Saturday, January 31, 2009

Price increase in a down economy (part 2)

Diamond has recently raised their purchase order benchmark from $1,500 to $2,500. For those unfamiliar with this benchmark, this means the publisher has to be selling enough copies of their title to merit Diamond paying them at least $2,500 to buy said copies (and Diamond is buying them at a discounted level --- as mentioned in part one of this post, that discount is close to 60% for some publishers, so $2,500 is the equivalent of approximately $6,250 at full cover price). If a title doesn’t receive enough orders to reach the $2,500 benchmark, Diamond will not place the order. And if Diamond believes a title isn’t going to generate enough orders to reach the benchmark, they won’t even list the title in Previews to begin with. This also appears to include relists, so if a title can’t achieve the benchmark when listed a second or third time (or any subsequent times), then no purchase order will be generated and comics shops won’t be receiving additional copies.
What does this mean to you, the end purchaser and reader. Well, first it means there are going to be some publishers who will either be going out of business or will have to find another means to distribute their titles. It means there will be some titles that will no longer be available through the usual channels. It means if you don’t buy a comic the first time it is listed, you may not be able to get it on second or third printings because those print runs may not occur. Obviously this affects the smaller publishers the most, but all publishers are likely to feel some impact when it comes to relisted titles.
Of course, having a higher cover price makes it a little easier to reach the benchmark. A publisher would have to have orders for over 2,090 copies at a $2.99 cover price while they would only need to have orders for over 1,566 copies at a $3.99 cover price. For a number of publishers, there is room for price increases. Marvel is obviously moving to $3.99 very soon. DC will likely follow. I expect Dark Horse will do the same. Image already has some titles at $3.50 so an increase on those wouldn’t be as significant as those from Marvel, DC, etc. But then you have publishers such as Boom! Studios and IDW who already have a $3.99 cover price. Should we expect them to bump to $4.50 so they can meet the benchmark? Or $4.99?
That begs the question – how much is too much? I know I’ve already passed over some Boom! Studios and IDW titles I would have liked to have tried because I didn’t want to pay $3.99 for them. Of course, I have paid $3.99 (begrudgingly) for a couple of titles so I can’t say as an absolute that I would never pay that much for a comic. Even so, I can’t really say I’ve felt like there was four dollars worth of entertainment in those particular comics. When you compare a comic versus a movie or a tv or animated series on DVD, it doesn’t hold up. The average comic probably takes about 20 minutes to read (some even less). That breaks down to about $12 an hour on average. A movie ticket costs less than $12 and that is good for anywhere from 75-120 minutes worth of entertainment. A movie on DVD may run about $25. For a two hour movie that is about the same average cost as a comic. A season of a television series on DVD probably runs in the neighborhood of $50-$90. That is for anywhere from 13 to 22 episodes at about 20 minutes per episode. $50 divided by 13 episodes comes in around $3.84 per episode. $90 divided by 22 episodes comes in just over $4 per episode. An animated series runs between $20-$30 for 4 or 5 episodes. That comes out to somewhere around $6 per episode (some discs have more episodes and some series can be had for a much better price – for example you can buy the most recent edition of the Gunslinger Girls collection, 13 episodes in all, for a suggested retail price of $39.95, which works out to just over $3 per episode). Most DVDs also have extras on them these days, so you’re getting additional value as well.
That isn’t really the key thing I want to touch on in this discussion however. What I really want to introduce is the fact that Diamond is shooting themselves by eliminating publishers. Sure, in the short term it will help them cut costs and be more efficient. In the long term, they are pushing out the very business that is going to help them to remain an ongoing entity once Marvel fully engages with their digital initiative.
Digital initiative? How exactly did we jump from benchmarks and price comparisons to digital initiatives? It really isn’t a great leap. If you haven’t heard, Marvel is investing $10 million in digital media with an expectation of receiving a profit from said investment beginning in 2011. A company doesn’t make that kind of investment unless they are expecting significant returns. Currently they are offering some digital content for a monthly fee (part of their library is online, but they are not making any current issues available there). Marvel is raising the prices of their comics 33% for what I expect to be a couple of reasons. First, costs have certainly gone up. I know paper has become much more expensive in the past few years. Second, they are obviously trying to maximize profits. Third, I believe they are setting the stage for a transition to digital media.
Consider if you will --- if they are selling their comics to Diamond at a 60% discount (or in the neighborhood), that means they are receiving $1.20 for each comic with a $2.99 cover price. That would grow to $1.60 at a $3.99 cover price. I don’t know what the printing/materials costs are per comic. Perhaps $0.20 per comic? $0.25? Less? I just have no idea. If we assume $0.20 per comic, that means Marvel is down to $1.00 per comic at the $2.99 cover price (and this is before they pay the creators and whatever other production expenses they have) or $1.40 at the $3.99 cover price. If Marvel were able to deliver their comics strictly as digital media, that would eliminate the printing expenses. More importantly, it would eliminate the need to use Diamond to distribute their comics. Currently we see (based on my assumption of discounts and printing costs – which obviously are just made up numbers because I don’t know what the actual numbers are --- hopefully the numbers I am using are at least in the neighborhood) Marvel getting $1.00 per comic and likely to get $1.40 per comic once they raise the price. So if that is what they are generating now, then wouldn’t it stand to reason they could offer their comics in a digital format for the same price (or somewhere close to that price)? And now let’s really take a leap. If they are selling 50,000 copies of a given title right now at $2.99 a pop --- imagine how many copies they might sell if they were offering them digitally for only $1.00 per issue? Currently a comic fan can buy 10 comics a month for about $30 (plus tax). If a publisher is delivering their content digitally for $1.00 an issue, a comic fan can get 30 comics for that $30. The comic fan is already spending the $30, now they get more comics out of it. Even if the comics were $1.50 an issue, they are still getting twice as many comics as they were before. And once the price goes to $3.99 an issue (printed), a comic fan will only be getting 7 comics a month (and have $2 left over). So you have 7 comics a month at $28 (plus tax) vs. 20 comics a month for $30 (plus tax). Which do you think is going to appeal to comics fans?
Also consider that with digital delivery, Marvel is going to have the ability to reach an even larger audience. Currently there are only so many comic shops in the direct market. People who do not have a shop locally have to buy their comics from an online retailer, if they buy them at all. Those who do buy from online retailers are likely going to stick with the major known titles and be hesitant to try an unknown title or limited series (unlike fans who can purchase comics from a local shop, they can’t thumb through something new to decide if they might like it or not). If a comic is only going to cost $1.00 or $1.50, a fan will be more willing to try something unknown. But guess what, it won’t exactly be unknown. Since the comic is available digitally, Marvel could easily provide several pages of a title to be ‘thumbed through’ online so a reader wouldn’t have to buy it completely sight unseen. We already see preview pages of comics released online through comics news sites such as Newsarama and Comic Book Resources. Well now Marvel can host those pages themselves for virtually everything they are selling. Guess what else. The title is never really out of print. Since it is digital, it doesn’t have to be printed and sit in a warehouse until someone orders it. It can be ordered and delivered at any time. So when a fan suddenly discovers a title, they can buy all the back issues they want and have them available immediately. Those comics will continue to sell year after year after year (even if it is only 50 or 100 copies in a given year).
Getting back to the larger audience, I’m not just talking about the current comics audience. Marvel already sells to fans who have a local comic shop and to those who buy via online retailers. With digital delivery, they are going to be able to sell to people who don’t currently buy comics. Because they can offer digital comics at such a lower price point, it is going to be easier to get people to try their product. So going back to the numbers, we have a title currently selling 50,000 printed copies. At a price point of $1.00 or $1.50, with readers now able to buy more comics, people who previously may have wanted to read a title but were already spending their comic allocation on other books will now be able to buy it. Toss in non-comics readers who are enticed to try it because of the price point and availability, and is it unreasonable to expect the comic that was moving 50,000 printed copies to more than double or triple that in digital distribution? So now Marvel is making significantly more money on the title even though the book is selling for much cheaper.
What part of this equation isn’t more appealing to a publisher? They cut costs, they don’t have to deal with the middle man (Diamond), they increase distribution, and they sell far more ‘copies’, thus increasing revenue.
This is the future. Marvel is putting down the groundwork. It may not be five years, it may not even be ten years, but I fully expect that sometime in the 2020s (if not before), Marvel will not be printing monthly comics any longer and will be delivering those titles strictly as digital media (I still expect there will be printed trade collections that will move through booksellers and the like). DC won’t be far behind (especially when they see Marvel starting to make major inroads with their digital delivery system) and Dark Horse and Image will certainly follow.
So where does that leave Diamond? In a lot of trouble. Especially since the small publishers who would be the last to make the transition to digital delivery are being forced to find another distributor or actually make the digital transition RIGHT NOW. Hey, how about that. Diamond’s move may actually be benefiting some of these publishers (the ones that survive at least) because it is forcing them to make the leap that is the future of the comics industry right now.
Let’s not forget retailers. They are in the same boat as Diamond. Once Marvel pulls their monthly titles out of the print market, a lot of retailers will be going out of business. And when DC follows, the remaining retailers will be shuttering their doors as well. Unless they find some other stream of income for their shops (beyond gaming merchandise) their businesses will not be sustainable. I hope retailers are either currently seeking other revenue streams for their shops or have a really good plan B in mind.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Price increase in a down economy (part 1)

As most, if not all, of you have probably heard by now, Marvel will be raising the price of their monthly titles to $3.99 in 2009.
In regards to that price increase, Brian Hibbs mentioned this is his most recent column:
‘The reason Marvel is willing to try selling regular monthly comics at $3.99 is because 10 of the top 10 for the year are $3.99.’
Given the current economic climate, one might wonder why Marvel would decide to increase the price of their titles by 33%. With people losing jobs left and right and a significant number cutting back on non-essentials in order to lower their expenses, it might seem on the surface to be an illogical move.
The math tells a different story.
First and foremost, the numbers I am about to use are purely speculated. I don’t know what the exact discounts are through Diamond, but I do have a rough idea of one side of it. According to Dan Vado’s comments in regards to Diamond’s recently announced policy change (more on that later), it appears Slave Labor sells their titles to Diamond for around a 60% discount of the cover price (it is slightly less than 60%, but I’ll round it to sixty to make the math easier). Marvel and DC likely have a better deal but I don’t have any data on those numbers. As far as the retail side goes, I don’t know what percentage of cover price they pay to Diamond. I’m going to take a wild guess and say they pay Diamond somewhere in the neighborhood of 50% of cover. It could be less, it could be more, I just don’t know (the only real numbers I have to go on would be the discount that is offered by online retailer Discount Comic Book Service --- they sell Marvel and DC books for 40% off cover and most other publishers for 35% off cover, so clearly they have to be buying Marvel/DC books for at least 50% of cover and at a slightly lower discount for all other books). For the purposes of my calculations, I’m going to use 50% as the basis.
So let’s take a look the numbers based on a $2.99 comic vs. a $3.99 comic, and then we’ll factor in a decline in quantity sales due to the price increase.
We’ll use 50K as the baseline monthly sales for the publisher and 50 as the monthly sales for the retailer. You’ll note in these numbers as presented that the bottom number is what matters for the publisher (sales after discount) while the discount (profit*) amount is what matters for the retailer (because that is the money they are making back before any expenses are factored in).
Marvel
Copies 50,000.00
Price 2.99
Sales (pre-discount) 149,500.00
 x 0.60
Discount 89,700.00
Sales (after discount) 59,800.00

Retailer
Copies 50.00
Price 2.99
Cost (pre-discount) 149.50
 x 0.50
Discount (profit*) 74.75
Cost (after discount) 74.75

Marvel
Copies 50,000.00
Price 3.99
Sales (pre-discount) 199,500.00
 x 0.60
Discount 119,700.00
Sales (after discount) 79,800.00

Retailer
Copies 50.00
Price 3.99
Cost (pre-discount) 199.50
 x 0.50
Discount (profit*) 99.75
Cost (after discount) 99.75

So in this instance we see the retailer is making an extra $15 and the publisher is making and extra $20K.
Now let’s have a look at things when we factor in a 20% drop in sales.

Marvel
Copies 40,000.00
Price 3.99
Sales (pre-discount) 159,500.00
 x 0.60
Discount 95,760.00
Sales (after discount) 63,840.00

Retailer
Copies 40.00
Price 3.99
Cost (pre-discount) 159.60
 x 0.50
Discount (profit*) 79.80
Cost (after discount) 79.80

Both the publisher and retailer are still making more money than they were at the $2.99 price point even though sales have declined by 20%. The publisher is making $4,040 more and the retailer is making $4.95 more.

Now we’ll look at the numbers when we factor a 25% drop in sales.

Marvel
Copies 37,500.00
Price 3.99
Sales (pre-discount) 149,625.00
 x 0.60
Discount 89,775.00
Sales (after discount) 59,850.00

Retailer
Copies 38.00
Price 3.99
Cost (pre-discount) 151.62
 x 0.50
Discount (profit*) 75.81
Cost (after discount) 75.81

The publisher and retailer are still making more money than they were at the $2.99 price point. The publisher is making $50 more and the retailer is making $0.06 more.

But here is where things get tricky. The publisher (Marvel in this instance) isn’t going to be hurt by the surface drop in sales (even if it is a 25% drop across the board). However, chances are there will be some cannibalizing of titles going on in addition to the primary drop. By this I mean that people will be dropping some titles they may not want to drop just because they can’t afford to buy as many as they previously did at the lower price point. This is in addition to people who just drop out completely because they decide this ‘hobby’ is getting too expensive for them (that is where the original drop would be coming from – whether that would be as high as 20% - or even 25% - isn’t something we can know at this point). If we assume it is lower (or even if we assume 20%), the publisher (Marvel is this case) would see only minimal decline in overall sales dollars (if there was a decline at all --- chances are there would be an increase in sales dollars overall).
Retailers, on the other hand, won’t be so lucky. Because if people are dropping out completely due to the cost increase, it isn’t just one publisher’s books they will be dropping. It will be every publisher. So the retailer has to contend with a larger scale drop in revenue. Then factor in the cannibalization of books (especially as relates to titles from publishers other than Marvel and DC) the remaining customers will be doing to cut costs (and allow them to continue to be a part of the ‘hobby’), and their sales decline even further. So while the publisher (Marvel in this instance) might see higher sales, the retailer can almost certainly be expected to see less money.

I think this move also makes it much more difficult for a publisher (such as Marvel) to launch new product. There will already be a cannibalization of titles as I mentioned. Readers are going to be less interested in trying out a new limited series or new on-going because it will mean bumping something else off their list. Retailers will order less because their numbers are already down and they are not going to want to get stuck with a bunch of copies of something they can’t move. So that puts the new series (limited or on-going) behind the eight-ball before it ever gets out of the gate. That means fewer opportunities for creators as well. If a publisher isn’t careful about thoroughly testing the waters on a project before they decide to move ahead on it, they are going to end up losing money on it and cutting into whatever gains they realized from their price increase.

That leads me into part two of the discusson (which will be in a separate post that should be available in a day or two).

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Why do I keep buying this stuff?

I bought a copy of DC's re-launch of the Vigilante title last week.
I know why I bought it. Walt Simonson is doing the covers and Rick Leonardi is doing the interior art. Two artists whose work I greatly enjoyed through the late 80s and 90s (and even some this decade, though their output has certainly diminished to some degree). And the Vigilante is a character I quite enjoyed in the late 80s as well. In fact, it was the first DC title I actually read on a regular basis.
I knew absolutely nothing going into the re-launch here about this most recent incarnation of the character. And frankly, the character has tough shoes to fill. Because Adrian Chase was THE Vigilante as far as I'm concerned. And Adrian Chase is dead. Long dead. And really, that is where the Vigilante should be. There doesn't need to be another one. The comics universe doesn't need yet another person running around wearing the same color scheme and calling themself the Vigilante.
But I bought the first issue anyway. And the shoes didn't get filled. Nowhere near filled. I expected as much. I did enjoy Leonardi's interiors though. I wish he was working on a title that I do read on a regular basis because I would like to see more of his work. Unfortunately I'm not going to be able to see it on this one because there just isn't any place for it on my reading list. As I said, the Vigilante should remain dead and buried. This particular incarnation is adding nothing to the mythos that I consider worthwhile.

I don't want to leave on a negative note however. While I've found that I've been disappointed in recent months with comics as a whole, there have definitely been some bright spots in my reading list. Not as many as I would like, there are definitely books such as Wildcats which make me continually question a) why I continue to buy it, b) why it is being published because there seems to be no clear cut direction, and c) how can a title be relaunched so many times and still be at a point where I feel as a reader that no one knows what the hell to do with it other than sling stuff against the wall and hope something sticks. But see, there I go again with the negative.
As I started to say, there have been some definite bright spots. Titles that I pick up and read, and when I put them down I feel like I got something out it. I was entertained. It was time and money well spent on my part. So I just want to hit on a few of those. I'm not going to go into detail, I'm just going to list them. In no particular order. Wonder Woman. Terra (put Amanda Conner on something and I'm gonna buy it --- I can't tell you how much I'm looking forward to the new Power Girl series). Trinity (it has been a little more hit and miss of late, but overall I've thoroughly enjoyed what Kurt Busiek - with Fabian Nicieza's assist on the secondary stories - has been doing here). Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Fables (definitely one of my favorite titles month in and month out). House of Mystery. Terry Moore's Echo (this one has been a very pleasant surprise). Madame Xanadu. Ted Naifeh's Courtney Crumrin one-shots. Dead Ahead.
I'd like to be able to say Green Lantern makes the cut on this list, but I've been just a little disappointed with the past few issues. Admittedly, it is tough to maintain at such a high level after a great epic like the Sinestro Corps War. I am very much looking forward to the Blackest Night arc this coming year. I think it will elevate the title back up so that it will deserve inclusion on this list.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Not Like This!

So were those intended jabs at Bendis by Grant Morrison (Batman no. 681) and Paul Dini (Detective Comics no. 850) in the final issues of their R.I.P. arcs?
I found the inclusion of the line quite humorous.

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Piss and Hades

Title = favorite saying of mine. That's the way it goes. Typically doesn't mean a good thing.
So this is my DC rant.
Initially I was ticked with the Robin/Nightwing/Birds of Prey cancellations until I stopped and thought about it. And then it all (almost) made sense. Batman R.I.P. It has been close to the vest at this point and they are attempting to position readers to believe someone else will be wearing the cowl. The obvious choices are of course Dick and TIm. So what better way to build the likelihood of one of those individuals taking over than to cancel their own titles. Makes perfect sense. Birds of Prey doesn't exactly factor into it, but since they are cancelling those other major Batman titles, why not drop that one in as well since sales have fallen to possibly unacceptable levels (due to DC not knowing how to properly market and sell titles).
So while I wanted to be angry about those cancellations, there was really no reason to be. It is all part of the game.
That doesn't stop me from being angry at DC's overall ineptitude.
Let me count the ways.
First, DC has the best Wonder Woman writer they have had in YEARS (outside of Greg Rucka --- who had a great understanding of the character) in Gail Simone. And yet somehow sales are less than what they had with Allan Heinberg. And that makes NO sense to me. His credits as writer for The O.C., Grey's Anatomy, Gilmore Girls, Party of Five, and Sex in the City (and Yong Avengers) shouldn't have that much of a factor over Gail Simone's resume. I say that because if one is a comic reader, then one is a COMIC reader. And a fan of Wonder Woman should most likely have checked out Birds of Prey at some point. And if someone checked out Birds of Prey when Gail was at the helm, then they continued to check it out and discovered what a great writer she is. So when she was named as the writer of Wonder Woman, they should have immediatetly checked that title out as well.
I can't imagine that Heinberg's name brought in that many readers. I honestly don't. Maybe it brought in more retailers' orders. But I don't think it necessairly brought in more readers. At least not regular readers.
I can't understand why Wonder Woman took such a major sales drop between Heinberg and Simone. Yes, I realize Jodi Picoult followed Allan Heinberg and then there were a couple of fill-in issues after that--- but for those who were actually following all the goings-on, it should have been clear that everything was going to be stabilized once Gail came onboard. All those numbers tell me is that retailers are still foolish speculators. They bank that a supposedly 'known' TV writer is going to uplift a title moreso than a quality established comic writer (and in this case a writer who even has a littel better gender association as well).
I think the ball was actually dropped when DC's 'brain-trust' pulled Jodi Picoult into the mix. Not because she couldn't do a good job, but because they brought her in right in the middle of a major event where Wonder Woman's activities were already defined and Jodi had to build her stories around those events (meaning she couldn't really bring an original take on the character). Hence, it really wasn't so much Jodie writing Wonder Woman as much as it was editorial telling her what the story was going to be and Jodi having to spin it as best she could.
So when Gail came onboard, she didn't have the full marketing push that Allan had, and she was following an 'event' that had been lackluster in terms of fan reception and sales. And though DC had a fantastic opportunity as far as one of the most appreciated female comic writers taking the reins of one of the most recognized female comic characters, they didn't press it the way they should have. They should have been beating us all over the head so much so that I would be complained about it. But they didn't get anywhere near that. And so the audience that should have been there from day one didn't develop.
But that is just item one of their failings.
DC right now has one of the best imprints in comics. Vertigo. No other publisher has anything approaching what they have with Vertigo. DC's biggest competitor, Marvel, doesn't have anything like Vertigo at all. DC should be kicking Marvel's ass up and down the street strictly with Vertigo alone. Their Vertigo line is something that should appeal to audiences outside the regular comic reader. DC (Warner Brothers) should be pushing the hell out of these titles (in trade form) as they can. They should be dragging Marvel's carcass through the streets in terms of sales on those trades. DC should be pulling non-comics readers into the comic world via Vertigo. There is no excuse for DC's failings in this area. It is INEPT management. Pure and simple. I can't believe that someone in Warner Brothers upper line doesn't recognize this. It is inexcuseable that DC hasn't created new sales lines through those books and left Marvel in their dust. UNBELIEVABLE to me.
I have so much more to say in regards to this. But frankly I'm so disgusted with DC right now in regards to their handling of Family Dynamic (I'm just so angry with the overall oversight/management of this title yhat I literally want to smack someone in the head) and the Vertigo line over all that I just don't want to get myself started. I'm just going to say three things. Room full of monkeys. DC management/marketing. Same f'n results.
Major thumbs down to you, Dan Didio. How have you been in charge for so long and not be driving Marvel into the ground with Vertigo alone. How can you not see how much of an advantage you have with this line of titles. Superheroes are so limited in terms of overall audience versus everything you can do (and have done) in Vertigo. I am just astounded by the lack of recognition and sales focus in this area.
Seriously. What the hell are you people doing? How are you missing on this???