Subject:
|
Re: Lego hostility
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Fri, 9 Nov 2001 00:13:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2025 times
|
| |
|
|
"Allan Bedford" <apotomeREMOVE-THIS@altavista.net> wrote in message
news:GMI9n7.8q1@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.dear-lego, John Neal writes:
> > Given all of your cantankerous rants, I'll bet
> > that you are the butt of many jokes around the LD water tank!
>
> I have to disagree. If I was working for a company who had customers that
> were this unhappy with our output I think I'd try to find some way to make
> my bosses see that things could be better.
I recall a discussion I had with a couple of them towards the beginning of
the year when Richard was commenting quite harshly then too. When I brought
up Richard's comments (which disturbed me then and still disturb me), they
didn't even regard them because of his demeanor. I think Richard's message
is solid, but his methods are off base. There's something to be said about
shock value when dealing with someone who seems to be not listening, but on
the other hand, you win more bees with honey than with vinegar.
And I agree with your other statement, Allan, LEGO has forgotten where it
came from and has no idea where it is going. I wish we were regarded higher
as customers.
I have only one complaint about LEGO Direct though, and that is their bulk
selection and pricing. The prices are up the nose - they've proven to us
the price they CAN sell bricks at - 1200 pc tubs are 1.6 cents per piece.
Now, add some colors to that and raise it to .03/piece and that's STILL a
steal.
Other than that, I have a lot of praise for LEGO Direct for communicating
with us and offering some amazing sets! We do need to see more effort on
the part of TLC in regards to their product offerings though.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Lego hostility
|
| (...) I completely agree with you. That was why I prefaced my comments with this statement: +++...+++ (...) +++...+++ (...) Well... I have mixed feelings about this stance. Normally I'm considered a very reasonable person. More than once co-workers (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | foo!
|
| (...) Which disturbed you then and disturbs you now? C'mon? Reread it, it's not that harsh -- except for maybe the subject line. Disturbs? I think you aren't actually losing any sleep over it, Tim. ;o) Anyway, you know what I owe TLC? Nothing. For (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: Lego hostility
|
| (...) Amen! I'm not posting this message as a "response" to your response but more as a direct post to Lego. I didn't want to say anything but I recently had a nightmare of an experience with the Customer "Service" Representatives at the S & H 800 (...) (23 years ago, 9-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Lego hostility
|
| (...) I agree, his tone might have been a bit harsh... there are probably ways to express these feelings and maintain a little more integrity. (...) Well... good. I hope you're right. Maybe some of this dissatisfaction might eventually trickle up (...) (23 years ago, 8-Nov-01, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
13 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
|
|
|
|
