# Your Just a Monkey With a Keyboard..... Who Me?



## Plasticweld

A quote from Michael Henderson in this morning's New York Times discussing E publishing and the future with Amazon for writers.  Great article, it goes into depth about the new pay structure and format used by Amazon and the reaction by some of the more popular writers there and its effect.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/28/t...thors-turn-up-noses.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0


----------



## TKent

Great article.


----------



## shadowwalker

Chickens coming home to roost. Some have been warning that Amazon has a long and negative history with publishers, and that self-publishers would find themselves in the same boat eventually. Books have been the draw for the rest of Amazon's products for a long time, so taking a loss on them - or making the writers take the loss - should come as no surprise to anyone.


----------



## Riis Marshall

Hello Folks

This silliness supports my personal plan for 2015.

In 2013 I published my first thriller on Kindle, a standalone project. Since then I have been trying to market it with limited success.

Following that, I am nearly finished with my second in a series - an estimated 20-40,000 words to go, and I'm pretty sure how it's going to work out.

I have set myself a target that by 21 march, 2015, the first day of Spring, I will have acquired an agent as the first step on the road to landing a deal with a traditional, bricks and mortar publisher who publishes real books made out of paper.

Am I recommending this as the best way for anybody else to go? certainly not. Will it work for an unpublished author in a crowded market? I have absolutely no idea.

Having been through this process for a non-fiction work in the '90s, I'm aware my three month target may stretch to six or even nine months and we - by then my agent and I - may be looking at a further one to two years to sign a contract with a publisher. But bring it on - I'm ready! Maybe we writers should be as suspicious of Amazon's long-range plans as are independent bookstore owners.

I'm glad we've had this little chat.

All the best with your writing.

Warmest regards and a very happy New Year
Riis


----------



## Caragula

Thing is Riis, you can always self publish, so why not go the traditional route first.  If you end up with a decent publisher you will get the marketing etc. and support.  It will either work out or it won't.  If it works out, great, keep going.  If not, that book has had a lot more eyeballs on it than you might otherwise have been able to manage, and you can then go on and self publish, but from a better position, recognition-wise.


----------



## FleshEater

I really like this:

Complaints about literary overproduction are ancient. “To write and have  something published is less and less something special,” the French  critic Sainte-Beuve wrote in 1839. “Why not me, too? everyone asks.”

Anymore, it's even less special to have something published when it's quite simple to do yourself and throw it on the pile for all to dig through. 

Honestly, the self-publishing is out of control. I've searched Amazon before, looking for a new Horror author. There are so many that I don't even know where to begin. So what do I do? I go back to the tried and true names. Yep...I rarely read a new author because I'm not going to waste money on garbage, which is what a lot of self published novels seem to be. Now, there are good self published titles out there, but how does one find them?


----------



## Terry D

Caragula said:


> Thing is Riis, you can always self publish, so why not go the traditional route first.  If you end up with a decent publisher you will get the marketing etc. and support.  It will either work out or it won't.  If it works out, great, keep going.  If not, that book has had a lot more eyeballs on it than you might otherwise have been able to manage, and you can then go on and self publish, but from a better position, recognition-wise.



Consider this: I spend a year writing my book and putting it into a shape I would be happy having someone read, then I spend 6? 9? 12? months finding an agent. That agent then spends part of her time promoting my book to publishers for the next 6 months before finding one willing to read the MS. Now my book is in an editor queue for what, 3 more months? More? But finally they decide to take a chance and put it into their print schedule for 18 months from the time they get a signed contract. That's what, 33 to 40 months from the time I finish my book to the time it hits the stands, and, with me being an unknown I'm not going to get front-of-the-store placement or any significant promotion.

That's not an unrealistic time-table. If I choose to self-publish I have the book read by betas, or edited, 3 months after I finish writing it, and then I spend, at most, a few weeks formatting it for my chosen outlet. 4 Months after my final revision/clean-up I have my book in front of readers. Then I need to choose how much promotional work I want to do (much of which will be the same work publishers will be asking me to do). 

I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from traditional publishing (I fully plan to go that route with my current WIP), but not everyone wants to invest 3+ years in hopes of getting a few books in book stores.


----------



## FleshEater

Terry D said:


> Consider this: I spend a year writing my book and putting it into a shape I would be happy having someone read, then I spend 6? 9? 12? months finding an agent. That agent then spends part of her time promoting my book to publishers for the next 6 months before finding one willing to read the MS. Now my book is in an editor queue for what, 3 more months? More? But finally they decide to take a chance and put it into their print schedule for 18 months from the time they get a signed contract. That's what, 33 to 40 months from the time I finish my book to the time it hits the stands, and, with me being an unknown I'm not going to get front-of-the-store placement or any significant promotion.
> 
> That's not an unrealistic time-table. If I choose to self-publish I have the book read by betas, or edited, 3 months after I finish writing it, and then I spend, at most, a few weeks formatting it for my chosen outlet. 4 Months after my final revision/clean-up I have my book in front of readers. Then I need to choose how much promotional work I want to do (much of which will be the same work publishers will be asking me to do).
> 
> I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from traditional publishing (I fully plan to go that route with my current WIP), but not everyone wants to invest 3+ years in hopes of getting a few books in book stores.



That may be the case. But if a publisher is willing to spend money on you, chances are you'll see greater rewards from the experience. If nothing else, at least it's something to put on your resume when submitting to future publishers. 

I've heard excellent things about your novel Chase, so don't take offense to this. But, I think self-publishing gets a bad reputation because there is more garbage than anything else. Like the title of the thread says, any monkey with a keyboard can become a writer now. 

Getting traditionally published speaks volumes. I mean, a publisher WANTS to invest in you. That says a lot. Even if you don't become a millionaire, or earn more than a couple hundred dollars, the fact still remains that someone found enough value in your work to publish it AND pay you for it.


----------



## Riis Marshall

Hello Terry

Based on my 25 years professional experience in work management and workplace performance improvement, I am still comfortable arguing if you self publish you can expect to spend 80% of your time promoting which leaves you 20% of your time to write. And if you go the traditional agent/bricks and mortar publisher route, you can split your time 50%-50% between promoting and writing.

And if you doubt this hypothetical 80%-20% split, I can refer you to a - successful - self-published author who three weeks ago traveled 150 miles north of Edinburgh twice in one week from where she lives to deliver talks in two of our local libraries. We met her a year ago when she was up here on a similar trip. What else is this but promotional effort and how much more could she have written in those two days? 

My choice, which is not necessarily anybody else's, is I would rather spend more time writing and less time promoting. Yes, you're right, it takes a long time but at least you'll have that time to write the next two or maybe even three books in the series.

And you could argue with equal vigour that self-publishing gives you a level of control over editorial issues, cover design, formatting, etc. you relinquish to a publisher.

Thanks for starting an interesting thread, Plasticweld. Let's keep it going.

All the best with your writing.

Warmest regards and happy New Year
Riis


----------



## Apex

Writing a good story takes time. Securing a good literary agent takes time. If a publisher buys your manuscript, it takes one, or two years before it hits stores. It may sell, and it may not. Always secure an agent who believes in your work. Always secure an agent who will push for a six figure advance. More times than not, all a writer earns is the advance.
If you go the self-publish, or Ebook route, you will have to do all the things a standard publisher does, and spend the same amount of time, and money. 
Yes I know, a few writers who have self-published, and Ebookers’ have made a great deal of money…the key word here is…FEW. 
I am not saying, “Stop writing.” I’m saying, “Never stop writing…never give up.”
Very few people make it in anything over night. Give yourself ten years.  To the young writers I suggest, Go to San Francisco, or New York. Secure a position with an agent, or standard publisher. Work for minimum wage. Mop floors…just get in the door. You will not only learn the publishing business, you will make contacts. Contacts are the engine that will pull your career along.  If you can not secure a position as suggested, go to a writers conference at least  once a year…meet agents. A writer who just sits home, and submits, has less of a chance breaking into the business. Take note: The key word here is BUSINESS.

Turn a deaf ear to those who say, “Oh those damn agents. They think they are gods.”  Agents pray each morning on the way to work…”Oh dear god…let there be a good story on my desk.” Even agents who are athirst.
Writers are the apex of the publishing industry…without writers there is no publishing industry. But, it is up to you to build a manuscript that will sell, and learn how to get that manuscript into the hands of a good agent. A writer who wants the title, Author, must earn a seat at the table. There is no back door. 

I keep the name of one author close by. He was a blind man. He could not write. This man would sing his stories. Stories passed from mouth to ear. He was like an actor of his day. A man who sang stories of history, drama, and adventure. At the time there was no written language for his people. A written language was invented to record his stories. Who was this blind story teller? His name was Homer. Today is know as the father of the literary world. If a blind man can leave a great work to the world, so can you, and me.
If you have never read his work, do so…”The Odyssey of Homer.


----------



## InstituteMan

The thing is, the entire publishing industry is changing faster than anyone imagines. I'm not sure what comes next, but I'm pretty sure it won't look like what we are used to. I suspect that's all to the good for those of us who aren't established, but it's also no guarantee that I or anyone else will succeed (whatever that means).


----------



## Apex

InstituteMan said:


> The thing is, the entire publishing industry is changing faster than anyone imagines. I'm not sure what comes next, but I'm pretty sure it won't look like what we are used to. I suspect that's all to the good for those of us who aren't established, but it's also no guarantee that I or anyone else will succeed (whatever that means).



Yes it is changing...for the good. In the past there were thousands of little book stores. Big money came in, and ran the little guys out of business. These money hogs, once they had the market, they would only buy from publishers on contract. Books that did not sell within xxxdays, the publisher had to buy back...that hurt publishers. Used book stores started poping up. These usednbook stores buy these buy back books from publishers. That started to hurt the big stores. If you have watched, the big book stores have started going out of business...they are starting to sell coffee, and other junk trying to hold onto customers. The little stores are coming back strong. The harder it is for folks to make money, the more they look to save. Yes the industry is changing...it's going back to what it used to be. Good times are around the corner. The big money will look for other fields to make money. Once the little guy is back in control, and publisher do not have to buy books back...Those who have trained to write good stories will again be in demand...Yes, the industry is changing.


----------



## shadowwalker

The industry has been changing for decades. Some changes have been good for writers, some not. There isn't an industry in the world that's 100% good for the worker bees.

As to trade versus self, yes, sometimes it can take a couple years to get from acceptance to bookstore, but I've learned patience over the past 60 years so that doesn't bother me. I'm not at all interested in being a publisher, or dealing with all that entails. JMO, and no disrespect to your opinion, Terry, but time should be the last reason for self-publishing. I think too many writers get impatient and self-publish before they or the book are ready. They don't understand the time and money and stress it will cost them to do it right; they just don't want to wait 2 years to see their book out there. So it takes two years - I'm going to be writing during that time, not trying to figure out how to get reviews or convincing the local bookstore to stock it or trying to come up with the money for a good, commercial cover.


----------



## dale

shadowwalker said:


> The industry has been changing for decades. Some changes have been good for writers, some not. There isn't an industry in the world that's 100% good for the worker bees.
> 
> As to trade versus self, yes, sometimes it can take a couple years to get from acceptance to bookstore, but I've learned patience over the past 60 years so that doesn't bother me. I'm not at all interested in being a publisher, or dealing with all that entails. JMO, and no disrespect to your opinion, Terry, but time should be the last reason for self-publishing. I think too many writers get impatient and self-publish before they or the book are ready. They don't understand the time and money and stress it will cost them to do it right; they just don't want to wait 2 years to see their book out there. So it takes two years - I'm going to be writing during that time, not trying to figure out how to get reviews or convincing the local bookstore to stock it or trying to come up with the money for a good, commercial cover.



yeah. the impatience thing is a killer. it took like about a dozen rejections from big name agents before i became impatient
and sent the manuscript to small publishers. and what good did it do me? sure, the book got accepted and published fairly
quick, but it didn't sell worth a damn. so what good did it do for me to take the impatient route? just to "say" i have a book
published? well whoop-dee-doo. i won't make that same mistake of being impatient again. i know that much.


----------



## Terry D

FleshEater said:


> That may be the case. But if a publisher is willing to spend money on you, chances are you'll see greater rewards from the experience. If nothing else, at least it's something to put on your resume when submitting to future publishers.
> 
> I've heard excellent things about your novel Chase, so don't take offense to this. But, I think self-publishing gets a bad reputation because there is more garbage than anything else. Like the title of the thread says, any monkey with a keyboard can become a writer now.
> 
> Getting traditionally published speaks volumes. I mean, a publisher WANTS to invest in you. That says a lot. Even if you don't become a millionaire, or earn more than a couple hundred dollars, the fact still remains that someone found enough value in your work to publish it AND pay you for it.



I'm not advocating self over traditional publishing at all. I've gone the self pub route on three books now, and it was for very specific reasons in each case. _The Legacy of Aaron Geist_ was written in the 90's and its subject matter (a traditional, vampire story, more Stoker than Meyer) is not really marketable today, but the book is a good one (it's been reviewed well) and I wanted to give self-publishing a try. Currently there are more than 500 copies of Legacy on shelves and in Kindles other than my own. _Chase_ ran long (206,000 words after editing out 20K) and would not have even been considered by an agent or publisher simply for its size. My current collection of short stories is just that, a collection of shorts which, again, agents and publishers won't consider from an unknown author. My current WIP will be 90K to 100K (right in the publishing wheelhouse) and of a genre which is sellable. This one will be marketed to agents with an eye on traditional publishing. I will not, however, let it languish out there trying to find a home for years. Getting it into a bookstore, spine out at the back of the store (until it's put on the 50% off dump table) isn't worth that sort of time investment.

There seems to be a misconception that just because a publisher chooses your book, they will automatically pump-up the marketing machine for it. That's not the case at all. Most new, and even mid-list, authors receive very little marketing from their publishers. I admit that the odds of 'hitting it', even to a small degree, are better with a traditional publishing house than through self publishing, and it does look far better on your writing resume. It just depends on what you want for a particular book.



Riis Marshall said:


> Hello Terry
> 
> Based on my 25 years professional experience in work management and workplace performance improvement, I am still comfortable arguing if you self publish you can expect to spend 80% of your time promoting which leaves you 20% of your time to write. And if you go the traditional agent/bricks and mortar publisher route, you can split your time 50%-50% between promoting and writing.
> 
> And if you doubt this hypothetical 80%-20% split, I can refer you to a - successful - self-published author who three weeks ago traveled 150 miles north of Edinburgh twice in one week from where she lives to deliver talks in two of our local libraries. We met her a year ago when she was up here on a similar trip. What else is this but promotional effort and how much more could she have written in those two days?
> 
> My choice, which is not necessarily anybody else's, is I would rather spend more time writing and less time promoting. Yes, you're right, it takes a long time but at least you'll have that time to write the next two or maybe even three books in the series.
> 
> And you could argue with equal vigour that self-publishing gives you a level of control over editorial issues, cover design, formatting, etc. you relinquish to a publisher.
> 
> Thanks for starting an interesting thread, Plasticweld. Let's keep it going.
> 
> All the best with your writing.
> 
> Warmest regards and happy New Year
> Riis



Sounds like we do the same sort of work, Riis. I will argue with your 80-20 split, however. I spend no less time working on current projects now than I did before publishing any of my books. Any promotional time comes from other time buckets, not from my writing.

The control offered by self-publishing, really wasn't a draw for me. I'd be happy to let someone else worry about cover design, formatting, and promotion. I have learned a lot by doing those things, and have enjoyed the process, but would happily relinquish it.



shadowwalker said:


> The industry has been changing for decades. Some changes have been good for writers, some not. There isn't an industry in the world that's 100% good for the worker bees.
> 
> As to trade versus self, yes, sometimes it can take a couple years to get from acceptance to bookstore, but I've learned patience over the past 60 years so that doesn't bother me. I'm not at all interested in being a publisher, or dealing with all that entails. JMO, and no disrespect to your opinion, Terry, but time should be the last reason for self-publishing. I think too many writers get impatient and self-publish before they or the book are ready. They don't understand the time and money and stress it will cost them to do it right; they just don't want to wait 2 years to see their book out there. So it takes two years - I'm going to be writing during that time, not trying to figure out how to get reviews or convincing the local bookstore to stock it or trying to come up with the money for a good, commercial cover.



I think the reasons for making the choice are up to the individual. Time is an issue for some people. And one important thing to remember is that there is no assurance that going the traditional route is going to result in your book being bought by a publisher. You can spend a lot of time waiting for responses from agents and publishers only to have that response be 'no'. 

Again, this is a choice for each writer to make based on their own wants and needs. I'm not trying to convince anyone which way to go.


----------



## Kyle R

Waiting to hear back from agents and/or publications sure does suck.

I'm still trying the traditional route, though. My plan is to query agents and then work on writing my next book while my queries are out there, floating in the cyber slush-piles.

This is what I've been doing with my short stories (submitting, then working on new stories while I wait to hear back).

At any given time I have multiple stories out for consideration, and I'm working on more in the meantime. This seems to be what many of the authors I read recommend. "Don't just write one story and hope to make it on that," they seem to say. "Write dozens."

It makes sense that with more output, (assuming each story is written to the best of one's abilities) and more submissions, one's chances of making it increase. It sure takes a lot of work, though!

I can definitely see the appeal of self-publishing. And some authors have done very well with it. I've considered it for a few of my novelettes (which tend to be difficult to place in the paying market).

I still have stars in my eyes, though, and plan to chase that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow with a bazooka. And if I don't make it, I'll shell the whole publishing industry into a smoldering heap.


----------



## dale

@kyle....now if i ever get stuck with a novelette? i probably will go the "amazon singles" route or something like that with it. because you're right. unless you're an already "famous" name? they're almost impossible to get published through traditional means.


----------



## Kyle R

I'll look into _Amazon Singles_, thanks Dale.

Either that, or publish under a pseudonym—Steven King—and hope to fool readers into buying. lol


----------



## Apex

Steinbect wrote a novelette, 48,000 words...it is still selling well after all these years. "Cannery Row." Publishers do buy novelettes if well written. Do novelettes sell? Yes. Many readers like something they can read when traveling.


----------



## dale

48,000 words isn't considered a "novelette". that's a LONG novella or a short novel. a novelette is like 8000-15,000 words.
there are a few traditional novella publishers out there. i have a 22,000 word novella published, which barely crossed the minimum
length the publisher's requirements listed. they wanted a novella to be between 20,000 and 40,000 words.


----------



## escorial




----------



## Terry D

Apex said:


> Steinbect wrote a novelette, 48,000 words...it is still selling well after all these years. "Cannery Row." Publishers do buy novelettes if well written. Do novelettes sell? Yes. Many readers like something they can read when traveling.



When Steinbeck was publishing, 48,000 was considered novel-length. Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 is only 45,000 words, but still considered a novel. Most current publishers still consider 45K the break-point for novel-length, although lengths are generally greater now.


----------



## InstituteMan

My biggest concern with traditional publishing right now is that I'm not sure what it will look like in 5 or 10 years. I suspect that a lot of it will be gone. Even assuming the big publishing houses will still be around, I certainly don't want to put all my eggs in that basket for fear of breaking them due to circumstamces outside of my control.

My merely big concern with traditional publishing is that from the outside looking in it seems like it may be becoming harder and harder for an outsider to break in. I am very much an outsider, and it seems like the best way to get a good deal from my outsider's position is to write and market and get readers in sufficient numbers to be irresistible to the publishers. Of course, at that point, you may be better off on your own . . .

I'm not opposed to having an agent and a book deal, but I'm not pinning my hopes to it.


----------



## dale

InstituteMan said:


> My biggest concern with traditional publishing right now is that I'm not sure what it will look like in 5 or 10 years. I suspect that a lot of it will be gone. Even assuming the big publishing houses will still be around, I certainly don't want to put all my eggs in that basket for fear of breaking them due to circumstamces outside of my control.
> 
> My merely big concern with traditional publishing is that from the outside looking in it seems like it may be becoming harder and harder for an outsider to break in. I am very much an outsider, and it seems like the best way to get a good deal from my outsider's position is to write and market and get readers in sufficient numbers to be irresistible to the publishers. Of course, at that point, you may be better off on your own . . .
> 
> I'm not opposed to having an agent and a book deal, but I'm not pinning my hopes to it.



  i don't see traditional publishing going away, but i do see it becoming more "branched out" in the future...much like there were a few small record companies that ended up signing artists that became extremely successful in the music industry. as far as self-publishing? i see it remaining the way it is now. an ocean of feces with a few pearls cast within it.


----------



## shadowwalker

I'm not worried about trade publishing disappearing. It's been around for a long time, and evolves constantly. I don't worry about being a newcomer either - where else are publishers going to get new material when their current writers quit, die, or otherwise move on? And I'm not sure where this 'little or no marketing' comes in either - does it really make sense that publishers will not do what needs to be done to sell their books - those things that keep them in business? Why on earth would they invest time and money in your book and then not try to make it as successful as possible? Will they put out a full page ad in the NY Times? Not likely. But they are going to work hard to get your book in the hands of _booksellers_, which is where the sales come from.


----------



## Caragula

Hi Terry,
Certainly can't argue on how long it takes to get a novel published via the traditional route.  But even if it's a couple of years, it took three times that to write it.  Given I'm already surviving without the income a self published novel could provide, I figure I've nothing to lose.  I can get on with the next novel in the meantime.  I am deferring potential income, but the difference is that even if I make no more than the advance, the marketing and publicity will be priceless.  I'm a father of three and in a senior management position.  My time to market my work is woefully limited compared to the time I want/need to write.  I'm hoping the publisher will make the difference.  If not, and we go our separate ways, I'll put it out on Amazon and move on.

I won't, in that scenario, have done enough I'm sure to market my work to make a noise, certainly not in the fantasy segment, but that's a fact of my life.  I have to have faith the quality will carry some recommendations through and success would no doubt be deferred, if not indefinitely, then probably far far longer than if I'd got into some bookstores with this one in a couple of years time.


----------



## dale

Caragula said:


> Hi Terry,
> Certainly can't argue on how long it takes to get a novel published via the traditional route.  But even if it's a couple of years, it took three times that to write it.  Given I'm already surviving without the income a self published novel could provide, I figure I've nothing to lose.  I can get on with the next novel in the meantime.  I am deferring potential income, but the difference is that even if I make no more than the advance, the marketing and publicity will be priceless.  I'm a father of three and in a senior management position.  My time to market my work is woefully limited compared to the time I want/need to write.  I'm hoping the publisher will make the difference.  If not, and we go our separate ways, I'll put it out on Amazon and move on.
> 
> I won't, in that scenario, have done enough I'm sure to market my work to make a noise, certainly not in the fantasy segment, but that's a fact of my life.  I have to have faith the quality will carry some recommendations through and success would no doubt be deferred, if not indefinitely, then probably far far longer than if I'd got into some bookstores with this one in a couple of years time.



hmmm...this seems like a very well-reasoned and thoughtful reply. you've weighed the options to your predicament
 and have carefully approached a reasonable consequence scenario to your variety of options, in each case-scenario.
 are you speaking spanish or greek or latin or something? and if you are? am i now typing in spanish or greek or latin or something?


----------



## dvspec

For those with a business mind, this would be a great time to set up as an e-publisher.  Specialize in one genre, select only the best writing you can get, make sure it's polished, proofed, and edited thoroughly and put it out there for a cut of the profits.  The e-publisher would focus on the business side of marketing and let the writer do the creative part.  

Think along the lines of "if you like this big name writer, you'll probably like these unknowns".  Make the unknowns your focus.  I love books by Dick Francis, Brad Thor, Daniel Silva, and Jim Butcher.  I am always looking for writers that are similar, but have a hard time wading through the crap.  I don't care what the recommendation sites say, Vince Flynn isn't even in the same class as Brad Thor or Daniel Silva.  If there was one place out there where I could get similar books, that is where I would go.


----------



## dale

dvspec said:


> For those with a business mind, this would be a great time to set up as an e-publisher.  Specialize in one genre, select only the best writing you can get, make sure it's polished, proofed, and edited thoroughly and put it out there for a cut of the profits.  The e-publisher would focus on the business side of marketing and let the writer do the creative part.
> 
> Think along the lines of "if you like this big name writer, you'll probably like these unknowns".  Make the unknowns your focus.  I love books by Dick Francis, Brad Thor, Daniel Silva, and Jim Butcher.  I am always looking for writers that are similar, but have a hard time wading through the crap.  I don't care what the recommendation sites say, Vince Flynn isn't even in the same class as Brad Thor or Daniel Silva.  If there was one place out there where I could get similar books, that is where I would go.



would it? not if you're gonna give any kind of advance...or even if you ain't gonna charge a writer anything. 
i mean...what's it cost to put a book on createspace now? it used to be about $300. then, if you want a quality cover?
that's gonna be about $100 at the least. so a publisher gonna invest at least $400 in a writer. now...factor in just how many 
of these idiots out there who really don't understand the art OR the business are gonna dive into this pit. i'm only saying this,
because as a fledgling writer, i've had quite a few "fledgling publishers" accept my work and send contracts only for
them to cave before my story even came out. one of them even paid me before they caved and got a chance to print
my story. sorry about their luck. i cashed that check and then contracted it elsewhere. but it's just not as easy as what you
make it out to be.


----------



## Caragula

I posted a while back about a potential model whereby literary agents who have work they can't sell, but believe in, could act as a useful filter.  I imagine a savvy person could link up these agents onto a website, they could promote their wares (books that couldn't get a publishing deal) and you, the reader, know that the books on that site were chosen by agents in the belief they were good enough to make everyone (agent, author, publisher) a worthwhile amount of money.


----------



## dale

Caragula said:


> I posted a while back about a potential model whereby literary agents who have work they can't sell, but believe in, could act as a useful filter.  I imagine a savvy person could link up these agents onto a website, they could promote their wares (books that couldn't get a publishing deal) and you, the reader, know that the books on that site were chosen by agents in the belief they were good enough to make everyone (agent, author, publisher) a worthwhile amount of money.



 but to be honest? an "upstart" would have to have "established contacts". you know what i mean? and these "contacts" could be made a number of ways. but if i was gonna try to start some kind of "literary zine project" or "indie publushing company"? i'd understand it would be a long, hard haul without some decent "contacts".


----------



## Plasticweld

From a purely business point of view I sometime wonder if writers are worth more than .10 cents a dozen.  
Supply and demand in business always works. 

Dvspec makes a great point

For those with a business mind, this would be a great time to set up as an e-publisher.  Specialize in one genre, select only the best writing you can get, make sure it's polished, proofed, and edited thoroughly and put it out there for a cut of the profits.  The e-publisher would focus on the business side of marketing and let the writer do the creative part.

 A businessman looks at a couple of things before investing. What is the market?  What is the Supply and what is the mark up. 

The market right now is flooded with stories and writers.  While the quality may leave something to be desired, the fact that there is an abundance of material to choose from, it lessens the value of what is out there. 

Gold is valuable because it is rare, while it might be that great writers are few and far between my gut feeling is that there are a few writers here on the forum that if they wrote the same material 30 to 50 years ago they would be famous and have sold a lot of work.  The pool of talent is huge.  How many talented writers were there back then, how many are there today?

I think each of us know what it's like to pick up a book and find a gem  of an author and then go on to read all of their work.  I do think there would be a market as Dvspec mentions if you knew that if you liked this type of author then you would also enjoy this author.  Getting to be credible in that field would be expensive and a long process, I bet. 


So what are you worth as an author, I can only think back to when my son back in the late 90s became a expert in Cold fusion  a new software language.  Head hunters called all the time to see if he were available, they even used to ask us if he had any friends that did cold fusion and if they were looking for work.  The demand far out weighed the supply. 


I look at this forum and others and there is no shortage of talented writers.  If the profit and return were good, each of you good writers would be getting PMs from Publishers who where cruising the forums searching for talent.  They would want to know about what you were working on and would you be interested in selling?


I make a  living buying and selling, I normally have to dig pretty hard to come up with something I can make money on.  Today we have writers that can get sucked into paying to have their stuff published, are happy to do it for next to nothing. 


It also takes a ton of work to sell a book; this fall I interviewed Peter Parnall he has 85 books to his credit.  His last book that I read which I easily think is his best, sits on the desk and will go no where.  Peter who is 77 says he is too tired and too old to go through the process of promoting his book.  As a businessman I bet I could buy his manuscript for next to nothing.  I doubt that given his track record that it would sell without him pushing it.  His past publishers know about the book, without him to sell it, they are not interested.  Kind of put things in perspective for me. 


The next best way to sell books has yet to happen.  The authors who are good at marketing their skills, willing to hustle and put in lots of time will always rise to the top whether books are sold through a publisher or self sold.  I doubt the days of sitting back and just collecting a check ever really existed.  I know of two successful authors personally Bill Caldwell from Maine and Peter, both guys worked really hard at promoting their work.  Bill was a journalist and could always promote his books through his articles and could keep his work in front of the public.  He often did article for the paper that were similar to his books, the paper would often give him a blurb at the end of the article pushing the book.  Peter spend most of his time traveling to promote his books and give talks at colleges and book stores.  He is a great public speaker and story teller and I would not be surprised if he made almost as much money speaking as he did writing and illustrating.  Both guys made millions at what they did, both worked far more hours than anyone I know.


----------



## Kyle R

Plasticweld said:
			
		

> Both guys made millions at what they did, both worked far more hours than anyone I know.


This seems to be the trend with the most successful people (in any field). They work harder, longer, and more obsessively than the rest.

"Where I excel is ridiculous, sickening, work ethic. You know, while the other guy's sleeping? I'm working." — Will Smith 

"You're in competition with people who have made that decision, who have committed themselves 100 percent. . . If you don't make the same commitment you're not going to compete. It's that simple." — James Cameron

The list goes on. :encouragement:


----------



## dale

Kyle R said:


> This seems to be the trend with the most successful people (in any field). They work harder, longer, and more obsessively than the rest.
> 
> "Where I excel is ridiculous, sickening, work ethic. You know, while the other guy's sleeping? I'm working." — Will Smith
> 
> "You're in competition with people who have made that decision, who have committed themselves 100 percent. . . If you don't make the same commitment you're not going to compete. It's that simple." — James Cameron
> 
> The list goes on. :encouragement:



quit lying, dude. we ALL know the REAL secret to success in this world is being 1/2 chinese.


----------



## Kyle R

Lol! 

Except that asian half of me is horrendous at translating.


----------



## shadowwalker

Every year there are "business-minded" people who think they can run a publishing company. They like reading! They've self-published! They had a book trade published! It's a golden opportunity!

Some even last a couple years before folding.

It's kinda like saying you've built a shelf and there's a housing shortage, so you should start a construction company.


----------



## dale

shadowwalker said:


> Every year there are "business-minded" people who think they can run a publishing company. They like reading! They've self-published! They had a book trade published! It's a golden opportunity!
> 
> Some even last a couple years before folding.
> 
> It's kinda like saying you've built a shelf and there's a housing shortage, so you should start a construction company.



 lol. no. seriously. when i was in 5th grade? i was a defensive end on my grade school football team. ya see? i could be the star quarterback for the indianapolis colts with that kind of experience. they NEED to get rid of andrew luck. dale hollin is on the sidelines...helmet on.


----------



## InstituteMan

I think that we probably are all biased in our analysis of the publishing industry based upon our prior experiences in other industries. 

In my recent past I have seen a business model that was once extraordinarily stable and lucrative come crashing down. A few firms failed outright; others were acquired; most simply moved down the food chain and now make considerably less money doing less prestigious work than they used to. New entrants into the market have snapped up most of the work those firms used to do so profitably by charging a lot less for service that is almost as good (but still good enough). A tiny handful of those old firms may have managed to separate themselves from the field to set themselves up as providers of services you just can't get elsewhere, but the jury is still out as to whether they have succeeded. I was in the room when a lot of (mostly) old and (entirely) white (almost entirely) men laughed off warnings of impending change in the industry; those folks aren't laughing now.

That is all to admit that I have a bias here, but I think that I also have learned a few lessons along the way to acquiring that bias. There's no reason to think that just because the big publishing houses have "always" been with us that they shall ever remain. The nature of reading and writing has changed, but has the publishing industry changed enough to suit the market? I posit that only the publishing houses that change in the right direction will thrive. 

Everyone who is reading my words here are reading them on some kind of computer screen. The incremental cost of another person reading them is zero. Zilch. Nothing. Nada. 

I am creating these words on a laptop that cost me about a thousand dollars three years ago, but there are even cheaper options than what I use which will generate indistinguishable text. I am getting these words off of my computer using an internet connection that costs me some amount a month bundled in with my phone bill, but I could get a free connection at the library. Cran is nice enough to host this site on a server somewhere, and it costs electricity to run the whole show, etc., but aside from the rather unlikely problem of my little post here drawing more traffic than the servers can handle, there is not any additional cost to an additional person or an additional thousand people reading my words. The same principle applies to everything "published" electronically, be it a post in a thread here or the next Great American Novel or the next great literary work for wherever you happen to be sitting.

The publishing industry grew up around printing presses, which, ironically enough, were drastically cheaper than the prior technology of monks with quills. The publishing industry developed in a world where there was a limited supply of printed material (but still a glut relative to all times before!), and as the folks who owned the printing presses they were the de facto gatekeepers to what got printed. The incremental cost of printing a new book in that environment was not that large for them, but it was certainly not zero. Plus, the publishing houses could control the supply of what they printed (not that they didn't want to print as many as they could sell, mind you--my point is just that setting up your own printing press to pirate a book was an expensive proposition). 

The publishing industry will adapt to our brave new digital world, or it will go away, or it will be relegated to printing quaint little curios and collector's pieces. We will see. I am personally pretty sure that some part of the current publishing industry will figure this all out, but I don't know which one and I don't trust myself to figure it out. I would love the editing and the outright validation that would come with a big time book deal, but getting one of those is about 47th on my writing to-do list. Writing and getting my writing out there occupies the first 28 or so spots on that to-do list, though. Even if I get a big time book deal I don't think that will change.


----------



## FleshEater

Plasticweld said:


> Gold is valuable because it is rare, while it might be that great writers are few and far between my gut feeling is that there are a few writers here on the forum that if they wrote the same material 30 to 50 years ago they would be famous and have sold a lot of work.  The pool of talent is huge.  How many talented writers were there back then, how many are there today?



I agree with this to a point. I don't think "famous" would be the word, but definitely more frequently published. However, I say the same thing in regards to writers 30 to 50 years ago, in that they COULDN'T or WOULDN'T be published today. Lovecraft would be one of us, mourning our failures on a forum. I feel Stephen King would be there, too, but that's been debated here before.


----------



## dale

FleshEater said:


> I agree with this to a point. I don't think "famous" would be the word, but definitely more frequently published. However, I say the same thing in regards to writers 30 to 50 years ago, in that they COULDN'T or WOULDN'T be published today. Lovecraft would be one of us, mourning our failures on a forum. I feel Stephen King would be there, too, but that's been debated here before.



 funny about lovecraft, ain't it? and even poe. my major influences and an influence upon millions of others. you can see lovecraft in almost everything in the "horror" genre, today...although many in the horror genre have never really READ his stories. but those men...those major influences upon all that is now considered "horror" today, both died flat broke and depressed as hell. what would have either of them accomplished with "riches" which their writing should have earned? who knows? maybe nothing. or maybe something FAR beyond what they already did. who knows.


----------



## shadowwalker

Anyone who still thinks the publishing industry hasn't come into the digital age has been sleeping. Were they slower to enter? Not really. They were more careful in preparing for it and also had a hell of a lot more product to re-format than the self-publishers and small presses. As I said, they have been around for a long, long time and have faced a lot of changes over that time. Individual companies within trade publishing may merge or close, but the industry itself? I'm not the least bit worried.


----------



## InstituteMan

shadowwalker said:


> Anyone who still thinks the publishing industry hasn't come into the digital age has been sleeping. Were they slower to enter? Not really. They were more careful in preparing for it and also had a hell of a lot more product to re-format than the self-publishers and small presses. As I said, they have been around for a long, long time and have faced a lot of changes over that time. Individual companies within trade publishing may merge or close, but the industry itself? I'm not the least bit worried.



Maybe. 

The problem as I see it is that entering the digital age requires more than selling ebooks. The pricing structure, release timelines, marketing strategies, talent acquisition process, and pretty much everything else has to change too. 

Most of what I see from traditional publishing in the digital age is just adding a new medium and a new distribution mechanism to the print book model. I don't think that will work. 

I might be wrong. I'm not worried either way, as I lack a dog in the fight. If I develop a dog to root for, I might begin to worry.


----------



## shadowwalker

And all of those things have been addressed, and are, as with the entire industry, being refined.

The idea that trade publishers are going the way of the dinosaurs, don't know what they're doing, and are, in general, incompetent, came from the early self-publishing gurus who had an axe to grind and an agenda to put forward. Trade publishers aren't stupid - but they are in it for the long haul and, wisely, don't leap to decisions before they have good reason to. Have they made mistakes? Sure, because they're run by human beings. But underestimating them is a bigger mistake.


----------



## InstituteMan

shadowwalker said:


> The idea that trade publishers are going the way of the dinosaurs, don't know what they're doing, and are, in general, incompetent, came from the early self-publishing gurus who had an axe to grind and an agenda to put forward. Trade publishers aren't stupid - but they are in it for the long haul and, wisely, don't leap to decisions before they have good reason to. Have they made mistakes? Sure, because they're run by human beings. But underestimating them is a bigger mistake.



There certainly have been some ignoramuses with axes to grind claiming that traditional publishers were doomed, thus far mostly without being correct. I don't dispute that the publishing houses have some significant advantages, such as editing, (unevenly applied) marketing know-how, established distribution channels, authors under contract, and perceived credibility among readers and reviewers. 

I tend to disagree with you as far as whether their digital deficiencies have been addressed, but there's no way of knowing how that is going to shake out for a bit still. Maybe well know in 5 years, we'll likely know in 10. Happily, we now have an abundance of options to pursue while the industry gets sorted out.


----------



## Kyle R

Unless I'm reading the data wrong, the _Big Five_ seem to be doing really well as a result of the e-book boom. They've experienced steady sales and increased profits because of it, along with lower production costs.

If anything, big publishers seem to be getting richer by the minute.

I picture them sitting around a conference table, in their expensive suits, with their hands up in the air, yelling, "Whee!" 

_The rise of ebooks then helped publishers maintain its sales level but increase profits, the well-documented and oft-discussed result of ebooks being more profitable for publishers than their print counterparts. — DigitalBookWorld.com

_I do agree that things are changing and evolving. But, personally, I'd be more worried about small publishers and self-published/unsigned writers. To me, they seem to be the most vulnerable. :grief:


----------



## Apex

I have friends in China. many writers have their books printed, (Some print their own) and sell them door to door. Writers do what they have to do.


----------



## shadowwalker

Apex said:


> I have friends in China. many writers have their books printed, (Some print their own) and sell them door to door. Writers do what they have to do.



I'm assuming you mean your friends either do this or know some writers who do - in China. Maybe that's because of the way publishing works over there, I have no idea. For me, here in the States, I can't think of a bigger waste of time for a writer, not to mention it being a sure-fire way of getting your name known in a negative way.


----------



## InstituteMan

Kyle R said:


> Unless I'm reading the data wrong, the _Big Five_ seem to be doing really well as a result of the e-book boom. They've experienced steady sales and increased profits because of it, along with lower production costs.
> 
> If anything, big publishers seem to be getting richer by the minute.
> 
> I picture them sitting around a conference table, in their expensive suits, with their hands up in the air, yelling, "Whee!"
> 
> _The rise of ebooks then helped publishers maintain its sales level but increase profits, the well-documented and oft-discussed result of ebooks being more profitable for publishers than their print counterparts. — DigitalBookWorld.com
> 
> _I do agree that things are changing and evolving. But, personally, I'd be more worried about small publishers and self-published/unsigned writers. To me, they seem to be the most vulnerable. :grief:



I could certainly see this being the case, where an elite group breaks away leaving everyone else in a scrum fighting for a tiny slice of the overall profit. Truth be told, most writers (likely myself included) would be left in that scrum, if we are lucky.

While this could be my bias coming through, short term profits can be part of what dooms an enterprise. In my background, I saw large law firms become acclimated to a short term uptick in $$$ from things like reviewing electronic documents in lawsuits, the kind of work that didn't exist in the past. In the late 90's and early 00's, there wasn't a way to review and disclose those materials (and thereby avoid being held in contempt of court and other nasty things) other than to pay for a small army of lawyers to read through them. The profits were astronomical! In fact, the profits were so astronomical that "legal services" companies and even software developers started offering the same service at a tiny fraction of the cost to clients. Firms could have taken those short term profits and invested in creating the solutions and services of the future, but the partners viewed that as undercutting their own financial interests. The Big Law profits went poof. [NOTE: that is a very abbreviated summary of the situation that omits a great deal]

I honestly have no idea if the Big Five are doing a good job of really re-tooling their operations for the next 10 to 100 years with their (windfall?) profits. I bet at least one or two is, and I bet at least one or two isn't. I also bet that there are some upstarts, either now existing or soon to be created, that will shock the established publishers. I can list off about dozen reasons why my analogy to my prior experience in law isn't directly applicable to publishing, so I don't expect an identical outcome. I don't expect a radically different outcome, though.


----------



## shadowwalker

My main point is to keep people from believing those "statements" by some strident self-publishers about the demise of trade publishing. No matter which route one decides to take, it should be based on facts and not self-serving statements by those who have a bone to pick with trade publishing. Businesses that leap on bandwagons instead of careful consideration and sound business thought are the ones that tend to fail; this is precisely the reason I'm glad most trade publishers took their time getting into ebooks. They still made some mistakes, but they've proved quite capable of handling this change, just as they have others.


----------



## T.S.Bowman

Plasticweld said:


> The authors who are good at marketing their skills, willing to hustle and put in lots of time will always rise to the top whether books are sold through a publisher or self sold.



This is the most discouraging thing for me. I am not a salesman. I'm just a writer. I have never been one to pat myself on the back or try to convince others to pat it for me.

The fact that, even with subpar work (and I'm not suggesting either of the fellas you mentioned had subpar writing skills) all a person really needs to be is JUST good enough at writing and GREAT at self promotion to get to the top of the heap, while a few very good writers who aren't so good at promoting themselves langiush in the shadows is extremely discouraging.


----------



## shadowwalker

I wouldn't get too discouraged, TS. Sure, a writer huckster may make great sales on the first book, but it's the writing that will determine the longevity of their career, not their promotional skills. The old "fool me once" thing is alive and well.


----------



## Plasticweld

T.S.Bowman said:


> .
> 
> The fact that, even with subpar work (and I'm not suggesting either of the fellas you mentioned had subpar writing skills) all a person really needs to be is JUST good enough at writing and GREAT at self promotion to get to the top of the heap, while a few very good writers who aren't so good at promoting themselves langiush in the shadows is extremely discouraging.




Both where good writers, Pete is still alive but no  longer writing.  Each of them had an audience, their work was directed at them; while they wrote stuff they liked they never lost sight of what the reader wanted and was interested in. 



The best chef in the world needs to  let the customer knows that he serves the finest food anywhere.  Customers will seek him out, they will also value their meal much more because it was from the someone at the top of the field.  I am pretty sure  being a writer of fine words is not that different than chef serving fine  food. 

The difference between a cook and a chef ... Salesmanship!


----------



## dale

Plasticweld said:


> Both where good writers, Pete is still alive but no  longer writing.  Each of them had an audience, their work was directed at them; while they wrote stuff they liked they never lost sight of what the reader wanted and was interested in.
> 
> 
> 
> The best chef in the world needs to  let the customer knows that he serves the finest food anywhere.  Customers will seek him out, they will also value their meal much more because it was from the someone at the top of the field.  I am pretty sure  being a writer of fine words is not that different than chef serving fine  food.
> 
> The difference between a cook and a chef ... Salesmanship!



i don't know about that. the difference between a chef and a cook is quality, skill, and aptitude. i don't know the name
of the cook at st. elmos in indy, a 5 star steakhouse...and i don't know the name of the cook at TGI fridays. but i know
the steak i get at st. elmos is gonna taste 100 times better than the one at fridays.


----------



## InstituteMan

T.S.Bowman said:


> The fact that, even with subpar work (and I'm not suggesting either of the fellas you mentioned had subpar writing skills) all a person really needs to be is JUST good enough at writing and GREAT at self promotion to get to the top of the heap, while a few very good writers who aren't so good at promoting themselves langiush in the shadows is extremely discouraging.



Dumb, stupid luck doesn't hurt either.

The glass-half-full view is that niche writers now have a greater chance than ever of finding readers. It takes work, sure, but in prior times all the work in the world (along with talent) couldn't make up for the lack of a printing press and distribution contracts. A slim chance beats no chance.


----------



## shadowwalker

Plasticweld said:


> The best chef in the world needs to  let the customer knows that he serves the finest food anywhere.



The best chef in the world will have customers telling others that he serves the finest food anywhere. People can blow their own horn all they want, and that _may _get people to try them out. But if they serve hamburger when they promised steak, those customers won't be back.


----------



## Plasticweld

dale said:


> i don't know about that. the difference between a chef and a cook is quality, skill, and aptitude. i don't know the name
> of the cook at st. elmos in indy, a 5 star steakhouse...and i don't know the name of the cook at TGI fridays. but i know
> the steak i get at st. elmos is gonna taste 100 times better than the one at fridays.




I betcha a  steak diner that TGI Fridays sells way more steak than St.Emos ... why because of salesmanship or advertising. 


If I am wrong Dale you just drive on up and I'll take you to Texas Road House.  I don't know that name of that Cook/Chef either.

- - - Updated - - -



shadowwalker said:


> The best chef in the world will have customers telling others that he serves the finest food anywhere. People can blow their own horn all they want, and that _may _get people to try them out. But if they serve hamburger when they promised steak, those customers won't be back.




A good salesman will tell the customer that's what good steak tastes like.  I agree with your premise at the same time my confidence in the public is not as high as yours to believe that the public always knows the difference.  I am sure you can name countless authors who are popular and successful who made a living serving hamburger to a crowd that couldn't tell the difference.


----------



## dale

Plasticweld said:


> I betcha a  steak diner that TGI Fridays sells way more steak than St.Emos ... why because of salesmanship or advertising.
> 
> 
> If I am wrong Dale you just drive on up and I'll take you to Texas Road House.  I don't know that name of that Cook/Chef either.



probably. not everyone can afford st elmos. both times i went, my wallet went dry like $130. for 2 people. i mean....i'm not slamming
fridays. i have a good time going there. but it's not the same as far as food quality.


----------



## InstituteMan

shadowwalker said:


> The best chef in the world will have customers telling others that he serves the finest food anywhere. People can blow their own horn all they want, and that _may _get people to try them out. But if they serve hamburger when they promised steak, those customers won't be back.



I know of plenty of delicious restaurants that closed for reasons other than food quality. Some made excellent food of a type of cuisine people were scared to try, some just couldn't make cash flow work in their space, some never mastered the logistics of the business. Serving terrible food is a pretty sure way to fail, but serving great food is not a sure route to success either.

Every other business (other than basic comodity production) I have been around is the same: quality matters, especially if the quality is poor, but it isn't the only criteria determining success and failure.


----------



## shadowwalker

Plasticweld said:


> A good salesman will tell the customer that's what good steak tastes like.  I agree with your premise at the same time my confidence in the public is not as high as yours to believe that the public always knows the difference.  I am sure you can name countless authors who are popular and successful who made a living serving hamburger to a crowd that couldn't tell the difference.



Please notice I said if they _promised steak and served hamburger_, people would not be back. As to the public knowing the difference - well, some people will take the salesman's word for it and eat whatever he sells them because that's what they "should" like. Others have brains enough to try it and see if they like it. If they do, they don't really care what others say. I've had a lot of great hamburgers and a lot of lousy steaks...



InstituteMan said:


> Every other business (other than basic comity production) I have been around is the same: quality matters, especially if the quality is poor, but it isn't the only criteria determining success and failure.



Never said it was the only criteria, but marketing like crazy isn't going to change those other reasons either. All other things being equal, the business with quality products will do better and do it longer than the business with poor quality products.


----------



## InstituteMan

shadowwalker said:


> Never said it was the only criteria, but marketing like crazy isn't going to change those other reasons either. All other things being equal, the business with quality products will do better and do it longer than the business with poor quality products.



Absolutely. Quality is a necessary but insufficient ingredient to sustained success.


----------



## Caragula

I know only one publisher, and one agent, who has worked in a few publishers.  They're looking for great writing and a great story, and nothing else.  Anecdotal evidence, but I thought I'd throw it in.


----------



## Terry D

It's not about quality, or about marketing. It is about filling a niche in that market. To further utilize the food analogy, The restaurant that serves the best food on the planet is going to be successful, but so is McDonalds. Not because Micky D's has great food, but because it serves its niche very well. Just as the a five star steak joint selling an aged and cooked to perfection $100 porterhouse fills its. Publishing is no different. Twilight filled a niche and filled it well, bringing great success to its author. The top literary authors also fill their niches. There is room for top tier French cuisine on the same block with a Taco Bell.


----------

