#1 Posted by Rick475069 (177 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm thinking one comic book company was more obtainable than the other.

#2 Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt (13626 posts) - - Show Bio

because DC doesn't need Disney.

#4 Posted by danhimself (22691 posts) - - Show Bio

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

#5 Edited by Strider92 (16765 posts) - - Show Bio

Because they used the same technique to decide who they where going to buy as was used in South Park to determine economic outcomes........the chicken just happened to land on Marvel:

#6 Posted by Juandicimo_Magnifico45 (152 posts) - - Show Bio

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

Precisely

#7 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

@Juandicimo_Magnifico45 said:

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

Precisely

This, but also Marvel is a lot more profitable. DC has Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman and not much else as far as marketing goes. Marvel has Spider-Man, Wolverine, Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man etc... DC has the more iconic characters, but Marvel has more marketable characters.

#8 Posted by noj (1094 posts) - - Show Bio

@Night Thrasher: Well that isnt true at all. Superman and Batman are THE quintessential comic characters. Their marketing value alone far eclipses Cap, Thor, and Iron Man combined especially before their movies came out which was around the time when Disney made the decision to buy Marvel. Spider-Man and to a lesser extent Wolverine are the only characters that comes close to Superman and Batman in terms of the public consciousness. Though it is true Marvel was more profitable comic sales wise at the time. I think you're also underestimating the marketing value of characters like Green Lantern and The Flash.

#9 Posted by The_Soverighn (1813 posts) - - Show Bio

warner bros already owns dc and they hate disney and would never sell to them

#10 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

@noj said:

@Night Thrasher: Well that isnt true at all. Superman and Batman are THE quintessential comic characters. Their marketing value alone far eclipses Cap, Thor, and Iron Man combined especially before their movies came out which was around the time when Disney made the decision to buy Marvel. Spider-Man and to a lesser extent Wolverine are the only characters that comes close to Superman and Batman in terms of the public consciousness. Though it is true Marvel was more profitable comic sales wise at the time. I think you're also underestimating the marketing value of characters like Green Lantern and The Flash.

Go to WalMart look at sheets, pajamas, coloring books, toys, etc...You are going to see Superman, Batman, Wolverine, Spider-Man predominantly but to a lesser extent the others are made up of mostly Marvel characters mainly Iron Man and Hulk with Captain America lagging slightly behind. As far as Superman/Batman - Wolverine/Spider-Man comparison, I think they are fairly comparable. More people might recognize Superman and Batman but just as much crap has Spider-Man and Wolverine plastered on them as do the DC characters. All you have to do is look in a department store to see the evidence.

#11 Posted by mettlekm (417 posts) - - Show Bio

@The_Soverighn said:

warner bros already owns dc and they hate disney and would never sell to them

Unless the price is right...

#13 Posted by The Stegman (25523 posts) - - Show Bio
Because Mickey Mouse knows not to F*ck with Bugs Bunny.
#14 Posted by Matchstick (565 posts) - - Show Bio

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

this

#15 Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt (13626 posts) - - Show Bio

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

cept mine : D

i mean why would DC need Disney when they are already owned by the WB

#16 Posted by joshmightbe (25021 posts) - - Show Bio

WB is pretty much their only actual competition and they owned Marvel's only actual competition so honestly Marvel being bought out by Disney kind of seems like it was destined. Also them buying Lucasfilm makes me wonder how long it will be before WB acquires Star Trek so the two companies will pretty much control all of nerdom

Online
#17 Posted by AtPhantom (14521 posts) - - Show Bio

@Night Thrasher said:

This, but also Marvel is a lot more profitable. DC has Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman and not much else as far as marketing goes. Marvel has Spider-Man, Wolverine, Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man etc... DC has the more iconic characters, but Marvel has more marketable characters.

Man TDKR almost made as much money as the Avengers combined. I don't think Marvel gets to claim the marketability side.

#18 Posted by Stormbox (2001 posts) - - Show Bio

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

#19 Posted by xybernauts (858 posts) - - Show Bio

At the time I imagine Marvel was just cheaper to buy then DC, I assume. Besides, WB would never willingly sell to Disney because DC is too iconic and profitable and if they did the price would be too high or WB would be going bankrupt.

@Night Thrasher said:

@Juandicimo_Magnifico45 said:

@danhimself said:

because DC is already owned by WB....nothing anyone said above

Precisely

This, but also Marvel is a lot more profitable. DC has Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman and not much else as far as marketing goes. Marvel has Spider-Man, Wolverine, Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man etc... DC has the more iconic characters, but Marvel has more marketable characters.

DC and Marvel are both just as iconic and therefore just as profitable and just as marketable.

#20 Posted by Gambit1024 (9890 posts) - - Show Bio

You think Disney can buy DC anyway? How much would Disney have to offer before Time Warner would hand over the properties?

#21 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

@AtPhantom said:

@Night Thrasher said:

This, but also Marvel is a lot more profitable. DC has Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman and not much else as far as marketing goes. Marvel has Spider-Man, Wolverine, Captain America, Hulk, Iron Man etc... DC has the more iconic characters, but Marvel has more marketable characters.

Man TDKR almost made as much money as the Avengers combined. I don't think Marvel gets to claim the marketability side.

You do realize I posted a link with facts and not opinion right? All of Warner Bros made $6B from licenses; that includes Loony Tunes and DC comics. While Disney made $26B alone and Marvel made $5.6B from licenses. That's the numbers for you. I'm not saying this to be biased, I'm saying it as fact. TDKR almost made as much as Avengers but Avengers plus Amazing in one year put them well past DC in films this year alone not to mention over the past decade were they have been crushing. The numbers say Marvel is more marketable not me.

#22 Posted by SandMan_ (4528 posts) - - Show Bio

Because DC is WB...

#23 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

Disney could afford to buy TimeWarner if they wanted. The net worth of Disney is over three times as much as TimeWarner and that's before the purchase of LucasFilm. Disney is a mega corporation and might honestly be "Too Big to Fail". It's ridiculus how much they are worth.

#24 Posted by AtPhantom (14521 posts) - - Show Bio

@Night Thrasher said:

You do realize I posted a link with facts and not opinion right? All of Warner Bros made $6B from licenses; that includes Loony Tunes and DC comics. While Disney made $26B alone and Marvel made $5.6B from licenses. That's the numbers for you. I'm not saying this to be biased, I'm saying it as fact. TDKR almost made as much as Avengers but Avengers plus Amazing in one year put them well past DC in films this year alone not to mention over the past decade were they have been crushing. The numbers say Marvel is more marketable not me.

That only means Disney is better at marketing than WB is. You're assuming all things equal here, when it's not. Marvel has put out more films, better films, and had the most elaborate movie marketing strategy ever seen so far. The fact that DC, whose entire movie output has so far rested on Batman and a couple of flops that shouldn't even be mentioned much, is still following along nicely speaks volumes of DC's marketable potential. All the numbers tell you is that DC and WB are a bit retarded when it comes to tapping into that potential, at least relative to Disney.

#25 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

@AtPhantom: You are talking potential and I'm talking reality. The reality is Marvel capitalized on the library of characters that they have much better than DC over the past decade. They've made successful franchises out of The Avengers and it's subsidiaries, Spider-Man, X-Men and it's subsidiaries, Blade, Ghost Rider, and Wolverine. They've got their characters plastered on just as many books, clothes, beddings, underwear, electronics, etc as DC if not more. And they sell just as many toys. The fact is that Marvel came out of it's bankruptcy with a plan and it's worked. You can hold on to the bias of loving DC but the numbers won't change. Marvel made almost as much money from licensing by itself as TimeWarner did as a whole. The most important factor IMO is that while DC has it's "Big 3", they don't have much outside of that and Marvel is using a lot more of their catalog. If you really want DC to do better then you should've seen Green Lantern a few times and written about a hundred positive reviews so maybe they'd think about a Flash movie. The real indicator that Marvel is outshining DC in outside revenue is that Ghost Rider has had a movie and a sequel before Superman Returns had one and got rebooted.

#26 Posted by AtPhantom (14521 posts) - - Show Bio

@Night Thrasher: The word marketability means potential for marketing. So the reality is still that Marvel isn't necessarily more marketable than DC, but that they've been using what they had better.

#27 Posted by Night Thrasher (3705 posts) - - Show Bio

@AtPhantom: I know what marketability means...and I'm telling you your wrong. The fact is that DC has a "Big 3" that drives their maketing. After that they are limited. They have some marketable characters, but not as deep a catalog as Marvel. They have been slacking in terms of capitalizing on what they have though. A Flash movie is well overdue and Green Lantern was utter crap; but after that there aren't many characters off the top of my head that many think could carry their own movie or show. Arrow has his own show, but it is on CW and it will be a few years before that shows dividends in terms of licenses. Marvel however, has a list of characters that aren't exactly A-List that are not only carrying their own movies, but also getting sequels. Blade!, freakin Blade got THREE movies. Blade got three movies since the turn of the century and Superman has one. That should be all you need to know. The movies you are probably craving for from DC are probably the Big 3 or a couple of B-Listers; Blade is a freakin C-Lister at best! Ghost Rider got TWO movies and both did pretty decent at the box office. Thing is that Marvel is digging deeper in the crates to pull out licenses than DC is and that's why they're more marketable. It's not just what they CAN do; it's also what they HAVE done and how that affects what people are WILLING to do. That's what marketability really means....class dismissed

#28 Posted by lightsout (1833 posts) - - Show Bio

@Night Thrasher said:

The real indicator that Marvel is outshining DC in outside revenue is that Ghost Rider has had a movie and a sequel before Superman Returns had one and got rebooted.

Ow...as a huge Supes fan that feels like a punch in the gut....haha.

#29 Posted by RoyHarperBLOW (1496 posts) - - Show Bio