 | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hey guys,
I finally got to my senses and decided to advertise around my hs for used
lego... I should've done it a long time ago. But I think this (near the end
of the year) is also a good time, since I have a lot of free classes and I
know a lot more people than in the beginning of the year. ;-) Plus, most
kids are prolly desperate for some money for the summer. ;-)
I put up ads (that were later taken down (1)) asking for lego, and also
asked anyone in my classes, all the people I know, and anyone I happened to
see during my free classes and lunch. I handed out my phone number to at
least 30, 40 people, etc, etc.
A *lot* of people said they have too much sentimental value, others said
they have little siblings, or they moved and left it behind, or gave it
away. An absolutely overwhelming amount of people said they still play with
them... (more about that later)... A bunch of people said that they're
called legos, not lego, and most of the time I didn't argue. ;-) But a lot
of people said they'll check and get back to me.
Well, today someone gave me my first batch of stuff. For $5, I got a red
plastic container w/LEGO printed on it (a set all by itself, tho I can't
remember the #). It was full to the brim with lego. Among these, I already
recognized pieces from.... Poolside Paradise, <set:6552 Rocky
River Retreat>, Pulsar Charger, Pizza To Go, what
looks like a Police Helicopter, and other numerous unidentified
pieces. There are two forestman figs, a few classic space dudes, two knights
(with two European armor pieces!!), and none other than the *clear* minifig
dress (2x2x2 slope). How sweet! All that - $5. Surely most of the sets are
not complete, but the girl said she has more to bring tomorrow, and most of
the rare pieces seem to be there; so possibly I could complete the sets from
my own collection. Definitely a good find.
More people promised to bring me lego tomorrow, and others will hopefully
call me. :-)
Plus, I was really amazed by how many teenagers (these are kids about 14-18)
said that they *love* their lego and still play with it. Wow! I asked well
over a hundred, maybe two hundred kids, and I think at least a quarter of
them said they would never give them away. Some, I found out, are actually
minor-AFOLs and crazy about lego. I gave the lugnet URL to a couple of them.
My theory is - LEGO doesn't take care of its audience as they grow up. TLC
would be well off to stop putting ages on the boxes, *especially* cutting
off the boxes at twelve. Kids get the "aren't you too old?" comment once
they pass 12 and so TLC loses its chance to keep an audience that would,
oncreasingly, be able to pay for sets from their own pocket. Instead of
pampering these kids with bigger, more challanging sets, that aren't limited
in age (2), or rather are *targeted and marketed towards* early teens. If
they create a market image that LEGO is cool - that LEGO isn't just for
"kids" - people will be a lot more inclined, and less ashamed, to continue
their childhood hobby. The teens who just now start making their own money
can start buying things on their own... and as time goes by they will be
able to afford more and more sets, letting the hobby become an addiction,
and that can only be a good thing for the company...
Well, just some thoughts. I'd Xpost to .lego.direct, but the first part of
this post is really inappropriate there. Maybe some other time.
-Shiri
(1) We're not supposed to put up non-school-related commercial stuff... boo :-(
(2) The 6-99 age "restriction" on the HP computer game is a good start, I'll
say. But definitely *just* a start.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.general, Shiri Dori writes:
>
> A *lot* of people said they have too much sentimental value, others said
> they have little siblings, or they moved and left it behind, or gave it
> away. An absolutely overwhelming amount of people said they still play with
> them... (more about that later)
Wow Shiri, that's really cool...
> ... A bunch of people said that they're
> called legos, not lego, and most of the time I didn't argue. ;-)
LOL!
> Well, today someone gave me my first batch of stuff. For $5, I got a red
> plastic container w/LEGO printed on it (a set all by itself, tho I can't
> remember the #). It was full to the brim with lego. Among these, I already
> recognized pieces from.... Poolside Paradise, <set:6552 Rocky
> River Retreat>, Pulsar Charger, Pizza To Go, what
> looks like a Police Helicopter, and other numerous unidentified
> pieces. There are two forestman figs, a few classic space dudes, two knights
> (with two European armor pieces!!), and none other than the *clear* minifig
> dress (2x2x2 slope). How sweet! All that - $5. Surely most of the sets are
> not complete, but the girl said she has more to bring tomorrow, and most of
> the rare pieces seem to be there; so possibly I could complete the sets from
> my own collection. Definitely a good find.
Find of the week? Probably after tomorrows batch I'd say!
> Plus, I was really amazed by how many teenagers (these are kids about 14-18)
> said that they *love* their lego and still play with it. Wow! I asked well
> over a hundred, maybe two hundred kids, and I think at least a quarter of
> them said they would never give them away. Some, I found out, are actually
> minor-AFOLs and crazy about lego. I gave the lugnet URL to a couple of them.
Again, VERY cool!
>
> My theory is - LEGO doesn't take care of its audience as they grow up. TLC
> would be well off to stop putting ages on the boxes, *especially* cutting
> off the boxes at twelve. Kids get the "aren't you too old?" comment once
> they pass 12 and so TLC loses its chance to keep an audience that would,
> oncreasingly, be able to pay for sets from their own pocket. Instead of
> pampering these kids with bigger, more challanging sets, that aren't limited
> in age (2), or rather are *targeted and marketed towards* early teens. If
> they create a market image that LEGO is cool - that LEGO isn't just for
> "kids" - people will be a lot more inclined, and less ashamed, to continue
> their childhood hobby. The teens who just now start making their own money
> can start buying things on their own... and as time goes by they will be
> able to afford more and more sets, letting the hobby become an addiction,
> and that can only be a good thing for the company...
>
> Well, just some thoughts. I'd Xpost to .lego.direct, but the first part of
> this post is really inappropriate there. Maybe some other time.
You have hit on a VERY valid point here. There was a time when a kid could
graduate through the LEGO line, so teens using Technic wouldn't feel ashamed
for "playing with toys", and their original sets were just bulk fodder for
their more advanced creations. In this age of license aquisition and
character development, LEGO seems to have forgotten this (see my rant from a
few days ago).
You SHOULD post this to lego.direct, but moreso to dear-lego. They need to
hear this oud and clear. Go for it, girl!
Matt
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Matthew Gerber wrote:
> You have hit on a VERY valid point here. There was a time when a kid could
> graduate through the LEGO line, so teens using Technic wouldn't feel ashamed
> for "playing with toys", and their original sets were just bulk fodder for
> their more advanced creations. In this age of license aquisition and
> character development, LEGO seems to have forgotten this (see my rant from a
> few days ago).
Yea, one wonders what my life would have been like if I was a few years
younger and got to play with the Technic they got at my high school
while I was in college. I was a real sucker for it when Mindstorms came
along and then I discovered Lugnet etc. because I had already looked at
LEGO several times for gaming (but couldn't imagine getting enough to
really use, besides, how would my lead miniatures stand up properly on
all those studs...). Boy, if Steve Jackson had published the Pirate Game
earlier, I would have been sunk long ago, ah well, better get on with
the sinking....
Frank
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I think I'll take you up on that, right now actually. ;-)
(I am not expecting a reply from anyone, so this fits in dear-lego, but I
still hope someone will be listening. Anyway, FUTs to dear-lego.)
Dear LEGO, and dear LEGO Direct reps.:
To introduce myself, my name is Shiri Dori, and I am almost 17. I have
always loved LEGO, as far as I can remember myself. At various points of my
life I played with it less, or was ashamed to admit my hobby, but I never
really put it aside or sold it.
Right now I am active in lugnet and the LEGO community (as you may or may
not know). I have heard about many people's experiences, how they got into
lego, how they got out of LEGO, and how they got in again.
In the past week or so I've been advertising around my high-school, in
Newton, Mass, offering to buy used LEGO. I put up ads asking for LEGO, and also
asked anyone in my classes, my teachers, all the people I know, and anyone I
happened to see during my free classes and lunch, if they were interested in
selling LEGO to me. I must've talked to anywhere from 150 to 200 kids. I
handed out my phone number to at least 30-40 people, etc., and asked my
friends to tell their friends. A *lot* of people said they have too much
sentimental value, others said they have little siblings, or they moved and
left the LEGO behind, or gave it away... you get the picture.
But an absolutely overwhelming amount of people said they still play with
them... I estimate that about a quarter to a fifth of the people I asked
said that either they, or their teenage/adult children, still actively
played with LEGO or where "obssessed" with LEGO. I was really amazed by how
many teenagers (these are kids about 14-18) said that they *love* their LEGO
and still play with it.
My theory is - the LEGO Company doesn't take care of its audience as they
grow up. TLC would be well off to stop putting ages on the boxes,
*especially* cutting off the boxes at twelve. Kids get the "aren't you too
old?" comment once they pass 12 and so TLC loses its chance to keep an
audience that would,
oncreasingly, be able to pay for sets from their own pocket. Instead of
pampering these kids with bigger, more challanging sets, that aren't limited
in age (1), or rather are *targeted and marketed towards* early teens. If
they create a market image that LEGO is cool - that LEGO isn't just for
"kids" - people will be a lot more inclined, and less ashamed, to continue
their childhood hobby. The teens who just now start making their own money
can start buying things on their own... and as time goes by they will be
able to afford more and more sets, letting the hobby become an addiction,
and that can only be a good thing for the company...
All I can thing of is the Driver's Ed. video I just watched the other night
- talking about how alcohol and beer companies create a popular image for
their drinks, that attracts young or heavy users. The video also showed how
they rely on heavy drinkers for most of their income (one of the factoids
was: 10% of the drinkers purchase about 50% of the alcohol manufactured in
the U.S.). Not to bash anyone at all here, I'm just suggesting that by
encouraging heavy buyers you will increase your profit much more than by
trying to recruit more customers and then sending them away, a few years
later. And certainly, LEGO addiction is a lot less harmful than alcohol
addiction! (IMHO!)
These are obviously simply suggestions. But I think they would benefit your
company, and many individuals who lose out on the fun.
Good luck,
-Shiri
P.S. a lot of this is c&p'd and edited from my post:
http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=30506
(1) The 6-99 age "restriction" on the HP computer game is a good start, I'll
say. But definitely *just* a start.
| | | | | | |
