TheCorpulent1
SHAZAM!
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
- Messages
- 154,474
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
It'd be great if we could just go back to that numbering system. Thor could get a real #500 with some actual attention devoted to it.
Originally posted by TheCorpulent1
It'd be great if we could just go back to that numbering system. Thor could get a real #500 with some actual attention devoted to it.
Originally posted by WeeZiTe
It's funny, because I was planning on busting out a Wizard and figuring out what original numbering Hulk and Daredevil were on. Thanks, Themanofbat.
TheCorpulent1 said:Ah, Themanofbat. Your anal retentive attention to detail is an inspiration to us all.
Themanofbat said:Back in 1968, the "First issue = more sales" mentality probably wasn't as prevalent as it is today. They probably decided on keeping the old numbering for people who were buying the books at that time and were following issue numbers, just so they wouldn't get too confused....
I don't really know why....
dk said:It would probably still mean that if comics were distributed anywhere outside of comic book shops these days.
Thats two big humps to get over. Retailer confidence is why books like She-Hulk or Runaways tend to launch so low on the March 05 order form there are seventy comic books (and seventeen new TP releases) coming from Marvel. It is really hard for an individual book to stand out of the pack in that kind of swell of product (especially when you think about the eighty-three comics and twenty-six books coming from DC in that same month!) It is made harder when 11 of those 70 comics are issue #1.
(Parenthetically, 33 out of 70 comics offered by Marvel for March are issue #4 or below 47% -- and it is generally understood that it takes 6-8 issues to establish actual sales on a title. DCs percentage for the same period is 17 out of 83 comics being below issue #4, or 20%)
iloveclones said:Looking at your list sort of reminded me of all the great characters they came up with in such a short amount of time: Spidey, FF, Avengers, Doc Strange, DD, Hulk. Themanofbat, what would be the shortest time frame that you could give that would include a majority of new (Cap and Namor don't count) characters(let's leave it at good guys)?
dk said:Marvel should do away with #2 issues, and simply release a new #1 every single month for every title they publish.
Tokyo Vigilante #1 said:*shrugs*
I wouldn't have a real problem with that. As long as the insides were good, I wouldn't really give a damn.
dk said:OK, let me ask you this, then. In the eyes of a collector, what makes #1 vol. 14 more or less significant than #1 vol. 31? If a person likes and follows a certain character, would it be easy or difficult for them to keep track of every #1 released and collect them all? Would it even be necessary to buy back issues, since you're getting in on the "ground floor" every month anyway?
What the constant stop and starts are actually doing is eliminating the collector mentality. There's no loyalty to buying a series and sticking with it through thick and thin anymore. Sales reflect this, as there's a small to non-existent core readership now - people you can count on to pick up a book every month. Title by title, it can change dramatically in an instant. A creative team leaves - sales drop by 30%. "Time for a new #1. We'll get the next group of people willing to jump on the merry-go-round." What about hanging on to the LAST group for more than a year or so?
Used to be, if you were a Captain America fan, you bought Captain America every single month, rain-or-shine, for as long as you read comics. If you dropped it for some reason, you knew you could come back in a year and it'd still be there - at least it wouldn't be on an earlier issue number than when you left. You picked up every back issue you could get your hands on, because you wanted to complete your collection. Do people even do this anymore? I doubt most readers hang on a title for more than a few years average. They jump to another book, or give up reading comics altogether.
Your local comic shop used to stock back issues - not just a few, but thousands and thousands, right there, in the store! They HAD to, because a large part of their sales every month came from back issues. Now, there's vintage dealers, who specialize in 1970's and older comic books, people unloading their recent collections on eBay, and your local comic shop, who - if they're anything like mine - has a total inventory of whatever's sitting on the shelf from the past month or so.
Am I the only one who sees how the current lack of long-term fans dedicated to the hobby is tied to the constant stop-and-starts? And why it's been damaging to the entire industry? Besides distribution, it's the main reason comic book readership has dwindled to what it has - as important, if not more so than pricing, IMO. Most people enter the hobby, stick with it for a few years, give it up, and don't come back. It's too challenging for the casual comic book fan.
KAD said:Sounds like a job for.........
Uhmmm someone, anyone HELP
dk said:You picked up every back issue you could get your hands on, because you wanted to complete your collection. Do people even do this anymore? I doubt most readers hang on a title for more than a few years average.
dk said:OK, let me ask you this, then. In the eyes of a collector, what makes #1 vol. 14 more or less significant than #1 vol. 31? If a person likes and follows a certain character, would it be easy or difficult for them to keep track of every #1 released and collect them all? Would it even be necessary to buy back issues, since you're getting in on the "ground floor" every month anyway?
Themanofbat said:While there are not that many comics I need to hunt down, I have a few. Especially if I start a new series that may be so-many issues from number One, I'll pick up from the start. When I signed on to Spider-Girl, it was around issue #67, and digging up the first 66 issues was kind of fun (in an 80's reminiscent (sic) sort of way). I did get the first 55 issues of e-bay, but it was fun searching for the next 11 issues. (and rather difficult, because most shops didn't have an extra copy of a low-selling title that high in its run).
And for the record, when I start collecting a title, I do so til it's over or I decide it's really not worth it anymore. And it takes me about 3 consecutive years of bad books to decide to drop a title, becausde when I do, I'll probably never go back to it.