Does it say a lot about how DC has changed when a character like

>>85785711
What is this, 1997?

It doesn't say anything. A lot of characters have rivaled Batman over the years, their popularity just never really sticks more than 10 years or so. Harley isn't doing anything unusual historically.

>>85785711
I like harley myself. More with joker than by herself though

Batman's writting has ben dogshit for years

Just says they're good businessmen. There's clearly a market for the (admitedly pretty rubbish) modern Harley, and they're exploiting it expertly.

Good on them. I don't like it, but if it brings in cash and doesn't spoil books I do like, then who cares?

>>85785763
I think her merch sales have always been unusually high for an ancillary character

If she had existed longer she would have more merchandise than WW or Superman by now

>>85785711
Just shows you how DC has really kinda dropped the ball with a lot of stuff but still bumble their way into establishing yet another bat characters dominance

>>85785711
It says nothing about DC, it says more about how consumer tastes (the wider demographic, not just the 2 /co/mrades who actually buy comics to ''support'' the Big Two) are changing and DC are adapting to cater to a bigger source of revenue. People are far more interested in seeing comedic, somewhat apathetic characters with slapstick elements and self-aware irony. Deadpool proved that this is the case with the lasting success of his ongoing since Marvel NOW and the overwhelming success of Fox's movie. DC have noticed that Harley could in fact serve as their answer to that kind of buzz, and they're hence using her in a reactionary manner to appeal to a changing audience.
The same thing happened in the 90s with Venom (in his Lethal Protector period) and Wolverine appearing all the time, people wanted to see hyper-violent badass heroes and Marvel responded accordingly.

>>85785831
Are you me?

>>85785782
Same here