Toy licenses

[LadyZod]

(Not sure if this is the proper folder for this discussion, so mods please move if necessary)

The other day, when discussing Mego toylines, it occurred to me:

Mego took some interesting risks in many of the lines it chose.

Nowadays, we see a toy company pick up a license for a TV show, say "Lost" for example, and we might nitpick the choice for many reasons. The show is not kid friendly, how will it sustain a line? Or the characters have no flashy costumes, how will it attract children? etc, etc, etc....

Yet, Mego gets the rights to Starsky and Hutch. A cop drama. Not exactly "kid friendly" being that it was on at a late timeslot in the middle of the week (after bedtime on a school night). The characters wore everyday clothes, nothing that could be considered "flashy" in the 70's... and yet, pretty successful and many of those kids from back then still have fond memories of this show.

And yes, kids did have plenty of TV shows vying for their attention... The Incredible Hulk, Six Million Dollar Man, Wonderwoman... all super heroes, or heroic enough to sustain a child's imagination.

So, why wouldn't an adult license marketed to kids work today? Are those marketing toward kids using a dumbed downed formula? They say kids today are more street savy than those of my childhood, yet it seems adults purposely try to market kiddyfare to them. Is it any surprise that these kids choose to play video games then to put up with cartoony mess that's offered to them?

[BlackKnight]

More Toys today , are Marketed at Adult Collectors, or as well, there for you see more, and more Adult themed Properties taking form of Action Figures, and statues and Such. Toy companies reconize this , and make more of such things.

[samurainoir]

When I first heard about the Lost license, I was a bit baffled at the idea of licensing toys for a TV show that would be finished by the time toys rolled out and even even more baffled at the choice of a "Nostalgia" format like the Megos.

However, in the past few weeks of hearing the rabid Lost fanbase discussing the episodes as they roll out, and in particular witnessing two "kids" (who were probably late high school or college age) at the big comicon yesterday obsessing over the Macfarlane Lost figures they had just purchased, I'm convinced.

Add in the female fanbase of Lost and the fact that Mego-likes are considered "dolls" in some circles, and there is a great deal of crossover potential here.

[ctc]

>why wouldn't an adult license marketed to kids work today?

I think some of them would. A lot of times if it's on tv, kids will watch. (I watched Starsky and Hutch when I was a kid, and I bet a lot of other folks here did too; even though it really wasn't a kid's show.) I think the execs tend to rely on formula too much, and that's why you get toys sold specificly as collectibles OR toys, even though the only real differential is price. (Kids would play with a $200 figure, if you let them.) And the "educated" fans tend to play along.

That's why I was glad to see so many different figures coming from the different companies doing Mego-esque figures. Shows some inventiveness and willingness to experiment.

>even more baffled at the choice of a "Nostalgia" format like the Megos

If you haven't seen it before it's not realy nostalgia; it's new.

Don C.

[SUPERUNDERDOGGIE]

I agree with you. I think things are a lot different today though with Nickelodean, Cartoon Network, etc.

When I was a kid I think the "kid show" options were limited....mostly Saturday cartoons. There were other shows that kids liked such as Star Trek, Battlestar Gallactica, etc. but I think they were geared towards adults, no?

Come to think of it I mostly watched the same shows as my dad....Kojack, The Streets of San Francisco, Adam 12, Lone Ranger, etc. It seemed like the toy companys made kids toys around some adult programs.

Nowadays my wife and I watch Spongebob with our kids. Seems like its reversed. I used to watch adult shows with my parents.....now as an adult I watch kids shows with my kids.

[palitoy]

I showed my kid some six million dollar man over the weekend, he got pretty antsy.

I realized that he never watchs one hour drama, ever. When I was his age, I had watched every Star Trek, Space:1999, Planet of the apes, Fantastic Journey and a whole mess of Adam 12.

Starsky and Hutch was really popular on my playground, kids loved it. It's hard to believe in today's world but I grew up with 12 channels, one was French, the other Chinese.

[Mikey]

I think back in the old days kids and adults watched a lot of the same stuff because TV was more interchangeable.

Today, each age group has more programming directed specifically to them.

[jimsmegos]

"Cops and Robbers plus a cool car" I think that was the main appeal. Today however "good guys vs. bad guys" isn't so clear cut and entertainment reflects that. My son loves video games just as much as any other kid and I can't blame him. While I myself am not a big fan, you got to admit that the ability to play out your adventure in brilliant 3d colors with realistic graphics is an awesome playground. With that said though, while my son isn't so much into the little plastic dudes he still loves playing with toy guns.

So in the end my opinion is that as far as TV show licenses go there is simply too many options to ever be able to really target a mass slice of the audience with one show/ movie. Plus now that almost every movie and show has merchandise tie in's it's just too flooded.

[samurainoir]

At a certain point in the nineties, the "Tweens" came into existence and evolved into the most powerful demographic given their influence on household spending. You can see it in the quick shift in the specialty channels. YTV in Canada in particular took a certain turn when it shifted to commercial.

The potential impact of this on consumer society actually frightened me a little bit when I was consulting with companies mining and exploiting that data.

[samurainoir]

And the "educated" fans tend to play along.

I'm not always certain I'm understanding your use of the term "educated" Don, but I am intrigued.

In which circumstances do you feel education of any sort is necessarily a "bad" thing? I've always worked under the assumption that knowledge can only empower a consumer at all levels of spending.

I mean the fact that you acknowledge that the only difference in a "toy" and "collectible" is price point and perceived availability, which is a direct result of your educated knowledge is it not? Or are you saying that the "educated" fans are part and parcel with this system of potential exploitation as dealers, re-sellers and manufacturers?

[AAAAA]

even tho the it was on prime time,
older seasons episodes would be air in the mourning of network , right before games shows.Barney Miller and kojac were.
But you have to remenber syndication which airs shows all hours of the day.9:00 to 12:00 & 5:00 to 8:00 in the eveing, the shows would air on Locale stations.

[drmego]

There were only 3 networks back then, and most homes had one TV, so we all
watched what Dad was watching. I remember ABC making Starsky and Hutch
and Baretta look more like comedies than cop thrillers. After Mork and Mindy
were a hit, lead actors had to do broad comedy.

Today the cable channels and even the networks are so narrow-cast that it's
hard to get the kids and parents to watch the same shows. Especially when
each bedroom has a TV and probably a DVR cable box.

[bobws]

That is what the modern producers of Doctor who were dealing with. No Families were viewing programs together. each had there own shows to watch. then they relaunched Doctor Who and all of a sudden Family Viewing came back! Parents were sharing the show they loved with kids who loved the new stuff. now they are having a upswing in family programing.
as far as licensing it was easier back then with a much narrower entertainment field, 3 networks and movies, now with 200 channels of nothing on and everyone is put into their own niche it must be harder to put out toys that have a wide enough appeal.

[ctc]

>I'm not always certain I'm understanding your use of the term "educated" Don, but I am intrigued.

I quotate the term 'cos I'm not referring to any real education level. The "educated" fan base are those who percieve themselves as in the know with how their particular thing works. I use the term derisively 'cos it usually means someone who's obsessed with what they percieve as the right way for their particular thing to be done; even though when it comes to entertainment, there realy ISN'T a right way to do things.

I started using the term in the early 90's to refer to the comic fans I saw populating the shop where I worked. Folks who’d debate which one of Batman’s emblems was best, or would buy comics ‘cos Wizard said Artist X was HOT! Not that there’s anything wrong with that sort of thing; but a lot of the fan base would take it to absurd levels. And the result is intellectual inbreeding. (Like the “....and Batman!” guy from the beginning of “Understanding Comics.”) It seemed like a lot of them weren’t enjoying things any more either.

>are you saying that the "educated" fans are part and parcel with this system of potential exploitation

They’re part of it. During the 90's there were a lot of publications, websites and tv shows meant to get the fans in the know. Problem is, what you’d get was a condensed version of the big picture. Fans would think they knew what was going on when in actuality all they knew was what stuff was selling, and what big name was on what project. Which becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy: Artist X is getting popular, so they do an article of how popular they are, which increases their popularity prompting another article, etc.

>I've always worked under the assumption that knowledge can only empower a consumer

REAL knowledge can. Pandering and shills don’t.

Don C.