The French translations have been doing this for decades.

For example, you have the "X-Men" monthly, which on any random month will give you an issue of Uncanny, an issue of Adjectiveless/Legacy, an issue of New X-Men/Young X-Men, and an issue of whatever mini is running that month (or an extra issue of one the three other books), all for €4.

Similarly, the Spider-Man monthly used to be a combination of all of his books (though of course with BND they're just putting 3/4 issues of Amazing).

Of course, for some bloated franchises this is not enough : for example, we also have "Astonishing X-Men", which reprints X-Factor, New New New Excalibur, Exiles, and sometimes Astonishing.

And there's also the bimonthly Ultimate books, the various "Extra" series for short-lived solo series and some special minis... We're still far from the "only one monthly" goal.
JD | Email | 06.29.09 - 2:34 am | #

They do something similar in the UK. Panini, I think, do a number of reprint comics that collect a couple of the big ongoing titles (they ignore the smaller, minor titles). So we get titles like Avengers Unconquered, Essential X-Men and Fantastic Four Adventures for around £2.50.

Of course, these are just reprint collections (which sell in regular bookstores and some newsstands btw). The original floppies are still available.

Reducing the number of books would surely help in promoting these titles - and help clear some shelf space to promote other titles. They'd only have to highlight one Avengers/Spiderman/Superman book so everyoe will know where to get their fix.

Having said that, how woulditall work. Is something like "Exiles" a standalone book or an X-Men book? Would Mighty and New Avengers both be allowed because they deal with different characters?
nimbus | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 2:52 am | #

It sounds like a pretty reasonable plan that would work for something like Superman. There really isn't too much differentiation between Superman or Action or even Man of Steel and Adventures but something like X-Men? I can't see that working as a single book or even as an anthology title. It seems like there are more X-Men books I am not buying every day. I would probably drop X-Factor if it was roped into a collection-type thing with X-Force and Uncanny, though I'm far from the majority opinion. Well, never mind then.
Sebastian | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 4:08 am | #

I'd imagine we'd see a lot more of what Marvel's doing with Amazing Spider-Man. Superman, Batman, X-Men, and Avengers would issue books two to three times a month with rotating creative teams working together more like a TV show's writing bullpen.

In other words, you'd still get Superman/Action Comics/World Of New Krypton, but it would all just be called "Superman".
K26dp | 06.29.09 - 4:28 am | #

Seems like the market in the 80's. Doesn't all those Wolverine, Batman, and Deadpool extras contribute to your profit?

I want to buy Superman and Batman. By having multiple writers handle the character, I can buy the one I like and avoid the ones I don't like. The point is to give me, the consumer, a variety to choose from.
Ray | Email | 06.29.09 - 4:47 am | #

Yeah, as late as the late 80s, I think *only* Superman, Batman, and Spider-Man would have broken this rule among solo heroes, plus JLA/ JLE (which under this system would just have to be given slightly-more-different names, I guess?); Avengers and West Coast Avengers; and Titans and Titans Spotlight.

And back then, Superman or Spider-Man miniseries or one-shots were rare.

Things don't go to hell, here as everywhere else, until the launch of adjectiveless Spider-Man and X-Men.


But as long as the rule allows X-Men, X-Factor, New Mutants, and Excalibur; or Justice League and Justice Society and Young Justice; or Batman, Detective Comics Starring Robin And Frequently Guest-Starring Batman; or Superman, Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes, Superman's Pal whatsisface, and Superman's Girlfriend whatsername; I don't think you'll see any great redirection of creative or readerly effort.

The direct market will bear what the direct market will bear in X-titles, say. And whatever the rule is about how much rebranding is required to let it fit the rule, Marvel will go rightupthisclose to the rule in order to meet that demand.

With respect to ongoings, you'll see a flowering of slightly-rebranded shared-subuniverse titles, like the "families" of books each publisher had at one point. There might be some new creative energy in minis-- or else the Big 2 might decide that minis starring second-tier character are sure-fire losers and get out of the mini business altogether except for Events.

"I'll say okay to annuals, though, provided they are annual and not, say, every nine months. "

When's the last time any Big 2 comic had, say, three annuals in a row published in the space of 25 months? Does any Big 2 book still maintain continuous numbering of Annuals from 'wayback? It seems to me that "annual" has become a name for "once every few years oneshot or slightly oversized story that doesn't really fit into the ongoing, maybe because it ran so late that the ongoing just had to go ahead without it." I don't perceive any problem of annuals coming out *too* quickly.

(I know, you were just heading off one possible escape route around the rules. But it provided an excuse got a rant.)
Jacob T. Levy | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 5:53 am | #

You'd get a lot of loopholery - Marvel Team-Up and Two-In-One would return, and spin-offs would be generated that feature a suspicious number of prominent guest-stars ("The Prime of Miss Brant, Betty," "Superman's Milkman, Wilbur Lake," etc.).

//Oo/\
Matthew Craig | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 6:04 am | #

I think it's a great idea. I've always liked the idea of combining the different titles into one "anthology" sized digest/giant sized format and putting that out monthly. I think it would also drive more periodical sales, because you'd be getting more bang for the buck.
Phil Looney | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 6:11 am | #

Interesting thought. You make a good point about how if there was only one X-Men even you would buy it. I recently bought Essential X-Men 9 and have been really enjoying it. So much so that I succumbed to the gorgeous cover of the X-Club in last week's Uncanny X-Men and bought my first modern x-men comic since Morrison. It occurs to me that if there was a single X-Men title that contained all the characters, I would but it. I wouldn't feel like I'd walked in half-way through a movie.
I've bought some of those Panini comics mentioned above and they are a good format. Something like that could be interesting. Imagine Uncanny, Legacy, Wolverine and Excalibur coming out monthly under one cover. Pricey, but worth a go, no?

One down-side I can see of the only-one comic per team/character idea is they if its, say, a 5 part story and the first two parts are awful, chances are you'll have people dropping the title with no real way to entice them back.
GQ | Email | 06.29.09 - 6:33 am | #

It'd be nice to see one (or both!) of the Big Two do a Shonen Jump type monthly mag where they put stories from several different titles in one big issue. They could even do this on cheap newsprint and keep the floppies as well. That way budget-minded fans could still get a good dose of titles (and perhaps pick up a few new ones) and the comic companies could score some extra coin each month. It might a short term loss for Marvel/DC for the monthly mag itself but theoretically it could drive more sales of trades so potentially profitable when all is said and done.

I had always been thinking of this more as a selection of different titles but it'd also make sense to compile all the X-titles or other series which are spread across the map.

I think your idea is sound - especially since it'd address one of the biggest complaints about entries for new readers: "where to start?" If you want to start reading X-Men and there's only one X-Men comic on the rack, it's pretty clear what to do
Keath | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 6:34 am | #

"But not multiple Justice League comics. One's plenty. "

What, and deprive the world of Extreme Justice?

(Although, considering that that was actually a wholly different set of characters, does that mean your thought experiment would actually allow for Extreme Justice to be inflicted upon the reading public?)
Loren | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 6:53 am | #

Re: the "digest" approach, for the non-direct-market public, doesn't Marvel already kinda-sorta do this? Spider-Man Magazine, Marvel Adventures Magazine, and the like? They bundle up a couple of issues of MA-line comics and sell them as larger periodicals. You can find 'em in bookstores and the occasional 7-11. It's an excellent idea. I hope it sells well.
Harvey Jerkwater | Email | 06.29.09 - 7:01 am | #

What if the characters/teams from Marvel and DC were allowed one starring title, and that's it? Only one X-Men comic, only one Batman comic, only one Wolverine comic, only one Spider-Man comic -- you know, like that.

You mean like how things were (for the most part) in the 1960s, when most titles regularly sold in the hundreds of thousands? Eww, who would want THAT?

Seriously, right now the superhero fans actually WILL buy 6 different titles featuring the same character, so there's no incentive to NOT publish them. Joe Average Citizen wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole, but Marvel and DC don't want Joe Average's money, they want that true believer money. It spends better or something, I guess.
dave merrill | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 7:36 am | #

"I'm going to assume, for the purposes of this, that Marvel and DC can get by just fine on the profits from this more limited range of titles."

But the beauty of your idea (don't you just love the sound of that phrase) is that the range of titles would be expanded. Marvel and D.C. wouldn't be able to lean on their Wolverines and The Batsmen, so they would be forced to make some of their other characters interesting.

For instance, D.C. could address untold geo-political storylines in a "Global Guardians" title. And Marvel could do stories about drugs, corruption in sports and the explosion of MMA with a title based on The Unlimited Class Wrestling Federation. D.C. could do the Impact characters as D.C. Universe-style stories for younger readers. Marvel could do something worthwhile with the Inhumans.

The possibilities -- and possibilities for profit! -- are boundless because they both have deep, deep benches. But as long as they insist on keeping four Wolverines on the court at one time, those possibilities will never be explored.

-- MrJM
MrJM | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 7:45 am | #

But this only makes sense as a concern if we stick with the Everything Is Vital Continuity and All Each Issue Is Just A Slice Of A Story world. I don't see anyone complaining that they have to buy Betty & Veronica -and- Archie's Pals & Gals.

I think that a belief that getting rid of a few Wolverine titles would simply make shelf space for other comics has some large assumptions in it. Much of the comics business these days is these additional titles. Would Ralph's even be able to stay in business without that "must buy three copies of All-Star Batman And Robin, The Boy Wonder to enter" policy?
Nat Gertler | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 7:54 am | #

I'd like to see something along the lines of "Shonen Jump"/"Shojo Beat" from Viz for these types of titles. $5.99-$6.99 for about six different books, longer format stories, perhaps an article or two (some could be extended versions of the Dan DiDio/Joe Quesada columns), a return of the letters columns, fan art pages, etc.

They could easily resurrect Batman Family, Superman Family, etc. Marvel is already producing Spider-Man Family and the occasional Hulk Family

DC:
Superman Family could include stories for Superman, Supergirl, Lois, Jimmy, Kon-El/Superboy, Steel, etc.

Batman Family could include Batman, Robin, Red Robin, Batgirl, Batwoman, Catwoman, Gotham Central, etc.

The Justice League book would be a Justice League story, a Justice Society story, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Green Lantern, Flash, etc. (perhaps two books, one for JLA, one for JSA).

Titans/Teen Titans book could feature a story for each time, plus solo stories for various members.

We'd need another book for the greater DC Universe (Showcase): Legion, Secret Six, Booster Gold, etc.

Marvel:
Spider-Man family includes Spider-Man, Spider-Woman (Jessica Drew), Venom, Spider-Girl, etc.

Hulk family includes Hulk, Rulk, She-Hulk, Savage She-Hulk, Son of Hulk, etc.

Avengers book includes New Avengers, Mighty Avengers, Dark Avengers, Young Avengers, etc.

"Marvel Heroes" is the Captain America, Iron Man, Fantastic Four, Black Panther, etc. book (Marvel Comics Presents).

X-Men Family: X-Men, New Mutants, X-Factor, Wolverine, Rogue, Storm, etc.

The Galactic line would likely need an anthology as would the "Max" type heroes (Elektra, Daredevil, Punisher).

---
This formatting would assure better stories, because the publishers would REALLY have to strive to distill all their submissions down to the best stuff to include. This would also hopefully slow down the amount of crossovers (which have been getting crazy lately from both sides).
Bryan Irrera | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 8:09 am | #

I'd be neat if the big sellers, your X-Men and Batmans, could be moved to a weekly or bi-weekly schedule, with rotating creative teams a la Amazing Spider-Man. This might make a certain segment of the comics-buying public less inclined to subscribe to books at their shop as they follow only certain creators, but it'd make checking out the new releases more exciting.

And how about anthology titles? These could make a comeback in this kind of market. Perhaps the ground rules here would be either no one with their own title gets a story, or maybe there's only one story per book from characters or teams with their own book. The anthologies could be themed, like Bryan says above, but in this case for example Batman has his own book, and Detective is an anthology where you'd read Robin, Batwoman, Catwoman, etc. Superman has his own book, Jimmy and Lois have stories in Action Comics...
Steve Canadian | Email | 06.29.09 - 9:35 am | #

I've ONLY been buying one title of any multi-title "group." My LCS owner gets annoyed by this, I think. For example, I only buy New Avengers (mainly holding out for Stuart Immonen to come on board), but he consistently suggests/throws in my box Mighty, Dark, Light, Mocha and whatever other variety of Avengers (even the friggin' Avengers: Reunion or whatever that was). This is a good practice for him to increase his store's profits, but otherwise it's wasted on me.

And I'm totally confused when I read accounts of what's happening in other books anyway. For example, I just read in CSN that Carol Danvers as Ms. Marvel "died" a few issues back in her own title (I know the current Ms. Marvel in that book is Moonstone or whomever). But Ms. Marvel is bouncing around in "New Avengers" meanwhile. And there seem to be 18 versions of the Fantastic Four floating around, with the "main" title (which I DO collect and enjoy) seemingly having nothing to do with any other limited Dark Reign-Secret Invasion-What The Hell series being printed. Could be because it takes Millar four issues to cover one day's time in the FF's lives.

But I guess my point is, and I agree with Mike on this, my problem isn't so much with multiple iterations of the same character or group title, but the constant spin-off limited series that may or may not be "in continuity." And I'm no continuity junkie, but I don't understand why a new series has to be launched every time there is a minor change to a lead character. Why does there have to be a Captain America: Reborn series? Shouldn't that story be told in the regular C.A. series ANYWAY? If "Secret Invasion" was a company-wide X-over, why couldn't the S.I. issues of regular series such as X-Men and Fantastic Four include the S.I. tie-ins instead of spin-off series? Did people buy those? Did they care that much?

Yes, I am a product of 1980s comic book readership, so in my perception, storylines should be fluid but consistent. Remember when the FF's HQ was destroyed and they had to stay with the Avengers for a few months in the mid-80s? This was consistently exhibited in both the Avengers title and the FF title. X-Men were "dead?" Every other title knew it and made reference to it. It didn't interrupt storylines. It merely made for a more coherent reading experience. If you're going to have characters interact in a "shared" universe, then you have to just accept the fact that continuity matters.

Wow, that was a tangent. Do I think individual title sales would increase immensely if Marvel/DC were limited to publishing one title per character/group per month? Well … kind of. It would only consolidate the numbers from the divergent titles to the "main" titles. Would that open up the market for new concepts? Sure. But would Marvel or DC really try out new concepts, or would they just rehash the same ones they've been doing for 75 years?
Pj Perez | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 9:40 am | #

I just want to see the return of the Marvel Graphic Novels series. Those (well, some of them) were pretty special stories.
Greg Stinson | Email | Homepage | 06.29.09 - 11:01 am | #

I'd like to think with character/franchise titles limited, quality would be sustained over longer periods of time. Like the 1st 38 issues of Amazing Spider-Man or 100 issues of the Fantastic Four. Or maybe something akin to the strong offerings from the 3 flagship titles -- Ult. Spider-Man, Ult. X-Men & The Ultimates -- of Marvel's Ultimate line launch, which created a ton of buzz for the imprint.

On the financial side of things, Steven Grant recently posted a wonderful column -- http://www.comicbookresources.co...rticle& id=21751 -- on the economic myths of expanding a comics line. Bottom line: More isn't necessarily better.

As far as anthologies publishing multiple titles, I can see this happening. People who just want to pick up individual titles will download them upon release from a site akin to Longbox.com or wait for larger, individual trades. The anthologies would be a way to keep comic shops in the "every Wednesday" game despite the rise of digital comics.
Joe Vince | Email | 06.29.09 - 1:36 pm | #

You know, I never understood the difficult you people have with the anthology format. Here in Brazil, comics never had less than 50 pages and two to three different titles in it (it could have three superman stories in it, but in that case it would have a 100 pages and have a JLA story to boot).
Julio Dvulture | Email | 06.29.09 - 4:30 pm | #

Another benefit I can see is that the Big Two would be more willing and able to take risks with new characters and franchises. The temptation to just milk a sure thing to dust in lieu of new ventures would be greatly curtailed.

That could only be an extremely good thing. Why? Well, the Big Two have quite a few very similar and even interrelated problems, but I think most of them can be chalked up to extremely short-term thinking and a total risk-adverse mindset, which...well, puts them on the same boat as every other big-money entertainment industry in the United States today, when you think about it.
Chad | Email | 06.29.09 - 6:17 pm | #

Boom Boom hater!
Sarah | Email | 06.29.09 - 8:30 pm | #

Well, since we're just spitballing anyway, why not say "no loopholes"?

Back in 2001 when I was first getting back into comics my old college roommate and I shot the shit about this exact plan. We tried to limit Marvel and DC's lines to just about a dozen different series per company, divvied up among the major characters, concepts, and "tones." It was fun.
Sean T. Collins | Email | Homepage | 06.30.09 - 8:59 am | #

A few years ago I picked up a $6.99 trade paperback from Boom! Studios called 'Ninja Tales' when I was looking for something new and interesting to read that wasn't too expensive. It was a really nice format with a variety of different stories (all centering around ninjas, of course) that included advertisements for other Boom! Studios work. I'm not sure about how many other books have been published this way (from any company) but given my willingness to buy something completely new after being intrigued by the format and price, I think it's not too shabby an idea for companies to look into as a means of publication.
Andrew Clark | Email | 06.30.09 - 9:27 am | #

I think you would see a slow, but consistent uptrend in sales. If there were one and only one Superman title, then it would get the best creative team and it would encourage folks to sample it. Ditto Batman, Spider-Man and the X-Men.

You would also see a lot more diversity. Marvel and DC would both want to crank out a similar number of titles. Cutting Wolverine and X-Men back to one each means finding TEN pitches for new series. You might see a return of forgotten genres like horror, war, western and romance.

Honestly, it would be a healthier marketplace as a whole.
Dean | Email | 07.10.09 - 2:32 pm | #