Archie Comics Fan Forum

Everything Archie => All About Archie => Topic started by: Vegan Jughead on March 09, 2017, 07:35:46 AM

Title: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Vegan Jughead on March 09, 2017, 07:35:46 AM
I hear a lot of complaining about the reboots and RIVERDALE, etc, but I'm genuinely curious.  How would people on this forum have done it differently? 


I love classic Archie as much as the rest of y'all.  Trust me on that.  In a perfect world, the original house style Archie would be the best selling comic books in the world.  I think they should be.  They're my favorite comics of all time.  However, they weren't selling much.  Something had to be done.  Archie Comics chose one way.  Seems like most of the people on this forum don't like it. 


So, how would y'all have done it?  Personally I don't have any ideas.  That's why I'm asking.


Full disclosure: I'm mostly happy with the reboots and the TV show.  They're not perfect, but I don't dislike them.   


Love to hear your ideas.   
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 11:07:21 AM
I don't know exactly what I would have done, but here are some ideas (whether plausible or not):

Instead of canceling the floppies, I'd cancel the digest line and, instead of just reprinting the same stories over and over, print full-sized chronological collections of every story (reissue the collections as demand warrants).

I'd also digitize every previous floppy issue and sell them cheaply on Amazon and other platforms.

I'd also collect the new stories from the digests and sell those digitally as well.

As for the floppies:

Instead of doing New Riverdale, I'd do more of a soft reboot. Older stories, published before the characters' lifetimes, wouldn't hold any weight. The stories would be more modern and relevant. But it wouldn't be a fresh start. The characters wouldn't be meeting each other for the first time.

Story lengths and art styles would vary, from 5-6 pages to 20, from Classic style to various New Look styles. The older and newer writers and artists would contribute.

I'd set up a "continuity of situations", meaning if a character is in one place or predicament in one title, it would carry through to the other titles, so we could avoid situations like Betty and Veronica globetrotting in their own title but being in Riverdale in "Archie", all during seemingly the same school year. Or Riverdale High having different principals in "Archie" and "Jughead".

The floppy titles would be:

Archie
Jughead
Betty
Veronica
Cheryl
Reggie
Sabrina
Josie and the Pussycats
Katy Keene

I'd work in Sabrina's supporting casts from the original live-action film and the various TV series (Seth, Katy Lemore, Fran, Freddie, Marnie/Jenny, Libby, Gem, Cassandra, etc.).

I'd have everyone live in Riverdale to make for easier interaction.

I'd still do the "Riverdale" TV series but without the murder plot, and each season would be only 13 episodes long. I'd introduce all of the characters right away. Between all of them, there should be enough artificial drama to fill 40+ minutes per week.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: BettyReggie on March 09, 2017, 11:24:53 AM
I love the reboot of each comics. But I wish Reggie & Me would be than 5 issues. I'm not crazy about The Josie & The Pussycats comic. I really just like covers. I may quit getting it. I don't get digests anymore. There's too expensive. I just buy the floppies.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 09, 2017, 01:07:37 PM
I'd have cancelled the floppies altogether. The comic shop market demographic that supports that format clearly isn't buying what Archie Comics is selling. Instead of trying to reinvent the characters to appeal to a marketplace demographic that has rejected them, I'd have concentrated on different formats and different avenues of distribution. That may have involved some slight degree of modernization for new stories as far as appealing to kids in the traditional audience age range, and probably a shift away from the short stories under 20+ pages. More likely the shift would be toward a standalone OGN with more pages, in a format that could be kept in print and distributed via the book trade, as opposed to comic shops. For comic shops, the high-end chronological/complete format in hardcover, starting with the very best material (Silver Age). Also all of the same stuff (and individual issues complete with ads and everything) for digital format. They could do some "best of" or character-centric or thematic collections of older stuff in the same format they were using for The Best of Archie Comics TPs (not that every collection would need to fit the 400-page format, they could try different page-count/price-point combos).
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 09, 2017, 01:24:40 PM
Quote from: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 11:07:21 AM
The floppy titles would be:

Archie
Jughead
Betty
Veronica
Cheryl
Reggie
Sabrina
Josie and the Pussycats
Katy Keene

Well you've obviously identified the major problem with Archie's floppy comic books. Betty and Veronica in a comic book together must have led to the downfall of the entire empire. Obviously those two need to stay far away from each other.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: BettyReggie on March 09, 2017, 01:36:07 PM

It's just sad that we only gonna have 3 Betty & Veronica issues that are new. I hope they get a new artist & writer to take over. But the question is when will that happen?
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Vegan Jughead on March 09, 2017, 02:13:29 PM
Quote from: BettyReggie on March 09, 2017, 01:36:07 PM

It's just sad that we only gonna have 3 Betty & Veronica issues that are new. I hope they get a new artist & writer to take over. But the question is when will that happen?

I didn't hear that BettyReggie.  Is it confirmed that number 3 is the last by Adam Hughes? 
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: BettyReggie on March 09, 2017, 03:28:52 PM
So will they start over with a new artist? Will there be another Betty & Veronica #1 since it will be totally different story arc.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: kassandralove on March 09, 2017, 04:35:44 PM
I believe the stories changed a lot after Dan Decarlo, nothing really sat with me or I was ever that interested in purchasing newer issues. Everything now is super PC and the panels were just drawn
differently like no funny characters hidden in the backdrops no detail to style and fashion.
It's just kinda blah.

I don't like the Archie reboots, it totally ruins the looks and feel of Archie and I stoped buying them.

If they could bring back the vibes Dan decarlo and others of his time brought I could see a pike in sales.

I'd also like to see another animated series!   

They she also do all the issues made into big books in chronological order too!!

And how about some nice merchandise and clothing for once?
The Betty and Veronica collection is honestly garbage and does not represent who they are and their individuality!  Also way to expensive for real archie fans. 
I'm going to do a little collection based on them through my own line. I have one dress coming based on a skirt Veronica wore that's coming up for sale this month I will be posting later on!   My Instagram is @rebelloveclothing if you want to follow it and see the collection once it comes out!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Vegan Jughead on March 09, 2017, 04:41:17 PM
Quote from: BettyReggie on March 09, 2017, 03:28:52 PM
So will they start over with a new artist? Will there be another Betty & Veronica #1 since it will be totally different story arc.

BettyReggie, I honestly haven't heard that they're replacing Adam Hughes as the artist.  Where did you hear this?  Do you have a link?
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 05:31:08 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on March 09, 2017, 01:24:40 PM
Quote from: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 11:07:21 AM
The floppy titles would be:

Archie
Jughead
Betty
Veronica
Cheryl
Reggie
Sabrina
Josie and the Pussycats
Katy Keene

Well you've obviously identified the major problem with Archie's floppy comic books. Betty and Veronica in a comic book together must have led to the downfall of the entire empire. Obviously those two need to stay far away from each other.

Meh. I just meant, with floppies not money-makers, it'd be pointless to have a title for a B&V team-up. They can interact in their solo titles.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: steveinthecity on March 09, 2017, 09:00:55 PM
Aside from some experimentation with format options, I'd have allowed the pool of creators to actually control the content.  I think there was too much meddling from the top that left the artists and writers hamstrung. 
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Upsiditus on March 09, 2017, 09:50:47 PM
I would like to see a cartoon.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 10, 2017, 12:42:18 AM
Quote from: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 05:31:08 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on March 09, 2017, 01:24:40 PM
Quote from: Tuxedo Mark on March 09, 2017, 11:07:21 AM
The floppy titles would be:

Archie
Jughead
Betty
Veronica
Cheryl
Reggie
Sabrina
Josie and the Pussycats
Katy Keene

Well you've obviously identified the major problem with Archie's floppy comic books. Betty and Veronica in a comic book together must have led to the downfall of the entire empire. Obviously those two need to stay far away from each other.

Meh. I just meant, with floppies not money-makers, it'd be pointless to have a title for a B&V team-up. They can interact in their solo titles.

So basically you're just wanting to return to what they were publishing circa 1982 before they cancelled all of the titles on your list (but with the addition of Veronica and Cheryl in their own titles, which didn't happen until later), but MINUS a BETTY & VERONICA title, which has a longer track record of selling than anything else but ARCHIE and JUGHEAD. Never mind that for a lot of their shared running time, B&V was outselling both of those titles. It is, in fact, the chemistry between the two girls (rather than the simple formula of adding Betty's popularity as a character to Veronica's popularity) that made that title a best-seller for ACP that outlasted JUGHEAD by three years (not to mention all the other titles on your list that were cancelled sooner, including their own solo titles). You just seem to want to ignore reality here, in favor of your own personal wish-fulfillment.

It's all well and good to play the fantasy wishing game and say "I wish they'd just start publishing all those titles/characters I like again", but you're not really identifying or offering any solutions to the problem of why ACP floppy titles aren't selling. Adding continuity to all the titles may please you, but it isn't going to make them sell any better.

You're just not getting it. The only place floppy comics sell is in comic book shops. But the comic shop customer doesn't want Archie Comics -- or any humor comic, really. If humor comics sold, Marvel and DC would have established ongoing titles in that genre. The only reason DC even publishes things like Looney Tunes or Scooby-Doo or Teen Titans GO! as floppy comics is that DC's main audience includes parents who buy DC's comics aimed at older readers, who are also encouraging their kids to read comics by buying those titles for them. Those comics DC can afford to publish at close to break-even, just to seed an upcoming generation of comic readers (and to tell the truth, half the sales of those comics are probably coming from older nostalgic adults who buy them for themselves).

On the other hand, the only thing that IS selling for ACP, the digests -- if less than in their heyday, still far better than the floppies, and far more profitable at higher cover prices -- you want to cancel, presumably for no other reason than that they don't interest you personally.

No, what ACP should have done, after cancelling one floppy title after another, is they should have started tranferring all that new content (20-25 pages worth) into all the digest titles. To encourage print digest sales, they shouldn't sell a digital version of the digests. They could make the new content from the digest issues available later (6 months to a year) as a digital single, for $2 -- but if you want those new stories earlier, you need to buy the print digest.

They obviously can't do that now, since they cut all their freelancers loose except for Dan Parent (who couldn't fill 80-100 new pages needed to fill the digests with a floppy comic's worth of new content every month).
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: Tuxedo Mark on March 11, 2017, 07:21:17 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on March 10, 2017, 12:42:18 AM
No, what ACP should have done, after cancelling one floppy title after another, is they should have started tranferring all that new content (20-25 pages worth) into all the digest titles. To encourage print digest sales, they shouldn't sell a digital version of the digests. They could make the new content from the digest issues available later (6 months to a year) as a digital single, for $2 -- but if you want those new stories earlier, you need to buy the print digest.

Meh, I'm not a fan of the "delay digital to get you to use the old format" tactic. Heck, I was pissed when The CW used to wait 8 days before putting a new episode online. Now, it's the more reasonable day after.

If floppies don't sell anywhere other than comic shops, ditch the physical format entirely and go digital-only. That way, customers can have a 20-page story (or a group of stories totaling 20 pages) for around $3.99 (heck, maybe less) and wouldn't have to pay shipping costs or deal with packaging. For anyone that really wants a physical copy, Archie Comics could set up a POD service.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 12, 2017, 12:24:37 AM
Quote from: Tuxedo Mark on March 11, 2017, 07:21:17 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on March 10, 2017, 12:42:18 AM
No, what ACP should have done, after cancelling one floppy title after another, is they should have started tranferring all that new content (20-25 pages worth) into all the digest titles. To encourage print digest sales, they shouldn't sell a digital version of the digests. They could make the new content from the digest issues available later (6 months to a year) as a digital single, for $2 -- but if you want those new stories earlier, you need to buy the print digest.

Meh, I'm not a fan of the "delay digital to get you to use the old format" tactic. Heck, I was pissed when The CW used to wait 8 days before putting a new episode online. Now, it's the more reasonable day after.

If floppies don't sell anywhere other than comic shops, ditch the physical format entirely and go digital-only. That way, customers can have a 20-page story (or a group of stories totaling 20 pages) for around $3.99 (heck, maybe less) and wouldn't have to pay shipping costs or deal with packaging. For anyone that really wants a physical copy, Archie Comics could set up a POD service.

Digital-exclusive comics are the biggest scam of all time. $4 for what? For a print comic, somehow a printer, a distributor, and a retailer and all the people that work for them all make a living off a slice of that price (in addition to the creators and the publisher, of course) -- and they all have operating expenses to justify the services they contribute. Paper and ink and printing presses and the industry to produce those things cost money. Moving physical objects around in the physical world means you have to pay a lot of people and the cost of fuel needed for transporting those objects. There's no way they're going to tell me that the cost of administering a website and server hosting costs add up to the same. It's a pure scam for the "publisher", who contributes ZERO to justify hoarding all that profit, unless it's underwriting part of the costs of print publishing.

Selling digital-only comics is literally like giving a publisher a license to print money. After the publisher pays the creators a per-page rate, its 100% profit for them from there on. All of those other people who normally get paid out of a slice of that $4 per copy? The publisher gets to keep their share for himself. UNlike the money a publisher had to invest to attempt to reap a profit on a finite number of print copies, that digital comic is infinite and everlasting - it just keeps making new copies of itself. And what has the publisher done to deserve all that? What did he invest or risk to justify reaping those profits? As far as I can see, his investment was minimized and his risk along with it, and all he did was take a lot of jobs away from other people. Why should he get to keep profiting eternally while the creators get nothing more?

The only way I'd consider buying a digital-only comic is if it's creator-owned/self-published, so the people who are doing the actual creative work are the only ones profiting from the fruits of their labor. Any monkey can set up a website to sell a digital comic, but not just any monkey can create a good comic book. How much profit do you think Dan Parent is seeing from the price of every digital copy of LIFE WITH KEVIN sold, as opposed to how much he's seeing from every digital copy of DIE KITTY DIE sold?

That's a rhetorical question, but I'll spell it out for you. Dan Parent created the characters for LIFE WITH KEVIN (except for Veronica) and entirely wrote and drew it himself, but he makes $ZERO profit off the price of every copy ACP sells of the digital-exclusive comic -- which is why I refuse to purchase it. Whatever money Dan made off the story and artwork, he made before the thing ever went on sale, so my money does nothing to contribute to Dan Parent. I have to assume that ACP recouped the cost they invested in paying Dan for that work, probably on the very first day that issue #1 went on sale, so none of my money is contributing to him earning a living. Paying for a digital-only comic where the creator gets nothing extra for selling more copies, but the so-called "publisher"s profits keep growing with every copy sold (and it never goes "out of print"), feels like being an enabler for a rapist. The cost of a page rate for 20+ pages of comic art & story is a drop in the bucket compared to the investment needed to print & distribute a floppy comic book -- and that's the only part where the publisher can be said to contribute anything -- the investment in the printing and distribution.

ACP has the means at its disposal to publish LIFE WITH KEVIN as a print comic and get it distributed, but they'd rather not (that would be risky because it might cut into their pure profit). Dan Parent and Fernando Ruiz don't have the means at their disposal to publish DIE KITTY DIE as a print comic and get it distributed. The only way they can do something like that is by running a Kickstarter campaign to fund the cost (something that is normally a publisher's contribution). Once they've managed to do that and pay themselves for writing and drawing the comic in the first place, they then have to work out a deal with someone like Chapterhouse Comics to publish a floppy comic for them -- that's the only thing justifying Chapterhouse making a profit off a comic book that was entirely created by Dan Parent and Fernando Ruiz.

I'd rather see ACP go belly-up than all digital-exclusive.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: irishmoxie on March 12, 2017, 03:21:07 AM
Interesting. I asked Viz on Twitter whether it's better to buy print or digital if I want to support a series I like (and see more similar series published) and they said print is more profitable for them.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 12, 2017, 03:43:12 AM
Quote from: irishmoxie on March 12, 2017, 03:21:07 AM
Interesting. I asked Viz on Twitter whether it's better to buy print or digital if I want to support a series I like (and see more similar series published) and they said print is more profitable for them.

Japanese creators own the rights to their own work, so they share in any profits.

Viz might have been lying to you. If what they told you was generally true for publishers operating in both media, why would ANYONE publish a digital-exclusive comic? That makes no sense.

On the other hand, maybe they weren't lying and print publishing really IS more profitable for them. That's AN answer, and it may have been true, but maybe there's a difference in how the profit breaks down between creators and publishers in Japan, and it's a different deal whether it's selling print copies or digital copies. That would make sense in terms of the relative contributions made by the publisher depending on the actual media. In print publishing, the publisher shoulders the burden of risk because of the money they need to invest for printing and distribution, so it makes sense that they should also receive the greater percentage of profits than the creators -- while in digital publishing, the publishers risk next to nothing, so the creators should gain the lion's share of the profits generated.

Maybe the key piece of information they neglected to tell you is that digital publishing is more profitable for the CREATORS.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: steveinthecity on March 12, 2017, 07:08:50 PM
Something I hadn't though about earlier, but maybe ACP should have made a better effort to accept outside advertising in their comics.  Surely there's some clever sales/marketing people that could have gotten them ads from businesses that want to sell to the Archie readership demo.  I'm sure ACP generates sales and subs through the in-house ads, but I'd imagine far less than if they were instead promoting candy, toys, movies, tween accessories, etc.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DeCarlo Rules on March 12, 2017, 10:21:42 PM
Quote from: steveinthecity on March 12, 2017, 07:08:50 PM
Something I hadn't though about earlier, but maybe ACP should have made a better effort to accept outside advertising in their comics.  Surely there's some clever sales/marketing people that could have gotten them ads from businesses that want to sell to the Archie readership demo.  I'm sure ACP generates sales and subs through the in-house ads, but I'd imagine far less than if they were instead promoting candy, toys, movies, tween accessories, etc.

This is true. I've been reading different ACP back issues from different years and making a mental observation of the types of paid advertising that was carried, and there's been a consistent steady reduction of that over the past couple of decades.

Other than the back covers of digests, the ONLY interior paid advertising now being carried in ACP's digests (which is where they'd have the most free space and the biggest circulation to attract advertisers) is for Diamond Comics Distribution. I don't count things like the CW's RIVERDALE and Rachael Antonoff's B&V fashion collection, because where else are they going to advertise, and who knows if it's not paid outright, but some kind of contract/reciprocal arrangement. For that matter, now that I think of it, maybe the DCD ads are some trading arrangement, too.
Title: Re: Instead of the current direction, how would YOU have saved Archie Comics?
Post by: DakotaArchieFan on March 14, 2017, 02:12:42 PM
Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on March 12, 2017, 10:21:42 PM
Quote from: steveinthecity on March 12, 2017, 07:08:50 PM
Something I hadn't though about earlier, but maybe ACP should have made a better effort to accept outside advertising in their comics.  Surely there's some clever sales/marketing people that could have gotten them ads from businesses that want to sell to the Archie readership demo.  I'm sure ACP generates sales and subs through the in-house ads, but I'd imagine far less than if they were instead promoting candy, toys, movies, tween accessories, etc.

This is true. I've been reading different ACP back issues from different years and making a mental observation of the types of paid advertising that was carried, and there's been a consistent steady reduction of that over the past couple of decades.

Other than the back covers of digests, the ONLY interior paid advertising now being carried in ACP's digests (which is where they'd have the most free space and the biggest circulation to attract advertisers) is for Diamond Comics Distribution. I don't count things like the CW's RIVERDALE and Rachael Antonoff's B&V fashion collection, because where else are they going to advertise, and who knows if it's not paid outright, but some kind of contract/reciprocal arrangement. For that matter, now that I think of it, maybe the DCD ads are some trading arrangement, too.


This is actually true for Marvel and DC too.  They used to have all kinds of ads in their comics, now it is just in-house ads.  I wonder if the low print numbers of modern comics make it not profitable for outside companies to buy ads in the comics. 


On the digests, I've always seen those as the most available format, since those are still sold in grocery stores and places like Wal-Mart.  I'm 44 and my town did not have a comics store, and not many comics racks either, so the only times I got actual comics were when we went out of town and I found Archie comics in a rack at a Mini Mart.  You don't even find those racks in convenience stores much anymore, so you'd have to go to an actual comics shop to find them.  That limits their reach even more.  Doing something with the digests would be the way to keep going.