 | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | To All, Well, this is very disappointing to see. Especially since SW was pretty strong in 2000. I do't know what to think. Sometimes I wish I could see what they really sell and what they really think. I always hate seeing my favorite companies (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Arnold Staniczek
|
| | | | | (...) market loss to Pokemon, Game Boy etc., stupid new lines: ZNAP, Lego clothes, clocks and watches.... (...) Bionicle, bionicle, bionicle....... (...) I'm not sure..... scratchin' brickhead (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | To All, (...) Perhaps somewhat to video games, I know I played a lot of Atari 2600 and used LEGO as well, so it might be an overall impact, but not a specific one. Most LEGO software to me seems... rather useless I guess. Those other things you (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Ray Sanders
|
| | | | | (...) My guess would be Star Warsz. Every store that had overstock, always had large amounts of SW. I wonder if TLC still has warehouses full of it. SW was a licensed product line. Not only did TLC have the overhead of designing the sets, but (I (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | Ray & All, (...) If I remember right, they are on two year cycles, and I think all the ones you mentioned are on it. Scott S. (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) Rock Raiders, yes, I think so... 1999 sets. Arctic and Knights Kingdom?? I'm not sure about that, aren't they 2000 sets? So they're not quite at end of life yet. Note that, IIRC, the Spring catalog traditionally has been the "lightest" and (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Scott Sanburn
|
| | | | | | | (...) Yes, RR are gone, the others no. Those are 2000. So I missed a year. : ) Scott S. -- (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Eric Kingsley
|
| | | | | | | (...) I'm theorizing here but I think they are possibly trying to scale down the catalogs because of the emergence of shop.lego.com. Even the themes that do appear in the catalog many of them are incomplete and have a "Look for more XXX-theme (...) (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Suzanne D. Rich
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) -Suz (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | | | "Eric Kingsley" <kingsley@nelug.org> wrote in message news:G9JEzM.AHB@lugnet.com... (...) ^^^ I would sure hope not... ;-) -Tim (24 years ago, 1-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Matt Brooks
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) Were these lines involved with Anime in any way??? Matt (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | | | | | | "Matt Brooks" <mbrooks@sonic.net> wrote in message news:3A9FCDE1.BB2B52...nic.net... (...) ROFL!! Jeff, any comment? -Tim (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Tony Hafner
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Ugh- at least you can turn a physical page in less than 2 minutes. -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Anders Isaksson
|
| | | | | | "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> skrev i meddelandet news:G9JE9r.8LM@lugnet.com... (...) Speaking of 'light' catalogs, my reaction to the Swedish 2001 catalog was: "The heaviest I ever seen (when put on a scale), but not so much Lego (...) (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Benjamin Medinets
|
| | | | | | (...) And I just want to add I like none of the new stuff at all... I don't like any of the studio line - way, WAY overpriced racers or race, bionicle, 95% of the life on mars - most of the sets were probably designed by people in a loony bin (...) (24 years ago, 3-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: LEGO Company announces poor performance in year 2000 —Rose Regner
|
| | | | Scott Sanburn wrote in message ... (...) One thing that does impact their losses are the dot com failures, how much are they losing to Etoys? Rose (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.general)
|
| | | | |
