MARVEL CAN'T SELL CHEAP TRADES FOR STUPID REASON

File: everythings fucked.gif (582KB, 480x366px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 480x366px

>We can't sell cheap collections because people wouldn't buy the expensive ones.

>>91197549
and that's why they're #5 behind Image and fucking Dark Horse

Just more evidence that Marvel's collections department really has no idea what they're doing.

Maybe the fact that trades would cannibalize Comics sales is because they're a superior product that more people would be willing to buy. Maybe you should sell people what they want more.

No wonder DC makes 10 million dollars more than Marvel every year in trade sales.

>>91197709
DC has a better trade game and a better back catalog.

>>91197680
I don't know why they're saying this anyway unless something internally in their payment structure between them and creators is really off. How does DC pull it off and manage to much so much more in trades than them? Sure they don't have a Watchmen or a DKR, but fucking DC Super Hero Girls sold more than almost every Marvel book last year.

Death to floppies

>>91197549
>Comics are now 10 dollars
>Because people will buy graphic novels instead of the issues it will cost 35 dollars

So are they going to axe the individual volumes or raise the price? Either way this is utter bullshit.

>>91197680

Seriously. I bought single issues for something like 25 years, but in this day and age where virtually everything of worth gets collected as trade paperbacks anyway, I've made the jump to ONLY buying trade paperbacks, and happily so. They're more durable, they're more attractive, there's no ads, they're easier to loan to freinds, and a more satisfying reading experience. Unless you're impatient (which is fairness is a non-trivial issue) there's no reason not to prefer them.

>people would buy this
>therefore we're not going to make this, but instead force them to buy our inferior product that is struggling to sell
What the fucking fuck business move is this?

>>91198389
>Unless you're impatient (which is fairness is a non-trivial issue) there's no reason not to prefer them.

Gutter loss is the other reason, but even then waiting for digital sales might be better since the ads there are all at the end. A little debatable since you're technically paying for something you don't own, unless it's one of the publisher that lets you download a backup.

I think DC's been putting out a ton of good trades lately and I wonder what that's about.

This is Perlmutter's doing, isn't it?

>>91198494
they've always had higher quality trades and Rebirth was basically built around having higher trade turnaround

>>91198501
Not just him. Axel clearly has his head firmly up his own asshole.

>>91197680
>I want the American comics industry to become like the European comics 'industry'

>>91198574
do you not?

>>91197549
Do they not notice that they are losing to a company that charges less than them?

>>91197549
>comparing Inhumans to Long Halloween

What the fuck?

I trade wait, fuck single issues, they don't fit on my shelves I have to wait a 6 months for a arc to finish instead of just buying a whole arc. If I want to read a comic I'll just buy older trades.

DESU, I'd rather have comic writers write an entire arc and publish it together then have it come out in single issues.

>>91198738
They're retarded. What else is new? They thought they could just swap the X-Men with Inhumans and X-Cucks would just roll over and accept it.

>>91197747
This must be it.

It has to have something to do with how creators are compensated for their work on single-issue format stuff, no? That's all i can think of.

Like maybe the paychecks would be too spread out due to the longer wait times between releases if things went trade-only, due to the work for hire nature of most comics creators?

>>91198733
Marvel still lives in a magical fairyland where floppy sales are all that matters, instead of the real world where trades reign supreme

>>91198738
not in quality but in length and price. Long Halloween has more pages but costs less.

he even says it's not entirely a fair comparison

>>91198733
They are losing to EVERY major comic company that charges less than them.

>>91198768
While you do have a point
>DESU, I'd rather have comic writers write an entire arc and publish it together then have it come out in single issues.

We've seen that this doesn't quite work in reality at least in capeshit. You just get even more decompression.

>>91197586
They are not wrong tho. If I have to choose between a new TPB for25 dollars, and the same book, good condition, second hand, for 5, im gonna choose the cheap one.

>>91198786
Trade-only IS complicated for that reason, but it does not explain why Marvel does not sell their collections at market value. Nothing in that kind of scheduling would explain it.

My guess is that it's payscale related. Someone is probably taking too large of the cut of the sales along the way so they can't lower the costs.

>>91197709
Marvel barely has a fraction of DC's ICONIC stories.

>>91198894
Of course you are. Basic Supply and demand is there greatest enemy.

>>91198951
This is true, but why can't they get normies to buy some shitty Iron Man trade even despite that? A collection of Batman vs Superman fights sold more than any Marvel trade last year.

>>91198951
it's less that DC has more iconic stories and more DC just keeps their four or five most iconic stories constantly in print, and that their most iconic stories lend themselves extremely well to being reprinted in trade form.

Marvel has several stories that could be considered iconic, but they're longer runs like Miller Daredevil and Claremont X-men, and they can't be fucked to keep them in print.

and all of this is on top of DC just putting out higher-quality trades for cheaper

>>91198951
No excuses. "DC Super Hero Girls" was created just a year ago and is already outselling almost every Marvel book.

http://www.comicsbeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Bookscan-16-Top-750_sheet.htm

Why there are no Captain America's books in the Top 750? He really has no stories worth buying?

Meanwhile, digital DC series like "Injustice" and "DC Comics Bombshells" sell better than "Avengers".

>>91199130
>Why there are no Captain America's books in the Top 750? He really has no stories worth buying?
He's a fucking white male!

>>91199056
>Marvel has several stories that could be considered iconic

They really dont. They basically just have Miller's Daredevil. Claremont is good and all, but nothing in that run is as iconic or influential as Watchmen, Sandman, Kingdom Come, The Dark Knight Returns, The Killing Joke, etc.


Heck, even Shade the Changing Man has had a more widespread impact than Claremont's X-Men I'd say.


Yes, sure, Claremont's X-Men became the blueprint for team books in Marvel and in certain parts of DC, but there are very few ideas, themes, or even images that permeated the rest of the medium like DC's iconic stories do.

>>91197549
I only ever buy Marvel trades in bargain bins, and they end up there A LOT more than DC. Bargain bins are where you find some of the best stuff, so there is nothing wrong with that, but Marvel shouldn't be having to throw a ton of their stuff in bargin bins.

But for the few of us that just look for good priced trades, Marvel is the bottom of the barrel. I will pick up some, but am far more exicted when I found Jodorworsky or Negative Burn stuff there.

Marvel is pricing themselves out of the market, not just on floppies, but now on trades. At least DC lowered floppies and Image sells most 1st trades at $10.

Either Disney is telling them to fuck up their business or the top management has lost all grip of economics. Not just comic economics, but you would think Perlmutter would know a bit more about pricing than this....Unless now that he's joining Trump cabinet he is purposefully tanking Marvel

>>91198574
>I want good comics instead of shit
I do

>>91199179
But you don't really need iconic stories to make money in trades. Marvel should be able to capitalize on their movies like TWD has with its TV show.

>>91199330
They do.

"Civil War" and "Old Man Logan" sold a lot last year.

>>91199330
idk the marvel movies are pretty disposable and just get the most surface level bits from the comics.


TWD requires investment and is actually written as a serial, long format story like the comics, so I can see it being easier for fans to transition.

>>91199377
they really, really dont. They sold more than usual, sure, but no where near normal DC trade sales.

>>91197625
I think the problem is that someone, somewhere, is fixed with the idea they MUST get a living with the floppies and the trades shouldn't hurt them

At some point, I guess they'll understand floppies shouldn't be anything more than advertising for the trades...

>>91198900
This! There is a problem with their pay scale. Upper management is taking all of it and leaving nothing to anyone else. It wouldn't be a problem as much if upper management gave a shit ant actually helped out the little guys in the market, or hired editors that worked at doing that job. But there is no structure, just profits. So the whole thing is crumbling.

>>91199377
>Civil War and Logan
Just because of their respective movie hypes.

If Marvel has to make a blockbuster film every time they want to sell a trade a little bit above average, that's....that's not really too economical.

>>91199179
I think there's something to be said about DC keeping their iconic stories relevant

Name ten story arcs in DC. Not events, just stories. Easy! Okay, name ten that aren't Batman. You can still do it, I wager

Okay, now name ten Marvel stories that aren't events. Okay, now name ten that aren't X-men. It's a lot tougher

DC has been way better about making sure you know the most relevant stories they have and that you know them by name, Marvel's just good at making sure you know runs

Not everybody wants to invest in an entire run

>>91199462
Civil War trades have always sold pretty well

>>91199377
Neither did well
>39,446 CIVIL WAR: A MARVEL COMICS EVE MILLAR MARK MARVEL COMICS GROUP HACHETTE BOOK GROUP 4/1/07 CGN004080 Trade Paperback 9780785121794 $24.99 $985,756
>13,994 OLD MAN LOGAN MILLAR MARK MARVEL COMICS GROUP HACHETTE BOOK GROUP 9/1/10 CGN004080 Trade Paperback 9780785131724 $29.99 $419,680

>>91199488
Relative to the rest of Marvel's stuff but overall not good.

>>91199513
And for comparison, Image's top 3:

>71,741 THE WALKING DEAD COMPENDIUM, V KIRKMAN ROBERT IMAGE COMICS DIAMOND BOOK DISTRIBUTORS 10/1/15 CGN004040 Trade Paperback 9781632154569 $59.99 $4,303,743
>66,601 THE WALKING DEAD COMPENDIUM VO KIRKMAN ROBERT IMAGE COMICS DIAMOND BOOK DISTRIBUTORS 5/1/09 CGN004040 Trade Paperback 9781607060765 $59.99 $3,995,394
>50,558 THE WALKING DEAD COMPENDIUM VO KIRKMAN ROBERT IMAGE COMICS DIAMOND BOOK DISTRIBUTORS 10/1/12 CGN004040 Trade Paperback 9781607065968 $59.99 $3,032,974

>>91199179
Jesus you are blind. There are plenty of Iconic Marvel stories, they just tend to be longer. As you mentioned Claremont (and to these days that is far more influencial than Millar DD (Millar Dark Knight is still more influencial than X-men though)). But Marvel works better as Omni's. Unfortunatly they don't seem to advertise them. Simonson's Thor and Claremont X-men are 2 of the best superhero comic runs that were ever made. But I'm guessing Perlmutter is just interesting in getting share prices up high enough that he can sell and move somewhere else.

Does marvel still sell hardcover trades with 120 pages for 25 bucks? I barely buy DC or Marvel shit but that used to infuriate me when I would search for trades especially since they were cheaply made.

>>91199590
>Claremont Xmen more influential than Miller DD
"no"

>>91199590
>, they just tend to be longer.
And that, in the TPB Market, is a problem.

>>91199466
>DC has been way better about making sure you know the most relevant stories they have and that you know them by name, Marvel's just good at making sure you know runs

hit the nail on the head

>>91199130

Marvel doesn't want people to know about their older stories. Bot diverse enough and too problematic.

File: 2015 known bookstore and diamond sales.png (42KB, 865x466px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 865x466px

>>91199130
>No excuses. "DC Super Hero Girls" was created just a year ago and is already outselling almost every Marvel book.
The excuse for this is children actually buy comics, especially considering its a popular webseries and toy/clothing line.

Both DC and marvel need to try harder and promote more children's comics with characters they'd KNOW and not literally whos like Moon Girl and Hellcat. Though apparently Moon Girl is doing well with scholastic but imagine how much better an Avengers book would be doing.
TTG and other all ages comics are basically never promoted and just exist.

>>91199466

Truth.
Batman alone has more iconic stories than most of Marvel combined. Killing Joke, Dark Knight Returns, Long Halloween, Year One....Even fucking Hush, the low-tier abortion that it was, is more iconic than a lot of Marvel's shit.

>>91199881
Marvel is doing this and it's the problem. They turn off old fans and try for new fans but they are far less than they lose. Look at all the replacement heroes, does anyone really care abut Riri? Nah, there is nothing wrong with having kid books to encourage new readers, but at the sacrifice of old readers is the problem

>>91199466
>DC has been way better about making sure you know the most relevant stories they have and that you know them by name, Marvel's just good at making sure you know runs
Here we are.

DC tries hard to promote singular story arcs and not just runs.
Hell, Snyder's Batman may be known Snyder's Batman, but people also know the name of the arcs and DC makes sure people do. Court of Owls, Death of the Family, Zero Year, etc.

Ms Marvel and Black Panther are doing well now, so marvel should really try hammering in that it's not just Wilson or Coates, it's No Normal and Nation Under Our Feet.

>>91199462
Well you're forgetting the income from the movie itself here now.

>>91199997
There are very few Marvel comics that work well like that though. Lets take away some of the Iconic runs like Claremont, Simonson and Busiek. It is still the case that Marvel has always played a long game and the greatest stories are always moving from one to the next.

The greatest recent example was the cosmic marvel that STARTED with Giffen (people give too much credit to DnA, who are great, but giffen needs more love). Once you start that saga, you can't stop!

Marvel well never compete as well in trade, but they SHOULD in Omni's

>>91200109
Logan was not a Marvel Studios movie.

>>91200109
Movie income isn't going to guys like David Gabriel. They need to make COMICS sell.

>>91200182
All comics move into the next, it's the nature of the beast

But story arcs are meant to be relatively self contained

Future Imperfect is a small part of a very large run, but I can name it

The Dark Phoenix Saga is a small part of a very large run but I can name it

I love the fuck out of Runaways but I cannot tell you the name of a single arc, just that "this is Vaughan, this is Whedon, this is Immomen"

That is a problem

>>91199947
>Batman alone
that's the rub, though, isn't it? nearly all of DC's iconic stories are batman. then there's one or two flash stories, one or two GL stories, a couple superman stories, the archetypal justice league vs darkseid thing they retell every year,
and....it all rapidly evaporates any further removed from Batman than that.

>>91200182
also the kid loki epic which arguably started all the way back when Loki was running around in Sif's body, through dark reign and siege, hit its stride in JiM, then continued through Young Avengers and finally concluded in Agent of Asgard

>>91200372
>Sandman
>All-Star Superman
>Watchmen
>For All Seasons
>Swamp Thing
>Sinestro Corps War
>Red Son
>Secret Identity
>Hellblazer
>The Invisibles
>Animal Man

>>91197747
>DC Superhero Girls outsells every Marvel trade except for Civil War and a random Deadpool trade.
Still feels good.

>>91200420
the Kid Loki saga really needs a more unified reprint because right now it's split across
>JMS Thor trades
>Fraction Thor trades
>JiM complete collections
>Young Avengers trades
>Agent of Asgard trades
it would be a nightmare to collect if you're trying to get it now rather than as it happened, particularly those Fraction Thor trades

>>91200370
>The Dark Phoenix Saga is a small part of a very large run but I can name it
But Dark Pheonix sucks without the context of the other trades. This is why I saw Claremont made Marvel, for better or for worse, many of the writers took from him, Simonson and Busiek also played the long game too, just not in that scale or style. Simonson's Thor is probably the best Thor story ever, but can you name an arc? I can't by name even though I read it, cause the entire thing is one story.


>I love the fuck out of Runaways but I cannot tell you the name of a single arc, just that "this is Vaughan, this is Whedon, this is Immomen"
>That is a problem
Maybe, in trades, but IP is more valuable than all this discussion. As much as we bitch about movies that is the end game of all comics now... at least DC and Marvel.

>>91200464
Sandman, Swamp Thing, Hellblazer, Invisibles, and Animal Man have the Marvel thing going for them. Noteworthy runs but not specific arcs (of course there are the two noteworthy issues for Swamp Thing and Animal Man that stick out).

>>91200535
DC has the advantage of having both the long-ass iconic runs AND the shorter self-contained stories that can be reprinted forever. Marvel seems to have only focused on the longer runs, with events mostly filling the shorter stories niche.

>>91200535
Neil Gaiman talked a bit about that in an interview. He said that, at least during his youth, it felt like DC comics were so disconnected from one another that you needed a passport to go from one character to another. If you read a Marvel comic though, you could only read half a story in one comic then you'd have to go find the ending in some other comic.

File: Marvel Bookscan 2016.png (51KB, 694x777px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 694x777px

>>91198733
Marvel is in 5th place in the trade market.

>>91200606
Sandman, at least, really lends itself to being able to pick it up basically anywhere in the run, except maybe the very last volume

>>91200640
and DC is in 2nd, and Image is in 3rd (or 4th, I can't remember if they're beating Simon and Schuster)

>>91200464
And even if we discount the ones that are full runs

>Man of Steel
>The Judas Contract
> Hard Traveling Heroes
>the Return of Barry Allen
>Rock of Ages
>New Frontier
>The Black Ring Saga
>The Hiketeia
>New Krypton
>Tower of Babel

Now ymmv on any of those stories but I bet you know them all save maybe one or two

>>91200606
They're more or less self-contained though. Since they're under the Vertigo imprint you can pretty much treat them as their own individual series.

>>91200690
>New Krypton

This can't count unless you're talking about something other than the 2 year, 4 book crossover

This is the problem with the American comics industry. It's stagnant and afraid of change.

I'm relatively new to comics, but I've heard that one of the reasons that the industry is so fixated on floppy sales is because of Diamond Publishing has a monopoly on distribution, can anybody break down what their hold over the industry is?

Bought Watchmen and X-Men Executioners Song trades a few weeks ago. Watchmen was $20 and XMen was $40. Watchmen had well over double the pages and was by far the superior book. Now I can't even fucking give away XMen, no one wants some obscure mediocre arc from 30 years ago. Fucking kicking myself over buying it. I will not buy another Marvel trade for as long as I live, I will only use Marvel Unlimited now. Which ends up being $6 a month, and completely kills my urge to buy any comics from them at all because everything I want to read is on it, while I'll happily buy DC trades. Marvel are absolutely shooting themselves in the foot. If I read three arcs over the course of a month, it'd cost easily $100+, but this way it only costs me $6. I mean, I'm grateful that MU is there, it's a good deal (and I'd be happy to fork over more if they offered higher quality scans of the comics), but as it is, there is absolutely no incentive to buy Marvel comics or trades.

>>91197549
the only thing Marvel's collections department is doing right right now is the complete collections. Those are pretty nice.

>>91200864
sorry to say but this board is mostly Marvel and DC. But you can find a eurocomic thread here usually, you just have to look in the catalogue. It's slow moving and will fall of the page lots. But eurocomics are were to start. Start with The Incal, Metabarons, Skydoll (just cause I read it) and (Aardvark)

>>91201132
*tips*

I haven't read every post in this thread. But I actually highly disagree with most of what I have read.

I love floppies. You fucking trade waiters are ruining the industry just as anyone. And he's absolutely right that it incentivizes trade waiting if you save that much money and get the shit like a month after the last issue in the trade is published.

Back issue collections I get, but fuck you losers that sit in story time threads leeching for months and then buy cheap ass trades from fucking amazon or newbury comics.

>>91201386
What is wrong with wanting to spend less money on a superior product?

Superior in terms of durability, appearance, physical quality, lack of advertisements, etc.,

>>91201386
>complaining about people being smart with their money
>complaining about people buying things

Do fuck off.

>>91201386
I love single issues too anon. Marvel makes the most of their money on the single issues. That is their business model. People wanting them to shift to trades or digital as their focus don't realize this is a risk. They will lose some of those single issue buyers, but may not pick up enough trade or digital buyers to make up the difference.

It's easy for us to say they should do that, or whatever initiative, but as a business they need to make money and can't just take risks to transform the market because some anon prefers trades.

>>91201386
>trades make more money than floppies except at Marvel who makes most of their money off endless variants and #1s
>trades are ruining the industry!
I see you, Marvel intern

>>91200864
A judge getting bribed to hell said diamond wasn't a monopoly because digital comic books exist.

Just do what i do and read them for free online instead of supporting that.

File: Growth in Trades Annually.png (66KB, 804x755px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 804x755px

>>91201386
Industry looks fine to me.

http://www.comicsbeat.com/tilting-at-windmills-257-looking-at-bookscan-2016-more-than-10-million-sold/

>>91201386
Make better products or sabotage trades.
Free market wins, fag. We're not obligated to drain our wallet to hold up their shitty model and if they go under, I'll say the same thing I'm always told when I complain about modern marvel
ALL YOUR OLD COMICS STILL EXIST

>>91201649
>>91201132
When I said "break down" I meant "explain".

What's their excuse for having the cheapest binding/paper on the market? They're trying to compete with Charmin too?

>>91201677
k. prlmttr

>>91201653
>That 2015 growth

Hooo boy

>>91197709
It really is fucking insane how much more DC sells in trades/graphic novels than Marvel.
http://www.comicsbeat.com/tilting-at-windmills-257-looking-at-bookscan-2016-more-than-10-million-sold/
>DC was the second highest selling publisher with 1.2 million units sold worth $23 million
>Marvel was the fifth with 556k units sold worth $10.6 million
And it's not like this was a one off. DC has always completely dominated Marvel is trade sales and with stuff like Super Hero Girls raking it in the gap is only going to get bigger.

>>91200864
They have an exclusive contract to supply the direct market (comic stores) with Marvel and DC comics. This makes a competing distributor have a huge problem as they can't carry what sells the most, and most retailers only deal with Diamond anyway.

It's not a monopoly because someone could start their own, and competitors exist.

In addition, this agreement does not have anything to do with the newsstand market. Marvel and DC simply choose not to supply this market. Diamond has no say in the matter if the publishers chose to sell comics that way.

>>91200820
I was thinking of World of New Krypton, but you're right

Sub it for Up, Up, and Away, For the Man Who Has Everything, The Lightning Saga, The Contest, or The Human Race, Brainiac, Terminal Velocity, Emerald Twilight, Agent Orange (I just saw an Agent Orange namedrop in Space Ghost/Green Lantern of all things)

>>91201772
>>91201672
Also, the industry couldn't just move away from floppies (or even to a new distributor) "over night." It would take a little while to reconfigure everything for the different rates of cash flow. The problem is that Diamond has to still exist in that interim time for publishers to survive that transition and so Diamond is using cold war tactics and promising "mutually assured destruction" if the industry tries to move away from them.

>>91201548
It has nothing to do with that. They make money either way you faggot fuck.

I just want my fucking floppies.

>>91201425
I understand this, I really do, but I sincerely love looking at the ads in back issues.

Also, if you're the type of degenerate who can't keep a comic book in readable condition no paperback is going to fare much better.

File: 1488163166459.jpg (83KB, 638x425px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 638x425px

>Cuckvel can't sell trades even when literally every Barnes & Noble has an entire shelf of Marvel trades

>>91201816
Oh, I can deal with my floppies just fine, but I don't trust others to do as such. When lending material out to friends, I have learned to not hand anyone floppies. I can't trust others with 'em.

Trades on the other hand are almost always returned in good condition. And yes, being able to easily lend something out is a major factor for a book. I like helping to get people interested in comics and appreciate the medium more, and I can do that if I can just hand them a single item and say "try this".

Ads in back issues do have a nostalgic quality in some cases sure, but I'll easily trade that away to not have them impede the narrative flow of the story every so many pages.

File: books.jpg (238KB, 1167x551px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1167x551px

>>91201886
>an entire shelf of 34.99 books marked down to 9.99
I bought all three of these for 28 dollars TOTAL at Books-a-Million this week. Their "discount trades" shelf is literally all Marvel. Great strategy Ike.....

>>91198951
What is it with Marvel? Their events tend to be way shittier than DC's even though they are supposed to have more relatable and/or better characters, which is also not true. Maybe in the distant past but not recently

>>91201909
Well, you can't always lend out trades either.

My friend lent a few trades to a guy he worked with. Unfortunately, they both worked on the Toilet Duck manufacturing line. The guy decided to read the books at work. The books were returned covered in blue fingerprints.

>>91201909
>I'm... uhhh... spreading the joy of comics with my trades...
Jesus Christ

Johnny Comicseed over here.

Fuck your trades and your trade waiting ways.

>>91201965
>books are made of paper
>most litter seems to be paper
>that must mean these books are disposable and it doesn't matter if you mutilate it because it's just paper
This shit makes me see red.

>>91202029
What's worse, being a shill or having no friends?

All most all my comic money these days goes towards Marvel omnis. Their deep backlist is where all the magic is.
Even if there current line interested me, it would be hard pressed to compete for my dollar with guys like Kirby, Moench, Byrne, Miller, Ditko, and so on...
Why eat garbage, when you can have steak?

File: 2726258-shonen_jump_volumes_2.jpg (186KB, 900x476px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 900x476px

So why doesn't marvel do jump style mega book of all their stuff?

File: marvel-digest-01-cover-232422[1].jpg (830KB, 732x984px) Image search: [Google]

830KB, 732x984px

>>91202183
They are trying something new later this year. A Marvel digest distributed by Archie. Meaning it will be available wherever Archie digests are.

>>91202183
Because they want to charge people $4.99-$5.99 per floppy issue.

>>91202183
They publish way too much shit for the binding to hang together.

>>91202183
Because floppies are more profitable plus they already pay their talent peanuts, they'd have to either cut down the money they spend on artists and writers or hope the digests sell very well to accommodate the increased page count and lower price.

the only thing Marvel has that are good are their Omnis, Epics, and Masterworks

However, Omnis are too big, Masterworks are hard to find and too expensive for the amount of content

Epics are a nice value for the price, for "34" bucks (you can find much cheaper online brand new at IST) you get ~450 pages of good quality material

File: 004.jpg (97KB, 530x805px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 530x805px

>>91202183
I used to buy these at the grocery store. Each collected a few issues of the different Ultimate series, not nearly as much material as a manga magazine though.

>>91202417
yep I remember those, I remember when grocery stores used to still sell comic books that weren't just archie digests. my first comic was Thor #1 Heroes Reborn idk what year that was probably 1998

File: xmen55.jpg (77KB, 400x609px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 400x609px

>>91202705
>bought at a gas station somewhere in Montanna while on a family trip when I was 9
the 90's were truly a different time.

>>91200640
Why does 2003 have so many titles? What happened that year?

>>91199161
The Avengers were never interesting. They were part of the Bendis meme and then the MCU meme. As these memes fade, Avenger characters will sell less and less. What did Avengers #4 sell last month? Not much, relatively.

The characters just aren't interesting, and that goes double for Captain Jingoism.

>>91202341
Omnis really aren't too big unless you read on the bus or something.

>>91200228
Axel Alonso and shit people like Slott were some smug motherfuckers back when they could pretend they were making the movies.

>>91197549

They might be right. As far as the direct market is concerned, the potential number of impulse buys might not offset destroying the price illusion they've already created in that space. What Marvel should consider is creating a new class of products for sale in a different venue.

For example, with the help of Disney and the current movie industry climate, Marvel should be able to convince large theater chains to allow temporary kiosk to sell comic books during the release of their movies. Theaters need the additional revenue stream, and sturdier cardboard cutouts can be easily modified to hold books. That's where they can experiment with cheaper trades, maybe something in the 64 page and $10 range. Get a dependable jobber with a more kids friendly style like Gurihiru to draw movie adaptations, do this on the west coast and bypass Diamond. Expand from there if the results are positive.

>>91203538
Ultimate line, Spider-Man and X-Men were melting the box office and the modern TPB market was just starting to catch on. Also the MAX and Marvel Knights line was in full swing.

>>91199618
His xmen created the xmen juggernaut today. Take ur head out of your ass.

>>91199600
100 for 25 is more accurate. The main factor in me buying the Duggan deadpool omnibus is that it worked out to only 2/3 the price of buying the original trades which should not be possible in today's market.

File: action 16-08.jpg (646KB, 919x1436px) Image search: [Google]

646KB, 919x1436px

It such pure naked capitalism I can't help but love it

In my experience people only buy single issues if it is a key book in some manner - a first appearance, a death, a new team, a #1, or has an exclusive variant cover.

For anything else, you get the TPB.

>>91197549
Going by that entire interview and the one from a month or so back where he said DC was scamming creators with their kikey $2.99 returnable comics I honestly think David Gabriel might be one of the absolute dumbest men in the industry. With guys like this in the higher up (above even EIC I'd assume) positions, they can shuffle editors around until they're blue in the face and it won't change anything. When the people running the show are utterly retarded what can you really do?

This will be a really interesting period of Marvel to get retrospectives on ten years from now.

>>91207421
>implying they'll still be making comics by then and not just exclusively a producer of movies, television shows and cartoons

Ike and guys like him are driving the comics division to its death.

>>91199590
>Iconic Marvel stories
No, they have iconic runs which tbf every character has. They don't have the mainstream iconic stories other than the Civil War, OML and some other events. Claremont's X-Men run is something only fans of the medium can appreciate because writing is very dated. Miller's DD is very stylized with its noir influences and doesn't feel as dated but here only Born Again and Man Without Fear are mainstream material but Marvel never pushes those. Hell even Bendis, the most popular writer of Marvel in current generation has barely 2 or 3 trades in top 750 that won't even crack sub 7.5k. Even all the influential things like Ultimates (back bone of MCU according to Millar/Hitch) or New Avengers by Bendis (the run that made Avengers a flagship book) of Memeye by Fagtion and Aja which ruined the modern Marvel can't sell good enough.

>>91197680
>Maybe the fact that trades would cannibalize Comics sales is because they're a superior product that more people would be willing to buy. Maybe you should sell people what they want more.
Japan had been using this model for decades.

Their Manga is first published on recycled paper and sold for cheap weekly (2 to 4 dollars). And then for people who want to collect and keep manga, they sell volumes of paperbacks.

>>91207421
>I honestly think David Gabriel might be one of the absolute dumbest men in the industry.
Marvel is simply a company that enforces zero accountability. They refuse to acknowledge past mistakes. They just pretend it was someone else's fault all along and play the innocent card.

>>91205042
what x-men juggernaut? The one currently selling like shit?

>>91207983
I wish there were higher quality versions of a lot of manga.

Where are my 8.5x11 Berserk HCs?

>>91199590
>There are plenty of Iconic Marvel stories,

Indeed.

>>91198786
James Stokoe said he can't finish orc stain in one go because he'd have to go without steady pay for around 6 months to get the next trade out and doesn't want to use all his savings for is so now he just works on it between his other projects

>>91198786
>>91208691
Every non-comics publisher can manage it, it can't be that hard.

>>91197709
It's not just that.

DC had been trying to work toward the book market as far back as the 80's. DKR and Watchmen helped them get inroads. Then came Sandman, Arkham Asylum, and some other stuff, and they still tried to push in the bookstore market. Marvel was lagging in that area because they didn't focus on it during the early 90's and then were in bankruptcy in the mid/late 90's. Only when Quesada came on board they started trying to focus more on it, but it had its restrictions (it's said that Ike wouldn't allow more than five volumes of a series to remain in print). Much as I hate it, Civil War might've been their first title that sells well consistently in bookstores year after year.

File: uncanny-142-cover.nocrop.w529.h875[1].jpg (259KB, 529x815px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 529x815px

>>91199179
>but nothing in that run is as iconic or influential
Terminator based their entire plot on Days Of Future past

>>91208342
>selling like shit
>still one of Marvels highest selling property even with almost a decade of sabotage
>before that the biggest Marvel title next to fucking Spider-man

>>91201772
>In addition, this agreement does not have anything to do with the newsstand market. Marvel and DC simply choose not to supply this market.

No, DC does supply to this market. That's why if you go to a Barnes and Noble or Books a Million you might see DC titles on the newsstand.

It's Marvel who abandoned the newsstand (back in 2012), although I think the Archie Comics deal is probably them trying to get back into that market.

>>91203655
t. casual trying too hard to fit in

>>91200109
The income goes to Ike and other upper managment. If you check https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Marvel-Entertainment-Reviews-E3929.htm you'd see the movie money doesn't really go into the rest of Marvel.

>>91208056
It's something they've been doing since the Quesada era. But I think they were easily able to get away with it because it worked back then. Now their sales got subpar and people don't want to take their shit anymore.

>>91199179
>Watchmen, Sandman, Kingdom Come, The Dark Knight Returns, The Killing Joke, etc.

Dark Phoenix Saga
Days of Future Past

You fucking idiot

>>91199179
Again, I already replied to you, but I want to choke the shit out of you, you stupid motherfucking imbecile

>>91207895
>Even all the influential things like Ultimates (back bone of MCU according to Millar/Hitch) or New Avengers by Bendis (the run that made Avengers a flagship book) of Memeye by Fagtion and Aja which ruined the modern Marvel can't sell good enough.

Hawkeye did used to sell pretty well on the Bookscan chart for a Marvel book years ago. I don't know what happened (I guess part of it was not enough follow through or something).

I guess the issue with New Avengers by Bendis is that it doesn't seem like an Avengers book. But if somehow they decide to bring Wolverine into the MCU and put him on the Avengers, then they might try to push that book again.

And Ultimates I wouldn't be surprised if Disney were trying to downplay it because 1. It's called Ultimates instead of Avengers and 2. Millar's take on Cap, Hulk, and Hank Pym are the kinds of things that Disney would shy away from. Millar was fucking super-lucky he wrote that book when he did because I don't think it would've gotten approved in the Disney era.

>>91199618
"Yes", you fucking idiot. Daredevil is mostly known by connoisseurs, but it's not influential whatsoever

>>91208709

Legit book publishers pay an advance, which is then docked against royalties.

If comics switched to royalties, any team that doesn't sell 20,000 per month will likely owe money to the publisher and starve to death.

>>91207895
They have Death of Gwen Stacy, Kraven's Last Hunt, Demon in the Bottle, the aforementioned DOFP and Dark Phoenix Saga, Maximum Carnage, Infinity War / Gauntlet, God Loves Man Kills, Original Cloak and Dagger mini, Secret Wars (which is more important for other reasons), Eternals, Moore's Captain Britain, etc etc.

>>91199130
>All these manga trades
What went right with the Japanese industry that made it strong even in America?

>>91208827
He's right, though. Avengers are mostly appreciated by hardcore fanbase.

>>91202183
Anthologies don't work. Even WSJ's sales have been slumping over the last few years and their editors are ruthless about killing series if the polls or tank sales aren't up to snuff.

>>91209183
Weekly issues and higher variety of content.

Retailers should just not sell Marvel trades. Problem solved.

>>91209183

As a whole, manga is priced competitively against other forms of entertainment, has a wide assortment of genres, good distribution, and benefit from strong fan advocacy online.

The big two should be doing more to convert moviegoers into readers, but they don't have the kind of product that translate into impulse purchases, and it isn't placed right in front of them. You want to make the buying process as effortless as possible, and the typical comic store experience isn't ideal for that. They're good for fans, but not as good for casuals or the uninitiated.

This last one may not even be a problem that needs to be solved. Publishers just need to make different product lines for different markets, instead of fitting a square peg into a round hole. Not everyone's going to be a hardcore reader or collector.

>>91201755
The nasty little secret about Marvel is that Marvel has always been a "starter" comic company. Kids and casuals read Marvel until they learn more about comics or get burned so bad they start to hate comics. Nobody actually wants to revisit Marvel books.

>>91197680
>make monthlys digital exclusive for $1-$2
>charge whatever you want for trades in print
There I fixed your problem, the industry won't be Diamond's bitch anymore and the LCS can finally die for good

>>91201755
see >>91208777
Also I'll say this for Marvel, they are showing growth in the last few years; it's just that they're still not getting higher on the chart for a lot of reasons.

Part of me thinks that the stuff like Moon Girl and Hellcat and Squirrel Girl and other stuff are them trying to get into the YA market. And I think Champions was said to be sold by Scholastic?

>>91209663
>Nobody actually wants to revisit Marvel books.
That's just not true at all.
I'm 32 and re-read quite a lot of Marvel stuff.

Just because you don't, doesn't mean everyone else feels the same.

>>91200492
omni is coming out

>>91197607
Who is the other one of that 5 some? DC, Image, Dark Horse, Archie?, and Marvel?

>>91197747
>>91197709
The one thing I hate about this is it means no DC unlimited ever

>>91198464
eh, if a publisher revoked my access to something I bought I would pirate it.

>>91209862
That anon's probably referring to the Bookscan chart (which deals with bookstores and other places that aren't the direct market).

#1: Scholastic
#2: DC
#3: Image
#4: Simon & Schuster
#5: Marvel

http://www.comicsbeat.com/tilting-at-windmills-257-looking-at-bookscan-2016-more-than-10-million-sold/

>>91209663
Marvel might not have put out too much great stuff in the past couple decades, but they do have a strong library of titles by some prominent and notable creators. Roy Thomas, Steve Gerber, Frank Miller, Garth Ennis, Jack Kirby, Steve Ditko, Jim Steranko, Mark Gruewald, Peter Milligan, and the list could go on.

They're a publisher. They have hired good creators, and good creators can put out good content almost anywhere.

I mean, shit, the recent Foolkiller was very well received, Vision by Tom King is phenomenal, and X-Men Legacy by Si Spurrier is one of the strongest series produced by the Big 2 in the 2010's, I'd say.

Is Marvel lagging right now (and lately) because of a lot of shit? You betcha. Editors who aren't worth a damn making it harder for quality work to be produced even by strong creators not that there are many? Those too. But that doesn't mean that anything written and drawn by talented creators yet published with a Marvel logo on the front and spine can't be good.

>>91208781
No Terminator stole its plot from two Outer Limits episodes that Harlan Ellison wrote.

>>91209880
I think they are working on something with Amazon where with a subscription you get access to everything DC related, movies shows comics. But nothing was finalized just something they floated

>>91197549
At least Panini publishes Marvel trades in my country at a decent price.

>>91210022
Marvel has literally nothing that anybody wants to go back and read. For fucks sake nobody wanted to read Foolkiller when it was new.

>>91210288
You mention foolkiller but ignore the vision or x-men legacy mention. I know you want to slander marvel but its not gonna work.


Face it. This shitty company actually shits a bunch of gold every now and then.

File: the greatest origin story in the history of comics.jpg (283KB, 1239x944px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1239x944px

>>91210288
>wanted to read Foolkiller when it was new
I did ::cries::

>>91202245
About time

>>91210418
That is retarded.

>>91209120
>but it's not influential whatsoever
False

>>91209120
Miller's Daredevil gave us TMNT