The publisher allows returnability of initial orders of convention debut books after 90 days from the direct market shipping date and only for publishers within a 100 mile radius from the convention.

Why 90 days? If a retailer can sell through their initial orders then they suffer no real harm. The most they would have lost is potential re-order sales which for the purpose of determining whether convention debuts sales cause loss is not a loss at all.

Why 100 miles? If there is any loss to be had, logically it would be suffered most by stores who are local or within a moderate drive from a convention. A store in San Diego or Los Angeles is more likely to see a greater percentage of its customers attend the SDCC than a store in Boston or New York. Similarly, a store in the greater DC area is more likely to see a greater percentage of its customers attend SPX than a store in San Francisco or Arizona.

Perhaps this can be arranged through the distributor. If not, it would probably not be very difficult as a one-on-one transaction between the publisher and the individual retailer. The retailer sends the publisher a letter letting them know that they are within 100 miles from a convention where the book debuts and they were not able to sell through initial orders in 90 days. They send the book with a copy of their invoice to the publisher. The publisher sends the retailer a check.

At first glance, this might seem inconvenient for all, but that just means it’s a good idea. In practice, retailers will probably sell through the bulk or entirety of their initial orders within the 90 days and the publishers would be able to continue to debut at conventions while offering an olive branch to the retailers who are most likely to suffer any harm to be had from the convention debuts.

This is a fair solution that would address retailer concerns and publishing realities.

[...] on convention pre-sales: Colleen Doran reminisces (not fondly) about a time when creators were banned from selling their [...]

[...] Lots more interesting commentary at Comics Worth Reading. [...]

[...] owner of the “Comic Book Industry Alliance” retailer-based private Delphi forum, was banned from commenting in the ComicPro convention pre-sale discussion thread here because of his refusal to abide by rules [...]

The system by which material is generally distributed into the comics direct sales market (or rather, the ramifications of that system) indeed underlies much of the reactions and feelings on this issue.

But that system–especially the non-returnability aspect of it–is a little more complex than just laying all blame on Diamond, nor is it exactly right to claim that Diamond “controls” non-returnability independent of its vendor publishers.

The direct sales comic book market was built on the premise of deep-discount, non-returnable, placed-in-advance sales.

As things have evolved, sure there are many non-trivial criticisms of the current distribution system, and naturally Diamond will be the first, best entity to have to figure out how to evolve and change as the future unfolds. But while distribution issues do underly a great deal of the rhetoric in this issue, it’s still not quite right to think that Diamond is the sole cause or only cure for the issues being raised in this position paper.

I’m sorry you’ve had so much bad luck finding a good local comics shop. I used to be a Diamond rep for the Southwestern United States, and I’ve visited at least a hundred stores where you would not have had this problem. (Yes, I’ve seen several that would match your 25, too.)

Perhaps it’s your locations that have been poor?*

As for your white elephant, I’m sorry, you are misinformed. Diamond only ENFORCES the DM rule of non-returnable comics. It’s the Publishers who wish to make them non-returnable, and in exchange, they offer retailers a better discount than if retailers bought comics through the so-called newsstand distributors (most of these, however, have stopped selling comics.)

At any time a Major Publisher wanted to sell their books on non-returnable basis, I’ll bet Diamond** would make it happen, for a fee, but it would be a losing proposition for those Publishers. It would hurt smaller publishers, too, if they wanted to constantly sell on a returnable basis. They’d have to pay Diamond a return fee to take books in like they ship books out; then there’d the storage problems, loss of income from sold books, etc. Returnability on a case-by-case basis works much better.

*Have you tried buying comics from online services like mine? I’m not sure if Johanna appreciates anyone pushing their wares, but here goes nothing: if you place an order over $25 from http://www.ComicsUnlimited.com we’ll ship it to you free within the continental United States. Our service is fast, our selection is HUGE and we expertly package your comics. If you click on the address above, you can see that we know all about Oni, Top Shelf, Boom!, etc. Oh, and Johanna writes a column for us called GRAPHIC NOVELS WORTH READING!~ And we’re not the only game in town–there are many other companies who sell comics online.

**I don’t speak for Diamond Comics with any authority whatsoever.

Thanks for reading!

It seems to me the elephant in the room not being addressed by retailers is the distribution system. If a book is non-returnable, isn’t that Diamond’s fault? I mean, I’m just the equivalent of a simple caveman when it comes to retailer issues, but why are the retailers upset with publishers over returnability when Diamond is the one who controls that?

On a different topic, I’ve lived in 10 cities in 10 years and have gone to many different comic shops. I’d say 25 is an underestimation, but I’ll work with that number. Out of those 25 shops, not one retailer knew *anything* about books from Oni, Top Shelf, etc. Only three shops would let me pre-order indy books. The common response was, “We don’t carry indy stuff.” So, why should I, as a consumer who wants to read indy books, care about a retail environment that has frequently hindered my shopping?

[...] More updates on the issue of convention pre-sales: [...]

[...] in case you’re not sure what the heck we’re talking about, you can click here, here, here and [...]

“Note: This item may be available through other retail outlets before shipping to comic book specialty shops.”

If a Publisher plans to sell their comics prior to shipping to Retailers, or post it FREE on their online site at the same time as it ships, they should announce it in Previews when soliciting, using the Note above, or something comparable. Isn’t this a case of certain Publishers wanting to have their cake and eating it, too?

And with all due respect, ADD was being just as rude as Robert. “Drunkenly” comes to mind. You yourself compare those who speak of fairness as reminding you of “whiny toddlers.” You disproportionately scolded Robert and let ADD’s snarkiness slide.

As for the PRIVATE email Robert sent you: And again, with all due respect, the correct response would have been to email block him, not relate something he sent you privately, even as rude and crude as it was, and then banish him.

Just my two cents.

@ morganagrom

“What’s the exact language in the distribution agreement? ”

There’s no language whatsoever in Diamond’s terms of sale to retailers about caution codes or what thresholds there might be towards those. I have no idea whatsoever is in Diamond’s contracts with publishers.

All returns and adjustments are solely at Diamond’s discretion, per the TOS.

Diamond will NEVER, I would not judge, “police” publishers on this issue — Diamond works very hard to not be seen as the “bad cop”

@ Teresa

“Are offering convetion exclusive or store variant covers considered to be on the same playing field as the comics these publishers are offering that this organization has taken a stance on? ”

Why would they be? When those kinds of variants are offered, it is clear to all retailers that we’re getting “second chance” on them, and they are not new nor timely.

“I believe there are many other conflicts and monopolies within this business that may need addressed prior to this particular problem”

In my opinion, “You should cover X rather than Y” is never ever going to be a fruitful conversation.

-B

I think taking such a stance on Publisher’s opportunity to generate interest in their product is trivial when maybe more concern should be the major Publishers offering substantial discounts on mailorders via their magazine that the direct market is selling to the end users. Or what seems to me as a huge conflict of interest, Wizard magazine, the source for what’s hot, going to be hot, ect. selling products on ebay, even graded comics, the same day as the original release of the comic to retailers (ie Captain America 25), or again offering Wizard exclusive items to get the consumer to purchase statues, toys and other merchandise from them that they are able to advertise for free in their book that we sell to the consumer. Or another conflict of interest, Diamond Comics parent company of Diamond Select Toys that sell directly to the consumer.

So to make such a statement against Pubishers when in fact some retailers are guilty of doing the same seem to contradict the strong stance in which your organization has taken. I believe there are many other conflicts and monopolies within this business that may need addressed prior to this particular problem, so I’m interested in ComicsPro’s opinion/stance on these.

I will agree with you that you are reading too much into the word “our”in my quote. I think the whole sentence is fairly clear but to expand: When a Publisher wholesales me a book but reserves an exclusive sales window for themselves to market the book to the same potential customer base (i.e. “our customers”–all our customers), that Publisher functions as both my supplier and competitor. That’s an uneasy relationship. A classic conflict of interest.

I would balk at any publisher offering any retail outlet an exclusive sales window. Top Cow released Wanted to Barnes and Noble 90 days or so prior to the DM without telling us. That is not a good thing.

And I can add a relevant factoid about Bone One Volume. Those 500 sales did cost the DM. Because Jeff under-printed from his orders, our committed advance orders were allocated. Jeff keeping 500 copies to sell at SDCC is actually an accountable number of books that were ordered by DM stores yet not delivered to them. 20k in sales the publisher kept for themselves.

That’s not insubstantial.

I can’t believe he posted that here. I actually thught he was making sense for the most part but he shouldn’t have posted that here.

http://forum.newsarama.com/showthread.php?t=20193

Apparently when he debuted his book at San Diego he sold approximately 400 copies of the softcover and 100 copies of the hardcover.

87,000 from all around the world attended the SDCC. http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=4026

So we’re talking about a grand total of 500 books that were bought by at most .575% of the 87,000 attendees from all around the world. It sounds like this was a pretty scarce book.

Beyond that, it’s difficult to have a conversation about cause and effect without knowing more concrete data. Who knows how many copies you ordered? 10 copies? Seems hard to believe 10 buyers were not to be found in the next 6 months. 1000 copies? Probably hard to move that many convention debut or otherwise.

As for why the publisher should be able to advertise his book as new and then debut it at a convention? Easy, it’s marketing and promotion. The books are available in limited number to people with convention memberships, but not members of the general public. Also, the debut sales have the ability to get people talking about the book, which has the ability to bring in more sales through the retailers. It’s kind of like advertising, except the publisher actually gets some money out of the deal. Would it be any different than if instead of selling the 500 copies, Smith gave away 500 copies to lucky attendees? Would the outrage exist? Any objections to sending out advance review copies to bloggers to spread the word (even if it’s at the expense of the bloggers’ retailers)?