The Problem with the Comic Book Industry

[Skywalker]

I only buy TPBs; I have zero interest in throwing $3-4 down on ridiculously short monthly issues that take five minutes to read. I also almost only buy comics from publishers like Dark Horse and IDW, with the exception of Vertigo, and the occasional seminal stories like Batman: Year One, The Killing Joke, etc. I used to love DC and Marvel when I was a kid, but it's just too much of a hassle trying to keep up with my favorite superheroes nowadays.

 

[RJDiogenes]

On second thought, maybe paper quality does have something to do with it, and coloring techniques.

In 1980 and 1990, comics only cost twice as much as they should have, whereas in 2000 and 2010 they've cost four times as much; if you round off.

Lower sales and decreased ad revenue may have something to do with it, too.

Personally, I don't think the glossy paper does the artwork any favors. It makes it look cheap and plastic. The old paper absorbed light and gave the colors a richer texture.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Personally, I don't think the glossy paper does the artwork any favors. It makes it look cheap and plastic. The old paper absorbed light and gave the colors a richer texture.

The old paper was better suited for the classic-style four-color process that's still in use here and there, but has long-since been abandoned by the comic book industry itself in lieu of more advanced computer-driven coloring techniques that allow for a greater range of colors. One of the early arguments was that the current paper stock holds up to today's coloring techniques well and the old stuff doesn't (tends to make everything murky-looking and swallows up a lot of details in the art).

IIRC, Marvel and DC briefly used an even more glossier paper than what they use now for awhile, but very quickly went back to a more sturdy and less shiny stock after complaints of art bleed throughs and too much overall flimsiness.

 

[Mr Light]

They should shrink the size of a comic book again; back in the Silver/Golden age they used to be larger.

 

[A beaker full of death]

The old paper was better suited for the classic-style four-color process that's still in use here and there, but has long-since been abandoned by the comic book industry

But... my precious benday patterns!!

 

[Nick Ryder]

While watching a history of comic books on History channel the other day I came to the realization that, while $3-4 bucks for ONE issue is way way too much, they're moving too far away from their roots. Comics were meant to be cheap. Yeah the new ones are really great looking, but... why not just sell comics in a TPB format and then I can justify spending maybe $20-30 on a story and have it printed on nice paper and all together, or even in an "Omnibus" format.

I think if anything certain titles should be printed on the old 'pulp' paper and distributed everywhere, if only to get interest in those characters back in the front burner. Like Spider-Man. Now that there's only 1 title and it's a weekly, that'd be the ideal one. Maybe Avengers and another random one, like say... Wolverine.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Personally, I don't think the glossy paper does the artwork any favors. It makes it look cheap and plastic. The old paper absorbed light and gave the colors a richer texture.

The old paper was better suited for the classic-style four-color process that's still in use here and there, but has long-since been abandoned by the comic book industry itself in lieu of more advanced computer-driven coloring techniques that allow for a greater range of colors. One of the early arguments was that the current paper stock holds up to today's coloring techniques well and the old stuff doesn't (tends to make everything murky-looking and swallows up a lot of details in the art).

IIRC, Marvel and DC briefly used an even more glossier paper than what they use now for awhile, but very quickly went back to a more sturdy and less shiny stock after complaints of art bleed throughs and too much overall flimsiness.

I don't know, I've never seen current printing on old stock. They could always simplify the coloring. Do Comic Books really need six billion colors?

 

[A beaker full of death]

They were descended from the pulps. Let's not forget where that name comes from.

 

[Mr Light]

I'd be perfectly happy to have newspaper quality paper and four colors if it meant $2 comic books...

 

[FormerLurker]

So would I.

For that matter, I'd be perfectly happy to spend $3.99 on a comic book printed on glossy cover paper on the inside, if it had 32-64 pages of well written, well drawn, easy to see and read comics content,* and the obligatory 8 pages of ads.



*unlike the crap they have today, which is so over-colored by amateurs who don't know anything about color theory that even line art by talented professional artists who meet their deadlines is all but invisible.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Personally, I don't think the glossy paper does the artwork any favors. It makes it look cheap and plastic. The old paper absorbed light and gave the colors a richer texture.

The old paper was better suited for the classic-style four-color process that's still in use here and there, but has long-since been abandoned by the comic book industry itself in lieu of more advanced computer-driven coloring techniques that allow for a greater range of colors. One of the early arguments was that the current paper stock holds up to today's coloring techniques well and the old stuff doesn't (tends to make everything murky-looking and swallows up a lot of details in the art).

IIRC, Marvel and DC briefly used an even more glossier paper than what they use now for awhile, but very quickly went back to a more sturdy and less shiny stock after complaints of art bleed throughs and too much overall flimsiness.

I don't know, I've never seen current printing on old stock. They could always simplify the coloring. Do Comic Books really need six billion colors?

It's kind of like asking the home entertainment industry to ditch DVD and blue-ray and go back to VHS. They'd only do it if there was suddenly a new public demand for VHS...

I'd be perfectly happy to have newspaper quality paper and four colors if it meant $2 comic books...

It actually might cause even more expensive comics if they went back to newsprint and four-color because those are no longer the industry standards and the cost of "downgrading" would be passed from the printing company, to the publishers, to eventually the consumers.

The newspapers can get away with it because they have significantly larger print runs (thus having a significantly lower per issue price point), and also because their industry still uses cheaper production values than comics currently do (their printers didn't ditch the old equipment).

I don't think the clock can be turned back unless a publisher makes a concentrated and deliberate effort to have lower profits or even operate in the red to keep prices low (and pray that millions and millions of new readers come back very quickly in order to stay afloat).

It may require a complete reversal--if not elimination--of the way things are currently done, IMO. A return to comics being a cheaply-made and disposable commodity. It would likely require the cooperation of shareholders, publishers, creators, printers, distributors, retailers, and even consumers themselves to pull this off...

 

[FormerLurker]

^ You say that like it's a bad thing.

Remember when comics had a significantly higher print run? Wasn't that long ago. If they went that route, and put the huge numbers in supermarkets and convenience stores (and book stores, and newsstands, and the magazine rack and all the discount department stores, etc), where they would sell, then there would be no loss of profit margin. And higher sales of a less expensive product? Guaranteed profit increase. The only fly in that ointment is the mindset of "kids don't read comics, and they never did." Something Joe Quesada actually said.

 

[C.E. Evans]

^ You say that like it's a bad thing.

Actually, very far from it. But I believe it's an unlikely thing to ever happen.

Comics should be relatively cheap items, IMO. One could argue that the industry is the biggest problem with the comic book industry. It's set up to be the way that it is today and no one seems inclined to do anything to change it. Customers have already voiced their opinion on how the business is run by leaving comics by the thousands (if not the millions). But rather than try to win them back, the strategy appears to be to concentrate on the remaining customer base and squeeze as much money as possible from them.

As a result, comics become a high-end luxury item catering to a continually shrinking customer base. Rather than lower prices, prices are going up. Many Marvel titles are now reaching $4.00 USD, and it's not so much to offset the price of lower-selling titles still at $3.00 USD as it is to simply maximize profits. They did their research. They discovered that many people would pay $4.00 USD for their favorite books, and so here we are. DC isn't as a bad, but one has to wonder how long will that last.

Remember when comics had a significantly higher print run? Wasn't that long ago. If they went that route, and put the huge numbers in supermarkets and convenience stores (and book stores, and newsstands, and the magazine rack and all the discount department stores, etc), where they would sell, then there would be no loss of profit margin. And higher sales of a less expensive product? Guaranteed profit increase. The only fly in that ointment is the mindset of "kids don't read comics, and they never did." Something Joe Quesada actually said.

Well, to be fair, one of the reasons why comics started to disappear from supermarkets and newstands, was because sales were declining and they were losing money there. They found a better and more profitable business model in the more exclusive direct market, so that's where they started to focus on. Unfortunately, they haven't changed their business model since, except for a major dependence on trade collection sales in book stores (both brick and online). Now, they're looking at putting comics online, but Marvel and DC haven't quite figured out how they can make millions out of that yet.

And Joe Quesada's comment was actually echoed by former DC Publisher Paul Levitz in a 2003 documentary in which he said something to effect that "not only are comics not just for kids, they haven't been mostly for kids." Quesada and Levitz may have been suggesting that kids may never have been the biggest audience for comics, but rather teenagers and up have always been...

 

[Mr Light]

What kills me is rather than do a quarter price increase or something they just go up a whole goddamn dollar!

 

[RJDiogenes]

It may require a complete reversal--if not elimination--of the way things are currently done, IMO. A return to comics being a cheaply-made and disposable commodity. It would likely require the cooperation of shareholders, publishers, creators, printers, distributors, retailers, and even consumers themselves to pull this off...

I don't think it would need to be that drastic. Just switch to some nice inexpensive paper and tell the colorists to use a suitable palette. I don't see any reason to downgrade their technology.

 

[C.E. Evans]

It may require a complete reversal--if not elimination--of the way things are currently done, IMO. A return to comics being a cheaply-made and disposable commodity. It would likely require the cooperation of shareholders, publishers, creators, printers, distributors, retailers, and even consumers themselves to pull this off...

I don't think it would need to be that drastic.

I think it really does. It's gotta be something that starts from the very top on down, because right now the people at the top aren't interested in making cheaper comics.

Just switch to some nice inexpensive paper and tell the colorists to use a suitable palette. I don't see any reason to downgrade their technology.

The printing company(ies) ditched inexpensive paper a long time ago and no longer has stock in it anymore. They would pass the price of going back to that paper to the publishers and then the publishers would pass that price to the consumers. In the end, you'd wind up paying extra now for "inexpensive paper". And the "suitable palette" was the old cut & paste (by hand) four-color process that nobody in comics uses anymore as they invested heavily in computer coloring and production technology.

It would have to be an industry-wide change to go back to cheaper-made comics, and I just don't see anyone willing to do that.

 

[FormerLurker]

A printing press is a printing press, no matter the palette. Paper will run through a printing press, no matter the quality of the paper, due to the design of paper rolls. The four color process isn't 'cut and paste,' as you put it, but only using four color plates in the press. Going back is limited to using only four plates, so it's actually less work, not more. The 'stock' in less expensive paper is limited to how willing the printer is to use the less expensive paper, as they, as you noted, don't keep it in stock. But the expense is nothing more than ordering the less expensive rolls.

The only reason they stopped selling comics in supermarkets, convenience stores and newsstands is Diamond Distributers making a deal with comic shops to exclusively carry them, so Diamond wouldn't have to deal with returns. Using a different distributer would solve that problem.

 

[RJDiogenes]

It may require a complete reversal--if not elimination--of the way things are currently done, IMO. A return to comics being a cheaply-made and disposable commodity. It would likely require the cooperation of shareholders, publishers, creators, printers, distributors, retailers, and even consumers themselves to pull this off...

I don't think it would need to be that drastic.

I think it really does. It's gotta be something that starts from the very top on down, because right now the people at the top aren't interested in making cheaper comics.

In terms of philosophy, of course. I'm talking about hardware and supplies.

Just switch to some nice inexpensive paper and tell the colorists to use a suitable palette. I don't see any reason to downgrade their technology.

The printing company(ies) ditched inexpensive paper a long time ago and no longer has stock in it anymore. They would pass the price of going back to that paper to the publishers and then the publishers would pass that price to the consumers. In the end, you'd wind up paying extra now for "inexpensive paper". And the "suitable palette" was the old cut & paste (by hand) four-color process that nobody in comics uses anymore as they invested heavily in computer coloring and production technology.

It would have to be an industry-wide change to go back to cheaper-made comics, and I just don't see anyone willing to do that.

No, changing the palette would just mean telling the colorists to color the pages appropriately for the medium they're working in. Then print it up on the less expensive paper. It will be cheaper and look better.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I don't think it would need to be that drastic.

I think it really does. It's gotta be something that starts from the very top on down, because right now the people at the top aren't interested in making cheaper comics.

In terms of philosophy, of course. I'm talking about hardware and supplies.

They'd probably have to change hardwire and supplies too, because that's what they essentially did when they upgraded to better production materials. They essentially went from analog to digital.

Just switch to some nice inexpensive paper and tell the colorists to use a suitable palette. I don't see any reason to downgrade their technology.

The printing company(ies) ditched inexpensive paper a long time ago and no longer has stock in it anymore. They would pass the price of going back to that paper to the publishers and then the publishers would pass that price to the consumers. In the end, you'd wind up paying extra now for "inexpensive paper". And the "suitable palette" was the old cut & paste (by hand) four-color process that nobody in comics uses anymore as they invested heavily in computer coloring and production technology.

It would have to be an industry-wide change to go back to cheaper-made comics, and I just don't see anyone willing to do that.

No, changing the palette would just mean telling the colorists to color the pages appropriately for the medium they're working in.

It's not a case of just using different colors, it's a case of changing the medium as well. The reason why they changed paper in the first place was because the current method of coloring and printing looks like total crap on the old paper, even if they changed the "palette" (Malibu Comics tried that it with an issue of Ultraforce in the '90s and it was a total disaster--they wound up having to quickly do a second printing on better paper and eating the cost of doing so). The best pallete for the old paper was the old four-color process.

Then print it up on the less expensive paper. It will be cheaper and look better.

Except that there's no such thing as less expensive paper anymore because as I said earlier, the main printing company(ies) that specializes in comic books no longer carry it and would pass the price of getting it back and using it again to the consumers. You'd wind up with even more expensive--but very bad-looking--comics in the end, which defeats the purpose. These days, the current paper is the less expensive paper for the comic book industry.

It's a different scenario for the newspaper industry and similar publications because they basically still do things the "old-fashioned" way as far as their comic strips are concerned.

Could comics be like today's newspapers comic strips? Well, that's what I've been suggesting the industry does--restructure and adopt a cheaper way of producing comics--but I also don't believe for one second that the industry won't pass the price of doing so to consumers.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

The only reason they stopped selling comics in supermarkets, convenience stores and newsstands is Diamond Distributers making a deal with comic shops to exclusively carry them, so Diamond wouldn't have to deal with returns. Using a different distributer would solve that problem.

Really? I always heard it was the shelf space at convenience stores, where in the same spot a $3-5 comic sits, a magazine over double that price would sit and the store would actually make more money off of it. Plus the comic company actually made more money when they didn't deal with the newstands as well, since a majority of the books were returned, as opposed to the direct market.

I don't think a different distributer would solve that problem, it would be the exact same problem, but with a different distributer.