LEGO® CUUSOO 空想 - Turn your model wishes into reality

[LiamM32]

Or, on a more serious note, It is cool that you are worried about TLG's financials, but I think you might be overestimating their risk a bit here. Remember the creator does not participate directly in the business-case phase, and they don't get to make a pitch that could sway the decision-makers. Lego will only produce a set if they coldly calculate that they can break even, or at least gain in terms of good PR, based on real-world focus-group responses. And in the end, even if a Cuusoo set somehow made absolute zero sales, then the entire loss could probably be easily written off on taxes as a promotional expense, and even a total loss would only be a small fraction of the millions of dollars that they give away to charity every single year, purely as a gift to the world. That nanoscopic amount of risk is barely enough to register a blip...

I would see how such a commercial failure could be a financial problem in other toy companies, but I would think that It would be easier for Lego. Is there a reason that they can't simply unpackage all the unsold sets and transfer the parts to other sets.

You are greatly underestimating the importance of the business case in the review process. You are way too optimistic that a specific reason must be found to justify not making a set, such as a license conflict. CuuSoo works in the opposite manner. 10k votes gives the opportunity to present why a set should or could be made. But contrary to many AFOL's belief the default position once it hits 10k is not "make it unless we can prove a case not to." The numbers matter. Big time. They have to be able to clearly and unequivocally justify the costs and the pricing and see a clear and determinable target market for the price offered.

As an example, you seem positive that the Japanese Old Style Architecture will pass review with flying colors. I'm not so sure. It's a great project. But even if trimmed down to one building it would still be pricey. And it is playing in a niche that might not have particularly strong cross cultural or international sales. Their data for a small run Japanese specific subject has been somewhat mixed. Case in point. Hayabusa, which seems to be something of a shelf warmer when compared to the #3 and #4 CuuSoo projects. How much did it sell where? After the multiple sell out runs of Minecraft and BttF, I am doubtful that the CuuSoo review team will be anxious to swing back around to a geographically limited niche subject.

Now I can agree with Indiana that you are overestimating the risks of the business case. I think that Japanese Old-Style would easily get through the review. Making one of the smaller ideas of that project as a set could be less than $100 or 80€. Lego seems to like making large sets, including the more experimental concepts; I recall reading years ago that the average Lego set was just over $50 (I cant remember if this was US or Canada). Because the project is generic and non-licensed, I think that it would sell much faster as a real product than on the website. I disagree that it would not have much appeal outside of Japan. The project is fairly generic, easy to scale to desired price, and uses simple parts to give a good monetary value.

There is however one small point that you made that has a slight chance of problem. What if they ask which set should be made first, and a large one is chosen. Even in that case, I wouldn't worry so much though.

http://blog.lego.cuu...6/26/141364880/

The misconception with the MWT is that they would have made it as it looks in the picture. TLG had already clearly said that they were evaluating the Saloon only. Which probably would have put the set at $99 or below.

Interesting fact to bring up. I was aware that they would only make one set initially. What I didn't know was that the entire review was specifically about the saloon. They should modify the review process; First the briefly review the overall project, then they briefly review the most popular set concept (moving to the next-popular if the first fails), and then experiment with the product design. The Modular Western Town in particular would have probably failed review no-matter which set was first released, but that's a different point.

[The Real Indiana Jones]

Ah, and so here is another vital Cuusoo question, and I think it is open to any number of educated guesses.

What do you think is the maximum number of times they would let one competitor get sets made on Cuusoo? I'd say at least 2, just to incentivize good builders to create more, and just to get more quality ideas out there. But then maybe they might not let any one person win 3 times or more...? or 5 times or more...? But on the other hand, if you win 12 medals fair-and-square at the Olympics or in the Army, then you win 12 medals. What would you say is the max?

I see that lots of quality builders have 10 or 20 entries posted, and most have at least 5 up, so I am sure that a lot of people are looking for multiple wins.

Edited September 20, 2013 by The Real Indiana Jones

[GregoryBrick]

I would see how such a commercial failure could be a financial problem in other toy companies, but I would think that It would be easier for Lego. Is there a reason that they can't simply unpackage all the unsold sets and transfer the parts to other sets.

TLG is going to avoid risk as much as possible. The argument that they can handle a product tanking isn't a very compelling reason to produce said product. They'll just go with something more likely to succeed.

Also, is there any precedent for unpackaging unsold sets and using the parts in other sets? I can't imagine this would ever be worth it. They would just sell at a loss or destroy the product instead.

[The Real Indiana Jones]

TLG is going to avoid risk as much as possible. The argument that they can handle a product tanking isn't a very compelling reason to produce said product. They'll just go with something more likely to succeed.

Also, is there any precedent for unpackaging unsold sets and using the parts in other sets? I can't imagine this would ever be worth it. They would just sell at a loss or destroy the product instead.

Ah, just like any smart company, Lego will seek to maximize their opportunities for profit-making, as long as the risks and downsides are within a calculated tolerable limit. In this case, the downside is far less than 1/3000 of their current total annual revenues.

If a set falls short, then I think they usually just donate them to schools around the world, and take it as a nice charitable deduction on their taxes. I imagine it's easier to justify that with educational sets.

We should take a closer look at their Annual Business Report, and their Annual Progress Report again. I have them highlighted somewhere in my files.....

Edited September 20, 2013 by The Real Indiana Jones

[GregoryBrick]

Ah, just like any smart company, Lego will seek to maximize their opportunities for profit-making, as long as the risks and downsides are within a calculated tolerable limit. In this case, the downside is far less than 1/3000 of their current total annual revenues.

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not, as your bolded statements don't contradict what I posted. If TLG can allocate resources towards making Product A OR product B, they will go with whichever product has a better (predicted) ROI, all else being equal. Suppose it's Product A. The relative size of the risk for Product B becomes irrelevant, no matter how small that risk is. And this sort of calculation happens all the time - while TLG is very large, their resources are not infinite, and they will allocate their resources for maximum benefit. Again, the argument that TLG wouldn't lose much money on Japanese Old-Style Architecture if it failed sounds compelling only if you assume TLG has no alternative product (internally, CUUSOO, or otherwise) where they could invest those resources.

Edited September 21, 2013 by GregoryBrick

[The Real Indiana Jones]

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or not, as your bolded statements don't contradict what I posted. If TLG can allocate resources towards making Product A OR product B, they will go with whichever product has a better (predicted) ROI, all else being equal. Suppose it's Product A. The relative size of the risk for Product B becomes irrelevant, no matter how small that risk is. And this sort of calculation happens all the time - while TLG is very large, their resources are not infinite, and they will allocate their resources for maximum benefit. Again, the argument that TLG wouldn't lose much money on Japanese Old-Style Architecture if it failed sounds compelling only if you assume TLG has no alternative product (internally, CUUSOO, or otherwise) where they could invest those resources.

Oh, I was definitely agreeing with you, but just balancing a bit. You were saying that "TLG is going to avoid risk as much as possible", but it is always a delicate balancing act between avoiding risks and pursuing rewards... the rewards of profit and market growth.

So yes, we agree!

[ShaydDeGrai]

Ah, and so here is another vital Cuusoo question, and I think it is open to any number of educated guesses.

What do you think is the maximum number of times they would let one competitor get sets made on Cuusoo? (snip) win (snip) win (snip) win (snip) wins.

While I appreciate the sentiment you're going for, I think the wording of your question belies a fundamental disconnect with the nature of crowd sourcing in general. Although I'm sure we, as AFOLs, might consider getting a set produced a "victory" I think it is wrong to think of CuuSoo as a "competition".

I've seen postings from Lego community reps and also heard one speak in person basically saying that the proposal-support-review mechanism of CuuSoo should the thought of as a _process_ not a _contest_. Fans should consider every proposal in isolation, to support it (or not), and to focus comments on the project at hand, not how it compares to other projects, past present or future. If there are perceived "competing" projects or designers on CuuSoo, it is only because _WE_ (not TLG) have declared them to be so by choosing to support one but not the other.

Getting back to the question of "consistently successful" project designers, TLG just wants greater brand visibility and hopes for new, fresh ideas out of CuuSoo; Who and what gets to 10k _first_ it less important to them than why and how they got there. The brand advertising mission of CuuSoo is achieved just by the fact that we're talking about it here and now. As for the crowd-sourcing aspects, the individual ideas really need to succeed of fail on their own merits, regardless of where they came from. From a business case standpoint, it makes no sense to ignore a good idea simply becouse it originated from someone who has already had other good ideas.

As I said, CuuSoo isn't intended to be a competition, but even if it were, it wouldn't be a feel-good, "politically-corrected" game of T-ball where nobody keeps score and everyone goes home with a trophy whether they played well or not. It would be more of a popularity contest - irrational, fickle, and ripe for abuse - because that's what _we're_ guilty of making it every time we see two similar projects of quality and chose one over the other rather than supporting both, or throw a tantrum on-line because some other designer "stole" our idea (that we copied from existing IP anyway), etc.

There are over 5000 active proposals on CuuSoo and the fact is only the smallest fraction of them are ever going to inspire official sets. Looking at this process as a competition between designers or even proposals makes about as much sense as fighting to cut ahead in a line to buy lottery tickets for fear that the guy in front of you will get the winning ticket. I'd like to think that originality, skill and execution of ideas matters a lot more with CuuSoo than dumb luck, but the truth is good projects still get rejected for all sorts of reasons already, I don't think we need a "spread the wealth" mentality as an extra hurdle.

[Jetrax99]

These are a few projects that I think really need some more supporters behind them.

Bunyip's Constaction Line for girls: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/6801

Kon1's Remolded Ball socket Service Pack: http://lego.cuusoo.c...deas/view/17500

CrashSanders' Macrofigures: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/138

These projects have a lot of potential, and Kon1's project would ease a lot of the parts problems with old Bionicle sets. They just need more support, and I find it sad how people seem to just be writing these off.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Jetrax99

[The Real Indiana Jones]

While I appreciate the sentiment you're going for, I think the wording of your question belies a fundamental disconnect with the nature of crowd sourcing in general. Although I'm sure we, as AFOLs, might consider getting a set produced a "victory" I think it is wrong to think of CuuSoo as a "competition".

I've seen postings from Lego community reps and also heard one speak in person basically saying that the proposal-support-review mechanism of CuuSoo should the thought of as a _process_ not a _contest_. Fans should consider every proposal in isolation, to support it (or not), and to focus comments on the project at hand, not how it compares to other projects, past present or future. If there are perceived "competing" projects or designers on CuuSoo, it is only because _WE_ (not TLG) have declared them to be so by choosing to support one but not the other.

Getting back to the question of "consistently successful" project designers, TLG just wants greater brand visibility and hopes for new, fresh ideas out of CuuSoo; Who and what gets to 10k _first_ it less important to them than why and how they got there. The brand advertising mission of CuuSoo is achieved just by the fact that we're talking about it here and now. As for the crowd-sourcing aspects, the individual ideas really need to succeed of fail on their own merits, regardless of where they came from. From a business case standpoint, it makes no sense to ignore a good idea simply because it originated from someone who has already had other good ideas.

As I said, CuuSoo isn't intended to be a competition, but even if it were, it wouldn't be a feel-good, "politically-corrected" game of T-ball where nobody keeps score and everyone goes home with a trophy whether they played well or not. It would be more of a popularity contest - irrational, fickle, and ripe for abuse - because that's what _we're_ guilty of making it every time we see two similar projects of quality and chose one over the other rather than supporting both, or throw a tantrum on-line because some other designer "stole" our idea (that we copied from existing IP anyway), etc.

There are over 5000 active proposals on CuuSoo and the fact is only the smallest fraction of them are ever going to inspire official sets. Looking at this process as a competition between designers or even proposals makes about as much sense as fighting to cut ahead in a line to buy lottery tickets for fear that the guy in front of you will get the winning ticket. I'd like to think that originality, skill and execution of ideas matters a lot more with CuuSoo than dumb luck, but the truth is good projects still get rejected for all sorts of reasons already, I don't think we need a "spread the wealth" mentality as an extra hurdle.

Yes, excellent points.

And overall, it must be "a process, not a contest" like you mentioned, since the early entries have an outrageously-unfair 18-month head-start versus later entries!

I think everyone agrees that this is a critical issue with Cuusoo... The people who started in 2011 get all the visibility... How do you think TLG adjusts for that problem?

What exact calculations do you think they do behind the scenes to seek out the sets that are moving much faster than other sets with a similar amount of votes / visibility?

[Faefrost]

Ah, just like any smart company, Lego will seek to maximize their opportunities for profit-making, as long as the risks and downsides are within a calculated tolerable limit. In this case, the downside is far less than 1/3000 of their current total annual revenues.

If a set falls short, then I think they usually just donate them to schools around the world, and take it as a nice charitable deduction on their taxes. I imagine it's easier to justify that with educational sets.

Part of the problem is that TLG like most modern production businesses, is compartmentalized. A CuuSoo project does not exist in a pool of the entirety of Legos overall profits. It sits in a risk pool that comprises the budget and expectations of the CuuSoo project group. So CuuSoo projects need to succeed in terms of their subgroups budget. Each subgroups must show their own positive results using the resources they are allocated. While it may seem that a risk of 1/30000 of the TLG budget or profits is minimal. It may in truth be risking 20 - 40% of the CuuSoo groups production budget or required annualsales returns. This tends to naturally focus the CuuSoo team on working towards the sets that are most likely to generate substantial positive returns.

Edited September 22, 2013 by Faefrost

[The Real Indiana Jones]

.....that are most likely to generate substantial http://www.airfix.co...-build/positive returns.

Oops... You have a random link inserted into your post there. Did you want to link to something?

Edited September 22, 2013 by The Real Indiana Jones

[Faefrost]

You have a (seemingly) random link inserted into your post. What did you want to point to?

Whoops, sorry about that. Just a quirk of posting from the iPad. I didn't mean to link anything thre.

[CM4Sci]

It's been a few weeks since I've been on CUUSOO and the first thing I saw was this.

Already at 10k! (almost) I doubt it'll pass though...

-Sci

[just2good]

It's been a few weeks since I've been on CUUSOO and the first thing I saw was this.

Already at 10k! (almost) I doubt it'll pass though...

-Sci

Yeah, it first started getting supports from Tumblr, but a lot of media sites picked up on it. It would sell very well if it's like $20 (which looks like a good price for it), as there are many different age groups who love the show. I just wonder if the content of the show "doesn't fit the LEGO brand".

[CM4Sci]

And it just hit 10k!

Meh.

Also, am I the only one who is having a userpage problem? It's always been taking forever to load.

-Sci

Edited September 22, 2013 by CM4S

[Faefrost]

Congrats to the Sherlock folks. That was a fast sprint to 10k. I think it might run into similar brand fit issues as the Firefly and Sean of the Dead projects sadly. Just a little too adult in nature. (Lego tends to shy away from tales of murder, at least in a modern setting.)

[AndyC]

Brand fit could be an issue with Sherlock. Possibly more intriguing is that the reason so much Sherlock Holmes things exist these days is that the characters are all out of copyright, making them cheap to use. But this project is so obviously based on the recent BBC adaptation that TLG probably couldn't run with it without licensing that off the BBC. Would TLG really want to pay license fees for something they could jut as easily do their own version of for nothing?

[The Real Indiana Jones]

Brand fit could be an issue with Sherlock.

I just wonder if the content of the show "doesn't fit the LEGO brand".

Just a little too adult in nature. (Lego tends to shy away from tales of murder, at least in a modern setting.)

Yep, Totally agreed. If this is one of those crime dramas that starts with a corpse and a cold-blooded murder at the beginning of every episode, then it's a no-go. I have not seen it.

[Faefrost]

Yep, Totally agreed. If this is one of those crime dramas that starts with a corpse and a cold-blooded murder at the beginning of every episode, then it's a no-go. I have not seen it.

The show sets the classic Sherlock Holmes in modern era London. The guy who played Khan in the recent Star Trek movie is Sherlock, the guy who played Bilbo Baggins in the Hobbit is Watson. It is a very psychologically dark crime drama ( yet oh so good). Stuff like Sherlock is essentially a high functioning sociopath. Watson is a PTSD suffering wounded Afghanistan vet. The stories themselves get very much into dark crime and serial killer territories.

Phenomenal stories, but in all liklihood a little too dark for Lego. They might do a classic Victorian Era Sherlock set. But a modern take, I'm doubtful.

Edited September 23, 2013 by Faefrost

[dvsntt]

I like the Sherlock television show, however I don't think that Lego would find it appropriate to make sets based on a character who's cocaine addiction is a defining trait of his personality, and routinely has murder and other violence in each episode.

[Mr Breden]

I am also a fan of the show, but I doubt TLG will ever make a set based on it

[Jedi master Brick]

I am not sure about Shelock, it may be on the edge on brand fit but it isn't on the same scale as Shaun of the Dead and Sherlock is very popular at the moment.

[Blondie-Wan]

I am not sure about Shelock, it may be on the edge on brand fit but it isn't on the same scale as Shaun of the Dead and Sherlock is very popular at the moment.

Maybe not Shaun of the Dead, but what about Firefly / Serenity? That's another IP on which a CUUSOO project was based, which garnered 10,000 votes. And while Sherlock is undoubtedly popular, Firefly has a lingering popularity with an audience I suspect may be somewhat more inclined to buy LEGO sets than the average Sherlock fan... but it was still declined for reasons of brand fit.

Right now, our ideas of just what works of popular entertainment might be acceptable source material for LEGO are being challenged and expanded by The Simpsons, but we have to remember there are still things they just won't do. I haven't seen Sherlock yet myself, but if the descriptions here do it justice, I suspect it's one of those things TLG just doesn't want associated with the brand, even if it's a high-quality production.

[SandMirror38]

The Sherlock page has dissapered for me anyone else had this problem?

[Faefrost]

The Sherlock page has dissapered for me anyone else had this problem?

That normally seems to happen when they hit 10k. The system auto locks down the project page when they hit 10k, until an admin can move it to under review status. It should re appear in a few days.