Will MLP survive the next few years in it's current form?

[Mermaid]

All of the images unfortunately just show what naturally happens over time - its not brain washing or marketing forcing something on culture. Its just that styles/technology/taste/perceptions change as time passes - what was visually appealing 10 years ago may no longer be; as a society we change. Try going to your office with shoulder pads in your suit or out partying with crimped hair and day glo bangles...you wont fit with the current taste, toys are no different their designs just adapt. In another 20 or 30 years, any of these toy lines which are still about will look as different from G4 as G1 does right now.

Ummmm give me shoulder pads and bangles and I'm there cat!!!

[rtattles]

WoW hathrocat, you sound like a CEO or some marketing guru. I wish I have all those knowledge you have!

I'll laugh if Hasbro isn't profiting since MLP and Transformers are doing crazy strong, and the Transformer movie is coming out, so it's going to generate sales again! I think MLPs will be riding stronger if they hadn't gone all nazi on the Bronies recently regarding copyrights issues.

[ponyqueen]

Next few years? I'm just hoping for a new wave of brushable characters for the holiday season. Two new earth, unicorn, and pegasi, please! Maybe two waves, one for this summer and fall, one for the holidays! Oo! With wintery themed symbols! *Dreams*

[Al-1701]

I think the current model is a bit shaky.  While I think having a main cast as an anchor for a brand is a good thing (and something Transformers and G.I. Joe have done for the past quarter century), they can't be the be all and end all of the brand like the Mane 6 have become (and they're not the icons I would want to build the foundation of the brand on like Optimus Prime, Megatron, and Starscream are).  You need fresh variety to come along every release for the customers you already have.

On it's current path, G4 is working really hard at not being viable.  However, it just needs fresh blood to fix whatever ails it.

[Zapper]

All of the images unfortunately just show what naturally happens over time - its not brain washing or marketing forcing something on culture. Its just that styles/technology/taste/perceptions change as time passes - what was visually appealing 10 years ago may no longer be; as a society we change. Try going to your office with shoulder pads in your suit or out partying with crimped hair and day glo bangles...you wont fit with the current taste, toys are no different their designs just adapt. In another 20 or 30 years, any of these toy lines which are still about will look as different from G4 as G1 does right now.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Of course it is mostly due to one company mimicking another company's sucess formula, but marketing in itself is nothing but brainwashing. People always want to make it sound like marketing strategies are just taking what is naturally there and catering to it but that implies that all our gender roles and other artificial, literally man-made concepts in our cultures are all naturally given and pre-implemented and that's a big fat lie, evidenced by our very own history.

Rant about the toy industry ahead:

Spoiler

I do feel like media for girls is indeed pushing a certain bodytype in toys for girls and in the series and movies that are targeted towards them. There is a much more limited line-up of forms and shapes that is considered acceptable for girls than for boys. Boys have robots in all shapes and forms, creatures that are all male-coded and come in thin and thick, super deformed cartoons that are not all about big eyes and tiny bodies but a wide range of caricatures, idealized heroes with abs of steel as well as thin and lanky, fat and bulky heroes, antiheroes, villains in phantastic shapes. Now look at what girls are given. Cutesy and/or perfect woman and cute or decorated animal - tadaa.
And people think this is harmless because it only follows what girls want. But why do they want it? Because it's the only thing they grow up with, because it's ingrained in our society that women should look a certain way while men are more defined by their actions.
Marketing people will always defend the "grown up, more human, more pretty" look by saying that girls grow up faster now than in the 80s. Oh gee, I wonder why so many little girls stop being little girls and jump straight into teenagehood without the entire pre-teen phase - because society wants them to. It doesn't matter if Hollywood or elsewhere, women need to look younger and younger while maturing faster and faster. And they need to buy the products earlier: make-up, certain kinds of clothing and shoes, hygiene products - even if they don't need them at all, even if they damage their developping bodies (hello, high heels!).
And the fun thing is they even get shamed for it.
The industry literally tells little girls to pretend they are already adults so they can make them buy all the coscmetics and fashion and crap. Why else are almost all girl franchises somehow about fashion and lifestyle or at least incorporate a good chunk of that into the franchise? Because it prepares the girls to be consumers of future female products earlier.

And how do you make the girls want the diet pills and that junk? You make their childhood heroes tiny, thin and as streamlined as possible with the least physical diversity.

I hope nobody will see this as an attack on their personal interests now. I love "girly" stuff a big deal but I think there are some glaring problems that are unique to this genre.
I am thankful for more recent doll franchises like Monster High and Ever After High, while still looking stereotypically cutesy, samey and thin, they at least concentrate more on diversity in terms of character development and story. A bit more like the franchises of the 80s that assigned more character to their figures and gave them a bit more to do. It slowly goes back to fantasy adventures in some areas and even Barbie got a fun makeover with the new webseries that is literally a loving parody on Barbie rather than the godawful Barbie movies, that are always filled with fairies, fashion design and a completely incompetend and passive Barbie caracter (why do I know this? I've been watching them all with a good friend of mine for research reasons. That's not a joke )

Blablabla, this was such a soapboxy rant, but this subject interests me as a former marketing jerk and aspiring product designer, so I hope I didn't come off as too preachy or mean

PS: I wouldn't have a problem with the ponies looking similar to how they are now. I think the current design smoothed out the more distorted G3.5 design. I think the future appeal of MLP will have to rely more on storytelling and a much better toyline in terms of quality and diversity in play and collecting.

[Al-1701]

I know one thing I would like to see change is more of a return to the full-on high fantasy feel of the original cartoon.  If boys can have unabashed science fiction in Transformers and G.I. Joe, why can't there by a completely fantasy My Little Pony cartoon?

[hathorcat]

WoW hathrocat, you sound like a CEO or some marketing guru. I wish I have all those knowledge you have!

I'll laugh if Hasbro isn't profiting since MLP and Transformers are doing crazy strong, and the Transformer movie is coming out, so it's going to generate sales again! I think MLPs will be riding stronger if they hadn't gone all nazi on the Bronies recently regarding copyrights issues.

LOL - I am a campaign marketing consultant We are a naturally nosy people when it comes to any other business.

All of the images unfortunately just show what naturally happens over time - its not brain washing or marketing forcing something on culture. Its just that styles/technology/taste/perceptions change as time passes - what was visually appealing 10 years ago may no longer be; as a society we change. Try going to your office with shoulder pads in your suit or out partying with crimped hair and day glo bangles...you wont fit with the current taste, toys are no different their designs just adapt. In another 20 or 30 years, any of these toy lines which are still about will look as different from G4 as G1 does right now.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Of course it is mostly due to one company mimicking another company's sucess formula, but marketing in itself is nothing but brainwashing. People always want to make it sound like marketing strategies are just taking what is naturally there and catering to it but that implies that all our gender roles and other artificial, literally man-made concepts in our cultures are all naturally given and pre-implemented and that's a big fat lie, evidenced by our very own history.

Rant about the toy industry ahead:

Spoiler

I do feel like media for girls is indeed pushing a certain bodytype in toys for girls and in the series and movies that are targeted towards them. There is a much more limited line-up of forms and shapes that is considered acceptable for girls than for boys. Boys have robots in all shapes and forms, creatures that are all male-coded and come in thin and thick, super deformed cartoons that are not all about big eyes and tiny bodies but a wide range of caricatures, idealized heroes with abs of steel as well as thin and lanky, fat and bulky heroes, antiheroes, villains in phantastic shapes. Now look at what girls are given. Cutesy and/or perfect woman and cute or decorated animal - tadaa.
And people think this is harmless because it only follows what girls want. But why do they want it? Because it's the only thing they grow up with, because it's ingrained in our society that women should look a certain way while men are more defined by their actions.
Marketing people will always defend the "grown up, more human, more pretty" look by saying that girls grow up faster now than in the 80s. Oh gee, I wonder why so many little girls stop being little girls and jump straight into teenagehood without the entire pre-teen phase - because society wants them to. It doesn't matter if Hollywood or elsewhere, women need to look younger and younger while maturing faster and faster. And they need to buy the products earlier: make-up, certain kinds of clothing and shoes, hygiene products - even if they don't need them at all, even if they damage their developping bodies (hello, high heels!).
And the fun thing is they even get shamed for it.
The industry literally tells little girls to pretend they are already adults so they can make them buy all the coscmetics and fashion and crap. Why else are almost all girl franchises somehow about fashion and lifestyle or at least incorporate a good chunk of that into the franchise? Because it prepares the girls to be consumers of future female products earlier.

And how do you make the girls want the diet pills and that junk? You make their childhood heroes tiny, thin and as streamlined as possible with the least physical diversity.

I hope nobody will see this as an attack on their personal interests now. I love "girly" stuff a big deal but I think there are some glaring problems that are unique to this genre.
I am thankful for more recent doll franchises like Monster High and Ever After High, while still looking stereotypically cutesy, samey and thin, they at least concentrate more on diversity in terms of character development and story. A bit more like the franchises of the 80s that assigned more character to their figures and gave them a bit more to do. It slowly goes back to fantasy adventures in some areas and even Barbie got a fun makeover with the new webseries that is literally a loving parody on Barbie rather than the godawful Barbie movies, that are always filled with fairies, fashion design and a completely incompetend and passive Barbie caracter (why do I know this? I've been watching them all with a good friend of mine for research reasons. That's not a joke )

Blablabla, this was such a soapboxy rant, but this subject interests me as a former marketing jerk and aspiring product designer, so I hope I didn't come off as too preachy or mean

PS: I wouldn't have a problem with the ponies looking similar to how they are now. I think the current design smoothed out the more distorted G3.5 design. I think the future appeal of MLP will have to rely more on storytelling and a much better toyline in terms of quality and diversity in play and collecting.

Alas we shall have to agree to disagree With advertising yes its totally about forcing a stereotype but that's not what the discussion here is - its about why products develop. Marketing is not brainwashing - marketing by its definition and nature is about finding out what is wanted and then getting it to the market - the good old fashioned 4 Ps. We dont ever take a product and force it on its audience; a product is developed because there is a need for it and then the marketing process is all about bringing that item to market. Seldom as a marketeer do you have any concrete influence on the actual product. Or to be more exact you get involved in product finishing and promotion design and perhaps on refining. But the hard core product itself? No; that's something else altogether. I am sorry for being a bit boring and ranty back too But being in the profession I always get annoyed when people blame marketeers and advertisers as being the bad guys who are making every girl in the world want to be skinny - nope we are just the people who then have to sell the product already past R&D, design and manufacture. Trust me advertising is not that successful. Its a society thing; people and opinions change with time and products and advertising/marketing adapt with it and, yes, take it to the extreme on occasion.

[Al-1701]

I guess it's more accurate to say advertisers are complacent in the perpetuation of the social norms Zapper mentioned.  And having studied marketing as a business major, they really have no choice.  A product or service is put in front of them and they're told sell it.

And Hasbro's strategy bypasses Madison Avenue.  They make shows starring characters representing their products.

Though I do have to ask, does anyone else fill the moral was rather heavy-handed in its delivery in the finale?

[Taxandria]

Hathorcat, I want to pick your brain a little on something that I see at my local Toys R US that's been bothering me. For the past 5 or 6 months, the store displayed Skylanders in a huge floor to ceiling shelving unit so it's the first thing you see as you walk in. A massive banner on top, tons of toys beneath. For months.

Then finally they changed it but lo and behold, it's now Transformers. Never have I seen this display for Frozen (which was a huge deal and parents are still trying to get!) or any other girl oriented toys. They could *easily* do an MLP display or Barbie etc. What's their problem?

I don't like sexism and we sure get enough of it when it comes to the toys (LEGOs in pink for girls, bah.)

Should I complain to TRU or is it a deeper issue?

[Al-1701]

It's a bit of a deeper issue.  They display is probably reserved for things that huge releases.  Skylanders Swap Force was a huge release and so is the newest wave of Transformers.  If My Little Pony did something like release two dozen new characters as brushables, then there could be an argument they deserve the display.

[Wardah]

My TRU had a big Disney Princess display around the time Cinderella came out on DVD. They probably didn't have a Frozen display because nobody was expecting Frozen to do as well as it did after Brave and Tangled only did okay toywise. That's why it's so freaking hard to find an Elsa doll.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[hathorcat]

Hathorcat, I want to pick your brain a little on something that I see at my local Toys R US that's been bothering me. For the past 5 or 6 months, the store displayed Skylanders in a huge floor to ceiling shelving unit so it's the first thing you see as you walk in. A massive banner on top, tons of toys beneath. For months.

Then finally they changed it but lo and behold, it's now Transformers. Never have I seen this display for Frozen (which was a huge deal and parents are still trying to get!) or any other girl oriented toys. They could *easily* do an MLP display or Barbie etc. What's their problem?

I don't like sexism and we sure get enough of it when it comes to the toys (LEGOs in pink for girls, bah.)

Should I complain to TRU or is it a deeper issue?

The areas you refer to are really more "in store marketing" than a retailer decision. Every store does it and it can be seen in a variety of different ways. So before you assume boys lines are getting a bigger push, check out the other promotional activity - you may find girls lines being pushed this way. These include everything from end caps, off shelf displays, floor graphics, audio advertising [this can be a as blatant as "check out our offer" or as subtle as playing the theme tune from a Disney movie], screen displays, gondola end-cards, shelf-edge talkers, coupons and even live action activity.

Its not sexism its all about $$$ and what is going to sell the most or what is going to benefit most from the marketing push. Different brands are normally promoted in different ways. You will tend to find male products tend to be pushed in an "in your face" and "HEY PAY ATTENTION TO ME" kind of way. Advertising to women tends to be a little more subtle. Advertising talks to us differently depending on gender.

Outside of grocery shopping, 60% of all in store purchases in industry specific retailers such as TRU, are unintended purchases! Thats a staggering amount when you think about it and its made up of people just picking up something they did not plan to buying an alternative to something they did want to buy. Thats why in store marketing is becoming more and more critical to manufacturers and why you see so many of these promo displays.

Promotional space like this is not just a TRU decision. Manufacturers actually pay retailers a commission if they offer end caps [aisle ends] promotional spaces or off shelf display areas. And getting some retailers to do this is both hard and expensive. Some of them guard their promotional space with a pack of money hungry wolves I used to work with one of the worlds biggest sportswear brands and even trying to get promotional space when we were pushing something was a bit of a long drawn out process. We had to do everything from pay for the space through to prove to the retailer it was going to be worth their while to stock the item in that kind of quantity and sometimes even provide stock before orders. You also have to work with the retailer in regards the appearance of your push - because retailers very much need to keep to their retailer science. This means they need everything in the right place to encourage shoppers and they also like to ensure all in store marketing is in sympathy with one another. In addition as the manufacturer you want to put in place promises about category exclusivity and sometimes even checking there will be no juxtaposing campaign running concurrently or consecutively with your activity.

Some times large promotional spaces such as those you mention are "hired" by a manufacturer. This is not done at TRU store level; its done at upper management levels. Manufacturers will work with retailers to decide which stores have what pattern of stock - do Transformers sell well in this store? does Disney Princess fly out of these shops? They will factor in local demographics, local competitors as well as buying patterns. They will then agree promotional space, select which stores get what push and roll that out. The decision of which retailers get that push is a financial one. Not to mention that some lines simply have a bigger marketing budget or a different marketing strategy - that is also going to influence which brands retailers and manufacturers decide to promote this way.

The area at the front of a store you mention is not even technically considered a selling space - its called the "decompression zone" - its pretty much useless as a selling space because your mind is just settling into the shopping vibe. So its traditionally used for promotional activity - it is however a very very valuable promotional space as it sets in the shoppers mind the concept of the product. It means even if you are not in for that item, you may well seek it out on shelves further into the store....part of that 60% impulsive shopping we mentioned before Its supposed to hint at whats to be found inside rather than actually be something you pick up then and there

And now I have completely bored everyone LOL.

[brittney_rochelle]

Retailers will push what they either expect to sell or want to sell up front. I work at GameStop and we push our marketing majors up front as soon as you walk in the door. We have Skylanders on the left when you walk in, clearly visible from the door. Right now we have a giant 6-foot-tall man standing next to you when you open the door (it's quite alarming actually) so we can push the NBA game because it isn't selling well.

We don't have to push Watch_Dogs or Skylanders  because they are best sellers. We have to push NBA and Wolfenstein because they aren't selling. We will shove that stuff in your face! It's all promotion to motivate you to at least LOOK at the games.

(Speaking of Skylanders, GS is having another Skylanders Day sale to promote Trap Team. These days are soooo much fun. I love working them because the kids are amazing!