Hey, just saw on ComicBookResources that in May, Marvel Comics had 52% of the market while DC only had 31%.

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page ... e&id=16836

Wow, Marvel's got 20% more sales than DC comics-- in fact, Secret Invasion #2 had just over 200,000 copies sold and DC's number one book, Final Crisis, had only 159,000. Marvel has 14 of the top twenty books-- and Dark Horse has one., leaving DC with only 5 books in the top twenty.

I've always thought of the Big Two in dead heat, with DC nipping at Marvel's heels. It seems as though there's no contest at all-- Marvel is beating the crap out of DC. It reminds me of a Kirby quote about leaving Marvel for DC in the 70's-- "It was like leaving a slave ship for a ship that was sinking."

Wow. That's a big difference to Comicon's figures.
They had FInal Crisis 1 at 144 000, a 15k difference.

They had SI 2 a lot higher though, IIRC.

And that's higher than DC deserve.

FC was utter shite.

The sales figures from May are way out of whack. The theory is that since the estimates tend to be based around Batman, and that book shipped twice AND was the start of an event it's skewed figures quite a bit depending on which of the two Batman issues was used to get the estimates.

The only time that happened was when Marvel decided to distribute their comics themselves and tried that whole "Marvel Store" fiasco that left DC scurrying to sign an exclusive distribution deal with Diamond -- which led to all the other distributors pretty much folding, leaving Diamond the only distributor for everyone, including Marvel.

There was a time when Marvel had 80% of the market share.

IIRC< there were some months around Infinite Crisis where they were tied or even beat Marvel. At the time, there seemed to be a load of possibilities for DC.

This will be the story until DC finds someone to steer the ship. At this point even if you like what's happening in the big event crossovers, you never know when the direction will change or if the series will just peter out with no real ending.

I think the main problem with DC's events is that if someone asks you "What's it about?" it's REALLY tough to say.

What prompted Crisis? Beats me.

Zero Hour? It has something to do with Hal Jordan going crazy, but what was the deal with Extant? The tie-in issues were fun, though.

Identity Crisis? I know what it was about, but I don't feel comfortable talking about it in polite company.

Infinite Crisis? I reread it, and STILL couldn't figure it out, beyond people getting arms ripped off.

Final Crisis - WTF? J'onn is captured off-panel, and is brought in and killed without a fight? I repeat - WTF?

Marvel's events, for the most part have a very clear narrative.

Heroes kidnapped and made to fight bad guys on an alien planet.

Omnipotent being comes to Earth, decides to explore humanity and wreaks havok in the process. And wears bad clothing.

Heroes take sides for and against government registration and come to blows.

Skrulls are among us and have been for longer than you can imagine. Trust no one.

Really, of the events Marvel's done, their worst (Avengers Disassembled) is about on par with DC's best (Crisis).

One Year Later was a complete failure.

Countdown was a complete failure.

Even Infinite Crisis was a failure. For goodness sake, they COMPLETELY changed the book for the trade.

Night and day.

Why should consumers pony up for this new one, when they've got no faith in DC's ability to put out a good product that they will stand behind.
And so far, the consumer was right not to.

And compare it to what Marvel's doing.

SI has been seeded through their books for years, building and building.

Whereas DC just yells 'NEW EVENT' and expects us all to come running.

Hank brought up a great point-- with Marvel's events, there is a simply, straight forward story.

DC events seem like an excuse to f*ck with continuity and oftentimes, a casual fan won't have any clue about it.

I just lent a good friend who's an extremely casual superhero fan Civil War-- the guy might have a few questions on it, but I have faith that this friend will be able to understand and enjoy the book. I doubt I could say the same about Final Crisis or whatever else.

Considering how many hardcover DC readers are lost, yeah.

And people are still confused as to what continuity changed from Infinite Crisis, let alone a whole new one.

It's just making their books more and more impenetrable, and that's not the right way to go.

Morrison wanted to make the New Gods the stars of this. Is that really the best thing to do for something you're aiming at new readers?

I love Morrison for his JLA and Superman work, but after Final Crisis #1, I wasn't interested.

No more events for ten years. That's what they should do.

I would buy more Marvel and DC books if they would stop having crossovers altogether.

All "epics" can be contained within a series or a pair of series at the most. Maybe a special. The Sinestro Corps War is a good example of this.

Of all the books, I'm surprised at All-Star Superman's numbers. I would have thought that this book would have been selling 100,000+.

I have to agree with the Jinks here.

As long as I don't have to read every book, I don't care how many titles an event crosses over into. Disassembled, House of M, Civil War, and World War Hulk were all easy enough to follow by just reading the main books.

Yeah, but I think ASS (dodgy abbreviation there) will become one of DC's evergreen titles for trade sales.

Also, thanks Monk for the explanation on the skewy numbers.

Civil War was a bad crossover, in my opinion.


The biggest chapter, and ultimately the real conclusion, wasn't even in the main miniseries.

Yeah, from the Cap readers POV it was good that it happened in his own book, but from a CW readers POV, it's a bit of a rort.

I love the DC characters.


I buy almost none of their books. That's sad.

What is sad is that some DC books are better than they have been in years, and they are getting lost in the perception (fully promoted by the company) that their entire Universe is in perpetual crossover state.

Batman? Dini knows how to write Batman, and Morrison is doing stories full of fun, action and wonder. As comics should be.

Superman? Ok, Johns/Donner was a fiasco, and Johns alone is entrenched in his Byrnesque fanboyish masturbatory fantasies; but Busiek wrote some great Superman stories in his run, picking and choosing the best from all eras. And I'm not even mentioning *that* other Superman book.

Green Lantern? Best Green Lantern ever. Bar none.

Wonder Woman? Great fun courtesy of Gail Simone.

Not to mention other great books like Checkmate, Atom or Shadowpact. There were a lot of things to like in the DCU. But they were absorbed by the enormous gravitational pull of the suckiness of Countdown.

I agree with you when it comes to Green Lantern and Wonder Woman, but I think the Bat-books have been a mess since Morrison and Dini took over (and I'm pretty shocked that I feel that way, since I had high hopes for both of them. Johns is doing great work on Action now that the Donner/Kubert arc is done (it is done, right?). I'm the last person to get caught up in nostalgia wankery when it comes to DC, but I loved the Superman and the Legion of Superheroes story, and the Brainiac arc is off to a good start. Honestly, it's reminding me a lot of All Star Superman, just set within the current DCU.

I'll add Booster Gold, Trinity (which is giving me my JLA fix), and Blue Beetle to the list of fun DC books.

I think Batman has stunk since Morrison took over. and Dini has just been meh.

Or that's what I felt when i dropped them

I just picked up that braniac Superman story. Not bad. Busiek is a solid writer.

I still get 2 DC books for every Marvel one. Marvel may be winning sales wise but I don't think their quality is any better. And these days if you don't like the Skrull storyline, you are fucked, because it is in practically every title. DC is geeting better at keeping it's events more contained.