Let's hope this is a step in a positive direction. Change is (hopefully) GOOD.
40 replies (most recent on top)
wait... was that a burn?...
of course you like ponies. no surprise.
Why don't you try using the word "pedantic " again mr caps lock. your frustration is "absolutely" entertaining. you're sort of a one trick donkey. I'd say pony but I like ponies.
and again, a designer talks in absolute and cant' read. The post was about not seeing broader than design, not excluding design. Go back to school and pass 6th grader, child.
Huhuu. wish that was actually a put down but how you feel is largely inconsequential. without design you'd be selling your spit and spinning empty tales that you have been doing here. does it hurt that much that your tirade is dismissed by your superiors?
You can always tell a designer is posting when they can't see beyond the toys. It's a curse. I feel bad for them.
All because the company still believes in the storied notion of thought leaders rather than strong empowered teams. There is no obiwan to save them from the darkness. The thought of a great individual is a myth that Mattel still clings to. the centralized power structure is antiquated and no longer tenable. thus it falls in the hole of leader after overcompensated leader that will fail. there is too much information to process for such a centralized system. so it relies on such things as testing for decisions rather than actual data. because the so called leaders who are too far from the battle don't trust their teams due to the pressure placed on them as "leaders" to succeed. your result is an over burdened bureaucracy and an uninspired work force. You've become the dmv. just look how happy those people are.
so true. our business acumen with licenses has been in the dumps for years now. we used to be great at picking potential winners but now? all clunkers. Thanks SL! the babe ruth of licensing you are not and the people that were around you that could call the potential winners you sacrificed to the layoff gods to protect yourself and your hubris.
goodness me little transmedia pimp, a previous poster has pegged you on your inexperience and naivete. you're working at the wrong place pal. mattel makes plastic things. and unless you're in a movie studio or a video game company no one's looking to give you licensing deals aplenty. god knows even warner bros. can't even pull their S#!t together. but you seem to think you see something no one else does which truly belies your sheer ignorance. its embarrassing.
To the small-minded toy elf who can't read:
I never said to abandon the toys - not once. I only said not to focus solely on it, because it's a losers game. The company is made up of more than just toys and whether the brand started from the toys or didn't, the brand represents more.
If you've taken it to mean abandonment of the toys, then maybe perhaps it's because you're threatened that there are other factors that may be as important or more important than the toys you work on and you're afraid you'll no longer fit because you only know how to do one thing - make toys. It's a great profession - but for Mattel, it simply isn't enough on its own.
Good idea - but it won't work. You don't have anyone in ES that is competent to have the discussion. You don't have the talent or the knowledge.
OK, new weekly meeting proposal. Reserve space in the Design Center (yep, still calling it that) and we'll have great discussions for hours on end to come up with concepts for BRANDS that will bring in Billions across movies, TV, internet, clothing, alcoholic beverages, shoes, bags, premiums, and even farking toys.
The BRAND is everything. All Hail the BRAND.
This is gonna be BIG. Let's make sure Maggie gets the invite.
To the person who incessantly pushes this idea of abandoning the toy business in the pursuit of transmedia brand building, your lack of insight is comforting if only to illustrate your lack of experience, which I can only hope translates into a status within the organization that lacks any sort of decision making capabilities. God help Mattel if you are ever in a position to implement your misguided notions. What are you twelve years old?
"Jeez - then I guess Star Wars was a toy line first? As was Toy Story, The Avengers, Batman, etc.?"
Not one of those properties are owned by any company in our business.
Sounds like someone wants us to be a Comic Book publisher and leverage the characters we design 30+ years later into Brands that include toy lines, and also a Movie Studio with blockbuster summer releases that we can then produce toy lines to support.
Why hasn't everyone in the world thought of that? Why do we do toys at all? We should just come up with these "Brands" and auction the Master Toy License to Hasbro, Jakks, or some other losers.
I hope Margaret is reading this. Just think, if we just get out of the plastic molding business we can save a lot of headcount, and profits will go through the roof!
Jeez - then I guess Star Wars was a toy line first? As was Toy Story, The Avengers, Batman, etc.? Stop talking in absolutes, Uncle Jed and get off the back porch and join the 2017 digital age. The more you deny what is actually happening, the more you relegate yourself and your kind to be no more than whittlers. You're better than that - start acting like it.
I repeat my assertion dear shill. No toy no movie, no toy no t-shirt.
Truly sounds like you'd rather work at big H true believer.
The component that you so critically like to downplay again is all of those revolve around a toy. No amount of fact spin changes that. It's all predicated on the "plastic". But since you have an affectation for fantasies and see things your own way as vividly as any trump voter does, this is a pointless conversation. Don't stop believing... I guess.
Hey, Spanky - you need to go back to college and take an economics degree. Are you kidding me about the examples you've given? Have you only been in the industry 10 minutes?
"My Little Pony" - only gathered momentum after the show aired in the late 80's. Since then it's had numerous TV shows, shorts and DVD movies to keep it afloat. The new movie will take it further
"Trolls" - Didya even know there was a DreamWorks movie (which took 5 years to develop) that brought this back to the forefront? And, it's already over because the animated TV show is in limbo now that NBC Universal bought DreamWorks. Besides, it did less than $75 million in toys sales - hardly worth anyone's attention.
"Shopkins" - A great $3 collectible concept which will be over by the end of 2017 unless the TV show they keep talking about actually gets any placement. By the end of 2018, it'll be a contest between Trolls and Shopkins on which one kids forgot about faster.
It's not "licensing" you baboon - it's building a brand with content and promotions and PR and all the other drivers that you can't seem to understand. The IDEA behind the toy is what creates the toy - the toy just doesn't magically happen, launch successfully and last for 10+ years on it's own. You know this - just admit and stop being such a pilgrim.
All the other toy brands that have existed for decades did so because they either launched from something bigger (like a movie) or created content as they grew (Lego). Toys CAN be successful on their own (ie: Hatchimals) but they are one-hit wonders that quickly drop off. That kind of product cycle makes no one any money long term - and long term is the trick.
If you want to keep yammering about how whittling, sculpting or building a new toy is going to save the world, then do so knowing you're just putting your head in the sand because you can't face the truth.
here goes the licensing shill again. some days you're opining about the blah blah of brands that are more than toys and then you descend into a tirade of blame on management on not knowing what toys to make. when you say:
"The company's issue is that other successful brands exist in multiple iterations where the kids are. Only 27% of what is bought for and bought by kids are toys - everything else comprises the whole experience for a kid." you're talking about Hasbro and Mattel, but you neglect to mention that these so called multi-iterated brands usually started from singular toys. MLP, Trolls, Shopkins, need i continue.
it doesn't become a lifestyle unless it is successful in its first form which is usually a toy first. Bunkie, no one buys a t-shirt until you've had the toy.
so i've seen you drivel and rabidly gnaw this point endlessly in numerous posts that its damn well boring. so if you could bring in a fresh pov i'm sure we'll all be thankful for that here.
To the last poster who thinks she's an elf in Santa's workshop, grow the hell up! ANYONE can make plastic toys - anyone. The idea behind the toy is what comprises the brand and the magic. The company's issue is that other successful brands exist in multiple iterations where the kids are. Only 27% of what is bought for and bought by kids are toys - everything else comprises the whole experience for a kid.
Mattel can make toys, sure. But the problem resides much deeper than just the toys. It's the ideas that bring the toy and it's characters to life in a child's imagination......and a parent's wallet. If there isn't MORE than just the toy then it's just a commodity. If it's valued as an experience or a lifestyle, then it's adopted by kids, if it's not, then it ceases to exist. Mattel's brands are good - but they aren't cool. Why? Because the leadership team hasn't figured out that to make things cool, they have to be willing to promote them and feature them in the minds and hearts of kids. They haven't figured out they will be FOREVER thwarted because they money they need is being spent on shareholder dividend - a dividend the company can only afford when it's earned by robust sales and profits. Mattel hasn't been in that strong of a position in nearly a decade. And it won't ever be as long as the Leadership Team and the BOD protect their stock options by ransoming off the company's future by paying themselves and institutional investors today.
"A monkey can figure out the hardlines toy business."
But our last 3 CEOs could not!
Mattel Brands are based on the stupid little plastic things we mold. If kids are aren't interested in those they won't be interested in a tshirt or online game based on those characters. You have to build a foundation before you build the house.
A monkey can figure out the hardline toy business. Why do you fools think your work is so hard or challenging? It's not. Just take your head out of the sand and see just how many other toy companies exist. Maggs will figure it out. The hard part and gutting the company of idiots who are so backward thinking and small minded that they can't assist in evolving the company. That's the challenge.
The company's value is based on the strength of the brands, not the stupid little plastic things you mold. You are doomed if this is the limit of your intellect and no matter what you tell yourselves to the contrary, you are wrong and the company will fail. It's why it's in the trouble that it is in.
So we now have Maggie. She has zero experience with the hardline toy business. She will be tutored in the business by the folks who have been failing for the past five years including CS and the rest of the BOD, RD, SL, and all the residents of the clown car. So her view will be very influenced by their views.
I assume she will try to compensate by rolling out initiatives for all sorts of web-based shiny baubles that will sound interesting but will ultimately negatively impact the bottom line. More ThingMaker apps anyone?
Sounds like a problem.
LOL you should probably look up the word "pedantic" before you start revealing your true IQ. Appreciate the burn attempt
The caps are on to make easy to read for your pedantic mind 😁
Last time I looked Mattel was making toys and google makes money off of selling your info to advertisers.
I'm sure if you were smart enough to peddle your wares anywhere else but here you would. But guess what you're not. But thanks for your amusing rant. Might want to check that caps lock button, keeps getting stuck I see.
If you're limited view of the world is Mattel as manufacturer and you can't see the evolution of brands that go beyond and SINGLE PRODUCT CONFIGURATION, then you should go join the Amish and make rocking chairs.
Manufacturing is just an output of the brand - just like licensed products are. Mattel doesn't even own that many of it's own plants (and is, in fact, the second to last toy company that does - Lego is the only other one). Everything other than fashion dolls, hotwheels basic assortments, Thomas minis, FP baby gear and Power Wheels is all made at 3rd party vendors - just like the rest of the toy industry.
Have a little pride in what you do isn't just making butter churns, will ya? It's INSULTING to many of us who look at the company in broader terms than just a "manufacturer". You're small-mindedness is disturbing........you should probably leave :)
he's right!!! Nodded all the other execs who've never made a thing in their lives...
Let's see. Mattel is a manufacturing company. Google doesn't manufacture anything. So to someone who doesn't know the process it might seem best to eliminate as many of these design and engineering people as possible. Just have it all done for cheap in a 3rd world country.
So did SL leave? Trying to figure out who GC is as well since it's been a while since I've been there...
If SL is gone there's gonna be dancing in the streets. Watch how fast serial brown noser GC dislodges his lips from her a-- to find a new sphincter to latch onto.
The problem I see is that you are all in a box.
If it's true, if SL is walking, the munchkins will be singing and dancing soon.
Time to Clean The House. 2.8.17.
Goodbye Old. Hello New.
Do it for Ruth and Elliot.
let's hope the queen she snatched from spinmaster is out on his a-- as well. he was a waste of an acquisition from the get go.
She needs to "drain the swamp" here, just like our newly anoited one.
been gone from nyc for 8 years now enjoying the weather out west. without bashing, what's the power structure like in NYC? who's in charge on down the line?
All this change at once! My, my. That orange, tweeting nut job being sworn in tomorrow as our president and a new CEO taking over the reins here in a few weeks. But I'm sure she's ten times more stable than he is, thank God. Should be interesting to see how it all plays out for the both of them. And for us. Let's all keep our fingers crossed.
You embarrass yourselves and all of us in consumer products when you start spouting off things like, "t's not good in that Google while good at digital s---s at physical products and understanding consumer needs, much less kids needs". Google knows more about kids than we do because they spend so much more money on it (and btw, by our sales, I'd say we don't know kids all that well) and have entire divisions set up to study consumer needs, Secondly, STOP THINKIN WE'RE JUST A TOY COMPANY. Toys are just one of hundreds of iterations of a brand. The brand (in all it's forms) is what gives us value. Not simpleton toys that kids only play with for an hour and then forget about it. The new CEO is just what we need to FINALLY get into the 21st century and leave the quaint days of being a toy company in the dust.
anything is better than "tricky dickie!" and his band of misfit puppets
It's good in that they realized that RD is all sizzle, no substance. He's very good at spending money, but so is an alcoholic in a liquor store. It's not good in that Google while good at digital s---s at physical products and understanding consumer needs, much less kids needs. She won't be the turnaround CEO Mattel needs, but thank god they didn't hand over the reigns to Richard and his idiot entourage.