Marvel to comics retailers: we'll give you limited edition singles if you destroy our competitors' products

Marvel Comics has offered comics retailers access to a limited-edition variant cover run of "Fear Itself #6," but only if the comic-shops destroy their No. 1 issue of DC Comics' Flashpoint and send 50 covers to Marvel:

Make no mistake, this is perfectly legal. The comic-shop proprietors would be destroying their own property, and it is their right so to do. However, this seems little different than someone buying books to burn them.
They would destroy a work of literature with the express intention of preventing another person from reading it. Anyone who does this is engaging in censorship, and Marvel Comics is agent provocateur.
This is not the first time Marvel Comics has tried this, and, according to them, previous efforts have netted tens of thousands of covers.

Marvel Bribes Retailers to Destroy DC Comics

I write books. My latest is a YA science fiction novel called Homeland (it's the sequel to Little Brother). More books: Rapture of the Nerds (a novel, with Charlie Stross); With a Little Help (short stories); and The Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow (novella and nonfic). I speak all over the place and I tweet and tumble, too.

MORE: Business • censorship • Comics • mafia • sleazy

More at Boing Boing

Eurovision 2013: An American in London

The technology that links taxonomy and Star Trek

ernunnos

Is that Streisand in the Iron Man suit?
Michael Curran

Billionaire industrialist Bruce Wayne could not be reached for comment.
http://twitter.com/cobaltmale Graeme Robertson

does not seem very timely here in UK
microcars

so, let me get this straight:
Once the cover is ripped off, the item cannot be sold?
In addition- the contents cannot be read?
How does that work? Does the remainder of the issue somehow self-destruct?
- Spriggan_Prime
  
  Yes.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stripped_book
  
  edit: guess I was late to the party but yes as stated above by others…stripped books.
http://www.kmoser.com kmoser

If any comic-shop proprietor destroys a comic book as part of this deal, it will be for the express intention of gaining money. Preventing anybody from reading it is merely an inconvenient side-effect. Besides, lack of a cover doesn’t prevent anybody from reading the rest of the comic book. If the proprietors were smart, they’d sell the coverless comic books at greatly reduced price, or even throw them in for free with every Marvel comic sold.
- Spriggan_Prime
  
  Except that they can’t legally sell them. I’m sure a few find their ways into the regular customer’s pull boxes though.
Scott Rubin

A savvy retailer will just buy 50 extra copies of the DC book. Thus, Marvel ends up just increasing DC’s sales! Talk about stupid.
Bubba73

I know very little about comics but if these issues are in anyway collectible aren’t they driving up the 2nd hand value and cachet of their rivals’ issues by reducing the number that are extant?

edit for spelling
- http://newnumber6.livejournal.com Peter
  
  Yes, but that really doesn’t matter much. Marvel gets no cut out of 2nd hand value, nor does DC. If anyone does, it’s the retailers, so they win twice.
  
  Where Marvel wins is that readers MAY not get access to one of these comics when they want it, increasing the likelihood that they won’t buy the followup.
  
  The thing is, the nefarious aspect of this is a bit overblown. These comics are ordered months in advance… chances are, the only reason retailers are going to cash in on this is if they speculated wrongly on the demand, and they’re now sitting on product that they’re unlikely to sell anytime soon… it’ll sit in their back issue bins and maybe, if they’re really lucky, make up the money over a few years. Whereas an exclusive variant, they can potentially sell on Ebay and make up the money quickly.
  
  If anything, it’s more of a “Haha, check out how DC’s sales are overblown, retailers have extra product they’d rather destroy to get one of our products!” type stunt.
  
  It’s still petty and immature, but it’s not really a cutthroat business decision. DC already got paid for these comics.
  - Bubba73
    
    Thanks Peter. I agree it’s petty but still think that all they’re ultimately doing is adding exclusivity to a competitor’s brand even if only for this issue, they are making it difficult to obtain DC comics which possibly may lead to a hard to get = desirable situation. Surely the canny retailers would refuse the deal and up the price of the No 1 Flashpoint especially if 50 = only 1 special edition but again I’m not up on comics and relative values.
    
    I’m not even gonna get into the whole destroying literature thing ’cause I think we’re all on the same page. Babum!
PlutoniumX

Yeah I think this is more just for publicity than the actual plan to destroy the other books. Which will happen.

The variant cover issue will be sold for the cost of 50 DC books at cost + markup.

I am pretty sure they can’t legally sell the damaged coverless comics. I would like to see them dropped off at a shelter or some place where kids without a lot of money for comics could read them.
adamrice

This is Marvel’s backwards way to increase the collectible value of DC’s Flashpoint.
Thad Boyd

Sigh. Since some of the commenters don’t seem to get the “tearing the cover off” part of the story, it’s probably a good idea to explain it:

Retailers of books — book-kind-of-books, not just comics — tear off the covers and send them back when they need to get a refund for whatever reason. Usually because the product is damaged. The reason they do this is because it’s less expensive to ship a cover than an entire book. Contractually, when they do this they are obligated to destroy the innards rather than selling them anyway; open a book and read the fine print on the first page sometime.

Whether Marvel is actually ENCOURAGING people to buy DC books just to destroy them is a matter of debate. The way Marvel frames it is “If you order more than you can sell, feel free to throw the rest away and send us proof and we’ll send you a prize.”

Though of course that still means the shop is destroying 50 copies of a comic instead of, say, donating them.

That and the fact that Flashpoint #1 seems to be selling just fine — it’s in what, third, fourth printing at this point?
mccrum

Those who are unfamiliar with the process of “stripping” a book of it’s cover should grab any paperback book they have to find the following printing somewhere near the copyright page:
If you purchased this book without a cover you should be aware that
this book is stolen property. It was reported as “unsold and destroyed”
to the publisher and neither the author nor the publisher has received
any payment for this “stripped book.”https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Stripped_book

You can read the information inside but nobody can sell it to you without the cover. You’ll see newspapers without the front page sitting next to the newsstand at the end of the day for the same reason.
NomadEngineer

If any retailer still has 50 copies of Flashpoint #1 sitting around they have egregiously over ordered and are probably willing to do anything to get rid of them.
HikingStick

Stripped covers are the common way for receiving credit for unsold goods in the world of books (and comics). It’s a lot cheaper to ship back a stack of covers. I run into little shops and thrift stores all the time that are selling stripped books. Book retailers have a contractual obligation to destroy/trash the rest of the book or periodical. Many books even include an advisory on some of the initial pages that advises readers that neither authors nor publishers get their due (money) from stripped books. It describes how booksellers are credited for every cover they return, and that the books are supposed to be destoryed.

Having worked in retail books for years, I do my best not to buy stripped books on principle.

I agree with others that this is more of a publicity stunt. I think it’s a stretch to call it censorship.
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KLDXI7FI3NUHYC23SUHMGLNBCQ Tom

People still read comic books? I thought we just dressed up like the characters and posted their pictures on Reddit..
Joe Helfrich

The problem with this theory, of course, was that Flashpoint #1 was released back in May. http://www.dccomics.com/dcu/comics/?cm=17823 Shops have long since ordered and received Flashpoint #1.

While it’s certainly possible for a shop to buy extras of DCs product on spec just to get Marvel’s special cover, that’s not in Marvel’s interest–DC gets the same money (and sales numbers) either way. Comics generally aren’t returnable if they don’t sell. Marvel’s offering them something in return for unsold product they would otherwise be stuck with.

They don’t have any interest in getting the whole book back from the retailer though; this is the same as when booksellers used to strip books and magazines to get refunds from distributors. (And why every mass market paperback still has “if you bought this book without a cover” text in it.)

Now, you can argue about the judgement of shop owners who might order books they can’t sell anticipating this sort of thing (I will admit there is probably more than one store owner that would do this) or the effectiveness of this marketing technique for Marvel (this does mean that the first issue of DC’s summer event, which might
still be sitting on the shelves and getting DC exposure, will now go
away, and it will probably get them some store goodwill). But they aren’t inciting people to order books just to destroy them.
Bass

Marvel has done this before and it’s not just for Flashpoint #1. It’s for current tie-ins to Flashpoint.

http://www.comicsbeat.com/2011/07/26/marvel-offers-variants-for-dc-covers-again/
http://www.facebook.com/people/Aron-Briggs/1386087012 Aron Briggs

seriously i could care less about the economics behind this. what i can’t get over is how awful that cover is. The foreshortening on Iron Man’s arm hurts my eyes to look at. and I swear Ed McGuiness must start by drawing a bunch of sausages and then slowly turns them in to people.
http://grumer.org/ Avram Grumer

A little more background on the tearing-off-covers thing: It’s common in the book-selling business to be able to return mass-market paperbacks to the publisher for a refund if they don’t sell. In actual practice, instead of mailing the whole book back, the bookstore just strips off the cover and sends that back, and pulps the rest of the book. This is why some paperbacks have a warning in the front saying that if you bought it without a cover, the store is trying to rip the publisher and author off.

This, returnability, is the actual distinction between mass-market and trade paperbacks in traditional fiction publishing. While it’s also true that most mass-market paperbacks are rack-sized, and most trade paperbacks larger, size is not an essential difference between the two categories. Returnability is.

In comics, fans have adopted the term “trade paperback” to refer to any paperback reprint collection, but I don’t know whether they are technically trades as the publishing industry uses the term. This story implies that the collections in question may actually be mass-market editions.
- Brainspore
  
  It’s common in the book-selling business to be able to return
  mass-market paperbacks to the publisher for a refund if they don’t sell.
  
  I understand that but I still don’t see how this offer would hurt D.C. since it apparently requires retailers to send said covers to Marvel. (Unless Marvel can claim the refund for themselves, which seems unlikely.)
http://twitter.com/tjic tjic

@HikinStick:disqus

> Stripped covers are the common way for receiving credit for unsold goods in the world of books (and comics).:

Having worked at bookstores, and having owned a comic book store (HeavyInk.com), I’ll point out that you are HALF correct.

Comics used to work in the send-the-cover-back model, but stopped working that way 25 or so years back.

Comics now are sold by the distributor (the monopoly Diamond Comics) on a no-returns basis.
Julian Fine

One thing to remember with comics is that the Direct Market buys their books without the possibility of returns or refunds in exchange for discounts on the front end.
http://www.beeurd.com/ Andy

No need to get annoyed when people don’t understand why they (apparently) can’t sell a book with the front cover torn off…

I’ve just checked a dozen or so of the hundreds of books I have in my house and not a single one of those I checked has any sort of notice mentioning removed covers.

So I assume this fine print is a US thing, so overseas readers like myself would not naturally understand.
- Spriggan_Prime
  
  Being that most major publishing houses are international your claim is bs. Most publishers list all the ‘houses’ the have under their name title.
  
  Example: Random House: New York, London, Paris, Sydney, Hong Kong.
  
  Most haven’t printed the stripped book warning in years because it was considered common practice and with the digital age the business models and focuses have changed. Grab and old high circulation paperback book from the 60s or 70s and you’ll see these listed on the copyright page.
  - http://www.beeurd.com/ Andy
    
    So you say my claim that the warning isn’t printed in books is bs, then continue to agree that it’s not printed in books these days.
    
    Like a billion or so other people I wasn’t alive in the 60s or 70s, so I don’t have any books that were printed in this time – only reprints from the 90s onwards.
    
    Major publishing houses may be international but they still print different versions in different territories due to spelling and other regional language variations.
    
    Regardless, I was merely pointing out the obvious fact that not everybody knows everything and so perhaps we shouldn’t get so wound up when people aren’t aware of something. ;)
    - Spriggan_Prime
      
      No, I said your claim that this was some ‘silly American law’ was BS as it was a standard international business practice.
      It is not printed in a lot of books anymore because its a COMMON
      business practice, and the selling of stripped books isn’t the problem
      today that it once was. But it is still illegal to sell stripped books.
      
      I am one of those ‘billions of people’. 1981. I own many books from
      before my birth atleast a dozen are over 100 years old. Your library may
      vary but don’t act like it’s incredulous.
      
      “Major publishing houses may be international but they still print
      different versions in different territories due to spelling and other
      regional language variations.”
      
      Not unless it an educational text. If it’s a creative work they can’t do
      that without the authors permission after sign-off on final edits.
      
      Just making you aware.
http://web.ncf.ca/shawnhcorey/ Shawn H Corey

Were these guys born stupid? Go out and buy a whole bunch of our competitors’ product and send us proof that you did? Get that? Spend your money on our competitors and increases their sales. Want we want proof that you caused our competitors sales to increase and increase their stock prices over ours. If I owned stock in Marvel, I’d sue the CEO. How can anyone be that stupid?
CGulow

Any competition between “Entertainment Products” such as comics is a fiction.
Neural Kernel

Hmm… how about I just download some comic books scans… then duplicate them until my hard drive fills up… since each of those copies is a lost sale so I’ll really be kicking whatever publisher you’d like in the tender places!
DevinC

If DC thinks this is an anticompetitive measure, they can start selling retailers Flashpoint #1 covers at cost.
Blaze Curry

For a looong time I labored under the foolish assumption that censorship and stuff was against the law, or at least unethical enough to invite some sort of scrutiny that could lead to consequences…
Now I know anyone can do anything they damn well like so long as a greater power does not stop the behavior.
- Gulliver
  
  This isn’t censorship; it’s Marvel making an ass of itself. For lack of time more than interest, I don’t read comics (occasionally I catch a superhero movie and that’s my level of personal stake in this). But if I tell you that I have a secret that I’ll only tell you and your customers provided you ignore that guy over there, I’m not stopping you from listening to that guy, I’m putting conditions on getting my secret. The shops are free to tell Marvel to take a hike and the customers are free to boycott the shops.
http://twitter.com/muddi900 muddi900

I think the headline is quite sensational, even by normal internet standards, and ignoring facts about book/magazine retail.
Steve Olszewski

I’ve just written Marvel subscriptions, as well as Marvel’s media relations person, to let them know that I will be canceling my marvel.com account, and will not be purchasing their comics anymore. I’ve been reading comics, primarily Marvel comics, since 1967, but I can’t stand censorship. Plus, DC and other comics companies have some great writers and artists. I don’t need Marvel.

(Gulliver, how is it not censorship when the whole point of Marvel’s campaign is to prevent readers from being able to read, or even to access, DC’s books? Isn’t that what censorship is?)

Here’s the contact info, if you’d like to send a comment:

Marvel subscriptions: marvelprint@sunbeltfs.com
Marvel media relations: jeff_klein@dkcnews.com
- Spriggan_Prime
  
  It’s not censorship because the books have been out for months, you could always go to another comic store if you don’t agree with the choices of your local store’s proprietor, order them in advance, they are available online in both legal and nonlegal formats, they will be republished in multiple print editions and future trades, etc…
  
  This isn’t a book burning, banning or eradication just a PR stunt. If you think DC is any better you might as well give up on mainstream comics all together.
  - Gulliver
    
    Even if Marvel had never released the publications in question and refused to ever do so unless and until the whole world destroyed all copies of DC’s competing publication, it still wouldn’t be censorship. It would just be really, really bad business that would loose them their customers and, consequently, their artists. If I wrote a song and told the world to destroy all copies of Yellow Submarine or I won’t release it, the only thing I would accomplish would be to never release my song, not to censor the Beatles. If instead the Beatles did the same to me (though they never would do something so sleazy), they would not be censoring me, just counting on everyone having good music taste :)
    - Spriggan_Prime
      
      I think you replied to the wrong person. I understand the concept of censorship.
      
      Either way;
      
      Bad business is still legal business and you know the old saying about risks sometimes paying off big. A few may piss and moan and leave, but comics have lifelong fans and new ones all the time (hell just look at all the new readers, titles and merch from the last 10 years of Marvel movies) and there is NO shortage of artist and writers willing to work in the industry.
      
      I’m pretty sure the first constitutional amendment would allow you to release whatever song you want.
      
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cop_Killer_%28song%29
      - Gulliver
        
        I’m pretty sure the first constitutional amendment would allow you to release whatever song you want.
        
        Right, but I can also set absurd terms and, provided I do not force anyone to use my product and the terms aren’t anything illegal (such as rob a bank), I’m not doing anything unethical.
        
        I just replied to your comment to clarify a point. You said it wasn’t censorship because the books have already been released and readers could buy them elsewhere. Even if the books weren’t out and readers had no way to get them anywhere except comic stores that pulled the DC titles Marvel specified, it still wouldn’t be censorship.
        
        As you said, maybe their gamble will pay off. Or maybe it will drive more casual readers to DC and smaller independent publishers.
- Gulliver
  
  Gulliver, how is it not censorship when the whole point of Marvel’s
  campaign is to prevent readers from being able to read, or even to
  access, DC’s books? Isn’t that what censorship is?
  
  Whatever their point, they are not in fact preventing readers from doing this. They’re preventing sellers from selling both theirs and their competitors product. They’re under no ethical, moral or legal obligation to sell their product to any given store. Anyone can still sell and buy DC’s product as long as DC is willing to sell them. They just can’t have Marvel’s too. If Marvel was actually blocking stores or readers from buying DC comics, then that would be censorship. Mind you, I agree that what Marvel is doing is sleazy. If I was a comic reader I’d be disgusted with how Marvel is treating me, their customer, and I’d go ahead and boycott them if they didn’t change their terms. I specifically don’t use the products of about two dozen or so companies for that very reason. But it’s not actually censorship, it’s those companies alienating my business and the money I might otherwise spend with them.
  
  Censorship is stopping someone from having access to information someone else wants to provide. It isn’t refusing to provide your own information if someone does access information someone else wants to provide.
Daemonworks

You keep using the word censorship. I do not think it means what you think it means.
http://www.facebook.com/john.h.frank John H. Frank

The promotion does not apply to FLASHPOINT #1. The comics listed are:
FLASHPOINT ABIN SUR THE GREEN LANTERN #1
FLASHPOINT BATMAN KNIGHT OF VENGEANCE #1
FLASHPOINT CITIZEN COLD #1
FLASHPOINT DEADMAN AND THE FLYING GRAYSONS #1
FLASHPOINT DEATHSTROKE THE CURSE OF RAVAGER #1
FLASHPOINT EMPEROR AQUAMAN #1
FLASHPOINT FRANKENSTEIN CREATURES OF UNKNOWN #1
FLASHPOINT GREEN ARROW INDUSTRIES #1
FLASHPOINT GRODD OF WAR #1
FLASHPOINT HAL JORDAN #1
FLASHPOINT KID FLASH LOST #1
FLASHPOINT LEGION OF DOOM #1
FLASHPOINT LOIS LANE AND THE RESISTANCE #1
FLASHPOINT PROJECT SUPERMAN #1
FLASHPOINT SECRET SEVEN #1
FLASHPOINT THE OUTSIDER #1
FLASHPOINT THE REVERSE FLASH #1
FLASHPOINT THE WORLD OF FLASHPOINT #1
FLASHPOINT WONDER WOMAN AND THE FURIES #1

These are comics that came out in June, and if they haven’t sold through yet probably /will/ not sell through- the trade collections are already solicited for next March. They’re not very popular books. The highest-selling of them is Knight of Vengeance 1, which moved 45,000 copies to retailers in June. The lowest is Grodd of War, at 26,000. In terms of secondary-market value, they’re pretty ehhhhh. A quick search of eBay shows that every single one is available at or below cover price.
knoxblox

Dear art dealer,

It seems that I’m less inclined to hang out with my friend Modigliani these days, and we’re just not getting along. If you would be so kind as to rip 50 of his works out of the frames and send me the canvas, I’d happily send you one unique painting out of my latest series of cubist works.

All best,

Picasso
http://www.facebook.com/HyperionToASatyr Jack Holmes

This is so awesomely 19th-century capitalism.
http://tokyofarm.com Spencer Cross

All of this back-and-forth about stripping is moot, because it hasn’t applied to comics since the rise of the direct market in the 80′s:

“The defining characteristic of the direct market is non-returnability: unlike bookstore and newsstand distribution, direct-market distribution prohibits distributors and retailers from returning their unsold merchandise for refunds.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_market
- Spriggan_Prime
  
  You’re right it’s a moot point, but oddly enough you still can’t sell comics without the covers. Can’t return’em can’t sell’em. It’s the mighty cock-punch that keeps Diamond in control of the distribution market. With the way shipping is so efficient nowadays it’s a shame Marvel and DC can’t just decide to tell them to go screw.
Grebby

The only way this would hurt DC is this: with no #1 issues on the shelves, fewer customers will buy #2 and #3 (these are all 3-issue mini-series). Of course, that would also hurt the retailers Marvel is supposedly trying to help out.