Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: why does Kimberly Clark only stay with Disney themes?

  1. #1

    Default why does Kimberly Clark only stay with Disney themes?

    With the recent change in the pull ups theme to yet another Disney theme I suddenly started wondering why, and how long have they been doing this? I don't know if the muppet babies were owned by Disney when I was little but I wore their diapers (I thought they were on the pull ups too but I don't think they were?) and I think Disney themed diapers from the 80s.I remember the pull-ups of my time were not licensed like now but they had neat sets with animals doing different things and depending upon the gender had pink or blue bands. I wish pull ups (end even goodnites since the smalls are Disney related) would either be generic or an exact replica of the early pull ups. I'm sure someone has some in their collection.

  2. #2

    Default

    It probably all boils down to money. Either Disney pays to have their characters on the products, or Kimberly-Clark pays Disney to use them, I don't know, but going with Disney probably offers the best deal. Both companies likely agree to a licensing contract where Kimberly-Clark has to put the characters on their products. Plus Disney characters are popular with kids, which is another incentive to use them on the Pull-Ups.

    And no, the Muppets were not always owned by Disney.

  3. #3

  4. #4

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by littlelodgewrecker View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/bu...anted=all&_r=0
    the above link has an interesting read that may answer some of the questions raised by the OP.....
    Wow nice find. That was a good news read there. I remember seeing 365 photo studios at a mall in California. But I can't remember which mall it was. Nice Find!

  5. #5

    Default

    Disney owned Characters are very popular
    so I'm sure it's a win win for both companies
    also if they didn't I'm P&G would like to be able to use the Disney characters on their products like they did in the past

  6. #6

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by KimbaStarshine View Post
    And no, the Muppets were not always owned by Disney.
    I know that's hat was the case but I was wondering if they were by the time they were put on diapers.



    Quote Originally Posted by wetatnight View Post
    I'm P&G would like to be able to use the Disney characters on their products like they did in the past
    I had no idea they did that. does anybody have any pictures?



    Quote Originally Posted by littlelodgewrecker View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/bu...anted=all&_r=0
    the above link has an interesting read that may answer some of the questions raised by the OP.....
    that was a neat link! I hope they have Stitch and Sulley themed stuff!

  8. #8

    Default

    Probably some kind of cross-promotional partnership. Disney's core demographic is still on the younger side, so it makes business and financial sense to advertise their stuff on diapers in exchange for commercial airtime for P&G products.

    That said: Does anyone else get a macabre sense of ironic satisfaction knowing that Disney mascots are being soiled by millions of children every day?

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by Experiment626 View Post
    I know that's hat was the case but I was wondering if they were by the time they were put on diapers.

    I had no idea they did that. does anybody have any pictures?

    that was a neat link! I hope they have Stitch and Sulley themed stuff!
    Disney bought the Muppets in 2004, so no.

  10. #10

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by PaddedPat View Post
    That said: Does anyone else get a macabre sense of ironic satisfaction knowing that Disney mascots are being soiled by millions of children every day?
    sort of, but such joviality is hidden beneath a sickening at the mind-meddling and exploitation of children (call me an old fart, if you will).
    'funny' how people wince at the idea of someone molesting their children's bodies, but not their minds, without realizing that a touching of one is a touching of both.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 29-Oct-2012, 05:54
  2. Working for Kimberly Clark starting Oct. 1st
    By EmoCowMoo in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 26-Sep-2012, 00:47
  3. I asked Kimberly Clark why Depends suck
    By Angelbaby in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 02-Apr-2012, 08:21
  4. Hi, I'm Kimberly & I'm new here
    By Cowgirl in forum Greetings / Introductions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 17-Aug-2009, 16:22
  5. Great news story about Kimberly Clark's R&D process...
    By shenanigans404 in forum Diaper Talk
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-Oct-2008, 22:24

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.