MP Chromedome?

[kup]

That's different. While Hasbro often do conceptual designs for toys they want, it's always Takara(TOMY) who do the job of actually engineering and creating the toys themselves. But this isn't the same as co-designing, at least not in the sense of what you're suggesting. What happens here is that Hasbro sends Takara their designs and specifications and Takara sends feedback in terms of what's feasible and what's not. For example the rear end of the G1 Kup's vehicle mode had to be changed because Hasbro's initial design wasn't practical for Takara to do --- Takara will notify Hasbro and Hasbro will approve or suggest a change. There's often a lot of back and forth between the two companies in terms of Takara trying to work out what Hasbro wants. If you look at the Animated Almanac there are pictures of toy prototypes/mock ups and designs with notes from Hasbro telling Takara what they want changed; like with Animated Arcee. But it's all still ultimately about the two parties working out what Hasbro wants. At no stage will Takara question a suggestion/decision from Hasbro based on what they think is suitable for their market -- but rather questions will be raised based on practicality/viability of design (e.g. budget restrictions, engineering issues etc.).

Armada/Micron Legend is a notable exception where both parties did sit down and negotiate over what was suitable for both markets, e.g. Takara at one stage wanted to have trains, but Hasbro argued against it because they said that trains weren't popular in their markets and that sports cars sold better; hence we didn't get any Trainbots in Armada/ML.


As far as I can see, Hasbro primarily leads the development and TakaraTOMY just carries them over for their market; with the exception of some "high end" lines like Alternity, Disney Label, Device Label etc.


The guy I spoke to was Mr. Takagi (don't know his given name). But I suspect that the clause still exists because if it didn't then retailers are able to order directly from TakaraTOMY and bypass Hasbro. This would be awesome if true, because with the current exchange rate and exemption from import duties (since TakaraTOMY would be distributing to overseas retailers) they'd be able to supply TakaraTOMY TFs at RRP - cheaper than Hasbro's rip off prices! Someone call TRU and tell them to order Japanese DOTM Deluxes and TF Prime First Eds! But I suspect this may not be the case -- Jetwing Optimus Prime was sold here via Hasbro Australia and not directly from TakaraTOMY. TakaraTOMY are happy to supply TFs to Australian retailers, but only through Hasbro or with Hasbro's consent (but even then retailers charged a pretty penny for that toy )

So the fact that Jetwing Optimus Prime was released here via Hasbro last year suggests to me that the clause is still in effect. If not... <wink>

I think you are arguing about something different to what I am. I am talking about recent practices and you are using 1980s examples - Even Hasbro's own local business practices have considerably changed since those days making such examples completely obsolete. Your Jetwing OP example also doesn't really proof much as how do you know that Tomy had intended to release the mold in their market but just cancelled it? They released everything else and this is just one mold after all.

Regardless, what you stated in your post about the Almanac certainly sounds like co-development to me which is exactly the point that I am making. Since Tomy joint with Takara, there has been less 'mainstream' Japanese exclusive lines with the exception of small collector friendly ones. This makes sense since Hasbro has a more 'toys for kids' mentality while in Japan, the collector market is more greatly acknowledged. All the higher profile 'retail' lines like Animated, Movie and Universe/Generations seem to be co-developed with Hasbro who appears to have the more influence on mold development decisions.

Just to make it clear - We are not talking about market cross-contamination, we are discussing co-development of molds which will end up being sold on both markets and which Hasbro clearly has a huge say on it. You know yourself that the toys intended for both markets are manufactured within the same factory further suggest cooperation in development and some manufacturing practices.

The clause is about market cross-contamination not the development of toy molds that will eventually end up in both markets under their own individual banners. I don't think Tomy just forks all the development costs and then sells the mold to Hasbro to produce in their own market, the toys are clearly co-developed for intended release in that of both. After that the factory creates two production runs, one intended for Hasbro and the other for Tomy which is the Clause that you keep bringing up and has no bearing in what is being discussed.