DC Relaunching Everything? - Part 3

[Watchman]

Quick cancellations and fill-ins?

Well there goes all my non-Morrison books.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Many of the new 52 books will have six issue story arcs, and Dan DiDio states that if sales are bad on a title, they won't wait very long to cancel it. He wants strong sales across the line.

Well, it's a lofty goal and all, but as the old saying goes, **** in one hand and wish in the other and see which hand fills up the fastest. There's not a chance that you're going to launch 52 ****ing titles (plus ones that will be coming a few months afterward) and get 'strong sells' across the board. Jesus himself would have to come down and perform that miracle. Sad to see they might be be Marvel-ing it up in that aspect. One thing I was liking about DC was their willingness to stick to a title a little longer and not axe something in 5-6 issues. But I guess with launching such a bulk at one time changes your mentality on that.

 

[Anubis]

They probably shouldn't do that.

 

[Hush]

Do what? **** in their hands? I agree. Thats just gross.

 

[Tron Bonne]

You never heard that expression before? I think I got it backwards actually looking at it now, but it still applies.

 

[Anubis]

Flash back of that dude in Bronson.

 

[X Knight]

so.........what if they relaunch a title and it doesn't sell...........are they going to cancel it...........and relaunch it again?

 

[sethypants]

glad that they're making aggressive measures to boost their sales, im kinda sick of DC always coming in 2nd after Marvel.
DC produces great stuff and has really iconic superheroes, but its probably their marketing and management that lead to their downfall

 

[Mystirious]

Really hope that the Batwoman ongoing sells really well. I want it to continue for a long time

Well, it's a lofty goal and all, but as the old saying goes, **** in one hand and wish in the other and see which hand fills up the fastest. There's not a chance that you're going to launch 52 ****ing titles (plus ones that will be coming a few months afterward) and get 'strong sells' across the board. Jesus himself would have to come down and perform that miracle. Sad to see they might be be Marvel-ing it up in that aspect. One thing I was liking about DC was their willingness to stick to a title a little longer and not axe something in 5-6 issues. But I guess with launching such a bulk at one time changes your mentality on that.

Agreed Tron Bonne

 

[SouLeSS]

I'm assuming they have these set levels for each book. I, Vampire, for example they're probably expecting to sell under 5000 copies of, where-as JLA they're gonna expect top 3 of the month easily.

I'm sure they won't just say "well none of these other books are selling at GL/Batman/JLA levels, so it's time to bring out the ole axe"

 

[Mystirious]

That would make more sense

 

[T-1000 2.0]

Well, it's a lofty goal and all, but as the old saying goes, **** in one hand and wish in the other and see which hand fills up the fastest. There's not a chance that you're going to launch 52 ****ing titles (plus ones that will be coming a few months afterward) and get 'strong sells' across the board. Jesus himself would have to come down and perform that miracle. Sad to see they might be be Marvel-ing it up in that aspect. One thing I was liking about DC was their willingness to stick to a title a little longer and not axe something in 5-6 issues. But I guess with launching such a bulk at one time changes your mentality on that.

I agree. Why would you release 52 new books at the same time and expect people to buy those on top of whatever else they buy? I feel like this is going to screw good titles over because you are really just forcing people to buy your top titles, because hey, if the s--- you like doesn't sell, it's game over.

I guess this is the end of having options and being able to choose what you read. Now through the idea of "only sales matter", we will be told what to read.

 

[JAK®]

I'm guessing that you got interested in comics though either an animated series or movie though. That's how it usually works, kids get interested in the characters through a different medium and then they get into comics. The sad thing is that kids don't read anymore. It isn't just about content, though that does factor into it. Maybe digital distribution will help with that.

But the point is, even if a kid gets interested through an animated series or movie, they will go to the comics and be turned off by the fact it is being written for an entirely different niche audience.

The DCAU is pretty much the perfect tone for these characters, not the stories where characters get raped and violently killed.

 

[T-1000 2.0]

But the point is, even if a kid gets interested through an animated series or movie, they will go to the comics and be turned off by the fact it is being written for an entirely different niche audience.

The DCAU is pretty much the perfect tone for these characters, not the stories where characters get raped and violently killed.

Yes, but you have to understand that kids don't have any money. It is not how it use to be where you could spare to give your kid $2.00 and he could get a few comics. Now you have to spare $2.99-$3.99 for one comic.

Not to mention the majority of readers are in the 18-34 demo, so as DC is a business they are going to appeal to their majority of readers.

Also I know Marvel has kids friendly publications and I am pretty sure DC does as well. So that really takes care of the younger readers.

 

[JAK®]

Yes, but you have to understand that kids don't have any money. It is not how it use to be where you could spare to give your kid $2.00 and he could get a few comics. Now you have to spare $2.99-$3.99 for one comic.

Comics are more expensive now because nobody is buying them.

Not to mention the majority of readers are in the 18-34 demo, so as DC is a business they are going to appeal to their majority of readers.

The majority of readers are in the 18-34 demo because there are no new readers coming in, because they aren't writing content that kids are willing to read.

Also I know Marvel has kids friendly publications and I am pretty sure DC does as well. So that really takes care of the younger readers.

Characters like Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman etc. should be all ages by default. Not every comic needs to be Watchmen.

 

[T-1000 2.0]

Comics are more expensive now because nobody is buying them.

Um, not really. The price of Coke a few years ago was $1.19 for a 20oz bottle, it is now $1.60. Is Coke not selling anymore? The price of everything has gone up and that is a fact. Comics are no exception.

The majority of readers are in the 18-34 demo because there are no new readers coming in, because they aren't writing content that kids are willing to read.

Also wrong, I can think of two friends on mine that are 22-23 that are new readers. I myself started reading in 2007. And while that example only applys to my life, I can promise you there are many new readers. If there were not any new readers, than comics would have died off in the 80's or 90's. Fact is the are drawing in new readers 18-34. So to say the are not getting any new readers is wrong.

Characters like Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman etc. should be all ages by default. Not every comic needs to be Watchmen.

Yes, but this is not what the majority of readers want. If it was, then it would be kid friendly. I mean look at the WWE, they went to a PG rating and fans wont shut up about how it sucks and it needs to back to TV-14. This is what the MAJORITY of people want. It doesn't matter if you or I like it, it just is what it is.

 

[JAK®]

Um, not really. The price of Coke a few years ago was $1.19 for a 20oz bottle, it is now $1.60. Is Coke not selling anymore? The price of everything has gone up and that is a fact. Comics are no exception.

It's a combination of inflation and the fact that comics sales are at an all time low. But, I'll concede your point and say that if kids really wanted comics that they would still find a way to buy them.

Also wrong, I can think of two friends on mine that are 22-23 that are new readers. I myself started reading in 2007. And while that example only applys to my life, I can promise you there are many new readers.

Your friends tend to have the same opinions and tastes as you, that's why they are your friends. But can you honestly say that what you and your friends have done is typical of your age group? To start buying comics?

Yes, but this is not what the majority of readers want.

The readers want good comics. If they need comics with mature content they shouldn't be reading Superman.

If it was, then it would be kid friendly. I mean look at the WWE, they went to a PG rating and fans wont shut up about how it sucks and it needs to back to TV-14.

Interesting, because when I was 10 everybody loved WWE (or WWF as it was known back then) Nobody I know is interested in it now, and not even when I was 14. You should also question why WWE went to a PG rating. Of course the older fans complained, that's what the older fans do.

This is what the MAJORITY of people want. It doesn't matter if you or I like it, it just is what it is.

The majority of people don't read comics.

 

[T-1000 2.0]

Your friends tend to have the same opinions and tastes as you, that's why they are your friends. But can you honestly say that what you and your friends have done is typical of your age group? To start buying comics?

Good point. I'll give you this, I work at a major bookstore and I don't ever see kids going to read the graphic novels. It is people ages 16-30, and they are not reading light hearted material, it is killing joke, watchmen, and everything else that is more adult focused.

Interesting, because when I was 10 everybody loved WWE (or WWF as it was known back then) Nobody I know is interested in it now, and not even when I was 14. You should also question why WWE went to a PG rating. Of course the older fans complained, that's what the older fans do.

WWE went PG because they thought it would bring in more money. And it has because they can get better advertisments to play during their programs then they could if they had their TV-14 stuff. Go look on the net, I would say the majority of people complaining about this are not adults or older fans. They are teenagers.

 

[JAK®]

Good point. I'll give you this, I work at a major bookstore and I don't ever see kids going to read the graphic novels. It is people ages 16-30, and they are not reading light hearted material, it is killing joke, watchmen, and everything else that is more adult focused.

Because there is little there for children to read. And even though mainstream titles like Superman are written for the 18-34 age group, only the diehard fans within that group are actually reading them. It's a strange thought that I have been interested in superheroes all my life but only two years ago I actually entered the target demographic.

WWE went PG because they thought it would bring in more money. And it has because they can get better advertisments to play during their programs then they could if they had their TV-14 stuff.

And a larger audience, I bet.

Go look on the net, I would say the majority of people complaining about this are not adults or older fans. They are teenagers.

Teenagers? You mean the group that are psychologically compelled to reject all things childish? Of course they would hate their interests being considered suitable for children. But I bet that they got interested in wrestling as kids.

 

[T-1000 2.0]

Because there is little there for children to read. And even though mainstream titles like Superman are written for the 18-34 age group, only the diehard fans within that group are actually reading them. It's a strange thought that I have been interested in superheroes all my life but only two years ago I actually entered the target demographic.

Because for today, comics really are not made for kids anymore. I mean that really is the truth. I know you feel DC/Marvel should make their titles for kids but then they wont sell. As I said, kids have no money.

And a larger audience, I bet.

I would say no. During the height of their "Attitude Era" WWE pulled in a 8.0 rating, unheard of in wrestling. Today, Raw is having problems pulling in a 3.0.

Teenagers? You mean the group that are psychologically compelled to reject all things childish? Of course they would hate their interests being considered suitable for children. But I bet that they got interested in wrestling as kids.

So what I can gather is you want all comics to be geared towards kids? Fact is the comics shifted when the readers did. The majority of people liked the Frank Miller style writing and that is why these darker stories keep being made. This is what the comic reader is reading. If you switched and made them more kid friendly I am almost positive that would do nothing to save the comic business. People just are not reading anymore, and that goes for not just comics but newspapers and books.

 

[JAK®]

Because for today, comics really are not made for kids anymore. I mean that really is the truth. I know you feel DC/Marvel should make their titles for kids but then they wont sell. As I said, kids have no money.

This is kind of a cyclical argument. In the heyday of comics sales, superhero comics were written for kids between 10 and 14. Other than the boom in the early '90s because comics were seen as a goldmine for collectors, comics have been at an all time low ever since they went 'dark' due to the critical success of TDKR and Watchmen. Even now that superhero movies are the biggest moneymakers in movies, the sales of comics haven't improved. Isn't that strange? The popularity is there, but the sales aren't.

I would say no. During the height of their "Attitude Era" WWE pulled in a 8.0 rating, unheard of in wrestling. Today, Raw is having problems pulling in a 3.0.

The Attitude Era wouldn't happen to be the same era with The Rock, Triple H and Stone Cold, where all the kids watched wrestling religiously?

So what I can gather is you want all comics to be geared towards kids?

Not all comics. Just the mainstream characters like Superman. There is a place for comics written for adults, I just don't see why Spider-Man and similar characters should be those comics.

Fact is the comics shifted when the readers did. The majority of people liked the Frank Miller style writing and that is why these darker stories keep being made.

Frank Miller wrote critically acclaimed comics, most notably TDKR, which was always intended to be an alternate interpretation of the character, which was possible because DC was going through a reboot at the time. The problem is, everybody tried to be Frank Miller and took the grim, gritty, adult approach to every single character. Ten years later and comics sales are at an all time low.

This is what the comic reader is reading. If you switched and made them more kid friendly I am almost positive that would do nothing to save the comic business. People just are not reading anymore, and that goes for not just comics but newspapers and books.

Are people not reading? Or is it just a switch from print to digital media? After all, we are communicating through words right now. Facebook is all about reading what your friends have said. Twitter is the same. Devices like the eReader are selling, and the iPad offers similar ways of getting the print experience digitally. The best part of DC's relaunch is the new focus on getting their comics online. However, the content is still the problem.

 

[JAK®]

In my opinion they could easily leave out the gore and rape without compromising the story. Sometimes it feels like they use gore for shock and because there is no PG rating to stop them. I dont know why there is everywhere else but not in comics.

I think it would help their sales a lot more that dressing up their female heroes in pants.

Yes, if you look at the DCAU you can see that you can still tell great stories with these characters despite the PG rating.

 

[T-1000 2.0]

In my opinion they could easily leave out the gore and rape without compromising the story. Sometimes it feels like they use gore for shock and because there is no PG rating to stop them. I dont know why there is everywhere else but not in comics.

I think it would help their sales a lot more that dressing up their female heroes in pants.

I don't think any of the current Batmans titles have any gore to them. Are they dark? Yes. Are they over the top, not by any means.

 

[Drz]

Not written by J.T Krull.

 

[Drz]

James Patrick wrote the issue, the solicitation on DC site hasn't been updated.