MAD Mumblings

[madcoversite]

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/010923-MAD-Quarterly.html

Editor John Ficarra said, “The feedback we've gotten from readers is that only every third issue of MAD is funny, so we've decided to just publish those."

[Neumaniac]

MAD Kids and MAD Classics also canceled as of their next issues.

Let's see, last year, I bought the following issues of MAD:

12 regular issues at $4.99 each = $59.88
4 issues of MAD Classics at $4.99 each = $19.96
4 issues of MAD Kids at $4.99 each = $19.96

TOTAL = $99.90.

With their new publication schedule, DC will now be getting per year:

4 regular issues at new price of $5.99 each = $23.96

TOTAL = $23.96

Interesting that a move that DC claims would save them money will actually result in me giving them approximately $75 less annually than I have in the past!

[yodazone]

crapitty crap crap......

I thought the comic industry had a great year last year despite the economy. Didn't Warner Bros. they make a billion dollars off of Dark Knight last year???

[madcoversite]

[john e. hett]

An Open Letter to John Ficarra, the Editorial Department, Art Department, and the Usual Gang of Idiots,
Luckily I was wrong. MAD will be a quarterly and not disappear completely. But MAD Kids and the Specials are long gone with the ever popular paperbacks. Here are a few helpful hints for editor Ficarra from John E. Hett and, "The Journal of MADness problem", as may magazine was refered to at MAD staff meetings. I hope this helps. No hard feelings.
1. Someone please purchase the rights for the old MAD logo and Alfred image from Time Warner. Let Time Warner keep all other licensing rights to make it lucrative for them to continue to market and make money. (I can start by contributing $50,000 cash asap for this purchase and can convince a few others to do the same. What would it cost John?)
2. Move out of New York City where rent and overhead is "CHEAP". Go back to timeless covers and black and white interiors while maintaining advertising like Editor Feldstein wanted to do back in the 1960's..
3. Cut page rates for artists and writers. Go back to the skeleton crew that once existed at MAD. Publisher, editor, asst editor, two art department personel, mail room, and part-time secretary. (One monkey could lay out the entire publication if he or she is computer literate!)
4. Go back to eight issues per year.
5. Trade paperbacks twice a year! After every fourth issue release a trade paperback. Look at the comic buying market place today. That is how people prefer to read this stuff. If you HAVE to add color, throw it into the trade paperback. Trades will sell very well through Diamond and chain book stores. SERIOUSLY! Forget the Bathroom Companions and expensive MAD Looks at the 90's anthologies. The trades will still be timely.
6. If Time Warner won't allow the above, license the E.C. comic title PANIC from Bill Gaines' daughters, use a slightly different version of Alfred E. Neuman, remember - Time Warner only owns/has rights to the 1956 Norman Mingo version, and relaunch MAD as PANIC. I know it sounds crazy and I'm giving away great advice for free but what the hell. It's worth a try isn't it?
7. While MAD should be timely, it should have a balance of left and right. The biggest complaint I get here in the Journal of MADness bunker is that MAD has become "to left of center". Satire works best when it is beholden to no person, entity, or ideology. Tighten it up a bit MAD. Barak is not God and Bush was not Satan, but a Socialist and a hawk should make for great satire! The editorial balance has arguably slipped a bit. You can't be The Onion or The People's Cube. But you can be something in between. You owe it to your history to be the best of both without worrying about offending the corporate agenda or the politically correct crowd. MAD's best sales and writers came from the mid-West, fly-over country to most in the corporate media. Rekindle that relationship with that audience.
8. Finally, how dare I make these suggestions? I am the only fan in MAD's history to have spent in excess of $80,000. of my own money
promoting something I love and would love to see survive and lost money. Am I the only one with the balls to make these kinds of suggestions to insure MAD lives to lampoon another day? This plan may not be the greatest. But other than a DCTimeWarner infusion of cash, which ain't gonna happen, I think it is a good start!

Good Luck to the Editorial Department, the Art Department, and The Usual Gang of Idiots.

Most Sincerely,
John E. Hett
The Journal of MADness

[MADdict]

Like everyone, I wish all the best to the folks at MAD in the current climate. Regrettably I guess that this is no surprise to those of us looking at the steady decline in MADs (& most other print medias) circulation over the last ten years. I imagine that most of us are looking at the DC suits as the bad guys in this scenario, but I'm just glad that they haven't (yet) pulled the plug altogether and are retaining some commitment to publishing the mag. I sincerely hope that MAD is soon able to emerge from this dark period to start afresh with a healthier production schedule.

[john e. hett]

To everyone who has emailed me about my "plan". Let me clear up a few of my statements:
Yes, I am suggesting that the employees buy MAD.
Yes, there are fans who would be willing to come on as co-publishers.
Correct, Time-Warner does not own the rights to the E.C. Comics' PANIC title.
Yes, I am a dreamer! Again, good luck MAD!

John E. Hett
The Journal of MADness

[melvin_m_melvin]

Never mind that, John E. I though I read somewhere that you were a schoolteacher. Where did a teacher get those sums of money from???

Dave Robinson

[art4mad]

John,

Good suggestions, but totally impractical. Here's why:

1. Time Warner will never just sell the rights or allow another entity to publish MAD. The value of owning MAD is in the catalog of material from the last 56 years, but allowing someone else to publish under the name would potentially hurt that brand. Will never happen, they'd see it stop publication and then sit on the rights while they publish giant collections of certain artist's work, like the did with Don Martin recently.

2. Moot point. Unable to purchase the rights means new lower cost premises meaningless. MAD was moved into 1/2 it's space some time ago and DC isn't going to give up the floors they have in their building, so their office space was a negligible cost and essential non-factor.

3. They did cut their crew considerably when 4 or 5 staffers were axed last year. The crew they had could barely put out the publications they did as it was. Cutting page rates would have been one move they could have done, but instead they cut the number of pages they paid for using more in-house material.

4. Good suggestion, that one. They took 200% of that idea.

5. Another good suggestion. If MAD Classics wasn't selling or generating revenue, then more books would have been the best way to get the valuable older material out there. Still, they did ramp up the book production in the 2000's with the "MAD About..." series and the decade books, plus the Cover book, SvS Casebook, Complete Don Martin, etc. How many more times can you repackage the same stuff?

6. This makes no sense. Why bother to license the rights to PANIC when you can just start another magazine instead. Pick your one word synonym for "mad" and start publishing. No SvS or other MAD owner properties, but otherwise there is no copyright on MAD type humor.

7. Did you see the recent issue? Funny how timing works. MAD announces it's going quarterly jut when it gets more attention for one of it's issues than it's ever gotten. The internet is buzzing with people talking about the latest issue and how MAD is daring to start taking shots at "Obamessiah" already. This issue will be a big seller for them. I'm waiting for the apology from all the righties who have been bitching for years that MAD is a leftist rag when they merely have been making fun of the people in office for the last 8 years. They have already shown they are ready to take on the new liberal controlled government and Obama's been in office for exactly 8 days.

8. I think your opinions are very welcome to the guys and MAD, John.

[john e. hett]

Hey Dave,
Good to see you. I hope all is well.
Yes, I am a teacher and while not wealthy I have invested well prior to becoming a teacher. Can anyone say equity line of credit, mutual funds, and smart investments in real estate? My lovely wife didn't let me publish The Journal of MADness at a loss on my teacher salary alone. In fact, when CRACKED was on life support publisher Dick Kulpa contacted and offered me the job of editor/co-publisher in a phone call if I would pay his printing tab through Quebecor because he no longer had the cash. I said no. While I had no faith in Dick, I do have faith in some of the MAD faithful if they could wrestle the title away from Time Warner. $50,000. isn't much. But remember Dick Kulpa got CRACKED from the NAtional Enquirer for next to nothing because it was no longer viable.
Is it possible this could happen with MAD eventually? It never hurts to ask.
John E. Hett

[john e. hett]

Hey Tom,
I'd love to see you continue in MAD for years to come. Again as I posted to Dave, Cracked sold for next to nothing. The magazine and the licensing rights were SOLD for next to nothing! (How Kulpa screwed that up is the biggest joke in the industry.)
If DCTimeWarner wasn't willing to wait for the economy to get better before selling The Soul of MAD, then they are deperate. MAD #30 sold for $175,000 plus commision. The buyer was willing to go to a million! Strike while the iron is hot is all I'm saying. MAD's parent company is hurting. In business, everything is for sale. Like the sale of the Soul of MAD, the suits proved to be completely out of step with the timing on that sale. It should have gone for more. Maybe they'll make one last idiotic decision, sell MAD to someone who really wants to see it survive and values its history more than just the bottom line. (Although, the bottom line is important. I know. That's why The Journal of MADness is on hold.)
Keep up the great job on the blog and the art Tom. You have the spirit of a true MAD veteran of old.

Respectfully,
John E. Hett

[melvin_m_melvin]

I agree, and I'd also hang on to Frederickson

[canucklehead]

I didn't want to come here and be down in the dumps about these developments at MAD, but I'm afraid I can't help it. This is the most depressing news I've received in a long, long time, to the point where my wife and I were actually talking about this for about half an hour tonight and she told me, "You need to be on MAD Mumblings right now."

So here I am, a reader for over 21 years, a subscriber for eight years, a Mumblings moderator for four years (although personal and professional commitments have limited the time I've had to spend on this site), and someone who had just renewed his MAD subscription for another two years. Eagerly anticipating MAD #500, delighted that the finely-tuned political antennae of the Bush years were now firmly focused on Obama, content in the knowledge that the magazine's veterans and newcomers were smartly blending together to preserve the proud MAD name forever.

Then, kaboom, kabang. Reality sets in and the decline of the worldwide publishing industry rips Alfred E. Neuman a new one. The magazine is still alive, but I feel like there's been a death in the family.

Technically, that's true, with the departure of MAD Kids and MAD Classics (which I'll discuss in separate threads). But there's just one thing that keeps me from writing the obituary - MAD is still here. Yes, it's in a quarterly format for the first time since Harvey Kurtzman was having trouble meeting his deadlines in the mid-'50s. Yes, some hardworking production staffers are looking for work today. But MAD is still here.

And while I won't pretend the magazine is perfect (poor in-house decisions like the proliferation of photo-gag "outtake" articles and the ghoulish "Darker Side Of The Lighter Side" feature have hobbled MAD's integrity), I refuse to join the camps insisting on MAD's devolution to its 50s/60s incarnation or decrying it as a tool of the Democratic Party (as Tom Richmond has said here and elsewhere, the Obama cover and interior material defuse this theory, as does the brilliant Keith Olbermann piece in #495 and several other recent MAD shots at Obama, the Clintons, John Edwards, Jesse Jackson, and so on).

Yes, MAD has changed. Yes, MAD has taken ads. Yes, the MAD of 2009 is not the MAD of 1959, 1969, 1979, 1989 or 1999.

But, while I have not sunk $80,000 of my own money into promoting MAD as Mr. Hett has done, I am also not a rich man. If I did not feel MAD was worth my time, money or passion over the past ten years, I wouldn't have wasted one iota of any of these things on it. But I have, and I'm proud to say that I did.

The bottom line: MAD Magazine deserves to continue publication. We may not see it appear more than four times a year for the foreseeable future, or perhaps forever. But four annual doses of the Usual Gang Of Idiots - a brand name that carries as much weight today as it did in MAD's highest sales years - is certainly better than the alternative.

Don't go away, MAD.

[melvin_m_melvin]

This link:

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?id=14937&page=article

dated Mon, May 23rd 2005 tells me that:

< In mid April, Phyllis Hume was made redundant as DC's International Director, after working there licensing DC's characters and stories internationally for many number of years. This story was not covered by the comics press at the time. >

Why do I say this, here? Because, a few Februarys before that, I had met with Phyllis to talk about MAD in the UK at London's swish Landmark Hotel -- it's 5-star!

Phyllis joked that the food was so expensive that she was having to cross the road to Marylebone rail station, to eat! Why did DC waste readers' hard-earned shekels in this fashion?

Dave

[melvin_m_melvin]

Re: JEH's, Tom's and Canuckle's comments

I'm luvvin Mr Hett's work and I know that his depth of feeling for MAD is at least as great as mine for MAD in the UK. He also seems to revere the Feldstein era as I do.

In trying to revive MAD in the UK, I always sought to balance my longevity as a reader with an up-to-date sense of what the modern market requires.

In my opinion, MAD stayed totally black and white for too long. Work by Richmond, Meijia and, indeed, Drucker looks more than twice as good in colo(u)r.

When John E talks of timeless covers, I'm making a rash assumption that he may be thinking Mingo and Freas (possibly Rickard). Sadly, neither is with us any longer; even FKF, by his own admission, ran stale of MAD ideas and his most recent AEN effort, for a front cover of Comic Journal, was predictably disappointing. And Mingo's pre-Freas work wasn't timeless: it is firmly rooted in an advertising style of that era.

The Lawrence of Arabia issue heralded a switch to movie and TV-related covers (though this step across was not immediate) and this was particularly prevalent in the 70s and 80s. Yet as "recently" as the 90s we have DeVito's snowboard [edited] cover (one of my favourites) and AEN's giant piercing; both of which, though fad-related, stand the test of time, as does Mark Fredrickson's style (better than Jones or Williams, say).

Point 5: DO trade paperbacks sell well?? We also need to remember that recent MAD-titled books come from a number of publishers: Little Brown, Kitchen Sink, Thunder's Mouth, etc. It's not just DC that have to "take a punt".

Point 6: I agree with point 6 that, if it doesn't have the title MAD, then it ain't MAD. A friend used to say this to me about MAD in the UK: 'Why don't you just bring out your own "zany" [sic] magazine?' He'd failed to realise that, in licensing the MAD name, you're buying into all that history, clout and influence. Shoulders of giants, and all that.

BTW I also mentioned to the UK Ed more than once that he was too left-wing: Ron always referred to Prime Minister Margaret as "Thatcher".

I don't think I've solved much but enjoyed airing these views.

Best,
Dave