Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

DC's next gimmick is...

124

Comments

  • MattMatt Posts: 4,457
    luke52 said:

    mwhitt80 said:

    Nick said:


    This last part was my point, if there is a set print run selling more or less isn't going to matter. They said they based the print run on what was ordered in normal months, so it's not like they are producing 5x the average month, this is just the average book volume. To me it seems no different than a company spending $10,000 for promotional materials to give away, they are taking a fixed loss but are hoping to gain some exposure from it.

    The big difference between this and using money on promotional material is that DC is losing an entire month of comic sales. Now I assume that this is closer to breakeven than really losing money, but dang.
    If this doesn't re-energize DC then someone(s)'s head needs to be on the chopping block coughcoughBobHarrascoughcough. Heads are going to roll after this one boys, heads are going to roll.
    So lets say heads will roll. What do you want to happen at DC after said head rolling??
    NewER52!

    M
  • luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    Matt said:

    luke52 said:

    mwhitt80 said:

    Nick said:


    This last part was my point, if there is a set print run selling more or less isn't going to matter. They said they based the print run on what was ordered in normal months, so it's not like they are producing 5x the average month, this is just the average book volume. To me it seems no different than a company spending $10,000 for promotional materials to give away, they are taking a fixed loss but are hoping to gain some exposure from it.

    The big difference between this and using money on promotional material is that DC is losing an entire month of comic sales. Now I assume that this is closer to breakeven than really losing money, but dang.
    If this doesn't re-energize DC then someone(s)'s head needs to be on the chopping block coughcoughBobHarrascoughcough. Heads are going to roll after this one boys, heads are going to roll.
    So lets say heads will roll. What do you want to happen at DC after said head rolling??
    NewER52!

    M
    Would you not prefer Old52???
  • hauberkhauberk Posts: 1,511
    luke52 said:

    mwhitt80 said:

    Nick said:


    This last part was my point, if there is a set print run selling more or less isn't going to matter. They said they based the print run on what was ordered in normal months, so it's not like they are producing 5x the average month, this is just the average book volume. To me it seems no different than a company spending $10,000 for promotional materials to give away, they are taking a fixed loss but are hoping to gain some exposure from it.

    The big difference between this and using money on promotional material is that DC is losing an entire month of comic sales. Now I assume that this is closer to breakeven than really losing money, but dang.
    If this doesn't re-energize DC then someone(s)'s head needs to be on the chopping block coughcoughBobHarrascoughcough. Heads are going to roll after this one boys, heads are going to roll.
    So lets say heads will roll. What do you want to happen at DC after said head rolling??
    That they let the creators do their jobs (you know, creating stuff like stories, drama and characters) the editorial staff do theirs (like spelling and consistency / continuity within the history (short that it is now) of the characters and between titles).
  • Chuck_MelvilleChuck_Melville Posts: 3,003
    luke52 said:

    mwhitt80 said:

    Nick said:


    This last part was my point, if there is a set print run selling more or less isn't going to matter. They said they based the print run on what was ordered in normal months, so it's not like they are producing 5x the average month, this is just the average book volume. To me it seems no different than a company spending $10,000 for promotional materials to give away, they are taking a fixed loss but are hoping to gain some exposure from it.

    The big difference between this and using money on promotional material is that DC is losing an entire month of comic sales. Now I assume that this is closer to breakeven than really losing money, but dang.
    If this doesn't re-energize DC then someone(s)'s head needs to be on the chopping block coughcoughBobHarrascoughcough. Heads are going to roll after this one boys, heads are going to roll.
    So lets say heads will roll. What do you want to happen at DC after said head rolling??
    Unflashpoint!
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314

    Unflashpoint!

    Flashpointless?
  • luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    hauberk said:

    luke52 said:

    mwhitt80 said:

    Nick said:


    This last part was my point, if there is a set print run selling more or less isn't going to matter. They said they based the print run on what was ordered in normal months, so it's not like they are producing 5x the average month, this is just the average book volume. To me it seems no different than a company spending $10,000 for promotional materials to give away, they are taking a fixed loss but are hoping to gain some exposure from it.

    The big difference between this and using money on promotional material is that DC is losing an entire month of comic sales. Now I assume that this is closer to breakeven than really losing money, but dang.
    If this doesn't re-energize DC then someone(s)'s head needs to be on the chopping block coughcoughBobHarrascoughcough. Heads are going to roll after this one boys, heads are going to roll.
    So lets say heads will roll. What do you want to happen at DC after said head rolling??
    That they let the creators do their jobs (you know, creating stuff like stories, drama and characters) the editorial staff do theirs (like spelling and consistency / continuity within the history (short that it is now) of the characters and between titles).
    I do agree with you and I must admit it does annoy me that DC have let some of their best talent on some of their best books go. Even if Villain month flops I still can't see the new 52 going. They've invested far too much into now. It's here to stay I think.
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited June 2013
    I think it was Cory that already made this joke-- but if heads rolled, they could always try to hire Quesada, Palmiotti, and Alonso to come edit. They did a great job of getting things back to quality at Marvel after Harris in the late 90s/early 00s. Could be they come and clean up after Harris again.
  • Mr_CosmicMr_Cosmic Posts: 3,200
  • mwhitt80mwhitt80 Posts: 4,637
    I like the "New 52"; I'm a firm believer it was the right move for DC. I wish they would have really restarted it, not the soft crap like they did with Batman and Green Lantern, and never given a 5 year time table. DC had to do something and why not hit the reset.

    I want DC to stick with the new universe, drop the new 52 logo, and fix whatever is wrong with creators jumping ship like it's 1992 at Marvel. Get the house straightened out and make good stories in a post-flashpoint reality.
  • Chuck_MelvilleChuck_Melville Posts: 3,003
    mwhitt80 said:

    I like the "New 52"; I'm a firm believer it was the right move for DC. I wish they would have really restarted it, not the soft crap like they did with Batman and Green Lantern, and never given a 5 year time table. DC had to do something and why not hit the reset.

    I want DC to stick with the new universe, drop the new 52 logo, and fix whatever is wrong with creators jumping ship like it's 1992 at Marvel. Get the house straightened out and make good stories in a post-flashpoint reality.

    Well, that would be a novel approach.

  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    edited June 2013
    mwhitt80 said:

    I like the "New 52"; I'm a firm believer it was the right move for DC. I wish they would have really restarted it, not the soft crap like they did with Batman and Green Lantern, and never given a 5 year time table. DC had to do something and why not hit the reset.

    I want DC to stick with the new universe, drop the new 52 logo, and fix whatever is wrong with creators jumping ship like it's 1992 at Marvel. Get the house straightened out and make good stories in a post-flashpoint reality.

    I agree with most of that-- I still give DC credit for the bold move of rebooting. I don't mind that some exceptions were made that allowed some strong, ongoing stories like Morrison's run on Batman and Johns' on Green Lantern to basically continue. I like that things that we liked from past continuity were allowed to be sticky.

    But the main point is that I agree that they should stick with the big move they have made, and get their talent management in order. And I would love to see them make use of the kinds of resources and editorial talent that were aimed at chasing the past in Before Watchmen, and instead try to create some prestige-level projects in the now. In whatever format it takes to attract that level of talent.
  • mwhitt80mwhitt80 Posts: 4,637
    David_D said:

    I think it was Cory that already made this joke-- but if heads rolled, they could always try to hire Quesada, Palmiotti, and Alonso to come edit. They did a great job of getting things back to quality at Marvel after Harris in the late 90s/early 00s. Could be they come and clean up after Harris again.

    Well Jimmy might be available for the job.
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    After the tumbling craniums:

    1) Don't reboot again. You've got this ball rolling, and there's nothing fundamentally wrong with it. It just needs the occasional tweak.
    2) Editorial - back off.
    3) Creatives - stick around. This, I realize, hinges on an enforcement of #2. I can't blame you for leaving, but we do value longevity on a title.
    4) Pare back from 52 titles. I'd rather have 26 good ones over 52 that are lackluster.
    5) Give us one solid year where the event is that there's no events or gimmicks on these 26 titles. You allow the creatives time to actually do some world-building (see #2) and establish some solid backgrounds for these newly reborn characters.
    6) Don't fuck with Ms. Simone. Ever again.
    7) You have a pretty good thing going with the digital first titles. Some of your best stuff is coming out of that creative well. Don't abuse, misuse, or take it for granted. Nurture that sucker and we will buy into it.
    8) Make a god-dammed Starfire Ame-Comi statue. Seriously...
    9) Same goes for that Mary Marvel prototype you guys showcased awhile back...why is that not being made?
    10) See #2. Commit it to memory. Yes, you get to help with the world-building, but you're really there to keep people like me from pointing out every typo, horrid grammar usage, miscoloration, etc. Your job is to make the comics good, not make comics.

  • ElsiebubElsiebub Posts: 338
    edited June 2013
    "We're losing money on every one of these $3.99 issues."

    From the same folks who brought you...

    "The pull-out poster in Superman Unchained is INTEGRAL to the story; it's part of some really innovative storytelling and it needs to be there; we're not just using it as an excuse to charge an extra dollar!"

    and

    "Batman Zero Year will be a stand-alone story with NO tie-ins come October. We promise."

    and

    "Holding the line at $2.99!"
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    Torchsong said:

    10) See #2. Commit it to memory. Yes, you get to help with the world-building, but you're really there to keep people like me from pointing out every typo, horrid grammar usage, miscoloration, etc. Your job is to make the comics good, not make comics.

    You're confusing editors with copy editors.

    Completely different jobs.
  • Chuck_MelvilleChuck_Melville Posts: 3,003
    WetRats said:

    Torchsong said:

    10) See #2. Commit it to memory. Yes, you get to help with the world-building, but you're really there to keep people like me from pointing out every typo, horrid grammar usage, miscoloration, etc. Your job is to make the comics good, not make comics.

    You're confusing editors with copy editors.

    Completely different jobs.
    Having done time as an editor, I can safely say that it is part of the job. The big companies can hire on assistant editors to help out and be assigned the copyediting chores, smaller companies demand that the editor do everything himself, but in either case his is the final responsibility.
  • CaptShazamCaptShazam Posts: 1,178
    How is Villian month going to be traded? I fully expect some massive Omnibus eventually. For the regular titles that have 3 + issues coming out this really adds confusion to the already confusing DC trade schedule.
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    As a corollary to the "editor's" discussion...

    11. Bring back "Assistant Editor's Month" - granted that was a Marvel thing, but my point is simply make your comics fun again. Wonder Woman is the only book of yours that has quite literally made me laugh out loud (for the right reasons!) and you need to bring more of that to the table.

  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    Torchsong said:

    Wonder Woman is the only book of yours that has quite literally made me laugh out loud (for the right reasons!) and you need to bring more of that to the table.

    Read the latest issue yet?
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    Not yet...hasn't shown up in my mailbox yet
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    You'll laugh out loud again.

    At least once.
  • TorchsongTorchsong Posts: 2,794
    edited June 2013
    The page with Hera and Zola fighting over the TV remote is one of my all-time favorite pages in comics. Just because I have a thing for matriarchal bitchy goddess queens. :)

    image
  • WetRatsWetRats Posts: 6,314
    I'm just gonna say one non-spoiler word: "Baby."
  • luke52luke52 Posts: 1,392
    WetRats said:
    Ha. I saw this earlier. My girlfriend is pretty excited for this stuff.
  • mwhitt80mwhitt80 Posts: 4,637

    DC has done this sort of thing before and it didn't sell well, according to Brian Hibbs.

    It's odd that companies try these "special months", and for the most part that I remember, a lot of the regulars who came to the shops I worked at, they said, "Good, I can save money this month by skipping these stories, they don't matter." True or not, that's the perception.

    I just finished reading the Hibbs article over CBR. It was really good.

    As for the "We're losing money on each book," I don't see why you would say that, why you would do it, and why I should care. If you are losing money with each book you sell, that just strikes me as a stupid business decision. "Here's a John's Burgers, we lose money every time you buy something, so we'll be out of business soon! Come and enjoy!"
    I think DC said "We're losing money on each book" to create scarcity and force/trick retailers into not ordering defensively (to use a Hibbs term). Assuming the losing money part is true (and we can only go on what they say), DC is losing a month of sales, ridiculous.

    The more I think about it the dumber it sounds. If you are intentionally losing money on books, why not lose money on an awesome Justice League event? You could lower the price on the core books (.99/1.99); that way you lose money only 2/3 titles. A good event will drive the universe forward and cause all kinds of enthusiasm for DC.
  • GregGreg Posts: 1,946
    edited June 2013
  • Chuck_MelvilleChuck_Melville Posts: 3,003
    Greg said:
    I wonder if it comes with all of the lenticular covers?
  • David_DDavid_D Posts: 3,884
    mwhitt80 said:

    DC has done this sort of thing before and it didn't sell well, according to Brian Hibbs.

    It's odd that companies try these "special months", and for the most part that I remember, a lot of the regulars who came to the shops I worked at, they said, "Good, I can save money this month by skipping these stories, they don't matter." True or not, that's the perception.

    I just finished reading the Hibbs article over CBR. It was really good.

    As for the "We're losing money on each book," I don't see why you would say that, why you would do it, and why I should care. If you are losing money with each book you sell, that just strikes me as a stupid business decision. "Here's a John's Burgers, we lose money every time you buy something, so we'll be out of business soon! Come and enjoy!"
    I think DC said "We're losing money on each book" to create scarcity and force/trick retailers into not ordering defensively (to use a Hibbs term). Assuming the losing money part is true (and we can only go on what they say), DC is losing a month of sales, ridiculous.

    The more I think about it the dumber it sounds. If you are intentionally losing money on books, why not lose money on an awesome Justice League event? You could lower the price on the core books (.99/1.99); that way you lose money only 2/3 titles. A good event will drive the universe forward and cause all kinds of enthusiasm for DC.

    Or, if they are going to lost money on the books, I would rather they do it on talent costs. Bump the page rates up and be more competitive for top talent to work on their properties. That is a kind of 'reckless' spending I would be intrigued by. Not covers.
Sign In or Register to comment.