Mattel no longer owns the rights to MOTU?

[Dice]

This exactly. What I have been thinking all along while I have been following and collecting this line since the beginning. It has pretty much come fast and furious over the coarse of the past couple of years and I have to believe there is some truth to this. It's like some sort of mission to get all of the figures re-released in Origins before time runs out. Perhaps this is the final swan song. And if that is the case I truly hope they are able to do it without leaving any holes. Got to at minimum re-create all of the vintage characters we are still waiting for...and Snake Mountain...Fright Zone....and some other things.

Google "Adults buying toys" and check out all the articles.

Mattel, the same as multiple other companies, is making bank off us adults that grew up in the 80's loving these toys. EVERY toy line out there right now is capitalizing! Transformers, G.I. Joe, TMNT, and MOTU are all doing huge things. Heck look at what's been offered as far as lines like Thundercats, Silverhawks, Dungeons and Dragons...I can't even begin to think of all the lines they're currently making a LOT of merchandise for.

We're kids of the 80's, living in our 40's, with a lot more disposable income

[Sketchy Skeletor]

Google "Adults buying toys" and check out all the articles.

Mattel, the same as multiple other companies, is making bank off us adults that grew up in the 80's loving these toys. EVERY toy line out there right now is capitalizing! Transformers, G.I. Joe, TMNT, and MOTU are all doing huge things. Heck look at what's been offered as far as lines like Thundercats, Silverhawks, Dungeons and Dragons...I can't even begin to think of all the lines they're currently making a LOT of merchandise for.

We're kids of the 80's, living in our 40's, with a lot more disposable income

Yup, there is way more profit in these things than the likes of Spector would have you believe. MOTU is already Mattel's 3rd biggest brand again. And that's with utterly shocking distribution.

[anytimepally]

Yup, there is way more profit in these things than the likes of Spector would have you believe. MOTU is already Mattel's 3rd biggest brand again. And that's with utterly shocking distribution.

3rd? It's bigger than Fisher Price, or Hot Wheels? I know it's not bigger than Barbie.

[Sketchy Skeletor]

3rd? It's bigger than Fisher Price, or Hot Wheels? I know it's not bigger than Barbie.

According to an investor call, I assumed it went Barbie, Hot Wheels, MOTU.

[anytimepally]

According to an investor call, I assumed it went Barbie, Hot Wheels, MOTU.

That's awesome. That's a lot of MOTU!

In the most recent full-year data from 2021, Barbie sold nearly $1.7 billion, F-P sold $1.13B, and Hot Wheels sold $1.07B.

2022 numbers should be out at the end of next month, although those are usually the only 3 brands they break out individually in the public data.

[Secret]

According to an investor call, I assumed it went Barbie, Hot Wheels, MOTU.

I think Thomas the Tank Engine is ahead of MOTU, based on the reports I'd read.

I'm not sure how these stack overall because when Mattel talks top brands, they separate comparisons between Mattel owned IP like Thomas, MOTU, and Barbie and licensed IP like WWE, Lightyear, and Jurassic World.

I'd be surprised if MOTU outperforms all of those. It is a Top 15 action figure line but I'm sure they'd say "Top 10" if it was "Top 10" and I'm not sure how many lines outside the "Top 15" routinely get stocked. And the "Top 15" figure didn't specify if it combined Origins and Masterverse and CGI sales or was just looking at one.

If you like metrics, here's one: one of the managers at Mattel exclusively works on MOTU and works on all MOTU products from Mattel. She says on her LinkedIn that she has a P&L responsibility of $60 million.

I think that essentially means if MOTU toys were a separate company that they'd do $60 million a year in revenue.

That doesn't tell us anything about profit margin or profitability.

If memory serves, Hasbro and Mattel are each $5 billion a year companies, roughly, and all Transformers toys make up about $350 million a year.

So if I have this right (my business degree wasn't really aimed at making me an executive so I may be misparsing this): Transformers is about five times the size of MOTU, operationally, give or take.

That doesn't seem far off when you compare retail footprint.

If I had to guess, I'd say as a operational unit, MOTU is bigger than Power Rangers but smaller than G.I. Joe.

[Sketchy Skeletor]

I took it to mean the brands were being ranked with MOTU hitting top 3, maybe incorporating all the licenced stuff (there's a LOT now) alongside the mainstream figures from the multiple lines.

[Lich Leech]

I think Thomas the Tank Engine is ahead of MOTU, based on the reports I'd read.

I'm not sure how these stack overall because when Mattel talks top brands, they separate comparisons between Mattel owned IP like Thomas, MOTU, and Barbie and licensed IP like WWE, Lightyear, and Jurassic World.

I'd be surprised if MOTU outperforms all of those. It is a Top 15 action figure line but I'm sure they'd say "Top 10" if it was "Top 10" and I'm not sure how many lines outside the "Top 15" routinely get stocked. And the "Top 15" figure didn't specify if it combined Origins and Masterverse and CGI sales or was just looking at one.

If you like metrics, here's one: one of the managers at Mattel exclusively works on MOTU and works on all MOTU products from Mattel. She says on her LinkedIn that she has a P&L responsibility of $60 million.

I think that essentially means if MOTU toys were a separate company that they'd do $60 million a year in revenue.

That doesn't tell us anything about profit margin or profitability.

If memory serves, Hasbro and Mattel are each $5 billion a year companies, roughly, and all Transformers toys make up about $350 million a year.

So if I have this right (my business degree wasn't really aimed at making me an executive so I may be misparsing this): Transformers is about five times the size of MOTU, operationally, give or take.

That doesn't seem far off when you compare retail footprint.

If I had to guess, I'd say as a operational unit, MOTU is bigger than Power Rangers but smaller than G.I. Joe.

Good analysis. Maybe with a movie MOTU will start competing more on the Transformers level.

[Darkkosis]

I think that essentially means if MOTU toys were a separate company that they'd do $60 million a year in revenue.

That doesn't tell us anything about profit margin or profitability.

If memory serves, Hasbro and Mattel are each $5 billion a year companies, roughly, and all Transformers toys make up about $350 million a year.

So if I have this right (my business degree wasn't really aimed at making me an executive so I may be misparsing this): Transformers is about five times the size of MOTU, operationally, give or take.

That doesn't seem far off when you compare retail footprint.

If I had to guess, I'd say as a operational unit, MOTU is bigger than Power Rangers but smaller than G.I. Joe.

If your numbers here are close estimates, I wonder what's the percentage of the adult market on those brands, particularly MOTU? I have a feeling it's above 75%, unlike that YT guy who claims its' about 1-2%... LOL

[Secret]

If your numbers here are close estimates, I wonder what's the percentage of the adult market on those brands, particularly MOTU? I have a feeling it's above 75%, unlike that YT guy who claims its' about 1-2%... LOL

I think, overall, it's about 20-25%.

I don't know that anybody has broken it down by brand or line. I've seen it suggested they may not WANT to break it down by brand because Walmart might WANT them to sell to kids for a variety of reasons. And Walmart might question if they belong in the toy aisle or if the prices should be higher or all kinds of stuff if the numbers came out. Toy companies might want to pretend nothing has changed so they don't have people backseat driving or to have parents who stop buying toys because "they're not for kids". We'll buy toys even if kids seem like the primary market for what we collect but parents may not buy toys if they believe they aren't made especially for kids.

So even if we were 75% of the action figure market, toy companies might be afraid of losing the other 25% if that came out.

Most of Hasbro's products say "4+". The designers talk a lot about TFs being STEM-promoting toys for kids.

I really wouldn't be surprised if collector action figures skew older and MOTU skews oldest of those, outside of stuff that isn't at retail like Masterpiece Transformers or Hot Toys or Super7. (Honestly, I bet Super Shogun stuff skews oldest. $300 a pop and you'd need to be 50 to be nostalgic for the originals. Not that younger people can't also like it.) NECA certainly has an older skew too.

With Scott... I have little doubt that Mattel makes a LOT selling Thomas the Tank Engine, Barbie, and Hot Wheels to kids. But I also think Mattel probably skews younger than almost anybody else who makes toys. So I think some of what Scott "knows" is based around Mattel having a near-monopoly on under-5's. He hasn't worked for more than a few months anywhere else. He did work at Jada but they skew young too.

I think someone who worked at McFarlane, NECA, Super7, and even Hasbro might see things differently.

And percentage of the toy market is different than percentage of the action figure market. Toys include board games and trading card games. And baby toys are expensive, quickly replaced, and probably include consumer goods like cups and music players and some nightlights.

I don't think most of us care what percentage of the toy market we are any more than we care what percentage of the grocery market we are. We care how much we have influence over individual products.

[ehenyo]

I think Thomas the Tank Engine is ahead of MOTU, based on the reports I'd read.

I'm not sure how these stack overall because when Mattel talks top brands, they separate comparisons between Mattel owned IP like Thomas, MOTU, and Barbie and licensed IP like WWE, Lightyear, and Jurassic World.

I'd be surprised if MOTU outperforms all of those. It is a Top 15 action figure line but I'm sure they'd say "Top 10" if it was "Top 10" and I'm not sure how many lines outside the "Top 15" routinely get stocked. And the "Top 15" figure didn't specify if it combined Origins and Masterverse and CGI sales or was just looking at one.

If you like metrics, here's one: one of the managers at Mattel exclusively works on MOTU and works on all MOTU products from Mattel. She says on her LinkedIn that she has a P&L responsibility of $60 million.

I think that essentially means if MOTU toys were a separate company that they'd do $60 million a year in revenue.

That doesn't tell us anything about profit margin or profitability.

If memory serves, Hasbro and Mattel are each $5 billion a year companies, roughly, and all Transformers toys make up about $350 million a year.

So if I have this right (my business degree wasn't really aimed at making me an executive so I may be misparsing this): Transformers is about five times the size of MOTU, operationally, give or take.

That doesn't seem far off when you compare retail footprint.

If I had to guess, I'd say as a operational unit, MOTU is bigger than Power Rangers but smaller than G.I. Joe.

I wonder if that includes licensing.

[Darkkosis]

I think, overall, it's about 20-25%.

I don't know that anybody has broken it down by brand or line. I've seen it suggested they may not WANT to break it down by brand because Walmart might WANT them to sell to kids for a variety of reasons. And Walmart might question if they belong in the toy aisle or if the prices should be higher or all kinds of stuff if the numbers came out. Toy companies might want to pretend nothing has changed so they don't have people backseat driving or to have parents who stop buying toys because "they're not for kids". We'll buy toys even if kids seem like the primary market for what we collect but parents may not buy toys if they believe they aren't made especially for kids.

So even if we were 75% of the action figure market, toy companies might be afraid of losing the other 25% if that came out.

Most of Hasbro's products say "4+". The designers talk a lot about TFs being STEM-promoting toys for kids.

I really wouldn't be surprised if collector action figures skew older and MOTU skews oldest of those, outside of stuff that isn't at retail like Masterpiece Transformers or Hot Toys or Super7. (Honestly, I bet Super Shogun stuff skews oldest. $300 a pop and you'd need to be 50 to be nostalgic for the originals. Not that younger people can't also like it.) NECA certainly has an older skew too.

With Scott... I have little doubt that Mattel makes a LOT selling Thomas the Tank Engine, Barbie, and Hot Wheels to kids. But I also think Mattel probably skews younger than almost anybody else who makes toys. So I think some of what Scott "knows" is based around Mattel having a near-monopoly on under-5's. He hasn't worked for more than a few months anywhere else. He did work at Jada but they skew young too.

I think someone who worked at McFarlane, NECA, Super7, and even Hasbro might see things differently.

And percentage of the toy market is different than percentage of the action figure market. Toys include board games and trading card games. And baby toys are expensive, quickly replaced, and probably include consumer goods like cups and music players and some nightlights.

I don't think most of us care what percentage of the toy market we are any more than we care what percentage of the grocery market we are. We care how much we have influence over individual products.

Not with those brands I was referring to!

I know for a fact that even LEGO is more than that percentage (25%) these days, but it fluctuates a little when some of the licensed properties don't have a movie/show year!

The overall toy market is certainly different than the typical action figure market that is dominated by the adult collectors from what I keep hearing...

[Sketchy Skeletor]

I think, overall, it's about 20-25%.

I don't know that anybody has broken it down by brand or line. I've seen it suggested they may not WANT to break it down by brand because Walmart might WANT them to sell to kids for a variety of reasons. And Walmart might question if they belong in the toy aisle or if the prices should be higher or all kinds of stuff if the numbers came out. Toy companies might want to pretend nothing has changed so they don't have people backseat driving or to have parents who stop buying toys because "they're not for kids". We'll buy toys even if kids seem like the primary market for what we collect but parents may not buy toys if they believe they aren't made especially for kids.

So even if we were 75% of the action figure market, toy companies might be afraid of losing the other 25% if that came out.

Most of Hasbro's products say "4+". The designers talk a lot about TFs being STEM-promoting toys for kids.

I really wouldn't be surprised if collector action figures skew older and MOTU skews oldest of those, outside of stuff that isn't at retail like Masterpiece Transformers or Hot Toys or Super7. (Honestly, I bet Super Shogun stuff skews oldest. $300 a pop and you'd need to be 50 to be nostalgic for the originals. Not that younger people can't also like it.) NECA certainly has an older skew too.

With Scott... I have little doubt that Mattel makes a LOT selling Thomas the Tank Engine, Barbie, and Hot Wheels to kids. But I also think Mattel probably skews younger than almost anybody else who makes toys. So I think some of what Scott "knows" is based around Mattel having a near-monopoly on under-5's. He hasn't worked for more than a few months anywhere else. He did work at Jada but they skew young too.

I think someone who worked at McFarlane, NECA, Super7, and even Hasbro might see things differently.

And percentage of the toy market is different than percentage of the action figure market. Toys include board games and trading card games. And baby toys are expensive, quickly replaced, and probably include consumer goods like cups and music players and some nightlights.

I don't think most of us care what percentage of the toy market we are any more than we care what percentage of the grocery market we are. We care how much we have influence over individual products.

I've always suspected Mattel or whoever don't fancy explaining to investor calls that they've known for a long time adult collectors are a massive chunk of the profits. All sorts of things would need to be admitted then, including why so much research not only said the opposite but was paid for!

[Secret]

I wonder if that includes licensing.

Definitely not. Licensing is a huge source of money with no expense except to employ like five people for multiple brands to negotiate fees and make sure the brand rules are followed and manage archives of artwork and documents. I'm oversimplifying. Licensing is mostly profit with no expense aside from renewing trademarks and suing people who violate your copyrights/trademarks to keep people paying a license fee, which technically doesn't come out of the licensing division budget but is probably in a real sense an upkeep expense of licensing.

I mean, if Mattel said, "We're not going to sue anybody who violates our copyrights! Here! We're putting He-Man and Barbie in an open-source public domain license!" then nobody's going to pay a license fee. Defending that stuff is how you successfully negotiate for charging people to use your stuff. So it's a cost partly attributable to licensing.

But licensing is mostly profit if you own something people want to license! You get a 10-25% cut of something other people make without lifting a finger hardly. Which is really great when they make stuff you don't make or can't make!

[MCX-Eternia]

If you like metrics, here's one: one of the managers at Mattel exclusively works on MOTU and works on all MOTU products from Mattel. She says on her LinkedIn that she has a P&L responsibility of $60 million.

I think that essentially means if MOTU toys were a separate company that they'd do $60 million a year in revenue.

$60 million would add up to approximately 3.33 million Origins figures. Spread over 20 figures a year, that's 167,000 units. However, if 1/3 of revenue is Core (CGI-advertised line) and 1/3 Masterverse, then we're only talking about around 56,000 units per Origins figure. Although her P&L responsibility would be Mattel's wholesale revenue, not MSRP, so if Mattel sells to retailers for half MSRP, the production runs might be ~112,000.

[Lich Leech]

If you look at ToyGuru's LinkedIn profile, this is what he says about his work on Matty Collector:

Initiated direct to consumer E-tail site/brand Mattycollector.com. Grew business from $3MM to $14MM in 4 years delivering 50%+ margin and 30%+ operating profit annually, through online e-commerce for exclusive product. Lead all aspects of e-tail site from product development to POS including marketing and SEO content.

Matty Collector included more than just MOTU, although at the end I think it was just MOTU that was left. So if we're at $60 million now that's a huge increase from 10 years ago.

[Adam_Prince of Eternia]

[jibernish]

I know, right? How wrong can someone be (saying the line is done with), look at all that product. I just preordered most of it and it was about $700.

[zodak74]

Please let yesterday just bury ToyGuru's channel for all time. I'm so tired of people perpetuating his utter b.s.

[Orko's Magic Hat]

Please let yesterday just bury ToyGuru's channel for all time. I'm so tired of people perpetuating his utter b.s.

Its unfortunate that so many people listen to him. The number of posters on Youtube you see saying "I'm no longer collecting MOTU 'cos the line is dead" or "The line is cancelled, I'm selling my collection". His fake news does have an impact on the MOTU community or the casual collector - who is crucial to the brand in order to grow.

A lot of channels (for clicks) will peddle this information and spread it further, which doesn't help matters.

[Secret]

If you look at ToyGuru's LinkedIn profile, this is what he says about his work on Matty Collector:



Matty Collector included more than just MOTU, although at the end I think it was just MOTU that was left. So if we're at $60 million now that's a huge increase from 10 years ago.

Just saw this from where the site took a nap:

So here's why that isn't 1:1.

In Scotty's defense, retail profits are much lower. His operating profits were around 30%. Retail operating profits average around 15%.

That would still mean MOTU is twice as successful right now, at least.

Beyond that, his numbers are for MattyCollector as a whole, which included DC and Ghostbusters. The number we're comparing against is JUST MOTU.

And there are hidden benefits to retail. You get awareness. That can drive merch sales, convert casual collectors (particularly if you keep offering reissues or basic characters in some form) which can lengthen a line's lifespan, and hopefully create nostalgia customers, which means maybe you can do a MOTUC style line in 20 years that partially targets kids raised on Origins and Masterverse.

Most of that doesn't work with a sub line.

[zodak74]

Its unfortunate that so many people listen to him. The number of posters on Youtube you see saying "I'm no longer collecting MOTU 'cos the line is dead" or "The line is cancelled, I'm selling my collection". His fake news does have an impact on the MOTU community or the casual collector - who is crucial to the brand in order to grow.

A lot of channels (for clicks) will peddle this information and spread it further, which doesn't help matters.

Exactly. There's a handful of prolific youtube channels that snuggle up to him and any time I see "person X" guest on another toytuber's video I have to turn it off because it's like "oh it's THAT guy". I don't know how some of these slimeballs sleep at night I guess the sound of click click clicks must lull 'em to sleep?

[Smitty.81]

just saw this from where the site took a nap:

So here's why that isn't 1:1.

In scotty's defense...

nope! nope!nope!nope!nope!

[Darkkosis]

Exactly. There's a handful of prolific youtube channels that snuggle up to him and any time I see "person X" guest on another toytuber's video I have to turn it off because it's like "oh it's THAT guy". I don't know how some of these slimeballs sleep at night I guess the sound of click click clicks must lull 'em to sleep?

Guess what also, whenever I post at his channel and remind him politely that his info isn’t correct and it’s outdated, my posts gets deleted instead of getting a reply back!

He’s definitely trolling his viewers… Even here, when I replied a while back to another poster that TG is a troll on YT when it comes to the current MOTU lines, my reply got deleted by a mod here and I got an infraction for it. Go figure…

[zodak74]

Guess what also, whenever I post at his channel and remind him politely that his info isn’t correct and it’s outdated, my posts gets deleted instead of getting a reply back!

He’s definitely trolling his viewers… Even here, when I replied a while back to another poster that TG is a troll on YT when it comes to the current MOTU lines, my reply got deleted by a mod here and I got an infraction for it. Go figure…

Ugh. At least there's some satisfaction in history proving these people wrong. I mean, not that it ever stops them- but it does make them look stupid. So there's that!