The Plastic Fett POLL

[tomandshell]

Does anyone know what kind of molds they use for polystone? Are they metal as well?

In a way the abs armor is cool, since its what was used to make the real armor in movies right?

Brant's response implied that the production costs and tooling for plastic components are higher than polystone. Apparently, the "very expensive steel tools" required for plastic castings make the production more costly than if they were working with polystone.

At the base of this debate, there seems to be a question of whether plastic (ABS/PVC/etc) is less expensive to produce than polystone. While it is true than ABS and PVC plastic materials are less expensive than polystone material, this is only a small part of the cost invested in the figure. In order to make castings in ABS, PVC, PP or the other plastic materials (injection plastics), we have to make very expensive steel tools. The cost to make the steel tool is the same whether we make one thousand piecs, tweny-five thousand, or one million pieces. You may expect injection plastic products to be less expensive because most injection plastic products are made in very large quantity, and that original investment in tooling is spread out (ammortized) over that large quantity, therefore having very little impact on the retail price.

Boba Fett is a very limited edition collectible, and therefore the investment in the steel tooling is not spread over very many pieces. There is no cost savings to Sideshow to produce Fett with injection plastic materials versus producing with polystone. We chose the injection plastic materials to give Fett the best possible outcome. The Boba Fett Premium Format Figure lives up to the Premium Format title (which is not called Polystone Format for a very good reason - these are meant to be mixed-mediums to capture the best of each character).

So my understanding of the equation is:

Costly Polystone + Cheaper Production = Cheaper Plastic + Costly Production

With one, the ingredients are cheaper but the production/manufacturing costs are higher. The other is the opposite. In the end, either choice ends up with roughly the same price tag.

They could have produced a polystone Fett with cheaper manufacturing costs and ended up spending the same amount of money--but after much experimentation, they decided that the quality of the end product would suffer. So they chose another method--roughly equivalent in total price--that would ensure a higher quality end product.

I'm glad I won't be getting a Fett with mismatching, disproportionate armor. And if Sideshow's Production Manager says that's what we would have gotten with polystone, I believe him. They made a decision that doesn't save them any money and upset a huge amount of customers. Why would they do that unless they believe it to be the best choice for the final product that they are putting their name on?

 

[outlikealight]

Yes they are. To think otherwise just because SSC tried to justify it that way is simply being gullible.

Now, cue the inevitable Wrath of Josh.

I absolutely agree.

Out

 

[IrishJedi]

They made a decision that doesn't save them any money.

There is not one cell in my body that believes that. And that would only be true if their decision also resulted in lowering the cost of the item for the consumer accordingly. They didn't, therefore lower overall costs of materials for the item at the same pricepoint means more profit for Sideshow, period.

This is also a case where it can be spun a thousand ways how much "total production costs" where. If they wanted, I'm sure they could include the dry cleaning bill from the Chinese factory in that equation (which sounds like a joke, but is actually a tactic that companies like Hollywood studios use all the time to make the bottom line favor their POV and interests).

Sorry, but I'm a PM too... and I'm not buying it.

 

[tomandshell]

No company is going to tell you they are making more money at your expense.

Out

I agree with you there.

But I have met Brant and I don't believe that he would lie. If they were making more money by producing it in plastic, they wouldn't tell us.

But he did come right out and state the opposite. He would know, and he says they aren't saving money. So we have a choice: Brant is lying or Brant is not lying. I believe he is telling the truth.

If he had said nothing, we could argue from his silence. But he flat out said that they are not saving money by using plastic, and you can either believe him or call him a liar. I believe him.

 

[speedracer]

I will just put my two cents in

A twelve inch limited "plastic" darth maul costs 54.99. for a comparable stat made in polystone such as GG's darth maul. it close to $175. There is little difference in the preparation of doing both..both have more or less the same RD and both are "limited"..why is it that one of them is worth almost 4X more...Just a question.

 

[outlikealight]

Why would they do that unless they believe it to be the best choice for the final product that they are putting their name on?

A one word answer! MONEY!!

Out

 

[Titan7170]

A pound of ABS plastic costs less than a pound of polystone. If that's all we were buying, we should expect a lower price.

But the total production costs of bringing a plastic Fett to the market are roughly the same as a polystone version. There are more costs involved than just the ingredients. Sideshow is not ultimately saving any money by going with ABS instead of polystone. That's what Brant was trying to explain to us, but we have either ignored him or assumed that he is lying.

You dont really think sideshow produced special molds to make the Fett body do you??.......Im sure they were able to get a company like Hot Toys to produce a standard/non detailed 19 inch doll body for a few dollars a piece in china. In fact Sideshow prolly gave some factory the Specs/plansdetails then the Factory just produces it the best they can........they prolly cost $27 each including the shipping over seas by container.

 

[IrishJedi]

If he had said nothing, we could argue from his silence. But he flat out said that they are not saving money by using plastic, and you can either believe him or call him a liar. I believe him.

I'm not calling him a liar but instead saying he's doing his job and protecting his and his company's interests and explaining things from THEIR side of the "debate" here, which is obviously at odds with how I and others see it.

It truly doesn't have to be as black and white as "Brant is either lying or not lying". Don't try and make it that way. I have given ample amounts of information and opinion to support my stance here without calling Brant a "liar" or questioning his integrity. He's an employee of Sideshow Collectibles, and a damn good one. A loyal one. And he's not going to jump into the fray here and say anything that does anything other than support SSC's POV.

We can play semantics and straw man tactics all day long if you guys want, but none of this is going to change otherwise.

 

[tomandshell]

It's true. They are a business and they need to make money to survive.

But I don't believe that Brant is a liar. There are a thousand ways he could have responded and tiptoed around the fact that they are saving money, but he came right out and said that they weren't.

So here are your choices:

1. Brant is lying and he knows it. (Maybe he is doing it to protect his company's image, or maybe he was told to lie.)
2. Brant is telling the truth.
3. Brant is misinformed. He is under the impression that they are saving money but it isn't true.

So you need to weigh his personality and integrity along with his ability to understand the production process and associated costs and decide for yourself whether he is lying, telling the truth, or is misinformed.

 

[Titan7170]

I agree with you there.

But I have met Brant and I don't believe that he would lie. If they were making more money by producing it in plastic, they wouldn't tell us.

But he did come right out and state the opposite. He would know, and he says they aren't saving money. So we have a choice: Brant is lying or Brant is not lying. I believe he is telling the truth.

If he had said nothing, we could argue from his silence. But he flat out said that they are not saving money by using plastic, and you can either believe him or call him a liar. I believe him.

I see where you are coming from...............Thank God Bill clinton stated he did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinski and that he never inhaled those Marijuana cigerettes he was smoking.........Im relieved

 

[IrishJedi]

There are a thousand ways he could have responded and tiptoed around the fact that they are saving money, but he came right out and said that they weren't.

That's because there are a thousand ways that SSC can claim that they're not making anymore profit on the piece (see above for one wacky example).

So, yeah, there are a thousand ways for them to work the numbers to support that position... and obviously some of you would accept every single one of them no matter what. And that's fine... just try not to begrudge the other side or use straw man tactics like "You're calling Brant a liar".

We can agree to disagree without opening that pandora's box.

 

[outlikealight]

I agree with you there.

But I have met Brant and I don't believe that he would lie. If they were making more money by producing it in plastic, they wouldn't tell us.

But he did come right out and state the opposite. He would know, and he says they aren't saving money. So we have a choice: Brant is lying or Brant is not lying. I believe he is telling the truth.

If he had said nothing, we could argue from his silence. But he flat out said that they are not saving money by using plastic, and you can either believe him or call him a liar. I believe him.

I truly respect your opinion and position. I have not met the people from Sideshow and will not call anyone a liar. I do think that your relationship with them could possibly cloud your judgement. Maybe he is telling the truth and Sideshow is not making any profit from this. But this is business. It would be an absolute disaster for them to say they are making more money from this. It would not look good to say nothing either. Let me assure you also that any response coming from Sideshow has been carefully screened. Brant may be a good friend of yours but he will post what the company wants him to. Business and friendship can be a very tricky thing. It's like politics and religion .

On a side note I do hope that Sideshow knocks Boba out of the park. I hold out hope because there are so many great PF's that could come down the line if this does rock. I can be a little cynical about business' and their motives. Hopefully I'm wrong and all of this is for the customers benefit.

Out

 

[outlikealight]

It's true. They are a business and they need to make money to survive.

But I don't believe that Brant is a liar. There are a thousand ways he could have responded and tiptoed around the fact that they are saving money, but he came right out and said that they weren't.

So here are your choices:

1. Brant is lying and he knows it. (Maybe he is doing it to protect his company's image, or maybe he was told to lie.)
2. Brant is telling the truth.
3. Brant is misinformed. He is under the impression that they are saving money but it isn't true.

So you need to weigh his personality and integrity along with his ability to understand the production process and associated costs and decide for yourself whether he is lying, telling the truth, or is misinformed.

4. Brant is saying what the company wants him to say.

This is a viable choice.

Out

 

[outlikealight]

I'm not calling him a liar but instead saying he's doing his job and protecting his and his company's interests and explaining things from THEIR side of the "debate" here, which is obviously at odds with how I and others see it.

It truly doesn't have to be as black and white as "Brant is either lying or not lying". Don't try and make it that way. I have given ample amounts of information and opinion to support my stance here without calling Brant a "liar" or questioning his integrity. He's an employee of Sideshow Collectibles, and a damn good one. A loyal one. And he's not going to jump into the fray here and say anything that does anything other than support SSC's POV.

We can play semantics and straw man tactics all day long if you guys want, but none of this is going to change otherwise.

Very well said

Out

 

[tomandshell]

4. Brant is saying what the company wants him to say.

This is a viable choice.

Out

How is that different from #1?

Maybe everybody is reading some kind of moral judgment into the word "lie" that I'm not intending. I suppose I could have worded it differently. What I meant with #1 was that Brant was intentionally not being truthful, possibly at the request or in the interest of his employer. To me, that sounds that same as #4.

 

[IrishJedi]

More much-needed levity...

Tom, maybe we shouldn't trust Brant. Afterall, as PM at Sideshow he likely could have had his likeness used for any number of cool Star Wars figures... yet he chose the boring Endor Rebel Trooper.



Come on, guys. It's okay to have a laugh!

 

[Amanaman]

5. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Viking28]

Alright guys I think everyone has had their say and Sideshow has responded to it. If you don't agree you don't agree. BUT I will say this Brant is a stand up guy so take it how you want too.