Tilting at Windmills - Mar 22, 2012

[CBR News]

Brian Hibbs reflects on the reality of digital comics as opposed to what publishers and stores thought they would mean to the industry, and how to harness them to help increase the overall comics market.


Full article here.

[amcpherson]

Great article, as always, Brian. Just a few thoughts:

1. It is probably too early to be assessing the success of digital initiatives, or to be dismissing the possibility that paper comics might go the way of all other media. Only in the last year has there been a reliable, high-quality distribution system for digital comics that (a) contains a high percentage of in-demand titles and (b) a platform (the iPad) that is really well suited to consumption. The new iPad, by all reports, is the best digital delivery system yet, and may have a dramatic effect on the market.

2. It is possible that the growth in paper does not correlate at all with the growth in digital, and that there are different drivers in both markets. In paper, you had an exceptionally well executed campaign by DC Comics, together with much better support from other media (mainly film, but also TV). The fact that paper has grown probably says nothing about the potential for digital. They are different markets, with different drivers.

3. I think you underestimate the potential impact of digital on the addressable market, and overestimate the significance of the collection gene and the need to educate consumers about comics. What makes digital revolutionary is its portability, its accessibility, and its ability to tie into social media. The latest release of the Comixology platform explicitly provides hooks for Facebook and Twitter. We have already seen early indicators of new markets for comics with the Twilight graphic novel series, the "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" series, and so on. I think properties like "Rachel Rising," "Morning Glories" and others that have broader appeal than superheroes for the first time have a distribution platform that can get them out of the direct market ghetto.

4. It's not just about underserved consumers, but underserved creators. Tons of promising books have died in the past because retailers wouldn't or couldn't support them, whether it was from their own myopia, lack of marketing resources, or simple non-returnability. Your idea of publishers steering consumers to retailers that stock their books is fine, but digital can reach everybody instantly. A creator wondering if they can get enough support from the channel to launch their book no longer has to worry as much: if they can generate buzz through Facebook or Twitter, they can steer their audience straight to a storefront where they can get the book right away. This is a gigantic change, that could completely transform the market.

5. The accessibility of serialized fiction increases dramatically when all back issues or collections are instantly available. I've read many comments from people on the boards who discovered a comic at issue 11 or something, and were able to easily go back and get caught up by buying the digital back issues. This has to have an impact on the potential market going forward.

In short, I am much more optimistic (or pessimistic, I guess it depends on your point of view) that you are about the potential for digital.

[MatthewDiCarlo]

Brian Hibbs reflects on the reality of digital comics as opposed to what publishers and stores thought they would mean to the industry, and how to harness them to help increase the overall comics market.


Full article here.

With Netflix and MP3s, it's all about the money, though. The big shift wasn't between Netflix dvd and Netflix digital. It was between going and renting a movie at blockbuster for $5 or paying $15 a month for unlimited movies. With MP3s it was about getting a song for $1 or an album at a discount from the old $17 cds. After that it was about control. The ability to have access to what you wanted, how you wanted. To mix and match songs.

The fact that the comic companies (in order to appease retailers) have not priced digital comics to the rest of the digital market and don't allow the sort of freedom to mix and match but instead enslave the consumer to a specific format that doesn't really involve ownership... well, it's hardly surprising it hasn't picked up. Why would anyone, either previous consumers or pirates switch to a model where they're getting less than what they had before for the same price. It's only a few scant people who STRONGLY prefer the format that have switched. I understand WHY they've been so conservative, but let's call a spade a spade here.

It's been the most backwards roll out imaginable.

[poneley]

With Netflix and MP3s, it's all about the money, though. The big shift wasn't between Netflix dvd and Netflix digital. It was between going and renting a movie at blockbuster for $5 or paying $15 a month for unlimited movies. With MP3s it was about getting a song for $1 or an album at a discount from the old $17 cds. After that it was about control. The ability to have access to what you wanted, how you wanted. To mix and match songs.

The fact that the comic companies (in order to appease retailers) have not priced digital comics to the rest of the digital market and don't allow the sort of freedom to mix and match but instead enslave the consumer to a specific format that doesn't really involve ownership... well, it's hardly surprising it hasn't picked up. Why would anyone, either previous consumers or pirates switch to a model where they're getting less than what they had before for the same price. It's only a few scant people who STRONGLY prefer the format that have switched. I understand WHY they've been so conservative, but let's call a spade a spade here.

It's been the most backwards roll out imaginable.

EXACTLY.

I do agree with Mr. Hibb's argument that comic books are a fundamentally different product then other products that have gone digital. The physical format of a comic book does have more staying power then say a DVD or CD. Having said that, consumers are getting shafted by the digital initiatives that the big publishers are putting out. And why is this happening? Because retailers raise hell when they see competition. Are retailers getting in the way of new fans and customers because they want to protect their market? We don't know that because digital comic books are not priced competitively with other digital products.

I think its silly Mr. Hibbs spent half of his blog reassuring us that digital is not a big deal especially since we kept hearing for years that it was the worst thing ever.

[mummra the ever living]

While I do agree with many of the conclusions in this article, I do not agree with the message.

While I was an Architecture student I wrote my dissertation on the role of libraries in the age of Information & communication technology (ict) in which (after months of research into the history and future of both) I concluded that the library will never die. This may not seem like a radical conclusion, but it is entirely contrary to the constantly praised belief of pop culture in the late 80's to mid 00's that the Internet would kill the book and thus the library.

I bring this up as, it is the perennial belief of seemingly everyone in all industries that the new will destroy the old to take it's place- this so very rarely happens- and the parable of the comic book (and books generally) to music and film is a false one.

The reasons that comic books are not being replaced are many, but can be roughly summed up in a few points:

1; haves & have nots: there will always be those who cannot gain access to the fancy new tech and infrastructure to support the new (not ever really) revolutionary trend

2; tangibility: humans are physical beings who require place and space and interaction- we enjoy the book as a physical object and the culture it creates, not just the information.

3; delivery; a book is instant delivery and enjoyment. As stated the comparison of comic books to music and film does not stand up as, unlike books, the format in which music or film are delivered bares not measurable impact on how they are received- a DVD is not a movie, a cd is not a song, but a comic

[Barry Convex]

With all due respect to Mr. Hibbs - and I do have plenty for him - if he were a music retailer in 2001, iTunes had launched selling only complete albums and the singles available on CD at CD prices with enormously restrictive DRM, and sales underwhelmed, he'd be trumpeting those sales figures as proof that digital wasn't the future of the music industry.

Attempting to execute a literal translation of a print business model to digital (actually worse than print, considering the lack of ownership) is a guaranteed way to ensure that digital remains an ancillary revenue stream to print. That's in addition to the points amcpherson made so well in his first post; at least comiXology's integration of social media features is a significant step in the right direction.

[skullduggery]

There are numerous reason why I haven't gone the digital route with my comic purchases, but the primary one among them us that thus far no one has guaranteed me that my purchase of a digital comic guarantees me ownership and access in perpetuity.
I know when I buy a hard copy of a comic or trade, it is mine. Unless I lose it or it is somehow damaged to the extent where it is no longer readable, I have it and can read it at any time.
With digital, we've already seen Amazon stripping books off their Kindle device.
With digital sellers, I have no guarantees that the same couldn't happen with a purchase. Or that somehow the files that list the record of my purchases somehow couldn't be lost or damaged such that I could not have my purchases moved/restored to a new device.
So as far as I can see it at this point, a person could spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on digital comics and wake up one dy to find that they can longer get to them. Basically, it seems like the purchase of a digital comic is really a rental.
I don't want to rent. I want to 100% own what I have paid for (and also it is nice to have the option of re-selling it once I have determined I no longer want to own it).

[amcpherson]

There are numerous reason why I haven't gone the digital route with my comic purchases, but the primary one among them us that thus far no one has guaranteed me that my purchase of a digital comic guarantees me ownership and access in perpetuity.
I know when I buy a hard copy of a comic or trade, it is mine. Unless I lose it or it is somehow damaged to the extent where it is no longer readable, I have it and can read it at any time.
With digital, we've already seen Amazon stripping books off their Kindle device.
With digital sellers, I have no guarantees that the same couldn't happen with a purchase. Or that somehow the files that list the record of my purchases somehow couldn't be lost or damaged such that I could not have my purchases moved/restored to a new device.
So as far as I can see it at this point, a person could spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on digital comics and wake up one dy to find that they can longer get to them. Basically, it seems like the purchase of a digital comic is really a rental.
I don't want to rent. I want to 100% own what I have paid for (and also it is nice to have the option of re-selling it once I have determined I no longer want to own it).

Since the general tenor of the comments here has been that paper is generally superior to digital at this point (which reinforces Brian's argument that it will not cut into the share of paper), I thought I should add a few points about why digital could be superior to paper for some buyers:

1. No storage costs. I am a longtime collector, and I've switched to digital whenever possible, because my longboxes are full, and I don't want to devote more space to the collection.
2. Even if I had infinite space, the simple fact is that I will never re-read most of the comics in my collection. It doesn't make sense to devote so much storage space to items I will likely never need.
3. Easy access to back issues. I said this before, but no one picked up on it, and I think it is absolutely key to getting new readers hooked. Brian in a past column complained about Marvel's poor backlist policies. With digital, the problem is gone.
4. Lower cost. Wait a month, and most comics go down by a buck. Often, they have sales at 99 cents. Thus it is not true, as some have said, that digital comics are priced the same as their paper equivalents.
5. Expanding the market means moving beyond the hard-core collector, which is a shrinking market, even if lapsed readers have been coming back. Non-collectors are not nearly so worried about the artifact itself - witness the success of Netflix streaming.
6. Digital comics can't burn, get wet or get chewed up by the dog.
7. Digital comics can be read wherever you are, whenever you care to read them. Just log into the site. Away from home on Wednesday? No need to hunt for a local shop - just download and enjoy.

I recognize that there are some advantages to owning a paper comic, such as resale value or aesthetics. And there will always be a place for high-quality, oversized deluxe versions of works that have proven their value over time. But most comics are disposable pop culture, and I urge any collector to really take a hard look at their collection and ask themselves how much of it they are really going to need in the future.

[Brian Hibbs]

1. It is probably too early to be assessing the success of digital initiatives, or to be dismissing the possibility that paper comics might go the way of all other media. Only in the last year has there been a reliable, high-quality distribution system for digital comics that (a) contains a high percentage of in-demand titles and (b) a platform (the iPad) that is really well suited to consumption. The new iPad, by all reports, is the best digital delivery system yet, and may have a dramatic effect on the market.

There's no doubt I could end up incredibly wrong for a long-term prognosis, but my recollection of things is that it was almost immediately clear, post-iTunes that (and how) the music industry would change. I'd argue that given the placement of the "Comics" app, and given the unprecendented marketing and promotion that DC did with their relaunch, that IF things were going to change dramatically for the "core" product, we'd have seen the signs by now

2. It is possible that the growth in paper does not correlate at all with the growth in digital, and that there are different drivers in both markets. In paper, you had an exceptionally well executed campaign by DC Comics, together with much better support from other media (mainly film, but also TV).

Possibly, but, I judge, unlikely -- DC's campaign was AT LEAST as much for digital as it was for print, and, given that the "lapsed" readership *appears* to have gone overwhelmingly for print should, I think, say something.

I don't know what you mean by the "better support" point?

3. I think you underestimate the potential impact of digital on the addressable market, and overestimate the significance of the collection gene and the need to educate consumers about comics.

On the latter, at least, if anything, I think I've dramatically UNDERstated it -- I sell comics to "civilians" all day long, and yeah, people drastically need thier hands held.

What makes digital revolutionary is its portability, its accessibility, and its ability to tie into social media. The latest release of the Comixology platform explicitly provides hooks for Facebook and Twitter. We have already seen early indicators of new markets for comics with the Twilight graphic novel series, the "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" series, and so on. I think properties like "Rachel Rising," "Morning Glories" and others that have broader appeal than superheroes for the first time have a distribution platform that can get them out of the direct market ghetto.

We've had facebook and twitter amongst all media for quite some time, and while "going viral" can certainly help increase general awareness, I'm not aware of a generalized explosion for specialized media as a result of social marketing -- that is to say, I believe that Oprah's book club sold more books that any tweet; and that neither grew the overall market for books over and above the market for books.

It would certainly be neat if that happened with comics (because increased demand or interest in title x can not HELP but increase sales in print as well), but while (say) Tyrese Gibson was able to tweet up a whole lot of sales for an issue #1, it did jack shit for #2 and beyond.

(That is to say, this isn't an opinion generated by luddism, but, rather by watching how these things actually play out in the real world)

4. It's not just about underserved consumers, but underserved creators. Tons of promising books have died in the past because retailers wouldn't or couldn't support them, whether it was from their own myopia, lack of marketing resources, or simple non-returnability.

I'll disagree strongly with the entire basis of this bit -- there are *exceedingly* few comics that weren't killed BY THE MARKET ITSELF. I don't mean retailers, I mean consumers and their individual buying power. When something fails to find a hold in the market, it is virtually always because the market, as a whole, doesn't actually want it.

Your idea of publishers steering consumers to retailers that stock their books is fine, but digital can reach everybody instantly. A creator wondering if they can get enough support from the channel to launch their book no longer has to worry as much: if they can generate buzz through Facebook or Twitter, they can steer their audience straight to a storefront where they can get the book right away. This is a gigantic change, that could completely transform the market.

What retailers do and can do is create and maintain an ongoing and regular support for a creator or a work -- once that isn't limited to only a "viral" buzz of-the-moment.

5. The accessibility of serialized fiction increases dramatically when all back issues or collections are instantly available. I've read many comments from people on the boards who discovered a comic at issue 11 or something, and were able to easily go back and get caught up by buying the digital back issues. This has to have an impact on the potential market going forward.

It *might*, but I suspect that in the end it will actually only have the impact that, say, the availability of (effectively) rush-produced TPs did.... not much, or, perhaps, slightly negative as it reduced the "Buy it now or buy it never" problem.

Thanks for the reasoned commentary!

-B

[DarkBeast]

Great article as always.

I wish you could clone yourself and appear in every podcast that ever makes totally uninformed, naive statements about how all we need is [the next pro-digital step at the time] in order to usher in millions of new readers who are supposedly just waiting to buy digital versions of mainstream comic issues, as long as they're day and date... or as long as they're relatively DRM-free... or as long as they're featured on iTunes... or as long as they're $1.99... or as long as they're $0.99... or, etc.

The biggest point is that digital vs. print isn't an either/or thing. There are advantages and disadvantages, perks and possible annoyances, on each side.

Lastly, the aspect of digital that never gets raised is that it tends to provide a shallower reading experience, and scientific studies actually back this up. When reading information on backlit screens, people tend to engage with it less and remember it less. This doesn't apply to every person in every situation, but in general this is the effect of digital: everything seems more forgettable and disposable. I think on some level most of the comics readers who feel the need to stick with print sense, maybe on a subconscious level, that their experiences with digital just don't seem as meaningful. I think often people self-criticize themselves as being "old-fashioned" or whatever for liking print better, but that seems like an uninformed criticism we pick up from the media. Personally, as someone who reads a lot of digital and print, I find that digital reading makes me more prone to distracted engagement. The only exception to this is reading on my regular Kindle that doesn't have a backlit screen.

[sandwich eater]

The reason I don't buy digital comics, which I consider to be superior to print, is DRM. I did buy those Marvel Comics DVDs that had DRM free PDFs that they released a few years ago, and I find digital to be much more convenient.

I think people embrace Netflix because you're not buying movies individually. You pay a flat rate and get access to hundreds of movies. If Netflix loses the streaming rights to a movie, it's no big loss because Netflix never gives its customers the illusion of ownership, the way that buying digital comics does. If someone made a "Netflix" for comics where you payed a low flat monthly fee and got unlimited access to a large library of thousands of comics from different companies, then I would probably give up print comics for good.

[leef]

Lastly, the aspect of digital that never gets raised is that it tends to provide a shallower reading experience, and scientific studies actually back this up. When reading information on backlit screens, people tend to engage with it less and remember it less. This doesn't apply to every person in every situation, but in general this is the effect of digital: everything seems more forgettable and disposable. I think on some level most of the comics readers who feel the need to stick with print sense, maybe on a subconscious level, that their experiences with digital just don't seem as meaningful. I think often people self-criticize themselves as being "old-fashioned" or whatever for liking print better, but that seems like an uninformed criticism we pick up from the media. Personally, as someone who reads a lot of digital and print, I find that digital reading makes me more prone to distracted engagement. The only exception to this is reading on my regular Kindle that doesn't have a backlit screen.

Excellent point! My experience "reading" digital comics feels much more like "watching", with much less engagement. And engagement is really the key to growing readership. As Brian has re-iterated many times, every comic isn't just competing with the other comics sitting on a shelf or in a digital storefront. Each comic is competing for mind-share in a very crowded market of entertainment possibilities. We want and need engaged readers that are excited about what their reading, and not just casually swiping through a comic as they watch TV out of rote habit or obligation.

[amcpherson]

OK, now I really am starting to feel like I'm the one "tilting at windmills" here, but I can't resist responding to some the points made by Brian and others here:

There's no doubt I could end up incredibly wrong for a long-term prognosis, but my recollection of things is that it was almost immediately clear, post-iTunes that (and how) the music industry would change. I'd argue that given the placement of the "Comics" app, and given the unprecendented marketing and promotion that DC did with their relaunch, that IF things were going to change dramatically for the "core" product, we'd have seen the signs by now

I think what you're forgetting here is that iTunes was a response to the illegal downloading that was killing the record industry. In fact, one of the reasons Apple was able to get the record labels to agree to sell individual songs at 99 cents was that it was clear that if they didn't, they wouldn't have a business in a few years. To the extent that iTunes changed the music industry, it was by restoring an income stream that was rapidly disappearing. Now, that obviously hasn't happened in comics yet, but it could - if you do a search on "0-day" on Google, you will see that there is an enterprising group of individuals that are pirating virtually the entire output of the comics publishers on weekly basis. The quality of these scans is so high that it suggests there is a leak at the publishers themselves - these are not done with a flatbed scanner.

Last quarter, Apple sold more iPads than HP sold computers, and is on track to do so again this quarter - this suggests to me that the day is fast approaching when a significant body of consumers will have tablets capable of providing a satisfying reading experience. CBR's own Graeme McMillan this past week praised the new iPad as a platform for reading comics, and speculated that the Retina display, by allowing him to read two pages at once comfortably, could replicate much of the experience of reading in paper.

Taken together, these trends tell me that we are rapidly approaching the day when significant numbers of readers will simply avoid paying for comics altogether by downloading them. Once they do, they will see that the experience of a digital comic is not that much worse than reading a paper comic, and to the extent that they do wish to support the industry, they will seek out legitimate digital outlets. To say that we have had sufficient time to see if a shift to digital is in the works ignores the rapid proliferation of new media tablets, and the ready availability of comics for free in digital form. Almost assuredly, Marvel and DC's push for digital last year was a defensive move against the pirates much more than it was an attempt to grow sales.

Possibly, but, I judge, unlikely -- DC's campaign was AT LEAST as much for digital as it was for print, and, given that the "lapsed" readership *appears* to have gone overwhelmingly for print should, I think, say something.

What it says to me is that the digital distribution platforms are still immature, and thus can't compete with paper as yet. However, digital will continue to evolve, while paper is, if anything, getting worse with the closure of Borders, the ongoing decimation of the Direct Market, and the stranglehold of Diamond on distribution.

I don't know what you mean by the "better support" point?

The release of the Green Lantern, Thor, and Ghost Rider movies; the release of the Lego DC Heroes line; the release of the "Super Friends" and "Justice League" cartoon series all constitute support driving people into stores. You yourself have complained that Marvel botched the opportunity to leverage its movie releases, but that doesn't invalidate the point that last year there was a lot of merchandising activity promoting the comic properties. Maybe for that reason you don't think the support was "better" than in past years, but as a consumer it seemed to me that DC was everywhere last year.

On the latter, at least, if anything, I think I've dramatically UNDERstated it -- I sell comics to "civilians" all day long, and yeah, people drastically need thier hands held.

Fair enough, but I do think that a digital storefront can be less intimidating to a new buyer than a full-line comic store. There are actually too many choices. If you look at the Comixology storefront, they highlight which books are on sale, and have a section at the bottom marked "New to Comics? Start Here." I agree that people do need their hands held, and that's why referrals from friends through social media are so important. If I tell somebody they should check out "Morning Glories," they (a) have to find a store, (b) have to hope that store actually has the trades and all subsequent back issues in stock, and (c) have to go there and risk embarrassment when the shop owner says they don't get any requests for it. Digital avoids all these problems. I've been to some big stores in Manhattan, and while I love them, they can be really hard to navigate. Not everyone is comfortable "bothering" the owner or his staff with "dumb" questions.

We've had facebook and twitter amongst all media for quite some time, and while "going viral" can certainly help increase general awareness, I'm not aware of a generalized explosion for specialized media as a result of social marketing -- that is to say, I believe that Oprah's book club sold more books that any tweet; and that neither grew the overall market for books over and above the market for books.

It would certainly be neat if that happened with comics (because increased demand or interest in title x can not HELP but increase sales in print as well), but while (say) Tyrese Gibson was able to tweet up a whole lot of sales for an issue #1, it did jack shit for #2 and beyond.

(That is to say, this isn't an opinion generated by luddism, but, rather by watching how these things actually play out in the real world)

Since Comixology just this past week integrated Facebook and Twitter into its storefront, I'd say it is much to early to judge how much of an impact they can have on digital sales. Perhaps the reasons I gave above help explain why they haven't budged the needle much in the brick-and-mortar stores.

I'll disagree strongly with the entire basis of this bit -- there are *exceedingly* few comics that weren't killed BY THE MARKET ITSELF. I don't mean retailers, I mean consumers and their individual buying power. When something fails to find a hold in the market, it is virtually always because the market, as a whole, doesn't actually want it.

I'll have to defer to your experience on this one, but I was thinking specifically of Terry Moore's experience trying to sell Rachel Rising, and his being told by numerous fans (including myself) that they simply couldn't find it at their local store. While there are no guarantees, Terry's switch to digital may well have saved Rachel Rising from a premature death. He was certainly making it very clear that he couldn't continue doing it with sales dropping as they were. Are you prepared to say that Rachel Rising was given a fair shot by the "market" and that it deserved to die?

What retailers do and can do is create and maintain an ongoing and regular support for a creator or a work -- once that isn't limited to only a "viral" buzz of-the-moment.

Yes, and I wish more retailers would do that, and not just for the stuff that caters to the core audience. However, that doesn't mean that social media can't do the same thing just as effectively. For example, "Morning Glories" has a very active community at CBR, which unquestionably supports the work itself by allowing the readers to interact with the creators. You can have your digital copy of "Morning Glories" up on your screen at the same time as you are reading the forum posts, and see the frames people are referring to. I can see in the future things like "commentary tracks" being attached to digital comics, or links to digital comics appearing in forum posts.

It *might*, but I suspect that in the end it will actually only have the impact that, say, the availability of (effectively) rush-produced TPs did.... not much, or, perhaps, slightly negative as it reduced the "Buy it now or buy it never" problem.

Thanks for the reasoned commentary!

-B

And thank you for the careful responses. I do feel that perhaps you are letting your lack of enthusiasm for digital comics blind you to the possibilities they present, but if I'm right, those possibilities should be abundantly clear in the next 18 months.

[amcpherson]

The reason I don't buy digital comics, which I consider to be superior to print, is DRM. I did buy those Marvel Comics DVDs that had DRM free PDFs that they released a few years ago, and I find digital to be much more convenient.

I think people embrace Netflix because you're not buying movies individually. You pay a flat rate and get access to hundreds of movies. If Netflix loses the streaming rights to a movie, it's no big loss because Netflix never gives its customers the illusion of ownership, the way that buying digital comics does. If someone made a "Netflix" for comics where you payed a low flat monthly fee and got unlimited access to a large library of thousands of comics from different companies, then I would probably give up print comics for good.

Interestingly enough, there is a close analogue to Netflix out there; it is Marvel Digital Comics Unlimited http://marvel.com/digital_comics/unlimited, which allows you to access the entire Marvel catalog (or at least as much as they have digitized) for $4.99/month. Of course, it doesn't meet your "different companies" criterion, but it is a start. As I keep saying, I think the digital comics market is still in the very early stages, and it would be unwise to judge it based solely on what's available today.

The point about DRM is a good one, and it's true that this can be a major turnoff for many people. I do hope that the comics publishers will follow the lead of iTunes and allow their comics to be sold DRM-free; given the ease of use that tools like Bit Torrent have, I don't think DRM is going to give them much protection. In fact, if the RIAA and MPAA are successful in shutting down peer-to-peer sharing, I suspect it wouldn't be long before someone broke the DRM that Comixology uses. For now, I can only say that I believe the risk of someone shutting off your access to your comics is very low, on the same order as a housefire destroying your entire paper collection. It could happen, but it probably won't, and if it does, there will be cracks available to restore your access. When you buy a digital comic, you actually get the digital file on your computer or tablet, and you can back it up. Thus, the worst that could happen is that your ability to access that file would be revoked; they can't just pull the whole file off of your machine. Perhaps Amazon can do that with the Kindle, because they control the platform, but no one has that kind of control over PCs and Macs.

[Brian Hibbs]

this suggests to me that the day is fast approaching when a significant body of consumers will have tablets capable of providing a satisfying reading experience.

But why do this significant body want COMICS?

I mean, to a certain extent you could say the same thing about poetry, right? Tablet computers will make it far easier for any person to read poetry at any time they might want to. Now, if you want poetry in the middle of the night, you don't have to leave your house, or risk embarrassment in a physical book store asking about poetry, or any of the other barriers to reading poetry -- just download some to your tablet! Poetry should grow by leaps and bounds, right?

Mass audiences are interested in mass products. Comics aren't a mass product, and while it could BECOME so, I think there are 47 different reasons why it's pretty extremely unlikely that will ever be the case. Just like poetry.

Meanwhile, I bet poets and poetry lovers would shit themselves if there was an independent network of 1800-ish poetry stores who were actively promoting their love and passion for that form, and exposing people to poetry.

Technology and access does not have any inherent relationship to INTEREST.

Almost assuredly, Marvel and DC's push for digital last year was a defensive move against the pirates much more than it was an attempt to grow sales.

Yeah, I think you're fundamentally wrong there.

I think that Warner's and Disney executives believed that digital comics would follow the same pattern as every other media.

The release of the Green Lantern, Thor, and Ghost Rider movies; the release of the Lego DC Heroes line; the release of the "Super Friends" and "Justice League" cartoon series all constitute support driving people into stores.

Ha, no!

Trans-media properties like those exist to sell underoos and coffee mugs, but they've *never* had any significant impact upon comics sales. Search back through the TaW archives, you'll find several columns discussing how that actually works in the real world.

Are you prepared to say that Rachel Rising was given a fair shot by the "market" and that it deserved to die?

"Deserves to die"? NEVER; "Fair shot"? Abso-frickin'-lutely.

Yes, and I wish more retailers would do that, and not just for the stuff that caters to the core audience. However, that doesn't mean that social media can't do the same thing just as effectively. For example, "Morning Glories" has a very active community at CBR, which unquestionably supports the work itself by allowing the readers to interact with the creators. You can have your digital copy of "Morning Glories" up on your screen at the same time as you are reading the forum posts, and see the frames people are referring to.

So, you have what you consider to be a very strong and impactful community with MG... and how many comics has that actually sold? Mm, not so many. Sales have dropped for the last six issues in a row.

And, so it goes.

-B