Dreamworld Lego Store construction

[themagician]

Taken this morning:

[themagician]

These photos were shared by AusParks, but taken by someone else (who's name I won't share just in case they don't want it to be on here)

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

2 hours ago, themagician said:

These photos were shared by AusParks, but taken by someone else (who's name I won't share just in case they don't want it to be on here)

1. Did AusParks publicly credit the photographer?
   (You should too)
2. Did you ask permission to post here?
   (probably simpler and easier than omitting a photo credit for someone on the assumption that they don't want it to be on here 'just in case'.

[themagician]

1. Yes they did.

2. Sorry, no I didn't and should have.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

All good mate - the whole 'permission' thing is a debate I don't wish to reopen, but suffice it to say if a 'media outlet' of any description publishes a photo, and you bring it here, I feel its only appropriate if the outlet uses the photographer's name, you should too.

For example - 'AusParks just posted these photos. Photo credit to Krusty the Klown.' I see no issue with that.

[bladex]

coming along nicely that thing is FUGE they must be going to have a mini LEGO display in there too?

Edited December 5, 2016 by bladex

[themagician]

Yeah I'm pretty sure, if I remember correctly, in the press release they said there would be LEGO display/models

[bladex]

maybe a huge lego version of the claw and tot?

[themagician]

I think a DW tower Lego model in the middle of the store would be pretty cool.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

TBH I don't think the tower would look that impressive - unless it was a working model.

[New display name]

I like the idea of a "Lego Tiger" on the roof escaping out of DW.

 

Edited December 5, 2016 by YLFATEEKS

[SunshineTom]

Dreamworld, in a way, are lucky they have this big brand coming on board at this stage. 

[themagician]

You say that, but LEGO had contracted with DW in the first half of the year, so I can't see the incident affecting anything like that.

[XxMrYoshixX]

2 hours ago, AlexB said:

TBH I don't think the tower would look that impressive - unless it was a working model.

I've built a Lego Dreamworld Tower before - if they got a professional builder to build a giant model of it and the surrounding area it would be quite cool. Perhaps they should make an exclusive Architecture-style set of the Dreamworld Tower.

40 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

Dreamworld, in a way, are lucky they have this big brand coming on board at this stage. 

Dreamworld made a deal with Lego long before the accident happened. The store itself was announced long before that.

[SunshineTom]

2 hours ago, XxMrYoshixX said:

Dreamworld made a deal with Lego long before the accident happened. The store itself was announced long before that.

 

I'm well aware but there are always clauses in contracts in which either party can exit if one party has significant PR damage and is causing flow-on damage to the attached party. LEGO could potentially leave this contract and i think they would've had they not already been half way through construction.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

being halfway through construction wouldn't stop them as Dreamworld is likely bearing the majority of the construction costs, and would no doubt be able to utilise the building for other purposes if Lego were to ditch them.

That said, the incident isn't something that they are handling badly overall. sure, their initial reactions possibly weren't as good as they could have been, but i think they've done surprisingly well.

I also noticed that throughout the media storm following the incident, there was very little mention, or imagery of the lego tie-in - all of the footage and imagery I saw (whether by accident or deliberately) kept the lego store and images well out of shot.

[New display name]

18 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

LEGO could potentially leave this contract and i think they would've had they not already been half way through construction.

Hogwash. DW would be paying to build the new Lego store. If Lego wanted to cancel the contract they would of.

Edited December 6, 2016 by YLFATEEKS

[SunshineTom]

Just now, YLFATEEKS said:

Hogwash. DW would be paying to build the new Lego store so if Lego wanted to cancel the contract they would of.

 

You really think D/W are going to bear the full cost of a new, custom LEGO-themed building? Why? What if LEGO just ups and leaves, citing a contract breach? They could easily do this now. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

take a look at every other lego building in the world. they aren't that 'custom' - some have some lego models installed - not hard to remove and patch over. the inside of the building is easily refitted into something else.

 

So yes. Hogwash.

And if Lego did exit the contract, it wouldn't be a big blow to dreamworld and easily filled with another brand or set up.

[SunshineTom]

1 minute ago, AlexB said:

take a look at every other lego building in the world. they aren't that 'custom' - some have some lego models installed - not hard to remove and patch over. the inside of the building is easily refitted into something else.

 

So yes. Hogwash.

And if Lego did exit the contract, it wouldn't be a big blow to dreamworld and easily filled with another brand or set up.

 

Incorrcect, if LEGO left, other 'big' brands would take note and stay clear imo. And i'd say LEGO would be shelling out at least 50% for the fitout. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Incorrect? on what basis? Just your opinion?

Some brands may think it prudent and follow suit, but not all would. And I said another brand OR setup. If they were not able to fill the facility with an alternative brand, they could no doubt fill it with their own cross branding - they still have associations with Mick Doohan, Peter Brock Museum, DW wildlife \ tiger \ conservation fund etc etc.

And unless you've got a copy of the contract stipulating the cost share, i don't buy the 50% claim. it would be unusual for a brand to commit to infrastructure costs on a property they do not own as if the contract was terminated, they would have to walk away from the funds invested (i'm talking about 2 years down the track for example rather than during construction). Usually in a partnership such as this, the property owner commits to the infrastructure (because they will own it) and the brand commits their IP. each would have a comparable value for a joint venture, and each could still walk away from the venture with the property that they entered the venture in.

[New display name]

10 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

You really think D/W are going to bear the full cost of a new, custom LEGO-themed building? Why? What if LEGO just ups and leaves, citing a contract breach? They could easily do this now. 

100% I do.  It's a standard building.  Nothing different from your local Coles store re-fitting out their shop every few years.

A friendly word from skeet.  From time to time you will come across people here who actual know what is going on.  So, if you say “incorrect” you better have something to back it up.

[SunshineTom]

3 minutes ago, YLFATEEKS said:

100% I do.  It's a standard building.  Nothing different from your local Coles store re-fitting out their shop every few years.

A friendly word from skeet.  From time to time you will come across people here who actual know what is going on.  So, if you say “incorrect” you better have something to back it up.

 

I'm sorry but have you seen LEGO themed buildings? Nothing standard about them at all. 

[New display name]

You’re not getting it.  The building is standard and nothing special.  The theme is added onto it and can be easily removed. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Why yes, yes I have. I've stood inside several of them.

Now - take a look at this image:

Take the dragon off the roof, and the statues off the front pathway and you've got yourself a pretty standard albeit round building. It could be a coffee shop, it could be a clothing retailer. It could be a petrol station outlet (sans pumps).

There is nothing particularly UNIQUE or CUSTOM about the building currently being erected outside dreamworld that would stymie any attempt by the park to rebrand it into something other than lego.

15 minutes ago, YLFATEEKS said:

So, if you say “incorrect”

Actually, I believe he said "incorrcect" not "incorrect"

24 minutes ago, SunshineTom said:

Incorrcect, if LEGO left, other 'big' brands would take note and stay clear imo. And i'd say LEGO would be shelling out at least 50% for the fitout.