Thread Drift: Will One More Day ever be reversed?

[Metamorphosis]

I'm pretty sure no one at DC is ever surprised when anything is undone. After all, this is company who is seemingly motivated by panic and kneejerk decision making.

Marvel is in a creative surge, not spiral. If you don't like what Marvel is up to today, that's your prerogative as a reader but one could point to many, many current runs at Marvel that are either classics in the making or are simply incredibly strong runs. Off the top of my head, I can think of Aaron's Thor, Spencer's Captain America (both Sam and Steve), Waid's Black Widow, Soule and Garney's Daredevil, Duggan's Deadpool and Uncanny Avengers, Waid's Avengers (criminally underappreciated, by the way), Slott's Silver Surfer, and, yes, Slott's Spidey among others. Fans can bitch about it all they want but Slott's Spidey run is going to stand as a defining run for the character. Complain about it, deny it, but it's a fact.

And if you're complaining about stories that don't require "undoing marriages, killing characters, or resurrecting characters who were far more relevant when dead", I guess you're against the kind of big upheavals and seismic changes that have always been a part of Marvel.

That's laughable when DC has been eating Marvel's lunch on the charts overall for more than half a year, and Marvel can only compete by flooding the market with overships.

[Atomic Man]

That's laughable when DC has been eating Marvel's lunch on the charts overall for more than half a year, and Marvel can only compete by flooding the market with overships.

Well-said, sir.

[Prof. Warren]

That's laughable when DC has been eating Marvel's lunch on the charts overall for more than half a year, and Marvel can only compete by flooding the market with overships.

It's laughable that anyone thinks DC has been "eating Marvel's lunch on the charts" when they led Marvel for only three months at the start of Rebirth, in July, August and September. All months, I believe, where DC offered full refunds on their books so retailers would feel free to over-order without being stuck with unsold copies - in other words, "flooding the market."

Also, when Marvel overships on any title, those extra copies are not reflected in Diamond Comic's Dollar Sales figures.

And Dollar Sales are what it all comes down to.

Bottom line: the last time DC led Marvel by any measure was back in September.

[Prof. Warren]

A good thing Marvel never undid the death of a goody two-shoes sidekick and brought him back as an anti-hero just months after DC did the same. And "the company seemingly motivated by panic and kneejerk decision making" is currently doing pretty well in sales and most of their "undoing" is producing some pretty strong stories, especially from titles like Superman and Wonder Woman.

It's also the company that completely blew up decades worth of continuity trying to compete with Marvel, initiating the ill-thought New52.

And less than five years later had to scrap all that and come with with a way to reboot and construct a whole event storyline (the presently unfolding Watchmen nonsense) to apologize for New52 and shoehorn all their past continuity back into place. Is it all going to fall into place? Hmm, doubtful. Is it all going to be undone in few years when they have to reboot again to revive interest in their line? Maybe.

And sales for DC are always ok when they price their books cheap. Because cheap comics are always an easy sell. Once those price go back up, as they inevitably do, DC instantly sheds readers. Selling your books for a lower price point than you can reasonably maintain is not a good long term sales strategy. You'd think that DC would've learned that from the last time they vowed to "hold the line" but I guess they didn't.

[Metamorphosis]

It's laughable that anyone thinks DC has been "eating Marvel's lunch on the charts" when they led Marvel for only three months at the start of Rebirth, in July, August and September. All months, I believe, where DC offered full refunds on their books so retailers would feel free to over-order without being stuck with unsold copies - in other words, "flooding the market."

Also, when Marvel overships on any title, those extra copies are not reflected in Diamond Comic's Dollar Sales figures.

And Dollar Sales are what it all comes down to.

Bottom line: the last time DC led Marvel by any measure was back in September.

Marvel have a larger share of the dollar market because they publish craploads of books at a much higher cover price. And they pass the cost of un-ordered overships on to retailers.

The top 10 has been dominated by DC comics for months. Anything not Star Wars or Spider-Man hasn't been ranking too high for Marvel.

[Confuzzled]

It's also the company that completely blew up decades worth of continuity trying to compete with Marvel, initiating the ill-thought New52.

And less than five years later had to scrap all that and come with with a way to reboot and construct a whole event storyline (the presently unfolding Watchmen nonsense) to apologize for New52 and shoehorn all their past continuity back into place. Is it all going to fall into place? Hmm, doubtful. Is it all going to be undone in few years when they have to reboot again to revive interest in their line? Maybe.

And sales for DC are always ok when they price their books cheap. Because cheap comics are always an easy sell. Once those price go back up, as they inevitably do, DC instantly sheds readers. Selling your books for a lower price point than you can reasonably maintain is not a good long term sales strategy. You'd think that DC would've learned that from the last time they vowed to "hold the line" but I guess they didn't.

Er... this is so entirely filled with subjective rants and convenient obscuring of the full facts that I don't even know where to begin or whether to bother at all

In short, 1) Rebirth sucking is your subjective opinion which doesn't seem to be shared by the majority and 2) Marvel has perfected the strategy of constant "No. 1's" and "event" books almost on a monthly basis, a greater number of bimonthly books, and the bonus of publishing Star Wars titles (which overshadow actual superhero titles), so it is hypocritical calling out DC for two reboots in 6 years and downplaying their success because of "cheaper books".

[Metamorphosis]

Er... this is so entirely filled with subjective rants and convenient obscuring of the full facts that I don't even know where to begin or whether to bother at all

In short, 1) Rebirth sucking is your subjective opinion which doesn't seem to be shared by the majority and 2) Marvel has perfected the strategy of constant "No. 1's" and "event" books almost on a monthly basis, a greater number of bimonthly books, and the bonus of publishing Star Wars titles (which overshadow actual superhero titles), so it is hypocritical calling out DC for two reboots in 6 years and downplaying their success because of "cheaper books".

Especially when Marvel themselves do a "soft" reboot on their titles every year to a year and a half, including rejumping all their titles at #1 constantly.

Which one are we on at this point? Make Mine All New All Different Marvel Now?

[Gridde]

It's also the company that completely blew up decades worth of continuity trying to compete with Marvel, initiating the ill-thought New52.

And less than five years later had to scrap all that and come with with a way to reboot and construct a whole event storyline (the presently unfolding Watchmen nonsense) to apologize for New52 and shoehorn all their past continuity back into place. Is it all going to fall into place? Hmm, doubtful. Is it all going to be undone in few years when they have to reboot again to revive interest in their line? Maybe.

And sales for DC are always ok when they price their books cheap. Because cheap comics are always an easy sell. Once those price go back up, as they inevitably do, DC instantly sheds readers. Selling your books for a lower price point than you can reasonably maintain is not a good long term sales strategy. You'd think that DC would've learned that from the last time they vowed to "hold the line" but I guess they didn't.

Bit confused here; are you slating DC for excessive reboots?

[Prof. Warren]

Marvel have a larger share of the dollar market because they publish craploads of books at a much higher cover price. And they pass the cost of un-ordered overships on to retailers.

The top 10 has been dominated by DC comics for months. Anything not Star Wars or Spider-Man hasn't been ranking too high for Marvel.

Ranking doesn't matter. Dollar sales matter.

DC can have a number of titles in the Top Ten on any given month but Marvel is still #1 because they have a deeper bench than DC. Once you get past the big titles, DC crumbles.

In short, 1) Rebirth sucking is your subjective opinion which doesn't seem to be shared by the majority and 2) Marvel has perfected the strategy of constant "No. 1's" and "event" books almost on a monthly basis, a greater number of bimonthly books, and the bonus of publishing Star Wars titles (which overshadow actual superhero titles), so it is hypocritical calling out DC for two reboots in 6 years and downplaying their success because of "cheaper books".

One I never said "Rebirth sucks". It represents comics at their most basic and prosaic but to each their own.

As to rebooting, Marvel's continuity is intact. DC's, not so much.

So Marvel has never done a "reboot". They have a seasonal model, which is not the same as rebooting their continuity.

And if you don't think cheaper books are what's driving DC sales at the moment, historical example says otherwise. They did well at a lower price previously and then dropped readers aplenty back when they went back on their promise to "hold the line". It's a bad position for DC to put themselves in, swearing to hold their line to a price point that they know they can't maintain indefinitely. Monthly DC books are already going back up in April. The rest of the line will follow eventually.

But as this is a OMD thread and not a Marvel vs. DC sales thread, all of this is irrelevant to the conversation.

[Prof. Warren]

Bit confused here; are you slating DC for excessive reboots?

I'm saying they purposely threw their post-Crisis continuity aside in an abrupt, half-ass fashion and just a few years later have had to figure out how to bring back the post-Crisis universe as well as fit in the New52 continuity. In that respect, DC is a mess in terms of having an intact continuity.

Marvel can have as many #1s as they want and employ as much branding as they want (Marvel NOW, All-New, etc.) but they haven't once obliterated their own continuity.

[Metamorphosis]

Marvel can have as many #1s as they want and employ as much branding as they want (Marvel NOW, All-New, etc.) but they haven't once obliterated their own continuity.

You mean aside from OMD, right?

Ranking doesn't matter. Dollar sales matter.

DC can have a number of titles in the Top Ten on any given month but Marvel is still #1 because they have a deeper bench than DC. Once you get past the big titles, DC crumbles.

Read through this article for how Marvel's current practices skew the sales charts:

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2017/01...december-2016/

A few choice bits:

What this means is that even though Marvel’s comics generally cost more than DC’s comics – around a third more – and they have greater reported unit sales across the board, the gap between Marvel’s dollar share and DC’s dollar share is lesser. Without the free overships, with the higher prices, Marvel traditionally have enjoyed a greater dollar share difference.

Indeed, if you were to remove overships entirely, it looks like DC Comics would have a higher unit sales marketshare than Marvel. And far fewer titles in the top fifty.

But that might not take into account another promotion Marvel runs with many launch titles, giving greater discounts if retailers increase their orders, compared to previous orders.

We have the top hundred below – and have bolded the titles with the greatest disparity comparing their unit sales and dollar sales, taking into account the retail price of the comic. Some like IVX #1 benefitted from those discounts. But most are down to free overships. And the greatest disparate figures when both happen at once.

The natural state of things would see, say, Teen Titans #3 at $2.99 be in 47th place for sales and 66th place for dollars raised, while just below it in 48th place for sales is Spider-Man/Deadpool #12 at $3.99 at 31st place for dollars. That makes sense, yes?

But what can only be explained by free overships is the likes of Flash #13 at $2.99. 34th place on the unit sales chart and 26th place on the dollar amount. Makes sense. But Guardians Of The Galaxy #15 at $3.99 above Flash at 23rd on the unit sales chart and 64th on the dollar sales despite costing 1/3 more. Take out the overships and factor for the $3.99 price and the unit sales would see it much further down the chart. It might not even be in the Top 100.

While Hawkeye #1 got both. First, stores who exceeded 125% of their numbers for All-New Wolverine #12 got a 15% discount on their order, reducing the dollar ranking. And then Marvel sent double the ordered numbers, upping the unit sales ranking.

Which is how it made the top twenty in unit sales at 16th place, but despite having a $3.99 price only scored 48th place in the dollar chart.

This article only covers December of 2016--Marvel overshipped the entire line in January.

Diamond also only shows sell-through to retailers, not what is going home with readers.

[WebLurker]

Er... this is so entirely filled with subjective rants and convenient obscuring of the full facts that I don't even know where to begin or whether to bother at all

To some extent, I think the thread is full of subjective options and confirmation bias, given that most posters are just people at home typing their opinions with little to no insider's knowledge of how things work.

Marvel can have as many #1s as they want and employ as much branding as they want (Marvel NOW, All-New, etc.) but they haven't once obliterated their own continuity.

As pointed out before, OMD is a continuity screwup, regardless of whether you like the end result or not. Also, Secret Wars 2015 was advertised as a reboot until they changed their minds and became whatever readers wanted it to be. Spider-Man: Year One was intended to replace the first part of the series as canon before Marvel backed off.

Also, retconning isn't inherently bad, nor is keeping continuity inherently good. Neither is restarting with #1s, but it is user-unfreindly.

[Prof. Warren]

You mean aside from OMD, right?

OMD didn't obliterate continuity. Every story still happened. You can read those stories knowing the marriage aspect was undone but Peter and MJ's relationship still impacts current continuity and any story from that time can be referenced today. You can't say the same about DC stories from the past in relation to today.

Diamond also only shows sell-through to retailers, not what is going home with readers.

Yes, we all know that Diamond's charts reflects what retailers order.

But if retailers order more Marvel, month after month, it follows that they're selling Marvel books just fine.

And as previously stated, whatever Marvel overshipped in January isn't reflected in Dollar Sales, a category which Marvel won that month.

Bottom line: Marvel has topped the charts from October through Feburary.

I know Rebirth has encouraged some readers to think that Marvel will have to follow suit but people said the same when New52 happened.

Marvel kept doing their own thing and it was DC that had to eventually change course. I would expect the same outcome this time around.

But again, this is not a sales thread, so I'll pass on continuing this discussion before it gets shuttled to a separate thread.

[Prof. Warren]

Also, Secret Wars 2015 was advertised as a reboot until they changed their minds and became whatever readers wanted it to be.

No, never advertised as a reboot.

Assumed to be by some readers but never advertised as such.

[Miles To Go]

There's an awful lot of curious MJ variants coming out...including one for Punisher that's gotten a bit of a buzz