Subject:
|
Re: Now that I've had a chance to see the new colors
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:02:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
884 times
|
| |
|
|
Douglas R. Clark wrote:
> 1. IF the "real" reason for the color change was that it was discovered that
> the original dye formulation contained minute quantities of lead or mercury or
> some other toxic substance, admitting so could open TLC up to multiple product
> liablity lawsuits. Think of all the billions of grey bricks that are out there
> that could be exposing the general public to some toxic substance. This is
> probably not too likely, but just imagine all the potential lawsuits if this
> were true.
They would be opening themselves up to lawsuits whether or not they
admitted to a problem of this... not divulging this information if it
were true would be even worse for them. LEGO's been around too long as
a company now to not have regard for the long haul... unsubstantiated
skepticism is nothing more than shouting "conspiracy", but in all
honesty it doesn't do much for your credibility.
> 2. IF the real reason for the color change was that TLC had either outsourced
> some brick production or changed ABS suppilers to the same companies that
> Megabocks use (or heaven forbid, buying bricks directly from MB), they might not
> want that known to the general public. It could lead to either a general
> believe that TLC was sacraficing quality or conversely that MB were of equal
> quality to Lego.
ABS is ABS, afaik... the difference is in the moulding process, the
pressure used, etc. Your other explanations again, still smack of
conspiracy theory... what has LEGO ever done in the past to you to earn
this distrust?
>
> This is just idle speculation with no basis in fact,
No kidding...
... but the point is that many
> companies (and individuals) "lie" to protect their image/reputations, to protect
> themselves from liability, and ultimately protect/enhance their bottom line.
> Its not like tobacco companies were jumping at the bit to tell everyone the
> negative effects of smoking or that Ford/Firestone were quick to admit there was
> a defect with their tire or SUV design. Look at all the coporate financial and
> safety scandals over the last several decades.
This line of reasoning is actually invalid and incomplete. It's a bit
like saying that if all Model T's were black, if a car was black, it
must have been a model T. Just because some companies lie, doesn't
mean all of them do... until you have actual specific evidence to the
contrary, your ranting does nobody any good. Hire a private
investigator if you feel that strongly about it.
... TLC is no different because they
> make toys for kids that we all love. They are not some super-benevolent entity.
> They are a company who's sole purpose is to make money. Companies that do not
> make profit in general do not exist anymore (I'm sure there are some gov't
> subsidized exceptions out there but I am speaking in generalities).
I don't ever recall saying that I think LEGO is some altruistic
non-profit organization that solely exists to make playing with their
bricks fun... of *COURSE* they are out for money. But how, exactly,
does it follow that if a company is out to make money, they must
necessarily tell deliberate lies to the public?
> See my example #2 above. What do you think the general reaction here would have
> been if lego was buying some of its bricks from MB and that is why the colors
> had changed??
The general reaction here? Not positive, to say the least. But then in
case you haven't noticed, there hasn't been a positive reaction to the
color change in the first place. Our viewpoints here don't matter to
LEGO as much as what their decision making guys feel would improve their
bottom line.
> If the new vs. old greys were used in the new snowspeeder (4500) I really doubt
> that most people would be able to tell from the box-art. Heck, I recently
> bought set 7420 and the colors on the box art had been shifted so much that I
> was suprised that the cowl on the airplane was red and not brown. Thus, I
> really do not think the the new colors will have any affect on sales. Like I
> said before, I doubt that most people will even notice the color change at all,
> conciously or unconciously.
The color of a product, *ANY* product, has been empirically proven to
have impact on sales. Whether or not people consciously notice it, it
makes a lot of sense that LEGO is banking on how visually appealing the
color is, in order to entice an impulse purchase.
Thus for me, the focus-group story does not pass my
> "common sense" test.
It makes perfect sense, if you assume that the focus group did not
address the issue of playability and only studied the immediate feedback
on the color based on a first visual impression. This study probably
did *not* examine the impact that mixing the colors from old and new
sets would have. I, like you, have no evidence to back this up, but at
least it makes real-world sense, and doesn't involve assuming that
anyone is lying.
> Like I said before, it is MY belief that the color-palette-focus-group is not
> the real reason for the color change.
Which is basically calling them liars... a pretty serious accusation.
...I also said that I could be entirely
> wrong as well. It just does not pass the "common sense" test for me, but then
> again I am extremely cynical about the actions of most large businesses.
There's nothing wrong with healthy skepticism, but what you are
projecting here seems far beyond that... what exactly did LEGO do that
earned your distrust?
... Not
> that I'm on of those anti-globalization, anti-corporation nut jobs. I just
> realize almost everything they do is motivated by $$$.
Just because a decision is motivated by money, doesn't mean that they
will lie about it... not even in the general case.
...Guess that comes from
> working for a large corporation for the last 9 yrs.
So that's what's made you so jaded... but you might try not
generalizing your experience with that company to all others... if
you're always assuming that all big companies are willing to lie, cheat,
and resort to unethical and maybe even illegal behavior in order to make
a buck, eventually you'll find that while you've been busy inventing
conspiracy theories, everyone else has stopped listening to you.
>> Mark
-- Don't bother to respond to this thread for my sake. This is posted
to off-topic.debate, which I never read anyways.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
31 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
|
|
|
|
