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 / 5302
5301  |  5303
Subject: 
Re: Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego
Date: 
Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:34:31 GMT
Viewed: 
419 times
  
In lugnet.build.microscale, Jeff Szklennik wrote:
   In lugnet.build.microscale, Kelly McKiernan wrote:
   In lugnet.build.microscale, Bruce Hietbrink wrote:
   Hey all,

SNIP
  
The Airport set, with 607 pieces, is USD$39.99.

The Amusement Park set is USD$69.99 and is 1,344 pieces.

Finally, the big set, Skyline, is USD$129.99 for 2,747 pieces.

SNIP

This is an example of unwise marketing/pricing on the Lego Co.‘s part (IMHO). To make these more widely accessible, the sets should have been sold per individual winner (just the pirate ship, just the Statue of Liberty, etc.) to keep the price less, starting around $10 or $15 (still seems doable to me since they’e mostly made of small parts & the current prices are MUCH less than $0.10/piece; AFAIK a good average-I assume Lego is gonna make a decent profit since the design, CAD & instructions were done by fan designers using small standard pieces & LEGO Co. is willing to have low price/piece points already). Lego could have made a series of increasing price point sets like most of their other lines. Since I’m gainfully employed, I’ll be able to get them all (& I will), but the fantastic work of the Lego community that resulted in many highly desirable designs, & showcased Lego creativity at it’s most fundamental best: BY THE CUSTOMER, may now only be available to (mostly) older, employed Lego fans. Obviously some AFOL parents will get them for their kids, & kids with great allowances, will get them etc, but I was really hoping the Lego Co. would use this opportunity to aggressively market their product to the widest group possible. I think mor lower priced sets would work better in this capacity & from the ‘designed by so-and-so individual’ idea of the contest, I was expecting more individual-fan designed sets. OK, and it would allow me to space out my most anticipated of this years Lego sets as weekly treats: “Ugh thank goodness it’s friday, I worked hard this week, time to get so-and-so’s set”...yeah as if i’d need an excuse not to buy them (all at once for that matter) :)

X-posted to Dear Lego

Jeff

P.S. pleas excuse the grammar & long sentences as it’s late, I’m tired & I didn’t want to forget to post my thoughts. ‘night


Yes. I agree, and thats not including the fact that they are even more expensive in the UK. The price per piece might not be high but the sets are just too big. If each winner was an indiviudual set I might end up buying most of them over a year or two, but as it is I probably won’t buy any. (however, smaller sets tend to be bought more on a whim than larger sets, but buying on SaH isn’t really on a whim like seeing one in a shop and grabbing is. Perhaps its not as bad an idea as it seems)

Tim



Message is in Reply To:
  Why not smaller & more affordable for all? was Re: LEGO Factory sets
 
(...) SNIP (...) SNIP This is an example of unwise marketing/pricing on the Lego Co.'s part (IMHO). To make these more widely accessible, the sets should have been sold per individual winner (just the pirate ship, just the Statue of Liberty, etc.) (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jul-05, to lugnet.build.microscale, lugnet.dear-lego, FTX)  

47 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