PAMB and its quotes

spike said:

. . .The difference with PA is that they claim they are not vanity, they do not put out the bucks that commercial publishers do. And I think that is the most insidious part of PA. They do not do the work of a commercial publisher, but they claim the profits of one.

Click to expand...

Precisely. PA lies about what it is. For the most part, it lies to people who are very susceptible to those lies, who want (if not need) to believe them. That is what makes the scam work, the appeal to people who crave recognition and who are naive about publishing. (Those who crave recognition and are not naive about publishing will do what it takes to sell to a real publisher, or die trying. Those who do not particularly crave recognition but want to make money from writing will go where the money is--and that is not PA or anything like it.)

As for profits . . . PA settles for a pittance, but tries to make that pittance out of the authors' pockets on every book, so it adds up. No commercial publisher would be interested in publishing a book with a potential profit of a few hundred dollars at best. They at least have to aim high.

Sigh . . . in a while I am off to a writers group meeting that will be treated to self-promotions by some PA-published members who honestly think their books have been legitimately published. Nice folks, but they really do not understand.

Post-meeting edit. One of the PA authors is catching on. Interesting. The group still greets a PA-published book with applause, though. Not sure if that is out of kindness our out of unawareness. Both, I think.

--Ken

If PA were just honest about what their business model is, I wouldn't have any objection to them -- and in my opinion they'd get just as many books and just as many sales.

Christine N. said:

By his standards, anyone who writes anything and puts in places for people to read are 'published'.

Click to expand...

I feel sorry for Alien. Yeah, it's true he's a loudmouthed, sassy kid, but he doesn't strike me as particularly stupid. He's kind of like a little dog that's been hit by a car. The dog's injured, and knows it, but finds itself unable to keep from snapping at those who try to help.

Unless I'm mistaken, Alien has already recieved a royalty statement (or two); he knows what a mess he's gotten himself into. It's sad, really. I don't think he's a bad kid at heart. Just hurt and confused.

And it's not like there isn't legitimate outlets for short fiction. A couple of our members are published by Chippewa Press, for example, which is a small but legitimate e-pub and print press, and does publish novel length books, but right now isn't accepting anything longer than 25,000 words. Many PA books would qualify on that front; they'd still have to make it though the submissions process.

Christine N. said:

And it's not like there isn't legitimate outlets for short fiction. A couple of our members are published by Chippewa Press, for example, which is a small but legitimate e-pub and print press, and does publish novel length books, but right now isn't accepting anything longer than 25,000 words. Many PA books would qualify on that front; they'd still have to make it though the submissions process.

Click to expand...

That's part of what is so frustrating - there are plenty of places to submit if a) you try and b) you work for it. I don't get the attitude that says "I wrote it therefore it should automatically be published". Sure, it can happen that way, but for the majority, it's building up a few rejections, learning to revise and rewrite, and then submitting all over again. All the while starting a new project. There's no easy way out and I don't buy the motto that if you aren't a name, no one will publish you. Even Stephen King wasn't Stephen King once upon a time.

You find too many people who generalize from "I can't sell my short stories" to "No one is buying short stories."

It's easier to blame others than to think maybe your work isn't as good as it should be, I guess.

I think part of that myth is on the fault of agents and publishers who aren't honest in their rejection letters. "We don't publish that many new authors" is sometimes used when "This reads like stink on a stick" should be used. Well, something nicer than that. Trouble is, is that if you're honest like that on a rejection letter, you get hate mail and it's more trouble than it's worth. So you get 'not right for us'. (Which is really sometimes true.)

People take "we don't publish that many new authors" and turn it into "If you're not a name you can't get published", because it's easier to blame the publishers and believe your work doesn't need more...work.

I agree Christine, if the agent or publisher would tell why the work is rejected, you could improve your writing instead of thinking you have a good book, just not for this publisher or agent.

Glenda said:

I agree Christine, if the agent or publisher would tell why the work is rejected, you could improve your writing instead of thinking you have a good book, just not for this publisher or agent.

Click to expand...

Ain't going to happen. Editors and agents are editors and agents, not critique partners.

Sassenach said:

Ain't going to happen. Editors and agents are editors and agents, not critique partners.

Click to expand...

Not only that, but then they'd be inundated with revised material they still don't want. Oy - imagine the flood of paper (or emails) an editor or agent would receive if they said "it needs XYZ" and the author made those changes and resubmitted. They'd be buried in an avalanche.

Vague rejections stink, but unfortunately, they come with the territory.

Miss Snark sums it up this way, if your queries are getting rejections, there's something wrong with the query. If a requested partial or full gets repeatedly rejected, it's time to sit down and figure out why. In the meantime, work on something else.

I don't want a critique. How about "This didn't appeal to me as a reader", instead of "we don't publish/represent many new authors", which gives the impression it's not the writing but the new-ness of the author.

I'm of course speaking of partials. Query rejections are a whole other ball of wax. "Not right for me", "Story didn't grab me", "I think this needs more work", even, would be better than the other.

Not right for me still works.

I know there are those out there who, no matter what you tell them, will still think their book is brilliant. So perhaps the whole thing is moot. Or moo, like a cow's opinion, yanno -moo?

Well, I don't know about the rest of you, but my work is brilliant.

just ask my mom

A poor soul asks about editing and the brain washed give him the standard answers but he sees right through it:

So, there is no real editing?

Click to expand...

Wonder how long he'll last?

zizban said:

A poor soul asks about editing and the brain washed give him the standard answers but he sees right through it:

pamb said:

Quote:
So, there is no real editing?

Click to expand...

Wonder how long he'll last?

Click to expand...

I can't find it. Can you provide a link? Or have the board-nazis already removed it?

Here is the thread but the poster's questioning of editing is gone.

http://bb.publishamerica.com/viewtopic.php?t=20120

A poster in that thread says:

Do not be misled. PA does a good job of editing if you take the long option, work with your editor, and stay on top of their instructions. You can't just sit back and expect a miracle to come out of bad writing.

Click to expand...

I would like to know when, and where, that poster was ever edited by anyone. Because do not be misled: PA does a lousy job of editing regardless of the option you take (but they do by far the best job if you take the "Don't touch my words" option). No one there is qualified or competent to edit anything. Nor do they even try -- there's no editing in the traditional sense. They don't spend enough time on production to even allow for reading the work. They run a spell-check and grammar-check, badly, and that's their deal.

Rather than return a marked-up manuscript, they return a pdf with the changes made invisibly, and require the authors to proofread that pdf themselves (a skill few first-time writers have) to find those changes. They allow insufficient time to do the job properly. This is all part of their standard "stupid author it's your fault!" defense to any criticisms of their slipshod and unprofessional operation.

UTA: I've looked at his webpage. Could someone please tell him that if he's going to put up a sample chapter it should be chapter one?

This is apparently his only published work. So no, he's never had anything edited, and is speaking from lack of experience.

And to make things worse, when someone pipes up and asks, there are so many other posters who are so quick to point out "You should have turned in the best manuscript you possibly can." And while that's true, isn't it also the job of your editor to catch things you missed? Otherwise, what's the point in having an editor???

Argh... sometimes I just wish I could reach into the computer and shake some of them. It's like watching a horror movie when you know the guy going into the woods is going to get it, the other people in the movie know it, but he goes out anyway and I'm sitting in my seat yelling at him to go back in the damn house!

Glenda said:

I agree Christine, if the agent or publisher would tell why the work is rejected, you could improve your writing instead of thinking you have a good book, just not for this publisher or agent.

Click to expand...

A writer who is serious doesn't need an agent or publisher to tell them to be a better writer. The writer should be striving for that.

That's why U.J. says, Send the last book around, and write another, let it set, make it the best you can, and send it around, etc.

I mean, I think it's obvious that if you sent the book around to twenty different publishers or agents and didn't get a bite...

Too many folks dwell on that first book, or one book. When you've written a complete work, let it rest, revised, and sent it out, your job on that book is finished. As a writer it is time to write another book!

Write and read a lot to be a better writer.

UTA: I've looked at his webpage. Could someone please tell him that if he's going to put up a sample chapter it should be chapter one?

Click to expand...

Ha, ha, that's funny! He posted chapter 13.

zizban said:

Ha, ha, that's funny! He posted chapter 13.

Click to expand...

I'm sure he thinks that is his best chapter. Not going to make any other comments that will get me in trouble.

I wasn't mocking the chapter, just the fact he didn't post chapter one.

I have just checked my royalties letters and according to PA's figures I have sold 23 copies of my first book. Add to that the 50 that I bought right after it was published and you have 73 copies. My second book was turned down by PA because of poor sales - -so I guess the 'magic number' has to be more than 73.
Now I tried marketing my book - -I have been to bookstores and phoned them up , approached the local newspaper, canvassed schools and libraries. 2 libraries took my book because I gave them free copies.
Now the way I read it back when I signed with PA I mistakenly thought that they would get my book actually on the shelf in bookstores. When I discovered that this was not the case I was disappointed because I really wanted to walk into stores and see it on the shelf and see kids taking it down and looking at the cover and reading the blurb on the back.
Now people are talking about authors not investing in their book - -the biggest investment is the one the author has already made - -writing it. I'm sorry but I dont agree that the author should be the one who does all the promotion and marketing to bookstores. PA only seems interested in selling the authors own book back to him and relatives and friends.

This quote is very telling and disturbing. It seems that 73 sales is not enough to get the golden ticket for a second book. After having bought 50 copies, that runs about 600 bucks or so, with his discount, it still doesn't seem to be enough. PA, as of late, has been declining a lot of second publications and quoting that para 13 stuff. These posts, expressing these concerns, is exactly the discussion that PA wants and needs. They've instigated a fear factor here, in that if you don't hit a magic number, you will not be considered for a second book. Now, I wonder how many PA posters are going to understand this thread and believe it to mean that they better buy at least 75 copies or more to be eligible for a second book. Hell, why not make it 100 copies just to insure they get over that hump.

This is the best subliminal message I see working for PA. It can only be a matter of time before they ALL discover the magic number. They are groping right now, trying to determine that figure. Looks like it might be between 75 and 100 copies. Once that magic number is firmly established, the newbies will find this out through private emails, rather than the public postings.

BTW, this PA poster has a clue now. You can see it in his last sentence. This post should go poof pretty soon, UNLESS PA wants their authors to get a clue about how many books you need to buy to stay in the game. The post is damaging on one hand, but advantageous to PA on the other.

Tri

Wow. That author will be banned lickety-split; they know how things are actually supposed to work. Can't have that.

And sure, you definitely should turn in the best manuscript you can, but you should also be confident that any you missed will be picked up. Sure, most books do have an error or two, but nobody should put more in.

zizban said:

I wasn't mocking the chapter, just the fact he didn't post chapter one.

Click to expand...

I wasn't accusing you of mocking. I was saying that I wasn't mocking!