>>7370032>t.zoomerI'm in my 30's. You're actually the zoomer here. Where are the mattel original IP toys?
>Why do you think it was an exclusive in the first place, if it has such a mass appeal?!Because there were no movies or media to create brand awareness for a child market and was purely aimed at adult collectors, such as a NECA figure, and was even sold in the adult collector section at Toys R Us.
>Are you really dumb enough to believe that Hasbro going to successfully revive GI Joe?That's not an answer. Yes or no, do you believe Hasbro will make more Joes or not?
https://variety.com/2018/film/news/g-i-joe-movie-snake-eyes-robert-schwentke-1203080234/>ignores all the evidences that Hasbro have distribution problems too>because of x, y must also be true!You're a special kind of stupid.
>talk about the movie tickets and the toys What are you talking about, it's just more and more money and supports more and more toys on the shelves. Bumblebee only cost $135 to make, while The Last Knight cost somewhere between $217-260 million. Bumblebee will likely make over $500 million, while TLK only made $600 million. When you subtract the budgets from the profits, you get that TLK only made $340 million after budget, while Bumblebee will have made $365 after budget. This also doesn't even factor in the cost of marketing, which people usually estimate can be the same as the budget(but I doubt that), and say that a movie isn't considered profitable until it's made twice it's budget back. So, by that estimate though, Bumblebee was a significantly more profitable movie.
Forbes also described it as a leggy movie, meaning that it gained more traction following it's Christmas time release.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottmendelson/2019/01/09/box-office-bumblebee-tops-100m-and-its-the-leggiest-transformers-ever/#29056dab2774SS Bumblebee toys are also in hot demand right now, with Optimus Prime dropping soon.
