(Commentary) I've been promising for weeks now to review the reactions to two recent essays, and I suppose I'd better get it done before everyone forgets what I was talking about in the first place. Those with no interest in these subjects are encouraged to skip ahead to the rest of the news.
First off, let's go back to December 8th, when I wrote an essay entitled "You can't miss what you can't measure." The thrust of this piece was a lament over the fact that the only way most comic books exploring various genres had a hope of selling copies in the Direct Market was if they included superheroes as well, a bizarre circumstance which highlights the American system of comics shops as by and large a one-genre network. Reactions largely seemed to depend upon the extent on which readers agreed with or even understood the distinction -- you can see this play out in microcosm on this Millarworld thread. For others, the basic thrust of the argument was unfair because they felt the Direct Market has informed their tastes in the first place (although the comics shops weren't always as closed as this argument implies). Others ignored the distinction I tried to make and simply assumed I was in anti-superhero mode -- I'd refute this one, but others have beaten me to it. Some people thought I was simply wasting my time.
Aside from a flurry of responses generated on the web, I also received a fair amount of email on the subject:
"I really enjoyed your article about the state of the direct market industry, particlarly your comments about capitalism... I've been railing for years about how ridiculous it is that the industry's response to doldrums is to increase the number of titles. Demand is low and there response is to increase supply. Ahhhh...Phooeey.
"I disagree with your final point, though. You can't blame the consumer when the industry has gone to the well too many times.
"Originally, Adam Smith wanted to dedicate The Wealth of Nations to Francois Quesnay, the founder of the French Physiocrat movement. Quesnay believed that the only all wealth originated from the land and agriculture. While the onset of the industrial revolution made the notion a little antiquated, Smith applied that philosophy to an economic system. I guess what I'm saying, Just like a farmer must has to make sure year to year that he doesn't farm out his land.... A business in a capitalist society must nurture its market to achieve longevity. The direct market industry basically sold out its future in the late 80s and early 90s by recognizing a market and then exploiting it to a point that it can't sustain itself and by allowing Diamond to develop a monopoly on its distribution."
This is all entirely possible; I often find myself having difficulties filtering the Direct Market through any but the most Malthusian prisms myself. Even assuming that attempting to make such arguments is largely a waste of time, however, I'm afraid I'm nonetheless compelled to make the attempt because despite it all I just plain like comics shops. Oh, I avoid bad ones like the plague, but a good, well-stocked comics shop is like a candy store to me.
I also have more selfish motives for wanting to see the Direct Market thrive as well. Here's a letter from Tim O'Neil:
"I read with great interest your latest anti-direct market screed, and I have to say that once again you took the words right out of my mouth. Once again, you do perhaps the best job of summing up a depressing and thankless situation.
"However -- reading this essay brought to mind a rather depressing (there's that word again!) realization. Perhaps there is no hope -- in fact, its beginning to look more and more like that's the case. The Direct Market is broken and no one wants to fix it or to even try and fix it because that might mean going out of business in six months instead of six years (now that we're down to the hard core, attrition is probably going to be slow and painful from here on out). Perhaps it is time to stop beating our collective heads against the wall and simply begin to make plans to cut our losses and leave.
"By 'we' I mean the Collected Brain-Trust of Right-Thinking Comics Fans And Producers. We need to start drawing up blueprints for a world without our friendly neighborhood comic book store, because it's looking like that world is getting closer and closer. I don't think it's too much to ask, since the direct market is already becoming superfluous to publishers like Fanta, D&Q, Tokyopop, Viz, Top Shelf, Archie and Co., that people simply get used to the notion of buying their comics at their local bookstore or alternative newstand or indie record store. Quite honestly, its a bit frustrating to read someone as intelligent and perceptive as yourself beat your head against this proverbial wall week in and week out -- I think it's fast becoming time to figure out how to put our nascent industry into that proverbial rocket ship, get him the fuck off this doomed planetoid and hope he grows up with strange and unusual powers in his newfound home (i.e. The Real World). If Shonen Jump can easily survive the death of the mainstream industry and direct market, could Love & Rockets? Could CSI: Miami? Could Dork or Conan or The Incal or Simpsons Comics? Its time to put our heads together and get the parts of this industry that deserve to survive on dry land, because there's a flood coming."
In the long term, I think you're right. The short term is another matter. At the moment, comics publishers not dealing in manga would find themselves in fairly dire straits if the Direct Market were to collapse tomorrow (which I should point out now, I don't at all see happening). Take my employer and perpetual conflict-of-interest, Fantagraphics Books: while it's true that at least half of its income is currently coming from bookstores, upwards of half of it is not. Were the Direct Market to suddenly vanish, the resulting financial contraction could easily take us out of business. Even assuming it didn't -- and that's a pretty big "if" -- we'd suddenly be a much smaller company with far less output. You could kiss comic books (and the magazine which subsidizes this weblog) goodbye altogether; whatever remained would be printed exclusively in book form. I'd be out of a job most likely, but as a comics fan that would actually be among the least of my concerns -- indeed, my income level would almost certainly rise after finding other work. Just the loss of the Journal alone would probably affect me more sentimentally than it ever could financially.
As for other publishers, it's doubtful many would survive the loss of income any better. Slave Labor has a certain amount of sales from the goth comics sold through shops like Hot Topics, Drawn & Quarterly can sell Canadian-themed books fairly well north of the border, and NBM has been working to diversify its sales outlets better and longer than virtually anyone else. Most other publishers likely as not would be wiped out instantaneously. Even as fucked up as it is, the loss of the Direct Market would be catastrophic. Will comics publishers be better poised to do without comics shops ten years from now? That's far more likely. It would be better for all concerned, however, if both markets were growing and thriving.
Writer and game designer Bruce Baugh read the essay and found himself with a question:
"I feel like I should be writing that with a powdered wig on, for some reason...
"In any event, I've just been reading 'You can't miss what you can't measure,' and I agree with it pretty much down the whole page. This closely parallels conversations going on in the roleplaying game industry, as I'm sure is little surprise, given that it's such a strongly overlapping population. What I wonder, about my own field and yours, is just how some things ever get started.
"How did manga start showing up in the chain bookstores? What were the early titles? Can we identify the buyers who managed to persuade their superiors to buy them? There must be stats on a lot of this around, but I scarcely know where I'd begin.
"There was a significant upheaval in the roleplaying game field back in the early '90s, when White Wolf Games Studio published Vampire: The Masquerade. It ended up creating a whole new constituency for RPGs, and had cascading consequences for game design and production. There, too, there's sort of a black-hole factor -- it seems like word of mouth managed to leap the the usual walls... somehow, and I'm honestly not sure how, nor (as nearly as I can tell) are friends who were actually in the middle of it.
"Clearly a marketplace can shift fairly rapidly when the right thing comes along, despite what seem like powerful locking-in constraints. But just what makes it happen? Beats me. Possibly something to ask your readership about?"
Good idea. I know that the first real attempts to sell manga to American markets occured in the late 1980s, courtesy of companies like Eclipse and Dark Horse, but there's a decade-long gap in my knowledge. Does anyone else know? Is there perhaps a convenient article on the subject floating around the internet? Anyone with the answer is encouraged to email me with links.
Finally, Christopher Butcher, who doesn't think I go nearly far enough, wrote in with his thoughts:
"Interesting essay and I agree with most of it on its face. The reason I'm writing is because I believe in absolving retailers of any responsibility for generating interest in new product lines, I think you might have missed some important information. There are a number of low-risk and no-risk, low-effort methods to diversify stock in order to build up an audience for a project. Better than 75% of the trade paperbacks and graphic novels offered through Diamond are also offered through alternative distribution sources, including bookstore distributors, anime distributors, and more. Most of these (and I'll use Viz and their bookstore distributor Publishers Group West, as an example) distributors offer good terms and partial- and full-returnability in return for a lower discount. With a credit application and an hour or two's worth of work, it is possible for even small stores to carry a good representitive sampling of Viz manga (including free display stands to properly display and promote it), with little risk. In exchange for the reduced discount, the retailer is building valuable sales-tracking data that will enable him or her to reorder books at a comfortable level, with a better discount at a future date. I honestly think that growing new product lines has to come from all sides of the equation. The publishers are actually doing their jobs (shockingly) by making the material available in a variety of formats and by a variety of methods, it's up to everyone to take advantage of the offer.
"Beyond that, what would the end result be of encouraging readers to look beyond their tastes and start asking for manga, alternative, and art-comix at their local superhero retailer? At best, I imagine frustration on the parts of all parties ("Do you have..." "No.", repeated 10 times a day). It doesn't matter how many people ask for it, if the product isn't there (and the shop doesn't want to carry it despite the vast array of easy and inexpensive methods to obtaining it) then all you're really doing is frustrating a lot of people out of the Direct Market entirely..."
This was only a sampling of the email I received on the subject, alas; my apologies to everyone whose letters I didn't have time to include.
Let's move on to our second essay, an examination of the issues surrounding Corner Comics' tax problems, which was posted two weeks ago. In that essay, I took a look at the reaction by some retailers, then did some investigating before concluding that said reaction was based upon faulty accounting assumptions. One of the retailers I quoted last time around, Jim Crocker, was kind enough to send me a reply:
"You're abosolutely correct when you discuss the differences between cash and acrrual accounting.
"The main problem with using cash accounting in our business, a sopposed ot the contracting example you cited is not in the declaration of money you take in, but in dealing with cash going out. Essentially, it means you have to pay all your bills right away. If you're on terms with any of your suppliers, or don't like paying bills immediately upon receipt, that pretty much means accrual accounting. Just about any retailer worth their salt is going to do their best to negotiate terms with their suppliers, and should be using accrual acocunting as a result.
"If Paige is doing all business with her various suppliers COD, (a situation I hadn't even considered for a store that's been in business for a number of years) then she has a much better case for cash accounting being a viable way to handle her books. I stand fast in my belief that there are very good non tax-related reasons for doing an inventory even when you don't 'have to', and the opportunity to have some time to sell my comics before I have to pay for them is chief among them.
"Ultimately, without actually sitting down and looking at her books and examining the IRS' compalint against her by a nuetral third party with a degree in tax law, we're probably not going to get a clear picture. That Paige has an accountant and attorney is good news, and despite any dubiousness about specifics of the case, I certainly hope her business comes through intact.
"As to the CBIA, I don't think anyone, the founder included, would ever lay claim to it being an industry trade organization or even a
substitute for same. I certainly find my time spent there to be well-spent, and have gotten quite a bit of very good, helpful advice
from the other retailers. But it's always been a venue, as opposed to a body.
"There was a comics industry trade association: PACER. I was a member at my old store, and it fizzled and died with a whimper back in the late '90s, when the great industry hemorrage of that era eliminated many of its members. I'd love to see another one get going, but the 'iconoclastic' nature of people (like myself) stupid enough to consider comics retailng as a career makes it about as easy as herding cats.
I appreciate the equal time. Thanks."
Hey, no problem -- I appreciate your taking the time to write. I think it's somewhat foolish to discuss the relative merits of Paige Gifford's case without having access to the relevant documents, and without hearing the case from both her accountant's and the IRS' side, so I'll forgo any further speculation from that end. The reaction to my comments concerning the CBIA, however, merit further scrutiny. Perhaps the best argument against my essay on that score came from Robert Scott, writing on our message board. Scott begins by quoting from my essay (and continues to do so throughout his response):
" 'A functional trade organization, in short, would be one capable of doing something rather than nothing. I see no evidence that this describes the CBIA in any way, shape or form. This is a shame.'
"I don't understand why this is a shame, it was never the intent for the CBIA to function as a trade organization. Heck it's a shame that ice-cold beer or chicken soup don't flow from my kitchen faucet but then again I certainly don't hold the water dept. suspect, as this is not their purpose.
"A few clicks on the website would have spelled it out for you but for expediency sake, here is a brief Mission Statement and History of the CBIA:
" 'Perhaps it's unfair to single out the CBIA for failing in this regard, but it's the closest thing to a trade organization we currently have -- and that's just sad.'
"This is a volunteer group run by one volunteer, me, with tremendous support from every facet of the industry and has effected numerous changes within the industry and striving to effect many more. However this is an industry which is barely capable of supporting even one full line distributor, so it's hardly suprising that every effort at organizing a Trade Organization for this industry, most recently PACER, has ultimately met with failure.
"This does not mean that strides are not being made to create a Trade Organization, they are, however at present, I will not expend valuable time and energy on something fairly certain to die stillborn, preferring to continue building the relationships and memebrship base that will allow us to continue to address things that can be dealt with through the forum as it currently exists, as well as attempting to either evolve or assist in creating something that will have the resources and muscle to do the things Trade Organizations can do.
" 'It's too late to save Corner Comics, of course, but what about the next retailer to face a similar situation? Is it possible to build something that might help them? If the Comic Book Industry Alliance isn't the organization for the job, shouldn't someone be thinking about a trade group that could fill this badly-needed role? Why isn't anyone trying?'
"Why the assumption that nobody is trying? There are things I am ready to talk about and things I am not, in this regard, and it would have been fairly easy considering your recognition of the CBIA entity and it's website, for you to contact me to discuss it, rather than issuing veiled insult and innuendo but that may not have made such sensational copy. I guess that's the difference between journalism and editorialization."
Gosh, but it seems I struck a nerve. Indeed, much of the email I received from retailers ran along similar lines, but let's deal with Scott's points here, which amount to: (1) the idea was tried once before, and since it didn't work it's pointless to try again; (2) the CBIA was never meant to be anything other than a discussion forum; and (3) how dare you criticise us.
It's a bit disingenuous for Mr. Scott to claim that it's unfair to criticise the CBIA for being nothing more than a do-nothing bitchfest, on the grounds that this is exactly what it is. First, as Scott himself implies, discussions on the creation of a more active industry trade group have taken place on the CBIA forum, including consideration of Brian Hibbs' idea to create a fund to provide retailers with further training and assistance in expanding their businesses. That these discussions have led to nothing in the way of concrete action is exactly what I find so exasperating: the comics industry desperately needs such initiatives if it's to do anything other than spin in place. What you discuss really doesn't matter if the end result is inertia, now does it?
There are any number of reasons why a proper retailer's trade group is necessary. Let's just run down a few of the obvious ones:
- Market leverage: As noted above, Brian Hibbs spent the better part of two years fighting Marvel Comics virtually alone, in an attempt to live up to the very terms of sale they wrote in the first place. The fact that in the end he was successful validates his case, of course, but it does more than that: it points out that someone with the backbone necessary to stand up for what's right can make a difference, even in the face of antagonists with superior resources. If it took two years for one retailer to force Marvel to live up to agreements they began violating back in 1998, how long would it have taken an organization representing a cross-section of retailers to do the same? If Marvel were facing a consortium of, say, a fifth of their Direct Market customer base, it's entirely likely that the fight needn't have gone on as long as it did. Last year Bill Jemas spent an ungodly amount of time trying to jam another speculators' craze down retailers' throats. Wouldn't it have been nice to have a trade alliance to tell him to fuck off in unison, rather than isolated voices on the internet?
- Retailer education: Hibbs' idea for a fund to help retailers learn and grow is a sound one, but it suffers from a fatal flaw: who's going to pay for it? It won't be Marvel or DC, unless by "grow" you mean "buy more of our product, and stop ordering from anyone else." It won't be Diamond, since they're too busy expending resources trying to get a proper foothold in the booksellers' market. Any such program will of necessity have to be produced by retailers, for retailers. There are too many motives at cross purposes in this industry for it to be anything else. Further, it needn't cost that much -- a website could serve as a basic handbook for discussing the perrenial issues affecting shopowners and the facts and practices needed to deal with them. A ten-page newsletter, distributed monthly with the rest of the promo materials sent through Diamond, could keep people informed of the day-to-day issues that crop up. (Such a method of distribution would also work because it wouldn't require Diamond to surrender what it considers to be its proprietary list of clients.) All of this could be paid for by a yearly membership fee of, say, fifty bucks if you can convince just 100 retailers to sign on at the outset. Furthermore, that membership roster would grow as every retailer in America received said newsletter, which would continue to sell the organization month in and month out. (Interesting fact: while virtually all of the email I received from CBIA members might as well have begun "How Dare you'" virtually all of the email I received from non-CBIA retailers contained some variation on "What the fuck is the CBIA?") The increased funds from a growing membership roster, in turn, could help finance...
- Mutual assistance: As noted above, a retailers' trade organization would assist greatly in ensuring that the rest of the industry took notice of shopowners' concerns. As membership grew, said organization could afford to keep a lawyer on retainer, who could offer occasional advice on things like terms of sale and tax issues. As I noted in my essay, such a group would also have more clout in dealing with the outside world when its more threatening elements came knocking on Direct Market doors. Had such an organization been there for Corner Comics, the highlight of Paige Gifford's contact with the rest of the industry might have been something other than a retailer advising her via email to offer sex to the IRS agent investigating her, you know?
Retailers need a better voice than they currently have. They need access to better advice than what they're getting right now, and they need to learn to speak with one voice if they're to deal with other parts of the industry which don't necessarily have their best interests at heart. Beset by suppliers scheming for the best way to use their leverage to shove more product down retailers' throats, a distributor utterly beholden by contract to said companies, increased competition from bookstores and the internet, and even each other (discounting, anyone?), retailers need a trade organization to ensure that they move as a group to help the industry thrive and survive into the 21st century.
Let's make no mistake: if an actual retailer's trade organization is to serve as a voice for the men and women serving on the front lines of the Direct Market, it'll have to come from the CBIA. There's simply no other comparable place where retailers gather in sufficient numbers to begin the process. There's no one else -- even if the CBIA doesn't wind up growing into the organization in question, it's the only place where such an organization can be discussed. It's you guys or nothing, and "nothing" is the wrong answer.
