It seems to me that editors these days are learning the wrong lessons, those being A: if something works one time, it works every time, and B: lesson A is proved correct by the fact that our books are selling like hotcakes no matter what we do. This fails to take into account what they SHOULD be learning, which is lesson C: overexposure is bad. As I understand it, 'Crisis' was such a huge hit that DC went 'ye gods, we've got a goldmine here! We must do more of them!' And so they did - ever since then, they did one company-wide crossover a year, and Marvel followed their example. This was a little annoying, but bearable - it only happened once a year, after all. But in the last few years, I've completely lost count of how many giant crossovers have come and gone, and they keep pumping out more of them! News flash, editors - drama depends on TIMING. If you have a large crossover against a gigantic evil every now and then, that's cool - there's great spectacle for huge battles and epic stories. If you kill a character fairly rarely, then it will come as a shock, and add real pathos. But if you have fifty $#@&in' crossovers a year and kill off characters willy-nilly, then not only do your readers cease to give a damn, but you use up all the good stories! How the hell is anyone supposed to keep track of so many gigantic happenings at once? The reason most of these stories sell like hotcakes, I would imagine, is because readers are desperately trying to figure out just what is happening to their favorite characters. My message, therefore, is this: cool DOWN. Slow up. Ease off. Save these earth-shattering Kabooms for just every once in a while. Your books will continue to sell well regardless, and you'll get a huge debt of gratitude from both older readers and newer ones who don't have to scramble to figure out just what in hell is going on.