<?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: March 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/</link>
	<description>The News Blog of Comics Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:10:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: smith ayodele</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-59572</link>
		<dc:creator>smith ayodele</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:45:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-59572</guid>
		<description>i need 2000 copies for resales in nigeria ihow should i go about</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i need 2000 copies for resales in nigeria ihow should i go about</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: smith ayodele</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-59570</link>
		<dc:creator>smith ayodele</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2010 13:42:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-59570</guid>
		<description>how would i order for your product</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>how would i order for your product</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: diet pill with ephedra</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38425</link>
		<dc:creator>diet pill with ephedra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:55:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38425</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;ephedra...&lt;/strong&gt;

original stacker 2 with ephedra...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>ephedra&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>original stacker 2 with ephedra&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: contains ephedra</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38424</link>
		<dc:creator>contains ephedra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jun 2008 17:53:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38424</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;ephedra...&lt;/strong&gt;

ephedra side effect...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>ephedra&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>ephedra side effect&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blog@Newsarama &#187; Four Not So Fantastic, But Okay.</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38423</link>
		<dc:creator>Blog@Newsarama &#187; Four Not So Fantastic, But Okay.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 May 2008 01:43:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38423</guid>
		<description>[...] Paul O&#8217;Brien crunches the Marvel sales numbers for March, including a 31% sales drop for the second issue of Millar and Hitch&#8217;s Fantastic Four: Well, I don’t understand this at all. I had Mark Millar and Bryan Hitch’s FANTASTIC FOUR pegged as a much bigger deal, but here we are down at 67K. For comparison, that’s slightly down from last June, which was an Initiative issue by Dwayne McDuffie and Paul Pelletier. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Paul O&#8217;Brien crunches the Marvel sales numbers for March, including a 31% sales drop for the second issue of Millar and Hitch&#8217;s Fantastic Four: Well, I don’t understand this at all. I had Mark Millar and Bryan Hitch’s FANTASTIC FOUR pegged as a much bigger deal, but here we are down at 67K. For comparison, that’s slightly down from last June, which was an Initiative issue by Dwayne McDuffie and Paul Pelletier. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darkfung</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38422</link>
		<dc:creator>Darkfung</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 12:15:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38422</guid>
		<description>Realistically at what sales number does a mainstream title become at risk of cancelation - I thought anything under 25,000 was in the danger zone but there are now loads of titles falling below that continuously - there must be a point where they aren&#039;t commercially viable ...

oh - and Wraith - I&#039;m seconding your predictions - they all seem like common sense to me !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Realistically at what sales number does a mainstream title become at risk of cancelation &#8211; I thought anything under 25,000 was in the danger zone but there are now loads of titles falling below that continuously &#8211; there must be a point where they aren&#8217;t commercially viable &#8230;</p>
<p>oh &#8211; and Wraith &#8211; I&#8217;m seconding your predictions &#8211; they all seem like common sense to me !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Somebody</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38421</link>
		<dc:creator>Somebody</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 16:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38421</guid>
		<description>&gt; Given that the creative team of INVINCIBLE IRON MAN isn’t in the same league commercially as that of THOR, and that there’s an existing IRON MAN book selling well below 40,000 units, I’d say Marvel can consider themselves lucky if they manage to shift between 50 and 60k of the debut issue, including the variant cover editions.

Well, it&#039;s got between seven and ten covers, remember...

&gt; Not that that matters either, since they can easily pick up the slack by involving Spidey in Secret Invasion. Any title that gets the SI logo slapped on it will easily sell 10k, 20k, 30k more. That’s just how it works and how it probably will always work.

Thing is though, they CAN&#039;T DO THAT for ASM as it stands - the lead-time the current format needs is so horrendous that they can&#039;t react to what&#039;s going on elsewhere (witness the recent botched New Avengers tie-in, which doesn&#039;t make sense in the context of recent events in that title...). The Secret Invasion tie-in - as with F4, another title whose current issues were done months earlier than is typical - is shunted off into a miniseries.

&gt; I presume what Tom’s referring to is the fact that the chart only covers sales outside the direct market, and therefore doesn’t cover newsstand sales or sales to the UK.

Well, *inside* the North American DM, but yeah.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Given that the creative team of INVINCIBLE IRON MAN isn’t in the same league commercially as that of THOR, and that there’s an existing IRON MAN book selling well below 40,000 units, I’d say Marvel can consider themselves lucky if they manage to shift between 50 and 60k of the debut issue, including the variant cover editions.</p>
<p>Well, it&#8217;s got between seven and ten covers, remember&#8230;</p>
<p>&gt; Not that that matters either, since they can easily pick up the slack by involving Spidey in Secret Invasion. Any title that gets the SI logo slapped on it will easily sell 10k, 20k, 30k more. That’s just how it works and how it probably will always work.</p>
<p>Thing is though, they CAN&#8217;T DO THAT for ASM as it stands &#8211; the lead-time the current format needs is so horrendous that they can&#8217;t react to what&#8217;s going on elsewhere (witness the recent botched New Avengers tie-in, which doesn&#8217;t make sense in the context of recent events in that title&#8230;). The Secret Invasion tie-in &#8211; as with F4, another title whose current issues were done months earlier than is typical &#8211; is shunted off into a miniseries.</p>
<p>&gt; I presume what Tom’s referring to is the fact that the chart only covers sales outside the direct market, and therefore doesn’t cover newsstand sales or sales to the UK.</p>
<p>Well, *inside* the North American DM, but yeah.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38420</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 12:27:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38420</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m pretty confident that the numbers are a largely accurate reflection of the sales that Diamond count on the chart.  Everyone who does the exercise comes up with much the same numbers, which is hardly surprising since it only requires one publisher&#039;s data and the ability to do basic maths.

I presume what Tom&#039;s referring to is the fact that the chart only covers sales outside the direct market, and therefore doesn&#039;t cover newsstand sales or sales to the UK.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m pretty confident that the numbers are a largely accurate reflection of the sales that Diamond count on the chart.  Everyone who does the exercise comes up with much the same numbers, which is hardly surprising since it only requires one publisher&#8217;s data and the ability to do basic maths.</p>
<p>I presume what Tom&#8217;s referring to is the fact that the chart only covers sales outside the direct market, and therefore doesn&#8217;t cover newsstand sales or sales to the UK.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Foot2Mouth - A Mouth Kicking Comics and Gaming News Source &#187; Blog Archive &#187; A Modest Proposal for ‘In-Trouble’ Books and Their Fans</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38419</link>
		<dc:creator>Foot2Mouth - A Mouth Kicking Comics and Gaming News Source &#187; Blog Archive &#187; A Modest Proposal for ‘In-Trouble’ Books and Their Fans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2008 00:39:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38419</guid>
		<description>[...] All of these books have low sales figures. Though the internet buzz about Scalped caused me to pick up the 1st trade in a half-off bin (that and I loved The Other Side, and That one issue of Wolverine that scribe Jason Aaron wrote) but I’m not buying Scalped as a monthly because I don’t love it like other people love it. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] All of these books have low sales figures. Though the internet buzz about Scalped caused me to pick up the 1st trade in a half-off bin (that and I loved The Other Side, and That one issue of Wolverine that scribe Jason Aaron wrote) but I’m not buying Scalped as a monthly because I don’t love it like other people love it. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Adriaenssens</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38418</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Adriaenssens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 18:12:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38418</guid>
		<description>As for Tom Brevoort&#039;s claim that the numbers are off 10k, it obviously barely matters. I took ASM&#039;s numbers, and added 10k:

139085
137958	-1127	-0,8%
111213	-26745	-19,4%
107959	-3254	-2,9%
111112	+3153	+2,9%
100874	-10238	-9,2%
98084	-2790	-2,8%
99835	+1751	+1,8%
92648	-7187	-7,2%
91072	-1576	-1,7%

And when they&#039;re 10k less than reported above:

119085
117958	-1127	-0,9%
91213	-26745	-22,7%
87959	-3254	-3,6%
91112	+3153	+3,6%
80874	-10238	-11,2%
78084	-2790	-3,4%
79835	+1751	+2,2%
72648	-7187	-9,0%
71072	-1576	-2,2%

As long as the numbers are consistently off, then the trends remain consistent as well, although obviously there is a bit of a difference when the books are in the lower regions like Spider-Girl is, for instance. But even if the numbers are 10k off, then ASM still lost 50k in between the first issue of BND and its 9th issue. That&#039;s not 7k a month, that&#039;s 7k a week. If that keeps up, we&#039;re below that average 63k very soon indeed. The danger of putting all your eggs in one basket is that, if you misread the audience (which I am certain they did), your eggs might well get ruined.

Not that that matters either, since they can easily pick up the slack by involving Spidey in Secret Invasion. Any title that gets the SI logo slapped on it will easily sell 10k, 20k, 30k more. That&#039;s just how it works and how it probably will always work. But right now, Spidey is lukewarm at best, and I don&#039;t think it&#039;ll be very long before it reaches Countdownesque numbers, despite Bachalo&#039;s excellent art, for one thing.

Also interesting that wraith&#039;s prediction about Thunderbolts indeed came true. Once the Initiative banner disappeared, it sank like a stone (same as for a lot of the other books that had the same banner), no doubt helped by Warren Ellis&#039;s writing style being such that it&#039;s highly unsatisfying to read in chapters and people figuring they&#039;re better off waiting for the trade. I&#039;m curious to see whether retailers/fans will fall for the same tricks again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As for Tom Brevoort&#8217;s claim that the numbers are off 10k, it obviously barely matters. I took ASM&#8217;s numbers, and added 10k:</p>
<p>139085<br />
137958	-1127	-0,8%<br />
111213	-26745	-19,4%<br />
107959	-3254	-2,9%<br />
111112	+3153	+2,9%<br />
100874	-10238	-9,2%<br />
98084	-2790	-2,8%<br />
99835	+1751	+1,8%<br />
92648	-7187	-7,2%<br />
91072	-1576	-1,7%</p>
<p>And when they&#8217;re 10k less than reported above:</p>
<p>119085<br />
117958	-1127	-0,9%<br />
91213	-26745	-22,7%<br />
87959	-3254	-3,6%<br />
91112	+3153	+3,6%<br />
80874	-10238	-11,2%<br />
78084	-2790	-3,4%<br />
79835	+1751	+2,2%<br />
72648	-7187	-9,0%<br />
71072	-1576	-2,2%</p>
<p>As long as the numbers are consistently off, then the trends remain consistent as well, although obviously there is a bit of a difference when the books are in the lower regions like Spider-Girl is, for instance. But even if the numbers are 10k off, then ASM still lost 50k in between the first issue of BND and its 9th issue. That&#8217;s not 7k a month, that&#8217;s 7k a week. If that keeps up, we&#8217;re below that average 63k very soon indeed. The danger of putting all your eggs in one basket is that, if you misread the audience (which I am certain they did), your eggs might well get ruined.</p>
<p>Not that that matters either, since they can easily pick up the slack by involving Spidey in Secret Invasion. Any title that gets the SI logo slapped on it will easily sell 10k, 20k, 30k more. That&#8217;s just how it works and how it probably will always work. But right now, Spidey is lukewarm at best, and I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;ll be very long before it reaches Countdownesque numbers, despite Bachalo&#8217;s excellent art, for one thing.</p>
<p>Also interesting that wraith&#8217;s prediction about Thunderbolts indeed came true. Once the Initiative banner disappeared, it sank like a stone (same as for a lot of the other books that had the same banner), no doubt helped by Warren Ellis&#8217;s writing style being such that it&#8217;s highly unsatisfying to read in chapters and people figuring they&#8217;re better off waiting for the trade. I&#8217;m curious to see whether retailers/fans will fall for the same tricks again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc-Oliver Frisch</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38417</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc-Oliver Frisch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 15:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38417</guid>
		<description>&quot;Really, anything less than 100K for the launch should be viewed as a miserable failure — Thor managed 200K as a relaunch, if IM can’t manage 100K with a giant movie push behind it, it’s pathetic.&quot;

Hold on- THOR has been fueled by a long absence of the character and a prominent creative team, and it&#039;s been selling spectacularly well even by those expectations.

Film adaptations, by contrast, rarely have much of an effect on comics sales, unless they point to one readily available book or finite series, as in the case of 300, HELLBOY or SIN CITY.

Given that the creative team of INVINCIBLE IRON MAN isn&#039;t in the same league commercially as that of THOR, and that there&#039;s an existing IRON MAN book selling well below 40,000 units, I&#039;d say Marvel can consider themselves lucky if they manage to shift between 50 and 60k of the debut issue, including the variant cover editions.

I pretty much agree with Paul. I think it would have made more sense to give the character some rest after CIVIL WAR and then relaunch the book in time for the movie. I&#039;m not sure who&#039;s supposed to buy a second series, either. (Well, I will, but that&#039;s just because it&#039;s by Fraction, so it doesn&#039;t count- I&#039;d also buy WOODGOD if it said &quot;Fraction&quot; on the cover.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Really, anything less than 100K for the launch should be viewed as a miserable failure — Thor managed 200K as a relaunch, if IM can’t manage 100K with a giant movie push behind it, it’s pathetic.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hold on- THOR has been fueled by a long absence of the character and a prominent creative team, and it&#8217;s been selling spectacularly well even by those expectations.</p>
<p>Film adaptations, by contrast, rarely have much of an effect on comics sales, unless they point to one readily available book or finite series, as in the case of 300, HELLBOY or SIN CITY.</p>
<p>Given that the creative team of INVINCIBLE IRON MAN isn&#8217;t in the same league commercially as that of THOR, and that there&#8217;s an existing IRON MAN book selling well below 40,000 units, I&#8217;d say Marvel can consider themselves lucky if they manage to shift between 50 and 60k of the debut issue, including the variant cover editions.</p>
<p>I pretty much agree with Paul. I think it would have made more sense to give the character some rest after CIVIL WAR and then relaunch the book in time for the movie. I&#8217;m not sure who&#8217;s supposed to buy a second series, either. (Well, I will, but that&#8217;s just because it&#8217;s by Fraction, so it doesn&#8217;t count- I&#8217;d also buy WOODGOD if it said &#8220;Fraction&#8221; on the cover.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DjeD</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38416</link>
		<dc:creator>DjeD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 10:36:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38416</guid>
		<description>I wonder why Thor of all books is holding up so well. Is it JMS&#039; writing, Coipel&#039;s art, the figure of Thor, or a combination of these factors? It will be interesting to see how Fraction&#039;s Thor is doing.

And please, guys, buy Nova and Ghost Rider, two of the best books on the superhero market.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder why Thor of all books is holding up so well. Is it JMS&#8217; writing, Coipel&#8217;s art, the figure of Thor, or a combination of these factors? It will be interesting to see how Fraction&#8217;s Thor is doing.</p>
<p>And please, guys, buy Nova and Ghost Rider, two of the best books on the superhero market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tavella</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38415</link>
		<dc:creator>tavella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 03:19:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38415</guid>
		<description>&quot;Also it amazes me that Marvel think there is a market for a second Iron Man ongoing whenever the other book can’t even make the top 50.&quot;

My guess is that they wanted a #1 Iron Man for movie fans (and retailers) to jump on.  Plus it&#039;s supposed to be much more straightforward heroics.

Really, anything less than 100K for the launch should be viewed as a miserable failure -- Thor managed 200K as a relaunch,  if IM can&#039;t manage 100K with a giant movie push behind it, it&#039;s pathetic.

Whether it&#039;ll *keep* those readers, I have my doubts; historically, movie fan bubbles have not stuck around long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Also it amazes me that Marvel think there is a market for a second Iron Man ongoing whenever the other book can’t even make the top 50.&#8221;</p>
<p>My guess is that they wanted a #1 Iron Man for movie fans (and retailers) to jump on.  Plus it&#8217;s supposed to be much more straightforward heroics.</p>
<p>Really, anything less than 100K for the launch should be viewed as a miserable failure &#8212; Thor managed 200K as a relaunch,  if IM can&#8217;t manage 100K with a giant movie push behind it, it&#8217;s pathetic.</p>
<p>Whether it&#8217;ll *keep* those readers, I have my doubts; historically, movie fan bubbles have not stuck around long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38414</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 06:53:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38414</guid>
		<description>For many retailers who paid for &quot;Free Comic Book Day&quot; books to sell at their stores, Marvel shipped tons of Cable #1 and whichever recent issue of Ultimate Spider-Man had Spidey &amp; the X-Men posed on it to comic book stores to give out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For many retailers who paid for &#8220;Free Comic Book Day&#8221; books to sell at their stores, Marvel shipped tons of Cable #1 and whichever recent issue of Ultimate Spider-Man had Spidey &amp; the X-Men posed on it to comic book stores to give out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wraith</title>
		<link>http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38413</link>
		<dc:creator>Wraith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 00:15:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comicsbeat.com/2008/05/01/marvel-month-to-month-sales-march-2008/#comment-38413</guid>
		<description>despite the spin, I&#039;m glad to see that Millar is at least honest enough to admit that his and Hitch&#039;s FF run isn&#039;t doing as well as he hoped it would and that the high sales for their first issue were  partly due to the variant cover.

As for sales on their FF run going up with issue 558, I HIGHLY doubt that will happen UNLEES that issue has a variant cover.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>despite the spin, I&#8217;m glad to see that Millar is at least honest enough to admit that his and Hitch&#8217;s FF run isn&#8217;t doing as well as he hoped it would and that the high sales for their first issue were  partly due to the variant cover.</p>
<p>As for sales on their FF run going up with issue 558, I HIGHLY doubt that will happen UNLEES that issue has a variant cover.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

