# The test of an indie's resolve...



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

...is a six figure offer from a major publisher. What's weird is that I would have fallen out of my chair as recently as four months ago if an offer like this came along. Now I look at my KDP reports, and I can't tell how much money I would _lose_ to accept the deal.

This is a strange publishing world materializing around us. Very strange.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

HELLZYAH!!!!  What a wonderfully delicious problem to have...


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Why is that a test? Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why one or the other? Why not both?

I ask these questions because the entire "indie" movement sometimes has the taint of a cult on it (other times, it has the Get Rich Quick scam feel). It's cool to make business decisions based solely on cash. Likewise, it's cool to make business decisions based on things not cash. Why can't it be about that, as opposed to indie?

/end rant


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Why is that a test? Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why one or the other? Why not both?
> 
> I ask these questions because the entire "indie" movement sometimes has the taint of a cult on it (other times, it has the Get Rich Quick scam feel). It's cool to make business decisions based solely on cash. Likewise, it's cool to make business decisions based on things not cash. Why can't it be about that, as opposed to indie?
> 
> /end rant


Oh, it's all about cash for me. Well, mostly. And I'm pretty sure this would be a bad move, earnings-wise.


----------



## kurzon (Feb 26, 2011)

Well, you can always say: "I'm not interested in selling you the ebook rights, but I'll work with you on a print deal."

Ideal outcome.


----------



## KindleNooker (Apr 22, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Oh, it's all about cash for me. Well, mostly. And I'm pretty sure this would be a bad move, earnings-wise.


I'm halfway through Wool now -- you deserve every cent! Amazing writing!


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

kurzon said:


> Well, you can always say: "I'm not interested in selling you the ebook rights, but I'll work with you on a print deal."
> 
> Ideal outcome.


First off, congrats Hugh!

as for this comment -- I would bet the e-book rights would have to be part of the deal. too valuable these days.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

kurzon said:


> Well, you can always say: "I'm not interested in selling you the ebook rights, but I'll work with you on a print deal."
> 
> Ideal outcome.


You can always write more books. I'm actively pursuiing a print deal. Just in case ebooks become a 99 cent commodity like game apps.


----------



## Zelah Meyer (Jun 15, 2011)

It's all about the details. As Krista says, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. However, it's important to check that the terms of the contract won't make it an all or nothing case (i.e. that it's not one of those contracts where the small print involves technically signing away the right to ever publish anything, ever again, unless the publisher says so.) http://www.thepassivevoice.com/06/2011/how-to-read-a-book-contract-%E2%80%93-non-competition/

It's certainly a nice dilemma to have - and a flattering one, so congratulations. 

Just make sure that you get an attorney to look over any proposed contracts for any hidden nasties!

Edited to add - that is, if they up their offer, since it sounds as if you're already leaning towards refusing the current one!


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

First, big congratulations. That's awesome.



Hugh Howey said:


> Oh, it's all about cash for me. Well, mostly. And I'm pretty sure this would be a bad move, earnings-wise.


Okay, so I feel that I might have something to offer since I was in a similar position last spring, with a book that jumped the charts and sudden interest from publishers.

In the end I decided that what I'm looking for is the best chance of maintaining a career as a professional writer and am going for a mixed strategy of indie and publisher books. I think of this as buying bonds in a bull equity market. It's hedging my bets. I'm not saying that _you _should sign, just pointing out a few things that have gone through my head over the past year.

In your case, do they want Wool, or something else? How quickly do you write? Can you write at a consistently high level? These are the questions I asked when I had an offer for The Righteous. They offered during a month when I'd sold over 20,000 copies of the book, so I was extrapolating to the end of my life, as if somehow I would stay on top forever. Of course, that never happens.


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

Whatever you decide, congrats! It's well deserved.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

Zelah Meyer said:


> It's all about the details. As Krista says, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. However, it's important to check that the terms of the contract won't make it an all or nothing case (i.e. that it's not one of those contracts where the small print involves technically signing away the right to ever publish anything, ever again, unless the publisher says so.) http://www.thepassivevoice.com/06/2011/how-to-read-a-book-contract-%E2%80%93-non-competition/


<derail>That is a FANTASTIC blog post, by the by. Thank you so much for posting it... Bookmarked!</derail>


----------



## John Daulton (Feb 28, 2012)

The thing is, what are your long-term prospects for movie deals and other avenues? If your agent works it right, you might make more in the long run from a big fat tv series or an epic movie.

Still, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. You are in a tough place, but it's a beautifully tough place to be.  (Plus, cash aside, you can shake the indie label, get in where the money and access are). You can always still write other books (if they make you give them your name, you can make a pen name).

Regardless. It's awesome and I'm stoked for you. Congrats.


----------



## ToniD (May 3, 2011)

Hugh, that's really exciting and a testament to the quality of your books. Quality got you big Indie numbers, and then got you noticed by a trad pub.

There's some good advice in this thread. I recall Michael posting his dilemma back when he was wrestling with a great offer. 

However you ultimately decide to go, CONGRATS!!!!


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

MichaelWallace said:


> First, big congratulations. That's awesome.
> 
> Okay, so I feel that I might have something to offer since I was in a similar position last spring, with a book that jumped the charts and sudden interest from publishers.
> 
> ...


Great points, Michael.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

Woot! Big congrats!

It's not unheard of to get a print only deal. Look at John Locke. If you want to keep your ebook rights, you could at least try to see if they'd go for print only.

Good luck, whatever you decide!


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> ...is a six figure offer from a major publisher. What's weird is that I would have fallen out of my chair as recently as four months ago if an offer like this came along. Now I look at my KDP reports, and I can't tell how much money I would _lose_ to accept the deal.
> 
> This is a strange publishing world materializing around us. Very strange.


Paper = new readers. If you can make this offer work for you. Why not do so?

Congratulations!


----------



## J. Tanner (Aug 22, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Oh, it's all about cash for me. Well, mostly. And I'm pretty sure this would be a bad move, earnings-wise.


They wan't Wool, I guess?

Counter-offer with a number that makes sense.

You can always write more and release it yourself.

An offer of life-changing money doesn't come along all that often.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

Congratulations Hugh!

I've nothing to add to the excellent advice above, other than to take your time and make sure you are making the right decision. Don't let anyone rush you.


----------



## MBlack (Mar 12, 2012)

I'd say it depends.

If they're offering 100k for your life, soul, and first born, I'd say don't do it.

Joe Konrath sez something to the effect of if it isn't a wildly life-changing amount, then one is probably better off on the indie track, controlling the book(s) forever.

So I'd be leery. Legacy publishers don't always treat authors all that well, either.

That said, I'd be sweating ink myself, if I perchance had such an offer.

It's a test. It's a test all right!


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

MBlack said:


> Joe Konrath sez something to the effect of if it isn't a wildly life-changing amount, then one is probably better off on the indie track, controlling the book(s) forever.
> 
> So I'd be leery. Legacy publishers don't always treat authors all that well, either.
> 
> ...


I'm with Konrath. The fear of "giving away" a series for less than I'll make off it over my lifetime is stomach-churning. The current offer is way too low.

Some great advice and support in the thread. Thanks a ton, everyone. Not feeling "alone" is worth a lot.


----------



## K.R. Harris (Jan 25, 2012)

First, major congrats! That's awesome. Second, do what you feel would be best for your writing long term. I'm sure you have a lot more stories to tell and books to write.


----------



## David Wisehart (Mar 2, 2010)

Congrats, Hugh! That is totally awesome.

If you think you'll lose money by taking the deal, then walk away.

There is a lot of power in saying "no." It doesn't have to mean "no" forever. Just "no" to this deal.

Keep saying "no" until the terms are in your favor.

What's the worst thing that could happen? You never get a traditional publishing deal and you keep printing money as an indie.

And you definitely don't need a traditional publisher to get a movie deal. I used to be a producer at Fox, and believe me, if a production company sees a property they want, they'll go to whoever owns the rights. That's you. Just make sure you get a good entertainment lawyer when that call comes. 

Good luck, Hugh. Your series rocks! 

David


----------



## Lisa Scott (Apr 4, 2011)

Wow.  Congrats.  Every day it's something new and crazy awesome from you!!!  Good luck making your decision.


----------



## Sybil Nelson (Jun 24, 2010)

Congrats, Hugh! Personally, I would follow Michael's advice.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

jljarvis said:


> So...are you asking for advice or simply marveling at the serendipitous nature of life in general and the publishing world in particular?


More of the former. Some of the latter.


----------



## CJArcher (Jan 22, 2011)

WOW, Hugh, absolutely fantastic! First up, mega congrats. I keep hearing about your books everywhere, so I'm not surprised. Secondly, why not tell them what you want and see what happens. Give them a figure you're prepared to go trad for, even if it seems ridiculously high at this point, tell them what rights you want to keep, tell them you want to be able to continue self-publishing other books, etc etc, then see what they come back with. If they say no then you've lost nothing. I do think getting a print deal is a good idea, as is getting into foreign markets - something that's tough to do on your own.

Good luck with whatever you decide!


----------



## 39179 (Mar 16, 2011)

Fantastic problem! Congratulations, Hugh!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Well done. Make them an offer they can't accept. Then if they do, jump on it.


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

Remember there's no deal until you accept the deal. Make sure it's in your full interest to make a deal when you decide to do so.

And don't just have an agent, have a lawyer.


----------



## WilliamEsmont (May 3, 2010)

You've already done all the hard work - the writing, the editing, building the audience, the 'nurturing' of your career.

Seven figures or bust.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Congrats!  And good luck.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Congrats, Hugh. It's a strange moment in time. What was once a dream of many authors is now only one of many tempting paths that we can take. A few months ago, I faced a tough call like this. I'll never know if I made the right decision, but I feel like I did the best that I could with the information that I had. I think that's all any of us can be expected to do. (That and hire a qualified IP lawyer.)



jljarvis said:


> Well, yeah...except for the part where if they withdraw the offer before you accept it, you don't get to decide anymore.


If a party is truly interested in building a healthy business relationship, they will spend the time and money to craft a document that is agreeable to both parties. If you encounter a party that urges haste and/or issues ultimatums, imagine what the work climate will be like after you sign on the dotted line.

A big advance is great, but no publisher just hands over the pile of money. They expect you to work with their editors. They expect you to comply with their revisions. They expect you to assist with their marketing. They expect you to do a few publicity tours. Perhaps they even expect you to grant them the rights to a few future works...or the exclusive rights to your created world. And how about the reversion clauses? And the subsidiary rights? You need to spend the time to work through each and every one of these issues, and you should only sign a contract if you are comfortable with all the terms. The advance is an important component to any publishing contract, but I would argue that the money actually takes a back seat to all those pesky details.



WilliamEsmont said:


> You've already done all the hard work - the writing, the editing, building the audience, the 'nurturing' of your career.


Fact.



WilliamEsmont said:


> Seven figures or bust.


Mine as well ask, right? 

Again. Congrats, Hugh. You have a rare talent. I'm sure you'll do fine either way.

B.


----------



## Kay Bratt (Dec 28, 2011)

Not much advice but a great big fat congrats!


----------



## David Adams (Jan 2, 2012)

Woo hoo! I knew that Wool would go far when I started reading it. 

Great work Hugh.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

WilliamEsmont said:


> You've already done all the hard work - the writing, the editing, building the audience, the 'nurturing' of your career.
> 
> Seven figures or bust.


Haha! I like your moxy.



David Adams said:


> Woo hoo! I knew that Wool would go far when I started reading it.
> 
> Great work Hugh.


Thanks, David! Remains to be seen if it goes anywhere from here or just slides into obscurity. 

And thanks for the advice, everyone. The biggest difference I see, just thinking about the contracts and all, is the relaxation I write with now compared to the "job" it can become. No-complete clauses, rights on future works, deadlines, hard and fast word counts, mandatory plot massages, and so on. It used to be that these things were the price of making a living as an author. Now they are the costs of going one particular route. The path I'm currently on means I goof off and write in whatever direction I please, and the reader judges me with their dollars. There's something about pleasing (or failing to please) the masses directly that feels different than how I imagine it will be to please a handful of interested parties in board rooms who are guessing what readers want.

Anyway, as someone already pointed out, it's a great problem to have. And I feel like this is going to become more and more common. I'm not breaking new ground here; dozens of self-published writers who have had most of their success through the Kindle store have gone before me. I think there's going to be a stampede behind us. Readers are discovering entertaining works at rock-bottom prices through Amazon. This is cutting in to the number of books they would be reading from traditional presses, which are grossly overpriced (all my postulating, here). One thing I have to keep in mind is that my e-books would probably shoot up in cost if I sign, and what does that do to my readership? If we're succeeding where traditional presses aren't doing so well (the top 200 of my genre was recently tallied and 145 of those entrants were indie!), then am I sacrificing success for a lump of cash?

Going 'round and 'round on this will make you dizzy. Hell, I agonize enough over pricing structure, KDP free days, whether to re-up or go back to the Nook and iPad. Every decision feels daunting . . . and then this decision comes along.

Again, thanks for the kudos and the input. Both are invaluable to me.


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

Congratulations, Hugh. 

If you haven't got an agent, I wouldn't advise getting one. Why give away 15%? You can negotiate on your own, and use an IP lawyer like Passive Guy to look over the contract for a fixed sum.

Lexi


----------



## KurtCarlson (Mar 12, 2012)

I am all about self publishing but if someone came to me with an offer like that I'd jump on it immediately. Your kdp reports must be quite amazing to do otherwise. The only thing I hate about traditional publishing is giving up control and the long wait until it is actually produced and available.


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson (Jul 5, 2010)

KayBratt said:


> Not much advice but a great big fat congrats!


Ditto on that. Whatever you decide, it's thrilling you're able to choose and don't feel like there's only one route to reaching readers and earning a living.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> \
> The biggest difference I see, just thinking about the contracts and all, is the relaxation I write with now compared to the "job" it can become. No-complete clauses, rights on future works, deadlines, hard and fast word counts, mandatory plot massages, and so on. It used to be that these things were the price of making a living as an author. Now they are the costs of going one particular route. The path I'm currently on means I goof off and write in whatever direction I please, and the reader judges me with their dollars. There's something about pleasing (or failing to please) the masses directly that feels different than how I imagine it will be to please a handful of interested parties in board rooms who are guessing what readers want.


Hugh, Congrats on getting the offer you could refuse. On one hand you do it Hugh's way and on the other you do it some companies way according to THEIR requirements and decisions. All depends upon what you want--it's your life afterall. You could try a foot in each? Then there is always the question of money. Good luck whatever you may do.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Why is that a test? Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why one or the other? Why not both?


I'd agree with the both thing...If you can get them to agree to it, and if there's not a clause against you releasing works on your own.

Congrats to you! And, good luck with whichever you choose.


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

What a wonderful dilemma! Good luck, whatever you decide.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

Congrats on the great problem to have.

I can't give you advice, I can only tell you what I _would_ do.

First, I'd look at the "guaranteed" money (advance/contract) versus the anticipated (self pub) money.

You said six figures, let's assume $100,000. If they offered me $100,000 clean getaway money (for the first in a trilogy, or series or works already created. Not my soul or "every book I ever write" or anything longer term than a few years) and I'm making $50k per month consistently (like every month for the past 6) Then there's no way I take the deal (cause I'd likely make that in the next two months). If I'm making around $20K per month I'd take the deal. There's no guarantee what the future holds and I'd need about 5 months to match that. Could be more, could be less. That's too far ahead to predict (royalties could go down, the market could change, who knows what could happen). That's a bet I'm willing to take. If it's more than $100K I'd analyze accordingly.

I wouldn't get an agent if I didn't already have one. There's no reason to give him/her a percentage of a deal that they did nothing to develop. I'd Hire a lawyer for a set hourly wage to check out the paperwork.

Anyway, that's what I'd do. Good luck!


----------



## Theresaragan (Jul 1, 2011)

Congratulations, Hugh. Wow, you do have a lot to think about. Exciting times!


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> Why is that a test? Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why one or the other? Why not both?
> 
> I ask these questions because the entire "indie" movement sometimes has the taint of a cult on it (other times, it has the Get Rich Quick scam feel). It's cool to make business decisions based solely on cash. Likewise, it's cool to make business decisions based on things not cash. Why can't it be about that, as opposed to indie?
> 
> /end rant


But he asks a perfectly REASONABLE question: Would I lose money if I accept this offer?

I would ask the same question (although maybe not with a six figure offer  )

What other basis is he supposed to make the decision on? The mythical "I won't have to do anything but write" one that is a lie? The "I'm only REALLY a writer if I'm trad published" one that is also a lie?

Edit: What you need to find out is the terms of the contract. Is there a _nasty_ non-compete clause hidden in there, for example. There is more to consider than just the cash, as much as I hate to agree with Krista. It's just not necessarily in a GOOD way. Many publisher-author contracts are laden with landmines for the author. To figure that out, you do NOT need an agent.

_You need a good IP lawyer. _ Even if you have an agent, a contract that important should be examined by a lawyer.

And a HUGE Congrats!!


----------



## acellis (Oct 10, 2011)

Wow! Great! But, yes, this self-publishing world is strange, indeed. Strange and wonderful.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Congrats Hugh!  If I was in your position, I'd have to run the numbers.  For me, it's mostly about the money as well, but that doesn't mean that signing a contract that offers less money than I currently make is out of the question.  One thing you have to factor in is what trad publishing can do for your profile.  Is this publisher a big name publisher?  Can they get you attention that you'll most likely never receive as an indy?  Will they get you reviewed by the big name media outlets?  These things can be more important than money, as they can guarantee better name recognition and bigger deals down the road.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> There is more to consider than just the cash, as much as I hate to agree with Krista.


There is a support group for that now.


----------



## John Daulton (Feb 28, 2012)

I think the question you have to ask is how long do you think the indie movement can sustain itself? Playing Devil's Advocate here for a moment (don't hang me people), but two forces are at work that may reduce the viability going forward. 

1. The more people who find success as you have, the more others will try to do the same. At some point, the numbers of people seeking riches will begin to grossly outweigh the numbers of carefully edited stories written with love by writers who care about craft and delivering a great reading experience. That dilution will foul the waters for the consumer, thus requiring some sort of middleman (which is how publishing houses came about to begin, essentially), and once again there will arise gate keepers--see how hard it is to get reviews these days; I see that as evidence of how the gatekeeper system is trying to reform itself. The populace does not want to wade through the slushpile. We are in a transition phase, which leads me to the second force at work.

2. Money. The people with the big money are not going to sit back and let more and more scrubby street writers cut into their profits and dictate terms. Whether the big 6 can evolve or not is beside the point. Someone will evolve, whether it's Amazon crushing the 6 and taking it all themselves, or one or two of those guys working with money elsewhere (Hollywood, Silicon Valley...) to make a deal that works for "everyone involved," i.e., all the people who can afford to be in the room when they figure it out. All I know is, whenever there is big money to be made, there are always people who are really good at making money and working systems who appear and take over, sucking the life out of "the little guy farmer" the "little guy gold miner," inventor, etc.

I don't think there is a big crush of demand for "indie" books. There is a crush of demand for affordable e-books that are good. What counts as affordable is relative to what is selling around it. If 1 & 2 work together in some gradation of ways, they can control price, and from there this bubble of indie success could pop or be popped.

My point is that, I think your agent should be trying to get you a deal that works for YOU and the big money. Then you will have corn growing on both sides of the river in case a levy breaks.


----------



## D.L. Shutter (Jul 9, 2011)

Congrat's Hugh, not at all surprised to hear you've receieved an offer. 

If it looks, smells and quacks like a lowball offer, well...


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "That dilution will foul the waters for the consumer, thus requiring some sort of middleman (which is how publishing houses came about to begin, essentially), and once again there will arise gate keepers--see how hard it is to get reviews these days; I see that as evidence of how the gatekeeper system is trying to reform itself. The populace does not want to wade through the slushpile."


The internet if is full of garbage, yet we manage to do fine without a middleman. There are millions of trash blogs, but we don't have to wade through them. The tools we have allow each of us to tailor our consumption to our own preferences.

The situation with books is similar. Amazon has provided tools that the consumer uses to get what he wants. Maybe there are a million eBooks on Amazon. But who has to bother with them?

Regarding publishers, I'd say they arose because of the capital requirements to get a book produced. There weren't enough books that someone needed to act as gatekeeper to maintain quality. There was limited capital. Money was the ultimate check valve. With the dramatic decline in costs to publish a book, money no longer prevents publication, and the people who have it no longer have the power to wield it as they did. If they did, newspapers would be thriving and the net would have died.

Book reviews? I wonder how many book reviews were written in 1980. If we compare that to 2011, is there a problem?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> There is a support group for that now.


I'll Google it! 

(As opposed to wading through millions of blogs and web pages.  )


Terrence OBrien said:


> The internet if is full of garbage, yet we manage to do fine without a middleman. There are millions of trash blogs, but we don't have to wade through them. The tools we have allow each of us to tailor our consumption to our own preferences.
> 
> The situation with books is similar. Amazon has provided tools that the consumer uses to get what he wants. Maybe there are a million eBooks on Amazon. But who has to bother with them?
> 
> ...


What created the "indie movement" was access to distribution. While relatively low cost publication has been around for a while, until Amazon broke the publisher stranglehold on distribution, nothing happened. Now between the two factors, I see no chance of the independent authors somehow ceasing to exist. Most people frankly don't care who publishes a book as long as they enjoy it.

This is off topic though. At the moment, the indie movement, if you want to call it that, DOES exist. One heck of a lot of indie novels sell. Running in circles crying that in a few years the sky may fall is not a good way to make sound business decisions.

As far as whether you should trust most agents... well, I'm not going there.


----------



## John Daulton (Feb 28, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> The internet if is full of garbage, yet we manage to do fine without a middleman. There are millions of trash blogs, but we don't have to wade through them. The tools we have allow each of us to tailor our consumption to our own preferences.
> 
> The situation with books is similar. Amazon has provided tools that the consumer uses to get what he wants. Maybe there are a million eBooks on Amazon. But who has to bother with them?
> 
> ...


I agree that there are tools to help wade through trash blogs and bad books presently, but the quality of books problem doesn't seem quite as solved as we would like. Readers still complain about poor quality in ebooks, which means they encounter them with enough frequency for them to feel compelled to complain (even to the point where I hear stories of hostility towards authors showing up in the readers forums on the other side of the KB aisle). So, if the proliferation of ebook publication continues to expand at an exponential rate, which I believe it will, I think that problem only gets worse. So the tools that you mention are in place, which are already imperfect, are only going to be tasked with filtering an even larger scale problem than the one they barely handle now.

Again, keep in mind, I'm playing devil's advocate. I'm hoping none of this happens any time soon, as I'd like to get my stuff read and find readers too. I'm just a cynic and have seen what big money does and always has done throughout the entire course of human history. I'm not making a case against the indie writer, I'm making a case against the super rich and super connected, and, ironically, the case I am making is that ultimately they will figure out how to win.

Sort of on a side note, your example of the newspapers makes your point, but proves mine as well, in that it's tremendously difficult to find good journalism anymore because nobody is paying journalists, vetting quality, and paying editors to maintain quality and some degree of integrity. Yes, newspapers are dead, but, at least in theory, with them died balanced, thoughtful reporting. The general populace has not the inclination, discipline or even know-how to find good sources of news. Which is good for the independent news website, they'll get lots of hits and can make adsense revenue if they are good at marketing and SEO, but not so good for ferreting out anything that might help discern the outlines of anything approaching truth.

I also don't think that the quantity of readers is going to increase proportionately to the quantity of things available for them to read.


----------



## AshMP (Dec 30, 2009)

Nothing to add but serious CONGRATULATIONS!  This is so exciting for you and I'm sure whatever way you go you'll have much success!!


----------



## Karl Fields (Jan 24, 2011)

Hugh,

Just wanted to add my congratulations and to say I love how you interact with the commenters on your Amazon reviews. Nice way to build relationships.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

John Daulton said:


> Readers still complain about poor quality in ebooks, which means they encounter them with enough frequency for them to feel compelled to complain (even to the point where I hear stories of hostility towards authors showing up in the readers forums on the other side of the KB aisle).


They complain about poor quality e-books from corporate publishers too. They also used to complain about poor quality books. Consumers will always complain, yet many of them still find what they are looking for. Their complaints actually highlight products to stay away from, which makes it easier to find the high quality books.



John Daulton said:


> I'm not making a case against the indie writer, I'm making a case against the super rich and super connected, and, ironically, the case I am making is that ultimately they will figure out how to win.


True, but just because the super rich and super connected "win" doesn't necessarily mean that I lose? For someone super rich to win, maybe that means they made a billion dollars. For me to win maybe that means I made $100,000. (please please please!). Independent ebooks are a pretty small percentage of the overall book market, so it could be argued that traditional paper publishing is kicking "our" asses, but everyday someone (like Hugh) is successful. There's a lot of pie to go around.



John Daulton said:


> Sort of on a side note, your example of the newspapers makes your point, but proves mine as well, in that it's tremendously difficult to find good journalism anymore because nobody is paying journalists, vetting quality, and paying editors to maintain quality and some degree of integrity. Yes, newspapers are dead, but, at least in theory, with them died balanced, thoughtful reporting.


Yikes. This thread could really go off the rails if we started debating what constitutes, "good" "balanced, thoughtful" reporting and journalism. How much corruption, tragedy, and inequality have the newspapers and traditional corporate media failed to report on in the past century?



John Daulton said:


> I also don't think that the quantity of readers is going to increase proportionately to the quantity of things available for them to read.


Of course not, which is why we have a bazillion discussions about whether to advertise on POI or on KND. Should I FB or Twitter? Do I go free through Select or do I have my books available on every platform? The struggle (after creating killer work) is in helping the finite number of readers find your book.

Back to you Hugh,


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

kfields said:


> Hugh,
> 
> Just wanted to add my congratulations and to say I love how you interact with the commenters on your Amazon reviews. Nice way to build relationships.


Thanks. It helps that I'm lonely.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

John Daulton said:


> 1. The more people who find success as you have, the more others will try to do the same. At some point, the numbers of people seeking riches will begin to grossly outweigh the numbers of carefully edited stories written with love by writers who care about craft and delivering a great reading experience. That dilution will foul the waters for the consumer, thus....
> 
> 2. Money. The people with the big money are not going to sit back and let more and more scrubby street writers cut into their profits and dictate terms. Whether the big 6 can evolve or not is beside the point. Someone will evolve, whether it's Amazon crushing the 6 and taking it all themselves, or one or two of those guys working with money elsewhere (Hollywood, Silicon Valley...) to make a deal that works for "everyone...


I don't know John? I think with #1 the market, the readers sort out the good from the drek quite well. Do we really need a handful of corporations (again) dictating what can be read and how many titles should be published. Gatekeepers stifled what could and could not be available. It depended upon what they could afford to put in their Spring Catalog. The stuff people want to read will sell, the stuff they don't want will sink. Those that can't reach their readers will quit.

There is not longer a seasonal Catalog for books because it's now a Daily Catalog with huge variety and selection.

#2 There is nothing big money can do to stop the scrubby street writers. It's like trying to stop the Viet Cong...Big money can't do it. What are you gonna do bomb them for a month? Hollywood? You think they could have a solution? They have enough problems right now--they wouldn't make heads or tails out of books. They have far more expensive flops than Big Publishers--just look at Disney...with another projected $200*+/-* Million loss with Carter and that's only if it's an international hit.

This is a transformational change. Now everyone has a printing press with movable type.

I'm afraid John that with ebooks it's A Brave New World.


----------



## Karl Fields (Jan 24, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Thanks. It helps that I'm lonely.


 Not with all those fans.


----------



## John Daulton (Feb 28, 2012)

jackz4000 said:


> I don't know John? I think with #1 the market, the readers sort out the good from the drek quite well. Do we really need a handful of corporations (again) dictating what can be read and how many titles should be published. Gatekeepers stifled what could and could not be available. It depended upon what they could afford to put in their Spring Catalog. The stuff people want to read will sell, the stuff they don't want will sink. Those that can't reach their readers will quit.
> 
> There is not longer a seasonal Catalog for books because it's now a Daily Catalog with huge variety and selection.
> 
> ...


I'm not afraid of the brave new world, just a cynic... or at least capable of mustering my inner-cynic in the name of devil's advocacy. I was just trying to imagine what it would be like to have run through Hugh's choices. We have him as a model. (Try to get it right, will you Hugh, we're all watching. )


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "I agree that there are tools to help wade through trash blogs and bad books presently, but the quality of books problem doesn't seem quite as solved as we would like. Readers still complain about poor quality in ebooks, which means they encounter them with enough frequency for them to feel compelled to complain (even to the point where I hear stories of hostility towards authors showing up in the readers forums on the other side of the KB aisle). So, if the proliferation of ebook publication continues to expand at an exponential rate, which I believe it will, I think that problem only gets worse. So the tools that you mention are in place, which are already imperfect, are only going to be tasked with filtering an even larger scale problem than the one they barely handle now."


Some readers might complain. I expect they will stop purchasing the class of books they don't like. But sales continue to increase. So it's hard to say the complaints are having a material effect. That's what matters. If sales were falling, it would be a very different situation.

If gatekeepers restricting entry resulted in consumers being able to access quality, the same benefit is now enjoyed using the computer tools. There is no need to use a clumsy approach of denying entry to the pool of books when consumers can customize the search tools to get what they want.

Are the tools imperfect? Of course they are. But they are better than available alternatives. We can also expect them to improve over time. Anyone who wants is free to use the same tools to publish a list of what they consider quality titles. Then consumers interested in that kind of vetting can use the tool.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

John Daulton said:


> I'm not afraid of the brave new world, just a cynic... or at least capable of mustering my inner-cynic in the name of devil's advocacy. I was just trying to imagine what it would be like to have run through Hugh's choices. We have him as a model. (Try to get it right, will you Hugh, we're all watching. )


I know. Being a Devil's Advocate myself sometimes. I wouldn't worry I'm sure Hugh will review the offer and contract and clauses and arrive at a decision that is right for him.


----------



## LKWatts (May 5, 2011)

KateDanley said:


> HELLZYAH!!!! What a wonderfully delicious problem to have...


Couldn't Agree more, lol


----------



## ErikHyrkas (Dec 24, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Thanks. It helps that I'm lonely.


That must mean you reached the top.

Congrats!


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

jljarvis said:


> I had a great answer, but just accidentally hit the wrong keys and lost it, and I'm on my way out for the evening.
> 
> So, short answer: BECAUSE, you are at your most marketable now, deal in hand. A good agent can negotiate the cost of their commission (and then some). S/he can negotiate terms an author might not even have thought of, as well as avoid pitfalls. If trad pubbing is in your career plan, then having an agent is important, if not vital. A good agent could take this deal and possibly sell other rights to other markets. Yes, you could go the lawyer route, but when you've finished the next manuscript and want an agent to shop it around, you won't be nearly as marketable as you are with a deal in hand. Once this deal is done, it won't be nearly as easy to generate interest in you and your work. I'm not saying it's the only way to go, but this is a strategy that can make good business sense.
> 
> No time to proof. Hope this makes sense.


100 percent agree with this. there's more to traditional publishing than just an offer from a U.S. publisher.


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

jljarvis said:


> So, short answer: BECAUSE, you are at your most marketable now, deal in hand. A good agent can negotiate the cost of their commission (and then some). S/he can negotiate terms an author might not even have thought of, as well as avoid pitfalls. If trad pubbing is in your career plan, then having an agent is important, if not vital. A good agent could take this deal and possibly sell other rights to other markets. Yes, you could go the lawyer route, but when you've finished the next manuscript and want an agent to shop it around, you won't be nearly as marketable as you are with a deal in hand. Once this deal is done, it won't be nearly as easy to generate interest in you and your work.


Yes, no problem to attract an agent when she will get an easy 15% of a deal that's already on the table. How are you going to guarantee she'll still be interested further down the line?

As for the next manuscript, if it's good and sales of the first book were high, why wouldn't your existing publisher be keen to publish it? It's not as if you'd be starting from scratch. Publishers can handle subsidiary rights as well as agents.

With contracts, I've learned never to trust a professional to check terms on his own. It matters much more to you than it does to him. He will go on to the next job, you are stuck with those terms forever.

Lexi


----------



## BAM Squared (Mar 17, 2012)

A Wool Squee Girl here -- Hugh I LOVED your Wool series and you deserve all the attention you get from it!!
I belong to an author friendly group on the Kindle Forum (I know, I know -- a very rare occurrence at Amazon) and your book has been recommended, gushed about and spoken at length over there!!

Good luck with whatever path you choose with the books!!


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

Hugh, this is wonderful.  Whatever you decide, it is very encouraging to know how well received your story is.  I went to buy it and found out, I already have it on my Kindle.  

I have found so many wonderful writers here, and I've bought so much, that I've become over-kindle-whelmed.  I need to catch up on my reading.  Can't wait to read yours.  It is nice when good things like this happen to such nice people.  Keep us updated.


----------



## Tattersail (Mar 17, 2012)

OMFG!

http://www.amazon.com/Fiction-eBooks-Kindle/b/ref=amb_link_86116011_14?ie=UTF8&node=157028011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=left-1&pf_rd_r=0XR3YC5RG18YJHTH6GSJ&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1340315882&pf_rd_i=2237633011#/ref=sr_st?qid=1332028467&rh=i%3Adigital-text%2Cn%3A157028011&sort=reviewrank_authority


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

Whoo-Hoo!!!  You go!


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Tattersail said:


> OMG!
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Fiction-eBooks-Kindle/b/ref=amb_link_86116011_14?ie=UTF8&node=157028011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=left-1&pf_rd_r=0XR3YC5RG18YJHTH6GSJ&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1340315882&pf_rd_i=2237633011#/ref=sr_st?qid=1332028467&rh=i%3Adigital-text%2Cn%3A157028011&sort=reviewrank_authority


OMG!!!!

Seriously?! Ten new reviews have gone up TODAY!

This is nuts. No wonder publishers want to jump in and milk this. (I decided against the offer, btw. Thanks for the advice in this thread. It would lead me to consider a more generous offer, as several of you have convinced me that there would be advantages to having a deal. I just think it needs to be a better deal).



BAM Squared said:


> A Wool Squee Girl here -- Hugh I LOVED your Wool series and you deserve all the attention you get from it!!
> I belong to an author friendly group on the Kindle Forum (I know, I know -- a very rare occurrence at Amazon) and your book has been recommended, gushed about and spoken at length over there!!


Really? What threads? I'm gonna have to go search. 

(And thanks for the compliments)


----------



## BAM Squared (Mar 17, 2012)

I am terrible with replying to someone's post here on Kindle Boards... I usually never leave the Amazon Kindle forum but I actually registered myself here so I could post to you, Hugh 

The thread on the Kindle Forum (not to be confused with the schizophrenic Meet Our Authors Forum nor the bi-polar Kindle Books Forum) is called "Al's Place" (+ the fact that we are on our 24th version of it). We started it in July of 2010 and it still goes strong. We have many authors who post there but also MANY more readers -- also untold "lurkers" who sometimes 'out' themselves after months of just reading and buying...

I post by the name "Anne-Marie", I am the one who originally started it and named it after my nemesis BigAl, who also has a popular Indie blog "BigAl's Books and Pals"...

I KNOW that the Regulars of Al's Place would be chuffed to see you post there. PLEASE consider visiting us!!


----------



## BAM Squared (Mar 17, 2012)

Oh GREAT!!!!!!
Now I sound like a stalking psychopath!!!


----------



## VincentZandri (Apr 21, 2010)

I agree...Do both...That's precisely what I'm doing...I signed a "very nice" deal for a bunch of books at Thomas & Mercer and I am continuing to work with indie publishing...Congrats!!!


----------



## Sean Patrick Fox (Dec 3, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> This is nuts. No wonder publishers want to jump in and milk this. (I decided against the offer, btw. Thanks for the advice in this thread. It would lead me to consider a more generous offer, as several of you have convinced me that there would be advantages to having a deal. I just think it needs to be a better deal).


Is the company that made the offer not willing to negotiate?

Would you mind sharing the amount of time it will take you to earn the amount of money the company offered you, based on your current rate of sales? I'd be very interested in seeing that (apologies if you've already mentioned it).

Oh, and congrats on your recent success!


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Sean Patrick Fox said:


> Is the company that made the offer not willing to negotiate?
> 
> Would you mind sharing the amount of time it will take you to earn the amount of money the company offered you, based on your current rate of sales? I'd be very interested in seeing that (apologies if you've already mentioned it).
> 
> Oh, and congrats on your recent success!


What they offered takes three months to earn (if sales hold up). Except, they were going to get the rights to my next series as well!


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

Hugh Howey said:


> What they offered takes three months to earn (if sales hold up). Except, they were going to get the rights to my next series as well!


That's an offer like Vito Corleone getting the band leader to let Johnny Fontaine out of his contract was an offer.

Did they have ski masks and guns when they "offered" you this deal?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> "What they offered takes three months to earn (if sales hold up). Except, they were going to get the rights to my next series as well! "


Sounds like a great deal for them.


----------



## MH Sargent (Apr 8, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Well done. Make them an offer they can't accept. Then if they do, jump on it.


This. John Locke made himself a good deal. Do the same. And congrats!!


----------



## VannaSmythe (Feb 28, 2012)

Man, do I wish I was in your shoes 6 months from now...


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> What they offered takes three months to earn (if sales hold up). Except, they were going to get the rights to my next series as well!


Publishers are really going to have to step up their game if they want to catch successful indies like you.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

David Kazzie said:


> That's an offer like Vito Corleone getting the band leader to let Johnny Fontaine out of his contract was an offer.
> 
> Did they have ski masks and guns when they "offered" you this deal?


I think publishers are so used to writers falling over themselves to get published that they're not accustomed to competing with their current earnings. They are more used to bidding wars between publishers, which is where I think the big advances come from.

There's another way I could think about this: Instead of worrying about the size of the advance, I could try and convince myself that the story would be just as infectious in the traditional market as it has been on the Kindle store, in which case I would earn out my advance and go on to make a sizable income on my royalties. I just have a difficult time believing this. And the royalties are so much smaller that I'd have to sell quite a lot more books to match and then exceed my current earnings.

We turned down the offer; they said they were sticking to the number for the advance and for us to think about it; I've thought about it quite enough.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> We turned down the offer; they said they were sticking to the number for the advance and for us to think about it; I've thought about it quite enough.


Actually, this sounds like a pretty good situation. Tell them you need a few weeks, then you can extrapolate based on how the books are sustaining sales over that period of time. And the thinking about it works the other way, too. They might come back with a bigger offer.


----------



## GUTMAN (Dec 22, 2011)

Having had a career in Hollywood I can only say that nothing raises desire so much as *saying no.*

If your sales continue at this pace, expect to be approached again.

So, you may want to consider, in the interim, _what is a deal you would say yes to?_

Good luck!

G


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Think about how many copies Hugh is selling right now.
Think about how many more copies Hugh needs to sell at a 17.5-25.0% rate to break even.

B.


----------



## Imogen Rose (Mar 22, 2010)

Congrats!


----------



## BRONZEAGE (Jun 25, 2011)

The arrogance of Big House Publishing is astounding...

Glad to see that Hugh considered the offer rationally then rejected it.  

Next time you have a valid offer, get a good attorney (in the UK, known as a "solicitor") experienced in this area of law to assist you. Don't sign what the Big House offers  as-is.  Don't accept a contract that allows the Big House to pay you royalties when they feel like it ( they can track sales in real time now despite the outdated contract terms they use), or to get back part of the "advance" based on spurious returns and fairy tales. 

You may have this opportunity again, and negotiating a better deal could help shape how trad publishing approaches the indie author.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Think about how many copies Hugh is selling right now.
> Think about how many more copies Hugh needs to sell at a 17.5-25.0% rate to break even.
> 
> B.


Not to mention that a $4.99 e-book would get jacked up to a $14.99 e-book that sells a lot less (and that I probably make the same amount on, per sale).

There's a reason you don't see a glut of traditional books all over the bestselling Kindle lists. They're priced way too high.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> There's a reason you don't see a glut of traditional books all over the bestselling Kindle lists. They're priced way too high.


*blink* We had a thread about this a couple weeks ago. Half of them in your genre were by big publishers with prices $7.99-$14.99. I consider half pretty good numbers, adding on top the print sales.

Of course, if your books can't carry a $14.99 price tag that's different. But just say the deal isn't for you or you are happy where you are. Don't say things like this when it's actually not true.


----------



## Robert Bidinotto (Mar 3, 2011)

Hugh, you wrote:

_And thanks for the advice, everyone. The biggest difference I see, just thinking about the contracts and all, is the relaxation I write with now compared to the "job" it can become. No-complete clauses, rights on future works, deadlines, hard and fast word counts, mandatory plot massages, and so on. It used to be that these things were the price of making a living as an author. Now they are the costs of going one particular route. The path I'm currently on means I goof off and write in whatever direction I please, and the reader judges me with their dollars. There's something about pleasing (or failing to please) the masses directly that feels different than how I imagine it will be to please a handful of interested parties in board rooms who are guessing what readers want._

IMHO, you chose...wisely.

And anyone who hasn't been reading the many cautionary blogs by Passive Guy, Dean Wesley Smith, and Kristine Kathryn Rusch about agents needs to spend a few hours on their sites doing some serious reading of past entries. What they reveal about the way book agents operate today is simply scary. If you ever do want a book deal, get a good I.P. attorney who is working for YOU. Many agents pretend to represent the author; but they really have a financial vested interest in maintaining relationships with and serving the interests of a limited number of publishers, while clients are many and replaceable. Read those blogs for details and plenty of gory examples.


----------



## UnicornEmily (Jul 2, 2011)

Congratulations!  That is a FANTASTIC problem!

I say, tell them you will sell the print rights only (not the e-book), and point out that you are already well established in the e-books, and that you've reached a lot of that market already (might convince them to consider it).  If they think they need the e-book rights too, either demand more money (if you think you'd be losing by signing), in either advance or higher royalties, or just make the decision to walk away.

This is, of course, assuming it really is just all about money.    If you like being independent, or you think it would be awesome to have a publisher's name on your book, then don't forget to weigh this, weighting it whatever this much is worth to you!


----------



## Andrew Dzeguze (Feb 3, 2012)

I know people have mentioned getting an attorney several times already, but as a former IP attorney (I'm still licensed to practice, I just don't right now) I can't stress that enough.  Especially if you can get one who isn't an agent and therefore doesn't have a vested interest in maintaining relationships at publishing houses.  

Agents make sense for someone who feels like they need to get a traditional deal and have no contacts in the industry, and hence no leverage in getting an audience with many traditional publishers.  You obviously aren't in that category, and your success to date gives you power that renders an agent at best an unnecessary drag on your revenue stream.  An attorney, though, is an absolute necessity to make sure you know just what you are signing.  It isn't just a matter of fine print, but also terms of art and acceptable conventions in the industry, so make sure they are a copyright attorney and not just someone who once filed a trademark application and therefore considers themselves an IP lawyer.

I'd also suggest that if branching out into paper is something you see as a net positive, you are probably in a position to draw up terms you'd find acceptable so you have a counter to any future proposals.  It will probably cost you a few grand in hourly fees, but it is worth having the same sort of planning session you'd have with an estate lawyer if you are making hundreds of thousands of dollars in royalties (and you should be talking to someone about your taxes and estate planning if you have that sort of income coming in, too - but I digress). Anything is negotiable if you have the power in a negotiation - and if Wool is making you that much money as an e-book, you have the power.  But it is a lot easier to get what it sounds like you really want (limits on scope of rights, freedom to pursue other projects, etc.) if you have put in the work to draw up a framework you can present.  Otherwise, since so few authors get to negotiate this way (most first timers get form deals and the only issue is advance size), your concerns might not be evident or even comprehensible to the publisher.  Being frank and having a comprehensive plan will almost always run off someone who is either stuck in the past or just looking to make a fast buck, but someone who really wants the property and wants to do right by you should be willing to work with your vision. 

Congratulations, by the way.


----------



## Sophrosyne (Mar 27, 2011)

You can always see if they'll agree to letting you keep your ebook rights if you give them control over print books.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Sophrosyne said:


> You can always see if they'll agree to letting you keep your ebook rights if you give them control over print books.


This is much too logical for them. Besides, I think publishers know e-books are a cash cow even as they poo-poo them publicly.

Not only do they all want the e-rights, the most any publisher has offered is 25% of net.

And they (not to mention the Authors' Guild) want us to believe Amazon is the bad guy.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

re: Amazon bad guy

I think folks should read Dean Wesley's Smith's post about it. Not his post, but the comments. Kris and Laura Resnick explain the history of that (as usual, it has nothing to do with Amazon or publishing, and everything to do with politics)


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> This is much too logical for them. Besides, I think publishers know e-books are a cash cow even as they poo-poo them publicly.
> 
> Not only do they all want the e-rights, the most any publisher has offered is 25% of net.
> 
> And they (not to mention the Authors' Guild) want us to believe Amazon is the bad guy.


Not true. I have one book deal that excludes eBook rights. I have another that fell through where they were excluding eBook rights. The reason it fell through was because they are a large Christian publisher and some of the way topics are handled in my book would not fit in with their editorial guidlines.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I am still at the point where that would be something I could not pass up.  I am still wishing I could make a living just from selling my books.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> Not true. I have one book deal that excludes eBook rights. I have another that fell through where they were excluding eBook rights. The reason it fell through was because they are a large Christian publisher and some of the way topics are handled in my book would not fit in with their editorial guidlines.


*nod*

All in the negotiation.


----------



## NathanWrann (May 5, 2011)

balaspa said:


> I am still at the point where that would be something I could not pass up. I am still wishing I could make a living just from selling my books.


Isn't that the irony of it?

When at the point where we wouldn't pass it up, they don't offer it to us. When they want us, we don't need them.

Right now, I'd take it. If I was pulling in $30,000 per month in sales, I'd pass.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Krista D. Ball said:


> re: Amazon bad guy
> 
> I think folks should read Dean Wesley's Smith's post about it. Not his post, but the comments. Kris and Laura Resnick explain the history of that (as usual, it has nothing to do with Amazon or publishing, and everything to do with politics)


Which post was that?


----------



## Andrew Dzeguze (Feb 3, 2012)

Hugh Howey said:


> Not only do they all want the e-rights, the most any publisher has offered is 25% of net.
> 
> And they (not to mention the Authors' Guild) want us to believe Amazon is the bad guy.


They are looking at everything as a single pie, where e-rights cannibalize paper and are therefore to be kept in check. That's a faulty assumption in my opinion, at least at the extremes. Much like with music, there will always be a core market for the tangible item - warehouse stores and BestBuy still sell CDs, even with all their drawbacks. Harry Potter and Game of Thrones type mega sellers will always havea paper market - probably even more than music because people like to read before they go to bed as a way of winding down, and the ritual of the process is aided by the tangible item.

You have every right to reject limited thinking like this, but I'm guessing there's at least one publisher out there willing to see it as a symbiotic relationship rather than parasitic, and treat the channels less as competitors they have to control. But maybe the industry is just too hidebound for that just yet.

I don't know the details but my understanding is that some authors in paper (James Patterson for one) have hybrid deals where they aren't so much published as distributed by a printing house. That might make more sense for you given your online presence and desire for control.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

There is often a simple explanation for why a party bids what he does. He doesn't have any more money to spend, and he's throwing out a spread of bids trying to get the biggest bang for his buck. That's why I didn't buy ten thousand shares of Apple last year. I didn't have a spare $3 million around. It would have been a good idea, and I would have made good money. After today's news, I feel cheated.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> Which post was that?


http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=6544

Read the comments. It really explains the situation.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> Not true. I have one book deal that excludes eBook rights. I have another that fell through where they were excluding eBook rights. The reason it fell through was because they are a large Christian publisher and some of the way topics are handled in my book would not fit in with their editorial guidlines.


Which publisher was this? Are they getting you into major bookstores? I'd love to have a list of forward-thinking houses in the biz, the ones amenable to limited rights deals.

If it's someone offering to do the POD thing for me with limited distribution, I've already done that myself and generate quite a bit of revenue from physical books.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Which publisher was this? Are they getting you into major bookstores? I'd love to have a list of forward-thinking houses in the biz, the ones amenable to limited rights deals.


It's not about "list". It's about negotiating with whoever is interested in you. Many people are unable to discuss contract terms, so can't provide you lists. However, we all negotiate our terms. We all make choices. If you want a limited rights deal, get a lawyer, and have them negotiate it, like this guy: http://www.contract-counsel.com/


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Which publisher was this? Are they getting you into major bookstores? I'd love to have a list of forward-thinking houses in the biz, the ones amenable to limited rights deals.
> 
> If it's someone offering to do the POD thing for me with limited distribution, I've already done that myself and generate quite a bit of revenue from physical books.


I'd love a list like this too. Locke signed that distro deal with Simon & Schuster, but beyond that, I have no idea who in the industry would be amicable. I know a few larger players that are most definitely not, but I'm bound by confidentiality agreements and cannot discuss them. *curses!*

http://www.mediabistro.com/galleycat/simon-schuster-to-handle-sales-distribution-for-john-locke-print-books_b36824

B.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Good to hear. S&S are doing "second reads" right now and sound interested. They've been known to operate outside the norm in other areas of the biz as well. My expectations are still low, but it's nice to know some of these companies are amenable.

Krista: I don't think it's as simple as that. The publishers I've been dealing with have lines they can't (won't) cross. It isn't like every purchasing agent gets autonomy. They have to go through financial departments and higher-ups to get deals sorted out. Everyone starts with boilerplate and bends slightly here and there, but many have never and seem to have no plans for signing a physical-only deal. And I'm represented by a top-notch agent who has dealt with similar situations in her decade of experience (I'm not the first e-book success she's shopped around. Not even the first who has turned down large offers because of current earnings). She warned me up-front (before I signed with her) that the chances of an offer coming through that made any sense (based on my earnings) were very slim.

Still, if you have the names of publishers who will ignore e-rights and still give decent marketing weight to a physical release, I'm all eyeballs over here!


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Hugh Howey said:


> Krista: I don't think it's as simple as that. The publishers I've been dealing with have lines they can't (won't) cross. It isn't like every purchasing agent gets autonomy. They have to go through financial departments and higher-ups to get deals sorted out. Everyone starts with boilerplate and bends slightly here and there, but many have never and seem to have no plans for signing a physical-only deal. And I'm represented by a top-notch agent who has dealt with similar situations in her decade of experience (I'm not the first e-book success she's shopped around. Not even the first who has turned down large offers because of current earnings). She warned me up-front (before I signed with her) that the chances of an offer coming through that made any sense (based on my earnings) were very slim.
> 
> Still, if you have the names of publishers who will ignore e-rights and still give decent marketing weight to a physical release, I'm all eyeballs over here!


Since I really don't want to get into a discussion over agents, I'll wish you luck.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Hugh-
If they gave you or your agent a contract, you can counter offer. You should always counter offer. It's part of negotiation. If they said no, then you know where you stand. I have my ET lawyer to negotiate for me, and she's awesome. 
This publisher is in all the stores. I would've loved to have worked with them. The only thing they asked is—would I be willing to raise the eBook price to match the paperbacks. Of course, I said yes.

I'm not naming publisher names, because while they ultimately decided this project isn't for them, I have other manuscripts in the pipeline. At least I have several acquisition editors who are willing to look at my MS's in the future. I'm way ahead of where I was a year ago.


----------



## EthanRussellErway (Nov 17, 2011)

Threads like this make me glad I found kindle boards.  Very informative and encouraging information.  I too hope to have such problems some day soon.


----------



## Ty Johnston (Jun 19, 2009)

Congratulations!

I would never say "no" immediately. First I'd want to see the contract and what they had to offer. Then I'd come back with my counter offer. If they didn't like it, ah well, such is life.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Ty Johnston said:


> Congratulations!
> 
> I would never say "no" immediately. First I'd want to see the contract and what they had to offer. Then I'd come back with my counter offer. If they didn't like it, ah well, such is life.


Exactly. You could be leaving money on the table. It took several months to close my one deal, but the worst they can say is it's a deal breaker. Then you know where you stand. Every deal is different, because they ultimately do want to do it if they can make money. If they think your eBook potential is tapped out, or aren't convinced eBooks are that valuable, you still can get a nice contract on just the paper. 
If you don't ask, you don't get it-that's for sure.
I find it hard to believe you wouldn't counter with what you would like-and it usually takes them at least a couple of weeks to think about it. (Actually, the one deal took almost six months, and the one that fell through took over four months.)


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

Hugh Howey said:


> I'm represented by a top-notch agent who has dealt with similar situations in her decade of experience (I'm not the first e-book success she's shopped around. Not even the first who has turned down large offers because of current earnings). She warned me up-front (before I signed with her) that the chances of an offer coming through that made any sense (based on my earnings) were very slim.
> 
> Still, if you have the names of publishers who will ignore e-rights and still give decent marketing weight to a physical release, I'm all eyeballs over here!


Given the beating that agents have been taking around here, it's important to note that Hugh's agent is obviously looking out for him - she told him that it was unlikely he would get an offer that would beat what he's making himself. I think people should still recognize the value of a good agent, who can help engineer deals that writers would never even know to think about. IP lawyers are fine, but generally they are not plugged into the market like a reputable agent (as Hugh has).


----------



## Romana Grimm (Mar 19, 2012)

I wouldn't have taken that deal either with his kind of sales to back me up. Still, I wouldn't give up on a paper deal completely, and maybe I'd even let the publisher have audio book rights and other stuff that's not movies if their offer is reasonable. Good luck to you, Hugh, however you'll handle this unexpected opportunity and its follow-ups. Please let us know what "the dark side" does next, I'm very curious


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

Jake Barton, a UK thriller writer with 84,000 sales, was wined and dined at the Savoy by a publisher who offered a print-only four/five book deal. Jake turned it down.

You can read about it here: http://bit.ly/xAdapk

We are so lucky to have a choice these days.

Lexi


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Lexi Revellian said:


> Jake Barton, a UK thriller writer with 84,000 sales, was wined and dined at the Savoy by a publisher who offered a print-only four/five book deal. Jake turned it down.
> You can read about it here: http://bit.ly/xAdapk
> We are so lucky to have a choice these days.
> Lexi


Lexi-
Thanks for posting. I knew I couldn't be the only one approached by large publishers who are interested in just the paperbacks. I was told by the acquistion editor that the publisher doesn't feel eBooks are a major part of their business model. Hence their only requirement on that end would be price matching.

Also I noticed Hugh mentioned talking to people at amazon by phone, so I'm not the only one either on that end.


----------

