Default Bleeding Cool: "Marvel NOW! a bit of a Damp Squib"

[RDMacQ]

But if the retailers are selling it for mega bucks successfully then why is it a bad thing?

I'm not supporting it either way, I'm just trying to figure out the economics behind it.

Because you're not selling the comic to more people. You're just selling it to a smaller audience who is willing to pay more.

It's the same reason this sort of thing caused the market to crash in the first place. Yes, you had lot's of people buying these comics with the notion that it would increase in price down the line. But those weren't fans following along because of the story. They were one off investors who were just showing up to pick up the latest issue as an investment for a later sale down the line. They were artificially inflating the market with their purchases. And since they weren't really all that concerned with the comic, they could take or leave it. Which they did when the bubble burst and they found that a lot of other people had the exact comics they had and the "investment" they though were going to pay for their retirements in a few years were now worthless. So the retaillers had no reason to keep buying these multiple copies for the casual investor who would be willing to pay for two or three extra copies of the comic, and now had to service those fans who were only willing to buy a single copy. And that deflated the market quite a bit.

The long of the short of it is, it's proven to be a VERY short lived strategy that can have VERY negative long term repercussions on the marketplace.

[vh4ever]

I agree.

We as readers should simply enjoy what we read.

This statement ought to end this thread. There's nothing left to say.

[carabas]

But if the retailers are selling it for mega bucks successfully then why is it a bad thing?

I'm not supporting it either way, I'm just trying to figure out the economics behind it.

Because of history... Remember what happened last time when the speculators switched hobbies?

This is the main difference now between Marvel and DC. DC is trying very hard to sell comics to readers. Marvel is focusing almostcompletely on selling comics to retailers with nary a though if anybody is ever even going to read them. And yes, I know that's a gross exaggeration.

[stephen wacker]

This is the main difference now between Marvel and DC. DC is trying very hard to sell comics to readers. Marvel is focusing almostcompletely on selling comics to retailers with nary a though if anybody is ever even going to read them. And yes, I know that's a gross exaggeration.

The difference between you and me is that you are trying to POISON ALL THE WATER ON THE PLANET AND KILL KITTENS!!!!

And yes, I know that's a gross exaggeration.

AQ

[RDMacQ]

The difference between you and me is that you are trying to POISON ALL THE WATER ON THE PLANET AND KILL KITTENS!!!!

And yes, I know that's a gross exaggeration.

AQ

That's OK. That's pretty much all we expect from you.

[RichJohnston]

The five week was used to explain Marvels edge over DC for a couple of months (I can't remember the exact months) but one or two of those months didn't even have a fifth week. That's why I said it was wrong.

DC employed variants for their top properties during the launch and employed them for the first year of the new 52. If that's not using it for higher sales then I don't know what is. Not to mention the fact that Before Watchmen was heavily incentivized. Personally, I don't have any opinion one way or the other on variants but calling out Marvel for something that DC and Image did earlier is pretty dubious.

And your article is faaaaaaaaarrrrr too early considering the fact that a good number of Marvel NOW books haven't even been solicited yet. As someone rightly explained, the model of the new 52 is pretty different from Marvel NOW and the effect it will have on the market will be different. DC stormed the market place with a single month of new issue 1s with lots of good sales incentives behind them. Marvel NOW is being staggered, so you probably won't see a month with every single issue in the top 10 being a Marvel comic.

Long and short Rich, your article was far too early and almost wholly unnecessary. I think we can re-discuss this after about 6 months into initiative.

Then I got that wrong... I'd like to know which months though, because it's been a common pattern going back a while.

DC use variants as, for want of a better phrase "part of a balanced diet". They don't run 20 variants of commonly run tiered variants (!:200, 1:100, 1:50, and another four set to % of previous issue orders) for their ten top sellers. It's a big difference. If they stuck to DC levels, no one would have a problem.

Marvel have shown similar variant order structures for all the Marvel NOW launches, and all the second issues too. The thirds are still to come. This is a problem. It's worth highlighting now rather than only poiinting out problems after they have caused irreparable damage.

Immediately after the article ran, I found myself talking to a number of Marvel staffers. Some shared my concerns on this. It is very possible this article may have helped their stance within the company.

[RichJohnston]

I don't understand this. Retailers don't have buy into an incentive that doesn't sell them books month after month.

Marvel are offering incentives that retailers don't necessarily have to employ since after a month or so, they will have a fair idea of their order levels. Retailers can order at slightly above the normal levels (as its impossible to quantify exactly how much they will sell) for the new titles and adjust or re-order the books when he sees his order levels stabilize.

Even with the new 52 and the returnability, retailers adjusted their ordering levels and some of the books found their level after some months (some bottomed out and fell off the map).

I don't see why any retailer will have to order 50 issues of Thor to qualify for an incentive when on average he/she sells only about 15. That's not wise business.

It usually makes great financial sense for retailers to engage in such promotions from Marvels - if they can sell the incentives for a good price, it can pay the entire cost of ordering that title - all fifty copies. So they might as well. The problem is that a crash of variant cover buying could happen in a fashion too quick to be reacted to. Or retailers order more and more to make up for the value they've lost. And then retailers go bust. Not all of them. Not a large chunk. But what if it wer ten percent. Could Diamond survive the loss of owed money from ten percent of their stores? Could all publishers survive losing ten percent of revenue? That's what I've been told could cause real problems.

[RichJohnston]

But if the retailers are selling it for mega bucks successfully then why is it a bad thing?

I'm not supporting it either way, I'm just trying to figure out the economics behind it.

Because it is unbsustainable and it crashes and takes the good with the bad...

[RichJohnston]

As Rich posted (and joked about) he's also been accused of being anti-DC due to reporting the changes on books and constant rewrites the company forces people to do. Hell he even showed them rewriting things after the books was published and TPB's had erased several lines.

Also anti-Image, anti-Dark Horse, anti-IDW, anti-Caliant, anti-Avatar, anti-Zenescope, time and time again...

[RichJohnston]

People are more than welcome to comment on anything they like at any time, but trying to gauge the overall success of an initiative that hasn't finished yet seems kind of silly to me. As I said in an earlier post (it may have even been in the other thread about this topic) I think in a few months enough time will have passed to determine whether individual portions of this initiative are likely to succeed, but as we still have books rolling out in Feb we won't have a complete set of data for the initiative as a whole.

Thankfully I didn't try to judge its overall success then. 8-)

[deathcry]

Because you're not selling the comic to more people. You're just selling it to a smaller audience who is willing to pay more.

It's the same reason this sort of thing caused the market to crash in the first place. Yes, you had lot's of people buying these comics with the notion that it would increase in price down the line. But those weren't fans following along because of the story. They were one off investors who were just showing up to pick up the latest issue as an investment for a later sale down the line. They were artificially inflating the market with their purchases. And since they weren't really all that concerned with the comic, they could take or leave it. Which they did when the bubble burst and they found that a lot of other people had the exact comics they had and the "investment" they though were going to pay for their retirements in a few years were now worthless. So the retaillers had no reason to keep buying these multiple copies for the casual investor who would be willing to pay for two or three extra copies of the comic, and now had to service those fans who were only willing to buy a single copy. And that deflated the market quite a bit.

The long of the short of it is, it's proven to be a VERY short lived strategy that can have VERY negative long term repercussions on the marketplace.

Not really. You can't compare the 90s with now. Variants may have been a part of the problem back then, but the issues then were larger and more varied than just variants.
This program (variants)...is to help retailers. AS I believe you said, if the retailer survives by getting and re-selling these books, than that means its a good thing (in other words they are making money). And the number of books sitting is irrelevant to anything really. Even if they end up selling it in the quarter bins, they are making money. Marvel has already made their money. So everyone wins. If the variants aren't covering the extra books they bought? well the retailer will probably stop getting them, and only buy enough books that they can re-sell and make money on (or go out of business).
As far the implication from the BC article about "goosing numbers"...who really cares? The whole argument about who wins or loses a month based on diamonds info has nothing to do with making money or company health. Purely discussion board (and bleeding cool) chatter

[deathcry]

Also anti-Image, anti-Dark Horse, anti-IDW, anti-Caliant, anti-Avatar, anti-Zenescope, time and time again...

anti-Caliber eh?

That must be hard to defend these days.
You probably say bad things about the dead too.

[Dog]

Because it is unbsustainable and it crashes and takes the good with the bad...

Is anything truly sustainable?

[stephen wacker]

Because it is unbsustainable and it crashes and takes the good with the bad...

Nothing in entertainment lasts forever. Chasing the "sustainable" in pop culture is a loser's game.

SW

[carabas]

The difference between you and me is that you are trying to POISON ALL THE WATER ON THE PLANET AND KILL KITTENS!!!!

And yes, I know that's a gross exaggeration.

AQ

God, your buttons are easy to push.