Subject:
|
Re: Understanding Leaks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 8 Jan 2003 19:43:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
489 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <H8EKx8.E9C@lugnet.com>,
"Paul S. D'Urbano" <durbano@optonline.net> wrote:
> 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.
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 them, sometimes describing in
agonizing detail what may be wrong with them (see the thread on
lugnet.technic about the green fire truck for an example of that). I
wouldn't blame them for trying to tap us as an inexpensive focus group.
However, if they really are using us to avoid paying for a focus group,
the least they owe us is to let us do it knowingly. We're already doing
the work, after all; we devote large amounts of our time and money to
this hobby. Just be open with us about picking our brains.
--
Mark D. McKean - The Quantum Panda - qpanda@quantumpanda.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Understanding Leaks
|
| (...) 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 (...) (21 years ago, 8-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
|
|
|
|
