Subject:
|
Re: most of us hate junorization but...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 10 Jul 2001 14:21:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
844 times
|
| |
|
|
<clipped for length>
I, too, am curious about what demographic is "appreciating" the juniorized
lines.
I have read many posts on LUGnet about the current state of TLC's product line,
especially concerning fans' disappointment and confusion with the newest sets.
From these posts I decided to make some critiques of my own having to do with
Lego's marketing behavior. Please realize this is purely my uneducated opinion
and I only submit the following observations as a point of departure for more
discussion and continued thought. The point of this is the hope for a positive
outcome. If you have a wish for Lego, please be encouraged to respond here, the
same goes for constructive criticism.
So, to begin...
Product Development and Differentiation Problems
---Lego's products are too similar to toys from other manufacturers...
There is nothing to distinguish the Scala, Belville, Jack Stone and Racers lines
from already well established non-construction competitors, such as Barbie and
Max Steel and Hot Wheels. The Lego Brand and peg holes are not enough to carry
the products, especially when the sculpting and design are sub-par.
---Lego's products are too similar to its own existing lines...
The similarity of the Creator line to the System line is confusing. One is
uncertain if this is product fractionalizing, fusion, merging or replacement.
Reading posts connected to the new sets, you see this lack of delineation has
perplexed the customer base. Are minifigs being EOL'd?
POP (Point of Purchase) and Availability Problems
---Lego's products are not placed along side competing products...
The "toy store within a toy store", single aisle categorization of the Lego
brand is restrictive of sales. Despite the "construction toy" moniker, Lego is *
also* a playset toy and as such should *in addition* be stocked along with non-
construction playsets of the same theme. This was done with much success with
the SW line in many outlets. This, I feel, could have also saved the poorly
marketed Paradisa line (the evolving dollhouse for intelligent young women).
---Lego's products are losing shelf space to competitors (Mega Block, Kubrick,
Playmobil (non-construction but themed), etc.)...
Three things are at play here: product differentiation (mentioned above), patent
infringement (or at least trademark dissolution) and failing to meet the demand
of the consumer (in price point, package content and theme development). As
strong a toy concept as Lego is, there should be no room for figurative or
literal adjacency.
---Retail inventory is low...
I read a post which proposed that Lego is cutting back their inventories in
brick & mortar stores in favor of shop.lego.com. I doubt this is true
considering that a heavy percentage of toy purchases are impulsive with the
point of purchase almost always being in-store and the sale being kid-driven
(with plenty of tugging on Mom or Dad's sleeve). Kids don't shop online, parents
(and AFOLs) do. But this raises an issue: Why are stocks getting low? I noticed
this myself. There's not even enough sets to do proper shelf-blocking at my
local WM & KB. The absence of product looks bad and is disconcerting. Is this
only a localized inventory problem?
---Some products are only available through LD/S@H...
Lego may never realize the true potential of some lines because they are only
available through mail order. As mentioned above, toy purchases tend to be
impulsive with the decision made in-store. This may not affect the sales of sets
geared toward AFOLs, but what does the general toy-buying population know of
Lego's lines if they've never heard of S@H?
---Sales are being cannibalized through aftermarket exchange...
I hate to admit this one because I am a fan of Brickbay and eBay. But these
outlets affect sales. For example, I did not buy a few current sets because the
two or three pieces and minifigs I desired I was able to get for a fraction of
the expense as aftermarket purchases, defusing the ARFMoB (A Reason For More
Bricks) potential of these items. There is a loss of profit for Lego in me
buying low-margin pieces carte blanc. But this situation only exists because
Lego does not make premium pieces available in reasonably priced sets. The
argument for items in bulk can also be added here.
---Sales are lost through slow revival...
Ideas never die in the toy development biz because kids grow up fast and there
is a constant set of new eyes every few years. Also, as far as toy concepts go,
kids pretty much play the same way they always have despite being in a "modern
age". Since time began there have been some form of modelling clay, construction
sets, magic tricks and action figures. And in as much as ways of play being
perennial, there are archetypal themes that attract children generation after
generation. What I'm getting to is that Lego (despite having the molds available
and most parts still in manufacture) has lost 3 cycles of kids (over a decade)
whose only interest in Lego may have been through Pirates or some such theme.
Why are sets retired and not just "rested and revived" once the market for a
theme has plateaued? Maybe we'll see a change to this with the Legends and
Classics directions.
---Lego misses trends...
Lego has gotten better about this as of late mostly due to the actual purchase
of licenses, but there have been occasions where had set themes coincided with
what was going on in the mainstream culture the market would have been kindlier
to the products. For instance: the Ninja line ended too soon to be aided by
Crouching Tiger HD; the Adventurers desert set hit between both Mummy movies and
the jungle set missed Tomb Raider; the female soccer team would had been clever
during the World Championships or even the Olympics (oh yeah, what is this I
hear that Lego hates Aussies?); and Shrek could have sold a few more castle sets
had the market not been saturated (and the sets worth it).
There is much more to add to the list of criticisms, such as the relationships
between TLC and its fan base (ie, support of LUGs, effectiveness of a LOM truck
tour, robotics competitions), but I'll end here to save your eyes. Please add
your 2 cents! Your response is bigger than you think.
Thanks,
Jim Green
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | most of us hate junorization but...
|
| Does anyone know (does TLC even know) whether kids, parents, AFOLs and other lego consumers accually prefer junorized sets? Here is an idea for an experiment: Get a representitave sample of the lego customer base (kids, parents, AFOLs, AFOLs who are (...) (23 years ago, 5-Jul-01, to lugnet.general)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
