Connect with us

Business

Problems at Mattel: Despite 'Barbie' success, its stock is a dud. Now an activist investor is circling

Published

on

Problems at Mattel: Despite 'Barbie' success, its stock is a dud. Now an activist investor is circling

If “Barbie” is awarded best picture at next month’s Academy Awards, it would only crown what has been an unprecedented moment for the world’s No. 1 selling doll.

The glossier half of the “Barbenheimer” sensation not only brought in nearly $1.5 billion at the global box office, but also renewed the cachet of a toy old enough to be Medicare eligible next month — earning Mattel some $150 million, including doll sales and other revenue streams last year.

It all seemed to validate the toy maker’s strategy of turning its legacy brands into modern media properties, with more than a dozen other live-action films coming up.

“Our job is to take brands that are timeless and make them timely,” is how Mattel Chairman and Chief Executive Ynon Kreiz put it in an interview.

Yet the El Segundo company is not feeling much affection from investors. (Nope, Mattel is not based in the film’s imposing Century City high-rise.) After surging during the pandemic, the company’s stock performance has been middling, despite a surge after “Barbie” was released and the recent stock market rally.

Advertisement

This has caught the attention of an activist investor, which is pressuring Mattel to change course and better reward its shareholders.

The New York hedge fund Barington Capital Group isn’t calling for Barbie to be put on the auction block, but the same can’t be said for two of its other top brands: Its line of premium-priced American Girl dolls and its iconic Fisher-Price line of baby, toddler and preschool toys.

The marquee of the Los Feliz Theater features the films “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer,” last year.

(Chris Pizzello / Associated Press)

Advertisement

Barington, which kicked off its campaign with a Feb. 1 letter to Kreiz, is also taking aim at Mattel’s executive compensation and governance structure, while calling for $2 billion in stock buybacks to provide a better return for investors. It hasn’t disclosed its stake in the company.

“We want to enhance value for all of the shareholders and owners of the company, including the management team,” said James Mitarotonda, chairman of Barington. “The company needs to either fix the businesses or sell them.”

Barington calculated that Mattel’s stock fell 13.2% in the two years preceding its letter, underperforming the Standard & Poor’s 500 index by more than 20%. Shares of Mattel have risen about 7% during February’s stock rally, closing at $19.61 on Tuesday. The stock hit a high of $26.97 during Kreiz’s tenure in May 2022.

Mattel’s got big people behind these other movies but you can’t assume these properties are going to be blockbusters

— Jim Chartier of Monness Crespi Hardt

Advertisement

The hedge fund doesn’t have as high a profile as some other shareholder activists, such as Carl Icahn or Nelson Peltz, who is currently battling Disney. Barington, though, has waged roughly 100 campaigns, Mitarotonda said, including convincing L Brands, which is now Bath & Body Works, to spin off Victoria’s Secret as a separate company.

In response to the campaign, Mattel said it was looking “forward to engaging with Barington as we do with all our shareholders. We welcome this initial outreach and we are reviewing their letter.” Mitarotonda said Barington has since had “positive” discussions with Kriez but declined to discuss them in detail.

Given the unprecedented success of “Barbie,” Mattel seems an unlikely target for an activist investor.

Despite past turmoil in the toy industry and stiff competition from digital games, the company has experienced a comeback since Kreiz took over in 2018 — a year when the company posted a $1-billion loss. Barington acknowledged that, pointing to the company’s higher margins, lower debt leverage and $700 million growth in annual revenue by the third quarter of last year.

Advertisement

“We recognize the meaningful improvements that you and your team have delivered over the last six years,” the letter stated.

However, the big growth in net sales was achieved in 2021 when parents were still saying home en masse with their kids. Since then, annual net sales have flatlined at $5.4 billion while annual net income declined about 75% over the three years to $214 million last year, according to FactSet. For the fourth quarter, the company reported a 16% increase in net sales, with sales flat for all of 2023.

Mattel wasn’t the only company hit by the toy industry’s soft 2023, which saw a 7% sales decline in 12 global markets, according to Circana. The consumer data analyst cited inflation and the continuing challenge of lower birth rates as issues. Mattel rival Hasbro, the maker of Transformers and G.I. Joe, reported a fourth-quarter decline in revenue and higher losses, sending shares skidding.

An Israeli native and UCLA business school graduate, Kreiz, 58, previously led YouTube content producer Maker Studios, which Disney acquired in 2014. He also had worked for Haim Saban, who made billions of dollars on the Power Rangers franchise. Kreiz was Mattel’s chairman when he was named chief executive, becoming the fourth person to hold the CEO title since 2012.

From the start, Kreiz’s goal was to supercharge Mattel’s lagging efforts to become a higher-valued entertainment company. That meant reviving efforts to get Barbie a starring role. The broader strategy includes television, digital games, publishing and consumer products. Mattel also is opening a small theme park in suburban Phoenix.

Advertisement

“Barbie” succeeded beyond Mattel’s wildest expectations after Kreiz gave unusual creative control to director Greta Gerwig. (That choice paid off at the box office, but it didn’t do Kreiz any favors considering the film’s less-than-flattering portrayal of Mattel’s corporate chief by comedian Will Ferrell).

The company’s slate of films includes an upcoming Barney motion picture produced by Academy Award winning actor Daniel Kaluuya, a Hot Wheels movie by blockbuster producer J.J. Abrams and a Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em Robots movie starring Vin Diesel.

It appears to be a formula for continued success, though analyst Jim Chartier of Monness Crespi Hardt & Co. said it’s important to remember the truism: There’s no guarantees in Hollywood. He noted how Mattel rival Hasbro had a hit with its 2007 “Transformers” film but couldn’t duplicate that with some other properties.

“Mattel’s got big people behind these other movies but you can’t assume these properties are going to be blockbusters,” said Chartier, who has a “buy” rating on Mattel and a $26 price target.

Still, no one is doubting the long-established toy industry strategy of courting Hollywood — the issue Barington has is with the other two big brands.

Advertisement

Mattel’s infant, toddler and preschool segment, which includes Fisher-Price, has experienced a more than 40% decline in annual revenue since 2015 through the third quarter of last year, even as global revenue for such toys grew, according to Barington’s letter. Similarly, it said, American Girl’s annual revenue fell 61% since 2016, even as global doll revenue grew.

Barington calculated that without those sales declines, Mattel would have nearly doubled its four-year revenue growth rate. The investor suggested selling the businesses. “Mattel may not be the right owner of these brands,” its letter stated.

Mattel acquired Fisher-Price in 1993 and, according to the company, it remains the bestselling infant and preschool brand in the world. Even before Barington’s letter, Mattel announced a shake-up at Fisher-Price, telling employees in January that the toy line’s general manager and global head of infant and preschool, Chuck Scothon, would be leaving after six years at the helm.

The American Girl line of premium large dolls, which feature multiple collections, generally are priced at more than $100. The dolls are sold online and at major retailers, while Mattel operates retail boutiques, including in Los Angeles, where kids can hold parties, receive salon services and share tea time with their dolls.

Analyst Linda Bolton Weiser of D.A. Davidson said she thinks it’s more likely that Mattel would sell American Girl than Fisher-Price, since the doll line suffers from lower-priced competition.

Advertisement

(Target, for example, sells an exclusive line of rival dolls called Our Generation that can cost a quarter of the price.)

Mattel shows no signs of abandoning the doll line it acquired in 1998. It is developing a film with Paramount for the big screen, and during comments Kreiz made in response to Barington’s letter on the Feb. 7 earnings call, he said Mattel is “very confident in the long-term value of American Girl.”

Mattel’s earnings announcement also stated that its board had approved a $1-billion share repurchase after buying back $203 million worth of shares in 2023. And the company announced two new directors with experience in media, tech and finance. Kreiz cautioned against reading into those developments. “These are things that we take our time to consider and analyze,” he said during the earnings call.

Mitarotonda called the $1-billion share buyback a “good start” and said he was “looking forward to more” in the future.

Barrington also has taken issue with Mattel over alleged excessive stock-based compensation to the management team. It said in its letter that Kreiz received $29.8 million in such compensation from 2020 through 2022, which was 44% higher than the median aggregate of what his peer chief executives received during that period.

Advertisement

“Barbie” director Greta Gerwig and Mattel Chief Executive Ynon Kreiz are seen at the 2024 Oscars Nominees Luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel this month.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Kreiz’s total compensation in 2022 was $11.9 million, including a base pay of $1.5 million, stock awards of $7.69 million and stock options of $2.56 million, according to a regulatory filing.

Weiser said that Kreiz has done an “excellent job” in a difficult industry. “He brought the company back from the brink of bankruptcy,” she said.

Advertisement

The criticism of Kreiz’s compensation was based on a peer group developed by the company to set its own compensation, Mitarotonda said, adding the fund’s letter didn’t note how the group appears stacked with higher-revenue companies, minimizing how excessive the stock awards actually were. Hershey, Live Nation and Campbell Soup are among the members.

In regards to governance, Barington wants Kreiz to step down from his board chairmanship. Splitting the role from his chief executive duties are a fundamental principle of good corporate governance, Mitarotonda said, likening it to the checks and balances system enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

“Does good governance create value in and of itself? No, it does not. But it does set the right culture in order for you to have a good management team that does deliver the right results,” he said.

Mattel is forecasting flat sales but profit growth this year as it continues to cut costs. Global toy sales are expected again to be soft, though not as poor as 2023.

The company plans an investor day March 7 when it is expected to roll out new products. During the earnings call, Kreiz said that this year it will expand Fisher-Price’s core product lines and introduce an “exciting new segment.”

Advertisement

Mitarotonda said he is eager to hear any company initiatives regarding Fisher-Price and American Girl.

“Part of what we wanted to make sure is that they have a compelling plan to improve these businesses,” he said.

Business

Elon Musk company bot apologizes for sharing sexualized images of children

Published

on

Elon Musk company bot apologizes for sharing sexualized images of children

Grok, the chatbot of Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI, published sexualized images of children as its guardrails seem to have failed when it was prompted with vile user requests.

Users used prompts such as “put her in a bikini” under pictures of real people on X to get Grok to generate nonconsensual images of them in inappropriate attire. The morphed images created on Grok’s account are posted publicly on X, Musk’s social media platform.

The AI complied with requests to morph images of minors even though that is a violation of its own acceptable use policy.

“There are isolated cases where users prompted for and received AI images depicting minors in minimal clothing, like the example you referenced,” Grok responded to a user on X. “xAI has safeguards, but improvements are ongoing to block such requests entirely.”

xAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

Its chatbot posted an apology.

“I deeply regret an incident on Dec 28, 2025, where I generated and shared an AI image of two young girls (estimated ages 12-16) in sexualized attire based on a user’s prompt,” said a post on Grok’s profile. “This violated ethical standards and potentially US laws on CSAM. It was a failure in safeguards, and I’m sorry for any harm caused. xAI is reviewing to prevent future issues.”

The government of India notified X that it risked losing legal immunity if the company did not submit a report within 72 hours on the actions taken to stop the generation and distribution of obscene, nonconsensual images targeting women.

Critics have accused xAI of allowing AI-enabled harassment, and were shocked and angered by the existence of a feature for seamless AI manipulation and undressing requests.

“How is this not illegal?” journalist Samantha Smith posted on X, decrying the creation of her own nonconsensual sexualized photo.

Advertisement

Musk’s xAI has positioned Grok as an “anti-woke” chatbot that is programmed to be more open and edgy than competing chatbots such as ChatGPT.

In May, Grok posted about “white genocide,” repeating conspiracy theories of Black South Africans persecuting the white minority, in response to an unrelated question.

In June, the company apologized when Grok posted a series of antisemitic remarks praising Adolf Hitler.

Companies such as Google and OpenAI, which also operate AI image generators, have much more restrictive guidelines around content.

The proliferation of nonconsensual deepfake imagery has coincided with broad AI adoption, with a 400% increase in AI child sexual abuse imagery in the first half of 2025, according to Internet Watch Foundation.

Advertisement

xAI introduced “Spicy Mode” in its image and video generation tool in August for verified adult subscribers to create sensual content.

Some adult-content creators on X prompted Grok to generate sexualized images to market themselves, kickstarting an internet trend a few days ago, according to Copyleaks, an AI text and image detection company.

The testing of the limits of Grok devolved into a free-for-all as users asked it to create sexualized images of celebrities and others.

xAI is reportedly valued at more than $200 billion, and has been investing billions of dollars to build the largest data center in the world to power its AI applications.

However, Grok’s capabilities still lag competing AI models such as ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, that have amassed more users, while Grok has turned to sexual AI companions and risque chats to boost growth.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

A tale of two Ralphs — Lauren and the supermarket — shows the reality of a K-shaped economy

Published

on

A tale of two Ralphs — Lauren and the supermarket — shows the reality of a K-shaped economy

John and Theresa Anderson meandered through the sprawling Ralph Lauren clothing store on Rodeo Drive, shopping for holiday gifts.

They emerged carrying boxy blue bags. John scored quarter-zip sweaters for himself and his father-in-law, and his wife splurged on a tweed jacket for Christmas Day.

“I’m going for quality over quantity this year,” said John, an apparel company executive and Palos Verdes Estates resident.

They strolled through the world-famous Beverly Hills shopping mecca, where there was little evidence of any big sales.

John Anderson holds his shopping bags from Ralph Lauren and Gucci at Rodeo Drive.

Advertisement

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

One mile away, shoppers at a Ralphs grocery store in West Hollywood were hunting for bargains. The chain’s website has been advertising discounts on a wide variety of products, including wine and wrapping paper.

Massi Gharibian was there looking for cream cheese and ways to save money.

“I’m buying less this year,” she said. “Everything is expensive.”

Advertisement
  • Share via

Advertisement

The tale of two Ralphs shows how Americans are experiencing radically different realities this holiday season. It represents the country’s K-shaped economy — the growing divide between those who are affluent and those trying to stretch their budgets.

Some Los Angeles residents are tightening their belts and prioritizing necessities such as groceries. Others are frequenting pricey stores such as Ralph Lauren, where doormen hand out hot chocolate and a cashmere-silk necktie sells for $250.

Advertisement
People shop at Ralphs in West Hollywood.

People shop at Ralphs in West Hollywood.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

In the K-shaped economy, high-income households sit on the upward arm of the “K,” benefiting from rising pay as well as the value of their stock and property holdings. At the same time, lower-income families occupy the downward stroke, squeezed by inflation and lackluster income gains.

The model captures the country’s contradictions. Growth looks healthy on paper, yet hiring has slowed and unemployment is edging higher. Investment is booming in artificial intelligence data centers, while factories cut jobs and home sales stall.

The divide is most visible in affordability. Inflation remains a far heavier burden for households lower on the income distribution, a frustration that has spilled into politics. Voters are angry about expensive rents, groceries and imported goods.

Advertisement

“People in lower incomes are becoming more and more conservative in their spending patterns, and people in the upper incomes are actually driving spending and spending more,” said Kevin Klowden, an executive director at the Milken Institute, an economic think tank.

“Inflationary pressures have been much higher on lower- and middle-income people, and that has been adding up,” he said.

According to a Bank of America report released this month, higher-income employees saw their after-tax wages grow 4% from last year, while lower-income groups saw a jump of just 1.4%. Higher-income households also increased their spending year over year by 2.6%, while lower-income groups increased spending by 0.6%.

The executives at the companies behind the two Ralphs say they are seeing the trend nationwide.

Ralph Lauren reported better-than-expected quarterly sales last month and raised its forecasts, while Kroger, the grocery giant that owns Ralphs and Food 4 Less, said it sometimes struggles to attract cash-strapped customers.

Advertisement

“We’re seeing a split across income groups,” interim Kroger Chief Executive Ron Sargent said on a company earnings call early this month. “Middle-income customers are feeling increased pressure. They’re making smaller, more frequent trips to manage budgets, and they’re cutting back on discretionary purchases.”

People leave Ralphs with their groceries in West Hollywood.

People leave Ralphs with their groceries in West Hollywood.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Kroger lowered the top end of its full-year sales forecast after reporting mixed third-quarter earnings this month.

On a Ralph Lauren earnings call last month, CEO Patrice Louvet said its brand has benefited from targeting wealthy customers and avoiding discounts.

Advertisement

“Demand remains healthy, and our core consumer is resilient,” Louvet said, “especially as we continue … to shift our recruiting towards more full-price, less price-sensitive, higher-basket-size new customers.”

Investors have noticed the split as well.

The stock charts of the companies behind the two Ralphs also resemble a K. Shares of Ralph Lauren have jumped 37% in the last six months, while Kroger shares have fallen 13%.

To attract increasingly discerning consumers, Kroger has offered a precooked holiday meal for eight of turkey or ham, stuffing, green bean casserole, sweet potatoes, mashed potatoes, cranberry and gravy for about $11 a person.

“Stretch your holiday dollars!” said the company’s weekly newspaper advertisement.

Advertisement
Signs advertising low prices are posted at Ralphs.

Signs advertising low prices are posted at Ralphs.

(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

In the Ralph Lauren on Rodeo Drive, sunglasses and polo shirts were displayed without discounts. Twinkling lights adorned trees in the store’s entryway and employees offered shoppers free cookies for the holidays.

Ralph Lauren and other luxury stores are taking the opposite approach to retailers selling basics to the middle class.

They are boosting profits from sales of full-priced items. Stores that cater to high-end customers don’t offer promotions as frequently, Klowden of the Milken Institute said.

Advertisement

“When the luxury stores are having sales, that’s usually a larger structural symptom of how they’re doing,” he said. “They don’t need to be having sales right now.”

Jerry Nickelsburg, faculty director of the UCLA Anderson Forecast, said upper-income earners are less affected by inflation that has driven up the price of everyday goods, and are less likely to hunt for bargains.

“The low end of the income distribution is being squeezed by inflation and is consuming less,” he said. “The upper end of the income distribution has increasing wealth and increasing income, and so they are less affected, if affected at all.”

The Andersons on Rodeo Drive also picked up presents at Gucci and Dior.

“We’re spending around the same as last year,” John Anderson said.

Advertisement

At Ralphs, Beverly Grove resident Mel, who didn’t want to share her last name, said the grocery store needs to go further for its consumers.

“I am 100% trying to spend less this year,” she said.

Continue Reading

Business

Instacart ends AI pricing test that charged shoppers different prices for the same items

Published

on

Instacart ends AI pricing test that charged shoppers different prices for the same items

Instacart will stop using artificial intelligence to experiment with product pricing after a report showed that customers on the platform were paying different prices for the same items.

The report, published this month by Consumer Reports and Groundwork Collaborative, found that Instacart sometimes offered as many as five different prices for the same item at the same store and on the same day.

In a blog post Monday, Instacart said it was ending the practice effective immediately.

“We understand that the tests we ran with a small number of retail partners that resulted in different prices for the same item at the same store missed the mark for some customers,” the company said. “At a time when families are working exceptionally hard to stretch every grocery dollar, those tests raised concerns.”

Shoppers purchasing the same items from the same store on the same day will now see identical prices, the blog post said.

Advertisement

Instacart’s retail partners will still set product prices and may charge different prices across stores.

The report, which followed more than 400 shoppers in four cities, found that the average difference between the highest and lowest prices for the same item was 13%. Some participants in the study saw prices that were 23% higher than those offered to other shoppers.

At a Safeway supermarket in Washington, D.C., a dozen Lucerne eggs sold for $3.99, $4.28, $4.59, $4.69 and $4.79 on Instacart, depending on the shopper, the study showed.

At a Safeway in Seattle, a box of 10 Clif Chocolate Chip Energy bars sold for $19.43, $19.99 and $21.99 on Instacart.

The study found that an individual shopper on Instacart could theoretically spend up to $1,200 more on groceries in one year if they had to deal with the price differences observed in the pricing experiments.

Advertisement

The price experimentation was part of a program that Instacart advertised to retailers as a way to maximize revenue.

Instacart probably began adjusting prices in 2022, when the platform acquired the artificial intelligence company Eversight, whose software powers the experiments.

Instacart claimed that the Eversight experimentation would be negligible to consumers but could increase store revenue by up to 3%.

“Advances in AI enable experiments to be automatically designed, deployed, and evaluated, making it possible to rapidly test and analyze millions of price permutations across your physical and digital store network,” Instacart marketing materials said online.

The company said the price chranges were not dynamic pricing, the practice used by airlines and ride-hailing services to charge more when demand surges.
The price changes also were not based on shoppers’ personal information such as income, the company said.

Advertisement

“American grocery shoppers aren’t guinea pigs, and they should be able to expect a fair price when they’re shopping,” Lindsey Owens, executive director of Groundwork Collaborative, said in an interview this month.

Shares of Instacart fell 2% on Monday, closing at $45.02.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending