I would cry myself to sleep.

 

disney would buy it. you all know disney wants to buy transformers.  

 

I have not yet forgive Disney for buying the muppets....or the Gargoyles. Disney will make them sissified....

 

I would love if Disney bought Transformers, or just Hasbro altogether if this scenario came to be.

 

Could Bandai of America take over production of Transformers if Hasbro folded?

 

I read somewhere Star Wars,GI Joe and Transformers are the three highest selling action figure toylines of all time so its not going to happen.But if it did there would be a lot more petroleum byproduct around to use on other things besides toys.

 

That be a sign the end is coming. Hasbro controls alot more than people think it does. It one of the biggest companies world wide.

 

Takara would just have the Transformers. It's a jointly owned franchise.

They'd either just bring TFs to the USA and Europe (they tried it before, Diakron was their attempt at bringing Diaclone to the USA a few months before TFs), since Tomy, their partner/owner, has distribution channels in all nations.

Or, they'd sublicence out the molds to another company to use. And they may do it line to line, so Bandai may have the cartoon line, and Mattel the movie line, and whatever. That isn't very likely though, they'd likely just license TFs as a whole instead of in bits.

Also, if Takara-Tomy went bust, Hasbro would just get TFs entirely. It's part of their business contracts. If one company 'goes bust' then the other takes all the Transformers assets.

 

I'd be happy with the figures I have and would happily retire from the hobby.

 

If Hasbro went bust, say hello to Disney.

 

Truly, Please elaborate on this because I would really like to know.  

On the subject of Hasbro's financial stability , lets look at some evidence that was presented to us.

Hasbro has experienced a quantifiable loss in profit in the boys division of their toy brand offerings (this includes Transformers and G.I.Jo, ext..) as noted in their Quarterly Public earnings report that has been posted in the News section of TFW. It noted a downward trend from recent years over the last several years...

In short, Hasbro hasn't made a sizable amount of $$$ on Transformers sense they had a movie at the box office. That is exactly why they are pushing so hard to get one made as fast as they can.

Oh, and to all you Animated fans out their, "good work". You spiked the graph making that line the most profitable toy line sense a movie line.  

Don't forget the many employees Hasbro layed off recently. We lost Aaron Archer, for Primus sake...surly the publics collective memory isn't that short?
But what if this changing of the guard wasn't forced...Could it be that Aaron saw the writing on the wall and got of the ship while it was just starting to take on water? Good instincts can save a currier. On this, we may never know, but it is interesting and worth while to speculate.

Lastly, I've been comparing lately the plastic quality of other toy lines vs. what Hasbro has been using in their most recent Generations/Prime lines. Hasbro's is crap. Nothing hardly compares. Even when compared to my wife's Monster High dolls that she collects I find them to be of far superior quality. This trend of such deep cost cutting and short cutting is perhaps the most disturbing of all.

Bottom line: In a recession, people are worried about paying their mortgages and putting food on the table, not toys. Unfortunately, Hasbro's numbers reflect this.

 

Loss of profits? It's happened.

Go bust? Highly improbable unless some other company takes over their market and puts them in a position to suffer absolute loss, but the odds of this are even more unlikely.

 

Kinda makes you wonder why they canceled Renegades for GIJOE, since the only media that line has had within the past few years were two lackluster movies and a short-lived cartoon that was canned because it was thought the movie toys would sell better (possibly because of the overwhelming success of the first TF movie line).

While it's obvious Hasbro is trying to move in on the demi-human doll market by having those Equestria Girl...things...ride on the success of the G4 MLP franchise (and from what I can tell it's working to a reasonable degree), I don't think comparing Monster High to Transformers would result with Monster High being the better value as they seem to be priced in MSRP around the same as the average Transformers Voyager. I mean, not to slam on people who collect Monster High, but that line can get away with just having some doll be loosely inspired by some archtypical monster asthetic (Zombie, mummy, etc.) and only needs a few joints in the arms with one in the neck, the greatest difference being each doll having a unique head mold. Then that exact same character can be sold multiple times with maybe only a slight variation in the paint application and different fabric accessories (I.E. Stacy Malibu vs. Stacy Malibu with a new hat).

Compare that to Generations Springer, who aside from a few differences to account for the fact he can't magically have parts appear and disappear depending on his current form, is more or less a perfect copy of his IDW design as seen in LSoTW and comes with a transforming sword which also contains the spinning rotor joint in the hilt. He has articulation in the neck, shoulders, elbows, wrists (both on the transformation joint AND on a legitimate robot mode use only wrist swivel), waist (though it's mostly useless with his back kibble), hips, upper thighs, knees, and feet. That's not counting the locked transformation joints, either. That is a significantly greater amount of engineering and resources put into a toy that, comparatively, is around what seems to be the average MSRP for a Monster High doll. And then they went and retooled Springer rather significantly to be an all-new Sandstorm design with an optional G1 configuration, even though that would logically have been more expensive due to all the retools as opposed to the cheaper option of only giving him a new head and a palette swap of the paint apps.

Not arguing that isn't true, but I'm not seeing how this only exclusively applies to Hasbro when its main competitors such as Mattel would also be feeling the decline in the money flow. Or how simply because the gradual decline in boy toy profit sales means Hasbro's on the way out, since Hasbro is experiencing a general increase in girl toys profitability and they also own big name subsidiaries such as Milton Bradley, Parker House, Playskool, and most importantly Wizards of the Coast (Magic: The Gathering is in fact Hasbro's most profitable franchise even with DOTM raking in billions for Transformers).

 

Have to agree with you, just cuz TF And GIJoes not doing good, doesn't mean the whole things going bust, they still have Marvel stuff, they just got Disney Princess, they have MLP and LPS, which are doing real well, and Care Bears. Not to mention Monopoly, Star Wars, Star Trek, potato head, heck, they even make 1 direction stuff. if ALL that flops, then weed have a problem, but I don't think we do.

 

I would save a fuckton of money. Oh wait, no I wouldn't.

 

First off, I would really like to thank you Autobot Burnout for responding to my post. Sometimes I feel like I'm posting in a void around here more often then not.

Topic: Monster High Vs. transformers "plastics discussion"

While it's obvious Hasbro is trying to move in on the demi-human doll market by having those Equestria Girl...things...ride on the success of the G4 MLP franchise (and from what I can tell it's working to a reasonable degree), I don't think comparing Monster High to Transformers would result with Monster High being the better value as they seem to be priced in MSRP around the same as the average Transformers Voyager. I mean, not to slam on people who collect Monster High, but that line can get away with just having some doll be loosely inspired by some archtypical monster asthetic (Zombie, mummy, etc.) and only needs a few joints in the arms with one in the neck, the greatest difference being each doll having a unique head mold. Then that exact same character can be sold multiple times with maybe only a slight variation in the paint application and different fabric accessories (I.E. Stacy Malibu vs. Stacy Malibu with a new hat).

I'm afraid you missed my intent on this.. I didn't say "better value purchase". I strictly was speaking on the current plastics Hasbro is using to produce their toys. I.E: plastic polymers, durable integrity, structural grades, just the plastics.

Transformers vs. Monster High: engineering and development

Compare that to Generations Springer, who aside from a few differences to account for the fact he can't magically have parts appear and disappear depending on his current form, is more or less a perfect copy of his IDW design as seen in LSoTW and comes with a transforming sword which also contains the spinning rotor joint in the hilt. He has articulation in the neck, shoulders, elbows, wrists (both on the transformation joint AND on a legitimate robot mode use only wrist swivel), waist (though it's mostly useless with his back kibble), hips, upper thighs, knees, and feet. That's not counting the locked transformation joints, either. That is a significantly greater amount of engineering and resources put into a toy that, comparatively, is around what seems to be the average MSRP for a Monster High doll. And then they went and retooled Springer rather significantly to be an all-new Sandstorm design with an optional G1 configuration, even though that would logically have been more expensive due to all the retools as opposed to the cheaper option of only giving him a new head and a palette swap of the paint apps.

I'm well aware of just how much money goes into Transformers R and D. it has been said from sources with in the industry that it is one of the most expensive lines one could possibly design do to engineering alone. Again, not what I was discussing.

As for slam'n on Monster High, didn't bother me one bit. But when my wife read your post over my shoulder, it pissed her off real good.   (She gave me a long rant about "them having 5 head molds, releasing older dolls with a new joint system, something something, something..something -SMACK-)....... 

Now that I have returned with an ice pack to nurse my wound, I have to comment on Generations Springer as well. It's a great figure top to bottom and would even be a possibly perfect if he only held together better in car mode. In fact, I agree on everything you said on Springer...but he was already excluded from my initial statement and that was my fault for not clarifying. What I'm speaking on is "Hasbro's current line of deluxes" and past deluxes of the FOC lines. So, we are talking the IDW comic packs here; Orion Pax, Stealth Megs, Bumblebee, and Trailbreaker. My apologies for the miscommunication on that one.

I agree that the voyagers are a better quality purchase for the dollar (except Grimlock), but I'm not taking aim at that or them. Just focusing on the problem that is evident. That problem being Hasbro choosing to use low cost, poor grade plastics in their current line of deluxe toys.

topic: Hasbro's decision making process; cost control and company lastability

I'm not seeing how this only exclusively applies to Hasbro when its main competitors such as Mattel would also be feeling the decline in the money flow. Or how simply because the gradual decline in boy toy profit sales means Hasbro's on the way out, since Hasbro is experiencing a general increase in girl toys profitability and they also own big name subsidiaries such as Milton Bradley, Parker House, Playskool, and most importantly Wizards of the Coast (Magic: The Gathering is in fact Hasbro's most profitable franchise even with DOTM raking in billions for Transformers).

We aren't discussing Mattel. We are discussing how Hasbro is weathering financially in our current economy. If you want to talk Mattel, no problem. They have lost money too. It's impossible to be selling toys in this market and not loose some profit on a line. And on that, there isn't much more to be said is there.

Ultimately, I would like to see Hasbro do well as they are the holders of the license after all. There continued financial well being has always been a concern of mine as I would like to see this hobby continue through out my life time.

I did enjoy the discussion but can't help feel that in your attempt to show me just how much you know, you derailed the topic. Even so, I respect your knowledge and your posts. But furthest and for most, thank you for including me in one. 

 

then Uncle Walt's dream of owning the world would come true all smothered in ponies

 

You are quite welcome 

Ah, I get what you mean now.

My apologies for inadvertantly bringing you to bodily harm. But, if it pleases your wife, this dicussion has taught me that MH dolls are actually much better than I gave them credit for, as I originally had assumed they were just repainted barbies and only had five points of articulation..

Ok, I only used Springer myself because of the similar pricepoint. I totally agree with you on the shoddy quality of some of the more recent deluxes, although the T30 ones seem to generally be much better (pin-axle wheels, for starters).

I was going to say something against it, but then I compared the weight of Voyager Blitzwing to Springer. Despite being more massive, Blitzwing surprisingly is significantly less hefty than Springer, which is in line with the idea Hasbro is using crappier plastic as logically it should be the other way around. The fact Blitzwing has no ratchet joints is also concerning as the toy would be greatly improved with them, but of course ratchets are more expensive even though almost every joint in Springer/Sandstorm is actually a ratchet in one way or another.

Oh, yeah, and then there's Voyager Breakdown, the toy Hasbro won't make because it costs too much to produce per unit (read: they can't retool it to have some crappy light up gimmick), and Airachnid who frankly shouldn't have made it past prototyping without major redesign to make a better robot mode.

Ah. I think I misunderstood the part where you said the recession was reflected in Hasbro's numbers. I thought you meant that it was a severe drop in their revenue that other companies weren't getting. Why I thought that I don't know.

I also disagree this is off topic. The subject is if Hasbro went bust overnight, while most of what I've said is pointing out how that can not happen even in a very small time frame.

And once again, you're welcome 

 

Hasbro is large, but I'm not sure if I would classify it as "one of the biggest companies world wide." Hasbro was last ranked as the #3 toy maker in the world -- behind Mattel and LEGO -- and the three of them combined total roughly $20 billion in 2012.

Disney, in 2012, was $42 billion.

Whole Foods was almost $12 billion; nearly twice Mattel.

Hasbro is big, #511 on the Fortune 500 in 2010, but there are larger companies out there.

It was ranked #92 on the best companies to work for: Hasbro - Best Companies to Work For 2013 - Fortune

 

If they went bust maybe Bandai would buy them and get rid of all of that stupid articulation.