Subject:
|
Re: Reply 6: Issues vs. Mistakes
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.color, lugnet.lego
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:53:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1878 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.color, Christian Treczoks wrote:
<snip>
> > But really, is there something else other than bringing back the old
> > colors that would satisfy you? If so, what?
> Like, bringing back the old colours?
>
> > > Well thats the way I see it. (TLC) owes (the customer).
> >
> > Nah. They owe us just as much as we owe them. They do something dumb?
> > They pay for it financially. Not ethically.
>
> Indeed they do. Just look at the list of signatures under Bens letter.
> And they will pay for this in the future, as the brand as such has lost
> a lot of credibility.
<snip>
> Yours, Christian
For me, you've just lost your credibility. You're saying one thing in one
post--'it's all about the communication--if they just said they're sorry but
they can't change it now due to whatever issues, that would have been fine'
But, as your posts keep saying, no matter what TLC would have done, short of
actually bringing back the old colours, you don't want to consider it.
This has nothing to do with communication, this has something to do with what
Christian wants. And what Christian wants, is not to be heard and acknowledged,
but have his ideas acted on in spite of what's best for the company.
If this was about communication, you would have objectively noted that not only
did Ben's letters generate many signatures for 'bringing back the old colours',
but the letter also generated a flurry of posts from those that don't mind the
new colours, and will still continue to buy the LEGO product. That's 'objective
opinion'. But you choose to ignore the facts that don't suit your case. You
choose to skip over pertainant information if that info doesn't suit you.
This brand has not lost all credibility, contrary to your statement as such.
This brand--this company--by implementing all the various things you've pointed
out that have issues, such as LEGO direct, such as Jake, et al, such as
whatever, has just increased the credibility with this particular fan, and many
fans who feel as I do. And the 'icing on the cake', as some would say, is the
fact--the FACT--that you specifically stated that an apology with a 'we can't
change it now due to...' was good enough, and that's *exactly* what happened.
But that's not good enough for you. In my mind, nothing short of reneging on
the new colours and bringing back the old colours, which we are told is fiscally
irresponsible for TLC, will be good enough for you. As you stated earlier, 'I
wouldn't trust them with a shovel full of manure.' Well, from this cheap seat,
I wouldn't trust you with the shovel either, 'cause it looks like you're the one
that's slinging it around.
I don't play the 'my camp believes this so you're wrong' game. I'm part of a
camp as well--the camp that wants to see TLC succeed in the marketplace so we
have a way of continuing and expanding our chosen hobby in the years to come.
I'm part of the camp that knows that with the various issues of running a
multi-billion/multi-national corporation there will be a few stumbles now and
again. I'm part of the camp that firmly believes that a kid with a university
education and fixes computers for a living doesn't understand the many various
issues of development/marketing/infrastructure/whatever that a company like TLC
faces every day of the year.
I'm also in the camp that will offer suggestions, raise concerns, and give what
I believe is better communication to TLC by stating my issues succinctly and
objectively, and leaving the decision making processes in the purview of those
that are actually running the company, instead of dictating what they should do.
I don't have all the pertainant 'behind the scenes' information needed to make
the decisions at TLC, nor should I--I don't run the company.
Are there things that need to be addressed? Sure.
Are there issues with the communication channels at TLC? Probably.
Does that factor into my LEGO hobby? If the answer is anything more than
extemely minimally' than you're too close to the hobby and you need to step back
and get a better perspective. I don't care if you've invested 10 dollars or 10
thousand dollars in the past year into buying LEGO bricks. I'm right there, on
par, with my financial outlay for the brick. I choose to purchase LEGO sets.
No one forced me to--Jake wasn't holding a gun to my head. Therfore, I owe TLC
nothing, and they owe me nothing to date--we're square. The fact that I called
up last week and mentioned missing pieces in a store demo I purchased at Radio
Shack, and TLC is sending me those missing pieces tells me that, while they
didn't 'owe me' those pieces--I knew I was buying a store demo and that there
were, in fact, missing pieces when I bought it, they actually care about their
customers more than the bottom line. That speaks volumes, but you don'twant to
listening to it, for that goes against your point of TLC's mistakes and issues.
So continue your conversations. Just know that one thing I personally hold more
dear than communication is consistency, and right now you're not showing much of
that.
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Reply 6: Issues vs. Mistakes
|
| David Eaton wrote: > Actually, is that true? At the time, was JVK in a position to reverse > the color change? He wasn't the CEO back then. IIRC he was a vice > president of some sort? Was he even in charge of that division of > Lego? I honestly (...) (20 years ago, 17-Mar-05, to lugnet.color, lugnet.lego)
|
79 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
