Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Black Panther >> View Post
·
Post By
Thatguy

In Reply To
DamonO

Subj: Re: That arguement is antiquated.
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 at 08:07:00 pm EDT
Reply Subj: Re: That arguement is antiquated.
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2007 at 07:21:57 pm EDT

Previous Post

> No other series has ever used half as many crossovers and guest stars >in such a blatant attempt to push up sales.

Thatguy, I'd like to address that point you made above. First of all, let me make it clear that I much prefer reasoned, civil debate rather than shouting matches, so understand that I am respectfully disagreeing with you here, not trying to pick a fight.

Your assertion that the BLACK PANTHER series depends on crossovers and guest-stars more than any other series is not correct, in my opinion.

Since CIVIL WAR was the big crossover event that just ended this year, I decided to look at a couple of other, ongoing monthly Marvel series to see how many tied-in with CIVIL WAR, and compared that with BLACK PANTHER.

I considered an issue of a comic to be an "official" Civil War tie-in when it displayed the Civil War banner (or trade-dress) on the cover.
Here's what I found:

Amazing Spider-Man tie-ins: #530, 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538

Fantastic Four tie-ins: #536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541,542, 543

Black Panther tie-ins: #18, 21*, 22, 23, 24, 25

Final tally: Amazing Spider-Man: NINE
Fantastic Four: EIGHT
Black Panther: SIX

Note: BLACK PANTHER #21 was released with two covers, one which did not display the CIVIL WAR banner and one that did. I counted it anyway.

Of course, the current crossover now at Marvel is WORLD WAR HULK. I checked Marvel's official list of titles tieing in to WWH. The BLACK PANTHER title was not on the list -- although GHOST RIDER, HEROES FOR HIRE and PUNISHER WAR JOURNAL (among others) are on the list.

As for guest-stars being added to "push-up" sales, I actually see nothing wrong with that as long as the guest appearances make sense within the context of the story. But even if you look at the majority of guest-stars who've appeared in the series -- not counting the wedding issue in which everybody showed up -- I'd say its hard to make the case that these guest-stars would have an appreciable effect on sales.

Luke Cage, the Falcon, Brother Voodoo, Blade, the Inhumans, Namor, Monica Rambeau,and Shang-Chi has all made guest appearances. NONE of them is even starring in their own comics, so I doubt that many people would suddenly pick up an issue of BLACK PANTHER just to see them. I don't really see how this is any different than, say, what I've seen in the pages of MS. MARVEL and THUNDERBOLTS, both titles that routinely have guest appearances from other characters in the Marvel U.

Now some have made the argument that Storm was added to the cast in order to increase sales. Maybe so, but again, I don't see how that's any different than what other titles have done. They added Spider-Man and Wolverine to the Avengers cast, and now Avengers is Marvel's best-selling franchise. So should BLACK PANTHER be held to a different standard?

Anyway, that's my two cents.




> > No other series has ever used half as many crossovers and guest stars >in such a blatant attempt to push up sales.
>
> Thatguy, I'd like to address that point you made above. First of all, let me make it clear that I much prefer reasoned, civil debate rather than shouting matches, so understand that I am respectfully disagreeing with you here, not trying to pick a fight.

I understand, and know that you're a good guy. To be honest, that's why I decided against continueing this thread, up until the rodent troll problem. Though I disagree with both you and Primetime on some matters, extended debate on the matters would be sour grapes, as you enjoy the series and I don't.
>
> Your assertion that the BLACK PANTHER series depends on crossovers and guest-stars more than any other series is not correct, in my opinion.
>
> Since CIVIL WAR was the big crossover event that just ended this year, I decided to look at a couple of other, ongoing monthly Marvel series to see how many tied-in with CIVIL WAR, and compared that with BLACK PANTHER.
>
> I considered an issue of a comic to be an "official" Civil War tie-in when it displayed the Civil War banner (or trade-dress) on the cover.
> Here's what I found:
>
> Amazing Spider-Man tie-ins: #530, 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 536, 537, 538
>
> Fantastic Four tie-ins: #536, 537, 538, 539, 540, 541,542, 543
>
> Black Panther tie-ins: #18, 21*, 22, 23, 24, 25
>
> Final tally: Amazing Spider-Man: NINE
> Fantastic Four: EIGHT
> Black Panther: SIX
>
> Note: BLACK PANTHER #21 was released with two covers, one which did not display the CIVIL WAR banner and one that did. I counted it anyway.
>
> Of course, the current crossover now at Marvel is WORLD WAR HULK. I checked Marvel's official list of titles tieing in to WWH. The BLACK PANTHER title was not on the list -- although GHOST RIDER, HEROES FOR HIRE and PUNISHER WAR JOURNAL (among others) are on the list.
>
> As for guest-stars being added to "push-up" sales, I actually see nothing wrong with that as long as the guest appearances make sense within the context of the story. But even if you look at the majority of guest-stars who've appeared in the series -- not counting the wedding issue in which everybody showed up -- I'd say its hard to make the case that these guest-stars would have an appreciable effect on sales.
>
> Luke Cage, the Falcon, Brother Voodoo, Blade, the Inhumans, Namor, Monica Rambeau,and Shang-Chi has all made guest appearances. NONE of them is even starring in their own comics, so I doubt that many people would suddenly pick up an issue of BLACK PANTHER just to see them. I don't really see how this is any different than, say, what I've seen in the pages of MS. MARVEL and THUNDERBOLTS, both titles that routinely have guest appearances from other characters in the Marvel U.

You forget to add the X-Men and House of M to that list. In fact, the crossover with X-Men was the first crossover that series had had in at least 5 years.

Also, both Blade and Cage have a decent fanbase. They're hardly third stringers ;\)
>
> Now some have made the argument that Storm was added to the cast in order to increase sales. Maybe so, but again, I don't see how that's any different than what other titles have done. They added Spider-Man and Wolverine to the Avengers cast, and now Avengers is Marvel's best-selling franchise. So should BLACK PANTHER be held to a different standard?

Because there are so many that they detact from the actual title, and come so close together that they prevent any stories about Panther's world.

We've had Cannibal around since the first arc. We've barely seen T'Challa's reconned in sister and T'Challa's supporting cast is virtually non existant. The series runs from one crossover to the next without even really contributing to the title's star.

I don't deny the commercial success, but the series is a creative failure because, as we've seen, it's completely unable to retain said readers even after all the help it's been given.


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software