| |
I'm just curious to know something...
This original posting has drawn over 50 responses (both pro and con) and yet
this message itself has only 1 spotlight vote for it. Doesn't any one use
the Highlight/Spotlight system? Doesn't a posting like this, which gets
people talking and debating issues deserve to be noticed on the front page
of LUGNET?
Any thoughts?
Regards,
Allan B.
> In lugnet.general, John P. Henderson writes:
> 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 is not quite the right place for this....
>
> ...So, I was just browsing around and happened across this:
>
> http://www.lego.com/eng/info/press/morepress.asp?CategoryId=4&id=171
>
> It was from this past spring, regarding the performance of TLC in 2000. In
> it, Poul Plougmann, Executive Vice President of TLC is quoted to acknowledge
> the previous year had losses due to lack of focus. He states that the new
> year would bring about a "refocus on our core business."
>
> Now that 2001 is drawing to a close, and LUGNETers everywhere scramble to
> clean up at the holiday sales and begin to look towards the new year's
> catalogues, I stop and ponder whether TLC has yet to live up to those
> earlier implications.
>
> Now, granted, a shift back into focus might well require some time -perhaps
> a year or more of development. That topic has been debated in the past.
> I've always been on the side of "give them the time they need to design and
> plan a good theme or subtheme." But one must ask how much time does such
> planning take?
>
> Afterall, we now have Harry Potter sets, which to my knowledge were planned
> around the release of the new HP movie. When did work on that movie begin
> anyway? Six months ago? A year ago? Five years ago? My bet is more
> recent than the latter. If they only began production of the film within,
> say, the last year, then contracts with TLC were also likely finalized in
> that time. Following that logic, if indeed it has been only a year, than
> the design and production of all these new sets (with new elements and new
> colors) must have been accomplished in that time. Just shows you how
> quickly TLC can act if they focus -focus their resources that is.
>
> So, back to the earlier thought, has TLC focused back towards their core
> business of playing well and learning through imagination?
>
> If we only use 2001 as an example, I would say, "Not quite."
>
> Plougmann states TLC's core product is "materials for open-ended play for
> children." The key part that strikes me is the *open-ended* part. I just
> fail to see how Star Wars sets and Harry Potter themes provide open-ended
> play -certainly not at the level that old Town sets did (I'm just using
> those as examples, I'm certain other past product lines would fit well
> also). The Jurassic Park, Spielburg, and Department 56 contracts seem to
> also lead further from that core spirit.
>
> True, some of those sets are darn cool. Some of them offer some
> interesting elements. And licensing is not new -think of the old Shell and
> Exxon gas stations for example. I'm not against having an occassional
> trademark thrown in here and there. But the question here is about focus on
> a core business idea...
>
> Meanwhile, TLC has continued expansion of non-toys (watches, pens,
> clothing), added to its Media line of software, and gone wild promoting
> Bionicle (in several media). They have expanded the Creator and Model
> series and added to the Train line. Some of this I like, some I can live
> without, but my point is that TLC is developing and marketing a growing
> variety of product lines, only a few of which (IMHO) meet the critia of
> "open-ended play."
>
> And the more TLC tries to do at once, the more spread out the resources,
> and in effect, the *less* focused they can be. Looking at the current
> product lines, and looking back over the past year or two, I do believe that
> there is less focus now than at the start of 2001.
>
> Glancing around other news releases, both at lego.com and here at LUGNET,
> it seems to me that many of them focus on how wonderful it is that the world
> famous TLC is joining forces with yet another non-toy company -Microsoft,
> Universal Music, Disney, Warner Brothers, etc., etc. I know how exciting it
> can be to have your hands on so many things. I know how expanding into so
> many genres can seem like an extension of the LEGO philosphy. But one must
> ask, are they trying to do too much at once?
>
> Now, let me finish by saying I in no way am trying to say TLC is corrupt or
> misled. Rather, I am just pointing out some things to ponder. After all,
> as an AFOL, all I really want is for LEGO products to always be the quality
> toys I have known them to be. I still have hope that they will return to
> focus on that core business we have all gathered here to enjoy.
>
> Now back to your regularly scheduled program....
>
> Cheers,
> -Hendo
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: End of Year Thoughts
|
| (...) Allen, as I kicked off the initial message that started this thread, I was wondering about that myself. But I would feel cheesy if I highlighted my own message... Thanks for the thought though! :) -Hendo (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
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
|
|
|
|
