Cliff R. Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 11 hours ago, the blob said: How come I still get vast quantities of shiney junk mail catalogues and what not? they don't seem to have printing cost issues. IF these were 64 page comics I think it would make sense at least in terms of product being delivered in terms of reading enjoyment. But to the collector, a non-key/hot back issue is going to be "worth" 50 cents - $2 as a back issue regardless of the cover price, so you really need to be buying these for reading value. why is it that image can afford to sell $2.99 comics? they used to be the expensive ones. Most things I buy today cost about 10 times more than they cost in my youth. Some more, some less. The price of a comic is 50 times more. I don't think it's because of higher printing costs. Technological advances should have lowered the cost. As I see it, a comic should be about $1.20 by now. kav 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ttfitz Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 3 hours ago, Cliff R. said: Most things I buy today cost about 10 times more than they cost in my youth. Some more, some less. The price of a comic is 50 times more. I don't think it's because of higher printing costs. Technological advances should have lowered the cost. As I see it, a comic should be about $1.20 by now. Not sure when "your youth" might have been, but a lot of comparisons depend on when you look at. For a long time, comic prices were kept artificially low - the 10¢ cover price continued for years while other magazines had price increases. But, just looking over my lifetime, I picked out a few price points to compare: 1962, prices jumped to 12¢ cover. 2021 equivalent (CPI-U adjusted) - $1.04 1969, 15¢. Equivalent $1.10 1979, 40¢. Equivalent $1.53 1988, $1.00. Equivalent $2.26 1997, $1.99. Equivalent $3.26 2010, $3.99. Equivalent $4.80 Another thing to keep in mind is the declining print run over those years. In 1962, Superman was selling around ¾ of a million copies every month. Last year's top selling issue, Wolverine #1, would have barely cracked the 1962 Top 30 with it's 196,000 copies. "Teen Confessions" in 1962 sold more each month (112,000 for 54th on the Comichron chart) than all but 4 individual issues for last year. Cliff R. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 3 hours ago, Cliff R. said: Most things I buy today cost about 10 times more than they cost in my youth. Some more, some less. The price of a comic is 50 times more. I don't think it's because of higher printing costs. Technological advances should have lowered the cost. As I see it, a comic should be about $1.20 by now. It makes no sense how far above inflation comics have become. And I still prefer newsprint to glossy shiny paper that you have to keep moving around just to read because of the glare. Cliff R. and D84 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakman29 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 On 3/22/2021 at 5:47 PM, Buzzetta said: With only ASM on my buy list, I can absorb a price increase and that is only to maintain the collection. Eventually though it will come to an end. I found it a perfect time to quit my ASM run at 700, when they said it was done. Like everything in comics it's never really over is it. I was done though. kav and ThothAmon 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, oakman29 said: I found it a perfect time to quit my ASM run at 700, when they said it was done. Like everything in comics it's never really over is it. I was done though. Bah I quit while I was ahead at #185😎 Edited March 25, 2021 by kav ThothAmon and oakman29 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drotto Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 Comics is entering a classic death spiral when it comes to pricing. Circulation goes down so profits go down. Company raises the price to account for loss of profits, this kinda works is the short term. Despite the changes, each time the profits margins get smaller despite the price increase. Eventually, more of that consumer base leaves due to the price change or decreased interest. Company repeats the same logic as before, raise prices to compensate for decreased sales. Each time to diminishing returns and eventually it all collapses. oldmilwaukee6er and D84 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toro Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 At my LCS while he has tons of back issues, most people go there for new issues. He has one customer who will buy the amount needed so he can get that 1 in 25 variant cover. So if the store ordered 15 books he will buy 10 more of that same book. He will usually give them to the owner as he doesn't want them. I forgot what book is coming out this month, but it has 16 covers. He has people that will buy all 16 and 2nd and 3rd prints if they come out too. You also get at that store and the one down the block from it parents bringing their kids in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrntWS6 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 I started to get back into comics in 2018 a bit after stopping in the 90s. After 2 months I could not take the high cover prices and countless variants offered. These people are out of their minds. Now I just focus on getting my key issues graded to sell when I retire. D84 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toro Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 It is crazy today a book comes out and that day it will be selling on ebay for $100, but within a week it is settled down to $25. I still like reading new stuff, but while the prices are high I don't have many other vices so I will read. The $5.99 though means I won't read Batman anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 On 3/24/2021 at 5:43 AM, ThothAmon said: Really? I kind of agreed with it. I know the business model of newspapers is to over inflate circulation numbers to bolster advertising rates. Seems like my local newspaper has been doing it for years by calculating circulation on papers that are never bought and returned to an apparent shell company. Wouldn’t be surprised if the circulation numbers for all forms of “newsprint media” are doing the same thing. The post you are defending was inappropriate political content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThothAmon Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 hour ago, sfcityduck said: The post you are defending was inappropriate political content. ‘it was a completely dishonest newsprint media that was the catalyst that brought down all other forms of print“ Really? I ran it through the Google “Political Content” determiner and it came back innocent. Which one are you using that it comes back “political”? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExNihilo Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 hour ago, toro said: At my LCS while he has tons of back issues, most people go there for new issues. He has one customer who will buy the amount needed so he can get that 1 in 25 variant cover. So if the store ordered 15 books he will buy 10 more of that same book. He will usually give them to the owner as he doesn't want them. I forgot what book is coming out this month, but it has 16 covers. He has people that will buy all 16 and 2nd and 3rd prints if they come out too. You also get at that store and the one down the block from it parents bringing their kids in. That is one generous customer. toro 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 (edited) 13 minutes ago, ThothAmon said: ‘it was a completely dishonest newsprint media that was the catalyst that brought down all other forms of print“ Really? I ran it through the Google “Political Content” determiner and it came back innocent. Which one are you using that it comes back “political”? His first comment on this thread was this: "our local newspaper is $2.50 an issue and it only has about 20 pages... i would never buy one or even read it for free because it is all lies ,.... but it seems that it was only 50 cents an issue 15 years ago ,... so the price has quintrupled since then" He then made the comment you are defending as non-political: "it was a completely dishonest newsprint media that was the catalyst that brought down all other forms of print" He's not talking about circulation stats. He is parroting a political view about a supposed lack of honesty in the mainstream media. Buzzetta is right. And it is notable that the poster is not pretending otherwise. Edited March 25, 2021 by sfcityduck Buzzetta, MetalPSI and ttfitz 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThothAmon Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 4 minutes ago, sfcityduck said: His first comment on this thread was this: "our local newspaper is $2.50 an issue and it only has about 20 pages... i would never buy one or even read it for free because it is all lies ,.... but it seems that it was only 50 cents an issue 15 years ago ,... so the price has quintrupled since then" He then made the comment you are defending as non-political: "it was a completely dishonest newsprint media that was the catalyst that brought down all other forms of print" He's not talking about circulation stats. He is parroting a political view about a supposed lack of honesty in the mainstream media. Buzzetta is right. And it is notable that the poster is not pretending otherwise. What’s any of that got to do with me? Your using a different comment than the comment I was so-called “defending”. I was responding to the original post only when I saw Buzz’s conclusory comment about another’s seemingly innocuous comment (given the title of the thread) and chimed in my two cents about what the OP was about. I had not read the whole thread. I am not “defending” anyone’s comment as you allege other than to the extent my own comment makes clear or muddles. I try very hard to stay away from politics and focus solely on comics as I have found most are very open minded. So long as you agree with them. MetalPSI 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 11 minutes ago, ThothAmon said: What’s any of that got to do with me? Your using a different comment than the comment I was so-called “defending”. I was responding to the original post only when I saw Buzz’s conclusory comment about another’s seemingly innocuous comment (given the title of the thread) and chimed in my two cents about what the OP was about. I had not read the whole thread. I am not “defending” anyone’s comment as you allege other than to the extent my own comment makes clear or muddles. I try very hard to stay away from politics and focus solely on comics as I have found most are very open minded. So long as you agree with them. I'm not accusing you of any intentional wrongdoing. I'm just pointing out that Buzzetta correctly identified the comment as yet another political comment by that poster (which prompted Buzzetta to disagree with it on political grounds). Buzzetta undoubtedly reached that conclusion the same way I did - by reading all of the poster's posts on this thread. By looking at that one post out of its context, you came to the wrong conclusion that Buzzetta was being unfair to the poster because you thought the comment was "innocuous." It wasn't. No biggee it happens that we all misinterpret a comment or miss the context. I just thought you should know. F For Fake and MetalPSI 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 2 hours ago, sfcityduck said: He's not talking about circulation stats. He is parroting a political view about a supposed lack of honesty in the mainstream media. Buzzetta is right. And it is notable that the poster is not pretending otherwise. I can confirm first hand the media is bogus. I have been interviewed on Tv and they re-arranged my answers to different questions to make it look like I was saying the opposite of what I actually said. The local newspaper also printed a story that I blew my head off when I was a teen. I did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, kav said: I can confirm first hand the media is bogus. I have been interviewed on Tv and they re-arranged my answers to different questions to make it look like I was saying the opposite of what I actually said. The local newspaper also printed a story that I blew my head off when I was a teen. I did not. No need for a political discussion here. If that happened, you must have made out like a bandit in the resulting defamation lawsuits. Hope you spent the money on comics! My experience, which includes having two parents who were reporters for a well-regarded local daily newspaper and my own experience contributing articles/columns to publications, leads me to a different conclusions than yours (including that there is no such thing as "the media" as there are many different outlets and publications). But, that's a debate for a different message board. Let's keep it on comics related topics here. MetalPSI , crassus, ttfitz and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 minute ago, sfcityduck said: No need for a political discussion here. If that happened, you must have made out like a bandit in the resulting defamation lawsuits. Dont you have to prove damages to sue for defamation tho? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfcityduck Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 minute ago, kav said: Dont you have to prove damages to sue for defamation tho? Under California law, where I recall (I think, going off memory) you live, the answer is "no." In a case of "defamation per se" damages are not an element of the cause of action. Accusing someone of a crime is an example of defamation per se. Committing or attempting suicide in California is a crime. If you win, your recovery can include monetary relief for general damages (such as loss of reputation, shame, mortification, hurt feelings, emotional distress) and punitive damages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kav Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 (edited) 22 minutes ago, sfcityduck said: Under California law, where I recall (I think, going off memory) you live, the answer is "no." In a case of "defamation per se" damages are not an element of the cause of action. Accusing someone of a crime is an example of defamation per se. Committing or attempting suicide in California is a crime. If you win, your recovery can include monetary relief for general damages (such as loss of reputation, shame, mortification, hurt feelings, emotional distress) and punitive damages. Well i'm screwed then because it wss not a suicide attempt they reported but a stupid accident. Edited March 25, 2021 by kav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
