So No Tornato
-
Posts
298 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by So No Tornato
-
-
Crap costume, crap figure.
Gee...thanks, HASBRO...again...
-
hey So No Tornato
what is your problem with the artists from the 90's. they drew some of the best stuff of that era, not all but some. the x-men looked awesome when drawn by lee in my opinion. you go ahead and bash anyone and everyone for liking the stuff from the 90's and it is just not right. i myself started reading comics in the late 80's. however over the years i have accumulated a collection that spans from 1963 all the way thru 1996. i was buying collections at auctions and from private sellers. i myself have just about every spider-man, fantastic four, x-men, avengers, and the list goes on and on for these comics. i have no problem with any artist from any era for marvel comics. i think all of them are great for the eras they were part of.
you also happen to mention mcfarlane and how he does not know how to draw worth a damn. this guy has more talent in his little finger than you have in your entire body. if he couldn't draw worth a damn then he would have never had the job he has. he is a damn good artist. do you remember his work for the spider-man comics and how great it was. or how about spawn, which was a hot selling comic when he was drawing it.
what i am trying to tell you is that certain people like certain artists and others don't. you don't have to go around on the message boards and basically insult people for who they like. i myself like them all and yes i do have my favorites but that does not mean i don't like the rest. you also stated that jim lee did not know about anatomy and didn't like how he drew the characters especially the women. do you have a problem with how the women look. this isn't real life they are just artist renderrings of how the artists want them to look. when lee drew them they looked like women.
Where do I start??
In my opinion, the era of the 1990's was a blight on the comics industry, dominated by under-talented artists, under-talented writers, and piss-poor management.
The dominant characteristic of the 1990's comic industry was "style over substance". However, the comic industry is not solely to blame for this phenomena, as it also accurately reflects the zeitgeist of the era. The 1990's were a silly, superfluous, and hedonistic decade becasue that's what "the people" wanted. It's why we elected a silly, superfluous, and hedonistic President in 1992. No one wanted a challenge...they wanted a party...and they got one. And parties are generally frivolous and vacuous affairs...
...but I digress...
I don't like the comics of the 90's because, with rare exceptions ("Kingdom Come"; "Astro-City"), most of them sucked. (Not coincidentally, the two examples of quality I reference were both derivatives of comic's Silver and Golden Ages). Sorry if that bothers you, but too bad. There it is.
In the 1990's comics ceased being fun, and became pretentious, overbearing, and trite. Comics professionals began to think of themselves as real Raconteurs, not just guys who made funny books for a living. The artists in particular were responsible for this problem, led by the cry-babies who left MARVEL and formed the execrable company known as "IMAGE" (a perfect name for a company with no substance in the 1990's...). Most of these individuals were young know-it-alls, short on real talent but big on ego - like McFarlane, Liefeld, etc. The influence of IMAGE, and their obsession with "style over substance" nearly killed the industry.
I'm getting bored with explaining myself, so I'll leave it at this: If you like 90's comics and Jim Lee, Rob Liefeld, Todd McFarlane, etc - swell. Good for you. I think they suck. I think they can't draw. And I think the fact that so many comics fans adore them means that many comics fans are short on good taste (not surprising when one sees the individulas that hang out at most comic stores...)
If you don't like the fact that someone disagrees with you, you must have a difficult life.
#US1#
it seems to me you have the difficult life. you have disagreed with a lot of people on this thread. i myself am not disagreeing with you at all i am simply saying that you need to respect what these guys have done in the ways of their artwork and talent whether you like them or not and bash the fans of these artists. you write all of your complaints in this thread against people who like particular artist from the 90's and how bad thier artwork is then how about you give it a try. let's see if you could draw like these guys or maybe even better. don't come on here and throw around big words and you are impressing anyone because you are not. unless you can show us that you can do better than those artists you so much hate then you are looking like a total ass.
Dude, get a grip.
I don't have to respect anything that Jim Lee, Robb Liefeld, or Todd Mcfarlane have ever done as artists.
I think they're all over-rated, especially Jim Lee. IMO, McFarlane and Liefeld simply suck.
Let me turn up the volume for you, in case you didn't hear:
JIM LEE STINKS. HE'S AN OVER-RATED HACK. LIEFELD AND MCFARLANE SUCK.
You like them??? Good for you.
And to answer yourt (dumb) question, I'm not an artist...I don't get paid to draw comics...so yeah, it's a safe bet that they can draw better than me...DUH!!!!!!
But in my book, they couldn't hold the jock-straps of any of the great Silver Age and Bronze Age artists at Marvel or DC.
-
hey So No Tornato
what is your problem with the artists from the 90's. they drew some of the best stuff of that era, not all but some. the x-men looked awesome when drawn by lee in my opinion. you go ahead and bash anyone and everyone for liking the stuff from the 90's and it is just not right. i myself started reading comics in the late 80's. however over the years i have accumulated a collection that spans from 1963 all the way thru 1996. i was buying collections at auctions and from private sellers. i myself have just about every spider-man, fantastic four, x-men, avengers, and the list goes on and on for these comics. i have no problem with any artist from any era for marvel comics. i think all of them are great for the eras they were part of.
you also happen to mention mcfarlane and how he does not know how to draw worth a damn. this guy has more talent in his little finger than you have in your entire body. if he couldn't draw worth a damn then he would have never had the job he has. he is a damn good artist. do you remember his work for the spider-man comics and how great it was. or how about spawn, which was a hot selling comic when he was drawing it.
what i am trying to tell you is that certain people like certain artists and others don't. you don't have to go around on the message boards and basically insult people for who they like. i myself like them all and yes i do have my favorites but that does not mean i don't like the rest. you also stated that jim lee did not know about anatomy and didn't like how he drew the characters especially the women. do you have a problem with how the women look. this isn't real life they are just artist renderrings of how the artists want them to look. when lee drew them they looked like women.
Where do I start??
In my opinion, the era of the 1990's was a blight on the comics industry, dominated by under-talented artists, under-talented writers, and piss-poor management.
The dominant characteristic of the 1990's comic industry was "style over substance". However, the comic industry is not solely to blame for this phenomena, as it also accurately reflects the zeitgeist of the era. The 1990's were a silly, superfluous, and hedonistic decade becasue that's what "the people" wanted. It's why we elected a silly, superfluous, and hedonistic President in 1992. No one wanted a challenge...they wanted a party...and they got one. And parties are generally frivolous and vacuous affairs...
...but I digress...
I don't like the comics of the 90's because, with rare exceptions ("Kingdom Come"; "Astro-City"), most of them sucked. (Not coincidentally, the two examples of quality I reference were both derivatives of comic's Silver and Golden Ages). Sorry if that bothers you, but too bad. There it is.
In the 1990's comics ceased being fun, and became pretentious, overbearing, and trite. Comics professionals began to think of themselves as real Raconteurs, not just guys who made funny books for a living. The artists in particular were responsible for this problem, led by the cry-babies who left MARVEL and formed the execrable company known as "IMAGE" (a perfect name for a company with no substance in the 1990's...). Most of these individuals were young know-it-alls, short on real talent but big on ego - like McFarlane, Liefeld, etc. The influence of IMAGE, and their obsession with "style over substance" nearly killed the industry.
I'm getting bored with explaining myself, so I'll leave it at this: If you like 90's comics and Jim Lee, Rob Liefeld, Todd McFarlane, etc - swell. Good for you. I think they suck. I think they can't draw. And I think the fact that so many comics fans adore them means that many comics fans are short on good taste (not surprising when one sees the individulas that hang out at most comic stores...)
If you don't like the fact that someone disagrees with you, you must have a difficult life.
#US1#
-
Ughh...
I can't stand Jim Lee. IMO, he's a horrendous artist.
All of his character's faces look exactly the same. In addition, he has no grasp of human anatomy, and has vividly created whole muscle groups that simply don't exist. His characters are also consistently over-muscled, or, if female, possess ridiculously over-endowed chests with little, narrow waists.
He also has a "stock" pose that he constantly puts his characters in, especially for covers...chin up, chest out, shoulders forward, arms bent at the elbows, hands clenched in fists, and one leg bent at the knee and resting on a rock or a ledge. If the character wears a cape, the fists are always clutching the cape...a VERY cliche' 90's pose.
I realize this puts me at odds with a lot of folks on this board who grew-up reading comics in the 90's, and think Jim Lee is good. Sorry if that offends, but I think he sucks. He's exemplary of that entire wave of "Image"-type artists, very few who actually had any classical training in art, including studies in human anatomy.
I figured this image would win, as this board is heavily populated by "X-babies" of that era.
In addition, if this imager is the winner...does that mean I get to look forward to another Hulk, another Wolverine, and another Deadpool??...Oh, happy day...
Jim Lee stinks.
haha your posts are turning into a running joke of ranting about every topic. Is there anything you don't hate? I bet John Byrne, George Perez and Todd Mcfarlane are also pathetic artists huh? I hate their kind, they stink!
John Byrne: He was a great artist back in the 70's when he debuted at Marvel. Check-out early editions of "Iron-Fist" (both in his own mag and in Marvel Premiere), and you'll see what I mean. However, he's a prime example of wisdom (or skill) not improving with age. His penciling has definitely deteriorated in the last 15-20 years...personally, I don't like his current work at all.
Todd Mcfarlane: Sorry, but if you were expecting me to be a Mcfarlane supporter, you're going to be disappointed. I put Mcfarlane in the same category as Lee, one of the Image "Wunderkinds" who, IMO, can't draw worth a damn. I've never liked his stuff...ever. But I don't think he's losing sleep over that...
George Perez: Like fine wine, he improves with age. He was great back in the 70's on Avengers and Fantastic Four, great in the 80's on Teen Titans, great in the 90's on the Avengers ("Hero's Return"), and he's great today. One of the best, most prolific artists ever in the biz, he'll be remembered up there with Kirby, Kubert, Everett, Ditko, Kane, Romita, and Buscema when he finally hangs up his brushes.
-
What the hell is this?!?!?!
An old post of VERY old news from 2005???
?????
-
Classic Crimson Dynamo (Silver Age)
Classic Titanium Man (Silver Age)
Classic Mandarin (Silver Age)
Ultimo BAF...a big one...
-
Ughh...
I can't stand Jim Lee. IMO, he's a horrendous artist.
All of his character's faces look exactly the same. In addition, he has no grasp of human anatomy, and has vividly created whole muscle groups that simply don't exist. His characters are also consistently over-muscled, or, if female, possess ridiculously over-endowed chests with little, narrow waists.
He also has a "stock" pose that he constantly puts his characters in, especially for covers...chin up, chest out, shoulders forward, arms bent at the elbows, hands clenched in fists, and one leg bent at the knee and resting on a rock or a ledge. If the character wears a cape, the fists are always clutching the cape...a VERY cliche' 90's pose.
I realize this puts me at odds with a lot of folks on this board who grew-up reading comics in the 90's, and think Jim Lee is good. Sorry if that offends, but I think he sucks. He's exemplary of that entire wave of "Image"-type artists, very few who actually had any classical training in art, including studies in human anatomy.
I figured this image would win, as this board is heavily populated by "X-babies" of that era.
In addition, if this imager is the winner...does that mean I get to look forward to another Hulk, another Wolverine, and another Deadpool??...Oh, happy day...
Jim Lee stinks.
-
Good:
Pretty much any character/villain from the great Lee/Kirby days of FF # 1 - FF # 100 would make great LEGEND figure, like...
All of the Inhumans...incluiding a Lockjaw BAF; Molecule Man; Mad Thinker; Mad Thinker's "Awesome Android" (FF # 70); Diablo; Rhama-Tut; Him (Adam Warlock from FF # 67); Psycho-Man; Blastaar; Doombots; Maximus; Klaw; Wizard; Sand-Man (in his "Frightful Four" costume); "Kurrgo, Master of Planet X" as a pack-in; Crusader (FF # 165-166); Brute; ...and most definitely, a Paste-Pot Pete!!!
...and the list goes on...
#US1#
-
...hurray...
FA Storm...yippee...I'm so excited...
...zzzzzz....
Not to be disrespectful...glad you're happy...but personally, I could care less about this character, or the figure.
-
Oh boy...I'm in re-paint heaven...or make that "re-paint Hell"...
But...Domino, Cannonball, and 70's Marvel Girl are new figs, so I'll probably pick them up.
-
Nothing wrong there. Apparently his helmet has a hinge that had it "raised" creating the perception that it is a box. The bubble helmet is there, much like an F-18 fighter jet's canopy raised. They should have more pics showing the figure with its canopy helmet lowered in the "closed" position.
OK...I see it now...
PHEW!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for clarifying this. Hopefully, they'll post better pics soon.
-
I'm sorry, but the BAF NEMESIS does not look right.
What the hell is that Box on top of his head? That is NOT how he looked in AoA.
Is this a recent, updated look for NEMESIS?
If "YES", it still looks stupid...why would they choose that over the classic AoA look?
If "NO", then why, why, WHY would HASBRO create this stupid-looking sculpt?
Uggh....
-
I'm both sorry and happy to see that people agree with me. Sorry because it validates my opinions; happy because...well, because it validates my opinions.
Here's my take:
HML 4:
Black Bolt: About time...and, he looks nice. I would have preferred the white-eyed version (a la' Kirby), but it's a minor point.
Nova: Not bad. I'm pleased that they used the 70's version, and I don't mind that the body is recycled,a s it seems to fit. And I like the metallic blue sheen. But overall, the paint-apps still seem a little flat.
Tigra: Big disappointment. I love this character, and was excited that she would be made. Unfortunately, she seems to be in the mold of HASBRO's female LEGENDS...to thin, over-simplified paint-apps, minimal detailing, and dumb-looking joints.
Tim Bradstreet Punisher: Honestly, was ANYONE asking for this figure?? Anyone??? Did we need anotheer Punisher. BORING...and kind of dumb-looking, too. I guess HASBRO wanted to recycle their ICONS molds...swell...can you say "Pegwarmer"??
Yellow Daredevil: Not bad...but his head looks a bit small. It's a ice addition to my silver-age LEGENDS, so OK.
Cat-Beast: Uggh. I hate this character...but I acknowledge that many do like him, so I understand why he was chosen. He's kinda' funny-looking...I envision replacing his head with one from the XMC line..
BAF NEMESIS: Good character selection, but I must say...WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON WITH HIS HEAD?!?!?!? That doesn't look like any NEMESIS I remember...is this an actual, updated look?? Piss-poor execution..just plain dumb.
On the plus side, we only need 6 figs to construct the BAF...if you want that dopey-looking NEMESIS...
FANTASTIC FOUR:
Namor: Those knees...uggh! Sorry, but I just can't get past them...they're horrible...they ruin an otherwise good sculpt. Although the head looks a tad small...
Doctor Doom: Seriously...did we NEED another Doctor Doom? In all honesty, I say "NO". His look has hardly changed in 40 years...what's wrong with the ML 2 DOOM??? Another shrunken ICONs mold...swell...
Mole Man: I like him...and I'm actually glad that they didn't let articulation ruin the sculpt. He looks like Mole Man from FF # 1. Well done.
Silver Surfer: Another Surfer???? 'Nuff said...
The Thing: Another Thing??? I realize you can't really do the FF without the core characters, but still...another one? On the plus side, the sculpt is good, if a tad over-detailed...and another puny head.
Johny Storm: Decent sculpt, and good idea...but it's another shrunken ICONs mold. Still, not bad...
Sue Storm: Nice head sculpt. Terrible body Sculpt. Terrible costume choice. Blech!!!
Reed Richard: Finally, a good Reed head-sculpt! And I definitely appreciate the concept. I'm wondering how they'll fit him in the box, though...this will probably be my default Reed for display.
BAF RONAN: I love this character, so awesome choice. And the sculpt looks good. If I had to criticize anything, I'd say only two things. First, I would have preferred his original Kirby-esque costume...but that's a minor issue. Secondly, his face just doesn't look menacing...RONAN should look angry...or at least grim...he kinda' looks like a Superhero Squad guy...
Overall, I'd only give HASBRO a "C-". The bad is these two waves is really bad, and hurst the good.
It would have been nice to see TOY-BIZ execute these figs.
**Note: The 6" Spiderman 3 movie figs are, in my opinion, so bad as to be beneath contempt...so I'm not even going to discuss them...
-
...totally underwhelming...
To those of you who like them...well, all I can say is, you're easily impressed. There's maybe 2-3 good figures in those 2 waves...the rest are crap.
If this is what HASBRO has in store for this line, it'll be dead in a year.
Can you say "HELLO, MARVEL TOYS""???
-
I'd like to see some legendary old goldne-age pulp heroes, like...
Doc Savage
The Shadow
We've got Conan...maybe we could get a Red Sonja and a King Kull, too.
A Phantom would be awesome, as well as a Lone Ranger.
I'm a stickler for 70's comics...so even though I know they'd never do them, I still think some ATLAS-SEABOARD characters wouold be fun...
...and maybe some of the late, lamented CROSSGEN characters, too.
-
The fact is, they are selling less and you know it. You don't need to throw out meaningless challenges that you know could never be met (showing you sales figures comparisons). I have seen HML2 in stores twice since they were released. And this isn't a case where I just always seem to "miss out." I'm saying almost every store in this city that carries MLs still has HML1 on the pegs and has never even ordered a case of series 2 and won't because they have too much of the series 1 junk left. Please explain to me how some of my stores had a dozen pegs for TB MLs and now only have 2 for HMLs and yet somehow you believe Hasbro is putting out MORE product than TB? If there is an abundance (which there isn't) , it is only because of poor sales...and the amount of shelf space they get is the best indicator of that.
For some perspective, I worked (and still work) at Walmart starting last summer. Last Christmas, we got a single case of the Onslaught wave in, it sold out in less than a week. Then we'd get two-three cases of Series 10 or 12 ((with the odd 11 in there), and they would lag. Hell, we NEVER got ANY of the last two waves from Toy Biz! During the post Christmas clearance, outside of one or two figures (usually the Hulk, Wolverine, or Spider-Man related characters), I could have built 3 Sentinals, 2 Apocalypse, and two half Onslaughts with what we had left AFTER Christmas.
When we set out the Hasbro Legends, we sold FOUR CASES in less than two weeks. I don't stretch the truth here at all. However, after a few more restocks, outside of Iron Man and Hulk, the figures would sit. By March, we had a pegs worth each dedicated to Banshee, White Queen, Beast, and Hercules. To date, we've gotten TWO cases of HML wave 2, that's it. We still have wave 1 sitting on the pegs (the whole 3 we have set to the line)
In regards to why so few pegs dedicated to HML now? Simple:
Movie toys
EVERY Walmart has nearly an aisle dedicated to Spider-Man 3, and nearly as much for Transformers. Some are still supporting Ghost Rider, and some also carry Fantastic Four 2 toys.
Plus Superhero Showdown
Plus Star Wars
You may not have noticed, but GI Joe or DC Heroes aren't getting a great deal of peg space either. More over, with Toy Biz, it was feast or famine, the reason for more pegs earlier I feel was largely because when stores finally got product, they got a LOT of it, and once they sold out, they had to wait sometime before replenishment came.
I said as much last year: I firmly believe that the core reason behind Toy Biz's "high sales" before were attributed largely to the situation of a store getting just one or two cases, collectors and scalpers buying out, sometimes entire cases, and stores left with nothing. But unlike Hasbro, Toy Biz didn't have a means to replenish these stores in a timely manner, thus creating a false "scarcity".
Now, a LOT of those speculators and even some collectors aren't buying as much because the supply is readily available.
You make soem good points.
Personally, I am very concerned by the emphasis on 6" Marvel movie figs from HASBRO, as these will definitely supplant additional LEGENDS waves.
And if they don't supplant actual LEGENDS waves, they'll definitely prevent us from ever getting more BOX SETS, FACE-OFFS, etc.
-
TIGRA
Classic SWORDSMAN
MANTIS
Classic MOONDRAGON
DOCTOR DRUID
HULK (from Avengers # 1...with 4 toes and l'il purple shorts...)
-
Hasbro.... Biting off more than you can chew.Star Wars,G.I.crap, and Transformers ,Movie figures. Lets face it Marvel legends are at the bottom of their list.They'll make just enough wave to keep people buying them.Let's face it they just don't give a dam about ML, or could it be their trying fix some of the problems everyone was complaning about with wave 1 & 2.Only time will tell.
Marvel Legends are definitely not at the bottom of their list. They know how well they did for ToyBiz when they had the Marvel license. That was their #1 selling line above all movie figures and everything else. Aside from trying to cash in on the latest Marvel movies (which ToyBiz would've done as well), I would say Marvel Legends are definitely high on their list.
You're mixing apples and oranges.
If you do a side-by-side comparison of the licenses for STAR WARS, G.I. JOE, TRANSFORMERS, and MARVEL LEGENDS, it's a safe bet that LEGENDS is the least lucrative of the four described.
STAR WARS is obviously huge. HASBRO probably puts their top marketing execs on this account. Next comes TRANSFORMERS, a hot property that has high appeal to kids as new customers, and to older collectors as a nostalgic property (and one that's been selling since the 80's). GI JOE is close behind; JOE came out in the 60's, sold through the 70's, was revamped in the 80's, and is an iconic property.
Next comes MARVEL. Remember, despite our love for the characters, only a select few are iconic, and have wide appeal across market segments - Spidey, Hulk, Wolverine & X-Men. Most people have no idea who the rest of Marvel's characters are, including ones that we as fans think are huge - like Captain America, Thor, Ironman, etc.
So yes, the MARVEL license was HUGE for a smaller company like TOY-BIZ, but it's not as big for a BIG company like HASBRO. They're putting effort behind it (obviously), but having worked in a large marketing department, I can safely tell you that the bulk of the marketing and sales budeget supports the larger licenses - STAR WARS, TRANSFORMERS, and GI JOE.
Therefore, TOY-BIZ gave us more "love" than HASBRO, because we were more important to their bottom line.
-
how does this always seem to happen? this forum was just a guy asking when the next wave of figures are out and it turn into a "Toybiz Vs Hasbro". AGIAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
oh and to does people saying that hasbro is only using the product to sit on it and not have and competition, have you guy actualy ever heard of Mattel's DC figure or TB Legendary Super.......whatever it is?
Hasbro is a business and they know that those product will sell, just like Tb knew and Mattel knows. so hasbro will continue to bring out a lisence they paid millions for.
Lastly, Guy TB has moved away from marvel and they are not bitter. in fact they welcome the challenge of bring out there own non-marvel products. They will never, i repeat never, get the lisence back so in what many people on this furom say, GET FECKING OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!
If you don't like it, then don't read it, and don't respond. Otherwise, you can get fecking over it yourself.
-
so no Tornato this thread was for people to list any information they know about HML 3 true release date. Not another "I rate Hasbro" rant from you. Everyone knows Toybiz made better figures. Everyone also knows that Hasbro has the license for 5 years, nothing can change that. Definitely not tirades. I wish the Biz was still making the figures as much as anyone but most of all I love Marvel Legends and will continue to buy them no matter who makes them. HML 3 will be available at retail in Oct, but I'm sure that as advertised you'll be able to buy them online in Sept. Nuff said.
Thanks for the...insights?
-
Tell ya what So No Tomato:
You lay out some facts............not opinions......not casual observations...........some actual regional or national sales numbers or hard data for all to see and compare, and I'll buy into what you are saying whole hog. Completely 100%.
Let me know when you have the data--I can wait.
If you need a direction to point yourself in, ask Jesse Falcon, or the Hasbro Q & A sessions.
I'm guessing right now the answers will surprise you.
I cannot be "wrong" ( nor can anyone else) unless you have those numbers to back up your claims, and until you present such numbers your claims are as suspect as any others.
So you might want to rein in calling other people "wrong"--because your POV is meaningless if you only see things one way.
Money where your mouth is.
Go ahead and wait...It's a meaningless challenge.
As anyone who's ever worked in corporate sales and marketing (as I have) will tell you, those figures are absolutely confidential. I could beg and plead with HASBRO and they'd release nothing. Regardless, even if they did, without the original sales forecasts (also ABSOLUTELY confidential), actual sales data is meaningless.
Let me simplify it for you. If you don't know how much you were supposed to sell, then you can't judge your success by how much you did sell. Does that make sense?
Regardless, as someone who has worked in Marketing and Sales (experience matters...see?), and as someone who is a frequent customer with knowledge of this particular market, my instincts (coupled with careful observation) tell me that HASBRO is not selling as much as TOY-BIZ did.
In addition, I bolster that opinion with a little Market Research. I'm a customer...and I talk with other customers...and no one is very thrilled with HASBRO's handling of LEGENDS.
Oh, BTW...the "HASBRO Q & A" sessions? You're joking right??? Again, here's another instance where actual corporate experience pays off. Q & A sessions are not designed to please the public...they're designed to give the appearance of pleasing the public. Most corporations will develop a list of likely questions before a conference, and come up with pre-packaged, canned responses. I read the Q & A...did you?? In fact, I created an entire thread dedicated to translating it...did you read it?? To anyone with a trained eye, it was full of the type of canned, pre-packaged answers I just described.
If you think that the overwhelming majority of us are pleased with HASBRO's handling of the license, I'd say you're not reading too carefully.
My money is where my mouth is, and from where I stand, I'm chewing on a big, fat, fistful of dollars.
Any more challenges?
-
HASBRO has dropped the ball, and dropped it severely. LEGENDS NEVER sat on the pegs like this when TOY-BIZ was designing the figs. Sure, a few dull characters would, but overall, you rarely found entire WAVES just sitting on the shelves like Stinky Pete begging to be bought.
Oooooh, its because the product sucks, y'think?
Or maybe because the distribution system became better with Hasbro.
Toybiz was notorious for lousy and limited distribution. Large stores would get a couple of cases, smaller stores sometimes one....if that, right?
2006 had the last two waves with limited release--the orders were CUT to just US domestic orders.
Now there's a manufacturer in place with a system that works and lo and behold, there's an adundance of product available. More stores are getting more cases of the product.
The Toy-biz stuff was selling before because there was so little of it to buy in the first place ( demand follows scarcity)........obviously that is going to skew your observations now that Hasbro has the means to actually put product everywhere.
The answer to your mystery is pretty clear: there's "less" people apparently buying ML toys because there never really were that many. We have a glut situation and the audience for all the product clearly doesn't exist in the numbers anticipated.
There were indeed entire ML waves sitting on the pegs in stores: ML10,11,12 were well reported as being quite common.
How's that for understanding the situation, eh?
Pretty poor, I'd say.
Or maybe because the distribution system became better with Hasbro.And that quote proves it. Better??? Are you kidding me?? How is it "better" if many, many people can't even find non-variant HML 2 figures?!?!? That is one of the biggest complaints...and you think it's "better"....
Now there's a manufacturer in place with a system that works and lo and behold, there's an adundance of product available.Again, what the "H" are you talking about?!?! There is NO "abundance of product...TRU has never even had HML 2, the first shipments hit sporadically in March, then sporadically agin in June...lots of people still don't have any. Seriously...you do read this board, right??
The answer to your mystery is pretty clear: there's "less" people apparently buying ML toys because there never really were that many. We have a glut situation and the audience for all the product clearly doesn't exist in the numbers anticipated.WRONG AGAIN. There's less people buying LEGENDS because demand is lower for the product since HASBRO took over...despite any problems TOY-BIZ may have had, the figures are NOT as good.
And AGAIN, a poll conducted on this very board indicated an almost 30% drop-off in potential customers of LEGENDS based on the initial switch and the quality of the product.
Can I be a Moderator?!?!?
-
@loll@I mean atleast toybiz had the entire set with variants available the day they were released.I'm sorry, I usually try and avoid the tired old Hasbro vs. ToyBiz argument, but when I read your post I nearly fell out of my chair.
Dude, Have you ever actually bought any ToyBiz Marvel Legends? There were entire series that never made it into wide release! I had to get Blade off Ebay, and THAT took almost a year! If I hadn't bought series 6 online, I never would have gotten a Phoenix or Juggernaught. I've never even SEEN an Apocalypse figure much less varients.
Yeah, I bought hundreds of them. And YES, some of them were harder to find than others, especially ML 6 and ML 7, many of which I had to pay higher prices to get them from Comic Shops or EBAY.
I often had complaints about TOY-BIZ, and they're documented on this board.
But despite these complaints, I still think HASBRO has failed to deliver on the deal, and will NEVER be able to deliver the way TOY-BIZ did.
Why?
Simple. TOY-BIZ, for all their faults, understood and respected the "MARVEL COLLECTOR". They understood what we wanted, and did their best to deliver. If they occasionally stumbled, it was forgivable. But when that license was pulled in 2006, they were on a ROLL!!!
2006 was AWESOME! The best year for LEGENDS ever! Each month was a mad, fun scramble to find the latest releases! And in the midst of all this fun comes the horrendous news that the license was being pulled, and given to HASBRO.
Now, I'm not anti-corporate or anti-profit, which I think is a stupid phrase to begin with. But the difference we see here is the difference between a large, corporate entity like HASBRO (that probably does endless focus-groups and market research), and a smaller, boutique-shop like TOY-BIZ that already knows and respects their audience...think "Jesse Falcon".
Sorry if you had trouble finding figs, I know that stinks.
BTW...how do you like the distribution on HML 2???
IMO, HASBRO will not be happy when MARVEL TOYS (TOY-BIZ) finally hit the shelves in the Fall with "Legendary Comic Heroes". I'm all over that, and I really don't care about most of these characters - I simply want to support MARVEL TOYS, and help them to expand their license to other great comic properties.
-
Make crap - your sales go down - plain and simple.
Amen. I'd like to believe that HASBRO is learning this lesson...but history tells me they're not. They're not exactly new to making toys based on licenses...
HASBRO seems to think that we're dumb enough to buy them 'cause they're LEGENDS...sorry, not playing anymore. And I'm not the only one having this reaction.
I'm only going to buy the figs that are worthy of being bought. The crap stays on the shelves, and I don't care about the BAFs...
what is the one character you want the most?
in Marvel
Posted
Classic 1970's Adam Warlock...done by TOY-BIZ...NOT HASBRO