Thread (Forum) Drift: Darn you, Quesada!

[Gyroscope352]

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/090206-nycc09-marvel-dark-reign.html


Question: How long is Dark Reign going to last? Can we take a break from events?

Quesada: So you don't want books where something happens?. . . When we produce books that aren't part of an event, there's a significant drop-off. You vote with your dollars.... We try to give you the stuff you want to read. When it's not successful, we stop publishing.

Okay, now I'm more annoyed with Quesada right now than I was after OMD. "Don't want books where something happens?" That is SUCH crap. Just because an event isn't going on doesn't mean nothing's happening. Look, I like events, but let's not do it EVERY year. They're changing the status quo too often; let's either see how these Initiative/Dark Reign new "status quos" play out for a while or change it back to normal. I'm getting a little sick of this. Anyone with me?

[Rev. Calibos]

I agree. I jumped back into buying monthly books again right in the middle of Civil War. With no 'jump on' point my diet consisted of mostly DC books while I waited for Civil War to end.

Since then we've had Secret Invasion and now that that's finally wrapped up again we have a 20+ part Dark Reign to deal with.

It's too much. I can't start picking up a book mid storyline and expect to feel satisfied about my purchase. As much as I've wanted to keep up with what's been going on in New/Mighty Avengers, Thunderbolts, etc. I can't because there's not been a break in the action for about two years now.

They're forgetting what made 'events' so special, the fact that they were temporary. You had a big crisis/secret war/inferno/etc., heroes would assemble, heroes would die, nothing would ever be the same again, etc. but at some point everyone could take a collective breath and get back to their regularly scheduled comics.

I'm all for huge, grandiose storylines but at some point the event has to end.

[Expletive Deleted]

He's not wrong. Crossover titles sell great; non-crossover titles don't. There's a degree to which he has to, as an employee of a public company, give the market what it wants.

As for the "something happens" comment, I'm inclined to read that as tongue-in-cheek. You lose a lot of nuance when you go from panel to transcript. The first few years of his tenure at Marvel were almost entirely crossover-free (to the point that people were complaining about elements from one title not appearing in others - be careful what you wish for, right?), so he obviously knows there's more than one way to run a comic book universe.

[Gyroscope352]

He's not wrong. Crossover titles sell great; non-crossover titles don't. There's a degree to which he has to, as an employee of a public company, give the market what it wants.

As for the "something happens" comment, I'm inclined to read that as tongue-in-cheek. You lose a lot of nuance when you go from panel to transcript. The first few years of his tenure at Marvel were almost entirely crossover-free (to the point that people were complaining about elements from one title not appearing in others), so he obviously knows there's more than one way to run a comic book universe.

Titles sell great during crossovers because people will buy all the tie-ins for an event, even for books they don't read. It does not translate to what people like or what they want. The events themselves (the main Civil War book or Secret Invasion book), yeah, I can see where you're coming from with those.

I get that the comment was tongue-in-cheek, but I certainly think he meant some truth in it. If there weren't, they wouldn't make so much of a big deal about how "the MU will never be the same!" year after year after year. And I'm not saying that books need to be independent of one another, as people may have been complaining about pre-Disassembled - I love crossovers, I don't love events. There's a difference. And good stories don't always need to have lasting implications on other MU books.

[stingerman]

He says it how it is, you vote with your dollars. Its that simple, to me at least.

[Gyroscope352]

He says it how it is, you vote with your dollars. Its that simple, to me at least.

And I think he is wrong. I think people buy more during a crossover so they can keep up with the status quo (and in the case of tie-ins, because they feel they can get a better experience by doing so), and I think he exploits that to sell more books by having an event every 12 months. Though perhaps this is unfounded.

[jpk]

I'm on the record as a Joe Q supporter. How can you argue with a guy who adheres to supply-demand economics? Don't call the guy a sellout while you're scooping up what he's selling.

[Gyroscope352]

I'm on the record as a Joe Q supporter. How can you argue with a guy who adheres to supply-demand economics? Don't call the guy a sellout while you're scooping up what he's selling.

Just because I'm buying comics doesn't mean I support him. I may be scooping up what he's selling, but I'm not one of the people who buys any more during crossovers than during regular time. I used to be, until I realized that it was no more enjoyable than what I'm doing now; plus it cost more.

[stingerman]

It would be interesting to look at the big event titles and the tie-ins associated with each, review each of them and see how many were actually worth buying and were definitely related to the story.

Joe is definitely, right though.

Some event titles sell like ten thousand or more than when there is no event. However, I do wonder how many of those title are sitting on shelves at comic stores. Do the retailers just order more or do the readers buy more? I supposed the question is already answered because the retailers wouldn't order without the demand from the readers, I suppose.

[Gyroscope352]

It would be interesting to look at the big event titles and the tie-ins associated with each, review each of them and see how many were actually worth buying and were definitely related to the story.

Joe is definitely, right though.

Some event titles sell like ten thousand or more than when there is no event. However, I do wonder how many of those title are sitting on shelves at comic stores. Do the retailers just order more or do the readers buy more? I supposed the question is already answered because the retailers wouldn't order without the demand from the readers, I suppose.

No, they're definitely bought. Very few sit on shelves (unless they're Ultimatum, lol). That's why we keep getting second and third printings of event titles like Civil War. People do buy them, for sure.

[DeadXMan]

if your buying Marvel comics, then Joe keeps his Job, since it his duty to produce comics that people will buy.

Therefore, you are supporting him.

[stingerman]

No, they're definitely bought. Very few sit on shelves (unless they're Ultimatum, lol). That's why we keep getting second and third printings of event titles like Civil War. People do buy them, for sure.

You are right. For the life of me I can't understand why people buy those Civil War, WWH reprints when they are all in trades/already out.

I check the sales charts and they are still selling thousands. Don't get me wrong thats good for business and all .... new readers?

[Ex_]

How is this tough? It's a business first. If it's making the big bucks, HOW can you be mad at the chief for calling the shots that maximize the profits? Quesada FTW.

[drwho]

I just think its bad that marvel wants readers to invest in these over extended arcs which end up being anticlimatic or just not worth all the money spent on it in the long run. I really question some of the quality of Marvel's work. Right now im only getting trades and im just going to have to go by word of mouth.