Target has a LOT of $200 to $300 items, mostly in the LEGO aisle. But there are a few others such as Barbie Dream House, those little two-seater vehicles with electric motors for kids that are usually shaped like a jeep or a monster truck, and bikes. Most of those are mass appeal besides LEGOs; those $200 and up sets are pretty niche. Not sure why they'd stock those but not a $200 big Marvel Legends figure.
The main issue is they seem to only give action figures a month or two of shelf space, whereas LEGO and Barbie gets permanent space. Items at the $200 and up level would need more than a month or two on the shelves, and I don't know if Hasbro can afford to pay for that much shelf space given that's what they currently do. I always wonder if LEGO is also paying for shelf space for their expensive sets that don't move quickly yet seem to sit there forever.
What Targets were actually stocking that shield? I don't think I've ever seen any Legends role-playing item in any Target or Walmart.
I took that pic myself at my local Target this past Monday.
Â
You must be in a high-traffic area. When I look at all of the stores in Virginia all I see is their indicator that they've never had something which is "Not sold at this store." Right now you can't really trust Target's inventory management because it's wrong about as much as it's right, but I've definitely never seen them locally and have been to every Target in my area within the last two months.
Â
This discussion again! If they could sell the thing just as well at retail, they would be doing that. Even in what you have identified as the high point of Hasbro's handling of the line, can you point to anything comparable to the Haslab Giant-Man that made it to retail shelves? Your insistence that they could but they just won't doesn't make any sense, and you're hand-waving away completely valid counter-points instead of engaging with them seriously.
Crowd funding is for an everyman who wants to start their own action figure line, not multimillion dollar corporations.Â
According to who? Your arbitrary perceptions?
I find it fascinating that many who take issue with the crowdfunding campaigns base a lot of their complaint on "the multi-billionaire company doesn't have to make this decision! Wwaaaahhhh 🤬 ! 🤬 ! 🤬 ! 🤬 !"Â
Yeah? So what? Who the fuck cares? You obviously do. I don't. And many, many other collectors don't. I remember the world before HasLabs, where products like the Sail Barge, the Sentinel, Galactus, etc didn't exist. They were just "dream projects."Â
I don't particularly care at all as to what avenue a company chooses to put out a product, I care that when I look at my collection the Sail Barge and the Sentinel and Galactus and the Proton Pack and the Razor Crest and Mattel's Stay Puft Marshmallow Man and soon-to-be Ghost and Giant-Man are on the shelf with that collection. It would irritate me far more if the license holders of these properties held items like this locked behind their license and DIDN'T offer them in some way because they didn't want to go through the effort of finding a reasonable way for it to work.
And when I say reasonable, I mean reasonable for both the consumer and the company. You are right that these are giant companies out to make a profit. That doesn't bother me. I can accept the fact that companies are going to try and maximize their ROI on any given product. I can accept that because I know that there will be misses that will cost that company tons and tons of money and resources and, when that happens, I'm not the one taking that risk or is financially harmed when something goes wrong. I'm not taking that risk, the company is.
Also, what is the difference between purchasing something through a crowdfund vs buying it at retail? Is it your completely unconfirmed notion that the item would cost less if released at retail at higher volumes? Your irritation that you can't wait to purchase the item at a discounted price? I am interested to know and I'm sure you'll tell us as you can't seem to stop passive aggressively criticizing Hasbro's handling of the Marvel Legends line in every thread you post in.
Â
$150 for the What If shield actually illustrates how much better a value HasLab Giant Man is for just $50 more. That shield shouldn't cost more than $75, and even that feels high.
Crowd funding is for an everyman who wants to start their own action figure line, not multimillion dollar corporations.Â
According to who? Your arbitrary perceptions?
Also, what is the difference between purchasing something through a crowdfund vs buying it at retail? Is it your completely unconfirmed notion that the item would cost less if released at retail at higher volumes? Your irritation that you can't wait to purchase the item at a discounted price? I am interested to know and I'm sure you'll tell us as you can't seem to stop passive aggressively criticizing Hasbro's handling of the Marvel Legends line in every thread you post in.
Stepster, you quoted a snippet from my post in which the entire first paragraph was me praising Hasbro ML at a time I FEEL they were doing a quality job. Now I FEEL they could be doing better. I gave my reasons for both. I never told you or anyone what or how to buy. When this Giant Man funded, I was rooting for it to go through for the people who wanted it. I can do that and still FEEL that Haslabs can be handled differently. "Passive aggressive" posts? That's every other poster here (mod included) responding every time someone calls into question something Hasbro says. Â
NORM posted above that he feels that shield is $75 overpriced. Who here is going to call for NORM to show his business school degree because he made that statement? I mean, he's calling into question something Hasbro did. He believes the price to be too high. Should we call out his "arbitrary perceptions" and "completely unconfirmed notions" on this shield? The man said what he felt. Â
You'll be able to find quotes form me criticizing Hasbro's practices in a few different places but I think you'll be hard pressed to find me talking down to fellow fwooshers for thinking differently.
Â
Â
If they could sell the thing just as well at retail, they would be doing that.
I doubt they are inclined to pursue that avenue once the HasLab model produced a way to keep retail's portion of the product's sales, remove the threat of sale prices, clearance and unsold stock entirely and have their customers foot the bill for a year, gaining interest on our millions, while successfully convincing the customer it's the only way.
I got my business school degree from Hasbro University. Bachelor's in business, minor in being a sheep.
Â
And when I say reasonable, I mean reasonable for both the consumer and the company. You are right that these are giant companies out to make a profit. That doesn't bother me. I can accept the fact that companies are going to try and maximize their ROI on any given product. I can accept that because I know that there will be misses that will cost that company tons and tons of money and resources and, when that happens, I'm not the one taking that risk or is financially harmed when something goes wrong. I'm not taking that risk, the company is.
Also, what is the difference between purchasing something through a crowdfund vs buying it at retail? Is it your completely unconfirmed notion that the item would cost less if released at retail at higher volumes? Your irritation that you can't wait to purchase the item at a discounted price? I am interested to know and I'm sure you'll tell us as you can't seem to stop passive aggressively criticizing Hasbro's handling of the Marvel Legends line in every thread you post in.
Â
You're allowed to be happy with the HasLab model, as anyone is allowed to be unhappy with it, but you kind of tiptoed around what sours some people on it. When a company manufactures and releases a product to retail, they are taking a risk that no one will buy it. It's obviously a calculated risk with a company as big as Hasbro that has marketing and research departments which should be able to give them a reasonable forecast on how the market will react to a given product, but no forecast is perfect. Flops happen. When a company like Hasbro pivots to a crowdfund, they are shifting the risk to the consumer. Now, I would agree there isn't a ton of risk with this particular product, but 10,000+ consumers are forking over money to Hasbro right now for something they hope to see in a year. Anything can happen between now and then and it isn't a guarantee the consumer will get their product and will lose out on their money. Is it likely? No, but it's entirely reasonable for a consumer to not like that arrangement and even reject it outright. And the main argument there is that Hasbro is a company that can shoulder that risk and doesn't need to pass it on to the consumer, but it chooses to anyway, and for the most part, it seems to be working.
Â
Â
And when I say reasonable, I mean reasonable for both the consumer and the company. You are right that these are giant companies out to make a profit. That doesn't bother me. I can accept the fact that companies are going to try and maximize their ROI on any given product. I can accept that because I know that there will be misses that will cost that company tons and tons of money and resources and, when that happens, I'm not the one taking that risk or is financially harmed when something goes wrong. I'm not taking that risk, the company is.
Also, what is the difference between purchasing something through a crowdfund vs buying it at retail? Is it your completely unconfirmed notion that the item would cost less if released at retail at higher volumes? Your irritation that you can't wait to purchase the item at a discounted price? I am interested to know and I'm sure you'll tell us as you can't seem to stop passive aggressively criticizing Hasbro's handling of the Marvel Legends line in every thread you post in.
Â
You're allowed to be happy with the HasLab model, as anyone is allowed to be unhappy with it, but you kind of tiptoed around what sours some people on it. When a company manufactures and releases a product to retail, they are taking a risk that no one will buy it. It's obviously a calculated risk with a company as big as Hasbro that has marketing and research departments which should be able to give them a reasonable forecast on how the market will react to a given product, but no forecast is perfect. Flops happen. When a company like Hasbro pivots to a crowdfund, they are shifting the risk to the consumer. Now, I would agree there isn't a ton of risk with this particular product, but 10,000+ consumers are forking over money to Hasbro right now for something they hope to see in a year. Anything can happen between now and then and it isn't a guarantee the consumer will get their product and will lose out on their money. Is it likely? No, but it's entirely reasonable for a consumer to not like that arrangement and even reject it outright. And the main argument there is that Hasbro is a company that can shoulder that risk and doesn't need to pass it on to the consumer, but it chooses to anyway, and for the most part, it seems to be working.
Â
Â
I acknowledge there is an incredibly minor amount of risk being transferred to the consumer. To contend that crowdfunding is OK for independents, yet outrageous for big companies, is sour grapes, though. To develop and produce a product like the Sentinel, Galactus, or Giant-Man is not a small investment, nor is it a sure-fire successful product at retail.
Â
@sepster you're treading into more subjective grounds now though. I think someone can be opposed to crowdfunding from the likes of Hasbro and not have it be a case of "sour grapes." What constitutes a large investment for a company with a market cap of over 6 billions dollars? I would argue none of these projects do. Hasbro has made its choice how it wants to sell certain products. It doesn't have to do it this way, but it's the way they chose and people either accept it or don't. I don't see many bad faith arguments for or against the product so it seems unreasonable for anyone to get too worked up over it. As is often said, they're just toys.
My comment about interest got me thinking - the interest on $2,000,000+ for a year should definitely be enough to cover the development costs of the HasLab, so Hasbro found a way to even have that risk paid for.
Someone with actual knowledge of how interest works feel free to correct me. 🙂
Because they put the tool cutting and the factory production and the cargo shipping and the warehousing on pre-order and don't pay until they actually get their toys. Those bastards!
I take Hasbro at their word that these are items they think would be tough to get retailer buy-in.Â
I think the main distinction I see between Hasbro and small businesses using the Kickstarter model is that the small businesses have limited to no other funding options (and if they put up the money themselves and the project was a failure it could bankrupt a small business) while Hasbro has the financial resources to self-fund (and could absorb a failure or two to some extent), but they are making a choice not to commit the resources way. That does sort of undermine the "this is the only way we can gauge interest and fund this" rationale that really is true for small businesses needing to go the Kickstarter route.
But I personally have no issue with Hasbro using this model, as I think we are getting items that a fiscally conservative, risk-adverse company would not greenlight otherwise, even if I think they could and sell via Pulse directly.
In what world does Hasbro not have to pay a single manufacturing bill until the product is delivered?
Latest Post: Marvel Legends MAXIMUM SERIES Our newest member: Perobeagob Recent Posts Unread Posts
