Subject:
|
Re: Question: Does the market realy want junorization?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:17:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
595 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Eaton writes:
> Also. Will Lego's sales REALLY be hurt if they take juniorization away? I
> dunno. How much will sales drop? I dunno. How much would they pick up? No
> clue. It's really too bad that there isn't good market data available. Plus
> there's so many other factors that it's tough to judge... What's best for
> Lego? Nobody knows. We just know what we want.
This is what I keep telling myself-- they *must* know what they are doing. They
*must* be reacting to some sort of data, because it would seem to me that, on
the surface, juniorization would seem to be an expensive move unilaterally (why
create 1000s of new elements and incur their costs if TLC didn't believe that
they were warranted?)
My worst fear is that TLC has lost perspective as to what is really important--
creating the best toy ever, or creating the best brand recognition ever.
When all is said and done, I'm betting that some marketing consultant geniuses
(all of whom probably never actually played with LEGO) are behind all of this...
-John
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Question: Does the market realy want junorization?
|
| (...) I think there's a couple problems. Lego is marketing itself as a specific kit. What can you build with the Hogwart's Castle set? Hogwart's Castle of course! It uses *all* the pieces nicely with none leftover, and doesn't provide (any?) (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.general)
|
60 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
