Ask Ken at Palisades

[Luke]

Originally posted by MaxGoof
In other words--the contract is binding, legal, 100%. Nobody but nobody can take it away.

Sorry about that - i was aware there had been plenty of discussions about buying that WCW contract out, i guess they were smart enough to figure that it wouldn't be worth much or damage business even if it carried on.

It's certainly not a 'nobody but nobody can take it away' situation though - if Disney thought it was worth it they definitely could try to buy out any of Henson's contracts, these things happen all the time with takeovers. Not that i think there is a strong chance of this because it's quite likely Disney will let Henson continue to exist like EMTV have, besides probably the distribution and production stuff.

 

[jarod]

Thanks, I think that one went through.

 

[beaker]

>>>but there's not much they can do making figures for a dead company which no longer employs ANY wrestlers. <<<

I hope one of these days you can add dubya dubya f, i mean wwe to the list of dead companies like enron. not only does the company laugh at their fans behind closed doors, but i cant see how people can still watch this garbage after so much mismanagement and inner deconstruction.

now then, seires 3 has been pushed back til early 2003?
ack!

 

[beaker]

>>>Ok i am worried and distressed, absolutely NOBODY has asked Ken anything for the last SEVEN hours. Is everything alright in the world outisde ? - i'm kinda getting an 'Omega Man' feeling here !<<<

um, theres people who are actually on this forum(besides the moderators) *that* long? oh boy...
then again, its astonishing to see under avatars '600+' posts. my goodness.

 

[Rufus]

Ken,

I'm glad you're considering dropping the bases, I was going to suggest you start using them only for the characters that really need them. I'm starting to amass a pile of unused Muppet Show bases, from Bunsen, Dr. Teeth, and Tux Kermit. But I'm thankful that Piggy and regular Kermit have bases to use.

So what's the head on reporter Kermit like? Basically the same as the original's, or are we getting a different expression? (closed mouth, perhaps..?)

- R -

 

[ResidentLilly]

Rufus
So what's the head on reporter Kermit like? Basically the same as the original's, or are we getting a different expression? (closed mouth, perhaps..?)

Basically the same head. Minor changes.

MaxGoof
Ken, you just posted this over on the RTM Board... I'm confused... I thought the next series with Fozzie and Gonzo was supposed to ship in August, and be on shelves in late August/early September... now they're not coming out for a whole two more months! What caused the delay? Does this mean there's absotively posilutely no chance of Series 3 and much more importantly The Swedish Chef this year?

It was originally supposed to be set up that way. It's complicated, but you are correct that Series 3 will not be out this year. I'll explain it when I have more time, but it's good for the line.

 

[Louis Kazagger]

Hi Ken,

Couldn't you change the packaging on an Invisible Beaker offered through the collector's club? Wouldn't that satisfy the collectors who paid big bucks to get the industry giveaway version, and at the same time satisfy the completist who'd like to add this variation to his/her collection at a reasonable price? It could say "Palisades Collector's Club" on the top flap or something like that. At least then there were would be something to differentiate. I mean, even the littlest change like the .01, .02, .03, .04 , etc.... variation codes on the back of the Star Wars figures seems to satisfy those diehard fans.

I know that you promised us WW Chicago VC Beakers, and that's exactly what we're getting, which is very cool of you and the Palisades crew. But you never promised us exact duplicates of the industry giveaways.

Playmates seems very aware of the danger of limited editions and re-releases. Over on the Simpsons Collector Sector, the mods are preparing a poll to submit to Playmates about the idea of rereleasing some of the harder to find Simpsons characters, i.e. Lisa Simpson and Waylon Smithers. Playmates is open to the idea, but they don't want to alienate the collectors like they did with their Star Trek line.

I would cite Playmates as an example as to how you can cheese people off with limited editions. They released three "1701 editions" with their Star Trek line. All three figures were variants based on putting together different pieces of figures from existing molds to create new figures. These were variants that were based on single Star Trek episodes. People got ticked off at Playmates because they could no longer collect all the figures in the line due to the supply and demand issue created by these three different "1701" figures (they even bumped the numbers of the last two figs to 3,000 but it still wasn't enough). So, as lots of collectors have the completist, "all or nothing" mentality, folks quit collecting the Trek figures. Then Playmates decided to rerelease these three rare figures in a boxed set, to appease the folks who complained about the limited figs, and that cheesed off the people who paid big money to obtain the rare limited edition figures. I'm sure this wasn't the only problem with the line, but many of the die hard collector's mark this saga as the turning point for the line. Playmates Trek line went from selling nearly 200,000 of each figure to the last gasp days of the line, when everything they released were Target exclusives, and Target couldn't even move 10,000 units of each figure, and wound up marking down every wave multiple times until they reached final clearance (from $9.99 down to $2.44).

Playmates handling of the Trek line would be my argument about a line that didn't do so great with limited edition variant figures. And believe me, they certainly don't want to make the same mistakes again with this Simpsons line. Even though Playmates believes it may be a "darned if you do, darned if you don't" issue. That's why they want to hear the results of this poll before they do any rereleases in 2003.

I think the Simpsons rereleases will happen. Honestly they really have to happen for the longevity of the line. But I will be VERY surprised if Playmates doesn't do a packaging change for them.

mai too since

 

[Aerosmith]

So if you drop the bases will you sale them threw the collectors club?

 

[ResidentLilly]

Good post muppetlabs...although I don't really know what the solution is. I think the Invisible Beaker is something that we should not be looked at as a-holes for making. Whether we release it to the public or not, it is simply not a part of the line, and if someone believes it is then they must, by definition, think a test shot is. It fits the very same definition or parameter. An item in the line not offered for retail that has some value to some collector's, but that is simply an unpainted version of a released figure.

I don't know...it's a debate that has no end. Sometimes my head really hurts over it.

As for bases for the club, if the demand is there, we would make anything truthfully. So let's see what kind of demand there is...

 

[ResidentLilly]

Here is the reader's digest version of why Series 2 goes to Oct/Nov and 3 goes to Jan/Feb. If the retailers would let us, we would have them go closer together, the series I mean...but the 2 month window, at least at this time, is not enough time for retailers to feel comfortable commiting to an order for a series when they have not been able to gauge sell through on the prior series yet. In order to get a 3 out this year, we would need PO's on 3 before Series 2 ever even hit shelf.

Maybe after a couple more series are under our belt, we can get to a surety level where a more tight release schedule will be doable. We are certainly ready. Series 3 is in tooling and we are actually ahead of schedule on it. IN the meantime, as a solution, exclusives and playsets and stuff will come out in between regular lines.