| |
"Jonathan B. McKay" <vebblejm@aol.com> wrote in message
news:GJ4Ito.DnJ@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.lego.direct, Dan Simonson writes:
> > Ok, this is going to be a long message.
>
> My name is Jonathan Mckay, I am also 13, with many of the same gripes.
>
> > (in my opinion way over priced for *bulk*)
> Bulk=3033 1200 piece brick bucket. When you buy these wholesale from lego
> they are 12.99 for 1 brick bucket. That's roughly 1 cent per brick. Buying
> the same bricks in the "bulk" elemnt packs at $0.10-$0.30 is not a resonable
> price. It is just another recent rip-off lego seems to be trying to pull on
> its now dwindling consumers.
Yup. My one gripe about LEGO Direct is the bulk brick prices. With the 1200 pc
retailing for 20.00 originally, 1.6 cents/piece was a STEAL. It helped out a
lot of AFOLs (especially train clubs and sculptors like Henry Lim and Eric
Harshbarger) build up their brick collections and do really cool stuff. The 1.6
cents/piece offer proved to us that LEGO could sell bricks for cheap. Bulk at
.10-.30 cents/piece is a joke, when you're talking about basic bricks. My .02
is this - sell bulk basic bricks of all sizes at an average of .05 - .07 a
piece. Make a bit of profit on them - afterall, you still had to be making a
profit at the bulk tubs' 1.6 cents. We'll get our bricks relatively cheaply,
and it'll be true to the idea of buying in bulk - the prices will still be less
than retail sets.
I know LEGO's worried about the bulk competing with the retail - I'd say don't
worry about basic bricks competing with retail. The retail sets still have
their themes and their specialty elements not readily available in bulk.
Having bulk bricks more readily available means that more train clubs can have
better layouts and more sculptors can build sculptures more cheaply. Eric
Harshbarger actually sculpts LEGO as a full time job! And train clubs are
getting noticed more and more at the model railroading shows. To quote that new
sitcom Bob Patterson, 'help me help you...' ;-)
> > duplo set, and was immediately angry. The buildings have nothing to them!
>
> I can hardly call Jack stone Lego, for the possibilities of creating new
> models other than the designated one are about equal to taking apart a $1
> toy that was made in china and then trying to make something else
> interesting out of it- just will not happen. As for the mania magazine, I
> stopped subscribing after I realized that the feature models were not
> selected on quality of the model. (which was about 5 years ago)
Mania is noting but advertising the new juniorized product line LEGO has to
offer. It offers nothing really insightful about the brick and doesn't dip into
LEGO's rich history or its broad uses. I'd love to see a general interest LEGO
modeling magazine - with tips and tricks for builders of all ages, model
showcases based on model quality across multiple age ranges, promotions for LUGs
and events nation- (and world-) wide, etc etc. Like Brick Kicks, only better.
The only reason I keep getting Mania is cause it's free, and I want to be able
to read what others talk about here on LUGNET when they get their issues. If I
ever have to pay for it, I'll have it stopped.
> > Page 5, DIONSAURS. The last time I had any interest in Dinosaurs was when I
> > was in Kindergarden. I see where it comes in with Jurasic Park III and the
> > Lego Studios but do you have to release and waste all that petrolium (yes,
> > it's a non-renewable resource) on a hole bunch of dinosaurs we really don't
> > even need. And at $10 a piece, what 5 year old can even afford to waste $40
> > on them.
> I don't see the purpose of dinosaurs. It reminds me again of a $1 "made in
> china" toy.
Exactly. Craig Hamilton had this AMAZING dinosaur at Brickfest built out of a
lot of plates and hinges (can anyone link me a picture of it?). I looked at it
and was amazed, then sickened at the thought of what LEGO *could have* done with
a line and didn't. Instead, they made something that looks cheap and tossed
together and has little play value outside of creating the basic animals. LEGO
products need to be based on the brick, and based on creative possibilities.
Its what LEGO was 'built' on.
> The new LOM sets seem to be created not for any alternate models whatsoever.
> Looking at the parts on the aero tube hanger, I am discusted. Rather than
> using interesting or high quality parts, TLG has made interesting new colors
> with little or no use because of the fact that they are only availible in 4
> or 5 different parts.
LOM has some good sets (the three wheeled rover is very fun and comes with very
cool parts) and other sets that aren't that cool - like the little shuttle and
the base. The only real redeeming value in the base is the huge tubes - use
them in your next capital ship for conduit (Joel Kuester did in his 8 foot long
Benevolent Grace). Sure, its fun to shoot those martians through the tubes (its
addicting too), but the structure is shoddy.
And yes, the new colors, almost useless because they're only in a few parts.
> One last thing I would like to mention:
>
> TLG is deaf. They do not LISTEN NOR CARE about Lego Collectors and their
> suggestions/complaints/ideas.
Yes and no. LEGO Direct *is* listening. I only have one gripe about them
(bulk), about everything else nothing but praise. However, LEGO Futura in
Billund appears to be not listening. That's evident in things like Dinosaurs
and Jack Stone.
Overall, excellent commentary, Jonathan. Its good to see some of the younger
people on LUGNET are speaking up about their dislikes of juniorization.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
74 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
|
|
|
|
