Dominic wrote:Hey, slow down there SGT Sodomy! I am agreeing with you, if only in general terms.
Not sure why I am calling you "SGT Sodomy", but maybe that is me just being a contrarian.
Target around here runs $13 and change, which is close to $15, even before tax (which I do count because it is still money that I have to spend).
I also don't know why you're doing it in all-caps, but you're clearly Capt. Contrary since you just said that $13 was $15 to bolster your argument.
They are $12.98 at my Target, $13.16 at the Target at the mall, which is $65.80 for 5.
At least the damned thing has some new moulding. $20 vehicle + 2 ~$10 figures = ~$40, + at least $10 basic mark-up for a short production run and now ~$10 for the new piece.
Yeah, that's just... no. $10 for a new piece would be a microscopic run since the rest of the steel is already cut. The figures don't run $10 when they're pack-ins either, and you're not factoring in that the $20 version comes with a pack-in figure which is not here, so half your cash just went back out the window. And the price has gone up another $5.
Hell to the yeah, (said Admiral Agreeable).
The thing is that some people will take this ride, just to get the right colours on Bruticus. Hell, I would probably be one of them if I were not trying to cut back on toys anyway. Hasbro is trying to force sales, and maybe to boost the bottom line of their exclusives division. Of course, as I pointed out above, this will harm the sales of their "regular" toys, after a year or so of (as JT pointed out) making idiotic decisions in terms of distributing lines with otherwise built in fandoms.
The really stupid thing is that Hasbro could make more in terms of sales volume by releasing a better toy than by forcing sales of a more limited toy. Hasbro could have made a non-game colour exclusive toy (maybe using G2 or RiD colours) and still sold plenty at SDCC, likely even with the price mark up.
Yeah, I will probably be one of those suckers too, and then I won't buy the regular one for sure.
They are doing exclusive G2 colors, but for Amazon.com instead (to go with the game's Amazon.com preorder bonus character colorscheme). None of it makes a damned lick of sense.
So long as we agree that this goes beyond just toys or just cartoons. I see it in publishing, with books having typing errors that would have been caught by MS Word and writers using childish punctuation or phrasing that would be caught and fixed by somebody who took 3 minutes to glance over a page or two.
Oh yeah, it's everywhere these days. It's hip to complain about complainers while actively stating you overlook such things in all sorts of interests. You often will see someone posting a sarcastic "first-world problems!" and most are doing so from their smartphone or tablet. It's like some folks cannot reconcile having personal interests while there is global suffering, so they just discount any personal-interest-level stuff as meaningless so that they can partake of them as well.
There is also a perception that "it ish awshum" when toys have shitty colours. Look at the people who were calling for "Action Master" Thundercracker colours on the modern Seeker mould. They wanted the obnoxious colours, even if it might have reduced the chances of getting a correctly coloured Thundercracker.
The attitude that "standards are bad" permeates all manner of disciplines and levels of society.
Not going to disagree, but not going to add more to this aspect as it's brought down other threads.
The average consumer is not going to keep looking for a toy. Right around the time that guys like us give up and look to eBay, they just give up and stop looking. Even if a kid is tenacious, his parents are going to tell him to let it fucking go. His friends are going to move on, and he is going to go with them unless he is a future collector.
Those casual fans are only going to care for so long. While the show is on, they are going to look for the toys. But, after however many fruitless searches, they are going to give up. They might not even care once the toys do show up in quantity. Are new episodes of "Prime" still running on TV? I am seeing Prime toys turning up at Walgreenws, which means that there is probably spill-over from retailers who are skipping the line.
I see what you mean, but my point was more that the average consumer isn't going to look for the toy in the first place if they aren't drawn to it either from external forces (marketing, fiction) or internal ones (product quality, brand, value). Your point is the issue of consumers who want to find, mine was the step before that, concerns over the consumer base being interested in the product.
Prime seems to be taking a break, it's been a month since the last new episode, and that didn't feel at all like a season finale, it's only the 15th episode of the season where last season had 26. I don't see ads for TFP on any other network anymore though where I used to.
"Generations" seemed to move better than any other TF line around here. I am still seeing newly rotated "Generations" product on shelves at local secondary stores. People are fucking buying them, and leaving movie toys. (I still see Tuner Mudflaps on occassion.)
Hard to tell since Generations is in sleep mode and moving a very small amount of product while it gears up for holiday 2012 (September), so it could be a distribution apples v oranges situation, where TFP is shipping 10x the product or more and suffering more volume-based issues. I dunno.
BWprowl wrote:JediTricks wrote:I don't think it's fair to call out fans on this one, Hasbro did solicit the good colorscheme first, then changed their minds and had Neon Camo Batman syndrome rain down on top of this figure.
Let me put it out here that I don't think the colors on retail Bruticus are as bad as you're making them out to be. There's no neon camo or anything, the colors aren't even strictly 'neon'. The colors on Onslaught, Brawl, and Swindle are basically the same, just a few levels brighter than the SDCC ones, Blast Off is actually a *darker* black and purple coloration than the SDCC's metallic gold, and Vortex about breaks even between the clashing yellow and red of the SDCC version and the more uniform red with purple highlights of the retail version. It's hardly Neon Night Attack Batman or anything, and actually still resembles the game colors reasonably well, Blast Off being the only one who jumps out as 'wrong'.
Really, not neon?
http://photos.actionfigs.com/prime/p679 ... rmers.html
http://photos.actionfigs.com/prime/p679 ... rmers.html
My buddy Steve runs that site and shot these photos at Toy Fair in New York, I know him and I know he's very good at capturing accurate views of these sorts of things at conventions. The one Hasbro displayed appears to be a production model, no less. Every figure except Blast Off has some level of neon coloring going on, Swindle, Brawl, and Vortex are using bright colors as their chief colors.
Hey, I just put out my theory as to why Hasbro did raise the price, I never said it was a good call on their part. This is one place where I actually agree with you: The jacked-up price on SDCC Bruticus is over-the-top and smacks of gouging.
It did seem like that is what they thought, my point was that the line of thinking doesn't make any real sense, not that you were being disagreeable.
My thing is that I just *cannot* get so bent out of shape over toys like this; I just can't take them this seriously. Don't get me wrong, if I was sold a car that didn't run, or some food that was spoiled, you bet I'd be livid and be taking the supplier to task and all that. But when I'm just plunking down ten bucks for a pure luxery item, a plastic child's plaything that I *know* I am not in the target audience for, then there's no reason for me to flip the fuck out because it's a few levels of yellow brighter than it was when it showed up months ago in a video game magazine I didn't even read. I've looked at it, I've read reviews or whatever, I've decided that I want to buy the toy because I think it will appeal to me and be worth my recreation-money, so I get it. If it's got some enjoyable bits, it's entertaining and I feel it was worth my money, cool, I enjoy it just as I have most every other TF toy that's kept me in the hobby. There are some disappointing ones every now and then, sure, but it's just a bad toy that, at worst, cost me no more than twenty bucks. It's not giving me cancer or anything, it's just a less-than-stellar toy.
Here's the thing, this is my hobby, I'm here on these forums to talk about this hobby, not to talk about politics or other serious issues, so in the scheme of greater things it might not matter too much, but within this hobby it is a viable issue.
Also, as a grown-up, we are able to see the line both as a collectible and as a business, and can discuss the latter issues as they reflect upon the former. Bad business choices, poor compromises on a line, they can affect the future of a line, and that IS of interest to all of us. So if you don't want to focus on those issues, then don't respond on those aspects, don't read them. But don't come down on those who are in the hobby who want to discuss them as if they're somehow out of touch and wanting too much when everybody has their limit and this isn't outside the norm. Everybody actively in this thread has thousands of posts on our Transformers collecting board, how are you going to argue that anybody here is not emotionally invested in some way in the products? Hasbro even solicits our input on these things at conventions as well, so it must be of SOME concern to the brand.
But when I can walk to Target and plunk down $12 for a cool Transformer with all the articulation and weapons I would want, that friggin' transforms, and the only 'flaw' is that it's missing a couple paint apps that I didn't even notice because I don't watch the show? That's not a bad deal at all, and to whine and bitch about it to a Hasbro that isn't even listening (and why should they?) just makes me look spoiled.
But that's not what we're talking about, we're not talking about a missing line or invisible detail, we're talking about the way the WHOLE FIGURE looks. We even have taken the issue beyond the context to just a general point of aesthetics and marketing. You talk about us as if we're spoiled, but this is about quality and consistency, realistic expectations vs value, quantifiable aspects important to the brand itself. When you get Onslaught, will you notice that the faux tires on his back aren't painted at all, only sculpted and cast in the same blue plastic as the area around it? I bet you will notice, and I bet a little part of you will feel a twinge of annoyance at it too, and that's REASONABLE. And again, we're on a Transformers collecting forum, we're here to talk with others with similar interests about these very sorts of things, to compare notes and discuss the pros and cons, to overgeneralize that as spoiled is take the very idea of collecting out of context. If we just gobbled up whatever and didn't voice our opinions, how would Hasbro know what our market wants to see addressed next time around? If we don't voice our grievances in an open forum, then we only do ourselves and those like us a disservice. It's up to the group as a whole to decide what is and isn't within the norm within the group. You say we're spoiled because we want a product that looks the way it did when it was originally solicited, and it was originally solicited that way because of its context, and we don't want to be gouged for wanting that, especially in light of Hasbro's previous selling actions at Comic-Con - well, none of us are Mother Theresa, so I guess that's spoiled, but every time you buy 1 figure and don't buy another one, that makes you exactly as spoiled, so either accept it's all relative or continue trying to demonize others who don't think the way you do.
You think WE'RE spoiled? Look at high-end camera enthusiasts, they complain about EVERYTHING with pure vitriol and Nikon, Canon, Leica, Hasselblad, Pentax, Panasonic, Olympus, those companies have to sort through the loud noise to make products marketed to those people in the hundreds and thousands of dollars. Last year's model 2 grams lighter? It's time to grab torches and pitchforks, but without those people making all that noise, those companies wouldn't have a marketing base.
Heh, I'd actually managed to forget about Power Rangers for that, no idea how. But man, even in the face of all your criticism for FOC Bruticus, that thing still blows the current Samurai Megazord on shelves out of the water. This is a side note I wanted to talk about, by the way: We Transfans are so lucky, we get a ton of toys that are AMAZING compared to what other fandoms get (have you seen the shit on shelves for the people who like stuff like Power Rangers, Ben10, or video games like Assassin's Creed or Red Faction? Even missing a few paint apps the TFs make those things look like jokes) so complaining when a toy might not be perfect (and indeed, that you could ever expect anything ever to be 'perfect') just seems petty.
Anyway, if a kid buys a TF giftset or one of those Cyberverse suits instead of Bruticus, then Hasbro still wins, so I don't see what the issue is.
This is a good example of relative though, you talk about MMPR the Samurai Megazord on shelves as if it's on the same level as TF, but that Megazord is $30, those MMPR figures are half the price of TF, so there is a sliding scale of quality from one to the other which is matched by a sliding price scale. TF is a brand for a more discerning consumer, that's why Ben 10 and MMPR are cheaper and discarded more quickly, so for Hasbro to slip on the size, complexity, design, paint, or sculpting only lowers the brand to those poorer areas little by little.
We're not talking about "Hasbro winning", we're talking about products like Bruticus selling or not, if Bruticus doesn't sell on shelves then it damages chances of another product like that coming out in the future. Also, if something is bought on clearance or from a liquidator, then Hasbro loses - there is no profit made there, and that product's inability to sell at original retail damages the brand in the eyes of the main retailers.
I know you probably didn't intend it this way, but this does come off a little douche-y when you insinuate that I haven't 'learned to become a person' just because I happen to think Energon Sharkticon's orange/purple color combo makes him look cool. Different tastes man, come on. I may think the plain, stacked-boxes look of a lot of the G1 animation models look like shit, but I accept that that's my opinion and that you liking them is your opinion, I don't try and negatively justify it by saying your opinion is wrong and that you were a victim of Hasbro foisting Dery style on you in the 80's. There is no 'right' opinion, some people genuinely think brighter, more defined colors look cool on some things, and to diminish them by saying that their opinion is 'wrong' or that your taste is somehow immune to the same sort of bias you accuse them of falling under just comes across as really elitist. You should *never* consider yourself better than someone or think that you've 'learned to become more of a person' than them, just because you've decided the things you like are better than the things they like. Especially when those things are kids' toys.
Did you work hard to find a way to take offense at that, or did it it come naturally to you? I was clearly talking about BABIES AND LITTLE KIDS, a component of the main casual-consumer market that toy manufacturers sometimes make compromises in their products to appeal to. So unless you're saying that "bright and shiny are the
only attraction" in products to you the way it is for babies, then you have taken offense at something that wasn't about you even a little bit - but I'm pretty sure you have mastered the ability to discern complex shapes and fine details and nuances in colors, and aren't 4-years-old. Thanks though for the sanctimony and outrage over something that wasn't said though, that was a really great use of our time.
Transfans got mad at a toy company for making a toy, which they weren't the primary target audience for, in colors that didn't appeal to them particularly. They then actually demanded that the toy company change the colors back to appeal to them and not said primary target audience. That is absolutely self-importance.
I'm not a vegetarian. I may enjoy some 'vegetarian' foods like falafel and tofu, but I am not the target consumer for those products. So if I were to march into a Trader Joe's and start demanding that the suppliers change the taste of these foods from what appealed to the target vegetarian market, to something to suit my personal, omnivorous tastes, that would come across as self-centered and arrogant. Which is what a bunch of adult Transfans whining to Hasbro to change the colors of a kids' toy because it didn't appeal to them enough comes off as. If you don't like it, don't buy it, that's your right as a consumer, but don't start yelling at Hasbro to make one special for you because you're entitled to it (even though Hasbro did JUST THAT for those fans, and those fans still whined).
1) Generations is market-focused on collectors.
2) Product is based on a video game Hasbro endorsed and is profiting from, it exists only because of that context, and was solicited originally as matching that as best as possible.
3) Product was changed afterwards in a compromise to add greater appeal to a casual consumer market, put in a rainbow of loud colors that matches no context anywhere.
4) Fans of original product voiced frustration in the revised product's new look.
5) Hasbro offered a compromise in a collector-only marketing release of being a convention exclusive, relieving concern.
6) Hasbro, with less than a month's warning, breaks with their previous convention pricing traditions (that have gone back nearly a decade), and prices the exclusive 55% higher than its retail counterpart.
What part of that is "self-important"?
Your argument makes little sense by the way, if a majority of fans are complaining about this situation then how can it be "self-importance" if it's not just you but a significant portion of the market requesting that? That's marketing.
If this were like your example, then you'd be buying falafel for years, Trader Joe's then solicits a falafel/beef hybrid that costs the same as the regular falafel, you are very interested in that hybrid, then a few months later Trader Joe's says the falafel hybrid is now tempeh rather than beef, you voice your lower interest in the revised hybrid and frustration in the alternate ingredient, Trader Joe's then says it's coming out with the beef hybrid as well in limited release, you show up at the store waiting for the doors to open and the manager comes out and tells you it costs 55% more than the tempeh hybrid despite Trader Joe's costs on both being roughly identical. Oh, and 30 other customers are standing outside with you having anticipated the release and lined up for the same thing, and the majority of them are also pissed off about this. "Self-importance" means you see excessive value in your personal opinion beyond a reasonable normal level within your group, this situation does not qualify as such except outside the entire context of the brand, Hasbro, the entire toy market, etc., which we are not talking about. We are talking about our fish in our pond, so yes it doesn't have anything to do with the state of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, but that doesn't automatically make it valueless self-aggrandizing.
I do kinda like how we're judging the success of this thing and Hasbro's decision before the toy's even out yet. Tell you what, if retail-colors Bruticus shelfwarms, I owe you a Coke.
Anything to chill out since we seem to end up at each other's throats any time this sort of subject comes up. This is why I try not to take it too seriously.
Only one of us keeps using the term "whining", and since it's you, I think that's sort of you taking it seriously. Anyway, the coke bet (caffeine-free only please) would have to take into account Hasbro's overall profitability or their distribution, they may see poor sales and thin future shipments to respond... AHAHAHAHAHA! Oh that's rich, like Hasbro's actually done any of that within a 6-month timeframe in the past 3 years.
Dammit Dom, no, you can't do that! You can't round up the price and include tax when you're trying to figure out the value of an exclusive set of toys before tax! Even at $13.50, the toys in question only come out to just $67.50 together, you can't count 'close to' price with these things! $13 and change is not $15, that's...just...not how numbers work.
See? Now we can totally agree on something! Granted, it's mathematics which is supposed to be a precise language unless you're Captain Contrary, but still... common ground at last.
Anyway, I have to run, reading and responding has been a lot slower going than I expected, I've been on this for 2 hours, so I'm going to stop here and leave you with these thoughts to at least stem some misunderstandings from part of this.
