It may not have been that one particular story line that reduced sales across the board, but it was indicative of how blind and deaf Marvel has been to their fans, and it might have just been the final straw for a lot of fans, the line in the sand.

So, now with this "new start," they might be trying to send the message that they're sorry for kicking us in the teeth over and over, but like Joe Zhang says above--with the same creatives and editorial in charge, there's no reason the readers should expect any real change.

Decades ago, something like "Secret Empire" would have been done and dusted within a matter of months, e.g. if it had been published in 1980, it would have been in the Jan-Apr issues. The editor would have dealt with the backlash a few months after that, and then by year's end, it may well have been forgotten about. An editor may have apologised if there'd been a negative backlash, but we'd have moved on.

"Secret Empire" ran for ten issues, plus countless tie-in stories. And there was "Hail Hydra" prior to that. That was a long time to receive such a negative backlash. 

It's not just about the Cap/Hydra thing. When you have stories that run for too long, so they can be made into trades, this sort of thing will happen. I remember a Batman story where he fought Captain Boomerang (70s). It didn't seem to be well-received and I remember the editor responding to that and semi-apologising for it (to be fair, I liked the story). As it was a one-off story, folk would have forgotten about it.

Today, it could well be a six-issue arc (with lots of tie-ins), and such long stories now, if not well received, are bound to result in fewer sales and the like.

I wish the industry would consider its position on decompression. 

Reading the article, I see this comment: "...The promotional artwork... features characters with high media profiles outside of comics" and then lists a large number of the Netflix and movie characters.

Funny that I didn't see S.H.I.E.L.D. or X-Men on that list... their TV presence seems pretty high profile. But in any case, it indicates what a lot of people feared... that the movies are now driving the comics. Which means that the Fantastic Four - Marvel's original comic book team and their second smash hit - is still getting screwed.

There's another huge problem with the reboots, restarts, etc. When changes happen within a series, readers may continue to buy a book due to purchasing inertia... "I've been buying Iron Man this long... I'll keep up with it."

But when they present a situation where they end a series to start a new one - yet another #1 - it's a sign that indicates, "This storyline and character are done", and a reader can then infer, "Ah, good. It's done. Now that I look at it, I don't know why I paid four bucks an issue for the past two years... but I don't have to any more. No more story to keep up with!"

This isn't a binary, zero-sum game. Publishing isn't about "I'll lose this many readers but I'll gain this many readers... so it's worth the change." There has to be a way to keep existing readers AND attract new readers. It doesn't seem that DC or Marvel have given that a lot of consideration... but again, I haven't read many of their books recently. Maybe they've finally got the message. Maybe.