| |
In lugnet.lego, John Neal wrote:
> In lugnet.lego, Scott Lyttle wrote:
>
> `<snip`>
> > John,
> >
> > You're a business owner, we all know you do much of the shirts for the clubs
> > and Brickfest. Let me pose a question. What if you made a "special
> > edition" Lego-based T-shirt for some club or big event. Say the group
> > wanting the shirts told you to make 200 shirts, and that's it.
>
> I would only {ever} make as many shirts as a customer would want:-)
>
> > The shirt is so popular,
> > it sells out in 4 hours. Some people got multiple shirts (maybe so they
> > could sell them at a premium profit later), some didn't get any. Those who
> > didn't get any get very upset and complain to the group that made the shirt.
>
> Well, at this point, I, as the producer for the group would be totally out of
> the loop.
>
> > The group caves in to customers, and requests you to make more to satisfy
> > the general public, but they don't have enough money to make any changes to
> > the design at all--they've managed to get just enough to make the shirts.
> >
> > You're a businessman...do you take the money and satisfy the customer, or do
> > you deny that group that's waving money in your face? Or...do you take a
> > hit and work with them, and change the design slightly with a bit of loss to
> > you and your business? What if you couldn't afford to take the small hit in
> > profit to change the shirt?
>
> I'm not sure a situation involving my business would be analogous. If a
> group comes to me and orders shirts, I produce them, I get paid. They want
> more, I produce them, I get paid. I haven't really any business knowing what
> the group is doing with the shirts (giving them away, reselling, whatever).
>
> If this group orders 200 shirts and promises a group that they will only make
> 200 and they sell them out and come to me for more, I make them no question.
> What they do with them is none of my business.
>
> Now, if [I] produce 200 shirts and decide to sell them, and I say as a
> selling point that only 200 will be made, I believe I am obligated to
> restrict myself to that number, no matter how fast I might sell them out.
> Part of the reason that they might have sold so quickly could be the
> "promised" limitedness of the shirt. Though I might have screwed myself in
> terms of limited profit in the short term, my reputation as a business of
> integrity is far more important in the long term.
And I would agree with that assessment wholeheartedly, John.
That said, if you said, "I can only produce 200 of these printed shirts because
I only have 200 shirts of this colour, and I don't have the opportunity to get
more shirts of this colour--so once they're all used up, that's it--I can't get
them anymore"
And then the producer of the shirts comes to you later and says, "Hey John,
seeing as you did so well with the printed shirt sales, and we really like that
particular printed shirt, how 'bout we give you the specific shirt colour so you
can produce more."
Therein lies all the difference in the world.
You didn't lie when you stated that the run was limited because, at the time it
was. Nor should that fact deny you future contracts with the shirt manufacturer
if they are so inclined to give you the blank shirts of the right colour.
> Even if TLC apologized and offered to buy back any of the extra 10152s that I
> bought, I wouldn't take them up on their offer. I just want them to stick
> with facts and certainties, or let us know if plans are just plans and not
> set in stone.
>
> [JOHN]
Why should they apologize for this? If I remember, they 'sort of' apologized
for the colour issue--"We didn't really consult the AFOL community or take their
ideas into consideration" (iirc, that's kinda what they said, and it's as close
to an apology that I'd expect to get from a multi billion dollar company to
me--a guy who spends 2-3 grand a year on purchasing LEGO bricks). On top of
that, they did offer the AFOL community the ability to purchase old colours in
bulk as a way of saying "We're sorry" Yes it was just a bone thrown our way,
but at least there was an effort made--not good enough for some but I am coming
to think that, unless TLC retools all their manufactuing processes and colours
and piece selection back to circa 1990, that some people just won't be happy.
Anyway, that was a tangent.
People have, and should, apologize when they did something wrong or made a
mistake. With this 10152 issue, there were no mistakes and TLC didn't do
anything wrong.
Seriously, I was planning on getting just one more boat, but all this talk, I'm
in the mood to get me as many as I can ;)
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
257 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
