业绩失速的布鲁可,难成下一个泡泡玛特
BLOKSBLOKS(HK:00325) 3 6 Ke·2025-10-22 02:10

Core Viewpoint - After years of consecutive losses, the company known as the "Chinese version of LEGO," Blokus, has finally achieved profitability [1] Financial Performance - In the first half of this year, Blokus reported revenue of 1.338 billion RMB, a year-on-year increase of 27.9%, and an adjusted net profit of 320 million RMB, up 9.6%, marking the end of four years of net losses [2][12] - The revenue growth is primarily supported by non-recurring income, including government subsidies, rather than improved market performance [2][13] - Despite a significant increase in product sales, the revenue growth rate has noticeably slowed, indicating that the low-price marketing strategy may be backfiring [2][10] Market Expansion - Blokus's overseas business revenue surged nearly 900% year-on-year in the first half of this year, possibly inspired by the success of Pop Mart in international markets [3][21] - However, the contribution of overseas markets to Blokus's total revenue remains low at only 8.3% [21] Product Strategy - Blokus has heavily relied on licensed IPs, with over 80% of its revenue coming from them, particularly from Ultraman, which contributes nearly 60% [16] - The company has expanded its IP matrix by signing contracts for 13 new IPs and launching 273 SKUs, but this has led to high licensing costs, resulting in continued losses [16][17] Competitive Landscape - The domestic market for building block toys is highly competitive, with brands like LEGO and other local companies also vying for market share [17] - Blokus's market share in the global building block toy market is only 6.3%, while LEGO and Bandai Namco together hold over 75% [21] Future Directions - To sustain growth, Blokus may need to either develop its own IPs or enhance brand influence, as relying solely on external licenses is not sustainable [22] - The company plans to improve its product design and development capabilities to create proprietary IPs, which could help mitigate risks associated with third-party licensing [22][23]