Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 212

Thread: Hostile Makeover: The Man Who Hijacked Masters of the Universe

  1. #126
    Life is good Dice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    6,187
    Quote Originally Posted by jibernish View Post
    So Michael is right. Hasbro is seeing a net gain off of holding that $10M that the customers could be benefitting from if they paid upon delivery.

    My issue is that Michael implies Hasbro is earning interest on $10m, while Scott in implying Hasbro isn't earning anything at all.

    Implying might be a strong word, but both are trying to inform the toy buying public by only giving the info that suits their side of the argument.
    While everything you're saying makes accounting sense, it doesn't take in to account some of the main details of manufacturing production.

    So the first thing is Hasbro can't just wait till they've amassed 10mil in the bank before they start making purchases towards filling this order. Some things like wages and operating costs have already been factored in but there will be a lot of unforeseen costs. The tooling is one you've mentioned. Bringing in basic supplies needed to assemble the product is another.

    My only point being that they couldn't just sit on a pile of cash and do nothing while it earned interest. Money was being spent well before the production started.

    Tell Youtube guy not to buy gift cards. They get your money for weeks, months, sometimes years and earn interest on it!
    "A fool always finds a greater fool to admire him."

  2. #127
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by herbie747 View Post
    I work in the toy industry.

    If Scott wants to be taken seriously and attract any of the major toy brands as clients (which is his main goal), this is not how you do it. It's so damn unprofessional... The only way to handle this is to 100% ignore it. And if you need to address it, handle it like a professional and contact a defamation lawyer.

    Who would want to work with someone who engages with internet call-out videos? This is such a bad look for a former brand manager and Mattel employee who wants to be taken seriously. I really assumed he'd know better than to engage with this.
    Scott has already fallen from Mattel > Jakks > Jada > Lootcrate, that he is basically just a YouTuber now. His "consulting business" appears to be just he and his wife.
    Positive Transactions:

    As buyer: boggs32, PaTrIcKfOgArTy, Dorko2, Shecky, Shenlon (2),
    Son of Keldor

    As seller: mikethedrummer, slgcmg, kngfu
    DJjoker182, bobtheodd, mahuti, FAKER II, General Hawk 7

    EBay: StLouisStallions

  3. #128
    Heroic Warrior herbie747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Eternia Burning View Post
    Scott has already fallen from Mattel > Jakks > Jada > Lootcrate, that he is basically just a YouTuber now. His "consulting business" appears to be just he and his wife.
    Oh okay lol. I've not followed his career.

    It's still not a good look to be acknowledging these "beef" videos, let alone reacting or replying to them.

  4. #129
    Evil Warrior jibernish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    While everything you're saying makes accounting sense, it doesn't take in to account some of the main details of manufacturing production.

    So the first thing is Hasbro can't just wait till they've amassed 10mil in the bank before they start making purchases towards filling this order. Some things like wages and operating costs have already been factored in but there will be a lot of unforeseen costs. The tooling is one you've mentioned. Bringing in basic supplies needed to assemble the product is another.

    My only point being that they couldn't just sit on a pile of cash and do nothing while it earned interest. Money was being spent well before the production started.

    Tell Youtube guy not to buy gift cards. They get your money for weeks, months, sometimes years and earn interest on it!
    Yes, but if Hasbro makes a profit, there is a portion of the money the customer sends them that they never have to spend. Hasbro can sit on that portion, the eventual profit, and earn interest. Or invest it in making Black Series figures that they make between 20-50% profit on.

    So if Hasbro takes in $10M and knows, worst case scenario they will spend $8m on the figures, they have $2M which they can use to their advantage. Michael's point is that if the customers didn't have to pay upfront, the customers could use the $10M to their own advantage. They could open up Buzz-Off's Honey Lemonade stand, making and selling honey sweetened lemonade all year long. Then when it's time to buy Galactus, they sell the lemonade stand for the $10M (or maybe more) and use that $10M to buy Galactus. Meanwhile all the profits they made for that year, from selling lemonade, they get to keep.

    So either Hasbro gets to profit off of the $2M for a year, or the customers get to profit off of the $10M for a year.

    This was Michael's point. Hasbro is a big company. Most big companies invest their own money when making a product. But they are passing the investment burden on to the customer, depriving the customer of their lemonade profits and making Black Series profits themselves with their customers' money.

  5. #130
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    531
    I think the part that gets glossed over though is that without the up front model, these things just WOULDN'T be made.

    Yeah, the companies COULD use their own budgeting to make them, but they likely wouldn't. Theyre not obligated to make any of this stuff, they'll only make stuff they're financially confident in. So sure, do away with the business model, but you'd be throwing out the baby with the bath water.

  6. #131
    Evil Warrior jibernish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoffman View Post
    I think the part that gets glossed over though is that without the up front model, these things just WOULDN'T be made.

    Yeah, the companies COULD use their own budgeting to make them, but they likely wouldn't. Theyre not obligated to make any of this stuff, they'll only make stuff they're financially confident in. So sure, do away with the business model, but you'd be throwing out the baby with the bath water.
    I think you are right, and I do believe Scott when he said classics Castle Grayskull wouldn't have happened in the traditional model.

    I was just relaying Michael's point and saying why I am interested in the debate because I feel both sides have only presented part of the story.

  7. #132
    Life is good Dice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    6,187
    Quote Originally Posted by jibernish View Post
    Yes, but if Hasbro makes a profit, there is a portion of the money the customer sends them that they never have to spend. Hasbro can sit on that portion, the eventual profit, and earn interest. Or invest it in making Black Series figures that they make between 20-50% profit on.

    So if Hasbro takes in $10M and knows, worst case scenario they will spend $8m on the figures, they have $2M which they can use to their advantage. Michael's point is that if the customers didn't have to pay upfront, the customers could use the $10M to their own advantage. They could open up Buzz-Off's Honey Lemonade stand, making and selling honey sweetened lemonade all year long. Then when it's time to buy Galactus, they sell the lemonade stand for the $10M (or maybe more) and use that $10M to buy Galactus. Meanwhile all the profits they made for that year, from selling lemonade, they get to keep.

    So either Hasbro gets to profit off of the $2M for a year, or the customers get to profit off of the $10M for a year.

    This was Michael's point. Hasbro is a big company. Most big companies invest their own money when making a product. But they are passing the investment burden on to the customer, depriving the customer of their lemonade profits and making Black Series profits themselves with their customers' money.
    But you're explaining as though Hasbro doesn't produce MANY other products that are not like this business model of "pre-pay". They incur expenses all year and make profit all year.


    Basically either the customer pays for a product to be made and losses out on their interest earnings (sorry lemonade fans) or the product doesn't get made. Which would fans prefer?

    Well, a lot of us know our answer to that. We want the product. So why would Hasbro, a billion dollar company, owe Youtube guy an explanation?
    "A fool always finds a greater fool to admire him."

  8. #133
    Pillar of the Community hadley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Kennesaw, GA
    Posts
    9,216
    I have no time for this sad wet boy garbage.
    Please check out my custom figures. The first few stink but I get better.

    https://www.he-man.org/forums/boards/showthread.php?277602-Masters-of-the-Hadleyverse


    I also wrote a fanfic. See the fanfic board. At least four people like it.

  9. #134
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    But you're explaining as though Hasbro doesn't produce MANY other products that are not like this business model of "pre-pay". They incur expenses all year and make profit all year.


    Basically either the customer pays for a product to be made and losses out on their interest earnings (sorry lemonade fans) or the product doesn't get made. Which would fans prefer?

    Well, a lot of us know our answer to that. We want the product. So why would Hasbro, a billion dollar company, owe Youtube guy an explanation?
    It's also a strawman argument. Nobody (and by nobody I mean a statistically insignificant few) would actually be investing the 200-500 dollars that these things typically run anywhere that would actually earn interest over a year. Sure, in a completely theoretically circumstance, it's a valid point. But it's completely irrelevant in reality.

  10. #135
    Evil Warrior jibernish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    But you're explaining as though Hasbro doesn't produce MANY other products that are not like this business model of "pre-pay". They incur expenses all year and make profit all year.


    Basically either the customer pays for a product to be made and losses out on their interest earnings (sorry lemonade fans) or the product doesn't get made. Which would fans prefer?

    Well, a lot of us know our answer to that. We want the product. So why would Hasbro, a billion dollar company, owe Youtube guy an explanation?
    I think my explanation of how a typical business works and Michael and Scott's points are getting mixed up.

    If Mattel announced an Eternia Playset funded through the kickstarter model, I'd be in for sure. And I'd be happy as a clam. I'm with the fans - I want the product. Heck I'm probably going in on the MOTU CMON board game that is currently in Kickstarter mode. It's $300+ already with other items still to be announced.

    And I don't know how Hasbro makes their decisions, and other factors come into play. But typically when a company decides to move forward with a new product or not, they don't say, "But we produce many other products like this." They decide on whether or not the projected future cash inflows from this product will outweigh the future cash outflows from this product. They also look at risk. If the surplus is great enough and the risk low enough, then they move forward. And that is why Scott is probably right on this point - the Kickstarter model decreases the risks significantly, thus making the decision to go forward that much easier for them. It also means they can do a shoddier job with the product, as is the case with the Sentinel that just came out. But I don't have that and I'm not trying to start an argument on that front either.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoffman View Post
    It's also a strawman argument. Nobody (and by nobody I mean a statistically insignificant few) would actually be investing the 200-500 dollars that these things typically run anywhere that would actually earn interest over a year. Sure, in a completely theoretically circumstance, it's a valid point. But it's completely irrelevant in reality.
    I would say completely irrelevant is an exaggeration. You are right. Not many Haslab customers would invest the $400 in the stock market. I'm not arguing that they would.

    But I wonder what percentage of Haslab customers currently have an outstanding credit card balance. Anyone buying Galactus who has a credit card balance for the year in question could save themselves money by paying the card down instead if Hasbro didn't charge the money until next year. If you had an interest rate of 25% which isn't uncommon, that'd be $100 over the course of a year.

    Again, I'm not arguing against Hasbro's model. We each make our own decisions on how to spend our money. I don't expect to be babied by any corporation. And buying a Galactus on credit is still probably worth it because the aftermarket prices will likely be higher than the interest you'd pay anyways. But Hasbro is most certainly benefitting from the kickstarter model. I'm just interested in laying all the cards on the table, especially since this is a discussion that has no real importance anyways. It's mostly just an intellectual exercise to everyone except Michael and Scott.
    Last edited by jibernish; September 23, 2021 at 02:52pm.

  11. #136
    Life is good Dice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    6,187
    Quote Originally Posted by jibernish View Post
    But I wonder what percentage of Haslab customers currently have an outstanding credit card balance. Anyone buying Galactus who has a credit card balance for the year in question could save themselves money by paying the card down instead if Hasbro didn't charge the money until next year. If you had an interest rate of 25% which isn't uncommon, that'd be $100 over the course of a year.

    Again, I'm not arguing against Hasbro's model. We each make our own decisions on how to spend our money. I don't expect to be babied by any corporation. And buying a Galactus on credit is still probably worth it because the aftermarket prices will likely be higher than the interest you'd pay anyways. But Hasbro is most certainly benefitting from the kickstarter model. I'm just interested in laying all the cards on the table, especially since this is a discussion that has no real importance anyways. It's mostly just an intellectual exercise to everyone except Michael and Scott.
    I see your points but still have to wonder, does anyone expect a fair and even trade between a business and a consumer? They're in the business to make a profit. Hasbro must benefit or else it wouldn't make good business sense to go forward on a product like that.

    I guess I get lost in the idea that a free consumer is somehow being cheated when they choose to pay for a product that they will not immediately receive. We all pay for things in advance all the time. Gift cards, vacations, items from overseas sellers, it's not uncommon at all.
    "A fool always finds a greater fool to admire him."

  12. #137
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    I see your points but still have to wonder, does anyone expect a fair and even trade between a business and a consumer? They're in the business to make a profit. Hasbro must benefit or else it wouldn't make good business sense to go forward on a product like that.

    I guess I get lost in the idea that a free consumer is somehow being cheated when they choose to pay for a product that they will not immediately receive. We all pay for things in advance all the time. Gift cards, vacations, items from overseas sellers, it's not uncommon at all.
    Yeah it ties into an entitled trend of "everything should be made for me and offered to me in terms of my choosing".

  13. #138
    Heroic Warrior banthafett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,007
    What Scott really should be called out for is the audio/video quality of his videos. Blurry pictures, awful posters you would see hanging in an awful office job. Soup can with a string connected to his computer for a mic.

  14. #139
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2021
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by banthafett View Post
    What Scott really should be called out for is the audio/video quality of his videos. Blurry pictures, awful posters you would see hanging in an awful office job. Soup can with a string connected to his computer for a mic.
    Don't forget the terrible pacing as he tries to improvise over his quickly moving slideshow (can't waste time writing scripts when you're posting multiple videos a day). Scott, I would suggest writing a script, timing it out, recording the VO, then cutting your "video" to match that.

    Oh and the "jokes" are pretty, um, yeah.

  15. #140
    Heroic Warrior banthafett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,007
    Quote Originally Posted by They-Them View Post
    Don't forget the terrible pacing as he tries to improvise over his quickly moving slideshow (can't waste time writing scripts when you're posting multiple videos a day). Scott, I would suggest writing a script, timing it out, recording the VO, then cutting your "video" to match that.

    Oh and the "jokes" are pretty, um, yeah.
    Yes to this . I didn't want to get personal, just the tech side.

  16. #141
    Heroic Warrior herbie747's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by They-Them View Post
    Don't forget the terrible pacing as he tries to improvise over his quickly moving slideshow (can't waste time writing scripts when you're posting multiple videos a day). Scott, I would suggest writing a script, timing it out, recording the VO, then cutting your "video" to match that.

    Oh and the "jokes" are pretty, um, yeah.
    He did a video last year testing out 3 mics and asked people which one sounds best.... and it still sounds like he's just doing it on his phone.

  17. #142
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    688
    Quote Originally Posted by King Kahn View Post
    I never heard of the retroblasting dude until this week and judging by this video and other I am kinda glad I haven't.

    I am not a defender of Scott but man this video comes off as super bitter and angry. And then he randomly attacks Pixel Dan for not taking Mattel to task in a video? Well yeah, you don't really want to turn an interiew into a GOTCHA piece and still expect to interview people in the toy industry. It doesn't seem like the guy gets interview with people from the toy industry (I haven't see all his video so maybe I am wrong) so maybe he is just jealous which is how it comes off.

    He has a couple points that I could maybe agree with but that he then stretches out to 37 excruciating minutes then fills with so much falsehoods (Keldor isn't a scott creation, it is from the original minicomic and plans for that) and angry venom.

    Judging by skimming through some of his other videos he seems very misinformed about the industry and is just an angry dude with a camera and a youtube account.

    - - - Updated - - -



    that what half the youtubers seem to be since negativity gets clicks. Does this dude even like toys? He doesn't seem to get much joy according to his videos but knows exactly what is best for every facet of the industry.

    - - - Updated - - -



    hahaha ok, that made me snort laugh.

    - - - Updated - - -



    the bit against Val and Dan seemed out of nowhere mean and uncalled for and smacking a bit of jealousy.
    I think you hit the nail on the head RB can't talk to Mattel like Dan can and now you see why

  18. #143
    Heroic Warrior King Kahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    nashville, tn
    Posts
    6,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    But you're explaining as though Hasbro doesn't produce MANY other products that are not like this business model of "pre-pay". They incur expenses all year and make profit all year.


    Basically either the customer pays for a product to be made and losses out on their interest earnings (sorry lemonade fans) or the product doesn't get made. Which would fans prefer?

    Well, a lot of us know our answer to that. We want the product. So why would Hasbro, a billion dollar company, owe Youtube guy an explanation?
    And also the idea, wait until galactus is ready to ship, is an issue because then he would instantly sell out and people would be made they weren't just able to pre-order him and be guaranteed a figure.

    Either we wait, pay up front to guarantee it will be made and therefor guarantee we get a figure, or we risk things selling out because the company can only risk producing so many units and have to pay secondary prices.

    That is pretty much the world we as collectors live in now.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by hadley View Post
    I have no time for this sad wet boy garbage.
    HAHA wet boy garbage...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by jibernish View Post
    I would say completely irrelevant is an exaggeration. You are right. Not many Haslab customers would invest the $400 in the stock market. I'm not arguing that they would.

    But I wonder what percentage of Haslab customers currently have an outstanding credit card balance. Anyone buying Galactus who has a credit card balance for the year in question could save themselves money by paying the card down instead if Hasbro didn't charge the money until next year. If you had an interest rate of 25% which isn't uncommon, that'd be $100 over the course of a year.

    Again, I'm not arguing against Hasbro's model. We each make our own decisions on how to spend our money. I don't expect to be babied by any corporation. And buying a Galactus on credit is still probably worth it because the aftermarket prices will likely be higher than the interest you'd pay anyways. But Hasbro is most certainly benefitting from the kickstarter model. I'm just interested in laying all the cards on the table, especially since this is a discussion that has no real importance anyways. It's mostly just an intellectual exercise to everyone except Michael and Scott.
    If they were going to invest 400.00 then they probably already are and then hypothetically are using those profits to pay for this.

    As far as credit cards and balances, that is on the consumer. No one should be going into debt on stuff. I am lucky in that I am fairly good with money, have a decent job, and so only buy what I can pay off prior to any interest being incurred etc.

    With all that said I cant see any way this 'debate' that will happen won't devolve into slap fights or else snore fests, no in between lol

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    I see your points but still have to wonder, does anyone expect a fair and even trade between a business and a consumer? They're in the business to make a profit. Hasbro must benefit or else it wouldn't make good business sense to go forward on a product like that.

    I guess I get lost in the idea that a free consumer is somehow being cheated when they choose to pay for a product that they will not immediately receive. We all pay for things in advance all the time. Gift cards, vacations, items from overseas sellers, it's not uncommon at all.
    Corporation producing a product don't care about you or where you are getting the funds to pay for their products. People, lots of times collectors, forget that when they try and attribute what corporations should be doing ethically but they aren't altruistic organizations.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by herbie747 View Post
    I work in the toy industry.

    If Scott wants to be taken seriously and attract any of the major toy brands as clients (which is his main goal), this is not how you do it. It's so damn unprofessional... The only way to handle this is to 100% ignore it. And if you need to address it, handle it like a professional and contact a defamation lawyer.

    Who would want to work with someone who engages with internet call-out videos? This is such a bad look for a former brand manager and Mattel employee who wants to be taken seriously. I really assumed he'd know better than to engage with this.
    Yeah, if he wanted to continue to work in the toy industry, creating videos telling potential company secrets, denigrating past companies' business choices etc isn't the best idea.

    If I saw someone that wanted to get hired and they were making videos about their old company I would say "well what is to stop him from making a video about us when he quits/gets fired and tells our inside scoops in order to get a few more clicks and likes"
    cogito ergo doleo

  19. #144
    Loco Motu Vato ehenyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    10,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoffman View Post
    Agreed. What is your perspective on him commenting on, analyzing, criticizing, etc. the current Mattel lines?

    As a former employee in a management role, that itself seems unprofessional and a red flag to potential future employers.
    Wait... What? No way is that a red flag. Whether it was Scott or anyone else, instead of lashing out, I think he demonstrated upmost professionalism and calm in the face of being criticized. I don't know if this qualifies him to be a brand manager for any toy company, but it demonstrates maturity.
    "I wouldn't be surprised if this movie has Adam as a skinny nerd from Earth battling another skinny nerd-hacker from Earth that used an alias of Keldor. They then enter Tron-style to a cyber world called Eternia, where they control muscle-bound avatars to battle (called He-Man and Skeletor). And these same avatars come to life and continue to battle in present-day Earth." - VZX

  20. #145
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by ehenyo View Post
    Wait... What? No way is that a red flag. Whether it was Scott or anyone else, instead of lashing out, I think he demonstrated upmost professionalism and calm in the face of being criticized. I don't know if this qualifies him to be a brand manager for any toy company, but it demonstrates maturity.
    I'm not referring to the beef with random YouTube channels. I'm talking about stuff like a video where he specifically discusses an ongoing toyline for a brand he used to work on and why it might be performing poorly. It seems very unprofessional to comment on the performance of your successors in a job.

    In a lot of industries that would be considered extremely unprofessional. But that's why I posed it as a question to a person who works in this particular industry.

  21. #146
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    104
    I just watched the lion head man video someone linked too.... yeah, not sure what the point of that was...

    The dupli-cat /copy cat issue is why some franchises stop people posting fan art, fiction etc (Games workshop for example.) And why they never take things unsolicited.
    The problem is there is no proof that mattel didn't come up with it on their own. Its not such a zany out there concept to give faker a fake battlecat that it wouldn't be thought up of by multiple people.
    Now it is possible they knocked it off, but I don't think mattel can really go and ask Joe for permission to do it if they did. For starters this very thread claims it's not Joes idea to begin with, so we get into the problem of whose is it if multiple people claim it. Second it would set a precedent that mattel legal likely dont want to set, as it would strengthen cases against them made by people who are ripping them off ("see, they do look at other peoples ideas!")
    The only real approach is don't make anything in the MOTU sandpit and make it public if you don't want it to potentially be stolen. That or the fans have to not complain if Mattel go hard ass on banning MOTU art etc on the internet.

    Joe is likely commissioning more dupli-cats than ever so the situation is likely a net positive for him.


    As far as Scott making Mighty Spector. Who cares! I wish Scott would stop with the obviously nonsense story that he was dragged kicking and screaming and forced to make the figure. It's clearly nonsense. But he was brand manager and got to make a figure - who the hell wouldn't jump on that opportunity? Everyone here would have done it. Fans of Power (which I love) complain about him doing it all the time and then in the next episode talk about their own character ideas.

    It was one character. Most people would probably have tried to invent more.

  22. #147
    Heroic Warrior Stygian360's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice View Post
    While everything you're saying makes accounting sense, it doesn't take in to account some of the main details of manufacturing production.

    So the first thing is Hasbro can't just wait till they've amassed 10mil in the bank before they start making purchases towards filling this order. Some things like wages and operating costs have already been factored in but there will be a lot of unforeseen costs. The tooling is one you've mentioned. Bringing in basic supplies needed to assemble the product is another.

    My only point being that they couldn't just sit on a pile of cash and do nothing while it earned interest. Money was being spent well before the production started.
    Very good point. I re-watched Michael's video yesterday and mentally camped out on the idea he put forth that Hasbro is essentially 'banking' the money they've amassed for X Haslab and simply letting it gain interest, which to your point Dice isn't how the financials work. Production budget would be allocated from those funds amassed because ultimately the funds have to come from somewhere. Departments have budgets they are allocated typically yearly and if say the Transformers team is working on a Haslab likely they would work out of their yearly budget for the up front R&D costs and then start digging into the 10mil when it comes time to cut tools, gather up production materials, etc. They aren't going to sock drawer 10mil letting it accrue interest over here, and then spend other Hasbro money to do everything associated with a Haslab project over there. That simply doesn't make sense. I don't work for Hasbro and have never worked on a Haslab project behind the scenes, but I do work in the business/financial world. So, Michael means well in stirring up fan ire (seems ironic to state that, but stirring up vitriol is his stock & trade these days), but he's ultimately wrong in how he's thinking about the financials.
    Harken the coming of Dragstor!!

  23. #148
    Heroic Warrior
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    4,011
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoffman View Post
    I'm not referring to the beef with random YouTube channels. I'm talking about stuff like a video where he specifically discusses an ongoing toyline for a brand he used to work on and why it might be performing poorly. It seems very unprofessional to comment on the performance of your successors in a job.

    In a lot of industries that would be considered extremely unprofessional. But that's why I posed it as a question to a person who works in this particular industry.
    I don't see a problem with it. He talks about Origins and probably has some serious insight into it based on similiarity to Classics, but he also talks about Hasbro, Star Wars, and a few other lines too using the same metrics.

    I also don't think he's entirely 'right' with his theories... but I don't have any inside knowledge. His basic discussion is you can tell the health of a toy line by how much unique tooling it gets in the budget. Origins has a lot of part reuse and repaints... so that's not a good sign.

    Typically I think he'd probably be right... but I think MOTU as a line should get a pass on that mentality. Like 90% of the fan favorite A-list characters are all parts reuse and repaints. Ironically the unique characters like Blade, Gwildor, Dragstor and the others came when the line was declining and people don't love those characters as much. Things like Scareglow, Faker, and even Anti-eternia He-man may be incredibly cheap to make... but they're also awesome characters that people are super excited about. When you make a line based on Nostalgia for a line that started super cheap and reusing parts... we can't really count it as a strike against the modern line when they're churning out super cheap and reused parts.

    Nothing about pointing out that lines that do well get more budget and this one doesn't seem to be getting that... feels 'unprofessional'. It feels like he's pulling back the curtain and letting us civilians know what it's like to work in the toy industry.... and that's always been his mission statement. It's what he does. the fact that he worked on a similar line a decade ago shouldn't grant this immunity to observations.

    It also hurts that everyone considers him THE MOTU person to ask every question of. If people are hounding him for his opinion on the new cartoons and the toy lines and what he thinks of it... why shouldn't he answer?

  24. #149
    Heroic Warrior MGurlea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida
    Posts
    96
    I am really surprised that I don't see anyone on here talking about the debate last night that happened between Michael French of Retroblasting and Scott Neitlich on YouTube. Unless I missed the thread. I looked around for one and did not see it.

  25. #150
    Heroic Warrior Cringe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Northern Ireland & Scotland
    Posts
    2,211
    Quote Originally Posted by MGurlea View Post
    I am really surprised that I don't see anyone on here talking about the debate last night that happened between Michael French of Retroblasting and Scott Neitlich on YouTube. Unless I missed the thread. I looked around for one and did not see it.

    I watched it and then spent the rest of the night questioning my life choices and considering selling my entire collection... Hahah.
    Will Bell - Part-Time Poster

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •