About this topic...
I can't believe I ended up spending all day on this. It started out as quick email to Major Retailers, to query their reason for all skipping the Generations Line, and listing some possible reasons that I've observed in recent years... but as I got carried away with more and more details, I figured that it would be worth posting it up as an essay here - which meant re-writing most of it from its initial email format. (it might still sound awkward in places if I missed editing bits)
I might still email this or just the link to this posting, even though it will probably get me in trouble with Hasbro for rocking the boat just to get some answers or to get the Retailers to put more effort into Brands like Transformers, to make them more profitable, which benefits us AND them.
My first priority is to this community, with a close second being to Hasbro, as it ultimately benefits my first priority... but if the two conflict, I would put this community first... just like Hasbro would put themselves before me or us if they had a similar conflict.
We both have a job to do, and I respect their job enough to not take it personally when they prioritise their own interests when it is necessary to do so (by not telling us things that we might want to know).
It will be interesting to see if they can have the same level of respect in return, for us doing our job of educating the Major Retailers, that increased online shopping is their own fault, from following certain practices... which I've called "rules".

Note that these are not official "rules" by Retailers here, or anywhere. These are just my own observations of their procedures and patterns over the last 17 years of reporting toy news, personally interacting with multiple Corporations and businesses, and attending several Toyfairs.


Introduction...
It can be confidently claimed that Transformers would have to be the biggest, most active and longest-running Action Figure Brand in this country, but Major Retailers in recent years have shown that they are failing to efficiently profit from this Brand, almost as if they are bound to follow "rules" when purchasing other people's Brands.
So I wondered what must these rules be, and why do the Major Retailers here stick to them, but then cry poor when more and more consumers are forced to import online, when it can be proven that it's their own procedures (these assumed rules) are to blame for lack of reliability with Product availability, and high Product prices in Australia. (not to mention poor customer service at the stores - but surely, that isn't a procedure that they have to follow like these "rules"... that's just lack of adequate investment in Human Resources)


What are the "rules" of Australian Major Retailers that I've observed over the last couple of decades?

1 - The Consumers (kids and parents buying most of the Toys) are not the target audience when it comes to Toy Marketing, the Product Buyers of the Major Retailers are. Toy Companies are forced by the Major Retailers to produce Products that have to capture the interest of the (mostly) middle-aged Product Buyers, who have little interest in the play value of Toys, and are not part of the majority demographics of the people buying the Toys (kids who are easily convinced to buy merchandise they saw on TV, and gift-giving, impulse-buying parents who just see a wall of random toys and grab something in their price-range - neither of which are Retailer Buyers, who know the tricks and profit-margins to make a more selective purchase).


2 - A Product Line must have "Media Support" (cartoon, Movie, commercials) paid by someone else, so that the Retailer doesn't have to lift a finger to do anything to sell those Products, but still make money off someone else's paid advertising. If it doesn't have a movie, or TV show, or commercials, the Retailer is not interested, no matter how popular it might be, or could be. Take a look at Transformers Generations - retailers in other countries can't keep up with the demand, and it has been popular enough by Hasbro to be one Transformers Line in the last decade to expand three years in a row (2012-2014), in both Product Numbers and Size Classes (giving more budgetary options for Consumers of different Socio-Economical backgrounds)... but it was ignored by ALL Australian Major Retailers because the other Transformers Lines had cartoons or commercials, so were falsely assumed to be more successful.
Instead, the Major Retailers prioritised Beast Hunters, not because they looked like anything recognisable, but because they had a cartoon that was meant to promote them. And it did promote the Series, but not enough to move the over-saturation of the first Wave to the Stores (noted further below).


3 - Toylines are only given a year long life-cycle by Retailers, resetting each year at Toyfair. There is no interest by Retailers to have any long-term interest or even nurturing of other people's Brands, even though it would result in better customer loyalty to their Store for being "the reliable store for Brand X". Retailers don't care if a Toy Brand has been around for 30 years or 3 months, as all Toylines are treated as "new" each year at Toyfair, and it is up to the Toy Companies to compete all over again. Even if a Brand is promoted as having past success, the Product Buyers won't consider it if it doesn't meet one of the "rules" first. This is why each year, an ongoing Product Line will have a new packaging style or Series name, or even a whole new Line-wide Gimmick added... even if the existing formula is a success and the changes forced onto it by Retailers kills off that successful Series. Retailers don't care, because they have no ties to the Brands and will just be back next year to find something else to fill the shelves. And Retailers don't care about the Consumers, or else they would find out what Consumers want, and not just force on them whatever interested the Product Buyers (see "rule" 1).
How many times have we seen a successful series of Transformers Toys, killed off because the Retailer-forced annual changes, took the series away from its winning formula, and lost the kids and collectors. Major Retailer are the catalyst for killing off successful toylines, but don't care, because, they just look for something else to force on the Consumers next year.


4 - "New product" is more important than restocking Product that Consumers still want. Following on from "rule" 3, the Major Retailers prefer to have a "new" toyline that ends up failing and being replaced next year, than a second year of a Successful Product that they can't label as "new". Why? Because of public image. Yes, it is actually more important to the Major Retailers public image, to have a range of Toy Products that may not even be in the Cartoon, just so that they can promote them as "new". It doesn't matter if the Consumers want a Red Optimus Prime like in the current cartoon, or a Black Batman, or any other superhero toy to look EXACTLY like it does in the cartoon or movie. The Major Retailers want something NEW on the shelves, and OFTEN, or else they will go to a Toy Company that is willing to do so. It then becomes the costly job of the Toy Companies to create more Product that has a shorter release window (making it higher risk, and requiring more recycling & redecos to get the same return on product that used to be available longer), and then have to justify in their "supported Media" (the cartoons). Each year, the Toy Companies have to explain to kids, why there is a change from the Winning Formula that made them fans and Consumers of that merchandise, into something different. As noted in "Rule" 3, this rapid change of Toy Product in the "supported Media" prevents a build-up or momentum of loyal Consumers to that Brand. Loyal Consumers, who would keep coming back to a Retailer's Store if that Retailer provided what Consumers want, instead of forcing them to choose between the items that only interested the Product Buyer and satisfied their "rules".
This is why Toyline Cartoons rarely go more than 2 or 3 years before ending, or undergoing a significant overhaul or reboot, because each year, the cartoon has to prioritise changing of Theme or Characters, over a story. Kids follow stories and Characters. They don't like change, or else they don't become collectors that become repeat Customers.
And what of the demand for toys featured in Re-Runs or from watching recently purchased DVDs? If "new" Product is required OFTEN, where do Consumers (kids and their parents) buy the Toys that are still in that Cartoon? Yep, they have to buy online from any source that still has them, or sells second-hand toys.
A rapid change of Product just to promote "new" in the Store by Retailers, means less people looking IN the Store to buy the Toys being advertised in Cartoons that are still currently in release. Do Retailers really think that a Kid or Parent is going to buy a green Optimus if the one on the cartoon is red? Or a Bumblebee with spikes all over it, if the one on the cartoon doesn't? This requirement for "new" Product often results in new colours or sculpting, just so that Toy Companies can still have the Cast Characters in Stores, but Retailers don't care that it is at the expense of being able to sell it... just as long as they can use the word "new" in the catalogues.
So instead of giving the Consumers what they want (accurate Toys while they are still being featured in the Cartoon), Retailers want you to buy their "new" Products, or go buy online from somewhere still stocking the Cartoon characters. See, by prioritising their "rule" of having "new" product, they are no longer able to give Consumers what they want... but complain about people importing what they want. You must buy what they want you to buy, or else they will run to the Government to force you to buy it, by asking for more restrictions on personal importing.
Last year, the Beast Hunters Deluxe Range had 16 toys in it, but only ONE was a toy that featured in the Cartoon last year (Smokescreen). Instead of letting Toy Companies produce the Toy Products that Consumers wanted (the souvenirs of the cartoon characters), Hasbro instead had to have a Gimmick-Filled range of toys that failed, because the cartoon could only afford to promote a limited number of new toys. And do the Retailers take on any responsibility for tying the hands of Toy Companies? No. They blame the Toy Companies if they believe that there wasn't adequate "Media Support" (if there is limited cartoon screening, or the Cartoon can't seriously justify all the new toys), and blame Consumers for not buying the Product (regardless of not being featured in the cartoon). They don't take the blame, because as it is noted in "rule" 3, next year is a brand new Toy year, and they'll just buy something else.
Story-driven Toyline cartoons should be allowed to run their course, without interference from Retailers Demanding "new" product before the Consumers want it. The Retailers force an annual change in the toys, which forces a frequent change in the cartoons (the media promoting it), which forces a drop-off in support for that Series AND its toy merchandise.
Look at the Beast Wars Toyline - the second year had to bring in Transmetals for the Retailers, which wasn't as popular, but still successful with the Cartoon, but the third year brought in Transmetal 2 toys (again, because Retailers want "new", even if the cartoon is still popular and on TV). The "new" toys that strayed from the winning formula of the first year, killed off the Beast Wars cartoon and series. Retailers love to blame it on Consumers and even Toy Companies for a drop off of sales after a successful first year, but Retailers are the ones to blame for forcing the Toy Companies to release "new" Product more often than the Consumers wanted it... before the story (cartoon) could justify it.
Then there is the bond that kids have to favourite characters. When a Retailer expects "new" each year, there is only so much a Toy Company can do with a character, before it looks nothing like what the Kids had bonded with... and if they aren't able to keep releasing the same Character Toy, then it is not worth the expense of the Toy Company to keep advertising it in the Cartoon. This ends up relating to "rule" 1, in that the "Media Support" must promote the current Toy Product, NOT, produce product based on the current "Media Support". Again, it is forcing Consumers to be stuck with what Retailers want, instead of Retailers stocking what Consumers want.
For Toy Companies though, it is more profitable to invest in a long-term project for their Brands, like a cartoon series or even a toy theme, which builds up a fanbase over several years who want to buy more of the next batch, and even become long-time collectors. But Retailers have no interest in Brand Loyalty if it isn't one of their Brands. They prioritise their Brand, and keeping it looking "fresh" with frequent "new" Products.
Retailers need to start differentiating between one-off toylines, and ongoing Brands that depend on long-term, repeat customers if they want more Consumers coming back to their Stores, looking to buy more of that Line. Allow the Toy Companies who actually follow Kids and Collector Trends, be the ones deciding what Products should stay in stores longer, and what Products are "new and fresh" to compete with other Toy Companies with. Otherwise, Retailers will continue to be the catalyst that forces popular toylines to end faster than they should... and force Consumers to look for alternatives to the Major Retailers when looking for Product from Current & Recent cartoons.


5 - It is cheaper and easier to force Product onto the Consumer, than to find out what the Consumers want and provide it. Major Retailers have no interest in investing time and money to do Consumer (Market) research on someone else's Brands, especially when they reset every year (see "rule" 3). So if they don't know what the Consumer Demographics want, and buy up the wrong lines, isn't it the Retailer's fault for losing customers to competitors or to importing? Why trust what Toy Companies claim is going to be popular, when they aren't going to tell you that it won't be. Spend a little time and money BEFORE spending millions of dollars on a gamble, and maybe Consumers will start coming back to the Major Retailers that are catering to their needs... instead of stocking whatever the Retailer Product Buyer wants, and then complaining about online importing going up just because it was the Retailers fault for not researching it first.
Some consumers may just buy from what is available (from what the Retailers force them to choose from), but with online awareness and global shopping, the Major Retailers have to start putting in an effort when it comes to finding out what Consumers WANT, and not try to force them to buy what the Retailers want.
If Retailers refuse to spend money on other people's Brands (like in "rule" 1), then get the Toy Companies to have their products independently Rated by a number of random kids and parents first. After all, if something doesn't rate well, it is in the Toy Company's interest to also know about it before production starts. Toyfair is a great opportunity to do this as well, as the first day can be open to kids and parents from a selected nearby school, and they can rate the products in each exhibit that is willing to participate.
See "rule" 2 for an example of how their blind faith in these "rules" only hurts themselves, because they failed to make themselves aware of the Profit Potential of incorporating the interests and demands of Toy Product Consumers. Even us older collectors are a factor, and can be very useful for opinions if objectively relating to the younger Primary Demographics' interests and Capabilities with Toys.


6 - A bigger profit margin is more important than a good quality toy. Toy Companies are not allowed to dictate the Retail Prices in this country, but they can suggest them. And as an added sweetener, have on selected items, especially high-priced items, a greater margin between Wholesale price and the recommended retail price (above the average 40%). This encourages Retailers to risk buying the Product, or buying a lot of it, giving them them room to heavily discount it later, to offload it without losing money. It can also be used to headline a Catalogue Sale, to make Consumers think that they are getting a great deal, but in reality, the regular price was just taking advantage of Consumers by not passing on the savings.


7 - Short-term gain is more important than long-term loyalty of Consumers. It is more important to excessively order the "Launching-Wave", to get more people in your store first, and make sure you outlast a competitor, just in case it is a popular product. This is more applicable to short-lived promotions (like Halloween) and Movie Toylines (that only have a small window of demand while it is in Theatres). But in the last two years, the mainline of Transformers have been treated the same, with excessive amounts of Wave 1 product in stores, that takes 6-8 months to move in most stores. And by then, most follow-up waves are missed by most Retailers, or the Line is discontinued completely by a Retailer. Consumers stop going back to a Store, that they have lost faith in, and it is the Major Retailer's fault for over-ordering on a long-term, non-movie line, instead of pacing itself across the first few Waves.
If each Retail Store only has a limited amount of demand in its area to sell toy products, and they know what their area's demand is over the years, why would a Retailer's Product Buyer, force the Stores to stock more than their area can sell. Why over-saturate the Market, and prevent future profit by preventing enough turn-over to order in new stock? Over-saturate to the extent of having to discount at a loss, just to get rid of the excess stock.... and tarnishing the integrity of the Brand to both the Retailer and the Consumer. The end result has the Retailer labelling the Brand as toxic and less interested in buying it next time, but it was their own CHOICE that prevented them from making a full profit to begin with.
For example, if a Store knows that it usually has demand for about 4 of each character toy in their Action Figure lines, should the Retailer's Product Buyer order 4 of each of the first 3 waves and sell all 12 at full price, or, order 12 of the first wave and only sell 4 at full price?
Are the Major Retailer Buyers that stupid to not see how simple that is, or do they not care about what the individual Stores now have to deal with? You don't maximise profits by over-saturating the Market on a long-term Product Line and wash your hands of the responsibility of what Stores have to do with them. Otherwise, the individual Stores then have to sell a lot of them on sale, or even at a loss, without even once restocking to be able to sell more Product at full-price.
In both 2012 and 2013, that's exactly what happened with Transformers - Prime in 2012, Beast Hunters in 2013. The Retailers must have treated them like short-lived Movie lines, and ordered the amount of Wave 1 stock that they should have ordered over 3 Waves. Over, and then had to sell a lot of it at a loss. Since the Major Retailers did the same thing in 2011 with the third Transformers Movie Line, the blame could indeed be on them, but pressure from Hasbro could be in play in the following two years, to keep their sales figures from dropping too much between Movies.
If Major Retailers don't plan ahead on their Ordering and have an idea of what their Store's saturation point is for their long-term Toylines, more Consumers are going to look to other sources that were able to restock, because they didn't over-saturate the Market with the first wave... and often that means overseas purchasing.


8 - Always accept the wholesale prices of foreign-owned toy Brands that have exclusive import rights (Mattel, Hasbro, Lego), because it translates to a higher profit margin to Retailers. Retailer mark-up is mostly around 40% (the margin to cover their expenses and profit), so if a Product has a Wholesale price here of $20, instead of $10 like in some other countries, the Retailer here makes an $8 margin instead of $4. So you can see why Major Retailers don't demand for fairer prices, even though they are losing business to private importing. Once again, the Major Retailers put themselves first before Consumers (like with what Products they force on us), but then complain about us Consumers not putting THEM first when we have to import just to save money.
Maybe there isn't any colluding to keep the prices here high (and their profit margins with it), but if there the high prices are NOT intentional by Retailers, wouldn't that mean, the Product Buyers are not aware of how cheap the Toy Products should be? Are they completely oblivious of retail prices in America being less than Wholesale prices here, which could be found with a quick internet search. Could their job of spending millions of dollars, make them NOT look for ways to be competitive and look for saving money?
Yes, if the Product Buyers were that unaware of the huge mark-up of foreign-owned toys in Australia, they wouldn't be employed to spend millions of dollars so blindly. Their bosses would have them sacked if they were not aware of how much they should be paying for toys, as it is their job to know... and their job to question it. Since the Major Retailers obviously have so much power that they can dictate what Toy Products are forced on Consumers, obviously they have the power to dictate prices... if they wanted to.
So if the Major Retailers CHOOSE not to secure fair pricing, because it is more profitable to support excessive wholesale pricing, isn't it their own fault for Consumers privately importing. After all, that's what competition is about - you buy from where-ever it is cheaper. And it is the Retailers' job to compete... not to cry about people shopping online from cheaper foreign sources because of a profit-based decision by the Major Retailers.

Most of us want to support local Jobs if we can, and local businesses, but we are forced to import items when they are a lot more than they should be here. A lot of their imported items, including Generic-Brand items, are cheaper, so why not Foreign-Owned Toy Products.
The Major Retailers obviously have power over the Toy Companies with what Toy Products are produced and sold, so they have the power to give us prices that prevent the need to import. But it's their choice, and their fault if they don't.


So, why did most of the Toy Collectors who participated in a recent poll here of their 2013 purchases, spend more than 80% on importing their Transformers Toys last year?
Reliability of Product availability, and Price - caused by most of these "rules" and procedures by the Australian Major Retailers. Procedures that are obviously wrong, because they are not working efficiently enough to encourage Domestic purchasing.
Australia's Major Retailers need to start taking responsibility for their own actions when it comes to increased online sales and importing, and change these procedures.
This is not the fault of Government or regulations, or even the Consumers' fault. Importing Toys and other Products is the fault of the Major Retailers - They CHOOSE what products they stock and what to avoid, they CHOOSE how much or how little they stock, and they CHOOSE to accept the wholesale prices of the Foreign-Owned toy companies.
Invest a little time and money to do some research, to give the Consumers the Products they want, for as long as it is in demand or in the supporting Media. And fight for fairer prices in this country on behalf of the Consumers, instead of working with Toy Companies to keep prices here so high, that it is cheaper for the Consumer to import it themselves.


(Corrections are welcomed, as I know some members work in Retail, but I don't think anyone here is personally involved in Product Buying)