STANDARD ATTRITION

Willow · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:28 pm Post subject: Virgin Comics goes belly-up

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/080826-VirginCLoses.html

They'll continue licensing properties for film and TV, but their comics publishing wing has been shut down. I'm pretty bummed about this--I had high hopes for Virgin. Two of my good friends, Saurav Mohapatra and Josh Dysart, were writing ongoing projects for them. I even wrote the forward for one of their DEVI TPBs. I was hoping they could draw in a new audience...India is one of the world's cultural superpowers, and the potential for cross-pollination in the west was exciting.

Why did Virgin go under? What didn't work? I have my own opinions but I'd like to hear yours first.

dina · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:54 pm Post subject:

To be honest, I never read any of Virgin's comics. When the first launched, I remember seeing them at a con (can't remember which), and all of the previews were like "John Woo presents', and "Nicholas Cage comic book x", and it just smacked way too much of product placement/big name-ism rather than content.

Maybe the comics were good, I don't know. But they certainly didn't pull me in to want to find out.
_________________
www.dinareadscomics.com
I lied. It's not back.

TimCallahan · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject:

I was talking to Ron Marz earlier in the summer, and he's been doing some writing and editing for Virgin. He was really enthusiastic about the company, but when I said, "I don't know if the comics are any good, because I never see them in shops, or read many reviews of them anywhere," he said that the distribution was one of the biggest problems. He also hooked me up with review copies to help promote the line, and I really liked the revamped Ramayan book.

But he also said that they were targeting the vast market in India, but they needed to find some way to deliver the comics more cheaply. A three or four dollar comic wasn't going to reach the masses.

So I guess they never did figure out how to deliver their content.

It didn't help that the line was weakened by a weirdly mixed message--e.g. "Our books are cool sci-fi retellings of ancient myths, plus random Hollywood concepts with actor's names plastered on the front, and, oh yeah, Dan Dare!" Not really a strong identity for a publisher trying to get attention.

joe.distort · Moderator Joined: 07 May 2008 Posts: 3464 Location: phx!

Blacaucasian · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:35 pm Post subject:

Gamekeeper, Dan Dare, and Dock Walloper were really awesome.

I think the problem was they tried to start a new imprint in 2008.

Cynicism aside, the real problem, proven over and over again, is that the general comic fan will not buy new concepts and things. They constantly bitch about what happens when exsisting concepts are changed, so new concepts? Forget about it.

I'm not sure what Virgin's expectations were versus their sales, but unfortunately the celebrity names they were floating out there where not neccessarily the celebrity names that are going to draw the mainstream comic fan to the books. The people who would be drawn to these books (and it's not even a automatic given) need COMIC superstars (Bendis, Johns, Morrisson, Millar). It's an unfortunate truth today that seems to be proven over and over again.
_________________
"All morons hate it when you call them a moron." - J.D.Salinger

http://www.myspace.com/jbvdlp

NathanBethell · Posted: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject:

TimCallahan · Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:38 am Post subject:

It's not that they had three different directions, it's that those three different directions seemed to be promoted equally and there was absolutely no relationship between them.

Successful companies have an identity, What was Virgin's identity?

NathanBethell · Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:57 am Post subject:

But what would you say IDW's identity is, for instance? They seem as multi-pronged as Virgin, with licensed properties, creator-owned horror comics, and golden-age reprints.

Dean Trippe · Joined: 18 Aug 2008 Posts: 27 Location: Nashville, TN

I'm not really surprised to hear this. New publishers tend to start with expansive lines and attempt to create some kinda comics cache on their branding...but it just doesn't work. You've gotta create a book. Make that book a brick. Then make another. And keep going like that. That's the only way to build a successful comics company. You can't just jump in with a bunch of money and expect to take a bite out of a market this hard to make money in anyway. This has happened over and over again and will keep happening.
_________________
Dean Trippe | Butterfly | Project Rooftop | LiveJournal

Willow · Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:02 am Post subject:

I agree with Blacaucasian re: putting the wrong celebrities' names on the books. I'm not sure the average JLA consumer is all that interested in Deepak Chopra. Putting Josh Dysart's name in bold instead of his might have helped.

To be fair, it would have been really hard to make characters that both Americans and Indians could strongly identify with. Especially since some of those characters were Hindu gods who are still worshiped by members of the world's 3rd largest religion. THAT is a tough cat to skin.

Thacher · Joined: 08 Jul 2008 Posts: 485 Location: Yellow Springs, OH

Blacaucasian · Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:18 am Post subject:

TimCallahan · Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject:

Yeah, I think IDW had a pretty strong identity as the place for good tv/movie license comics. Then they started branching out more, and I think it's a problem that they don't have a strong identity anymore, actually.

A lot of their books are awesome, though.

ashwin · Joined: 05 May 2008 Posts: 27

TimCallahan · Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:10 am Post subject:

What part's not true?