Subject:
|
Re: LEGO-Galidor Perspective In L.A. Times Article
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.mediawatch
|
Date:
|
Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:15:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1214 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.mediawatch, Matthew Gerber writes:
> Andrew Black covers some of the burning questions many people are asking in
> other threads in this article from yesterday's L.A. Times:
>
> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-000010593feb11.story
>
> Some relevant quotes:
>
> "We're redefining Lego," said Andrew Black, president of the company's
> Americas division. "It's not just about bricks. It's about learning and
> different ways of using your mind."
Doesn't this statement from Black seemingly contradict information presented
in this recent article:
http://media.guardian.co.uk/marketingandpr/story/0,7494,641380,00.html
Where the company reportedly announced that it had, "pledged to refocus on
its core product - plastic bricks - after a disastrous foray into clothing,
watches and high-tech toys."
You can't have it both ways. If it's not just about bricks, then you're not
refocusing on your core product of plastic bricks.
This is a company in trouble folks. No amount of Bionicle sales will help a
company who can't even decide in which direction it's trying to move.
> "If you bought five or six Galidor toys, took all the pieces apart and then
> rebuilt them, you can create products Lego hasn't thought of," Black said.
> "What you're seeing us do is creating and redefining the company. We're
> creating new forms of building and in this particular case, we've done what
> we do so well in creating a new building system and marrying it with story."
> "We've taken what was traditional Lego and we've created a brand new
> building system that's never been done before."
If it's a new definition of the company, then split it off into a separate
division. Create "LEGO New Directions" in the way in which they have
created "LEGO Direct". Allow the new division alone to create and market
the action figure-type toys like Bionicle and Galidor. Then for goodness
sake let the rest of the company get back to making brick based toys.
The new products may be well and good for sales, but they are eroding the
image of the company that took so many decades to create. The decision
needs to be made (and held to) about whether this is a toy company, or a
construction system company. In my opinion LEGO will never be a world-class
toy company, so they should return to being the premiere construction system
company. They defined this market a generation ago; today they pale in
comparison to their competitors.
If the company is listening... maybe it's already time to redefine your
goals. As I have said time and time again:
LEGO = bricks
Not necessarily 2 x 4 bricks and nothing else, but LEGO does NOT equal
backpacks, pens, watches, computer games or action figures. You are the
world recognized leader in plastic bricks. Why are you so willing to let
that slip away?
Regards,
Allan B.
-Expert Builder website
-http://www.apotome.com/builder
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | LEGO-Galidor Perspective In L.A. Times Article
|
| Andrew Black covers some of the burning questions many people are asking in other threads in this article from yesterday's L.A. Times: (URL) relevant quotes: "We're redefining Lego," said Andrew Black, president of the company's Americas division. (...) (23 years ago, 13-Feb-02, to lugnet.mediawatch)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
