Lots of links this week, so let’s get to it.
First up, there has been a huge controversy sparked by Harlquin’s announcement that they would be forming a self-publishing arm called Harlequin Horizons. Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware wrote a very helpful initial roundup of the plan and controversy, Kristin Nelson wondered if it was exploitation or empowerment, and How Publishing Really Works had similar questions. Following the uproar, the Romance Writers of America took the pretty drastic measure of revoking Harlequin’s “recognized publisher” status, and Harlequin announced that they are dropping the Harlequin name from the self-publishing program in order to distinguish the two.
Setting aside this controversy for a moment and the specifics of Harlequin’s operation, let me just say that in principle I don’t think publishers facilitating self-publishing is necessarily such a bad thing. However, there should be complete transparency, fair pricing, total disambiguation between traditional publishing arms and self-publishing arms, and every good faith attempt made to educate writers about the difference between the two. This industry obviously needs new revenue streams, and provided that the publisher’s program is genuinely nonexploitive and transparent I don’t see the problem, and I don’t see why publishers should continue to cede ground to self-publishing companies when they have every capacity to provide the same service. It just has to be done correctly.
Now then. Other news!
Mike Shatzkin has one of the most brilliant blogs on the future of publishing out there, and this week he had a great post about some conversations he’s had with agents about how our role will be changing in the new publishing landscape. He explores a possible change in the way agents earn money, the challenge of facilitating self-publishing, and his opinion (which I share) that “power is moving from ‘control of IP to control of eyeballs.'”
In e-book news, the NY Times noticed that quite a few people are reading on their smart phones, and raises the question about whether the future of e-books is with dedicated devices or devices people already have (my guess: a mix of both). And in gadget news, a (satiric?) beta tester of Apple’s iTablet spilled the beans to HuffPo/blew my mind, and Engadget released a helpful holiday gift guide for all the different e-readers.
My awesome colleague Sarah LaPolla passed along a really cool ode to the e-book in comic form. And HarperStudio posted a video ode to making a physical book.
Meanwhile, with all of our recent talk about efficiency and self-publishing and e-publishing, Rachelle Gardner had a really interesting post that worries about what will happen if every novel ever written is published.
Over at Upstart Crow, Michael Stearns noticed an interesting thing about the new Stephen King book UNDER THE DOME: it doesn’t have any jacket copy. He sees this as a sign that instant word of mouth is quickly becoming paramount, and it’s eliminating the browsing process.
As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, Oprah is ending her daily talk show, which had quite a few book people gasping with panic. C. Max Magee at the Millions has a terrific recap of the history of Oprah and books.
Reader Eric Laing pointed me to this amazing post by Lynn Viehl where she shares her ledger publicly and shows the financial reality of a NY Times bestseller After taxes, commission, and expenses, Lynn made about $24,517.36 on her mass market bestseller TWILIGHT FALL.
Brace yourself for a month of decade retrospectives and best of lists. Quickly out of the gate is the Times UK, which has a list of the top 100 books of the decade, which is, incredibly annoyingly, spread out over 17 pages. Geez louise, Times UK, I don’t need to click 16 times to know that Cormac McCarthy won.
The National Book Awards were held, and congrats to the winners! And, your nominee for best sign of the times: Google sponsored the after-party.
For all of you needing help with your last NaNoWriMo push, there’s a pretty hilarious widget called Write or Die that punishes you in various forms when you stop typing. (via Neil Vogler)
And finally, as I’m sure you know the second Twilight movie New Moon came out this week. Writing in the Millions, Emily Colette Wilkinson examines the role of wealth aspirations in the TWILIGHT series. io9 has a pretty unreal gallery of the worst/most disturbing TWILIGHT products, and the Daily Beast has a gallery of the best TWILIGHT tattoos, including one of a woman who had an entire paragraph tattooed on her back. Wow. I’d just like to say right now that if anyone gets a tattoo of a corndog I’ll send you a signed copy of JACOB WONDERBAR.
Have a great weekend!
Michael Broadway says
You've done it again, Nathan. Provided us with a wealth of information. It's going to take me some time to click all those links to get enlightened.
One thing I'm especially appreciative of is the correct spelling of "Geez." I'm prone to using it, and I never knew if it started with a "G" or a "J."
Now I do. Thanks to you.
Valerie Geary says
Thank you for another delightful TWIP!! I look forward to this day all week long. 🙂
Thomas Burchfield says
I read the e-books list with interest, but made no choices as I'm trying to look at it from all sides. I'm trying to look at it like buying a TV, except it's a TV for books. And I wouldn't want to buy a TV that only carried a certain number of stations or programs would I? Anymore than I'd want the Sharp TV company deciding whether or not to carry "The Daily Show/Colbert Report." Be interesting to see how it shakes out, but I'm keeping my Mastercard in my wallet for now.
Tori says
Oh, and Lynn is amazing. I read her blog every day. I was very surprised. I thought that someone on the Times list made a crap load of money. She gave a lot of needed info.
It confuses me that Harelquin seems surprised over what happened. They knew in advance that what they were doing was wrong, and they did it anyway. I don't feel bad for them. I feel sorry for the authors. I can't imagine what they are going through right now.
Tori says
nathan- Thank you for clarifying! Well, either way…I will get a copy of your book! Will you continue writing? Or was this sort of just something you wanted to try?
Nathan Bransford says
tori-
Thanks so much! And yes, I do believe there will be more than one JACOB WONDERBAR book, though as I always say, it's not a series until the second book is published.
Anonymous says
I don't have a smart phone. 🙁 Probably won't be able to get one in a while (though I'd probably lose it if I did).
Hm I keep hoping for more academic essays on Twilight from a Cultural Studies perspective. I mean the books themselves are a treasure trove of analysis.
Also I think e-stuff is cool except it's only gonna make it that much easier for people to pirate books online, like music, which is actually already happening much to my dismay.
Oh well TGIF (though not the awesome TGIF that showed on ABC back in the 90s. I miss that TGIF).
Marilyn Peake says
One more comment, then I think I probably used up my comment quota for the day. 🙂 I just love discussing eBooks because I’m so familiar with them! In regard to RWA’s decision to deny membership to Harlequin because of their new self-publishing branch, this isn’t the first time they've barred authors from membership based on how their books were published. In the past, RWA has barred eBook authors from membership. Quite a few people, including author and literary agent Deidre Knight posted comments on the Internet regarding that RWA decision.
Anonymous says
Regarding the Harlequin decision, I am wondering why so many authors are surprised at this decision. Publishers are, after all, in the business to make money. I agree that if one were to go the self-publishing route, they might as well do it and keep all the profits.
The other thing that is making me laugh is all the kudos being handed out to RWA and other such organizations who kicked Harleqiun out.
These organizations dictate who they think are published authors and they discriminate big time. It's a clique, superficial organization, but that's another discussion.
I say, if someone wants to pay Harlequin to publish a book, it's their money, their perogative and hopefully before they do it, they will research to ensure they are making the right decision.
I won't be surprised if more big publishers go this route in the future.
mirlacca says
The issue is not self-publishing, although Harlequin is trying its damndest to make Horizons look like a self-publishing venture. Harlequin Horizons is a vanity press, not a self-publishing venture. Not only does it charge authors for every element that a traditional publisher offers as a part of the regular publishing process, including editing (up to $6,100 for an 80K ms), but it offers no distribution, and charges for any marketing efforts–and THEN collects 50% of the net of any sales the poor author happens to make. This is NOT self-publishing. This is a ripoff venture to which Harlequin is directing the authors it rejects. In other words, Harlequin won't buy your book, but you can PAY them to get the chance to… continue paying them.
Anonymous says
mirlacca, good points, and I think Harlequin is doing more damage for people who are thinking to submit to them. Unfortunately, I don't think it will phase on the readers though. It's mostly people in the industry that are blogging and commenting on this new venture of theirs.
I hope anyone who even thinks about submitting to this vanity press, would do some research and get solid, sage advice before they hand over a dime to this company
Terry says
Gordon, I have to disagree that agents won't be needed. They know the ropes and they can do things that I simply would not want to deal with. You may be a savvy businessman, I'm not.
Also, Nathan makes a good point. He said: "For one, we could be more like concert promoters/managers and leverage our own brand to help the books stand out."
Much like Alfred Hitchcock, who once said to a group of directors, to the effect, we promote our product. Rather a new idea then. He didn't really write. He hired writers and worked with them. He may be the first director to brand himself, to promote.
And it worked.
I would love to work with someone like him. If an agent does that, I want him or her.
jjdebenedictis says
Anon 3:49PM said:
Regarding the Harlequin decision, I am wondering why so many authors are surprised at this decision. Publishers are, after all, in the business to make money.
And when you make money by taking advantage of people's naivety, it's evil and borderline criminal.
The information Harlequin has provided on the Horizons imprint is misleading and mercenary.
Gee, people are surprised see a respected publisher behaving this way.
Anonymous says
Seventy years on now since the introduction of the mass market paperback book opened up access to literature for all. James Hilton's 1933 Lost Horizon 1939 Pocket Books' edition is widely credited as being the first U.S. mass market paperback, although Pearl Buck's The Good Earth was first in 1938 as a proof of concept publication.
That's a bit of history relevant to the business model of publishing then. The Hilton paperback cost 25¢, early British mass market paperbacks cost six pence. The timing is important too, at the time a 6-1/2 oz. pop bottle deposit/return was 2¢. What I call the pop bottle marketing paradigm is what made the fiction market accessible to young people. Two six packs plus one bottle of coke bottles paid for a paperback novel. Nowadays, paperbacks cost at least eight bucks. About an hour and a half of drudge labor at minimum wage.
In my days of youth, it took me about a half hour to collect a few dozen pop bottles, redeem them for a few comic books, perhaps a paperback book, a bottle of pop, and a few candy bars.
The modern-day publishing business model has forgotten its roots and lost sight of the consumer. Too much fat, for one thing. Maybe all the chaos will settle out into a new "pop bottle paradigm."
Genella deGrey says
Nathan – If you get a chance, go see 2012 – there is a great plug for literature in that movie.
Have a great weekend.
🙂
G.
britmandelo says
Stamp me with "elitist" but as a bookstore employee, I can genuinely say that every single (fiction) self-published or vanity author who tries to give us a copy of their book to get us to order them… Have been terrible. Truly, truly awful books. Bad writing, shoddy plots, boring, pointless, or offensively misogynistic.
There is a reason we have gatekeepers in professional art. Sure, you can go to places like Deviantart and see some really good art–but 80% of it is childlike scribbling, and writing is no different. Go to somewhere like fanfiction.net and you'll see why self-publishing will never take over traditional publishing: because people don't like bad books, and nobody comes into the writing world capable of a masterpiece on their first try. Nobody.
If you weren't willing to go through the effort of submitting your book to agents or editors, doing the work to improve it or realizing where you made mistakes and starting a new project… I'm sorry, you cheated the system. Rejections, while painful, are for a reason. I'm on my seventh novel, four of which were contract romance work, and I'm just now getting to a level where I've got agent interest for my fantasy work.
And you know what? I'm okay with that. Because I see now that those first two or three were not quality manuscripts. I grew and learned.
If I would have said "well screw you meanie pie agents I know I'm good!" and self published, I would never have improved my writing to the level it is today. Rejection hurts, sure, but it means you need to get better. Not waste your money paying someone to print your book for you.
@JR Harvey
I'm sort of baffled by this "need these services" thing. Why do you need to pay someone up to $12,000 dollars to break out? You don't. You really, really don't. I'm acquainted with or friends of several authors who debuted this year or last by getting an agent and working on their manuscripts. That $12,000 is in their pockets, not a vanity press's. (Also, on the Niffenegger thing: it is rare that an author's first published novel is their first novel. It's usually #3 or more. Practice comes first.)
Christine H says
Does the corndog tattoo have to be visible?
Anonymous says
No time to read all the comments just yet, but for the "livliest" discussion on the Harlequin Horizons snafu (HQHo), Smart Bitches Trashy Books is the place to be. I mean, seriously, they're about to crash servers over there, and the to-the-death cage match with Zoe Winters and La Nora is worth the price of admission (starting on page 2 of the comments). https://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/comments/want-to-self-publish-how-about-harlequin/
Make no mistake. HQHo is vanity. RWA, MWA, and SFWA done good on this one.
Jarucia says
Lol…the Twilight products include the sparkle peen…while thankfully my younger sister doesn't have that item, she admits to owning a dozen posters, the bedspread and an Edward pillow.
Did I mention she's 21?
Oh, and next time you want to skip ahead to the end of a 17-page article look at the end of the URL Address:
=12&page=2
=24&page=3
…
=192&page=17
See the trend? Mostly it works with a little guess work, but you can skip ahead if you like.
🙂
~Sia McKye~ says
Boy, there was a lot of news in the publishing world, besides HQ. Some interesting links. I enjoyed reading quite few of them, thank you. Mike's was interesting. I'm on overload as far as HQ is concerned. Any bloggers wondering where their readers were today, you can find them in one or more of the loops.
I will say only this on HQ type buisness platforms–I agree on:
"complete transparency, fair pricing, total disambiguation between traditional publishing arms and self-publishing arms, and every good faith attempt made to educate writers about the difference between the two."
I also agree publishing has to change and adapt with the times.
Thanks for the thoughts Nathan. BTW how goes your book?
Mandi says
Wow. Freaking WOW. Some of those Twilight products are cre-e-py.
Bella's womb?? Edward's shadow standing over your bed?? An Edward-head shower curtain?? And, and, and Edward's penis??
Yikes!
MzMannerz says
I recently purchased a self published book for the first time and while I'm sure it is not representative of all self published books, I'll be much more cautious about them in the future.
There is something to be said about a book that has been vetted by someone other than the author as worthy of publication.
Also, editing is a good thing. I essentially purchased a book of typos.
Mira says
Wow. So many great links and so much going on, I'm not sure what to address……I'll have to come back after I've read what's posted.
However, two very important things caught my eye.
First, do we have to PROVE that we have a corndog tattoo? Because if not, I have 57,000 of them.
Okay, so where's my 57,000 books? And I'd rather not wait until 2011if that's okay, I really want to read it. Don't you have a copy of the unpublished manuscript at home? You can forward that, I don't need the cover. Hey! Do it by e-book! Thanks, Nathan.
Okay, for my next topic, I plan to pass out in utter horror. $24,000 for a bestselling novel!!!!!! AARRGGHHH. That's utterly ridiculous. You can't even support yourself if you have a best-selling novel????? Who could live on 24,000 a year? ARRGGGHHHH.
And I'm not even in this for the money, but I can't take it.
So, if Lynn brought home 10%, that means that OTHER PEOPLE made $230,000 off her novel.
AAAARRRRGGGGHHHHH.
I need to go lie down now.
Mira says
My math sucks.
And 24K – San Francisco is a very expensive city.
But the point is this was a best-selling novel. That's as good as it gets.
Moira Young says
Wow, that's actually a stroke of brilliance on Harlequin's part. Instead of fighting the tide, they're going with the flow of self-publishing. This gives Harlequin the chance to quietly *monitor* who among the self-published is selling well, and then snap them up and offer them opportunities with traditional publishing. It's almost better than taking a chance on a new author, because in order to sell well, the self-published author has to prove her or himself first. Very much like Keenspot vs. ComicGenesis with webcomics — ComicGenesis is for anyone, and the successful comics are invited to Keenspot.
Nathan Bransford says
mira-
Well, bear in mind that most titles don't make money, so the ones that do sell have to make up for the ones that don't. Publishers aren't exactly making out like bandits either.
Moira Young says
Brilliance from a business standpoint, I mean. And "almost better" for Harlequin. Regardless of the other controversies surrounding the matter, this idea does have financial potential for the publisher.
Mira says
Nathan,
24,000 to 216,000 is a pretty big gap. Also, the author only has this one book to profit from
I'm curious, though. Do you think the reimbursement system is fair?
AM says
The video of Abigail Uhteg constructing her books by hand was art itself. Amazing.
Thanks for sharing the link.
Nathan Bransford says
mira-
All I know is that between publishers, authors and editors and agents, no one's getting rich unless you have a true phenomenon like TWILIGHT or THE DA VINCI CODE. If publishers are busy exploiting authors they don't really have much to show for it because they can barely turn a profit.
Anonymous says
Royalties are an author's cut. On top of that are production costs, operating costs, overhead costs, and what profit a publisher makes.
The simple business model is 30% production costs, 30% operating costs, 30% overhead costs, and 10% gross profits out of which corporate income taxes must be paid.
$24,000 in royalty income is for one year, one season, really, for one title. Presumably, and not uncommonly, an author has more titles earning residual royalties from back list sales. Perhaps a few thousand each from several titles, although the average annual income for authors is roughly $30,000.
At a 30,000 copy print run, a $25 cover price casecover title costs about $5 each to manufacture, and about another buck in publisher costs for warehousing, shipping, and handling to supply distributors. Author royalties are typically included in production costs, as are editing, layout, design, and artwork costs.
Average actual profit before taxes for a publisher is about the same as an author's royalties.
And a $24,000 royalty earning means about 24,000 copies sold. If that's bestselling, that's a low performing bestseller, though it's certainly far above the global average 2,000 copy sell through.
Marilyn Peake says
Anon @ 6:08 PM – Whoa. I followed the link you provided and read the post and some of the comments there. Looking at the prices authors would have to pay Harlequin to be self-published by them, I’m flabergasted. There are small press eBook authors making $40,000 and more per year from sales of multiple romance books WITHOUT having to pay anything at all for publication. Some eBook authors have retired from their day jobs as a result of income from their romance books.
If a New York Times Best-Selling book often earns only $23,000 and the author can be dropped if their next book doesn’t sell enough copies, this starts to make successful small press companies look like a good choice. I wonder where the future will lead. Right now, some literary agents including Deidre Knight are submitting romance books to small eBook publishing houses. If wealthy individuals decide to get behind specific small press eBook companies by investing significant amounts of money in them, these houses could begin to offer real competition to large publishing houses charging money for the same type of publication. Right now, small press companies can’t afford many of the services that richer companies can afford: free ARCs (Advanced Reader Copies) for review, qualified Editors, book promotion, and so on. All that could change with investors.
Gordon Jerome says
gordon-
I agree that historically an agent's job has been to sell and handle contracts, but I still think agents could have a potential role in self-publishing. For one, we could be more like concert promoters/managers and leverage our own brand to help the books stand out. Second, we could function as packagers and help authors navigate the different elements of putting a book together and perhaps get them better deals with cover designers, copyeditors, etc. And third, we'd be here to sell subrights and to work out a distribution deal to get the book into bookstores in the event it starts taking off.
Admittedly the financial model for this is murky if it's strictly a commission-based structure, but I think you'll start seeing agents think about their jobs much differently if the industry continues to shed the midlist authors that used to be agents' bread and butter.
Good points, Nathan. I hadn't thought of it that way.
Gordon Jerome says
@ britmandelo
because people don't like bad books, and nobody comes into the writing world capable of a masterpiece on their first try. Nobody.
Harper Lee did. But in general, I agree with you. Most self-published works are not very good. One needs a second eye, an editorial eye.
Even in the world of e-publishing, the process of publishing will remain the same. The slush pile may become available to all who want to slush around in it, but the books that sell will be put out by publishers who can provide the quality fiction in that genre. No doubt about it.
Sandra says
Thought I'd tuck this in here. In regards to your efficiency blog, check this out:
https://www.slowmovement.com/
There are people and cities around the world who are joining this movement. I think I'm going to sign up. As authors, maybe we all should – after all reading is (for most people) a slow activity.
MzMannerz says
I'd like to adjust the expectation of what doing well means. I have a client who operates in a high rise luxury office building in Manhattan. Is their balance sheet exploding from all the extra cash? No, but that does not mean they are not doing well.
To suggest that overall profit is the only measure of doing well is to present an incomplete picture. Maybe it's accurate for stock value, but really – if only my leftover money were tallied as an indicator of how well I was doing, my financial health would look quite different.
All that rambling to ask, what is the net worth of said publishing house? How much do the C-level executives earn? What real estate is owned? What art graces the office walls? What investments and holdings do they have?
Just curious.
Christine H says
Nathan ~
I have a question on a totally different topic than the other comments(but related to your post.)
My son is seven, and his teacher just told us he is reading on a sixth-grade level. She suggested we find more challenging books for him. He's currently working his way through all of the "Geronimo Stilton" stories, which he really enjoys. She recommended "The Boxcar Children" books, but I've looked at them and they don't seem interesting enough to hold a seven-year-old's attention.
He's been reading everything Star Wars he can get his hands on, but I had to say no to a book (Scholastic's "The Story of Obi-Wan Kenobi") because some of it was too graphic.
As the author of a middle-grade book, can you recommend anything that might challenge him and still be really fun, and not above his maturity level?
Thanks! I am looking forward to "Jacob Wonderbar" coming out.
But I think I'll wait on the tattoo.
Nathan Bransford says
christine h-
At that time I really really loved everything by Roald Dahl.
Anonymous says
I like the model you describe of how an agent-freehand might help shape self-pub books like a brand.
It sounds like the agent will become more like a publishing partner if that happens.
How would you put the word out? How would you distinguish the one job from the other to avoid conflicts of interest?
Lots of questions to explore.
xx
On the other hand, looking at some awful titles with no editing, no promotion, just floating out there in cyberspace like all those biz models that didn't know how to locate customers…
almost as sad (and often embarrassing) (note to self: wow, I always forget two r's and two s's)
as the pathetic permanent kitsch Twilight tattoos (two t's, two o's)
that is covering all that previously baby perfect teenage skin.
THAT will make the Twi-Moms cry.
Anonymous says
This seems likely:
1) author establishes their own brand with an existing publisher
2) author transitions to publishing eBooks on their own
3) eBooks are made print books either via POD or through traditional publishing
I think the future will be better contracts for existing authors through traditional publishers. Self-publishing creates competition, which will force publishers to pay authors more or lose them completely.
I foresee publishers changing their business model. Retail and online vendors will continue to push down publishers margins, and established writing can utilize self-publishing either via eBook or POD as an alternative. This is gonna force publishers to offer more lucrative contracts or lose their top tier authors. This is going to mean that publishers are going to need to cut their overhead.
Will this happen this year? Probably not, but I can see it happening over the next decade.
Mira says
Nathan,
Before I continue, I want to express some thoughts.
First, I feel daunted at engaging in a debate with you where I feel so strongly about the issue. I truly hope you understand that if I don't back down from my stance, it's not out of disrespect or stubborness. I feel very deeply about this.
Given that, I do wonder if it's worth discussing, because things are about to change. But I worry that writers will hand over their power in the new paradigm simply because they are used to it in this one.
And finally, I hope I don't sound callous or greedy. I understand that people in the industry are affected by these changes, and are worried about their future. I don't want to be insensitive to that. I'm taking a stance on principle and to advocate for the writer. I'm not in any way saying that people who work in the industry are unimportant or I don't care about what happens to them.
But I am a writer's advocate.
I'll address the issues in a different post, or this one will get too long.
Thank you for the opportunity to talk about this.
Mira says
Okay, now I'm addressing the issues.
I have three things to say.
a. The reason agents aren't getting rich is because their income is tied to the author. If authors made more, the agent would make more.
b. If publishers are struggling to make money…..well, I thought Mz Manners has some very good points about overhead. They may also want to take a look at their businsess model. If most books don't sell out, there is a problem with the way books are being chosen and/or marketed. Publishers might want to consider market testing their product, market research of targeted audiences and marketing the product once it's finished. The web offers huge opportunities to market for low cost or for free.
c. I don't mean to sound callous, but again, as an author, why on earth should I care about (b.)? My job is to write the book. The publisher's job is to run a viable business. Unless the publisher is willing to open their books to me and ask my advice on their business practices, frankly, how they run their business is none of my business.
A writer creates a unique product. They deserve to be compensated for not just for their labor, but for their talent, skill and vision.
Please don't ask me to drop the price of my unique product because you are running your business in a way that doesn't make any money.
Pay me what I'm worth.
John Ross Harvey says
There is a big difference between $12000 and $1200, I will never pay $12000.
As for parent looking for next level up from Geronimo Stilton, my son age 12 and daughter age 10 are reading Here There Be Dragons series, and I read it as well, its excellent. Percy Jackson and the Olympians is also good for that age.
Lulu prints, and lists. I'm paying to get my books on shelves with iUniverse, if it doesn't happen, then its a waste.
For many posts on this site talking about paying $4000 to $6000 for editing, as normal. I cannot have that kind of budget, period.
I shouldn't be expected to.
I still see nothing evil about Author Solutions as they are established with the other branches a successful self-publishing services. I conversed with an author that won awards and had his book bought by a large publisher, he spent over $6000 to get it out as no publisher seemed willing. iUniverse got it out, McClelland Stewart bought it. It's called The Best Laid Plans by Terry Fallis, it won Stephen Leacock Humour Award, and an IPPY 2008 award as well. I cannot pay that amount, he was a lawyer, I'm a draftsman, big paycheque difference. I will keep trying to win though. I will never stop writing because some heretic thinks a self-published book alone means its garbage. Until you read it you have no right to claim it.
Because agents and publishers don't know me, and don't think my stories are what they want, this is the route I must take to be heard. My book is good, my female draft reviewer loved it.
Nathan Bransford says
mira-
I definitely think there are things that publishers could do differently and better targeted marketing is a good start, but you can't ask a publisher to both start focus grouping every book and increase their marketing efforts while also suggesting that they should lower their overhead. You can't ask someone to raise expenses and cut costs at the same time.
At the end of the day this isn't a business where it's easy to focus group and predict a book's success ahead of time. There is way more luck and guesswork involved than that. When you're starting with something so inherently uncertain, more focus grouping and predicting ahead of time isn't going to get you very far.
In fact, they do focus group for movies, and what they've found is that it's not particularly effective in predicting the eventual gross of a movie, because what someone will say in a controlled setting is much different than what happens in real life when someone is thinking of spending their own money.
So yeah – I do think there are things that publishers can do differently, and I think there should be more opportunities for authors to forgo an upfront advance for a larger share of the backend profits, thus sharing risk and reward a bit more equitably. But at the same time, I recognize that there are some uncertainties in every business with this much subjectivity.
Mira says
Nathan,
Well, that's a really interesting point about market testing with movies. I wasn't aware they found that ineffective.
Maybe what's needed is a better market testing instrument. One that's designed to measure people's reactions to books more closely.
If I were a publisher, I might hire someone to conduct pure research on why people like the books they like. I would try to find objective criteria in their responses.
I wonder how much this has been explored? How much really is due to luck vs. how much could be measured and addressed?
Nathan Bransford says
mira-
Well, even if publishers don't do that much Amazon sure does. They and companies like Netflix try really really hard to predict what you might like. But they're working with books that have already been written and published and they can look at who liked what and who bought what and use that data to try and predict what you might like.
How do you plug in the variables ahead of time? How can you quanitfy writing ability and plot lines and characters ahead of time?
I mean, I don't find Amazon's or Netflix's recommendation programs particularly effective, but they're working with way more data than publishers could possibly have before a book is published.
And, of course, basically what you're suggesting is that publishers make predictions based on past data and what people have liked in the past, which essentially translates to way more trend chasing. I think bookstores trying to be "scientific" about their ordering and pigeonholing authors with uncertain sales tracks is one reason we're in the situation we are now, with way too much trend chasing, not enough new thinking, and authors' careers derailed by one book that doesn't sell, no matter the quality of their future work.
Mira says
Nathan,
Yes, you make really good points, and I was thinking about this….
Honestly, I just don't know enough about market testing to know if there is a way to quantify variables. Not past trends, but in general: what do people want in books? Why do they read them, and what do they enjoy about them?
I don't know if you could measure this outside of a time frame, but if you could, it would be very useful in terms of book selection.
I'd love to see a bunch of graduate students write their theses on this. 🙂
I will say, though, that Amazon book recommendations really work for me. I've found lots of authors that way. In fact, it's one of the best ways for me to find new authors. I check the recommendations, and read the reviews. I found Shannon Hale that way.
But I'll concede, I may be wrong about the focus testing issue. It seems like it makes sense, but maybe it's too difficult to quantify what will sell in terms of entertainment, given changing times and trends and taste.
Marilyn Peake says
This is a really interesting discussion. I personally think that one of the major marketplace forces keeping most writers, literary agents and individual publishing houses feeling underpaid, stressed out and as though they’re under constant threat of losing everything is something that’s rarely talked about as part of the overall picture: the fact that, as of 2004, only 5 corporations (as opposed to 50 corporations in 1983) began controlling most of the U.S. media. The owners of these corporations are worth billions of dollars. Most of the people working very hard within the book industry are working to keep the heads of these businesses wealthy and stock holders earning. That’s the model. Within that model, a few authors – such as Stephenie Meyer with her TWILIGHT series – will sell such a huge number of books that their small royalty percentage on each book will add up to substantial income. At this point, it is what it is; but I think it’s helpful to at least acknowledge it.
I decided to look into who owns Harlequin. Harlequin’s a Canadian company owned by the Torstar Corporation, a media company listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TS.B). I went to the website of the Torstar Corporation – they actually have a chart showing the Current Activity of the Toronto Stock Exchange on their home page!
Anonymous says
@Mira:
When I read this:
https://www.straightgoods.ca/2009/ViewBrief.cfm?Ref=187&Cookies=yes
I was shocked to learn that the publisher passed on the supply chain risk to the author. The author is only being paid 8%. Why should they also have to share in the supply chain risk?
The author should not have to share the supply chain risk. If the publisher over prints a book because the publisher did not adequately predict demand, the author should not have to eat that risk. The author was not involved in the decision making process as to how many books should be printed.
Why should any author have to eat this risk when they're only being paid around 8%? Do publishers just assume writers cannot do simple math or are desperate enough to take on the risk to see their name on a spine of a book?
Help me understand this insanity.
Marilyn Peake says
More interesting facts. Harlequin is partnering with Author Solutions to create their self-publishing company. If you scroll down to the end of the announcement, Harlequin and Author Solutions Announce Publishing Partnership, you can see that Author Solutions also owns AuthorHouse, AuthorHouse UK, iUniverse, Trafford, Xlibris and Wordclay – which means those other self-publishing companies are not true competitors.