| |
In lugnet.lego.direct, Lawrence Wilkes writes:
>
> "Allan Bedford" <apotomeREMOVE-THIS@altavista.net> wrote in message
> news:Grv7Ax.BtH@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.trains, John Neal writes:
> >
> > The sooner a LEGO Direct item becomes unavailable, the sooner that • item
> > begins to show up on eBay at inflated prices. Isn't that one of the • things
> > LEGO Direct was supposed to help stop?
> >
> > I am personally against any sort of 'Limited Edition' products. They • only
> > reward people with immediate buying power and don't always end up with • true
> > fans. I believe in the long run the company would do well to keep • this
> > terrific set in production as long as possible. It is a good • ambassador for
> > their products and their image.
> >
> > I'm not a train fan in the least, but I'll be buying one of these sets • for
> > my desk at work.
> >
> > > (based on the fact that LD can only have so many different sets in
> > > production at any given time)
> >
> > If the sales for this division continue to be strong, I suspect this
> > artificial limit of how many sets they can release could be raised or
> > eliminated.
>
> Conversely, if folks know a model is 'always available', then what is
> the compelling reason to buy?
I guess I'd ask the same question about a music CD. Typically when a good
CD is released, the majority of sales are in the first few days and weeks.
Then they trickle off until the item eventually comes to be considered 'back
catalog' and sells (give or take) about the same number of units each
month/year. Only when it's not selling at all do you drop it completely.
But the question is then, "what is the compelling reason to buy" a CD that's
always available? Why would I buy a copy of Zeppelin IV today, if I know I
can get it next week? The answer is surprisingly simple.... because I
*want* it. I never need it. I never need a LEGO set. I want them. I want
to own them today. That's why you buy a set that's available. And, the
better the set, the more people *want* to buy it and over a longer period of
time. I firmly believe that this train could sell decent numbers for a long
time to come... that's why I'm trying to defend it against 'Limited Edition'
death. I'm trying to heap praise on this set, not to take away from it. :)
Think of Zeppelin IV as the 10020 engine. If the design and execution are
strong enough, you can be selling the same product a generation later having
never taken it out of production. I'm not saying that LEGO *should* do
this, only that this is another way in which to look at marketing products
like these.
> Lego need to shift stock, not leave it gathering dust on the shelves
> waiting for little Johny to save up his pocket money.
Give little Johnny a break. ;)
Given my thoughts above, I still hold that if the company spent more time
developing and marketing high quality sets like the new train engine, then
these sorts of discussions wouldn't even be necessary. You're absolutely
right though, they do need to make sure stock moves off the shelves (what
little of it gets the shelves anymore). My feeling is that the best way to
do this is to focus on fewer sets with stronger design principles. They
need to get away from weakly conceived lines like Jack Stone (which is
currently languishing on store shelves) and outright experiments like
Galidon't. The money saved by reigning in those kinds of poor product
decisions would probably cover the release of another train engine to
complement the 10020.
I sense that in the end you and I have the same goal in mind, we just see
the plan on getting there through different eyes. Nothing wrong with that. :)
> Limited editions is classical marketing.
They've been around for a while, but they're a tarnished classic at best.
Even hard core fans become jaded after too many Special, Limited, Numbered
Editions. They eventually see it for the marketing ploy it is. If LEGO
suddenly ran out of a particular brick needed to build this engine (lost the
mold, never to be seen again) then I can see them calling this a limited
edition. But when realistically they could produce this until the cows come
home, then it's just a marketing stratagem.
> I expect Lego to do more, not less of this approach.
You could be right. I hope not, but you probably will be. I'm almost never
right about these things. ;)
Best regards,
Allan B.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: 10020 limited to 10000 sets or not?
|
| "Allan Bedford" <apotomeREMOVE-THIS@...vista.net> wrote in message news:Grystz.yC@lugnet.com... (...) are (...) having (...) do (...) products (...) By Zepplin IV are you referring to set 5956 Air Zeppelin? Were there 3 other Zepplin sets? regards (...) (23 years ago, 23-Feb-02, to lugnet.market.theory)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: 10020 limited to 10000 sets or not?
|
| "Allan Bedford" <apotomeREMOVE-THIS@...vista.net> wrote in message news:Grv7Ax.BtH@lugnet.com... (...) item (...) things (...) only (...) true (...) this (...) ambassador for (...) for (...) Conversely, if folks know a model is 'always available', (...) (23 years ago, 21-Feb-02, to lugnet.lego.direct)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
