MOTUC Q&A's From Around the Net (3/1/2012)

[Dr Kain]

I never made excuses for Mattel. In fact, I pointed out the other issues with their figures and the fact they've done nothing about it outside of offering exchanges or refunds which is what any other company does. That's hardly an apology. I also pointed out how you as a consumer have a right to a refund or exchange if your product was defective or you were unsatisfied with it. How there is still an expectation for Mattel to eat the cost of re-engineering a defective part on a figure, going into full production and then not getting paid is beyond me at this point. As someone who has been collecting multiple toy lines for many years, no company has ever or will ever do that. And nobody "paid the price for it" as you put it, it's not like we paid for the figure's development and production costs. Also, don't confuse expectations with guarantees. Nobody expects their action figure to have defects, but no toy company will ever guarantee that their figures are 100% free of defects. Ever. I understand people being upset over purchasing something that was defective and/or broke right away due to a design flaw or substandard materials. But sometimes collectors (not only in this fandom) have these unrealistic expectations of what a toy company is and isn't supposed to do and also tend to overestimate their financial impact on said company.

If a small company like Mill Creek can eat the costs of hundreds of defective Gamera III BD discs and just send anyone who bought one a replacement by them just sending in the coverart from their defective copy, Mattel can sure as hell afford to eat the costs of replacing Snout Spout's head.

[Fendi]

It's...complicated.



This is the new opening theme for live-action She-Ra.

Tallstar.....

If there's a new theme for She-Ra? It have to be Lita Ford. *headbang*

[AximusPrime]

If a small company like Mill Creek can eat the costs of hundreds of defective Gamera III BD discs and just send anyone who bought one a replacement by them just sending in the coverart from their defective copy, Mattel can sure as hell afford to eat the costs of replacing Snout Spout's head.

Yes, they can afford it. I will not argue that. But they will not do it and I will tell you why, they don't care. They don't make their major profits off of MOTUC. A company like Mill Creek will eat the cost of replacing a disc because discs are way cheaper to produce than the head of an action figure that also requires developing costs too. Mill Creek, as far as I know, only sells DVDs and therefore only makes their money from it. Mattel has Hot Wheels, Barbie, Monster High, The WWE License, Fisher Price, and more. If MOTUC was handled by a smaller company, then you would probably see more of an effort as they would be completely dependent on it's success. Mattel does not need MOTUC to succeed as a company. As I have said in other posts, Mattel will only care if they see that they can make major money off of this line. As it stands, sellouts are taking longer, the number of subs are the lowest since they were first offered, and the DCUC vs MOTUC two packs failed at retail. While I am not saying that the line is doomed, I am saying that the customer base of MOTUC makes up too much of a small percentage of Mattel's profits for them to eat the cost of production runs to replace figures for free in a collector's line. Hasbro wouldn't do it, Bandai of America wouldn't do it, Jakks Pacific wouldn't do it, so why are you expecting Mattel to do it? Would it be great if they would do it? Hell yeah. But Mattel, just like the other companies I listed above are primarily toy companies that cater to children and have told collectors time and time again that they make up a small percentage of their market.

[scott metzger]

How there is still an expectation for Mattel to eat the cost of re-engineering a defective part on a figure, going into full production and then not getting paid is beyond me at this point. As someone who has been collecting multiple toy lines for many years, no company has ever or will ever do that.

No company will EVER do that? You might want to check some actual facts before making sweeping statements like that, as both the Horsemen and DC Direct BOTH did exactly the same thing with figures whose problems were, in fact, less egregious than things like Snout Spout's cracking nose or Goddess' disintegrating crotch, offering replacements for the defective figures with a second, corrected run (the 7th Kingdom Elephants from the horsemen and the DCD Crisis on Infinite Earths wave with Supergirl, for reference). And Mezco offered the option of a free replacement head for Mr. Wink from their collector aimed Hellboy line simply because the one on the figure was different than the final version of the character in the film. And Hasbro recently offered a replacement leg that functions correctly to replace the non-functioning one on one of their large Star Wars vehicles.

Other companies concerned about their reputation and future sales do, indeed, do this. Mattel simply chooses not to.

[Barbecue17]

No company will EVER do that? You might want to check some actual facts before making sweeping statements like that, as both the Horsemen and DC Direct BOTH did exactly the same thing with figures whose problems were, in fact, less egregious than things like Snout Spout's cracking nose or Goddess' disintegrating crotch, offering replacements for the defective figures with a second, corrected run (the 7th Kingdom Elephants from the horsemen and the DCD Crisis on Infinite Earths wave with Supergirl, for reference). And Mezco offered the option of a free replacement head for Mr. Wink from their collector aimed Hellboy line simply because the one on the figure was different than the final version of the character in the film. And Hasbro recently offered a replacement leg that functions correctly to replace the non-functioning one on one of their large Star Wars vehicles.

Other companies concerned about their reputation and future sales do, indeed, do this. Mattel simply chooses not to.

I was actually going to mention the Hellboy reference. Mezco always gets mad props to me for that (even though I like the original head better!).

[scott metzger]

I was actually going to mention the Hellboy reference. Mezco always gets mad props to me for that (even though I like the original head better!).

I didn't even take them up on it, as I was fine with the original, as well.

And the Fab four earned a lot of respect from me and others with their handling of the elephant problem. I honestly never took them up on the offer, either, as I never thought the original production run was that bad (I've got some recent Mattel figures whose joints are looser than those were). That small company likely took a hit in the pocketbook to do what they did, and, yet, it was a sound business decision. They stood behind their product and likely kept a lot of customers who might otherwise have never purchased from them again, as well as garnering a lot of good publicity from their actions. They took a loss then with eyes toward making more money down the road with a satisfied customer base. That's called good business. Mattel's attitude has been grab and gouge what money you can right now and get out when things turn bad. THat's bad, shortsighted business.

[AximusPrime]

No company will EVER do that? You might want to check some actual facts before making sweeping statements like that, as both the Horsemen and DC Direct BOTH did exactly the same thing with figures whose problems were, in fact, less egregious than things like Snout Spout's cracking nose or Goddess' disintegrating crotch, offering replacements for the defective figures with a second, corrected run (the 7th Kingdom Elephants from the horsemen and the DCD Crisis on Infinite Earths wave with Supergirl, for reference). And Mezco offered the option of a free replacement head for Mr. Wink from their collector aimed Hellboy line simply because the one on the figure was different than the final version of the character in the film. And Hasbro recently offered a replacement leg that functions correctly to replace the non-functioning one on one of their large Star Wars vehicles.

Other companies concerned about their reputation and future sales do, indeed, do this. Mattel simply chooses not to.

I'll take responsibility for the fact that I should have been more specific than making a general statement. But to clarify my point like I did in a later post than the one you chose to quote, Mattel can easily afford to do this, but they choose not to because they primarily cater to the children's market and not the adult collector market. The other companies you mentioned do not make revenue outside of the collector market, therefore they are going to do what ever it takes to keep their target market happy even at their own expense. As far as Hasbro is concerned, that's more of an exception than the rule. I'm sure at this point Mattel could realistically run the Classics line at a loss and still be financially well off, but like any major corporation they care more about increasing profits. Keeping a tiny market segment happy while making no money makes no business sense to them.

[Paul Justice]

Guys, I don't think it is ToyGuru who actually answers these QandA's. Remember occasionally we get a "Let me chime in here" from ToyGuru reply, which suggests that it's not him who always answers these.

Based on that, any posts above that blame Scott for these answers (I count a minimum of 3) are probably the kind of thing he was refering to as taking the blame for everything! (just sayin')

In terms of the She-Ra thing. My best guess is Classic Media and Damien Trommel are putting together a pitch for the series, which then they will officially approach Mattel and see if they can come to some sort of agreement. Until Classic Media approaches Mattel, Mattel has no official involvment in a She-Ra series, so it's not lies by ToyGuru (or whoever answers these QandA's, which I don't think is Scott*)

(*although I could be wrong!)

I believe you are 100% right.

[Tallstar]

The main thing that confuses me about Scott's response, is that it kind of reads like he's implying that it's impossible Classic Media would be developing a pitch for She-Ra. I mean, someone recently asked Mattel for information on upcoming 30th anniversary products, and their response was that Classic Media is handling this and it's not something they have access to. So if Mattel doesn't know their exact plans for consumer products, why is it so hard to believe they might temporarily be left in the dark about this pitch?

[Neutro]

...why is it so hard to believe they might temporarily be left in the dark about this pitch?

That. Or maybe he's being 'legally' smart by 'not saying anything', or simply 'matter of fact' since there is nothing that is 'set in stone' or 'official' yet. Either way, he doesn't have to 'share' anything... And maybe he simply he doesn't want spoil any potential 'surprise'...

I personally wouldn't worry. I have high hopes for both our famed heroes!

Believe me. I love She-Ra and Co. just as much, if not more than you.

Then again, who am I?!

[Tallstar]

That. Or maybe he's being 'legally' smart by 'not saying anything', or simply 'matter of fact' since there is nothing that is 'set in stone' or 'official' yet. Either way, he doesn't have to 'share' anything... And maybe he simply he doesn't want spoil any potential 'surprise'...

Oh I totally understand all of that, and I even listed some of those reasons as possibilities in the thread on the She-Ra forum... but thing is, Mattel already commented on this topic. Why not just leave it alone? If physical evidence surfaces that Classic Media is indeed working on a pitch, then all this insistance to the contrary from Mattel might backfire on them. Can anyone then blame the fans if they don't believe what Mattel says?

[man-at-work]

I'm a bit worried about the "childhood creation" trend for the 30th anniversary figures. I understand about Photog (cool figure, by the way), but then it became the trend: Scott's creation, Geoff's creation, and I'm afraid the Mattell slot will be given to some other artist or executive to materialize his/her childhood creation too. The problem is that characters from such a trend seem to result in bland designs. I hope the contest is won by an adult fan who didn't submitted his/her childhood creation, no more bland/lame characters please.

[scott metzger]

I'll take responsibility for the fact that I should have been more specific than making a general statement. But to clarify my point like I did in a later post than the one you chose to quote, Mattel can easily afford to do this, but they choose not to because they primarily cater to the children's market and not the adult collector market. The other companies you mentioned do not make revenue outside of the collector market, therefore they are going to do what ever it takes to keep their target market happy even at their own expense. As far as Hasbro is concerned, that's more of an exception than the rule. I'm sure at this point Mattel could realistically run the Classics line at a loss and still be financially well off, but like any major corporation they care more about increasing profits. Keeping a tiny market segment happy while making no money makes no business sense to them.

An understandable stance, except for one thing: Mattel deliberately courted this market with the establishment of Matty, which was likely not a small initial investment. They did so with, one assumes, the hopes of increasing this market as the children's market continues to shrink. That made good business sense, as the end goal was to increase profits. Again, it comes down to who has vision for the future and who looks at the bottom line right now and nothing else. Mattel is almost always in the latter category when push comes to shove; they broke their usual pattern in creating Matty, but quickly regressed to old habits, as usual.

[IamBrentN]

This is just another example which sets Mattell and, I guess, based on your comments, other toy companies from real companies. Small grocery stores replace spoiled produce or opened products you've purchased--heck, a restaurant will replace your food before you've even paid for it of there's something wrong. Apple just replaced every single first generation iPod Nano this past winter because a because a few had proved to be defective (maybe not related because they were hazardous, not fragile, but, they were still out of warranty by a number of years). Every single time something has gone wrong ( echoey ear buds, cracked screen) they've replaced it out of their pocket because they take a certain pride...