Mkall wrote:Dear 3rd Party Companies
Either show full artwork, resin pics, or the final product. These silhouettes, partial-reveals and teasers are just BS.
Mkall wrote:Dear 3rd Party Companies
Either show full artwork, resin pics, or the final product. These silhouettes, partial-reveals and teasers are just BS.
El Duque wrote:Also found these on their weibo page. Looks like they were taking a poll at one point to gauge interest.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
Counterpunch wrote:FP sure does provide some F'd up head.
joesaysso wrote:As far as I'm concerened "3rd party" and "KO" are pretty much interchangeable. They are companies that aren't Hasbro or Takara that make transformers. One makes copies of Has/Tak property for a profit, the other uses loopholes to make their own versions of Has/Taks property for a profit. They aren't really that much different from each other really. I hate when people ride the fence on this issue, supporting 3rd parties but bashing KOs.
Kibble wrote:joesaysso wrote:As far as I'm concerened "3rd party" and "KO" are pretty much interchangeable. They are companies that aren't Hasbro or Takara that make transformers. One makes copies of Has/Tak property for a profit, the other uses loopholes to make their own versions of Has/Taks property for a profit. They aren't really that much different from each other really. I hate when people ride the fence on this issue, supporting 3rd parties but bashing KOs.
I'll agree with this provided we put Hasbro in the same category for making Legos...and "borrowing" unlicensed alt mode designs.
Jeep! wrote:Why do I imagine Dead Metal sounding exactly like Arnie?
Intah-wib-buls?
Blurrz wrote:10/10
Leave it to Dead Metal to have the word 'Pronz' in his signature.
El Duque wrote:Mkall wrote:Dear 3rd Party Companies
Either show full artwork, resin pics, or the final product. These silhouettes, partial-reveals and teasers are just BS.
Exactly, which is why this only forum fodder and not news.
Kibble wrote:I'll agree with this provided we put Hasbro in the same category for making Legos...and "borrowing" unlicensed alt mode designs.
joesaysso wrote:Kibble wrote:I'll agree with this provided we put Hasbro in the same category for making Legos...and "borrowing" unlicensed alt mode designs.
Sounds good to me. I can say that I'm not exactly sure what you are refering to. I'm not sure why you would have to license an alt mode, unless of course the alt mode was supposed to be something very specific. But I'm not sure how it can be when it comes to legos.
Either way, you won't hear me defend Hasbro in many debates. If you think they are knocking off legos is some way, then by all means, add them to the list.
joesaysso wrote:Kibble wrote:I'll agree with this provided we put Hasbro in the same category for making Legos...and "borrowing" unlicensed alt mode designs.
Sounds good to me. I can say that I'm not exactly sure what you are refering to. I'm not sure why you would have to license an alt mode, unless of course the alt mode was supposed to be something very specific. But I'm not sure how it can be when it comes to legos.
Either way, you won't hear me defend Hasbro in many debates. If you think they are knocking off legos is some way, then by all means, add them to the list.
Kibble wrote:So if it's truly all the same, then let's just call a spade a spade.
Astronopolis wrote:im not buying your spiel. you make broad strokes about what you consider Knock Off, but you deny any defense of Hasbro? Which is it, man?
I do understand the facts that one of them is being passed off as an original in an attempt to get your money disingenuosly. However, I counter with the other one is using fanboyism against the collector to get your money disingenuously
joesaysso wrote:Astro, you misunderstood me again. I said 3rd parties prey upon your fanboyism to get as much of your money as they can. Not hasbro's. You are right hasbro lost little money off of warbot defender. But whoever paid for warbot defender lost more money than they probably should have. The prices of third party products is as big a ripoff as a junkie KO.
amcgrath929 wrote:I'm not sure I buy into that really. Hasbro had it's Springer out well before Warbot came along. So did BotCon for that matter. I don't think FP cost Hasbro any cash there. And as far as price goes, it cannot be proven either way that a small third party company makes any more % profit than Hasbro does per figure. I'd venture to say that Hasbro makes a greater % profit considering there the big dog in Transformer distribution.
Astronopolis wrote:You've got me that 3rd party products are just as legit as KO toys. They're both robot toys made by groups other than Hasbro that's for sure.
Astronopolis wrote:now this may just be romanticism, but i appreciate the work that goes into the development and design of a 3rd party toy. I admit i do not know what goes in to it all but a great effort is surely required, in most cases design choices have to be made due to limitations of the toy to be modified and so forth. it feels honest and admirable, so i feel a heftier price tag is appropriate.
on the other hand, to make a KO all one needs is to sacrifice an official item to make the casts and print them out, its all profit for little work in my opinion.
Return to Unlicensed and KO Transformers Toys
Registered users: 1984forever, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Jelze Bunnycat, Majestic-12 [Bot], MSN [Bot], MSNbot Media