Criteria for closing a title

[Raven]

Comics seemed to 'downsize' as time went on: HOOT [1985] had noticably less pages than was expected from a new DCT tabloid, and also the price was bumped up significantly [to a whopping 20p!]

This comic never survived long, and it's relative failure sadly reflected the dwindling market, perhaps leading to a revaluation of the comics scene by DCT: glossier paper stock and improved colour came along pretty soon afterwards.

I think it's failure reflected the fact that it was a weak title, with a minimal 16 pages of fairly tired ideas and mostly poor concepts: Piggles, Polar Blair, Spotted Dick.

Nipper, also, just didn't have strong enough material.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

HOOT was no worse than IPC's similar-end-of-the-line swansong as regards 'new title' launch, which I think may have been SCHOOL FUN [b.1983] which had an even shorter lifespan than DCT's 1985 entry.

To be fair, SCHOOL FUN was a decent-sized affair, although the centre section sometimes reran [admittedly good] archive school-related material, like Swots and the Blots which looked positively lush in comparison to a lot of the also-ran material that made up a fair whack of the new strips within.

This period of the mid-80s seems to have been the point when sales of new comic titles dipped to a precariously low level: [after an absolute glut in the early 70s especially] not so much a reflection of lower-quality output, I reckon there was a sea-change in young folks' cultures: they were more into popular music and the opposite sex at an earlier age, than they were into reading comic-cut exploits.

[Tammyfan]

I was browsing through some old comics at a fair the other day and found a title called Buddy. I didn't pick it up as it was not on my wants list. But does anyone know anything about Buddy?

[starscape]

Ever wondered what Billy the Cat would be like as a teenager? Or the Iron Fish in a modern world? Or the further adventures of the Wolf of Kabul? Or some classic adventures from the likes of Limp-Along Leslie?

That was Buddy. Basically a grim'n'gritty (well, for DCT anyway, so not overly grim or gritty but a little more grown up) comic filled with classic DCT characters.

It wasn't a bad comic but it was still marketed to primary school kids, when it should probably have been trying to reach secondary.

[Lew Stringer]

Ever wondered what Billy the Cat would be like as a teenager? Or the Iron Fish in a modern world? Or the further adventures of the Wolf of Kabul? Or some classic adventures from the likes of Limp-Along Leslie?

That was Buddy. Basically a grim'n'gritty (well, for DCT anyway, so not overly grim or gritty but a little more grown up) comic filled with classic DCT characters.

It wasn't a bad comic but it was still marketed to primary school kids, when it should probably have been trying to reach secondary.

I always felt 'Buddy' wasn't really the best title they could have chosen for it. 1930s American colloquialisms perhaps being a bit out of step for a 1980s UK comic title. It did have some very good material though as you say.

[Raven]

HOOT was no worse than IPC's similar-end-of-the-line swansong as regards 'new title' launch, which I think may have been SCHOOL FUN [b.1983] which had an even shorter lifespan than DCT's 1985 entry.

I'd say it was. There was nothing, really, in Hoot to inspire confidence that it would run for long, but School Fun had better strip ideas: the likes of Schoolditz and Time Bus were more inspired, with more potential - but how many kids wanted to read a comic all about school?

This period of the mid-80s seems to have been the point when sales of new comic titles dipped to a precariously low level: [after an absolute glut in the early 70s especially] not so much a reflection of lower-quality output, I reckon there was a sea-change in young folks' cultures: they were more into popular music and the opposite sex at an earlier age, than they were into reading comic-cut exploits.

I think that's a bit too simplistic: I doubt the 7-11 year-olds who read the fun comics were especially more into the opposite sex, or that a greater interest in one thing would have precluded an interest in something else.

The problem with Buddy, I think, was that it was just too dated - D.C. Thomson rehashing material and concepts from the '40s, '50s and '60s in a 1980s comic. Reprints of Jonah from 1958. It was Thomson unwilling to modernise.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

I think that's a bit too simplistic: I doubt the 7-11 year-olds who read the fun comics were especially more into the opposite sex, or that a greater interest in one thing would have precluded an interest in something else.

They seemed to be 'into' comics and sexual curiosity, at about the same equal measure, at my Primary School, at any rate!

I remember one guy in my class aged about 10, who got a trainee female teachers' face beaming bright red with the 'adult' stuff he blurted out to her....[no, I won't recount the details here!] This same guy was equally happy burying his nose in the latest SPARKY ANNUAL, I remember.

[Raven]

I remember one guy in my class aged about 10, who got a trainee female teachers' face beaming bright red with the 'adult' stuff he blurted out to her....[no, I won't recount the details here!] This same guy was equally happy burying his nose in the latest SPARKY ANNUAL, I remember.

Well, there you go!

I think that old "Oh, I was a huge fan of (fill in the hobby/interest/passion) UNTIL I DISCOVERED GIRLS!!!!!!!" trope is hugely specious, and doesn't really reflect real life at all.

[SID]

I bought Buddy for its entire run but the only thing that stood out for me was Billy the Cat and even then only at the beginning until the artist changed.

I seemed to remember thinking at the the time that Buddy was where The Beano's adventure strips had emigrated to.

[Digifiend]

Ever wondered what Billy the Cat would be like as a teenager? Or the Iron Fish in a modern world? Or the further adventures of the Wolf of Kabul? Or some classic adventures from the likes of Limp-Along Leslie?

That was Buddy. Basically a grim'n'gritty (well, for DCT anyway, so not overly grim or gritty but a little more grown up) comic filled with classic DCT characters.

It wasn't a bad comic but it was still marketed to primary school kids, when it should probably have been trying to reach secondary.

I always felt 'Buddy' wasn't really the best title they could have chosen for it. 1930s American colloquialisms perhaps being a bit out of step for a 1980s UK comic title. It did have some very good material though as you say.

Didn't DCT always have that problem with comic titles? The names Beano, Dandy and Beezer are certainly words that weren't used a lot, even when those titles launched in the 1930s and 1950s. Same goes for Bunty (named after a girl's name like most of the later titles of it's ilk, but you don't see many 60-70 year olds nowadays called that!) and even more recently with titles like Xtreme. Not that it did them much harm. Xtreme is the only one of those that wasn't a success (something that's been discussed to death elsewhere).

[AndyB]

Move to Belfast. We have beezer and cracker things.

[Lew Stringer]

Ever wondered what Billy the Cat would be like as a teenager? Or the Iron Fish in a modern world? Or the further adventures of the Wolf of Kabul? Or some classic adventures from the likes of Limp-Along Leslie?

That was Buddy. Basically a grim'n'gritty (well, for DCT anyway, so not overly grim or gritty but a little more grown up) comic filled with classic DCT characters.

It wasn't a bad comic but it was still marketed to primary school kids, when it should probably have been trying to reach secondary.

I always felt 'Buddy' wasn't really the best title they could have chosen for it. 1930s American colloquialisms perhaps being a bit out of step for a 1980s UK comic title. It did have some very good material though as you say.

Didn't DCT always have that problem with comic titles? The names Beano, Dandy and Beezer are certainly words that weren't used a lot, even when those titles launched in the 1930s and 1950s. Same goes for Bunty (named after a girl's name like most of the later titles of it's ilk, but you don't see many 60-70 year olds nowadays called that!) and even more recently with titles like Xtreme. Not that it did them much harm. Xtreme is the only one of those that wasn't a success (something that's been discussed to death elsewhere).

Yes, fair point. Now I think about it the first time I'd heard the words Dandy and Beano were as comic titles and it didn't bother me. I suppose kids of the 1980s felt the same about 'Buddy'.