 | | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
|
Jake McKee wrote: > > Thanks so much everyone for showing that the AFOLs are a force to be reckoned > with! > > * Would you buy LEGO toys for children 0-11? Y/N Yes. > * Why / Why not? > Lego is a toy range that gains value with every set you buy, (...) (21 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) LEGO continues to be an excellent product, encouraging creative play and original thinking. (...) Like others have stated, I am a bit unclear as to exactly what it is your asking. Are you referring to product features, or packaging (...) (21 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
|
(...) Yes (...) As the TLC slogan used to be, Lego toys are "toys that build imagination" (...) More emphasis on building and interconnecting multiple sets to build larger things. (...) Instead of trying to sell someone a $90 set I would try to sell (...) (21 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
|
(...) I would consider including Lego as one toy I might buy for young children. However, other toys that I might consider buying *before* Lego include: Rokenbok (for the older kids in that age range who might see it as being a more functionally (...) (21 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy Mackerel! LEGO survey...
|
|
In lugnet.general, Jake McKee wrote: [snip background story] WOW, indeed. :) (...) OK. (...) Thanks to you and your colleague for being willing to manually collate our input! (...) Y (...) LEGO toys are positive, facilitating action and creativity (...) (21 years ago, 18-Apr-05, to lugnet.general, lugnet.lego)
|
