222. The Publishing Discord
photo Harlequin, year 1761 by Maurice Sand curtsy: Wikipedia
It all began when Harlequin and Thomas Nelson announced an independent publishing imprint alongside their existing traditionally publisher Houses in November 2009. Here are extracts of the tumult it caused.
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2009
Posted by Victoria Strauss for Writer Beware
SFWA has joined RWA and MWA in issuing a statement about Harlequin Horizons.
SFWA has joined RWA and MWA in issuing a statement about Harlequin Horizons.
“Until such time as Harlequin changes course, and returns to a model of legitimately working with authors instead of charging authors for publishing services, SFWA has no choice but to be absolutely clear that NO titles from ANY Harlequin imprint will be counted as qualifying for membership in SFWA. Further, Harlequin should be on notice that while the rules of our annual Nebula Award do not expressly prohibit self-published titles from winning, it is highly unlikely that our membership would ever nominate or vote for a work that was published in this manner.”
Extract to my response objecting to the narrow mindedness of this decision to ban authors from various writers' associations
“Eva Ulian, while I agree with you that services like Harlequin Horizons are a kind of hybrid between vanity publishing and self-publishing--i.e., they have all the characteristics of vanity publishing but also a few of the qualities of self-publishing--I think that calling them "assisted publishing" (this is a new term invented by Author Solutions) adds nothing to the discussion. A proliferation of terminology doesn't clarify anything; it just confuses the issue further.
You also are not correct in your description of what these services offer--for instance, they don't let you publish your book "exactly the way you want it," since they offer only pre-set packages, and their distribution doesn't reach beyond the Internet--or in your discussion of royalties. Commercial publishers pay more than 5%--a good deal more, depending on the format of the book--and they pay on cover price, while self-publishing services' 20% royalty is paid on net, which can reduce the amount on which royalties are calculated to less than 50% of cover price.
But I take issue especially with this:
You pay, only a partial amount, for the cost involved for publication in Assisted Publishing.
First, this isn't true. You pay the full cost, in two installments--once with the fee you pay upfront, and a second time with every book sold, since the self-publishing company keeps the lion's share of sales proceeds, covering both overhead and manufacturing costs.
Second, Rachelle Gardner's cost breakdown is for a commercially published book. The figures she gives include the costs of editing, designing, cover art, marketing, warehousing, sales, and the printing of thousands of copies. Self-publishing companies don't do any of this. They don't edit (unless you pay extra fees); interiors and cover art are not custom-designed, but done from templates (unless, again, you pay extra); there is no sales representation; there's no meaningful marketing (and the marketing packages self-pub companies sell--once again, at extra cost--are rarely worth the money); and there's no warehousing or volume printing, since books are produced on demand. Self-publishing companies have a lot of overhead, but the cost of actually producing the books is minimal.
This kind of publishing absolutely is there to make money off of writers. It wouldn't exist otherwise. It's big business, and it is extremely lucrative, and that's why commercial publishers like Harlequin and Thomas Nelson have gotten involved--not from any desire to open their doors to writers.
One of the things that bothers me most about vanity publishing of any stripe--from the old-fashioned vanities that shipped you boxes of books to molder away in your basement, to the print on demand self-publishing services that are trying to re-brand themselves as "indie" publishers or "assisted publishing", to the sleazy deceptive pay-to-play companies that pass themselves off as "real" publishers--is that they take advantage of authors twice: first by taking their money, second by brainwashing them into believing all the deceptive hype.”
You also are not correct in your description of what these services offer--for instance, they don't let you publish your book "exactly the way you want it," since they offer only pre-set packages, and their distribution doesn't reach beyond the Internet--or in your discussion of royalties. Commercial publishers pay more than 5%--a good deal more, depending on the format of the book--and they pay on cover price, while self-publishing services' 20% royalty is paid on net, which can reduce the amount on which royalties are calculated to less than 50% of cover price.
But I take issue especially with this:
You pay, only a partial amount, for the cost involved for publication in Assisted Publishing.
First, this isn't true. You pay the full cost, in two installments--once with the fee you pay upfront, and a second time with every book sold, since the self-publishing company keeps the lion's share of sales proceeds, covering both overhead and manufacturing costs.
Second, Rachelle Gardner's cost breakdown is for a commercially published book. The figures she gives include the costs of editing, designing, cover art, marketing, warehousing, sales, and the printing of thousands of copies. Self-publishing companies don't do any of this. They don't edit (unless you pay extra fees); interiors and cover art are not custom-designed, but done from templates (unless, again, you pay extra); there is no sales representation; there's no meaningful marketing (and the marketing packages self-pub companies sell--once again, at extra cost--are rarely worth the money); and there's no warehousing or volume printing, since books are produced on demand. Self-publishing companies have a lot of overhead, but the cost of actually producing the books is minimal.
This kind of publishing absolutely is there to make money off of writers. It wouldn't exist otherwise. It's big business, and it is extremely lucrative, and that's why commercial publishers like Harlequin and Thomas Nelson have gotten involved--not from any desire to open their doors to writers.
One of the things that bothers me most about vanity publishing of any stripe--from the old-fashioned vanities that shipped you boxes of books to molder away in your basement, to the print on demand self-publishing services that are trying to re-brand themselves as "indie" publishers or "assisted publishing", to the sleazy deceptive pay-to-play companies that pass themselves off as "real" publishers--is that they take advantage of authors twice: first by taking their money, second by brainwashing them into believing all the deceptive hype.”
I then go and comment on Caveat Emptor- here are extracts from that episode:
“I think self-publishing (NOT vanity like HQ and Thomas Nelson are offering) is a viable option for some non-fiction authors who have a platform and a unique hook. Bottom line for fiction authors: forget about it. Yes, you can cite one or two examples of unique success, but 99.9% of self-published fiction is a waste of time and money.
A lot of people are going to waste a lot of money at HQ and Thomas Nelson using their vanity press arm. And HQ and Thomas Nelson are going to make a lot of money off these wanna-be writers—not readers. Makes you wonder what kind of business template that is.
To all you wanna-be authors. Caveat Emptor.”
This entry was posted on Sunday, November 22nd, 2009 at 11:20 am and is filed under General Posts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
And here are some responses:
Carolyn Jewel says:
Thank you for your post. You’re so very right.
Jessica Scott says:
Bob, you raise excellent points in your post. I think there is a lot of pressure on new writers but also, as you pointed, out, we don’t even know the right questions to ask. I think the Harlequin and Nelson ventures seek to make money off of new writer desperation and lack of knowledge.
And yes, it is caveat emptor but it’s a shame that some people are going to get screwed and are going to take it with a smile.
And yes, it is caveat emptor but it’s a shame that some people are going to get screwed and are going to take it with a smile.
Then this blogger had this to say on my statements
Keri says:
November 28th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
Eva, Harl Horizons (Or Dellarte Press as they’re now calling themselves), is NOT assisted publishing. It’s vanity publishing, pure and simple. YOU PAY THEM to publish your books, and then you give them half your royalties as well. That does not sound like a good deal to me. How our they assisting you? All they’re doing is providing editorial services (at a cost), printing your book (at a cost) and providing distribution services (at a cost). And those distribution services are nothing that you, as a self pubbed author, cannot do yourself (amazon don’t charge authors to list books–anyone can do it if you have an isbn). I have nothing against self or vanity publishing if that’s the route you want to go, but please be aware that there are cheaper options out there.
As for your comments on traditional publishing–5% is on the low side. Most authors get around 8%. WHich might not sound much, but consider the fact that with traditional publishers you’re getting your books in store and online–with self/vanity publishing, you’re only available online, and then only minimally. Also, trad publishing provides all the publicity and backing, and they’re taking the risk cost wise, not the author. The author is paid an advance and may never get more than that, but at least they have money in hand, up front. With a self/vanity publisher, the author shells out money upfront, and takes all the risk themselves. They may never make their money back, let alone profit, as the average number of sales for a self/vanity press book is around 79 copies sold. The average trad published author will sell at least several thousand (although if they only sold that, it’d be unlikely they’d be offered another contract).
And this blog supporter said in defence:
- Zee says:
November 29th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Keri I thank you for first of all for your original post, and for this follow-up. It was very eye opening. I am thinking of eventually publishing my work and found this very helpful. I like what you said about sometimes feeling your work is better than what others may think. You are right…sometimes we aren’t ready. We often times get fed up and impatient because things are not happening fast enough for us. If being an author and getting your work published was extremely easy, everyone would have something out there. I will not insult you by saying what you should or should not know because your are “in the business”. What I will do is say thank you for all the people out there who may have walked into a bad situation if not for you and authors like you who have decided to get the word out.
I then rest my case with an agency I much admire who after I said the following:
“....I’ve decided to take fate into my own hands and not let what I can’t do get in the way of what I can do- take a completely different course from traditional publishing, especially now with the new imprints of WestBow and DellArte. I think I am quite happy with that- an opportunity I must not sneer upon as many have suggested I should do, because it is my only opportunity of dying a reputably published author. Yet, there are many out there who would so much like to spoil that for me. I can’t understand that- and I don’t believe it’s because I am being ripped off… far from it.”
I got this advice:
Eva,
It sounds like you are going in to this self-publishing venture with your eyes wide open. I think many of the critics complained of writer-hopefuls being duped but if you’ve studied the alternatives and decided self-publishing is for you, there’s no deception.
For someone who simply wants to hold his book in his hand, it meets that goal. Getting it into the hands of readers is the rub.
It sounds like you are going in to this self-publishing venture with your eyes wide open. I think many of the critics complained of writer-hopefuls being duped but if you’ve studied the alternatives and decided self-publishing is for you, there’s no deception.
For someone who simply wants to hold his book in his hand, it meets that goal. Getting it into the hands of readers is the rub.
Trying to get published is sort of like trying to make it in Hollywood.
There’s a lot of talent out there and the pool is small. Picture a serious actor who simply gets fed-up with the auditions and trying to beat down the doors. He decides he wants to act and doesn’t care if he’s ever a box office hit or even if anyone comes to see him act. He rents a theater and puts on a one-man show. That’s like self-publishing. If you want to be a published author and don’t care whether you are financially successful and want to write whether readers are there or not, self-publishing is a viable option.
There’s a lot of talent out there and the pool is small. Picture a serious actor who simply gets fed-up with the auditions and trying to beat down the doors. He decides he wants to act and doesn’t care if he’s ever a box office hit or even if anyone comes to see him act. He rents a theater and puts on a one-man show. That’s like self-publishing. If you want to be a published author and don’t care whether you are financially successful and want to write whether readers are there or not, self-publishing is a viable option.
As to “fate” being against you, I’m so glad not to have to depend on some whim of the Fates. God is still in charge and calls on us to be “workman who need not be ashamed.” (2 Tim 2:15) It’s so hard when we want something and his answer seems to be not now. But keep working on the craft. If you decided to self-publish do it as an adjunct. Start your next book and keep banging on those doors.
Wendy Lawton
To which I answer:
“Thank you Wendy for your reply, but I don’t have that much life left to do all the things I have to do to get traditionally published. Yes, I agree self-publishing is as you describe it is hence I’ve refrained from doing just that. However, strangely enough, I don’t think WestBow will let me act out all on my own to an empty theatre, do you?”
And the Angent answers
Eva, I haven’t really studied the Westbow model but it’s a good question to ask them. I wish you the very best.
Wendy Lawton
There are more I could have posted but after a while it just gets repetitive, however my answer as to why I published with WestBow can be found on my next blog. Then perhaps you can let me know if I made a good or a bad choice
The Publishing Discord: My Answer
My Interview by WhoHub on WRITING
Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
Comments