BlueTulip wrote:

I kinda skimmed through it but I wanna share some things. First, Pink guy. He doesn't exist. Using your logic, all of the “purple guys” from the 4 games are different people, as they are not the same shade of purple. Or, the kid with the foxy mask at the restaurant and the kid with a foxy mask jumpscaring the player are different, as one has white pupils and one doesn't. You see what I'm saying here. Next, FNAF 4 being the bite of 83. I'm not gonna argue on this one right now. Finally, FNAF World isn't canon to the story. It may help us with it, but the game itself is not canon.

Edit: Plus, PG smiling in the GO GO GO foxy minigame could be because anything. He could be smiling because he successfully carried out his “wipeout”.

1. I was looking at the picture more closely at the GO GO GO minigame, and that man isn't Purple Guy, because he has completely black pupils and the pinkish-purple skin color. So I was slightly wrong on that one. I think that the ‘dead kids’ are a flashback, rather than really dead, because this happened in public, and thus, Pink Guy would have been arrested.

2. Actually, your theory about all of the purple men being different does make sense within my theory. That's why the employee in the back room is purple, why the older brother and his friends (when they start working for the company) are shown as slightly different shades of purple, and why the killer is a pinkish-purple.

3. The absence of pupils in the other minigames could be due to lighting. Or the pupils were added to show that he's becoming more like the animatronics themselves: devoid of feelings. Thankfully, his brother's death brings him back from the edge.

4. The FN@F 4's Bite of ‘83 has just about been proven. If you have any evidence to the contrary though, I’d love to hear it.

5. I know that FN@F World isn't canon. I just wanted to put that bit in for fun.

6. He could be smiling because he's planning something. Honestly, he could be smiling for any reason.

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

BlueTulip wrote:

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

1. I understand now that the ‘Pink Guy’ theory is incorrect. I just call him ‘Pink Guy’ so I don't confuse him with the other (mostly) innocent Purple Guys.

2. The thing about Mangle…Let me explain how this is still the Bite of ‘83, and the Bite of ’87 comes later.

There's a minigame where your character (the crying child) is scared by the older brother, who was hiding behind the couch. The T.V. is on, and a show called ‘Fredbear & Friends,’ with the date of 1983 on it, is playing.

Mangle is, at this time, a character on the show.

This explains the Mangle toy in the bedroom.

I think that each kid in the FN@F 4 family has a different set of toys. Here we go:

Oldest brother: He has all the masks. He gave his friends masks too.

Middle child (Younger brother): He has all the plushies, but his older brother ripped the head off of the Foxy plush.

Sister: She has all the plastic toys, which break easily. This is why Mangle is so broken. (I owned some plastic action figures, and I can tell you right now, they break very, very easily.)

And yes, these toys are all merchandise, based off of the characters on the show.

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

BlueTulip wrote:

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

Having done a bit of research, I can't come up with any explanation for Mangle being there…except that the 4th game does, in fact, happen in 1987 and that the television program is a rerun.

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

Having done a bit of research, I can't come up with any explanation for Mangle being there…except that the 4th game does, in fact, happen in 1987 and that the television program is a rerun.

Anyways, nice theory!

BlueTulip wrote:

I've been thinking about FN@F a lot recently, and I have a very interesting theory to share with you all. (Just to warn you, this is another LONG one.)

I wish to begin with the original Fredbear's Diner; the one before FN@F 4's and its sister location. If you were surprised by this statement, allow me to explain.

In the minigame; Give Cake, you play as a Fredbear animatrionic that goes around feeding cake to children. I want to note here that you were the ONLY animatrionic in the entire building. This means that this small location wasn't the larger, more modern one we see in FN@F 4, but one built about 1 to 2 years before.

If you remember, there's a kid standing outside this building. Most people seem to believe that he was abandoned outside the establishment, but I think that he was waiting for his parent(s) to get off of work.

While he's standing there, a man drives up in a car and kills him. However, this man ISN'T the Purple Guy, but Pink Guy. Look at his eyes and his body color and you'll see that these men aren't the same.

After Pink Guy's victim dies, ongoing police investigations/lawsuits force this building's company to file bankruptcy. Freddy Fazbear Entertainment buys the company, and builds the two locations I mentioned above.

These two locations had two different sets of animatronics: Golden Freddy & Golden Bonnie at the FN@F 4 location, and the “Withered” Animatronics at the sister location.

“Well, that's all well and good, but what happened to the spirit of the murdered child?” you ask.

“He became that creepy stalker Fredbear plushie that says such weird stuff to the kid in the minigames!” I reply.

As to why the kid and the possessed plushie are so afraid of the animatronics, they saw what looked like a dead body getting stuffed violently into a suit, but it was just a man getting his costume put on by an employee. And no, that employee WASN'T actually Purple Guy; or at least, not the one in the other minigames.

I think all the kids see the male security guards (and possibly others) of the FN@F games as purple men. This is why they always attack you in the games; the men's faces may change, but their perception of you doesn't.

And while we're on the subject of purple things…Nightmare Fredbear is this child's representation of Purple Freddy. Did you notice there are no purple animatronics in his nightmare? Nightmare Bonnie is more blue than purple! That's why Nightmare Fredbear is clearish-black: The kid hates the color so much (because he associates it with death), that he can't see it in his dreams.

Fast-forwarding to the end of the game, Fredbear's line: “You're broken. I will put you back together,” means that the first dead child will help teach this new victim how to possess an animatronic's suit. No wonder the child's reaction is to cry even harder! His soul will now haunt the diner!

And what about the box? To finally open the box, we first have to find out what happens to this child's older brother.

I would assume that he and his friends would spend some time behind bars. After that, they decide to work for the company, possibly to pay off debts they most likely incurred.

Phone Guy and Phone Dude are two of the masked bullies from FN@F 4. Phone Dude worked at the sister location to FBFD, until the Pink Guy struck again, killing 4 more kids and stuffing them into the Withered Animatronics. After the place shut down, he disappeared.I like to think he started a family.

Phone Guy doesn't start working for the company until the events of FN@F 2. Some people think that he's the murderer in this game, but I disagree. I believe that Pink Guy began working the dayshift. He's very good at taking apart/putting together animatronics, and knows how to tamper with the facial-recognition systems.

Why does he come back again? As a disgruntled former employee, he wants to give this company as much pain as possible. He wants this new company to shut down, just like the original.

As for your playable character, he does in fact get bitten by Mangle at the end of FN@F 2. There were actually two bites: FN@F 4's Bite of ‘83, and FN@F 2’s Bite of ‘87.

And I’ll now take a break from the living for a moment and concentrate on the dead.

The Withered animatronics (4), plus Shadow Bonnie (the form the kid from Fredbear's plushie takes occasionally to scare you), and Shadow Freddy (the Bite of ‘83 victim’s shadow form) (2), plus the kid Pink Guy kills in this game (Puppet) (1), equals 7 spirits so far.

The reason you don't see the Shadow animatronics much is because their possessed animatronics (Springtrap and Golden Freddy) are in a hidden back room, which Phone Guy mentions:

“One of the suits was used, a yellow one…We had a spare in the back. Someone used it, and now none of them are acting right…”

This is why neither GF or ST are seen in this game: They're both in the back room, out of use.

After FN@F 2, the Toy animatronics and the Withered animatronics are torn apart and used to make the four new “Originals” seen in FN@F 1.

The Withered animatronics were in such horrible condition that I highly doubt the merits of reusing them. Besides, they stank. Why would anyone even try to repair them? Therefore, the suits are completely destroyed and their parts used to make the new ones.

Pink Guy strikes one last time in this game, as evidenced by the newspaper clippings on the walls of this game's location.

However, the newspaper got the number of deaths wrong by 1. Because of Golden Freddy's bad odor and the new murders, the newspaper thought that 5 more children were killed, but it was only 4.

After this game, and before FN@F 3's events, Pink Guy dies of natural causes. Since he was already an adult during the early 1980's, there's no way that he survived until FN@F 3.

And now we can finally uncover Purple Guy's true identity…

He is the older brother from FN@F 4!

This is proven by the fact that he and Purple Guy both love Foxy.

“How do you know that?” you ask.

During the Foxy minigame where you have to go out and greet children, you see Purple Guy come and smile at you just before you run out for the third and final time.

Seeing Purple Guy causes you to have a flashback, which is why the three children seem to be dead when you run outside again. They aren't actually dead; this is just his memories coming back to haunt him.

And while we're on the subject of minigames, ‘The Happiest Day’ minigame shows the release of:

The Bite of ‘83 victim (Golden Freddy Mask)

The Withered animatronics (Foxy, Freddy, Chica, and Bonnie)

And the Puppet (the kid who died in FN@F 2 by Pink Guy)

During this scene, the first victim (Shadow Bonnie {Actually Shadow Springtrap}) and the newly destroyed FN@F 1 animatronics’ spirits cause Purple Guy's death.

Before I end this theory with FN@F 3's explanation, I'll tell you what the locked box contains, and why Purple Guy destroys the animatronics.

The box contains Purple Guy's Foxy mask, and with it, all of his anger, guilt, and sadness over his brother's death.

He destroys the animatronics to try and also destroy these feelings. But as the minigame shows, this plan backfires, and causes his death.

In addition, the five spirits are still trapped, which is why, if you get the ‘Bad Ending,’ the animatronics' eyes are glowing.

Durning FN@F 3's fire, these children's spirits are finally released, but if you brighten the image of the final newspaper clipping, you see that Springtrap is still alive. His spirit cannot rest until he can finally prove that he is innocent, or until he can come to terms with his brother's death and finally open the box he's kept locked away in his mind for so long.

And finally, I think FN@F World is possibly connected to all of this.

I think that the world you play through is the spirits' own imaginary world, and the animatronics you meet are their imaginary friends.

Well, thanks for reading this (insanely long) theory!

Please let me know if anything seems off, or if you have a question about any part of the theory.

Thanks.

Scratch on

~BT

PrincessLuna789 wrote:

cocothekidrs wrote:

Can someone plz explain the unknown character:Your text to link here…

OMG.

-GrimmArtLegend- wrote:

hawaii101 wrote:

-GrimmArtLegend- wrote:

Nextor wrote:

-GrimmArtLegend- wrote:

How many of you guy on here are 13 or older? This is a question thet has nothing to relate….

Are you STALKING US?
DUN DUN DUHHHH!
ARE YOU THE PURPLE GUY IN DISGUISE!!
BOOM!
MORE DRAMATIC BOOM!
MOST DRAMATIC EXPLOSION EVER!
EVERYONE PANIC! GRIMMARTLEGEND WILL KILL US ALL
On an entirely different note, yes, I am older than 13.14192653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816404286208998268 years old.
(That's ten plus pi years old.)

{Boom shaka laka}

OH NO YOU CAUGHT MEEEE!! YES FOR IT IS I PURPLE MAN!!! I WAS HIDDING IS A GIRLS BODYYY!!!!!!!
Ps. That cool Nice to know your old too!
PLZ DO NOT ARREST ME!!!!!!
IF YOU TELL JUST REMEMBER>>>> I KNOW HOW TO HIDE A BODY

I'm scared for my life…..

Ehhhh don't be……
I'm a potato
so your good

can u summmerize it? i am not willing to read all of that

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

PrincessLuna789 wrote:

kitty1killer5 wrote:

SpringTrap2377g wrote:

SISTER LOCTION IS OUT!!!!! FNAF 5 IS RREAL GO TO SCOTTGAME.COM

We already knew that yesterday!

UUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH GREAT. ANOTHER THING I NEED TO BUY IN MY LIFE.
Like no offense but, the games kinda got worse and more confusing after the third game.
First it was the souls of the dead kids, then it was a glitch in their AI
then they were apart of the protagonist's imagina- AH WHO CARES?! JUST MAKE SURE THE ROBOTS STARE AT THE CAMERA AND GO OOGA BOOGA BOOGA AND HE'LL BE RICH I TELL YOU RICH.

I respect your opinion, but I disagree. Also, you don't have to buy it.

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

1. I understand now that the ‘Pink Guy’ theory is incorrect. I just call him ‘Pink Guy’ so I don't confuse him with the other (mostly) innocent Purple Guys.

2. The thing about Mangle…Let me explain how this is still the Bite of ‘83, and the Bite of ’87 comes later.

There's a minigame where your character (the crying child) is scared by the older brother, who was hiding behind the couch. The T.V. is on, and a show called ‘Fredbear & Friends,’ with the date of 1983 on it, is playing.

Mangle is, at this time, a character on the show.

This explains the Mangle toy in the bedroom.

I think that each kid in the FN@F 4 family has a different set of toys. Here we go:

Oldest brother: He has all the masks. He gave his friends masks too.

Middle child (Younger brother): He has all the plushies, but his older brother ripped the head off of the Foxy plush.

Sister: She has all the plastic toys, which break easily. This is why Mangle is so broken. (I owned some plastic action figures, and I can tell you right now, they break very, very easily.)

And yes, these toys are all merchandise, based off of the characters on the show.

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

BlueTulip wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

1. I understand now that the ‘Pink Guy’ theory is incorrect. I just call him ‘Pink Guy’ so I don't confuse him with the other (mostly) innocent Purple Guys.

2. The thing about Mangle…Let me explain how this is still the Bite of ‘83, and the Bite of ’87 comes later.

There's a minigame where your character (the crying child) is scared by the older brother, who was hiding behind the couch. The T.V. is on, and a show called ‘Fredbear & Friends,’ with the date of 1983 on it, is playing.

Mangle is, at this time, a character on the show.

This explains the Mangle toy in the bedroom.

I think that each kid in the FN@F 4 family has a different set of toys. Here we go:

Oldest brother: He has all the masks. He gave his friends masks too.

Middle child (Younger brother): He has all the plushies, but his older brother ripped the head off of the Foxy plush.

Sister: She has all the plastic toys, which break easily. This is why Mangle is so broken. (I owned some plastic action figures, and I can tell you right now, they break very, very easily.)

And yes, these toys are all merchandise, based off of the characters on the show.

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

I was thinking about this a lot last night, and I believe I have solved this problem!

There are actually two reasons for the ‘Toy Animatronics’ having the word ‘Toy’ in front of their names:

1. They look like toys

2. They were first introduced as toys before they were characters on the T.V. program!

In addition, Mangle wasn't designed with two heads. The other ‘head’ is what is left of a parrot pet that was perched on her shoulder.

Why is the toy all broken apart on the floor? I think the toys were made of cheap plastic, which is why the Toy Chca toy's beak fell off, and why Mangle's entire plastic covering was broken almost completely off; except for her head and feet.

The same cheap plastic was most likely used to make the real animatronics, which is why they experienced the same kinds of problems.

Mangle's job as a take-apart toy isn't the children tearing her endoskeleton apart…they're just taking her plastic covering off and putting it back on.

So I believe that this fixes the problem of my theory. I hope this explains Mangle's absence on the show.

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

1. I understand now that the ‘Pink Guy’ theory is incorrect. I just call him ‘Pink Guy’ so I don't confuse him with the other (mostly) innocent Purple Guys.

2. The thing about Mangle…Let me explain how this is still the Bite of ‘83, and the Bite of ’87 comes later.

There's a minigame where your character (the crying child) is scared by the older brother, who was hiding behind the couch. The T.V. is on, and a show called ‘Fredbear & Friends,’ with the date of 1983 on it, is playing.

Mangle is, at this time, a character on the show.

This explains the Mangle toy in the bedroom.

I think that each kid in the FN@F 4 family has a different set of toys. Here we go:

Oldest brother: He has all the masks. He gave his friends masks too.

Middle child (Younger brother): He has all the plushies, but his older brother ripped the head off of the Foxy plush.

Sister: She has all the plastic toys, which break easily. This is why Mangle is so broken. (I owned some plastic action figures, and I can tell you right now, they break very, very easily.)

And yes, these toys are all merchandise, based off of the characters on the show.

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

I was thinking about this a lot last night, and I believe I have solved this problem!

There are actually two reasons for the ‘Toy Animatronics’ having the word ‘Toy’ in front of their names:

1. They look like toys

2. They were first introduced as toys before they were characters on the T.V. program!

In addition, Mangle wasn't designed with two heads. The other ‘head’ is what is left of a parrot pet that was perched on her shoulder.

Why is the toy all broken apart on the floor? I think the toys were made of cheap plastic, which is why the Toy Chca toy's beak fell off, and why Mangle's entire plastic covering was broken almost completely off; except for her head and feet.

The same cheap plastic was most likely used to make the real animatronics, which is why they experienced the same kinds of problems.

Mangle's job as a take-apart toy isn't the children tearing her endoskeleton apart…they're just taking her plastic covering off and putting it back on.

So I believe that this fixes the problem of my theory. I hope this explains Mangle's absence on the show.

First off lets knock the “head” one out. There is no evidence or even any hints to there ever being a parrot animatronic attached to any incarnation of the Foxy animatronic. Ever. Also, if by “real” animatronic you mean the withered, springs, ect, they are not made of plastic (at least not their suit). They are just experiencing being torn and withered (hence the name “withered animatronics”) over the ages (Fredbears/ Fazbears has been present for awhile in this timeline). Also back to that “head” thing you said, either way it still means the toy IS a toy of Mangle. The toys can be named just because they look like toys and not have been toys before. Again, there's no evidence. We do not know, so we have to use what we have.

BlueTulip wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

Scratchingthecode97 wrote:

BlueTulip wrote:

The no eyes and 4 purple guys wasn't a theory, it was to show that the pink guy theory is incorrect with the given logic. Pretty much all of the Reddit side of the fandom has concluded FNAF 4 to be the bite of 87. My main evidence is with mangle. It says in FNAF 2 that the kids were mangling her up into a mess of parts. What do we see on the ground? A little mangle toy. FNAF 2 is the only time we ever hear this happening. FNAF 2 is in 1987, right. We see a mangle toy in the “sister's” bedroom in FNAF 4. Keep in mind it's a toy of Mangle, not Toy Foxy (or Funtime Foxy). If the only ever time we have a mangled animatronic is in FNAF 2 (1987) and FNAF 4 is in 1983, how are we seeing a Mangle toy? Also keep in mind it is a toy, which means that they are most likely manufactured.

1. I understand now that the ‘Pink Guy’ theory is incorrect. I just call him ‘Pink Guy’ so I don't confuse him with the other (mostly) innocent Purple Guys.

2. The thing about Mangle…Let me explain how this is still the Bite of ‘83, and the Bite of ’87 comes later.

There's a minigame where your character (the crying child) is scared by the older brother, who was hiding behind the couch. The T.V. is on, and a show called ‘Fredbear & Friends,’ with the date of 1983 on it, is playing.

Mangle is, at this time, a character on the show.

This explains the Mangle toy in the bedroom.

I think that each kid in the FN@F 4 family has a different set of toys. Here we go:

Oldest brother: He has all the masks. He gave his friends masks too.

Middle child (Younger brother): He has all the plushies, but his older brother ripped the head off of the Foxy plush.

Sister: She has all the plastic toys, which break easily. This is why Mangle is so broken. (I owned some plastic action figures, and I can tell you right now, they break very, very easily.)

And yes, these toys are all merchandise, based off of the characters on the show.

There is no screen in FNAF 4 showing Mangle is on the show, so that doesn't really work. And, the Mangle toy on the floor has 2 heads.

I was thinking about this a lot last night, and I believe I have solved this problem!

There are actually two reasons for the ‘Toy Animatronics’ having the word ‘Toy’ in front of their names:

1. They look like toys

2. They were first introduced as toys before they were characters on the T.V. program!

In addition, Mangle wasn't designed with two heads. The other ‘head’ is what is left of a parrot pet that was perched on her shoulder.

Why is the toy all broken apart on the floor? I think the toys were made of cheap plastic, which is why the Toy Chca toy's beak fell off, and why Mangle's entire plastic covering was broken almost completely off; except for her head and feet.

The same cheap plastic was most likely used to make the real animatronics, which is why they experienced the same kinds of problems.

Mangle's job as a take-apart toy isn't the children tearing her endoskeleton apart…they're just taking her plastic covering off and putting it back on.

So I believe that this fixes the problem of my theory. I hope this explains Mangle's absence on the show.

First off lets knock the “head” one out. There is no evidence or even any hints to there ever being a parrot animatronic attached to any incarnation of the Foxy animatronic. Ever. Also, if by “real” animatronic you mean the withered, springs, ect, they are not made of plastic (at least not their suit). They are just experiencing being torn and withered (hence the name “withered animatronics”) over the ages (Fredbears/ Fazbears has been present for awhile in this timeline). Also back to that “head” thing you said, either way it still means the toy IS a toy of Mangle. The toys can be named just because they look like toys and not have been toys before. Again, there's no evidence. We do not know, so we have to use what we have.

1. Perhaps the 5th game will give us a clue as to what the head was…or perhaps this was just meant to be a ‘red herring,’ and whatever this thing was doesn't even matter right now.

2. No, by ‘real’ animatronic I meant the Toy animatronics themselves, rather than their merchandise.

3. Yes. I agree with your point there. It could go either way.

4. Indeed. We do have to use what we have. Maybe this 5th game will give us a bit more to go on.