Subject:
|
Re: !!!IMPORTANT!!!-SPUDS No fault of TLG-!!!IMPORTANT!!!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.dear-lego
|
Date:
|
Sun, 25 Feb 2001 22:22:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1258 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, James Jackson writes:
> What are SPUDs and POOPs? I understand that the online LEGO community has
Check out Shiri Dori's Scronym Guide:
http://www.lugnet.com/~88/acronym_faq/
> As for the Bridge issue, I can only say the 2x4 3HBCs (triple-height brick
> composites) were used in order to make the well-desired bridge not cost so much
> it makes AFOLs, KFOLs and their parents broke trying to buy it. In that sense,
> cheaper consumer cost defeats cheaper product. However, I disagree when the
> cheaper composites are used on sets to lower piece counts, but the set is still
> the same in price as one using unit elements, excluding inflation. Think about
> that sometime, and let me know what you think.
I can't see the composite pieces saving money. If you are already
producing the individual pieces in great quantity, then there is a
good economy of scale there to keep prices reduced. The moment you
add a new piece, you've just:
1) paid for the new tooling costs
2) begin paying for the overhead costs associated with having another
part number to manage in your company
3) made the existing pieces (that the composite "replaces") more expensive
if you reduce their volume as a result (reduced economy of scale). If
you never stop producing the original pieces then economy of scale for
both items suffers.
The only way I can see adding composite pieces being a cost-saving
measure is if the current machinery is running at full capacity
with the smaller separate parts. Adding composite pieces may help
to increase output more cheaply then adding new machinery. But
this will only be practical if all the set lines evolve to use
the new composite pieces wherever possible and reduce demand on
the original smaller pieces. In the case of the 2x4x3 superbrick,
LEGO would have to heavily reduce its output of the trademark 2x4
brick to pull this off. The irony in that is just too sad :[
Another way there may be a cost-saving is if the current smaller
pieces are difficult to make and have a high scrap rate. One larger
composite piece may be easier to pull off. But I would think that
TLC has manufacturing of the 2x4 brick down pat by now.
IMHO, their real problem is marketing.
KDJ
_______________________________________
LUGNETer #203, Windsor, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
37 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
|
|
|
|
