I'd like to think that today's comics would sell just a little better due to there not being a DSM to siphon away the readers and prevent new ones from popping up amongst the throngs who would accompany their parents/guardians to the newsstands and supermarket bookshelves.  However, given what the trends in the rest of the entertainment industry have been during the three decades which passed while the DSM was in place, I doubt that it would've resulted in much of a difference in the quality of what's out there today.

   While the DSM did see an explosion of genres at its onset due to the exposure of small independent publishers, much of that turned out to be "monkey see, monkey do" imitation of hot trends (the Image boys, "bad girl" comics, elves, zombies, etc).  It also led to the reduction of the number of new readers who would've kept the mainstream comics at a level, though that wouldn't have affected the decline by too much due to the distractions of video games, movies, and the Internet.

The DSM was created as what today we call an "after-market". As conceived by Phil Seuling and midwifed by Paul Levitz, the idea of the DSM was that dealers -- "retailers" did not exist yet -- would be able to buy their comics "directly" from the companies, without the middle-man of the distributors. In this way they would get the books at a substantially reduced cost, but, unlike the regular outlets, they would not be able to return the unsold copies. Thus, every comic sold thru the DSM would be close to 100% profit for the companies, and the dealers would build up a stock of back issues for future sale.

Unfortunately, that "100% profit" was simply too much of a siren call, for the companies, and as more and more of those dealers began transforming themselves into "retailers" (tho very often with no real skill in actual retail), the bean counters at the companies started seeing more and more ways to use the DSM to make money they might otherwise not. First, there cam the "Direct Only" titles -- books that had low sales which, in the traditional venues, would have meant cancellation. But, by selling them only thru the DSM, even those low sales represented 100% profit.

Gee! What if we sold ALL the books that way. . . ??

And what if we shot ourselves in both feet AND the head!!

••

I have heard -- and this may be just industry legend, so take it with maybe a couple of grains of salt -- that the sales on the non-MAD titles were marginal at best, even for the time, and it simply would not have been economically viable to switch them to magazine format.

From my own point of view, I'd say MAD underwent a considerable transformation when it turned into a magazine, and the other EC titles would probably not have "translated" so well.

To me the DSM is a perfect example of economics failure:

looking at profit rather than value. To whit:

Through the DSM I make 100% profit.
I have spent less to produce so the profit margin is higher.
But I sell less and so the overall amount is less

The lunacy of it all:
YOU HAVE LESS MONEY IN YOUR HAND YOU IDIOT

It's the same thinking that JB mentioned in the employment thread where a reduced increase in jobs was seen as a bad thing - the jobs still increased. but with the opposite result.

Here, although the profit margin increases, the actual income decreases.

Who looks at that and says it is a good thing?

Economists

Mind you, since the budget for a company year has traditionally been based on projected earnings -- spending NEXT YEAR'S money THIS YEAR -- in some ways this perception is accurate, tho the "loss" is self-inflicted!

Impulse buying, formerly the life blood of the industry, has been cut to almost nothing.

One of my old friends from high school runs a video rental store in my hometown (which is pretty much doinked once high speed internet and RedBox migtrate to the Indiana backwoods) and I have tried to get him to go in halves with me to start selling comics at his video store. 

I'm not particuarly concerned with making a profit on my end (though getting my money back to break even would be a nice bonus).  I think it would be great to have a venue to start putting comics in places kids go (at least until all video rental stores have gone the way of the dodo). 

And even as I approach 37, I still nurture the dream of producing my own comic (if only I could draw and did not need an artist!) and what a great place that would be to sell them from.

He has so far rejected the idea, even with only half the initial investment risk. 

I usually sell my backissues to 1/2 Price Books at dimes on the dollar so the kids in there can get some cheap comics from a decent collection.  But I've also deluded myself into believing that children other than my own son actually buy comics from 1/2 Price.