3 ms·

>How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later? I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with

>How are you supposed to create memories and have fun if you are buying to bank on it later? I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. All corporations have the same purpose, to generate value for their shareholders, using whichever way generates more revenue.

libertine 5y ago
I disagree, I do think they care about what people do with their Legos, to the point of having the whole etiquette around how to properly use Lego parts. But to the point of caring if people are actually building their limited edition sets? After the purchase people are free to do what ever they want with it, and like I said, they are making bank on it. If they wanted to throw panic they just had to re-release limited edition sets. >Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. And that's the fuel of change, AMD could have been capturing gamers but they're too focused on CPUs. But Intel got a taste of what it feels like not caring about consumers. Maximizing shareholder value is a short term strategy for B2C, usually doesn't go well. Shareholder value is a consequence from generating value to consumers, not the other way around.
the_mitsuhiko 5y ago
> I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Strongly disagreeing. Lego clearly is very interested in curating the brand. They also didn’t buy BrickLink without reasons. Lego wants to control and shape the entire ecosystem even outside of where they make money.

libertine 5y ago

I disagree, I do think they care about what people do with their Legos, to the point of having the whole etiquette around how to properly use Lego parts. But to the point of caring if people are actually building their limited edition sets? After the purchase people are free to do what ever they want with it, and like I said, they are making bank on it. If they wanted to throw panic they just had to re-release limited edition sets. >Same how Nvidia doesn't care that their GPUs end up in the hands of miners and scalpers, instead of gamers to enjoy, create memories and have fun. And that's the fuel of change, AMD could have been capturing gamers but they're too focused on CPUs. But Intel got a taste of what it feels like not caring about consumers. Maximizing shareholder value is a short term strategy for B2C, usually doesn't go well. Shareholder value is a consequence from generating value to consumers, not the other way around.

the_mitsuhiko 5y ago

> I don't think the Lego corporation cares about what people do with their Lego sets, as long as people keep buying more sets and at higher prices. Strongly disagreeing. Lego clearly is very interested in curating the brand. They also didn’t buy BrickLink without reasons. Lego wants to control and shape the entire ecosystem even outside of where they make money.