Subject:
|
Re: LEGO name branding = Builder's Reverie
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 2 Apr 2000 17:54:06 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
1988 times
|
| |
|
|
richard marchetti wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > I mean that LEGO desperately needs (IMHO) to break the association with
> > "lego" or "legos" meaning any old random kind of plastic building bricks
> > to the average consumer -- not that it necessarily needs to break the
> > association between the name "LEGO" and the idea of "LEGO brand building
> > bricks."
>
> I agree that TLC needs to accomplish this to remain competitive. How and why
> this will prove difficult is a big subject. Here's a short list of problems:
>
> 1. Quality control of the brick has dropped -- to be number one, the product
> itself must be of the HIGHEST quality. Anything less than outstanding means
> that they can just join the pack of plastic brick makers.
Agreed. I'm sure many people have noticed lately that they are de-molding the
bricks WAY too soon. Grab a nice new set with long 1x bricks in it - look at the
sides of those bricks. Many of them will have sags in them from being pulled from
the molds too hot (I refuse to believe their moldmakers have gotten that sloppy).
It's disgusting.
> 2. Brick design is currently abysmal [i.e. castle walls, juniorization].
I know that this is probably to make the building faster, but it CAN'T be cheaper.
If you have a choice between creating a new, very expensive, large mold in
quantity, or just ordering up X molds of parts A/B/C that you already have, so the
molds can be machined quickly, it's got to be cheaper to do the second. And the
ABS cost between the 2 has got to be minimal.
> 3. Price per brick. [Suggested price should result in nothing more costly
> than 1 brick = $0.10 USD, see SW sets and competing brands for a reality check
> price-wise. A 450 pc. set should never cost close to $90 USD and there should
> be price uniformity between themes and set sizes.]
Not agreed - I'd have no problem paying $.20/piece IF the pieces in there were
absolutely killer. The Juniorized CRAPP they build today doesn't fit that
description, even if there is a lot of ABS in it.
> 4. The Competition is INDEED improving. Ritvik/MegaBloks, in particular, has
> some pretty cool set designs now and the brick quality is getting better. One
> of the advantages that TLC has over the competition, and it was something TYCO
> understood very well, is its reliance on 1 x Y brick construction over the 2 x
> Y brick reliant constructions of the competition. Its all about the 1 x Y
> brick!
Agreed, if Megablocks gets any better (i.e. uses good ABS), I'm going to have to
start buying them for bulk projects.
> 5. Advertising should stress not the toy that can be built with a set, but
> that one can immediately abandon that single suggested structure and build
> anything one wants with the BRICKS! [This is sort of a playability issue that
> requires some careful thinking -- is it better to play with a SW toy, or to
> play with that for a while, take it apart, build something else, and then play
> with that newly constructed whoozywhatsit?]
>
> As Todd points out, they suffer BIG TIME of branding problems. Lego may
> identify a type of toy rather than a brand name of a toy maker in common
> parlance (that old Xerox = photocopy problem, and look at what Xerox is going
> through and everything they missed as an opportunity -- can you say "Gooey"!?).
>
> I am reminded of the McDonald's commercial where the parents are reading or
> something while the kids are in the background building with their Happy Meal
> Lego sets. Everyone here seemed to really enjoy that commercial. I think
> that they closely identified with both the parents enjoying their peace AND
> the kids engaged in that "builder's reverie." I know that everyone was having
> that "neither-neither" space buzz when they saw that commercial.
>
> And that's the missing piece of the puzzle: TLC must learn to advertise the
> notion of "builder's reverie." That's how to win the game before its begun,
> equate your product with ACTUALLY being high from creativity.
>
> -- Richard (And now for Saturday Night proper...)
--
Tom Stangl
***http://www.vfaq.com/
***DSM Visual FAQ home
***http://ba.dsm.org/
***SF Bay Area DSMs
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LEGO name branding = Builder's Reverie
|
| (...) product (...) means (...) the (...) at the (...) pulled from (...) sloppy). (...) And I thought that it was just me... I've got quite a few 1x16 bricks and 12x24 megabricks now, and when assembling them into my new ship, i've noticed that some (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | LEGO name branding = Builder's Reverie
|
| (...) I agree that TLC needs to accomplish this to remain competitive. How and why this will prove difficult is a big subject. Here's a short list of problems: 1. Quality control of the brick has dropped -- to be number one, the product itself must (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-00, to lugnet.general)
|
35 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
|
|
|
|
