-
[QUOTE=Raye;4137582]Oh and a general note I wanted to add because I forgot earlier. The reason the Digital Originals and other digital first efforts recently sometimes skip printing in floppies is usually because they are using non-standard formats that don't fit well with the 20 pages a month model of the direct market right now. The Digital Originals do 40 pages a month with hiatus' between arcs[/QUOTE]This is categorically untrue. Those 40 page issues? They actually have a second cover half way through. They were written and drawn for the standard floppy format! Also, those hiatuses are roughly three months, same as the length of time each run lasts. So they could easily have released 20 pages a month. The way they're doing it is cheaper for readers, as they're not charging $8 for these 40 pagers.
-
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;4137631]Did you not see Blockbuster go out of business? Did you not see Sears go out business? Businesses well ignore the obvious until it bite them in the butt.
[IMG]https://goboiano.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Comics.jpg[/IMG]
How do you think Manga has taken over so much of Market it is not by selling floppies. Marvel and DC are absolutely being dimwitted in terms of business but being market leader and controlling industry means they can stick with model they are built around for years.They are clear obvious things
1. Modern Fans would probably prefer an al carte way to get new comics every other entertainment medium is slowly moving in that direction Music, Movies are mostly there already
2. Trades are better at getting new readers and non traditional readers into comics. Manga teaches that lesson.
Marvel and DC have no reason to change because they are currently running market and that allows them to do what they want and they have no reason to break tradition. They have been a mostly single comic sale business forever and because they have sole access to big brands in the market it is harder to challenge them to change. It is not necessary good business that happening.[/QUOTE]
I understand what you are saying and I agree with almost everything you said here. However, it doesn't change the facts. Marvel and DC is currently ruining the market but at the rate their going they won't be forever. It also does not dismiss the quality of today.
-
[QUOTE=Raye;4137674]That isn't moving the goal posts, that is being off topic. There is a big difference. Am I off topic? Sure, but I am not the one who started that, I just can't let stupid conspiracy talk stand unchallenged.
this right here, this is moving the goal posts. You made statements earlier in the thread, stating examples of things Marvel would do if they believed digital and trades were viable. You never specified specifically which books had to meet these requirements, just that if Marvel saw digital or trades as viable they would have a line catering to that. You seemed to be speaking generally about digital and trade viability, not specifically in relation to books with new characters. (though, there is planty of evidence that these books do perform better in trades and digital relative to their print numbers than most other books, it is not exactly a secret that new readers, especially girls, tend to opt to read in trades or digital) Turned out they were doing exactly what you said they would be doing, I said so. Now you are coming up with excuses, making new caveats that you never stated initially, thus moving the goal posts.
The Digital Originals line was created after most of these books started being published. That they are not a part of it isn't a sign that they are not viable digitally, just that they missed the boat on getting in on it. If it works out for Marvel, they may roll other books into the line, we will have to wait and see.
I am not the one who misunderstood something here. I can understand your math. It's just that it doesn't matter. You are operating under a completely flawed idea of how the direct market works, and thus the numbers you posted are, get this, COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
I will explain in detail how things work, since you seem to be having trouble grasping this.
-Marvel/Diamond release the solicits to the stores 3 months in advance.
-The stores read these solicits, and using them as well as their own history and the sales charts Diamond releases make estimates about how many issues they anticipate they will be able to sell.
-They place orders with Diamond reflecting those estimates.
-Diamond tells the publishers how many issues they will need to fulfill orders at the final cutoff date.
-The publishers tell the printers to print enough issues to fulfill the orders, plus maybe a few extra, based on what they think may see some re-orders, but usually not too much (Publishers saying they sold out often doesn't mean anything if they went with a small over print)
-The comics are shipped to Diamond who process them and ships the comics to shops.
The publishers are not just printing books blindly, they ARE printing to order. And typically don't end up with a lot of stock left over, considering the scale of the runs. They know which runs are more likely to see re orders and print maybe an overprint to cover that, but it all depends on the specific book.
Again with moving the goalposts. You are an ace at this, considering you apparently don't even know what it means.
You made a bizarre conspiracy claim that Marvel was lying about how many issues sold (.... To what end? Bragging rights? An awful lot of trouble for something so inconsequential) by increasing the price of the books in order to increase their dollar share. The fact that Diamond releases unit share numbers as well clearly shows this is not what is happening, which is why I brought it up. If it was, then there would be a severe mismatch in the unit and dollar shares, and there isn't.
And now just ignoring everything said about the newer characters selling in markets other than Diamond. They sell poorly in one market of several, that doesn't mean they are doing poorly overall. Marvel isn't going to publish as many issues as they have of Squirrel Girl, Ms Marvel, Moon Girl if they were losing money, they just wouldn't. You don't like the stories, fine, whatever, I doubt you are their target audience anyway. but that doesn't mean they haven't found an audience elsewhere, or that their stories do not resonate with the audiences they are actually aimed at.[/QUOTE]
Now you are responding back for the sake of responding. I'm not getting in tit for tat scenario's on a comic forum. Just not going to do it. Many of your statements are not factual in terms of floppies. Just misinformed. I would know since I have dealt with comic shop owners in the past. However, none of that matters the best part of my reasoning with this is that TIME will show who was right and who was wrong. If things do not change Marvel Comics will be something different altogether if it's around at all.
People forget that Movie trends only last so long. Western's, Horror, Space and so on were all the rage way back when. A lot of which started in the pages of funny mags. If anyone thinks the way of the Superhero isn't the same or is immune doesn't really follow history. What's happening now in Marvel comics is the same thing that has happen before.
Genre gets in the spotlight. Genre expands with big budget films. Genre subjected to people who have no real interest in it but are using it as a stepping stone to something else. Genre is subjected to vocal minority on both sides. Genre quality drops. Genre stone steppers move on to next thing if they didn't move up. Genre's vocal minority immediately moves on to the next big thing when it shines it's head. Genre is slowly forgotten.
In present history we are currently in between stage 4&5. Believe it. Don't believe it. Time will tell either way.
-
[QUOTE=Digifiend;4134823]Amadeus Cho doesn't. His parents are dead. And for most of his time as the Totally Awesome Hulk, so was Bruce Banner.[/QUOTE]
Yes, true. Doesn’t change his status though, because his safety net was Hercules, the Olympus foundation, and eventually being the Totally Awesome in the Champions. At no time did Amadeus Cho need to defeat his pursuers because he was just a kid. There was no super hero comic that came out about Cho being this genius and standing up to those who killed his family. And didn’t it eventually turn out to be the Olympus Foundation that killed his family just to make him their CEO? (Much like the Yellow Claw pursued Jimmy Woo just to test he was the next leader of Atlas). Cho was succoured throughout World War Hulk and Incredible Hercules etc.
-
[QUOTE=Killerbee911;4135694]There is no better hero motivation than Tragedy. Any genre. It is rarity that hero is doing what they are doing because of just altruism. Those heroes are hard to write because people don't really connect with a person who doing something with no really stakes in it for them. If Billionaire gives his fortune away to help people most people can't understand, If a Billionaire gives his fortune away because mother had cancer he doesn't want to see people suffer we get it. Heroes don't need a tragedy but they do need a catalyst for their actions. The catalyst for Batman's actions is parents dying, Now try to picture Batman doing what he is doing without his parents dying.
A characters like Ms Marvel or Superman are rare where there motivation to help others is based on them being genuinely good people. If you can keep writing them same internal motivation it is fine but when you have try to express why this person is a hero becomes a bit harder. Why are some young heroes doing what they are doing
Sam Alexander to be hero that father wasn't or live up to hero his father was
Riri Williams to make sure that nobody gets hurt like her stepfather and best friend
You don't have to have a tragedy but if you are talking about core motivation. Why does Ms Marvel want to be a hero? To be like Captain Marvel? It is really interesting to have a character who wants to help because they simple just a good person but harder to explain why this person is putting their life on the line with no real motivation. I mean because it is a job and they are good at it the reason most people do it real life is reason enough but reading in a story isn't very interesting for a large amount of heroes. Tragedy is the simplest motivation to use, Responsibility(which ties well with tragedy) or Faith are much harder to use.[/QUOTE]
I don’t even see Sam or Riri motivated enough to be interesting. If Riri went after those who killed her father, that would be motivation like Batman. If Sam knew his father was lost in space or disgraced (liked Uatu’s father), then Sam going out and rectifying his family name is motivation. But we get none of this in these diversity characters. Marvel dropped the ball to give these kid heroes any strong motivation. X-23 was a good one. She had real tragedy.
-
[QUOTE=jackolover;4142461]I don’t even see Sam or Riri motivated enough to be interesting. If Riri went after those who killed her father, that would be motivation like Batman. If Sam knew his father was lost in space or disgraced (liked Uatu’s father), then Sam going out and rectifying his family name is motivation. But we get none of this in these diversity characters. Marvel dropped the ball to give these kid heroes any strong motivation. X-23 was a good one. She had real tragedy.[/QUOTE]
But it is singular reason that can be built upon Batman or Spiderman core reasoning parents or uncle dying isn't much stronger but it was built upon over the years. Spiderman got Gwen Stacy to cement the be responsible thing, Batman got Jason Todd to reinforce the tragedy thing. I don't think Marvel really dropping the ball with those guys. I am super interesting how long Ms Marvel can go before they give her some sort of trauma/tragedy
-
I'm a fan of Ms.Marvel who was driven by the desire to do good so I don't think you always need a tragedy to motivate a hero. Granted most of her friends have had more significant hardships in their upbringing while hers was relatively stable so maybe she's the outlier?
A tragedy is used because it is an effective way to push someone out of their comfort zone and have them make choices they wouldn't normally make. That fits the superhero paradigm to a T which is why tragedies are often common in a superhero origin story.
To me the problems with the new kids are from the fact that they are new and lots of other outside baggage than the lack of a compelling tragedy.
-
[QUOTE=the illustrious mr. kenway;4143144]I'm a fan of Ms.Marvel who was driven by the desire to do good so I don't think you always need a tragedy to motivate a hero. Granted most of her friends have had more significant hardships in their upbringing while hers was relatively stable so maybe she's the outlier?
A tragedy is used because it is an effective way to push someone out of their comfort zone and have them make choices they wouldn't normally make. That fits the superhero paradigm to a T which is why tragedies are often common in a superhero origin story.
To me the problems with the new kids are from the fact that they are new and lots of other outside baggage than the lack of a compelling tragedy.[/QUOTE]
I can understand a hero has such a good upbringing that they can make good choices every time. That is possible. But how many times have teenagers made good choices when left to their own device? It’s very rare, and to be honest, life is there to throw you curve balls just so you can learn from your mistakes. Life is seeing how many times you get knocked down before you realise your parents are right, not that you automatically get everything right. That’s what Marvel does right normally, except for this bunch of diversity characters. They seem to float through their adventures without harm. It’s Disney comics.
-
Telling you, people need to WAKE UP
[quote]Revenue for the division is down 4% from 2018 to 2017, and down almost 16% from 2018 to 2016. Profits for the two year period are also down nearly 17%. Disney’s Consumer Products division is also the [SIZE=4]only [/SIZE]division at Disney to have[SIZE=5] lost revenue[/SIZE] in 2018.[/quote]
[url]https://cosmicbook.news/star-wars-marvel-sales-drop-disney[/url]
-
[QUOTE=jackolover;4146682]I can understand a hero has such a good upbringing that they can make good choices every time. That is possible. But how many times have teenagers made good choices when left to their own device? It’s very rare, and to be honest, life is there to throw you curve balls just so you can learn from your mistakes. Life is seeing how many times you get knocked down before you realise your parents are right, not that you automatically get everything right. That’s what Marvel does right normally, except for this bunch of diversity characters. They seem to float through their adventures without harm. It’s Disney comics.[/QUOTE]
You are arguing something different than the OP. The OP is arguing about whether they need tragedy while you are arguing about them making mistakes and facing consequences. I agree with you more than him I just don't think it's as clear cut as you say.
For example Sam has never had an easy time being Nova and hasn't had an easy time without his powers.
