2 Spideys in the name of Diversity or the gradual decline of Marvel Comics?

[the authority]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I also agree with this. I don't feel like we're losing Peter Parker any more than we lost Hal Jordan or Barry Allen. This is an addition.

[Carl Elvis]

Interesting to see Miles made this list of black heroes with electric powers;

 

11 Black Superheroes That Use Electricity

 

Let's all agree not to create any new black characters with electric based powers.

 

[Catwomancomics]

Why would anyone create a new character for Marvel or DC Comics, and simply get a residual on the issues they worked on, with no ownership rights or big money if it becomes a hit?

 

They could. more easily than ever before, take their great idea to Image or Boom or even publish it themselves, and if it becomes a hit, have full creator owned rights and possibly make bank.

 

Kevin Eastman became a multi-millionaire. Bill Mantlo, not so much.

 

The lessons of the past have taught comic professionals to protect their legacy and NOT put it in the hands of the big two... use THEM to further their career, NOT the other way around.

 

The industry has gotten what it deserves.

 

I agree. Bill Mantlo, as the example given, wrote great stories. my favorite run of his would be Rom. He should be/have been paid. I would say Invincible has been a top 10 hero book for the last 15 years but the book doesn't get a ton of support for whatever reason. I guess its tough to get people to try new things.

 

+1

 

It would be nice to see Marvel or DC pay these creators some sort of royalty for their ideas that has made these companies money. Marvel or DC could easily afford to do so. Why not pay them a nickel per book printed of characters they created. Fans are buying comics for $3+. Pay them 5 cents per modern book printed for their characters they created. Then maybe Mantlo and others could get the health care and living expenses they need.

[the authority]

Interesting to see Miles made this list of black heroes with electric powers;

 

11 Black Superheroes That Use Electricity

 

Let's all agree not to create any new black characters with electric based powers.

 

[Prince Namor]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I also agree with this. I don't feel like we're losing Peter Parker any more than we lost Hal Jordan or Barry Allen. This is an addition.

 

+1

 

And Peter of course will be back.

[Jaydogrules]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

 

[MadGenius]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

So if Miles Morales was a new superhero, let's call him the Ineffable Silver Fish, his book would sell better? Because comic books fans really love and want to support new characters and unproven concepts from DC and Marvel.

[Prince Namor]

Outside of the racial discussuion...

 

On the surface it would seem a very strange move for Marvel, as ASM had finally gotten back to being one of their top sellers and doing the type of numbers (for this day and age) that it should.

The reboot has been a huge success.

 

Now they're going to cancel that book, and replace it with a character who was selling 1/3 the number of books in his own title.

 

Unless they're figuring that by replacing PP/ASM every 2 years (Doc Ock and now MM) and then rebooting it with a 'return' and a new number one for $5.99 is the best sales strategy.

 

That seems as if it'd get old really quick.

[Comicopolis]

Why would anyone create a new character for Marvel or DC Comics, and simply get a residual on the issues they worked on, with no ownership rights or big money if it becomes a hit?

 

They could. more easily than ever before, take their great idea to Image or Boom or even publish it themselves, and if it becomes a hit, have full creator owned rights and possibly make bank.

 

Kevin Eastman became a multi-millionaire. Bill Mantlo, not so much.

 

The lessons of the past have taught comic professionals to protect their legacy and NOT put it in the hands of the big two... use THEM to further their career, NOT the other way around.

 

The industry has gotten what it deserves.

 

[Comicopolis]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

[Comicopolis]

Interesting to see Miles made this list of black heroes with electric powers;

 

11 Black Superheroes That Use Electricity

 

Let's all agree not to create any new black characters with electric based powers.

 

 

Electricity isn't cheap.

[natevegas]

Outside of the racial discussuion...

 

On the surface it would seem a very strange move for Marvel, as ASM had finally gotten back to being one of their top sellers and doing the type of numbers (for this day and age) that it should.

The reboot has been a huge success.

 

Now they're going to cancel that book, and replace it with a character who was selling 1/3 the number of books in his own title.

 

Unless they're figuring that by replacing PP/ASM every 2 years (Doc Ock and now MM) and then rebooting it with a 'return' and a new number one for $5.99 is the best sales strategy.

 

That seems as if it'd get old really quick.

It must be a better business decision - no wait more sales versus less sales.

 

It must be the gnat attention span "new" readers have if a series dare go to issue 5 or the dreaded 15 or 25.

 

It must be Marvel hasn't got a clue and throwing stuff at the wall. (I'm going with this one)

[Jaydogrules]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

So if Miles Morales was a new superhero, let's call him the Ineffable Silver Fish, his book would sell better? Because comic books fans really love and want to support new characters and unproven concepts from DC and Marvel.

 

We'll of course never know until they actually start trying again.

 

-J.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

Why would anyone create a new character for Marvel or DC Comics, and simply get a residual on the issues they worked on, with no ownership rights or big money if it becomes a hit?

 

They could. more easily than ever before, take their great idea to Image or Boom or even publish it themselves, and if it becomes a hit, have full creator owned rights and possibly make bank.

 

Kevin Eastman became a multi-millionaire. Bill Mantlo, not so much.

 

The lessons of the past have taught comic professionals to protect their legacy and NOT put it in the hands of the big two... use THEM to further their career, NOT the other way around.

 

The industry has gotten what it deserves.

 

I agree. Bill Mantlo, as the example given, wrote great stories. my favorite run of his would be Rom. He should be/have been paid. I would say Invincible has been a top 10 hero book for the last 15 years but the book doesn't get a ton of support for whatever reason. I guess its tough to get people to try new things.

 

+1

 

It would be nice to see Marvel or DC pay these creators some sort of royalty for their ideas that has made these companies money. Marvel or DC could easily afford to do so. Why not pay them a nickel per book printed of characters they created. Fans are buying comics for $3+. Pay them 5 cents per modern book printed for their characters they created. Then maybe Mantlo and others could get the health care and living expenses they need.

 

Large corporations are not in the habit of giving chunks of their profit away unless they see it as an investment that will ultimately come back in multiples. And since the plight of comic creators is relatively unnoticed, by the general public but even by comic fans, and the lack of new creative concepts is not an easily quantifiable thing, I don't expect that to change any time soon.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

Did Marvel ever actually claim that the new character was non-white (note: MM is bi-racial, not only black) ' in the name of "diversity",' or is that your take? I don't understand why it seems to be the default in some people's minds that, if someone who is non-white replaces someone who is white, the driving reason behind it must be diversity – whether Marvel actually claimed that in this case, it is certainly a point that is brought up in other cases. In short, I question why so many people think "white" should be a default (same for "male" and "straight"), and when a character shows up that falls outside of those characteristics, diversity must be an intentional reason, rather than it simply being the case that not every person is a straight white male.

 

And I think a much more likely reason why sales would be low is because sales of books published in separate imprints tend to do worse than the mainstream universe. Take a look at the sales figures. The numbers on the Miles Morales Ultimate Spider-man books are in similar proportions to the rest of the Ultimate line as the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man books. The numbers on the entire line have been pretty low, which would explain why they're folding what they consider worthwhile to keep into the main Marvel Universe.

[Catwomancomics]

Why would anyone create a new character for Marvel or DC Comics, and simply get a residual on the issues they worked on, with no ownership rights or big money if it becomes a hit?

 

They could. more easily than ever before, take their great idea to Image or Boom or even publish it themselves, and if it becomes a hit, have full creator owned rights and possibly make bank.

 

Kevin Eastman became a multi-millionaire. Bill Mantlo, not so much.

 

The lessons of the past have taught comic professionals to protect their legacy and NOT put it in the hands of the big two... use THEM to further their career, NOT the other way around.

 

The industry has gotten what it deserves.

 

I agree. Bill Mantlo, as the example given, wrote great stories. my favorite run of his would be Rom. He should be/have been paid. I would say Invincible has been a top 10 hero book for the last 15 years but the book doesn't get a ton of support for whatever reason. I guess its tough to get people to try new things.

 

+1

 

It would be nice to see Marvel or DC pay these creators some sort of royalty for their ideas that has made these companies money. Marvel or DC could easily afford to do so. Why not pay them a nickel per book printed of characters they created. Fans are buying comics for $3+. Pay them 5 cents per modern book printed for their characters they created. Then maybe Mantlo and others could get the health care and living expenses they need.

 

Large corporations are not in the habit of giving chunks of their profit away unless they see it as an investment that will ultimately come back in multiples. And since the plight of comic creators is relatively unnoticed, by the general public but even by comic fans, and the lack of new creative concepts is not an easily quantifiable thing, I don't expect that to change any time soon.

 

Well said.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

Interesting to see Miles made this list of black heroes with electric powers;

 

11 Black Superheroes That Use Electricity

 

Let's all agree not to create any new black characters with electric based powers.

Four of the first five entires look like they could be the same character in different eras or with small costume tweaks.

[Jaydogrules]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

Did Marvel ever actually claim that the new character was non-white (note: MM is bi-racial, not only black) ' in the name of "diversity",' or is that your take? I don't understand why it seems to be the default in some people's minds that, if someone who is non-white replaces someone who is white, the driving reason behind it must be diversity – whether Marvel actually claimed that in this case, it is certainly a point that is brought up in other cases. In short, I question why so many people think "white" should be a default (same for "male" and "straight"), and when a character shows up that falls outside of those characteristics, diversity must be an intentional reason, rather than it simply being the case that not every person is a straight white male.

 

And I think a much more likely reason why sales would be low is because sales of books published in separate imprints tend to do worse than the mainstream universe. Take a look at the sales figures. The numbers on the Miles Morales Ultimate Spider-man books are in similar proportions to the rest of the Ultimate line as the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man books. The numbers on the entire line have been pretty low, which would explain why they're folding what they consider worthwhile to keep into the main Marvel Universe.

 

No. Ultimate Spider-man was a hit when it starred Peter Parker. Hence why Marvel started spinning off other titles into the Ultimate universe.

 

The sales tanked after Miles took over and the book was canceled.

 

Then Miles got another solo title and it also tanked and was also canceled.

 

Miles Morales does not sell books. Period.

 

Now Marvel wants to try to force Spider-fans to buy his third book by canceling (or at least temporarily suspending) the Amazing title which, as ChuckGower correctly stated, was a hit from the beginning and was a top seller for Marvel.

 

No thank you, Marvel. I'll just patiently wait for you to inevitably cry "Uncle", and re-instate the real Spider-man to where he rightfully belongs at the head of your lineup. Just in time (and perhaps before) Cap 3, I would imagine.

 

-J.

 

 

 

 

 

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

Did Marvel ever actually claim that the new character was non-white (note: MM is bi-racial, not only black) ' in the name of "diversity",' or is that your take? I don't understand why it seems to be the default in some people's minds that, if someone who is non-white replaces someone who is white, the driving reason behind it must be diversity – whether Marvel actually claimed that in this case, it is certainly a point that is brought up in other cases. In short, I question why so many people think "white" should be a default (same for "male" and "straight"), and when a character shows up that falls outside of those characteristics, diversity must be an intentional reason, rather than it simply being the case that not every person is a straight white male.

 

And I think a much more likely reason why sales would be low is because sales of books published in separate imprints tend to do worse than the mainstream universe. Take a look at the sales figures. The numbers on the Miles Morales Ultimate Spider-man books are in similar proportions to the rest of the Ultimate line as the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man books. The numbers on the entire line have been pretty low, which would explain why they're folding what they consider worthwhile to keep into the main Marvel Universe.

 

No. Ultimate Spider-man was a hit when it starred Peter Parker. Hence why Marvel started spinning off other titles into the Ultimate universe.

 

The sales tanked after Miles took over and the book was canceled.

 

Then Miles got another solo title and it also tanked and was also canceled.

 

Miles Morales does not sell books. Period.

 

Now Marvel wants to try to force Spider-fans to buy his third book by canceling (or at least temporarily suspending) the Amazing title which, as ChuckGower correctly stated, was a hit from the beginning and was a top seller for Marvel.

 

No thank you, Marvel. I'll just patiently wait for you to inevitably cry "Uncle", and re-instate the real Spider-man to where he rightfully belongs at the head of your lineup. Just in time (and perhaps before) Cap 3, I would imagine.

 

-J.

Sorry, but your conclusion is wrong. Ultimate Spider-man may have been a hit when it was first launched, but it's not accurate to say "Ultimate Spider-man was a hit when it starred Peter Parker," if you want to compare comics from around the time of the switch. Below are the comichron numbers (embedded as an image to preserve formatting) of the top Ultimate books and their corresponding mainstream-Marvel counterpart. I chose a month (December) at random and compared the trends over the course of a few years.

 

The first year (December 2010) still features the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man. The numbers look pretty low to me. He's not even the top selling Ultimate book. The top-selling Ultimate books all fall between 25-35K, about half the numbers of their Marvel-U counterpart.

 

In the second year, Miles Morales is the new Ultimate Spider-man. He's the top Ultimate book, even though Peter Parker is still Spider-man in mainstream Marvel. Looks like Peter's numbers are lower than the Avengers and X-Men.

 

In the third year: well, it certainly looks like Peter Parker sold a lot of books this month. Miles Morales not looking so good I suppose. But wait, the Avengers also did very well this month. How did their Ultimate counterparts fare? What's that? They're proportionately lower than their mainstream counterpart than Spider-man is? That can't be right, can it?

 

In the fourth year, we see the trend continue. Numbers for all Ultimate titles still falling. The conclusion is obvious. People stopped caring about the Ultimate titles, and they suffered a progressive decline regardless of who was wearing a costume.

 

[the authority]

Miles Morales IS a new character.

 

They didn't make Peter Parker black, they created a new character.

 

And his comics so far have been really good stories.

 

I think a lot of people mad about this, haven't read the comics.

 

I think it's a tad disingenuous to say Miles Morales is a "new" character when Marvel is literally calling him "Spider-man".

 

No, Marvel did not "make Peter Parker black". No one has said that.

 

They've simply made a "black version" of an already well worn and proven concept in the name of "diversity", rather than creating an actually new concept and/or character that can blaze his own trail. Instead he will always remain in Peter Parker's long shadow and always bee seen as an also-ran, wannabe, pretender, gimmick, etc. This probably goes a long way to explain the abysmal sales of his books.

 

-J.

Did Marvel ever actually claim that the new character was non-white (note: MM is bi-racial, not only black) ' in the name of "diversity",' or is that your take? I don't understand why it seems to be the default in some people's minds that, if someone who is non-white replaces someone who is white, the driving reason behind it must be diversity – whether Marvel actually claimed that in this case, it is certainly a point that is brought up in other cases. In short, I question why so many people think "white" should be a default (same for "male" and "straight"), and when a character shows up that falls outside of those characteristics, diversity must be an intentional reason, rather than it simply being the case that not every person is a straight white male.

 

And I think a much more likely reason why sales would be low is because sales of books published in separate imprints tend to do worse than the mainstream universe. Take a look at the sales figures. The numbers on the Miles Morales Ultimate Spider-man books are in similar proportions to the rest of the Ultimate line as the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man books. The numbers on the entire line have been pretty low, which would explain why they're folding what they consider worthwhile to keep into the main Marvel Universe.

 

No. Ultimate Spider-man was a hit when it starred Peter Parker. Hence why Marvel started spinning off other titles into the Ultimate universe.

 

The sales tanked after Miles took over and the book was canceled.

 

Then Miles got another solo title and it also tanked and was also canceled.

 

Miles Morales does not sell books. Period.

 

Now Marvel wants to try to force Spider-fans to buy his third book by canceling (or at least temporarily suspending) the Amazing title which, as ChuckGower correctly stated, was a hit from the beginning and was a top seller for Marvel.

 

No thank you, Marvel. I'll just patiently wait for you to inevitably cry "Uncle", and re-instate the real Spider-man to where he rightfully belongs at the head of your lineup. Just in time (and perhaps before) Cap 3, I would imagine.

 

-J.

Sorry, but your conclusion is wrong. Ultimate Spider-man may have been a hit when it was first launched, but it's not accurate to say "Ultimate Spider-man was a hit when it starred Peter Parker," if you want to compare comics from around the time of the switch. Below are the comichron numbers (embedded as an image to preserve formatting) of the top Ultimate books and their corresponding mainstream-Marvel counterpart. I chose a month (December) at random and compared the trends over the course of a few years.

 

The first year (December 2010) still features the Peter Parker Ultimate Spider-man. The numbers look pretty low to me. He's not even the top selling Ultimate book. The top-selling Ultimate books all fall between 25-35K, about half the numbers of their Marvel-U counterpart.

 

In the second year, Miles Morales is the new Ultimate Spider-man. He's the top Ultimate book, even though Peter Parker is still Spider-man in mainstream Marvel. Looks like Peter's numbers are lower than the Avengers and X-Men.

 

In the third year: well, it certainly looks like Peter Parker sold a lot of books this month. Miles Morales not looking so good I suppose. But wait, the Avengers also did very well this month. How did their Ultimate counterparts fare? What's that? They're proportionately lower than their mainstream counterpart than Spider-man is? That can't be right, can it?

 

In the fourth year, we see the trend continue. Numbers for all Ultimate titles still falling. The conclusion is obvious. People stopped caring about the Ultimate titles, and they suffered a progressive decline regardless of who was wearing a costume.

 

 

I wouldn't put a lot into those numbers. Comparing a #151 to a #5, #18, and a #2, I would expect the lower numbers to be considerably higher in volume sales but they aren't. If you compared the same #'s, I think Peter's USm books probably outsold Miles' books by multiples. I doubt that Miles will ever sell comics like Peter in a volume contest but I still think there is plenty of room for both and I'm actually looking forward to see how they interact in it.