The only issue I can see with the idea that backlist reprints could supplant the frontlist is that the frontlist is what keeps new people coming into comics, especially younger readers. Buying single issues is still a reasonable risk when disposable income is at a premium and you don't know what you like yet. It's only after experimenting with a selection and figuring out that you prefer Those Annoying Post Bros to Batman that those readers will risk getting caught up in backlist collections, if only because there is SO MUCH. (I've watched new readers absolutely paralyzed when facing big compilations of reprints, because they don't know where to start. Which version of Justice League? How far back do you want to go and how many can you afford to get up to speed on the Fantastic Four? Which collections are complete and reprinted from original art, and which ones were practically mimeographed? And the biggest question of all: the balance between completism and burnout?)
Imagining Bookscan as a poll with margin of error… nah.
Imagining Bookscan as a sticky trap for pest monitoring.
“First week of March: One Codling Moth found in sticky trap. Second week of March: Two Codling Moth. And a Batman comic flew in.”
“Could be time to spray the orchard. Oh, and update Comics BizJournazine on the direct market sales of Batman. Also: these comics are messing with our core BugScan business, can we somehow zero them out?”
Several years ago I had lunch with a DC VP and an editor and they started asking me if I knew anything about reported sales numbers for a particular Image book. The creators had claimed in public that the book had sold over 100,000 copies, but the DC guys couldn't figure out where the sales came from, partly due to their reliance on Bookscan numbers. Knowing the creators well enough, I was sure the 100,000 figure was correct, even if DC couldn't figure out how.
All of which is to say I never trust numbers from anyone aside from those actually selling and shipping the book.
Yep. I'm laughing that anyone at DC ever thought Bookscan was accurate. I first started writing about what a laugh it was over a dozen years ago. When Amazon made the Bookscan numbers available to authors, the jig was up. I found they were over 1/2 to 3/4 off my real numbers. When I blogged about it several people kept trying to tell me that was because they were not accurately representing the direct market. I also knew this was bull, because I had access to my direct market numbers as well. I had one book that only got about 950 orders in the direct market, but sold over 55,000 copies outside it. But according to Bookscan, we did about 35,000. After some years, in the end we did 6 figures overall, and that book is still in print.
If we ever needed a new definition of conspiracy, this is it. That is, it definitely looks like the publishing industry is conspiring to keep artists and authors attached to them by using false or non-existent sales figures. I can't imagine anything more frightening than not knowing how your product sales in this situation. This needs disruption/reinvention.
Well, this has been an issues for decades. Everyone knows (or ought to) that Bookscan only tracks sales at bookstores that are subscribed to the system. So every sale you get that isn’t plugged in doesn’t exist. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s the Nielsen ratings. A Nielsen family has more power over the ratings than 100 families watching a show Nielsen isn’t tracking.
The only issue I can see with the idea that backlist reprints could supplant the frontlist is that the frontlist is what keeps new people coming into comics, especially younger readers. Buying single issues is still a reasonable risk when disposable income is at a premium and you don't know what you like yet. It's only after experimenting with a selection and figuring out that you prefer Those Annoying Post Bros to Batman that those readers will risk getting caught up in backlist collections, if only because there is SO MUCH. (I've watched new readers absolutely paralyzed when facing big compilations of reprints, because they don't know where to start. Which version of Justice League? How far back do you want to go and how many can you afford to get up to speed on the Fantastic Four? Which collections are complete and reprinted from original art, and which ones were practically mimeographed? And the biggest question of all: the balance between completism and burnout?)
Imagining Bookscan as a poll with margin of error… nah.
Imagining Bookscan as a sticky trap for pest monitoring.
“First week of March: One Codling Moth found in sticky trap. Second week of March: Two Codling Moth. And a Batman comic flew in.”
“Could be time to spray the orchard. Oh, and update Comics BizJournazine on the direct market sales of Batman. Also: these comics are messing with our core BugScan business, can we somehow zero them out?”
Several years ago I had lunch with a DC VP and an editor and they started asking me if I knew anything about reported sales numbers for a particular Image book. The creators had claimed in public that the book had sold over 100,000 copies, but the DC guys couldn't figure out where the sales came from, partly due to their reliance on Bookscan numbers. Knowing the creators well enough, I was sure the 100,000 figure was correct, even if DC couldn't figure out how.
All of which is to say I never trust numbers from anyone aside from those actually selling and shipping the book.
Yep. I'm laughing that anyone at DC ever thought Bookscan was accurate. I first started writing about what a laugh it was over a dozen years ago. When Amazon made the Bookscan numbers available to authors, the jig was up. I found they were over 1/2 to 3/4 off my real numbers. When I blogged about it several people kept trying to tell me that was because they were not accurately representing the direct market. I also knew this was bull, because I had access to my direct market numbers as well. I had one book that only got about 950 orders in the direct market, but sold over 55,000 copies outside it. But according to Bookscan, we did about 35,000. After some years, in the end we did 6 figures overall, and that book is still in print.
If we ever needed a new definition of conspiracy, this is it. That is, it definitely looks like the publishing industry is conspiring to keep artists and authors attached to them by using false or non-existent sales figures. I can't imagine anything more frightening than not knowing how your product sales in this situation. This needs disruption/reinvention.
Well, this has been an issues for decades. Everyone knows (or ought to) that Bookscan only tracks sales at bookstores that are subscribed to the system. So every sale you get that isn’t plugged in doesn’t exist. It’s not a conspiracy. It’s the Nielsen ratings. A Nielsen family has more power over the ratings than 100 families watching a show Nielsen isn’t tracking.