Let's do a poll here: Who would you bet on as winning the CEO race - Richard Dickson vs Tim Kilpin
17 replies (most recent on top)
Considering anyone that has ever worked under Tim Kilpin call's him a glorified Assistant Brand Manager, I doubt he has the vision of a CEO. Dick Dick only cares about Barbie (and his massive $735,000 paycheck and millions in stock options). His bungling of the issue with FP Friends -- that if the license doesn't have educational value, it shouldn't be FP (when some of the largest revenue generating brands aren't inherently educational). Yet he has now been promoted to COO so sure that salary was covered on the backs of the slaughtered.
No one ever says the problem started when Stockton couldn't say anything except "50 Points Margin" and then hid behind saying "we need to innovate" which really just meant "how do we get away with charging consumers more money..."
Tim Kilpin is a nice guy but an idiot for leading the Company where it is today because it was all on his watch.........all of it. Go HeMan. go Max Steel, go Hot Wheels The Movie, go New, Next Nowhere, go Waste of Time Wednesdays.
Go The Toyz Band. Not...............
we need a leader who can LEAD! IF it's one or the other... it must be kilpin. dickson goes out of his way to distance himself from "his" subjects... I mean people. case in point... the glass palace he erected in the dc and the fact that everyone near his palace was moved so he can sit alone... in his palace! which, by the way, does anyone ever see him there? does sinclair, the board and kaye REALLY believe that dickson is the one? not possible! they just need to tell a good story and maybe he sells better?? he threw barbie a hellofaparty a few years back. who knows. makes. no. sense. kilpin is admired, respected and followed. people believe in kilpin. that alone says it all.
Anonymous82370, good points. Sounds like you're a creative with idealistic goals. Sure, a radical revamp of upper management and bringing in a creative outsider for CEO might work. Might not. Mattel is a huge corporation and answers to their shareholders, who are not happy right now. They'll want to see another proven Fortune 500 CEO come in, like Bob Eckert from Kraft. Huge salary and bonus will be paid, Stockton's $1.5 will be chump change.
Research isn't the problem. Leadership having a drought of ideas on making brands like Barbie relevant is - if Girls aren't into Barbie, it doesn't matter how good the toy concept is.
Richard if anything set back the brand by trying to starf*ck all of the high end designers with the Barbie 50th. Does having the Blondes (brother/transgender sibling designers) really make Barbie relevant to anyone? That whole brand after Dickson thought they could rub elbows with Versace, the $$$ spent on the 50th that didn't translate into sales that year or the 2 years after, and even in 2014 with their hilarious brazilian blowouts at the SI Swimsuit party (another barbie WTF) and it all showed just how out of touch they all are.
NEITHER. bring someone in who can run a company not ruin it.
Anonymous82370 - you nailed it dude. 1000%. Perfect post.
Richard? Meh. What's he actually done? How has he demonstrated that he even begins to understand the business? No track record. You better wait and see if he can even handle his current job before he fails upward to CEO. Tim? Tim is nice. Very nice. Maybe too nice. He won't rock the boat. He can't handle drama or conflict. He likes a peaceful play-nice team of yes men. No demonstrated passion. Never seen him go out on a limb, buck convention, take real risks, or promote or reward real innovation. No long term vision. He's a great musician and a popular guy, great to have around. Very personable and easy to talk to; he knows people's names and makes them feel good. I really enjoy working for him, but let's face it, he's been in a powerful position for MANY years already and is responsible for our lackluster line of toys, not to mention the dreadful cutthroat culture that has flourished on his watch. I think he has been fairly lucky, coasting off of the successful momentum Mattel has had for so long. There's a place for Tim, but not CEO. It's time for a bold new dynamic and visionary leader who isn't afraid to shake things up. Leadership isn't a popularity contest. And innovative toys are not best selected by a committee, whether at the executive or overhyped team level. "Empowering the team" has failed the best-practice test. Too many cooks spoil the toy. Time to re-inspire and empower individuals to rise up, follow their passions, seize their equity, and make great toys. Up until this past year's ridiculous forced retirement of experienced senior toy people, Mattel had all the right talent and resources in place. Sadly they are constantly micromanaged, squandered and misdirected on mediocre me-too projects (Formula After High) endless tweaking of color and theme to please the market research gods and even management tastes. Toys are about passion and discovery and fun. Toys are not a science, stop letting DOCTOR Shore tell you it is. From the top down, we need risk-taking, fun-loving leadership who isn't afraid to stand up and say "I disagree with you guys and the test results, I like this toy, I really think there's something here. MAKE IT HAPPEN." That kind of leadership would make me want to work hard and stay late. But I haven't seen it lately. Let the CEO search continue, it's neither of these two fellows. What's the rush? The throne was vacant for a year in between Barad and Eckert.
Probably Tim. Yes, he's old school but probably understands the business better....and at least is a nice guy. I never understood why they brought back Dixon. The guy is a poser. What is his genius exactly? When he was here last time he put on a big 50th birthday splash for Barbie...big deal. He spent millions....created a Malibu dream house with Jonathan Adler and really was just a place for him and the other execs to enjoy. They got a bunch of B list celebrities to show up for a PR event and then what? How did it sell Barbie dolls exactly? And what about the Barbie Shanghai store he spent millions on. He put himself in every single video talking about it to promote himself like HE was some celebrity. Again, how many millions down the drain? And how long did it last? A year? Two? They quietly closed it. Barbie in Fred Segal? How did that sell Barbie dolls? Do you think little girls care about Jonathan Adler or Fred Segal or Barbie Shanghai? All vanity projects for Richard.....which got him his next gig at Jones New York as president. Well guess what, he failed there too! Look it up. So why on earth did the board bring him back as our chief brands officer? Just because he has long hair and wears his shirt untucked, does not make him a creative genius. And the dog and pony shows the two of them do together? Laughable.
Here's some info on Dickson's contract
Kilpin's too old school and Dickson's too new. Hire a successful proven veteran exec from another TOY COMPANY. Not Kraft foods, not makeup, not cat food, not Coke, not Ford, not Disney. TOYS.
Throw both bums out and get a tech exec so we can at least understand why we're incapable of making a product kids want after age 5
Tim knows more, and is more reasonable
Anonymous82249 why so negative
A lose/lose proposition wither way. Time for some fresh blood.