>>98018800>>98019007They are/were around 45 in 2011 when the research I know about was done - so they're predominantly around 50 now.
This is kind of reflected in the creatorship too - name, off the top of your head, one big-name creator who's 30 or younger. Now 40. Not easy?
The thing is, from about 45 onwards, newly diagnosed heart disease hits 8% of males annually, year on year; that's either fatal (diagnosed post-mortem) or expensive (diagnosed at a checkup) and tends to lead, in either case, to lifestyle changes (or without them, in the second case, an early death).
That's across general population too - and it's not just heart disease. Diabetes, cancer, all kinds of things get more common, but when you're talking about the drive-everywhere dads and the single men who live on pizza rolls... it's probably higher than 8% for comic books, is all I'm gonna say.
Of course death is inevitable and predictable, but if you're a publisher and your readership dies off without being replaced, which is easily done if you're too busy pandering to the smaller, richer cohort, then you have a problem. There will come a tipping point when it's no longer viable to play to that audience despite their buying habits, because there just won't be enough of them.
>>98019389I think his taking of movie development work and using it in his books was part of the reason they got rid of the MCC altogether. That's expensive development work to give away to the distinguished opposition in a $4 book, and we've known for years that movie sales are so vastly higher than comic books that comics don't drive ticket sales and movies don't affect comic books. Synergy for new readers is one argument, but you'd think after a while they'd realize it wasn't working.
