Is "Image" dead?

[icctrombone]

You said, "without TWD Image would probably be dead by now" which makes no sense. Image doesn't profit from the book. Whether it sells two copies or two million copies makes no difference whatsoever to Image's bottom line.

As for enjoying the books more or less then--that's up to readers. Certainly enthusiasm was high back in 1992 but those books were heavily criticized as well for being shallow and simpleminded. Current books are more critically acclaimed and more substantive. If that's not your cup of tea--well, that's your business.

I miss a lot of the energy of the early stuff myself. At that point I was reading every Image book--at this point I don't. But we put out considerably more titles as well. So...there's that.

Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.

[AngryComicBookNerd]

Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.

Yeah, as I was going through all this I was wondering the same thing. I've heard the indie publishers take a % for each copy sold. I'm not sure how much... 10% - 50%, but if a book sells more copies then Image gets more money. But Image doesn't own the intellectual property. So if the creators of Snotgirl wanted to go elsewhere and publish their stuff, I don't think Image gets anything. But someone needs to fact check me here because I'm kind of a dumbass.

[dimo1]

Yeah, as I was going through all this I was wondering the same thing. I've heard the indie publishers take a % for each copy sold. I'm not sure how much... 10% - 50%, but if a book sells more copies then Image gets more money. But Image doesn't own the intellectual property. So if the creators of Snotgirl wanted to go elsewhere and publish their stuff, I don't think Image gets anything. But someone needs to fact check me here because I'm kind of a dumbass.

Please check this.

Image was set up so that creators could do what they want with their creations, and reap the benefits financially. When a book is published by Image, creators are not paid up front. It can sometimes be two or three months before one sees money from a book. It sounds rough, and it most definitely can be. But if it’s done right, the payoff can be far more rewarding than producing a book in the conventional manner.

When the creator does finally get paid, they get paid on what their book makes after the cost of printing and Image’s modest office fee, which covers solicitations, traffic, production, and some promotion of the book. We make no more money off of our highest selling book than we do our lowest.

[AngryComicBookNerd]

Well if you were to read that literally, "We make no more money off of our highest selling book than we do our lowest" just means they charge everyone the same rate. So it doesn't matter if walking dead sells 70,000 copies or a dozen different titles sell a combined 70,000... Image gets the same amount but make no mistake, they do get paid.

[dimo1]

Of course they get paid, otherwise they could‘t run a publishing house.
My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Image‘s life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.

[JFP]

Of course they get paid, otherwise they could‘t run a publishing house.
My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Image‘s life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.

My argument was that TWD is Image's pull product in terms of keeping Image popular; not profitable. In business, this is called pull marketing or pull marketing strategy. Tyco Toys used this with Tickle Me Elmo:

Interest in Tickle Me Elmo was high from the start, but skyrocketed once supplies of the toy couldn't meet the mounting demand as the end of the year approached. After the dust settled, Tyco saw their profits multiply to five times their projections, reaching $350 million for 1996 alone. Tickle Me Elmo's success might have caught Tyco Toys by surprise, but that success wasn't entirely accidental.

http://www.marketing-schools.org/typ...marketing.html

The success of Tickle Me Elmo caused consumers to check out other Tyco products. There aren't numbers to show how many other Tyco products were bought through the success of Tickle Me Elmo. But it's safe to assume a great deal were bought. Same thing with TWD and Image. There aren't numbers to show how many titles are bought on the success of TWD. But I assume many are.

However, this is all my opinion. Just an opinion. But the Dumb-Fux guy and numberthirtyfive took it outta proportion and put words in my mouth like I was stating facts. This is the reason why people type IMHO before making a sentence on message boards. Even though stating IMHO is redundant, there's always some idiots out there who will blow up as if you're stating facts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In terms of artistic quality of 90s Image, they'll always be called garbage. But it was good garbage. It got a reaction outta people whether they loved it or hated it. I remember countless times reading an Image Comic in public and someone would come up to me and say, "Image sucks!" Then tell me about how they were trying way too hard to be like Marvel and DC. That it was a comic company for hacks. Then I found out the guy didn't read Image Comics but knew so much about how much they sucked. Nowadays, when talking to non-Image Comics reader you get a "meh" reaction. The fun times of people either loving or hating Image (there was never any in between) are long gone. Now people either love it or are lukewarm. Interestingly, looking at the reactions in this thread, 90s Image still invokes a strong love it or hate it response. 18 years later, people are still expressing strong reactions about 90s Image. That's something current Image will never be able to do.

[Erik Larsen]

Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.

On comic books--Image takes a flat fee. So, the Walking Dead comic book doesn't generate any more than Snot Girl or the Beef. The rules are also a bit different for Image partners.

Image pays its bill primarily from the flat fees from the comics. We do take a small percentage from trades as well--which makes keeping books in print worthwhile.

But Image wasn't set up as this huge profit center. The whole idea was to have creators being enriched--not the "suits."

[Erik Larsen]

Same thing with TWD and Image. There aren't numbers to show how many titles are bought on the success of TWD. But I assume many are.

However, this is all my opinion. Just an opinion. But the Dumb-Fux guy and numberthirtyfive took it outta proportion and put words in my mouth like I was stating facts.

I don't know if there's a lot of brand loyalty at this point. I guess retailers understand that we've been around a while and that we're likely to be around a while longer. There's some trust in the mix. But I don't know that a lot of readers are going, "Man, I sure do love the Walking Dead--I think I'll go read I Hate Fairyland because it is an Image comic book as well."

[Erik Larsen]

Of course they get paid, otherwise they could‘t run a publishing house.
My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Image‘s life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.

I think your argument has shifted since you initially made it. There's nothing in your post to indicate that you were talking about the Walking Dead creating Image comics brand awareness and loyalty. It seemed your argument was that money from the Walking Dead was helping keep our doors open when the reality is that Image gets no money from the Walking Dead.

[numberthirty]

I don't know if there's a lot of brand loyalty at this point. I guess retailers understand that we've been around a while and that we're likely to be around a while longer. There's some trust in the mix. But I don't know that a lot of readers are going, "Man, I sure do love the Walking Dead--I think I'll go read I Hate Fairyland because it is an Image comic book as well."

Agreed.

If you are a Hickman fan, the idea that you run out to pick up something like TWD or Moonshine just because the same company puts them out is on shaky ground.

It's essentially the exact opposite of the "Tyco" assertion above. It's more like "Consumers would buy something like a Dungeons & Dragons game and a Transformers figure because they both were being sold under the "Hasbro" name."

It ignores that they don't have much in common outside of that they fit into the same corner of the retail market.

[JFP]

I don't think it's far-fetched or on shaky ground at all to say TWD makes people wanna try out other titles. My first Marvel Comic title I bought regularly was Amazing Spiderman. These days I enjoy Ghost Rider more than Spiderman. Those are real different titles. Same how I've always been a Batman fan but I also enjoy Deadman. When I got back into Image years ago, Savage Dragon was the first title I picked up. Still read it. But I have zero problem reading Moon Struck.

A person's tastes vary. They aren't stuck in one genre. Just like I don't see it being far-fetched that a person who likes Dirty Harry also enjoying Finding Nemo; I don't think it is far-fetched someone could enjoy TWD and then try out other Image titles. Considering that Image publishes a lot of horror titles, I think it is likely a fan of comics could go from TWD to Rose, Black Road, or other Image titles.

Going from TWD to I Hate Fairyland is kinda extreme. But not unlikely. Is it really hard for people to believe that a fan of TWD could say, "I enjoyed this comic. I like horror comics. What company publishes this? Image Comics, huh? I'll see if they have other horror titles on their website. Wow. These comics called Rose, Black Road, and the Realm look good. They are probably gonna be good horror comics like TWD. I'll try these too." Really? That's hard for you guys to believe?

[Erik Larsen]

I don't think it's far-fetched or on shaky ground at all to say TWD makes people wanna try out other titles. My first Marvel Comic title I bought regularly was Amazing Spiderman. These days I enjoy Ghost Rider more than Spiderman. Those are real different titles. Same how I've always been a Batman fan but I also enjoy Deadman. When I got back into Image years ago, Savage Dragon was the first title I picked up. Still read it. But I have zero problem reading Moon Struck.

A person's tastes vary. They aren't stuck in one genre. Just like I don't see it being far-fetched that a person who likes Dirty Harry also enjoying Finding Nemo; I don't think it is far-fetched someone could enjoy TWD and then try out other Image titles. Considering that Image publishes a lot of horror titles, I think it is likely a fan of comics could go from TWD to Rose, Black Road, or other Image titles.

Going from TWD to I Hate Fairyland is kinda extreme. But not unlikely. Is it really hard for people to believe that a fan of TWD could say, "I enjoyed this comic. I like horror comics. What company publishes this? Image Comics, huh? I'll see if they have other horror titles on their website. Wow. These comics called Rose, Black Road, and the Realm look good. They are probably gonna be good horror comics like TWD. I'll try these too." Really? That's hard for you guys to believe?

In the case of Marvel and DC their strength is their uniformity. Spider-Man crosses over with Ghost Rider. Captain America coexists with Howard the Duck. They may attempt diversity but largely they have succeeded selling the same thing: their universe.

Stepping away from Marvel and DC it's a whole different ball game. I liken it to book publishers. If you like Hellboy--you might seek out other Mignola-related books but there's no uniform anything else at Dark Horse. Image's line is so eclectic and so diverse that many books are one-of-a-kind items. Like Snot Girl? There it literally nothing else like it to be found at Image. Like Elephantmen? There's nothing else like it. Image may have done a decent job of saying "we put out a LOT of books and the commonality is that they all come from a creator's unique voice and they're all great" but I'm not convinced it's the label selling the books so much as it is the books selling the books and the creators selling the books.

Fans bought the brand in 1992. I don't think it's necessarily that way anymore.

[numberthirty]

One guy's take...

Let's use a comparison that most folks can grasp.

Hershey's as a company that makes candy. Let's say that a regular old chocolate bar is "Batman". You might like that, and even have more wide ranging tastes. You might go for a Take 5 bar. That you are willing to get away from the plain old chocolate bar with the Take 5 bar doesn't mean you will look at Hershey's overall product line and grab a bag of black licorice Twizzlers.

To me, that feels like TWD and The Black Monday Murders. They are both candy. That doesn't mean they would be something that folks would look at that they like one, and decide to pick up the other.

While it will happen sometimes, the stark differences tend to point away from it being something that happens regularly.

Never mind being something that has a regular bearing on sales numbers of each title.

[numberthirty]

One more thing about the idea that genre fan overlap is how readers wind up buying a title.

Take that I read The Black Monday Murders and Moonshine. While I am a fan of horror, that is not the main reason I am buying those titles.

It is the creators.

I'd imagine that is the main reason that most folks who regularly buy Image titles buy them. I'm fairly certain that the company just happens to be putting out the titles by creators they are interested in.

[dimo1]

Well, you have to start somewhere.
Quite a few will stumble across TWD because of the T.V. show. Fewer will pay attention to the publisher, but still, very often having a brand makes people try other products as well.
Let‘s take Apple as an example. Years ago I was one of the few who used Apple Computers. That has changed due to the iPhone. Nowadays people also buy laptops and computers and what else Apple sells.
My saying is just that TWD is a bit like the iPhone, and I don‘t think it‘s really healthy for a company to rely on only one product if said product is part of a competative market. You run the risk of waning interest, and I feel the same might happen to Image.
Once TWD stops airing, less exposure in general could result in fewer sales throughout all titles.