>>58794918>Why is disney Princess a brandDolls and dresses. Princess has been its own brand since 2000.
>wouldn’t some of the shounens be covered under Jump of we’re calling that a brandSJ publishes various works that each have their own brand deals and ownership structures
>Spider Man is a part of the MCU AS WELLSpidey's brand was split for a long time, because Marvel sold off a bunch of properties piecemeal. I assume there are still grandfathered licenses from that more fractured brand era
>Might as well just lump Cars and Toy Story into a new beand called Pixar or Disney Animation, including Winnie the Pooj and the Mouse itselfLike Spidey, Pixar had a split deal prior to Disney buying the studio. Each property was managed separately as part of a limited agreement between Disney and Pixar. Even today, Toy Story comes out on top, and having a portfolio with 2 top brands looks better than a unified "Pixar" brand that gets dragged down by unproven IP.
>Batman coild be a larger brand called DC Universe or somethingSometimes it is, just like Spidey, but there are lots of licensees that just want Batman. For a long time, Donkey Kong was part of the Mario license, but with the theme parks and movies they split the license into two. Because DK has more value than it used to, it warrants a split license. Batman is the same way. Why would a license pay for an all-encompassing DC license if they don't want to make Green Lantern or Hawk Girl products?
