UlasanAnime.com – Robert Napton’s ANNCast is presented as a noteworthy episode, primarily due to its substantial two-and-a-half-hour runtime. The podcast delves into Napton’s experiences during the comic boom of the early 1990s, specifically his work as a writer for Image Comics. It also features anecdotes from his time at Nippon Books and US Rendition, serving as a final tribute to Bandai Entertainment USA.
The episode stands out for mentioning “Anime Expo 2007” and “Yutaka Yamamoto,” and notably, it dedicates significant discussion to Turn-A Gundam, a departure from typical ANNCast topics. The author finds the podcast compelling due to Napton’s narrative approach, which aligns with the author’s preference for structured storytelling.
For those who prefer a concise overview rather than listening to the full podcast, detailed notes are available on AODVD and Fandompost, courtesy of WTK. However, the author intends to offer a personal interpretation and “distortions” of the content, likening it to a “crappy dubstep remix.” While acknowledging the fascinating aspects of Napton’s career and discussions about manga, the author admits these are somewhat tangential to the main points.
A more critical element highlighted is an errata posted by Napton in the ANN forums, which elaborates on the core issue raised by Quarkboy. The author aims to reconstruct Napton’s perspective on the closure of Bandai Entertainment USA.
From Napton’s viewpoint, the shutdown of Bandai Entertainment USA was a consequence of a strategic restructuring decision made by Bandai in Japan. He asserts that Bandai Entertainment USA was operating successfully and sustainably, implying that the decision to close it was unexpected and abrupt. The author also notes that following the merger with Namco, Bandai operated as a conglomerate of largely independent business units. Bandai Entertainment USA, as a distinct unit, was performing well, with titles like K-ON! demonstrating strong performance.
The overarching reason for the closure, as explained in a quote from within Bandai “corporate” in Japan, was the implementation of a unified international strategy. This strategy aimed to consolidate Bandai’s global audiovisual operations and shift focus towards manufacturing physical products in Japan for international sales.
I’ve heard things here in Japan from within Bandai “corporate” as to the reasoning for the shutting of Bandai Entertainment…
The reason why it seems so senseless is because Robert is only considering the situation in the US market, as if Bandai in Japan made the decision in a vacuum. The decision to shutdown Bandai Ent. was part of an overall restructuring that affected all parts of Bandai Group’s audio visual units, within and outside of Japan.
The new overall philosophy is that Bandai should make physical products in Japan, and sell them overseas.
You remember how you said it was so silly for Bandai Ent. to have to pay Japan (bandai visual or sunrise) to license the shows? It seemed silly to them too, especially when the market had shrunk so much. Why should Bandai have a licensing and sales unit in the US but not everywhere else in the world, for example?
Their new strategy is to treat videogram sales more like gundam kits, and export Japanese made products to the world. For broadcast and internet license to local companies, and for sales export your Japanese products.
In this new strategy it didn’t make sense to keep a sub company like Bandai Entertainment around. In fact having it license things in the US just made it harder to control a global marketing strategy from HQ. Bandai Group wants to treat the global market as much as possible as a single entity.
Napton later provided an errata to his podcast, where he emphasized the importance of a “ground effort” for the North American anime market, drawing an analogy to President Obama’s re-election campaign. He argued that simply manufacturing discs in Japan with subtitles and dubs and importing them is insufficient without local representation and advocacy.
As for the future, after reading some of the comments, I’d like to make the analogy that President Obama was re-elected because his campaign did a better job on the GROUND in the battleground states. More people knocking on more doors. The R1 US anime market cannot be salvaged without a dedicated ground effort, which cannot be accomplished by manufacturing discs in Japan with subs and dubs and importing them long distance with no one here speaking on their behalf. Aniplex is succeeding at the moment because they have a US based group heading up their North American effort. I would hope in some form or fashion, Bandai Japan realizes that this is the best strategy for the US market because I believe it’s the only way to really accomplish the goal of selling more DVD and Blu-ray product in the R1 market, which is the understandable goal of any company.
The author concurs with Napton’s assessment, drawing a parallel to their previous thoughts on the Daisuki service. The internet’s ability to provide subtitled Japanese releases is valuable, but it doesn’t replace the “footprint” that Bandai Entertainment USA had in North America. This footprint encompassed physical presence, convention engagement, public relations, retail stores, and manga lines, all of which hold a certain value that needs to be assessed by both corporations and consumers.
This discussion also touches upon why titles like K-ON! might falter in marketing when licenses change hands. These are complex issues that often go unnoticed by the average consumer. In the context of narratives where “American fans party, don’t pay,” Napton’s “Star Blazer mountain” narrative highlights the critical failure point of middlemen. The author suggests that while fan reactions to content like Turn-A Gundam are expected, expecting fans to understand the disconnect between Japanese licensors and US market realities is unreasonable, as this understanding is the essence of the localization business.
You might also be interested in : Content Arbitrage Daisuki
Ultimately, the author views this not as a story of good versus bad decisions, but as an illustration of how the industry is evolving. Napton, who was drawn to anime by Star Blazer, is contrasted with newer figures like EJ, whose motivations as a fan versus a professional are questioned. Napton’s mention of new marketing professionals and Japanese industry figures like Henry Goto is noted. The author expresses hope that these transitions will lead to fewer stranded licenses and fewer layoffs.
Beyond the primary discussion, the author highlights other notable points from the podcast that make it worth listening to, acknowledging that while not a regular podcast listener, some ANNCasts, like this one, offer significant value.
Napton reported that FLAG sold out at A-kon, speculating that an autographing tie-in might have been the reason. Despite FLAG‘s general underperformance, its success in Texas is noted as a curiosity.
The mention of Anime Expo 2007 evokes a shared sentiment among fellow “seiwota chasers” that it was a poorly managed convention. While Napton did not elaborate, the author implies that understanding the situation requires direct experience at AX, observing the interactions between marketing directors and fans in autograph lines.
Yutaka Yamamoto (Yamakan) was also name-dropped, with his controversial statements to 2ch users being referenced. The idea of dubbing The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya‘s Endless Eight arc with different voice actors and role-switching was mentioned as an internal concept that did not materialize.
Napton’s point about the Cowboy Bebop dub and the actors’ connection to the early days of R1 anime resonated with the author, who, despite not closely following dub actors, is indirectly aware of that scene.
A considerable discussion revolved around Bandai Visual, where the issues seemed to stem from execution rather than the concept itself. While the strength of the titles was an apparent concern from the outset, distribution problems likely became evident later. The author wonders about Loy’s involvement in this venture.
The evolving image of Bandai Entertainment is also explored. The author suggests that this change might be intertwined with the evolution of anime itself, possibly driven by the licensing of more diverse titles. While Bandai always licensed shows like FLAG, Gundam series, and Bones productions, a shift may have occurred when Bones began experimenting with different styles. The mention of Soul Eater and Fullmetal Alchemist (both series) as embodying the Bandai Entertainment title feel is noted. The question is posed whether this image change is partly due to licensing pressures stemming from a narrow focus in a widening field. Lucky Star is identified as a potential turning point for the company.
In essence, the podcast is described not just as a factual account, but as a comprehensive survey of the 1990s and 2000s era from the perspective of someone who was both an insider and an observer. The author concludes that the podcast offers particularly interesting insights for those who followed anime news during that period.
