This makes me so angry...VALIANT haters!

[nutflush76]

I don't think that the article was all that negative.

Although I think that the writer is misinterpreting the numbers. I think that the high sales of the #1 issues are attributed to speculation over #1s. Nobody wants to miss the next "The Walking dead" and they buy multiple copies of a lot of #1 issues that come out. That, and there are more people who want the variants to the #1 issues so the orders are artificially high for the #1s. Add to that, the normal drop from #1 issues, to #2 issues and you get the big fall-offs that you see in the graphic.

I don't know why the author knocks Valiant for rehashing the same heroes over and over again. All publishers do that. Not everyone has the same business model as Image, and these characters failed in the past because they were poorly written. They succeeded when they were written well.

He does have a point about new characters. I would like to see VEI come up with a new character that generates some buzz in the comic community. This would do away with some of the "been there. Done that." mentality of naysayers.

The problem is VEI and its investors have invested money in the existing IPs. So while I expect old characters/teams with brand new concepts, or new concepts packaged under old names (like Secret Weapons), I do not expect new characters in new titles in the near future.

I don't think they have to be in new titles. One of the great things about the original Valiant was the surprise new characters showing up in other books. That is more along the lines of what I was thinking as far as new characters.

[BugsySig]

I don't think that the article was all that negative.

Although I think that the writer is misinterpreting the numbers. I think that the high sales of the #1 issues are attributed to speculation over #1s. Nobody wants to miss the next "The Walking dead" and they buy multiple copies of a lot of #1 issues that come out. That, and there are more people who want the variants to the #1 issues so the orders are artificially high for the #1s. Add to that, the normal drop from #1 issues, to #2 issues and you get the big fall-offs that you see in the graphic.

I don't know why the author knocks Valiant for rehashing the same heroes over and over again. All publishers do that. Not everyone has the same business model as Image, and these characters failed in the past because they were poorly written. They succeeded when they were written well.

He does have a point about new characters. I would like to see VEI come up with a new character that generates some buzz in the comic community. This would do away with some of the "been there. Done that." mentality of naysayers.

The problem is VEI and its investors have invested money in the existing IPs. So while I expect old characters/teams with brand new concepts, or new concepts packaged under old names (like Secret Weapons), I do not expect new characters in new titles in the near future.

I don't think they have to be in new titles. One of the great things about the original Valiant was the surprise new characters showing up in other books. That is more along the lines of what I was thinking as far as new characters.

In that case we have already seen new characters being introduced, and once the initial wave of appearances take place by the old school characters, I am sure we will see new characters being introduced. Harbinger is an easy one, like XMen, where new Psiots can always be introduced.

Warren was quoted as saying, however, that whatever new concept you have better be better than a concept they already have in hand. So they are more likely to mold a new concept or old character to fit something in their stable than allow something totally new at this point.