sales in comics, what is better

[ArnoldoAAD]

What is better?

a book that cost $1 and sells 30.000 copies

or

a book that cost $3 and sells 10.000 copies

[MajorHoy]

Who are the writers and artists?

Who are the publishers?

What are the overall costs associated with each book?

[Munkiman]

Either way it's getting canceled, those are terrible numbers.

[Jake V]

Better for who?

[Goggindowner]

High circulation is always better. Not to mention that if you are paying $1 for a comic you had been paying $4 for, you can now buy four times as many comics, which is also good for the industry.

That being said, I also don't know what the exact cost is to publish a single issue of a comic. Something tells me, though, that $1 would be much more feasible if you cut out distribution and printing costs for single issues.

Just sayin.

[El Sombrero]

High circulation is always better.

That's how I would view it as well.

[Hulk_Is]

a book that cost $3 and sells 10.000 copies

People need to face reality. We no longer live on a prairie. Thing's cost more now and other forms of entertainment has taken away from books.

[Sabrina_Fried]

Who are the writers and artists?

Who are the publishers?

What are the overall costs associated with each book?

All of the above, plus the following from the publishers' perspective:

What are the comics' sources of revenue? Are we talking strictly unit sales here or does it have advertising? What proportion of the book's total income comes from unit sales and what proportion comes from advertising/licensing/etc.

What is the release schedule for the comic? In your example, the revenue from the comic is $30,000. Is that the retail value or the wholesale value? Comic shops don't sell comics out of the goodness of their hearts. They take a share to pay their own bills and maybe profit. Is the net amount that the publisher gets from the sale of the comics enough for you to fund the production of the next issue and pay your overhead?

Also, since comics are a non-returnable product, how many comics did you have to print to sell those numbers? Let's say you sell out your print run of 30,000 books for $1. Your expenses are that you printed 30,000 books and you sold them all. Now lets say you printed 30,000 books with a cover price of $3 but only sold 10,000. Your expenses are still that you printed 30,000 books so even though your revenue per unit sold is higher, your overall take will be lower because you will have to eat the cost of producing the unsold comics. On top of that, you now have to pay to warehouse the unsold comics until either someone orders them from you or their book value diminishes to the point where it is just cheaper to pulp them. And with a typical comic, your sales window is typically not larger than a few weeks.

From the comic shop owner's perspective, if they (collectively) order 30,000 books with a cover price of $3 and only sell 10,000 they are now sitting on two books for every one they sold and probably have not broken even on their investment. The first thing they are going to do is adjust their orders DOWN for the next issue.

[dupont2005]

How about a comic that costs a penny and sells three million copies?

[Shellhead]

How about a comic that costs a penny and sells three million copies?

In all seriousness, if typical monthly titles had a circulation of 3 million copies each, they could almost get away with a cover price of a penny, because the publishers could sell enough advertising to cover all the costs and maybe an adequate profit margin. For comparison, the Wall Street Journal has a daily circulation of 2 million. Newsweek has a weekly circulation of 4 million, though that represents a significant drop over years past.

[Iangould]

The 30,000 copies at $1 is preferable - assuming you have some vested interest in bankrupting publishers and comic shops.

[Muldwych]

The more you sell the better, regardless of price.

[thehod]

Whatever makes you the most money.

Halving the price does not automatically equate to a doubling of sales.

[thwhtGuardian]

Whatever makes you the most money.

Halving the price does not automatically equate to a doubling of sales.

This is one of the odder thoughts I often see expressed in discussions about comic sales, some people seriously think that if comics were cheaper sales would be better. It's just not that simple though, especially when you look at sales numbers from the early 80's when comics really were cheaper than they are today and see that sales really weren't all that different than they are now.

We're a niche audience, we have been for a while, and lowering the cover price isn't going to magically increase the audience size.

[Aubergine~!]

This is one of the odder thoughts I often see expressed in discussions about comic sales, some people seriously think that if comics were cheaper sales would be better. It's just not that simple though, especially when you look at sales numbers from the early 80's when comics really were cheaper than they are today and see that sales really weren't all that different than they are now.

We're a niche audience, we have been for a while, and lowering the cover price isn't going to magically increase the audience size.

Lowering cover prices isn't going to magically save the industry or anything, but at the same time, more people buying something if it's price is reduced is pretty much a basic economic rule, even for niche products.

For me, the main reason to lower cover prices (which, from what I've been hearing, might not even be possible) is so kids can afford the things, like they used to be able to. Comics have more competition for children's attention than ever, but without new generations of kids reading and getting into comics, the industry isn't going to survive.

[dupont2005]

The more you sell the better, regardless of price.

I wish this line of thought carried over to Lamborghinis. They could outsell the Civic at 20k

[thehod]

Lowering cover prices isn't going to magically save the industry or anything, but at the same time, more people buying something if it's price is reduced is pretty much a basic economic rule, even for niche products.

For me, the main reason to lower cover prices (which, from what I've been hearing, might not even be possible) is so kids can afford the things, like they used to be able to. Comics have more competition for children's attention than ever, but without new generations of kids reading and getting into comics, the industry isn't going to survive.

That is the long term view certianly.

but if you're wanting to sell a comic, which figures are you going to want to see

20,000 x $1 = $20,000
11,000 x $3 = $33,000

for example.

[Aubergine~!]

That is the long term view certianly.

but if you're wanting to sell a comic, which figures are you going to want to see

20,000 x $1 = $20,000
11,000 x $3 = $33,000

for example.

Oh, the latter, definitely. It's basic profit maximization. You sell your product at the price which will bring you the greatest revenue.

My only point was that adjusting cover price does affect sales numbers.

[JackParra]

I started collecting in the early 90's when comics were $1. The paper was also cheaper, and many books still used acid paper.

Now the paper is nicer, print quality better, and they don't yellow. Plus with digital color entering the game in a big way, they now have another artist to pay.

For these reasons $3 a book doesn't bother me at all. Plus it's been $3 for a very long time, meaning they're not just jacking up the prices cause they can.