|
Post by fr4tbrn on May 6, 2008 6:03:26 GMT
Reminds me of the thread 'bout the Valentine's letters : those children made some spectacular remarks, didn't they? I wonder what they'd like as Gunnerkrigg Court merchandise... Not a bad idea, lots of people love those and might like a life-sized copy as a thank-you gift for a donation to support GC. Sadly the idea is probably dead on arrival for legal reasons. Since the authors are kids they can't sign a release for Tom to use their work; it would be a big headache to explain to their parents or guardians and get them to sign off on it. Let me modify your idea and reflect it back to you for comment: How about replicas of Kat's letters to Antimony from her vacation instead? Those would also be dirt-cheap to produce in large numbers, and folding-flat for mailing would make them more realistic. I think what was meant was what would the kids like as merchandise.
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on May 6, 2008 7:14:41 GMT
Yep, on further review I misread it as "be like as GC merchandise." Many apologies.
The offending text has been struck in what was probably the first genuine and correct use of the strike tag in years on the internet.
Also, (even though I am fully aware that it would be impractical as GC merchandise) thinking of miniatures has gotten me to wondering about a GC theme chess set. To entertain myself I have done some preliminary sketches. Would anyone be interested in seeing them? I'm considering posting them to the Fanart thread.
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on May 28, 2008 7:56:18 GMT
Anyone else catch Kurtz's blog yesterday on webcomics? The panel mentioned some of the issues that this thread dealt with. Apparently "running a fulfillment center from your home" is the correct industry lingo for taking orders for merchandise yourself. I was going to critique them on their take on contract negotiation but other comments in the second half sort of balanced out what I took issue with; it's still very much from the webcomic artists' perspective but they at least acknowledged the other side of the process. Permanent link to "Webcomics Weekly #34" www.pvponline.com/2008/05/27/webcomics-weekly-34/By the way, does anyone else find this merchandising and marketing topic at all interesting or am I now officially just blogging to this thread?
|
|
Jabor
New Member
New and Improved!
Posts: 45
|
Post by Jabor on May 28, 2008 8:06:55 GMT
I'm reading. I'd also be interested in seeing sketches of GC Chess. Pwease?
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on May 28, 2008 9:52:22 GMT
I've begun posting GC chess piece sketches to the fanart thread.
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jun 4, 2008 19:05:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Jun 4, 2008 21:17:56 GMT
I'd buy a shirt with a TicToc on it.
|
|
|
Post by randymcman on Jun 5, 2008 1:19:20 GMT
I'd buy a shirt that said "Born to heckle"
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Jun 5, 2008 7:21:21 GMT
The issue of what may be too much marketing has come up once or twice in this thread; I would like to read everyone's opinions on how much marketing is too much and what are the deciding factors. For example, I think we all can agree we wouldn’t like to see Antimony on television shilling for feminine hygiene products. Why? I would say that such things are very far from anything related to GC in theme and the all-ages nature of the web comic suggests that it is inappropriate for many readers. It would also be a media that GC has had, to date, nothing to do with. Further, such a use of the character/name would also turn off potential readers and reduce the number of future book sales or any other merchandise that came out under the GC name (sometimes called brand dilution).
That example was exaggerated on purpose to make it obvious but what about more subtle things like merchandise? What sort of a T-shirt would be going too far and why? Is anything that is planned to increase the GC fan base too much marketing? In general, is anything with a logo necessarily too much marketing? Are things would make a profit from GC things that would cost Tom some “cred” as an indie cartoonist by the fact that he makes money from them?
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jun 5, 2008 11:51:19 GMT
Maybe I'm using the word marketing differently than you. For me, too much marketing is when stuff is being sold that is so simple and boring that you instantly know it was only made to make as much money as possible and targeting obsessive fans and/or children who you know will buy anything no matter how boring it looks. Like simply cropping random stuff from the comic and printing them on shirts, mugs and anything else that can be printed. I want well-designed or well-chosen stuff. When people see me wearing a shirt, they should think something like "Hey, interesting shirt." and not "Whoa.. obsessive fan ahead." An example: gunnerkrigg.proboards75.com/index.cgi?action=gotopost&board=general&thread=318&post=9820 I don't think this would work on a shirt, but it'd probably make for a good poster. Of course, that's probably a matter of taste. I prefer unobtrusive stuff. I'm not saying that taking stuff from the comic and using it for merch is bad. but you have to chose wisely. I think, most of the ideas here are ok so far.
|
|
|
Post by silvercat on Jun 6, 2008 21:29:31 GMT
haha a plushie fight with lead collectibles! that would be cruel fun if you're tired of baby sitting ;-) There are a lot of risks connected to reading Gunnerkrigg Court let me tell you : I was reading up on alchemy and Antimony... and suddenly I find myself making bathsalts as a first alchemy session...
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Jun 6, 2008 23:51:31 GMT
Don't worry, that shirt will never be made. I just whipped it up in paint as an example of a conventional sort of T-shirt design so I could post it to this thread for discussion's sake. When/if Tom makes shirts I'm reasonably certain he will not just cut/paste stuff from the comic. That particular one features the logo prominently in a field where the main characters are doing something typical to the strip and/or notable, and it could be used for just about any webcomic with few changes in strategy. Another standardized shirt template that webcomics seem to go is based on a comical and/or significant phrase. How about this? (image deleted due to lack of hosting) Just in case I made that too small to read the text on that is, "You're alone because you're insane." Sure, it's not sidesplitting but I got tired of searching the archives for a better one-liner. The main promotional difference is that there is no logo (or if there is, it's not prominent). This way nobody will know you're a GC fan unless you tell them. Maybe I'm using the word marketing differently than you. For me, too much marketing is when stuff is being sold that is so simple and boring that you instantly know it was only made to make as much money as possible and targeting obsessive fans and/or children who you know will buy anything no matter how boring it looks. Most kids I know are pretty picky, but other than that I completely agree with what you're saying. The reason why predictable stuff like this gets made all the time is money, and designs are made to try to sell to as many people as possible. I'll go even further and observe that things are often dumbed down past the median of the typical consumer because people are more likely to buy down than up (nobody wants to own things that make them feel stupid either way). In short, stuff gets designed for people who mostly aren't you. That results in stuff you don't like. Here's the thing, though: Figuring out what people want or even what sort of people you're trying to sell to is pretty tough. There may be some value in polling the forum to see what people would like/are willing to accept in GC stuff but the forum is almost certainly not representative of the general reader. If Tom keeps A/S/L data from the forum and time sensitive eyeball info from the archives and main page there may be a tricky mathematical way to make an educated guess about the demographics of the general readers, but since he says he's not good at marketing I assume he's not able. It's also reasonable to assume Tom doesn't want to sink money into hiring someone who could, and if he wants to stay indie at this point (as he probably should) that rules out an agency. He'd probably get only a few hours' attention from an actual professional even if he did, afterward GC promotion/marketing would be kicked to an intern who also handles twelve other projects. It's tempting to say that since print-on-demand exists Tom can make many shirts so there'd be one for everyone. I'm not sure GC is big/popular enough to support that and make Tom any sort of return for the effort involved. The problem is that he'd either have to set the price much higher than a shirt would normally go or work for less money that he's used to. Here's why: Tom does b/w commissions for $20US so we can assume he'd want at least that for taking the time to do a shirt design. If he sets the price at $30 per shirt (plus whatever shipping is) for print on demand he'll have to sell two shirts of each design to break even for his time. Look at the vote tallies for the previous shirt poll and you'll see the problem. So... that leaves trial-and-error. Tom could just make a shirt, perhaps one that he feels is the best shirt he can design, and gamble on having a small lot run off. Prices could set lower than print-on-demand he problem with this method is risk. Depending on lot size he'd have to sell a particular number of shirts to break even. The shirt just might not become popular. There may be a compromise by way of a very limited set of designs but there's risk that way also. I suspect that there are a lot of GC readers who are tweens and kids who would like something that would look good at a Hannah-Montana concert. A unisex and boringly predictable shirt might sell even better and might be acceptable to replace it. Perhaps there's also room for a GC shirt that looks more like a rock concert shirt that would better appeal ot older male fans?
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jun 7, 2008 0:22:45 GMT
I agree with most of the stuff you said. Whether selling shirts would make more money than the drawings or not depends on the average number of units sold per month. Some people like to get something real for their money and will not just donate $20 for an image file. Plus, for kids it's easier to justify an expense if they actually get something in return for their money. Plus... Tom does seems to want to sell shirts. Thus the remark about the "born to heckle"-shirt and the shirt poll thread.
Using POD really isn't hard. I opened a Zazzle account this week and made a simple mug and it was really really easy and didn't cost anything.
I really don't know why Tom hasn't tried that yet.
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Jun 7, 2008 1:04:01 GMT
There may be a compromise by way of a very limited set of designs but there's risk that way also. I suspect that there are a lot of GC readers who are tweens and kids who would like something that would look good at a Hannah-Montana concert. A unisex and boringly predictable shirt might sell even better and might be acceptable to replace it. Perhaps there's also room for a GC shirt that looks more like a rock concert shirt that would better appeal ot older male fans? Tom's already got his rock concert shirts. I'm a 23-year-old male, and I would wear any of those proudly. (Would? I already am.) Anyway, I recall an interview with Ryan North in which Ryan theorized that, in order for webcomickers to "make it" selling merch, they need to make wares that are tangentially related to the original comic. If you just put the character's face on a shirt, then only the fans will be interested in buying it. And said fans are only going to buy a set number of character shirts, and no more. But, if you take an idea that's derived from the comic, but which can be appreciated as a t-shirt without prior knowledge of the comic, then you'll get something that people will be much more likely to wear. You might even get people who don't even read the comic liking the shirt and buying one. Looking at the merch sold by the webcomickers who actually make a living off it ( Dinosaur Comics and Dr. McNinja are the two I know of) seems to bear Ryan North's hypothesis out.
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Jun 7, 2008 2:59:48 GMT
Plus... Tom does seems to want to sell shirts. Thus the remark about the "born to heckle"-shirt and the shirt poll thread. Using POD really isn't hard. I opened a Zazzle account this week and made a simple mug and it was really really easy and didn't cost anything. I really don't know why Tom hasn't tried that yet. Only Tom knows for sure but it does cost time. Even if he doesn't lose money on setting the account up he may not make enough to be worth his while. He must be pretty time-crunched, GC has been a time-intensive hobby. Back when I first posted through the forum I was reading through the old Questions to Tom thread and I found his estimate on how much time it took to make each comic; I multiplied that out by the then-current comic plus how far he'd worked ahead and got an insane number of hours. Also, if Tom does use print-on-demand to sell shirts he wouldn't sell as many if he went a more profitable way later, as I think Mezzaphor is getting at (see below). (edit2) Since then Tom has answered this question in the Posters thread.Nope, it all seems fair, and a lot of their webcomic guys use them. The main reason I haven't used them [Topato Co.] yet is because I don't have a shirt design. (/edit2) Most excellent! (edit) You should post that to the fanart thread if you haven't already. (/edit) Anyway, I recall an interview with Ryan North in which Ryan theorized that, in order for webcomickers to "make it" selling merch, they need to make wares that are tangentially related to the original comic. If you just put the character's face on a shirt, then only the fans will be interested in buying it. And said fans are only going to buy a set number of character shirts, and no more. But, if you take an idea that's derived from the comic, but which can be appreciated as a t-shirt without prior knowledge of the comic, then you'll get something that people will be much more likely to wear. You might even get people who don't even read the comic liking the shirt and buying one. Agreed, it's a good test of any piece of merchandising to see if it can stand alone or not. The better mass-marketed things made via formulaic design get focus-grouped by people unfamiliar with the brand to see what people think. I'm not familiar with the North interview and I didn't quickly see a way to nav to it through that page so I can't talk about it. I will say that you can treat a market (in this case, a fanbase) as a fixed number in the short run but the price and quantity supplied and demanded relationship is to be ignored at peril. In other words, that subset of fans who actually plunk down money to buy things will change based on how expensive those things are; the demand for current pop culture collectibles is usually elastic. Also, the more complicated the choices are the more likely customers are to delay or not purchase. In the long run the situation is dynamic. Some people will leave the fan base, more will join, and old members will reconsider how to spend their disposable income. It may be that North was talking about reaching saturation; a small fanbase like GC is right now could easily become saturated, but if it did with new content coming out that will become less true as time passes. One thing: Even if a GC shirt (or whatever) is high-quality and could stand-alone without the GC connection it's probably not going to be competitive in price with the mass-produced ones. Also, how are people going to know about it if it's not self-promoting with the book or site?
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Jun 7, 2008 4:11:06 GMT
I'm not familiar with the North interview and I didn't quickly see a way to nav to it through that page so I can't talk about it. Sorry about that. I tried to google-search for the interview in question and I couldn't find it at all. I just linked to Dinosaur Comics because that's Ryan North's comic -- he makes enough money off his merch to fully support himself and make webcomics full-time, so I think when he talks merchandising he knows what he's talking about. Now if I could just find that stupid interview...
|
|
|
Post by nikita on Jun 7, 2008 11:18:32 GMT
webcomicsreview.com/examiner/issue050912/ryannorth.html at least the word tangential is in that interview. Of course, Print on demand can be quite costly, but for the start it'd be the best option in my opinion. It also takes less time because you don't have to care about payment and shipping. Mass production would be problematic with the small fan base.
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Jun 7, 2008 21:14:16 GMT
Print on demand mostly makes money for the print on demand company. Sure, they'd give Tom a small cut but in return he's essentially giving them the right to sell to his fanbase.
Ordering a small run of shirts and "running a fulfillment center from your home" (fancy indie webcomic lingo for taking orders and mailing out the stuff yourself) may not be for everyone but there'd be a lot more profit for Tom in it. The difficulties involved are similar to selling stuff on eBay. I've been doing that for years in my spare time.
About the Ryan North interview: Probably the most profound thing he says is that "micropayments" for content is a poor alternative to free content supported by other means. That does seem to be the most progressive route, not that the established media with old-fashioned models like the trend one bit. He also makes a good point about how viewers can be offended by over-advertised sites for "selling their eyeballs" but leaves out the fact that a given level of adverts is not only acceptable but expected. Most people have trained themselves to filter them while they look at the content much like commercials on free TV; they only pay attention when something they think is interesting appears. Last, there was the obligatory Kurtz reference. Does anyone else feel that Kurtz is now more famous for being an expert on webcomics than for his webcomics?
|
|
|
Post by Mezzaphor on Jun 11, 2008 3:23:17 GMT
Aha. With a little help, I found the article I was originally thinking of. But the merchandising insight was from Dorothy Gambrell of Cat and Girl, not Ryan North of Dinosaur Comics. The relevant part is on page 3:
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Jun 12, 2008 9:06:40 GMT
Wow, that article brushes by several extremely deep topics. I'll try to stick with what is most relevent to the current discussion in this thread.
It struck me that the examples of successful webcomics Bernardi lists do not have an ambitious and continuing narrative like GC does. With occasional exceptions each strip from the comics he mentions stands alone; that appears to limit merchandising choices to iconic or tangental (for lack of better terms). Further, if a comic specializes in "obscure subject matter" (as Bernardi describes Gambrell's Cat and Girl) tangentiality can't possibly be abnormal. What effect does that have on the fanbase's buying habits with regard to tangental merchandise? I suspect there must be some but I don't feel that I'm enough of an expert to hazard a guess as to how much. It's likely the case that there isn't anyone expert enough in the marketing of webcomics to answer such a question with authority. I will venture this statement: Since the fanbases of the comics Bernardi uses in his article are probably quite different from GC's fanbase, employing a merchandising strategy for GC identical to what they use will probably not meet the same level of success. Please note that I'm not saying that tangental merchandise will necessarily be unsuccessful; I do think that the GC fanbase is probably big enough to support it in a limited fashion. I expect that a model from a successful webcomic that is narrative, like Kurtz's or Foglio's, would probably be a better predictor for what can be done with GC.
While I was thinking about that puzzle it occurred to me that I'm unsure if in the strict sense the description of tangent merchandise can be applied to a Tic Toc or Mort shirt since those are repeating and oft-referenced things in GC. A true tangent would be something that only comes up within one strip (perhaps in one panel), or if you don't want to quibble over terms, something that appears very rarely and with nothing to do with the plot. A very steep tangent might possibly have nothing to do with the strip except than that the same artist made both the item and the strip. Using "semi-" or "quasi-tangental" seems a bit awkward. Perhaps if Tom gets interviewed by someone about this subject he will have the chance to coin a brand new word for it.
Also within that article are some statements on general trends that I don't agree with; if anyone wants I'll post a brief rant on the Big Picture as I see it.
|
|