Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Star Wars is Expensive, So Hasbro Deliberately Cheaps Out on Transformers and G.I. Joe
41 views
Skip to first unread message
Zobovor
Jan 24, 2021, 2:57:16 PM1/24/21
to
There was a podcast interview recently with a former Hasbro employee named Bobby Vala, a ten-year veteran of the toy industry and has some interesting insights about the state of collectibles as they exist today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6RDGk1GZGE
Evidently, the licensing fees paid to Disney are so exorbitant for brands like Star Wars or Marvel that it limits Hasbro's ability to offer additional portraits (swappable heads) or interchangeable hands with those toys. The licensing fees are so expensive that there would be no way to include these extra parts and still turn a profit.
However, when it comes to brand that Hasbro owns free and clear, like G. I. Joe (and presumably Transformers), they purposefully limit the number of extra parts for a very different reason. They probably could add all these extra parts for G.I. Joe and Transformers and still turn a tidy profit, but they don't want the Star Wars toy line or the Marvel toys to look cheaper by comparison. So they leave out all the potential additional accessories in EVERY toy line to create some consistency, and so it doesn't hurt the perceived value of toys that are expensive to license.
So, it's likely that we could, for example, have easily gotten Studio Series Hot Rod with all the extra weapons and accessories at the Deluxe price point. However, Hasbro controls the consumer perception to a degree of what does and does not constitute a twenty-dollar toy (which is arguably the new impulse price point; it's the price for most standard six-inch scale action figures now, be it Marvel Legends or Star Wars Black Series or what have you). Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck. Don't cheap out enough, though, and people will start to ask, "Hey, why do I get all these extra weapons and accessories with Transformers and G.I. Joe, but never for Star Wars or Marvel Legends?" And we can't have THAT, now can we?
Zob (shakes head aggressively)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6RDGk1GZGE
Evidently, the licensing fees paid to Disney are so exorbitant for brands like Star Wars or Marvel that it limits Hasbro's ability to offer additional portraits (swappable heads) or interchangeable hands with those toys. The licensing fees are so expensive that there would be no way to include these extra parts and still turn a profit.
However, when it comes to brand that Hasbro owns free and clear, like G. I. Joe (and presumably Transformers), they purposefully limit the number of extra parts for a very different reason. They probably could add all these extra parts for G.I. Joe and Transformers and still turn a tidy profit, but they don't want the Star Wars toy line or the Marvel toys to look cheaper by comparison. So they leave out all the potential additional accessories in EVERY toy line to create some consistency, and so it doesn't hurt the perceived value of toys that are expensive to license.
So, it's likely that we could, for example, have easily gotten Studio Series Hot Rod with all the extra weapons and accessories at the Deluxe price point. However, Hasbro controls the consumer perception to a degree of what does and does not constitute a twenty-dollar toy (which is arguably the new impulse price point; it's the price for most standard six-inch scale action figures now, be it Marvel Legends or Star Wars Black Series or what have you). Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck. Don't cheap out enough, though, and people will start to ask, "Hey, why do I get all these extra weapons and accessories with Transformers and G.I. Joe, but never for Star Wars or Marvel Legends?" And we can't have THAT, now can we?
Zob (shakes head aggressively)
Irrellius Spamticon
Jan 24, 2021, 6:26:12 PM1/24/21
to
Zobovor
Jan 24, 2021, 6:28:38 PM1/24/21
to
On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 12:57:16 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:
> Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck.
I've been thinking about this some more, specifically as it relates to other toy manufacturers and the prices that they charge for similar toys.
> Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck.
Mattel has got their current He-Man Origins toy line, which is sculpted to superficially resemble the action figures from the 1980's but which have all-new modern-era articulation. They each seem to come with about one accessory or so apiece, which is close to how Hasbro is currently handling Star Wars and Marvel. Mattel owns He-Man, though, so there are no licensing fees involved. The new He-Man toys retail for $15, a bit less than most modern action figures. I think this is a closer reflection of the price Hasbro could be selling their non-licensed toys for.
McFarlane Toys currently has the license for Batman, so in addition to the occasional foray into more Spawn toys, they also produce a steady stream of Batman action figures. I bought one of them for a possible future project and they're really nicely made. Good articulation, quality plastic. (Dunno about the rest of you, but I remember a time in the 1990's when Spawn toys were junk and tended to fall apart regularly.) The current Batman toys retail for $20, same as the Marvel toys. But, there are licensing fees to pay to DC Comics.
NECA is one of the companies licensed to produce Ninja Turtles action figures, and they tend to sell them in two-packs that are loaded with accessories. Extra hands, plenty of weapons, and lots of scene-specific accessories. The two-packs are $50 so that works out to be $25 per toy. I think this is what it looks like when companies have to fork over licensing fees but go, "Screw it, we're paying Nickelodeon but we're still doing interchangeable fists and heads." (Super7 also has a TMNT toy line, but it's made-to-order at the time of production so I think the costs associated are very different. They sell for $45 a pop, which is outrageous, but I suspect their production numbers are much smaller and probably isn't relevant to this specific discussion.)
There are a few other collector toy lines I could probably cite, but I'm not one hundred percent sure about the manufacturer or the licensing relationship. Lanard Toys is doing some very nice Predator and Aliens action figures right now at like the ten-dollar price point, but they're famous for doing the bargain basement The C.O.R.P.S. toy line (the G.I. Joe knockoff) so I wonder if perhaps the Predator and Aliens merchandising rights just aren't very expensive and/or in high demand right now? (Predator and Terminator are vaguely relevant to today's audience inasmuch as the characters are currently available in the Fortnite video game, but again, these are movies from decades ago that are probably not very expensive for Epic Games to license.)
If anybody else has examples to support my theory (or counter-examples that totally throw me off my game, which I know you guys are good at) then by all means, let 'er rip. So far, though, all indications are that Bobby Vala is one hundred percent on the money, and that Hasbro is deliberately cheaping out on some of their best toy lines, just so the other toys don't start to get jealous.
Zob ("I'm from Mattel! Well, actually, I'm from a smaller company that was purchased by Mattel in a leveraged buyout...")
Zobovor
Jan 24, 2021, 6:35:43 PM1/24/21
to
On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 4:26:12 PM UTC-7, Ob1k...@att.net wrote:
> Lego followed a similar strategem. At first it used to be Lego sets were a price for a certain piece count, then Star Wars and Marvel sets were $3~12 more depending on the size of the set, but then to even things out on brands they had no licensing requirements for, like City, Chima or Ninjago, they raised the prices on those sets so people would see them as equivalent to the Disney licensed properties.
Somehow that doesn't surprise me.
> Lego followed a similar strategem. At first it used to be Lego sets were a price for a certain piece count, then Star Wars and Marvel sets were $3~12 more depending on the size of the set, but then to even things out on brands they had no licensing requirements for, like City, Chima or Ninjago, they raised the prices on those sets so people would see them as equivalent to the Disney licensed properties.
It's funny how LEGO was close to bankruptcy about 20 years ago before, in desperation, they started producing building sets based on licensed characters, something they had always sworn they would never do. And, of course, it was the licensing that not only ultimately saved them, but helped them catapult to become the number one toy company in the world. Can you imagine a world where the only LEGO sets you could buy are LEGO City and LEGO Friends, with no Ghostbusters or Harry Potter or Jurassic Park or Star Wars? It's inconceivable!
Zob (toy industry armchair analyst extraordinaire)
Irrellius Spamticon
Jan 24, 2021, 6:38:23 PM1/24/21
to
On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 5:28:38 PM UTC-6, Zobovor wrote:
> On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 12:57:16 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:
>
> > Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck.
> I've been thinking about this some more, specifically as it relates to other toy manufacturers and the prices that they charge for similar toys.
>
> Mattel has got their current He-Man Origins toy line, which is sculpted to superficially resemble the action figures from the 1980's but which have all-new modern-era articulation. They each seem to come with about one accessory or so apiece, which is close to how Hasbro is currently handling Star Wars and Marvel. Mattel owns He-Man, though, so there are no licensing fees involved. The new He-Man toys retail for $15, a bit less than most modern action figures. I think this is a closer reflection of the price Hasbro could be selling their non-licensed toys for.
>
> McFarlane Toys currently has the license for Batman, so in addition to the occasional foray into more Spawn toys, they also produce a steady stream of Batman action figures. I bought one of them for a possible future project and they're really nicely made. Good articulation, quality plastic. (Dunno about the rest of you, but I remember a time in the 1990's when Spawn toys were junk and tended to fall apart regularly.) The current Batman toys retail for $20, same as the Marvel toys. But, there are licensing fees to pay to DC Comics.
>
> NECA is one of the companies licensed to produce Ninja Turtles action figures, and they tend to sell them in two-packs that are loaded with accessories. Extra hands, plenty of weapons, and lots of scene-specific accessories. The two-packs are $50 so that works out to be $25 per toy. I think this is what it looks like when companies have to fork over licensing fees but go, "Screw it, we're paying Nickelodeon but we're still doing interchangeable fists and heads." (Super7 also has a TMNT toy line, but it's made-to-order at the time of production so I think the costs associated are very different. They sell for $45 a pop, which is outrageous, but I suspect their production numbers are much smaller and probably isn't relevant to this specific discussion.)
>
> There are a few other collector toy lines I could probably cite, but I'm not one hundred percent sure about the manufacturer or the licensing relationship. Lanard Toys is doing some very nice Predator and Aliens action figures right now at like the ten-dollar price point, but they're famous for doing the bargain basement The C.O.R.P.S. toy line (the G.I. Joe knockoff) so I wonder if perhaps the Predator and Aliens merchandising rights just aren't very expensive and/or in high demand right now? (Predator and Terminator are vaguely relevant to today's audience inasmuch as the characters are currently available in the Fortnite video game, but again, these are movies from decades ago that are probably not very expensive for Epic Games to license.)
>
Terminator, Predator, Alien, and horror icons all belong to NECA in every retail market outside of Walmart. Lanard is making them only for Walmart so I was wondering last week about the licensing for that. We got some unreleased Lanard Predators on Jan 1, and at the time they hadn't even populated on Walmart's website. Nevca's detailing and extra parts on their $20 Predators blows Lanard out of the water. Neca just celebrated their 100th Predator with the Alpha Predator, a premium $30 bone armor predator with even more than the extreme amount of weapons they normally come with, and had a light up comicon model. There's a huge market for Predator, it's just that Walmart decided to split off and carry Lanard instead of Neca for some reason.
> On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 12:57:16 PM UTC-7, Zobovor wrote:
>
> > Cheap out too much, and consumers won't bite because it doesn't seem like you're getting enough bang for your buck.
> I've been thinking about this some more, specifically as it relates to other toy manufacturers and the prices that they charge for similar toys.
>
> Mattel has got their current He-Man Origins toy line, which is sculpted to superficially resemble the action figures from the 1980's but which have all-new modern-era articulation. They each seem to come with about one accessory or so apiece, which is close to how Hasbro is currently handling Star Wars and Marvel. Mattel owns He-Man, though, so there are no licensing fees involved. The new He-Man toys retail for $15, a bit less than most modern action figures. I think this is a closer reflection of the price Hasbro could be selling their non-licensed toys for.
>
> McFarlane Toys currently has the license for Batman, so in addition to the occasional foray into more Spawn toys, they also produce a steady stream of Batman action figures. I bought one of them for a possible future project and they're really nicely made. Good articulation, quality plastic. (Dunno about the rest of you, but I remember a time in the 1990's when Spawn toys were junk and tended to fall apart regularly.) The current Batman toys retail for $20, same as the Marvel toys. But, there are licensing fees to pay to DC Comics.
>
> NECA is one of the companies licensed to produce Ninja Turtles action figures, and they tend to sell them in two-packs that are loaded with accessories. Extra hands, plenty of weapons, and lots of scene-specific accessories. The two-packs are $50 so that works out to be $25 per toy. I think this is what it looks like when companies have to fork over licensing fees but go, "Screw it, we're paying Nickelodeon but we're still doing interchangeable fists and heads." (Super7 also has a TMNT toy line, but it's made-to-order at the time of production so I think the costs associated are very different. They sell for $45 a pop, which is outrageous, but I suspect their production numbers are much smaller and probably isn't relevant to this specific discussion.)
>
> There are a few other collector toy lines I could probably cite, but I'm not one hundred percent sure about the manufacturer or the licensing relationship. Lanard Toys is doing some very nice Predator and Aliens action figures right now at like the ten-dollar price point, but they're famous for doing the bargain basement The C.O.R.P.S. toy line (the G.I. Joe knockoff) so I wonder if perhaps the Predator and Aliens merchandising rights just aren't very expensive and/or in high demand right now? (Predator and Terminator are vaguely relevant to today's audience inasmuch as the characters are currently available in the Fortnite video game, but again, these are movies from decades ago that are probably not very expensive for Epic Games to license.)
>
Neca can be good, and has a lot to offer on their $20 price point figures, but then they get the hyper detailed cloth clothing figures that can be $50 a pop. Turtles are practically an afterthought to Neca, their main licenses are horror movies like Haloween and Nightmare on Elm Street.
Zobovor
Jan 24, 2021, 10:00:25 PM1/24/21
to
On Sunday, January 24, 2021 at 4:38:23 PM UTC-7, Ob1k...@att.net wrote:
> Terminator, Predator, Alien, and horror icons all belong to NECA in every retail market outside of Walmart. <snip> There's a huge market for Predator, it's just that Walmart decided to split off and carry Lanard instead of Neca for some reason.
Lanard offers toys on the cheap, which I think really appeals to Walmart, who is trying to sell merchandise at the lowest prices possible. It's the same reason Walmart wouldn't carry G.I. Joe for a while, but they would carry the much cheaper C.O.R.P.S. toys, which in their minds probably amounted to pretty much the same thing (military action figures).
However, being the cheapest guy in town probably isn't a sustainable business model for Walmart over the long haul. They finally managed to drive Toys "R" Us out of business, but I don't know if they realize what this would mean for their market share. Now, there are manufacturers who want to offer high-end collectible toys who basically only have Target and Walmart to sell them at now. Walmart can't suddenly decide they want to become the new Toys "R" Us and pick up all these wayward toys with no retailer home while still maintaining their reputation as the cheapest store on the block. The two are irreconcilable.
> Neca can be good, and has a lot to offer on their $20 price point figures, but then they get the hyper detailed cloth clothing figures that can be $50 a pop. Turtles are practically an afterthought to Neca, their main licenses are horror movies like Haloween and Nightmare on Elm Street.
I'm not sure who is copying whom at this stage, but I think it's interesting that both Target and Walmart are now carrying toys in their electronics departments in a sort of weird "collectible corner" that's separate and distinct from their toy departments. Walmart is actually carrying some NECA Ninja Turtles stuff too, which surprises me given the high price tag. It's like they're trying to grab their piece of the pie in the collectible market as well as the toy market.
Zob (obviously there's some overlap)
> Terminator, Predator, Alien, and horror icons all belong to NECA in every retail market outside of Walmart. <snip> There's a huge market for Predator, it's just that Walmart decided to split off and carry Lanard instead of Neca for some reason.
Lanard offers toys on the cheap, which I think really appeals to Walmart, who is trying to sell merchandise at the lowest prices possible. It's the same reason Walmart wouldn't carry G.I. Joe for a while, but they would carry the much cheaper C.O.R.P.S. toys, which in their minds probably amounted to pretty much the same thing (military action figures).
However, being the cheapest guy in town probably isn't a sustainable business model for Walmart over the long haul. They finally managed to drive Toys "R" Us out of business, but I don't know if they realize what this would mean for their market share. Now, there are manufacturers who want to offer high-end collectible toys who basically only have Target and Walmart to sell them at now. Walmart can't suddenly decide they want to become the new Toys "R" Us and pick up all these wayward toys with no retailer home while still maintaining their reputation as the cheapest store on the block. The two are irreconcilable.
> Neca can be good, and has a lot to offer on their $20 price point figures, but then they get the hyper detailed cloth clothing figures that can be $50 a pop. Turtles are practically an afterthought to Neca, their main licenses are horror movies like Haloween and Nightmare on Elm Street.
Zob (obviously there's some overlap)
0 new messages