And so once these kinds of reports moved online, they’d had a history of being esoteric, inside information. I think it took a while for non-civilians to begin paying attention to them — and for those of us writing about them to realize they were out there.

So I’ve been layering more specifics since I went to writing online about these things several years ago — my charts specifically say “Estimated Comics Sold to North American Comics Shops as Reported by Diamond Comic Distributors” — but there’s no way to assure that everyone who quotes them will pick that up, and it’s a lot to put into a blog subject line. I think sites are providing the caveats more often than they were, but I think the newcomer will always have some chance for confusion.

But when you think about it, CNN runs the Dow average on the screen all day without explaining what it is, so newcomers at anything face a learning curve.

“Diamond Comics Distributors released their preliminary Top 10 SALES charts and publisher Market Share report for products that went on sale in the comic book Direct Market in March 2009 and it’s ‘Dark’ days for the industry…

No, we don’t yet have data on what sort of overall month it was against historical sales averages … it means Marvel’s “Dark Reign” storyline continues to dominate the comic book SALES charts.”

This news report does not state anything about sales based on orders from retaliers. It doesn’t differentiate between retailer and consumer. It just states “SALES CHARTS,” twice. I realize it’s more complicated than that, and I understand that there are different ways to look at these charts. But this particular news report (and I also understand that other news reports go into more detail) is what it is, and a first-time reader will see it as an actual sales chart, while the rest of us in the know must understand that what is being reported is something more than what’s been reported.

Honest, I don’t lose sleep over this, and I’m not trying to discredit the chart and the purpose it serves. I don’t even want to pick a fight! It’s just something that annoys me.

Not necessarily. With the advent of gimmick variant covers, many comic book retailers are ordering a lot more of some titles than they actually need just so they can get the special 1:50 or a 1:75 variant cover to put on eBay.

A couple of years ago, I was at a comic book convention and saw one dealer selling (at least he was trying to sell) copies of Civil War #7 for a dollar each. He had an entire long box full of them. Here was the supposed top-selling comic of February 2007 just collecting dust in a dollar bin only a few months after being published.

Clearly this retailer ordered a lot more copies than what he or she actually needed.

I’ve now gone through the March sales and I can see no sign of a 5% anomaly on the Marvel books. Most titles are either sticking to existing trends, or have an obvious reason to depart from them, such as variant covers. There are two low-selling minis where sales unexpectedly increased by a few hundred for no apparent reason, but this doesn’t suggest a general glitch.

Not so sure why you are so convinced people are misusing these numbers. They are what they are — monthly initial orders (and as mentioned above, some reorders and reprints) by comic book shops. No where do they claim to be sell through numbers and I think the majority of people understand this. I just wonder why certain people, who seem to have continual problems with the monthly sales charts, just love to keep on saying otherwise?

The numbers for March were calculated the same way as always.

Look, I’ll concede the chart is fun to look at on a monthly basis. Hey, Justice League of America is holding on. Scalped is doing better. Uh oh, I think Green Arrow and Black Canary is in trouble. But this isn’t the Billboard charts. When U2 sells 484,000 copies of its new album, that, according to SoundScan, is what it sold. It’s not based on anything else.

If Green Lantern Corps suddenly/surprisingly sells out of any given issue, and there are second and third printings of that particular issue, is that reflected further down the line based on orders, or on actual issues sold? I don’t know, maybe it’s me, maybe I’m asking too much. Reading the last 100 Bullets is so much more fun.

This is why I can never understand the big deal over these monthly comic book sales figures. If it’s based on orders, and, say, the 20 issue order of Booster Gold for this month sells only 5 copies and 15 remain on the shelf for long after the month has passed, how can any of us possibly find these monthly comic book sales acceptable? And then people leap to its defense and say it’s as close to accuracy as it can get. But they’re still not accurate sales figures. Oh, I get it, they’re SALES figures based on ORDERING figures. Y’know, I stared real hard at that new issue of Booster Gold on the shelf at the comic book shop yesterday. They might even have ordered it based on my ordering issues of the title in the past. But I didn’t buy the new issue. Couldn’t afford it this month. But there it sits on the shelf. SOLD! Another triumph for accuracy.

Mike

That doesn’t mean consumers are actually buying the comics, even if they have pull-lists at their local comic shop.