[ SECRET POST #3439 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3439 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[lupin sansei/lupin the third]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Pokemon]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Lord of the Rings]


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.
[Animorphs]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Dark Tower]


__________________________________________________



















08. [SPOILERS for Shin Megami Tensei IV]



__________________________________________________



09. [WARNING for discussion of rape]


[Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes, "The Adventure of the Solitary Cyclist"]


__________________________________________________



10. [WARNING for discussion of rape]























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #491.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

(I'm so sorry that I'm so wordy.)

As can be seen by visiting his site, John Marcotte is an advocate. He has a reason to throw hyperbole around.

"Again, it's impossible to separate the fact that Disney itself pushed Kylo on everyone regardless of whether they liked him or not (he was their main marketing push and they didn't change their strategy) from the fact that TFA was extremely popular, so claiming that TFA sales in general were successful and Kylo was on all their materials doesn't really forward your argument."

I kinda feel we're talking past each other a bit. Let me try to restate my argument:
1. TFA merchandise sales were profitable. (This can be seen in the Consumer Products & Interactive Media part of the earnings reports.) I'm not including profits from the movie itself (the theatrical release and DVD/Blu-ray/digital/streaming that are under Studio Entertainment in the earnings reports).
2. People can spend their money however they choose.
3. Kylo Ren was on the majority of the TFA merchandise.
4. Therefore, enough people chose to buy Kylo Ren merchandise to make TFA merchandise profitable for Disney.

This brings me to a point I should have explained better the last time I replied. Disney has a legal duty to the shareholders to tell them what is going on. So when they singled out Disney Infinity among all video games in the Q1 report as performing poorly, Disney told shareholders exactly what the problem was: "higher inventory reserves and lower unit sales volume" which translated from business-speak is "we have too many Disney Infinity figures on store shelves and they aren't selling." If there was a similar problem with Kylo Ren, this would impact all Star Wars merchandise because of the prevalence of his products and I can't imagine the earnings report would ignore it.

I think we've mostly been in agreement here vis-a-vis Rey, although I think along with sexism was the precedent that villains were the "faces" of the franchise. Darth Vader has, by far, the most character goods of any character from Star Wars. He's the one on the cover of my Blu-ray of A New Hope, not Luke. So maybe the sexism was bolstered by the belief that Kylo Ren would be the next Vader.

"I'm not saying that he didn't sell at all"

But you did...? "Kylo Ren dolls did not sell at all" is what I originally objected to. (Unless you aren't the anon I thought I've been replying to this whole thread.) But I'm glad we both agree that Kylo Ren merchandise sells.