Subject:
|
Re: Let's be realistc (WasRe:MoreVenomAnyone? (WasRe:Givethemabreak (was:Hey,like,isanyonethere?)))
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 10 Feb 2001 00:38:29 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
747 times
|
| |
|
|
> In lugnet.general, Kevin Wilson writes:
>
> > Suzanne D. Rich wrote in message ...
> > So you worry about negative posts here damaging a good relationship with TLC?
> > Please don't. The LEGO Company does have to listen due to the fact that
> > their bulk sales will get a real shot in the arm from us soon, and they
> > planned it that way a long time ago. They are probably stuck with us now, and
> > they will watch here for marketing reasons and PR reasons.
> >
> > Don't be mistaken about LD's motives. Sales to AFOLs are part of a grander
> > plan. It's never been personal or sway-able that I know of.
>
> Suz, you've said things like this before, as if you know much more than the
> rest of us about what's behind various actions of LD... want to elucidate?
>
> Kevin
I know some interesting things, but of course I can't discuss them
before LD announces them. I'll elucidate in another way though.
All of us have had our own unique experiences with TLC. [1] The volume
and variety of contact I've had could lead me to "know more," as you
say, than some folks about the actions of TLC and LD. (but I certainly
don't assume that's the case.) There's a certain type of less experienced AFOL I
worry for. And it's their feelings I worry about.
I've seen someone post, "I think they just don't like us." A highly personal
statement. not a happy one. So I wonder, who exactly is "they" anyway? And what
does it mean for a company to "like" us? How would we know? Is that realistic?
(I know this sounds goofy, but..)
I'll tell you a story:
-----------
Once I was finally "inside" TLC, it didn't take long for me to be crushed.
emotionally that is. Simply seeing the company do company-like things was
painful when I had unconsciously assumed TLC was so much better than that. I
lived in this fantasy of believing that TLC would always do the "right" thing.
the "good" thing. the quality thing. Now I see that I had childish views. But
heck!, I was a FAN.
Today I'm just an enthusiast of the brick. It's a calmer way of life I guess. I
no longer count the days until a new catalog comes out, or attempt to con
retailers into giving me their catalog, or try to obtain LEGO signage from TRU,
or insist on being "such-and-such complete". Instead, I'm kinda numbed out. But
I still love to build. I love to talk about and see models. I love the old sets.
Those passions haven't changed. And now I love the community more than ever. I
love to watch what people build.
But I'm not the same as I was.
-------------
So it's not "secret facts" that I allude to in my posts. It's more like
this: I see my friends standing in the street about to be hit by a
truck, but they're stone still and smiling because they see that it's an
ice cream truck.
I've been treated differently by LD than the rest of TLC. Even people in
TLC I've previously had contact with act differently toward me on LD
turf. I'm now treated as naive and manipulatable. Sometimes I feel insulted.
Often it's not until the day after a meeting with LD that I realize what really
happened.
I've been watching LD's sweet performances as they're strategically carried
out. Some AFOLs fall for them -- hook, line and sinker. I don't. They
indicate to me that TLC and LD are no more interested in our community
than they ever were. I believe we're being used -- just as any smart company
would use their enthusiasts. I'd just prefer it without the sugar coating.
For instance: A year ago, I wish Brad had flat out said:
"We're building a tool to accept uploading of the thousands of
models you've all built in the .dat file format. You will buy
loads of bricks from our new LD sales site and all your hot
models will make us look super to the surfing public and our
bosses. We'll even reveal our new hybrid file format so you folks
will build modeling apps. (We know you'd prefer to run community
made software.)" Blah, blah, blah..
That wouldn't have been bad news at all! I would have been happy. It would have
looked like a mutually beneficial future. But the above tone wouldn't have
brought on the desired "super buzz." And the company's motives would have been
too exposed.
INSTEAD, Brad described his announcement as "the light at the end of [AFOLs']
tunnel," and declared he was "ready to bring cheer" to us all. As if LD was
created in the heavens just for us. Our prayers were about to be answered.
That's what I mean by LD leaving out some truth. Or when LD's promises never pan
out, community trust and faith are damaged. It makes me angry to think there's
even a possibility of LD's methods leading to some fans losing their passion for
TLC, or LEGO enthusiasts becoming less enthusiastic.
I know it's not rocket science to make mental leaps to the whole truth, but it
makes a real difference to me when I feel like I've been had. Or when I can tell
someone's attempting to play with my head. Such a slimy "relationship" makes me
ill. I have to assume there's someone else in the community who shares that
feeling. Seeing some posts lately where the author is in a panic about stability
of our ties with LD upsets me. How can I assure them that the sky will not fall?
Note that LD is representing the entire LEGO Company here. (They don't actually,
but to most people like us, it's one and the same.) That's a huge and serious
responsibility. Yet all of it appears to be in the hands of two people! I'm
shocked that TLC would do this. And I really don't want LD to blow it. It would
be so difficult to fix a blunder here.
Well, as more elucidation I could document many little examples for others in
the community to put together. Perhaps people would agree with my conclusions.
Perhaps some people wouldn't get it because they haven't the experience to
recognize such stuff. But if you're at all interested in these things, try to
trust me.
It really wouldn't be wise for me to say more. I don't want to cause the very
thing I fear.
If there's something significcant I know about, it's that LD isn't representing
TLC very accurately, they're not up-front, their primary aim is to make money
for TLC, and that it may be best for AFOLs to not get too excited or too down
about LD and what they say/do. I think it's smarter to just go back to playing.
Then whatever happens happens.
If I still don't seem clear, please LMK. I am trying.
-Suz
[1]
As for myself, beyond being a consumer, collector and builder, my
official LEGO Company experiences have included: candidate for
employment at DACTA R&D; concept designer in a special LEGO summer
program; designer on contract for Futura (technology product concepts
and presentations) over 2 years; designer, creator, and manager of a
LEGO building-lab at MIT; being a LEGO Fellow at the MIT Media Lab, studied
under creators of the RCX, took over the Constructopedia, was a host
at MIT's MindFest, meeting with various LEGO Company lawyers over the
past 4 years or so, meeting with LEGO VP's regarding LUGNET, having a
friend who's a retailer selling LEGO, designing ads and website for LEGO sales,
attending Toy Fairs, planning a wedding at LEGOLAND, and finally....
dealing with Mr. Justus.
|
|
Message has 6 Replies:
 | | Re: Let's be realistc
|
| (...) Honestly, I think that many of us who are still "inside" TLC can relate to this worry. It's a very good point and I'm glad you brought it up. With any company -- from a restaurant to a multinational corporation -- it's a little difficult to (...) (24 years ago, 10-Feb-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego.direct)
|
Message is in Reply To:
19 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
|
|
|
|
