So Marvel is renumbering books AGAIN and abandoning the Legacy numbers for some books 1 1

[Cat]

Makes one want to drop all their Marvel titles... again. They're just incapable of learning, and the law of diminishing returns is well past biting them in the arse. 

[Ken Aldred]

There have been quite a few threads about this topic in Comics General, so it's more predictable, stagnant, repetitious 'news' from Marvel.  

[PunisherPunisherPunisher]

Reboot after reboot

Im sure the new Venom number 1 will only have about 50 variant covers

[Doktor]

There's 2 changes that Marvel really needs to make and until they're done, I don't know if anything else can help:

1) David Gabriel really needs to be out of the sales strategy position. He's the one that came up with the ridiculously absurd ratio variant program that gets more & more convoluted every few months. I get that they're money-makers for retailers & can offset the unsold A covers, but all they're really doing is inflating order numbers (on top of overshipping) for books that are otherwise regularly dropping in sales. They're temporarily stemming the bleeding & are a bandage on a gaping wound, but even the variants are losing their luster. I've personally stopped caring entirely. Especially once the ratios got beyond 1:100 & they essentially became out of reach for a completest like me.  

And 2) get Tom Brevoort out of having his hands anywhere near the publishing division. He's the one that wanted to "solve" the problem of "new readers being scared off by high issue numbers" by deciding to treat comics publishing like it was a TV show. And each "season" gets a new #1 on ostensibly the same title just with a slightly new direction, a few changed cast members, and maybe a new creative team. And on its surface, it sorta makes sense to open the door to new readers like that. Except he neglected to realize that there's a reason most tv shows only last 3-5 seasons. And it's because the law of diminishing returns kicks in every "season premiere" and the audience shrinks a little more each time. And by the final season, it's a Friday night death-slot show. That seems like a very bad thing to happen when your company is built around keeping the same 2 dozen core titles as your major IP that you need to keep in the spotlight all the time because they carry your company as your "tentpole" titles. And why it can work for C-list titles just fine because they're not supposed to be "evergreen" properties that always sell. They just hired John Nee to be the publisher. Let him do the job & Tom can go back to doing what he does best: being a continuity cop & Marvel historian and staying away from publishing decisions.

Both of those guys philosophy on sales & publishing is extremely short-sighted & the inevitable result is a smaller & less profitable Marvel going forward once the luster starts wearing off, which this past year showed is starting to happen. I could probably explain even deeper why these 2 guys, along with the creators they've hired in the past few years, are causing a downward spiral for the company but that's a long complicated thing nobody cares to read. I already wrote too much on this one.

[Mercury Man]

The great thing about the hobby though, is there is a tremendous amount of back history and back issues to go look for.  Instead of dropping $100 a month on new comics, buy a few nice old ones, and work on runs. 

 I would like to think someday, the light bulb will go off at the House of Ideas, but I am afraid their better days are behind them.   They should really just publish like 10 titles a month.  Quality vs. Quantity.  But that will never happen. 

[oakman29]

17 hours ago, TheRealVenom said:

I'm shocked people are surprised by this. Marvel has been doing this for what 5 or 6 years now? I gave up on marvel after uncanny x-men rebooted 3 times in 2 years. 

my OCD collecting can't handle it.

 

I asked Joe Quesada at fan expo a couple years ago if we would ever see 50 issues of a title again and he was honest as hell and said no, probably not. They can slap a new #1 on a series and charge 5.99 for it and make more than say issues 33 of a series.

All about the benjamins since disney took over.

This is why I stopped my ASM run at the 700 mark. I figured it was a perfect time to end it.

[wolverine180]

This is such discouraging news.  I can't say that I am surprised by any means. But there was a little part of me that thought that they were trying to right the ship with legacy.  I think it might be time to jump ship. Will probably wait for new wolverine titles and see how they ruin him for a 2nd time and then never look back...... Sad....

[STORMSHADOW_80]

5 hours ago, oakman29 said:

This is why I stopped my ASM run at the 700 mark. I figured it was a perfect time to end it.

You missed out on Superior Spider-Man 

[oakman29]

1 hour ago, STORMSHADOW_80 said:

You missed out on Superior Spider-Man 

No, I do have the first 20. That is it though.

[bababooey]

4 hours ago, oakman29 said:

6 hours ago, STORMSHADOW_80 said:

You missed out on Superior Spider-Man 

No, I do have the first 20. That is it though.

That was the good part of that run and everything since has been pretty horrible.  

[jcjames]

On 2/21/2018 at 5:00 AM, ChiSoxFan said:

I'd like to act surprised, but since I posted this back last July, I can't:

I care about the same about their "Fresh Start" as I did about their "Legacy" marketing of their titles, which is to say "Not at all".  The gimmicks over quality storytelling lost me long ago (which sadly means that, if there actually WAS any quality material being put out by them, I never saw it) I didn't take the bait then, and I won't now.

Every $4-6 I save on not buying new stuff is money I can put towards classic material.  Thank you, Marvel, for making my decisions easy for me! 

The film division is clearly where their money is being made, and the reasons listed here to keep publishing  books are spot-on.  That said, what happens when if/when superhero fatigue sets in in that medium?  Or have we passed a point where that's no longer a possibility, at least in our lifetimes?  The success of Black Panther at the box office suggests that Disney/Marvel shows no signs of slowing down in that avenue, but have comic characters been so completely ingrained into the public consciousness that there's no chance of them falling into future irrelevancy in the mainstream?

Never say never.

Westerns were dominantly mainstream from the 40s-60s, on radio, movies, books and TV... until they weren't anymore.

Superhero-fatigue will set in eventually, maybe sooner, maybe later. There are already whispers of "Star Wars-fatigue" regardless of bringing new characters into the forefront.

As far as Marvel's "All-New-All-Different-Re-Re-Renumbering-Legacy-Point-NOW Relaunch" - it's just so unbelievably believable. 

 

[WoWitHurts]

14 hours ago, oakman29 said:

This is why I stopped my ASM run at the 700 mark. I figured it was a perfect time to end it.

I stopped at 700 but really don't care about anything after 441.

[the blob]

Can't they slap $5.99 price tags on jazzy jumbo sized 25th, 50th, 75th, 100th issues? Isn't that what Marvel used to do...all those fancy hologram mutants books were all 25th, 50th, 75th or whatever issues. Why do people jump back on the 1s over and over? I don't. I buy them for $1 later, out of overstock. The idea that Black Panther, a character that has not sold gangbusters until now, is on his 6th frigging series...

Anyway, I remember a conversation in my old shop with a low level DC executive who shopped there. Anyway, he made it clear "we at DC do not give a damn about the collectors." That is almost a straight up quote.  But it's a short-term view, because the collectors are readers and they bow out. I used to buy 4-5 titles a month off the rack. Now I don't unless my kid begs me to buy him a Deadpool book or something. Sure, I bought a few of the recent lenticular covers because they looked cool. Gimmick successful. But the ASM 129 punisher/deadpool cover, come on, I had to have that, right?

[starlord86]

To be fair Marvel's books have been garbage. So I don't think it is a bad idea to reboot as tiring as it is. Their sales are falling off a cliff. Hopefully this is the end of all the SJW nonsense that has been jammed down our throats and good stories and characters will take their place.  HOWEVER, if that is not the case and it remains to be the same old then yeah ill change my tune pretty quickly.

[Lazyboy]

1 hour ago, starlord86 said:

To be fair Marvel's books have been garbage. So I don't think it is a bad idea to reboot as tiring as it is. Their sales are falling off a cliff. Hopefully this is the end of all the SJW nonsense that has been jammed down our throats and good stories and characters will take their place.  HOWEVER, if that is not the case and it remains to be the same old then yeah ill change my tune pretty quickly.

If you think anything is going to change other than the issue numbers, you're

2 hours ago, the blob said:

Why do people jump back on the 1s over and over? I don't. I buy them for $1 later, out of overstock. The idea that Black Panther, a character that has not sold gangbusters until now, is on his 6th frigging series...

There's a huge difference between cancelling a title just to relaunch the next month with a new #1 and cancelling a title because sales suck but giving the property another chance after some time has passed.

3 hours ago, the blob said:

Anyway, I remember a conversation in my old shop with a low level DC executive who shopped there. Anyway, he made it clear "we at DC do not give a damn about the collectors." That is almost a straight up quote.  But it's a short-term view, because the collectors are readers and they bow out.

Publishing for readers is the only sustainable model. Publishing for collectors is a big party, but bad things happen when the music stops.

[Prince Namor]

I'm not sure I can see Star Wars fatigue on the horizon, I think any movie that breaks the BILLION DOLLAR mark worldwide, we can assume they're still in the safe zone. 

As far as Marvel Comics...

It seems that Marvel is trying to keep their characters in a form of stasis so that they can't upset their use in other media. 

I'm sure no one thought Wolverine was REALLY dead for good, and the timing of his return isn't really a curiosity....

The comic books are for people who love the characters, or are drawn to the 'events', not for sequential numbering addicts. 

(I know everyone complains about the numbering, but Marvel gave it back and still the sales numbers were pathetic.)

Is this a good move for Marvel? 

Yes. 

Because here's where Marvel makes their money: From Retailers. 

Retailers BUY #1's and 'event' books regardless of if their customers do, because Marvel can print them an endless number of variants to entice it (see what I did there?) to allow retailers to make their money off it, while eventually selling off the dead stock for $1. 

The dead stock for RETAILERS. Once Marvel sells it they don't have to worry about it.

The big retailers, or smart retailers, or crafty retailers - the one's with the customers who HAVE to HAVE every Variant at $25 to $100 - will make sure they have plenty of stock on Cover A to sell to anyone who wants one, but really make up for it from Variant sales.

A success for Marvel, a success for the retailer, a satiation for the completist, the speculator, the average buyer who loves the character, and the subscriber.

A media sensation keeps the character in the public eye and then...

It all dies down from there. 

Of course there were endless copies of Amazing Spider-man #25 (Vol 4) in dollar boxes with it's $9.99 (you can buy a NM on mycomicshop.com for $3 - it's actually tough in NM because the heavy binding), and everyone moaned and complained - SEE! It's a failure!

No.

No it wasn't.

It was the top selling book on Diamonds monthly chart at 113,000 copies (through JUST Diamond North America) OR what would be the equivalent of selling 5 1/2 months of the title at $3.99 each. 

Marvel doubled the sales of Amazing Spider-man for almost half the year in ONE MONTH of sales.

Which means, in terms of PROFIT - if they average a paltry 51,000 copies a month for 10 months of the year at $3.99 each, but sell an 'event' book for $9.99 TWICE a year - it averages out to the profitability of having a 100,000 copy a month $3.99 book for the year. 

The greed and OCD of speculators, is what is keeping this all afloat. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

 

[classicaaron]

while the renumbering is annoying and pointless in my opinion its not going to make me either stop buying a book or start buying a book.  I never buy a book just because a #1 is on a cover.  I learned to stop that when I was 10 years old in 1992.  on the other hand I love spiderman, im not going to stop buying amazing spiderman just because its a new #1.  what do I care if its issue 805 or issue 1, it would end up being the same story in the inside and im still getting what I like.  sure its annoying because its a little confusing at times to know what number goes to what volume but that's what the internet is for, to look such things up.

if anything I may drop a couple books because its a natural stopping point but that is books that im not very fond of at the moment.  but even then I normally jump off after an anniversary issue anyways.  not really sure how this helps marvel.

[ParamagicFF]

On 2/21/2018 at 3:27 PM, Doktor said:

 

And 2) get Tom Brevoort out of having his hands anywhere near the publishing division. He's the one that wanted to "solve" the problem of "new readers being scared off by high issue numbers" by deciding to treat comics publishing like it was a TV show. And each "season" gets a new #1 on ostensibly the same title just with a slightly new direction, a few changed cast members, and maybe a new creative team. 
 

You may not like this model, and I'm not saying I do either, but the publishers need to pick a model and stick to it. When I was a retailer, the publishing model was the biggest hurdle with getting new readers. Fans would come in and have a hard time figuring out the different spider-man books. And they would always ask "are there any books that are just starting?". This wasn't an occasional situation, this was many times a week. Not many people want to come in 500 issues later and spend a few evenings doing continuity research before they can read their comic.

I'm like many here, I'm good with the long term continuity. I love having a backlog I can read through as well as current publishing. But to teenagers/young adults today, they want something that can be theirs. I think a clear season/volume model would be good.

6 hours ago, the blob said:

Anyway, I remember a conversation in my old shop with a low level DC executive who shopped there. Anyway, he made it clear "we at DC do not give a damn about the collectors." That is almost a straight up quote.  But it's a short-term view, because the collectors are readers and they bow out.

Collectors do not keep comic shops open, period. There are some "buy everything" collectors that are FANTASTIC for their local LCS' bottom line, but the majority of the market comes from readers.

The majority of patrons don't care about comic grading, vintage comics, or variants. They just want to read the stories they like and be able to understand what is going on.

From a retail standpoint, collectors are generally the biggest pain in the , and are often more trouble than they are worth. Publishers should ABSOLUTELY focus on acquiring readership and easing entry into the market. One of the easiest ways to enter the medium is through trades/graphic novels. Many successful creators at Image are catching on to that and capitalizing on it. Marvel/DC have to find a way to catch that audience as well.

[Doktor]

1 hour ago, ParamagicFF said:

You may not like this model, and I'm not saying I do either, but the publishers need to pick a model and stick to it. When I was a retailer, the publishing model was the biggest hurdle with getting new readers. Fans would come in and have a hard time figuring out the different spider-man books. And they would always ask "are there any books that are just starting?". This wasn't an occasional situation, this was many times a week. Not many people want to come in 500 issues later and spend a few evenings doing continuity research before they can read their comic.

I'm like many here, I'm good with the long term continuity. I love having a backlog I can read through as well as current publishing. But to teenagers/young adults today, they want something that can be theirs. I think a clear season/volume model would be good.

I agree in principle to the "pick something & stick with it". The problem is, that the "tv season" model is built around the idea that 99.99999% of tv shows are essentially disposable. The shows. The characters. The actors. They appear, stick around for maybe 3-5 seasons on your average decent show (1-2 on an ok or bad show, 6-10 on a great show & 11-whatever-the-simpsons-is-at for a cultural touchstone that manages to be that that 0.00000001% show) whereas the core comic titles, at least from the big-2, are designed to be evergreen. They are need to last. They are the "tentpoles". This tv season model works on a Moon Knight or Scarlet Spider or whatever D-lister gets a book for 2 "seasons" before the nostalgia fades and then gets replaced by an Iron Fist or Defenders or Champions. They can get swapped out for one of the other replaceable properties & then "rebooted" 5-10 years later to start the cycle all over again.

But this harms titles like X-Men, Avengers, Cap, Hulk, Spidey, etc. Those need to be evergreen & ongoing. Because those tentpole titles are going to always be in production, applying this model that ALWAYS leads to a downward spiral of viewership/readership, is a horrible idea. As I said, even some huge show that starts at 15-20M viewers loses a few million ever new "season" until they're a friday night deathslot show with a viewership of 5M by season 4 or 5. 

Now, if Marvel wants to become Image or Boom Studios or IDW or whatever low-tier, 5k-average-sales-per-issue studio, then that's their choice. Image & Boom and whoever else can put out nothing but 4-15 issues of someone's rejected screenplay adapted into a comic and then when that peters out, they can just swap in the next rejected screenplay turned comics -script. Hell, even Invincible, Walking Dead & Spawn realize this and keep their sequential numbering. Because they know they'll take a hit in the long-term if they relaunch with a new #1 that's nothing but short-term bumps. The new "normal/plateau" sales numbers will almost always be lower than the old one.  

But that's the inevitable end result of this model. At least on the tentpole titles. Because every new #1 is just as much a jumping off point as it is a jumping on point. And fewer people jump on as those that jump off almost every time. I can only speak for myself & friends when I say that I'm FAR more likely to buy a #25 after buying #24 than I would a #1 after buying #24. Every new relaunch, I (and I'd hazard to guess that a lot of others do this as well) re-think if they want this book on their pull list. I think we re-evaluate even more than we do when a new creative team comes aboard on say issue 194 or something. We think about it as a new purchase, rather than a continuation of an old purchasing habit. And you don't want your long-time customers re-thinking "is this a book I want to keep reading?" 

And sooner or later, customers get sick of asking themselves this question & just say "nah" and go spend their money on something else. 

[WolverineX]

Yeah, I'm saying nah now.  I'm done with Marvel.