Funko Pops Are Getting More Expensive Under Trump
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Funko, the company behind the collectible POP! figurines, have increased prices this year, attributing this—and its broader financial struggles—to the trade policies of the Donald Trump administration.
Funko announced earlier this year that, starting in July, it would be increasing the retail price of its flagship POP! dolls to $14.99. This compares to $11.99 in 2024, according to online collectibles store Boxed Vinyl. Funko said that this was in part due to "rising tariffs" which had "significantly" pushed up its costs.
Last week, the company posted a weak set of results for the second quarter, again blaming these price adjustments, as well as its decision to cut around 20 percent of its workforce, on the tariffs.
Newsweek has reached out to Funko via email for further comment, and to the U.S. Department of Commerce for a response.
Why It Matters
While rising tariffs on the majority of America's trading partners promise to reshape most aspects of the economy, toymakers in particular are expected to feel an outsize impact given the industry's reliance on imports from China.
Many major brands besides Funko—including Hasbro and Barbie-maker Mattel—warned earlier this year that they would need to raise toy prices to mitigate these effects. The 90-day trade truce agreed between the U.S. and China in May, and extended again this week, eased some of these concerns, but industry representatives remain fearful of the impacts.
What To Know
Last week, Funko reported $193.5 million in sales for the second quarter which ended June 30, marking a 22 percent decline from $247.7 in the comparable period of 2024.
During the quarter, which interim CEO Mike Lunsford said was "impacted by a dynamic and uncertain tariff environment," Funko also swung to a net loss of $41 million from a $5.4 million net income last year.
In a subsequent earnings call, Chief Financial Officer Yves LePendeven said that tariffs had led to a pause in U.S.-bound orders from China, which in turn disrupted second-quarter sales.
Funko Pop! vinyl figures are displayed during ToyCon at the Eastside Cannery Casino Hotel on March 13, 2020 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Funko Pop! vinyl figures are displayed during ToyCon at the Eastside Cannery Casino Hotel on March 13, 2020 in Las Vegas, Nevada.Lunsford said that the company had "moved quickly" during the quarter to minimize the impact of tariffs. These efforts included the price increases, a "workforce reduction of approximately 20 percent," and efforts to shift more of its production out of China and into Vietnam and other sourcing countries.
Having fully implemented the price increases and returned to ordinary shipping schedules, LePendeven said the company expects "to fully offset the financial impact of incremental tariffs within the current year." However, he added that "continuing uncertainty around global tariff policies" made it challenging to provide a concrete financial forecast for the remainder of 2025.
According to recent analysis by economic research firm John Dunham & Associates, published by The Toy Association last week, toy imports have declined significantly this year. Total imports fell 31 percent year-over-year in June, driven by a 47 percent drop in Chinese shipments. The Toy Association, a trade organization representing U.S. toymakers, said the figures "raise concerns about potential product shortages later in the year if the trend continues."
What People Are Saying
Mike Lunsford, Interim CEO at Funko, said: "Looking ahead, we expect headwinds to moderate and our business to improve as a result of the actions we've taken to cut costs, diversify product sourcing and adjust prices. The team is focused on stabilizing the business, accelerating execution on growth initiatives and unlocking Funko's long-term potential."
Kathrin Belliveau, chief policy officer at The Toy Association, said this week: "Tariffs are creating serious headwinds for the toy industry and are disrupting the flow of toys into the U.S. market ahead of the crucial holiday season. Tariffs don't just affect companies; they ultimately impact the choices and prices American families face. Without relief, we risk seeing fewer products on store shelves, higher costs for families, and lasting strain on the businesses that bring play to children."
What Happens Next?
While Funko said that ongoing changes in the trading environment make providing a formal outlook challenging, it expects its financial performance in the second half of the year to mark an improvement compared to the first six months. However, it still expects net sales to decline by "high single-digits" compared with the second half of 2024.
U.S. toy sales were solid in the first half of 2025, according to market research firm Circana, with dollar sales up by 6 percent year-over-year and units sold up 3 percent.
The toy industry is showing strength during this period as consumers are holding their breath and waiting for higher prices to kick in," said Juli Lennett, vice president and industry adviser for Circana's toy division.
"This resilience is especially important as we set our sights on the holiday season and what categories are critical for the consumer to bring joy to their loved ones."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tech it down a notch
By Jamie McGeever ORLANDO, Florida (Reuters) -TRADING DAY Making sense of the forces driving global markets By Jamie McGeever, Markets Columnist Wall Street slumped on Tuesday, dragged down by weakness in some of the big tech companies that have led the charge to new highs this year, as investors hunker down ahead of a keynote speech by Fed Chair Jerome Powell later this week. More on that below. In my column today I look at the cagey dance between Donald Trump and Wall Street - the market knows it has the power to rein in some of the president's policy excesses, but isn't wielding it. Not yet, anyway. If you have more time to read, here are a few articles I recommend to help you make sense of what happened in markets today. 1. Trump says Putin may not want to make a deal on Ukraine 2. Switzerland ready to host Putin for any Geneva peacetalks, minister says 3. S&P affirms 'AA+' credit rating for US, cites impact oftariff 4. Trump's interest rate demands put 'fiscal dominance' inmarket spotlight 5. AI will replace most humans, but then what? Today's Key Market Moves * STOCKS: Wall Street in the red, with the Nasdaq leadingthe way, down 1.5%. The Dow ekes out a new high of 45,207 pointsbefore easing. Europe gains, Asia and EM in the red. * SHARES/SECTORS: Intel up 7% after Softbank takes $2 blnstake. Nvidia -3.5%, its biggest fall in four months, pushingthe tech sector down nearly 2%. * FX: Canadian dollar falls 0.5% to 1.3855/$ on softinflation data. Brazil's real down 1.2% to 5.50/$, another downday and its biggest fall in six weeks. * BONDS: Treasury yields ease from recent highs, down 4bps at the long end to flatten the curve. UK 30-year yield hitsnew 27-year high, but ends the day lower too. * COMMODITIES: Oil falls again, WTI crude futures down1.7% to lowest close since June 2 at $62.35/bbl. Today's Talking Points: * Peace in our time? Investors digested the extraordinary summit between U.S. President Donald Trump, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, and a phalanx of European leaders in the White House on Monday. Did it move the dial much on the prospects of a Russia-Ukraine ceasefire, or a deal to end the war? Optimism around Trump's promise of security guarantees for Ukraine in the future buoyed European markets on Tuesday. But that evaporated as the U.S. session rolled on, as Trump told Fox News he thinks Russian President Vladimir Putin may not want to make a deal after all. There may be no immediate direct impact on major equity, bond, or currency markets from the conflict. But prolonged war on Europe's doorstep, fractured ties between the US and Europe, and a fickle relationship between Trump and Putin can't be good in the long term. * Retail therapy. Some of America's biggest retailers report second-quarter earnings this week, shining a light on the health of the U.S. consumer and, by extension, the economy at large. Home Depot reported on Tuesday; Lowe's, Target, and TJX release results on Wednesday; and Walmart is out on Thursday. There are conflicting signals coming from the U.S. consumer. By some measures, household consumption flat-lined in the first half of the year, but other indicators show consumer spending is the biggest contributor to GDP growth. The rich are spending, but the bottom 50% are struggling. The S&P 500's consumer discretionary sector is flat this year, and the consumer staples index is up 6%. Both are lagging the broader index, which is up 8%, and the IT and communications sectors, which are both up around 13%. * Interest rate decisions. The central banks of New Zealand, Indonesia, and China announce their latest policy decisions on Wednesday. Two of the three are expected to stand pat, and one is expected to cut borrowing costs. The People's Bank of China is expected to keep benchmark one- and five-year lending rates unchanged for the third straight month at 3.5% and 5.5%, respectively. Although the economy needs more support, the central bank may want to explore structural policies aimed at specific sectors rather than broad-based monetary easing. For now. This has helped propel a recovery in the yuan, which was plumbing 17-year lows at the depths of the "Liberation Day" tariff turmoil in April. Since then, the PBOC has only lowered borrowing costs once, by 10 basis points, and has fixed the yuan higher in 16 of the last 19 weeks. Markets, Trump in delicate policy dance U.S. President Donald Trump has faced little opposition in his drive to rip up the global economic rulebook, whether from his fellow Republicans, political opponents, or institutional guardrails. The only exception has been "the market." But now even investors are holding their fire, enabling more risk to build up in the financial system. Wall Street's reaction to Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs on April 2 was so ferocious that the president did something he had rarely done: he backed down. Trillions of dollars were wiped off the value of U.S. stocks amid a 10% nosedive from April 3-4. The only two-day selloffs since the 1930s that were bigger occurred during the Second World War, "Black Monday" in 1987, the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, and the pandemic in 2020. The stock market bottomed out on April 7 after Trump paused most of his country-specific tariffs. Wall Street has not looked back since, with the S&P 500 rebounding 35% to an all-time high. This episode suggests that "the market" is one of the few true checks on Trump's apparent pursuit to reshape the U.S. – and indeed the world – economy. The only problem is that the president has continued to pursue unorthodox policies in recent months - including challenging the independence of the Federal Reserve, firing statisticians, and slapping tariffs on countries for non-economic reasons – and investors have failed to tap the brakes. FED PUT The so-called "Trump put" -- the idea that the president won't let the markets fall too far -- is essentially a funhouse mirror version of the famous "Fed put," the long-held belief that, in the event of a crisis, the central bank will step in to restore stability. Trump seemingly did just that in April, but it was to clean up a mess of his own making. And one could argue that it was actually investors who came to the economy's rescue by putting pressure on the president to reconsider policies considered ill-advised by most economists. Trump and markets are therefore now in a curious dance. Investors appear to believe that markets can ultimately stop Trump from pushing the envelope too far on tariffs or other policies. But as a result, investors are not overreacting – or reacting at all – to the latest controversies around the Bureau of Labor Statistics firing, his attacks on Fed Chair Jerome Powell, his pressure on Intel's CEO to resign, or the outsized tariffs slapped on Brazil and India. This, in turn, has powered the markets to new record highs, emboldening Trump to push the envelope even further. RISK ON So even though the market has the power to rein in the president's economic policy excesses, it's not using it. Why hasn't the market pushed back? As the cliche goes, equity investors are paid to be optimistic. It's in their interest to keep the train hurtling along, provided there aren't any immediate obstacles to derail it. There are, of course, a few pretty large hurdles on the horizon for the U.S. economy, including the highest tariffs since the 1930s and some of the biggest budget deficits since World War II outside of crisis periods. But until these or other issues present an immediate economic threat, markets can choose to ignore them. By under-reacting to Trump's unorthodox policies, markets may not only delay the day of reckoning but also amplify the potential impact. Why? Genuine economic and geopolitical paradigm shifts are under way, and investors are not pricing in the attendant risk. Nobody knows what the ultimate impact of these shifts will be, but we do know that with greater uncertainty comes greater downside risk. Yet equity volatility is the lowest it has been this year, and even in the bond market – not known for its optimism – volatility is the lowest in three and a half years, while U.S. corporate bond spreads are the tightest since 1998. Ultimately, the market is unlikely to call Trump's bluff until something truly unexpected or extreme hits. In the meantime, investors can justify this nonchalance by saying that corporate earnings growth is solid, AI enthusiasm is high, economic growth remains decent, unemployment is low, and consumers are still spending. Wall Street is choosing not to put on the brakes, meaning this train will continue rolling on. Whether it's heading for a collision is an open question. What could move markets tomorrow? * New Zealand interest rate decision * Indonesia interest rate decision * China interest rate decision * Japan machinery orders (June) * Japan trade (July) * UK inflation (July) * Germany producer price inflation (July) * Euro zone inflation (July, final) * U.S. Treasury auctions $16 billion of 20-year bonds * U.S. earnings, including retailers TJX Companies, Lowe's,and Target Want to receive Trading Day in your inbox every weekday morning? Sign up for my newsletter here. Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias. (By Jamie McGeever; Editing by Rod Nickel)
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump blows past the Senate to put loyalists in charge of prosecutorial offices across the country
Around the country, President Donald Trump is circumventing the Senate to install top federal prosecutors, using loopholes to keep loyalists in place. In U.S. attorney's offices in Los Angeles, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico and upstate New York, the administration has effectively sidestepped or overridden both the Senate confirmation and judicial appointment processes for selecting U.S. attorneys. When Trump's nominees can't get confirmed by the Senate, as required by federal law, the administration installs them on a temporary basis as 'interim' U.S. attorneys, who are legally allowed to serve for 120 days. And when district judges have then rejected Trump's choices by exercising a 160-year-old power allowing them to appoint someone to the office after an interim U.S. attorney's term ends, the administration has in a few cases taken an extraordinary step: voiding the judges' decision and reinstalling Trump's desired prosecutor as an 'acting' U.S. attorney, who can serve for an additional 210 days beyond the initial 120-day interim period. In two instances, the Trump administration preempted the judges' votes, appointing the interim U.S. attorneys as acting U.S. attorneys before the judges could have their say. And in at least one district, the administration's attempt to sidestep the Senate and district judges is being challenged in court. Though the law doesn't explicitly forbid the Trump administration's approach of appointing people to successive temporary stints, 'the intent [of the law] was always for Senate confirmation,' said Jennifer Selin, a professor at Arizona State University law school. 'The Trump administration has been very strategic in using the law in this particular way,' Selin said. A spokesperson for the Justice Department didn't respond to a request for comment. The nation's 93 U.S. attorneys are the top federal law enforcement officials in their geographic districts. While they are nominated by the president, the Justice Department has historically sought to insulate them from political influence. And the president's selections are expected to have the blessing of another branch of government — either the Senate or the courts. Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law school professor, said the workarounds are alarming because they eliminate the vetting process conducted by the Senate, calling it 'a perversion of what the Constitution seems to require.' Critics worry that the lack of oversight on some of Trump's picks could create a perception — if not a reality — that those prosecutors are simply doing the White House's bidding and using their offices for political purposes. For instance, Trump's pick in New Jersey, Alina Habba, has been criticized for prosecuting a Democratic member of Congress who was attempting to conduct an oversight visit at an immigration detention center. Trump's strategy of overriding the other branches could also create tension between U.S. attorney's offices and the district courts in which they operate. 'Senatorial influence over selection has really been a critical aspect of the U.S. attorney's system, and so has the relationship between the U.S. attorney and local institutions like the district court bench, local governments and local communities,' said Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and former federal prosecutor. 'And when you start ramming people down into these offices without any consideration of local communities, and in particular of the district court bench, bad things happen.' Richman pointed to a recent ruling in Manhattan denying the DOJ's effort to unseal secret materials in the cases of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein as an example of 'judges looking askance at an effort by Washington to circumvent the district.' 'District judges really care about the integrity, and, to some extent, the autonomy of the U.S. attorney's offices that appear before them,' he said. 'They, like any actor, like to help shape the quality of justice that's done in their courtroom, and they do that not just through their rulings, but through the influence they have on the U.S. attorney's offices. And U.S. attorney's offices that have any desire to be effective tend to their relationship with the local bench.' The most dramatic fight over a U.S. attorney post in the second Trump administration has been in New Jersey, where earlier this year Trump picked Habba, one of his former personal defense attorneys and a vocal supporter, to serve as U.S. attorney on an interim basis while also nominating her to take the job permanently. Habba, who had never worked as a prosecutor, is a controversial figure who opened a number of politically charged cases in her first few months on the job. Her office charged Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) with assaulting federal agents after she clashed with immigration officials while attempting to visit an immigration detention center; she is seeking to get the case dismissed. Habba's office also arrested Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, a Democrat, but later dropped the case. And shortly after Habba took office, she opened an investigation into Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat, over the state's immigration policies. It quickly became clear that Habba could not win Senate confirmation. So when her term as interim U.S. attorney was about to expire last month, district judges in New Jersey voted to determine who should occupy the post indefinitely until the Senate could confirm someone to the job. The judges declined to keep Habba in office, voting instead to install longtime career prosecutor Desiree Leigh Grace. But Trump quickly bypassed that selection, reinstalling Habba on a longer-term but still temporary basis as acting U.S. attorney. He did so by having the Justice Department fire Grace while simultaneously withdrawing Habba's nomination in the Senate. The withdrawal was important because nominees for a full-time U.S. attorney post generally cannot also serve in an 'acting' capacity, per federal law. But once Habba was no longer a nominee before the Senate, the Trump administration argued, she could remain in the job for another 210 days, or about seven months. What will happen after that remains unclear. Trump's workaround to keep Habba in the job for now is contested. A defendant in a drug and gun case in New Jersey is arguing that the administration's maneuvering was irregular and unconstitutional and is challenging Habba's authority. Habba's office didn't respond to a request for comment. Slightly different scenarios have played out in other U.S. attorney's offices. In the Northern District of New York, which covers Albany and Buffalo, Trump's interim choice for the job was John Sarcone III, a Republican lawyer who has run for office unsuccessfully several times and, like Habba, had no apparent prosecutorial experience. Sarcone had a tumultuous start to his tenure that included listing his address on a police affidavit as a location that was actually a boarded-up building. When Sarcone's 120-day interim period expired, the district judges in northern New York declined to appoint him to continue in the job. But unlike in New Jersey, the judges did not select a substitute — they simply didn't appoint anyone. The Justice Department responded by giving Sarcone an appointment of 'special attorney' with an 'indefinite' term so that he could return to the job. The office didn't respond to a request for comment. A similar sequence occurred in New Mexico last week. The district judges in the state declined to extendTrump's pick for interim U.S. attorney, Ryan Ellison. So the Justice Department converted him to the 'acting' head of the office under a federal vacancies law. As with Habba, that maneuver allows Trump to chain together the 120-day interim period and the 210-day acting period — potentially allowing the non-confirmed official to remain on the job for nearly a full year. New Mexico's Democratic senators, Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Luján, said the decision exemplified 'this administration's continuing willingness to trample the role of the Judiciary and Congress.' Ellison embraced the move, saying in a statement: 'I applaud New Mexico's federal district judges for declining to appoint someone other than the Trump Administration's choice to lead the United States Attorney's Office as they had the discretion to do at the end of my interim appointment.' He added that 'the appointment of a U.S. Attorney is a process that should be sorted out in a collaborative and professional manner between the executive and legislative branches of government.' In one powerful district — the Southern District of New York, which is based in Manhattan — Trump's interim U.S. attorney pick did not run into resistance from judges. On Monday, the judges there voted to retain Trump's choice, former Securities and Exchange Commission chair Jay Clayton. The vote allows Clayton to continue running the office indefinitely, even though Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) blocked Clayton's confirmation in the Senate. In the Central District of California, which is based in Los Angeles, Trump's interim choice was Bill Essayli, a Republican who had been serving in the California State Assembly. In his early months on the job, Essayli drew scrutiny for reportedly pushing prosecutors to bring cases desired by the Trump administration but unsupported by sufficient evidence. As his interim period was coming to an end, the Trump administration converted Essayli's title from interim to acting. It's not clear if the district's judges ever held a vote on the post. The court didn't provide an answer when asked about it. A spokesperson for Essayli's office declined to comment. And the administration deployed the same tactic in Nevada to keep in place Sigal Chattah. In the final days of her temporary tenure as interim U.S. attorney, a group of more than 100 retired federal and state judges wrote to the chief federal district judge in Nevada to object to voting to install Chattah after her appointment expired. The group said her history of 'racially charged, violence-tinged, and inflammatory public statements' disqualified her. Instead of waiting for the judicial vote, the Trump administration simply made her the acting U.S. attorney. The office didn't respond to a request for comment. While Trump may be getting his way on U.S. attorney choices for now, the strategy may ultimately come back to haunt him. Retired U.S. District Judge John S. Martin predicted that the practical effect of the maneuvers is that a U.S. attorney who is installed over the objections of the local bench will lose credibility with the judges, not necessarily because of any actions they take, but simply by virtue of the process. That may jeopardize cases in court for prosecutors, Martin said, because it 'means that when the government comes in and asserts something a little bit unusual, it's going to get a very skeptical view from the court.'
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UK Drops Apple Backdoor Mandate After Talks With U.S. Spy Chief Gabbard
U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said Monday the U.K. agreed to drop its order requiring Apple (AAPL, Financials) to create a back door to access encrypted data of American citizens. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 8 Warning Signs with NXST. Gabbard said on X she worked for months with President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance and British officials to secure the deal. Prime Minister Keir Starmer was in Washington on Monday for talks with Trump and other European leaders. The U.K. mandate, issued earlier this year, had forced Apple to suspend its Advanced Data Protection feature for British users in February. The iPhone maker challenged the order at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, warning that backdoors could be exploited by hackers and authoritarian regimes. U.S. lawmakers argued the demand could have violated the CLOUD Act, which restricts governments from ordering access to the encrypted data of another country's citizens. Gabbard had raised the concern in a February letter to Congress. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
