case study

S

VA L E R I A G I A C O M I N CH R I S T I N A L U B I N S K I

Historical Entrepreneurship Case Series

Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll

S C G - 5 6 8 R e v i s e d J ul y 1 6 , 2 0 20

“You imagine that you are going to be what you want to be and you will be it. That’s what she wanted kids to be able to do, and she wasn’t going to take no for an answer”

Cheryl Segal remembering her grandmother Ruth Handler, 2017

itting on her patio facing the ocean from her beach house in Malibu, Ruth Handler adjusted her make-up and hair in the mirror. Despite her 80 years, she felt bursting with energy and

full of optimism. In the early 1990s, Mattel’s first female CEO, Jill Barad, awarded Ruth with the “Women of Distinction” prize.1 In 1994, Jill also invited her to give a commemorative address at the International-Fan-Club annual event. Now, two years later, Ruth’s calendar was full of appointments as she received frequent requests to attend Barbie’s fan-club events across America. She recalled a recent meeting in Las Vegas, where a seasoned Barbie collector, after asking for her autograph, told her that Barbie had changed her life, teaching her how to be comfortable with her femininity and become an independent woman. Ruth thought back to the earlier days of envisioning the Barbie doll and how Mattel’s engineers had rejected her plans for a grown-up doll for girls. Clearly not everybody shared her vision. Indeed, at times during her career it felt as if nobody did. But looking back at her entrepreneurial journey, Ruth was proud of her accomplishment. Barbie had not just conquered children’s rooms by storm, it had become a pop culture icon second-to-none.

Ruth and Elliot Handler in the early days Ruth Handler, born Mosko (Moskowicz) on November 4th, 1916 in Denver Colorado, was the

youngest of ten children from a Polish-Jewish immigrant family. Since her childhood, she proved to be very active and entrepreneurial, with a passion for hard work. At age 16, she was in charge of managing the soda fountain at her sister Sarah’s drugstore.2 In 1938, at age 21, Ruth married Elliot Handler, a man with artistic ambitions. Together, they moved to Los Angeles, where Ruth took a job as secretary at Paramount Pictures and Elliot attended design school and worked part time as a light-shop clerk.3 Soon after they had moved, Elliot quit school and decided to open up his own shop. The company, Elliot Handler Plastics, produced furniture and other smaller objects from wood and new materials, such as

SCG-568 Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll

Plexiglas and Lucite, which he had discovered while serving in the military. He rented a building on Olympic Boulevard which was formerly a Chinese laundry, and Ruth joined him in her free time to help with sales. Ruth recalled that her husband was “a very shy guy. He was the kind of guy who, if he walked into a restaurant, he was embarrassed at placing an order.”4 By contrast, Ruth was more outgoing and took on the task of sales. After a few small orders, Ruth was able to establish contact with Douglas Aircraft, a business which also wholesaled the expensive Plexiglas and Lucite materials they used for manufacturing. Elliot was hesitant to meet them but Ruth decided to go: “I walked in that office and looked at these three guys [Douglas executives] and I wondered what I was doing there…”.5 She walked out with a major order for tailored giftware and a contract for sourcing materials in bulk.

Elliot’s business expanded and he decided to join Zachary Zemby, an immigrant entrepreneur, and other partners in a new venture called El-Zac, focusing on costume jewelry.6 Meanwhile, Ruth had her first baby, Barbara, in 1941. Eventually, she decided to start her own business with Harold Mattson, Elliot’s former co-worker, producing primarily picture frames based on Elliot’s designs.7 In 1944, Elliot left El-Zac for a fraction of his investment and joined Ruth and Mattson. He soon realized that he could produce doll-house furniture from the frames’ scrap. They started a toy line, which quickly became their core business. That same year, they renamed their partnership Mattel, a combination of Mattson and Elliot. Ruth, still in charge of sales, travelled to New York, where she visited what she dubbed “the toy building,” the center of the toy industry at the time, hosting manufacturers’ showrooms and sales agents’ offices. She met two agents, who eventually sold $100,000 (about $1.4 million in 2019) worth of doll house furniture for Mattel that year.8

Envisioning Mattel in the Toy Industry (1944-1956) In the first part of 2oth century, the toy-making industry had grown significantly, developing large-

scale manufacturing operations, multiple product types and sophisticated marketing strategies. It was a very competitive and fast-paced market in which US companies had to battle against international players, especially from Europe and Japan. The situation abruptly changed during WWII, when toy imports plummeted drastically; the government introduced the regulation L-18, mandating strict restrictions in use of materials (i.e. rubber, metals and plastics) and color dyes, used for toy manufacturing. Several toy manufacturers were also required to convert their operations and facilities in support of the military effort. All of a sudden, the toy market shifted from a buyer’s market into a seller’s, with very few toy options available for consumers.9

Some quite drab and unrefined miniature toys could still be found in tire stores, as major rubber manufacturers such as Goodrich, Goodyear and Firestone had been able to manufacture simple products from scrap rubber, which they could easily access.10 The war eliminated foreign competition. Traditional toy manufacturers took a while to readapt their strategies to peace time, temporarily leaving a vacuum for new entrants to fill. Among them were the Handlers, who saw this as a great opportunity to produce higher quality playthings to entertain kids, tapping into the deeper pockets of a growing

Valeria Giacomin, Postdoctoral Fellow, and Christina Lubinski, Clinical Professor of Entrepreneurship at the USC Marshall School of Business, prepared this case. The case is based on published sources and archival research at the Arthur and Elizabeth Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies at Harvard University, Cambridge MA. The authors would like to thank the staff of the archives for the help and support during the process of data collection. This case in the Historical Entrepreneurship Case Series was supported by a grant from the Founder Central Initiative. Cases are developed solely as the basis for class discussion and are not intended to serve as endorsements, sources of primary data or illustrations of effective or ineffective management.

Copyright © 2020 L loyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies, Marshall School of Business, Univer sity of Southern California. For information about Greif Center cases, p lease contact us at greifcases@marsha ll.usc.edu. This publication may not be digitized, photocopied, or other wise reproduced, posted or transmitted without the permission of The Lloyd Greif Center for Entrepreneurial Studies.

2

Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll SCG-568

number of American parents. While during the war birth rate had plummeted, after 1945, five million extra children were added to the American toy consumer pool in a “baby boom”.11 Further, compared to the previous generation, baby-boomers’ parents commanded higher incomes (see Exhibit 1 for US per capita GDP and Exhibit 2 for US toy manufacturer sales) and showed an increasingly greater interest in toys, actively supporting the development of their children.

Despite being stationed with the army Camps-Roberts from 1944 to 1946,12 Elliot was able to come up with endless ideas for toys during the 1940s, which Mattson developed in their laboratory and Ruth was fast to market to wholesalers. In the late 1940s, Mattel was already grossing $2 million (about $21.5 million in 2019). In 1947, the Handlers bought out Mattson borrowing the capital from Ruth’s brother- in-law, Louie Greenwald (Sarah’s husband), and split the responsibilities between the two of them. In 1948, they incorporated the company. While Elliot assumed control of operations, logistics, and processes; Ruth took charge of external relations, namely procurement, distribution, sales and marketing.

Between the late 1940s and the mid-1950s, Mattel was the first company to conceptualize musical toys and bring to market a whole product line. Their first major hit was a plastic ukulele, named uku- de (see Exhibit 3); a miniature plastic piano and a music box followed. Ruth described the ukulele as “very classy with multi-colored decals” and recalled: “It was going to retail for about a buck and a half. And we made all mistakes in the world with that thing. We learned our lesson very fast.”13 When they first launched the uku-de, Ruth had no idea about the seasonality of the toy market, nor about how operations should be planned accordingly. They first sold some samples of the ukulele to a Chicago agent in January for a discounted price and then approached other sales reps in the same area. They ignored how the industry’s conventional pricing arrangements with sales representatives and wholesalers worked, and compromised relationships with both parties. Then, in March, at the Toy Fair, a plethora of knocked-off versions mushroomed after their samples had been released earlier in the year, which depressed their retail price. Despite these problems they obtained a massive order, which they almost missed as they could not finance manufacturing and packaging expenses. Eventually, Eddie Meyers, a generous box manufacturer, personally guaranteed the account and as Ruth recalled: “we sold our ukulele, learned what big volume was and made half a million dollars.”14

As for the miniature piano, it was presented at the toy show with great success but turned out to be a major loss. First, the piano looked gorgeous but had a faulty design, which was prone to break during shipment. Second, it was priced too low at $3, and the Handlers later realized they were losing between 20 and 30 cents for each of the 400,000 units sold.15 A similar problem occurred at first with the musical box, but eventually they turned it into a success. However, their lack of business knowledge and experience in manufacturing continued to show. The Handlers, bursting with new ideas, went into expensive product development, increasing their burn rate and causing frequent liquidity issues. Once again, Ruth managed to convince a relative, Harry Paul, her sister Doris’ husband, to lend them the funds needed to finance their working capital cycle. Harry later decided to remain as an investor in the firm with 25% ownership.16

The supportive context of the early 1950s was forgiving of those mistakes and allowed the company to continue growing. Reflecting back on her experience, Ruth reckoned that: “We did, far in advance of the whole industry, get into intensive effort and expenditure in research and design very early, because we knew that our growth and our success depended on being unique in both product and marketing.”17 In addition to being competitive, the toy industry was prone to seasonal fads. This pushed Elliot to continue producing novel toy concepts inspired by his two small children, Barbara and Kenneth (born in 1944). After the success with musical instruments, Mattel launched a full toy-gun line and expanded further into new items. As head of the R&D department, Elliot established processes to periodically test prototypes on children of different ages. These prototypes helped Mattel to communicate the idea for new products and refine it.18

3

SCG-568 Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll

Ruth also introduced multiple innovations in marketing, which allowed the company to grow fast during the 1950s. 19 Leveraging the increased presence of TV sets in American households and cooperating with emerging professional ad agencies, they pioneered new strategies for marketing directly to children. In 1955, Ruth embarked on a giant bet by allocating $500,000 (about equal to their net worth) to become the exclusive all-year-round sponsor of a kids’ TV show, “The Mickey Mouse Club,” where they advertised their brand-new creation, the Burp Gun, “the first automatic cap gun.”20 In 1959, Mattel launched a $2 million advertising plan to be the sole sponsor of a co-created half-hour kid show on ABC, “Matty’s Funday Funnies,” which by 1961 expanded to a bi-weekly show reaching an estimated $25 million children for 52 Weeks a year.21

This major investment in TV represented a significant break with tradition also in terms of ad content. At the time, conventional wisdom considered toy ads effective only at Christmas time and when primarily targeting adults.22 Instead, Mattel’s first commercial featured a boy hunting for elephants in the living room, making his imagination the central message of the short video. By the 1960s, they had moved to “wall-to-wall advertising,” namely simultaneous ads on multiple networks. As Ruth explained: “We would buy up all the programs on Saturday morning on ABC, NBC, CBS- all the shows. We became very strong in buying TV time all year long, where the other manufacturers couldn’t keep up and wouldn’t dare.”23 The introduction of TV ads with constant exposure further shortened the average toy product-cycle to about two to three years, increasing the need for novelty in the industry and favoring firms with deep pockets. In the mid-1950s, Mattel had reached $6.5 million revenue (equal to $62 million in 2019) with increasing orders, but demand was growing so fast that the firm had constant liquidity problems.24

Barbie: Innovation and Femininity through the 1960s Ruth Handler admitted having toyed with the idea of creating a grown-up doll since observing her

small daughter Barbara playing with paper dolls: “She would sit and play all the adult situations you could imagine with these paper dolls (…) and the clothing was big part of this paper dolls playing and the props, you know, they had little cars and they had this and that and all this was part of the play pattern.”25 Ruth realized that this was “a very basic, but much needed play pattern that had never been offered by the doll industry to little girls.”26 Barbara also played with regular dolls but Ruth thought that: “they had flatter bellies, they were breast-less, had chubby stubby legs – they were unrealistic.” While traditional dolls limited girls to play the role of moms, paper dolls portrayed adult characters, and “she (Barbara) and her friends projected their dreams of being grown-ups through the paper dolls and kept changing their clothes for each play situation. Through that type of doll play they also integrated the world around them.”27

However, when Ruth pitched the idea to her team at Mattel, the male engineers resisted it. Ruth was still struggling to find a good solution for a tridimensional doll based on paper-dolls. In addition, she was now unsure about the resources she could mobilize at Mattel for this project, given the less than friendly reactions she received: “I did nothing about it because I didn’t know quite how to go about getting it done. We did not have the best doll designers and we were not in the doll business.”28

In 1956, during a business-vacation trip to Europe, Ruth came across “Bild Lilli,” a blonde-haired and blue-eyed adult-looking doll in a toy shop in Switzerland (Exhibit 4). Handler bought Lilli dressed in one style for Barbara, but then she realized that the doll came with multiple outfits. However, these outfits could not be bought separately. She explained: “So, I bought the doll into that costume and still another costume. By now I had it all figured out.”29 At this point, Ruth knew what Lilli’s manufacturers were missing. Upon return to the US, Ruth bought the rights to market Bild Lilli and proceeded in using her as a prototype for creating a Mattel doll that embodied the American beauty standards of the time: “I wanted an American teenager, but I wanted a narrow waist, narrow ankles, and boobs.” 30 The Handlers quickly understood that to realize higher margins, Barbie should be manufactured in Asia,

4

ntrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll SCG-568

following an increasing trend of Western multinationals manufacturing there.31 The doll would be sold wearing only a small swimsuits, while clothes would be sold separately (Exhibit 5). They hired Charlotte Johnson, a young fashion designer, whose task was to create outfits reflecting current trends among teenagers and young women. They sent Charlotte to Japan, where Mattel organized production of both the dolls and the clothing line.32

When first presented at the Toy Show in 1959, Barbie’s reception was lukewarm. The doll’s curves were considered too provocative for a toy, and buyers worried that the market may already be saturated with fashion-dolls, i.e. baby-looking dolls whose clothes could be changed. Even Elliot was not fully convinced, as by that time he was completely absorbed by the new concept of a talking doll, Chatty Cathy. Ruth recalled: “Buyers were so extreme in their reaction to the doll (…) 70% of them had a negative reaction [they thought that] the American public would not accept this [look] on a doll.”33 However, Ruth was determined to make her vision a reality. Once Barbie hit the counters that same year, she was an instant success.34

By envisioning a doll that could embody a variety of roles for women, Handler broke with the previous industry standard for girls’ toys. By comparison, global beauty brands, such as Estée Lauder and Max Factor, did not incorporate professional styles for women in their campaigns until the 1970s.35 Ruth envisioned a doll that could empower little girls by representing their aspirations. As Ruth explained: “When I conceived Barbie, I believed it was important to give little girls self-esteem.”36 So the doll was designed to portray girls’ imagined futures and inspire them with a new model of femininity. Barbie was independent and modern, she had no family, was career- and especially consumption-oriented. In short: a new female version of the American dream. Through the different clothing options, such as the prom dress, the office-career clothes, and the tennis outfit, Barbie could embody different professions and activities for women. Blonde and blue-eyed, with her multiple outfits and accessories, Barbie also incorporated the beauty standards, the charm and exclusivity of California’s lifestyle in the 1960s, increasingly portrayed in Hollywood movies, together with the growing societal interest in fitness and appearance.37 During the 1960s, Mattel’s Barbie Doll surfaced as a global product and an American beauty icon. Her look reflected the ideal type of the American girl, which by then filled the screens of movie theaters and newly acquired TV sets in Western Europe and Japan.38

As the doll adaptations were potentially infinite, Mattel was set to provide a whole “Barbie ecosystem” reflecting real world developments and contemporary fashion trends. Barbie was suited to limitless follow-on products, not only clothes and fashion accessories, but also cars, sport tools, houses, pets, and other auxiliary dolls. After what Handler defined as: “tremendous amounts of requests for a boy doll,” Mattel launched “Ken,” named after the Handlers’ son Kenneth, in 1961.39 Just like for Barbie, Ruth wanted Ken to look realistic, but she encountered deep resistance among the male staff of Mattel. She explained: “We did not have the guts to give him the male organs, or even a suggestion. I have to say, that I was ahead of my time in that respect. I did want them. [Yet, in the end] I couldn’t win in our male organization… And our guys (…) made the decision to put them in painted underpants.”40 In the following years, Mattel went on adding characters to Barbie’s world, such as Skipper, Barbie’s younger (and flatter) sister, and “Colored Francie,” an African-American friend, in support of the 1960s civil right movement.

The massive marketing budget behind Barbie’s promotion and the creation of an ecosystem around the doll, allowed Mattel to break with the typical two to three-year product cycle in the toy industry and make Barbie a timeless and iconic product. In 1967, Mattel launched a trade-in program for Barbie dolls, which resulted in more than 1,250,000 dolls exchanged in the first month alone.41 This surprised adults and toy industry observers, who had grown up considering toys as life companions never to be exchanged, and made them realize that toys had become disposable mass consumer goods.42 More than 1.5 million customers signed up to Barbie fan clubs in the US alone and by 1973, the Barbie line had

5

SCG-568 Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll

generated more than $600 million in sales (equal to 2019 $3.5 billion ).43 In 1960, Mattel went public over the counter. In 1961, the company made $1.2 million net profit and $26 million in sales (about $10 and $180 million in 2019 respectively). In 1963, the Handlers proceeded to list the company on the New York Stock Exchange for $10 million and quickly entered the Fortune 500 list.44

While the Barbie ecosystem grew, Elliot innovated further. Observing the great success of fast cars in America’s 1960s pop culture, he pitched the idea of creating a new line of pocket-size die-cast cars. Initially, both Ruth and his R&D department remained skeptical as the die-cast toy market was dominated by Matchbox at the time. Just like Ruth with Barbie, Elliot pushed forward with his plan and launched the first “Hot Wheels” car, the Custom Camaro, in 1968, retailing for $1 (see Exhibit 6 for examples of the toys). Elliot also brought Fred Adickes on board, a car designer at Chrysler, who in turn used his network in the automotive industry to set up a dedicated design team.45 Hot Wheels incorporated several innovations in terms of design, color and performance and came within a transparent packaging, previously unseen among competitors. The Hot Wheels development, in many ways, paralleled the one of Barbie. While Barbie was designed to allow children to project themselves into adult experiences, Hot Wheels very similarly encouraged “playing adult” by imagining oneself driving and going to far-away places. It suggested autonomy, coolness and adventure to children. Finally, as for Barbie, it implemented a razor-blade model, as tracks and accessories to use with the car were to be purchased separately. In a few years, Hot Wheels cars had become a classic staple in children’s room.

Ruth Handler after Barbie: Crisis and Rebirth (1967-1985) During the 1960s, Mattel aggressively expanded overseas towards new markets in Europe and

Japan, taking advantage of new manufacturing locations in Mexico and the Far East. After 1967 Mattel also launched a professionalization program hiring an external CEO and increasingly transferring responsibilities to middle management. Although the Barbie line and new products like Hot-Wheels, allowed the company to grow swiftly, Mattel faced increased criticism by consumer associations that argued their marketing approach manipulated children.46 Ruth in particular was attacked for creating a doll with unrealistic features, thereby promoting an unhealthy body image for little girls to aspire to.

In order to diversify from toys, Mattel entered into several diverse acquisitions, which stretched their product portfolio.47 The company did not manage to successfully scale and in the 1970s a quick descent into chaos brought the company to its knees. The oil crisis hit in 1973 depressing demand and inventory started piling up. Several acquisitions turned sour and problems with manufacturing facilities compounded the issue. As a result, the company reported a massive loss of $32 million in 1972 ($195 million in 2019), which prompted shareholders to file a lawsuit.48 The ensuing Securities and Exchange Commission investigation evidenced multiple accounting irregularities and defective returns. As a result, the Handlers were forced out of Mattel and left the board on October 17th, 1975.49 In 1978, Ruth, together with several top executives, was sentenced for falsifying earnings and sales records. She had to pay hefty fines and attend to 2,500 hours of community services.50 In 1980, the Handlers cashed most of their stock, equaling 12% of the company, for $18.5 million (about $60 million in 2019).51 Personally, too, the 1970s represented a dark period for Ruth. In 1970s, she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had to undergo a mastectomy. The crisis and scandal at Mattel severely eroded her reputation as a hard-working and well-regarded businesswoman. For several years, the Handlers were haunted by negative press which depressed Ruth’s morale.52

However, she was quick to recover. “I had resigned from Mattel in 1975 and I had floundered for around a year and then I had started Nearly Me (…) my prosthesis business.”53 Before the widespread development of plastic surgery, most women, who underwent invasive operations such as breast removal due to cancer, used rubber or silicone breast forms, or external prostheses, that could be placed inside their bras. After her mastectomy in 1970, Ruth experimented with the external breast prothesis

6

Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll SCG-568

on the market and found that the ones available were ill-fitting, uncomfortable and very limited in selection and size. She found a prosthesis designer in Santa Monica, Peyton Massey, who created her first two prostheses for $350 each (about $1,750 in 2019) and after several iterations in shape, size and material, eventually created a customized artificial breast. Ruth immediately saw the opportunity of entering this market, but then she got involved in the Mattel’s crisis and discontinued the project.

It was not until 1976 that Ruth assembled a small team with Peyton, Elliot and some former Mattel engineers and designers to create Ruthton Corporation (a combination of Ruth and Peyton).54 The venture produced silicone prostheses, as well as bras and swimsuits to fit them, under the brand Nearly Me. The company was innovative on multiple fronts. The protheses came in different sizes and shapes and could fit everyday bras and swimsuits. They were also affordable compared to Peyton’s first customized prototype, retailing between $90 and $150 ($500-$650 in 2019). After fine-tuning the product, Ruth launched a nation-wide department store promotion campaign in 1977, which brought her to travel across America every year until the early 1980s. 55 During these events, Ruth would personally help customers in the fitting rooms and train sales representatives on how to market the product. Besides capitalizing on her business network, Ruth applied several marketing techniques she had tested in the toy industry. For instance, she developed a swimsuit “Malibu” collection and a bra- line fitting the prosthesis. Her trade-in program for the artificial breasts mimicked the one she had developed for Barbie years earlier. She also discovered that clothing lines displayed a seasonality similar to the one in the toy industry.56

Last but not least, Ruth also developed a powerful narrative that was meant to empower women. She hired women who had undergone mastectomies, like herself, into the company. Nearly Me’s sales and marketing strategy leveraged Ruth’s past experience and her persona. Her picture was featured on all the prosthesis information material and she also modelled for the Malibu swimwear collection.57 By 1979, Nearly Me had sold 200,000 prostheses and grossed $2 million ($7.5 million in 2019). 58 It continued to grow through the mid-1980s, driven by Ruth’s ambitious marketing campaigns and in- store promotions through the country.

Epilogue In the mid-1980s, the advances in surgical breast implants and angioplasties made it clear that the

market for artificial prostheses was bound to shrink. In 1986, Ruth underwent another mastectomy and then developed heart problems. In the mid-1980s, Ruth had started inquiring about potential acquirers for Nearly Me and eventually sold the company in 1991 to Spenco Medical Corp, remaining as a part- time consultant and occasional speaker.59 Despite Ruth’s career rollercoaster, Barbie continued to be one of the best-selling products in the history of the toy industry. In the early 1990s, the Barbie line yielded more than $75 million (about $140 million in 2019). Thanks to Nearly Me, her activities in support of women and the continuous success that Barbie obtained through the 1990s, Ruth was able to restore her tarnished reputation. She spent her last years touring America as a guest speaker at Barbie fan clubs and female entrepreneurship events. Elliot continued to be by her side (see Exhibit 7 for a photo of Ruth and Elliot). On April 27, 2002, Ruth Handler died in Los Angeles at age 85.60

7

250 0

225 9 204

1 200 0

182 4 156

0 150 0

142 0

110 0

114 1

121 3

130 4

100 0

99 2 77

8 83 8 59

2 65 3

692 684

50 0

0 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968

1969 1970 Year

SCG-568 Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll Exhibit 1: US Real Domestic Product Per Capita In Chained 2012 US Dollars

Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A939RX0Q048SBEA , accessed March 2, 2020.

Exhibit 2: US Toy Manufacturer Sales In Million US Dollars

Source: Ruth Handler’s collection at Schlesinger Archives, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies at Harvard University, RH MC/501/BP/8- 10. Author's compilation from different public data. Sales: Ernst & Ernst Annual Index X 718015666. Exports: Report #FT 410 "US Exports of Domestic Merchandise," Dept. of Commerce, Census Bureau. Imports: Report #125, "US Imports of Merchandise for Consumption," Dept. of Commerce, Census Bureau.

8

Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll SCG-568

Exhibit 3: Uke-A-Doodle 1948

Exhibit 4: Bild Lilli Doll

Source: Courtesy of William DeJesus, collector, 2020.

9

SCG-568 Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll Exhibit 5: First Barbie (1959)

Source: Courtesy of Diane Williams, collector, 2020.

Exhibit 6: Hot Wheels

1967 Pontiac GTO Chevrolet Camaro Convertible

Source: i-Stock

10

Entrepreneurial Imagination: Ruth Handler and the Barbie Doll SCG-568

Exhibit 7: Photo of Ruth and Elliot Handler

Elliot (second from left) and Ruth (right) with friends Pam and Derek Gable. Photo taken at a reception featuring paintings by Elliot Handler.

Source: Courtesy of Derek Gable

1 Ruth Hander’s Collection at Schlesinger Library Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Studies at Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Henceforth RH, MC/501/DD/33/2 Tape VIIIA 03/27/1993, p. 4. 2 RH MC501/DD/33/1 Tape IVA 3/22/1993, p. 4. 3 Handler, R. and Shannon J., Dream Doll: The Ruth Handler Story, Longmeadow Press, 1994. 4 RH MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/1981, p. 3. 5 MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/1981, p. 5. 6 RH MC501/BP/8-9. 7 RH MC501/BP/8-9. 8 RH MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/81, p. 27. 9 Greenfield, L.F., Toys, children, and the toy industry in a culture of consumption, 1890—1991. (Volumes I and II), unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Ohio State University, 1991. 10 Byrne, C., A Profile of the United States Toy Industry, 2Nd ed., Business Expert Press, 2017. 11 Toys and Novelties. February 1946, p. 225. 12 RH MC501/FC 1945-57. 13 RH MC501/DD32/2, 1981, p. 28. 14 RH MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/81, p. 34. 15 RH MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/81, p. 36. 16 RH MC501/NM/32/2, Tape 1 6/27/81, pp. 39-42. 17 RH MC501/DD32/2, 1981, p. 51. 18 RH MC/501/BP/1/2 Memo 1961. 19 RH MC501/DD32/2, 1981, p. 28. 20 Video of Matty’s Funday Funnies: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMW6W8voSQ4 21 RH MC501/BP/1/1, History of Mattel, 1969, p. 24. 22 Cross, G., Kids’ Stuff: Toys and the Changing World of American Childhood, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p. 165. 23 RH MC501/DD/33/2, Tape VIIB 03/27/1993, p. 3.

11