Legacy numbering.

[Jely4me]

I’m a fan of what Marvel has finally done with their books by using the little notations on the trade dress to acknowledge the actual issue number regardless of numbering in the current volume. With DC returning Action, Detective, The Flash and WW to their rightful place, how about doing right by the Batman, GL, Nightwing and Justice League series? I was buying these books in the 70’s, and to me, it’s a testament to the longevity of the characters more than anything. Hawkman, Aquaman, and Green Arrow too, when they return. They ought to be recognized. Out of respect. That argument that you can’t understand a character because it’s issue #256 versus a #1 is ridiculous. Any book can be someone’s first. If you’re interested, you track down more, help out your local brick and mortar with their back issues or bins that are simply gathering dust. Trades, whatever. Creates foot traffic in an industry that has seen better days. Everyone wins, no? Thoughts?

[Vakanai]

Does numbering really matter?

[Jim Kelly]

Numbering did matter to me and it affected my buying.

However, numbering matters in a different way to some collectors--and they will buy multiple copies of first issues. Which is how this whole mess began. Since high numbers used to be seen as more valuable, it could have stayed that way--but the new number one became a powerful device for increasing orders and sales. It might not be as effective as it used to be, but it's still something that pushes comic shops to over-order issues numbered one. They don't know if the book is going to sell in high numbers, but they have to hedge their bets and there might be some deal from the publisher that requires them to order in high numbers. Once the title establishes a sales pattern, the shop is better able to determine how many copies to order in.

I think it's cheating to decide years later to change the numbers, to make them high again. What about all those years when the issues didn't have those numbers? The reason so many of us in the old days would stick with a title and buy every issue, even when it wasn't going good, was so we could keep up our run. It's a point of pride. Once the book is cancelled--that's the end of the run. But then the publisher turns around and says, "No, you should have also been buying issues of this different run because now we've decided it's all one run." Give me a break.

And many times, even when they do institute the high number, they later go back on that and start over with a new number one. They keep jerking us around like that--I just want to say, "a pox on both your houses."

It's all too little, too late. There so few titles left that have any kind of history behind them, that it matters much less to me.

And how do they determine which title belongs in a run? With GREEN LANTERN, the first run was Alan Scott's. In 1960, when they started the new GREEN LANTERN comic, that was a different animal. The second series had a very long distinguished run--it seems wrong to mash it in with a bunch of other runs. On the other hand, THE FLASH (1958) continued the numbering of FLASH COMICS (not ALL-FLASH).

[cranger]

Numbering did matter to me and it affected my buying.

However, numbering matters in a different way to some collectors--and they will buy multiple copies of first issues. Which is how this whole mess began. Since high numbers used to be seen as more valuable, it could have stayed that way--but the new number one became a powerful device for increasing orders and sales. It might not be as effective as it used to be, but it's still something that pushes comic shops to over-order issues numbered one. They don't know if the book is going to sell in high numbers, but they have to hedge their bets and there might be some deal from the publisher that requires them to order in high numbers. Once the title establishes a sales pattern, the shop is better able to determine how many copies to order in.

I think it's cheating to decide years later to change the numbers, to make them high again. What about all those years when the issues didn't have those numbers? The reason so many of us in the old days would stick with a title and buy every issue, even when it wasn't going good, was so we could keep up our run. It's a point of pride. Once the book is cancelled--that's the end of the run. But then the publisher turns around and says, "No, you should have also been buying issues of this different run because now we've decided it's all one run." Give me a break.

And many times, even when they do institute the high number, they later go back on that and start over with a new number one. They keep jerking us around like that--I just want to say, "a pox on both your houses."

It's all too little, too late. There so few titles left that have any kind of history behind them, that it matters much less to me.

And how do they determine which title belongs in a run? With GREEN LANTERN, the first run was Alan Scott's. In 1960, when they started the new GREEN LANTERN comic, that was a different animal. The second series had a very long distinguished run--it seems wrong to mash it in with a bunch of other runs. On the other hand, THE FLASH (1958) continued the numbering of FLASH COMICS (not ALL-FLASH).

I do not mind the way DC has handled it, at least with Detective and Action. Others can arguably be messier, as some of Marvel's legacy numbers are just silly. Again, though, if the publisher is committed to the continuing on the original volume/numbering I am all for it. If they want to keep relaunching the book, then they are missing the point. If they want to go a year without the title, and then rename it something else, or any of a number of other stunts, keep the legacy numbering away.

[Jim Kelly]

I do not mind the way DC has handled it, at least with Detective and Action. Others can arguably be messier, as some of Marvel's legacy numbers are just silly. Again, though, if the publisher is committed to the continuing on the original volume/numbering I am all for it. If they want to keep relaunching the book, then they are missing the point. If they want to go a year without the title, and then rename it something else, or any of a number of other stunts, keep the legacy numbering away.

When they did the new 52 and relaunched all the titles at number one--I took that as a jumping off point and dumped the comics (well, they had dumped me given they were all cancelled). If they had had a second number, like they'd been doing with ADVENTURE COMICS, I probably would have kept buying some titles and I wouldn't have been as upset by the relaunch. Even if they had said they were going to start DETECTIVE at one, but they were still keeping track of the issues and would return to the original numbering at a later date, that might have been enough to calm me down and keep me interested in some titles.

It was relaunching everything at once and in the same sales period--an obvious stunt to boost sales immediately, without regard for the past or future--that soured me on the comics.

[Restingvoice]

I don't mind the high numbering if we're still in the era that treats comics like magazines where you can just pick whatever number and immediately know what's going on because there's recap and recognizable status quo.

Not so much today. These days stories run for 6 issues and the back stories for the current development go back at least a couple of story arcs before that. It's easier to track in Trades, but with single issues it's annoying.

If they have a banner on the cover saying Part One of Three, that helps a lot, and I prefer the one that has that. That way, high or low numbering doesn't matter, you can just look at the banner.

Currently we have Infinite Frontier label, to differentiate from the previous DCU banner, and Rebirth banner before that, and The New 52! before that. The Part One banner is a story arc marker, while these labels are the era markers. So you shouldn't really need renumbering if you have that...

I guess it's kind of silly if at every cover you have

Issue number #678
Era Label No. 68
Story Arc Title Part One

but that will make it really easy for me to pick up and track down the rest

At least, at the very least for me it should always have the story arc Part something out of something. That's how I used to pick single issues in the 90s-2000s once I realized these single issues are no longer a pick-me-up one-shots. Though these days that has been replaced by simply picking up Trades, but we're talking single issues here.

[FFJamie94]

I actually like how Marvel does it. As a general rule, I don’t pick up books in the middle of a run, i will always prefer to start at the beginning of a run. So the relaunches help me in that regard, but the legacy numbering gives it some continuation which is needed with these kind of books.

[CaptCleghorn]

I personally like legacy numbering. I can certainly understand someone not caring or even being against it but I like what I like. Relaunching with new numbers one increases sales and brings in new readers. I get that. And new writers/new directions are prime causes of a relaunching. Alan Moore's Swamp Thing 20, or Grant Morrison's Doom Patrol 19 would both entail new numbers one in today's market. Green Lantern 76 certainly gets renumbered.

DC's been very frugal with legacy numbering, only using it for books which started their original numbering runs in the Golden Age. Still, for most of these characters, how many people truly think this is the FIRST comic starring so-and-so. Because number ones sell, I don't see this renumbering ending any time soon. What I'd actually like to see are ideas on what numbers various series would get if legacy numbered, like Green lantern, Legion of Super-Heroes, Justice League...

[Factor]

I think covers should display only the legacy numbering of the book and the chapter of its current arc (with a bigger emphasis on it than the legacy numbering).
I.e.: JLA #257. Amazo Saga Part 1
This way you respect the book's legacy but also clearly showcase whenever there is a good jumping-on point.
This way a new reader could see an arc as a "season" without feeling like they need to read all previous XX issues of the book.

[MajorHoy]

What I'd actually like to see are ideas on what numbers various series would get if legacy numbered, like Green lantern, Legion of Super-Heroes, Justice League...

Green Lantern and Justice League may be a bit straight-forward because they did have an "Issue #1" back in the Silver Age.
(Green Lantern may get messy if you also include Alan's series during the Golden Age, but . . . )
Legion of Super-Heroes may present problems. For a while they were the headline feature in Adventure Comics, they they eventually starred in the Bronze Age Superboy series (which eventually became Superboy and The Legion of Super-Heroes and then just Legion of Super-Heroes).
The LoSH didn't get their own continuing series that started with an issue #1 until 1984 (unless you want to count that four-issue reprint series from 1973).

[John Venus]

I like legacy numbering so I second the OP.

There is a middle ground between new #1's that will draw in new readers and legacy numbering which acknowledges the longevity and history of the characters.

[Lee Stone]

I like the idea of resuming the numbering, rather than doing Legacy numbering.

For example, something like how All-Star Comics picked back up in the '70s with #58.

Instead of renumbering Justice League, just have a new JLA title pick up with #262.
Or have a new Wonder Woman title start with #330.
Or launch a new Sensation Comics, but start it with #107 (the first issue after Wonder Woman stopped appearing) or #110 (the first issue after it was renamed Sensation Mystery).

[Captain Nostalgia]

Great idea, I was sad when they rebooted the numbering in Detective Comics, because it goes back for so many decades.

It would be great to see the numbering of the Flash, Green Lantern, and even smaller runs like Hawkman ect.

[married guy]

Marvel's CONSTANT renumbering is the reason I stopped buying their titles.
It was just too damn hard to keep track of it all!

Big issue numbers don't scare readers. Look at the Phantom!!! Well past #1000 and still going strong.
I like seeing the big issue number in the letterhead. It suggests it might be worth a go seeing as it's been around for a while.

[Jim Kelly]

Big issue numbers don't scare readers. Look at the Phantom!!! Well past #1000 and still going strong.

Pardon my stupidity, but I'm looking in the Grand Comics Database for a comic called THE PHANTOM that has had 1000 issues and is still in publication and I'm coming up empty. A little help?

You are right about there being comics with high issue numbers--although these are more common in other countries than the U.S. and in the U.S. happened more often in the past.

This GamesRadar-Newsarama page lists THE BEANO (over 3000) and 2000 A.D (over 2000) as the longest still going that have never been renumbered--but those are both British, so a different market. After that they have WALT DISNEY'S COMICS AND STORIES (over 700), but while that U.S. title has kept its numbering it's gone through several different publishers and has had gaps in publication. The second run of Dell's FOUR COLOR ended with issue 1354 back in 1962.