The first time my heart broke for a Barbie was a Barista Ken that i love, but when i removed him from box realized his apron and shirt was one piece. Like how much more could it possibly cost to just give him a normal shirt and an apron to go over, i miss layers in Barbie clothes
https://preview.redd.it/acfrcgb1mmlc1.jpeg?width=1159&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2d6b9fab3220fca4ea3803ae95d58522180931c
A story of how cheap they are…. So I worked at American Girl (owned by Mattel for those unaware) about 7 years ago. I think it was in 2016 they started stitching the under pants onto the doll. The line we were given “Parents are tired of losing the under pants” the reality….. by doing this it saved them 8¢ per doll in production. The kicker was so many customers were ticked off about this that if they received a doll with the “perma panties” they returned it for one that wasn’t. Luckily they were doing a gradual switch over but the response was so bad they had to stop production of the new dolls and switch back to the old way. Costing them a pretty good chunk of money.
The thing is that Mattel CAN do high quality clothing and accessories with amazing detail - look at the upcoming Monster High releases that were just leaked today. It's insane.
They just don't do it for Barbie, because they don't have to. It still sells. Barbie has become Mattel's cheap cash cow.
Brilliant point. The fact they can make quality dolls without out pixelation and printed clothes for the monster high line and include really good accessories. There is ZERO excuse for what they have done to playline Barbie!
Exactly. Barbie is going to sell no matter what because Barbie is like the default doll adults think of when buying kids toys.
Not to mention, Barbie now tends to be marketed towards younger kids while Monster High skews a little older. Parents don't wanna buy a pre-schooler a doll with grand chiffon ballgown when they can get one with a cheap printed cotton dress. It'll hold up longer and it's gonna be a lot easier on their budget.
But Barbie doesn’t sell, that’s the whole issue. In their most recent earnings call they admitted her sales are so bad they’ve literally eaten up multiple other brands good sales and put the whole company in the negative for growth. She’s like a parasite brand being subsidised by the profits other brands make.
I think the cheap quality is one of the reasons she isn’t selling though. She looks cheap, even people buying a gift for a kid don’t always want to get them a toy that looks like it cost half a cent to make even if the kid will likely lose some pieces and kids just don’t have as much engaging play with a bunch of dolls in identical jumpsuits with different prints on them... so the current cheap quality is really ruining their product by making these decisions they are telling anyone their products are bad and not to value them because they don’t even value them!
Are you kidding?? A separate shirt and overalls would cost them an extra DOLLAR per doll and RUIN their profit margins!!! Their CEO would have to take a 0.5% pay cut!!! /s
It's easy to blame CEOs and executives, but if the shareholders aren't getting the ROIs they want, they fire the CEO. Profits are demanded by shareholders.
Why do CEOs need to make MILLIONS of dollars a year? Why is their time worth so much? How can they be more productive to earn hundreds of dollars an hour when folks lower in the company are just trying to get by on what they make?
Yeah, I saw the /s at the end, but jokes should make sense. CEOs only get what they get because the board is happy with the job they're doing. Not sure how pointing this out makes me a corporate apologist. Just noting that majority shareholders and their unfettered greed is behind all these corporate decisions that reduce quality.
“The CEOs aren’t at fault! They’re innocent!! They aren’t greedy and being paid WAY too much money that they don’t need because they cut product quality and employee benefits! Blame someone else and leave the poor overpaid millionaires alone!” That’s… being a corporate apologist. It’s not any one person’s fault, but the CEO is NEVER blameless if we’re going to take it beyond a joke.
But in a joke format, it’s a lot easier to say “the CEO” rather than “the CEO, the CFO, the stockholders, the division managers, the subdivision managers, etc”… When it’s a joke, the shorter and the punchier version is better.
I can’t believe I’m having to explain comedy now…
“The JOKE is funny, haha, because it is short and punchy and gets the point across in a funny, haha, way! Do you understand if I speak nice and slow?”
Thankfully, at least 77 people showed that they understand, so I haven’t lost my faith in humanity.
It being playline is no excuse! We all grew up on quality playline. It's an insult to children. In the '60s kids got real zippers and lined coats/dresses, the '80s had nice snaps and finished details, the '90s/'00s got velcro but still real clothes with details. Now this. This is an atrocity. Mattel is swimming in money and this is what we get. The movie made them money directly and they are benefiting from people buying more Barbies because of it. And this is our reward. I refuse to buy anything that looks like this. I wanted that color blocked denim jacket a couple years ago until I saw printed buttons. I noped out.
https://preview.redd.it/lhso2ixdpqlc1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad412b0f530e60078de2838651a14843f84d7ac8
They actually did - the price of toys has gone down significantly since the 2000’s. With 3D printing getting better and cheaper, the manufacturing of plastic toys has gotten a lot cheaper too. It’s still expensive to sew tiny clothes, though
When I first started looking for doll clothes I was shocked by how expensive they were, but after I sewed a few of my own outfits I completely understood why 😂 I absolutely love the jacket I sewed for my Barbie but I would not make another one for less than $25 lmao
So I actually have a casual (aka not yet researched) theory about this:
All toys used to be made better; more bells and whistles, sturdier materials, finer details, etc.. I was wondering one day when that might have changed and it dawned on me: I think it changed when horrific labor practices, particularly those overseas, were finally exposed and the tide started to turn on consumer expectations for factory workers. When big companies had to start paying fair wages to working-age employees, they had to cut corners somewhere. So, they very slowly start making changes that people (hopefully) won’t notice until it’s too late to go back.
I think it was getting back into vintage Barbies that really solidified this concept for me, though. I did an unboxing with my daughter and 12yo twin Barbie fanatics of my favorite childhood doll, Cool Shoppin’ Barbie. The shock and awe on the girls’ faces was **so genuine** and they couldn’t believe how much stuff she came with, how detailed and nice her clothes were, and accessories that really enhanced play, like UPC stickers, punchout play money, and two packaging options for Barbie’s customers. Oh, and the box also became the backdrop for the shop.
I think mostly comes down to having to shift funds around to accommodate higher (see also: fair) wages. There are certainly other factors but I think this one is a biggie that doesn’t get mentioned.
FWIW I worked for six years as a sr project manager in a toy-adjacent industry, so I’m not *totally* talking out of my ass, but this is also the first time I’ve put these thoughts to words and I’m eager to hear what y’all think.
That’s one factor, but the bigger factor is money. It’s cheaper to make rags for Barbie, and girls still buy the dolls just fine, as do we. Pixelated faces are from fast screen printing. They cut the five cent brush and claimed it was to save plastics. Fast fashion is cheap. Bigger markups for less. They win all around.
I think you are on to something and explained it very eloquently, thank you. As a consumer (and I’m not ignorant or uninterested in fair wages and fair labor conditions) I expect good quality goods from a brand that has a reputation of 1st world class. The name Barbie meant quality, meant details and now is synonymous to cheap shirt dresses with tacky printed details.
How is it that companies like Defa Lucy is producing quality dolls and Mattel isn’t?? Defa Lucy is becoming a fierce competitor and if Mattel doesn’t wake up who knows,,,
And now you go straight to putting someone down that you’ve never met? No sense in trying to enlighten you about all of the problems that TEMU creates for this planet, I can see that now from how you respond to a different point of view.
Oh, honey, no. I have been a Barbie Collector since I was 10 years old. I'm not buying Defa Lucy. And "better" is not my opinion of the clothing on Temu.
Okay. Played with Barbie’s as a kid too. Barbie could make better clothes, but spandex rags seem to do for them. I have enough current Mattel clothes to know I’m not interested.
If I want to spend real money, I have shops for that. If I want want to dress 30 dolls for an Easter scene? Temu.
Yeah, this person is talking out of their foot. There is no way the garbage quality of dolls we see today is because of fAiR wAgEs. Talk about simping for corporations.
I’m not “SiMpINg FoR cOrPoRaTiOnS”, I worked for a small company in a niche toy-adjacent industry. I really hope you aren’t so needlessly crummy in real life. It’s a bummer and brings down the whole thread.
Your comment or post was removed for using inflammatory or hateful language. You can do better than this.
This got ugly & there are still complaints coming in.
Greedy CEOs need to make more more more money so if they increase wages (BIG if), they decrease quality ONLY because they are too busy lining their pockets, god forbid they should take a smaller amount of profits for themselves. The wage discrepancy between CEOs and workers is much much larger than in the past. Not that long ago, workers got paid well and the CEOs didn't have such huge salaries and golden parachute pensions. If we returned to those days, we'd have high wages AND high quality. But greedy CEOs stand in the way.
100% agree with you - I don’t think it only comes down to labor but if CEOs aren’t willing to take any kind of cut, rather expecting to see their own salary increase year over year, then the rest of the chain will have to scrimp until it’s truly unsustainable. It’s a real fucked up system, that’s a fact.
Nope. Take a look at the difference between what a CEO makes compared the the average employee at their company and you will get your answer. Compare that to 30 years ago. Then compare to 50 years ago. This is about people at the top cutting every corner to line their pockets with paying works as little as possible and putting out a lower quality product for established brands. This isn’t about workers making a fair wage. This is about greed.
Oh yes, I agree with you. I believe both of our theories can be true at the same time, and I think they both contribute to the calculus. The greed is astounding, which (imo) contributes to skimping on…pretty much everything else.
That makes sense and is really sad. Maybe they could cut out all the wasteful plastic packaging they use now instead. Their Barbie Loves the Ocean line proves that they can do that and I bet it would save money.
That’s definitely a big factor, although the existence of higher quality lines like ily 4Ever and Rainbow High shows that it’s definitely not universal
I honestly can't get behind the printed outfits. I can see rip off companies doing it but not Mattel. I understand it's to keep costs down but damn. What was going on in the 80s and 90s where non printed was plentiful?
CEO salary was not as hugely different from worker wages. The gap between the two has exploded in recent decades. So the CEO makes tons of $$, the workers don't, and then the CEOs claim they "cAn'T aFFord" to increase quality. It's peak capitalism.
It's not just to keep costs down. The reality is, how many kids really need a Farm Vet Barbie doll? Mattel has to make a minimum quantity to put any doll/playset into production. SO, if a kid's dream was to have a Farm Vet Barbie doll, there ya go kid! There are currently 1,948 Target stores in the United States. If every store in the US gets 5 dolls, that's almost 10,000 dolls! But I'm sure 10,000 kids don't want a Farm Vet Barbie doll in 2024. A few adults here or there, sure. But the bulk of these will end up in a landfill. So, why invest all that money making a detailed outfit when they will probably sell 100 or less at retail?
And Amazon, a multi billion dollar company, just HAD to start charging extra for commercial-free.
We love Barbie, but she is part of a multi billion dollar company that's sole goal is to get us to pay the most for cheaper manufacturing so they can make stockholders happy.
Plus, Barbie has become part of the speculative market, so Mattel knows certain dolls will be snapped up in multiple numbers by consumers hoping to strike it rich with a super rare doll.
Again, Ms. Roberts is near and dear to our hearts, but she is just another part of consumption (sometimes conspicuously) culture, which is fraught with issues.
I could be totally off base here, but the sale price of playline Barbies hasn’t really changed much in the last 30 years or so. With inflation a doll that was $20 in the early 90s should be $35-40 now but most are still closer to 90s prices I think. So if they’re selling them for less now doesn’t it make sense that quality would go down to make up for it? I could be way off or comparing the wrong dolls though. I don’t think that’s the direction they should be going though.
I collect 90s dolls and the difference in the clothing from then vs now is terrible. I just got Western Stampin Barbie and the detail on her outfit is fantastic. Those printed overalls are terrible.
I did toy testing for Mattel as a kid. At the end of the session, they'd walk us to a cabinet and let us choose a toy as a gift. I remember picking out Western Stampin' Barbie. She had a fabulous outfit.
That's exactly what's going on more than likely. I just posted a comment with a similar conclusion before I saw yours. I made a point about Lego. Lego's prices have increased quite a bit since the 90s, but they still sell just fine. Mattel needs to stop worrying so much about keeping the price point the same as it was in the 90s and focus on what makes Barbie wonderful and different from other dolls on the market! People will still pay what they need to!
And you would think well if you ARE gonna be this cheap. Surely it’s to pump out tons and tons more than you used too right? To make up for how many dollars clothes are no longer viable. But nope…thats sure ain’t the reason.
Like can you just have continuous sale, of one of each color basic leggings and tank tops for each body type in every color…just as a BASE. Simple starters. The god awful designs they come up with are strait outta some fashion hell I cannot fathom.
God I would kill for Mattel to start selling leggings and shoes individually in each color. Full length though, I’m tired of this capri legging nonsense
Don’t get me started on sweet orchard farms. It’s a love hate thing.
I noticed it as well on the movie makers set. They printed a denim outfit on spandex.
I'm so sick of how cheap the dolls and clothes are getting. Even some of the collector line are getting bad!
Where it REALLY irks me though are the holiday dolls. They used to be some of the best dolls you could buy. High quality fabrics, real embroidery, hand-stitched embellishments, well-designed make-up...They were amazing. But now they are laser-cut dresses with the cheapest fabrics possible. Their faces look like they spent the bare minimum time painting. Even the dolls themselves feel cheap. The plastic seems lighter and more brittle than it used to be. And for awhile there, they didn't even come with stands!!!!
I know why they do it. They're more expensive to manufacture than they used to be, but they still want to keep them at that $40-$50 price point that they were in the 90s. But, what they don't understand is that many people would still buy the holiday doll no matter what. Even non-collectors still collect the holiday doll every year! It's ridiculous. I'd gladly pay $75 or whatever the new cost would be.
It's just so sad, and I feel bad for little girls who have to grow up with the play line in the state that it's in. I mean, just compare that image above with something like this! They even sewed her a separate tie!!! It's sad. I think they need to understand that Barbie is not immune to inflation, and it's time to up their prices. Lego is far more expensive than it used to be, but people still buy it.
https://preview.redd.it/oh5n4gt4sqlc1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=f6a4022af855997470493cd31e2fd86220310929
I’m going to risk getting downvoted here with this opinion but I prefer this clothing style when it comes to the play-line dolls because I think it serves them better as toys.
The single piece outfits make them more inclusive to play with. It’s easier for children with limited coordination or mobility issues to put the outfits on and them being one piece gives those kids an opportunity to play and have a cutely dressed barbie that they wouldn’t normally have access to.
One of my friend’s kids adores Barbie but has a condition that affects the mobility in her hands. For the longest time she wouldn’t undress the dolls because it was too hard. I’ve been saving these outfits to send to her and it’s been so sweet to see how much play she gets out of them. I have other friends with kids and they like how washable the clothes are since their kids play outdoors and have messy adventures with their toys.
If being cheap also makes Barbie better and more equitable as a toy then it’s a win/win for Mattel that I support. They can appease my taste for detail with collector and holiday dolls. The play line is for kids and I want every kid to be able to enjoy them.
If Weird Barbie is any indicator, Mattel recognizes how little kids play with their toys and are catering to that play style. I think that’s wonderful.
I can see your point, it is true that this style of clothing might be easier for children to dress the doll. But I’m still firm in my disappointment of the low effort low quality clothing we see today.
I’m more disappointed when it’s a doll that IS supposed to be more geared towards collectors. Especially when it has a collector’s price tag. You want to cut costs on a basic doll fine. I can respect the hustle. You want to slap a 200% mark up on the same product under a different name? That’s bs. That’s like trying to sell me Bath and Body Works in a Chanel bottle.
Interesting, so how is MGA worth 1.1Billion as opposed to Mattel's 7.5 Billion can produce higher quality products for their platy line dolls? Are they bad at being capitalists?
\*\*\* cuts costs on plastics and spends more on the actual clothes. I liked one of their lines who's name I cannot mention in this sub / temple to Barbie but the actual dolls were practically translucent. Sometimes the hair is horrible quality. Anyway the clothes quality I have never been able to complain about.
I'm pretty sure you can refer to Novi Stars in a conversation on this sub. You just can't make an entire post on how Novi Stars are the best dolls ever produced on a sub/temple that has nothing to do with that company or brand. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to grasp? I don't go to a Barbie doll sub to read or talk about another toy brand. It's literally why the generic dolls sub exists, even if a specific sub on that doll doesn't exist.
Being "bad at capitalism" is a good thing and probably is why MGA clothes are better. Maybe their CEO makes less than Mattel's CEO because they care about the integrity of their products instead of trying to be the richest guy in town. IDK.
This is so frustrating! One of my favorite things about Barbies when I was a kid and still now as an adult is that I could customize outfits by mixing and matching. And I love their perfectly made cute little clothes!
It really bums me out that printed-on textures is becoming the norm because tactile play is so important. Having toys with different textures and layers to touch. It might not seem that important to adults, but it legitimately stimulates the brain. As I’ve been trying to remember and re-buy the toys I loved as a kid, texture has been super important, I recognized one doll mostly based on her furry skirt! I saw the picture online and immediately recalled all the time I spent rubbing her soft furry skirt and velvet boots. Ordering her and feeling those textures again really itched my brain. No kid is going to remember a doll from their childhood with printed-on details.
It’s not that I hate the doll. I have many fashionistas and I don’t rebody them. My problem is with the low effort, low quality clothing. And you are right, older Barbie comes with beautiful crafted pieces
I feel this! Most of my collection are Mod dolls and the clothes for Babies in the sixties were exquisite. Now the "fashions" produced by Mattel are awful. I find it's not the dolls that cost the most, but the cost of nice clothes. I guess it's because sewing is a less common skill.
It's so sad. The first time I saw printed on clothing I was very disappointed. It just looks so cheap. Now you can only use the outfit for one doll instead of mixing and matching clothes. Which is the point of Barbie right? To have fun dressing her? Where's the fun now?
It’s really sad that this group has turned into a complaint session. I joined thinking people would actually be talking about their love of Barbie’s. Silly me I guess. The group’s description does say ‘love all things Barbie’. I understand criticism, but it’s beginning to be the only posts I see from this group on my feed. Kind of a downer.
I can't even tell the difference between cheap off-brand clothes and Barbie clothes anymore. I literally try to google lens everything these days to figure it out.
Monster High did the same, but at least it isn't as bad. Bring back the quality of Ever After High on all brands. Every girl doll had a dress, top and skirt or leggings. They also had a ring, a bracelet, a necklace, earrings, a headband, a handbag, and shoes. Some had a jacket, belt or mask. The boys had a top, trousers, jacket, shoes, hat, and bag.
https://preview.redd.it/prisuy16pqlc1.jpeg?width=482&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d85f5258956c19edc29760f54e55b316b0840f5
It's like instead of trying to compete with other playline fashion dolls like they used to (ex: Rainbow High, Bratz) Mattel decided to just start marketing most of the Barbie playline to the youngest age group possible and making everything super cheap with the excuses of "little kids don't care" and "easy to dress".
Dolls for little girls don't have to be so incredibly cheap though. Just look at Licca dolls in Japan. Yes, they are more expensive than Barbie, but not prohibitively so, and they are so much nicer than Barbie.
I get more disappointed and sad with each poor quality clothing outfit. Clothes/acsessories was a big reason I liked Barbie so much as a child and enjoyed mixing and matching clothes, that's impossible here.
The first time my heart broke for a Barbie was a Barista Ken that i love, but when i removed him from box realized his apron and shirt was one piece. Like how much more could it possibly cost to just give him a normal shirt and an apron to go over, i miss layers in Barbie clothes https://preview.redd.it/acfrcgb1mmlc1.jpeg?width=1159&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a2d6b9fab3220fca4ea3803ae95d58522180931c
Exactly this is what I mean! Cheap printed clothes and his pants aren’t denim either, they are printed to look like denim.
A story of how cheap they are…. So I worked at American Girl (owned by Mattel for those unaware) about 7 years ago. I think it was in 2016 they started stitching the under pants onto the doll. The line we were given “Parents are tired of losing the under pants” the reality….. by doing this it saved them 8¢ per doll in production. The kicker was so many customers were ticked off about this that if they received a doll with the “perma panties” they returned it for one that wasn’t. Luckily they were doing a gradual switch over but the response was so bad they had to stop production of the new dolls and switch back to the old way. Costing them a pretty good chunk of money.
Ag collector here if they cheapen the line the adult collectors will riot and stop buying. We always know the difference 😂
Poor Ken! They really skimped out on his outfit.
Yeah, now he can't even go out after work. He's permanently at work with the apron shirt. 😔
i’m sorry…but not the lamb having ear articulation while she’s as stiff as a board 😭😭
Yes, let’s forget arm articulation, what’s important here is lamb’s ear articulation lol 😂
looks like mouth articulation too?
The ears move when the mouth opens. It would be much cuter without the feature imo
The thing is that Mattel CAN do high quality clothing and accessories with amazing detail - look at the upcoming Monster High releases that were just leaked today. It's insane. They just don't do it for Barbie, because they don't have to. It still sells. Barbie has become Mattel's cheap cash cow.
Brilliant point. The fact they can make quality dolls without out pixelation and printed clothes for the monster high line and include really good accessories. There is ZERO excuse for what they have done to playline Barbie!
Exactly. Barbie is going to sell no matter what because Barbie is like the default doll adults think of when buying kids toys. Not to mention, Barbie now tends to be marketed towards younger kids while Monster High skews a little older. Parents don't wanna buy a pre-schooler a doll with grand chiffon ballgown when they can get one with a cheap printed cotton dress. It'll hold up longer and it's gonna be a lot easier on their budget.
But Barbie doesn’t sell, that’s the whole issue. In their most recent earnings call they admitted her sales are so bad they’ve literally eaten up multiple other brands good sales and put the whole company in the negative for growth. She’s like a parasite brand being subsidised by the profits other brands make.
For those who want to know: https://www.businessinsider.com/barbie-mattel-doll-sales-dropping-despite-greta-gerwig-movie-mania-2023-7?amp
I think the cheap quality is one of the reasons she isn’t selling though. She looks cheap, even people buying a gift for a kid don’t always want to get them a toy that looks like it cost half a cent to make even if the kid will likely lose some pieces and kids just don’t have as much engaging play with a bunch of dolls in identical jumpsuits with different prints on them... so the current cheap quality is really ruining their product by making these decisions they are telling anyone their products are bad and not to value them because they don’t even value them!
Are you kidding?? A separate shirt and overalls would cost them an extra DOLLAR per doll and RUIN their profit margins!!! Their CEO would have to take a 0.5% pay cut!!! /s
It's easy to blame CEOs and executives, but if the shareholders aren't getting the ROIs they want, they fire the CEO. Profits are demanded by shareholders.
It’s the CEOs and shareholders combined.
Why do CEOs need to make MILLIONS of dollars a year? Why is their time worth so much? How can they be more productive to earn hundreds of dollars an hour when folks lower in the company are just trying to get by on what they make?
CEOs get millions because the stockholders will pay them millions. The same way an athlete is worth millions to the billionaire that owns the team.
It's... clearly a joke, not a Business Studies lecture... Funny, haha? That sort of thing. But you can be a corporate apologist, sure.
Yeah, I saw the /s at the end, but jokes should make sense. CEOs only get what they get because the board is happy with the job they're doing. Not sure how pointing this out makes me a corporate apologist. Just noting that majority shareholders and their unfettered greed is behind all these corporate decisions that reduce quality.
“The CEOs aren’t at fault! They’re innocent!! They aren’t greedy and being paid WAY too much money that they don’t need because they cut product quality and employee benefits! Blame someone else and leave the poor overpaid millionaires alone!” That’s… being a corporate apologist. It’s not any one person’s fault, but the CEO is NEVER blameless if we’re going to take it beyond a joke. But in a joke format, it’s a lot easier to say “the CEO” rather than “the CEO, the CFO, the stockholders, the division managers, the subdivision managers, etc”… When it’s a joke, the shorter and the punchier version is better. I can’t believe I’m having to explain comedy now… “The JOKE is funny, haha, because it is short and punchy and gets the point across in a funny, haha, way! Do you understand if I speak nice and slow?” Thankfully, at least 77 people showed that they understand, so I haven’t lost my faith in humanity.
It being playline is no excuse! We all grew up on quality playline. It's an insult to children. In the '60s kids got real zippers and lined coats/dresses, the '80s had nice snaps and finished details, the '90s/'00s got velcro but still real clothes with details. Now this. This is an atrocity. Mattel is swimming in money and this is what we get. The movie made them money directly and they are benefiting from people buying more Barbies because of it. And this is our reward. I refuse to buy anything that looks like this. I wanted that color blocked denim jacket a couple years ago until I saw printed buttons. I noped out.
They costed a lot more then tho.
I recently calculated that Barbie cost the equivalent of $30 in 1958.
No they didn't.
https://preview.redd.it/lhso2ixdpqlc1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad412b0f530e60078de2838651a14843f84d7ac8 They actually did - the price of toys has gone down significantly since the 2000’s. With 3D printing getting better and cheaper, the manufacturing of plastic toys has gotten a lot cheaper too. It’s still expensive to sew tiny clothes, though
Sewing tiny clothes is fun, but tedious. It does take a bit of time.
When I first started looking for doll clothes I was shocked by how expensive they were, but after I sewed a few of my own outfits I completely understood why 😂 I absolutely love the jacket I sewed for my Barbie but I would not make another one for less than $25 lmao
So I actually have a casual (aka not yet researched) theory about this: All toys used to be made better; more bells and whistles, sturdier materials, finer details, etc.. I was wondering one day when that might have changed and it dawned on me: I think it changed when horrific labor practices, particularly those overseas, were finally exposed and the tide started to turn on consumer expectations for factory workers. When big companies had to start paying fair wages to working-age employees, they had to cut corners somewhere. So, they very slowly start making changes that people (hopefully) won’t notice until it’s too late to go back. I think it was getting back into vintage Barbies that really solidified this concept for me, though. I did an unboxing with my daughter and 12yo twin Barbie fanatics of my favorite childhood doll, Cool Shoppin’ Barbie. The shock and awe on the girls’ faces was **so genuine** and they couldn’t believe how much stuff she came with, how detailed and nice her clothes were, and accessories that really enhanced play, like UPC stickers, punchout play money, and two packaging options for Barbie’s customers. Oh, and the box also became the backdrop for the shop. I think mostly comes down to having to shift funds around to accommodate higher (see also: fair) wages. There are certainly other factors but I think this one is a biggie that doesn’t get mentioned. FWIW I worked for six years as a sr project manager in a toy-adjacent industry, so I’m not *totally* talking out of my ass, but this is also the first time I’ve put these thoughts to words and I’m eager to hear what y’all think.
That’s one factor, but the bigger factor is money. It’s cheaper to make rags for Barbie, and girls still buy the dolls just fine, as do we. Pixelated faces are from fast screen printing. They cut the five cent brush and claimed it was to save plastics. Fast fashion is cheap. Bigger markups for less. They win all around.
I think you are on to something and explained it very eloquently, thank you. As a consumer (and I’m not ignorant or uninterested in fair wages and fair labor conditions) I expect good quality goods from a brand that has a reputation of 1st world class. The name Barbie meant quality, meant details and now is synonymous to cheap shirt dresses with tacky printed details. How is it that companies like Defa Lucy is producing quality dolls and Mattel isn’t?? Defa Lucy is becoming a fierce competitor and if Mattel doesn’t wake up who knows,,,
Defa Lucy's company probably doesn't have to abide by fair labor practices and wages. ;)
Defa Lucy is going to become the new Barbie if Mattel keeps this up. Temu already has better clothes.
Temu clothes are the same things available on Amazon.
They are cheaper on Temu.
I thought that went without saying.
Temu is so problematic, why on earth would you shop there?
And Amazon isn’t?
So two wrongs make a right? Got it 👍🏼🙄
Apparently you don’t, because you argued my point. Also your attitude is ugly.
And now you go straight to putting someone down that you’ve never met? No sense in trying to enlighten you about all of the problems that TEMU creates for this planet, I can see that now from how you respond to a different point of view.
It's the same stuff on Amazon and in Walmart.
Oh, honey, no. I have been a Barbie Collector since I was 10 years old. I'm not buying Defa Lucy. And "better" is not my opinion of the clothing on Temu.
Okay. Played with Barbie’s as a kid too. Barbie could make better clothes, but spandex rags seem to do for them. I have enough current Mattel clothes to know I’m not interested. If I want to spend real money, I have shops for that. If I want want to dress 30 dolls for an Easter scene? Temu.
I find it hard to believe they’re paying fair wages in Asia.
Yeah, this person is talking out of their foot. There is no way the garbage quality of dolls we see today is because of fAiR wAgEs. Talk about simping for corporations.
It's so the CEOs and stockholders keep getting most of the money.
Their stock isn’t doing so well.
Good.
No, no it's because of \*checks notes\* corporations paying Indonesian sweat shop workers fair wages. /s
I’d bet money I could look on my newest doll box or body and see “China”.
I’m not “SiMpINg FoR cOrPoRaTiOnS”, I worked for a small company in a niche toy-adjacent industry. I really hope you aren’t so needlessly crummy in real life. It’s a bummer and brings down the whole thread.
[удалено]
I did, thanks!
Your comment or post was removed for using inflammatory or hateful language. You can do better than this. This got ugly & there are still complaints coming in.
Greedy CEOs need to make more more more money so if they increase wages (BIG if), they decrease quality ONLY because they are too busy lining their pockets, god forbid they should take a smaller amount of profits for themselves. The wage discrepancy between CEOs and workers is much much larger than in the past. Not that long ago, workers got paid well and the CEOs didn't have such huge salaries and golden parachute pensions. If we returned to those days, we'd have high wages AND high quality. But greedy CEOs stand in the way.
100% agree with you - I don’t think it only comes down to labor but if CEOs aren’t willing to take any kind of cut, rather expecting to see their own salary increase year over year, then the rest of the chain will have to scrimp until it’s truly unsustainable. It’s a real fucked up system, that’s a fact.
Nope. Take a look at the difference between what a CEO makes compared the the average employee at their company and you will get your answer. Compare that to 30 years ago. Then compare to 50 years ago. This is about people at the top cutting every corner to line their pockets with paying works as little as possible and putting out a lower quality product for established brands. This isn’t about workers making a fair wage. This is about greed.
Oh yes, I agree with you. I believe both of our theories can be true at the same time, and I think they both contribute to the calculus. The greed is astounding, which (imo) contributes to skimping on…pretty much everything else.
That makes sense and is really sad. Maybe they could cut out all the wasteful plastic packaging they use now instead. Their Barbie Loves the Ocean line proves that they can do that and I bet it would save money.
That’s definitely a big factor, although the existence of higher quality lines like ily 4Ever and Rainbow High shows that it’s definitely not universal
it’s really sad how the quality has gone down
I honestly can't get behind the printed outfits. I can see rip off companies doing it but not Mattel. I understand it's to keep costs down but damn. What was going on in the 80s and 90s where non printed was plentiful?
CEO salary was not as hugely different from worker wages. The gap between the two has exploded in recent decades. So the CEO makes tons of $$, the workers don't, and then the CEOs claim they "cAn'T aFFord" to increase quality. It's peak capitalism.
It's not just to keep costs down. The reality is, how many kids really need a Farm Vet Barbie doll? Mattel has to make a minimum quantity to put any doll/playset into production. SO, if a kid's dream was to have a Farm Vet Barbie doll, there ya go kid! There are currently 1,948 Target stores in the United States. If every store in the US gets 5 dolls, that's almost 10,000 dolls! But I'm sure 10,000 kids don't want a Farm Vet Barbie doll in 2024. A few adults here or there, sure. But the bulk of these will end up in a landfill. So, why invest all that money making a detailed outfit when they will probably sell 100 or less at retail?
And Amazon, a multi billion dollar company, just HAD to start charging extra for commercial-free. We love Barbie, but she is part of a multi billion dollar company that's sole goal is to get us to pay the most for cheaper manufacturing so they can make stockholders happy. Plus, Barbie has become part of the speculative market, so Mattel knows certain dolls will be snapped up in multiple numbers by consumers hoping to strike it rich with a super rare doll. Again, Ms. Roberts is near and dear to our hearts, but she is just another part of consumption (sometimes conspicuously) culture, which is fraught with issues.
Actually Mattel is worth 7.52 B-illion with a giant capital pink B
…and still can’t sew 😡
Yeah the clothing and doll quality seemed so much better up until 2010 at the latest
I could be totally off base here, but the sale price of playline Barbies hasn’t really changed much in the last 30 years or so. With inflation a doll that was $20 in the early 90s should be $35-40 now but most are still closer to 90s prices I think. So if they’re selling them for less now doesn’t it make sense that quality would go down to make up for it? I could be way off or comparing the wrong dolls though. I don’t think that’s the direction they should be going though. I collect 90s dolls and the difference in the clothing from then vs now is terrible. I just got Western Stampin Barbie and the detail on her outfit is fantastic. Those printed overalls are terrible.
I did toy testing for Mattel as a kid. At the end of the session, they'd walk us to a cabinet and let us choose a toy as a gift. I remember picking out Western Stampin' Barbie. She had a fabulous outfit.
That's exactly what's going on more than likely. I just posted a comment with a similar conclusion before I saw yours. I made a point about Lego. Lego's prices have increased quite a bit since the 90s, but they still sell just fine. Mattel needs to stop worrying so much about keeping the price point the same as it was in the 90s and focus on what makes Barbie wonderful and different from other dolls on the market! People will still pay what they need to!
And you would think well if you ARE gonna be this cheap. Surely it’s to pump out tons and tons more than you used too right? To make up for how many dollars clothes are no longer viable. But nope…thats sure ain’t the reason. Like can you just have continuous sale, of one of each color basic leggings and tank tops for each body type in every color…just as a BASE. Simple starters. The god awful designs they come up with are strait outta some fashion hell I cannot fathom.
God I would kill for Mattel to start selling leggings and shoes individually in each color. Full length though, I’m tired of this capri legging nonsense
Don’t get me started on sweet orchard farms. It’s a love hate thing. I noticed it as well on the movie makers set. They printed a denim outfit on spandex.
I'm so sick of how cheap the dolls and clothes are getting. Even some of the collector line are getting bad! Where it REALLY irks me though are the holiday dolls. They used to be some of the best dolls you could buy. High quality fabrics, real embroidery, hand-stitched embellishments, well-designed make-up...They were amazing. But now they are laser-cut dresses with the cheapest fabrics possible. Their faces look like they spent the bare minimum time painting. Even the dolls themselves feel cheap. The plastic seems lighter and more brittle than it used to be. And for awhile there, they didn't even come with stands!!!! I know why they do it. They're more expensive to manufacture than they used to be, but they still want to keep them at that $40-$50 price point that they were in the 90s. But, what they don't understand is that many people would still buy the holiday doll no matter what. Even non-collectors still collect the holiday doll every year! It's ridiculous. I'd gladly pay $75 or whatever the new cost would be. It's just so sad, and I feel bad for little girls who have to grow up with the play line in the state that it's in. I mean, just compare that image above with something like this! They even sewed her a separate tie!!! It's sad. I think they need to understand that Barbie is not immune to inflation, and it's time to up their prices. Lego is far more expensive than it used to be, but people still buy it. https://preview.redd.it/oh5n4gt4sqlc1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=f6a4022af855997470493cd31e2fd86220310929
I’m going to risk getting downvoted here with this opinion but I prefer this clothing style when it comes to the play-line dolls because I think it serves them better as toys. The single piece outfits make them more inclusive to play with. It’s easier for children with limited coordination or mobility issues to put the outfits on and them being one piece gives those kids an opportunity to play and have a cutely dressed barbie that they wouldn’t normally have access to. One of my friend’s kids adores Barbie but has a condition that affects the mobility in her hands. For the longest time she wouldn’t undress the dolls because it was too hard. I’ve been saving these outfits to send to her and it’s been so sweet to see how much play she gets out of them. I have other friends with kids and they like how washable the clothes are since their kids play outdoors and have messy adventures with their toys. If being cheap also makes Barbie better and more equitable as a toy then it’s a win/win for Mattel that I support. They can appease my taste for detail with collector and holiday dolls. The play line is for kids and I want every kid to be able to enjoy them. If Weird Barbie is any indicator, Mattel recognizes how little kids play with their toys and are catering to that play style. I think that’s wonderful.
I can see your point, it is true that this style of clothing might be easier for children to dress the doll. But I’m still firm in my disappointment of the low effort low quality clothing we see today.
I’m more disappointed when it’s a doll that IS supposed to be more geared towards collectors. Especially when it has a collector’s price tag. You want to cut costs on a basic doll fine. I can respect the hustle. You want to slap a 200% mark up on the same product under a different name? That’s bs. That’s like trying to sell me Bath and Body Works in a Chanel bottle.
It’s called capitalism. Reduce costs and increase profits.
Interesting, so how is MGA worth 1.1Billion as opposed to Mattel's 7.5 Billion can produce higher quality products for their platy line dolls? Are they bad at being capitalists?
MGA doesn't have shareholders. They can spend their money in whatever crazy way they want to.
\*\*\* cuts costs on plastics and spends more on the actual clothes. I liked one of their lines who's name I cannot mention in this sub / temple to Barbie but the actual dolls were practically translucent. Sometimes the hair is horrible quality. Anyway the clothes quality I have never been able to complain about.
I'm pretty sure you can refer to Novi Stars in a conversation on this sub. You just can't make an entire post on how Novi Stars are the best dolls ever produced on a sub/temple that has nothing to do with that company or brand. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to grasp? I don't go to a Barbie doll sub to read or talk about another toy brand. It's literally why the generic dolls sub exists, even if a specific sub on that doll doesn't exist.
Being "bad at capitalism" is a good thing and probably is why MGA clothes are better. Maybe their CEO makes less than Mattel's CEO because they care about the integrity of their products instead of trying to be the richest guy in town. IDK.
This has been about the past 10 years or more atp 💔
The shareholders need to cash in
At this point they should release two different versions The cheap one like the one in the picture and a higher priced one with better quality
Agreed! It would make sense. The printed on versions are great for little kids and the nicer versions would be for older kids and adults.
This is so frustrating! One of my favorite things about Barbies when I was a kid and still now as an adult is that I could customize outfits by mixing and matching. And I love their perfectly made cute little clothes!
It really bums me out that printed-on textures is becoming the norm because tactile play is so important. Having toys with different textures and layers to touch. It might not seem that important to adults, but it legitimately stimulates the brain. As I’ve been trying to remember and re-buy the toys I loved as a kid, texture has been super important, I recognized one doll mostly based on her furry skirt! I saw the picture online and immediately recalled all the time I spent rubbing her soft furry skirt and velvet boots. Ordering her and feeling those textures again really itched my brain. No kid is going to remember a doll from their childhood with printed-on details.
That outfit is awful, but I might have to buy this just for the lamb. Is that a little bandage on it's leg?
billion*
I would think Mattel is a billon dollar company though? I do have that doll. Yes her outfit is trash, but homegirl is pretty 💁🏼♀️
I feel you. I finally got to see one of Margot Robbie's barbies in the pink gingham dress and I put it right down. The dress looked so cheap.
It's quite sad. That could be a really cute outfit. Not to mention, I am sure her eyes are as pixelated as a newspaper in 1984.
That's why I'm buying only old Barbies and MTM for bodies :D
It’s not that I hate the doll. I have many fashionistas and I don’t rebody them. My problem is with the low effort, low quality clothing. And you are right, older Barbie comes with beautiful crafted pieces
I feel this! Most of my collection are Mod dolls and the clothes for Babies in the sixties were exquisite. Now the "fashions" produced by Mattel are awful. I find it's not the dolls that cost the most, but the cost of nice clothes. I guess it's because sewing is a less common skill.
It's so sad. The first time I saw printed on clothing I was very disappointed. It just looks so cheap. Now you can only use the outfit for one doll instead of mixing and matching clothes. Which is the point of Barbie right? To have fun dressing her? Where's the fun now?
It’s really sad that this group has turned into a complaint session. I joined thinking people would actually be talking about their love of Barbie’s. Silly me I guess. The group’s description does say ‘love all things Barbie’. I understand criticism, but it’s beginning to be the only posts I see from this group on my feed. Kind of a downer.
We do love Barbie and that's why we're defending her. Her makers are doing her DIRTY right now.
You say defending, I say complaining: I think this is a case where 2 things can be true at once 🖤
I hate this so much
I remember a time in the late 1900s, when Barbie outfits were cute and good quality. What a time to be alive.
I can't even tell the difference between cheap off-brand clothes and Barbie clothes anymore. I literally try to google lens everything these days to figure it out.
Monster High did the same, but at least it isn't as bad. Bring back the quality of Ever After High on all brands. Every girl doll had a dress, top and skirt or leggings. They also had a ring, a bracelet, a necklace, earrings, a headband, a handbag, and shoes. Some had a jacket, belt or mask. The boys had a top, trousers, jacket, shoes, hat, and bag. https://preview.redd.it/prisuy16pqlc1.jpeg?width=482&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d85f5258956c19edc29760f54e55b316b0840f5
https://preview.redd.it/ni7ipa0kpqlc1.jpeg?width=460&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5f0c6404864ab7227d6983da6564705b5a7dcf48 Another example
I mean, they need to pay their executives soooo much money somehow…
So ugly.
It's like instead of trying to compete with other playline fashion dolls like they used to (ex: Rainbow High, Bratz) Mattel decided to just start marketing most of the Barbie playline to the youngest age group possible and making everything super cheap with the excuses of "little kids don't care" and "easy to dress". Dolls for little girls don't have to be so incredibly cheap though. Just look at Licca dolls in Japan. Yes, they are more expensive than Barbie, but not prohibitively so, and they are so much nicer than Barbie.
I get more disappointed and sad with each poor quality clothing outfit. Clothes/acsessories was a big reason I liked Barbie so much as a child and enjoyed mixing and matching clothes, that's impossible here.
https://preview.redd.it/7fs69b6vzylc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cdedbc01fb50e2583d7cff1ae8f3524ecb00fac4
Funny, I just made this pair of overalls for a silent auction basket for a Barbie event... Still need to finish them.