"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Sep 17, 1:11 am, "Tom Gardner" wrote:
"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message

ups.com...





On Sep 16, 8:34 pm, "Noozer" wrote:
Now you are telling us that the consumer wants to give their
children
poisonious toys?!?!?!

Nope... Just cheap toys.

You are so full of it.

Tom, just sit back and watch the consumer change Mattel's bottom
line.

It'll be forgotten by Christmas. Sure they won't sell as much, but
they'll
still make money on the other few dozen items that they brought in
from
China, which have less noticable defects.

The CEO and all others responsible deserve what is going to happen
to
them.

Be given a multi-million dollar retirement package and spend the rest
of
their lives basking in the south of Spain?

You must not have kids...parents have long memories for people who
attempt to poison little Johnny.

Mattel is going to get creamed this Christmas.

The retailers who sell toys are breaking records trying to test
product before Christmas...they won't make the deadline.

Many parents I know have already decided to go toy lite this
Christmas...they can't trust the greedy Corporation that wants larger
profits at the expense of their children's health.

TMT

A smart CEO will turn this to Mattel's advantage...watch and see.
Besides,
if little Johnny WANTS the latest Mattel toy the parents will cave. Of
course, the parents will be doubly assured by Mattel that the toy is
extra-special-double-safe...sooo much safer than the competitor's
offering.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A "smart" CEO would never have allowed this situation to develop.

It is not rocket science that a company needs to inspect incoming
merchandise from a supplier.

The losses that Mattel suffers (and they have admited that they will
be significant) should come out of the CEO's compensation.

Then this problem will not happen again.


TMT


I'll buy that. But, it's how a screw-up is handled that shows one's mettle.