The Building Our Future Toy Conference that took place in early October ended up offering more than a look at where the toy industry is heading in the future. The participants also had a great deal to say about where it is going right now.

I held the conference as a means of looking around the corner and seeing what the toy business will be facing in the next five to 10 years. The event was attended by a select and highly diverse group of children's entertainment industry players. We wanted to know what they saw coming for Toy Nation. We got some fantastic results; I wrote about them in last month's issue of Playthings.

Participants did not, however, just stop with looking at the future. They also had some very strong opinions on what the toy industry needs to do right now to make it a better future for everyone.

The attendees felt that the toy industry needed to take a hard look at the business models that make the electronic gaming industry so successful and, if not exactly emulate them, be inspired by them. In particular, attendees felt that much of the gaming industry's success is based upon its heavy investment in research and development. This means that even though their products take longer to get to market and cost more when they get there, they are far more profitable than toy industry products as they provide consumers with games they want to play and are excited about.

Attendees noted that, unlike the electronic gaming industry, the toy business puts its money not in R&D, but in marketing. This means we are spending more and more to sell toys that people want less and less. In fact, one attendee noted that the concept of age compression is just the toy industry's way of explaining to itself why kids no longer want what it makes.

Attendees again looked to the electronic gaming industry as they noted that industry's success with product previews. Unlike the toy industry, which keeps its products under wraps until they start to ship, the electronics industry does a great job of creating consumer excitement long before the product hits. By using “teasers” on the Internet (think You Tube) and other media formats, they create excitement and buzz. Those efforts succeed in creating interest in products long before they hit the market at a far lower cost than Toy Nation's TV advertising.

It was also noted that the toy industry, with its history of intellectual property theft and subsequent paranoia, keeps its products well under wraps until very late in the process, one notable exception being Fisher-Price's Elmo products, which get lots of buzz long before they come to market.

Attendees felt that toymakers need to rethink their caution about revealing product details and do a better job of “teasing” the consumer so that shoppers are ready to buy a toy long before it hits the shelves.

Attendees expressed concern that we are categorized by a term, “toy,” whose meaning has become corrupted. It has either had its meaning smeared through the term, “adult toy,” to describe various sexual aids, or has become stodgy though the appellation “traditional toy,” which makes it sound like “fun's” maiden aunt. Either way, the term no longer clearly conveys the innocent pleasure that comes from our industry's cutting-edge products.

In the end, there was no consensus for what our products should be called, but there seemed to be agreement that the name must convey what toys provide: joy, fun, excitement and pleasure. As a consumers, could you see yourself visiting a Fun Store or shopping in the Joy Department?

Though we historically have been the best intellectual property creators in the world, there was a sense that the toy industry no longer understand today's children and their parents. Why? Because kids and their parents are dramatically different today.

Attendees again pointed to the electronic gaming industry as a role model. They noted the financial grants that industry gives to educators and psychologists in order to study children and how they are entertained. There was a sense that the toy industry needs to do the same. We should bring in specialists to help us better understand what types of play most appeal to the 21st century children and then provide those children with the toys they actually want and need.

The consensus seemed to be that the toy business has adhered too long to products, techniques and attitudes that are out of date. The solution is to change how we think about ourselves, our competitors, our products and our end users in order to better compete today and in the near future.