Rant: Batman 50 and Publishers’ Abusive Relationship with Retailers

Spoiler Alert: there will be no spoilers in this post!

Why? Because the latest blow up over Batman 50’s pretty big spoilers is the reason I’m ranting today. If you’re reading this article, odds are you have heard about the upset over at The New York Times (click on the link at your own expense). But, despite the article’s massive spoilers, the actual culprit to this maddening event is DC Comics.

One question has been scouring many fans and retailers minds after the article dropped on Monday. What purpose does spoiling one of the most anticipated DC comic books of the summer serve? With all my industry knowledge and all my time spent working in a comic book retailer, I have legitimately no idea. But there’s a better question to be asked. Who hurts from spoiling Batman 50? Certainly not DC Comics.

DC isn’t going to feel the whiplash of the article, outside taking the time to make some unhelpful statements defending it. Retailers have paid DC months ago for their purchase orders on this particular issue. Very large, bloated purchase orders in most cases. Not only did retailers stock up on the 17 different covers available for this one issue, but we cannot forget the retailer exclusives. Many stores purchased orders of thousands just to qualify for a retailer exclusive cover.

After footing the bill for large purchase orders, retailers assumed they could make their money back attracting the two major comic book customer demographics. Batman’s regular readers, which have always set the gold standard for comic book sales, but more importantly new readers. The great white whale of the comic book retail industry, new readers hear about a big event like this and we all hope they get hooked on our supply.

The New York Times not only spoiled the book in their article, but the article’s title itself gave major spoilers that implied the end result of the Caped Crusader’s nuptials. Essentially the article told new readers not to waste their time picking up this issue. That is a major blow to the potential sales retailers expected. There’s also no word on whether the issue is returnable, allowing retailers to recoup some of their costs. But once again, DC doesn’t care because they already got paid.

The publisher has assured retailers there is a plan, it just hasn’t been explained. It’s like telling a spouse, “Don’t worry, honey, I have an idea to make you forget I beat you last night.” Perhaps DC should stop taking relationship advice from their best selling vigilante, well known for leading with his fists, and start treating retailers with a little more respect.