DC beats Marvel in Market share for July

[matthew]

Marvel's problem is that they are so focused on movie tie-ins that they're letting it harm their comics. I mean, when you have just about all but a handful of your comics tied into this contrived Civil War tie-in with Captain Marvel beefing with Iron Man -- two characters with no past problems -- just so you can "promote" a character that's getting a movie, you've hit an all time low.

[matthew]

And that's why I say DC should do it. Marvel has proved that it works.

If it ever stops working, then you just stop doing it.

It's stopped working to some degree, they are in 2nd place after all. I wish they would just own the seasonality of it. Stop pretending like it's a "new #1", just saying it's a new season, label your TPBs according so people can actually figure out what books to buy in what order, and just say you're running it like a TV show. Own it.

[Trey Strain]

It's stopped working to some degree, they are in 2nd place after all. I wish they would just own the seasonality of it. Stop pretending like it's a "new #1", just saying it's a new season, label your TPBs according so people can actually figure out what books to buy in what order, and just say you're running it like a TV show. Own it.

So people insist on buying Number 1's, and your response is that you won't sell them any?

I'll sell them so many that they'll be too stunned to know what cleaned out their wallets.

[matthew]

So people insist on buying Number 1's, and your response is that you won't sell them any?

I'll sell them so many that they'll be too stunned to know what cleaned out their wallets.

Sure, you could also kill Spiderman off every year and for a while it would benefit you, but like all gimmicks there are diminishing returns.

And what I actually said was to make your comics be truly seasonal. Don't act like it's a shock that you release a new #1. Own it. New season mean's new #1 the same way a television show as "episode 1" of each season.

[Trey Strain]

Sure, you could also kill Spiderman off every year and for a while it would benefit you, but like all gimmicks there are diminishing returns.

And what I actually said was to make your comics be truly seasonal. Don't act like it's a shock that you release a new #1. Own it. New season mean's new #1 the same way a television show as "episode 1" of each season.

There is NO evidence that putting out a lot of Number 1's has has a long-term bad impact on Marvel's sales, and mountains of evidence that it's made a fortune for them.

A few fanboys might complain that it makes it a little harder to arrange the comics in their cardboard boxes, but like the speculators, they aren't going anywhere.

[Calighoula]

Marvel's problem is that they are so focused on movie tie-ins that they're letting it harm their comics. I mean, when you have just about all but a handful of your comics tied into this contrived Civil War tie-in with Captain Marvel beefing with Iron Man -- two characters with no past problems -- just so you can "promote" a character that's getting a movie, you've hit an all time low.

A thousand times this. When artists are told to draw Fury, Hawkeye, Widow (etc.) to resemble their film counterparts:

[matthew]

There is NO evidence that putting out a lot of Number 1's has has a long-term bad impact on Marvel's sales, and mountains of evidence that it's made a fortune for them.

There's no evidence either way, it hasn't happened for a long-term yet. It's worked in the short term, sure, all gimmicks do. But there is plenty of evidence that doing something repeatedly diminishes its specialness over time in general. There's even an expression for it; crying wolf.

[matthew]

A thousand times this. When artists are told to draw Fury, Hawkeye, Widow (etc.) to resemble their film counterparts:

I think it's a deeper problem than that, it's essentially removed creators from having the freedom to define their own stories. On the one hand they are being told that they need to have events that center around similar themes, plots, and characters as the movies. And on the other hand anything actually creative they do has to be justified as to how it may work in a possible future movie.

It's the one reason why I'm somewhat glad WB is failing in the movies.

[Calighoula]

I think it's a deeper problem than that, it's essentially removed creators from having the freedom to define their own stories. On the one hand they are being told that they need to have events that center around similar themes, plots, and characters as the movies. And on the other hand anything actually creative they do has to be justified as to how it may work in a possible future movie.

Yes to the above. My facepalm gif was meant to apply to all that silliness.

It's the one reason why I'm somewhat glad WB is failing in the movies.

Well, IMO, WB isn't failing (and I'm very glad WB's CBMs are very different from Marvel's), but I don't think they'd do that to their creators, either. At least I hope not.

[Noodle]

There is NO evidence that putting out a lot of Number 1's has has a long-term bad impact on Marvel's sales, and mountains of evidence that it's made a fortune for them.

A few fanboys might complain that it makes it a little harder to arrange the comics in their cardboard boxes, but like the speculators, they aren't going anywhere.

There is evidence. The crash of the 90s. New #1s and variant covers killed the industry. The speculators didn't stay, they left when the money dried up and didn't come back until the movies started bringing in bank. History does repeat itself.

As for the argument of "once it stops working just don't do it anymore." OK. Then what? It's not a switch you can just flick and go to the next thing that sells. There's transition periods. They have to start loosing money before they notice it doesn't work, and then you have to plan and re-route to switch your entire publishing plan. All the while loosing money. People don't get paid. Investors have issues. Crashes happen.

It's not as black and white as you're making out to be.

[Trey Strain]

There is evidence. The crash of the 90s. New #1s and variant covers killed the industry. The speculators didn't stay, they left when the money dried up and didn't come back until the movies started bringing in bank. History does repeat itself.

As for the argument of "once it stops working just don't do it anymore." OK. Then what? It's not a switch you can just flick and go to the next thing that sells. There's transition periods. They have to start loosing money before they notice it doesn't work, and then you have to plan and re-route to switch your entire publishing plan. All the while loosing money. People don't get paid. Investors have issues. Crashes happen.

It's not as black and white as you're making out to be.

That was the "death" of Superman, and a lot of people being stupid enough to think it was for keeps. Then getting angry when they found out it wasn't.

Well, maybe DC should decline to take in all that money Marvel is taking in, out of fear that the speculators will finally go away. But as I've said three times now in this thread, if people stop buying Number 1's, then stop printing them! Until then, just make the damned money!

Who would refuse to sell something this year because people might stop buying it in three years? Nobody. You sell it until they stop buying it.

[GreenLanternRanger]

Anywho getting back on topic. Again glad to see DC at #1. Personally I feel they can keep that spot for August as well. Then September & October could go either way. But at the end of the day always good to see DC doing well.

[Rig]

[QUOTE=matthew;2232079]It

[ian0delond]

There is evidence. The crash of the 90s. New #1s and variant covers killed the industry. The speculators didn't stay, they left when the money dried up and didn't come back until the movies started bringing in bank. History does repeat itself.

As for the argument of "once it stops working just don't do it anymore." OK. Then what? It's not a switch you can just flick and go to the next thing that sells. There's transition periods. They have to start loosing money before they notice it doesn't work, and then you have to plan and re-route to switch your entire publishing plan. All the while loosing money. People don't get paid. Investors have issues. Crashes happen.

It's not as black and white as you're making out to be.

Today is a different market than it was in the early 90's.
Digital comics are a thing now and everything ends printed in trade.
Everybody knows that the next #1 is going to be easy to find in five years. No one shows you a chromium Cable #1 with written "super collector" while pretending this is a super rare thing and you are going to pay a new car in a few year with the 50 copies you just buy of that scam.

There is not going to be a big epiphany that GLA(2016)#1 is not going to pay your kids' tuition.

There is still a game about variants, but how much does it actually weight with the new books ,how much do the buyers expect to speculate on those ? We just don't know. All we can do is... well speculate. I personally don't think it is comparable with that period of the 90's and I do think speculators are a marginal part of the buyers, most of the sells are actually from curious readers and if the speculators left it will cause so drop in sell but not to the point it will kill the industry.

[Trey Strain]

If all you have to do to sell a comic is to print a #! on it, then you print a #1 on it.