Subject:
|
Re: The LEGO Revival Survey
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Jun 2005 02:33:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
4849 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Dan Thompson wrote:
> Why do LEGO toys have value to you?
Because, regardless of age or gender, it can be enjoyed by all - over and
over again. We can, with creativity, build anything we can imagine. My little
girl, when she is born in November, is only a short time from playing with LEGO
toys because there are elements made for toddlers, and she and I can play with
them together, and grow together, for all of our lives.
> What makes LEGO brand construction toys worth your money?
Cool initial model design, little minifigs, an impressive array of elements
from which to choose, interconnectivity, and the ability to make new things of
my own design. The incredible engineering that makes each element I bought
years ago work with each new element that I buy this year. Uncompromising
quality, and an underlying sense of fun.
> In what way has the LEGO brand let you down?
I'm not sure they have, but some really cool stuff is available exclusively
via LEGO Education, LEGOLand Parks, and other outlets that isn't generally
available otherwise. This feels a little like they're holding out on us. Such
offerings, if made more generally available to those who love the LEGO system,
would expand the already-mind-boggling ability to do anything you want with LEGO
elements, and would bring great value to the adult LEGO community (a market
willing to spend greatly if offered great value).
> Recently, how has the LEGO brand improved?
Overall, I believe that LEGO as a brand has improved in recognizing the
market for serious users of its products. Also, LEGO has expanded into more
creative venues that will bring unexpected worth to the brand as a whole;
examples include the Clikits line, train sets, and Quattro, all of which can
still interact with the entirety of previous LEGO lines while bringing new users
into the fold.
> What would you like to see LEGO (re)introduce in the next three years?
I believe that the educational aspect of Mindstorms was captivating to the
imagination; the LEGO Company has many wonderful educational sets that could be
made more available to the general public. Also, I'd like to see the LEGO brand
returning to the big three themes of castle, space, and town with serious
(meaning non-juniorized) new sets.
> What does LEGO need to do to sell more products for less cost to them?
To save money, LEGO designers might return to simpler minifigs (fewer
facial styles, more general clothing and accessories), though part of a
minifig's charm is the many expressions and accessories - perhaps this isn't the
way.
Another way to save money might be to trim the available color palette; use
fewer, more basic, hues. This didn't hurt the LEGO company before, and I
believe that a return to simplicity wouldn't hurt them now.
A third way to save money would be to slow the introduction of new LEGO
elements; rely on combinations of already-existing elements to design sets.
Bring a feeling of newness by instead introducing "girl" parts that wouldn't
normally be seen in "boy" sets, and vice versa; many of these parts are foreign
to one or the other of the genders because they are almost exclusively marketed
to their chosen gender. Flowers, food, and animals can be useful in town sets;
Bionicle struts could make neat carriage frames. Belville elements bring
charming detail to castle sets; castle doorframes make Belville sets more like
we imagine the fairy tales by which they are inspired.
To sell more products, the LEGO Company might consider selling more smaller
sets rather than few larger sets. Then more people might be inclined to jump
for the immediate sale instead of saving it for a special occassion.
Also, open up advertising of existing products to less specialized groups
of people. Include educational sets in catalogs; boys wear necklaces and
bracelets, too; girls are interested in science and adventure.
> What reason(s) do you have for not buying new LEGO sets?
Chief for me is price; I can't afford to impulse buy $70-200 sets, but I
wouldn't hesitate to impulse buy $15-25 sets. There are many very interesting
(but large and therefore expensive) sets available, but few in my price range.
I believe I'd actually spend more in total if I could buy it in smaller chunks
at a time.
> What would it take for you to spend more money on new LEGO products versus
> buying sets/parts on the second hand markets?
Having the ability to purchase LEGO elements in the same way as is done on
the secondary markets (selecting the individual elements that I want to
purchase, and buying as many as I would like to buy at one time) would
definitely get me spending more money with the LEGO Company. I'm not against
resellers, but I wouldn't mind more of my money going directly to the LEGO
company with this kind of option available, directly supporting the company that
makes the toys that I and many others love.
> What will it take for LEGO to remain the best construction toy for all ages and
> be a profitable company?
I believe that selling a wider variety of smaller sets will allow more
people to buy LEGO products on impulse instead of making it something only for
special times like birthdays or holidays. This doesn't mean that a large set
like Hogwarts couldn't be done, but instead that LEGO designers could split this
set into smaller subsets that, when assembled together, still become something
awe-inspiring. The group of sets could be sold at the same, or slightly higher,
aggregate price as the single set, but could allow for more impulse sales of
smaller sets leading to the collection.
Also, target the public (rather than just educators) more with educational
toys.
Retain interconnectivity, and showcase ways that different genres (Clikits,
Belville, Castle, Bionicle) can work together by making sets with parts from
several different genres; this will open people's eyes to new possibilities, and
they'll try (and buy) new genres.
Tone down the juniorization of parts (1x2x5 wall pieces) and instead
include 5 1x2 bricks; part of the great satisfaction of LEGO sets is having
built something yourself.
> What are your home country, first name and age?
United States of America, Tony, 38 years.
> Is there anything you would like to say with this last question that you feel
> someone at LEGO should not go without reading?
I love LEGO toys. I want to buy more LEGO toys and support the company
that has brought me such joy for such a long time. As an adult who loves LEGO
toys with a child on the way, my family (like many others in the worldwide
community) is gaining greater potential to be loyal customers more often.
Please don't compromise quality, but please make LEGO toys more available to the
average consumer. I believe in your products, and look forward to many more
years of innovation and happiness. Thank you very much for listening.
Peace and Long Life,
Tony Alexander
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | The LEGO Revival Survey
|
| LEGO is a changing company that many think is not what it should be or what it used to be. The best quality construction toys are made by LEGO. The current customer relationship between LEGO and the people who enjoy the toys they make is the best it (...) (19 years ago, 23-Jun-05, to lugnet.general) !!
|
48 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
