One aspect of the commentary on the choices of made on the franchisor side of the Lego dispute is the surprise that they're destroying a brand, destroying a business, over what, given presumed revenues, is chump change.
This reveals how social chuncking, which is to say cognitive parasociality, operates to confound those observing this unfolding conflict. What few are grappling with is that the members of the McNeff family do not relate to brands as social entities, this for the reason that they do not relate to any business as a discrete entity, as such.
Per an ongoing investigation by BJ Courville, those involved relate to corporate registrations as shields, as veils, as records that fluidly change from one name to another, sometimes on an annual basis, alongside other such filings that take on each the other's discarded husk of a name through d/b/as or as newly founded companies, their records clean, any history associated with those names becoming folklore that preexists their operational documents.
Those aghast that a CEO would destroy his own business, destroy the brand of that business, are thinking of that business as a matter of exchange-value and ego-value, of the business. Where the McNeffs relate to any business as pure use-value. The business itself, as a thing registered in a state database, being a commodity, indeed the only commodity of concern, fungible and disposable.
#lumpentheory #BrickByBrick