The Price of Price

[Tron Bonne]

I think it's fair that most of us were pretty happy with the $2.99 pricepoint that DC decided to stick with for their monthlies, and most of their minis, as well. Now, I'm not trying to go against that decision by any means, so don't misinterpret me here, but one thing that kind of got lost in the shuffle is the fact that to do this decision, two pages are going to be cut from the standard page count for more ads. It may not seem like much on the surface, but writer Jason Aaron wrote about in his ongoing CBR article 'Where The Hell Am I?' (which is a good article, by the way), and brings up a lot of decent points about this. I highlighted the specific parts in bold, but it's all a good article:

Price point.


Publishers are raising it and lowering it. Fans are freaking out. Creators are caught in the middle.


In the last couple months, both Marvel and DC have teased new initiatives to lower prices on their monthly comics. Marvel is lowering some of their series to $2.99. DC is making all of their series $2.99, but also lowering page counts from 22 to 20 pages. As I currently write books for both companies, these initiatives affect me in a big way.


Actually, Marvel's move affects me in an indirect sort of way. Everything I write for Marvel is currently priced at $3.99. It's been like that for probably a year or so now, and I imagine that's not likely to change. Now, of course I don't ask for my books to be $3.99. That's not my decision. But like most writers, I'm not about to admit to being overpaid and beg you to take some of this money back.



All I can do is give readers the best stories I can for their four bucks. Of course, that's what I've always try to do, regardless of the price point. It's not like I save my A game for the $3.99 books and just bring my B or C game for the lower priced titles.



So how do you make readers feel like they're justified in spending their four bucks for your book? For the new "Wolverine" series, I asked to have back-up stories added to the first arc, in part so I could explore some secondary characters, but also because I wanted to try and give readers more bang for their buck. Some fans, though, actually complained about there being back-ups, as if they were merely an excuse for Marvel to justify charging that extra buck. Basically it's the old "damned if you, damned if you don't" conundrum.


For the most part, readers paying four bucks for their monthly comics just want to know that the story they're reading "matters," that it's somehow relevant to the big picture of the Marvel U. And that's where I think we get into some tricky territory.


I understand that times are tough and readers have less money to spend on their weekly pull list, and if it comes down to choosing between a book that's seemingly vital to following the overall story of the Marvel Universe and one that's seemingly inconsequential, a lot of fans are gonna go with the book that "matters" more.


This puts me in a tough spot as a writer.


I prefer stories that are less continuity heavy and more new-reader friendly, as both a writer and a reader. But it's hard to do those kinds of stories right now. It's especially hard to do them when they're priced at $3.99. My recent "Wolverine Weapon X" series was meant to be a new-reader friendly series that was light on continuity, but it was priced at $3.99, like the other more "relevant" books. It ultimately didn't prove as successful as Marvel was hoping. So now I'm writing "Wolverine," which in some ways is simply a continuation of what I was doing in "Weapon X," only set on a bigger stage and featuring events that will have a much greater impact on the character overall. I'm still having fun, still getting to tell the stories I want to tell. I just feel like I need to be more conscious of playing with the big toys more and doing stories that are ultimately more "relevant."



It sucks to see good books fail in part because they're viewed as less relevant, because they're not as tuned in to what's going up at the top of the totem pole. It happens all the time. That's why I'm happy to see Marvel lowering some of their prices. Hopefully those lower tier books will have more of a shot. Those of us at Marvel and DC have really done all we can over the last few years to make readers want the big books, the events and crossovers and tie-ins and such. That stuff can be fun, I know. I've written some of it myself. It's a hard gravy train to get off of sales-wise. But it stops being fun when we lose good books because they don't seem important enough to the overall picture.


At the end of the day, the only thing that should really be relevant or important is whether or not you're reading a good story.


How much you're willing to pay for it, well, that's up to you.


So back to DC, and their recent announcement that all their monthly titles were dropping to $2.99. Sort of lost in that announcement was the fact that pages counts are also being cut. The original talk sort of downplayed that reduction, like losing those two pages wouldn't really matter. It was even suggested that with today's reliance on more decompressed storytelling that some writers could even benefit from taking pages out and moving their stories along.



A couple things bother me about this.

First of all, the fact that as a DC creator, I didn't hear about this change until the same time everyone else did. No matter how you slice it, this page reduction amounts to a pay cut for all DC creators. In my case, not a big one, since the bulk of my income is made at Marvel. But still, if you're basically asking your creators to take a pay cut in order to finance a reduction in cover price, you'd think you'd at least give those creators some sort of heads up.

Now you might argue, well, just because you're losing those two pages, that doesn't really have to amount to a pay cut. After all, you can just go right from one script into the next and continue working, making up the difference. True, but that's assuming that it takes less work to write a 20 page script than it does a 22 page script, which I'm not convinced is true. I can almost guarantee you it takes Warren Ellis and Matt Fraction a lot longer to write their 16 page issues of Fell and Casanova than it does any of their 22 page comics. It's sometimes hard enough to fit a story into 22 pages. Taking pages away does not make the job easier. Even just two pages. Instead it necessitates that you either take stuff out of your story or dramatically change the way you're telling that story.

Now, pay-cut or no pay-cut, if losing those two pages is the only way to keep my series "Scalped" from bumping up to $3.99 (which I had already been told was going to happen, across the board at Vertigo), then I'm all for it. I just would've appreciated a bit of notice from The Powers That Be. I also don't think the loss of those pages should be so quickly discounted from a storytelling stand-point.


We won't know exactly how that loss has changed DC comics until January, when those new 20 page books start hitting shelves. I've written two 20 page issues of "Scalped" so far, and I'm still not exactly sure how it's going to affect me.


When I heard about the DC announcement, I was set to begin a brand new five issue arc of "Scalped." So just like that, my arc had lost 10 pages. That's quite a chunk. That's multiple scenes. When it's all said and done, will I end up with basically the same sort of arc I would've had to begin with, only with less splash pages or extended moments? No, I don't think so. We're on issue #42 of "Scalped" right now. I don't want to change the way I write the book. I love all the quiet, emotional moments in the series. I don't want to lose those. I think I'll just have to shift things around and pace my issues and arcs a bit differently. And at times, maybe I'll simply have to cut a scene I would've otherwise kept.


Like I said, I've written two of these 20 pages issues so far, and I'm still struggling with it. The first one I wrote, issue #45, had a lot of problems and had to be re-written. The second one came out much easier, but looking over it now, it almost feels too brief to me. I don't know, I think it's gonna take me a while to get a handle on this. Maybe readers won't even notice, but somehow, I doubt that. Either way, I'm interested in seeing how the 20 page comic ultimately plays out.


We just need more people reading comics, I think we can all agree on that. Whether they're picking up monthly issues or waiting for the trade or downloading them on their iPads, I don't care. Let's just get their asses in the seats...


And then do our best to give 'em their money's worth.

 

[sandwraith]

I see the problem but I can't really get an idea for a solution. Can there be a compromise between the creative powers and sales? Is this what JMS meant when he said DiDio believed that the future of comics were in OGNs?

I'm not liking it but adaptability is part of working, even in the realm of comics. If a writer is able to get across a decent storyline in 20 pages as compared to the 22 pages he's used to, it speaks volumes of the writer's ability. Funny thing is recently, I've been picking up Knight-Errant published by Dark Horse and at $2.99, with impressive quality of print and presentation, they're still able to give a decent storyline with about 20-22 pages even with all the Star Wars ads in there.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I see the problem but I can't really get an idea for a solution. Can there be a compromise between the creative powers and sales? Is this what JMS meant when he said DiDio believed that the future of comics were in OGNs?

How are you making that connection

I'm not liking it but adaptability is part of working, even in the realm of comics. If a writer is able to get across a decent storyline in 20 pages as compared to the 22 pages he's used to, it speaks volumes of the writer's ability. Funny thing is recently, I've been picking up Knight-Errant published by Dark Horse and at $2.99, with impressive quality of print and presentation, they're still able to give a decent storyline with about 20-22 pages even with all the Star Wars ads in there.

Well, 22 pages is the standard, but it's not all about an issue of adaptability, but also of pay, and well, kind of decency in some ways. I mean, the writers weren't even told they would be cutting page standards until we were, causing writers, like Aaron, to have to rewrite some of his later scripts? Kind of a crappy move on DC's part. And, also, there's the issue of whether this is necessary or just another way to gouge the reader, just in different way.

Though, I tend to agree with Aaron, 2 pages may not seem like a lot, but when the standard is 22, that's an 1/11th of a book.

 

[Watchman]

I'm glad that Aaron brought up the Slimline books. Both were really great, smaller page count but felt like that had more content that the books twice their size. Although, not all writers are as strong as Ellis or Fraction.

I was against the price drop due to the creative limitations it created. The last thing monthlies need is more creative restrictions.

 

[sandwraith]

How are you making that connection

I'm sort of guessing that DiDio is pushing for more creative input through OGNs rather than monthlies.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

The only thing I find troublesome about this is that DC didn't bother to tell their writers about the change. Everything else is just the nature of the beast. Don't like it? Embrace Kirkman's pro-indie schtick and do your own thing with as few or as many pages per issue as you want.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I'm sort of guessing that DiDio is pushing for more creative input through OGNs rather than monthlies.

Okay, but I'm not sure how you're connecting this two. Are you saying that the move to cut pages is one to frustrate creators to do more OGN work?

 

[sandwraith]

Okay, but I'm not sure how you're connecting this two. Are you saying that the move to cut pages is one to frustrate creators to do more OGN work?

Pretty much.

 

[CrimsonMist]

The only thing I find troublesome about this is that DC didn't bother to tell their writers about the change. Everything else is just the nature of the beast. Don't like it? Embrace Kirkman's pro-indie schtick and do your own thing with as few or as many pages per issue as you want.

Agreed.

Here's another issue I find with this. As much as I like long stories, it almost seems like comics depend on them. Everything has to be 6 issue arcs. And it seems that today, most writers can't do short, single issue stories, with more pages or less.

Examples: All of the PunisherMAX one-shots that Marvel put out during the main title's delay. All were written by some established writers, Peter Milligan, Charlie Huston, Rob Williams, David Lapham, etc. All had 32 story pages. And only David Lapham was able to use the pages competently enough. He was the only guy to write a story with a solid beginning, solid middle and solid ending. The others would spend too much time at the beginning and rush the ending, or they were drag out the ending. Some of them were really brief reads, too. And I had to chuckle when going through my Tomb of Dracula comics, because the page count would fluctuate from anywhere between 17 and 23 pages. And the stories were still awesome.

Also, the new Creepy book by Dark Horse was disappointing because none of the writers could tell a well-balanced story in 8 to 10 pages. It was made worse when you'd read the story they'd reprint from an old issue of Creepy and see that the story, told anywhere from 6 to 8 pages, were miles above the new guys in terms of quality story telling.

The point is, these guys gotta start learning how to condense their stories into less pages, but still manage to tell damn good stories.

 

[CConn]

If you ask me, Aaron just seems to be coming off as whiny.

It's two pages.

I understand how it would suck to loose some of your story telling ability with those two pages, but they were lost for a reason. A good reason.

Accept it, adjust to it, and move on.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Pretty much.

Well, I guess that's a possibility, but I think it's probably more of a cost issue.

If you ask me, Aaron just seems to be coming off as whiny.

It's two pages.

I understand how it would suck to loose some of your story telling ability with those two pages, but they were lost for a reason. A good reason.

I disagree. I think he has a right to be upset. It's not even necessarily an issue of just the number of pages, but he wasn't even told, causing him to have rewrite scripts he'd already submitted. Not only is that entirely unprofessional, but it's a real ****** way to treat your employees, freelance or otherwise.

And, yeah, 'just' two pages, but again, small medium, every little bit counts. It's like shooting a 12 minute short and being told to shave 2 minutes off, or writing a 10 page story and told to cut out a page. It doesn't seem like much in just passing, but yeah, that can screw up a flow pretty easily when talking about such short pieces. I have no doubt he probably did have to rewrite some of his scripts, maybe even somewhat extensively.

Accept it, adjust to it, and move on.

Sounds like that's what he's doing to me, just talking about it. I don't see an issue.

Agreed.

Here's another issue I find with this. As much as I like long stories, it almost seems like comics depend on them. Everything has to be 6 issue arcs. And it seems that today, most writers can't do short, single issue stories, with more pages or less.

Examples: All of the PunisherMAX one-shots that Marvel put out during the main title's delay. All were written by some established writers, Peter Milligan, Charlie Huston, Rob Williams, David Lapham, etc. All had 32 story pages. And only David Lapham was able to use the pages competently enough. He was the only guy to write a story with a solid beginning, solid middle and solid ending. The others would spend too much time at the beginning and rush the ending, or they were drag out the ending. Some of them were really brief reads, too. And I had to chuckle when going through my Tomb of Dracula comics, because the page count would fluctuate from anywhere between 17 and 23 pages. And the stories were still awesome.

Also, the new Creepy book by Dark Horse was disappointing because none of the writers could tell a well-balanced story in 8 to 10 pages. It was made worse when you'd read the story they'd reprint from an old issue of Creepy and see that the story, told anywhere from 6 to 8 pages, were miles above the new guys in terms of quality story telling.

The point is, these guys gotta start learning how to condense their stories into less pages, but still manage to tell damn good stories.

Well, I agree with a lot of things you're saying here, decompression is definitely a big problem nowadays, but it's all kind of beside the point.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

But comics aren't really 20 pages or 22 pages or whatever, least of all Vertigo comics. They're a serialized medium, meaning each issue can flow right into the next. So while Aaron may have to adjust the pacing here and there to make each individual issue satisfying with 2 fewer pages apiece, he can still plan out the whole arc and get in everything he wants to get in. It just might not be organized exactly the same way as it would've been in 22-page issues, just as the 22-page version wouldn't have been organized exactly the same way as a 32-page version or a 64-page version if those were the norms. It's just a new paradigm, no better or worse, necessarily, than any other page count. 20 pages is still a pretty substantial amount of story per issue.

 

[sandwraith]

And I'm also thinking along the lines of how the cut in pages might allow for writers to limit using annoying cliches. I think Bendis could use a two-page cut for any comic he writes so that he'd be compelled to get his points across in dialogue without unnecessary repetition. Sadly, Marvel doesn't see the wisdom in this.

 

[Tron Bonne]

But comics aren't really 20 pages or 22 pages or whatever, least of all Vertigo comics.

Well, the script he turned in was 22 pages and have to rewrite for 20 pages, so that's what I was reference. Though I don't know what you mean by comics not being 22 pages. That's been the standard for the Marvel and DC single comics for ages now far as I'm aware. They do have occasions of more, but that's far from the rule. Even a lot of indies company use that standard for their books far as I know, IDW and Dark Horse, for example

They're a serialized medium, meaning each issue can flow right into the next. So while Aaron may have to adjust the pacing here and there to make each individual issue satisfying with 2 fewer pages apiece, he can still plan out the whole arc and get in everything he wants to get in. It just might not be organized exactly the same way as it would've been in 22-page issues, just as the 22-page version wouldn't have been organized exactly the same way as a 32-page version or a 64-page version if those were the norms. It's just a new paradigm, no better or worse, necessarily, than any other page count. 20 pages is still a pretty substantial amount of story per issue.

Well, I think Aaron was kind of getting out was it is somewhat a mindset. Get used to doing something one way for so long, it is difficult to adjust. Like he was referencing with Fell and Casanova, try to write a script for 22 pages, then write the same one for 16, or even 18. I'm sure writers will adjust, but I totally see his point there.

And remember, it isn't just a creator thing. They are taking two pages of story from us, the reader, as well.

 

[sandwraith]

I'm curious, but how are the artists taking this two-page cut? I'd imagine that its more of a mix bag for them.

 

[Tron Bonne]

I'm curious, but how are the artists taking this two-page cut? I'd imagine that its more of a mix bag for them.

I'm willing to bet Aaron's opinion is probably pretty shared, but I doubt many will pique up like him or anything, at least not while it's happening. I mean, it does mean mild light pay cuts and, apparently, rewrites to submitted scripts. I don't foresee any big stink about it, though. People wanted the price cut, and they'll be willing to sweep any negativity from it under the rug. And DC's sales, on a whole, did spike a good amount after the announcement.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

I mean 22 pages is just an arbitrary unit that the medium has standardized for each issue. So yeah, Aaron may be used to writing for 22 pages now, but I'm sure he could just as easily get used to writing for 20 pages after a bit of adjustment. Plus, those 22 pages are just for one issue and one-issue stories are very, very rare now, especially in Vertigo comics. Serialization is the norm, so even if each individual issue gets 2 pages cut out of it, Aaron could plan the arc out with that in mind and add an extra issue if he feels he's cutting too much material or whatever.

The Fell and Casanova examples are moot because he's obviously not going to be writing 22-page scripts and then editing them down anymore. Ellis and Fraction didn't plan out a full 22-page story and then arbitrarily decide, "Nah, I'm gonna make this 16 pages instead." It's not something that's going to be happening after the fact every month; it'll only be a shift in writers' minds from 22 to 20 pages for the adjustment period of maybe a few months, tops (unless they write scripts out like 6 months in advance, in which case I really feel for 'em). Like I said, I agree that DC f***ed up by not telling its writers that they'd be switching to this 20-page format until the last minute, but now that everyone is aware of it and it's the official new paradigm of DC's comics, writers can move forward with 20 pages in mind and adjust. It's not a horrible travesty or anything; it's 2 pages that they can shuffle the content around for without too much trouble.

As for the readers, well, I as a reader don't really notice page counts in the first place. If an issue is paced well and feels like a complete, satisfying story, I'm good regardless of whether it's 22 pages, 32 pages, 150 pages, or whatever. I've read plenty of oversized issues that feel like they fly by and plenty of normal-sized issues that seem to drag on and on forever. "22 pages" to me is just a number, not any indication of how much bang I'm getting for my buck in terms of story; that's entirely up to how effective the creators are in the space given, regardless of how much space that is (within reason, obviously--a 2-page comic is obviously going to feel markedly different from a 20-page one regardless of how good the creators are).

 

[Tron Bonne]

I mean 22 pages is just an arbitrary unit that the medium has standardized for each issue. So yeah, Aaron may be used to writing for 22 pages now, but I'm sure he could just as easily get used to writing for 20 pages after a bit of adjustment. Plus, those 22 pages are just for one issue and one-issue stories are very, very rare now, especially in Vertigo comics. Serialization is the norm, so even if each individual issue gets 2 pages cut out of it, Aaron could plan the arc out with that in mind and add an extra issue if he feels he's cutting too much material or whatever.

Well, sure, I have said I'm sure the adjustment will come, but like he points out, in a 6 issue arc that's 12 pages lost in whole. That's over half an issue all by itself. Pretty hefty number when you start adding up. I mean, sure, adding more issues and stuff, but then it's just adding to the already rather back decompression problem comics suffer.

The Fell and Casanova examples are moot because he's obviously not going to be writing 22-page scripts and then editing them down anymore. Ellis and Fraction didn't plan out a full 22-page story and then arbitrarily decide, "Nah, I'm gonna make this 16 pages instead."

I did mean as far as in the now in that example, sorry if that wasn't clear. But I don't think it's totally moot, because it's a good example of difficultly of adjustment. Those guys are used to 22 page standard comics and probably had to really re-think the pacing and scenes and stuff quite a bit. Of course, he was speculating, maybe it wasn't hard for them.

It's not something that's going to be happening after the fact every month; it'll only be a shift in writers' minds from 22 to 20 pages for the adjustment period of maybe a few months, tops (unless they write scripts out like 6 months in advance, in which case I really feel for 'em).

Yeah, I don't know about that. I think it's pretty standard to have about 2 or 3 in advance for scripts (for writer's who are usually on top of their respective series), but I guess it depends on the writer. I remember reading Bendis is sometimes a good year ahead on some of his series.

Like I said, I agree that DC f***ed up by not telling its writers that they'd be switching to this 20-page format until the last minute, but now that everyone is aware of it and it's the official new paradigm of DC's comics, writers can move forward with 20 pages in mind and adjust. It's not a horrible travesty or anything; it's 2 pages that they can shuffle the content around for without too much trouble.

As for the readers, well, I as a reader don't really notice page counts in the first place. If an issue is paced well and feels like a complete, satisfying story, I'm good regardless of whether it's 22 pages, 32 pages, 150 pages, or whatever. I've read plenty of oversized issues that feel like they fly by and plenty of normal-sized issues that seem to drag on and on forever. "22 pages" to me is just a number, not any indication of how much bang I'm getting for my buck in terms of story; that's entirely up to how effective the creators are in the space given, regardless of how much space that is (within reason, obviously--a 2-page comic is obviously going to feel markedly different from a 20-page one regardless of how good the creators are).

Okay, but surely you have to have a limit? Would you be okay paying $2.99 for a book with 12 pages of story, even if the story was good? I can't imagine not accounting at all for the amount of content you're actually paying for.

 

[CConn]

I disagree. I think he has a right to be upset. It's not even necessarily an issue of just the number of pages, but he wasn't even told, causing him to have rewrite scripts he'd already submitted. Not only is that entirely unprofessional, but it's a real ****** way to treat your employees, freelance or otherwise.

Oh, I don't disagree with that at all. Poor communication is one of the stupidest (and unfortunately, common) mistakes an employer can make. But to act like it's anything more than a foolish oversight on DC's part is overblowing it.

And, yeah, 'just' two pages, but again, small medium, every little bit counts. It's like shooting a 12 minute short and being told to shave 2 minutes off, or writing a 10 page story and told to cut out a page. It doesn't seem like much in just passing, but yeah, that can screw up a flow pretty easily when talking about such short pieces. I have no doubt he probably did have to rewrite some of his scripts, maybe even somewhat extensively.

Film director's have to cut large portions of their films off regularly. They rarely complain about it. (Yes, I know a lot do. But when you consider the large majority of films have vast amounts of footage left on the cutting room floor, the percentages are rather slim)

Hell, even in the comic industry. Aaron's lucky to be writing for Vertigo where he can pretty much plot his own course rather than being constantly ruled by editorial mandates and direction.

And I largely disagree that two pages can screw up the flow dramatically. I read a lot of comics. Most comics nowadays (Aaron's very much included) have a ton of useless filler and decompression in them. Not to be smug, but almost any comic on the stands today I could edit down pretty easily without greatly tarnishing the quality of the story. And I'm not trying to insult their stories (they're very good, don't get me wrong), but they can easily convey the same story, just in a slightly different form.

Now, if Aaron wrote like the comic arthors of the 60s or 70s. The Allen Moore type of storytelling where a ridiculous amount of information and story is jammed into every panel, that's generally jammed into every page, I could see Aaron's complaint being very valid. To cut two pages off of every issue of, say, Watchmen, would have been a tragic event. But cut back on the rather useless splash pages and "thematic" panels in most current comics, is not a big deal. In my opinion.

 

[TheCorpulent1]

Sure, there's a limit. Cut the comic by half and charge me the same price, I'll be pissed. But drop 2 pages to ensure that the $2.99 price tags don't go up a dollar? That's a pretty fair trade, I'd say. You're losing way less than a quarter of the content but you're saving a quarter of what the price would be. 2 pages just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me.

 

[CConn]

Sure, there's a limit. Cut the comic by half and charge me the same price, I'll be pissed. But drop 2 pages to ensure that the $2.99 price tags don't go up a dollar? That's a pretty fair trade, I'd say. You're losing way less than a quarter of the content but you're saving a quarter of what the price would be. 2 pages just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me.

And that's the real crux of the matter; losing two pages of content for dollar-cheaper comics is pretty much the best compromise you could come up with for readers, creators, and the ownership. To start any time of discussion to complain about it...just kind of seems ungrateful and petty to me.

Yeah, it would be great if we could be getting 2.99 22 page comics, and it would be great if I could make 50 bucks an hour, but some things just aren't feasible. Especially in our current economic state.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Oh, I don't disagree with that at all. Poor communication is one of the stupidest (and unfortunately, common) mistakes an employer can make. But to act like it's anything more than a foolish oversight on DC's part is overblowing it.

I guess it depends on your definition of 'foolish'. If foolish is unprofessional and being incredibly ****** to writers you have to rely on longer spans, then sure, but if you're definition of foolish is 'Oops, spilled the ink, hehe', no, I think it goes beyond that.

And, though you edited your post, I'll address this point; I know it happens, been in situations like it myself, but I'm not one who believes criticism should be voided simply because 'Well, they're a business, and live sucks'. I mean, that's cool if you want to see it that way, but I've never subscribed to that mentality personal, and don't have any problems being critical of people, businesses, when they cross a line. No loyalities to companies here.

Film director's have to cut large portions of their films off regularly. They rarely complain about it. (Yes, I know a lot do. But when you consider the large majority of films have vast amounts of footage left on the cutting room floor, the percentages are rather slim)

Large portions? I don't know about that.

And I largely disagree that two pages can screw up the flow dramatically. I read a lot of comics. Most comics nowadays (Aaron's very much included) have a ton of useless filler and decompression in them. Not to be smug, but almost any comic on the stands today I could edit down pretty easily without greatly tarnishing the quality of the story. And I'm not trying to insult their stories (they're very good, don't get me wrong), but they can easily convey the same story, just in a slightly different form.

Now, if Aaron wrote like the comic arthors of the 60s or 70s. The Allen Moore type of storytelling where a ridiculous amount of information and story is jammed into every panel, that's generally jammed into every page, I could see Aaron's complaint being very valid. To cut two pages off of every issue of, say, Watchmen, would have been a tragic event. But cut back on the rather useless splash pages and "thematic" panels in most current comics, is not a big deal. In my opinion.

Yeah, that is one way to try and approach it, but like Aaron kind of indirectly implies, do you think all of that kind of writing is going to stop because of this? Splash pages and all that stuff? Nah, that's just kind of the standard. If anything, it'll probably just lead to what Corp suggested people adding more issues to make up the difference and becoming even more decompressed.

Sure, there's a limit. Cut the comic by half and charge me the same price, I'll be pissed. But drop 2 pages to ensure that the $2.99 price tags don't go up a dollar? That's a pretty fair trade, I'd say. You're losing way less than a quarter of the content but you're saving a quarter of what the price would be. 2 pages just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me.

Well, okay, I can live with that, as long as you do have a standard for this type of stuff.

And that's the real crux of the matter; losing two pages of content for dollar-cheaper comics is pretty much the best compromise you could come up with for readers, creators, and the ownership. To start any time of discussion to complain about it...just kind of seems ungrateful and petty to me.

Yeah, it would be great if we could be getting 2.99 22 page comics, and it would be great if I could make 50 bucks an hour, but some things just aren't feasible. Especially in our current economic state.

I think it's fair that most of us were pretty happy with the $2.99 pricepoint that DC decided to stick with for their monthlies, and most of their minis, as well. Now, I'm not trying to go against that decision by any means, so don't misinterpret me here, but one thing that kind of got lost in the shuffle is the fact that to do this decision, two pages are going to be cut from the standard page count for more ads. It may not seem like much on the surface, but writer Jason Aaron wrote about in his ongoing CBR article 'Where The Hell Am I?' (which is a good article, by the way), and brings up a lot of decent points about this. I highlighted the specific parts in bold, but it's all a good article:

I was pretty blatant in saying I was for this in this post, and in the past of this decision. But, yes, I definitely thinking it's worth discussing that we're losing something while we're gaining something, and the way it effects us and creators. If that's a problem, you can just go ahead put me on your ignore list, no fear of being critical and wanting to get as much as I can from them, because let's face, they're trying to do the same to me. I have no loyalties to DC.

 

[CConn]

I guess it depends on your definition of 'foolish'. If foolish is unprofessional and being incredibly ****** to writers you have to rely on longer spans, then sure, but if you're definition of foolish is 'Oops, spilled the ink, hehe', no, I think it goes beyond that.

And, though you edited your post, I'll address this point; I know it happens, been in situations like it myself, but I'm not one who believes criticism should be voided simply because 'Well, they're a business, and live sucks'. I mean, that's cool if you want to see it that way, but I've never subscribed to that mentality personal, and don't have any problems being critical of people, businesses, when they cross a bad line.

Oh, I understand what you mean. And I'm not quite saying he should just swallow all the company ********, but I work in an industry where I've had to tell people who depend on their job for their life that they have to take a cut in hours or a cut in pay in order to stay employed. And there's nothing either them or myself can do about it. That really sucks. In that context, I just can't find myself getting too fired up over a couple of pages of artistic expression.

Large portions? I don't know about that.

Semantics. Simply put, entire scenes are left never to be seen. Losing two pages doesn't even mean you have to lose scenes in most cases. Just compress your storytelling more, or as Corp and you say, expand your arc.

Yeah, that is one way to try and approach it, but like Aaron kind of indirectly implies, do you think all of that kind of writing is going to stop because of this? Splash pages and all that stuff? Nah, that's just kind of the standard. If anything, it'll probably just lead to what Corp suggested people adding more issues to make up the difference and becoming even more decompressed.

Oh, I wasn't trying to elude to this making any change in how people write comics exactly. Just saying that the way in which they write now makes losing two pages much less precious than it would have been in the past.

I was pretty blatant in saying I was for this in this post, and in the past of this decision. But, yes, I definitely thinking it's worth discussing that we're losing something while we're gaining something, and the way it effects us and creators. If that's a problem, you can just go ahead put me on your ignore list, no fear of being critical and wanting to get as much as I can from them, because let's face, they're trying to do the same to me. I have no loyalties to DC.

I'm not suggesting that you should. I'm just saying this reeks of internet "something changed, so we need to talk about it for at least 4 pages" discussion. I don't think it really needs to be discussed. In a critical sense at least. And it's not about loyalty to DC, it's about me as a consumer getting a pretty good deal, and being pleased about it. It's not that big of a deal.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Oh, I understand what you mean. And I'm not quite saying he should just swallow all the company ********, but I work in an industry where I've had to tell people who depend on their job for their life that they have to take a cut in hours or a cut in pay in order to stay employed. And there's nothing either them or myself can do about it. That really sucks. In that context, I just can't find myself getting too fired up over a couple of pages of artistic expression.

Aren't the two kind of the same? There will be pay cuts, obviously little notice, and they're jobs are far from certain, sometimes even from month to month. I don't know, seems like both have fairly level relevancy.

Semantics. Simply put, entire scenes are left never to be seen. Losing two pages doesn't even mean you have to lose scenes in most cases. Just compress your storytelling more, or as Corp and you say, expand your arc.

Eh, I guess.

I'm not suggesting that you should. I'm just saying this reeks of internet "something changed, so we need to talk about it for at least 4 pages" discussion. I don't think it really needs to be discussed. In a critical sense at least. And it's not about loyalty to DC, it's about me as a consumer getting a pretty good deal, and being pleased about it. It's not that big of a deal.

Well, okay, but I don't see why not. We've talked about how Marvel's price gouging, how comics are already questionable priced due to raising way past inflation, a CEO at Marvel blatantly saying as much when he said the $3.99 hike was purely for upping profits even though they still had a hefty price margin, and we talked a lot when the announcement of this $2.99 dropped, so I don't understand why this is off the table? Unless you didn't think those things shouldn't have been talked about critically, either, but I don't know, I think the price points and the workings of them are very relevant and worth discussing.

I think I see where you're coming from, and I was happy when this drop happened. Here's my exact post of when it happened:

Okay, well, since I got that out the way, I do kind of feel what Keyser was saying; it's bittersweet in the sense that we are losing pages for this. Admittedly, only two pages, but still it's a lose. And we are losing co-features, which kind of sucks, since I've enjoyed almost every one I got to read.

But besides all that, this is fantastic. I've been shaking my head about the fairly rampant and, at times, out and out ridiculous price gouging in the last few years. This is a good move by DC. I can't help but wonder if this stems from the fact that the last two months on the diamond charts DC has been quite low market share wise (around 25% in contrast to the usual low 30% status quo). I don't know how much that will help them in that regard, but I'm happy about this.

One last celebratory pic:

But, yeah, I guess the best way to say it is I don't believe in cutting slack. I give them my money for things, and that's the slack cutting DC and Marvel get from me. I'm a consumer too, obviously, but my stance has always been about knowing that they don't give a **** about me and just want to take my cash, so I don't have any reserves about being critically about their practices and all that, especially when points are brought up by someone in the industry. That's how I look at things.

I mean, ultimately, isn't that why most of us post here, anyway? To discuss, to criticize, to praise something we're more into than generally speaking? Or is that really just me? I guess I could understand better if we had threads started about this all the time, but this isn't CBR, these kinds of threads are usually only spurred by events and articles, or stick with isolated conversations that come and go. Seems something worth discussing, but if you don't think so, and no one else does...then, yeah, I guess Corp can go ahead and close this in that case.

 

[CrimsonMist]

Well, the script he turned in was 22 pages and have to rewrite for 20 pages, so that's what I was reference. Though I don't know what you mean by comics not being 22 pages. That's been the standard for the Marvel and DC single comics for ages now far as I'm aware. They do have occasions of more, but that's far from the rule. Even a lot of indies company use that standard for their books far as I know, IDW and Dark Horse, for example
.

I'm not sure about all of their titles, but with the Hellboy stuff, it was, not too long ago, 24 story pages for 3 bucks. Now it's 24 story pages for $3.50. That includes one-shots and mini-series. I always liked that, too. I'm getting 2 extra pages, for either the same price as a regular comic, of 50 cents more than a regular comic. And come January, it'll still be that way.

Just checked some others: Eric Powell's "Buzzard" mini series was 24 pages as well, for $3.50, and the main story was 18 pages per issue(3 issues), with 6 pages being devoted to a Billy The Kid's Old Timey Oddities back-up.

Powell's "Billy The Kid's Old Timey Oddities And The Ghastly Fiend of London" is 4 dollars, but with the same page count as Buzzard: 18 pages for the main story(per issue, 4 of them) and 6 pages for the Goon back-up. I don't know why this one is four bucks, but even so. There's still an extra two-pages that could justify purchase that you wouldn't get from a Marvel comic.

Their Metalocalypse book is also 4 dollars, but the total page count is 40 pages, with 22 pages of story. But there was also some "intro" to the creators. Dark Horse stuff has a tendency to fluctuate by a page or so sometimes(Billy The Kid #3's main story is 19 pages instead of 18)

The Metalocalypse vs The Goon one-shot was $3.50 for a total of 32 pages, all story, no ads.