Subject:
|
Re: End of Year Thoughts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 29 Nov 2001 18:06:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
528 times
|
| |
|
|
A general response to all that has been said in this thread.
Didn't Lego Group have a terrible year in 1999 as well? It seems to me the
business decisions made in 1998 lead to the terrible year in 1999. Now 2000 is
bad! That would mean 1999 decisions are affecting (or is it effecting) the past
year. Wouldn't that mean that if 2001 is bad then all of the decisions since
1998 have been poor.
By my calculations that would mean that Bioncile, Harry Potter and Star Wars,
not to mention Arctic, Life on Mars, Alpha Team, Spielburg, and Jurasic Park,
would all have been part of the problem not the solution. Although I think the
economic downturn will be a large part of the problem in 2001.
But what is LEGO Groups true focus? The main focus of LEGO Group is the same
focus of any international company, to make money. The way to do that is to
find a product that people will pay money for. The problem is that people
change their minds and stop spending money on the same things. I use as my
evidence the fashion industry. If people always wore the same things, then
there wouldn't be much of an industry.
So LEGO Group must do what they can with the product they have developed to
maintain sales. Since children, sorry adults, stopped buying the bricks, then
LEGO Group had to do something to sell more product. Since the old brick wasn't
selling like it use to they had to adapt the brick to the new consumer.
Children today are not that imaginative. Trust me, imagination has been
replaced with toys that talk more, emit more sounds, do more and generally are
supposed to cost less than $10.00. Big time expensive toys are bought for
birthday and holidays like that big marketing bonanza where one quarter to one
third of all retail sales are made, Thanksgiving to Christmas.
So how has LEGO Group adapted their product? I think they have used a four stud
attack which I outline below.
Stud One: Technology, Technology, Technology
Without adopting technology in the product line LEGO Group is sunk. You can see
the effort in Mindstorms, that smart toy thing (name escapes me), and Bionicle
games for the popular game consoles. The later is to help children remember
LEGO Group and their line of toys is still cool. Spielburg is another example
of this and those that hate it have missed the point. The point was to provide
children, and yes adults, with another means of being creative, maybe in a new
genre, using a familiar product, the block. Yes the camera sucks, but then the
product was only $200 and you get what you pay for. If you want Hollywood style
productions, buy a better camera and software.
Stud Two: Market, Market, Market
LEGO Group really had lost all market focus prior to Star Wars In My Humble
Opinion, IMHO. The Star Wars line was the right thing to do and I believe sales
has born this out. The bricks range from basic to specialized and in the
appropriate colors and children can always take the basic building blocks and
do more with it. (By the way, if your kid isn't doing more with sets, i.e.
taking them down and building other things, like Star Wars, Harry Potter,
Jurasic Park, and others marketed around movies and other kid attractants then
don't play the product. I once took a horse to water, but I don't blame the
water or the trough for the horses failure to drink).
Stud Three: Bridge the Gap
Not the Gap store but the gully, the divide, the canyon, between Duplo and
building sets. I have first hand experience with this and my nephew. A well
intentioned aunt bought fo my nephew a car from the space set. The product said
"for ages 4 and up" but he just turned three. He need help to assemble it and
when he played with it, it fell apart. This required multiple trips to Uncle
Todd, who was the resident LEGO expert, to reassemble the car so that it could
be smashed up again. Despite repeated attempts to teach a three year old how to
assemble products made for children 4 or more years of development, my nephew
never got it. (Has nothing to do with the horse analogy from before).
So LEGO Group has tried to bridge this gap with Town Jr. and Jack Stone. My
Nephew was given one of these sets when they first came out. He loves it. Plays
with it all the time. Tells me he is a big boy cause he can get it back
together by himself without my help. Does it suck for building? Yes! It is
intended for those that grew up with LEGO Products over the last 25 years,
NO!!!!!!! Will I buy similar products until my nephew can handle the products
designed for his development, YES!!! LEGO Group keep the development up for
this line, you are on the right track!
Stud Four: Throw stuff out their and see what works.
Every company does this and LEGO Group is no exception. The products are a
growing list of failures, but hey they are trying. The crowning example of this
is ZAP! What were they thinking? But to get to Bionicle, you need to go through
ZAP hang a left at Slizers and a right at ROBO Raiders. Are they doing right
with Bionicle? Only time will tell. But I will tell you this. Building a story
line and a following around a product that goes beyond the pieces is right on
track for today's children.
Not to belabor this point, but children are spoon-fed imagination and
creativity. When I was growing up I might have created a story around Bionicle,
but children today are not used to having to do that so they lack the skills
and intellectual development.
Does that mean they can't, of course, not. Does it mean the LEGO Group is
responsible for helping children do this? NO! LEGO Group's goal is staying in
business and in today's world of changing markets that's a lot to do.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: End of Year Thoughts
|
| (...) <snip> You bring up some valid points of view in your post... Just a couple comments though... (...) But where does this bridge to?? Without some sort of Town or City sets designed for an older age bracket (6-12), then they have simply (...) (23 years ago, 29-Nov-01, to lugnet.general)
| | | RE: End of Year Thoughts
|
| (...) A 3 year old will still tell you that one twig she's digging in the dirt with is a shovel, and the other twig is a rake. But maybe that's just the kids I know... I'm sure there are still plenty of kids who think the cardboard box is a heck of (...) (23 years ago, 30-Nov-01, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | End of Year Thoughts
|
| Hi all, Okay I am about to ramble endlessly again. Everything I am about to spout forth is indeed my own uneducated opinion. Feel free to educate me on any points that are off-base (just do it nicely, pretty please)... Also, forgive me if .general (...) (23 years ago, 28-Nov-01, to lugnet.general) !
|
60 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
|
|
|
|
