Retailer Fury At Marvel NYCC Panel

[Triniking1234]

Are comics really meant to be disposable? I never got that feeling. Newspapers are disposable because they become obsolete within a few hours so they get tossed. Fictional stories last longer so story books, magazines, and other such media get held on to.

When I was a kid, I wasn't going to throw a comic book after I spent $10 - $15 on it. Especially when they were rare and I might not see another one. That would've been nuts.

[Redjack]

Oh. You like my post so much you thought it'd look good above your completely unrelated comment? I mean, I know it's a very nice post, but what of anything in my post are you even replying to if that is indeed what you're doing?

What is your business comment even meant to be in regard to? You saying comic companies invest in better paper stock and spend more on printing and coloring to better entice an audience into buying into a totally disposable medium? Shit, if Marvel is making comics with them being thrown out afterwards in mind like we all know everyone does, you'd think they'd be making them cost a little less. I mean why would anyone care about things like the paper quality if they just going in the trash anyways as intended?

Here's what you should do. Tell your friends.

When you want to talk intelligently about publishing and its practices, actually learn something about publishing and its practices before you start speaking. Periodicals are disposable publishing product, meant for short-term use and then the trash. This isn't news. It's not a theory. It's not an opinion. It's not controversial.

[WebLurker]

Periodicals are disposable publishing product, meant for short-term use and then the trash. This isn't news. It's not a theory. It's not an opinion. It's not controversial.

I've heard of some that weren't.

[Za Waldo]

Well, it's not newsprint (and I used to work with newsprint, so I do know what that is). Also, all the floppies I ever bought were more like $3.99 than a buck. I'm not even sure that the dollar price is a good indication of long-term value.



Subjective opinions about the current line of Marvel comics is not relevant to the discussion of whether comic book floppies are designed to be kept long-term or not, much less what a "collector" is. (Case in point, I could say that Marvel is making a lot of good comics these days, but what would that prove?)

Yeah, I know it's not newsprint. And I know now much they cost. Dat is da joke...because this stuff isn't printed on the cheapest non-archival paper they could get, and the price of comics is a bit much given how little most of them have. I find the idea that Marvel specifically has it in mind that people will just throw a comic away when done with it a bit strange. If they were designing the floppies with that in mind they'd likely look different.

Arguing that floppies are still a disposable medium seems like arguing tv is still a disposable medium.

[JackDaw]

Yeah, I know it's not newsprint. And I know now much they cost. Dat is da joke...because this stuff isn't printed on the cheapest non-archival paper they could get, and the price of comics is a bit much given how little most of them have. I find the idea that Marvel specifically has it in mind that people will just throw a comic away when done with it a bit strange. If they were designing the floppies with that in mind they'd likely look different.

Arguing that floppies are still a disposable medium seems like arguing tv is still a disposable medium.

There's at least a credible argument that Marvel have deliberately moved price point, paper quality, and type of story to cater for guys that want to keep comics at least for long enough to re-read a few times.

Pretending that they are really same ultra cheap disposable product they were back in the seventies seems way eccentric.

Take the typical story in a Marvel or DC comic...its usually not a satisfying "done in one issue" tale. (The fairly recent Jonah Hex/ All Star Western run stood out as a real exception because a lot of the issues featured done in one issue story.)

Most series feature ultra long story arcs...and it makes perfect sense from a "pure" reading point of view to keep issues on hand so you can refresh your mind on what happened in recent months when reading current comic.

I think many of us can see that keeping comics for re-reading is a long way from mindset of true collecting...but, as ever, not all agree.

[gwangung]

There's at least a credible argument that Marvel have deliberately moved price point, paper quality, and type of story to cater for guys that want to keep comics at least for long enough to re-read a few times.

Pretending that they are really same ultra cheap disposable product they were back in the seventies seems way eccentric.

Take the typical story in a Marvel or DC comic...its usually not a satisfying "done in one issue" tale. (The fairly recent Jonah Hex/ All Star Western run stood out as a real exception because a lot of the issues featured done in one issue story.)

Most series feature ultra long story arcs...and it makes perfect sense from a "pure" reading point of view to keep issues on hand so you can refresh your mind on what happened in recent months when reading current comic.

I think many of us can see that keeping comics for re-reading is a long way from mindset of true collecting...but, as ever, not all agree.

On the other hand, if you compare to the rest of the magazine publishing industry, where the paper is not newsprint and is more durable, I would argue the mindset is STILL that the product is disposable. Not that many mass-oriented publications are meant to be more durable.

[JackDaw]

On the other hand, if you compare to the rest of the magazine publishing industry, where the paper is not newsprint and is more durable, I would argue the mindset is STILL that the product is disposable. Not that many mass-oriented publications are meant to be more durable.

Whose mindset?

We could arrange a poll on site to ask guys who still buy floppies if they:-
a/ Immediately throw them away.
b/ Keep them primarily for re-reading.
c/ Keep them in hope prices go up/ pure collecting purposes.

My own guess is that people answering a/ would be substantially smaller than those answering b or c.

Tell me...what's your honest guess?

[CentralPower]

If that is the case after say issue 3-that book or books should NOT be in your store. Don't go to a Marvel employee and go off about Moon Girl not selling a single issue and her book is at issue 24.

That logic works in theory. But, if too many readers drop too many series at the same time, then the store's cashflow gets strangled.

Keep in mind, if Marvel has a mass exodus of readers, some of those readers are simply going to stay home with their money. They are not going to buy in for another series. A small comic shop can easily cut orders on a few titles. But, an entire company's output is another question, especially if the company is Marvel or DC. In that situation, the retailer needs to find something else to fill that shelf space (that they are still paying rent on).

If retailers are seeing a mass drop-off in readers, they have a good reason to be worried.

that makes you a collector. comics are designed to be disposed of once read. just like all monthly magazines.

At this point, it is my fault for talking to a hipster like you. (And, pretending that a hobby or industry norm does not apply does not make it less of a norm.)

By your definition, most comic readers are collectors. You understand this. But, you are pretending that you do not understand for reasons that will probably involve more I-statements than anybody cares to read. (You also seem to be arguing that collectors are inferior to readers.)

Yeah, I bag and board just for ease of storage.

Technically, bags and boards make storage more difficult. (Consider the mass and weight of a package of either. You are effectively adding that to your collection, making it harder to store or transport.)

But, yes, bags and boards certainly make storage more effective, as they preserve the comics (justifying the cost in mass and weight).

Also, magazines are usually not kept since they are very topical (current events of various kinds), while comics are usually fictional narrative, which is much more timeless.

Even then, something like "National Geographic" is commonly saved. (They are designed to be saved.)

Modern comics are printed on high quality paper, are relatively expensive, variant covers are common...and some of the stories are complex. I imagine people still buying floppies would pretty often put them aside for re-reading. You might, for example, want to refresh your memory what happened a couple of months ago before reading current month purely to optimise reading pleasure.

Floppies are a legacy format. The industry has used it for decades, and enough readers are still comfortable with it to keep it (barely) viable. But, those same readers generally keep their floppies. (I only dispose of them if I updgrade to a compilation or if I end up not liking the series.)

I know that there is a case for floppies being a better long term format. But, I still go with compilations as they take up slightly less room.

The quality of the paper varies.

[Redjack]

At this point, it is my fault for talking to a hipster like you.

"Hipster?" LOL. Dude. I've been collecting comics for decades. I own more than 30K (down from 50k). It's adorable how you people keep trying to find insults that fit. Don't hold your breath.

By your definition, most comic readers are collectors.

Nope. By my definition most comics readers are readers who dispose of their books relatively soon after reading.

You understand this. But, you are pretending that you do not understand for reasons that will probably involve more I-statements than anybody cares to read. (You also seem to be arguing that collectors are inferior to readers.)

Again, adorable how you think you have a clue about my motivations or thought processes. Nope. Wrong on all counts. Best to stick to things you can actually process in future. What I understand is how publishing works which you, very clearly, do not. So far, I haven't expressed an opinion on this. Just facts.

Collectors are, by definition, not to be considered as the primary target when publishing monthly periodicals. I am a collector.

I am also a publishing pro. You simply do not know what you're talking about.

[JackDaw]

Nope. By my definition most comics readers are readers who dispose of their books relatively soon after reading.

Any strong feeling on magnitude of that “relatively soon”?

In my case when I still bought current floppies as they came out, I tended to keep them for around 6 months...a typical story arc’s worth. I wouldn’t have dreamed of chucking them month by month...because given my memory I knew when reading September issue I’d most likely want to refer to earlier months.

It was quite different to way I treat most magazines/ periodicals...there I tend to read once and sling them away almost immediately or pass on to friends. Or indeed prose novels where I tend to get almost always from library. (Returning them once read!)

[Redjack]

Any strong feeling on magnitude of that “relatively soon”?

In my case when I still bought current floppies as they came out, I tended to keep them for around 6 months...a typical story arc’s worth. I wouldn’t have dreamed of chucking them month by month...because given my memory I knew when reading September issue I’d most likely want to refer to earlier months.

It was quite different to way I treat most magazines/ periodicals...there I tend to read once and sling them away almost immediately or pass on to friends. Or indeed prose novels where I tend to get almost always from library. (Returning them once read!)

paperback novels were specially invented to be quickly disposed of once used and that model holds true today. Periodicals were and are as well. Comic books are made of crappier stock, on the whole, than magazines, on the whole. Comic books are magazines. Comic books are periodicals. This isn't calculus. It's just how it works.

[JackDaw]

paperback novels were specially invented to be quickly disposed of once used and that model holds true today. Periodicals were and are as well. Comic books are made of crappier stock, on the whole, than magazines, on the whole. Comic books are magazines. Comic books are periodicals. This isn't calculus. It's just how it works.

But the paper stock really isn’t much of a limiting factor...it doesn’t determine whether owner keeps it for one week, one month, one year or a decade...or longer.

The comparatively few comics I’ve kept for long periods haven’t been ultra-carefully stored..like I imagine your collection is...I’ve kept them warm and dry in polythene bags, that’s it. I certainly don’t board them. And they come out pretty frequently for re-reading.

And stuff that 40 or 30 years old...like Mike Grell Warlord run or John Ostrander Suicide Squad run are still in fine condition under that treatment.

The paper stock really doesn’t limit retention to a couple of months. That is factual.

[Redjack]

But the paper stock really isn’t much of a limiting factor...it doesn’t determine whether owner keeps it for one week, one month, one year or a decade...or longer.

The comparatively few comics I’ve kept for long periods haven’t been ultra-carefully stored..like I imagine your collection is...I’ve kept them warm and dry in polythene bags, that’s it. I certainly don’t board them. And they come out pretty frequently for re-reading.

And stuff that 40 or 30 years old...like Mike Grell Warlord run or John Ostrander Suicide Squad run are still in fine condition under that treatment.

The paper stock really doesn’t limit retention to a couple of months. That is factual.

dude. how many ways do I have to say this? these are disposable products. INTENTIONALLY disposable products. what you, personally, do wth the product has NOTHING to do wth the intent when they're made. You and I are collectors. We are not the target audience for periodicals. We are, by definition, an ANCILLARY market.

[PhantomStranger]

And which specific crowd they are catering to? The non-male-white crowd? Marvel has like 4 black character books (IM, BP, Falcon, Cage), 1 asian character book (Hulk), 1 latino character book (America) and 1 hispanic/black character book (Spider Man). 7 book out of 70, only 63 books for the poor white male readers. I can feel your pain. And people are surprised when an increasingly smaller part of the fandom is accused to be entitled? I don't know, do you consider women a “crowd” too? They are just half of the people in the world after all, why they should have their books at the expenses of the poor neglected white male readers?

Ethnic amd female characters have always been present in good numbers at Marvel, and even more so since the 80s. There is NO shortage of ethnic characters at Marvel. Therefore there is no need to "push" ethnic/female characters.

Sorry but is there's something that's more fanfiction than a self-serving fictional universe for white males where every hero is a white male?

Marvel is not that and never has been that.

[PhantomStranger]

Which is the natural reaction to something we have no interest in, and what many of us are saying to those not enjoying Marvel. Just walk away.

Why? Many of us were here first. Why do we have to "just walk away" and let you do what you want with the characters we've loved in many cases for decades? What makes your claim on them superior to ours?