What If Valiant HAD lowered it's prices?

Todd Luck · Post by **Todd Luck** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 10:47 am

I remember a Shooter editoral apologizing for an early Valiant price (back then the cover price was hefty compared to other companies). In the editoral, Shooter said that they would lower prices if the sales went up. Now there's an intrigueing idea.

We know Valiant went through a period were their sales were astronomical, they had to be making profit. What if they had indeed decided to lower the comics by 25 or 50 cent? Would that have enticed more people to keep reading or, for those who hadn't, to try their comics?

Yes, the prices would have gone back up eventually but could they have retained more readers in the process. Speaking for myself, I would probably would have given many of their titles more issues to "click" with me if they had been cheaper. Ofcourse, nothing can make me buy a series I just can't stand reading, but for those titles that were on the borderline with me (and many of them were) a lower price might have kept me reading them.

Just a possiblity I thought was intrigueing. Does anyone know if any company has ever lowered their comic prices?

justin · Post by **justin** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 10:56 am

Well, I know when I was buying comics in my prime 1994-1995, I was spending over 100 a month on comics. I would have bought the titles I was buying regardless if they were a quarter more or less.

-A

Daniel Jackson · Post by **Daniel Jackson** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:36 pm

I don't think that lowering the price by 10 - 25 cents would have mattered much to me either back then. Lowering them to a buck a piece would have been more to my liking. When I was a kid it sure seemed a lot easier to plunk down a quarter or fifty cents for a comic from my allowance vs. as a grown up with a job paying the $2.50+ they want for them now. I know the price of things has gone up on everything since then but it still seems too high.

dino · Post by **dino** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:44 pm

Daniel Jackson wrote:I don't think that lowering the price by 10 - 25 cents would have mattered much to me either back then. Lowering them to a buck a piece would have been more to my liking. When I was a kid it sure seemed a lot easier to plunk down a quarter or fifty cents for a comic from my allowance vs. as a grown up with a job paying the $2.50+ they want for them now. I know the price of things has gone up on everything since then but it still seems too high.

I agree. Buying 15 mins of entertainment for 2.50 versus at least a 90 min movie at $8 or unlimited replayablity of a 45 min CD at $12.

I don't think Valiant dropping prices would have made that much of a difference in sales - people buying mulitple copies would have been happy though

But it would have been a great PR move, giving back to the fans and all that. I bet wizard would have eat it up.

Vault-Keeper · Post by **Vault-Keeper** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:46 pm

Actually Valiant did suffer from bad product line management. I believe they expanded to 14 titles at a time when the market was already saturated with new universes & on the verge collapse. Plus the 'bad-girl' fad took over, which Valiant didn't participate in. Sorry, no Zephyr Swimsuit issues...a pity, I say!:)

They could have told the Armorines, Psi-Lords, Geomancer, & other stories in some of the core titles. Even do split-books or flip-books, like they did to start out Rai. Just my 2¢---Steve G

dino · Post by **dino** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:47 pm

Vault-Keeper wrote:Actually Valiant did suffer from bad product line management. I believe they expanded to 14 titles at a time when the market was already saturated with new universes & on the verge collapse. Plus the 'bad-girl' fad took over, which Valiant didn't participate in. Sorry, no Zephyr Swimsuit issues...a pity, I say!:)

They could have told the Armorines, Psi-Lords, Geomancer, & other stories in some of the core titles. Even do split-books or flip-books, like they did to start out Rai. Just my 2¢---Steve G

Yeah, they got a bit cocky/greedy

justin · Post by **justin** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 1:09 pm

Knightt_333 wrote:But then Chaos Effect hit and I could take it no longer... dropped Valiant all together and I was suprised at how much money I then had

LOL everyone that I have talked to, including myself, got out at about this time!

-A

Vault-Keeper · Post by **Vault-Keeper** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:10 pm

What really burnt me out was when they started to publish twice a month! Or maybe it was Fred Hembeck who destroyed the Valiant Universe...

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:19 pm

Cover prices are the reason I have not bought new comics on a regular basis since 1993, or, indeed, had a 'sub' service since then.

Sorry, but I'm not paying $2.25 and up, REGARDLESS of 'discount', for 30-40 cents worth of entertainment...especially when I can pay 25-50 cents for them 6 months down the line, and I don't NEED to know 'what happened next' the second it happens. That's what TV is for. And..believe me, the occasional time that a book becomes a break out hit, me paying $10 or $20 for a copy and then 50 cents for the REST of the junk, it's WAYYYYY in my favor. Or, I'll just wait til the hot book becomes $5 again.

In fact, the ONLY title, in the last 20 YEARS, that I have not been able to do that with is Ultimate Spiderman. Out of how many HUNDREDS, and THOUSANDS of titles published?

Ok, ok, I'l give you Bone, Strangers in Paradise, and Cry for Dawn. But that's IT.

Sorry, but I'm a gambling man, and those odds are TERRIBLE.

We've talked about this at length in the past, I'd be happy to discuss it again (as always.

) The main reason cover prices spiralled out of control in the mid 90's is one man: Ron Perelman.

As it relates to VALIANT...they definitely could have lowered prices by the end of 1992. They just didn't want to.

I'll leave this as an anecdote: Dave Sim, while publishing Cerebus, raised the cover price five times in 26 YEARS. From $1, to $1.25, to $1.50, to $1.60, to $2, to $2.25 (US).

In the same time period, Marvel comics raised the price of their 'standard' comic line TWELVE TIMES (30¢, 35¢, 40¢, 50¢, 60¢, 65¢, 75¢, $1, $1.25, $1.50, $1.95, $1.99, $2.25) or more than double the rate. DC is the same story.

An independent publisher, publishing an average of one title a year for 26 years...and by the end of his run, the book was the same price as the 'standard' Marvel comic. With all the resources Marvel has at it's fingertips, an indepedent book that NEVER, EVER had circulation above 40,000 copies a month ended up at the same price.

When you look at the perventages...it's even worse.

When you factor in advertising...it's MUCH MUCH worse.

depluto · Post by **depluto** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 6:10 pm

I don't think the cover prices mattered much in the end. Advertising was at almost zilch, about the only ads were Acclaim video game ads (cheap rates!) and a bunch of full color house ads. Those positions would have surely gone to paying advertisers if there was anyone willing to throw away their money on them.

Valiant was circling the drain for a while.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 7:26 pm

ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:Cover prices are the reason I have not bought new comics on a regular basis since 1993, or, indeed, had a 'sub' service since then.

Sorry, but I'm not paying $2.25 and up, REGARDLESS of 'discount', for 30-40 cents worth of entertainment...

Try this one

They have some really good prices. Some times they have comics at 75 cents.

And why do you say that it's 30-40 cents worth of entertainment?

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 8:24 pm

ManofTheAtom wrote:
ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:Cover prices are the reason I have not bought new comics on a regular basis since 1993, or, indeed, had a 'sub' service since then.

Sorry, but I'm not paying $2.25 and up, REGARDLESS of 'discount', for 30-40 cents worth of entertainment...
Try this one

They have some really good prices. Some times they have comics at 75 cents.

And why do you say that it's 30-40 cents worth of entertainment?

Y the Last Man. Good example. $2.95 original cover. Nice concept. Took me SEVEN MINUTES to read, mainly because it's a lot of 1-3 panel pages which take up space when you don't know how to write dialogue.

Sorry, but seven minutes for $3? If I pay $8 for a flick, MINIMUM 90 minutes, then that's 9 cents a minute, or....ok, 62 cents in this case. But when the film's 120 min+ (the usual length I watch), it turns out to be 7 cents a minute, or 46 cents for seven minutes.

Fair enough?

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 8:26 pm

As far as mailordercomics goes...how on EARTH can they sell for 75% off of cover? Max distributor discount (last time I cheched) was 60% and change. If they're buying at 60% off cover, and selling for 75% off cover.....

uhhhh.....

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Thu Jul 22, 2004 9:29 pm

The comics at 75 cents are limited at 2 copies.

They sell the same comic for like 35% off cover price with no limit.

So far, it's been a good experience buying with them.

Master Dorque · Post by **Master Dorque** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:57 am

ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:
ManofTheAtom wrote:
ZephyrWasHOT!! wrote:Cover prices are the reason I have not bought new comics on a regular basis since 1993, or, indeed, had a 'sub' service since then.

Sorry, but I'm not paying $2.25 and up, REGARDLESS of 'discount', for 30-40 cents worth of entertainment...
Try this one

They have some really good prices. Some times they have comics at 75 cents.

And why do you say that it's 30-40 cents worth of entertainment?
Y the Last Man. Good example. $2.95 original cover. Nice concept. Took me SEVEN MINUTES to read, mainly because it's a lot of 1-3 panel pages which take up space when you don't know how to write dialogue.

Sorry, but seven minutes for $3? If I pay $8 for a flick, MINIMUM 90 minutes, then that's 9 cents a minute, or....ok, 62 cents in this case. But when the film's 120 min+ (the usual length I watch), it turns out to be 7 cents a minute, or 46 cents for seven minutes.

Fair enough?

Yeah, but after you've seen the movie you have nothing tangible to show for your money...only the memory of the experience. The comic is yours to enjoy over and over. You could share it with others, or revisit it at any time in the future. And you still have in hand a tangible item with intrinsic value....value that could even rise over time (if you're lucky). Of course you could do similar with a film by purchasing a DVD of the film....but now you need to do your math again - I'm too lazy!

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:23 am

You make a great point.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:45 am

Master Dorque wrote:
Yeah, but after you've seen the movie you have nothing tangible to show for your money...only the memory of the experience. The comic is yours to enjoy over and over. You could share it with others, or revisit it at any time in the future. And you still have in hand a tangible item with intrinsic value....value that could even rise over time (if you're lucky). Of course you could do similar with a film by purchasing a DVD of the film....but now you need to do your math again - I'm too lazy!

Entertainment is entertainment; I'm not going to get the same level (if any) of entertainment reading a comic a 2nd or a 3rd time, so the experience is just as intangible. Whether you get a boost in intrinsic value is irrelevant to the discussion; that's a 'what if' in the BEST case scenario, and just isn't a factor in a discussion of entertainment value.

I'm comparing pure entertainment value to entertainment value, here, not corollary arguments of intrinsic or repetitive value. You can make the same argument about, say, sports cards, and they provide significantly LESS entertainment...but they are significantly CHEAPER, as well.

However....you can also make the same argument about a BOOK....and, a softcover book currently costs $5.95-$8.95 these days....and I get (and I read fast) roughly 20-30 hours out of a typical book. You don't even need to do the math to see the HUGE difference in value.

Even original hardcovers are a much better value.

Or even a magazine....it takes me roughly two hours to read through an entire issue of, say, Entertainment Weekly....and it's the SAME PRICE as a comic, with MOUNDS more information and entertainment.

That is, it's a FARRRRRRRR better value.

No, there's no reason 20 pages of story and art should sell for what they do; it's nothing but established precedent. They could be printed exactly the same way they were printed for 50+ years, on ordinary newsprint with standard covers, and sell for $1. They could, and they'd be profitable, if they sold enough units.

The fact that EVERYONE has put out mounds of CRAP with scattered gems for the last 10+ years, resulting in farrrrr less units sold, is the PUBLISHERS fault....not the buying public's.

Econ 101: to lower costs, you have to sell more units. To sell more units, you have to raise the quality and value of each unit sold. It's basic.

Raising prices because you can't sell as many units is the Black Hole of all economic theories. You raise prices to cover costs, which means you sell fewer units, which means you have to raise prices to cover costs, etc etc etc......

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 10:51 am

How can you ask for better quality and the return of newsprint in the same breath?

Those are contradictory statements.

You have to remember that the paper companies have raised prices in the last few years.

A decade ago, Superman comics had a cover price of 1.50 (after being sold for 75 cents for a loooooooong time), but as the paper prices have gone up, so have the cover prices (from 1.50 to 1.75 to 2.25 to 2.50).

High prices is not always the publisher's fault.

x-omatic · Post by **x-omatic** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:01 am

The cost of comics today has nothing to do with the physical quality of the book. At least not to justify a 2.95 or 3.50 cover price. The cost is more related to more money being paid to the creators and higher overhead costs. This is mainly do to the fact that most books today pay alot more people to do less than they did in the past.

The changes in paper cost, ink cost, and other production changes could not amount to more than a 25 cent change in price. If it were these factors we would see the same % increase in cost of all other book forms. But we don't, novels have only increased a tiny bit in cost.

Todd Luck · Post by **Todd Luck** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 11:37 am

General comments to those who've responded:

It sounds like most of you guys must have a lot more free cash to spend on comics than me or most people I know. The amount of money I was spending was a huge factor for me when deciding on whether to drop titles or if I could try even afford new ones.

I tried out nearly all the post-Shooter Valiants until after Dr Mirage was released. Many like Hard Corps or Bloodshot I liked or I was interested in where they were going, but they just didn't click with on some level (art, pacing, parts of the story, etc) so I just couldn't afford to keep getting them past the first 6 or so issues. To save money, I dropped my last Valiant book (Shadowman) the month after Chaos Effect, basically because I wasn't collecting any other Valiant titles and because they got rid of Master Darque. I've since gone back and found bought all those Shadowman issues I missed for a dollar and found out I would've liked most of them. I suspect when I go back and try that with some of the other series I'll have similar results.

I'm not saying that lowering prices could've saved the company (though I suppose one might argue if the drop in sales hadn't been so severe, the direction of the company might have been different by the time Chaos Effect and Accliam happened but who knows). But it would've been a helluva a PR move and would've been interesting to say the least.

And I'm not going to get into the whole "comic prices are too much compared to other media" arguement because I can name a ton of things that you get less for your money than buying a comic and a ton of things that you get more for your money than buying a comic (unfortunately the later one is a longer list). But the extrodinary price jump in the 90's does hurt the amount of comics sold. I'm currently paying maybe five or ten dollars less to collect roughly 7 titles a month than I was paying to collect over 20 titles in the early 90's. If a comic ain't absolutely flawless I can't afford to collect it. If I don't know to a scientific certianity I'm going to love a title before I buy it, I can't afford to try it. I know I don't exactly have an incredible amount of money set aside for comics but a lot of people don't.

Daniel Jackson · Post by **Daniel Jackson** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 12:06 pm

No, there's no reason 20 pages of story and art should sell for what they do; it's nothing but established precedent. They could be printed exactly the same way they were printed for 50+ years, on ordinary newsprint with standard covers, and sell for $1. They could, and they'd be profitable, if they sold enough units.

The fact that EVERYONE has put out mounds of CRAP with scattered gems for the last 10+ years, resulting in farrrrr less units sold, is the PUBLISHERS fault....not the buying public's.

I think that Zeph has nailed it pretty good. I think they have lost a lot of people who would still be buying comics on a regular basis because of the ridiculous prices they feel they have to charge now. After conditioning everyone to expect more out of a comic than is necessary though (i.e. glossy paper, hot artists, etc..). I'm not sure that they can go back without causing a backlash from whoever is buying this stuff now, but it would be interesting to see.

Master Dorque · Post by **Master Dorque** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:35 pm

ZephryWasHot....I disagree with you on a couple points. First, when you say that you will not get any significant enjoyment out of rereading a comic. I find some of my most enjoyable moments with comics is revisiting my favorites from the past. When I'm going thru my collection and come across and old favorite I haven't seen in a few years, and take the time to reread it...it's like seeing an old friend again. Not only does it give me a chance to enjoy the story and art anew, it also links me nostalgically to the era when I first experienced it. Makes me all kinda warm and fuzzy! A truly classic comic has story and art that are timeless, and can be enjoyed over and over. It's like a favorite food, just because you've tasted it before, doesn't mean you won't enjoy tasting it again. The second point I disagree on is when you mention sports cards being cheaper! Have you bought any sporsts cards lately! The more desireable product is insanely priced! But cards, like comics, give enjoyment to some, simply thru ownership. It's the collector mentality that allows people to enjoy a comic without ever opening the book....hence the success of CGC. Anyway, just my 2cents for what it's worth.

Todd Luck · Post by **Todd Luck** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 4:19 pm

Daniel Jackson wrote:
No, there's no reason 20 pages of story and art should sell for what they do; it's nothing but established precedent. They could be printed exactly the same way they were printed for 50+ years, on ordinary newsprint with standard covers, and sell for $1. They could, and they'd be profitable, if they sold enough units.

The fact that EVERYONE has put out mounds of CRAP with scattered gems for the last 10+ years, resulting in farrrrr less units sold, is the PUBLISHERS fault....not the buying public's.
I think that Zeph has nailed it pretty good. I think they have lost a lot of people who would still be buying comics on a regular basis because of the ridiculous prices they feel they have to charge now. After conditioning everyone to expect more out of a comic than is necessary though (i.e. glossy paper, hot artists, etc..). I'm not sure that they can go back without causing a backlash from whoever is buying this stuff now, but it would be interesting to see.

Well let me put my vote in for newprint comics just in case anyone who has a say in the issue is reading (you never know

)

I saw somewhere (the History Channel comics special?) that basically the switch to the more expensive formats was because the difference between the cost of production and the money coming in on the newsprint comics wasn't enough to pay the bills.

It seems possible to me. It's an old publishing industry trick that when the difference between production and sales is too small or negative you tack on things that cost you just a little more to justify putting a big price tag on it (hard cover, glossy paper, big format,etc). In comics, the Crisis hardcover is an example of this (atleast according to the stories from DC)

EDIT: Actually I just remembered the trick I'm referring to is done when the situation I just mentioned forces the company to charge more than what they think the reader is willing to pay in the regular format.In other word, they didn't think people would be willing to pay somewhere around $2 for a newsprint comic, so they added slicker paper that added a little more to price, but made it seem more worth a premuim price.

ZephyrWasHOT!! · Post by **ZephyrWasHOT!!** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 6:09 pm

ManofTheAtom wrote:How can you ask for better quality and the return of newsprint in the same breath?

Those are contradictory statements.

No they're not. Not in the slightest.

Let me clariify: when I say QUALITY, I mean STORY and ART. Not paper.

Paper is just a VEHICLE for GETTING the story and art to the people who want to be entertained by it.

When the STORY is good, it could be printed on TOILET PAPER, and people would like it.

You have to remember that the paper companies have raised prices in the last few years.

I did, and do. But standard newsprint...you know, the stuff they print the NEWSPAPER on...hasn't gone through the roof....if it had...why don't we pay $3 for our daily newspaper? IN FACT...you get a HELL of a lot more than 20 pages of story and art in your daily newspaper.

Ahhh yes...it's the FANCY stuff that went sky high in the 90's.

Screw fancy. You want fancy, go to a museum. I want entertainment, and I want it cheap.

And I'll tell you....pretty paper doesn't do SQUAT to make up for crappy story and art. ANY Rob Liefeld book proves that.

A decade ago, Superman comics had a cover price of 1.50 (after being sold for 75 cents for a loooooooong time), but as the paper prices have gone up, so have the cover prices (from 1.50 to 1.75 to 2.25 to 2.50).

Actually, Superman went to $1 cover prices with the Jan, 1991 cover date, then followed the rest of DC through $1.25 and so on.

High prices is not always the publisher's fault.

Yes, it is. In the case of the 1990's, it ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY, 100% WITHOUT A DOUBT is ENTIRELY Marvel's...and SPECIFICALLY Ron Perelman's...fault.

Ron Perelman drove Marvel into the GROUND, publsihing nearly ONE HUNDRED titles a month, and raised cover prices just as FAST as he thought he could and get away with it....it was HIS directive to raise cover prices so fast.

So yes, it is ABSOLUTELY Perelman's, and through him Marvel's, and through Marvel's, the entire industry's fault.

Don't believe me? Challenge my Cerebus example.

Go on. I dare ya.

ManofTheAtom · Post by **ManofTheAtom** » Fri Jul 23, 2004 6:17 pm

You say that you want high quality art and story regardless of the paper it's printed.

Many professional pencilers would disagree with you, they (rightly) think that the paper they use is connected to the quality of the art.

In recent years we've had Brian Hitch and Crisscross both complain about DC's lack of paper support on JLA and Firestorm... in fact, the use of newsprint-like paper instead of the shiny paper was one of the reasons why they chose to leave their respective titles.

As a reader, I want comics produced in the modern style on every front, not the production values from the 1960's or before as I don't live in that era.

I demand the kind of production values quality that the era I live in calls for

As a writer, I expect my work to be of the highest-possible quality on every front, that it's something I can be proud of the day it comes out, a year after it comes out, five years after it comes out, a decade after it comes out and even on my dead bed.

It's not the paper that has to change, it's just the price, that's it.

Publishers can sell a million comics (with shiny paper) at 10 cents a copy or they can sell 10 comics at 1 million dollars a copy... it's really their choice.

I believe that it's best to sell more at a low price than sell less at a high price, but at the same time I see no reason why production values have to go down when sales go up.