What Exactly is Marvel's Problem?

[Flightpath07]

The title to this thread is a lot like giving a (comic loving) child a loaded gun.

That being said, something concerns me.

For me, it starts with realizing that Marvel has just cancelled Fearless Defenders after 12 issues. At some point, i have to question why it is that well-written comic series by Marvel DON'T SELL enough to keep going.

So, I leave it up to you to discuss here.

My thoughts at this moment: Is it because Marvel does not know how to market a good series? Or is it because Marvel is SO GOOD at marketing a few of their titles, that nobody cares about (or is willing to pay any attention to) anything else?

Because, seriously, in the last few years, I don't have enough fingers (got to stop greasing my chainsaw while it is running!) to count the GREAT Marvel titles that have been discontinued due to poor sales! In my opinion, the talented writers who come up with this stuff, deserve a better fate than what they have been handed of late!

So, what's the scoop, people? Is Marvel too good at marketing, or are they really lousy at it?

btw, in this case, i don't consider the argument of "people can't afford" to buy comics a valid one; simply because, I am poor, in debt, struggling to keep my head above water financially, yet just spent $66.08 at my LCS today. 'Nuff said.

[Phil]

"Well-written" is relative though. You say it's well written, others don't.

The majority of superhero comic readers want what they've had for the last 50 years; a traditional capes and tights fight. Nothing more, nothing less.

That's what sells, no matter what Marvel or DC do.

[Flightpath07]

Then why not drop the pretense?

Why put out new series at all? Just put out limited series of everything that isn't a traditional top-seller. At least then we the reader know that what we are reading is going to end. Do away with the false hope. If the LS sells decently, do another LS a bit later. I could live with that.

[Phil]

Because LS's don't sell as well as ongoings anymore.
People don't tend to buy LS's because they don't think they matter.

[Garry/Al-Fan]

What's the number of issues sold that would cause a title to be cancelled or that a title should try not to go below?

[Chris]

With Marvel, I've noticed it's around the 20,000 sales mark. DC is bit more lenient. Usually it's around 12,000 to 10,000 sales mark for DC. These sales figures are not written in stone since Uncanny X-Force was selling around 32,000 copies in October and got canned. I think sales were dropping too fast with Uncanny X-Force so Marvel decided to end it early. That's my opinion.

[Flightpath07]

Because LS's don't sell as well as ongoings anymore.
People don't tend to buy LS's because they don't think they matter.

So Phil, this again swings the discussion around to what i was asking; isn't this a marketing issue, in one way or another? Either they market their big-selling series too well, thus killing the market for anything but...or they just don't know how to market something that isn't already established.

Why do I say this? Well, if Limited Series don't sell well because people think they don't matter...then doesn't Marvel need to change people's perceptions? Isn't that what a marketing department is for?


As far as this goes...


The majority of superhero comic readers want what they've had for the last 50 years; a traditional capes and tights fight. Nothing more, nothing less.

...IMHO, that ISN'T what the last 50 years has given them. Strictly super-vs-super fights, without much character development, is still a relatively-new development in comics. I grew up in the age where comics, even team comics, spent just as much time showing heroes interacting with each other out of costume, and just as much time showing the home-lives of supers, as they did showing mindless battle scenes. So, I don't think that "capes and tights fights; nothing more, nothing less" are a tradition at all, or at least not a long-standing one.

[Phil]

Fantastic Four #1 - Superheroes in tights fighting a supervillain in a cape.
That's as long-standing as the Marvel Universe as we know it.

I'm not saying that that was all the issue was, but for children at the time that was undoubtedly a highlight of the issue. Those children have now grown up and still read the same comics with the same hero v villain fights.

And again, not saying it applies to everyone; I specifically said the majority.

Established names and titles sell. "Fantastic Four" will outsell "Fearless Defenders" on name alone. Retailers trust the brand, habitual buyers buy it.

I don't want this thread (or any other) to spin off into the cliché that is me disagreeing with everything you put and having to be the only person to defend Marvel on every point so I'll leave my input at that.

[Flightpath07]

Hey, you're allowed to like Marvel if you choose to.

Just like you allow me to basically loathe them.

Its all good.

[Le Messor]

I don't want this thread (or any other) to spin off into the cliché that is me disagreeing with everything you put and having to be the only person to defend Marvel on every point so I'll leave my input at that.

Y'know, Phil, sometimes I feel sorry for you. Trying to be the voice of reason and, well, niceness, with all us bitter cynical types around.
C'mon, guys, let's be more supportive of Phil!

~ LM
"Make new friends but keep the old; one is silver and the other's gold."

[Phil]

Hey, you've all been given plenty of reasons to be cynical. Just from both Marvel and DC.

[Flightpath07]

Hey, you've all been given plenty of reasons to be cynical. Just from both Marvel and DC.

Ah, but this isn't All-StarSuperman.net , so...

[Phil]

It's not FearlessDefenders.net either though.

[Garry/Al-Fan]

My answer to this thread's question would be that some people remember that "fan" is short for "fanatic", and they remember it with derision.

[Le Messor]

I think you're all correct - that if I'm cynical at Marvel more than DC, if I attack Marvel more than DC, it's because I care less about DC's characters. Then again, IMO, Marvel have never done anything as bad as the Nu52. Even their 'equivalent' - Marvel Now! - made things better, not worse (for me, at least).
And, yeah, that is what 'fan' means!
(But we're not (necessarily) Fearless Defenders fans.)

I also don't like answers which say 'the majority want this' (when I think 'this' isn't very good), because it makes me feel hopeless - that there will never be the good comics of my youth again, and there's nothing I can do about it, because a whole lotta people are after things I'm not AS fond of.
Unfortunately, I know very well 'I don't like' and 'It isn't true' mean two very different things.

~ Le Messor
"Male, old enough to know better, wishes correspondence with female not quite that old."

[Flightpath07]

there will never be the good comics of my youth again, and there's nothing I can do about it

Well, if you reference the article about what Alan Moore thinks about comics, you might come to the conclusion that what is really wrong with comics is that they are writing them for the wrong demographic. Perhaps ALL comics companies should create several series aimed solely at the 9-13 age bracket. If they wrote some series with the same sense of mystery and wonder and hope that many of us older fans enjoyed when we were younger, and told us older fans to buy it for our children (or any children that we know), perhaps then we would all get what we wanted. You could stuill, as an adult, read dark and gritty and grey comics, if that is your thing, or you could reach for the lighter-hearted and hopeful and bright and fun series, which would also be selling well because kids would be buying them once again.

[Le Messor]

I agree completely.

[Flightpath07]

I agree completely.

I probably stole it from you. My apologies, if so; you are welcome to it back (because it'll never happen).

[Flightpath07]

It's not FearlessDefenders.net either though.

True. But I figured that "plenty of reasons" meant "more than just Alpha Flight", and it does make more sense to complain about the Marvel company on a site that reveres one of their products.

And, unlike some, I enjoy DC's New52 relaunch, which is why I still get 5 or 6 titles from them each month. It would be more, but they cancelled several that I really enjoyed.

[Le Messor]

I probably stole it from you.

Not that I know of.

[Jason Eberly]

Well, if you reference the article about what Alan Moore thinks about comics, you might come to the conclusion that what is really wrong with comics is that they are writing them for the wrong demographic. Perhaps ALL comics companies should create several series aimed solely at the 9-13 age bracket.

I've actually said this for many years. One of the things that drew me into comics at the age of 9 or 10 was that, while obviously aimed at kids, they didn't talk to me as if I were a child. These were complex stories with complex characters with complex vocabularies and complex moralities. They did what they did because it was right, not because it was simple to do so.

My first issue of Spider-Man dealt with Peter Parker's personal issues, as well as the first appearance of The Hobgoblin.
My first issue of Avengers dealt with the finale of Hank Pym's fall from grace, and his "retiring" from superheroing.
My first issue of Iron Man dealt with Tony Stark being so far deep into alcoholism that Jim Rhodes had to don the armor for the first time to protect Stark International.
My first issue of Fantastic Four had this cosmic entity Galactus having a talk with Death itself(!) before literally eating the Skrull homeworld and killing billions of living creatures.

Pretty heavy stuff for kids, yet obviously these comics were made for kids. They just didn't treat kids as stupid. Whereas today, I often feel writers are trying to shovel these high-handed meta-concepts that only a few people purport to "get" (I'm looking at you, Morrison!).


If they wrote some series with the same sense of mystery and wonder and hope that many of us older fans enjoyed when we were younger, and told us older fans to buy it for our children (or any children that we know), perhaps then we would all get what we wanted. You could stuill, as an adult, read dark and gritty and grey comics, if that is your thing, or you could reach for the lighter-hearted and hopeful and bright and fun series, which would also be selling well because kids would be buying them once again.

Wonderfully put.

The thing I don't get is today's marketing in so many things is aimed at exactly this 9-13 "tween" demographic. Books, movies, merchandise due to the fact they have the greatest amount of disposable income. Yet comic books continue to aim for an aging audience. I don't get it.

[Flightpath07]

On the same subject, I thoroughly enjoyed the heck out of the issues of Marvel Adventures that I purchased. I'd buy a series like that on a monthly basis. There have been a few other ones as well, one with DC using the Titans, that sort of thing. Not sure how long these series lasted or how they sold. Feel bad now that i did not do MORE to support them at the time. Sometimes we don't know what we are missing, until we are missing it.

[Flightpath07]

Not that I know of.

That's because I'm that good. I also have your lunch money, the bell and basket for your bicycle, and your entire youth, but you didn't know that either!

[Phil]

It would be more, but they cancelled several that I really enjoyed.
Yet the thread title doesn't ask what DC's problem is...

[-K-M-]

I don't want this thread (or any other) to spin off into the cliché that is me disagreeing with everything you put and having to be the only person to defend Marvel on every point so I'll leave my input at that.

You're not alone, I agree with many of your points about Marvel. In the end, their in the business to make money. Sure we love the characters, but can't fault Marvel in many ways as they have tried. I strongly disagreed with how they handled Omega Flight as the sales did warrant an on-going even after the switch-a-roo (on-going to mini before #1 came out)

[Le Messor]

I've actually said this for many years. One of the things that drew me into comics at the age of 9 or 10 was that, while obviously aimed at kids, they didn't talk to me as if I were a child. These were complex stories with complex characters with complex vocabularies and complex moralities. They did what they did because it was right, not because it was simple to do so.

I keep saying that my favourite period in comics is the 70s-80s (the Bronze Age, I believe). The things you're saying are a lot of the reasons why - they struck that perfect balance for me; reasonably sophisticated, without forgetting that they're (superhero) comics; readable by kids, but not *only* by kids; neither too dark nor too light.
(I think, though, most of the stories you describe are from before that time.)

Writers like Morrison, for me at least, their stories have no heart; they're just trying to be a bunch of big, high-concept ideas, but I can't care about the characters. (I actually like the New X-Men, though... at least, I would've, if it had been about an original team. Being about the X-Men, he had to derail all the characters for it.)

Last night, I watched Nostalgia Critic / Angry Joe's review of Man Of Steel, and NC started talking about characters being hit with the 'Nolan Spray' - which meant that they may have had a few lines of good, realistic dialogue, but then they got the Spray, and everything turned into huge speeches about how Important this movie (and main character) is. It's kind of like what we're talking about.


That's because I'm that good. I also have your lunch money, the bell and basket for your bicycle, and your entire youth, but you didn't know that either!

I wondered where those things got to!

~ Le Messor
"Man is able to do what he is unable to imagine."
~ René Char

[Jason Eberly]

(I think, though, most of the stories you describe are from before that time.)


Early 1983 is where all those stories came from...Amazing Spider-Man #238, Avengers #230, Iron Man #170, and Fantastic Four #257. Wait...comics could make it past #16 without getting a reboot and the cosmos didn't crumble?! Absurdity!

[Le Messor]

Early 1983 is where all those stories came from...Amazing Spider-Man #238, Avengers #230, Iron Man #170, and Fantastic Four #257. Wait...comics could make it past #16 without getting a reboot and the cosmos didn't crumble?! Absurdity!

That was a great time, then!

But, you have to be joking... past #16? Never!

[DIGGER]

The thing with Alpha Flight when it first came out was it had at that time THE HOTTEST ARTIST/WRITER doing it. What is needed in order for people to take notice nowadays is that current big name in comics to do the new title (Peter David and Phil Jiminez would be ideal in my mind for an Alpha do over). The reader first needs the sizzle to get their attention, then give them the steak. Also patience is a virtue and sometimes the industry is just not patient enough.

[Flightpath07]

The thing with Alpha Flight when it first came out was it had at that time THE HOTTEST ARTIST/WRITER doing it. What is needed in order for people to take notice nowadays is that current big name in comics to do the new title (Peter David and Phil Jiminez would be ideal in my mind for an Alpha do over). The reader first needs the sizzle to get their attention, then give them the steak. Also patience is a virtue and sometimes the industry is just not patient enough.

I agree with the above.

Phil, I add this firmly tongue-in-cheek, but the likelihood of an article entitled "What exactly is DC's problem?" posted on DoomPatrol.net ever getting around to being a discussion about Alpha Flight, seems slim...so i am glad it happened here instead. ;)

(You know I love you, Phil...)

Digger, you are correct in that Alpha started with the hottest man in comics at that time, John Byrne (with help from Chris Claremont). You are incorrect, or at least only partially correct, in stating that it would require a big name in comics to re-start Alpha Flight. I seem to recall Fred Van Lente being larger-than-life in the comics world, but he didn't rally Alpha support around him (or at least, apart from us here on the boards). It takes MORE than just a great writer and/or artist. Remember, this is Alpha Flight. People who buy comics have proven, again and again, that Alpha Flight no longer sells; they don't care to buy it.

Alpha Flight had another definitive advantage when they first showed up. They showed up in a hot comic, as unexpected, from out of nowhere, guest stars. They were so unique, so different, that people wanted to see more of them.

Nowadays, people have grown used to, and apathetic about, the Alpha Flight characters, for the most part.

Alpha Flight needs a complete rebirth. The whole program needs to be re-imagined.

In many ways, Omega Flight had an idea that could have worked. Having one surviving Alphan take over a brand new team, with brand new bosses (US instead of Can.), that idea wasn't bad or wrong. It may not be the idea that takes them over the top of greatness again, but it is a step in the discussion that must happen in order to reinvent Alpha Flight.

Also, Digger, "Patience" doesn't seem to be anything the big two comic companies understand.

If Chris's comments below are even remotely correct (and I haven't fact-checked them, by any means)...


With Marvel, I've noticed it's around the 20,000 sales mark. DC is bit more lenient. Usually it's around 12,000 to 10,000 sales mark for DC. These sales figures are not written in stone since Uncanny X-Force was selling around 32,000 copies in October and got canned. I think sales were dropping too fast with Uncanny X-Force so Marvel decided to end it early. That's my opinion.

...then it would seem that Marvel is even less patient than DC. Actually, it would seem that DC can survive on less profit, or is ok with receiving less profits for a longer time than Marvel is. Does Marvel pay its staff more, and have more overhead bills? Or is Marvel's way of dealing with sagging sales on a title to merely cancel it quick and then throw another movie or two at us eager spenders? Personally, i can't wait for Marvel to experience a couple of big-screen flops in a row, maybe it'll make them come full circle and realize they need to work harder on improving their product line of comics!

[Garry/Al-Fan]

If 10,000 x $2.99 = $29,900, and 20,000 x $2.99 = $59,800, then what is the cost of a comic book's (1st) printing? Since I don't know what the creative teams costs are, I am assuming that $59,800 doesn't give MARVEL enough profit to consider most titles viable.

I would think a comic such as CHAOS WAR: ALPHA FLIGHT, which according to a post elsewhere sold 17,276 copies (@ $3.99 = $68,931.24), would be a pretty good benchmark to shoot for.

[Phil]

I seem to recall Fred Van Lente being larger-than-life in the comics world, but he didn't rally Alpha support around him
With no disrespect to FVL he's not a big name in comics.
If you want a big, guaranteed sales name you need Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Frank Millar, Brian Bendis, Mark Millar, Geoff Johns, Robert Kirkman, Jim Lee or John Cassaday.
Scott Snyder is probably close to being on that list.


(or at least, apart from us here on the boards)
He did interviews for most websites, he did newspaper interviews, he did con appearances.
All out of his own time and his own pocket; he did as much as he could IMO.


People who buy comics have proven, again and again, that Alpha Flight no longer sells; they don't care to buy it.
So you're agreeing it's not Marvel's problem but a problem with the readers?


...then it would seem that Marvel is even less patient than DC. Actually, it would seem that DC can survive on less profit, or is ok with receiving less profits for a longer time than Marvel is. Does Marvel pay its staff more, and have more overhead bills? Or is Marvel's way of dealing with sagging sales on a title to merely cancel it quick and then throw another movie or two at us eager spenders?
DC have for many years had the financial backing of Time Warner so their comics line could make less of a profit as they'd get cash back through merchandising, comics and films.
Up until the Disney merger Marvel have had to do it alone and rely on their bottom line, especially after the trading card company buy out and bankruptcy; that's
why they have different cut off's.
However, even with Disney backing it's no different as Marvel's profit margin was the reason Disney bought them; they're not going to buy something profitable and allow it to make less now than why they bought it.


Personally, i can't wait for Marvel to experience a couple of big-screen flops in a row, maybe it'll make them come full circle and realize they need to work harder on improving their product line of comics!
Marvel Studios and Marvel Entertainment are two different beasts though; money from one isn't connected to the other.
Yes the comics get a boost from the films, but the money doesn't mix.

[Phil]

If 10,000 x $2.99 = $29,900, and 20,000 x $2.99 = $59,800, then what is the cost of a comic book's (1st) printing?
The thing is, a comic will require:

Writer
Penciller
Inker
Colourist
Letterer
Assistant Editor
Editor
Digital Archiver/Production

These people all need paying and that's before the website space/courier fees, printing, distribution, Diamond listing etc. etc.

You can't reasonably expect these people to produce at a loss - that's makes no sense in any business.


I would think a comic such as CHAOS WAR: ALPHA FLIGHT, which according to a post elsewhere sold 17,276 copies (@ $3.99 = $68,931.24), would be a pretty good benchmark to shoot for.
The problem with that is that looking at any numbers threads (http://alphaflight.net/content.php?771-Sales-Figures-For-September-2013), (I need to do October and November soon enough)issues drop from month to month for whatever reason (readers giving up comics, increase in taxes/expenditure, digital piracy etc. etc.) so that will extremely quickly drop to a negative equity figure, especially for a non-traditional title. A healthy figure is around the 40,000 mark.

[Garry/Al-Fan]

The thing is, a comic will require:

Writer
Penciller
Inker
Colourist
Letterer
Assistant Editor
Editor
Digital Archiver/Production

These people all need paying and that's before the website space/courier fees, printing, distribution, Diamond listing etc. etc.

You can't reasonably expect these people to produce at a loss - that's makes no sense in any business.

Makes sense; no argument. Hope Marvel wouldn't produce at a loss; I don't want them to. G/A-F

The problem with that is that looking at any numbers threads (http://alphaflight.net/content.php?771-Sales-Figures-For-September-2013), (I need to do October and November soon enough)issues drop from month to month for whatever reason (readers giving up comics, increase in taxes/expenditure, digital piracy etc. etc.) so that will extremely quickly drop to a negative equity figure, especially for a non-traditional title. A healthy figure is around the 40,000 mark.

This is excellent info. Website costs; courier fees? Digital Archiver? Wow. Maybe the next Alpha Flight offering should consider going bare-bones.

I understand that MARVEL has a policy of not accepting unsolicited ideas/stories; I wonder who (internally at MARVEL) has an idea that will reach the 40,000 threshold (and maintain it).

If DC manages to hit it right with JUSTICE LEAGUE:CANADA, where will that leave Alpha Flight whenever MARVEL next needs to exercise its licensing authority?

[Le Messor]

If you want a big, guaranteed sales name you need Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Frank Millar, Brian Bendis, Mark Millar, Geoff Johns, Robert Kirkman, Jim Lee or John Cassaday.

You're right about this, but the sad part for me is, only one of those names would actually make me consider reading a book. Five of them would actually repel me (for different reasons).

~ Le Messor
Devon: Man, we need a roadie. Other bands have roadies.
Oz: Well, other bands know more than three chords. Your professional bands can play up to six, sometimes seven completely different chords.
Devon: That's just, like, fruity jazz bands.

[Phil]

This is excellent info. Website costs; courier fees? Digital Archiver?
Well with comics going digital someone has to make them available to read online/on devices.

Courier fees have always been around - the inker has to receive the pencilled pages from the penciller; these are lessening with digital colouring as colours can be done directly over pencils (such as the latter 4 issues of Eaglesham's AF run) without the cost of an inker or courier, providing the penciller can scan and send them.
This, however, then adds FTP/Website costs as they have to upload them somewhere.