|
|
Thread Tools |
02-10-2016, 09:49 AM | #71 |
Iron Grenadier
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 950
|
Quote:
You seem to have a problem with making up words that don't exist in statements other people are making. Please highlight in that exact quote above where I said Disney had the "legal right" to do (or not do) anything?
Also please note the part about "normally keep their contracts in place until their normal expiration." I know that many have been peddling the "No really guys Disney/Lucasfilm/Marvel is totally just about to strip the license from Hasbro!" line for years now (even prior to the Disney/Marvel and Disney/Lucasfilm mergers), and I know that in that time frame, not only has the license continually failed to be stripped as these folks that are "in the know" have totally assured everyone was going to happen, but it has in fact been extended, and Hasbro has been given new licenses. That flies in flagrant contradiction to your supposedly infallible "source." It doesn't make a tiny bit of difference how "experienced" your lawyers are or how many you have. The most basic understanding of licensing contracts is all that's required to know that licensors do NOT have the ability to strip licenses at will without incurring significant penalties or risking a rather costly and clear-cut lawsuit against them (in this particular case likely to the tune of hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars since it would go against "lost revenues" from Hasbro's projections). A licensing contract means Hasbro pays Disney for the privilege of making products based on their properties, and while Disney gets a degree of approval over the products that get made, they cannot simply shut down the line without breaching that contract. As long as Hasbro has made their licensing payments on-time, and hasn't misrepresented the property, there is very little Disney can do except not renew or further extend their license in 2020. If the Mattel/Hasbro merger happens (still a huge "if" at this point), it may be another story, but that brings us back to.... You fail to address a rather key point: Do you think Disney wants a year to two years of virtually no Star Wars or Marvel toys on major retailer shelves when they suddenly shift the license out-of-cycle as you claim they're right on the verge of doing? It generally takes 12-18 months to get an all-new product on-shelves, much less to push out a huge product line (or multiple product lines), and that's not even counting the time it takes to hire and spin up the actual teams of people necessary to manage and design the new licenses and product lines. So you really think Disney's going to sabotage their own marketing by cutting out a huge retail segment over this? No...it's not worth the headaches. At worst (if the merger happens) they wait out the next four years, conclude the current trilogy of Star Wars films (and the 2-3 "anthology" films) and "Phase 3" for Marvel, and then decide to take their business elsewhere when the licenses are up. Disney may have a legal right to strip the license if the merger occurs, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense for them to do so right away, or more accurately doing so could hurt them just as badly as it would Mattel/Hasbro. If the merger doesn't happen, then Disney has to provide iron-clad proof that Hasbro has violated their licensing contracts in order to end the contract before the extension date occurs, and contrary to what you seem to believe, I'm pretty sure Hasbro's corporate lawyers are probably just about as good at what they do as Disney's, particularly when it comes to licensing contracts. After all, they were dealing with Lucasfilm and Marvel Entertainment prior to Disney, both of whom were long-standing powerhouses when it comes to licensing. Anyway, my source tells me that the licenses are totally getting extended to the year 6345, merger or no. One, Disney has complete and sole approval over what goes into the market. Every toy concept, design and sample requires Disney's approval. They don't have just some level of control, they have complete control. Mashers, black series, universe; those concepts, scales and styles only exist because Disney permits them. Two, in any licensing agreement, and there is no reason to believe these master toy licenses are different, there is a clause that change of majority ownership of the licensee permits the licensor the right to terminate. There is no ambiguity about those terms and no fight a merged company could wage. The only issue would be who bought who? Is Hasbro being bought by Mattel or vice versa. Whichever loses their majority ownership to the other would/could lose their licensing deals. Not both. Mattel buying Hadbro wouldn't allow Disney to strip Mattel. |
02-10-2016, 10:58 AM | #72 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,578
|
Quote:
You're mistaken about two things.
One, Disney has complete and sole approval over what goes into the market. Every toy concept, design and sample requires Disney's approval. They don't have just some level of control, they have complete control. Mashers, black series, universe; those concepts, scales and styles only exist because Disney permits them. Quote:
Two, in any licensing agreement, and there is no reason to believe these master toy licenses are different, there is a clause that change of majority ownership of the licensee permits the licensor the right to terminate. There is no ambiguity about those terms and no fight a merged company could wage. The only issue would be who bought who? Is Hasbro being bought by Mattel or vice versa. Whichever loses their majority ownership to the other would/could lose their licensing deals. Not both. Mattel buying Hadbro wouldn't allow Disney to strip Mattel.
Especially when you factor in that any merger would take a couple of years to fully go through, and Disney will be cranking out movies during that timeframe. In other words, the sensible move is to let the contracts go to their already-existing endpoint (2020), and then move to a different licensee if they so choose (and they may not, if they think "HasMat" is still the best option to market their licensed products). Now...it's all-but-certain that Disney is already talking to other potential licensees...in fact they're probably pretty much constantly being courted. 2020 isn't THAT far away, and while the decision might not be made public until say, 2018 or 2019, Disney will likely have to decide on a new licensee within the next year or two, three at most (if they're going to go with a new licensee) in order to make sure that there is no major "product gap" if/when the license is transferred. Last edited by Jmacq1; 02-10-2016 at 11:46 AM.. |
02-10-2016, 11:32 AM | #73 |
Tiger Force member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Here with my boy , Jacob , and Mama:)
Posts: 5,374
|
Isn't this mainly just to get investors talking?
|
02-10-2016, 11:50 AM | #74 |
Crimson Nerd
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12,578
|
To an extent...and as others have noted, there's still a more-than-decent chance that this merger never comes to pass (at least in this go-round, as it's not the first time such talks have been held). But if the investors start talking about the merger and liking the idea...then that boosts the chances of it becoming a reality.
I think the "egos" (so to speak) may be what gets in the way here, though...Hasbro is generally viewed as a company on the rise (contrary to what collectors tend to think) while Mattel is seen as suffering a bit of a decline as competitors have steadily chipped away at one of it's iconic brands (Barbie), but I believe Mattel is still considered the second-biggest toymaker (behind Lego, if I recall correctly). So Mattel might be trying to say "We're bigger, so we take control" while Hasbro says "You need us more than we need you, so we take control." Pertinent to the conversation: Analysts say Hasbro and Mattel merger unlikely | Boston Herald Last edited by Jmacq1; 02-10-2016 at 12:02 PM.. |
02-10-2016, 01:23 PM | #75 |
Iron Grenadier
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 950
|
Quote:
Sure. But at the same time Disney can't refuse to approve ANYTHING just out of spite, or they'll have to give back those couple hundred mil in licensing fees Hasbro's been paying them. Basically Disney would be the ones violating the contract in that case. There has to be a good-faith effort from both parties involved.
Quote:
I wasn't arguing against this point in the slightest (once again people putting words in my mouth). It's not about whether Disney has the right to strip the contract if Mattel buys Hasbro, as they by all indications do (though it sounds like if Hasbro buys Mattel, it may not be so clear-cut). The point is whether or not it would make sense for them to do so versus waiting out the current contract and THEN moving on. That, and how much power Disney has to strip the license from Hasbro at a moment's notice (as Saboteur is implying is going to happen any day now) without incurring large financial penalties for doing so (and again...running into the potential problem of having a gap in product while the other media rolls on).
Especially when you factor in that any merger would take a couple of years to fully go through, and Disney will be cranking out movies during that timeframe. In other words, the sensible move is to let the contracts go to their already-existing endpoint (2020), and then move to a different licensee if they so choose (and they may not, if they think "HasMat" is still the best option to market their licensed products). Now...it's all-but-certain that Disney is already talking to other potential licensees...in fact they're probably pretty much constantly being courted. 2020 isn't THAT far away, and while the decision might not be made public until say, 2018 or 2019, Disney will likely have to decide on a new licensee within the next year or two, three at most (if they're going to go with a new licensee) in order to make sure that there is no major "product gap" if/when the license is transferred. |
02-12-2016, 12:07 AM | #76 |
twitter viper
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: SD
Posts: 4,909
|
Brian Goldner comments on the rumors as just being rumors;
Source TFW2005 and CNBC Hasbro CEO: Brands today are driven by media properties
__________________
Take a load off and watch some GIJOE videos. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYF...fZnzjMATv1_JGg That's the way the Pogo Ballistic Battle Ball bounces. |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DreamWorks Animation & Hasbro In Merger Talks? | DESTRO | G.I. Joe News and Rumors | 67 | 11-21-2014 08:47 PM |
G.I.Joe Collectors Convention 50th Anniversary Celebration To Be Held Without Hasbro | DESTRO | G.I. Joe News and Rumors | 199 | 03-12-2014 07:10 PM |
What if Hasbro held a custom contest | Fierce Krypton | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 10 | 04-08-2009 03:04 AM |
Hasbro's new CEO talks about G.I. JOE | Commando | G.I. Joe General Discussion | 10 | 05-24-2008 05:45 AM |
|
|
Recent Off Topic Threads |
Hisstank Late Night thread... |
JazWares 18th Halo |
What song are you listening to? |
Star Wars 3 3/4 discussion thread |
4" Fortnite from Jazwares |