Is the writer’s strike going to break the back of SDCC? 3 3

[Buzzetta]

On 7/18/2023 at 11:55 PM, Nick Furious said:

I wonder if we might see a pattern emerge here where the broader scope mega-cons act as incubators for single-scope cons to emerge from.  Maybe a Disney, Lego or Hasbro focused community becomes too large (and too intense) to be properly served at a multi-scope convention, causing those brands go off on their own.  I wonder if they might be replaced by a lesser-known product or franchise that does benefit from the exposure to a multi-scope con audience.  

In a way it already has. 

Hasbro really does not need SDCC or any of the other cons at this point.  I think that the only reason it attends San Diego is so the Hasbro people get a free trip out of it.  

While Hasbro is doing its own thing on a weekly basis by doing streaming product drops and interviews and things, the smaller parties are gathering together to do their own thing.

A specific example I can give you is with Transformers.  Hasbro does not usually attend Botcon but every other 3rd Party Transformable robot company does.  Botcon is a privately organized con celebrating all things related to transformable robots with a focus on Hasbro's Transformers.  While San Diego might be too expensive for a company like Fans Toys or Planet X to attend, they will send representatives to Bot Con to show off product that they are developing.  (3rd Party Transformers refers to companies that are designing their own version of say, Optimus Prime, with a slightly different mold that they themselves engineered.  This is not a bootleg.  A 3rd Party Transformer might also be a toy of a character that Hasbro has not created yet either. Either way they are original designs).

At Joe Con, smaller vendors like Marauder Gunrunners who make custom weapons and gear for GI Joe figures, will show up at the Augusta Joe con but not pay for the table at SDCC.\

So, we are seeing many companies bypass things like NYCC and SDCC and go straight toward the smaller dedicated cons to reach their customers.   It really makes sense though to do this as a smaller retailer.  Why spend the money to go to SDCC and be lost in the shuffle?  Go to where you know your dedicated customers are going to be.  

SDCC and NYCC have become overbloated and it is not just myself, the collector saying this.  The companies themselves are saying this. 

[KingOfRulers]

On 7/19/2023 at 1:19 AM, Buzzetta said:

In a way it already has. 

Hasbro really does not need SDCC or any of the other cons at this point.  I think that the only reason it attends San Diego is so the Hasbro people get a free trip out of it.  

While Hasbro is doing its own thing on a weekly basis by doing streaming product drops and interviews and things, the smaller parties are gathering together to do their own thing.

A specific example I can give you is with Transformers.  Hasbro does not usually attend Botcon but every other 3rd Party Transformable robot company does.  Botcon is a privately organized con celebrating all things related to transformable robots with a focus on Hasbro's Transformers.  While San Diego might be too expensive for a company like Fans Toys or Planet X to attend, they will send representatives to Bot Con to show off product that they are developing.  (3rd Party Transformers refers to companies that are designing their own version of say, Optimus Prime, with a slightly different mold that they themselves engineered.  This is not a bootleg.  A 3rd Party Transformer might also be a toy of a character that Hasbro has not created yet either. Either way they are original designs).

At Joe Con, smaller vendors like Marauder Gunrunners who make custom weapons and gear for GI Joe figures, will show up at the Augusta Joe con but not pay for the table at SDCC.\

So, we are seeing many companies bypass things like NYCC and SDCC and go straight toward the smaller dedicated cons to reach their customers.   It really makes sense though to do this as a smaller retailer.  Why spend the money to go to SDCC and be lost in the shuffle?  Go to where you know your dedicated customers are going to be.  

SDCC and NYCC have become overbloated and it is not just myself, the collector saying this.  The companies themselves are saying this. 

From the event organizing side of things, I wonder who owns these new, niche events. As far as I know, Hasbro is not in the event production business. Will Hasbro own and operate these new events? For example, I believe Star Wars Celebration is owned by Disney, but they contract out the production of the event to an event company (Reed Pop). I'm not familiar with Botcon, but it sounds like it is a convention in the same way that SDCC is (owned and operated by a self-contained production and promotion company), except with a very narrow focus.

You say, "Why spend the money to go to SDCC and be lost in the shuffle?  Go to where you know your dedicated customers are going to be." There is some good sense in that, but I'd say to some extent it's also an unwise choice to simply choose one or the other; choosing niche appeal (Botcon) over broad appeal (SDCC). What makes a "dedicated customer", dedicated? They're the customer that follows the business wherever they go. They're on Hasbro message boards, follow the company on social media, perhaps blog or make YouTube vids about their products, and are always watching their website for new announcements etc. These folks are already diehard customers, and chances are they will continue to be. How does Hasbro setting up at Botcon to essentially market to these existing diehard customers help them grow? When big companies go to conventions it is purely a marketing opportunity.

I think a convention such as SDCC is good for Hasbro because it allows them to market their products to a very large audience that aren't necessarily Hasbro fanboys and fangirls yet, but are near enough in general interest that they are potential new customers. In my opinion, new money is what Hasbro wants (in addition to retaining their existing dedicated fans). Catering only to dedicated fans isn't a worthwhile strategy, in my opinion. They need both new and old money.

As well, SDCC gets worldwide, mainstream publicity which a niche convention will not receive. 

[Buzzetta]

On 7/19/2023 at 10:17 AM, KingOfRulers said:

From the event organizing side of things, I wonder who owns these new, niche events. As far as I know, Hasbro is not in the event production business. Will Hasbro own and operate these new events? For example, I believe Star Wars Celebration is owned by Disney, but they contract out the production of the event to an event company (Reed Pop). I'm not familiar with Botcon, but it sounds like it is a convention in the same way that SDCC is (owned and operated by a self-contained production and promotion company), except with a very narrow focus.

Hasbro tried organizing its own con prior to the pandemic and called it Hascon.  Eventually they abandoned that when they realized that it was more profitable to do everything online, they switched to that platform and host mini events.  They have broken things down to events where it is just to demonstrate product and in other cases they actually make it an "event" to host panels.

So for example, in June they hosted a GI Joe 2hr event where they introduced and demonstrated new product that ended in preorder opportunities as well as the introduction of their next Haslab project which was funded and ended last night.  That is more along the lines of what I would call a product release party. 

Then there is what could be considered a weekly con.  They also hosted an event for Indiana Jones where they introduced product, provided additional videos for the creative process and also held live interviews with Karen Allen and then John Rhys Davies. 

All of these appear from the Hasbro Studio these days.

On 7/19/2023 at 10:17 AM, KingOfRulers said:

You say, "Why spend the money to go to SDCC and be lost in the shuffle?  Go to where you know your dedicated customers are going to be." There is some good sense in that, but I'd say to some extent it's also an unwise choice to simply choose one or the other; choosing niche appeal (Botcon) over broad appeal (SDCC). What makes a "dedicated customer", dedicated? They're the customer that follows the business wherever they go. They're on Hasbro message boards, follow the company on social media, perhaps blog or make YouTube vids about their products, and are always watching their website for new announcements etc. These folks are already diehard customers, and chances are they will continue to be. How does Hasbro setting up at Botcon to essentially market to these existing diehard customers help them grow? When big companies go to conventions it is purely a marketing opportunity.

I think a convention such as SDCC is good for Hasbro because it allows them to market their products to a very large audience that aren't necessarily Hasbro fanboys and fangirls yet, but are near enough in general interest that they are potential new customers. In my opinion, new money is what Hasbro wants (in addition to retaining their existing dedicated fans). Catering only to dedicated fans isn't a worthwhile strategy, in my opinion. They need both new and old money.

As well, SDCC gets worldwide, mainstream publicity which a niche convention will not receive. 

 I should clarify.  I am not so much talking about dedicated customers in so much as a dedicated con for that subject matter.  It is not feasible for a small business that focuses on customized weapons specifically for GI Joe figures to spend the money at SDCC.  It is too cost prohibitive.  Your reliance is on the GI Joe Market and collector base and you are not going to grow outside of Hasbro's own product.  Their products are advertised and supported through the online community in Facebook groups and the like. 

Now Hasbro seems to have a dual approach to marketing.  They have come to realize that they have two customer bases.  There are kids and adult collectors.  Kid products seem to still be advertised the traditional ways across the traditional venues.  There are still advertisements on TV for Nerf Guns.  However, the adult focused Star Wars 3 3/4" figures marketed are marketed differently and they really do not need to attend these cons to grow their adult collector base.  They are all over FB, IG, Twitter, You Tube, Viral Marketing and the like.  I was sent an announcement from a friend last evening how a new Jabba's playset was being released for $90.  I have no idea how a non-collector found that article.  They sent it to me saying something to the effect of, "This is cool.  Thought you would be interested."  They reached him somehow.   However, these cons are not the end all be all for product promotion.  Hasbro profits may be down but that is not due to lack of attendance at cons.  The lower profit margins can be attributed for other reasons that I will get into if you want me to. 

 

[L'Angelo Misterioso]

On 7/11/2023 at 12:42 PM, theCapraAegagrus said:

Like I said, stripping all nuance and context from the discussion.

What's the nuance and context missed, with respect to discussing these movies?

[Pixx_L]

On 7/18/2023 at 10:50 AM, KingOfRulers said:

I could write a book on the comic con business. In short, comic book collectors are not a large enough fanbase to support a large-scale comic convention. I say this having experienced both sides of the coin. It's evident by merely looking at the landscape for comic conventions. The largest comic-centric convention in the U.S. is Heroes Con, with what Google tells me has a record attendance of 40,000 set in 2016. After Heroes Con, what other comic centric convention comes remotely close to Heroes? I can't think of any comic-centric event that is anywhere close to those attendance numbers. Comic-centric events are plentiful all around the U.S., but the attendance is usually in the 500-1,500 attendee range. I can't think of a single comic-centric event that even touches 5,000 attendees, other than Heroes.

If you look at the convention landscape for comic cons that are really "pop-culture" and nerd-culture conventions, then you'll find tons of events that hit 40,000 attendees and more. Plenty of 5,000, 10,000, 50,000, 75,000 attendees and more conventions that are in every major U.S. city, often times with multiple events within the same city drawing those numbers. These are often events that have only been around for 10 years and get these numbers, whereas it took Heroes Con 35 years to get to 40k.

As a convention goer, I would not have attended the conventions I owned as I don't like the hassle that comes with huge crowds. The admission price to my conventions would've been too high. The number of comic book dealers we had would've appeared too few in number. I much prefer going to smaller shows where a high percentage of the vendors are comic book dealers, the crowds are small, the parking is easy, and the admission is relatively low.

As a convention owner, in my experience, hardcore comic book collectors (such as myself) are perhaps the worst group to cater to. The demographic is small in number, unwilling to spend on admission (often don't pay as they are well connected and get free dealer passes), expensive customers to acquire, and tend to complain more than anyone else. Why bother going through the effort and investment to attract them? I can tell you that in large part, it was pure emotion and respect for the world of comics that led us to continue the effort. We didn't want to be "sellouts" to the term "comic con". As hardcore comic guys ourselves, we genuinely care about the longevity of comics. But from a business standpoint, I regret to inform you that comic collectors are the worst and are money losers for comic cons.

I didn't mean to imply a convention should only be comics, but rather (pulling from the example of my teenage years in the 90s) that I'd like to see conventions more focused on keeping the admission price down. Mega-con (at that time) was a big event with comics (obviously), anime screenings of upcoming state side releases, vast rooms of Lan-party computer gaming setups, artists, seminars on various topics, dealers of comics, toys, bootleg movies/anime, pulp and pop culture oddities etc etc, I think a magic tournament as well - on and on. It just didn't cost much to attend. There also wasn't a roster of A-list TV & Movie celebrity guests at that time either though. Whatever the costs of 25 artists I can't imagine the costs of the increasingly bloated lists of TV & movie stars I see at the top of the marketing for every (even mid-sized) convention advertised these days.

I've never been to SDCC but what does a day pass cost? $100-ish? I would guess a few hundred for a 3 or 4day pass. It might not be an apples to apples comparison content-wise but Gamescom in Europe is of a similarly massive scale to SDCC with a huge number of attendees and the price per day is under $30 ($20 if you're a retiree or student). That's a price point that won't simply gather the people already into the culture but is low enough to add a more casual audience as well. That is the kind of pricing I'd like to see SDCC or any equally big show aiming for (obviously I'll probably move to Europe before that happens though).

On a side note: one thing I'd like to see conventions doing (and I have no idea how easy it might already be) is to make conventions very accessible for unknown artists to get tables. And by artists I mean of any visual medium not simply comics, and not people that are just doing doodles of superheroes they put up for sale but people that actually have an artistic voice, style, project, something of real interest etc. I can remember backing a Kickstarter some 10yrs ago for a woman that came from advertising and animation who in her free time worked on a graphic novel she wanted to publish. She raised a little over 10k on Kickstarter and got it published and then around the time she got the books out to her backers, she went to a few conventions to try to promote extra copies she had on hand. It was purely coincidental I ended up seeing her at a convention near me but I can remember talking to her a bit and hearing how she was getting beat up on the costs of travel, hotels, and then renting tables at shows for not much if any benefit. She was the type of person, with the type of project and work (she was selling some amazing prints of her illustration work in addition to her graphic novel) that should have been lifted up by attending the events she was at. It's a real shame she wasn't and a real disappointment if nerd culture/conventions have gotten to a point where the most corporate/mass market/advertised thing is what people are salivating to go to them for or show the majority of their interest in.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Pixx_L

[theCapraAegagrus]

On 7/19/2023 at 3:12 PM, L'Angelo Misterioso said:

What's the nuance and context missed, with respect to discussing these movies?

Literally everything not related to the Box Office...

[KingOfRulers]

On 7/20/2023 at 2:38 AM, Pixx_L said:

I didn't mean to imply a convention should only be comics, but rather (pulling from the example of my teenage years in the 90s) that I'd like to see conventions more focused on keeping the admission price down. Mega-con (at that time) was a big event with comics (obviously), anime screenings of upcoming state side releases, vast rooms of Lan-party computer gaming setups, artists, seminars on various topics, dealers of comics, toys, bootleg movies/anime, pulp and pop culture oddities etc etc, I think a magic tournament as well - on and on. It just didn't cost much to attend. There also wasn't a roster of A-list TV & Movie celebrity guests at that time either though. Whatever the costs of 25 artists I can't imagine the costs of the increasingly bloated lists of TV & movie stars I see at the top of the marketing for every (even mid-sized) convention advertised these days.

I've never been to SDCC but what does a day pass cost? $100-ish? I would guess a few hundred for a 3 or 4day pass. It might not be an apples to apples comparison content-wise but Gamescom in Europe is of a similarly massive scale to SDCC with a huge number of attendees and the price per day is under $30 ($20 if you're a retiree or student). That's a price point that won't simply gather the people already into the culture but is low enough to add a more casual audience as well. That is the kind of pricing I'd like to see SDCC or any equally big show aiming for (obviously I'll probably move to Europe before that happens though).

 

On a side note: one thing I'd like to see conventions doing (and I have no idea how easy it might already be) is to make conventions very accessible for unknown artists to get tables. And by artists I mean of any visual medium not simply comics, and not people that are just doing doodles of superheroes they put up for sale but people that actually have an artistic voice, style, project, something of real interest etc. I can remember backing a Kickstarter some 10yrs ago for a woman that came from advertising and animation who in her free time worked on a graphic novel she wanted to publish. She raised a little over 10k on Kickstarter and got it published and then around the time she got the books out to her backers, she went to a few conventions to try to promote extra copies she had on hand. It was purely coincidental I ended up seeing her at a convention near me but I can remember talking to her a bit and hearing how she was getting beat up on the costs of travel, hotels, and then renting tables at shows for not much if any benefit. She was the type of person, with the type of project and work (she was selling some amazing prints of her illustration work in addition to her graphic novel) that should have been lifted up by attending the events she was at. It's a real shame she wasn't and a real disappointment if nerd culture/conventions have gotten to a point where the most corporate/mass market/advertised thing is what people are salivating to go to them for or show the majority of their interest in.

Comparing SDCC to any other pop-culture comparison is indeed NOT apples to apples. SDCC is its own comic con category, apart from essentially all other U.S. comic conventions. SDCC is not set apart from other conventions due to size/attendance (as there are other comic cons that are just as large), but for two other reasons: 

1) SDCC is a non-profit organization. As a non-profit, the way that it does business and its goals are different than other comic cons. SDCC isn't an event that can be sold to some larger entity one day, like every other comic con can be. Instead of gaining value as a company, SDCC's administrator's become the beneficiaries of the financial success the organization achieves and they do this through massive salaries. SDCC administrators are not incentivized to manage the organization in the same way that for-profit companies are.

2) SDCC is widely accepted as a PR opportunity for Hollywood. SDCC doesn't pay for TV and movie stars to appear at the event. I'm sure they end up being on the hook for some travel accommodations, per diem, and minor expenses, but they aren't paying appearance fees or guarantees. As SDCC is a PR opportunity for TV and movie studios, the stars from the hot shows and movies of the day appear at SDCC for no charge. All other comic cons hire celebrities to attend their events; for all events other than SDCC, it is a paid appearance deal. For SDCC, celebrities attend for free as it is part of their PR obligation to the studios for whom they've done work for.

As a pure PR opportunity for studios, celebs aren't contractually bound to the strict terms that they are in other comic convention personal appearances. At SDCC they'll do the all-important panel and then maybe sign posters for fans for an hour or so, and then they're done. At all other comic cons, the appearing celebs are guaranteed a certain amount of money for a very specific scope and length of work; they are to participate in a panel for X minutes, they are to participate in autograph signings for X minutes, and are to participate in photo-ops for X minutes.

As far as ticket prices...why wouldn't SDCC charge $100/day? They sell out of tickets every year at that price, and still have mobs of people willing to purchase. It makes no sense for them to sell tickets for $30/day and sell out when they can sell them at $100/day and still sell out. Being that they have a huge waiting list every year, wouldn't the law of supply and demand suggest that they probably need to raise their price?

And when it comes to conventions being accessible to unknown artists; as far as I can tell the convention world already is as accessible as can be. Pretty much every convention has an artist alley section where artists can show off their work. At my conventions, we usually had around 120 artist alley tables. We made the tables available to all types of illustrators. It all comes down to if the varying types of artists wanted to attend...if they applied, chances are I'd accept them!

But you are right in that the only thing the average, common denominator of a person cares about is mass marketed, corporate properties. That's what most people like for whatever reason. If I had to make a bet, I'd bet that the unknown artist selling Spider-Man art will likely garner more interest than the unknown artist selling Japanese woodblock carvings of bonsai trees. As I mentioned previously, most people don't even care about the legendary (to us) artists that brought all of our favorite, popular characters to life within comic books for decades. I can guarantee that even fewer people care about the comparatively unknown artists. The average dum-dum doesn't care about art at all. Maybe an event like Art Basel is what you're looking for. I'd imagine a greater percentage of attendees care about the arts there. But maybe not even there. I guess that narrows it down to the folks on these boards...this is the last holdout of people that actually care about the art.

[Pixx_L]

On 7/21/2023 at 12:46 PM, KingOfRulers said:

Comparing SDCC to any other pop-culture comparison is indeed NOT apples to apples. SDCC is its own comic con category, apart from essentially all other U.S. comic conventions. SDCC is not set apart from other conventions due to size/attendance (as there are other comic cons that are just as large), but for two other reasons: 

1) SDCC is a non-profit organization. As a non-profit, the way that it does business and its goals are different than other comic cons. SDCC isn't an event that can be sold to some larger entity one day, like every other comic con can be. Instead of gaining value as a company, SDCC's administrator's become the beneficiaries of the financial success the organization achieves and they do this through massive salaries. SDCC administrators are not incentivized to manage the organization in the same way that for-profit companies are.

2) SDCC is widely accepted as a PR opportunity for Hollywood. SDCC doesn't pay for TV and movie stars to appear at the event. I'm sure they end up being on the hook for some travel accommodations, per diem, and minor expenses, but they aren't paying appearance fees or guarantees. As SDCC is a PR opportunity for TV and movie studios, the stars from the hot shows and movies of the day appear at SDCC for no charge. All other comic cons hire celebrities to attend their events; for all events other than SDCC, it is a paid appearance deal. For SDCC, celebrities attend for free as it is part of their PR obligation to the studios for whom they've done work for.

As a pure PR opportunity for studios, celebs aren't contractually bound to the strict terms that they are in other comic convention personal appearances. At SDCC they'll do the all-important panel and then maybe sign posters for fans for an hour or so, and then they're done. At all other comic cons, the appearing celebs are guaranteed a certain amount of money for a very specific scope and length of work; they are to participate in a panel for X minutes, they are to participate in autograph signings for X minutes, and are to participate in photo-ops for X minutes.

As far as ticket prices...why wouldn't SDCC charge $100/day? They sell out of tickets every year at that price, and still have mobs of people willing to purchase. It makes no sense for them to sell tickets for $30/day and sell out when they can sell them at $100/day and still sell out. Being that they have a huge waiting list every year, wouldn't the law of supply and demand suggest that they probably need to raise their price?

And when it comes to conventions being accessible to unknown artists; as far as I can tell the convention world already is as accessible as can be. Pretty much every convention has an artist alley section where artists can show off their work. At my conventions, we usually had around 120 artist alley tables. We made the tables available to all types of illustrators. It all comes down to if the varying types of artists wanted to attend...if they applied, chances are I'd accept them!

But you are right in that the only thing the average, common denominator of a person cares about is mass marketed, corporate properties. That's what most people like for whatever reason. If I had to make a bet, I'd bet that the unknown artist selling Spider-Man art will likely garner more interest than the unknown artist selling Japanese woodblock carvings of bonsai trees. As I mentioned previously, most people don't even care about the legendary (to us) artists that brought all of our favorite, popular characters to life within comic books for decades. I can guarantee that even fewer people care about the comparatively unknown artists. The average dum-dum doesn't care about art at all. Maybe an event like Art Basel is what you're looking for. I'd imagine a greater percentage of attendees care about the arts there. But maybe not even there. I guess that narrows it down to the folks on these boards...this is the last holdout of people that actually care about the art.

1) "Why wouldn't SDCC charge $100day?" You answered your own question - if they are a non-profit then the goal is not to make profit but service a collective, social or public benefit. They exist to serve a public good. I don't see how a $100 a day ticket is a public good. The better question is if someone is so devoted to 'caring about the art' of comics why wouldn't they want one of the largest pop-culture/comics-related events (or just more conventions in general) to be as affordable and as accessible as possible to as many people as possible? Obviously Gamescon in Europe with its $20-$30 tickets embody this. The conventions I attended in my youth embodied this. I see no reason more conventions in the US currently couldn't as well, besides a certain corporate mindset that sees everything as a profit maximizing endeavor. The philosophy of taxing everyone's wallets at every opportunity didn't lead to a healthy comics market by the end of the 90s - I don't see why that example would reach a different outcome for geek culture and conventions the way they're going.

2) This side steps the issue of accessibly for artists at conventions. Whether you have 120 artists at a convention or not really says nothing about how accessible those tables are given their price. Obviously, my example was not of an artist making 'japanese woodblock carvings of Bonsai Trees,' (that definitely would fit the bill for Art Basel) but rather a working class woman who normally works as an illustrator with an ad firm (by day) who was moonlighting in comics with a graphic novel she had made in her free time along with prints of various illustration work she had done. Given the cost of that table for her, she was finding it pointless financially to go to conventions. But I totally get why it would benefit conventions to sell tables to more than just one type of vendor while pretending to do a service for the artists. There's a similar dynamic at work for most film festivals here in the US that charge the same price for a short film (overwhelmingly submitted by students and unknowns) to be entered and reviewed for acceptance as they do a full-length feature film. I have never been to a US film festival where the organizers didn't come out and grandstand as providing a great resource and service to filmmakers. By contrast most European film festivals have no charge to review short films for acceptance - an actual service to filmmakers.

3) As far as what people care about and why - this is ground someone like Robert McChesney covers extensively. The short answer is if people have few opportunities for one thing and more for another popular tastes become reflective of what is more dominant. You can't just blame the people themselves for this result but those that are restricting the options available to them.

Edited July 21, 2023 by Pixx_L

[KingOfRulers]

On 7/21/2023 at 6:00 PM, Pixx_L said:

1) "Why wouldn't SDCC charge $100day?" You answered your own question - if they are a non-profit then the goal is not to make profit but service a collective, social or public benefit. They exist to serve a public good. I don't see how a $100 a day ticket is a public good. The better question is if someone is so devoted to 'caring about the art' of comics why wouldn't they want one of the largest pop-culture/comics-related events (or just more conventions in general) to be as affordable and as accessible as possible to as many people as possible? Obviously Gamescon in Europe with its $20-$30 tickets embody this. The conventions I attended in my youth embodied this. I see no reason more conventions in the US currently couldn't as well, besides a certain corporate mindset that sees everything as a profit maximizing endeavor. The philosophy of taxing everyone's wallets at every opportunity didn't lead to a healthy comics market by the end of the 90s - I don't see why that example would reach a different outcome for geek culture and conventions the way they're going.

2) This side steps the issue of accessibly for artists at conventions. Whether you have 120 artists at a convention or not really says nothing about how accessible those tables are given their price. Obviously, my example was not of an artist making 'japanese woodblock carvings of Bonsai Trees,' (that definitely would fit the bill for Art Basel) but rather a working class woman who normally works as an illustrator with an ad firm (by day) who was moonlighting in comics with a graphic novel she had made in her free time along with prints of various illustration work she had done. Given the cost of that table for her, she was finding it pointless financially to go to conventions. But I totally get why it would benefit conventions to sell tables to more than just one type of vendor while pretending to do a service for the artists. There's a similar dynamic at work for most film festivals here in the US that charge the same price for a short film (overwhelmingly submitted by students and unknowns) to be entered and reviewed for acceptance as they do a full-length feature film. I have never been to a US film festival where the organizers didn't come out and grandstand as providing a great resource and service to filmmakers. By contrast most European film festivals have no charge to review short films for acceptance - an actual service to filmmakers.

3) As far as what people care about and why - this is ground someone like Robert McChesney covers extensively. The short answer is if people have few opportunities for one thing and more for another popular tastes become reflective of what is more dominant. You can't just blame the people themselves for this result but those that are restricting the options available to them.

1) A non-profit organization is merely a government designation. Organizations have no goals. Just as a corporation cannot pay taxes. Only people can pay taxes, whether that person be a shareholder, employee, or customer. But it's always ultimately a person. The people that are in positions of power are the ones that have the goals. The culture of an organization changes as new people enter and old people exit, but the organization has no mind of its own with which to have goals. To say that because SDCC is a non-profit organization and therefore its administrators are not interested in financial self-interest, is in my personal opinion, naive.

Have you ever researched what percentage of monetary donations to various non-profit "charitable" organizations actually goes to the causes they ostensibly support? If you haven't, you'd likely be shocked at the percentage that goes to things other than the cause they support, and further shocked at the salaries that administrators of some non-profit organizations make. Non-profit in no way means that there aren't folks banking.

2) Artist alley tables are not pretending to do anything. It costs a lot of money to put on a convention. My conventions were regional-level conventions and each event would cost us roughly $600,000 to make happen, on average. I'm sure conventions such as SDCC and NYCC must cost a couple million dollars to put together. Conventions to showcase such artists would not exist if they operated at a loss. Not even SDCC.

3) People have the freedom to seek out art, if it strikes their fancy. With the popularity of Instagram and YouTube, I'd say it is easier than ever to make your art available to the world as it costs no money to do so. Convincing folks to care is the trick!

Edited July 21, 2023 by KingOfRulers

[KingOfRulers]

And all of that is not to say that the folks running SDCC don't care about the benevolent goals of supporting comics and the arts. If I had to guess, I think they do care. But I think they also have financial self-interest in mind, as almost everyone does.

My company was "for-profit", but we still cared about keeping comics and comic creators a central part of our conventions. If we didn't care, we would've stopped bringing in guest artists and shifted strictly to celebrity appearances. Guest artists definitely didn't improve our bottom line. But even being for-profit, we kept bringing guest artists to our conventions because we love comics and want to keep the hobby alive.

[Nick Furious]

On 7/21/2023 at 11:46 AM, KingOfRulers said:

As far as ticket prices...why wouldn't SDCC charge $100/day? They sell out of tickets every year at that price, and still have mobs of people willing to purchase. It makes no sense for them to sell tickets for $30/day and sell out when they can sell them at $100/day and still sell out. Being that they have a huge waiting list every year, wouldn't the law of supply and demand suggest that they probably need to raise their price?

Yes, it would.  And the vendors who spend huge dollars to be there would prefer the show be filled capacity with people who can afford to spend money with them.  Not filled to capacity with people who can only afford $20-$30 for attendance.  And where would those people come from anyway, considering the cost of travel and lodging?  Not every show is intended for every financial demographic.  There are other shows available to those people, they are called local conventions.  And I include myself in that group that is better suited for a local convention than for the expense of attending a remote mega convention.  I think those who refuse to recognize the law of supply and demand have a narcissistic perspective.  They don't recognize those already attending as real people who would be replaced by new attendees if the barriers were eliminated.  Only they, and others like them are real people in their minds.  

[Pixx_L]

On 7/21/2023 at 6:47 PM, KingOfRulers said:

1) A non-profit organization is merely a government designation. Organizations have no goals. Just as a corporation cannot pay taxes. Only people can pay taxes, whether that person be a shareholder, employee, or customer. But it's always ultimately a person. The people that are in positions of power are the ones that have the goals. The culture of an organization changes as new people enter and old people exit, but the organization has no mind of its own with which to have goals. To say that because SDCC is a non-profit organization and therefore its administrators are not interested in financial self-interest, is in my personal opinion, naive.

Have you ever researched what percentage of monetary donations to various non-profit "charitable" organizations actually goes to the causes they ostensibly support? If you haven't, you'd likely be shocked at the percentage that goes to things other than the cause they support, and further shocked at the salaries that administrators of some non-profit organizations make. Non-profit in no way means that there aren't folks banking.

2) Artist alley tables are not pretending to do anything. It costs a lot of money to put on a convention. My conventions were regional-level conventions and each event would cost us roughly $600,000 to make happen, on average. I'm sure conventions such as SDCC and NYCC must cost a couple million dollars to put together. Conventions to showcase such artists would not exist if they operated at a loss. Not even SDCC.

3) People have the freedom to seek out art, if it strikes their fancy. With the popularity of Instagram and YouTube, I'd say it is easier than ever to make your art available to the world as it costs no money to do so. Convincing folks to care is the trick!

1) People create institutions that are greater than the individuals that participate in them. They are reflective of ideological missions - whether that be a current day not-for-profit organization, or corporation, or those of previous eras like the monarchy, or church. Institutions are more powerful and impactful in a society than any lone individual or group of individuals as a result. This is what people mean when they talk about systemic power. It's why billionaires invest millions into institutions that reflect their ideological priorities. Reducing the power of institutions to the attitudes and preferences of individuals is misleading, and incorrect.

Further, whether the legal definition of a non-profit organization can be subverted to undermine its stated purpose is irrelevant to the idea and importance of having non-profit oriented entities that serve a public good. Spoiler: there will always be bad actors and corruption that exists in any society. I don't see how acknowledging the existence of such bad actors or corruption justifies not caring to have/create institutions that serve a public good. Again pricing tickets for cultural events like SDCC at $100 does not serve a public good. Pricing a ticket at a broadly accessible $20-$30 (like Gamescon) does. That doesn't mean every large convention in the country has to be at the price point of Gamescon but to treat the current norm of large conventions being priced at nearly $100 for a ticket with not just indifference but applause is to me antithetical to wanting the culture to grow, be in good health or in anyway 'care about the art.' ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

2) Conventions do not need to 'operate at a loss' to make their artist tables financially accessible at better rates than the example I gave with the woman who self-published her own graphic novel. (They don't need operate at a loss to reduce their ticket prices either). They just need to adjust their priorities in what they choose to monetize and for how much as well as reconsider who they care to serve. Pretty simple.

I've backed several kickstarters for pop-up art shows, downtown murals, public sculptures etc. Maybe the people running conventions that think they need to charge $100 a ticket to be financial solvent just have a lack of imagination in how they fund what they do.

3) I agree with you. I think the comic-con culture in the US I grew up with has largely become irrelevant and stagnant for all the reasons and preferences you outlined above.

Anyways I rarely post on these forums and I'm not finding any value in this engagement at this point with you from the positive interest I had when it started, so I'm just going to exercise this little button I found called 'ignore.'

Cheers.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Pixx_L

[Robot Man]

$100 a day for a show like SDCC really, by today’s standards, does not really seem THAT excessive. And the fact that it sells out so fast to more than willing attendees bears this out.

When it starts getting crazy is the cost of flying into SD, $800 a night hotel rooms that a week later will go for a third of that. Then the cost of eating, drinking parking ect. And the fact that one has to compete in “on line lotteries” to do so. A lot of folks look at it like a vacation and are more willing to put up with the hassle and crowds and pay up for the privlage.

I prefer to put that vacation money to so many other places than a comic con.

I mostly to go shows to buy vintage comics only. I went to the Torpedo show last weekend. $25. To get in. I was greeted with a huge room of walls of comics. Almost made my head spin at first. About every book you could want at all price ranges. I spent my money on a nice pile of books. I didn’t get that “vibe” I would have gotton at SDCC but am ok with that.

And part of the fun was cleaning out all the dealers of all the “deals” that without this show, would have gone to SDCC…

[Nick Furious]

On 7/22/2023 at 10:17 AM, Robot Man said:

When it starts getting crazy is the cost of flying into SD, $800 a night hotel rooms that a week later will go for a third of that. Then the cost of eating, drinking parking ect. And the fact that one has to compete in “on line lotteries” to do so.

That was my thought also.  The attendance fee is such a small cost component in the scheme of things.  Even if attendance were free, it still wouldn't change who could attend...other than some who live in the region.  

[MAR1979]

Is the writer’s strike going to break the back of SDCC?

I don't see how that could even be plausible as SDCC was sold out more than half a year ago.  As long as they continue to sell out of badges/tickets SDCC org will be just fine.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by MAR1979

[Robot Man]

On 7/22/2023 at 10:15 AM, MAR1979 said:

Is the writer’s strike going to break the back of SDCC?

I don't see how that could even be plausible as SDCC was sold out more than half a year ago.  As long as they continue to sell out of badges/tickets SDCC org will be just fine.

 

 

I believe that is so as well.

I wonder what would have happed if this strike was announced when tickets were first offered? I do believe it would have had an impact. This year not so much.

It should be a wake up call for the promoters. 

[TupennyConan]

On 7/18/2023 at 10:50 AM, KingOfRulers said:

I could write a book on the comic con business.

Yep. 

November 7, 2010 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

February 20, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

August 7, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

November 13, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

March 3-4, 2012 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 23, 2012 - Orlando Comic Expo

October 21-22, 2012 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

April 6-7, 2013 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

May 18-19, 2013 - Orlando Comic Expo

August 23-25, 2013 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 14-15, 2013 - Nashville Comic Expo

 

March 14-16, 2014 - Indiana Comic Con

August 1-3, 2014 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

 

March 13-15, 2015 - Indiana Comic Con

July 31 - August 2, 2015 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

 

April 29 - May 1, 2016 - Indiana Comic Con

August 5-7, 2016 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 2-4, 2016 - San Francisco Comic Con

 

April 14-16, 2017 - Indiana Comic Con

July 28-30, 2017 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 1-3, 2017 - San Francisco Comic Con

 

March 30 - April 1, 2018 - Indiana Comic Con

June 8-10, 2018 - San Francisco Comic Con

July 13-15, 2018 - Atlanta Comic Con

August 3-5, 2018 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

August 17-19, 2018 - Michigan Comic Con

 

June 28-30, 2019 - Wisconsin Comic Convention

July 12-14, 2019 – Atlanta Comic Con

August 2-4, 2019 – Tampa Bay Comic Convention

August 16-18, 2019 – Michigan Comic Convention

August 30 – September 1, 2019 – Indiana Comic Convention

 

July 30 – August 1, 2021 – Tampa Bay Comic Convention

August 6-8, 2021 – Atlanta Comic Con

October 15-17, 2021 – Indiana Comic Convention

[VintageComics]

On 9/10/2023 at 3:18 PM, TupennyConan said:

Yep. 

November 7, 2010 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

February 20, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

August 7, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

November 13, 2011 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

March 3-4, 2012 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 23, 2012 - Orlando Comic Expo

October 21-22, 2012 - Tampa Bay Comic Con 

 

April 6-7, 2013 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

May 18-19, 2013 - Orlando Comic Expo

August 23-25, 2013 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 14-15, 2013 - Nashville Comic Expo

 

March 14-16, 2014 - Indiana Comic Con

August 1-3, 2014 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

 

March 13-15, 2015 - Indiana Comic Con

July 31 - August 2, 2015 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

 

April 29 - May 1, 2016 - Indiana Comic Con

August 5-7, 2016 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 2-4, 2016 - San Francisco Comic Con

 

April 14-16, 2017 - Indiana Comic Con

July 28-30, 2017 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

September 1-3, 2017 - San Francisco Comic Con

 

March 30 - April 1, 2018 - Indiana Comic Con

June 8-10, 2018 - San Francisco Comic Con

July 13-15, 2018 - Atlanta Comic Con

August 3-5, 2018 - Tampa Bay Comic Con

August 17-19, 2018 - Michigan Comic Con

 

June 28-30, 2019 - Wisconsin Comic Convention

July 12-14, 2019 – Atlanta Comic Con

August 2-4, 2019 – Tampa Bay Comic Convention

August 16-18, 2019 – Michigan Comic Convention

August 30 – September 1, 2019 – Indiana Comic Convention

 

July 30 – August 1, 2021 – Tampa Bay Comic Convention

August 6-8, 2021 – Atlanta Comic Con

October 15-17, 2021 – Indiana Comic Convention

That Vern, is the American dream right there. 

[the blob]

On 7/21/2023 at 6:00 PM, Pixx_L said:

1) "Why wouldn't SDCC charge $100day?" You answered your own question - if they are a non-profit then the goal is not to make profit but service a collective, social or public benefit. They exist to serve a public good. I don't see how a $100 a day ticket is a public good. The better question is if someone is so devoted to 'caring about the art' of comics why wouldn't they want one of the largest pop-culture/comics-related events (or just more conventions in general) to be as affordable and as accessible as possible to as many people as possible? Obviously Gamescon in Europe with its $20-$30 tickets embody this. The conventions I attended in my youth embodied this. I see no reason more conventions in the US currently couldn't as well, besides a certain corporate mindset that sees everything as a profit maximizing endeavor. The philosophy of taxing everyone's wallets at every opportunity didn't lead to a healthy comics market by the end of the 90s - I don't see why that example would reach a different outcome for geek culture and conventions the way they're going.

2) This side steps the issue of accessibly for artists at conventions. Whether you have 120 artists at a convention or not really says nothing about how accessible those tables are given their price. Obviously, my example was not of an artist making 'japanese woodblock carvings of Bonsai Trees,' (that definitely would fit the bill for Art Basel) but rather a working class woman who normally works as an illustrator with an ad firm (by day) who was moonlighting in comics with a graphic novel she had made in her free time along with prints of various illustration work she had done. Given the cost of that table for her, she was finding it pointless financially to go to conventions. But I totally get why it would benefit conventions to sell tables to more than just one type of vendor while pretending to do a service for the artists. There's a similar dynamic at work for most film festivals here in the US that charge the same price for a short film (overwhelmingly submitted by students and unknowns) to be entered and reviewed for acceptance as they do a full-length feature film. I have never been to a US film festival where the organizers didn't come out and grandstand as providing a great resource and service to filmmakers. By contrast most European film festivals have no charge to review short films for acceptance - an actual service to filmmakers.

3) As far as what people care about and why - this is ground someone like Robert McChesney covers extensively. The short answer is if people have few opportunities for one thing and more for another popular tastes become reflective of what is more dominant. You can't just blame the people themselves for this result but those that are restricting the options available to them.

Doesn't the venue and staffing the venue cost a tremendous amount? Both SD and NYCC are in high wage spots. 

[the blob]

On 7/22/2023 at 11:17 AM, Robot Man said:

$100 a day for a show like SDCC really, by today’s standards, does not really seem THAT excessive. And the fact that it sells out so fast to more than willing attendees bears this out.

When it starts getting crazy is the cost of flying into SD, $800 a night hotel rooms that a week later will go for a third of that. Then the cost of eating, drinking parking ect. And the fact that one has to compete in “on line lotteries” to do so. A lot of folks look at it like a vacation and are more willing to put up with the hassle and crowds and pay up for the privlage.

I prefer to put that vacation money to so many other places than a comic con.

I mostly to go shows to buy vintage comics only. I went to the Torpedo show last weekend. $25. To get in. I was greeted with a huge room of walls of comics. Almost made my head spin at first. About every book you could want at all price ranges. I spent my money on a nice pile of books. I didn’t get that “vibe” I would have gotton at SDCC but am ok with that.

And part of the fun was cleaning out all the dealers of all the “deals” that without this show, would have gone to SDCC…

Not long ago at NYCC it was like $30-35 a day and there was a free kids day. Now it is $73 a day, but I guess NYCC is not the spectacle that SDCC is. At $73 it hardly seems worth it for buying comics (which is why I have always gone for free). I sort of regret not going to SDCC a few years back when my friend at a studio offered (but he wasn't offering to fly me out, just VIP passes and sleeping on the couch at his hotel suite), but financially, at the time I could not justify the airfare and other expenses. He doesn't have that position anymore, so that will probably never happen again.