layters
asked:
An example is if you'd made wolverines, antman, hawkeye and squirrel girl all 2.99 for the first six issues I would have picked them all up. It's not just about budget its value for money. Instead I'll prob pick up Wolverines and Squirrel Girl and I'm dropping Guardians and Silver Surfer my too least urgent read books. after the first arc you increased the price and id loved Antman which i wouldn't have picked up i'm more likely to find the money to keep getting it. now I won't even try it.

That’s how it works for you, but that’s not how it works for everybody, I’m afraid–when you’re attempting to affect things on a 10,000 copy level rather than a 10 copy level, you need to operate differently.

Even in what you say here, you can see the Darwinian principle in action. At the higher price point, you’re still willing to give WOLVERINES and SQUIRREL GIRL a try. That immediately indicates that those series have a better chance of long-term survival.

It also indicates, speaking plainly, that regardless of what you’re saying right here, on the week that HAWKEYE or ANT-MAN came out, even if they were priced at $2.99, you might very well not buy them. Maybe there are enough other regular titles that you regularly buy that week that you don’t have the spare cash. Maybe there’s a title from some other publisher that’s more attractive to you. Or maybe, flipping through those books on the racks, they just don’t appeal to you as much as you thought they might.

This is really a measure of how interested you as a consumer are in a particular product, and willing to pay the cost of that product. You’re clearly more interested in WOLVERINES and SQUIRREL GIRL than you are in either HAWKEYE and ANT-MAN or SILVER SURFER and GUARDIANS–and that’s regardless of the $2.99 vs $3.99 price point argument. That’s teh metric that more readily determines whether you’ll actually pick up a particualr title when push comes to shove.