Who is Marvel going to replace next? 0

[ygogolak]

And even now, after two of the biggest Superhero movies of all time, the numbers are the same if not worse! And this is just after the sales spike of a reboot on all three of these!

#23 ANAD Avengers #2 67,000

#38 Uncanny Avengers #3 53,000

#67 New Avengers #4 36,000

 

I just don't see anything that makes me think 'readership' has been increased because of the movies.

I still believe that readership of NON-Marvel titles has increased, but Im not sure the Marvel movies has anything to do with that.

What I DO see is more people TALKING about the movies, but I just don't see the numbers that equates that as new 'readers' of the new releases.

 

Looks like 156,000 to me, from comics that I personally wouldn't even bother reading. The only character(s) that really approach that on an annual basis is Batman and many would agree that the story arcs and artwork have been great.

[Prince Namor]

Fans are fleeting. Readers, if properly cultivated, will be there for the long run.

 

Star Wars fans are laughing at this statement, as is Disney... well once they are done counting their billions they'll laugh...

 

No, Disney understands it. They have plenty of properties that no longer command an audience. An animated version of Snow White, the Sequel* just wouldn't pull in the audience it once did. That property wasn't cultivated and brought along. It simply told the same story over and over again. Until people got tired of it.

 

Star Wars has evolved. Sometimes not always to it's audience expectations, but it did evolve. Through movies, through books, through cartoons. It continued to tell the story without constantly relying on the same characters doing the same things or through summer crossovers, etc.

 

What Dark Horse did with the comics was respect the property - what the writers did with the novels was respect the property - what the animators did with the cartoons was respect the property - because they HAD to. It was owned by someone who demanded it.

 

The problem with mainstream Big Two comics is the creators no longer own, or have anything to do with, the characters they created, and the overseers of the characters are businessmen and not creators. They farm it out to creators, but it's so heavily editorialized, especially the bigger the character, that there's only so much that can be done.

 

It's amazing they've made it last as long as they have... In movies, it seems new and fresh to a brand new audience, but how long until it starts to wear thin? Luckily they have a great deal more time with movies to put forth something well done... a monthly schedule of comics is tough to keep up with. Especially when the company that owns them don't seem to understand what made them popular in the first place. And because of it, the fans have begun to flee...

 

Are all mainstream big two comics bad? Not at all. There's some entertaining stuff being done right now, and some of it, remember, is still being experience by new readers for the first time, and they may enjoy it or have a different perspective on it. Overall, I think it could be better. Much better.

 

 

*There actually was a Snow White the Sequel, though it wasn't a Disney movie. It was a 2007 Belgian/French/British X-rated animated film.

[vaillant]

I'd replace old male readers stuck in the past with a new contemporary readership.

 

I'd replace endless reboots and deaths/rebirths with history and continuity.

 

50, 60, 70 years of continuity - nobody can remember all of that stuff. Publishers don't care and writers don't want to be hampered by something that happened decades ago.

I believe you are mixing a lot of elements, all of this does not justify the lack of respect Marvel has been showing for at least twenty years. And if you really cared about a character, you remember everything, at least you remember what counts.

Marvel does not.

 

To keep the spirit Hector probably wanted for the thread, I’d say that Marvel will have to replace me very soon. It has been difficult, but they finally managed to do it.

[Prince Namor]

And even now, after two of the biggest Superhero movies of all time, the numbers are the same if not worse! And this is just after the sales spike of a reboot on all three of these!

#23 ANAD Avengers #2 67,000

#38 Uncanny Avengers #3 53,000

#67 New Avengers #4 36,000

 

I just don't see anything that makes me think 'readership' has been increased because of the movies.

I still believe that readership of NON-Marvel titles has increased, but Im not sure the Marvel movies has anything to do with that.

What I DO see is more people TALKING about the movies, but I just don't see the numbers that equates that as new 'readers' of the new releases.

 

Looks like 156,000 to me, from comics that I personally wouldn't even bother reading. The only character(s) that really approach that on an annual basis is Batman and many would agree that the story arcs and artwork have been great.

 

You really don't understand the numbers?

 

That's three different comics there... that add up to one Batman comic. And the numbers are no different than they where BEFORE the movie, so....

 

 

There's.... no... sign... that.... it increased sales...? Right? You get that?

 

And there are plenty of comics that put up better numbers than those three. 22 other comics more than the All New All Different Avengers, 37 other comics more than the Uncanny Avengers, and 66 other comics more than the New Avengers. Most of which didn't have two of the top 10 biggest domestic movies in the history of cinema to promote them.

 

 

And it may look to you like, those are good numbers... but I can assure you, through factual understanding of the way publisher's work... that Marvel is HIGHLY disappointed in those numbers, for where those books are at in their numerical state.

 

 

[darkstar]

I'd replace old male readers stuck in the past with a new contemporary readership.

 

Ah, nothing like loyalty to customers that helped make you what you are.

What exactly is this supposed to mean? This isn't something like Coke/New Coke, where you expect the same exact product every time you pay for it. It's a creative field. I'd say it's a disservice to loyal fans to keep throwing the same type of story at them. Keep it fresh by playing with the concept, I say.

 

Creativity would be coming up with an entirely new character that is still relevant 50 years from now. Bastardizing an existing character is a short term solution.

[ygogolak]

And even now, after two of the biggest Superhero movies of all time, the numbers are the same if not worse! And this is just after the sales spike of a reboot on all three of these!

#23 ANAD Avengers #2 67,000

#38 Uncanny Avengers #3 53,000

#67 New Avengers #4 36,000

 

I just don't see anything that makes me think 'readership' has been increased because of the movies.

I still believe that readership of NON-Marvel titles has increased, but Im not sure the Marvel movies has anything to do with that.

What I DO see is more people TALKING about the movies, but I just don't see the numbers that equates that as new 'readers' of the new releases.

 

Looks like 156,000 to me, from comics that I personally wouldn't even bother reading. The only character(s) that really approach that on an annual basis is Batman and many would agree that the story arcs and artwork have been great.

 

You really don't understand the numbers?

 

That's three different comics there... that add up to one Batman comic. And the numbers are no different than they where BEFORE the movie, so....

 

 

There's.... no... sign... that.... it increased sales...? Right? You get that?

 

And there are plenty of comics that put up better numbers than those three. 22 other comics more than the All New All Different Avengers, 37 other comics more than the Uncanny Avengers, and 66 other comics more than the New Avengers. Most of which didn't have two of the top 10 biggest domestic movies in the history of cinema to promote them.

 

 

And it may look to you like, those are good numbers... but I can assure you, through factual understanding of the way publisher's work... that Marvel is HIGHLY disappointed in those numbers, for where those books are at in their numerical state.

 

 

I never once said that the Avengers movie created a demand for Avengers comics. Yet another person that has misquoted me.

[Jeffro.]

I'd replace old male readers stuck in the past with a new contemporary readership.

 

Ah, nothing like loyalty to customers that helped make you what you are.

What exactly is this supposed to mean? This isn't something like Coke/New Coke, where you expect the same exact product every time you pay for it. It's a creative field. I'd say it's a disservice to loyal fans to keep throwing the same type of story at them. Keep it fresh by playing with the concept, I say.

 

Well said

 

Perhaps I'm in the minority but from what I've seen of these fresh concepts lately, I'll stick with my SA through CA comics. Most everything about modern superhero comics repulses me. I don't like the cover designs. I don't like the price tag. I don't like the slick paper and computerized coloring. I don't like many of the artists. I don't like the abandonment of history and continuity.

[Jeffro.]

It's really all guesswork, but I would not say that readership is "down" since the new genre of successful movie and TV properties.

 

The question is, are the movies bringing in new readers? Can we say yes to that? Not so sure

Not new readers,but new fans.

What`s more important?

70,000 people reading Avengers or Avengers doing over 1 billion at the box office?

60,000 people reading Snyder`s Batman or 4 million people buying the Batman video game about Arkham Asylum?

20,000 readers reading Green Arrow or millions watching Arrow?

Marvel and DC are now entertainment companies first,than comic book companies second.

The game has changed and there is no going back.

 

 

Yes, but we're talking about readership here. Are movies bringing in new readers? I don't think so. ygogolak seems to think the movies are bringing in new readers, despite low print runs.

 

Now you are just flat out misquoting me.

 

Misquoting you? no, wrong. I haven't changed anything you wrote. If I'm misunderstanding you, then please enlighten me. I wouldn't want to Kav up the thread with misinformation.

[ygogolak]

 

Now you are just flat out misquoting me.

 

Misquoting you? no, wrong. I haven't changed anything you wrote. If I'm misunderstanding you, then please enlighten me. I wouldn't want to Kav up the thread with misinformation.

 

 

No. Movies haven't played a significant part in increasing the sales.

 

The Avengers is the highest grossing superhero movie of all time. An average Avengers comic can't break 70,000 copies in a month.

 

In 1990, ASM had a print run of around 450,000 and an average paid circulation of 260,000. That's just an average issue. And that's just before all hell broke loose.

An average issue of Spider-man today sells about 100,000 copies a month.

That's 160,000 LESS, despite the movies.

 

You're not looking at it the same way I was. I'm not talking a direct correlation between Avengers movie and a comic book (which comic btw, there are about 10+ Avengers titles at any given time?). What I saying about movies AND TV, is that it's cool to read comics now / again and that brings more people into stores and shows. Also, cosplay is a big thing now and that brings more people to shows, who may or may not buy some comics.

 

Spider-Man has definitely lost some readership because of how it has been handled over the past 5-10 years, while companies like Image have grown in terms of titles from the way they have done things.

[rjrjr]

if someone wanted to argue that movie success increased readership they should look at trade sales, not floppy sales.

 

Every dealer I know redirects new readers (or potentially one-off readers) to their TPB/GN shelves and to a good jumping on point tpb.

 

TPB sales have increased at a slower pace that comic sales the past year. Sales for TPBs have been virtually flat for the past 5 years.

[ned]

I don't know who will be replaced next but my bet is this:

 

If it's a white male hero, he will be replaced with a minority (ex. Cho Hulk).

 

If it's a villain who isn't white, then the new version will be.

 

I thought of this while watching the Netfilx Daredevil around Christmas time. During the DD movie, they made Kingpin a black actor (Michael Clarke Duncan) who was great in my opinion. Now since everyone is bowing more and more to racial pressure, it's not just enough to have more minorities, you have to have more minority heroes. The new DD series had a white Kingpin and a black Ben Urich, so that way they added a minority that the comic didn't and he is a good guy and we get the bad white Kingpin back.

 

 

 

[Prince Namor]

if someone wanted to argue that movie success increased readership they should look at trade sales, not floppy sales.

 

Every dealer I know redirects new readers (or potentially one-off readers) to their TPB/GN shelves and to a good jumping on point tpb.

 

TPB sales have increased at a slower pace that comic sales the past year.

 

True.

 

According to comichron.com the most definitive source for information on such things, graphic novel/tpb sales are up just over half a million dollars from 2014, and comic sales are up $33 Million over that same period.

 

Of course, they print 3000X as many comics as they do tpb's....

 

Sales for TPBs have been virtually flat for the past 5 years.

 

Not true.

 

According to comichron.com the most definitive source for information on such things, graphic novel/tpb sales are up $19 MILLION dollars from 2011 (4 years ago) and $30 Million from 2008 (7 years ago).

 

Marvel and DC's sales may have been flat, but the industry as a whole has seen fantastic growth over the past 5 years in graphic novel/tpb sales.

[Comicopolis]

I'd replace old male readers stuck in the past with a new contemporary readership.

 

Ah, nothing like loyalty to customers that helped make you what you are.

What exactly is this supposed to mean? This isn't something like Coke/New Coke, where you expect the same exact product every time you pay for it. It's a creative field. I'd say it's a disservice to loyal fans to keep throwing the same type of story at them. Keep it fresh by playing with the concept, I say.

 

Well said

 

Perhaps I'm in the minority but from what I've seen of these fresh concepts lately, I'll stick with my SA through CA comics. Most everything about modern superhero comics repulses me. I don't like the cover designs. I don't like the price tag. I don't like the slick paper and computerized coloring. I don't like many of the artists. I don't like the abandonment of history and continuity.

 

Grown men shouldn't be reading superhero comics

[THE_BEYONDER]

People still read comic books?

[Buzzetta]

Fans are fleeting. Readers, if properly cultivated, will be there for the long run.

 

Star Wars fans are laughing at this statement, as is Disney... well once they are done counting their billions they'll laugh...

 

No, Disney understands it. They have plenty of properties that no longer command an audience. An animated version of Snow White, the Sequel* just wouldn't pull in the audience it once did. That property wasn't cultivated and brought along. It simply told the same story over and over again. Until people got tired of it.

 

Star Wars has evolved. Sometimes not always to it's audience expectations, but it did evolve. Through movies, through books, through cartoons. It continued to tell the story without constantly relying on the same characters doing the same things or through summer crossovers, etc.

 

What Dark Horse did with the comics was respect the property - what the writers did with the novels was respect the property - what the animators did with the cartoons was respect the property - because they HAD to. It was owned by someone who demanded it.

 

The problem with mainstream Big Two comics is the creators no longer own, or have anything to do with, the characters they created, and the overseers of the characters are businessmen and not creators. They farm it out to creators, but it's so heavily editorialized, especially the bigger the character, that there's only so much that can be done.

 

It's amazing they've made it last as long as they have... In movies, it seems new and fresh to a brand new audience, but how long until it starts to wear thin? Luckily they have a great deal more time with movies to put forth something well done... a monthly schedule of comics is tough to keep up with. Especially when the company that owns them don't seem to understand what made them popular in the first place. And because of it, the fans have begun to flee...

 

Are all mainstream big two comics bad? Not at all. There's some entertaining stuff being done right now, and some of it, remember, is still being experience by new readers for the first time, and they may enjoy it or have a different perspective on it. Overall, I think it could be better. Much better.

 

 

*There actually was a Snow White the Sequel, though it wasn't a Disney movie. It was a 2007 Belgian/French/British X-rated animated film.

 

Chuck - first I pretty much agree with you. However the classic Disney model is not relatable to the way that the comics are fostered. Disney created its own hype by placing its films in moratorium. The films have been cycled so that they are generational and not perpetually available creating an aurora of specialness about them. There are only 54 films that are considered "Disney Full Length Animated Features." (Their words, not mine). Of those 54, there are perhaps about 1/5th of those films currently in publication or production in some form. Their retail focuses on whatever is currently being cycled with some variance or exceptions. The Disney Princesses come to mind which in the last decade has been a huge marketing campaign.

 

 

The comics are for the most part serialized with the reader wondering, "What happens next?"

[Prince Namor]

Fans are fleeting. Readers, if properly cultivated, will be there for the long run.

 

Star Wars fans are laughing at this statement, as is Disney... well once they are done counting their billions they'll laugh...

 

No, Disney understands it. They have plenty of properties that no longer command an audience. An animated version of Snow White, the Sequel* just wouldn't pull in the audience it once did. That property wasn't cultivated and brought along. It simply told the same story over and over again. Until people got tired of it.

 

Star Wars has evolved. Sometimes not always to it's audience expectations, but it did evolve. Through movies, through books, through cartoons. It continued to tell the story without constantly relying on the same characters doing the same things or through summer crossovers, etc.

 

What Dark Horse did with the comics was respect the property - what the writers did with the novels was respect the property - what the animators did with the cartoons was respect the property - because they HAD to. It was owned by someone who demanded it.

 

The problem with mainstream Big Two comics is the creators no longer own, or have anything to do with, the characters they created, and the overseers of the characters are businessmen and not creators. They farm it out to creators, but it's so heavily editorialized, especially the bigger the character, that there's only so much that can be done.

 

It's amazing they've made it last as long as they have... In movies, it seems new and fresh to a brand new audience, but how long until it starts to wear thin? Luckily they have a great deal more time with movies to put forth something well done... a monthly schedule of comics is tough to keep up with. Especially when the company that owns them don't seem to understand what made them popular in the first place. And because of it, the fans have begun to flee...

 

Are all mainstream big two comics bad? Not at all. There's some entertaining stuff being done right now, and some of it, remember, is still being experience by new readers for the first time, and they may enjoy it or have a different perspective on it. Overall, I think it could be better. Much better.

 

 

*There actually was a Snow White the Sequel, though it wasn't a Disney movie. It was a 2007 Belgian/French/British X-rated animated film.

 

Chuck - first I pretty much agree with you. However the classic Disney model is not relatable to the way that the comics are fostered. Disney created its own hype by placing its films in moratorium. The films have been cycled so that they are generational and not perpetually available creating an aurora of specialness about them. There are only 54 films that are considered "Disney Full Length Animated Features." (Their words, not mine). Of those 54, there are perhaps about 1/5th of those films currently in publication or production in some form. Their retail focuses on whatever is currently being cycled with some variance or exceptions. The Disney Princesses come to mind which in the last decade has been a huge marketing campaign.

 

 

The comics are for the most part serialized with the reader wondering, "What happens next?"

 

Correct, though each re-release seems to have less celebration (and sales), but you're right, it's not a very good example.

 

A better example might be Tarzan, or the Lone Ranger, or even specific genres that petered out over time; because they couldn't advance past the basic concepts to keep it fresh. Heck, I used to love the old Shaw Brothers Kung Fu movies, but after one too many 'You have disgraced our temple!' Storylines, it got old. The new wave of Kung Fu cinema in the late 80's/early 90's revitalized those concepts, kept it fresh, and built a whole new market for it...

 

 

[miraclemet]

if someone wanted to argue that movie success increased readership they should look at trade sales, not floppy sales.

 

Every dealer I know redirects new readers (or potentially one-off readers) to their TPB/GN shelves and to a good jumping on point tpb.

 

TPB sales have increased at a slower pace that comic sales the past year.

 

True.

 

According to comichron.com the most definitive source for information on such things, graphic novel/tpb sales are up just over half a million dollars from 2014, and comic sales are up $33 Million over that same period.

 

Of course, they print 3000X as many comics as they do tpb's....

 

 

is comichron crunching just diamond numbers or are they plugged into sales via amazon and brick&mortar stores?

[miraclemet]

I don't know who will be replaced next but my bet is this:

 

If it's a white male hero, he will be replaced with a minority (ex. Cho Hulk).

 

If it's a villain who isn't white, then the new version will be.

 

I thought of this while watching the Netfilx Daredevil around Christmas time. During the DD movie, they made Kingpin a black actor (Michael Clarke Duncan) who was great in my opinion. Now since everyone is bowing more and more to racial pressure ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, it's not just enough to have more minorities, you have to have more minority heroes. The new DD series had a white Kingpin and a black Ben Urich, so that way they added a minority that the comic didn't and he is a good guy and we get the bad white Kingpin back.

 

Good lord, figure this out. CEOs don't care about "racial pressure", political correctness or whatever... the thing that makes them make executive edicts is $$$$$$$$$$$$$$. (and if you hear one saying that a decision is being made in response to racial pressure, its only if they also know it will make them money)

 

Last year on tv, one of the biggest booms was Empire, and it showed decision makers at the studios that there is an underserved audience. So you know what every executive is saying this year? "We need an Empire" or "Empire made good bank, lets get more black people on our show to try and get some of that audience, and thus increase our share, which then increases our ad revenue, which increases my bonus!"

 

Why is Marvel increasing the prominence of female characters? Is it just bending to the PC police? Nope. Its marketing consultants telling the COO that theres a huge untapped market of female readers (just as empire tapped into underserved black viewers), who are more likely to respond to female lead characters, and thus we get an emphasis, or an evening of emphasis between the male and female characters

[rjrjr]

if someone wanted to argue that movie success increased readership they should look at trade sales, not floppy sales.

 

Every dealer I know redirects new readers (or potentially one-off readers) to their TPB/GN shelves and to a good jumping on point tpb.

 

TPB sales have increased at a slower pace that comic sales the past year.

 

True.

 

According to comichron.com the most definitive source for information on such things, graphic novel/tpb sales are up just over half a million dollars from 2014, and comic sales are up $33 Million over that same period.

 

Of course, they print 3000X as many comics as they do tpb's....

 

 

is comichron crunching just diamond numbers or are they plugged into sales via amazon and brick&mortar stores?

 

If I recall correctly, Diamond service Amazon and physical bookstores. So, those numbers would account for those venues.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Fans are fleeting. Readers, if properly cultivated, will be there for the long run.

 

Star Wars fans are laughing at this statement, as is Disney... well once they are done counting their billions they'll laugh...

 

No, Disney understands it. They have plenty of properties that no longer command an audience. An animated version of Snow White, the Sequel* just wouldn't pull in the audience it once did. That property wasn't cultivated and brought along. It simply told the same story over and over again. Until people got tired of it.

 

Star Wars has evolved. Sometimes not always to it's audience expectations, but it did evolve. Through movies, through books, through cartoons. It continued to tell the story without constantly relying on the same characters doing the same things or through summer crossovers, etc.

 

What Dark Horse did with the comics was respect the property - what the writers did with the novels was respect the property - what the animators did with the cartoons was respect the property - because they HAD to. It was owned by someone who demanded it.

 

The problem with mainstream Big Two comics is the creators no longer own, or have anything to do with, the characters they created, and the overseers of the characters are businessmen and not creators. They farm it out to creators, but it's so heavily editorialized, especially the bigger the character, that there's only so much that can be done.

 

It's amazing they've made it last as long as they have... In movies, it seems new and fresh to a brand new audience, but how long until it starts to wear thin? Luckily they have a great deal more time with movies to put forth something well done... a monthly schedule of comics is tough to keep up with. Especially when the company that owns them don't seem to understand what made them popular in the first place. And because of it, the fans have begun to flee...

 

Are all mainstream big two comics bad? Not at all. There's some entertaining stuff being done right now, and some of it, remember, is still being experience by new readers for the first time, and they may enjoy it or have a different perspective on it. Overall, I think it could be better. Much better.

 

 

*There actually was a Snow White the Sequel, though it wasn't a Disney movie. It was a 2007 Belgian/French/British X-rated animated film.

 

Chuck - first I pretty much agree with you. However the classic Disney model is not relatable to the way that the comics are fostered. Disney created its own hype by placing its films in moratorium. The films have been cycled so that they are generational and not perpetually available creating an aurora of specialness about them. There are only 54 films that are considered "Disney Full Length Animated Features." (Their words, not mine). Of those 54, there are perhaps about 1/5th of those films currently in publication or production in some form. Their retail focuses on whatever is currently being cycled with some variance or exceptions. The Disney Princesses come to mind which in the last decade has been a huge marketing campaign.

 

 

The comics are for the most part serialized with the reader wondering, "What happens next?"

 

Correct, though each re-release seems to have less celebration (and sales), but you're right, it's not a very good example.

 

A better example might be Tarzan, or the Lone Ranger, or even specific genres that petered out over time; because they couldn't advance past the basic concepts to keep it fresh. Heck, I used to love the old Shaw Brothers Kung Fu movies, but after one too many 'You have disgraced our temple!' Storylines, it got old. The new wave of Kung Fu cinema in the late 80's/early 90's revitalized those concepts, kept it fresh, and built a whole new market for it...

 

That`s why I find it amazing that Spider-Man,Batman and Superman stayed as popular as long as they did.

Not many characters created between 1938 to 1962 are still relevant like them.

The next question should be is how long will their movie popularity last? Never mind their comic book sales.

Hopefully, mainstream moviegoers don`t get tired of them.