Sunday, February 5, 2017

*NEWS* Changes to AG Doll Body


Everyone (including me) is shaking their head about this decision. Diana brings up a very good point: AG has been using the Gotz patented doll body for years. It's possible they are not renewing the patent, but adding SEWN ON UNDERWEAR as a new feature. Don't forget, gone are the neck strings. Gabriela GOTY17 has zip ties.
 

Here's a look at Gotz doll Elizabeth Cady Stanton as compared to classic AG Caroline. The flesh tone is darker, but the bodies are the same.
 




You can see more comparisons with Elizabeth (Candace) and Marie Grace (Paige).


What are your thoughts? Is this a good idea? Is AG doing this for patent reasons or modesty reasons? Why the sudden change? Will this effect your future buying decisions?

56 comments:

  1. I think it is a horrible idea. What are modern bathing suits supposed to look like with underwear on underneath? Or will they stop making modern suits? How many "customers" said they wanted the underwear sewn on? 2? It seems that it would be more expensive and complicated to sew it on right. I would guess only small underwear would work. Madelon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This reminds me of what the 12" plastic dolls look like, wth the underwear colored painted on their body. If they are concerned about modesty, why not a sewn on bra? Weren't there some of the Disney Princess dolls or other Mattel 12' dolls that had a painted torso? First thing that came to mind was that it would be part of the fabric of the body. Looking at the backside of the doll, there is a horizontal seam across the lower quarter. I bet that seam will go around to the front and that fabric will be a different color, for the underwear.

      Delete
  2. I wondered about bathing suits, too. I will reserve judgement until I see a new doll. I only collect historical characters and already have the three mentioned, so it won't concern me for awhile. Felicity should be safe. Colonial fashion was commando with a shift and corset.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was what I thought about as soon as I heard it. Looks like I'll be buying a 46.

      Delete
  3. Not happy with all the changes. Change is not always good. We will see. Maybe Mattel will lose AG customers as they lost Barbie customers. Whose horrible idea was this anyway? Was it 1, 100, or 1,000 people that requested this change?

    ReplyDelete
  4. What happens when a doll is colored with a crayon, marker, etc. How do you clean it?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Wait. They didn't say anything about the GOTY. Unless they're calling GOTY contemporary characters........

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rumor is Gabby GOTY17 will be the last GOTY. http://livingadollslife.blogspot.com/2016/06/rumors-lots-of-rumors-1.html

      Delete
  6. I don't like the idea of sewn on underwear.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It upsets me even more. American Girl is just turning into a Barbie doll. What's next, the body becoming plastic?!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hope Tenney doesn't have this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to @theagboy on Instagram she won't have sewn on underwear.

      Delete
  9. Between the box change and now this, I see an end to our collecting (very, very, sad). The boxes and taking care not to lose items helped my daughter learn that this doll was something special to be taken care of. I always felt the price for AG was money well spent because I was purchasing something well made that would hold its value if my daughter didn't enjoy playing with a particular item, or it would be something she truely enjoyed and held up because it was well made. There was always a trip to the hospital as an option as well.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have been watching the AG facebook comments and looking for any blog post about this, and I have not heard one single positive comment from anyone. This change is almost getting more hate than beforever, more hate than any other outrageous change in the last 5 years. I believe we are moving closer to a tipping point when things start to change for the better, as the dolls are one of the most exspensive things that are bought most often, and that continuing with the change will result in a huge loss of profit, way more than will be recovered by other changes.

    My opinion- terrible idea. The underwear stays on the dolls half the time, it WAS NEVER AN ISSUE BEFORE (sorry for the caps, I just can't underline). Seriously, no one considered this a change. The underwear isn't a choking hazard, it doesn't get in the way of anything, there is LITERALLY no reason for the company to make this change other than to cheapen the dolls and increase profit.

    I've seen multiple comments from the company on Facebook that they are listening, and yet they're either listening to the wrong people or not listening very carefully at all.

    I hope they loose enough profit to warant the changes their fanbase has asked for for years. Just wish I'd gotten Maryellen in time for the change, but I'll just get her off ebay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Get Mary Ellen off of Amazon free shipping and free returns if she comes with bad underwear. It's being sold on Amazon and shipped from American Girl so no markup.

      Delete
    2. Awesome, I'll be sure to tell my parents that when my birthday comes up.

      Delete
  11. I can't see any reason for this ridiculous idea. Putting on clothes and taking them off are part of playing with dolls--why would AG attach underwear when they could sell it separately, so girls can dress their dolls with it? As far as "modesty," that would be an even more ridiculous reason--dollies have stuffing, nothing to be "modest" about! It's like making Winnie the Pooh wear pants.

    If AG--and whatever customers suggested this--are worried about lost underwear (and again, is it just me, or is that a really weird reason?)--why don't they glue on the shoes? Those get lost, too. Sicks, too, while they are at it. Heck, hot glue the entire outfit on, then n o one will lose anything.

    Really odd marketing rationale.

    I just don't know what is up with this.

    --Alice

    ReplyDelete
  12. This is an absolutely ridiculous idea. I cannot understand the rationale. Part of playing with dolls is dressing and undressing them. AG could sell more doll underwear for little girls to put on their dolls if they were not "permanently" attached. As far as "modesty,"--dollies are stuffed, they have nothing to be modest about! It's like making Winnie the Pooh wear pants.

    And if the reason is to prevent underwear loss--if indeed customers requested this--why not glue on shoes, too? Those get lost. While they're at it, glue on socks--heck, hot glue the whole outfit to the doll, and then no one will lose anything. This seems a very odd reason for AG to cite. Do customers really complain that losing doll underwear is a big concern?

    As a marketing strategy, this leaves me baffled.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Honestly I think it is the stupidest thing in the world however I also find it rather funny at the same time. The idea of underwear that cant come off on my dolls reminds me of the barbie or monster high dolls. At the same time, I can see AG's point. When I was a little girl I lost everything that came with my dolls and sometimes the dolls themselves.To this day all i have left of my Original Kirsten doll is one little sock. This being said, one of my favorite things about having the dolls is being able to change their clothes. And what if the underwear shows through the clothes? I dont know, I want to see the changes for myself before I decide if I will continue to buy these dolls or not.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Whats more peculiar, is that Julie is soon to get her own bathroom complete with sink, shower and TOILET.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This makes no sense. Madelon

      Delete
    2. I also saw that rumor! I wondered why in the world they would give Julie a bathroom? I'd rather have a bedroom or a kitchen. Maybe little girls want a bathroom for their dolls? *sighs*

      Delete
    3. A few people on AGFB pointed out that the Bitty Babies have diapers and asked if those will be attached also, since they can be lost as well as underwear. Some others have said they asked their daughters about attached underwear and bathing and toilets, they said their daughters that it was weird, that you don't take a bath with underwear on.

      Delete
  15. Toilet???

    Dolls can pretend to take baths, and brush their teeth, but I have never had a doll that needed a toilet.

    I guess, if someone was a stickler for realism, then a bathroom needs a toilet. But a doll doesn't.

    So long as they don't attach the toilet to Julie so it doesn't get lost . . . .

    ReplyDelete
  16. This is the last straw in a long line of missteps. My 7 year old asked for Kit for her 8th birthday. I am now on the hunt for a used kit in nice shape, I don't even trust the doll hospital at this point. Starting to explore the idea of buying a Gotz doll from Pottery Barn instead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kit won't have the sewn undies because she has pouffy panties. Only the dolls that would otherwise come with briefs were mentioned. That said, newer Kits might come with the zip tie so an older Kit would be the way to go if you want the head removability.

      Delete
  17. Hopefully, the new CEO of Mattel who starts on February 8 will make some much needed changes! Madelon

    ReplyDelete
  18. I really hadn't thought it possible Mattel could make it more awful...and yet here we are. Grrr. What next? Really, what corner has not been cut yet? So sad!

    ReplyDelete
  19. This is a horrible decisions on the part of American Brand Doll Company.Why make, bath tubs when the Dolls can't change her underwear during a shower or bath.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I completely agree! Are they going to continue to make bathing suits? I don't understand how that will work either -__-

      Delete
  20. This could be a college course-how to run a profitable iconic company into the ground. Madelon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Door true. American Girl Brand Doll Company is driving away it's true fans base, I hope the new CEO starting on the 8th knows what she is getting into. I will not buy Tenny or Logan if they seem on underwears.

      Delete
    2. NEX got Tenney, Logan and Felicity early! No permanent underwear, thank goodness!!

      I don't know if it was an accident, but I'm hoping the NEX received the dolls early to sell on purpose. What a nice way to thank and support our military families.

      Delete
    3. Is NEX a Base Exchange? Where is it? I thought Felicity was only available in flagship stores? This is all so aggravating.
      -RainingCatsandDollsMom

      Delete
  21. Thank you all for the good laughs, at imagining some of the suggestions to hot glue socks, shoes and clothes.

    If they truly sew a piece of underwear to the body, did they ever think about a young child wanting to take them off and ripping the body cloth? Hmmmm... Could generate more revenue for the company in repairs.

    I find the description confusing. The first sentence says 'permanent PART OF the cloth body' but the end says" The new underwear will fit the same as they always have under all of our doll clothes and we will continue to sell doll tank and brief sets." So are they a separate piece sewn in place or part of the cloth body? And if they are an actual underwear sewn in place, how does that work with putting another underwear over it? Another AGFB twist of the story, so that the customer doesn't get upset.

    Look at your WW. The mold for their body has an indented line under the belly button, and the plastic below that is a little rough with 'WW' on it. All ready to be painted and no cloth underwear.

    I couldn't stand what Mattel did to the Disney Princess line, painting clothing on, especially the legs. This is so ironic coming from AG that puts out marketing about girls being who they are, yet can't allow them to put on whatever underwear they want on doll.

    Did you all realize that they only mentioned three of the current Beforever dolls will get the 'new' underwear. Does that mean the rest will be retired? But I don't think Kaya comes with underwear, so maybe she won't get retired or just won't get the disgusting underwear.

    AG did say when they partnered with TRU and Kohl's that the BF line would be sold exclusively in the stores. To only mention 3 of the Beforever dolls seems strange. So is the bigger picture to reduce the BF line, and add Contemporary? Was Contemporary line going to be sold in partner stores? For some of the smaller stores, I can see an issue with not enough floor space for 8 BF dolls, and 3 Contemporary dolls and their clothes and accessories ( I saw rumor that there is a big ticket item for Tenney), and GOTY. Plus more accessories for WW.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was Maryellen, Melody, & Julie that were mentioned bc their underwear is the same modern style as truly me. They couldn't get away with this style on the other historical characters... Some of us are speculating that this change comes with AG opening stores in Africa & the middle east. (No fair, they said no more stores in the US) It makes no sense why they would cater to those countries & risk losing so many sales in the US, but their recent moves have not been at all logical.

      Delete
  22. Ridiculous. These dolls are meant to be special and unique. Dressing a doll has always been part of learn through play. For collecting purposes it is about tradition and nostalgia. Honoring traditional themes does not seem to even register on the AG radar anymore. Cheapening the iconic doll brand is not winning the new CEO any fans. Too bad, this company seems to be forgetting what popularized their brand in the first place. Why is doll underwear even being considered or a changing factor? Socks seem to be easily lost too. Seems like a silly issue for a doll company that specializes in overpriced dolls and doll collection pieces that are supposed to mimic real life and American history.

    ReplyDelete
  23. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM SO MAD AT AG RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was going to get Maryellen in April too. If they don't change their minds about this I might not get a doll in April at all! I might NEVER buy another new AG doll in my life! I'm literally on the edge of crying.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sorry my comment was in all caps. I was really mad and probably should have waited to comment until I settled down a little.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't worry, a lot of us are very emotional about this. Madelon

      Delete
  25. Just saw post of Julie's bathroom. Despite the oddity of a doll toilet, the bathroom itself looks pretty cool--very 1970's in detail. It is almost like there is a separate design team for the historic dolls, their clothes and accessories, and another, more "Barbie-fied" team for the more contemporary dolls. Melody's and Mary Ellen's accessories appear to be detailed and well-researched, and have imaginative play-value. I feel like AG cut corners on Samantha's re-issue of accessories, like her treat set.

    Still not understanding the underwear decision.

    ReplyDelete
  26. In regards to the Gotz patent, I found a webpage that talks about the Barbie doll patent. The patent covers the body, limbs, how the limbs attach to the doll, how the doll parts are constructed so the doll stands a certain way, and the way the limbs are held together internally. In my opinion, AG/Mattel would have to do more than just add underwear to avoid a patent issue. If it is a matter of the body, they could figure out a different way to sew it together. I don't have an OG doll, but is the OG doll body have the same seams on the backside of the doll like AG and Gotz?

    Someone on AGFB mentioned the announcement of the AG brand being sold in UAE. I don't remember if re-release of Samantha or Lea was the first with zip ties, but the AG brand was sold internationally (Canada, Mexico and available through phone orders) before the zip ties. What I remember AG saying at that time was they needed to do this because of international sales, but they had been sold for at least a year (in a store) before that announcement. Then at the end of the year they announced selling the dolls in TRU's and Kohl's. So are the partnership retail stores dictating the changes, and AG is saying that these changes are customer changes so that they don't anger the customer about the retail partnerships? With TRU already having the JG line, why would they put AG in their store? I didn't work out for FAO, unless the deal was too good to pass up. For the price of 1 AG doll TRU could sell 1 JG and one or more accessories.

    Here is the link for the Barbie Doll patent informationhttps://www.google.com/patents/US3009284

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The OG doll has the same seams as AG in the back. Madelon

      Delete
  27. If the issue is packaging the dolls for overseas sales, how difficult would it be to make underwear-clad bodes for that market and then add the proper heads at time of order? Slightly more time-consuming, but does not affect the whole line for US consumers, which I assume is still the largest market.

    And a cloth body is a cloth body. They can make some other minimal change if it is patent-related. I am uncomfortable, wondering if this may be a move, eventually, away from cloth bodies to cheaper, mass-produced vinyl/plastic bodies, complete with painted underwear? They say fabric now--so I assume, printed on the body fabric?--but what later?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do think you might be spot on about the printed on underwear. That must be how the underwear and tank sets still fit correctly over the permanent underwear. Not excited about this...but very thankful we have some already with out. Will have to be extra careful in the future on what we actually buy from AG.

      Delete
    2. I agree that they could make the sewn on underwear for non-US markets. If they went to vinyl bodies, that would be so destructive to the brand. Madelon

      Delete
  28. If the sole reason for doing this was because of the customers wanting 'easier play and no lost underwear' then why wouldn't AG do this to all the dolls. What makes one doll's underwear more likely to be lost than another? This just gives the theory of doing this specifically for the UAE deal more credibility. There is an article on the internet about the lack of dolls for sale in the Middle East , but there is another article in a UK paper that talks about how dolls can't be in the room at night because it has eyes, so someone in the UK made dolls without a face. Here is a link that talks about Barbie sales in Middle East. http://www.csames.illinois.edu/documents/outreach/Dolls.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  29. It's all about saving the company money. Has any one else noticed that outfits,especially for the TM dolls,never come with socks anymore?

    ReplyDelete
  30. THIS IS A VERY BAAAAAAAAAAAAAD IDEA, IT'S ALSO SAD, WE DON'T LIKE THE NEW DOLL BOXES OR THE WAY THE NEW CLOTHES ARE PACKAGE. MY DAUGHTER JUST TURN 9 AND RECEIVE SOME AG DOLL CLOTHING THAT STILL CAME IN A BOX WITH TISUE PAPER, SHE LOVE IT, THE BOX AND TISSUE PAPER MADE IT SEEM SPECIAL AND ALSO WHEN SHE RECIEVE HER DOLL IN THE RED BOX, IT'S JUST SPECIAL; IT'S LIKE RECIEVING A GIFT IN THAT BLUE TIFFANY BOX. I ALSO DON'T LIKE SEEING AG AT TRU, AG IS CHANGING AND NOT IN A GOOD WAY.

    ReplyDelete
  31. If the underwear can't be removed, safely, I will not buy any AG dolls with this feature. At this point I plan to buy Felicity, and she may be the end of the line for me. I think we are witnessing the "Barbie-izing" of the AG line; what I mean by that is that "corporate" makes decisions about things that will save money or that will please some subset of customers (customers want this, really?), and little by little, a step at a time, the doll (product) loses any vestige of integrity to the original, Pleasant Company vision. It seems to me that corporate is looking at the AG dolls as--nothing special--18" play dolls, interchangeable... I have watched and enjoyed these dolls from the beginning of the line (PC), and in the past the whole point was that they ARE special. They are different. You cannot have the experience these dolls bring you anywhere else. I don't think that Mattel corporate still has that vision of this doll line. Fortunately, there are other quality doll lines--I will focus mostly on the Girl for All Time Dolls... Their commitment to quality is unparalleled. They also appreciate adult collectors and seamstresses for their dolls, something Mattel has never done.

    ReplyDelete
  32. AG MUST KNOW THAT MOST OF THIER SALES COME FROM ADULT COLLECTORS. I'M MAKING A LIST OF A FEW THINGS I SHOULD GET FOR ME AND MY DAUGHTER BEFORE THEY CHANGE OR STOP SELLING THEM.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Hi! I saw this and went to the AG page and posted a comment on the article. i suppose I should have read more of the comments first as others voiced similar concerns that I did.

    I think this is a silly move. As a company whose profits are based on consumables, it makes more sense to provide more underwear and foundation garment sets at $7 - $12 to replace lost items. Plus it is not like the dolls are anatomically correct; there really is no modesty issue.

    My big question to them referenced the materials. The current underwear I have (Grace and Lea) is made with a weird material that gets snagged by Velcro all the time - will these new dolls have panties from the same material? If yes, when they get ragged will the dolls need to go to the doll hospital for a panty transplant? I'm thinking the marketing team saw more dollars coming in via the doll hospital and customer need for new torsos. :(

    As I read the comments on the Facebook page, I help sorry for the AG representative who was responding to everyone. A few people were rather extreme and my heart hurt for their narrow-mindedness.

    Of course, now that I have made a comment on the Facebook page I am extremely worried about sending melody in for limb tightening...overthinking things is a strong suit of mine.
    ~Xyra

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think the patent thing is not true. I am not an expert on the patent laws, but I do know that there has to be something proprietary about a design in order for a patent to be granted. I've even read up on the Patent site, to learn more. I discovered it is even more unlikely to be the reason. Even if a patent was owned by Gotz, it is only good for a limited time. In the US, that is generally 20 years from date of filing. Gotz is a German company and would likely have originally filed for a patent in Germany, if they did at all. Currently it looks like Germany too has the same time limit as the US (many countries enjoy a reciprocating treaty deal for patents). Of course, the patent could possibly be under the guidelines in place at the time of filing, so limits could be different; but I doubt they would still be in effect for a patent that would have to be at least 31 years old.

    ReplyDelete