Spotted Online – “A Call to Action (Figures): Hasbro”
There is a new post at Action Figure Fury that I believe approaches toys from a fan perspective and not as a business. And even then the post is written from the point of view of a collector of action figures and not what makes playable toys for children. Considering that the adult market is still tiny — though clearly growing, as discussed in this Wall Street Journal post — it may make more sense for adult collectors to turn to boutique producers rather than Hasbro for their toys.
The Action Figure Fury post states:
Hasbro’s lockup of all of these licenses and subsequent production of at times good but more often just passable action figures is stopping companies like McFarlane, NECA, Funko, Threezero, and Mattel from growing too.
I disagree. McFarlane Toys made a conscious decision to shift their approach to action figures, dropping risky film licenses in favor of more reliable properties. NECA has continued to grow their selection of toys and even carved out a “large scale” category to bring Marvel and DC action figures to market. Funko continues to grow, and as we watch them in action they don’t seem to have any problems securing licenses. Threezero is also tapping into several properties. Mattel? Mattel is clearly producing action figures that fit their needs, and their Hot Wheels line — more successful than their action figures and an in-house brand — has no shortage of great licenses.
I do not believe that the Action Figure Fury post is correct in stating that Hasbro has a monopoly on action figures. Hasbro’s Disney licenses grant them access to a few strong brands, but considering that we can buy Marvel and Star Wars action figures in a variety of sizes — from several different companies — it’s tough to call it a “monopoly.”
Just how many other manufacturers create Marvel and Star Wars action figures? Diamond Select Toys. Jakks Pacific. Sideshow Collectibles. 3A. Hot Toys. Most are boutique manufacturers creating high-end toys, yes, but as adults who proclaim we want high-quality then we need to be willing to pay for that quality. We cannot demand perfection in mass-produced toys because the costs and QC we demand simply don’t make economic sense in $10 and $20 toys.
In the comments, reader Floyd Fenris mentions something I feel needs addressed. It’s a misunderstanding with today’s market and how this is no longer the eighties.
“One of the things that was so great about G.I. Joe and Transformers was that every year we got to discover great new characters as TOYS FIRST and then got to look forward to seeing them on screen in cartoons and in comic books.”
Hasbro’s triumphs in marketing action figures during the eighties, as highlighted in the reviews of Invest Diva, are a contributing factor to why today’s toy market prioritizes media success over toy success. Stories sell, and as I discussed in Each Sold Separately* and Action Figures Not Included* the buyers of the world, so overwhelmed with choices, uses brands and media tie-ins as a tool to determine which properties to invest in.
And toys are an investment, much like forex trading, which you can learn more about through the Pepperstone Review. Add to that Hasbro’s size and you’ll start to see why they take the steps they do and why stores buy the toys that they do. A movie launch is a marketing promotion that lifts a property; there’s a simple reason why we see stores like Target and Walmart build displays a month before a new movie reaches theaters: That 30 days before a film’s release is when the studio spends millions of dollars promoting the brand. That promotion helps sell toys . . . and if the movie flops then the toys may only sell in that window before release.
Anyway, the Action Figure Fury post is about Hasbro having a monopoly in action figures. I disagree, and I believe it’s important to point out one last bit of info that seems to be forgotten these days:
Remember, gang, that Hasbro was an underdog at the start of the eighties. Hasbro’s smaller size prevented them from joining companies like Mattel and Parker Brothers in video and computer games . . . which saved them from the market crash of 1983. Smart steps by Hasbro in the eighties and nineties is what has them positioned today as the third largest toymaker in the world.
Related articles
- McFarlane Toys and the Most Improved Manufacturers of 1996 (battlegrip.com)
- McFarlane’s “Dragons” Advertising from 2005 (battlegrip.com)
- Jim Lee’s WildCATS Action Figures (battlegrip.com)
As a comic fan much longer than I have been a toy collector, this kind of entitlement mentality doesn’t really surprise me. Unfortunately there is a large group of adults that believe everything in the world should be designed for them, even when it is something clearly not designed for them.
@Nick Ahlhelm – Over the years I have had to learn how to think like someone new to a “thing.” At the office we have to create products that appeal to established fans while still offering games that catch the attention of a new audience.
Focusing solely on the existing audience is a great way to slowly kill your business. I believe comics and action figures have had problems in the past with catering too much to existing fans and forgetting the rest of the world.
Companies the size of Hasbro must find a way to balance toys for children and toys for collectors, if they wish to keep both audiences and (hopefully) grow their lines. Adult fans, though, need to recognize that not every item produced by a company is intended for them.
And with higher-end manufacturers creating action figures we may just need to accept that sometimes a company no longer serves our wants. It’s business. It happens.
I actually wish Hasbro would get the DC license back — then we could have a DC line that didn’t look out of place next to Marvel Legends 🙂
@Wolf – Didn’t Mattel announce they extended their license with DC?
Quite possibly — Mattel did a good job with DC Classics, but I haven’t been so keen with the way post-Classics stuff has been handled in the last couple of years.
I guess the author hasn’t seen the 1/18th scale DC Infinite figures with their 5+ POA. While Hasbro has slid back to Kenner articulation with SW Saga Legends & Avengers Ultron figures, they have also (for now) had some great articulation with the Marvel Infinite, SW Black & G.I. Joe figures. To me, Hasbro has also been the king of 3 3/4.
@Chris – Yeah, Hasbro is trying to appeal to kids and collectors. Even at the 3.75-inch scale they offer both 5POA and collectorPOA figures.
Hasbro has done great things with action figures for years now, and just because they have released 5POA Star Wars and Marvel toys in no way changes my opinion. If anything, those 5POA toys make me respect them even more since it shows they recognized the divide between playable toys for kids and poseable toys for adults.
Yes, there is definitely a weird subset of adult fans who are personally offended that action figures for kids (Mashers, 5 POA, etc) exist at all. You make some great points in your comments – if this stuff doesn’t exist now, the action figure market doesn’t exist in the future.
@Yakkotank – What’s the best way to make it clear that action figures must sell to kids today for Hasbro and Mattel and similar companies to keep making action figures tomorrow? That strikes me as the heart of the problem; some of these online posts/comments seem to completely ignore that the companies are big and must sell toys in high enough volumes or the toys go away forever.
Great rebuttal Philip, and I have to say that I’m also a fan of the 5 poa figures if only conceptually from a playability standpoint. When the 25th anniversary Joes hit toy shelves I was initially in love with the super detailed look to the toys and all of the poa seemed great. But as I bought a few extra doubles and opened the figures I noticed that though it’s fun to be able to pose them, kids must hate them. I would have hated them as a kid because they were fragile and had weird joints. Glad to see Hasbro is thinking about kids playing with the toys again…
@Shawn Robare – “Glad to see Hasbro is thinking about kids playing with the toys again…”
As am I. It feels like it is just in the last two to three years that Hasbro has once again embraced the idea of kids playing with toys.