The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **GHERU** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:31 pm

ElijahSnowFan wrote:
That's always been my point, though: So many are thinking of only the model you know. There are other models that can work, could work, might work, or won't work. Most importantly, someone will create a model that WILL work.

Those models will be created, likely if/when Marvel/DC and/or the direct market collapse. Maybe sooner, maybe later. But make no mistake: They will! There's money to be made!

Those models will be created.

Ok, businessman, give me a rough outline of this new model without the big two

by **Eli Katz** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:32 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:The decline of the industry is almost entirely the fault of the direct market exclusivity of single issue comics. You can place blame on other things like the price point, the failure to embrace digital, the incestuous storytelling and marketing, but all of that leads back to the fact that the industry stopped courting new readers and decided to sell only to the ones they already had, because it was more profitable to print comics that way. It's really impossible to dispute this. People don't go to comic shops. I would bet that 99% of comics fans today discovered comics in a place like a supermarket, pharmacy, newsstand, or convenience store, and comics are not there anymore. As a result, no one new discovers comics.

People will argue that comics can't be sold in newsstands or 7-11s now because the shelf space is more valuable, but whose fault is that? It was the industry that chose to leave that market 20 years ago, and we're paying for it now. But for places like Rite Aid or Walgreens or supermarkets, I believe there's no reason companies couldn't get comics back in there easily. They would just need to follow the same procedures as magazine companies and deal with overprinting and not making as much profit from it. However, it would be healthier in the long run. That process was abandoned because more profit could be made selling to the direct market with no overprinting, but obviously that only worked for a few years and the market dwindled to the point where they've had to quadruple the fucking prices. They need to go back to what worked for half a century instead of clinging to the failed business model of the specialty shop, and at the same time embrace the modern version of the newsstand, the digital realm.

IMO. YMMV. (but if it does you are stupid)

Kids don't read anymore. They play games online, screw around on youtube, and text each other homophobic jokes.

by **ElijahSnowFan** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:32 pm

Before I blocked Frag, he said something to the effect of, "Marvel's publishing division generates $30 million, they have costs of $11 million. Not worth it to publish."

I have no idea if those numbers are accurate or not. No clue. But just say they are.

Maybe it's not worth it to Disney to publish Marvel Comics. But as a person in a free market economy, it behooves me to see what, if any, of that $30 MILLION DOLLARS I could get my hands on.

That's what capitalism is. Take the ball and run with it.

by **ReturnoftheMack** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:34 pm

Eli Katz wrote:I haven't read this entire thread. But to those who complain that Marchman wrote a diatribe rather than a book review, I suggest you read more book reviews. Especially in the New York Review of Books, the London Review of Books, and other prestigious publications, reviewers commonly write book reviews that end up being analytical essays on the subject matter covered in the reviewed book. Readers don't read such articles to find out whether the book is "good" or not, but rather to gain an overview of the topic at hand. So I don't think Marchman failed as a reviewer. He simply used the opportunity to review this book as a springboard to discuss the comics industry as a whole. It's a common review strategy.

Too bad he didn't touch upon the topic at hand at all.

He most certainly failed as a reviewer since I still have no clue not just if the book was good, but anything about it.

by **Herald** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:36 pm

Punchy wrote:Why is it that the only threads that get any traction on this site these days are the negative ones?

GHERU wrote:because even the positive ones turn negative because haters can't stay away and people who like comics don't want to stay in a thread with a bunch of self-hating buzzkills

IMO, YMMV

Incorrect.

As mentioned, you positive lovers HAD an all-positive, not-turning-negative thread: The recent Aquaman thread. YOU guys, and YOU ALONE, failed to keep it going.

Don't blame the people who don't like current comics for YOUR failure. :roll:

by **alaska1125** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:36 pm

The President wrote:
Too bad he didn't touch upon the topic at hand at all.

He most certainly failed as a reviewer since I still have no clue not just if the book was good, but anything about it.

Agreed. I had to go to Amazon to see what the book is like. It's a bit different than I was expecting, but looks pretty interesting.

by **GHERU** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:39 pm

Herald wrote:

Incorrect.

As mentioned, you positive lovers HAD an all-positive, not-turning-negative thread: The recent Aquaman thread. YOU guys, and YOU ALONE, failed to keep it going.

Don't blame the people who don't like current comics for YOUR failure.

I don't read Aquaman, so I don't know who this "you" is that you are talking to

so, howabout you stop vilifying me

by **ElijahSnowFan** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:39 pm

GHERU wrote:Ok, businessman, give me a rough outline of this new model without the big two

Oh, hell no! Wouldn't you and the rest of the internet like to know!

I'm just saying: I'm old enough to know what does work and doesn't work. For example: Jude just mentioned the direct market. It KILLED Legion of Super-Heroes and New Teen Titans when DC went to the Baxter editions. KILLED them DEAD.

This industry has history. A long history. One that is ripe with examples and ideas and best-case practices of what does and doesn't work. What a person can control is looking them up, understanding them, decide for yourself what will and won't work, and take your best shot.

That's all a person can do. That's all business is, capitalism is. Supply and demand. If/when Marvel and DC go, supply is cut. The risk comes if you try to fill the demand.

I think someone will try, and be successful. I honestly believe that.

by **Johnny Smith** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:41 pm

The President wrote:
Too bad he didn't touch upon the topic at hand at all.

He most certainly failed as a reviewer since I still have no clue not just if the book was good, but anything about it.

just think of all the web hits he generated :twisted:

by **Eli Katz** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:42 pm

Marchman indicates that it's a good book:

"Leaping Tall Buildings," a collection of brief and beautifully illustrated profiles of comic-book artists, intends to celebrate the form—and does—but along the way reveals the forces that have caused its most iconic titles to rot.

The most telling sections in "Leaping Tall Buildings" are thus those written about industry powers like Brian Michael Bendis, Joe Quesada, Grant Morrison and Dan DiDio. These are the men most responsible for the failure of the big publishers to take advantage of the public's obvious fascination with men in capes.

But by far the most charming and enjoyable parts of the book are those that present substantive artists like Mr. Ware, Jaime Hernandez ("Love and Rockets") and Jeffrey Brown ("Unlikely"). By a quirk of the comics industry, artists like these, who deal with the stuff of real life and whose work is treasured by people who read books that have spines, are tagged as "alternative" or "underground." It's amusing to see how, in "Leaping Tall Buildings," such artists come off as normal, thoughtful people, while contemporary superhero creators tend to come off as pretentious autodidacts or failed cult leaders. If anything is "underground," it's their insular, indecipherable comics.

by **Herald** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:44 pm

GHERU wrote:I don't read Aquaman, so I don't know who this "you" is that you are talking to

So now we see that you missed the very sort of positive, not-turning-negative thread you were claiming doesn't exist! You spoke out of lack of knowledge! Good to have that established.

so, howabout you stop vilifying me

When you stop villifying posters who don't like what's happening with comics, I'll consider the request.

by **ReturnoftheMack** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:46 pm

When cell phones came out, beepers eventually died out (I know some people still use them).

There is no void that will be filled by Image, Boom! or others if Marvel and DC disappeared. The customers will move to something else.

by **ReturnoftheMack** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:48 pm

Yeah Eli, I know how this is done in certain places, but doesn't make it right. He spends very little time on the review and too much on his soapbox.

It's like reviewing a book on W's life but spending the article talking about your opinion on WMDs on Iraq. That's all good, but how's the book?

by **ReturnoftheMack** » Wed May 30, 2012 4:49 pm

Herald is really lashing out at everyone today. I think we should make sure he gets his meds.

by **Eli Katz** » Wed May 30, 2012 5:02 pm

The President wrote:Yeah Eli, I know how this is done in certain places, but doesn't make it right. He spends very little time on the review and too much on his soapbox.

It's like reviewing a book on W's life but spending the article talking about your opinion on WMDs on Iraq. That's all good, but how's the book?

The editors probably decided that a critique of the comics industry would be more useful to their readers than a detailed assessment of the book itself. Presumably, most WSJ readers aren't also fanboys. The review is not aimed at us, hardcore nerds, but rather at guys who have seen the Avengers movie and would find it somewhat interesting to learn that comics are in decline while comic-book movies are in their ascendency.