Subject:
|
Re: Time to write Lego Consumer Affairs a (nasty) letter..
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Sat, 9 Mar 2002 14:04:23 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
!
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
520 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Travis Matheson writes:
> > I want to see Lego survive as much as anybody, but does anyone really
> > want to see Lego survive in this fashion?
>
> I have to say that I pretty much agree with most everything you have said. I
> thought that the Bonical stuff, though interesting, really wasn't LEGO in the
> traditional sense, Jack Stone is an abonimation. I was never ever going to pay
> that much money for a set where I can count the pieces in the set from the
> picture on the box and still not have used up all my fingers (o.k. maybe that's
> an exaguration) These two themes were a direct reaction by the LEGO company to
> compete with all thos Action Figures on the market (Action Man, Max Steele
> etc...)
>
> My question is this. Why are LEGO competing with them? Finance and business
> aside I really want to know why LEGO are taking this approach. LEGO has always
> been a versitile and reusable toy. That was it's attraction, always have been.
> but nowadays we see LEGO trying to conpete with toys that really, are in no
> way like LEGO. Why is the company playing to others strengths?
>
> If the LEGO group fails, it will be because they have put themselves out of
> business. Over the last few years LEGO has made some smart moves, Star Wars
> license, Harry Potter (not that I really like the sets, but they are LEGO in
> essence). Playing to their own strengths, and these two lines have been very
> successful.
>
> I was in a store a few weeks ago, looking over some of the sets that were
> there, before any of the 2002 sets had arrived (we always have to wait for
> everthing in Australai, I don't think we are even getting the new Alpha Team
> stuff this year) and there was a young boy, with his Mum. She asked him what
> Lego Set he wanted, He wanted one that had sold out (I suspect that I may have
> just brought the last ATST the day before) so she asked him to pick another
> one. He was there for 10 minutes, lookinmg at all the other sets, Mostly Jack
> Stone, Bonical and Creator. He turned to his mum and said "I don't like any of
> these sets, they are too simple" Now this kid must have been around 10, not
> really young, but part of the "Target" market for these types of sets. Jack
> Stone and Bonical sets are still widely avaliable most everywhere, I don't
> think they are moving as fast as Star Wars and Harry Potter stuff.
>
> My point is that LEGO will not win like this. They may have initinal success
> but it will not last. I cannot say that I have the answers, but I truly hope
> that somebody does.
>
> So in answer to you question, No, I do not want to see LEGO survive like this,
> because they will not. Do they need to evolve past the Brick, yes they do,
> evolve not discard.
I agree totally. But the interesting thing is... I'm twelve! Maybe thats
a bit old for most of Lego's stuff- but even before I discovered Lugnet(last
year) I'd had harder and harder times picking out what to buy. I used to
always dash to the toys section of a store to see what sets where there,
along with discounts. Now I don't bother. I know what I'll see. Alpha
team- big canopies, a one-piece chassis, huge slope pieces that make an
excuse for a roof. And then Bionicle- WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THE
STUFF? Nowadays, even genaric canopies like the one found in -lets say
6886- cannot be found in any set in any color.
The reason that Lego is competing with non-brick(well, I have to say piece
now-bricks are so hard to find) companies is simple. Back in the good old
years, like 14 years ago(before I was even born... sniff!) kids( who were
and are Lego's main buyer) had an imagination, and could appreciate good
Lego sets. But now, there are video games, and even worse- in my kiddies
view- modern society. Kids, with their ever lowering attention span, didn't
find Lego as interesting. Heres when I begin guessing: Because Lego was a
pretty large company, with many reaccuring costs, couldn't afford to lose so
many customers. So, a combination of two things happened- Lego tried to
become 'cooler'(honostly, look at those racer faces!) by using 'coolor'
pictures, and sets in general. That's how Bionicle came around. Kids
didn't want white, black, and blue spaceships without gargantuam lasers and
a 'good guys kill the badguys and wins' plot. But bionicle, well, dosn't
have big lasers, but has an actionfigure-like goodguy/badguy plot, which
appealed to the current kids. So now, we have (ugg)Galidor coming out!
Complete action figures! Produced by Lego! Then Lego, in an effort to
cust costs, reduced piece counts and made pieces larger so the models don't
seem smaller. This is juniorazation- an effort to cut costs,
Still, I have to applaude Lego direct- but they are too limited by the rest
of Lego. Still, given time, I bet they will do some good stuff.
Yes, this is told at a pre-teen prespective.
John Kruer
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Time to write Lego Consumer Affairs a (nasty) letter..
|
| (...) I have to say that I pretty much agree with most everything you have said. I thought that the Bonical stuff, though interesting, really wasn't LEGO in the traditional sense, Jack Stone is an abonimation. I was never ever going to pay that much (...) (22 years ago, 6-Mar-02, to lugnet.space)
|
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
|
|
|
|
