Contexto Social

PUNTO 1

The problem in this case is that both companies Mattel and MGA entreteiment spent a lot of money to demonstrate in the court who owned the rights of the Bratz doll losing a lot of money onlawyers, testing and research.

The companies neglected the business, instead of focusing on how to take advantage of competitors and innovate ideas to sell and excel in the competitive market.
thecourt case have injured directly the financial statements of the companies that invested millions of dollars to prove who was right.
Barbie has been losing much of its consumers since Bratz dolls cameto market.

Total sales of Barbie fell worldwide, down 6% from April to June, while the company's net earnings fell 48% to just $ 11.8 million.

Only U.S. Barbie sales fell 21%.
The point is thatBratz dolls have been sold since its introduction more than 150 million units, generating $ 500 million annually and have come to oust Barbie dolls on more than one occasion.

Lawyers for Mattel Inc.filed an appeal of the decision of a judge who forces them to pay more than $ 309 million to the toymaker MGA Entertainment Inc. in the fight over ownership of its popular line of Bratz dolls. Thisinformation show us how the Mattel company was affected no only in the market place or in competitive market but also in the capital investement of the company.

The judge also awarded MGA and CEO IsaacLarian over 137 million for violations of copyright, violation of contract and other business. And MGA entreteiment in this case the company was less affected in terms of the judge's decision, becausethey receive a monetary compensation.

CONCLUSION DE LIZETH
So instead of bleeding money in courts, the companies would be better off spending every dime on market research, as the real winner of thedoll-vs.-doll battle will be decided by their customers. The consumers who are buying dolls don't know anything about a lawsuit. Ninety-nine percent don't know or don't care. They just want to buy the...