 | | Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ???...???
|
|
(...) I agree with you there! I'd also like to see the studless beams complimented with 1/2 width "links". They are also very, very usefull. The more I get, the more usefull they seem to be. Of course we all wish for "Blue Tubs" that offer other (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ???...???
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure they were intended to compete with MegaBlox which had been producing similar tubs at similarly cut-rate prices. Lego's 3033 (just about?) completely annihilated the competition. Now that there is no competition for that (I (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) That's a shame. I consider the Blue Tub (3033) a staple set amongst AFOLs everywhere. Their content is just too essential to our building needs. Even if you only use 50% of the bricks, it's still worth the $20 price (comparing it to bulk (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Tubs [was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ???...???]
|
|
(...) Last I saw my local Wal-Mart still had a fair number of Mega Bloks tubs, and even more identical tubs manufactured by Ritvik but sold under the house brand name "Kid Connection". (And yes, they clearanced their 3033s months ago.) I thought (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) Lego has stated that 3033 is NOT a loss leader. (meaning it's profitable). (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) I doubt anything LEGO makes, now or at any time in the past, could be classified a loss leader. There is not $19.99 worth of raw materials and packaging in that tub. (...) I think an argument could be made that it might also be a staple for (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) I've heard that too, but I suspect they are just talking about production costs. ABS is cheap, and there's no retooling needed to make basic bricks. So from that end it is certainly profitable. But when you include the distribution costs, I'm (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) Didn't you read the part in parentheses? --Bill. (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.technic)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) Sorry... let me rephrase.... There is not $19.95 worth of raw materials, packaging and costs of distribution etc. in that tub. I don't waver from my point. I still don't believe that was a loss leader for LEGO. Regards, Allan (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Bulk Sets (was: Re: How about "Technic Tubs" ?)
|
|
(...) Bill and Allan I brought that point up with Brad Justus at Brickfest 2001 when I asked about single color 3033's. I, like alot of other people, assumed (never assume) it was a loss leader also. Brad said it "was not a loss leader", however the (...) (23 years ago, 13-Oct-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
