Subject:
|
The direction of the company and the average consumer (Re: Petition against permanent color changes)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:04:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2349 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Adrian Egli wrote:
| |
In lugnet.general, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
If your only complaint is the quality of cohesion then this is no longer a
real issue with Mega Bloks. If you are insistent on LEGO brand just for the
sake of the name than I respect that.
|
It’s brand loyality and 30+ years of doing business with LEGO (never a dark
age). I still hear stories from many friends who have had troubles with MB.
So I figure “Why spend my money on something people say is starting to work
when I’ve been using a product that has and continues to work for me for over
30 years?”
Adr.
|
Fair enough. I used to think that way, and admittedly I still have a strong
brand preference for LEGO, but those MB navy ships were too much to pass up
IMHO.
I personally feel the main LEGO company is a boat teetering on the edge of a
waterfall and the thin rope of LEGO direct is trying to pull them back. This
‘make the last 20 years of my lifelong collection worth of grey obsolete’ is
just another kick in the teeth from the guy on the boat that thinks there is
something besides ruin at the bottom of the waterfall. My anger at the latest
corporate stupidity on the part of the Company is becuase I do not want them to
fail. I have had parents tell me they do not buy kids LEGO stuff becuase there
are no good sets like when they were kids. When I tell them the best stuff LEGO
makes is only available directly from LEGO they typically wonder aloud if the
company wants to go out of buisness. Mark my words, there will be two groups of
average consumers. One will be the people who think they got a bad batch because
the colors don’t match and then be astounded to learn it was intentional. The
other will be those that don’t care at all because they don’t know the
difference between LEGO and Mega Bloks and are used to seeing color variations
because of the mix of brands. LEGO used to stand for unsurpassed quality and be
the one true brand. Frankly I don’t think it has since the late 90s.
Juniorization started it all, and despite the best efforts of LEGO direct they
seem to continue down the path of ruining their namesake.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Petition against permanent color changes
|
| (...) It's brand loyality and 30+ years of doing business with LEGO (never a dark age). I still hear stories from many friends who have had troubles with MB. So I figure "Why spend my money on something people say is starting to work when I've been (...) (21 years ago, 20-Nov-03, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
103 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
