Re: Why does "BOOM" Disney have too much variants?

[johnnystorm]

I actually like some of the Boom Disney comics... Nemo, Cars & the Incredibles. I guess Boom is better suited to Pixar over classic Disney.
I gave the Mickey, Donald, & WDCS books a try, but trying to shoehorn European Disney stories into American comics doesn't always work. Was kinda looking forward to the super-hero versions of the characters to team-up, but it was a pretty poor production so I gave it a pass after the first new issue. Expected Super Goof & Darkwing Duck etc., not just teaming up all of Donald's cast & giving them generic powers & costumes.
The Muppet Show book was eh,ok, not anything great. You can't recapture the feel of the show on paper I'm afraid, but the storybook tales Robin Hood & Peter Pan were pretty good.

And as far as variants go, I just choose whichever cover they have that I like. At Baltimore ComicCon they were offering a limited edition Uncle Scrooge cover by Don Rosa- wanted to get it to have him sign it, but it cost $20 bucks...I could buy 20 back issues of Uncle Scrooge for that! In this month's Previews Boom is offering a 4 issue Incredibles Holgram Foil Variant set...for $99.00!!! Not happening here, I'm afraid!

Oh as an aside, any Disney collectors go check Target's Dollar area in the front of the store right now...they have some Pixar items including three issues of a Disney Comic, reprints from the Disney Digest book: Monsters Inc, Incredibles, & Nemo. They did this last year with Toy Story, Tinkerbell, & Incredibles. This year's Incredibles reprint 2 of the 3 stories from last year. LY book's were squarebound like junior style kid's series paperbacks with a poster & stickers. This year they are thin square things like those Whitman shape books.

[thunderbolt]

No one's rooting for them to fail (except the thread starter) its just a fact that somewhere down the line they will lose the comics back to Disney/Marvel. I read one Boom title, The Anchor, great book.

[ctc]

>I can't figure out why we don't see Bugs Bunny, Scooby Doo et al at the Drug Store and Grocery Marts alongside Archie anymore.

Last I saw, DC was doing them, and for better or worse, they’re prisoners of their distribution system.

>I never understand it when folks actively root AGAINST indie comics.

Inertia? This has been one of my gripes for a LONG time: the comics, a medium supposedly predicated on imagination is populated by some of the most close-minded fans going. It comes and goes though; I think we’re nearing the end of a “building” phase, and the old guard are feeling left out ‘cos it doesn’t include their favourites.

Don C.

[samurainoir]

>I can't figure out why we don't see Bugs Bunny, Scooby Doo et al at the Drug Store and Grocery Marts alongside Archie anymore.

Last I saw, DC was doing them, and for better or worse, they’re prisoners of their distribution system.

I do see those Bugs comics at the few stores that do stock kids comics, but we're talking about the media conglomorate that owns TIME MAGAZINE (and Entertainment Weekly etc) and the related distribution. Of course DC Comics lives under the Warner Studios umbrella, so I'm sure their is certain politics involved in what they feel they should be pushing at the newsstands these days. Particularly as Print begins to suffer more and more in favour of digital distribution models.

[LadyZod]

There was a time when a Newstand would get their comics, like any other periodical, through an ID distributor.

The Comic company would print two sets of books... one going to direct sales, (to Diamond) and one going to the Newsstands (to ID Distributors).

A little while ago, the monopoly known as Diamond took over newsstand distribution for comics, so no more ID distribution for them.

Now, it was cheaper to print for newsstands for the comic companies (using newsprint instead of the glossy paper we see in direct sales) and it was cheaper for newsstands to get books through the ID's since if the book didn't sell, they would rip the cover off and get a credit (no back issue market on the stand!)

Now with Diamond in the fold, books are printed the same and the credits the stands (or bookstores if you will) are less and less... making it not a worthwhile venture for a place like a Supermarket to carry comics. Bookstores, ya, since periodicals and comics are loss leaders... they get people butts in the store to drink their expensive coffee (where the profit is!) and who care if the magazines or comics sell?

[samurainoir]

There was a time when a Newstand would get their comics, like any other periodical, through an ID distributor.

The Comic company would print two sets of books... one going to direct sales, (to Diamond) and one going to the Newsstands (to ID Distributors).

A little while ago, the monopoly known as Diamond took over newsstand distribution for comics, so no more ID distribution for them.

Now, it was cheaper to print for newsstands for the comic companies (using newsprint instead of the glossy paper we see in direct sales) and it was cheaper for newsstands to get books through the ID's since if the book didn't sell, they would rip the cover off and get a credit (no back issue market on the stand!)

Now with Diamond in the fold, books are printed the same and the credits the stands (or bookstores if you will) are less and less... making it not a worthwhile venture for a place like a Supermarket to carry comics. Bookstores, ya, since periodicals and comics are loss leaders... they get people butts in the store to drink their expensive coffee (where the profit is!) and who care if the magazines or comics sell?

Thank you for that information! I've been really curious why comic spinner racks have returned to Bookstores in recent years but not Drug or Grocery Stores. Particularly since these same bookstores have fully stocked graphic novel sections.

I had not realized we've actually come to the point in time where print periodicals are now officially loss-leaders in that market! It makes perfect sense since the coffee kiosks are located next to the periodicals most of the time.