<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Marvel Month-to-Month sales February 2007</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/</link>
	<description>The News Blog of Comics Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:28:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Painter</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-72026</link>
		<dc:creator>Painter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2011 00:54:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-72026</guid>
		<description>Hello Top InteressanterArtikelwell donebest regards</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Top InteressanterArtikelwell donebest regards</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ginkel</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14653</link>
		<dc:creator>Ginkel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:09:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14653</guid>
		<description>You?ve written nice post, I am gonna bookmark this page, thanks for info. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.kenwoodtelsiz.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;kenwoodtelsiz&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You?ve written nice post, I am gonna bookmark this page, thanks for info. <a href="http://www.kenwoodtelsiz.com/" rel="nofollow">kenwoodtelsiz</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TEN JACK TEN &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Of Interest - 4/5/07</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14652</link>
		<dc:creator>TEN JACK TEN &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Of Interest - 4/5/07</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 16:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14652</guid>
		<description>[...] LINK [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] LINK [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Adriaenssens</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14651</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Adriaenssens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 13:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14651</guid>
		<description>Wraith, I&#039;ll take your word for it, about big names not selling. I don&#039;t really remember either GG or Venom being in anything recently though? I take it the Bullseye/Punisher mini didn&#039;t move well in your store? I think it&#039;s also the novelty of cramming them all together that&#039;s attracting some people. Out of all the CW/Initiative stuff, Thunderbolts seems to be the book that&#039;s trying to combine the way it was, and the way it is now with the new &quot;landscape&quot;. I think that allows for a potentially larger readership. We&#039;ll see in half a year or so when the variants are gone (I do agree they inflate numbers, but hey, can&#039;t blame the publisher for doing what the audience will put up with) and when the Initiative banners have disappeared. To be honest, to me the banners are a sign of what books to stay away from, for the most part...

I remember there being a time when I bought every single Marvel comic (and most of DC&#039;s). Those were the days, heh. I&#039;m kind of glad they&#039;re behind me though!

Paul, I don&#039;t think the 30k bumps and drops reflect badly at CW, I was more wondering why the retailers have so little confidence in the books&#039; inherent selling power. Although, if most of those 30k were people who did buy all the tie-ins, and are interested in that aspect alone, then it makes sense they wouldn&#039;t want to hang around on another book, since that&#039;d eat up more money for other tie-ins. Ah, comics :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wraith, I&#8217;ll take your word for it, about big names not selling. I don&#8217;t really remember either GG or Venom being in anything recently though? I take it the Bullseye/Punisher mini didn&#8217;t move well in your store? I think it&#8217;s also the novelty of cramming them all together that&#8217;s attracting some people. Out of all the CW/Initiative stuff, Thunderbolts seems to be the book that&#8217;s trying to combine the way it was, and the way it is now with the new &#8220;landscape&#8221;. I think that allows for a potentially larger readership. We&#8217;ll see in half a year or so when the variants are gone (I do agree they inflate numbers, but hey, can&#8217;t blame the publisher for doing what the audience will put up with) and when the Initiative banners have disappeared. To be honest, to me the banners are a sign of what books to stay away from, for the most part&#8230;</p>
<p>I remember there being a time when I bought every single Marvel comic (and most of DC&#8217;s). Those were the days, heh. I&#8217;m kind of glad they&#8217;re behind me though!</p>
<p>Paul, I don&#8217;t think the 30k bumps and drops reflect badly at CW, I was more wondering why the retailers have so little confidence in the books&#8217; inherent selling power. Although, if most of those 30k were people who did buy all the tie-ins, and are interested in that aspect alone, then it makes sense they wouldn&#8217;t want to hang around on another book, since that&#8217;d eat up more money for other tie-ins. Ah, comics :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wraith</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14650</link>
		<dc:creator>Wraith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 02:21:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14650</guid>
		<description>Peter, trust me, putting big name characters in a comic does not always equal huge sales. Recent history has shown us that solo books or mini series starring or co-starring big name villains like Green Goblin,Venom, and Bullseye did not sell all that well. Spealing ONLY for the comic book store I work at, I can tell you that those books just don&#039;t sell.

And yes, there are customers who will pick up every single comic that ties into a big crossover like CW. Regardless if they don&#039;t read that book or flat out hate that book. Many of our customers see the whole INITIATIVE thing as either a tie into or continuation of CW.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter, trust me, putting big name characters in a comic does not always equal huge sales. Recent history has shown us that solo books or mini series starring or co-starring big name villains like Green Goblin,Venom, and Bullseye did not sell all that well. Spealing ONLY for the comic book store I work at, I can tell you that those books just don&#8217;t sell.</p>
<p>And yes, there are customers who will pick up every single comic that ties into a big crossover like CW. Regardless if they don&#8217;t read that book or flat out hate that book. Many of our customers see the whole INITIATIVE thing as either a tie into or continuation of CW.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jerry Ray</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14649</link>
		<dc:creator>Jerry Ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 19:57:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14649</guid>
		<description>Paul, one note - Wolverine #50 (the first Loeb issue) didn&#039;t just have a variant cover, it had a variant (black and white) interior.  I haven&#039;t looked closely, but I think that trend continued for the next two parts of the storyline.  I&#039;m not sure how much more difference that makes than a variant cover, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul, one note &#8211; Wolverine #50 (the first Loeb issue) didn&#8217;t just have a variant cover, it had a variant (black and white) interior.  I haven&#8217;t looked closely, but I think that trend continued for the next two parts of the storyline.  I&#8217;m not sure how much more difference that makes than a variant cover, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Journalista - the news weblog of The Comics Journal &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Apr. 2, 2007: My agenda</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14648</link>
		<dc:creator>Journalista - the news weblog of The Comics Journal &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Apr. 2, 2007: My agenda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 12:14:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14648</guid>
		<description>[...] Over at The Beat, Paul O&#8217;Brien provides his month-to-month analysis of Marvel&#8217;s sales to retailers in the Direct Market, now updated for February 2007. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Over at The Beat, Paul O&#8217;Brien provides his month-to-month analysis of Marvel&#8217;s sales to retailers in the Direct Market, now updated for February 2007. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14647</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 09:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14647</guid>
		<description>&quot;...it seems clear that retailers only ordered them based on the tie-in nature. But did they do that prompted by specific demand, or guesswork?&quot;

Well, CIVIL WAR lasted the better part of a year.  If the retailers failed to adjust for poor sell-through after that long, more fool them.  Also, when you consider the demand for second printings of the tie-in books, that does tend to suggest that sell-through was pretty good.

On the other hand, the immediate drops afterwards suggest that retailers had little confidence in CIVIL WAR to attract and *keep* readers in the majority of cases - but that&#039;s the way it tends to work with most crossovers, so I wouldn&#039;t see that as reflecting badly on CW.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;it seems clear that retailers only ordered them based on the tie-in nature. But did they do that prompted by specific demand, or guesswork?&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, CIVIL WAR lasted the better part of a year.  If the retailers failed to adjust for poor sell-through after that long, more fool them.  Also, when you consider the demand for second printings of the tie-in books, that does tend to suggest that sell-through was pretty good.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the immediate drops afterwards suggest that retailers had little confidence in CIVIL WAR to attract and *keep* readers in the majority of cases &#8211; but that&#8217;s the way it tends to work with most crossovers, so I wouldn&#8217;t see that as reflecting badly on CW.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Adriaenssens</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14646</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Adriaenssens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2007 08:19:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14646</guid>
		<description>@Wraith: I don&#039;t think Thunderbolts will fall that far back, for the reasons stated above: high-profile characters like Venom (there&#039;s a movie coming up, don&#039;t you know?), Green Goblin (ditto) and Bullseye will keep this book strong without much trouble. Moreover, I think Ellis is succeeding in making this book something that can be read by new people, as well as the old fans. That alone is enough to keep it well above Nicieza&#039;s core audience.

I&#039;ll thank Paul too for his monthly efforts. These are always highly interesting to read, although it&#039;d be very neat if retailers banded together and made a sell-through list. Then we&#039;d really be cooking.

I find it interesting that most of the CW jumps consist of around 30k. So does that imply there were about 30,000 customers who basically wanted everything CW-related? What with most of them dropping right back to the previous levels (all except Nicieza&#039;s books, though, interestingly), it seems clear that retailers only ordered them based on the tie-in nature. But did they do that prompted by specific demand, or guesswork?

I didn&#039;t buy Criminal. I&#039;m buying the trade though. I&#039;m sure hundreds if not thousands of others will do so too. Single issue sales really aren&#039;t that important compared to longevity of sales through collections.

As for Alan&#039;s comment about retailers only being able to buy what they think customers will buy: if both Marvel and DC would wise up and not throw dozens of titles at the market, retailers could take more chances. Unfortunately, since Marvel and DC probably mainly look at the overall total of copies sold, I don&#039;t think they care about boosting sales on specific characters and series, if they can inflate them artificially with very little effort. The variant cover is an excellent way to do it, because it costs them very little indeed, but always makes for fairly high bumps in sales. They&#039;d be fools not to do it, really.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Wraith: I don&#8217;t think Thunderbolts will fall that far back, for the reasons stated above: high-profile characters like Venom (there&#8217;s a movie coming up, don&#8217;t you know?), Green Goblin (ditto) and Bullseye will keep this book strong without much trouble. Moreover, I think Ellis is succeeding in making this book something that can be read by new people, as well as the old fans. That alone is enough to keep it well above Nicieza&#8217;s core audience.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll thank Paul too for his monthly efforts. These are always highly interesting to read, although it&#8217;d be very neat if retailers banded together and made a sell-through list. Then we&#8217;d really be cooking.</p>
<p>I find it interesting that most of the CW jumps consist of around 30k. So does that imply there were about 30,000 customers who basically wanted everything CW-related? What with most of them dropping right back to the previous levels (all except Nicieza&#8217;s books, though, interestingly), it seems clear that retailers only ordered them based on the tie-in nature. But did they do that prompted by specific demand, or guesswork?</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t buy Criminal. I&#8217;m buying the trade though. I&#8217;m sure hundreds if not thousands of others will do so too. Single issue sales really aren&#8217;t that important compared to longevity of sales through collections.</p>
<p>As for Alan&#8217;s comment about retailers only being able to buy what they think customers will buy: if both Marvel and DC would wise up and not throw dozens of titles at the market, retailers could take more chances. Unfortunately, since Marvel and DC probably mainly look at the overall total of copies sold, I don&#8217;t think they care about boosting sales on specific characters and series, if they can inflate them artificially with very little effort. The variant cover is an excellent way to do it, because it costs them very little indeed, but always makes for fairly high bumps in sales. They&#8217;d be fools not to do it, really.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wraith</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14645</link>
		<dc:creator>Wraith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 20:34:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14645</guid>
		<description>Grobble and Paul, recent history has shown that tieing a low selling book into a major crossover event and adding a variant cover will most definitely boost sales for the entire time those gimicks are being used. Remember, the CW tie in issues of Fabian&#039;s run also had a hug sales increase and stayed high durring the duration of those crossover issues. And those issues did&#039;nt even have variant covers or a fraction of the hype that the current Ellis run has been given by Marvel. Trust me, once Marvel stop&#039;s with the variant covers after the current creative team&#039;s 6th issue and they stop putting the huge &quot;INITIATIVE&quot; stamp/title on the cover, sales on the T-bolts will be droppig right back down to the mid 20,000 range.

OMT, Paul I have to echo what Michael and Gil have already said, and say that I look forward to this column every month. Keep up the great work, and don&#039;t let the haters get you down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Grobble and Paul, recent history has shown that tieing a low selling book into a major crossover event and adding a variant cover will most definitely boost sales for the entire time those gimicks are being used. Remember, the CW tie in issues of Fabian&#8217;s run also had a hug sales increase and stayed high durring the duration of those crossover issues. And those issues did&#8217;nt even have variant covers or a fraction of the hype that the current Ellis run has been given by Marvel. Trust me, once Marvel stop&#8217;s with the variant covers after the current creative team&#8217;s 6th issue and they stop putting the huge &#8220;INITIATIVE&#8221; stamp/title on the cover, sales on the T-bolts will be droppig right back down to the mid 20,000 range.</p>
<p>OMT, Paul I have to echo what Michael and Gil have already said, and say that I look forward to this column every month. Keep up the great work, and don&#8217;t let the haters get you down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gil Jaysmith</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14644</link>
		<dc:creator>Gil Jaysmith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:42:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14644</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d like to agree with Michael Climek. More of the silent majority (hopefully) should chime in to register their admiration for your hard work. It&#039;s a solid read, presented with dry wit but also a genuine affection for and marvelling at the world of comics. I was gutted when this column vanished from its previous home, thinking that you&#039;d pulled it out of despair at the regular &quot;why do you bother if you hate Marvel so much!&quot; comments, and that maybe a few more kind words from people like me who took it for granted might have kept you going. I&#039;m so pleased that it was a relocation rather than a cancellation.

I know, I know, it sounds like a love letter... but really, man, this is impressive work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d like to agree with Michael Climek. More of the silent majority (hopefully) should chime in to register their admiration for your hard work. It&#8217;s a solid read, presented with dry wit but also a genuine affection for and marvelling at the world of comics. I was gutted when this column vanished from its previous home, thinking that you&#8217;d pulled it out of despair at the regular &#8220;why do you bother if you hate Marvel so much!&#8221; comments, and that maybe a few more kind words from people like me who took it for granted might have kept you going. I&#8217;m so pleased that it was a relocation rather than a cancellation.</p>
<p>I know, I know, it sounds like a love letter&#8230; but really, man, this is impressive work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14643</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14643</guid>
		<description>I agree.  THUNDERBOLTS has effectively been relaunched with a completely new direction, new creators, and a largely new cast.  That would have boosted sales anyway.  CIVIL WAR has given the relaunch even further momentum, but you still can&#039;t compare the current version of the book to the Nicieza incarnation.  Obviously sales will almost certainly drop back after the initial surge of interest - they always do - but if this book drops back to the mid-20K range any time soon then I&#039;ll be astounded.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree.  THUNDERBOLTS has effectively been relaunched with a completely new direction, new creators, and a largely new cast.  That would have boosted sales anyway.  CIVIL WAR has given the relaunch even further momentum, but you still can&#8217;t compare the current version of the book to the Nicieza incarnation.  Obviously sales will almost certainly drop back after the initial surge of interest &#8211; they always do &#8211; but if this book drops back to the mid-20K range any time soon then I&#8217;ll be astounded.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grobbel</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14642</link>
		<dc:creator>Grobbel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 09:39:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14642</guid>
		<description>@Wraith: I seriously doubt Thunderbolts will drop back to the mid-twenties when the Initiative tie-in is over though, for the simple reason that it now contains a much higher profile character line-up instead of the relative &quot;nobodies&quot; that used to be on this title. So without even taking the creative team and the quality and userfriendliness of the stories into consideration, I&#039;m pretty sure Thunderbolts will stay comfortably ahead of its pre-CW numbers based on that fact alone. Will sales figures drop? Very likely. I still think it&#039;ll stay on a different level, however.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Wraith: I seriously doubt Thunderbolts will drop back to the mid-twenties when the Initiative tie-in is over though, for the simple reason that it now contains a much higher profile character line-up instead of the relative &#8220;nobodies&#8221; that used to be on this title. So without even taking the creative team and the quality and userfriendliness of the stories into consideration, I&#8217;m pretty sure Thunderbolts will stay comfortably ahead of its pre-CW numbers based on that fact alone. Will sales figures drop? Very likely. I still think it&#8217;ll stay on a different level, however.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Climek</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14641</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Climek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 00:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14641</guid>
		<description>Paul,

I know I say this a bit often, but these really are one of the highlights of my month.  Reading this once a month is one the best activities online there is.

So just in case you ever feel unappreciated, know that I think you&#039;re totally awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul,</p>
<p>I know I say this a bit often, but these really are one of the highlights of my month.  Reading this once a month is one the best activities online there is.</p>
<p>So just in case you ever feel unappreciated, know that I think you&#8217;re totally awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wraith</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14640</link>
		<dc:creator>Wraith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2007 22:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2007/03/29/marvel-month-to-month-sales-february-2007/#comment-14640</guid>
		<description>It should be noted that in addition to the variant covers, the only other reason why a number of post CW books like THUNDERBOLTS are doing much better then they were before CW, is because they are seen by many fans and retailers as still being CW tie ins. They see the word &quot;INITIATIVE&quot; stamped across the top of a comic in big bold letters and they think a book is still tieing in to CW or is a continuation of CW. It&#039;s a safe bet that once Marvel stop with the variant covers and stop putting the &quot;INITIATIVE&quot; label on the books, sales will drop right back down to pre-CW sales levels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It should be noted that in addition to the variant covers, the only other reason why a number of post CW books like THUNDERBOLTS are doing much better then they were before CW, is because they are seen by many fans and retailers as still being CW tie ins. They see the word &#8220;INITIATIVE&#8221; stamped across the top of a comic in big bold letters and they think a book is still tieing in to CW or is a continuation of CW. It&#8217;s a safe bet that once Marvel stop with the variant covers and stop putting the &#8220;INITIATIVE&#8221; label on the books, sales will drop right back down to pre-CW sales levels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

