Subject:
|
Re: LEGO for Life Sweepstakes
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Oct 1999 14:41:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
877 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Steve Bliss writes:
> Well, they obviously have their sites set too low. I can't believe the
> "how many LEGO products do you own?" topped out at 10. Geez.
Yeah, that was kind of a disappointment... I would have expected at least
something like 20 or maybe even 50...
> It could be they didn't want to scare off casual users/buyers. "Who the
> *heck* would own 100+ sets? Those marketing people must be nutty!"
I think probably there's more of a danger in it in this respect. If you bought
your kids 12 sets, and you therefore fit in the "10+" category, you might think
that maybe you're spending more than you should on Lego, since you might tend
to think that the 'average' number of sets per household is about 5 or 6.
> Also, if their expectation was that maybe 1% of the respondants would check
> the 10+ category, there's not a lot of useful information to be gained by
> having higher levels (from one point of view). Personally, if I owned a
> company, and was aware of customers who buy 100x as much of my product as
> most people, I would be doing whatever I could take care of these people,
> and encourage them to be "ambassadors of goodwill" for my company.
Yeah, I rather hope (expect, even) that the numbers they get back are
something like:
0-1: 0.2%
2-3: 0.6%
4-5: 1.8%
8-9: 1.3%
10+: 96.1%
> > Also, with no room for comments, they're putting
> > blinders on their marketing division. "No, we don't want answers to
> > questions we didn't think to ask."
>
> It could be a focusing issue. They want to get answers to specific
> questions, not go on a fishing trip.
>
> Or it could be a deliberate attempt to ignore the adult-fan sector.
I think it's probably a matter of workload. Which is also probably why they
didn't allow a text field to enter things like the number of sets. You can
always get someone entering bogus data that can't be processed automatically.
Similarly, if you had a section for comments, you might have to get someone to
read them (you don't HAVE to, I guess). And if hundreds of kids, parents and
AFOLs go filling out comments, it gets messy. And most of the comments would
most likely be repetative or just plain garbage.
> > Oh well. I entered it anyway, despite being from Canada, on the off chance
> > that it might get me e-mail from "Susan Williams" :/
Yeah, this was one of the few times I entered as much info as possible on a web
form. Usually you DON'T want them contacting you... Lego on the other hand...
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LEGO for Life Sweepstakes
|
| (...) Well, they obviously have their sites set too low. I can't believe the "how many LEGO products do you own?" topped out at 10. Geez. (...) It could be they didn't want to scare off casual users/buyers. "Who the *heck* would own 100+ sets? Those (...) (25 years ago, 5-Oct-99, to lugnet.general)
|
47 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
|
|
|
|
