Subject:
|
Re: Understanding Leaks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 8 Jan 2003 16:10:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
516 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Paul S. D'Urbano writes:
> Hi All,
>
> This may have been covered before, but as a relative newbie, I'd like to
> better understand what is meant when people talk about "leaks."
> I have four examples below.
>
> Example 1: A prediction about 8460 becoming the classic 8431...
> http://news.lugnet.com/technic/?n=7594
>
> Example 2: Pictures of new 2003 sets...
> http://news.lugnet.com/announce/?n=1804
>
> Example 3: A fan from Japan sees an AT-AT at a LEGO show...
> http://news.lugnet.com/starwars/?n=14586
>
> Example 4: The Marz Distribution pictures that have recently been
> widespread across LUGNET news...
> http://news.lugnet.com/year/2003/?n=54
Thanks to everyone who replied to this thread. Most of this is a lot
clearer now although there is still a little cloudiness that probably can
never be avoided.
I'd like to again express to the authors of the four posts I cited that I
did not mean to single you out as examples of leaks. I hope I haven't
created any bad feelings. My assumption before posting is that each post I
cited is not actually a leak for certain reasons and I wanted to better
understand those reasons so that I myself would never inadvertently post
something that harms TLC or angers the administrators and members of LUGNET.
If I've given the impression that I pointed out your posts as an attempt to
criticize or chastise, please forgive me, since that was not my intent and
it would make me something of a hypocrite since each of your posts was
probably the LEGO highlight of that particular day of my AFOL life. Since
these were all long-standing posts and/or posts that received a lot of
traffic, I assume these were all examples of acceptable behavior by the
LUGNET community since I did not notice any criticisms or admonishments in
the threads (or censorship).
Although some of the responses in this thread have pointed to some of your
posts as actual leaks, I believe there is a subtle distinction that should
be pointed out between the content of the post being a leak vs. the poster
being a "leaker".
In the first two examples, the posters are refering to information that
appears to have been already posted to LEGO fan sites in Germany. I don't
believe the pictures were scanned by the posters themselves. This type of
thing happens often in the USA where one news organization reports on some
leaked information and then, regardless of the appropriateness of that
information being leaked, the other major news organizations start reporting
on it as well since the information is out there already. This always
creates some debate but it's also always a tough call. Considering the huge
market for LEGO in Germany, it may be hard to consider that this information
is still a secret once it's been posted to the German fan sites. I'm not
trying to start a huge debate here but just trying to demonstrate how I've
given the posters the benefit of the doubt and did not mean to criticize
them by using them as examples.
In the third example, I think everyone has agreed that if LEGO shows
something at an official LEGO event, even if by mistake, there's no way to
consider it a leak, and the poster has done absolutely nothing wrong.
In the fourth example, once again as others have commented, an open
non-password-protected website is pretty much public domain so if there is
any fault it lies with the website operator. Apparently there was some
mistake since the sets have been removed from the Marz Distribution website.
Another intersting thing about leaks, which again happens here in the US
often with our press and politicians, is that some leaks are intentional. I
don't know if this would or could ever happen in the world of Toy companies,
but it's an interesting thought anyway (IMO). There are many reasons why
TLC could have been harmed by Marz Distribution posting those pictures
early, since some of the sets may have been incomplete, the package pictures
were rough, TLC wasn't able to control the "first impression" they created
with those sets on their customers, and TLC's competitors could have gotten
an early hint of ways to steal TLC's thunder, even if only by a couple
months. On the other hand, if the sets are incomplete, TLC has now gotten
some widespread customer feedback on the sets, without the cost and
difficulty of creating focus groups, that they can use to fine tune the sets
before the summer. They have a hint now of what sets will be big with the
fans and what sets may be weak. Maybe, for example, they'll fine tune the
MINI AT-AT since I noticed that get some criticism. If you think about it,
first impressions with the die hards are really not that important. We're
not going to walk away saying "bah, LEGO's got some duds, I'll spend my toy
dollars elsewhere." We're going to buy in one way or another anyway. It
might be worth it for them to blow their first impressions with us in
exchange for some useful feedback that they can use to polish things up
before they show their wares to some kids who might be just as happy to
spend their money on Yu-Gi-Oh cards. Not trying to suggest a conspiracy
here. Just some thoughts.
Thanks and Regards to All! (sorry for such a long post)
-Paul
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Understanding Leaks
|
| (...) I think this is an interesting point, and it wouldn't surprise me if there were some truth to this idea. TLC knows that Lugnetters, by nature, will (1) seek out any info they can find on upcoming sets, and (2) thoroughly, mercilessly criticize (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-03, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Understanding Leaks
|
| Hi All, This may have been covered before, but as a relative newbie, I'd like to better understand what is meant when people talk about "leaks." I've noticed a number of folks talk about leaks in both LUGNET and FBTB, and gotten the impression that (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-03, to lugnet.general)
|
20 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
|
|
|
|
