To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.dear-legoOpen lugnet.dear-lego in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Dear LEGO / 2958
2957  |  2959
Subject: 
Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:05:17 GMT
Viewed: 
576 times
  
In lugnet.general, Kyle D. Jackson writes:
The only way I can see adding composite pieces being a cost-saving
measure is if the current machinery is running at full capacity
with the smaller separate parts.  Adding composite pieces may help
to increase output more cheaply then adding new machinery.  But
this will only be practical if all the set lines evolve to use
the new composite pieces wherever possible and reduce demand on
the original smaller pieces.  In the case of the 2x4x3 superbrick,
LEGO would have to heavily reduce its output of the trademark 2x4
brick to pull this off.  The irony in that is just too sad  :[

One thing which needs to be taken into account for the X x Y x Z bricks where Z
is greater than one is that I think they were generally introduced for printed
bricks. It's far cheaper to print a single brick than have 2 or 3 or 5 separate
bricks each with a different printing, which then has to line up perfectly, and
still looks horrible, and at least for the 3+ sets, stickers may not be wise. I
know I treasure my classic space 1x6x5 printed bricks....

Once the 2x4x3 mold exists, making a bunch of grey 2x4x3s is almost certainly
cheaper than making three times as many grey 2x4x1s. I suspect two motives to
the use of this part in 6600. One is to offset the increased cost of the
special road parts, the other is to make the support towers sturdier. Of course
what I'd love to see TLC do is amortize the cost of the molds for those road
sections by using them again in other sets, and especially selling them
separately. I'm sure there are folks who would buy them in large quantities if
they were available separately, even if they cost $10 each.

In fact, if you look at almost every SPUD or POOP type part, and how it was
originally used, I think you will find that it either really did save money, or
allowed a better looking model, added structural strength, or addressed a real
need for younger kids.

I would also point out that ultimately it's the specialty parts which make LEGO
interesting to us. How many of us would still be playing with LEGO if all they
made were rectangular bricks and plates? I dare you to build an interesting
train display without using SPUDs...

I'd also be amazed if there are more than a small handfull of LEGO parts which
couldn't be put to some other interesting use.

Frank



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
 
(...) Check out Shiri Dori's Scronym Guide: (URL) As for the Bridge issue, I can only say the 2x4 3HBCs (triple-height brick (...) I can't see the composite pieces saving money. If you are already producing the individual pieces in great quantity, (...) (24 years ago, 25-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

37 Messages in This Thread:
















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR