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??
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??
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).
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??
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.
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.
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 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 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.
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.
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.
"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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. :)
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.
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!"
As for what DC should do...
It's simple. Follow the blueprint set down in 1999-2002:
-Hire experienced editors from indy companies with a track record of critical success. Why? Usually, they haven't had the Big Name characters as a platform, but they know how to help creators put out good books.
-Reach out the new talent. Marvel brought in a LOT of folks from the indies during that time period. Not all of them worked out, but the ones who did brought fresh blood and ideas.
-Have a vision. Quesada and Jemas came in saying they would build a trade library because DC was making bank with theirs, and when the X-Men movie came out, there was nothing for new readers to pick up and run with. Hell, "Death of the Phoenix" was out of print when the X-Men movie came out. I don't know if trades are the way to go, but DC's incredible backstock and trade program has completely fallen off the map in the last 3 - 5 years, and it used to generate as much as new comics.
-Instead of editors "guiding" stories, have the creators you hired do it. Marvel's retreats have given them a sense of direction and identity, and it works. DC is flailing about, running from gimmick to gimmick, but their stories and crossovers (other than Batman) and landing with a dull thud.
I agree that they should stick with the New52 (but kill the branding, they haven't published 52 comics a month for over a year now). They should do what they did with Post-Crisis once THAT bump faded: Let your top creators tell good stories. Don't :"fill in gaps", don't "Create events". Hire good people and let them do good work.
It's what Bill Gaines did. It's what Stan Lee did. It's what Dick Giordano did. It's what Joe Quesada did. It's what Warren Littlefield did with NBC in the 90's. It's a "gimmick" that ALWAYS works. How bloody hard is that?
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.
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.
Comments
M
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.
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.
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.
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!"
Completely different jobs.
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.
At least once.
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.
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!"
As for what DC should do...
It's simple. Follow the blueprint set down in 1999-2002:
-Hire experienced editors from indy companies with a track record of critical success. Why? Usually, they haven't had the Big Name characters as a platform, but they know how to help creators put out good books.
-Reach out the new talent. Marvel brought in a LOT of folks from the indies during that time period. Not all of them worked out, but the ones who did brought fresh blood and ideas.
-Have a vision. Quesada and Jemas came in saying they would build a trade library because DC was making bank with theirs, and when the X-Men movie came out, there was nothing for new readers to pick up and run with. Hell, "Death of the Phoenix" was out of print when the X-Men movie came out. I don't know if trades are the way to go, but DC's incredible backstock and trade program has completely fallen off the map in the last 3 - 5 years, and it used to generate as much as new comics.
-Instead of editors "guiding" stories, have the creators you hired do it. Marvel's retreats have given them a sense of direction and identity, and it works. DC is flailing about, running from gimmick to gimmick, but their stories and crossovers (other than Batman) and landing with a dull thud.
I agree that they should stick with the New52 (but kill the branding, they haven't published 52 comics a month for over a year now). They should do what they did with Post-Crisis once THAT bump faded: Let your top creators tell good stories. Don't :"fill in gaps", don't "Create events". Hire good people and let them do good work.
It's what Bill Gaines did. It's what Stan Lee did. It's what Dick Giordano did. It's what Joe Quesada did. It's what Warren Littlefield did with NBC in the 90's. It's a "gimmick" that ALWAYS works. How bloody hard is that?
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.
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.