Why Marvel Sales are down - Per the VP of Sales

[nnelg]

Shhh, stop telling those things or Rich Johnston is going to appear and it is going to be very awkward.



They are making very little with 2.99 comics. You have to sell a lot more to make a profit.
The monthly titles are going to cost $4 and the less profitable bi-montly are going to be monthly.

Are you a Diamond rep or a shop owner? If not not how do you know the profit margins. I don't know anything. But I believe that Marvel is a big corporation and big corporations lie.

[penthotal]

Are you a Diamond rep or a shop owner? If not not how do you know the profit margins. I don't know anything. But I believe that Marvel is a big corporation and big corporations lie.

DC it's a big corporation too, in fact with the new 52 promised a $2.99 that in a year was almost completely $3.99 and they've already announced that all the monthlies rebirth book are raising at $3.99. The weeklies will follow as usual. If nobody can sustain 2.99$ books in the long run, the best assumption it's that it's not a price that can be sustained.

[Coin Biter]

And yes, BC is "the comics version of Breitbart."

They hardly seem like members of the alt right to me, so it's not a fair comparison. As to whether the reporting of the comments made by the VP of sales has in itself been fair, I admit I haven't trawled through sufficient of the recent articles to be able to form a decided view.

Their columnists aren't all identical, and there are quite a few differences of style between them, whether Rich Johnston, or the main writer of the articles on the comments from David Gabriel, Jude Terror.

For that matter, the Guardian has now reported on the controversy: https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...enated-readers

Is the Guardian like Breitbart too?

[rui no onna]

Is there a resource out there that tracks digital comic sales yet?

Nope. Companies are keeping those numbers under wraps but I reckon looking at comiXology's Top Selling weekend after new comics day would give you the best selling titles in a given week since comiXology probably has the largest market share in terms of digital.

https://www.comixology.com/comics-best-sellers

And someone has decided to track those charts:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...uEL9A/htmlview

[rui no onna]

Here's a very good analysis by one retailer from the Bleeding Cool comments.

@fitztheruke

The trouble with Marvel is they beat a good thing to death:

X-Men books were great sellers so they did a ton of them until nobody could afford them all.

Events sold amazing, so they did them yearly, then quarterly, then overlapping until no one could keep up.

Number ones sell best, so they relaunched over and over and faster and faster until you can't tell what series a book goes in anymore.

Variant covers sold, so they put upwards of seven or so on EVERY comic they publish, until nobody cares anymore.

We (good retailers) were asking for diversity for YEARS. Comics for women. For kids. Staring underused, often minority characters. At the time, we were told “Those things never sell!” and given a third Wolverine book instead.

Finally, they decided it was a good idea (and treated us like we had been holding them back all this time) and they tried a few. And they sold. So they killed off and replaced nearly every single one of their popular characters.

Talk about taking a good thing too far!

They just take anything that works and beat it to death.

[Smoov-E]

Here's a very good analysis by one retailer from the Bleeding Cool comments.

DC does the same thing and get praise for it, nobody complained about the multiple Batman and Superman events, Before Watchmen, Forever Evil, the 3D covers, the selfie covers, loony toons covers. Nobody said anything actually or really buy any of it

[rui no onna]

DC does the same thing and get praise for it, nobody complained about the multiple Batman and Superman events, Before Watchmen, Forever Evil, the 3D covers, the selfie covers, loony toons covers. Nobody said anything actually or really buy any of it

Oh, DC saw major decline thanks to all the gimmicks and they were getting mocked, too. In January 2016, they were down to 1.6 million comics sold.

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2016/01...arvel-and-zim/

Oh and the only non-Marvel title on the list was Oni’s Invader Zim. Not one DC…

It’s a Star Wars world and we get to read it. Nothing came close to beating Star Wars and Vader this week and no sign of it slowing up anytime soon.

The usual suspects sold this week on the back-issue front. Harley, Deadpool and Batman. Expect Suicide Squad and Justice League to pick up in the next month with new people on board in March.

This was a amazing week as almost every Indie books came close to selling out. Dc comics had a rough week, with more pull box drops. Civil war trades continue to own the market.

Not a single DC book in the Top Ten this week (although they did take four slots in our Top Twenty). How have the mighty fallen–there was a time when DC routinely outsold almost all Marvels. The biggest success story is Dr. Strange, which is still selling right in the middle of the Top Ten with its fourth issue–the sign of a quality comic!

Really, prior to Rebirth, DC sales were down in the dumps.

[The Negative Zone]

And yes, BC is "the comics version of Breitbart."

Nah, BC seems to get hate from all sides. I've seen a guy who calls it "sjw cancer." BC is its own category.

[ijacksparrow]

Bleeding Cool isn't the comics version of Breitbart at all. Like Dan Slott and many creators, I really dislike how they cover spoilers, but these reports about the Marvel Retailer Summit are fair. Marvel Comics has only itself and its employees to blame on this one. It's quite Trumpanian to put the blame in the messenger instead of a the message itself. That's way more Breitbart than Bleeding Cool could possibly be. Also, being a follower of BC for a long time, they seem to hold very progressive views most of the times. Blaming BC here is really just shifting the blame, and it's quite sad to be honest.

[Panfoot]

DC does the same thing and get praise for it, nobody complained about the multiple Batman and Superman events, Before Watchmen, Forever Evil, the 3D covers, the selfie covers, loony toons covers. Nobody said anything actually or really buy any of it

You didn't hear much about it as much because DC doesn't do that stuff nearly to the level Marvel does. When was the last DC event that lasted 8 months and had significant impact on nearly the entire line of books?

[superduperman]

I'm sure terrible creative decisions played no role whatsoever. Turning Cap into a Hydra stooge? Replacing your premier super-hero team with a bunch of C-listers? Killing off your second most popular character and keeping him dead for three years? Yeah, I'm sure none of those things had anything to do with it. Let me make this as clear as I can: NO ONE WILL EVER CARE ABOUT INHUMANS! We get it, you're pissed that you don't own the movie rights to the X-Men so you are deliberately sabotaging them. But to take a bunch of C-list Fantastic Four characters and just plug them into the X-Men's place isn't going to make people automatically accept them. Their attempts to downplay franchises they don't own the movie rights to is so transparent as to be insulting. Civil War 2 was one of the dumbest ideas ever conceived. The first one was a mixed bag to begin with. To try to replicate it to force the Inhumans on everyone is just an act of desperation. People are still pissed about undoing the Spider-marriage and you kill off the second most popular character? And then keep him dead? Laura Kinney is a cool character. But nobody wants to see her be THE Wolverine. I love Old Man Logan but, I swear to God, if they start turning that book into another "Inhumans are better than mutants" book too, I'm out. Seriously, you guys stuck the Xavier School in limbo? Like, ACTUAL limbo? How bitter are you about this movie thing?

"Diversity" didn't kill sales. Insulting the intelligence of your fans did. They want the REAL X-Men back. Not time displaced kids. Not a stand-in for Wolverine. Not some C-listers being lined up as their replacement. Cap is riding high on movie success and you turn him into a villain? But let's blame "EEEW! GIRLS! GROSS!" for declining sales. Nobody wants Mary Jane working for Iron Man, they want her married to Spider-Man. You can have all the diverse characters you want but fans expect you listen to them instead of turning the mainstream continuity into your own personal fan fiction and expecting them to blindly accept it.

[ishikabe]

GG Marvel. You played yourself.

[Tiamatty]

Laura Kinney is a cool character. But nobody wants to see her be THE Wolverine.

I do. I want her to be the Wolverine. I want her to be the Wolverine permanently. I'd be quite happy if we never got Logan back in the uniform. And All-New Wolverine's got pretty good sales and gets tons of praise, from critics and from readers. So there's a lot of people who want to see Laura as the Wolverine.

[Valamist]

I do. I want her to be the Wolverine. I want her to be the Wolverine permanently. I'd be quite happy if we never got Logan back in the uniform. And All-New Wolverine's got pretty good sales and gets tons of praise, from critics and from readers. So there's a lot of people who want to see Laura as the Wolverine.

I am one of them too. All-new Wolverine is one of my favorite books and seems to be getting a lot of praise. I think Logan could actually carry himself off without the name/costume for a long time (I mean, the film simply titled Logan has become a big successes it seems and I think the Old Man Logan solo is doing well!) and I feel there is still a lot more that Laura can do with the name/costume. That is not say I never want Logan-Wolverine back, but if/when they do I just hope Laura is not kicked into the gutter and perhaps they can share the title like Hawkeye.

[nnelg]

What is better about All New Wolverine than her title was named X23. She already was the female Wolverine. The name change was unnecessary.