Marvel’s Senior Vice President of Publishing Tom Brevoort just posted this on his Formspring account talking about the Spider-Marriage. What do you think? Sound off on the comment section.
Question: Characters along with the rest of humanity, and most species, for that matter evolve. Why can’t Superman be married? Or Spider Man for that matter? Is it possible that books lose readers because the content doesn’t jive with the real world?
Brevort: The characters on most ongoing television series evolve very little, even over years. The same thing goes for characters in, say, comic strips. So I think that in certain ways, characters can evolve, but in others, it’s a bad idea to develop characters away from the very things that made them popular in the first place. To use a very old example, Fonzie the motorcycle-riding rebel was cool, Fonzie the High School teacher was lame. (And Fonzie the eventual married suburbanite with a motorcycle in his garage that he never touched because he was too busy earning a living to support his wife and two children would have been horrifying.) The appeal of Superman or Spider-Man has very little to do with them being married–and in fact, I think being married diminishes both of them on a conceptual level.
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Amazon Music
iHeartRadio
Podbean
Amazon Alexa
Player.fm
Listen Notes
Stitcher
To actually address the topic of this thread, I believe Brevoort underestimates the power the marriage had on normal everyday people. As a guy who was a groomsmen at a friend’s wedding who had a live size print of the marriage cover made so you could put your head in the place of Spidey and MJ to get a picture taken, it would appear a whole lot of people liked the marriage and it managed to user the comic for 20 something years. I’ll never blame the marriage on any issues people had with Spider-man when the real blame should be directed to poor writing. If you’re saying it’s totally impossible for a comic book writer to tell stories of a married superhero then that’d be one thing, but somehow I doubt the task is on the level of the impossible.
I want a job at Marvel so I too can insult the buying public of my products. Feh, you stupid ignorant “fans”.
Sweet attempt, but I’m clearly far more joyous and delightful than you. I did the math.
I can understand why you’d want to get away from some of the silly, smug and needlessly hostile stuff you wrote above though. It happens.
SW
Steve, (if it is really you…) I certainly did not put you on a pedestal. I was simply using an analogy that from your vantage point I am probably just another annoying fan…when in fact the stadium is full of fans cheering, booing or talking to their friends on their cell phone. Using the same analogy, I am actually the fan having a beer just trying to enjoy the game and hope my team wins. Sorry you don’t see it that way.
Lastly, I think you missed the entire joke I was making in my last post. You did claim in your previous post “Not knowing what you do, I believe you’ve risen to far at your job and aren’t very good at it.” I saw that as a swipe at my level of competency, complete with the irony of the incorrect grammar coming from an editor. Juxtaposed with the Dilbert Principal, I thought I would have a bit of fun… complete with an emoticon.
Thought you were the whimsical one…Guess I missed your mood on this one.
Sorry you had a bad day today. Maybe it will get better tomorrow.
It’s safe to say we are VERY different people. You’re frustrated about some pedastal you put me on. I certainly didn’t compare myself to LA Russa or anything of the sort. I just happen to have a better vantage point than you about my job.
I’m quite confident that even if the book were ranked #1 every month, it wouldn’t be enough for people here. After all…you have CHARTS proving Spidey is failing even when it’s one of the top ranked books in the industry!!! Plus you all coincidentally go to stores that no longer order ANY Spider-Man comics!! Crazy world!
As to your ongoing concern about the way spend my personal time, I don’t spend as much time here as you suggest. Certainly not a “tremendous amount”. That’s just an assumption people here make when they want me to stop posting (and while I can certainly understand why you would want me to go away).
It’s always amazing here how so many of the more hostile or belligerent members start griping “loudly” for me to leave almost as a knee jerk response and then wonder why some posters might deem the place overly-negative. I’m surprised the blog owner doesn’t squash that kind of stuff since it’s so against freedom of expression (but I don’t run a blog, so who knows).
Anyway Marvel seems to be happy with me….though as we know we’re all horrible at our jobs here.
Probably a good thing I don’t work for you if you planned on policing my time so completely. And don’t worry, the books have never been as error proof as you seem to think and in the end my job isn’t to be proofreading 24 hours a day. I certainly have no problem with fans pointing out errors. I point them out myself in the book on a regular basis. (If only people here were as brave!)
Finally, I don’t believe I called you “incompetent”as you seem to suggest. Though you are very good at pretending to be a victim, you simply don’t know much about my business. No harm in that, but it’s just odd to me when people fashion themselves experts about stuff they know nothing about. (Tell me again about how people here you know nothing about rose because of the “Peter Principle.”)
SW
CBP, my LCS owner is a HUGE booster of all things comics. Not only is he a fan, but unlike me his very livelihood depends on it. Despite this, he will also give you the straight dope if asked. When I stayed on to ASM when OMD hit, he was not surprised I kept the title going. He mentioned many of his older readers were only buying to keep strings intact and had stopped reading the book entirely. This is about the time he broke down the 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 thing I mentioned. When I asked other LCS owners I frequent and know, they echoed the same sentiment.
The other thing they all agreed upon is: When a major change like this occurs, they will lose a percentage of long-time fans and never get them back. It happened during the Clone Saga, so it was not surprising to them it happened again during OMD. The other thing they all agree on is, with the publishing business declining, they cannot really afford any more major shocks to a main character…
@89…Since when are “sales” down across the board??? I thought we weren’t supposed to read anything into those misleading sales numbers… 🙂
Steve, please re-read my post. No where did I state the sales decline was an ASM only phenomena. I was only speaking to the state of mind to how fans feel about ASM and providing the basis on that perspective. From your vantage point, I am completely offbase. In your position, if ASM is making money and you get to read fans praising the work, then hey, us old fogeys “don’t get it” that Spider-Man is just as “healthy” as he ever was. However, with all Peter’s bedhopping, might want to have him see a doctor…just to be safe.
Also we agree that we both want a good product that fans enjoy. I remember Walt’s Thor run. Quite enjoyed it at the time, but I recall many a fan that despised that run and still do. To paraphrase Lincoln…You can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not please all of the people all of the time.
Too bad you think I am “corporate” and “cold”. Far from me to tell you what to do and get you to listen. If Marvel is OK with you spending a tremendous amount of time online bantering away with fans, go for it. But don’t kvetch when fans point out continuity flaws or other editing errors because the staff “is super busy”. From your vantage point, you are somehow Tony LaRussa and I am just another unruly fan in the stands booing you. However, we both want the same thing. Spider-Man (and the Cardinals…) should be #1. Not in the top 20…but at the top. Anything less than that is unacceptable and from my vantage point spending more time online is clearly not getting the job done.
NOTE: Did you really write, “…I believe you’ve risen to far at your job….”? Wouldn’t that be “too far” instead of “to far”? But what do I know? I am only an incompetent customer… 😛
Spider-Dad:
I found your comments interesting. One of my friends owns a comic shop around the corner from my house. He’s had his store since 1996. We’ve talked about the state of Spider-Man Spider-Man sales since the start of OMD. He’s told me:
1) His orders are down 35-40% sinced 2008 (which is a loss of approximately 1/3 of his readers)
2) Many who still buy the book aren’t excited about it but they want a complete run of AMZ and have too much invested in their collections to ever drop it.
3) About 25-30% have never voiced any displeasure so he’s assuming their content with the status quo
His store seems to mimic your local shop. Many of his “retail peers” have reported a similar pattern. He also said that his sales for non-Spidey Marvel books began to decline in the 6-12 months immediately following OMD. Some of this was undoubetdly due to the economy. But several people actually told him that they felt Spidey was so mischaracterized in OMD that they dropped their Spider-books and eventually lost intererest in the MU as a whole.
SDad–Sales are down across the board from the post-Civil War era for myriad reasons. Only the truly blind try to suggest this is just a Spidey phenomenon. Spidey is quite healthy. Sorry.
The idea that you just want good stories and Marvel–I suppose– doesn’t is just a bizzare projection. Why are youquoting “haters” and “difficult”? Fact of the matter is every great comic run has had loud fans who hate it. I’ve been reading for a long time and I can rememebr people who hated Walt’s Thor run for goodness sake. What you apparently think is special and new is as old as comics.
Sorry you don’t like how I spend my time, but back and forth with fans is ingrained in Marvel DNA and is one of the reasons people feel so dedicated to the company. I know you’d like it to be more corporate and cold, but luckily for me, I don’t have to clear my life though you! Phew! As always though, I can certainly understand why people who say misleading things here wouldn’t want me to answer them. Seems to be prevalent.
And finally, Not knowing what you do, I believe you’ve risen to far at your job and aren’t very good at it.
SW
@77…Steve, methinks you protest to much and do not really know who I converse with on a regular basis. For one, I rarely talk comics, except at LCS’ and here. I find my LCS and here to be pretty much very similar. I repeatedly say on the boards that there is a split in the fanbase and from my vantage point is about like this: Using late 2007 as the benchmark, 1/3 already left the title when OMD hit and those fans are not coming back, 1/3 of the fans hate\dislike the general direction and continue to buy the book out of loyalty to their collection and another 1/3 really love the title. This is also a similar breakdown I get from the (3) LCS owners I know well. So, that means from my perspective of the fans buying right now, 1/2 the fans like it, the other 1/2 don’t. Based upon this flimsy “evidence” I hardly believe it is an overestimation of anger by fans. Marvel on the other hand continues to try and paint the argument that the “haters” are fringe folks, but then talks about how “difficult” the fans can be regardless of the title or situation.
Look, most comic book fans can be bizarre and I don’t envy on trying to create a product to a market demographic that can easily contradict themselves. My beef is, I would rather see Marvel put out a better quality product, with a better tightness in storytelling and continuity than having you (and other Marvel folks) spend tons of time on boards responding to this stuff. Reading the posts, I can see how it might help provide insight for WHY fans may like or hate something. It is the constant back and forth with fans, (including responding to me on this comment thread) that I see as a waste of time and counterproductive.
As for the “Peter Principal”…nope I was quoting the “Dilbert Principal”…an entirely different concept. Might want to read it. It is a great book. Luckily for me, my job is not in entertainment…and believe me I get my fair share of criticism at my job, (everybody does) warranted or not.
Cheers…good thing Yadi delivered tonight. Now there is something you and I can agree…
@ChaosInc – I think it’s fairly obvious that I didn’t.
@ Two-Bit: You did read SW’s comment directly below that right? The one where he says he meant “UNfortunately”.
“Spider-Girl was a sales failure fortunately”
Fortunately? You sir know how to prick at the heart.
“If ASM is a failure are all the books under it on the charts failing as well?”
Uh, yeah. That’s how that works. You said it yourself. It IS a weak market.
-_-
… so what was the prior post count record again, Gerard?
Gah…I meant UNfortunately
Nonsense. Spider-Girl was a sales failure fortunately and I have no trouble admitting it We always have books that don’t end up working.
Unlike some of you I have no trouble admitting true things. Calling ASM a failure is just wishful thinking. It’s one of the best selling books in the market.
If ASM is a failure are all the books under it on the charts failing as well?
SW
Guys, stop taking Wacker’s bait. Do you honestly think he’ll ever acknowledge Marvel’s sales failures? He only shoots himself in the foot by doing that.
@79 Stephen Wacker–Steve, if you’re referring to what Kurt Busiek said about Statement of Ownerships (who certainly is much more knowledgeable about these things than I am), I agree that he did a very good job summarizing not just the history of them but why, even though “they’re the best data we have” it “doesn’t make them good data” and “insisting that it’s absolutely accurate because it’s the law, isn’t really supportable,” although he does also say that due to the advent of computers, the SOO are likely more dependable than what they were in the past. http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=12247832&postcount=2562 , http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=12248065&postcount=2565 , http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=12248952&postcount=2569
Others like John Byrne, on the other hand, (who is also much more knowledgeable about these things than I am) says that, although they would have the occasional typing glitch and or a number would be off, they still “can be taken as fairly representative of actual sales.” After all, if I understand this correctly, not everything that gets printed by the publishing company is actually sold; in fact not everything that gets printed by the publishing company actually makes it to the Direct Market or the Newsstands.
And yes, Steve, I am aware that Amazing Spider-Man has been consistently selling in the top 20 in the rankings all through Brand New Day and Big Time (and had been consistently selling in the top 20 before that even when its sales estimates were actually LOWER than what they are reported to be now). However, there’s a lot of expert opinion (and I never claimed to count myself among these experts or be an expert by the way) are saying that, when it comes to monthly periodicals and graphic novels overall, it’s a declining market. So it’s doing “well” in an era in which print media overall, including monthly comics, are suffering.
Nerd, this Statement of Ownership malarkey has been explained to you on a couple different occasions by people other than me. Why are you doing that obnoxious thing you do where you pretend it hasn’t?
Regardless of your willing obstinance and wishful thinking, the book is doing quite well by any metric (unless you want to make the ludicrous claim that the all 285-290 books below it on your coveted top 300 chart are also all failing miserably).
Yes, comics sold more in 19-whatever, but that’s a meaningless statistic message board people try to make important because they really have very little info to work with. Just because Gone With The Wind (or pick your movie movie)sold more tickets in 1939 doesn’t mean Toy Story was a failure.
There may be a reason why no one pays you for this “expertise” you claim to have.
SW
@73–Stephen Wacker–The issue was that the data based on the index numbers from Diamond Distributors are not reliable because it focuses solely on the Direct Market and not newsstand sales, book stores, or overseas markets, and that the figures are merely estimates. Hence why there’s also the Statement of Ownerships to look at, although they look at the annual performance of comic. And the reason why it’s considered a more reliable indicator in comparison to Diamond is because–although, yes, they are averages that include newsstand and subscription sales, still subject to error, and don’t include figures from trades (which, from what I understand, is a separate market than periodicals) or digital (which is a totally new market)–is because it’s your data on how that particular comic book series is performing for that year being published in your every own comic books. So if we can’t rely on data that’s being printed in your very own comic books every year, what are we supposed to rely on?
Sorry, “Dad”, but you over estimate the amount of anger out there. You just only talk to people who agree with you and most of them are congregated here. HArdly enough to build a business plan around.
And shouldn’t you actually know someone’s work habit and ethic before you cry “Peter Principal”. I can easily imagine that if someone said something like that about you… or anyone else here… without knowing you, there’d be many here quick to loudly cry foul and feign offense.
SW
I know others have caught this, but I think it bears repeating…if marital status has little to do with the appeal of the character, then why create it in the first place, (Stunt by Stan Lee – SW) and then take it away with a magical method that could disrupt 20 years of stories that many fans hold dear?
Look, no matter which side of the “fence” you sit, Marvel created a mess. Either they were “wrong” for marrying Peter & MJ or they were “wrong” to take it away. In the end, it makes a huge pile of crap from an overall narrative standpoint, creates a divisive atmosphere for fans and we all lose.
Sad, really that such a “genius” like this somehow is an executive at Marvel. I guess it shows the Dilbert Principle is alive and well on 5th avenue.
The stupid Carlie Cooper and ending the marriage ‘supernaturally’ was a blow. Why can’t he be married? They have many universes.
Sheesh… why don’t you guys just meet at the bike rack after school?
This is getting to be a tradition. When the post count gets ridiculous, you KNOW who just dropped by to give his $0.02….
Stillanerds irrational belief in the sanctity of the Statement of Ownership has been debunked several times by people smarter than me.
As seems to be the pattern though, he or she ignores facts they don’t want to hear. I’m not surprised he fails to bring that information up.
Drew: youre all over the place and your anger is blocking your common sense, so I’ll bow out.
You win. The book is a disaster!!
But Brevoort, guess what? Spider-man’s not relatable now. I hear he lost his job because he doctored some photo. Certainly not a great guy there. He seems like a selfish gimp who doesn’t use his head. What’s relatable about a person whose actions have no consequences. He lost his uncle once and now when he stands to lost his aunt he cheats his way out of it. The fans get cheated too because they were told people they had big stories about Spider-man and his new powers and everyone knows Peter Parker has been Spider-man. Not only did these promises not get kept, they were never meant too. It’s not Amazing how nothing can really happen in the book now that he single. Fans were already promised the biggest thing ever and they never got that story. Just introducing things and avoiding talking about them is not a story. Spider-man went back to teaching in the middle of a war and instead of that big Flash Thompson conversation you think we would get we got ‘No way, you’re not Spider-man.’ Wow. Just wow. Stracynski was not a Spider-man writer. He only had three characters in the book from the main Spider-man mythos and produced the worst comic of all time even if he took his name off it. It is still his. THere’s nothing relatable to this character anymore.
Think of the issues you could of sold if you actually had done that Unmasking story as the big story. 200,000 a month for atleast two months I bet.
I hear Spider-man got another new costume a couple of months ago.
…and he’s back to teaching.
They wanted him to be single, why promise stuff you can’t pull off?
@#65–Nick MB–in addition, when one looks at the sales estimates published by Diamond, one is actually looking at dealer orders made in the Direct Market, which is not necessarily the same thing as sales. However, the reason why these numbers are used, even though there are other factors like mail-order and digital subscriptions, is because the Direct Market is where the bulk of the distribution for comics goes. Hence why it’s used in comparative sales trends analysis. However, another way to tell how well a comic book is doing is to look at the Statement of Ownerships that are annually published in the comic book themselves, usually every October or November, and which, because Marvel is a publicly traded company on Nasdaq, is required by law to publish. And if one looks at the Statement of Ownerships, the downward trend for the average number of comics per issue sold looks even sharper.
It was demonstrated several months ago at several different sites including this one, using Marvel’s own once-a-year sales statistic reports (which stands as an authoritative source), that the estimated Icv2 2010 numbers compared to Marvel’s own numbers were accurate within a variable of a few K. The only people who still believe Marvel’s claims of extraordinary U.S. ASM sales (“through the roof” was a very recent phrase used by a Marvel exec), or that the publicly available sales data is completely unreliable, appear to be uninformed new-comers and kids. We know that the claim that the available sales data is unreliable is false, and I personally consider it a lie, since many of the Marvel people claiming that the publicly available sales data is unreliable would have high motivation to lie, and they have been deceptive before about many other matters. We also rightly assume that the volume of issues shipped to local distributors is higher than the numbers actually sold to customers, with occasional exceptions. Those sales numbers are being artificially propped up by stunts like variant covers and re-numbering. So ASM sells less than the shipping numbers would indicate.
Why does stephen wacker bring so much anger and bitterness to my life?!!!!!
So Nick then let me ask – what is the number that comichron states they are getting from Diamond? Is it titles shipped to distributors?
Please point to a post where I have claimed expertise. i have quoted for you exactly what the website said and asked you to explain your statement versus theirs – something you have dodged and avoided over and over while being nothing but insulting and demeaning. If I was an expert I would have explained it as Nick MB was kind enough to do.
But let me point out the fallacy in your argument. You claim that these numbers are crap BUT then stand by their rankings and use it as a stake in a ground to claim that Spiderman is doing well relatively compared to the market. Well we can’t compare according to you because the numbers are crap and don’t show the whole picture. how do you know in subscription and digital sales that DC does not have 5 books that vault over Spiderman in total? Do you have access to DC’s secret hidden figures? Do they share that with their main rival? You can’t have it both ways and call the numbers crap and incomplete but then try to use them to prove a point of how well the book is doing.
I know you won’t answer any of these questions and just dodge around and be insulting as usual. Sadly sir you are the one who has become so blinded and consumed by your hate for this site that all you want to do is come on here and argue and beat down everyone, that you can’t see the fallacy in your own circle jerk logic. All I’ve done is ask you pointed questions to explain your statements and all you’ve done is dodge and insult. For someone who claims to hate how message boards allow this kind of behavior, you sure have no problem replicating it. Maybe you should learn to practice what you preach.
Drew, youre skipping the word “approximate”. It’s kind of important in context.
You don’t need to admit it, but you simply don’t know about the subject you seem to think you’re an expert on.
Of course that is what message boards were built for.
SW
Well, Comichron are describing the index numbers Diamond release as “sales figures”, which I personally think is misleading, because it isn’t actually a number of copies sold. The quantity numbers quoted on various websites, which are what I would call “sales figures”, are extracted from the index number using whatever maths they use. I’m sure your quote from Comichron is an accurate description of their method, but I personally wouldn’t call a relative index number a “sales figure”. But this is, yes, probably semantics.
But regardless, Wacker is correct in that neither Marvel nor Diamond release hard quantitative sales figures.
Circles? Never realized repeating the same point over and over again was a circle. I think it is you who are projecting on me now. I will post once again what is on comichron
Here is what comichron states – Diamond publishes “indexed” sales figures, in which it keys orders for all comics it lists sales for to a single comic book (usually Batman), with one “order index point” being equal to 1% of that title’s orders. We use the actual Diamond final orders from titles accounting for more than 25% of Diamond’s Top 300 to approximate what an order index point equals each month. The result is applied to the Diamond charts to produce the estimates seen at right.
So your claim that Diamond does not publish sales figures is disingenuous once again and yes semantics. Or are you saying the above statement is false?
Heh….Joe will only ben exec for 20 years? And Brevoort for 30?
What failures!
SW
The way hard-copy sales are trending as tracked over years, Marvel execs will lucky to even have jobs 6-8 years from now.
Jason, I’m not the one suggesting sales equal quality. I’m responding to people suggesting that. Personally I couldn’t disagree more. Your beef, however, is with them not me. Sorry to lose ya on the book, but I do understand.
Drew, the circles you’re running in must be tiring. Diamond doesn’t release sales numbers. That’s not semantics, that’s fact….and it’s at the core of why most of the punditry here is proudly clueless on that subject. The book is doing quite well. Even by your selective diamond ranking standards.
Again if we were as doltish as you believe and as unsuccessful as you wish, we wouldn’t be here.
SW
Fonzie never got married on ‘Happy Days’. FAIL.
Okay,got that out of the way,first off it’s hard to get worked up over a high-ranking Marvel Official(Breevort) parroting what another high-ranking Marvel official(Quesada) has been saying for several years. I don’t expect him to say anything critical in an interview.
But what I always come back to is this:
With all the highly-paid writers & artists Marvel has, this is the only way they could think of to break up the marriage? Don’t like the marriage? Fine. Write a divorce story. 50% of marriages end in divorce. I’m sure a decent percentage of readers have been divorced or had divorced parents. Imagine how a well-written divorce arc could reach people. I can almost see the fan mail:”Dear Joe, thank you, the divorce story helped me deal with and work through the pain I went through when my family broke up”.
Because Spider-Man(as we’ve been told for 40+ years now) doesn’t make deals with bad guys. Period.
@Stephen Wacker, I don’t care how good or bad your sales figures are. I’ve been buying Marvel products for years but I don’t plan on buying any ‘Spider-Man’ titles for a while. I’d bet every issue of ‘Secret Wars II’ outsold,say, every issue of Avengers between #89 and #97 too. What does that prove? That ‘Secret Wars II’ is better than the ‘Kree Skrull War’? And that people who believe otherwise are “anonymous cranks”?
@ Brian Bradley – yeah I was impressed at how close they stayed to the book too. I’m a little over half through listening to it as an audio book and they have captured it so amazingly well.
Not really. My point was that you said Diamond does not release sales figures when the truth is they do, claiming they do not is trying to play coy with semantics. Never did I say they were the be all end all and I even acknowledged your point about other forms of media and hoped digital was on the rise. All I said was there is a disturbing trend shown in these figures that is worrisome and since Marvel well not give us the full picture that you say you have we don’t have anything else to go on but the figures presented vs your word. And considering your word is usually sandwiched between insults and you refuse to trot any real proof (and yes I realize your hands are tied there), forgive me if I don’t take is as the gospel.
And I don’t know how you can in one post claim they do not release sales figures and deride me for relying on “estimates” but then later claim that the rankings were correct. That completely then nullifies your earlier point and that sir is the art of changing your argument to avoid admitting error.
“admitting error”
Sorry About that. iPad.
Sw
@Drew – Game of Thrones was pretty awesome. I’m going through the book now and am really pleased at how faithful that first episode has been so far.
You’ere changing your point to avoid smittingerreor. I’ve said all along the rankings are usually correct. As to your Nielsen comparison, Just because you see two sets of numbers from different companies doesn’t mean the methodology is the same in determining them. You seem to be one of many that start from a desired conclusion and see what you want.
By any real world determination ASM is doing quite well in a weak market…even helping books that launch out of it.
Sorry.
(and yes I know that won’t have an effect on the closed minded who can make up charts that absolve themselves from all reality.)
SW
Sorry, to much game of thrones. Its creeping into the subconcious when I type.
I understand it’s an incomplete estimate but so are Nielson ratings (to bring it back to Brevoort’s point about TV) and incomplete or not they are also used as a gauge to determine the success or failure of a show. And while they may not tell the whole story – you can in general tell when ratings are low what the show’s fate is going to be. So they can’t be completely dismissed.
Fine agreed. I bet you kick puppies too. Viva la revolución. Although I much prefer – It’s going to be alright.
Sire?
The fact remains you see incomplete estimates….anger at Marvel or not.
I think the numbers are actually besides your main point though: regardless of success or failure, the people at Marvel are idiots who shouldn’t have their jobs. We can all agree on that, right?
Also Brevoort hates working people and we all hate our families.
Revolution!!
SW
SW
Ha ha ha…the fact that you can’t understand that the analogy is regarding your actions around transparency and has nothing to do with comparing how the two entities are run is telling. Also by the way, Disney is a PUBLICLY traded company on the NYSE as Marvel was before it, not private. The fact that you don’t know the difference is also quite telling.
Also here is what comichron states – Diamond publishes “indexed” sales figures, in which it keys orders for all comics it lists sales for to a single comic book (usually Batman), with one “order index point” being equal to 1% of that title’s orders. We use the actual Diamond final orders from titles accounting for more than 25% of Diamond’s Top 300 to approximate what an order index point equals each month. The result is applied to the Diamond charts to produce the estimates seen at right.
So your claim that Diamond does not publish sales figures is kind of disingenuous and again another nice deflection. At the very least you can quite clearly get trend analysis on the distribution of the books. Agreed that there are other sales outlets beyond Diamond and hopefully digital as a whole for the industry is trending nothing but upward as the published trend is worrisome to fans but again you are unwilling to share.
Thank you for being as entertaining as always. Sad that you can’t handle debate without having to resort to insults though. And if your purpose wasn’t to come on here and shut everyone up about the false comments about sales then why even engage about it. Actions speak louder than words good sire. Have a nice day.
@#50
“I don’t want everyone to shut up. You’re projecting your own hostility onto me.”
You know, before you even showed up, ONE person mentioned you. I doubt anyone else even cared.