Keskustelujen arkisto

Chuck wrote that he didn't mind seeing some reprints in the monthly books. What is more important is his reason though, "I accept it as a way to introduce classic stories to a new audience." That would be a laudable goal, but I don't think it is a reality though. Both Chuck and I discovered Disney comics through Barks reprints. I just do not think that is happening today though. I imagine that 95% or more of the readers of the two remaining monthly titles, U$ and WDC&S, are dedicated Disney comics fans. I doubt very many kids are reading these two titles at all, thus are there really that many new people being *introduced* to Disney comics via these reprints? I don't think so.

So in essence, Chuck is being very generous and charitable, which is wonderful *if* this generosity and charity pays off in new readers. So I have a question for you Chuck. Just answering the question *selfishly*, what would you like to see in the two monthly titles if your only concern was for what *you* wanted to see? If you still would want to see a combination of reprints and new stories for your *own* enjoyment, that is fine. However, perhaps for *yourself* you would rather see new stories and not reprints of stories you already have? Just wondering?

Steven writes that he feels pessimistic. I feel the same way too and also *hate* feeling that way. :( However since all we have seen and experienced in the past 20 years with Disney comics, isn't it kind of normal and realistic to be at least somewhat pessimistic?

Pessimism though does not have to translate into giving up though, and I am very thankful that Gemstone has *not* given up all hope on reaching new and/or younger readers. I really hope that their "Shonen Jump" style blank and white titles does great! I think the key though is where it will be able to be sold. If it just ends up in comics book stores, I don't see how that will work. However, if it can get into bookstores and/or magazine stands I think it has realistic chance at decent sales. Perhaps this is *way* too early for you to know, Gary, but what are the plans for *where* this "Shonen Jump" style title will be sold? Is there any hope or chance that it could actually be sold right next to or near the actual "Shonen Jump" magazine? That would be fantastic!

Finally, thanks to Chuck for bringing up how lucky and fortunate we are for having dedicated Disney comics fans who have provided us with the possibility to read Disney comics these past 20 years or so. Without Bruce Hamilton and Steve Geppi, none of these discussions here on the mailing list would even be taking place as there would have been *no* Disney comics in North America for last 20+ years!

Dean Rekich

DEANMARY, 18-11-2006:
> Finally, thanks to Chuck for bringing up how lucky and fortunate we are for
> having dedicated Disney comics fans who have provided us with the possibility
> to read Disney comics these past 20 years or so. Without Bruce Hamilton and
> Steve Geppi, none of these discussions here on the mailing list would even be
> taking place as there would have been *no* Disney comics in North America for
> last 20+ years!
I think Bruce Hamilton and Stevi Geppi are turned into holy saints this way. I
see them as business men making commercial products. The fact that they make
products of my interest, doesn't mean that they should be praised as if they're
messiahs. I have great difficulties with such idolizing.
The same for DCML-contributions by Gemstone-employees like Gary Leach and David
Gerstein. It's great that they answer and inform us, really great, but the
subject is still related to their professional work. Companies don't need to
contact their customers, but it can be in their own benefit if they do. For
example, your complaints about Gemstone may have been bad publicity for
Gemstone, something that they'd rather try to refute.

I respect Bruce Hamilton, Stevi Geppi, Gary Leach and David Gerstein for their
profession.
If I would need their charity to read a Disney comic, I wouldn't be able to
enjoy it at all. It would mean that philanthropics are trying to reanimate a
dead body for my enjoyment. If a body is dead, it's dead. Therefore I don't
believe that the efforts are charity. I've heard the Hamilton-myth and the
Geppi-myth before, and it just feels wrong to look at commercial people this
way. They're turned into guru's we should thank on our knees, just because they
publish a comic.

Let Bruce Hamilton, Stevi Geppi, Gary Leach and David Gerstein save the rain
forests. That would be charity.

Dani?l

>I think Bruce Hamilton and Stevi Geppi are turned into holy saints
>this way. I
>see them as business men making commercial products.

Of course they're making commercial products, but Daniel, do you
REALLY think that there is much money to be made in publishing
magazines with a circulation of 6000 a month with enormous licensing
fees? Yes, it's a commercial product, and yes, they want to make
money from it, but really their money could be invested in a much
better way. They chose to do it this way because they LIKE Disney
comics and because they are/were in a position to keep these
publications in print. Believe it or not, there are many people who
do things with little/no chance of making a substantial product, and
they do it simply because they know that people enjoy it.

David was on the DCML long before he was a Gemstone employee. Gary
Leach was subscribed to this digest when there were no Disney comics
published in America. They are here ultimately because they LIKE
Disney comics. I've met David and his excitement over this medium
far exceeds whatever publication his employer is releasing that
month. They rarely mention their products unless someone actually
asks them a question directly, and yet, you act like their sole
purpose in being here is simply to advertise their work. It's really
unfair.

rodney

________________________________________________________________________
Try Juno Platinum for Free! Then, only $9.95/month!
Unlimited Internet Access with 1GB of Email Storage.
Visit http://www.juno.com/value to sign up today!

Daniel:

> I wonder why editors want to
> recolour old comics, even including rarities like 'Race to the
> South Seas'.
> I've understood that a recent Gemstone-reprint of 'Race to the
> South Seas'
> (in 'Disney Treasures') has been pasted together from several sources,
> including art by Jippes. Personally I strongly dislike such a frauded
> version.

Then you'll love the version that will appear in Egmont's CBC. The
goal was to present the nearest thing to Bark's line art as could be
managed (it no longer exists as original art or reproducible stats),
and preserve the printed color as far as was possible. It was no
small task to achieve, since the ink coverage and color registration
on the source material - the original give-away - was abominable. It
required cleaning up the line art without retouching it AND get the
color into registration AND correct any mistakes by the original
colorist AND eliminate as much as possible of the sheer garbage
caused by the original dirt-cheap printing process.

For the record - and it's on record - Daan Jippes and David Gerstein
are credited with restoration on the version of "Race to the South
Seas" in "Disney Treasures".

Gary

Dean:

> Perhaps this is *way* too early for you to know, Gary, but what are
> the plans for *where* this "Shonen Jump" style title will be sold?
> Is there any hope or chance that it could actually be sold right
> next to or near the actual "Shonen Jump" magazine? That would be
> fantastic!

It is way too early to know, but the IDEA behind the launch of such
titles is to have them racked in the graphic novels sections of
bookstores. (Racking them with the "Shonen Jump" magazine may be more
problematic, but the prospect does exist.) That is the idea behind
the one-shots, as well, and there seems to be some indication that,
over the long haul, Disney comics can compete in that position and
deliver satisfactory sales.

Gary

Rodney, 20-11-2006:
> Of course they're making commercial products, but Daniel, do you
> REALLY think that there is much money to be made in publishing
> magazines with a circulation of 6000 a month with enormous licensing
> fees? Yes, it's a commercial product, and yes, they want to make
> money from it, but really their money could be invested in a much
> better way.
Then why don't they just invest their money in a better way? Now readers can't
complain without being reminded of charity. The Gemstone people make
commericial products but we should be thankful that they are making these
products, even though their products are expensive and contain material that a
lot of people already have. That makes Gemstone invincible. When they do
something good, readers should be happy that they're great. And when they do
something bad, readers should be happy that they're doing something anyway.
People should be happy. Happy or not. How to get out of this?

If business for American Disney comics is so bad nowadays, that it needs
philanthropists, cheap fillers (reprints), and overpaying custumers to keep the
products appearing, then it would be all the more a reason to be critical about
these comics and their contents. If business is so fragile, then it's clumsy to
put reprints in an all-new comic. Such a formula (or lack thereof) raises
complaints. What are the Gemstone people thinking? That they can educate an
audience into their taste and policy?
A lot of complainers will be wiser than me and just desert the comics. And I
don't know why I'm even trying to get my complaints across. Years ago, in the
late 1990s, people were having a party here because American Disney comics were
back. Rather soon thereafter, there were already complaints about their
reprints-policy. What have the Gemstone people done with this? They just keep on
doing it, ignoring complaints. The fact that Gerstein writes "I think we're
doing pretty well!" (15-11-2006) shows to me that he must have shells on his
eyes. His statistics of reprints he listed surprised me, because I didn't know
that Gemstone has become that bad.

Maybe the majority of the readers will love this situation, but what is a
majority? A majority is any number above 50%. A company should try to get as
much customers as possible, especially if they're in an emergency situation. A
majority of readers is not enough. And there are also many non-readers
(potential customers) outside which are not counted.

Other complaints about Gemstone are that, why they do publish a long new story,
they publish it in multi-parts. Particularly new Don Rosa-stories have been
divided over three months, in three issues, with about 8 pages each episode. In
Europe, three issues would have taken only three weeks. And even three weeks
takes a lot of time.
It's obvious that Gemstone is trying to get as much as possible out of new
Rosa's, so much that the joy of reading new stories is destroyed. In short,
Gemstone gives the choice to wait for
- an old Rosa that you've already read
- a new Rosa that you can't read because it takes an eternity (and a fortune) to
receive and read the individual parts.

I'm too much of a comic book lover to keep on looking at this. American Disney
comics are back, but the editors don't try to get the best out of it. It would
need creativity to make each comic interesting. Recycling Barks is cheap. As if
Barks has to do the real work once again, even though he's dead.
Even Gemstone's choice of European comics leaves a lot to be desired. European
comics are rapidly getting worser and worser, but Gemstone peope seem to have a
talent to pick out the worst of the worst of the worst. And what they use gets
frauded because an editor (Gerstein?) changes the translation into some
"canonical" reference to whatever other story, frauding history. Even Barks got
frauded into the elusive Gemstone vision, with Leach writing some weird campfire
story to fraud Barks's classic(!) 'The Magic Hourglass'. (Doesn't artist Van
Horn have any pride?)

And the collector gets frustrated anyhow, because Barks stories (and who knows
what else) are being retouched without notice. This already happened with a
collector's(!!) edition like The Carl Barks Library. And we collectors shouldn't
complain. Reading the CBL, one can only guess if they're looking at original
Barks or some frauded version. Is that a policy to take an audience serious? I
felt terribly cheated when I bought the CBL. It's a terrible collection, only
useful for people who don't care about Barks.

> They chose to do it this way because they LIKE Disney
> comics and because they are/were in a position to keep these
> publications in print. Believe it or not, there are many people who
> do things with little/no chance of making a substantial product, and
> they do it simply because they know that people enjoy it.
No, I don't believe they do it simply because they know that people enjoy it. It
sounds too much like a fairy tale to me. It turns a commercial product into
charity.
Editors are not the easiest people.

> David was on the DCML long before he was a Gemstone employee. Gary
> Leach was subscribed to this digest when there were no Disney comics
> published in America. They are here ultimately because they LIKE
> Disney comics. I've met David and his excitement over this medium
> far exceeds whatever publication his employer is releasing that
> month. They rarely mention their products unless someone actually
> asks them a question directly, and yet, you act like their sole
> purpose in being here is simply to advertise their work. It's really
> unfair.
When Gary Leach and David Gerstein are writing as Gemstone employees, they are
writing in function, in the name of their company. David wrote in plural form
when saying ""I think we're doing pretty well!" By saying "we", David makes
clear he's writing in function, as employee of Gemstone.

I have met David several times as a friend, as I saw it. David has visited me at
my home, here in The Netherlands. To me that is David as a friend.
Do you see the difference? Or am I mistaken and is David of Gemstone (at work)
just the same fellow as David as a friend (in his spare time), according to you?

Deanmary, 20-11-2006:
> I in no way said or implied that Bruce Hamilton, Steve Geppi, Gary Leach, or
> David Gerstein are saints. I *will* say explicitly that I am thankful for all
> of them and appreciate what they have done, are doing, and will do.
I see it as the other way around: The Gemstone people should be thankful to
their customers, because these customers keep them in business. We're paying for
Leach's and Gerstein's food.

Thankful is a word I'd reserve for matters like health and life. I'm thankful to
be alive, for example. But I am in no way thankful for commercial people, or
their products. These products are being paid for.

> I greatly appreciate the fact that David and Gary both have contributed to
> this
> list. I think the fact that they do so is wonderful. I don't know many other
> companies or businesses that I deal with where people at the company will
> participate so openly or honestly. They don't even have to be *members* of
> this
> ML, let alone contribute to it!
Indeed it's great that Leach and Gerstein contribute to DCML. But if that would
mean that we just have to praise them and censor ourselves in our complaints, it
would destroy the whole picture of them being open and helpful.
I think that Leach and Gerstein are professional enough to know that they are
not just friends when writing as Gemstone employees. We pay for their work. We
are not just their friends here, but customers.

Dani?l

Thanks Gary for the update on the plans for where Gemstone would like some on the new titles to appear. Two quick questions. One, were there any particular reasons that Gemstone was not able to get the two pocket book titles into bookstores? I always thought they would have made a great fit in the manga section of bookstores. Two, has anything changed or are there new plans to get these new titles in bookstores? I hope it all works out wonderfully.

Dean Rekich