Joe Quesada retires

[Mister Mets]

I misspoke. The print comic book market as a whole has pretty much maintained the same level of sales (i.e. the top selling comic, while it varies by title, usually sells <200K copies, more like 125K copies depending on month).

But ASM has declined.

July 2007, pre-OMD:
ASM 545: sales 105678
Batman 666: sales 83751
Uncanny X-Men 488: sales 86716

January 2018:
ASM 794: sales 51412
Batman 38: sales 98440
Astonishing X-Men 7 (no Uncanny that month): sales 50772

March 2020 (last month both DC and Marvel used Diamond):
ASM 41: sales 53428
Batman 91: sales 88735
X-Men 8 (no Uncanny that month): sales 75080

Gee, it looks like today's kids aren't turned off by reading about an adult Bruce Wayne in a committed relationship with Selina Kyle. *thinking face*

The last issue of One More Day is not a typical Amazing Spider-Man issue. I think we can all agree on that.

If we want a standard Amazing Spider-Man issue, you could go with #524. That sold just over 71,000 copies.

https://www.comichron.com/monthlycom...5/2005-09.html

It was followed by "The Other" a highly promoted crossover which pumped up sales.

[Mister Mets]

What is Quesada legacy, exactly, leaving OMD aside? For me, its the Ultimate Universe which has resulted in the MCU.

Ultimate Marvel.
A robust TPB program, which reshuffled the experience for readers. It's no longer that you start a comic book on a random issue, but that you start from the beginning of a run, which allows for more complex stories.
A shift to cinematic storytelling with the decline in caption boxes and thought balloons.
New Avengers.
Morrison's New X-Men followed by the Whedon/ Cassady Astonishing X-Men.
The Big Time era of Spider-Man.
Ed Brubaker's Captain America.
Planet Hulk/ World War Hulk
Waid/ Wieringo's Fantastic Four
Jonathan Hickman's Fantastic Four
Marvel MAX including Jessica Jones
Rick Remender's Uncanny X-Force
Civil War
Mark Millar's Wolverine/ Old Man Logan
The entire Daredevil revival (Kevin Smith followed by Mack followed by Bendis/ Maleev followed by Brubaker/ Lark
Garth Ennis/ Steve Dillon on Punisher
JMS and later Matt Fraction on Thor

There's other stuff as well.

Quesada did plenty of good, but he's still infamous as being the guy who made OMD happen because he wanted Spider-Man to go be like it was back when he read it.

There's the usual wrong assumption that he's the only one who did so, or the only one who really wanted that, but OMD has fucked over his reputation more than any good he did.



The stuff added hardly needed Spidey to be single to begin with, just forgettable love interests nobody likes lol.



OMD still caused the marriage to be seen not as important to the franchise, having random people see its era as "underappreciated" is kinda whatever when OMD quite clearly caused massive damage to it.

Fans who think all that Quesada is break up the spider-marriage are wrong, and should be told so.

This is a matter of objective fact, and not opinion.

[RJT]

Was there any longer-term goal besides erasing the marriage from 616 continuity? One can debate whether Marvel has been trying to unscramble the eggs on this point, but I never really got the impression that it was seen as anything other than Quesada and company wanting to undo something they didn't like.



Frankly, seeing how popular Spider-Man is, I think it would sell ether way.

Here's the thing--they had been trying to undo the Spider-marriage since 1994--way before Quesada took over. (Remember this was the stated goal of the Clone Saga: to get rid of a married Spider-Man; their method was just to have the Peter Parker who got married be a clone.)
The creators who wrote the early years of the marriage were almost to a one against it; it was mandated from the owners of Marvel at the time (you can read the interviews in Tom DeFalco's Comic Creators on Spider-Man book; only J.M. DeMatteis spoke in a positive way about the marriage.) After the Clone Saga flamed out, they blew Mary Jane up in an airplane, then unblew her up, then had her leave Peter. I don't think anyone is happy with the way that JMS and Quesada got rid of the marriage, but to pretend this was the desire of just one editor ignores the twenty years before OMD.
So while sales didn't go up, compared the entire American comics industry, Spider-Man has held steady, and under Slott it was often Marvel's number one ongoing title. So I don't think the average reader really cared. And if creators were able to write a Peter/Spider-Man that they felt was truer to the character, that is also a win for Marvel, instead of having to have writers who didn't want to write the marriage struggle to figure out how to make it work. (If you read the Spider-Man books before the Clone Sage, Mary Jane was given stories where she developed a smoking habit and nagged Peter about quitting being Spider-Man to spend more time with her--these are not the stories writers come up with if they feel really excited and energetic about a status quo.)
I know none of this is going to convince anybody here--nobody goes to a Beatles convention to convince anybody that the Stones were the better band, but I think the zealotry about the Spider-marriage here blinds people to some obvious facts: namely that editorial was trying to undo the Spider-marriage for at least a decade before JMS and Quesada did OMD, so pretending it was only Quesada and Quesada alone who wanted this change is not borne out by reality. That doesn't mean it was the right decision, it just means that his leaving isn't some silver bullet that is going to undo the last fifteen years of Spider-Man comics.

[Kevinroc]

The problem is the question of who Spider-Man's love is has been settled. And OMD, in its erasure of the marriage, also completely cemented Peter and MJ as the romantic pairing of the franchise.

[TinkerSpider]

The last issue of One More Day is not a typical Amazing Spider-Man issue. I think we can all agree on that.

If we want a standard Amazing Spider-Man issue, you could go with #524. That sold just over 71,000 copies.

https://www.comichron.com/monthlycom...5/2005-09.html

It was followed by "The Other" a highly promoted crossover which pumped up sales.

I typed the wrong issue number. July 2007 was ASM 542 and part of Back in Black. I picked it on purpose because it was before OMD.

All story lines are highly promoted; I picked other random months without big anniversaries or #1s on purpose.

Here are more numbers:

Jan 2007 ASM 537: 114796

Nov 2006 ASM 536: 118824

Jan 2006 ASM 528: 95383

Nov 2005 ASM 526: 79672

October 2005 ASM 525: 79616

June 2005 ASM 521: 74104

Jan 2005 ASM 516: 79682

Even going with ASM 524, which is on the low end for the period, ASM has fallen on average ~17,000 to 20,000 print copies a month. That’s a loss of ~28% of its print audience. Meanwhile, Batman has pretty much maintained its print sales, and X-Men hasn’t had anywhere near as steep as a drop off.

Here's the thing--they had been trying to undo the Spider-marriage since 1994--way before Quesada took over. (Remember this was the stated goal of the Clone Saga: to get rid of a married Spider-Man; their method was just to have the Peter Parker who got married be a clone.)
The creators who wrote the early years of the marriage were almost to a one against it; it was mandated from the owners of Marvel at the time (you can read the interviews in Tom DeFalco's Comic Creators on Spider-Man book; only J.M. DeMatteis spoke in a positive way about the marriage.) After the Clone Saga flamed out, they blew Mary Jane up in an airplane, then unblew her up, then had her leave Peter. I don't think anyone is happy with the way that JMS and Quesada got rid of the marriage, but to pretend this was the desire of just one editor ignores the twenty years before OMD.

No one is pretending this. Instead, we are discussing how OMD, of all the ways to reach the goal, is a wretched, poorly crafted story that turns Peter Parker into a moral villain who aids and abets the Devil out of selfish desires. It’s the bad storytelling decisions that led to the OMD’s abysmal quality that will always stain Q’s legacy.

So while sales didn't go up, compared the entire American comics industry, Spider-Man has held steady

It did not hold steady. It’s fallen quite a bit while Batman has remained steady and X-Men hasn’t had nearly as steep of a drop. See above.

, and under Slott it was often Marvel's number one ongoing title.

It was number one when the book was relaunched and/or anniversaries.

But it was Marvel’s number one book repeatedly in the early days of the marriage - even more so than X-Men, which was the hot title of the day. In fact, ASM was so successful in the late 1980s/early 1990s it was the title against which all other comic book sales were indexed by Diamond.

So I don't think the average reader really cared.

Some 17K-20K buyers of print ASM books left. They did not leave Batman or even X-Men in the same proportion.

And if creators were able to write a Peter/Spider-Man that they felt was truer to the character, that is also a win for Marvel, instead of having to have writers who didn't want to write the marriage struggle to figure out how to make it work.

If writers are so unimaginative, so lacking in talent, and so lacking in craft that they are incapable of writing a certain status quo, then may I suggest the issue lies with the writers and not with the status quo.

(If you read the Spider-Man books before the Clone Sage, Mary Jane was given stories where she developed a smoking habit and nagged Peter about quitting being Spider-Man to spend more time with her--these are not the stories writers come up with if they feel really excited and energetic about a status quo.)

And JM DeMatteis, Fraction, Tom Beland, Peter David, JMS, Gerry Conway et al used a married MJ quite well. Even Roger Stern in Hobgoblin Lives despite his stated aversion to MJ as a love interest. Again, I suggest the issue lies with the writers and not with the characters nor the status quo.

I know none of this is going to convince anybody here--nobody goes to a Beatles convention to convince anybody that the Stones were the better band, but I think the zealotry about the Spider-marriage here blinds people to some obvious facts: namely that editorial was trying to undo the Spider-marriage for at least a decade before JMS and Quesada did OMD, so pretending it was only Quesada and Quesada alone who wanted this change is not borne out by reality. That doesn't mean it was the right decision, it just means that his leaving isn't some silver bullet that is going to undo the last fifteen years of Spider-Man comics.

I haven’t seen anyone here arguing this.

[Mister Mets]

I typed the wrong issue number. July 2007 was ASM 542 and part of Back in Black. I picked it on purpose because it was before OMD.

All story lines are highly promoted; I picked other random months without big anniversaries or #1s on purpose.

Even going with ASM 524, ASM has fallen on average ~17,000 to 20,000 copies a month. In what universe is that considered “holding steady?!?”

Especially when Batman HAS pretty much maintained its sales.



No one is pretending this. Instead, we are discussing how OMD, of all the ways to reach the goal, is a wretched, poorly crafted story that turns Peter Parker into a moral villain who aids and abets the Devil out of selfish desires.




It did not hold steady. It’s fallen quite a bit. See above.



It was number one when the book was relaunched and/or anniversaries.

But it was Marvel’s number one book repeatedly in the early days of the marriage - even more so than X-Men, which was the hot title of the day. In fact, ASM was so successful in the late 1980s/early 1990s it was the title against which all other comic book sales were indexed by Diamond.



Some 17K-20K buyers of print ASM books left. They did not leave Batman or even X-Men in the same proportion.



If writers are so unimaginative, so lacking in talent, and so lacking in craft that they are incapable of writing a certain status quo, then may I suggest the issue lies with the writers and not with the status quo.



And JM DeMatteis, Fraction, Tom Beland, Peter David, JMS et al used her quite well. Again, I suggest the issue lies with the writers and not with the characters.



Thank you for the straw man but no one is arguing this.

"Back in Black" was not a typical story.

In fact, the first chapter was the best-selling issue of JMS' run.

Comparisons with Batman are incomplete, as that has been DC's biggest hit, arguably to the detriment of other titles as they're not publishing those.

Comparing June 2007 with March 2020, we can compare sales based on ranking.

The fifth-ranked issue of June 2007 was Dark Tower with over 132,000 copies. In 2020, Thor was fifth-ranked with 75,988 copies.

The tenth-ranked issue of June 2007 was Buffy with over 100,000 copies. In 2020, Immortal Hulk was tenth-tanked with 68,765 copies.

There are some differences. Digital sales are not included in the figures, and a much bigger factor in 2020.

In addition, many readers have shifted to digital subscriptions.

[TinkerSpider]

"Back in Black" was not a typical story.

In fact, the first chapter was the best-selling issue of JMS' run.

I highly doubt any writer sets out to write “typical” stories. Every story has the capability to be the best selling issue. And since the argument is that OMD did not hurt Spider-Man and instead increased/maintained sales, then the issue to benchmark against should be the best selling issue of the previous status quo - because the new status quo was supposed to be even “better” and pull in even more readers.

Regardless, I pulled other issue sales numbers. The fact remains ASM has lost ~28% of its audience even when using the low selling issue for the period.

Comparisons with Batman are incomplete, as that has been DC's biggest hit, arguably to the detriment of other titles as they're not publishing those.

Yeah, no.

Spider-Man isn’t one of Marvel’s biggest hits? Spider-Man as a character isn’t also popular? Spider-Man isn’t supposed to be Marvel’s flagship character?

You originally said Spider-Man maintained print sales since OMD, making it a success considering the modern state of the industry. That, however, is not the case.

Batman, however, HAS maintained print sales over that time period. X-Men has fallen, but not as steep. Therefore, it is indeed possible to maintain print sales, or lose a smaller percentage of print buyers, despite the modern state of the comic industry.

Comparing June 2007 with March 2020, we can compare sales based on ranking.

The fifth-ranked issue of June 2007 was Dark Tower with over 132,000 copies. In 2020, Thor was fifth-ranked with 75,988 copies.

The discussion was about Spider-Man sales and how ASM sales have performed pre- and post-OMD. Therefore, the correct apples to apples comparison is title to title, or Spider-Man to Batman. Ranking is meaningless as that is driven by the hot title du jour/anniversary/number one issue.

There are some differences. Digital sales are not included in the figures, and a much bigger factor in 2020.

In addition, many readers have shifted to digital subscriptions.

I’ve been clear I’m discussing print copies.

And since we don’t have digital numbers, your claim that ASM has maintained its sales also cannot be made as the date doesn’t exist publicly to the best of my knowledge. Looking at Amazon ranking numbers, and using ranking to sales calculators developed by indie authors and therefore nowhere near official, ASM appears to sell a few hundred copies on release day.

[WebLurker]

Here's the thing--they had been trying to undo the Spider-marriage since 1994--way before Quesada took over. (Remember this was the stated goal of the Clone Saga: to get rid of a married Spider-Man; their method was just to have the Peter Parker who got married be a clone.)
The creators who wrote the early years of the marriage were almost to a one against it; it was mandated from the owners of Marvel at the time (you can read the interviews in Tom DeFalco's Comic Creators on Spider-Man book; only J.M. DeMatteis spoke in a positive way about the marriage.) After the Clone Saga flamed out, they blew Mary Jane up in an airplane, then unblew her up, then had her leave Peter. I don't think anyone is happy with the way that JMS and Quesada got rid of the marriage, but to pretend this was the desire of just one editor ignores the twenty years before OMD.

That is why I said "and company." I agree that Quesada was not the first or the last to object to the marriage, just the one that arranged the longest-running write-out of it to date. The point of what I was saying is that I don't think the OMD story had any more purpose behind it than its own central retcon for the series.

So while sales didn't go up, compared the entire American comics industry, Spider-Man has held steady, and under Slott it was often Marvel's number one ongoing title. So I don't think the average reader really cared. And if creators were able to write a Peter/Spider-Man that they felt was truer to the character, that is also a win for Marvel, instead of having to have writers who didn't want to write the marriage struggle to figure out how to make it work. (If you read the Spider-Man books before the Clone Sage, Mary Jane was given stories where she developed a smoking habit and nagged Peter about quitting being Spider-Man to spend more time with her--these are not the stories writers come up with if they feel really excited and energetic about a status quo.)

Interesting creative question r.e. that: is it better for the material to conform to what the creative people want it to be or for those making the content to tailor their work to the material they're writing for?

I know none of this is going to convince anybody here--nobody goes to a Beatles convention to convince anybody that the Stones were the better band, but I think the zealotry about the Spider-marriage here blinds people to some obvious facts: namely that editorial was trying to undo the Spider-marriage for at least a decade before JMS and Quesada did OMD, so pretending it was only Quesada and Quesada alone who wanted this change is not borne out by reality. That doesn't mean it was the right decision, it just means that his leaving isn't some silver bullet that is going to undo the last fifteen years of Spider-Man comics.

I don't think anyone thinks that Quesada leaving is going to trigger anything anytime soon. IMHO, I think it's going to be a Barry Allen situation; only undone when fans of it are the ones writing and want to recreate their childhoods (see TV Tropes, "Running the Asylum").

[Malachi]

Ultimate Marvel.
A robust TPB program, which reshuffled the experience for readers. It's no longer that you start a comic book on a random issue, but that you start from the beginning of a run, which allows for more complex stories.
A shift to cinematic storytelling with the decline in caption boxes and thought balloons.
New Avengers.
Morrison's New X-Men followed by the Whedon/ Cassady Astonishing X-Men.
The Big Time era of Spider-Man.
Ed Brubaker's Captain America.
Planet Hulk/ World War Hulk
Waid/ Wieringo's Fantastic Four
Jonathan Hickman's Fantastic Four
Marvel MAX including Jessica Jones
Rick Remender's Uncanny X-Force
Civil War
Mark Millar's Wolverine/ Old Man Logan
The entire Daredevil revival (Kevin Smith followed by Mack followed by Bendis/ Maleev followed by Brubaker/ Lark
Garth Ennis/ Steve Dillon on Punisher
JMS and later Matt Fraction on Thor

There's other stuff as well.


Fans who think all that Quesada is break up the spider-marriage are wrong, and should be told so.

This is a matter of objective fact, and not opinion.

It’s very hard to know how much Joe Q did on those. The untold history of Marvel argues it was more Jemas and Joe Q was talent scout.

Quesada biggest contribution was his networking. Under him many new writers, for marvel, got hired. Then you have to add the financial problems they where in witch created an environment that made these things possible. Quesada and Palmotti made an effort to network. That was their strength for marvel.

Then Quesada canceled several books that where selling good numbers. He did so because he felt they bloated the line. So from the get go Quesada made decisions that fitted his vision and did so because he felt it would work better in the long game.

I lost some really good books because of that. Yet his so called long term vision has yet to proved itself. Mostly because in many ways marvel has reversed much of it. With the exception of things like OMD who where storyline mandated changes and not publishing changes. The hassel of geting rid of something like OMD is also more tricky and involves a certain amount of prestige. Because marriage or not the story of OMD is a colossal mistake. By closing rank and not even allowing the story itself to be either reversed or critiqued Marvel shows us again how there has been no greater evolution in how the business is run. They just got Disney now and are no longer saddled with venture capitalists who just want to milk them for all they are worth.

[RJT]

Interesting creative question r.e. that: is it better for the material to conform to what the creative people want it to be or for those making the content to tailor their work to the material they're writing for?.

I think if you separate it from the Spider-marriage situation it isn’t an interesting question at all. I guarantee if you go to any of the other boards here on CBR and ask the basic question: is it better for the material to conform to what the creative people want it to be or for those making the content to tailor their work to the material that the executives of Marvel’s parent company want them to?—you would get pretty lopsided support for the former.

[TinkerSpider]

I think if you separate it from the Spider-marriage situation it isn’t an interesting question at all. I guarantee if you go to any of the other boards here on CBR and ask the basic question: is it better for the material to conform to what the creative people want it to be or for those making the content to tailor their work to the material that the executives of Marvel’s parent company want them to?—you would get pretty lopsided support for the former.

If creatives want to write whatever they want to write, they should be working on original content and NOT on characters with decades of history and established characterization. Period.

[RJT]

If creatives want to write whatever they want to write, they should be working on original content and NOT on characters with decades of history and established characterization. Period.

If a writer came out in an interview and said their burning desire as a creative was to write Peter Parker and Mary Jane as married couple again but were told by Marvel editorial they couldn’t I guarantee you would do a 180 on that position.

[Celgress]

If creatives want to write whatever they want to write, they should be working on original content and NOT on characters with decades of history and established characterization. Period.

Funny you say that because mudding two arguably three decades of continuity didn't matter one wit to Big Joe. Maybe he should have written some original content rather than do what he did? I know a lot of fans would have been happier if Joe had done so rather than what he did do.

[TinkerSpider]

If a writer came out in an interview and said their burning desire as a creative was to write Peter Parker and Mary Jane as married couple again but were told by Marvel editorial they couldn’t I guarantee you would do a 180 on that position.

I applauded your use of the tu quoque logical fallacy. And so not true. I have not been shy about how hard I am side-eyeing the “enduring love of Peter and MJ” story coming in Amazing Fantasy 1000 because it is by Slott, who has a history of ignoring established characterization and instead forces/twists characters to suit his plots rather than the other way around.

Spider-Man - or any intellectual property such as Star Wars, Star Trek, etc - is not a creator’s private sandbox. The characters do not belong to the creators. The characters have established personalities and histories and it’s the job of the creators to work within the lines, not color outside them willy nillly just because they feel like it - or because they lack the talent/imagination/skill to work within the lines.

Funny you say that because mudding two arguably three decades of continuity didn't matter one wit to Big Joe. Maybe he should have written some original content rather than do what he did? I know a lot of fans would have been happier if Joe had done so rather than what he did do.

Well, I read his original comic Ash and let’s just say it…wasn’t good. But yeah.

[WebLurker]

I think if you separate it from the Spider-marriage situation it isn’t an interesting question at all. I guarantee if you go to any of the other boards here on CBR and ask the basic question: is it better for the material to conform to what the creative people want it to be or for those making the content to tailor their work to the material that the executives of Marvel’s parent company want them to?—you would get pretty lopsided support for the former.

That's not the same question, though.