Big Girl, etc.

Midster

Lego made a bomb making the standard Lego (let’s not forget that) but what with inflation over the years, putting up there own prices to make more profit, the truth is people started to look at it as being to expensive for what it is, and to make a mass collection of Lego pieces (like many did growing up) for your kid, so he/she could make something more than just a Lego house just became to expensive for most parents.

Let’s be honest here it became a bit of a rip off..

Profits plummeted, customers run away and for the first time Lego were in real trouble. The didn’t want to lower there profits and make it more affordable so they decided to try and make it more popular again.

They made all sorts of Lego movies, kids loved it and hey presto. Lego is back.

Only in the films it clearly shows kits, for everything, Batman, etc. The most popular things around at the time to deliberately entice the new age kids pestering there parents into buying them.

Because it was different to the norm, Lego would have had to buy now machinery, new moulds for the new plastic pieces, and to do that they had to increase the price again.

So now even more of a rip off!!

I can’t see the old Lego lasting much longer, to many kids are buying the kits now, why would they continue selling it... there’s nothing particularly special about it either as it sits in a see through tub on the shelf, so why why would parents buy it.

Soon as the kits become unpopular, Lego itself will probably die out.

shutup

Victor, have you and your husband come up with any solutions for phrases to use with your Theyby?

Victor

shutup wrote: »

Theyby?

This looks garbled.

Cabaal

Midster wrote: »

Lego itself will probably die out.

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath on that one,
Lego started in 1932, it has a long life ahead of it yet

Unlike a one trick pony toy like say "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" legao can very easily change with the times, coming up with new plans and designs.
Going back to the older kits may even happen as well as people see the real value in encouraging imagination more

Midster

Cabaal wrote: »

I wouldn't recommend holding your breath on that one,
Lego started in 1932, it has a long life ahead of it yet

They said the same about Woolworths and gamleys

mirrorwall14

The only issue I see lego having is that it never dies lol. I have a massive box of lego from my youth. My four year old has knocked a years use out of it already and is just adding the new kits to it. And to be fair, (as a girl), I had bucket loads of the castle lego from the 80s like this so I didn't have all multicoloured bricks. What I do like today is the ability to buy base plates. Not sure if that was a thing when I was a kid but I know I never had enough lol

Midster

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

The only issue I see lego having is that it never dies lol. I have a massive box of lego from my youth. My four year old has knocked a years use out of it already and is just adding the new kits to it. And to be fair, (as a girl), I had bucket loads of the castle lego from the 80s like this so I didn't have all multicoloured bricks. What I do like today is the ability to buy base plates. Not sure if that was a thing when I was a kid but I know I never had enough lol

That’s the thing about Lego, you can never have enough base plates. Lol

antix80

Victor wrote: »

Yes, I appreciate she is only 3, but perhaps people should use more thoughtful and less stereotypical phrases.

I hope you didn't assume the child's gender. That's cissexist normativism, and you won't win "woke parent of the year award" thinking like that.

shutup

Imagine being the poor teacher (obviously in Educate Together) of Dictor and his husbands non binary child. Every week they’d be in complaining that somebody should be fired for saying postman or a child should be sent to inclusion/diversity training for asking if a girl would like to play with a doll.

Accepting Cookies

shutup wrote: »

Imagine being the poor teacher (obviously in Educate Together) of Dictor and his husbands non binary child. Every week they’d be in complaining that somebody should be fired for saying postman or a child should be sent to inclusion/diversity training for asking if a girl would like to play with a doll.

These kinds of comments are so OTT. While I didn't understand how the OP posted the topic that was made, there's no need to make nasty commentary. I don't know anything about this OP is he gay and does he have a non-binary child? Why should that even matter and why are you using those particular examples. This is the 3rd time this week alone that on here and Facebook combined I have seen grown adults make sneery comments about non binary people, specifically children. We can maturely talk about gender and gender roles, without the OTT implications of what someone MIGHT do IF they were gay and IF they had a non binary child.
Gender identities aren't a new thing. Society is only giving language to identities that have always existed under judgement and shame. Much like this particular comment. Perhaps one should be better informed than to only offer dolls to girl children in an educational setting.

The chan chan man

LOL! Classic

Dravokivich

shutup wrote: »

Imagine being the poor teacher (obviously in Educate Together) of Dictor and his husbands non binary child. Every week they’d be in complaining that somebody should be fired for saying postman or a child should be sent to inclusion/diversity training for asking if a girl would like to play with a doll.

Mod:

Abuse won't be tolerated here.

antix80 wrote: »

I hope you didn't assume the child's gender. That's cissexist normativism, and you won't win "woke parent of the year award" thinking like that.

Please refrain from clipping comments by other posters, resulting in a loss of context by them with the sole intention of having a snipe at them.