Marvel's Business

[iloveclones]

5) Fifth straight year of sales growth for comics industry
by John Jackson Miller

It may not be a big deal for newcomers to the hobby -- but the fact that there are newcomers is a very big deal to those who make a living in it. Especially those who lived through 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, or 2000 -- all years in which the comics business shrank!

Diamond’s sales of comic books, trade paperbacks, and magazines to North American retailers are on pace for a $350 million year, up from $328 million in 2004. The figures are pending final results from December; as of November, Diamond's final sales of comic books, trade paperbacks, and magazines for the last 11 months stood at $320.7 million, up 8% over the same period in 2004.

It might not be the double-digit gains we were on pace for earlier in the year, or like we saw in 2002 -- but it’s better to be in a class with 2004, which saw modest growth, than 2001 or 2003, in which the industry eked out the narrowest of gains. And they all beat anything we went through in the mid- and late-1990s, when there were minus signs attached to everything. Dollarwise, 2005 is likely to be the best year since 1996.

It is not entirely due to trade paperbacks, nor is it entirely due to increases in comics prices. Diamond's Top 300 comic books for each month are up 2% in units and 4% in dollars. But trade paperbacks are definitely a huge part of the story. While overall trade paperback sales are harder to calculate, trades are likely to wind up in the $100-120 million range in the direct market for the year -- meaning they're nearly a third of overall sales. For every two dollars or so comic books make in the direct market, trade paperbacks contribute one. That ratio, if correct, would reflect the highest share for trade paperbacks yet -- although again, not necessarily at the expense of the comics themselves. And this does not count sales into the mass market or newsstand, either for comics or for trades.

Should you still call it a recovery after six years? Many in the business would like to find out in 2006...

From the above link. For those curious, sales are up, so far, in 2006 by 12%. I would say the comics industry is happy right now.

 

[SpideyInATree]

Definitely a good thing for the industry. Hopefully some sparks have gone off for some new comic fans and they'll become life long fans.

 

[iloveclones]

Saw this on the main page anf thought I'd throw it on here.

Marvel Adds Iron Man and Hulk to Facility Source: Marvel Entertainment, Inc. October 4, 2006

Marvel Entertainment, Inc. announced today that it has completed the amendments required to enable the funding of its Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk feature film projects through its $525 million non-recourse debt facility. The films, which are being produced by the company's Marvel Studios subsidiary, were not included in the initial film financing facility but have now been added on the same terms.

Iron Man will be distributed by Paramount Pictures and is scheduled for release on May 2, 2008, and The Incredible Hulk will be distributed by Universal Studios and is planned for release in 2008. Borrowings under the film facility are non-recourse to Marvel Entertainment, Inc. and its affiliates.

 

[Ahura Mazda]

I am amazed that banks give non-recourse financing to movie studios unless they get first rate mortgages on the real estate o other equivalent collateral.

One thing to note however, with the current rates and based on a margin which I imagine to be close to 110 bps, they are paying 6/6.5% interest cost annually on the debt which has been drawn down. the cost of the facility itself may be in the order of 100 bps.

This is all based on conjecture as I have no plans of going through the notes of their annual reports to analyse this debt facility, which if anyone feels the inclination can do.

 

[iloveclones]

Maybe you could explain what bps and non-recourse financing is to those of us who have trouble balancing our checkbook.

Actually, Ahura, I would love for some of you of a more "business" type to comment on some of this stuff. DBM used to from time to time, but I haven't seen much of him lately (probably somewhere counting all his money, women, and cars. Bastard )

 

[Ahura Mazda]

Maybe you could explain what bps and non-recourse financing is to those of us who have trouble balancing our checkbook.

Actually, Ahura, I would love for some of you of a more "business" type to comment on some of this stuff. DBM used to from time to time, but I haven't seen much of him lately (probably somewhere counting all his money, women, and cars. Bastard )

bps = basis points

A basis point is the equivalent of a 100th of a percentage point. Therefore a 100 bps equates to 1% so if I say 100 bps over 6 month Libor I am staing 1%+ 6 month Libor.

Definition of Non recourse

A type of loan that is secured by collateral, which is usually property. If the borrower defaults, the issuer can seize the collateral, but cannot seek out the borrower for any further compensation, even if the collateral does not cover the full value of the defaulted amount. This is one instance where the borrower does not have personal liability for the loan.

Most funds that operate use non recource financing to finance the acquisition of property meaning the bank has claims over the property in case you default the loan but have no claims over your other operations.

In any case, that is the way, my fund operates.

And I will try and comment from time to time but my commentary is purely conjecture as educated commentary would require further research into marvel's 10k (annual financial report) and other filings as well as equity research documents.

 

[iloveclones]

bps = basis points

A basis point is the equivalent of a 100th of a percentage point. Therefore a 100 bps equates to 1% so if I say 100 bps over 6 month Libor I am staing 1%+ 6 month Libor.

Definition of Non recourse

A type of loan that is secured by collateral, which is usually property. If the borrower defaults, the issuer can seize the collateral, but cannot seek out the borrower for any further compensation, even if the collateral does not cover the full value of the defaulted amount. This is one instance where the borrower does not have personal liability for the loan.

Most funds that operate use non recource financing to finance the acquisition of property meaning the bank has claims over the property in case you default the loan but have no claims over your other operations.

In any case, that is the way, my fund operates.

And I will try and comment from time to time but my commentary is purely conjecture as educated commentary would require further research into marvel's 10k (annual financial report) and other filings as well as equity research documents.

You've just described every single comment ever made on the internet.

 

[Ahura Mazda]

You've just described every single comment ever made on the internet.

Yes I guess your statement is pretty accurate and mine was unneccessary