As previously suspected, January sales figures released by Diamond were elevated due to a technical glitch, ICv2 reports.
Corrected figures are now available and rather than the previously reported 7% gain in periodical sales, they were actually just up 1% over January 2007, while graphic novels were up a modest 3%, not the gaudy 17% that was previously reported. Still nine comic titles sold over 100,000 copies (versus just six in December) and periodical sales did outpace (however slightly) a strong January of 2007, which posted a 26% gain over January of 2006.
The 3% increase in graphic novel sales continued to outpace gains in the sales of periodicals, continuing a trend that was apparent through most of 2007. But the gain in graphic novels was not enough to move the combined sales of comics and graphic novels above the 1% mark.
Corrected figures: Top 300 Comics Actual–January 2008
Aww thats sad they took away Brand New Day’s number 1 and gave it to Hulk. Oh that darn Mephisto always changing reality.
The revised numbers look plausible. They’re perfectly in line with trends.
the real sad thing for the BND haters is that cap lost the second place by only a measly 300 hundred copies..
They appear to have merged the Phoenix Comicon variant’s sales with the rest of the Hulk total this go-around; there are a number of such mergers in the chart, seemingly unrelated to the corrections. I’ll try to note some of the differences when I post my revised estimates.
Revised calcs are up: http://www.comichron.com/Home/tabid/171/EntryID/131/Default.aspx
Diamond indeed consolidated order codes for several items between their first and second runs. Not the cause of earlier problems, just another difference between the two tables.
I want to see a top 200 list of graphic novels. Who’s with me?
I also noticed that IDW got listed as IDE in the revised list. The publisher abbreviations may get done manually each month which would explain a lot of the inconsistencies in that area from month to month.
I agree it would be interesting to see the second hundred — they started out listing only 10, and have increased every so often.
100th place seems to be pretty close to the 1,000-copy threshhold — so probably we’re looking at the next 100 adding $1 million or so worth of data, depending on the average price and how quickly the tail flattens.
When Diamond does increase the size of the list, it seems to usually be in or around February. I’d certainly like to see the trades list expanded to at least 200 items.
Then again, I’d also be in favor of both lists including all of the information and not stopping at some arbitrary cutoff point.
“Then again, I’d also be in favor of both lists including all of the information and not stopping at some arbitrary cutoff point.”
I’m sure Brian Wood would sign that petition.
Over 66% of the sales through Diamond of the first DMZ trade and around 50% of the sales through Diamond of the DMZ trade flew under the radar of the monthly top 100 trades in 2007.
The sales of DMZ seem to be more of a slow and steady nature and the current arbitrary cutoff point for the top trades list is why the sales of DMZ are being unreported by Diamond.
As such, I would agree that Brian Wood would probably be in favor of Diamond reporting all sales for the month instead of just the top items.
I should probably point out that I wasn’t being sarcastic.
“I should probably point out that I wasn’t being sarcastic.”
I didn’t think you were being sarcastic. I just figured it might be worth pointing out how it could benefit Brain Wood for Diamond report more information than just the top 100 trades each month.
And – while I can’t check the percentages you cite – I think you’re absolutely right, in principle.