Claypool has recently made public the news that they told me in confidence some weeks ago: That the print end of the line would cesae to exist.
Personally, I think this should send a serious chill through the industry. For the first time that I can think of, an entire publishing line has been canceled, not by the publisher, but by the distributor. The distributor should theoretically be the middle man. In this instance, however–again, for the first time that I can think of–the middle man has taken the lead position and shut down the publisher.
And any publisher who thinks he is immune from this monopolistic maneuver is kidding himself.
And the real killer is going to be the chorus of fan voices saying, “Claypool Comics? What’s that? Never heard of it.”
PAD
• 
Fan of Claypool’s peeps. Peter and David Seidman. Became a fan and a con friend of Amanda Connor because of Soulsearchers. I am sorry to see it go. As much as I would love to say “Too bad you couldn’t say check out Soulsearchers in every one of your DC and Marvel books” Thats not DC and Marvel’s job. That’s not Diamond’s job. That’s Claypool’s job. Having only 2 trades in stock? Having an old school trade dress that doesn’t even look as good as Dork Storm Press or Oni? I truly believe Peter did all he could. I truly believe David did all he could. Do I think Diamond’s policy sucks… yes. But Claypool the company killed Claypool. Through the same legitimate reason Peter put up: Claypool? Never heard of it. Changing with the times? Being proactive years ago to survive and thrive with the times? Claypool: Never heard of it.
Until later
John
This is nothing new in comics or anything else. Right now 4 local non-cable stations out of 7 are owned by 2 companies here in Houston. Think about that for a second. If those 2 companies decide not to cover a issue, it only has 2 outlets as the PBS station does very limited local news coverage.
Now look at Claypool and Diamond and the complaint to Marvel,DC,Image and Dark Horse. Notice anything in PREVIEWS all four have in common? Let me keep your head from exploiding (heehee, it’s a joke), all four have major sections in the PREVIEWS catalog. Why have most not heard of Claypool? Because it’s back among the myriad of comics in the regular section. Know how hard it is to go thru page after page of the same print style and stuff? I mean, it takes me 3 days now to get thru it.
That being said, since the Big 4 have these dedicated special sections in the book, where is the incentive to not sign the exclusive contract? It certainly can’t hurt any of them to have these huge sections in the catalog. Advertising counts in a big way.
Best thing that could happen is for someone like the guy who created Crossgen (not him specifically but you get the point) to, instead of creating another comics line, start up a good distributer for lower selling books. The idea is that yes, profitiability is good but you have to define how much profit you have to have. In most cases nowadays it’s not good enough for a company to make 10 million dollars in profit but they have to make 10 Billion.
The other option is for someone to approach another periodical distributer and get on board in book stores exclusively. You get a Peter David or Neil Gaiman on the book and put it in the magazine rack or by the graphic novel section and it’ll sell. Start small and build. If you can get the creators to not take top dollar, as a way of creating something alternative, your profit threshold becomes a lot smaller.
Finally, as much as I love small press stuff, Mouse Guard is a good example of what I like, I find that too many small publishers tend to publish the same thing as the next small publisher. It’s either manga, personalized stories (like Blankets for example, even though I’m not sure thats a small publisher), or sex-fetishist stuff. Very few do something exciting on a month to month basis.
Oh and a question: What’s Archie Comics deal with Diamond? They are in book stores as well as comic places and seem to do well.
Michael
“Finally, as much as I love small press stuff, Mouse Guard is a good example of what I like, I find that too many small publishers tend to publish the same thing as the next small publisher.”
Unlike Marvel and DC which publish an incredible wide variety of books.
1Does anyone have a mailing address for Claypool? Thanks!
In the brouhaha of distributor grumblings, Peter, I just wanted to know if you got enough advance warning to be able to tie up the remaining plot points and offer up a conclusion to the series?
Well, that sucks. Can’t say I didn’t see it coming back when Diamond said that they were dropping the line. Still sucks though.
What will the number of the final issue of Soulsearchers be?
Will you still be writing the online comic?
Seems to me that with your fan base, you’d be the proof in the pudding that people would still read digital comics.
There isn’t going to be an online version of Soulsearchers.
I wrote a letter asking them to reprint the series online. I just need an address to send it to.
What I would really like to know is the rough sales figures for Soulsearchers.
What will the number of the final issue of Soulsearchers be?
#82, according to the article at http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/9077.html
I will be sorry to see SOULSEARCHERS go. I’ve been supporting it since the first issue, and have always gotten a chuckle out of it. I’m going to miss this series.
I will miss Claypool – I’ve bought every book they’ve published, and am a big fan of Richard Howell and his approach to comics. Claypool comics were books that rewarded the reader — continuing plot threads, puns, great art, and fun. Heck, they published Paul Dini’s first comics story. They survived the disintegration of Eclipse, the distributor shake-ups, and the comics crash. They brought me much enjoyment, and I’ll miss them.
But I’m happy that Deadbeats will live on!
Thanks to Peter and Richard and everyone at Claypool for some wonderful times.
Claypool Comics line wasn’t cancelled by Diamond. Claypool Comics line was cancelled by Claypool.
Diamond chose not to carry the line any longer because they weren’t making enough money from it.
When I had a brick-and-mortar shop, I made decisions every month as to which titles were worth my time to carry. There were some that I put on my shelves to broaden the selection, but if they didn’t sell enough, I stopped carrying them.
As a matter of fact, one of those titles was Soulsearchers and Company. I brought in six consecutive issues, and all six ended up in my quarter box.
It happens all the time; recording artists, television shows, movie franchises…they drop below a threshold level, and they lose their access to a wide audience.
All my favorite shows have been cancelled. Many of my favorite recording artists have had to go to smaller indie labels.
Diamond has done nothing to prevent Claypool from publishing their comics. Claypool will simply have to find another distributor or means of distribution.
The nice thing about the Internet is that there is now a place for every creator, regardless of sales level or expertise, to find that audience.
Claypool’s next logical move is digital. If they’re smart, they’ll cobble up a database of comics shops and send out flyers for the shops to distribute to their Claypool customers, letting them know which site to find their favorite comics.
Holding Diamond responsible for a normal marketplace adjustment is just silly. According to the article in Newsarama, Diamond is actually giving Claypool a grace period before they stop carrying the books, in order to give the creators a chance to finish their storylines.
They also co-sponsored a promotion where dealers got free Claypool comics to try to bump up the sales. It didn’t work. These are not the actions of a heartless monolith. Diamond is not the bad guy here.
I’m sorry that Claypool losing Diamond’s customer base bothers people, but I can’t see castigating Diamond for deciding not to carry a product that wasn’t generating enough money for them.
Holding Diamond responsible for a normal marketplace adjustment is just silly.
A normal marketplace would afford publishers more options than Diamond’s monopoly.
#82, according to the article
Thanks.
====================
Holding Diamond responsible for a normal marketplace adjustment is just silly.
If this were a normal market place, Diamond wouldn’t have the power to kill a book by deciding not to carry it.
>>>A normal marketplace would afford publishers more options than Diamond’s monopoly.
There are — most notably Cold Cut and Last Gasp. Claypool didn’t avail themselves of them, or THOSE distributor’s didn’t want them either.
-B
What I would really like to know is the rough sales figures for Soulsearchers.
Draw your own conclusions, but I couldn’t find it listed in any of the Top 300 lists at http://www.icv2.com (which go back to 2001). Sales figures on the lowest titles on the list range from ~2000 to less than a thousand, depending on the month.
For comparison, “Elvira” is listed several times with sales averaging around 1000 (the most recent listing being January 2005, when issue #141 sold 780 copies at #287–the #300 title sold 680 copies).
@Doug Atkinson
Thanks. That helps give a good idea. I’m surprised though. I would have assumed Soulsearchers sold higher.
@Brian Hibbs
It’s true, a variety of other distributors exist. But obviously none of them are playing at Diamonds level. Unless more retailers are willing to get on board and utilize these existing resources, Diamond will continue to hold a monopoly in spirit, even if not as a legal fact. Could distribution through Cold Cut and Last Gasp have saved Claypool? It certainly would have been a smart move to use these, but I do not see it likely that there would have been a different end result.
Michael Brunner writes:
“If this were a normal market place, Diamond wouldn’t have the power to kill a book by deciding not to carry it.”
Diamond didn’t kill any of Claypool’s books. They declined to carry them. Claypool itself made the decision not to continue publishing.
If you want to blame anyone, blame Marvel for precipitating this state of affairs with the Heroes’ World debacle. If they hadn’t decided to distribute their own books–badly, I might add– there’d be more than one major distributor on the landscape.
Mark Patterson writes:
“Diamond didn’t kill any of Claypool’s books. They declined to carry them. Claypool itself made the decision not to continue publishing.”
Technically true. But you are making an argument based on semantics. The cause and effect is clear. Without Diamonds participation, Claypool comics sales have no hopes of justifying the cost involved in publishing.
It’s worth noting that when Diamond acquired Capital, they made a promise to small press publishers not shut out books due to low sales, as Capital had a comparatively open arms policy. At least initially, Diamond honored this. Unfortunately within a few years they returned to their earlier business model and began denying lower selling titles. As time has passed, this practice seems to have increased.
Well, I dont know what PAD did to piss em off, but I now get the black screen of death at work when I try to come to this site.
So why not continue the series as prose books? Or self publish?
JC
L. Walker writes:
“Technically true. But you are making an argument based on semantics. The cause and effect is clear. Without Diamonds participation, Claypool comics sales have no hopes of justifying the cost involved in publishing.”
Well, then, I hate to say it, but if they’re that close to the edge that Diamond is their only hope, then they weren’t long for this world anyway.
Given that there are at least two other distributors out there, plus online solutions that Claypool may or may not use for their other books, it was still Claypool’s decision to shut the books down. Diamond did nothing to stop them from going elsewhere, and did actively try to save the line.
Diamond’s still not the bad guy here.
Mark Patterson writes: “Well, then, I hate to say it, but if they’re that close to the edge that Diamond is their only hope, then they weren’t long for this world anyway.”
You’re missing the point. Diamond is the only hope regardless of how close to the edge they are. Diamond is the edge. If the book was selling ten times what it had been, Diamond would still be the only hope. Because Diamond is, at the end of the day, the only real game in town.
Mark Patterson writes: “Diamond’s still not the bad guy here.”
As I said: “It’s worth noting that when Diamond acquired Capital, they made a promise to small press publishers not shut out books due to low sales, as Capital had a comparatively open arms policy. At least initially, Diamond honored this. Unfortunately within a few years they returned to their earlier business model and began denying lower selling titles. As time has passed, this practice seems to have increased.”
L. Walker, no offense, but I think you’re missing the point. Unless you’re privy to information I haven’t seen, you don’t know that Claypool couldn’t have survived by going to the other distributors. You’re assuming that wouldn’t work without really know for sure if that’s the case. Chances are it’s only larger shops that can afford to carry Claypool’s books to begin with given their sales, and larger shops are more likely to go through more than one distributor because they can afford the wider selection, so it would stand to reason that those shops would be willing to continue ordering Claypool books through the other distributors.
What we’d really need to know is how many shops order Claypool books and of those how many go through other distributors and if it’s enough to support the line. I don’t have that kind of information or any indication that Claypool considered that alternative. It would stand to reason, however, that some books can survive being distributed other than by Diamond, otherwise, there wouldn’t be much reason for shops to go through more than one distributor. If every book had to go through Diamond to survive then retailers would just order through Diamond.
Brian Thomer writes: “It would stand to reason, however, that some books can survive being distributed other than by Diamond, otherwise, there wouldn’t be much reason for shops to go through more than one distributor. If every book had to go through Diamond to survive then retailers would just order through Diamond.”
A book that can survive without being distributed through Diamond? Show me a comic book that caters primarily to the direct market without support from Diamond and does not lose money. And yeah, there are plenty of reasons for a retailer to utilize smaller distributors. Availability, priority shipping and increased discounts being the foremost, though many retailers will ignore these advantages. Regardless, what is being ignored in this equation is that both ColdCut and Last Gasp do a large amount of their distribution as a resupply point. These companies are not comparable to Diamond in either volume or product focus. Furthermore, you simply cannot dismiss the advertisement value that a presence in the Diamond catalog affords. Again, every book in the direct market must go through Diamond to survive.
Brian Thomer writes: “L. Walker, no offense, but I think you’re missing the point. Unless you’re privy to information I haven’t seen, you don’t know that Claypool couldn’t have survived by going to the other distributors. You’re assuming that wouldn’t work without really know for sure if that’s the case.”
I’m privy to fifteen cumulative years of experience working in every aspect of the industry. Retail, distribution (both direct market and other), publishing and creative. I’m not making any outrageous assumptions here. You take a book that sells an initial run of 10,000 copies through the three named distributors and remove Diamond, then you have a book that sells well under a thousand. A book with high sales might be able to survive this. Might. Take a book that sells a thousand and remove Diamond… you have a book that will lose too much money to survive.
Did Claypool Comics avail itself to all resources offered? My understanding is that they did not. Would it have made a difference in the long run? Not likely.
I must admit I am one of those who did not know much about Claypool Comics until I read the announcement at Newsarama.
But it is always a sad thing to see. And the way that the market seems to be shrinking, it is difficult not to think that it will only get worse.
L. Walker writes: “You’re missing the point. Diamond is the only hope regardless of how close to the edge they are. Diamond is the edge. If the book was selling ten times what it had been, Diamond would still be the only hope. Because Diamond is, at the end of the day, the only real game in town.”
Due respect, L. Walker, but if the book had been selling ten times what it was, we wouldn’t be having this conversation right now, because the question wouldn’t have risen.
If you’re dismayed that Diamond is the only game in town, I again suggest that you blame Marvel for that.
L. Walker writes, “As I said: “It’s worth noting that when Diamond acquired Capital, they made a promise to small press publishers not shut out books due to low sales, as Capital had a comparatively open arms policy. At least initially, Diamond honored this. Unfortunately within a few years they returned to their earlier business model and began denying lower selling titles. As time has passed, this practice seems to have increased.”
I don’t see that Diamond should be held in perpetuity to an agreement made in different circumstances. If they stuck with it for a few years, then that’s reasonably all anyone can expect. Was there a clause in any agreement specifying how long Diamond was expected to carry low-selling books?
Diamond’s in business to make money. If they’re not making enough on a given publisher, especially one they went out of their way to help, I can’t work up any angst against them if they decide that they’ve had enough.
If Claypool books sold their identical Diamond numbers with Cold Cut and Last Gasp, would they still get cancelled?
I don’t mean to be cruel, but indie books have to work harder to survive. Not all the turtles make it to the sea.
If I want Diamond to do business with me, I have to order a minimum amount ($450.00 a month, I believe). If I can’t make that nut, then Diamond won’t sell to me. It’s the same with publishers. There has to be a minimum number that a line or title generates to make it worth a distributor’s time to carry.
Diamond didn’t just dump Claypool. They let the publisher know that there was a problem, and tried to work with them to fix it. When that didn’t happen and Claypool decided to cease publication, Diamond gave Claypool time enough to finish longstanding storylines.
Seventy-plus issues of a title is not a small thing. If their sales have diminished, and I believe that’s the case, then, well…sometimes it’s for the best.
Note that I’m not particularly blaming Diamond for canceling a line of books. I’m simply pointing to the fact that Diamond does hold a monopoly on the industry, even if not in the eyes of the law. They shut down a book, that book dies. I’m quite certain they are aware of this as well. From my perspective, that gives them an amount of responsibility to uphold promises made when they initiated the exclusive distribution system that drove the competition into the ground. Blame Marvel? Yes, actions of Marvel comics helped facilitate Diamonds takeover of the distribution end of the industry. But so to did many other events. The business that holds the power now is Diamond.
L. Walker writes: “Note that I’m not particularly blaming Diamond for canceling a line of books. I’m simply pointing to the fact that Diamond does hold a monopoly on the industry, even if not in the eyes of the law. They shut down a book, that book dies. I’m quite certain they are aware of this as well. From my perspective, that gives them an amount of responsibility to uphold promises made when they initiated the exclusive distribution system that drove the competition into the ground. Blame Marvel? Yes, actions of Marvel comics helped facilitate Diamonds takeover of the distribution end of the industry. But so to did many other events. The business that holds the power now is Diamond.”
Absolutely Diamond holds the power in the industry. They’re the biggest player with the most companies. They are not, however, a monopoly. Cold Cut and Last Gasp are still around and doing business.
If a publisher can’t make it in the majors (Diamond), then they go to the minors (Last Gasp and Cold Cut).
Business is like politics…everything’s fluid. Your perspective may be that Diamond should be obligated to stand by policies made a decade ago, but that doesn’t seem to have much to do with the way the world works.
Diamond did not shut down anything. They gave Claypool a chance to improve their sales, and when that didn’t happen, they decided not to continue carrying Claypool product. Diamond went further than most businesses would when dealing with a lower-tier client.
Claypool itself made the decision to stop publishing paper versions of their comics. We’ll never know (unless someone feels like telling us) whether or not they considered going with other distributors. We don’t know whether or not the creators will bring them back in a new format.
If Claypool comics sold better, they’d still be viable commercially. If it wasn’t Diamond that swung the axe, it would have been something else.
The Diamond catalogue is stuffed with indie comics. Is it a complete selection of everything that’s out there? No. But it’s pretty vast.
My perspective was the same as yours…up until December of this year, I ran a brick-and-mortar shop, and did that for twenty-one years. Now I do strictly online sales. Things change. As it goes with retail shops, so it goes with direct-sales publishing.
Not all the wonderful, individual indie ideas are going to reach their audience. It’s too bad, but it’s a fact of life.
Mark Patterson said: “Absolutely Diamond holds the power in the industry. They’re the biggest player with the most companies. They are not, however, a monopoly. Cold Cut and Last Gasp are still around and doing business.”
This is becoming circular. Again, Cold Cut and Last Gasp are not comparable to Diamond. Did you do business with them when you were a retailer? How many distributers did you work with? How many times do I have to say that Diamond does not hold a monopoly in the LEGAL sense? They do however hold one in the practical sense. If Diamond cancels a book, the book is dead. It cannot reach enough comic book stores to survive.
Mark Patterson said: “If a publisher can’t make it in the majors (Diamond), then they go to the minors (Last Gasp and Cold Cut).”
No. They go out of business. We already covered this. And something you seem to be missing is that Diamond is raising the bar on what it takes ot qualify in the majors.
Mark Patterson said: “Business is like politics…everything’s fluid. Your perspective may be that Diamond should be obligated to stand by policies made a decade ago, but that doesn’t seem to have much to do with the way the world works.”
I simply do not agree with your world view that a corporation has no responsibility or accountability for the industry it dominates. If next year Diamond raises that bar a little higher, and ten percent more books have no viable outlet? Is that simply more turtles not making it to the sea? And the year after that, they raise it a bit more and another ten percent of indie books die on the beach, do you shake your head and simply say it’s business? Then ten years down the line when we have no indie books? Even Diamond recognizes it has a responsibility to the industry. If it did not, it would never have made the broken promise in the first place. If it did not, they would not practice many of the policies that they do. I argue that they do not do enough. Not that they do nothing. They recognize their responsibility. Why don’t you?
Mark Patterson said: “Diamond did not shut down anything. They gave Claypool a chance to improve their sales, and when that didn’t happen, they decided not to continue carrying Claypool product. Diamond went further than most businesses would when dealing with a lower-tier client.”
Yes. And then they shut them down. This aspect simply is not debatable. They ceased to carry Claypools books, then Claypool went out of business. I have never claimed that Diamond was an evil entity here, and you are arguing with me as if I had. Yes, Diamond goes out of it’s way dealing with lower tier clients. Sometimes. That is their job. That is the responsibility they assumed when they initiated multiple exclusive distribution deals. Unfortunately, they are not living up to this to the degree they promised.
Mark Patterson said: “Claypool itself made the decision to stop publishing paper versions of their comics.”
What’s the point is printing them if they cannot get them into stores. We’ve gone over this already.
Mark Patterson said: “We’ll never know (unless someone feels like telling us) whether or not they considered going with other distributors.”
Really? See, there’s this thing we have called the internet. ColdCut carries Claypool comics. Last Gasp does not. I suspect they would not, as it is not their style of material that they typically handle. They’re not the same kind of distributor as Diamond and I really do not see why people have been holding them up as a viable alternative.
Mark Patterson said: “If Claypool comics sold better, they’d still be viable commercially. If it wasn’t Diamond that swung the axe, it would have been something else.”
With Diamond, they were viable. Without they are not. Many other publishers are in identical situations. If Diamond decided to stop carrying any book that sold under 10,000 copies, how many companies would go out of business?
Mark Patterson said: “The Diamond catalogue is stuffed with indie comics. Is it a complete selection of everything that’s out there? No. But it’s pretty vast.”
And?
Mark Patterson said: “My perspective was the same as yours…up until December of this year, I ran a brick-and-mortar shop, and did that for twenty-one years. Now I do strictly online sales. Things change. As it goes with retail shops, so it goes with direct-sales publishing.”
I think I’ve made it quite clear that I am an advocate of change. I have already stated my favor for digital distribution.
Mark Patterson said: “Not all the wonderful, individual indie ideas are going to reach their audience. It’s too bad, but it’s a fact of life.”
A fact of life determined by Diamond.
Is Cold Cuts Distributing still out there? (Asks the guy who still remembers Friendly Frank’s.)
I’m going to get into the distribution wars debate, as I was just getting into comics at the time and don’t have a full understanding of the details.
I will say that I’m disappointed by Claypool’s farewell to print publishing. However, I’ve also got to admit that I haven’t actually bought one of Claypool’s books (meaning Soulsearchers, which was the only one that I really consistently enjoyed) in … well, a while now. Probably since the early #50s.
My biggest disappointment isn’t Diamond’s role in this (though I recognize the concern); rather, I am disappointed that Claypool did not seek out other publishing options/strategies while there was some time.
For myself, for various reasons, I switched over to exclusively buying collected editions. People may complain about the practice, but it’s increasingly common and most publishers are recognizing this and taking the appropriate steps. It’s the publisher’s job to put out material AND format that the audience wants. Claypool hasn’t put out a new trade in years now.
That said, I understand the economic costs involved, and perhaps the initial collections simply weren’t selling enough to justify more books. However, there are still other options – online publication was an option long before now.
I feel for Claypool and their staff, but I also wish that there had been some effort to find alternative forms and distribution (though I have no idea what went on behind Claypool’s door; so I may be speaking completely out of turn, and if so, I apologize completely).
Also, regarding Elayne’s suggestion of buying directly from Claypool —
I’d definitely do so (if they had trades, that is). I’ve done if for Carla Speed McNeil’s superb Finder on a few occasions when I couldn’t find the newest volume through another outlet and never had any trouble. And I even got a terrific sketch out of it!!
If a lot of retailers are upset over this and/or Diamond’s share of the distribution market, perhaps they could start a petition saying they’d be willing to order Claypool comics through ColdCut. Once enough names are added to the petition it can be sent off to Claypool. Maybe if they had some show of commitment from the retailers they’d be more willing to try print comics again.
Just a thought in trying to effect some change.
“How many distributers did you work with?”
Three or four, over the years. When another distributor would send me a catalogue, I’d look through it.
“How many times do I have to say that Diamond does not hold a monopoly in the LEGAL sense? They do however hold one in the practical sense. If Diamond cancels a book, the book is dead. It cannot reach enough comic book stores to survive.”
Well, since we’re talking about business entities here, I assumed that the legal definition would be the default one. Your mileage obviously varies.
“No. They go out of business. We already covered this. And something you seem to be missing is that Diamond is raising the bar on what it takes ot qualify in the majors.”
I’m not missing that point at all. I’m saying that Diamond gets to decide who they will and won’t do business with, and at what level it no longer becomes worth their time.
“I simply do not agree with your world view that a corporation has no responsibility or accountability for the industry it dominates.”
Feel free to disagree. That’s not, by the way, what I said. If Diamond were irresponsible, they wouldn’t have given Claypool notice and assistance. They would simply have dropped them.
“If next year Diamond raises that bar a little higher, and ten percent more books have no viable outlet? Is that simply more turtles not making it to the sea?”
As a matter of fact, that’s exactly what it is.
“And the year after that, they raise it a bit more and another ten percent of indie books die on the beach, do you shake your head and simply say it’s business?”
Yes, I do.
“Then ten years down the line when we have no indie books?”
If they don’t make enough money for the distributor, publisher, or retailer, that’s exactly what will happen. Except that it won’t. When the current direct sales distribution system collapses (as they all do eventually), something else will have taken its place.
“Even Diamond recognizes it has a responsibility to the industry. If it did not, it would never have made the broken promise in the first place. If it did not, they would not practice many of the policies that they do. I argue that they do not do enough. Not that they do nothing.”
In your opinion. Which I absolutely recongnize and bow to your right to hold. I simply don’t share it, is all.
“They recognize their responsibility. Why don’t you?”
Because they are motivated chiefly by self-interest, and they’re a commerical company, not a public trust. It’s wonderful that they do all that they do. They’re simply not obligated to, is all.
I recognize that it’s in Diamond’s self-interest that a vibrant, creative wide tent exist, and so do they. What you and I seem to be arguing about is whether or not it’s a choice or an obligation. I feel that it’s the former, to be exercised at their discretion. You seem to feel otherwise.
“Yes. And then they shut them down. This aspect simply is not debatable.”
Absolutely I can and do debate exactly that point.
Diamond, after doing way more than its legal obligation to help Claypool, made the choice not to carry it more than a few months more. Claypool, not Diamond, made the choice to shut down print operations after that.
“They ceased to carry Claypools books, then Claypool went out of business. I have never claimed that Diamond was an evil entity here, and you are arguing with me as if I had.”
No, I am not. I am arguing that you’re assigning blame to the wrong place. I’ll admit that my choice of the words ‘bad guy’ may not have been as well-chosen as it could have been, but it was in response to Diamond being called to task for ducking their responsibilities to the medium, a charge which I believe is unfounded.
“Yes, Diamond goes out of it’s way dealing with lower tier clients. Sometimes. That is their job. That is the responsibility they assumed when they initiated multiple exclusive distribution deals. Unfortunately, they are not living up to this to the degree they promised.”
Things change. The cost of doing business goes up every day. Should Diamond be shackled to policies made when shipping, insurance and personnel costs were less?
“What’s the point is printing them if they cannot get them into stores. We’ve gone over this already.”
And we’ll go over it again and again and again until one of us gets sick of it. You’re about to point out that Cold Cut carries them, so SOME shops will get them.
“Mark Patterson said: “We’ll never know (unless someone feels like telling us) whether or not they considered going with other distributors.” “
“Really? See, there’s this thing we have called the internet. ColdCut carries Claypool comics. Last Gasp does not. I suspect they would not, as it is not their style of material that they typically handle. They’re not the same kind of distributor as Diamond and I really do not see why people have been holding them up as a viable alternative.”
I haven’t once condescended to you, L. Feel free to knock that off any time (‘see, there’s this thing we have called the internet’?? Come ON.). Soulsearchers and Company and Elvira could be marketed as a Last Gasp book, if LG wanted to expand into family-friendly stuff.
“With Diamond, they were viable. Without they are not. Many other publishers are in identical situations. If Diamond decided to stop carrying any book that sold under 10,000 copies, how many companies would go out of business?”
We’ll find out if and when that happens. If Claypool actually was viable, then Diamond would still be carrying it.
“Mark Patterson said: “The Diamond catalogue is stuffed with indie comics. Is it a complete selection of everything that’s out there? No. But it’s pretty vast.” “
“And?”
Sorry, shoulda finished the thought there. Given that there are indie comics that do make Diamond’s sales grade, I don’t think that it’s fair to hammer them for not supporting every single book that comes out, regardless of its sales figures.
L. Walker writes, “I think I’ve made it quite clear that I am an advocate of change. I have already stated my favor for digital distribution.”
Then we’re on the same page. If Claypool could swing it, graphic novel reprints of more of their line in depth might be the way to go, to finance a few all-new GNs. That’s paper. Digital access to old and new strips is also a way to go.
L. Walker writes, “Mark Patterson said: “Not all the wonderful, individual indie ideas are going to reach their audience. It’s too bad, but it’s a fact of life.” “
“A fact of life determined by Diamond.”
A fact of life determined by economics. For as long as I can remember, Claypool has been grimly hanging on by its fingernails. If it hadn’t been Diamond, it would have been somebody else.
Pardon me, I realized after I posted it that I made an error in something that I wrote in the last post:
“And we’ll go over it again and again and again until one of us gets sick of it. You’re about to point out that Cold Cut carries them, so SOME shops will get them.”
That last sentence should read, “…Cold Cut carried them, so some shops OTHER THAN DIAMOND ACCOUNTS DID get them.”
As Claypool made the decision to cease publication, nobody will be getting them past the final issue.
Thanks.
Mark Patterson said: “Well, since we’re talking about business entities here, I assumed that the legal definition would be the default one. Your mileage obviously varies.”
Unfortunately, the legal definition is only so relevant.
Mark Patterson said: “Feel free to disagree. That’s not, by the way, what I said. If Diamond were irresponsible, they wouldn’t have given Claypool notice and assistance. They would simply have dropped them.”
Again, I stated that Diamond does participate. I am arguing that what they do is not enough.
Mark Patterson said: “As a matter of fact, that’s exactly what it is.”
As a matter of fact, no. Because Diamond has no real competition, they are in a position to artificially manipulate the marketplace.
Mark Patterson said: “If they don’t make enough money for the distributor, publisher, or retailer, that’s exactly what will happen.”
And here is the continued flaw with your logic. If the distributor carries the book, it may very well make enough money for the publisher and the retailer. But if the distributor denies the book, then the publisher and the retailer do not stand a chance. We are in a position where Diamond sets the bar of what is acceptable and what is not. They do so alone. There is no viable alternative, something Diamond made certain of when it strangled Capital out of business. hence the term being used “monopoly”.
Mark Patterson said: “Except that it won’t. When the current direct sales distribution system collapses (as they all do eventually), something else will have taken its place.”
Of course something would replace it. I am painting an exaggerated picture of the current system to underscore the inherent problem.
Mark Patterson said: “Because they are motivated chiefly by self-interest, and they’re a commerical company, not a public trust. It’s wonderful that they do all that they do. They’re simply not obligated to, is all.”
In the eyes of the law, of course not. In regards to self interest, they should be doing much more. they are in an obvious position to help nurture the industry back on it’s feet. Instead of doing so, they recant promises made to the industry and raise the bar so that more and more books fail. They do not do this blindly. I am well aware that they also do some things to try to help smaller titles sell. But these are minor in comparison to some of the things they have done that have hamstrung the growth of the industry. They do particpate, yes. They simply do not do enough.
Mark Patterson said: “I recognize that it’s in Diamond’s self-interest that a vibrant, creative wide tent exist, and so do they. What you and I seem to be arguing about is whether or not it’s a choice or an obligation. I feel that it’s the former, to be exercised at their discretion. You seem to feel otherwise.”
To me, it’s a given that a corporation has a responsibility to protect the industry it dominates. It is in their best interest that the industry thrives, isn’t it?
Mark Patterson said: “Absolutely I can and do debate exactly that point. Diamond, after doing way more than its legal obligation to help Claypool, made the choice not to carry it more than a few months more. Claypool, not Diamond, made the choice to shut down print operations after that.”
It’s not a real choice. Not a practical choice. If there is no distribution outlet and the books are not viable without Diamond, then Diamond is the one making the decision. You can debate it, but there is no foundation for your argument. This is basic cause and effect. You seem to be arguing the most literal interpretation. Did Diamond literally shut Claypool down? No, of course not. It is implicit from the onset of this discussion that this is not the case. Technically it was a choice made by Claypool. Claypool is free to publish whatever they want without the support of Diamond. They’re free to print their comics on bars of solid gold too. But just because they are free to make this decision does not mean the decision is practical.
Mark Patterson said: “Things change. The cost of doing business goes up every day. Should Diamond be shackled to policies made when shipping, insurance and personnel costs were less?”
They still reap the rewards from exclusive contracts, do they not? Have they relinquished all the benefits from said time? No distributor can compete at the level of Diamond because Diamond holds the major publishers in contract. Obviously this responsibility is not exclusive to Diamond, the publishers bear a share of the burden as well. But Diamond initiated a system that guaranteed them as the dominant force. They continue to hold that position. Absolutely they should still be bound by the price of aquiring that position.
Mark Patterson said: “And we’ll go over it again and again and again until one of us gets sick of it. You’re about to point out that Cold Cut carries them, so SOME shops will get them.”
No, SOME will not. Because without the infrastructure of Diamond, the book will not continue to exist in it’s current form to the direct market. I’ve said it already. ColdCut is not simply a smaller version of Diamond.
Mark Patterson said: “I haven’t once condescended to you, L. Feel free to knock that off any time (‘see, there’s this thing we have called the internet’?? Come ON.).”
I am genuinely sorry if you feel slighted. But I should NOT have to point out the obvious. You work in retail. You’ve worked with distributors. You are spending your time online discussing this. It’s not outrageous for me to be irritated that you would make such a ridiculous assumption. The world of information is at your fingertips. Look it up first. If you, as a retailer, as currently an ONLINE retailer, have not actually spent a portion of your time investigating what distribution systems are available ONLINE, then what ARE you doing? Your assumption that we could never be privy to the dark secrets of ColdCut or Last Gasp amazes me.
Mark Patterson said : “Soulsearchers and Company and Elvira could be marketed as a Last Gasp book, if LG wanted to expand into family-friendly stuff.”
If they wanted to, sure. If they don’t then they are not really a viable alternative to Diamond in this instance.
Mark Patterson said: “We’ll find out if and when that happens. If Claypool actually was viable, then Diamond would still be carrying it.”
Your logic here is flawed. Obviously Claypool was viable for Claypool WITH Diamond supporting it, which is the point of the discussion. Diamond has made the decision that Claypool was not viable for Diamond. And by doing so, they have made the decision for Claypool as well. Why? Because the industry holds no reasonable alternative. Hence the allegation that Diamond holds a monopoly in spirit, even if not in the legal sense of the term.
Mark Patterson said: “Then we’re on the same page. If Claypool could swing it, graphic novel reprints of more of their line in depth might be the way to go, to finance a few all-new GNs. That’s paper. Digital access to old and new strips is also a way to go.”
Agreed.
Mark Patterson said: “…Cold Cut carried them, so some shops OTHER THAN DIAMOND ACCOUNTS DID get them.”
Again, ColdCut does not operate like a miniature Diamond. Also, I have yet to encounter a store that used ColdCut without Diamond. Diamond IS the direct market. Again, did you ever do business with Cold Cut?
And regardless, the main point is certainly the fact that you use the word “DID”. Without Diamond, the books will not sell enough copies to keep the company in operation. ColdCut does not operate at anywhere near sufficient volume to sustain a title. It’s not that type of distributor.
Explain it for us not in the retail business why ColdCut is not the type of distributor that can sustain a line? If you have a ColdCut account will they not fill your order if you begin placing your Claypool orders through them? You already said that they carry Claypool titles. They already distribute some of the books, what’s keeping them from being able to distribute more?
Brian Thomer wrote: “They already distribute some of the books, what’s keeping them from being able to distribute more?”
The fact that too small of a percentage of retailers order through them. They do not operate at anywhere near sufficient volume.
If they got more orders, they could fill them though, right? So, theorectically, if enough orders were placed with ColdCut to support Claypool’s line, ColdCut would be able and willing to do it?
In theory it could happen. But it’s akin to suggesting that the local burger joint could take over for McDonalds. Possible, yes. But even if the infrastructure could support the increase in business, you need a willing customer base to make the transition feasible. It’s not like distribution outside of Diamond has not been tried. Personally, I’ve seen several titles die without Diamond, despite many alternate forms of distribution being utilized. The problem is, in the case of comics, the customer base has two levels. The retailers and the consumers. Personally, I do not believe that a majority of retailers are willing to step outside of the convenience of Diamond. If they were, one of the many attempts at competition over the years would have encountered a larger measure of success. This is why I have been careful to state that Diamond does not technically hold a monopoly. Not in the legal sense. However, Diamond secured exclusive contracts with the major publishers, which keeps any alternate distributor from competing at their level in regards within the direct market. This is why I state that they hold a monopoly in the practical sense.
Could Claypool survive within the direct market without Diamond? Technically yes. Realistically, the answer is no.
>>>Without Diamond, the books will not sell enough copies to keep the company in operation.
Y’know, there was almost a decade there where Diamond didn’t sell ASTERIX or TINTIN.
Cold Cut’s website has like 10 pages of “Not carried by Diamond” comics.
Not being carried by Diamond is death for one specific model of comics: publishing ongoing monthly titles where that’s your sole source of revenue. There are, however, other possible models.
Claypool was a doomed company just from economic darwinism — thier books were ugly (I mean the trade dress, and package), they did effectively no promotion or advertising, they never made any serious attempt to exploit thier backlist, and so on.
We stopped carrying Claypool comics many many years ago, because they simply didn’t sell. And every year or two, I’d give them another chance and bring a few copies in… and they never sold. C’est la guerre.
-B
Brian Hibbs writes: “Y’know, there was almost a decade there where Diamond didn’t sell ASTERIX or TINTIN.”
Sure. There are many books that Diamond does not, or did not always, carry. But please take my statement in context. I have been specifying quite heavily that I am referring to the direct market with my statements, and I think it is implicit within the topic that we are discussing the publishing of ongoing mainstream monthly titles, the U.S. industry standard. I’ve also been quite clear on my opinion that Claypool Comics did not (by my understanding) avail themselves to every possible resource before shutting down operations. Not support from Diamond and as of yet, perhaps not alternate forms of publishing/distribution.
Brian Hibbs writes: “Not being carried by Diamond is death for one specific model of comics: publishing ongoing monthly titles where that’s your sole source of revenue. There are, however, other possible models.”
Agreed. And despite our arguing other aspects, that is one topic that Mark Patterson and I have agreed on as well.
Brian,
Thank you for expressing the bottom line that so many fail to grasp: If comics don’t sell, they will eventually be cancelled. And if you can barely sell 700 copies of any book, let alone one like Elvira, which is a household name, you are obviously not trying very hard.
I am not trying to be callous. It is simply true. I believe you wrote a column recently about how so many blame the Big Two when the indies don’t sell (yet another instance of “victimization” by corporations in many comic fans’ minds. But I remember seeing the “Elvira team at a con this year, and they were sitting at their table, waiting for people to come up to them, rather than saying, “Hey, have you tried “Elvira”. if you are Jim Lee and Geoff Johns, you can sit back and relax. If you are selling about 700 copies an issue – and someone expresses to you that they are a fan of women’s comics AND writes about comics for a newspaper, you think you would REALLY try to get the word out. Yet so many creators I haverun into feel all they have to do is write the story and that marketing a book is “someone else’s problem”. Except when sales fall, it quickly becomes THEIR problem.
I don’t think it’s any coincidence that writers/artists of books like “Jonah Hex” such as Jimmy Palmiotti go to a ton of conventions and actually talk up and promote their books.
Jerome Maida: “Thank you for expressing the bottom line that so many fail to grasp: If comics don’t sell, they will eventually be cancelled.”
I may have missed it but, where has that “bottom line” been debated here? The topic on cancellation has been in regards to WHO makes the decision to cancel. The distributor or the publisher? If sales through Diamond equals a viable product for the publisher, but not the distributor, and no viable method of distribution exists, then it is the distributor making the decision to cancel. This was the point PAD was making, as I read it.
Jerome Maida: “And if you can barely sell 700 copies of any book, let alone one like Elvira, which is a household name, you are obviously not trying very hard.”
Way to undercut the efforts of the dozens of creators who DO work very hard to sell 700 copies. It’s a brutal industry and sales can be quite hard to come by. Many creators simply sit at their tables. It’s a terrible way to do business, I concede. However, I know just as many creators who do all but have circus acts to try to attract attention and still sell under 500 copies.
And Claypool is a company that does virtually nothing to promote its line. Is this the type of company that Diamond should bend over backwards for? They haven’t updated their previews on their website in a year and a half. This announcement isn’t even up on their site yet and it’s been over a week. There’s no mailing address on there either. So why should Diamond be responsible for doing more than they are even willing to do for themselves?
I was gonna make the comment that retailers could show their power by organizing and supporting Claypool through ColdCut to show that it could be done, but I’m not sure Claypool is the right company for that kind of effort.
Brian Thomer wrote: “And Claypool is a company that does virtually nothing to promote its line.”
Yup. As I stated earlier: “Did Claypool Comics avail itself to all resources offered? My understanding is that they did not.”
Brian Thomer wrote: “Is this the type of company that Diamond should bend over backwards for?”
Also as stated: “Diamond has shut down many comics over the years.” Not all of these comics/companies are going to have been as irresponsible as Claypool. Diamonds decisions are not based on the efforts (or lack thereof) of the company in question.
So then we’re all in agreement that Diamond did nothing wrong in this specific instance?