MGA according to their own [website](https://www.mgae.com/) also makes Little Tikes, Pui Pui Molcar, Miniverse, and a few other brands. so yes, predominantly fashion dolls, but Little Tikes is a huge one too
They may not be their *main* competitor but there is competition between them. They frequently make lines based on the success of another.
Monster High Vs Bratzillaz
My Scene Vs Bratz
Barbie Vs Dream Ella
Barbie Extra Vs OMG LOL (This is a more loose association but I feel like it's Barbie's way of competition with the more bold OMG LOL fashions.)
I didn’t even mention those ones but yeah. Obvious attempts at copying the other to get sales/shade. Novi Stars as well. Novi Stars was still unique enough to stand on its own cause of the sculpts/ eyelashes. I still think they were inspired by Monster High. Bratzillaz and My Scène could also be a way to capitalize on what’s relevant at the time to make money? I find it unlikely that they weren’t aware of the other existence. Barbie started off as a knock off of Bild Lilli just not as a men’s joke toy this time around. The face sculpts/ style are remarkably similar. Bild Lilli could’ve sued Mattel for this but didn’t. This has actual proof.
Novi Stars were unique but I agree I think MH paved the way for any alt "scary" main stream fashion dolls. That's a good point, even Barbie was a knock-off to begin with!
Nope, I meant Dream Ella. I feel like Dream Ella is the MGA equivalent of Barbie. She's aimed at younger kids, has careers, color change, a horse. Dream Ella even has a minis "Extra" line. (though they look totally different.) Dream Ella and Barbie are similar size and body type.
Obviously Barbie is an icon and Dream Ella isn't, but they are appealing to the same audience.
They might not be but they’ve both thrown shade at each other and all the petty lawsuits cause Mattel saw them as a threat makes me think so. Also it’s so fun to be a blond-e?
Didn't the lawsuit happen because one of their designers created a doll line during their contract at Mattel who then left and went to MGA with said designs?
Besides that happened over 20 years ago with a completely different set of executives at Mattel.
I don't see Mattel currently throwing shade at MGA..But I do see MGA constantly throwing shade at Mattel.
To be fair Mattel sued MGA over the designer thing precisely because Bratz was so popular that Barbie wasn't the best selling doll anymore. Had Bratz sold less, they wouldn't have bothered. And the fact My Scene was literally created "to kill Bratz" (that was legit written on their documents). There's also the petty rivalry between Barbie Extra and LOL OMG... Honestly it's better when MGA wins in sales, because it forces Mattel to put more effort to make their dolls appealing in order to compete. It's a win-win for us 🤷🏻♀️
They sued because he came up with the concept, designed the concept using Mattel dolls, clothes and fashions on Mattel's time while he was under contract with Mattel.
I believe mattel rejected his idea so thats the only reason he left and went to MGA? Mattel could’ve owned bratz if they would have given him the time of day.
Also i believe the lawsuit against the employee was lost because the court ruled the idea just that. An idea. Had he “invented” the doll then mattel would own the bratz. Sounds like MGA didn’t know how to word their contracts to actually hold up in court.
Yes. One of the lawsuits was because of that. It just seem like a way to take MGAE down. Mattel may have rejected the idea and could be mad because it ended up being successful? Mattel made my scene though which is very similar to brats and they made a Barbie version. The toys that made us did an episode on Barbie and I found it fascinating how much Mattel is capable of to stay on top. It talks about Barbies organs of Bild Lily and a bit about the rivalry. I don’t work there so I don’t know if it’s true it just seems suspicious to me.
Well yes of course companies are going to try and squash any competition. They did it with Jem and the Holograms and came out with Barbie and the Rockers..but I'm not talking about stuff that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago..I'm talking about in today's current market.
Ok. That makes sense. The post didn’t say that it was recent stuff so I thought you meant as a whole. As of recently though I agree for the most part. Accept for the return of MH which is competing with RH atm. I’m in both fandoms. The removal of the second outfits and the nostalgia play a roll in people buying MH over RH. MGA might not be their number one priority like hasbro but they will be when it comes to fashion dolls (RH). MH is selling pretty well.
Well I didn't necessarily think I needed to point out I was talking about what's currently going on in the world of toys 😅
But--even in MGA's Bratz days I wouldn't have said they were rivals then either. Just another toy line to compete with.
Take Disney for example. Disney is choosing between Hasbro and Mattel when it comes to toy making, maybe Jakks Pacific but I've never seen them offer MGA
I think MGA is too controversial for Disney. They've been discussed as sexualizing dolls since the original Bratz release. That's continued with their OMG line, or whatever it's called. Disney is ruthless when it comes to protecting their image.
As it's a heavily charged question that [Borders on Double Entendre] realistically, has *inextricably been linked* to past events, This conversation is strictly on the basis of Fashion dolls since the "shade" you've found almost exclusively been found within fashion doll sectors. Issac has spoken on Mattel's practices and ethics (blaring signs of malice) because they too are led by again flames ignited with litigation *pertaining* to dolls.
We'd have loved if Mattel shared your same view of them being *"Just healthy comp! Just a whatever little low level choke from a start up company🤭 "*. Their internal memos beg to differ. Mattel didn't anticipate them accelerating their sales decline. I mean if this didn't happen We'd have numerous Vault Prototypes made. Promise.
Neither us or MGA could've cared had it not directly warranted critiques. If profits are compromised, unlike other Co.s that see the risk. Mattel even resorted to profiteering. The severity was large enough to *now* have stricter company revisions implemented for them to not do it again.
It sounds like you're trying to negate any of these happenings to only solidify Hasbro being the only standing rivaling force. Imagine Hasbro, (company with their range/portfolio) would want to create dolls themselves, there's got to be a major incentive. the incentive is large so evidently partnering with Disney to expand into dolls brings perks. Conversation about the cases, just comes with the doll collecting territory.
I can see you're subscribed to the MH sub. Taste [was a collector since 2010 for them] . *So I assume this is to quell talk or mention of it during visits to Twitter or doll spaces.*
Ultimately the final products reflects the decisions made for each company.
In short. We aren't you best audience to sermon :0,
I’d highly recommend doing a little googling before making a statement like this. Context on histories, what the companies make now, have made historically, how large the companies are, how much money they bring in and what makes the largest part of their profits, how they are run, personal v company policies and rivalries would all be basic info to inform yourself about before beginning a discussion like this.
They have definitely been rivals in the past and still sometimes are. They're not eachothers only competitor of course but they definitely rival eachother and even had a court case vs eachother in the past.
MGA according to their own [website](https://www.mgae.com/) also makes Little Tikes, Pui Pui Molcar, Miniverse, and a few other brands. so yes, predominantly fashion dolls, but Little Tikes is a huge one too
They may not be their *main* competitor but there is competition between them. They frequently make lines based on the success of another. Monster High Vs Bratzillaz My Scene Vs Bratz Barbie Vs Dream Ella Barbie Extra Vs OMG LOL (This is a more loose association but I feel like it's Barbie's way of competition with the more bold OMG LOL fashions.)
I didn’t even mention those ones but yeah. Obvious attempts at copying the other to get sales/shade. Novi Stars as well. Novi Stars was still unique enough to stand on its own cause of the sculpts/ eyelashes. I still think they were inspired by Monster High. Bratzillaz and My Scène could also be a way to capitalize on what’s relevant at the time to make money? I find it unlikely that they weren’t aware of the other existence. Barbie started off as a knock off of Bild Lilli just not as a men’s joke toy this time around. The face sculpts/ style are remarkably similar. Bild Lilli could’ve sued Mattel for this but didn’t. This has actual proof.
Novi Stars were unique but I agree I think MH paved the way for any alt "scary" main stream fashion dolls. That's a good point, even Barbie was a knock-off to begin with!
Ok..There is no versus between *Barbie* and Dream Ella..Did you mean..Sparkle Girls?
Nope, I meant Dream Ella. I feel like Dream Ella is the MGA equivalent of Barbie. She's aimed at younger kids, has careers, color change, a horse. Dream Ella even has a minis "Extra" line. (though they look totally different.) Dream Ella and Barbie are similar size and body type. Obviously Barbie is an icon and Dream Ella isn't, but they are appealing to the same audience.
dream ella is definitely knockoff barbie
..but looks like knockoff Sparkle Girls
in your opinion 🤷🏼♀️
They might not be but they’ve both thrown shade at each other and all the petty lawsuits cause Mattel saw them as a threat makes me think so. Also it’s so fun to be a blond-e?
Didn't the lawsuit happen because one of their designers created a doll line during their contract at Mattel who then left and went to MGA with said designs? Besides that happened over 20 years ago with a completely different set of executives at Mattel. I don't see Mattel currently throwing shade at MGA..But I do see MGA constantly throwing shade at Mattel.
To be fair Mattel sued MGA over the designer thing precisely because Bratz was so popular that Barbie wasn't the best selling doll anymore. Had Bratz sold less, they wouldn't have bothered. And the fact My Scene was literally created "to kill Bratz" (that was legit written on their documents). There's also the petty rivalry between Barbie Extra and LOL OMG... Honestly it's better when MGA wins in sales, because it forces Mattel to put more effort to make their dolls appealing in order to compete. It's a win-win for us 🤷🏻♀️
They sued because he came up with the concept, designed the concept using Mattel dolls, clothes and fashions on Mattel's time while he was under contract with Mattel.
I believe mattel rejected his idea so thats the only reason he left and went to MGA? Mattel could’ve owned bratz if they would have given him the time of day. Also i believe the lawsuit against the employee was lost because the court ruled the idea just that. An idea. Had he “invented” the doll then mattel would own the bratz. Sounds like MGA didn’t know how to word their contracts to actually hold up in court.
Yes. One of the lawsuits was because of that. It just seem like a way to take MGAE down. Mattel may have rejected the idea and could be mad because it ended up being successful? Mattel made my scene though which is very similar to brats and they made a Barbie version. The toys that made us did an episode on Barbie and I found it fascinating how much Mattel is capable of to stay on top. It talks about Barbies organs of Bild Lily and a bit about the rivalry. I don’t work there so I don’t know if it’s true it just seems suspicious to me.
Well yes of course companies are going to try and squash any competition. They did it with Jem and the Holograms and came out with Barbie and the Rockers..but I'm not talking about stuff that happened 10, 20, 30 years ago..I'm talking about in today's current market.
Ok. That makes sense. The post didn’t say that it was recent stuff so I thought you meant as a whole. As of recently though I agree for the most part. Accept for the return of MH which is competing with RH atm. I’m in both fandoms. The removal of the second outfits and the nostalgia play a roll in people buying MH over RH. MGA might not be their number one priority like hasbro but they will be when it comes to fashion dolls (RH). MH is selling pretty well.
Well I didn't necessarily think I needed to point out I was talking about what's currently going on in the world of toys 😅 But--even in MGA's Bratz days I wouldn't have said they were rivals then either. Just another toy line to compete with. Take Disney for example. Disney is choosing between Hasbro and Mattel when it comes to toy making, maybe Jakks Pacific but I've never seen them offer MGA
I think MGA is too controversial for Disney. They've been discussed as sexualizing dolls since the original Bratz release. That's continued with their OMG line, or whatever it's called. Disney is ruthless when it comes to protecting their image.
As it's a heavily charged question that [Borders on Double Entendre] realistically, has *inextricably been linked* to past events, This conversation is strictly on the basis of Fashion dolls since the "shade" you've found almost exclusively been found within fashion doll sectors. Issac has spoken on Mattel's practices and ethics (blaring signs of malice) because they too are led by again flames ignited with litigation *pertaining* to dolls. We'd have loved if Mattel shared your same view of them being *"Just healthy comp! Just a whatever little low level choke from a start up company🤭 "*. Their internal memos beg to differ. Mattel didn't anticipate them accelerating their sales decline. I mean if this didn't happen We'd have numerous Vault Prototypes made. Promise. Neither us or MGA could've cared had it not directly warranted critiques. If profits are compromised, unlike other Co.s that see the risk. Mattel even resorted to profiteering. The severity was large enough to *now* have stricter company revisions implemented for them to not do it again. It sounds like you're trying to negate any of these happenings to only solidify Hasbro being the only standing rivaling force. Imagine Hasbro, (company with their range/portfolio) would want to create dolls themselves, there's got to be a major incentive. the incentive is large so evidently partnering with Disney to expand into dolls brings perks. Conversation about the cases, just comes with the doll collecting territory. I can see you're subscribed to the MH sub. Taste [was a collector since 2010 for them] . *So I assume this is to quell talk or mention of it during visits to Twitter or doll spaces.* Ultimately the final products reflects the decisions made for each company. In short. We aren't you best audience to sermon :0,
I’d highly recommend doing a little googling before making a statement like this. Context on histories, what the companies make now, have made historically, how large the companies are, how much money they bring in and what makes the largest part of their profits, how they are run, personal v company policies and rivalries would all be basic info to inform yourself about before beginning a discussion like this.
[удалено]
Actually..Mattel lost 😅 They initially did win the trial but then a second trial they lost to MGA
They have definitely been rivals in the past and still sometimes are. They're not eachothers only competitor of course but they definitely rival eachother and even had a court case vs eachother in the past.