NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9060430" data-attributes="member: 7034611">I include that in my consideration, but it is obviously impossible to measure at this time and we will never know, so I see this mostly as an excuse by those that do not want to accept that the movie did not make money. Maybe the brand benefits enough from this, but that seems pretty unlikely given the gap it needs to fill.convenient, so unless the whole WotC CU fails, HAT can be declared a success, even if it left a 100M hole.I understand that, I don't think HAT is building them 100M worth of brand value however. Let's see what the numbers for the second quarter are, and then we talk. If we see no progress there, then I doubt HAT will show one 5 years down the line either.no, it's more that we do not have the long term numbers, and that we likely will never know. I am saying it is unlikely that it fills the remaining hole for a reason, and that is that I am considering the long tail.yes, same as HAT, not promoting a single product. I am sure Nike has some idea of whether their campaign was successful though, same for Dove or WotC. The problem is we will never know, so you cannot really use this as your 'see, this is how HAT made money' proof.agreed, that was my 'big if' <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />By whom, us or Hasbro? I agree that we will not know, I would assume that Hasbro will have a pretty good idea.Either way, if we do not know, we cannot actually claim that it turned a profit because of this. We can at most speculate.yes, but just like marketing, it has to pay for itself in increased salesI am not wrong, you also explain how it is supposed to make money in the long run..you do not have to explain this to me, I understand the concept. My 'problem' with this is that 1) it is much too early to tell based on this (which I pretty much acknowledge in every post), 2) we will never actually know either way, so 3) anyone who claims that HAT is making its money back this way has no leg to stand on.This is what I am refuting, the claim that 'HAT is a success, if only you consider everything'. You do not know that, this is at best speculation and at worst just wishful thinking.I am fully aware that it could make the 100M gap up, I do not think it is likely, but I concede that I will not know whether it will / did and likely never will. That is far different from claiming that this is how it will do so.no, I don't think I did. I also don't think HAT was supposed to be a loss leader. Do you think so?</blockquote>

Verification