Retailer Fury At Marvel NYCC Panel

[Punjabi_Hitman]

What does that have to do with something that cost like ten or fifteen cents then?

That buying power decreases over time. Something that costs 10 cents in the past isn't worth 10 cents in the present.

That inflation, dollar value, market value, profit margins don't remain the same over the course of time.

That a chocolate bar from a vending machine cost $.50 in the late eighties early nineties and now is $2.50.

Just because a product increases in price, doesn't determine what the product is used for. The price is what the market is willing to pay to maximize the profit of the corporation. It doesn't change the fact that it's a consumable item.

[WebLurker]

I think many of us can see that keeping comics for re-reading is a long way from mindset of true collecting...but, as ever, not all agree.

Well, by definition, a "collector" is someone who habitually purchases stuff of a specific kind for keeping. So, I can see the case being made that someone who buys comics/trades with the intent to keep them for re-reading is a "collector," like someone who buys all the fancy covers and releases just to have them with no intent of reading. However, since "collecting" is such a broad term, I think it one of those "it explains everything, so explains nothing" things; in function, it's no different than the collecting of people who buy (e.g.) collects BluRays of their favorite movies, steelbooks, novels, save ticket stubs of events they went to, whatever.

Nope. By my definition most comics readers are readers who dispose of their books relatively soon after reading.

How do we know that most people buy once, then recycle/resell/give away/discard/whatever? Is there a way to track the ultimate disposition of floppies and see if is indeed the case that people who save them are the exceptions to the rule?

paperback novels were specially invented to be quickly disposed of once used and that model holds true today.

If that's the case (and you're literally the only person I have heard claim this), they aren't priced like that. They go for about ten bucks a pop, which seems a bit too high for a planned one-time read (esp. when I can do the same at a library for free). On top of that, why buy a book you're not planning to keep?

Why? Many of us were here first. Why do we have to "just walk away" and let you do what you want with the characters we've loved in many cases for decades?

There's a word for this worldview. It's called "entitlement" and it has no validity in the discussion.

What makes your claim on them superior to ours?

If you're talking to the creators, they're the people making the darn stuff, which is the ultimate superior claim (although I will concede that the final product does need to be marketable to be successful). If you're taking to newer fans, nothing, although being as newer readers are the future of Marvel's pool of regular customers, it would be smarter business practice to market more to them than the shrinking audience of older readers; the latter is a demographic of diminishing returns.

[JackDaw]

The first half of the run was fairly traditional. Frank Miller did pencils and Klaus Janson did inks. As it went along, Miller did sketches and Janson drew and inked from those sketches. The big thing Miller did was have such a profound understanding of the medium and layouts, including the use of the page turn, which was not as common at the time with so many ads.

One of the issues that stands out as something that I'm glad I bought in floppy is Daredevil #191, which Miller went back to pencil while Terry Austin inked. In this issue, Daredevil is playing Russian Roulette with Bullseye. The issue goes back and forth with Daredevil pulling the trigger against Bullseye's head and then his head. Finally, you get to the final spin and Daredevil pulls the trigger. In the comic, you have to turn the page, then turn past two full pages of ads before the final reveal that the gun didn't have bullets in it in the first place. It's a simple trick, but it does a masterful job at building tension before the final reveal. The trade I have, which is the three volume Frank Miller set (well, one of those sets), has the reveal literally on the right side of the page. There isn't even a page turn. To me, there is no doubt in my mind that Miller had his pages lined up deliberately and that the trade completely butchered how it was supposed to have been read.

Thanks for that.

I was particularly interested when you said before how carefully the stories had been designed to read in original format and wondered what you meant.

So it was really good to read such a well explained example on that point.

[Za Waldo]

That buying power decreases over time. Something that costs 10 cents in the past isn't worth 10 cents in the present.

That inflation, dollar value, market value, profit margins don't remain the same over the course of time.

That a chocolate bar from a vending machine cost $.50 in the late eighties early nineties and now is $2.50.

Just because a product increases in price, doesn't determine what the product is used for. The price is what the market is willing to pay to maximize the profit of the corporation. It doesn't change the fact that it's a consumable item.

Before it sure seemed like you were trying to make the point through pricing, by saying a dollar a hundred years ago was worth more than maybe you thought I was thinking. But then I pointed out how off you were in price, and that those things were like only ten cents, so now you seem to be trying to make the point totally the opposite way.

I'd say things like the quality of the print and the price you're paying for it are kind of big factors in determining if that book or magazine or comic was made with the idea that it'd be thrown out afterwards. If a paperback was meant to me thrown away after finishing it the cover would probably be the same quality as the paper inside, it would probably all be very low quality paper, and it'd probably be less expensive. The same is true with comics, with the floppies. If the publisher's intent was for them to be thrown out after you've read it, they could be making them a whole hell of a lot cheaper. If they're intended to be thrown out, these cheaply produced comics shouldn't be of any problem to the audience either, because seemingly this audience would know that this is what's meant to be done with them.

This whole weird discussion about how paperback books and single issue comics are still meant to be thrown out when you're finished also raise an interesting question: Who the hell does this? Who are these people buying books, even paperbacks, and just trashing them when they're done? Who are these people buying single issues of comics and trashing them when they're done? Most people seem to keep these, and I wouldn't say they're book collectors or something either just because they have a bundle of books they kept. Why would used book stores even take the cheaper paperback if paperbacks are still meant to be garbaged when finished, shouldn't they only be in the market for hardcovers when it comes to the resale of modern books?

[SignorMiracolo]

That logic works in theory. But, if too many readers drop too many series at the same time, then the store's cashflow gets strangled.

Keep in mind, if Marvel has a mass exodus of readers, some of those readers are simply going to stay home with their money. They are not going to buy in for another series. A small comic shop can easily cut orders on a few titles. But, an entire company's output is another question, especially if the company is Marvel or DC. In that situation, the retailer needs to find something else to fill that shelf space (that they are still paying rent on).

If retailers are seeing a mass drop-off in readers, they have a good reason to be worried

Where is this mass drop-off of readers? There has been a general decline, not a mass drop-off, that has interested all publishers, not Marvel alone. The fact is there i a tiny part of retailers that have an outdated business model and would like time to go back instead of keep up with the times. Period.

At this point, it is my fault for talking to a hipster like you. (And, pretending that a hobby or industry norm does not apply does not make it less of a norm.)

By your definition, most comic readers are collectors. You understand this. But, you are pretending that you do not understand for reasons that will probably involve more I-statements than anybody cares to read. (You also seem to be arguing that collectors are inferior to readers.)

You are just one of those people that confuses anecdotical evidence ("what I and my friends do", "what I and my friends like") with “most people”, “the readers”, “the people”. It's not how it works.

[SignorMiracolo]

Ethnic amd female characters have always been present in good numbers at Marvel, and even more so since the 80s. There is NO shortage of ethnic characters at Marvel. Therefore there is no need to "push" ethnic/female characters.

To prove your point to me, tell me how many books had a female or black or asian or latino protagonist in the 80s and in the 90s, or the 00s, and how many had a white male as the protagonist. I can spare you the time, until 5 years ago Marvel never had more than 1 solo book with a female protagonist and 1-2 solo book swith non-white protagonists, out of an average of 50-70 monthly books. If that for you means there was “no need to "push" ethnic/female characters” I think you are being delusional. Or you have some issue with female and diverse characters.

Why? Many of us were here first. Why do we have to "just walk away" and let you do what you want with the characters we've loved in many cases for decades? What makes your claim on them superior to ours?

“Here first” when? I started reading Marvel in 1984. The person you replied to is more than 50 years old. And we like current Marvel direction, as many other old readers. Anyway. Do you want to know why? Because the longer you have been reading comics, the earlier you are going to die and stop being a customer, and that's all that matter in business. I find hard to believe you are a grown up (implied when you tell you read from decades) and you can be so naive at the same time. You are just buying a product, nobody cares how much time is it you are buying it, and that time gives you no special rights whatsoever. It's not the army, it's silly books intended for children and teenagers that some of us keep buying even when they grow up, but they are not made for us.

[Redjack]

If that's the case (and you're literally the only person I have heard claim this), they aren't priced like that. They go for about ten bucks a pop, which seems a bit too high for a planned one-time read (esp. when I can do the same at a library for free). On top of that, why buy a book you're not planning to keep?

They are, in fact, "priced like that." Do you know what happens to unpurchased paperbacks? They are destroyed and the covers returned to the publisher to PROVE they were destroyed. You don't do that wth something you made for longevity. The paper stock is crap and the books are mass produced, extremely quickly. They are not built to last. Same with periodicals. The reason I'm the only person you've seen write that is because I'm likely the only person you've interacted wth who's been making a living in publishing (among other things.).

Again. This isn't a debate. It's a person who knows something trying to pass information on to an audience that doesn't like it. Tough luck. Facts are facts.

[JKtheMac]

“Here first” when? I started reading Marvel in 1984. The person you replied to is more than 50 years old. And we like current Marvel direction, as many other old readers. Anyway. Do you want to know why? Because the longer you have been reading comics, the earlier you are going to die and stop being a customer, and that's all that matter in business. I find hard to believe you are a grown up (implied when you tell you read from decades) and you can be so naive at the same time. You are just buying a product, nobody cares how much time is it you are buying it, and that time gives you no special rights whatsoever. It's not the army, it's silly books intended for children and teenagers that some of us keep buying even when they grow up, but they are not made for us.

I think you agree with me that part of the problem is that too many of these books are 'made for us'. The average big two reader is mid thirties and skews to male and that is crazy for a medium that naturally should be aimed at the YA market. I am never going to complain that writers like Hickman have a place in modern comics, but it doesn't make sense for the entire line to be pandering to a single market.

My perspective, coming from the UK is comics are what kids buy with their pocket money when they are ten and maybe graduate to a slightly older focused book like 2000AD that will keep them interested until around 18-20 at the latest. When you started to hide your comics inside other magazines like porn, or bought them on the way to the off-licence, you kind of knew you had nearly grown out of them.

My main problem with the way the direct market formed was the way it moved the demographic upwards. I am not actually over 50, I am in my fiftieth year, but I distinctly remember this insidious period in popular culture in the late eighties and early nineties, when the beginnings of this modern entitled perspective bargain to take root, and it drove me away. It felt like an adolescent demand to be taken seriously by adults from a kid in shorts.

This isn't to say comics can't be adult, haven't always had an adult component, or that there is no place for adult themes in comics. But superhero comics are not the best genre for gritty realism. The Punisher should never have been in the same universe for example, and the fact that this is a controversial topic in comics is itself proof. I adore the Netflix shows, but the main reason they work is the way they are never going to have a Rocket Raccoon cameo. Fans will extol the virtues of how Daredevil is done so well at Netflix, but he isn't, he is the distilled Direct Market Daredevil, that is just one Daredevil, not even the modern comic book version. Nolan's Batman is just one Batman, unrecognisable from the guy I first read in the seventies, fighting Dracula in Detective Comics in a torn second-hand comic that I happily doodled on. I don't like that new guy, he has regressed into a Direct Market stereotype telling serious stories for adults. He isn't a superhero, he is a vigilante that seriously needs a therapist.

Recently Marvel have begun to walk out of this dark shadow of edgy adolescence and into a world where it is ok to tell an aspirational tale of a kid finding a Nova helmet. That is the main reason I am back. Champions is the most important comic book on the stands today. It isn't my favourite book because I am old, but it is great and it points the way.

[Jokerz79]

They are, in fact, "priced like that." Do you know what happens to unpurchased paperbacks? They are destroyed and the covers returned to the publisher to PROVE they were destroyed. You don't do that wth something you made for longevity. The paper stock is crap and the books are mass produced, extremely quickly. They are not built to last. Same with periodicals. The reason I'm the only person you've seen write that is because I'm likely the only person you've interacted wth who's been making a living in publishing (among other things.).

Again. This isn't a debate. It's a person who knows something trying to pass information on to an audience that doesn't like it. Tough luck. Facts are facts.

That's not 100% accurate yes paperback books and magazines are destroyed when returned for reimbursement I myself have already said that here when discussing some of the unfair advantages chain stores have over small businesses. But CDs when they were a thing, Games, and Gaming Accessories were/are also destroyed for reimbursement purposes and those are definitely mean to have some longevity and part of destroying unsold product is to help stop it from flooding the market and undercutting prices. Fact is there is a whole market for used books including paperbacks. Paperbacks are a cheap alternative to hardbacks in some cases and there own thing in others cheap doesn't equate disposable and if a business thinks that then they are foolish given there is a whole industry dedicated to used/old comics and books.

[Mike_Murdock]

Thanks for that.

I was particularly interested when you said before how carefully the stories had been designed to read in original format and wondered what you meant.

So it was really good to read such a well explained example on that point.

Thank you.

I've almost finished collecting the original Miller run (I think I have about three or four issues left, including #168, which is a bit too pricey). I recently finished re-reading his run as part of a massive read through of every single Daredevil issue that's been going on for more than a year now. I'm not sure if I want to re-read the whole thing again in floppy form once it's complete. I suspect what I'll do is a side-by-side comparison to see how big the changes are.

That being said, many of the neat little tricks he does are still relevant if you buy it in trade. Some, like the use of many panels to show discrete action (which creates an effect like slow motion) can still be seen in trade.

[SignorMiracolo]

I think you agree with me that part of the problem is that too many of these books are 'made for us'. The average big two reader is mid thirties and skews to male and that is crazy for a medium that naturally should be aimed at the YA market. I am never going to complain that writers like Hickman have a place in modern comics, but it doesn't make sense for the entire line to be pandering to a single market.

I understand what you mean and you are probably right. Personally, I have always considered the type of comics you talk about for “teenagers that want to feel adults, and not for actual adults, so my perspective may be skewed. When I think of American comics for an adult audience I think of Fantagraphics, Pantheon Books or Top Shelf, not Marvel, DC. Even publisher or labels considered "mature" like Vertigo or Image are still for 20 somethings and not adult people imho.

That's why, when it comes to super hero comics, I find easier to relate to titles that embrace the peculiarity of the genre. To me super heroes, Marvel super hero stories, are about (funny crazy emotional) aspirational tales with genuine characters. Peter Parker and his personal issues, the FF extended family dynamics, Banner and his relation with his dark side, the soap opera of teams like X-Men or Avengers and so on. That's why I think characters like Ms. Marvel, the new Spider Man and Hulk and Nova, the Champions are more true to the original Marvel spirit than what many older characters have become. Their stories are about crazy adventures, but also about their family, friends, lovers, about they living, growing and trying to find their place in the world.

Fraction's Hawkeye, Slott's Silver Surfer, Hickman's FF are better super hero stories than Brubaker's Winter Soldier or Hickman's Avengers. The stories are true, the characters are real. I like Hickman as a writer but when I find myself reading about the 7 smartest persons on the planet punching themselves about destroying a universe or let two being destroyed I can only feel a bit embarrassed.

[rui no onna]

I think you agree with me that part of the problem is that too many of these books are 'made for us'. The average big two reader is mid thirties and skews to male and that is crazy for a medium that naturally should be aimed at the YA market. I am never going to complain that writers like Hickman have a place in modern comics, but it doesn't make sense for the entire line to be pandering to a single market.

My perspective, coming from the UK is comics are what kids buy with their pocket money when they are ten and maybe graduate to a slightly older focused book like 2000AD that will keep them interested until around 18-20 at the latest. When you started to hide your comics inside other magazines like porn, or bought them on the way to the off-licence, you kind of knew you had nearly grown out of them.

My main problem with the way the direct market formed was the way it moved the demographic upwards. I am not actually over 50, I am in my fiftieth year, but I distinctly remember this insidious period in popular culture in the late eighties and early nineties, when the beginnings of this modern entitled perspective bargain to take root, and it drove me away. It felt like an adolescent demand to be taken seriously by adults from a kid in shorts.

Probably because it's those same entitled fans that were willing (and can afford) to pay increasingly high prices for comics. The current price point just isn't ideal for what's supposed to be disposable entertainment.

Between $3.99 for 20 pages of Amazing Spider-Man or $9.99 for 200 pages of My Hero Academia or heck, even $0.99 for digital Weekly Shonen Jump (which has the latest chapter with ~16-20 pages of My Hero Academia plus latest chapters of a bunch of other titles), I reckon a lot of kids and parents would opt for My Hero Academia.

[SignorMiracolo]

Probably because it's those same entitled fans that were willing (and can afford) to pay increasingly high prices for comics. The current price point just isn't ideal for what's supposed to be disposable entertainment.

Between $3.99 for 20 pages of Amazing Spider-Man or $9.99 for 200 pages of My Hero Academia or heck, even $0.99 for digital Weekly Shonen Jump (which has the latest chapter with ~16-20 pages of My Hero Academia plus latest chapters of a bunch of other titles), I reckon a lot of kids and parents would opt for My Hero Academia.

You can't really compare the price of comics produces and published in USA and comics produced elsewhere and then published in USA. Publishing a licensed comics is infinitely cheaper, so the price will always be a lot lower. It's not only a choice of the publisher. Or to better say, a publisher of licensed comics (for licensed I don't mean like IDW that license the property and produce the comics, but who licenses foreign comics) can choose if adapt to the price of its market or go with lower prices, but who produce comics (be it Marvel, or a creator at Image) can't. In my country, for example, a 48 page comic book with 2 Spider-Man/Cap/Avengers/GwenPool etc. stories cost $3.00 and sell between 2-5k and it's still profitable.

[rui no onna]

You can't really compare the price of comics produces and published in USA and comics produced elsewhere and then published in USA. Publishing a licensed comics is infinitely cheaper, so the price will always be a lot lower. It's not only a choice of the publisher. Or to better say, a publisher of licensed comics (for licensed I don't mean like IDW that license the property and produce the comics, but who licenses foreign comics) can choose if adapt to the price of its market or go with lower prices, but who produce comics (be it Marvel, or a creator at Image) can't. In my country, for example, a 48 page comic book with 2 Spider-Man/Cap/Avengers/GwenPool etc. stories cost $3.00 and sell between 2-5k and it's still profitable.

I know the production costs are different. The buyers aren't likely to care about that, though.

For something closer to home, Raina Telgemeier's graphic novels are $10.99 and a quick check on Amazon shows Drama and Smile for $7-8. Amulet by Kazu Kubuishi is $12.99 per 200-page volume and there's a box set with 7 books for $58.70 on Amazon. Big Nate by Lincoln Peirce is $9.99.

[WebLurker]

They are, in fact, "priced like that."

Ten bucks for a normal-sized paperback, twelve-ish for the newer taller size, twenty-give or take for the "trade paperback" size. That's priced for a disposable product (esp. one that can last awhile)? Regardless of what the intended use of the paperback format is by the publishers, that is not "priced like that." (Two or three bucks would be priced like that.)

Do you know what happens to unpurchased paperbacks? They are destroyed and the covers returned to the publisher to PROVE they were destroyed. You don't do that wth something you made for longevity.[/quote]

Hmm.

The paper stock is crap and the books are mass produced, extremely quickly. They are not built to last. Same with periodicals. The reason I'm the only person you've seen write that is because I'm likely the only person you've interacted wth who's been making a living in publishing (among other things.).

Again. This isn't a debate. It's a person who knows something trying to pass information on to an audience that doesn't like it. Tough luck. Facts are facts.

I tried researching this a bit. Everything I found (and I will concede that it was not very much), pointed to paperbacks being made as a cheaper alternative to hardcovers (both on the production side of things and as way to entice customers who might not impulse buy the thirty-buck hardcover, but might if it was a fraction of the cost). Nothing about them being intended to be thrown away after one read (and I can say that paperbacks last a lot longer than you're giving them credit for). Is there good source of info on this?

However, you have gotten me really curious how what people actually do do with them after the fact. Are we, to borrow an Apollo 13 quote, comparing what they're made to do vs. what they can do, and all that.