What licenses would you like to see DE pick up?

[tony ingram]

Have to admit I'm not too familiar with Rebellion -- as I understand it, they're a videogame company that once licensed the 2000 AD characters from IPC/Fleetway for games? (A bit like Toy Biz purchasing Marvel Comics in the 1990s, or even more apropos, Akklaim buying Valiant Comics.)

Must have gotten confused because DC published that Albion mini right around the same time as they started doing 2000 AD reprints, IIRC.

Not quite right. Rebellion are principally a games company, yes, but they were comparatively late realizing the potential of the 2000AD characters (a few other companies got there first). Buying 2000AD was their first real foray into magazine publishing and they've done pretty well with it, but oddly enough they didn't actually release a game based on the 2000AD characters until 2003, several years after they bought the comic itself.

[Red Bryan]

Tony, I remember some of these characters from Quality Comics and Titan Books reprints. Have to think they'd be a tough sell for American audiences, though, as there's almost no recognition of these characters here.

I think you'd be better off trying to plead your case with the guys at IDW, since they've just acquired the license to Judge Dredd, and I assume Rebellion still owns these characters.

AXA might fit in with Red Sonja and Vampirella fans, and the concept is simple enough that previous familiarity might not be an issue.

AXA would fit into a program with Jungle Girl in tow. But when they will not continue the first, why choose another one? I cannot really understand the theme of this thread. Look around and see what Dynamite makes with the characters. Okay, they revived Red Sonja, almost pronounced dead and not as good as it was before, they give us Vampirella almost exactly like they gave us Red Sonja (with one ongoing and several limited series' and classic reprints) before (as long as it sells). What else? They left us with fragments at several ends. Don't know if your favorite characters should be wished for the Dynamite treatment.

[positronic]

Not quite right. Rebellion are principally a games company, yes, but they were comparatively late realizing the potential of the 2000AD characters (a few other companies got there first). Buying 2000AD was their first real foray into magazine publishing and they've done pretty well with it, but oddly enough they didn't actually release a game based on the 2000AD characters until 2003, several years after they bought the comic itself.

I admit I'm a bit fascinated by this story, Tony. So, Rebellion bought 2000 AD (and maybe Starlord) and all its characters but didn't actually purchase "the company" known as IPC/Fleetway? Does this mean that IPC/Fleetway is still in the publishing business, and if so, what do they publish? (Or do they have other business interests besides publishing?) And were they managing 2000 AD so poorly before selling it, that they could afford to part with (what would appear to me to be) their most valuable asset? Or is IPC/Fleetway now a lot like Egmont (more of a childrens' book publisher like Scholastic Books in the US), who seem to depend primarily on licensed characters from television, to sustain their publishing ventures?

[tony ingram]

I admit I'm a bit fascinated by this story, Tony. So, Rebellion bought 2000 AD (and maybe Starlord) and all its characters but didn't actually purchase "the company" known as IPC/Fleetway? Does this mean that IPC/Fleetway is still in the publishing business, and if so, what do they publish? (Or do they have other business interests besides publishing?) And were they managing 2000 AD so poorly before selling it, that they could afford to part with (what would appear to me to be) their most valuable asset? Or is IPC/Fleetway now a lot like Egmont (more of a childrens' book publisher like Scholastic Books in the US), who seem to depend primarily on licensed characters from television, to sustain their publishing ventures?

OK, bear with me on this because it's a bit complicated: IPC Media still exists, and is quite profitable I gather, but sold its comics publishing arm (then consolidated as Fleetway) to Pergemon Holdings in 1987, along with the rights to all characters created after January 1970, plus 26 characters from 'Buster' comic (which was still being published). Any characters created before January 1st 1970 remained with IPC but were not being used. In 1991, Egmont UK bought Fleetway from Pergamon, and combined it with their own UK based comics arm, London Editions Magazines (then better known for UK reprints of DC Comics material) to form Fleetway Editions. By 2000 though, Fleetway Editions was effectively wound up and absorbed into Egmont, with 2000AD (then the only non licensed title still being published) sold off to Rebellion, who now own all the characters who originated in or have legally* appeared in 2000AD, the only exception being Dan Dare, who was sold off separately to the Dan Dare Corporation. Egmont have since published only licensed titles, ignoring their former Fleetway holdings, while IPC (which no longer publishes comics) were bought by Time-Warner in 1998 and have done little with the characters they retained except license them for occasional reprints or (in 2005) to be used by Wildstorm.

* I mentioned characters which have "legally" appeared in 2000AD since, in the early 90's, 2000AD illegally used several characters still owned by IPC (notably Tim Kelly of Kelly's Eye) in both the main title and a one-off '2000AD Action Special' in the mistaken belief that their parent company, Egmont, owned them.

As it stands now: all IPC characters created before Jan 1st 1970 (including the Spider, Steel Claw Etc) are still owned by IPC, and therefore by Time-Warner. All characters created after Jan 1st 1970 are owned by Egmont, which isn't using them, except for the 2000AD characters which are owned by Rebellion and Dan Dare which is owned by the Dan Dare Corporation and licensed to Spaceship Away magazine. There. Clear as mud, right...?

[tony ingram]

AXA would fit into a program with Jungle Girl in tow. But when they will not continue the first, why choose another one? I cannot really understand the theme of this thread. Look around and see what Dynamite makes with the characters. Okay, they revived Red Sonja, almost pronounced dead and not as good as it was before, they give us Vampirella almost exactly like they gave us Red Sonja (with one ongoing and several limited series' and classic reprints) before (as long as it sells). What else? They left us with fragments at several ends. Don't know if your favorite characters should be wished for the Dynamite treatment.

Actually, while I agree Red Sonja isn't as good as it once was, I still thoroughly enjoy it and if Dynamite could handle Axa as well as they have Sonja, I'd be delighted to see them use her. It isn't as though anyone else is doing anything with her at the moment.

[positronic]

Thanks, Tony. I admit I had to read that through several times to make sure I understood it. When I mentioned Egmont I had no idea they had actually bought Fleetway from IPC at one point, it was just the only other UK company I could think of that publishes comics. I have just now wikipedia'ed Egmont and was surprised to learn that they are a HUGE international publishing concern originating in Denmark (and also the largest publisher of Disney comics in the world).

So then you mention that IPC was bought by Time-Warner in 1998, which then licensed the "Albion" (pre-1970 IPC) characters to Wildstorm (which is owned by DC, which is owned by... Time-Warner), so in effect they licensed the characters they owned to themselves. Weird.

Speaking of "legally", since I know I didn't read The Spider and The Steel Claw until some reprints from the 1980s and 1990s, I wonder if those were "legal"...?

Apologies to everyone else for the off-topicality of these posts; I'll stop now.

[tony ingram]

Thanks, Tony. I admit I had to read that through several times to make sure I understood it. When I mentioned Egmont I had no idea they had actually bought Fleetway from IPC at one point, it was just the only other UK company I could think of that publishes comics. I have just now wikipedia'ed Egmont and was surprised to learn that they are a HUGE international publishing concern originating in Denmark (and also the largest publisher of Disney comics in the world).

So then you mention that IPC was bought by Time-Warner in 1998, which then licensed the "Albion" (pre-1970 IPC) characters to Wildstorm (which is owned by DC, which is owned by... Time-Warner), so in effect they licensed the characters they owned to themselves. Weird.

Speaking of "legally", since I know I didn't read The Spider and The Steel Claw until some reprints from the 1980s and 1990s, I wonder if those were "legal"...?

Apologies to everyone else for the off-topicality of these posts; I'll stop now.

I suspect the reprints were either the hardback collected editions or the Quality Comics reprints. Both were published under license. The other major British comics publisher still in operation is DC Thomson, by the way; they publish, amongst others, The Dandy and The Beano, two of the five longest running comic titles in the world (the first issue of The Dandy was published in December 1937, just a few months after Detective Comics #1, while The Beano #1 was published in July 1938, just a month after Action Comics #1). The third largest British comics publisher for quite some time was Marvel UK, which was eventually sold by Marvel to Panini UK; they now concentrate mostly on licensed material and Marvel reprints. There are and were a lot of others, though; Britain has a history of comics publishing stretching back to the late 1800's, long before a retired soldier kickstarted the US comics industry. http://britishcomics.wikia.com/wiki/Comic_Cuts

[Red Bryan]

Actually, while I agree Red Sonja isn't as good as it once was, I still thoroughly enjoy it and if Dynamite could handle Axa as well as they have Sonja, I'd be delighted to see them use her. It isn't as though anyone else is doing anything with her at the moment.

Yes, but they cancelled Jungle Girl. Why in favor for a series that gets cancelled as soon as it got started?

[tony ingram]

Yes, but they cancelled Jungle Girl. Why in favor for a series that gets cancelled as soon as it got started?

Axa is not Jungle Girl. I remain convinced of Axa's saleability, if they stayed true to Romero's original concept.

[positronic]

Yes, but they cancelled Jungle Girl. Why in favor for a series that gets cancelled as soon as it got started?

They didn't "cancel" Frank Cho's Jungle Girl. They published 2 limited series. They never indicated the title was supposed to be an ongoing series. While I wish the demand had been great enough for a third series (or an ongoing), this is why publishers do limited series in the first place -- to test the viability of an ongoing title. Then again, sometimes the factors that prevent further exploiting a property have to do with the creator or creative team.