Jim Lemoine
Dec 6, 2002, 01:29 pm
<img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/logos/dittol_logo.jpg" align=left width=115 height=100 border=0 alt="Did I Think That Out Loud?!? logo">By Jim Lemoine, darkkelf@earthlink.net
This is the massively delayed third part of a series examining the “New Marvel” and its effect on long-term Marvel Comics readers. Since we've already looked at the creative side of things, today we’re briefly examining the financial aspects.
A purely hypothetical question, to get this debate started:
Let's say that the second X-Men movie is released, and it's a phenomenal success! It's even bigger than the Spider-Man movie, and potential customers are flocking to drugstores and comic shops to read the latest adventures of their new favorite super-hero: Wolverine. Only there's a difference. See, in X-Men 2, those brilliant Hollywood wunderkids thought that they'd make the whole Weapon X/Origin thing an implanted memory. According to the movie, Wolverine's really only 24 years old, and the accompanying revelations about his past have given him a new outlook on life. He no longer enjoys fighting, he's gotten rid of the berserker rages, and as it turns out, he's had a huge crush on Cyclops for a long, long time.
Like it or loathe it, bear with me here. There's a point coming.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/origin1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/origin1t.jpg" align=right alt="Origin #1"></a>So according to the movie, Wolverine is a closet homosexual and a pacifist, none of that Weapon X and Origin stuff ever happened, and he's really the youngest X-Man. Thanks to the widespread popular acceptance of the movie, this is the way the non-comics-reading world now sees Wolverine, and this is the way they want to see him in the comics. And they'll actually start buying the comics if he's portrayed that way there.
The question is this: Would Marvel change Wolverine completely, everything about who he is and what he isn't, because that would sell more books to the usually-non-comics-reading-public?
Your personal answer to that question probably reveals what you see Marvel as: storytellers (who happen to have a business) or business people (who happen to be storytellers). There's a third option, that of a Marvel who believes the young, gay Wolverine is more of a short-term fad, so they keep the old Wolverine to maintain his long-term appeal. But still, for argument's sake, let's ignore that option. Which is Marvel, the House of Artistry or the Profit Center?
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/xmevo-09.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/xmevo-09t.jpg" align=right alt="X-Men: Evolution #9"></a>If we're forced to keep it that simple, the answer is obvious. Marvel is a business. As much as we, the comics-reading public, would like to ignore it, Marvel exists solely for the purpose of making money. If a certain creative move will most likely increase profits, Marvel will go with it. And if a good, critically-acclaimed book is actually costing the company money, and there's no boost in revenues seen in the future, the book is going to be cancelled. Unlike AOL-Time-Warner-backed-DC Comics, Marvel is backed by a relatively small corporation: Toy Biz. Without strong corporate ownership, Marvel must remain a profitable entity. Because of that, high quality books like Slingers, X-Men: Evolution, and possibly Soldier X get cancelled. Factor in this data, and I have my answer to the hypothetical question presented above: yes.
Which gives a nice lead-in to the focus of this column: the financial aspects of the "Marvelution" that has taken place under the reigns of Joe Quesada and Bill Jemas over the last two years. Last time we focused on the creative changes that have been made, and next time we'll look at the whole marketing/P.R. campaign that accompanies it, but right now let's have a look at what's honestly most important to Marvel: the money. One could easily write an entire book on this topic, so we'll just briefly examine some of the most notable consequences.
The obvious financial result of Jemas and Quesada's New Marvel is more profit. Pulled from the brink of bankruptcy, Marvel's done a complete turnaround; they're even prepaying their loans interest-free, which is one of the surest signs of a company's financial stability. Check the figures and yes, a lot of this profit comes from the huge success of the Spider-Man movie... but the comics themselves aren't doing too poorly at all. According to Diamond Distributors, Marvel was involved in nearly half of ALL comics-related sales during the month of October.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/tf-armada1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/tf-armada1t.jpg" align=right alt="Transformers: Armada #1"></a>Think about that for a second: half of all comics-related sales. Marvel's up against DC Comics, which is backed by one of the biggest entertainment conglomerates on the planet. Marvel's up against Dark Horse's Star Wars franchise, which is supported by some of the most successful movies ever made. Marvel's up against the amazing Transformers relaunch spearheaded by Dreamwave Productions. And yet, Marvel, backed by a small company with relatively little entertainment influence, manages to take half of the market share. From a business viewpoint, that's frankly amazing, and a great sign for the future of Marvel Enterprises.
So then the question is, what's caused the higher sales and profits at Marvel over the past two years? Anybody at Marvel would be quick to point out the new, expanded trade paperback program. They'd wax poetic on the high-profile creative teams that are drawing new readers to Marvel (think Garth Ennis on Punisher or Mike Allred on X-Force). They'd talk your ear off about more accessible storylines and stronger tie-ins to feature films. But they'll never mention the truth about where these Diamond sales numbers come from.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/newxmen134.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/newxmen134t.jpg" align=right alt="New X-Men #134"></a>If you hear, for instance, that 90,000 copies of New X-Men were sold last month, that doesn't necessarily mean that 90,000 fans bought copies of the issue. Instead, it means that sales outlets bought 90,000 copies from Marvel: conceivably, all 90,000 of those comics could just be sitting on the comic racks with not a one sold. Actual sales of Marvel comics to customers, to my knowledge, aren't ever tracked. When you hear that Marvel comics are selling well, that doesn't necessarily mean that a lot of us are buying them; it means that retailers are expecting us to buy a lot of them, so they're ordering a lot of them.
The best example of this is the Ultimate Spider-Man #1 scenario. Way back when, before the Ultimate line existed, there was a Marvel book that was pretty much universally hated called Spider-Man: Chapter One. Billed as the ultimate retelling of Spider-Man's origin for a modern audience, it was completely disappointing. Shortly thereafter, Marvel told us that they were going to do the exact same thing again, only that this time it would be called Ultimate Spider-Man and it would be written by a relative newcomer named Bendis.
For the uninitiated, comics retailers usually buy their books from Diamond Distributors, and they generally aren't allowed to return them. If a book doesn't sell, it's stuck in a back-issue bin or a 50-cent box. Either way, the retailer rarely gets much of a return on the money he paid for the book in the first place. Thus, because running a comic shop isn't all that profitable to begin with, retailers have to be very careful about how much they order of any given title.
Now put yourself in a retailer's shoes: if a modern Spidey origin revamp by a superstar like John Byrne wouldn't sell last year, why would a modern Spidey origin revamp by a Marvel newcomer do any better? Retailers chose not to order very many copies of Ultimate Spider-Man #1, so that's all Marvel printed (back in the nineties, Marvel would print lots of extra copies for reorders just in case, but not anymore). As we all know, the first issue was a tremendous success and remains one of the last few years' most sought-after comics. It's nearly impossible to put your hands on a copy, because everybody sold out. Retailers are left counting the dollars they could have made if only they’d had more copies to sell and stock.
After that and several similar occasions, retailers have learned the lesson of how costly it is to underestimate the selling potential of any of Marvel's titles. This mindset has led many of them to overorder, especially on high profile books like Amazing Spider-Man and Ultimates. The end result: Marvel gets high sales figures, so they're overjoyed. Retailers continue to struggle with the realities of maintaining a profit for their business. And fans... well, it's a mixed bag: on the one hand, it's pretty annoying when your shop forgets to save you a copy of Origin #1, and just two days after its release you have to pay ten bucks for a copy (true story). On the other hand, it's pretty neat (and retro) to see your comics actually gain value the way they used to before Marvel started printing thousands of extra copies of every issue.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/previews/1102/truth_1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/previews/1102/truth_1t.jpg" align=right alt="Truth: Red, White & Black #1 preview"></a>Don't get the impression, though, that things are all doom and gloom in the worlds of comics retailers. Comics in general, and Marvel books in particular, are selling much better these days, which means more profit for the store owners. Still, many retailers are complaining that Marvel's tactics are contributing to their financial ruination; one has to admit, they have a valid point. Marvel's generally kept a policy that if a comic is more than 30 days late, or if the creative team has significantly changed from what was promoted in the previews, that they would accept returns. Thus far, Marvel have refused to follow that policy, and with so many of their books running late and/or including last-minute "fill-in" teams, the retailers have a right to be upset. There are many fans out there who would buy, for instance, a Frank Quitely issue of New X-Men, but who wouldn't buy that same issue as pencilled by Igor Kordey. Retailers order based on an assumption of a certain level of sales, and different creators or timelines certainly change the rules of the marketing. A Garth Ennis Punisher, for instance, is a huge seller; a Punisher by virtually anybody else is probably on its way to the quarter box. An issue of Truth is probably a safe bet for high sales, sure... unless the issue's two months late and the hype around it has died down by the time it's released!
The situation is unfortunate, often unfair, and frankly detrimental to the legions of comic book stores across the company. Several of the more reputable of them have even instituted a class-action lawsuit against Marvel over the company's seeming inability to follow their own policy. While these guys have an excellent point, here's hoping the scope of the lawsuit remains reasonable: implement the rules in a fair way, and possibly give restitution for lost sales (in other words, retailers, please don't try to claim 'emotional trauma' or something similar and go for more than you deserve here. That would quickly make you the bad guys in this scenario). Marvel seems to have taken baby steps to correct the situation by allowing some books to be returned, but they've still got a ways to go if they want to truly treat their retailers fairly.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/uxmen416.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/uxmen416t.jpg" align=right alt="Uncanny X-Men #416"></a>Speaking of creative teams, another way Marvel's managed to enhance their revenue stream is by offering more than the standard 12 issues of a title per year. Marvel caught a lot of flak from fans over the unilateral decision to eliminate Annuals and instead produce a 13th issue. Let's look at it logically, though, and it makes perfect sense. Not everybody who buys Uncanny X-Men will buy the Uncanny X-Men Annual. Annuals often have different creative teams, as well as storylines that have nothing to do with the core title. On the other hand, everybody who buys Uncanny X-Men will buy Uncanny X-Men #416. Hence, Marvel doesn't have to publish a "side" issue, and they sell more books overall. It’s hard to argue with a concept as simple as that one.
With the financial success of that move, it shouldn't have been a surprise when Marvel began their Thunderbolts experiment: two issues per month, twice as many as any normal series, with one writer and a rotating art team telling the story twice as fast. Thunderbolts fans like me loved the idea, because we read the title for the story first, art second. Ignore for a minute the sharp decline in quality that Thunderbolts has faced for the last few months, and consider how this concept looked to fans originally. We’d get more of our favorite characters, and more of these incredibly in-depth stories... perfect! And on the financial side, Thunderbolts is suddenly making Marvel twice as much money. Because of this, Marvel execs are asking, "Why the heck aren't we doing this with our other titles?"
Indeed, why not. A fundamental change could be coming in the timing of Marvel's publications, one engineered specifically to make you, the fan, spend more money. Take the Peter Parker, Spider-Man title, for instance. Current plans are for the relaunched title to publish 18 issues per year. Are you willing to spend 50% more on the book in order to keep your complete run? What about Uncanny X-Men? Can you afford to buy two issues per month instead of one? Will you still want to collect the series if you can only afford to buy every other issue? Maybe you will. Maybe you won't. I don't have an answer.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/exiles20.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/exiles20t.jpg" align=right alt="Exiles #20"></a>Personally, I like the idea of publishing more issues per year; I'm not a poor college student anymore, and I'd happily pay more for extra installments of books like X-Statix, Thor, and Exiles. On the other hand, though, I remember when I was a poor college student and had to ration out every penny I spent on comics. Will Marvel lose readers from students who can't afford to buy 18-24 issues of a title per year? Will the less affluent of the fanbase leave their former favorites because they just can't justify the expense any longer? Pick one of your not-so-favorite titles and ask yourself, “Would I still collect this if I had to buy twice as many issues?” Some fans (like me) would see that as a great thing and will happily give Marvel more money… but other readers may see it as a hindrance to continuing to buy the title.
The fact is, unlike a DC Comics, Marvel has to make a profit in order to survive. While DC receives funding from Time Warner to keep books in the Vertigo and kiddie lines in print, every Marvel series has to make money or there's simply no economic justification for its continued existence. Jemas and Quesada understand this, albeit in a controversial manner. Once you understand the following fact, you understand the two of them: their actions -- whether it be signing up a big new creative team, or changing the X-Men's costumes, or authorizing extra issues of a book per year -- are all engineered to sell more comics and make the company more money.
Which is all generally good for us, the fans. Just so long as prices don't go too high, print frequency doesn't get too unreasonable, retailers manage to stay in business, Logan doesn't deviate too far from what we're used to, and Marvel follows a reasonable long-term growth strategy. With Marvel constantly pushing the envelope, they're walking a fine line, but it’s worked for them so far. Time will tell.
Jim Lemoine has worked as a disc jockey, a video game designer, and a leadership consultant. He's been reading comics for 18 years, and he's been thinking too much for a while before that.
This is the massively delayed third part of a series examining the “New Marvel” and its effect on long-term Marvel Comics readers. Since we've already looked at the creative side of things, today we’re briefly examining the financial aspects.
A purely hypothetical question, to get this debate started:
Let's say that the second X-Men movie is released, and it's a phenomenal success! It's even bigger than the Spider-Man movie, and potential customers are flocking to drugstores and comic shops to read the latest adventures of their new favorite super-hero: Wolverine. Only there's a difference. See, in X-Men 2, those brilliant Hollywood wunderkids thought that they'd make the whole Weapon X/Origin thing an implanted memory. According to the movie, Wolverine's really only 24 years old, and the accompanying revelations about his past have given him a new outlook on life. He no longer enjoys fighting, he's gotten rid of the berserker rages, and as it turns out, he's had a huge crush on Cyclops for a long, long time.
Like it or loathe it, bear with me here. There's a point coming.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/origin1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/origin1t.jpg" align=right alt="Origin #1"></a>So according to the movie, Wolverine is a closet homosexual and a pacifist, none of that Weapon X and Origin stuff ever happened, and he's really the youngest X-Man. Thanks to the widespread popular acceptance of the movie, this is the way the non-comics-reading world now sees Wolverine, and this is the way they want to see him in the comics. And they'll actually start buying the comics if he's portrayed that way there.
The question is this: Would Marvel change Wolverine completely, everything about who he is and what he isn't, because that would sell more books to the usually-non-comics-reading-public?
Your personal answer to that question probably reveals what you see Marvel as: storytellers (who happen to have a business) or business people (who happen to be storytellers). There's a third option, that of a Marvel who believes the young, gay Wolverine is more of a short-term fad, so they keep the old Wolverine to maintain his long-term appeal. But still, for argument's sake, let's ignore that option. Which is Marvel, the House of Artistry or the Profit Center?
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/xmevo-09.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/xmevo-09t.jpg" align=right alt="X-Men: Evolution #9"></a>If we're forced to keep it that simple, the answer is obvious. Marvel is a business. As much as we, the comics-reading public, would like to ignore it, Marvel exists solely for the purpose of making money. If a certain creative move will most likely increase profits, Marvel will go with it. And if a good, critically-acclaimed book is actually costing the company money, and there's no boost in revenues seen in the future, the book is going to be cancelled. Unlike AOL-Time-Warner-backed-DC Comics, Marvel is backed by a relatively small corporation: Toy Biz. Without strong corporate ownership, Marvel must remain a profitable entity. Because of that, high quality books like Slingers, X-Men: Evolution, and possibly Soldier X get cancelled. Factor in this data, and I have my answer to the hypothetical question presented above: yes.
Which gives a nice lead-in to the focus of this column: the financial aspects of the "Marvelution" that has taken place under the reigns of Joe Quesada and Bill Jemas over the last two years. Last time we focused on the creative changes that have been made, and next time we'll look at the whole marketing/P.R. campaign that accompanies it, but right now let's have a look at what's honestly most important to Marvel: the money. One could easily write an entire book on this topic, so we'll just briefly examine some of the most notable consequences.
The obvious financial result of Jemas and Quesada's New Marvel is more profit. Pulled from the brink of bankruptcy, Marvel's done a complete turnaround; they're even prepaying their loans interest-free, which is one of the surest signs of a company's financial stability. Check the figures and yes, a lot of this profit comes from the huge success of the Spider-Man movie... but the comics themselves aren't doing too poorly at all. According to Diamond Distributors, Marvel was involved in nearly half of ALL comics-related sales during the month of October.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/tf-armada1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/tf-armada1t.jpg" align=right alt="Transformers: Armada #1"></a>Think about that for a second: half of all comics-related sales. Marvel's up against DC Comics, which is backed by one of the biggest entertainment conglomerates on the planet. Marvel's up against Dark Horse's Star Wars franchise, which is supported by some of the most successful movies ever made. Marvel's up against the amazing Transformers relaunch spearheaded by Dreamwave Productions. And yet, Marvel, backed by a small company with relatively little entertainment influence, manages to take half of the market share. From a business viewpoint, that's frankly amazing, and a great sign for the future of Marvel Enterprises.
So then the question is, what's caused the higher sales and profits at Marvel over the past two years? Anybody at Marvel would be quick to point out the new, expanded trade paperback program. They'd wax poetic on the high-profile creative teams that are drawing new readers to Marvel (think Garth Ennis on Punisher or Mike Allred on X-Force). They'd talk your ear off about more accessible storylines and stronger tie-ins to feature films. But they'll never mention the truth about where these Diamond sales numbers come from.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/newxmen134.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/newxmen134t.jpg" align=right alt="New X-Men #134"></a>If you hear, for instance, that 90,000 copies of New X-Men were sold last month, that doesn't necessarily mean that 90,000 fans bought copies of the issue. Instead, it means that sales outlets bought 90,000 copies from Marvel: conceivably, all 90,000 of those comics could just be sitting on the comic racks with not a one sold. Actual sales of Marvel comics to customers, to my knowledge, aren't ever tracked. When you hear that Marvel comics are selling well, that doesn't necessarily mean that a lot of us are buying them; it means that retailers are expecting us to buy a lot of them, so they're ordering a lot of them.
The best example of this is the Ultimate Spider-Man #1 scenario. Way back when, before the Ultimate line existed, there was a Marvel book that was pretty much universally hated called Spider-Man: Chapter One. Billed as the ultimate retelling of Spider-Man's origin for a modern audience, it was completely disappointing. Shortly thereafter, Marvel told us that they were going to do the exact same thing again, only that this time it would be called Ultimate Spider-Man and it would be written by a relative newcomer named Bendis.
For the uninitiated, comics retailers usually buy their books from Diamond Distributors, and they generally aren't allowed to return them. If a book doesn't sell, it's stuck in a back-issue bin or a 50-cent box. Either way, the retailer rarely gets much of a return on the money he paid for the book in the first place. Thus, because running a comic shop isn't all that profitable to begin with, retailers have to be very careful about how much they order of any given title.
Now put yourself in a retailer's shoes: if a modern Spidey origin revamp by a superstar like John Byrne wouldn't sell last year, why would a modern Spidey origin revamp by a Marvel newcomer do any better? Retailers chose not to order very many copies of Ultimate Spider-Man #1, so that's all Marvel printed (back in the nineties, Marvel would print lots of extra copies for reorders just in case, but not anymore). As we all know, the first issue was a tremendous success and remains one of the last few years' most sought-after comics. It's nearly impossible to put your hands on a copy, because everybody sold out. Retailers are left counting the dollars they could have made if only they’d had more copies to sell and stock.
After that and several similar occasions, retailers have learned the lesson of how costly it is to underestimate the selling potential of any of Marvel's titles. This mindset has led many of them to overorder, especially on high profile books like Amazing Spider-Man and Ultimates. The end result: Marvel gets high sales figures, so they're overjoyed. Retailers continue to struggle with the realities of maintaining a profit for their business. And fans... well, it's a mixed bag: on the one hand, it's pretty annoying when your shop forgets to save you a copy of Origin #1, and just two days after its release you have to pay ten bucks for a copy (true story). On the other hand, it's pretty neat (and retro) to see your comics actually gain value the way they used to before Marvel started printing thousands of extra copies of every issue.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/previews/1102/truth_1.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/previews/1102/truth_1t.jpg" align=right alt="Truth: Red, White & Black #1 preview"></a>Don't get the impression, though, that things are all doom and gloom in the worlds of comics retailers. Comics in general, and Marvel books in particular, are selling much better these days, which means more profit for the store owners. Still, many retailers are complaining that Marvel's tactics are contributing to their financial ruination; one has to admit, they have a valid point. Marvel's generally kept a policy that if a comic is more than 30 days late, or if the creative team has significantly changed from what was promoted in the previews, that they would accept returns. Thus far, Marvel have refused to follow that policy, and with so many of their books running late and/or including last-minute "fill-in" teams, the retailers have a right to be upset. There are many fans out there who would buy, for instance, a Frank Quitely issue of New X-Men, but who wouldn't buy that same issue as pencilled by Igor Kordey. Retailers order based on an assumption of a certain level of sales, and different creators or timelines certainly change the rules of the marketing. A Garth Ennis Punisher, for instance, is a huge seller; a Punisher by virtually anybody else is probably on its way to the quarter box. An issue of Truth is probably a safe bet for high sales, sure... unless the issue's two months late and the hype around it has died down by the time it's released!
The situation is unfortunate, often unfair, and frankly detrimental to the legions of comic book stores across the company. Several of the more reputable of them have even instituted a class-action lawsuit against Marvel over the company's seeming inability to follow their own policy. While these guys have an excellent point, here's hoping the scope of the lawsuit remains reasonable: implement the rules in a fair way, and possibly give restitution for lost sales (in other words, retailers, please don't try to claim 'emotional trauma' or something similar and go for more than you deserve here. That would quickly make you the bad guys in this scenario). Marvel seems to have taken baby steps to correct the situation by allowing some books to be returned, but they've still got a ways to go if they want to truly treat their retailers fairly.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/uxmen416.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/uxmen416t.jpg" align=right alt="Uncanny X-Men #416"></a>Speaking of creative teams, another way Marvel's managed to enhance their revenue stream is by offering more than the standard 12 issues of a title per year. Marvel caught a lot of flak from fans over the unilateral decision to eliminate Annuals and instead produce a 13th issue. Let's look at it logically, though, and it makes perfect sense. Not everybody who buys Uncanny X-Men will buy the Uncanny X-Men Annual. Annuals often have different creative teams, as well as storylines that have nothing to do with the core title. On the other hand, everybody who buys Uncanny X-Men will buy Uncanny X-Men #416. Hence, Marvel doesn't have to publish a "side" issue, and they sell more books overall. It’s hard to argue with a concept as simple as that one.
With the financial success of that move, it shouldn't have been a surprise when Marvel began their Thunderbolts experiment: two issues per month, twice as many as any normal series, with one writer and a rotating art team telling the story twice as fast. Thunderbolts fans like me loved the idea, because we read the title for the story first, art second. Ignore for a minute the sharp decline in quality that Thunderbolts has faced for the last few months, and consider how this concept looked to fans originally. We’d get more of our favorite characters, and more of these incredibly in-depth stories... perfect! And on the financial side, Thunderbolts is suddenly making Marvel twice as much money. Because of this, Marvel execs are asking, "Why the heck aren't we doing this with our other titles?"
Indeed, why not. A fundamental change could be coming in the timing of Marvel's publications, one engineered specifically to make you, the fan, spend more money. Take the Peter Parker, Spider-Man title, for instance. Current plans are for the relaunched title to publish 18 issues per year. Are you willing to spend 50% more on the book in order to keep your complete run? What about Uncanny X-Men? Can you afford to buy two issues per month instead of one? Will you still want to collect the series if you can only afford to buy every other issue? Maybe you will. Maybe you won't. I don't have an answer.
<a href="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/exiles20.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://x-mencomics.com/xfan/images/covers/exiles20t.jpg" align=right alt="Exiles #20"></a>Personally, I like the idea of publishing more issues per year; I'm not a poor college student anymore, and I'd happily pay more for extra installments of books like X-Statix, Thor, and Exiles. On the other hand, though, I remember when I was a poor college student and had to ration out every penny I spent on comics. Will Marvel lose readers from students who can't afford to buy 18-24 issues of a title per year? Will the less affluent of the fanbase leave their former favorites because they just can't justify the expense any longer? Pick one of your not-so-favorite titles and ask yourself, “Would I still collect this if I had to buy twice as many issues?” Some fans (like me) would see that as a great thing and will happily give Marvel more money… but other readers may see it as a hindrance to continuing to buy the title.
The fact is, unlike a DC Comics, Marvel has to make a profit in order to survive. While DC receives funding from Time Warner to keep books in the Vertigo and kiddie lines in print, every Marvel series has to make money or there's simply no economic justification for its continued existence. Jemas and Quesada understand this, albeit in a controversial manner. Once you understand the following fact, you understand the two of them: their actions -- whether it be signing up a big new creative team, or changing the X-Men's costumes, or authorizing extra issues of a book per year -- are all engineered to sell more comics and make the company more money.
Which is all generally good for us, the fans. Just so long as prices don't go too high, print frequency doesn't get too unreasonable, retailers manage to stay in business, Logan doesn't deviate too far from what we're used to, and Marvel follows a reasonable long-term growth strategy. With Marvel constantly pushing the envelope, they're walking a fine line, but it’s worked for them so far. Time will tell.
Jim Lemoine has worked as a disc jockey, a video game designer, and a leadership consultant. He's been reading comics for 18 years, and he's been thinking too much for a while before that.