Options
Episode 1494 Talkback - Listener Feedback
Adam_Murdough
Posts: 506
Demonstrating once again the truth of the old Riosian motto 'We Are Wordy B**ches!', we the Geeks take a mere handful of communiqués from you the Listeners and spin them out into an hour-and-a-half of entertaining comics-connected commentary and conversation. It's what we do! (1:37:01)
Listen here.
Listen here.
Comments
It's time for comics to evolve.
The comic book industry long ago outgrew it's original business model, yet the publishers are still operating on a system that has not been viable for decades.
Distribution/Accessibility
Comic books are now (and have been for a couple of decades) an invisible product. To grow a business, you have to make your product available to new customers; however, the comic book product is virtually available only in a closed ecosystem. There is an entire generation of potential buyers that only know comic characters by their tv, movie, or game incarnation. They are not even aware that these characters exist in a printed medium. The vast majority of the public wouldn't know where to get a comic book, even if they wanted one. And, if they do know where a comic shop is located, it's inconvenient and/or too often not a happy shopping experience.
Value
The product is far too expensive compared to other similar forms of entertainment.
Focus
Comics are being written for a very narrow demographic. They're violent, gory, and very sex heavy. I'm not saying this as a criticism other than it makes the product inaccessible to a lot of potential new readers. Sure, there are some alternative titles, but it takes too much work to find them.
So - what to do? It's time for publishers to quit looking at comic books as a product unto itself. It's just not a competitive item anymore - there are too many other better options.
The two big publishers are owned by huge corporate interests. For these corporations, the real money is being made in the licensing of the characters - action figures, t-shirts, games, etc. Therefore, these companies need to completely do a paradigm shift and start looking at comic books as an advertising medium. In practicality, comic books need to become the sales brochure that markets their licenses. How do you use a sales brochure? You get it in the hands of potential buyers, and you give it away.
I'm not suggesting that the corporations literally give comics away, but almost. Charge a dollar an issue - the idea is not that you make money off the comic, but you promote the future of your licenses. And get them back in the public view. Buy rack space if you have to -- get them back into grocery stores, gas stations, or wherever there is heavy traffic and impulse purchases. Make the stories accessible to a wider range of reader. Sure, you can keep the adult themed issues that are available through specialty shops, online, or wherever - but make the majority of your lines a product that has broad appeal.
The idea is that comic books become an advertising and marketing expense, not a source of revenue.
As an expense, simplify the production process. Comic book companies have become too impressed with themselves. It takes far too many people to produce a comic book. Simplify the work, simplify the product -- endless detail, photographic coloring, and gloss stock are expensive. Are they worthwhile for some key titles? Maybe. Are they necessary for every issue on the stand? Probably not.
One thing's for sure - comics as a product purchased on it's own merits cannot survive. In order for the medium to continue, it has to have a restructured business model.
That's amazing that Chris is only carrying 50 new books and going a year
with selling only 2 wall books is crazy.
Back when the Watchmen movie came out, the graphic novel was available everywhere: big box stores, chain bookstores, and even grocers like Meijer. And it was always discounted. The only place selling Watchmen at full price was your local comic shop, in many cases. Although life can't be easy for comic merchants, the reality of bookselling is that many titles do not sell for cover price, and if the LCS owner wants to be firm and not discount anything, he places himself at a competitive disadvantage. Book buyers are conditioned to look for bargains, thanks to very long-term policies by publishers and bookstores.
I've said this before but I'm very fortunate to have a job that has enough down time during the day that I can get a few issues read each shift. I buy around 20-25/month(through DCBS) and usually have them read by the middle of the month. I'll spend the last few weeks, before my next box arrives, catching up on trades/HCs. That is where I struggle...I'm so far behind on my TPBs it's not even funny.
It was a good episode overall, full of a lot of great discussion.
The Cap and Thor discussion was interesting. I agreed with most of what was said, but more and more with all of this stuff...
...I just think the controversies and disagreements are 90% due to the marketing, media, and op-eds. If a lot of the haters simply encountered the substance of the actual issues, I doubt many of them would have a problem with it. But instead we have a climate in which the plotlines are framed in the most controversial ways possible, so as to excite and incite as many people as possible, many of whom will either never read the storylines in question (but totally hate them), or else they'll read them with a preconditioned scowl on their faces, ready to hate them for any little reason.
I first noticed this the Miles Morales Spider-Man a few years ago. To me, the marketing made it seem like a gimmick, the media fanned the fire, and the op-eds told me that I needed to embrace the character or else I was an evil racist. But the actual comics... they were good! They weren't full of gimmickery or us-vs.-them race issues. It was solid storytelling and the makings of a very well-rounded new character. (Okay, maybe the death of Ultimate Peter Parker itself was a gimmick. So yeah, it's based on a gimmick. But what Bendis & co. went on to do with it... not a gimmick.) An editor came out and said "You never know... Miles might turn out to be GAY, too!" Would I have a problem with a gay Spider-Man? NO. Do I think that the editor was irresponsibly fanning the flames in order to cause more controversy? YES. It's pretty clear that they say this stuff to get a rise out of people. I think it's tacky, and it whips up hate and resentment, for no real reason.
It causes a very acrimonious social atmosphere, and to me it seems like it's getting worse. Instead of winning more new readers over by putting story first, publishers seem to be choosing to make a gimmick out of race and gender, using it as a wedge issue to get more media attention. And meanwhile really good storytelling and great new characters come off, to most people, as a gimmick. Even when they're not.
I think Peter's on the right track when he says that to some extent this is just what the people behind the comics may want to do. I'd go even further and say that it doesn't even have to be couched inside a political agenda or whatever, but it could easily be seen as these creators and editors wanting to tell different stories. Have we ever had a story where the Falcon becomes Captain America? No. Does it make sense that this longtime character COULD step up and become Cap, at least for a while? Absolutely. It's a different sort of story to tell.
But, oh, wait, we have to take to the media and frame everything in terms of "Black Captain America! You're either going to buy it... or you're a racist! You either shut up and like it, before it even comes out... or you're a dickhead!" And the other side is of course wrong, too. Yeah, it's not the Captain America who's USUALLY been in the suit. So what? Sam Wilson has more than earned his chance, so don't dismiss it.
Regarding Jason Aaron's Thor: I trust the guy on that property; I'd buy whatever he touched on it. I'd buy a solo Angela-as-Goddess-of-Thunder series from him. I'd at least TRY a Jane-Foster-as-Goddess-of-Thunder series from him (I just don't think he's done such a great job with that character so far). I do think it's freaking ridiculous that they're trying to say "This is THOR", when Thor is a male name. If someone else (male or female) holds Thor's hammer, that character doesn't become "Thor", which is the name of a specific person. The title is "God of Thunder". It just seems weird. If the Thor we know now is going to be transformed into a female, as strange as that would be, at least that would make sense in terms of the whole "This is THOR" thing. But again, that's kind of beside the point. That's extraneous. If the story's good -- and I have no reason to doubt Jason Aaron -- then I'm totally behind it.
Where I think Peter's going wrong, though, is the whole "Different people need similar-looking people to look up to in the media" thing. I will say that as a (mostly) white person, I DID think it was cool when I was a kid and there was that one white guy in the NBA who was MAYBE one of the top two players (Larry Bird). I admit that I thought that was cool. But did that make me think "Hey, maybe I could be in the NBA". Uh, no. And I think it's ridiculous for people (of any color or gender) to think "I could be Superman". That's just a frankly insane way to look at things. It's freaking delusional even for a four-year-old to think that for a second. You can't be Superman. And, whoever you are, your chances of getting in the NBA or becoming president aren't much better either. I just think the whole "identity politics" thing here is hopelessly misleading and naive, sorry. For role models, young people should be looking up to their parents, teachers, and the responsible older people in their life. When you're trying to rely on MEDIA FIGURES (real or -- good god -- fictional) to try and give young people role models, to me it just seems like the game is already lost, because the people are already lost in a funhouse mirrormaze of simulacra B.S. This isn't even about race or gender. It's about reality. Anyone who has ever looked up to an American president (especially a recent one) as a serious role model would have to be a dangerously gullible person, sorry. These politicians are all dirty and shamelessly compromised; it's obvious. (I'm not saying "Don't vote". I'm not saying some of them aren't clearly "the lesser of two evils." But... role models? NO.) Do I think it's cool on some VERY SUPERFICIAL level that a little kid can look at someone in the media and say "hey, that guy looks like me"? Yes, I can see that. But to take it to any remotely serious level, where we're calling anyone who disagrees a "dickhead"? No way. People end up identifying too strongly with politicians just because their accents or skin color are similar to theirs. Dangerous stuff for the fabric of society. Us against them social warfare.
I think insisting upon any of this too much is just silly. And I think both sides are to blame, at the extremes, where we're demonizing 40-60% of the rest of the audience because we marginally disagree with them.
PS. I don't think anyone who disagrees with me is a dickhead.
As a person of color who did not grow up with many positive real life role models I can say that the fictional ones were very important to me. Its not about "being Superman" literally. Positive representation says "Hey look! people who look like you, who sound like you, who maybe even came from the same kind of place as you can be viewed as good people even heroic, not just as criminals or as poor pitiable waste." And it says to people from outside those cultures "hey we have an existence beyond the stereotypes and it's rich and layered, please don't ignore that!"
When you don't see that it's easy to forget that you can do better. When others don't see it it's easy for them to not to expect better of you. The media is part of our collective culture, a baseline for understanding. It bridges distance, cultures, even language.
I hate to use this argument because it upsets people but it's hard for those in the majority who have centuries of positively reinforced representation to really understand how important this kind of thing is. It's the difference that a dollar makes to a homeless man compared to a middle class person.
Just look at the perception of gays in the US and how it's changed in the last 15 years. This is in large part because of positive media representation. It said to gay people, it's ok to be who you are, and to straight people, you don't need to be afraid of us, we're still human.
- Stephen Pennimpede
Distribution is 90% of the problem in my opinion, but this wasn't talked about.
The simple fact is that it's very hard to buy a comic book. The only guaranteed way to get a comic is to know 3 months in advance that you want it and then pre-order it.
That's an amazingly bad business model. How was this not the primary topic of conversion?
What other medium requires customers pre-order a product 3 months in advance?
There's really no reason why comics can't be printed on-demand. I can buy a DVD of nearly any movie ever created but I can't buy a comic book unless I know 3 months in advance of its release that I want it. Or I dig through used bins.
That's horrific customer service.
I know that this conflicts with existing business models, whether they be of the publishers, of Diamond, or the LCS. But the medium is more important than incumbent interests.
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/07/31/idw-trademarks-micro-fun-packs-after-selling-half-a-million-of-them/
I'm pretty sure they talked about Archie comics on grocery racks and comics at newstands and how the direct market was a stop-gap measure. There was definitely some distribution talk on the episode which is why I thought that above news story was perfect timing.
I think online has helped to reshape the distribution model as well. It's probably still a small percentage of people that 100% use the internet for their comics shopping and a smaller percentage still that use both the internet and comic shops, but that whole Comixology/Amazon deal will change that around. Suddenly, distribution is a new ball game. And now Comixology has gone DRM free. We may be closer to print on demand than people realize.
EVERY OTHER form of entertainment is working overtime to be comes available on demand. TV has changed in that if you miss a show, it’s on demand within hours, on DVD within months, and then available on a streaming service soon after that. I can click a button and have and electronic book in seconds, or at my front door in two days. When the new max Allen Collins novel came out, I went to the book store and bought it. I didn’t have to pre-order it, even though it’s genre mystery, and if I would have had to order and pre-paid for it, I would probably have just said “I’ll get it at the library.” Same with DVD…in fact, if I have to pre-buy a ticket to a movie, I generally don’t go because I don’t want to pay DAYS IN ADVANCE. Going to the movies can be a spur of the moment decision. Most disposable income entertainment choices should be like that. The harder it is to get something, the fewer people are going to jump through the hoops to get it.
Comics shops and comics publishers have lived in a model of the “Wednesday lifers” who order their stuff months in advance, show up on Wednesday and know when everything is coming out. Comic books have driven out the casual fan, the fan who comes in, browses and finds a book they didn’t know about and picks it up because it looks cool. The proof is in the covers: When comics were on newsstands, the cover would try to entice you and get you to try it, and now comic book covers are just a pin-up drawing, and sometimes has no connection to what is inside.
I have pinned a LOT of my hope in the future of this hobby we love on Digital. Marvel’s getting aggressive with their Unlimited, the new Ms. Marvel has gone through 5 printings and the digital has STILL outsold print…and if that continues, there may be a larger audience out there than the people who sit down with Previews and plan what they are buying three months from now.
Forcing customers to order in advance is anti-customer. No industry in the world can get away with that.
This has absolutely driven out casual fans. Why bother buying issue #3 of something you see when you can't possibly get issue #1 and #2? Why buy an issue #1 when you can't get issue #2 next month (too late! you didn't preorder!) unless you happen to get to the store right when it opens so you can grab the 1 copy that's on the shelf?
The entire industry is so anti-customer that I can't understand why it's not the only thing we are talking about.
It's great that digital is opening the doors to more casual fans but it shouldn't be exclusively digital. There's nothing stopping DC and Marvel from making their entire catalog available as on-demand printing right now. Nothing but croney agreements.
Chris, I chuckled at your 'Amazon guy' story and salute you (by you I mean your store) for not telling him to f-off right there.
Maybe that's a good idea for the 1500th episode. 8 straight hours of cgs goodness, so I can sit at work and literally listen to you all day.
I thought your talk of the industry today was fair and reasoned from both sides of the fence. It's actually given me bit of a kick up the arse to go to my lcs a bit more, and like Shane just vet something, anything when I visit. I'm happy to pay the extra over our (very slightly cheaper) sub services here in the UK.
I think with the move toward digital print on demand will look like a very expensive backwards looking venture. You could never do it for new releases, too many people don't decide if they want to buy something until it's on the stands, plus the economy of scale weighs against it heavily. And it would have to be direct to the consumer because I can't imagine a way to involve the retailers efficiently.
Pants, now that you've finish the first two seasons of Game of Thrones, what do you think? Do you plan on watching the third and fourth season? I'm obsessed with both the show and the books and I have to say, the TV series just continues to get better and better.
Everyone, there's a rumour out there that DC may try another reboot, yes I repeat, reboot with this new event coming up, the name I can't recall at the moment. Trust, it's not wishful thinking on my part. I actually recall reading this on the Newsrama or some other comic related site. Thoughts?
I'm sure I read somewhere that it's Brainiac storing universes in bottles, rather then cities ala Kandor.
All rumours at this point though.
I've watched the first four episodes of season three and will watch season 4 too. Not sure how since I don't have HBO and don't want to wait till February for the DVD's.
First off, let’s be clear, the publishers don’t require customers to order three months ahead of time. They require the comic shop retailers to order three months ahead of time. I’ve posted multiple times on this board about why it’s more advantageous for the shops if they can get their customers to place advance orders, and I think you all probably know the reasons, but when you boil it down it’s because the comics they order are non-returnable, and the more accurate the store’s orders are, the less likely they’ll blow their profit by over-ordering.
Just for comparison, traditional book stores are required to place their orders quarterly rather than monthly, and are ordering six to eight months ahead of time. But book stores don’t ask their customers to pre-order. They don’t have to. They can order as many copies as the want, and if they over-order, they can just send back what they didn't sell. Book publishers can afford to over-print because they're selling a higher ticket price item. And a lot of their books still lose money. The bestsellers make enough to cover for the riskier publishing endeavors. The reason you can just walk out and buy that DVD is that there are a lot more people buying DVDs (though that market too is shrinking with the rise of Netflix, et al) and watching TV than there are buying comics. If you print 10,000 too many copies of a DVD, it’s probably not going to be that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. If you print 10,000 too many copies of a comic book, unless you're talking about the top twenty or so titles, that's going to have a significant impact on your profit.
So why not get more comics in more traditional stores—bookstores, Wal-Marts, etc.? Oh yeah, retailers don't want to stock them heavily because they don't make them enough profit per square foot of display space. Why bother watching the third episode of the hot new TV show when you missed the first two episodes and the DVD set won't be out for another eight months and you won't see a rerun for at least two months? Well, now you can probably go online and find those first two episodes on Netflix or Hulu or YouTube (the legal official channel’s posting only, of course). And you can also go online and find those first two issues of the comic on ComiXology.
Now you may be thinking that I'm going to join the chorus singing the praises of print on demand. I'm not. Read my next post. This post is getting a bit too long.
I agreed with caller(?) who said he's not reading comics(me too) at the moment but he enjoys the banter of the show.
I did walk into a LCS today and my local Barnes and Noble. I ended up spending money at both but more was given to the LCS. And I went to BN because I had a coupon. Picked up the Kree/Skrull War trade.
At the LCS grabbed Marvel Firsts the 1970's volume 3, and an issue of Previews.
And here was my problem. I looked through Previews and nothing grabbed my attention. I'll visit Batman in trades. And I've been meaning to get to Hawkeye. But many of my buying habits has been old Showcase and Essential trades. I get more enjoyment out of those, than anything current
And I assume you have all used FedEx and the Post Office enough to know that shipping a lot of items at once is much cheaper per pound than shipping one item is. And that’s definitely the case with coated stock paper. Those pounds add up pretty quickly, as anyone who's moved a full long box can attest.
And then, of course, there’s the additional man-hours involved in sorting out what goes where. Rather than going through dozens of different titles each week, you could potentially be going through hundreds of different titles.
And then there’s the matter of how many hi-res files the printer(s) would have to have on-hand. And the matter of sorting out royalties (which have already become less transparent at DC with their new contracts). And the matter of not offering issues where licensed characters appear (sorry, you can get Batman #252 and 254, but not 253 because we no longer hold the license to The Shadow). All of this could be worked out, of course, but it would require more time and money.
So I'm curious as to how the Big Two could do print-on-demand without having to raise prices even higher. Or would they have to use two different prices, one for pre-orders, and a higher one for PoDs?
And then there’s a possible side effect. If any issue could be had at any time, how many people would have pre-ordered, say, Vibe #1? How many people would simply wait on it, either because they wanted to hear good reviews before buying or because their budget was tight and that was the easiest title to come back to later? A significant number, I would think. Which means fewer pre-orders, which in turn means a higher per copy cost to print, which in turn means less profit, which in turn means DC gives it a shorter leash before they pull the plug on it.
I'm sorry, I just don’t see print-on-demand as a feasible option on a large scale. I could see it for certain titles—your Batmans, your Avengers, etc.—but not company-wide. It’s just too inefficient. That’s an interesting idea, but that would be even less efficient and cost-effective. It would cost them additional man-hours as well, as someone would have to assemble the files. Would you be willing to pay $15–20 for that 80-page Giant? Because that's what they would likely need to charge, if not more. Another interesting idea, but I think in the end, comics would prove to be a poor return on their advertising dollar. The biggest problem, of course, is how would retailers make money on this? Again, it goes back to comics not being profitable enough per square foot of display space. At only a dollar a pop, you'd have to move a lot of books. Maybe there’s a magic price point that sells enough to make that a worthy investment of space for the retailers, I don't know. And would that in turn bring in enough of a return in licensing fees to the publishers to cover their costs? I'm not so sure.
At this point, I see the movies as the prime force when it comes to generating licensing money.