Subject:
|
Re: Now that I've had a chance to see the new colors
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 19 Dec 2003 01:41:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
981 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
| |
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...
|
If I remember correctly, you asked “What *POSSIBLE* reason would TLC lie?”. Well
I gave you some possible reasons. You did not ask for probable, plausible or
credible reasons. I answered your question fairly, and you attack me instead?
Heck, I even admitted that it was idle speculation. I don’t see how this damages
my credibility.
| |
... 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.
|
No, I was merely trying to point out that many companies that we interact with
do not fully inform the public about all their actions or the motives behind
them. TLC is perfectly capable of doing the same. I was not accusing TLC of
anything illegal or immoral. Yes, I am personally disappointed with the color
change, and I don’t appreciate being fed a story that doesn’t make sense. I
would have been happier if TLC had said “the reason for the color change is
proprietary and cannot be disclosed outside the company without appropriate
NDA’s in place”.
As far as ranting goes, in my original post, I was simply stating a personal
belief. You seemed to get really upset that I was implying the TLC could somehow
be lying to us. In my subsequent post I tried to further clarify my position,
answer your questions and back up my logic. You respond by challenging my
credibility, and essentially calling me a paranoid nut case. Who is doing the
ranting?
| |
... 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?
|
You’re the one who seems to believe that TLC has NO reason to “lie” to the
public. Lets face it, everybody and every company lies from time to time. To
believe otherwise is rather naive. Have you ever lied to anyone? If so, why? If
not, then I am honestly very impressed. It’s your turn to back up your assertion
that either TLC or any other for-profit company has NEVER lied to the public.
Again, I was never accusing TLC of any wrongdoing. I was only asserting that the
public reasons given for the color change did not seem to make sense to me. As a
result, I believe that there is more to the story than is being fully disclosed.
This idea is not new and has been expressed here on lugnet by others. Have you
gotten as upset with others that have expressed this idea as you have with me?
| |
| |
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.
|
Yes, but if it were true, many of us would maybe start buying MB if the quality
distinction that Lego possesses went away. Their set design and prices are
generally much better than Lego’s products.
| |
| |
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.
|
You’ve already stated this before. You seem to have ignored my assertions on
this so I will repeat them for you. I agree with you that, in general, the color
of any eqivalent products will have an impact on sales. I’ll even give you an
example. My last trip to the Pick-a-brick store I grabbed some handfuls of teal
and lime-green 1x2 bricks on impulse. I really have no idea what I’m going to do
with them, but the bright colors did stand out, did catch my attention, so they
ended up in my cup. However, if the teal, and lime-green colors were slightly
different (slightly brighter, slightly darker, slightly bluer, slightly redder,
etc) it would not have made much a difference in my purchasing. Those “bright”
colors would have still ended up in my cup.
| |
Thus for me, the focus-group story does not pass my
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.
|
I will concede that, it is entirely possible that a group of kids preferred a
pile of “new gray” bricks vs. a pile of “old gray” bricks. However, except for
P-A-B, very few Lego bricks are sold in that fashion. You seem to have
completely ignored my argument that there are many other factors that will
influence what a consumer will buy when standing in the aisles of a toy store. I
would be willing to bet that, consciously or subliminally, the color of the
individual bricks in a set is much further down the decision tree when a
consumer is trying to decide between a Lego Knights Kingdom set and a MB Dragons
Set. The average consumer is buying Lego as a set, part of a larger theme,
contained in a cardboard box. Modern sets no longer have the flap and
transparent packaging so the consumer cannot even see the true color of the
bricks until after they have purchased and opened the set. Set design, theme
design, and packaging design are all more likely to have a greater effect on
sales than a subtle color shift in a few colors of the bricks contained within
the box. The same effect could have been achieved with Photoshop when producing
the box art!
| |
| |
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.
|
Again, I’m not accusing anyone of wrongdoing. I just choose not to believe the
answers that are being fed to us. And in this day in age, unless under oath,
being a liar is not really that serious. Again, I ask, have you ever met anyone
who has NEVER lied?
| |
...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?
|
What did Lego do to earn such trust from you? Do you believe everything that
someone on an Internet news group tells you at face value? Lego switched the
colors and then spun a story that doesn’t hold up well.
| |
... 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.
|
Hmmm... have you heard of Enron, Tyco, MCI, WorldCom, Adelphia, ImClone, Quest,
AOL....shall I go on or should you just read some of these
articles or you
can try these articles too.
Or just search the internet for “corporate scandals”. I’m not saying that the
color change “scandal” is on par with any of these, but if you seriously believe
that big companies don’t lie, cheat, and steal to make a buck then where have
you been lately? Thats been going on for as long a man has engaged in any sort
of trade.
| |
-- Don’t bother to respond to this thread for my sake. This is posted
to off-topic.debate, which I never read anyways.
|
So you attack me and tell me not to respond? What fun is that?
So, in summary, all I’m really trying to say is that I don’t belive the
focus-group story is the ENTIRE story. I don’t belive that the impact on sales,
alone, is enough to justify the change. Even though there may be some truth in
the focus group story, I belive that there is significant supplier/manufacturing
cost savings associated with the color change. That was the real motivating
factor behind the change, and TLC does not want to share that information with
us. I don’t know why that theory upsets you so much. I also do not know why
you have chosen to attack me so vigorously for merely stating a personal belief.
I am not trying to say TLC is evil or immoral or shouldn’t be out to make a
profit. I hope TLC continues to be profitable because that is the only way we
can be assured a continuing supply of new Lego bricks (new gray or otherwise).
Regards,
drc
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
31 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
