Will It Work?

[Triniking1234]

In light of Marvel's new editor in chief C.B. Cebulski's revelation to diversify their line in spite of their Fresh Start which promised a back to basics approach. (Which was supposed to be the point of their Legacy initiative) Will it work when they brought back the same writers whose series failed and got canned after a while?

No. Cebulski's tripping. The floppies aside from the #1 and 2 will do bad again. If the fanbase of Nadia's and Bobby's lie in digital and trade waiters they'll stick to those buying habits. Hopefully Grace and Whitley improve like Chip Zdarsky did after the Comicsgate community roasted the hell outta him.

[Skedatz]

Do they want it to work? I think they have purposely injected diversity in the most off putting way so the readership rejects it. This allows them to say that they tried and return to the status quo. Look at Darkhawk. They gave him a good writer and an excellent artist. Absolutely nothing controversial about the title. They even helped him out by putting Richard rider in the book.

That's probably not why most people have "rejected" it. Whether it's a conscious thing for them or not.

[Skedatz]

No. Cebulski's tripping. The floppies aside from the #1 and 2 will do bad again. If the fanbase of Nadia's and Bobby's lie in digital and trade waiters they'll stick to those buying habits. Hopefully Grace and Whitley improve like Chip Zdarsky did after the Comicsgate community roasted the hell outta him.

I've been out of the greater comic social loop for a while. What did he do?

[CaptCleghorn]

With how things have been going in recent years and have completely wrecked them and the X-Men franchise has gotten rather stale. I don't think so.

If we accept your ridiculous statement that Marvel is completely wrecked, what makes your observations and warnings valid at all? Personally, if I had a better way to run Marvel, my resume and cover letter would be in their in-box.

[The Dying Detective]

If we accept your ridiculous statement that Marvel is completely wrecked, what makes your observations and warnings valid at all? Personally, if I had a better way to run Marvel, my resume and cover letter would be in their in-box.

When you replace the characters for head scratching reasons of course I can feel something is wrong.

[Triniking1234]

I've been out of the greater comic social loop for a while. What did he do?

When Chip first started Spectacular Spidey the Comicsgate guys roasted him for writing Peter like a "useless, effeminate, unfunny cuck". Then after Secret Empire when Slott made Peter broke again in Amazing, they said Chip's recent stories spoilers:

with him getting arrested and Jonah finding out he was Spidey

end of spoilers were pretty good and now they leave his books alone.

[Raye]

You don't honestly believe he wrote that in response to a bunch of whiny fans do you? People can't be THAT delusional. That JJJ arc was likely at least plotted out, if not already written, by the time those people began their whining. Correlation does not equal causation, and all that.

[Skedatz]

When Chip first started Spectacular Spidey the Comicsgate guys roasted him for writing Peter like a "useless, effeminate, unfunny cuck". Then after Secret Empire when Slott made Peter broke again in Amazing, they said Chip's recent stories spoilers:

with him getting arrested and Jonah finding out he was Spidey

end of spoilers were pretty good and now they leave his books alone.

Sounds like some reactionary stuff.


Thanks for the fill in.

[Zodlike]

In light of Marvel's new editor in chief C.B. Cebulski's revelation to diversify their line in spite of their Fresh Start which promised a back to basics approach. (Which was supposed to be the point of their Legacy initiative) Will it work when they brought back the same writers whose series failed and got canned after a while?

No, it will fail again.

[CaptCleghorn]

When you replace the characters for head scratching reasons of course I can feel something is wrong.

What's wrong is you have no idea why Marvel is doing what they've been doing. They're "head scratching reasons" because you don't know what they are. You may like the changes, you may not, but deciding if it's a good change or not is something you have no clue about.

[Raye]

oh and also, if the floppies do bad.... that doesn't necessarily mean it's a failure. Success doesn't have to mean does well in comic shops. People have to get over this notion that floppy sales are the only thing that matters, they aren't. They may have been at one time, but not any more. All that matters is money brought in. I mean obviously they would probably like for a book to do well in all channels, but if a books's money comes from trades, digital, or whatever and the floppy sales are bad, as long as it is still turning a profit overall, then it's fine. there's a reason Squirrel Girl and Moon Girl are still around despite poor direct market sales, and it's not some political agenda, it's because they are earning their keep. If this was all about agenda with no regard for profit, they would have never cancelled Iceman and Wasp in the first place, they'd have just kept them around.

[The Dying Detective]

What's wrong is you have no idea why Marvel is doing what they've been doing. They're "head scratching reasons" because you don't know what they are. You may like the changes, you may not, but deciding if it's a good change or not is something you have no clue about.

I don't even know what was the point of those changes Marvel didn't disclose why so of course I am wondering whether it qualifies as gross mismanagement.

[Prof. Warren]

I don't even know what was the point of those changes Marvel didn't disclose why so of course I am wondering whether it qualifies as gross mismanagement.

You know that Marvel isn't obliged to include in you on every decision they make and to walk you through their thought process and to show you all the numbers that back up their choices, right?

Just like TV networks don't have to explain to every viewer all the inside reasons why they cancel shows that seem to be doing ok or on the bubble, or why they renew shows even when the ratings look anemic, etc., etc..

[The Dying Detective]

You know that Marvel isn't obliged to include in you on every decision they make and to walk you through their thought process and to show you all the numbers that back up their choices, right?

Just like TV networks don't have to explain to every viewer all the inside reasons why they cancel shows that seem to be doing ok or on the bubble, or why they renew shows even when the ratings look anemic, etc., etc..

So what's wrong with wanting to know things?

[Skedatz]

So what's wrong with wanting to know things?

I think the difference is in sort of wanting to know something, and demanding information never before asked about a very specific subject someone doesn't really like.


For instance, I may not have cared about the naming of the Dinobots but now I demand the number of UK citizens who thought Slag was offensive enough for Hasbro to change his name to Slug. And then keep insisting on it when people say, "Because that's what Hasbro said has been brought up as a concern." "Well, show me the numbers. I don't see how this is unreasonable."