I agree with eveyrthing you said, Melissa, and Pat B, you worded what has been on my mind so well - thanks!
I think it is hard for people on the buying end sometimes to really grasp what goes into a product ( or doesn't. ) if they've never worked in manufacturing. Some companies spend money on design and developement and others don't. AG does. Knock offs never do. Most doll companies do only a minimal amount. AG pulls out all the stops.
If you ask me, AG *dolls* are ( please don't throw things )an over priced, cheaply made doll with exceptionally poor quality control. I value them at about 20.00. However, ALL the trimmings, and there are oodles of them, from books to accessories to historic outfits to both clubs, the many ways the company works to motivate and enlighten girls, in a society that increasingly fails children makes this an over all maximum value product.
Unfortunately too few of their customers seem to get the message Pleasant worked so hard to get out, and I constantly worry that eventually AGOT ( which lacks 85% of the above) will choke out the historic AG dolls. From what I know of people in our area who buy the dolls for their girls, including teh *historic* AG club (which had 125 members) this is a real threat.
If it had been up to me, I'd have bought my dd the Magic Attic dolls, and paired them with AG books, costumes and accessories. I can alter clothes and some, like Samantha's actually fit MA in a more true to history way. Megan makes a much better Samantha IMO. MA can be had for half the price, has virtually no quality problems, and it has been through several makers. The complexion is always perfect ( I've never seen two AG dolls in a row that were, and some are quite green, with white lips), the head tilts in a lovely manner, the eyes don't stare and they don't have bunny teeth. The dolls also all look different. The staring eyes and bunny teeth make this impossible with AG.
However, this product was originally prchased for my dd. She thinks of AG dolls when she thinks of the stories, because they are the ones used in the catalogues. Also, two other women in her life have bought her AG dolls, and they would have found it all too confusing to mix and match. So, I fully supported her choice to have the AG dolls. They have all grown on me, but none take my breath away like Megan when she is caught from a new angle. AG dolls are not capable of being seen form new angles, with their stiff necks.
Now that I think about it, the Addy I love ( we have two) most I love because she has a wonderful depth to her cheeks, which our newer Addy completely lacks. It works, because I turned dusky Addy into Sam and explain it away because he was a field hand, but really, dusky Addy/Sam is simply not very well made. I would not trade him for the world, mind you, but he's not the same quality as the other Addy, and she's not the same as MA .
I am a big fan of the company Pleaasant built, and am indebted to her for what she brought into my dd's one and only childhood. To me, that is truly priceless. I am watching my child grow into a lovely young lady who carries herself with poise and confidence I did not have at her age, and who posesses all the best values and appreciation for the past that this product helps teach. I am confident her future is bright, I could not have done it without AG.
So, even though this doll is really no better made than a 7.98 Barbie by the same company ( worse if you consider flawed wigs and silver eyes opaque vinyl and poor paint jobs), the *overall* value of this product makes it worth the -what is it - 1000.00 - 1500.00 ? it actually costs. $100.00 dolls? Who are we kidding? We're in the price range of boy toys here. I'm okay with the substandard doll, because I am getting far above standard everything else, and as someone else said - nobody else is offering those other things - for any price. I guess I'd know - I collect antique dolls, and like accessories best of all. Something like Kit's waffle iron, if you could find it, would go for $150.00 - 200.00 at a doll show if it were not readily avialable through AG. Only in the era of Brus did toy manufactueres make such cunning accessories, and with some of their items, AG trumps those. One reason we keep collecting eveyrthing AG makes is that toy quality cycles from generation to generation, and I want my grandchildren to have what we were able to give my dd.
I figure she's pricey, that Pleasant Rowland, but a fraction of what girls who grow up on shallow empty value Bratz dolls will be spending on therapy and self help products.
YMMV, of course
[img]smile.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I didn't even think of that but you're right--and that would increase the price of every order we make if their shipping charges go up. [img]frown.gif[/img]Originally posted by Popsie:
Perhaps we should be concerned about what that last shipping will cost us - it may well go up substantially too. [img]frown.gif[/img]
Well, I honestly hope it's a rumor.
Putting more thought into it, though, $100 is not too outrageous for a "collector" doll. My mother has a beautiful Native American maiden by Rustie that cost $275...and worth every penny. Granted, she's 35 inches and porcelian. But there are Collector Barbies that sell for over $100 too! I think it comes down to is American Girl a "collector" doll or a play doll in the majorites eyes? That will judge how the reaction to a possible price increase will go.
Talking about other dolls, I'verecently discovered Collector Barbies, especially the Dolls of the World collection. I'm getting a little more faith in Mattel, seeing the beautiful Collector versions they make of Barbie versus the "play" version. TO be honest, I like the Dolls of the World over Girls of Many Lands. *ducks* FOr me, since both lines have gorgeous clothing, it comes down to faces and Kish doesn't do it for me. I'm glad I have them, but I can now honestly say they weren't worth the $50 when DOTW sell for $20 to $30.
I hope American Girl learned from the GOML experince and realizes that overpricing can cut a product's throat. I'm not saying *I* think the AGs are over priced, because I don't, but alot of people do and majority tends to rule.
I think that Pat B made an excellent point about the cost of research etc that goes into the historical dolls and therefore the cost. Not true on the AGT's but at least the historicals.
Laurie
What bothers me... and I've hesitated to say this on here, because I don't want to upset anyone... but what bothers me is that essentially I think the quality of the doll clothing and most of the accessories has remined relatively the same as when it was PC. The problem is that the doll itself I think has lowered in quality. I love my Kit doll (my only Mattel girl), but she has so many differences than my other AG dolls. Yes, they are tiny differences that only someone who has been a longtime collector would notice. But they are differences nonetheless. I don't think the differences take away from the educational or play value, but they are there. Her vinyl seems cheaper. It is not as soft, smooth, or dense/heavy as pre-Mattel dolls have. Her body is much thinner and overall she weighs less. Her face doesn't have that round, soft, pretty look - rather, it is slightly thinner and more angular. Still pretty, for sure, but not the "same." Her hair isn't as thick or as heavy as my pre-M girls'. Her joints are not as "tight" and tend to stick sometimes or move out of a pose or wobble other times (my Pre-Mattel girls' joints are much "smoother" when I adjust them) Tiny, teeny, bitty differences that just slightly bother me. When I bought Kit, I didn't mind the tiny differences because I love her and I figured that they had to make some minor changes in order to account for the cost of the doll only having gone up $2 in price in 15 years. That's not bad. But, now that they're going to raise the price, I just can't see them justifying it unless they are going to also make a genuine effort to fit these tiny "flaws" in the design and try to raise the quality back up where it belongs.
That's just my 2 cents. I'm not a "Pre-Mattel elitist" nor am I ever going to be someone someone who thinks that today's dolls are quite the same as Pleasant Company's dolls. I just think that if they're going to raise the price that they should also step it up on the design quality and quit trying to cut corners with the design changes.
Finally, and lastly, it is a shame that they are going up in price (if this is indeed true) more than just 2-3 dollars. Going up to almost $100/doll will make it very difficult for girls who want a doll to be able to save up for one, and will be hard on parents as well. They are expensive as it is, no doubt, and maybe it won't make a huge difference in their clientelle, but I hate to think of girls who really want a doll having the line drawn because their parents just can't stand to pay $100 for a doll. They are, after all, meant to be played with. I'm afraid that $100 for "just a doll" will be hard for a lot of parents - who aren't as into it or as aware of the value of AG as well as those of us on the board do - to swallow. [img]frown.gif[/img] and I wish every girl could have the opportunity I had, to love AG dolls and just enjoy them. while it doesn't make a huge difference to some of us, a $100 doll will make it more of a collector's item and it would be sad to take away the play value of the doll.
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ April 20, 2005 10:55 PM: Message edited by: * amanda ]</font>
Well, I wasn't really gonna post anymore, but I want to point something out. In my life, my toys have come and gone. Those that have stayed, stay in storage or because they have extraordinary sentimental value. My American Girl dolls, on the other hand are not all tied to special events or people, but I couldn't part with even one tiny part of their collection. I also want to point out that the face molds for the American Girl dolls blow other dolls faces out of the water. I actually find MAC and even Gotz Precious Day dolls quite ugly. No offense, but the artistry simply doesn't compare for me. I would also rather spend $100 on a toy that a child can play with than on some stupid electronic that plays with the child. American Girl dolls are educational in more ways than one. They inspire creativity as well as teaching history. The dolls are simply one of a kind, despite the rash of knockoffs that have populated the market. The dolls themselves are fantastic toys that are well worth the price. And whatever ya'll might say about the quality, the only issue I've ever had is silver eye, but that's a trade-off AG made for more realistic eyes. I have also never gotten anything but perfect service, and CS reps with real integrity. These dolls are meant to be loved, and I can honestly say, no other toy has captured that so completely. So, not to be argumentative, but I think even the AGOTs are well worth the money. One final note, and then I'm done. It's hard to strike a balance between playability and collectibility. The dolls and their accessories cannot be so high quality that they become shelf sitters to preserve them, and at the same time they must be durable enough to become heirlooms. So, I have defended my dolls, over and out!
Regarding Mare's GOML comments,
At a birthday party recently (Saba) became the topic of a half hour conversation. This crowd thinks I am nuts to spend anything over Barbie prices on dolls, but they could not get their hands off this doll. Soon she was stripped naked, poor thing,. just so we could all marvel at her fully lined silk (not synthetic) clothes. Every one of us agreed that had we only been allowed to see and touch the finery on these dolls we'd have paid the full price for them.
We own all but Kathleen, and each one has details that make us gasp. Tiny silk brocade shoes, hand sewn snaps ( another major beef I have about AG), delicate sculpting that photos failed to show off well. Perfect fit on a tiny figure that requires precise sewing. And, they each came in a beautifully designed box with a well written book by authors like Lawrence Yep. Somehow they did not translate well on the website. This is what is known as hanger appeal because the best fitting dress in the world has to look good on a hanger to sell. The way it looks on a body is irrelevant if it lacks hanger appeal. Here is where selling through a website can hurt.
Our excitement at getting these dolls for such a deal was dampened considerably by the knowledge that there will not be more of them.
There is a paradox in business that we don't always know what we've got til it's gone, and it certainly applies in this case. I've been in volved in a number of conversations about GOML with parents who aren't in the habit of talking dolls the way we are. Word has gotten around that these dolls are special, and I think if they had another chance they actually would do pretty well. I think they will also do extremely well on the secondary market, because in the end it doesn't matter a whit if something is labeled a 'collectable' if it is missing the quality, and these dolls certainly have the quality in spades.
<font color="#051E50"><font size="1">[ April 21, 2005 08:36 AM: Message edited by: Popsie ]</font></font>
<font color="#051E50" size="1">[ April 21, 2005 08:37 AM: Message edited by: Popsie ]</font>
I just have to say I love the older generation MAC dolls. They have such pretty faces. They are like porcelain. I think the Gotz Little Sisters faces look very young. I actually think Gotz maxy muffins have the perfect face for a toddler. I think she is cuter than Bitty twin girl. But the little Sisters look like they have a maxy muffin face on an older doll. I find a lot of European dolls have younger looking faces. I wonder if that is a cultural thing. They view their "real" children as children longer than we do. I am not sure why you guys think AG has such low quality dolls. I think they are really nice. I did buy my niece a PM Samantha and I really can't see that much difference in quality to Kaitlin's AG dolls.
I agree with you about M vs PM dolls, Lieu - at least recent M ones. I don't think one is better than the other in most cases. I think it is a combination of personal preference, and a good bit of the ole' luck of the draw.
My first M Kit was as well made (and had some of the same deficits) as PM ones but I got one of the last batch of PM Felicity's ever shipped, and one of the first batch of M Felicity's and there was a tremendous difference between the two of them. PM Felicity is an exceptionally nice one and M Felicity is extremely poorly made. Her dress as well as her.
Recent dolls I've seen have been far more consistant and had better coloring than PM dolls and I prefer them to PM. This is just in the last year and a half. I am really hoping the quality control has improved - that is my biggest complaint about AG - dolls with flawed wigs and silver eye have no business ever leaving a factory - not at this price, or really, any. They definatly had no quality control the day our M Felicity left the factory, nor when our Addy did, hair a flying all over the place. We're still awaiting a replacement from the hospital on Addy - it was ordered over a month ago. This will be our third - the frist two were from the same batch of flawed wig Addys.
Yesterday my dd said to me" Can you believe we both used to not like Molly? She's SO pretty, how could we have felt that way?" Well, she is really pretty - she's one of the new Mattel dolls with the 'thin' vinyl some don't like, We love it - she's squeezable ( ever so slightly) instead of quite so hard. Her complexion glows with depth and she has rosy cheeks and lips. I honestly do not like PM Mollys and never have. I think the new ones look more lively and have more spark, like the girl in the story. But, that's just me.
From watching which dolls she tends to favor, I would choose recent M's for my dd, if we always had that choice. I probably would for myself as well, although I do prefer the hair colored eyelashes. (we have 12, half and half).
The real question is how will they look in 10, 20 years? Red is the most fugitive of all dyes, meaning it runs, it fades, and otherwise disappears. Red is what makes vinyl dolls look lifelike. Likely all these like other vinyl dolls) will wash out. We have some Carolle dolls that were equally expensive but are 10 years older and they look like Casper the Ghost. I tend to think the recent Mattels will go that route and the earlier of both will go green ( some already have). Probably if we plan on keeping these dolls we should all consdier which we prefer?
Mare, I reread your post and see you do own GOML. sorry for missing that before.
Can you tell me since I don't think I've seen the DOTW dolls, are they also natural fibers and fully lined like GOML? Mattel has been doing international dolls of various types for Barbie for years, and they have seemed to me to be improving a little every year. But have they gotten this good - I mean when you take the outfits off and really examine them?
I guess Gene and Alex etc. are pushing them towards this. My dd owns two Genes and 50-75 outfits that a generous cousin gave her. The workmanship on Gene clothes is unbelievably good - and each outfit runs about 50.00 - 75.00. The workmanship on the GOML outfits is comparable - possibly done in the same factory. I can['t speak for DOTW, but by this measure, GOML are a bargain at 50.00
GOML appeal to me in part because I do like the Kish faces - and much more so in person than on the website. I like the size too. Just my taste.
I have never been a Barbie fan, in part because of the overkill factor - it's the same face over and over ( kind of fascinating the endless variety though!). To me, they are like a plastic hanger - you aren't meant to look at the doll ( just the outfit). So, I am not going to be that Barbie customer. I'm going to want some thing a bit more unusual, and I'll pay a more for that privledge. That would be my choice.
I think AG was looking for someone who, like me is not going to buy Barbie no matter what when they made GOML.. I also think they went to great lengths to research which designer to hire, which country to portray, which author to hire to write the book etc. etc. before even getting to the point they began with, with Barbie. And they had to pay big name artist and authors their going rates too, as opposed to a salaried faceless design staff who likely barely make a living wage (the reality of that sort of job). On the rare occassions when they've hired big name designers to do clothes for Barbie, the item goes for big name prices. So, I think that is a more equal comparison.
I am going to check out the DOTW though - thanks!
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks