Subject:
|
Re: Formal Letter to TLC?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Sun, 20 Aug 2000 07:07:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1628 times
|
| |
|
|
"Kyle D. Jackson" <flightdeck@sympatico.deletethisspamblock.ca> wrote in
message news:FzKGvp.5qA@lugnet.com...
> Having said that, what I think when I read the posts here, is
> that a lot of people are complaining because some company
> somewhere is doing things they disagree with. They want the
> company to listen to them and do what they want. Again, I'm
> somewhat of an outsider as I don't know anything about the
> issues being mentioned, but I think that in itself is very
> important: as I have no knowledge of where you're coming
> from, I'm pretty neutral at the moment..., much as someone
> at TLC may be. But after reading the post(s), all I can
> think is man, here's a bunch of fanatic collectors who don't
> like how we're running our company and think they know better
> than we do where we should be heading.
That's *not* what is happening right now, and its *not* just gripes on our
part about how their company is run.
Brad Justus came to us last December, announcing Lego Direct, as the new
part of the company to interact with us and promised interaction between TLC
and the fans.
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=11596
Quoted from his message:
"Whether you are an AFOL, or a parent purchasing a first DUPLO set,
or a KABOB (Kid with a Bunch of Bricks - we just made that up), here are
some
words that should gladden your hearts: We are listening. And more than that,
we will endeavor to be very responsive to your needs and desires. We want
to
have the best possible relationships with all of you who want to have a
relationship with us. That is what LEGO Direct - our new direct-to-you
communications and commerce channel (which I am heading) is all about. LEGO
Direct embraces all the company's direct-to-consumer efforts on a global
basis, both on- and off-line: Shop@Home, our Internet presence(s),
e-commerce,
LEGO clubs worldwide, community building activities, and more."
Right there, Brad made a direct promise to us, to listen and 'be very
responsive to your needs and desires.' This is something he has not handled
very well over the few months we have known about Lego Direct.
The two big gripes right now are about TLC not explaining to us as a
community why they acted the way they did over the leaked 2001 set info
(large discussion in admin.general last week), and their neglect to correct
copyright infringement done by kids on their website (discussion in
lego.direct I believe). Both of these incidents are very irresponsible and
disrespectful to all of us. They also go against the promise Brad made and
has continued to back up by his words and not his actions.
Brad promised an increased relationship between the company and the fans.
This is something we've been asking for for a long time, and the impact that
these empty promises have had on the community is very negative. We're all
on edge here and all are looking for answers.
> See the problem here? As a new witness to the discussions,
> my opinion is already leaning "in favour" (as if there's
> "sides") of TLC. They have a company to keep afloat, and
> a great number of people to keep employed. Us? We just have
> a hobby. Our general day-to-day grumblings about this and
> that should not have to go across the desks of the people
> at the helm of TLC. Do you realize how much mail someone
> in that position receives? And then how much of it simply
> gets pre-sorted by assistants and directed elsewhere, often
> to the trash.
Its not that way at all. Its mismanagement on the part of TLC and a neglect
to fulfill a promise they said they would keep. Its the desire on our part
as fans to work with the comany on many things which would be possible -
right here is the single greatest resource in my mind to TLC for their use
as research, promotions, feedback, etc, and we're good. People don't just
whine about what they want here, they seriously analyze product for what its
worth. And they love the product. What better resource could TLC have??
We have a lot to gain from a relationship with TLC. If our LTCs were
sponsored or at least given better product packages to ease cost, we could
be a large force in promoting their product and allowing what I believe
would be a big sales increase for them. Its a two way street.
> Personally, I am very interested in hearing about the things
> that you reference have been "done wrong" recently. Maybe
> there are one or two very specific items there that should
> be brought to TLC's attention, particularly if there are
> legal ramifications (which I gather there may be). But they
> should be brought pointedly to the attention of those at
> TLC tasked with the responsibility of addressing them. They
> should not all be pasted together into a massive letter,
> combined with general rants of "we don't think you're listening
> to us", and then sent to TLC executives. That will accomplish
> nothing but aggravate those who have to focus objectively
> on the company's bottom line.
You're not seeing the big picture. Lego Direct was established to build up
the internet fan community and interface with the users - that's basically
in their charter. They haven't done a very good job at it, from our
perspective, by disrespecting us and not taking care of polite and serious
requests, which they said they would take care of. IIRC, someone received a
response from TLC claiming they would take care of the pirated images issue,
and a week or more has passed with nothing. A week has passed since the
2001 set info was deleted, and now somehow, TLC has approved the information
to come out again. But they haven't explained themselves to the community
as to what went on the first time.
This is key in having an open and honest relationship between the two
groups. Its an issue they are at fault with. Its also an issue that I
believe can be improved by sending a polite, serious, letter with a request,
explanation of our views, and proposal for working together in the future.
I personally know a few people in the company who do care about this, but
they're just individuals in lower level jobs and don't have any influence on
management. Its a possibility, and I believe its necessary, for the MUTUAL
benefit of the community (which is more than 'just a bunch of fans') and the
comany.
> My suggestion: if there is a specific legal concern regarding
> an incident, then contact the appropriate TLC representative
> to present the issue. If there is a concern over theming,
> set skill levels, etc., then contact the appropriate people in
> the product marketing area to let them know your thoughts and
> suggestions. Or if there are things you think could be
> improved in a TLC venture, such as LEGO Direct, then contact that
> entity.
This has been weighed. I know that regarding the images on lego.com as a
part of the contest, appropriate people will be addressed. As to Lego
Direct, really, who knows what contacting them will do, if anything? Its
gone much beond 'we'll go talk to LD,' its become 'LD hasn't fulfilled what
they said they would do, which is what we're asking for now anyhow' It
needs to go to LD, but above LD at the same time.
> I've read in posts that "TLC is not listening to us!". Well,
> that's probably true. A bunch of posts on the internet with
> people griping out loud probably hasn't gotten their attention.
> Heck, I'm *on* LUGNET, only a "few pages over", and I didn't
> even hear all the ranting going on..., how are the appropriate
> people at TLC supposed to have heard anything?
There are two specific groups set up for the purpose of dialogging with the
company - lugnet.dear-lego, and lugnet.lego.direct. The first is rather
informal, and the second is serious and formal. We are discussing this
topic in the former. TLC knows about these groups and reads them. I
personally know of an instance where I've been called on something I posted
to .events in preparation for Kidvention - so yes, I know for a fact that
they do read Lugnet.
> If consumers
> are griping about my product, but not to the right people in
> my company, then we don't hear anything about it. That means
> we think we must be doing a good job, and so keep doing the same
> things. Marketing researchers can only do so much.
TLC has clearly dropped the ball in their product line - even marketing
research should have shown them that. Recent stuff such as juniorization,
ZNAP, etc. baffle me beyond words. Thought we dont' know for sure, its been
rumored they're losing money. I wonder why.
> I'm just getting into a general ramble here now I guess, so I'll
> wrap things up:
>
> 1) Could someone please highlight the specific items of concern
> in one post? Call it an issues list if you wish, but at least
> it's something we can all look at.
Well, its late, I gotta get to bed, and I posted some of that above, when I
talked about the LD announcement. Tomorrow I'm busy all day, and won't have
time to research it further. Hope what I posted helps you understand, and
if someone else could get my back on this, it would be much appreciated.
> 2) I agree contacting TLC about some issues is a good idea,
> or at the very least it doesn't hurt to try. However, please
> do it with singular purposes (one per letter), and to the
> appropriate people. And if nothing happens (unless there's
> a legal issue), then don't badger it. Just let it go..., it's
> their company.
From the perspective on the issue that I have, going to singular people in
the middle management level won't do anything. We do need to go higher on
this, and the people I'm thinking about going to, I believe will listen.
> Guess that's all I have to say until I can better understand
> where everyone is coming from.
Hope my post clears stuff up for you. From reading your response, I don't
think you carry quite the same perspective on it - or see the big picture.
Its much more than us trying to tell them how to run a company, and we're
much more than a little band of fans. We're dealing with irresponsibility
and broken promises, and the negative effects it has had upon the
community - the confusion, lowered morale, nervousness, concern, etc it has
caused. It also has a lot to do with our readiness and willingness to work
out a serious relationship with them so both sides can benefit from each
other in the future. They have a lot to offer us, and we have a lot to
offer them. Its only a matter of working it out, testing the waters and
gaining trust, and going at it for a better hobby and community in the
future.
> On an amusing note, if I think about the letters that TLC
> must usually receive, I bet most are along the lines of, "Dear
> LEGO, your toys are great! Please make a minifig in kid size,
> with brown hair. I can pretend it's me!". This is a letter I
> would have written over 20 years ago. Now, in the past months
> that I've been participating on LUGNET, I've seen fights over
> auction anouncement posts, smoky LEGO, international swipes,
> and posts about TLC doing it all wrong.
>
> What I wouldn't give to go back to that simpler time I knew
> as a kid. Of those two very different worlds, who's input
> would you prefer were influencing the company?
I certainly wouldn't prefer the input of some of the kids I know influencing
the company. There's a much bigger picture to see than they see. And some
of the hopeful results of a positive relationship here would benefit those
very kids - more events and shows, more cool stuff for them to see and more
people for them to talk to. Better toys available to them which results in
a much better experience with the product. I'm not saying that 'I have the
answer' or 'Lugnet has the answer' but with dialog between TLC and us, with
working out our desires and theirs, their promises, and providing them our
serious feedback on their product, something much better can be realized.
Things need to be addressed first, because as far as the 'little group of
fans' goes, there's little if any trust for them at all.
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
ICQ: 23951114
AIM: TimCourtne
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Formal Letter to TLC?
|
| (...) G'day Tim, First of all, thanks for your reply. As I imagine you're aware, I wasn't trying to start up any arguments, but was just trying to put another perspective on things, from someone who is both a LEGO hobbyist and a member of LUGNET, (...) (24 years ago, 21-Aug-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Formal Letter to TLC?
|
| (...) [Warning! Long message!] G'day Tim and other folks, I stumbled upon your post because it appeared on the new-style LUGNET homepage. After reading it, I did a scan of recent postings to this group, and dug up those made by Brad Justus of TLC. I (...) (24 years ago, 20-Aug-00, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
