Subject:
|
Re: Pricing on Lego Sets
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 Aug 2000 19:59:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
979 times
|
| |
|
|
Ben Gatrelle <ben@yellowcastle.spam.com> wrote in message
news:Fz1A63.MBp@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.general, Timothy D. Freshly writes:
> > We consumers all recognize the great play value in LEGO sets;
> > especially when you or your child has a good size collection.
> >
> > However, getting to that point has become prohibitively expensive for
> > so many families.
> >
> > Back in 1980, I was on a business trip with my parents in Hartford, CT. • I
> > guess I had been bugging my mom to buy me a set and was being a pain in • the
> > backside, because she bought me an X-1 Patrol Craft for something like
> > $3.00. For the rest of that trip, all I did was play with that set. • With a
> > grand total of 53 pieces, I can remember making 100 or so different MOCs.
> > Looking back, that was GOOD PLAY VALUE.
> >
> > Any juniorized set today can not even come close to matching that kind of
> > play value. Until Lego recognizes the importance of play value to
> > consumers, <snip>
>
> I think what you mean here is that until The LEGO Group redefines "play • value"
> to what you want it to mean, or what you think it means, they have not
> recognized the importance of play value. But play value is all TLG talks
> about. Read their product literature. For you and me (almost 30 years • old)
> the classic space sets that we grew up on had lots of "play value" because • the
> pieces were less "juniorized" and we had more creative control over what • we
> built. TLG's tag line in much of that literature is "Just Imagine..." • which I
> think we both agree is harder do no now than mid to late 70's when they • had
> less specialized pieces. Of course what we consider great is "juniroized" • by
> classic classic collectors like Gary Istok who remember fondly the • pre-minifig
> era when it really took imagination to build things.
>
> BEN GATRELLE
One point is that if LEGO does not meet a consumer's interpretation of "good
play value" (providing a product that is worth the amount of money spent to
obtain such product), then that consumer will not purchase the product
(especially if another "better" play value product is available). Each
consumer must determine for themselves what they consider to be a "good"
value. Those who believe Lego is a good value will buy; those who do not
will not. However, it appears that the current higher prices for less
pieces may be keeping some consumers away from the product, either initially
or after the first purchase (who hasn't heard some parent comment that Lego
is "too expensive" - comments like that indicate that those people do not
believe Lego has good "play value").
Tim
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Pricing on Lego Sets
|
| (...) I think what you mean here is that until The LEGO Group redefines "play value" to what you want it to mean, or what you think it means, they have not recognized the importance of play value. But play value is all TLG talks about. Read their (...) (24 years ago, 9-Aug-00, to lugnet.general)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
