Originally posted in the Huffington Post
In the climactic scene in Frank Norris’ classic novel McTEAGUE, the two antagonists find themselves in the desert. Shady San Francisco dentist McTeague has murdered his wife to steal her money (Belated spoiler alert!). He is then pursued by his former best friend Marcus, who wants revenge slash money slash I only vaguely remember this I read it in college and that was kind of a long time ago.
A scuffle ensues in Death Valley. It’s hot! Water is lacking! Tensions running high! Bad guy McTeague nearly kills Marcus in the fight. But just before Marcus dies he handcuffs himself to McTeague.
And thus McTeague finds himself handcuffed to a corpse, the keys are back in San Francisco, and Marcus has successfully ensured that even though he has lost the battle, McTeague will also die in Death Valley.
Transition.
Book publishers are currently in retrenching mode. The slumping economy has not been kind to the print world. It has exacerbated many existing weaknesses (rise of e-tailing, rise of e-books, creeping omnipotence of e’s and hyphens), and has forced publishers to examine their business models.
The publishing marketplace has been plunged into a great deal of chaos. And if, as I detailed in my last post, publishers can no longer accurately guess at an audience even for formerly safe categories like adult trade nonfiction, will they continue to gamble so much money on big advances for a small number of books whose success is increasingly difficult to predict?
Well, from a publisher’s perspective, they’re often willing to pay big advances because their profits hinge on a relatively small number of hits and bestsellers. Thus the authors/celebrities who can reliably deliver an audience become hugely valuable. If a publisher doesn’t pay a healthy advance they risk losing their bread-and-butter authors and the most promising new projects to their competitors.
From an agent’s and author’s perspective, there’s not always a strong incentive to move away from traditional advance/royalties either, simply because it’s often appealing to bank the guaranteed money and head for the desert.
In economics they call this the Winner’s Curse, which is the theory that when you don’t know what an object is truly worth (e.g. how many copies a book will actually sell) the winner of an auction will tend to overpay relative to the actual value of the object. The theory goes that someone who wins an auction is often worse off than if they hadn’t bid at all. (Was that Gladwellian? I hope it was Gladwellian.)
And so here we publishers and agents are, McTeague and Marcus style, handcuffed to each other in the desert, stuck with the advance and royalty model even if it’s ill-suited for a time when success is nearly impossible to predict. (Who murdered whose wife probably depends on whether you work at a publisher or an agency. Also: send water!)
Is it time to think outside of the desert?
Ink says
Makes me want to read McTeague, anyway.
Patti says
I've heard of a few publishers skipping the advances and giving their authors the royalties right away.
Malia Sutton says
It's almost (not totally) impossible to predict how a book will be received. That's why there are so many stories about books that were received well, and weren't expected to be received that way.
It's time for everyone to think outside the desert. I love the way you phrased it.
T. Anne says
Though the model changes, for the writer, the dream remains the same.
Luv your analogy. BTW, water may only prolong your misery.
Chuck H. says
I haven't published anything. Can't get an agent. Still gonna write every chance I get. I don't figure I'm going to be instrumental in any changes to the status quo in publishing so that's it. Oh, and water's always good.
WV: shmag – a different kind of shmog?
Laurel says
Yes. It is time for a change. I'm just not clever enough to figure out what it should be.
Livia says
I love your Huffington Post essays, Nathan. They're really insightful.
Marilyn Peake says
Maybe the publishing world should watch the new TV show, PAWN STARS. Those guys, especially the Old Man, rarely pay too much for anything without first doing research to find out the item’s real worth. They even talk about how the current economy might affect an item’s worth, and the Old Man has a fit if the younger guys pay too much for something. After losing a million dollars in real estate, the Old Man turned a $10,000 investment into a multi-million dollar business. Interesting stuff.
Anonymous says
Publishers will use Kindle store or sites such as authonomy (their own market test beds) to test the marketability of a work. Why rely on the more expensive agent/gatekeeper system when technology makes it easy (and much cheaper) to find the next Great American Novel? It's American Idol gone to the literati.
The advance (if there is one) becomes an investment in a proven product.
Why are you still blogging about this? The new model is already in play. It seems you agents are the last to get the memo — perhaps because you are the middleman being cut out of the new system ?
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
I wouldn't be so quick to dance on agents' graves. Authonomy hasn't exactly blown the doors off the publishing world in terms of actual books being published to actual sales. Maybe someday, but it's still way more hypothetical than reality.
Terry says
Water's on the way, no doubt, from somewhere. We hope.
Meanwhile here's a tip or two:
Some cactuses have water inside, be sure to use lots of sunscreen and watch out for those snakes, especially that last one.
traceybaptiste says
The issue is, it's hard to know what an author or a book is worth. Many authors take a few years to really get off the ground (personal experience) so yes, in the meantime we all deal with a flawed system. Handcuffed, you are, sir. But the writers are too, only we're always trying to get into the handcuffs…
Rick Daley says
Hopefully it's not too late to think outside the desert.
L-Plate Author says
Great post as ever, Nathan. Keep it up Curtis Brown Boy!
Mel Sherratt, England
Marilyn Peake says
My own prescription for thinking outside of the desert: Bring back respect for mid-listers and reign in the huge corporations with exorbitant executive salaries, all of which would allow agents and publishers to take risks on creative projects that might only result in mid-lister sales. That ain’t gonna happen any time soon, though, if ever, so I’m just planning to write without worrying too much about the big corporations and how they've changed the publishing landscape as well as the overall economy. It is what it is. When the majority of people really want change, things will change, but not before then. In the meantime, we should find creative ways to build desert homes because that’s where we live.
DK says
I think the most important part of this post is at the end: SEND WATER!
Why doesn't someone come up with a NEW business-model, if the old one doesn't work anymore? How hard can it be?
Anyway: I'm not going to be the corpse being dragged along the dessert.
And for that: why didn't the sucker bring a knife to cut himself loose???
Anonymous says
I haven't seen numbers on authonomy (fairly new model), but many Kindle self-pubbed authors are experiencing success. Boyd Morrison, Karen McQuestion, John Rector, Stacey Cochran, JA Konrath, Anna Murray, RJ Keller, John Pearson, Eric Christopherson, and Dennis Batchelder come to mind.
I've read many good indie books on Kindle. I'm wondering how the industry missed so much good writing . . . I hope more rejected authors will put work out there so they can be found.
Scott says
Indie filmmakers have festivals and distributors get to attend them and shop for films they think they can throw their reputation and marketing acumen behind. Again, it's all about selling at every stage now and using your expertise.
That said, it's still a calculated risk. Only, you the filmmaker is getting exposure, not advances. The film's already made. So the author has to put sweat equity in and the publisher has to put in theirs plus cash. Dual risk with marketing behind it could switch the market back to publisher's first. Waiting for something to hit and then jumping on the bandwagon can still happen, but it can't drive the publishing industry anymore than it can the film industry.
Marketing, marketing, marketing. I'll tell you this: if an agent liked my idea, I would totally be up for them throwing their name on it and letting it ride until we're both seeing a profit.
ryan field says
Great piece.
Anonymous says
I think the unitentional or deliberate marketing and advance strategem of J. K. Rowling publisher Bloomsbury shows a way to uncuff agents and publishers.
1996 Modest £1500 advance.
1000 copy initial print run.
500 copies distributed to public libraries.
1998 U.S. auction won by Scholastic for $105,000.
And the rest is history. Hundreds of millions of books sold. The first ever billionaire author, a lot of which a consequence of movie rights royalties.
JDuncan says
The low advance, higher royalties is great for authors who can afford the payment on the back end. Question is, how many authors could afford this? I'm thinking specifically of the midlist author who makes some kind of living from their writing. Could they afford the transition time from little advance until they received it on the backend? I'm guessing no. So, publishers are left starting a new policy and keeping current authors on the same schedule. Minor annoyance perhaps, but probably unavoidable.
Really though, is this even an issue for the midlist and under author? Publishers can afford these. It's the big sellers, celebrities, etc. that want the upfront big time money. If this new model was going to work though, every major publisher would have to agree to do it at once. Could they all come together and agree to this or would greed for the next big seller win out?
They could set auction caps. Then it would come down choosing the best publishing house, editor, marketing campaign, etc. This might be more interesting. What would happen if six publishers put in for the max bid? What would the rest of the package offer be? What could agents look to get beyond the money? Would put a whole new spin on the whole bidding war process at least.
Things are changing for sure. Going to be an interesting next couple of years in publishing.
Anonymous says
So when does the Kindle store turn into iTunes? Today, I can download quality podcasts that are put together professionally such as Twit and Talking Metal. These are entertaining shows. When will authors put up self-published content in the Kindle store that will rival what publishers put out? It took podcasts a couple of years, so how long will it take authors? Then, where will agents fit in this new world when folks can crowd source good material from the bad like they do on iTunes?
Mira says
This is a really good article, Nathan. Nicely written and plotted. Extremely good point. Love the last line. 🙂
I absolutely think the model should change.
Drop the advance. Let's share risk and then share more of the profits. That just makes sense to me.
As an aside, is it just me, or is that is an absolutely depressing novel? Sheesh.
Also, the ending to that depressing novel is bogus. I mean really. I won't go into details, because it would be completely gross, but if I find myself hand-cuffed to a corpse in the middle of the desert, that corpse is going to be missing an important appendage pretty darn quickly. I don't care if I have drag that thing across the desert, dripping blood the whole time, there's no way I'm just going to sit there all 'oh no, now I have to die.' That arm is coming off.
That's what I recommend for the publishing industry. Rip that arm right out of it's socket and head for the hills.
Actually, I have no idea what that meant, but I just couldn't resist. Sorry. Um…my apologies.
pjd says
So… should agents get in the habit of carrying a bone saw? Seems wise.
Publishers, however, are not doomed. It was not that long ago that IBM was written off as the soon-to-be-extinct dinosaur. But astute, courageous leadership allowed them to rethink themselves, and again they thrive. Some companies were unable to redesign themselves (Remember Control Data? Nobody else does either.)
Eventually the landscape for publishing will change, as you've prophesied here. Some publishers will thrive; others will die out, to be replaced by newcomers. It is the way of all things.
But gosh, I would love to see my name on the spine of a book in a good, old-fashioned retail book store. It's not too late yet, but the times they are a-changin'.
Renee Collins says
To anon 12:53/1:14 (I'm assuming you are the same person.)
I'm willing to bet that the average reader does not even know what Authonomy is, does not own a Kindle, and even if they did they are probably buying the bestsellers.
And when I say average reader, I'm talking the "buy a book every other month or so from Barnes and Noble" readers. I imagine the majority of book sales are coming from this segment of the population.
So, it's a huge stretch to say that there is a "new model in play." Not yet.
JTSHEA says
Just gnaw through the dead guy's wrist. And drink his blood. Then wait for Erich Von Stroheim to make a 10 hour silent movie about it.
Anonymous says
Renee — the "new model in play" has nothing to do with the average 3-book-a-year reader.
I'm talking about the model for selecting what gets to the big boys (the publishers, the "show", the "major leagues" — whatever you call it). The Kindlers and other eReaders/eReviewers will choose what we read in the future, especially if writers use free eBook publishing as a test market.
There's really no reason NOT to do that . . . it costs nothing to publish to Kindle. Waiting months to go through the traditional query and MS submission process (often several rounds due to rejections), and then (if successful) two years to get the book published is so last century.
Today a writer can finish a book, load it up to Kindle store, and be selling (and making money) within a week. Why would anyone wait two years to get a midlist book to market, especially if it is "hot" (the hot-selling genre, timely themes, etc).
This new model is indeed "already in play". Take a look at the growth of the indie community on Kindle.
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
I do think you'll see more of that in the future, though I don't think it will be the only way, and especially not until e-books comprise more than 5% of the market. For now, the game is still in bookstores, and until that changes the old model will persist.
The game is changing, but it hasn't changed, if you know what I mean.
And even in your scenario where people first self-publish, agents are still going to be needed. If they want to go mainstream they're probably going to need a publisher, and if they want a good deal with a publisher they're going to need an agent.
Anonymous says
Cash up front is hard to beat. that's where I'm goin'.
Thomas Taylor says
I'm going to think about my dessert for a bit…
Mira says
Nathan – question, if you choose to answer…
What would be your solution? What would thinking outside the desert look like to you?
Paul Greci says
Thanks again for an interesting post. Well written, too!
Nathan Bransford says
mira-
More experimentation with new publishing models, more smaller risks with debuts and the midlist, more transparency/cooperation/author partnerships rather than rights grabs and hostility, and more publishing options for less money up front in exchange for a split on the backend.
Mira says
Nathan – thanks.
I like what you said, especially about cooperation and partnership. I guess I don't see that aspect of it from the outside. That's a shame, if it's not there already. It seems like the whole point is to be in partnership.
If you're interested, you might consider a follow-up article. I'd love to hear more about your ideas – like experimentation with publishing models, and the rest.
Steph Damore says
I guess I don't get what the hold up is with exploring new publishing models. If everyone knows there's a problem with the current system, why not change it as opposed to waiting for it to change outside of your control?
Oh wait, this is industry that we're talking about.
I'm just saying that it would be great if a few smaller publishers looked a exploring new models. What a way to make your mark on industry.
As for authonomy, it may sound crazy, but I want to break into publishing the good old fashion way. Even with e this and that, brick and mortar publishing houses, bookstores and yes, real-life agents is still where it's at–at least for now.
Phyllis says
I'm not so sure the problem is the advance vs. royalties model. Sure, if there are no advances, there's less risk for the publisher. But they will still have to make predictions on whether a book will be successful or not.
And making predictions is the problem, I think. Right now, more than with e-book sales, the internet changes information gathering, and where we get information about the books we are going to read. And it seems the publishing houses have lost track of where the buzz is.
Who are the first readers of a book and make other people read it? And where are they?
If you want a way out of the desert, you need a map (or a compass).
Cary says
All about platform now for us. Create an interactive web presence beyond blogs. Show the publisher a minimum of 1k registered followers (likely buyers) at the very least. Give your work a life outside the page.
All about effort…
Lisa Desrochers says
Question for you Nathan. Do you think an imprint's motivation to market a book is directly tied to their investment in it?
In theory, it shouldn't matter if you get an advance or not because, provided you've written a book that will sell, you should earn out and start collecting royalties at some point. That said, I know most books never earn out, so I see publishing's dilemma. My concern is that if they have nothing but their time and publishing costs invested, they may not go to bat for the book.
Anonymous says
As advances shrink, self-publishing and allowing the crowd to source the quality of books is the potential future. If you're advance is less than 10k, does it make sense to go with a traditional publisher? I'm thinking the future is gonna look a lot like the guys in the Anvil documentary. Writers are going to need to their success in their own hands and persist. Nathan, if you haven't seen the Anvil documentary, check it out. The movie feels like the future of publishing.
Marilyn Peake says
Nathan said:
"And even in your scenario where people first self-publish, agents are still going to be needed. If they want to go mainstream they're probably going to need a publisher, and if they want a good deal with a publisher they're going to need an agent."
I don’t think that’s going to happen in most cases. Most authors who self-publish – even really, really good ones; even writers who have been told by literary agents that they’re really good, but they can’t take them on for whatever reason – do so BECAUSE their book was rejected by agents. Literary agents have gotten the word out that "no means no" when they reject a manuscript, so there’s no way most authors will ever re-query after they successfully self-publish. When self-publishing brings in enough money for authors to live on, they’ve already found an alternative way to make money through their writing.
Anonymous says
if an indepedent author (and I tink that term makes more sense these days than "self-published" which connotes days gone by images of a writer hawking bound books he paid for himself to passersby out of the trunk of his car) can sell sufficient copies online, the traditional business will eventually take notice.
What you'll see hapening will be a shifting from agents-as-filters- to Amazon-as-filter for the agents, where the agents will pick from those "ubpublished" authors whose independent books have racked up impressive online sales and rankings and followings.
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
Even if that's the case I don't know if self-publish/then find agent will always be the norm. Manuscripts can benefit hugely from going through the submission process, first a round of edits with the agent and then a round of edits with the publisher, so that the manuscript that's supposed to catch on with audiences will be in the best shape possible. Also, not all authors are going to have the resources to self-publish.
I don't think this is or ever will be an either/or scenario. And given the obstacles, I have a hard time imagining that unagented/self-published-first will become the norm any time soon.
Mira says
Marilyn,
I'm not so sure. I know if I was turned down by an agent I really wanted to work with, and I successfully self-published, I would go back to that agent with the statistics.
I wouldn't want to pass up an opportunity to get my book into stores, and it's really hard get books into stores with self-publishing.
That said, I think if I had trouble finding an agent, e-publishing looks viable. I like your experiences, for example. But I wouldn't turn down an offer that came in at that point….
Anonymous says
And then like 10 years from now, there will have to be a filter for the filter–a baby Amazon where you have to prove yourself before you can even sell on Amazon. And so it goes, with ever fine filters being put in place. First we had anyone they want making books. Then we had publishers. Then we had to have agents for the publishers. Now the agents are starting to use Amazon/Web as their filter. Then there will be baby Amazon filter. Then…? Direct-to-brain downlaods?
Anonymous says
I do not think it is all that difficult to predict the success of a given book — unless you are a publisher.
A book does well based on one of two things — it has a built in audience (the celebrity factor) or it is a really good book and word gets around that it is a really good book.
I think the problem is that as the economy crunches down on profits Biz people who see books as a source of profit are finding themselves increasingly unable to predict which are 'good' books.
That happens when you try to apply buisness concepts to something that is essentially art. If you don't love the art you can't tell what it is worth.
And that is why they fail. Publishers are finding themselves jumping after whatever the hot trend of the moment is — YA vampire romance! Zombie mash-up! YA everything! — and then getting stuck with suck-ass sales when those trends burn out.
Which wouldn't have happend if they picked books based on which books were great books and not on what was the 'HOT' trend of the moment.
I think agents are increasingly falling into the same trap. How many Agents have you seen post the words "I can't sell that." in their blogs? If the book was good, you should have been able to sell it, but they are busy trying to chase the same trends and finding themselves always caught on the tail end of whatever is on the way out instead of being the person who created the trend by finding the next HOT property before people even knew it was hot.
Chase quality and that doesn't happen. Chase trends and you will be lamenting the lack of sales and gnawing your fingernails over e-books instead of making a profit.
pjd says
Anon 3:23, I think you just provided the ultimate "handcuffed in the desert" illustration.
Publishers look for the next home run. Editors talk to agents and say what they're looking for. Agents who only look for what editors say they want are handcuffed to the corpse. I think most agents are more open minded than that, though.
Robin says
Nathan,
It's posts like this that make me believe that you are a brilliant agent. You have a good read on material and a terrific marketing drive. AND you know how to get people to see what you see.
Great post, thank you.
Nathan Bransford says
anon@3:23-
Well, I agree there should be less trend chasing, but you're making something really complicated sound really simple. Determining what is a "great" book is often easy to spot in retrospect, but would you have been the one to say THE DA VINCI CODE would go on to be on of the bestselling books of all time? TWILIGHT? THE LOVELY BONES?
And there's another irony, which is that trendchasing often pays off. After TWILIGHT, guess what's still going strong: paranormal YA.
Ciara says
maybe i don't get the point but surely if the big authors are the one's getting the big advances then they'd be happy enough to go on royalties instead because obviously they're selling over their advances. and new authors (as an aspiring one myself) should theoretically be happy to go for v. small advance/royalties only too because it makes them less of a risk next time they want to publish?
Anonymous says
Once upon a time, publishers employed readers and literary agents actually read Ms. They made personal assessments of their literary value and publishing/representation decisions accordingly.
Nathan Bransford's Principle #1 appears to be that publishers and agents should think first, second, third and last of the potential market, as a politician might who believes his trade consists solely of pandering to opinion polls.
Did I get this about right?