Subject:
|
Re: Come on Lego...get with it!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Mon, 22 Jan 2001 01:05:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1593 times
|
| |
|
|
"Brendan Coughlin" <Duck360198@aol.com> wrote in message
news:G7J7yD.Dxz@lugnet.com...
> WOW! Completely agree. I hate bringing up the concept of juniorization but
> it's really putting a damper on everything. You're right...it's supposed to
> be a family oriented Lego. The Lego Company had said that the point of
> juniorization is for "kids" who don't have a lot of time to build Legos. So
> that means they just trash the normal Town theme. I personally build only
> the main model. That is the whole point of my Lego city. I build only what
> is on the box. That's the point right? But I can't incorporate a Super
> Rescue Complex or the vehicles into my city because they look hideous. 90%
> of its market IS based on fans of Lego.
Well, some would argue that building the main model is *not* the point of LEGO,
but being creative and exploring the endless possibilities *is.* Look at the
number of MOCs displayed from people here on LUGNET - that's what LEGO is for,
not for buying sets (IMO). TLC makes sets because they will sell to
kids/parents buying for kids - average people don't want parts, they want
something to do with the parts. The LEGO connoisseur (again, IMO) models with
his/her bricks versus sticks them on a shelf in their original kit design.
> I agree with Tim that Lego will
> always be a kid related toy but again go to eBay. The sets going for
> auction from the 80's to mid 90's are basically collectors. I don't know
> many diehard collectors who are going out and buying the Town Jr. stuff.
> The KIDS are buying this stuff...NOT fans of Lego. People are realizing
> what Lego is becoming and they want the nostalgia. A MISB 6399 goes for
> $300 - $500. These are kids buying the sets...they're collectors (aka: Fans
> of Lego).
No - marketing is not done to FOLs, and I doubt kids are spending 3-500 on a set
on ebay either. Marketing is done to kids and parents who buy for their kids,
in order to move product. Not to make a good product, to move product. That's
the sole goal of a company - to make money. How each company goes about that
varies.
What needs to happen is LEGO needs to look at the bigger picture and long term
growth rather than short term gratification. They ARE losing money and its not
a good thing if it continues. I believe LEGO should invest in LTCs, model
railroading design with LEGO bricks, promotions, promote Legofests across the
country, and do what it can to raise awareness of the LEGO hobby. They should
seek to move the teenagers in their waning LEGO play years into AFOL-dom, to
secure big spenders on their product 10 years down the road. Then, they should
be consistent with their original vision and values of 'only the best is good
enough' and making sure that every brick works together in a totally integrated
system of play. They're getting away from that with Juniorization and (shudder)
racers (ick, gag).
The good thing is they are listening - look at LEGO Direct. People complain
because they want something to complain about, but the folks at LEGO Direct are
doing a darn good job. It takes time to get a backwards company with old money
into a new way of thinking - and it will take a few more years yet. But if the
right people are in and the right decisions are made, LEGO can do it, and it
will be good for all of us in the end.
LEGO will never market to just collectors, the collector market is such a small
slice of their whole pie. They can market some to collectors, or consider them
when designing product, but the primary market will always be kids and parents.
Still, LEGO should not forget their products collectible and educational
potential when designing stuff. Town Jr et al. is NOT the way to do that.
> I do not care for technology. I don't care for the computer games,
> mindstorms, and whatever else there is. I LOVE building and admiring the
> final product. Then figuring out where to incorporate the building into my
> city. Then realizing that my city is too big so I get to start planning a
> bigger city. That's what Lego is all about...building and expanding.
But don't forget, a lot of people DO care about technology. Mindstorms is
ENORMOUS and served to get a lot of 'big kids' into LEGO. It reached out to the
geek community and a lot of AFOLs were born from Mindstorms. It also brings a
tremendous educational value to the product which has been seen in stuff like
the First LEGO League, etc. Building will always be the heart of LEGO, but
Mindstorms and robotics is building too. And to keep up with today's technology
market, LEGO has to develop software - there's no two ways around it.
> > The only reason why Lego is losing money is all the specialty pieces they are
> > making...if they cut down on them, and used basic blocks to achieve the same
> > design, it would save a TON of money...
And the increased cost of plastic due to oil (OPEC strikes again), investing in
other markets, their vision for 2005 (strongest household brand among families
with children) etc. Not JUST pieces.
> They really didn't have to save money though back when the sets were good.
> They were making a huge profit from all the sets. What brought on this idea
> of change? It makes no sense to me why they would go from the top of the
> toy chain to the quality of toy they are making today.
Do you have figures to back your claims up?
--
Tim Courtney - tim@zacktron.com
http://www.ldraw.org - Centralized LDraw Resources
http://www.zacktron.com - Zacktron Alliance
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
