Thread continued from:

http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/thread?forumid=248951&messageid=1077016671&lp=1077137622



Matt Reed

John asked for examples of late comics occurring in the era preceding the "deadline doom" days of the mid-late 70s at Marvel... I can give you a passel. Basically anything done by Neal Adams was consistently late, and this goes back to the late 60s. It got him fired from the Avengers, which in my own humble opinion was perhaps the best superhero work Adams ever did. Green Lantern / Green Arrow was also frequently delivered late from what I've read, and that book wasn't even monthly.


******


Neal was late. The books were not.

Am I just not writing these posts in English, or something??

John, Kirby's FF is the gold standard. But not every artist today is Kirby. In fact, none of them are.

I get the point that every artist should endeavor to be that professional. Really, I do! I love the fact that your work is both incredible and professional.

But on the other hand, I also love Bryan Hitch's art. And he's not anywhere near as fast as you. Do I stop buying his book because he's slow? In your equation, yes. In mine, in which the main criteria is whether or not I'm having a good time reading the book, no!

You asked why comic book consumers don't invoke their right to stop buying late books. I've given you three answers:
1. It doesn't necessarily send the right message to publishers.
2. It forces me to track the timeliness of the comics, even though I get my books in a box shipped to me on a monthly basis, and even then I don't rip them open and read them right away.
3. The most important criteria to buying a comic is whether or not I'm going to enjoy the book, not whether it shipped on time.

These factors work both in the microeconomic case (what's good for me) and the macroeconomic case (what's good for the retailer).

Final question:
You know, I've been writing on this thread all day. So have you. I have time to do this because I'm unemployed (actually, back in school switching careers so I can teach math in the fall). You, on the other hand, have comics to draw. Is any issue of Title Withheld going to ship late because of your participation in this thread?

(Okay, I'm being a wise-ass on that last bit. I know you too well, JB. And I can't wait for JLA and TW.)

Neal was late. The books were not.

Am I just not writing these posts in English, or something??
=========
if it makes you feel any better, JB, I did grasp this disctinction. More than likely, every Marvel before the Harras/Quesada era shipped on time, or so close to on-time that no one noticed (i.e. a week or two behind).

The only pre-direct market late-ships that I personally can recall came in the mid-70s, when a paper shortage resulted in a number of books being pulled off the presses because there simply wasn't paper with which to print them. This was about the point when the color books went to 25 cents the second time. Marvel was esepecially hard hit -- they began publishing the black-and-whites out of CANADA, because there was more paper to be had.

Before that, and for a long time after, the book came out, even if it had to include reprints. Newsstand distributors could invoke hellacious late fees.

John, Kirby's FF is the gold standard. But not every artist today is Kirby. In fact, none of them are.

*****

Kirby was not alone. Let me say this one more time: THERE WERE ABOUT FORTY YEARS WHERE NO ISSUE OF ANY COMIC SHIPPED LATE NO MATTER WHO WAS WORKING ON IT.

Now, until you ram this thru your thick skull, will you please stop posting that you "get" what I am saying?

One thing I don't get...

If artist make a certain amount per page, how can Hitch afford to be a comic book artist? He's only done 12 issues since the book came out in 2002.

Neal was late. The books were not.

----------

JB-

It is my understanding (if you have other info, I'm open to hearing it) that Green Lantern 88 was all-reprint (except for one page) because Neal was unable to deliver his pages on time. On a bi-monthly book! Ironic, given that the very next issue was the final issue. So, while semantically DC did release product on time, they were late in delivering what they had promised (which was Neal's climactic pencilled and inked 25-page "...and through him save a world" which appeared two months later (and late) in issue 89.

But, I'm not arguing against your general point. I am in agreement that deadlines are taken far less seriously now than they were in the past.

Rick Senger
Byrne-ing Up In LA

JB, who's got the thick skull? You don't seem to grasp what I'm saying.

Yes, books were on time, but quality was sacrificed. I've said this numerous times. And while it wasn't sacrificed in the first 100 issues of the FF, it was sacrificed numerous times in the next 100 issues- reprints, rushed issues, fill-in artists.

And this happened- on LOTS of titles over 40 years. Do I need to make you a checklist of every fill-in, reprint, or album issue during that time to make myself clear? Do I need to tell you that I think fill-in issues, reprint issues, and album issues, at the same price as a regular issue, is not acceptible to me?

I can't believe this conversation. I'm agreeing with you, and you're still insulting me.

This is the crux of the argument. You certainly aren't agreeing with JB here:

But on the other hand, I also love Bryan Hitch's art. And he's not anywhere near as fast as you. Do I stop buying his book because he's slow? In your equation, yes. In mine, in which the main criteria is whether or not I'm having a good time reading the book, no!

Wise-ass or not, pale attempt at humor or not, I don't think this kind of statement should be a part of this or any discussion here at the JBF:

Final question:
You know, I've been writing on this thread all day. So have you. I have time to do this because I'm unemployed (actually, back in school switching careers so I can teach math in the fall). You, on the other hand, have comics to draw. Is any issue of Title Withheld going to ship late because of your participation in this thread?

That JB takes time out of his day, that in reality he doesn't have to at all, just to interact with fans is fantastic. To say that he should be getting back to work instead of posting in a thread he feels passionate about (or any thread here on a site dedicated to him) is an insult of the highest degree.



Matt Reed

Not to mention that Byrne is a dozen comics and a graphic novel ahead of schedule.

You know, I've been writing on this thread all day. So have you. I have time to do this because I'm unemployed (actually, back in school switching careers so I can teach math in the fall). You, on the other hand, have comics to draw. Is any issue of Title Withheld going to ship late because of your participation in this thread?

How many months ahead is JB on TW? What...6...7, maybe?

~Bob

Boy, Matt, you can't read either, can you? You must be thick-headed.

Not fun to get called names, is it?

(For the record, I agree with JB that substantially all Marvel and DC issues between, say, 1955 and 1995 shipped on time. What I don't agree with is the notion that late comics are a bad thing, that consumer activism on the issue of late comics is a good thing, and that the on-time records of 1955-1995 are good things. So I do agree with him on some things, and disagree with him on others. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.)

(And at this point, I'm logging out of this forum, possibly for good. This is the second time I've been insulted by JB for disagreeing with him. I'm tired of it. Let him believe what he wants. I believe what I want.)

Boy, Matt, you can't read either, can you? You must be thick-headed.

What can't I read?

Crux of the argument: A late book is a late book no matter the reason. JB's stance is that no one should purchase any late book lest the publisher get the idea that consumers will buy any book no matter how late it is. You insist that even though a book may be late, you'll buy it because a) you don't know when/if a book is late, b) you like the artist and/or writer's work so it's worth it to you. You further contend that lateness inherently means that the work, when eventually produced, will be better (i.e., not rushed) than if it had be published on time.

What am I missing? If nothing, then where in the above are you agreeing with JB?

That you took it to a different, lower level by "humorously" questioning whether TW will be late because JB is posting in this thread is preposterous and so unfunny on its' face as to be insulting.



Matt Reed

Before <the paper shortage of the 70s>, and for a long time after, the book came out, even if it had to include reprints. Newsstand distributors could invoke hellacious late fees.
-----

This is news to me... and it sounds like it could be a huge part of why deadlines are no longer met. Since the model for comic book distribution began changing in the 80s and 90s toward direct sales to specialty shops, have the penalties for late delivery also changed? I would guess that the answer is a big, fat YES. Almost everything in a business setting is based on dollars and cents, so if there is no longer the same monetary punishment for not honoring a deadline, that is surely the biggest reason for deadlines being blown off presently. Anyone out there know what penalties (if any) are currently in place for late delivery of product?

Rick Senger
Byrne-ing Up In LA

Oh, the change in distribution is a HUGE contributing factor, and in more ways than one. Newsstand distributors could and did charge late fees, and could and did decline to carry product if it was delivered late. Those, along with printers' late fees, are strong drivers to get something, anything into production and onto the stands, on time. Comics per se were a volume industry, and any money a given issue of a given title stood to make could be MORE than wiped out by various late fees. If you put out an issue of CONAN filled with MILLIE THE MODEL reprints, newsstands wouldn't give a damn, at least some would sell, and you might make a little money.

It's not that way now; in fact, it's almost the reverse.

How many months ahead is JB on TW? What...6...7, maybe?

******


Currently at work on TW5. TW1 ships in June.

One thing I don't get...

If artist make a certain amount per page, how can Hitch afford to be a comic book artist? He's only done 12 issues since the book came out in 2002.
*****************************************

Without looking into another guy's life and financial situation, I guess I'm curious about this too. I guess he must have other (non-comics) income? I shouldn't imagine that he'd make a living on his page rate (whatever it is) alone...


As far as late books go, I agree 100% with JB. Sure, there's plenty of very talented artists around these days, and we all want to see their work. But it's just lazy and sloppy to bring in work late, and by forgiving this and buying the book anyway, we're contributing to a cycle that just makes more and more books late. Battle Chasers, anyone? Global Frequency? These things boiled my blood and I stopped buying because they were late. This is something that has crept in recently and we need to stop it.

The comics I grew up on were never late. It was always too long between issues, but that was just 'cos they were GOOD!


PS Mike, I don't think your dislike of Kill Bill was because it's a two-parter. I think it was just because it was self-indulgent garbage...


____________________________________________
You are a god among insects. Never let anyone tell you different.

I did end up purchasing Issue #2 of New Frontiers today, but I have removed myself from the pull for it and will be typing up my letter to send to DC before issue #3 comes out.

I thought that New Frontier was SUPPOSED to be monthly at first, & then bi-monthly. After all, isn't each issue about 3 normal issues in size?

Chris,
I did an archive search on Newsrama and got the following interviews:

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=f71791b4f370f43f9611297a168b051c&threadid=4583&highlight=New+Frontier

http://www.newsarama.com/forums/showthread.php?s=f71791b4f370f43f9611297a168b051c&threadid=7312&highlight=New+Frontier

Neither one mentions a planned change in the schedule from monthly to bi-monthly.

Many slow artists are very good. Many slow artists should be read by people who enjoy thier work. Slow artists should not claim to an editor that they can produce monthly work if they can't. My conclusion, to the trades with them!

Stephen

Currently at work on TW5. TW1 ships in June.

...and you have time to interact online?? At this rate we'll be seeing TW fill-in issues in no time!!!

I hope there are other "professionals" lurking through and taking notes.

~Bob

Hey, what do I know? I heard it from a friend anyway! I should stop listening to him!!

Adam Hughes is one of my favorite artists. I really loved him on Maze Agency. The comic did not make it monthly. However, it could have been worked like Rags Morales and Geoff Johns did for Hawkman.

Plan for fillins. It is still monthly, and doesn't require that the comic be delayed.

Maybe I'm wrong. We couldn't ever PLAN ahead, could we?

Maybe I'm wrong. We couldn't ever PLAN ahead, could we?

*******


This is precisely what Carlin is doing with JLA, with several different teams working on several different arcs at the same time. That's how my 6 issues came to be.

Of course, there are numbskulls on the internet who are complaining that this is "not the way to do it" and that it will "ruin the JLA" -- without having seen the plan put into practise, of course! Must not cloud the issue with facts!!

And he's being harangued for it. These are paraphrases, but some near examples are, "Carlin's going to RUIN the JLA! First O'Neil with his save the earth garbage, now Byrne and Clairemont trying to recapture their youth after a series of flops."

Considering that JLA is JLA and consists of characters who (for the most part) populate their own books and their own mini-universes, it seems like a good strategy to let rotating teams take a crack at them. I mean, really ... is anything of huge consequence going to happen to Superman or Batman in the pages of JLA?

And if this means that JLA fans get 18 or more issues a year of their favorite heroes -- all the better!

Brendan Howard

Now step outside your own little life for a moment, and multiply yourself by 30 or 40 or 100 thousand who might be ticked off that they are not getting what they paid for.* Multiply yourself by the potential new readers who start up a series only to have it peter out on them after a couple of issues.

In other words, try to look at the big picture, and its effect on the state of the whole industry, rather than just whether or not it bothers you.

If I was the caring sort, I’d be far more concerned with how large amounts of comics fans will continue to buy large amounts of shit as long as it features their favourite characters while excellent series like Sleeper, Batman Adventures, Plastic Man and Invincible languish near the bottom of the sales charts. I know of far more fans who grow disillusioned with the industry because of crap comics than because of late comics.



*Buying a comicbook series is like buying a movie scene by scene, on an installment plan. When you have paid for the first half, you expect to be given the second half on a timely schedule -- the fact that the producers/publishers have taken your money for the first part of their product carries the implicit expectation that they will deliver the rest. You don't buy half a house, or half a car, and then content yourself with not having to spend "the rest of the money" because the folkselling it to you crapped out.

Apples and oranges. Houses and cars are totally unusable unless delivered in a whole. Serial fiction is different. If someone in the 19th century was pissed off because Dickens was taking his sweet time with the next section of the Pickwick Papers, that wouldn’t stop him from enjoying the previous chapters.

And I don’t agree with the first point either. If I pay for a movie scene by scene, I expect each scene I buy to be up to a certain level of quality and to keep me interested enough to stay a paying customer. That’s what I want from the producer. And that’s why I’ll be buying JLA\Avengers #4 while dropping the increasingly sloppy and dumb Superman\Batman.


cactusmaac

If an artist can't do a monthly they shouldn't commit to one. The folks who defend this lack of professionalism love to bring up the fact that in the past companies would put out re-prints or works by inferior creator. I would thing that if I was reading a book, and in four months I'd get to read a story by the "A Team" and the other three were fill-ins, I wouldn't be reading the book for much longer.

It's my understanding that:

Yes, comics were late in the past.

Yes, re-prints or fill-ins were used to avoid missing the shipping deadline.

Yet the point some folks seem to want to miss is that it didn't happen with the frequency it happens now. We didn't get twelve issues a year with the headline creators only doing less than 1/3 of those issues.

Bottom line: There's no way a monthly book would have survived if the creators in the past were as unprofessional as some of today's. Heck, most of those creators couldn't make a living.


Orlando Teuta Jr

Given the determination of some to make excuses for unprofessionalism, we seem to have reached the Just Keep Flogging It To Death point with this discussion. Time for a lockdown.

Move along, people. Nothing to see here. . .