Exclusive: Read the Letter from a Former Hasbro Exec

Well, we've remonetized on YouTube... frankly I'm shocked. At the same time, we're going to continue offering tremendous value here on Patreon in the way of providing you with exclusive information that is too spicy (or sensitive) to put anywhere else. Today, I'd like to do that. For the first time ever, we're giving you a look behind the curtain. 

As you likely know, I have gathered a large number of highly-placed sources all throughout the various industries. It's how we get the scoops we have. Today, we're going to share with you an email I received three days ago from a former Hasbro exec who still has major connections across the toy industry. Valliant and I know his real identity and we jokingly refer to him as "Deep Toy". I've run his original email through artificial intelligence to change the writing style but keep the entire meaning of what he says. This is the first of two messages -- I have to check the second to see if it is shareable. Please note that with this message below, we've removed the first four and last paragraphs as they are now appropriate for release of any sort. Here's the message:

_______

I've watched your videos dissecting the detrimental impact that the tarnished Star Wars and Marvel brands had on Hasbro, and I couldn't agree more.

However, it's essential to acknowledge that numerous other factors contributed to Hasbro's decline. Issues such as supply chain disruptions, poorly managed retail pricing strategies, talent loss, and questionable hiring decisions all played significant roles.

From my perspective, rooted in the toy industry since the Hassenfeld era, the pivotal misstep occurred when Goldner shifted Hasbro's identity away from being solely a toy company to a brand portfolio holder focused on non-toy entertainment. This strategic shift fundamentally altered Hasbro's core identity.

While it's unfair to attribute Hasbro's downfall solely to Disney, it's undeniable that Disney's involvement delivered a critical blow. In the past, Hasbro's structure divided its operations into distinct categories like Board Games and Boys and Girls Toys. Star Wars was the linchpin of the Boys Toys division from 1977 until Disney's acquisition, overshadowing other brands like Transformers and G.I. Joe.

Contrary to popular belief, Hasbro's alignment with Disney is a relatively recent development driven by Disney's acquisition of various intellectual properties. Historically, Hasbro's relationship with Disney was distant compared to the rapport between Disney and Mattel.

The demise of Star Wars and Marvel as dominant boys' brands, coupled with changes in societal ideologies, led to a noticeable absence of young boys in toy aisles. This shift severely impacted Hasbro's sustainability, particularly with Star Wars losing its once-iconic status and collectors distancing themselves from these brands.

Transformers warrants a deeper discussion, albeit one I'm unable to delve into at the moment.

As for Dungeons & Dragons, its recent tribulations epitomize the challenges of modern-day management.

In summary, Mattel is associated with girls' toys, while Hasbro is synonymous with boys' toys. The demographic makeup of "boys" toys predominantly comprises Caucasian, heterosexual individuals, a fact that may offend some.

Ultimately, the destruction of key "boy" category anchors struck at the heart of Hasbro's business model. Additionally, Hasbro's mismanagement of its relationships with Star Wars and Marvel, coupled with internal agreement with Disney's diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) strategies despite declining toy sales, exacerbated the company's woes.

In light of these factors, there's little reason to sympathize with Hasbro's plight.