I may not be a mom or a child, but I gotta say - this is pretty freakin' rad.

I think it has too many varied components.  A wide variety of pieces that don't all fit together, a book to go along with it, a base board... part of the appeal of the other products she mentions in the video (legos, lincoln logs, kinects) is that it is nigh impossible to "mess up" putting them together. At the most basic level, they are simple toys that almost always "work".

This toy, as it is shown in the video, is going to not-work more often than it does work.  The pieces must be assembled precisely, and there seems to be little room for creativity or ingenuity.  If the pieces are not assembled correctly, children of the target ages (5-8 I'm guessing from the video?) do not have the mental talent to problem-solve this sort of dynamic interaction. Unless, and I am possibly guessing wrong, the pieces can be fit together in other arrangements, I see this toy being very short-lived before relegation to the bin or garage.  What if I want to make a Ferris Wheel?  A Clock?  A Van?  A Basinet?  The other toys she mentioned can all do this, but this toy does not seem to have that capability.  This means that, at some point, the toy is "finished", all combinations that come with the book being "solved", as it were.  That will keep this product from being the same type of multi-year experience as I think she envisions.

Nice idea, but I'm not seeing the execution that will create long-term success.

@Endrath@xanga - I think the point she was trying to make was there's no marketing geared towards girls to get them interested in building.  She found girls are really interested in reading.  The book is just to grab their attention and make them interested in making the "machines" from the book.  Once they've tried those out they'll want to be creative and see what else they can make.  Her point was many girls are visual and the book provides them with the visual instructions plus a plot to follow.  What they do after that is their own prerogative.

I'm an engineering student.  As a kid, I played with legos.  LEGO puts out a ton of "sets" geared towards girls - I remember assembling doll houses that were entirely pink and white legos.  I also played with Barbie.  And in a creek.  And with a microscope.

Really parents should do their best to balance their children's exposure to different "learning" toys.  This toy seems a lot more geared towards parents who want all of their children's toys to reflect their gender, than it does to the actual child.

Just my 2 cents

May