Tilting at Windmills: The Art (and Commerce) of Licensed Comics

[CBR News]

Brian Hibbs both defines and discusses what is and isn't a licensed comic book, what that means for demand, and how it affects retailers.


Full article here.

[kumagawa]

With monthly comics, are they sold in Walmart and other super markets or newsagents in the USA? (they are in the UK and it's nearly all licensed comics more than DC or Marvel superhero stuff) because if they are sold through those channels who would track sales? bookscan is trades and diamond is comic shops or would Walmart go through diamond? that could be one reason for so much licensed material with such low sales in specialist comic shops.

[Brian Hibbs]

With monthly comics, are they sold in Walmart and other super markets or newsagents in the USA? (they are in the UK and it's nearly all licensed comics more than DC or Marvel superhero stuff) because if they are sold through those channels who would track sales? bookscan is trades and diamond is comic shops or would Walmart go through diamond? that could be one reason for so much licensed material with such low sales in specialist comic shops.

My understanding is no -- especially from non-newstand vendors like Boom! or Dynamite.

Even Marvel essentially shut down newstand distribution of periodical comics a year or three back....

-B

[kumagawa]

My understanding is no -- especially from non-newstand vendors like Boom! or Dynamite.

Even Marvel essentially shut down newstand distribution of periodical comics a year or three back....

-B

Okay I'm honestly surprised that for at least new issues for certain licensed and big superhero comics the UK has more readily available places to obtain them.

[codystarbuck]

With monthly comics, are they sold in Walmart and other super markets or newsagents in the USA? (they are in the UK and it's nearly all licensed comics more than DC or Marvel superhero stuff) because if they are sold through those channels who would track sales? bookscan is trades and diamond is comic shops or would Walmart go through diamond? that could be one reason for so much licensed material with such low sales in specialist comic shops.

Book retailer Barnes and Noble has carried quite a bit of the licensed material on their newsstands, though not anything available only through the direct market distribution channel. However, the digital side of things is well represented on Nook.

[Lexor7]

I remember staying away from licensed comics in my younger days when I heavily read Marvel/DC superheroes. For me it was the realization that the stories "didn't really count". I've since gotten over that and really enjoy going back and reading those old DC Star Trek books that I dropped at the time. I also happily read Marvel Star Wars and dip in and out of Doctor Who. Licensed books have gotten smarter about the "doesn't count" issue by now often setting stories as prequels or continuations of cancelled/ended TV series. I do agree that there is often not a lot of Alist talent on these books and sometimes the photo realistic art can be off putting. I think Star Wars bucks those trends and shows that licensed books can be consistent sellers as well as entertaining and "feel" like comic books. And yes, I say this realizing that Star Wars is still riding a significant wave of pent up hype...but that's all the more reason Marvel COULD have put mediocre teams on the books and still gotten a strong launch. But I bet they would have faded more quickly by now.

[urmyth]

Regardless of how we define a licensed comic, in a weird way the big two have been treating their titles in the same way as licensed books. sure there are tendrils of continuity across it all, but at the same time nothing really matters. Its all just IP now, and each book is a project with a prescribed ending that fits into a broader branding plan. I mean they talk like its all 75+ years of stories and fans etc, but as the focus beyond TPB to hardcover omnibuss now each title, story arc at times, is like a licensed mini series. just licensed by Marvel Disney to Marvel Editorial.

[shamus]

I think it would have been helpful to stick with the legal definition of a licensed publication rather than putting forth your own folk definitions which to me muddies the waters about an already murky situation.

[poneley]

I love licensed books. Transformers has been immensely fun for several years- (I'm a big James Roberts fan). The Star Trek books have been fun. The Marvel Star Wars books have been immensely fun. It seems like publishers don't treat licensed material as an easy cash grab-- hard work is actually put in the books. Don't be afraid of licensed books.

[Kurt Busiek]

"Star Wars" is a licensed comic, because it was a movie first and foremost; while, from my point of view, "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" isn't, because it was originally a comic book before it was ever toys or a TV show or movies -- despite Nickelodeon owning the actual property and IDW literally licensing the publishing rights. And it can get murkier: despite being a comics-first (-slash-only) presentation, I believe that "Fight Club 2" is a licensed comic, and while they are based on video games, I don't really think of Either DC's "Injustice" or Marvel's "Contest of Champions" as being licensed books per se.

Hmm. I'd definitely call TMNT a licensed book, because the process of creation and the finances are identical to that of other licensed books, while FIGHT CLUB 2 is to my mind a creator-owned book because it's owned and written by one of the creators, isn't it?

INJUSTICE and CONTEST may be based on video games, but they're not licensed from the video game company, they're owned by the publisher.

POPEYE may have started out life as comics, but it's a licensing deal, yes? The creators and publisher get stuff approved by the licensor rather than deciding for themselves.

kdb

[codystarbuck]

One of my favorite comics of the late 80s was a licensed book: Comico's Jonny Quest. William Messner-Loebs did a fantastic job on the series, with a variety of artist, though most especially regulars Mark Hempel and Mark Wheatley. It captured the spirit of the cartoons and expanded upon the material, with a nice mix of humor, drama, character, and adventure. We got to meet Jonny's late mother and see a story from bandit's point of view, plus an excellent one where Doctor Quest defeats an enemy through his reputation as an adventurer.

[Nat Gertler]

I am sometimes befuddled by how the mid-tier publishers have embraced licensed books. Yes, they have some built in sales, but as you note, in many cases not huge. They also have some built in additional expense (in general, although there are exceptions; I've heard of cases where the licensed was offered for free, or even where the licensor paid for generation of the book.) And they don't build anything for the publisher - on a publisher-owned comic, they are building their intellectual property base, and even on creator-owned comics publishers often end up control over or a cut of any licensing. But on third party material, all of the rights to the comics are generally handed over to the licensor, who can take that material to another publisher for reprinting down the road. It also means that creators are shut out of future royalties - if I were to write Batman, and they were to reprint it 10 years from now, I'd see some money from DC, but when I do a licensed book (and I've done a number - Speed Racer, Power Rangers, NASCAR, Flintstones, Peanuts, and so forth), that reprint is likely to be from another publisher with no money owed to me.

This isn't to say that there can't be some great licensed comics, where the creators and the license are a great fit (Dorkin's Bill &Ted, Roger Langridge on Muppets, Goodwin & Williamson on Star Wars), and some ones that are obvious moneymakers, but a lot of what's out there leave me wondering why.

[John Pannozzi]

Technically, Fight Club 2 IS a creator-owned comic.