# Comics  > Image Comics >  Is "Image" dead?

## MagSeven

Besides Savage Dragon and Spawn, There are no original creator books (an asterisk to Spawn..). The OG creators did crossovers and played in each other's sandboxes for better or worse. Dragon would pop up in Spawn or Shadowhawk, They'd crossover with Youngblood...ect.   For a bit Image had a shared universe. I think other than Spawn or Savage Dragon, none of the current books have any relation whatsoever to each other. Not a bad thing by any means. But I remember when Image firstW came out and I was but a wee lad, Image was a preferable alternative to Marvel and DC (it still is) but it sort of operated in a shared universe. ith the end of Invincible, it seems like there won't be too many more opportunities for shared continuity.  I guess what I'm asking is that if anyone else will miss all the semi-shared universe books or at least the aspect of them. Once Image was mostly shared universe with a few outliers and now it's all unique projects with Dragon and Spawn being the exceptions (and Dragon is definitely in it's own universe when it wants to be). 

Either way, I love and support most of what Image currently publishes. Brilliant shit every month no matter what your interests are. Just want to see if anyone has a fondness for the "good old days".

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Besides Savage Dragon and Spawn, There are no original creator books (an asterisk to Spawn..). The OG creators did crossovers and played in each other's sandboxes for better or worse. Dragon would pop up in Spawn or Shadowhawk, They'd crossover with Youngblood...ect.   For a bit Image had a shared universe. I think other than Spawn or Savage Dragon, none of the current books have any relation whatsoever to each other. Not a bad thing by any means. But I remember when Image firstW came out and I was but a wee lad, Image was a preferable alternative to Marvel and DC (it still is) but it sort of operated in a shared universe. ith the end of Invincible, it seems like there won't be too many more opportunities for shared continuity.  I guess what I'm asking is that if anyone else will miss all the semi-shared universe books or at least the aspect of them. Once Image was mostly shared universe with a few outliers and now it's all unique projects with Dragon and Spawn being the exceptions (and Dragon is definitely in it's own universe when it wants to be). 
> 
> Either way, I love and support most of what Image currently publishes. Brilliant shit every month no matter what your interests are. Just want to see if anyone has a fondness for the "good old days".


Cyber Force and Youngblood are also currently being published. As well as various other Artifact-verse books from Top Cow.

But officially, the shared Image superhero universe ended way back in the 90s anyway with Shattered Image. After that its just basically been something which is only acknowledged if the individual creators want to make use of it - ie. Larsen and Kirkman on occasion.

I really dont think this has had any meaninful impact on any of the books. Most of the crossovers were just fluff anyway. The more weighty stuff came from the individual imprints shared continuity imo. ie. Tow Cows Artifact books, Wildstorm shared universe, etc.

----------


## DanMad1977

I like Image best when its NOT a shared universe, no crossover. Let the creators do their thing. We got enough shared universes and their problems with Marvel and DC...

I say NO to the good old days. I like it how it is today.

----------


## cc008

> I like Image best when its NOT a shared universe, no crossover. Let the creators do their thing. We got enough shared universes and their problems with Marvel and DC...
> 
> I say NO to the good old days. I like it how it is today.


Me too. I love how the driving force behind Image is creator owned characters in creator owned stories. If one writer wants to pool some of their characters into a universe, go for it. But I love what Image is now.

----------


## FluffySheep

> I like Image best when its NOT a shared universe, no crossover. Let the creators do their thing. We got enough shared universes and their problems with Marvel and DC...
> 
> I say NO to the good old days. I like it how it is today.


I feel the same way. I much prefer my Image stories to be "linear" and not crossing over into other books.

----------


## MajorHoy

Some of those early _Image_ comic books were really . . . *bad*.
Great artwork, but the writing could often be somewhat dreadful.

----------


## PyroTwilight

I've loved when they did crossovers of a sort.

REALLY LOVED the Invincible War with the Image heroes uniting to take down the evil doppelgangers of Invincible. or when Dynamo 5 had Supreme and Omniman teamup with Captain Dynamo in a flashback. 

The lack of a real shared universe has made it hard to like too many of the books though, but in fairness yeah Image isn't and doesn't really NEED a shared universe. 

Plus as a publisher they're clearly still very viable and a great place to get your book published.

----------


## Paulie Blade

> Some of those early _Image_ comic books were really . . . *bad*.
> Great artwork, but the writing could often be somewhat dreadful.


Could you say which books you mean specifically? Just today I decided I would binge read old Wildcats, since I grew up reading those and loved them at the time. My current view, though, could be clouded by the nostalgia goggles.

----------


## MajorHoy

> Could you say which books you mean specifically? Just today I decided I would binge read old Wildcats, since I grew up reading those and loved them at the time. My current view, though, could be clouded by the nostalgia goggles.


The Liefeld books are probably the biggest offenders, with all the multiple teams he launched in a short period of time. Others seemed to also be more of "lets create all these kewl-looking characters" books that didn't put in nearly enough thought to the *reasons* for the groups/characters to even exist in the first place in those initial issues.
(Can't recall specific titles off-hand; they all start blurring together in my memories, and the "frequency" of their publication really made it hard to remember some as well.)

----------


## JQP

> The Liefeld books are probably the biggest offenders, with all the multiple teams he launched in a short period of time. Others seemed to also be more of "lets create all these kewl-looking characters" books that didn't put in nearly enough thought to the *reasons* for the groups/characters to even exist in the first place in those initial issues.
> (Can't recall specific titles off-hand; they all start blurring together in my memories, and the "frequency" of their publication really made it hard to remember some as well.)


True, but Image was playing catchup, not creating a universe organically over decades. _And_ it all had to feel fresh and original in an already crowded market. So you kinda have to grade on a curve. Imagine what Marvel or DC would do if they had to start all over from scratch with a 5 year plan or whatever. Yes, New Universe, I'm looking at you...

----------


## Adset

i'm in the group that preferred when individual studios developed their own shared universes, not necessarily one united image-verse. even though certain image characters obviously crossed over into different core books, when i think of classic "image" i tend to think a bit farther into the 90s with the wildstorm universe, extreme universe, top cow universe, etc etc.

----------


## iblogalot

> But officially, the shared Image superhero universe ended way back in the 90s anyway with Shattered Image.


Anyone remember when they tried to bring it back in 2009 with IMAGE UNITED? The planned 6-issue miniseries, where they managed to get issues 1 and 2 done in two months, and then #3 came out eight months after #2, and that was a wrap?

It was certainly an ambitious project, with Robert Kirkman writing a story featuring the main characters of 6 of the original Image founders, minus Jim Lee, but the plan to have each creator draw their own characters in each book was doomed to failure. They should have just got some other dependable artist to draw the whole series and maybe have each creator draw a cover, and some pin-ups. 

Personally, as someone who was there from the start, I do miss the shared Image Universe. I liked the little details like Rob Liefeld's character Chapel being the man who killed Todd McFarland's Al Simmons, which lead to Al becoming Spawn, and Youngblood showing up in the last issue of the original WildC.A.T.S. series, Savage Dragon being sent to New York to track down ShadowHawk, etc. At the time it genuinely felt like we were getting in on the ground floor of a the Next Marvel Comics. 

I still wish there was a sort of Central Image Universe like that, where creators could participate with their titles _if they wanted to_, while also publishing separate unconnected titles like Walking Dead and Astro City that were just their own thing.

----------


## Rod G

It would seem Image has indeed become a shadow of its former self as stated.

Spawn and Savage Dragon are still around.

Youngblood has been revived, but hardly the powerhouse it was in its heyday.

Not sure about the others.

----------


## Paulie Blade

> Anyone remember when they tried to bring it back in 2009 with IMAGE UNITED? The planned 6-issue miniseries, where they managed to get issues 1 and 2 done in two months, and then #3 came out eight months after #2, and that was a wrap?
> 
> It was certainly an ambitious project, with Robert Kirkman writing a story featuring the main characters of 6 of the original Image founders, minus Jim Lee, but the plan to have each creator draw their own characters in each book was doomed to failure. They should have just got some other dependable artist to draw the whole series and maybe have each creator draw a cover, and some pin-ups. 
> 
> Personally, as someone who was there from the start, I do miss the shared Image Universe. I liked the little details like Rob Liefeld's character Chapel being the man who killed Todd McFarland's Al Simmons, which lead to Al becoming Spawn, and Youngblood showing up in the last issue of the original WildC.A.T.S. series, Savage Dragon being sent to New York to track down ShadowHawk, etc. At the time it genuinely felt like we were getting in on the ground floor of a the Next Marvel Comics. 
> 
> I still wish there was a sort of Central Image Universe like that, where creators could participate with their titles _if they wanted to_, while also publishing separate unconnected titles like Walking Dead and Astro City that were just their own thing.


On one hand I agree, it sounds tempting and I recall the Spawn/Chapel and WildC.A.T.s/Youngblood bits fondly, but it can cause problems regarding the creator-owned philosophy of Image. If, for instance, Grifter (of WildC.A.T.s) had been set as Al's killer (instead of Chapel), he would have never been able to mentioned again once Jim Lee left for DC and took his properties with him. That being said, I'm not sure if Chapel has ever been mentioned either ever since that single appearance. So, yeah, perhaps making single, minor visits to other books sounds like a safer idea compared to building an entire universe around creator-owned characters.

----------


## DanMad1977

The stuff at Image today is not comparable to the older stuff anymore. Its so much better today. More thought is given into the storys and the characters. It has real substance and will stand the test of time. I cant say that for 90% of the older books. I tried to read some lately, but just coudlnt get through most of the first issues, except Spawn and Savage Dragon...

----------


## Dr. Skeleton

Yeah, I miss the old days too when it's superhero universe were the dominant force.  Then some creators started leaving, especially Jim Lee and Wildstorm that left a large gaping hole.  I also found out a few years ago that the Savage Dragon and supporting cast age normally which made it difficult for crossovers IMO for those creators who don't want their characters aging normally and eventually dying.  The original Dragon has died for those who don't know.  Spawn and characters have aged and died too now that Cyan is a grown woman.  Ugh.  I think Cyberforce now reside in an alternate universe now?  Yeah, I did love it when they crossover and shared a universe to some extent.  Not really fond of the Image titles outside of the superhero world with the exceptions of Walking Dead, Bitch Planet, etc.  I'd love to see the Image superhero universe return in a big way at some point.

----------


## sven

> Yeah, I miss the old days too when it's superhero universe were the dominant force.  Then some creators started leaving, especially Jim Lee and Wildstorm that left a large gaping hole.  I also found out a few years ago that the Savage Dragon and supporting cast age normally which made it difficult for crossovers IMO for those creators who don't want their characters aging normally and eventually dying.  The original Dragon has died for those who don't know.  Spawn and characters have aged and died too now that Cyan is a grown woman.  Ugh.  I think Cyberforce now reside in an alternate universe now?  Yeah, I did love it when they crossover and shared a universe to some extent.  Not really fond of the Image titles outside of the superhero world with the exceptions of Walking Dead, Bitch Planet, etc.  I'd love to see the Image superhero universe return in a big way at some point.


Old Image was garbage. I don't miss it at all.

----------


## seismic-2

I did not buy Image comics in the 1990s.  That's when I was a fan of Vertigo's offerings, where what was "shared" wasn't an actual universe but more nearly an overall atmosphere and a sense of unbounded imagination.  That is the status of Image now, and those are in fact the main comics I follow.

----------


## Adset

> Anyone remember when they tried to bring it back in 2009 with IMAGE UNITED? The planned 6-issue miniseries, where they managed to get issues 1 and 2 done in two months, and then #3 came out eight months after #2, and that was a wrap?
> 
> It was certainly an ambitious project, with Robert Kirkman writing a story featuring the main characters of 6 of the original Image founders, minus Jim Lee, but the plan to have each creator draw their own characters in each book was doomed to failure. They should have just got some other dependable artist to draw the whole series and maybe have each creator draw a cover, and some pin-ups.


honestly i'm surprised they even got 3 issues out. i never understood why each founder didn't just draw an individual issue.

----------


## iblogalot

> On one hand I agree, it sounds tempting and I recall the Spawn/Chapel and WildC.A.T.s/Youngblood bits fondly, but it can cause problems regarding the creator-owned philosophy of Image. If, for instance, Grifter (of WildC.A.T.s) had been set as Al's killer (instead of Chapel), he would have never been able to mentioned again once Jim Lee left for DC and took his properties with him. That being said, I'm not sure if Chapel has ever been mentioned either ever since that single appearance.


Yes, that is what essentially happened with Spawn after Rob left the company. Since Todd could no longer use Chapel, Todd introduced a new character, Jessica Priest, who appeared in the live-action movie and then was introduced in the comic as the real killer of Al Simmons. With the previous history being explained as a result of Spawn's then-fragmented memories of his past life, due to the Devil deliberately messing with him. And then Chapel was just never mentioned or referred to again (I do recall back when Rob first returned to publish Youngblood at Image again someone asked them at a comicon panel if Rob's returned meant that Chapel was back to being Spawn's killer, but Rob and Todd just laughed it off and didn't reply). 

Even early on there were other glitches in the shared Universe. Erik Larsen's character Super-Patriot was revealed to have served on a super-team back in WWII alongside Rob Liefeld's characters Glory and Die-Hard, and was also an ally of Supreme at the time, and it was pointed out to Erik that whenever the character appeared in Rob's books he was often shown to be flying, which wasn't one of Super-Patriot's powers. Erik acknowledged that was an error on those other artists part and then explained it away in a letter column by saying Super-Patriot temporarily experimented with a special serum or pill back then that gave him the ability to fly, but then stopped doing that after the war because of bad side-effects. 

So, yeah, mistake could and did happen, but to me a few glitches like that were worth it. Shoot, it happens in corporately-owned shared universes too, like Marvel and DC. Character's histories change and get retconned, without thinking of how that effects the histories of other characters, and sometimes there are contradictions in different titles. I mean, going back to the Chapel/Spawn connection, I could compare that to the changes in Batman's history. Whether or not it was Joe Chill who killed the Waynes, including whether it was just a simple random mugging gone wrong, or actually a professional assassination for some reason, and whether or not Batman ever caught or confronted Chill has been retconned several times. I don't even know what the current continuity is, but in the end it doesn't really matter. The basics are that his parents murder when he was a young boy is what inspired Bruce Wayne to train to eventually become Batman. Just like for Spawn it's that he was murdered and went to Hell, where he made a deal with a Devil to return.

----------


## iblogalot

> honestly i'm surprised they even got 3 issues out. i never understood why each founder didn't just draw an individual issue.


Even if they tried that, it would have likely lead to delays, as most of them had trouble with deadlines, even for just one issue. Remember they couldn't even get the single "Image Comics 10th Anniversary" book finished on time (I think it actually came out on the 14th anniversary of Image), and that was just a short story by each of the remaining founders. That's why I think some other artist, who could focus just on that series, would have been a better bet.

----------


## Dr. Skeleton

> Old Image was garbage. I don't miss it at all.


 :Mad: 

Your POV.  The things Marvel and DC's been putting out lately left me really cold.

----------


## numberthirty

> Old Image was garbage. I don't miss it at all.


For the most part, agreed.

It's no great loss that the current company replaced that company.

----------


## Cmbmool

> I've loved when they did crossovers of a sort.
> 
> REALLY LOVED the Invincible War with the Image heroes uniting to take down the evil doppelgangers of Invincible. or when Dynamo 5 had Supreme and Omniman teamup with Captain Dynamo in a flashback. 
> 
> The lack of a real shared universe has made it hard to like too many of the books though, but in fairness yeah Image isn't and doesn't really NEED a shared universe. 
> 
> Plus as a publisher they're clearly still very viable and a great place to get your book published.


I enjoy crossover too even flashbacks ones. I mean I would have love to see Savage Dragons kids and Grandkids make cameo in Invincibles world or vice versa.

----------


## Tayne Japal

Old Image is my Golden Age. Yeah, I got into comics with early 90s X-Men, but the art of Image's titles drew me towards them. Wildstorm and Top Cow will always have a special place in my collection. I only wish the entire Wildstorm catalog was available on digital.

----------


## MajorHoy

> . . . Yeah, I got into comics with early 90s X-Men, but the art of Image's titles drew me towards them...


"Image" was truly an appropriate name for the company; art was a main selling point.
But as to actual _writing_ skills in the early days, . . .

----------


## dimo1

> Old Image is my Golden Age. Yeah, I got into comics with early 90s X-Men, but the art of Image's titles drew me towards them. Wildstorm and Top Cow will always have a special place in my collection. I only wish the entire Wildstorm catalog was available on digital.


Amen to that.
Those were the times, in your face art, all founders were competing, current Image is now nothing much than a melting pot of often c or d list stories and art.
On top of that, I have stopped buying any Image books since the poor decision to get overly political.

----------


## seismic-2

> current Image is now nothing much than a melting pot of often c or d list stories and art.


That's probably why Image comics received so many Eisner nominations this year.  Those awards committees are really heavily into c- and d-list stories and art!




> On top of that, I have stopped buying any Image books


And yet you know so much about the quality of their current offerings.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Old Image is my Golden Age.


I think that is an apt comparison as both were created with a lot of enthusiasm by people who didn't necessarily know what they were doing. Both were exiting times and both produced work that was at times brilliant and at times dreck. I do love the energy of both periods but I acknowledge that neither period produced uniform greatness. And, like the Golden Age, there were a few survivors and a lot of books which fell by the wayside. 

It's fair to say our books are better now--but a lot of that initial energy isn't as easy to find as it once was.

----------


## Smoking Gun

> I did not buy Image comics in the 1990s.  That's when I was a fan of Vertigo's offerings, where what was "shared" wasn't an actual universe but more nearly an overall atmosphere and a sense of unbounded imagination.  That is the status of Image now, and those are in fact the main comics I follow.


I believe you mean Valiant not Vertigo.

One of the things I enjoy most about Image is that there are minimal crossovers. The crossovers from the big 2 can get convoluted and often force story lines in the individual titles. With Image having titles that exist independently the continuity of those titles are never altered by crossover events. Plus I feel that crossovers work in the world of superheroes, but for titles that are not superheroes crossovers and events would feel out of place.

----------


## DebkoX

Far from it. The 'hype' is dying, but Image iMO publishes the best content.

----------


## seismic-2

> I believe you mean Valiant not Vertigo.


No, I meant Vertigo (which started in 1993).  Every title in the Vertigo imprint was of course set its own world, but if you were a fan of some of them you were probably a fan of a lot of them, because they shared sort of a mission to be weird, unrestrained, complex, and intriguing.  Image comics nowadays are a lot like that, and it's good for fans of that kind of books to have a publisher that attracts creative talent who want to produce stories like that.  Long may it continue!

----------


## John Keyt

I used to have mostly Marvel titles on my pull list and only a few Image titles but now the majority  is  Image  with 1 Marvel title .  Never read must of the older Image . But rather enjoying the current titles .

----------


## Smoking Gun

> No, I meant Vertigo (which started in 1993).  Every title in the Vertigo imprint was of course set its own world, but if you were a fan of some of them you were probably a fan of a lot of them, because they shared sort of a mission to be weird, unrestrained, complex, and intriguing.  Image comics nowadays are a lot like that, and it's good for fans of that kind of books to have a publisher that attracts creative talent who want to produce stories like that.  Long may it continue!


My apologies. What I have read from Vertigo is also mostly disjointed where each book has its own universe. Which of the Vertigo books shared a universe.

----------


## seismic-2

> My apologies. What I have read from Vertigo is also mostly disjointed where each book has its own universe. Which of the Vertigo books shared a universe.


That was my point - Vertigo comics _didn't_ share a "universe"; instead, they shared an _attitude_, namely a commitment to presenting stories characterized by a general atmosphere of anything-can-happen, weirdness abounds, things can be hard to figure out, so sit back and enjoy the ride.  That's the same attitude (rather than a universe) that's shared by Image creators today, and it's an approach to comics publishing that I continue to appreciate.

----------


## JFP

> That's probably why Image comics received so many Eisner nominations this year.  Those awards committees are really heavily into c- and d-list stories and art!
> 
> 
> And yet you know so much about the quality of their current offerings.


Come on, bro, you're taking his opinion outta context. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with thinking Old Image was great and new Image is garbage. And vice versa. 

Personally, I agree with that poster that the current stuff can't hold a candle to the old stuff. No amount of awards can change my opinion of this.

----------


## cc008

I don't think it's really even fair to compare the old stuff to the new stuff. It's totally different. With the exception of a few self-contained mini-universes among single creators. It's all different.

Not like some of the old titles from Valiant vs Valiant today.

----------


## Murrocko

Outside of Invincible, I've never read any book from the Image-Verse. Really love all the self contained creator owned books they put out though. Saga, Deadly Class, Kill or Be Killed, Sex Criminals are all so good, I'm ok with the shared universe not being a huge priority for the company if it means more books like those.

----------


## Joe

Marvel was back to being good again for a short period of time with the Civil War saga, but now its back to being trash again.

----------


## Joe

> Far from it. The 'hype' is dying, but Image iMO publishes the best content.


Marvel was back to being good again for a short period of time with the Civil War saga, but now its back to being trash again.

----------


## Minerboh

Someone correct me if i am mistaken but Walking Dead is an Image comic and it's a top seller. And quite recently, Millarworld was trasitioned successfully. Why Image should be considered a dead company?

----------


## capuga

> Someone correct me if i am mistaken but Walking Dead is an Image comic and it's a top seller. And quite recently, Millarworld was trasitioned successfully. Why Image should be considered a dead company?


The original poster was referring to a larger shared Image universe that all the various properties and heroes were a part of during the beginning of the company. Now everything is separate and there aren't any Image titles really sharing a company wide universe.

----------


## dimo1

Of course there are a few gems in-between. 
Let‘s be honest, without TWD Image would probably be dead by now.
Back in the day Image titles sold in their hundreds of thousands, even millions.
Today‘s numbers are sometimes lower than 4,000. 
Yes, looks very healthy.

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Of course there are a few gems in-between. 
> Let‘s be honest, without TWD Image would probably be dead by now.
> Back in the day Image titles sold in their hundreds of thousands, even millions.
> Today‘s numbers are sometimes lower than 4,000. 
> Yes, looks very healthy.


Please. TWD is their best selling book but even without it theyd still rank as NA's third biggest publisher. Sales on individual titles are down across the board, not just Image, but theres also way more product pushed out these days. The markets just diversified.

----------


## skyvolt2000

> Of course there are a few gems in-between. 
> Let‘s be honest, without TWD Image would probably be dead by now.
> Back in the day Image titles sold in their hundreds of thousands, even millions.
> Today‘s numbers are sometimes lower than 4,000. 
> Yes, looks very healthy.


I think you are forgetting trades.

And I can tell you folks are reading those trades. I have met plenty of Motor Crush, Wicked & Divine & Saga fans. In fact more of them than certain big two proprieties.

----------


## JFP

> Please. TWD is their best selling book but even without it theyd still rank as NA's third biggest publisher. Sales on individual titles are down across the board, not just Image, but theres also way more product pushed out these days. The markets just diversified.


He did use "probably" be dead by now. He did not say definitely be dead by now. 

He definitely has a point. Back in the day, Image could sell hundreds of thousands, even millions. Today, just selling 4,000 is a blessing for an Image book. When you compare current Image to old Image, no, Image is not healthy. When you compare current Image to other current comic publishers, then, yes, Image is healthy, by today's standards. However, the loss of Walking Dead would be devastating to Image. It's not healthy for a comic company when the loss of one title has a negative impact.

But it just wasn't the sales. It was the stories. 90s Image had this gutsy fun to it I can't find in most Image titles today. Yes, some will say the books were garbage. But they were good garbage.

----------


## capuga

> However, the loss of Walking Dead would be devastating to Image. It's not healthy for a comic company when the loss of one title has a negative impact.


Considering all the Walking Dead money goes pretty much straight into Kirkman's and the other creators' pockets as a creator owned title and not to Image Comics (they take a flat fee regardless of sales), I don't think the loss of the Walking Dead would really impact Image Comics all that much. The fees on the trades are set up a little differently and the Walking Dead sells a lot of trades so there would be some impact there, but by and large, Image Comics does not (and is designed not to) profit from the sales of the comics it publishes.

----------


## JFP

> Considering all the Walking Dead money goes pretty much straight into Kirkman's and the other creators' pockets as a creator owned title and not to Image Comics (they take a flat fee regardless of sales), I don't think the loss of the Walking Dead would really impact Image Comics all that much. The fees on the trades are set up a little differently and the Walking Dead sells a lot of trades so there would be some impact there, but by and large, Image Comics does not (and is designed not to) profit from the sales of the comics it publishes.


I wasn't talking entirely about profit.

It's like this: a guy who owns a building rents to McDonalds and lesser known businesses. The guy doesn't make any money except from renters fees. But if McDonalds leaves, the guy loses money. The loss of McDonalds means fewer customers coming to his building. Even though he only lost revenue from rentals and he still has other renters, the loss of McDonalds means fewer traffic from customers. The customers used to come in for McDonalds. But they also checked out the other businesses. Without McDonalds customers, that means fewer customers for the other businesses. With decreased revenue from the other businesses, they might leave. As a result, the renter looks at the possibility of the other businesses leaving.

With TWD, a customer picks up an issue, likes it, and then thinks, "This is great. Who publishes this comic? Image Comics, huh. I'm gonna check the other Image titles and see if they are as good as TWD."

That's how it works with comic readers. They get into one title then check and see if there are other good titles from the comic publishers. I know many people who got into Image Comics simply thru TWD. Same thing with Invincible. Same thing with Savage Dragon. I used to be into comics but stopped at the end of the 90s. Back in 2005, I got back into comics but it was only the big 2 for a while. Then I saw SD as I was browsing my local store and thought, "I remember this green guy. I used to watch his cartoon. Lemme buy this comic for shits and giggles." From there, I started reading other titles. If there was no SD comic, it's doubtful I woulda bought other Image titles.

So even though Image makes zero profit off TWD, many people have got into Image thru TWD. 

Without a popular title like TWD to draw people to Image Comics, what other title does Image have of equal or greater pulling power?

----------


## Green Knight

I wonder about this from time to time. Did all those characters Liefeld created just fade away into limbo? Because he had a metric ton of them. Two different Youngblood teams (I preferred Team Youngblood, actually, over the main one he worked on), Brigade, and some other team book that I can't remember. Not to mention solo characters like Prophet (Garbage character, really. Generic Liefeld at his worst). I wasn't even sure if Spawn was still being published these days, either. I can't believe Larsen is still plugging away on Savage Dragon. What a cruddy character and title, but he's apparently decided to tie himself creatively to that character for all time.

----------


## numberthirty

> Without a popular title like TWD to draw people to Image Comics, *what other title does Image have of equal or greater pulling power?*


Politely, you are missing the point.

The "Black Monday Murders" thread could probably shed some light onto things. Heck, the "Kill Or Be Killed" thread...

----------


## JFP

> Politely, you are missing the point.
> 
> The "Black Monday Murders" thread could probably shed some light onto things. Heck, the "Kill Or Be Killed" thread...


Those two comics just started. Black Monday has less than 10 issues. KOBK has less than 24. TWD has been around for years and has proven to readers that it can stay on schedule and is most likely to be around for a long time. Neither BMM nor KOBK can say such a thing. 

I'm not talking about the quality of the stories. I'm asking is there an Image Comic that rivals TWD in terms of popularity, longevity, consistently getting issues out on time with no hiatuses (either planned or unplanned), and has at least half the number of issues TWD has?

----------


## numberthirty

> Those two comics just started. Black Monday has less than 10 issues. KOBK has less than 24. TWD has been around for years and has proven to readers that it can stay on schedule and is most likely to be around for a long time. Neither BMM nor KOBK can say such a thing. 
> 
> I'm not talking about the quality of the stories. I'm asking is there an Image Comic that rivals TWD in terms of popularity, longevity, consistently getting issues out on time with no hiatuses (either planned or unplanned), and has at least half the number of issues TWD has?


Again...

Politely, you are still missing the point.

You are framing things in "Standard Operating Procedure: The Big Two" terms. The strength of Image is that it can allow creators to completely ignore that nonsense.

"Can They Say Such A Thing?"...  Not the question.

"Why Should They Ever Have To?"

Now, that's a question worth considering.

----------


## JFP

> Again...
> 
> Politely, you are still missing the point.
> 
> You are framing things in "Standard Operating Procedure: The Big Two" terms. The strength of Image is that it can allow creators to completely ignore that nonsense.
> 
> "Can They Say Such A Thing?"...  Not the question.
> 
> "Why Should They Ever Have To?"
> ...


I thought the point of this thread was old Image compared to current Image. Not creators, per se. 

The quote, which you took outta context, was about this: TWD draws people who generally don't read Image comics to check out other titles from Image. A guy who doesn't read any Image Comics reads TWD, likes it, and thinks, "Hey, this is a good comic. Who publishes it? Image Comics, huh. Maybe I should check out other Image Comics cuz they might be as good as TWD." Same thing happens with a guy who reads Invincible. Same thing happened with me when I read SD.

Comic creators do benefit from the pulling power of TWD to get non-Image readers to read more Image Comics. Image benefits too. I asked, "If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?" and you answered with a couple comics that are a fraction as popular TWD. So you didn't answer my question. That's okay. You're not required to answer my question.

Image Comics and their creators should indeed be worried if TWD decides to leave. That's the problem. They shouldn't be worried about one book leaving. Furthermore, this illustrates the point the other poster made. He pointed out when Image were selling hundreds of thousands or millions of comics, they didn't have to worry about the disappearance of one comic. In that regard, old Image definitely had things better than current Image.

----------


## numberthirty

> *Comic creators do benefit from the pulling power of TWD to get non-Image readers to read more Image Comics*. Image benefits too. I asked, "If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?" and you answered with a couple comics that are a fraction as popular TWD. So you didn't answer my question. That's okay. You're not required to answer my question.
> *
> Image Comics and their creators should indeed be worried if TWD decides to leave. That's the problem. They shouldn't be worried about one book leaving.* Furthermore, this illustrates the point the other poster made.* He pointed out when Image were selling hundreds of thousands or millions of comics, they didn't have to worry about the disappearance of one comic.* In that regard, old Image definitely had things better than current Image.


As for what's in blue, the way Image operates makes it a non-issue. If you want to try to create a scenario where it actually is an issue, your call.

As for what is in green, that is like saying that Merge Records will be in really big trouble after Arcade Fire left the label because at one point bands could sell more records. That's not what actually happened when that band left the label.

----------


## numberthirty

> I asked, *"If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?"* and you answered with a couple comics that are a fraction as popular TWD. So you didn't answer my question. That's okay. You're not required to answer my question.


As for that question, I gave you the correct answer.

What you see as a fraction is actually "Because those titles have an engaged fan base that can support the title(even when no one know when the final arc of *The Black Monday Murders* will be on shelves), the amount of copies that *The Walking Dead* sells is a non-issue."

----------


## icctrombone

> I wonder about this from time to time. Did all those characters Liefeld created just fade away into limbo? Because he had a metric ton of them. Two different Youngblood teams (I preferred Team Youngblood, actually, over the main one he worked on), Brigade, and some other team book that I can't remember. Not to mention solo characters like Prophet (Garbage character, really. Generic Liefeld at his worst). I wasn't even sure if Spawn was still being published these days, either. I can't believe Larsen is still plugging away on Savage Dragon. What a cruddy character and title, but he's apparently decided to tie himself creatively to that character for all time.


Savage Dragon is one of the most unpredictable comics you could buy. That's good thing. In the big 2, you know nothing is really going to happen to their main money makers. Even Rhodey ( War Machine) was brought back from the dead, but in the SD universe, dead is truly dead.

----------


## JFP

> As for that question, I gave you the correct answer.
> 
> What you see as a fraction is actually "Because those titles have an engaged fan base that can support the title(even when no one know when the final arc of *The Black Monday Murders* will be on shelves), the amount of copies that *The Walking Dead* sells is a non-issue."


Dude, I asked, "If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?"

You named Kill or Be Killed and Black Monday Murders.

TWD sold 73,978 units in April.
KOBK sold 16,240 units in April.
BMM sold 0 units in April.

TWD = 77,407 units sold in Feb.
KOBK = 16,584 units sold in Feb.
BMM = 12,568 units sold in Feb.

In both months, KOBK and BMM didn't sell 1/3rd as many comics combined as TWD.

Furthermore, I've been talking about if this has been good for IMAGE COMICS. I'm not talking about what the creators think. I only care about Image Comics in this discussion. Image Comics. That's all. Quit talking about creators opinion because that's not what I'm asking. 

TWD has the power to pull non-Image readers into reading other Image Comics. I said no other comic has this power. Yet you still insist that these two comics that sell less than 1/3rd combined as TWD have the power to fill TWD's shoes in terms of reader popularity among Image Comics. How does that work? Question answered: it doesn't. 2 comics with small and engaged fanbases do not have the power to fill the shoes of a comic title known to even non-comic book readers.

----------


## icctrombone

Also, I think Image is essentially a publishing house and doesn't aspire to be a shared universe anymore. It has evolved from its beginnings mainly because it didn't have one guiding voice. Each of the original 7 could do what they wanted and that killed any chance of a shared universe being a permanent thing.

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Dude, I asked, "If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?"
> 
> You named Kill or Be Killed and Black Monday Murders.
> 
> TWD sold 73,978 units in April.
> KOBK sold 16,240 units in April.
> BMM sold 0 units in April.
> 
> TWD = 77,407 units sold in Feb.
> ...


There is absolutly no way of knowing the number of readers that crossover from TWD to other Image books and vice verca. This is entirely speculation on your part.

----------


## JFP

> There is absolutly no way of knowing the number of readers that crossover from TWD to other Image books and vice verca. This is entirely speculation on your part.


Where in this thread have I stated there is a way of knowing the number of readers that crossover from TWD? Go ahead. Find it. I'll wait here.

While this fool who puts words in my mouth tries to make himself look stupid, I'll reiterate my point: The leadership at Image are extremely uncomfortable with the idea of TWD cancelling. During the days of old Image, the cancellation of one book didn't make them uncomfortable. Therefore, current Image is not in a healthy position compared to old Image.

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Where in this thread have I stated there is a way of knowing the number of readers that crossover from TWD? Go ahead. Find it. I'll wait here.
> 
> While this fool who puts words in my mouth tries to make himself look stupid, I'll reiterate my point: The leadership at Image are extremely uncomfortable with the idea of TWD cancelling. During the days of old Image, the cancellation of one book didn't make them uncomfortable. Therefore, current Image is not in a healthy position compared to old Image.


"Where did i say i could prove any of the baseless shit im spewing? Huh?"

Youre a fucking joke, dude.

----------


## numberthirty

> Dude, I asked, "If TWD left, is there a comic with equal pulling power?"
> 
> You named Kill or Be Killed and Black Monday Murders.
> 
> TWD sold 73,978 units in April.
> KOBK sold 16,240 units in April.
> BMM sold 0 units in April.
> 
> TWD = 77,407 units sold in Feb.
> ...


Politely, what you are talking about is essentially the equivalent of asking "Why aren't you taking that there are not enough urinals in this convent seriously?".

If there is any real spill over in the numbers(which is what you seem to suggesting happens), it is absolutely not there in the numbers you just cited. 

Since that pull is seemingly non-existent, there being(or not being) a "TWD" title doesn't really matter when it comes to what those titles sell.

Which is before you even seriously consider if the company is in a position that it believes is anything other than where it wants to be. 

You are essentially fretting over the solution to a problem that does not exist.

----------


## numberthirty

> Where in this thread have I stated there is a way of knowing the number of readers that crossover from TWD? Go ahead. Find it. I'll wait here.
> 
> While this fool who puts words in my mouth tries to make himself look stupid, I'll reiterate my point: *The leadership at Image are extremely uncomfortable with the idea of TWD cancelling.* During the days of old Image, the cancellation of one book didn't make them uncomfortable. Therefore, current Image is not in a healthy position compared to old Image.


Source?

..........

----------


## JFP

> As for what's in blue, the way Image operates makes it a non-issue. If you want to try to create a scenario where it actually is an issue, your call.
> 
> As for what is in green, that is like saying that Merge Records will be in really big trouble after Arcade Fire left the label because at one point bands could sell more records. That's not what actually happened when that band left the label.


Source...?



> As for that question, I gave you the correct answer.
> 
> What you see as a fraction is actually "Because those titles have an engaged fan base that can support the title(even when no one know when the final arc of *The Black Monday Murders* will be on shelves), the amount of copies that *The Walking Dead* sells is a non-issue."


Source...?



> Politely, you are missing the point.
> 
> The "Black Monday Murders" thread could probably shed some light onto things. Heck, the "Kill Or Be Killed" thread...


Source...?

----------


## numberthirty

> As for what's in blue, the way Image operates makes it a non-issue. If you want to try to create a scenario where it actually is an issue, your call.
> 
> As for what is in green, that is like saying that Merge Records will be in really big trouble after Arcade Fire left the label because at one point bands could sell more records. That's not what actually happened when that band left the label.





> Source...?


Here is a link to Merge records current website. Since they are currently releasing new music, we have no reason to believe that they are(or have been) in really serious trouble in the time since Arcade Fire left the label.

https://www.mergerecords.com/

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Of course there are a few gems in-between. 
> Lets be honest, without TWD Image would probably be dead by now.
> Back in the day Image titles sold in their hundreds of thousands, even millions.
> Todays numbers are sometimes lower than 4,000. 
> Yes, looks very healthy.


Let's be really honest and admit you have no idea what you're talking about.

----------


## JFP

> Let's be really honest and admit you have no idea what you're talking about.


Erik, I think the guy's main point was to defend old Image vs. current Image. I see nothing wrong with other posters in this thread saying, "Old Image is garbage". So there's nothing wrong with thinking the opposite and saying current Image can't hold a candle to old Image. 

I believe in a lot of weird things: Sasquatch exists, Lochness Monster exists, Elvis is still alive, and the Nazis saved Hitler's brain. However, there's no chance in Hell yer gonna get me to believe current Image can hold a candle to old Image. Yes, there is good stuff. But old Image was a blast. Yes, I admit I'm looking at them thru biased nostalgia goggles. But I don't care. That's how I feel. And I'm not alone.

That poster wasn't trying to trash Image. He was merely defending old Image to current Image by pointing out the sales and quality of the books. Yes, we've seen East of West, Kill or Be Killed, Snotgirl, and the like. It's good. However, when someone says that stuff is better than 90s Image with Gen13, CyberForce, and WildCATS??? Somebody needs their head examined pronto.

----------


## Bor

> Erik, I think the guy's main point was to defend old Image vs. current Image. I see nothing wrong with other posters in this thread saying, "Old Image is garbage". So there's nothing wrong with thinking the opposite and saying current Image can't hold a candle to old Image. 
> 
> I believe in a lot of weird things: Sasquatch exists, Lochness Monster exists, Elvis is still alive, and the Nazis saved Hitler's brain. However, there's no chance in Hell yer gonna get me to believe current Image can hold a candle to old Image. Yes, there is good stuff. But old Image was a blast. Yes, I admit I'm looking at them thru biased nostalgia goggles. But I don't care. That's how I feel. And I'm not alone.
> 
> That poster wasn't trying to trash Image. He was merely defending old Image to current Image by pointing out the sales and quality of the books. Yes, we've seen East of West, Kill or Be Killed, Snotgirl, and the like. It's good. However, when someone says that stuff is better than 90s Image with Gen13, CyberForce, and WildCATS??? Somebody needs their head examined pronto.


Or perhaps they just have a different point of view then you do? I will take most current thing over 90% of 90s Image.

----------


## icctrombone

> Or perhaps they just have a different point of view then you do? I will take most current thing over 90% of 90s Image.


I have to admit I only buy Savage Dragon from Image these days, but currently Image mostly publishes non Superhero books. If you're into Superheroes, the original version might be more beloved.

----------


## Bor

> I have to admit I only buy Savage Dragon from Image these days, but currently Image mostly publishes non Superhero books. If you're into Superheroes, the original version might be more beloved.


Sure and that is completely fine. But there is a difference between that and thinking someone needs their head examined because you think some of the current stuff is better then the stuff from the 90s. 

And comparing sales is pretty silly considering the speculate boom in the 90s too. If that stuff really still is as popular as back then why is it you can literaly find 10-15 copies of the same no. 1 book from back then in a most stores?

----------


## dimo1

> Let's be really honest and admit you have no idea what you're talking about.


True, I have no idea.
I can only see that todays interest in comics is low, dramatically low given the spotlight they receive from movies and T.V. shows.
Comparing this with the excitement of Image at the beginning I cant really see where the positive aspects lie, but, as stated above, Im just a reader and have no insight whatsoever.

Another confession, yes, Im horribly nostalgic looking back to the beginning days, and surely enough, quite a lot of what came out was not deep, but it really was so full of energy and fun, something I clearly find lacking in todays comics. 
And Im not alone, quite a few feel like too much politics and social issues drain comics of their entertainment.

Being European Im more than aware that comics offer all ranges of stories, but for me most popular US comics were a nice way of ecapism, they have lost their innocence. For some its great, and to a certain extend I agree, but nostalgia gets the better of me.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> True, I have no idea.
> I can only see that today‘s interest in comics is low, dramatically low given the spotlight they receive from movies and T.V. shows.
> Comparing this with the excitement of Image at the beginning I can‘t really see where the positive aspects lie, but, as stated above, I‘m just a reader and have no insight whatsoever.
> 
> Another confession, yes, I‘m horribly nostalgic looking back to the beginning days, and surely enough, quite a lot of what came out was not deep, but it really was so full of energy and fun, something I clearly find lacking in today‘s comics. 
> And I‘m not alone, quite a few feel like too much politics and social issues drain comics of their entertainment.
> 
> Being European I‘m more than aware that comics offer all ranges of stories, but for me most popular US comics were a nice way of ecapism, they have lost their innocence. For some it‘s great, and to a certain extend I agree, but nostalgia gets the better of me.


You said, "without TWD Image would probably be dead by now" which makes no sense. Image doesn't profit from the book. Whether it sells two copies or two million copies makes no difference whatsoever to Image's bottom line. 

As for enjoying the books more or less then--that's up to readers. Certainly enthusiasm was high back in 1992 but those books were heavily criticized as well for being shallow and simpleminded. Current books are more critically acclaimed and more substantive. If that's not your cup of tea--well, that's your business. 

I miss a lot of the energy of the early stuff myself. At that point I was reading every Image book--at this point I don't. But we put out considerably more titles as well. So...there's that.

----------


## dimo1

Sure enough, but Image as a publisher needs money, for this you need an audience in proper numbers to run your business profitably. As such as title like TWD works in as much as attracting new readers trying out all the other diverse titles. 
Again, I‘m just an outsider, but the way I see it without such a title Image‘s abilities to publish such an amount would not be given.

----------


## numberthirty

> Sure enough, but Image as a publisher needs money, for this you need an audience in proper numbers to run your business profitable.* As such as title like TWD works in as much as attracting new readers trying out all the other diverse titles.* 
> Again, I‘m just an outsider, but the way I see it without such a title Image‘s abilities to publish such an amount would not be given.


I get the feeling that this is more "Something That Folks Seem To Want To Believe Is The Case..." than "Something That Is Actually The Case..."

----------


## dimo1

> I get the feeling that this is more "Something That Folks Seem To Want To Believe Is The Case..." than "Something That Is Actually The Case..."


Sure enough, it‘s just one factor, but I think you need a pull factor for gathering an audience.

----------


## icctrombone

> You said, "without TWD Image would probably be dead by now" which makes no sense. Image doesn't profit from the book. Whether it sells two copies or two million copies makes no difference whatsoever to Image's bottom line. 
> 
> As for enjoying the books more or less then--that's up to readers. Certainly enthusiasm was high back in 1992 but those books were heavily criticized as well for being shallow and simpleminded. Current books are more critically acclaimed and more substantive. If that's not your cup of tea--well, that's your business. 
> 
> I miss a lot of the energy of the early stuff myself. At that point I was reading every Image book--at this point I don't. But we put out considerably more titles as well. So...there's that.


Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.


Yeah, as I was going through all this I was wondering the same thing.  I've heard the indie publishers take a % for each copy sold.  I'm not sure how much... 10% - 50%, but if a book sells more copies then Image gets more money.  But Image doesn't own the intellectual property.  So if the creators of Snotgirl wanted to go elsewhere and publish their stuff, I don't think Image gets anything.  But someone needs to fact check me here because I'm kind of a dumbass.

----------


## dimo1

> Yeah, as I was going through all this I was wondering the same thing.  I've heard the indie publishers take a % for each copy sold.  I'm not sure how much... 10% - 50%, but if a book sells more copies then Image gets more money.  But Image doesn't own the intellectual property.  So if the creators of Snotgirl wanted to go elsewhere and publish their stuff, I don't think Image gets anything.  But someone needs to fact check me here because I'm kind of a dumbass.


Please check this.




> Image was set up so that creators could do what they want with their creations, and reap the benefits financially. When a book is published by Image, creators are not paid up front. It can sometimes be two or three months before one sees money from a book. It sounds rough, and it most definitely can be. But if it’s done right, the payoff can be far more rewarding than producing a book in the conventional manner.
> 
> When the creator does finally get paid, they get paid on what their book makes after the cost of printing and Image’s modest office fee, which covers solicitations, traffic, production, and some promotion of the book. We make no more money off of our highest selling book than we do our lowest.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

Well if you were to read that literally, "We make no more money off of our highest selling book than we do our lowest" just means they charge everyone the same rate.  So it doesn't matter if walking dead sells 70,000 copies or a dozen different titles sell a combined 70,000... Image gets the same amount but make no mistake, they do get paid.

----------


## dimo1

Of course they get paid, otherwise they could‘t run a publishing house.
My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Image‘s life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.

----------


## JFP

> Of course they get paid, otherwise they couldt run a publishing house.
> My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Images life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.


My argument was that TWD is Image's pull product in terms of keeping Image popular; not profitable. In business, this is called pull marketing or pull marketing strategy. Tyco Toys used this with Tickle Me Elmo:




> Interest in Tickle Me Elmo was high from the start, but skyrocketed once supplies of the toy couldn't meet the mounting demand as the end of the year approached. After the dust settled, Tyco saw their profits multiply to five times their projections, reaching $350 million for 1996 alone. Tickle Me Elmo's success might have caught Tyco Toys by surprise, but that success wasn't entirely accidental.


http://www.marketing-schools.org/typ...marketing.html

The success of Tickle Me Elmo caused consumers to check out other Tyco products. There aren't numbers to show how many other Tyco products were bought through the success of Tickle Me Elmo. But it's safe to assume a great deal were bought. Same thing with TWD and Image. There aren't numbers to show how many titles are bought on the success of TWD. But I assume many are.

However, this is all my opinion. Just an opinion. But the Dumb-Fux guy and numberthirtyfive took it outta proportion and put words in my mouth like I was stating facts. This is the reason why people type IMHO before making a sentence on message boards. Even though stating IMHO is redundant, there's always some idiots out there who will blow up as if you're stating facts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In terms of artistic quality of 90s Image, they'll always be called garbage. But it was good garbage. It got a reaction outta people whether they loved it or hated it. I remember countless times reading an Image Comic in public and someone would come up to me and say, "Image sucks!" Then tell me about how they were trying way too hard to be like Marvel and DC. That it was a comic company for hacks. Then I found out the guy didn't read Image Comics but knew so much about how much they sucked. Nowadays, when talking to non-Image Comics reader you get a "meh" reaction. The fun times of people either loving or hating Image (there was never any in between) are long gone. Now people either love it or are lukewarm. Interestingly, looking at the reactions in this thread, 90s Image still invokes a strong love it or hate it response. 18 years later, people are still expressing strong reactions about 90s Image. That's something current Image will never be able to do.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Does Image collect some kind of money from the books that they release under the banner? Seems like you couldn't sustain the company otherwise.


On comic books--Image takes a flat fee. So, the Walking Dead comic book doesn't generate any more than Snot Girl or the Beef. The rules are also a bit different for Image partners. 

Image pays its bill primarily from the flat fees from the comics. We do take a small percentage from trades as well--which makes keeping books in print worthwhile. 

But Image wasn't set up as this huge profit center. The whole idea was to have creators being enriched--not the "suits."

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Same thing with TWD and Image. There aren't numbers to show how many titles are bought on the success of TWD. But I assume many are.
> 
> However, this is all my opinion. Just an opinion. But the Dumb-Fux guy and numberthirtyfive took it outta proportion and put words in my mouth like I was stating facts.


I don't know if there's a lot of brand loyalty at this point. I guess retailers understand that we've been around a while and that we're likely to be around a while longer. There's some trust in the mix. But I don't know that a lot of readers are going, "Man, I sure do love the Walking Dead--I think I'll go read I Hate Fairyland because it is an Image comic book as well."

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Of course they get paid, otherwise they could‘t run a publishing house.
> My argument was that you need strong titles to create awareness and that TWD was Image‘s life line, but I learned now that I was aparantely wrong, as Erik Larsen stated.


I think your argument has shifted since you initially made it. There's nothing in your post to indicate that you were talking about the Walking Dead creating Image comics brand awareness and loyalty. It seemed your argument was that money from the Walking Dead was helping keep our doors open when the reality is that Image gets no money from the Walking Dead.

----------


## numberthirty

> I don't know if there's a lot of brand loyalty at this point. I guess retailers understand that we've been around a while and that we're likely to be around a while longer. There's some trust in the mix. *But I don't know that a lot of readers are going, "Man, I sure do love the Walking Dead--I think I'll go read I Hate Fairyland because it is an Image comic book as well."*


Agreed.

If you are a Hickman fan, the idea that you run out to pick up something like *TWD* or *Moonshine* just because the same company puts them out is on shaky ground.

It's essentially the exact opposite of the "Tyco" assertion above. It's more like "Consumers would buy something like a Dungeons & Dragons game and a Transformers figure because they both were being sold under the "Hasbro" name."

It ignores that they don't have much in common outside of that they fit into the same corner of the retail market.

----------


## JFP

I don't think it's far-fetched or on shaky ground at all to say TWD makes people wanna try out other titles. My first Marvel Comic title I bought regularly was Amazing Spiderman. These days I enjoy Ghost Rider more than Spiderman. Those are real different titles. Same how I've always been a Batman fan but I also enjoy Deadman. When I got back into Image years ago, Savage Dragon was the first title I picked up. Still read it. But I have zero problem reading Moon Struck. 

A person's tastes vary. They aren't stuck in one genre. Just like I don't see it being far-fetched that a person who likes Dirty Harry also enjoying Finding Nemo; I don't think it is far-fetched someone could enjoy TWD and then try out other Image titles. Considering that Image publishes a lot of horror titles, I think it is likely a fan of comics could go from TWD to Rose, Black Road, or other Image titles.

Going from TWD to I Hate Fairyland is kinda extreme. But not unlikely. Is it really hard for people to believe that a fan of TWD could say, "I enjoyed this comic. I like horror comics. What company publishes this? Image Comics, huh? I'll see if they have other horror titles on their website. Wow. These comics called Rose, Black Road, and the Realm look good. They are probably gonna be good horror comics like TWD. I'll try these too." Really? That's hard for you guys to believe?

----------


## Erik Larsen

> I don't think it's far-fetched or on shaky ground at all to say TWD makes people wanna try out other titles. My first Marvel Comic title I bought regularly was Amazing Spiderman. These days I enjoy Ghost Rider more than Spiderman. Those are real different titles. Same how I've always been a Batman fan but I also enjoy Deadman. When I got back into Image years ago, Savage Dragon was the first title I picked up. Still read it. But I have zero problem reading Moon Struck. 
> 
> A person's tastes vary. They aren't stuck in one genre. Just like I don't see it being far-fetched that a person who likes Dirty Harry also enjoying Finding Nemo; I don't think it is far-fetched someone could enjoy TWD and then try out other Image titles. Considering that Image publishes a lot of horror titles, I think it is likely a fan of comics could go from TWD to Rose, Black Road, or other Image titles.
> 
> Going from TWD to I Hate Fairyland is kinda extreme. But not unlikely. Is it really hard for people to believe that a fan of TWD could say, "I enjoyed this comic. I like horror comics. What company publishes this? Image Comics, huh? I'll see if they have other horror titles on their website. Wow. These comics called Rose, Black Road, and the Realm look good. They are probably gonna be good horror comics like TWD. I'll try these too." Really? That's hard for you guys to believe?


In the case of Marvel and DC their strength is their uniformity. Spider-Man crosses over with Ghost Rider. Captain America coexists with Howard the Duck. They may attempt diversity but largely they have succeeded selling the same thing: their universe.

Stepping away from Marvel and DC it's a whole different ball game. I liken it to book publishers. If you like Hellboy--you might seek out other Mignola-related books but there's no uniform anything else at Dark Horse. Image's line is so eclectic and so diverse that many books are one-of-a-kind items. Like Snot Girl? There it literally nothing else like it to be found at Image. Like Elephantmen? There's nothing else like it. Image may have done a decent job of saying "we put out a LOT of books and the commonality is that they all come from a creator's unique voice and they're all great" but I'm not convinced it's the label selling the books so much as it is the books selling the books and the creators selling the books. 

Fans bought the brand in 1992. I don't think it's necessarily that way anymore.

----------


## numberthirty

One guy's take...

Let's use a comparison that most folks can grasp.

Hershey's as a company that makes candy. Let's say that a regular old chocolate bar is "Batman". You might like that, and even have more wide ranging tastes. You might go for a Take 5 bar. That you are willing to get away from the plain old chocolate bar with the Take 5 bar doesn't mean you will look at Hershey's overall product line and grab a bag of black licorice Twizzlers.

To me, that feels like *TWD* and *The Black Monday Murders*. They are both candy. That doesn't mean they would be something that folks would look at that they like one, and decide to pick up the other.

While it will happen sometimes, the stark differences tend to point away from it being something that happens regularly.

Never mind being something that has a regular bearing on sales numbers of each title.

----------


## numberthirty

One more thing about the idea that genre fan overlap is how readers wind up buying a title.

Take that I read *The Black Monday Murders* and *Moonshine*. While I am a fan of horror, that is not the main reason I am buying those titles. 

It is the creators. 

I'd imagine that is the main reason that most folks who regularly buy Image titles buy them. I'm fairly certain that the company just happens to be putting out the titles by creators they are interested in.

----------


## dimo1

Well, you have to start somewhere.
Quite a few will stumble across TWD because of the T.V. show. Fewer will pay attention to the publisher, but still, very often having a brand makes people try other products as well.
Let‘s take Apple as an example. Years ago I was one of the few who used Apple Computers. That has changed due to the iPhone. Nowadays people also buy laptops and computers and what else Apple sells.
My saying is just that TWD is a bit like the iPhone, and I don‘t think it‘s really healthy for a company to rely on only one product if said product is part of a competative market. You run the risk of waning interest, and I feel the same might happen to Image.
Once TWD stops airing, less exposure in general could result in fewer sales throughout all titles.

----------


## Bor

> Well, you have to start somewhere.
> Quite a few will stumble across TWD because of the T.V. show. Fewer will pay attention to the publisher, but still, very often having a brand makes people try other products as well.
> Lets take Apple as an example. Years ago I was one of the few who used Apple Computers. That has changed due to the iPhone. Nowadays people also buy laptops and computers and what else Apple sells.
> My saying is just that TWD is a bit like the iPhone, and I dont think its really healthy for a company to rely on only one product if said product is part of a competative market. You run the risk of waning interest, and I feel the same might happen to Image.
> Once TWD stops airing, less exposure in general could result in fewer sales throughout all titles.


But as pointed out the numbers of the other titles do not suggest that there actually is any connection in this case so what you have here is an idea without anything to back it up. 
There is nothing that suggests people starts reading other titles because of TWD in any significant numbers.

----------


## numberthirty

There is also the obvious uniformity in how Apple products operate.

If the difference between the mechanics of using an Iphone and another Apple product was as stark as trying to read *TWD* and then trying to read *Prism Stalker*, Apple wouldn't last five minutes.

----------


## dimo1

Of course I‘m aware of the differences, in any case, without a pull factor, whether it was the speculators’ boom of 90s or the TWD fanbase of today, Image runs the risk of falling into obscurity.
My believe, I could be wrong of course.

----------


## Dylan Davison

Just posting this to see if it helps anyone, not sure if this was showed before. Here are the top sales for Image around the announcement and the air date for season one.

Around announcement:

Jan
Haunt 4 26,420
Walking Dead 69 23,695
Chew 8 12,727

Feb
Walking Dead 70 23,999
Haunt 5 22,454
Image United 0 15,452

Skip to around air date:

Sep
Walking Dead 77 27,448
Haunt 9 17,894
Morning Glories 8,265


Oct  

Walking Dead 78 27,947
Haunt 10 17,309
Morning Glories 3 11,258

Nov
Walking Dead 79 28,971
Haunt 11 16,658
Morning Glories 4 11,292

As you can guess, WD does get a big jump, now the other ones, not so much. Not saying this really means anything, cause a lot of factors go into these sales, and I'm not sure what else was going on at the time. But here you go everyone, hope this helps one of you lol.

Personally, I don't think image is dead at all.

----------


## Bor

> Of course Im aware of the differences, in any case, without a pull factor, whether it was the speculators boom of 90s or the TWD fanbase of today, Image runs the risk of falling into obscurity.
> My believe, I could be wrong of course.


Obscurity? How? They are one of the biggest publishers today and have been so for quite some time. Disregarding Marvel and DC few companies have the presence Image has. 
The idea of a pull factor being a major factor here is simply not supported by any numbers we have available.

----------


## JFP

> In the case of Marvel and DC their strength is their uniformity. Spider-Man crosses over with Ghost Rider. Captain America coexists with Howard the Duck. They may attempt diversity but largely they have succeeded selling the same thing: their universe.
> 
> Stepping away from Marvel and DC it's a whole different ball game. I liken it to book publishers. If you like Hellboy--you might seek out other Mignola-related books but there's no uniform anything else at Dark Horse. Image's line is so eclectic and so diverse that many books are one-of-a-kind items. Like Snot Girl? There it literally nothing else like it to be found at Image. Like Elephantmen? There's nothing else like it. Image may have done a decent job of saying "we put out a LOT of books and the commonality is that they all come from a creator's unique voice and they're all great" but I'm not convinced it's the label selling the books so much as it is the books selling the books and the creators selling the books. 
> 
> Fans bought the brand in 1992. I don't think it's necessarily that way anymore.


You're most likely correct in all you're saying. Not gonna argue the point anymore.

We got on this topic because dimo said Image wasn't healthy and some other poster disagreed. I'm pretty sure dimo meant to say, "compared to old Image, current Image is not healthy". On that, I don't know how someone can disagree with him. Maybe they misinterpreted him to say Image is not healthy at all. Since English isn't his first language, there's stuff lost in translation.

When he cited TWD, he was saying Image should have several books competing with the Big 2 for the top 50 spot, like they did in the 90s. Instead, there's only TWD. If Image would lose TWD, then Image would have zero books in the Top 50. He was saying that's not good. I agree with that too.

So what he was saying (and what I agreed with) that people in this thread have stated old Image is garbage and current Image is way better. However, in terms of brand loyalty and getting comics to compete with the Big 2 in the top 50 spot, current Image is definitely not better than old Image.

----------


## dimo1

Thanks JFP, not sure why we go in circles here. Might be a problem of written communication.
That‘s all I wanted to say. 
The entire industry is in decline, and given current sales numbers, being the third largest publisher doesn‘t count for much.

Nobody can deny that Image back then killed it, compared to the furious hurricanes of the past what we have got today is a mild breeze.

Yes, I‘m aware that this is true for comics in general, but this is an Image thread.

And by the way, this is by no means meant to critisise the creative teams or the quality of their work, plus, it‘s entirely my assumption.

----------


## BaneBreaker

I think the breakdown comes from trying to reconcile two eras of comics and not factoring in how vastly different they were.  I mean we're talking about something that happened 25 years ago and wondering why it isn't the same.  The early 90s were so different compared to today.  $10 could get you 5, 8, even 10 comics versus today when it gets you 2 or 3.  They could also be purchased almost anywhere.  Now, not so much.  Its also a time of "hot, collectible comics", "must have" and "limited edition".  Comics just moved.  So its a bit unreasonable to say or expect Image properties today to sell in the millions of units like the Image properties of 1993.

----------


## dimo1

Sure it is unreasonable, to some extent.
What happened, where is the dynamism, fun and joy of those times?
Seriously, there are some issues I have problems with, but they aren‘t the answer to failing sales in general.
My question for the last 25 years, after the big crash, has been why is our industry in a decline?
We have such a diversity, and for a brief period Image was on top of their game again, TWD, Saga, Lazarus, top creators flocking to Image. Why has it failed? 
Yes, Erik argues differently, but seeing sales numbers of Savage Dragon 1 compared to the current issues just makes me sad.

As such, old Image rules over new Image, except for that short glimpse when I thought they might have ignited that spark again, which sadly seems to have been sniffed out.

----------


## numberthirty

> Sure it is unreasonable, to some extent.
> What happened, where is the dynamism, fun and joy of those times?
> *Seriously, there are some issues I have problems with, but they aren‘t the answer to failing sales in general.
> My question for the last 25 years, after the big crash, has been why is our industry in a decline?*
> We have such a diversity, and for a brief period Image was on top of their game again, TWD, Saga, Lazarus, top creators flocking to Image. Why has it failed? 
> Yes, Erik argues differently, but seeing sales numbers of Savage Dragon 1 compared to the current issues just makes me sad.
> 
> As such, old Image rules over new Image, except for that short glimpse when I thought they might have ignited that spark again, which sadly seems to have been sniffed out.


Politely, you have to ignore that the world has changed in the time since then to seriously pose that question.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Thanks JFP, not sure why we go in circles here. Might be a problem of written communication.
> That‘s all I wanted to say. 
> The entire industry is in decline, and given current sales numbers, being the third largest publisher doesn‘t count for much.
> 
> Nobody can deny that Image back then killed it, compared to the furious hurricanes of the past what we have got today is a mild breeze.
> 
> Yes, I‘m aware that this is true for comics in general, but this is an Image thread.
> 
> And by the way, this is by no means meant to critisise the creative teams or the quality of their work, plus, it‘s entirely my assumption.


There's an ebb and flow. Books go up and down. The Walking Dead sells considerably better than it did when it launched--others are doing solid numbers--Savage Dragon is limping along. The new books seem to be thriving--books that were there at the start aren't doing as well. Their time has come and gone and modern readers are reading the modern books. 

Image is a very solid #3 publisher and it has been for most of the last 26 years. There was a time when we'd slipped a bit but at this point we have quite a few thriving, vital titles. It may not thrill you that those are the books people are enthusiastic about--but it's misleading to imply that the company is failing because your taste doesn't align with the tastes of other readers.

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Sure it is unreasonable, to some extent.
> 
> Seriously, there are some issues I have problems with, but they aren‘t the answer to failing sales in general.
> My question for the last 25 years, after the big crash, has been why is our industry in a decline?


Its not.

Not sure where this 'the industry is in decline' is coming from. Looking at Comichrons figures the overall industry revenue has been rising year by year since the crash. Sales on individual titles may be way lower than during the spectator boom, but theres also way more product. Plus the emergence of the bookstore and digital markets. The figures dropped over the last year or so in the direct market but the correlation is positive. Comics reached a billion in revenue back in 2016. Thats the highest since the market tanked back in the mid 90s.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> There's an ebb and flow. Books go up and down. The Walking Dead sells considerably better than it did when it launched--others are doing solid numbers--Savage Dragon is limping along. The new books seem to be thriving--books that were there at the start aren't doing as well. Their time has come and gone and modern readers are reading the modern books. 
> 
> Image is a very solid #3 publisher and it has been for most of the last 26 years. There was a time when we'd slipped a bit but at this point we have quite a few thriving, vital titles. It may not thrill you that those are the books people are enthusiastic about--but it's misleading to imply that the company is failing because your taste doesn't align with the tastes of other readers.


Just one fan's opinion, I don't think it's failing but I do feel like Image and most of the indie scene is stagnating.  Possibly because there's too many comics out there and they all seem to blend together in the same category of 'different for the sake of being different'.  So I guess my question is, what is Image doing to promote and cultivate new talent?  And I mean truly new, kid with that golden idea, talent.  I'm not talking about the same 15 - 20 creators who can bounce around to any publisher and get paid.  And I'm not talking about the ones who try to contour their work to match what they think Image and others are looking for, because if you're doing that, then do you really have a 'unique' voice?  I guess what I'm looking for is something new from a voice that I haven't heard before.  Again, I'm just a fan on the outside of everything.  I'm sure anyone can cite a bunch of examples from Image's line of comics from new creators that aren't formulaic or pandering to current trends.  But the fact that a casual fan like me has to dig deep to find it is a problem.

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Just one fan's opinion, I don't think it's failing but I do feel like Image and most of the indie scene is stagnating.  Possibly because there's too many comics out there and they all seem to blend together in the same category of 'different for the sake of being different'.  So I guess my question is, what is Image doing to promote and cultivate new talent?  And I mean truly new, kid with that golden idea, talent.  I'm not talking about the same 15 - 20 creators who can bounce around to any publisher and get paid.  And I'm not talking about the ones who try to contour their work to match what they think Image and others are looking for, because if you're doing that, then do you really have a 'unique' voice?  I guess what I'm looking for is something new from a voice that I haven't heard before.  Again, I'm just a fan on the outside of everything.  I'm sure anyone can cite a bunch of examples from Image's line of comics from new creators that aren't formulaic or pandering to current trends.  But the fact that a casual fan like me has to dig deep to find it is a problem.


I dont think you have to dig deep. Just thumb through the Image section in Previews or look at the monthly solicits. You might not see them have top billing on the comic shelf but thats on retailers who dont order many of them precisely because these creators arnt as well known. But then, you could say the same for lower-tier books from every publisher in that regard. But yeah, i think if you take the time to look then many of those unique voice books are certainly at Image.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> I dont think you have to dig deep. Just thumb through the Image section in Previews or look at the monthly solicits. You might not see them have top billing on the comic shelf but thats on retailers who dont order many of them precisely because these creators arnt as well known. But then, you could say the same for lower-tier books from every publisher in that regard. But yeah, i think if you take the time to look then many of those unique voice books are certainly at Image.


Well that's the thing though, why should I have to dig deep to find the new and upcoming talent?  Shouldn't they be promoted more?  Wasn't that one of Image's original missions, to give the indies a chance?  I understand it's easier to sell a book from a know commodity than an unknown one.  I'm not saying let's shelf TWD for some rando comic.  I'm just saying, maybe I'd like Image to take a few chances on things outside the box.  And I mean outside the box as it is drawn today.  Make it easier for the casual or new fan to pick up a comic based on its actual content and not on the creator's prior accomplishments.  I already paid 3.99 for that stuff.  Tell me why I should pay 3.99 for this comic right here.  Or maybe just put out an anthology or something.  When was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator?

----------


## Dark-Flux

> Well that's the thing though, why should I have to dig deep to find the new and upcoming talent?  Shouldn't they be promoted more?  Wasn't that one of Image's original missions, to give the indies a chance?  I understand it's easier to sell a book from a know commodity than an unknown one.  I'm not saying let's shelf TWD for some rando comic.  I'm just saying, maybe I'd like Image to take a few chances on things outside the box.  And I mean outside the box as it is drawn today.  Make it easier for the casual or new fan to pick up a comic based on its actual content and not on the creator's prior accomplishments.  I already paid 3.99 for that stuff.  Tell me why I should pay 3.99 for this comic right here.  Or maybe just put out an anthology or something.  When was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator?


They did put out an anthology. By a bunch of unknown creators...

And its the retailers that order books. And they order in low numbers because the teams are unknown factors. This isnt an Image problem exclusivly. 
Image is unique because they give so much control and and complete ownership to their creators. That comes with its own sets of challenges which extends to creator responsibility for marketing. But asking then to differ from that is to deny the very aspect that makes Image such a unique opportunity for indie creators in the first place.

----------


## Bor

> Well that's the thing though, why should I have to dig deep to find the new and upcoming talent?  Shouldn't they be promoted more?  Wasn't that one of Image's original missions, to give the indies a chance?  I understand it's easier to sell a book from a know commodity than an unknown one.  I'm not saying let's shelf TWD for some rando comic.  I'm just saying, maybe I'd like Image to take a few chances on things outside the box.  And I mean outside the box as it is drawn today.  Make it easier for the casual or new fan to pick up a comic based on its actual content and not on the creator's prior accomplishments.  I already paid 3.99 for that stuff.  Tell me why I should pay 3.99 for this comic right here.  Or maybe just put out an anthology or something.  When was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator?


I think you are downplaying how much early Image also had well established talents early on. Most of the founders were not unproven talent. Image has always been a mix between new and established talent.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> They did put out an anthology. By a bunch of unknown creators...
> 
> And its the retailers that order books. And they order in low numbers because the teams are unknown factors. This isnt an Image problem exclusivly. 
> Image is unique because they give so much control and and complete ownership to their creators. That comes with its own sets of challenges which extends to creator responsibility for marketing. But asking then to differ from that is to deny the very aspect that makes Image such a unique opportunity for indie creators in the first place.


I agree, it's not an Image problem exclusively.  But Image is not unique in giving so much control and ownership to its creators.  Pretty much every indie publisher does that.  I'm not telling them to stop that.  But Image does control who they publish and who they promote.  There's only so much a creative team can do to promote their stuff on their own.  All I'm saying is maybe promote some of the lesser known things that may be hidden gems.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> I think you are downplaying how much early Image also had well established talents early on. Most of the founders were not unproven talent. Image has always been a mix between new and established talent.


Yep, this is true.  It's possible I just am in a rut and nothing from Image is giving me that feeling I used to get a few years ago when it was really excited to get their new stuff.  It's also very possible that the next few months will yield some better offerings.  I also think the way the system is rigged, it's very tough for unknowns to prove themselves and people with real talent may be more inclined to go elsewhere with it.

----------


## numberthirty

> When was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator?


On this...

Everyone who can tell me who wrote *Scene Of The Crime*, raise your hands now.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> On this...
> 
> Everyone who can tell me who wrote *Scene Of The Crime*, raise your hands now.


I'm sure someone can google it.  I personally do not know though I feel like I should as a comic fan. 

I was thinking something like Luther Strode was the last breakout hit for a relatively unknown at the time.

----------


## JPAR

> On this...
> 
> Everyone who can tell me who wrote *Scene Of The Crime*, raise your hands now.


Ed Brubaker  :Cool:   :Stick Out Tongue:

----------


## JFP

> I'm sure someone can google it.  I personally do not know though I feel like I should as a comic fan. 
> 
> I was thinking something like Luther Strode was the last breakout hit for a relatively unknown at the time.


You asked when was the last time Image had a breakthru hit by an unknown and the guy mentioned a comic originally released by Vertigo...back in 1999. WTF?

So the last time Image had a breakthru hit by an unknown creator was from a comic released by Vertigo 19 years ago? 

Ok. Image really needs to get their shit together.

----------


## Bor

> You asked when was the last time Image had a breakthru hit by an unknown and the guy mentioned a comic originally released by Vertigo...back in 1999. WTF?
> 
> So the last time Image had a breakthru hit by an unknown creator was from a comic released by Vertigo 19 years ago? 
> 
> Ok. Image really needs to get their shit together.


Unlike Marvel and DC who has it every other week? When was the last time any company had something like that at all? Image has lots of descent selling books and while single issues rarely dominate several of their books are some of the biggest sellers when it comes go collected editions.

----------


## numberthirty

> I'm sure someone can google it.  I personally do not know though I feel like I should as a comic fan. 
> 
> I was thinking something like Luther Strode was the last breakout hit for a relatively unknown at the time.


I'm saying "Even great writers aren't going to regularly do gangbusters numbers early on." It's kind of asking a lot. It's going to be the exception way more than it's going to be the rule.

Most writers are going to build a fan base that will do those sorts of numbers over a career.

----------


## JFP

All I know is Angrynerd asked when was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator. And numberfifty responded with Scene of the Crime, a comic published by Vertigo almost two decades ago.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> All I know is Angrynerd asked when was the last time Image had a breakthrough hit from an unknown creator. And numberfifty responded with Scene of the Crime, a comic published by Vertigo almost two decades ago.


How about the Walking Dead from relative unknowns Robert Kirkman and Tony Moore from October, 2003? Or Ultra which launched the careers of unknowns Joshua  and Jonathan Luna from August, 2004? Or the Nightly News from unknown Jonathan Hickman from November, 2006?

Everybody starts somewhere and an awful lot of creators get their big break at Image comics. Some hit pretty quick--with others--it's a slow burn as books gradually build.

----------


## numberthirty

> How about the Walking Dead from relative unknowns Robert Kirkman and Tony Moore from October, 2003? Or Ultra which launched the careers of unknowns Joshua  and Jonathan Luna from August, 2004? Or the Nightly News from unknown Jonathan Hickman from November, 2006?
> 
> Everybody starts somewhere and an awful lot of creators get their big break at Image comics. Some hit pretty quick--with others--it's a slow burn as books gradually build.


Somebody gets it.

----------


## Erik Larsen

> Just one fan's opinion, I don't think it's failing but I do feel like Image and most of the indie scene is stagnating.  Possibly because there's too many comics out there and they all seem to blend together in the same category of 'different for the sake of being different'.  So I guess my question is, what is Image doing to promote and cultivate new talent?


We publish book by creators I've never heard of all the time. I don't follow everybody everywhere but a ton of new creators have broken in at Image. It is a harder sell. New talent is by nature an unknown quantity but lots of creators work with new talent and frequently there will be new creators as part of a creative team who will establish themselves and build a reputation in addition to books which are from complete unknowns.

Creators pitch Image new books all the time. But we can't go knocking door to door looking for creators. They have to take that first step and let people know they exist.

----------


## numberthirty

> Yep, this is true.  It's possible I just am in a rut and nothing from Image is giving me that feeling I used to get a few years ago when it was really excited to get their new stuff.  It's also very possible that the next few months will yield some better offerings.  I also think the way the system is rigged, it's very tough for unknowns to prove themselves and *people with real talent may be more inclined to go elsewhere with it.*


On this, I'd say the output of the company tends to point to that this is simply not the case.

----------


## JFP

> How about the Walking Dead from relative unknowns Robert Kirkman and Tony Moore from October, 2003? Or Ultra which launched the careers of unknowns Joshua  and Jonathan Luna from August, 2004? Or the Nightly News from unknown Jonathan Hickman from November, 2006?
> 
> Everybody starts somewhere and an awful lot of creators get their big break at Image comics. Some hit pretty quick--with others--it's a slow burn as books gradually build.


My apologies. I wasn't asking the question. Angrycomicnerd asked it. I just thought it was ridiculous that number thirty named a comic by Vertigo from almost two decades ago to refute Angrynerd's question. That's as ridiculous as someone asking what innovation in comics has DC done recently and me naming Frank Miller's Daredevil.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> We publish book by creators I've never heard of all the time. I don't follow everybody everywhere but a ton of new creators have broken in at Image. It is a harder sell. New talent is by nature an unknown quantity but lots of creators work with new talent and frequently there will be new creators as part of a creative team who will establish themselves and build a reputation in addition to books which are from complete unknowns.
> 
> Creators pitch Image new books all the time. But we can't go knocking door to door looking for creators. They have to take that first step and let people know they exist.


I'm just a reader, I don't know or have any experience going through the process of creating and selling a comic.  For me personally I just feel like what I'm looking for is that Kurt Cobain moment where this new thing drops that blows everything away and injects some new excitement in comics.  You mentioned Robert Kirkman doing that in 2003 but that was like 15 years ago.  There's been good books and mediocre ones, but nothing that exciting.  I know this is asking for a lot.  A whole lot.  I get that.  I don't think that kind of thing is coming from anyone recognized now because we'd have seen it from them already.  But Image is the 3rd largest publisher and the largest one that promotes creator owned content.  I figure if that kind of unknown talent existed, they should be discovered by Image.  So I guess if you're telling me you're on it and the next big thing is on the way, then I'll just shut the f%ck up and go back to ranting on Last Jedi or whatever other waste of time I can find.

----------


## dimo1

To be fair, how is Erik supposed to know what the next big thing is?
You can‘t plan for it.
The audience is getting more and more diverse in its taste, so you just have to wait and see when and even if a next big thing will happen.

----------


## JFP

> To be fair, how is Erik supposed to know what the next big thing is?
> You cant plan for it.
> The audience is getting more and more diverse in its taste, so you just have to wait and see when and even if a next big thing will happen.


In Angrynerd's defense, the guys at Image have decades of experience in the comic book industry. From their experience, they can know which of the submissions has the greatest potential to sell as many copies as TWD. 

I think Image's business structure makes them unable and/or unwilling to promote and cultivate new talent. Not getting paid anymore on a comic that sells 1 million than on a comic that sells 1,000 doesn't motivate them. They'd have to hire a lot of editors to mold and guide new talent to push out great stories. They'd have to do a bunch of promotion. Unfortunately, they wouldn't see a return on the money they invested. So they can't put the money there.

I also think it's a question of egos too. A total newbie might not take too kindly to an experienced vet telling him how to make his comic. I can see the newbie pissed and saying, "It's my comic. I'm gonna do it this way. You think that because you have decades of experience in the industry you can tell me how to make my comic. I care about the comic. You just care about the money and want to ruin my art. I don't appreciate it."

----------


## MRP

> In Angrynerd's defense, the guys at Image have decades of experience in the comic book industry. From their experience, they can know which of the submissions has the greatest potential to sell as many copies as TWD. 
> 
> I think Image's business structure makes them unable and/or unwilling to promote and cultivate new talent. Not getting paid anymore on a comic that sells 1 million than on a comic that sells 1,000 doesn't motivate them. They'd have to hire a lot of editors to mold and guide new talent to push out great stories. They'd have to do a bunch of promotion. Unfortunately, they wouldn't see a return on the money they invested. So they can't put the money there.
> 
> I also think it's a question of egos too. A total newbie might not take too kindly to an experienced vet telling him how to make his comic. I can see the newbie pissed and saying, "It's my comic. I'm gonna do it this way. You think that because you have decades of experience in the industry you can tell me how to make my comic. I care about the comic. You just care about the money and want to ruin my art. I don't appreciate it."


But nobody knew Walking Dead was going to sell like Walking Dead. And the Walking Dead wasn't "The Walking Dead" phenomenon it's become out of the gate. It took a while to grow it's audience, but finding a book like that is lightning in a bottle. They got a pitch they liked and gave it a chance, and eventually it built an audience and grew into the juggernaut it is now. Listen to Kirkman talk about the early days, he wasn't sure how long it would last and even jokes he had to bluff about an alien invasion element to the plot to get people to buy into the pitch in the first place (one that never materialized). It's easy to say find more things like The Walking Dead. Doing it however is an altogether different story. Lots of quality  books never find an audience. Sometime junk blows up and becomes popular. Everyone thinks they can predict audience reactions and know what will sell if they just put the effort in, but if that were true everything would sell because no one would take the time and effort to put out a flop. All Image can do is keep accepting pitches that excite them and give the creative teams a chance to execute the idea and try to gain/grow an audience. However, that is difficult int he direct market these days. To gain an audience, books have to be on the shelves to be seen, browsed, bought and read. However, because there are so many books on the shelves, many shops only order to preorders, not to stock shelf copies. Unless a new book catches the attention of retailers before it comes out for them to actually see the book, it's not likely to be out there for people to find and for an audience to grow. Getting to a trade that can get into the wider book market outside the Diamond direct market can expose more people to the book and possibly find a wider audience, but there is a ceiling out there as to how many copies are available to be found and that ceiling is set by retailer orders. Those orders are partially based on customers preordering the book after solicitations, and party on the retailers belief the book can find an audience and won't sit on the shelf unsold and tie up their operating capital. Image does a decent job of trying to give retailers incentive to try new books (bigger discounts, sometimes returnability, etc.) and the $9.99 first trade pricing program also helps making books accessible for retailers to stock and readers to try, but its a case of "you can led a horse to water..." sometimes. Retailers and readers have many options (possibly too many) and allocation of resources (shelf space, buying budgets, marketing/hype efforts), is a big factor and leads to retailers (and customers) having to make difficult decisions about what to support and (for retailers) how to manage the risk of investing operating capital into store stock. There's a lot of factors in determining the next big thing that are outside the publishers purview. Image does a lot right in trying to influence those factors in a positive direction, but there's no guarantee the lightning will go into the bottle. 

And when looking at sales of the initial Image releases, ask yourself this-how many of those wound up with end customers and how many remained in boxes at comic shops unsold? How many end customers bought multiple copies on speculation? If everyone who bought a copy of say Spawn #1 only bought 1 copy and every copy bought by comic retailers was then purchased by an end customer so no copies remained unsold, what would the actual sales numbers have been? In today's market, how many customers are buying 5, 10, 20 copies of a book? How many retailers are buying extra cases of books for later sales as back issues because they think it will be a long term profitable book they want to stock for years to come to exploit the back issue demand? Those are no longer factors driving sales in current market place the way there were in the early 90s, so current sales numbers are not inflated by those, and more accurately reflect actual end customer sales (not perfectly though as there are still unsold copies floating around in the marketplace). Trade paperback sales were also not a factor in the early 90s, and there wasn't a portion of readership who skipped initial single issue releases to buy in trade paperback format. And then there are digital sales (however healthy or stagnant those are and as much debate as there is as to what they actually are, only publishers and Comixology know for certain) which also replace a segment of single issue print sales, and that was not part of the sales equation in the 90s. It's a different world, and a different marketplace.For some context, X-Men now sells fewer copies each month than it did when it was demoted to a bimonthly reprint book by Marvel and then cancelled before being revived in Giant Sized X-Men #1. Sales charts see spikes for some books at launch, but few titles sustain those sales and fewer grow sales over the life of the book. Most of the books that do grow in sales over it's life are published by Image (books like Saga and Walking Dead who have seen an upward trend in sales, especially if sales of trades are taken into account), while most books from most publishers have a steady attrition of sales the longer it runs. 

So is Image dead? No, I don;t think so. Is the speculator drive comic market of the early 90s that fueled those sales numbers of early Image dead? Yes. It died a long time ago and took a lot of comic retailers out with it because their operating capital was tied up in books that never sold to end customers so they couldn't keep operating. 

-M

----------


## numberthirty

> I think Image's business structure makes them unable and/or unwilling to promote and cultivate new talent. Not getting paid anymore on a comic that sells 1 million than on a comic that sells 1,000 doesn't motivate them. *They'd have to hire a lot of editors to mold and guide new talent to push out great stories.* They'd have to do a bunch of promotion. Unfortunately, they wouldn't see a return on the money they invested. So they can't put the money there.


Which would run contrary to the what seems to be the way the company has made a conscious decision to run.

----------


## MRP

> Which would run contrary to the what seems to be the way the company has made a conscious decision to run.


Editors are hired by the creators as far as I know (at least from what I have read of Brubaker and Remender talking about developing the titles they have done for Image) and there's not an editorial staff at Image per se, at least not in the mold Marvel and DC has. There are liasons for talent and such, but part of image's model calls for low overhead at the company level and maintaining an editorial staff is expensive. 

-M

----------


## numberthirty

> Editors are hired by the creators as far as I know (at least from what I have read of Brubaker and Remender talking about developing the titles they have done for Image) and there's not an editorial staff at Image per se, at least not in the mold Marvel and DC has. There are liasons for talent and such, but part of image's model calls for low overhead at the company level and maintaining an editorial staff is expensive. 
> 
> -M


Sure.

I was just pointing out that nothing I've seen points to that the company has any intentions of playing a role in what creators do in their titles.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

There's no way I'm expecting Image to flat out identify the next big thing at the drop of a hat.  (I didn't mean to single out Erik either if I did, that's not fair, I'm sorry for that)  But as a fan, I'd like to think the next big thing is coming and I just want to know if Image is making it easier for that to happen.  I don't understand the whole process myself, which is why I'm asking the questions and I'm getting a lot of answers which, more appreciative I cannot be.

So, not every pitched comic gets published.  Although I'm not sure why not, if their success or failure has no effect on Image.  But in Image's selection process for which comics to publish, what factor gets the higher ranking?  Content or creator?  Like, if there was only one more slot and you had 2 comics: a really great story by an unknown, or a so-so story by someone like Bendis (just for example purposes, I have nothing against Bendis).  Which of those two does Image select?  I'm guessing based on what I'm hearing here about this whole diamond market thing, that Image goes with the Bendis comic.  It sells its respecible numbers and everyone is happy, the other one just falls off into obscurity, and we are treated to another solid 7.5 out of 10 comic that's kinda ok, has it's good moments, but I'm not marking my calendar for when the next issue drops.

Also, what exactly does Image do for the creators?  There was mention of a flat fee, but what does that cover?  I assume printing costs, office expenses, whatever it takes to put a book on a shelf.  Is marketing part of that fee?  Because if it is, and if everyone pays the same amount, then shouldn't every book be promoted equally?  And if all Image does is print a book and put it on the shelf, then why couldn't the creator just do it themself seeing as how all the hustle and grind of self promotion is entirely the creator's burden either way?

My bottom line concern is, the way the system is set up now (and not just Image but comics in general), is it designed to help a new creator with a new vision succeed or is it just another obstacle in their path?  As a fan, I only have so many pity purchases in me.  And also, is the system feeding mediocrity by shining the light only on known creators and those unknown ones whos only option at making it is by creating a comic that resembles something that's already been done?

----------


## MRP

> There's no way I'm expecting Image to flat out identify the next big thing at the drop of a hat.  (I didn't mean to single out Erik either if I did, that's not fair, I'm sorry for that)  But as a fan, I'd like to think the next big thing is coming and I just want to know if Image is making it easier for that to happen.  I don't understand the whole process myself, which is why I'm asking the questions and I'm getting a lot of answers which, more appreciative I cannot be.
> 
> So, not every pitched comic gets published.  Although I'm not sure why not, if their success or failure has no effect on Image.  But in Image's selection process for which comics to publish, what factor gets the higher ranking?  Content or creator?  Like, if there was only one more slot and you had 2 comics: a really great story by an unknown, or a so-so story by someone like Bendis (just for example purposes, I have nothing against Bendis).  Which of those two does Image select?  I'm guessing based on what I'm hearing here about this whole diamond market thing, that Image goes with the Bendis comic.  It sells its respecible numbers and everyone is happy, the other one just falls off into obscurity, and we are treated to another solid 7.5 out of 10 comic that's kinda ok, has it's good moments, but I'm not marking my calendar for when the next issue drops.
> 
> Also, what exactly does Image do for the creators?  There was mention of a flat fee, but what does that cover?  I assume printing costs, office expenses, whatever it takes to put a book on a shelf.  Is marketing part of that fee?  Because if it is, and if everyone pays the same amount, then shouldn't every book be promoted equally?  And if all Image does is print a book and put it on the shelf, then why couldn't the creator just do it themself seeing as how all the hustle and grind of self promotion is entirely the creator's burden either way?
> 
> My bottom line concern is, the way the system is set up now (and not just Image but comics in general), is it designed to help a new creator with a new vision succeed or is it just another obstacle in their path?  As a fan, I only have so many pity purchases in me.  And also, is the system feeding mediocrity by shining the light only on known creators and those unknown ones whos only option at making it is by creating a comic that resembles something that's already been done?


Publishing with Image gets you into the front section of Previews instead of lost in the mass of titles mashed together under other publishers. Diamond also a gatekeeper as to which books get to market. Doesn't apply much to the big 5 comic publishers, but if you are a self-publisher or smaller press company, Diamond may not choose to accept your title if they do not think it will achieve a certain level of sales. Getting picked up by image guarantees a path to the marketplace for a creator. Image also deals with all the business end  of dealing with Diamond-solicitations, listing in Previews, processing orders, filling orders, all of which takes time away from the creator to actually create the books. 

For every comic carried by Diamond in the other publisher section, there are hundreds of comics being produced and sold on the con circuit, through other means, etc. that Diamond doesn't carry and most potential readers won't see unless they do cons, trade shows, small press shows, or otherwise actively look for small press stuff outside the realm of Diamond. Some shops will carry these, others won't bother  as it is extra work for small returns and stick to only what they can get through Diamond. That's a big thing for creators. Everything extra they have to do business wise is less time writing or drawing the actual books. If you want to do a kickstarter to leverage a launch, that's time and effort away form creating. Calling a bunch of shops to see if they will take your books for sale if Diamond won't distribute them-time away form creating. If Diamond does accept them, you have to deal with them, getting solicits done providing sample art, processing orders to know how to set your print runs, shipping the books to Diamond once printed, etc. etc. all extra time, all costs money, and most of that is done by Image as part of the services provided for that flat fee. 

Publishing also works on economy of scale. If you are self-publishing, you pay a unit cost based on only the copies you print.  If your print run is too small, your unit price for printing alone may be more than the cover price for most comics on the shelf, so you are priced out of competing with other books. Bigger publishing house like Image likely has a contract with a publisher for all their books lowering unit cost production for printing. 

There's huge benefits being picked up by an established publishing house, especially one of the bigger ones like Image vs. going it alone, but there can be some trade offs too. As a creator you have to look at the cost-benefit analysis for your efforts and weigh the pros and cons, and set your priorities based on that. Some do choose to go it solo, others work with the publishing houses. But if you are not established name, going solo helps to establish a track record, show what you can do, that you CAN actually produce a book, etc. all things that can open doors at a bigger publisher. The next big thing will likely be an overnight sensation that has been at it for years establishing their track record on their own before getting a shot at a bigger publisher. Even someone like Kirkman worked those trenches with books like Battle Pope for years before he became an "overnight" sensation with the Walking Dead. If you are trying to break in, your probably going to have to pay some dues and produce some work on your own before your pitch gets accepted by any publisher, including Image. Some pitches have no track record behind them and that means more risk on everyone's part (Image for accepting it, retailers for ordering it, customers for buying it, etc.) so yes, sometimes pitches with proven track records behind them will get a faster track because publishers are businesses first and foremost. Talent can win out at times, but publishers can't print or sell talent, they have to sell product that is actually produced and sometimes all the talent and potential in the world never gets executed, so as a business, you manage risk by going with track records first, and take a risk when it is warranted, not just because who knows it could be good maybe, possibly, if things go right and all the stars lined up. Resources are limited, and opportunity costs come into play, allocating resources into one project means those resources aren't available for another project, and choosing a bad risk often means you don't recoup your investment of time and money to have the resources available to do other things. 

-M

----------


## numberthirty

> My bottom line concern is, the way the system is set up now (and not just Image but comics in general), is it designed to help a new creator with a new vision succeed or *is it just another obstacle in their path? * As a fan, I only have so many pity purchases in me.  And also, is the system feeding mediocrity by shining the light only on known creators and those unknown ones whos only option at making it is by creating a comic that resembles something that's already been done?


In blue...

Have you ever seen a creator that has put a title out through Image frame it that way? Also, Image can't change the entirety of the bigger picture.

As for the second part, I'd say you have to ignore what Image puts out to even entertain the idea that it's roster are creating titles that they are trying to get to resemble something that has already been done.

Do you have examples of such titles at Image?

----------


## ed2962

I was going to say the new Rob Leifeld titles, but the creators who work on them are actually trying to make them _not_ like their well known inspirations.

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

For me, things can feel derivative even when it isn't obvious.  But I don't want to single anything out because it really is just my own opinion and I'd rather not crap over any specific creator's work.  They don't need some asshole on the internet spouting off on them.  I'll go off all day and night on Marvel and DC.  That's different than an indie creator trying to navigate this mess of a system.  I'm just one person feeling kinda meh with the state of things but in all honesty I really want my opinion to be wrong.  I don't want comics or Image or anyone to fail.

MRP cleared a lot of things up for me and I have a much bigger appreciation for the creators.  Thank you for that.  The only thing I am still curious about is this flat fee thing because there may be some misunderstanding.  If everyone pays a flat fee and a comic's success or failure doesn't matter to Image, then why doesn't Image just publish every random pitch they get to collect all the fees.  There's probably something else to it so if anyone knows...?

----------


## numberthirty

> For me, things can feel derivative even when it isn't obvious.  But I don't want to single anything out because it really is just my own opinion and I'd rather not crap over any specific creator's work.  They don't need some asshole on the internet spouting off on them.  I'll go off all day and night on Marvel and DC.  That's different than an indie creator trying to navigate this mess of a system.  I'm just one person feeling kinda meh with the state of things but in all honesty I really want my opinion to be wrong.  I don't want comics or Image or anyone to fail.
> 
> MRP cleared a lot of things up for me and I have a much bigger appreciation for the creators.  Thank you for that.  The only thing I am still curious about is this flat fee thing because there may be some misunderstanding.  If everyone pays a flat fee and a comic's success or failure doesn't matter to Image,* then why doesn't Image just publish every random pitch they get to collect all the fees.*  There's probably something else to it so if anyone knows...?


Even with Image, I'd guess that part of it is that there's a "Critical Mass" point where a certain number of titles would just not be feasible.

----------


## MRP

> For me, things can feel derivative even when it isn't obvious.  But I don't want to single anything out because it really is just my own opinion and I'd rather not crap over any specific creator's work.  They don't need some asshole on the internet spouting off on them.  I'll go off all day and night on Marvel and DC.  That's different than an indie creator trying to navigate this mess of a system.  I'm just one person feeling kinda meh with the state of things but in all honesty I really want my opinion to be wrong.  I don't want comics or Image or anyone to fail.
> 
> MRP cleared a lot of things up for me and I have a much bigger appreciation for the creators.  Thank you for that.  The only thing I am still curious about is this flat fee thing because there may be some misunderstanding.  If everyone pays a flat fee and a comic's success or failure doesn't matter to Image, then why doesn't Image just publish every random pitch they get to collect all the fees.  There's probably something else to it so if anyone knows...?


That's where opportunity costs comes in. Image has a small staff that can only do so much work in a day. If you take up their time and effort on one title, you can't put them on another. The flat fee is per issue (trades are slightly different) and it is less work to keep selling a successful title than to continuously launch new titles. Retailers know what to order on established titles, less so with new books, especially if the creators don't have a track record. Also, failing titles can be a disincentive for future clients. If a book doesn't sell enough to cover the fee, the creators get nothing for the book, which is not a good situation for the creators or for Image themselves. Having a successful track record brings more creators to Image looking to publish there. Having a rep for quality books goes a long way with getting retailers to order new titles as well. Building some kind of customer confidence (and the real customers for publishers in the direct market are retailers who order the books and those orders determine success or failure of a book) is essential to success in the direct market where retailers buy books on a non-returnable basis. So taking the fees and just publishing whatever might have some short term appeal in terms of making a quick buck, but it's not a sound long term strategy for building a successful business plan and a publishing house that continues to attract both creators and retailers. 

-M

----------


## numberthirty

Along the same line as what MRP posted above, I'd say that it's important to keep in mind that "Image Comics" is just one piece of the equation.

For a creator to seriously consider putting work out as an Image title, they would have to take a realistic look at that most of the cost will be theirs to shoulder. I have a feeling that a good-sized portion of the work that doesn't wind up at Image might be because some new creators have trouble managing that method of making a profit from their work.

----------


## DanMad1977

Why does Spawn 285 sell so many copies in May. Source is Comichron.com

Does anyone know?

----------


## numberthirty

> Why does Spawn 285 sell so many copies in May. Source is Comichron.com
> 
> Does anyone know?


Here's a piece on the issue in question...

https://www.bleedingcool.com/2018/05...uried-in-text/

----------


## AngryComicBookNerd

> That's where opportunity costs comes in. Image has a small staff that can only do so much work in a day. If you take up their time and effort on one title, you can't put them on another. The flat fee is per issue (trades are slightly different) and it is less work to keep selling a successful title than to continuously launch new titles. Retailers know what to order on established titles, less so with new books, especially if the creators don't have a track record. Also, failing titles can be a disincentive for future clients. If a book doesn't sell enough to cover the fee, the creators get nothing for the book, which is not a good situation for the creators or for Image themselves. Having a successful track record brings more creators to Image looking to publish there. Having a rep for quality books goes a long way with getting retailers to order new titles as well. Building some kind of customer confidence (and the real customers for publishers in the direct market are retailers who order the books and those orders determine success or failure of a book) is essential to success in the direct market where retailers buy books on a non-returnable basis. So taking the fees and just publishing whatever might have some short term appeal in terms of making a quick buck, but it's not a sound long term strategy for building a successful business plan and a publishing house that continues to attract both creators and retailers. 
> 
> -M


Ah.  Ok I think my tiny brain can process this and it makes a lot of sense.  Inherently, just the nature of the beast and nothing Image can do about it, established creators have an edge.  But from what I'm reading, Image is doing all it can to level the playing field but asking them to take crazy risks is unwise.

Jeez, I'm glad I have zero talent.  I'd rather go be an accountant than deal with all this bullchit of trying to make a comic.

----------


## DanMad1977

> Here's a piece on the issue in question...
> 
> https://www.bleedingcool.com/2018/05...uried-in-text/


Ok, thanks, but i still dont understand what the fuzz is all about.

----------

