ALL MONTHLY DC TITLES ARE $3.99

How does selling the more popular titles twice a month for a total of 6 dollars not make sense? Keeping everything at 2.99 was nice but it had to end at some point when every other publisher is at 3.99 or higher, except for some really long series that have dedicated fan bases.

File: Mercs1-600x911.jpg (118KB, 600x911px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 600x911px

Meanwhile at The House of Ideas

>>89236138
>it's an OP is a stupid fucking retard that didnt read the whole thing

It's a dollar more because you get a digital copy with every physical issue now.

File: Mercs2-600x911.jpg (129KB, 600x911px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 600x911px

>>89236401

File: Mercs3-1-600x911.jpg (148KB, 600x911px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 600x911px

>>89236424

>>89236138
As much as I dislike price increases I understand sometimes they are necessary and I also understand that DC maybe unable to keep up the current pace of bi-weekly releases but I hope they do keep some books double shipping and some books at $2.99, even if its just something like Action and Detective Comics are $2.99 and are bi weekly, everything else is monthly and $3.99.

>>89236522
>As much as I dislike price increases I understand sometimes they are necessary
This. Sooner or later it had to happen.

>>89236406
And how many people read both the physical comic and the digital copy? Unless you sell the code on eBay, it's not worth it.

Hell, if they really want to justify a dollar markup, just throw a coupon for the collection in the floppies. Buy six issues, get six bucks off the trade. The company still makes a profit, and more readers are encouraged to buy both versions.

>>89236654
Its obvious they are including the digital code to try to soften the blow a bit and add some more value at a minimum cost to them. I don't think they can justify the increase beyond planning stating market forces make it no longer viable to sell these books at $2.99

>>89236654
>And how many people read both the physical comic and the digital copy?
Judging from the reaction to Marvel dropping the digital code, more than you'd think.

>>89236138
>Is the Rebirth sales model a failure

No, sale or return is by far the most popular method of periodicals distribution both in the US and worldwide.

But

it doesn't work with destination outlets like LCS retailers, because the people going there already know what they're going in for. Very few of them will make impulse purchases - which SoR relies on. In a supermarket or drugstore you're exposed to magazines you might not have seen at a destination outlet and a proportion of people who go there will impulsively buy copies. Even relatively modest magazine sales - actual sales, not copies printed - in that environment are usually in the hundreds of thousands. The problem for DC is that their line is interlinked by continuity - you can't get a drugstore to take 80+ titles from a single publisher each month unless they're going to fly off the shelves, but comic books won't (at least initially). DC needed a gateway book that could go to those kinds of outlets, but they didn't understand that, so the model was mistakenly applied to LCS instead and failed.

With the underlying costs of the relaunch and the additional costs of extra printings that were eventually returned unsold, it's like DC lost a lot of money on Rebirth - but for a few months, because Diamond can't properly account for returns and is the sole source of stats on comic sales, they appeared to be crushing the market. In fact they probably never raised their sales beyond where they've been the past couple of years (and where they find themselves again).

So, $4 books it is. This was always inevitable (because of inflation), but right now it's almost certainly necessity.

Double shipping isn't bad, per se - one creative team taking two spots each month may mean less backroom spending, and if a book is popular enough to support double shipping it's better to do it than give up one of those spots to a lower-selling monthly, regardless of whether you think you're bleeding readers from other titles.

>>89236654
Literally anyone with siblings that reads comics or wants to keep the issues forever. You are getting 2 copies for the price of one.

>>89236902
>>89236654
Anybody with limited space at home and wanting to retain a copy, too.

>>89236735
Which is a perfect justification. They're not running a charity.

Expect Batman to go to $5 as their first regular at that price point - it can sustain it. It'll also push up their dollar share significantly.

Maybe some firings to come over Rebirth too.

>>89236902
Holy shit great idea man, I am totally gonna give the physical copy to my little cousins and just keep the digital.

>>89236902
DIDIO DOES IT AGAIN!

>>89236832
Do you have any support information about how DC has lost money on Rebirth?

>>89236832
Keep dreaming, mousefag

>>89236902
Damn, how did I not think about that.

>the days of my little brother ruining my copy with his gross little hands are over

ANONS REJOICE

File: Laughing At Marvel.jpg (99KB, 768x514px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 768x514px

>>89236522
>I also understand that DC maybe unable to keep up the current pace of bi-weekly releases but I hope they do keep some books double shipping and some books at $2.99
This is DC moving underperforming bi-monthly books into monthly books to reduce the cost of production. The price increase to $3.99 for all monthly books is fine, especially since they're throwing in a digital copy. This is basically giving you two copies of the book you just bought, giving your local retailer some much needed support with a physical sale, and kicking Marvel in the nuts along the way for an unpopular move they did recently. Most of the average to very good performing bi-monthly books are remaining at $2.99.

>>89236138
Good news for digital only people. The monthly titles will stay 2.99 if you buy them digitally!!!!
HYPE BASED DC

>>89237345
here is source
http://www.newsarama.com/32768-dc-s-price-3-99-price-increases-only-for-print-books-digital-titles-remain-at-2-99.html

>>89237345
>>89237370

Interesting, wonder how retailers will react to this.

>>89236401
>>89236424
Who made these?
They deserve mad props.

>>89237582
>Who made these?
>They deserve mad props.
Bleeding Cool

>>89237660
Well props to them, anyway.

>>89236401
>>89236424
>>89236458


>Machine Man and Domino

Huh. I assumed the Mercs for Money book was all Deadpool type OC Donut Steels. Also this was great and they should have edited the whole issue like this

>>89237145
Yeah, they printed millions of copies that were sent out SALE or RETURN.

Normally, Diamond ships ordered comics only - these have a very low return rate because the comic book stores that ordered them have already paid for them, so only defective copies and those where the retailer's check bounces end up returned/unpaid for.

DC started shipping RETURNABLE titles with Rebirth - but quickly abandoned it, despite apparently huge sales. Their sales before Rebirth were about where they are now - all returnable titles became order-only (non-returnable) again. There's no reason to do that if you're selling millions more copies every month - especially if you know/suspect the result would be orders slumping back to where they were.

DC made it possible for retailers to fill their stores with merchandise - often retailer rewards like variant covers for high order numbers - at no risk to the retailer, because the unsold copies were simply returned at DC's expense (sale or return charges a modest deposit - usually - per-copy, of which most is refunded when the copies are registered as unsold and sent to the pulp mill; this covers basic costs, but not printing the extra copies- that comes out of DC's money)

So for like three months they were printing at first millions, then hundreds of thousands of extra books that nobody would buy, which retailers were ordering anyway because they got variants for higher orders. Since variants aren't separated out by DC/Diamond's quaintly simplistic order system, you can bet those didn't get pulped.

Sale or return isn't an unworkable model (which is why it's so popular - newspapers and other high-volume sales all use it), DC just used it in the one place it was guaranteed to fail, and because it failed they're stuck with the cost of printing and shipping millions of copies nobody ever wanted. Their actual sales won't have changed at all from the baseline position they've been at for years - you don't gain/lose readers like that.

>>89237923
2pasta4me

>>89237923
>No, I don't have support information because I'm stupidly thinking they """""abandoned""""" returnability despite saying right from the start it was a temporary thing

Well that answers the question.

>>89237923
Your entire premise is based on DC books not selling, which we know is objectively false since most books had two, three, or even four reprints.

>>89237923
Well this is all total bullshit.

>>89237923
>DC started shipping RETURNABLE titles with Rebirth - but quickly abandoned it, despite apparently huge sales.

Stop pushing this bullshit, you fucking idiot.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2016/04/14/dc-comics-to-make-141-of-their-rebirth-titles-returnable/

>April 14, 2016

>I believe this is the biggest returnable programme made to the direct market by one publisher in its entire history. 141 separate DC Comics titles and that’s not including the variant covers.

>That’s the first 6 issues (including Rebirth specials) of all the bi-weekly titles.

>And the first 3 issues (including Rebirth specials) of all the monthly titles.

>Which means that retailers can order as many as they like, safe in the knowledge that those they cannot sell, they can rip the covers off and return to DC Comics for a refund.

>>89236788
That was actually a big part in how things from Marvel like Captain Marvel became popular. People would buy the floppy and then give the digital code to someone else, which helped grow the fanbase.

File: future so bright I need shades.png (447KB, 707x410px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 707x410px

>>89238452
>Captain Marvel
>popular

>>89236138
I only buy three monthlies. So who cares.

>>89238246
Yeah, reprints have rarity value, and DC's print runs have been declining in size in recent years because of declining orders - meaning if they expected low orders, they sure as shit weren't going to have huge print runs, and most of those books that even went to a second didn't have a huge first. But if they were selling, where did those audiences go?

Why did DC suddenly decide to make them all non-returnable again if it was working out for them?

Because someone in Burbank fundamentally misunderstood how the comic book audience works, and what those sales to retailers actually represent.

>>89238174
You don't abandon a business practice unless it's not working.

You try out new things and, if they work, you keep them. That's it. That's all this was. Those high "sales" were false inflation - nobody is going to confirm that they ever actually sold to consumers, because they didn't.

>>89238164
>can't read

>>89238339
>can't understand

>>89238379
You've... you've literally confirmed what I said, anon. Do you...not understand what those words say?

Have I been talking to a bot all along?

>>89239359
>You've... you've literally confirmed what I said, anon.
>DC quickly abandoned returnability!
>Your article about how DC announced returnability on a limited number of issues before DCU Rebirth was out confirmed my bullshit!

You need to stop before you hurt yourself again.

>>89237923
None of this shit is fucking true

>DC started shipping RETURNABLE titles with Rebirth - but quickly abandoned it
DC didn't suddenly decide to end returnability, it was literally announced from the start to only be for the first six issues of the bi-weekly's and three for the monthlies
>Their sales before Rebirth were about where they are now
Objectively not true. Look at the charts
>all returnable titles became order-only (non-returnable) again
Again, that was planned from the beginning.
>often retailer rewards like variant covers for high order numbers
DC don't do that shit. A hand full of issues since Rebirth have gotten store exclusive variants and every issue has at least one variant which are all free to order non-incentive based. You're thinking of Marvel
>then hundreds of thousands of extra books that nobody would buy, which retailers were ordering anyway because they got variants for higher orders
Again, not fucking true in the slightest
>because it failed they're stuck with the cost of printing and shipping millions of copies nobody ever wanted
Were the fuck did you get this notion that the issues weren't selling? You do know that most went back for at minimum second printings right? and alot of them even third and fourth ones. Returnability did no fail you fucking spazz. It was always limited time thing so stores would feel comfortable taking a chance on Rebirth

>>89239359
>Why did DC suddenly decide to make them all non-returnable again if it was working out for them?
Jesus fucking Christ
>Those high "sales" were false inflation - nobody is going to confirm that they ever actually sold to consumers, because they didn't.
Except all the retailers that have been constantly gushing about how great Rebirth has been for them

You're that faggot that's been posting this shit ever since Rebirth started. You keep changing your reasons as to why it's failed when people call you out on being full of shit. I'm surprised Marvel keep interns for this long.

>>89239700
DK3 did have incentive variants (one was like 1:5000 I think) but that's the only one

>>89239949
>DK3
Which isn't a part of Rebirth and has gone on for way too fucking long for anyone to care

>>89239977
yes but I was just saying DC does in fact do variant covers for high order numbers

>>89239700
>DC didn't suddenly decide to end returnability, it was literally announced from the start to only be for the first six issues of the bi-weekly's and three for the monthlies

The only reason to do it at all is to see if it helps sales. It didn't.

>Objectively not true. Look at the charts

March 2016 unit share 25.94% dollar share 26.32%

Dec 2016 unit share 29.04% dollar share 29.47%

Dec 2015 unit share 29.93% dollar share 29.32%

so yeah, back where they were

>Again, that was planned from the beginning.

There's absolutely no reason to do that. It's ridiculous - they shipped millions of additional copies at their own expense. They were hoping it would mean new readers, and it didn't work out. The fact you can point to an announcement that it would happen this way doesn't mean that if it worked out like they hoped they'd have just stopped.

>Again, not fucking true in the slightest

Then where are the extra readers now, anon? DC's unit share went up hugely, Marvel's shipped units barely changed and neither did anybody else's; DC were shipping more books. As they say, at their own expense.

If readers were buying them, why did the comic stores stop ordering them?

>second printings

You do know that a second printing has a higher resale value because of rarity, right? And that they were selling to a collector's network?

>It was always limited time thing so stores would feel comfortable taking a chance on Rebirth

I mean fuck anon if their sales weren't/aren't in the toilet why would they need to do that? Everybody else sells just fine without it.


>>89239413
They'd still be doing it if it wasn't hurting them. Point being, Diamond only reports orders, not sales - items shipped and their nominal dollar value. It reports without accounting for returns at all, simply noting that titles are returnable and actual sales may be lower.

>>89239700
>Except all the retailers that have been constantly gushing about how great Rebirth has been for them

>all the retailers

>all

The ones who stopped ordering DC books as soon as they stopped being free?

I feel like you're not grasping the key concept here, anon.

>>89239359

>Why did DC suddenly decide to make them all non-returnable again if it was working out for them?
Because the program was always temporary?

>You don't abandon a business practice unless it's not working.

Marvel abandoned making good comics and they're floundering though :^)

>>89240064
>They'd still be doing it if it wasn't hurting them.

They knew that back in April, before DCU Rebirth was out at stores. BRAVO, """detective"""!

>>89239359
>article is from well before Rebirth
>says returnable issues is temporary
>WOW YOU JUST CONFIRMED THEY DID IT OUT OF NOWHERE BECAUSE IT WAS A FAILED IDEA

>>89240064
>There's absolutely no reason to do that.
It was so retailers could feel more confident about taking a chance on Rebirth.
>they shipped millions of additional copies at their own expense.
Virtually none of the returnable issues were actually returned though. So it wasn't at there expense since stores and then people actually bought the issues which is why they all went back for multiple printings.

>Then where are the extra readers now, anon?
How fucking new are you? Readership always fucking drops after the first few issues. People bought the first few, then stopped a few issues in. Mystery solved.
>DC were shipping more books. As they say, at their own expense.
No. Stores still had to pay for all the issues up front. Then when the time came they shipped back their unsold copies (of which there were VERY few) and DC reimbursed them.
>If readers were buying them, why did the comic stores stop ordering them?
Because every fucking series ever drops as it goes on. Why do you think Marvel relaunches once a year now?
>You do know that a second printing has a higher resale value because of rarity, right? And that they were selling to a collector's network?
You're fucking insane. I think your tin foil hat is on to tight.
>why would they need to do that?
How many fucking times does someone need to tell you it was so stores would feel confident in taking a chance on Rebirth.
>Everybody else sells just fine without it.
If by sells just fine you mean "ships thousands of free copies to bump up their numbers so it looks like they're beating DC" then yeah, just fine.
>They'd still be doing it if it wasn't hurting them.
Stores now know how much they can sell so there's no point.

>>89239700
>You're that faggot that's been posting this shit ever since Rebirth started. You keep changing your reasons as to why it's failed when people call you out on being full of shit. I'm surprised Marvel keep interns for this long.

Look on the bright side: the longer Marvel keeps pretending nothing is wrong, the deeper they dig themselves. We might even see them go bankrupt for the final time if we play our cards right.

>>89240089
>The ones who stopped ordering DC books as soon as they stopped being free?
and where are all these stores? Got some links?

Because the charts show that DC is still beating Marvel in units shipped despite not having returnability for months now. Plus actual store owners/employees are talking about how great Rebirth is still doing.

>>89236356
because the ones that sell 2.99 sell a lot more and maybe that covers up

>>89236356
Apparently the plan was to run the twice monthly thing for six months but it's gone so well for them and they're still selling so high that they extended it.

>>89240064
>The only reason to do it at all is to see if it helps sales. It didn't.

The reason was to get stores to order more of their titles by providing an insurance policy. And it worked, considering that DC trounced the shit out of Marvel.