Quote from: steveinthecity on November 19, 2016, 09:23:39 PM
I don't understand the story as a long time reader, and equally I don't understand why a New reader would be interested in this. Too many questions as your original post puts forth, which is why I want to re-read both issues back to back.

That's why I had to ask all those questions. The book SHOULD be immediately accessible to both newcomer and veteran ACP fans alike, but so many vagaries in the information supplied on the pages of the comic led me to wonder whether the book had been written from the standpoint of assuming that any reader would have already been familiar with anything previously established in the New Riverdale ARCHIE title. That would still have been a failing, but apparently that's not the case either, which makes B&V an even bigger Fail from a storytelling perspective. Before the title even came out, I joked about Hughes filling 20 pages or so with cheesecake pin-up panels of B&V, but in hindsight that would have represented a major improvement here in the art helping to compensate for a vapid story.

Warning: Rant Ahead:
I have reached the jumping off point for the New Riverdale titles.  Betty and Veronica is a mess.  So much space in Issue #1 wasted on captions.  Our first view of Betty and Veronica on page 1 with them fighting is just awful as well.  Why on earth did Hot Dog narrate the story?  Why replace two pages of the story with more caption balloons and a pic of Betty and Veronica in bikinis for no reason? 
Off-topic, but Archie's storyline is just dragging on and becoming more and more unpleasant, between Cheryl Blossom's introduction and Archie's eating himself into the hospital.  Then we get a preview for the previous issue of Jughead instead of a classic reprint.  Jughead has been fun, but I get the sneaky fekeling that it isn't selling very well.  While fun, I just can't bring myself to start reading the Josie reboot.  I just get the feeling it'll end suddenly, like Life With Archie did, or be dropped to be replaced with a Riverdale comic (which is coming).  The 75th Anniversary Digests are a big rip-off, just reusing stories from the 75th Anniversary book and Best of Books (which may or may not eventually become Deluxe hardcovers anyways, so maybe I'll just wait). If the Super Specials keep up, I'll happily read them and Dark Horse's Archie Archives paperbacks, but honestly, it's hard not to be frustrated with Archie Comics right now.
End of Rant.

Quote from: Deb on November 20, 2016, 05:59:08 PM
Warning: Rant Ahead:
I have reached the jumping off point for the New Riverdale titles.  Betty and Veronica is a mess.  So much space in Issue #1 wasted on captions.  Our first view of Betty and Veronica on page 1 with them fighting is just awful as well.  Why on earth did Hot Dog narrate the story?  Why replace two pages of the story with more caption balloons and a pic of Betty and Veronica in bikinis for no reason? 
Off-topic, but Archie's storyline is just dragging on and becoming more and more unpleasant, between Cheryl Blossom's introduction and Archie's eating himself into the hospital.  Then we get a preview for the previous issue of Jughead instead of a classic reprint.  Jughead has been fun, but I get the sneaky fekeling that it isn't selling very well.  While fun, I just can't bring myself to start reading the Josie reboot.  I just get the feeling it'll end suddenly, like Life With Archie did, or be dropped to be replaced with a Riverdale comic (which is coming).  The 75th Anniversary Digests are a big rip-off, just reusing stories from the 75th Anniversary book and Best of Books (which may or may not eventually become Deluxe hardcovers anyways, so maybe I'll just wait). If the Super Specials keep up, I'll happily read them and Dark Horse's Archie Archives paperbacks, but honestly, it's hard not to be frustrated with Archie Comics right now.
End of Rant.

You're my pick for  "favorite poster" of the month. 

Quote from: DeCarloRules...snip...

I like when we argue over stuff we've formed a similar opinion on.


DCR's successfully using "vagaries" in a reply and being the incumbent will certainly make this a tough challenge for Deb, though.

Quote from: steveinthecity on November 20, 2016, 08:17:39 PM

Quote from: Deb on November 20, 2016, 05:59:08 PM
Warning: Rant Ahead:
I have reached the jumping off point for the New Riverdale titles.  Betty and Veronica is a mess.  So much space in Issue #1 wasted on captions.  Our first view of Betty and Veronica on page 1 with them fighting is just awful as well.  Why on earth did Hot Dog narrate the story?  Why replace two pages of the story with more caption balloons and a pic of Betty and Veronica in bikinis for no reason? 
Off-topic, but Archie's storyline is just dragging on and becoming more and more unpleasant, between Cheryl Blossom's introduction and Archie's eating himself into the hospital.  Then we get a preview for the previous issue of Jughead instead of a classic reprint.  Jughead has been fun, but I get the sneaky fekeling that it isn't selling very well.  While fun, I just can't bring myself to start reading the Josie reboot.  I just get the feeling it'll end suddenly, like Life With Archie did, or be dropped to be replaced with a Riverdale comic (which is coming).  The 75th Anniversary Digests are a big rip-off, just reusing stories from the 75th Anniversary book and Best of Books (which may or may not eventually become Deluxe hardcovers anyways, so maybe I'll just wait). If the Super Specials keep up, I'll happily read them and Dark Horse's Archie Archives paperbacks, but honestly, it's hard not to be frustrated with Archie Comics right now.
End of Rant.

You're my pick for  "favorite poster" of the month. 

Quote from: DeCarloRules...snip...

I like when we argue over stuff we've formed a similar opinion on.


DCR's successfully using "vagaries" in a reply and being the incumbent will certainly make this a tough challenge for Deb, though.

Oh, is THAT what we were doing, arguing? Well, I guess I've botched it, then. I was under the impression we were just discussing. Or commenting. Something like that, anyway.

I'd just like to add that I'm in complete agreement with every rant that Deb just ranted (well, almost... but since I haven't been reading ARCHIE, I'm willing to trust her on that one), especially as she summarized nicely how it makes me feel, in her final sentence, that I was emboldened to.. well, embolden. Personally, I generally don't bother to label my rants as such, but just assume that people would know that if they've read many of my prior posts.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 21, 2016, 05:31:38 AM


Oh, is THAT what we were doing, arguing? Well, I guess I've botched it, then. I was under the impression we were just discussing. Or commenting. Something like that, anyway.

I'd just like to add that I'm in complete agreement with every rant that Deb just ranted (well, almost... but since I haven't been reading ARCHIE, I'm willing to trust her on that one), especially as she summarized nicely how it makes me feel, in her final sentence, that I was emboldened to.. well, embolden. Personally, I generally don't bother to label my rants as such, but just assume that people would know that if they've read many of my prior posts.

OK.  "Arguing" might be the wrong word, but my intent stands. I've learned over time I'm not the best at chat board communication, but I'm sure the immediacy coupled with my dry, wry delivery would win you over in real life.  [M]Messageboardcrushgremlin[/M]

I'll make time to read these two comics again Monday or Tuesday with a particularly discerning eye.



Irishmoxie would still be steadfast in her opposition of my seemingly neverending political rants, irl btw.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 08:22:27 PM

Quote from: steveinthecity on November 19, 2016, 07:28:49 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 12:13:52 PM

Quote from: steveinthecity on November 19, 2016, 04:42:57 AM
Adam Hughes art doesn't seem a big plus here btw.

I'm not sure in what sense you mean that, but after the long wait since the B&V reboot was first hyped, Hughes can't bedazzle the way he did years ago. It's still good art relative to the median of the industry in the broader sense, but it's not ranking high relative to Hughes' own oeuvre. The coloring here certainly doesn't help much.

What you stated was pretty much what I meant.  I don't collect posters, so as I offered in SAGG's now defunct thread of whether Art or Story is more important to a comic, I'm leaning towards story in this instance.  I like that Hughes makes Ethel somewhat homely and that Hot Dog smokes, but beyond that, the art does nothing  for me.  Not a plus by my measure. Being "median" doesn't resonate with me here.

I don't think it's median. I said it's good relative to the median for the industry. I think the artwork in ARCHIE is median or below median; none of the artists who've drawn that book have impressed me in the slightest. The artwork in B&V is above that, but it's not good art compared to Adam Hughes' other work. It's only "not good" relative to my high level of expectations for a B&V comic book drawn by Adam Hughes.

When you consider what he could be getting paid for his art by other publishers, he's got to be the biggest financial drain on ACP's resources of any of the artists working on the New Riverdale titles so far, who are all relative newcomers to the industry compared to Hughes, and IMO the costs to the company aren't worth the results. I think the relative sales on the B&V title bear that out as well.

B&V isn't selling well?

Quote from: irishmoxie on November 21, 2016, 09:29:15 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 08:22:27 PM
When you consider what he could be getting paid for his art by other publishers, he's got to be the biggest financial drain on ACP's resources of any of the artists working on the New Riverdale titles so far, who are all relative newcomers to the industry compared to Hughes, and IMO the costs to the company aren't worth the results. I think the relative sales on the B&V title bear that out as well.

B&V isn't selling well?

Compared to ARCHIE, no. I think they expected the first issue of B&V to do nearly as well (or dare they hope, better) than ARCHIE #1, and it fell far short of expectations. It seems like there are a bunch of people reading ARCHIE but not bothering with JUGHEAD or B&V or JOSIE. The quick reduction of REGGIE & ME from ongoing to 5-issue miniseries probably indicates that they've reached a market saturation point. It will be interesting to see what titles are still being published by the end of 2017.

B&V#1 sold 70k compared to Archie #1's 100k+.  I recall Archie #10 being in the 13k range, but haven't seen sales of B&V#2. The numbers seem relatively poor.  The Ramones title was around 18k and one would think that would garner more interest.  The most recent Jughead was in the 8k area fwiw.

I just pray Reggie & Me sells a lot of comics. I can't believe it's only be a five part mini series. That breaks my heart.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 21, 2016, 10:43:46 PM

Quote from: irishmoxie on November 21, 2016, 09:29:15 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 08:22:27 PM
When you consider what he could be getting paid for his art by other publishers, he's got to be the biggest financial drain on ACP's resources of any of the artists working on the New Riverdale titles so far, who are all relative newcomers to the industry compared to Hughes, and IMO the costs to the company aren't worth the results. I think the relative sales on the B&V title bear that out as well.

B&V isn't selling well?

Compared to ARCHIE, no. I think they expected the first issue of B&V to do nearly as well (or dare they hope, better) than ARCHIE #1, and it fell far short of expectations. It seems like there are a bunch of people reading ARCHIE but not bothering with JUGHEAD or B&V or JOSIE. The quick reduction of REGGIE & ME from ongoing to 5-issue miniseries probably indicates that they've reached a market saturation point. It will be interesting to see what titles are still being published by the end of 2017.

What if ACP doesn't succeed on this, I wonder? Could this be the end of it? 

Quote from: SAGG on November 22, 2016, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 21, 2016, 10:43:46 PM

Quote from: irishmoxie on November 21, 2016, 09:29:15 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 08:22:27 PM
When you consider what he could be getting paid for his art by other publishers, he's got to be the biggest financial drain on ACP's resources of any of the artists working on the New Riverdale titles so far, who are all relative newcomers to the industry compared to Hughes, and IMO the costs to the company aren't worth the results. I think the relative sales on the B&V title bear that out as well.

B&V isn't selling well?

Compared to ARCHIE, no. I think they expected the first issue of B&V to do nearly as well (or dare they hope, better) than ARCHIE #1, and it fell far short of expectations. It seems like there are a bunch of people reading ARCHIE but not bothering with JUGHEAD or B&V or JOSIE. The quick reduction of REGGIE & ME from ongoing to 5-issue miniseries probably indicates that they've reached a market saturation point. It will be interesting to see what titles are still being published by the end of 2017.

What if ACP doesn't succeed on this, I wonder? Could this be the end of it? 

Well, there's RIVERDALE, so it remains to be seen how that does. My guess would be that regardless of whether the series and the comic book based on it does well or not, it's not going to affect sales of the New Riverdale comics one way or another. "Could this be the end of it?"...  Well, that depends on what "it" is in your query. New Riverdale comics will end eventually, one way or the other... it's just a question of how long.

The end of NR floppy comics wouldn't seem to affect sales of the digests and Super Specials reprinting classic Archie, either. They could certainly enhance those sales, making those titles appeal more to the older readers by offering more pages of new material in each issue. My guess would be that the Super Specials are purchased by a greater percentage of older readers than the digests, and that's where they should start, by making those magazine collections more attractive to older readers purchasing them for themselves by adding a new lead story (20 pages, +/-) in each of the quarterly issues. That would be by Dan Parent, since he's the sole classic Archie creator left.

Digests are a good value for money. As I've mentioned before where I shop I can get 3 digest for $10. Canadian. That is cheaper than subscribing. That's why I personally don't mind when content gets reprinted in digest form. Not just classic Archie, but the 75th Anniversary content. A puzzle to myself is why they don't reprint entire issues in digest form. If a digest came on the market & the cover said 'Pep Comics #100 to 110' (for example), you could mark it as 'sold'. I think reprinting entire issues of classic Sabrina would be a good seller.

Quote from: Ottawagrant on November 22, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Digests are a good value for money. As I've mentioned before where I shop I can get 3 digest for $10. Canadian. That is cheaper than subscribing. That's why I personally don't mind when content gets reprinted in digest form. Not just classic Archie, but the 75th Anniversary content. A puzzle to myself is why they don't reprint entire issues in digest form. If a digest came on the market & the cover said 'Pep Comics #100 to 110' (for example), you could mark it as 'sold'. I think reprinting entire issues of classic Sabrina would be a good seller.

I think you have to consider that the main reader demographic for Archie digests is 8-12 year-old girls. Generally it's a point-of-purchase item for a parent on a shopping trip. While you and I and older readers would certainly love to see whole runs of some of the older classic titles reprinted, that's going to be meaningless to their main reader demographic. This also explains why the bulk of the stories reprinted in the digests are the more recent ones from the last couple of decades.

Quote from: Ottawagrant on November 22, 2016, 08:08:45 PM
Digests are a good value for money. As I've mentioned before where I shop I can get 3 digest for $10. Canadian. That is cheaper than subscribing. That's why I personally don't mind when content gets reprinted in digest form. Not just classic Archie, but the 75th Anniversary content. A puzzle to myself is why they don't reprint entire issues in digest form. If a digest came on the market & the cover said 'Pep Comics #100 to 110' (for example), you could mark it as 'sold'. I think reprinting entire issues of classic Sabrina would be a good seller.

At 3/$10 one would wonder what their net profit margin is, or the incentive as the digests apparently make little (if any) revenue from outside advertising.  To previously echo previous thoughts, I don't believe ACP ever really archived stories based on title or subject until more recent years when editors where being called upon to provide such material.


I'll also harken back to a previous comment that offering stories perceived to be "old" would probably generate less interest at the checkout stand. Ignorance is bliss.

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 22, 2016, 04:21:06 PM

Quote from: SAGG on November 22, 2016, 02:31:14 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 21, 2016, 10:43:46 PM

Quote from: irishmoxie on November 21, 2016, 09:29:15 PM

Quote from: DeCarlo Rules on November 19, 2016, 08:22:27 PM
When you consider what he could be getting paid for his art by other publishers, he's got to be the biggest financial drain on ACP's resources of any of the artists working on the New Riverdale titles so far, who are all relative newcomers to the industry compared to Hughes, and IMO the costs to the company aren't worth the results. I think the relative sales on the B&V title bear that out as well.

B&V isn't selling well?

Compared to ARCHIE, no. I think they expected the first issue of B&V to do nearly as well (or dare they hope, better) than ARCHIE #1, and it fell far short of expectations. It seems like there are a bunch of people reading ARCHIE but not bothering with JUGHEAD or B&V or JOSIE. The quick reduction of REGGIE & ME from ongoing to 5-issue miniseries probably indicates that they've reached a market saturation point. It will be interesting to see what titles are still being published by the end of 2017.

What if ACP doesn't succeed on this, I wonder? Could this be the end of it? 

Well, there's RIVERDALE, so it remains to be seen how that does. My guess would be that regardless of whether the series and the comic book based on it does well or not, it's not going to affect sales of the New Riverdale comics one way or another. "Could this be the end of it?"...  Well, that depends on what "it" is in your query. New Riverdale comics will end eventually, one way or the other... it's just a question of how long.

The end of NR floppy comics wouldn't seem to affect sales of the digests and Super Specials reprinting classic Archie, either. They could certainly enhance those sales, making those titles appeal more to the older readers by offering more pages of new material in each issue. My guess would be that the Super Specials are purchased by a greater percentage of older readers than the digests, and that's where they should start, by making those magazine collections more attractive to older readers purchasing them for themselves by adding a new lead story (20 pages, +/-) in each of the quarterly issues. That would be by Dan Parent, since he's the sole classic Archie creator left.

Bolling's no longer there? Man...