Choice Mag Australia's insult to AFOL's

[BrickTango]

Hi all,

My attention was brought to the back cover of the latest issue of 'Choice' magazine.

Obviously the writers and publishers have never heard of AFOL's

Choice: "We are pretty sure most boys over 16 have moved on from Lego..."

They are trying to be funny and smart (back cover is to highlight advertising inaccuracies and peculiarities), but I am not sure whether to get annoyed or laugh it off.

http://www.choice.com.au/

Cheers,

Serkan

[Brickus]

They're just ignorant.

[purpleparadox]

They're just ignorant.

Yup, they simply don't know about AFOLs. It's not significant enough to be a big deal, or to upset me.

[HawkLord]

Doesn't bother me. I just bought the Star Wars Desert Skiff that's listed for "Ages 7-12". That's surely didn't stop me from buying it.

[fred67]

Looks like a ripoff of Consumer Report's inside back cover that ridicules, usually, misleading packaging and terrible advertising... and it looks like they couldn't find enough to make fun of so they tried this lame "joke."

[lightningtiger]

Unbelievable, well I've sent a message to Choice complaining about their narrow mindedness.

I'll post the result, if there is one.

[Artanis I]

These are submitted by readers of the magazine. (Of course the editors don't have to include everything, they must've been desperate -and stupid- to include something like this though.) The "narrow-minded" (or ignorant) term can be applied to 1 of Mannie De Saxe, Phil Mason, Ethan Giacomel or Graham Philpott, whoever was responsible...

Perhaps someone with a copy of Choice magazine can submit to "Hard Word" that page along with a signed letter from a bunch of AFOLs to say that Lego users over 16 - male AND female - are not so rare.

[Vindicare]

Just ignore it...AFTER sending a letter to the editor saying, "eurobricks.com...Just sayin'"

Hawkman, it's best to just ignore those pesky numbers also.

[lightningtiger]

As promised here's Choice magazine's email response.....

"I’ve received your comment on the Lego item in the Hard Word, CHOICE’s back page. Thank you for taking the time to write to us. The Hard Word is intended as a lighthearted look at misprints and other marketing blunders. In the item you refer to, the comment was directed at the (high) lower age limit advertised with the product, and no disrespect to anyone else was intended. Nonetheless, we have certainly taken your comment on board, and I thank you for your feedback."

Where was the marketing boo-boo ?

[Darth Hagrid]

...They seem to have completely misunderstood the message.

[Capt. Redblade]

Blasphemers!

But, seriously, folks...

Doesn't bother me in the least. What I find usually works is to multiply the two numbers of the "recommended age" and think of the product thereof as the maximum recommended age. For instance, if the set I was eyeing were 7-16, the conversation might go like, "7x16=112. Well, I'm still far younger than that, so I guess I'll be taking this home with me."