Basic Instructions, Part 2

Holy crap. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a positive response to a new comic. (See yesterday’s comments.) It looks as if about 80% of you like it a lot.

Let me put that in perspective.

Dilbert is in 2,000 newspapers, and I would guess that only 20% of the general public enjoys it. That’s all it takes to be a big commercial success, especially if that 20% is an identifiable demographic group.

Pick almost any famous music group and ask yourself what percentage of the general public loves it. First, 70% of the public won’t like music from the entire genre (country, hip hop, whatever). If your art moves two-out-of-ten people, that’s huge.

Readers of The Dilbert Blog are far from a representative sample of the world, so one must use caution in interpreting the feedback. As I described in a much earlier post, the thing you look for in evaluating entertainment is physical activity, not opinion. These two comments, for example, are not equal:

1. I love that comic.
2. I added it to my RSS feed.

Saying you love a comic is words. Adding it to your RSS feed, or taping it to your door, are examples of action. While only 20% of the public might enjoy Dilbert, the workplace humor inspires an unusual amount of action. It’s probably the most copied comic of all time, thanks to the Internet. Action predicts commercial potential.

If you look at the comments about Basic Instruction, you see a lot of action. People added it to their favorites list, or subscribed to it, or said they would buy it in book or calendar form.

Opinions were divided on whether the original square-and-wordy format was better than the slimmed down comic strip panel form. The comic strip form is far more commercial, assuming you are selling to newspapers. But as many of you pointed out, the market for newspapers is shrinking. Many of you advise that Scott Meyer should take his work directly to books and calendars and Internet publishing.

Has that ever worked?

Yes, on a small scale. I believe Scott could leverage the visibility he is getting here to earn perhaps $100K per year with a small book deal, small calendar deal, self-publication in smaller alternative newspapers, and a small but growing Internet presence. I put his odds of making that strategy work at about 90%.

Now let’s look at newspaper syndication. Assuming the comic got picked up by 500 newspapers in five years, and licensing started to take off (books, calendars, greeting cards), that would put him in the $500K to $1 million per year range, with lots of room for upside growth. But what are the odds of that happening, even with my support?

Only a handful of comics per decade have made it to 500 newspapers. And the newspaper industry is struggling, so the odds of it happening again are falling fast. In all likelihood, Dilbert will be the last mega-comic, and it launched in 1989.

Syndication means splitting your earnings, typically 50-50, with the syndication company, in the hope that they can more than double your sales. For a complete unknown, as I was in 1989, that’s an easy choice. But Scott Meyer already has traction, a small stream of income from Internet ads and small publications, interest from potential licensees, and now some extra attention from this blog.

What are Scott’s odds of making the syndication path work? If he keeps to the old and square format, I would say 5%. If he moves to the strip form, all things considered, I think his odds of getting an offer for syndication are 90%, and his odds of making 500 newspapers, even in a declining market, might be as high as 50%. If that happened, even if newspapers continued their decline, it would be a springboard to larger book and calendar deals, etc.

The rational path is to try and develop the strip to the point where Scott gets a syndication offer. Then he can make his decision.

Your question of the day is this: Should Scott stick to relationship humor, so the comic is easier to market, or stay broad?

I’ll pause from this topic for a few days until Scott has some more samples.

Comments

[A. Wolfe]

I personally don't think he should change a thing. I look through the comic section of our paper every once in a while, and on some occasions a laugh may occur, but for the most part what I see is just "cute". "Basic Instructions" on the other hand got a laugh out of me on probably 8 or 9 out of every 10 strips, and I went back and read all of them.

I would hate to see him change to be more like some of the comics that do little to tickle my funny bone.

[grace]

IMO, he should NOT stick to relationship humor. i read the entire comic archives (like many others), and overall i thought the relationship humor wasn't really his strongest. i thought the funniest things were the generic ones, like "how to smile" or "how to tell a joke", which everyone does at one point but sooo many people screw up.

i didn't comment on the previous post, but i'm all for his original format. i think the wordiness makes it exponentially funnier, and i didn't really think the streamlined newspaper sized frames did the original ideas justice. also, the original format allowed a sort of comic build-up throughout the frames, which isn't possible in a smaller space.

[South]

Stay broad and go with the strip. The 4-panel hurts my eyes.

If you stay broad, you can do "mostly" relationship stuff and the door is open to other avenues. Why restrict yourself?

I like it very much. It's a cool angle and well executed.

[Bruce]

Basic Instructions is perfect in its current form (I've been reading it since the beginning). It's a brilliant format, and is always spew-liquid-out-of-the-nose-funny (that's a 5/5), something that's harder to do with fewer words (and/or space).

The new strips, according to my own nose/liquid tests, in the smaller format don't have the same impact. I suspect it's the repeated hits of humour in the larger format that make it so damned funny. Spreading it over days just isn't the same.

(I find the same thing with Dilbert, which is why I read it a week at a time)

[Dramenbnejs]

It would be a big loss to change the Scot's style anyhow.

Unless it is your subversive action to make his strip less funny than the Dilbert :-)

Bookmarked (next to dilbert).

[Simes]

Face it Mr Adams, Mr Meyer will soon be snapping at your heels!

[mason]

Quick question, Scott.

What changed between 1996 and 2007? In 1996 you wrote a droll little forward for Guy Kawasaki's "Driving Your Competition Crazy" in which you explained that you don't want to help new cartoonists make it big because you don't want the competition. Yet here you are today doing exactly that. What gives?

I don't chide you for it. I applaud you for the transformation and I think few things could be better for modern cartooning as a whole than to have you start deliberately grooming and mentoring new talent. I guess I'm just curious what brought about the shift.

[Jonathan Allen]

Definitely stay broad. I'm already bored with the relationship stuff.

[Kodjo Hogan]

Relationship humor,

especailly the kind the everyone experiences but no really takes the time to think about.

Point: I had a quirky doorman who loved to talk, so when I had packages delivered he would talka hole in my head until i escaped. I eventually began to circumnavigate this problem by waiting until he was just about to leave to get my packages.

Stuff like that always makes me laugh

[tenassian]

Yes, www.pvponline.com and www.penny-arcade.com are successful.

I don't know what PVP makes, my guess is over $100k. And PA makes enough to support 3 people full-time, plus they run a big expo every year, and the t-shirts, items and posters they sell do very well. My guess is well over $250k+ a year, based on traffic and banners and assuming some from sales of swag and such. Plus they are working on a video game that has a huge built-in audience, too. That will be worth a good amount, too.

Whereas newspapers are winding down.

I love Basic Instructions. Been reading it for months. Without him tapping into the gaming market, like PA and PVP, I don't see him growing online as big, for some time. But more and more "regular folk" will be reading comics online, and finding his work.

Bottom line, syndication has made you a millionaire, and congrats on that. We are entering a different era, and I'm not sure that's the way to go for future success.

Nonetheless your mentorship will be great for his work, whatever avenue ends up working for him.

[Calvin Spealman]

It is becoming one of the defining characteristics of the New Media that more people can make less money. To the eyes of the Old Media, this is obviously a Bad Thing. No one gets quite as much attention or makes quite as much money, but if you look at how many more people can make it at least to a good level, and you sum it all up, I'd be sure the overall industry makes more. To add to that, huge chunks of the money aren't going to syndication agencies and other central entities. More of the less money stays with the artists. The same is happening in moves from newspaper comics to web comics, music from CD to download, and sixty dollar video games being pushed aside for dozens of ten to twenty dollar smaller titles, each. The end is more variety, and a better chance of finding something that you like, more people make a living on what they love, and more of the profits staying with the people who are actually doing the creating. The old media will not go away for a long time, and we still need it, but the model simply changes. Cartoonists aren't supposed to make a million dollars a year any more, and that's OK if, instead, twenty or more cartoonists can make a very decent living with their craft, don't you agree?

[Steve]

I think Get Fuzzy has the potential to be a "mega comic"

[Ms_Takez]

Stay broad; relationship-based strips get stale & cliched fast.

I loved the strip, added it to my work favourites, e-mailed it home, and used it to bribe myself through the afternoon's drudgery.

[mason]

He's good. But I don't think he's great. Compare him to the last comic you recommended, "Cow and Boy" and he comes out the clear loser. I think he has a better shot at success doing the internet comic thing, where there are plenty of fans who will visit his site, click on his ads, and buy his occasional books and calendars. I just don't see him appealing to a wide enough audience to get major syndication.

I can name several webcomics that are funnier just off the top of my head, and in the layout form you suggested (not the original, which was excellent for conveying humor) I really can't think of many recent newspaper comics that Basic Instructions is better than.

I think with the failing newspaper industry, syndication is unlikely to produce major benefits for a talented new cartoonist unless they can consistently rise to the level of recent successes like "Get Fuzzy", "Pearls", "Cow and Boy", or "Brewster Rocket".

[JFS in IL]

I see his work as the large square, in the Onion and also on-line.

[D.]

What is the pay rate for the free newspapers like City Pages or Metro Times? They use the square format for comics like Red Meat and Tom Tomorrow's This Modern World. Has a comic ever moved from one of those to a larger paper? I notice the format of Dilbert is different in some papers on Sunday - couldn't a large square/4 panel strip be possible?

I do like the larger lettering better - even on the computer it was a little hard to read what Scott was saying.

I don't care what the comic is about, but I would like it to keep the same art style, attitude, and viewpoint.

[wernman]

Why not pursue both paths in parallel?

He should stay broad. Different topics and subject areas keep it fresh.

[justbob]

Scott, you wrote
"Readers of The Dilbert Blog are far from a representative sample of the world,"

We may not represent the whole world but we are members of DNRC, so our opinion counts more than the rest of the world!.

[Radwaste]

This situation immediately reminded me of The Joy of Tech. See http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/index.html

[charlie]

Speaking from a business perspective, I think he should focus on one theme like relationships or business, and try to get syndicated. If nothing else, being syndicated would provide some guaranteed income.

But from an artistic perspective, I think he should continue with his broad focus and not get syndicated. I think it would really stifle his humor.

[Manoj]

OK, this guy is good and his humor style is very similar to that of our own Scott's - 80% of the blog readers liked it and there were some very flattering comments. He is clearly competition in the making.

Scott (A), here is a suggestion - you hire him as your backup, train him to draw Dilbert, this way you can double your throughput. So when you are 200 years old with writer's block you could be living off of those strips and who knows, people might find a refreshing new perspective to Dilbert.

[Rach]

I think Scott's works are very funny.

1. I prefer Scott to stay broad on this topic
2. I prefer the original 4 sq format. It sounds funnier and more cynical.

[Nicholas]

Comic added to favourites!!

I'd got with relationship humour which can be linked into pretty much everything involving people do in their lives. Relationships aren't just between 2 people. You can have relationships between colleges, between friends, between you and your bankmanager. Plus you can have lots of spin off topics.

The thing about relationships is people can relate to them, they can see themselves in the position of the characters and grow a bond with them.

Have a theme that you follow goes along with branding, and creating a brand image helps A LOT!!!

Mr Adams has said that when he first started he found it weird that people prefered his comics about Dilbert's work life, since he didn't think those were his best ones. However they were the ones that people could relate too. Now look where Dilbert is.

[Paul Roberts]

Of course you've got to factor all the people like me who read (and in this case add the comic to my bookmarks, and would buy the book like a shot if it were to be available) but don't tend to comment.

Your final question can be paraphrased as the age old "should artistic merit be compromised for commercialism?" The answer for which is generally more affirmative in the U.S. than elsewhere.

I would, in ignorance, strongly suggest that not becoming the same as almost every other comic and being individual has to be a good thing. It worked for you.

[Jeff]

Relationship humor does seem to be his forte; I'd make it the primary theme. Doesn't mean I'd suggest *only* using it, but primarily using it sure.

[Carl]

Your figure of 80% doesn't include the people like me, who thought Basic Instructions was hilarious, but couldn't be bothered to leave a comment to that effect. Until now.

I almost cried with laughter at "How To Wash A Cat".

[Mayuresh]

Scott,

You could also take a look at http://xkcd.com/. This is quite a cool comic.

[synapticmisfires]

Even if his focus is on relationship humor, it's not like every comic he writes has to fit into that box. Summarize it like that if it will help sell it to the syndication company, but they won't tear up his contract if he does a strip on something else.

[rd]

to whom it may concern:
stay broad and in the present format
do not refuse millions though

[Rain]

whoa. You make that much money?
do you know that $100,000 would totally solve all of my problems in life? (or at least keep Sallie Mae from killing me.)

then I would go out and do philanthropic shit and you'd have made the world a better place.

how about it?

[Steveo]

Dear Scott Meyer:

1st, Scott Adams is pulling numbers out of his ass. He gets lots of things from there.

2nd, I think BI, and you, are wired for a 4 panel comic, just like Dilbert & Adams are perfect in 3. I think you need to stay with what works for you. I don't see a crippled version of a good comic being all that successful.

3rd, I have no expertise on this subject. I don't even read newspapers anymore.

Good luck. I wasted about 2 hours yesterday going through your archives. Funny stuff.

[Tom H]

Answered with a simple Monte Carlo simulation.

Option 1 - 90% chance of earning $100k per year = $90k

Option 2 - 50% chance of earning $500-1,000k per year. Say 50% of $750k = $375k

Option 2 offers better potential outcome, therefore choose option 2.

[frank]

1st he didn't get 80% approval, he got 80% of your regular readers approval. That is a small but important difference.

2nd what does he lose by going for the brass ring? If he failed he could always play small. Go big!

Me personally I thought he was ok, not hilarious but I'd probably read him in the morning along with Arlo and Janis for those time when it is funny.

[drevell]

I would prefer him to stay broad.

The How to Pitch a Movie one had me literally laughing out loud, which I really try not to do when I'm reading my daily comics in my cubicle at work.

I'd hate to give up the possibility of more stuff like that because he's decided to lock himself into relationships.

[Drone74B]

Whoa! JohnJohn is bitter, isn't he? What he probably doesn't realize is that the most successful artists in history (who were successful during their own life, that is) became so because they produced work that others were willing to pay for. March to your own beat in spite of public opinion, and maybe, just maybe you'll be famous enough so that your great grandchildren can see a documentary about you on late-night PBS long after you've starved to death.

This is the way it works: You become famous for giving the people what they want. When they like your stuff so much that it doesn't matter what you do, then you can start giving them what you want. It doesn't work the other way around.

For Scott M, if your goal is to become syndicated, keep listening to those who've been there, and you'll get there. Personally, I don't see a lot of longevity in relationship humor, though. Sooner or later, everything gets old, so use it while it's fresh and interesting, but leave yourself some room to grow. Maybe develop regular characters, instead of just using the idea of people to set up gags. If people learn to identify with the characters and not just the situations, you'll be able to alter the kind of situations they get into as time goes on and people won't lose interest. Think of the Simpsons. Bart used to be the main character. But, as time went on, people fell in love with Homer, and the writers responded by making the show more about him. The situations can be totally unrelated from one episode to another, but people respond to the character, because they enjoy seeing how they respond.

[standgale]

To be honest, I wouldn't read them in strip format, whether they were in a newspaper or otherwise, because I didn't like those ones. But I like them as they are now.
If he just went to relationship humour, well, I think I liked the non-relationship ones better, so I also wouldn't like that. Besides, that would limit his scope and could make it harder to generate new ideas for the strip. What percentage is relationship and what percentage is not, currently?

[Esn]

Oh, he should definitely stay broad.

Every comic needs a flavour, and his flavour is the "how to", which nobody else is doing (a few comics like "Adam@Home" and "Pirahna Club" do it occasionally). He shouldn't try to narrow it down any further.

That way, he leaves himself open to inspiration, makes his comic appeal to a wider audience, and allows room for his comic's evolution (for example, he might be inspired by a certain set of topics over a couple of months, and then by something else).

Furthermore, I don't think there's any market imperative for having a narrow subject range. Many of the most popular comics of recent times have been about a broad range of subjects.

See:

-The Far Side
-Bizarro
-The Perry Bible Fellowship

I also like the box format better because there are four jokes in one, instead of just one joke at the end.

[Chris Benson (Asparagus Pee Guy)]

I think Scott Meyers had a good thing going and we should let him continue doing it - heck, it's what attracted Scott Adams to do this in the first place!

I do not like the dumbed-down strips.

[standgale]

To be honest, I wouldn't read them in strip format, whether they were in a newspaper or otherwise, because I didn't like those ones. But I like them as they are now.
If he just went to relationship humour, well, I think I liked the non-relationship ones better, so I also wouldn't like that. Besides, that would limit his scope and could make it harder to generate new ideas for the strip. What percentage is relationship and what percentage is not, currently?

[Jan]

Another trick to figure out what type of comics your readership prefers, is having them rate the comic, like http://www.ratemykitten.com etc.

Then you just have to watch the top rated comics to see what people like.

[Devin]

I like the healthy mix of characters in his comic strips. The combination of the boss, friend, wife/girlfriend, coworker, etc. that occur in different strips. While I agree with your original assessment that his comic may be somewhat wordy, I think that much of the humor comes from having what essentially amounts to a full comic strip in each individual panel.

I hope he can find some happy medium that would make his comic strip printable in the newspapers, because this is the first new comic that I have truly enjoyed in a long, long time.

[Devin]

I like the healthy mix of characters in his comic strips. The combination of the boss, friend, wife/girlfriend, coworker, etc. that occur in different strips. While I agree with your original assessment that his comic may be somewhat wordy, I think that much of the humor comes from having what essentially amounts to a full comic strip in each individual panel.

I hope he can find some happy medium that would make his comic strip printable in the newspapers, because this is the first new comic that I have truly enjoyed in a long, long time.

[JKritner]

I'd go with the 100k a year and maintain full control over the comic. (write what you want and use whatever format you want) Web Comics like Penny Arcade http://www.penny-arcade.com have shown that if you are creative and have a solid audience, you can be very successful.

[Aaron]

Great comic. Added to favourites and forwarded to some friends. Broad would be my suggestion as I really enjoyed the variety. But take that advice with a container of salt since my knowledge of what works with comics is really based only on what Scott Adams has told me I can't really comment.

[ViX]

I fwd'd the strip to my wife and she liked it. Only then did i tell her that it was being reccomended by Scot Adams. Looks like unbiased opinions to favor the comic :)

[Tim Wilson]

On today's question: Keep it broad. The strip is way funny as it is. Doesn't need tweaking into "relationship" humor.

On the syndication question: I may have missed some background, but is there a (probably $$$) to rule out syndication in the weekly formerly-alternative papers? Or, say, getting him a slot a site like The Onion?

Some things are better when they're not in the funny papers proper.

[Lowdown]

Ok, you did not have todays blog up when I got to work this morning so I had to reread yesterdays blog. I checked out the website this time, and I have to say his work is very funny. I have a new wall hanging as a matter of fact.

I like the wordy style more than the shortened style, even though it may be more dificult to fit into newspapers. I dont read newspapwers, so I really dont think that it is a big deal. I like the fact that he is deviating from the norm of relationships, work humor, ect.., the instructions format seems new and creative. It is sort of reminds me of a Seinfield monologue of comics.

[Sir Mike Tallon]

No, stay broad! Part of humor is the fact that it surprises you, catches you off-guard. He can hit more 2 out of 6 or 3 out of 6 points of funny when he comes up with crazy concepts.

[Graham]

I think he should try both formats, as I see a few other people have already mentioned. His four-panel strip has a distinctive style, with a rhythm that might be hard to replicate in a strip.

I don't think he should do the same joke in both formats, though, which would mean doing two strips per day/week/whatever - twice as much work.

[nemezide]

I added the comic to my Google Reader. I'm not sure if that's good for the author's business, if many people do that, because the Reader doesn't show the website's ads.
But the Reader will remind me of the comic every time Scot posts something new. So in theory it could make me buy something from him in future...

[Nathan]

I definitely think Scott should stay broad. I'd also like to mention that I've added his comic to my list of daily reads (amongst such hallowed works as Penny-arcade, Achewood, Least I Could Do and Looking for Group), and I believe it's a fantastic comic with lots of appeal for the sarcastic among us.

[The Dude]

I'm going to try posting this again, I appologize if it appears multiple times but it seems every time I try to post it I get some kind of network error.
-------------------------------------------------------
First let me say that I know nothing of business, economics or comic writing. That being said I think Scott should shy away from newspapers all together, the main reason is that at the moment he is a weekly comic which is best placed in the Sunday edition of a paper which tend to run color comics, but his comics are black and white so unless he really wants to change his comic to be color I don't think that would work. Plus I actually really like his current "block" format in black and white for whatever reason I think it really works for his subject matter. I know I sent the link to a friend of mine and mentioned it to my wife when I got home from work yesterday.

In my opinion I think he should stick to internet based, or maybe some sort of internet syndication (if such a thing exists). Try to get onto major news websites comics section (msnbc or yahoo for example). Sure the audience would be smaller but closer to his demographic I would think. I also highly recommend the book/calendar deal. I could easily see a weekly day planner with a Basic Instruction for each week.

Another thing he needs to be careful of if he goes a syndication route is likeness rights. If he is truly using "Photocartooning" as a drawing method as he indicates in one comic he may have to pay folks to use their images (Eric Estrada for example). If he stays small time he can probably avoid likeness rights issues but if he starts to hit it big he may have some legal issues on his hands as would his syndication and/or publishing company.

[McGurker]

If 500 newspapers makes 500-1000k than 2000 must make 2000-4000k

Plus book deals...plus calenders...plus toys...YOU ARE IN THE FREAKING MONEY! Holy crap you're well off.

[Curtis Sawyer]

I added it to my RSS feed and read every back "issue" available. I e-mailed links to 2 of them to friends. Great comic. Love it. Looking forward to more. Now that I read it he has to be prepared for my utter devastation when I don't see a new comic posted every single day! :-)

My only criticism is that in the comics there seem to be a limited number of poses for the characters, and sometimes the pose selected doesn't seem to really match what the character is saying. Sometimes it is spot on, but it is off enough that I wanted to comment. It is like the body language doesn't match the actual language in an unintentional way.

[PHaser]

I first saw Basic Instructions in an indie paper, I can't remember if it was Willamette Week in Portland, OR, or The Stranger in Seattle. I like the unusual 4 square format, but that fits in fine with the indie paper style, in which the comics are sprinkled throughout rather than relegated to the ever shrinking comics page of the major newspapers.

As the big time newspapers struggle and move more and more to online, I think Mr. Meyer might want to think about sticking with his current format. As to content, I think keeping it broad is best artistically and "funny-ily" but I understand the business side and that hooking a large portion of a certain demographic is more desirable (to editors anyway) than hooking a smaller percentage of multiple demographics, even if the total number of readers is the same. Agreeing with some of the other posts - avoid the relationship humor genre.

[sam gates]

the one bit that caught me off guard was the "old guy getting beat up movie" line. i literally laughed out loud to that one. the yawn strip was kind of a dud though. it felt like i was reading peanuts again, i respected it, but i wouldn't tell it to the coworkers.

[sam gates]

the one bit that caught me off guard was the "old guy getting beat up movie" line. i literally laughed out loud to that one. the yawn strip was kind of a dud though. it felt like i was reading peanuts again, i respected it, but i wouldn't tell it to the coworkers.

[bdd]

Step 1:) Draw Comic
Step 2:) ?
Step 3:) PROFIT!!!!

I think that rule 1 is do what sells, given that the alternative is a cubicle job. Getting to draw comics AND being able to eat as a result is simply unheard of. Focus on what people want to read.

[LA Clay]

Relationship humor in very in vogue at the moment and shows no signs of slowing. As we move into the next administration (assume democrat) the nation will once again become touchy-feely. It is no concidence that Alan Alda got big when we had a democrat and action flicks abound when we have republicans.
BOCTAOE

[Fuzznsmoo]

Definitely relationship humor. I figured he could mine the public for ideas and use his talents to make them funny, as you do with the business community. Sure seems like there is some real potential there.

[Erik]

Hi Scott (Adams)!

I bit my tongue yesterday, because I didn´t want to compare your noble effort to help this cartoonist to the untimely demise of the " Unfit" project.
But now I feel I must share that the original work on the website at times had me with tears of laughter in my eyes. The shorter, ˇdumbed downˇ samples you offered in your blog, didn´t have that effect. The original format has much more to offer due to its wordiness, the humour pressure builds for 4 pannels until you just burst out laughing. Now this is chopped up in 4 separate installments and 4 X 1/4 doesn´t equal 1 in this case. I think Scott (not you - the other one!) should decide if he is happy raking in 100K doing what he did good, and hopefully loved to do, or if he wants to compromise and shoot for the big bucks. The subject matter would not be the biggest issue here, any topic is funny if tackled the right way, even though my personal preference is to be surprised by a different subject every day.
Of course, if the slimmed down version fails to get syndicated, he could revert to the old format and his internet presence, and blame it all on being misguided by you!
Either way I wish him good luck and hope to see more of his work soon.

[Jan]

JohnJohn wrote:
> Do exactly like the other Scott says and SELL OUT!

I wonder if JohnJohn is a jealous starving artist who is still wondering why art buyers dont' spontaneously line up at his front door.

[Will]

He should absolutely stay broad. It's the randomness(see how to negotiate with the UN, prove your not the evil twin, etc.) that keeps it fresh. Obviously topics close to home are just as important, but the relationship niche has already been taken by so many others. Office humor like yours is unique because no one really focused on it before, but I love his brand of unexpected advice. And the 4 panel format is much, much funnier and original in my humble opinion. However, I realize the change may be necessary for marketability. I just ask if Dilbert would want to alter one his his pet projects because some guys from marketing said it wouldn't sell. I guess the primary difference would be you having actual intelligence and wisdom versus the induhviduals Dilbert works with.

[Nick H]

Personally, I think a broad range of topics is way better. The randomness aspect is appealing to me... so you can read up on 'How to Travel Back in Time' or 'How to Lie to Children'... The relationship ones are funny too, and maybe easier to market, but I think that it might narrow the focus too much...

That's all I got.
Keep up the good work Scott! (Both of you)

[redblue]

No matter what format Meyer ends up composing in, if it doesn't come from the Gut, it will not work. The lure of 1m over 100k is enticing but it can't be the primary motivator.

Perhaps the single panel format is something that he will just grow into with some light mentoring. Not to mention, what is preventing him from doing all formats simultaneously? I doubt there is a universal rule that says Meyer can only produce one strip a day(or week or whatever). Perhaps he just needs to figure out how to be prolific...

[Jan]

> Should Scott stick to relationship humor, so
> the comic is easier to market, or stay broad?

Why not try *both* approaches and look which has most success? (publish relationship humor and misc humor on different webpages, rss-feeds or whatever).

You seem very optimistic, but I sincerely wish Scott (or mini-me as you may wish to call him) much success.

[rcphq]

never mind the last point, of course people have brought the comics i mentioned up :P

[rcphq]

i wonder if youve taken internet-only comics into consideration, ctrl-alt-del (cad-comic.com) and penny arcade (penny-arcade.com) are to good sample of guys who are probably making more than the 500k+ you suggest, and their 100% internet,
of course, they're one among thousands, but still, he already gets half your blog traffic or more, it's a great start.
by the way, i added the feed to, i love getting comics on feeds. (pun)

[tyler]

I would keep it broad. I like to see variety in comics.

[midnight]

Having a very wide range of interests, I would say keep it broad. I don't know which would be better with marketing, so I'll leave that to the experts. I think Scott Meyer's best comics are probably those that are not relationship orientated. Those comics I actually passed on to everyone whom I thought would appreciate them. (Didn't hear anyone dislike them.)

I do get the feeling that changing the format from his current 4 panels and reducing the words, would be a great disservice. If it was my choice I would go for the 100k a year and still have control then to change everything for the 500k-1mil. I think a compromise would be best; have it as a weekly comic, not a daily one.

[Austinspace]

You're right to split the responders into those that do something about it and those that simply express an opinion. But, and you may have already considered this, in going to the trouble of expressing an opinion at all, you are 'taking action'. So, amongs other things, this then brings up the question as to whether you are more likely to take action by expressing an opinion if you like something or more likely to if you dislike the same thing. Considering that those who read your blog have already passed the 'I like dilbert and the thinking behind it and am interested in what the guy who writes it has to say and the subjects that interest him' filter... the results are likely to be highly weighted towards receiving more opinions from those who will be expressing a positive one. The ones who don't like Scott Meyer's work so much probably won't bother commenting on it at all. I'd be interested to hear what proportion of your blog readership responded. I bet its low. Now that's not to say that the Cartoon may not appeal to a sufficient section of society to warrant an attempt at going commercial with it, personally I thought it was great, its just that opinion polls like this one should be generally considered, to coin one of my native english expressions,.... bollocks.

Just realised that I have just voided my membership to the silent majority by leaving a comment... thereby increasing the 'respondee' proportion to the tune of 1.

[AndyT13]

The whole thing is relationship humor it seems to me. Sometimes those relationships are with other people than his wife(friends, bosses, coworkers, etc...) Where's the non-relationship ones? I read most of what was on his site.
I still think the stick of knowledge in the upper right hand corner is the funniest part. I printed THAT out and stuck it on my wall at work because it cracks me and everyone who sees it up (aside the head).

[Miss Kyri]

It bears, in its new format, a high similarity to several other comics, notably Rhymes with Orange, Real Life Adventures, and probably a couple more I never read. The relationship focus could help in the short term, but without any general strips the comic probably won't be broad enough. Dilbert isn't ALWAYS in the office, just most of the time.

Even the best one panel doesn't have the same draw as a multi-panel, however, and if he is going to rework the comic to try and get a large number of newspapers I would suggest he think about the format a second time. It just doesn't have the same thing which is making it catchy online- without that its odds drop considerably.

[Denver]

Maybe he should stick to relationship humour but, stay broad enough that he may be able to throw something unrelated in there ever now and then. They're all very funny.

Meh, why do people read physical newspapers again? Oh, and how weird is it that you're both called Scott?! Is he short? Are you looking for a miniyou?

[ScottRC]

Scott A: I think your own history with "Dilbert" is an argument for keeping it broad in the beginning. As you've pointed out, "Dilbert" didn't start out as a workplace strip -- you shaped it into that based on reader response.

An earlier commenter mentioned "Diesel Sweeties" as an example of going both the webcomic and newspaper route. I would add that I think "Basic Instructions" has a much better shot at being successful in both formats. (I like the D.S. webcomic but don't imagine it'll gain much traction in mainstream newspapers -- I'm just not feelin' it. But I definitely feel it for "Basic Instructions." )

Now I'm gonna go eat my liver. I just sent hard copies of my comic strip out to the syndicates ... Gonna have to save my pennies to get my stuff up on the web ... Congrats, Scott M.! (he said bitterly).

--- Yet Another Scott

[jo]

Who can't relate to relationship humor? There is infinite material there, not just between partners, but really any human to human interaction. Plus, it's nice to know what to expect to a certain extent when you commit the time to reading a comic. When a comic is too all over the place there seems to be more inconsistency with quality.

[Dago]

These are awesome, have been reading through them all day and emailed everyone i know the link, and everyone i emailed is doing the same.
I do like the look of the larger panels but its understandable how a single panel is needed for success in newpapers. Thanks for pointing this out its genius

[GLK]

I think "relationship humor = $$$" is the way to go. He can throw in a smattering of avant garde stuff after he's a big shot.

[odp]

I sent his comics to friends also. They laughed their asses off. And these friends don't even like Dilbert!

[Damian]

Mmmm keep it on relationships

yes... long post eh?

[Chris]

My links from earlier suck:
http://www.penny-arcade.com
and
http://www.pvponline.com

Both are very successful.

[John McNelly]

I was going to suggest that Scott just forget about brevity. But then I saw the logo (with the board of knowledge), and thought that was the funniest thing so far. IMHO it would be funnier if he removed the "you will learn" text. Oh, and he should experiment with topics to see what gets the biggest response.

[mtty]

Sticking to relationship humor, initially, might be the best marketing strategy, since publishers and editors seem to need a clear genre in order to wrap their heads around any new idea. I would think that anyone would run out of ideas for new relationship humor in time (maybe that's just me.) Personally, I'd like to see this cartoonist do whatever is funny. He has some good, solid observations on life, and expresses them well.

I agree with some of yesterday's posters who said he needs to simplify the artwork. As I mentioned yesterday, he needs to trust his reader to understand rather than hitting him over the head with the point.

[Sona]

"Your question of the day is this: Should Scott stick to relationship humor, so the comic is easier to market, or stay broad?"

Being well defined is the key. Take "Dilbert" - that's all about the life of that character, mostly involving work, but also involving friends and the occassional date.

So I think the question is: What defines "Basic Instructions"? Is it just a social commentary on what the author finds interesting/amusing? Or is it about a person or group and what they experience in life?

A social commentary is going to be more like Gary Larson. One comic doesn't have to flow into or reference another.

[Amy]

First let me say that I love these comics and have laughed out loud many times since I've started going back and reading the archives. Bravo!

I think the "basic instruction" format narrows the scope enough as it is. Let the subject matter stay general.

[Roger H]

Chris Onstad does well on-line with Achewood http://www.achewood.com

Of course he and his wife are Stanford grads which fits another Scott Adams theory. They do a lot of marketing.

[JohnJohn]

Hey, Meyers:

Do exactly like the other Scott says and SELL OUT!

The money will make it worth compromising whatever artistic principles you may have imagined yourself to hold.

Half a mil per annum. Think of the possibilities. You can start a blog and become a self-styled guru of whatever strikes your fancy at the moment. Or help other struggling cartoonists to sell out just like you did.

Be sure to estrange all of your leechy friends first.

[friskybeaver]

broad

[Mike Duffy]

Scott, could you back up one step? What are the basic economics of the (syndicated) comic business? You talk about 50/50 split with the syndicator, but 50/50 of what? And for a (syndicated) comic artist, what percentage of their revenues derive from the strip itself, compliations, books, T-shirts, etc.? Thanks for the additional insight.

(PS - I took action by forwarding the strips to my wife)

[Andrew Molyneux]

"How To Fake A Smile" made me laugh so hard I nearly died, and it's not a "relationship" strip. So I say keep it broad.

[TurdFerguson]

I think he has a great comic going. It would be hard to get so much text into a daily strip, but on a Sunday only strip, he could have full range. I know I would look forward to his strip being in the paper, even if it was only one day a week. I hope he does make it big. I tried to send a link to his page to the website of a local radio show that posts a daily set of "Missing Links" that seem to be checked daily by many people in the state. Hopefully that will give him even more exposure.

PS - Scott, you might enjoy their show, they engage in a lot of "philosotainment." See what you think at http://www.coreyandjayshow.com

[Shan]

I really like his content the way it is... but I think he'll probably sell more if he focuses on relationship humor, just like you sold more when you focused on office humor.

[GirlFan]

Loving the topic, but can you refer to him as Scott M? I get confused...

[Cobra]

[Your question of the day is this: Should Scott stick to relationship humor, so the comic is easier to market, or stay broad?]

I would say stay broad, if I were to take only my tastes in consideration. But having a single (albeit vast) subject, like office humor or relationship humor, would probably increase the marketability of the comic, indeed.

Perhaps he could focus a bit on relationship humor -- something like 1 in every 3 strips having relationship-related subjects. Another option would be to run various "comic series", each dealing consistently with a different subject. In addition to that, he could run some "one-shot" strips, each with random, unrelated topics.

[CLB]

[Your question of the day is this: Should Scott stick to relationship humor, so the comic is easier to market, or stay broad?]

If there were a syndication deal to do a strip EVERY DAY could the other Scott stick to just one topic (relationships) and stay fresh for the long term? That sounds more marketable, but tough!

[dayj]

It's all about relationships!
Life forms have two imperatives: survive and reproduce. The cosmetics industry, health clubs and big honking automobiles are about gittin' laid. Does anybody really believe that "Starbucks" is about coffee? (Don't get me started about breast implants.) So, yeah, duh! A relationship strip is all there is... crap, war is about wanna-be alpha(esque) males lookin’ to be big shots (using other poor slobs lives), so they can have their pick of females. Dang, if Henry Kissinger said that "Power is the most potent aphrodisiac..." you know it's the only game in town... (and that's comin' from a friggin' toad.)

[Jameson]

I added it to my RSS reader, and contributed to the drain on his bandwidth resources reading the whole archive.

[DilFan]

Scott - maybe this high 80% figure is because the kind of people who like his humour maybe the same kind of people who like your humour. DilbertBlog readers aren't a random sample of the people, so it may not translate to 80% of the general public. But still it's a great figure.

[Chad]

First, I love this comic, but I fear that it's BECAUSE OF the detail...which if removed would also retract some of the humor with it. As far as the actual comic goes, focusing on relationships is always a winner because we all have atleast one. Even if it's with a dog or cat. Marriage(or serious relationship) humor is a plus given that it is so integrated in our lives. You or someone close to you is probably in a relationship and know that your "other" can be very frustrating at times. This is an open door to humor.

Scott,
For me, your funniest posts are when you open your life to us and write about your marriage...The Dishwasher post is my favorite. Thanks for doing that.

[christian]

i think, if you're funny you can make it in any topic. personally i'm not really into relationship humor but i still really enjoyed his comics.

so i think he should consider other topics as well eg electronics (although that might be a little too nerdy)

anyways he should focus on one topic so ppl can relate and have better expections so i guess if he has lots of ideas for it relationship might just be fine

[susan]

This comic is absolutely awesome! I have added it to my favorites and plan to check it regularly. If you have anything else to recommend i would love to hear about it.

[Avi]

Now that I've got a good look at it, I think it's hilarious and will bookmark it to look at it more thoroughly later. My favorite so far is How to share a movie you love with a person you love, because it's so true.

[Mike B]

Why not try both the newspapers and a book. Seems like that would work. Short strip for the comics and large panel for a book.

[Avi]

Stick to relationship humor or go broad? I say, go with whatever is genuinely funny.

"Saying you love a comic is words. Adding it to your RSS feed...action"

I think it's you or Stephan Pastis who said something about a "copy test," that if you show your work to people, it shows that they REALLY like it if they want to share it with someone else.

Only a handful of comics get big in syndication, and on the flip side, only a handful of comics become huge megahits on the internet, like Penny Arcade. However, lots of webcomics do get modest popularity, and an endorsement from Scott Adams is a tad more than that.

You say there might not be another mega hit like Dilbert. Megahits are extremely rare, like Peanuts, Calvin and Hobbes. I say sucsess should not be divided between megahit and flop, it's unhealthy.

I believe Richard Stevens from Diesel Sweeties is both in syndication and on the internet, getting money from ads and t-shirt sales, etc. An interesting approach. I bet it's a little more work.

[Rob]

judging by the bumber of "how to avoid writer's block" comics he draws, sticking with a broad theme might be the smart route

[Adam]

I think these comics are hilarious and it would be a shame to screw with them in any way (format or content). Since the newspaper market is shrinking, maybe it would be a better idea for him to go for a different market say, magazines, or even high traffic web pages like MSN, etc. I sent the link to some friends of mine who don't read the Dilbert blog and we all about wet our pants reading these.

[Aaron P. Churchill]

Stay broad. He has a great sense of humor and if he stuck with relationships, it would limit the humor potential in the long run. Using relationships as a major theme and the center of the strip might be a good idea, but his writing style and thought process has to much potential to be limited.

[Jeff]

if 80% of dilbert fans (which i am guessing, most readers of this blog are) liked basic instructions and only 20% of the general public likes dilbert, then that means 16% of the public would like basic instructions.

which isn't so bad. i hope he makes it.

by the way, i would love for you to post on how you can identify someone's gender just from their writing style.

[F. Dwarf]

Perhaps the good response that Scott got from the readers of this blog is due to the acid and cynic humor that Scott puts in his comics, same humor we like to see in Dilbert comic. So, maybe that 80% of good response is not a representative sample, but it gives an idea of the segment of the population that Scott should direct his comic to. And for the same reason, the answer that the readers will give to today's question could not be a representative sample as well ;)
However, IMHO Scott could stay braod and categorize his comic strips/squares, ie, he could begin the strip/square with "Basic instructions for [topic]. How to [subject]".
Of course, that's just my opinion :)

[Stomper]

Depends on Meyers' goal. If he is doing this just to make money, then he should emulate "Garfield" as closely as possible. If he wants people to hear what he has to say, then he should stick with the hilarious format he already has. The challenge should not be changing his work to suit the whims of the marketplace. Rather, the challenge should be finding the market for his obvious talent.

Scott Adams' advice is counter-productive. Scott Meyers (no relation to PZ, I hope) should find a more crweative marketing consultant.

--Stomper

[Chris]

Has that ever worked? Yes.

Look at Penny Arcade. (http://www.pennyarcade.com)
and PvP (http://www.pvponline.com)

You can make more than 100K a year (if you are extremely lucky). Though thanks to you, the other Scott just won the lottery without ever buying a ticket. Maybe a bad analogy because the other Scott had to work very hard to get where he is now. But to have a HUGE comic author say i am going to increase hits to your comic by 50,000+ people is pretty close (statistically at least).

Now the real question is does he want to keep complete control over his stuff. If he syndicates his stuff, he has to stay very mainstream and clean (no sex jokes or anything like that). He will have to change his format (which works now) and potentially loose some of his core (paying) audience. But with success in syndication comes the ability of early retirement (in Hawaii).

[simon]

Broad base !!

Sticking to man/woman humor is very like a stand up who comes on with "..the problem with women .... " basically hes on a well worn path and the audiance are expecting more of the same ......

Best to keep the "How to calm a child stuff" as it s real USP

[Geoffrey]

Ahh... The need to mentor is one of the strongest desires of a middle-aged man.

[Mark]

"Holy crap. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a positive response to a new comic. (See yesterday’s comments.) It looks as if about 80% of you like it a lot.

Let me put that in perspective.

Dilbert is in 2,000 newspapers, and I would guess that only 20% of the general public enjoys it. That’s all it takes to be a big commercial success, especially if that 20% is an identifiable demographic group."

With a degree in economics didn't you ever learn about selection bias?

[Tim2]

You just like his comics because you share the same first name.

[Barry]

To the general public that enjoy newspaper comics as they are today, I'd unfortunately have to say stick to relationship humor.

However, if that road was taken I could see myself reading it a lot less. If it was up to me and my enjoyment I'd say stay broad all the way. It's not that I don't like relationship humor, it's just that, well, I like the variety. Variety is something rare in comics these days (See: Garfield), but for this particular cartoonist and his cartoon, variety seems to be one strong point. It's basic instructions about LIFE, not MARRIAGE.

---

The reason I have been wary of going the newspaper route is because his humor differs from that of people who would actually read a daily newspaper. I have trouble seeing Joe Boring, who reads the paper while drinking coffee at breakfast or on the subway, enjoying this comic even a fraction as much as I do.

And yes, there WILL be people who would enjoy it in the paper. But you have to think, based on the comic's humor, wouldn't those people reading it in the paper be the same people who would get to work and read it online instead of doing work anyway? Does anyone else see that?

[flyawaynet]

I should read comments before I post. I just now see that Sponge Jim already said my comment. Sorry to be oblivious.

[Ken]

As per your 'action' question, I favorited BI and intend to go back once the server is upgraded and/or the furor dies down.

(I also friended it from my band's myspace page).

As per focus on the comic, I would prefer that it stay broad, not focus on relationships. Again, as I mentioned yesterday, catering to my personal taste is not generally a recipe for commercial success, but there ya go.

[Ryan]

I would stay broad. My personal favorite comic, Piled Higher and Deeper www.phdcomics.com (sorry Scott), is absolutely hilarious to 0.00001% of the population. Unfortunately, I doubt it will ever make money or a splash because the humor is so specific.

I should add that my reaction to the other Scott's comic is totally positive, and I thought it was significantly better than the previous comic recommended on this blog. I liked square formatting, but probably only because I saw it that way first.

[flyawaynet]

Not to dash hopes or anything, but... if only 20% of the general population likes your comics (I'm one of that 20% btw) I generally assume most of the people that read your blog also like your comics.
Based on that assumption doesn't that mean that only 80% of your 20% like this new Scotts comics?

That's still good news though, even if this new scott only has 80% of your success, he's still going to do really well.

[HeatherLyn]

I'm glad that you mentioned "Basic Instructions"-- I've had it on my RSS feed for a while (one of 3 comics, the other ones being F Minus and of course, Dilbert).

I really enjoy his broad reach. If he went to JUST relationships, there's a much smaller pool to choose humour from, and as well... what about the people who don't care about relationships? What about the single geeks who'd rather date their computer or a RealDoll? Everyone can benefit from the "how to disguise a yawn" humour, because that's universal. "How to Tell when your wife is PMSing" or whatever is not so universal, and frankly not as interesting.

It's not "Basic Instructions for Relationships", it's "Basic Instructions".

[Andrew]

If you are thinking along the same lines as Dilbert having his successful environment in the office rather than society then I would say Basic Instructions would be hit by another constraint. It does one thing – give basic instructions. We need them for everything we do. They’ll all be funny and identifiable.

[Jon]

In my response yesterday I neglected to mention my action of adding it to my comic book marks. I like his earlier wordy 4 panel work better and would be more likely to purchase that in book format. The newer format would still keep it in my comic book mark list, but wouldn't have as much commercial potential to me.

[ishtar]

I just thought I'd like to recommend a site, simple and funny comics that says lots in a few words :) stickgal.blogspot.com

[rita mae]

Let's see? Stick to relationship humor so the comic is easier to market? OR Stay broad?

All things considered, Scott has to decide how much he wants to pimp himself to the big guys for a buck. If he can make it on what he is earning now, he should keep doing what he's doing. A no brainer. Make the best and most logical decision at the time, and then go with it. Never second guess yourself. Never let 'em see you sweat. Never say never. You can always change your mind if a deal comes along that's too good to refuse. (Ask any Italian.)

I feel better today. But better is relative. It depends on how bad you felt originally.

Scott A, still love you, but still too old to stalk you.

Rita Mae

[Kevin Kunreuther]

I though it went with out saying I subscribed. And visited his other websites.
Anyway, as much as I love the box panel (we're talking syndication in the alternative weeklies, e.g. Tom The Dancing Bug, This Modern World, Red Meat and the evergreen Life In Hell), ya' gotta' go with the strip and the focus on relationships if you wanna' get in the dailies. Unless you're absolutely married to the box and had a real aggressive agent and THEN an aggressive rep from the syndicate who'd convince the dailies to run your panel AND make it legible.

[Tom NC]

It has been added. Add me to the list of people who did something physical with the information.

[jerry w.]

Is it true that 73% of all percentages are made up on the fly?

Some quotes:

It looks as if about 80% of you like it a lot.
.... only 20% of the general public enjoys it.
First, 70% of the public won’t like music from the entire genre.....
While only 20% of the public might enjoy Dilbert....
I put his odds of making that strategy work at about 90%.
.....what are the odds of that happening, even with my support?
Syndication means splitting your earnings, typically 50-50.....
..... I would say 5%. If he moves to the strip form,
.....getting an offer for syndication are 90%.....
.....might be as high as 50%. .....

Or have I just been hypnotized?

What are the odds on that?

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[Tom NC]

Was there an RSS feed available for Basic Instructions.
I didn't see one. If there is one available, it will be added for me. I haven't finished reading all of the past installments yet, but they have been really good thus far.

[Christopher]

I think he should stay broad. Why limit yourself to one flavor of observations? That would be similar to having Dilbert only interact with the PHB and not with coworkers, vendors, Dogbert, etc.

[Norellicus]

I too enjoyed it thoroughly but didn't really comment on the content.

As for how he should proceed, I enjoy the variety of subjects he covers. You yourself particularly seemed to enjoy "How to Disguise a Yawn" (enough to specifically mention it to the lot of us when recommending the comic) which has nothing to do with relationships. I say he stays broad.

[ScottM]

Your observations about dwindling newspaper readership begs a question which has nagged me for some time:

Why don't Internet news sites, like cnn.com, have a funnies page? I would certainly visit them more often, or for longer, if they did. Hmmm.

[Joe]

I think you stay broad. Test the market for a while and see what areas generate the most interest, and try to sprinkle in more of those types of comics in the future. Keeping it broad allows your market to define the strip, rather than simply trying to force-feed the strip to a specific market.

... as far as the format, definitely target the classic strip (make a living now.. you can always try to change the industry later)

The intro piece (black frame with white text) is unique, and I (now) really like it (hated it at first). The important thing is to edit it down to the least amount of words possible, and allow the reader's logic and imagination to fill in the gaps.

The daily teaser for the next day's comic is cool, too.. helps build anticipation.

[Evan]

I'm not personally a big fan of relationship humor.

It is really hard to come up with something that hasn't been done a thousand times before because most humor of this type relies on gender stereotypes, which are horribly trite. If Scott is going to stick with relationship humor, I would recommend that he find a fresh angle on it -- something that cleverly subverts traditional gender stereotypes.

A really good recent example of this is from a funny new show called Flight of the Conchords. Check out the last episode on Youtube (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=conchords+episode+8&search=Search) Throughout the episode as one the protagonists, Bret, becomes involved with his new girlfriend Lisa, it becomes clear that he has taken the "submissive girlfriend" role in the relationship, while she has taken the "douchebag boyfriend" role. I'd seen these roles played out many times, but it was a fresh, unexpected, and most importantly funny approach.

My advice: If you can come up with something that is a fresh take on relationship humor, fantastic. It's marketable and it's funny. Otherwise, you are retreading territory that's ably covered by greeting cards and I Love Lucy reruns.

[Mikey Benny]

"The rational path is to try and develop the strip to the point where Scott gets a syndication offer. Then he can make his decision."

Exactly. The material was still good in the "comic strip" format. Doing it that way will allow him the possibility of hitting the bigtime, while not stopping him from getting smaller deals if the bigtime doesn't come his way.

Congrats Mr. Meyer; no matter what happens, something good will almost surely come from this relationship, and you deserve it. I've enjoyed your comic for the past two years. It's the first webcomic I ever thought was worth a bookmark, and is one of three web comics I've found worth reading (XKCD and Questionable Content are the others).

Mr. Adams, I think it's absolutely outstanding that someone with your success and stature takes the time and resources (such as your audience) to mentor others. I hope you keep it going.

[Mark Thorson]

Relationship humor? No, that
field is already filled with
Cathy, Mary Worth, etc.

Broad doesn't work for the
same reason you switched from
broad to office humor. He
needs to find a niche and
fill it.

I suggest the mocking
dangerous cult religions
niche (Scientology, Your Black
Muslim Bakery, Mormons, etc.).
Although there's a certain
risk here, it's an entirely
fresh field, and one which a
large fraction of the
population would find amusing.

Interpreted more broadly, it
could include organizations
with cult-like behavior, such
as Herbalife, Amway, etc. And
TV religions such as The 700
Club.

Now, who hasn't had some
contact or experience with one
of these? Nobody, and that's
why it would be a fruitful
field to explore. There would
be a never-ending supply of
material to parody.

[Ben]

I think I'm going to echo a lot of commenters, but:

1.) How important is the balance between good art and good business? (The Watterson vs. Adams debate.)

2.) Newspapers are dying, and you're advocating a fairly traditional approach to business in a world quickly being swept by new media. In approaches to generating revenue, innovation could be infinitely more profitable than tradition.
(See: http://www.penny-arcade.com)

[I gave my estimate of the odds. What are yours? -- Scott]

[Richard in Savannah, GA]

I enjoy this new comic. I don't know that I'd yet buy a book or calendar (I already receive a Dilbert calendar each year as a standing gift from a family member.). I will email a link to Scott's site to selected friends and colleagues along with a recommendation.

I like the intellectual level of the strip and suspect that most Dilbert Blog readers do, too. However, some of the vocabulary is going to take a Dennis Milleresque leap over the heads of many (e.g. - the strip about telling your spouse about your day).

I like the new, smaller strip version Scott's created - probably because I'm used to reading comics in that format. It feels familiar and comfortable.

To the extent I have a vote, I vote for Scott to go the syndication route.

Good luck. This is very exciting!

[JoePike]

I think Scott should stay broad. Just keeping to relationship topics would rob his audience of some really funny comics on other topics. I'm sure he'll still have enough relationship stuff in there to make it marketable.

Those who have said he needs to get rid of the wordy intros on each panel are missing the whole point...those are the 'basic instructions', followed by the punchlines of dialog from the characters. To remove them would kill the point of the comic and make it much less funny.

I'm confused about your statement "I’ll pause from this topic for a few days until Scott has some more samples." I've been perusing the archives of Basic Instructions since yesterday. Tons and tons of hilarious strips are already available.

Or did you mean more samples of the stripped down panel format? Probably. I love it when I answer my own question.

[Paul Gifford]

I'm much like $8, in that I read through his back archive and found it hilarious, bookmarked the site and sent it to a few friends, but I didn't post about it. I suspect there're going to be a lot of us.

As for the comic itself, the strips that are about broader subjects I found to be generally funnier, excepting the strip about buying irrational things, so I would say stick to the broad. As for whether or not to go for syndication, I think that really does depend on his goals. If he wants to make writing the strip his full time job, and try to make his fortune at it then I guess go for it, but remember that the strip is quite funny as is. If he changes it too much, it may lose its appeal.

[AJ]

Scott should stay broad. There are far more areas of life that require Basic Instruction than just relationships.

I only got the chance to see on strip yesterday before the site crashed. I bookmarked it, and spent a good half-hour reading the strips this morning. It's staying on the Favourites list.

[BrandonM]

I personally love the wide range of topics he covers so I don't think he should focus on relationships just for newspaper syndication. I also told emailed the link to all my friends less than hour from the time I first read his comic, so I think there is alot of potential for it to take off by word of mouth(or email).

[JPatterson]

I think he should stay broad. The variety is one of the things I really liked about the strip.

[Stretch]

Personally I would avoid sticking to one theme - the comic as it is (I've read through the enitre back catalogue now - havent got any work done either....) is nice and varied, so you never know what the next one will contain - If he went along the route of just using relationship humor it could run dry very quickly, where as keeping it broad lets his mind wander about and find inspiration from all over, therefore keeping it from becoming to stale or expected. I beleive I'm correct in saying that even though Dilbert has its basis in office humor that it does deviate quite often in to other areas. I think that would be the best course to follow.