Marvel NOW! sales

[USERNAME TAKEN]

But Cyclops was already the focus of the book during the last Uncanny iteration, whose sales were decidedly mediocre. You'd have to look at the variables that changed for the new volume to explain the sales increase, which of course points to Jean Grey.

Lol... What?

[Lady_Alternate]

But Cyclops was already the focus of the book during the last Uncanny iteration, whose sales were decidedly mediocre. You'd have to look at the variables that changed for the new volume to explain the sales increase, which of course points to Jean Grey.

Gillen's Uncanny was Marvel's top-selling book pre-AvX.

[Mesektet]

They've canceled books above 30k and kept books selling well below 20k around for years. The estimated domestic direct market numbers are interesting and allow us to make some useful educated guesses, but even if they were accurate they wouldn't be dispositive.

What books have they kept around for years that sell well below 20k? Licensed comics and kids comics don't follow the same rules and usually sell less than 20k, or even less than 10k. But if a marvel universe title slips below 20k then its as good as gone.

[Jake Fury]

But Cyclops was already the focus of the book during the last Uncanny iteration, whose sales were decidedly mediocre. You'd have to look at the variables that changed for the new volume to explain the sales increase, which of course points to Jean Grey.

Just making a joke and looking for an excuse to use $ in Scott's name.

[Expletive Deleted]

Licensed comics and kids comics don't follow the same rules...

So except for the ones that don't fit, everything fits?

[Mesektet]

So except for the ones that don't fit, everything fits?

Seriously? You think if JiM starts selling the same as Marvel Universe Ultimate Spider-Man (5,588) that Marvel would be fine with that? Licensed and kids comics OBVIOUSLY have different standards than Marvel universe books.

[PwrdOff]

Just making a joke and looking for an excuse to use $ in Scott's name.

Pfft, what a dreadful attitude. Why would they be called comics if they weren't serious business?

[Expletive Deleted]

Seriously? You think if JiM starts selling the same as Marvel Universe Ultimate Spider-Man (5,588) that Marvel would be fine with that?

If it was selling as well as Marvel Universe Ultimate Spider-Man apparently does in other sales channels, sure.

It probably isn't, but that's one of those things we simply don't know when all we have to go on is the estimated sales numbers.

[theDarkestKnight]

Wow. I'm very surprised that Remender's Cap is doing better than Waid's Hulk.

[BrotherUnitNo_4]

Wow. I'm very surprised that Remender's Cap is doing better than Waid's Hulk.

Hulk has been getting quite a few reorders on future issues. Then again, so has Cap (and Thor). It'll be interesting to see how things settle over the next few months.

[Jake Fury]

Pfft, what a dreadful attitude. Why would they be called comics if they weren't serious business?

I know I'm such a grouch.

[Game Show]

Well i still think the numbers are poor, I'm not gonna say 'these numbers are amazing' the numbers shown here are poor, thats all I'm saying + its only estimated.

You would have done better if you didn't stick your foot in your mouth assuming Gillen's JiM was a big seller

And what's the point of you throwing in "it's only estimated" here? It's only estimated so JiM's true numbers can be higher? Lower? Cause you can say that for every title on the list. If you're going to go this route, you might as well not talk about these numbers at all

[CyberHubbs]

You would have done better if you didn't stick your foot in your mouth assuming Gillen's JiM was a big seller

And what's the point of you throwing in "it's only estimated" here? It's only estimated so JiM's true numbers can be higher? Lower? Cause you can say that for every title on the list. If you're going to go this route, you might as well not talk about these numbers at all

Well, yeah. The numbers are wrong, but I guess the placements are about right. Actual numbers are not released by either company (or any comic book company).

[USERNAME TAKEN]

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/12/...ics-like-saga/

While this is not related to Marvel, the article proves more than anything that the diamond rankings that we get is definitely not a reflection of true sales.

Image have stated time and again that Saga is selling a lot higher than what's reported in the diamond 300. This is even typified by its dominance of comixology (which is actually an easier barometer of sales as there's no middle man) but for reasons unknown, retailers continue to initially under order the book but later re-order to make up for the initial shortfall.

While the diamond rankings give an indicator to what moves in the market (I would argue though that titles like Saga that have strong re-order activity, the actual ranking of the book might be flat out wrong), it doesn't represent true sales and even arguing over them is pretty much a waste of time.

[cliffhanger]

These numbers are bad. If they were high I doubt people would be saying they are inaccurate. Looks like DC is winning the war, AVX for a year couldn't have helped things.