Nick Fury, Captain America, and the Fantastic Four have always been favorites of mine. She-Hulk is great when done by John Byrne, but very liable to not be so good when done by anyone else.
Would you call Black Adam a villian or an antihero? Do the characters in the Vertigo books count as Superheroes?
Do the characters in the Vertigo books count as Superheroes?
Depending on the character, yes, of course. Dream, from Sandman, for example, isn't a Superhero, but Westley Dodds, AKA the Sandman, from Sandman Mystery Theatre, is. The Doom Patrol most certainly are, with Beast boy, Elastigirl, Vox, Bumblebee, so on.
Would you call Black Adam a villian or an antihero?
Far as I remember, he's a reformed villain, but I've not checked up on it for a while.
it's mostly with the corporate knobs who are all about the money, rather than the books.
There seems to be this common belief that there are corporate stooges at the top of Marvel (Disney) and DC (Time Warner) that screw around with the comics. I actually have a hard time swallowing it.
At both of these companies, the publishing division is amongst the smallest and least important. It's barely a blip on the radar in terms of revenues. I think that there are only a few reasons they keep these divisions at all. One is that there is a legacy and prestige aspect, and there would be some bad PR just shutting it down. Also, while it isn't enormously profitable, it is profitable. It still makes at least $1, so why stop doing it? A little money is still more money.
As long as they remain profitable,and do not create any PR disasters, I don't think the head honchos give two shits about what the publishing divisions do. Geoff Johns is the chief creative officer at DC. Joe Quesada is the chief creative officer at Marvel. I have to believe that the buck stops there when it comes to questions about the quality of the product. If there are indeed executives mucking about, they are Dan Buckley COO and publisher at Marvel, and Diane Nelson, president of DC. I have a hard time believing that anyone above them even thinks or gives two shits about any comics other than as a line item on a spreadsheet.
At both of these companies, the publishing division is amongst the smallest and least important. It's barely a blip on the radar in terms of revenues. I think that there are only a few reasons they keep these divisions at all. One is that there is a legacy and prestige aspect, and there would be some bad PR just shutting it down. Also, while it isn't enormously profitable, it is profitable. It still makes at least $1, so why stop doing it? A little money is still more money.
Let's have a look see. The Dark Knight, from december 2010. 89,985 copies or thereabouts, at $4 a copy. That's 359,940, for one print run, of one issue of one title, North America Only. They had Four titles that were consistently in the 85-105 thousand range, every month. Most titles are in the 45-65 range, with some others just below that. That does not include Trade copies (sales numbers of which are harder to get from destributors, but I've heard that DKR, for example, sells about a hundred thousand a year, and it's a 20-something year old book). Going over the sales figures for just DC label books, in 2010 only, you can see they're not doing too badly in the floppies. Each of those books is selling for about 4.99(Remember, the $2.99 price drop only kicked in january this year). Just the first 12 books on that list(Not even the top twelve, just the order of the list, and including three very limited series, out of Ninety Six titles released last year) bought in a cool $32,679,994, before tax, but also before any and all licensing, reprints, Merchandise, trades, And so on, and so fourth, which are all controlled by DC.
And the only reason I'm not giving you a total floppies figure is because if you think I'm bothering to add up all the sales figures for 96 titles, month by month, over 12 months, so that I can come up with the gross on floppies for the sake of arguing with you, I suggest you hire someone. Do it your goddamn self, or pay me for my time, you're not that fucking important that I'll work free.
Figures are down compared to previous years, but they are by no means failing like the manga industry is, and it's only if you go all the way across the board. General sales figures are slightly up. Further, they make a shit-load of money on books alone, and let's not forget - Despite that you might fall and worship at the feet of B:TAS(Though I personally think they need to reign in the cameos, there were just too many for the fanboy's sake in there), it's not the primary method of people to intake the DC universe - the Comics are.
Also, you forgot a few key people in the structure - for example, at DC, You forgot Bob Harras, John Rood, Dan DiDio, And of course, Jim Lee, who according to you, caved, and has no effect on the industry, while he's the Co-publisher of DC comics. However, somehow, I really doubt that Chief Creative is as high up the power structure as you think they are - For example, I've no doubt that when John Rood, EVP, and top dog in Marketing, sales and development tells Johns "Hey, you know what this focus groups says would sell, let's kill superman again. Get to it, kiddo" Do you think johns says "Hey Rood, I'm the Chief Creative here, go fuck yourself." or does he say "Yessir, I'll get the writers and artists on that now sir." Johns Comes up to Rood with a risky idea that won't sell books, you think he's not going to get told no, because he's chief creative? Try again, Scott. Even Jim Lee - Who you think needs to return to the industry - has far more power than Johns.
Also, you're forgetting another problem - DC Comics isn't the main company, it's a division of DC entertainment. On top of the DC structure, there is another layer or Corporate on top, which is very, very concerned with how well the comics do, as the comics are a good part of their bread and butter work, along with merch and animation - in fact, animation makes up far less than the comics do, and pulls in less again.
And of course, You're saying these people don't care about comics as anything other than a line item on a spreadsheet. Well, I know you're a little clueless when it actually comes to running a business, but when you care about a line item on a spreadsheet because it's directly about making you money, you should be very fucking concerned about how that line item can make you more money, and worry a lot when it's bringing in less money, and how you can fix that. If you only care about a major part of your business as a line item on a spreadsheet, without wanting to actually improve that number, then you don't so much have a business as a metaphorical money-fueled bonfire.
Also, You need to explain something if your overall theory holds true - If Johns so shit, then why has he won no less than Six annual best writer awards? Why is Kirkman a highly successful and well reviewed writer? Why does Brian Michael Bendis have Five Eisner awards, and Four Best writer awards from Wizard Magazine(Not to be confused with Anything to do with Wizards of the Coast)? And of course, why shouldn't this group of multi-award winning writers and artists be as high up the industry as they can go?
I've been trying to figure if they would be a superhero, but would any of the Boys be considered as such? The Oracle/Batwoman/Barbra Gorden was always pretty cool for me. I am noticing, amongst my social circle at least that Superman isn't exactly mister popular. Is this just me or does everyone kinda dislike him these days.
I've been trying to figure if they would be a superhero, but would any of the Boys be considered as such? The Oracle/Batwoman/Barbra Gorden was always pretty cool for me. I am noticing, amongst my social circle at least that Superman isn't exactly mister popular. Is this jsut me or does everyone kinda dislike him these days.
I don't know about dislike, but he's certainly less popular - his regular books only pull sales in the 30 thousands, compared to your average 50-60 for a bat title.
The Boys are sorta superheroes, but they're all more superpowered anti-heroes. It depends where you draw the line, I'd suppose.
Superman isn't exactly mister popular. Is this jsut me or does everyone kinda dislike him these days
Chalk that one up to Frank Miller as well. The Dark Knight Returns and The Dark Knight Strikes Again made us realize that the boy scout was not very intelligent, easily manipulated, and physically broken by the Bat. I also love the scene in Hush where Batman beats the shit out of him with a Kryptonite ring.
Yes, comics make a lot of money, but not that much money. Just some millions. It's a pittance compared to the other parts of the business. They make more money off of one movie than they make off of all the comics from an entire year combined. I don't have any numbers, but they probably also make orders of magnitude more money from merchandising than from all the comics combined. I have a very hard time believing that the executives really care about the contents of the comic books as long as the numbers are good. The most content control I can imagine coming from the executive power structure is the marketing department making sure the comics are properly timed to coincide with movie releases and such.
As for those writers I don't like being award winning artists, it doesn't mean much. It's an industry with fanboys in every possible area. Johns wins because he's a fanboy writing fanboy books for fanboy readers. You think a Geoff Johns comic could actually have any sort of mass appeal? The only one on the list who has any real success, in my eyes, is Kirkman's Walking Dead. The thing is, nothing else he's done has been even close to that successful. Invincible is good, but also lacks mass appeal. These guy can't even beat, or even come close, to something like My Little Pony.
It would be hard for Superman to get the Frank Miller treatment. In that case is there anywhere that he can go as a character. I get the impression that readers are no longer that fond of the all super-boy scout who can do whatever he wants.
also love the scene in Hush where Batman beats the shit out of him with a Kryptonite ring.
Everyone loves that scene.
It depends where you draw the line
That is one of the things that I think about when I read them. They do good things, in a world that isn't exactly good, but in a bad way. The hero's in the world aren't exactly bad but there not really good. Would it then be subjective to the universe?
I don't have any numbers, but they probably also make orders of magnitude more money from merchandising than from all the comics combined.
I gave you the numbers. You're just - as I am - not willing to spend the time and effort to add them all up to come up with the final gross. I don't blame you, that's a tedious task, but don't say you don't have the numbers.
I have a very hard time believing that the executives really care about the contents of the comic books as long as the numbers are good.
That's the part where you're wrong. Say, you have a book that consistently sells about 50 K per month. You start a story arc, and suddenly, your numbers are dropping by 10 K a month - not an unreasonable figure for a bad arc. You think they company is not going to be jumping on you, telling you to drop that shit or take it in another direction? Fucking oath they are, because you're bleeding readers fast - You'd have to be actually intentionally deluding yourself to think otherwise. Comic Companies are always pushing hard for ways to boost readership, and while they might not be telling you that on page five, Batman should punch the riddler in the goolies, but they can and do say things like "We want a XYZ character to go in ABC direction, and 123 societal/personal issues to be included". Sometimes, a writer will pitch an idea, and the company says "Yeah, okay, but we want this, this and this changed." or a book is ongoing, so they might ask or order a writer to drop or change a particular unpopular character.
You think a Geoff Johns comic could actually have any sort of mass appeal?
Yes, Because they do. Remember those numbers I gave you? Johns is Currently writing Brightest Day, The Flash, and Green Lantern, which are consistently selling, respectively, 70-100 thousand monthly, 50-70 thousand monthly(Very respectable for a flash book, which normally sell sub-50K), and 50-30 K, though it's on the accelerating downward slide - though, historically, it's doing quite well. In fact, the 26 best selling single issues of 2010 were all written or co-written by either Geoff Johns or Grant Morrison. Oh, and Four of the six Writer of the year awards he has are voted for by fans, not exclusively creators or publishers.
As for Kirkman - Yeah, Walking dead is in the top 50 Graphic novels of the year - but so Is Invincible. And Invincible - Before Walking dead became a TV show - Was outselling Walking dead - I'm pretty sure I recall seeing that It outsold Scott Pilgrim last year.
These guy can't even beat, or even come close, to something like My Little Pony.
And Despite both being in the same medium and starting within a few months of each other, TWIT is still beating Geeknights for popularity. Compared to TWIT, Geeknights is a tiny little fish. And I'm talking TWIT alone, just the show, not the entire network of shows it spawned. Naturally, by your own logic, this means that Leo Laporte and his hosts are superior to you. And I even have the sense to compare something in the same medium.
However, let's be honest - between TWIT and Geeknights? Pick Geeknights, 11 times out of 10 - it's just a better show. Numbers are not everything. Though you could learn a thing or three from Leo, once you'd learned them, you could surpass him.
s one of the things that I think about when I read them. They do good things, in a world that isn't exactly good, but in a bad way. The hero's in the world aren't exactly bad but there not really good. Would it then be subjective to the universe?
It depends on a number of things - but for the purposes of this thread, I suppose it's good enough for it to be someone who is either superpowered, or can hold their own amongst those with superpowers through other means(for example, iron man, Batman, so on) and is for the most part Acting for the objective general good - for example, They boys, while their methods are not always clean, they're approximately the good guys, the majority of the time. Dr Doom, while he has used his powers for good previously, is evil a majority of the time.
It would be hard for Superman to get the Frank Miller treatment. In that case is there anywhere that he can go as a character. I get the impression that readers are no longer that fond of the all super-boy scout who can do whatever he wants.
It's part of the problem with Superman - He's so powerful that to provide any challenge for him, you have to practically destroy the universe every other week, or you have to come up with some contrived way for him to be manipulated or otherwise forced to not use his powers - but then you have to find some way for him to use his powers, or else, you might as well just have written a book for any other hero, among other problems - I'm not that good at actually writing comics myself, so I'm sure you can figure out some other way to do things there.
You think they company is not going to be jumping on you, telling you to drop that shit or take it in another direction? Fucking oath they are, because you're bleeding readers fast
Yes, "the company" will jump on that and cancel it, but who exactly is that? There's a human being at "the company" that is responsible for those decisions. It's not some Time Warner executive. It's those people we just named: Didio, Jim Lee, Buckley, Alonso, Harras, etc. Who is above them that even knows what comic titles are on the shelves? You think Isaac Perlmutter, the CEO of Marvel Entertainment, reads comics or even knows or cares what is happening in them? I highly doubt it. If he was making the call as to which books to cancel, that would be some excessive micro-management right there.
Yes, Because they do. Remember those numbers I gave you? Johns is Currently writing Brightest Day, The Flash, and Green Lantern, which are consistently selling, respectively, 70-100 thousand monthly, 50-70 thousand monthly(Very respectable for a flash book, which normally sell sub-50K), and 50-30 K, though it's on the accelerating downward slide - though, historically, it's doing quite well. In fact, the 26 best selling single issues of 2010 were all written or co-written by either Geoff Johns or Grant Morrison. Oh, and Four of the six Writer of the year awards he has are voted for by fans, not exclusively creators or publishers.
Like I said, those are all fanboys. It just so happens there are a few hundred thousand comic superhero fanboys out there. That doesn't mean it has mass appeal. To have mass appeal you need to cross demographics. Milking one demographic, no matter how large, is not mass appeal.
As for Kirkman - Yeah, Walking dead is in the top 50 Graphic novels of the year - but so Is Invincible. And Invincible - Before Walking dead became a TV show - Was outselling Walking dead - I'm pretty sure I recall seeing that It outsold Scott Pilgrim last year.
I don't know if this is true. I have been told that Walking Dead trade paperbacks were the only ones that saw increased sales every month, month after month. Perhaps you are looking at some numbers just for floppies? Invincible selling more floppies than Walking Dead makes sense. Also, if your numbers just include the direct market, then they are complete horse shit. Real sales are in the book market, where any book that non-fanboys care about will be sold. You can't get those real book market sales figures without paying for book scan, though.
Yes, "the company" will jump on that and cancel it, but who exactly is that? There's a human being at "the company" that is responsible for those decisions. It's not some Time Warner executive. It's those people we just named: Didio, Jim Lee, Buckley, Alonso, Harras, etc. Who is above them that even knows what comic titles are on the shelves? You think Isaac Perlmutter, the CEO of Marvel Entertainment, reads comics or even knows or cares what is happening in them? I highly doubt it. If he was making the call as to which books to cancel, that would be some excessive micro-management right there.
I'm speaking collectively, because I doubt it's always the one person or group who does it. I doubt Perlmutter is going to do it, but it's equally likely for, say, Lee, Harras, or Rood to do it, depending on the reason. I'm being imprecise, because A)Getting into specifics is pointless, and I don't want to go to the effort every time of explaining who and why would be doing the jumping, and B)Beyond the executives, I don't know the structure or day to day operations of Marvel in intimate detail. I don't know how often they'll, Say, get a focus group in, or a sub-editor or editor will clamp down on something, or a committee will decide on something, blah blah blah. I can't tell you details I don't know. However, at least I'm not making things up when I don't really know.
If you want to talk about things we have a hard time believing, I'm having a hard time believing you actually thought that I meant they had the chief officer interfering on minute crap like you're describing.
Like I said, those are all fanboys. It just so happens there are a few hundred thousand comic superhero fanboys out there. That doesn't mean it has mass appeal. To have mass appeal you need to cross demographics. Milking one demographic, no matter how large, is not mass appeal.
Scott, Now you're just being stupid. "Oh, I don't like the guy, he's only popular with fanboys" "Most of his books are very popular, according to the sales figures" "Oh, then all those people buying them are all fanboys". We're talking about someone who writes Superhero comics. Of course he doesn't have cross market appeal to, say, Horror comics, or barbie comics, TV shows, Movies, Novels, hallmark cards, or whatever the fuck else, because he doesn't write those. His Appeal in things he doesn't write is exactly zero, because he hasn't written them. This is as ludicrous as saying You're a terrible Programmer, because you're not popular as a rugby player or a flautist. But of course that's silly - You're not exactly an all blacks Center Forward, nor a member of the Philharmonic, but I don't doubt your chops as a programmer, and considering your job, I don't doubt you're highly skilled. Despite that you can't play rugby.
Admittedly, my argument that he's got cross-market appeal is as ludicrous as yours, but simply because he only does well in the market he publishes in. We can't - as laypeople with zero relevant data - know if work he hasn't actually done will appeal to the public, for good or bad.
I don't know if this is true. I have been told that Walking Dead trade paperbacks were the only ones that saw increased sales every month, month after month. Perhaps you are looking at some numbers just for floppies? Invincible selling more floppies than Walking Dead makes sense. Also, if your numbers just include the direct market, then they are complete horse shit. Real sales are in the book market, where any book that non-fanboys care about will be sold. You can't get those real book market sales figures without paying for book scan, though.
No, I'm thinking of them seperately - The Invincible trades were outselling the Walking Dead Trades, as were the floppies, until Walking dead became a TV show - at which point, Walking Dead just starting thrashing everyfuckingthing in Graphic Novel/Trade format. I can't give you exact numbers, because I don't have them in front of me either - I'm looking, but I've not found them as I'm posting this, but I'll link them when/if I do.
Is it weird that these arguments are becoming far more amicable from both sides as time goes on? Or am I just a mad bastard?
Admittedly, my argument that he's got cross-market appeal is as ludicrous as yours, but simply because he only does well in the market he publishes in. We can't - as laypeople with zero relevant data - know if work he hasn't actually done will appeal to the public, for good or bad.
Many creators are capable of creating works that can appeal to a very wide audience as well as fanboys. Just like, oh, the superhero movies. You know every fanboys goes to see them, and also all the normal people. They could do the same thing with the comic books. Archie does, to great success. But instead, Johns writes comics by fanboys for fanboys only. To anyone else, his books are impenetrable nonsense. Compared to Sandman, Walking Dead, Fables, DKR, Watchmen, etc. which can be enjoyed by anybody. It's the same problem you see in Japan with the moe. Pervs making manga and anime for pervs. Compared to Miyazaki making anime for everybody.
o, I'm thinking of them seperately - The Invincible trades were outselling the Walking Dead Trades, as were the floppies, until Walking dead became a TV show - at which point, Walking Dead just starting thrashing everyfuckingthing in Graphic Novel/Trade format. I can't give you exact numbers, because I don't have them in front of me either - I'm looking, but I've not found them as I'm posting this, but I'll link them when/if I do.
I am skeptical. Every number I have ever seen cited by any comic fan has always been based on Diamond, which is only the direct market. So they're only counting things sold in comic book stores, and not counting anything sold on Amazon, B&N;, Borders, etc.
I am skeptical. Every number I have ever seen cited by any comic fan has always been based on Diamond, which is only the direct market. So they're only counting things sold in comic book stores, and not counting anything sold on Amazon, B&N;, Borders, etc.
That's why you want to get the numbers later on - if I recall, roughly how it works is that Comic store/corporation will order a certain amount from the previews, then Diamond will send them out, however, publishers also take returns, as long as the book is in saleable condition - which saves re-prints, and so on, so that later on, if that book is re-printed within a certain amount of time, or they get further orders, they will use them - and with Sales minus returns, they end up with pretty good figures of how many books they have sold - That's the very broad-strokes version, anyway, I'm sure there is some details I'm missing simply from failure to recall, it's not something I really need to think about often.
Essentially, Your numbers for January 2010 are going to be much, much more accurate than for January 2011, because it's still within three months of the first-sell date of those titles - Three months simply being a good rule of thumb for getting good numbers on how many have sold.
That's why you want to get the numbers later on - if I recall, roughly how it works is that Comic store/corporation will order a certain amount from the previews, then Diamond will send them out, however, publishers and/or diamond (my memory fails me on that specific point) also take returns, as long as the book is in saleable condition - which saves re-prints, and so on, so that later on, if that book is re-printed within a certain amount of time, or they get further orders, they will use them - and with Sales minus returns, they end up with pretty good figures of how many books they have sold - That's the very broad-strokes version, anyway, I'm sure there is some details I'm missing simply from failure to recall, it's not something I really need to think about often.
Diamond doesn't do returns. That's why it's the direct market. Diamond kinda sorta publishes it's numbers kinda. They use some system where they give numbers that are relative to the number of copies of Batman that were sold, and people estimate based on that. Because they don't do returns, many books have inflated numbers. You can tell when you go to conventions and see a bunch of copies of something that the retailers couldn't sell. That's less true for the seriously popular books, though. It's usually just retailers buying crap not even fanboys want. Usually that happens when they buy 75 copies just to get one variant cover.
Book stores and Amazon don't go through Diamond. They order from magazine and book distributors, which are returnable markets. They don't publish any sales figures, and you have to pay Bookscan to get those numbers, just like how you have to pay NPD to get video game sales figures, or pay the Elias Sports Bureau to get sports stats.
Diamond doesn't do returns. That's why it's the direct market
I looked it up after I posted, and edited to reflect that fact before you finished posting, I'd suspect. I couldn't remember off the top of my head if it was diamond or the publishers - but it's the publishers who take returns. Sales numbers I tend to find are tending to be mishmash figures - sometimes, they're Diamond Direct only, sometimes combined. I'm mostly relying on diamond figures for Graphic Novel distribution though - enough places get their books from diamond that it makes it a reasonable place to go for numbers, since nobody else is talking about them.
Though, about not selling to bookstores and Amazon, According to diamond's Website, on their Book distribution arm -
DBD sells to a variety of sources, including Barnes & Noble, Ingram, Baker & Taylor, WaldenBooks, Amazon.com, Borders, and more, offering a vast array of high-quality graphic novels, gaming products, and trading cards from some of the top publishers and creators in the business.
And the DBD site further lists - AAFFES/PMG(Ie, the Army's Onbase Stores and exchanges), Amazon.com, Baker & Taylor, Barnes & Noble, Barnes & Noble College Stores, BarnesandNoble.com, BJs, Bookazine, Books-A-Million, Booksource, Borders, Brodart, Chapters/Indigo, Demco, Follett Library Resources, Gamestop, Hastings, Hot Topic, Ingram, Koen Book Distributors, Levy, Partners/Partners West, QVC, Sam's Club, Spencers, Target, ToysRUs, ToysRUs.com, Universal Theme Parks, Waldenbooks, Wal-Mart, and Wherehouse.
EDIT - Also, Diamond Book Distributors, unlike their Parent company, Do in fact handle Returns.
And the DBD site further lists - AAFFES/PMG(Ie, the Army's Onbase Stores and exchanges), Amazon.com, Baker & Taylor, Barnes & Noble, Barnes & Noble College Stores, BarnesandNoble.com, BJs, Bookazine, Books-A-Million, Booksource, Borders, Brodart, Chapters/Indigo, Demco, Follett Library Resources, Gamestop, Hastings, Hot Topic, Ingram, Koen Book Distributors, Levy, Partners/Partners West, QVC, Sam's Club, Spencers, Target, ToysRUs, ToysRUs.com, Universal Theme Parks, Waldenbooks, Wal-Mart, and Wherehouse.
Diamond book distributors is kinda sad, and is sorta separate from the regular Diamond distribution. Also, Diamond book sales are usually not included in the regular sales figures, and would instead be on bookscan.
Diamond book distributors is kinda sad, and is sorta separate from the regular Diamond distribution. Also, Diamond book sales are usually not included in the regular sales figures, and would instead be on bookscan.
DBD do all the Trades and Graphic Novels, along with some odd comics(Usually comics of an unusual format, and that's rare) games and CCGS. Diamond Comics only handles Floppies and merch.
Diamond book distributors is kinda sad, and is sorta separate from the regular Diamond distribution. Also, Diamond book sales are usually not included in the regular sales figures, and would instead be on bookscan.
DBD do all the Trades and Graphic Novels, along with some odd comics(Usually comics of an unusual format, and that's rare) games and CCGS. Diamond Comics only handles Floppies and merch.
I don't know about that because you can order every trade through Previews. Also, there are often special trades that have different covers in the direct market.
I don't know about that because you can order every trade through Previews. Also, there are often special trades that have different covers in the direct market.
I do know that the previews catalog is unified across both - I don't know if it's ALL the applicable companies(The Diamond catalog for the US isn't going to include Diamond UK, for example), but Diamond Comics and DBD are in the one catalog - they used to be seperate, but they were combined to save money and paper - since a comic store, for example, is going to buy both trades and floppies, so why bother printing two preview books and shipping them both, when you can print one with the content of both?
With all this love for Batman, I wonder why his Marvel Universe counterpart, The Punisher, doesn't get more appreciation?
I don't know if that's a very apt comparison - Batman is rich, doesn't kill, doesn't use guns - generally, at least, though there are occasions - and generally fights for good, because he wants to prevent crime, as his parents were victims of crime. Punisher is usually not rich, his entire purpose is to kill, and fights fire with fire - essentially, his goal is to kill criminals because criminals killed his family.
I'd say that Iron Man is more the Marvel Batman than Punisher, to be honest - he's another guy with infinite moneys - though more of a tendancy to lose it or lose control of it, how many stark corporations have we clocked up now? Stark Industries(Side note - Stark Industries, the original and the general status quo every time we get a reboot or the like, was founded In Byron Bay, in New South Wales), Stark Solutions, Stark\Fujikawa, Stark International, Stark Enterprises, Stark Resilient, he's holds onto companies like Michael J Fox holds on to...anything, really, but anyway - He fights for good, generally doesn't kill, and is fighting crime and evil for a motive other than revenge.
Comments
Would you call Black Adam a villian or an antihero? Do the characters in the Vertigo books count as Superheroes?
At both of these companies, the publishing division is amongst the smallest and least important. It's barely a blip on the radar in terms of revenues. I think that there are only a few reasons they keep these divisions at all. One is that there is a legacy and prestige aspect, and there would be some bad PR just shutting it down. Also, while it isn't enormously profitable, it is profitable. It still makes at least $1, so why stop doing it? A little money is still more money.
As long as they remain profitable,and do not create any PR disasters, I don't think the head honchos give two shits about what the publishing divisions do. Geoff Johns is the chief creative officer at DC. Joe Quesada is the chief creative officer at Marvel. I have to believe that the buck stops there when it comes to questions about the quality of the product. If there are indeed executives mucking about, they are Dan Buckley COO and publisher at Marvel, and Diane Nelson, president of DC. I have a hard time believing that anyone above them even thinks or gives two shits about any comics other than as a line item on a spreadsheet.
Going over the sales figures for just DC label books, in 2010 only, you can see they're not doing too badly in the floppies. Each of those books is selling for about 4.99(Remember, the $2.99 price drop only kicked in january this year). Just the first 12 books on that list(Not even the top twelve, just the order of the list, and including three very limited series, out of Ninety Six titles released last year) bought in a cool $32,679,994, before tax, but also before any and all licensing, reprints, Merchandise, trades, And so on, and so fourth, which are all controlled by DC.
And the only reason I'm not giving you a total floppies figure is because if you think I'm bothering to add up all the sales figures for 96 titles, month by month, over 12 months, so that I can come up with the gross on floppies for the sake of arguing with you, I suggest you hire someone. Do it your goddamn self, or pay me for my time, you're not that fucking important that I'll work free.
Figures are down compared to previous years, but they are by no means failing like the manga industry is, and it's only if you go all the way across the board. General sales figures are slightly up. Further, they make a shit-load of money on books alone, and let's not forget - Despite that you might fall and worship at the feet of B:TAS(Though I personally think they need to reign in the cameos, there were just too many for the fanboy's sake in there), it's not the primary method of people to intake the DC universe - the Comics are.
Also, you forgot a few key people in the structure - for example, at DC, You forgot Bob Harras, John Rood, Dan DiDio, And of course, Jim Lee, who according to you, caved, and has no effect on the industry, while he's the Co-publisher of DC comics. However, somehow, I really doubt that Chief Creative is as high up the power structure as you think they are - For example, I've no doubt that when John Rood, EVP, and top dog in Marketing, sales and development tells Johns "Hey, you know what this focus groups says would sell, let's kill superman again. Get to it, kiddo" Do you think johns says "Hey Rood, I'm the Chief Creative here, go fuck yourself." or does he say "Yessir, I'll get the writers and artists on that now sir." Johns Comes up to Rood with a risky idea that won't sell books, you think he's not going to get told no, because he's chief creative? Try again, Scott. Even Jim Lee - Who you think needs to return to the industry - has far more power than Johns.
Also, you're forgetting another problem - DC Comics isn't the main company, it's a division of DC entertainment. On top of the DC structure, there is another layer or Corporate on top, which is very, very concerned with how well the comics do, as the comics are a good part of their bread and butter work, along with merch and animation - in fact, animation makes up far less than the comics do, and pulls in less again.
And of course, You're saying these people don't care about comics as anything other than a line item on a spreadsheet. Well, I know you're a little clueless when it actually comes to running a business, but when you care about a line item on a spreadsheet because it's directly about making you money, you should be very fucking concerned about how that line item can make you more money, and worry a lot when it's bringing in less money, and how you can fix that. If you only care about a major part of your business as a line item on a spreadsheet, without wanting to actually improve that number, then you don't so much have a business as a metaphorical money-fueled bonfire.
Also, You need to explain something if your overall theory holds true - If Johns so shit, then why has he won no less than Six annual best writer awards? Why is Kirkman a highly successful and well reviewed writer? Why does Brian Michael Bendis have Five Eisner awards, and Four Best writer awards from Wizard Magazine(Not to be confused with Anything to do with Wizards of the Coast)? And of course, why shouldn't this group of multi-award winning writers and artists be as high up the industry as they can go?
The Boys are sorta superheroes, but they're all more superpowered anti-heroes. It depends where you draw the line, I'd suppose.
As for those writers I don't like being award winning artists, it doesn't mean much. It's an industry with fanboys in every possible area. Johns wins because he's a fanboy writing fanboy books for fanboy readers. You think a Geoff Johns comic could actually have any sort of mass appeal? The only one on the list who has any real success, in my eyes, is Kirkman's Walking Dead. The thing is, nothing else he's done has been even close to that successful. Invincible is good, but also lacks mass appeal. These guy can't even beat, or even come close, to something like My Little Pony.
As for Kirkman - Yeah, Walking dead is in the top 50 Graphic novels of the year - but so Is Invincible. And Invincible - Before Walking dead became a TV show - Was outselling Walking dead - I'm pretty sure I recall seeing that It outsold Scott Pilgrim last year. And Despite both being in the same medium and starting within a few months of each other, TWIT is still beating Geeknights for popularity. Compared to TWIT, Geeknights is a tiny little fish. And I'm talking TWIT alone, just the show, not the entire network of shows it spawned. Naturally, by your own logic, this means that Leo Laporte and his hosts are superior to you. And I even have the sense to compare something in the same medium.
However, let's be honest - between TWIT and Geeknights? Pick Geeknights, 11 times out of 10 - it's just a better show. Numbers are not everything. Though you could learn a thing or three from Leo, once you'd learned them, you could surpass him. It depends on a number of things - but for the purposes of this thread, I suppose it's good enough for it to be someone who is either superpowered, or can hold their own amongst those with superpowers through other means(for example, iron man, Batman, so on) and is for the most part Acting for the objective general good - for example, They boys, while their methods are not always clean, they're approximately the good guys, the majority of the time. Dr Doom, while he has used his powers for good previously, is evil a majority of the time. It's part of the problem with Superman - He's so powerful that to provide any challenge for him, you have to practically destroy the universe every other week, or you have to come up with some contrived way for him to be manipulated or otherwise forced to not use his powers - but then you have to find some way for him to use his powers, or else, you might as well just have written a book for any other hero, among other problems - I'm not that good at actually writing comics myself, so I'm sure you can figure out some other way to do things there.
If you want to talk about things we have a hard time believing, I'm having a hard time believing you actually thought that I meant they had the chief officer interfering on minute crap like you're describing. Scott, Now you're just being stupid. "Oh, I don't like the guy, he's only popular with fanboys" "Most of his books are very popular, according to the sales figures" "Oh, then all those people buying them are all fanboys". We're talking about someone who writes Superhero comics. Of course he doesn't have cross market appeal to, say, Horror comics, or barbie comics, TV shows, Movies, Novels, hallmark cards, or whatever the fuck else, because he doesn't write those. His Appeal in things he doesn't write is exactly zero, because he hasn't written them.
This is as ludicrous as saying You're a terrible Programmer, because you're not popular as a rugby player or a flautist. But of course that's silly - You're not exactly an all blacks Center Forward, nor a member of the Philharmonic, but I don't doubt your chops as a programmer, and considering your job, I don't doubt you're highly skilled. Despite that you can't play rugby.
Admittedly, my argument that he's got cross-market appeal is as ludicrous as yours, but simply because he only does well in the market he publishes in. We can't - as laypeople with zero relevant data - know if work he hasn't actually done will appeal to the public, for good or bad. No, I'm thinking of them seperately - The Invincible trades were outselling the Walking Dead Trades, as were the floppies, until Walking dead became a TV show - at which point, Walking Dead just starting thrashing everyfuckingthing in Graphic Novel/Trade format. I can't give you exact numbers, because I don't have them in front of me either - I'm looking, but I've not found them as I'm posting this, but I'll link them when/if I do.
Is it weird that these arguments are becoming far more amicable from both sides as time goes on? Or am I just a mad bastard?
Essentially, Your numbers for January 2010 are going to be much, much more accurate than for January 2011, because it's still within three months of the first-sell date of those titles - Three months simply being a good rule of thumb for getting good numbers on how many have sold.
Book stores and Amazon don't go through Diamond. They order from magazine and book distributors, which are returnable markets. They don't publish any sales figures, and you have to pay Bookscan to get those numbers, just like how you have to pay NPD to get video game sales figures, or pay the Elias Sports Bureau to get sports stats.
Though, about not selling to bookstores and Amazon, According to diamond's Website, on their Book distribution arm - And the DBD site further lists - AAFFES/PMG(Ie, the Army's Onbase Stores and exchanges), Amazon.com, Baker & Taylor, Barnes & Noble, Barnes & Noble College Stores, BarnesandNoble.com, BJs, Bookazine, Books-A-Million, Booksource, Borders, Brodart, Chapters/Indigo, Demco, Follett Library Resources, Gamestop, Hastings, Hot Topic, Ingram, Koen Book Distributors, Levy, Partners/Partners West, QVC, Sam's Club, Spencers, Target, ToysRUs, ToysRUs.com, Universal Theme Parks, Waldenbooks, Wal-Mart, and Wherehouse.
EDIT - Also, Diamond Book Distributors, unlike their Parent company, Do in fact handle Returns.
I'd say that Iron Man is more the Marvel Batman than Punisher, to be honest - he's another guy with infinite moneys - though more of a tendancy to lose it or lose control of it, how many stark corporations have we clocked up now? Stark Industries(Side note - Stark Industries, the original and the general status quo every time we get a reboot or the like, was founded In Byron Bay, in New South Wales), Stark Solutions, Stark\Fujikawa, Stark International, Stark Enterprises, Stark Resilient, he's holds onto companies like Michael J Fox holds on to...anything, really, but anyway - He fights for good, generally doesn't kill, and is fighting crime and evil for a motive other than revenge.