And if we talk about manufacturing quality again?

It is on purpose that I did not jump on the Brickset article which presents the above shot taken by Chris McVeigh when you unpack your set LEGO Monster Fighters 9466 The Crazy Scientist & His Monster and which indicates that the left brick from this set is much less heavy, the plastic less opaque and less dense and that the color which should have been Medium Blue is far from agreeing with that of the right brick ...

Always according Chris McVeigh, all the bricks in the set in question appear to be of poor quality, with the exception of the 1x2x2 slopes in Medium Blue.

That being said, the reactions were numerous, and the comments of the article in question swarm as usual with remarks about a possible manufacture in China of these bricks, which would explain their poor quality.

It's a rather quick shortcut often done in the heat of the moment and without taking a step back. Anyone who has worked with Chinese manufacturers before, and I am in a good position to bring it up, knows that it is not that simple.

The Chinese, like other manufacturers on the planet, produce according to the criteria provided by the principal, in this case LEGO in this specific case. And LEGO necessarily has quality control in place, throughout the production process. To summarize Chinese industry as the production of low-end products is to misunderstand the capacity of these manufacturers to adapt to the constraints of the market for which they produce.

Let's face it, the Chinese also know how to manufacture quality products. The extremely low cost of labor allows them to be competitive, but they are able to keep precise specifications, as long as the person who orders the goods keeps an eye on the production phase.

I think that we should not systematically blame the Chinese factories that are subcontractors of LEGO for every quality problem, and there are more and more of them, that we are currently encountering in different ranges.

LEGO may have decided to reduce its production costs, by reducing the density of the plastic, its quality, the quality of the coloring pigments used, the number of checks carried out during the production phase, etc.

After all, LEGO has regained its leadership position in its industry and everyone knows it's easy to rest on your laurels. Shareholders are smiling again, dividends, and always want more. At the same time, production volumes are increasing, allowing significant economies of scale and favoring the relocation of production to countries capable of responding rapidly to growing demand but which do not have the best image in terms of production. quality. Whether in Mexico or China, or even in Eastern countries, LEGO seeks to reduce its costs, and labor represents a large part of it.

But substantial savings can also be achieved by reducing the quality of raw materials to even a limited extent. The average consumer will see nothing but fire, it is above all a construction toy intended to be handled by children.

Maniacal and meticulous AFOLs obviously realize that many details are overlooked by LEGO these days, from misaligned silkscreens to pieces that split quickly after first use.

The quality problems are there, more and more present, it is a fact. But let's not blame the Chinese or the Mexicans. It is to LEGO that it is necessary to turn, to forward the information, and to make understand to this leading manufacturer today but at the limit of the filing of bankruptcy a few years ago, that nothing is acquired. .

People buy LEGO at a high price for the quality of the products. If this quality drops, prices will also have to drop, or consumers will turn without qualms to alternative brands, much less expensive ...