Subject:
|
Re: LEGO fires CEO Plougman - concentrates on bricks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego, lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jan 2004 20:49:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
87 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Jindroush <jindroush@nospam.seznam.nospam.cz> wrote:
>
> Jason J Railton wrote:
> > Does this:¬
> > {"The future strategy of the LEGO Company will emphasise the core products,
> > including a re-launch of the pre-school products."}¬ mean they'll be calling
> > it
> > {[Duplo]} again?¬ ¬
>
> I doubt that, Explore or Duplo, still the same stuff.
I dunno-- "Duplo" is a brand name that lasted 25 years. Some of today's parents
probably remember growing up with it. But "Explore" was only around for 2 years.
Hardly as recognizable. Plus, "Duplo" is one of Lego's great brand names that
hasn't been lost. People call Mega Bloks "Legos", but nobody (that I've ever
heard) calls anything else "Duplos". But *everyone* I know who refers to
Lego-style building blocks for pre-schoolers says/asks for "Duplo". I'd
certainly recommend sticking with the "Duplo" name.
> Maybe they're going to kick Jack Stone's butt? (hope so). I think that
> pre-school is 4-6, and when I was young, I got wonderful sets such as
> 145 (lots of bricks, some roofs, some windows, some wheels).
Personally, I'd love to see what lines are making them the most/least money per
cost. Jack Stone may be down there, but then again, I'd figure the same would be
true for Duplo/Explore. It's always been my thought that the biggest
money-making "toys" are for kids age 7 to 14, not much younger; mainly because:
- at that age you can actually express what toys you want (you can speak more or
less coherantly)
- kids at that age are usually in school already and have exposure to a greater
amount of peer influence (I don't really mean "pressure" per se, since it's not
the peers themselves doing the active influencing)
Hence, toys geared for younger children are probably less likely to be your
strong money makers.
Sounds like the big loser for this year was Harry Potter-- not through any fault
of Lego's, though. Lego's HP sets (though a bit too juniorized for my tastes)
were no worse this year than last, or the year before. But the fad apparently is
dying without a new movie to support it (and perhaps just simply because it's
dying of its own accord anyway).
Hopefully, the Designer and Inventor sets did well, as I think I'm fondest of
these most of all (Only thing I've found lacking with them to date is a short
supply of plain/dull/matte colors). With luck these will be long lived, though I
suppose only time will tell. Makes me wish I could see what Lego's
cost/profit/quantities were for each of the sets/themes they produced... Would
indeed be interesting to see what themes *actually* did well or poorly, and how
they stacked up to other themes quantitatively...
Ah well... here's hoping for a better year this year for Lego!
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO fires CEO Plougman - concentrates on bricks
|
| (...) I doubt that, Explore or Duplo, still the same stuff. Maybe they're going to kick Jack Stone's butt? (hope so). I think that pre-school is 4-6, and when I was young, I got wonderful sets such as 145 (lots of bricks, some roofs, some windows, (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.lego, lugnet.general)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
