Subject:
|
Re: LEGO® Group The world’s most reputable company of 2007
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Thu, 24 May 2007 20:40:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5225 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Bryan Wong wrote:
| |
In lugnet.mediawatch, Abner Finley wrote:
| |
LEGO® is No.1 of 600 companies for 2007
May 23, 2007 Fobes.com By Tara Weiss
The world’s most reputable companies:
These business have products consumers want — and their trust
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18805466/
|
It’s interesting how the change they implemented around 2003/04 created a
huge schism within the AFOL community, but really had no major effect
whatsoever on how the average consumer views/viewed TLG. TLG probably lost a
lot of our trust because of that move, but by including us in their product
development, I’m sure they’ve started to win it back.
-Bryan
|
Bryan,
Interesting choice of words, “schism.” Schism is often associated with the
division or split of great and permanent nature among religions or religious
sects. The Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church is an example
of a great schism dating back to the 11th Century. By your choice of words are
you implying that your LEGO Religion has been divided greatly and permanently
from the company?
Regardless, I do not believe your statement to be true. First, what change are
you referring too that was implemented in 2003/2004? Are you referring to the
change in the color Gray? I will confine my statements to that event as I speak
further. I think the change did cause a major effect among The LEGO Group. The
change they made for reasons known in part to us and in full by them resulted in
a broad concern among their adult fans. They were caught a little, okay a lot,
off-guard by this. TLG recognized from that point on that major changes such as
this would need to be preempted by a little marketing in the future, the
hallmark of any good company seeking to raise or restore trust among its
customers. So in essence average customer views played a big role in helping TLG
to be aware of our concerns about issues they had not previously considered.
As for me, they did not lose my trust at any point. They are a company with a
bottom line. They must make money. Hemorrhaging cash will eventually kill the
company I hope to be a loyal customer of for many years to come. My trust was
further strengthened by their response to a small, adult fan base of individuals
broadly dispersed across the world. I believed they dealt appropriately with the
matter after the dam had burst.
Ultimately, we as a community must understand our small impact on a world wide
corporation. True, the Lilliputians can bring down the goliath should we all be
ostracized by the company. Individuals and clubs perform an immeasurable service
to the company through displays and shows where the creativity and the notion of
“playing well” is demonstrated. Should we stop to perform this function, as a
community, then TLG will certainly suffer. To what degree, however? I can only
assume our impact would fell the giant but could not keep it tied down. (If you
haven’t read “Gulliver’s Travels” you should. Much of the symbolism and irony in
the interaction between the Lilliputians and Gulliver is apt here).
Clearly, we, the AFOL community (and those TFOL and CFOL in this community),
have played a role in enabling TLG to acheive their #1 status. I intend to
celebrate their success with a large cup of Bick-O-Brick.
Todd
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
12 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
|
|
|
|
