|
[crossposted to .dear-lego & .general; followups to .dear-lego]
Brad Justus, Senior Vice President of LEGO Direct, wrote in
<http://www.lugnet.com/dear-lego/?n=560>:
"We want to be a company with whom you want to be involved. We want to
be the company you'd like us to be. And to do that, we need your input.
What do you love? What do you hate? How can we help you? Tell us
we want your input."
I can't express in words how great I feel that we've finally been asked this!!
=:*s But I guess everyone knows the feeling! :)
For me, the best way to answer these questions is to put myself into TLC's
shoes. That is, rather than looking in from the outside and saying, "I'd
like to see you do this and this and stop doing this," I find it easier to
get right to the heart of things by imagining being on the inside and saying,
"If it were my toy company, here's the way it would be..."
So I'd like to start a little thread on that note. Maybe it will help flush
out more radical ideas coming from that angle.
If LEGO were your toy company,
What would it be like?
Below are a few posts I made to a couple years ago addressing this question.
I'm just repeating the posts here verbatim because they still say pretty much
what I'd say today.
These came out of a spirited debate about Time Cruisers in January of 1998 in
rec.toys.lego. The name of the thread was "In defense of TLG and their
themes," started by Daniel Miller.
(I wish I could, but I can't repost other people's messages from the thread
here without their permission. But you can still read all the messages in
the thread at Deja.com: <http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=317416877>.)
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 20 Jan 1998 19:25:12 GMT
Joakim Karlsson <aviator@mv.mv.com> writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> >
> > Still, I hate Timmy and I still think of the theme as "Time Pukers" or
> > "Time Crusters." I would rather have seen some cool classic Town models.
> > But it's not my toy company.
>
> i really like the thought of lego being todd's toy company. the sets we
> would have. the web pages. the mind reels. ...joakim
If it were my toy company, you would be able to buy any quantity of any
part you wanted -- from a web site. No limitation on the number of parts
purchased (big or small) and no restriction to predefined parts packs or
building sets.
If it were my toy company, you would be able to design your own models in
a first-rate CAD package and upload the models to the LEGO web site where
other people could buy the exact parts needed to make your model. And
you would get a royalty each time someone bought the parts to build your
model. Your model might even make it into the official product line sold
to be sold in stores.
If it were my toy company, there would be a separate monthly or bimonthly
32- to 64-page full-color publication for each major product programme.
In this publication would be reviews, photos of creations, building
instructions, building tips, interviews with net-celebs like Ed Boxer,
and (of course) coupons for sets in the store, but you wouldn't have to
ruin the back page of the publication to cut them out.
If it were my toy company, a list of all retailers selling LEGO products
would appear on the official LEGO site. This list would of course be
searchable by location (with maps and driving instructions) and would
contain information about retail sales and clearances (subject to such
information being provided by retailers).
If it were my toy company, you would be able to buy theme buckets of
space parts, castle parts, Adventurers parts, etc. Unfortunately these
wouldn't probably be as cheap as FreeStyle (i.e. $20 for a big bucket),
but you'd at least be able to get them (maybe $60 for a 65-pc bucket).
If it were my toy company, Idea Books would be released every 3 months,
not every 2-3 years. And they would feature many fan-created models. And
they would cover themes in a more focused way, but they would also have
many mixed-theme ideas.
If it were my toy company, building instructions for out-of-production
building sets would be available free-of-charge on the official web
site, or for a fee if you wanted a printed version. You could then
order specific pieces you are missing to build the set. If it were my
toy company, the design process of parts would be much more important
than the design process of pre-defined building sets. Emphasis of
design of building sets (i.e. models) would be shifted from internal
designers to hobbyists, because hobbyists know what other hobbyists want
better than designers do. Of course it's still the desinger's job to
come up with things that hobbyists want, that they didn't know they wanted.
The bottom line in any case is to leverage the incredible enthusiasm and
talent of the fan/enthusiast/hobbyist community and become more of a
parts manufacturer than a "complete solution" manufacturer. Complete
solutions would always be a high priority, but no longer the only
priority, and no longer solely in the hands of the manufacturer.
If it were my toy company, you could go to the official web site and
look up information on specific pieces, such as the history of the
piece, and how it can be used (examples), and above all, you could share
your specific experiences and ideas with other people in a structured
way.
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 22 Jan 1998 01:13:51 GMT
Kekoa Proudfoot <kekoa@pixel.Stanford.EDU> writes:
> Todd Lehman <lehman@visi.com> wrote:
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
> > If it were my toy company, ...
>
> I could have sworn you were going to end with:
>
> "But it's not my toy company,"
>
> which you wrote in a previous post. Alas, you didn't.
I almost did...but I figured it would have sounded bitter, and I'm not bitter
about TLG at all. (Disappointed sometimes, with things like the LEGO Star,
but not bitter.)
> Lots of great ideas, though. If you make enough money off of Auczilla,
> perhaps you will buy Lego out and change the way things are done? :)
One of the objectives of LUGNET is to work around these roadblocks. I
guess AucZILLA comes part of the way to working around one of them, but
only so very slightly.
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 21 Jan 1998 03:17:32 GMT
Adam Howard <abhoward@mediaone.net> writes:
> Right on Todd! Give 'em Hell!
> Adam
Oh my gosh -- no -- that wasn't intended as harsh criticism of TLG at
all and what they should be doing -- it was a braindump/brainstorm.
It's their company and they can run it how they want it.
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: Idea books (was Re: In defense of TLG and their themes)
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 25 Jan 1998 19:11:49 GMT
Larry Pieniazek <lpien@ctp.IWANTNOSPAM.com> writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> > <idea books don't have good ideas>
Hmm. Hm. Maybe that's what I wrote, but it's not what I meant. I
meant that the quality and execution of ideas in LEGO-released idea
books has gone downhill in the past 19 years, not that idea books are
devoid of good ideas in general. I think the first 1 or 2 minifig-style
idea books were good, with #6000 being exceptionally great. I once had a
copy of the first Technic idea book and I remember it as being exceptionally
great too compared to more recent ones.
> I would tend to agree. Set design just isn't as *imaginative* either.
> Even in 4 years there has been a decline, based on what I have seen in
> the few months I've been reactivated. I just put together a copy of 6670
> Rescue Rig that I got on sale at S@H (unfortunately the free set offer
> packed in it is probably not going to happen <g>) and I was marveling at
> some of the ideas that I have not seen in more recent sets, like the 5
> wide back part, the big hook tow rig, and the horns.
I think that's tough to disagree with in Town, Pirates, and Technic.
But I think opinions scatter more when considering most other play themes/
play systems. Heck, I sure know that I think space is much more imaginitive
than it was 20 years ago...and Adventurers coming out of nowhere is pretty
great and imaginitive, IMHO.
> > In an efficient distribution model, would the books have to be printed
> > prior to their purchase?
>
> If you want perfect binding, I would say yes, unless a 2-3 day lag
> between order and shipment is acceptable. I think it takes a while for
> that binding process to be worked, what with all the slicing and
> glueing. However, in the biz I am in, it is not unheard of to finish
> writing material at 2 AM, 6 hours before it's due, get it to Kinko's(r)
> and deliver 50 bound copies (spiral, pin, 3 ring binder, or plastic
> finger bound or one of the other fast binding technologies) to the
> client at 8 AM, so the technology exists. (you've probably done it too,
> hehe...)
I think sales should be subscription-based. You pay for a 1- or 2-year
subscription and they arrive through the mail quarterly.
If there were a good, fertile landscape of fan-designed models from
which to farm ideas as well (in a structured way), there would be no
shortage of things to print, and you could pick the best of the best.
You'd probably need about 10,000 or 100,000 models out there first
before people would care to see them in print, because everything would
also be available on the web.
Just a thought.
> BTW, I have been watching for a copy of Bill and Mary's to come up for
> sale. Is there a Lego Lending Library ??
I think there once was a LEGO lending library of some sort, but given
shipping and labor costs, I believe that any lending library created
either has to be subsidized by rentals or some other means, or is doomed
to failure past a certain bandwidth of in/out traffic.
One alternative approach is to scan everything and destroy the original.
Then you -might- be able to restrict viewing to one person at a time.
But I don't know if that falls under fair use or not. It might be
illegal.
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 25 Jan 1998 07:17:52 GMT
Mike Stanley <cjc@cdc.net> writes:
> Kevan Houser <103753.3631@compuserve.com> wrote:
> > > If it were my toy company, Idea Books would be released every 3 months,
> > > not every 2-3 years. And they would feature many fan-created models.
> > > And they would cover themes in a more focused way, but they would also
> > > have many mixed-theme ideas.
> >
> > Again, a good idea, if not terribly difficult to dream up. I mean,
> > really. Is TLG asleep at the wheel? How much does paper cost? They
> > can rake in bucks selling quality Idea Books! Not to mention the added
> > sales of bricks, etc. that would result from people
>
> Not sure about your area, but in my area at TRU Idea Books don't seem to
> sell at all. I've seen the last one on the shelf (in a rack) for so long
> it isn't funny. And every time I look there are the same number (and I
> even checked to make sure they were the same ones).
But I wonder if TRU is the best distribution model for idea books. And I
think it sure was unfortunate that Lego decided to rotate the aspect ratio
from Portrait to Landscape in the most recent book, because the wire-frame
dispensers were designed for Portrait-oriented books with the spine sitting
vertically. Putting the new Landscape-oriented books in the old dispensers
causes them to flop over, become frayed and wrinkled, and look generally
uninviting.
I also wonder if the more recent idea books aren't selling well because they
basically stink compared to the older ones (at least, that's the consensus
here).
It's interesting how many different opinions there are about the models
and pieces now compared to the models and pieces 20 years ago. People
seem to fall into 3 main camps: (a) hate the new stuff, (b) respect the old
stuff but prefer the new stuff, and (c) don't really care too much. Yet,
it's widely agreed that the #6000 Bill & Mary idea book is hands-down
the best one ever, both in coverage and depth of planning...and it's the
oldest.
I just don't think that TLG puts much effort into the idea books anymore.
They seem like more of a checklist-item now, which I think is unfortunate
for kids.
> Idea books sell great to us. They probably sell moderately well to poorly
> to everyone else. If you released a new book every 3 months you would
> either have to do a tiny run or accept sending tons to the recycling bin.
In an efficient distribution model, would the books have to be printed
prior to their purchase?
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 25 Jan 1998 19:20:32 GMT
Mike Stanley <cjc@cdc.net> writes:
> Idea books sell great to us. They probably sell moderately well to poorly
> to everyone else. If you released a new book every 3 months you would
> either have to do a tiny run or accept sending tons to the recycling bin.
Well, see...hopefully they would be high enough quality (content-wise)
that they would be appealing as back-issues. And then people might even
be able to get them cheaper direct from LEGO than in auctions here.
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 20 Jan 1998 18:38:49 GMT
"Elf" <elf@intervett.no> writes:
> visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) writes:
> > Thats not the case. LEGO is going through themes much faster
> > than they used to. These themes "died" because they had reached the
> > end of their life, not because of unpopularity.
>
> And why had they reached the end of their lifespan? Because they
> didn't sell.
No.
Other products in the pipeline pushed them out.
LEGO uses a product development pipeline because they cannot afford to
start developing a new theme when an old theme starts tiring out. By
the time the old theme tires out, they have to have new themes ready to
go. This is sometimes good and sometimes bad. It's good when the
newer product in the pipeline is better than the old one, and it's bad
when the older product is better than the new one.
Take the Aquanauts' Neptune Discovery Lab, for example. It was replaced
in the product matrix by the new Hyrdonauts base. Regardless of how
well the NDL was selling, TLG could not have released the new base last
year because it would be premature entry of the Hydronauts theme, which
is full of new 1998 pieces and would spoil their marketing blitz as
well. If the NDL was still stilling extremely well in mid-1997, they
might have been able to delay the introduction of the new Hydronauts base
until the 1999 season, but then they would be removing steam from
Hydronauts as well as unnecessarily complicating the theme coverage.
It would also delay the recovery of development costs, which is bad for
business.
Keeping older sets around and under production is also costly if they
contain a largely different collection of parts. If TLG is smart about
manufacturing, they keep a very low inventory, and they want to keep the
number of unique parts being manufactured at any given point to a
reasonable level.
In the 80's, when play themes weren't a critical focus for TLG, sets
followed a much more loose cycle, with some lasting 1 year, most lasting
2-3 years, and some lasting 5 years. These may have been sales-based
decisions, and it was also easier then to keep something in production
longer because there were fewer molds.
But TLG is clearly following a more pipelined approach in the past 10
years and considers play themes to be a very important aspect of their
business. With that extra focus in marketing, turnover is all the more
important.
> Some people has pointed out that sets only have a 2 year
> life-span, while they before lasted at least 3 years. The reason for
> this is simple: Lego's sales have declined enormously the past few
> years.
That's news to me.
> So they desperately try to come up with something new. When the
> Time Cruiser strategy failed they stopped that and now they have
> started a Town Jr (wich now is only called Town wich mean that this IS
> the Town-theme now) theme to try a new strategy. When this strategy
> fails (and believe me, it will) they will try something new again.
On what basis is the judgment of failure or success, in this case?
I don't think those can be measured directly as sales. If Town Jr has
dismal sales but ends up converting a huge number of kids from imitation
brands to the real thing, then I would consider Town Jr to be successful
in that aspect.
I don't know if TLG considers failure or success holistically, but I
think it's naive to assume that Time Cruisers and Town Jr are desperate
attempts at anything.
> If a theme sells they will continue it. Simple as that!
Ideally, that would be true. But a disadvantage of pipelines is that
once something's entered them, it's very difficult to remove them. If
you have a system with a product line that can grow without bound, then
there's probably no need to remove a product from pipeline prematurely
prior to its productization or release. And if you have a system with a
product line that can shrink on a whim, then there's probably no worry
in removing a product from the pipeline after its productization or
release. But TLG has put itself into a position where it has neither of
those luxuries. Not that that's necessarily bad -- because pipelining
is good -- but it's just a side-effect of pipelining combined with not
wanting to grow or shrink the product line drastically in any given
year. Drastic changes in product coverage can be difficult to manage
(dangerous even), especially in a large and disjointed company. (Keep
in mind that TLG is a group of approximately 50 companies, all of which
need to synchronize to the motherland...and things need to be planned
very carefully.)
--Todd
____________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.toys.lego
Subject: Re: In defense of TLG and their themes
From: lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman)
Organization: Fibblesnork Software
Date: 21 Jan 1998 04:23:32 GMT
Rob Farver <rfarver@enter.net> writes:
> On 20 Jan 1998 19:25:12 GMT, lehman@visi.com (Todd Lehman) wrote:
> <SNIP>
> >
> > If it were my toy company, you would be able to buy theme buckets of
> > space parts, castle parts, Adventurers parts, etc. Unfortunately these
> > wouldn't probably be as cheap as FreeStyle (i.e. $20 for a big bucket),
> > but you'd at least be able to get them (maybe $60 for a 65-pc bucket).
>
> I wondered how Todd would pay for all that, and now it's clear. At just
> under a dollar a piece he can do just about anything he wants. ;)
>
> Rob
>
> (For the humour impaired, I'm assuming Todd meant $60 for a 650-pc bucket)
LOL -- thanks for catching that. Yes, I meant 650-pc. Like the #4128
red FreeStyle bucket.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 3 Replies: | | Re: "If it were my toy company..."
|
| Go Todd! I agree wholeheartedly with every idea, especially the point about being able to submit your own models for consideration as a company-produced set. Just imagine a line of text on the box: "This Lego set custom designed by: Your name here!" (...) (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: "If it were my toy company..."
|
| Wow! Todd, those were GREAT ideas! The only things I might add if it were my toy company are: 1) To (maybe) re-release discontinued items that are exteremly wanted. I mean, think Demand and Supply - people are willing to pay a heck of a lot for (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
| | | Re: "If it were my toy company..."
|
| Todd Lehman skrev i meddelandet <3853a96b.135213995@...et.com>... (...) this!! (...) saying, (...) flush (...) question. (...) much (...) in (...) _ (...) models. (...) This is good -but perhaps not from a website (also from catalogs, by phone (...) (25 years ago, 18-Dec-99, to lugnet.dear-lego)
|
28 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|