Echo

An Argument Against Most Non-Licensed Themes

Recommended Posts

Before I even begin, I will preface this by saying that I am NOT personally advocating for what I am going to talk about here. I grew up primarily with non-licensed sets from the '90s and '00s so I very much appreciate and even prefer original properties. Thus, do not mistake this as coming from any personal preference for licensed themes or dislike for original properties.

Now with that out of the way, I shall begin. I don't know that there is much of an argument in favor of Lego producing non-licensed themes outside of City, Ninjago, and maybe another Big Bang action theme with an accompanying TV show and marketing blitz here and there. Simply put, the built-in familiarity with existing properties both increases the range of people a theme may appeal to and reduces the budget required for making the customer aware of the product and convincing them to buy it. For instance, what reason does an average kid have to be interested in a non-Big Bang action theme like Ultra Agents that has no accompanying TV show to market its story? Sure, the action vehicle designs may fit the mold that Lego goes to for its action themes, but a kid is much more likely to want the Ninjago or Batman set that he has either seen on the TV show in the case of Ninjago or is already aware of through the massive cultural penetration that superheroes have in the case of Batman. 

This applies even more so to non-action themes like Castle, Pirates, and themes along the lines of Adventurers and Pharaoh's Quest. We know that young boys are drawn to cool sci-fi vehicles as is reflected in the designs of the Big Bang themes like Ninjago, Chima, and Nexo Knights. More structure-oriented themes like the aforementioned themes are therefore already at a disadvantage and it seems to me that Lego seems to be aware of that as the most recent attempts at Pirates and Castle have been short term themes with only one wave released in both cases and they were both very broad strokes and nonspecific archetype themes; basically the most basic methods of executing the ideas with no attempt at stories or bringing anything new to the table. In short, I'd say that they were not very high priority as far as marketing or time spent on design because they simply were not gonna sell as well as other things and therefore did not merit any more effort or expense than what they got. Thus, I'd conclude that such themes probably won't exist anymore outside of the context of more structure-oriented licensed themes like the Wizarding World. 

In conclusion, I think it is very likely that going forward, we will only see City/Creator, (I'm combining those due to how closely they overlap) Ninjago, and a smaller TV show tie-in Big Bang theme like Nexo Knights as the non-licensed themes. Quite frankly, I unfortunately can't say that Lego is wrong to do that either. They've missed on some licenses like Speed Racer and the Angry Birds Movie, but they have also secured some really good licenses in Star Wars, the Wizarding World, Disney, Marvel, DC, the various car companies for Speed Champions, Minecraft, and Jurassic World. Those are consistent producers and should continue to be in the long term; much more so than any non-licensed theme they can come up with. 

 

Edited by Echo
Added very important missed word.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you believe the Technic line would benefit from this arrangement as well, I noticed you totally neglected to mention it, do you not consider it to be LEGO? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Johnny1360 said:

Do you believe the Technic line would benefit from this arrangement as well, I noticed you totally neglected to mention it, do you not consider it to be LEGO? 

I omitted it because it isn't really impacted by licenses. There may be an occasional licensed Technic car, but they don't really affect it positively or negatively. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Echo said:

Before I even begin, ... *snipped for brevity*, read the original post.

Nah, I couldn't disagree more. The issue is not whether it's licensed or not, the issue is LEGOs lack of commitment and sloppy execution. And Star Wars a "good" license? SRSLY? Star Wars has been dead in the water for years, not just at LEGO. Marvel, DC and possibly other Disney stuff will follow suit soon simply due to people getting tired of this stuff and the market being hopelessly oversaturated. The more they make themselves dependent on this, the more likely LEGO are to suffer. They have no control over the designs and marketing and any failure is going to backfire onto them as well plus the licensing fees are eating up any revenue. Just look at what's happening at Hasbro currently with their gigazillions of licensed products. They pay more fees than they make grosses and are at the verge of bankruptcy. And even from the mere sales point of view - do you have any idea how many licensed themes are rotting on the shelves here in Germany? Nobody cares much for Batman, Spiderman and whatnot since there isn't the pop culture around it. The only stuff that really flies ATM is Harry Potter. So, no offense, seeing LEGO's salvation in even more licensing is just plain naive and dead wrong. In my view just the opposite is true - LEGO need to cull all that nonsense and focus on developing strong own brands with integrated thematic worlds, but as their screwing around with Friends amd Ninjago shows they have no handle on that, either, which basically brings me back to my initial point: They need to throw themselves more into it than firing out so many quick cash grabs.

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There still needs to be creative attempts at something new. There still needs to be a product that no one ever thought about that is actually really cool. Just like how the streaming services can experiment with their in-house productions (Would Stranger Things made it as a movie in the current cinema culture?) using the money that the familiar and popular earns them. 

Even within the studios (Avengers profits meant that they could run the risk with Guardians of the Galaxy). 

So, no, LEGO should keep on producing interesting ideas outside of the immediately recognisable.

Also, you've missed out the minidoll themes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't disagree more.

While I absolutely see the merits of having some licensed themes around, especially in the action-oriented markets you mentioned, the gross neglect of traditional themes like Castle and Pirates is a short-sighted and stupid move.

Kids LOVE stories about knights and pirates, and love making up their own stories about them. The only thing you need to sell sets in that area is a consistent theme that can be continuously added to over the years that kids do play with Lego. Lego was really, really good at that 20-30 years ago, but at some point they forgot all about it, and the few attempts they made ever since where half-assed. And sinec you mentioned that the recent attempts at Castle and Pirates were short-lived: Yes, they were, but imo that's not so much for a general lack of interest but more so due to Lego itself not being commited to those Themes. If they released a strong initial wave and then added more and more stuff over the following release cycles (like they used to), things surely would've looked different.

Lastly, I think that Lego's "One strategy fits all"-approach is also a problem here. as @Mylenium already pointed out, much of the licensed Super Hero stuff does not work in Germany. They may sell well in the US (don't know, just supposing), but over here there is still a huge demand for way more traditional toys that Lego simply fails to fulfil. So parents whose kids want to play with Knights or Pirates do the logical thing: No, they don't go to Bricklink and buy old sets for huge amounts of money - they simply go and buy Playmobil. Resulting in a kid who'll have little contact with Lego, and thus may have little incliniation to buy his or her kids Lego 30 years down the road. And that's just plain stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RogerSmith said:

And sinec you mentioned that the recent attempts at Castle and Pirates were short-lived: Yes, they were, but imo that's not so much for a general lack of interest but more so due to Lego itself not being commited to those Themes. If they released a strong initial wave and then added more and more stuff over the following release cycles (like they used to), things surely would've looked different.

Yupp, exactly my point. LEGO are too focussed on immediate returns and these days lack the patience to just let series grow organically. Just another sign of them operating in full panic mode and chasing every buck they can get.

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite the more recent influx of more IP-based products coming into their own lineup (:ugh:), Playmobil even in this day and age still relies heavily on original, archetypical playsets, meaning that there's still a significant market for such themes and storylines that Lego is neglecting for the most part. The least they could do is introduce another unified umbrella theme to encompass all those currently homeless themes. Creator anyone? :wink:

6 hours ago, Peppermint_M said:

Just like how the streaming services can experiment with their in-house productions (Would Stranger Things made it as a movie in the current cinema culture?) using the money that the familiar and popular earns them. 

A most perfect example to cite as an analogy, especially ironic since I just finished watching its first two seasons for the very first time. :thumbup: :sweet:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your argument goes way too far in generalizing the types of things kids are interested in. For one thing, it disregards differences in demographics. Most of LEGO's more story-driven themes (particularly non-licensed ones, but also many licensed ones) tend towards a 7+ target age range. The success of themes like City and Friends, on the other hand, has typically been with a 5+ target age, and this also tends to be the target demographic for Castle and Pirates sets. Duplo has also had great success with non-licensed play scenarios even outside of modern-day settings. Younger kids often don't tend to have as high demand for the kind of genre-defying, gimmick-heavy novelty expressed in themes like Ninjago or Legends of Chima or Nexo Knights, nor as much impulse to rebel against the types of interests their parents enjoy and want to instill in them. To these sorts of younger kids who are only just beginning to learn and hear stories about medieval history and pirates and space travel and so forth, those sorts of things are just as new and fascinating as any wacky movie or cartoon. In fact, if anything that sense of familiarity helps keep them engaged.

What's more, both "big bang" themes and licensed themes have costs associated with them that themes without any kind of royalty agreements or enormous media campaigns do not. A lot of people here are complaining that recent Castle and Pirates themes have been short-lived and not heavily promoted, but the counter-argument is that there are many ways LEGO probably benefits from having occasional themes like this which are NOT expensive, long-term investments. In fact, releasing themes like this briefly, sporadically, and on a small scale probably boosts the sense of novelty that helps them stand out to kids who might have never had a LEGO pirate ship or medieval castle before.

Another thing you're not accounting for is that LEGO's preferred strategy at any given time is heavily informed by their context. Right now, we're seeing fewer new themes than we were used to between 2005 and 2015 or so, but that's in part because the sheer number of returning themes is currently so high. With themes like Elves, Nexo Knights, The LEGO Batman Movie, and The LEGO Ninjago Movie not expected to continue next year, who's to say the situation will still be the same? Another thing setting the past few years apart from the decade or so leading up to them is that from 2005 to 2015, the LEGO Group experienced near-constant growth which probably incentivized greater amounts of experimentation with themes that might not have had long-term potential. From 2016 onward that growth has stalled out, which has probably caused the company to become a little bit more conservative about launching those types of themes. We're also seeing considerable shifts in LEGO's global reach, as they continue to expand rapidly in Asia. It's not yet clear what kind of changes that might result in for the types of new product lines LEGO develops.

Overall, I don't think we're really in a position to forecast what kinds of themes will be in LEGO's best interest in the future, but I imagine they probably want to keep as many doors open as possible, and that includes many of the more traditional sorts of non-licensed themes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Digger of Bricks said:

Despite the more recent influx of more IP-based products coming into their own lineup (:ugh:), Playmobil even in this day and age still relies heavily on original, archetypical playsets,

It also stands to note that they do so very carefully and seem to know when enough is enough. Unlike LEGO thery are not flooding the market with even more products of a "dead" film or TV series years after its initial release.

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Aanchir said:

but the counter-argument is that there are many ways LEGO probably benefits from having occasional themes like this which are NOT expensive, long-term investments. In fact, releasing themes like this briefly, sporadically, and on a small scale probably boosts the sense of novelty that helps them stand out to kids who might have never had a LEGO pirate ship or medieval castle before.

That sounds like those preposterous mails you get from LEGO customer support when you tell them that the umpteenth repeat of a Star Wars TIE fighter sucks and is boring. "Star Wars for a new generation of customers." Nonsense. They're just bad, overpriced sets.

Your argument can easily be put down from a European perspective, too. There's literally an old castle every few kilometers here, cities prominently and distinctly expose their heritage and historic building styles, excursions and lessons about medieval times are part of the school curriculum, parents and grandparents will explore castles with kids during their holidays, you bump into traces of ship-based trading unions like the Hanse in many cities near rivers and coasts and so on. Don't you think that this informs and influences those people's wants and needs, even a 5 year old kid's?

So no, it's just stupid that those things are not a permanent fixture in LEGOs portfolio and occasionally digging them out every few years under some steampunked theme like Nexo Knights doesn't do justice to the whole thing. Even in this day and age this stuff would sell like sliced bread as Playmobil and others show. It doesn't even need any novelty effects or massive marketing, it's just part of the cultural heritage. I therefore think you're completely wrong on that. I'm pretty sure similar arguments could be made for pirates, cowboys/ Wild West or Asian-themed stuff if truly understood in the historical, broader context and not reduced to stereotypes like you seem to view the whole matter.

The rest of course we cannot know, but I find "keeping as many doors open as possible" not a viable strategy, either. In the end I see it as one of LEGOs current problems just as well. Segwaying around and coming up with ever new series in the hopes that one of them will be a success only eats up resources while you are waiting for it to happen and then what do you do if this never comes? You've created another furball of half-baked stuff and in the end even piss off those few customers that may have commited to one of these new series when you kill it off. Nothing achieved at all and just more to put on the LEGO graveyard of failed series.

Mylenium

Edited by Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mylenium said:

That sounds like those preposterous mails you get from LEGO customer support when you tell them that the umpteenth repeat of a Star Wars TIE fighter sucks and is boring. "Star Wars for a new generation of customers." Nonsense. They're just bad, overpriced sets.

I don't see why it's nonsense and not the obvious truth. ALL popular themes tend to periodically revisit or reinvent their most popular and iconic subjects, and it's neither a recent phenomenon nor one specific to licensed themes or even recent ones. Just look at the frequency of…

  • Royal castles, evil prison towers, prison carriages, etc. in LEGO Castle
  • Pirate ships, Imperial forts/outposts, rafts, shipwrecks, and treasure caves in LEGO Pirates.
  • Police cars, fire trucks, police stations, fire stations, helicopters, dump trucks, front loaders, passenger trains, freight trains, train stations, etc. in LEGO Town/City/World City/Trains
  • Spaceships, planetary rovers, planetary bases, and robots/mechs in LEGO Space
  • Mobile cranes
  • Motorcycle chases, temples, dragons, mechs, and flying boats in LEGO Ninjago/The LEGO Ninjago Movie
  • Houses, performance stages, horse stables, swimming pools, convertibles, and restaurants in LEGO Friends
  • Motorcycles, mobile cranes, front loaders, helicopters, bulldozers, and race cars in LEGO Technic.
  • The Batcave, Batmobile, Batwing, etc. in LEGO Batman/LEGO DC Super Heroes/the LEGO Batman Movie
  • The Millennium Falcon, X-Wing, TIE Fighter, and Jedi Starfighters in LEGO Star Wars
  • And so on…

In licensed themes, granted, the popular subjects are a lot more clearly defined — LEGO doesn't have the same liberty to spontaneously change the shape of a new X-Wing or TIE fighter that they have with a new police station or Ninjago motorcycle chase, for example. Licensed themes can also exert a bit more pressure on WHEN previously depicted subjects get re-released if, for instance, that subject is hugely significant to a new movie (like the TIE Fighter and Millennium Falcon in Solo, or the X-Wings and TIE Fighters in The Force Awakens).

That said, the frequency with which these iconic subjects are repeated in these themes is hardly any more than in other themes. Like, the 2012 X-Wing set came SIX YEARS after the previous minifigure-scale X-Wing. Can you imagine how frustrated LEGO City fans would get if they had to wait six years between new passenger trains? Even six years between new clinics/hospitals in LEGO City/Town is often said to be too long a wait, and that's about as frequent as hospital/clinic sets have ever been in those themes!

9 hours ago, Mylenium said:

Your argument can easily be put down from a European perspective, too. There's literally an old castle every few kilometers here, cities prominently and distinctly expose their heritage and historic building styles, excursions and lessons about medieval times are part of the school curriculum, parents and grandparents will explore castles with kids during their holidays, you bump into traces of ship-based trading unions like the Hanse in many cities near rivers and coasts and so on. Don't you think that this informs and influences those people's wants and needs, even a 5 year old kid's? 

Here's the thing, though… yes, castles are iconic. There's no questioning that, and I don't think that's a strictly European thing either. I certainly loved reading books about castles and knights and dragons as a kid. But LEGO has loads of opportunities to release new castles even outside the context of European military history. There have been more sets since 2010 with castles as their primary subject than in the 80s and 90s COMBINED. What's more, there's hardly any indication that LEGO has given up on non-licensed Castle themes, considering that they tend to be reinvented every 3–4 years almost like clockwork, and the only reason that AFOLs have been disgruntled with the past cycle is because out of the TWO non-licensed Castle themes during that time (how often has THAT ever happened?), one was a sci-fi mashup and the other was I guess too girly and not militaristic enough.

Furthermore, I keep hearing this perspective that LEGO's recent policies have somehow been focusing excessively on the American market at the expense of European buyers, and the facts don't really seem to bear credence to that. Even from 2016 to today (the years that the previous decade of LEGO sales growth more or less plateaued), most of the interim and annual results more frequently point to American sales underperforming compared to European sales most of the time:

  • 2016 interim result: "Regionally, sales growth was particularly strong in both Europe and Asia with both regions achieving high double-digit growth, while sales development in the Americas region was flat year over year."
  • 2016 annual result: "We were encouraged by our performance in mature markets in Europe and continue to see strong potential in China, which represents an attractive growth opportunity.… In the US, consumer sales were flat year-on-year despite a significant increase in marketing spend in the second half of the year."
  • 2017 interim result: "Performance across the market regions was mixed. In established markets such as the United States and in parts of Europe revenue declined, while in a growing market, such as China, revenue grew by double digit."
  • 2017 annual result: "While revenue in established markets in North America and Europe declined in 2017, total consumer sales across a number of these markets improved, particularly in the final months of the year.… The Group also sees strong potential in China, where revenue grew high double-digits in 2017."
  • 2018 interim result: "Performance in established markets was stable compared with the same period in 2017. In constant currency, revenue in western Europe grew low single digits, while revenue in North America declined slightly, in part due to the changes in the retail landscape. China continues to perform strongly, with revenue growing double-digits in the first six months of the year."

So all in all, I don't really get the sense that European buyers have felt collectively neglected by recent sets and themes.

9 hours ago, Mylenium said:

So no, it's just stupid that those things are not a permanent fixture in LEGOs portfolio and occasionally digging them out every few years under some steampunked theme like Nexo Knights doesn't do justice to the whole thing. Even in this day and age this stuff would sell like sliced bread as Playmobil and others show. It doesn't even need any novelty effects or massive marketing, it's just part of the cultural heritage. I therefore think you're completely wrong on that. I'm pretty sure similar arguments could be made for pirates, cowboys/ Wild West or Asian-themed stuff if truly understood in the historical, broader context and not reduced to stereotypes like you seem to view the whole matter. 

In general I find comparisons to Playmobil rather unconvincing… not only are they nowhere near as big a company as LEGO, but more often than not, they seem to try and follow LEGO's lead rather than the other way around — for example, creating CMF-style blind-bag figure packs, Hero Factory-style foil zip pouches, licensed themes based on 80s movies, app-integrated products, an Asian-inspired product line with an emphasis on dragons, and adding dark magic and dragons to their fairy tale line, and even launching a genre-mashing theme called Super 4 shortly after LEGO found success with similar initiatives. If Playmobil were more reliably successful in their Europe-focused market than LEGO, you wouldn't think Playmobil would be the company playing follow-the-leader.

Even in Germany, LEGO still commanded a larger share of the toy market than Playmobil. Andf Playmobil's most recent press release back in January put a huge emphasis on the importance of licensing, digital tech integration, and diversification to the company's ongoing growth strategy. So I don't get the impression that Playmobil has any sort of profound wisdom indicating that these types of brand extensions would lead them and other toy companies astray.

What Playmobil DOES seem to have that LEGO does not is a business model that depends on product categories staying relevant year after year, since their products use far more specific molds than LEGO at a similar standard of quality, and thus require more sales of products in those particular genres to offset manufacturing costs (whereas most LEGO parts in sets from any theme are neither set– nor genre-specific).

9 hours ago, Mylenium said:

The rest of course we cannot know, but I find "keeping as many doors open as possible" not a viable strategy, either. In the end I see it as one of LEGOs current problems just as well. Segwaying around and coming up with ever new series in the hopes that one of them will be a success only eats up resources while you are waiting for it to happen and then what do you do if this never comes? You've created another furball of half-baked stuff and in the end even piss off those few customers that may have commited to one of these new series when you kill it off. Nothing achieved at all and just more to put on the LEGO graveyard of failed series.

Your idea of where LEGO's strategy has been leading them (or that there exists some "LEGO graveyard of failed series" that is expanding uncontrollably) seems at odds with the present reality, considering that the number of current LEGO themes that have sold well enough to stick around anywhere from three to twelve years straight (Architecture, City, Classic, Creator, Disney, Duplo, Elves, Friends, Ideas, Juniors, Minecraft, Minifigures, Ninjago, Speed Champions, Star Wars, Super Heroes, and Technic) far exceeds the number that are new or have been around a shorter time (BrickHeadz, Fantastic Beasts, Harry Potter, Jurassic World, Nexo Knights, The Powerpuff Girls, Unikitty, and last year's two LEGO movies). What's more, the number of new-for-2018 sets across those long-running themes (316) far exceeds the number for newer or more short-lived ones (87).

"Keeping as many doors open as possible" doesn't mean having a finger in every pie or launching new product lines willy-nilly regardless of their anticipated potential, it just means keeping a little room open for experimentation while putting continued emphasis on proven product lines, and not planning all new product launches as if any performance short of becoming a long-running mega hit on the level of City, Creator, Friends, and Ninjago ought to be regarded as an abject failure. As much as AFOLs like to talk about Legends of Chima and Nexo Knights as if they were huge disasters, the truth is that BOTH themes exceeded the LEGO Group's sales targets and lasted as long or longer than Ninjago's original timetable. If this tells us anything it's that LEGO is through with the kind of unearned faith in unproven innovations that got them in so much trouble in the late 90s and early 2000s. Themes these days tend to be retired not because they've stopped being successful, but to free up resources for new products.

And yes, this includes stuff like Castle and Pirates which so many AFOLs assume would have to fail miserably for LEGO to ever turn their back on them. After all, this is the same company that had fully intended to cut Ninjago short even when it had achieved the strongest first-year sales of any new LEGO product line in history, had set TV viewership records on Cartoon Network, and had put multiple books on the New York Times best sellers list. How, then, is it that people get the impression that the impermanence of three-year product lines like Chima and Nexo Knights, let alone one-year product lines like the latest incarnations of Castle and Pirates, somehow indicate that those product lines have failed or that LEGO has given up on them?

EDIT:

9 hours ago, Mylenium said:

It also stands to note that they do so very carefully and seem to know when enough is enough. Unlike LEGO thery are not flooding the market with even more products of a "dead" film or TV series years after its initial release.

Mylenium

You… you realize they are literally doing exactly this? They've made sets based on not just the first two Ghostbusters movies, but also the preposterous ghosts, gadgets, and vehicles of the much less well-known "The Real Ghostbusters" cartoon from the late 80s: https://www.playmobil.us/shop-online/shop/ghostbusters™. They've also partnered with Funko — yes, THAT Funko — to produce large-scale Playmobil-style figures based on equally dated film and TV properties like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Back to the Future, and Doctor Who: https://nerdist.com/playmobil-joins-funko-with-ghostbusters-back-to-the-future-doctor-who/

Edited by Aanchir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As @RogerSmith pointed out, kids love to play pretend and make up stories. I did that when I was young, and sets featuring fire department, arctic exploration or other scenes provide the basics for a child to tell their own story.

And, though I recall as a child (does this date me?) playing Harry Potter and Power Rangers in the playground, non-licensed themes inherently have a bit more wiggle room for creativity when telling stories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Aanchir said:

I don't see why it's nonsense and not the obvious truth. (...) *snipped*

Clearly you have e.g. no idea how important and predominant Playmobil are in European markets with certain age demographics nor how their economics actually work, which makes any such discussion pointless. That and you really need to stop listening to LEGO'S PR BS (or for that matter, GeoBra's/ Playmobil's). Even your examples don't make much sense. For instance Playmobil has been selling separate figures for as long as I can think. So did they really just ape LEGO? Probably not. It has been part of their portfolio since forever. And as I already said a few times: You mustn't apply your American market logic to Europe or Germany in particular. "Dr. Who" is a big thing just as "TMNT" are still oddly popular with kids. There's a ton of re-runs of these series on TV at any given moment currently. So Playmobil must be doing something right by latching onto that, after all?! Conversely, LEGO are probably doing something "wrong" by bringing out the umpteenth "Spiderman" set? We can stand here all day and argue about these things, but suffice it to say that there are truths beyond the mere business figures and you would likely feel differently if you actually lived here just as the situation might be totally reversed for me if I lived in the US where all this comic stuff reigns. Still, it doesn't change the fact that was the starting point of this thread: More licensed themes would not be smart on LEGO's part and as some comments show, they are missing out on huge parts of regional markets by simply not offering specific types of unlicensed products people want.

Mylenium

Edited by Mylenium
Typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are being accurate, LEGO may not have invented the"blind bag" concept, but the introduction of CMFs created a whole new market that all the toy manufacturers followed. 

We went from trading cards and stickers being the only major blind packed collectables to an enormous variety of miniature figures to collect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mylenium said:

Clearly you have e.g. no idea how important and predominant Playmobil are in European markets with certain age demographics nor how their economics actually work, which makes any such discussion pointless. That and you really need to stop listening to LEGO'S PR BS (or for that matter, GeoBra's/ Playmobil's). Even your examples don't make much sense. For instance Playmobil has been selling separate figures for as long as I can think. So did they really just ape LEGO? Probably not. It has been part of their portfolio since forever. And as I already said a few times: You mustn't apply your American market logic to Europe or Germany in particular. "Dr. Who" is a big thing just as "TMNT" are still oddly popular with kids. There's a ton of re-runs of these series on TV at any given moment currently. So Playmobil must be doing something right by latching onto that, after all?! Conversely, LEGO are probably doing something "wrong" by bringing out the umpteenth "Spiderman" set? We can stand here all day and argue about these things, but suffice it to say that there are truths beyond the mere business figures and you would likely feel differently if you actually lived here just as the situation might be totally reversed for me if I lived in the US where all this comic stuff reigns. Still, it doesn't change the fact that was the starting point of this thread: More licensed themes would not be smart on LEGO's part and as some comments show, they are missing out on huge parts of regional markets by simply not offering specific types of unlicensed products people want.

Mylenium

Selling individual figures and selling randomized blind-bag figures are entirely different things. Playmobil only began doing the latter after LEGO did. And while Dr. Who may be popular with kids, do you really think a vinyl figurine of the Fourth Doctor is aimed primarily at a child audience? Particularly from a company like Funko that is so intensely focused on an adult collectors' market? Whether or not the Spider-Man sets are as popular in Europe as in the United States, there's no mistaking the fact that they're primarily aimed at kids and aren't banking on adult nostalgia for portrayals of the character from the 80s or earlier.

As for the PR stuff, both companies may be willing to spin the facts in their favor, but it's ridiculous to think they would straight-up LIE about whether their sales in a particular region are growing or shrinking. What's more, if they WERE going to lie to make their sales in Europe sound better than they actually are, then why would they not do the same for the US instead of admitting to flat or declining sales figures? It's definitely smart to try and read between the lines in a press release and figure out what the company is NOT saying, but that's not the same as doubting anything and everything that comes from a press release just because the company is inevitably going to try and phrase it in a way that casts them in a positive light.

I entirely agree with you that abandoning non-licensed stuff would be a bad move, let alone giving up entirely on categories like Castle, Pirates, and Space. But I don't think that Playmobil is a particularly astute model for how they should handle their non-licensed properties, nor that LEGO's current strategies with regard to non-licensed themes are as disastrous as you make them sound. Even just in Germany, LEGO's share of the toy market is greater than Playmobil's, and I don't think that's likely to change for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked through the latest catalog (available in Lithuania) with my eyes of a child from early 90's. Note: I'm aware catalog doesn't show complete offering like Modulars or Ideas sets, but it is/was the source of inspiration for kids. Oh an boy it is boring! Despite catalog growing in number of pages for last couple of years (it has now whooping 128 pages) it barely caught my eye. I never liked these out-of-the-world themes much (such like Space), so overuse of these looks to like there are just a few options left - City, Speed Champions, some Creator stuff an Technic. There's just not much I would be dreaming of (except for Technic Bugatti) so I would be sleeping well.

Some non-core themes taking too much space. Super heroes take up 8 pages - am I interested in any of that stuff? No. Same with Star Wars - I'm yet to see half of the movies. It seem like any space related theme other than SW would be much more interesting now. At least for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, zux said:

I looked through the latest catalog (available in Lithuania) with my eyes of a child from early 90's. Note: I'm aware catalog doesn't show complete offering like Modulars or Ideas sets, but it is/was the source of inspiration for kids. Oh an boy it is boring! Despite catalog growing in number of pages for last couple of years (it has now whooping 128 pages) it barely caught my eye. I never liked these out-of-the-world themes much (such like Space), so overuse of these looks to like there are just a few options left - City, Speed Champions, some Creator stuff an Technic. There's just not much I would be dreaming of (except for Technic Bugatti) so I would be sleeping well.

Some non-core themes taking too much space. Super heroes take up 8 pages - am I interested in any of that stuff? No. Same with Star Wars - I'm yet to see half of the movies. It seem like any space related theme other than SW would be much more interesting now. At least for me.

For what it's worth, I'm also a child from the early '90s and the "out of the world" themes (by which I assume you mean fantasy, sci-fi, and other genres not based on the real world) have always been some of my favorites. Occasionally a City, Friends, or Technic set will grab my attention, but themes like Ninjago, Nexo Knights, and Elves are much more likely to earn my dollars. I rarely collect licensed themes, but I was much more into them as a kid and might pick up the occasional one-off set every now and again.

The main point I wanted to make with this is that our experiences are not universal. And considering that, I think it's a very good thing that Lego offers the variety it does. I'm sure that for every person like you who likes real-world themes, or for me who likes non-licensed fantasy/sci-fi themes, there's probably somebody else for whom those eight pages of Super Heroes sets are the most interesting pages of the book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aanchir said:

Even just in Germany, LEGO's share of the toy market is greater than Playmobil's, and I don't think that's likely to change for some time.

You can spin that either way. The fact of the matter is that presentation areas and shelf space in stores is about equal and Playmobil is just as present. In fact I would argue that Playmobil is even more present. So arguably it's not actual larger market penetration, just bigger grosses due to LEGO's higher pricing, which I never considered to be a good thing, anyway. As far as that's concerned, we're really talking about  completely different things and as I've told you in some other threads already, Playmobil is by and large the preferred go-to toy in some age groups here in Germany. Of course this would require a much more detailed analysis, but I maintain: The reality is different from what corporate reports may lead you to assume. LEGO can brag about being the world's number one toy company, yet my experiences tell a different story, which makes some of their claims dubious at best.

Beyond that I think you're missing an important point: Nobody is claiming that LEGOs product policy would be disastrous as far as the mere business side is concerned, but people are really beginning to get frustrated with the choice of subjects. Case in point: A lot of the success of the "Harry Potter" sets has to do with the simple fact that people are desperate for any kind of medieval-ish theme with some sort of castle, not with them being HP fans. And in my view that is disconcerting and a sign of how LEGO miss crucial markets and demos. Is getting people to buy your stuff simply because there are no good alternatives a sustainable business model? I don't think so and in the long run LEGO's ignorance of users wishes is going to hurt them.

Mylenium

9 minutes ago, Lyichir said:

The main point I wanted to make with this is that our experiences are not universal. And considering that, I think it's a very good thing that Lego offers the variety it does. I'm sure that for every person like you who likes real-world themes, or for me who likes non-licensed fantasy/sci-fi themes, there's probably somebody else for whom those eight pages of Super Heroes sets are the most interesting pages of the book.

Fair enough, but one possible way to interpret this is also gratuitousness. It often seems like LEGO is trying too hard to sell everything to everyone. And I share @zux sentiment - for us Europeans a lot of this stuff wouldn't need to be in there.

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son liked Ninjago, then Chima, then Ninjago again and NK too. Yet he didn't see any of the media / TV shows until quite recently. Similarly my daughter likes Elves and has never seen any of the media. I don't think the sets need media to sell. They need to be attractive to kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, MAB said:

I don't think the sets need media to sell. They need to be attractive to kids.

Well said!

Mylenium

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MAB said:

My son liked Ninjago, then Chima, then Ninjago again and NK too. Yet he didn't see any of the media / TV shows until quite recently. Similarly my daughter likes Elves and has never seen any of the media. I don't think the sets need media to sell. They need to be attractive to kids.

As both a former child and current parent, I think this really hits the nail on the head.  Growing up. I loved Lego (couldn't afford much of it but loved it anyway).  I didn't care it it was linked to other media or not _I_ wan't linked to other media in those days either (we only had one TV, it was black and white had a smaller screen than my current laptop and there were only 4 stations).  My first "mini-figures" didn't even have face printing or movable arms; none of that mattered.  The narrative was in my head.  My lego could be anything _I_ wanted it to be and the idea that a mini-figure would _come_ with a name or a backstory wasn't something I even considered.

Okay, jumping forward in time (before I start ranting about the old days when we had to walk to school in the snow, uphill, both ways...) my daughter loves her Duplo and "daddy's Legos" as well.  We've made a conscious decision to limit her exposure to TV and media powerhouses (she'll get that soon enough, despite our best efforts) so I KNOW she's never seen Lego media tie-ins (even licensed ones).  Just yesterday, we got a new Lego catalog in the mail and we sat down together and she told me what she liked and what she didn't.  It was amazing the way she looked at the stuff with the eye of an AFOL, she picked good sets and gave brutally honest reviews to a lot of licensed  and in-house IP kits that she felt just weren't very good.  Maybe being tied to media would encourage some people who are fans of that offering for be more accepting, but a lame kit is still a lame kit and deep down even kids know it.  Make a kit that's compelling (regardless of media tie-ins) and kids will want it.

My daughter has never seen Star Wars (at least not yet) but when she saw the new Sandcrawler she declared that the one I have is better, same thing for the latest remake of the Cantina.  She doesn't know what it's supposed to be, but recognizes the older versions as being superior.   As for characters, she recognizes Batman (not quite sure how), but everyone else is whomever she wants them to be.  Poor Darth Vader got folded into one of her play sessions as "bucket head monkey" and was the pet of one of her Duplo figures.  At her age, trying to give her a narrative to buy into just gets in the way, give her a clean slate to build on, and she'll fill it with a more meaningful story (to her) than anything she's see on TV anyway. 

Does linking a kit to a particular IP (in-house or otherwise) make it easier to market to certain demographics? Probably, specially if the commercial for the set is during the same show.  

Is having a tie-in gaurantee success/acceptance of the kit? Definitely not.

Does the lack of a tie-in make a good set less appealing? I doubt it.  If I had to reduce Lego's brand reputation to just one word, that word would be "quality"  People (even kids) recognize quality, and historically that has trumped issues of media tie-ins, popular fads and quarterly earnings.  Quality kits become popular; mediocre kits tied to popular culture end up in the discount bin at Target.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny actually. My daughter saw some of the Friends cartoons and really didn't like them. They were different to how she played with Friends (she has invented her own personalities for the characters) and got quite upset after seeing them thinking she had been doing it wrong and she stopped playing with them for a while. I had to explain to her that her making up her own stories was better than the cartoons as she could decide what they do. Eventually she made up new characters too to help get around this. Plus the Elves seemed to have moved in too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MAB said:

It's funny actually. My daughter saw some of the Friends cartoons and really didn't like them. They were different to how she played with Friends (she has invented her own personalities for the characters) and got quite upset after seeing them ...

I can relate, I went through a similar emotional crisis when TLG started printing faces on mini-figure heads.  When they were blank, I could imagine any expression the story called for, but stamping the same bloody expression on everyone's face made me want to put the heads on backwards to hid the smilie under their hair/helmet.

I think trying to force a uniform narrative on a creative toy like Lego is really tricky; for every kid who embraces the narrative, you risk disappointing/offending/belittling some other kid who dreamed up their own.  I guess that's why I've always thought going with the core archetypes (Space, City, Castle, Pirates, etc.) was better than getting bogged down in the details of named characters and well defined backstories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAB said:

My son liked Ninjago, then Chima, then Ninjago again and NK too. Yet he didn't see any of the media / TV shows until quite recently. Similarly my daughter likes Elves and has never seen any of the media. I don't think the sets need media to sell. They need to be attractive to kids.

This is a good point as well… most of the time, media tie-ins for themes are much like any marketing in that they help expand the reach of the products in question, but for these themes to succeed the core concept typically has to be pretty strong in and of itself. A comparison I make sometimes is the classic Pirates theme, which in a lot of ways was incredibly media-driven for its time, with comics, picture books, named characters, etc. The mobile game and TV show tie-ins for themes like Nexo Knights and Ninjago are in a lot of ways just an evolution of that concept. But just as back then, Ninjago sets aren't aimed only at people who partake in the supporting media. In a lot of ways, the media and sets are just meant to supplement each other, with the shows, books, games, etc. reinforcing kids' interests in the products and the products reinforcing kids' interests in the sets and vice-versa.

As an aside, this is also why I tend to be fairly cynical about some Bionicle fans' suggestions for that theme's story to be revived somehow (like as books/comics/movies) without the supposed "burden" of having to promote building sets to kids. It's true that the need to promote toys can sometimes put constraints on the direction and tone a merchandise-driven IP takes. But in a lot of ways the Bionicle story can be unappealing if not downright alienating without the toys to contextualize it, and some of the online Bionicle side stories which weren't as closely tied in with the current toys had a tendency to feel rather directionless. Critical reviews of Bionicle media such as the comics, video games, and movies tend to be far more negative than the perspectives of people who are already fans of the sets. I very strongly doubt that the Bionicle franchise would have lasted ten years with 30+ books, 4 movies, and numerous video games and online games if it hadn't been for its strengths as a toy line. Let alone that a current series like Ninjago with no toy tie-ins would have lasted 9 seasons, 8 years, and over 90 episodes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.