1/6 Are you buying Hot Toys DOFP Wolverine?

[YankeesFanboy]

I approve your choice.

Funny, I used to hate all the GIFs and Memes and image responses in forums....till one day I found out how to do it.

That's because you finally accessed your detailed files!

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Ah, Bridget Wilson. Before she married that rapidly balding ex-tennis player.

 

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

That Veronica Vaughn is one piece of ace!

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Incomplete without at least one pic!

 

[DiFabio]

Wrong.

 

[mac749040]

feels like is overprice for this, skip

 

[Brandoloneous]

Just the head sculpt second hand.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Wrong.

She...buh-buh-broke it.

 

[pturtle]

Stop your crying and love this figure with all your heart.

 

[Motuxmen]

For those who asked about whom/what I work for...sorry. Due to non disclosure agreements and just plain pissing my friends off by name dropping their financial business I can not tell whom I've worked for.

But that does not change the info. I've seen the contracts. I've been in the room and on conf calls where these things are negotiated. I'm not guessing or basing this on some random internet chatter.

Each film presents it's own contract issues. But the xmen franchise has the hardest strangest contract issues I've ever seen.

And if you don't believe me, that's fine. But if you think because they have done xmen that means they own the license take a look at hot toys announcements, for example. Like how they did 89 batman...then later announced they had then got batman returns licenses. By the logic that they buy a license for a property not individual films that would not happen. But it did.

When dealing with film titles, plots, story lines, actor likeness it is a world away from comic book likeness and toys. The comic characters rights are solely owned by marvel/Disney...which is not the case with movie figures.

 

[devilof76]

No. I don't like Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. Buying a doll of him would be ridiculous.

Is he expensive or something?

 

[Motuxmen]

Did you ever encounter a license where the company sold item A and B (which were both from the same license), then suddenly, upped their price substantially for item C?

Last time I checked, the last two Hot Toys Wolverine figures were $224 and $234. Both with Hugh Jackman's likeness, both from a Fox X-Men movie, both from a situation where Marvel and Fox were at odds, both from a license that had little to no merchandise (other than minimates really). Nothing changed. In fact, the price from X3 Wolverine to The Wolverine dropped 10 bucks. Same thing should apply with this figure since it's the same license, same character, same licensee, same deal, etc. The Wolverine was only last year, in fact, Wolverine and DOFP were in development around the same time.

Smells funny. People were making excuses up for the recent Bank Robber Joker with it's outrageous price tag, everything from "it's Ledger's parents asking for more" to "the base was all new", both of which were BS.

Again...not the same license. And how things where between marvel with the first three xfilms and currently are worlds apart. Back then did marvel cancel the FF comic to spite fox when it made the FF movies? Things have changed immensely. Again, comparing the licenses to past movies or other movies means nothing. Each film gets a new contract.

Also, with the three previous, and both wolverine solo flicks, all actors likeness rights where negotiated and included in the overall actor contracts. So no further negotiating with the actors by companies where required.

With xmen origins and the wolverine Hugh actually waived most of his likeness rights because he was involved in the films as both actor and Executive producer, and did everything he could to promote the films

 

[DiFabio]

Again...not the same license. And how things where between marvel with the first three xfilms and currently are worlds apart. Back then did marvel cancel the FF comic to spite fox when it made the FF movies? Things have changed immensely. Again, comparing the licenses to past movies or other movies means nothing. Each film gets a new contract.

Also, with the three previous, and both wolverine solo flicks, all actors likeness rights where negotiated and included in the overall actor contracts. So no further negotiating with the actors by companies where required.

With xmen origins and the wolverine Hugh actually waived most of his likeness rights because he was involved in the films as both actor and Executive producer, and did everything he could to promote the films

Right.


Hot Toys X-Men 3: Wolverine 2013




Hot Toys The Wolverine: Logan 2014



Hot Toys DOFP: Wolverine 2014









Looks the same to me, bub. Also, Origins was the one Hugh Jackman produced, NOT The Wolverine. Hutch Parker took over producing The Wolverine. Parker also had a helping hand with . . . DOFP. In fact, The Wolverine and DOFP have the same exact production companies. Isn't that odd?

This pricing situation hasn't just happened with X-Men/Marvel movies but all licenses across the board. There is no rhyme or reason to it. People say likenesses, when another instance contradicts it (Jack Nicholson). Another example might be "stuff you get", then something contradicts it (The Predator).

Also, not all companies "dump" their licenses fees onto the consumer with the prices, nor should they. That gets worked out with their production supply (demand vs. sold products). The only case where that SHOULD occur is with the Hot Toys Superman figure with the Reeve foundation. I've never seen a situation where the consumer is charged for the licensee's bills, except for Hot Toys supposedly.

 

[optical20]

i would print this post, frame it and hang it on my wall.

 

[YankeesFanboy]

Stop your crying and love this figure with all your heart.

pturtle's all in, how 'bout you?



And when DiFabio's feelin' his oats, look out!

 

[karamazov80]

Yeah, I don't think there's a real objective process to determining HT's prices, nor do I feel licensing/likenesses play as much of a role as many seem to think it does. Hot Toys Luke Skywalker probably warranted the highest licensing fees of any figure thus far, due to their having to pay multiple middle men (an idea reinforced by HT only doing one figure, then a couple years later making a huge deal out of their negotiating their own, independent Star Wars license). And yet, HT Luke was $300 for 2 complete figures. A pretty good deal at the time released. So. . .

 

[Motuxmen]

Every company that pays license fees translates that cost onto the consumer in some way. Just because you don't see that cost doesn't mean it's not there.

And with most toys there's a way to mask production costs by producing large amounts. Not hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands...but hundreds of thousands and millions. Most of the time exact production is not known . But to give an idea...an old one though it may be...in 1985 the largest seller on masters of universe reported sales for the year of 3 million units(600k over Xmas alone)That's one retail outlet, and that's 30 years ago. Back when gas cost 80 cents a gallon, when wages where 4 bucks an hour, when oil per barrel was 15 buck(115 a barrel now. Plastic is made from oil, as is a huge percentage of synthetic fabrics). That line had no licenses costs at all.

Bowen, sideshow, enter bay..they all include lic costs in the production costs. It's all overhead.

 

[DiFabio]

Yeah, I don't think there's a real objective process to determining HT's prices, nor do I feel licensing/likenesses play as much of a role as many seem to think it does. Hot Toys Luke Skywalker probably warranted the highest licensing fees of any figure thus far, due to their having to pay multiple middle men (an idea reinforced by HT only doing one figure, then a couple years later making a huge deal out of their negotiating their own, independent Star Wars license). And yet, HT Luke was $300 for 2 complete figures. A pretty good deal at the time released. So. . .

Exactly.

Not to mention other companies like NECA have a wide range of different licensed products . . . yet all those figures are priced the same be it 1/4 Marvel or DC heroes, to 7" Alien/Robot/Cult/Video game figures. They make up the profit through SALES, not charging $20 bucks here and $70 there. Look at Sigourney Weaver Ripley. Think NECA is going to charge $90 for their Ripley while only charging $16 for their Bishop? Nope. But I bet it's a sure bet that people speculate that the reason Hot Toys Ripley (either one) is so high is because of what Weaver negotiated just like people say about Nicholson or Weller.

I'll close my point with this, Marvel Select DOFP Mystique. Oddly enough, that figure was slated for this month. It was completely finished, ready to go and near sale time. It had Lawrence's likeness and looked great. At the shows it was slated for an October 2014 release for . . . $25. The same price as all the other Marvel Select figures be it Cap from Cap 2 or a Spider-Man from the comic. What happened? The figure was cancelled. Not because of licensing or some feud, but because Jennifer Lawrence backed out because she didn't want that figure to have her likeness (a common issue Toy Biz had to deal with back in the day). That figure was a go for a regular MSRP price until just a few months where she backed out. It's not a licensing thing since she did the same damn thing to one of her Hunter Games figures. And hey, Marvel Select put out a nice The Wolverine Hugh Jackman figure much like the produced Mystique for the same price and everything. Mystique got as far as packaged and test shots, plus licensor approval before the plug was pulled.

 

[Motuxmen]

Yeah, I don't think there's a real objective process to determining HT's prices, nor do I feel licensing/likenesses play as much of a role as many seem to think it does. Hot Toys Luke Skywalker probably warranted the highest licensing fees of any figure thus far, due to their having to pay multiple middle men (an idea reinforced by HT only doing one figure, then a couple years later making a huge deal out of their negotiating their own, independent Star Wars license). And yet, HT Luke was $300 for 2 complete figures. A pretty good deal at the time released. So. . .

No Luke did not warrant the highest licenses. Lucas films own the complete likeness rights. Hot toys only needed to negotiate with Lucas which is now Disney/marvel...with xmen it's marvel...fox...and the individual actors. Mark (Luke) got paid for his likeness when he got paid for the film work originally.

You are correct that guessing as to why hot toys prices figures where they do is that, guessing.

But costs rise. Asking them to sell a figure in 2015 for the same price as a figure from 2008 is silly. Not only do production costs increase....but so do other overhead at a company. Rent, transportation, licenses, salary, taxes, utilities..does everything you pay stay the same over 5-10 years? Do you not expect an increase in wages? Is your electric bill the same? Well an electric bill at a major factory can run 100k a month or more.

Compare what you get with hot toys to other lines. Look at statements from officials from other lines. Take motu (my other fav line so I know a lot off hand)...toyguru stated that a 12inch non rotocast figure with minimum accesories would cost north of 100 dollars. That's with a line that has no actor licenses rights to pay. That's owns the rights in house so it wouldn't have to pay someone like marvel and fox also. And the detail on a motu figure is light years away from a hot toys.

I'm not saying the licenses are the only reason this figure costs what it does. But to think it doesn't or shouldn't play a part is silly. Hot toys is a business that needs to make a profit or it no longer makes anything. When it's costs go up, or are not on par with everything else for whatever reason, that cost is either eaten by the company or translated to the product.

And Hugh was still an producer on the wolverine. Just because there was another producer means nothing. In fact, Hugh had even more input and control on the wolverine then he did on origins.

As for your legal disclaimer info...that's pointless. Those are legally required disclaimers not proof of license issues or contract wording. Its like reading the same on a DVD and assuming that only those named had a part or involvement.

I'm sure you are way more informed because you read those though. Not like actually being involved in the contract discussions like I was could come close to knowing what you do. You win


O

 

[yodasan]

In the movie, all he did was sleep in this outfit...I'm not paying $250 for wolvie in his days of future pajamas.