Comments on: Which side are you on? Disgruntled or unsurprised?

By: sonic producer

sonic producer — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:54:23 +0000

I was reading through some of your content on this internet site and I conceive this web site is real informative ! Retain putting up.

By: Kross

Kross — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 21:25:03 +0000

If this is in fact due to Millar’s illness, then it is understandable for him to be running late, but a chronically ill writer seems like all the more reason for Marvel to get most of the issues ready to print before release rather than pushing their luck like this. Marvel still dropped the ball.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:47:16 +0000

I will address this in my new mega cross over “Civil Crisis of Infinite Delays.” Issue #1 will be shipped in November. Issue #2 will be shipped in July.

By: justme

justme — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:51:31 +0000

With all of the war, death and terrorism going on in the world, I love that sliver of the population that gets angry when their comic books dont ship on time.

By: Frank Olivia

Frank Olivia — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:20:49 +0000

It is sad to hear that the title is delayed, mainly because I have really been enjoying it. I thought a lot of the delays in the whole Civil War project were attributable to Mr. Millar’s illness. The way that Millar has been limited has hindered the cohesiveness of all the tie-ins and the main mini-series. This has been very public knowledge for the past few months. So maybe we should cut the guy a break and support Marvel for sticking by the writer, despite lateness and inconsistency, because it this whole project was his idea.

By: Jim Caldwell

Jim Caldwell — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:02:26 +0000

Dan,

I’m pretty sure there are ways to show your displeasure without hosing your retailer.

Since this has been announced as being (at least, let’s be honest) 6 weeks late, retailers should be able to *adjust orders.* And they can adjust upwards or downwards – in the case of lateness, downwards is normal.

Tell your retailer that you won’t be buying Civil War. (This would show your displeasure.) Your retailer can then reduce the order by one less copy per customer who has said the same. That way, the retailer isn’t stuck with potentially unsold copies, if said retailer would be concerned by such a possibility.

Then, take that unspent money and try a new book. You might even like it.

This may be self-explanatory advice to savvy fans, but I reckon there are fans who aren’t aware of these steps. (And any retailers who find fault with these steps, feel free to stomp on them)

(Of course, this doesn’t totally solve the retailer’s dilemma. They budgeted for these next issues already, so there may be a revenue hole unable to be quickly filled…)

By: Dan G.

Dan G. — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:51:36 +0000

With Millar’s recent diatribe about how much money he makes and how anyone working comics (for the big 2 at least) can make a living at it, I say it’s time to start holding back checks for this kind of BS.

“If you don’t deliver such and such pages/scripts by such and such a date before publication, you will forefit such and such a percentage of your final income from said project each day the agreed-upon amount of work isn’t turned in.” Or something like that – never did get my business degree.

And you’ve also got to put the publishers to task for soliciting these things as soon as the idea strikes them. “Bring back Alex Luthor and Superboy?!?! Solicit it!!!” “Split the Marvel Universe down the middle?!?! Solicit it!!!” “Deliver a project on time!?!?! Next idea.”

By: apk

apk — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:44:05 +0000

This is entirely unacceptable. I put up with unGodly delays on Astonishing X-Men and Ultimates all the time, to the point where I never know when/if they’re ever coming out, and now I have to “suck it up and deal” with a six week delay on Civil War?

I can appreciate the fact that Marvel doesn’t want to switch to a fill-in artist, because McNiven’s work has been absolutely incredible so far. However, Millar’s on the record saying that McNiven had “no lead time”. Well why the hell not? If you’re building your entire line around ONE BOOK, why wouldn’t you have at LEAST 5 of the 7 issues in the hopper before going to press with number 1? We were getting Civil War teaser pictures in Wizard over a year ago, but apparently no one thought it would be prudent to use some of that advance time to get these books done? It’s infuriating.

I’m not reading any of the tie-ins, except for FrontLine, but if I were, I’d be even MORE pissed. When this inevitibly affects Captain America (one of the only Marvel books that’s consistently on time), I’m going to become livid. Thank God the newly rebooted X-books aren’t linked to this travesty.

The saddest thing is that Marvel has the biggest mainstream comics success in years on its hands, and they only message they’ve sent at this point is, “You can’t rely on us.” Thanks, guys.

By: Mike Nicolai

Mike Nicolai — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:36:30 +0000

“Also, this is about the same amount of time as another big company crossover was delayed…”

Would that be last year’s “House of M”?

Who can blame Marvel? In a year, they’ll have a book they can sell to bookstores, and it will probably sell pretty well. The drirect market has been dead for a while, this is just the rior mortis.

By: ejulp

ejulp — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:57:18 +0000

This mini-series will be remembered a long time…if the artist needs some extra time, its worth it…(as long as Marvel double ships some of these books in the future, to help retailers out with a smaller month). The real tradegy here is, if they even guessed there might be scheduling issues, why have Mcniven do that random issue of New Avengers right before Civil War…or, ehy not wait an extra month to launch this? I’m guessing the originally “unintended” de-masking of Spiderman, caused for some rewrites and delays.

By: Dan Jacobson

Dan Jacobson — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:55:16 +0000

Wasn’t it SOP as recently as 15 years ago to have these things in the can a good 6 months prior to publication? How hard could it honestly be? Also, how can we make Marvel notice our disappointment over this without also hosing our retailers?

By: justme

justme — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:26:17 +0000

Eh…it happens

By: Jesse

Jesse — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:19:17 +0000

Only 6 weeks? If I walked into my boss’s office today and told him that something I was supposed to have done tomorrow wouldn’t be done for another 6 weeks someone would be fired. If not me than whoever caused the hold up.

By: Rich Johnston

Rich Johnston — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 11:54:59 +0000

Hopefully Civil Wardrobe will help spahn the gap…

By: markus

markus — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:40:14 +0000

I’m to the point where I say there should be penalties for lateness. Someone needs to pay and there’s no greater teacher than the loss of money from one’s wallet.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
As long as not too many people jump ship after such a stunt, there’s really no incentive for Marvel to stop and change the way they do business, is there? As it is, retailers can’t hurt them, they’re too dependent on Marvel and Marvel in turn has no incentive to punish artists and writers when these people continue to sell way even if they’re late.
Unless and until _you_ are willing to drop Civil War right now and never look back you are enabling this system and make this possible.

By: Chris Hunter

Chris Hunter — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:16:31 +0000

Someone please tell me why at least 5 of these 7 issues could not have been completed before #1 hit the shelves? WHY?

I’m to the point where I say there should be penalties for lateness. Someone needs to pay and there’s no greater teacher than the loss of money from one’s wallet.

This is just blatant pissing on fans and retailers. Say “ah” to those golden showers, boys and girls…

By: Jason

Jason — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:47:02 +0000

I have two friends that I have talked into giving this series a try (they are both non comic readers), and they have both enjoyed it so far – and I am now dreading explaining to them that comic companies today don’t feel the need to put their monthly books out monthly. Monthly = when they feel like it.

I hearing somewhere that Julie Schwartz used to have a stable of fill-in artists and writers that would complete stories that his “problem children” couldn’t finish. Maybe the comics business needs the second coming of Julie Schwartz.

Maybe instead of “Nuff Said” Marvel’s theme in October will be “Not Done”

By: Jamie

Jamie — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:37:25 +0000

Seems to me this is a by-product of these endless ‘exclusive’ deals signed by writers and artists – they can’t just be killfee-d and told to sod off.

In prose publishing, authors get hit HARD for not delivering on time. Amazing – nay, Astonishing – nay, Spectacular – how financial penalties can galvanise people into turning work round quickly.

By: Paul O'Brien

Paul O'Brien — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:34:33 +0000

An “on-time” bonus is really just a positive-thinking way of saying “We’ll fine you if you don’t get it done on time.” It all depends how you look at it.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 03:28:12 +0000

“I wonder if the big two gave an “on-time” bonus on big projects (or maybe the opposite, a ding on trade royalties for late delivery), there’d be a whole lot less of this.”

I dunno, man. Do you really think people should get a bonus just for, y’know, doing their fucking job? Not doing it well, mind you: just DOING it.

By: Barry Convex

Barry Convex — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 03:16:57 +0000

Paul (you’re the same Paul O’Brien from X-Axis, right?) is exactly right. For the reasons he cited, this is nothing like the delays on Infinite Crisis. Even though that book was delayed (though not as much as CW will be), DC had OYL, which kept its books from having to deal with the immediate ramifications of IC. Marvel doesn’t have that luxury, and this is going to seriously screw things up for them.

By: Bill Ritter

Bill Ritter — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:47:57 +0000

Continuing Paul O’Brien’s comments, this is probably the first serious (egregious, even) infraction against retailers. Unlike Ultimates or even the Civil War title, the schedule slip pushes mainline Marvel titles off by month(s).

Titles like FF and Amazing Spider-Man are implanted into store’s revenue streams, and likely relied on to cover store expenses. Losing a month of these titles for many stores is losing operating capital.

No matter how good a sales boon Civil War might have been, this is a blow to retailers right smack in their cash registers and wallets. Regardless of the spin Marvel or the creators on those titles want to try to make, this is irresponsible.

By: Jeff Lester

Jeff Lester — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 01:21:44 +0000

I wonder if the big two gave an “on-time” bonus on big projects (or maybe the opposite, a ding on trade royalties for late delivery), there’d be a whole lot less of this.

By: Scott King

Scott King — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 00:43:50 +0000

I wonder how “Civil War” being delayed affects all the tie-ins. Will we bet reveals in other books because of this? Will they have to delay other books so there aren’t reveals?

Do we know a reason as to why?

By: Sam Hobart

Sam Hobart — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 00:35:31 +0000

This is what we get (and will continue to get) with increased creator leverage and business models wherein DC and Marvel place “monthly” comics at the forefront of their publishing operations. The highest profile books will continue to be the latest because the sales hit they’ll take from being late is much smaller than the sales hit they would take from changing creators mid-stream.

Now retailers get to guess just how much of a hit that will be for 2/3 of Marvel’s output (meanwhile Marvel simultaneously announces 1:75 variants on every issue of Civil War to offset their own losses).

By: Paul O'Brien

Paul O'Brien — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 00:29:56 +0000

We’re not just talking about a six week delay – at this rate, the end of the series is going to slip by a whole quarter. And I don’t for a second believe that issue #6 will ship when Marvel are claiming; history shows that when a major Marvel title starts slipping, it keeps slipping. The first set of dates never turns out to be right.

Now, aside from the fact that they’ve had to reschedule fourteen other top-selling comics, a delay in finishing CIVIL WAR screws up the 2007 publishing plan. Until CIVIL WAR finishes, they can’t launch THOR. They can’t launch MIGHTY AVENGERS. They can’t launch any of the other post-CW projects they’ve been hinting at.

The point is, this is NOT just another late book. It’s not just ULTIMATES shipping late again. This is a big chunk of the 2007 schedule going out the window. It’s going to put a dent in the bank balance.

If I was working on this book, and I was potentially to blame for it being late… well, I’d be worried.

By: Kross

Kross — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 00:21:13 +0000

Its simply bad form. You’re book shouldn’t be behind in the first place, but don’t give a speech trying to spin it as a play for artistic integrity when you announce that it is. I do think its better to delay a book than to rush it, but its a sign of bad organization within the company. This book is too important to Marvel for this kind of thing. They should have had plenty of buffer room to ensure that this didn’t happen. Two months is a lot, it must have taken some serious screwuperry to pull that off. By the way, wasn’t one of the reasons Ultimates has been delayed so that Millar could focus on getting all of his Civil War stuff done? So if Ultimates still isn’t out…and Civil War is now delayed…what has he been doing with his time?

Okay, maybe that’s a bit presumptuous to say that Millar is the source of the problem, but I do recall Bryan Hitch mentioning on the net that he was still waiting for a script to draw…