|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2017 18:32:12 GMT -5
From the Gizmodo website based on comments by Lee & Didio at SDCC Interesting. I wonder what format these evergreen projects will be and where they will market them. They may have to step away fromt he Diamond weekly comic market to find customers for this type of project. From other comments from the panel ( article on panel here) it doesn't sound like DC is all in on the new format and still counting on Rebirth for the bulk of their revenue. -M |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 23, 2017 20:21:14 GMT -5
Aren't they basically doing this with the Earth One books? It was a limited success, though I suppose with a broader out reach sales might be better.
|
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jul 23, 2017 20:22:58 GMT -5
Anyone know how many times DC has declared their intention to pull themselves out of "the grim and gritty rut" only to then get grimmer and grittier than ever before? I refuse to support DC financially for many reasons (their "women need not apply" stance when hiring for the Superman books since editor Eddie Berganza can't stop sexually harassing them, is one) but I hear enough to suspect that every time DC announces their plans to go down a less darker route, they also announce plans for something like The Joker cutting off his own face or something. Any reason to believe that this time this isn't just lip service?
|
|
|
|
Post by Spike-X on Jul 23, 2017 20:49:15 GMT -5
I thought their plan was to just put the Watchmen characters in everything, because they haven't quite f***ed that corpse to pieces yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 23, 2017 20:50:14 GMT -5
Anyone know how many times DC has declared their intention to pull themselves out of "the grim and gritty rut" only to then get grimmer and grittier than ever before? I refuse to support DC financially for many reasons (their "women need not apply" stance when hiring for the Superman books since editor Eddie Berganza can't stop sexually harassing them, is one) but I hear enough to suspect that every time DC announces their plans to go down a less darker route, they also announce plans for something like The Joker cutting off his own face or something. Any reason to believe that this time this isn't just lip service? Yeah, I haven't really noticed a lighter tone at DC since Rebirth other than maybe in Batgir, (and although I hate Berganza's involvement too) the Superman family books are as far away from grim and gritty as you can get and is arguably the best its been in years. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2017 20:51:01 GMT -5
I thought their plan was to just put the Watchmen characters in everything, because they haven't quite f***ed that corpse to pieces yet? Well that's what the entire 2nd year of Rebirth is about according to the article on the SDCC panel I linked. -M |
|
|
|
Post by chadwilliam on Jul 23, 2017 22:57:15 GMT -5
I hear enough to suspect that every time DC announces their plans to go down a less darker route, they also announce plans for something like The Joker cutting off his own face or something. Speaking of which... Frank Miller will be writing Superman: Year One. Dear God... |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jul 25, 2017 1:07:48 GMT -5
I still think the best possible outcome for both readers and creators would be for Marvel and DC to collapse and the rights to all these characters to become public domain. I suppose that isn't likely, even if the Big 2 companies did disappear: the rights would just revert to someone else. But maybe that someone else would be more open to different creators working with those characters in their own way, following their own ideas, rather than whatever the current corporate editorial policy happens to be. You might get someone who felt inspired by, say, Steve Englehart's Dr. Strange, try something that takes off from that run as a starting point - maybe Englehart might even feel inspired himself if that freedom was there.
But that's just an example, I think the same holds true of all the copyrighted characters, even the most popular, like Batman, or whatever. I think they'd all be better served under a scenario like the above. Sure, you'd get a lot of bad stuff, but the chances of something good, or even a bit special coming along would be greatly increased. And of course, the more obscure, less popular concepts would fare much better, since they are really stifled under the rigid constraints of the respective fictional universes and editorial policies of Marvel and DC, where everything is geared towards the superhero world and the movies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 8:44:26 GMT -5
I still think the best possible outcome for both readers and creators would be for Marvel and DC to collapse and the rights to all these characters to become public domain. I suppose that isn't likely, even if the Big 2 companies did disappear: the rights would just revert to someone else. But maybe that someone else would be more open to different creators working with those characters in their own way, following their own ideas, rather than whatever the current corporate editorial policy happens to be. You might get someone who felt inspired by, say, Steve Englehart's Dr. Strange, try something that takes off from that run as a starting point - maybe Englehart might even feel inspired himself if that freedom was there. But that's just an example, I think the same holds true of all the copyrighted characters, even the most popular, like Batman, or whatever. I think they'd all be better served under a scenario like the above. Sure, you'd get a lot of bad stuff, but the chances of something good, or even a bit special coming along would be greatly increased. And of course, the more obscure, less popular concepts would fare much better, since they are really stifled under the rigid constraints of the respective fictional universes and editorial policies of Marvel and DC, where everything is geared towards the superhero world and the movies. The thing is even if the publishing houses of Marvel and DC were to collapse, the characters and trademarks would still belong to Disney and WB, so the characters would remain locked up. The copyrights might fall to public domain, but the trademarks (which is what you need to really put new products featuring those characters and using their likeness/names) will remain with the corporate rights holders as long as they continue to use the characters in some medium. The best possible outcome for the industry would be for audiences to move on from the stagnated characters clutched onto by Marvel & DC and their corporate bosses and to embrace a new wave of stories and characters and support these with their dollars. But the audiences don't, so the viability of the industry to grow and change is limited by people clutching to the creations of the past rather than supporting the new and creative. -M |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 19:57:07 GMT -5
I still think the best possible outcome for both readers and creators would be for Marvel and DC to collapse and the rights to all these characters to become public domain. I suppose that isn't likely, even if the Big 2 companies did disappear: the rights would just revert to someone else. But maybe that someone else would be more open to different creators working with those characters in their own way, following their own ideas, rather than whatever the current corporate editorial policy happens to be. You might get someone who felt inspired by, say, Steve Englehart's Dr. Strange, try something that takes off from that run as a starting point - maybe Englehart might even feel inspired himself if that freedom was there. But that's just an example, I think the same holds true of all the copyrighted characters, even the most popular, like Batman, or whatever. I think they'd all be better served under a scenario like the above. Sure, you'd get a lot of bad stuff, but the chances of something good, or even a bit special coming along would be greatly increased. And of course, the more obscure, less popular concepts would fare much better, since they are really stifled under the rigid constraints of the respective fictional universes and editorial policies of Marvel and DC, where everything is geared towards the superhero world and the movies. The thing is even if the publishing houses of Marvel and DC were to collapse, the characters and trademarks would still belong to Disney and WB, so the characters would remain locked up. The copyrights might fall to public domain, but the trademarks (which is what you need to really put new products featuring those characters and using their likeness/names) will remain with the corporate rights holders as long as they continue to use the characters in some medium. The best possible outcome for the industry would be for audiences to move on from the stagnated characters clutched onto by Marvel & DC and their corporate bosses and to embrace a new wave of stories and characters and support these with their dollars. But the audiences don't, so the viability of the industry to grow and change is limited by people clutching to the creations of the past rather than supporting the new and creative. -M Or maybe they're not clutching but actually enjoying what they're reading? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 20:15:27 GMT -5
The thing is even if the publishing houses of Marvel and DC were to collapse, the characters and trademarks would still belong to Disney and WB, so the characters would remain locked up. The copyrights might fall to public domain, but the trademarks (which is what you need to really put new products featuring those characters and using their likeness/names) will remain with the corporate rights holders as long as they continue to use the characters in some medium. The best possible outcome for the industry would be for audiences to move on from the stagnated characters clutched onto by Marvel & DC and their corporate bosses and to embrace a new wave of stories and characters and support these with their dollars. But the audiences don't, so the viability of the industry to grow and change is limited by people clutching to the creations of the past rather than supporting the new and creative. -M Or maybe they're not clutching but actually enjoying what they're reading? Possibly, but sales continue to dwindle on average and cover prices rise as economy of sale works against the viability of the project as anything but a niche product. At some point cost of living increases to page rates and increases in printing costs will raise the cover price to the point where even die hards have to spend more then their enjoyment level. Plus steadily growing attrition rates the longer a title runs shows that people aren't enjoying it enough to stick around long term. Only reboots, restarts, variants etc. are keeping the numbers afloat and even Didio and Lee admitted in this interview that sales are still steadily dropping even with those props. If you have to constantly change and chase lapsed readers to prop up sales numbers are the people buying nd dropping the books really enjoying what they are reading or are they buying out of hope they will enjoy it but being dissatisfied and cease purchasing to account for attrition and declining sales levels on even the best selling books? It seems customers are chasing new and different or they wouldn't respond to all new all different #1 issue form the big 2 every couple of years, but don't stick around when they get the same old pablum repackaged because the characters cannot experience real change or growth because that changes the IP for the better producing mediums they are used in to make real revenue for their rights holders. Another trend that is telling is that publishers across the board seem to be cutting back their lines focusing on new promising properties and tried and a handful of tried and true sellers and are experiencing growth (small but growth) since they started, but Marvel & DC continue to flood the market with titles to retain marketshare and are getting larger percentages of a smaller pie, but other publishers are getting a smaller piece of the share but greater returns per title as their successful titles don't have to finance the poor sellers as much and they discard titles and properties that are not carrying their own weight. Since DC and Marvel market lines of books rather than individual titles they spread their customer's money thin and prevent growth in many titles because customers have to buy the line to get a story. They are dependent on the line as their selling point rather than on quality books that can stand on their own and attract audiences. This is not good for the industry overall, but the customer base clings to the line and events thinking they will miss out on something if they don't get it all rather than seeking out books they enjoy for what's there (not what their FOMO thinks might be there). On the whole satisfied customers sustain sales and satisfied customers plus word of mouth from those customers leads to growth. Sales are not being sustained and word of mouth from satisfied customers are not leading to growth. That beggars the question if the customers buying the product are satisfied by it based on basic market principles. The economic indicators don't point to a satisfied customer base overall. -M |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 20:20:02 GMT -5
Addendum-I am sure there are some readers enjoying what they buy/read and are satisfied, but the question is are there enough for the health of the industry? Markets grow by the influx of new customers seeking new products. If the only product you can offer is the same old thing with shrinking customer bases, it is not good for the health of the industry. The industry would be healthier with an influx of new customers seeking different products that leads to higher level of satisfaction and sustainable sales levels.
-M
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 20:24:11 GMT -5
Or maybe they're not clutching but actually enjoying what they're reading? Possibly, but sales continue to dwindle on average and cover prices rise as economy of sale works against the viability of the project as anything but a niche product. At some point cost of living increases to page rates and increases in printing costs will raise the cover price to the point where even die hards have to spend more then their enjoyment level. Plus steadily growing attrition rates the longer a title runs shows that people aren't enjoying it enough to stick around long term. Only reboots, restarts, variants etc. are keeping the numbers afloat and even Didio and Lee admitted in this interview that sales are still steadily dropping even with those props. If you have to constantly change and chase lapsed readers to prop up sales numbers are the people buying nd dropping the books really enjoying what they are reading or are they buying out of hope they will enjoy it but being dissatisfied and cease purchasing to account for attrition and declining sales levels on even the best selling books? It seems customers are chasing new and different or they wouldn't respond to all new all different #1 issue form the big 2 every couple of years, but don't stick around when they get the same old pablum repackaged because the characters cannot experience real change or growth because that changes the IP for the better producing mediums they are used in to make real revenue for their rights holders. Another trend that is telling is that publishers across the board seem to be cutting back their lines focusing on new promising properties and tried and a handful of tried and true sellers and are experiencing growth (small but growth) since they started, but Marvel & DC continue to flood the market with titles to retain marketshare and are getting larger percentages of a smaller pie, but other publishers are getting a smaller piece of the share but greater returns per title as their successful titles don't have to finance the poor sellers as much and they discard titles and properties that are not carrying their own weight. Since DC and Marvel market lines of books rather than individual titles they spread their customer's money thin and prevent growth in many titles because customers have to buy the line to get a story. They are dependent on the line as their selling point rather than on quality books that can stand on their own and attract audiences. This is not good for the industry overall, but the customer base clings to the line and events thinking they will miss out on something if they don't get it all rather than seeking out books they enjoy for what's there (not what their FOMO thinks might be there). On the whole satisfied customers sustain sales and satisfied customers plus word of mouth from those customers leads to growth. Sales are not being sustained and word of mouth from satisfied customers are not leading to growth. That beggars the question if the customers buying the product are satisfied by it based on basic market principles. The economic indicators don't point to a satisfied customer base overall. -M But they don't necessarily point to DC and Marvel pushing 20 versions of Batman and the X-Men as being a blight on the industry or that doing so is a sign of lesser quality. Hellboy is a work of art in my opinion and I've been following the story over 20 years...and yet barring a few spikes here and there it has not experienced a growth in sales over the years despite it's continued rise in quality in both art and story so I don't think we can say that if DC and Marvel's business strategy went away magically tomorrow that the comic industry would be a better place. As a point of comparison it's worth noting that Manga has a wide variety of styles and genres and yet it too is increasingly dropping in sales both here in the states and even in its native Japan. I would say that these declines then have less to do with subjective tastes in subject matter and story telling methods and more to do with changing tastes in culture at large. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 20:33:28 GMT -5
Possibly, but sales continue to dwindle on average and cover prices rise as economy of sale works against the viability of the project as anything but a niche product. At some point cost of living increases to page rates and increases in printing costs will raise the cover price to the point where even die hards have to spend more then their enjoyment level. Plus steadily growing attrition rates the longer a title runs shows that people aren't enjoying it enough to stick around long term. Only reboots, restarts, variants etc. are keeping the numbers afloat and even Didio and Lee admitted in this interview that sales are still steadily dropping even with those props. If you have to constantly change and chase lapsed readers to prop up sales numbers are the people buying nd dropping the books really enjoying what they are reading or are they buying out of hope they will enjoy it but being dissatisfied and cease purchasing to account for attrition and declining sales levels on even the best selling books? It seems customers are chasing new and different or they wouldn't respond to all new all different #1 issue form the big 2 every couple of years, but don't stick around when they get the same old pablum repackaged because the characters cannot experience real change or growth because that changes the IP for the better producing mediums they are used in to make real revenue for their rights holders. Another trend that is telling is that publishers across the board seem to be cutting back their lines focusing on new promising properties and tried and a handful of tried and true sellers and are experiencing growth (small but growth) since they started, but Marvel & DC continue to flood the market with titles to retain marketshare and are getting larger percentages of a smaller pie, but other publishers are getting a smaller piece of the share but greater returns per title as their successful titles don't have to finance the poor sellers as much and they discard titles and properties that are not carrying their own weight. Since DC and Marvel market lines of books rather than individual titles they spread their customer's money thin and prevent growth in many titles because customers have to buy the line to get a story. They are dependent on the line as their selling point rather than on quality books that can stand on their own and attract audiences. This is not good for the industry overall, but the customer base clings to the line and events thinking they will miss out on something if they don't get it all rather than seeking out books they enjoy for what's there (not what their FOMO thinks might be there). On the whole satisfied customers sustain sales and satisfied customers plus word of mouth from those customers leads to growth. Sales are not being sustained and word of mouth from satisfied customers are not leading to growth. That beggars the question if the customers buying the product are satisfied by it based on basic market principles. The economic indicators don't point to a satisfied customer base overall. -M But they don't necessarily point to DC and Marvel pushing 20 versions of Batman and the X-Men as being a blight on the industry or that doing so is a sign of lesser quality. Hellboy is a work of art in my opinion and I've been following the story over 20 years...and yet barring a few spikes here and there it has not experienced a growth in sales over the years despite it's continued rise in quality in both art and story so I don't think we can say that if DC and Marvel's business strategy went away magically tomorrow that the comic industry would be a better place. I could argue that Hellboy hasn't grown despite it's quality because too much of the money spent within the industry is spent on the Marvel & DC lines (i.e those 20 versions of Batman or whatever you mention) and the clinging of the customer base to those stagnant characters and lines, leaving no room for growth of many books outside those lines, and the fact that Diamond thrives on the profits from those lines from DC and Marvel being sold on a non-returnable basis so unsatisfied customers are stuck with product they don't like or can't sell, and that Diamond has no incentive to broaden the market and potential audience for books like Hellboy as long as the status quo of selling the Marvle & DC lines to shopowners rather than end customers benefits them because of their monopoly and their restrictive business practices. I might also argue (though I don't know that I necessarily believe it) that Hellboy's growth was limited by diluting the brand and following the Marvel/DC model of trying to turn one story in one book into a line of books trying to gobble up market share that way. -M |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 20:44:16 GMT -5
But they don't necessarily point to DC and Marvel pushing 20 versions of Batman and the X-Men as being a blight on the industry or that doing so is a sign of lesser quality. Hellboy is a work of art in my opinion and I've been following the story over 20 years...and yet barring a few spikes here and there it has not experienced a growth in sales over the years despite it's continued rise in quality in both art and story so I don't think we can say that if DC and Marvel's business strategy went away magically tomorrow that the comic industry would be a better place. I could argue that Hellboy hasn't grown despite it's quality because too much of the money spent within the industry is spent on the Marvel & DC lines (i.e those 20 versions of Batman or whatever you mention) and the clinging of the customer base to those stagnant characters and lines, leaving no room for growth of many books outside those lines, and the fact that Diamond thrives on the profits from those lines from DC and Marvel being sold on a non-returnable basis so unsatisfied customers are stuck with product they don't like or can't sell, and that Diamond has no incentive to broaden the market and potential audience for books like Hellboy as long as the status quo of selling the Marvle & DC lines to shopowners rather than end customers benefits them because of their monopoly and their restrictive business practices. I might also argue (though I don't know that I necessarily believe it) that Hellboy's growth was limited by diluting the brand and following the Marvel/DC model of trying to turn one story in one book into a line of books trying to gobble up market share that way. -M I don't think you can make that leap with anything really approaching any real degree of certainty. You can lead a horse to water for certain, but can you make it drink? I don't always like having to buy more than one series, or even more than one comic, to get a whole story and you and many here on this board don't like that style either...but there are other boards online full of people who believe differently and just positing that sales were larger back before this kind of writing became popular (and we liked those stories better) doesn't mean that change is necessarily a substantial part of the sales problem that the industry is facing. Part of the problem? Sure, I think that could be argued. But such a large part that if it were to go away that the industry would be substantially revived? No, I just don't see anything that would convince me of that being the case. |
|
