viewpoint Richard
Gottlieb Global Toy Experts Time and toys
As everyone in the traditional toy segment of the Play Industry is only too aware, revenues have been in an almost (not almost if you include inflation) steady decline for a couple of decades. As worrisome as that trend may be, what should be of a bigger concern to everyone is the loss of time spent playing with traditional toys. That loss of time may well be the leading indicator of a continuing rate of decline. Why? Because at some point parents are going to figure out that their children, simply, don’t have the time to play with all those forms and begin cutting back. How challenging is the competition for time? For just a moment, let’s forget about the loss of toy play time due to other forms of play like video games and apps. Let’s instead focus on the overall reduction in leisure time that children are experiencing. Consider these findings; In 1981, two University of Maryland studies found that children had 57 hours of free time per week. By 2003 that was down to 48. A 2009 study by the Alliance for Childhood found that children in kindergarten had less than 30 minutes of time that they could use as they pleased. In 2009 the Robert Wood Johnson foundation
surveyed school principals and found that 50% of principals reported that their schools on average allowed 16 to 30 minutes of play per day. In other words, children have far less free time in their lives than previous generations did. Not surprisingly, kids are feeling the heat. A poll entitled, “What Kids Say about Being Busy,” reported that 90% of 9-13 year olds surveyed said they felt stressed because they were so busy. Now let’s consider those alternative forms of
play. Think about all the digital play with which toys have to compete with. Spend any amount of time with a child at their home, in the car or at a restaurant and you will see that there is a great deal of time being spent engaged with some kind of screen, whether it is a video game, a computer, an iPad or some other mobile device. Think about when you were a child. With the exception of computers, most of these devices, if not all, were simply not in existence. Now consider how much of whatever leisure time kids do have still is spent playing with electronic play platforms. Thank goodness, most kids know how to multi-task. As it is, children simply have too little time and too many play choices. What can the toy industry do? Create toys and games that are so compelling that they demand play time? Make toys that are so incredibly well-crafted that children will want
56 Toyworld
to pick them up and touch them? In other words, instead of trying to be the cheapest form of play (you’ll never beat an app); be the best.
Below are examples of revenue competitors and time competitors; Revenue competitors Video Games (software and hardware) Digital Games Tablets, Cell Phones and all other Mobile Devices Furniture Games (Billiards, Foosball, Ping Pong etc.) Play Environments (Bowling Allies, Bars, etc.) Hobbies and Crafts Theme Parks and Water Parks
Time Competitors Playground Beach Homework Free Play Television Organized sports School
How challenging do you feel the competition for a child’s time is? Let us know by sending an email to the editor at
tom@toyworldmag.co.uk
Dan
Salem Prism Digital
Solutions
Balancing act for Pre- school
Now that you have all read last month’s issue of Toy World, you’ll be buoyed up with renewed vigour and excitement for the Pre-school toys category; some would say it’s the most important sector of the toy industry as it supports the true fantasy age of play. However, whilst pre-schoolers are pre-logical in their thinking and driven by their parents more than at any stage in their life, their world of influence, while limited, is still powerful when it comes to getting what they want in terms of toys. At its simplest, for a parent to see their 18-month-old child smiling during a particular programme is enough for that character and its associated licensed product to dominate the child’s next birthday. But engaging the children commercially with any
true meaning is not an easy task. Whilst children of 2-3 years old may recognise some commercial brands through experience, when it comes to their desire for toys it is solely driven by what they see on TV. But there is no research to detect between an advert for a licensed product or the show itself. The show can be seen as a 20-minute advert for the products, which in the virtuous circle of marketing then makes the toy an advert for the show. So to what extent should marketing to the under
three’s be directed at the kids, as opposed to the parents? Aside from the low-cost media, there is more evidence to suggest that directing messages more to the parents would be more effective, with mums in particular being the key purchasers. And with the rise of more social media platforms
and other digital media opportunities, how much of your media should you be diverting from TV. Unfortunately, there is no secret formula, as there are not enough consistent case studies to be able to create some magic model. Moreover, with different characters crossing over age boundaries, and toys falling into ‘stuff’ for many four-year-old children who would gratefully accept everything they see in the Argos catalogue, ensuring that you get under the skin of your product and really focus in on the details will help you craft the right approach. That means getting to grips with the emotional and
rational benefits for the child and the purchaser in the same way a traditional FMCG marketer would, and creating a marketing plan with a number of different touch points to deliver your message. And so for Pre-school products, this means
delivering three key elements to your creative: Ensuring that you deliver against quality, which will always be of particular concern to parents; Showing the fun/play value of the product; Delivering the ‘ahh’ moment. Having worked for many brands, from loo roll
to Evian, appealing to human instincts as parents, and showing babies/young children having fun and laughing, will help seal your success. It may take all day, but being able to get that unconditional smile and joy from a child in an advert or photo shoot is worth its weight in gold. For many mums, using Facebook is about sharing the photos and progress of their children. And all of the photos could be put in three categories: Showing progress versus other children of a similar
age; Cute photos of parents’ own children (even if that is subjective); Those humorous/embarrassing ones that include children covered in spaghetti when they first start to feed themselves. How many marketers get the time to watch children playing with the products before they get to write and deliver their marketing plans? Even if it’s with extended family and friends, this insight may help drive some of the communication and ultimately the balance between TV and social media platforms.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96