Please. These people do actually know what they're talking about, since they're the ones who do the market research on these toys. And anyway, it's not as if it isn't totally obvious that TFs are boys' toys.

Interesting idea, but unfortunately, completely incorrect.

 

By NOT saying whether a toy is actually a "boys toy", then the toy in question can STILL be marketed at boys without alienating girls that might be interested.

 

For example, Ferrai do not market their car as a "mens car" and yet it is percieved as such. That is the key to good marketing strategy.

 

Another example is in cigarretes. Marlbro are seen as a men's product, even though its never explicitly said. Silk cut on the other hand, is seen as a womans smoke. Again, with no actual evidence to support it.

 

Hasbro need only change the name of their division to something else and then all their bases are covered.

 

But nice try, Lord Madhammer.

YOU need to shut the hell up.

 

The LAST thing I want in my TFs is an autobot that transforms into a flower, or a Decepticon that becomes an easter basket. Hey, you were looking for sexist.

 

Girls, traditionally, are not interested in giant robots that go around blowing things up, and if they are, they're not going to care what Hasbro's divisions are labeled. After all, I've never heard a girl tell me in the store that she was reluctant to buy a toy because "This company labels the division in charge of this product the "boy's" division, and I find that sexist, even though it's in charge of products that have to do with war and things boys are generally interested in. I know I wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell with a lawsuit, but it just alienates me, you know?"

 

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, Hasbro sexist because of what it CALLS a DIVISION. If you haven't, you should go to school and enroll in marketing. There, you will learn that if Hasbro were to "desegregate" it's divisions, so to speak, it would end up alienating the customers it already has in exchange for only a handfull of customers it doesn't. And that's IF anybody but hippies and weirdos cares about what MARKETING DIVISIONS ARE CALLED!!!!

 

Next thing you'll be saying is G.I. Joes are racist because they don't have any Venezuelian men in the ranks!

You ARE a funny little fella, arnt you?

 

I DID study marketing and stuff like the works of Roland Barthe while studying Illustration at University, hence my comments.

 

The main point of advertising and marketing is that just because something is thought to be related to a certain group, idea or context, doesnt mean that it is.

 

Thus, TFs are NOT boys toys, and therefore should not be labelled as such. In order to appear more PC, the toys can still be in the same group they have always been and marketed the same way, but if the name changes, then all the bases are covered. I wouldnt sue, but other might. My goodness, child, we are in the 21st Century here!

 

Im sure you will understand, when you are older.

 

Honestly, you make me laugh!

Nice.

 

Perhaps I will understand, when I'm older, exactly why someone who is educated would even begin to think that if Hasbro changes it's marketing division titles, anything is really going to change where lawsuits are concerned.

 

We're dealing with a multi-billion dollar company here. They have lawyers. Many of them, and all very eager to protect their jobs and make themselves appear valuable to the company. So if the marketing division behind TFs being called the Boy's Toys Marketing Division being named such would bring Hasbro under fire for a lawsuit, I'm sure they would have already brought it up.

 

And if you seriously doubt they have lawyers, just look at how swiftly they dealt with 3H productions.

 

Now if Hasbro SAID that only boys should buy TFs, or that girls need not apply to purchase a G.I. Joe, then there might be a problem. But both types of toys are bought by an overwhelming amount of boys. I'm not saying girls don't buy them. Those gems are few and far between, but they still exist. What I'm saying is, market to the demographic that's already buying your product, but don't alienate either group. Hasbro is doing a fine job of that by featuring boys playing with tfs and G.I. Joes, and girls playing with whatever-it-is Hasbro sells to girls.

 

Seriously, it's strange to me that you consider me the child, when you're the one getting all bent out of shape about what Hasbro's marketing divisions are called.

 

Come to think of it, I'm getting all bent out of shape over you thinking that way, which is really silly, especially considering you're just a hippie who will never make a dent in anything but people's migraines.

Next thing you'll be saying is G.I. Joes are racist because they don't have any Venezuelian men in the ranks!

That's a good point. Where are the Venezuelian G.I. Joes?!?!?!!!?!

 

*Emails Hasbro a nasty letter regarding Venezuelian G.I.Joes*

Great, Hasbro is asking us for our say. There not even going to do it

 

Honestly, you make me laugh!

Nice.

 

Perhaps I will understand, when I'm older, exactly why someone who is educated would even begin to think that if Hasbro changes it's marketing division titles, anything is really going to change where lawsuits are concerned.

 

We're dealing with a multi-billion dollar company here. They have lawyers. Many of them, and all very eager to protect their jobs and make themselves appear valuable to the company. So if the marketing division behind TFs being called the Boy's Toys Marketing Division being named such would bring Hasbro under fire for a lawsuit, I'm sure they would have already brought it up.

 

And if you seriously doubt they have lawyers, just look at how swiftly they dealt with 3H productions.

 

Now if Hasbro SAID that only boys should buy TFs, or that girls need not apply to purchase a G.I. Joe, then there might be a problem. But both types of toys are bought by an overwhelming amount of boys. I'm not saying girls don't buy them. Those gems are few and far between, but they still exist. What I'm saying is, market to the demographic that's already buying your product, but don't alienate either group. Hasbro is doing a fine job of that by featuring boys playing with tfs and G.I. Joes, and girls playing with whatever-it-is Hasbro sells to girls.

 

Seriously, it's strange to me that you consider me the child, when you're the one getting all bent out of shape about what Hasbro's marketing divisions are called.

 

Come to think of it, I'm getting all bent out of shape over you thinking that way, which is really silly, especially considering you're just a hippie who will never make a dent in anything but people's migraines.

Well, good for you.

 

I never said that I was angry..I was saying that you would think that Hasbro would shy away from such (possible) blatant sexual/sexist discrimination.

 

Modern companies have learnt to not alienate any possible revenue. Pperhaps you havnt met people who have NOT bought the products based on feelings of sexism. Thats the point with sales..you dont. Companies are always looking at potential sales or potentially LOST sales.

 

Most modern customer service training will tell you that in many cases, those that truly dont come back are not the customers that kick up a storm. Normally, they are the polite, quite customers that just never come back.

 

So, my point is valid. Companies, regardless of all the lawyers they have, listen and respond to markets. Its their bread and butter.

 

Although I aggree with companies having "legal power" via their laywers, using the recent 3H incident is slightly in error. It would seem that the use of "the law" here was simply basic proceedure. it wasnt as if 3H were going to fight anything Hasbro asked as tey knew they had a moral and legal obligation anyway. Hasbro just called in the lawyers as a matter of course.

 

A better example for your argument was when Hasbro took a young boy to court to make him relinquish his rights to a web site name with a Transformer name (Grimlock I belive).

 

As for the "hippy", THAT did make me laugh!

 

Also, remember that Hasbro is in the USA-Home of law suits, court settlemets, out-of-court settlements and pressure groups. Things like "boys toys" are not something that will go unchecked. It will change and become non-sexual/genderised in future, regardless of whaich sex it is actually marketing to. Only a matter of logical time.

*hopes a mod locks this thread*

Also, remember that Hasbro is in the USA-Home of law suits, court settlemets, out-of-court settlements and pressure groups. Things like "boys toys" are not something that will go unchecked. It will change and become non-sexual/genderised in future, regardless of whaich sex it is actually marketing to. Only a matter of logical time.

 

And that little bit of truth absolutely sucks. It's gotten to the point where we don't have rights anymore, for fear some lawyer is going to sue us on behalf of our neighbor, who doesn't like us going to work at 6 in the morning because it disturbs his slumber.

 

I thought the idea of destroying all lawyers from an old episode of Justice League was a good one. I'll admit, I haven't personally met many lawyers, but from those I have, one gets a feeling the prerequisite for Harvard is "sleazebag".