LEGO fight Against Chinese counterfeit LEGO

FowlerBricks

^Unfortunately, that will not make you very popular with the AFOLs and TFOLs of the world. Us Bricksetters don't view Lego as toys. They are a highly sophisticated interlocking brick system. Not toys. Don't even utter that word on this forum. :D

VorpalRyu

alaskaguy said:

...just as a followup - just recently I went to go buy two $20 sets (track accessory kits) that I bought a few months ago, only to find it discontinued and people selling for 3x the price.  Screw that.  If Lepin or anyone else wants to sell me an equivalent for $20 or less, I'm on it.

They're children's toys. I buy them for my child to play with. 

I will agree wholeheartedly with you on that point, it is a toy. A toy, which is a luxury item, your quality of life will not be seriously & severely impacted by not having it, you will not die if you do not have it. You could just go without, or wait until TLG releases a new version of those packs (TLG regularly releases accessory packs like you mentioned for a time before retiring it & replacing it with a newer, sometimes better version), but instead, you would rather be party to potential patent infringement & copyright/trademark breeches (plus also IP theft if you're also buying knock-offs of licensed sets).

alaskaguy

FowlerBricks said:

^Unfortunately, that will not make you very popular with the AFOLs and TFOLs of the world.

Gee, that's a shame.

alaskaguy

VorpalRyu said:

alaskaguy said:

...just as a followup - just recently I went to go buy two $20 sets (track accessory kits) that I bought a few months ago, only to find it discontinued and people selling for 3x the price.  Screw that.  If Lepin or anyone else wants to sell me an equivalent for $20 or less, I'm on it.

They're children's toys. I buy them for my child to play with. 

I will agree wholeheartedly with you on that point, it is a toy. A toy, which is a luxury item, your quality of life will not be seriously & severely impacted by not having it, you will not die if you do not have it. You could just go without, or wait until TLG releases a new version of those packs (TLG regularly releases accessory packs like you mentioned for a time before retiring it & replacing it with a newer, sometimes better version), but instead, you would rather be party to potential patent infringement & copyright/trademark breeches (plus also IP theft if you're also buying knock-offs of licensed sets).

Here's a concept: bring out the new one at the same time you stop selling the old one. Lego could have sold me two $20 sets had they done that.

But no - I ended up buying four of these instead:
https://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/Funlock-Duplo-Heroes-City-Scene-Vehicle-Blocks-Assembling-Part-The-Locomotive-Toys-For-Kids/2164078_32673676511.html?spm=2114.12010612.0.0.20999d2ellv8tu

And hey, saved $10 too. Too bad for Lego I guess.

alaskaguy

....hell, for that matter, Lego doesn't make Duplo stuff available via Pick-A-Brick. Can't really blame people for meeting their needs in some other fashion.

On that note - if it made a 10-pack of Duplo train switches available for anything resembling a reasonable price, I'd consider buying one.  But even when it DID have a kit with switches, you only get two.  What are you supposed to do with that?

Same for a 50 pack of Duplo straight track, or Duplo curved track, or maybe a few other Duplo things.  But it doesn't. 

Hardly the buying public's fault if Lego isn't producing what it wants.

datsunrobbie

alaskaguy said:

VorpalRyu said:

alaskaguy said:

...just as a followup - just recently I went to go buy two $20 sets (track accessory kits) that I bought a few months ago, only to find it discontinued and people selling for 3x the price.  Screw that.  If Lepin or anyone else wants to sell me an equivalent for $20 or less, I'm on it.

They're children's toys. I buy them for my child to play with. 

I will agree wholeheartedly with you on that point, it is a toy. A toy, which is a luxury item, your quality of life will not be seriously & severely impacted by not having it, you will not die if you do not have it. You could just go without, or wait until TLG releases a new version of those packs (TLG regularly releases accessory packs like you mentioned for a time before retiring it & replacing it with a newer, sometimes better version), but instead, you would rather be party to potential patent infringement & copyright/trademark breeches (plus also IP theft if you're also buying knock-offs of licensed sets).

Here's a concept: bring out the new one at the same time you stop selling the old one. Lego could have sold me two $20 sets had they done that.

But no - I ended up buying four of these instead:
https://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/Funlock-Duplo-Heroes-City-Scene-Vehicle-Blocks-Assembling-Part-The-Locomotive-Toys-For-Kids/2164078_32673676511.html?spm=2114.12010612.0.0.20999d2ellv8tu

And hey, saved $10 too. Too bad for Lego I guess.

If you only wanted the crossovers, and not the other pieces in #10506, you saved some money. #10506 also contains 8 curves, 5 straights, and a crossing guard. There's plenty of them available on Bricklink priced at or below $21.

This seller has 24 of them
https://store.bricklink.com/bienesladen2003?itemID=139143956#/shop?o={"invID":"139143956"}

alaskaguy

datsunrobbie said:

If you only wanted the crossovers, and not the other pieces in #10506, you saved some money. #10506 also contains 8 curves, 5 straights, and a crossing guard. There's plenty of them available on Bricklink priced at or below $21.

This seller has 24 of them
https://store.bricklink.com/bienesladen2003?itemID=139143956#/shop?o={"invID":"139143956"}

Yes - but I don't buy stuff from Bricklink.

That seller is also selling those sets for about $21/each...plus - I imagine - shipping, which is not going to be cheap from Germany.   Ignoring the rest of the stuff in the set that I'm not interested in, that's $21 plus shipping for 2 switches - or roughly, $11/each - plus any shipping charges. With the link I posted, ignoring the extra piece (which I DO happen to what - but want to compare apples to apples), it's roughly $7.50 each. And shipping is free. If I want 4 switches, which I do, that's roughly $44 vs $30.

Now, truthfully, $14...meh...not really a big deal to be honest.  It's just the principle of the thing. If I could buy from Lego, I'd buy from Lego.  But since I can't - I'll buy from any source that I find attractive.  For something like Duplo train tracks - I think it is unlikely that there will be any material quality difference. Certainly not one that is going to affect the enjoyment of my 2 year old who is the one playing with this stuff.

In any event - buying tracks from Bricklink instead of Funlock is unlikely to make any material difference to Lego.

alaskaguy

...I'm definitely not willing to pay retail price PLUS shipping for something I could have gotten for retail price WITHOUT shipping until fairly recently.  I mean - screw that.

SumoLego

Maybe if you would have bought more earlier, the set wouldn't have been retired.

VorpalRyu

alaskaguy said:

Here's a concept: bring out the new one at the same time you stop selling the old one. Lego could have sold me two $20 sets had they done that. 

But no - I ended up buying four of these instead:
https://www.aliexpress.com/store/product/Funlock-Duplo-Heroes-City-Scene-Vehicle-Blocks-Assembling-Part-The-Locomotive-Toys-For-Kids/2164078_32673676511.html?spm=2114.12010612.0.0.20999d2ellv8tu

And hey, saved $10 too. Too bad for Lego I guess.

Here's a concept, the world doesn't revolve around you. TLG are under no obligation to make products available to you when you want them & at the price you've decided you want to pay. I would have preferred to pay AU$600 for the new UCS MF, but Lego set the price for our market at AU$1,300. So I had two choices, pay it or don't, as the option you'd pick makes you an accessory to IP theft, copyright/trademark infringement & patent breaches.

It's not just too bad for Lego, for every person that takes your course of action, it's less money in TLG's coffers. As a company, they're in the game to make money, the less they make, the greater the chance they'll have to downsize, which can translate as less products on shelf &/or less variety of products.

alaskaguy said:

....hell, for that matter, Lego doesn't make Duplo stuff available via Pick-A-Brick. Can't really blame people for meeting their needs in some other fashion.

On that note - if it made a 10-pack of Duplo train switches available for anything resembling a reasonable price, I'd consider buying one.  But even when it DID have a kit with switches, you only get two.  What are you supposed to do with that?

Same for a 50 pack of Duplo straight track, or Duplo curved track, or maybe a few other Duplo things.  But it doesn't. 

Hardly the buying public's fault if Lego isn't producing what it wants.

It's not a need, it is a want, to declare it a need reeks of a seriously entitled attitude. I wanted to purchase the Minecraft sets the Village & the Witch's Hut, but unfortunately TLG chose to retire the sets before they went on sale here, so I missed out, that's on me, not TLG. If I want the sets now, I have to consider purchasing from the aftermarket at the going prices, or hope that my fellow bricksetter that lives in Queensland finds them up his way & we can come to some arrangement.

Don't like the way TLG is making a product available to you? Contact them, inform them that you would like a bulk track pack, but realise they are under no obligation to make the product available to you, the way you see fit. I'd like to be able to buy a 1,000 round 1x1 plates for AU$10 in any colour I want, but TLG don't do this, so I can choose to pay the price they're asking or hit up BrickLink, eBay, etc & see if I can get a better price from sellers there. You are not entitled to Lego products at the prices you deem acceptable, if you don't like the price I'd suggest wait & hope it goes on clearance, but as has clearly already happened to you, this means you run the risk of missing out.

alaskaguy said:

Yes - but I don't buy stuff from Bricklink. 

That seller is also selling those sets for about $21/each...plus - I imagine - shipping, which is not going to be cheap from Germany.   Ignoring the rest of the stuff in the set that I'm not interested in, that's $21 plus shipping for 2 switches - or roughly, $11/each - plus any shipping charges. With the link I posted, ignoring the extra piece (which I DO happen to what - but want to compare apples to apples), it's roughly $7.50 each. And shipping is free. If I want 4 switches, which I do, that's roughly $44 vs $30.

You have legitimate alternatives to buying knock-offs, but you don't want to use legitimate alternatives? This is not justification, it's an excuse, a cop out. As for shipping from Germany being too expensive, it's cheaper than shipping from there to here, than from the US to here, but again it's an excuse to justify your purchasing of knock-offs.

alaskaguy said:

Now, truthfully, $14...meh...not really a big deal to be honest.  It's just the principle of the thing. If I could buy from Lego, I'd buy from Lego.  But since I can't - I'll buy from any source that I find attractive.  For something like Duplo train tracks - I think it is unlikely that there will be any material quality difference. Certainly not one that is going to affect the enjoyment of my 2 year old who is the one playing with this stuff.

I find this laughable, you post repeatedly about the price being too much, then turn around & claim it's not about the money, it's the principle, I'd post that Princess Bride "that word" meme, but memes aren't allowed on the forums anymore.

As for the quality? Do you work in quality control somewhere, are you QC inspector? No, then you are assuming the quality is the same, manufacturing standards are different in China, particularly for products meant primarily for the domestic market. Even if I was willing to buy knock-offs from China, I wouldn't gamble with stuff I intend for a 2 year old, even now, there are manufacturers over there using lead based paints & worse on products meant for children.

alaskaguy said:

In any event - buying tracks from Bricklink instead of Funlock is unlikely to make any material difference to Lego.

That BrickLink store had to purchase those products from TLG, either directly or indirectly, so some of the money ended up in TLG's coffers & when that BL store restocks, again TLG will see some of the coin, where as Funlock makes their own parts, so no money makes to TLG. The fact that TLG reps will direct people to BrickLink for replacement parts when a part is no longer in production, says different, otherwise, why don't they suggest Alibaba & the like for these parts?

alaskaguy said:

...I'm definitely not willing to pay retail price PLUS shipping for something I could have gotten for retail price WITHOUT shipping until fairly recently.  I mean - screw that.

But it's not about the price, it's the principle... It was available recently at retail & you didn't purchase, so now you have two legitimate choices or the option you picked, support the knock-off market & their IP theft, patent infringement & copyright/trademark breaching. Strong logic there, so were you actually intending to buy the legitimate product, or was the plan to wait until TLG retires the item so you can justify buy a knock-off product because of the evil aftermarket?

CCC

For duplo, especially track and trains, I found that you can normally buy decent second hand stuff at a reasonable price, then resell it once the kids have finished playing with it for what you paid for it (or more).

The real second hand stuff sells easily. I'm not sure about second hand knock-offs.

TheFew

This thread got real, fast! :-)

datsunrobbie

alaskaguy said:

datsunrobbie said:

If you only wanted the crossovers, and not the other pieces in #10506, you saved some money. #10506 also contains 8 curves, 5 straights, and a crossing guard. There's plenty of them available on Bricklink priced at or below $21.

This seller has 24 of them
https://store.bricklink.com/bienesladen2003?itemID=139143956#/shop?o={"invID":"139143956"}

Yes - but I don't buy stuff from Bricklink.

That seller is also selling those sets for about $21/each...plus - I imagine - shipping, which is not going to be cheap from Germany.   Ignoring the rest of the stuff in the set that I'm not interested in, that's $21 plus shipping for 2 switches - or roughly, $11/each - plus any shipping charges. With the link I posted, ignoring the extra piece (which I DO happen to what - but want to compare apples to apples), it's roughly $7.50 each. And shipping is free. If I want 4 switches, which I do, that's roughly $44 vs $30.

Now, truthfully, $14...meh...not really a big deal to be honest.  It's just the principle of the thing. If I could buy from Lego, I'd buy from Lego.  But since I can't - I'll buy from any source that I find attractive.  For something like Duplo train tracks - I think it is unlikely that there will be any material quality difference. Certainly not one that is going to affect the enjoyment of my 2 year old who is the one playing with this stuff.

In any event - buying tracks from Bricklink instead of Funlock is unlikely to make any material difference to Lego.

https://store.bricklink.com/LottaBricks?itemID=134573575#/shop?o={"invID":"134573575"}

US seller that has 5 of the switches for $5 each. That's 4 for $20, plus shipping, but if you'd rather pay more for off-brand parts, continue to ignore Bricklink.

alaskaguy

SumoLego said:

Maybe if you would have bought more earlier, the set wouldn't have been retired.

Had I known it was going to be retired, I would have. I get spam from lego.com daily. Would have been nice if they sent a spam that said, "Warning!! This set is being discontinued as if X date. If you want it, buy it now!". I would have bought five.

I had no idea they would axe such a useful little $20 set that is kinda critical to anyone wanting for their train to do much more than go around in a circle.

daewoo

"TLG are under no obligation to make products available to you when you want them & at the price you've decided you want to pay."

So, no, they do not have an "obligation" to do those things, but it is in their best interests to do it as much as they can within their business model.  If they do not listen to what consumers want (and I mean the actual target audience - parents of kids and kids), then their sales will decline and they will have a myriad of consequences to deal with.  We're already seeing that now.  The bottom line is that the VAST majority of people (not AFOLs) have ZERO brand loyalty to Lego.  If Lego wants continual sales growth, then they need to figure out how to make competitive products at competitive prices.

alaskaguy

VorpalRyu said:

Here's a concept, the world doesn't revolve around you. TLG are under no obligation to make products available to you when you want them & at the price you've decided you want to pay. I would have preferred to pay AU$600 for the new UCS MF, but Lego set the price for our market at AU$1,300. So I had two choices, pay it or don't, as the option you'd pick makes you an accessory to IP theft, copyright/trademark infringement & patent breaches.

Nope. They sure arn't.  Any more than someone is obligated to buy from them at whatever price they want to charge, on their calendar.

Really?  Please specify exactly what patent, what trademark and what copyright is infringed by someone producing Lego-compatible train tracks.

alaskaguy

CCC said:

For duplo, especially track and trains, I found that you can normally buy decent second hand stuff at a reasonable price, then resell it once the kids have finished playing with it for what you paid for it (or more).

The real second hand stuff sells easily. I'm not sure about second hand knock-offs.

A lot of people factor "resale value" into their purchases - regardless of what they may be buying. Whether it is Legos, automobiles...maybe electronics - other stuff.  I don't tend to. I plan on the value of whatever I'm buying to be zero by the time I am done with it - and purchase (or not) accordingly.  If it turns out something DOES have some value to it - well, hey - that's just bonus on the back end.  Hooray, for bonus!

I did get, fairly recently, a box of Duplos locally on Craigslist that had two switches in it.  If there were more such boxes to buy, I'd undoubtedly buy them.  Duplo train stuff doesn't come up locally very often though - for whatever reason. A lot of other stuff does, but not that stuff.

alaskaguy

datsunrobbie said:

US seller that has 5 of the switches for $5 each. That's 4 for $20, plus shipping, but if you'd rather pay more for off-brand parts, continue to ignore Bricklink.

I checked it out. Unfortunately, the shipping charge isn't listed. But I did send an email to ask.  Thanks for the tip!

I don't think it is accurate to say I "ignore" Bricklink.  I check it out all the time.  I just find it difficult to use and end up not buying anything.

SumoLego

daewoo said:
...We're already seeing that now...

$2 Billion Dollars in pre-tax profit.  I think they are doing just fine.

daewoo

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:
...We're already seeing that now...

$2 Billion Dollars in pre-tax profit.  I think they are doing just fine.

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

AndyPol

alaskaguy said:

VorpalRyu said:

So I had two choices, pay it or don't, as the option you'd pick makes you an accessory to IP theft, copyright/trademark infringement & patent breaches.

Really?  Please specify exactly what patent, what trademark and what copyright is infringed by someone producing Lego-compatible train tracks.

I'm not an expert, but you could always write / e-mail / call TLG legal team I suppose? I imagine they would know the answers?

alaskaguy

AndyPol said:

alaskaguy said:

VorpalRyu said:

So I had two choices, pay it or don't, as the option you'd pick makes you an accessory to IP theft, copyright/trademark infringement & patent breaches.

Really?  Please specify exactly what patent, what trademark and what copyright is infringed by someone producing Lego-compatible train tracks.

I'm not an expert, but you could always write / e-mail / call TLG legal team I suppose? I imagine they would know the answers?

Seems like the guy making accusations should be able to support them.

alaskaguy

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:
...We're already seeing that now...

$2 Billion Dollars in pre-tax profit.  I think they are doing just fine.

I know that if I had even .01% of that, I would consider myself to be doing just fine (:

If the 1400 people referenced above want to complain about something, they'd be more reasonable to focus their efforts on the family that OWNS the company and decided to keep $2B for themselves and/or $2B for themselves is not enough, rather than blaming Lego's competitors.

monkeyhanger

Snide companies like Lepin only look cheap because they have a fraction of the overheads that a legitimate company operating as it should does.

Development costs, advertising, paying to be independently audited, paying decent wages in countries with high labour costs etc. Without Lego innovating  you wouldn't gave the likes of Lepin able to rip them off.

No way i'd risk a toddler's health with suspiciously cheap toys that meet no internationally recognised standards such as "CE". That counterfeit Duplo could be full of Cadmium, Lead or other noxious substances, it could be brittle and liable to break into shards - and Duplo often ends up in little ones' mouths.

In the same vein I wouldn't put suspiciously cheap alloys of questionable origin on my car that might fracture or shatter if they go over a pothole. Worth paying for peace of mind.

VorpalRyu

alaskaguy said:

SumoLego said:

Maybe if you would have bought more earlier, the set wouldn't have been retired.

Had I known it was going to be retired, I would have. I get spam from lego.com daily. Would have been nice if they sent a spam that said, "Warning!! This set is being discontinued as if X date. If you want it, buy it now!". I would have bought five.

I had no idea they would axe such a useful little $20 set that is kinda critical to anyone wanting for their train to do much more than go around in a circle.

So you complain several times about the cost of Lego, then you want TLG to do something that will eat into their profits, which will likely see them raise prices? Learn to logic please... & before you say they could make it so you select what themes you want to receive updates on to make it less work, contrary to popular belief, such options actually creates more work on the back end of such a server/database, even in fairly simple setups, it can require two or three times as much work.

alaskaguy said:

VorpalRyu said:

Here's a concept, the world doesn't revolve around you. TLG are under no obligation to make products available to you when you want them & at the price you've decided you want to pay. I would have preferred to pay AU$600 for the new UCS MF, but Lego set the price for our market at AU$1,300. So I had two choices, pay it or don't, as the option you'd pick makes you an accessory to IP theft, copyright/trademark infringement & patent breaches.

Nope. They sure arn't.  Any more than someone is obligated to buy from them at whatever price they want to charge, on their calendar.

Really?  Please specify exactly what patent, what trademark and what copyright is infringed by someone producing Lego-compatible train tracks.

https://patents.google.com/patent/USD281443S

There's one I could dig up with minimal effort. TLG has patented a good number of their parts & after the fiasco with the patents for the original SYSTEM bricks, they have taken more care to keep patents active & pursue legal action against those violating their patents. China a big issue for TLG, as they often refuse to acknowledge patents filed in other countries & allow local corporations to file identical patents in their country, so patent enforcement has been an issue. This is why you can buy those knock-off track elements from China, but no companies are making them locally.

SumoLego

daewoo said:

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:
...We're already seeing that now...

$2 Billion Dollars in pre-tax profit.  I think they are doing just fine.

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

The remaining 17,000 would agree.  What's your point?  

I think overall, if you're going to be critical of a company, there are other less environmentally, socially and fiscally responsible companies to direct your attention.  Part of maintaining a healthy company is managing growth or the lack thereof.  I'm happy that LEGO cuts (and increases) their workforce if that ensures long-term stability.

For instance...
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/toys-r-us-said-to-be-preparing-to-liquidate-all-us-stores-2018-03-08

VorpalRyu

daewoo said:

"TLG are under no obligation to make products available to you when you want them & at the price you've decided you want to pay."

So, no, they do not have an "obligation" to do those things, but it is in their best interests to do it as much as they can within their business model.  If they do not listen to what consumers want (and I mean the actual target audience - parents of kids and kids), then their sales will decline and they will have a myriad of consequences to deal with.  We're already seeing that now.  The bottom line is that the VAST majority of people (not AFOLs) have ZERO brand loyalty to Lego.  If Lego wants continual sales growth, then they need to figure out how to make competitive products at competitive prices.

TLG definitely do listen to customers & they make changes from time to time based on customer feedback. As for the decline, it's a bit of bump, but it's hardly another 2003 scenario. The current downturn could be due to a number of factors, including unemployment, cost of living increases, etc (correlation does not imply causation).

Nice attempt to conflate the issue though, we both know that my comment wasn't about customer feedback from the average consumer, it was about the rants from perpetually entitled man-child AFOLs.

samiam391

I feel like we've been down this rabbit hole many times before.

*insert meme of stormtroopers beating a lepin horse*

(lepin = dead)

pharmjod

I really do miss @TigerMoth

SumoLego

pharmjod said:

I really do miss @TigerMoth

I really miss memes.

Recce

pharmjod said:

I really do miss @TigerMoth

I'm wondering too. What happened to him? 

CCC

He obviously loved memes. 

Bosstone100

Have you learned nothing from Beetlejuice?

VorpalRyu

@TigerMoth is Beetlejuice? Hmmm...

SumoLego

VorpalRyu said:

@TigerMoth is Beetlejuice? Hmmm...

I'm not sure if he's a Zagnut fan.

pharmjod

pharmjod said:

@TigerMoth @TigerMoth @TigerMoth....











I thought maybe it would be like Beetlejuice

Bosstone100 said:

Have you learned nothing from Beetlejuice?

I tried that a while back.  Clearly it didn't work :(

alaskaguy

VorpalRyu said:So you complain several times about the cost of Lego, then you want TLG to do something that will eat into their profits, which will likely see them raise prices?

://patents.google.com/patent/USD281443S

There's one I could dig up with minimal effort. TLG has patented a good number of their parts & after the fiasco with the patents for the original SYSTEM bricks, they have taken more care to keep patents active & pursue legal action against those violating their patents.

Oh please. Lego is already sending me the spam. They already know when they're discontinuing something.  Connecting those two pieces of information and taking action on it is trivial.  Besides which, I didn't complain about the cost of the set I was interested in. As noted above, I said I would buy five of them at the requested price, had I known this would be an issue.  But what I will NOT do is buy them from 3rd party sellers at a price higher than that.

The patent cited doesn't cover Duplo track switches - which is the subject of my above posts. In any case - by your own admission, they're not violating any patents according to the law in China.

alaskaguy

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

The remaining 17,000 would agree.  What's your point? 

Don't look now - but we agree on something (:

daewoo

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:
...We're already seeing that now...

$2 Billion Dollars in pre-tax profit.  I think they are doing just fine.

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

The remaining 17,000 would agree.  What's your point?  

I think overall, if you're going to be critical of a company, there are other less environmentally, socially and fiscally responsible companies to direct your attention.  Part of maintaining a healthy company is managing growth or the lack thereof.  I'm happy that LEGO cuts (and increases) their workforce if that ensures long-term stability.

For instance...
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/toys-r-us-said-to-be-preparing-to-liquidate-all-us-stores-2018-03-08Plea

I'm not complaining about TLG letting people go.  I only said that things were not going well (or as well as TLG would like) and that we are seeing the consequences of that.  How is that untrue?  I read the 2017 annual report when it was released and it says that 2017 was a difficult year and changes had to be made which are being made.  Do I hope they are successful?  Absolutely.

VorpalRyu

alaskaguy said:

Oh please. Lego is already sending me the spam. They already know when they're discontinuing something.  Connecting those two pieces of information and taking action on it is trivial.  Besides which, I didn't complain about the cost of the set I was interested in. As noted above, I said I would buy five of them at the requested price, had I known this would be an issue.  But what I will NOT do is buy them from 3rd party sellers at a price higher than that.

Trivial? Really? Clearly you have no understanding of how big an ask you are making there. TLG produces approximately around 500 different sets for retail purchase per year, multiply that by the number of customers that would potentially use the service if TLG created it. That is a lot of emails to generate & probably a couple of extra positions in the company to maintain the system, as any employees already doing a similar job within the company would already have their hands full keeping tabs on various sections & reporting everything back to upper management.

alaskaguy said:

The patent cited doesn't cover Duplo track switches - which is the subject of my above posts. In any case - by your own admission, they're not violating any patents according to the law in China.

Admission? What admission?!? Again, please show some basic logic skills. I gave you first active example of a Duplo track piece patent I came across, out of 100 odd patents relating to Duplo parts, but because I didn't hand you the exact patent relating to the Duplo piece you've given a loose reference to, that means I'm wrong, you're right & you win? I need an extra arm right about now, so I can triple facepalm...

alaskaguy

daewoo said:

I only said that things were not going well (or as well as TLG would like)

But isn't that always the case?  Extraordinarily rare is the company that says, "Hey, we're doing well enough! We have no plans to increase market share, reduce costs or introduce new products.  We don't need to make any more profit than what we're already making because things are already going as well as we would like them to go."

alaskaguy

VorpalRyu said:

alaskaguy said:

Oh please. Lego is already sending me the spam. They already know when they're discontinuing something.  Connecting those two pieces of information and taking action on it is trivial.  Besides which, I didn't complain about the cost of the set I was interested in. As noted above, I said I would buy five of them at the requested price, had I known this would be an issue.  But what I will NOT do is buy them from 3rd party sellers at a price higher than that.

Trivial? Really? Clearly you have no understanding of how big an ask you are making there. TLG produces approximately around 500 different sets for retail purchase per year, multiply that by the number of customers that would potentially use the service if TLG created it. That is a lot of emails to generate & probably a couple of extra positions in the company to maintain the system, as any employees already doing a similar job within the company would already have their hands full keeping tabs on various sections & reporting everything back to upper management.

alaskaguy said:

The patent cited doesn't cover Duplo track switches - which is the subject of my above posts. In any case - by your own admission, they're not violating any patents according to the law in China.

Admission? What admission?!? Again, please show some basic logic skills. I gave you first active example of a Duplo track piece patent I came across, out of 100 odd patents relating to Duplo parts, but because I didn't hand you the exact patent relating to the Duplo piece you've given a loose reference to, that means I'm wrong, you're right & you win? I need an extra arm right about now, so I can triple facepalm...

Yeah.  OK.  Good luck with all that.

daewoo

alaskaguy said:

daewoo said:

I only said that things were not going well (or as well as TLG would like)

But isn't that always the case?  Extraordinarily rare is the company that says, "Hey, we're doing well enough! We have no plans to increase market share, reduce costs or introduce new products.  We don't need to make any more profit than what we're already making because things are already going as well as we would like them to go."

All companies want to increase market share; Customer loyalty; revenue; profits; etc.  Companies compare results to forecasts, so when results meet or beat forecasts, then they are indeed happy.  When they fall below, then they are not.  TLG's numbers fell below forecasts, prompting the structural changes we have been seeing.

SumoLego

daewoo said:
I'm not complaining about TLG letting people go. 

So you're lamenting on behalf of the 1,400 now-expendible employees that were made expendible because LEGO didn't hit their self-imposed growth goals?  

daewoo said:

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

Got it.  

$2 Billion in pre-tax profit for their private shareholders.  I think they are doing just fine.

CCC

Decool are also copying the pod now, here are some Joker pods:

dmcc0

^ I wonder if that's where all the Vader pods that failed QC went

daewoo

SumoLego said:

daewoo said:
I'm not complaining about TLG letting people go. 

So you're lamenting on behalf of the 1,400 now-expendible employees that were made expendible because LEGO didn't hit their self-imposed growth goals?  

daewoo said:

I highly doubt that 1,400 people will be in agreement with you.

Got it.  

$2 Billion in pre-tax profit for their private shareholders.  I think they are doing just fine.

Good lord, man.  Lamenting?  Really?  Way to twist words into something that they were not.  Did Lego have a banner 2017?  According to Lego, not some random guy on the internet, they did not.  That is a fact.  What you or I think about Lego's performance is not relevant to Lego.

SumoLego

Lamenting is a dramatic word.  I would have prefer to use 'malaise', but it didn't quite fit.

And you did point out that those folks aren't happy about being downsized.

Anywya, given the TRU bankruptcy and loss of thousands and thousands of jobs, LEGO's performance looks more like feigning than real financial trouble.

(That was my point - of which I happen to think we agree.)

Who knows - maybe LEGO is already anticipating a downturn because of the uncertainly with TRU.  We all should anticipate that earnings will be down in 2018 when TRU isn't available during the Christmas Retail Season.

daewoo

SumoLego said:

Lamenting is a dramatic word.  I would have prefer to use 'malaise', but it didn't quite fit.

And you did point out that those folks aren't happy about being downsized.

Anywya, given the TRU bankruptcy and loss of thousands and thousands of jobs, LEGO's performance looks more like feigning than real financial trouble.

(That was my point - of which I happen to think we agree.)

Who knows - maybe LEGO is already anticipating a downturn because of the uncertainly with TRU.  We all should anticipate that earnings will be down in 2018 when TRU isn't available during the Christmas Retail Season.

The TRU situation will certainly have an impact.  Hopefully TLG can develop some new partnerships to replace that one.

SumoLego

daewoo said:
Hopefully TLG can develop some new partnerships to replace that one.

Anybody want to bet LEGO increased their Amazon marketing budget?  (And how full are the shelves going to be at Wal-Mart and Target in November 2018...)