The New York Times Business
Skip to article
Business Home Media & Advertising World Business Your Money Markets Company Research Mutual Funds Stock Portfolio Columns

A Makeover of a Romance

Published: February 9, 2006

Skip to next paragraph
Illustration by The New York Times

Ken's new garb includes a motorcycle jacket and cargo pants. But that's not all: he now dabbles in Buddhism and has learned to cook. Apparently, he still doesn't have a last name.

Tina Fineberg/Associated Press

In 2004, Barbie broke up with her old boyfriend, Ken, right. Her new admirer was Blaine.

Corrections Appended

It was the breakup that shocked legions of fans. She was the image of perfection dressed in Pepto-Bismol pink, with a dozen movie credits under her Size 2 belt, several best-selling advice books and a line of accessories that bore her name.

He was her dashing playmate in short shorts, with a washboard stomach, a killer smile and a pampered life of tennis, surfing and roller skating.

Now, after a heart-wrenching, two-year separation — for the record, it was her idea — Ken and Barbie are headed for a romantic reunion, according to their handlers. Ken's new attraction? A makeover, set to be unveiled today at a news conference in Manhattan, that finds him sporting a more rugged jaw line, wearing cargo pants and listening to Norah Jones.

Like a desperate publicist trying to revive the moribund career of a Hollywood star, Barbie's manufacturer, Mattel, is pulling out all the stops to put her back on her feet. For nearly 50 years, Barbie has been at the heart of Mattel's success, but now the very qualities that long drew girls to her — a squeaky-clean image and virtually no electronic bells and whistles — are turning them off.

Barbie's dream house is in disarray. Sales have plunged, retailers are cutting back on shelf space for her and, for the first time, a competitor has edged her out as the No. 1 fashion doll in the United States.

Bratz, a line of dolls with pouty lips and big heads, manufactured by MGA Entertainment, a privately held company in Van Nuys, Calif., said yesterday that it overtook Barbie in the fashion doll business in the 2005 holiday season — a remarkable coup for a brand introduced just five years ago. MGA cited data from the NPD Group, a market research firm.

Barbie's midlife crisis holds wide-ranging implications, not just for Mattel, where the buxom doll accounts for 20 percent of sales, but for the entire toy industry. Barbie has long been the best-selling toy brand in the world and retailers ranging from Wal-Mart Stores to CVS devote millions of square feet of space to her wedding dresses, lunch boxes and convertibles.

"It is very much in the industry's best interest to help Mattel revive the brand," said John Barbour, president of Toys "R" Us, whose store in Times Square features a two-story Barbie mansion bigger than the average Starbucks.

Several factors have contributed to Barbie's stumble. Electronics made for children, like Disney's line of MP3 players introduced for 6-year-olds last holiday season, have lured young girls away from traditional dolls at ever younger ages.

Because of Barbie's close ties to fairy tales — Barbie movies are almost always based on them — and historically safe fashions, it has come to be viewed as a toy for girls ages 3 to 6, souring older girls on the brand.

Barbie's troubles have sent shockwaves throughout Mattel, which recently ousted Matthew Bousquette, the president who oversaw the prized brand, and shifted control of Barbie to Neil Friedman and Chuck Scothon, who led the company's highly profitable Fisher-Price brand.

The company, based in El Segundo, Calif., remains the largest toy maker in the world, with perennial best sellers like Elmo, Hot Wheels and the American Girl dolls. But Barbie's performance over the last two years has begun to significantly drag down overall sales.

Barbie's sales slid 12.8 percent over the last year, to $1.2 billion, from $1.4 billion, while Mattel's revenue rose 1.5 percent, to $5.2 billion. Without Barbie, the company's sales would have increased 6.7 percent, according to an analysis by the brokerage firm Harris Nesbit.

"The only thing that is a problem at Mattel is the one thing it cannot afford to be a problem," said Sean P. McGowan, who tracks the toy industry for Harris Nesbitt.

Jim Silver, a longtime toy industry analyst, traces Barbie's troubles back to 1999, with the arrival of teenage celebrities like Britney Spears, whose belly shirts and leggy skirts were quickly adopted by young female fans.

Two years later, MGA Entertainment introduced Bratz, which hit the shelves wearing belly shirts, leggy skirts and a wide variety of other racy fashions that children's doll makers had long viewed as out of bounds. "Bratz saw the trend and really pushed the envelope," Mr. Silver said.

Bratz, which appealed to girls 7 and older, proved that the older girls who had begun to shun Barbie would play with a doll provided it struck the right mix of fashion and attitude, Mr. Silver said.

Mattel's early efforts to battle Bratz flopped. In 2003, it rushed out a new line called Flavas, six hip-hop-style dolls whose urban sensibility appeared to be heavily inspired — critics said borrowed — from Bratz. But the product sold poorly and Mattel killed it within a year.

Correction: Feb. 10, 2006

An article in Business Day yesterday about Mattel's efforts to revive sales of the Barbie doll referred incorrectly in some copies to the toy-industry analyst who explained how the company's failure to react to trends contributed to a decline in the doll's popularity. He is Jim Silver. (Chris Byrne is a different toy-industry analyst.) In some copies, the article and the attribution for the Quotation of the Day also misspelled the name of the celebrity stylist who gave the Ken doll a makeover. He is Phillip Bloch, not Philip Block.

Correction: Feb. 10, 2006

The article also included an erroneous reference from the NPD Group, a market research firm, to the performance of Barbie for the fourth quarter of 2005. It was No. 1 in the fashion doll category; Bratz was second. The article also referred imprecisely to Mattel's lawsuit against a former employee. It was not a response to