The Pure Hate in this Article is Astounding 1 1

[theCapraAegagrus]

4 minutes ago, Ryan. said:

But what about the really clever flippers that simply wander in wearing a Batman t-shirt, phone still in pocket, buy a single copy, and wander out all innocent like? How do we suss them out and put a stop to their secret greed? 

Get a PI to follow them home, obv. Hack their ISP packet info, track their outgoing packages, and monitor their PayPal transactions...

[RockMyAmadeus]

By the way...a good way for retailers to not have to keep an obsessive pulse on the industry is to limit purchase of all books to 1 copy per person until the book is no longer new...say, after a week or a month...no matter what it is.

Book comes out this week? You can buy 1. You want to buy more than one? You'll have to wait until next week/month/whatever, and whatever is left, you can buy.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

3 minutes ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Get a PI to follow them home, obv. Hack their ISP packet info, track their outgoing packages, and monitor their PayPal transactions...

I'd go with NSA surveillance. Those guys know everything.

[slym2none]

21 hours ago, nickdemeato said:

No one just reads comics? No children buy spiderman? In over 30 years youve never seen anyone reading for fun? Who only had a limited budget to work with treating it as a hobby. Not starving or living on the streets. Just working within a budget.

"Ah man I wanted to start reading that Superior spiderman trade but it will have to wait until next month, not if I sell that Hells Arisen #3 it wont"

Never?

Never ever. I have worked in retail for 20 years. I dont see why running a comic shop day to day would be any different. I understand about the advanced ordering I asked Diamond to send me information about opening an account. Then wised up super quick.

 

I have worked in retail, many shops, over many years. Some of them have been comic shops. There is a difference.



-slym

[Gatsby77]

On 2/27/2020 at 12:02 PM, FlyingDonut said:

BTW I'm not sure that his solution fixes the problem. In order to get Hell Arisen 3 from him I have to buy 1 and 2? OK. I'm out $15. I'll sell the sets for $45. I'd like to nine times my money, but tripling my money is fine too.

My solution?

The same way that a lot of places do things. 1) all people with the title (or family) on their pull list get one. 2) any current pull list customer who calls and says "hey, I don't normally get Bat books, can you put that in my box" gets one 3) any that are left get set aside and are sold to people who have previously bought from the store - one per customer firm - 4) second printings get put out to the world.

This.

Also, I see no problem with requiring people to buy previous issues as a package.

I don't know that I've bought a new comic off the shelf since 2012, but even back in the '90s my local stores did this:

1992 - To get Unity # 0 (a "free" comic), the dealer required you to buy at least four of the other 8 Unity books released that month. Because he himself received only 2 copies for each set of 8 Unity month one books he ordered. For Unity # 1 ($1.50 cover), you had to buy all 8 books that month, because he received only 1 for all 8 he ordered.

You can also enforce per-customer limits on hot books.

1991 - My LCS switched Silver Surfer 50 & Ghost Rider 15 to "1 per customer" within a day of release when it became clear how quickly they were selling.

1992 - Youngblood # 1 - Limit 5 per customer (even after they ordered 300+ copies)

1993 - Rai # 0. LCS was so shorted on the book by Valiant that they were just able to cover their pre-orders and Valiant subscribers. None actually made it to the shelves at all.

2001 - Wolverine: Origin # 1 -- Limit 2 per customer from Day 1.

2008 - Captain America # 25 -- Limit 1 per customer (a bit harsh, since there were two covers -- subscribers received both covers).

Edited March 3, 2020 by Gatsby77

[slym2none]

5 hours ago, 1Cool said:

Is it just me or did books selling out and becoming $20 books overnight part of the reason you started collecting comics way back when?

No. My first book was UXM 171, right off a spinner rack. I read my buddy's Spider-Man comics, but I just bought X-Men because I liked the X-Men. I am pretty sure I never sold a comic for at least 15 years after that, at least one that was mine (I worked in a couple brick-and-mortar stores back then).



-slym

[Deadpoolica]

5 hours ago, theCapraAegagrus said:

Pick a side, dingus!

Edited March 3, 2020 by Deadpoolica

[theCapraAegagrus]

1 minute ago, Deadpoolica said:

O.

M.

G.

Spoiler

 

[thunsicker]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

2 hours ago, Turtle said:

I see some parallels between this subject and the one in this thread, only you've taken the other side this time.  In this thread, it very much matters what the buyer is intending to do with his property.  If he's going to buy the book and keep it because he's a Batman fan, he's welcome in the store.  If he's going to buy it to flip it on ebay, he's not welcome.  In either case, the retailer is selling the book for the same price just like in either case in the earlier scenario, the creator is making the same money per signature regardless of the intention.  In both cases, the retailer and the creator cite the fact that the buyer's actions impact their business.  Why is one correct while the other isn't?

To add to the above, I understand your point:

Creator: "what you intend to do with that after I sign it matters to me, and affects my willingness to sign it for you."

Retailer: "what you intend to do with that after I sell it to you matters to me, and affects my willingness to sell it to you."

And on the surface, sure, that may seem to be parallel...but they're not...at least, not really.

The item being signed already belongs to the person seeking the signature. They're buying something that isn't (technically) tangible, to add to the item they already own. And signatures are, because of their essentially intangible nature, theoretically infinite. Creators don't "sell out" of their signatures (until they can or will no longer sign.) There's little danger...aside from fatigue, which is curable...of someone seeking a signature to not get it because there aren't any "more" to be had. 

The new book being purchased, however, belongs to the retailer until it's sold. It's a tangible item. And it's certainly finite. And there are many, many, many examples of people going to the store to buy one and being unable to because someone else came and cleaned them out.

And due to the serial nature of the item...a periodical...there's a good reason to want to cultivate people to be repeat buyers, whereas signatures are not periodical, and there's no natural incentive for anyone to want to come back to get "the next signature."

So while yes, it doesn't matter what someone does with something after they own it, there's a difference in...call it "business development"...that exists for the retailer that doesn't exist for the creator signing.

The other main difference is availability.  The artist isn't going to run out of signatures he can give to 'true' fans because a flipper wants a signature.  The store will run out of issues of the comic to sell to 'true fans'.

[Lazyboy]

5 hours ago, 1Cool said:

Is it just me or did books selling out and becoming $20 books overnight part of the reason you started collecting comics way back when?

It's just you.

For the vast majority of the time I've collected comics, I haven't even been buying new issues. The rest of the time, I've usually been buying very few new issues.

[wilbil]

13 minutes ago, BL4Z3 said:

"I've been thinking about this. So, like, if you bring me your comic and I sign it, doesn't that make it our comic?"

that is good. very good. 

[Number 6]

22 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

It's just you.

For the vast majority of the time I've collected comics, I haven't even been buying new issues. The rest of the time, I've usually been buying very few new issues.

I remember when I was a teenager trying to convince my parents to let me start a pull list at the local comic shop. I used the devastating logic of “and someday the comics I buy will be worth more than what I paid”

Funny thing is, I never actually made my purchasing decisions with the thought of flipping the books for a profit.  Not even the Rule of 25 has had an impact on the books I put on my pull list back then. 

Even when I spotted a book on the LCS rack that only had one or two copies left - Silver Surfer #50, Star Wars: Dark Empire #2 - I picked them up because I thought they looked cool and I wanted to read them. The thought that they would sell out, get hot, and make me money never crossed my mind. Such a dork. 
 

[Bookery]

When I was buying my first comics in the mid-1960s, I was acutely aware of their potential value down-the-line.  I predicted that if I did the following -- read them a dozen times each, passed them around to friends, and tossed them in and out of a large box in the closet -- that by the time I was in high school, these comics would certainly be worth less than the 12-cents I paid for them.  I did exactly that, and my prediction was proven 100% correct.  Eerie, huh?

This prescient wizardry also came in handy when I secured a job at Merrill Lynch after graduation.

[dupont2005]

13 hours ago, 1Cool said:

Is it just me or did books selling out and becoming $20 books overnight part of the reason you started collecting comics way back when?  I loved reading (and rereading) the books and loved to complete sets but part of the thrill was knowing my books could jump in value.  The search for that sold out issue of Green Arrow Long Bow Hunter was what really got the collecting juice going. The argument that readers should get first shot at books is kind of moot since any reader of comics can preorder books and have them waiting for them to read.  Readers of comics do not see the headlines of a hot new book and run out to the shops and buy a copy to read.  They want the complete set and they would have bought issues 1 - 3 via preorder.

Can readers hear about a hot book they skipped over and want to pick up a copy to see what the hype is about - sure.  A ton of readers are collectors so I'm sure they are pissed they can't get the books they want but that has been the market forever since Independent Black and White books sold out in minutes way back in the 80s.  Is anyone actually reading these recent hot Batman books - are they good?

My first four years of collecting comics was buying whatever looked cool in the quarter bin. I didn’t start buying bags and boards until I had amassed several moving boxes full of comics. I didn’t even know longboxes were available to people who didn’t own comic shops until after my nearly two decade long comic break had ended. I did buy for speculation in the 90’s, Chromium Valiants and polybagged Superman stuff I wasn’t even interested in reading. Bad choices every single time. I have some comics worth a few bucks, but I bought them for the joy of owning them. I wouldn’t flip them for a profit unless I was in a bad place financially or I ran out of room to store them. 
 

The thing you’re missing is the readers are likely already following the series. I’ve followed several series and been burned on the random hot issue, both through an online retailer (can’t remember what they were called) and with the LCS multiple times. Titles I had on the pull list several months, even years in advance. As soon as a hot issue hits the stand suddenly I don’t get a copy. If I’m lucky it will go into reprint and I can get the worthless edition several months late, but that’s small consolation for the fact someone who doesn’t read the series at all takes Wednesday off so they can clear the shelves of anything worth putting on eBay. And of course not everything that sells out gets reprinted. I still don’t think I got to read the final issue of Life With Archie

[siro123]

 

On 2/27/2020 at 2:03 PM, Planet Terror said:

 

 All comic shop owners who order from diamond are speculators. 

 

 

 

[theCapraAegagrus]

9 hours ago, siro123 said:

 

 All comic shop owners who order from diamond are speculators. 

 

 

 

[D84]

9 hours ago, siro123 said:

 

 All comic shop owners who order from diamond are speculators. 

 

 

 

Please elaborate. 

Edited March 4, 2020 by D84

[Turtle]

20 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

To add to the above, I understand your point:

Creator: "what you intend to do with that after I sign it matters to me, and affects my willingness to sign it for you."

Retailer: "what you intend to do with that after I sell it to you matters to me, and affects my willingness to sell it to you."

And on the surface, sure, that may seem to be parallel...but they're not...at least, not really.

The item being signed already belongs to the person seeking the signature. They're buying something that isn't (technically) tangible, to add to the item they already own. And signatures are, because of their essentially intangible nature, theoretically infinite. Creators don't "sell out" of their signatures (until they can or will no longer sign.) There's little danger...aside from fatigue, which is curable...of someone seeking a signature to not get it because there aren't any "more" to be had. 

The new book being purchased, however, belongs to the retailer until it's sold. It's a tangible item. And it's certainly finite. And there are many, many, many examples of people going to the store to buy one and being unable to because someone else came and cleaned them out.

And due to the serial nature of the item...a periodical...there's a good reason to want to cultivate people to be repeat buyers, whereas signatures are not periodical, and there's no natural incentive for anyone to want to come back to get "the next signature."

So while yes, it doesn't matter what someone does with something after they own it, there's a difference in...call it "business development"...that exists for the retailer that doesn't exist for the creator signing.

 

I appreciate you taking the time to respond.  I think this second piece focuses on the point I'm interested in exploring.

Just to be 100% clear, my heart always goes out to people when I hear some variation of the story where a book becomes hot and a regular customer and follower of the series is unable to get their copy for cover price thanks to the actions of "profiteers".  Sometimes the profiteer is fellow customers, sometimes it's the retailer himself.  In all cases, it sucks for the fan.  Because of this, I tend to agree with the idea the guy in the article is trying to convey (though I tend to disagree with his tone).  Again, I'm just trying to reconcile this issue and the "creator charging more for grading" issue mentioned earlier. 

One of the arguments you made (that I liked and really stuck with me) in one of the threads discussing the practice of charging more for books that will be graded was an analogy of a supermarket.  In the analogy, if the supermarket behaved in a similar manner to the creator signing books, the supermarket would need to ask the customer what they intend to do with the eggs, flour, sugar, and butter they're buying.  I've they're making cookies to serve at a family gathering, they can get the items for the listed price.  However, if they're going to bake cookies to then sell them to people online, they will be charged more.  After all, why should the customer be allowed to make money off the items supplied by the supermarket?  This is effectively what is being done when a creator charges more for the signature on a book that will be graded.  This practice isn't tolerated (rightfully so) in retail in the US and the fact that it's tolerated on the convention circuit seems absurd. 

Your response I think can be boiled down to 2 reasons why retailers can do this: The resource (book) is finite and "business development" must be considered to ensure the survival of the retailer.  Using the supermarket analogy, the resources (ingredients) are finite and I assume business development is still being considered.  Supermarkets could potentially make higher profit margins if they charged more for resellers, but the practice would no doubt scare future customers away once word spread of this practice.  So why are we agreeing that a comic retailer is right to do this when a supermarket would be roasted if they did the same thing?

Again, I'm definitely on your side for the creator issue and I'm pretty sure I'm on your side for the retailer issue.  I'm just trying to resolve how these things aren't directly opposed to one another.  I feel like I'm team Yanny on one topic and team Laurel on a very similar topic.  I suppose I can personally live with being a hypocrite on this issue, chalking it up to a "gray area".  I just wanted to pick your brain a bit to see if there's anything out there that could make it so I don't feel like a hypocrite.  Thanks!

[siro123]

You can always buy digital if you cant get ahold of a physical copy.

Yes i understand its not the same but its an option until the prices come down.

So you cant really complain that you cant read the story. Unless you just like to complain then i understand.

Digital never sells out. 

Yes comic stores can sell digital on there websites and make 33% of the digital sale for the store. 

Any comic store with a website can do this and have this as a backup option if they so choose but most dont.

 

[slym2none]

11 hours ago, siro123 said:

 

 All comic shop owners who order from diamond are speculators. 

 

 

 

How so? The retailer has pre-orders, copies he knows he is going to sell, and the "table" copies he knows he will sell a good percentage of, and that covers his profit margin. That isn't speculation, that's just commerce.





-slym