Look, Jude Terror did a follow-up piece for his article. >A

>Let's ignore that it's complete fiction that I "fixed the worst errors" in the article - I didn't change a single thing about what I said of the direct market - and look at Heidi's main gripe - that I implied that Marvel and/or Diamond invented the direct market. Of my very long rant, I must assume Heidi is cherry-picking a few sentences, which I'll reprint below:

>The direct market was created to solve a "problem" for publishers, and is beneficial to literally no one else in the comics food chain, other than perhaps Diamond itself.

>[...]

>But as fucking great as it was to have comics in places like grocery stores, and to have millions of people reading them, major comics publishers (read: Marvel) had a problem. They had to make good comics that people wanted to buy, or else they would be returned to them and Marvel wouldn't make much of a profit. And you can't pay for the cocaine budget of a young Rob Liefeld if you're constantly paying for returned comics.

>So the industry came upon a brilliant idea: get all the stores that specialized in selling comics, lock them into a single closed distribution system, and refuse to accept returns for unsold comics anymore. Now, Marvel didn't need to make comics that people want to read in order to get paid. All they have to do is convince retailers to buy the comics, and that can be accomplished with all that hype and gimmickry we talked about before. And that's exactly what happened, so that by the turn of the century, specialty shops (or occasionally a single, isolated shelf in Barnes and Noble) were the only places where anyone could purchase comics.

File: Cappa.png (375KB, 846x886px) Image search: [Google]

375KB, 846x886px

Screencapped this since there were multiple pictures

>Yes, that's it. The actual substance of my rant was focused on the audacity of Marvel's top writer blaming fans for the cancellation of a book and insisting that pre-ordering comics - that is, agreeing to purchase them sight unseen - was the only way to keep them alive. A description of the direct market only served to describe the landscape in which comics currently flounder, or at least, greatly underperform their potential, and the "rant" format isn't one well suited to detailed historical accounts in any case. But Heidi was far from my only critic. Several others used my lack of a detailed account of the decades-long history that led to the current state of the comics industry as an excuse to dismiss or downplay the actual points I made.

>Take ComicBook.com writer Russ Burlingame:

>(Pic Related)

>Or another friend, local comics creator James Moore:

>(Pic Related)

>There were even misguided posts from Eisner Award winning indie comics creators who must not have read the article, since they didn't even realize that I'm not talking about them - just Marvel and DC - when I tell readers not to preorder comics and instead buy the comics they want, when they want, in the format they prefer, as is their right as consumers. I happily preorder comics from publishers who aren't backed by gigantic corporations on a regular basis and encourage others to do the same. Nevertheless, Gene Ha wrote:

File: Dicks.png (958KB, 644x2160px)

958KB, 644x2160px

Also screen capped

>To be fair, there were also tweets of support from people I deeply respect and admire, which are more appreciated than they probably know:

>Pic Related

>There were also plenty of subtweets from Mark Waid and others in the comics establishment, who clearly have a vested interest in protecting the comics status quo. But the sentiment was the same across these detractors: my history of the direct market was "inaccurate," and therefore, my rant was wrong. However, while I'll admit my history wasn't anywhere near complete, the fact is that it was never meant to be, and it didn't need to be either. To take offhand, cynical remarks about the creation of the direct market and assume that I believe, or want others to believe, that Marvel and Diamond decided one day to cease the lucrative operation of selling comics on news stands and give birth to the direct market, fully formed, is disingenuous at best. I'm aware that it took decades to get to where we are, and that the news stand business was drying up for comics, and that a lot of people and organizations were involved in the evolution of the direct market.

Also including Mark Waid's tweets here.

>I propose that this doesn't matter; that my statements, whose scope was Marvel's own involvement as it relates to their unwillingness to do the work required to bring new readers into comics in favor of selling more comics at higher prices to the existing, dwindling fanbase, is accurate enough for the topic I was actually discussing, and that the pedantic focus on my flippant summary was little more than an attempt to deflect from the real issue at hand. Or, as sometimes Outhouse contributor Richard Caldwell put it:

>Grown pedants on social media who think the history of the direct market mentioned here is not lining up perfectly with their rose-tinted lenses.
>Same people would sell their kids for a chance to write full-time for Marvel or DC.

>So let's look at some of that direct market history in greater depth and see exactly how inaccurate I am. To avoid any question of spin on my part, we'll go straight to Wikipedia. Here's the long, boring history that preceded the situation I referenced in my rant, where Marvel, at a crossroads, chose higher short term profit margins over the long term sustainability of the comic book industry:

File: Mark Waid.png (87KB, 439x754px)

87KB, 439x754px

crap forgot the image for last post, welp never mind

>The direct market was created in the early 1970s in response to the declining market for comic books on newsstands. Fan convention organizer and comic dealer Phil Seuling approached publishers in 1972 to purchase comics directly from them, rather than going through traditional periodical distribution companies. Unlike the newsstand, or ID (for independent distributor) market, which included drugstores, groceries, toy stores, convenience stores, and other magazine vendors, in which unsold units could be returned for credit, these purchases were non-returnable. In return, comics specialty retailers received larger discounts on the books they ordered, since the publisher did not carry the risk of giving credit for unsold units. Instead, distributors and retailers shouldered the risk, in exchange for greater profits.

>Additionally, retailers ordering comics through Seuling's Sea Gate Distributors (and within two years, through other companies) were able to set their own orders for each issue of each title, something which many local IDs did not allow. This ability to fine-tune an order was crucial to the establishment of a non-returnable system.[2]

>Direct distributors typically were much faster at getting the product into the hands of their customers than were IDs: a direct distribution warehouse generally had re-shipped a weekly batch of comics or delivered it to local customers within a day or two (sometimes within hours) of receiving the books from the printer. By contrast, most IDs would usually take two or even three weeks to do so, though some moved more quickly. This factor was a strong drawing card for retailers whose customer base consisted principally of fans eager to see the new issues each week.

>Finally, another factor in creating demand for direct sales distribution was that many IDs refused to deal with comics specialty shops or with any retailer who dealt in back issues on any terms at all, fearing that used comics could be purchased by these shops from readers for pennies, and then cycled back through the system as returns for full credit at a profit.

>By the mid-1970s, other direct sales distribution concerns had sprung up, mostly regionally based (Donahoe Brothers in the Great Lakes region, Pacific Comics Distributors in Southern California, and New Media Distribution/Irjax in the Southeast were all operating by early 1974), essentially replacing the order-taking and fulfillment functions of newsstand distributors for the infant comic shop specialty market. For several years,Seagate retained an edge over its competitors in that it was able to provide "drop shipping" (the shipment of an order directly from the printer to the retailer) to its customers for quantities of 25 or multiples thereof per issue, while the newer distributors had to use more conventional methods, putting together customer orders and re-shipping or delivering them from their own warehouses. Threats of legal action[3] and the need for retailers to order very precise (and sometimes very small) quantities of items ended this practice for all but the largest customers by the end of the 1970s, and extended the ability to provide drop shipping to those large customers to all the direct distributors — by which time several of the newer distributors had multiple warehouses.

>Newsstand distribution through the IDs continued at the same time (and indeed remained dominant for years afterward, on its conventional returnable, low-discount terms).

>In the early 1980s, a trade organization, the International Association of Direct Distributors (IADD) was formed, consisting of all the distributors who purchased product directly from either DC, Marvel, or both. The IADD had annual conferences, issuing obscenity guidelines in 1987,[4] and electing Diamond Comic Distributors' Steve Geppi as IADD Vice President in 1988.[5]

>As early as 1980, Marvel Comics saw the growth potential of the Direct Market,[6] and by 1981 was putting out a number of titles geared specifically to that market (including Dazzler). By the early 1980s, all the major publishers were producing material specifically for the new market, series that would probably not sell well enough on the newsstand, but sold well enough on a non-returnable basis to the more dedicated readers of the Direct Market to be profitable.[7]

>Several of the new distributors lasted a relatively short time, and were succeeded by more competitive organizations; with no continuity of ownership and only limited continuity of personnel, it would nonetheless be fair to say that Diamond Comic Distributors replaced New Media/Irjax and Capital City Distribution largely replaced Big Rapids Distribution in the marketplace.

>By 1985, the number of direct distributors in North America peaked with approximately twenty companies, many of them multi-warehouse operations, purchasing product for resale to retailers directly from either DC Comics, Marvel Comics, or both. There were also an unknown number, probably in the dozens, of sub-distributors who bought DCs and Marvels from these larger companies (and often the products of other, smaller publishers direct from those publishers), and re-sold to retailers. Most of these sub-distributors were in cities in which the direct distributors themselves did not (at least as yet) have warehouses, including Philadelphia,Boston, Columbus (Ohio), Madison (Wisconsin), Lansing (Michigan), Indianapolis, and Berkeley (California). Many of them were eventually absorbed by the companies which had been their principal suppliers.

>>85954693
who?

>>From the mid-80s to the mid-90s, nearly every major urban area in the United States had at least one (and sometimes two or three) local direct distribution warehouses that functioned not only as distribution points for pre-ordered weekly shipments, but also as what could be described as "supermarkets for retailers", where store owners could shop for reorders and examine and purchase product that they might not have ordered in advance.

And so ends that Wikipedia Article, back to the actual article

>The news stand business was declining, and there were advantages for everyone involved in the business of making and selling comics (well, except maybe the creators, for whom getting the shaft is the one constant of the mainstream comics industry for its entire history). And as the industry entered the infamous 90s, the appeal of speculators proved too enticing for Marvel to resist. Understand that, around that time, the general public was becoming aware of the fact that, due to the scarcity of older comics from the 60s and earlier, which most people viewed as disposable, those comics could be sold to collectors for huge amounts of money. This attracted speculators looking for the comics being printed today that could be stored away and sold in twenty years time for a huge profit. Marvel was happy to oblige these speculators by printing millions of copies of "new" #1 issues of comics like X-Men, Spider-Man, X-Force, and the like, which would never become as valuable as Fantastic Four #1 or Amazing Fantasy #15 because everyone was meticulously preserving them in hopes of paying their children's college tuition. 90s excess included chrome variant covers, holographic covers, covers inside polybags with special trading cards packed inside, and all manner of other gimmickry that we've seen make a comeback in the past few years in an attempt to spike sales.

File: Outhouse.jpg (93KB, 1110x498px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1110x498px

>>85955125
Works for this website

File: Outhousers.jpg (29KB, 897x166px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 897x166px

>>85955150

>This represented a huge opportunity for profit through the direct market, one which was irresistible to publishers. But this opportunity existed only because of the decades prior, where the availability of comics on news stands, in grocery stores, in pharmacies, and other places outside specialty shops provided an entry point for new readers. Through that entry point, people were able to discover comic books, and those people would eventually end up as customers of the direct market. But without that entry point, common sense dictates that the whole thing would eventually collapse (and indeed, it did, following the massive expansion of the direct market on the back of a speculator bubble that was bound to burst, and Marvel's Heroes World debacle, which inadvertently led to the Diamond monopoly, Marvel's own near bankruptcy, and ultimately the comics landscape we have today).

Well poop another fucking excerpt from the Wikipedia Article

>By late 1994, Heroes World was North America's third largest comics distributor[2] (behind Diamond Comics Distributors and Capital City Distribution). On December 28, 1994,[3] Heroes World was bought by Marvel Comics to act as the company's exclusive distributor,[2][4] thus reducing other distributors' market share by more than a third.[5] The change took effect with books shipped July 1995.[6] As industry veteran Chuck Rozanski notes:

>
>" Without Marvel comics to distribute, all of the surviving direct market comics distributors suddenly found their overall sales volume reduced by 35%-40% ... while their operating costs remained constant. In a business where even a single point of discount or volume could translate into huge differences in earnings, these massive losses in sales volume were simply not sustainable. Steve Geppi, owner of Diamond Comic Distributors, responded to this threat to the survival of his business by entering into negotiations to become the exclusive distributor for all the other comics publishers. ... While Steve was begging all the comics publishers to switch all of their distribution business exclusively over to his company, John Davis and Milton Griepp of Capital City were making the same pleas on the part of their organization.[5] "

>The ripple effect resulted in the survival of only one other major North American distributor, Diamond.[4][7]

>Heroes World's new role as Marvel's exclusive distributor was a failure from the beginning. Lacking the infrastructure to handle Marvel's huge weekly orders resulted in extensive shipment and billing mistakes, errors which caused great consternation among the thousands of comics specialty shops affected.[8] Writes Rozanski:

>" ... the Heroes World management team failed miserably in the PR war to win the hearts and minds of comics retailers. In fact, rather than win over any converts to Marvel, the hassle of having to place two new comics orders each month (sometimes at a lower overall discount), plus paying freight costs on Heroes World shipments, pushed many comics retailers to the brink of closing their stores.[5] "

>These factors, combined with the collapse of the comics speculation market, did indeed result in many comics stores closing their doors for good.

>Throughout 1995 and 1996, Heroes World continued to flounder, facing lost business[9] and lawsuits.[10][11] Finally, in 1997 the company went out of business, and Marvel returned to Diamond Distributors,[12] which by that point was the only major distributor left standing.

Back to the article

>It was at this crossroads in the late eighties, early nineties, that Marvel had a choice: fix the problems with the news stand market (or find a replacement entry point), or commit fully to direct-market-only comics distribution and seal the fate of superhero comics as a niche industry that would cater to the same aging fanbase that would eventually dwindle to the less than 100,000 regular readers of comics today. But you don't have to take my word for it. Just listen to Chuck Rozanski of Mile High Comics, who was directly involved in the formation of the direct market, and whose long account of its history on his blog details meetings with Jim Shooter and other top Marvel execs around this time (bolding is mine):

Oh shit back to his old article

>In last week's column, I wrote that the percentage of comics sold in comics specialty shops grew from 6% in 1979, to approximately 70% by 1987. While this was a remarkable achievement in terms of an industry switching from one form of marketing (newsstand distribution) almost entirely to another (Direct Market comics shops), it also set the stage for the greatest collapse in sales in the entire history of the medium. The reality of the situation is that the overwhelming success of comics shops during the 1980's is one of the main reasons why we're seeing such poor new comics sales today.

Thanks OP, I hate Outhousers but I'm loving the shitstorm so I appreciate you doing this.

>>85955244
What shitstorm I don't have time to read an essay by a literal who.

>DC's winning now?!
>If Marvel isn't on top, it's clearly the system's fault!

>>85955273
The article is super critical of Marvel.

>>85955260
When people in an internet article say 'shitstorm' they mean on the comics internet on twitter

>>85955305
Because now they're losing.

>While that sounds like a great development for the Direct Market, it actually ended up destroying the entry point of most new readers. While most comics specialty shops do a great job of servicing their existing clients, the distressing truth is that many shops inadvertently (or sometimes blatantly...) give the appearance of being private clubs, where only the already initiated need apply. Newsstands, on the other hand, are quite egalitarian, offering everyone the same access to new comics and magazines, in a usually very family friendly environment. As a result, the vast majority of the base of comics readers existing in 1980 began their purchasing of comics through a local mass market outlet of some kind, and only later shifted their loyalty to a comics specialty store.

>>85955273
They're actually for the first time in a long time finally giving Marvel proper shit. This is probably more ass pained than their Dan Didio Complaint articles

>>85955260
He called Bendis an Bald Uncle Fester Blow Hard so that roused up /co/ to thinking this site is good. I personally don't, they're the same gang of idiots who think that putting comics in non-specialty stores will solve the problem. It won't, that's what literally digital comics should have done and other than Injustice, literally all digital titles have sold like shit

I love that since Rebirth
People have been turning on Marvel

>Where this really becomes a problem is that it created a completely false sense of profitability for the publishers. While it was seldom that a newsstand sold more than 30% of the new comics they displayed (they were able to return unsold copies for full credit at the end of the month...), comics specialty stores were a guaranteed 100% sell-through, as they purchased on non-returnable basis. Freed from the enormous printing costs of publishing three comics for every one that sold, and also being able to eliminate the administration costs of issuing credits for returns, the publishers suddenly found themselves awash in profits. That was the good news. The bad news is that all those unsold copies sent out to the newsstands were the #1 method by which the publishers reached out for new readers. Eliminate newsstand sales, and profits boom in the short term, but new readers become quite scarce. Without new readers the only way to keep profits growing is to steadily raise cover prices. Thus begins the vicious cycle of having to raise cover prices because unit sales are declining, and then having sales decline even further because cover prices are rising. This self-reinforcing negative trend is why we presently have comics with a cover price of $3.00, that the publisher is lucky if they sell 20,000 - 30,000 copies (compared with 100,000+ copies on every book published in 1979). Simply put, were it not for the potential additional future revenue from trade paperback sales, new comics as we know them would already be long gone.

>>85955363
Yeah, fucking finally they're realizing that these constant events and rising price tags are fucking stupid.

>>85955346
It won't solve the problem but it's a first step. The current system is so fucking retarded it's easy to see why everyone's surface level reaction is "What the hell? Fix this."

>>85955363
He sounds like a tool but I agree. Marvel needs a fuck load of Chemo to get better again.

>spend years calling everyone working at The Outhousers the biggest hacks in the industry, and somehow manage to be worse and less relevant than BleedingCuck
>they slam Marvel instead of DC for once
>Based Outhousers, the heroes we need
Nah, senpai.

>>85954693
>comics journalism
There's no such thing they're all bloggers

>>85955343
It's also critical of DC.

File: nothingendsthumb.jpg (42KB, 250x392px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 250x392px

He's right. I've been saying forever to let big 2 burn down.

File: Blame Didio.png (11KB, 580x118px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 580x118px

>Having been one of the people who started the decimation of the newsstand business, I often feel more than a bit guilty when I see how few young people are reading comics today. In many regards, those of us who built the Direct Market during the early 1980's at the specific expense of the newsstands should be held in some measure culpable for the destruction of the comics industry. That having been said, however, the flip side of the argument is that the newsstand market for comics was already disintegrating in 1979, so we helped stave off for twenty years the inevitable replacement of printed forms of entertainment by the newly created electronic forms. I can argue the issue both ways. The fact remains, however, that because of the dearth of new readers in the comics world, that we now are now in a crisis from which it is going to be very difficult to extricate ourselves. Difficult, but most certainly not impossible.

back to the actual article

>And so, when I said that Marvel chose the direct market over news stands for the lure of short term profits, I was absolutely correct. Sure, I didn't include a comprehensive account of everything that led us there, but I didn't need to. That history is well known, or easily located with a simple Google search. But the point of my rant was never that comics needed to return to news stands, of which I concluded, "that ship has sailed." My point was that Marvel (and other publishers, and retailers) chose to completely ignore the need to bring in new readers in favor of bilking money from the readers that already existed. As a result, we get price hikes, gimmick-based sales tactics, and an environment where successful comics professionals browbeat fans into pre-ordering brand new series under threat of cancellation in less than six issues.

>>85955390
Digital Comics should have been that step, they're cheaper and literally easier to get than going to a store or pharmacy or news stand but we see that's not the case.

>>85955399
Broken clock, etc. Outhousers is still shit, but the original rant and the butthurt it generated were great

>>85955403
For fucking what? Single-handedly saving this dying industry and striking a decisive blow against the SJWs?

>>85955346
>This is probably more ass pained than their Dan Didio Complaint articles

Didn't the initial article still try to pin blame on DC? Or am I thinking of a different article?

File: image.jpg (89KB, 396x593px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 396x593px

>>85955415
I need Marvel to last a couple more years, just for the delicious omnis.

>>85955415
edgy

>>85955399
they're still cucks, but they're better cucks now since they insulted Bendis and that's always a plus for me

>>85955403
yet literally nearly everything bad in this article has been due to Marvel though

>And so, when I said that Marvel chose the direct market over news stands for the lure of short term profits, I was absolutely correct. Sure, I didn't include a comprehensive account of everything that led us there, but I didn't need to. That history is well known, or easily located with a simple Google search. But the point of my rant was never that comics needed to return to news stands, of which I concluded, "that ship has sailed." My point was that Marvel (and other publishers, and retailers) chose to completely ignore the need to bring in new readers in favor of bilking money from the readers that already existed. As a result, we get price hikes, gimmick-based sales tactics, and an environment where successful comics professionals browbeat fans into pre-ordering brand new series under threat of cancellation in less than six issues.

>>85955346
why would someone insult uncle fester like that

It is strange cause like I decided to look around the rest of outhousers and it's like painfully unfunny or informative or anything

broken clock tho

>>85955433

because rebirth still sells like crazy small numbers of real issues.

>>85955452

the trades would stick around I think, movies and such.

>>85955435
It wouldn't be an "article" on the "internet" from a leftist rag if they didn't try to blame everything wrong in the world on DC.

File: anigif_enhanced-7543-1415632917-24.gif (682KB, 625x262px)

682KB, 625x262px

>>85955456

are the standards for edgy that low?

>>85955390
>>85955423
It is far more intricate and messy than a few steps fixing

>>85955433
No, their role in the direct market.
I'm sure if you read the piece you could find something legit to get angry about, as it is you're just flopping around like a fish out of water.

>>85955470
>because rebirth still sells like crazy small numbers of real issues.
That's fucking bullshit. Literally every Rebirth book has gone back for 3-4 printings. It's straight up impossible for the sales to not be through the roof across the board. They're clearly just lieing and bullshit to try and make DC look bad yet again. Fuck them.

>I stand by my statements, cynical and snarky for the sake of tone, by no means comprehensive, but also, I believe, not at all inaccurate.

>Comics industry apologies would have you believe that recent, minor spikes in growth of comics sales mean everything is just fine, that DC's Rebirth titles (which are returnable, by the way, like the news stand comics of old) are selling 200,000 copies (to retailers, not readers), and that direct market comic sales are up from where they were at six years ago. They'll argue that movies and TV shows based on comics serve as the new entry point for readers. But these things represent a minor improvement on an entirely broken system, not a great hope for the future of the industry, and any real growth in the readership is coming from creator-owned comics that explore new genres and concepts instead of retreading the same storylines from decades past over and over.

>They'll point to comics outside the Diamond ecosystem, like "Smile" by Raina Telgemeier, which are far more successful than anything Marvel or DC put out, as examples of the industry thriving, ignoring the fact that Smile and similar comics, just like creator owned comics, are not a part of the superhero industrial complex I'm railing against.

>>85955485
literally anarchist tier

>>85955433
they compared the current DC Rebirth to newsstands of yore about how it was returnable and shit

>>85955423
I really don't think that's true. Digital sure as hell didn't save the music industry or the movie industry or really any industry. They've adapted now - or are in the process of doing so - but digital was a big hit for a lot of them.

>>85955506
There is nothing like that in the article at all.

>>85955346
I've seen /co/mrades lol at the Uncle Fester thing (frankly the Kingpin comparisons got old) but I haven't seen anyone declare love for Outhousers.

>>85955506

What did the best Rebirth sell for? Compare that to Smile, which is what 1.5 mil?

So much flawed stuff in this article.

>>85955433

>For fucking what? Single-handedly saving this dying industry and striking a decisive blow against the SJWs?

People who think their favorite company should be exempt from all criticism and brands those who disagree a traitor aren't fans, they're cultists.

How can anyone take what you say seriously?

File: anigif_enhanced-5732-1408401108-2.gif (1MB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 600x338px

>>85955521

No? Comics can move online, small publishing can exist, etc etc. it's Big 2 that are in an unsustainable model and right now they're shuffling deckchairs

>>85955506
They don't really rail much on DC here but rather on Marvel. DC just gets mentioned for association because its the Big 2

>Books like Smile may well be the future of comics. Millions of kids read Telgemeier's comics, but those kids aren't following up by buying Captain America. And why would they? Smile offers a complete, satisfying story for roughly the same price as the first issue of Marvel's Civil War 2 #1. A kid who enjoyed Smile for six bucks isn't going to pay $67 to read the first month of tie-ins for a super-mega-crossover event, just to get 1/5 of a complete story that isn't anywhere near as good as Smile in the first place. And so, while the comics medium may be doing fantastic, and while I personally believe there are an unprecedented amount of great comics being published outside Big Two capes books, it has fuck all to do with what we're talking about here, which is the superhero industry dominated by Marvel and DC.

>>85955526
>Digital sure as hell didn't save the music industry
But it did, thanks to Itunes it's practically easy to get music now legally which was a real problem back then. Piracy still existed before that you know, but a lot of people only really pirated because out of convenience since it was really fucking hard to track down what they wanted

>>85955563
Shipped 12 Million Units it did.

File: tumblr_inline_mr6q5rSA441qz4rgp.gif (994KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

994KB, 500x281px

>>85955593

12 million units across the entire line during the entire summer.

File: The Barge and Marge.png (29KB, 432x105px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 432x105px

>As retailer Dennis Barger Jr., who disagreed with my rant (surprise), told me:

>Pic Related

>The bottom line is that the situation Marvel is in is a situation they played a major role in creating, and its one that has industry professionals attempting to place the onus on us, the readers, to save it, by spending more of our money on the same old products marketed and sold through the same old channels. But it isn't our responsibility. Marvel and DC are owned by multinational conglomerates who, if they wanted to put in the effort, could find a new entry point for readers. Not the news stand or grocery store, which as I noted in my previous rant, are no longer an option. But something like it, some place where new readers can, on a whim, purchase a single comic, read the comic, and become interested in reading more

>I don't know what that is. Maybe it's affordable and easily available digital comics, but I'm not sure we really have those yet, at least from Marvel and DC, which hamstring their digital offerings out of fear of undercutting the fragile direct market. Maybe it's cheaply printed collections available in places like Walmart and Target. Maybe it's a flyer inside the DVD and Blu Ray releases of superhero movies showing people where to find a comic shop. Maybe it's creator owned comics finding a viable alternative to Diamond and exploding with their massive potential for widespread appeal. Maybe it's making direct market books fully returnable so that comic shops can stock comics on shelves in greater numbers the way new stands once could. Maybe it's something no one has even thought of yet.

>But if we're looking for new ideas, we're not going to get them from the same people who have been on top of the industry for the past decade or longer. I'll return once more to the words of Richard Caldwell, again from the comments of my previous piece:

>>85955593
Digital hasn't saved music it made it legal but it cut all the profit out of it.

>>85955609
smile has been out since 2010

So is Smile actually decent or is this another case of 20 and 30-something hipsters fapping vicariously through media meant for children?

>>85955557
/co/ has a black and white "you're with me or against me" mentality, you can hate/dislike/disagree with X person/website but if you as so much laugh at a comment they did and didn't ridicule them you're suddenly in love with them.

>The parent companies for both Marvel and DC have always maintained a HUGE retail presence, so the fact of the subsidiaries being confined to direct markets, I think, is suggestive that Disney and Warners both were only ever interested in the decades of IP and not expanding the medium.

>So solutions for saving the industry won't come from upstairs.

>Marvel and DC are both plagued with inner circles of "good old boys", so the chances of anyone slipping in anything remotely dynamic are slim.

>Solutions will not come from the publishers themselves, especially when the upper editors and headliner acts can leave the smoldering ruins for co-Executive Producer credits on syndicated cartoon series and the like.

>>85955650
No it is published by Scholastic and is honest to go mostly going to kids.

>>85955628

it's still 1 book. We're not comparing the series.

Seems like top selling Rebirth numbers are 350,000 copies for Rebirth and the Harley Quinn with 400,000?

>>85955650

no it's a book fair book that's a hit with kids. i only ever hear about it as "Kids will read comics"

>I feel the answer is really in Geppi's court. The Diamond monopoly must be challenged, very seriously. I understand he's had money issues in the last decade, but maybe if he struggled a bit more he might be willing to help get floppies back onto newsstands. And if print media is supposedly dying there must be room for them now. But it would be nice if mid-range publishers made a valorous attempt at bringing back mail order subscriptions. This wouldn't bring in new readers, but it would take some pennies out of Steve Geppi's purse.

>Personally, I think the industry should keel over already. Anybody who genuinely wants to make and/or read comix will find a way. Earning a living and being creative can be simpatico, for the ever-diminishing minority, but they are not now nor have they ever been synonymous. The medium is in no danger at all. But if the industry is going to survive even just a few more years it really needs to reconsider plastering everything with dollar signs. People need to stop seeing it as a business (and people need to take Geppi down a few notches), because the only businesses with longevity involve sex and drugs and guns, and not portrayals of them. Lower prices might mean lower profits temporarily, but affordability could well be an investment towards increased readerships in the long run.

Last sentence is literally what DC Rebirth is doing yet you don't see any recognition of that there because of muh double shipping

>>85955609
>Rebirth has sold 12 million in 3 months. >Yeah, well Smile sold 1.5 million in 6 years!
I really wonder what the total sales are for hallmark trades like Watchmen, Killing Joke and Dark Knight Returns. They must be ridiculous.

>Marketing is another thing. The TV shows and theatrical movies need to have comic adverts, then maybe some of the viewers actually would be curious about the source material (because it is not happening in reality). Bring back TV commercials. Probably a full fifth of the articles on this site are all joking on the marketing attempts of DC and Marvel. Pink slip those departments entirely and bring in actual marketing/promotions firms. Advertising is even more cut throat than comics, so they could probably honestly find better qualified people for even cheaper rates than the bloggers promoted to staffers doing it now.

>And Belle-Tain Summer, who wrote in those same comments:

>Maybe if comic book stores were not flat out sleazy places to be most of the time, with Frank Cho-esque ass and tittie posters and statuettes leering at you on full display, with cramped aisles where the gropers lurk, and various other shit that would get your average porno store shut down if they tried it, then they'd get a little more custom through them. As a woman who loves comics and SF, I gotta say the stores you have to go to to get the product are the biggest deterrent to new customers. And it is not just women they are off-putting to. At least with Sci-Fi books you can get them from Amazon, and most merch too, but comic book issue numbering and title schemes are deliberately confusing and bamboozling so you can never be 100% certain about what you are ordering if you order them online. The entire industry is exclusionary.

>And mega-crossover events. I'm not buying a dozen different titles just to understand how a single story goes.

Holy fucking shit this long

>>85955677
>>85955676
Marvel really needs to put their Marvel Adventures trades in scholastic catalogues. DC too, with their Scooby-Doo team up and Tiny Titan books.

>There are a lot of problems with the comics industry we have today, and my rant yesterday addressed just one of them. But lack of completion doesn't make what I said inaccurate or irrelevant. Here at The Outhouse, we address all of those problems, all of the time, and a single article could never hope to address everything that's wrong with comics. For instance, this article and the previous one, as lengthy as they are, don't even touch on the industry's problems with institutionalized racism, sexism, exclusion, and rampant, unpunished sexual harassment.

>As a final note to my detractors, I'll point out that I'm not a professional journalist, this is not my full time job, and aside from the same meager profit share we offer all our writers (thanks Double Take), I don't make any money off of doing it (and if you want to really feel depressed, check out how much people make for writing top five listicles at major outlets and compare it to what the people writing things that actually matter earn). Believe it or not, I do this because I love comics. So if you, as an established, paid journalist or industry professional, feel that my abrasive, dramatic style doesn't do the problems with this industry justice, then I would encourage you to start addressing some of these problems yourself, with the full extent of your superior journalistic skillset, on your outlets with far greater reach than this one.

>Wouldn't it be great if Comic Book Resources or ComicBook.com took a serious, researched look at why so many comics can't survive for twelve issues instead of blindly promoting Marvel's next big relaunch package? Wouldn't it be nice if, instead of yelling at fans to pre-order comics, someone like Brian Bendis used his influence in the industry to change the system so that new books have a chance to build an audience instead of relying on being an instant hit in an already oversaturated market?

I can't stand articles like this

It wants to cut a piece of Comics out and treat it like an island and it is the most foolish thinking.

Also the idea that successful movies will lead to people wanting to read the comics in any large numbers is also a flawed idea.

>>85955751

It's an angry cape fan raging about how what they enjoy is going to die and we're gonna be stuck with movies and tv shows which are fine but you know, i want the stories in comics

>I may be unprofessional. I may shoot from the hip instead of spending my (unpaid) hours researching the history of the direct market to write a nuanced, intellectual thunkpiece. I may even be a hypocritical jerk who calls Bendis an "Uncle Fester looking motherfucker deeply embedded in the comics establishment," which, yes, I realize wasn't very nice - I'm no Chris Hemsworth myself.

>But at least I'm not like the majority of comics industry and media personalities you'll find on our little corner of the interwebs, because I have no vested interest in propping up the abysmal status quo. So to my detractors, you can say my rant was inaccurate. You can say that I'm a heartless prick who wants the industry to fail and put people out of work (though I think people who make comics would find a new system, one out from under the boot heel of Marvel, DC, and Diamond, to be more beneficial for them in the long run, and I actually want very badly for non-Big Two comics to succeed).

>But I'm not so sure you have any grounds to criticize, because while this may be me...

>(Picture of Nero and the burning of Rome)

>This... this is you:

>(This is Fine Dog)

fucking done finally.

>>85955737

marvel's wasting money not doing it. like i'm sure there's byzantine bs why not but it's so obvious

>>85955693
According to http://www.newsarama.com/781-watchmen-one-million-copies-in-2008.html Watchman was at a million in 08. So say, 50k copies a year. Puts it at about 1.5m ish now?

>>85955771
I don't think anyone has to worry about the comics going away until the Movie Bubble (if it even is one) bursts.

Comics are such a small % of those profits to get people to just make up stuff to fuel future movies.

>>85955794
I doubt it

People that assume they know what will make money over people paid to do it are largely wrong.

Marvel sells their comics in Walmarts and those stores but the Book Sections in those places is way at the back, comics are there though

Peoples habits have changed.

>>85955801

yeah. this is projecting but i think it's kind of "I don't like the stories big 2 are doing" and the idea is an expanding market would change and have more different stories? like whenever people complain about big 2 the answer is vote with your wallet but there's clearly not the numbers to support it. or more successful companies can sell at a loss stuff that has a rapid fanbase maybe?

>>85954693
tl;dr this shit for me

>>85955719
>>Maybe if comic book stores were not flat out sleazy places to be most of the time, with Frank Cho-esque ass and tittie posters and statuettes leering at you on full display, with cramped aisles where the gropers lurk, and various other shit that would get your average porno store shut down if they tried it, then they'd get a little more custom through them. As a woman who loves comics and SF, I gotta say the stores you have to go to to get the product are the biggest deterrent to new customers.


I wonder if this person has been to a comic store lately or if they have the misfortune of living close to a sleazy one in a shitty area.

I'm a bbq grill that travels a lot because of my job and I've been to many comic book stores and I've yet to encounter one of these cramped aisles with lurking gropers. On the contrary a lot of the comic stores that I've gone to have women working there and they are in shopping malls or in OK looking places.

I guess it's like Wal-Mart, some Wal-Marts are decent to acceptable but man some Wal-Marts are really fucking shitty AF and the people who go there are just terrible.

>>85955890
Tell me about it, I gave up half way through it and the writer could have made their point in fewer words.

>>85955797
Read the article. It says they sold 1 million copies in 2008 ALONE because of theach trailer.

>>85955890
>>85955915
>tldr; BURN MARVEL AND DC BURN!

>>85955892
Its a giant strawman.

>>85955423
>11 KB PNG>Having been one of the people who started the decimation of the newsstand business, I often feel more than a bit guilty when I see how few young people are reading comics today. In many regards, those of us who built the Direct Market during the early 1980's at the specific expense of the newsstands should be held in some measure culpable for the destruction of the comics industry. That having been said, however, the flip side of the argument is that the newsstand market for comics was already disintegrating in 1979, so we helped stave off for twenty years the inevitable replacement of printed forms of entertainment by the newly created electronic forms. I can argue the issue both ways. The fact remains, however, that because of the dearth of new readers in the comics world, that we now are now in a crisis from which it is going to be very difficult to extricate ourselves. Difficult, but most certainly not impossible.
who said this?

>>85955929
Oh shit I misread it, I read it was 900k up to the trailer, and they were expecting 1m by the end of it

>>85955892
It's one of those things you hear online and repeat for an amen, really. I've been in lots of shops too, all over the US and the worst were kind of dark and smelled bad- usually of unlcean litter box. I have certainly never seen one full of tits and ass sculptures. But I'm not afraid of detached body oarts as a rule, so maybe I missed them.
Of the two in my town, one is run by an old hippie couple and is a bit run down, but very family friendsly, the other is all mew and super professional and clean to the point of being sterole.

>>85955892
I can relate. I'm in a third world country and I honestly haven't seen anything like that. It's mostly in Local Games Store where there are a lot of greasy middle aged men but they're nice when you get to know them enough. I've been to a quite a number of stores (Don't think there's a lot though, I'm in the industrialized section of the country, outside of here, it's hard to find this crap)
>>85955951
Chuck Rozanski >>85955179

>>85955892
My lcs is so nice and inviting
The owner babysit his grandson who's name is Clark and he gives out comics and suckers to all the little kids
And last week they was somthing wrong with his card machine he just told me I could pay it when I came in this week

File: Amaama-04.jpg (155KB, 1280x738px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1280x738px

>>85955565
Such as?

>>85956068
Young People aren't reading comics is the big neon sign one.

>>85956081
but they aren't. Literally from the beginning of its inception to the Direct Market, comics has only been bought by the same audience you dummy.

>>85956103
Mr. Terror I wasn't expecting you here

>>85956081
Kind of true though, take Spider-Gwen fans for example they love her, yet most of them didn't know she wasn't in high school and that she was college age when the Frank Cho thing happened.

I even know a girl who has merch of her and hasn't touched a single one of her comics.

>>85956192
You should stop falling into the trap of the article and having such a small perception of what comics is.

>>85956232
He actually talks about comics outside of the big two that kids do read- unlike you and the artical apparently.

So I am a Marvel fan, mostly odler stuff, but still.

Using Unlimited makes sense to me; buying reprints makes sense to me, but why the fuck do people buy floppies?

>>85955892
it can be a roll of the dice, there are some real shit holes out there

>>85956068
>>85956103
>>85956192
>>85956250
Why are you guys indulging a namefag? They just want the attention.

>>85956302
As someone who primarily buys new issues in floppies I will tell you

1) Most Small Press stuff is stapled single issues due to how it is created

2) I like getting stuff new

3) Floppies are the best way to judge the quality of a book being sold that way at the smallest increment.

4) Buying Floppies saves me money in the long run

5) I enjoy reading single issues more than trades or omnibuses
>>85956394
That isn't actually true, the intent of putting a name of thing is so legibly conversation is easier, it makes it more enjoyable.

>>85956394
I wasn't thinking.

>>85956081

>young people aren't reading

Fixd

>>85955832
>People that assume they know what will make money over people paid to do it are largely wrong.
This is the kind of defeatist thinking that prohibits new lines of thought. Just because we don't work in the industry, does not mean our ideas are worthless. In fact, outsider point-of-view can and has proved beneficial in the past.

Those that work in the industry have more experience, sure. But they are operating in a vacuum of other industry elders with old ways of thinking. These type of people are only thinking in the short term, paddling water out of a sinking canoe.

They need to start thinking outside the box if they want to adapt to a changing market.

>>85956450
Yes all of what you said is true.

However when people then go and suggest thoe new methods it is to latch their wagon onto other dying industries or places in stores that also wouldn't sell.

>>85956419
I get it with stuff that isn't Marvel.

>>85956495
I don't understand that but then I haven't bought new Marvel / DC for a year at this point.

>>85956531
I haven't bought a floppie since the first week of new52, or maybe FF 600.
Mostly, I get omnis of really old stuff (60-70's is my jam these days). Outside of capes, I also only buy books. Mostly hardcovers.
I buy indie stuff, but also in books.

>>85955892
woman here
yeah i've only been to one LCS that was uninviting, it was dark inside, kind of cluttered (because of so much product, but because it was messy persay) and the people who worked there were the fat nerd/creepy nerd archtype.
The other LCS in my city is okay, its clean inside, the lighting is nice, but the outside isn't especially inviting, and its kind of a hole-in-the-wall with regards to location.


but anyway, just spit balling places to sell comics:
newstands
drugstores and grocery stores
big market stores, like Target and Wall-Mart
Ads promoting comic books placed in Cape movie trailers, shown during Cape-TV, and at the end of Cape media credits
a better online distribution system
comics in the other e-book stores (Apple, Amazon, kindle)
a dedicated "floppy" section in places like Barnes and Noble
comics in Record Stores

I think the main reason there is no entry point is advertising really.
even if you have to go to a specialty store; most people just DONT KNOW about new comics. not knowing where to get them is a secondary issue really.
Vogue, and the New Yorker can still sell tons of copies, so even with print sales (and the sales physical media in general) dwindling, comics could still expand WAY MORE

In fact why not just have some books direct to trade? Big books like Batman, Spider-Man, Super-man; They're never going to be cancelled, why not just put out a nice trade every 1-3 months; and abandon floppies? (the trades need to sell for a lower price though)
Heck, even what the Japanese have inregards to anthologies can work Print a "disposable" anthology, thats in black in white or something, save ink, sell it for $4, and offer all the family books (all the Bat-family books, etc etc)

>>85956302
For me, part of it is to support the series, part of it is because I want to keep up with the story as it progresses without being a pirate leech.

Also I plan on eventually hanging up comics on the wall as decoration. If you look at a comic as both a story and decoration, it suddenly becomes a lot easier to justify the price.

>>85956482
>>85956482
>However when people then go and suggest thoe new methods it is to latch their wagon onto other dying industries or places in stores that also wouldn't sell.
this is true, but ideas need to start somewhere

the problem needs to be viewed not as a purchasing problem, but one of accessibility so to speak.

>>85956449
Adults are even worse.

>>85956302
I like being able to discuss things as they come out rather than waiting for the trade before I can even say anything about the first issue.
I like owning stories I enjoy in a physical format.
If I've already read something I find it hard to justify paying money for it.
Put the three together and you have a reason to buy floppies. Not to mention that they're nicer to read than looking at a screen or dealing with binding that cuts off part of the pages, and the fact that it helps keep the book alive.

>>85956627
Wow this post is a greatest hits of the last 15 years of how to fix the direct market blog posts.

Fantastic.

>>85956627
>In fact why not just have some books direct to trade?
DC has been doing this with the Earth One series. As a trade-waiter, It's a smart business model, I feel. They should focus more on that. Floppies are a waste of money.

>>85956697
The problem is that they don't sell well enough, not to mention that like half of the E1 books and pretty much all of Marvel's GNs were shit.

>>85956683
All of those ideas would help get comics more exposure, which is the entire purpose of the article and of this thread. The only reason you think it wouldn't work is because DC/Marvel have tried almost none of those things.

File: image.jpg (222KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 960x720px

>>85956673
Gutter loss in hardbacks, especially the big marvel ones is minimal to non existant, just so you know. Pic relatd.
I get where you're coming from otherwise. I prefer paper too. But a tablet is okayish.
I don't pirate any more at all. But I did go ahead and buy all the BPRD books I read online.

>>85956758
Except they have tried most of them....

In order

>but anyway, just spit balling places to sell comics:

>newstands

I doubt the newstands are making nearly the amount they were making and I doubt you could convince them to want to buy in on comics these days

>drugstores and grocery stores

Replaced those magazine racks with stuff that actually sells, keeps the 6 magazines that people still impulse buy

>big market stores, like Target and Wall-Mart

Comics are Sold in these places, when is the last time you went the magazine rack in a Walmart?

>Ads promoting comic books placed in Cape movie trailers, shown during Cape-TV, and at the end of Cape media credits

This was actually done and has been done in the past

>a better online distribution system

Not going to disagree here, but no specifics?

>comics in the other e-book stores (Apple, Amazon, kindle)

Already Done

>a dedicated "floppy" section in places like Barnes and Noble

Chain Book stores (chapters) (that are still around) have spinner racks where I live

>comics in Record Stores

Sure another slowly dying Brick and Mortar store

>>85956683
and yet the big two have done none of those things whatsoever, so you can fuck off.
If you dont have any better ideas, maybe things can get started by TRYING THINGS TO SEE IF THEY WORK??????

>>85956697
>>85956735
I forgot about Earth One
yeah i mean book series still sell well (Twilight, Harry Potter, etc) so its certainly possible, even though the medium is different.
The Earth One books are all entertaining, but they are released so few and far in between, i feel like a direct to trade approach would require something "in the family" to be released maybe every month or two?

Like, Action Comics is January
Man of Steel is February
Superman is March
Supergirl is April....
then you repeat.

Manga and other periodicals and viewed as disposable, and comics aren't so that works in the favor of the comics industry I believe

>>85956867
Wait what?
How are manga viewed as disposable?

And stuff like Killjng Joke and Watchmen and Civil War do sell well yearly.

>>85956837
I don't know what Wonderland Walmart you visit but none of the Walmarts I've ever been to carry comic books. Just magazines IF that.

And when have comics been advertised on TV/Film? Why haven't they been re-attempted after the superhero boom thanks to the MCU?

>>85956837
I think the main reason there is no entry point is advertising really.
even if you have to go to a specialty store; most people just DONT KNOW about new comics. not knowing where to get them is a secondary issue really.

>Vogue, and the New Yorker can still sell tons of copies, so even with print sales (and the sales physical media in general) dwindling, comics could still expand WAY MORE

Comparing Fiction to Non-Fiction is an issue here

>In fact why not just have some books direct to trade? Big books like Batman, Spider-Man, Super-man; They're never going to be cancelled, why not just put out a nice trade every 1-3 months; and abandon floppies? (the trades need to sell for a lower price though)

They do this, it doesn't really work and they can't justify making it cheaper because it does sell well enough.


>Heck, even what the Japanese have inregards to anthologies can work Print a "disposable" anthology, thats in black in white or something, save ink, sell it for $4, and offer all the family books (all the Bat-family books, etc etc)

So many misconceptions here.

Japanese Anthology comics were started in Post War Japan where

1) The population was starved for entertainment

2) The landmass is small and ideal for shipping

3) A lot of the more high tech entertainments (movie theaters) were in disrepair due to the war

Comics were able to grab a LARGE % and hold it over years and decades

Which those HUGE sales allowed them to keep their disposable anthology down in price

How do you make a Western comics anthology in 2016 for that much money and pay everyone involved?

Is it in color?

How long is it?

How many different creative teams?

Is it sold in print?

Does it completely throw off collectors?

All problems facing something like that in this the year 2016.

>>85956898
Manga Anthologies are not intended as something to be kept around the home.

>>85956907
The top row of the Magazine section has about a dozen comics, like 7 all ages, a batman and a Spiderman like 3 months out of date.

Also this is real and aired on TV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z22pJlATQsw

>>85956837
>I doubt the newstands are making nearly the amount they were making and I doubt you could convince them to want to buy in on comics these days
ie it hasn't been done
>Replaced those magazine racks with stuff that actually sells, keeps the 6 magazines that people still impulse buy
>Comics are Sold in these places, when is the last time you went the magazine rack in a Walmart?
IF they carry comics (and thats a big if, many do not) comics are sold in the book section, not by the check-out.
The big two can pay to be on the checkout stands, its that simple. People buy what they see, its a self-perpetuating cycle; and not having Comics EVERYWHERE during major movie releases is a misstep
>>85956837
>Chain Book stores (chapters) (that are still around) have spinner racks where I live
the Borders and Barnes and Nobles I frequent/have frequented do not.

>>85956898
Manga is printed on cheap paper; for most Japanese, you buy whatever manga-anthology, read it on the train or whatever else, then get rid of it every month.
I.E like most periodicals. You dont save the newspaper or US Weekly, etc etc for indefinite periods, you read it for the month and then toss it after a while.
With American comics, we keep them, they're viewed as "collector" items

>>85956990
Yeah but manga anthologies don't even exist in the west from the digital Shonen Jump.

they need to figure out a way to make digital appealing. and it's pretty close now honestly.

they need to let people know they're out there

there just aren't that many people who'll care.

not being garbage would help

File: Timely-Comics-Scarlet-Witch.png (508KB, 630x956px)

508KB, 630x956px

What are you guys' thoughts on the Timely Comics system where Marvel selects a few titles to reprint the first three issues of and sell for $3?

>>85957049
We aren't talking about the West we are talking about the place where it does well as a business and is able to keep them cheap.

digital shonen jump is 25 dollars a year are you fucking kidding me.

but i do understand things like creators having living wages

>>85957102
Digital Shonen Jump sold in America is a Secondary Market and thus can be sold to the VIZ very cheaply compared to other comics you can find in the West.

There is a very good reason that deal is so amazing.

It is not comparable to anything in the slightest.

>>85957102

like I don't even read or like manga and i might start buying this.

>>85957069

these were great but 0 publicity. love em

>>85955433
by relaunching with a bunch of #1s and banking on nostalgia while promising to reimburse unsold issues for the first three months causing a temporary inflation of sales? or because their most popular book is now Harley Quinn and Batman replaced Robin with a black kid? or replaced Green Lanterns with a terrorist sympathizer and a Hispanic woman while still pushing black Wally on the Teen Titans?

DC is Marvel
they are the exact same fucking thing

>>85957045
>People buy what they see, its a self-perpetuating cycle;
The Big Two had to leave in the first place because people weren't buying them, so the publishers had to buy the issues back.

>>85956837
>>85956945
>>85956990
I'm seeing a lot of negativity and cynicism in your posts, disregarding ideas because they were attempted (poorly) in the past and you assume they'll never work at a later point in time.

Don't you at least agree that the current business model is flawed?

>>85957069
I didn't know this existed but that's awesome and I wish I got them. That's economical as fuck.

Let's do an experiment.

Think of all the movies you saw in the previous year.

Now cut that down to all the movie you liked

Now imagine if right after seeing that movie there was another story adjacent to the movie's story, not told by the same people for sale.

Would you go buy any of those stories?

Welcome to the current Direct Market predicament.

Not that many people want to DEEP DIVE on something

For most a 2 hour movie will suffice.
>>85957185
They are a UK thing primarily
>>85957172
A hundred thousand percent


>>85957129
Best deal in comics running but I like the stuff so I may be biased.

>>85956990
This ad is terrible. How is this supposed to convince new customers to come aboard? It doesn't have any kind of hook to make new readers care or be excited. I can't imagine anyone who has never bought a comic walking away from this wanting to get up and buy a trade.

>>85957206
>A hundred thousand percent
Well at least we agree on that much.

>>85956907
I have 4 Walmarts within close driving distance.

I haven't seen a comic in any of em since the 90's until just recently.

Even then its just a few trades slapped onto a bluray of some of the animated movies.

local Target carried a few trades of TWD very shortly (around the 2nd or 3rd season of the show) but once they sold out they never bothered to stock any more.

Pretty much these are your comic book buying choices in my area
>junk stores
lots of older junk in em
>Booksamillion
downsized their comics selection my huge margins and 90% of their selection is archie/sonic, Starwars and largely marvel
>Hastings
Best selection of comics and pulled every new issue of every comic every week but they're going outta business at the end of October
>LCS
tiny in a hole in the wall, only person that works there is the owner who chain smokes by the front door, refuses to have sales of any kind, and hates FCBD

>>85956945
I am aware of how manga was birthed how that differs from the origins of the american comic book industry, and why manga still has the hold it does.
I'm also aware of the fact that Manga is generally created by one or two individuals and their assistants, whereas american comics have a wider creation bracket (writer, artist, colorist,inker,letterer, etc)

That noted
I'm not going to get into the details of whatever, since its pointless, and youre quick to dismiss everything, but
American periodicals have multiple creators who are all paid, and the magazine is sold for $4 or less.
To return to Vogue (non-fiction) or the New Yorker (which often contains fiction), it is possible and it can be done. if that requires a change in command or whatever else then fine.

>>85957049
The US had a print version of SJ that was "widely" available from 2003-2013 iirc. Like other american periodicals, it was relatively easy to get it at first (near the check-out, etc) although there weren't as many issues stocked, so it sold out quickly.
I believe that they made the most money from subscriptions though.
>>85957069
When did they start doing that? that's brilliant imo

>>85957164
But that seems like a problem of advertising+the public perception of comics (which is still being battled).

>>85956990
>Also this is real and aired on TV
thats a terrible commerical and its far too long.
A 10-30 second spot promoting a specific line/character would be far more effective.
With the current comics arrangement, it'd work best as an advertisement for a trade.

>>85957269
Not disagreeing it isn't terrible.

That ad was for the trades as well.

>>85954720
>And you can't pay for the cocaine budget of a young Rob Liefeld if you're constantly paying for returned comics.

SAVAGE. This guy is spot on.

>>85957206
I never actually thought of it like that. Not a bad experiment.

>>85956990
I'm not certain but I think someone may of actually been paid to make that video

>>85957172
There doesn't exist an untapped market large enough for a non-flawed business model. Too many people don't want to read comics, and we can't convince them to no matter how hard we try.

>>85957238
There is no possible greater advertisement than the movies and television series that we already have. And they still cannot convince anybody to become a comic-reader if that person didn't already want to become a comic-reader.

File: Ronin Ad.jpg (160KB, 483x750px)

160KB, 483x750px

I do enjoying going back to old house ads before the collapse and seeing what it took to deliver comics to North America in its vastness before everything burst.

>>85957102
SJ sells that low because its upfront, its digital, so now they're saving on printing/shipping costs; and because its licensed.
Its all second hand, so Viz is paying licensing and translation, not actual wages so to speak

>>85955521
>that DC's Rebirth titles (which are returnable, by the way, like the news stand comics of old) are selling 200,000 copies (to retailers, not readers), and that direct market comic sales are up from where they were at six years ago

Ok wait. Stop.

First, yes Rebirth is returnable however the titles showing up in the top 20 are also showing up on the reprint lists meaning those first prints of 100k are gone. So are those second prints. This argument needs to die in relation to DC because its not pulling a fucking Marvel by spiking its sales numbers with variant covers. It's actually fucking selling.

Second direct market sales have been showing a fairly steady slight incline over the years meaning shops are ordering more. Direct market isn't just going to spike and it retailers are showing growth it means they are selling. The last few years have also seen an increase in brick and mortar stores opening.

>and any real growth in the readership is coming from creator-owned comics that explore new genres and concepts instead of retreading the same storylines from decades past over and over.

But this is wrong. You look at where Image is making its money from and its the other smaller publishers. Dark Horse, IDW, Boom etc are all on the decline, hell just following the loss in dollar share of DH and it fucking mirrors to a damn T the growth of Image. Image is collapsing the third party market while Marvel's been kicking DC around since the nu52. Watch the next few months with the rise in popularity of DC you're doing to be seeing DC stepping into Marvels dollar share while Image says steady.

If creator owned work was the driving force like this idiot wants to claim there market share should be chipping at everyone. Not just fortifying against the third party publishers

>>85957206
>Now imagine if right after seeing that movie there was another story adjacent to the movie's story, not told by the same people for sale.
>Would you go buy any of those stories?
You're describing the MCU, which, based on the billions of dollars the films have been making, most would answer "yes"

>>85955521
>They'll point to comics outside the Diamond ecosystem, like "Smile" by Raina Telgemeier, which are far more successful than anything Marvel or DC put out, as examples of the industry thriving, ignoring the fact that Smile and similar comics, just like creator owned comics, are not a part of the superhero industrial complex I'm railing against.


This Smile meme needs to die, nobody talks about this shit anywhere outside of being promoted by ads or shillers.

They treat it like Saga or the Walking Dead but practically every normie has heard of at least TWD due to the tv show.

Smile has jack shit.

File: tumblr_o85tfdxWZo1r2u4sdo1_500.jpg (169KB, 488x750px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 488x750px

>>85955433
>striking a decisive blow against the SJWs

I think you need to take a break from your super important internet culture war and get some fresh air

>Batman replaced Robin with a black kid
Damien's still Robin and he's in Teen Titans. Tim's Red Robin (so might as well be Robin) and he's in Detective Comics. Also except for like a minute Duke was never officially Robin. Even now he's supposed to be Lark or whatever he's called.

>replaced Green Lanterns
The older Green Lanterns still have their own twice-monthly book

>>85957381
You are saying Most people who walked out of Civil War went and bought a copy of the trade of Civil War, or the latest Captain America thing?

In which Universe?

>>85957373
This is true, according to the most accurate places for reporting this stuff the direct market is on a slow upward climb

>>85955433
>Gamergate-tier faggotry

>>>/2014/

Also before some suggests more people will buy cheaper single issues

Marvel and DC have both at different points tried doing selling books on lower quality paper at a cheaper price and it didn't do anything.

Direct Market Comics are a weird thing in that they are boutique print collectibles

The worst place to be

>>85957387
Smile has kids reading it. Of course you're not going to find adults who read it and talk about it. We adults only read mature comics for mature audiences such as ourselves.

I read Smile. I really liked it and would recommend it to anyone interested in childhood slice-of-life autobio.

>>85957338
>Too many people don't want to read comics, and we can't convince them to no matter how hard we try.
Is it truly because people don't want to read comics? Or could it be because comics in their current form simply aren't accessible to the masses?

It's like an fat guy crying about not having a girlfriend. Lose some weight and go socialize in order to solve your problem.

>>85957417>>85957206
>Would you go buy any of those stories?
>You are saying Most people who walked out of Civil War went and bought a copy of the trade of Civil War, or the latest Captain America thing?
Were they aware of the civil war comic?
they have a general awareness of "this is based on a comic" but thats not the same.
Films based on books (Gone Girl, Dan Green books, etc) increase the sales of the book.
so I disagree, what Marvel and DC are doing is just broken, simple as that

>>85957381
exactly.

>>85957417
>You are saying Most people who walked out of Civil War went and bought a copy of the trade of Civil War, or the latest Captain America thing?

No, the anon's saying many people watched Iron Man then Thor then Captain America then The Avengers and so on.

>>85957045
>and not having Comics EVERYWHERE during major movie releases is a misstep
The closest I've seen was a sign at the counter that said "take your ticket stub to the LCS for 10% your next purchase". Granted I live in bumfuck nowhere and basically everyone knows each other so whoever owned the LCS probably talked to whoever owned the cinema franchise

>>85957468
Yes but people are talking about leveraging the movies to sell COMICS not more Movies.

>>85957486
The anon was talking about the "adjacent story made by different people" working for the movies.

>>85957460
Discussing strictly the audience for comic movies and comic television shows: Amazon is accessible to every adult. Piracy is accessible to every teenager.

If someone WANTS to read comics, they can. Easily. But they don't want to. Even though they enjoy those advertisements for comics, they aren't interested in the comics themselves.

>>85957516
They do

If they do it is just a couple webcomics here and there.

This website is fun

http://www.comicshoplocator.com/StoreLocator

The comic shop closest to me isn't even on here.

>>85956192
>> base a new character on cosplay factor alone
>> be surprised that everyone loves dressing up but doesn't give a shit about the comic.

That's part of Marvel's big "we've got female readers!" audience.

>>85957516
>If someone WANTS to read comics, they can.
In order to make comics thrive, publishers have to make people WANT to read comics. A customer base won't simply like thing just because it exists. You have to make them aware of thing, and put thing in a place they can easily browse it, sample it, and buy it. In other words, if you make them accessible, customers will come.

>>85957550
That website looks too modern. I can't trust it. Web 1.0 for me, please.

http://www.the-master-list.com/

>>85957631
The hardcore comics fans seem to be the people you are describing they have pullists that have gone on for decades

And they will continue until ???


And are also the people that Marvel and DC are both the most tiptoe around

>>85957655
>The hardcore comics fans seem to be the people you are describing
No I'm talking about getting new readers entirely.

>>85957715
talking about this bit

>A customer base won't simply like thing just because it exists.

>>85957631
We're still talking about people who choose to spend their time going out and buying tickets for superhero movies, right?

>You have to make them aware of thing,
Done. They're even seeing the movie.

>and put thing in a place they can easily browse it,
Done.
>sample it,
Done.
>and buy it.
Done.

Believe it or not, these people have access to the Internet, even if they aren't expert hackers like us enlightened 4chins geniuses.

>In other words, if you make them accessible, customers will come.
No. People have free will. Really, that's all there is to it. You think there's a set formula that a publisher can follow in order to achieve guaranteed results. But the world isn't that simple. We can't force someone to take an interest in comics if they don't want to, because they control their own lives, their own destinies, their own actions. Not your simple mathematical formula to revolutionize comic economics.

>>85957634
my shop is listed
I love living in San Diego

>>85957757
You are assuming that for most people seeing that movie they will not have their fill of the thing from that 2 hour action movie.

>>85957757
>set formula that a publisher can follow in order to achieve guaranteed results.

Not that Anon but there are a few tricks. Slapping #1 on the cover is a proven method to get people invested in a character or title. You think Batman Year One sold so well for years because people new just looking at it that it would be good? Hell no, they saw a clear and easy to follow instruction right on the cover that said "hey dumbass start here".

The best thing publishers started doing was putting a fucking number on the spine of their trades indicating an order for people to follow.

>>85957780
Majority of people? Probably.

But there's always a spike in post in every comic community saying "I just saw X and loved it! Where do I start reading!".

>>85957842
I am not sure I would call that a spike

>>85957780
The opposite. I'm assuming that they will have their fill. That movie is enough to satisfy them, and they feel zero desire to look up The Further Adventures of Captain America in comic book format afterwards.

Those movies are the best advertisements we could ever hope for, and they still won't work because people by and large simply aren't interested in comics.

Advertisements are not the solution to fixing the market.

>>85957811
You mean the TPB of Year One right? Cause it was originally printed in the ongoing singles

>>85957891
>and they still won't work because people by and large simply aren't interested in comics.
maybe thats the issue
how do we make people interested in reading comics?
>>85957920
thats what he was referring to, yeah

>>85957891
I agree

And think there isn't really a readily available solution and that people have so much available to fill their free time these days that I am not sure something that is as niche as comics is can carve out that time for enough people ever again.

I am also content with that but then again I have largely disengaged from a majority of Direct Market stuff.

>>85955677
But smile is a complete book, while Rebirth and Harley are single issues.

>>85957811
In general, #1 issues and collections only trick people who are already into comics. They don't work to entice new readers because people won't be browsing the list of available comics in the first place unless they were already interested.

Take a look at the New 52. A massive surge of sales, right? But according to The Nielsen Company, only 5% were from new readers getting their very first comics. And that's what happens with an entire linewide relaunch. The results are more negligible when we're trying individual #1s coming out here and there.

>>85957927
>how do we make people interested in reading comics?
We don't. People have free will, they like whatever suits their natures, not ours. We don't have the ability to force or trick or otherwise manipulate them into liking what we want them to like.

Or maybe you're talking about a different "we" than I am, I don't know.

>>85956627
spot on.

So wait, what is Smile? This thread is the first I've ever heard about it.

>>85958409
http://goraina.com/books/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raina_Telgemeier

>>85956482
>However when people then go and suggest thoe new methods it is to latch their wagon onto other dying industries or places in stores that also wouldn't sell.

Oh you noticed that too?

I too get tired of seeing people go "BUT COMICS SHOULD BE IN THE GROCERY STORES AND 7-11s" when it's fucking clear they don't fucking know how grocery stores and the newsstand market works. Believe me, I've seen comics at 7-11s and grocery stores at the time when people assumed they weren't there. And they only lasted maybe a few months to a year at best!

Yes, comics should be available at a place where a bigger audience can see them. No, I don't focusing on the newsstand market would help. Especially not when circulation for print magazines overall went down in the last 8 years.

>>85955892
My LCS has a sizable share of cheesecake pinups, lewd comics and sexy figurines and one of the cashiers is a girl

>36 IPs
I guess the comic market really is tiny if this is all the people who care about it.

>>85958662
and most of my replies are shit posts

>>85955892
my shop has some sexy statues mixed in with regulars. Shop is pretty inviting though.

File: kys.jpg (15KB, 751x418px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 751x418px

>>85958520
>>85958873
>All this mansplaining

>>85955892
>I wonder if this person has been to a comic store lately or if they have the misfortune of living close to a sleazy one in a shitty area.

I'd say it could be the latter. Some places are lucky to have a variety of comic shops, others are stuck with one within like a 100 mile radius and therefore that one shop could do whatever it pleases.

I think the kind of shop that Belle-Tain Summer describes was far more frequent during the 80's and 90's than it is today, though.

>>85958929
>using gender-based shaming techniques

>>85955892
I'm a woman and I can only think of maybe one shop that I refused to step foot in again and weirdly enough it did everything 'right'. It was clean, didn't have female characters posing in 'that' pose on posters, and had a pretty nice selection.

However the guy running the store was the rudest person I've dealt with in a comic store. He didn't help me out and made me feel like I was wasting his time despite me being the only one in that fucking store. Then his buddies show up and starts a convo with me and I'm like fuck this and left.

>>85954801
>Kirby forbid
Cringe.

>>85958027
>We don't. People have free will, they like whatever suits their natures, not ours. We don't have the ability to force or trick or otherwise manipulate them into liking what we want them to like.
thats so imbecilic it wasn't even worth posting.
obviously no one can make anyone do anything.
I can't make you watch TV, i cant make you read books, I can't make you go to school, no one can make anyone else do anything.

To imply that the market for comics is as big as it can be is absolutely retarded, most people are not aware; and if they were aware then it'd be a different story.
Most people know Taylor Swift, so yeah, asking "how can we make people buy taylor swift ___" may not be worth asking--people are aware.
Most people DONT know _(insert much smaller music artist)_ so asking how to improve their puclic recognition and popularity is worth asking.

and movies/tv based on comics=/= the comics themselves.

>>85956735
WW E1 sold really well

>>85954801
>on the audacity of Marvel's top write
Surely he's not talking about David fucking Walker here, is he?

>>85959114
He's talking about Bendis' tweets.

misleading click bait, should either say "comics in America" or "capeshit comics"

>>85955890
>The direct market distribution system for the big 2 can't attract new readers.

Aaand, that's about it.

It's not rocket science to say shit is fucked.

And dude isn't even really suggesting a solution, or demonstrates he has any real business knowlege.

>>85958027
Then what's the point of any advertising you dumbass.

>>85955780
Pastebin is a thing, idiot.

>>85956735
>The problem is that they don't sell well enough,

The first Superman EO actually sold really well. I remember the big news about it the year it was out. It was even the seventh highest DC TPB on the Bookscan 2011 list (which covers non-comic shop sales, so places like Barnes and Noble and all that). I didn't like the book, but I had to acknowledge it was a sales success. Batman: Earth One vol 1 was a sales success on the 2012 Bookscan chart (third highest DC book). Superman Earth One vol 2 was in 16th place, which is still pretty good considering it's the bookstore market.

But as far as I can tell, none of the Marvel Season One books ever made it onto the Bookscan list. And the lowest selling Marvel GN/TPB on a Bookscan list is like 3000 copies.

I haven't checked to see how well these sell in comic shops, but I do know that Marvel deep discounted the Season One stuff this year, so it really wasn't a success.

>>85955751
>Also the idea that successful movies will lead to people wanting to read the comics in any large numbers is also a flawed idea

It works for books. Sales of novels spike significantly when an adaptation comes out

>>85956419
No, namefags are faggots.

>>85959163
>And dude isn't even really suggesting a solution, or demonstrates he has any real business knowlege.

Nor does he act like he does. But he is right. This system is destined to collapse and mark my worlds Marvel will be the ones to crash it

>>85958027
>People have free will
my sides.

>>85956419
>Buying Floppies saves me money in the long run

Fucking how?

>>85959245
Okay, now I checked Comichron's yearly sales. Usually what happens is that the heavy orders are done for TPBs and HCs the year they're out and then if it does well it gets reordered every year, even if it's not as high as the initial number.

2010
Superman: Earth One v1 HC (debut): 31,900

2011
Superman: Earth One v1 HC (reorder): 6,500

2012
Batman: Earth One v1 HC (debut): 45,700
Superman Earth One v2 HC (debut): 23,900
Superman Earth One v1 HC (reorder): 9,200
X-Men Season One (debut): 4,900
Fantastic Four Season One (debut): 4,700
Spider-Man Season One (debut): 4,400
Hulk Season One (debut): 4,300
Dr. Strange Season One (debut): 3,800
Daredevil Season One (debut): 3,300
Ant-Man Season One (debut): 2,900

>>85957053
>they need to figure out a way to make digital appealing

By making new comics 99 cents. Why the fuck would you pay $3.99 or a digital comic?

>>85959402

2013
Batman: Earth One v1 HC (reorder): 8,000
Superman: Earth One v1 TPB (softcover debut): 7,700
Superman Earth One v2 HC (reorder): 7,300
Superman Earth One v1 HC (reorder): 5,700

No year reorders shown for the Season One stuff, which means if there were any, it'd be lower than 1,600.

2014
Teen Titans Earth One v1 HC: 9,674
Batman: Earth One v1 TPB (softcover debut): 5,863
Superman Earth One v2 TPB (softcover debut): 4,527
Batman: Earth One v1 HC (reorder): 3,545
Superman: Earth One v1 TPB (reorder): 3,070

No Marvel Season One reorders listed here, either.

File: 1427112721408.jpg (241KB, 800x641px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 800x641px

>All that TL;DR
Holy shit, does this guy not realize using fewer words makes you easier to understand?

That aside, his main point is correct. Using guilt based economical tactics is doomed to failure. It is up to the producer to ensure their content is desirable and reaches it's audience. Take whatever 'mortal' stance on how it 'should' be instead, but the fact remains it doesn't work that way in reality. In reality, the consumer is not obligated to hand over money or attention just because a product exists.

"Tough shit" if your token effort and passive aggressive marketing tactic doesn't pan out.

Much easier to see how badly passive aggressive marketing works in video games because it's not dominated only by two big companies that use the same strategy. There's plenty of comparison cases that show simply working harder is the only way compared to screaming at your lost consumer base at how entitled they are for not buying your product.

>>85955346
>I personally don't, they're the same gang of idiots who think that putting comics in non-specialty stores will solve the problem

While the suggestion isn't a magic bullet. You have to seriously question a business that gets butt hurt when its brought up that exposing your product in MORE markets might be a good thing.

>>85959529
>Mortal

Meant moral.

>>85959529
This.

>>85959497
Oops forgot the Season One debuts in 2013:

Avengers Season One: 2,900
Wolverine Season One: 2,800
Iron Man Season One: 2,600
Thor Season One: 2,400

>>85959532
>when its brought up that exposing your product in MORE markets might be a good thing.

That's because you assume they don't have it in more markets. They actually do. The problem is that it's not enough effort.

Really, the big caveat here is money. All the proposed "solutions" overlook the fact that publishers don't have the breathing room to extravagantly experiment with distribution like it's nothing.

>>85955433


This is what Johnsfags believe.

>>85956665
>this is true, but ideas need to start somewhere

But like HL said, a lot of times ideas in these threads is just latching on to dying industries or in places in stores that also wouldn't sell. Ideas don't work when you only have a vague idea of what the problem is and just throw around repetitive comments.

For instance, in the past people kept suggesting that the price on comics should be lowered to $2 or $1 or whatever. Marvel did try to sell 99 cent comics in the mid-90's. But it didn't work because the grocery stores and newsstands didn't want to sell a 99 cent product, they demanded the price be higher. And that's why on the newsstand, Untold Tales of Spider-Man got bundled with another 99 cent comic and sold for $1.99 instead, which defeated the purpose. Kurt Busiek went into this in detail here:

http://busiek.com/site/2009/06/21/comics-as-a-mass-medium/

DC to their credit did lower prices, but obviously by a dollar so it's just $2.99. But what you don't know is that on the newsstand (Barnes and Nobles and stuff), those comics have a cover price of $3.99 instead, so it's only $2.99 in comic shops. Before you whine and moan about DC only lowering the price for comic shops, go and read Busiek's essay again about Untold Tales of Spider-Man and remember that it might not have been DC's decision.

>>85955627
music artist don't profit ftom record sales. they earn their fortune with live shows

>>85955008
Mark Waid is a cuck.

>>85957927
>how do we make people interested in reading comics?

Not the anon you were replying to, but here's my take on the whole thing. The thing is, the habit of reading comics (and the habit of reading books in general) is something that is best ingrained in childhood. Print comics largely being limited to the direct market really works against that, though (i.e., it's a niche retail space that is set up largely to cater to existing and older comics readers), which is part of the Outhousers article that I agree with. Without a constant influx of new and young readers, the comics industry (and the medium itself) is destined to become irrelevant.

I think change might be in the air, though. Primary and secondary schools and public libraries (at least where I live) have been using all-ages graphic novels (such as Raina Telgemeier's books) to encourage kids and teens to read. It's somewhat ironic given the history of the medium, but it might be that schoolteachers and librarians may end up doing more to ensure that a next generation of comics readers will exist than the Big Two (which are really just IP farms for movies/merchandise at this point).

>>85954801
>I'm not talking about them - just Marvel and DC - when I tell readers not to preorder comics and instead buy the comics they want, when they want, in the format they prefer, as is their right as consumers. I happily preorder comics from publishers who aren't backed by gigantic corporations on a regular basis and encourage others to do the same.
This is stupid. You either choose to preorder, that is to say buy without seeing the final product or waiting for opinions, or you don't. The size of the company doesn't matter.

It's like in video game. You can't say I won't preorder a game from Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo, EA, Ubisoft (...) because they're big companies but I dont mind with indie games.
In the end, you're still buying a product with little knowlegde of its content. It's like buying a car based on a picture.

>>85955423
>based Didio avenges DC for what Marvel did to them in the 70s
Neat.

>>85955346
>that's what literally digital comics should have done
How? Kids don't buy digital comics and don't pester their parents to do so. And to buy a digital comics, you either need to go on a site dedicated to digital comics or on the section of a non-specialized site dedicated to comics.
Internet is not the solution to every problem of the physical market.

I buy most of my comics on Amazon (I don't buy floppies). If I'm not looking specifically for comics, I will never see a comic recommendation appears why looking for something else. That's something that happen only in shops. You go through aisles looking for a book or a whatever and your eyes catch the cover of a comic.

>>85957143
>Batman replaced Robin with a black kid? or replaced Green Lanterns with a terrorist sympathizer and a Hispanic woman while still pushing black Wally on the Teen Titans
You sell yourself away, /pol/.

File: BRILLIANT.jpg (107KB, 372x527px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 372x527px

>>85960966
>be constantly outsold by Marvel
>go full 90s
>Marvel does the same
>go back to status quo
>Marvel doesn't
>outsell them

>>85961044
fuck off /co/mblr

>>85954900
What was the fourth from the end?

>>85960585he didn't say anything wrong

I have a question. I'm mostly from /a/ and /v/ , but I enjoy /co/ too.

Why don't you post archive links of articles like we do in other boards, instead of copy/pasting the whole article? I see this practice here a lot, it seems dumb.

>>85961344
What does that have to do with the fact he's a cuck?

>>85961044
threadly reminder that /pol/ is for political discussions, not for conservative opinions. Conservative opinions can exist on every board.

>>85961347
Because people want to discuss individual points

File: MV5BML_.jpg (16KB, 228x341px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 228x341px

>>85961369
>/pol/ is for political discussions, not for conservative opinions

>>85957143
>le both sides are the same!

Except Marvel has never made a good comic.

>>85955273
They're literally saying the system is Marvel's fault

>>85961398
they made Punnisher

>>85961394
Yes, anon. You might like to think that /pol/ is an institutionalised way to keep the "evil" people away from you, but it's not.
"Evil" people are in every discussion and rightfully so.
Enjoy your stay.

>>85961417
Exactly, Marvel has never made a good comic

File: 1x31_-_Zi.png (168KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 320x240px

>>85961425
>trying to make me visit that white trash cesspool

>>85961452
>reading comprehension

>>85961467
Why should I comprehend your writing? YOU'RE HITLER!

>>85961477
>not LITERALLY HITLER
one job. you had one job, faggot.

>>85961186
Go home /pol/.

>>85961347
Steadfast refusal to give Outhousers any traffic in this case, I'd assume.

>>85957757
That's not how it works.
When you watched a movie based on a novel and want more, you buy the novel which you can do everywhere. With comic, apart from creator owned stuff, you have to find the arc that was used for the movie (it's not always named the same). If you're lucky, Barnes and Noble will put the TPB related to the movie in a conspicuous place. Otherwise, you'll have to go online (using the name of the movie for searching purpose will give you mostly links about the movie, not the related comics) or in a LCS which most people will never do.

>>85961559
But OP goes there to view the article. Making an archive link afterwards wouldn't give traffic, that's the point of archives.

>>85957757
>No. People have free will. Really, that's all there is to it. You think there's a set formula that a publisher can follow in order to achieve guaranteed results.
There is no set formula but marketing would have died a long time ago if it wasn't efficient. People have free will but they need to be aware of something to have the idea to buy.

A lot less people would buy the novel a movie is based on if they didn't see on screen in theater: "based on the novel buy...).
With comic, people know a movie is related to a comic's character and that's it. Is it a new story? Is it a sory told in a comic? Which run out of the 20-60 years of stories about this character.

I even doubt most people are interested in reading the comic after seeing the movie. The link between a comic and a movie is more tenuous than between a novel and a movie.

>>85955346
digital comics are not newstand comics. Newstand comics are impulse buys, they are there promanant and in your face, they advertise themselves. Digital you still have to go out of your way to find the comic

>>85955526
Tell that to netflix,youtube, vevo and spotify

>>85960054
>fortune
>musicians

no, most artists actually have to save up to tour even if they are signed on a label. Where they make their money is not the show itself but the merch, the live show barely lets them break even and certainly doesn't give them enough in case of something going wrong in the tour.

Unless you are talking about the top 100 bands, but that's a whole different thing. And just like seemingly everything else, all the money is going into fewer and fewer bands. At least the bottom end have a lot more bands that seem to scrape by though

>>85955892
One of the two comic stores I go to only has female staff, the other two have at least one female on staff.

I've always thought that the speculation market couldn't haven't killed the comic industry as bad as it did. Speculators couldn't have been 99.9% of buyers. I don't remember the name but there was an interview with a teacher at a comic school who used to publish a book about a T-rex. He was selling 1 mil an issue and then suddenly he was selling under 100k the next month. Problems with distribution make that sound a lot more believable.

>>85955719
>I am going to use a stereotype of comic book stores from the 80's that never really existed even in the 80's

I hate these people

>>85962092
It's some very stupid hyperbole, but LCS aren't exactly warm and welcoming establishments.

Most LCS' I've ever gone to, even the larger more successful ones, have had totally disinterested staff and obnoxious customers.

>>85961171
so was pic related here right? >>85955423

>>85961347
OP here, I was stupid. but see, the problem with that is if it was just linked, this thread will quickly get buried. If it wasn't and I did what I did, it would get consistent bumps and individual pieces of the article are already cut up for quoting

>>85962227
hmm, yeah, /co/ has slower traffic than /v/ or /a/, I see the point of not archiving and posting like this.

>>85962227
I, for one, would not have read it if it wasn't pasted directly into the tread.

>>85955008
Ginger faggot didn't even read the article

>>85957516
Comics face a similar problem to animation. No one takes it seriously as a medium and it suffers because of it. At least with animation parents take their kids to see each movie.

>>85961495
Nah, you just didn't get the specific reference.

File: These aint your daddys comic books fanboy.jpg (67KB, 839x435px)

67KB, 839x435px

This was the only TV commercial for comic I ever recall seeing, and I haven't seen it in over 15 years:

https://youtu.be/6aYz9RtFuD8

Disney and Time Warner could easily afford to pay for TV commercials to promote their comic publishers. They deliberately choose not to.

>>85962563
>Cyborg

Dropped in the 90's

What if the Big 2 Created their own Netflix-type service?

I know Marvel has Unlimited but I'm talking about releasing current runs at the same time as print as well as an extensive back catalogue rather than waiting half a year for runs to show up on Unlimited.

I would also say treat a run like Netflix treats their series and just release it all at once, see how popular it is and renew the series, but that sounds crazy.

If the price is right people don't mind letting a supscription keep going without a second as long as they get some use out of it, sometimes even if they don't.

Also make the fucking app work for more than apple and android and fix that shitty website.

>>85954693
So we like Outhousers now or...

>>85959398
Ever gotten half way through a first trade and realized you don't actually like the book?

When you are picky with quality reading a First issue of a new title and then dropping it is a lot cheaper than saving money and reading the first trade and then dropping it.

Even cheaper if you get a couple issues in

>>85963117
>So we like Outhousers now or...

No
But this guy's article was pretty spot on

So tl;dr, Marvel and DC are becoming like Games Workshop: treating their target audience like shut and surprised sales are dropping

>>85960618
You are ignoring the main way kids get into reading comics these days, which is funny that most print comics articles and companies still ignore the effect of.

>>85955452
Their collections are the only new things I buy.

>>85955719
>Bring back TV commercials
Mexico here. We have been having those. I don't watch much TV, but yesterday I caught a DC one about Suicide Squad, there was also a few ones about Deadpool by the time his movie came out.

Shit's not working.

>Ditch floppies and focus on trades.

There I fixed everything.

>>85963318
The sad part is even if you are trolling there are lots of people who actually think this.

>>85961347
Tradition. We do things by the old ways.

>>85963202
>Marvel and DC are becoming like Games Workshop:
GW fans are even more fanatical and GW hates making money even more than comic companies. But yeah pretty much

>>85963402
But it works for some people. There are lots of creators that make good money off of selling through box book stores and amazon. These are not counted in the trade sales posted on /co/. And for creators these work exactly like novels a long term investment. They don't get paid per page or any bullshit. They write a book and it goes to a bookstore to slowly sell until they build up a library of books where they can stsrt to draw in fans that look at the rest of their stuff. Like a novel. And comics are big enough that in my city it's section is just as big as the kids section. This is the way some people choose to publish, non-diamond and not paid per fucking page.

It works but you have to work a normal job while you make a few books, just like every novelist.

Well.

That all seems accurate.

>>85963776
Yes

But you are failing to see all the tendrils that spread out of the single issue market, that keep it up beyond just storytelling.

Someone give me a tl;dr of this, I ain't reading all this word vomit

>>85963865
Nah brah

>>85963814
That is just superhero storytelling not comic stories. Culture and medium are not the same thing, they influence each other greatly but are still independent. Cape comics could die and we would still have comics.

The single issue comic buying is a cultural hold over from a dying breed of comic buyers.

>>85955008
Mark SJWaid is such a faggot.

>>85963865
No wonder /co/ hates Bendis. They are too lazy to read

>>85964121
Oh, we like to read. But good things only.

>>85964093
beyond storytelling

I am talking about stuff like the artists employed doing Variant Covers and the Demand and Speculation for those for one

The collectors who are in it just to have it all who would given that provocation just stop.

There is a reason Marvel and DC keep this going, I mean it is lazy to assume they are unaware of everything talked about in this thread and they have more information and solid details than anyone here does.

I think there is method to this thing that surely madness.

>>85964161
Pandering to collectors with endless variants and #1s is exactly what's killing the market

>>85963865
tl;dr is how we have some many retards running around thinking they actually know shit

>>85964187
Please stop taking a tone that I am disagreeing with that.

I am not

What I am saying is the reasons the Companies do not take hard rights is because of reasons and Dying is not Dead to them and the market around that corner won't be made up of Diehards.

Everyone is aware of the problems including the companies themselves.

>>85959303
We know it's not working for comics as Marvel's Civil War proves. If anything I suggest it's because MCU fans have a lower bullshit crossover threshold than most Marvel readers.

>>85964187
>Pandering to collectors with endless variants and #1s is exactly what's killing the market

As opposed to pandering to SJW aka the "new readers".

It seems you are in a situation where can't have your cake and eat it too.

File: stanley.gif (884KB, 245x138px)

884KB, 245x138px

>>85964135
>/co/
>reading good things

>>85957238
You do realize that those fucking huge Vogue issues and things like it actually cost more to print than they're sold for, and they're basically a delivery mechanism for hundreds of pages of glossy full-color ads, right?