|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 17:34:25 GMT -5
Unless those customers were low profit margin customers, and by eliminating them they have influenced the direct market to order more product from their higher profit margin accounts. Kind of how retail stores have eliminated the kind of stock from their shelves that were low profit margin merchandise to fill their shelves with high profit margin merchandise, or how a car salesman will try to sell you what nets him the most commission regardless of what you stepped on the lot looking for, or the same with cellular phone dealers and service plans. I used to do that, and I remember the difference in commissions for certain things, and believe me, we tried to make sure everyone chose the plan that paid us the most. My belief is those smaller publishers were profitable, just not AS profitable as the big two, and doing a favor for the big two, while doing a favor for yourself seemed like a win win for them. Distributing comics isn't commission based though so I don't think the logic carries over, plus it seems like a rather complicated line of reasoning that includes many intricate steps to reach the nefarious end goal...which would suggest to me that a much simpler explanation would be much closer to the actual reasoning for their business practice. I get it, it stinks that comics we enjoy aren't popular enough to be profitable but I see no beneficial reason for chasing ghosts in the belief that these comics are being purposefully set up to fail for nefarious reasons by the distributor. Stocking merchandise in a store isn't commission based either, but the store will have different profit margins for different things. Frozen yogurt places sometimes hide the mochi because it's the lowest profit margin topping. Others simply won't offer it at all. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 21, 2014 17:59:37 GMT -5
Distributing comics isn't commission based though so I don't think the logic carries over, plus it seems like a rather complicated line of reasoning that includes many intricate steps to reach the nefarious end goal...which would suggest to me that a much simpler explanation would be much closer to the actual reasoning for their business practice. I get it, it stinks that comics we enjoy aren't popular enough to be profitable but I see no beneficial reason for chasing ghosts in the belief that these comics are being purposefully set up to fail for nefarious reasons by the distributor. Stocking merchandise in a store isn't commission based either, but the store will have different profit margins for different things. Frozen yogurt places sometimes hide the mochi because it's the lowest profit margin topping. Others simply won't offer it at all. My understanding is that the profit margin is strictly based on units shipped though, which makes it an even matter. If it were something along the lines of say genre and superhero comics got a break because that genre was seen to have a higher margin for profit than mystery or humor comics that would seem to be an unfair standard but that's not the case; the threshold is the same no matter if the book belongs to either the humor, pulp or superhero genres. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 18:39:19 GMT -5
Yeah, we're in agreement on that. I just disagree that there was no way to make a comic with aa 2500 unit print run profitable to distribute.
I think it either was profitable or could easily have been profitable, but not AS profitable as a comic with a thirty thousand unit print run, and that by eliminating the lower profit margin options, they're guaranteeing higher sales for the higher profit margin options. Because if a comic shop has 150 slots for new monthly comics, and a five thousand dollar weekly budget, when ten percent of his titles are eliminated he's not going to leave ten empty slots, he's going to pick up ten more titles. It's a snowball effect of making your more profitable stock even more profitable than before. It has to be done at the expense of someone else, because simply offering a wider selection of product isn't going to do it, you have to guide the retailers hand, help him pick the product that works best for you.
Have you ever heard of that happening when a big discount store rolls into town and shuts down the grocery store, hardware store, toy store, electronics store, and department store? Your favorite brands gone in favor of brands the larger store has streamlined due to their higher profit margins and limited shelf space? You can still get a frozen chicken pot pie, just not that Claimjumper one you liked so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 21, 2014 18:49:25 GMT -5
Yeah, we're in agreement on that. I just disagree that there was no way to make a comic with aa 2500 unit print run profitable to distribute. I think it either was profitable or could easily have been profitable, but not AS profitable as a comic with a thirty thousand unit print run, and that by eliminating the lower profit margin options, they're guaranteeing higher sales for the higher profit margin options. Because if a comic shop has 150 slots for new monthly comics, and a five thousand dollar weekly budget, when ten percent of his titles are eliminated he's not going to leave ten empty slots, he's going to pick up ten more titles. It's a snowball effect of making your more profitable stock even more profitable than before. It has to be done at the expense of someone else, because simply offering a wider selection of product isn't going to do it, you have to guide the retailers hand, help him pick the product that works best for you. Have you ever heard of that happening when a big discount store rolls into town and shuts down the grocery store, hardware store, toy store, electronics store, and department store? Your favorite brands gone in favor of brands the larger store has streamlined due to their higher profit margins and limited shelf space? You can still get a frozen chicken pot pie, just not that Claimjumper one you liked so much. Comics don't really work like that though, those other commodities and brands are at their bases interchangeable; you like peanut butter( like I do) and your favorite brand goes away you're not going to just give up peanut butter, you're just going to find a new substitute. However, with comics just because title x is available doesn't mean that title y will lose anything close to even approaching causal change and the same is true of the reverse; if title x is no longer available it doesn't mean that title y then gains those readers. Just think about it anecdotally here, if say Mouse Guard got taken of the shelves tomorrow how likely are you to substitute it for All New! All Different! X-Men: Blue's brand new #1 issue? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 18:53:15 GMT -5
If Mouseguard was forced out of print I would replace that empty slot on my pull list with something still in print. There are more comics than I have the time or money to read, so when one goes I easily pick up another, which is why I'm never a stickler about a tight schedule.
But there's also the fact that I'm not the only patron of the store. And if somehow everything I liked had been removed from the shelves in exchange for other similar items that I in particular wasn't a reader of, the possibility of other store patrons with more money than titles would buy it out of curiosity, especially if it was within their area of interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 21, 2014 19:23:00 GMT -5
If Mouseguard was forced out of print I would replace that empty slot on my pull list with something still in print. There are more comics than I have the time or money to read, so when one goes I easily pick up another, which is why I'm never a stickler about a tight schedule. But there's also the fact that I'm not the only patron of the store. And if somehow everything I liked had been removed from the shelves in exchange for other similar items that I in particular wasn't a reader of, the possibility of other store patrons with more money than titles would buy it out of curiosity, especially if it was within their area of interest. That doesn't really answer the question though, how likely would it be for you to buy comic x or y from Marvel or DC if indie comic z were unavailable? Is it a one to one substitution like it would be for products like peanut butter or chicken pot pies? My experience is no, and I'm guessing you're the same way. And the reverse is fairly similar, though just by being in the store does increase the chances of indie comic Z being profitable it does not equal a direct correlation to a lost sale for either comics x or y from Marvel and DC because random consumer 1 is likely to purchase random indie comic Z in addition to the comics he does buy as chances are it would be an impulse buy because it's an untried novelty. Could said purchase become an instead of comic x or y somewhere down the road? Perhaps, but that's no where near a sure bet so it would seem unlikely that Diamond, in its devious and nefarious ways, would actively choose to attempt to stop this scenario from occurring if the chances are not all that likely. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 19:44:51 GMT -5
If Mouseguard was forced out of print I would replace that empty slot on my pull list with something still in print. There are more comics than I have the time or money to read, so when one goes I easily pick up another, which is why I'm never a stickler about a tight schedule. But there's also the fact that I'm not the only patron of the store. And if somehow everything I liked had been removed from the shelves in exchange for other similar items that I in particular wasn't a reader of, the possibility of other store patrons with more money than titles would buy it out of curiosity, especially if it was within their area of interest. That doesn't really answer the question though, how likely would it be for you to buy comic x or y from Marvel or DC if indie comic z were unavailable? Is it a one to one substitution like it would be for products like peanut butter or chicken pot pies? My experience is no, and I'm guessing you're the same way. And the reverse is fairly similar, though just by being in the store does increase the chances of indie comic Z being profitable it does not equal a direct correlation to a lost sale for either comics x or y from Marvel and DC because random consumer 1 is likely to purchase random indie comic Z in addition to the comics he does buy as chances are it would be an impulse buy because it's an untried novelty. Could said purchase become an instead of comic x or y somewhere down the road? Perhaps, but that's no where near a sure bet so it would seem unlikely that Diamond, in its devious and nefarious ways, would actively choose to attempt to stop this scenario from occurring if the chances are not all that likely. I'm unlikely to, but many people are not. I imagine most comic readers read at least one title from either Marvel and DC, and for the few that don't, it's not like all Indy options have been removed. Make do with licensed comics, or comics that have a hit TV show behind them. There's larger indy publishers. And I am very likely, in the event of Dark Horse being forced out of business for example, to pick up more Image titles. The distributor still gets to streamline their stock, the retailer is still selling comics, profit margins go up just a little bit for everyone involved who wasn't forced out of business. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 21, 2014 20:11:25 GMT -5
That doesn't really answer the question though, how likely would it be for you to buy comic x or y from Marvel or DC if indie comic z were unavailable? Is it a one to one substitution like it would be for products like peanut butter or chicken pot pies? My experience is no, and I'm guessing you're the same way. And the reverse is fairly similar, though just by being in the store does increase the chances of indie comic Z being profitable it does not equal a direct correlation to a lost sale for either comics x or y from Marvel and DC because random consumer 1 is likely to purchase random indie comic Z in addition to the comics he does buy as chances are it would be an impulse buy because it's an untried novelty. Could said purchase become an instead of comic x or y somewhere down the road? Perhaps, but that's no where near a sure bet so it would seem unlikely that Diamond, in its devious and nefarious ways, would actively choose to attempt to stop this scenario from occurring if the chances are not all that likely. I'm unlikely to, but many people are not. I imagine most comic readers read at least one title from either Marvel and DC, and for the few that don't, it's not like all Indy options have been removed. Make do with licensed comics, or comics that have a hit TV show behind them. There's larger indy publishers. And I am very likely, in the event of Dark Horse being forced out of business for example, to pick up more Image titles. The distributor still gets to streamline their stock, the retailer is still selling comics, profit margins go up just a little bit for everyone involved who wasn't forced out of business. I don't think you're giving yourself enough credit, various consumer studies illustrate that the buying behavior of most people is akin to yours and mine in this regard. Unless product X is an direct substitution for product Y(say Jiff for Grammy Em's Peanutbutter) the consumer is unlikely to switch out if product y becomes unavailable( they aren't likely to buy Trader Joe's Cookie Butter for instance instead of Grammy Em's Peanutbutter). And the same is true with comics, especially where it concerns comics of different genres, a comic about a teenaged girl's every day life, or a group of anthropomorphic mid-evil mice are not an equal substitution for Batman and a reader of that everyday life/ mouse comic is unlikely to simply pick up Batman if said comic becomes unavailable. And the latter part of your post? Broadening the nefarious reasons for canceling one indie publishers account to help all other accounts instead of just to protect the big dogs is a pretty big push to the old goal posts. But even ignoring that, it seriously weakens your supposition because such a casual trickle down effect as the broad reaching scenario you now pose would seem to be more likely to be a small and coincidental side benefit to a normal business move rather than an evil scheme meant to help pad the profits of their most coveted customers. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 23:19:36 GMT -5
That's the thing though, eliminating the smaller self published comics does not eliminate entire genres. And people who tend to read those books tend to not stick to just one genre. Despite the fact that I think Diamond has been behind pushing several comics out of print, it's not the only way a small self published comic goes out of print. Comics I like go out of print all the time. Sometimes early, sometimes planned, sometimes temporarily. What do I do in the mean time? Read different comics. I'm not going to quit reading comics the day Usagi Yojimbo ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2014 23:23:54 GMT -5
And the latter part of your post? Broadening the nefarious reasons for canceling one indie publishers account to help all other accounts instead of just to protect the big dogs is a pretty big push to the old goal posts. But even ignoring that, it seriously weakens your supposition because such a casual trickle down effect as the broad reaching scenario you now pose would seem to be more likely to be a small and coincidental side benefit to a normal business move rather than an evil scheme meant to help pad the profits of their most coveted customers. I don't see it as a moving of the goal posts, since it's what I've been stating from the start. It may not be the case, I believe it is. It's not an uncommon business practice in other industries. Why do you think Marvel and DC consistently publish more titles than they can support, just to consistently cancel their bottom tier titles every year, just to release new titles that will once again have to be canceled? Because the cost of doing so is preferable to the retailer having shelf space and money dedicated to competitors. Marvel and DC can weather the storm with ten underperforming titles, other publishers cannot. Why did the comic code ban the word "Terror" in comic book titles but didn't ban Whitewash Jones? Because it was more about putting EC out of business than it was about making comics wholesome. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456 
|
Post by ironchimp on Jul 22, 2014 4:05:34 GMT -5
Yeah, we're in agreement on that. I just disagree that there was no way to make a comic with aa 2500 unit print run profitable to distribute. I think it either was profitable or could easily have been profitable, but not AS profitable as a comic with a thirty thousand unit print run, and that by eliminating the lower profit margin options, they're guaranteeing higher sales for the higher profit margin options. Because if a comic shop has 150 slots for new monthly comics, and a five thousand dollar weekly budget, when ten percent of his titles are eliminated he's not going to leave ten empty slots, he's going to pick up ten more titles. It's a snowball effect of making your more profitable stock even more profitable than before. It has to be done at the expense of someone else, because simply offering a wider selection of product isn't going to do it, you have to guide the retailers hand, help him pick the product that works best for you. Have you ever heard of that happening when a big discount store rolls into town and shuts down the grocery store, hardware store, toy store, electronics store, and department store? Your favorite brands gone in favor of brands the larger store has streamlined due to their higher profit margins and limited shelf space? You can still get a frozen chicken pot pie, just not that Claimjumper one you liked so much. but diamond does distribute books with a 2500 print run |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 15:41:48 GMT -5
Yeah, we're in agreement on that. I just disagree that there was no way to make a comic with aa 2500 unit print run profitable to distribute. I think it either was profitable or could easily have been profitable, but not AS profitable as a comic with a thirty thousand unit print run, and that by eliminating the lower profit margin options, they're guaranteeing higher sales for the higher profit margin options. Because if a comic shop has 150 slots for new monthly comics, and a five thousand dollar weekly budget, when ten percent of his titles are eliminated he's not going to leave ten empty slots, he's going to pick up ten more titles. It's a snowball effect of making your more profitable stock even more profitable than before. It has to be done at the expense of someone else, because simply offering a wider selection of product isn't going to do it, you have to guide the retailers hand, help him pick the product that works best for you. Have you ever heard of that happening when a big discount store rolls into town and shuts down the grocery store, hardware store, toy store, electronics store, and department store? Your favorite brands gone in favor of brands the larger store has streamlined due to their higher profit margins and limited shelf space? You can still get a frozen chicken pot pie, just not that Claimjumper one you liked so much. but diamond does distribute books with a 2500 print run Not if that is the only book the publisher has. In other words, they'll do it for Marvel and DC, but not for Aardvark Vanaheim, WaRP Graphics, ect. The effects of such practices are pretty far reaching. You want to publish your comic? Sign on with one of these big publishers who may be telling you how to make your comic and possibly even try to take your creations from you. The whole "Kirby knew what he was doing when he agreed to work for hire" argument to me is invalid because that was the only kind of work available. It was the small press that improved comics as a medium and as an industry. What happens when they are pushed out? Not to mention the lack of diversity this creates. You know Sergio Aragones went to Marvel first with Groo, but Marvel told him they would only publish it if they get the rights to the intellectual property, and there was absolutely no other way of doing it. So Sergio found Pacific, got his comic published, and all the sudden Marvel found a way to publish creator owned comics. But just imagine how awesome that would be for Marvel if Pacific had never existed? The next Pacific might not. |
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Jul 22, 2014 17:11:33 GMT -5
That's true of any business, you get certain perks for being a big customer and it has nothing to do with hard balling smaller customers and everything to do with keeping your best customers happy because they give you more sales more often. And the big complaint with Amazon is they are simply treating the fifth smallest publisher the same exact way they treat the largest publisher. That's actually not true. There are many, many small publishers (those that only print a couple books) that Amazon ignores completely... I know because I don't ignore them, and and able to make some money selling those books on Amazon myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2014 17:17:27 GMT -5
And the big complaint with Amazon is they are simply treating the fifth smallest publisher the same exact way they treat the largest publisher. That's actually not true. There are many, many small publishers (those that only print a couple books) that Amazon ignores completely... I know because I don't ignore them, and and able to make some money selling those books on Amazon myself. And Diamond doesn't ignore many small publishers themselves? Like I said, the only real difference is Amazon isn't the only book distributor, or even the only large online book distributor. In fact, according to this, online sales (from all online retailers combined) make up less than half of all book sales.  Do you think Diamond makes up more or less than half of all floppy sales? I couldn't find the exact marketshare of Amazon in the online marketplace, but if we assume it's 3/4 of all online sales (I think a generous figure) then they only really make up 32% of books sold. |
|
ironchimp
Full Member
Simian Overlord
Posts: 456
|
Post by ironchimp on Jul 22, 2014 19:29:00 GMT -5
but diamond does distribute books with a 2500 print run Not if that is the only book the publisher has. In other words, they'll do it for Marvel and DC, but not for Aardvark Vanaheim, WaRP Graphics, ect. The effects of such practices are pretty far reaching. You want to publish your comic? Sign on with one of these big publishers who may be telling you how to make your comic and possibly even try to take your creations from you. The whole "Kirby knew what he was doing when he agreed to work for hire" argument to me is invalid because that was the only kind of work available. It was the small press that improved comics as a medium and as an industry. What happens when they are pushed out? Not to mention the lack of diversity this creates. You know Sergio Aragones went to Marvel first with Groo, but Marvel told him they would only publish it if they get the rights to the intellectual property, and there was absolutely no other way of doing it. So Sergio found Pacific, got his comic published, and all the sudden Marvel found a way to publish creator owned comics. But just imagine how awesome that would be for Marvel if Pacific had never existed? The next Pacific might not. you just get 3 creators with a print run of 2000 form a publishing umbrella and publish them that way. or use image - lots of books in a wide range of styles - no editorial interference - all intellectual rights belong to creators - and print runs from 80,000 to 2000- what you are describing already exists. |
|
