D&D General Dungeons and Dragons: The Makeup Set!!!


log in or register to remove this ad

MGibster

Legend
The kids didn't want the GI Joe Ice Cream, GI Joe Shirts and GI Joe Pencil Cases. By the late 80s this stuff was being offloaded in clearance stores all over the place - and it was about that time that the animated show really died. They tried to bring it back in the early 90s ... but it had no identity and lacked the capability to draw in kids.

Are you kidding? We couldn't get enough licensed products when I was a kid. It sold well until it didn't and they switched to using other licensed properties. For all the problems the Masters of the Universe, GI Joe, and Transformers lines had, it's possible they just had a good run and kids turned to other interests. In 1986 I got a few Joe figures, including a B.A.T.S., Low Light, and Lifeline, as well as Sgt. Slaughter and his tank and the Tomahawk helicopter, but just a few months into 1987 I pretty much put them down. Partly because by then the other kids would have made fun of me had it been known I still played with toys. (If only they could see adult me painting little plastic figures.) By the time the 1989 series rolled around I had pretty much stopped watching cartoons (save for TMNT at a friend's house on occasion) and had no interest in GI Joe.
I think the target demographic for a lot of those 80s boys toys were for those 5-12 years of age. GI Joe and Masters of the Universe have never quite resonated with children like they did in the 80s and the toys today and pretty much just made for the adult collectors.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots

Gnometown Hero
I gotta say, this is about the best use of repurposed art that I've seen in a licensed product. Usually, the folks making t-shirts with this same art use it in absolutely the most lazy way possible. This line actually makes it look like the art was created expressly for the make-up.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Did GI Joe have a plethora of movies in the 1980s that I missed? Or Transformers?
I have no idea. Did it nova from ancillary products like makeup in the 80s? I don't recall that happening either. I am completely ignorant about the history of those properties flaming out in the 80s if they even did, but now I am curious if this is common knowledge?

No, these IPs - which ruled kids marketing in the early 1980s
Given GI Joe started in 1963, and Transformers began in 1984, I don't think either of them ruled kids marketing in the "early" 1980s?


had their life choked out of them by the IP owners pushing for monetizing the IP too aggressively. They knew that they would be better off squeezing the IP for every penny, letting it die off, and then squeezing the next IP the same way. That squeezing took many forms.
Is there some history of this I can read somewhere which supports that claim?

GI Joe has been like Barbie - it rises and falls every generation at some point and definitely is not defined as an "80s thing" given I know it was hugely popular in the 60s, and then again in the 70s (which is when the Kung Fu Grip came around). In fact if I am not mistaken GI Joe was at a low point in the 80s, and rose again in the 90s.

Transformers, I don't know of anything about it pushing for over monetizing. It's not one of those things which I recall crossed over into that kind of mass marketing and then collapsed in the 80s, but I am pretty ignorant about it in general so maybe I am wrong.

The same types of things happened with Transformers, TMNT, Care Bears, He-Man, Rainbow Bright, etc...
Wait you're comparing D&D, a 50 year longstanding brand, to brief fads which lasted around 5 years? Naw, that's not a good comparison. Of course fads faded. Rainbow Bright is not a franchise dominate brand like D&D or Star Wars. It's more akin to LOL Dolls, which could be seen as a fad from the get-go,

To keep an IP going strong you need to be true to your core identity, you need to maintain quality, and you need to focus on long term growth over short term profiteering. If you were to, say, flood the world with your IP so fast that quality took a dive while simultaneously turning away from your most Marvelous characters in favor of 2nd tier characters .... while simultaneously flooding the world with your merchandise all the time to the point we get numb to the faces of the characters ... It isn't like that would end the dominance of an IP in a SNAP.
You mean how Star Wars flooded the marketplace in the early 1980s only to burn out. Oh wait...it didn't do that. Maybe how KPOP is flooding the marketplace these days and will...no, it's not anything close to burning out either, it just keeps getting more and more dominant.

Licensing your IP can be a sign of a franchise burning out, or it can be a sign of a franchise growing into something bigger. It really depends on the franchise, but I don't think it's in itself indicative of doom like you're making it out to be. It might be indicative of when YOU burn out on a franchise maybe?
 

jgsugden

Legend
Are you kidding? We couldn't get enough licensed products when I was a kid. It sold well until it didn't and they switched to using other licensed properties. For all the problems the Masters of the Universe, GI Joe, and Transformers lines had, it's possible they just had a good run and kids turned to other interests....
... which is exactly why I am arguing that we should be concerned that they're going to oversaturate the markets with D&D - bringing about the end of the run on on the IP - and we'll see it be shelved more and more in favor of the next IP that rises up.
 

KYRON45

Explorer
What percent of IPs die off because their core demographic grows up?
A 6 year old Rainbow Brite fan most likely won't be a 16 year old who wants Rainbow Brite makeup. They are going to want Revlon and Maybelline or whatever other brands are out there. Not a lot of adult G.I Joe fans want a Hasbro branded rifle or truck.

D&D has always had a marketing problem. The satanic panic had a lot to do with that i think. How do you market a product endorsed by the guy downstairs? Now they can just license the brand out to others who also have marketing problems; but hope a 50 year old brand name can help them out.

Some people like gimmicks and some don't. Beadle & Grimm is a wildly expensive gimmick but they sell stuff.
The edition that must not be named released a book a week it seemed.....and the brand is stronger than ever.
The public is a fickle lot...none more so than...well....us.
 

jgsugden

Legend
I have no idea. Did it nova from ancillary products like makeup in the 80s? I don't recall that happening either. I am completely ignorant about the history of those properties flaming out in the 80s if they even did, but now I am curious if this is common knowledge?
It is.
Given GI Joe started in 1963, and Transformers began in 1984, I don't think either of them ruled kids marketing in the "early" 1980s?
Relying upon Google to be an authority can fail you. GI Joe had a few 'lives'. The one that most of us know began with the 1983 TV series that was on after school. Transformers began the following year and were shown back to back in most markets. They, and Robotech, were the clearly dominant afternoon cartoons aimed at male audiences.
Is there some history of this I can read somewhere which supports that claim?
Take a marketing class that has a focus on history.
GI Joe has been like Barbie - it rises and falls every generation at some point and definitely is not defined as an "80s thing" given I know it was hugely popular in the 60s, and then again in the 70s (which is when the Kung Fu Grip came around). In fact if I am not mistaken GI Joe was at a low point in the 80s, and rose again in the 90s.
It was dominant in the early 1980s and fell off towards the end of the decade. I can't fathom why you're trying to argue this when so many people on these boards were kids in this era and LIVED through this situation.
Transformers, I don't know of anything about it pushing for over monetizing. It's not one of those things which I recall crossed over into that kind of mass marketing and then collapsed in the 80s, but I am pretty ignorant about it in general so maybe I am wrong.
You are. GI Joe and Transformers - as shows - were entirely there to get kids to buy toys. There is a lot written about how these shows - and Rainbow Brite, Care Bears, etc... - were just glorified advertisements.
Wait you're comparing D&D, a 50 year longstanding brand, to brief fads which lasted around 5 years? Naw, that's not a good comparison. Of course fads faded. Rainbow Bright is not a franchise dominate brand like D&D or Star Wars. It's more akin to LOL Dolls, which could be seen as a fad from the get-go,
So, by your logic, anything that burned out can't be a good example of the risk of D&D burning out ... very self supportive of you. The longevity before abusive practices flames out the product is irrelevant. That is like saying that a wooden house that has stood for 100 years is less likely to burn down than a wooden house built yesterday. The destructive forces are not related to the prior longevity.
You mean how Star Wars flooded the marketplace in the early 1980s only to burn out.
Actually - Yes. It did. That is another decent example. Star Wars toy sales were down in the 1990s until the Prequels were announced. Once Star Wars jumped off the rails with the animated Droids, Ewok Movies, etc... the sales were way down.

However, Lucas had more interest in the IP than a toy company had in their cartoon IPs - and Lucas had LONG TERM plans. He kept interest alive with the VHS, Laser Disk, DVD and BLu Ray releases, including the special editions, and brought it back with the release of the prequels in a well executed nostalgic path. Unlike the toy companies, Lucas was tied to Star Wars. If he squeezed it to death, he didn't get to jump to the next replacement. It was his baby. It was his legacy. As a result, while it did have a dive in popularity after the original trilogy had run the course, there were plans in place to keep the interest and rebuild for the future.
.. Maybe how KPOP is flooding the marketplace these days and will...no, it's not anything close to burning out either, it just keeps getting more and more dominant.
KPOP isn't my thing at all. However, when I Google it, I see articles about it starting to break into the mainstream ... so I will not comment beyond saying: I think the percentage of Americans that would struggle to name someone from K-POP would be much higher than the percentage that would struggle to name a Transformer, GI Joe character or Star Wars character. As far as I know, while K-POP is growing in popularity, it is still not mainstream.
Licensing your IP can be a sign of a franchise burning out, or it can be a sign of a franchise growing into something bigger. It really depends on the franchise, but I don't think it's in itself indicative of doom like you're making it out to be. It might be indicative of when YOU burn out on a franchise maybe?
Again - it isn't just licensing. Well executed and intelligently designed licensing is revenue generating and marketing rolled into one.

It is how you license. When you just throw everything at the wall without consideration for how it impacts the future of your IP, you risk damaging the IP. But, if you have a good plan that balances current profits and long term longevity ... Do you have a marketing plan that considers market saturation across products, for example.

Have you never seen a mix of IP and product that made you go, "Really? How the %@# are those related?" Have you never been tired of seeing a particualr thing coming up over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over ...?

In general, markets can grow ... to a point. Once they reach a certain level, the cost of increasing that market risks becoming greater than the expected returns. D&D just went tghrough a huge growth period and then had massive negative PR accidents. Trying to increase their revenue within the primary market (which at this point includes physical books, peripheral products, and digital) is going to be hard until they get a boon. Historically, that boon has been the new edition. However, they'll face much harsher competition than ever before when they release the next set of books. They are getting a boon from BG3, but the timing of it could not be worse. A good segment of the people that are gaining interest in D&D after BG3 are hearing that a new edition is coming and that the current one is dying away ... so buying the books/digital now is like buying a PS4 right before the PS 5 is released.

However, WOTC executives want their bonuses - and saying that they can't grow profits more is not going to get them that bonus ... or keep their job safe. So they're going to squeeze any peripheral market revenue they can. And we'll see D&D pop up in more and more places. Maybe Happy Meals? Maybe snacks? And as we do, we get burned out on too much of it. We get tired of seeing it. It is human nature.

D&D has some advantages in this area - it is a diverse IP with a lot of iconic elements that can be spread around ... but despite those advantages, squeezing it on and one on and on will harm the IP. And, with the IP already in jeopardy from the next edition /competition wars ... it should worry those of us that are long term fans.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
It is.Relying upon Google to be an authority can fail you. GI Joe had a few 'lives'. The one that most of us know began with the 1983 TV series that was on after school. Transformers began the following year and were shown back to back in most markets. They, and Robotech, were the clearly dominant afternoon cartoons aimed at male audiences. Take a marketing class that has a focus on history.

If it's common knowledge, and it's a core of marketing history, then you can provide a link. Because I am at the "calling BS" on this one. I did a Google search and find nothing supporting your claims. You're the one making these claims, and your only support is you saying it right now and telling me everyone knows what you're claiming. I am not asking for a huge amount of evidence, just, you know, anything at all besides you appearing to push an "I win" button because...reasons?

It was dominant in the early 1980s and fell off towards the end of the decade. I can't fathom why you're trying to argue this when so many people on these boards were kids in this era and LIVED through this situation.

It's you. Nobody else has made these claims except you. I was a kid in that era as well. I am betting we're quite close to the same age. I lived that era and I am not at all remembering it the way you do, and when I ask for support you give nothing, and when I say these properties didn't have the kind of marketing like makeup kits you ignore that and mention the primary property again like movies and TV shows - which isn't ancillary marketing like we're talking about. So yeah, I am again calling BS. Support your claim with more than "everyone knows except you - even though nobody has jumped in to say they agree."

You are. GI Joe and Transformers - as shows - were entirely there to get kids to buy toys. There is a lot written about how these shows

So LINK TO IT if you think there is "a lot written about this."

Have you never seen a mix of IP and product that made you go, "Really? How the %@# are those related?" Have you never been tired of seeing a particualr thing coming up over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over ...?
Not really, no. If I like the brand I think it's cool I can get other stuff with that brand. Again, I like this makeup thing. I showed my daughter and she is interested in two of the items. Anything which interests her in two of her hobbies simultaneously is a good thing to me. She has some D&D stuffed animals too which she and I like.

Is it that you don't personally have any interest in this one?
 

jgsugden

Legend
... then you can provide a link...
Transformers and GI Jow as marketing tools ... and showing them as highly successful shows while we're at it: https://public.com/learn/how-hasbro...0s-birthed-the-beloved-transformers-franchise
https://www.everything80spodcast.com/g-i-joe-the-story-of-toys-cartoons-trade-embargoes/ (focus around the "1982" When G.I.Joe Changed Forever" section - it has discussion of the reason why Reagan's 1980s were the era in which these toys took off).

It took me a few seconds to find those on Google. You said you could find no evidence supporting my claims? I found three things in seconds.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Transformers and GI Jow as marketing tools ... and showing them as highly successful shows while we're at it: https://public.com/learn/how-hasbro...0s-birthed-the-beloved-transformers-franchise
https://www.everything80spodcast.com/g-i-joe-the-story-of-toys-cartoons-trade-embargoes/ (focus around the "1982" When G.I.Joe Changed Forever" section - it has discussion of the reason why Reagan's 1980s were the era in which these toys took off).

It took me a few seconds to find those on Google. You said you could find no evidence supporting my claims? I found three things in seconds.
Yes, because neither has anything to do with your claims. They both show how and why they were successful, and nothing about how they flamed out due to overexposure from things like makeup kits and such? Or are you claiming now your argument is based around "early rather than mid 80s?" as opposed to...you know...the entire heart of your argument which is what I was replying to?
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top