BurningRage
Super Freak
Contact them via live chat. I think they will.
1/6 SSC Batman Classic Sixth Scale Figure
- Thread starter BurningRage
- Start date
Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:
Contact them via live chat. I think they will.
Leroy
Super Freak
By me.
They don't care for feedback. I mean, they shipp early production samples to crappy reviewers in order to create the fazz... They count on the casual masses to buy these, not the actual collectors.
That was soooooooooo long ago, man!
Even Hot Toys used to change and add stuff back then.
Hah, I know right, Bring back the good ol' days!!
I’m curious what reply you got. Same thing happened to me on a different item and they wouldn’t give me free shipping. Was told offers are only valid at time of order.
Is that a photoshop? Who wouldn't buy this? They could rerelease that figure every two years until the end of time and it would always sell out.
That's the version of Batman that appears in every fan's mind when they think of Batman.
Superman-Prime
Super Freak
- Joined
- May 2, 2014
- Messages
- 731
- Reaction score
- 1
And yet for some reason no one releases it in 1:6 scale....I agree. Neal Adams Batman is awesome.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BurningRage
Super Freak
1000 ex
I really don’t know why sideshow can’t do a classic someone wants to buy. A Neal Adams figure would be classic that people are more inclined to buy. The 30’s batman would’ve cool if it was designed exactly.
This one will be bought by people who missed the 1st batman and the black style.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This one will be bought by people who missed the 1st batman and the black style.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
EVILFACE
Super Freak
They are holding out on a Neal Adams Batman because they know it's the one people want. Instead they can just pimp out their made up Batmen until then.
I'm not sure a private company failing to produce and sell a particular Batman qualifies as "corrupt."
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Iam_Dabatman
Super Freak
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2013
- Messages
- 753
- Reaction score
- 8
That's kind of amazing that people think companies don't give them the classic representations they want by choice. It's the same thing in the Mezco topics. I've even read that Sideshow was preventing other companies from making classic superheroes. Really? Do you guys think they have the rights to awesome popular classic designs and choose to make no use of them? As far as I know (and it's not much), licensing does not work like that.
Seriously, they're not bunch of sadistic businessmen with a gripe against grown up geeks.
Seriously, they're not bunch of sadistic businessmen with a gripe against grown up geeks.
As a rule, everyone should follow NECA's twitter. They talk about the intricacies of what their licensors allow and disallow from time to time, and it's very educational.
It's pretty simple; the licensor has absolute control over what a company like Sideshow is permitted to make. Anyone who's wanted to buy a Fantastic Four product in the last three years can tell you that the IP owners might have lots of reasons for keeping a particular product off the market.
Do I know for sure that licensing is what keeps Sideshow from making such a figure? Of course not. But I'm fairly confident that it's not a sinister scheme to somehow make more money by releasing a less popular figure instead. That wouldn't exactly make a lot of business sense, you know?
Sideshow is a business. If they believed releasing a line of (more) comic accurate Batmen would be profitable for them, and they had the resources and the licensors approval to do so, they would probably do it.
If they're not doing it, well, one of those conditions probably isn't met. The alternative is that they've made an artistic choice about what their product/brand is, which I can't fault them for either.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
It's pretty simple; the licensor has absolute control over what a company like Sideshow is permitted to make. Anyone who's wanted to buy a Fantastic Four product in the last three years can tell you that the IP owners might have lots of reasons for keeping a particular product off the market.
Do I know for sure that licensing is what keeps Sideshow from making such a figure? Of course not. But I'm fairly confident that it's not a sinister scheme to somehow make more money by releasing a less popular figure instead. That wouldn't exactly make a lot of business sense, you know?
Sideshow is a business. If they believed releasing a line of (more) comic accurate Batmen would be profitable for them, and they had the resources and the licensors approval to do so, they would probably do it.
If they're not doing it, well, one of those conditions probably isn't met. The alternative is that they've made an artistic choice about what their product/brand is, which I can't fault them for either.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
mattinglymint23
Super Freak
- Joined
- May 19, 2015
- Messages
- 1,241
- Reaction score
- 9
Zuckerberg could have used your help on Tuesday. Nice post.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I say corrupt because minimally accessorized, labeled as classic which it’s not. It’s made for 2 groups of people. Those who missed their chance at buying it and the group that buy anything hot toys and sideshow makes.
It’s a slap stick revamp. Use of labeling to rebrand it for resale.
The buying market for 1/6 is lately x-gens through younger millennials
A batman from late 60’s-mid 90’s would make more sales. I’m sure Warmer Brothers likes getting money. They want a product that sells.
An artisanal figure that will be low grade sales would be not good business. Especially after the disappointment with GL.
This could be done deliberately by sideshow to get out of 1/6 DC figures. They keep self sabotaging themselves
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It’s a slap stick revamp. Use of labeling to rebrand it for resale.
The buying market for 1/6 is lately x-gens through younger millennials
A batman from late 60’s-mid 90’s would make more sales. I’m sure Warmer Brothers likes getting money. They want a product that sells.
An artisanal figure that will be low grade sales would be not good business. Especially after the disappointment with GL.
This could be done deliberately by sideshow to get out of 1/6 DC figures. They keep self sabotaging themselves
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
The style of that batman pretty much lasted 20+yrs. longest than any revamp. That’s why it’s a classic.
30’s style lasted through till the change in 50’s.
The 50’s version lasted until 64-65 I think.
If your doing an iconic look you do one that’s been time tested. The Neal Adams look only changed color of costume slightly and ears got longer in 90’s. But that’s it. If I was a company I’d do the version they did. And do the classic oval chest that is recognizable and beloved.
I don’t see why Warner would not let them have free reign on older costume design because it doesn’t interfere with hot toys movie designs. And DC collectibles nor Mattel is doing anything related in scale.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Sardo Numspa
Super Freak
Other thing everyone seems to forget, is that it costs money to develop and produce figures. Sideshow as a business, is not going to take on costs to produce and sell a figure, intentionally to have bad sales and get out of the 1/6 line. That's ridiculous. No one is forcing them to make the 1/6 figs in the first place. If they don't want to make anymore DC Comics 1/6, then they would simply stop making them (like so many lines that ALL 1/6 figure manufacturers have given up on).
Also, on a licensing standpoint, DC (and other) actually do NOT want to make classic designs that might have a fan base. They are actually more interested in maintaining whatever current look their characters have. That is brand consistency. They would much prefer to promote the current look from comics or films, where their main revenue streams are, than promote products based on past designs.
Also, on a licensing standpoint, DC (and other) actually do NOT want to make classic designs that might have a fan base. They are actually more interested in maintaining whatever current look their characters have. That is brand consistency. They would much prefer to promote the current look from comics or films, where their main revenue streams are, than promote products based on past designs.
SS shouldn't call the line "comic book" or use words like "classic". Call it what it is, an "artist interpretation" or something. This figure is NOT classic. There is nothing classic about it.
Similar threads
