Talk:Forbidden Planet (retail chain)

Untitled

There are two Forbidden Planet chains - Forbidden Planet is the larger and more successful - the whole chain split apparently due to some argument between the owners and so two rival firms with the name were created. Anyone know any more? Magic Pickle 00:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

There definitely has to be a mention of the Forbidden Planet in NYC. It's something of a local landmark! --Icarus 18:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the relationship between the two companies does need some clarification. For example, FPI is stated to have "majority ownership" of the NY store, so does FP own the rest, or is a third-party? Just a bit of rewriting would clear things up, I think. Sadly, I came ot the page to find out about the differences between the two companies, so I can't be of any help! Kelvingreen (talk) 13:23, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

The NY store had at least one location prior to its corner spot on Broadway and 13th, a ground floor and basement space a block or two further down. I remember shopping there many times in the early 90s; it has however been almost twenty years since the move, so I'm having a hard time remembering the exact street address and a similarly difficult time finding a reliable reference. Silberritter (talk) 03:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Somebody should throw in the fact that MC Frontalot has a whole song about the place on his album "Secrets From the Future". (It's a good song, at that.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.214.106.17 (talk) 17:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The history seems a bit sparse and doesn't go into enough detail on how the chain expanded, e.g. which stores were complete new-starts, as opposed to FP buying out an existing chain, such as was the case with the Odyssey shops in Manchester and Leeds. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Reason for Lake, Landau & Luckman Split?

I never heard what the specific issue was that they argued over, and caused the two rival firms. Wasn't a woman, was it? --24.190.71.206 (talk) 23:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

“Megastore”

The article states “Forbidden Planet London is the largest cult megastore in the UK, flagship of a national chain that includes megastores in Bristol and Southampton”… Apart from the fact this sounds like PR puff, the use of “megastore” sounds unencyclopædic. Does it actually have any meaning outide of marketing? Using “store” or more happily “shop” given that it’s British, would be a better option here. The intention of the sentence is to describe the purpose of the enterprise - qualifying it with needless superlatives seems to devalue the entry. None of the shops is distinctively or outstandingly big when compared to other shops as a general class, they may just have been a bit bigger than comic shops had been in the past - and “mega” to mean big is almost a comedy trope in SF and comic-circles, rather than a serious comparitor (probably popularised by MegaCity One in 2000AD…?). A sweeping generalization, but nobody talks about going to “the megastore”, because everybody calls it “Eff-Pee” anyway… Jock123 (talk) 08:20, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Some of the shops are self-described as "Megastore" (capitalised), but you're right in that the introductory text should simply read "shop." I'll see if I can address this. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

In my time I have been to Forbidden Planet stores in Glasgow, Southampton, Leeds and London. The 'megastore' in London occupies roughly the same amount of floor space and size as the one in Southampton. The ones in Leeds and Glasgow are roughly the same size. I'm not certain on whether the term 'mega' is used to describe floor space or not, but hopefully this gives some comparison range here. Justin.Parallax (talk) 11:07, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

The London and Southampton stores are both run by Forbidden Planet and are self-described as "Megastores." Glasgow and Leeds are run by Forbidden Planet International - i.e. the separate other company - which does not use the "Megastore" description. The question of what is or what is not a "Megastore" is restricted to the FP stores, and the FPI shops don't come into the equation. Nick Cooper (talk) 11:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Good to clarify. Justin.Parallax (talk) 12:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

If one of the companies had opted for a completely different name, things would be a lot easier.... Nick Cooper (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Too many external links

Could there be more reasons, asides providing information without interests, why there are so many external links to Forbidden Planet. Although the community should be least bothered as this has no positive effect on the store's SEO, I still think it has intruded our space too much beyond informing.

Any other opinions? Cc. User:Bhadani User:NawlinWiki User:Vegaswikian User:TonyTheTiger User:Grutness User:Carlossuarez46 User:TenPoundHammer User:Nyttend User:Colonies_Chris User:Tim! User:Dbachmann Danidamiobi (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, too many links. Best to cut it down to two links, one per chain. We have to give priority to one over the other, so give priority to the original chain (the one that wasn't "Scotland"), merely because it's older. Curious, why were Vegaswikian and I called in? I've never edited this article, and I don't much edit articles related to bookshops, while Vegaswikian hasn't edited anything in nearly four years. Nyttend (talk) 22:05, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

You were brought in for exemplary experience ;)Danidamiobi (talk) 10:57, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Certainly the blogs and subscription services shouldn't be there. I've remoed the less appropriate ones. Grutness...wha? 03:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I guess that was just perfect. Danidamiobi (talk) 10:57, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

:) Grutness...wha? 14:58, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Time to split?

Coming back to the page again after a few years, it's dispiriting to see that is is still a confusing mess, with no clear demarcation between the original business and the two separate companies it split into. For example, both the "Founding" and "Expansion" sections deal with events before and after the 1992/93 split, and it makes painful reading trying to work out which text relates to which of the two companies.

I would think that at the very least the "Founding" section should be deal only with events up to 1992/93 - perhaps as "Foundign and initial expansion" - and then have two separate sections for the respective companies from the split to the present day. Nick Cooper (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)