# Resistance is futile: the future of publishing



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

The Borg are in close Earth orbit and preparing to land.  The future of publishing is now.  I was recently speaking with a science fiction author.  He also does consulting in the corporate world, except he doesn’t call himself a science fiction writer when he does that; he’s a futurist.  And the #1 thing he preaches is that change is occurring exponentially, not linearly.

Here are some facts:
The Big 6 Publishers currently control 95% of print publishing.
Starting in 1995, the print business began contracting.
7 out of 10 books printed by the Big 6 lose money.
10% of their titles generate 90% of their revenue.
Those facts indicate a reality:  the focus for the Big 6 is going to be more and more on the Brand Name authors and less on midlist.  The problem is:  where is the next generation of Brand Name Authors going to come from?  For every Amanda Hocking going one way, there are ten trad authors going the other.

The decline of the book chains is biggest problem for traditional publishers.  Here’s the conundrum that NY doesn’t want to face:  The book business is the same for them, but the retail business has changed.  While NY basically operates the same, the way books are sold has changed dramatically.  How many music retailers are left in your town?  

The focus is too much on celebrity books in NY and many are money-losers.  Much more so than all those midlist authors.  The bestseller lists are very deceptive.  For example, Kate Gosselin’s book sold only 11,000 copies yet hit #6 on the NY Times list.  Ditto for Snooki's numbers.  Someone is playing with the numbers to make it look good, but many of those big deals are money-bleeders for trad publishers.  

There are two major trends in publishing going on right now:
1.  Mid list authors going it on their own. Actually, this is creeping upward.  David Morrell (not a midlist author, can we say Rambo?)  announced he is bringing nine books from his backlist into print AND his newest title on his own, skipping traditional publishing altogether.  So is Barry Eisler.  So am I.  And Connie Brockway.  EJ Sellers.  And numerous others. 

2.  Digital publishing is exploding.  I predict by the end of 2011 we will be close to 50-60% of all books being digital.  

The problem is this:  the makers of digital platforms like Kindle and iPad want content.  The Big 6 are loath to give digital content to them because they believe it cuts into their hardcover and other print sales and would hurt their own business.  So there is a huge divide between the platform makers, primarily Amazon and Apple, and the content providers.  The Big 6 are also holding on to Agency pricing to try to force print sales.

This is the VOID that will destroy some of the Big 6 if they don’t exploit it.  And also the VOID which savvy writers can fill.  

Adapt or be assimilated.


----------



## Philip Chen (Aug 8, 2010)

Good post. So I should be glad that trad literary agents and publishers have given me the bum's rush all these years?


----------



## deanfromaustralia (Mar 24, 2011)

REDgroup retail - who own the Borders chain Down Under, announced late last week that they are closing 17 Borders stores nation wide. They have been in the news quite a bit throughout late 2010 and early 2011. 

The irony for me is that Borders, Adelaide hosted my Adelaide launch in the middle of last year.


----------



## WizardofWestmarch (Jan 12, 2011)

Huh I missed David Morell's switching over, and I read The Successful Novelist which was rather thought provoking. Interesting to see him switch over.

One thing I found interesting in your post is mentioning Apple but not B&N, when last I knew the Nook was a MUCH bigger platform from the ebooks sold perspective, or did I miss a major shift? In fact, I'm going to be curious to see how B&N transitions during this time since they are the only brick and mortar with a strong presence in the ebook space.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Brilliant analysis, Bob.


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Hey Bob - not disputing your numbers...in fact would like to use them myself - but no I'll be called on them - so where do you get your facts about 7 out of 10 books losing money and NY making money on only 10%?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

The economic reality is paper publishing is a function of the number of feet of shelf space that can be profitably deployed by retailers. A publisher's competitive advantage is filling those shelves. They do that very well. When shelf space diminishes, so does the publishers' competitive edge.


----------



## aaronpolson (Apr 4, 2010)

I'm happy to be a small fish in this very big ocean.  

And the patriot in me--I'm not jingoistic or anything--loves the independence of it all.  

Thanks for the post!


----------



## Ruth Harris (Dec 26, 2010)

Bob, the 10% (or whatever the small number is) making money & the rest losing is truly nothing new.  Many years ago a bestselling friend of mine told me:  "I'm paying for X,"  she said bitterly, naming a "literary" writer who was published, promoted & fete-d by her publisher while all she (& her very popular fiction) did was keep them in business.

To cut to the bottom line, she was paying the bills.  The publisher was swanning around giving cocktail parties to indulge his "literary" pretensions.

Voodoo economics have defined TradPub for a long time.  The world changed while they were having lunch at the Four Seasons & they weren't paying attention.  Then the internet came along and pow!


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Great post Bob. You are very right about content, which the net has always been hungry for. People seem to forget the scale when talking about online distribution. We are talking in the hundreds of millions of unique users, all of them with unique tastes and wants. All of this means that niche does not necessarily mean small and unprofitable. 

I think the biggest problem that trad publishing faces is getting over their addiction to their very flawed gatekeeping role. It is far too subjective a system and has allowed many great works of literature slip through, proven by the success of many of those they rejected such as Rowling and Hocking.


----------



## Sarah Woodbury (Jan 30, 2011)

Towards the end of December, I asked a question on Writer Unboxed (mostly traditionally published authors) about 'how bad it was' in the publishing industry and Jane Friedman was kind enough to answer. This is what I asked: " I'd like to see an assessment from an agent, published author, and an editor about what happened in 2009-2010 in the publishing world. I've heard some amazing things (30% of employees laid off, advances down 50%, sales down a similar amount, publishing houses not buying books at all for months at a time, reprinting older books rather than buying new ones) and I'd like to know what's true and what's not."

And this is the link to the answer: http://writerunboxed.com/2010/12/28/qa-how-bad-is-it-really-in-the-publishing-industry/

Four months later, my impression is that it's only gotten more so . . .


----------



## Michelle Muto (Feb 1, 2011)

I wonder where they'll be in another year or two. Will the agent be seeking authors instead of the other way around?


----------



## Romi (Apr 4, 2011)

If I only ever reach ten readers by going it alone (_or five, g-dammit, or even one!_), that's ten more readers than I would've reached, if my work stayed trapped on my hard drive for however long or maybe forever, had the gatekeeping structure been my only option.

Hooray I say...hooray!


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

Just back from speaking at a professional journalists conference, where Bill Bernhardt (wait, I should say WILLIAM Bernhardt, nearly 30 bestselling legal thrillers) said he's reluctant to sign another book deal because agents/editors are still trying to "guess" what way to jump. 

Even the "name" authors question whether to continue the merry go round. David Morrell some years ago told me he'd had to "reinvent" himself several times over the years--and now it seems again. I've had to learn to be a "chameleon" too. What's important, too, is that choosing one or the other (or several options) isn't jumping off a cliff. There are do-overs, if one wishes to try something else.

Great post, Bob. 

amy


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

We might want to remember the tipping point is only obvious in hindsight. I propose it has already happened.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

The numbers I got were from a person who worked for 30 years in Random House's sales force.  He had some very interesting things to say.  He talked about having meetings where to keep a book in print, they'd print 50 copies and stick them in a warehouse.  That being said, I'm happy to report that Random House has at least verbally agreed to give me rights back to my Area 51 series.  I'll believe it when I get the reversion letters, but that series sold over a million copies in print and since I held on to the erights to two of the middle books, it was a big mess.  I'm psyched to see what the series will do in ebook.
At the recent Whidbey Island Writers Conference I noted a distinct change in the attitude of agents and writers.  It was almost the opposite of what it's always been.  Agents were scared and uncertain.  Writers kept asking how they could go indie.  
I keep seeing the deals in PW every day and I really wonder what all those people making those deals think is going to be happening by the time the book makes it through a traditional publishers production pipeline.  Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense.


----------



## bobdev (Dec 7, 2010)

Those of you on Facebook should friend David Morrell.

He posts often and interestingly on such matters.

Robert


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

Good one, Bob.  "Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense."  Yes, being as it takes about sixteen months for a book to hit the shelves after signing (it took them 3 years to get mine out), I wonder why anyone would sign.  How many of the big 6 will make it through the next two or three years?


----------



## Music &amp; Mayhem (Jun 15, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> At the recent Whidbey Island Writers Conference I noted a distinct change in the attitude of agents and writers. It was almost the opposite of what it's always been. Agents were scared and uncertain. Writers kept asking how they could go indie. I keep seeing the deals in PW every day and I really wonder what all those people making those deals think is going to be happening by the time the book makes it through a traditional publishers production pipeline. Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense.


I agree, on both counts. I just attended an agent/editor panel at Tennessee William's writers conference in New Orleans last month ... same thing ... agents and editors seem not half so snotty as I've seen them in previous years at other conferences. And pretty soon more authors than Barry Eisler will realize that they don't have to wait (and wait on) a publisher and the publisher's timeline to pub a book. Indie pub offers way more control over everything: price, cover, editing ... even marketing.


----------



## Alisha (Feb 20, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> The numbers I got were from a person who worked for 30 years in Random House's sales force. He had some very interesting things to say. He talked about having meetings where to keep a book in print, they'd print 50 copies and stick them in a warehouse. That being said, I'm happy to report that Random House has at least verbally agreed to give me rights back to my Area 51 series. I'll believe it when I get the reversion letters, but that series sold over a million copies in print and since I held on to the erights to two of the middle books, it was a big mess. I'm psyched to see what the series will do in ebook.
> At the recent Whidbey Island Writers Conference I noted a distinct change in the attitude of agents and writers. It was almost the opposite of what it's always been. Agents were scared and uncertain. Writers kept asking how they could go indie.
> I keep seeing the deals in PW every day and I really wonder what all those people making those deals think is going to be happening by the time the book makes it through a traditional publishers production pipeline. Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense.


These are exciting times indeed. I had six books at three different publishers. I've made more money in less than 2 months on my first two Indie releases than my other books combined over a period of four years. The learning curve for an Indie author isn't huge either, especially for an author already published elsewhere who knows the ins and outs of editing, cover design, marketing, etc. I'm looking forward to getting the rights back to all my books. And now I finally have an agent interested in my YA books and I probably won't sign with an agent. Weird how these things happen.


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

Overheard at the RT convention: "We can argue till the cows come home about legitimacy and distribution, but I just want to pay my mortgage."


----------



## Eve Yohalem (Apr 1, 2011)

Great post, Bob. There seems to be a deer in the headlights thing going on with traditional publishers that I don't get at all. They know their business model is doomed, they know they need to change, and yet they're holding fast to the old ways. Pushing prices up when the market is clearly pulling them down; outsourcing or neglecting editorial services when that's an area where they can provide real value; choosing not to market most of the books they acquire. Given that they still control 95% of the market, the big 6 COULD survive if they were willing to reinvent themselves, but I'm betting they won't.


----------



## Mike McIntyre (Jan 19, 2011)

Bob, I love your posts. I've been meaning to tell you that, but every time I try I see you've posted another brilliant post and I get distracted.


----------



## Christine Kersey (Feb 13, 2011)

Bob - thanks for your post. It's fascinating to watch the changes in publishing unfold. But more than that, it's exciting to be part of the Indie publishing wave that is overtaking trad publishing.


----------



## judd.exley (Mar 31, 2011)

Good stuff, I LOVE futurist talk. It'll be fun to spend the latter parts of December going through the predictions for where 2011 is going to end up and see how accurate any of it was.

For my money, I'm betting that this post will come pretty close.



deanfromaustralia said:


> REDgroup retail - who own the Borders chain Down Under, announced late last week that they are closing 17 Borders stores nation wide. They have been in the news quite a bit throughout late 2010 and early 2011.
> 
> The irony for me is that Borders, Adelaide hosted my Adelaide launch in the middle of last year.


Mate, the Borders closures was kind of quiet on the international front, but HUGE in my opinion. I believe it marked one of the first major shifts towards the substantial changes that Bob's predicting.

It's certainly what prompted me to really pursue self-publishing over traditional, I can tell you that.


----------



## Hayden Duvall (Mar 24, 2011)

This shift is somewhat similar to what we have seen in the video game industry over the past few years.  Big publishers are putting serious money behind the heavy-hitters, and the top 10% of games are funding everything else.  The event of digital distribution, and an independant route to market is eroding the control of the big publishers, and will put them under pressure unless they adapt.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

I agree with this.  

I can't even stand to go into a bookstore anymore.  Prices too high, too hard to find stuff I am looking for, and if I actually do buy something, I'm annoyed carring it around because it is huge and bulky.  I guess I'm a lazy ass, because turning the pages of a paperback book has now become a chore that drives me batty!

We are a smaller, easier, faster, better culture.  

Books are now getting smaller, easier, faster, better.

I am thrilled with the changes and I say bring it on!


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

It will be interesting to see what happens, but last I heard CDs still outsold digital downloads in the music world even after all these years. I can see paper books hanging on in the big box stores and selected bookstores and still being viable, though midlist writers will be the ones squeezed. People who only read a few books a year have little incentive to switch to e-readers. The best hope to convert them is through a device they may have that the bought for other reasons -- a smartphone or tablet PC -- and hope they shrug and decide to use that instead of buying the paper book. 

I also wonder what will happen in the ebook world when books never go out of print and the number of ebooks for sale grows dramatically. If the amount of money spent every year on books remains flat or grows at a small rate but the supply of unique titles grows at a dramatic rate, what will that do to the sales of individual books, and what kind of pressure will that put on pricing? Will the average earnings per writer go up or down in a scenario like this?


----------



## tim290280 (Jan 11, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> The Borg are in close Earth orbit and preparing to land. The future of publishing is now. I was recently speaking with a science fiction author. He also does consulting in the corporate world, except he doesn't call himself a science fiction writer when he does that; he's a futurist. And the #1 thing he preaches is that change is occurring exponentially, not linearly.


I agree completely, except for the exponential thing. It is actually a logarithmic growth curve.









This is even more of a reason to get onboard early. I work in an extension role and the adoption curve is very much of this type. Early adopters get on board and have the most to benefit from the change over. During the exponentional growth period everything suddenly switches and towards the middle of this phase the new thing becomes the standard. The late adopters are essentially forced out of the market, or forced to change. You will get some that never adopt, but usually because they never needed to (in this case an e.g. would be a small scale hardcover print specialist).

So not just adapt of be assimilated, adapt early!


----------



## iamstoryteller (Jul 16, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> ...People who only read a few books a year have little incentive to switch to e-readers. The best hope to convert them is through a device they may have that the bought for other reasons -- a smartphone or tablet PC -- and hope they shrug and decide to use that instead of buying the paper book...


This is a good point. My book is very much niche, not genre, and a bit more difficult to market. The good news is that if one finds where their niche market hangs out on the internet, those folks can be reached much more quickly and effectively than the corresponding print book sitting languishing on a bookshelf.

Sharon


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

Nice post!  I keep reading and hearing about how things are going and how fast change seems to be coming.  It is interesting to watch.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Sony, a huge music company, stopped making CDs last year.


----------



## Sarah Woodbury (Jan 30, 2011)

I've heard that CD statistic elsewhere, and I'm always like --really?

Here's an article from 2008:

"Year-end sales figures released Wednesday by The Nielsen Co. show total album sales, including album equivalents made up of single digital tracks, fell to 428.4 million units, down 8.5 percent from 500.5 million in 2007.

Physical album sales fell 20 percent to 362.6 million from 450.5 million, while digital album sales rose 32 percent to a record 65.8 million units.

Digital track sales, such as those conducted in Apple Inc.'s iTunes Music Store, were up 27 percent from last year, breaking the 1 billion mark for the first time at 1.07 billion."

Okay . . . this is 2011: "Album sales were only 26% digital in 2010, meaning that 74% of all albums sold were still physical. That's with the loss of Tower and Virgin and with Best Buy cutting way back on the amount of music they carry. So even though it's harder to buy music physically it's still an enormous amount of sales. If you read the music trades you'd think there were no more physical sales. 
Of course, Silverman admits that this is only looking at album sales, while digital downloads tend to be singles -- at a ratio of 15 to 1 (single sales to album sales)." http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2011/02/silverman-cd-sales-to-co-exist-with-cloud-digital-downloads035.html

So, I'm thinking that this oft-quoted statistic references ALBUMS--not overall music sales.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

This is what I found about music:



> Sales of digital albums jumped 13 percent to 86.3 million, and sales of digital tracks increased 1 percent to 1.172 billion. In total, digital sales accounted for 46 percent of all music sold in 2010.


http://blogs.courant.com/eric_danton_sound_check/2011/01/2010-music-sales-eminem-recovery.html

It's interesting to me that after all these years digital sales still don't represent 50% of sales, and I'd argue that digital music offers more convenience than digital books. Most of us don't feel a need to carry our book library with us because as readers we tend to focus on one book at a time. Carrying around a paperback isn't problem enough to make us wish for a Kindle. Music is different. We like having access to our music library wherever we are. That iPod is quite attractive in that light.

I'd also look to the music industry as a possible mirror to the publishing industry. When the barriers came down and anyone could publish music to iTunes, did that result in a lot of indie musicians making a lot of money?


----------



## Sarah Woodbury (Jan 30, 2011)

I don't know if it's 'a lot' of money, but my husband is involved in music and he's said that it's the combination of digital music downloads and Youtube that has enabled many indie musicians to flourish.


----------



## Rhonda Helms (Apr 8, 2011)

Very interesting statistics and thoughts on the industry. Thanks, everyone!


----------



## LCEvans (Mar 29, 2009)

Thanks, Bob, for the very useful information. The big 6 may not be ready to adapt, but I am.


----------



## J. Carson Black (Feb 27, 2011)

Bob, I see this as a window of opportunity. What makes us competitive?  Low low prices.  And many here are either naturally talented writers or the same midlist authors that could have used a build but never got one. (Think of these names: Laura Lippman, Harlan Coben, and Robert Crais. What do all these authors have in common?  They were built, probably averaging between five to seven books with a publisher - all of them in mass market paperback - and look at them now!  The publishers gave them the opportunity, and the rest they did themselves.)  

Now they aren't building authors but desperately running after Snooki Money.  

In the meantime, there's a hole we can drive a truck through. I anticipate that some time in the future that hole may narrow somewhat, but right now?  Charge!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

CDs may still have strong sales for all the folks who have a CD deck, amplifier, receiver, and speakers at home. The same might be true for car systems. 

i just dragged stereo equipment that cost me about a thousand dollars down to Goodwill, replaced it with a Bose iPod speaker about 12 inches on a side. It sounds better than the old stuff ever did. The car now connects to the phone in my pocket, and asks me what I want to hear. So now I have nothing left that even plays CDs.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Print publishing has a fatal flaw that is now coming home:  sell through vs sales.

Since bookstores are consignment stores, they order X number of copies.  They sell what they can and then the rest are back on the publisher.

So you've got new author A.  A has a mass market paperback.  Low orders, because new author.  So they manage to "sell-in" 10,000 copies.  But it sells 8,000 of those.  80% sell through.  Great news in the old days.  But here's what happened next.  When A has book #2, no one looks at sell through, they look at sales.  So a bookstore that sold 8 out of 10 they ordered, orders only 8 of the next.  Since they only sold 8.  But that means less books on the shelf.  So guess what A's print run is for #2?  8,000.  And sells 7,000.  Even higher sell through, but lower sales.

Do you see the inevitability?  It's insane but I saw it for 20 years with almost every one of the big 6.  Every once in a while they commit to "pushing" a new author, but rarely.  They throw 100 books against the wall hoping one sticks.  For the rest, they could care less.  But now the authors could care less about having their book thrown against the wall by a "major publisher".  
I know a #1 NY Times bestselling author who went through this numbers game with several different publisher before one committed to pushing more of the 2d book out, and the 3rd, rather than let the numbers drown.  That's how she became #1.  But her numbers weren't any different than most of the others.  As she tells me:  "They just picked me."

Hell of a way to run a business.


----------



## J. Carson Black (Feb 27, 2011)

Absolutely! It's an upside-down pyramid. Down, down... and out.

Good for the author who got chosen!

The good thing about ebooks: the publisher wants to build the author. And the publisher has time to build the author. Because most times, the publisher _is_ the author. Instead of trying to beat the clock from the lay-down date, the author can "build slowly," just as editors used to talk about ten, fifteen years ago.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

J. Carson Black said:


> Now they aren't building authors but desperately running after Snooki Money.
> 
> In the meantime, there's a hole we can drive a truck through. I anticipate that some time in the future that hole may narrow somewhat, but right now? Charge!


I really don't think the hole will shrink. My prediction is the big six will take after Hollywood: soon only be selling big bets, 7 figure deal books, because only they have the deep pockets to play at that level, and cherry pick from amongst the most successful self-publishers, aka, former midlisters and never midlisters. That's the future IMO.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Yes, but note the change in Hollywood.  Everyone's fleeing movies to go to cable.  DeNiro is going to be on a show.  All the best writers are at HBO & Showtime and AMC.  Even there, the change is palpable.


----------



## Cate Rowan (Jun 11, 2010)

Bob wrote: "Kate Gosselin’s book sold only 11,000 copies yet hit #6 on the NY Times list."

That gave me such a brain cramp.

Thanks for another great post. IMO, there's been no better time to be an author than right now. I just wish it hadn't taken me ten years of bashing my head against the trad. pub ceiling first.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> This is what I found about music:
> 
> http://blogs.courant.com/eric_danton_sound_check/2011/01/2010-music-sales-eminem-recovery.html
> 
> ...


I think radio and television are two important tools available to the music industry to market their products for almost no cost. It doesn't matter if the record/cd stores go, the big music producers will still have a way to get their product in front of their audience. Unfortunately, for the publishing industry, they don't have such effective marketing tools at their disposal. If the bookstores go, that's it.
Another difference between music and printed literature is that people listen to music all the time, whereas most books are read two or three times at most. So the products differ in the way they are used. A person hears a song on the radio, likes it, buys the single, buys the album etc. Can't do that with print.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

1. When does a bookstore pay the publisher? At order? Delivery? After sales?

2. Who pays return shipping to the publisher?


----------



## tim290280 (Jan 11, 2011)

Sarah Woodbury said:


> I've heard that CD statistic elsewhere, and I'm always like --really?
> 
> Here's an article from 2008:
> 
> ...


Since mp3s individual song sales have been the way of the music world. Billy Corgan of the Smashing Pumpkins is actually releasing all their new work as individual singles rather than as an album. Apparently there are only a couple of genres were album sales are still king, metal being the most notable. This is the primary reason for drops in sales as people can now pick and choose what songs they want, not buying an album and it isn't that much bigger than the single market that used to exist.

Another interesting thing I heard was about the industry woes. Everyone cites a drop in album sales as the reason the industry is hurting. The reality of this is that the mid 90's was actually a sales blip and a correction occurred. The real problem was that record companies overinvested in artists like Aerosmith and ZZ Top who haven't sold anywhere near as well as the deals they were given. Hell, AC/DC was given a $100 million deal that no-one thought they'd earn out and it was just for their back catalogue rights.


----------



## wildwitchof (Sep 2, 2010)

Another difference with CD's is that you can quickly burn it onto your computer and have it on your iPod in five minutes. You get the case, the CD backup, and a clean digital version.

You can't take that MMPB and wave it at your Kindle and read it on the bus five minutes later.


----------



## Lori Devoti (Oct 26, 2010)

I was at a writer's conference this weekend where I expected there to be no talk of self-publishing. Boy, was I wrong. Two of the agents brought it up, then two NY pubbed authors (me being one) said we were making that choice. It was surprising to me how much things have changed so quickly.
Actually, I've noticed a big change in the past week.
A few NY houses are starting "backlist" ebook lines, or original ebook lines and emailing their authors about them. A time not that long ago authors would have been thrilled to think those backlist books were going to be back out there making money. Now the attitude is completely different. 
It's really interesting to be a part of all of this. 
Lori


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

@Lori Devoti:

I was at RT, and the difference in author attitudes between now and just a few months ago was absolutely amazing. Authors--whether they want to self-publish or stay with traditional publishing--are all just excited about having choices. Choice means leverage. We're realizing that we're not interchangeable parts any more, and they can't hurt us by threatening to drop us.

A few months ago, I hadn't even been willing to use my name when I posted to this site for fear that "someone" might see and wonder what I was thinking about. Right now, I don't even care. Every publisher needs to take stock and realize that every author they have is running the math.

A year ago, if you'd told me all the bad news in the print market (Borders going under, print runs shrinking, fewer books in Walmart/Target) I would have expected authors to be beat down, but the feeling was electric. We have choices. We have power. Publishers are going to start fearing that _we_ will drop _them_.

Yay for authors!


----------



## Jamie Case (Feb 15, 2011)

One thing I'd like to see more discussion about in these prediction threads is the fact that traditional publishers currently have a dominant share in e-book sales as well. It's easy enough to predict their demise if you restrict the argument to print books, but it gets a little more complicated if you take a comprehensive view. 

If we're making predictions and, by extension, business decisions, then we might as well make them based on an analysis of all of the facts.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Another little interesting twist in the picture on paper publishing. Check out Dean W Smith's post "A Side Note on POD Publishing." And _read the comments_.

He points out that a lot of independent bookstores don't do consignment/returns. And that POD has reached the point to allow small publishers, and even individual authors, to give the great discounts that indie bookstores need.

Camille


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

Jamie Case said:


> One thing I'd like to see more discussion about in these prediction threads is the fact that traditional publishers currently have a dominant share in e-book sales as well. It's easy enough to predict their demise if you restrict the argument to print books, but it gets a little more complicated if you take a comprehensive view.
> 
> If we're making predictions and, by extension, business decisions, then we might as well make them based on an analysis of all of the facts.


They do, but there are a couple of huge differences between print and ebooks:

1. Authors with a following can quite easily drop a publisher and self-publish electronically. The cost of prepping a book is much lower, print-setting is far less of an issue.

2. Distribution is far easier. A self-publishing author - no matter how popular on the trad-published scene - once would have struggled to get his or her books into enough bookstores to sell a decent number.

Add those two points together, and you have the publishers' current writer lists looking like less of a sure thing. The power structure does seem to be shifting, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays out in the next few years.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Jamie Case said:


> One thing I'd like to see more discussion about in these prediction threads is the fact that traditional publishers currently have a dominant share in e-book sales as well. It's easy enough to predict their demise if you restrict the argument to print books, but it gets a little more complicated if you take a comprehensive view.
> 
> If we're making predictions and, by extension, business decisions, then we might as well make them based on an analysis of all of the facts.


Well another two cents from me: the overhead of trad publishers is too high to compete with indies on price, so if the public ends up not differentiating much between trad authors and (the best of the) indies on the quality of the read, then indies win on ebooks too, and if the perceived difference in quality is small enough in favor of the trads (or more accurately, if the marginal utility difference is small enough), then both groups may continue to exist for a long time to come. As I'd suggested upthread, I don't think any of the big six will disappear anytime soon (maybe more consolidation though), but they will downsize and give up on the midlist just as midlisters give up on them.


----------



## Henry WK (Apr 3, 2011)

Of course the traditional publishers are dominating the ebook market. That's part of their business, they better. If they didn't at this stage, the industry would be in an even more precarious state. If the traditionals held on to all their clout (gatekeeper, cultural selectors and propagators, marketing) in the ebook market as they did the print market, self-published would have remained in the pariah vanity status it always had. 

Instead we see a steady increase in self-pubs, some are giving the traditionals a fight for the top spots, without much of the infrastructure of the traditionals. Things are still in transition. No one has won yet. That self-published has a sliver of a chance is unprecedented. 

The goals are also different for the two sides. Traditionals have to "win". They have to hold on to their dominance just to maintain their status in both the market and in cultural relevance. Indie publishing just has to gain a significant enough market share to put the fear of writers into the traditionals. Once there is a choice with roughly equal advantages, content providers have more say. They don't need to take the whole pie (even if some want to), they just need to get more of it.


----------



## tim290280 (Jan 11, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> Another little interesting twist in the picture on paper publishing. Check out Dean W Smith's post "A Side Note on POD Publishing." And _read the comments_.
> 
> He points out that a lot of independent bookstores don't do consignment/returns. And that POD has reached the point to allow small publishers, and even individual authors, to give the great discounts that indie bookstores need.
> 
> Camille


Yes POD is a big game changer. I've seen some interesting figures for print costs on this. The thing that really changes is that production costs overall drop massively so book prices and publishing suddenly isn't so bad.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Yes, traditional publishers dominate the ebook market for several reasons.  However, they can't hold on to 25% royalty rate forever, especially as author royalty statements shift more and more to ebook sales.  The question is, how high can they pay out for ebook royalties and still operate?

As far as POD, the price point has to get lower.  We really have to decide whether to put a book out in POD, especially fiction, at Who Dares Wins.  We've found very little of our fiction sells in POD, but our nonfiction sells a lot.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> Yes, traditional publishers dominate the ebook market for several reasons. However, they can't hold on to 25% royalty rate forever, especially as author royalty statements shift more and more to ebook sales. The question is, how high can they pay out for ebook royalties and still operate?
> 
> As far as POD, the price point has to get lower. We really have to decide whether to put a book out in POD, especially fiction, at Who Dares Wins. We've found very little of our fiction sells in POD, but our nonfiction sells a lot.


So if they went to a 50-50 split with writers for ebook royalties, how many writers would choose to go traditional rather than self-publish? If a big publisher can push a $7.99 ebook into the top 1000 and generate 1000 sales a month, that would be about $2800 in royalties every month for the writer. The same book self-pubbed at $2.99 would be about $2070 every month if it had the same sales ranking.

One big advantage the big publishers have besides visibility is money. Once the market has shifted to ebooks, they can take that money spent on printing and shipping and use it to pay for premium search placement on Amazon and B&N.

It will be interesting to see.


----------



## VincentZandri (Apr 21, 2010)

Great Post Bob!!!
Vin

www.vincentzandri.com


----------



## Anna_DeStefano (Feb 28, 2011)

Courtney Milan said:


> I was at RT, and the difference in author attitudes between now and just a few months ago was absolutely amazing. Authors--whether they want to self-publish or stay with traditional publishing--are all just excited about having choices. Choice means leverage...A year ago, if you'd told me all the bad news in the print market (Borders going under, print runs shrinking, fewer books in Walmart/Target) I would have expected authors to be beat down, but the feeling was electric. We have choices. We have power. Publishers are going to start fearing that _we_ will drop _them_.


Yes, the choices abound. They're almost too many of them to process at the moment ;o) One of the best pieces of advice I hear from Bob and others is that each author has to choose the right path for him/herself. We aren't all bringing successful backlists into the mix like Bob. We aren't all already NYT bestselling authors like Eisler. We don't all generate the same eBook sales of Amadna Hocking.

But we can watch and listen and weigh all the available information against our own situations and come up with personal plans that suit us best.

I'm personally travelling a hybrid path at the moment, with a direct-to-digital/trade sci-fi/fantasy release coming out in May '11 (Secret Legacy), while I continue to pursue traditional publishing opportunities on the category romance side of my busines with industry leader Harlequin/Silhouette. I see the opportunity to be equally successful in both areas, even while I investigate self or indie publishing for other projects.

Only time will tell which of these ventures will lead the march into my publishing future--but I am excited about the doors opening to all of us across the industry. And I'm blogging about my experience each Thursday in my Publishing Isn't For Sissies series... I'd love to hear more of your thoughts there. Industry leaders regularly post their thougths and experiences and open the comments for questions. Who Dares Wins Publishing's Jenni Holbrook-Talty was just with us last month!

Thanks for leading the way, Bob ;o) And good luck with DHC!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"If we're making predictions and, by extension, business decisions, then we might as well make them based on an analysis of all of the facts."_

We lack all the facts. The most important fact we lack is the number of independent unit sales and revenue. If we want to determine when traditional eBook fiction and independent eBook fiction each have 50% of the market, what do we look at? If we want to determine what percentage of the eBook fiction market today is independent, what do we look at?

Take a simpler question. What percentage of the fiction market today is eBook? How do we know? Romance? Thriller? Fantasy?


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

I agree with Anna-- everyone's situation is different.  I think I did a thread on here about the three Ps:  Platform, Product, Promotion.  I'll see if I can find and bump it up, because every author has to evaluate themselves based on those three variables and they are a sliding scale.
One size does not fit all.


----------



## Beatriz (Feb 22, 2011)

Philip Chen said:


> Good post. So I should be glad that trad literary agents and publishers have given me the bum's rush all these years?


I think you should. You might have the last laugh here.


----------



## Anna_DeStefano (Feb 28, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> We lack all the facts. The most important fact we lack is the number of independent unit sales and revenue. If we want to determine when traditional eBook fiction and independent eBook fiction each have 50% of the market, what do we look at? If we want to determine what percentage of the eBook fiction market today is independent, what do we look at? Take a simpler question. What percentage of the fiction market today is eBook? How do we know? Romance? Thriller? Fantasy?


We do lack the bigger picture, which is why it would be hasty to turn our backs on any segment of the publishing industry as a no-win situation for everyone. Be we can also watch trends carefully and learn from what we can see.

Can the bigger-named authors make money off their reverted backslists that publishers were sitting on. Absolutely. Can a good book (or even a passible book) strike the right tone with readers and take off with eBook readers and sell millions of copies without a traditional publisher backing it. Absolutely. Can we all do what we see others doing. No. But then again, we couldn't do that when mass market publishing was having its day in the sun, either. Some authors were riding the wave, others thought the chance of them ever selling traditionally was just as hopeless as many do now.

Publishing has never been an easy business to make money at--not for the writers. It still isn't. Independently or self publishing eBooks isn't going to be the winning answer for everyone. But it is an answer, and we can spin that to our advantage if we're smart about it.

Bob's working his butt off on his business, as we all should be. Then we'll regroup and strike out again in a new, more refined direction, and we still won't have all the big-picture answers. But the hard-working writers with good product and a drive to promote/sell it will find their way. The same way they always have.


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> I keep seeing the deals in PW every day and I really wonder what all those people making those deals think is going to be happening by the time the book makes it through a traditional publishers production pipeline. Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense.


Wanted to tell you how much I enjoyed reading your guest blog on Konrath's blog today. I think you guys are one of the new voices in independent publishing -that of the fed up traditionally published author. Very interested to see where things move in the future. Congrats on your new book, by the way.


----------



## Jamie Case (Feb 15, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"If we're making predictions and, by extension, business decisions, then we might as well make them based on an analysis of all of the facts."_
> 
> We lack all the facts. The most important fact we lack is the number of independent unit sales and revenue.
> If we want to determine when traditional eBook fiction and independent eBook fiction each have 50% of the market, what do we look at? If we want to determine what percentage of the eBook fiction market today is independent, what do we look at?


We can do one of two things. 
We can wait until Nielsen gets around to offering market research on e-books, [crickets] or we can do what everyone did before Bookscan showed up in the early 2000s...generalize based on the bestseller lists.

Distributor/publisher splits are well-known. Several indie authors have shared enough info to give us a rough idea of the correlation between sales volume and list ranking. This makes generating a rough revenue/sales/market share report a fairly simple, if tedious task. I've seen a few of those kinds of threads on here, but you can probably come to your own conclusions by eyeballing the Kindle/B&N et. al. bestseller lists. Imprecise? Sure. But it's no less valid than some of the numbers mentioned upthread. And honestly, precision is not the point. Bookscan [the all-knowing] tracks just 70% of all book sales and only touts its reliability for hardcover books.



Terrence OBrien said:


> Take a simpler question. What percentage of the fiction market today is eBook? How do we know? Romance? Thriller? Fantasy?


I've seen you ask this question before. Assuming it's not rhetorical...if you're willing to spring for stats or engage in some advanced Google Fu, you can probably find the answer. This is some outdated info on the subject.

2009 Fiction Sales in Comparison

(source: Simba Information)

* Romance: $1.36 billion
* Religion/inspirational: $770 million
* Mystery: $674 million
* Science fiction/fantasy: $554 million
* Classic literary fiction: $462 million

That $1.36 billion represents 13% of fiction sales.



nomesque said:


> They do, but there are a couple of huge differences between print and ebooks:
> 
> 1. Authors with a following can quite easily drop a publisher and self-publish electronically. The cost of prepping a book is much lower, print-setting is far less of an issue.
> 
> ...


1. Yes they can. But if they truly have a following, their back catalog will never stop being valuable, and the publishers will retain the rights to it. Every new book they write will be an advertisement for the old ones.

Besides, for every seven authors that reclaim the rights to their catalog, there is an in-copyright book that never went out of print because it was so beloved by readers [the greatest hits of literature if you will]. Those books are the workhorses that supported all the the other releases at an imprint. Those workhorses all belong to traditional publishers. Betting against them is like betting against The Beatles catalog.

If authors find a way to snatch back their rights because e-rights didn't exist when they signed their contracts, (which is one line of argument I've heard) then I'd get worried for traditional publishers.

2. Distribution is easier, which means it will become unimportant. Visibility is now the kingmaker and traditional publishers are very, very good at visibility. They no longer do the horse and pony show for all of their authors, but that doesn't mean it isn't effective. Nine times out of ten when I see a trad-pubbed book on the e-book bestseller lists, I've already seen it someplace else.

Publishers will go through some contractions. There will probably be lots of not-so-fun surprises up ahead for traditional and independent publishers both. So taking a victory lap after the first inning seems a little premature to me.


----------



## Chris Strange (Apr 4, 2011)

Great post Bob, and another great post on JA Konrath's blog as well. It's incredibly interesting to see you guys who were successful in traditional publishing turning to indie publishing and being even more successful.

I especially agree with the point you raise about the time taken to market in traditional publishing. I've had a few nibbles by agents and editors, but considering that even if I got a deal the book probably won't be out until some time in 2013 or 2014, it seems ridiculous to go that way. Who knows if in two years time the large publishers will even be in a position to put out any books that aren't guaranteed bestsellers? Not to mention the archaic royalty rates.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"We can wait until Nielsen gets around to offering market research on e-books, [crickets] or we can do what everyone did before Bookscan showed up in the early 2000s...generalize based on the bestseller lists."_

We can indeed work with what we have, but we won't be working with all the facts as you initially requested. That's no reason to do nothing, but it's important to acknowledge limited data limits the usefulness and accuracy of the analysis.

I have asked before about the percentage of fiction represented by eBooks. No, it's not rhetorical. I will probably continue to ask. The 13% you provide for 2009 is the best i've seen so far. Thank you.


----------



## Jamie Case (Feb 15, 2011)

I think we got our wires crossed. Or, more likely, I just misread what you wrote. 
The 13% is not restricted to e-books. It's total sales for '09. [http://www.rwa.org/cs/the_romance_genre/romance_literature_statistics]
E-book sales trends mirror the overall sales trends, [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/books/09romance.html]but no market research firm currently offers precise figures. At least not unless you've got press credentials from the NYTimes. Bookscan was supposedly going to offer it at the end of 2010, but it's not available yet.


----------



## KVWitten (Apr 11, 2011)

Gretchen Galway said:


> Another difference with CD's is that you can quickly burn it onto your computer and have it on your iPod in five minutes. You get the case, the CD backup, and a clean digital version.
> 
> You can't take that MMPB and wave it at your Kindle and read it on the bus five minutes later.


I was going to mention this too.

If you looked at my music buying habits, you'd say cds control 100% of the market. But I buy cds and burn them myself, then keep the physical cd for backup. (Besides, I buy mainly classical music which I think lends itself better to 'album' sales.)

Until three months ago, I was one of those that said you'd have to pry physical books out of my cold, dead hands. My opinion has swung 180 degrees. Bring on ebooks!!


----------



## Jacqueline T Lynch (Dec 29, 2010)

Courtney Milan said:


> Overheard at the RT convention: "We can argue till the cows come home about legitimacy and distribution, but I just want to pay my mortgage."


Love this. So true.


----------



## wildwitchof (Sep 2, 2010)

BarbaraKE said:


> Until three months ago, I was one of those that said you'd have to pry physical books out of my cold, dead hands. My opinion has swung 180 degrees. Bring on ebooks!!


Welcome BarbaraKE! Are you the same Barbara KE from another writing forum that is deeply suspicious of self-pubbing? I've had to delete that forum from my bookmarks...it always gets me upset. No point in that. Hope you stick around KB.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

I quote number some of the time, but ultimately, I don't think they're really going to change what I do.  The only numbers I focus on are sales and rankings for my books.

No one knows the true numbers.  First, no one is keeping track.  Second, some are "juking the stats" to quote from The Wire.  Manipulating the numbers to fit the picture they want to see.  

My business partner, Jen Talty, emailed me to show me how I can access something on Amazon that shows where my books are being bought.  She likes looking at stats like that.  I'm not sure what good is does me to know that.  Maybe targeted marketing?  Who knows.

I think the future of publishing is we each make our own future and help other writers as much as possible, regardless if they're self, indie or trad published.  We all want readers to enjoy our works.


----------



## NickCole (Feb 25, 2011)

I just got my first novel up here...I gotta say this about the whole experience:  This is what getting a book on the market should have been.  The creative control.  The relationship with the buyer through the distributor.  Even the arena aspect of it.  So what if you get a big six deal?  You get blown out by their desire to promote the show pony and hope that somehow you fluke into being the next John Grisham.  You realize that and you start writing that way.  After turning in a novel I loved my agent told me to work on something new.  His words 'Addiction's hot right now.'  That was right before the Million Little Pieces debacle.  Then addiction wasn't so hot.  Too bad for those writers who carved out a year of their life because some topic was hot.  Final point.  I know this seems like a great deal.  The numbers, as Bob Mayer and JA Konrath point out, are there.  But what's truly priceless...is the choice to write what you want.  And live with the consequences.  Like my novel below.  I wanted to write The Old Man and the Sea.  It's a great novel.  I am also fascinated by nuclear war and the world that might come after.  I wrote this and sent it to my agent.  He said, 'Nah, too much like The Road.'  Wait a minute.  The Road was great.  If it's too much like it isn't that good.  I would consider that a compliment.  I'm a fan of great writers before I'm a writer.  That is a number that can't be valuated here.  It's priceless


----------



## AnneMarie Novark (Aug 15, 2010)

Excellent post, Bob.

You always present the facts and statistics and your take on it in a well-thought out manner.

Good luck with your new book!!!


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Bob Mayer said:


> I keep seeing the deals in PW every day and I really wonder what all those people making those deals think is going to be happening by the time the book makes it through a traditional publishers production pipeline. Making a book deal for publication in 2013 or 2014 right now doesn't seem to make much sense.


Over at absoulte write I posted that a book signed will usully see print in 12 - 15 months and most publishers will put out subsequent books in the series at 1 year and I was told I was completely nuts - that those numbers are highly exagerated. If anyone has some sites I could point to in order to support those findings I would greatly appeciat it.


----------



## wildwitchof (Sep 2, 2010)

Robin, are you still fighting the good fight over at AW? There are some very entrenched opinions over there. Posted frequently. Like here, I suppose--but not the echo I want to hear anymore.


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Terrence OBrien said:


> 1. When does a bookstore pay the publisher? At order? Delivery? After sales?
> 
> 2. Who pays return shipping to the publisher?


They actually pay the distributor not the publisher and it is 60 - 120 days after the books arrive in the stores. Since books are 100% returnable it is not uncommon for a bookstore to do returns and then turn around and re-buy the books again because from a cash flow standpoint they don't have to pay the first bill.

The shipping comes out of the publisher's pockets - although sometimes they aren't actually returned - in many cases the covers are torn off and the covers are sent back for "credit" and the coverless books are thown away so the publisher loses the sale and the cost of printing.


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Gretchen Galway said:


> Robin, are you still fighting the good fight over at AW? There are some very entrenched opinions over there. Posted frequently. Like here, I suppose--but not the echo I want to hear anymore.


Lol - no I haven't posted there since I left in disgust but I want to post some data on my own site - and want refernces to back up any information I put out there.


----------



## bobdev (Dec 7, 2010)

Here's where to find the one, the only David Morrell on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000119013400


----------



## wildwitchof (Sep 2, 2010)

Good for you. I always appreciate your info and experiences. BTW, the first job I had at age 16 was at the local indie bookstore. The day they had me rip the covers off unsold paperbacks and throw the books in the Dumpster was unforgettable. Years of being told never to write in a book, never read at the table because it might get dirty, never prop it open and break the binding...you name it, all those messages. And then, full of book-love, I get my first job in a bookstore and they have me destroy more books than I'd ever owned in my life.

Aaaaaaarrrrrgh! I can still feel the paper in my hands, the sound of the cover ripping...


----------



## 39179 (Mar 16, 2011)

The Silence of the Paperbacks!

Great post, Bob. I'm 100% in agreeement and I'm catching that wave.


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

rsullivan9597 said:


> Over at absoulte write I posted that a book signed will usully see print in 12 - 15 months and most publishers will put out subsequent books in the series at 1 year and I was told I was completely nuts - that those numbers are highly exagerated. If anyone has some sites I could point to in order to support those findings I would greatly appeciat it.


I think it depends on the genre. In romance it takes more than 12-15 months to get on the shelves, but assuming you're productive enough, you can get them every 6 months thereafter. (Not all authors, and some authors come out faster than others).

It took me 16 months from agreeing on deal points to get my first book on the shelves, and that was fast. My book came out a month before a friend of mine, who had signed her deal 5 months earlier, and another friend of mine sold her book in November of 2007 and had the first one on the shelves July of 2009--admittedly, they were releasing three books back-to-back, and so she had to write the other 2.

But 12 months to get on the shelves is BLAZING fast for a debut.

For a book that's already on the schedule, 8 months between handing the book in and seeing it appear on the shelves seems to be what I'm seeing from my friends--less if the books are back-to-back or the author is late or the editor slips in production; more happens, too. But 8 months seems about average.

These aren't statistics, but just random bits of data I've picked up, and I wouldn't suggest them for other genres because I know there's substantial differences between them. For instance, I know George R.R. Martin still claims he isn't done with DANCE yet but the book's supposed to (really?) come out July 12th. That's totally crashing the schedule at this point--from author turn-in to publication being less than 3 months! Eek! But for an indie, that would be a comfortable margin.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

An interesting development noted in today's PW Daily:  Amazon 'sold' 10 books for print to Houghton Mifflin.  That seems like it will be a likely trend, where the print rights become a subsidiary and Amazon becomes a bigger player as a publisher.


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Bob Mayer said:


> An interesting development noted in today's PW Daily: Amazon 'sold' 10 books for print to Houghton Mifflin. That seems like it will be a likely trend, where the print rights become a subsidiary and Amazon becomes a bigger player as a publisher.


Very interesting...Did you also know that Amazon actually outbid SMP for Hocking's series? They went in with a joint proposal for he print (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt) and wanted an "exclusive" on the ebooks - can't be sold through B&N etc. Hocking took the lesser deal - which I think is smart - limiting distribution is not the way to go.

Amazon is making some interesting moves these days.


----------



## Music &amp; Mayhem (Jun 15, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> Sony, a huge music company, stopped making CDs last year.


Yeah, and there aren't many CD players out there anymore either, as I discovered when mine died. I'm a musician and I've got over 2000 CDs ... go bonkers when people say oh just put what you want on an iPod?? Are they out of their minds? How long would it take me to put 2000 CDs on an iPod. And besides, I want to sit in my house with my nice big speakers and put on Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and hear it blasting out of my speakers, not into some dinky thing sticking out of my ear. ok, I'll end the rant. Sorry


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Check out the speaker systems for the iPod, or look at the iPod docks that connect to your existing system. All the iPod does is provide the signal. The amps and speakers can take it from there. But I'd agree that still doesn't get all those 2,000 CDs on the computer.


----------



## Hayden Duvall (Mar 24, 2011)

2000 cds- working about 5 hrs a day- would take you around a month to mp3ify. If you prioritise, you could do your favourites in a weekend.  Also, as pointed out, it is merely the cost of a cable to play your digital music through a stereo, and you have all the benefits like playlists, lack of scratchability, and the saving of space.  Pain in the arse though- no doubt about it.


----------



## Frank Marcopolos (Dec 29, 2010)

I think one of the more interesting aspects of this situation is the retailer becoming the publisher, as Amazon is doing, and as Apple seems like they want to do. If you have a situation where one or two companies dominate as retailer/publishers that would make for an interesting marketplace, I guess. It's kind of like Toyota saying, "We don't need independent dealerships anymore, we're gonna open some Toyota stores on the same land as our manufacturing plants." Hmmm...


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> An interesting development noted in today's PW Daily: Amazon 'sold' 10 books for print to Houghton Mifflin. That seems like it will be a likely trend, where the print rights become a subsidiary and Amazon becomes a bigger player as a publisher.


So this means a publisher is open to the idea of getting print rights only and letting the author retain the ebook rights? In this case it's Amazon acting as the ebook publisher I gather, but it's not a huge leap from that scenario to one where a writer retains ebook rights.

(I suppose in this case Amazon will end up selling the print book too and make some money on those sales as well, so perhaps Amazon is kicking promotional money into the deal?).


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

From what I understand, there is some resistance in the other direction, too, from B&N and some brick and mortars against stocking Amazon DTBs, which is part of the reason for the HM partnership. That way, it doesn't look like supporting their biggest rival.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

I think savvy publishers would sign authors to contracts now with advances, never planning to actually publish the book in print unless it really took off.  Or if they do print, keeping the run to a minimum and focusing on making money off ebooks.  The Big 6 aren't going to die, they're going to transform as long as authors are willing to settle for the 25% (it will go up to 35 probably) royalty rates on ebooks.  It will be a good deal for some authors, but a shock to many others expecting more.  One of the greatest misconceptions for authors who sign traditionally is the thought that the publisher will support them and promote them and do all sorts of things.  My rule of thumb used to be that if you didn't get at least a 6 figure advance, the publisher is essentially throwing your book out there.  At least in the past that meant printing copies and distributing.  But now, if they just do ebook, what exactly are they going to do for those midlist authors?


----------



## rsullivan9597 (Nov 18, 2009)

Bob Mayer said:


> I think savvy publishers would sign authors to contracts now with advances, never planning to actually publish the book in print unless it really took off. Or if they do print, keeping the run to a minimum and focusing on making money off ebooks. The Big 6 aren't going to die, they're going to transform as long as authors are willing to settle for the 25% (it will go up to 35 probably) royalty rates on ebooks. It will be a good deal for some authors, but a shock to many others expecting more. One of the greatest misconceptions for authors who sign traditionally is the thought that the publisher will support them and promote them and do all sorts of things. My rule of thumb used to be that if you didn't get at least a 6 figure advance, the publisher is essentially throwing your book out there. At least in the past that meant printing copies and distributing. But now, if they just do ebook, what exactly are they going to do for those midlist authors?


Totally agree about the printing thing. As to the midlist authors --- This is the population that I think stand to benefit the most in the self-publishing revolution.


----------



## KVWitten (Apr 11, 2011)

Gretchen Galway said:


> Welcome BarbaraKE! Are you the same Barbara KE from another writing forum that is deeply suspicious of self-pubbing? I've had to delete that forum from my bookmarks...it always gets me upset. No point in that. Hope you stick around KB.


Hi Gretchen!!

Yes, I'm the same BarbaraKE.  Thanks for the welcome! This board seems so much friendlier than the other not-to-be-named forum so I think I'll be sticking around.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"But now, if they just do ebook, what exactly are they going to do for those midlist authors?"_

I think the answer is 1) cover, 2) editing, 3) formatting, 4) upload to eRetailer platform.

All of these are discrete services that have a defined start and end time. Each can be measured and it is either complete or not. Each can be done very well by people frequenting this site. Each can be paid for once and only once. When these services are complete, all revenue flows to the author forever, and he retains all rights forever.

So I would add a question, and ask, "Why should I give up 75% of my revenue forever to have these services done one and only one time?"


----------



## KVWitten (Apr 11, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> I think savvy publishers would sign authors to contracts now with advances, never planning to actually publish the book in print unless it really took off. Or if they do print, keeping the run to a minimum and focusing on making money off ebooks. The Big 6 aren't going to die, they're going to transform as long as authors are willing to settle for the 25% (it will go up to 35 probably) royalty rates on ebooks. It will be a good deal for some authors, but a shock to many others expecting more. One of the greatest misconceptions for authors who sign traditionally is the thought that the publisher will support them and promote them and do all sorts of things. My rule of thumb used to be that if you didn't get at least a 6 figure advance, the publisher is essentially throwing your book out there. At least in the past that meant printing copies and distributing. But now, if they just do ebook, what exactly are they going to do for those midlist authors?


I think the situation will shake out as follows...

First of all, publishers aren't stupid. But they are big corporations (that simply cannot change/move as quickly as individuals) and they have significant overhead. But they do provide valuable services.

In the past, that was 1) distribution and 2) quality assurance.

They're losing their grip on distribution. But they can still provide quality assurance.

I'm not saying a self-published author can't write a good book without a publisher. Of course they can. But, unfortunately, many self-published books are simply not ready to be published. I like to think that 'cream rises to the top' but I'm not sure that always happens.

I think publishers will actively search out well-written self-published books and try to sign the authors to contracts. Then they'll put out those books electronically only. If they're smart, they'll offer a royalty rate in the 50% range and then price the book at $5.99 or something like that.

Everybody's happy.

On a six dollar book, the author, publisher, and distributor (Amazon, whomever) would each end up with approx. two dollars for each book sold.

The reader is now paying six dollars. Still cheaper than a mmpb. And, because it has a big-6 publisher's name behind it, the reader is confident that the book is halfway decent.

The author is getting the same amount as if s/he self-published at $3.00. But they're gambling that they'll sell more books at six dollars (with a publisher's name attached) than they would if they went it alone and sold at $3.00. I think many authors would go for that.

Publishers are happy because they're making two dollars from a book which is more than they'd make if they put out the book in paperback. And their costs/risks are much lower.

I think this could lead to a boom in publishers courting 'mid-list' authors.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

With no bookstore promotion or presence, I wonder how many consumers know the publisher's involvement in the eBook? It is certainly available, but how many bother looking? I confess to never looking beyond the blurb for any fiction before I wrote a book and poked around Amazon a bit more. 

I'd also note anyone can form a LLC for $99 on LegalZoom. Then the publisher might be listed as Canary Publishing. I acknowledge a consumer could research Canary Publishing, but I question how many would bother.

I think the future will be murky.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

How many readers even know who the publisher of a book is?  Seriously, they walk in B&N, those books have been vetted by the process of going through known publishers to make it on the shelf.  But does the reader think about that?  Ever heard a reader say:  Give me the latest Random House?  Never.  Readers buy author brands, not publisher brands except for Harlequin and EC.  
So the concept of a Big 6 being a mark of legitimacy is true inside the industry, but with the consumer, not so much.
As part of anecdata, ie my experience:  the same books published by Putnam/Berkley sold 1/20th the number of ebooks when that Big 6 company was distributing them as I do by myself.  My current Big 6, NY Times bestselling co-written title, Wild Ride, sells less in six months in ebook than I do in a week with my own books.
Readers don't give a hoot who publishes a book.  They care about the author and the book.  So I'm not sure I buy into an author getting 50% royalties from a publisher on ebook even being a particularly good deal.  I think it is for a new author, with no platform.  But for an author who establishes herself as midlist on her own, to then sign over, is a different story.  It might be worth it for print distribution and some other things.  Each person's situation will be different.
I think for every Hocking going one way, there will be ten midlist going the other.
And for the Big 6 thinking they can skim the cream off the top of indie world, it will work in some cases, but most will be savvy enough to really question what the upside is?  
And as I keep saying:  it's not about things are now, it's about where things will be a year from now.
I don't recall a single pundit from inside traditional publishing that even dared predict the changes would have been as fast and as large as they have been, so I really don't think they're going to be any better at doing it now.
It's not that they're dumb.  Brilliant and good people.  But large companies have a hell of a time changing.  And, frankly, there is always a prevalent mindset to want to hold on to the known than take on the unknown.


----------



## Eve Yohalem (Apr 1, 2011)

I agree that for most segments, readers don't care about publishers, they just care about authors and blurbs, recommendations, etc. An exception is children's books where librarians and teachers are critical conduits to readers and they don't look at self-published stuff yet. For one thing, School Library Journal and Kirkus - where many librarians and teachers find out about new titles - don't review self-published books. The award committees  - which are way more important for kid lit sales than for most other kinds of books sales - also don't look at self published books. I expect this will change, but for now it's hard for a new or midlist author to ignore. That being said, if Rick Riordan, Jeff Kinney, Suzanne Collins, Stephenie Meyer decide to jump ship and self publish today, I don't see anything stopping them.


----------



## KVWitten (Apr 11, 2011)

I agree that most readers don't know and/or care who is the publisher of a book (with certain exceptions).

But I venture to say that - up until recently - it wasn't important because traditional publishing was the only game in town. If I went into a bookstore, I could pick up just about any book and be confident it was adequately written. I might not like it, I might find a minor error or two but I'm not going to find multiple typos, glaring continuity errors, etc.

Like it or not, self-publishing does have a reputation for sub-standard writing. Unfortunately, it's sometimes well-deserved.

(And please don't take that the wrong way. I don't think a writer *needs* a publisher to produce a good book. And I think there are many well-written, self-published books out there. But there are a lot of poorly-written, self-published books out there also.)

Yes, samples help to weed out gross gramatical problems. But they don't help with things like characterization or continuity problems. And I think many readers are simply not interested in reading sample after sample.



BarbaraKE said:


> I think publishers will actively search out well-written self-published books and try to sign the authors to contracts. Then they'll put out those books electronically only. If they're smart, they'll offer a royalty rate in the 50% range and then price the book at $5.99 or something like that.
> 
> Everybody's happy.
> 
> ...


I still think this could be a win-win situation for authors, readers, and publishers.


----------



## Mike Dennis (Apr 26, 2010)

Good post, Bob. I attended Sleuthfest last month near Fort Lauderdale. There were quite a few traditional New York types in attendance: publishers, agents and authors, and I can't tell you how deep in the sand their heads were buried. I wrote at length about it on my website, and they really were pretending like the barbarians weren't about to crash through the doors of the hotel where the conference was taking place.

You can check out my full post here: http://mikedennisnoir.com/sleuthfest-more-like-denialfest/1738/


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Good point about those books that have different ways of being sold and might need the cache of a publishing house.

Here's the deal. For most of my titles, I'm not self-publishing. I'm *republishing*. I've got 40 titles in backlist that NY could care less about. I'm bringing them out these are books that were "vetted" by the traditional process, were bought by one of the Big 6, edited, hit bestseller lists, etc. So I'm looking at this somewhat differently than a lot of people. I've got so much backlist that we've still got 15 titles to get up.

I'm very curious to see what the mood will be at RWA National and Thrillerfest in NY this summer. I had dinner this past week with a bunch of author friends, three of whom were #1 NY Times, and most could care less about all of this. Their loss in hardcover sales was being made up in ebook sales. Their fans wanted their books no matter what the price point on ebook was.

On the other end, a lot of selfpublishing is essentially a large agency's query inbox. 99% of which gets rejected. Except now readers get to do that en masse rather than an agent solo.

Where the ebook has profoundly changed the playing field is the midlist. And I'm not sure how that's going to play out, but I'm glad this technology has given us the opportunity to keep our creativity alive without having to have Corporate Publishing's approval.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Like it or not, self-publishing does have a reputation for sub-standard writing. Unfortunately, it's sometimes well-deserved."_

Could be, but I'd ask with whom it has that reputation. I'd suggest the vast majority of readers don't even know what self-published eBooks are. Enthusiasts and people involved with those books know, but it's all inside baseball to the rest of the world.

Sales ranking brings both published and independent books onto the same best seller lists by category. So do the "Also Bought" lists for each book. Every book also has a star score next to it everyplace it is displayed on the eRetailers. If we cross match the "Also Boughts," we can see clusters of books that are repeated. I doubt readers selecting books from these lists encounter substandard work from any source.

We can go looking for substandard books, but I doubt we will find them on the best selling lists. I'd ask the same question each time a consumer lands on an Amazon book page. How did he get there? Random chance, or a link from some other list or review? Strange as it may seem, the aggregate actions of all those consumers are sorting the wheat from the chaff pretty well. I can't tell exactly how it is happening, but I can observe that it is happening.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> Here's the deal. For most of my titles, I'm not self-publishing. I'm *republishing*. I've got 40 titles in backlist that NY could care less about.


You know, as a reader, whenever I hear an author say this, it makes my spine tingle.

Do you know how much of my life I've spent haunting libraries and book sales to find odd backlist titles that NY couldn't care less about? (Unfortunately, many of those authors are not around to take advantage of the change -- but just knowing that more books won't be lost makes me very very happy.)

Camille


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> Where the ebook has profoundly changed the playing field is the midlist. And I'm not sure how that's going to play out, but I'm glad this technology has given us the opportunity to keep our creativity alive without having to have Corporate Publishing's approval.


The other place is with new authors who have good books and are willing to put in effort on promotion/getting the word out. These are authors who might very well have eventually been midlist after 5 or 10 or 15 years of trying. Now, they may find success sooner. 99% percent of self-published authors are doing little or nothing effective to promote.

When I first started podcasting my book in 2008, I contacted J.C. Hutchins, who had a wildly successful series of podcast novels. I asked him about some specific things I planned on doing for promotion. These were things I picked up because before taking the plunge, I had done some research on what successful podcast novelists were doing. I also tried to get a handle on what things were working for some authors and not others. I figured I needed to know as much as I could about the challenge I was facing, and the best source of that was people already in the trenches.

After immersing myself in that research and beginning to interact with people, I was struck when one of J.C.'s comments to me was something along the lines of - "It's good that you're interested in promotion; so many podcast novelists are not." I had been studying and hanging around authors who *were* promoting. It never occurred to me that people wouldn't at least be _trying_ to promote. Especially people who were coming to this new form of building fan bases in 2007 and 2008.

Promotion is far from a guarantee of real success. But without it, you're behind the 8-ball and starting the race ten steps behind. Authors who can get multiple books out, can do effective promotion, and who have quality work (good enough to sell to fans of their genre, not necessarily Nobel laureates) currently have a better shot than average at success. That advantage may start to disappear as ebooks mature, but I don't think it will disappear entirely. Human nature in general and the nature of authors in particular suggests that most will not choose to be as aggressive as they need to be to give themselves the advantage.


----------



## Eve Yohalem (Apr 1, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> Good point about those books that have different ways of being sold and might need the cache of a publishing house.


My personal feeling (and what the heck to I know?) is that it's only a matter of time before self published books start to emerge in these genres, too, probably on the tails of a flood of beloved backlist titles. (Also, this is my first time using the "quote" feature. I hope I'm doing it right. Sorry, Bob, if I mangle what you said! *Squeezing my eyes shut, crossing my fingers, pressing "post" now...*)


----------



## Music &amp; Mayhem (Jun 15, 2010)

Hayden Duvall said:


> 2000 cds- working about 5 hrs a day- would take you around a month to mp3ify. If you prioritise, you could do your favourites in a weekend.


Eek, pain the arse doesn't even begin to describe ... 

Good news is, I bought a used Sony 5 disc changer for $50 and it is working like a charm.


----------



## Music &amp; Mayhem (Jun 15, 2010)

BarbaraKE said:


> Like it or not, self-publishing does have a reputation for sub-standard writing. Unfortunately, it's sometimes well-deserved.


This may be true for some selfpubbed books, and also some traditionally published ones. It's interesting to note that many highly successful indie authors, like John Locke, were successful in another field before they began writing and publishing fiction. Not trying to toot my own here ... aw shucks, of course I am  ... but I was a pretty successful musician and had published a good amount of non-fiction before I self published my first novel ... which, incidentally, was NOT the first novel I wrote. THAT one is hidden in the deep recesses of my trashbin.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

And traditional publishing sets the bar high, such as Snookie, Palin's ex son-in-law whoever he is who just got a book deal, Lady Gaga's boyfriend's beer diet, etc.


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> And traditional publishing sets the bar high, such as Snookie, Palin's ex son-in-law whoever he is who just got a book deal, Lady Gaga's boyfriend's beer diet, etc.


Bwa ha ha ha.

I think it's funny when people complain that self-pub means sub-standard. Really? Is there something inherent to self-publishing that means it's sub-standard? No. And the successful authors are the ones that make sure they're not publishing illiterate trash. Are there crappy books out there? Sure. Just make sure your book isn't crappy and you'll be fine.

Vicki


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Eve Yohalem said:


> Great post, Bob. There seems to be a deer in the headlights thing going on with traditional publishers that I don't get at all. They know their business model is doomed, they know they need to change, and yet they're holding fast to the old ways. Pushing prices up when the market is clearly pulling them down; outsourcing or neglecting editorial services when that's an area where they can provide real value; choosing not to market most of the books they acquire. Given that they still control 95% of the market, the big 6 COULD survive if they were willing to reinvent themselves, but I'm betting they won't.


I think their inability to shift quickly has to do with the overall corporate model. It's like trying to turn the Titanic in time to avoid the iceberg. Those monster companies are just too big to shift quickly, with too many people at the top only interested in the bottom line, not innovation. Innovation takes more of an initial investment with uncertain pay-off than just staying the course and hoping things won't change. Problem is, they always do. Great discussion everyone.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Okay-- to show how out of touch publishers are.  I finally got my Dec 2010 royalty statements from Random House today.  And sold quite a few ebook versions of my Area 51 series and had a decent check from my agent.  But the day before I got the reversion letters from Random House for those same books.  I"m not complaining.  In fact, doing the Snoopy Dance on two fronts:  having the rights back so I can publish them myself, and also getting a royalty check.
But why don't any of these publishers care?  What are they focusing on?  Someone on this thread pointed out if they hired someone full time to take care of their backlist in ebooks, they could make a ton of money.  
I think the problem is that for the majority of authors, publishers never considered it important to work with them; to build a team.  We were just replaceable parts in their big machine.  Except that big machine is falling apart.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

So the plot thickens. If a firm has a revenue stream that essentially has an ungodly high ROI, it's unusual to give it away for free. That's what they did when they reverted the rights. Why an ungodly high ROI? They do not have to spend a nickel to keep those books on Amazon for the next ten years. The 52% royalty cut they get is almost pure profit. Their only expense is accounting and sending an author a check.

Question: Can a publisher sell the eBook rights? Assign them? Subcontract them to an eBook management firm? Could RH sell them to Harper Collins or Microsoft? Could they sell them to me? Spin off a subsidiary with ownership of the rights? Do the contracts allow that?


----------



## Sarah Woodbury (Jan 30, 2011)

I read that maybe 10-15% of publishers have hired enough technical staff to process ebooks.  Though clearly, in Bob's case, his Area 51 books already were ebooks.  Why would they give up those rights?  It seems crazy.  

Is it just that publishers have lost all sense of reason of what sells and what doesn't?  They want a Twilight but don't know how to find it.  They don't want to take a chance of a new author tanking so they don't buy their books, no matter how good the writing or the story, and they don't support mid-list authors because they no longer think the 'long tail' is worth their time.  It's the blockbuster mentality.  And even if a publishing house comes along and decides that they have some kind of plan--pay fewer royalties, go after the mid-list and new authors--the indie publishing thing is taking off to such an extent that it no longer makes sense for these authors to sign away their rights for very little up front.


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

As Bob knows, I'm also "re-publishing" my backlist. But as my brand continues to build I have plans to pub some originals as well. But I'll hire an editor.

Interestingly, I just discovered one of my backlist books (I don't own copr though) has suddenly appeared on Kindle and is in the top sellers in its category. Funny, too, that those sales are not reflected on my royalty statement despite having that standard 25% clause. And yes, my agent for that title is investigating.

Maybe they thought I wouldn't notice.  

I can't wait to see what Thrillerfest panels and the Q&As will reveal. I'm speaking in two weeks at a writer's conference on DIY kindle-ization and have been told it will be a "hot" topic.


----------



## jongoff (Mar 31, 2011)

I disagree with your prediction of 50 - 60% of books being published as electronic by the end of 2011.  E-publishing is certainly growing exponentially, but currently it comprises a small fraction of the total work produced.  Now, we could extrapolate and reach that number if you take into account self published books, which is growing very fast, but the overwhelming majority of self published books aren't any good. I'd lay that maybe one out of a thousand is worth reading, and I'm being generous. 

Further, there are people who want and like hard copies.  Add to that the fact that most of your traditional publishers are also putting a high commodity on digital rights.  Bear in mind that the trend has always been that most books lose money for publishers. That's nothing new.  No one can predict what the next best seller is going to be, and name recognition doesn't always ensure it. No one had heard of J.K. Rowling a decade ago, and she'd been turned down by some big houses before being picked up by Bloomsbury. 

These are companies that have been around in one way or another for centuries, and there are some pretty savvy people running them. I really don't think the kindle, as much as I love it, is going to be the death of the traditional print model, or the end of midlist authors.  I know for a fact that DAW continues to leave in print any author whose books are selling, even if they're not their A-list authors.


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> Okay-- to show how out of touch publishers are. I finally got my Dec 2010 royalty statements from Random House today. And sold quite a few ebook versions of my Area 51 series and had a decent check from my agent. But the day before I got the reversion letters from Random House for those same books. I"m not complaining. In fact, doing the Snoopy Dance on two fronts: having the rights back so I can publish them myself, and also getting a royalty check.
> But why don't any of these publishers care? What are they focusing on? Someone on this thread pointed out if they hired someone full time to take care of their backlist in ebooks, they could make a ton of money.
> I think the problem is that for the majority of authors, publishers never considered it important to work with them; to build a team. We were just replaceable parts in their big machine. Except that big machine is falling apart.


It is strange. I think they are operating under an old mentality. If something doesn't generate X amount of revenue per year, get rid of it. It's an opportunity loss to continue to support it. Re-channel those resources into something that yields bigger dollars. That kind of corporate thinking.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

jongoff said:


> I disagree with your prediction of 50 - 60% of books being published as electronic by the end of 2011. E-publishing is certainly growing exponentially, but currently it comprises a small fraction of the total work produced. Now, we could extrapolate and reach that number if you take into account self published books, which is growing very fast, but the overwhelming majority of self published books aren't any good. I'd lay that maybe one out of a thousand is worth reading, and I'm being generous.


I believe Bob means that 50-60% of all book sales will be digital by year's end. Most of the trad publishers now concede that by 2015 at least half of all book sales will be digital. But there are a growing number of industry watchers who now consider that estimate too conservative.


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

Eric C said:


> I believe Bob means that 50-60% of all book sales will be digital by year's end. Most of the trad publishers now concede that by 2015 at least half of all book sales will be digital. But there are a growing number of industry watchers who now consider that estimate too conservative.


It's not hard to see the numbers at 50% sometime following the next Christmas season. It was 30% in February excluding textbook sales. It may well be higher already. It almost certainly is for fiction. And the quoted numbers don't include indie books either, which are mostly ebook.


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

Amyshojai, or any others here who have been trade published: if your ebook sales and royalty statements aren't making sense, you really need to read these posts from Kristine Kathryn Rusch here: http://kriswrites.com/2011/04/13/the-business-rusch-royalty-statements/

and the update here: http://kriswrites.com/2011/04/20/the-business-rusch-royalty-statements-update/#comments

Honestly, if you've been traditionally published you need to read those posts, even if your statements seem okay.


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

Thanks jnfr, good info in the links.


----------



## Anna_DeStefano (Feb 28, 2011)

Bob Mayer said:


> Okay-- to show how out of touch publishers are. I finally got my Dec 2010 royalty statements from Random House today. And sold quite a few ebook versions of my Area 51 series and had a decent check from my agent. But the day before I got the reversion letters from Random House for those same books...
> But why don't any of these publishers care? What are they focusing on?


The same thing's happening in romance. I'd had two successful author-driven series at Harlequin, within one of their series lines. The most recent, all the titles are in Kindle format and it would be simple to bundle them and sell them at a reduced price as a set--a promotion that readers love. I've bought a lot of backlists for favorite authors that way myself. But they're not doing it. Yet. I'm pushing. My books are bundled with other authors, seemingly randomly, but a defined set of stories that could be easily capitalized on...someone's asleep at the switch.

My earlier series isn't in digital format yet. When I (soon) ask for the rights back to the three books, I'm sure it'll go on the list of digital uploads to be done. That seems to be their process--focus on the problems, rather than creating useful solutions and income streams on their own. But I don't suspect those books to be bundled either for better digital sell through. All best-sellers, BTW.

Sigh...

Congrats on getting your rights back, Bob!


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Sigh.  I keep seeing people say electronic is only a small fraction, yada, yada.  Everyone has different numbers.  The one I believe is the bottom line.  According to the 17 publishers who reported, including the Big 6, electronic outsold HC and mm in first two months of 2011.  And that's not including indie.
And yes, most self-published books aren't very good, but most of my books aren't self-published.  They're re-published.  A lot of people on this forum are re-publishing books that went through the vetting system.
As far as companies that have been in business yada, yada, that long, that's what they said about the cavalry.  I do think there are savvy people running publishing and it will survive and print will survive.  But it will be a very different beast.  
This isn't an either/or situation.  What we're going to end up with is a different business model.  One forerunner of that is Amazon selling print rights for some of its Encore books to a Big 6 publisher.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

The next step for those who don't like the whole independent publishing phenomenon will be the "No True Scotsman" argument. I've heard it a bit, but not nearly as much as the objection that independents harbor lots of crap in their midst.

As readers choose the good independents, and various genre lists feature those good independents, the odds of finding crappy independents on Amazon diminish. It's hard to find crap when readers are vetting it themselves and Amazon is sharing the info.

So the "No True Scotsman" argument enters the dialog. Under this idea, no true author will publish without a commercial publisher. We might highlight Eisler or Mayers, but the response will be they are not true authors. Why not? Well, they are not using a publisher, and no true author would do that.

Of course it's nonsense, and you can save your objections because I won't be defending a stupid argument. But I do think we will see more of it as we move through the transition.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

It's amazing just how deep set the idea that 'legacy' published works are of good quality, and yet the evidence to substantiate this idea is fairly thin on the ground. When I walk through my local borders (just before it closes) and into my local department store, I am confronted by shelf after shelf of celebrity cook books and ghost written biographies. This is the quality literature that everyone keeps banging on about? It's just as bad as the worst that indie published fiction has to offer, just presented differently. Page after page of empty glossiness masquerading as information. And what of the publisher's claims that this is what the public wants? If that were the case, why are there so many bookshops closing and the book sections in department stores shrinking, and indie published fiction doing so well?


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

I would say that the worst of indie fiction is worse than any fiction that comes from traditional publishing.  And the median of indie fiction is still pretty bad, worse than the median of indie tradpub.

But here's the key - no one buys the worst of either group.  It's largely irrelevant what quality anything except the very best of each are.  And indie ebooks are comparable to tradpub when we're talking the best stuff. Even forgetting republished books like Bob's books, the best indie stuff is the best.  As a thriller fan, Eric's "Crack-Up", Dave's "Wrecker", Blake's "Run" and others are simply among the top thrillers I've read in the past year. And all the people buying these books and leaving 4 and 5 star reviews care not a whit how they got published.


----------



## Bob Mayer (Feb 20, 2011)

Let's all go buy Snooki. Or Lady Gaga's boyfriend's diet book of beer and cigarettes.  Or the scam about Tea in Afghanistan that has cost soldiers their lives.  Or James Frey.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> Let's all go buy Snooki. Or Lady Gaga's boyfriend's diet book of beer and cigarettes. Or the scam about Tea in Afghanistan that has cost soldiers their lives. Or James Frey.


Think maybe I'll buy Book 2 in the Atlantis series instead


----------



## Lori Devoti (Oct 26, 2010)

And now we have Levi Johnston's new book....



Bob Mayer said:


> Let's all go buy Snooki. Or Lady Gaga's boyfriend's diet book of beer and cigarettes. Or the scam about Tea in Afghanistan that has cost soldiers their lives. Or James Frey.


----------



## FastPop (Dec 22, 2010)

The major publishers still have a lot of momentum.


----------



## Music &amp; Mayhem (Jun 15, 2010)

Bob Mayer said:


> And traditional publishing sets the bar high, such as Snookie, Palin's ex son-in-law whoever he is who just got a book deal, Lady Gaga's boyfriend's beer diet, etc.


Yeah, and don't get me started on the fact that Ed Koch, former NYC mayor, and Bill Weld, former governor of Massachusetts, got mysteries published. Was this because they were wonderful writers? Pah, I say to you! It was because they had NAME RECOGNITION and the publishers figured people would buy them. Wanna see if Bill Weld's Mackerel By Moonlight is still selling? haha so it's the SOS, only now the people you mentioned have way way WAY more name recognition, and people are so stupid, they will actually BUY these books!


----------

