JiC: ARCHIE RULES IN THE FLYOVER STATES

[MattBrady]

<img src="http://www.newsarama.com/Other_Publishers/archiecast.jpg" width="300" height="88" align="right" border="0"><I>by Mike Sangiacomo</I>

Allan Grafman, president of Archie Comics Entertainment, has an air of astonishment when he talks to newspaper reporters, as if he is as surprised as the figures as he suspects the reporter will be.

“Do you know how many comics Archie Comics Publications sells,” he asked earnestly. “Eight-hundred thousand, and that’s every single month. And 70 percent of that is sold in mass-market stores.”

If you want to, compare 800,000 comics a month with the Top 300 (http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5637) comics sold to retailers by Diamond. We all cheer when a comic breaks the 100,000 mark, remember?

Hey, we all laughed at Archie teaming with the Punisher a ways back, but putting a DC or Marvel character with Archie may be a way to get the characters in front of more eyes than they can via the direct market. Batman & Jughead, anyone? Jimmy Olsen & Archie...think of it, after an accident where they're both knocked unconscious, they get mistaken for the other. Archie gets kidnapped by one of Superman's enemies (while on a field trip to Metropolis), and meanwhile, the amnesiac Jimmy heads back to Riverdale and has to fight off Betty and Veronica's affections.

Hey, there've been <i>worse</i> stories...

Grafman said that Archie’s are the 12th largest selling periodical in the Walmart chain, that’s putting Archie and friends right up against <I>People, Time</I> and all those teen and bride magazines.

If this is a surprise, that’s because the primary readers are kids between 6 and 16, slightly more girls than boys. “We are strongest throughout the Midwest and Canada,” he said. “We’re not so strong on the coasts, the big cities where kids grow up faster.”

Still, that’s a lot of funny books.

Grafman wants to do more, not with comics, but with television, movies, licensing and merchandising, music and “potentially” he said, theme parks. This move to take a bigger bite out of the American pie started earlier this year.

The big coup came when Miramax Films announced plans to make a live action movie starring Archie’s gals, Betty and Veronica. Why the girls and not Archie? Do you have to ask?

“Archie will be a big part in it, of course,” Grafman said. “But we thought it would be more interesting to focus the movie on Betty and Veronica, their friendship and competition. Everyone would like to be in Archie’s position, he’s a lucky guy having two girl fighting over him.”

The difference between Archie’s core audience and many of the people reading this article is that the younger kids will not read that line and think, “Oh yeah, that’s hot.” Come on, you know that’s what you were thinking. Archie is wholesome and as American as apple pie.

Grafman said Mirmax is on a talent search to fill the roles of Betty and Veronica. He said they would also like to start production on a new <I>Archie Comics Riverdale Stars</I> television show within a year. It will likely be some kind of talent search program for kids. Grafman said they are in negotiations with two children’s television networks.

The movie is about two years away. Don’t look for Arnold Schwarzenegger to pay Mr. Weatherbee, the film will have “no $10 million stars,” just good actors.

[JackHoff]

Originally posted by MattBrady
<img
If you want to, compare 800,000 comics a month with the Top 300 (http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5637) comics sold to retailers by Diamond. We all cheer when a comic breaks the 100,000 mark, remember?


You're NOT comparing apples to apples here as they do NOT sell 800,000 copies of the SAME book like the figures in the Diamond chart.I don't have the list handy but there is about 10/12 different Archie titles and Sonic too that they publish which would be about 80,000 copies per title or about half what the top selling books are doing.That's still great numbers for Archie books don't get me wrong but if you are going to be doing comparisons do them right..

[md62]

Archie comics are a great way to get kids into comics. My 11 year old daughter showed no interest in comics until she read Sabrina & now she is reading Teen Titans, Superman/Batman & Ultimate Spider-Man.

[zeraze]

Originally posted by JackHoff
You're NOT comparing apples to apples here as they do NOT sell 800,000 copies of the SAME book like the figures in the Diamond chart.I don't have the list handy but there is about 10/12 different Archie titles and Sonic too that they publish which would be about 80,000 copies per title or about half what the top selling books are doing.That's still great numbers for Archie books don't get me wrong but if you are going to be doing comparisons do them right..

Actually, you could say the same thing about Superman who appears in what four different comics. If you add up all those spinoff titles, the Man of Steel sells a couple hundred thousand comics a month at least. The same is true of Spider-Man, Batman, and X-Men.

So, Jack Hoff would be comparing apples to apples regarding these four titles and the various Archie Comics.

zeraze

[Spider-Bob]

I don’t have any fact or figures to back this up, but I have heard that Archie Comics is the largest publisher of comics worldwide.

[kdmelrose]

Originally posted by JackHoff
You're NOT comparing apples to apples here as they do NOT sell 800,000 copies of the SAME book like the figures in the Diamond chart.I don't have the list handy but there is about 10/12 different Archie titles and Sonic too that they publish which would be about 80,000 copies per title or about half what the top selling books are doing.That's still great numbers for Archie books don't get me wrong but if you are going to be doing comparisons do them right..

You make a good point; there's not a true parallel.

However, the comics industry should be looking at Archie's mass-market success. According to Grafman's figures, Archie is selling about 560,000 copies a month in Wal-Marts, Rite-Aids, Walgreens, Safeways and countless other ubiquitous chain stores.

Those are decent numbers by today's comic standards, even when split among 15 or 16 titles. I'm sure Marvel and DC would love to tack on an extra 35,000 copies to each of their top-sellers.

[punkmonkey]

Originally posted by JackHoff
You're NOT comparing apples to apples here as they do NOT sell 800,000 copies of the SAME book like the figures in the Diamond chart.I don't have the list handy but there is about 10/12 different Archie titles and Sonic too that they publish which would be about 80,000 copies per title or about half what the top selling books are doing.That's still great numbers for Archie books don't get me wrong but if you are going to be doing comparisons do them right..

Yeah, but all the Archie comics are basically the exact same book. There are really no differences in writing tone and art style in the Archie books as there are with the Superman or Batman books. I know what you're saying, though.

[jawaplumber]

I dig Archie comics, but I'm still a bit disappointed in the publisher itself after the way they mistreated Dan DeCarlo. He was a good man who I had the pleasure of speaking to on several occassions, and was truly THE definitive Archie artist. He deserved so much more than Archie was willing to give, considering he also created Sabrina The Teenage Witch and Josie And The Pussycats.

At least the comics and characters are still bringing smiles to the faces of children all around the world, though :)

As for crossovers with other comics characters, I've ALWAYS felt a Shazam!/Archie crossover would be fantastic, considering both Fawcett City and Riverdale are seemingly stuck in time.

[blankpoint]

Basically, what's been proven is that numb-brained crap sells more than imaginitive, thought-provoking work. We see this on the Diamond 300 all the time - Austen's Uncanny at #5, and most of Vertigo around #140, but this just shows it follows through on a larger scale as well.

Linkin Park sells more than A Perfect Circle, Tool, Nine Inch Nails, Counting Crows, and Pearl Jam.
Britney Spears sells more than Tori Amos, Ani Difranco, Fiona Apple and Cat Power.

So the fuck what? All the lower-selling artists still put out albums, and Vertigo still puts out comics. They're not selling to 9-year old Mary-Lou from Kentucky and so they sell less - so what?

[flutegirlrockz]

Originally posted by kdmelrose
You make a good point; there's not a true parallel.

However, the comics industry should be looking at Archie's mass-market success. According to Grafman's figures, Archie is selling about 560,000 copies a month in Wal-Marts, Rite-Aids, Walgreens, Safeways and countless other ubiquitous chain stores.

Those are decent numbers by today's comic standards, even when split among 15 or 16 titles. I'm sure Marvel and DC would love to tack on an extra 35,000 copies to each of their top-sellers. This is similar to the sucsess of Simpsons and Phantom comics in Australia which by far outsell D/C comics in the non direct market (as for Marvel you can't even buy their comics outside a comic store witch is stupid when you consider how popular superheros are with kids around here). The big two need to look at how other comics are marketed if they want to thrive.

[Tom Daylight]

Originally posted by flutegirlrockz
This is similar to the sucsess of Simpsons and Phantom comics in Australia which by far outsell D/C comics in the non direct market (as for Marvel you can't even buy their comics outside a comic store witch is stupid when you consider how popular superheros are with kids around here). The big two need to look at how other comics are marketed if they want to thrive.

There's not a lot you can do if a store doesn't want to sell your product. A lot of the time you can't even give your products to them for free. The most effective way to deal with it would probably be to enquire about ordering it as a consumer.

[zeraze]

Originally posted by blankpoint
Basically, what's been proven is that numb-brained crap sells more than imaginitive, thought-provoking work. We see this on the Diamond 300 all the time - Austen's Uncanny at #5, and most of Vertigo around #140, but this just shows it follows through on a larger scale as well.



No, the success of Archie Comics proves that kids will read comics if they're interesting and appropriate in content. Vertigo comics wouldn't be the best way to introduce kids to comics because of the intense profanity, sex, and violence and highbrow concepts. Archie would be because their simple and inoffensive enough for parents to comfortably pass on to their little kids. When the kids become teens, THEN they can buy the Vertigo titles. I'd suggest Y- THe Last Man, a sharp, relevant, and satirical series, which is the second Vertigo comic worthy of my time and money. (The first was the much publicized Orbiter.)

American comics publishers, especially Marvel and DC, have to think long-term and be diverse in their offerings if they are going to stay in business.

zeraze

[dave berns]

didn't archie's influence on how the comics' code was written effectively put ec out of business in the 50's? this doesn't exactly make me wish for their success, even if this alledged bully tactic was just business.
archie comics are the safe kinda pablum parents will buy for their kids. i doubt there's many kids choosing to spend their allowances on archie books.
while i've never cared for archie's content, their reprint digest format is a wise publishing move. while archie's been trying to branch out and become the next disney w/ theme parks, movies and tv shows, disney's been trying to become the next archie (digest anyways) with their digest sized disney adventures magazine.
the problem with comics reprinting at this size is mainly a layout problem. were marvel or dc to publish one each of its flagship characters multiple titles as a younger readers comic with strict layout grids that could be chopped into digest format like archies can and are. they could put out a regular monthly digest anthology with heavy hitter characters that would sell just as well, if not better than archie and disney's magazines do. rack space is an issue in the supermarkets, pay attention next time you're grocery shopping and you'll see how oversaturated that market is, but inroads could be made in this market by the big 2 if they were to try. 10 years ago, supermarkets and drug stores usually had a comics rack ghetto-ized somewhere in the store, nowadays it's a rare occurance indeed.
it'd be an interesting experiment. marvel could publish a line of all-ages simplified spidey, xmen, hulk, daredevil and fantastic four comics, then one month later, chop them into digest anthologies for kids (2 bi-weeklies a month or weekly) and make some gravy money off of the same material. joey q, if you're interested, give me a buzz, i'll edit & package it for you!
back to the drawing board,
dave berns

www.daveberns.com (http://www.daveberns.com)

[blankpoint]

No, the success of Archie Comics proves that kids will read comics if they're interesting and appropriate in content. Vertigo comics wouldn't be the best way to introduce kids to comics because of the intense profanity, sex, and violence and highbrow concepts. Archie would be because their simple and inoffensive enough for parents to comfortably pass on to their little kids. When the kids become teens, THEN they can buy the Vertigo titles. I'd suggest Y- THe Last Man, a sharp, relevant, and satirical series, which is the second Vertigo comic worthy of my time and money. (The first was the much publicized Orbiter.)

You are either saying that you think kids are essentially stupid -- that Archie's publications are "interesting and appropriate in content" to them, or else you really think that Archie offers quality stories. Either way, I disagree. I wasn't suggesting that kids buy Vertigo, though I did pick up the first issue of Hellblazer when I was 9 and have read every issue since. I do think, however, that the average nine-year old can, knowing Batman's origin story and basic background (which most kids do, through the cartoon, or just through mass culture), pick up and read an issue of Legends of the Dark Knight and throroughly enjoy it. Those stories tend to be "typical" Batman stories - ones that tell about a particular, for the most part self-contained adventure against a specific foe.

The goal, in my mind, is not to simply get people to read comics, but to get them to read comics that are good enough that they won't realize suddenly, like some kid whose spent $100 on yu-gi-oh cards, that they're wasting their money and time on trash.

[wraith]

I have only 3 things to say in regards to this subject.

1. I said it before, and I'll say it again, Archie Comics should bring back a revamped version of their superhero line. They could sell this line of all ages superhero comics in supermarkets,newstands,and comic stores. They could and should hire creators who are both willing and capable of delivering/putting out superhero books for kids/all ages, as well as those creators who are not currently working in the comic industry (or who can'tget work atte big 2 for whatever reason). They could hire creators like Larry Hama, Busiek,Karl Kessel,Byrne,Cockrum, Ordway,Claremont,Priest,Waid,Tom Defalco,Ron Frenze,Dikto,Pat Oliffe, Patrick Zircher,Fabian Nieceiza, Scott Lobdel,Roger Stern,Jim Krueger ,MD Bright,Ron Lim,Roy Thomas,Doug Moench,and Jim Shooter. Also, with Archie Comics trying to break into other media's, they could/should try to get together with an aniation studio like Disney,Mike Young Productions,Film Ronan,or an anime studi like TMS (the people behind 80's cartoons like Galaxy Rangers and Bionic Six) and get their superhero characters on tv or in staight to video/DVD movies.

2. Marvel and DC, should take a cue from Archie, and start making all of their in continuity MU and DCU superhero titles both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages again.

3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does'nt the Archie digest sell about 15 vmillion copies a month alone in Wal-Mart.

[JohnnyONeal]

Good article, Mike. It's helpful to remember that the world of comics isn't confined to the CD/Marvel/Indie direct market that we all know and love. Things like Archie comics, newspaper strips and online strips all show that the medium of comics is still extremely popular.

Archie is doing a lot of things right. Archie comics have:

lots of pages in each issue
self-contained stories
all-ages content that makes mass market distribution possible
and an emphasis on familiar, iconic characters

While it would be tremendously risky and potentially alienating for Marvel and DC to abandon the 22-page pamphlet direct market format, I'd love to see them do more branching out. We've already seen that a new format--the trade paperback--can drive sales and reach new audiences. Why don't we see each company publishing a single monthly digest-sized comics magazine of all-ages stories featuring iconic characters? I know it takes resources to get something like this off a ground, but it seems like such a no-brainer!

[JackHoff]

Originally posted by punkmonkey
Yeah, but all the Archie comics are basically the exact same book. There are really no differences in writing tone and art style in the Archie books as there are with the Superman or Batman books. I know what you're saying, though.

No,actually all the books are pretty much different.You have the monthly books with new material featuring Archie,Veronica,Betty,Jughead,Sabrina etc. which might look the same but focus on different charcters.It's like the difference between Batman,Spider-Man,X-Men,Superman just without the Spandex.Then you have the 6 or 7 digests which are reprint material and then you have Sonic The Hedgehog and his various spin-off books.I carry and promote all of the Archie tiltles in my store and when a parant comes in looking for comics for kids these are what we suggest.Most of the time you get a "They still publish these" response so even with all those copies selling in the mass market a LOT of people still don't know these are even around.And to be honest I live in the Midwest in a large city and I don't see these that often in Walmart or other mass market stores.
<p>
And I would bet out of those copies that are sold in the mass market which is a returnable market a lot of those copies end up being returned.Is Archie figuring mass market returns into their sales figures?

[OM]

...Hell, I'm still convinced that Archie Publications needs to run a "U-Decide" contest, whereby the readers decide which one gets Archie once and for all - Betty, Veronica or Jughead. Then, after the issue where Archie loses his cherry, the entire Archiverse goes through a crisis, and everything starts over again.

[Mister Farrell]

Originally posted by jawaplumber
I dig Archie comics, but I'm still a bit disappointed in the publisher itself after the way they mistreated Dan DeCarlo.


Hear hear! Never forget Dan DeCarlo.

[blackandwhite]

Originally posted by Mister Farrell
Hear hear! Never forget Dan DeCarlo.

u can count on me to always remember Dan DeCarlo, Farrell. he really was the definite Archie artist.

[kdmelrose]

Originally posted by wraith
I have only 3 things to say in regards to this subject.

1. I said it before, and I'll say it again, Archie Comics should bring back a revamped version of their superhero line. They could sell this line of all ages superhero comics in supermarkets,newstands,and comic stores.

2. Marvel and DC, should take a cue from Archie, and start making all of their in continuity MU and DCU superhero titles both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages again.

Archie Comics' forays into super heroes were pretty weak. For the most part, their '60s characters were ripoffs/parodies of Marvel heroes. Even their pulpish characters from the late '30s-early '40s (under MLJ) were pretty lackluster. Archie briefly attempted to revive many of those characters in the '80s, but that flopped. And let's not talk about the horror/fantasy experiment in the '70s.

Archie's strong point is the bubblegum teen romance/hijinks stories of Archie, Sabrina, Josie and the Pussycats, etc. The company should stick with what it does best.

I'm not entirely convinced there's really such thing as an "all-ages comic"; what appeals to a 9-year-old seldom appeals to a 16-year-old, and what appeals to that 16-year-old rarely appeals to a 25-year-old. But that's beside the point, I guess.

I agree that Marvel, DC, Image, et al should take a cue from Archie when it comes to mass-market sales. But there's nothing that says all of those publishers' titles should be sold in Wal-Mart or Walgreens or 7-11. I certainly wouldn't expect to see the Marvel Knights or Vertigo imprints at my local Rite-Aid.

But there's little reason why the Superman books and some of the Batman titles, as well as "Ultimate Spider-Man" and a few other MU books, can't be on those shelves.

[Richard Werder]

Originally posted by wraith
2. Marvel and DC, should take a cue from Archie, and start making all of their in continuity MU and DCU superhero titles both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages again.

3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does'nt the Archie digest sell about 15 vmillion copies a month alone in Wal-Mart. [/B]

I think it's got more to do with the format and availability than anything else, otherwise DC's Cartoon Network comics would be selling as well as the Archie stuff.

Scooby Doo merchandise is HUGE. Everywhere I look, I see Scooby shirts, lunchboxes, toys...why not mass market Scooby comics in the Archie paperback format for $1.95 or so? Or superhero comics as well?

[cncoyle]

Originally posted by blankpoint
...They're not selling to 9-year old Mary-Lou from Kentucky and so they sell less - so what?
:mad:I'm going to ignore any insinuation made from that comment about Kentucky.:mad:
Anyway, there's nothing wrong with Archie Comics, DC Comics, Marvel Comics, Oni Press, etc., just like there's nothing wrong with Cherry Poptart Comics. Every comic company caters to a particular audience, on either a narrower or broader scale.
I think a lot of the posters here are off base by saying that Archie doesn't offer quality stories--they're just different in scope. Just because they refrain from profanity or constrained continuity doesn't make them any less entertaining.

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by blankpoint
Basically, what's been proven is that numb-brained crap sells more than imaginitive, thought-provoking work.

Amen, preacher.


Britney Spears sells more than Tori Amos

And that makes me cry. :(

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by JackHoff
then you have Sonic The Hedgehog and his various spin-off books

...what spin-off books? They've been cancelled for years.

[Charles RB]

Personally, I find Archie's popularity bloody weird, because as far as I can tell he's crap and I'm amazed kids read it without thinking "this sucks".

But then I grew up in Britain, where generations of kids grew up reading the Beano, which features juvenile anarchists.

[Alan Coil]

I must agree with cncoyle. Let's not have any more cracks about Kentucky. My pappy's kin was from Kentucky. :)

Why, cncoyle and I might even be cousins, as I had relatives that spelled the name as 'coyle'.

[wraith]

Originally posted by kdmelrose
Archie Comics' forays into super heroes were pretty weak. For the most part, their '60s characters were ripoffs/parodies of Marvel heroes. Even their pulpish characters from the late '30s-early '40s (under MLJ) were pretty lackluster. Archie briefly attempted to revive many of those characters in the '80s, but that flopped. And let's not talk about the horror/fantasy experiment in the '70s.

Archie's strong point is the bubblegum teen romance/hijinks stories of Archie, Sabrina, Josie and the Pussycats, etc. The company should stick with what it does best.

I'm not entirely convinced there's really such thing as an "all-ages comic"; what appeals to a 9-year-old seldom appeals to a 16-year-old, and what appeals to that 16-year-old rarely appeals to a 25-year-old. But that's beside the point, I guess.

I agree that Marvel, DC, Image, et al should take a cue from Archie when it comes to mass-market sales. But there's nothing that says all of those publishers' titles should be sold in Wal-Mart or Walgreens or 7-11. I certainly wouldn't expect to see the Marvel Knights or Vertigo imprints at my local Rite-Aid.

But there's little reason why the Superman books and some of the Batman titles, as well as "Ultimate Spider-Man" and a few other MU books, can't be on those shelves.

1. I'm quite aware of Archie Comics lackluster track record in publishing superhero comics. Which is why I sugested that Archie should hire some (or all) of those creators I listed in my post. Especialy, since they have experience (not to mention successful track record) in writing superhero comics. OMT, you can add PAD and Alan Davis to the list of creators I would like to see working on a revamped/revised line of the Archie superheroes.

2. While some of the Archie hero books of the 60's may have been parodies of 60's marvel books, they were not ripoffs of marvel books. In fact, (if you want to get technicle) it was the other way around. For example, spider-man was nothing more then marvel's version of Archie's Fly/Flyman and Cyclops (of te x-men) was noting more then a ripoff of the original Comet (the original Comet had the power to shoot uncontolable optic blasts from his eyes and had to wear red gogles to help control and contain his deadly powers).

3. Just because Archie does teen bublegum romance real well, does not mean that they should only stick/deal with that one drama. That's just as bad as saying that since marvel and DC do superhero books real well, that they should only publish superhero books.

4. Considering that the Batman and X-Men cartoons,the edited Dragonball Z cartoon,code approved DC comics, and most (if not all) of the pre-quemas interconected marvel universe comics (specificaly in the 60's,70's,80's,and early 90's) were read by 9 year olds,16 year olds ,26 olds,36 year olds,and 46 year olds I will say there is definitly such a thing as a comic that can appeal to all ages.

5. If you go back and re-read my post, you will see that I saidthat all interconected MU and DCU soperhero titles should be both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages. I did not say anything about me wanting Vertigo and Image books being made into all ages books so that they can be spld in Wal-Mart. I beleave that characters that were originaly created to entertain kids/all ages (the MU,DCU,and Archie characters) should always remain suitable and appealing to kids/all ages. The Image books and Vertigo line were NOT created for kids under the age of 13, those books were specificaly created to appeal to teens and adults.

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by wraith
For example, spider-man was nothing more then marvel's version of Archie's Fly/Flyman

Except for having a completely different character, supporting cast, style, costume etc...

5. If you go back and re-read my post, you will see that I saidthat all interconected MU and DCU soperhero titles should be both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages.

Except some of them work far better when they're not all-ages. Frank Miller and Bendis are considered the best writers on Daredevil by most people, and was their work suitable for kids/all ages? Bollocks it was.

[cncoyle]

Originally posted by Alan Coil
I must agree with cncoyle. Let's not have any more cracks about Kentucky. My pappy's kin was from Kentucky. :)

Why, cncoyle and I might even be cousins, as I had relatives that spelled the name as 'coyle'.
Hey, as long as they keep off the in-breeding or racist jokes, I'm cool with that. (Did you read the latest JLA? Kelly had a Klan rally in Kentucky. How fair is that?! :mad:)
The Coyle's I come from lived in the Boyle/Washington County area in the 1920's. (I don't know much more geneology beyond that.)

Another important note about Archie is its sincerity. Archie represents an idealized view of teenage life that doesn't harm a soul.
Actually, as a messed-up 12 year-old, I would obsess about death and dying to the point I couldn't sleep. To get my mind off of the subject, I'd keep a couple of Archie Double Digests by the bed and eventually fall asleep.
Is it prize-winning material? No, but it does its job of entertaining.

[kdmelrose]

Originally posted by wraith
2. While some of the Archie hero books of the 60's may have been parodies of 60's marvel books, they were not ripoffs of marvel books. In fact, (if you want to get technicle) it was the other way around. For example, spider-man was nothing more then marvel's version of Archie's Fly/Flyman and Cyclops (of te x-men) was noting more then a ripoff of the original Comet (the original Comet had the power to shoot uncontolable optic blasts from his eyes and had to wear red gogles to help control and contain his deadly powers).

While there is a connection between Spider-Man and the Fly, the former isn't really a rip-off of the latter. They both trace their origins to the Silver Spider, a character pitched to Archie in the mid-'50s by Simon & Kirby. Archie passed on Silver Spider, but Simon & Kirby tweaked the concept a few years later and game them the Fly.

I'll give you the Comet-Cyclops similarities, though. Stan Lee seldom met a character he couldn't recycle.

3. Just because Archie does teen bublegum romance real well, does not mean that they should only stick/deal with that one drama. That's just as bad as saying that since marvel and DC do superhero books real well, that they should only publish superhero books.

I'm not entirely convinced Marvel and DC do super-hero books all that well -- at least on a consistent basis. But my point is that Archie cornered the market on the bubblegum teen romance/hijinks genre a long time ago. So why, when the capes and tights genre is performing so poorly, should they dust off their mediocre line of super-heroes to compete with companies who have higher-profile super-hero characters?

4. Considering that the Batman and X-Men cartoons,the edited Dragonball Z cartoon,code approved DC comics, and most (if not all) of the pre-quemas interconected marvel universe comics (specificaly in the 60's,70's,80's,and early 90's) were read by 9 year olds,16 year olds ,26 olds,36 year olds,and 46 year olds I will say there is definitly such a thing as a comic that can appeal to all ages.

I find it odd that so many people preach about "all-ages" comics. Most every other entertainment medium has (usually) clearly defined categories for children, teens, adults, etc. Movies, books, magazines and even television -- they all target specific works to specific age groups.

Yet comics are expected to cast this wide "all-ages" net.

Certain titles should be aimed at 12-year-olds, and others targeted toward 16-year-olds, etc., just as most films, prose works and many TV shows are.

I'm not sure that Marvel and DC comics in the '60s, '70s and '80s were all ages. Until the '80s, the core comic readership was adolescent boys; there wasn't much of an "adult audience" for publishers to concern themselves with. Marvel aimed at a slightly older demographic -- but even then, it was the "barely shaving" crowd.

5. If you go back and re-read my post, you will see that I saidthat all interconected MU and DCU soperhero titles should be both suitable for and appealing to kids/all ages. I did not say anything about me wanting Vertigo and Image books being made into all ages books so that they can be spld in Wal-Mart. I beleave that characters that were originaly created to entertain kids/all ages (the MU,DCU,and Archie characters) should always remain suitable and appealing to kids/all ages. The Image books and Vertigo line were NOT created for kids under the age of 13, those books were specificaly created to appeal to teens and adults.

I didn't suggest you had said that. My point is there would be no need to try to sanitize the entire, say, MU or DCU core line. Write certain titles so they are appropriate for younger readers, and make those available for mass-market distribution.

DC has the cartoon-based titles ("Justice League," "Superman Adventures," etc.), but it could expand beyond those. Marvel has a couple of the Tsunami titles and maybe "Ultimate Spider-Man." It, too, could expand a "young readers line."

But they should write those titles for that audience, not neuter a majority of their books in some attempt to appeal to that nebulous (and, in my opinion, non-existent) "all-ages market."

[bear1971]

Dc offered digest sized reprints for many years, and they were a big part of me becoming a comic fan as a kid. I recieved my first exposure to LSH stories from the Jim Shooter era as I recovered in a hospital bed for a minor operation. These digests are great impulse purchases that DC or Marvel could easily capitilize on; even if they just ran reprints.

[doom]

Originally posted by JohnnyONeal
While it would be tremendously risky and potentially alienating for Marvel and DC to abandon the 22-page pamphlet direct market format, I'd love to see them do more branching out. We've already seen that a new format--the trade paperback--can drive sales and reach new audiences. Why don't we see each company publishing a single monthly digest-sized comics magazine of all-ages stories featuring iconic characters? I know it takes resources to get something like this off a ground, but it seems like such a no-brainer!

marvel had digest versions of gi joe in grocery stores in the mid - late 80s.

****aside****
go to a stucky's and pick up a pamphlet for a point of interest, then walk over to their magazine rack and pick up one of those. get in the way-back machine to when sesame street did those "one of these things is not like the other" segments and compare and contrast the two with a comic book......please.

alternately, go to a comic shop and look through the back issue bin at the issues of fantastic four and notice the labeling at the top of the issue. its a banner that actually labels the media format.

and, just so you know, a dvd isn't a record.

[JackHoff]

Originally posted by Charles RB
...what spin-off books? They've been cancelled for years.

They may have been over years ago but they (Archie) still do sell them.They re-solicate just about every Sonic Spin-Off at least 3 times a year in Previews and you can buy anyone of them in bulk quantities from Bulldog any day of the week.I am sure they took all those books Bulldog bought for back-stock into those sales figures too.They also package two old books together into a cardboard package and sell those too.Archie overprints their books so you can get reorders of Sonic all the way back into the "Teens" from Bulldog and that's over 100 issues old!

[wraith]

Originally posted by kdmelrose


While there is a connection between Spider-Man and the Fly, the former isn't really a rip-off of the latter. They both trace their origins to the Silver Spider, a character pitched to Archie in the mid-'50s by Simon & Kirby. Archie passed on Silver Spider, but Simon & Kirby tweaked the concept a few years later and game them the Fly.

I'll give you the Comet-Cyclops similarities, though. Stan Lee seldom met a character he couldn't recycle.



I'm not entirely convinced Marvel and DC do super-hero books all that well -- at least on a consistent basis. But my point is that Archie cornered the market on the bubblegum teen romance/hijinks genre a long time ago. So why, when the capes and tights genre is performing so poorly, should they dust off their mediocre line of super-heroes to compete with companies who have higher-profile super-hero characters?



I find it odd that so many people preach about "all-ages" comics. Most every other entertainment medium has (usually) clearly defined categories for children, teens, adults, etc. Movies, books, magazines and even television -- they all target specific works to specific age groups.

Yet comics are expected to cast this wide "all-ages" net.

Certain titles should be aimed at 12-year-olds, and others targeted toward 16-year-olds, etc., just as most films, prose works and many TV shows are.

I'm not sure that Marvel and DC comics in the '60s, '70s and '80s were all ages. Until the '80s, the core comic readership was adolescent boys; there wasn't much of an "adult audience" for publishers to concern themselves with. Marvel aimed at a slightly older demographic -- but even then, it was the "barely shaving" crowd.

[b]

I didn't suggest you had said that. My point is there would be no need to try to sanitize the entire, say, MU or DCU core line. Write certain titles so they are appropriate for younger readers, and make those available for mass-market distribution.

DC has the cartoon-based titles ("Justice League," "Superman Adventures," etc.), but it could expand beyond those. Marvel has a couple of the Tsunami titles and maybe "Ultimate Spider-Man." It, too, could expand a "young readers line."

But they should write those titles for that audience, not neuter a majority of their books in some attempt to appeal to that nebulous (and, in my opinion, non-existent) "all-ages market."

1. You are absolutely correct that the Fly and Spider-Man were influenced/inspired/based off of the Silver Spider character.

2. The reason why I think Archie Comics should bring back a REVAMPED line of their superhero characters, is to try and bring in new younger readers who may like superheroes but cannot find or get into (or are not allowed to read) most marvel and DC superhero books, due to their mature content. Reviving the Archie superheroes would/could also provide work for many out of work creators, who like to write superhero comics but for whatever reason, cannot get work from marvel or DC.

3. "All ages" entertainent such as comics,cartoons, movies,and books is material that is both suitable for and appealing to kids, as well as appealing to the little kid inside adults. I should also point out that just because something is "all ages" ,does not mean that the material has to be "dumbed down" for the audience.

4. We will just have to agree to disagree on your last point.

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by wraith

2. The reason why I think Archie Comics should bring back a REVAMPED line of their superhero characters

It would make more sense to create new characters. Their old heroes are... well, they're crap and never lasted very long. Let them die and create something new. (I wish more people would do that...)

3. "All ages" entertainent such as comics,cartoons, movies,and books is material that is both suitable for and appealing to kids, as well as appealing to the little kid inside adults.

And stuff like that is not really very common.

[dollman]

The last time Archie's Super-hero line was DC's Impact Line, and quite frankly, it sucked! Admittly, it was better than Rich Buckler's Red Circle line of the 80s, but I wonder if inherently, the characters are just not that interesting.

I know some people have a soft spot for the Fly, Shield, Comet, etc. But I personally find these characters derivative and un-inspiring. It's the same reaction that I have to the Thunder Agents, which also seems to be a sentimental favorite. But every incarnation of the Thunder Agents has left me bored to tears.

I suppose you can pass on the Archie properties to some hotshot writer like Gaimen, Millar, or Morrison and see what they can come up with.

[zeraze]

Originally posted by wraith

3. "All ages" entertainent such as comics,cartoons, movies,and books is material that is both suitable for and appealing to kids, as well as appealing to the little kid inside adults. I should also point out that just because something is "all ages" ,does not mean that the material has to be "dumbed down" for the audience.


That's very true. The most enjoyable and clever films I saw this year were kid-friendly fare like Finding Nemo, Pirates of the Caribbean, Holes, and Freaky Friday. Underneath the jokes and dynamic characters were some deep themes like racism, redemption, the trials of parenthood, coping with loss, and choosing your destiny.

If anything, it was the "adult films" like The Hulk and The Matrix 2 you had to look out for because these movies try so hard to be "sophisticated" and "edgy" that they come off as pretentious and even silly.

The same is true of comics. I think a lot of comic fans and creators have such an aversion to "alll ages" fare because they believe he general public dismisses comics as "kid's stuff." However, adults are not THAT turned off by "kiddie fare" considering that, for example, Harry Potter books have far more adult fans than Stephen King, Tom Clancy, Walter Mosley, Neil Gaiman, etc.

So, I wouldn't label Archie Comics as a threat to comics attracting a broad audience because they happen to be kid friendly. If anything, American comics should follow the example of manga, which have become surprisingly popular in the US by focusing on a variety of genres for a diversity of readers.

zeraze

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by zeraze

So, I wouldn't label Archie Comics as a threat to comics attracting a broad audience because they happen to be kid friendly.

I don't- I label them as being crap.

And yes, Pirates was great. Long live Depp.

[wraith]

Originally posted by Charles RB
It would make more sense to create new characters. Their old heroes are... well, they're crap and never lasted very long. Let them die and create something new. (I wish more people would do that...)



And stuff like that is not really very common.

1. Actualy, it would make even more sense to create new characters in addition to revamping the older character. Hell, if it could work for the x-men,the teen titans,and the old Gold Key/Valiant heroes, it can work for the Archie superheroes.

2. Watch cartoon network sometimes (particularly the toonami block) and you will see that there is a lot of all ages material that simultaneously appeals to kids,tweens,teens,and adults.

[wraith]

Originally posted by Charles RB
I don't- I label them as being crap.

And yes, Pirates was great. Long live Depp.

Well, when it comes to comics, what maybe crap today can turn into treasure tomorow. All it takes is someone coming up with a great idea for a character(s).

[Kamandi2]

In the newest Previews Archie solicits 13 books (comics and digests) for the month. 800,000 divided between the 13 titles is over 61,500 copies of each title. That easily beats almost all of the top 10 comics in the Diamond 300 list each month. Only the top 5 or so sell more than 60,000 copies.

Since Archie has a house style (the art looks the same in all of their books) and the stories are not continuity driven and they have no "big name" talent to pay. I'm sure their page rates are much lower than the rest of the industry. This makes them an extremely profitable publisher.

In essence, all their books would fall in the top 20 titles each month and cost them less to produce than their Marvel/DC counterparts. I bet every other publisher out there wishes they could do what Archie has done. Archie Comics realized the smart thing to do was to spend cash up front to help down the road. They pay stores for shelf space at the cash registers of supermarkets/chain stores and this has paid off in spades. Since DC is getting back in the digest business, let's hope they realize that's the route they need to take. A little loss up front will pay off big down the road. That's something Marvel really can't afford to do right now, but DC, with the backing of a corporate giant, can.

[rdcoyner]

Originally posted by Charles RB
Frank Miller and Bendis are considered the best writers on Daredevil by most people, and was their work suitable for kids/all ages? Bollocks it was.

Well, Miller's work on Daredevil was able to get Comics Code approval, so I don't know about that. Mature - which his work was - does not necessarily mean explicit.

[Banana_Oil]

Originally posted by Kamandi2

Archie Comics realized the smart thing to do was to spend cash up front to help down the road. They pay stores for shelf space at the cash registers of supermarkets/chain stores and this has paid off in spades. Since DC is getting back in the digest business, let's hope they realize that's the route they need to take. A little loss up front will pay off big down the road. That's something Marvel really can't afford to do right now, but DC, with the backing of a corporate giant, can.

Marvel put out 4 digests a few years back, but they were black & white and no effort put into marketing them. Still, it's the only way you can get a TPB of the Michelinie/Byrne Avengers era...

Marvel's efforts seem to have all flopped in this area, now that I think of it. Ultimate Magazine fizzled out, as did the X-Men and Avengers 80-page "Universe" reprints back in '99...

DC is getting back into digests? Since when? This is the first I've heard of it. I hope it's a return to the days of Blue Ribbon Digests and 100-page classic reprints. The facsimile annuals and Superman/Batman "Decades" collections have been fantastic. They'd make good impulse purchases if marketed Archie-style...

[S_Robins]

Originally posted by Banana_Oil
DC is getting back into digests? Since when? This is the first I've heard of it.

DC is putting out both Powerpuff Girls and Scooby Doo digest books reprinting material from the ongoing series.

Unfortunately for Powerpuff Girls...it's about 2-3 years too late. With Scooby Doo, there's just so much product out there already I'm not sure how well a comic book collection will perform. A parent in a book store will more than likely buy a $4.95 chapter book over a $7.95 comic collection.

Scott Robins
Book Club Product Manager
Scholastic Canada, Ltd.
srobins@scholastic.ca

[Charles RB]

Originally posted by wraith
Well, when it comes to comics, what maybe crap today can turn into treasure tomorow. All it takes is someone coming up with a great idea for a character(s).

However, when it comes to the Archie superheroes, that great idea would have to be a complete revamp.

[wraith]

Originally posted by Charles RB
However, when it comes to the Archie superheroes, that great idea would have to be a complete revamp.

I would have absolutely no problem what so ever, with the Archie heroes being completely revamped.

[mpg]

anything that gets kids reading, let alone reading comic books, is good by me.

[fantomex]

archie smarchie

[Shawn C.]

Not sure for those of you commenting how lackluster the MLJ titles were, but how many of you have actually read the original stuff from the 1940's? The Black Hood and Hangman were fantastic! You know MLJ had the first WWII cover in comics, the first death of a superhero, the first patriotic superhero, among other firsts?

Here's a site I highly recommend; and if you sign up you can read 4 complete original MLJ comics.

http://www.goldcomics.com

Love live Archie Co. !

[jca622961]

Originally posted by wraith
I have only 3 things to say in regards to this subject.

1. I said it before, and I'll say it again, Archie Comics should bring back a revamped version of their superhero line. They could sell this line of all ages superhero comics in supermarkets,newstands,and comic stores. They could and should hire creators who are both willing and capable of delivering/putting out superhero books for kids/all ages,


I agree with this 100%. Imagine if the Archie Super heroes, treated with respect, could reach those who's only exposure to comics is at the supermarket. I know that in the small town in which I grew up, (where there were once 5 stores that had comic racks but no comic store) there is nowhere to purchase comic books. But those Archie Digests are in the Supermarket.

Archie has the mass market clout to bring comics to the next generation of readers.

[tralfaz]

archie was killed by punisher right?

[darrik]

What ever happened to the Archie movie?