The Atlantic on the real reasons for Marvel's Financial Woes

[Miles To Go]

Just to clarify, if some of us agree that marvel has been having way to many Avengers, X-men, titles, to many events, to many re launch at #1.Blaming bad sales (minority titles, women leads, etc) on your customers.

If we agree with these things then we are juvenile? Just asking for clarification on your remark.

From the posts I've gathered on him from similar threads covering these sort of subjects, he's a bit biased towards Marvel and very much rallies against any sort of objective success DC has had lately, so I wouldn't expect any sort of answer from him other than one that dismisses valid points really.

It's like what I said to someone else with a similar dismissive attitude over in the other thread...only so many times you can stick fingers in your ears before the noise becomes so deafening you may have to start listening to it.

[Prof. Warren]

From the posts I've gathered on him from similar threads covering these sort of subjects, he's a bit biased towards Marvel and very much rallies against any sort of objective success DC has had lately, so I wouldn't expect any sort of answer from him other than one that dismisses valid points really.

It's like what I said to someone else with a similar dismissive attitude over in the other thread...only so many times you can stick fingers in your ears before the noise becomes so deafening you may have to start listening to it.

Thanks, MTG, but I can speak for myself quite well as I already answered Magnum's question. If I didn't answer it to his satisfaction, he can let me know.

As for being "biased towards Marvel" and "against" DC, as a reader I do prefer one company over the other but I am not adamantly for or against one company or the other in every case. I'm currently reading Action, Green Arrow, and Green Lanterns from DC (tried Batman several times but just didn't like King's version) so I'm not a hard line hater of DC in any way. If anything, my criticisms of them come from a place of having been a very devoted DC reader back in the day.

I just find many of the so-called "valid points" that are used to trash Marvel are not very valid at all and are easily refuted.

I mean, saying "Uh-oh, sales aren't what they used to be in the '90s and what's Marvel doing wrong?" is a bs criticism. If DC was still selling books at '90s levels and Marvel wasn't then, yeah, you'd have to ask why. But comic sales have dropped across the board, as have sales for all of print media. Trying to frame it as a Marvel problem as though everyone else isn't in the exact same boat is flatly ridiculous.

And jeez, Miles, for someone who keeps insisting that the Spider-marriage is on its way back in the mainstream MU any day now, despite what anyone and everyone tells them, you're really the last person who should anyone else of being in denial of reality. Just saying.

[Mister Mets]

There is one element to Marvel's woes that isn't mentioned. It's not something Marvel's doing wrong per se, but something that hasn't happened.

There's a lot of emphasis on books that clearly should be selling better, although there are also some books that are selling about as well as you'd expect them to sell (Amazing Spider-Man's definitely in this category.)

But there isn't an unexpected hit, a book that is doing much better than anyone would have thought it would, like Geoff Johns' Green Lantern, Jeph Loeb's Hulk, or the early Ultimate books.

The obvious point on unexpected hits is that these can't be manufactured. But this is one of the big things the Marvel Universe is missing right now.

[TheNewFiftyForum]

I'm thinking a bit more on the suggestion of having longer runs, especially with artists. It makes it seem like an event when an artist who has been on a title for some time does something. It might be a bigger deal to have a guy who has been on the book for several years draw a major character for the first time than it is to get a decent guy from another book to come on board for that arc.



The incident occurred before the financial problems.

Basically, he was at a panel on LGBT representation in the X-Men comics. There was a lengthy question from an attendee on Romani representation. He responded based on incorrect information he had received years earlier.

He did apologize for it pretty quickly, once he learned how he was wrong.

http://www.peterdavid.net/2016/10/08...-my-big-mouth/

Feel free to delete this if it's too off topic, but that's more an "I saw what I saw, deal with it" than an apology, right?

[Mister Mets]

Feel free to delete this if it's too off topic, but that's more an "I saw what I saw, deal with it" than an apology, right?

There was one that came a few days later after he had been exposed to more information.

http://www.peterdavid.net/2016/10/10...on-the-romani/

So now that the dust of the convention has settled, I’ve had a good deal of time to assess my behavior regarding the Romani and my conduct during the convention. I’ve read many of the links that were sent my way and really thought about what I witnessed two decades ago back in Bucharest. And I’ve been assessing my actions during the panel that lead to all this.

After all that, I have to conclude that I’m ashamed of myself.

I want you to understand: when the Romani rep tried to shift the focus of the panel from gays and lesbians to the Romani, suddenly I was twenty years younger and the trauma of what I saw and what I was told slammed back through me. What screamed through my mind was, “Why should I give a damn about the Romani considering that the Bucharest Romani are crippling their children?” And I unleashed that anger upon the questioner, for no reason. None. There is no excuse.

But the more I’ve read, the more convinced I’ve become that what I saw was indeed examples, not of children crippled by parents, but children suffering from a genetic disorder. The pictures are simply too identical. I cannot come to any other reasonable conclusion.

And I’ve wracked my memory, but the more I do, the more I come up empty on recalling any examples of children with busted elbows or gouged eyes, even though my guide assured me that was the case. And of course Wikipedia didn’t exist two decades ago for me to check through his claims.

Did my guide lie to me? I don’t think so. Why would he? I think he genuinely believed it. I have no doubt he asked the same questions of his parents and they told him what they believed, what they were told, going back generations, because the Romani have been biased against for centuries.

[Kevinroc]

There is one element to Marvel's woes that isn't mentioned. It's not something Marvel's doing wrong per se, but something that hasn't happened.

There's a lot of emphasis on books that clearly should be selling better, although there are also some books that are selling about as well as you'd expect them to sell (Amazing Spider-Man's definitely in this category.)

But there isn't an unexpected hit, a book that is doing much better than anyone would have thought it would, like Geoff Johns' Green Lantern, Jeph Loeb's Hulk, or the early Ultimate books.

The obvious point on unexpected hits is that these can't be manufactured. But this is one of the big things the Marvel Universe is missing right now.

Spider-Gwen? (Even though S-G has dropped off massively from when it launched.)

[plasticman101]

It's like what I said to someone else with a similar dismissive attitude over in the other thread...only so many times you can stick fingers in your ears before the noise becomes so deafening you may have to start listening to it. posted by miles to go

or.....911 that'll stop the screaming..yes?

BTW i'd believe someone that actually WORKS for/at marvel Dan Slott about the peter/mj marriage coming back. he's says its NOT, its the reason YOU have a RYW comic that is currently being printed.

[magnum]

I would always call it juvenile when fans want to say that diversity is a problem.

Also, "blaming bad sales on your customers" would be juvenile as it's based on clickbait articles and not what was actually said by anyone at Marvel.

If David Gabriel says that the word they've gotten from some retailers is that certain titles aren't selling, it's not "blaming the customers", it's acknowledging feedback.

Characterizing that as being an attack on customers is juvenile because it's a needlessly inflammatory reading of a situation.

Marvel does need to re-adjust some of their strategies, yes. But publishers always need to course correct every so often. It's not unusual.

Too many Avengers and X-Men titles? Perhaps, but yet there's been times when the market wants as many books under those banners as Marvel can produce so it's not always easy to anticipate how that appetite is going to wax and wane, especially when plans are made so far ahead in publishing.

As for events, I think saying readers are against "too many events" is a glib reading of the situation. Because for all the complaining, readers still buy into events. What I think everyone really resents when it comes to events is the chronic mis-management of them lately. Marvel can't say that this is our "summer event" and then have it roll on into the fall, winter, and sometimes even into the following year. That's when fan's patience becomes fried and they think that their loyalty is being taken for granted.

If Secret Empire ships on schedule as planned, that alone will incur a lot of good will towards the next event, whenever it might be.

It's not that Marvel is above criticism and it's not that they don't need to get their **** together in several areas, it's that this particular article offers a poorly thought out, superficial analysis at best.

Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying.

I would say that at least the article, like others has kicked up the conversation. As far as what the VP said, I was pretty sure I saw a quote of him saying that diverse comics with female leads, minorities, etc were not what the customer base wanted. Now I may be wrong but if I am not then that is what I would be referring to.

Again thanks for the clarification.

Cheers

[Prof. Warren]

There is one element to Marvel's woes that isn't mentioned. It's not something Marvel's doing wrong per se, but something that hasn't happened.

There's a lot of emphasis on books that clearly should be selling better, although there are also some books that are selling about as well as you'd expect them to sell (Amazing Spider-Man's definitely in this category.)

But there isn't an unexpected hit, a book that is doing much better than anyone would have thought it would, like Geoff Johns' Green Lantern, Jeph Loeb's Hulk, or the early Ultimate books.

The obvious point on unexpected hits is that these can't be manufactured. But this is one of the big things the Marvel Universe is missing right now.

I don't know - I'd kind of put Venom in that category of an "unexpected hit". It's way more successful than I would've predicted, at least.

Venom's solo runs have been doing either just ok or poor since Remender left and I assumed that this latest volume would perform on par with those...if maybe slightly better than Space Knight but clearly it's a very hot title.

[Frontier]

I don't know - I'd kind of put Venom in that category of an "unexpected hit". It's way more successful than I would've predicted, at least.

Venom's solo runs have been doing either just ok or poor since Remender left and I assumed that this latest volume would perform on par with those...if maybe slightly better than Space Knight but clearly it's a very hot title.

I guess there must've been a pretty big contingent of fans waiting for the return of classic Venom, which we haven't really seen in the comics for 6 or 7 years, or even longer if we're talking Brock as Venom and not Anti-Venom.

[Mister Mets]

I don't know - I'd kind of put Venom in that category of an "unexpected hit". It's way more successful than I would've predicted, at least.

Venom's solo runs have been doing either just ok or poor since Remender left and I assumed that this latest volume would perform on par with those...if maybe slightly better than Space Knight but clearly it's a very hot title.

The main thing Marvel's missing is a monster hit, something that is consistently in the top twenty but not a book that you would expect to that well.

Venom's doing okay, but it's not on that level.

[comicscollector]

Some of these reasons are shared by DC comics as well.
The reason i agree more is the pricing of comics other than that i can not say i agree with much more things in that article.
Events for example ever since Secret Wars 1,have been something that fans generally enjoyed,so in a shared universe it is obvious that events get mentioned in other titles.

[magnum]

I would always call it juvenile when fans want to say that diversity is a problem.

I don't think it is the fans that are saying diversity is the problem, from the interview with the VP the impression people got is that he was saying "fans did not want that much diversity." At least that is how I took it and I think people took that as him blaming the fans for the low success of the attempt at diversifying their characters.

I for one love having more diverse characters provided it is done right, written well and drawn well. I don't think you have to replace long standing characters with female leads or different ethnicities. I think those characters done right stand on their own.

[Malachi]

Very good article. But overall these are pretty basic points. Any person at Marvel should understand this quite easily so the question is more: why aren't they trying to fix it? Legacy is more of an reactive band aid. DC did it so now we do it too. Characters have been written odd, OOC and plain simply for shock value for some years now. Marvel thinks it works and must have some reason to think so. Unless the inmates run the assylum.

When it comes to the PR nightmare that is writers ranting to fans: I just assumed that Marvel thought this wasn't worth their attention. They think that so few people actually know about this that it doesn't matter. Or to take the Wacker/Slott stance when ranting about OMD: only people who don't read Spider-man or will continue to buy it whatever we do.

[ngroove]

Marvel used to be fun and unified.

Now, cannot tell who's "good" or who's "bad" (ex. Cyclops, Doctor Doom), keep killing off top characters (ex. Hulk), replacing them with lesser characters, some of them even kids (ex. Wolverine, Thor, Iron Man, Ms. Marvel) , too outrageously changing other characters (ex. Captain America), too many jerk characters (ex. Iron Man, Cyclops, Inhumans), too depressingly darkening up other characters (ex. She-Hulk).

Last time Marvel was fun to me, was the late nineties, extremely early noughties tops; before the jerk move of whispering "no more mutants" was uttered out, then chain reaction of other Marvel Universe "events" followed.