| |
| |
| |
see
and then see
and tell me that a different color, in and of itself,
makes a set somehow undesirable. I have both 4554 and 2150 and I like them
both.
|
I’m not saying I disagree with you, but to play devil’s advocate...
While 2150 is basically the same model as 4554 in a different color, LEGO
never marketed it as a re-release as 4554, did they? If not, it’s not
*quite* the same thing as different colors in Legends. However, you make a
very valid point none-the-less.
--Anthony
|
Well, then, all those that griped about Legends series ruining the value of
their old sets won’t have anything to complain about, since the old sets were
the old gray and new “Legends” sets are new gray....That means to the AFOL
collector who tirelessly abhors the new gray, that their old sets now increase
in value.
Somebody may then argue “It’s a re-release, not a Legend”... hm..well, define
“re-release”...Wouldn’t a re-release be a completely identical set? Isn’t a
Legend series an identical set? If you look carefully at some of the past
Legend and re-release sets (i.e. Guarded Inn, USS Constellation, Main Street for
example), they are not completely identical, so technically, it’s not a
re-release. IMO, a Legend set more than anything else, allows you to have
directions and pieces to build a set....don’t like the “new gray”...ok, replace
the gray with bricklink purchases and let the new gray permeate your
collection...or be placed in a separate storage container in your collection.
So, perhaps a LEGEND should be defined as “a replica of an original design”
Note that most replicas try to be exact re-creations, but due to certain
limitations--cannot be true re-creations...
Change is inevitable...get over it. If you don’t like change, I challenge you
to go get some bell-bottom jeans and a shirt with a butterfly collar, and wear
it out in public--or to your office/workplace. For Lego to remain static is
against common business processes/procedures. Take some business and marketing
courses, and talk to people in other companies--espeically those that have to
promote their product internationally. For Lego to remain a private company and
have the brand recognition it has is an extraordinary feat. Think about this...
1. Coca-Cola
2. Kellogg’s
3. Disney
4. M&M’s
5. Fisher Price
6. LEGO
7. Sony
8. Levi’s
9. Kit Kat
10. Pampers
What is this list? Well, it’s the 2002/2003 most recognized brands...how many
of them are private companies? Hm..well off the top of my head, Coca-Cola,
Disney, Sony, and Pampers (Procter and Gamble) are not private...I’d have to do
some digging to verify the other six...M&M’s are part of M&M Mars (not sure if
the gang in Hackettstown, NJ are private or not).
Am I trying to defend LEGO for it’s actions--not necessarily. However, before
one starts to rant and rave (especially at Jake), it’s important to put yourself
in that individual’s shoes and understand the situation before making
assumptions and start to place blame. Do I want the old gray? Sure--who
wouldn’t?
Has LEGO made mistakes? I dare you to find a company who admits that they
havent...LEGO Explore was a great idea. As a trainer, I must admit that I
didn’t know what Explore was about, until it was explained to me. The new Lego
store employees I trained should know what Explore is about (I certainly
hope)...how many people knew the four stages of Explore are tied to critical
stages of a Child’s learning? I didn’t...until it was explained to me.. I
think the big problem there was that the whole concept of the Explore worlds
were never explained to the general public very effectively--creating a lot of
confusion and frustration--and a desire NOT to buy products.
Could this thing happen with the sets featuring new gray? Perhaps...but as
others have said...the majority of sales for LEGO are not the AFOL’s that buy
multiple sets at a time--it’s the kids with parents, and brothers/sisters,
uncles and aunts and grandparents that buy LEGO as gifts that encompass large
portions of LEGO sales. Most of the kids who love LEGO may not have x-hundred
pieces of a particular color to make a creation---the result? A rainbow
warrior--but should the lack of color affect a child’s imagination? I dare you
to challenge a child that builds up a stack of 2x4’s in multiple colors and
calls it “a skyscraper”, or “a tree” or anything else that a young mind
interprets....it’s all about a creativity and imagination, not necessarily about
what color things should be. If you want something off color, I’ll send you a
cake with (old) gray icing--careful, I’d have to adjust the color mix, and I
wouldn’t be able to completely reproduce the same gray effectively unless I
carefully measured it out--taking me much longer to do, and also probaly costing
me more time (and since time is money...)..greater cost to me....
Should LEGO bring back old gray? Well, since it’s already been said several
times that it’s not coming back...why beat a dead horse? Change is inevitable.
My final point...Before going on any rant and rave about stuff--apply some
(global) business practices to what the company is doing, and try to present
some RATIONAL thought when making comments...LEGO is a company--the first goal
of any company is to increase profits. Also, play the devil’s advocate...try to
debate the issue within yourself--find points for AND against certain decisions.
Then apply the biggest issues when running a company--sales,costs,and profit
margins...
Ok, my rant is done. This color change issue will probably be debated as much
as politics and abortion....
Scott
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Announcing new Legend!
|
| (...) I'm not saying I disagree with you Larry, but to play devil's advocate... While 2150 is basically the same model as 4554 in a different color, LEGO never marketed it as a re-release as 4554, did they? If not, it's not *quite* the same thing as (...) (20 years ago, 7-May-04, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego, FTX)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
