SuvieD Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 I read this on Lugnet Jim Hughes reply and it made me think that this may infact be exactly what LEGO is looking to do. It has proven to be one of the few toy companies that can be profitable in this day and age. With a strong enough value and stock price I think this could happen in the next 5 years. Concerned? Maybe. Excited? Maybe. Selling LEGO to MB would equal disaster. Selling it to Hasbro could equal collectors dreams come true. Star Wars minifigure packs anyone? Not sure how I feel about all this though. New ownership could change the way the company works in huge ways. It could change nothing in regards to me. Interesting idea to say the least. Quote
gylman Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 I find the thought of Lego being sold to a "maximum sharehold value" kind of corporate mentality to be highly disturbing, but I wonder how much of this is a psychological gut response, but not really rational. Most often, the people buying the company would seek to position it as a premium product, not as a commodity. That's is, after all, the best way to a profit, not fighting with the other bottom dwellers for every last crumb. Buying TLC only to to turn it into Megabloks on steroids would be retarded. The only risk is that someone does this in order to squeeze some short term cash and does not care about the medium or long term. Someone who has never actualyl played with Lego. Quote
optimus-convoy Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 This has me concerned... I can't help but think all these massive changes will make Lego something horrible. But maybe all this could turn out a better product. I dunno, all I can do is speculate and hope for the best. Quote
Kikuichimonji Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 If they sell ut, I doubt they'll let their competition (Megabloks) buy them. As long as the quality and prices stays the same, I'm fine with everything. Quote
natelite Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 i dont think there is any risk of lego being sold. the brick-locking system is no longer patented. they are selling the production to flextronic so no longer will the brick material be proprietary. all they have left after the new structure would be purely set design and box art design. that can't be bought because it's all human capital. piss off the lead designer, he quits, go work for mega bloks and the whole company crumble to nothing. there's still brand recognition currently. but if the brick production technology leaked to mega bloks or elsewhere the premium on brand name should disappear in a few years. the block makers would probably compete on designs at that point. from then on, if you want the company, just hire the key people. it will be just like the game software companies - human capital forms the bulk of the company value. Quote
snefroe Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 yeah... i also think we're over reacting. there's still lots of money to be made in the lego business, so from a financial point of view, i guess it wouldn't be smart to just sell it all. In future, the three children will own the company, and maybe they're not highly involved, that doesn't mean they want to sell. there's also an emotional element to this. Why would you wanna sell the family business that, in many ways influenced your own life, not to speak of the lives of your parents and your grandparents? Even if you hate lego, and you yourself don't want to have anything to do with it, then surely it would be better to go and look for a few damn good managers to take on the daily work. i also don't think that the Danish authorities would just stand by and do nothing.... What's changed is this: the company no longer produces the toys, but i do think they're still designing the products. It's basically the trend of globalisation for Europe: production goes to Asia, all the 'intelligent' activities stay in Europe. We see it every day, honestly. In fact, it's going to be good for us and for lego, because now lego is a customer herself to the actual product producers. If lego is not happy with the quality they can go some place else to get their products made at their own conditions... Quote
Jipay Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 Don't forget that there is sell and sell ! If they go on the stock market, then we could all buy some lego shares X-D Quote
xwingyoda Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 Don't forget that there is sell and sell ! If they go on the stock market, then we could all buy some lego shares X-D Are you crazy ?? If I invest, its to gain money and not loose anything :-| :-P *yoda* Quote
Hobbes Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 I find the thought of Lego being sold to a "maximum sharehold value" kind of corporate mentality to be highly disturbing Not just you. This usually ends up in someone sitting at the top of the corporation in front of an excel sheet, wondering why the numbers in the last line don't look too good, and why the heck there's no cutting anything anywhere (costs, people, anything) since cutting in general helps (everybody does it, don't they)?! Happens all the time... Then again, maybe we're just "overreacting"... Buying TLC only to to turn it into Megabloks on steroids would be retarded. That is too funny ;-) Quote
JINZONINGEN73 Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 Don't ask me why I'm asking, but how much is Lego "worth" these days? Like, any idea what kind of numbers they're looking for to be bailed out? Quote
SuvieD Posted June 22, 2006 Author Posted June 22, 2006 They had losses from 1998-2004 I thought. Only about 4 million in losses the first year (I think) but much more than that at times. I am not sure how much they had in reserve before the losses started or how much of the profit from this year was used to cancel out debt. I am guessing they are close to debt free. This year should also be a profitable one so that will help. I don't think LEGO will get sold but it is possible. It is obvious that the family no longer wants primary responsibility though, which could be reason to expect a sale or at least a turnover to another private party. Quote
Deinonychus Posted June 22, 2006 Posted June 22, 2006 Selling it to Hasbro could equal collectors dreams come true. No No No A thousand times NO! If LEGO ever fell to Hasbro expect a sharp drop in brick quality, hideous re-issues and cost cutting measures to get every last dime out of each piece mold casting, poor avalibility and case assortments, retailer exclusives impossible to find or afford, a piss-poor online shopping option, a deficit of creativity, and a company so unconcerned with what AFOLs or even basic consumers would love to see as to make Microsoft look like Santa Claus. Hasbro would be a total, unmitigated, f##king disaster... Plus, did you see those Built-To-Rule sets a few years back? :P Quote
Brick Miner Posted June 23, 2006 Posted June 23, 2006 this reminds me of something very similar that happened in the comic book world... ex-president of marvel comics, bill jemas, left the company to start a licensing company. he saw that licensing the intellectual property of the marvel heroes was far more profitable than actually publishing the books. that is why you see a boat load of "spiderman-this-and-spiderman-that" in markets other than comic books. band-aids, birthday party plates, cereal... i mean, everything !!! sounds to me like most entertainment companies are realizing the intellectual property is far more valuable than the actual material that is bought and sold. in bill jemas case, comics... in our case here, lego bricks. i think this is just the natural evolution of a company. and we are realizing the evolution happen before us... as i don't think that it existed 10-15 years ago. - BrickMiner Quote
SuvieD Posted June 23, 2006 Author Posted June 23, 2006 No No NoA thousand times NO! If LEGO ever fell to Hasbro expect a sharp drop in brick quality, hideous re-issues and cost cutting measures to get every last dime out of each piece mold casting, poor avalibility and case assortments, retailer exclusives impossible to find or afford, a piss-poor online shopping option, a deficit of creativity, and a company so unconcerned with what AFOLs or even basic consumers would love to see as to make Microsoft look like Santa Claus. Hasbro would be a total, unmitigated, f##king disaster... Plus, did you see those Built-To-Rule sets a few years back? :P Woah! Never even considered all that. I just thought because they had the rights to produces stand alone figures it could work weel for those interested. Truth is I haven't purchased a new toy other than LEGO for a few years now. I picked up some of the newer GIJoe figures and a couple minimates a few years back and that is the last of my toy purchases. I never got back into the Star Wars figures after Kenner quit making them. If not Hasbro then which company is big enough to consider buying them? Hasbro owns half of the toy world practically. Quote
natelite Posted June 23, 2006 Posted June 23, 2006 hasbro is not the biggest. it is second to mattel. :-P will we start seeing lego barbie? :-P Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.