Everytime I see anything that says it was written or co-written by Alex Ross, I remember what the great Alex Toth said about guys who could paint a pretty picture but can’t tell a story. If Ross wasn’t who Toth was referring to, he’s certainly a member of the club. Ross shore does paint a purty pickture, but his story telling is about as substantial as a fart.

I believe there were 3 variants to the first issue, an ash one, a jason one and a freddy one as listed in Wizard.

I wonder if being Vertigo would help. I can’t imagine anybody NOT buying it because if was Vertigo that’s buying it now and maybe a few more would pick it up because it IS Vertigo.

I love the idea of a seperate “beachhead” of comics like that. A monthly Sgt. Rock. Maybe a series of Mini-Series rotating between Bat Lash and Nathaniel Dusk or even a House of Mystery style book or a Strange Adventures type.

I really wish there was some kind of “sampler” style TPB. Similar to what Vertigo did several years back where they printed the first issues of several series in a cheap TPB. DC could reprint some recent issues in a cheap newsprint TPB that would allow titles like this to get some more exposure.

Mike Nielsen

Like Mike, I wonder if the self-contained nature of the stories helps or hurts the book. I love it, but at the same time, each issue is satisfying in and of itself — and I wonder if satisfaction works against periodical sales. (I’m shooting myself in the foot, saying that, I know.)

While Jonah Hex is always *in* my pile of comics, it’s rarely on the top, because I never need to know what happens *next* — I just need to know what happens *this time*, which is a different feeling.

It’s completely impractical (and certainly beyond your control), but it might help to expand the mini line a little — establish a beachhead of non-superhero DCU books. Hex, Bat Lash, Sgt. Rock, maybe Nathaniel Dusk or another P.I. or spy. While it would be a significant investment, it would also change the perception of JH from a weird little offshoot of the DCU to the center of a mini-line.

On a more practical level, do you and Jimmy have a blog presence? It takes some time, but it might be worth doing to promote your books across the board. (I’m still sorry Monolith is gone.)

Rob

“For most Vertigo and some WildStorm titles, collection sales tend to be a significant factor, so the numbers for those books should be taken with a grain of salt as well.”

That basically covers it. It’s only in his analysis of individual titles and in these comments that he occasionally says things that rub people the wrong way. Personally, I am really glad Vertigo exists, since they’ve published almost all of my favorite books of the last 15 years, so I felt the need to contest some of those overly negative statements. But you’re right, Brian Wood is definitely the one most qualified to do so, so I’ll stop with the speculation.

It’s because it’s an American comic book. American comic books do that. ;)

More seriously, take a look at, for instance, the 1 year comparisons list. Here are, excerpted, the *only* titles that climbed in sales compared to 1 year ago.

1-YEAR COMPARISONS
+ 59.3%: Robin
+ 41.3%: Nightwing
+ 37.6%: Legion of Super-Heroes
+ 30.4%: Green Lanern Corps
+ 25.1%: Green Arrow
+ 17.9%: Outsiders
+ 8.6%: Detective Comics

Robin, Nightwing and Detective Comics are up because of Ra’s Al Ghul crossover. Legion is up because of Shooter’s name. Green Lantern Corps is up because of the Sinestro Corps War. Outsiders and Green Arrow are up because of a recent relaunch creating buzz.

So if you want to up the sales, you’ll need to have a crossover, bring in a big name creator, or relaunch the book.

If you don’t do one of those, the book’s sales *will* slip month after month after month. Just like any other book. :) It’s just the way things are, like the sky is blue. :)

NONE of us knows what the economic model at Vertigo or DC is. I worked there, and I have no idea what it is today. A lot can change in 6 years. That said, I discourage speculation from the uninformed here. Brian Wood has a far better idea of what the economics are, and while he’s not exactly an impartial source, he is much closer to it than anyone who is not privy to Vertigo’s business plan.

I suspect there are many variables at play here. I have seen the Bookscan sales for many graphic novels, and some of the ones Vertigo publishes don’t sell for squat. Those books have by and large been cancelled. The ones that sell graphic novels in decent numbers (which I would define as a number not much different than the initial DM orders) are, by and large, being continued.

I have NO idea what the break even number for any kind of pamphlet is these days, or what the formula for profitability is.

But I do ask that those who DO NOT KNOW what the business models for the books they are talking about not act like they do.

Well, no, not at all.

First up, I don’t know what they “should” do.

Second, while Vertigo may release the majority of original material through periodicals at this time, they also frequently publish original graphic novels, so even if there were no periodicals, there’d still be original material.

Finally, even if Vertigo would stop producing original material altogether today, they’d probably still have a very healthy business a few years from now, thanks to their existing library.

My comment was just a blunt reference to the fact that, with Y: THE LAST MAN ending, Vertigo don’t have any strong periodical sellers left, outside of the two Willingham titles.

“[...] in the context of this discussion, “collection sales are very healthy” is more or less synonymous with ” collection sales “make up” for their low numbers”.”

In the examples you cite, I’m talking about the significance of collection sales for individual titles, not for Vertigo as a whole.

“I think it’s pretty obvious that I’m referring to Vertigo’s periodicals, and not to Vertigo as a whole, as you seem to have inferred. I don’t think there’s anything particularly ambiguous about my comment at all, really, so I’m not sure why you refuse to acknowledge that it says what it says.”

Yes, it’s obvious you’re referring to periodicals, and I never said otherwise. Combined with this generally accepted fact, which you mentioned in this very thread:

“It’s frequently said by people who should know that it’s not viable at this time for Vertigo – or for their creators, for that matter – to abandon the periodical market altogether and exclusively produce original graphic novels instead.”

your ‘call it a day’ quote basically says that Vertigo should stop publishing anything new. (If it doesn’t say that, please finally tell me what I misunderstood.) So saying that an imprint should stop publishing because of low sales is not suggesting “that Vertigo, as an imprint, is in any sort of trouble”? Again I ask, are you serious?

“Erm, where, exactly…?”

Here: ” “Declining periodical sales are (presumably) made up for by rising trade sales.”

There’s evidence that this is true for DMZ and 100 BULLETS, but I understand that those books are profitable as periodicals, anyway. There’s no evidence that it’s true for any other current Vertigo periodicals. ”

And here: “As far as increasing paperback sales making up for lapsing periodical sales is concerned, I took a look at the available data a while back, and I didn’t find much evidence for it, apart from books which are already profitable as periodicals, anyway.”

And here: “collection sales apparently aren’t quite significant enough to keep alive books that aren’t profitable as periodicals.”

And finally here: “What I’m disputing is the suggestion that, as a general rule, periodical sales are now meaningless for individual titles because collection sales “make up” for their low numbers.”

Again, you may interpret your statements any way you like, but to me (and I think to anybody else reading this thread, assuming such a person still exists beyond the two of us*) it is obvious that, in the context of this discussion, “collection sales are very healthy” is more or less synonymous with ” collection sales “make up” for their low numbers”.

*BTW, if nobody but us is reading this, does it strike you also as kind of funny that we are still having this discussion in English? Funny that two German guys are so passionate about American comic books, isn’t it?

What you’re referring to is this sentence I wrote: ‘If writer and Fables creator Bill Willingham decides to move on, at this stage, Vertigo might as well call it a day, as far as periodicals are concerned.’

I think it’s pretty obvious that I’m referring to Vertigo’s periodicals, and not to Vertigo as a whole, as you seem to have inferred. I don’t think there’s anything particularly ambiguous about my comment at all, really, so I’m not sure why you refuse to acknowledge that it says what it says.

“Now you are saying that you “never disputed the notion that their overall graphic novel and collection sales are very healthy” which is a 180-degree-turn if I ever saw one, since that is exactly what you have been doing for months and numerous times in this thread.”

Erm, where, exactly…?

You’re misremembering, Heinz. Here’s a link to the appropriate post:
http://pwbeat.publishersweekly.com/blog/2007/09/26/dc-month-to-month-sales-august-2007/#comment-443276

That said, I’ve never suggested that Vertigo, as an imprint, is in any sort of trouble, and I’ve never disputed the notion that their overall graphic novel and collection sales are very healthy, either. So, to be honest, I’m still not quite sure what your point is.

What I’ve been talking about is the sharp decline in Vertigo’s periodical sales, their increasing inability to produce viable new series and the possible long-term consequences of that trend, should it continue.

You must be thinking of some other guy named Heinz, since I didn’t say anything resembling that.

“Besides, Vertigo’s periodical line was pretty diverse five years ago, too.”

Of course. The point is that now it is even more diverse.

Five years ago (June 03 cover-date): eight monthly books, three of those part of the traditional ‘Vertigo universe’ (Hellblazer, Hunter, Lucifer), that leaves five monthly books with non-VU, original concepts.

Today (June 08 cover-date, latest Previews): thirteen monthly books, two VU (Hellblazer, Un-Men), eleven original concepts.

Can we agree that eleven is more than five? Do you really, seriously disagree that a publisher giving more new, untested concepts a try is a healthy publisher? Do you see nothing positive in the fact that there are now twice as many books where creators can develop their own ideas instead of writing characters others created? Since DC is a business it seems obvious that all these books are profitable, otherwise they wouldn’t keep adding new books to their line. If some of them aren’t profitable enough to run for more than two or three years, where’s the problem? Is there any creative business where everything is a hit?

“What I’m disputing is the suggestion that, as a general rule, periodical sales are now meaningless for individual titles because collection sales “make up” for their low numbers. That’s plainly not true, because the Vertigo books likely to get cancelled are still the ones at the tail-end of the charts.”

There’s such an incredible leap of logic between those two sentences I hardly know where to begin. Of course, as long as periodicals and trades sell to roughly the same audience, what’s popular in one format will be more or less popular in the other (though there is also the bookstore audience to consider, which might be a different demographic). Of course, given the usual decline, a low-selling book will eventually be cancelled, though the precision with which you can predict this by looking at periodical numbers alone is rapidly shrinking, as proven by the fact that Crossing Midnight lasted a lot longer than could be expected. However, all this is beside the point. So low-selling books get cancelled eventually? So what? As I said before, Vertigo books cancelled due to low sales has been part of the imprint’s reality since it exists. Why should this be reason for concern all of a sudden?

What actually prompted you to talk about Vertigo’s troubles (though your statements have varied wildly, a few months ago you were suggesting they ‘call it a day’, whatever that means, now you’re down to worrying about their long-term health) wasn’t the fact that some books get cancelled after a few years, but rather the fact that their periodical sales have decreased across the board, as shown in the ‘Average Sales per Title’ four-year-comparison. This is what I’m talking about when I say that I believe that rising trade sales make up for decreasing periodical sales, as supported by lots of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence, and by pretty much everything Brian, as an informed insider, says. And this idea certainly doesn’t get disproven by the fact that some books still get cancelled. It would be ridiculous to assume that every single trade Vertigo publishes sells so great that no book has to get cancelled ever. It is, however, reasonable to assume that the trades sell good enough to make up for the periodical sales difference between now and a few years ago. It is reasonable to assume that trade sales allow books that sell extremely low as periodicals to exist for two or three years instead of getting cancelled right away, as books selling this low as periodicals would have been a few years ago (see Trigger). That many new books are cancelled after two or three years is as much a part of Vertigo now as it was five years ago (see American Century, Codename Knockout, Crusades, Hunter) and thus no cause for concern.