definitely pre-movie

 

regardless though post movie still does not make up a controlling majority and CERTAINLY not 50-70%
And even if it did Hasbro is under no requirement to explain every policy,plan & Change to us.

 

Amazing! You get to infer whatever data you wish to discredit my educated guess. Are we having a flame war?

Where? I want to see a direct quote from a Hasbro rep.

I never claimed anything other than my own observation, not any kind of scientific study, but please, feel free to enlighten me with ANY actual sales demographics with clear definitions of what constitutes a "collector" published by Hasbro. The link to HISSTank has VERY narrow definition (as much as the vague 'category' gets anyway):

Who, demographically, are 'kids or casual fans or whatever'? Many very serious collectors may fall into any of these vague 'other' categories but because Hasbro doesn't say how they are defined, we can't know. I STILL call bullshit.

 

Until you have some hard data to back that up, your guess is no less a delusion than mine.

 

I guess (and I say this NON-sarcastically) that it is a credit to you to not just accept things blindly, but boy howdy, I don't think any of us could have seen how much we needed to HOLD tightly to a link of this quote from Hasbro within just a few short years.... cause bugger me if I could find it again......

 

LOL...

 

Respectfully, I have seen the 'collectors make a miniscule portion of sales' argument many, many times for both TF and GI Joe, but I have yet to EVER see ANYTHING official, tangible and credible that supports that idea. Matter of fact, it seems the toy lines most geared towards 'the kids' are the ones which sell the LEAST. My personal opinion is that this "statistic" is an easy-out that Hasbro uses to justify its REAL motivation for most of its stupid toy marketing: the accounting department, which can neither recognize that innovation could lead to better profits or that better made products would be more demanded by consumers and thus, less likely to be held hostage by Walmart in distribution warehouses until being resold to Ross/TJX.

Even in an improving economy (which is debatable), ALL consumers of toys are going to want better value, yet what Hasbro has done across the board with TF and Joe is make lower quality toys and charge higher prices for them, which is completely counter-intuitive to encouraging sales growth. Even if collectors only account for less than half of the overall toy sales, the toys collectors buy are effectively the 'cherries,' leaving the bulk of consumer purchases to case double-packs and shelfwarmers, and as Prime BB demonstrated, even a desperate parent will only pay $7 for a Christmas toy that nobody else wants, and that Optimus Maximus and Weaponizers are crap toys.

 

^

Give this man his tinfoil hat. Maybe it'll block out all the crazy rays so he won't have to go around calling himself "Psycho" all the time.


If that's really what you think is going on, then you're just another deluded fan who thinks he knows better than a team of accountants and market analysts and toy designers.

Honestly, I've had it up to here arguing with people who think they know all the answers. Give 'em the company to run for a week. See how they do. That'll show 'em.

 

So you don't believe this number because the qoute can no longer be linked to (an understandable statement) but then proclaim that even if it could be shown....it's still a lie?

all I gotta do is keep it afloat long enough to get Masterpiece BW. Dinobot made! LOL

 

I've been Psycho online since 1997. I'm not about to stop now for you. >^}

You act as though the actions of Hasbro are beyond reproach or criticism, which ignores a glaring fact: they are a large toy conglomerate with internal politics and agendas. Who's to say the findings of their research don't agree with me? You? Are you a high-level Hasbro employee with access to such information?

Give me the company; I'll do JUST fine. I can play Golden Parachute with the best of them.

 

No, simply that anything to that effect that has been presented is more than meets the eye (couldn't resist) because without some sort of defining standard of what constitutes a "collector" such statements are meaningless. I'm sure there are many serious collectors (in their minds) who fall outside of that definition, if it truly exists.

 

While I wish that Hasbro were able to handle some things differently, I'm also aware of how handcuffed they are to the retail chain, and I make the effort to understand the causes and effects behind their decisions.

I don't go around blindly proclaiming that Hasbro's a bunch of greedy good-for-nothings always looking to gouge their biggest customers. You said yourself that that would be insane. Which is why they don't do that.

 

You're the one who started in on me with character aspersions. I'm simply proposing taking a "Shockwave" approach: cold, hard, logic based on facts, and the facts which I have observed do NOT agree with established fanboy lore about collector percentage numbers. I never characterized Hasbro as ANYTHING other than a business out to maximize its profit, and there is nothing wrong with that, but blind adoration and devotion are silly, as is viewing the company in any light other than that of a business who will say and do anything it can to make a profit, including misleading its primary consumers about their buying power. Hasbro is not a god that will reward its worshipers, and it is in its interest that collectors NOT be aware of just how much potential control over sales they may hold.

 

Therein lies the objection. It's not that Hasbro isn't fallible, it's that they're in a much better position to understand their market that any of our individual anecdotes.

 

The facts which you have observed.

That cannot be quantified, and aren't being backed up by any facts.

THIS IS WHY WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS.

 

Disregarding Hasbro's statements by assuming them a "cover story" for more "nefarious" practices is hardly "cold, hard, and logical".

Prices went up, while quality went down simply due to the nature of inflation. Retailers had been pushing the lower price points for far too long, artificially and negatively enforcing the perceived value of the toys. But eventually, it would come to the point where Hasbro could no longer turn a profit on TF toys, and here we are. MSRP jumped to $15 for Deluxes, and the toys dropped maybe 10-15% in mass to balance out the fact that, accounting for inflation.

Note that ~$10 has been the average price for "Deluxes" ever since the line's inception in 1984. $10 in 1984 dollars adjusted for inflation is $22 now. Even if we took a more moderate approach, and used Beast Wars as the starting point, $10 is 1994 dollars is just over $15 nowadays. So we're in the ballpark.

Throw in increasing labour costs overseas, and increased material and shipping costs worldwide, the math largely adds up.

That's really all there is to it. Anything else about Hasbro purposefully massaging numbers for their own gain, etc, etc, well, that's all tinfoil-hat crazy talk, with no basis in reality.

 

It is your fanboy inference that Hasbro is being honest about any supposed data. For that matter, what have they ever actually said that conflicts with anything I have?

 

And your inference that Hasbro is being dishonest is somehow more valid because...?

Occam's Razor here dude. Hasbro's statement jibe with general reality. Ergo, barring any further evidence, they are acceptable.

 

In discussion and debate, calling the other party a liar requires some sort of evidence to support the accusation, so on what basis do you assert that I am incapable of making and sharing a factual observation?

 

First, to address your ad hominem: I couldn't care less about Hasbro or how they conduct business. I defer to them with regards to running a giant toy manufacturing operation because that is their business.

Hasbro makes statements periodically. If they are being deceptive, the onus is on you to demonstrate that since you are making the claim.