Marvel's strategy of constant relaunching

[C. Earl]

Marvel can relaunch every title every 12 months as far as I care, but relaunching titles with a new #1 is something Marvel has been doing ever since I can remember (going back to the '70s). They'd simply stick into the indicia at that it's Vol. 2 or Vol. 3 and people just went on with business as usual.

Back then, it was for titles that had been cancelled/ceased publication and then had been brought back after while. These days, there's definitely a business element behind doing so for some titles to attract new/more readers who look at an issue #1 as a jumping-on point. But they do seem generally to tie such relaunches with something ending or beginning story-wise (either in that particular book or in the larger universe it's set in).

[Rasputin9977]

I hate it but it does'nt affect my pull list. I wish Marvel would concentrate on good stories over gimmicks when they try to boost sales.

[earl]

It seems to be a thing to try to get lapsed readers to jump back in on the title. It is not like there are that many really 'new' readers that are coming into the super hero habit. There are some, I don't doubt, but it's probably not 5-10% more in the last year or two and some of the new readers I'd imagine head more for the trade paperbacks. So really it's aimed at like 10-20% of the readers to try to get them to pick back up on a title they read before or the small percentage that never read that character.

The die-hards are going to grumble, but they are mostly going to buy the book anyway.

The thing I think is nutty is how you get so many of these long storylines that run from one title to another and there really is not a true reading list and find yourself missing a chapter of the story. Junk like that makes buying monthly comics seem like a waste of time. Then again they sometimes mess it up when they compile the story into trades, as chapters that were say outside the main mini-series that have plots that make the main series make sense are not reprinted in order. A prime example I think of that is Civil War, which without some of the crossovers, really is like only getting 60% of the actual story.

[Piratelion]

I voted that it would not affect my pull list, but I wish that if they gonna go with new #1, they would do it like DC and renumber all of it at #1 and be done with it. Note that I said renumber them all, not reboot them all.

[earl]

I would say also doing these reboots are also a good jump off point for many readers. To be honest, it's not a bad way to go as you can drop a title for a couple years and then catch up usually way cheaper than cover buy buying it in a lot off ebay, as people will often puts sets from say v.3 1-24 up all the time.

[Imraith Nimphais]

I have to say...wot will affect my pull-list more than the re-launch itself is the 3.99 price point...for the titles that pique my interest. (As well as the frequency with which those titles might be double shipped).

[Kymeric]

Dosent REALLY matter to me, but Im a lapsed reader. The premise of the o5 xmen appeals to me, and will have me buying an Xmen comic for the first time in forever tho.

[alphaflightfan69er]

At least they don't relaunch their continuity like DC does. Every time that happens its a big F U to the fans for paying attention and trying to follow their comics. They never keep things straight and mix up all the times they've tried to simplify their universe.

[Leocomix]

Relaunching with #1 started in 1968 with Iron Man, Sub-Mariner and Nick Fury. In the 70s Dr Strange restarted with #1. By the 80s a new #1 was selling like pancakes. Why are people complaining for something that has existed since before they were born?

Plus "constant relaunch" refers to what exactly? Iron Man has had the same team for ages. Brubaker has had the same writer for ages.

[aNamored]

Not affecting my pull list.

[whiteshark]

Marvel Now is the best.
Just from the little info available of the new titles i know i will add quite a few more titles from the ones i was collecting.

[Professor Arkham]

I really dislike it (not quite hate though). The constant restarts is a big reason I dropped all my Marvel titles a while back. I will, however give the relaunched Thor and Hulk a go, so maybe Marvel's strategy works??

[Wellman]

When it is done within 18 months as it has been for the last year or two, I dislike it. If they hold off for more then a year or do what they used to do in actually coming up with a new title for the book along with direction for the launches that warrant a relaunch, instead of just for when a new 'hot' writer takes over, then I will be fine with a relaunch completely.

But these days, it really does seem like they are granting renumberings for all the wrong reasons besides the #1 issue boost.

[klinton]

Brubaker has had the same writer for ages.

Oh? Who's writing Bru these days? :p

I kinda wish they'd relaunch titles much more frequently, to be honest. Then you could hop on and off of various titles after smaller, more defined arcs.

I think comics as a whole would be better served if they gave up the idea of prolonged runs and published stories in mini and maxi series. Lower numbers and more self contained stories would encourage a lot more casual reading of various titles.

[gforce99]

Although I would they prefer keep the overall number going, I understand they are in a business and need to get whatever angle they need to stay non-solvent.