Comics still cost much less than a pack of smokes.  Crazy as it sounds, I think this is a good measure.  I think a pack of smokes were a buck and a buck and a quarter when comics were 50 and 60 cents.  Since a pack cost nealry $6.00 now, $2.99 isn't so bad.

Is this a crazy way to look at it?

BTW, I do not smoke.

I sizzle ;-)

However, I'd still say something like Friends would be a better example, because there's a continuing narrative, even if there tends to be more "illusion of change" than real change.  The appeal of Law and Order reruns is that (once again, other than cast changes) you can come in cold, leave cold, and not miss a thing.  Spider-Man has never been like that.  Pick up a random issue (other than a fill-in) and chances are you're in the middle of something going on that won't be resolved that issue.

***************

I'd agree with this. The Law & Order/Spider-Man analogy doesn't hold up. Law & Order is entirely a plot-driven show. The recurring characters just play stock roles in the stories - we aren't expected to get emotionally invested in them.

Spider-Man, on the other hand, has always been about the characters as much as the plot. Not saying Spider-Man needs "real change," but Spider-Man never was about entirely self-contained stories and completely static characters. The ongoing subplots and issue-to-issue melodrama ("How can Gwen love Peter Parker when she hates Spider-Man?") have been an important part of the formula since the Lee/Ditko days.

The key is maintaining an "illusion of change" to keep things moving, while the basic premise doesn't really change. Admittedly, it's a pretty tough balancing act, which makes it even more remarkable that Spider-Man's creative teams were able to pull it off for 20+ years.

But with numbers as small as what comics presently pull in,
those who "wait for the trade" are more likely to be guaranteeing that there won't be a trade, since the original series didn't sell well enough.

I see your point, JB, but this no longer seems to be the case.  The trade IS coming, and it's no secret.  "Writing for the trade" isn't a buzzline, it's what is happening, to the point where these trade chapters may give way to online comics instead of "floppies."  Trades and bookstores have already replaced comics and newstands.  Hopefully they, along with eComics, will not replace comics and comic shops.

For what it's worth, I think the Next Men phone books is a good idea, but you could probably make additional money by re-releasing color trades afterwards, especially if these things go to book stores.  Then, you could create a market for new Next Men comics by promising to deliver new trades.  This seems to be the way it works now.

Sad, I know.

Granted, I'm biased, but I think Next Men trades should be selling as well as Watchmen trades.  It was that good.  Maybe your "Magnum Opus."

Is my Latin correct?

Stephen Robinson wrote: Spider-Man is more than just a guy with spider powers. Sure, if you're talented enough, you can make a wise-cracking married superhero interesting, but you've lost the original character in order to do this. It's like giving Batman super powers, revealing he's from another planet, and forcing him to get a real job (maybe at a newspaper). The result might be good but why ruin 1 character to create another when you could just create 2 different characters.

Turning Batman into Superman isn't the same thing as Peter Parker taking one of his romantic entanglements to the next level.  The former is grafting a new character onto an existing one while the latter is a logical progression from what has come before (for arguments sake, go with how the newspaper strip set-up the marriage :-) - I know people have cited the abruptness in the comics in the past, but would the anti-marriage people really have accepted the development even if we'd had 50 issues of "dating to engagement to marriage" stories?). 

I don't think there's any disagreement with that from either side.  It's just that the anti-marriage folks feel it should be the end of the story rather than part of the middle, whereas the pro-marriage are perfectly happy with Peter taking that step and seeing what comes next.

I am not pro-marriage, but once married, just STOP.  Same for Superman.

No aging, no babies, and no divorce.  Just stop!

So JB you have done zero to explain why there ARE superheroes who are clearly adults who are able to capture the atention an affection of kids and adults alike.

If you are writing for a 12 year old audience who don't want to read about their parents being superheroes....

Why don't they? With that statement, you are saying that not only Spider-Man should be a teenager and should not be an adult, then therefore Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Thing, Profesor X, Batman, Green Lantern...should all be teenagers.

ANd you don't see that there might be 16 yr olds or 18 yr olds or 20 yr olds who might enjoy those kinds of stories. But to you they are too old to be reading comic books.

That has got to be the stupidest thing I ever heard.

On one hand you are complaining that the industry has pushed all of the kids away, and on the other hand you are saying that they should stop reading comics after a few years any way. You can't have it both ways. Do you want to bitch about the industry pushing away young fans? Or do you think that fandom of comics has a naturally short shelf life and should naturally drift away after a certain age. You have argued both sides on this one thread.

Maybe it is you that just doesn't "Get" it.

I never said that keeping Peter the way that you want him is not viable, but I have not seen one single reason that the way that I want is not viable.

****

The stories are much more bland and boring, even with the best writers at the helm.

Also how exactly did Peter get to be 26. If you are really being generous Peter is 23 or 24 tops.