THE CHEAPER COMICS MANIFESTO

[Superman]

THE CHEAPER COMICS MANIFESTO : The case for printing monthly comics on good ol' newsprint so they can be priced as close to 99˘ as possible.

THE CONS:

(Let’s get them out of the way, shall we?)

• Art doesn’t look as good on newsprint as it does on higher-quality paper.

• Newsprint doesn’t age as well as higher-quality, acid-free paper does.

THE COUNTER-ARGUMENTS:

(The Pros for the Cons.)

• Yes, the art wouldn't look its best. But it will in the trade paperback.

It’s a trade-off (pun intended). People who enjoy the serialized nature of comics could get their monthly fix on the cheap, and the material more deserving of a more permanent format (by virtue of sales or publisher confidence) would get it in the form of trade paperbacks. More on this later.

• Yes, the books would be less durable. And thus, perhaps more collectible.

As comics have become more durable, so has the collector's market dwindled. Of course, there are a variety of reasons for the decline. But one of them is, well, there’s plenty of supply to meet the demand. If more Modern Age comics yellowed, brittled and just plain disintegrated, in time there would be fewer of them in collectible condition. Therefore, demand would be more likely to exceed supply, which would go a long way toward revitalizing the collector's market.

THE ABSOLUTE PROS:

(There are many.)

• If comics costed less (yes, costed is a word), everyone could buy more.

• If comics costed less, the casual reader would be more likely to pick up a few.

The casual reader has $10. What are they going to buy? Three comics at today’s prices (about 30 minutes of reading)? Or a mass market paperback (about 300 minutes of reading)?

• If comics costed less, kids might actually be able to afford them.

• If comics costed less, publishers wouldn’t have to spend as much money to put a one on the shelf.

Therefore, they might be more willing to take chances on new material.

• If comics costed less, readers might be more willing to take chances on new material.

• Printing comics on newsprint would better differentiate them from trade paperbacks.

Therefore, each would have competitive advantages over the other, fueling sales for both. The monthlies would be cheaper and more immediate for those who enjoy their monthly fix of truly serialized entertainment. While the trades would be printed to last on high-quality paper for those who enjoy complete stories and the permanence of the format.

And lastly...

• Newsprint is readably recyclable.

• Newsprint just smells like comics should. Like ink and paper. Not chemicals. (Or sometimes tortillas.)

CHEAPER COMICS! LET THE REVOLUTION BEGIN!

[KSChris]

No. As expensive as they may be, going back to newsprint would be a HUUGE step back.. I would much rather pay $3 for a comic which is a good read and is aesthetically pleasing.. than 99 cents for a newspaper with crappy quality.

[Lobok]

I think better paper matters to most of the comic book audience, so none of the companies would want to go back to the newsprint first.

[TroyCarter]

FU! I like to rub my glossy expensive comics all over my body.

[punk_love]

Has it been scientifically proven that reverting to "newsprint" paper will cause comics to be reduced in price, especially to less than half of what they cost now?

Every week someone seems to say this, as if it were A) actually true that simply changing the paperstock would mean comics could be lowered by over 50% of current cover prices and still be a profitable venture or, B) even if a company did change to newsprint, that they actually WOULD reduce prices and not continue to soak every cent they can.

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by Superman
THE ABSOLUTE PROS:

(There are many.)

• If comics costed less (yes, costed is a word), everyone could buy more.



How many of the Beckett Comics line titles do you read (first issues only 99 cents, each successive issue 1.99) and they aren't on cheap newsprint paper, either.

How many of Alias Comics (debuting in April) have you ordered (a good many of their initial offerings are only 75 cents for the first issues, and they are talking to have other lower priced issues as well)..?

(forgive me for mentioning beckett comics again, but this is the 4 time in two months that someone has mentioned the cost of comics. I hope noone thinks I am 'spamming' or 'trolling' by my constantly mentioning Beckett books, but I think in this case (and the other two times I have mentioned them) it has been germaine to the conversation.)

[I am MODOK]

Originally posted by Blind Assassin
How many of the Beckett Comics line titles do you read (first issues only 99 cents, each successive issue 1.99) and they aren't on cheap newsprint paper, either.

How many of Alias Comics (debuting in April) have you ordered (a good many of their initial offerings are only 75 cents for the first issues, and they are talking to have other lower priced issues as well)..?

(forgive me for mentioning beckett comics again, but this is the 4 time in two months that someone has mentioned the cost of comics. I hope noone thinks I am 'spamming' or 'trolling' by my constantly mentioning Beckett books, but I think in this case (and the other two times I have mentioned them) it has been germaine to the conversation.)

I don't think I've even heard of these...

[arthur pendragon]

As I've written before, they'd rather sell 100,000 copies at $3.50 than the possibility they'll 200,000 copies at $1.75.

Also, retailers don't want cheaper comics because the price won't justify the shelf space.

Regrettably, we're never going back.

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=16186

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by I am MODOK
I don't think I've even heard of these...


Here you go:

http://www.beckettcomics.com/comics.asp (they haven't updated their page for february yet, but you can find out about their offerings there)

As for Alias Comics, newsarama just did a story on them a couple of days/weeks ago.

You can go right here to see their offerings:

http://www.newsarama.com/pages/Other_Publishers/Alias.htm

[arthur pendragon]

Originally posted by Blind Assassin
How many of the Beckett Comics line titles do you read (first issues only 99 cents, each successive issue 1.99) and they aren't on cheap newsprint paper, either.

How many of Alias Comics (debuting in April) have you ordered (a good many of their initial offerings are only 75 cents for the first issues, and they are talking to have other lower priced issues as well)..?

(forgive me for mentioning beckett comics again, but this is the 4 time in two months that someone has mentioned the cost of comics. I hope noone thinks I am 'spamming' or 'trolling' by my constantly mentioning Beckett books, but I think in this case (and the other two times I have mentioned them) it has been germaine to the conversation.)

I don't think some fans simply want cheaper comics, they want cheaper comics from the Big Two.

Lower prices are a great incentive but new properties are a pretty hard sell in this industry.

The incentive I never liked from the Big Two was the inexpensive introductory issue. I don't care if the first issue is free, so long as the rest are $2.99, count me out.

[dollman]

I think Supes is missing a major component as to why comics aren't $0.99 - the cost of living has gone up. Comics aren't the only periodicals that have gone up in price. I remember when I was able to purchase new paperbacks between $2 and $5. Not anymore.

And unlike previous generations, today's creators are a bit more savvy about their financial affairs, and rights to royalites on newly created characters, etc. And I suspect printing costs have also soared. All of this cost money. So even reverting to newsprint, you probably have to charge say 1.50 or $2.00 to cover all printing costs.

As to the paper argument, the major advantage of the glossy paper over newsprint is the color. Look at colors of the background, especially the skies ala recent issues of Strange and Ultimate FF. No freaking way you can duplicate the vibrant blues and whites on plain newsprint.

I'm sticking with color.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by arthur pendragon
Regrettably, we're never going back.


oh... we'll go back. by the time it happens, though, it will likely be too late for most companies. but i can promise prices will have to make a turnaround sometime.
it's obvious that when you have 500,000 readers at $1.75, and 100,000 readers at $2.99, and that is one of your best sellers, something is going wrong. comics aren't seeing a significant enough influx of new readers anymore, and cost will drive away the ones who are still around.
sure, there is always going to be someone who will pay $7.50 to read their nice x-men comic, but it's illogical to think that it will be enough of a group to justify printing the thing. :(

[adamcasey]

Firstly, I don't think 99 cent is the magic number but rather $1.50 - $1.95. You don't buy a $12.95 video game, you don't buy a $300 car, doesn't 99 cents sound a bit fishy? $1.50 gives the impression of entertaintment value.

Secondly, I don't know if you can convince everyone that straight up newsprint is the best, but I don't mind the quality of paper used in Flash, Teen Titans, or Aquaman-- 'psuedo-newsprint'.

As for Beckett Comics, I know people just don't want cheaper comics but want cheaper X-Men comics, but the point of Beckett is that an independent company (albeit with a strong publisher) can publish glossy comics with a thicker cover and have no ads for $1.99. DC publishes Batman on glossy paper, yet charges $2.25, possibly taking a loss on individual issues, but making up the difference on volume. They print Flash on the psuedo-newsprint and charge $2.25, probably breaking even, and both titles have ads, so DC's game plan is anyone's guess.

[NYCEvolution]

Higher price does not mean better quality. I have smugges on some of the glossy comics. And sometimes in certain Ulitmate comics, the words are faded. Great, $3 for a comic I can't read because of a prinitng error.

[HailHydra]

int. borders - saturday afternoon. a father stands in a checkout line with his son ready to pay for the new john grisham novel. the son sees the pretty well-hidden comics turnstyle in the corner. the son grabs the new spider-man issue from the many bent over books.

son: dad, can i buy this?

dad: a comic? sure, son, i read these when i was your age actually.

son: but i spent my allowance on renting that video game.

dad: well, ok, you can have a $.50 advance, but just this time.

son: umm dad, that will cover the tax.

dad: put that piece of garbage back.

fade out.

:p

[Bakema NL]

No, don't ever go back to shitty paper. Shitty paper is what it says, to wipe your behind with. I can only imagine the horror of European comics printed on shitty paper............stuff them in your own arse is what I would say then.
99 cts will never come back as a cover price. Inflation brings all prices up, except those of comics....definitely not. Then there's paper driving the price up, but for a good reason, it looks way better. Artists/creators are compensated better, almost everybody was screaming about the way they were treated before......not that they get the money that's due to them we want prices of comics to be lower......doesn't happen guys and gals, we elevated them to kind of popstars, so there are those among them making a more than decent living and you pay for that. People are stuck in mainstream comics, the big 2, so don't count on Indies cutting their prices, they have to make a living.

Let's see, I bought the latest Bluejackets comic today, an European comic about the American civil war.....comical in content. I paid 4.50 in euro's for a normal-sized album (and that's bigger than a comic, graphic novel size) with a thick cover (not hardcover) and printed on high-quality paper (not glossy), numbering 44 pages of art/text.
4.50 in euro's is almost 6 American dollars...........2 comics of 22 pages costing 2.95 each equals said European album in price and pages. The European album only offers maybe a little more with the size and quality of the cover. The artists here always have the rights to their books. Through the years almost nothing has changed in paper quality. But prices have gone up, so that's due to inflation, comics are products too. When I was a kid of about 6 years old (34 now), I bought a similar album for 4.50 in Dutch florins........so prices have doubled in roughly 25 - 28 years.
Is this the case with American comics too? Maybe it's more, but with prices you have been better off compared to us. And then you have to take into account what I said about compensations for the creators and the improved quality of paper, bringing it all closer to each other.
Still, I would buy even more comics if they cost me less.........but I don't want them to be of lesser quality in paper.
I would say American comics are not too expensive, they have grown along with the economy.

Originally posted by HailHydra
int. borders - saturday afternoon. a father stands in a checkout line with his son ready to pay for the new john grisham novel. the son sees the pretty well-hidden comics turnstyle in the corner. the son grabs the new spider-man issue from the many bent over books.

son: dad, can i buy this?

dad: a comic? sure, son, i read these when i was your age actually.

son: but i spent my allowance on renting that video game.

dad: well, ok, you can have a $.50 advance, but just this time.

son: umm dad, that will cover the tax.

dad: put that piece of garbage back.

fade out.

:p

Bah, humbug. How many years ago did daddy buy his comics as a kid? I bet his sneakers didn't cost the amount of money they cost now............everything costs more as when you were a kid 20 years ago, it's not so hard to understand only this little bit about economics.

[Bakema NL]

Originally posted by adamcasey
Secondly, I don't know if you can convince everyone that straight up newsprint is the best, but I don't mind the quality of paper used in Flash, Teen Titans, or Aquaman-- 'psuedo-newsprint'.

You are right, that's paper I can live with too.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by Bakema NL
Bah, humbug. How many years ago did daddy buy his comics as a kid? I bet his sneakers didn't cost the amount of money they cost now............everything costs more as when you were a kid 20 years ago, it's not so hard to understand only this little bit about economics.

my dad bought my comics for me once when i was 13 and visiting him in florida and freaked out at the prices. when he read them, they were $.25.

sneakers don't cost 250% more than they did 10 years ago, do they? :confused:

[Crump's Brother]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Blind Assassin
How many of the Beckett Comics line titles do you read (first issues only 99 cents, each successive issue 1.99) and they aren't on cheap newsprint paper, either.
(forgive me for mentioning beckett comics again, but this is the 4 time in two months that someone has mentioned the cost of comics. I hope noone thinks I am 'spamming' or 'trolling' by my constantly mentioning Beckett books, but I think in this case (and the other two times I have mentioned them) it has been germaine to the conversation.) [/QUOTE

Ha ha, I don't think you are spamming with all your plugging for Beckett comics, but I do think you are misguided. ;) I've tried a few of these comics ("Ballad of Sleeping Beauty" and "Fade") and found them to be rather poor--both in story and in artwork. I don't care how much they cost me.

It's fine that you keep bringing them up as a solution to higher priced comics, but if the product isn't very good, then the argument is moot. And yes, opinions are all subjective. I'm sure Beckett has plenty of titles you enjoy, I just cannot figure out why.

Good call to the poster who said that we all want "cheaper X-Men (or insert your favorite mainstream comic title here) comics, not cheaper comics." This is totally true.

I would be in favor of a return to newsprint and less glossy covers. My Astonishing X-Men #2 cover has white fingerprints all over it where the color faded away. Nice. There goes 3 bucks.

[Bakema NL]

Originally posted by HailHydra
my dad bought my comics for me once when i was 13 and visiting him in florida and freaked out at the prices. when he read them, they were $.25.

sneakers don't cost 250% more than they did 10 years ago, do they? :confused:

No, they don't. Fortunately they are assembled by little Chinese children for pathetic salaries. It's somewhat harder to find Chinese artists willing to and able to do the work in comics for ridiculously cheap wages.

[Blind Assassin]

Originally posted by Crump's Brother

Ha ha, I don't think you are spamming with all your plugging for Beckett comics, but I do think you are misguided. ;) I've tried a few of these comics ("Ballad of Sleeping Beauty" and "Fade") and found them to be rather poor--both in story and in artwork. I don't care how much they cost me.

It's fine that you keep bringing them up as a solution to higher priced comics, but if the product isn't very good, then the argument is moot. And yes, opinions are all subjective. I'm sure Beckett has plenty of titles you enjoy, I just cannot figure out why.

Good call to the poster who said that we all want "cheaper X-Men (or insert your favorite mainstream comic title here) comics, not cheaper comics." This is totally true.



As you said, taste is subjective, and I totally enjoy Fade From Grace and Ballad of Sleeping Beauty (didn't really like volume 1 of Ruule, so I didn't bother with issue 2)

But, cheers to you, for trying them at least. I think people would rather try a 99 cent or 1.99 book and find they don't like it, compared to the people who pick up a 2.95/2.99/3.50 book and find they don't like it.


As I said in the other thread, it appears that people who appear to be complaining about how books aren't lower priced, are actually only really complaining that the books they read are not lower priced.

[Crump's Brother]

Originally posted by Blind Assassin
I think people would rather try a 99 cent or 1.99 book and find they don't like it, compared to the people who pick up a 2.95/2.99/3.50 book and find they don't like it.

Good call.

[Jess Nukem]

[/QUOTE] oh... we'll go back. by the time it happens, though, it will likely be too late for most companies.

Marvel is planning a televison commercial for their Fantastic Four comic, right? They are hoping that whole new generation of kids with money will buy it. They're hoping that the price they stick on there will be the norm for the kids. What they'll be conditioned to.

It worked on me in 1993 when I started, comics were $1.25. Now looking back at it, the companies were getting greedy. When you have a price for an item, you're supposed to let it stick at long as possible. The first major price increase I remember from reading the old X-Men comics from the eighties, right after the Fall of The Mutants, was a letter from the new editor of chief Tom DeFalco in the Bullpen explaining why X-Men, Spidey, Avengers, G.I. Joe were getting their price increased to a full dollar while the FF were not, was because of talent, increasing paper costs, and etc.

They thought they could increase the price on their top-selling titles, just so they could keep the lower prices on the other titles. Something rubbed me wrong about that, the other titles' creators weren't worth as much as Chris Claremont or Larry Hama? John Romita Jr. who was doing Daredevil at the time with Ann Noceti (sp?) wasn't worth as much as Marc Silvestri who was basically doing chicken scratches on paper while John had a more polished line quality. (I know Marc has gotten better later on.)

Marvel knows that they could lower their prices but they don't want to even though their sales are shitty. They really are and DC's too compared to the early nineties. You can argue that the huge drop-off was in fault due to bad storylines and collector mentality, but the prices had a hand in it too.

I remember in the spring of 1994, comics rose to $1.50 and I thought no big deal. But in the summer, I saw all the X-Men comics go to $2.95 with no page increase and a shiny cover. It was the Phalanx crossover. Then fall came and the crossover was over and the comics went down a dollar. WTF?!

I was just starting to read comics and in a two year period, they had risen three times! It was nuts to a ten-year old at the time. I stopped reading for a year except for Generation X.

And now I'm watching it happen all over again. We had 1.99 for a few months in 2000, then it rose to 2.25, and in 2002, a lot of titles rose up to 2.99. In the winter of 2004, I noticed on the newsstand, the Marvel titles were all 2.99 even though some were 2.25 in the direct market.

Marvel is obviously the industry leader and they're shooting themselves in the foot on their price gouging. And they need to stop.

I know you'll say you have discounts in the store, but that's only because so many of you buy so much crap.

I'm so getting flamed and I'll be polled on whether I should get banned for this.

[UX-Gal]

I like glossy. Glossy stays.

I don't mind paying a lot for my comics, really. They should go down to $1.99 at least, thought.

What I want is not cheaper comics, but COMICS THAT ARE WORTH MY $2.99!!! If I am gonna pay three bucks for an issue, it'd better blow me away, I want MEAT in the story, I want LOTS OF STUFF TO HAPPEN (in a coherent way of course). I want comics that are all not splash pages but actually contain more than four pannels per page. I want comics that tell a GOOD STORY.

What happens today is that $2.99 is not worth what they are trying to sell.

---UX
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ux-fans

[spiritofevil99]

What's wrong with using paper that was used in the X-men around issues 30-35ish (1991 series) and the ones used in Spawn 1...not quite newsprint that was used in the 80s but one step away from the glossy expensive paper.

[reed88]

Archie comics cost $2.19 and they do not sell anywhere near what a marvel or dc title sells.

[gwangung]

Folks should remember that you have to use a separate press for newsprint...and not that many people use newsprint anymore.

You only get savings for using newsprint at much higher copies.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by reed88
Archie comics cost $2.19 and they do not sell anywhere near what a marvel or dc title sells.

no, you're right... they sell three times as much, and have more pages. :D

[Lobok]

Originally posted by HailHydra
no, you're right... they sell three times as much, and have more pages. :D

Do you mean the comic books or the digests?

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by Lobok
Do you mean the comic books or the digests?

whatever is at the grocer. aren't those the ones that are $2.19?

[reed88]

The issues are $2.19 the digests are like $3.00 I think.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by reed88
The issues are $2.19 the digests are like $3.00 I think.

i can't find the exact numbers right now because i am at work and logging into too many sites makes them mad, but basically archie comics sell in the neighborhood of 300,000 issues each.

[MudshovelForYou]

I firmly stand by my belief that cost is not the main factor forming a barrier of entry for new readers.

As long as comics are viewed as collectibles, closed off network of "man did you see how writer X screwed up that flashback on page 5? In issue 220, that's sooo not what happened. How could he not know that?"and an industry audience that continues to beg for the companies to embrace the past and fear change, cost suddenly seems less important than content.

[Jess Nukem]

The single Archie comics are $2.19.

The digests are $2.59.

The double digests are $3.59.

It's still a great bang for your buck if you're trying to shut that kid who sitting next to you in the airplane.

[TheScantronman]

All your fancy pants number crunching aside, what I am blown away at is that at this point JUST NOW is the username Superman taken?!?!

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
I firmly stand by my belief that cost is not the main factor forming a barrier of entry for new readers.

As long as comics are viewed as collectibles, closed off network of "man did you see how writer X screwed up that flashback on page 5? In issue 220, that's sooo not what happened. How could he not know that?"and an industry audience that continues to beg for the companies to embrace the past and fear change, cost suddenly seems less important than content.

i have to disagree. i mean, i know i bang the money gong a lot, so of course i do, but the reasoning you list just doesn't sound like it would deter someone from buying a comic.

i mean, i doubt people see the bitchy side of nitpicking comic fans or their constant throwbacks unless they come somewhere like this or read wizard. if someone just read comics from the newsstand, none of what you said would apply to them. because a) it'd be just another magazine to them, b) they wouldn't be worrying over continuity, they'd be satisfying a james bond-esque reading mentality, and c) they wouldn't know what the industry was going to in the past. of course, that is looking at it as a new reader.

all the points you make very much apply to someone who is an avid reader and is becomming disillusioned by the medium. :D

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
i have to disagree. i mean, i know i bang the money gong a lot, so of course i do, but the reasoning you list just doesn't sound like it would deter someone from buying a comic.

i mean, i doubt people see the bitchy side of nitpicking comic fans or their constant throwbacks unless they come somewhere like this or read wizard. if someone just read comics from the newsstand, none of what you said would apply to them. because a) it'd be just another magazine to them, b) they wouldn't be worrying over continuity, they'd be satisfying a james bond-esque reading mentality, and c) they wouldn't know what the industry was going to in the past. of course, that is looking at it as a new reader.

all the points you make very much apply to someone who is an avid reader and is becomming disillusioned by the medium. :D

Ah, but I'm not specifically saying that fan complaining is turning people off as much as comic readers are presented to the public via mass media as a closed off group who have nit picky arguments. The same thing applies to the collectible "aspect" of it. The mass media portrayel of comics doesn't show them as serialized stories, it shows them as this obscene geeky little outcast social club of people who don't want you to breath over their bagged books because your oxygen could damage the precious varient cover. This is the media image, this turns people off.

I think the way comics were portrayed in shows like The O.C. or Everwood were a better job of improving the media image and media image dictates a lot in consumer goods.

I also think there's worth to the fact that the industry, specifically the big 2, seems to care more about what the current readers want and less about the general audience. Take the out cry over the New Avengers roster for an example: "That's not my Avengers!" The theory works (of course it's lacking other media advertising but that's a whole different point).

EDIT: Damn enter button.. And who said I was disillusioned? Who squealed? C'mon... I want names. :D

[HailHydra]

ok... assuming that these are the things keeping people away from comics... if it was a clean slate tomorrow, people would still not be buying little comic books for $3 with 20 minutes (TOPS!) of enjoyment over $6 movies or $5 video game rentals or even $6 paperback books.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
EDIT: Damn enter button.. And who said I was disillusioned? Who squealed? C'mon... I want names. :D

i was actually refering to myself. :D

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
ok... assuming that these are the things keeping people away from comics... if it was a clean slate tomorrow, people would still not be buying little comic books for $3 with 20 minutes (TOPS!) of enjoyment over $6 movies or $5 video game rentals or even $6 paperback books.

Hrm... I'll agree to the movie comparison, but if it was a clean slate then video games would have a more dorkier connotation again, and no one reads today :p.

I do think that price is a factor, but I think the package has to be made appealling towards people first. Crabs have a nice price... I'm not lining up to get it. :p

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
i was actually refering to myself. :D

Oooh.. Then I, um, I said nothing. NOTHING!

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
I do think that price is a factor, but I think the package has to be made appealling towards people first.

it's the MAIN factor though. you can make them the best they ever have been (and it is arguable that some recently have hit that plateau), but people aren't going to shell out as much money if they were half the price. it's just a fact. as prices have gone up over the last year, readership has plummeted. you can blame that somewhat on the speculator market, but long before superman died, there were more than 100,000 people reading the book.

and your crab comparison is cute, but really... i say put a $1.75 price tag on a comic in a grocery store, and no matter how awful it is, it will sell more than astonishing x-men and new avengers put together! :D

[adamcasey]

Originally posted by HailHydra
it's the MAIN factor though. you can make them the best they ever have been (and it is arguable that some recently have hit that plateau), but people aren't going to shell out as much money if they were half the price. it's just a fact. as prices have gone up over the last year, readership has plummeted. you can blame that somewhat on the speculator market, but long before superman died, there were more than 100,000 people reading the book.

and your crab comparison is cute, but really... i say put a $1.75 price tag on a comic in a grocery store, and no matter how awful it is, it will sell more than astonishing x-men and new avengers put together! :D

After reading this thread, and a few others, I think the winning factor comes down to this for non-comics readers:

Content - 40%, readily identifyable characters (this includes artwork)
Price - 40%, and it's got to be affordable
Cover - 20%, it's got to be eye catching.

Ergo, if we can ditch pin-up covers, and have Ultimate Spider-Man for $1.95, we might have a winner.

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
it's the MAIN factor though. you can make them the best they ever have been (and it is arguable that some recently have hit that plateau), but people aren't going to shell out as much money if they were half the price. it's just a fact. as prices have gone up over the last year, readership has plummeted. you can blame that somewhat on the speculator market, but long before superman died, there were more than 100,000 people reading the book.

and your crab comparison is cute, but really... i say put a $1.75 price tag on a comic in a grocery store, and no matter how awful it is, it will sell more than astonishing x-men and new avengers put together! :D

Ah, but if it is crap how do you get them back? :D

You bring up a good point about access with putting in a grocery store. Some grocery stores refuse to sell them, thus shrinking access. I will conceded that if prices were lower more comics would be selling, but I don't think your stable market would grow as much as if comics media image was better.

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by adamcasey
After reading this thread, and a few others, I think the winning factor comes down to this for non-comics readers:

Content - 40%, readily identifyable characters (this includes artwork)
Price - 40%, and it's got to be affordable
Cover - 20%, it's got to be eye catching.

Ergo, if we can ditch pin-up covers, and have Ultimate Spider-Man for $1.95, we might have a winner.

Hey, I'll fight you on the pin-up covers, too. Although I think Marvel took it too far into the abstract direction, the idea of a single reprsentative image works much better in the public conscious. Take a look at most book trade dresses or movie posters.

Marvel just went way too far with this, though.

Man, am I contrary right now or what?

[gwangung]

Originally posted by adamcasey
After reading this thread, and a few others, I think the winning factor comes down to this for non-comics readers:

Content - 40%, readily identifyable characters (this includes artwork)
Price - 40%, and it's got to be affordable
Cover - 20%, it's got to be eye catching.

Ergo, if we can ditch pin-up covers, and have Ultimate Spider-Man for $1.95, we might have a winner.

Hm. I think you're a bit off on these things.

Content: good, coherent story? or just an identifiable character?
Price? "Affordable" depends on bang for buck, in my book. Complete story in one shot? Folks will buy that up to $5.95, right now, I think.
Cover: Pin up covers ARE eye-catching in many ways. I'm not so certain that they are off putting for non-fans.

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
Ah, but if it is crap how do you get them back? :D

You bring up a good point about access with putting in a grocery store. Some grocery stores refuse to sell them, thus shrinking access. I will conceded that if prices were lower more comics would be selling, but I don't think your stable market would grow as much as if comics media image was better.

umm actually, both companies kinda decided to forego most markets outside of the direct sales. :( it isn't the local kroger's fault.

also, i don't need a stable market to grow. i just need a vital market that is self-sustaining. sales going up and down is fine as long as it isn't a major fluxation, and really, at that price, it'd have to be a stinker for it to happen.

look at the comics we have now. people hate uncanny x-men, but are loyal to the product and continue buying it. i don't think losing less money a weak would be an adversion.

[sleepyturtle1]

Originally posted by HailHydra
i can't find the exact numbers right now because i am at work and logging into too many sites makes them mad, but basically archie comics sell in the neighborhood of 300,000 issues each.

No one talks about how well Archie Comics do. It's seem to be a dirty little secret in the industry. Archie is laughing all the way to the bank.

That said, what I believe is driving the cost of the big 2's comics is the price tag of the creators involved, not paperstock.

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
umm actually, both companies kinda decided to forego most markets outside of the direct sales. :( it isn't the local kroger's fault.

also, i don't need a stable market to grow. i just need a vital market that is self-sustaining. sales going up and down is fine as long as it isn't a major fluxation, and really, at that price, it'd have to be a stinker for it to happen.

look at the comics we have now. people hate uncanny x-men, but are loyal to the product and continue buying it. i don't think losing less money a weak would be an adversion.

See I've heard both now. That companies said screw it to grocery stores and the reverse like you just said. This brings up another question though, companies bust there butts to put trades in other stores and the direct market screams betrayal (but that's for a later discussion).

I think we are reaching a point where are discussion is just.. not circular, but locked in place and I think it comes down to us having two different yet similiar goals: I'd prefer to have a growing market with a large stable base unit, while you prefer to have a growing market with a larger vital core.

I think each view is "right" and they are both made of the same basic thing (we need good product and good price), it's just we differ on which one is the most important.

Now, however, I suddenly have a craving to play a comic book sim game, sort of like lemonade stand like game. :D

[HailHydra]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
Now, however, I suddenly have a craving to play a comic book sim game, sort of like lemonade stand like game. :D

ok. :D you make the best lemonade ever, charge $3/glass. i will make plain old lemonade and charge $.50. ;)

[MudshovelForYou]

Originally posted by HailHydra
ok. :D you make the best lemonade ever, charge $3/glass. i will make plain old lemonade and charge $.50. ;)

Hey, as long as I put a little heroin or so in my lemonade, sounds fine by me.

:D

(And to be fair, I did say price was an issue, therefore I get to charge 2.25 :p)

[gwangung]

Originally posted by HailHydra
umm actually, both companies kinda decided to forego most markets outside of the direct sales. :( it isn't the local kroger's fault.


Really? I heard the EXACT OPPOSITE from people who were in the industry at the time.

I think it's actually true that retailers were getting more from returning comic books than they were from actually trying to sell them...

[GothamKnight]

I smile when I go through my weekly stack and see regular DC books at $2.25 or $2.50... and then other DC books with the cardboard stock covers for $2.99.

That's completely cool with me.. especially since DC keeps their mainstreams at $2.50 & under.

The every marvel book that's not an Ultimate is $2.99 and up...

Maybe that's why my weekly Marvel pulls are slimming down at a rate i never thought possible...

DC is on the right track.

[Lorendiac]

Originally posted by Superman
THE CHEAPER COMICS MANIFESTO : The case for printing monthly comics on good ol' newsprint so they can be priced as close to 99˘ as possible.

THE CONS:

(Let’s get them out of the way, shall we?)

• Art doesn’t look as good on newsprint as it does on higher-quality paper.

• Newsprint doesn’t age as well as higher-quality, acid-free paper does.

I admit that those are Cons I could live with, provided that I could feel certain that every story I enjoyed in the newsprint publication would still be available in TPB 10 or 20 years from now when my original copies are fading.

Originally posted by Superman
• Yes, the books would be less durable. And thus, perhaps more collectible.

As comics have become more durable, so has the collector's market dwindled. Of course, there are a variety of reasons for the decline. But one of them is, well, there’s plenty of supply to meet the demand. If more Modern Age comics yellowed, brittled and just plain disintegrated, in time there would be fewer of them in collectible condition. Therefore, demand would be more likely to exceed supply, which would go a long way toward revitalizing the collector's market.

My basic attitude is that there's nothing sacred about a "collector's market" and that downgrading the quality of your physical materials in the hopes that more people will buy the stuff just because you did that is a bad idea.

Originally posted by Superman

• If comics costed less (yes, costed is a word), everyone could buy more.

• If comics costed less, the casual reader would be more likely to pick up a few.



What casual reader? Seems like we hardly have anything but diehard "fans" buying the things anymore. To me, the most important thing is to get a LOT more people reading the silly things in the first place. Casually picking up a comic or two off the rack as they are doing their weekly shopping at the local Wal-Mart or whatever. Right now, most monthly comics are hiding from the general public, hunkering down in the isolated ghetto we call "direct market comic shops." If the whole point is for the publishers to make more money from more sales, than that entire approach is self-defeating.

Originally posted by Superman
The casual reader has $10. What are they going to buy? Three comics at today’s prices (about 30 minutes of reading)? Or a mass market paperback (about 300 minutes of reading)?

• If comics costed less, kids might actually be able to afford them.


I think the kids you're talking about don't have their own driver's licenses or cars, and thus are not in a good position to visit a comic shop and buy the monthly publications anyway. If they're never really exposed to the temptation to buy the silly things, then the question of how many of them they could theoretically afford to buy each month is a moot point. I got started in the early 80s because I could easily find the silly things in a drugstore when I accompanied my mom on her shopping trips. Until that becomes possible for the new generation of potential readers, it should be no surprise that comics aren't getting as many "impulse buys" and new "regular customers" as a result as they used to get in the good old days.

[dr_doomy]

Comics should be as widely available as magazines (like they were back in the pre-direct market days). I would have never developed an interest in the medium if it wasn't for small-town grocers and pharmacists and their wide selections of periodicals.

Even today I find the magazine rack is where I go for disposable reading material, and I am often pleased to discover a new (to me) or niche publication that intrigues me enough to drop 4-10 bucks. Of course, if I really like a mag, I'm more likely to subscribe for the savings than to regularly pay full retail price to pick it up at the store.

The comic industry, though, is firmly entrenched in both the direct market and the tiny pamphlet.

[Superman]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post.

Some have noticed that I posted my “manifesto” on a variety of boards. The reason I did that is to get people talking and gather a wide range of opinions on my points. The reason I am just now responding (as some of you have voiced an impatience for me to do so) is because I have a day job.

But now that I’m home, and have had time to sift through your comments, I’ll be happy to respond to some of the excellent rebuttals to my assumptions.

Yes, that’s all they are -- assumptions. But they were made from the perspective of considerable expertise. I work in marketing at a midsized advertising agency on the creative strategy/production side. I have been doing this work for nearly 15 years, and I’ve been reading comics for twice as long.

First of all, I appreciate the comments of those of you who are on my side in this. “Cheaper Comics” is not a magic bullet for the industry, but I think it could serve as a valid tactic for bringing sequential art back to the levels of popularity it has enjoyed in years past.

Now, my replies to your collective comments:

• For those of you who lament that paper costs do not contribute “that much” to the final cost of a book:

Again, I have considerable experience in print production and can say with confidence that paper choices dramatically effect the final cost of any piece of printed material. But how’s this for a bare bones rebuttal to that argument: daily newspapers print maybe three-comics-worth of newsprint on which they’ve printed content from dozens of paid contributors for less than half the cost of a single comic book. Sure, they sell lots of ads to defray their costs, but so could comics...if they sold more copies and could justify significant audience numbers to their advertisers. And how do they sell more copies? How about lowering prices?

• For those of you who argue that price isn’t the problem, that it’s poor advertising and distribution:

It’s a valid point. But I find it funny that many of the people who threw this one out are admitted retailers; and the retailers are the only ones aside from the publishers themselves who bear the responsibility for doing those very things! In today’s comics industry, direct market retailers ARE the distribution. (And lest you argue that Diamond is the distribution, you’re the victim of a semantic misunderstanding. Sure, they distribute comics, but in terms of marketing, they are not a distribution channel for reaching consumers with product. Stores are. In terms of “distributing” product to retailers, they’re not perfect, but they get the job done.) Yes, comics publishers could do a better job of pushing consumers into retail outlets for their products (appropriately called a Push Strategy), but direct market retailers bear a mountain of responsibility for not pulling customers into their retail stores (called a Pull Strategy). And please, I am not trying to denigrate retailers. Publishers would do well to better support them in their efforts at pulling in customers. Of course, as we all know, there’s one tried and true tactic retailers use to pull customers into their stores: they lower prices.

• For those of you who seem to have missed it the first time, let me expand on the different competitive advantages of comics and trades again:

I like reading serialized fiction; that is, fiction that is released chapter by chapter instead of as a complete package. A lot of people do. Identity Crisis wouldn’t have been nearly as popular if it had been released as a complete story. The serialized nature of the story added to the mystery, fueled speculation, got people talking and all that translated into sales. If Identity Crisis had been a newsprint comic costing 99˘, instead of $4.00 (FOUR FREAKING DOLLARS!), I wouldn’t have had to choose it over Blahblah Adventures, Example-Man and Exhibit C; I could have bought all of them. And having been exposed to them, I might have wanted to pick up a trade collection of one or all of them. Instead, I spent $4 a month for IDC adding up to a grand total of $28. (And I suspect the trade will cost a few bucks less, even though it’s not partly supported by ads -- that indicates to me that prices on monthlies could come down even without switching to cheaper paper.) And okay, I’m rambling, but the point is: the advantage of monthly comics is the serialization and the immediacy. The advantage of TPB’s is a complete story, maybe a few “extra features” and sometimes the price. Today, both are printed essentially on the same paper. A cheaper price point would give monthlies the advantage in price as well as immediacy, while the trades would have the advantage of nicer paper. In other words, do you want in NOW? Or on glossy paper? That’s would be the difference between “Cheap Comics” and TPB’s. (Phew.)

• On distribution (again):

If retailers outside the direct market (newsstands, grocery stores, etc.) thought they could sell comics, they would be selling comics. Why don’t they think they can sell comics? I bet if you took a poll, they would tell you it’s because they cost too much relative to their other offerings (such as mass market paperbacks). The fact that their not returnable is also a factor. But perhaps if comics costed (there it is again) less for publishers to print, they might be able to guarantee a certain number of returns? Of course that’s barely an educated guess; admittedly I have little experience in that arena. Still, it’s something to think about.

• For those of you who mentioned Beckett Comics:

Great example. If they can do it, others publishers can, too.

• Okay, that’s probably too much to retain anyone’s interest so I’ll stop now and see how it goes. Thanks again to everyone who took the time to read the Manifesto, and my only hope is that the people who think there’s something to it will spread the word to the companies that can make it happen. Tell any publisher who will listen what you think. I love comics and all I want is to see the industry flourish so I can read as many as possible on my meager budget.

Jeff

[TroyCarter]

You forgot about those of us that like the feel of glossy paper all over our naked bodies.

[Toejam]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
I firmly stand by my belief that cost is not the main factor forming a barrier of entry for new readers.

I've only bought two comics in the past year. Just two. Because they're too expensive. It's not that I can't afford 50 bucks a month on comics, because I gladly would if they were a better value, but 3 bucks for a 5-10-minute read is just not worth it. So, instead of buying 40 comics a month at $1.50 each, which I would do if they were that price, I buy zero comics at their current price. I have friends who are the same way. So cost, for us, is probably the primary factor in our comic-buying (or non-buying, as the case may be) habits.


Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
Hey, I'll fight you on the pin-up covers, too. Although I think Marvel took it too far into the abstract direction, the idea of a single reprsentative image works much better in the public conscious. Take a look at most book trade dresses or movie posters.

Marvel just went way too far with this, though.

Man, am I contrary right now or what?

Pin-up covers are also a huge detterent for me, because they don't begin to tell me if I might be interested in what's between the covers of the comic. They're boring. Which is why I've only bought a couple issues from the Ultimate line. They, for me, are utterly, completely ineffective at piquing my interest.

The comparison to movie posters is inappropriate, because movies are also accompanied by movie trailers, which tell you what the movies is about, and gives you a visual glimpse at what happens in the movie. Which is what, in my opinion, a comic book cover should do.

[adamcasey]

Originally posted by MudshovelForYou
Hey, I'll fight you on the pin-up covers, too. Although I think Marvel took it too far into the abstract direction, the idea of a single reprsentative image works much better in the public conscious. Take a look at most book trade dresses or movie posters.

Marvel just went way too far with this, though.

Man, am I contrary right now or what?

Pin-up is one thing, but engaging is another. Most of the Ultimate Fantastic Four have been yawners.

As for movie posters, this is tough as the horror ones tend to be mood pieces (Alone in the Dark), comedy ones tend to be 'zany' (Anger Management), drama ones tend to be the closest thing to 'pin up' (Coach Carter), but action tends to have a little more concept and story to them (Aviator, 1 sheet teaser with his head above the clouds, not wide release one of sunglasses with reflection.)

[LK_]

I think the paper used by Vertigo titles are good, it gives a good old comic feeling. I really dont mind companies switching to this type of paper if the price is reduced.

[spiritofevil99]

I think I stated this in another thread but I dont think the publishers care too much about their customers who buy their comics...I really dont think they make that much from comics...I think its the licensing deals and movies where they make their bottom line...I could be wrong

[Superman]

I think they care about their current customers. But they better start caring about their potential customers, their future customers. Because without them, the publishers don't have a future themselves.

[dr_doomy]

Originally posted by Superman
Again, I have considerable experience in print production and can say with confidence that paper choices dramatically effect the final cost of any piece of printed material.


That's certainly true for the client buying printing services directly from a printer, but the price the consumer (a comic buyer) pays includes all the other costs beyond physical reproduction. These costs are going to remain constant.

The retailer, for instance, is expected to sell twice as many issues in order to make up for selling at half the price. Would that not require twice as much space, twice as much effort to shelve, twice as much freight cost? (For the sake of simplicity, this scenario assumes the retailer's discount and shipping rates remain constant.) The comic store owners, particularly those scraping by with the current system, might just follow the lead of the newstands and decide comics (these cheap ones) aren't worth the retail space they occupy.