To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.dear-legoOpen lugnet.dear-lego in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Dear LEGO / 438
437  |  439
Subject: 
Re: The shortsighted stupid wastefulness of TLG (was Re: The Ruthlessness of Lego
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Tue, 24 Aug 1999 16:36:28 GMT
Viewed: 
233 times
  
   Hi, everyone--

   Well, after two months, I'm back in the good ol' US of A and
   (more importantly) able to post.  I was unfortunately limited in
   what I could buy while in the UK and on the Continent because
   of container space, but I still found some fences and trees for
   6 guilders in Amsterdam and a few little Insectoid sets for 2
   guilders apiece (about $1).  London is, however, far to
   expensive for Lego buying, although I did buy two of the
   little hang-gliders because they were under a pound fifty.

   Enough about that!  Now Larry P. (is there another?) wrote:

Consider what TLG would do, if, hypothetically, a fire broke out in
their storeroom,
say at the MoA, and smoke damaged their entire stock, contained in a 25
by 50 foot storeroom underneath the floor of the store.

My vision is that they would hire some non sympathetic firm to drag it
out of the store room, dump it in dumpsters, fiercely guard the
dumpsters to prevent rummaging, and haul it all away without making any
provision for the staff, interested fans, or charities to get access to
all those only slightly damaged sets. ...

   Yeah, it makes me cringe, but there *is* actual logic   behind actions
like that.

   If you give it away, you saturate the market.  When
   you're restocked, in theory you'll sell *much* less
   merchandise to those local groups you mentioned
   above.  It's rather heartless, but they're thinking of
   the bottom line--disposal costs are covered by the
   insurance company.  In addition, the insurance co.
   may not pay unless something is a 'total loss,'
   meaning that further use is impossible.  If TLG
   sold or donated the sets, that would no longer be
   true--unsaleable for retail does not equal useless.
   I think the real reasoning behind that scenario
   would be heartless insurance companies more
   than heartless TLG execs.

   And before you say 'you can never have too many
   bricks!' (a sentiment with which I wholeheartedly
   an unashamedly agree), remember that not every-
   one thinks that way, especially when they're not
   buying for themselves.

   Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, if
   something like that happens they should just
   sell the sets off at pennies on the dollar to Lugnet
   subscribers, since we'll buy more no matter what.  :)

   LFB

---

   Lindsay Frederick Braun (Mr)
   Department of History
   Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey



Message is in Reply To:
  The shortsighted stupid wastefulness of TLG (was Re: The Ruthlessness of Lego
 
Consider what TLG would do, if, hypothetically, a fire broke out in their storeroom, say at the MoA, and smoke damaged their entire stock, contained in a 25 by 50 foot storeroom underneath the floor of the store. My vision is that they would hire (...) (25 years ago, 14-Aug-99, to lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego)

39 Messages in This Thread:















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR