Something surprising from Marvel Editor-in-Chief Axel Alonso’s latest CBR appearance is his explanation for the latest round of Point One issues:
A Point One book is meant to provide an easy entry-point to a monthly series for new readers that is relevant to long-term readers. It counts. Simple as that. If you haven’t read a single issue of Iron Man, here’s a clean, told-on-one sampler. There was a time when the Annuals might have served this purpose, but in recent years retailers and fans lost confidence that they were essential reads. The first wave of Point One books did so well we had to do more. And we’ll continue to do more for any title we think will benefit from it.
The surprising part? That the first wave of Point One books did so well that Marvel “had” to do more… because the direct market estimates tell an entirely different story. Of the twenty Point One books that have already come out that weren’t #0.1 issues, only three were ordered in quantities higher than the previous issue, with sales on the following issues either seeing a small bump that didn’t offset the drop from the .1 issue, or continuing to drop in all but six cases (and in two of those cases, the following issues were Fear Itself tie-ins). Quite how that translates into such a success that the company felt compelled to do more seems a mystery to journey into, some might say; perhaps the collected editions did particularly well, or the digital sales…?
January 30th, 2012 at 11:04 am
Or maybe newstand? Were the Point One books offered to newstand distributors? It could be that they are the ones clamoring for more. (Not sure why, really, since the average non-comics reader probably doesn’t know what the Point One initiative is.)
January 30th, 2012 at 1:30 pm
wow Graeme I’m impressed – actual investigative journalism. Good for you!
January 30th, 2012 at 2:38 pm
The NOT surprising part? That Graeme would take a comment from a Marvel Editor, slice it, dice it, analayze it, and snark it up to the nines, then try to cover his tracks by ending his post in a question that any logical person would arrive to anyways.
There is no story here. Clearly you are not working with the numbers or information the Editor In Chief is (and he actually never claims they were good selling books, only that they “did well”. He may have a different measure of success.) But you already know that, don’t you, because you say as much yourself in the last paragraph. Your ax to grind with Marvel is obvious and frankly, I don’t understand all your negativity and snark. Don’t you think the industry and community at large needs more positivity?
January 30th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
Tyler –
I did not think this was negative whatsoever. What I gather from point one issues was a “marketing tool” which meant two issues a month for monthlies (or 3 or 4 if it is Amazing Spider-man). Now Marvel realizes that they can double ship comics instead of doing point ones. Although they are still doing point ones it is just a veil over double shipping comics. Positivity is not doing anything for the comics industry. The comic industry needs to get real and face the reality of the situation: digital is the only way to keep the industry growing and the further they wait to go cheap and digital just means they are going to end up like the music industry, dvd’s, and other industries who cannot recognize the digital future. Positivity no, reality check yes.
January 30th, 2012 at 3:21 pm
.1 issues = Annuals – just in new 2012.1 speak (see what i did there – yep I’m a cool guy just like Marvel!). Alonso admits as much in the article quote. Just a different wording to mean ‘cool bonus issue!’.
And while i think the price is a bit much to take at $3.99 – two comics a month is pretty awesome imo. X-Force’s Dark Angel Saga was so good i couldn’t wait the 2 weeks between issues.
It wasn’t the .1 issues that proved double shipping works – it was Amazing Spiderman shipping 4x a month and selling that proved it.
January 30th, 2012 at 3:34 pm
“It wasn’t the .1 issues that proved double shipping works – it was Amazing Spiderman shipping 4x a month and selling that proved it.”
Except for the fact that sales on Amazing Spider-Man are the lowest they’ve been at any point in the title’s history outside of the Byrne-and-Mackie reboot, even according to Marvel’s own statement of ownership numbers. But please, continue.
January 30th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Maybe they’re comparing the .1 issues to the comics which would have been published in their place: additional issues of canned books like Alpha Flight, Ghostrider, Herc, etc.
January 30th, 2012 at 4:31 pm
Tom Brevoort told CBR in March that the Point One books were selling around the same level as regular issues or slightly below – which matches the direct market data. So apparently they’re not doing any better elsewhere. Strangely, he too claimed that this was a tremendous success, even though it plainly shows that they’re not drawing in any new readers. It’s all very strange. Perhaps the idea is to try and build up the brand over a period of years and they’re simply trying to talk it up.
January 30th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
I find it really confusing that this blog and many of the comment folk seem stuck on the idea that people like Alonso or Brevoort would DELIBERATELY make bad business decisions just to make us all crazy.
I mean honestly, setting aside the fact that extra issues of books we like should make us happy (whether it’s decimal point issues or annuals or just plain old double-shippers), where’s the logic in a company continuing a project that isn’t working?
Anyway, that’s neither here nor there. I’m really chiming in to say that this is the most convoluted sentence I’ve read all day and I love it:
“Of the twenty Point One books that have already come out that weren’t #0.1 issues, only three were ordered in quantities higher than the previous issue, with sales on the following issues either seeing a small bump that didn’t offset the drop from the .1 issue, or continuing to drop in all but six cases (and in two of those cases, the following issues were Fear Itself tie-ins).”
It’s like a madhouse mirror maze!
January 30th, 2012 at 6:57 pm
@Tyler Switch to decaf.
January 30th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
I would have to agree that there must be something working in the initiative that is making Marvel continue with it. Logic would tell us that if it wasn’t ‘working’ or they were losing money Marvel wouldn’t be continuing it.
January 31st, 2012 at 11:49 am
I honestly believe the corporate culture at Marvel is “if you say it enough times, it will become true.” So while I agree that they aren’t purposefully sabotaging the company, I do believe that Breevort and Alonso try to make everything seem 80% better than it actually is. E.g.: While the point one books getting a middling reception sales-wise and readership-wise, they aren’t losing money so let’s call that a runaway success.
January 31st, 2012 at 1:57 pm
@Kyle Garret switch to not being a moron.
January 31st, 2012 at 8:16 pm
This is interesting:
‘I honestly believe the corporate culture at Marvel is “if you say it enough times, it will become true.”’
Why do you “honestly” believe that? What evidence is there that these guys, who have remained in fairly lucrative positions for a fair length of time, are actually SUPER SHITTY at their jobs?
I mean, I don’t particularly love any editor/publisher/whatever at any company. I just think the fan (and newsarama blogger) perspective on the business side of things is CRAZYTOWN.
Also, it’s weird when bloggers imagine creators having sex on podcasts. NOT NAMING NAMES JUST SAYING.
February 1st, 2012 at 1:32 am
@Kyle Garret switch to not being a moron.
Why would he? It didn’t work for you.