TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Money, violence, sex, computer graphics, scatalogical humor, racism, robots designed to be rednecks but given European accents, and maybe another sequel to the saga... what's not to love? TF m1, Revenge of the Fallen, Dark of the Moon and now Age of Extinction.
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Tigermegatron »

Sparky Prime wrote: And once again, in my original argument I was saying the aesthetics of the toys had nothing to do with poor sales as you had suggested, referring the the sales of all 3 movie lines, in-particular ROTF.
Usually when the product is ugly,garbage,weak,inferior,riddled with short cuts/faults. This is when products gets low sales.

Your "assuming" based off nothing that the DOTM toy line aesthetics had ZERO reasons to do with low sales. How exactly do you know this as fact,Do you have a Crystal ball or black 8 ball that feeds you random answers when you shake it?

Whenever large corporations like Hasbro have low sales for a toy line or quarter sales. They have a bunch of large staff meetings,which they fully discuss what the reasons might have been for bad sales. nobody really knows,most throw out random speculation based off studies or consumer buying methods. WITH ALL THIS,IT'S A SAFE BET THE VARIOUS STAFF MEMBERS/PR GAVE THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR BAD/LOW SALES FOR THE DOTM TOY LINE:
1- The downward spiral economy in 2011 was at a all time high. 10% of americans are un-employed,companies are not giving raises. Those with jobs are saving/hording their money in fears of getting fired next. toys are luxury items they are not necessity items.
2- Perhaps parents/kids didn't like the aesthetics/designs of the toys.
3- maybe parents/kids bought a few toys but they complained about quality control issues thus didn't buy anymore DOTM toys.
4- DOTM toys looked too similar to 2007 movie & ROTF toys.
5- parents/kids don't like buying the same group of characters toys over & over again.
6- Newer price hikes made buyers buy less.
7- on-line fans gave various reasons why they didn't like the DOTM toys. here is a short list of things various fans repeated over & over.
8- lets look at the case assortment waves,maybe we had too many repaints,too many of one character multiplied in the case assortment wave.
9-... The list goes one.
User avatar
Onslaught Six
Supreme-Class
Posts: 7023
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:49 am
Location: In front of my computer.
Contact:

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Onslaught Six »

Didn't DOTM do better than ROTF? Or was it the other way around? Someone repost that chart I posted.
BWprowl wrote:The internet having this many different words to describe nerdy folks is akin to the whole eskimos/ice situation, I would presume.
People spend so much time worrying about whether a figure is "mint" or not that they never stop to consider other flavours.
Image
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Sparky Prime »

Onslaught Six wrote:Didn't DOTM do better than ROTF? Or was it the other way around? Someone repost that chart I posted.
You mean this one? Yeah, it shows ROTF did the best in revenues out of the 3 films, with DOTM and the 2007 film closely matched.
Tigermegatron wrote:Usually when the product is ugly,garbage,weak,inferior,riddled with short cuts/faults. This is when products gets low sales.
If a toy had that many faults, sure. But we were discussing just the aesthetics here, which is entirely up to personal opinion.
Your "assuming" based off nothing that the DOTM toy line aesthetics had ZERO reasons to do with low sales. How exactly do you know this as fact,Do you have a Crystal ball or black 8 ball that feeds you random answers when you shake it?
If you'd actually read any of my earlier posts you'd know I have said already, I base that on reports Hasbro has released about Transformers sales over the last several years, such as that article about Hasbro's quarterly report I posted a link to (so you can read for yourself), or the chart O6 was referring to above. DOTM was the 3rd film of the movie franchise. If the toys didn't sell that well because of the aesthetics as you had suggested earlier, then that should have also been reflected in the sales of the first two films toy lines as well, seeing as it's the same aesthetics across all 3 films. Yet, the first 2 sold very well despite DOTM toy line's shortcomings. Pretty sure Hasbro's reports are more accurate than a magic 8 ball. And what are your "assumptions" based on, besides pure speculation?
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Tigermegatron »

Sparky Prime wrote:
Onslaught Six wrote:Didn't DOTM do better than ROTF? Or was it the other way around? Someone repost that chart I posted.
You mean this one? Yeah, it shows ROTF did the best in revenues out of the 3 films, with DOTM and the 2007 film closely matched.
Tigermegatron wrote:Usually when the product is ugly,garbage,weak,inferior,riddled with short cuts/faults. This is when products gets low sales.
If a toy had that many faults, sure. But we were discussing just the aesthetics here, which is entirely up to personal opinion.
Your "assuming" based off nothing that the DOTM toy line aesthetics had ZERO reasons to do with low sales. How exactly do you know this as fact,Do you have a Crystal ball or black 8 ball that feeds you random answers when you shake it?
If you'd actually read any of my earlier posts you'd know I have said already, I base that on reports Hasbro has released about Transformers sales over the last several years, such as that article about Hasbro's quarterly report I posted a link to (so you can read for yourself), or the chart O6 was referring to above. DOTM was the 3rd film of the movie franchise. If the toys didn't sell that well because of the aesthetics as you had suggested earlier, then that should have also been reflected in the sales of the first two films toy lines as well, seeing as it's the same aesthetics across all 3 films. Yet, the first 2 sold very well despite DOTM toy line's shortcomings. Pretty sure Hasbro's reports are more accurate than a magic 8 ball. And what are your "assumptions" based on, besides pure speculation?
Sparky,I'm done replying to you,I don't need anymore non-sense or flame baiting tactics from you.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Sparky Prime »

Tigermegatron wrote:I'm done replying to you,I don't need anymore non-sense or flame baiting tactics from you.
How is anything I've posted flame baiting or nonsense? You're the one who has been saying I'm wrong for things that I never said and that my arguments aren't based on anything or came from a crystal ball, despite links I've posted to support it, and so on. I've kept the conversation civil for my part. So don't accuse me of flame baiting when I haven't done anything even remotely close to it.
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6205
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Shockwave »

Tigermegatron wrote:Do you have a Crystal ball
Yes. It's 2" wide and made of Amethyst. Not that it would help in this situation because anyone knows even the slightest information about witchcraft knows that divination isn't what it's used for anyway.

Shockwave
-Would really like to see that saying fall into obscurity...
User avatar
Shockwave
Supreme-Class
Posts: 6205
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Shockwave »

Tigermegatron wrote:Sparky,I'm done replying to you,I don't need anymore non-sense or flame baiting tactics from you.
Nobody's flame baiting anyone. Sparky has pretty much just proven you wrong on all counts and you're just fed up because once again, you can't back up the wild batshit crazy shit you say. See, Sparky is actually proving his point by citing evidence and links that back up what he's saying. That's how a legitimate debate works. You say something and then you back it up with evidence. Except you don't do that. You say something completely off the wall, expect us to just take your word for it and when we don't and get annoyed at you for not backing up your claims, you accuse us of flame baiting or some other such nonsense. Usually with some epic wall of text that's TYPED IN ALL CAPS FOR NO EXPLICABLE REASON!!!
User avatar
JediTricks
Site Admin
Posts: 3849
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:17 pm
Location: LA, CA, USA

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by JediTricks »

Sparky Prime wrote:You're not even addressing my point here. The first thing you said was simply DOTM didn't sell well and that your own point had nothing to do with a lack of quality. I wasn't talking about what you said at all, I was talking about Tigermegatron said about the toys not selling well because he didn't like how they looked. But the first two movie lines sold extremely well. And even DOTM started out strong according to Hasbro's own reports. All you're doing is disagreeing that quarterly report doesn't reflect consumers. Fine, but that's NOT the point I'm making here.
I'm a stickler for accuracy, I don't care about sides. ;)
In any case though, you're right that there's certainly no reason to claim that the aesthetic is the cause for the DOTM line's failure, the problem wasn't the movie aesthetic as that was previously very successful.
Thank you, that's all I was saying. No need to complicate it beyond that.
See?
Tigermegatron wrote:Jedi Is correct & Sparky Prime is Wrong.

I & other on-line Fans have been saying the same exact things that Jedi is trying to explain to Sparky.

USA retailer stores over ordered in the Beginning months/year in advance,most stores had stock piles in the back waiting for the street release date to stock shelves/pegs. USA Stores probably did their over-ordering for the first wave or two based off the high sales of the 2007 TF Movie & ROTF toys sales.

The DOTM toys didn't sell that well,did badly in sales,Some items like the Voyagers got reduced in price after a few weeks of release from $20 to $15. The DOTM Toy line did so badly in USA stores,That Hasbro had no choice but to cancel the toy line in 6 months. USA stores refused to order newer assortment waves due to so many un-sold shelves/pegs warmers.

Hasbro Had originally planned for the DOTM toy line to last more than 6 months in stores. Since retailers were not ordering newer assortment waves at a decent pace. Hasbro cancelled the DOTM toy line in late december/early January. A whole bunch of newer & repainted DOTM toys never arrived in USA stores Because Hasbro had to cancel DOTM due to stores not wanting to order any newer product.

The proof that DOTM was meant to be more than a 6 month toy line. Is that Hasbro released newer & repainted DOTM toys in those Asian countries,maybe canade. Takara in Japan kept the DOTM toy line going beyond 6 months in Japanese stores/sites by releasing newer products,repaints & retools.
Sparky isn't wrong in his main point that the product wasn't failing because of its aesthetic, he simply got snarled in why the line did fail and that's not the topic here. And now you're doing the same thing, the REASON that line was canceled is crucial to this topic and none of that other stuff matters because you're arguing it's due to the movie aesthetic, but that seems wildly unlikely given the success with that aesthetic on the previous 2 lines.
Tigermegatron wrote:aesthetic/designs,Hasbro & Internet TF fans speculated was one of the major reasons why The DOTM toys sold worse in sales compared to the 2007 Movie & ROTF toys. Parents/kids bought bought less of the DOTM toys due to the aesthetic/designs being too similar to the 2007 Movie & DOTM toys they already owned.
Fan speculation is meaningless without evidence to back it, and only slightly less meaningless when it has that. But the movie line's aesthetic being a problem runs counter to the previous 2 movie lines selling well while using the same aesthetic, so that speculation is automatically discounted.

The idea that kids don't want to buy the same looking figures is addressed in each line, that's why they change decos and update looks and swap out characters, they talk about this at every convention.
Image
See, that one's a camcorder, that one's a camera, that one's a phone, and they're doing "Speak no evil, See no evil, Hear no evil", get it?
User avatar
Tigermegatron
Supreme-Class
Posts: 2106
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 7:28 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Tigermegatron »

JediTricks wrote:
Sparky Prime wrote:You're not even addressing my point here. The first thing you said was simply DOTM didn't sell well and that your own point had nothing to do with a lack of quality. I wasn't talking about what you said at all, I was talking about Tigermegatron said about the toys not selling well because he didn't like how they looked. But the first two movie lines sold extremely well. And even DOTM started out strong according to Hasbro's own reports. All you're doing is disagreeing that quarterly report doesn't reflect consumers. Fine, but that's NOT the point I'm making here.
I'm a stickler for accuracy, I don't care about sides. ;)
In any case though, you're right that there's certainly no reason to claim that the aesthetic is the cause for the DOTM line's failure, the problem wasn't the movie aesthetic as that was previously very successful.
Thank you, that's all I was saying. No need to complicate it beyond that.
See?
Tigermegatron wrote:Jedi Is correct & Sparky Prime is Wrong.

I & other on-line Fans have been saying the same exact things that Jedi is trying to explain to Sparky.

USA retailer stores over ordered in the Beginning months/year in advance,most stores had stock piles in the back waiting for the street release date to stock shelves/pegs. USA Stores probably did their over-ordering for the first wave or two based off the high sales of the 2007 TF Movie & ROTF toys sales.

The DOTM toys didn't sell that well,did badly in sales,Some items like the Voyagers got reduced in price after a few weeks of release from $20 to $15. The DOTM Toy line did so badly in USA stores,That Hasbro had no choice but to cancel the toy line in 6 months. USA stores refused to order newer assortment waves due to so many un-sold shelves/pegs warmers.

Hasbro Had originally planned for the DOTM toy line to last more than 6 months in stores. Since retailers were not ordering newer assortment waves at a decent pace. Hasbro cancelled the DOTM toy line in late december/early January. A whole bunch of newer & repainted DOTM toys never arrived in USA stores Because Hasbro had to cancel DOTM due to stores not wanting to order any newer product.

The proof that DOTM was meant to be more than a 6 month toy line. Is that Hasbro released newer & repainted DOTM toys in those Asian countries,maybe canade. Takara in Japan kept the DOTM toy line going beyond 6 months in Japanese stores/sites by releasing newer products,repaints & retools.
Sparky isn't wrong in his main point that the product wasn't failing because of its aesthetic, he simply got snarled in why the line did fail and that's not the topic here. And now you're doing the same thing, the REASON that line was canceled is crucial to this topic and none of that other stuff matters because you're arguing it's due to the movie aesthetic, but that seems wildly unlikely given the success with that aesthetic on the previous 2 lines.
Tigermegatron wrote:aesthetic/designs,Hasbro & Internet TF fans speculated was one of the major reasons why The DOTM toys sold worse in sales compared to the 2007 Movie & ROTF toys. Parents/kids bought bought less of the DOTM toys due to the aesthetic/designs being too similar to the 2007 Movie & DOTM toys they already owned.
Fan speculation is meaningless without evidence to back it, and only slightly less meaningless when it has that. But the movie line's aesthetic being a problem runs counter to the previous 2 movie lines selling well while using the same aesthetic, so that speculation is automatically discounted.

The idea that kids don't want to buy the same looking figures is addressed in each line, that's why they change decos and update looks and swap out characters, they talk about this at every convention.
Sparky,dis-agreed with you,I agreed with you & you dis-agree with me & agree with sparky. :?

Jedi,The sheer fact is when a TF toy line performs badly in stores. The Hasbro crew/PR in those board meetings blame everything they can think of. they throw out random ideas like bad aesthetic sculpt,repeative designs,bad enginering,same core cast,price,smaller toys,colors,etc... because nobody really knows what's the thought process for a "NO-BUY" is in the consumers mind. sales data facts can only go so far, as it gives no reasons why,other than the items were not bought by the consumer at a volume hoped for.
User avatar
Sparky Prime
Supreme-Class
Posts: 5225
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 3:12 am

Re: TF4 robots Re-designs,can't be any worse than DOTM toys.

Post by Sparky Prime »

Tigermegatron wrote:Sparky,dis-agreed with you,I agreed with you & you dis-agree with me & agree with sparky. :?
You're talking about two different points there. I wouldn't really say JediTricks and I disagreed, more like he clarified something that I was talking about, but he still agreed with me on my main point that aesthetics had nothing to do with why the line did badly as you'd suggested.
Jedi,The sheer fact is when a TF toy line performs badly in stores. The Hasbro crew/PR in those board meetings blame everything they can think of. they throw out random ideas like bad aesthetic sculpt,repeative designs,bad enginering,same core cast,price,smaller toys,colors,etc... because nobody really knows what's the thought process for a "NO-BUY" is in the consumers mind. sales data facts can only go so far, as it gives no reasons why,other than the items were not bought by the consumer at a volume hoped for.
They might throw out some ideas, but you keep overlooking that this was the 3rd toy line out of the movie franchises. The first two of which were much more successful lines. They wouldn't be looking at things like aesthetics at that point, seeing as that is not something that had changed between films.
Post Reply