Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Nicklab

Pages: 1 ... 389 390 391 392 393 [394] 395 396 397 398 399 ... 449
5896
Other Toy Lines / Re: McFarlane Sportspicks
« on: October 19, 2003, 06:26 AM »
So, has anyone gotten the 12" NFL figures?  I'm passing on them myself.  I'm more stoked for the 2nd NFL 2-pack, with the Raiders Rich Gannon and the Bucs Derrick Brooks.

5897
Middle Earth / Re: Lord of the Rings Figures
« on: October 19, 2003, 06:25 AM »
It will probably depend on how the sales continue.  If sales remain solid following the release of ROTK, maybe ToyBiz will keep moving it forward.  You can also keep some measure of hope since there is a strong possibility of "The Hobbit" making it's way to the big screen in a few years.

5898
Other Toy Lines / Re: McFarlane Led Zeppelin & Jimi Hendrix
« on: October 19, 2003, 06:23 AM »
Thank God for Peter Grant!  I read about how he pioneered the change in how venues deal with artists.  It was a terrible arrangement until he told the venues to screw off, you can't have the artist unless you deal on our terms.

Music is also a major interest of mine, to the point where a regional tour and serious representation  may be on the near horizon.

As for the difference between mechanicals and performance royalties, I was always under the impression that the mechanical referred to airplay, and the performance was in reference to each copy of an album sold.  I'll have to consult a friend who works for a management company.  I thought I had that straight.

5899
Other Toy Lines / Re: McFarlane Led Zeppelin & Jimi Hendrix
« on: October 18, 2003, 07:19 PM »
Wow, you know your music business!  Actually though, touring and ancillary merchandise sales are a large percentage of a musicians income as well.

As for the various types of royalties you mentioned, the performance one is for the actual performance on the recording.  This one pays on a per unit (disc, tape, etc) basis.  The typical major label  rate is $.08 to $.11 per disc.  Rather pathetic, to be honest.  Business models like Ani DiFranco's Righteous Babe records, a self owned label, have proven far more profitable.

The mechanical is paid based on airplay.  Soundscan, an independent monitoring company,  keeps track of how many times a given recording is played on radio, and broadcasters pay a fee per playout.  MTV, however, has managed to skirt around paying mechanicals since they term music videos as promotional material, and not a musical performance.  I've yet to see anyone take on MTV to payout mechanicals, and they probably won't for fear of being blackballed by one of the biggest forces in the music industry.  Ironic, since MTV made their name playing music videos, but barely shows them at all anymore.

Print income is for sheet music sales.  This is usually a partnership with a publishing house that will do the actually score printing, and take a percentage of the sales as a fee.  This is a very low percentage source of income.

Synchronization fees refer to film or television use of  a song in a given production.  Fees must be paid for rights to use the song.  In the case of every artist, it's imperative to hold onto these publishing rights, as syncing fees can bring in serious money.  A single track being put on a movie soundtrack and placement in a major motion picture can easily run a couple hundred thousand dollars for a low level band on a major label.  A band I know was set to appear on the "American Wedding" soundtrack, and they had negotiated a fee in the mid 100 thousand range.  Too bad the deal fell through for them.  :(

Additionally, merch and touring are big income draws.  Far bigger than most people realize.  It dwarfs the $.08 to $.11 per disc that most major label artists earn in their performance royalty.  Bands like Metallica (an extreme example) have made themselves rich for a lifetime because of touring and merch.

5900
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Goin' Shoppin' - need your help
« on: October 17, 2003, 03:31 PM »
Any kind of condition is cool, although I don't know if they're still anywhere to be found.

5901
Other Toy Lines / Re: McFarlane Led Zeppelin & Jimi Hendrix
« on: October 17, 2003, 10:21 AM »
Actually, Jimi Hendrix's family finally regained control of his music within the past few years.  So, money from sales of any Hendrix music goes to his family.

And you are correct, Sems Fir.  The people who own rights to songs, called publishing rights in the music industry, are the ones who primarily benefit from the sales of music.  Yes, record labels also benefit from the sales of CDs, but CD sales are how a large number of musicians earn a living, and most of them are far from being rich.

5902
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Goin' Shoppin' - need your help
« on: October 17, 2003, 10:17 AM »
DEFINITELY!  We don't have Meijers here in NY, and the red Red Wings 3-pack was exclusive to Meijers.

5903
JD Sports Forum! / Re: Batter up! The JD Baseball Thread...
« on: October 17, 2003, 12:36 AM »
THE YANKEES WIN!  THU-UH-UH YANKEES WIN!

And another Yankee third baseman comes through in the clutch during the postseason!  Unbelievable!

To the Red Sox fans:  your team fought valiantly, all the way to the 11th inning.  You should be proud of your team.

5904
Other Toy Lines / Re: McFarlane Led Zeppelin & Jimi Hendrix
« on: October 16, 2003, 08:36 PM »
He may be, but there are lots of other musicians who aren't.  Sorry, I take the downloading thing very personally.

5905
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Goin' Shoppin' - need your help
« on: October 16, 2003, 07:04 PM »
Going to look for the red Detroit Red Wings set, huh Morg?

5906
JD Sports Forum! / Re: Batter up! The JD Baseball Thread...
« on: October 16, 2003, 11:34 AM »
Please tell me that's a photoshop job and that kind of hostility isn't bred into the youth of New England at that tender of an age.

5907
I recall seeing still images from the Clone Wars cartoon of a red Clone Trooper with a shoulder pauldron and possibly the ARC Trooper style waist skirt.  It seems like a decent concept for a figure.  It might very well be as easy as a kit-bash.

5908
The base is very cool.  Unfortunately, it looks as though they might be  moving away from the stylized base concept.   The images that Hasbro put out a couple of weeks ago showed figures with non-descript, non scene-specific bases.  That's a little bit of a disappointment, since I'm a big fan of the scene specifc bases.

5909
Quote
I personally think that this is an extremely unfair comparison.  Just from a business model standpoint, Hasbro and these other companies are completely different animals.

First, licensing.  Star Wars is a license that is paid from Hasbro to Lucasfilm Ltd.  So right off the bat, Hasbro is operating at a loss.  The SW license cost them plenty, including a 10% stake in the company that George Lucas now owns.

Differences in companies doesn't necessarily make an unfair playing field though Nick.  That's a tad shortsighted.  So we're to assume that Hasbro's licensing fee means they're in a weaker financial situation right off the bat when compared to a company like 21st Century Toys, BBI, or Dragon?

Come on now...  We're talking about a public corporation, muliti-national, and with a capital reserve that makes the small private companies like Dragon, BBI, and 21st look like a mom & pop general store up against Wall-Mart.

Licensing is not the big crutch everyone claims it to be...

Tack onto that the fact other companies DO pay licensing fees too (Though smaller), and it's hard to say Hasbro's licensing issues are a solid excuse as to any shortcomings within the Star Wars brand.

I will agree with you that we're comparing 2 very different company styles, but I can't help but laugh when anyone gives the "unfair advantage" to the smaller private companies who struggle financially.  Hasbro has a distinct advantage as a large corporation that helps negate licensing as a real issue (If we're doing comparisons here).

I never said that other companies weren't paying licensing fees.  But, when the Star Wars license ticks in at half a billions dollars and 10% ownership in your company, that's a hefty cost.  The other licensing fees that the companies you're talking about  pale in comparison.



LFL's personal approval process can be compared to anything within any other company as well.  For 21st Century, their process relies on the strictest historical accuracy in deco or details...  For Dragon, their approval process is reported to take up to 20 different tries at a single figure before the heads of Dragon say "OK, now it's ready for production".  

LFL's maybe strict, but let's face it...  Some of what we've seen isn't exactly amazing in accuracy sometimes so how strict can their approval process really be?  They stamp it as "OK, you didn't cross our guidelines" likely and they Hasbro starts cranking it out.  Star Wars, by its very nature, is going to have more leeway in that regard.  It's fiction, and as such some things can be compromised.  The companies working on military product tend not to have that luxury.

You're leaving out a lot of other steps.  First Hasbro has to approve something at the departmental level.  Next, they no doubt have a corporate safety standards department that it has to go through.  These are after all approved for children what, ages 5 and up?  THEN, it proceeds to LFL.  Lucasfilm has been renowned for being sticklers for what will and will not go out.  This delays the process, and in the long run costs more money.

Quote
The fact is, the small companies like BBi, Dragon, 21st Century, etc don't have anywhere near the cost factor.  Let's face facts:  it's far cheaper for these companies to do business than it is for Hasbro.  As a result, they can offer a somewhat superiro product at about the same price points.

No, there's no "fact" to that at all.  

Once again, you negate the fact that these are dramatically smaller companies with much higher production costs than Hasbro due to capital restraints.  You don't recognize their own licensing fees, and the fact that they're working under the same pressures and overhead that Hasbro is, and doing it from a much smaller company's standpoint.

To say they're able to put out product cheaper than Hasbro is simply misinformation...  Some of these companies, even with very high sales, are struggling because their profit must be turned right back into the company for its own growth.  21st Century continuously makes profit but has financial issues because their overhead bogs the company down, even with good sales.  

So they're somehow still able to make things cheaper than Hasbro does?  That doesn't really make any sense unless you're looking at it black & white in that Star Wars is just a huge license and 21st's brands aren't.  Not a fair analysis by any stretch, but then you'd be correct I guess.

The fact is that the bottom line is the core fact.  Are the smaller companies having a harder time getting by?  Yes.  They have a smaller market share.  They're fundamentally smaller companies.  They have higher production costs because they can't manufacture in the quantity level that Hasbro does at a comparable expense level.  But, the core issue once again is the licensing.  Are any of these other companies able or willing to shell out the kind of capital needed to produce a viable line?  Are they able to stick it out to see an eventual profit?  Probably not.
 
Quote
Regarding GI Joe:  GI Joe is able to make more money than Star Wars because Hasbro owns all the rights to GI Joe.  As a result, they don't have to pay any licensing fees, and has free reign over this property.  A very different business model.

Actually it's the same business model since it's Hasbro producing a toy line (Even same markets, trying to balance between older and younger/newer collectors).  It has a distinct overhead I'm sure, with a lot of similarities too, but you're right there's no cost for licensing...

Of course, does licensing suddenly become the key overhead cost t hough?  No, so I don't think one rather small overhead variance is what makes G.I. Joe more profitable than Star Wars.

GI Joe is an intellectual property that is wholly owned by Hasbro.  As a result, Hasbro does not have to factor in licensing payments in their costs.  Hasbro owns all the rights to GI Joe.  They're therefore able to spend more money on R&D, manufacturing, marketing and other costs because there isn't the looming spector of licensing.  And if they play smart businessmen in GI Joe and keep their costs down, they can get a much higher profit margin out of the GI Joe line because they have a dramatically lower overhead.

And I have to restate, I and just about any other business person would agree that half a billions dollars is not a small overhead variance.


5910
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Xbox
« on: October 16, 2003, 09:38 AM »
He's a funny guy!  He just tells a story funny, that's all!

Pages: 1 ... 389 390 391 392 393 [394] 395 396 397 398 399 ... 449