Random Hasbro Ponderings
Oct. 6th, 2003 12:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
patgundWhile at Conjecture, I was having an interesting conversation with two friends of mine who are game developers. Both have severe problems with the D20 system of gaming that WIzards of the Coast is promoting on almost anything gaming-wise, and there seems to be a concern that WotC may try to use their leverage to turn D20 into a gaming monoculture, similar to Windows in the computer field.
The problem is that WotC is owned by the toy company Hasbro. Which has it's paws into just about anything, (including the Kenner, Tonka and Playskool lines.) This got me to thinking about something.
I'm a toy collector as well as a gamer. And of the four things I collect the most, three of the lines, (Gi Joe, Transformers, and Zoids), are all either owned by Hasbro, or licensed in the US by Hasbro. The only line I collect that they don't own is Lego.
Lego is a family-owned company, and has resisted attempts in the past to buy them out. Unlike many toy companies, they own a fair amount of real estate, (Legoland Billund, California, Windsor, and Germany, for starters), and have stakes in films as well. Lego resisted licensing for a long time, but finally started doing media-based Lego sets a few years ago, and those have become quite popular. (Currently their licenses are Star Wars, Harry Potter, and Spiderman, as well as "Bob the Builder" duplo sets).
This year, Hasbro started their "Build to Rule" series of Lego-compatible building block sets, using tie-ins to their GI Joe, Transformer, and Tonka lines. Response to those sets have been luke-warm at best. Lego collectors don't like them, (and the two sets I got do not stay together at all well), and many TransFans and Joe collectors don't much like them either. Usually if one of Hasbro's toy lines does badly it's first year, they drop it like yesterday's garbage and go on to the next latest and greatest.
However, I have to wonder if they plan to do that with "Build to Rule". And the reason is simple - Star Wars.
Star Wars is one of Hasbro's biggest money-makers, and they make just about anything to tie in with that series. Even down to Playskool Star Wars sets for preschoolers. And they've been jealously protecting their turf as well. When Galoob toys brought out their Star Wars action fleet line with little figures for the vehicles, Hasbro tried to claim that those were "action figures" and therefore Galoob couldn't sell them. Same thing when Lego came out with their Star Wars line - Hasbro threatened Lego by claiming that the Lego "minifig" was an action figure. In both cases, both Lucasfilm and the courts came down against Hasbro.
Hasbro neutralized Galoob by buying them out. Sure enough, MiniMachines are now Hasbro, and they do sell the same small Star Wars vehicles - minus the figures that used to go with them.
But Hasbro can't do this with Lego. Not only is Lego privately owned, but they're far bigger than Galoob was. However, Lego's Star Wars licence is due for renewal within another year.
Enter the "Build to Rule" line of blocks. Personally, I've started to wonder if they're a "trojan horse". It doesn't matter to Hasbro if the line sells or not, the key is when Lego goes to renew the Star Wars licence, they can now go to Lucasfilm and say "well, we have a building block system as well, and since we have the action figure licence, we can tie those into the block sets as well, and we can offer you x amount of money for that licecne."
Basically, I think the sole purpose of the "build to rule" line is to try and get the Star Wars building block licence away from Lego, and add it to the rest of Hasbro "Star Wars" cash cows.
Anyone want to comment?
The problem is that WotC is owned by the toy company Hasbro. Which has it's paws into just about anything, (including the Kenner, Tonka and Playskool lines.) This got me to thinking about something.
I'm a toy collector as well as a gamer. And of the four things I collect the most, three of the lines, (Gi Joe, Transformers, and Zoids), are all either owned by Hasbro, or licensed in the US by Hasbro. The only line I collect that they don't own is Lego.
Lego is a family-owned company, and has resisted attempts in the past to buy them out. Unlike many toy companies, they own a fair amount of real estate, (Legoland Billund, California, Windsor, and Germany, for starters), and have stakes in films as well. Lego resisted licensing for a long time, but finally started doing media-based Lego sets a few years ago, and those have become quite popular. (Currently their licenses are Star Wars, Harry Potter, and Spiderman, as well as "Bob the Builder" duplo sets).
This year, Hasbro started their "Build to Rule" series of Lego-compatible building block sets, using tie-ins to their GI Joe, Transformer, and Tonka lines. Response to those sets have been luke-warm at best. Lego collectors don't like them, (and the two sets I got do not stay together at all well), and many TransFans and Joe collectors don't much like them either. Usually if one of Hasbro's toy lines does badly it's first year, they drop it like yesterday's garbage and go on to the next latest and greatest.
However, I have to wonder if they plan to do that with "Build to Rule". And the reason is simple - Star Wars.
Star Wars is one of Hasbro's biggest money-makers, and they make just about anything to tie in with that series. Even down to Playskool Star Wars sets for preschoolers. And they've been jealously protecting their turf as well. When Galoob toys brought out their Star Wars action fleet line with little figures for the vehicles, Hasbro tried to claim that those were "action figures" and therefore Galoob couldn't sell them. Same thing when Lego came out with their Star Wars line - Hasbro threatened Lego by claiming that the Lego "minifig" was an action figure. In both cases, both Lucasfilm and the courts came down against Hasbro.
Hasbro neutralized Galoob by buying them out. Sure enough, MiniMachines are now Hasbro, and they do sell the same small Star Wars vehicles - minus the figures that used to go with them.
But Hasbro can't do this with Lego. Not only is Lego privately owned, but they're far bigger than Galoob was. However, Lego's Star Wars licence is due for renewal within another year.
Enter the "Build to Rule" line of blocks. Personally, I've started to wonder if they're a "trojan horse". It doesn't matter to Hasbro if the line sells or not, the key is when Lego goes to renew the Star Wars licence, they can now go to Lucasfilm and say "well, we have a building block system as well, and since we have the action figure licence, we can tie those into the block sets as well, and we can offer you x amount of money for that licecne."
Basically, I think the sole purpose of the "build to rule" line is to try and get the Star Wars building block licence away from Lego, and add it to the rest of Hasbro "Star Wars" cash cows.
Anyone want to comment?
