Comments on: Fantagraphics goes exclusive with Diamond

by: gene phillips

Wed, 21 May 2008 17:59:24 +0000

Well, I did look through my old issues. There’s no writeup about exclusives in #161, and since I don’t have #160, I have no way of knowing whether or not Eric Reynolds or anyone else wrote scathingly of those earlier exclusives.

I did find a few other items suggestive of disapproval, but it hardly matters. I don’t have any problem with anyone critiquing exclusives, or Diamond Distribution.

I would think it a contradiction IF a writer had run down Dark Horse taking an exclusive for pure business reasons, but had no problem with Fanta doing the same, also for business reasons.

However, if a writer had avoided that possible pitfall way back when, that too would have been exactly what I called it: “interesting.”

I suppose my snarky version of the Santayana quote might have led some to assume that I could mean only “interesting in a way that makes the JOURNAL look bad.” Not quite– though the piece by Butcher may have predisposed me to think the JOURNAL might regret the move.

by: gene phillips

Wed, 21 May 2008 17:42:02 +0000

Seriously?

“Can I use this to stave off the stampede of Gene Phillips fans who have been hounding us to do this?”

Is this a Journalista denigrating someone else– anyone else– on the basis of a lack of POPULARITY?

The shame.

by: K.

Wed, 21 May 2008 03:02:36 +0000

Wow. There’s a lot of venom being spewed in here.

Um…

Fantagraphics publishes many books which I like.

by: michael

Tue, 20 May 2008 18:17:54 +0000

monopolies are not good things. I can’t fault Fanta for wanting the best deal for themselves, but hopefully, everyone’s folly in relying on ONE company for distribution will one day come to fruition and a new business structure will begin.

by: gene phillips

Mon, 19 May 2008 23:34:42 +0000

Wow, for people who make their living critiquing others who don’t meet their standards, ya’ll sure are thin-skinned.

Unless–

The truth is that you’re so starved for attention that you want me to look up the issue numbers you so helpfully provided, and to heap greater denigration upon you.

Hey, depending on whether I kept those issues, I’m happy to oblige.

I can resist anything but a charity case.

by: Eric Reynolds

Mon, 19 May 2008 21:18:39 +0000

“I don’t believe I’d be interested in publishing a book with comics journalism’s version of Geraldo Rivera.”

Can I use this to stave off the stampede of Gene Phillips fans who have been hounding us to do this?

by: gene phillips

Mon, 19 May 2008 13:37:56 +0000

I don’t believe I’d be interested in publishing a book with comics journalism’s version of Geraldo Rivera.

There might be a book’s worth of material about how often the JOURNAL’s put its foot in its mouth, though.

by: STWALLSKULL » Interesting Links: May 15th, 2008

Fri, 16 May 2008 05:18:49 +0000

[…] Fantagraphics goes exclusive with Diamond from THE BEAT […]

by: Eric Reynolds

Thu, 15 May 2008 21:50:33 +0000

I also love how on every Fantagraphics-related message thread on the Internet, you can count on Statler and Waldorf — I mean Gene Phillips and Alan Coil — to chime in with their well-informed opinions. Maybe we’ll publish a book one day, fellas.

by: gene phillips

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:30:23 +0000

Don’t forget “resistance is futile.”

by: Alan Coil

Thu, 15 May 2008 19:05:44 +0000

It was just a matter of time before they sold out to The Man. It was inevitable. All will be assimilated.

by: Eric Reynolds

Thu, 15 May 2008 18:20:44 +0000

I can, because I wrote most of those pieces. 160 and 161, if memory serves.

by: gene phillips

Thu, 15 May 2008 18:12:33 +0000

‘I like how Gene begins his post about “those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat” it by admitting he doesn’t remember what he’s talking about. Brilliant.’

I said I didn’t remember the specifics of JOURNAL coverage of earlier exclusivity deals, but I don’t doubt that some sort of coverage took place. And it would be “interesting” to read that coverage in light of recent events, whether the coverage was positive, negative, or even neutral.

Without looking, Eric, can you recall the *specific* issue in which the JOURNAL covered the deal Butcher referenced: the Image-Dark Horse contraxcts? If so, I’ll concede that your memory’s better than mine.

by: Eric Reynolds

Thu, 15 May 2008 17:13:40 +0000

I do, too.

by: Scott Bieser

Thu, 15 May 2008 17:08:04 +0000

I think the photo of Eric that Tom put up next to the text block quoting him is priceless.

by: Eric Reynolds

Thu, 15 May 2008 16:32:49 +0000

I meant no disrespect to Haven in my comment Lance quoted. Haven hasn’t been around long enough for us to have really established a relationship, unfortunately. I do hope they thrive, though.

by: Eric Reynolds

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:58:31 +0000

I like how Gene begins his post about “those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat” it by admitting he doesn’t remember what he’s talking about. Brilliant.

by: Lance Stahlberg

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:41:01 +0000

* they have grandfathered in their relationships with Last Gasp and Bud Plant, both of whom do business with DM retailers. Eric Reynolds of Fantagraphics told CR that these were the last two DM distributors with whom Fantagraphics had a relationship that wasn’t Diamond.

Wel…. okay then.

Looking for Fantagraphics back stock? … www.havendistro.com

by: gene phillips

Thu, 15 May 2008 15:10:23 +0000

Though I’ve no particular recollection of the JOURNAL’s news coverage of previous Diamond exclusivity deals where they pertained to other companies (as per Chris Butcher’s reference), said news items and/or editorials might make interesting reading now.

“Those who do not remember the past are doomed to have their asses bitten off by it.”