Subject:
|
Re: 10152 Update
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Sun, 19 Dec 2004 10:56:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7863 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Yes, I agree. It sure is bad form to do what a big customer wants you to do
> and is willing to pay for when you are losing money and have idle production
> capacity you're not sure what to do with! Why make easy money when there are
> rabid AFOLs to keep happy (neglecting that *nothing* you can or will do will
> make some of them happy)? How silly!
Hi,
very poor try of irony, Larry, you normaly write better ones ;-)
To make a serious theme out of this:
It's for sure a good deal for TLC when Mearsk wanted them to re-release the
ship.
But that they now decided to make the same model again shows up their worse
marketing quality.
They should have told Maersk that they could not run the same model again
because of their "Limited Edition" promise. Such a successful company like
Maersk would have known how important market promises are.
So they should had look together with Maersk what set they can make instead of
this. Again as a limited edition. Maybe an other ship of the company as a start
of a whole ship series?
This would have at least three big trend-setting and money making marketing
advantages:
1. Maersk gets its set now and remains a big customer
2. Collectors get one more set to collect and will trust TLCs promises of
limited editions still in future
3. Maersk blue as a color remains and is still available as an exclusive color
for MOCs.
And to another point you mentioned in your other post:
For sure there are some sellers which just wanted to make big money by buying
100s of copies of the 10152.
But what about those who sell the ship to people which have no access to
Shop@Home in their countries?
And while normal toy dealers have not discount at TLC on buying S@H-Sets its no
wonder that the prices for the 10152 by selling through dealers are that high.
So don't complain about the sellers but complain about TLC.
Bye,
Ronald
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) That would be an incredibly stupid business decision. (...) Number 1 isn't correct as Maersk wouldn't get their set now. They would have to wait while TLC developed a new set and got approval for it from Maersk, developed new instruction (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 10152 Update
|
| (...) Um, because their big and important customer asked them to do so, and paid for the pellets specifically to produce this particular set, not so you, John Neal can have your fantasy GP38s in a color scheme never seen on a GP38 in the wild(and (...) (19 years ago, 19-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego, FTX)
|
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
