 | | Why all the dumping? Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Why is that that whenever someone isn't actively attacking LEGO and deriding everything they do, they get accused of being some kind of cheerleading, banner-waving drone? It really gets under my skin sometimes. Someone out there bitches about (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Whoops. My mistake. I thought that since your original remark about some things being worth waiting for followed a quote about Jimmy Parks' posting that you were providing validation to his (non)announcement. Guess we'll all just have to (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Kevin Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com> wrote in message news:GCz59A.A7o@lugnet.com... . (...) Except my point was that for a long time in Lego early history that did just that. Sold prime parts individually. Look at late 50's early 60's. I think relative (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Here's one way... give the stuff away for free. Instant money loser, very happy customers. (did I hear an internet bubble popping in the background?) Or were you asking a serious question? There are thousands of ways to satisfy customers and (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I don't know anything about a "July Surprise". KL (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I can't speak for the UK experience, but here in the US the effects have been incredibly cool. Absolutely amazing actually. Somewhere in my basement I have an unopened case of 5542's that I was keeping just for the clear train glass. Now I can (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Does this mean that you know the details of "The July Surprise"? Or is whether or not you possess that secret also a secret? You can tell us - we won't spread it around. Promise! Greg (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"James Brown" <galliard@shades-of-night.com> wrote in message news:GCz419.7AF@lugnet.com... (...) Yes. And producing duff products is another. regards lawrence (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Kevin Loch" <kloch@opnsys.com> wrote in message news:GCyzMv.InD@lugnet.com... (...) What? You mean like I wouldnt have dreamt of e-commerce? Or they they would sell bulk bricks, which I could have done 40 years ago? Or that they might sell trains, (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Bad management, poor processes, resistance to change, non-understanding of market forces, sheer bad luck... there's lots and lots of reasons for a company to be losing money even while keeping customers happy. Heck, I was pretty darn happy (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GCz3rD.6L8@lugnet.com... (...) TLC (...) more (...) the way things are going with lego products, soon the rarity will be a brick with studs on it. :-) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
"Mr L F Braun" <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> wrote in message news:GCz2Du.2xw@lugnet.com... (...) How can a company that is losing money be satisfying its customers? regards lawrence (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I thought you said you read the Cluetrain Manifesto? I had a chance to hear one of the authors and one point he made in his talk is that companies can, and should, choose which customers to satisfy and which to write off as not being a good (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I doubt LD is responsible for the current rumors. They probably haven't told anyone outside of LEGO what they are planning. They most certainly told everyone else inside LEGO because that is required for production (of anything) to occur. It (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Noted! I didn't mean to address that part specifically to you, but I was on a roll. Dave! (one may infer from the tone of my invective that I have likewise signed no NDA nor had private communication with TLC or any of its tentacles.) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I think that's a bit of an absolutist portrayal, don't you? The point is that people have been trying to explain *why* it is the way it is, not trying to defend it or say it's necessarily the right way of doing something, given infinite time (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Tom Stangl writes:>> I guess I still don't get it. I'm trying to think of an example of how LEGO (...) I defy you to point to a single MegaBloks product (other than basic brick design itself, of course) that so closely mirrors (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I largely agree with you and Suz about the intent of the summit. But I don't have a problem with LEGO manufacturing interest in their product. I see advertising (including posts on LUGNET, leaks, summits, etc.) as a very good thing. It gives (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) For the record, I have never signed an NDA with LEGO and I have not had any private communication with LD in a long time. KL (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
Kevin Loch wrote: <snip> (...) Well said! I would even go so far as to say that LD is the best thing going on in TLC right now. Even as TLC strays woefully away from the concepts which made the toy company the greatest in the world, LD is (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) You're bored? I have to listen to the endless drumbeat of "like it or lump it", "you should feel lucky LEGO sells us anything" talk. (...) A company not satisfying its customers is doing something wrong. (...) This is a great case in point. (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) But they don't want it kept secret; if they did, they wouldn't have spilled anything to anyone. Suz hit it right on the head when she called it fan management. TLC wants to manufacture interest in something for which we have no solid (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) I thought there were more like 120 colors. Maybe it's 84 currently used. Obviously most of them are for the model shop. Just as well. I don't think my sorting system could handle 84 colors. KL (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
(...) Nice job! I especially like the Auto Chassis history. That is my favorite progression because each model is an improvement from the previous (and the original was a masterpiece in it's time). I bet we won't be seeing a police station evolution (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) cut (...) Some things are worth waithing for. This is one of them. Obviously there are reasons for keeping certain plans secret. They might want to time the release of the information to maximize it's effect on the market. There also might be (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Exactly! On one hand there is the official promotion of Lego as a great tool for the expression of and the development of a person's imagination. TLC is happy to hold up talented, creative, successful individuals as role models who talk about (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) If it helps any, I spoke with customer service and the annoymous rep told me that the Castle System has been a top producer (and VERY popular) for them for some time, and that it is highly likely that the US/general market will see some nice (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
....Beautiful! Nice looking site. Cant wait to dive in deeper :-) (...) --- wubwub wubwub@wildlink.com www.sitcatsit.com <-- a guy and his cat www.wildlink.com <-- the wildlinks < INSERT HUMOROUS TAGLINE HERE > (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) To my mind, TLC should not be stressing the uniqueness of items at all -- but rather their modularity and ability to be used interchangably in an overall systematic scheme of a construction toy. My problem is that they claim to be doing one (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
Marc, I'm getting bored now. On Mon, 7 May 2001, Marc Nelson Jr. (<GCyJ93.Cuy@lugnet.com>) wrote at 08:51:03 (...) TLC doesn't have to tell you anything. Your question is like me asking you how you clean your teeth. It's just a thing you do. As a (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) So... Efficient: UK S@H pays someone to pull a bunch of service packs and box them up for shipment to the U.S. LEGO pays for these things to be shipped over to Connecticut. U.S. S@H pays someone to receive the shipment, enter it into the (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) I asked what that reason was (for not shipping outside territories) and got the answer at the top from Tomas Clark, basically, "that's not the way we do things", which is no answer at all as far as I'm concerned. I got a more detailed answer (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
WOW! This is Fantastic! It's exactly what I've wished the lego.com site would be! Excellent work! I love the interview with part designer; please continue this series, and try to go into more detail on why parts fit together in different ways and (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Well said. I get grouchy too. I wonder how many people who wanted to pay shipping costs would be willing to pay the extra costs of the out of band processing too. Here's a slightly relevant factoid.. the average US company pays well north of (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Simple answer: It breaks the process, and it's unnecessary duplication. (more complex) 99% of the time, S@H Europe is dealing with Europeans who want things delivered to Europe. Ditto the other distribution centers. Because they spend 99% of (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
SNIP! You might as well through raw meat to dogs, it'd be (...) SNIP! I meant "throw". Really. Aaron (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
In lugnet.lego.direct, Marc Nelson, Jr. writes: <snip> Just do what I've done and give up. Lose faith in Lego being a company about toys, values, or children being creative. They are merely a corporation producing a product for consumption. They've (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Understandable, to be sure. But, remember that we are a bunch of junkies for LEGO product. Posts revealing "Holy Grail" material of sorts drives us stark-raving-CRAZY!!!!! You might as well through raw meat to dogs, it'd be the same (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: Bad Policy #2 (Why all the secrecy, LEGO Direct?)
|
|
(...) Indeed... Our Intellectual Property policy precludes us from signing NDA's with TLC. This is by design, for although we document as much as we can think of, there are still always things we've talked about but haven't documented yet publicly (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
| |
| | Re: A new area of LEGO.com: the Build section
|
|
I don't have any problems running netscape on the site, everything seemed to come up fine for me. Slower than molasses in sub-zero winter... though it looked ok.. Tamy (...) (23 years ago, 7-May-01, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
