Thread Drift: What Fans Want

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

Well, for example, it's extremely hard to have MORE appearances by Cardiac and LESS appearances by Cardiac at the same time.

How could Caridac appear less if he hasn't appeared in the books for decades?

Nor can you have Peter Parker go back to work at the Daily Bugle and NOT work at the Daily Bugle at once.

Ultimate Spider-Man seemed to solve that problem.

Likewise you can't writer Peter and MJ getting back together while at the sametime keeping MJ out of the books completely.

See above.

[Steeler53]

But the problem I have with that attitude is that is essentially becomes used as an excuse to treat anyone you disagree with as simply not knowing what they want. It's not used to give greater insight into the buying process. It's used by a select group of individuals to bludgeon their views into another person, or to simply tell them to stop talking, they don't want to deal with viewpoints that they don't agree with.

I work in a sales environment where I deal with people on a daily basis who often don't have an idea of what they are looking for. They have a general idea, but often times they don't have a specific one. But that doesn't mean that they are ignorant. And it doesn't mean that I treat them like they are ignorant. It's my job as a salesperson to find out what they are looking for, and give them an option or several options that will fit their needs. I don't tell them to simply accept something or get out. I have to work with them to get them what they want.



But, that's kind of where the research comes in. Yes, it's very easy to be mislead by people's statements about what may or may not be popular. And it's very comforting to only listen to those voices that back up what you want. But it's getting at the root of what is being said and what is happening that is the important thing.

For example, take Superior Foes of Spider-Man. Yes, there are people who want it. People are still buying it, and they are raving about it. That doesn't mean the conclusion is "People don't want the title." It should lead to the question "Why aren't more people buying it?" Or "What is keeping them from buying it?" What are the factors that is or is not inspiring people to buy the comic.

And it's important to ask the right questions and not simply make assumptions based on the customer base simply on inconclusive results. I'm reminded of the whole "New Coke" situation- how Coca-Cola axed it's old formula to make way for "New Coke" because, according to their research, people preferred the taste of Pepsi. But that was due to flawed research. People saying they liked Pepsi didn't mean they disliked Coke. In addition, further research found that while people liked Pepsi in small doses due to it's sweet flavor, they prefer to drink Coca-Cola in larger quantities due to the same sweetness. In addition, people didn't mind New Coke, but it didn't mean they wanted to lose the classic flavor. That's why it is important to ask questions and do research, to talk to people to find out not just the what but also the why. The focus shouldn't just be on that the fans aren't buying a comic, but why they aren't buying. Or why they are buying another.

I agree 100% with this opinion. The problem when it comes to Comic Books, is everything should be predicated on economics, and the goal of trying to reach the "Casual Fan" (those who generally do not Subscribe). Marvel and DC (for that matter), should know that those fans usually are not going to looking to purchase Superior Foes Of Spider-Man (like the Morbius flop) when it comes to spending their hard earned money, instead it will be on ASM, Batman, Avengers, etc, and that fan makes or breaks the book. The "Casual Fan" generally does not care about OMD/BND, and if Pete and MJ are married, they just want a good story. Basically the storytelling of Dan Slott had people buy "Superior" as opposed to another comic. If it was not for Slott, it would basically be a cheap stunt (like the female Thor on "The View." or the killing of Archie to make some kind of political statement on gays). Why is the "Casual Fan" so important? Because the hard core fan even after OMD/BND will come back, or as a Penn State Fan, I did after the Sandusky child molestation case. The Casual Fan" they will not (at least for a long time).

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

I agree 100% with this opinion. The problem when it comes to Comic Books, is everything should be predicated on economics, and the goal of trying to reach the "Casual Fan" (those who generally do not Subscribe). Marvel and DC (for that matter), should know that those fans usually are not going to looking to purchase Superior Foes Of Spider-Man (like the Morbius flop) when it comes to spending their hard earned money, instead it will be on ASM, Batman, Avengers, etc, and that fan makes or breaks the book. The "Casual Fan" generally does not care about OMD/BND, and if Pete and MJ are married, they just want a good story. Basically the storytelling of Dan Slott had people buy "Superior" as opposed to another comic. If it was not for Slott, it would basically be a cheap stunt (like the female Thor on "The View." or the killing of Archie to make some kind of political statement on gays). Why is the "Casual Fan" so important? Because the hard core fan even after OMD/BND will come back, or as a Penn State Fan, I did after the Sandusky child molestation case. The Casual Fan" they will not (at least for a long time).

Actually, in terms of sales, it probably is better to have more casual fans. More people who aren't the hardcore fans who will buy everything under the sun to fill a collection. Think about it in terms of the movies- yes, you want a film that satisfies the fans of the X-Men comics. But you also want to appease the casual people who are just going to the movies to look for a good time.

And you are right. The casual fan is probably not going to care about whether or not MJ is married. Or if Xavier is dead. Or if Superman no longer has his red undies. But I think the problem with the industry right now is that the publishers are trying to appeal to more casual fans, or make things easier for casual fans to pick it up, but they are only doing things that hardcore readers would care about, or that they think that is a problem. They really aren't looking into the hows and why's of the lack of more of a casual fanbase. They are making an assumption based on these fans, but it is influenced by their own biases. They think that casual fans wouldn't like a single Spidey, but that is largely due to their own biases against a married Spider-Man, since they didn't like it when they were a hardcore fan. And so they interpret the information that they do receive, like the success of the Raimi films, as proof to back up their own pre-determined narrative. And that's the problem. These decisions aren't made due to an honest evaluation of what is preventing fans from buying, but from an assumption regarding buying patterns that are largely influenced by personal bias.

[Steeler53]

Actually, in terms of sales, it probably is better to have more casual fans. More people who aren't the hardcore fans who will buy everything under the sun to fill a collection. Think about it in terms of the movies- yes, you want a film that satisfies the fans of the X-Men comics. But you also want to appease the casual people who are just going to the movies to look for a good time.

And you are right. The casual fan is probably not going to care about whether or not MJ is married. Or if Xavier is dead. Or if Superman no longer has his red undies. But I think the problem with the industry right now is that the publishers are trying to appeal to more casual fans, or make things easier for casual fans to pick it up, but they are only doing things that hardcore readers would care about, or that they think that is a problem. They really aren't looking into the hows and why's of the lack of more of a casual fanbase. They are making an assumption based on these fans, but it is influenced by their own biases. They think that casual fans wouldn't like a single Spidey, but that is largely due to their own biases against a married Spider-Man, since they didn't like it when they were a hardcore fan. And so they interpret the information that they do receive, like the success of the Raimi films, as proof to back up their own pre-determined narrative. And that's the problem. These decisions aren't made due to an honest evaluation of what is preventing fans from buying, but from an assumption regarding buying patterns that are largely influenced by personal bias.

You are correct, when it comes to an honest evaluation what the "Casual Fan" wants. Every analysis should start with time followed by economics. Brian Tracy said "Time is our most precious commodity." The "Hard Core Fan" will invest his/her time on the Comic Book, TV Show, Sports Team, whatever. Most people simply cannot not (primarily due to one or both of those factors). Using myself as an example: On Tuesday, I left the House @ 6:00AM, attended a Toastmasters Meeting from 7:00AM-8:30, drove to work, and work 9:00-6:00PM before getting home after 7:00PM. This does not include other obligations such as preparing for work, cleaning, girlfriend, appointments and other things. I do have the time to squeeze in Amazing Spider-Man (like I do the Steelers or Penn State Nittany Lions), but I cannot follow Spider-Man in The Avengers, nor can I watch the Yankees & Pittsburgh Penguins as much as I want. Why? I simply do not have the time to do so. Who understands this? Dan Slott that is who. He talks about his obligations (not just to Marvel), and since he is aware of this, makes sure that he comes out with a product that will keep someone like me (with limited time) interested. The problem IS when Hollywood Type Executives with all kinds of TIME and especially Millions of $$$$$$$$$$$ in the Bank, inject their opinions and biases for common sense. "The Lone Ranger" and "Green Lantern" are perfect examples: Anyone with half a brain would know that unless the story was awesome those movies would fail, because they do not have the built-in audience for them (let alone creating a New Audience). Same for "Morbius" If anyone made a Top 10 Rogues Gallery list of Spider-Man Villains, would he even make the Top 10? Lets see if he does? In no particular order: Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Electro, Kingpin, Sandman, Venom, Carnage, Lizard, Kraven, Hobgoblin. You get the picture. So why would the "Hard-Core" Spider-Man buy (let alone the "Casual Fan")?Never the less, all of these projects were "Green Lit" and the result was as expected. Until elitist attitudes change, and actually caring about the bottom line (meaning creating things that many of actually will invest our time and (or) money in, NOT the likes of a female Thor or a "B-Lister" (at best) comic like "Morbius") nothing will change.

[cyberhubbs]

You are correct, when it comes to an honest evaluation what the "Casual Fan" wants. Every analysis should start with time followed by economics. Brian Tracy said "Time is our most precious commodity." The "Hard Core Fan" will invest his/her time on the Comic Book, TV Show, Sports Team, whatever. Most people simply cannot not (primarily due to one or both of those factors). Using myself as an example: On Tuesday, I left the House @ 6:00AM, attended a Toastmasters Meeting from 7:00AM-8:30, drove to work, and work 9:00-6:00PM before getting home after 7:00PM. This does not include other obligations such as preparing for work, cleaning, girlfriend, appointments and other things. I do have the time to squeeze in Amazing Spider-Man (like I do the Steelers or Penn State Nittany Lions), but I cannot follow Spider-Man in The Avengers, nor can I watch the Yankees & Pittsburgh Penguins as much as I want. Why? I simply do not have the time to do so. Who understands this? Dan Slott that is who. He talks about his obligations (not just to Marvel), and since he is aware of this, makes sure that he comes out with a product that will keep someone like me (with limited time) interested. The problem IS when Hollywood Type Executives with all kinds of TIME and especially Millions of $$$$$$$$$$$ in the Bank, inject their opinions and biases for common sense. "The Lone Ranger" and "Green Lantern" are perfect examples: Anyone with half a brain would know that unless the story was awesome those movies would fail, because they do not have the built-in audience for them (let alone creating a New Audience). Same for "Morbius" If anyone made a Top 10 Rogues Gallery list of Spider-Man Villains, would he even make the Top 10? Lets see if he does? In no particular order: Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Electro, Kingpin, Sandman, Venom, Carnage, Lizard, Kraven, Hobgoblin. You get the picture. So why would the "Hard-Core" Spider-Man buy (let alone the "Casual Fan")?Never the less, all of these projects were "Green Lit" and the result was as expected. Until elitist attitudes change, and actually caring about the bottom line (meaning creating things that many of actually will invest our time and (or) money in, NOT the likes of a female Thor or a "B-Lister" (at best) comic like "Morbius") nothing will change.

And this is literally why no one will ever try something new or radical in the mainstream market. This thinking right here.

[Aruran.]

You know what this thread reminds me of, Twitch plays Pokemon.
Seriously, a group of people trying to agree on certain things, only for chaos to happen. And nothing ever changes until the product actually becomes really bad.
Group A wants this, while Group B doesn't want it. You'll never see them agree on it unless they become trapped.
Either you let one person be in control and decide everything, or you let everyone vote and take the highest option.
The problem with the latter is that your targeting a specific group, when you should really be targeting everyone.

[cyberhubbs]

You know what this thread reminds me of, Twitch plays Pokemon.
Seriously, a group of people trying to agree on certain things, only for chaos to happen. And nothing ever changes until the product actually becomes really bad.
Group A wants this, while Group B doesn't want it. You'll never see them agree on it unless they become trapped.
Either you let one person be in control and decide everything, or you let everyone vote and take the highest option.
The problem with the latter is that your targeting a specific group, when you should really be targeting everyone.

Hey, they did eventually beat the game.

[Aruran.]

Hey, they did eventually beat the game.

Kinda, every time they finish a generation they start the next one.
The difference with comics is that the story will never end.

[cyberhubbs]

Kinda, every time they finish a generation they start the next one.
The difference with comics is that the story will never end.

Yeah. It was an interesting experiment.

Long time ago, way before CBR rebooted, we did something similar in one of those collective stories. Each post built on the last post and we'd see where the story ended up. Fun times.

Not quite viable in an actual comic book, of course.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

Yeah. It was an interesting experiment.

Long time ago, way before CBR rebooted, we did something similar in one of those collective stories. Each post built on the last post and we'd see where the story ended up. Fun times.

Not quite viable in an actual comic book, of course.

Isn't that how long term comics work anyway?

[cyberhubbs]

Isn't that how long term comics work anyway?

There was no order, no law. Plot-points were being dropped and never heard of again on a far-too-regular basis.

Like I said, fun times, a neat local experiment, but eventually you want someone to take control for the sake of simple coherence.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

There was no order, no law. Plot-points were being dropped and never heard of again on a far-too-regular basis.

Because that never happens in mainstream comics.

[cyberhubbs]

Because that never happens in mainstream comics.

I'd like to say it happens less regularly. Far less regularly.

Surprised you're defending it so much when I remember you not being a fan of the project.

[RobertMacQuarrie1]

I'd like to say it happens less regularly. Far less regularly.

Surprised you're defending it so much when I remember you not being a fan of the project.

Because I knew- as it was set up- it would essentially devolve into what you said it did.

[Alan2099]

Yeah, it got crazy, but it was fun.

I've been thinking about starting the thing up again actually. Maybe we just need a new rtule or something saying that every 25th issue all subplots need to be resolved and things need to start fresh.

Or maybe not. I dunno.