Retailer Fury At Marvel NYCC Panel

[skyvolt2000]

The store I go to most often the retailer is always friendly and there's a a mix of different kinds of customers in the the store. And while I've noticed that they seem to be ordering perhaps a lower number of certain fringe books, I've never heard them say the business was suffering because Marvel "changed all their heroes at once."

I have heard more complaints of "I am TIRED of Batman" than anything else.

This makes me curious as to which comic book store you've ever been in where such things have been uttered. Furthermore, how many stores exist where this has occurred at all?

A SMART owner doesn't say this stuff in public.

Because guess what word gets around and don't let folks see you at a comic con with a booth. I would not do business with any store that bashes Marvel and I buy more INDY books than DC/Marvel.


I am willing to wager that the biggest complainers are the ones who don't sell that many POC, LGBT & Women lead books to begin with.

Lets just say my store does not have trouble selling my 50 solo books with straight white males-even a low seller like Slapstick does OK. No bothers with my 10 black lead solos (for whatever reason) and I don't order anymore.

Now reverse the roles. Guess who has an issue now?

Is that Marvel's fault? NO.

That is an issue for ME and ME alone.

If 90 out of 100 comic book stores have no issue with Miles Morales books-does Marvel pander to those 10? NO

It is up to ME to find other books to promote and SELL. Those 60 books do not make or break me when I stock over 500.

[Sighphi]

I'm curious which minority character actually said anything like that in the book.

I don't know why people keep perpetuating this lie that the minority or female heroes are about them "just being minorities".

My point is that Rhodes was Iron Man, period, correct? He wasnt a version that was taking the top seat. He was running around being Iron Man, that's it. He wasnt constantly having discussion about being black.

But as to that point, Ms. Marvel has a whole mess of storylines based on Muslim stuff, Jane Foster got several instances with people written out of character just to have the, "Im not a female Thor im Thor," talk. I think Cap Falcon got some of that, too. "Ask me about my feminist agenda." The weird retcon origin for Mockingbird that she had no female heroes to look up to, it was all men. I think in Wasp we had the whole, "The top intelligence list is made up by men." So it excludes women, apparently. The Champions were talking about white privilege in some book, etc, etc, etc.

It's not just about them being just that but it does get brought up and it the most awkward way possible. For characters that should not be acting like that.

Ms. Marvel, fine, but for most others this stuff should not be an issue.

It was horrible when Bendis did it with Luke Cage. Because all he did was having him talk and not do anything. Which is the opposite of what Luke is, Luke would be on the block dealing with stuff instead of complaining to Cap about how bad it's on the block.

Ms Marvel action Figure $25
A Pop Finn from Star Wars toy $15


Ms Marvel Figure is $15
Pop Finn is $7
At Wal-Mart, Target and others

Actually, Star Wars Pops usually cost a couple more bucks than the standard, i think because of the license fees. So 8 to 10 for standard and 10 to 13 for SWs.

And, yes, in Walmart the prices can drop but those stores are not everywhere and they are just trying to move stock. So it's not on all figures it's usually here and there for things they want to move.

Now, for the other action figures, i think the 6 inch stuff is around 19.99 to 22 butcomic stores do pump the price for them bit way too high. 25 i think is actually low. I havent bought a toy in a comic store for yeeeeeaarrrs. I go to toys R us or just anywhere else.

[CrimsonEchidna]

At this point, these "replaced characters" nonsense is getting ridiculous. Captain America is back, Thor getting his hammer back is likely coming up after the death of Jane Foster, they're teasing Tony Stark coming back. But nooooo I guess everyone wants to scream "NOW! NOW! NOW! NOW!"

I kind of look at this of two minds. I get why store owners would be frustrated giving the continuous down trend of comic sales in general, so the idea of Marvel suddenly being "experimental" all at once with their characters puts the stores more at risk with their bottom line, than Marvel themselves.

On the other hand, yeah, Marvel has already announced the return of all these characters. I feel like at this stage, any continued complaints is looking more like blowing hot air and wanting validation for their entitlement. Marvel doesn't "owe an apology" or whatever BS people keep spewing.

[Michael Watkins]

I find the Iceman thing particularly funny because honestly, not many people cared about him before the announcement. But then after you'd think he was as popular as Spider-man, with the amount of people upset about it... I also think it's the same for my thread on Johnny possibly being bi. He doesn't even have enough fans for an appreciation thread, yet many are against it...

Heck, the reveal of his sexuality is the most interesting thing to happen to him in years. He would never have had a solo without it and while it may not be selling well, it would be selling much less if he was still straight.

I mostly agree. but, just to throw it out there, I think creating a kid version of Iceman is what hurt the adult version's chances. why should anyone give a crap about adult Bobby when it was the young version who was outed? it just highlights how little growth adult Iceman has seen. he has the same personality (maturity level) as Ice Kid and no accomplishments to his name. the kid, at least, had the interesting wrinkle of being gay.

[rui no onna]

Which is very unfortunate.

But a lot of us have known for a very long time now (particularly when Miles Morales was created years ago) that a good chunk of retailers are racist asshats.

It's part of the reason why a black female led book (Motor Crush) sold terribly in the direct market but the collected edition sold extremely well.

Afaik, the TPB sales numbers we have for Motor Crush came from Diamond. It may not be single issues but those sales are still through the direct market.

[rui no onna]

I think the argument could be made straight, gay, bi or whatever that an Iceman solo book, hell Bobby in general just doesn't have the current hook. If one thinks a characters sexuality makes for good long term storytelling they are sorely mistaken. Frankly Bobby just isn't interesting outside a team dynamic. Maybe a creative team could prove me wrong but it's not this initial team on his existing book.

Issue #1 sold 34K
Issue #2 sold 22K (two weeks later, both June '17)
Issue #3 sold 15.7K (July '17)
Issue #4 will sell how many for August??? 12K?

14,056

10char

[Digifiend]

At this point, these "replaced characters" nonsense is getting ridiculous. Captain America is back, Thor getting his hammer back is likely coming up after the death of Jane Foster, they're teasing Tony Stark coming back. But nooooo I guess everyone wants to scream "NOW! NOW! NOW! NOW!"

How long is The Death of the Mighty Thor supposed to be? Jane is in Avengers: No Surrender, so unless DOMT is SEVEN MONTHS LONG, she isn't dying.

And that's no longer an issue. Steve Rogers is back as the one true Captain America and Sam Wilson is Falcon again. We're getting Thor back to the basics. Tony Stark is coming back. Looks like Bruce Banner is too. The original Logan is back as well. Yet somehow the problem is still, and I quote "blacks," "homos" and "freaking females." There are other ways the MCU and comics don't align, yet that was the hill they chose to die on. Wonder why.

Banner back? What indications have there been for that? As far as I can see, they're just making Cho's Hulk more like his, a curse that the alter ego wants rid of.

It's doing well digitally.

If only they published sales numbers to prove that.

I think the argument could be made straight, gay, bi or whatever that an Iceman solo book, hell Bobby in general just doesn't have the current hook. If one thinks a characters sexuality makes for good long term storytelling they are sorely mistaken. Frankly Bobby just isn't interesting outside a team dynamic. Maybe a creative team could prove me wrong but it's not this initial team on his existing book.

Issue #1 sold 34K
Issue #2 sold 22K (two weeks later, both June '17)
Issue #3 sold 15.7K (July '17)
Issue #4 will sell how many for August??? 12K?

14k.

[Captain Craig]

Re: Iceman #4 sales

14,056

10char

Thanks, so a bit of stabilizing vs issues 1-3 but still a 1.7K drop.
It'll clearly be cancelled, or should by issue #6/7. I doubt Scholastic sales are going to prop up Iceman.

[Raye]

How long is The Death of the Mighty Thor supposed to be? Jane is in Avengers: No Surrender, so unless DOMT is SEVEN MONTHS LONG, she isn't dying.

Comics are sometimes set at different times, it's not a case of every book published in a given month is set at the same time in-universe, that just can't work. If she dies in Mighty Thor, it doesn't mean we can't still have her final adventure with the Avengers being published in No Surrender months after she dies in Thor. Stories happen at different paces, so while No Surrender may cover (I have no idea, just saying) a week over it's run, while Mighty Thor includes some kind of time skip that makes it span a couple months in-universe.... Or maybe No Surrender in it's entirety is simply set before that arc of Thor ever begins. If you look at the preview art for No Surrender, there is an indicator that it takes place very, very early into Legacy, quite possibly before the arc in Mighty Thor even starts. Namely, it has a panel of Doctor Strange in the Sanctum Sanctorum, still Sorcerer Supreme. In an issue that hits a month AFTER Loki gets the position in Strange's own book. Who, also, will be simultaneously appearing in Strange's book on Earth, Squirrel Girl's book in space, and probably will at least make a few cameos in Thor, maybe more. It's not that he is jumping between all these locations, it's that they are set at different times, even though for a stretch of 6 months or so, the books will have him in all 3 places. But anyway, it gives us a way to order the stories chronologically in universe. we will have to wait and see if Loki is shown as the Sorcerer Supreme or not in Thor. If he is, then it takes place after No Surrender, regardless of publishing dates. If he is not, then things get a bit more confusing, but it is possible even then that the timeline is No Surrender, Thor, then Doctor Strange. Rather than NS, Strange, Thor.

Edited to add: since i just read it, and it seemed like a good example to show how impossible it is to expect books to line up timeline wise from month to month... just read Astonishing X-Men, and it is on issue 4, but it is pretty clear only a few hours have passed in universe since the story started, if that. This will likely hold true for the majority of it's 12 issues, given its premise. It it will most likely take a year of our time to cover less than a day in universe. That she is currently stuck on the astral plane in Astonishing, and will likely remain there for months yet, does not prevent Rogue from appearing in Uncanny Avengers, and then No Surrender, or OML from appearing here as well as, what, 3 other books? because the day in which Astonishing takes place can simply be slotted in somewhere before or after those stories. So if something similar happens in either Thor or No Surrender, then we will just have to accept that though they may take place over the same timeframe in real life, in universe they are not happening at the same time, one will be set before the other, and so far it looks like No Surrender is simply set before Death of Thor.

[Dragonick]

I don't know what the thought process behind this is, you're already having problems selling goods so you go to one of the biggest comic conventions around to go on a bigoted rant. So you're not only scaring away new customers, but you're scaring away old customers that don't want to be associated with this kind of speech.

[Xalfrea]

Even putting aside the topic at hand, this behavior in one of the biggest comic events of all time just seems like really bad form. I hope Marvel and its creative team won't be too negatively affected by this.

[Dayguard]

Probably should have kept their opinions on women, blacks, and gays to themselves. If they'd relegated their outbursts to just being about how Marvel's big stories have been terrible, then it would have been better.

It isn't diversity that's killing the market. Although that's part of it, it's the story telling. Marvel could do whatever they wanted, but if the stories behind the characters were excellent they would be more accepted.

Just coming from me, this is what lowered my drive to buy most of their books. Miles Morales, Kamala, Sam as Cap, Sam Alexander Nova: I actually loved them from the start. That was in 2013 though. I started reading Thor because Jane picked up the hammer, never cared before that. However, her stories had that SJW crap in it at first. Fortunately that's gone now and her story is great. Bobby Drake becoming gay actually didn't phase me at the start, but I actually started to hate the character after they released his solo.

Then there's the books like She-Hulk (sorta), Mockingbird, America, and Captain Marvel's latest runs. I can usually see why someone likes something, even if it's not to my taste. That these books were/are being published blows my mind.

Legacy has been an inch in the right direction, imo.

[MajorHoy]

I find the Iceman thing particularly funny because honestly, not many people cared about him before the announcement. But then after you'd think he was as popular as Spider-man, with the amount of people upset about it... I also think it's the same for my thread on Johnny possibly being bi. He doesn't even have enough fans for an appreciation thread, yet many are against it...

Heck, the reveal of his sexuality is the most interesting thing to happen to him in years. He would never have had a solo without it and while it may not be selling well, it would be selling much less if he was still straight.

But when you have old-timers coming back to comic books and looking for "comfort reading", radical changes like changing a character's sexuality and changing the character to somebody else, especially if it's a different race and/or sex, may leave those older readers uninterested if they were looking for what they use to know and enjoyed once upon a time. "Radical change" is much more jarring than character growth, especially when Marvel seemed to change out so many old-guard characters all at the same time.

[Sighphi]

Even putting aside the topic at hand, this behavior in one of the biggest comic events of all time just seems like really bad form. I hope Marvel and its creative team won't be too negatively affected by this.

how many times do retailers get to talk to marvel people?

[JudicatorPrime]

Even as someone who's not crazy about Marvel and their creative decisions at the moment, this kind of blatant bigotry and hate should never be taken seriously .

I disagree. Not taking the bigots seriously is why comics continues to be one of the most pervasive bastions of nuanced tribalism (if not blatant racism and misogyny) in this country. The retailers aren't patient zero here. They're the strain.