Thread regarding Mattel Inc. layoffs

You would think that operating in a nowhere town in upstate new york would be cheaper than employing the mass amount of bo--s in ES. I don't blame mattel for it's demise. I blame the leadership that hasn't been smart enough to leverage the creativity and resources.

…or Blue Bird toys. Gobble em up, destroy whats working, sp-t out whats not and then shut em down. The trend has continued for over 40yrs. Thank you Mattel!

@636 Don't forget Radica Games.

@62n, ok then let’s focus on Mattel and the example it has set for the rest of its brands regarding its acquisitions.
So overall, how are Kransco, Tyco, Pleasant Company, Learning Company, HIT Intertainment and Mega Brands performing since Mattel took over? Do you see a pattern here? It’s no different than what has happened to FP. So please, keep your misguided opinions to yourself.

@625 Fisher-Price employees will blame literally everyone but the actual people who literally run and work at Fisher-Price for the brand's decline.

Yes! Give in to your anger.

@5z5, but it does, it’s called a slow burn decline in sales. Granted there are other factors, exiting the baby gear category, KGOY, earlier digital access, older targeted advertising to younger audiences and prolonged high inflation. Yes, these did all play a role, but by and large FP was the premier preschool brand for a reason, quality and play value at an affordable price and it’s what sold product. That can no longer be said about FP.

@5z2 Even if we grant you that this is part of the problem, which I'm sure it is as you've seen it happen firsthand, it doesn't remotely explain away the magnitude of Fisher-Price's decline: +$2 billion down to $500M for the broader comparable category is roughly a 75% nominal contraction, despite nearly two decades of inflation.

@5z0, well then that is your opinion. Perhaps allow yourself to take a closer look at what actually happened and you’ll come to realize that is exactly what happened. Short term gain for long term damage…it is the exact same thing that happened to all the brands Mattel acquired. AG was the most extreme example of that. I witnessed firsthand what happened at FP and there is absolutely no denying how and why…a complete disregard for quality and play value based on short sighted greed for the bottom line.

@5yp I'm saying that that makes no sense as an explanation; Why would they do that? You're telling me that the executive leadership at Mattel would rather have higher gross margins even if that meant losing hundreds of millions of dollars in gross profits, cratering sales volume while simultaneously damaging the brand's reputation? Impossible.

@5v1, ok, do you realize that what you are saying is exactly what I’m saying or are you just not so inclined or perhaps stubbornly confused?
So, once more…Mattel’s greed forced FP to increase their margins. But, they also had to hold the retail price lists for their products. So the only way to do that is to cost reduce the product to meet the increased margin requirements, which created less play value resulting in way less than forecasted sales and profitability. Hence a once 2 billion dollar brand is now a 500 million dollar brand.
Is this finally resonating with you or am I the only sane one in the room?

@5tm let me spell it out for you; Imagine a SKU that sells 1,000,000 units at a $10 gross profit/unit. The gross profit = $10M, right?

Now let's say the margin requirement is increased to $12 gross profit/unit at the same retail price. Cost reductions are implemented and the less appealing, cost reduced product sells only 750,000 units. So, you have a 20% increase in unit profitability, but the gross profit is now only $9 million instead of $10 million. So you make LESS gross profit even though the profit on each individual unit is 20% higher.

Do you understand why this is a bad strategy?

@5t7, your comment is a paradox of confusion and therefore makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Once again, Mattel’s greed is what destroyed FP, by dramatically increasing margin requirements while holding price points resulting in the life/play value being su-ked right out of its product…of course sales tanked.

@5s4 except this makes no sense if you think about it for more than two seconds; Would Mattel prefer that Fisher-Price be a healthy, well-regarded brand that sells higher quality products at higher volume even if margins are a bit lower or for FP toys be high-margin products that have all the fun costed out of them- not only does this hurt the perception of the brand, but sales will suffer. If sales volume is deteriorating, it doesn't matter what your margins are, you're not making sales.

@58r, your comment makes no sense at all. When you increase margin expectations significantly there is only one thing that happens to a product, especially when no change is made to its target price point, you get less product and in FP’s case less play value for the money. There is only one thing that results from that type of greed, “an enormous deterioration” in sales. So yes, it absolutely “can account for this sort of extraordinary contraction of what use to be one of Mattel’s crown jewels.”

There are a lot of YouTube videos on how to fix the new Mattel designed and engineered Thomas locomotives. Come on guys it’s 2 gears and you can’t even get that right? Showing Mattel quality?

10 years ago, Fisher-Price was a roughly $2 billion a year business. These days FP does about $500 million a year. That is frankly an enormous deterioration. I don't think "greedy finance requirements" can account for this sort of extraordinary contraction of what used to be one of Mattel's crown jewels.

Haha…yes the perfect new name since it’s now morphed into an exact same producer of junk products.

You mean Mattel East

@4g8 Mattel’s greedy finance requirements were/are the bulk of the problem. When margin requirements increase from the 30’s to the 50’s, guess what? That’s less money that you can put in to the product and packaging, and it shows. Look at older products compared to today’s hollowed-out junk. Playsets would be loaded with features, front and back, and would keep kids entertained. And they would sell like crazy! Now they are just a pretty facade, and that’s about it. One trick pony and the kid pushes it aside. They’ve turned once rich FP products in to the same junk that Mattel produces. Yes, Mattel is a major factor in why FP is in the situation it is today.

@47e i used to work at FP and never got the impression that Mattel leadership was particularly involved in telling FP leadership what they could or could not do. I imagine Mattel set guidance and targets for finances, but in terms of new product development, it seemed like they largely left FP to its own devices.

For those of us who experienced FP’s downfall first hand, Mattel most definitely was to blame. There were multiple attempts to enter into different products categories only to get shot down by Mattel leadership as well as a refusal to expand beyond our core competencies because it did not fit into Mattel’s current portfolio of brands. Mattel is and always has been a manufacture of cheap plastic products. It’s no doubt that every quality product manufacturer they acquired was d-mb downed by Mattel’s limited and costly overhead manufacturing capabilities and its insatiable appetite for profit over quality.

I think it was more of a de@th by 1000 cuts situation, and to be fair, not all those cuts were inflicted by Mattel policy- the baby/toddler market has changed significantly in the past 15 years, and FP failed to get with the times.

Actually it’s more like a slow growing condition that takes 30yrs to manifest. Anyone who can’t clearly see that might benefit from a little self reflection. I admire anyone at FP who managed through this slow burn successfully. No matter the timing, under these obvious circumstances, you have every right to err your grievances.

It's been over 30 years since Mattel acquisition of Fisher-Price. Perhaps it's time to begin process of slowly letting go of the past.

FP was an amazing place to work. Its culture and approach to developing and marketing products was genuinely principled with one goal in mind, to put out great quality products.
Mattel’s acquisition set forth a slow eroding demise of everything beloved both in culture and reputation at what was once a predominant preschool brand.
May you rest in peace FP…Mattel, karma is waiting at your doorstep.

@30d Maybe Mattel keeps buying failing companies they think they can fix and always unsuccessful. More of a failing to rescue failing companies situation.

Mattel destroyed every brand or company it took over: FP, Matchbox, AG, Mega, Corolle.....

@2wx Imaginext still has toys in shelf, but it’s hard to see if they’re old SKU developed by the Boys Team at EA or new stuff coming out of ES.

What happened to Power Wheels? Thought they were licensed to a Chinese company a couple years ago. There was to be products on the shelves by now?
Heard Mattel ki-led Imaginext after moving it to ES?
Thomas got a makeover and it isn’t selling?
Mattel has done wonders taking over FP properties.

@2f3 You're sad af. Let people rant, it's nice to see we're all on the same boat. Doesn't mean we're not grateful for what we have. This forum is a community and policing what we can or can't write is lame. Expand your world, log off.

Any idea around when the EA campus is expected to be closed? I haven't heard any official announcements about this from management. I assume they'd give everyone a bit of a heads up, but maybe not?

Honestly not even close to leadership. I feel bad for you honestly. If you’re this unhappy and doing nothing about it but crying here behind the mask of a website intended to share layoff details, not daily grievances. I wish you the courage to change the things in your life you hate so much. Best of luck to you, boomer ❤️

Clearly someone is from leadership.,... Maybe figure out how to right the ship instead of bickering with employees on this site

Know wonder the companies a mess... Blaming employees for your mess and theft of The company

@2cx if there are enough chairs and surfaces for everyone

@2cy which is so far out of our control and if you consider this place that much of a he-l hole - why don’t you leave? This is not prison. I doubt you’re under contract. You’re working here on your own free will and rallying for change on a website that will do nothing nor respond to your rallying. Campaign effectively in reality for a benefit you feel entitled to, otherwise you’re just wasting your energy for the sake of a few upvotes. Which I’m unaffected by, but if you’re literally going to do nothing but…this…then the place you choose to continue to work at is just the toxic partner you refuse to leave. Go you. You seem like one of those people who cry for a promotion. You should unpack all of this somewhere else. And I don’t mean behind a keyboard, I mean in therapy.

@2e1 def not ynot or hr. Just very aware that I am more productive and contribute more effectively when I focus my energy on what I can control. Decisions at the top of the ladder, regardless if I agree with them or not, are far beyond my control and I’m realistic about that. Whining about it on an anonymous website isn’t even going to change that lol. I WFH when I absolutely need to and don’t abuse the privilege of flexibility, but if a requirement of my job is that im in office that’s a really easy requirement to meet. The attitude that we’re entitled to anything, including wfh/bonus/those of you still pulling half day Fridays and complaining you’re overwhelmed, is not going to get you anything or anywhere. If you don’t want to play by corporate rules, I’m not sure why you’re on a corporate game board.

If you want to actually change the WFH policy though, I’m not sure why you’re here on this meaningless ineffective website.

@2cr thanks ynot and hr d-mbasses.

Want to increase efficiency? Fire all HR and eliminate all the stupid busy work they create.... goodbye APs and CAP

@2ck The products that were sold during those high profit years of 2020 and 2021 had largely already been developed pre-pandemic. The toy industry boomed during those years because of changes in consumer behavior; pandemic restrictions kept families at home which dramatically increasing demand for toys/at-home entertainment. At the same time stimulus payments and reduced spending on things like travel, dining, and social activities gave families more disposable income to spend on toys.

In short, it had nothing to do with any theoretical productivity gains that WFH might have generated.

@2cr And this mentality is exactly why we’re in this he-l hole. I know the market is terrible and there are thousands of people that would gladly take my job and commute everyday. But do you understand the talent we’re missing out on for the sake of control and status quo? This company’s main attraction comes from nostalgia and name recognition, not the working conditions; and that’s why we’ll never level up.