Quote Originally Posted by Kuwagaton View Post
It's really hard to determine that given the poor insight we have into their metrics or market performance. But what we do see is that they perform about the same against Marvel as they have for years. People assume that these huge movies will translate and it seems unrealistic when you see all sorts of Marvel properties blow up (compared to a few Batmen and a modest Superman presence) and have it fail to significantly transform the comic consumer culture.

I'm more than fine admitting that my insight as a consumer is irrelevant, but in my experience I have to say that small increases don't usually result in sacking senior management.
Every report and study I have found says that movies and tv shows dont really impact comic sales. Trades see a nice uptick around the month of a film debut and that can last a month or three, but thats about it. However, comic sales aside, DC hasn't done everything they could do to capitalize on the momentum the genre has gained either. They control three of the four biggest and most recognized superheroes on earth, so perhaps they felt they didnt need to push as hard? Seems complacent but possible.

Bottom line is the current comics distribution system doesnt reach the potential audience, and the industry is too scared (and perhaps too broke) to make the necessary changes. Sure, comics are largely just IP farms these days.....but nothing says they have to be. They could, had things played out differently, have gained some of the ground they lost in the past and be selling far better than they are. Seems to me that an IP farm that makes bank on its own is better than an IP farm that breaks even on its own. Especially when the larger-media stuff often fails (as is DC's case).

Its true though, that its virtually impossible to know who came up with what idea or who ultimately gave it the green light. However, because we're on the wrong side of it and will never know the details (which are none of our business anyway), the way I see it is upper management get blamed for the stuff that goes wrong, so by that logic we might as well give them credit for the stuff that goes right too. Whoever came up with the same day digital had to have someone in upper management approve it (most likely anyway) just like someone in upper management had to approve stuff like Cry For Justice.

And yeah, I forgot Archie started doing same-day-digital before DC. I believe a few other indies (I wanna say Dark Horse?) did as well. But....do they really count? Its not like they're in the same league as Marvel and DC, or even Image really. I suppose credit where credit is due, but does Archie really work on the same level as the big companies, move product in a similar fashion (isnt most of their stuff digests?), or compare evenly at all? Ive always seen Archie the same way I see manga; a similar product created and marketed for largely different audiences with different distribution models and expectations. But since my lack of knowledge of Archie is extensive I could be absolutely wrong on that.

Minor increases or decreases aren't worth sacking upper management....and Im not suggesting otherwise. There are however, qualitative factors at play that *might* be worth a pink slip, such as a stark drop in consumer confidence, continual under-performance, or failing to take advantage of opportunities when they knock on the door. Perhaps these X factors are worth firing Didio and co., perhaps not. Without a whole lot of paperwork DC/WB arent likely to provide to me, I cant do more than guess.