Quote:Having a number of appearances and exposes suggest that the readers want to read about him.
Quote:With respect, in my opinion that's the opposite of what it means. What it means is that a writer pitched to the editor; it doesn't necessarily mean that there is what we might call "fan demand" (as in the oft-spouted and rarely true "Because YOU demanded it!"). Quicksilver is about as old as I am (the poor bastard), and while he's a personal favorite of mine (I am a sucker for any of the Kooky Quartet plus two), he's never been very popular as a character since his martial problems (early 1980's?).
I'm assuming that the editor actually wants people to read his titles. And if that were the case then they will need popular characters in their titles. For a specific example, I'd guess the most popular Avengers make the most appearances in Avengers comics (Cap, Thor, Iron Man). And the least popular Avengers make the least number of appearances (Deathcry?, Silverclaw?).
Quote:If he was popular with the fans, the sales on his appearances would have led to non-event tie in LS, and strong sales would have resulted in an ongoing series. But the character has been in limbo on and off for decades.
Well that depends on how popular a specific character is with the fans. I'm not saying that Quicksilver is a top 20 character at Marvel, but I'd guess he is top 50 or so in terms of popularity. I'd guess Spitfire would be lucky to make the top 100,
Quicksilver has appeared in every year since his creation, having multiyear runs in titles like the Avengers (65-73, 78-79, 91-96) and X-Factor (91-93). I'd guess he has a multiyear run in the Avengers Academy as long as that book continues to be published.
Quote:The reason nobody made a Spitfire figure is that the Invaders were never licensed for a toy line focus. This might change after the CA movie and its WWII presence.
Marvel doesn't really license out specific lines anymore, which is why something like an Invaders toy line isn't going to appear. Union Jack got an Action figure.
Quote:Son of M sold very highly given what it was.
Quote:Not at our local stores - it sold very poorly, for what it was (an event tie-in). Its sales appeal was as a tie-in for mutant enthusiasts and completists, for the most part. Of course, neither of us are quoting the Diamond sales figures, and comparing them to the other House of M tie-ins or LS tie-ins for other event comics, but hey... my point is that my data (subjective) is just as valid as yours (subjective); we just happen to have had different experiences.
My data isn't subjective, I quoted the public Diamond sales figures.
29 Son Of M 1 $2.99 Marvel 62,255
25 Son of M 2 $2.99 Marvel 52,686
30 Son of M 3 $2.99 Marvel 52,208
39 Son of M 4 $2.99 Marvel 49,967
44 Son of M 6 $2.99 Marvel 47,148
This to counter the point that Son of M was low selling. It clearly was not.
Quote:While I'm sure part of the appeal of Quicksilver is his family connections in Wanda and Magneto, but how many Spitfire stories can you really name without Union Jack, Baron Blood, or vampires?
Quote:How many Quicksilver stories can you tell without the Avengers, or Magneto, or the Inhumans? Both of the characters are niche player.
My point is that the associations of either character are part of the character and cannot be excluded. The fact that Quicksilver is more popular because of his associations is the same as Spitfire being popular because of hers.
Regardless, my point is that Quicksilver is a more popular character than Spitfire. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise. It's relevant to the initial conversation because it's hard (and stupid) to replace a more popular character linked to the Avengers with a less popular character who has no association with the Avengers.
Whether one character is better than the other, or one character has the potential to be better than the other has no bearing to any discussion I care about. Since it is subjective.