| |
In lugnet.color, Walter Walters wrote:
> [Suppose we, the AFOL community, could get a well-written letter {to him
> directly}. The color change could potentially be reversed with this one,
> well-placed, shot!] It may be a long shot, but it is one of our few
> remaining hopes, and it actually stands a reasonable chance of success.
If you insist on going at this, why don't you do a petition from a more
representative group of LEGO's customers, namely parents? (And they can
sign on behalf of their children if you want, as you probably don't want
to be "using" children for a petition.) I think that would carry far more
significance than a letter from a bunch of adult hobbyists (no matter how
many of us there are).
> Mr. Knudstorp may not even be aware that the color change has occurred, or
> why the change was so upsetting to the AFOL community. In fact, he may not
> yet even know that the AFOL community exists at all.
He's the Chief Executive Officer. If something is important, he'll be briefed.
If any of these things are as important to the company as you believe, he's
been briefed.
> Certainly it cost TLG money to
> make the switch, and it will certainly cost them money to make the switch
> back. Although I personally believe TLG's bottom line would benefit by
> switching back, it is not obviously certain. But it is more certain that
> changing a 20-year-old core color goes against the principles that TLG stands
> for. "Only the best is good enough." Which is best, the (supposedly) best
> {color} or the best {system}?
You're confusing the philosophy for a product line with the principles of a
company, and those are very different things. It's more accurate to say:
"changing a 20-year-old core color goes against the philosophy of the LEGO
product". I imagine the company's principles are quite intact, with profit
being a primary one. They chose what they felt was the best decision for
their product line in order to respect that principle. I doubt any of us
have real evidence that the net effects of that decision were poor.
KDJ
______________________________
LUGNETer #203, Ontario, Canada
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
67 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
|
|
|
|
