The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **Spidey-Man** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:38 pm

At the time of Infinite Crisis, DC was close, or even a month or two in first place IIRC.

Now:

Marvel Comics had the largest percentage of the top 300 comics with 51.86% of the total units sold followed by DC Comics with 31.68%.

Top 20 books, 15 Marvel, 4 DC, 1 Dark Horse.

Dollars wise, Marvel made $13.3 million, to DC's $7.6 million with comics.

Even in trades, which used to be a DC strong suit, while DC sold slightly more trades 31.93% to Marvel's 30.06%, Marvel made more money off of them $2.2 million, to $1.8 million.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page ... e&id=16836

How did DC go from pretty close, to pretty far away?

by **Chris** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:40 pm

Spiderrob wrote:How did DC go from pretty close, to pretty far away?

Horrible management.

IMO Levitz and Didio both need to go.

by **Keb** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:41 pm

DC probably made more in trades because all the hot shit they released two years ago finally came out in collected form...

(yes, it quite obvious I dislike their collections policy)

by **Thunderstorm** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:41 pm

Mega-Event burnout, and a dwindling of quality after Infinite Crisis hurt them really bad. I have no idea how Marvel has kept it's numbers up after all the crap they've delivered, but people also watch reality TV, and voted for Bush.

by **C20Percent** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:47 pm

Marvel maximizes it's talent -- Bendis, Brubaker, Fraction, Millar -- just those guys alone are probably writing over 20 books at Marvel.

In comparison, Grant Morrison is on one book -- two if you count Final Crisis. Geoff Johns is the only writer that burns the night like the above Marvel writers; I think he's the only reason Dan DiDio still has a job.

And did you see how easily Marvel just ripped Jason Aaron away from DC -- that guy's gonna be a superstar, and DC let's him fall right through their fingers.

by **lancer_man** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:51 pm

I think marvel stuff is more accessible right now. I am always trying to get non comic readers to read stuff and they seem to be able to get into Marvel books easier than DC recently.

by **Chris** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:52 pm

Thunderstorm wrote:I have no idea how Marvel has kept it's numbers up after all the crap they've delivered, but people also watch reality TV, and voted for Bush.

One person's crap is another's treasure. It's not fair to belittle Marvel fans as brainless zombies just because you don't enjoy the product.

by **Keb** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

lancer_man wrote:I think marvel stuff is more accessible right now. I am always trying to get non comic readers to read stuff and they seem to be able to get into Marvel books easier than DC recently.

I think it's because Marvel writers tend to focus more on the person rather than the hero, and people want to see that instead of the big action.

Just a personal opinion, though.

by **The Juan Percenter** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:55 pm

Who cares? I read things that I enjoy not was is #1 on sales charts. But as a Z-100 listener, I see that ratings are more important than quality to you

by **Sgt.Marvel** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:56 pm

I'd try a lot more DC, if they just added a freaken recap page.

by **Thunderstorm** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:57 pm

DaReekstah wrote:One person's crap is another's treasure. It's not fair to belittle Marvel fans as brainless zombies just because you don't enjoy the product.

I am saying that the characters have been handled horribly, and the mega-events have failed to deliver. Marvel is doing well, and DC is doing worse, despite the same things affecting both companies.

by **Chris** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:57 pm

milton73 wrote:Who cares? I read things that I enjoy not was is #1 on sales charts. But as a Z-100 listener, I see that ratings are more important than quality to you

The problem is, what is #1 on sales charts generally tends to be pretty indicative of the quality of the brands. So it kind of goes hand in hand. Not always, and not for everyone. But most of the time.

by **The Juan Percenter** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:59 pm

DaReekstah wrote:The problem is, what is #1 on sales charts generally tends to be pretty indicative of the quality of the brands. So it kind of goes hand in hand. Not always, and not for everyone. But most of the time.

So when Britney Spears had a #1 album, she's probably the highest quality singer? There's no accounting for taste (good or bad).

by **Spidey-Man** » Wed Jun 25, 2008 4:00 pm

milton73 wrote:Who cares? I read things that I enjoy not was is #1 on sales charts. But as a Z-100 listener, I see that ratings are more important than quality to you

Who cares about anything we talk about?

I just find it interesting that 3 years ago, they were neck and neck and now we're here.