i'm back from eating with the fam...

[rockerchic88]

9 minutes ago, satoori said:

A diversified portfolio can be nice...for some..

 Do you think some companies who are not good at managing GGs should stick to just managing BGs?

 

How do you know? How do you know the GGs are making ZERO money even if you consider them ‘flops’. Even if they are 1% profitable, that’s enough reason to have them. This is true for literally anything btw. Any business venture. 
 

And regardless of GG or BG if they are not profitable don’t they get disband? So many mid tire groups have disband. 

[satoori]

Just now, haikyuuboo said:

How do you know? How do you know the GGs are making ZERO money even if you consider them ‘flops’. Even if they are 1% profitable, that’s enough reason to have them. This is true for literally anything btw. Any business venture. 
 

And regardless of GG or BG if they are not profitable don’t they get disband? So many mid tire groups have disband. 

So you feel a company not good at managing GGs should continue to do so...

Thanks for your response.

[rockerchic88]

5 minutes ago, satoori said:

So you feel a company not good at managing GGs should continue to do so...

Thanks for your response.

That was neither your question nor my answer. 

There are companies that can’t manage BGs or GGs. So again your thread before and now is pointless and you literally have no discussion point what so ever. 

[satoori]

my question:

20 minutes ago, satoori said:

 Do you think some companies who are not good at managing GGs should stick to just managing BGs?

your answer:

8 minutes ago, haikyuuboo said:

Even if they are 1% profitable, that’s enough reason to have them. 

 

Just now, haikyuuboo said:

That was neither your question nor my answer. 

 

If a group is making only 1%, that's not good management.

Therefore you feel company should continue their bad management?

If I am interrupting your answer wrong then give a more direct answer. I don't need all the extra. I asked one question.

[rockerchic88]

9 minutes ago, satoori said:

my question:

your answer:

 

If a group is making only 1%, that's not good management.

Therefore you feel company should continue their bad management?

If I am interrupting your answer wrong then give a more direct answer. I don't need all the extra. I asked one question.

Stop being obtuse. 

what I want to point out is nothing you said is specific to GGs. Your discussion is about GG in PARTICULAR and what I’m pointing out is in NO PART OF YOUR discussion is any problem you have mentioned specific to GGs. 
If a group is not profitable they will disband. Doesn’t matter if it’s GG or BG 

If a group is badly managed it can be a BG or GG. 

a badly managed group making 1% profit can be kept regardless of whether it’s a GG or BG. Lord knows there are a tone of Mediocre  BG out there. 
 

Your discussion from the beginning had no point. 
So now your changed into something it’s not. You singled out GG and I’m pointing out that’s stupid. That’s my answer to your question. That your question was stupid and pointless. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by haikyuuboo

[satoori]

4 minutes ago, haikyuuboo said:

Stop being obtuse. 

what I want to point out is nothing you said is specific to GGs. Your discussion is about GG in PARTICULAR and what I’m pointing out is in NO PART OF YOUR discussion is any problem you have mentioned specific to GGs. 
If a group is not profitable they will disband. Doesn’t matter if it’s GG or BG 

If a group is badly managed it can be a BG or GG. 

a badly managed group making 1% profit can be kept regardless of whether it’s a GG or BG. Lord knows there are a tone of Mediocre  BG out there. 
 

Your discussion from the beginning had no point. 
So now your changed into something it’s not. You singled out GG and I’m pointing out that’s stupid. That’s my answer to your question. That your question was stupid and pointless. 

Yes, this topic is about girl groups. If someone wants to make the same one about boy groups, go for it!

Anyways - Just answer the question

You're not tho. I figure you wouldn't. If you gave me a direct answer (yes or no), then that would put you in a odd situation, right

My point has been made. Good day~

Edited November 18, 2019 by satoori

[miachu]

popular female idols are largely more relevant than male idols tho........ thinking about "it girls" of the past - yoona, suzy, iu, taeyeon, irene, hwasa, krystal, etc etc.... what were the male equivalents? kang daniel is rare in that there really was not an it boy for years before he came long (if anything, it boys tended to be actors, not idols).

yeah, miss A were never a primary breadwinner for jyp but suzy was essentially the face of JYP in the gap between wonder girls and twice. apart from gdragon from YG, which other individual male idols could become the public "face" of their agencies?

bts jimin is popular enough to be an it boy but he still doesn't have the individual domestic cultural saturation as someone like hwasa (largely because bighit doesn't promote anyone from bts as a solo so jimin never makes individual tv appearances but i hope you get my point).  imo agencies debut girl groups in the hope that one or two of them will hit it big - much more likely than someone from a boy group, even if the boy group overall is more profitable than the girl group.

[rockerchic88]

10 minutes ago, satoori said:

Yes, this topic is about girl groups. If someone wants to make the same one about boy groups, go for it!

Anyways - Just answer the question

You're not tho. I figure you wouldn't. If you gave me a direct answer (yes or no), then that would put you in a odd situation, right

My point has been made. Good day~

You just got owned and once again proved the stupidity of your question. 

Now you’re backtracking and saying the same question can be asked for BGs. 
You specifically asking a question about a gender implies that the question has special significance to the gender. When clearly this topic does not. 
 

give it up satoori please don’t embarrass yourself further I feel bad for you. 

Edited November 18, 2019 by haikyuuboo

[satoori]

15 minutes ago, miachu said:

popular female idols are largely more relevant than male idols tho........ thinking about "it girls" of the past - yoona, suzy, iu, taeyeon, irene, hwasa, krystal, etc etc.... what were the male equivalents? kang daniel is rare in that there really was not an it boy for years before he came long (if anything, it boys tended to be actors, not idols).

yeah, miss A were never a primary breadwinner for jyp but suzy was essentially the face of JYP in the gap between wonder girls and twice. apart from gdragon from YG, which other individual male idols could become the public "face" of their agencies?

bts jimin is popular enough to be an it boy but he still doesn't have the individual domestic cultural saturation as someone like hwasa (largely because bighit doesn't promote anyone from bts as a solo so jimin never makes individual tv appearances but i hope you get my point).  imo agencies debut girl groups in the hope that one or two of them will hit it big - much more likely than someone from a boy group, even if the boy group overall is more profitable than the girl group.

My initial question isn't about the minority of successful it girls, it's about girl groups overall. 

However I completely agree, it girls have always had more success with the general public then it boys. They still do.

As you said, Jimin isn't a good comparison or worth mentioning. Because unlike other companies with it girls and boys, Bighit isn't pushing or using Jimin. So we'll never know how big he could of got. Eventually he'll probably be replaced with the next it boy before Bighit even start to care about individual activities in Korea/general public

You make a good point. Maybe some companies debut girl group in hope one or two members will hit big. It's risky. But worth it if they succeed.

So financially there might not be a huge purpose for the entire girl group, instead the purpose is for one or two members(?)

 

14 minutes ago, haikyuuboo said:

You just got owned and once again proved the stupidity of your question. 

Now you’re backtracking and saying the same question can be asked for BGs. 
You specifically asking a question about a gender implies that the question has special significance to the gender. When clearly this topic does not. 
 

give it up satoori please don’t embarrass yourself further I feel bad for you. 

so you're not going to answer the question directly. ok, bye

Edited November 18, 2019 by satoori

[Ynez the Splendid]

I will actually try to answer your question, satoori. This is what I think the purpose for girl groups are. But not from the viewpoint of a consumer.

 

Q: What is the purpose of girl groups currently?

A: I think the purpose of girl groups (from the company's view) nowadays is to bring attention to the company itself and to hook, not male fans, but female fans. A lot of women in Korea follow/listen to GG's. So that's the true demographic. Female fans are loyal af and will buy a lot of stuff in support of their faves. 

Another purpose is brand recognition. I know CFs were mentioned earlier, but I truly believe there are brands that would prefer a feminine touch. Whether it be jewelry, makeup, fashion, etc. Companies want to sell the face of their girls for the money of female fans and female gp. Females will more likely buy a luxury purse if they saw xxx wearing it at a fashion show. Just like we do in the west. Watch and emulate.

Also the company's pride. They want to show off their girls like trophies. But later get bored of their own group! Like a person who brings home a puppy but doesn't expect to look after them. Many ggs have fallen by the wayside because of this lack of commitment.

The problem: if companies as a whole start treating ggs like bgs then you'll see a bigger profit. They need to be loyal to their group and earnest in regular promotion and content. And I don't mean half hearted comebacks with little money or thought put in. But well planned and executed comebacks and concepts centered around good music.

Currently there are a few known companies that are doing this and it's paying off. These girl groups have gone further in their career than their peers, so it can be done. Because they may have a slow year in digitals or charting doesn't mean their success is over. GG's success has always been measured differently. 

Companies are thinking in kinda outdated ways. Trusting in the largely believed saying that ggs are more popular with the public. With that belief they start slacking after the first few comebacks, thinking the gp will support their group regardless of what they throw out.

They're thinking "if we can get the gp then we're good", but that's not good enough now. The music aspect has to be seriously considered. Also market saturation. Another issue is that many companies don't think their girls are physically, mentally and emotionally capable of being somewhat creatively autonomous. Which hobbles them and the group.

Honestly, I think a lot of these agencies don't know what to do with their girls. They make these kids sign a 5 year contract without having a 5 year plan. There is a purpose for GG's, they just need to be invested in long term to reap the benefits.

[satoori]

48 minutes ago, Ynez the Splendid said:

I will actually try to answer your question, satoori. This is what I think the purpose for girl groups are. But not from the viewpoint of a consumer.

 

Q: What is the purpose of girl groups currently?

A: I think the purpose of girl groups (from the company's view) nowadays is to bring attention to the company itself and to hook, not male fans, but female fans. A lot of women in Korea follow/listen to GG's. So that's the true demographic. Female fans are loyal af and will buy a lot of stuff in support of their faves. 

Another purpose is brand recognition. I know CFs were mentioned earlier, but I truly believe there are brands that would prefer a feminine touch. Whether it be jewelry, makeup, fashion, etc. Companies want to sell the face of their girls for the money of female fans and female gp. Females will more likely buy a luxury purse if they saw xxx wearing it at a fashion show. Just like we do in the west. Watch and emulate.

Also the company's pride. They want to show off their girls like trophies. But later get bored of their own group! Like a person who brings home a puppy but doesn't expect to look after them. Many ggs have fallen by the wayside because of this lack of commitment.

The problem: if companies as a whole start treating ggs like bgs then you'll see a bigger profit. They need to be loyal to their group and earnest in regular promotion and content. And I don't mean half hearted comebacks with little money or thought put in. But well planned and executed comebacks and concepts centered around good music.

Currently there are a few known companies that are doing this and it's paying off. These girl groups have gone further in their career than their peers, so it can be done. Because they may have a slow year in digitals or charting doesn't mean their success is over. GG's success has always been measured differently. 

Companies are thinking in kinda outdated ways. Trusting in the largely believed saying that ggs are more popular with the public. With that belief they start slacking after the first few comebacks, thinking the gp will support their group regardless of what they throw out.

They're thinking "if we can get the gp then we're good", but that's not good enough now. The music aspect has to be seriously considered. Also market saturation. Another issue is that many companies don't think their girls are physically, mentally and emotionally capable of being somewhat creatively autonomous. Which hobbles them and the group.

Honestly, I think a lot of these agencies don't know what to do with their girls. They make these kids sign a 5 year contract without having a 5 year plan. There is a purpose for GG's, they just need to be invested in long term to reap the benefits.

Interesting view point about fans. Many people tend to say girl groups are to hook male fans. A demographics boy groups haven't always been popular with. Yes, it's known that female fans are loyal af - which why bog group fandoms are usually described as so.

Yes, as mentioned in the discussion there are brands that only want female idols. Male groups are also able to get CFs and endorsements too. So the money in this general area can be made by both boy and girl groups. Also would like to point out, boy groups are endorsing with more make up companies..even lipstick nowadays..is due these commercial companies realizing boy group fandoms are loyal af and many of their fans are female. A make up company having a huge boy group fandom supporting them is very beneficial to their brand reputation. VT Cosmetics, Nature Republic are just a few that have benefited greatly due to male idols. I actually think boy groups could endorse more female products, like purses and etc, and do absolutely fine. However all of Korea isn't ready for that yet lol

Women as trophies. Something men have done for ages. You're right, and then they push them to the side like nothings.

Everything else you said, about the problem and companies way of thinking is outdated, I strongly agree! Thank you!

[Ynez the Splendid]

@satoori

No problem! We're on a forum to discuss, after all!