tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post9099224786840409650..comments2024-03-28T02:00:11.260-05:00Comments on A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Douglas Preston's Blood MoneyJA Konrathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comBlogger105125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-58952669659134443972014-07-10T21:34:50.826-05:002014-07-10T21:34:50.826-05:00http://www.bloomberg.com/video/authors-weigh-in-on...http://www.bloomberg.com/video/authors-weigh-in-on-amazon-hachette-feud-uXNXYP8~TCqlu8HDl9d~TA.html<br /><br />I love the nonbiased reporting. Howey gets about twenty seconds and Preston is allowed to speak first, last and pretty much uses up the majority of the time while completely ignoring every point Howey made.Rob Gregory Brownehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12785299355462748009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-56192706105384115022014-07-10T18:05:54.442-05:002014-07-10T18:05:54.442-05:00Joshua—
Yeah, it is a bold statement. But I said...Joshua— <br /><br />Yeah, it is a bold statement. But I said "many" of the writers are elitist, not "all."<br /><br />I worked in publishing a long time. I worked at publishing houses and magazines as both an editor and a publicist, so I speak from experience when I say that traditional publishing has created a system that is not welcoming to new writers.<br /><br />Although Preston's letter states that no writer should be boycotted, he is talking about writers ordained by a publishing house. Indie authors are blacklisted every day and to my knowledge, no traditional author has even broached the topic. Amazon's publishing imprints are blacklisted which is just bizarre. <br /><br />Even when Preston could have addressed the point fairly with Hugh Howey, he did not take the opportunity as you can see in the Bloomberg TV video below. Preston complains about "new" authors being punished with no pre-sale button and when Hugh Howey points out that he doesn't have a pre-sale button and that he is virtually blacklisted, Preston says nothing.<br /><br />The letter these writers signed is hypocritical and uninformed. I hope the blowback educates them.<br /><br />http://www.bloomberg.com/video/authors-weigh-in-on-amazon-hachette-feud-uXNXYP8~TCqlu8HDl9d~TA.html<br /><br />And Steve Hockensmith, your caddyshack reference cracked me up :)amy eyriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12227108832208430792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-24453431722522329532014-07-10T15:05:15.885-05:002014-07-10T15:05:15.885-05:00@Mark Edward Hall
How did I badmouth Amazon? And w...@Mark Edward Hall<br />How did I badmouth Amazon? And where did I say I was "worried" or that I "hate" them?<br />I stated that Amazon can change what it pays authors, just like any other platform can, and I gave an example. No paranoia or hate.Renee Pawlishhttp://www.reneepawlish.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-13929333662432213942014-07-10T11:01:42.059-05:002014-07-10T11:01:42.059-05:00Silas,
I agree--authors are the pawns and the lik...Silas,<br /><br />I agree--authors are the pawns and the likelihood of an anonymous poll is next to none. It would have to be an anonymous poll for the whole internet which Hachette authors could join. Otherwise I don't see how they could participate and still maintain their anonymity. That being said, I'm sure the outcome of the poll wouldn't affect anything. But it would be wonderful to hear from them in a setting where they felt safe to speak their opinions. Daniel Barnettnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-67506382506806665472014-07-10T10:13:44.495-05:002014-07-10T10:13:44.495-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.T. M. Bilderbackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10543827916764604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-37967947547460502162014-07-10T09:49:13.700-05:002014-07-10T09:49:13.700-05:00Wow - I'm shocked. I actually got Shatzkin to ...Wow - I'm shocked. I actually got Shatzkin to concede not one - but two points. <br /><br />In reference to Hatchette authors benefiting from the Amazon deal, he originally wrote: "And most of their authors, if they were honest, would admit they couldn’t benefit so much from it either." I suggested that from what you wrote in his comments he actually meant he thinks they "shouldn't" benefit because he thinks it would not me moral and/or legal.<br /><br />I also pointed out that if Hatchette agreed to the deal then that would remove all moral and legal objections - and he agreed to that point as well. <br /><br />Shatzkin agreeing he was wrong and actually accepting sound logic - we should probably all keep our eyes open for other signs of the Apocalypse. Daniel Knightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-66700123575044727392014-07-10T09:48:40.972-05:002014-07-10T09:48:40.972-05:00"Shatzkin quoted one of his anonymous sources..."Shatzkin quoted one of his anonymous sources as saying that they calculated the “real” royalty rate for most of their books comes out to about 40%. Okay, well that is still a lot lower than the 70% indies get through Amazon"<br /><br />I believe the 40% Shatzkin quoted was 40% of net. That's what the publisher of three of my books pays me and it actually figures out to somewhere south of 20% of the list price of the book. Peanuts when you figure I get 70% from my independent titles. <br /><br />When I signed contracts for those three books I didn't really have a good understanding of what I was signing. A mistake a lot of newbies make. <br /><br />My advice is make sure you know what your signing before jumping in. Mark Edward Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09348437062900925019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-13221119307238441912014-07-10T09:40:55.472-05:002014-07-10T09:40:55.472-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.T. M. Bilderbackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10543827916764604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-3117260206177439382014-07-10T09:32:32.262-05:002014-07-10T09:32:32.262-05:00Shatzkin’s go-to argument these days is the idea o...Shatzkin’s go-to argument these days is the idea of unearned advances. It seems flawed in a number of ways but maybe I’m wrong about some of these (Joe maybe you can chime in with your inside knowledge to let me know if I’m not understanding advances correctly).<br /><br />First off, don’t publishers determine advances largely based on what they expect to sell – so that they are hoping that advances will earn out. And in most cases if those advances don’t earn out in a certain amount of time (or come close) – doesn’t this make it much less likely that the author will get a follow-up contract with the publisher (or any publisher)?<br /><br />Next of course is the dramatic change in how books are sold now. It used to be that authors had a limited window to sell books at physical bookstores before their titles were pulled from shelves. In that scenario it is easy to see how sales per day/month/or whatever unit of time can drop to zero. However, in this new world of publishing books can continue to sell (especially ebooks) forever so that the time scale to earn out an advance is a really long time. If a writers sales/per unit of time did drop to such a low number that it would take too long to earn out their advance – what is their real chance of getting another contract with a publisher?<br /><br />And of course, if royalties were higher – advances would earn out much faster. Shatzkin quoted one of his anonymous sources as saying that they calculated the “real” royalty rate for most of their books comes out to about 40%. Okay, well that is still a lot lower than the 70% indies get through Amazon. It also suggests that there is a hard cut-off beyond which books don’t continue to sell. If they do continue to sell, then that “effective royalty” rate will just keep going down – until the advance is earned out.Daniel Knightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-17895613526000443402014-07-10T08:52:21.975-05:002014-07-10T08:52:21.975-05:00Anonymous, if you're downloading Preston's...Anonymous, if you're downloading Preston's books for free, you could clean up your karma by donating 15.43 to charity :-)<br />Just send him an email telling him how you took his letter to heart and you've decided to donate the money to a school library...A.G. Claymorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06109502266487845431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-9720615530095142652014-07-10T06:10:41.175-05:002014-07-10T06:10:41.175-05:00And here's Shatzkin's answer: "Fraugh...And here's Shatzkin's answer: "Fraught with legal complications, I'd say. And that's not the offer Amazon made. It's not worth tackling it theoretically unless they do."<br /><br />Really, he wouldn't speak differently if he were Hachette's spokesperson.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-83666683416227513452014-07-10T06:10:01.308-05:002014-07-10T06:10:01.308-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-48094769485897249552014-07-10T05:59:27.156-05:002014-07-10T05:59:27.156-05:00"There is an easy solution to your objection ..."There is an easy solution to your objection to Amazon's offer. If Hachette agrees to give 100% of the ebook receipts to authors, Amazon can then still pay the money to Hachette. Then if an author has an advance that has not earned out, Hachette keeps the money, but applies the full 100% to the paying down of the advance. And if an author has earned out their advance, then Hachette would just pass the full 100% along to the authors. Once the dispute is settled, then of course everything would return to normal."<br /><br />Excellent proposal, Nirmala. <br /><br />Very reasonable. And if that doesn't appear to be reasonable to Shatzkin and other s who follow him, it's because they are too accustomed to see authors screwed. To see authors being screwed has become a cultural thing.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-46767726404551919442014-07-10T05:55:29.525-05:002014-07-10T05:55:29.525-05:00"And I still hope Bezos announces 75% for all..."And I still hope Bezos announces 75% for all ebooks in KDP from 99 cents to 9.99. A juicy finger shot at Big 5 and iBooks.<br /><br />I want them to do that so bad..."<br /><br />I, too, Mir Whites<br /><br /><br />"the problem is in the contract between us and the publishers." Anon couldn't be more right.<br /><br />Laura's stance makes me thing of somebody who would want a war with no collateral damage. Or, no war at all. The status quo.<br /><br />But what is the status quo? It is big companies extorting money from authors with horrible contracts (often with the help of literary agents). More and more money. More and more power to these publishing companies who keep exploiting authors.<br /><br />It is not as if they weren't any other options for authors, once they get rid of these evil companies.<br /><br />So, yes, Amazon is here for the money. Yes, they might lower royalties to authors if there are no more big publishing companies. But the numeric field is not the material field of yesterday. When you base your decisions on fear, fear of the future, fear of what will happen if..., those are always bad decisions.<br /><br />Joe said it better than me: "You don't worry about the wolf that might eat you someday when there is a lion currently feasting on your leg."<br /><br />Sorry, but the best way to get rid of the lion is in this case to side with Amazon, to offer a different point of view than what we see in the news.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-80833007292058773562014-07-10T05:45:38.449-05:002014-07-10T05:45:38.449-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-8042530060908584002014-07-10T04:14:11.438-05:002014-07-10T04:14:11.438-05:00Mir, that would affect EVERYONE, not just the Big ...Mir, that would affect EVERYONE, not just the Big 5. Why Should indies be hurt by this?Liz Borinohttp://lizborino.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-72040667174185559082014-07-10T04:00:43.339-05:002014-07-10T04:00:43.339-05:00~~the problem is in the contract between us and th...~~the problem is in the contract between us and the publishers~~<br /><br />Which is why instead of hammering Amazon, all those authors should be looking at their contracts and demanding something better for their NEXT books... The problem is between them and their publishers, not Amazon. And if Hachette gave a damn about their authors, they would have promised them from the start of their non-negotiating that they would make sure they were recompensed, period, for their own foot-dragging. <br /><br />September cometh.<br /><br />And I still hope Bezos announces 75% for all ebooks in KDP from 99 cents to 9.99. A juicy finger shot at Big 5 and iBooks.<br /><br />I want them to do that so bad...Mir Writeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02156591500697731242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-18496286345680139142014-07-10T00:33:24.126-05:002014-07-10T00:33:24.126-05:00Laura, the reason this may cut into your earnings ...Laura, the reason this may cut into your earnings is because your contract for ebooks gives you a percentage of net, not list.<br /><br />If you got a percentage of list, it wouldn't matter how the pie between publisher and retailer was cut.<br /><br />All my trad contracts give me a percentage of list for hardcover and paper, and a percentage of net for ebooks.<br /><br />the problem is in the contract between us and the publishers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-91617299808065412272014-07-09T23:41:33.273-05:002014-07-09T23:41:33.273-05:00(head desk)
I deserve no ice cream.(head desk)<br /><br /><br />I deserve no ice cream.Laura Resnickhttp://www.lauraresnick.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-7448139671708679642014-07-09T23:30:15.368-05:002014-07-09T23:30:15.368-05:00OHMYGOD, why didn't someone do an intervention...<i>OHMYGOD, why didn't someone do an intervention before I reached this point</i><br /><br />I call Eisler when I need an intervention, and the bastard usually winds up joining me to fisk. JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-45728140311128515682014-07-09T23:27:51.579-05:002014-07-09T23:27:51.579-05:00You're seeing this from Amazon's point of ...<i>You're seeing this from Amazon's point of view, whereas I'm seeing it from mine.</i><br /><br />I'm seeing it from an impartial point of view.<br /><br />If Amazon were wrong in this negotiation, I'd call it that way. I've done so before.<br /><br />I came out against the agency model before there was a DOJ suit, because authors were making less money because of it. <br /><br />Right now, I think I've presented a good case that Hachette is the one harming authors, and wants to raise ebook prices which will harm authors and readers. That's why I'm backing Amazon.<br /><br />No one knows the terms of the negotiation, but there is a chance authors could make more money if Amazon wins. If it's about coop and placement dollars, or a percentage of sales thresholds, Hachette could go back to its old wholesale pricing structure, which was better for authors.<br /><br />If not, there's always the option of hiring a lawyer to get your rights back. :)JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-2211384592473644672014-07-09T23:26:43.861-05:002014-07-09T23:26:43.861-05:00And now I'm vowing to get offline for a few da...And now I'm vowing to get offline for a few days, because I have just left a post on Shatzkin's blog, and OHMYGOD, why didn't someone do an intervention before I reached this point, I need help, how did I spiral this far out of control!!!!????Laura Resnickhttp://www.lauraresnick.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-37570777107734738382014-07-09T23:10:24.186-05:002014-07-09T23:10:24.186-05:00Not in need of sympathy.
Not convinced any other...Not in need of sympathy. <br /><br />Not convinced any other writers are, either.<br /><br />It's a big wide world full of options. I like my publisher and I like doing business with them. But if this doesn't work out, it certainly won't be the first time for me (it'll just be the first time things didn't work out with a publisher I -like-). And unlike all the other times, there are lots of options and opportunities these days--for every writer.<br /><br /><br />Amazon is the source of a lot of those options and opportunities, which I appreciate.<br /><br />But that doesn't mean I'm =in favor of= them taking a bigger cut of the ebook revenue of my traditionally published books. <br /><br />Joe asked: "If Amazon wants to go back to the old deal--you know, the ones before the illegal collusion--why shouldn't that be allowed?"<br /><br />You're seeing this from Amazon's point of view, whereas I'm seeing it from mine. I've never said that it shouldn't be allowed. I've said that a bigger cut of revenue for Amazon on my traditionally ebooks would mean a smaller cut for me--and I'm not in favor of any position that reduces my income in order to increase the income of a corporation. <br /><br /><br />That does not mean, as you have suggested, that I am am therefore in favor of collusive price-fixing and those who engage in it. It is actually possible NOT to be in favor of EITHER of two bad things, rather than having to pick one of them to like.Laura Resnickhttp://www.lauraresnick.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-27454529200675376652014-07-09T22:52:35.596-05:002014-07-09T22:52:35.596-05:00I hope you continue to blog (as long as it doesn&#...I hope you continue to blog (as long as it doesn't affect your writing, family, or personal time). <br /><br />I adore Hugh Howey, Passive Guy, David Gaughran; etc, but the more voices and perspectives there are out there, the better.<br /><br />Each person in this world is affected by their own perspective and experiences. They have their own way of saying things. They can reach different people and that's always a good thing.<br /><br />Hugh Howey is an empathetic dollbaby and his enthusiasm can be contagious. Passive Guy has such an understated, dry humor and is very insightful. David Gauhran regularly puts reporters to shame with his ability to collect data and present it with the dots neatly collected. I'd miss any of them if they decided to close up shop. I miss Kris Rusch's perspective for that very reason. <br /><br />But there's no one out there who can put things quite the way you do. Sometimes you need someone who will mock the kings as well as the fools. To use acid to scour, to use bluntness, and down to earth, even earthy, common sense and humor to make your points. <br /><br />I'm not buttering you up or anything. I don't always agree with you and sometimes I do feel the way you've put things will close more ears than the number of eyes they open. But I wouldn't trade you for anyone.Klawziehttp://www.patreon.com/klawzie/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-65691965287384099092014-07-09T22:47:20.437-05:002014-07-09T22:47:20.437-05:00but all the buzz insists that whatever the result ...<i>but all the buzz insists that whatever the result of these negotiations is, it will affect the remaining publishing corporations lined up to negotiate with Amazon--including the one that distributes my traditionally published books.</i><br /><br />That will probably be the case.<br /><br />Not a good spot to be in, and I sympathize. JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.com