>>11363349McFarlane is richer now than any point in their history.
They're richer now than they were when they got the Five Nights at Freddy license, which was their former biggest toyline ever. Spawn. Halo. Minions. Call of Duty. Prince of Persia. Walking Dead. All sold like shit compared to Five nights at Freddys.
Nothing sold more than their Five Nights at Freddy's building block toyline and it's why McFarlane was able to afford to get the DC license. Do note that McFarlane stopped making those FnaF building block toys almost two years before their DC line started, because sales eventually dropped off that that the license wasn't worth it anymore.
Most any toy company will make money off of these licenses, even if they sell poorly. So even shit like Fortnite or Overwatch, which failed for various toy companies, still made them money...but was it enough money? Nope, but they always more than broke even.
It's very rare for a company to actually go bankrupt with a big license, especially when they're supported by Walmart. Problems only arise when a company is too big to support itself even with a big license. If a line sells poorly and it was their only big seller, that company could easily go out of business.
As for Star Wars, Hasbro's been paying up huge wads of cash, despite the license starting to flounder with Last Jedi, Solo and Rogue One. And lawyers have a working brain, so they set up clauses that minimum royalties can't be met if movie bomb. ... but that only works for movies. General toy releases when there aren't movies or part of a movie wave, there's still minimum guaranteed royalties (lowered minimum when there aren't any movies to market the toyline) So Hasbro still thinks the Star WArs license is a worthwhile investment, albeit its value has been renegotiated.
