So what does that make changing the Editor like? 

I think the parallels don't quite fit neatly enough to make a hard and fast compairson.  Some characters Sell, Some artists/writers Sell, some only sell in combination with each other.  Ultimately, the companies need to realize that the Characters are the resorces they OWN, and no matter how much a given creator will sell  - he'll eventually move on -- the characters are there's forever (or untill their creator goes to court to reclaim them) and can remain profitable unless they've let a transiant creator turn the character into "box office poison"

James C. Taylor wrote: This just handed to me: Not everyone in the world has the same taste as Francis Grey. We now return you to the thread.

You will pay for that, Lightning Man.  Oh, yes, you will pay.

It is in sharks, but a somewhat transparent nictitating membrane could function to limit the amount of light striking the retina. 

(Oh, you didnt think I thought it through before I posted!!!)

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

And here I thought I would surprise you and act a little smart. I should have known better.

"Ultimately, the companies need to realize that the Characters are the resorces they OWN, and no matter how much a given creator will sell  - he'll eventually move on -- the characters are there's forever (or untill their creator goes to court to reclaim them) and can remain profitable unless they've let a transiant creator turn the character into "box office poison""

This is the point.  If a publisher has got a creator doing their own original work, promoting that creator (especially if they're already well-known) is an essential part of selling that work.  But when you're hiring someone to work on a pre-existing character owned by the publisher, hyping the creator is a bad thing in the long run.  You shouldn't try and promote Bendis or Morrison like they're Brad Pitt when they're working on Daredevil or Superman.  You should be promoting Daredevil and Superman like they're Brad Pitt.

Mike