| |
TWS Garrison wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Suzanne Rich wrote:
> > What about DACTA? If price were not an issue, why wouldn't we buy a
> > zillion DACTA TECHNIC sets? could/should the adult community focus on
> > that possibility instead? I for one, would love to encourage those
> > products' survival, and I have more hope for that happening. ..at least
> > for a little while.
>
>
> Well, technically DACTA is already as dead as the DUPLO, err, dodo:
> http://www.lego.com/dacta/home.asp
> The middle of the page announces the DACTA is now "LEGO Educational
> Division".
yeah, I'm aware of the name change, but for some reason I refuse to
adopt it. ..chock it up to nostalgia. and too long of a name. I still
say SYSTEM, DUPLO and TOOLO too.
> This press release raises three interesting questions:
> 1) Is this rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?
lol. that's not funny, but it made me laugh. never heard that expression
before.
I believe there are many factors at work which we may be unaware of.
There's their business relationship with Pitsco, there's the names of
the same service in other parts of the world, there's the start of
K'Nex's educational line, and the psychology of curent educational
purchasers.. and who knows what.
Lately I cringe at the thought of Apple losing its place in the
educational market. I cringe too, knowing how standardized testing is
killing DACTA. (among other things)
> [...] It is my general impression, however, that DACTA products are
> a) hideously overpriced
well, that's all relative. I agree that it looks expensive (especially
when up against the retail sets) but, for me personally, there are NO
other LEGO sets I consistantly want so badly. In fact, if I could
collect anything, it'd be DACTA.[1] So, for me, the additional cost gets
ballanced out by additional value.
Back to my main point:
Yeah, it might be expensive, but at least it's still available!!
:-)
> b) available only to those willing and able to jump through the hoops
> Pitsco erects to frustrate those who want to buy Lego.[2]
I think that's a myth at this point.
> If these impressions (true or false) are common among Lego buyers,
> I can understand why few would be interested in DACTA.
Maybe it'd be a worthy endeavor to begin an educational campaign in our
community. Maybe with enough effort, we could open a fruitful
relationship with this part of TLC. (They did, afterall, ask for the
lego.dacta ng, and do send their consumers to LUGNET for RCX help...)
Personally, after reading most of this thread, I gotta say [no offense
meant to anyone], to all folks disapointed at the loss of TECHNIC who
want it back:
I'd guess that vocalizing despair here in hopes that TLC will listen and
take pity, is WAY more of a longshot than charging the gates of DACTA
offices, in hopes of striking a mutually beneficial deal that improves
our accessability to their products.
Either way is a longshot, but at least the latter makes for prettier
Spotlight titles. ;-)
> [...]
> When a construction toy company loses sight of this, it has forgotten
> why it is a *construction* toy company to begin with.
It's pretty plain to me that TLC (for years now) wants NOT to be thought
of as a 'construction toy company'.
-Suz
[1] Well, I do collect it, as I can. My flip-top play table stores lots
of TOOLO and DUPLO gears.. My LEGO bookshelf has plenty of TECHNIC
literature on it, thanks to DACTA. (How can someone -not- love the
Manufacturing Systems Teacher Guide?).. I live in constant fear of the
Control Center going away before I can get one.. I dream of armloads of
solar elements, beams, gears and sensors all around me, stored in those
lovely bins...
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
12 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
|
|
|
|
