If past years are any indication, we will probably see people live blogging the event, as well as the possible webcast.  THAT is one of the things that I was very proud to help get going at SDCC in 2009.

The Game of Thrones panel is on teh interwebz now.  George R.R. Martin moderates, and the panel includes the two show runners and several prominent cast members.

Saw the new Galactus with Silver Surfer tonight, as well as the Giant Sized X-Men multipack.  I've been able to ignore this line for a while, but those sets were awesome!

THIS may get me to finally buy an X-Box 360.  Very cool.

I've been doing some regular toy runs over the past several weeks.  And I cannot help but notice a glut of Green Lantern product at a number of retailers.  Notably with TRU and WalMart.  Did Mattel just go out of their minds with the projected sales of this line, or did the retailers really think that the movie would generate massive toy sales?

Hasbro showed EXACTLY what would happen to sites that got belligerent in the Q&A process:  they got cut off, or they got snarky, non-answer responses.  Treat Hasbro like garbage and they will do the same to your website.  And I can think of one site that tried that kind of hard-nosed approach and got nothing for it.  Other sites adjusted and were able to make something of the Q&A relationship.  And like any relationship there is a lot of give & take. 


-The fan sites need news from Hasbro in order to drive traffic to their sites
-Hasbro uses the fan sites as a free PR outlet
-Hasbro uses the fan sites (forums, in particular) to conduct market research within the collector community and get a general sense of what collectors are interested in
-The fan sites that are part of the Q&A process get credentials for events like Toy Fair, etc

Biting the hand that feeds you may serve your own conscience well in the short term, but in the long term it can be far more damaging.  Long story short, some sites handle the process better than others.  Some avoid the blatantly obvious questions that will be asked by 6 other sites.  Some provide historical context in order to elicit a better response.  And some simply know to avoid certain topics because they're simply non-starters.

And say what you will about Derryl DePriest, but he took the line from the dregs of the 2004 Saga line and built up something VERY GOOD over the past 7 years.  The previous Star Wars brand manager barely had a clue about Star Wars.  Has there been a decline in the brand in recent years?  Absolutely.  People who have been with the modern Star Wars line knew very well that once REVENGE OF THE SITH had it's run that sales of the movie lines were going to decline.  Combine that with how the past couple of years have been rocky due to the economic downturn, and I think those are the overriding factors.  You want to look at distribution issues?  Look more at the way the retailers are ordering.  They're the ones with the highest level of uncertainty right now in the entire chain.

Hmmm.  A highly sought after convention exclusive, and limited availability?  Sounds like someone might be trying to stir up interest in the line again.

Gentle Giant did this in the past.  They had convention exclusives that were tough to come by.  Limited production runs, etc, etc.  And it was all done in the name of "creating buzz".

Having watched the trailer you can count me in the group that is questioning the need for a reboot at this point. 

That answer is very simple:  it was all about money. 

Sony had the option to keep Spiderman as long as they would keep producing Spiderman films.  They had to commence production of a new film by a certain point in time, otherwise the rights to Spiderman would revert to Marvel studios.  They could not get a 4th Sam Raimi / Tobey Maguire movie greenlit, hence the decision to reboot.  The three Spiderman movies had grossed over $2 billion for Sony, so with a cash-cow like that they could not just let it go.