| |
Greg Perry wrote:
> Before proceeding, let me say that I am not any kind of strident political
> activist or anyone of any particular high morals or principles. However,
> avoiding items that are "MADE IN CHINA" is the one "protest" act that I
> actively pursue. This is mainly due to the proddings of my much-more-aware
> wife who's interests are more humanitarian and political. While I certainly
> see the problems inherent in a society that forces it's population to work
> under virtual "slave labor" conditions, for me the botton line is that
> products made in China are inevitably cheap, inferior crap.
>
> And to me, that's not what LEGO toys and products should be about.
This news is pretty shocking (maybe I've been sleeping and never
noticed).
<snipped Greg's observations>
> - Am I just being jingo-istic (and euro-centric) in thinking that if LEGO
> products across the board begin to be made in China that there will be an
> overall reduction in quality?
Depends how you define quality.
> - Does anyone think LEGO is the kind of company that would NOT move to China
> if people raised a stink about it? Or do you think that they'll just be
> more concerned with the bottom line - especially considering their earnings
> reports from the last couple of years?
Difficult to say. I've always had this idea of LEGO of being some sort
of
magical company that was somehow above the norm of the corporate world.
I
know that was a fantasy. I got back into LEGO as an adult as a 'stress
reliever' of sorts, but as time goes on I find that the knowledge I gain
about the LEGO business makes me want to leave the hobby.
For instance, the following things currently *annoy* me about LEGO:
-the news that the Enfield molding facility was closing down and moving
to Europe
-similar news that a South America facility was closing down (i might be
misremembering this one
-the movie/book/etc licenses LEGO appears to be using to replace
Themes. Star Wars was cool as many people including myself had always
dreamed and built Star Wars themed MOCs so many years ago. Harry Potter
isn't that bad, but I wish it came directly from the book and not
because of the movie. Movies seem to be a larger source of cross
marketing branding than books, and IMO most products resulting from them
are garbage (e.g Tomb Raider Taco Bell cups). Bob the Builder- never
saw the show- don't have much of an opinion. Jurassic Park III- what is
LEGO thinking? I think if LEGO believes that they need to be part of
licensing they should use established, quality ones (e.g. Star Wars).
-Bionicle- nuff said.
-items with just the LEGO logo. Sure some collectables are fine like
maybe a LEGO pencil or a t-shirt but why do we need a LEGO stereo
(apparently only available in Japan), beach towels, book covers, rulers,
salt&pepper shakers, and so on that aren't even compatable with the
bricks? I don't know how LEGO decides what products to market with
their logo and how they affect their brand image. This bothers me
because, as some of you might know Chuck Taylor All-Star shoes are no
longer being made and Converse has decided to market the All-Star brand
on t-shirts and other products and that's it. It started with a shoe
(same as a brick(1)) and eventually went on to shoes and other products
like t-shirts and what-not (this is where LEGO is now) and now Chuck
Taylor is just an image (will LEGO go this route?)
-Tie-ins with questionable products- two examples:
-I don't eat McDonalds. I know there are many families that don't want
to eat there either but the company brings in the kids(+parents) with
the happy meals. Is this bad- I don't know- this has been debated
before. It was hard a year or two back not ordering >$75 worth of stuff
from s@h when they were giving away free drive-thrus.
-Shell. This company has done some pretty shady stuff over in Africa.
I think LEGO dropped them in the 80's because of this, but now Shell
cleaned up its image (on the surface) and they are back in bed together
again. [is quaker oats owned by Phillip Morris?- just a thought]
These are just a few examples. I know they have gone off track from the
Made in China topic, but I think many of these factors are
inter-related. Opinions?
> Anyway, I've been wanting to vent my mild frustration and dismay at
> discovering LEGO products were now being MADE IN CHINA. Wouldn't surprise
> me to find out that no one else gives a brick but hey, that's the great
> thing about the Internet - any crackpot can moan, grumble and whine about
> any old thing they want. But where there's one crank there's usually at
> least one more...
I give a brick. For what it's worth.
-chris
FUT... I don't know- I'll leave it here for now until it reaches
.debate.
1- i know LEGO started with wooden toys originally, but for the purposes
of this converstation we can fast forward to the brick.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Bummer of the Week: LEGO Made in China
|
| Chris - many thanks to you for your comments and thoughts related to my post. Unlike other responses (such as lawrence's "crap" one) yours has led me to do some further thinking about whether an anti-MADE IN CHINA position is a tenable one with (...) (23 years ago, 6-Sep-01, to lugnet.general)
| | | Re: Bummer of the Week: LEGO Made in China
|
| In lugnet.general, Christopher Tracey writes: <snippitty-doo-da> (...) I had heard this news many months ago and in a panic rushed to buy-up a lifetime supply of my favorite low-tops (a necessary part of my social uniform). However, according to my (...) (23 years ago, 6-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
Message is in Reply To:
103 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
