bpp
Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Posts: 74 
|
Post by bpp on Dec 29, 2014 16:21:45 GMT -5
Henrythemorerecent - does the obligation to be polite extend to those 'defending' (to their minds) the podcasters? Because your rant is nothing but 'if you don't like it scram' ad hominem attack. It's perfectly fine to express that out of all the comics produced and all the comics covered in the podcast some of us are dismayed that Big 2 product so dominated the shortlists in this show. It's further perfectly valid to say that pricing policies should exclude a publisher (as those have very real consequences for the direct market) from being 'publisher of the year'. None of us need to go make our own podcast to express that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Dec 29, 2014 17:15:51 GMT -5
I can't help but disagree with most of what you guys have said. I do totally agree with the $5 price point complaint, but those prices have always been for larger issues and only one-offs. It is something that is worrying in that it may lead to books permanently being priced that way, though. What do you think that SHIELD book is? What do you think their move to jump Batman to $5 regularly was back in October? Why do you think we've seen $5 books over and over this year, and only from those two companies (nevermind that those companies, and their parent companies, number as a few of the wealthiest and most profitable in the country, and they certainly don't need that extra buck a book to break even or anything like that; it's nothing but gross, pure-driven greed), even if, at first, they were on "specials" and "anniversaries" and "events" and annuals? They were testing the waters with those events and one-offs, and they've found them to be economically feasible (in a totally unethical way, pushing towards a marketplace that's more and more exclusive and viciously unfriendly to its customers both old and potential), and now we're starting to see the product of that with the SHIELD book. An ongoing; 20 pages per issue; $5. It's not an event, it's not a one-off, it's a regular ongoing. That's where this has all been going, man, and that's not a light or inconsequential thing; that's not what a business who gives two shits about either its customers or the industry does. Like I said, I love several of the books that those companies put out, I would never argue that Ms Marvel or Gotham Academy or Cap Marvel or Daredevil or Rocket or whathaveyou aren't in the "best books in comics" category, but that's on the creators of those books, and if the discussion is Best Publisher, then what we're talking about is how they do business, how they treat their customers, where they're taking the industry, and regardless that there are good books at those companies, both Marvel and DC fail so, so utterly in that discussion. They run their businesses in a deplorable manner, with utter disregard for the consequences, and they're only getting worse. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Dec 29, 2014 17:19:02 GMT -5
Just want to ring in here and say this. I'm never frustrated by criticism or by disagreements. I want them. I want us to be pushed to do better. However, I do bristle at any accusation that states in anyway that we aren't giving our honest and most well intentioned opinions on these topics. We have no motivation other than passion and love to do these things. If we aren't reflecting your feelings please feel free to write in with your votes. He reason we poll the audience is because a group of thousands will always be able to read more than just the 4 of us. I don't know who you were responding to, Bobby, but I'm sorry if something I said was taken to mean that I think you guys weren't being on the up-and-up. I've never had any questions whatsoever about the intentions, honesty, or integrity of you fine folks behind the mics; as far as I'm concerned, you and Steph, and Bob, and Steve have always been nothing but honest and forthright, and I'm very, very sorry if anything I said intimated otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Dec 29, 2014 17:27:00 GMT -5
Henrythemorerecent - does the obligation to be polite extend to those 'defending' (to their minds) the podcasters? Because your rant is nothing but 'if you don't like it scram' ad hominem attack. It's perfectly fine to express that out of all the comics produced and all the comics covered in the podcast some of us are dismayed that Big 2 product so dominated the shortlists in this show. It's further perfectly valid to say that pricing policies should exclude a publisher (as those have very real consequences for the direct market) from being 'publisher of the year'. None of us need to go make our own podcast to express that. Exactly this. |
|
|
|
Post by angelus104 on Dec 29, 2014 17:28:52 GMT -5
This in response to a lot, but first off of course being polite extends to all opinions and all points. You should not be harassed in disagreeing with us the podcasters. That's the opposite of what we'd ever want to happen.
Secondly it's perfectly valid to disagree with what the big two do. You aren't wrong in thinking their practices are bad business in some cases. However, there is nothing unethical about charging a price for a product you create, that is purchased voluntarily. Let's save important words such as ethics for the things that really matter.
Semantics aside I hear you. The prices can be crappy and the events being pushed out are at times overwhelming. But the truth is how much those things matter is up to each individual.
No one is right or wrong in this debate. The mistake is in treating the other side (whatever it may be) as if what they are saying has no merit. When you express opinions, whether they be in a podcast, on a forum or in life there will always be people who don't share your way of thinking. That is an opportunity for discussion not anger. That is why we do it to prompt thoughtful discourse.
There are pros and cons to every publisher. So those who like Marvel and DC tell us why, those who think other publishers deserve to be more represented tell us why they should be.
Love the level of passion everyone has just remember we are all comic lovers and that makes us more a like than different any day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Dec 29, 2014 17:40:53 GMT -5
. . However, there is nothing unethical about charging a price for a product you create, that is purchased voluntarily. Let's save important words such as ethics for the things that really matter. We're going to have to agree to disagree on that, Bobby. Ethics can be applied to anything and everything, including price gouging on a comic book, and those two companies have decided that they're perfectly ok with aligning themselves with the darker, more sinister, absurdly-greedy, and anti-humanistic aspects of base capitalism. The rich are getting richer in those companies at the expense of so many; that extra buck sure as hell isn't going in the pocket of the creators. Sure, the ethics of the behavior of the military industrial complex, or election finance, or the oil industry, or Monsanto, or Big Pharma, or whathaveyou, are vastly and exponentially more important and meaningful than the ethics involved in comic book publication, but there's most definitely still a discussion re: ethics to be had. Business ethics applies to all manner of business, and The Big Two, regardless of whether their product is comics, or life-saving-medicine, can still be weighed on that scale. Either they conduct their business with honor, and in an ethical way, or they don't, or they're somewhere in the grey-middle. That's not an unreasonable discussion to have. |
|
skylynx
Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Posts: 94
|
Post by skylynx on Dec 29, 2014 17:41:14 GMT -5
These end of year 'best of' shows are always my favourite. I'm a sucker for awards and love the discussions. As someone who is pretty set in my ways when it comes to comics I find these useful for directing me to new stuff. On the subject of publishers, I'm really not surprised the big 2 got in (and Image of course). I'm just glad you guys decided to include IDW who got overlooked last year. They really are doing great things and actually seem to listen to their readers and create a range of titles for a diverse audience. They also brought out what is rapidly becoming my favourite series of at least the last 5 years - the insanely creative Transformers vs GI Joe!  |
|
|
|
Post by angelus104 on Dec 29, 2014 17:59:11 GMT -5
. . However, there is nothing unethical about charging a price for a product you create, that is purchased voluntarily. Let's save important words such as ethics for the things that really matter. We're going to have to agree to disagree on that, Bobby. Ethics can be applied to anything and everything, including price gouging on a comic book, and those two companies have decided that they're perfectly ok with aligning themselves with the darker, more sinister, absurdly-greedy, and anti-humanistic aspects of base capitalism. The rich are getting richer in those companies at the expense of so many; that extra buck sure as hell isn't going in the pocket of the creators. Sure, the ethics of the behavior of the military industrial complex, or election finance, or the oil industry, or Monsanto, or Big Pharma, or whathaveyou, are vastly and exponentially more important and meaningful than the ethics involved in comic book publication, but there's most definitely still a discussion re: ethics to be had. Business ethics applies to all manner of business, and The Big Two, regardless of whether their product is comics, or life-saving-medicine, can still be weighed on that scale. Either they conduct their business with honor, and in an ethical way, or they don't, or they're somewhere in the grey-middle. That's not an unreasonable discussion to have. I'm not saying there isn't a discussion to be had about business practices. There is. And if you want to have talks about Disney and Time Warner ethically I want to have that chat. But ethics is more than just charging an extra dollar for a book. I don't think either of us can speak to the way the publishers deal with their internal goings on or their financial realities. What if Disney told Marvel publishing here is your bottom line hit it or we are going to start making major cuts. Which could lead to many people losing their jobs. Did this happen? I have no idea and probably not but I think it's too harsh and too knee jerk to simply label something unethical. All the facts are needed before making a call like that. (Before anyone calls foul, neither Marvel or DC send us free books) Do I hate that books are so much? Yes of course I do. Do I agree that things should change, yes. But look across the industry, many companies are charging 3.99 for books and some more. Are they unethical? Or are they not because that has become more the norm now when t wasn't a few years ago. Marvel and DC set the market because they are what makes up a giant chunk of the total revenue for the industry. If we want that to change its on us. We need to as a fan base stop buying the overpriced stuff and they will stop making it. I'm not saying you are wrong for being upset and that you aren't making good points. I just think we too often jump to hyperbole and it makes it really difficult to contextualize things when they do get worse or better than they already are. |
|
|
|
Post by theboogieman on Dec 29, 2014 19:41:26 GMT -5
I'm just gonna chime in here and say that I can't stand that whole thought process of, "this person expressed dismay or negativity towards something, and I don't agree with them doing that, so that means they have no right to express dismay over that thing here, and they need to go elsewhere if they're going to criticize that thing I like, or not criticize it at all, because criticizing things is being hostile". And also the equally redundant and familiar, "if you don't like this thing and feel the need to criticize it, make your own thing". I seem to see this a lot on the internet, when people criticize something they're a fan of, without insulting anyone or being an asshole about it, and then other fans of what the first person is criticizing quickly come in and start trying to defend the thing in question, as if it is being verbally attacked, or insulted. People should be able to criticize things, even things that they and other people like and are a fan of. Without criticism, where would anyone be? Especially things like up-and-coming podcasts which are still growing and finding out what works and what doesn't, what they want to do and don't want to do, and what makes their fans tick and how to resolve that and work with it.
Now that I think of it, I think that I'll also add that the issue of how comics are priced is more an issue of convenience for the consumer, rather than ethics. Comics companies aren't evil or unethical if they charge too much for their comics, they're just annoying. Or rather, it's more an inconvenience (not an annoyance for me as I rarely purchase single issues or Marvel/DC stuff, but probably an annoyance for other people) that companies feel that they need to price their comics highly in order keep all their stuff going, and keep in business. Ethics, as Bobby pointed out, carries too much weight to it as a phrase to be used here, I think. To put this into the whole realm of ethics would be to rope it in with the much more serious issues that are more associated with business ethics, like using slave labour to make products for example, or underpaying workers.
I think (but I don't really know about the business side of comics) that if publishers are charging too much for their books, it would be the publishers that would lose out more, as customers would start to buy less and less of their products as a result, and subsequently the publishers would start to make less money, and have to think of new ways to keep making money from their comics. Perhaps Marvel and DC, instead of increasing the prices of their comics, should try to market them in new ways, or to new kinds of consumers. I dunno.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tony on Dec 30, 2014 4:19:23 GMT -5
I'm not saying there isn't a discussion to be had about business practices. There is. And if you want to have talks about Disney and Time Warner ethically I want to have that chat. But ethics is more than just charging an extra dollar for a book. I don't think either of us can speak to the way the publishers deal with their internal goings on or their financial realities. What if Disney told Marvel publishing here is your bottom line hit it or we are going to start making major cuts. Which could lead to many people losing their jobs. Did this happen? I have no idea and probably not but I think it's too harsh and too knee jerk to simply label something unethical. All the facts are needed before making a call like that. Ok, fine, I said upfront very clearly that we're going to have to agree to disagree about whether ethics are applicable in this case (there are ethics to running a kids lemonade stand, for christsakes; there's nothing inherently 'grande' about the nature, definition, or application of ethics), and you're just going to charge right on ahead and call my argument kneejerk and hyperbolic and that I don't know the definition or application of ethics from a hole in the ground, and obviously that's extremely dismissive and more than a little insulting, but regardless, i'm more than happy to play the hypothetical situation game that you've proposed. So Disney comes to Marvel and says this, that they need to hit this certain number or else. Disney is a multi-billion dollar company, and they make a truly, staggeringly unfathomable amount of money every year. Not gross, but net; outright profit. So in this scenario that you've concocted, might the head of Marvel be in a bit of a tough spot? Potentially, yes; no one wants to have to choose between abusing their customers and firing their friends. Does that change anything that I said at all? Not even a little bit. Because the money's there, the profits are there, they, both Marvel and their parent company, are already raking it in, and you know that. They're well in the black; that's not up for debate. This is not Terry Moore trying to make ends meet. They're making money hand over first, and all they want is more. So in that scenario, would some of the ethical onus shift from the Marvel execs to the Disney execs? Sure. But they're the same goddamn company, and -again- you know that. When I say "Marvel comics" I think it's perfectly clear that the meaning is "Marvel/Disney" because that's the reality of that corporate entity, the same as the reality of "DC Comics" is also "DC/Time Warner" (which also clears an unfathomable profit every single year). So internal politics aside, there's no difference between "Marvel regularly embraces shameful and harmful business practices, such as outright price gouging" and "Marvel/Disney regularly embraces shameful and harmful business practices, such as outright price gouging". Same thing. To be perfectly honest, what I don't understand is why you're feeling it's necessary to put me down and belittle what i'm saying and how i'm saying it in defense of the practices of these two megaliths. I'm not under any illusion that you're in their pocket in any way, shape, or form, obviously you're not, so what is it? On the show you do like to play devil's advocate often, which works well within the context of a podcast discussion, and if anyone in the comic industry is the devil, it is they (or Diamond); is that it? Do you just like to argue? They don't need the help, I assure you, they already have the industry well under-heel. It's baffling to me, because we are both lovers of and consumers of comic books; we're on the same side. You, and I, and your friends and family that read and care about comics; we're all on the same side. I am speaking on behalf of us, of the consumer, and in the context of the practices of some of their smaller, more customer friendly competitors, the behavior of the Big Two is nothing less than reprehensible. You are trying to defend the indefensible, justify the unjustifiable, and for the life of me I cannot figure out why. Raising the price of a book 66% in three years (while simultaneously chopping the page count, and leaving the ads in place) is not cost of living, it's not inflation, it's pure greed, and it's incontrovertibly detrimental to the growth of comics as an industry. You guys often talk about how much you all love comics, about how enriching they can be, and about how much you want the industry to grow, the audience and readership to grow, about how much you want to put comics in the hands of new readers, and kids, and everyone else of every possible description. And I agree wholeheartedly; that's what i'm talking about; that enthusiasm and attitude is part of why I like the show so much. I love comics now because I loved them as a kid; that foundation is what my current love of them is built upon, and that would not and could not have happened if I were a kid today. I wish comics were still available in grocery stores and drug stores and gas stations and airports, that the physical books were still as prevalent in our culture as the movies and TV shows and videogames based on those properties have become; that would be awesome, wouldn't it? So you're going to launch into an ill-conceived defense of these two companies, even though they willfully (one might say "proudly", which -again- is totally unethical) engage in practices that are totally antithetical to those notions? It baffles me. $4 and now $5 comics (and who are the ones pushing the $5 price point other than DC/Marvel) are aggressively unfriendly to the current consumer base, aggressively unfriendly to potential new readers, and aggressively unfriendly to potential kid readers. That business practice is profit for profit's sake, and it damages the future of both the industry and the medium. If you love the medium like I do, if you want more people to be reading comics tomorrow than are reading them today, which is something that you guys say all the time on the show, then what are you doing defending the business practices of the two companies that care more about squeezing every extra cent out of the current customer base than they do about gaining new readers. (Before anyone calls foul, neither Marvel or DC send us free books) Do I hate that books are so much? Yes of course I do. Do I agree that things should change, yes. But look across the industry, many companies are charging 3.99 for books and some more. Are they unethical? Or are they not because that has become more the norm now when t wasn't a few years ago. Marvel and DC set the market because they are what makes up a giant chunk of the total revenue for the industry. If we want that to change its on us. We need to as a fan base stop buying the overpriced stuff and they will stop making it. I'm not saying you are wrong for being upset and that you aren't making good points. I just think we too often jump to hyperbole and it makes it really difficult to contextualize things when they do get worse or better than they already are. I object, fully, to the notion that this is our, the consumers, situation to control or change. That's not even close to true. This is not Adam Smith's laissez faire; such a thing does not exist in American Big Business. Those two companies have advantages beyond what is dreamt of in your philosophy, sir, and no matter how much I wish it were so, the behavior of one person, or ten people, or ten thousand will not change their practices when it comes to how they view the market and how they treat the customer. Can it impact the creative side of things? Of course. Spider-Gwen, yeah? Or Captain Marvel being announced as a movie; awesome. They're listening. But that's Creative, capital "C"; i'm talking about Executive, and Accounting, CEOs and CFOs. Creative, capital "C" doesn't set those prices. So if you love a book from those companies, that's great; defend those creators to your dying day; I doubt anyone will be there to argue that they don't deserve all the credit in the world for doing the fantastic work that they do. That's what the other categories are for; that's why there's a "Best Book" and "Best Writer" and "Best Artist" and all the rest. But "Best Publisher" is akin to "Best Comic Book Company", and that's a different ballgame altogether. Defending Disney and Time Warner isn't all that different from defending Monsanto, or Walmart, or Clear Channel; it's the cold, calculating, destructive, profit-at-the-expense-of-all-else side of big business. They are happy to suck the life out of the industry that we love so very much if it means a little higher stock price at the quarter, and they will push, and push, and push that bubble 'till it bursts AGAIN, and then sell the broken pieces off for scrap and move on, unphased. You care, I care, Image, Dark Horse, Boom, Oni, Archie, Valiant, IDW, they all care; Disney and Time Warner don't care a fig. Don't let the propaganda or the trotted-out ghost of Walt Disney fool you, they don't care about dreams, or imagination, or art; they don't care about a kid getting his hand on his first comic book, and it setting his or her world alight; they don't play the long-game; they're Bain Capital; they're Danny Devito in Other People's Money; they don't care about you, or me, or the writers and artists, they only care about profit margins, and they certainly don't need your help, so please, I beg you, don't help them by pretending that they're no different, ethically, from any other publisher, or that they shouldn't be held accountable for their destructive policies. |
|
|
|
Post by tundra on Dec 30, 2014 6:50:13 GMT -5
To put this into the whole realm of ethics would be to rope it in with the much more serious issues that are more associated with business ethics, like using slave labour to make products for example, or underpaying workers. I don't think you can be quite that reductionist about the application of ethics, and I think that in addition to what's already been mentioned there is a real ethical problem with Marvel & DR overpricing their output - that of denying other publishers access to the market. Exactly how unethical you feel that is will depend on your feelings about monopolies, but they are generally considered destructive at best. In brief, thanks to the rather broken nature of the direct market in American comics (which never seems quite sure if it is selling entertainment or collectibles) it is commercial suicide for a shop not to carry the full range from both Marvel and DC. The more they are charged for those books (up front, with no possibility of returns) the less of their finite budget will be available to place orders with any other publishers, denying the end consumers even the opportunity to vote with their wallets. This was very much the model the last time the industry imploded. Hopefully digital distribution is improving this - better for the consumer to have access to everything, but obviously bad for the comic stores. |
|
|
|
Post by theboogieman on Dec 30, 2014 7:07:07 GMT -5
To put this into the whole realm of ethics would be to rope it in with the much more serious issues that are more associated with business ethics, like using slave labour to make products for example, or underpaying workers. I don't think you can be quite that reductionist about the application of ethics, and I think that in addition to what's already been mentioned there is a real ethical problem with Marvel & DR overpricing their output - that of denying other publishers access to the market. Exactly how unethical you feel that is will depend on your feelings about monopolies, but they are generally considered destructive at best. In brief, thanks to the rather broken nature of the direct market in American comics (which never seems quite sure if it is selling entertainment or collectibles) it is commercial suicide for a shop not to carry the full range from both Marvel and DC. The more they are charged for those books (up front, with no possibility of returns) the less of their finite budget will be available to place orders with any other publishers, denying the end consumers even the opportunity to vote with their wallets. This was very much the model the last time the industry imploded. Hopefully digital distribution is improving this - better for the consumer to have access to everything, but obviously bad for the comic stores. Yeah, alright, I see what you mean now. I dunno, I don't know about business, or anything like that, until it's explained to me generally. I didn't really think about that stuff. Like how their pricing policies could have a significant effect on the livelihoods of people employed in the comics industry, as well as on how much other publishers that aren't so restrictive in terms of the stories they want to tell, are able to tell their stories, and work in a more positive way. I guess that is ethics after all. So disregard what I said about that I guess, it sounds pretty stupid to me now lol. But the other thing I said is still relevant though. As a side-note though, in regards to digital distribution, I do think that eventually that will win out, and Marvel and DC's pricing policies won't matter, as individuals will be able to buy whichever individual comics they choose to, just like what's happened with music. |
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Dec 30, 2014 8:21:14 GMT -5
A LOT of what they discussed this year involved good books from both DC and Mavel. If you dislike it, start your own podcast. No one's requiring anyone here to vote.
I also don't understand the complaints about price, and never have. The price is the price, and no one is forcing anyone to pay it. If it's too much money, don't buy it. If it's good enough to be bought, you'll buy it, but don't then complain about something you willingly purchased.
|
|
|
|
Post by theboogieman on Dec 30, 2014 9:49:05 GMT -5
A LOT of what they discussed this year involved good books from both DC and Mavel. If you dislike it, start your own podcast. No one's requiring anyone here to vote. I also don't understand the complaints about price, and never have. The price is the price, and no one is forcing anyone to pay it. If it's too much money, don't buy it. If it's good enough to be bought, you'll buy it, but don't then complain about something you willingly purchased. So... if someone dislikes something about the podcast, they should go away, and start their own? I don't understand why you think that way. People are allowed to dislike things, and things they're a fan of, and they're allowed to discuss what they dislike. Why shouldn't people discuss and talk about what they dislike about stuff they're a fan of? No-one criticizing the podcast here has been an asshole about it and neither has anyone insulted anyone. The attitude of "you dislike something they said? Leave, and make your own thing" is stunningly flawed, and only pushes other fans away from the community, and maybe even away from the podcast, or any thing they're criticizing just in general. People can call bullshit on and take issue with things that people say, and still be a fan of them. That whole line of logic implies that no-one should take issue with anything, and no-one should criticize things. If people did that, the stuff left that does have fans would just have fan-bases that are just a big circlejerk of everyone approving completely of everything everyone says. The "dislike something about it? Then leave and start your own thing" viewpoint is a shitty way of trying to invalidate criticism, and turns what would otherwise be a civil, stimulating and interesting discussion into a hostile one. There shouldn't be an atmosphere here where people can't criticize something, without someone jumping in to inform them that apparently, since they don't run their own podcast, they shouldn't criticize or express their dislike about anything regarding the podcast. That's bullshit. |
|
|
|
Post by pacino on Dec 30, 2014 9:54:46 GMT -5
No, they voted for a lot of things I don't think are very good. They discuss lots of stuff I think isn't very good. What the previous amounted to was ranting and picking, however. Criticism is fine, but I don't act like it's 'depressing' that they like things or that I'm disappointed in them for their opinions. THAT is bullshit and frankly an elitist line of thinking. It's your opinion, fine. But when you want to essentially change a large portion of the show, go start your own podcast because it's no longer a product you're really interested in. They don't do a podcast to agree with everyone's opinions on comics.
|
|
