Modern collector/speculator trend vs 90's speculator movement

[Kermit the frog]

To everyone

 

Since i wasn't collecting comics when the macflarnish 90's speculator boom exploded (thank god i drop the wagon before it) and i often read comparisons between the now collector/speculator behaviour vs the begining of the 90's, i would like to know what are your thoughts on the following subjects:

 

1- Are the 2 movements similar (for ex: the ultimate spidey has been around for 5 years and the prices are still steady...did Todd's books endured that long on the high value/collecting note?!).

 

2- The "actual" marvel/dc trend of posting variant's and special editions move in the same direction of the 90's fever?! do these gimmicks nowadays serve more the collector fan or the speculator one?!

 

3- WHile in the 90's it seemed to me that the speculator behaviour was more strong than the collector behaviour...does this trend changed nowadays?! It seems^people nowadays buy more spontaneouslly what they love, rather than what they think it's high bucks in the near future...

Several time i hear "i buy this variant because i like the cover, i don't car chasing the rest of them"...and i fell to be in that league.

 

4- Again, using the ultimate universe as an example...do you think the visual and written form of art is more "developped/cared" (sorry for the lack of better word) or at least there's a more reasonable balance between art and story, rather than the 90's which seemed to me to have it's "strenght" on the art departement solely...

 

regards, Pedro.

[Kevin Boyd]

Where does the reader/fan fit into all of this? Do they fall under your definition of a collector?

 

1... yes. Although the benefit that Ultimate Spider-Man has over Todd's books is that the print runs on USM are 1/10 or less of the print runs on Todd's Spider-Man title and about 1/4 of the print runs of his ASM issues. ASM dropped a bit, but there's always been interest in those issues (just not at stupid money prices) and people eventually realized there were so many copies of Spider-Man around that they are pretty much worth cover or less.

 

2... not yet. In the 93-94 period there were many more gimmick covers floating around (anywhere from 5-10 from Marvel per month and 2-4 from DC, not to mention the umpteen number ones released each month). We have now, at best, 1-2 variants from Marvel per month and 1-2 later printing/new cover variants from DC. But we do seem to be heading in that direction. I'm going to discount the Top Cow, Aspen books as they never really stopped producing variants.

 

3... if there is anything to be learned from the mistakes of the 90's is that you can't speculate heavily on moderns without getting burned. That being said, good comics are good comics, and you can't go wrong taking care of what you enjoy reading... chances are there are others that agree with you... and if you tell enough people you increase "collector" interest.

 

4. The problem with the 90's IMO was that everything suffered in a lot of books - story and art - so that Marvel and DC could make as much money as possible by cranking out many mediocre to low selling titles supported by gimmicks alone. I fear that Marvel is on that slippery slope again by churning out dozens of low-selling garbage to maintain their bottom line. But there were probably as many (or more) quality books being published in 1994 as there are now. Late 90's did see a shift towards writing, but there were many strong writers in the field in 1993-94, no less than we have today...

Kev

[Kermit the frog]

Kevin

 

Thanks for the interesting reply...

 

1... yes. Although the benefit that Ultimate Spider-Man has over Todd's books is that the print runs on USM are 1/10 or less of the print runs on Todd's Spider-Man title and about 1/4 of the print runs of his ASM issues. ASM dropped a bit, but there's always been interest in those issues (just not at stupid money prices) and people eventually realized there were so many copies of Spider-Man around that they are pretty much worth cover or less.

 

So we are talking about an huge difference in the printing numbers, but on a value stand point, shouldn't this have been an obstacle at that time to Todd's boom short therm prices, instead the contrary?!

How many months or years (?) was the waiting for the big value drop at that time?!

 

So when people put this 2 titles/trends in the same bag, we're talking about completly different trends/periods with each one having aspects different to the other (high printing numbers vs low printing; more bigger reading and speculating community vs more reduced fan community wich seems more interesting in reading, etc...).

 

2... not yet. In the 93-94 period there were many more gimmick covers floating around (anywhere from 5-10 from Marvel per month and 2-4 from DC, not to mention the umpteen number ones released each month). We have now, at best, 1-2 variants from Marvel per month and 1-2 later printing/new cover variants from DC. But we do seem to be heading in that direction. I'm going to discount the Top Cow, Aspen books as they never really stopped producing variants.

 

Indeed there are some big differences upon the numbers you've presented...i have the impression that now marvela nd dc are at their full variant speed and even like that they won't achieve at producing half of the gimmicks that were produced in the 90's but...with a much shorter community/market, can't the effects/consequences/impact be near similar?!

 

3... if there is anything to be learned from the mistakes of the 90's is that you can't speculate heavily on moderns without getting burned. That being said, good comics are good comics, and you can't go wrong taking care of what you enjoy reading... chances are there are others that agree with you... and if you tell enough people you increase "collector" interest.

 

Completly agree with your thoughts. It seems nowadays, "we" long therm readers seem to have a more significant impact on the modern/monthly comics producing not only by spreading the word about the good comics, but also by the "coming back" effect of the "fanboy" base...

 

4. The problem with the 90's IMO was that everything suffered in a lot of books - story and art - so that Marvel and DC could make as much money as possible by cranking out many mediocre to low selling titles supported by gimmicks alone. I fear that Marvel is on that slippery slope again by churning out dozens of low-selling garbage to maintain their bottom line. But there were probably as many (or more) quality books being published in 1994 as there are now. Late 90's did see a shift towards writing, but there were many strong writers in the field in 1993-94, no less than we have today...

 

The high producing titles on a monthly basis imho lowered a lot the comics quality. But i truly believed, based on what's being produced nowadays (from the end of the 90's up to today) that this time period is one of the best regarding visual and written storytelling on this medium. Not just the quality but the diversity of it...

 

We have wonderful great books such as fables, Y the last man, Powers, Astro City (from the 90's, ), Conan, DD, very good mini-series such as Inhumans, The sentry, independent masterpieces such as Blankets by Craig Thompson, Owly, etc...

 

Another apsect that seems to add/help this quality/diversity building up is the recent "raising of the dc", while some years ago it was all marvel...

 

A lot of times i like to "dive" on the 25/50cents bins and look at what was produced during hte 90's and i get shivers over the low quality of what was being made (mainsteam mainly of course). But of course there were also a small bunch of titles that were very good too...but it seems the numbers/diversity/quality between now and then has a huge gap, don't you think?!

 

It seems also that the small labels/independant titles are more presented and supported...

 

Even if i'm a convicted marvel zombie (mostly the link to a great/rich past) and feel that marvel has been declining steadly in the last 2 years, overral i think today is a great period for being a comic fan, probably as great as the late 70's/ early 80's (where i started collecting/reading seriouslly).

 

regards, Pedro.

[helionaut]

There are big differences between speculators today and 10-15 years ago. I shall enumerate to illuminate.

 

1) The collector base has shrunk. There are simply fewer people buying comics month to month now, and quite a bit fewer, too. Books with print runs in the hundreds of thousands to a million are extinct. The people that drive the industry have left, so there is a tougher sell all around for books to just survive, let alone become cash cows.

 

2) The speculator base has shrunk, too. By this I mean the number of non-collectors who were in it for the score. These people read in Money magazine or somewhere that comics were hot collectibles, that Rob Liefeld was the new Jack Kirby, that Spawn was the new Spider-man and they should get in on it before prices go through the roof. Whenever a collectible like comics or sportscards crosses over into the mainstream media, there's a ton of new people with new money coming in without a clue what they are buying or how to make a profit. They have either lost their money and disappeared, or smartened up and gone into blue-chip HG vintage. Buying a case of everything that comes out is not a viable investment model today, if it ever was.

 

3) Quality sells. In the early 90s, it seemed like the only creative people working on the big 2's comics were in the marketing departments. Gimmick covers, multiple covers, Wizard magazine Marve/DC hype machine, hot Wizard artists of the week doing covers for books with which they have no association, bound-in trading cards, Bad Girls, rebooting long-running series, X-everything, bleah. Very little worth reading was very successful, but they sold a ton for a little while. Around the time Wolverine Origin came out, it seemed to me like Marvel had figured that it was better to simply put out good books, and for a while they were putting out a lot of excellent product. Their no-overprint policy and several high-profile, top creator projects had dealers increasing their initial orders and righted their ship. DC followed, at least on the creative end. Of course, quality is hard and nothing lasts forever. Now it seems like there are fewer must-read books from the big 2, but these things are cyclical. Now books usually succeed not because they have a chromium cover or a cheesecake artist or a "controversial" storyline (individual issues notwithstanding), but because the book is actually good. Gimmicks like multi-printing covers come after a book has sold out, so at least they have the cart behind the horse there. And indies are as strong as ever. The 1987 B&W boom happened because B&W indie comics got "hot" for some reason, not because there was a ton of people doing great work in that area. Now, people can make a living producing a decent B&W comic every month or two. If it's extraordinarily good, they can make a very nice living. Being a page-slave at the big 2 isn't the only way to be a professional comic artist anymore, and the occasional out-of-the-blue blip in the market, or full-on trend, comes about because of it.

 

4) The internet and CGC. If ebay had been around when X-Men #1 came out, I doubt anyone would've gone crazy with buying 10 copies of each cover because they would've seen hundreds of auctions for exactly that. When you are able to look at the whole world instead of just one or two local shops, you'll see that things are not exactly rare. Conversely, when your town is completely sold out on a book and you see few auctions on ebay, you know something is scarce and most people aren't moving it. CGC is the natural evolution in the market following the same path coins and cards did. Ebay makes it a necessity in a grade-conscious hobby for both the buyer and seller to have confidence in a common denominator of quality. And NGs like this make it easy for opinions on what's good/bad/hot/cold to spread and catch on.

 

That's all I got.

[hobbes]

I shall enumerate to illuminate.

 

 

4) The internet and CGC. If ebay had been around when X-Men #1 came out, I doubt anyone would've gone crazy with buying 10 copies of each cover because they would've seen hundreds of auctions for exactly that. When you are able to look at the whole world instead of just one or two local shops, you'll see that things are not exactly rare. Conversely, when your town is completely sold out on a book and you see few auctions on ebay, you know something is scarce and most people aren't moving it.

 

Good point!

[WiseGuyX]

2... not yet. In the 93-94 period there were many more gimmick covers floating around (anywhere from 5-10 from Marvel per month and 2-4 from DC, not to mention the umpteen number ones released each month). We have now, at best, 1-2 variants from Marvel per month and 1-2 later printing/new cover variants from DC. But we do seem to be heading in that direction. I'm going to discount the Top Cow, Aspen books as they never really stopped producing variants.

 

Kevin as usual your information in Astonishing but are you counting reprints in these numbers? I believe DC and Marvel is simply replacing the bad word of variant with a easier to swollow reprint wording.

[Kevin Boyd]

Well, since Marvel doesn't reprint (they used to though) I assume you are talking about DC? Marvel seems to love throwing the word variant around.

 

No, DC used to reprint stuff that was sold out at the distributor level back in the early 1990's. They usually kept the same cover, but put a symbol on the cover to indicate a second print (sometimes) or just wrote 2nd (or later) printing at the end of the indicia box on the bottom of pages 1. This multiple cover thing is definitely a gimmick to sell later printings to completionists as well as people that missed the boat on a first print.

 

DC used to do real variants all of the time - multiple covers on first prints shipped at varying ratios, variant interiors, die cut covers with a companion standard edition, hologram covers with a companion standard edition, holofoil covers with a companion standard edition, bagged editions with a non-bagged version, glow-in-the-dark covers with a companion standard edition and so on...

[jbud73]

Wow some really great posts in here -I think there would be more but a lot of the senior board members probably looked at the title and though another crash thread, which this is not turning out to be.

 

There is a speculator factor that has not been mentioned - the Comic Book movie. This has caused comics to cross over into the main stream. Sure there were the Batman movies in the early 90's - however that was one character and by the time the third movie came about the ship had sank. Today we have high budget productions for a number of comicbook characters and this has affected not only the new issue market, but the back issue market as well and even moreso.

 

It will be interesting to see what if anything occurs when the movie cycle dies down. Hollywood will not keep making comicbook movies infinitely, just as TV will someday, soon I hope, stop with the reality TV stuff

 

There will no doubt be a ripple effect in the comicbook market as I beileve a significant amount of money has been funnelled due to the movie industry. Not sure what will happen - it would be easy to prophesize doom, but I don't think that is the case. History does tend to repeat itself and there are some similarities currently at play in comicbooks that were evident during the early 90s. BUT ....

 

The market is NOT exactly the same, the influences are different, which means the outcome will not be an exact replica either.

 

I thinking about things from a macro perspective I agree with alot of the stuff posted by Gene (delek) and others - comics are currently in a Bull (upward increasing) phase. This cannot last forever, there will be a correct, small or large. A levelling off, possibly a downturn, maybe a crash and I would hope a subsequent upward movement again. When and how this will occur is up for debate. There may be similarities with the previous downturn, but I still think that enough diversity exists that the cause and effect will not be mirror images.

 

Talk amongst yourselves ..................

[Kermit the frog]

Kevin

 

Thanks again for the good info.

 

There is a speculator factor that has not been mentioned - the Comic Book movie. This has caused comics to cross over into the main stream. Sure there were the Batman movies in the early 90's - however that was one character and by the time the third movie came about the ship had sank. Today we have high budget productions for a number of comicbook characters and this has affected not only the new issue market, but the back issue market as well and even moreso.

 

Interesting point you've got here. I discussed this matter a few times with friends and fans, and i think the impact of this new quality wave of movies over the comics characters will have it's major or more visible effects in the long therm.

I've seen/heard several times kids or young teens coming out of the theaters with a new speech towards super-heroes "...hey aren' they cool with the powers...?! but what about that bad guy the one with the green mask, why does he do all that stuff?! how can he have all those weapons?!..." and the internet is having also a direct impact, in the way several kids use it also to know a lot more about the movies, characters and end up discovering the comics. I'm not going to use this example to glorify the movies as a way of saving this medium or bringing new readers, but one thing we can't ignore, is it's mid/long therm impact on those kids. Some of them are touched by the characters/storys, a lot of them might go to buy comics (here in france has in other european countrys you find comics almost everywhere).

 

I guess there might be enough "emotional link" to attache the kids to this important events (come on Spidey and X-men were great movies) and i think a new cycle might be on the works, a new porcess of "recycling" the fan base is possibly happening (thank God, ).

 

At this time we still fully ignore this kind of events (and the same could be said about other important sagas/intelectual properties such as LOTR).

 

And that's where everything might change: people buying comics to read mostly and care for them.

Speculation will exist of course, but it's another kind of speculation, that it doesn't sem to envolve big/drastic changes (even the industry printing numbers/fans community doesn't allow it at this time). It seems some kind of self defense was build up...

 

There will no doubt be a ripple effect in the comicbook market as I beileve a significant amount of money has been funnelled due to the movie industry. Not sure what will happen - it would be easy to prophesize doom, but I don't think that is the case. History does tend to repeat itself and there are some similarities currently at play in comicbooks that were evident during the early 90s. BUT ....

 

Good point, but the different aspects/points that can describe industry today might still bring up a negative impact in the econimical area, but the track to achieve to that end will be a completly different one from the one we saw in the 90's, so the doom might happen at a very lower scale and shaping other forms than just the price increase, but also and mostly at an artistic level direction/orientation.

 

The market is NOT exactly the same, the influences are different, which means the outcome will not be an exact replica either.

 

Nicely said...

 

There may be similarities with the previous downturn, but I still think that enough diversity exists that the cause and effect will not be mirror images.

 

And that simply changes everything...

 

regards, Pedro.

 

ps-

Wow some really great posts in here -I think there would be more but a lot of the senior board members probably looked at the title and though another crash thread, which this is not turning out to be.

 

Your sentence is a very interesting one, because it's the reflex of the core of the today longtime fans (not point out as good or bad) ...the interesting to see is : will this kind of behaviour/approach towards the medium will change, or even end to leave space to a new one?

?! I think so and the movies might have something to say on this changing and so do we, as how we try to invite or not new people, or how we spread or not the quality of something we love, that in the end is nothing more or nothing less than a fantastic form of art.

[Kevin Boyd]

As an aside I think this year may actually cement the push for additional comic book movies, so I don't see the trend cooling off any time sooner. With the success of Spider-Man 2, Punisher, and the upcoming Blade: Trinity super-heroes will remain at the top of the box office action heap so long as the people still remain interested.... and as long as the movies aren't anything like the tepid Catwoman they will continue to do well. But these movies are mostly targetted to teens and adults, so there's not a huge group of new fans being exposed to comic material for the first time who have no idea what comic books are like.

 

However, there's one movie that just came out that I think does more for superhero comics and kids, and that's Pixar's THE INCREDIBLES. It lowers the bar by introducing superhero concepts to the under 10 crowd that are usually not allowed to see movies like Spider-Man and X-Men at the theatres (or at home) because of the violence. It's very imaginative and I hope will inspire kids to look around for the comic sections in their local bookstores/libraries.

[Foolkiller]

I wouldn't call Punisher a success.

 

But with Batman, Spidey 2, and the Incredibles, i think studios will continue to make super hero properties.

[Kevin Boyd]

I have no problem calling the Punisher movie a success.

 

It wasn't a great movie, but most people that didn't know the character and went to see it were entertained.

 

It was cheap to make ($33 million) and promote ($20 million) and it recouped that money at the box office ($33 million domestically, $20 million overseas).

 

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=punisher.htm

 

Last Thursday at a Q&A I was at in Toronto, Kevin Smith mentioned that if the studio can make it's money back in the theatres before it hits DVD then the studio considers it a hit. Punisher was a hit... DVD money is almost all profit.

 

Considering that it sold $1.8 million copies on DVD in the first week alone, a low estimate would indicate that brought in another $25 million in revenues (after sellers got their cut). God knows how many additional copies have been sold since it came out last September.

 

 

.

[Kevin Boyd]

Comic book movies were big for Sony this year.

 

Spider-Man 2

 

$200 million to make + $50 million to market

 

Domestic box office - $373 million

Foreign box office - $419 million

------------------------------------------------

Total box office ~$784 million =

 

Remove half for the theatres ($392 million) and deduct $250 for initial costs and Spider-Man 2 has earned $142 million BEFORE DVD.

 

Spider-Man is a cash cow.

 

Hellboy

 

$66 million to make + $30 million to market

 

Domestic box office $59 million

Foreign box office $40 million

------------------------------------------

Total box office $99 million

 

Remove half for the theatres ($49 million) and deduct $96 million for initial costs and Hellboy had lost $47 million before DVD.

 

Strong DVD sales from two different releases have led the studio to greenlight a sequel.

 

Catwoman

 

$100 million to make + $35 million to market

 

Domestic box office $40 million

Foreign box office $40 million

------------------------------------------

Total box office $80 million =

 

Remove half for the theatres ($40 million) and deduct $135 million for initial costs and Catwoman has lost $95 million BEFORE DVD.

 

Even DVD won't help this one out for a while.

 

The Incredibles - released two weeks ago.

 

$92 million to make + ?? marketting

 

Domestic box office - $179 million and rising

Foreign box office - $6 million and rising

----------------------------------------------------------

Total box office $185 million

 

[Foolkiller]

Kev,

all due respect, breaking even is not a success. Go by the basic math of the figures you presented... From an executive's standpoint, that's not a success.

 

Plus, traditionally, studios under report costs. My guess is the studio lost money on this venture -- initially. when you factor in dvd sales, eventually it may turn a profit... but I don't anyone over there is calling the punisher movie a success, or at least the kind of movie that they feel is a shining example of how super hero movies can make the studio movie.

[Tango 'n Cash]

It was cheap to make ($33 million) and promote ($20 million) and it recouped that money at the box office ($33 million domestically, $20 million overseas). Last Thursday at a Q&A I was at in Toronto, Kevin Smith mentioned that if the studio can make it's money back in the theatres before it hits DVD then the studio considers it a hit. Punisher was a hit... DVD money is almost all profit.

 

So the theatres didn't take their 50-60% of the ticket revenues on the Punisher? Strange.

[Tango 'n Cash]

Kevin you should really understand how movie revenue and costs work before posting those numbers. Theatres take a huge chunk of the ticket sales (45% on average), and when it comes to international there are additional costs such as film copies, international distribution and other marketing.

 

If you want close estimates, just take 55% of domestic box office and 40% of international, and then subtract the production and promotional costs to find the estimated profit.

 

The Punisher:

 

$33 million budget + $20 million production

$18 million domestic and $8 million international theatre take for studio.

 

So at the end of its run, the Punisher would have lost $27 million, not counting DVD sales.

 

I hope that helps and take this as free information not an insult.

[october]

Theaters only take 20 - 30% of ticket revenues for the first 2 weeks or so, which is where a lot of the money is made anyway. They only start taking upwards of 50 or 60% in later weeks when the movie has lost steam. Here is a good article if anyone is really interested in how theaters make their money....

 

http://money.cnn.com/2002/03/08/smbusiness/q_movies/

 

Regardless, looks like the Punisher movie lost some bucks.

[Kevin Boyd]

Kev,

all due respect, breaking even is not a success. Go by the basic math of the figures you presented... From an executive's standpoint, that's not a success.

 

Plus, traditionally, studios under report costs. My guess is the studio lost money on this venture -- initially. when you factor in dvd sales, eventually it may turn a profit... but I don't anyone over there is calling the punisher movie a success, or at least the kind of movie that they feel is a shining example of how super hero movies can make the studio movie.

 

Brian, going by the math presented the studio broke even, or lost a little bit of money before it went to DVD.

 

In the current market, breaking even before DVD IS considered a success. The majority of films released by the major studios lose money before they are released on home video.

 

DVD sales have already made this a profitable film for Lion's Gate.

 

And... what's a shining example of a super-hero movie? Punisher isn't really a super-hero, so I have a hard time calling this a super-hero movie, or a shining example thereof. It's a comic book movie, and one that made money - enough to make Lion's Gate want to do more comic book movies, and greenlight a sequel.

 

They'll tweak the formula to make it more crowd-pleasing in the sequel. That's already happened with Blade, Spider-Man and X-Men, and is guaranteed to be the approach to take with follow-ups to Daredevil and the Hulk (if they get made).

[Tango 'n Cash]

Theaters only take 20 - 30% of ticket revenues for the first 2 weeks or so, which is where a lot of the money is made anyway. They only start taking upwards of 50 or 60% in later weeks when the movie has lost steam.

 

That is why I used 45% for the domestic theatre side which is consistent with overall statistics. Might be a bit higher or lower depending on the movie but it'll be close.

[Foolkiller]

problem is kev, as october and tango have noted you can't go by those broad math figures, you have to figure in their other costs.

my understanding was that the Punisher was a loser thus far for the studio.