Tweet
5 Most Profitable Company License in the World | The Daily News Global
5. Warner Bros. (U.S. $ 6 billion)
4. Mattel (U.S. $ 7 billion)
2. Iconix Brand Group (U.S. $ 12 billion)
In 2010, Iconix acquired Peanuts brand.
1. Disney Consumer Products (U.S. $ 28.6 billion)
Conversationally open to interpretation, this is probably relevant to many of the discussions that go on around the forum.
It would be really interesting for example to see how much of that 6 billion this year was down to Green Lantern licensing. All the bedsheets, video games, food products, colouring books, toys etc that GL appears on this year is pretty much gravy because other than the movie (which hasn't yet broken even at the box office) Warners doesn't actually need to manufacture anything other than a library of images for the companies that license their characters to slap on countless products. Is this why GL 2 will still go ahead? a 200 million dollar commercial for licensed product?
Mattel. Why shouldn't they be focusing their efforts primarily on Hot Wheels and Barbie (and MoTU)... which they own outright without having to pay Warners their cut for the DC characters for example. I'm not happy that they seem to be making less of a push on DC product over at Matty, but I guess I understand why MoTU seems to get most of the love and attention in terms of company effort.
Snoopy... I think we generally have a fairly North American centric point of view about the popularity of things. The Peanuts may not be the star brand that it once was on this side of the pond, but you wander over to Asia and BLAMMO. The size of the Snoopy store in Tokyo and the depth of their product there is mind boggling.
Ditto Disney all around the world at double or triple the profits it's closest licensing challengers.
5. Warner Bros. (U.S. $ 6 billion)
4. Mattel (U.S. $ 7 billion)
2. Iconix Brand Group (U.S. $ 12 billion)
In 2010, Iconix acquired Peanuts brand.
1. Disney Consumer Products (U.S. $ 28.6 billion)
Conversationally open to interpretation, this is probably relevant to many of the discussions that go on around the forum.
It would be really interesting for example to see how much of that 6 billion this year was down to Green Lantern licensing. All the bedsheets, video games, food products, colouring books, toys etc that GL appears on this year is pretty much gravy because other than the movie (which hasn't yet broken even at the box office) Warners doesn't actually need to manufacture anything other than a library of images for the companies that license their characters to slap on countless products. Is this why GL 2 will still go ahead? a 200 million dollar commercial for licensed product?
Mattel. Why shouldn't they be focusing their efforts primarily on Hot Wheels and Barbie (and MoTU)... which they own outright without having to pay Warners their cut for the DC characters for example. I'm not happy that they seem to be making less of a push on DC product over at Matty, but I guess I understand why MoTU seems to get most of the love and attention in terms of company effort.
Snoopy... I think we generally have a fairly North American centric point of view about the popularity of things. The Peanuts may not be the star brand that it once was on this side of the pond, but you wander over to Asia and BLAMMO. The size of the Snoopy store in Tokyo and the depth of their product there is mind boggling.
Ditto Disney all around the world at double or triple the profits it's closest licensing challengers.
Comment