Subject:
|
Re: More POOPs and licenses (was Re: 2002 catalog scans at FBTB)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.year.2002
|
Date:
|
Thu, 1 Nov 2001 01:33:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1801 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.year.2002, Eric Kingsley writes:
> Oh well... Just continuing the downward spin in terms of LEGO
> and Licensing. I remember when the Star Wars License was
> announced (TLC's First), that it was made clear that TLC was
> looking for long term relationships with products that have as
> long a shelf life as LEGO and that they didn't want Licenses that
> would dry up like a fad.
Yep, I remember that as well. Guess all the critics that this was the thin
edge of a wedge were right after all.
> Well Star Wars has a long history, Harry Potter has a large
> following but not much history, Jurassic Park has a moderate
> following without much history, Bob Builder is popular with
> small children but has no history. This new license seems to
> have no history or following... Huge Risk in my oppinion.
Completely agreed on the risk. What a crock. I think the Bob sets will be
a failure (or passable success) for the simple reason that there are a dozen
major Bob toy licences out there, and the Lego products hardly stand out in
the noise. Perhaps Lego has something better lined up here, like an
exclusive contract that keeps other stuff off the shelves. From the teaser,
it is clearly going to be a figure-heavy theme; maybe there won't BE a
full-on figure line competing for attention. (If there is, than this is
just toast in the making.)
> My feeling is that the Star Wars License was a good thing. Harry
> Potter was OK because of the huge following. Jurassic Park
> should never have been done, who needs a license to sell
> dinosaurs? Bob Builder probably wasn't necessary either
> although it definitly cuts down on R&D, which I guess is part of
> the point with Licenses. I fully think that if this is a new license
> for an unproven product that it is a big mistake.
I agree with a follow-up that JPIII is probably just fall-out from the
Spielberg connection. Bob: see comments above. Galidor: my hope are
officially near zero at this point. When I thought it might be a new custom
theme, with an in-house back-story like Bionicle, I was somewhat intrigued.
Afternoon cartoon spin-offs are NOT what I preceive as a strong move for
Lego, and certainly not a bold one.
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: More POOPs and licenses (Galidor)
|
| (...) I don't know if this answers the issue as for Galidor, but here is a little more info... (URL) the article: "As merchandising rights owner, Lego holds master toy and software licenses and is currently negotiating with licensing agents. The (...) (23 years ago, 2-Nov-01, to lugnet.year.2002)
|
Message is in Reply To:
68 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
|
|
|
|
