>>10262250>Can you read?yes
>>TPM still underperformed with respect to their expectations.>TPM sold very well *for that year.* This did not persist. Can you?
How can TPM under perform in 2000 if Hasbro was already planning to not use TPM since at least March of 1999, 3 months before TPM even came out? 9 months is the bare minimum to start production on products to be released at the of the next year, since it takes a long time to get shit made.
You lack of understanding is further cemented with
>This does not change the fact that merchandise was clogging stores for months. It takes months for them to start noticing this at a corporate level, and again, wouldn't be until Christmas time (november) for them to change course. Stores order shit many months (if not a year) ahead of time, hence not being able to change course.
Your entire post also sounds liek you don't even understand that Hasbro made a shit ton of money whether retail sold all their stock or not.
Your pictures prove nothing, because TPM came out in 1999 and not 2000. Everyone in the consumer industry selling products has known there's only a short window to make money off of movies since at least the 70s, yet fuckwits like yourself pretend otherwise.
>>>10262288>months of shelf warmingHUGE difference from TFA shelf warming for 5 years on non-off years, because there was cross promotion every single year non-stop, unlike the prequels.
Again, Star Wars was a premiere toy brand from 1995 until at 2015. IT always had a shit ton of space because it sold a shit ton of products, even in years where they didn't meet their goal by 5.3%. After 2015? There was noticeable shrinkage of space starting in 2018 for Star Wars and has been shrinking ever since.
