Retailer Fury At Marvel NYCC Panel

[PhantomStranger]

I wouldn't say it's an empirical fact that moviegoers are gaining enough comic book interest by the droves to buy comic books and are turned off when they see something other than what they saw in the films. Maybe a little at best, but not really much.

Lost sales are still lost sales and may be the margin between keeping the doors open and not keeping them open.

It implies a few things:

1) Movie goers have zero understanding of the comics and their relation to films. Almost like they didn't know what a comic book was before they ever saw the end credits of a comic movie and just assumed Marvel was always some sort of minor movie production company that just made it big about ten years ago entirely by accident. It also implies that not one moviegoer who is interested in comics can internet search something.

Have you ever heard of an "impulse purchase"? Those are an important source of income for any store, and impeding them (in this case by having radically different versions of the characters in leading books) is bad for business. They've gone to the time and trouble of seeking out the book, clearly showing an interest. Why throw one more obstacle in their path?

I imagine for those who see the movies, they've probably seen many news articles talking about differences or histories or other such. I can't imagine they've been completely devoid of any concept of differences between comics and movies. Most likely I think they're just not interested in buying comics.

Then why did they take the time to come into the store and take a look in the first place?

2) The Direct Market is this weird thing that people who do not know what comic books are or what might go on inside them that people have an instinctual location knowledge for, even if they don't know what's inside of one. People who have no clue what they're getting into do zero research of their own and simply go to comic shops. This also is added by the bizarre nature of these moviegoers who instead of using an online source would seek out a comic shop at all when they know of sites like Amazon, Comixology, eBay, or what have you. And it's because of the people who are going to movies and not seeing movie translated comics are causing the collapse of the direct market industry wide.

Not the sole cause, perhaps, but an important enough one that retailers are reporting it as one. Lost sales are lost sales. I trust retailers to know what is happening in their own stores far better than I trust remote analyses by self-serving Marvel.

I imagine economic reasoning combined with the availability of online retailers affects DM sales more than movie goers do.

And yet they make a point of referencing them as a significant factor...

3) That these people were heavily inspired to buy comics in the first place. It's odd that anybody with only very little knowledge of comics or previous interest would find a movie so thought provoking and soul resonating they would have an immediate urge to go from a movie theater to a comic shop without any stop between to really know what they're getting into.

I would imagine most people who are inspired to buy comics were those who already had an interest in doing so, or were previous comic collectors in the first place.

Ultimately, their internal motivation doesn't matter. The facts are that they a) took the time to go into the shop, b) looked for specific titles based on a perception from immediate previous experience as to what they would contain, and c) left disappointed when that expectation was not met.

I've been reading comics since the early '70s. I am a part of the "existing fanbase" and I don't feel like anything has been "forced" down my throat.

I read books like Mighty Thor and All-New Wolverine because they're simply great books, not because they reflects any "agenda" other than making compelling, entertaining comics.

Interesting that you find stories about an usurper stealing not just Thor's status, but his very name and swanning around having everyone praise them as "better than the original" (even by said original) to be "compelling and entertaining". Same could be said of X-23.

No that is not empirical facts that is anecdotal evidence which actual sales numbers prove is not true. How do you not understand that?

The actual sales numbers suck, and do not reflect what they could have been if those potential new/return readers had not been pushed away by radically different versions of characters in the books. Again, retailers know their shops through direct experience. Their testimonies should not be dismissed as "anecdotes".

[Spidey5640]

There are several ways Market Research could be used to help target certain types of buyers, there is patently no need to constantly track individual buyers to do that. You’re arguing against something I’ve never suggested.

I don’t understand how any post of mine can really demonstrate that “entitlement fuels the anger...”

I don’t have any such anger. I have nothing but fondness for Marvel for giving me many hours of pleasure, and welcome their attempts to reach out to a wider readership.

As far as I know Redjack is correct that the comics industry does not collect the demographics of it's customers in any meaningful way but I agree with your point that such data could be useful. While I don't think it would help Marvel to craft better stories for any given title knowing that maybe 60% of the buyers of Amazing Spiderman are white guys above age 40 (I'm making these numbers up BTW) it may allow them to better target future projects, say to create a superhero who starts out in his 40's, just to possibly appeal to that demographic.

or maybe not?

[PhantomStranger]

Bad reasoning on two counts. First of all, the fact that you've bought more and for longer than other readers doesn't give you seniority over other fans, much less make you "more" of a fan then they are.

Yes it does on the former, maybe not on the later, but they have yet to demonstrate that they will be around for the long term (something long-time fans have done).

Secondly, that assumes that the only people who actually buy comics to any great degree are people of your position.

I am sure you can find those who don't. But you must explain why there are so many people who have quit following characters they love (or even Marvel entirely) who do.

In other words, true Scotsman are the only customers. That's not right; not every reader hangs out on Tumbler, much is everyone who likes any of the new comics doing it because of a cause of some kind.

Most readers don't. That's the point. Catering to the Tumblerista cause-heads shrinks your market-base.

(Anyways, from a business-speaking perspective, what would Marvel be more interested in; those who bought comics in the past, or those who'll buy them in the future?)

Gee, why would a company be interested in a steady, proven cash-flow vs a wildly fluctuating theoretical one...?

Random thought: there are future lifelong comic readers who're getting their start right now with the current Marvel lineup. Dollars to donuts, at least some of them will count stuff like RiRi Williams Iron Man, Squirrel Girl, All-New Wolverine, or whatever legacy-based series you want to name as their most favorites and the characters that matter to them like how old school Iron Man, Captain America, Hulk, or whoever mean to you.

Then it will be a much smaller market, as the sales figures show. I thought the goal of any business was expansion of its market.

So? That was then. This is now. Anyways, creating new characters, either for their own mantles or to inherit old ones, has always been a thing. Besides, if it was "okay" for Marvel to used diversity in the past, it should be equally okay to continue to do so now.

The difference is in the way it has been done. Simply being diverse vs actively changing characters explicitly to signal "diversity". And presenting them in uninteresting, insulting ways (such as the "one punch woman" phenomenon).

If so, Marvel is still arguably on top; they're getting more money than then the YouTubers are. Which is the crux of the issue. I'm going to guess that Marvel isn't too concerned about how many critics they have, so long as they're staying in the black.

Financials just came out for Disney/Marvel...not looking good at all.

I'm not sure how factoring in numbers from YouTube videos proves anything; it inherently assumes that every view and whatnot = support for the YouTuber's position

Difference between "view" and "subscriber". Subscribers have shown an approval of and interest in further consumption of the channels content/position. That's the purpose of subscribing.

[numberthirty]

The existing fanbase that doesn't appreciate the "new" paradigm being forced down their throats.

The "Existing Fanbase" is not some monolith that a single person can speak for.

Speaking as a single part of that larger fanbase, I'm fine with that new paradigm.

[PhantomStranger]

All customers are equal.

No they're not. Customers who shop regularly and spend lots are far more valuable then occasional customers who spend relatively little. Stores make the rent on the former. The later add profit, but stores really want to see them become the former.

There are no "super buyers."

All customers are equal.

I'm beginning to suspect you have little actual retail experience.

The internet gives such folks a megaphone and allows them to find each other and they make up this fantasy that their opinions and conspiracy theories matter more than actual sales.

Actual sales prove our point. Even with all the padding due to overship and minimum order shennanigans to get perk items the ship numbers are terrible. The actual out the door to reader numbers are far lower even than that (again per retailer testimony).

By the way, financials for the last year just came out, and it isn't looking good for Disney/Marvel at all...

If your niche-directed, one-product shop can't manage to survive in a more diverse climate because you refuse to adapt to that climate, your shop will die and good riddance. Adapt or die. Those are the rules in business and, mostly, in life.

Rather arrogant assumption isn't it that all these retailers are comic-exclusive ones?

By the way, the fact that you don't seem to understand the importance of brand loyalty in business is more proof you dont understand business.

The highest selling comics of October 2017.

Thor is an Anniversary issue (those always spike sales).

Spider-Man and Deadpool and Spider-Man and Deadpool. (also outliers)

Where are Capt Marvel, RiRi and America Chavez, et al. If they are such successful characters surely they would be high sellers...

[numberthirty]

Who has the greater right? Fans who have supported the books for decades with hard-earned dollars or a bunch of cause-heads who sales figures prove don't read he books in any large numbers?

Neither of the groups listed.

The one with the greater right is actually the company that owns the IP. It's theirs to do with as they will.

[Bor]

No they're not. Customers who shop regularly and spend lots are far more valuable then occasional customers who spend relatively little. Stores make the rent on the former. The later add profit, but stores really want to see them become the former.



I'm beginning to suspect you have little actual retail experience.



Actual sales prove our point. Even with all the padding due to overship and minimum order shennanigans to get perk items the ship numbers are terrible. The actual out the door to reader numbers are far lower even than that (again per retailer testimony).

By the way, financials for the last year just came out, and it isn't looking good for Disney/Marvel at all...



Rather arrogant assumption isn't it that all these retailers are comic-exclusive ones?

By the way, the fact that you don't seem to understand the importance of brand loyalty in business is more proof you dont understand business.



Thor is an Anniversary issue (those always spike sales).

Spider-Man and Deadpool and Spider-Man and Deadpool. (also outliers)

Where are Capt Marvel, RiRi and America Chavez, et al. If they are such successful characters surely they would be high sellers...

Where are all the traditionel male white characers like Green arrow and flash who both have succesfull tv shows right now? Why are they not higher then they are? Oh right because your opinions does not match reality.

[Bor]

The "Existing Fanbase" is not some monolith that a single person can speak for.

Speaking as a single part of that larger fanbase, I'm fine with that new paradigm.

Speaking as someone who is also part of the existing fanbase and has been so for about 23 years I am likewise fine with it.

[PhantomStranger]

We can all see that no one at Marvel will lose sleep over losing an individual customer (if that’s all Redjack means by saying “all customers are equal”), but it seem unlikely that Marvel wouldn’t care about losing large numbers of its most profitable customers.

I imagine that key decision makers at Marvel have decided that won’t happen. No reason why it should.

One thing to keep in mind that Marvel isn't seeing the sales number to their ultimate customer (the reader), they're seeing the sales number to their direct customer (the retailer). The retailer may be sitting on a lot of unsold stock, but until the retailers reduce their order numbers, Marvel doesn't see it. (Diamond made the books non-returnable a long time ago.) That doesn't even get into the issue of overshipping (the retailer orders 10, Marvel ships 20 and puts 20 down as "sold", even though it is only paid for 10).

This also explains the rising number Marvel requires to get "specials" (lenticular covers, etc). Retailers know that "specials" do appeal to a significant part of their core customer base (collectors) who are also a good part of their "big spenders". They will therefore swallow hard and order the requisite numbers of regular copies to get those specials and hope the regular copies somehow sell.

At least that is how it used to be. Retailers are starting to rankle at Marvel putting all the risk on their shoulders. Marvel just hasn't let that reality sink in (yet). They probably won't either until retailer orders start falling sharply. That probably won't happen until the entire direct market is near total collapse.

[PhantomStranger]

Where are all the traditionel male white characers like Green arrow and flash who both have succesfull tv shows right now? Why are they not higher then they are? Oh right because your opinions does not match reality.

TV shows are not comic books. The consumption patterns are not the same. The comic book market has the quirk of certain characters whose sales spike higher than others and who therefore should not be calculated into or used as a reference as to the average level of sales.

The concept of such "outliers" is basic statistics.

[Bor]

TV shows are not comic books. The consumption patterns are not the same. The comic book market has the quirk of certain characters whose sales spike higher than others and who therefore should not be calculated into or used as a reference as to the average level of sales.

The concept of such "outliers" is basic statistics..

Also funny how suddenly now you want to ignore other media when you were the one saying just a couple of pages ago that the people were coming into the shops to buy the versions of the avengers they were expecting from the movies but not buying the titles because it didnt match. Funny how that only applies when you want to make pretend buyers habits are a certain way but not when it shows your faulty logic.

[Carabas]

Where are Capt Marvel, RiRi and America Chavez, et al. If they are such successful characters surely they would be high sellers...

Capt Marvel, RiRi and America Chavez are in the same place as the Avengers, Superman, and the X-people: not in thge top 10 this month.

Also, this has been explained to you: many books are very succesfull despite not selling floppies even a little bit.

[WebLurker]

Yes it does on the former...

Not even remotely.

...maybe not on the later, but they have yet to demonstrate that they will be around for the long term (something long-time fans have done).

They shouldn't have to prove anything. Besides, if a comic is selling well, it's justified it existence regardless of what kind of readers it attracts, and some of those readers probably will stay long-term.

I am sure you can find those who don't. But you must explain why there are so many people who have quit following characters they love (or even Marvel entirely) who do.

Anecdotes do not represent the everyone. How do you know that they're a larger group that the Tumblr users you don't like? Frankly, the fact that most of the legacy characters have been generally well-received and have generally sold well (or at least to compete with the originals) suggests that you're not the majority.

Most readers don't. That's the point. Catering to the Tumblerista cause-heads shrinks your market-base.

And how do we know that the non-Tumblr users are unhappy as a whole with the way things have gone? One faction who doesn't like it doesn't speak for everyone.

Gee, why would a company be interested in a steady, proven cash-flow vs a wildly fluctuating theoretical one...? Then it will be a much smaller market, as the sales figures show. I thought the goal of any business was expansion of its market.

First of all, it has yet to be proven that Marvel's creative decisions have put the company on financially shaky ground. Secondly, from a business perspective, it's smart to get new readers in. That's where the future long-term readers you so idolize will come from. On top of that, it's arrogant, at best, to assume that only the stuff you like will draw in readers and stuff that you dislike won't. New series and new characters do expand markets. Speaking for myself, if not the X-23 character you earlier dismissed as a thief of the Wolverine comics, I wouldn't be buying any X-Men comics period. Now, I'm getting back-issues of X-Force and seriously considering tracking down old New X-Men books and following that new "Red" series coming out soon because I happen to like that specific character.

Finally, single issue sales alone are not what makes a comic book series financially worthwhile. So, arguing that sales alone dictate what books should be made/not made is like working with a jigsaw puzzle with half the pieces missing.

The difference is in the way it has been done. Simply being diverse vs actively changing characters explicitly to signal "diversity". And presenting them in uninteresting, insulting ways (such as the "one punch woman" phenomenon).

That's highly subjective and extremly prone to confirmation bias. Maybe you should point out some specific examples as to what bothers you, since, from what I've seen and read, I can't come up with anything.

Financials just came out for Disney/Marvel...not looking good at all.

And we know this is happening because Marvel isn't catering to you because...?

Difference between "view" and "subscriber". Subscribers have shown an approval of and interest in further consumption of the channels content/position. That's the purpose of subscribing.

That's still not an accurate representation of the comic buyers by and large.

[JackDaw]

As far as I know Redjack is correct that the comics industry does not collect the demographics of it's customers in any meaningful way but I agree with your point that such data could be useful. While I don't think it would help Marvel to craft better stories for any given title knowing that maybe 60% of the buyers of Amazing Spiderman are white guys above age 40 (I'm making these numbers up BTW) it may allow them to better target future projects, say to create a superhero who starts out in his 40's, just to possibly appeal to that demographic.

or maybe not?

Yes, that (better targeting future projects) is exactly the sort of potential use I had in mind.

Years ago, I was a member of another comic site (honestly can't remember name) where Peter David took part from time to time.

For some reason or other Peter D got onto topic of background to why he started writing a couple of DC series, Young Justice and Fallen Angel. (NB Don't take following as "complete gospel"...it's my memory of a few chat site postings a few years ago.)

With Young Justice guy who commissioned Peter to write series wanted it to target specifically young teenagers...to encourage youngsters to transfer over from Johnny DC comics to adult super hero comics. With Fallen Angel the specific aim was to get more women reading comics.

Peter effectively tried to get into "mindset" of those specific target audiences...and did fairly common sense moves such as ensuring artwork/ character designs for Fallen Angel were close to something a real woman might wear.

I think he produced two really enjoyable comics...but then I wasn't in the target audience DC were purportedly trying to reach.

As often the case...however good a comic is...there came a time when sales weren't great...and Peter was called in to discuss what needed to be done. Early on in meeting...Peter made point that discussion should be about more than total sales...in these cases what was arguably more important was whether the comics were achieving their original agreed objectives. Was Young Justice bringing youngsters through from Johnny DC? Was Fallen Angel attracting new women readers?

The point was..nobody knew. It would have been useful to have some data.

[Redjack]

No they're not. Customers who shop regularly and spend lots are far more valuable then occasional customers who spend relatively little. Stores make the rent on the former. The later add profit, but stores really want to see them become the former.

you're attempting to shift the playing field and, while adorable, that's not allowed.

Actual sales prove our point.

No. They prove you don't understand basic arithmetic or the first thing about publishing.

Even with all the padding due to overship and minimum order shennanigans to get perk items the ship numbers are terrible. The actual out the door to reader numbers are far lower even than that (again per retailer testimony).

No. Per some whiny retailers as quoted by BLEEDING COOL. Anecdotal evidence is evidence of anecdotes and nothing more.

By the way, financials for the last year just came out, and it isn't looking good for Disney/Marvel at all...

Oh, yes. Please school me on "the financials" of "Disney/Marvel" to which you are privy. LOL. As if.

Rather arrogant assumption isn't it that all these retailers are comic-exclusive ones?

"arrogant?" No. But I guarantee the ones that are floundering are.

By the way, the fact that you don't seem to understand the importance of brand loyalty in business is more proof you dont understand business.

Oh please.Your "brand loyalty" is worthless. No one knows who you are and no one is tracking your buys to find out. No one is catering to you or to your LCS. These are facts. Accept or don't. They remain facts nonetheless..