A YANKEE IN BLE COURT

A YANKEE IN BLE COURT

Our very own Todd Lustgarten of Westbridge Consulting and Toys & Licensing shares his thoughts on attending Brand Licensing Europe in London for the first time

Across the pond, and right at home.

After years in licensing, I finally made my first trip to Brand Licensing Europe. I arrived with a clear business agenda, a full calendar, and plenty of curiosity about how BLE would compare with the shows I know closer to home.

I came back impressed by the organization, the turnout, and the quality of both exhibitors and attendees. Above all, I appreciated the seriousness of the people who were there. The conversations had purpose, and there was a clear interest in exploring opportunities and moving business forward.

But first, a little about London.

Getting to the venue required some planning, and the location was a bit inconvenient. Still, I loved riding the Tube and interacting with Londoners. Navigating a city alongside the people who live and work there adds something to a trip that you simply don’t get from the back seat of a taxi.

London’s energy, neighborhoods, and everyday encounters made the experience especially enjoyable. I went for the meetings, but the city was a big part of what made me want to return.

Taking Westbridge abroad

My primary reason for attending was to explore international opportunities for key Westbridge clients and properties, including Carlos Santana, Sunkist, Boast apparel, DinkyBalls, Pierce Archives, and Santa Monica Beach Club.

Each offers something distinct: musical heritage, citrus and sunshine, tennis heritage, pickleball personality, an extraordinary visual archive, or California beach culture. BLE provided an opportunity to see how those qualities might connect with partners and consumers in different markets.

Finding the right fit requires listening as much as pitching. Someone who knows a territory can quickly help you understand where a concept resonates, where it needs refinement, and which opportunities warrant further attention.

Those conversations are a big part of the value of attending. They give you perspectives that are difficult to develop through research and email alone.

BLE also offered opportunities to build connections for Toys & Licensing, the consultancy I work on with Steve Reece. The toy industry, licensing, product development, and manufacturing are all closely connected, and bringing the right people into the conversation early can help turn a promising concept into a workable business.

Building relationships that travel

Another important purpose of the trip was spending time with the international partner network Westbridge has been developing since Licensing Expo 2026.

Meeting with partners such as Ventura Brand Licensing, Charlie Day’s Sharpe Company, and The Sunflowers Licensing Group allowed us to strengthen relationships and talk through opportunities together.

Email and video calls keep business moving, but sitting across from someone gives you a clearer understanding of their priorities, working style, and expectations. It also builds the rapport that makes the next conversation easier.

For Westbridge, those relationships are central to international growth. Local knowledge matters, as does having partners who understand our properties and can identify the right opportunities in their markets.

Beyond the logo

One of my strongest takeaways from BLE was the emphasis on lifestyle programs and thoughtful brand collaborations.

The most interesting concepts drew on a brand’s history, personality, and cultural relevance to create products and collections with a clear point of view. They gave consumers a reason to connect beyond recognition of a familiar logo.

That approach resonates with how we think about our own portfolio. Beach culture, tennis heritage, and original archival artwork all offer rich material for product development. The opportunity is to translate those qualities into something consumers want to bring into their lives.

The educational programming added useful context to those conversations. Sessions at the Networking Hub and Licensing University offered opportunities to consider brand development, collaboration, and emerging business possibilities alongside the meetings taking place throughout the show.

Credit where it’s due

The BLE organizing team deserves recognition for an event that felt well planned and productive.

From the advance communications and meeting portal to matchmaking and the availability of meeting spaces, the practical details helped me make good use of my time.

Maura Regan and her team at Licensing International also deserve credit for their contributions to the education, connections, and sense of community that make these gatherings valuable.

Now comes the follow-up

I left London with new contacts, stronger relationships, and a clearer view of where Westbridge can grow internationally.

Now comes the work of continuing those conversations, evaluating opportunities, and turning introductions into productive partnerships.

My first BLE reinforced something I’ve learned throughout my career: showing up, listening, and spending time with the right people still matter enormously in this business.

As Arnold says, “I’ll be back.”

When Should a Toy Company Walk Away From a Licensing Deal?

When Should a Toy Company Walk Away From a Licensing Deal?

Licensing can be one of the fastest ways for a toy company to grow its business, but not every attractive brand makes for an attractive commercial opportunity. Knowing when to walk away from a licensing negotiation can be just as important as knowing how to secure a deal in the first place.

The Excitement of Chasing a Big License

There is something undeniably exciting about the prospect of securing a major toy licensing deal. Whether it involves a blockbuster movie franchise, a hugely popular television series, a successful video game or a rapidly emerging children's entertainment brand, the opportunity to put a recognised property on your products can appear to offer a shortcut to commercial success.

For toy companies, the appeal is obvious. A well-established entertainment property can deliver instant consumer recognition, provide a compelling story for retail buyers and potentially generate demand that would take years to build with an entirely new brand. In a competitive toy market, where securing shelf space and attracting consumer attention are constant challenges, these benefits can be enormously valuable.

However, the excitement of pursuing a desirable license can sometimes overwhelm commercial common sense. Toy companies can become so focused on winning the rights to a particular property that they lose sight of whether the deal actually makes financial or operational sense.

The reality is that some licensing opportunities are simply not worth pursuing, regardless of how famous the brand might be. Worse still, an unsuitable licensing agreement can tie up valuable capital, consume management resources and leave a toy business carrying substantial losses long after the initial excitement has disappeared.

So, when should a toy company recognise that a licensing opportunity is no longer worth pursuing and have the confidence to walk away?

1. When the Minimum Guarantee Is Based on Optimism Rather Than Reality

One of the most obvious warning signs in a licensing negotiation is a minimum guarantee that bears little relationship to realistic sales expectations.

Minimum guarantees are a normal part of toy licensing. Licensors understandably want some assurance that their intellectual property will generate revenue, particularly if they are granting exclusive rights that prevent other manufacturers from operating in the same product category.

However, there is a significant difference between making a sensible commercial commitment and taking a potentially damaging gamble.

Imagine a toy company evaluating a licensing opportunity that it believes could realistically generate £1 million in wholesale sales over the agreement period. At an illustrative royalty rate of 10%, that would produce £100,000 in royalties. If the licensor insists on a £250,000 minimum guarantee, the manufacturer is effectively committing to royalty payments equivalent to £2.5 million in qualifying sales, assuming the same royalty base.

Unless there is a credible reason to believe that substantially higher sales are achievable, this creates a considerable financial risk.

Of course, licensing negotiations involve differing commercial expectations. Licensors naturally want to maximise the value of their properties, while manufacturers need to protect profitability. A gap between initial positions is perfectly normal. The problem arises when the licensor refuses to recognise realistic market conditions, retailer feedback or the economics of the proposed product range.

If the financial success of a licensing deal depends on everything going perfectly, there is a strong argument that the deal is simply too risky.

2. When the Royalty Structure Destroys Your Profit Margin

Even if the minimum guarantee is manageable, the royalty percentage itself can make a proposed licensing arrangement commercially unattractive.

Toy companies operate in a business where margins are frequently squeezed from several directions. Manufacturing costs, freight, import duties, product testing, warehousing, sales commissions, retailer promotional allowances and other expenses all need to be accounted for before calculating genuine profitability. Adding a royalty payment to this cost structure can dramatically change the economics of a product.

For example, a toy manufacturer might have a product that generates a reasonable profit margin when sold under its own brand. Applying a licensing royalty could substantially reduce that margin, while additional requirements for character artwork, special packaging, product approvals and promotional activity push costs even higher.

The manufacturer might initially assume that the popularity of the licensed brand will allow the product to command a higher selling price. Sometimes this is absolutely true, but it is by no means guaranteed.

Retailers are acutely aware of consumer price sensitivity, and many will resist significantly higher retail prices simply because a product carries a famous entertainment brand.

The crucial calculation is therefore not whether the licensed product will sell more units than an equivalent unlicensed product, but whether it will generate sufficient additional profit to justify the extra costs and risks. If a licensing deal generates impressive sales figures but little meaningful profit, the manufacturer may find itself working extremely hard for a disappointing return.

3. When Retailers Are Not Nearly as Excited as the Licensor

Perhaps one of the most important commercial warning signs is a significant mismatch between the licensor's expectations and the enthusiasm of major retailers. Licensors naturally tend to be optimistic about their properties. They may present impressive viewing figures, social media engagement, movie box-office forecasts or brand awareness research to demonstrate the strength of consumer demand. These statistics can be valuable, but they do not necessarily translate into retail demand for toys.

There are countless examples of entertainment properties that have attracted substantial audiences without generating proportionately successful toy merchandise programmes. A hugely popular television show might appeal to an audience that has limited interest in buying physical toys, while a successful digital property might struggle to translate its appeal into compelling products.

Before making major financial commitments, manufacturers should seek meaningful feedback from their retail customers. Are buyers genuinely enthusiastic about the property? Do they see an obvious opportunity for the proposed products? Are they prepared to allocate shelf space, or are they merely expressing polite interest?

There is a world of difference between a retailer saying that a particular license looks interesting and that retailer being prepared to commit to a meaningful purchase programme. If the licensor expects a substantial financial guarantee but the manufacturer cannot establish credible retail demand, alarm bells should be ringing.

4. When the Licensor Wants Too Much Control Over Product Development

Brand protection is an entirely legitimate concern for licensors. Intellectual property owners need to ensure that licensed products reflect their brand values, maintain appropriate quality standards and do not damage the reputation of the underlying property.

However, there is a point at which reasonable brand protection can become excessive operational interference.

Some licensors impose complicated approval processes involving multiple departments, extensive design revisions and lengthy decision-making periods. Product concepts, packaging artwork, promotional materials and even relatively minor alterations may require formal approval. For a toy manufacturer operating within tight seasonal deadlines, these processes can become a serious problem.

Imagine developing a range intended for Christmas retail distribution, only to discover that essential product approvals are taking several months longer than anticipated. The resulting delays could prevent the manufacturer from meeting retailer delivery windows, leaving the business with expensive inventory that cannot be sold at the intended time.

This risk becomes particularly concerning when the licensor has extensive approval rights but accepts little responsibility for the commercial consequences of delayed decisions.

Before signing, manufacturers should establish how the approval process will work in practice, who has decision-making authority and what turnaround times can reasonably be expected.

If the licensor cannot provide a credible approval process compatible with the manufacturer's development and production schedule, the opportunity deserves serious reconsideration.

5. When the License Has Limited Time Left to Generate Sales

Timing is absolutely critical in toy licensing, particularly when dealing with entertainment properties linked to movie releases, television launches or other events that create a concentrated period of consumer interest.

A license might appear incredibly attractive when an entertainment property is approaching the height of its popularity, but the commercial opportunity could be considerably smaller by the time products actually reach retail shelves.

Toy product development, safety testing, tooling, production and international shipping can all take significant amounts of time. Retailers also work to buying schedules that may require product ranges to be presented many months before consumer availability. Consequently, a manufacturer signing a licensing agreement today may not be able to deliver meaningful sales until well into the following year.

This creates an obvious problem when the underlying property's popularity is expected to peak much earlier. There are certainly entertainment brands with enduring appeal, and successful franchises can generate toy sales over many years. However, short-lived phenomena and properties dependent on a single release require a much more cautious approach.

Manufacturers should pay particular attention to whether the licensing term provides enough time to recover development costs, build distribution and earn a satisfactory return.

A short agreement with a large minimum guarantee, extensive development requirements and limited renewal certainty can represent a highly unattractive combination.

6. When the Licensor's Expectations Are Not Matched by Its Own Commitments

Another important warning sign arises when a licensor demands substantial financial and operational commitments from the manufacturer without offering meaningful commitments of its own. For example, a licensor might require a significant minimum guarantee, ambitious marketing expenditure and extensive product development, while providing little certainty over the promotional support behind the property.

Manufacturers may be shown ambitious plans involving new television content, marketing campaigns, influencer partnerships or major entertainment releases. These plans can sound extremely impressive during negotiations. However, plans are not the same as commitments.

What happens if the television series is delayed, the marketing budget is reduced or a planned entertainment release fails to materialise?

The toy manufacturer may still be left with substantial royalty obligations and inventory commitments, even though the commercial circumstances that originally justified the deal have changed dramatically. It is therefore important to understand which elements of the licensor's proposed support are guaranteed, which are merely anticipated and whether the agreement provides appropriate protection if material circumstances change.

A licensing agreement should ideally represent a genuine commercial partnership rather than a situation where virtually all the financial risk falls on the manufacturer.

7. When the Rights Being Offered Are Too Restrictive

Not all licensing agreements provide manufacturers with the same commercial freedoms.

A company may secure rights to an attractive entertainment property only to discover that those rights are limited to particular product categories, geographical territories, retail channels or customer types.

Some restrictions are entirely reasonable and reflect the way licensors organise their programmes across multiple manufacturing partners. However, restrictions can become problematic when they prevent the licensee from operating effectively. For example, imagine securing the rights to manufacture a range of licensed games, only to discover that certain product formats are excluded or that another licensee has rights to closely related categories.

Alternatively, a manufacturer might receive rights for a particular territory but find that major retail customers require regional or international supply arrangements that the agreement does not permit. There can also be complications surrounding online marketplaces, direct-to-consumer sales and international retailers whose operations cross national boundaries.

The critical question is whether the rights being offered genuinely allow the manufacturer to execute its intended business plan.

If a toy company must accept substantial financial commitments while being prevented from accessing important customers, territories or product categories, the commercial value of the license may be significantly lower than it initially appears.

8. When the Licensor Is Unreasonable During Negotiations

Licensing is ultimately a relationship business. Successful programmes require ongoing cooperation between the brand owner and manufacturer, often over several years.

That relationship begins long before the agreement is signed. Negotiations can therefore provide valuable insights into how a prospective licensing partner is likely to behave once the commercial relationship is established.

There is nothing wrong with a licensor negotiating firmly or seeking favourable terms. Both sides have legitimate commercial interests, and robust negotiations are a normal part of reaching a workable agreement.

However, repeated unreasonable demands, constantly changing commercial positions, poor communication or an unwillingness to acknowledge legitimate operational concerns can indicate future problems.

If a prospective licensing partner is exceptionally difficult to deal with when trying to win your business, there is little reason to assume the relationship will automatically improve once the agreement has been signed.

This is particularly important because manufacturers may need regular cooperation from licensors over artwork approvals, marketing campaigns, product modifications and extensions to the range. A commercially attractive licensing opportunity can rapidly become exhausting and unprofitable if the working relationship is dysfunctional.

9. When the Downside Risk Could Seriously Damage Your Business

One of the easiest mistakes for toy companies to make is evaluating licensing opportunities primarily in terms of potential revenue rather than the financial consequences of failure.

A successful licensing programme can generate substantial turnover, strengthen retailer relationships and elevate a manufacturer's profile within the industry.

However, the downside risk must also be considered carefully. Licensed toy ranges may require significant expenditure on tooling, product development, minimum royalty guarantees, marketing and inventory before meaningful sales revenue is generated.

A manufacturer might therefore commit hundreds of thousands of pounds to a programme that has yet to receive firm retailer orders.

If the property subsequently underperforms, retailers reduce their commitments or consumer demand fails to materialise, the manufacturer can be left facing serious financial difficulties. The danger is particularly acute for smaller toy companies that lack the financial resources to absorb a major commercial disappointment.

Before proceeding, management should model several realistic scenarios, including an optimistic outcome, a reasonable base case and a substantial underperformance scenario.

What happens if sales reach only 50% of the original forecast? Can the business still meet its financial commitments? Would a poor outcome threaten cash flow or prevent investment in other product ranges?

If the consequences of failure could seriously damage the wider business, management should be extremely cautious about proceeding, regardless of how exciting the property appears.

10. When There Are Better Uses for Your Money and Resources

Finally, toy companies should remember that every licensing agreement carries an opportunity cost. Money committed to royalty guarantees, tooling, development and marketing cannot simultaneously be invested elsewhere. Management time devoted to negotiating and operating a licensing programme is also time that cannot be spent developing other areas of the business.

This is particularly relevant for manufacturers with successful proprietary brands or promising new product concepts. Licensing can be an excellent growth strategy, but it is not necessarily superior to developing products that the manufacturer owns outright.

A successful proprietary brand may offer greater long-term value, more control over product development and freedom from continuing royalty obligations. Conversely, the right license may provide faster market access and lower brand-building risk.

The important point is that licensing opportunities should be evaluated alongside alternative investments rather than viewed in isolation. A manufacturer might conclude that a proposed license is capable of generating a respectable profit but that the same capital and management resources could generate a significantly better return elsewhere.

In those circumstances, walking away does not mean the licensing opportunity is necessarily a bad deal for everyone. It simply means it is not the best commercial decision for that particular business.

How to Decide Whether to Walk Away

There is an important distinction between identifying a problem during licensing negotiations and automatically abandoning the opportunity. Many of the issues discussed above can be addressed through sensible commercial negotiation. A minimum guarantee might be reduced, payment schedules restructured, product categories clarified or approval procedures improved.

Sometimes the solution involves narrowing the scope of the agreement. A manufacturer might find that a license covering five territories is financially unattractive but that a more focused arrangement covering two key markets makes excellent commercial sense.

Similarly, reducing the number of product categories, securing a longer licensing term or linking aspects of the commercial commitment to agreed milestones can sometimes transform the economics of a proposed deal.

The crucial factor is whether both parties are prepared to negotiate towards an arrangement that offers genuine mutual benefit.

Before signing, manufacturers should be able to answer several fundamental questions with confidence:

• Is there convincing evidence of consumer and retailer demand for the proposed products?

• Do the financial projections demonstrate an acceptable level of profitability after all licensing-related costs?

• Are the minimum guarantees supportable under realistic sales scenarios?

• Does the agreement provide sufficient rights, time and operational flexibility to execute the business plan?

• Are the risks manageable if the programme significantly underperforms?

• Is the licensor likely to be a constructive and commercially reasonable partner?

• Could the company's money and resources generate a better return elsewhere?

• 
  

If the answers to several of these questions are unsatisfactory, management should resist the temptation to proceed simply because the property is desirable.

Walking Away Can Be a Sign of Commercial Strength

One of the more interesting aspects of toy licensing is that the most successful manufacturers are not necessarily those with the largest number of licensing agreements or the most impressive collection of entertainment brands. They are often the companies that understand precisely which licenses complement their capabilities, customer relationships and commercial objectives.

Experienced licensing professionals recognise that some properties are better suited to particular manufacturers, product categories or retail channels. A license that makes excellent commercial sense for one company may represent a poor investment for another.

They also appreciate the importance of maintaining negotiating discipline.

It can be psychologically difficult to abandon a licensing opportunity after spending months building relationships, developing product concepts and negotiating commercial terms. Management teams can become emotionally invested in the prospect of announcing a prestigious new partnership.

However, the time and money already spent evaluating an opportunity should not dictate the decision to commit substantially more resources. The decision should always be based on the future commercial prospects of the deal, not the effort already invested in pursuing it.

In some cases, withdrawing from negotiations can even strengthen a manufacturer's commercial credibility. It demonstrates that the company understands its economics, takes its obligations seriously and is unwilling to make promises that it cannot reasonably fulfil.

The Best Licensing Deal Is Not Always the Biggest

Toy licensing can create enormous commercial opportunities. The right property, combined with the right products, retailers and manufacturing partner, can deliver impressive sales growth and long-term business value.

However, a famous brand does not automatically create a profitable toy range, and winning a fiercely contested licensing agreement is not necessarily a commercial victory.

The most attractive deals are those where the licensing rights, financial commitments, retail opportunities and operational requirements fit together into a coherent and achievable business plan.

Sometimes that means negotiating harder. Sometimes it means changing the proposed structure of the agreement. And occasionally, it means deciding that the opportunity simply isn't right.

Ultimately, the objective of toy licensing is not to win licenses. It is to build a profitable and sustainable toy business.

Knowing when to walk away is an essential part of achieving that objective.

Brand Licensing Europe 2026 Review: What Did BLE Tell Us About the Future of Toy Licensing?

Brand Licensing Europe 2026 Review: What Did BLE Tell Us About the Future of Toy Licensing?

ToyLicensing.com | October 2026

Brand Licensing Europe returned to Excel London from 6–8 October 2026, bringing together the great and the good of the international licensing industry for three days of meetings, presentations, networking and, of course, the endless pursuit of the next big thing.

For those of us working in the toy and games industry, BLE is always an interesting event. Unlike the major toy fairs, where finished products tend to take centre stage, BLE is much more concerned with the intellectual property behind those products. It's where brand owners, licensing agents, manufacturers and retailers come together to explore which characters, entertainment franchises and established brands might translate into commercial success over the next few years.

The 2026 edition was the biggest BLE to date, with 325 exhibiting companies, an increase of 12% on the previous year, and a show floor expanded by 5%. There were also around 90 new exhibitors, demonstrating the increasing breadth of the licensing business. But beyond the headline figures, what did this year's event tell us about the state of the toy licensing industry, and where are the biggest opportunities likely to come from?

We greatly enjoyed the show and had some great meetings with old friends and contacts, and we met some new people we look forward to building relationships with. Also, we have memories of struggling our way out to Excel via over crowded, infrequent DLR trains, but with the Elizabeth Line it’s now frankly a breeze…as long as all runs well with the Elizabeth line…on our way down to the show it was closed which reminded us of how it used to be as we traversed London via multiple stations, lines and forms of transport!

Licensed Toys Are Becoming More Important Than Ever

One of the most significant developments surrounding BLE 2026 was the release of new market data showing just how important licensed products have become to the European toy industry.

According to figures from Circana, licensed toys accounted for approximately 35% of total toy sales across the five major European markets in the year to August 2026, up from around 31% in 2025. Perhaps even more strikingly, licensed toy sales grew by 20% in value over the same period, compared with growth of 8% for the overall toy market.

In the UK, the position is even more pronounced. Licensed products accounted for 39.3% of toy sales in the year to 22 August, while licensed toy sales increased by 24% compared with the previous year.

These are significant figures because they demonstrate that licensing is no longer simply an optional addition to a toy company's product development strategy. For many manufacturers, it has become one of the principal drivers of growth.

There are obvious advantages to developing products around established intellectual property. Consumer awareness already exists, children often have an emotional connection with the characters, and retailers can have greater confidence in products supported by television, films, gaming or other entertainment.

Of course, there is a downside. Licensing royalties, minimum guarantees, approval processes and contractual restrictions all add complexity and cost to the product development process. Nevertheless, when licensed toys are outperforming the wider market by such a substantial margin, it is easy to understand why manufacturers and retailers remain enthusiastic about the sector.

The Big Entertainment Franchises Still Dominate

Anyone hoping that the major entertainment properties might be losing their grip on the licensing business would probably have been disappointed by BLE 2026.

The established entertainment franchises remained highly prominent, including Pokémon, Bluey, Harry Potter, Peppa Pig, Minecraft, Sonic the Hedgehog, Transformers and numerous Disney and Warner Bros. properties.

There is a good reason why the industry keeps returning to these brands. Successful entertainment franchises can deliver consumer demand over many years, particularly when their owners continue investing in fresh content, new product ranges and marketing activity.

Harry Potter was a particularly good example this year, with Warner Bros. Discovery highlighting the 25th anniversary of the first film and explaining how the franchise continues to attract successive generations of consumers.

For toy companies, this longevity is extremely attractive. Developing a product range around a property with an established audience and a long-term entertainment strategy can be considerably less risky than investing in a completely unproven licence.

However, established franchises bring their own commercial challenges. Competition between licensees can be intense, royalty arrangements may be demanding, and retailers already have plenty of products competing for limited shelf space.

The real question for manufacturers is therefore not simply whether a particular licence is popular, but whether they can produce something sufficiently differentiated to justify the investment.

Bluey Continues to Demonstrate the Value of Strong Preschool Brands

Bluey was another important property at BLE 2026, with BBC Studios using the event to discuss how the Australian preschool phenomenon has developed into a major international entertainment franchise.

The programme's success is particularly interesting because it appeals not only to preschool children but also to parents, who often appreciate the humour, storytelling and family relationships portrayed in the series.

This wider emotional connection creates considerable opportunities for licensing. Whereas some preschool properties experience relatively short periods of intense popularity before children move on, brands with genuine family appeal can potentially enjoy much longer commercial lives.

The forthcoming Bluey movie also provides an obvious opportunity to maintain consumer interest and support additional product development.

For manufacturers operating in the preschool sector, Bluey demonstrates how powerful the combination of engaging content, appealing characters and consistent brand management can be.

It also highlights the importance of looking beyond raw audience figures when evaluating a licence. The depth of consumers' emotional attachment to a property can be every bit as important as the number of people watching it.

Gaming Properties Are Now a Major Force in Toy Licensing

Another important theme at BLE 2026 was the continued integration of video gaming and traditional consumer products.

Minecraft, Pokémon, Sonic and other gaming-related franchises featured prominently, reflecting the increasingly blurred boundaries between digital entertainment and physical play.

Minecraft is a particularly interesting example. Its popularity is not dependent on a traditional television series or film franchise, although entertainment extensions obviously help. Instead, much of its success comes from the enormous amount of time consumers spend engaging with the game itself.

This gives the brand an unusually strong foundation for licensed products, particularly construction toys, collectibles, figures and playsets.

The BLE programme included a presentation from Xbox and Merlin Entertainments exploring the development of Minecraft experiences, demonstrating how gaming properties are expanding beyond both screens and conventional merchandise.

For toy manufacturers, there is a clear opportunity here, but also a warning. The gaming audience is not necessarily identical to the traditional toy-buying audience, and successful products must understand how consumers interact with the original game.

Simply putting a recognisable gaming character onto an otherwise generic product is unlikely to be enough in an increasingly competitive market.

Anime and Japanese Entertainment Continue Their Expansion

One of the most interesting areas of licensing growth is the increasing importance of anime and Japanese entertainment properties in Western markets.

BLE 2026 reflected this trend through the presence of companies and brands associated with Japanese animation, character licensing and collectible products, including Crunchyroll, Toei and a variety of other rights holders.

For the toy industry, the opportunities are substantial. Anime fans often demonstrate particularly strong engagement with their favourite characters and franchises, and many are enthusiastic collectors willing to purchase multiple products. This creates opportunities in action figures, plush toys, trading cards, collectibles, model kits and other categories.

Importantly, anime licensing is not exclusively concerned with children. Many properties attract teenagers and adults, bringing them firmly into the expanding kidult and collector segments.

For European toy companies, this represents an opportunity to develop product ranges aimed at audiences that might not traditionally have been considered mainstream toy consumers. Nevertheless, choosing the right property is critical. Anime encompasses a huge variety of genres, age groups and fan communities, and a successful licensing programme requires a clear understanding of the intended audience.

Toy Brands Are Increasingly Becoming Licensing Properties Themselves

One of the more interesting aspects of modern toy licensing is that the relationship between toys and intellectual property increasingly works in both directions.

Traditionally, manufacturers would acquire the rights to an established entertainment property and develop toys around it. Today, successful toy brands are also being extended into entertainment, fashion, experiences, publishing and other consumer product categories.

Hasbro's presence at BLE 2026 illustrated this approach particularly well.

The company highlighted a franchise-led strategy built around properties including Transformers, My Little Pony, Peppa Pig, Monopoly, Play-Doh, Dungeons & Dragons and Magic: The Gathering, looking beyond traditional toy sales to engage consumers across multiple categories.

This approach makes considerable commercial sense. A strong toy brand can become a valuable intellectual property asset capable of generating revenue well beyond its original product category.

For smaller toy companies, the lesson is worth considering. Building a distinctive, ownable brand can create long-term opportunities that would never exist for a collection of unrelated products.

Naturally, not every toy range is going to become a global entertainment franchise. But developing memorable characters, coherent brand identities and repeatable play concepts can help build assets that become more valuable over time.

The Best Licensing Partnerships Offer More Than a Logo

One of the most interesting toy-related collaborations announced during BLE was the partnership between Plus-Plus and Crayola. The companies are combining the Plus-Plus construction system with Crayola's established expertise in creativity and colour, developing products that encourage children to build, draw and create. The range, scheduled for launch in 2027, includes construction and colouring combinations alongside collectible character products.

This is an excellent example of what a licensing partnership should ideally achieve. Rather than simply applying a famous brand name to an existing toy, the collaboration brings together complementary strengths to create a potentially more appealing consumer proposition.

There is an important lesson here for manufacturers considering licensing opportunities. A well-known brand can undoubtedly help drive sales, but the most successful partnerships should also make the underlying product more interesting, differentiated or desirable.

Ultimately, consumers are buying the product, not the licensing agreement behind it.

Sport Is Becoming an Increasingly Attractive Licensing Opportunity

Sports licensing was another prominent part of BLE 2026, with football clubs, international competitions and other sporting organisations represented across the event. The show's sports-related exhibitor offering increased by 17% year on year, reflecting growing interest in the category.

For toy companies, sports licensing offers opportunities in collectibles, trading cards, figures, games, construction sets and a variety of novelty products. Football is particularly attractive because of its enormous international following, although commercial success depends heavily on the particular rights being licensed, the popularity of teams or personalities, and the intended distribution markets.

Circana's European toy market data also highlighted the impact of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with football-related licensed merchandise benefiting from the event. However, sporting licences present an interesting challenge. Consumer interest can fluctuate dramatically according to major tournaments, team performance and individual personalities, making forecasting difficult.

Manufacturers need to think carefully about development timelines, product availability and the risk of being left with inventory once a particular sporting event or period of excitement has passed.

The Rise of Unconventional Licensing Opportunities

One of the strengths of BLE is that it introduces toy companies to intellectual property they might not ordinarily consider. Alongside the familiar entertainment and character brands, this year's event featured opportunities associated with museums, art galleries, music, heritage brands and other cultural organisations.

The licensing industry's growing interest in these areas is significant because it demonstrates how broadly the concept of intellectual property can be applied.

For toy and games companies, museum and heritage partnerships could offer interesting possibilities in educational games, science kits, puzzles, construction products and creative activities.

Music licensing also offers potential, particularly for collectible products, music-related games and gift-oriented merchandise aimed at adult consumers. Not every licensing opportunity needs to involve a cartoon character or blockbuster film. Sometimes the most commercially interesting partnerships come from finding a distinctive brand that connects naturally with a particular product category.

The Challenge for Smaller Toy Companies

Despite the optimism surrounding BLE 2026, it is worth remembering that the licensing business can be a difficult environment for smaller manufacturers. Major entertainment properties often come with substantial minimum guarantees, demanding contractual requirements and significant expectations around marketing support. The pressure to deliver products within specific entertainment release windows can add another layer of risk.

Retail distribution is another major consideration. A manufacturer may secure an attractive licensing agreement but still struggle to achieve sufficient retail listings to make the programme profitable.

In some respects, the growing popularity of licensed toys could make life more difficult for smaller businesses. As more manufacturers compete for the same established properties, the commercial terms may become harder to justify. However, there are also opportunities. Smaller manufacturers can often move more quickly, develop distinctive niche products and pursue less obvious licences that larger companies may overlook.

The key is to match the scale of the licensing commitment with realistic distribution capabilities and consumer demand, rather than becoming carried away by the excitement surrounding a particular property.

The Importance of Retailers in Making Licensing Work

One of the most commercially useful presentations at BLE involved Carrefour, Jazwares and Sun City discussing the realities of successful licensing partnerships in European retail.

It highlighted something that can sometimes be overlooked when manufacturers become enthusiastic about new intellectual property: ultimately, somebody has to buy the finished products, and retailers play a decisive role in determining which ranges reach consumers.

The Carrefour perspective was particularly interesting, emphasising factors including appropriate launch timing, product differentiation, consumer awareness, family appeal and meaningful support from licensors. From a toy manufacturer's perspective, these are sensible criteria.

A strong licence may help open doors, but it does not automatically guarantee retail listings. Buyers still need convincing that a particular product offers something new, that the pricing is competitive, and that sufficient consumer demand exists to justify allocating valuable shelf space. For smaller manufacturers especially, the best time to begin discussing retailer interest is often before committing to substantial licensing guarantees.

BLE Remains Fundamentally a Relationship Business

For all the impressive presentations, elaborate stands and exciting intellectual property, the real value of Brand Licensing Europe remains its ability to bring the licensing industry's decision-makers together in one place.

Licensing is a relationship-driven business, particularly when complex commercial agreements, brand management and long-term partnerships are involved. A successful licensing arrangement requires trust between licensors and licensees. Rights holders need confidence that manufacturers will develop suitable products, maintain quality standards, support the brand and deliver on commercial commitments.

Manufacturers, meanwhile, need confidence that licensors will provide the necessary approvals, marketing support and long-term investment in their properties. These relationships are rarely built through a single email or online enquiry. Events like BLE provide opportunities to meet people, understand their priorities and explore possibilities that may not have been apparent beforehand.

For companies actively involved in licensing, the commercial value of the show will ultimately depend less on the number of meetings attended than on the quality of the partnerships and business generated afterwards.

Our Verdict: An Encouraging Show, But Commercial Discipline Matters

BLE 2026 provided further evidence that the licensing industry is expanding, becoming more diverse and playing an increasingly important role in the commercial performance of toy companies.

The growth in licensed toy sales is particularly striking, and it is difficult to ignore the opportunities presented by established entertainment franchises, gaming properties, anime, sports and the expanding kidult market. At the same time, the industry's increasing enthusiasm for licensing should not obscure the fundamental realities of the toy business.

A licence is not a substitute for a good product. It does not eliminate the need for consumer research, competitive pricing, strong retail distribution or effective marketing. And an expensive licence attached to a mediocre product can become a very costly mistake.

Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of BLE 2026 was the growing variety of intellectual property available to manufacturers. There are now more opportunities than ever to identify brands that appeal to specific consumer groups, rather than simply chasing whichever entertainment franchise happens to be fashionable.

For the toy industry, the biggest opportunities will probably come from companies that combine good licensing decisions with genuine product innovation and disciplined commercial execution.

BLE 2026 reinforced one important point: licensing is becoming an increasingly powerful force in the toy industry, but choosing the right licence and turning it into profitable sales remain two very different challenges. And that, ultimately, is what makes the business so interesting.