Subject:
|
Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Wed, 29 Dec 2004 04:00:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
12010 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.lego, Ken Nagel wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, David Eaton wrote:
> > In lugnet.lego, Ken Nagel wrote:
> > > They also said there would only be 10,000 availible publicly. SNIP
> > I don't see why you keep going back to this.
>
> Because that is what they said and words mean things.
Yeah, but what they said was true. "This is a small run too – only 14,000 total,
with 10,000 coming to Shop At Home." It *WAS* a small run, and it *WAS* limited
to 14K, and 10K *DID* go to S@H. Please point out the exact error in the phrase,
because as I see it, the phrase that was used in NO WAY referenced future runs
of the set, and hence is not in error as regards to the new run of 10152's.
> > But again, *IF* they had had more Maersk blue,
> > I think they would have made more. Evidenced by the facts that:
> >
> > 1) They were going to make a new version of the set with another color
> > 2) They're rerunning the set
> > 3) They KNOW (and always knew) that AFOLs would love this set
>
> "If" doesn't much matter
No. "If" DOES matter to me because I judge morality based on intent. "If"
matters a great deal to me. "If" there were a way to stop Bin Laden from causing
any harm, but without killing him, would you? Your answer will affect my moral
judgement of you, regardless of what you actually do or do not do. Just because
someone WOULD steal something, but hasn't, doesn't make them moral. Since you
brought the company's moral value into the debate, I'll examine it as I believe
it should be. And "if" matters.
> as "if" wasn't true so they chose to market it as a limited set.
No. They chose to tell us that it was limited. Larry mentioned elsewhere
something I had forgotten, but is phenomenally relevant. When Lego re-released
cypress trees in a bulk pack, they knew full well that it would be a limited run
and that the mold would be destroyed afterwards. But they didn't tell us. And
they suffered a great deal of flak for that lack of warning. I expect the same
would be true with the ship, if AFOLs attempted to order one a month after it
was released only to discover that it was out of stock and never to be re-issued
(again, "if" matters).
They told us because they believed we should know. Not because they were stating
a policy that the set would never come again. If you can prove otherwise, I'd
love to see it.
> The fact that they knew AFOL's would love the set is why they should have
> kept their word.
No. A word should be kept regardless. But their word is not what they intended
to give.
> > Of course, I think that's irrelevant in this case because I don't think this
> > decision part of a negative trend.
>
> The trend is the point that Lego, when viewed as a company is a failure. They
> have lost money and market share for years and continues to fall. That is not
> a matter of opinion it is big news in the world wide financal comunity.
I didn't say that there is no negative trend. I said I don't think this decision
is a part of one.
DaveE
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
| In lugnet.lego, David Eaton wrote: <snip> (...) I forgot all about this ine--TLC can't win one way or the other. Nice catch Larry and Dave. (...) As Dave just stated--there was no 'word' given--just the statement of facts that at the time were (...) (19 years ago, 29-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
| | | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
| (...) I'd say "LAST CHANCE" pretty much locks that up. SNIP "If" there were a way to stop Bin Laden from causing (...) I really don't get all of these u-turns in the name of whatever but since you bring it up "IF" Bill Clinton had taken Bin Laden (...) (19 years ago, 29-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A Community Problem (Was: Re: 10152 Update)
|
| (...) SNIP (...) Because that is what they said and words mean things. (...) "If" doesn't much matter as "if" wasn't true so they chose to market it as a limited set. The new color (that they took back) doesn't matter as that was to be a diffrent (...) (19 years ago, 28-Dec-04, to lugnet.lego)
|
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
|
|
|
|
