Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2013 20:42:42 GMT -5
This is a total waste of out time, yet they will make so much money on this stupid item haha
|
|
|
Post by Bandalero on Jul 16, 2013 21:43:57 GMT -5
well aint SDCC shaping up to be a blast for us WWE Mattel collectors.
...said nobody.
|
|
|
Post by Squid: The Anti-Hero on Jul 16, 2013 21:49:05 GMT -5
If you ask me, these things are really pointless. Then again they're WAY better than those giant things.(powerslammers?)
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2013 21:54:41 GMT -5
I would take nothing over this
|
|
|
Post by blu3blazer on Jul 16, 2013 21:56:00 GMT -5
The Rumblers are a FREE item that they give away to attendees of the convention.
You had to spend $25 to get Ministry Undertaker and it was still available on Mattycollector earlier this year. So it couldn't have done very well at all if they were stuck with them that long.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2013 22:06:49 GMT -5
BOO!
|
|
|
Post by Midnight on Jul 16, 2013 22:13:06 GMT -5
Damn! I was hoping it would be an elite figure, next year it should be.
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Jul 17, 2013 5:24:47 GMT -5
The Rumblers are a FREE item that they give away to attendees of the convention. You had to spend $25 to get Ministry Undertaker and it was still available on Mattycollector earlier this year. So it couldn't have done very well at all if they were stuck with them that long. Yup. I'm amazed that all these kids were expecting an elite somehow - if they were going to do an elite for sdcc it would've been announced months ago, like all the other exclusive toys Mattel are selling there were. When Mattel announced all the exclusives theyd be selling at SDCC back in April or May and WWE wasn't on the list, we knew they weren't going to be selling a big figure. And even before that, we knew from how the Undertaker one flopped that they probably weren't going to do a WWE one again. This Rumbler is a free giveaway. Anyone complaining about a free figure has a weird sense of entitlement.
|
|
RollinsFan44
Main Eventer
12 UK Classifieds Refs.
Joined on: Feb 27, 2013 13:05:53 GMT -5
Posts: 4,160
|
Post by RollinsFan44 on Jul 17, 2013 7:30:26 GMT -5
*Yawn*. Why can't we get something like the SDCC 2010 Undertaker? :/
|
|
|
Post by The Madness on Jul 17, 2013 7:49:57 GMT -5
The Rumblers are a FREE item that they give away to attendees of the convention. You had to spend $25 to get Ministry Undertaker and it was still available on Mattycollector earlier this year. So it couldn't have done very well at all if they were stuck with them that long. These are the two points I think a lot of folks aren't aware of.
|
|
just1fan
Mid-Carder
An International Collector
Joined on: May 27, 2013 5:46:15 GMT -5
Posts: 130
|
Post by just1fan on Jul 17, 2013 7:53:25 GMT -5
I don't mind receiving it if I get the chance to attend SDCC. It is a nice souvenir to bring back even though I don't collect rumblers. I don't understand why people are complaining a giveaway that is free.
|
|
|
Post by poindizzle on Jul 17, 2013 7:55:17 GMT -5
I doubt this 'good will' gesture is going to lure anyone over to the Mattel booth for WWE who wasn't already going, nor do I think it's going to drum up sales for Rumblers which already sell themselves. So basically they just wasted a bunch of plastic and production costs for nothing. It's like Coca Cola advertising. Who doesn't know Coca Cola? Who is weak minded enough to see a Coke ad before a movie and run to the lobby to grab one?
We know why the SDCC exclusive failed. It's just like the Legends in that regard. We know where the decisions went wrong and yet we hear that wonderful little Mattel Mantra again from the suits "NEVER AGAIN, NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER AGAIN".
The SDCC exclusive was an expensive tooling for a product that took a long time for them to finally sell. But it did sell. Here's an idea. Make a simple but in demand repaint like others have pointed out. Make it available and try it out and if it succeeds, great. If not, then you can say it was a flop but trying once doesn't equal market research. Everyone, all the time, are constantly misreading the signs. If a simple repaint doesn't end up being cost effective, then you have a problem. Now, secondly, you have a plan if the figure doesn't sell at the show. Guess what? Plenty of people who love wrestling and would love and exclusive figure don't give two sh--ts and a motherf*** about SDCC. Make the remaining stock available on Ringside and WWEshop or Matty, or hell, make limited quantities available at a higher price to comic shops like other companies such as how Funko does to shops that have an account with them. Do that immediately. Don't sulk about poor sales and then sit on them for over a year before throwing them up.
Now, feel free to cue "that guy" to tell me my common sense solution is stupid because I've never worked for a market research team and because Mattel is doing so well. Let me tell you a story. Hasbro was on top of the world again back in 2008 with their Star Wars line. It was the big push item that year at most stores, it had a theatrical film to coincide, and it was likely the #1 boys toy brand. They still made stupid decisions such as the one to include and overpack "Yarna D'Al Gargan" a.k.a. the six-boobed woman from Jabba's palace, a figure that exactly 3 people clamored for. Sure, she had never officially been released before and a character debut in a line like that has to be a good thing, right? Nope, here in 2013, almost 5 years later I can still pick up 20 of her at the local TRU, one of which still has the first day of issue sticker on it. Point? No matter how well a business is doing, they could do better. So please explain how if the Rumbler isn't achieving anything, regardless of how low the production cost, how it makes sense to spend money to make none, rather than spend money and eventually see returns. SDCC Taker isn't available anymore and they sold those figures full price online, no clearance. They made long term money.
|
|
|
Post by micco on Jul 17, 2013 9:36:09 GMT -5
I doubt this 'good will' gesture is going to lure anyone over to the Mattel booth for WWE who wasn't already going, nor do I think it's going to drum up sales for Rumblers which already sell themselves. So basically they just wasted a bunch of plastic and production costs for nothing. It's like Coca Cola advertising. Who doesn't know Coca Cola? Who is weak minded enough to see a Coke ad before a movie and run to the lobby to grab one? We know why the SDCC exclusive failed. It's just like the Legends in that regard. We know where the decisions went wrong and yet we hear that wonderful little Mattel Mantra again from the suits "NEVER AGAIN, NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER AGAIN". The SDCC exclusive was an expensive tooling for a product that took a long time for them to finally sell. But it did sell. Here's an idea. Make a simple but in demand repaint like others have pointed out. Make it available and try it out and if it succeeds, great. If not, then you can say it was a flop but trying once doesn't equal market research. Everyone, all the time, are constantly misreading the signs. If a simple repaint doesn't end up being cost effective, then you have a problem. Now, secondly, you have a plan if the figure doesn't sell at the show. Guess what? Plenty of people who love wrestling and would love and exclusive figure don't give two sh--ts and a motherf*** about SDCC. Make the remaining stock available on Ringside and WWEshop or Matty, or hell, make limited quantities available at a higher price to comic shops like other companies such as how Funko does to shops that have an account with them. Do that immediately. Don't sulk about poor sales and then sit on them for over a year before throwing them up. Now, feel free to cue "that guy" to tell me my common sense solution is stupid because I've never worked for a market research team and because Mattel is doing so well. Let me tell you a story. Hasbro was on top of the world again back in 2008 with their Star Wars line. It was the big push item that year at most stores, it had a theatrical film to coincide, and it was likely the #1 boys toy brand. They still made stupid decisions such as the one to include and overpack "Yarna D'Al Gargan" a.k.a. the six-boobed woman from Jabba's palace, a figure that exactly 3 people clamored for. Sure, she had never officially been released before and a character debut in a line like that has to be a good thing, right? Nope, here in 2013, almost 5 years later I can still pick up 20 of her at the local TRU, one of which still has the first day of issue sticker on it. Point? No matter how well a business is doing, they could do better. So please explain how if the Rumbler isn't achieving anything, regardless of how low the production cost, how it makes sense to spend money to make none, rather than spend money and eventually see returns. SDCC Taker isn't available anymore and they sold those figures full price online, no clearance. They made long term money. you're making a bunch of assumptions. you start by assuming that nobody will be compelled to check out their booth with the promise of a free toy. it might not work on you but i'm sure there are people that would take the bait. considering the marginal expense of producing that rumbler, if it raises brand awareness even the tiniest bit, it will have served it's purpose. if we believe that it is in fact a gesture of good will, then none of that matter anyway. you also assume that they ultimately made money on the undertaker exclusive. how do you know? do you know how much they sold the inventory to mattycollector for? and how much they cost to produce? we can almost be sure that mattycollector profited from them but mattel themselves may have unloaded them onto mattycollector at a highly discounted rate just hoping to break even after hanging onto that inventory for longer than they'd have wanted and watching it collect dust. point is, we dont know. the one thing i'm willing to assume is that mattel does their market research, and if they've deemed it a poor business decision to release even a repaint, then i trust they have their reasons. and the reason would be simple, it wouldn't generate the type of profit that would make it worth their time. mattel is a publicly traded company and like all others, makes decisions based upon what's going to make their shareholders as wealthy as possible. they're not in the business of trying to appease a few dozen people on a messageboard. i doubt they'll even waste time entertaining an idea that doesn't move them towards their greater goal of getting richer. with that in mind, a free rumbler is a better idea than the exclusive that you and i would prefer.
|
|
|
Post by Chewdeezy on Jul 17, 2013 9:41:06 GMT -5
SDCC Undertaker flopped big time but I'm glad Mattel released it.
|
|
|
Post by MrPerfect25 on Jul 17, 2013 10:16:34 GMT -5
I like the Miz but that's hot garbage
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2013 11:50:14 GMT -5
From a Badass WM XV Undertaker Figure to Dwäyne and The Miz Rumblers ? you to Mattel... YOU TO ! -.-
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2013 12:05:38 GMT -5
I wish I could find that taker at a reasonable price
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 18:58:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2013 15:23:28 GMT -5
Am I the only one happy it's something I don't want so I can save some money.
|
|
JFlagg
Superstar
Are you not impressed?
Joined on: Oct 31, 2011 16:27:07 GMT -5
Posts: 507
|
Post by JFlagg on Jul 17, 2013 21:07:40 GMT -5
Pretty good looking Rumbler for anyone who collects rumblers, but not as updated as expected (mohawk) wish it was a non rumbler, but does look pretty cool
|
|
|
Post by JC Motors on Jul 17, 2013 21:10:40 GMT -5
I hate rumblers
|
|