Please refrain from posting animated GIFs, memes, joke videos and so on in discussions other than those in the off topic area.

Dismiss this message to confirm your acceptance of this additional forum term of use.
You must be 16 or over to participate in the Brickset Forum. Please read the announcements and rules before you join.

Key findings from latest LEGO quarterly survey

drdavewatforddrdavewatford Hertfordshire, UKAdministrator Posts: 6,003
Fellow Bricksetters,

Please find below some findings from LEGO's most recent quarterly fan survey.

Cheers,

Dr. D.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Dear LEGO Fan community,

In June and July 2013, we ran an installation of our quarterly LEGO Fan Survey, and we would like to share the results with you.

Over 4,000 LEGO fans over the age of 13 participated from all over the world. In addition to the new languages offered in Q1, we added Italian and Polish versions of the survey. Teens (13-18) represented 12% of survey takers, and the largest two groups of adult fans participating remained those from 25-34 and 35-44. Adult Fans of LEGO (AFOL) from North America, Asia, and Western Europe represented the bulk of survey takers.

We were able to code all of the responses to the question regarding AFOL willingness to recommend products and services to friends and family members. Those highly likely to recommend have a strong passion for the brand, appreciate the quality of the products, and recognize LEGO products’ ability to draw out creativity and fun among people of all ages. Those less likely to recommend aren’t quite sure their friends will appreciate LEGO products in the same way they do, due to the perception of both high price and declining quality of products. Better efforts will be made by the CEE Support Team to share factual data on the pricing trends for the products (price per brick) along with quality and perfection rate data.


We also ask a question about the likelihood to recommend community resources and received a diverse set of responses to that question, too. Those likely to recommend community resources mention the warmth, expertise, and passion in the community as well as the wealth of information available to anyone with any interest (no matter how narrow). Those less likely to recommend feel that the community is too complex for casual LEGO builders or that the sites are too diverse and lacking a central source to hold them together.

There’s also a lack of awareness in nearly all regions except Northern Europe of the LEGO Community Events and Engagement team. Those familiar with the team feel that the fan community is strong and that they have good opportunities to participate in events with other fans much more than those unfamiliar with the LEGO CEE team. The Community team will continue to improve ways in being more accessible and easier to find while ensuring fair and equal support around the world.

Thank you to those of you who participated in the survey for allowing us the opportunity to improve. We look forward to your responses in the next survey and to your continued engagement and participation in the community.

With kind regards,
Yun Mi Antorini, Community Strategist

16.08.2013
SilentModeMatthewWesleyBy2joshPhoneboothicey117

Comments

  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 14,871
    Those less likely to recommend aren’t quite sure their friends will appreciate LEGO products in the same way they do, due to the perception of both high price and declining quality of products. Better efforts will be made by the CEE Support Team to share factual data on the pricing trends for the products (price per brick) along with quality and perfection rate data.

    I think they have missed the point here. I doubt the perfection rate of the product is getting worse. It is the declining quality of the design of some sets, rather than the quality of the pieces, that is the problem. And how are they going to measure quality of design? It is just a feeling of lesser quality in design compared to older similar sets, rather than a definitive data point they can put on a graph.
  • CaptAPJTCaptAPJT Member Posts: 210
    Some argument could be made that the proliferation of stickers vs printed pieces is an example of compromising on quality.
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,256
    CaptAPJT said:

    Some argument could be made that the proliferation of stickers vs printed pieces is an example of compromising on quality.

    I'd disagree there. I have never considered stickers a quality issue unless they are difficult to align or do not stick to the surface as intended (this tends to apply to a lot of stickers wrapped around 2x2 round elements, like Plankton's face in #3826).

    To me, applying stickers has always just been another part of the building process, albeit one I trusted to my dad back when I was very young. I'm sure there are a lot of younger fans who feel similarly, particularly about stickers in sets that are comparable to model kits like LEGO Technic.

    And to be perfectly honest, I think the LEGO Group has gotten a lot better about stickers. The last time I encountered a STAMP (Sticker Across Multiple Pieces) in a set was the Maersk Train (perhaps because Maersk was opposed to the idea of splitting their logo up into sections), and I don't remember the last time before that. Back in the 90s, STAMPs were common, and I had to rely on my dad to cut between the parts with a pen-knife so they could be properly separated. One classic set that suffers from this affliction, #6350, remains perhaps my favorite classic town set, but the STAMPs make it much more difficult to find it in the aftermarket without any peeling of the stickers from times when the truck was disassembled.

    I probably often seem like a cheery-faced optimist due to all the praise I give current LEGO sets, but frankly, having grown up during the 90s and early naughts, I've seen things a lot worse than anything we have to deal with today. Rampant juniorization, STAMPs galore, awful and incompatible minifigure designs, and plenty of repetitive, bare-bones set designs. I loved many of those sets as a kid, and even today I have to admire the LEGO Group for all the imaginative ideas that emerged from that desperate era of experimentation. But there's hardly a set or theme from my childhood that I'd consider superior to its closest modern-day counterpart.
  • legomattlegomatt Member Posts: 2,526
    edited August 2013
    Unless I am reading it wrong, it seems the responders to the survey have also convinced themselves, and in turn the survey team, that 'price per brick' is the same as value for money in the 'recommending due to price perceptions part'.

    That kind of thinking is why we're getting increasingly large numbers of cheese slopes, droid/skeleton arms, etc, in every set design, and a pile of other smaller pieces where one or two would be more practical and make more sense - just to please the 'price per brick' crowd. But it's nonsense. A pile of cheese slopes is a pile of cheese slopes. Parts usage should be for ascetic reasons, not for bulking out a now meaningless number.

    Maybe, back in the day, when the element inventory was limited to bricks, plates, and connectors, it made some sense, but today? With droid arms, cheese slopse, etc? No. Just no.

    I can't help but roll eyes when seeing phrases such as "it has 600 pieces and is £60, great value!" without any consideration for the actual model. Yet just one glance at the model, and at the parts list to confirm, I can immediately discount up to a third of them as single studs, spikes, etc, so that the bulk of what actually makes the set is closer to 350 pieces, and then half of those will be two-pieces-doing-the-job-of-one for the sake of that damned piece count.

    A satisfactory build with proper parts usage for the ascetic value of the set is value for money, NOT a pile of 'sneeze and they're everywhere' confetti parts with a new (chinese manufactured costing no more than a £1.99 CMF to produce anyway) Johnny Wonderpants fig thrown in to push sales, cos we know the build stinks. That's why people say 'value isn't there', figs and bits are covering the cracks of poor value/unfinished builds

    At least that's how I see it.

    :o)
    Thanos75CCCthenoshewmanStuBoyTheBigLegoski
  • legomattlegomatt Member Posts: 2,526
    edited August 2013

    Clarification: I'm not saying there aren't any good builds. There are - some really good - but by gum they don't half make you pay for them! It feels like you have to spend £100 these days to get anywhere close to something worth building.
  • AanchirAanchir United StatesMember Posts: 2,256
    Personally, I tend to feel like even cheese slopes and other tiny detail elements tend to add to builds, so I don't have a hard time justifying including those in price-per-brick calculations. But I agree that price-per-brick is not the best measure of value-for-money in all cases. I wouldn't be a Hero Factory collector if I was convinced that price-per-brick were the be-all and end-all of LEGO valuation!

    I tend to find a lot of sets enjoyable to build, no matter what the price point. I don't feel like it's only the largest sets that have any building value. Even a Creator polybag can be a fun build for its size. Same with the LEGO City Great Vehicles sets. One of my favorite Ninjago sets this year is the smallest one: #70500, a $10 set.
    legomattvitreolumMODVLEX
  • legomattlegomatt Member Posts: 2,526
  • LegoFanTexasLegoFanTexas TexasMember Posts: 8,409
    Cheese slopes are clearly not worth as much as a 4x8 plate, but every part does take some time to attach and large amounts of small parts can add a lot of detail.

    It is a slippery slope (no pun intended), but I do like the large part count sets, even if they aren't all that big.

    A 300 part count set, no matter how nice and efficient in use of parts, takes 20 minutes to put together for most adults.

    A 3,000 part set, even if all little bitty parts, will take all day to put together.

    So there is value there, in that respect. How much you or I or someone else values that part, is a personal matter.

    Personally? I have found that while I enjoy sets of all sizes, the ones that bring me lasting enjoyment are the 2,000+ part sets. Almost everything I have built smaller than that gets forgotten all too quickly.
  • TheLoneTensorTheLoneTensor MericaMember Posts: 3,950

    A 3,000 part set, even if all little bitty parts, will take all day to put together.

    A 3,000 part set, especially if all little bitty parts, will take all day to put together.

    vitreolum
  • Jonn420Jonn420 Member Posts: 267
    Personaly i have issues with the Plastic Quality, im tired of cracking cheese slopes, horse sadles and my latest find, my white clones that are 2 years or older are starting to crack under their arms.. And these are stricktly display figures.. No stress at all.....and face it Lego prices have always been high end... For a quality toy.... Now i feel like im paying Lego prices for megablock quality... The quality in the minifigures has changed.... The color matching has gone downhill... And i do feel like im buying more rehashed sets cause they add new figures.
    I think the Lego group has forgotten the old man's pledge.... Money has won out over quality.... Now im sad i passed on all those Halo sets due to me being a Lego loyalist.
    LegoboyColoradoBricksBustinmargot
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 4,257
    i haven't had any issue with quality of plastic but i think some of the print on coloured pieces isn't brilliant. i work as a sign maker so I understand how print works and i can tell that they aren't overprinting where they should be, to save money.
  • UnixpaceUnixpace Member Posts: 12
    edited March 2014
    Even my collection is small I've already felt some very different quality levels on minifigs. The touch of the helmet in #850423 feels weird, for example, as opposed to the helmet in #2855028 (and I have to say that what really pissed me on the blue spaceman was its face).

    About the quality of sets, I can't really give feedback about history, but about size. I'm really most excited about large part count sets, but one of the sets I liked most was #42001, a 100 parts set with a rubber belt, because of its modularity being such a small set.

    Edit: Sorry, looks like my # links are not working... I'll try to find out why when possible.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy