Joe sez: I'm trying to get some writing done, and I really feel like I've said all there is to say about the publishing industry and going indie. But then several alert readers emailed me to say Hachette created an internal memo to explain to its employees and customers why it’s still relevant.
I was published by Hachette, and for the most part I enjoyed working with them. They're good people and dedicated professionals.
But boy, their memo is a giant bowl of steaming fail. And they dropped the ball when it came to me, too. More on that below.
So I called up my friend Barry Eisler and begged him to convince me to just let it go and not do a blog post about how silly the memo is.
Instead, Barry read the memo and said, come on, we should just fisk this sucker together.
Barry: You knew I would! You sent me a link to the memo because you knew it was so stupid it would draw me in, you bastard.
Joe: I wanted you to talk me down from the ledge, and instead you climbed up there to jump off with me. You're a bad, bad man.
Barry: Sure you wanted me to talk you down. That’s like an addict coming to his dealer for help getting clean!
Joe: All right, regardless, now I'm all in, so let's do this. Hachette's memo is likely indicative of what many major publishers are thinking, so it’s worth examining closely, both for newbies and old pros.
Here's their memo, in italics, and our responses.
"Self-publishing” is a misnomer.
Barry: Whenever someone begins his argument by trying to redefine a popularly understood term, your bullshit detector should start tingling.
Joe: Unless bullshit is also a misnomer.
Publishing requires a complex series of engagements, both behind the scenes and public facing.
Barry: Well, okay, but what business doesn’t doesn’t require a complex series of engagements etc? When someone fills the air with platitudes like this one, it’s fair to ask whether he has anything meaningful to say -- and what he might be trying to conceal.
Digital distribution (which is what most people mean when they say self-publishing) is just one of the components of bringing a book to market and helping the public take notice of it.
Barry: Um, no, that’s not what self-publishing means. Unless Hachette is also a self-publisher? Because they distribute books digitally, too.
In fact, self-publishing has a pretty simple definition: it means you keep the rights to your book and publish it yourself using distributor/retailers like Amazon, Apple, B&N, Kobo, Smashwords, and Sony, typically retaining 70% of the cover price instead of the 17.5% offered by legacy publishers (for digital editions). This isn’t what “most people” mean when they say self-publishing; it’s what everybody means when they say self-publishing. If Hachette really doesn’t know what self-publishing is, its executives are in worse trouble than even their memo reveals.
Joe: Digital distribution is quickly becoming the dominant means of reaching readers. To distribute digitally, you need:
1. Something you've written.
2. Editing and proofreading.
3. Formatting for various platforms.
3. Cover art and jacket copy.
Now, you can cross your fingers and send out queries and hope to find a publisher to assist you with these tasks, in which case they’ll keep 52.5% from the ebook list price (a price they set) and give you 17.5% . Or you can do these things yourself (or hire out) and keep 70% of the list price (a price you set).
But digital distribution is not the only thing a self-publisher does. I also make my books available in paper, and my agent sells subsidiary rights (audio, foreign, film). My agent gets to do that because I keep the rights, rather than licensing them to a publisher.
So what else are publishers doing that justifies them getting three times as much per ebook sale as the author gets?
Let's read on and see.
As a full service publisher, Hachette Book Group offers a wide array of services to authors:
Barry: Again, is there, or has there ever been, a service business that does only one thing? Is this “wide array” claim in any way remarkable, or even relevant to anything? Let’s see...
1. Curator: We find and nurture talent:
Barry: The more accurate way to state this would be, “We try to find talent. Sometimes we miss talent. Sometimes we nurture what we find; sometimes we let it whither. We’re a big publisher -- for us, it’s a numbers game. Think spaghetti sticking to the wall. Some of it sticks; most of it slides down behind the stove.
• We identify authors and books that are going to stand out in the marketplace. HBG discovers new voices, and separates the remarkable from the rest.
Barry: Again, for the sake of accuracy: “We try to identify authors and books we believe we can sell. Sometimes we discover new voices; sometimes we make mistakes.
Joe: Were the authors they dropped or who were allowed to go out of print unremarkable?
If so, I volunteer to be unremarkable so I can get the rights to AFRAID back.
• We act as content collaborator, focused on nurturing writing talent, fostering rich relationships with our authors, providing them with expert editorial advice on their writing, and tackling a huge variety of issues on their behalf.
Barry: There’s a remarkable amount of bullshit in that sentence.
“Content collaborator?” What does that mean? Why is this publisher shying away from plain English?
Shit, you and I are collaborating right now, on this post. ZOMG, that means we’re acting as content collaborators!
Joe: Does that mean you're taking a 52.5% cut?
Barry: Maybe I should, ’cause we know that’s what Content Collaborators do.
Joe: If you take that much, can you at least nurture me a little?
Barry: Hah, right, that “nurturing” claim, and for the second time, too. Sure, sure, me nurture you long time, sailor.
Joe: By "long time" you mean "forever", don't you?
Barry: Yes, of course. I’m a Content Collaborator, after all. That’s very important.
Joe: If you say so. (long, dramatic pause) I'm never going to get my rights back, am I?
Barry: No. But I'll make sure I price your book at $12.99 so sales stay poor.
Joe: Thanks for nurturing me!
Look, if I were to say, "I'm a good parent", that statement needs to be backed up with all the reasons I am a good parent, and all the specific things I do for my children. Or else the statement is empty. Or worse, an affirmation based on ignorance and hope instead of facts.
Barry: Yes, if you can back up a claim with evidence, you should do so. When the evidence isn’t presented, could it be because no evidence exists?
Joe: Now, a bad parent might do a lot of things that could negatively affect the child. Much like a bad publisher can drop authors who are making money, provide poor cover art, make bad editorial suggestions, leave marketing promises unfulfilled, charge too much for ebooks, offer too small a royalty, insist on “windowing” and “the agency model,” mess up distribution, not exploit sub rights they bought, make contracts overly complicated and one-sided, make royalty statements indecipherable, grab erights on old contracts, refuse to return rights to the author, and so on.
Is a publisher engaging in such behavior finding and nurturing talent?
And what if all publishers acted like this?
Hint: they do.
Barry: I love those euphemisms, by the way. “Windowing” means “Making people who like to read in digital wait an extra year because we favor paper.” The “agency model” means “forcing Amazon and other digital retailers to charge customers more for books than the retailer wants to.”
As we’ve argued many times elsewhere, these euphemisms and the practices they’re intended to obscure are aimed at two things: retarding the growth of digital, and preserving the position of paper. A few days ago, in a moment of uncharacteristic candor, a top publishing executive confirmed this:
“‘We hoped that a handsome object [Stephen King’s latest novel, 11/22/63, which BTW is awesome] would slow the migration to e-book for King and, in fact, we are now in our fourth printing,’ said Nan Graham, the senior vice president and editor in chief at Scribner.”
Joe: Right, the purpose of the special effort they put into the packaging wasn’t so much selling more paper as it was slowing the adoption of digital. And if the only way legacy publishers tried to slow digital adoption was by making paper better, it would be great. But instead, they’re doing it primarily by making digital more expensive and by delaying the release of digital titles.
I don't hold out much hope for any company that actively refuses to give its customers what they want.
Barry: Let's go back to the specifics of that bullshit-redolent memo sentence. What does it mean to foster a rich relationship with an author? How is it accomplished? Glittering generalities like this one are usually intended to conceal an absence of underlying substance.
Joe: You and I have a rich relationship.
Barry: We don’t.
Joe: Okay, but that’s only because we don’t charge for these Content Collaborations. If we wrote short stories instead, we could have a rich relationship -- without a legacy publisher!
Barry: We should really do that. I loved your latest with Blake Crouch -- STIRRED.
Joe: Thanks. Blake did all the verbs with that one. If you and I do a story together, you can do the adjectives.
Barry: Excellent!
Joe: Try to come up with some better adjectives than that.
Barry: Now, provision of expert editorial advice -- finally, something real. Yes, publishers do provide editorial services. I can’t speak for other authors, but the three editors I’ve worked with at two publishing hours have all been excellent and I’ve learned a lot from working with them. Whether editorial services are worth the 52.5% publishers charge, however, and whether editorial services can be secured elsewhere at lower cost, are topics worth considering.
Joe: You're being too kind. As I mentioned earlier, 52.5% is three times 17.5%. So unless an editor spent three times as many hours editing your book than you did writing your book, they really don't deserve that much.
Hell, if I had an editor who worked on my book, cleaned my house once a week, gave me sex on demand, and drove me around, that still wouldn't be worth 52.5%.
Barry: Hard to argue with your math. For anyone who’s curious, we talk more about most of these issues in our profoundly offensive book, BE THE MONKEY: A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NEW WORLD OF PUBLISHING. Free download here.
Joe: That book is far too offensive for everyone. If you do read it, I suggest it's with an eye toward objecting to every little thing we said that might offend the sensibilities of some delicate soul, while totally ignoring the major points.
Barry: Finally, let’s consider this claim that publishers tackle a huge variety of issues on behalf of authors. Do I even need to say it?
Joe: Probably not. Glittering generality, devoid of specifics; applicable to every single service industry ever invented, so meaningless with regard to publishing specifically.
Barry: Thanks for that. I hate repeating myself.
Joe: But, to be fair, they do tackle some issues on our behalf. I mean, didn't they create your website?
Barry: No. I did that myself. Well, I hired someone to do it. I don’t know much about website design.
Joe: But they helped you get all those Facebook friends and Twitter followers and blog readers, right?
Barry: That was me.
Joe: They must have paid for you to attend those dozens of conferences over the last nine years.
Barry: That was pretty much all me.
Joe: Certainly they helped you accrue your mailing list of fans?
Barry: Nope. I did it myself, one at a time.
Joe: But they did pay for your tours!
Barry: That they did do.
Joe: And they drove 12,000 miles right along with you, assisting every step of the way while you did signings in over 30 states.
Barry: Uh...no.
Joe: Neither did mine. And BTW, I did signings in over 40 states.
Barry: We're so lucky to have had them as Content Collaborators, though.
Joe: Indeed.
Now let's get specific.
Hachette published my novel AFRAID. They then rejected two subsequent novels of mine. I self-published those novels.
Hachette has earned me $60,000 in two years with AFRAID.
In one year, I earned $170,000 on the two novels they didn't take, all on my own.
Barry: So much for them nurturing talent, fostering rich relationships with authors, and being a content collaborator.
Joe: Their expert editorial advice helped them miss out on a whole lot of money, because they didn't publish TRAPPED and ENDURANCE.
Now I do give them credit for publishing AFRAID when no one else would. My agent had that book on submission for six months before getting that offer. AFRAID was rejected by everyone.
What does that tell you about this industry? A book that went on to earn triple its modest advance was rejected by over a dozen top editors. Then the follow-ups made even more money.
But that was back in 2008. Now I cringe when I think about all the money I'm missing out on because Hachette still has AFRAID. Funny how what was once a blessing can become a curse.
2. Venture Capitalist: We fund the author’s writing process:
• At HBG we invest in ideas.
Barry: I don’t mean to be harsh, but this memo is really beginning to play like a game of Bullshit Bingo. Nurture Relationships... Tackle Issues... Invest In Ideas... Bingo!
Joe: Dammit! They invest in ideas? Why the hell did I bother spending six months writing a book for them? Then six more months promoting it? I should have just given them an idea and let them run with it!
Barry: Here’s an idea they might have invested in: an online bookstore!
Joe: Here's another one: a damn ereader!
Barry: We’re being half-facetious, but the thing is, an online bookstore, and ereaders, and an online lending library -- those are real ideas. And someone certainly is investing in them, big-time. In the face of this, when Hachette plays Bullshit Bingo and bleats, “We invest in ideas!”, you have to wonder... do even the people who wrote this thing believe it? If asked, could they even explain what they’re referring to?
Joe: It's also worth noting that I've been offering free advice to publishers for several years on how to succeed in this new publishing climate. I know they must be reading my blog, because they keep doing the exact opposite of everything I suggest.
Seriously, for an industry to get so much so wrong, it's gotta be intentional.
In the form of advances, we allow authors the time and resources to research and write.
Barry: An advance can definitely be critical in this regard. What would make the claim meaningful would be a breakdown of what advances Hachette provides. They don’t need to name names; they could just provide a chart showing averages. I’ve heard many times that the average legacy advance these days is $5000. If that’s true, it’s a hell of a stretch for Hachette to suggest they’re providing authors enough to research and write. No one can quit her day job for a $5000 advance, 15% of which goes to an agent and the balance of which will be paid out in installments over the course of a year or more.
Once again, you have to wonder why Hachette provides no meaningful data to back up their claims of how relevant they are to authors.
Joe: Averages wouldn't work. They could say their average advance is high because they give James Patterson millions. In reality, the majority of their authors probably need a second job or working spouse to support themselves.
Barry: I didn’t do well in college statistics. Mean, median... that kind of thing.
Joe: I got lucky. They gave me a $20k advance for AFRAID, and I get royalty checks twice a year. That's better than what many authors get.
But with self-publishing I get paid monthly. I'd rather get paid promptly than receive a small advance.
As for investing in ideas, perhaps they should have invested in the two books of mine they rejected...
In addition we invest continuously in infrastructure, tools, and partnerships that make HBG a great publisher partner.
Barry: I know I’m being repetitive, but only because the same logical shortcomings keep cropping up in this memo. So: what are the infrastructure, tools, and partnerships Hachette continuously invests in? How, specifically, do these investments benefit authors?
Joe: Yes, I'm really curious to know about their investment in infrastructure, tools, and partnerships. I don't invest in any of those things, but my ebooks outsell theirs. Perhaps their actual investment is in buzzwords and bad rhetoric.
I'm kind of disappointed they didn't mention synergy.
Barry: Strategic partnerships... Inflection point... Bingo!
3. Sales and Distribution Specialist: We ensure widest possible audience:
• We get our books to the right place, in the right numbers, and at the right time (this applies equally to print and digital editions).
Barry: Is this a memo intended to convince people of Hachette’s continued relevance, or is it some kind of personal empowerment seminar? “Gosh darn it, I’m good enough, and smart enough, and right, right, right enough...”
All the things they claim to do right apply equally in paper and digital? The right place in digital is wherever self-published authors get their books to -- again, generally, Amazon, B&N, and Smashwords. So you don’t really need to pay 52.5% to a Collaboration Partner for that.
The right numbers? Hachette, how many digital copies of a title do you typically upload to a retailer? (Um, that’s a trick question.)
And the right time? The right time is now, because you can’t make money from a book until people can buy it. But legacy publishers don’t publisher digital titles now. They publish them a year later, when the paper version is ready. When Hachette says “the right time,” they mean, “much later than you would on your own.”
We work with retailers and distribution partners to ensure that every book has the opportunity to reach the widest possible readership.
Joe: Hyperion, which published my last Jack Daniels novel, Cherry Bomb, didn't ship a single copy to Borders until the book had been out for two weeks.
I've also done signings my publishers set up where there weren't any of my books for sale. And I'm far from the only author who has had distribution issues.
Still, I can't complain. My publishers have done a pretty good job of getting my paper books into stores. That's the main value they offer.
But they offer no value at all when it comes to getting ebooks onto online retailers. After formatting, it doesn't take more than a few hours to upload an ebook to all the major sellers. Which is one of the things that drove me so crazy about Penguin's Book Country.
Barry: This is such a key point that I’m going to repeat it even though we’ve been saying it elsewhere: in digital distribution, legacy publishers offer no value. Zero. None. A self-published author, working alone, has exactly the same distribution reach in digital as a multi-million-dollar New York publishing conglomerate.
I’m going to say that one more time, because it’s critical to the revolution in publishing and it’s so big and far-reaching it takes a moment to grasp:
A self-published author, working alone, has exactly the same distribution reach in digital as a multi-million-dollar New York publishing conglomerate.
Yes, legacy publishers provide various value-added services, such as editing, marketing, etc -- at least some of the time. But distribution is what authors have until recently really needed from publishers, because without a distribution partner, an author can’t cost-effectively reach a mass audience in paper.
Joe: I'd say they offer negative value. Taking a long time to upload titles, a long time to make changes or fix problems, controlling pricing, doing poor formatting (Hachette did a fine job with AFRAID, but I've gotten scores of email about formatting issues in my Hyperion titles), and not making ebooks available on all platforms in all markets directly hurts sales. High ebook prices do not ensure a book has the widest possible readership. Quite the opposite, in fact.
If a publisher is hurting your digital sales, that's negative value.
Barry: So yes, Hachette is still relevant in the world of paper distribution (yea!). The problem is that paper is shrinking and digital is exploding -- and in digital, the Hachettes of the world have no distribution value to offer. That’s why they’re writing bizarre, obfuscating memos like the one we’re discussing.
By the way, because digital distribution is flat -- equally available to everyone -- digital publishing is increasingly going to be built on direct-to-consumer marketing. As I said in a recent piece at Writer Unboxed:
“In a digital world, the primary value a publisher can offer an author is direct-to-consumer marketing. This is why Amazon is so strongly positioned to succeed in digital publishing: its book business is built on its ability to reach tens or even hundreds of millions of readers directly by email. Amazon marketing is both exceptionally focused (book buyers) and exceptionally broad (tens or even hundreds of millions of customers). Entities that can offer authors compelling direct-to-consumer marketing value will be in a good position to take a cut of the profits. One recent example is the L.A. Times. Think of entities that fit the bill, and you’ll be able to predict tomorrow’s publishers.
“Interestingly, there’s one particular group of companies that lacks any meaningful direct-to-consumer marketing ability. That group is New York publishing. Draw your own conclusions.”
Joe: You're so right about this. As authors, we need to be able to reach readers. In the past, we needed publishers to get our work into bookstores (we also needed bookstores) so readers could buy us.
Today, we can be bought -- both in paper and in digital -- with the press of a button. So if a middleman wants to add value to this equation, they can either create the ereader and the store we sell our titles on (Amazon, Sony, Kobo, Apple, B&N), or they can help us reach a broader audience than we can on our own by giving us marketing advantages.
If the L.A. Times wanted to publish me, I'd give them a percentage of my royalties, because they could advertise the hell out of my book to their existing readership of several million people.
I'd also sign a deal with a TV station who would produce commercials for my book, or a guy who owned 10,000 billboards that he wanted to use to promote it, or Charlie Sheen as long as he mentioned it to the media every time he got arrested.
Distribution was the key to success in paper. Now that we're all getting equal distribution in digital, there’s value to partnering with companies that can help our books get noticed.
What is Hachette doing to help their authors get noticed in a digital world? All their methods and means are paper-based.
• We ensure broad distribution and master supply chain complexity, in both digital and physical formats.
Joe: Ah, distributors. One more middleman taking potential royalties away from the author's share.
I can't wait for a day when books can be printed on demand, so there’s no need for giant warehouses and distributors who take a huge cut.
Or better yet, maybe someday there will be a distribution system where books cost zero to copy and zero to send to readers.
Oh, wait a sec... we already have these things.
Fail.
Barry: I just have to add... again, look at that “master supply chain complexity” sentence. Like so much else in this memo, it’s gobbleygook. Here’s Orwell, in Politics and the English Language:
“The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.”
The irony. Publishers, those richly nurturing Content Collaborators, purveyors of top-flight editorial services, finders of Remarkable New Voices... penning such prolix prose.
Joe: Maybe they forgot to richly nurture the person who wrote the memo.
Barry: They did find a remarkable new voice, though.
Joe: I'd make a joke about being mentally challenged here, but then the Dudgeon Demons would whine about political incorrectitude rather than acknowledge our relevant points.
Barry: Okay, glad you didn’t go there.
And finally, again -- they ensure distribution, and have mastered supply chain complexity... in digital?
Come on. Digital distribution is ubiquitous. It’s available to everyone, and a legacy publisher claiming to supply it is like me trying to sell someone air. And there is no digital supply chain. Claiming otherwise is like pretending uploading a photo on Facebook requires supply chain complexity mastery. It’s just embarrassing bullshit.
Hey Hachette, invite either of us to a conference. We challenge you to debate any of your claims in a public forum of your choosing. If fact, I’m keynoting the Writers Digest Convention in NYC this January; if you like, we could do it there.
Joe: I'll be at the Romantic Times Convention in April leading a discussion about ebooks. Stop by and say hello. Or get in touch sooner, and I'll get you on the panel.
• We function as a new market pioneer, exploring and experimenting with new ideas in every area of our business and investing in those new ideas – even if, in some cases, a positive outcome is not guaranteed (as with apps and enhanced ebooks).
Barry: In case you missed it the first time... they really, really do invest in new ideas! It’s like Double Secret Probation, but better.
I won’t even mention the entirely unsupported glittering generalities. Whoops, I guess I did.
And it’s awesome that they invest even when there is no guarantee of a positive return! That’s so bold and really distinguishes them from everyone else. As everyone knows, most businesses, and all people, only invest when returns are 100% certain. Anything else would be imprudent.
Joe: I am 100% certain you are correct.
Barry: Finally... I’m sorry, I know I’m being a little hard on them, but the claim that Hachette or any legacy publisher is a “pioneer” is so demonstrably absurd as to be laughable. Again, think of the most pioneering changes in publishing -- online bookstores, digital distribution, ereaders, lending library subscription programs -- and ask who pioneered them.
Joe: (Hint. It wasn’t Hachette or any other legacy publisher.)
Barry: The truth is that, to the extent legacy publishers are experimenting with anything, it’s because far more innovative new market entrants are forcing them to.
Joe: All that pioneering, and exploring, and experimenting, and investing. I bet Hachette has a 100% sell-through and a 0% return rate, and that every book they publish turns a handsome profit.
If not -- well, I guess they can pay for their inefficiencies by taking 52.5% and giving authors 17.5%.
• We act as a price and promotion specialist (coordinating 250+ monthly, weekly and daily deals on ebooks at all accounts).
Joe: The AFRAID ebook has been on sale twice in two years. When this happened, sales were up 10x. So, naturally, Grand Central raised it back to $6.99 after a week of lower prices.
The effort it takes to put a book on sale takes no more than a few minutes. I do it myself all the time.
Why don't legacy publishers do it all the time?
Barry: This word “specialist”... I do not think it means what they think it means.
Seriously, where is all the dynamism and innovation in pricing?
Joe: In self-publishing, and at Amazon.
Barry: Exactly. A “sale” in the legacy world means the remainder table in a brick-and-mortar store.
Joe: To more and more authors, paper distribution doesn't matter much anymore. And as a New Market Pioneer, Hachette should price my two-year-old ebook more competitively than $6.99. My ebooks are priced at $2.99, and they've made me more money than any of my legacy books. Value isn't in a book's cover price, but rather how much money the book earns overall.
With plummeting paper sales, and vastly increasing ebook sales, Hachette does very little to deserve the royalties they're taking.
4. Brand Builder and Copyright Watchdog: We build author brands and protect their intellectual property:
Barry: In my experience, publishers know almost nothing about building a brand. If they did, they would brand themselves. Listening to a publisher hawk its brand-building cred is like listening to the proverbial 98-pound weakling tout his awesome strength-training program.
Joe: I gotta disagree with you here. I don't care about authors, or individual titles, or even genre. But I do buy and read every single book Grand Central publishes, because I am sooooo brand loyal. It's all about the logo on the spine. That's why so many fans stopped reading Lee Child when he switched houses. Stephen King, too. Betcha Janet Evanovich’s readership deserts her, now that she’s left SMP.
Barry: You’re right. I’m being unfair. Why, just the other day I was in a Barnes & Noble, asking if they could direct me to the latest Random House title.
Joe: I'll read anything Random House publishes! They published you, so everything else they publish must also be perfect for me! Brand brand brand!
Barry: Okay, maybe we’re wrong. Maybe legacy publishers really are expert brand-builders.
Joe: Sure. Hachette really helped me build my brand, dropping me after one title.
I personally visited 200 bookstores in 19 states to promote AFRAID.
Hachette took out a small one-off ad in USA Today.
I did a blog tour, posting new content on 100 blogs in 30 days.
Hachette sent out some galleys.
I sent out a newsletter to 10,000 people on my mailing list.
Does Hachette even have a mailing list?
• We protect authors’ intellectual property through strict anti-piracy measures and territorial controls.
Barry: Let’s translate this. “We protect authors’ (and by authors’ we mean our) intellectual property” is code for “we insist on DRM and other anti-piracy measures that customers hate, that are ineffective against piracy, and that diminish author profits.” “Territorial controls” means “Your book will not be available in many markets where people would like to buy it.”
Joe: Congrats that Hachette learned from the RIAA and the woes of the music industry, and has figured out that DRM doesn't work and piracy doesn't hurt sales.
Oh, wait a second. They HAVEN'T figured that out.
I'm widely pirated, and I currently earn enough money via self-publishing to be in the top 1% tax bracket of the US. Compare that to the eight years I spent in the legacy publishing world, making $40k a year and spending half of that on self-promotion.
• Publishers generate and spread excitement, always looking for new ways make our authors and their books stand out. We’re able to connect books with readers in a meaningful way.
Barry: When I first read that initial clause, I thought it said, “Publishers generate and spread excrement.”
Joe: Ha! That would have been a shitty thing to say.
Barry: I’m sure that reveals my biases. But -- let’s be honest -- it’s a more credible claim than “Publishers generate excitement.” If I’m missing something, maybe readers could tell us about the last time their excitement was generated by a publisher.
Joe: How about this one? And guess what? The Kindle edition is priced higher than the hardcover. :P
Barry: Okay, an excitement exception. :D
But seriously, could a “We are relevant!” memo get any more meaningless, over-general, and aspirational than this? “We don’t just connect books with readers -- we do it in a meaningful way.”
I mean, for realz this time! We’re meaningful, damn it!
Joe: From now on, my job will be to remind people what my job is.
Now hold still while I spread excitement.
Barry: It’s all part of the nurturing.
Oh, and by the way, legacy publishers don’t connect books with readers, and in fact this structural deficit is essential to the increasing irrelevance Hachette is protesting against. Publishers connect books with intermediaries.
Joe: And now those intermediaries, like Amazon, can directly reach and target readers.
Is it any wonder we can sell so many more books with Amazon as our publisher?
Barry: You know, I’m starting to wonder if someone wrote this to play a joke on us, to see if we could be fooled into taking it seriously and responding. It’s not April Fool’s Day, is it?
Joe: Don't use the word fool. You might offend someone.
Barry: For God’s sake, Dudgeon Demons, do not watch this extremely offensive Carlos Mencia skit!
Joe: I'm only picking on Hachette here because they wrote that silly memo, and because I have personal experience with them. I discuss book deals with my peers. Hachette actually did a lot more for my book than most publishers do, and I appreciate their efforts.
But I've never relied on publishers to promote my books because publishers actually do very little promotion. A press release and catalog inclusion aren't worth the 52.5% royalties they take.
By contrast, I signed a deal with Amazon's imprint Thomas & Mercer for STIRRED, my latest novel, co-written with Blake Crouch.
Barry: Didn’t you just hit #1 on the Kindle Top 100?
Joe. Yes, and thanks for the shill. STIRRED has sold more ebooks in two weeks than Hachette has sold of AFRAID in thirty-two months. And Amazon pays me a much better royalty than Hachette did.
Not to put you on the spot here, but I know you signed a decent six-figure deal for RAIN FALL, your first John Rain thriller. It's had, what, a dozen printings since 2002?
Barry: It's up to fifteen or sixteen.
Joe: So you must have earned out that advance a long time ago, right?
Barry: Not yet. But close now. To the extent I could decipher Putnam’s royalty statements. I’m thinking about calling in a Dead Sea Scrolls specialist.
Joe: You also got a comparable six-figure advance for THE DETACHMENT, which you released through the Amazon imprint Thomas & Mercer.
Barry: Yes. We've discussed the deal before.
Joe: Do you think you'll be able to earn out that advance faster than the one for RAIN FALL?
Barry: THE DETACHMENT has already earned out.
Joe: Holy shit! What’s that, two months from the pub date?
Barry: Something like that. I wasn’t supposed to say anything, but my wife didn’t know it was under wraps and inadvertently mentioned it at a conference, so I guess it’s public domain now.
Joe: Congrats! When THE DETACHMENT was in the Top 10 on the Kindle Bestseller List, it was really buoying your backlist sales. Hopefully RAIN FALL will earn out soon...
• We offer marketing and publicity expertise, presenting a book to the marketplace in exactly the right way, and ensuring that intelligence, creativity, and business acumen inform our strategy.
Joe: Well, it's certainly reassuring that their strategy isn't informed by laziness, bad ideas, stupidity, and a profound ignorance about how their business works.
Barry: Seriously, when someone claims to be or to do something the opposite of which would be unthinkable, you are being bullshitted. The only question is, does Hachette know they’re bullshitting? Or do they really believe it’s remarkable that their strategy is supposedly informed by intelligence instead of stupidity, creativity rather than dullness, and business acumen rather than business ineptitude?
And come on, presenting a book to the marketplace in exactly the right way? There are so many examples of legacy publishing marketing disasters it’s hard to know where to begin. So why don’t I just point to: The Green Garage Door (viewer discretion advised).
Joe: I gotta say, with so many books losing money, so many authors being dropped, so many titles going out of print, perhaps expertise isn't quite the right word.
Barry: No, maybe something more along the line of... Whistling Past The Graveyard? Or Hoping Against Hope?
Joe: Publishers should stop trying to convince themselves and others that they're relevant, and start actually being relevant. Here's how:
1. Offer much better royalties to authors.
2. Release titles faster. It can take 18 months after a book is turned in to be published. I can do it myself in a week.
3. Use up-to-date accounting methods that are trackable by the author, and pay royalties monthly.
4. Lower ebook prices.
5. Stop futilely fighting piracy. Hint: all such fighting is futile. Piracy can only be made redundant with cost and convenience.
6. Start marketing effectively. Ads and catalogue copy aren't enough. Neither is your imprint's Twitter feed. Especially if your author has more Twitter followers than you do.
Did I miss anything?
Barry: Legacy publishing’s contracts are a disaster. Substantively, they should reflect 21st-Century realities, among those realities the fact that for the first time, authors have real alternatives to the legacy route. So absolutely, the ridiculous current 52.5%-publisher and 17.5%-author digital split needs to be massively adjusted. Again, in a digital world, publishers are unnecessary for distribution, and the fact that they’re still trying to charge for a benefit they no longer provide is an untenable state of affairs.
They also need to stop with the crazy land grabs -- the first looks, the last refusals, the character and series and “anything remotely competitive” lock-ups and other non-compete clauses.
On a less substantive level, they need to make their contracts readable and understandable. Why do publishers still use antediluvian 14-inch legal paper for their contracts and 9-point font? Because it’s off-putting. It discourages anyone from reading or arguing about the contents. Why do they use such monumentally opaque and impenetrable legalese? Because they don’t want people to understand what the contract is doing -- what rights are being forfeited and what obligations imposed.
If there’s one thing I wish Amazon would do differently, it’s use their publishing contract as a sales tool. It’s the best I’ve ever seen -- clear, short, and understandable (just like their every-60-days royalty statements, in fact), and if they’d be more aggressive about publicizing how remarkably clear and fair their contract is, it would put some pressure on legacy publishers -- sorry, on Experimenting, Excitement-Generating Pioneers -- to follow suit.
Joe: I've been telling publishers how to improve since 2009, and not one has listened.
Except for Amazon. Amazon listens. Amazon listens closely.
That's why Amazon doesn't need to create silly internal memos about how they're still relevant.
Barry: Seriously, can you imagine Amazon putting out a memo like that? “We are still relevant” is not a good sign for Hachette, or for legacy publishing generally. It’s like when the government says, “The war is still winnable.” Surest sign it’s lost.
Joe: Yeah, hard to imagine a memo like this one from Amazon. Because every book Amazon has published actually makes a profit.
Barry: I want to say one last thing, about our tone.
Joe: Okay.
Barry: We’re pretty disrespectful here toward Hachette, aren’t we?
Joe: Yes. But not unfairly.
Barry: Exactly. Not unfairly. A lot of people get uncomfortable when small-fry like us criticize big, august institutions like Hachette. Up to a point, I understand that reflex, but I don’t share it.
Joe: This dialog could anger or hurt people who work at Hachette, or authors with Hachette. In fact, it could anger or hurt anyone working for legacy publishers.
But instead of getting hurt or angry, how about figuring out how to fix your broken business model?
This is a business. Business isn't personal.
At least, that's what my agent said when my last two publishers dropped me. Two publishers who are making money off my backlist hand-over-fist.
Barry: For me, respect isn’t something to which anyone is entitled (courtesy is different); it’s something that has to be earned. And when someone -- anyone -- writes a memo as weak, unsupported, and full of obvious bullshit as Hachette’s, there’s nothing wrong with, and indeed there’s everything right with, calling them on it.
Joe: Ultimately, I decided to spend some time doing this fisk because I see too many authors still crossing their fingers, holding out for legacy deals.
Seriously? You really want to work with a company that does stuff like this?
Barry: Was our tone sometimes derisive and mocking and otherwise harsh? Yes. Was that deserved? Again, yes.
Joe: Didn’t you just get into it with the Pentagon’s spokesperson?
Barry: Yeah, I wrote a blog criticizing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta for being full of shit -- which he is -- and his spokesman responded with the usual, “Why do you hate the troops?” dodge. If anyone’s curious, you can read about it here. But yes, there are a lot of people who believe individuals have to defer to authority, including being terribly civil even while the authority in question pisses down your back and assures you it’s just raining. I’m not one of those people. If someone tries to bullshit me, I think it’s a public service to call bullshit and explain why.
Joe: You're anti-American and unappreciative of the opportunities this country has given you. You're also anti-legacy publishing and unappreciative of the opportunities the Big 6 have given you.
Barry: Hah. You see right through me.
Joe: But at least we've both managed to avoid any incendiary analogies this dialog. Good thing, too. I was getting really tired of dealing with overreacting, hypersensitive pinheads.
I was published by Hachette, and for the most part I enjoyed working with them. They're good people and dedicated professionals.
But boy, their memo is a giant bowl of steaming fail. And they dropped the ball when it came to me, too. More on that below.
So I called up my friend Barry Eisler and begged him to convince me to just let it go and not do a blog post about how silly the memo is.
Instead, Barry read the memo and said, come on, we should just fisk this sucker together.
Barry: You knew I would! You sent me a link to the memo because you knew it was so stupid it would draw me in, you bastard.
Joe: I wanted you to talk me down from the ledge, and instead you climbed up there to jump off with me. You're a bad, bad man.
Barry: Sure you wanted me to talk you down. That’s like an addict coming to his dealer for help getting clean!
Joe: All right, regardless, now I'm all in, so let's do this. Hachette's memo is likely indicative of what many major publishers are thinking, so it’s worth examining closely, both for newbies and old pros.
Here's their memo, in italics, and our responses.
"Self-publishing” is a misnomer.
Barry: Whenever someone begins his argument by trying to redefine a popularly understood term, your bullshit detector should start tingling.
Joe: Unless bullshit is also a misnomer.
Publishing requires a complex series of engagements, both behind the scenes and public facing.
Barry: Well, okay, but what business doesn’t doesn’t require a complex series of engagements etc? When someone fills the air with platitudes like this one, it’s fair to ask whether he has anything meaningful to say -- and what he might be trying to conceal.
Digital distribution (which is what most people mean when they say self-publishing) is just one of the components of bringing a book to market and helping the public take notice of it.
Barry: Um, no, that’s not what self-publishing means. Unless Hachette is also a self-publisher? Because they distribute books digitally, too.
In fact, self-publishing has a pretty simple definition: it means you keep the rights to your book and publish it yourself using distributor/retailers like Amazon, Apple, B&N, Kobo, Smashwords, and Sony, typically retaining 70% of the cover price instead of the 17.5% offered by legacy publishers (for digital editions). This isn’t what “most people” mean when they say self-publishing; it’s what everybody means when they say self-publishing. If Hachette really doesn’t know what self-publishing is, its executives are in worse trouble than even their memo reveals.
Joe: Digital distribution is quickly becoming the dominant means of reaching readers. To distribute digitally, you need:
1. Something you've written.
2. Editing and proofreading.
3. Formatting for various platforms.
3. Cover art and jacket copy.
Now, you can cross your fingers and send out queries and hope to find a publisher to assist you with these tasks, in which case they’ll keep 52.5% from the ebook list price (a price they set) and give you 17.5% . Or you can do these things yourself (or hire out) and keep 70% of the list price (a price you set).
But digital distribution is not the only thing a self-publisher does. I also make my books available in paper, and my agent sells subsidiary rights (audio, foreign, film). My agent gets to do that because I keep the rights, rather than licensing them to a publisher.
So what else are publishers doing that justifies them getting three times as much per ebook sale as the author gets?
Let's read on and see.
As a full service publisher, Hachette Book Group offers a wide array of services to authors:
Barry: Again, is there, or has there ever been, a service business that does only one thing? Is this “wide array” claim in any way remarkable, or even relevant to anything? Let’s see...
1. Curator: We find and nurture talent:
Barry: The more accurate way to state this would be, “We try to find talent. Sometimes we miss talent. Sometimes we nurture what we find; sometimes we let it whither. We’re a big publisher -- for us, it’s a numbers game. Think spaghetti sticking to the wall. Some of it sticks; most of it slides down behind the stove.
• We identify authors and books that are going to stand out in the marketplace. HBG discovers new voices, and separates the remarkable from the rest.
Barry: Again, for the sake of accuracy: “We try to identify authors and books we believe we can sell. Sometimes we discover new voices; sometimes we make mistakes.
Joe: Were the authors they dropped or who were allowed to go out of print unremarkable?
If so, I volunteer to be unremarkable so I can get the rights to AFRAID back.
• We act as content collaborator, focused on nurturing writing talent, fostering rich relationships with our authors, providing them with expert editorial advice on their writing, and tackling a huge variety of issues on their behalf.
Barry: There’s a remarkable amount of bullshit in that sentence.
“Content collaborator?” What does that mean? Why is this publisher shying away from plain English?
Shit, you and I are collaborating right now, on this post. ZOMG, that means we’re acting as content collaborators!
Joe: Does that mean you're taking a 52.5% cut?
Barry: Maybe I should, ’cause we know that’s what Content Collaborators do.
Joe: If you take that much, can you at least nurture me a little?
Barry: Hah, right, that “nurturing” claim, and for the second time, too. Sure, sure, me nurture you long time, sailor.
Joe: By "long time" you mean "forever", don't you?
Barry: Yes, of course. I’m a Content Collaborator, after all. That’s very important.
Joe: If you say so. (long, dramatic pause) I'm never going to get my rights back, am I?
Barry: No. But I'll make sure I price your book at $12.99 so sales stay poor.
Joe: Thanks for nurturing me!
Look, if I were to say, "I'm a good parent", that statement needs to be backed up with all the reasons I am a good parent, and all the specific things I do for my children. Or else the statement is empty. Or worse, an affirmation based on ignorance and hope instead of facts.
Barry: Yes, if you can back up a claim with evidence, you should do so. When the evidence isn’t presented, could it be because no evidence exists?
Joe: Now, a bad parent might do a lot of things that could negatively affect the child. Much like a bad publisher can drop authors who are making money, provide poor cover art, make bad editorial suggestions, leave marketing promises unfulfilled, charge too much for ebooks, offer too small a royalty, insist on “windowing” and “the agency model,” mess up distribution, not exploit sub rights they bought, make contracts overly complicated and one-sided, make royalty statements indecipherable, grab erights on old contracts, refuse to return rights to the author, and so on.
Is a publisher engaging in such behavior finding and nurturing talent?
And what if all publishers acted like this?
Hint: they do.
Barry: I love those euphemisms, by the way. “Windowing” means “Making people who like to read in digital wait an extra year because we favor paper.” The “agency model” means “forcing Amazon and other digital retailers to charge customers more for books than the retailer wants to.”
As we’ve argued many times elsewhere, these euphemisms and the practices they’re intended to obscure are aimed at two things: retarding the growth of digital, and preserving the position of paper. A few days ago, in a moment of uncharacteristic candor, a top publishing executive confirmed this:
“‘We hoped that a handsome object [Stephen King’s latest novel, 11/22/63, which BTW is awesome] would slow the migration to e-book for King and, in fact, we are now in our fourth printing,’ said Nan Graham, the senior vice president and editor in chief at Scribner.”
Joe: Right, the purpose of the special effort they put into the packaging wasn’t so much selling more paper as it was slowing the adoption of digital. And if the only way legacy publishers tried to slow digital adoption was by making paper better, it would be great. But instead, they’re doing it primarily by making digital more expensive and by delaying the release of digital titles.
I don't hold out much hope for any company that actively refuses to give its customers what they want.
Barry: Let's go back to the specifics of that bullshit-redolent memo sentence. What does it mean to foster a rich relationship with an author? How is it accomplished? Glittering generalities like this one are usually intended to conceal an absence of underlying substance.
Joe: You and I have a rich relationship.
Barry: We don’t.
Joe: Okay, but that’s only because we don’t charge for these Content Collaborations. If we wrote short stories instead, we could have a rich relationship -- without a legacy publisher!
Barry: We should really do that. I loved your latest with Blake Crouch -- STIRRED.
Joe: Thanks. Blake did all the verbs with that one. If you and I do a story together, you can do the adjectives.
Barry: Excellent!
Joe: Try to come up with some better adjectives than that.
Barry: Now, provision of expert editorial advice -- finally, something real. Yes, publishers do provide editorial services. I can’t speak for other authors, but the three editors I’ve worked with at two publishing hours have all been excellent and I’ve learned a lot from working with them. Whether editorial services are worth the 52.5% publishers charge, however, and whether editorial services can be secured elsewhere at lower cost, are topics worth considering.
Joe: You're being too kind. As I mentioned earlier, 52.5% is three times 17.5%. So unless an editor spent three times as many hours editing your book than you did writing your book, they really don't deserve that much.
Hell, if I had an editor who worked on my book, cleaned my house once a week, gave me sex on demand, and drove me around, that still wouldn't be worth 52.5%.
Barry: Hard to argue with your math. For anyone who’s curious, we talk more about most of these issues in our profoundly offensive book, BE THE MONKEY: A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE NEW WORLD OF PUBLISHING. Free download here.
Joe: That book is far too offensive for everyone. If you do read it, I suggest it's with an eye toward objecting to every little thing we said that might offend the sensibilities of some delicate soul, while totally ignoring the major points.
Barry: Finally, let’s consider this claim that publishers tackle a huge variety of issues on behalf of authors. Do I even need to say it?
Joe: Probably not. Glittering generality, devoid of specifics; applicable to every single service industry ever invented, so meaningless with regard to publishing specifically.
Barry: Thanks for that. I hate repeating myself.
Joe: But, to be fair, they do tackle some issues on our behalf. I mean, didn't they create your website?
Barry: No. I did that myself. Well, I hired someone to do it. I don’t know much about website design.
Joe: But they helped you get all those Facebook friends and Twitter followers and blog readers, right?
Barry: That was me.
Joe: They must have paid for you to attend those dozens of conferences over the last nine years.
Barry: That was pretty much all me.
Joe: Certainly they helped you accrue your mailing list of fans?
Barry: Nope. I did it myself, one at a time.
Joe: But they did pay for your tours!
Barry: That they did do.
Joe: And they drove 12,000 miles right along with you, assisting every step of the way while you did signings in over 30 states.
Barry: Uh...no.
Joe: Neither did mine. And BTW, I did signings in over 40 states.
Barry: We're so lucky to have had them as Content Collaborators, though.
Joe: Indeed.
Now let's get specific.
Hachette published my novel AFRAID. They then rejected two subsequent novels of mine. I self-published those novels.
Hachette has earned me $60,000 in two years with AFRAID.
In one year, I earned $170,000 on the two novels they didn't take, all on my own.
Barry: So much for them nurturing talent, fostering rich relationships with authors, and being a content collaborator.
Joe: Their expert editorial advice helped them miss out on a whole lot of money, because they didn't publish TRAPPED and ENDURANCE.
Now I do give them credit for publishing AFRAID when no one else would. My agent had that book on submission for six months before getting that offer. AFRAID was rejected by everyone.
What does that tell you about this industry? A book that went on to earn triple its modest advance was rejected by over a dozen top editors. Then the follow-ups made even more money.
But that was back in 2008. Now I cringe when I think about all the money I'm missing out on because Hachette still has AFRAID. Funny how what was once a blessing can become a curse.
2. Venture Capitalist: We fund the author’s writing process:
• At HBG we invest in ideas.
Barry: I don’t mean to be harsh, but this memo is really beginning to play like a game of Bullshit Bingo. Nurture Relationships... Tackle Issues... Invest In Ideas... Bingo!
Joe: Dammit! They invest in ideas? Why the hell did I bother spending six months writing a book for them? Then six more months promoting it? I should have just given them an idea and let them run with it!
Barry: Here’s an idea they might have invested in: an online bookstore!
Joe: Here's another one: a damn ereader!
Barry: We’re being half-facetious, but the thing is, an online bookstore, and ereaders, and an online lending library -- those are real ideas. And someone certainly is investing in them, big-time. In the face of this, when Hachette plays Bullshit Bingo and bleats, “We invest in ideas!”, you have to wonder... do even the people who wrote this thing believe it? If asked, could they even explain what they’re referring to?
Joe: It's also worth noting that I've been offering free advice to publishers for several years on how to succeed in this new publishing climate. I know they must be reading my blog, because they keep doing the exact opposite of everything I suggest.
Seriously, for an industry to get so much so wrong, it's gotta be intentional.
In the form of advances, we allow authors the time and resources to research and write.
Barry: An advance can definitely be critical in this regard. What would make the claim meaningful would be a breakdown of what advances Hachette provides. They don’t need to name names; they could just provide a chart showing averages. I’ve heard many times that the average legacy advance these days is $5000. If that’s true, it’s a hell of a stretch for Hachette to suggest they’re providing authors enough to research and write. No one can quit her day job for a $5000 advance, 15% of which goes to an agent and the balance of which will be paid out in installments over the course of a year or more.
Once again, you have to wonder why Hachette provides no meaningful data to back up their claims of how relevant they are to authors.
Joe: Averages wouldn't work. They could say their average advance is high because they give James Patterson millions. In reality, the majority of their authors probably need a second job or working spouse to support themselves.
Barry: I didn’t do well in college statistics. Mean, median... that kind of thing.
Joe: I got lucky. They gave me a $20k advance for AFRAID, and I get royalty checks twice a year. That's better than what many authors get.
But with self-publishing I get paid monthly. I'd rather get paid promptly than receive a small advance.
As for investing in ideas, perhaps they should have invested in the two books of mine they rejected...
In addition we invest continuously in infrastructure, tools, and partnerships that make HBG a great publisher partner.
Barry: I know I’m being repetitive, but only because the same logical shortcomings keep cropping up in this memo. So: what are the infrastructure, tools, and partnerships Hachette continuously invests in? How, specifically, do these investments benefit authors?
Joe: Yes, I'm really curious to know about their investment in infrastructure, tools, and partnerships. I don't invest in any of those things, but my ebooks outsell theirs. Perhaps their actual investment is in buzzwords and bad rhetoric.
I'm kind of disappointed they didn't mention synergy.
Barry: Strategic partnerships... Inflection point... Bingo!
3. Sales and Distribution Specialist: We ensure widest possible audience:
• We get our books to the right place, in the right numbers, and at the right time (this applies equally to print and digital editions).
Barry: Is this a memo intended to convince people of Hachette’s continued relevance, or is it some kind of personal empowerment seminar? “Gosh darn it, I’m good enough, and smart enough, and right, right, right enough...”
All the things they claim to do right apply equally in paper and digital? The right place in digital is wherever self-published authors get their books to -- again, generally, Amazon, B&N, and Smashwords. So you don’t really need to pay 52.5% to a Collaboration Partner for that.
The right numbers? Hachette, how many digital copies of a title do you typically upload to a retailer? (Um, that’s a trick question.)
And the right time? The right time is now, because you can’t make money from a book until people can buy it. But legacy publishers don’t publisher digital titles now. They publish them a year later, when the paper version is ready. When Hachette says “the right time,” they mean, “much later than you would on your own.”
We work with retailers and distribution partners to ensure that every book has the opportunity to reach the widest possible readership.
Joe: Hyperion, which published my last Jack Daniels novel, Cherry Bomb, didn't ship a single copy to Borders until the book had been out for two weeks.
I've also done signings my publishers set up where there weren't any of my books for sale. And I'm far from the only author who has had distribution issues.
Still, I can't complain. My publishers have done a pretty good job of getting my paper books into stores. That's the main value they offer.
But they offer no value at all when it comes to getting ebooks onto online retailers. After formatting, it doesn't take more than a few hours to upload an ebook to all the major sellers. Which is one of the things that drove me so crazy about Penguin's Book Country.
Barry: This is such a key point that I’m going to repeat it even though we’ve been saying it elsewhere: in digital distribution, legacy publishers offer no value. Zero. None. A self-published author, working alone, has exactly the same distribution reach in digital as a multi-million-dollar New York publishing conglomerate.
I’m going to say that one more time, because it’s critical to the revolution in publishing and it’s so big and far-reaching it takes a moment to grasp:
A self-published author, working alone, has exactly the same distribution reach in digital as a multi-million-dollar New York publishing conglomerate.
Yes, legacy publishers provide various value-added services, such as editing, marketing, etc -- at least some of the time. But distribution is what authors have until recently really needed from publishers, because without a distribution partner, an author can’t cost-effectively reach a mass audience in paper.
Joe: I'd say they offer negative value. Taking a long time to upload titles, a long time to make changes or fix problems, controlling pricing, doing poor formatting (Hachette did a fine job with AFRAID, but I've gotten scores of email about formatting issues in my Hyperion titles), and not making ebooks available on all platforms in all markets directly hurts sales. High ebook prices do not ensure a book has the widest possible readership. Quite the opposite, in fact.
If a publisher is hurting your digital sales, that's negative value.
Barry: So yes, Hachette is still relevant in the world of paper distribution (yea!). The problem is that paper is shrinking and digital is exploding -- and in digital, the Hachettes of the world have no distribution value to offer. That’s why they’re writing bizarre, obfuscating memos like the one we’re discussing.
By the way, because digital distribution is flat -- equally available to everyone -- digital publishing is increasingly going to be built on direct-to-consumer marketing. As I said in a recent piece at Writer Unboxed:
“In a digital world, the primary value a publisher can offer an author is direct-to-consumer marketing. This is why Amazon is so strongly positioned to succeed in digital publishing: its book business is built on its ability to reach tens or even hundreds of millions of readers directly by email. Amazon marketing is both exceptionally focused (book buyers) and exceptionally broad (tens or even hundreds of millions of customers). Entities that can offer authors compelling direct-to-consumer marketing value will be in a good position to take a cut of the profits. One recent example is the L.A. Times. Think of entities that fit the bill, and you’ll be able to predict tomorrow’s publishers.
“Interestingly, there’s one particular group of companies that lacks any meaningful direct-to-consumer marketing ability. That group is New York publishing. Draw your own conclusions.”
Joe: You're so right about this. As authors, we need to be able to reach readers. In the past, we needed publishers to get our work into bookstores (we also needed bookstores) so readers could buy us.
Today, we can be bought -- both in paper and in digital -- with the press of a button. So if a middleman wants to add value to this equation, they can either create the ereader and the store we sell our titles on (Amazon, Sony, Kobo, Apple, B&N), or they can help us reach a broader audience than we can on our own by giving us marketing advantages.
If the L.A. Times wanted to publish me, I'd give them a percentage of my royalties, because they could advertise the hell out of my book to their existing readership of several million people.
I'd also sign a deal with a TV station who would produce commercials for my book, or a guy who owned 10,000 billboards that he wanted to use to promote it, or Charlie Sheen as long as he mentioned it to the media every time he got arrested.
Distribution was the key to success in paper. Now that we're all getting equal distribution in digital, there’s value to partnering with companies that can help our books get noticed.
What is Hachette doing to help their authors get noticed in a digital world? All their methods and means are paper-based.
• We ensure broad distribution and master supply chain complexity, in both digital and physical formats.
Joe: Ah, distributors. One more middleman taking potential royalties away from the author's share.
I can't wait for a day when books can be printed on demand, so there’s no need for giant warehouses and distributors who take a huge cut.
Or better yet, maybe someday there will be a distribution system where books cost zero to copy and zero to send to readers.
Oh, wait a sec... we already have these things.
Fail.
Barry: I just have to add... again, look at that “master supply chain complexity” sentence. Like so much else in this memo, it’s gobbleygook. Here’s Orwell, in Politics and the English Language:
“The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.”
The irony. Publishers, those richly nurturing Content Collaborators, purveyors of top-flight editorial services, finders of Remarkable New Voices... penning such prolix prose.
Joe: Maybe they forgot to richly nurture the person who wrote the memo.
Barry: They did find a remarkable new voice, though.
Joe: I'd make a joke about being mentally challenged here, but then the Dudgeon Demons would whine about political incorrectitude rather than acknowledge our relevant points.
Barry: Okay, glad you didn’t go there.
| Jokes.com | ||||
| Carlos Mencia - Special Treatment | ||||
| ||||
And finally, again -- they ensure distribution, and have mastered supply chain complexity... in digital?
Come on. Digital distribution is ubiquitous. It’s available to everyone, and a legacy publisher claiming to supply it is like me trying to sell someone air. And there is no digital supply chain. Claiming otherwise is like pretending uploading a photo on Facebook requires supply chain complexity mastery. It’s just embarrassing bullshit.
Hey Hachette, invite either of us to a conference. We challenge you to debate any of your claims in a public forum of your choosing. If fact, I’m keynoting the Writers Digest Convention in NYC this January; if you like, we could do it there.
Joe: I'll be at the Romantic Times Convention in April leading a discussion about ebooks. Stop by and say hello. Or get in touch sooner, and I'll get you on the panel.
• We function as a new market pioneer, exploring and experimenting with new ideas in every area of our business and investing in those new ideas – even if, in some cases, a positive outcome is not guaranteed (as with apps and enhanced ebooks).
Barry: In case you missed it the first time... they really, really do invest in new ideas! It’s like Double Secret Probation, but better.
I won’t even mention the entirely unsupported glittering generalities. Whoops, I guess I did.
And it’s awesome that they invest even when there is no guarantee of a positive return! That’s so bold and really distinguishes them from everyone else. As everyone knows, most businesses, and all people, only invest when returns are 100% certain. Anything else would be imprudent.
Joe: I am 100% certain you are correct.
Barry: Finally... I’m sorry, I know I’m being a little hard on them, but the claim that Hachette or any legacy publisher is a “pioneer” is so demonstrably absurd as to be laughable. Again, think of the most pioneering changes in publishing -- online bookstores, digital distribution, ereaders, lending library subscription programs -- and ask who pioneered them.
Joe: (Hint. It wasn’t Hachette or any other legacy publisher.)
Barry: The truth is that, to the extent legacy publishers are experimenting with anything, it’s because far more innovative new market entrants are forcing them to.
Joe: All that pioneering, and exploring, and experimenting, and investing. I bet Hachette has a 100% sell-through and a 0% return rate, and that every book they publish turns a handsome profit.
If not -- well, I guess they can pay for their inefficiencies by taking 52.5% and giving authors 17.5%.
• We act as a price and promotion specialist (coordinating 250+ monthly, weekly and daily deals on ebooks at all accounts).
Joe: The AFRAID ebook has been on sale twice in two years. When this happened, sales were up 10x. So, naturally, Grand Central raised it back to $6.99 after a week of lower prices.
The effort it takes to put a book on sale takes no more than a few minutes. I do it myself all the time.
Why don't legacy publishers do it all the time?
Barry: This word “specialist”... I do not think it means what they think it means.
Seriously, where is all the dynamism and innovation in pricing?
Joe: In self-publishing, and at Amazon.
Barry: Exactly. A “sale” in the legacy world means the remainder table in a brick-and-mortar store.
Joe: To more and more authors, paper distribution doesn't matter much anymore. And as a New Market Pioneer, Hachette should price my two-year-old ebook more competitively than $6.99. My ebooks are priced at $2.99, and they've made me more money than any of my legacy books. Value isn't in a book's cover price, but rather how much money the book earns overall.
With plummeting paper sales, and vastly increasing ebook sales, Hachette does very little to deserve the royalties they're taking.
4. Brand Builder and Copyright Watchdog: We build author brands and protect their intellectual property:
Barry: In my experience, publishers know almost nothing about building a brand. If they did, they would brand themselves. Listening to a publisher hawk its brand-building cred is like listening to the proverbial 98-pound weakling tout his awesome strength-training program.
Joe: I gotta disagree with you here. I don't care about authors, or individual titles, or even genre. But I do buy and read every single book Grand Central publishes, because I am sooooo brand loyal. It's all about the logo on the spine. That's why so many fans stopped reading Lee Child when he switched houses. Stephen King, too. Betcha Janet Evanovich’s readership deserts her, now that she’s left SMP.
Barry: You’re right. I’m being unfair. Why, just the other day I was in a Barnes & Noble, asking if they could direct me to the latest Random House title.
Joe: I'll read anything Random House publishes! They published you, so everything else they publish must also be perfect for me! Brand brand brand!
Barry: Okay, maybe we’re wrong. Maybe legacy publishers really are expert brand-builders.
Joe: Sure. Hachette really helped me build my brand, dropping me after one title.
I personally visited 200 bookstores in 19 states to promote AFRAID.
Hachette took out a small one-off ad in USA Today.
I did a blog tour, posting new content on 100 blogs in 30 days.
Hachette sent out some galleys.
I sent out a newsletter to 10,000 people on my mailing list.
Does Hachette even have a mailing list?
• We protect authors’ intellectual property through strict anti-piracy measures and territorial controls.
Barry: Let’s translate this. “We protect authors’ (and by authors’ we mean our) intellectual property” is code for “we insist on DRM and other anti-piracy measures that customers hate, that are ineffective against piracy, and that diminish author profits.” “Territorial controls” means “Your book will not be available in many markets where people would like to buy it.”
Joe: Congrats that Hachette learned from the RIAA and the woes of the music industry, and has figured out that DRM doesn't work and piracy doesn't hurt sales.
Oh, wait a second. They HAVEN'T figured that out.
I'm widely pirated, and I currently earn enough money via self-publishing to be in the top 1% tax bracket of the US. Compare that to the eight years I spent in the legacy publishing world, making $40k a year and spending half of that on self-promotion.
• Publishers generate and spread excitement, always looking for new ways make our authors and their books stand out. We’re able to connect books with readers in a meaningful way.
Barry: When I first read that initial clause, I thought it said, “Publishers generate and spread excrement.”
Joe: Ha! That would have been a shitty thing to say.
Barry: I’m sure that reveals my biases. But -- let’s be honest -- it’s a more credible claim than “Publishers generate excitement.” If I’m missing something, maybe readers could tell us about the last time their excitement was generated by a publisher.
Joe: How about this one? And guess what? The Kindle edition is priced higher than the hardcover. :P
Barry: Okay, an excitement exception. :D
But seriously, could a “We are relevant!” memo get any more meaningless, over-general, and aspirational than this? “We don’t just connect books with readers -- we do it in a meaningful way.”
I mean, for realz this time! We’re meaningful, damn it!
Joe: From now on, my job will be to remind people what my job is.
Now hold still while I spread excitement.
Barry: It’s all part of the nurturing.
Oh, and by the way, legacy publishers don’t connect books with readers, and in fact this structural deficit is essential to the increasing irrelevance Hachette is protesting against. Publishers connect books with intermediaries.
Joe: And now those intermediaries, like Amazon, can directly reach and target readers.
Is it any wonder we can sell so many more books with Amazon as our publisher?
Barry: You know, I’m starting to wonder if someone wrote this to play a joke on us, to see if we could be fooled into taking it seriously and responding. It’s not April Fool’s Day, is it?
Joe: Don't use the word fool. You might offend someone.
Barry: For God’s sake, Dudgeon Demons, do not watch this extremely offensive Carlos Mencia skit!
| Jokes.com | ||||
| Carlos Mencia - Hospital Show | ||||
| ||||
Joe: I'm only picking on Hachette here because they wrote that silly memo, and because I have personal experience with them. I discuss book deals with my peers. Hachette actually did a lot more for my book than most publishers do, and I appreciate their efforts.
But I've never relied on publishers to promote my books because publishers actually do very little promotion. A press release and catalog inclusion aren't worth the 52.5% royalties they take.
By contrast, I signed a deal with Amazon's imprint Thomas & Mercer for STIRRED, my latest novel, co-written with Blake Crouch.
Barry: Didn’t you just hit #1 on the Kindle Top 100?
Joe. Yes, and thanks for the shill. STIRRED has sold more ebooks in two weeks than Hachette has sold of AFRAID in thirty-two months. And Amazon pays me a much better royalty than Hachette did.
Not to put you on the spot here, but I know you signed a decent six-figure deal for RAIN FALL, your first John Rain thriller. It's had, what, a dozen printings since 2002?
Barry: It's up to fifteen or sixteen.
Joe: So you must have earned out that advance a long time ago, right?
Barry: Not yet. But close now. To the extent I could decipher Putnam’s royalty statements. I’m thinking about calling in a Dead Sea Scrolls specialist.
Joe: You also got a comparable six-figure advance for THE DETACHMENT, which you released through the Amazon imprint Thomas & Mercer.
Barry: Yes. We've discussed the deal before.
Joe: Do you think you'll be able to earn out that advance faster than the one for RAIN FALL?
Barry: THE DETACHMENT has already earned out.
Joe: Holy shit! What’s that, two months from the pub date?
Barry: Something like that. I wasn’t supposed to say anything, but my wife didn’t know it was under wraps and inadvertently mentioned it at a conference, so I guess it’s public domain now.
Joe: Congrats! When THE DETACHMENT was in the Top 10 on the Kindle Bestseller List, it was really buoying your backlist sales. Hopefully RAIN FALL will earn out soon...
• We offer marketing and publicity expertise, presenting a book to the marketplace in exactly the right way, and ensuring that intelligence, creativity, and business acumen inform our strategy.
Joe: Well, it's certainly reassuring that their strategy isn't informed by laziness, bad ideas, stupidity, and a profound ignorance about how their business works.
Barry: Seriously, when someone claims to be or to do something the opposite of which would be unthinkable, you are being bullshitted. The only question is, does Hachette know they’re bullshitting? Or do they really believe it’s remarkable that their strategy is supposedly informed by intelligence instead of stupidity, creativity rather than dullness, and business acumen rather than business ineptitude?
And come on, presenting a book to the marketplace in exactly the right way? There are so many examples of legacy publishing marketing disasters it’s hard to know where to begin. So why don’t I just point to: The Green Garage Door (viewer discretion advised).
Joe: I gotta say, with so many books losing money, so many authors being dropped, so many titles going out of print, perhaps expertise isn't quite the right word.
Barry: No, maybe something more along the line of... Whistling Past The Graveyard? Or Hoping Against Hope?
Joe: Publishers should stop trying to convince themselves and others that they're relevant, and start actually being relevant. Here's how:
1. Offer much better royalties to authors.
2. Release titles faster. It can take 18 months after a book is turned in to be published. I can do it myself in a week.
3. Use up-to-date accounting methods that are trackable by the author, and pay royalties monthly.
4. Lower ebook prices.
5. Stop futilely fighting piracy. Hint: all such fighting is futile. Piracy can only be made redundant with cost and convenience.
6. Start marketing effectively. Ads and catalogue copy aren't enough. Neither is your imprint's Twitter feed. Especially if your author has more Twitter followers than you do.
Did I miss anything?
Barry: Legacy publishing’s contracts are a disaster. Substantively, they should reflect 21st-Century realities, among those realities the fact that for the first time, authors have real alternatives to the legacy route. So absolutely, the ridiculous current 52.5%-publisher and 17.5%-author digital split needs to be massively adjusted. Again, in a digital world, publishers are unnecessary for distribution, and the fact that they’re still trying to charge for a benefit they no longer provide is an untenable state of affairs.
They also need to stop with the crazy land grabs -- the first looks, the last refusals, the character and series and “anything remotely competitive” lock-ups and other non-compete clauses.
On a less substantive level, they need to make their contracts readable and understandable. Why do publishers still use antediluvian 14-inch legal paper for their contracts and 9-point font? Because it’s off-putting. It discourages anyone from reading or arguing about the contents. Why do they use such monumentally opaque and impenetrable legalese? Because they don’t want people to understand what the contract is doing -- what rights are being forfeited and what obligations imposed.
If there’s one thing I wish Amazon would do differently, it’s use their publishing contract as a sales tool. It’s the best I’ve ever seen -- clear, short, and understandable (just like their every-60-days royalty statements, in fact), and if they’d be more aggressive about publicizing how remarkably clear and fair their contract is, it would put some pressure on legacy publishers -- sorry, on Experimenting, Excitement-Generating Pioneers -- to follow suit.
Joe: I've been telling publishers how to improve since 2009, and not one has listened.
Except for Amazon. Amazon listens. Amazon listens closely.
That's why Amazon doesn't need to create silly internal memos about how they're still relevant.
Barry: Seriously, can you imagine Amazon putting out a memo like that? “We are still relevant” is not a good sign for Hachette, or for legacy publishing generally. It’s like when the government says, “The war is still winnable.” Surest sign it’s lost.
Joe: Yeah, hard to imagine a memo like this one from Amazon. Because every book Amazon has published actually makes a profit.
Barry: I want to say one last thing, about our tone.
Joe: Okay.
Barry: We’re pretty disrespectful here toward Hachette, aren’t we?
Joe: Yes. But not unfairly.
Barry: Exactly. Not unfairly. A lot of people get uncomfortable when small-fry like us criticize big, august institutions like Hachette. Up to a point, I understand that reflex, but I don’t share it.
Joe: This dialog could anger or hurt people who work at Hachette, or authors with Hachette. In fact, it could anger or hurt anyone working for legacy publishers.
But instead of getting hurt or angry, how about figuring out how to fix your broken business model?
This is a business. Business isn't personal.
At least, that's what my agent said when my last two publishers dropped me. Two publishers who are making money off my backlist hand-over-fist.
Barry: For me, respect isn’t something to which anyone is entitled (courtesy is different); it’s something that has to be earned. And when someone -- anyone -- writes a memo as weak, unsupported, and full of obvious bullshit as Hachette’s, there’s nothing wrong with, and indeed there’s everything right with, calling them on it.
Joe: Ultimately, I decided to spend some time doing this fisk because I see too many authors still crossing their fingers, holding out for legacy deals.
Seriously? You really want to work with a company that does stuff like this?
Barry: Was our tone sometimes derisive and mocking and otherwise harsh? Yes. Was that deserved? Again, yes.
Joe: Didn’t you just get into it with the Pentagon’s spokesperson?
Barry: Yeah, I wrote a blog criticizing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta for being full of shit -- which he is -- and his spokesman responded with the usual, “Why do you hate the troops?” dodge. If anyone’s curious, you can read about it here. But yes, there are a lot of people who believe individuals have to defer to authority, including being terribly civil even while the authority in question pisses down your back and assures you it’s just raining. I’m not one of those people. If someone tries to bullshit me, I think it’s a public service to call bullshit and explain why.
Joe: You're anti-American and unappreciative of the opportunities this country has given you. You're also anti-legacy publishing and unappreciative of the opportunities the Big 6 have given you.
Barry: Hah. You see right through me.
Joe: But at least we've both managed to avoid any incendiary analogies this dialog. Good thing, too. I was getting really tired of dealing with overreacting, hypersensitive pinheads.
As for authors, I'll repeat my mantra. Set appropriate goals, and figure out realistic ways to reach those goals. If you really want to publish with a legacy house, fully understand what you're getting into, and why.
If you go into it all doe-eyed and hopeful, you can’t complain about whatever happens.
Barry: Hachette, go back to the drawing board and write a real memo, devoid of bullshit and dodges and glittering generalities that apply to every business that’s ever existed. Write something built on actual evidence instead of relying on a narcissistic and unmerited “trust us” attitude, and I promise we’ll examine it as carefully as we’ve reviewed this one -- though perhaps with a different result. Fair enough?
Joe: Did you do the wrap-up yet? I was too busy molesting this frog.
Barry: LMAO... Let the Dudgeon Demons descend!
Joe: Be the monkey!
271 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 271 of 271@Anonymous,
How do you get 3k a month? I am just curious if you did some blogs or bought ebook ads? Just wondering. That is great. What are the books?
Sean
Sorry Sean, I keep anonymous for a reason as my readers are typically on a tight household budget and I don't feel comfortable with them knowing my sales data.
But, I can tell you that I bought zero ads. Not true, I bought one - but it was worthless.
I simply write in a small niche within a large genre inhabited by only a handful of authors. To get started I facebooked and twittered with these authors' established fanbases in a fairly nonthreatening manner. I did this for several hours a day during the first few months.
I release a new novel every 2 months, as I had a backlist of 6 that had been rejected by publishers over the past 3 years.
I still spend many hours a day interacting with my readers via facebook, twitter, blogs, and emails. I write several hours a day as well.
Added up, 10 hours a day for 4 years is what it took in my case to become an 'overnight' success. I still follow that schedule, including holidays and weekends.
My monthly trail of profits:
$150
$400
$1500
$5200
$7100
$7900
$4400 (no new release)
$8900
I am literally a nobody; my books start at about a 500 overall Amazon ranking upon release and settle in around 2,500. All are at $3.99 or less. There are dozens of others just like myself.
I cannot stress enough the 'niche within a genre' concept. I just happened to get lucky in that regard. Traditional publishers won't touch such a 'small market' with a 10 foot pole, but an indie can do so quite profitably.
Somewhere I read about a guy who wrote a book about a murder on a cruise ship - then he blogged about it a bit on a few sites/blogs in the industry. Bam, success. He had been a cruise ship aficionado for several years beforehand.
John Locke's ebook on his selling success is what I would recommend for any author getting started.
That, and professional covers with nice blurbs of course....best of luck to you Sean!
Thanks for the information. If you don't mind what exactly do you mean by "niche within a genre?" That seems like an interesting concept. Your numbers are great. Are they also available in print? I have only been at this for two years(two novels through a traditional route and two through ereader) and I am trying to work my way through.
Thanks again.
Sean
It boils down to a simple concept:
What do you do when confronted with a new idea such as indie publishing?
Are you immediately full of fear and doubt? Or do you subconsciously tell yourself - I can do this! If anyone else can do it, why not me?
You are either initially overwhelmed with negative emotions, or positive feelings of hope - and that dictates what happens to you to a large degree.
Then you run into a few dozen brick walls: rejections, low sales, family problems. etc. Do you quit, or push on?
99% quit when given multiple chances to do so, the other 1% post here about their successes.
I've had dozens of authors ask me for a step by step guide to what I did to sell so many books - those are the ones who won't make it.
There is no 'step by step' each of us needs to find our own path - oh yeah, you probably need to also find about 400 rejections from the industry before your work is of sufficient quality before going the indie route.
That was my path since 2008, and that is the true value of the Hachette's of the world - helping us fine tune our work through multiple rejections, so we can then strike out on our own!
'niche within a genre' - here is what I mean by that phrase.
Let's say there are 1,000 authors out there writing about fantasy stuff. Blood, sex, cursing, etc. - dark, dark worlds. This sells like hotcakes in the indie world.
But somewhere out there are a few fantasy authors who write in the same general vein, but with humor, and lightness, and characters who stumble about their adventures without banging, cursing, and killing everyone they encounter.
Most fantasy readers will scoff, because they want the dark stuff - but there may be a few 'light' authors servicing the 'light' niche within a 'dark' genre.
They may never hit the Top 100 because the reader market for 'light' fantasy is too small, but they can own the hell out of that thin slice of a thick pie.
Again, you probably cannot choose to write to a specific niche, but us ones who are lucky just happened to fill that void.
And traditional publishers will never sign such an author, or very few of them at least, because they are not going to hit a home run in this space.
'Chick lit' is but another example. Publishers consider it dead as of 2005 or earlier - but I know such indie authors making 6 figures a year servicing 'chick lit' readers in 2011.
Hope this helps!?
Thanks. :)
Today on Digital Book World came this response from Hachette:
MT: The manifesto is just a slide from a presentation that we started doing more than a year ago with agents because agents were saying they felt that they didn’t know about the digital world, they didn’t understand the nuances around rights and royalties in digital books. We put together this presentation for them discussing our strategies. It’s been an evolving document. We’ve presented it to several hundred agents.
And then...
JG: Do you think the publishing industry as a whole needs to go to its various constituencies and explain its relevance?
MT: I do. I think there’s a propaganda battle going on. Publishers have traditionally and rightly been a modest bunch. Publishers have always been a pedestal for the author, who is the star.
When you finish a book, you don’t get a list of credits at the end like in a movie or on an album, that’s something that publishers have been modest about in order to let the author take center stage.
The problem with that philosophy is that nobody knows the hundreds of people that contribute to making a great book.
Dare to comment???
I have a comment: I do everything they do. Writing, editing, cover design ... I may be carrying a few extra winter pounds, but there's still just one of me.
If it really takes hundreds of people to create a great ... or crappy, for that matter ... book through legacy publishing, it's a wonder they've all lasted this long. That's a hell of an inefficient business model. Now that authors have another, probably better, option, those houses are in trouble.
From me (one of the thousands of underpaid, under-appreciated "stars"):
Hachette, give me the 52.5% digital royalties that you're currently taking, and I'll give you my 17.5%, and then I'll happily include in the ebook a long list of all those people who contributed.
Your relevance has ZERO to do with modesty. It has to do with actually providing value for your authors. Which you don't do in digital formats.
Dan, where's the Like button on this blog?
Where were those hundreds of people when I was writing my novel for Nanowrimo last month? I didn't see a one of them. They would have been very useful. My cover designer does a darn good job as just one person, too. That's two of us; where's the other 98+?
Legacy publishers will give this blog a Like button, but they'll drop your percentage to 16.5%
Can we substitute "elitist snobs" for the "modest bunch" in that quote? I think it reads more accurately? What do I know - I'm just an editor.
But I think, Joe, their long-suffering modesty is coming to an end. That's the feel I get. They might have to cut royalties to the writers in order to give proper credit on the author byline. Your editor should get a cut, too, don't you think? After all, by making you cut out several paragraphs and improving your grammar and punctuation, the editorial team made your book publishable to their exceedingly high standards.
MT: I do. I think there’s a propaganda battle going on. Publishers have traditionally and rightly been a modest bunch. Publishers have always been a pedestal for the author, who is the star.
And now Amazon is another pedestal.
When you finish a book, you don’t get a list of credits at the end like in a movie or on an album, that’s something that publishers have been modest about in order to let the author take center stage.
Actually, production companies and record labels have been modest as well. I can name you my favorite movies, bands, and books but I can't name you my favorite production companies, record labels, or publishing houses.
The problem with that philosophy is that nobody knows the hundreds of people that contribute to making a great book.
Why should they? It's not that people in publishing don't work hard, but without the writer, there is no book, no sales, and no money for the house. Joe's blog post alone shows that writers need to be treated much better and need more compensation.
An anonymous *writer* here. Just thought I'd address the idea that it's impossibly hard for an unknown writer to success in self-pubbing.
I have a strong background in writing, had the agent, almost had a deal, never came together. S'okay. It happens.
Started self-pubbing two months ago. No blog. No marketing beforehand. No spreading the word among friends and family (I use a pseudonym). I have a twitter feed no one follows and a website no one visits. In other words, no previous trad sales, no marketing, no endless hours of social networking.
That $5,000 average trad advance...is my net after 7 weeks. Anyone interested in how? Because there have been blog posts about it right here.
I write. Well and a lot. Especially a lot. In fact, going back to that now.
This is my thank you message to Mr. Konrath, to avoid clogging up his inbox.
Publishers and agents are completely insincere. They are in business to make money, period.
Really? In BUSINESS to make money? How insincere of them!
And could someone, anyone, please explain to me how it could possibly be a bad thing for your agent to make money? I hope my agents make millions from my work.
Getting chosen for publication is purely random, and don't kid yourself otherwise.
That's right. Thousands of submissions are thrown into a dry swimming pool and "editors" are blindfolded and told to wade through and pluck one out. There's no need to work on honing your craft for years, or anything like that.
Jude, I realize you need the validation of saying you have an agent and a publisher, and so I'm glad you have both, but I'm making more money than ever before in my career having neither.
Yet you don't seem very happy. You seem bitter, and you're afraid to show your face. :(
@Jude
Thousands of submissions are thrown into a dry swimming pool and "editors" are blindfolded and told to wade through and pluck one out. There's no need to work on honing your craft for years, or anything like that.
Jude, you will never be published by the Big6. I was. So you can give it a rest.
Jude,
Publishers dont pick books at random, but the individual writer's success does involve a significant luck element. True, you can do things right to improve your chances, but you still need a break or two along the way. And I dont know any other word to describe that other than luck.
I do agree with you that a good agent is an invaluable asset. But they are rare and hard to come by.
Jude, you will never be published by the Big6.
I will if I want to, although it's not currently on my agenda.
And if you want me to give it a rest, stop writing ridiculous statements headed with @Jude.
Publishers dont pick books at random, but the individual writer's success does involve a significant luck element. True, you can do things right to improve your chances, but you still need a break or two along the way. And I dont know any other word to describe that other than luck.
If you do things right, and stick with it long enough--assuming you have some game to begin with--I believe you'll eventually get lucky. But then, is that really luck? Or did you succeed because you had some game and did things right and stuck with it?
Now children, let's play nice in the sandbox together.
Jude, there is luck involved in getting a book deal. You got one from Oceanview - how long did it take and how many agents did you query and how many publishers were approached before you got the deal?
Legacy authors like the pedestal. There's nothing wrong with liking it, but the fact is, more and more authors are thinking the bottom line is more important than the feelings of elitism. Why take 17% when you can get closer to 70%?
Who's smarter? Who's more savvy?
The one thing we are forgetting is the editorial selection process. Every year, editorial and acquisitions boards have a little pow-wow to determine acquisition goals for the coming year. While there is some room for movement obviously, a house has certain goals and targets based upon what has been hot in the past year and what they think will be hot in the next. If your book isn't in that acquisition plan, no matter how brilliantly written, your chances of making it are incredibly low.
I'm an editor. I'm a writer. I'm an avid reader. I want to read great books and I don't care who prints them or how they get on the shelf. I've read tons of self-published work and a lot of it is truly phenomenal. If I didn't have access to independent writers, I'd never get to read some of this stuff. Conversely, I've read some legacy authors who publish utter crap under houses that can't even get a proofreader to do a decent job.
Funny funny. I love the "rich relationship" part. I'm sure if you are Justin Cronin they can't wait to latch onto a hind tit. As for deciding what "is worth publishing," let me guess. Another vampire book! Hilarious. You've made my day agsin, guys. Can we do worse than this?
Jude, there is luck involved in getting a book deal. You got one from Oceanview - how long did it take and how many agents did you query and how many publishers were approached before you got the deal?
I queried one agent, and he signed me after reading the first 100 pages. When the book didn't sell in NY, I went out on my own. Oceanview was the first and only small press I approached.
I know my story isn't typical, but I truly believe the reason most books never land their authors an agent or a book deal is because most of the books submitted are not of publishable quality. Ask Joe, who has judged some writing contests. The ratio we generally throw around is 10,000:1.
I will if I want to, although it's not currently on my agenda.
uh huh
Here's the thing:
I am a member of the WGA and was paid stupid amounts of money to write television shows. Some were good, and some were crap. But I got paid a boatload.
But guess what? At the end of the day, I don't own all this work. The studio does.
You "real writers" own your work, whether you are Indie or Legacy.
But Indie writers have much more control over their work.
And if all of those important, behind the scenes middle managers in the publishing world are anything like their counterparts in the TV business, they are certainly not worth 51% of your income.
If you can put numbers up as an Indie--my god, why would you want to do anything else?
But guess what? At the end of the day, I don't own all this work. The studio does.
My sincere hope is that new technology changes the tv and movie industry next. It is ripe for reform.
Tara Maya
The Unfinished Song epic fantasy
USAToday has a great article about ebooks today. Konrath is quoted as are several other successful authors.
Sean
As a newb looking up at the mountain, trusty rope and chalk bag in hand, and why I'm leaning towards the indie side of the course (along with many, many others) is simple:
The massively disproportiate amount of genuinely sucessful, positive testimonies "from experience" of people with traditional experience vs. indie's
We have Mr. Leather and Mr. Mayer, speaking positively, getting paid lots, recommending newb's pursue it, God bless e'm, I'm sure there are others but their numbers are appaling low compared to those against it.
Throwing out how well King and Patterson sell, how much Meyer or or Connelley is worth, comparing the avg. indie first time seller to one or two of the top published writers in histroy, or Joes lifetime sales to Grisham's, all while ignoring the dozens of other negative and punitive factors that 99% of most legacy writers have to deal with...isn't much of a realistic argument I think.
@ David
Good point about looking up the mountain. Seems to me that Joe's comment still applies, to everyone, you have to get lucky in some way.
Sean
Sean McCartney:
Here's an interesting blurb from that USA Today article you mentioned. The last few paragraphs:
"Already wealthy from her self-published e-books, (Amanda) Hocking in June signed a $2 million contract with St. Martin's Press. In January, the Trylle trilogy will hit stores — brick and mortar as well as online — in trade paperback. The movie rights already have been sold.
With technology enabling everyone to be his or her own Johannes Gutenberg, why would an author sign with a traditional book publisher?
"I wanted to reach more readers," Hocking says. She points out that most people — particularly the young teens she writes for — do not own iPads or e-readers. Hocking says it's about the story, not the device. 'I wanted to write a fun book, not start a revolution.'
C.J. Lyons also appreciates what traditional publishers bring to the table. A former emergency-room pediatrician, Lyons, 47, has published more than a dozen medical suspense novels with traditional publishers, as well as nine self-published titles, two of which hit USA TODAY's list this summer.
Now she has signed with a traditional publisher, Minotaur Press, a division of St. Martin's. ' enjoy working with an editor, and I think my writing is ready to go to the next level,' she says.
Her new publisher, Andrew Martin, says, 'I'm not buying a book, I'm building a career with an author.' He says an established publishing house lets the author do what he does best — write — while the publisher offers expert marketing, editing, production and aggressive protection against e-books being illegally pirated.
In the midst of this revolution, Martin sees a silver lining for traditional publishers. In the past, editors, agents and publishers depended on their gut about whether a book would connect with readers. Now the stories are being pre-tested in the online marketplace. 'It's like the old-fashioned slush pile being road tested — with the cream rising to top.'"
Sean McCartney:
Here's an interesting blurb from that USA Today article you mentioned. The last few paragraphs:
"Already wealthy from her self-published e-books, (Amanda) Hocking in June signed a $2 million contract with St. Martin's Press. In January, the Trylle trilogy will hit stores — brick and mortar as well as online — in trade paperback. The movie rights already have been sold.
With technology enabling everyone to be his or her own Johannes Gutenberg, why would an author sign with a traditional book publisher?
"I wanted to reach more readers," Hocking says. She points out that most people — particularly the young teens she writes for — do not own iPads or e-readers. Hocking says it's about the story, not the device. 'I wanted to write a fun book, not start a revolution.'
C.J. Lyons also appreciates what traditional publishers bring to the table. A former emergency-room pediatrician, Lyons, 47, has published more than a dozen medical suspense novels with traditional publishers, as well as nine self-published titles, two of which hit USA TODAY's list this summer.
Now she has signed with a traditional publisher, Minotaur Press, a division of St. Martin's. ' enjoy working with an editor, and I think my writing is ready to go to the next level,' she says.
Her new publisher, Andrew Martin, says, 'I'm not buying a book, I'm building a career with an author.' He says an established publishing house lets the author do what he does best — write — while the publisher offers expert marketing, editing, production and aggressive protection against e-books being illegally pirated.
In the midst of this revolution, Martin sees a silver lining for traditional publishers. In the past, editors, agents and publishers depended on their gut about whether a book would connect with readers. Now the stories are being pre-tested in the online marketplace. 'It's like the old-fashioned slush pile being road tested — with the cream rising to top.'"
and aggressive protection against e-books being illegally pirated.
DRM sucks.
Just sayin'.
"Now the stories are being pre-tested in the online marketplace. 'It's like the old-fashioned slush pile being road tested — with the cream rising to top."
Really? But I thought that the cream would get buried by the "tsunami of swill." Apparently not.
""Already wealthy from her self-published e-books, (Amanda) Hocking in June signed a $2 million contract with St. Martin's Press.
And speaking of Amanda Hocking, consider this: She self-published her first book about a year and a half ago. She has self-pubbed about a dozen novels. Had she gone the legacy route from square one, she might have one book out now, with maybe a second one in the pipeline for publication. rather than being a phenom with a 7-digit deal, she'd be just another newbie author struggling her way up the midlist.
We also have Mrs. Chan to discuss: she's stated openly that she wants to be traditionally published. I think self is the best slush pile for newbs vs. the corner of the agent or editors office floor but considering it's still only 10% of books sold (for now) and with a readership you stand to get better terms, it can make sense to do sign. But there's some big "IF's" in there.
She allegedly was contacted by three publishers! It's what she wants! Why hasn't she jumped?
Because as a Lawyer married to a Dr. (and a top selling indie) she's mot likely not deperate for any kind of "standard" advance. And as a Lawyer that writes contracts (environmental business according to the articles on her) she can probably tell that their contracts suck.
Take done your book now...stop making what you've been making monthly...with only X amount of advance in hand...and maybe in 18 months start making it back...but only after you've earned out at X% royalty rate. Oh, and we take over 50% of digital...which you're doing all by yourself now.
Hocking got a giant bag-o-cash and Locke got stand alone distribution but independents are getting better educated every day about traditonal practices. They're not hush-hush topics or insider secrets anymore...clearly.
To get breakout indies like Chan, and more importantly to retain the top sellers they have now, they'll have to pay a lot more.
J. DuMond
Go read Hocking's blog! She pursued traditional for YEARS.
Maybe she should have kept at it and not bothered bother with the whole silly, e-pub thing. It's for wannabe's anyway.
Just think: if she was ever picked up w/o the whole e-pub thing she could be starting from scratch right now..with zero readers...under rock-bottom "newb" contractual terms.
But she'd still be validated!
I'm wondering why publishers who have signed successful indies think huge sales of ebooks priced at free-$2.99 will translate into huge sales of ebooks priced at $8.99, paperbacks priced at $8.99-$14.99, and hardcovers priced at $24.99 and higher. Maybe they'll do well, I hope they do, but it seems like a whole different ballgame to me.
the most seductive publisher's swill: "'I'm not buying a book, I'm building a career with an author.' "
It is rarely true. I've heard it, many others have too. It's incredibly alluring at first.
But, put facts and actions with this "promise" and well, I'd just say, so many have gone proudly, even inflatiively, grandstandingly pompous to the mountain, thinking they've been speciallyl 'chosen' and are specially 'lucky,' and putting out puff of what become predictable props defending their mountain prince and princess...
only to come back with the prince no longer taking their calls or having kicked them off the mountain for good.. and the princess having no interest unless author agrees to nonstop labor.
There are many kinds of prisons. One is to think oneself the chosen darling, or the luckiest talented writer, or the wow how much money they gave me foole. Trust that none of that, NONE, comes in a way that allows the writer to be truly free.
Just a .02
So, let me understand this.
I write a book which includes several drafts until I have a nearly finished ready for market product. Here you go, ready to publish manuscript.
I get an agent, because I have to in order to get published these days.
The publisher wants ready to go books, and picks among them which rights they will buy in order to market.
And they are being modest?
100's of people? So, are they counting now the people who stock the book? Are they counting the help desk of the publisher?
They must believe that authors are smart enough to create entire stories out of there heads, but completely too stupid to see when they are being fed a truck load of bullshit.
Thank you both for this! Can you comment on the attached article from Huffington Post about Amazon's new effort to monopolize the marketplace? Thanks -- Meta
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-coker/amazon-ebooks-kdp-select_b_1139260.html
their memo is a giant bowl of steaming fail. And they dropped the ball when it came to me, too. More on that below.Good topic, I will concern on.
Do best, no regret! By giubbotti moncler outlet 2012 lover.
@Meta,
See David Gaughram's blog (Dec 11) for an interesting discussion regarding this. He posts here pretty often as well.
http://davidgaughran.wordpress.com/
Marta
Sorry for the misspelling above. It's David Gaughran.
You guys Rock the casbah :)
"I'm wondering why publishers who have signed successful indies think huge sales of ebooks priced at free-$2.99 will translate..."
I don't think publishers are picking up authors because of those sales. The sales may get their attention, but publishers are interested in the concept and it's potential for mass appeal. This is more and more true as their business changes due to all the things Joe and Barry are talking about here.
Publishing is becoming more and more like the movie business. Big Studios basically put a lot of money into very few pictures each year. The ad budget for a 100M dollar movie (now not even particularly "big") is AT LEAST that much. The reason? Failure of the picture is not an option. So it's basically become "high concept" with proven recognizability (comic book movies, movies about old toys, or TV shows, etc.) Or it's real small. The equivalent of "mid list" in movies are mostly independent films.
That's why non-fiction is so much a piece of the Big-Six pie. It's just so much easier to market and make money on non-fiction concepts.
I have a friend (sorry, I have to be vague here) who has never written a book before. He has a friend with a really, really interesting life story. My friend wrote this man's story. Got it to one agent. Agent sold it in 3 weeks with a bidding war and a huge advance. What Publishers Weekly would term "Significant."
If I could tell you this guy's story, or even the title of the book, it would be clear why. Really, really marketable. But the first thing the agent did when he read the book was say 'I need to meet your friend (the subject." The reason was because he had to know if they could put him on TV. Would he look good on the Today Show? All about the marketability. Turns out the guy should be great on TV... cha-ching.
As for signing Indies with big sales... Amanda's books have a Twilight vibe. That added to the fame of her e-book journey... maybe it will be a hit, maybe not, but it at least it has enough of a chance that they want to invest in her. Her movie deal also adds to the public interest factor.
'She's a great story and people will be curious.' That's part the bet they are taking.
What I'm saying is that while ebooks have been a godsend to the midlist author, I think it's also probably the proper place for midlist books (i.e., good books that appeal to a niche but aren't necessarily going to set the world on fire because the plot is incredibly relevant, timely or controversial, etc...). Publishers have been getting less and less interested in such books for a long time and it's only speeding up.
The good news for writers and readers is that what big publishers think of such books is no longer important. Maybe no longer even relevant.
David Kirkpatrick presented a report to the Author's Guild Midlist Books Study Committee back in 2000 that presnted the "plight" of the midlist book. This is nothing new. The interest publishers have had in midlist books has been waning for well over a decade. But the opportunity to self-publish ebooks has started a revival, of sorts, for the midlist category.
Merrill Heath
I know this is off topic a little, but it's been discussed in this thread, so here's a link to another interesting article regarding the Amazon KDP.
I'm not a lawyer so I won't begin to comment on the statements made in this article, but it is an interesting interpretation.
Merrill Heath
Another thing I find very curious lately, is if legacy publishing is so much better than indie publishing, why in the world am I finding more and more traditional published books pretending to be "Indie" authors? I mean, is Harper Collins really Indie now? Seal Press? I have found a number of books which at first seem indie, but then guess what, there is a legacy publisher here. This again, must be apart of their modesty.
Going out on a limb here, just a bit, but I think it's relevant.
For fans of Louis C.K. this will be interesting:
Louis CK's 'Experiment' Brings In 110k Sales, $550k Gross, Over $200k Net... In Four Days
But even if you can't stand the guy, you should really take note. He's experimenting with selling directly to fans, without DRM or regional restrictions. There are lessons to be learned here and I highly recommend reading it.
All: Check out this article about a self-pubbed newbie getting a movie deal, (And check out the comments afterward!):
http://jezebel.com/5867781/womans-bestselling-self+published-book-will-now-become-a-movie
All: Check out this article about a self-pubbed newbie getting a movie deal, (And check out the comments afterward!):
http://jezebel.com/5867781/womans-bestselling-self+published-book-will-now-become-a-movie
I spent a solid 2 weeks teaching myself the basics of cover design. I pay $15 for artwork and do the rest on my laptop editing software.
My local college offers such a course as well. Do best, no regret!moncler jackets good topic, I will concern on.
That's an interesting article about Colleen Houck's books. I continue to be surprised by how popular this type of YA books is these days.
Merrill Heath
"Sales are also easy to check by looking at ranking on bestseller lists. Right now, in the Hardboiled Mysteriers Top 100, I'm outselling ebooks by Connelly, King, Grafton, Crais, Parker, Sandford, and Coben.
Several of my ebooks are outselling King, Graham, Moore, and Koontz in the Horror Top 100."
In other news, Koontz, King, Coben, and Connelly continue to weep bitterly as they ponder the imminent demise of their careers...
Umm...sure.
LOL, yes, I'm being dickish and snarky. But I'm still a fan, Joe. :)
--Josh
"Jude, you will never be published by the Big6."
I've never understood all the hate Jude seems to get here. He's a talented guy that deserves success as much as anyone.
God forbid anyone have the audacity to present an opposing point of view.
--Josh
To Barry's fans:
I'm contemplating giving Eisler another shot. Is "The Detachment" a good place to start?
I briefly sampled one of the earlier John Rain novels way back in the early 00's when you could still find them at your local supermarket.
I wasn't hooked, but I want to try Barry again since I do enjoy his blog entries so much. "The Detachment" seems like a logical place to start since it's getting so much buzz these days. Is it a good jumping-on point for a new reader?
--Josh
Nice post. I was checking continuously this blog and I am impressed! Extremely useful information specifically the last part :) I care for such info a lot. I was looking for this certain information for a very long time. Thank you and best of luck. revenue cycle bpo
Joshua
I don't get it either. I think I've disagreed with him here and there but he has a lot of practical experience and I enjoy his posts.
Doesn't seem to bother him much, but then again, I wouldn't give two shits what some Anon' said if I had a Thomas & Mercer deal either.
Dave
Writing Trip
Joe sez: "I'm outselling ebooks by Connelly, King, Grafton, Crais, Parker, Sandford, and Coben."
Also Dan Brown. Which must mean you're the most successful writer in history. Wow. Facts and logic.
Hi Jo & Barry, great post. Jo; have you ever considered taking the text for "Afraid" changing the names of the characters and the ending and republishing it? Or should I say publishing your entirely new book that is completely different to Afraid? You could call it "I'm not Afraid..." :)
Never tick off an author :-D
Do best, no regret! moncler jackets By moncler jackets lover.Indies are bad, all our reviews are fake and we should be cast off to some penal colony for wayward writers.
I'm looking forward to either Konrath or Barry blogging about KDP Select once the results are in.
Does Joe have any readers who aren't aspiring writers? People who want to use him as a model?
How do we know if the writer known as 'anomymous' here is a successful writer at all, perhaps an ideologue or a sock puppet?
I first self-published in the 1980's. It was extremely frustrating.
It is much easier in the 21st century.
"We identify authors and books that are going to stand out in the marketplace."
"...exploring and experimenting with new ideas ..."
"Brand Builder ..."
"Publishers generate and spread excitement, always looking for new ways make our authors and their books stand out."
You ridiculed these statements, but Hachette has certainly turned it round, at least here in Australia.
A month ago, I wouldn't have had a clue if an ebook was published by Hachette. But Hachette (and Macmillan and, to a lesser extent, Penguin Australia) finally found a sure-fire way to brand themselves and really make their authors and books stand out! Their books now positively glow when I look at ebooks available from Amazon.
Of course, none of this happened in a good way. In order to make "our authors and their books stand out", the Australian arms of these publishers basically doubled the price.
I'm sorry about "Afraid", but it's on my 'do not buy' list - it's $12.21 for Australians. Mind you, that's a lot less than the $20.35 they are charging us for a lot of ebooks.
Pricing really has become an issue, and this year, I feel it really hit kids' books.
My novel for 9-12 year olds was languishing until kids opened Nooks for Christmas, and parents realized kids ebooks were almost double the paperback price.
Look at the top 100 bestsellers on BN in that category--half are indies. Only a handful are more than $8.
I wound up a bestseller because my book was priced correctly--I hadn't done any marketing on the Nook at all.
Thanks for the dedication and work that you have put into your site. I truly motivates me as a writer. I am working on my first book and hope that it will be a success. I must also thank you for putting together the resources on this site. I am in the process of talking to one of your resources for my book cover artwork.
I've posted a rough draft of chapter one on line for interested readers. just look up thornsofathief on google.
Thanks again
Quick question for you folks. I am trying to determine what genre my novel will fall in. My novel covers the topic of genocide and slavery in Africa.
Joe, thanks for posting the information about your ebook sales - it is inspirational.
I do have a question. You mentioned selling via Amazon UK. I uploaded my first novel via BookBaby this evening and I had not even thought about Amazon in other countries. Did you have to upload your novel to the UK site or was Amazon.com all that was needed?
Congrats again.
Alan
Reading Hachette’s memo, and with the whole tone of this apparent PR campaign, I’m beginning to wonder if it’s even directed at the general public at all, but at writers, instead. The writers who aren’t approaching tradpub at all anymore in favor of going indie.
Is Hachette trying to say, “Look! Look what Amazon can do! If they can do this to us, a huge corporation, just think what they can do to the poor writer, all alone!”
I’ve certainly seen this sentiment expressed by indie writers since this tempest brewed up. Might those made sufficiently nervous by such a thought decide that maybe tradpub really isn’t so bad after all and return to the fold?
Could it be that the defection of writers is beginning to be felt by tradpub, and this is one way to combat it?
Post a Comment