Was I right to walk away from this Publisher?

[Susie]

I had a publisher show interest in my unrhymed poetry collection, and were willing to pay any costs, (I wouldn't layout any money), but I also wouldn't see any profits until they made their money back.They told me it could take 4+ months to get their money back. I turned them down, since I didn't think that was a good deal, but now since I can't find any other publishers who are interested, I may have been too hasty. I know poetry doesn't sell as much as people like to read it. What do you think?

Much good luck with your novels!

Warm regards, susie:)

[zizban]

What publisher? If a publihser markets to a niche audience, I guess this could happen. I dunno what to say. Weird. :crazy:

[James D. Macdonald]

Were they offering an advance?

Do they get books into bookstores?

Have they published anyone you've heard of?

[Susie]

To Ziz, It was a publisher in Australia.

To Jim: No, yes & no in connection to your questions.:)

Thanks anyway, Susie:)

[Ian Hocking]

Sherri, the contract I have with my current publisher specifies that I won't get any royalties until they've recouped their costs. I think this is normal (though I haven't signed very many publishing contracts in my life). Perhaps you could return to this publisher?

[Richard]

Sherri, the contract I have with my current publisher specifies that I won't get any royalties until they've recouped their costs. I think this is normal

Is that after getting an advance?

[gena140]

I say go with gut instinct. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck it's either a duck or a good impression of a duck.

Anytime something just "doesn't seem right" I say walk away and wait on your blessing to come.

I had a friend turn down a $1000 advance and 3% royalties. She eventually self published and made much much more.

It's all about what works best for YOU.

Good luck.

[Susie]

Thanks much for your helpful posts. Yep, my 'gut' did say walk away, so that's what I did. Hopefully, I was right. Much good luck to everyone.


warm regards, Susie:)

[veinglory]

Based only on what you have said, assuming it is a small press and knowing it is for poetry -- I would say that is a good deal. I don't see how it could be a scam or exploit you unfairly?

[Susie]

I decided not to go with them as it could be years that I wouldn't get any money from the book. I'll see what the future holds in store for my collection...


warm regards, Susie:)

[Howard Gross]

Wow, with all due respect, I haven't heard such old fashioned advice in a long time. Today's writer should know there's absolutely no reason to wait around for some staunching pipe-smoking publisher to tell you your book is worth publishing. And if you do, you'll be disappointed 99% of the time. Given the changes in today's publishing industry, advances and books on shelves should never be the short-term objective. Be realistic, take action, and go the self-pub POD route and test the demand. If your book is good it will find an audience. If it is really good, it will find a publishing contract. Today's authors, the ones that stay on top of the industry, should ignore that old-fashioned validation mentality. Oh yeah, and if anyone mentions the word "vanity publishing" when giving advice, then you know you're talking to a publishing dinosaur. That term is as relevant today as DOS and Floppy Disk. If you don't know what that means, then you're probably still waiting around for that publishing advance on your first book.

Cheers,
HG

[Euan H.]

To be blunt, you're a nincompoop.

And that's my 2c.

[Jamesaritchie]

Wow, with all due respect, I haven't heard such old fashioned advice in a long time. Today's writer should know there's absolutely no reason to wait around for some staunching pipe-smoking publisher to tell you your book is worth publishing. And if you do, you'll be disappointed 99% of the time. Given the changes in today's publishing industry, advances and books on shelves should never be the short-term objective. Be realistic, take action, and go the self-pub POD route and test the demand. If your book is good it will find an audience. If it is really good, it will find a publishing contract. Today's authors, the ones that stay on top of the industry, should ignore that old-fashioned validation mentality. Oh yeah, and if anyone mentions the word "vanity publishing" when giving advice, then you know you're talking to a publishing dinosaur. That term is as relevant today as DOS and Floppy Disk. If you don't know what that means, then you're probably still waiting around for that publishing advance on your first book.

Cheers,
HG

Yeah, right. It's self-publishing in any form that disappoints 99.9999999999% of teh time. It's still vanity publishing, it still stinks, and it still leads nowhere fast.

[Jamesaritchie]

I say go with gut instinct. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck it's either a duck or a good impression of a duck.

Anytime something just "doesn't seem right" I say walk away and wait on your blessing to come.

I had a friend turn down a $1000 advance and 3% royalties. She eventually self published and made much much more.

It's all about what works best for YOU.

Good luck.

The trouble with this is that your friend has no way at all of knowing how much those 3% royalties would have added up to. It might have been millions.

And legitimate pubishers all offer more than 3% royalties.

[James D. Macdonald]

Anything you say, Howard.

Let me know how it all works out for you, okay?

[Medievalist]

Oh yeah, and if anyone mentions the word "vanity publishing" when giving advice, then you know you're talking to a publishing dinosaur. That term is as relevant today as DOS and Floppy Disk. If you don't know what that means, then you're probably still waiting around for that publishing advance on your first book.


Call me old fashioned--I like advances. I like royalties. I believe in standard discounts, and returns, and publishers marketing the books for authors, so authors can write.

DOS is still there in every copy of Windows. And those POD publshers? They all take floppies.

[pianoman5]

'sfunny how quickly the issue of POD generates a head of steam around here.

"Dwayne, fetch me that 44 gallon drum of vitriol--we're gonna need every last drop."

But it strikes me that it's an interesting option in the world of poetry. The terms 'well-paid' and 'poet' have not been legitimately used in the same sentence for at least the last 50 years. These days it's a subsidised activity, because it just doesn't sell well enough to make money for anyone. The only variable is who pays the subsidy--a publisher, an arts fund, the author etc. The most common mention of poetry I see at all is in agents' and publishers' submission guidelines - "NO POETRY".

That being the case, as a (presumably) little-known poet, Susie (sherri234) is fortunate indeed to have found a traditional publisher prepared to risk their own money on even a modest print run. Hoping for a decent advance to go with it is surely icing on the cake beyond the hope of the wildest optimist. The offer, which gets her work published and distributed with no outlay on her part followed by the possibility of future royalties, sounds like a reasonable deal to me, if all the other commercial terms are as per usual.

If Croesus-like riches are the goal, one is better advised to become a movie icon, a championship golfer, or a well-placed dude in the distribution chain of Columbian marching powder. As a poet, your earnings are unlikely to enable you to make a statement of conspicuous consumption anywhere other than at your local burger bar. ("Yippee, it's royalty cheque night. Upsize EVERYTHING, dammit.")

Given the grim financial reality of the poet's life, where there are so many poets and so few paying publishers in the oeuvre (and even fewer readers, it seems), it follows that a realistic poet--one of competent though unspectacular talents who is not looking to make much money out of it but who would like to see their work in print and available for sale--would be foolish not to at least consider self-publishing.

If you properly cost the time, effort and money spent on seeking out a buyer for hard-to-place work like poetry, it's easy to see how the same time and money could be used in some other activity (even cleaning toilets pays a better hourly rate than most writing) to accumulate a few hundred or a few thousand dollars to self publish, whether via offset or POD technology.

What cannot be costed is the angst, frustration and disappointment at constant rejection that so many writers suffer on the path (often) to nowhere.

There has to be a great deal of satisfaction in having a well-finished book of your own poetry in your hands, and in others' hands too. So you only sell a few dozen copies? Well, that's probably not much different to how many a publisher would sell. Did you make any appreciable money out of it? Nah, but that wasn't really the point, was it?

Is it better to have the book available now, rather than stuffing around for years living in hope yet having those hopes continually dashed? Sounds like it to me.

It is more fun trying to market your actual, existing book to potential buyers rather than trying to market your material for a book to snooty, offhand, delay-ridden, time-constrained, feedback-denying, risk-averse, uncommunicative agents and publishers with the mentality of imperfectly cultured sheep? ("I want the same, but different.") Sounds like it to me.

I think POD is made for poetry, so long as everyone stays realistic and delusion-free.

[James D. Macdonald]

Self-publishing is all-but standard for poets.

I didn't offer any advice at all in my post.

Sherri didn't mention the name of the publisher or many details of the deal, which is what brought up my questions.

If the publisher offered an advance then it's perfectly normal for them not to pay royalties until after the advance is paid back. If no advance, then I'd think that royalties should start accruing with the first copy sold. Paying back their other expenses before paying the author could be an invitation to abuse.

Do they get their books into bookstores? That's a good question of any publisher. If the publisher can't do that, there's no reason to be talking to them. The purpose of a publisher is to make a book public. The ones that can't get bookstore placement fail the test.

Whether they've published anyone you've heard of speaks to the prestige of the press. Even with small (or no) monetary returns publication in a high-prestige venue can be worthwhile.

Those are questions you ought to ask about any publisher.

Since Sherri had already walked away there's no point in offering any guidance.

[Medievalist]

'sfunny how quickly the issue of POD generates a head of steam around here.

Hold your horses. I adore POD. Really. I've used it for years--I probably had early access to POD printers since I was a consultant for Xerox in the early days and visited clients offering POD services.

I'm just a little leary regarding a POD "publisher." Most of the time, I don't see that the publisher is actually adding anything to regular small-scale printing, besides being a middleman. And in many cases, like Sherri's, there's potential for charging the author for services that aren't usually charged to the author. Plus I worry about distribution; POD is a way of avoiding warehouses, and usually, the standard distribution channels.

You can do absolutely fabulous books using a POD service--if you have the time and expertise (you still need editors, typesetters, designers), or access to them. And for a lot of books, and some authors (for instance poetry and poets) POD is a super solution. But I'd worry about who takes care of the editing, and production values (typesetting for poetry is a big deal), editorial quality, costs, and most especially, distribution. You can have the best book in the world, but if it's not to be found in a high percentage of book stores, it's not going to do as well as it should.

[Celeste]

To be blunt, you're a nincompoop.

And that's my 2c.

Susie is not a nincompoop. :wag:

[Susie]

Thanks much, Celeste, I agree with you. Most appreciated!

Hugs, Susie:)

[brokenfingers]

Sherri,

I believe Euan H. was responding to Howard Gross...

[James D. Macdonald]

Please remember that POD (Print on Demand) is a business model.

Digital printing is a technology.

[Celeste]

After reading that through again, he may have been responding to Howard, SusieQ.

But still...You're no nincompoop. :)

[sgtsdaughter]

howard is the doodiehead . . . sherri you are not.

[Susie]

Thanks so much, SD, Celeste & BF. I don't think anyone here is a nincompoop or a doodiehead. lol. Back to intelligent discussions.:)


Hugs, Susie:)

[Euan H.]

I wasn't calling Susie a nincompoop. All nincompoopery on this thread has come from Howard Gross, who is quite possibly a nitwit as well.

[Susie]

Thanks much, Euan. Most appreciated.

Warm regards, Susie:)

[Howard Gross]

To be blunt, you're a nincompoop.

And that's my 2c.

Euan, you make me laugh. I haven't been called a childish name since gradeschool. Thanks for making me feel young again and for sharing your meaningless wind.

Ps... You may consider getting on the train rather than slowly walking behind. This Sunday's (4/24/05) Book Review in the NY Times makes my point.

Cheers,
Howard

"Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral."

[Tish Davidson]

"Ps... You may consider getting on the train rather than slowly walking behind. This Sunday's (4/24/05) Book Review in the NY Times makes my point."


You are prescient? Today is only 4/21/05

[Euan H.]

Ps... You may consider getting on the train rather than slowly walking behind. This Sunday's (4/24/05) Book Review in the NY Times makes my point.
I considered arguing with you, but to do so would be to give more credit to your waffle than it deserves.

[stace001]

Wow, nincompoop? Doodiehead? I haven't heard those names in about twenty years. Nice to see the classics always stay around. Susie, you go girl! Howard, if the shoe fits...