 | | Re: Treacleheads —Eric Joslin
|
| | | (...) Are they the only thing keeping LEGO from complacency, or are they driving LEGO to juniorise the heck out of everything? If they didn't have to contend with competition, would they be dumbing down their sets, or would they be producing (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) My take is that LEGO's trend toward Juniorization would continue with or without market competition, since we have evidence of its roots long before any serious competitor hit the market. LEGO can't blame (not that they do) their own reduced (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Treacleheads —David Low
|
| | | | (...) (assuming it's an open question...) Could you ever have a total, _total_ competition vacuum? Because if there's a market, there's kids, and if there's kids there's no vacuum since they can always make up their own games. And if they couldn't (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Treacleheads —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | (...) I don't really think so, no. Because to have a total competition vacuum assumes that you're talking about a company that makes boxes full of elements and hands them to kids in a round grey room with absolutely nothing else to do. I guess a (...) (24 years ago, 8-Nov-00, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | (canceled) —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | |
