| |
In lugnet.dear-lego, Deidre Rushton Brumby writes:
> Are Lego already a household name? Probably. Is it a good name? Not
> really, unless "that hideously expensive plastic stuff" can be taken as good.
How is Lego hideously expensive? I think its a pretty good deal. Lego, IMO
opinion, has about the best playability of anything ever invented. A kid can
build the main model, play with it for a while, and then make something
completley diffenrt the next day. Lots of people pay $5-10 for a Beanie Baby,
but I know from experience that those things just sit around and get dusty.
For the price of one typical action figure with a few violent accessories, you
can get at least one Lego mini-figure and a vehicle. And even if a LEGO set
reccommended for "ages 6-10", four years is a good lifespan by today's
standards. But many people don't outgrow their LEGO, because you can combine
the sets into more complicated things as you get older- look at the terrific
castles on some AFOL homepages. Lego is a toy for life, and is not expensive.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: A Parental Perspective on Juniorisation and Being the Strongest Brand
|
| (...) Unfortunately, your perception isn't shared by a lot of non-AFOL parents. They look at, say, the LEGO X-wing, and see the $30 price tag, then they look at the Hasbro X-wing which comes in a box about 4 times as large for the same price, and (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jul-00, to lugnet.dear-lego, lugnet.general, lugnet.loc.au)
|
Message is in Reply To:
45 Messages in This Thread:
 
- 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
|
|
|
|
