Comments on: Marvel Month-to-Month Sales: March 2007

by: com soma

Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:46:12 +0000

soma…

buy carisoprodol diazepam online soma…

by: fioricet with codeine and the strength

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:53:46 +0000

fioricet…

fioricet free cod…

by: can you take valium and ultram together

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 04:35:08 +0000

valium…

valium no rx…

by: Journalista - the news weblog of The Comics Journal » Blog Archive » May 15, 2007: Money feeds my music machine

Tue, 15 May 2007 10:22:37 +0000

[…] Six or seven years back, Marvel Comics faced an economic slump and was therefore experimenting with new concepts and ideas, launching high-concept comics by the bucketload, throwing intriguing creator choices at titles and letting them rewrite them to suit their temperaments. Alas, it didn’t work the way they wanted; fans accepted the experiments that meshed with the superhero decadence incubated by the last decade of comic-book culture, and rejected everything else. Eventually, former president Bill Jemas was eased out of Marvel, and the company retreated to the alternate covers, endless miniseries, line-wide crossovers and appeals to the fanboys’ lower halves that we see today. And you know what? They’ve since made money hand over fist, and presumably would very much like to keep doing so. […]

by: Butch

Sat, 28 Apr 2007 03:32:25 +0000

I on the other hand, am digging the Avengers now more than ever. And I’m a fan of the old school stuff. The old New Avengers were up and down, but the new New and Mighty dichotomy is really interesting.

Great job as always, Paul.

by: kelvingreen

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 13:24:59 +0000

Peter, I’m with you. I’m pleased as punch to see the Avengers as the topd dogs at Marvel, but I’ve got next to no interest in how the titles are being run nowadays. and I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who’s noticed how fickle/schizophrenic/two-faced Brevoort is being.

by: Peter Adriaenssens

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:19:16 +0000

As Leigh points out, the trend on Uncanny indicates it’ll actually fall below the last Claremont/Bedard issues in 2-3 months. Now Marvel does have its next event at the ready, but it’s definitely a sign that the X doesn’t captivate people anymore the way it used to. (ditto for the Spider, look at those flailing mid-level books!)

Interestingly, the Avengers franchise currently seems to rule Marvel. Something I always dreamed of. Yet thanks to the handling of said franchise, I’m basically at my nadir of interest in the Avengers series (both of them, the existence of which directly contradicts everything Tom Brevoort used to rail against back in the days of Busiek and Perez), Iron Man, and Thor. Talk about being careful what you wish for! But at least Captain America is highly enjoyable, even if he’s “dead”.

(I’ll be incredibly surprised if we don’t see his floating brain or something like it pop up as a cliffhanger in one of the coming months. I just hope it’ll become monthly again instead of quarterly! It’s torture! Which is fitting, considering the involvement of Zola, Faustus and the Skull )

It’s nice to see them doing good financially, but it sucks for me personally since it won’t make them change direction, and I don’t like their current direction. But as long as they provide me with Essentials and cool minis on the side like the Jeff Parker ones, I’m good!

by: Michael Liebel

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 07:14:43 +0000

We had a blast at my store fielding calls from Barnes & Noble and Border’s those first few weeks. My favorite, oft repeated, question from flustered callers: “What’s the ISBN for the Stephen King graphic novel?”

by: Leigh Walton

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 04:19:14 +0000

‘Ed Brubaker and Billy Tan remain significantly up on the sales of the previous creative team”

Can somebody explain how 83,000 is “significantly up” on 79,000? Paul, UNCANNY 472-474 were by your own admission a completely forgettable fill-in storyline co-written by Tony Bedard and Chris Claremont, disrupted by the heart troubles of the now-commercially-unviable Claremont and finished in a hurry. If the much-ballyhooed new team of industry superstars Brubaker and Tan is already back down to this level, something’s gone wrong.

by: Torsten Adair

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:41:13 +0000

One item of note: Barnes & Noble is carrying “Dark Tower” at its newsstands, and from the memo they sent out to the stores, it seems these copies are non-returnable and possibly from the direct market. They implemented this when many customers asked for the comic, about three weeks after the Midnight Madness. So those reorders for #1 might be from B&N.

by: Paul O'Brien

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:57:01 +0000

“Except they did. ”

Yeah, this does merit some explanation. When I wrote that line, what I had in mind was the reports I’d seen from people who’d gone down to Borders and couldn’t see anything wrong with the copies on sale. But re-reading it, I’ve phrased it very badly. It should say something like “don’t all seem to…” So fair point, yes.

by: Journalista - the news weblog of The Comics Journal » Blog Archive » Apr. 24, 2007: Courting tackle and its discontents

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:56:50 +0000

[…] Over at The Beat, Paul O’Brien looks at Marvel’s month-to-month sales to Direct Market retailers, now updated for March. […]

by: Paul O'Brien

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:52:49 +0000

“I wouldn’t exactly call X-Men’s 0.7% loss “in decline.””

In the context of what’s gone before, it’s a continuation of an existing downward trend, and I wouldn’t read it as a sign of levelling out.

by: Rich Johnston

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 06:54:24 +0000

“Although copies that made it to the newsstands don’t seem to display that error.”

Except they did.

by: AERose

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 04:01:20 +0000

“I wouldn’t exactly call X-Men’s 0.7% loss “in decline.”

Isn’t that more in the “stabilizing” or “Finding its level” catagory?”

by: Michael

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:39:08 +0000

“Although copies that made it to the newsstands don’t seem to display that error.” Hee.

by: Joe Williams

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 00:05:40 +0000

Anyone else find it kind of funny that DC is being criticized for actually being a company more diversified and better suited to the long-term market?

“As I say every month, the Marvel Adventures imprint is primarily aimed at audiences outside the direct market, so its performance on this chart doesn’t really matter a great deal.”

Shouldn’t we say it’s not the only think to look at but it DOES matter. I’m sure the combined costs from the different markets are put together to determine whether a comic is profitable and worth continuing, if not it’s done. That said, you’re spot on about the Jack Kirby book not having the same crossover appeal in the news stand or bookstore markets and I don’t see why it won’t be quickly put down.

by: Wraith

Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:56:11 +0000

I said it before, and I’ll say it again. The INITIATIVE is seen as a continuation of CIVIL WAR by MOST fans and retailers. This is ONE of the reasons (the other reason being, that the first 6 issues of his run all have variant covers) why sales on Ellis’s T-bolts are still high. Speaki ng ONLY for the comic store I work at, I can tell you that many of our customers consider the INITIATIVE as a continuation of CW.

by: Matt D

Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:48:01 +0000

I wouldn’t exactly call X-Men’s 0.7% loss “in decline.”

Isn’t that more in the “stabilizing” or “Finding its level” catagory?

by: Ian

Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:43:10 +0000

Is it really fair to put the numbers of Wonderman and Wisdom on the same level. The former is a better known character and the latter is a MAX book. If you were to gauge each books success relative to those facts, shouldn’t you gauge their lack of success as well? Either Wonderman is doing TERRIBLE or Wisdom is just doing sub-par.