September 2018 solicitations

[Frontier]

I keep wondering why they don't just try something like Justice League Unlimited where everyone is an active Avenger but different arcs call for different groupings of characters.

That's kind of what Hickman did with the main Avengers book but if you want to write a core, intimate, Avengers team that kind of group doesn't really work.

[Kintor]

Except I never said branding wasn't important for Marvel. I argued against brand purity, not branding itself. In my personal opinion, characters are more important than whatever name's on the cover, which is why I don't mind if there are multiple books with Avengers written on it. I never even disputed the idea that certain books get ''Avengers'' on the title for marketing purposes. You don't have to turn everything into one of your ridiculous rants against certain characters, dear.

Well, it just seems to me that you're downplaying the cynicism behind WCA as a concept. Intrinsically the Avengers name still has value, thanks to the efforts of better books. Having 'Avengers' in the title is pretty much the only thing that WCA has going for itself, because the characters of the main cast certainly can't support a book by themselves. Even thrown together like this all Marvel has is a collection of the most hated and neurotic characters they've ever put to print; it's like anti-charisma, a cast so toxic it actively repels readers. Using the WCA branding is supposed to disguise these problems but it's not going to work.

[Mike]

And what are Franklin and Valeria’s new codenames?

And with that little announcement I am already done with the new FF book.
I find the kids to be very annoying. Especially Val.

[Prof. Warren]

Well, it just seems to me that you're downplaying the cynicism behind WCA as a concept. Intrinsically the Avengers name still has value, thanks to the efforts of better books. Having 'Avengers' in the title is pretty much the only thing that WCA has going for itself, because the characters of the main cast certainly can't support a book by themselves. Even thrown together like this all Marvel has is a collection of the most hated and neurotic characters they've ever put to print; it's like anti-charisma, a cast so toxic it actively repels readers. Using the WCA branding is supposed to disguise these problems but it's not going to work.

How about you just wait and see what actually works or not?

Predicting failure ahead of time is frequently a good way to end up looking stupid.

I suspect the new WCA will do just fine. And either way, the Avengers as a brand will survive the experience.

[Crimz]

And what are Franklin and Valeria’s new codenames?

And with that little announcement I am already done with the new FF book.
I find the kids to be very annoying. Especially Val.

It could just be setting up a separate Future Foundation book that stars the kids.

[Mike_Murdock]

Think of it as a 'Tragedy of the Commons' type situation. Brand integrity is a finite resource, the more books that use the Avengers branding the less valuable that resource becomes. So each new Avengers book acts in its own self-interest, drawing from that brand integrity, without regard to the whole Marvel community. With time these Avengers books deplete that resource and the brand is worthless.

Brand integrity is absolutely not a finite resource. In fact, a second, good book can potentially increase the value of the brand.

[Kintor]

Brand integrity is absolutely not a finite resource. In fact, a second, good book can potentially increase the value of the brand.

That's all well and good except for the fact that we aren't talking about good book but rather a bunch of hangers-on just using the Avengers brand. I thought that was the whole point of reducing the Avengers line to a single book, bringing back a little integrity to the name compared to the last few years. The later announced of the WCA contradicts this policy and once again undermines brand integrity.

[Mike_Murdock]

Neither one of us has read this book.

[gurkle]

If companies want us to get hyped for books we haven't read yet then they have to expect us to be the opposite for other books we haven't read yet.

If a book sounds like it has a bad premise and turns out to be good, we usually will find out. But until it's available, "this sounds bad" is just as much a part of the conversation as "this sounds good," as long as no one tries to talk anyone else out of their advance reaction.

[Tycon]

People look for brand integrity in.......the Avengers??? Much less, the West Coast Avengers? That's odd.

[responsarbre]

That's kind of what Hickman did with the main Avengers book but if you want to write a core, intimate, Avengers team that kind of group doesn't really work.

I'd argue that JLU was more of an anthology series that worked as a spotlight for the different groups of characters that it showed. Hickman's Avengers, on the other hand, mixed up the cast from story to story, but it still kept a bigger focus on the plot as opposed to whatever selection of characters that Hickman picked to solve a particular problem. I think Avengers World is closer in concept to JLU, with mixed results.

Well, it just seems to me that you're downplaying the cynicism behind WCA as a concept. Intrinsically the Avengers name still has value, thanks to the efforts of better books. Having 'Avengers' in the title is pretty much the only thing that WCA has going for itself, because the characters of the main cast certainly can't support a book by themselves. Even thrown together like this all Marvel has is a collection of the most hated and neurotic characters they've ever put to print; it's like anti-charisma, a cast so toxic it actively repels readers. Using the WCA branding is supposed to disguise these problems but it's not going to work.

My guy, it's not that complicated. The "West Coast Avengers" name has been thrown around since Fraction's run when Kate first moved out to California. It's an obvious connection to make because, hey look, it's Hawkeye on the West Coast. I actually remember people asking for a West Coast Avengers revivial centered around Kate ever since the L.A. Woman issues of Fraction's Hawkeye were coming out. I personally would have loved to see a WCA revival that made better use of the classic characters, but I'm not gonna act like nobody likes any of the characters on Thompson's roster because that's patently untrue.

One might even say that the assumption that one person won't like every single character is the very reason why companies like Marvel publish 50-60 different comics a month. If you don't like any of these characters, then maybe you should be happy that they're all clustered in one team book that you can ignore. And I don't think it's worth sweating too much about Marvel's health as a company considering their massive share of the comic market as of last month's numbers. If they survived Marville and Trouble, they can survive this.

[Crimz]

People look for brand integrity in.......the Avengers??? Much less, the West Coast Avengers? That's odd.

For real. Everyone and their grandma can be an Avenger.

If Aunt May was added to a team called the "Decrepit Avengers!" I wouldn't even bat an eyelid.

Brand Integrity? lol

[nickytesla96]

Kate Bishop sports a membership in multiple well-reviewed Young Avengers runs, a shared starring role in the critically praised Fraction's Hawkeye run, and her own solo was well-reviewed and at least lasted three trades.

America Chavez was a member of well-reviewed Young Avengers and Ultimates runs. Yeah her solo sucked but what character hasn't had bad writing.

Gwenpool's solo lasted five trades and was well-reviewed.

Are these guys high sellers or universally loved? Nah. But there's no need to exaggerate with labels like "toxic" or "hated." The characters have their fanbases. Heck some have lasted as long as or longer than the recent Black Knight, Nova, Luke Cage and Iron Fist runs. And I'd argue that if a reader is bothered by a non-main AVENGERS (as in the group that's recruited the majority of heroes at one point or another) team having Gwenpool on it because "muh brand integrity," they probably need better priorities.

[Kintor]

People look for brand integrity in.......the Avengers??? Much less, the West Coast Avengers? That's odd.

The Avengers is supposed to be Marvel's elite team, the best and most popular heroes in a single book. Stunts like the WCA literally cheapen the concept of the Avengers, ruining and degrading that carefully maintained sense of brand integrity. To be blunt, if the characters in the new WCA can't survive without leeching credibility from the Avengers name then they shouldn't be in a book together.

[gurkle]

The Avengers is supposed to be Marvel's elite team, the best and most popular heroes in a single book.

Is it really though? I mean ever since they kicked out the stars and replaced them with three nobody ex-villains, it's often been far from Marvel's most elite team, and the best eras for the book have not really overlapped that much with its overall power level or the number of non-obscure characters on it.

Different people want different things from the team, of course. My problem with the current team is that it is too much of an elite team of stars, and it would be better off kicking out some of the star characters and replacing them with some of the minor characters who have historically carried the book (from Wasp and Scarlet Witch to Spider-Woman and Luke Cage). But that's me; others would rather have it be a Justice League type of all-star team like this one.

My point is not that WCA is going to be great (I doubt it will be) but that we all have different ideas about what dilutes the brand of the Avengers. For me a team of characters who almost all have their own books, like Waid's and Aaron's very different (but in that way, very similar) teams, is farther from what "The Avengers" should be than the WCA cast, which at least continues the tradition of being about a bunch of nobodies whose destiny the writer mostly controls.