There’s a good article in The Atlantic that delves into why Marvel, and similarly, DC Comics have had trouble making money publishing their comics. It’s a good read for anyone that cares about popular comics. I have several criticisms that are both touched on and not presented in the article. If you don’t want to read my word-vomiting, at least read the article for an actual journalist’s insight into the world of Marvel (and DC’s) publishing faults.

Marvel and DC have been using the same direct market model for decades without attempting to adapt the publishing, distribution, or business models for new readers and new/different reading habits, while also frustrating long time readers. I’m not a retailer, but from my own consumer perspective (and my interest in the industry as a whole), I can tell you that there are so many reasons why Marvel and DC are not great publishers any more, even though they may be great entertainment companies.

1. I much prefer the Japanese model – cheap anthologies chock full of stories, which later get collected into trades (tankōbon). I’d much rather see DC and Marvel publish full graphic novels, serial or otherwise, periodically throughout the year while offering super cheap anthologies every month. This would give monthly lovers their fix, provide a constant stream of income, and help get rid of stupid continuity convolution because continuity changes would be slower as the stories become more focused (graphic novels) and/or take longer to develop (both graphic novels and short anthology stories). Even if the Big Two weren’t to adopt this model, they should, at the very least, take a look at how people are finding, buying, and reading their books and try to find a balance between financial stability and good publishing and distribution practices. At the very least, work with the book stores (not comic shops) to better display and present the trades/graphic novels.

2. I question how much the Big Two care about their characters. Their marketing and treatment of their characters suggest that they don’t, at least relative the how much they care about making a profit – a very business-oriented perspective instead of a creative one. And while Marvel and DC are definitely big businesses, their product can arguably suffer as a result of this prioritization. Make good products, consumers will buy for a long time. Make pandering products built to make money and some will buy for a short time. This might explain why good, critically acclaimed books that don’t feature the major, popular icons like Spider-Man, The Avengers, or The X-Men don’t get promoted as well as they should. Without proper marketing, pre-orders can suffer, and low pre-orders can lead to the cancellation of a title.

3. We’ve been trained to think that anything significant – changing a major icon’s character from the original to someone new, a crossover story, a major event for a single character – is a gimmick. On the first Sam Raimi Spider-Man DVD, there was a special feature where Marvel creators were interviewed. In this feature, Joe Quesada had said that, during the comics boom of the 90s, they’d forgotten what readers really want: a good story. And yet, Marvel and DC have returned to “the gimmick” era disguised as “good stories” when the good stories that get critical and fan acclaim go without proper marketing.

4. Convoluted storylines are nothing new. They can, in fact, be interesting if done right. But when convoluted publishing coincides with convoluted stories, that’s when buying books becomes a chore. Frequent crossover events require buying multiple titles readers may not be interested in becomes a pain and financially draining, and relaunching books with new #1s over and over and over again becomes cumbersome and prevents readers from becoming invested in an ongoing title. Even self-contained stories don’t necessitate relaunching a title under the monthly publishing model. And, replacing major, iconic characters may or may not be confusing to new and old readers, but combined with multiple universes/imprints and numerous relaunches and yes, it can be confusing. Basically, collecting monthly comics is a chore and difficult for new readers. This is another reason why I like trade paperbacks: I can select which stories I want to read.

5. Licensing is much more important to these companies (or, at least, their parent companies). The books are now secondary. Even though the comic book is an American invention, they get much more respect in Europe and Japan – in Japan, everyone reads comics, and the comic industry is, from my understanding, largely autonomous with licensing being supplemental. Also, there are multitudes of subject matter: from superheroes to sports; from sci-fi to romance; from fantasy to board games. To an extent, we have that here, but because most of the marketing from the Big Two goes towards superhero titles, other books get lost. Not to mention that much of diverse subject matter comes to us in imported manga titles and indie/alternative books – the latter of which are treated more like the prose book market: traditional book stores, along with book reviews and recommendations from trusted sources, are almost essential in drawing the public’s attention to books like Nanking, Fun Home, American Born Chinese, etc.

6. Many comic shops are not inviting to everyone. They’re often – not always, but often – dim or dark-ish, dank, and/or staffed by aloof “comic bros”, and the racks are full of books geared for specific readers. The best comic shops I’ve been to are bright and well-lit, clean, and the staff may be casual but they’re friendly to everyone and they’re professional. And they’re easily identifiable in some way (a badge, similar T-shirts, etc). Those shops are inviting to women and families. If I were a woman, for example, I’d much rather go to a large book store to get my comics than a typical comic store.