The Old Neverending PublishAmerica Thread (Publish America)

[DeePower]

This is from an email that they sent to us May 20th.

Begin Quote from PublishAmerica email
**********************************
"Again, the tone of your letter is way out of place. Soon we will sell our one millionth book! Neither your fax nor your registered letter reached the intended recipient. Future paper letters from you will be discarded unread. If, after reading our bulleted refutations below, you still wish to end your contract, please renew your request, using support@publishamerica.com as your sole point of contact.

None of it what we say is nonsense, and all of it is exactly, completely accurate. What is nonsense is your tone, your drama, and your whole escapade. There is no drama, no problem, no attorneys in New York, and no issues at all. What there appears to be is a simple request for contract termination. We will deal with that request without any special consideration at all.

You do not need baseless jabs, drama, or a lawyer to request termination of your contract. We will consider your request at our next review meeting, to be held at our leisure, probably within the next month or so. Our decision on your contract will be made with disregard for your tone and ridiculous and baseless accusations. Your communications with us will not be made known to the committee making the decision, and your untrue statements will not be considered.

Your statements are so naive, so false, and so totally baseless that it is difficult to even respond to them, but we'll make a brief attempt.
***************************
End of Quote from PublishAmerica email.

It goes on and gets worse.

This is how they treat their authors, discourteous, rude and condescending.

BTW, the attorneys we supposedly don't have, have contacted PA. We have instructed our law firm to use whatever means is necessary to terminate the contract.

What can we all do to warn writers about PublishAmerica? Beyond posting at boards like this one?

Dee
www.BrianHillAndDeePower.com (http://www.BrianHillAndDeePower.com)

[vstrauss]

>> I'd like to know why they mostly avoid genre fiction.<<

Yeah, that would be my question too. Why no regular sf/fantasy and mystery columns?

- Victoria

[HapiSofi]

(laughs bitterly)

[James D Macdonald]

They're throwing out lawyer letters unread?

I bet they at least open the envelopes to see if maybe there are checks enclosed.

[James D Macdonald]

Way back on the first of April (http://p197.ezboard.com/fabsolutewritefrm11.showMessageRange?topicID=209.t opic&start=441&stop=460) (April Fools?) we heard:

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Today we are welcoming the following authors in your midst:
*Novelist James W. Bennett came from Simon and Schuster with "Harvey Potter Does Dallas". Mr. Bennett was also published by Scholastic, of Harry Potter fame.
*Richard C. Mears joins us from Simon and Schuster as well. PublishAmerica recently released his book "Anubis Rex".
*Yolanda Smith comes to us from Random House. PublishAmerica will soon release her book "Worry Free Retirement Living".
*And two weeks ago, we also reached an agreement with a top award winning, world-renowned author, who will come to us from Harper Collins. We expect the contract to be signed this week, and an announcement to be made soon.<hr></blockquote>

So..... any new word on who this top award winning, world-renowned author is? Has anyone figured out who "Yolanda Smith" is or what she published with Random House (or anyone else)?

[LaVerneRoss]

:shrug I can't imagine any writer who has been published by top publishers would lower themselves to PA. Whatever for? As a joke? I am sure their agents know of PAs reputation, and would tell them. Are these writers figments of someones imagination? Possibly to impress new writers...or try to make us feel we made a mistake about PA.( in their dreams) I don't believe it. I never read the PA board I don't belong there anyway. I read enough fantasy in book form, I don't like their version. Has anyone ever heard of any of them or their books? I can't say that I have.

[James D Macdonald]

Some of them have been heard of ...

James W. Bennett exists, and has the credits listed. However ... a book titled Harvey Potter Does Dallas may be a problem if it's a Porno Parody of Harry Potter (as the title suggests). Scholastic's legal department might have said "No way, dude." If this comes out, we'll see what PA's indemnity clause looks like.

Richard C. Mears is real. His previous book, from an imprint of Simon & Schuster, came out 24 years ago. He copyrighted Anubis Rex eighteen years ago. It's either been in his desk drawer or in a slush pile ever since. It's unlikely that he turned down a professional publishing contract in order to go with PA.

Concerning Yolanda Smith: There's a Yolanda Smith who teaches at Yale, but she was published by Pilgrim Press, not Random House.

And the "top award winning, world-renowned author" is ... well, have they made the announcement yet? They said they'd announce it "soon," but that was two and half months ago.

[LaVerneRoss]

Interesting James, So they do exist but couldn't publish those books most likely with any of their regular publishers so went slumming to PA. A porn book, didn't think PA did those though didn't they publish one that looked like one? I thought the same as you did about the HP though wondering if it were underage porn. Not good. I wonder how they compare to most of the books at PA. Guess its their turn to get made fun of by critics when they see those books. They are going in with their eyes wide open I would think.
Does most message boards have warnings about PA? Wondering how many people have seem them and turned away. PA must be getting their authors from those ads in magazines, where there are no warnings.

[HapiSofi]

Hey, it happens. Lots of established authors have an unsaleable manuscript or two kicking around. Right off the top of my head I could name you three well-known authors in one popular publishing category who've got finished novels they've been shopping around for years.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Blaming those writers for someone taking advantage of that lack of knowledge isn't fair, either. They didn't ask to be deceived.<hr></blockquote>
DaveKuzminski:

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not excusing PA but the author must accept some of the responsibility as well (right or wrong). Ignorance, in my book, isn’t an excuse. Have I been taken advantage of in the past? Sure. Has it taught me to research anything that is important to me before investing in it? Absolutely.

As for your analogy - If your bank hangs a sign on its door that says “Our safe is open, we have no security guards or cameras, and everyone is out to lunch” they’re inviting someone to rob them. Is the robber still responsible? Yes, but whom are you going to hold most responsible?

[James D Macdonald]

Yes, but whom are you going to hold most responsible?

The robber.

I am always responsible for my own moral behavior.

[Nameless65]

Wow, I'm sure the bank will be happy that they've been absolved of all blame.

Don't get me wrong here - all I'm advocating here is personal responsibility. If a writer doesn't want to research a publisher or agent before he deals with them and get's screwed by them I'll sympathize with them and hope they learn next time. If they do the same thing with the next agent or publisher and get screwed again...that old saying that ends with "...shame on me" comes to mind.

[DaveKuzminski]

Nameless65, you've got the sequence in the wrong order. Banks didn't start out with all those things. Those came about because they took action to improve the security of the bank to protect the money they were entrusted with because they discovered that people would rob them otherwise.

Consider this as well. If you don't have any reason to distrust a source, do you distrust it? Remember that the source you're considering may boast of a satisfactory rating from the BBB and might not be listed on a top ten warrant from the government. So, do you distrust it in light of the fact that it's slid by, unbeknownst to you, on mere technicalities or because the amounts in question weren't high enough on the radar to trigger a full scale government criminal investigation?

Now remember, the average new writer won't know about private sites such as this one or Writer Beware or P&E. So, the new writer is left with checking the known places such as the BBB and the government after seeing the widespread ads. Okay, who's to blame? The writer or the company victimizing the writer? The writer did his research. It's not his fault that the company in question has used gags to suppress warnings from many of those who succeeded in getting out of their clutches.

Now let's talk about the other examples. Are you going to blame a woman for being molested? Is it the fault of a kid who wears glasses for being picked upon? You already stated it's the bank's fault for being robbed. Do you hold similar feelings for those other examples?

[SimonSays]

I agree with Nameless.

I am not absolving PA of their sins. But let's face it, anyone who wants to be published has a responsiblity to learn about the publishing industry. And anyone who had done any research at all would know that:

PA books are not in brick and mortar stores and that only a small percentage of their titles are available online.

PA royalties are not calculated in the same manner as the industry standard.

That traditional publishers do not print on demand, print thousands of copies at a time, and unlike PA handle distribution and marketing of their titles.

That no PA titles are on any bestseller list.

That no mass market titles have ever been published by PA.

That the PA book pricing structure is not in line with other publishers.

Anyone with a calculator could look at the numbers authors/books sold and realize that average gross sales per title is abysmal - and at the very least, shows horrendous marketing abilities. THAT alone would make someone think twice. It they have demonstrated a lack of ability to sell their titles, why would you pick them regardless of what promises they make?

There is a lot of self-deception here on the part of the authors who sign with PA. And yes, ignorance may be a part of it, but they CHOSE to be ignorant. They chose not to do the research. In the internet age, there is no excuse for this. Information is just a mouseclick away.

Those who have been published previously by traditional houses are even more culpable. They read the PA contract, they KNEW that the royalties were calculated differently than their past contracts. They KNEW that the other publishers handled distribution. And yet they signed that contract anyway.

While PA authors may be misled, there seems to me to be a certain willingness on their part to be misled. And a certain unwillingness to take responsiblility for a bad decision.

[Nameless65]

“If you don't have any reason to distrust a source, do you distrust it?”
Trust is earned. Even if I don’t outright distrust something/someone in the back of my mind I at least consider that this person or thing *could* rip me off. Now if someone does do a little research and they come up empty – okay they’ve at least *tried*. There are no guarantees anywhere but to not do ANY research? That’s foolish.

“Okay, who's to blame? The writer or the company victimizing the writer? The writer did his research.”
The company of course. As long as the writer did his best to check on them and not blindly cut them a check.

“Now let's talk about the other examples. Are you going to blame a woman for being molested? Is it the fault of a kid who wears glasses for being picked upon? You already stated it's the bank's fault for being robbed. Do you hold similar feelings for those other examples?”
Do you lock your car when you leave it somewhere? How about your house at night? Of course you do – you are taking precautions. That’s what my post was about – taking precautions. When that woman went up *alone* to Mike Tyson’s hotel room and he raped her I thought, “you were nuts to go up there” – was it her fault? No way! But she was very, very foolish in my book.

Look, all I’m saying is that there are predators, con artists, thieves out there. Anyone over 5 years old knows this and should take some steps to protect themselves against these people. You got the mistaken idea that I was saying that it’s ALWAYS the victims fault. I wasn’t.

[DeePower]

*******************************
"And anyone who had done any research at all would know that:

PA books are not in brick and mortar stores and that only a small percentage of their titles are available online."
*******************************

How would an author know that? This is from PublishAmerica Facts and figures

FACT #4: Each day, an average 12 times a PublishAmerica author is invited to do a book signing or another in-store event at a bookstore or a library. An average 250 times each day, a bookstore calls or logs on to order a PublishAmerica title. Of all the brick-and-mortar bookstores, Barnes and Noble is our largest customer. Borders/Waldenbooks and Books-A-Million are second and third.
End of quote from website.

BTW 5026 PA titles are available for purchase at amazon.com. Not that that makes a difference because only six are offered with the customer expected discount of 30%.

*************************
"PA royalties are not calculated in the same manner as the industry standard."
*************************

How would an author know? I have contracts for three nonfiction books with major houses and all three have different royalty calculations.

************************
"That traditional publishers do not print on demand, print thousands of copies at a time, and unlike PA handle distribution and marketing of their titles."
*************************

Again how would an author know? From the PA web site

FACT #5: PublishAmerica is NOT in any way a POD, vanity press, or subsidy publisher, and has nothing in common with them. Obviously, our authors are also not being self-published. In the most commonly used context, POD indicates "Publish On Demand", or vanity publishing. Vanity publishers charge for their "services". Some charge a few hundred dollars, others a thousand or more. We are not in that league, in any way, shape or fashion.
end of PA web site quote.

Additionally traditional publishers, especially small presses use print on demand all the time.

**********************************
"That no PA titles are on any bestseller list."
**********************************

This isn't valid, there are hundreds of publishers, probably thousands, that have never had a title on a bestseller list.

********************************
"That no mass market titles have ever been published by PA."
*********************************

How would an author know, unless they checked every PA title listed on say, amazon.com. And there are publishers who don't do mass market paperbacks.

**********************************
"That the PA book pricing structure is not in line with other publishers."
**********************************

I give you this point, although when you look at the average trade paperback price, which I believe is around $18.00, the pricing of PA is not horrendously out of line. What you have to consider is that most fiction published in paperback is mass market at around $8.00, not in trade paperback. But how would a new author know that?

********************************
"Anyone with a calculator could look at the numbers authors/books sold and realize that average gross sales per title is abysmal - and at the very least, shows horrendous marketing abilities. THAT alone would make someone think twice. It they have demonstrated a lack of ability to sell their titles, why would you pick them regardless of what promises they make?"
*********************************

How would an author make this calculation? The sales information isn't on the PublishAmerica website. The only reason I can figure it out, sort of, is because they sent me an email saying they are getting close to selling their millionth book, "Soon we will sell our one millionth book!" or they have sold 250,000 books in the last two years, which was also in the same email to me "In the past two years we have sold more than a quarter of a million books, which stands in contrast to any allegation that our books are not competitively priced and/or supplied."

***********************************
"There is a lot of self-deception here on the part of the authors who sign with PA. And yes, ignorance may be a part of it, but they CHOSE to be ignorant. They chose not to do the research. In the internet age, there is no excuse for this. Information is just a mouseclick away.

Those who have been published previously by traditional houses are even more culpable. They read the PA contract, they KNEW that the royalties were calculated differently than their past contracts. They KNEW that the other publishers handled distribution. And yet they signed that contract anyway."
**********************************

I did NOT know or have any reason to know two years ago when the contract was signed that PA handled distribution differently. It is only after a year of frustration that I have learned that PA does not do what they say on their web site they do.

I agree there were some discussions on some writers' boards that PublishAmerica was a vanity publisher, but nearly as much as now. I think it took the two years time for authors like myself to realize we got ripped. To realize that no matter what we did as far as promoting the book, getting good reviews, newspaper articles and such that our books were not going to be carried in bricks and mortar stores. In fact The Borders store here said that our title was not in their system even to be ordered.

Oh, here’s what PA said when we told them that

From an email from support@publishamerica.com May 20, 2004

- Sales director: Your statement is incorrect. The sales director you
mentioned is wrong. All bookstores have access to Ingram's computer system, and all of our titles may be found there. Additionally, all bookstore managers know this.
end quote from PA email.

Well she couldn’t order it, and when she realized it was a PublishAmerica book refused to consider a book signing.


***********************************
"While PA authors may be misled, there seems to me to be a certain willingness on their part to be misled. And a certain unwillingness to take responsibility for a bad decision."
***********************************

It's far worse than misled, it's being lied to. PA does not sell the majority of its books to bricks and mortar book stores as their website states. No where on their site or in the contract do they mention that PublishAmerica books are non returnable by bookstores and that they do not offer the standard discount to bookstores.

Barnes and Noble requires any PA author to send in two copies to their small press division for consideration for stocking and invariably declines on the basis the book is inferior. If PA was a traditional publisher they would contact B&N. But why bother, the no return policy is the kiss of death for bookstores. And how would an author know that?

And I do take responsibility for a bad decision, we will proceed to litigation, if necessary, to terminate our contract with PublishAmerica.

I know the trolls from PA screen these boards.

Dee Power
NOT a PA (piss ass) author.
www.brianhillanddeepower.com (http://www.brianhillanddeepower.com)

[SimonSays]

Dee-

As I said in my previous posting, I do not absolve PA of their sins, I do no condone what they do. But we all have a personal responsibility. And if you rely solely on the information dispensed to you by the person who's trying to sell you something, whether it's a publishing contract, shares of stock or a car, then you are a fool - and you bear some reponsibility for a lack of due diligence.

As for where people are supposed to find this information. Most bookstores have books about the publishing industry. If your local bookstore doesn't there's Amazon, Powell's etc. There are thousands of websites with information. There's trade publications. Market Guides. The information is out there if you bother to look.

I knew nothing about the publishing industry when I started working on my novel, but I have dedicated an awful lot of time learning what I need to know so that I can achieve the goals that I set for myself.

I do wish you luck getting out of your contract, but perhaps if you had done a little due diligence, you wouldn't have signed it in the first place.

[emeraldcite]

I knew nothing about the publishing industry when I started working on my novel, but I have dedicated an awful lot of time learning what I need to know so that I can achieve the goals that I set for myself.

I have done the same, but not until I learned a few hard lessons when I was younger. (most of these lessons involved sending submissions to places that do not accept unsolicited manuscripts and also to a few vanity presses. Of course, I was too poor at the time to pay for anything, so I didn't get hoodwinked).

I believe that we all have personal responsibility, but many beginning writers have no idea how the publishing industry works. Do you blame a child for burning their hand on a hot stove, or do you blame the parent for not telling them everything they needed to know about hot things?

Not to say that writers don't have a certain set of responsibilities, but you can't expect them, especially those with the basic idea that publishers make books and send them to bookstores, to even have a clue that they will get scammed.

If my grandma wrote a book and submitted it, with the help of one of her granddaughters, to PA, i wouldn't really blame her. My grandma doesn't really know that much about the internet, let alone basic research skills. Hell, she worked in a light bulb factory when she was younger and now she's a waitress.

Is it her fault she was scammed? How would she know any better. People get scammed everyday because the scammers appear legit. That's why the scam works. It earns your trust and admiration, and then cleans you out. If everyone knew that they had to responsible in this manner, then there would be very few scams out there. But, as you can see by the amount of material on the Background Check board, many are scammed.

In fact, as has been mentioned, there are several kinds of PA users:

1. Groundfloor Fanatics -- These members believe they've gotten onto the ground floor of a revolutionary publisher who's going to take them, and the other 7000 authors, to the stars.
2. Denial Fanatics -- Things are working out for these kids like they wanted them to, so they keep spewing the quotes on the site.
3. Squinters -- These writers are opening their eyes, but the truth hurts. They start to ask hard questions and then get taken down by other members or banned.
4. Repentant Writers -- Willing to admit that PA scammed them, knowingly or unknowingly, and are ready to move on, only if they can wrestle their rights from PA.

Now then, there is a fifth group -- those who PA really works for. Let's face it, PA is a nice service for a select few with a built in audience. It's a way to avoid the startup cost of vanity and to pass on the bulk of the press payment to the consumer. This group is rare and lacks in sufficient numbers to maintain the press. So we defer to the larger percentage, groups 1-4.

[DaveKuzminski]

Not everyone can afford to hop down to the nearest bookstore and order a book on how to find a publisher or agent. This is too frequently the case in the instances of those who are fleeced.

Not every library has a copy, let alone a recent copy, of the reference books that would help a new writer. I know. I tried to find such books when I started. Most libraries concentrate their funds on references that will help more than just one or two individuals in a community. In other words, most libraries don't have those. Those that do tend to have copies that are out of date and barely useful.

Many new writers aren't even certain they can trust the watchdog sites because of repeated attempts to discredit those by some of those businesses for which the watchdog sites have issued warnings. In their eyes, it becomes a he said--she said type of argument. In the absence of other warnings, it's only too easy to fall into the trap.

The point I'm making is that some businesses have deliberately, I repeat, deliberately taken steps to lure writers into becoming victims. Under those circumstances, it is not right to blame the victim. No one deserves to be victimized. And no, not everyone over five knows the difference. If that was the case, we wouldn't have laws protecting minors.

As well, the Internet isn't like a real city where you can tell by the condition of the neighborhood whether it's relatively safe or dangerous to negotiate. The scammers know this and use it to their advantage.

By the way, you don't even have to leave your home in what you believe to be a nice safe neighborhood to be victimized by a violent criminal. There are only too many of them willing to break into your home even while you're there.

The point I'm making is that it's always the fault of the victimizer and not the victim in cases such as these. There would be no victim without the victimizer. Consequently, it is the victimizer's fault. That is how courts view such matters. Judges do not tell criminals that they'll impose only half the sentence since the victim helped by being deceived.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>
1. Groundfloor Fanatics --
2. Denial Fanatics --
3. Squinters --
4. Repentant Writers --<hr></blockquote>
I know you didn't mean to be funny since this is hardly a laughing matter. But I found this to be entertaining only because your insights are so beautifully worded. Great job.

[emeraldcite]

thanks :)

i do try to add a bit of humor, it helps to keep (at least me) grounded.

[SimonSays]

Dave -

I truly admire what you do. I think you provide an invaluable service to writers and I hope you continue. That said, I think you are so impassioned about this, that you may have lost a little perspective.

I do not think you can equate what PA does to a "violent crime" as you did. They do not harm you physically in any way and they don't even take or swindle your money - they sell you your own books - at a discount. This is not quite the same thing as raping you, beating you over the head or bilking you out of your life savings.

And yes I realize they mislead and lie, and while nothing excuses what they do, this appears to be more of a civil than a criminal matter. And the fact is that in civil cases, sometimes a judge or jury will take into consideration the culpability of the victim when they impose penalties on the defendant. There are many cases where they find in favor of the plaintiff and award them $1.00. And even if it is criminal, this is a crime that requires a willing, proactive victim. PA does not put a gun to anyone's head and force them to sign a contract.

As for 'doing the research'. I think anyone who is serious about pursuing a career in any given field, should take it upon themselves to find out a little bit about that field. Not having the money, is no excuse. When I moved to LA in the mid-90's I could not afford the hundreds of dollars it costs to buy the Creative Directory or similar publications. There was no internet. So I went to Barnes & Noble with a pen and a pad. I looked through books I could not afford to buy, I took notes, made lists. I took responsibility for my own career, my own choices. I found a way to get the information I needed. There is even less excuse these days for not researching things for yourself. While many libraries may not have the types of books you mentioned, most do have computers with free internet access. And there are all sorts of informational sites on the web, not just watchdog sites. Sites run by different publishing or writing organizations. Sites on some educationual institution websites, man that provide only factual information and are opinion free.

As for people getting conflicting information. You can lead a horse to water… If a person receives two opposing viewpoints on a particular subject, the prudent thing to do is to seek out a 3rd independent opinion and/or research further on your own to form your own opinion. If you choose to go with the person who says what you want hear, that is a your choice, albeit a bad choice, and you have no one to blame but yourself for the consequences of that choice. Anyone who has read the posts on these boards or gone to P&E and signs with PA anyway, has no one to blame but themselves. They are not victims.

As for emeralcite’s assertion that there is a small, select group that PA really works for. I disagree that it’s a “small group” – to the contrary I believe that PA works for the vast majority of the writers – because they haven’t got a shot in hell of being published anywhere else. I’ve checked out the PA boards, where many members are eager to share snippets of their work. Stuff that could not possibly, under any circumstances ever be published by a traditional house. Stuff that all the editing in the world wouldn’t help. Stuff that is just plain bad, written by people who just plain cannot write.

And the reason that PA is able to suck so many of them in, is because they like thinking of themselves as authors, but they are NOT serious about their craft. They are not serious about their careers. If they were they would have DONE the research.

If PA is breaching its contract, it should be easy enough to break the contract. If they make claims in their marketing materials, but do not include those things in the contract – then once again, I think some of the responsibility lies with the writer for not thoroughly reading the contract, or better still showing it to a lawyer. And before you say it, yes, I realize that not everyone can afford a lawyer.

The point is that we all have to take a certain amount of responsibility for the choices we make. The better informed and educated we are, the better are choices. Whether or not to get informed and educated is a choice in itself.

I hope you continue to warn people about PA and all the scammers out there. But those who see your warnings and choose not to heed them do not deserve your sympathy when they realize that they’ve been had.

[CWGranny]

Ahhh..it's the famous "I would be too smart to do what you did, therefore you deserve what you got" thinking. It ranks right up there with "anyway in which you are different from me makes you wrong" as one of the great self-absorbed theories.

Writers come in all sorts. If I sent a book to PA and they did what they do, I would end up feeling sheepish and a bit ticked off. I hate being had and it would be embarrassing...but I am not the all in all of writers. Some writers feel far more emotionally connected to their books. They don't feel sheepish. They don't feel had. They feel devastated. That is just as legitimate and not inferior or a sign of greater stupidity.

People have committed suicide over publishing failures...and not just losers who cannot write either. Just because writing is a profession and a deeply enjoyable job for me, doesn't mean it has to be for everyone. For some it's a kind of psychic bloodletting and their response to having someone crap on their hopes is far worse.

It's a bit like going on vacation and having your purse stolen. For me it would be inconvenient. For my mother before me, it would have been devastating. Why the difference? She lived much closer financially than I. Different people, different circumstances.

We are just tickled to pieces that you approach writing as a professional and do all the required study. So do many of us. However, some approach writing as an artist and they may not be nearly as good at study. Some others may approach their writing as a personal mission, or a emotional purging...they don't tend to be so good at taking a long cold look at research either. But their writing may be superior to mine and they are no more deserving of getting screwed than I am. No more deserving.

Those taken advantage of by PA, don't deserve it just because they did things differently from how you would have done it. The old folks suckered out of their life savings who get taken because they don't have the skeptical view of life that I do, don't deserve it. Those who have their purses snatched because they carry a purse instead of cramming everything in their front pocket like I do don't deserve to be robbed.

Cheats, thieves and shysters are the wrongdoers.
They don't get a free pass as long as they agree to only cheat those who do things differently than you or I.

Gran

[emeraldcite]

As for emeralcite’s assertion that there is a small, select group that PA really works for. I disagree that it’s a “small group” – to the contrary I believe that PA works for the vast majority of the writers – because they haven’t got a shot in hell of being published anywhere else.

Actually, this group falls into the "denial fanatics" category. The small group that I refer to are comprised of those with non-fiction titles or titles that they use for seminars.

Those who are terrible writers, or an underpracticed, fall into the denial group. They're playing the game that Jim has outlined before. They're role-playing as writers. This, I believe, is one of the largest groups.

The smaller group would be more like that senator's intern who has done interviews and the like. You don't see these people on the boards often spewing how great PA is. PA is a vehicle to print their materials without much cost to them.

[SimonSays]

Gran - you are insulting, condescending and totally offbase. I don't care if others do what I do or don't do what I do or do anything at all - but I do wish they'd stop whining.

I have never said that PA has the right to do what they do. What I advocate is PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Things like due diligence, and reading the fine print before you sign a contract - any contract. If you choose not to do so and you get taken, well you are at least in part responsible for allowing yourself to get taken, which does not absolve the other party of their crimes.

Quote:

"People have committed suicide over publishing failures"

Huh? People have committed suicide because they got bad grades, or their siginficant other left them or because they lost their job. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

As for someone "crapping on their hopes." The life of a writer is filled with rejection. From agents, publishers, critics, the public. If you don't have a thick enough skin to cope with having your hopes crapped on over and over again then I suggest you find another hobby. Chances are even if you're published by a traditional publisher the reality of publication is not going to come anywhere close to your dreams of grandeur. The dream: a bestseller and being on Oprah - The reality - being # 834 on amazon.com.

PA does not put you under some kind of servitude. Those people are free to write something else if they want and try other avenues of publication the next time around. The vast majority of authors, even successful authors, don't get their first novel published. Chalk it up to experience and move on with a little more wisdom.

This is not do or die, life or death stuff here. And if some do find it to be do or die stuff, might I suggest seeking the services of a qualified professional.

In the grand scheme of the world of the scam - PA is closer to the three card monte dealer on the streets of New York than the slick con-men who bilks little old ladies out of their life savings. And in the grand scheme of PA - they've probably made far more dreams come true for the "denial fantatics" than the number of dreams they've crushed.

Again I am not condoning what they do, just trying to put it all in some kind of perspective here.

[Nameless65]

Simon said it perfectly. No one here is saying that PA should be held blameless but we all need to take at least a small measure of responsibility of being taken. Yes, it is possible to do the research and still get taken but I doubt it would take more than 15 minutes on the internet searching for PA to set even the most trusting person’s warning sirens off.

[HapiSofi]

Simon says he agrees with Nameless65? Well golly gosh gee whiz, ain't that a surprise.

There is no reason or need to go muddling our arguments the way Simon and Nameless want us to do. No matter how good or bad their authors are, PA's frauds and misdeeds remain frauds and misdeeds. Our analyses of PA are made no clearer by mixing in irrelevancies like the idea that inept authors are somehow less deserving of our efforts because they've failed to notice that they can't write.

And yes, that argument is irrelevant. It's also untrue. It's also immoral, if one cares about such things.

Should the authors have known better? Could they have known? Alas, they couldn't. If bad authors had enough insight to know that they're bad authors, they wouldn't write as badly as they do. But they don't have the necessary abilities; and so they write badly, and can't tell they write badly.

Everyone who works with wanna-be authors knows that about them. Everyone.

Here's another fact about them: auctorial naivete, sense of personal responsibility, and writing ability are not related. Those are three separate issues. Where does Simon get off equating them?

The business about "personal responsibility" is especially offensive. Many PA authors run themselves ragged on behalf of their books, accepting responsibility for a thousand tasks that at conventional publishing houses would be done for them. They undertake to promote their own books. They make cold sales calls on bookstore managers. They set up signings, send out promotional material, even register their own copyrights. Some of them have tried to work around PA's excessive cover prices by buying copies of their books and selling them at a more appropriate price, taking a loss on every sale in order to get their books into readers' hands. Some have traveled hundreds of miles and spent hundreds of dollars to participate in doomed but earnest group signings.

These are not people who've failed to take personal responsibility for themselves, and I have no respect for Simon's assertions to the contrary.

As for their naivete: PA has been aggressively pushing the idea that they're a real publisher: huge elaborate webpage, testimonials from supposedly satisfied authors, constant self-promotion (the "Up in Lights" section is shameless), and a tightly policed bulletin board where any suggestion that they're not a real publisher with real distribution will disappear within a day of being posted (as will the author of the suggestion). PA's package is a very slick piece of salesmanship. It's no surprise that authors buy into it; that's the effect it's been engineered to have.

What we have here is an unequal transaction. On one side, you have PA doing everything they can to hoodwink and mislead writers. On the other side, you have writers whose everyday levels of caution are inadequate to protect them from such an elaborate and sophisticated con game. The writers are in earnest. PA is not. PA is knowingly and deliberately committing fraud upon them. You could demonstrate PA's bad intent solely by observing that the thing that'll get your post deleted fastest from their boards is any discussion of PA's non-presence in brick-and-mortar bookstores. That's a major selling point for them, so they have an allergic reaction to mentions of the truth.

Exercising due diligence and taking personal responsibility for ourselves is not enough to protect us from professional con artists. If you're not already aware that those scams exist, the really subtle, sophisticated con games require a level of caution and paranoia that would be completely out of line when you're dealing with the other challenges and interactions of your life. You can cheat an honest man, and you can cheat a reasonably wary one, too.

In closing, I'd like to observe that it's a standard trope on the PA boards to refer to dissatisfied PA authors as crybabies who failed to read their contracts. That was the only place I'd run into that viewpoint, until Nameless and Simon started preaching a full-blown version of it here. Feel free to draw your own inferences.

[SimonSays]

I never said, or even implied that "personal responsibility, and writing ability are related!" Good writers can be as irresponsible as bad ones. Bad writers can be pillars of responsiblity.

I said that the "denial fantatics" were not injured and in fact, in their eyes PA HAD made their dreams come true. And since the chances of those who are bad writers being published by any other means was nonexistent, I don't necessarily see that they have been harmed. Who are you to say that they have? They're living their dream. So I think with PA the issue of harm is truly in the eyes of the beholder.

As for those who have been harmed, I have never said they shouldn't try to break their contracts, I just said they should quit whining on these boards! And take responsiblity for their own bad judgement.

The fact is you can be wronged and still be wrong. And just because someone does you wrong, it does not absolve you of your own actions. Most con artists prey not on naivite, but on greed, avarice, vanity. "Give me 10 grand and I'll give you 1000% return on your investment in x amount of time." And people who are looking for the easy buck, who want something for nothing fork over the dough. Has the con artist committed a crime? yes. Does the idiot who forked over the dough bear any responsiblity for his bad judgement? yes. He's the one who cleared out his savings account. And even if the con artist is convicted, it doesn't mean the guy's gonna get his 10 grand back.

As for your implication that because I think someone should read a contract before signing it means I'm a PA mole - I don't know whether to laugh or puke. Basic common sense says that if you are entering into a legally binding agreement of any kind, it might behoove you to read the damn thing before you sign it. And if you don't read it and later realize that you don't like the terms.... well.... who's fault is that? In that case you have not been duped, you have not been conned, you have just been irresponsible.

I have no idea whether PA lives up to it's contractual obligations or not. If they don't, I'd think it would be fairly easy to break it, in fact I'd think that even the threat of litigation (as in a nasty letter on law firm letterhead) would be enough to get you out of it, because they're not making enough off of any given author to justify the legal fees it would take for a court fight.

[HapiSofi]

Uh-huh.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>In closing, I'd like to observe that it's a standard trope on the PA boards to refer to dissatisfied PA authors as crybabies who failed to read their contracts. That was the only place I'd run into that viewpoint, until Nameless and Simon started preaching a full-blown version of it here. Feel free to draw your own inferences. <hr></blockquote>
Wow, all this hostility from, "A writer should do his/her research". It's pretty childish to suggest that anyone that "preaches" personal responsiblity as Simon and I have done is "in league" with PA - actually it's downright paranoid. <img border=0 src="http://www.ezboard.com/image/posticons/pi_freak.gif" />

If you'd read the thread instead of just picking bits and pieces that you disagree with you would have seen that we say over and over and over (for those sitting in the cheap seats or just plain hard of hearing) that we do not absolve PA of their blame.

For the rest of your post - I'd challenge you to have any high schooler do a search using Google, Yahoo, or even AOL's cheap search engine for PA and see what they get. Tell them they're about to give something they cherish, something incredibly important to them, to PA. If they don't come up with some major warnings within 10-30 minutes I'd be incredibly surprised. Or does this go beyond "everyday levels of precaution"?

For my part, I respect the work that the PA author goes through to get his or her book "out there". I sympathize with them for trying to make a bad thing less bad. I would also hope that they learn from their mistake and scrutinize any future publishing house thoroughly before jumping in.

[HapiSofi]

Vide supra.

[MacAl Stone]

(I'm always sorry when I jump into these things, but nonetheless...)

Actually--I'm an unpublished writer. I have a novel-in-progress that I've nursed along with cherished hopes and dreams.

I'm not an idiot. I write sales-copy for a living. I understand a little bit about different business models. However, it would never occur to me in my wildest freaking dreams that an entire company would exist just to scam would-be writers like myself.

For that reason, it wouldn't occur to me to do an in-depth google on a company that offered to publish my beloved prose. Sure, I'd check out their web-site. I would probably call the BBB. I would probably even look to see if they're listed in whatever year's edition of Writer's Market my library happens to have--gosh, they aren't listed there. Well, hey, no reference book is perfect. Besides, it tells you right there in the front that publishers come and go.

So, if I hypothetically finish my deathless masterpiece, and send it out a few times, getting more and more discouraged as the rejections pile up--about the time I've decided I'm just not cut out to write fiction, after all--PA tells me they want it.

Sure. I'd rather TOR or someone was publishing it, but you dance with the one what brung ya, right?

Naive? Sure. But the fact remains, I found this site by the merest fluke. I'm an insomniac, I live alone, I have internet access in my home. Take away any of those factors--I could've been here sometime next year or the year after, sadder-but-wiser. Instead I'm here now, forewarned and forearmed.

So a hearty thank-you to Jim, Hapi, Victoria, Dave, and everyone else who cares enough to try and head naive writers off before they must learn the hard way. And another thank-you to the former PA authors who've made a point of sharing their own stories.

[vstrauss]

>> For the rest of your post - I'd challenge you to have any high schooler do a search using Google, Yahoo, or even AOL's cheap search engine for PA and see what they get. Tell them they're about to give something they cherish, something incredibly important to them, to PA. If they don't come up with some major warnings within 10-30 minutes I'd be incredibly surprised.<<

Prepare to be surprised, then. If you use specific word combinations that many people doing this kind of general search probably wouldn't think of, you might wind up at this message board on the fifth or sixth page of your search. Otherwise, apart from the P&E mention, you'd find little but general publisher listings, PA author websites, and happy PA author interviews. A websearch on PA is more likely to encourage an author to think PA is legit than to make them smell a rat.

This is true, BTW, of many scammers. There just aren't all that many general warnings floating around. Authors who've been hoodwinked are often too ashamed to publicly proclaim their humiliation.

I agree with those who point to writers' personal responsibility. I communicate all the time with writers who think they can plunge into the world of publishing without knowing a thing about it, and are very resistant to being told to take some time out to educate themselves about how it all works. A lot of people just don't want to bother with the research. That doesn't mean they aren't worth warning or saving, though. And in some cases, such as PA, the scam really is difficult to spot--intentionally so--unless you're fairly savvy.

- Victoria

[HapiSofi]

Absolutely, Mac. Look how many people get married without running a check on their sweetie's finances, legal history, marital status, odd hobbies, and other essential issues.

If signing with PA is a big step, marriage is a bigger one, full of catastrophic possibilities for the unwary. And yet, when it turns out that someone's promising new spouse has a long history of battering his girlfriends and the two previous wives he'd never mentioned, or is a grifter who's left a trail of kited checks, stolen credit cards, and plundered employers in the last four cities where she's lived, we don't tell their confused and grieving partner that it's all their fault for not finding it out in advance. We certainly don't mock them for being so deluded as to believe that anyone worthwhile could have wanted to marry them.

To carry the analogy further, PA isn't the equivalent of a guy with too many tattoos, too few teeth, and a string of odd friends who turn up at odd hours -- the kind whose past any reasonably prudent woman would investigate before marrying him. PA is the guy with good manners, capped teeth, a nice suit, and a habit of ingratiating himself with young women who've just inherited real estate or received a fat insurance settlement. F*ckups and losers are easy to spot. Professional con artists aren't. That's why they're professionals. And that's PA, which presents itself as a successful, squeaky clean, public-spirited enterprise.

Ol' Nameless here says I'd challenge you to have any high schooler do a search using Google, Yahoo, or even AOL's cheap search engine for PA and see what they get.I used Google, the best and most popular search engine going, and "publish america" as my search string. The entire first page of hits consisted of jolly PA promo. The first blip of negative information, on the second page, is Caveat Scrivener at Speculations (http://www.speculations.com/rumormill/?z=102187), which leads to a lengthy ongoing discussion. The currently topmost post might or might not say anything useful. Then there's some more jolly PA promo. Then you hit the VOY Forum (http://www.voy.com/103082/231.html), with some few bits of negative information.

The second item on page three of the Google results is an interview at Fiction Forum (http://www.fictionforum.net/writers/toolbox/interview-pa.html) that so completely fails to be hard-hitting thit might as well be a paid advertisement for PA. A little further down that page you find ABCtales (http://phorum.abctales.com/read.php?f=4&i=1058&t=756), with more PA disinformation. The second to last hit on the third page, finally, is a writers.net discussion of PA (http://www.writers.net/forum/read/13/5578/5577Vf) that has a big post from Dee Power in it. That's where you really start to find out about PublishAmerica.

If this were a high-school assignment, would the students get that far? Don't kid yourself. They'd have to have waded through site after site that represented PA as a legit publishing company. The fifth or sixth or twelfth time they saw the same results, they'd have figured they had their answer, and quit looking.

One reason for this is that PublishAmerica gives a "free website" to all their authors. However, those sites aren't controlled by the authors. They can't update them. They have to submit updates to PA -- which won't post negative information. What you tend to get are the excited early testimonials of authors waiting for their books to come out, and their first few experiences once they're published. Later experiences aren't reported. This gives a very good impression of PA. It also chokes the Googlestream.

Easy to research? Malarkey. This one requires an experienced, cynical old researcher with a lot of time and some idea of what they're looking for. So why would Nameless and SimonSays even suggest that this information is easily found? I'd say there's some possibility that it's because Dee Power is taking serious legal action against PA. Before, PA's big talking point was that they're a real publishing company. Now they're arguing that it was careless and stupid of their authors to believe their misrepresentations. It's a move to limit their own liability. If the authors failed to display a reasonable degree of common sense, good judgement, and prudence, PublishAmerica is less at fault for having cold-heartedly and deliberately scammed them.

I'd say "nice try", Nameless and Simon, but it wasn't.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Easy to research? Malarkey.<hr></blockquote>
I thought that vstrauss left it off nicely but you apparently felt that you had to stir things up. Fine.

If you put “Publish America Scam” in Google you will find info on the FIRST page. That’s right the FIRST page. I guess that makes me a cynical old researcher. Wow. If I’m submitting something I value to an unknown entity, you’d better believe that I’m going to put in as much research as I can. As vstrauss said, I’m going to learn about the industry, I’m going to find out about the pitfalls, the sharks, the scam artists – the whole kitten caboodle. I might still get ripped off but at least I tried to educate myself.

Not too long ago my daughter, was approached by a modeling agency (I think it was Wilhelmina) after an open call. They said that they would call the next day. I immediately jumped on the internet and did some research and after about 1 hour I found that (1) many considered them a scan (2) they were being sued by the state of Florida (3) they had changed their business name recently due to other legal action. I also learned a lot about the industry and what to watch out for. Sure enough, when they called they did everything that my sources on the internet said that they would do right up to asking for a $1000 check.

And why did I do this? Because I was ripped off by another slick outfit called John Robert Powers about 10 years ago. I didn’t do a lick of research then and I paid for it. Yes, I blame them – they preyed on a child/parent’s dream (just like PA). However, I recognize that as the scamee, I share a part of the blame for getting scammed. Do you get that HappityHop, or is that too difficult of a concept? I accept responsibility.

If you want to lay all the blame on PA and say that the author has no responsibility – knock yourself out - that is your opinion. But I think it’s more important to educate authors on the fact that there are a lot of scam artists out there besides PA and how to look for them. Besides, if PA does ever close down, they’ll probably just reopen under a new name.

[SimonSays]

Hapi,

Your analogy, though interesting is off on a major point. Relationships, marriage are about love, following our hearts - and our hearts are often unwise.

Writing may be driven by passion and love. Publishing on the other hand is business. Pure and simple. And business requires a certain amount of knowledge, rational thought, logic, planning, and yes, that dreaded word - research.

You could go into business without any of the above - but you almost certainly would fail, of course you could fail even with the above, but the chances of success are much better if you actually know what your are doing.

And as for researching, my stand was that one should research the publishing industry in general, not PA in particular. By doing so, one would come to know rather quickly that the large publishers DO NOT advertise for authors with links on websites or classified ads in the back of magazines, and though some independent publishers do, the large majority of those with ads everywhere are vanity and POD publishers. A major warning sign that screams: proceed with caution. Research would also show that most publishers want manuscripts that go through agents, and again while some don't, the large majority that say "NO AGENT REQUIRED" are vanity or POD - another warning sign. Research on vanity, POD, vs. traditional publishers would give one a clear picture of the differences, things like what real editors actually do, so you would know they do more than spellcheck your ms, what the average sales figures are for first time authors in different generes, etc. You would then to be equipped to ask PA intelligent questions that require specific answers that would give you the information you need to make an educated decision.

Back to your abuser analogy, of course it is not the fault of the victim, but if the victim KNOWS that a man has a history of abuse, and chooses to get involved anyway, then although she is not responsible for the abuse she may receive, she IS responsible for choosing to put herself in harm's way.

It is a little scary to me to see that with the exception of Nameless and Victoria, everyone on this thread seems to have the inability to even acknowledge the concept that some of those duped by PA could have avoided being duped if they had taken it upon themselves to learn more about the publishing industry. You make one excuse after another about why they didn't or didn't have to or why it was too difficult for them, yada, yada, yada. My guess is that you're all civil attorneys who represent people who sue companies for things like not putting warning labels on a pair of scissors that they are sharp.

The charlatans are out there, they always have been, always will be. You can bring them to justice AFTER you are conned (if you can find them) and if you are lucky you can try to get back what you have lost (if they haven't spent it already). OR you can be proactive, take precautions that will allow you to avoid being victimized. You may not have control over whether or not you are targeted by a con artist, but it is ALWAYS ultimately your choice whether or not you give the con artist what he wants.

And Victoria, I never meant to imply that I didn’t think you should warn people about PA and the other scammers out there, in fact I have emphasized in many posts in this thread that I respect admire and support what you and Dave do. Obviously, many of those who come across your warnings ARE actively researching the industry, they are taking responsibility for their career as a writer. I applaud that. My issue is with those who did no such research, signed with PA, and now are whining about it AND NOT taking personal responsibility for not trying to educate themselves before signing a bad contract with a bad company.

[SRHowen]

that's silly, why would someone researching an agent or publisher put that in?

Umm, yeah when I research I put scam with it is I want to know is they are reputable. Wrong, esp a high school student--I know I once taught about that age level kids.

Simple is what they want and they most times use the first link they find as proof positive of what they want to say or know.

Most people start out thinking a place or biz is legit, not the other way around.

They would put in publish America and that's it.

I bet you people are the sort who also say a battered woman asked for it or that she could leave if she wanted to and blame her for everything that happens. Get real folks.

Shawn

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Simple is what they want and they most times use the first link they find as proof positive of what they want to say or know.<hr></blockquote>Then, after getting scammed, they should be adult enough to admit that they didn’t do enough research.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I bet you people are the sort who also say a battered woman asked for it or that she could leave if she wanted to and blame her for everything that happens.<hr></blockquote>
“WE” are ones that accept some responsibility for getting scammed. How did this devolve to the point where getting scammed is equated to being raped or battered? How about this for an comparison? I bet you people are the sort that sue a restaurant because you spilled coffee on yourself. I bet you people are the sort that sue bicycle companies because you were hit by a car while crossing the street at night without any reflective gear.

I’d like to repeat the part in my original post that started this charming discussion:
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>PA seems to be a bit less above-board than the others but… well if you don’t do your research you’re just asking for it.<hr></blockquote>
That’s it people. That’s all I said. I didn’t say that victims deserve it. I didn’t say that they were stupid. That's it.

[HConn]

Because misinformation is evil....

I bet you people are the sort that sue a restaurant because you spilled coffee on yourself.

From snopes.com:

Some celebrated "outrageous" suits wherein judgement went for the plaintiff prove upon closer examination to be far less "outrageous" than originally presented in the media. (For example, the "woman scalded by hot coffee" suit, which at first blush looked like the height of frivolity proved to be a perfectly legitimate action taken against a corporation that knew, thanks to a string of similar scaldings it had quietly been paying off, that its coffee was not just hot, but dangerously hot. The Association of Trial Lawyers of America provides an excellent description of this case (http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp#coffee)).

www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp (http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp)

[CaoPaux]

Barnes & Noble (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4645.htm)

[CWGranny]

There have been PA authors who were uncomfortable with the "too good" aspect of PA and those folks did look around harder and saw that warnings existed....but they also found cheery cheery reports of how wonderful PA life is and dire warnings about listening to the "watchdogs" who were nothing but puppets for big publishing. So those folks chose to believe the cheer, signed up, got burned. Despite the fact that those authors were scammed, plain and simply, most of them NOW choose to accept part of the responsibility for being scammed. They felt unsure at some point but they let all the good reports sway them in the direction that they wanted so much.

But many others didn't know...they looked around, saw plenty of glowing reports, didn't know who the heck writer beware or preditor and editors were but certainly saw many of those same glowing reports said to "watch out" for the "watchdogs" who were in the backpocket of big publishing. So, they never doubted that PA was a real publisher (after all, look at those happy writers) and that the watchdogs really were in the pocket of big publishing (after all, don't we just love conspiracy theories). But apparently those folks are responsible for what happened because they didn't direct their natural skepticism in the right direction, right?

I've seen a lot of scammers "warn" against the watchdogs.
The reality is that one of the first things the scammers do is make sure you distrust anyone who gives you a warning. So, fine, even many of those who did their homework simply believed the wrong "warnings" -- the guilt still lies with the con, not the victim. I rather doubt that those literary scammers who HAVE been prosecuted got off on the "but my victims should have believed the watchdogs (despite my putting hours and money into trying to discredit the watchdogs) so they hold part of the responsibility."

Guess how far a pickpocket gets with a judge when he argues, but I just had to pick his pocket...he was carrying a wallet -- he must have been told not to carry a wallet on the subway. I oughta get a lighter sentence because he deserved to get robbed.

PA has put a good bit of time, energy, and even money in trying to discredit the watchdogs. They've pushed the envelope of legally actionable time and again because they know the value of putting out those "warnings" -- after all, if you know nothing about publishing and your shiny new publisher and all their happy authors are warning you not to listen to "watchdogs," I guess REAL WRITERS just have some kind of psychic ability to tell which person is lying. And if you don't...well, you're not a real writer and you got whatcha deserved -- right?

[DaveKuzminski]

Do we get a response from Nameless65 about the inaccuracy of his own cynical research regarding the coffee?

Truth is, this is a common problem with other writers. Too quick acceptance of information that fits what they believe is or should be how the system works. This is why justice uses the reasonable man parameter. Would a reasonable man be likely to find the falseness of some business claims in which that man is clearly not an expert and is, if anything, a complete neophyte? I don't believe that most will.

Statistically, only a few will do enough indepth research to find the real truth. Scammers know and rely upon this tendency of human nature in order to bring in victims.

[sfsassenach]

I bet you people are the sort who also say a battered woman asked for it or that she could leave if she wanted to and blame her for everything that happens. Get real folks.

Shawn invokes Godwin's law, and renders her argument null and void.

[SimonSays]

Just because a jury found for the plaintiff, does not mean that a) it was a correct verdict - juries are known to be fallible - can you say ROBERT DURST? And incidentally there are a number of different opinions on the coffee verdict other than the one on snopes.

b) the plaintiff was not an idiot for balancing a hot cup of coffee on his lap while driving.

Guess what? If he'd used a cup holder, he could have avoided the whole thing!

[DaveKuzminski]

SimonSays should go back to remedial reading. Get your facts straight and don't assume other facts not included. For all you know, there might have been a cup holder that didn't fit. However, that would be speculation based upon your own speculation and that is not how you base a judgment. In fact, if you'd read that more carefully, you would have noticed that it was one of numerous scalding instances which was partly why the jury found in favor of the plaintiff.

Now let's discuss how many writers have been harmed by PublishAmerica. That is what the topic is really about.

[SimonSays]

Dave please define who is harmed. Do you mean all those who contracted with PA? ONLY those who are unhappy with PA? EVEN those who are happy with PA and aren't good enough to be published elsewhere and are living their dream?

And if third group on the list above is harmed, would you be so kind as to tell me how?

As for the coffee once again you miss the concept of personal responsibility. Whether or not the coffee was too hot is not the issue. It is a choice to balance a cup on your lap when you're driving, it is a stupid choice and a dangerous choice, especially when it's a cup of hot coffee - scalding or not, it could still at the very least make you look down, lose control or inadvertently press down on the gas pedal.

Incidentally, I was shocked, SHOCKED to discover that the Trial Lawyers Association supported the verdict. Afterall, the association is made up of.... Trial Lawyers who coincidentally usually get a standard fee of something like 30 or 40% of these types of jury awards. Who'da thunk?

Your kids if you have any must be holy terrors with your version of personal responsibility. "Run across the street kids. Don't bother looking both ways, if you get hit it's the bus driver's fault." Or of course if they are hit by the driver who spilled the coffee and lost control of the wheel, you can always blame McDonald's.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Do we get a response from Nameless65 about the inaccuracy of his own cynical research regarding the coffee?<hr></blockquote>
What I have to wonder Dave is whether you would have researched the coffee issue on your own or would you have hoped someone else would provide it for you? I’m guessing the latter. Or is this an example of your research skills – one person posting something that you agree with and you buy it part and parcel?

Whether the coffee example was a good one or not is subjective, the fact is that some people just want to blame PA. “I didn’t have enough money to do the research”, “My library doesn’t carry the book”, “My internet is too slow”, “My bookstore was closed the day I went there to do research”. I don’t buy that Dave.

The truth is that you can scream to the hills all you want about being ripped off but it’s time that you accept at least some responsibility for being scammed (I’m assuming you were scammed from your hostile attitude towards anyone that doesn’t tow the “party line”). Yes, do something to prevent others from being scammed. Educate authors on the sharks and scammers – on the industry itself. But please, please spare us from the “We’re all helpless against the power of the EVIL [Insert evil power here]”. I accepted my part in being scammed, it doesn’t make you less of a person.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Statistically, only a few will do enough indepth research to find the real truth. Scammers know and rely upon this tendency of human nature in order to bring in victims.<hr></blockquote>So does this mean they shouldn’t do in-depth research? Wouldn’t you recommend that an author research a prospective publisher or agent because if they don’t they might be asking for trouble? Be careful, if you say yes you're agreeing with my original post.

[emeraldcite]

"Run across the street kids. Don't bother looking both ways, if you get hit it's the bus driver's fault."

in this case, you, the responsible adult, are misinforming the children by telling them to run in traffic. So, being a responsible adult, you inspire trust in these children, and unless they have any reason to doubt you, they will follow your instructions.

I’m all for personal responsibility, but the art of the scam is to cheat the mark before they notice. And when they notice, it's too late. For those happy with PA, that's spectacular, but as you can see from their boards, it's the same 100 people trading quotes from PA like baseball cards.

The point of this board is to offer support to those who are looking into PA, and for those who have signed with PA and want out after realizing that PA isn't going to fulfill their dream.

Us seasoned researchers will search out PA every which way but loose; however, most writers won't type in more than Publish America into google and come up with several pages of praise. Obviously, with all that praise, they seem completely legit. Hell, even I'm called in by their siren's song about being published. How nice it would be to hold my book in my hands. Really printed and available to the world via brick and mortar stores and other sites.

And unlike most vanity presses, it doesn't cost me a thing. They'll do it all for me. And then there's the support group of proud authors. Woo Hoo! My dollar.

Sounds great to the rejected, the newbies, etc. Although there is an amount of personal responsibility, most of us only learn through mistakes and experience. Most of these new pups see exactly what they expect to see in PA. They see a "traditional" publisher who is not going to cost them a penny.

They offer editing and free covers. Everything is done for the author, except marketing. But how many people know, without a good bit of research and being able to ask the right questions, about how the publishing industry really works, especially with all the false and misleading information slung across the web? Do I blame the authors? Not as much as I blame the scammers.

So, back to the kids. If we think of new authors as children, inexperienced and wanting to learn but unable to come up on their own exactly how, then we can start to see how the big “publisher” can lead these young writers (young in terms of experience) into the fires. Lots of “facts,” “info,” and other nifty little tidbits that effectively sell products all the time.

You want it. You need it. And when it looks so shiny and new, who would guess that the engine is crap and only will run a few miles? Next time you buy a new car, check under the hood. It might have that new car smell, but it might be a lemon. Despite what the salesman says, check under the hood. It’s your responsibility as a consumer to make sure it’s not a lemon before you buy it. Right?

Or, wait. Sometimes you don’t know it’s a lemon until it breaks down a few times. Whose fault is that? Gee…I don’t know. Stupid consumer should’ve done their research and seen it coming.

[HConn]

Whether or not the coffee was too hot is not the issue. It is a choice to balance a cup on your lap when you're driving....

Didn't read the article, did you?

[SimonSays]

I would be very curious to know what percentage of disgruntled, disillusioned PA'ers actually LOOKED under the hood or did more than glance at the engine and take the owner's word for everything. If I were buying a car without a warranty, I'd probably get my own mechanic to take a look at it before I bought it.

Of course, there is a chance that even with taking precautions - you wind up with a lemon. And that is a different situation entirely. But with all the information out there on publishing, PA, etc. it's hard to believe that so many people did solid research and did not find any information anywhere that gave them pause.

If you don't take precautions, don't vet something properly then you are responsilbe for not vetting properly. If you're looking at an old pinto, and didn't do enough research to know that some of them had a tendency to explode......... you DID NOT do enough research.

And even if you were hoodwinked into buying the pinto by a slick, smooth-talking con artist, that is going be of little comfort to you after you're rear-ended and crispier than a piece of KFC chicken.

[DaveKuzminski]

Nope, I haven't been scammed.

I've seen the quality of the reference books that were available to writers before the Internet brought forth new sources. I've seen how the scammers have flocked to the Internet ahead of the real publishers and agents because they guessed correctly that many new writers would endorse the Internet as the next new thing. They knew there was no policing of the Internet. They know that the quality of education in the US is appalling and that new writers would have few if any defenses against them. I've read too many letters from writers who were scammed. I know what they've been through because the pain showed in their letters. I've researched the businesses they complained about. When their complaints proved valid, I posted negative recommendations for those businesses in Preditors & Editors (tm) in order to assist those new writers, in particular, in making more informed choices. Because I put real research and time into P&E's recommendations, P&E has been lauded by numerous publishers, agents, and editing services. You'll find those comments on their sites and in forums where they recommend to writers that they visit P&E for our view on businesses within the industry.

Why do I do this? Because I have the knowledge and ability and it's the right thing to do.

Could the victims have done more to protect themselves? Some could, but most were left defenseless by our system of education and government which doesn't teach these matters and doesn't go after scammers who were smart enough to steal small amounts from lots of people so that the few who complained would fall under the radar of most prosecutors.

Like it or not, the Internet is the level playing field most new writers never had a chance of finding in the past. Scammers had a field day because they were the ones who took out ads in the writing magazines in many instances. Those magazines back then didn't dare list them by name because they represented advertising dollars. Well, that day for the scammers is over.

Furthermore, you don't solve the problem by telling victims that they have to take responsibility. They didn't go looking for a scam. They were taken by someone slick and polished who looked and claimed to be a professional. If you want to deal with the problem, then tell writers who to avoid. The key is to educate them, not shame them. Or is that how you get your jollies?

By the way, I researched the coffee issue on my own when it first came out and now. From what was stated above, that's two more times than you.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Do I blame the authors? Not as much as I blame the scammers.<hr></blockquote>
This is all I’m saying Emeraldcite and have been saying from the beginning.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Could the victims have done more to protect themselves? Some could, but most were left defenseless by our system of education and government which doesn't teach these matters and doesn't go after scammers…<hr></blockquote>
Oh my God. Are you serious? <img border=0 src="http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif" />You’re going to blame this on the government?!?!? Oh boy that’s rich!!!!!!!! That is just tooo funny. Okay, I’m gonna save this one for posterity. Hooo Weeee!


For what it’s worth Dave, I’ve been to preeditors and I respect what you’re doing…there. Here, you’re just a little over the top. I’ll try to stay away from threads that you’re running since you don’t seem to respond well to contrary opinions.

[vstrauss]

This is a stupid, STUPID argument. Enough already.

- Victoria

[DaveKuzminski]

Just pointing out the truth. Government prosecutors at all levels aren't interested in going after most of the scammers in the literary industry because there's not enough publicity in it for them. It's not cost effective to spend thousands in order to recover hundreds or less for the few writers willing to complain to the authorities.

In fact, in some of those instances where an official interest is taken, the scammers know how to defuse the problem by claiming it was just a misunderstanding and stating that they'll refund the money because they're not crooks. They know the case against them will collapse in those few instances if they do that and they'll recoup that money from the next victim.

The government was created to serve the people, but it doesn't serve all the people when they need it most. So yes, I blame the government.

A little over the top? Not at all. Not when you think about it carefully.

Also, I'm not running any threads. I'm just responding to statements that have little reason or validity to them because leaving those unanswered would mislead new writers finding this site for the first time.

[SimonSays]

Dave -

Thank your for acknowledging, FINALLY, that some of the victims could have done more to protect themselves. That was my key point from the get go.

I think I have mentioned in almost every posting that I admire what you do - THAT was never the issue. The issue was and is the people who don't bother to look for the information you provide, or worse still - find it, but choose to ignore the information. I just don't have the ability to consider those in the second group victims of PA, if they choose to sign after seeing what you and others have to say, then they get what they deserve.

Actually I believe that this little debate could lead to there being less victims in the future, not only because they now know that PA may not be what it appears to be, but also because PA and ST Literary are NOT the only scammers out there.

By suggesting that we are all in part responsible for own fate, that we can and should take it upon ourselves to educate ourselves about those areas in life we are interested in, and that we can do things to try and minimize the chances of being victimized - maybe some will take it upon themselves to learn what they need to know to keep themselves from falling for a scam in the future - even if that scam is not on P&E, Writers Beware or these boards.

And to quickly illustrate why it is so important that people actually educate themselves about the industry and not just rely on the lists on the watchdog sites, here's a little true story

There is a post on this board inquiring about Mike Noble and Noble Literary Agency. They are listed on P&E but there is no info. Today I saw a posting on craigslist for Mike Noble at the Noble Agency, they were looking for clients. This was a red flag for me, because I know that most legit agents don't post ads seeking clients, as they are inundated with queries from writer's seeking agents. There was a link to their site, that showed they are a subsidiary of a "book packaging" firm, a google search led to no real information on either Noble or the Parent Co. I did a little more checking around and found that PW shows no verifiable sales for Mike Noble or the Noble Agency. Are they legit? I have no idea, but there's enough questionable information there to make me think you are better off avoiding them - so I posted the info on the board. Three other people posted, saying they seemed legit. Do they know what I know about Noble? probably not. If they did know what I know would it have raised the same red flags? It would if they, like I, have researched the business. If they knew that when looking for an agent, vetting doesn't stop when you find out they don't charge fees. That if you can't verify an agent's sales, you should avoid that agent. That most legit agencies that have websites will list both their clients and their recent releases and sales. Learning how the industry actually operates makes it much easier to sense when something isn't right.

It is great to be an advocate, to protect and defend the little guy, but you also need to point out to them, that they have to take an active, not passive role in protecting themselves. Some of the current PA victims did not do that their first time around, if they feel shame for having that pointed out to them, that is an issue of their own self esteem or lack thereof. I certainly am not going to apologize for stating the obvious. If I sound unsympathetic, maybe it's because I have never come across postings from anybody who had lived to regret signing with PA saying something along the lines of "I didn't do my homework, shame on me, I could have avoided being taken."

I still cannot get a grip on whether or not you feel that ALL PA's clients are victim's or only the ones who feel they are not getting what they thought they would. What other publishing options do all the really bad PA authors have? If they are happy to be published what is the harm?

[reph]

SimonSays, I believe you've made a case here in favor of personal responsibility. You've promoted the view that individuals need to ascertain the facts if they're to avoid consequences that prove them to have acted foolishly.

Now let me give you just a few facts about the scalding-coffee lawsuit. The plaintiff was an elderly woman. She was a passenger. The driver was her grandson.

Despite having been told to read an account of the case, you continue to present arguments that speak of a (fictitious) male driver.

Don't you feel just a little bit foolish?

[alphabeter]

The San Antonio Current, an independent paper has published an interesting article on PA.
How will this be spinned in the sandbox?

URL:
sacurrent.com/site/news.c...4045&rfi=6 (http://sacurrent.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12073075&BRD=2318&PAG=461&dept_id=484045&rfi=6)

I would post the article, but I'm pretty sure it would violate copyright.

[DaveKuzminski]

The About Us page in Author's Market states "AuthorsMarket is a service of PublishAmerica."

SimonSays, the point I was making is that you kept stating they should own up to being responsible. That is quite different from the fact that they could have done more. Call it semantics if you want, but the two are clearly different actions. That would be like blaming the thousands of birds that die each year from colliding with windows in skyscrapers when we know that they were deceived into believing there were holes in the buildings because they saw a reflection of what appeared to be part of their natural environment--the sky. Had they been with a large flock, they would have been spared because they would have seen their own reflection approaching as a huge mass and turned away. Solitary birds mistakenly believe they can pass by the single image of a bird flying at them. They don't have the knowledge of the group.

[MacAl Stone]

Dave, that's a great analogy. This particular board hardly ever makes me smile. Thank you. :)

[SimonSays]

I didn't cite the coffee case, my anaology was the hypotheical of suing a scissors manufacturerer for not putting a warning label on the scissors.

The particulars of the coffee case are not the issue, as I was talking about a concept that goes far beyond the particulars of any specific case. Hell someone once sued because he injured himself (I think he fell through the roof, please don't pound me if that detail is not right) when he was BREAKING INTO SOMEONE'S HOUSE TO ROB THEM! He was commiting a crime, chose to break in, had no right to try to break in. Don't you think he bears some responsiblitity for his injury? And I believe he won that case, because many jurors feel like you do, that no one should have to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions if they are injured in the process by someone else.

Apparently some of you don't have the ability to think conceptually or take an idea from a specific situation and apply it to a broader idea, or to see shades of grey in anything.

And Dave, birds have very small brains, I believe they are thought to be one of the least intelligent animals on the planet.

Humans on the other hand..... yes I realise IQ varies, but if you have the ability to write a manuscript, you also have the ability to read. And since it appears that many, many, many people know what PA is all about and are able to avoid signing with them, you obviously don't have to be some sort of genius or super - duper responsible person to have dug up enough information to stay away. So, yes I think that many of those who feel duped by PA COULD HAVE DONE MORE

And once again you have not answered my question regarding PA and harm, and since I have asked at least 3 times and you are apparently not stupid and apparently can read, I am going to take it to mean you are uncomfortable answering that question, for some mysterious reason and leave it at that.

[AC Crispin]

I'm quoted in that article about PA in the San Antonio Current, and I think the author, Susan Pagani, made a creditable effort to present a balanced point of view.

Even so, I bet PA is going to be furious.

-Ann C. Crispin

[CaoPaux]

Is this the first non-positive article re: PA in a print medium?

[KW]

Not everybody will look to see if a company is a scam. I know when I was checking on PA I didn't put in PUBLISHAMERICA scam in the search criteria.

I looked into them and found page after page of glowing reviews from PA authors. I found their website, theirs authors websites, etc. Everything was good. I found a few places where a few people were saying bad things about PA, but then someone would come in and say "listen here, I'm an author with PA and these statements are not true."

At the time, a few years ago, there was not as much negativity about PA on the web as there is now. So to say that you can put into google and see all the bad about PA is not accurate, when most of the writers that are having problems signed years ago. You can not base your findings of PA today on what was on the web two years ago, it was really different then.

For most people looking for a publisher they are trying to take care of a family, work a full time job or two, and write. They don't have the time to spend hours searching for anything negative about a company. After the first page or two of good things they will more likely decide, "hey, there were one or two bad things, but the majority were good." You can work for any company and have one or two employees hate them, does that mean that the company is bad? No, not if the majority of its employees like them. You can not base your decision on a few bad apples when the majority of the bunch is good.

As for their contract, we signed it right? Well not many people are knowledgeable in reading contract lingo, and, like me, I don't have a lawyer and couldn't afford to have one look at it. Plus there are no lawyers around where I live that deal with publishing contracts. So does that make us wrong for signing it? No, it is worded slick enough to fool unknowing authors, and that was the point.

Yeah we need to take some blame in going with them, but you know what? We will take some blame if PA ever gets enough balls to step up and shoulder some of the blame for coning thousands of authors.

KW

[DaveKuzminski]

Believe this or not, I witnessed this just last week. At my home, we have a bird feeder hanging just outside the kitchen window. One morning it was empty. One particularly ragged looking little finch sat on the perch of the feeder, looked in, and then turned around at hearing me in the kitchen to face the window. The bird chirped away for several moments at me. Then it opened and closed its mouth several times as if eating. Then it chirped some more and followed that again with the eating motion. It repeated that several times until I, the dense human, figured out it wanted me to put more seeds in the feeder. That's only one example. I could give others I've witnessed such as the woodpecker that would wake us up in the morning by pecking on the roof if the feeder hadn't been filled yet. A lot of animals, including birds, are far more intelligent than they're generally credited. You just have to be observant.

Of course, that doesn't mean there won't be exceptions where juries do foolish things. However, it's been my experience that juries tend to weigh the facts carefully because they know that there are important issues that have to be considered.

Still, the point here is that it doesn't matter whether the authors in question are at fault for not doing more research. The key question is whether the business presented an illusion beyond the reasonable limits of legal puffery that it knew to be patently false for the purpose of its own gain to the detriment of its authors. It doesn't matter that not every author who signed with them was harmed. What matters is that a significant number of those authors were.

It's the same logic that a prosecutor might pursue against an individual firing a gun in a crowded room. The individual might have only six bullets and there might have been twenty people. Even if all six of his shots missed everyone, the prosecutor could still charge him with twenty counts of attempted murder.

[SimonSays]

Quote:

"As for their contract, we signed it right? Well not many people are knowledgeable in reading contract lingo, and, like me, I don't have a lawyer and couldn't afford to have one look at it. Plus there are no lawyers around where I live that deal with publishing contracts. So does that make us wrong for signing it? No, it is worded slick enough to fool unknowing authors, and that was the point."

This is not an issue of right or wrong. It is an issue of the choice you made to sign the contract and taking responsibility for that choice. We all make mistakes in our lives, misjudge things, don’t do our homework and then make bad decisions. Once you are past the age of nine or ten there are very few “do-overs” in life. After strike three you are out, and you just have to wait until your next turn at bat to try again – hopefully wiser, although maybe a little worse for wear.

As for the contract. Have you ever seen a contract that WASN’T worded slickly or filled with legal jargon? Ever read the fine print on a rental car agreement or the licensing agreement for software before clicking to install? There full of slick legalese. Most of us don’t bother reading the fine print in these situations because it’s standard stuff – and probably won’t have any real impact on our lives – it’s freakin’ software. However, when you are signing a contract for something that you know will have a major impact on your life – like say a publishing contract – especially when you have no experience in the field and minimal knowledge - then maybe it would be wise to ask for clarification on some of the slick stuff or else put a little money aside so you could afford a few hours of an attorney’s time. Not having the money is no excuse. We save for the things that truly matter to us. You chose not to do that. And if PA has not breached their slickly worded contract, well then, there’s really nothing you can do but move onto the next book and do a little more research this time around.

Quote:

“It's the same logic that a prosecutor might pursue against an individual firing a gun in a crowded room. The individual might have only six bullets and there might have been twenty people. Even if all six of his shots missed everyone, the prosecutor could still charge him with twenty counts of attempted murder”

Actually not sure this analogy works, because those who WANT what PA provides – are not shot at, at all. They are blown kisses if you will, not blown away.

As for Susan Pagani’s article in the current (and by the way, nice quotes Ann) – I think it perfectly spells out exactly what PA does and does not offer – it gives both sides, it gives hard numbers (people don’t even have to whip out their calculators – she does the math for them). Any author who reads this article and wants the perks and benefits that a traditional publishing house offers, will know this is not the place for them. As for the others – well they will see the differences and if they still choose to sign with PA, they cannot plead “innocent victim” somewhere down the line.

In closing, I would like to quote the last few sentences of the article in question:

"….. PA certainly could be more forthright in how they present their services and business model, and everyone would profit if PA were more diligent in their practices, BUT IT IS UP TO PROSPECTIVE AUTHORS TO DO THEIR HOMEWORK.“

Amen, Ms. Pagani.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Still, the point here is that it doesn't matter whether the authors in question are at fault for not doing more research.<hr></blockquote>You’re right. This thread should be focusing on PA’s liability.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It's the same logic that a prosecutor might pursue against an individual firing a gun in a crowded room. The individual might have only six bullets and there might have been twenty people. Even if all six of his shots missed everyone, the prosecutor could still charge him with twenty counts of attempted murder.<hr></blockquote>
The question is, and I don’t know since I don’t deal with them, how much of what they spew is just slick advertising and how much is flagrant falsity. Yes, they can and should be held accountable if they say the B&N carries their books. They should be forced to change their advertising if they say that their books are reviewed by major newspapers (if they’re not).

The problem I see with your analogy is that they are basically making false or misleading promises – they’re (at least to my knowledge) not targeting anyone specifically. I think a better analogy would be to compare them to the carnie running the ring toss game. “It’s easy people, anyone can win a kewpie doll. Step right up!”

Sure you can peg them on the B&N thing – that in my mind is easy. They say yes, B&N says no, it’s a lie. But how do you distinguish between “Get your book published without the headache of dealing with the traditional publishers!” and “Fords are the best cars on the road” or “Our timeshares are great! It’s so easy”. How do you legally prove that a car isn’t the “best” or a timeshare isn’t “easy”? Where is the line between a prosecutable lie and just slick advertising?

[SimonSays]

I am becoming obsessed with the manuscripts that PA rejects - No, I do not believe they reject 80% of the submissions, I don't even believe they reject 8%. Probably far closer to .8%.

But wouldn't it be the ultimate irony, if the manuscripts they do reject are the one's they deem as actually "publishable" by traditional houses (i.e. well written, talented writer, commercially viable)?

[reph]

SimonSays, you now say you "didn't cite the coffee case."

From one of your posts: "Or of course if they are hit by the driver who spilled the coffee and lost control of the wheel, you can always blame McDonald's."

My point here isn't that the details of the coffee case are important in any way to the argument about PA. It's that you lose credibility by being intellectually careless.

Dave, I loved your finch story. We have some clever creatures in our yard, too.

[DaveKuzminski]

Interestingly enough, some of the rejections that have been reported to P&E were gained not as a result of being bad manuscripts, but because the authors were savvy enough to know they weren't bad and wanted to negotiate the contracts they were offered. It was at that point that some of them were rejected by PA which withdrew the acceptances. Consequently, one could argue that PA was targeting writers by how little they knew about publishing. If so, that would make them far more culpable, if not insidious, in their behavior.

[Nameless65]

Quote from reph
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>My point here isn't that the details of the coffee case are important in any way to the argument about PA. It's that you lose credibility by being intellectually careless.<hr></blockquote>

Quote from DaveKuzminski
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Still, the point here is that it doesn't matter whether the authors in question are at fault for not doing more research. The key question is whether the business presented an illusion beyond the reasonable limits of legal puffery that it knew to be patently false for the purpose of its own gain to the detriment of its authors.<hr></blockquote>
It's over reph - let it the issue of responsibility go – move on. I’m the one that originally brought up the coffee case. If you want to continue discussing responsibility open a new thread and I’ll join you there.

[SimonSays]

I did not use the coffee case as an example originally, someone else did that's what I meant when I said I didnt' cite it.

My knowledge of that case was limited, My memory of the case was that the coffee was being held in someone's lap, maybe I was wrong on that detail. I didn't read the link when it was posted - because I have issues with the source - being that it was the Trial Lawyers of Association - they have a vested interest. They are not the most objective source of information on such matters as they receive HUGE FEES from these types of suits, so you would expect them to argue that the verdict was correct.

That said, it would have been better to use a case I was more familiar with - like the robber who sued the people he was robbing because he was injured trying to break into their house, or else to get more details on the coffee case.

I should have done more research. I was wrong.

Oh wait look at that, I have taken responsibility for my own mistake. Which of course does not make those of you who are wrong on the issue of personal responsiblity any less wrong.

My theory in action..... gotta love it!

[AnneMarble]

"Prather argues that PA authors aren't missing much: "It's a common myth that bookstore placement equals sales. Most buyers have an author they are looking for - it's a rare reader who's out there browsing the shelves for some new writer to read.""

:rollin :ha :lol :rofl

What planet is this woman living on? :head

[FM St George]

gee, there's no sign of it on the PA boards - think it survived being posted for an hour?

LOL!

[reph]

nameless65 wrote: "It's over reph - let it the issue of responsibility go – move on."

I see two implications there that I don't like. (1) I'm hanging onto an issue in an obsessive-compulsive way. (2) Nameless has the privileges of reminding me which way lies reality and deciding when I've said enough.

Excuse me, but I intend to decide when to "move on." Not yet; I just got here. That is, I just got to this part of the PA discussion; I got to the Water Cooler long ago. Despite having no special interest in PA, I look at this thread occasionally, driven by morbid curiosity. I posted yesterday because it irks me when someone breaks the very rules that he or she proclaims for others.

This time, I posted because it also irks me to be told off when I don't deserve it.

[Nameless65]

My apologies, I thought you were just trolling. It seemed as though the heated topic of responsibility had petered out and the thread was moving back toward the main issue of PA (less hostility, cooler tempers) and you were just trying to stir the pot.

[LaVerneRoss]

All of us who were taken in by PA feel some responcibility along with a gaunlet of other negative emotions. We beat ourselves up over the decision and none of us can take back that decision. Doesn't matter how much research we did either as most did research, as I did. But found the real answer too late.
Some of us learned a valuable lesson from this. We want to fix that mistake to help others avoid the same mistakes. Support each other along the way learn from each other. But also to get justice, and get what is ours back. Most writers aren't stagnating as most are moving on writing more novels. But one can move on and fight for justice at the same time.

[LaVerneRoss]

Prather just can't speak the truth about anything. I never buy books over the net. I like the real bookstores and trolling the isles looking for something interesting. Reading the back seeing the cover. How many people actually buy their books over the net? If I see a book I want I can have it and take it home with me and read it. That is the way it should be. Are most of the PA writers over there agreeing? Probably.

I don't consider myself published still. No book in real stores can't go to the store and look at my book and think...yeah I wrote that. But one day soon it will happen.

[KW]

"As for the contract. Have you ever seen a contract that WASN’T worded slickly or filled with legal jargon?"

Yes I have. Most contracts are for the benefit of both parties and there is no need to hide info. PA's contract, if you don't know what you are looking for, has it to where the naive author doesn't know that the royalties are paid on net, not gross. The contract states, in section 19, that this agreement refers to the first edition when all the books are first editions. There are no initial runs and so for this is false.

They talk about sending out copies, at their expense, for reviews, publicity. We authors are having a hard time trying to get PA to send out the two copies that they will send out, these two copies are not stated in the contract. It also says that sales promotion, advertising and publicity shall be at the publishers election and discretion as to the extent, scope and character. And that the author must be involved in the promotion of said book. The authors are doing their part but PA is not doing any advertising or sales promotion.

If you look at the contract you see all of these little things that make PA look like a traditional publisher, it isn't until later that you realize they are not.

"then maybe it would be wise to ask for clarification on some of the slick stuff or else put a little money aside so you could afford a few hours of an attorney’s time."

And again I say, most people, like me, are working a full time job, going to school, taking care of two kids and am married. My time is limited and I am barely able to get buy a month. If I miss one day of work I can not pay my bills for that month, so to pay a publishing attorney to look at the contract would put me over and really hurt me and my family. A good attorney isn't cheap as you know.

And I do plan to move on from PA, but I also plan to let new writers know what PA is about. As I said before, there was no where near as much bad info about PA on the net when I signed, so yeah, they did mislead me. I take some responsibility for it, but the majority should befall PA.

And yes they have hurt authors. I know of one lady that has health issues and the battle with PA over her book has caused her to have a slight stroke. So yeah, PA has hurt their authors.

"After strike three you are out, and you just have to wait until your next turn at bat to try again – hopefully wiser, although maybe a little worse for wear."

Well, yeah, that is true. The thing is when you sign up for the baseball team and the coach says everybody will be able to bat, you get three strikes and if you don't hit the ball then you are out. You go to the game knowing this but when you get up to bat and you swing, strike one. You swing again, strike two and then your coach comes in and says

"all right, that's it. Take the bench,"

"But I get three strikes, you said." You argue.

"Don't use that tone with me, I never said that. You know what, you can not play on the team no more."

That is PA. They tell you one thing and do another. If you argue it, you are banned and any responsibilities they would have suppose to have done will get lost in the email. Hence, when you are banned you can only contact them by email, so they can lose it. Convenient huh?


KW

[SimonSays]

Hey KW -

Actually, standard contracts that are written by one party (i.e. a car rental agreement, etc.) which you are required to sign, are not necessarily about protecting both parties equally - in many cases they are about limiting the company's liability and spelling out YOUR responsiblities.

Contracts that offer EQUAL protection are generally negotiated by attorney's for both sides. In fact I've had what would be considered standard contracts given to me by reputable producers, that I changed after having an attorney review them, because the drafter of a contract is usually prone to give himself more favorable terms. In many cases they are willing to modify those terms - but why give it away if you don't have to? Not that I think PA would be willing to negotiate the terms. But my point is, even if you are dealing with a legitimate publisher, it is still advisable to get a professional to review it. Preferably a lawyer or your agent if you can't afford one. Because you may be able to get something that is not initally offered to you.

I would think that if they are breaching the contract, then you could probably get out of the contract. In fact if they have breached it, it may already be null and void, so there is a possiblity that the arbitration clause may no longer be valid, and you could seek a remedy in court. I'm not a lawyer or anything, but someone once told me that, don't know if it's true or not. Anyway you might want to check that out. Do a google search for breach of contract and see what you come up with.

If they haven't breached the contract, however or if the terms are all vague and everything is at their discrection, well that's another story. There are some non-profit organizations that give legal advice and/or representation to artists for free or for greatly discounted fees. You might want to check that out as well.

[SRHowen]

That's what an agent is for.

Shawn

[reph]

One place to call about contract review, if you're in the U.S., is your state Lawyers for the Arts association, a nonprofit group. They deal with publishing as well as with music and the other more "arty" arts. They'll make referrals to intellectual property lawyers. Sometimes you can get an initial consultation for a very small fee.

Nameless65, thanks for your acknowledgment.

[CaoPaux]

Hot off the press: Complaint about Publishamerica (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4682.htm)

SuaveSuccubus

Message:
I picked up a newspaper the other day, a free one off the stand at a restaurant and was SHOCKED to see that PublishAmerica had some back feedback. A whole article was dedicated to PA being a scam! Don't worry, it's not. First of all, the article acted as if vanity publishing was the better route to go, better than PA, and we all know that unless the person has a specific reason (and not just to see their name in print) that VP is a scam.
They say that royalties are paid by net profit and several other things. So I wrote back to them and explained what was going on. First of all, PA is meant for first-time authors, but some like it and come back. But even though it's just a small increase to be paid per book and not percent of profit, PA needs that money to take risks on their authors because they ARE mostly first-time unknown authors. There was a lot of stuff they were complaining about and there is nothing but "massage therapist" and escort ads in these papers. The person who wrote the ad was an IDIOT, plain and simple. And another thing, if we hired an agent, we'd have to pay them quite a bit so we would come out with the same pay we would at PA as if we hired an agent. Plus, like I said, I had read that you have to WORK to get your book into big name stores and they acted like PA guaranteed it right off (not if you actually READ things on the website).
So I was unbiased, in part because I read it and though "Omigod! PA is a scam! theyre going to charge me lots of $$" and all these things went through my mind. I started getting worried that this publisher wasn't good or something was wrong, but when I read it, I realised something by the writing and comments.

THE PERSON WHO WROTE THE ARTICLE HAD NO CLUE WHAT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT! NONE WHAT-SO-EVER! Neither did the authors. They were just whining because they thought they were going to go in and get famous after their book was out. And they had no real information and they omitted most everything good about PA. Anyways I wrote them a letter and explained that stupid people ruin it for the rest of us who actually checked PA out. Now because of some stupid idiot that supersized his food at McDonalds and got fat because he ate there a billion times a day, we cant even supersize our own orders because people can't think for themselves anymore. We have to pad everything up so no one hurts themselves, and it's THESE people who ruin it for us.

Besides, unless you wanna spend $ and get an agent and go to a big publisher, PA is the best way to go for your first book. So after they got my letter, I got an email asking if they could publish it in the newspaper. I gave em permission.

GOD some people are stupid. If they even had the whole story but most of what they wrote was just like, Poor me, im not famous yet...

That's my rant...Just thought I'd let you guys know. The article may have been true in part, but it wasn't like they didn't get a contract to read! They also talked about the contract, and when I signed I asked about larger cash advances, say with other publishers, (which some publishers make you pay it back if you don't meet the amount they gave you) and about terms of contract (which CAN be negotiated). Besides that, if you know nothing of the business, then you DEFINITELY don't need to be demanding special treatment and if you want it, find an agent and get another publisher so you don't ruin it for everyone else!!!!!

------

[emeraldcite]

Besides, unless you wanna spend $ and get an agent

well, that's all you need to dismiss this rant...

[DaveKuzminski]

To date, I believe that only one author has claimed that he successfully negotiated his contract with PublishAmerica. However, I've seen no proof that the terms he sought were fulfilled by PA.

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The person who wrote the ad was an IDIOT, plain and simple. And another thing, if we hired an agent, we'd have to pay them quite a bit so we would come out with the same pay we would at PA as if we hired an agent.<hr></blockquote>
Who was the idiot? The agent gets a percentage of what the author makes, so the more money the author makes the more money the agent makes. You don’t “hire” and agent, they represent YOU.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>They also talked about the contract, and when I signed I asked about larger cash advances, say with other publishers, (which some publishers make you pay it back if you don't meet the amount they gave you) and about terms of contract (which CAN be negotiated).<hr></blockquote>
Has the industry changed radically? Last time I checked, a publisher didn’t demand a refund – if you get an advance and the book tanks you get to keep the advance. The publisher gambled and lost in that case.

I almost registered on their forum to correct this person but I have a feeling that it would have fallen on deaf ears.

[AC Crispin]

I just checked and "Suave's" post has already been pulled.

Wonder what Suave will think of that, especially since he or she was defending PA with all his/her "eloquence?"

It's sad.

-Ann C. Crispin

[DaveKuzminski]

Nameless65, I believe you have to be one of their authors in order to register to use their forum.

You're mostly correct in your knowledge of the industry. However, a number of their posters frequently post inaccurate, distorted, or misleading information. Those few appear to believe that you pay an agent to represent you when we know that legitimate agents don't get paid until they make a sale and then it's a percentage based commission. That or some of those posters are placing inaccurate, distorted, and misleading information in that forum in order to pacify the authors into believing they've chosen the best publisher available.

[reph]

Maybe the experience of people who write such defenses of PA is limited to the kind of "agent" who asks for money up front.

[SimonSays]

You are probably correct, Reph.

Of course if they had bothered to research the publishing industry, they would have learned that agents don't charge fees.

But apparently that is something truly beyond the abilities of many, and we should not hold it against them, as they are tragic victims of a cruel, cruel world.............

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>That or some of those posters are placing inaccurate, distorted, and misleading information in that forum in order to pacify the authors into believing they've chosen the best publisher available.<hr></blockquote>
Possible but unlikely in my opinion. This poster seemed to believe what he/she was posting. Like reph suggests, the poster may only have dealt with agents of the unscrupulous kind.

I wonder if PA pulled the thread because it shed some light on areas/promises that they’d rather people not see. I mean, it’s easier for them to say, “Oh sure, you can get your book into a brick & mortar” and then, only when someone complains say, “Well we never said it would be easy. Look here, it was on our website all along.” Also, by saying that authors that complain didn’t read their contract a potential PA customer could infer that they should look at the contract closely. Something I’m sure PA doesn’t want.

I have to give PA credit – they are one slick outfit. I’ve never seen a forum as rigidly policed as theirs. By eliminating negative posts, threads, and the posters themselves, PA creates a harmonious forum filled with all the “shiny happy people” who only sing praises about their experiences.

[CWGranny]

I recently had a woman tell me that she would never get an agent because she couldn't afford one. I asked her where on earth she got that idea. She was told it by a college professor (from a really good university) in a creative writing class she was taking as part of her English degree. He told her all unpublished authors pay their agents -- he believed it. Now he had probably been scammed and didn't know any better, but he was passing that misinformation on to people who would have every reason to believe his input over anything they saw on the Internet (where we know anyone can say anything.)

The woman had NO reason to believe this professor wasn't a credible source -- after all he had a PhD AND a book. Why would she doubt him? Why would she believe some Internet watchdog site she over a man she believed was an "insider" in the world of publishing? Apparently she was born without Simon's genetic knowledge of publishing so she believed someone with the credibility *stamp* of a major university. She thought she WAS educating herself...but according to some, she would be deserving of being scammed by the agent. Lucky her.

[SimonSays]

I never said anyone deserved anything, I just said forearmed is forewarned. You can do all the research in the world, and still get burned.

The difference is:

If you really try to educate yourself (and researching more than one source would be nice) and you still get burned - well it's a shame.

If you don't try to educate yourself and get burned, then shame on you.

'nuff said

[DaveKuzminski]

Some scammers have justified what they did by using the same reasoning. They blamed the victims for not checking them out better and not themselves for being so convincing.

[FM St George]

there was a mention many posts ago about a PA author being hired to teach a writing course at a college, IIRC - he, of course, would be bragging about how he got his "big start" from PublishAmerica and would obviously be pointing his students towards them in order to get their "big chance" at writing stardom.

the discussion went back and forth about how horrible some posters were to see this as a problem, since the teacher wasn't doing anything wrong. Of course, some of us saw it as a Bad Thing waiting to Happen; since the students would go to PA with this teacher's reference and be scammed gleefully and happily by PA.

the same sort of thing happens every day with PA authors - they help con others into the same situation they're stuck in by reciting the lies and the half-lies that THEY believe to "help" their friend; their relative; their work buddy. It's rather like the pyramid scheme; everyone brings someone new into the network and the company benefits from their innate trust in a friend or relative - because THEY wouldn't steer them wrong, right?

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I wonder if PA pulled the thread because it shed some light on areas/promises that they’d rather people not see. I mean, it’s easier for them to say, “Oh sure, you can get your book into a brick & mortar” and then, only when someone complains say, “Well we never said it would be easy. Look here, it was on our website all along.”<hr></blockquote>

This is a possiblity. However, I'm of the mind that they simply didn't want anyone on their boards knowing this article even exists. So many of these authors believe their books will be on the bookshevles. For ages their website has held that very inference up in lights.

If they read Miranda Prather's statement about how PA authors aren't missing much by not being carried in a bookstore and that's it's a myth that store placement equals sales, they could very well feel betrayed.

To suggest that buyers rarely go into a brick and mortar store only to buy a specific author is simply spin control and telling the masses what they want to hear. Different day, different story. It's business as usual for them.

Lynn

[Euan Harvey]

>The woman had NO reason to believe this professor wasn't a credible source -- after all he had a PhD ...
>...so she believed someone with the credibility *stamp* of a major university

:ha

I work in a university, and the idea that university professors are 'credible sources' tickles me. The PhDs I know are a collection of, um, ah, very 'interesting' people, for the most part with very strange views, an immense knowledge of their subject area and an immense ignorance of everything outside it.

I can see why people might think that professor were reliable sources, but let me tell you now: in my experience, they're not. But then again, I'm a professor, so...

Cheers,

Euan

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>A journey of a thousand miles begins with a damn strong cup of coffee.<hr></blockquote>
Well, Euan, you may be a professor, but you have a delightful sense of humor.

[vstrauss]

>>However, I'm of the mind that they simply didn't want anyone on their boards knowing this article even exists.<<

I agree, Lynn. I also wonder how long it will be before they yank the Author's Market site down.

Anyone notice that co-owner Larry Clopper's name was mis-spelled in the article? She called him "Larry Clobber". Kinda unintentionally appropriate, huh?

- Victoria

[HapiSofi]

The Author's Market site was down as of yesterday.

[DaveKuzminski]

Nope, it's still up at URL www.authorsmarket.net/ (http://www.authorsmarket.net/)

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I also wonder how long it will be before they yank the Author's Market site down.<hr></blockquote>
Victoria, why would they yank that site down? Even though I haven't really gone through it, it appears to be an innocuous little site that simply re-tells the same story with a pretty background. Am I missing something?

Geez, with five titles going to print, why do I even ask myself these silly questions??<img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/EmoteHeadbang.gif" />

[SimonSays]

I have seen a lot of helpful information on these background check boards detailing the difference between what legitimate agents and publishers and the scam agents and publishers do.

However I have noticed one thing that appears to have been overlooked. This is in fact the most common thing that legit agents and publishers do. And that thing is that they reject you. Most writers will be rejected over and over again before they find an agent who wants to represent them. And even once they are signed with an agent, they will almost definitely experience further rejection by publishers, until they find one that wants to publish them. And that is the storyline for the minority who actually find an agent and/or get published. Most will never do either. There are far more manuscripts being written out there than will ever be published. Most won't be, because they aren't good enough.

And before the accusations start flying, let me state for the record that I am not a bitter, repeatedly rejected novelist. I've never had my novel rejected, because I have not submitted it anywhere yet. I'm still working on my first novel and am currently researching agents, which is what originally led me to these boards. Though, I have had both successes and failures in other venues with my writing and have no delusions of what lies ahead.

Pursuing a writing career is not for the thin skinned or the faint of heart. It requires tenacity and resillience, and if you are not willing to deal with repeated rejection, then perhaps vanity publishing is the way to go.

I think it is very important that as you warn writers of the scams, you also prepare them for the reality of legitimate publishing. You are doing them no favors telling them what they should look for, without giving them any perspective on the odds of them ever finding it.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This is in fact the most common thing that legit agents and publishers do. And that thing is that they reject you.<hr></blockquote>
Well, yes, Simon, we do reject. Often. I can only speak for my own company, but our standards are extremely high. Manuscripts have usually been edited professionally before they're even submitted to us. Those that haven't been and require a lot of work get rejected. Same thing if it needs developmental work.

In our rejection notices, we go far beyond a form letter. Each author receives a full out critique of why I rejected their manuscript. As an author myself, I understand the appreciation of knowing why I didn't fit the bill.

It's a painful process for both publisher (at least it is in my case) and the author, and it's the worst part of my job. However, I must say that we've had two authors who took my advice to heart and went to work. Their titles will be coming out in pre-release soon.

So keep up the writing and keep faith that someone will read your work, and it will touch them. I was an oft-rejected author and I know how lousy it feels to have the form letters lining the walls of my bathroom.

The publisher that eventually accepted me was less than stellar, making reviews and signings hard to come by. I was fortunate to have someone on the inside of a major paper review my book. First thing they told me to do is find another publisher. Second thing they told me was that my novel belonged on the N.Y. Times Bestseller. So, don't ever lose faith. Dreams do come true.

Best of luck,

[aka eraser]

The purpose of Background Check is put out feelers about prospective agents and publishers and to warn about those who seem less than legit.

The travails of the writing life are covered in detail in many other sections of the Water Cooler including (but not limited to) Rejection and Dejection - Freelance Writing - Take It Outside and even the Newbies section.

[SimonSays]

AKA

It has been expressed by many on this board, that it is just too darn difficult for many to find the information that they need about publishing either in cyberspace or elsewhere. This would include statistics etc., about rejection and what is really involved in finding an agent.

If by the grace of God someone has been fortunate enough to find the Background Check board BEFORE getting sucked in by a scammer, and they read these posts, it might be helpful to them if a little care is taken to impart a total picture of legit publishing. If you tell someone to expect a legit agent to take 10 or 15% of your writing income and not charge reading fees, you should also point out they should expect most legit agents to reject their work. That is an important fact as well. And something all writers need to be prepared for.

If you assume that people will do more research elsewhere, I would agree with you. But that is obviously not the case. And furthermore, many of the knowledgable posters on this board, know this is not the case and they do not expect people to do more research or even encourage them to do so. They obviously want to help the ones who do not share their knowledge. So while you got their attention, why not give them a little extra info?

There are many who want to be in print, but do not want to venture down a long, hard rejection filled road to get there. For many of those people, vanity publishing or POD might be the way to go. For many vanity or POD may be the only option.

You can't have it both ways, you can't say it's too hard to find the information and then not bother to give the information when you have the chance. That would be... what's the word?....... irresponsible.

[vstrauss]

>>Victoria, why would they yank that site down? Even though I haven't really gone through it, it appears to be an innocuous little site that simply re-tells the same story with a pretty background. Am I missing something?<<

Lynn, check this part of it: www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm. (http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm.) It's a tirade against "author advocates" specifically aimed at Ann, Dave, and me. And incidentally dissing a good proportion of PA's writers. PA publishes a lot of sf/fantasy.

>>If you tell someone to expect a legit agent to take 10 or 15% of your writing income and not charge reading fees, you should also point out they should expect most legit agents to reject their work.<<

Simon, from my observation, this is one of the few pieces of true publishing lore that most aspiring writers do know. And many have been rejected, over and over--which is what gives the scam acceptance letter such magical power. It's often the first validation of their work they've ever received.

90% of a good con is psychology.

- Victoria

[aka eraser]

SimonSays:

If someone has found the Background Check board then that someone has found the Water Cooler.

Background Check is one of 32 open forums on the Cooler, each with a theme, some inter-related. If I'm understanding your complaint correctly you seem to think that this particular board and its posters should provide a crash course in publishing with a special emphasis on the difficulties of landing an agent or publisher.

I've been posting on the Cooler in various forums since the day it started. While I'm not about to wade through all the accumulated threads on BC I'd venture to say that point has been addressed more than once.

And, as I mentioned in my previous post; the difficulties of the writer's lot including the difficulty of getting published has been covered many, many times on many, many forums. I don't think it's a stretch to say it pops up in one thread or another every day.

The viability, indeed, even the benefits of vanity or POD publishing for some has also been addressed on more than one Cooler forum.

Yes there's an emphasis on being published by a traditional publisher. I believe the vast majority of people who join the AW community have that as their goal. I also believe that any who come here thinking that goal is easy to attain soon disabuse themselves of the notion.

I think it's a tad disingenuous to suggest that "while you got their attention, why not give them a little extra info?"

That info is all over the Cooler for them as wants it.

[DaveKuzminski]

And it might be pointed out that some of us specialize. Some folks in the industry specialize in publishing books. Others print magazines. Others are agents. It goes on and on like that. And many are writers.

However, some of us work to prevent frauds. We're aware that rejection is going to occur to good writers and bad. However, preparing them for rejection is not our area of expertise. We leave that to others who are more knowledgeable about formats and submissions, even though P&E does contain some common sense about such matters. So does Writer Beware. So do other watchdog sites. Providing such extras helps writers find us when they need what we have to give them.

I don't know about the other watchdog sites, but I once tallied the amounts about six years ago that writers wrote to tell me P&E had saved them before I had to stop saving those particular emails because of hard drive space limitations. That was when P&E was only in operation for two years. We'd helped writers save almost a half-million dollars in steering them away from the upfront fee chargers. On top of that, several wrote to exclaim excitedly that they'd found a good agent using our listings and had sold their books. The total they'd earned was over a hundred thousand dollars.

Interestingly enough, P&E doesn't receive as many complaints now as it used to. That's partly because we know most of the main players now. Instead, many of the emails are thanks for having the information they need. We don't embarrass those who gave us information and they've spread the word about us and others such as Writers Beware and Absolute Write. We don't put them down. We don't steal their dignity. They've rewarded us by providing much needed information about what they've encountered and in some cases by getting published with reputable outlets.

[SimonSays]

i think it's a bit disingenuous, not to mention hypocritical to take the positions that both the info is elsewhere if people want it AND it's not people's fault if they don't look elsewhere to find it and then get scammed.

I don't know if you were involved in the discussion above, but that was the position of many posters on this board - that the information is too hard to find, so people who get sucked in are not responsible for not finding it or not even bothering to look for it.

As I said you can't have it both ways. And since my suggestion merely involves typing a few extra words when you point out the differences between legit and scam, it really does not seem like too much to ask.

[reph]

"i think it's a bit disingenuous, not to mention hypocritical to take the positions that both the info is elsewhere if people want it AND it's not people's fault if they don't look elsewhere to find it and then get scammed."

Being naive or underinformed can get people in many kinds of trouble. In that sense, a scammee has some responsibility. I don't think that that excuses a scammer, though. The scammer is guilty of deliberate manipulation; the scammee only believed the scammer's lies.

[DaveKuzminski]

Part of the point that at least I have been making is that many people in the US were not taught how to properly conduct research. In fact, it doesn't occur to most people to add the word scam to their other search words. That it occurred to you only points out that you are one of the few who appears to know how to conduct a search.

However, having said that, there is also this to be considered. Add too many words to a search using many of the Internet search engines will result in a deluge of matches, many of which will not even be at all near to what's wanted. Furthermore, a number of those will statistically poll higher than what is wanted, so what's wanted will frequently be buried beneath numerous pages of unwanted material.

With that point in mind, remember that we are discussing a common denominator in skills and that precludes accusing everyone of ignorance simply because they don't rank at the top in search skills. I learned over the years that people who are different are not necessarily stupid. It just means they're specialized in other areas where many of the rest of us would appear just as stupid and unknowledgeable about where to research the facts we would need for those pursuits.

It's also a fact that most people accept the first sources they find because they don't know enough about what they're researching to know that there is more out there than meets the eye. If they knew that, they wouldn't be victimized. However, everyone goes through the learning curve and it's while they're in that curve that they're most vulnerable. They're still learning the hows and whys of the industry. It's a given that they didn't do enough research because they don't know enough to do proper research. That's why they're targeted by scammers. Making them admit to that is not beneficial to anyone. Well, except for those who feed on the insecurities of others and need to feel like they're superior.

[SimonSays]

Actually Dave, you got the wrong idea from the beginning about me.

From the posts I had read on the few pages before, besides for Dee (and I have nothing against Dee, who is obviously taking personal responsiblity for trying to get herself OUT of the contract as opposed to just whining about it - you go girl!) I got the feeling that most of the posters were not scam victims, they were advocates like you and those who were informed enough to avoid the scams. I did not think I was speaking to an audience of PA authors.

I was not picking on anybody, I was making a GENERAL OBSERVATION about doing research. And since I am not a rocket scientist and my research has brought me so much valuable information in a relatively short period of time time, it appeared to me that it was not all that difficult to do.

I was not trying to make anyone feel bad. I was not as you so rudely put it "feeding on the insecurities of others" because I "need to feel superior" I was not attacking anyone - I was merely pointing out, that there are ways to do your best to avoid things like this and the best way to do it is through educating yourself. And also suggesting that people make an effort to educate themselves so they greatly reduce the risk of getting scammed in the future.

It's more of life philosphy than anything else, that we have a responsiblity to take care and protect ourselves to the best of our ability. I did not think it was an outrageous or mean-spirited concept. And to be honest, I was shocked that my and Nameless' statements were met with such a resounding and loud group "raspberry". And quite frustrated to see how few people embrace that concept, because it scares me that we live in a world where so few people are willing to take responsiblity for their decisions and this particular dialogue was a microcosm of a much bigger picture for me. In fact this conversation, for me at least was never really about PA.

As for the rest. I don't think you have any idea how devestating it can be for people to go through rejection after rejection after rejection if they are not mentally prepared for it. Hell, it's tough even when you are prepared. But if you are not prepared it can be just as hard on the psyche as falling for a scammer.

But it is clear to me now that this particular message board is about bashing the scammer and nothing else. So I will just hope that those who need more information about publishing will do their own research and let you all get back to the bashing.

[DaveKuzminski]

Your observation is well taken, but this is the wrong place to state that others should take responsibility for what they don't know. Teach them how in another board within this overall forum, if you want. This board is for telling them and others what's out there to be wary of.

You've been jumped on because you advocated an argument that's been used before by trolls trying to advance their own scam business interests. They and flim flam artists always try to shift the blame onto others rather than admit their guilt in using deception. Why? Because this forum and a few others are having success at cutting into the number of victims they create.

We protect minors from getting in over their heads with laws because it's a commonly known fact that the majority of children are unprepared to deal with contracts and such because they're still learning. Unfortunately, we don't offer the same protections to those who enter a new field of endeavor and are learning once more.

So yes, if you think writers should take more responsibility, then help teach them how. I think that would be equally important to giving out warnings. You might even put us out of business... and I won't mind at all.

[SimonSays]

Making snap judgements that someone is a troll or scammer because they express views that differ from yours is really quite sad.

I actually do have quite a bit of insight and knowledge from both my research into publishing and my working experience as a screenwriter.

However some of the regulars on this board have made me feel so unwelcome at this site for my opposing views and my non-coddling style, I really don't know if I want to be bothered.

[HapiSofi]

Non-coddling? Yeah, right. You're a sockpuppet apologist for scammers. Don't let the blank hit you in the blank on your way blank.

[NancyMehl]

The important thing to remember is who the villian is in this piece. Yes, we all need to learn to watch out for ourselves out there, but most of us thought we were! I checked with other authors about PA - and questioned PA directly about their traditional/POD status. Now I know that I should have done more - should have searched the 'net for info - but I thought I was making a good decision. PA wasn't asking for money. Supposedly, that was one of the warning signs.

As far as others who took the bait: there are some writers who barely use the Internet - or just weren't aware that we needed to be careful! When I started out, I thought all publishers and agents were on the level! It never occurred to me that the world was full of literary wolves.

Being scammed is something that happens TO YOU. Making the victims feel guilty is wrong. Helping them to become informed is the right step to take. That is why I have so much respect for people like Dave, Victoria Strauss, and Ann Crispin. Their answer is to TRY to keep it from happening - but if someone does fall into a trap, they pull them out and try to keep them from falling in again.

A much better response, I think.

Nancy Mehl

[LiamJackson]

<<<sockpuppet apologist for scammers>>>

Another Hapisofi-ism to add to the old lexicon. :lol

[DaveKuzminski]

Making snap judgments? Not hardly. You fly in quacking like a duck in duck season, well, you ought to be wise enough to figure out the rest.

You chose an argument used over and over again before by trolls doing the bidding of scammers. After all, they're not scammers if their trolls can convince others that the victims are more at fault. Why else do you think they have a section in their contract disavowing their advertising? They have to because their advertising is patently false and they know it. The victims think they're acknowledging that they weren't influenced by all the notices of success by other writers.

When it comes to scammers and anyone espousing their arguments, we don't roll over and play dead. We don't turn the other cheek. And we don't take prisoners. There is no compromise. Either the scammers change their business practices to those that are legitimate or they change industries. Otherwise, we'll eventually nail them.

And you think I'm being mean to you? Well, consider this. I can either be mean to you or mean to thousands of other writers. Guess which side of the scales you're on.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Lynn, check this part of it: www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm. It's a tirade against "author advocates" specifically aimed at Ann, Dave, and me. And incidentally dissing a good proportion of PA's writers. PA publishes a lot of sf/fantasy.<hr></blockquote>

LOL. Victoria, it's gone. Poof. Where are they doing their tirade against you? This is a PA site, right? Does that mean that the same powers that be actually maintain this site as well? I'm not really sure why I give a rat's patoot about all this as I'm far too busy, but I suppose it's good to be informed.

[emeraldcite]

www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm (http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm)

it's still there, just don't include that period at the end.

[priceless1]

Ah, okay, now I understand what you're talking about, Victoria. Wow. Interesting information packed on this sour little page - <a href="http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm" target="_new">http://www.authorsmarket.net/youreyes.htm</a>

The only thing missing are names, right? If I had read this site as an author in search of a publisher, this would have had me running in the opposite direction.

This is filled with an amateurish diatribe that sounds as if someone snapped their bras in gym class. They would be far better served if they simply took this entire page out. Any company that spends an inordinate amount of time defending themselves by smearing their detractors gives the impression that perhaps there is a grain of truth to those detractor’s claims. Bad tactics in my opinion.

Having been a recent target for their smear tactics in a public forum, all I can do is shake my head and pity their fears. It rules their lives. Hardly a benchmark for success.

[SimonSays]

I had no idea what arguments the scammers use, because ironically, my research led me on a path that avoided things like clicking on an ad for any agent or publisher seeking writers. And knowing that the types of publishers that I am looking for, require submission by an agent. I believe that particular area of my research took maybe 15 seconds. Okay I'm exaggerating maybe closer to 3 minutes. So I never even looked at the PA's of the world.

This board is 44 pages. 44 pages of warnings and whining (mostly whining). If someone has not gotten the message about PA after the first 4 pages, let alone the first 4 posts, well...... what can i say? And this is obviously not the only board on this site that deals with PA as the Board Administrators are attempting to limit the number of threads, so there very well may be 100s if not 1,000s of pages of warnings and whining.

This has far less to do with warning others than it is a self-indulgent pity-party. And it is sad to see that after all this time there has been no real effort to ORGANIZE and actually DO something about the problem.

So in an effort to save any potential PA'er from making a huge mistake not to mention sparing them from subjecting themeselves to another 44 pages of whining let me just say:

PA IS NOT A TRADTIONAL PUBLISHER EVEN THOUGH THEY CLAIM THEY ARE. IF YOU WANT A TRADITIONAL PUBLISHER AND YOU WANT YOUR BOOK IN BOOKSTORES GET YOURSELF AN AGENT (ONE WHO DOES NOT CHARGE FEES AND IS AN AAR MEMBER). MANY PUBLISHERS ONLY ACCEPT MANUSCRIPTS THAT ARE SUBMITTED BY AGENTS

CHECK THE WEB OR THE BOOKSTORES FOR INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY WORKS. IF YOUR LOCAL BOOKSTORE DOES NOT CARRY THEM, CHECK AMAZON.COM. YOU MAY HAVE TO PAY 20 OR 30 BUCKS TO BUY THE BOOK, BUT IT IS A WORTHWHILE INVESTMENT AND IT WILL HELP YOU AVOID OTHER SCAMS IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU WILL KNOW WHAT TO LOOK FOR AND WHAT QUESTIONS TO ASK.

CHOOSE AGENTS WHO HAVE SOLD BOOKS IN THE SAME GENRE AS YOURS - MOST LEGITIMATE AGENTS THAT HAVE WEBSITES LIST THEIR CLIENTS & THEIR RECENT SALES. AVOID AGENTS WITH NO VERIFIABLE SALES.

CHECK PREDITORS & EDITORS AND WRITERS BEWARE TO SEE IF THE AGENT IS LEGIT.

DO A SEARCH ON GOOGLE FOR TIPS ON HOW TO WRITE A QUERY LETTER, BECAUSE IF YOUR QUERY LETTER IS NOT GOOD, YOU WILL NOT GET YOUR MANUSCRIPT READ.

PREPARE FOR A LOT OF REJECTION ALONG THE WAY.

IF YOU DO NOT DO ANY OF THE ABOVE, AND END UP SIGNING WITH A SCAM AGENT OR PUBLISHER, THEN IT IS PARTLY YOUR FAULT BECAUSE YOU DID NOT TAKE THE TIME TO EDUCATE YOURSELF.

GOOD LUCK.

*If you are looking to get published, and you read this post, you should now know that you should stay away from Publish America, have a little information about what you need to do and know what you should do to learn more about publishing. You do not have to read the next 44 pages, unless of course you enjoy reading post after post of people whining.

All the best on your road to publication,

Simon

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>This has far less to do with warning others than it is a self-indulgent pity-party.<hr></blockquote>

Simon, I believe I have to take issue with your remark. It's insensitive and crude. As an author, I know what it's like to pour years of hard research and writing into a novel.

I am extremely grateful for the experiences I had with my publisher because it made me a much better person and business woman. That doesn't mean I'm not taking prudent steps to gain my rights back, because my novel deserves better.

However, I well understand the pain and agony many have experienced by being associated with certain publishers. To blithely accuse people of having a pity party diminishes any goodwill one might attempt to have for you.

Yes, there are 44 pages filled with pain and suffering and well-intentioned information. This forum isn't strictly to get the word out about the newest and greatest scams that are populating the publishing industry, but is also a therapeutic outlet with others who understand. Some people need to hang on to their anger for various reasons, and it isn't up to any of us to define what is whining or a curative vent. You are telling people it's time to move on and quit crying, and I'd like to know just who appointed you the Keeper of Emotions.

If you don't like what you're reading here, go elsewhere. But to insist that everyone base their emotional strengths according to SimonSays is arrogant and rude. Emotions are like belly buttons; everybody has one and a little respect goes a long, long way.

[FM St George]

actually, page ONE of this thread is dated 11/19/03; November 19, 2003.

so in seven months you have 44 pages - considering that most of these are discussions going back and forth between posters debating the merits of PA (yes, they do have their defenders who come in and attempt to justify their decisions) that's still under seven pages a month - and with some posts taking up almost a page itself, not exactly a good example of a lengthy thread on a "pity party".

the length of the post itself is also due to the "restriction" put on that ALL PA discussions be limited to a single thread, to avoid having a slew of different threads bleeding all over the different boards about PublishAmerica; so that also has added to the length and longevity of the thread as well. There's been posts discussing contract negotiations; bad editing and a variety of conversations about pricing and selling of PA books - hardly the example you think it is.

:D

[SimonSays]

Priceless - this board is the background check board - where people come to see if an agent or publisher they are considering is or is not reputable. Most of the threads on the Background Check Board do exactly that.

It has been suggested that the information I have posted about the publishing world belongs elsewhere. I contend that the commiserating and venting belongs on a "support" or "rant" board NOT a background check board. I don't think it's fair that people have to wade through pages and pages of griping before hitting on one pertinent fact about why one should stay away from PA. Your point about the Authors Market website sounding like a “an amateurish diatribe that sounds as if someone snapped their bras in gym class” is true. But what you don’t realize is that to those who know nothing about PA, some of the postings on this board come across EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

There are people who have issues with pretty much every company out there legit or not. Do a google search for the phrase “sucks.com” and see what comes up. Sites for griping about every company from Amazon to Walmart. There are millions of people who are quite happy with Amazon and Walmart - so generally speaking, many may be inclined to take the obviously emotional Amazon bashing with a grain of salt.

You and others are emotionally invested in the issue of PA – and as such sometimes come off somewhat irrational, even if your position is valid. And I never said, stated, or implied that your position wasn't valid. A less emotional approach would be far more helpful to those seeking to gain knowledge.

[SRHowen]

I have no emotional investment in PA at all. I am repped by a top NY agent, and have my novel under consideration by three major publishers--yes at the same time.

It does seem to me that you came here to bash people--hey they don't know how to research--GIVE yourself a grand pat on the back because hey you know how to do it! Oh and anyone here is only whining--good for them, at least they have a place to vent their frustrations. Unlike you who seems to need to knock others down to feel good about yourself. gotta love a bully.

Pick up your toys and quit throwing sand the people in the sandbox don't need to be knocked down by you when they are already in the dirt.

44 pages--well, there a lot more pages professing the good of PA out there on the internet. Balance has to come somewhere and if this is where those hurt by PA choose to vent anger and share that anger then who the heck are you to tell them they have no right to?

Shawn

[SimonSays]

Obviously Shawn you did not bother to read my last posting. Or else you read it and did not understand it. Or else you read it and understood it, but chose to be insulting rather than to consider unemotionally what I said.

I am very sorry if people are upset by the fact that I advocate research and personal responsibility. I am very sorry that people feel insulted because I pointed out that they may have prevented being victimized if they had been better informed to begin with - but the fact remains that the more you know, the less likely you are of becoming a victim of scammers. I am very sorry (and sad) that people cannot understand the concept that questioning if you did all you could do - does not in any way shape or form absolve the scammers of their wrongdoing.

I am very sorry if people are upset that I suggested that there may be better venues for this venting. I personally never would have clicked on a message board dedicated to venting or ranting or griping or whatever.

The fact remains that people who are investigating PA do not need to hear a symphony of hard luck stories to get the message that PA is not what they appear to be. Maybe you are the one who looks down on the potential victims, I believe they are smart enough to get the message after hearing a couple of facts and one or two personal examples. You apparently do not have the same faith in your fellow man as I do.

[DaveKuzminski]

It might be worth noting if you read through the pages in this particular forum that we post mainly to counter the comments made by the trolls who are supporting the scammers. If we don't, other new writers might get the impression that those trolls are telling the truth.

We also ask for information from those who visit here to post their complaints or who post a verification of the poor treatment or defrauding they received.

AND like I've stated before, it's not our job to tell others that they should have performed adequate research in the first place. It's not our job to make them feel even smaller and more vulnerable. This is mainly a place to exchange information and guidance along with some warnings. It's a place where we can remind them that all is not lost and that there are ways to pick up the pieces.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I contend that the commiserating and venting belongs on a "support" or "rant" board NOT a background check board.<hr></blockquote>

One is not offered. No one is forcing you to stay and attempt to change how people express themselves. Since you have stated that you already know how to do a thorough search for scam publishers, why bother with this board at all? If you came to impart sincere, heartfelt advice, terrific. That is why this board exists. But to imply indifference to people's suffering will not endear you to thosee whose pain is very real. After all, aren't these the very people you are looking to advise?

You are wrong that I am emotionally involved with regards to my publisher. I'm not. I bless my experiences because of the fabulous experiences I've gained. I'm able to look at what needs to be done about my book with a very clear and unfettered mind. That doesn't mean that I've lost the ability to feel for those who are still hurting and stuck in a darker place. Some people need their anger to keep them motivated to finish the job. I'm certainly not one to judge since I'm not walking in their Doc Martens.

You have mixed in your attempts at some very helpful tips with an air of arrogance. It's a shame because I feel you genuinely care about people finding an honest publisher. But your message can't help but become lost against your abrasive attitude.

Of course I realize that some of the rants that go on here are the flip side of what goes on with some publisher's boards, and attempts at clarity may fall short of the mark. However, if one takes the time to read beyond the anger, they will see the genuine substance.

This isn't about crying in one's beer because they aren't on the N.Y. Times Best Seller or the fact that they need to market their books. This is about smearing the reputations of those who dare step outside the mold, missing royalties, empty promises made on websites, dishonesty regarding editing, a no return policy that makes getting into bookstores difficult.

These are concrete issues, Simon. So while the complaining may grate on you like nails on a chalkboard, the message still comes through loud and clear.

[SimonSays]

Actually I ascribe to the belief that "knowledge is power". By educating people or giving people the tools to acquire the knowledge themselves, you do not "make them feel even smaller and more vulnerable" you actually empower them, strengthen them and give them hope that they can keep themselves from being taken in in the future.

[AnneMarble]

This is filled with an amateurish diatribe that sounds as if someone snapped their bras in gym class.

:rofl

They would be far better served if they simply took this entire page out. Any company that spends an inordinate amount of time defending themselves by smearing their detractors gives the impression that perhaps there is a grain of truth to those detractor’s claims. Bad tactics in my opinion.

Not might explain why what's-her-face in that newspaper article claimed "no knowledge" of the site. :b

I remember some of the dismayed posts from SF/fantasy on the PA board when that site originally went up. I wonder if some people first realized there was something fishy after reading that site?...

[SimonSays]

Hey Priceless,

Yes, I actually was trying to impart sincere, heartfelt advice and give helpful, useful information.

If you had not noticed by the tone of my posts I happen to be quite passionate about my belief in educating oneself.

I also have concerns that if you merely commiserate and do not educate then you run the risk of setting people up for falling for a different type of scam somewhere down the line. Whereas if you tell them, or encourage them to learn about how the world of publishing actually operates, then they will know when things are out of sorts, and immediately move on. They will know where to go to verify sales, etc. They will know what to expect, what is and is not acceptable. They will no longer be an 'easy mark' for any publishing related scam.

And if it makes me appear arrogant to believe that and say that, well then I guess I am arrogant. And I have to say, that if I had been unfortunate enough to be a victim of PA, I wish that if I came to a forum like this, I would receive more than just moral support. I would hope that those who knew about the publishing world would share their knowledge with me and encourage me to take the measures that I would need to, to protect myself - just as I would hope that if I were ever the victim of a violent crime, that along with the physical therapy and emotional therapy - someone might also suggest that I take a self-defense class.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I happen to be quite passionate about my belief in educating oneself.<hr></blockquote>
On this we agree, as I'm certain we would on other topics. I have not doubted your sincerity. It's your delivery that overshadows your benevolence. If you truly desire your message to be heard, then expressing yourself with a bit more tact may garner better results. We're all in this together, right? That's all I'm trying to say. Far more understanding and clarity is gleaned with an empathetic delivery any day.

[SimonSays]

Ah, tact. Tact is not my strong suit, never was - which actually is why I picked the name SimonSays.

I knew that the tone of my posts were more Simon Cowell then Paula Abdul.

Well, I do hope that at least some people could get past the tone, to the message. Although I must say that I feel I got as much crap for the message as I got for the tone, as my first few posts were pretty innocuous in tone and yet they were not embraced with open arms.

[vstrauss]

>>This board is 44 pages. 44 pages of warnings and whining (mostly whining). If someone has not gotten the message about PA after the first 4 pages, let alone the first 4 posts, well...... what can i say?<<

45 pages now, and you are on 10 of them, with 2-3 posts per page, reiterating pretty much the same position in each post. You've done more than many of the people here to add to the volume of this thread.

As I said before, I think this is a stupid argument, which stopped needing amplification about 9 pages back. I suspect that most of us are actually in agreement on the basics. At this point it's just infinite hair-splitting.

I'll also say that it's easy to be complacent about a particular bad experience when you've been lucky enough or diligent enough to have steered clear of it. You avoided the bad thing; you therefore can't imagine why everyone else wasn't also able to avoid it, and conclude that those who failed to do so are stupid. If PA victims are indulging in a pity party, you're indulging in a judgment party. I find it unpleasant.

- Victoria

[KW]

Simon said,

"The fact remains that people who are investigating PA do not need to hear a symphony of hard luck stories to get the message that PA is not what they appear to be."

I don't agree Simon. If someone clicked on this board and saw one bad story about PA they might think it was a one time thing or an unhappy author causing problems. Now if they come here and see the same thing over, and over, and over then they might realize that, "hey, this is really happening. These people are scammers."

Like you said click on sucks.com and see people rant about Wal-Mart, etc. You said most people like Wal-Mart so a few people moaning about them really don't amount to much. Same scenario here. If only a handful of people did it, it might not be so bad. If a large majority did, then there might be a problem.

KW

[SimonSays]

Victoria,

I never said, nor do I think those who were taken in by PA lack intelligence - I said they lacked knowledge - a different thing entirely.

It is those who take the position that it is too difficult to find the information or to get educated who are the one's that are not giving PA victims enough credit. You are the ones who are treating them like they are too weak and helpless to take care of themselves or to take measures to protect themselves in the future or stand up for themselves if they have been scammed. I find that rather unpleasant.

I happen to have more faith in them than that.

[aka eraser]

I think if folks stop responding to what SimonSays says he'll stop SimonSaying it.

Then this particular puppy can be put to bed and we can wait for something new-ish on PA to appear.

[Betty W01]

I think Frank is right. And it begins to be obvious why he's got a new title... congrats, Frank, welcome to the Mod Squad!

[SimonSays]

Betty, you should never assume anything - although in this case, you may be right. If people stopped pissing me off I probably wouldn't bother with this board anymore.

I've said what I had to say. If it had penetrated the first time there would have been no reason to say anything more. But I have always seen thick skulls as a challenge - and no, the skulls I am referring to our not attached to bodies of the PA'ers, they are attached to the dragon slayers - who cannot see the bigger picture beyond their mission.

And now, if you would all be kind enough to let me have the last word, we can put this whole matter to bed.

[Betty W01]

anything...

anything...??

Does anyone out there have something new to add to this?

Good.

[reph]

SimonSaid: "I've said what I had to say. If it had penetrated the first time there would have been no reason to say anything more. But I have always seen thick skulls as a challenge."

Simon, don't interpret disagreement with your position as failure to understand it.

[emeraldcite]

congrats, Frank, welcome to the Mod Squad!

hey, i want a super secret decoder ring too! :bang


:rofl

[FM St George]

well, here's someone who's getting a clue... unfortunately, after the fact.

and look, even HB has trouble getting HIS books into stores...

JaclynGray



6/27/2004
10:02:24
Subject: Anyone have books at Borders,Waldens, b.Dalton?


Message:
Message:
Hello Everyone!


I was wondering if anyone actually has any of their books on the bookstore shelves?

If so, how did you get them there? How receptive were store owners/ managers?

Any information would be awesome.

Thanks in advance.,
Jaclyn Gray

The Beauty of Reflection
Life Inspired Poems
WWW.JaclynGray.BraveHost.com (Http://WWW.JaclynGray.BraveHost.com)



Joyce Ann

6/27/2004
10:59:43
RE: Anyone have books at Borders,Waldens, b.Dalton


Message:
Two bookstores (local Barnes & Noble and BAM) told
me they order books wholesale and they must be
returnable. They did, however, suggest a group
signing if the book was approved by the bookstore
purchasing dept. They also told me they would
consider ordering a few and would be glad to order if
customers requested it. Submit synopsis, ISBN, etc. or
a copy of the book to the book store manager. That was
my first experience. The manager told me to contact
her when I had the price, ISBN, etc. and she would look
it up in the computer. Others have better information on
this.

When my book is released, I will pursue it. In the
meanwhile, I am seeking information on the board as
well.

Joyce Ann

tim186

6/27/2004
19:53:02

Memories Die Last
RE: Anyone have books at Borders,Waldens, b.Dalton?


Message:
Jaclyn, I got mine on the shelves at 2 Borders (Dayton & Cincinnati)a B. Dalton in Dayton and a BAMM-owned megastore called Books & Company, all from working with the area marketing managers and arranging signings at each. It wasn't easy and required a lot of follow-up, but eventually happened. Judging from other folks' experiences, I was surprised that Borders and B. Dalton ordered books themselves. I haven't had any success with B & N aside from the offer of a panel-type thing, but other posters on the boards in different parts of the country have had better luck. It all depends on where you are and how receptive the managers are.

Tim Smith

HB Marcus

6/27/2004
22:21:18

H. B. Marcus
CRISPY
The Joe Schmoe Show
RE: Anyone have books at Borders,Waldens, b.Dalton?


Message:
I'm at Waldens now. I was at B&N but the manager is a twit. PA even made a call for me to Borders in the area. The manager there is on crack or something. But at least the Waldens keeps me replaced as soon as they sell. I'm at quite a few libraries in the area also.
*************

mind you, he also calls all PA detractors "terrorists"; so...

:D

expect this thread to be gone when the PA drones wake up in a few hours....

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>PA even made a call for me to Borders in the area.<hr></blockquote>
Wow. They do that? Who knew? Shouldn't they put that on their website as a selling tool?

[CaoPaux]

Although not a complaint per se, I found this discussion interesting in terms of comparing clauses:

Movie Rights? (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/main/9854.htm)

[AC Crispin]

It should be noted that a depressingly large percentage of people who get scammed by fake literary agents or publishers are elderly, or invalids. Some are getting senile. I've known scammers to zero in on mentally retarded folks, too.

These people often don't have internet access, or, if they do, they aren't very web-savvy. They also often don't have the strength to engage in long searches.

Also, scammees are thirsting for validation regarding their writing the way someone dumped 10 miles from Barstow on a summer afternoon would be thirsting after the first mile or so.

I deeply resent Simon's comment to Victoria Strauss, who works more tirelessly than almost any SFWA volunteer I've ever encountered (and I include myself -- recently awarded the Service to SFWA Presidential Award).

Simon, when you're a year or two into querying agents and publishes, and have been forced to partake of that Dish of Desperation, and are feeling that Thirst for Validation, maybe you'll learn some human compassion. But I doubt it.

Now make your last post, because I KNOW you won't let me get the last word. You already said you wouldn't.

I just couldn't sit here and see my partner dissed by the likes of you. Victoria is a mensch. YOU are not.

-Ann C. Crispin
Writer Beware
Chair, SFWA Committee on Writing Scams

[SimonSays]

Anne, I will never have the "thirst for validation" because I don't have the need to be validated in that way, which is not to say I do not want publishing success, but I don't need publishing success to be happy or fullfilled or "validated" because I have a very fulfilling, happy life.

I have worked very hard to get to that place, incidentally.

And if you had read my previous posts, you would know that I realize that there will be a lot of rejection on this road and I have prepared myself for that rejection. Which is why I also pointed out that I think there should be more care taken on this board to give people a realistic view of chances for success in the world of legitimate publishing. People deserve to know what they are up against so that they can determine if it's something they want to expose themself or not.

As for my comment to Victoria. I have repeatedly said over and over and over again that I admire and respect what you, Victoria and Dave do. I never "went after" any individual on this board until they 'dissed' me. And Victoria implied that I was heartless and accused me of saying that the victims were stupid - which I never said.

Some of you people seem to have no problem attacking those who voice dissent and then turn around and accuse them of being mean when they counter-punch. I believe that you are probably all really nice individuals - but there is a group mind-set here that shouts down ANY differing viewpoint, even if that viewpoint does not support or defend PA.

As for whether or not I'm a mensch or not - who are you to say? You know absolutely nothing about me or my life other than the fact that I believe in personal responsiblity and self-education. These are not necessarily positions one would automatically associate with a cruel, uncaring human being. Yet you have. Which I think speaks far more of your worldview than mine.

[DaveKuzminski]

Hmmm, let's see...

Do we conduct smear campaigns by libeling others by name as pornographers?

Do we purchase Internet domains using a trademark that belongs to someone else?

Do we fabricate facts in our advertising and then put a disclaimer in our contracts?

Give yourself one point for each yes answer. If your score is zero, then you may be a terrorist.

[SimonSays]

Dave - I'm gonna assume your last post was in reaction to something other than my own. A little point of reference might be helpful.

Simon

[FM St George]

I believe it is reference to a note in MY post where I point out that HB Marcus, one of PublishAmerica's biggest fans, has now taken to calling any detractor a "terrorist" - it's his new cute word for any who dare to question the godly image of PA...

sorry for the confusion there - there should be an easier way to do quoting, I figure...

[Nameless65]

I was wondering if we could maybe get this thread pointed in a more positive direction by pointing out things an author can do to protect him/herself.

1. Learn the industry (this is the most important one).
2. Assume everyone is trying to rip you off – research accordingly. I’d wouldn’t be surprised if, for every one legitimate agent/publisher there are 100 illegitimate ones. Try including the word “SCAM” or “RIPOFF” to narrow your internet search for the target agent or publisher.
3. Don’t accept the first positive or negative response. I think this one is the trickiest. Don’t accept one person’s opinion. Their expectations and/or experience may be very different from yours – research them. For example, can you find their books in B&N, Borders, Amazon? Why did they like them? By the same token you don’t want to discard a company due to one disgruntled person’s negative opinion. Find out why they didn’t like the agent or publisher. To be honest I’m suspicious of any opinion that’s overly positive or overly negative.
4. Writer's Market and Writer's Digest are your friends.
5. If something looks too good to be true, it usually is. The publishing industry is tough, very tough. If someone offers you a way to get into it that’s easy (or easier) – find out why.

[SimonSays]

Great information Nameless - and important things that all writers need to be aware of!

[Betty W01]

If something looks too good to be true, it usually is. The publishing industry is tough, very tough. If someone offers you a way to get into it that’s easy (or easier) – find out why.

If this board ever decides to add a section called "Words to the Wise", the above statement ought to be given the place of honor. Great advice!!

[SimonSays]

Betty, could you start a word to the wise board that would always stay near the top of the background check board like the common beginner mistakes threads are on some of the other boards?

That way people could put up general tips on what to look for and what to avoid. Not info related to any particular scammer, just general things to know and suggested websites etc.

[Betty W01]

Good idea, SimonSays. I'll run it by Queen Jenna.

[SimonSays]

thanks, Betty

[DaveKuzminski]

However, make sure that writers understand they should be checking the brick and mortar bookstores and not the online kind. There are many books that are available only online and not at a physical store location. This is partly how PA gets away with its false advertising. They claim that their books are available at some big name stores. That is partly true in that their books are available online at those big name stores.

[vstrauss]

>>2. Assume everyone is trying to rip you off<<

I think this is a dangerous mindset. If writers approach their publication search this way, they run the risk of thinking themselves into not trusting anyone, which may make it very hard for them to work with a legitimate agent and/or publisher, should they find one. At some point you do need to trust the judgment of a reputable professional--and if you've been assuming for a long time that everyone's out to get you, it may prove very difficult to give your trust to anyone. Which could screw up your relationship with your reputable agent, if it drives you to second guess him all the time (I've seen this happen, by the way).

I'm not saying writers should be credulous, or that caution isn't in order--but a better approach is to determine to avoid the ripoff artists right from the start, by learning about legitimate practice (and thus learning how to recognize illegitimate practice) and researching the agents and publishers you approach ahead of time (i.e., before you mail the query letter).

Besides, everyone is not out to get you--only the scumbags.

>>4. Writer's Market and Writer's Digest are your friends.<<

Um. I've written for Writer's Digest, but I have to say that there's a lot of bad and/or misleading information in that magazine. I don't think any of the writers' magazines provide a very accurate view of publishing, and honestly I'd urge anyone who is serious about a writing career to skip them. Unless you already have some experience, it's just too hard to sort the good information from the bad. I also think there are much better guides out there than Writer's Market.

- Victoria

[AnneMarble]

I think this is a dangerous mindset. If writers approach their publication search this way, they run the risk of thinking themselves into not trusting anyone, which may make it very hard for them to work with a legitimate agent and/or publisher, should they find one.

Good point. Paranoia is useful only up to a point. I imagine that overly paranoid writers are the ones who end up doing things like copyrighting their stories before sending them off (I've heard that can sometimes make things difficult for the publisher to use the story) or even accusing potential publishers of stealing their ideas. They must be incredibly hard to work with. :head

[Nameless65]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Besides, everyone is not out to get you--only the scumbags.<hr></blockquote>
No, but how do you tell the difference? I’m not saying to “treat” everyone like they are scumbags just to research them like they might be. I’d rather be suspicious and prove myself wrong (through research) than trusting and wrong. I agree though that there comes a point where you’re just going to have to trust someone.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I don't think any of the writers' magazines provide a very accurate view of publishing, and honestly I'd urge anyone who is serious about a writing career to skip them.<hr></blockquote>
I’ve read Writer’s Digest issues and they’re usually informative from both a writing skills and industry aspect. Are they the end all in publishing information? No, but I find them to be more credible than a lot of things I read online.

The bottom line is if you thoroughly research the industry (through more than just one source) you’re going a long way to protecting yourself. It’s not a guarantee against being ripped off but it’s far better than blind trust.

[SimonSays]

My thinking is if you know the basics of how publishing works, you will have a built-in early warning system of when things may be amiss. You may not be able to totally prevent yourself from being scammed but you will seriously cut down on the possibility of it happening to you.

For example if you know that the vast majority of agents do NOT advertise for new clients because they are flooded with unsolicited queries, then when you see a classified ad in the paper or a link at the top of these pages to ST or Desert Rose or whoever, you will automatically be skeptical - and either move on or at least do some serious research before proceeding.

Or if you KNOW that legit agents normally list their clients and recent sales - then you will automatically be skeptical of an agent who refuses to give them out, or like ST, laughingly refers to their clients as: John C. or Eleanor B.

That's the kind of stuff I think should be on a "word to the wise" board. Basic knowlege of how publishing works. 'Cause if you know how it works, you won't be sucked in by the big lies.

[Ed Williams 3]

www.publishamerica.com/cg...e/4736.htm (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4736.htm)

It's a PA author who has gotten a literary agent, and wants to know if PA will release her from her contract.

"I know this is probably a tacky question, but.....I have asked PA twice and haven't received a reply. Does anyone know if it is possible to be released from the PA contract and/or how to go about doing it? I THINK I have an agent for my second book, and he has expressed an interest in promoting my first book also, if I can be released from the contract. Any information would be appreciated. You can contact me by e-mail if you wish at *****. Thanks in advance for any assistance."

My money says, if PA sniffs some money in the water they'll hold her book forever. Thoughts?

[FM St George]

gone now!

[sfsassenach]

Trust But Verify always works.

[DeePower]

I would be happy to contribute to such a board.

As an example we surveyed over 100 editors and agents at major publishing houses and literary agencies of all sizes and asked them questions such as what is the most common reason they decline a manuscript, what is the most critical mistake writers make when approaching agencies for representation, and what are the characteristics of a successful book?

Oh, the most common reason editors decline a nonfiction book is that the author's platform is too small, and for fiction, the quality of writing is poor.

And did you know that agencies receive, on the average, 90 unsolicited query letters, proposals, or manuscripts a week and only take on 11 new clients every year? That means that they accept less than 2 writers in 1000 for representation.

Dee
www.BrianHillAndDeePower.com (http://www.BrianHillAndDeePower.com)

[CaoPaux]

IIRC from a thread a month or so back, the intent is to convince the EPA to endorse POD as being more environmentally friendly than traditional publishing. I.e., fewer books printed = fewer trees killed, and there aren’t millions of books being pulped when the Powers That Be pull your book off the shelf after three months, etc., etc.

EPA Response (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4739.htm)

[vstrauss]

>>That means that they accept less than 2 writers in 1000 for representation.<<

This statistic sounds scary--but only if you assume that all 1000 writers are publishable. In fact it's likely that less than 100 of them even approach publishability, and 50 or fewer are ready for prime time.

If your work is marketable, you're not in competition with every writer out there, but only with the top 10% or so.

- Victoria

[sfsassenach]

but they do accept ads from some dodgy sources, including agencies that charge reading fees and "editing services."

IMO, their editorial skews to beginners, so after a year or so of reading it, there's very little more to learn.

[CaoPaux]

I found this interesting:

SDSchaffer1

6/27/2004
01:13:31

“…When I received my proofs, I also received an email that explained how to proof-read and what to and not to change. One thing the email said was that PA signs the contract with you for your book as it is delivered to them….”

Talk About Good Editing! (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/newauthors/1614.htm)

[SRHowen]

I agree that it is skewed toward beginners--but there is a need for that sort of thing as well. But once you make it past the--I'll say wanna be stage--after you have those piles of rejections or an agent or a publisher--then the magazine and many of the how to books loose their luster very quickly.

Shawn

[FM St George]

I don't know... I don't mind getting articles that may seem to be rehashing the same concepts over and over because *I* may not be getting it on the first read...

heck, there's WORSE magazines to spend your money on...

:)

[CaoPaux]

This seems to be worth preserving. ebooks and PA (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4749.htm)

-----
michellet
6/30/2004
09:58:37

Message:
I don't believe PA has the rights to our books other than in paper format, so we can do what we want in regard to publishing it as an e-book.

Am I correct? A few people said they emailed PA about this and didn't get a response.

I know we retain the audio rights as I asked them about this months ago and am planning to record an audio cd of my book to sell at readings along with the print book.

Anyone know for sure about e-books?

Michelle

-----
shannonds
6/30/2004
10:02:48

Message:
Michelle,
I don't recall anything about ebooks being mentioned in the contract but I am not sure. The only thing I would know to do is to continue to email PA about it. I am sure they will answer your question sooner or later.

Shannon Stafford
"Inspiration Through The Years"
ISBN: 1-4137-4228-9
http://www.geocities.com/shannonds/homepage.html
http://www.publishedauthors.net/shannonstafford
http://shannonstafford.bravehost.com/

-----
Infocenter
Administrator
6/30/2004
13:35:20

Message:
PA owns your book's e-rights. Check Par. 9 of your contract.
You own the audio and movie rights, though.

-----
JLRutter
6/30/2004
20:09:06

Message:
I have a couple questions:

What does that mean? Does PA publish our book as an e-book?

My other question is this: if we get an offer to have our book made into a movie, do we make 100% on royalties?

(I filed away my contract...then forgot where)

Joy

-----
Infocenter
Administrator
6/30/2004
20:22:52

Message:
Does PA publish our book as an e-book?
Answer: we may. We have done it in the past, we may do it in the future.

...if we get an offer to have our book made into a movie, do we make 100% on royalties?
Answer: yes.

-----
gannon1212
6/30/2004
20:28:00

Message:
Paragraph 9 of the contract states that their sale of e-books will result in the same royalties to you noted in paragraph 3.

Paragraph 8 states:
All compensation received by the Publisher for the dramatic or motion picture rights, or for the first serial right prior to book publication, or for foreign, radio, dramatic, cheap-edition, television and/or all rights in said literary work shall be similary divided between the Author and the Publisher , as hereabove set forth (50% - 50%)

To JL
You might want to think about a file folder for each book that would include a copy of the contract with the real relavent points high lighted in yellow.

-----
JLRutter
6/30/2004
21:52:50

Message:
LOL Gannon, Yes, thank you for the advice. I have the contract and could probably locate if I wanted to backhoe through my anti-feng shui nightmare of a file system designed by an ADD poster child such as myself...but uh...what were we discussing? Oh, movie rights. Hmm. Now I'm really confused. You say 50%, but the PA dude says we get 100%.

Where's the PA guy? Never mind...I'm going to bed before my head pops.

Joy

-----
SandyDe
7/01/2004
10:48:18

Message:
What paragraph 8 means is that IF you request PA to handle the issue of movie rights for you then PA gets 50% and you get 50%. Otherwise, if you handle it yourself, you get the entire 100%.

Hope that helps....

Sandy
www.sandyslibrary.com

-----
SaraPrice
7/01/2004
11:28:47

Message:
OK it is true. In paragraph nine they do reserve exclusive rights to the electronic format. But the question is, do they ever do that, and are they going to do it for us. Its almost as if they don't want us to sell books and e-books. i don't know. I am really confused and discouraged.
Sara

-----
JLRutter
7/01/2004
12:24:14

Message:
Tnank you, Sandy, for clarify that movie thing. I have been befuddled on that since I signed the contract.

Sara, don't be discouraged. Perhaps, in response to the PA guy's message about 5 up from mine, if enough authors requested that PA offer our work in e-book form, with the standard 50%-80% royalty, maybe they will consider it. It would be a great way for PA to offer our books for review without out-of-pocket costs, IF the reviewer will accept it that way...and another way to sell our books. More and more people are buying PDAs and like storing books in that format. Just an idea. :)

Joy
------


IIRC, PA dropped ebooks because they were caught using the same ISBN for the ebook as the printed version.

[PixelFish]

The one time in the last year that I picked up a Writer's Digest, it actually had a bit of an article written by our hostess here, Jenna.

By and large, I ignore Writers Digest unless they feature a writer whose work I enjoy. I need to get my subscription to Locus set up for my new address though.

[KW]

DJ, you seem to be supporting PA again, but the last I heard you were trying your best to get out of your contract since PA lied to you about pricing your book competitively. (And I know this because I got an email from you a long time back saying this.)

Are you for or against PA, I'm getting confused.

KW

[DaveKuzminski]

Someone appears to have forgotten something.

Betty, are the rules still in effect or not?

[SimonSays]

Dave -

I have to admit I was quite disappointed that Jenna set-up a general tips on avoiding scam board, specifically requested in one of the first paragraphs that you (along with James, Victoria et. al.) contribute to the board - and all you did was comment on the postcard idea in the article Jenna posted, pushed for the inclusion of the P&E logo on such postcards, and promoted the P&E tchokes at cafe press.

I was actually hoping you would contribute more substitive information. Maybe things that could actually help people avoid being taken in by the scammers.

I humbly request that you do so now.

Thank you,
Simon

[Ed Williams 3]

....or let Dave respond in kind. I hope everyone here sees who launched yet another attack, and who can't seem to let this go. In fact, my vote would be to ban him from this board period, as enough is enough, and some of his "dialogue" is so incredibly mean spirited and hateful that there can be no doubt as to what his true intentions are. He elevates being a PA hack to a new level, and offers nothing to this board's denizens except the occasional venomous attack on one of our regulars. I am very much starting to understand why DJ is "published" by the likes of PA.

If DJ is banned, at least maybe a new PA shill would be sent here to enter the debate, one with a new, more interesting approach, perhaps?

[DaveKuzminski]

SimonSays, offering ideas is not like turning a spigot on and off. Jenna's contribution was excellent. At that point, I could only compliment her on posting one idea that hadn't occurred to me even though it's an idea that will work only for a few authors. After all, how many authors will take the time to help another author in such a situation?

At the same time, I felt I was contributing something by hinting that a postcard bearing the name of a writing site might give the request a bit more weight. That is why I suggested also that Jenna get a CafePress store. If she similarly makes available a pithy comment with her Absolute Write logo on the back of a postcard, that might also figure into the payer's decision on whether to pay even if only a few such postcards are received. However, I didn't feel I needed to go into this much detail when suggesting it.

While I think that the idea of a "general tips on scams" topic is nice, it's the type of material that needs more organization with an appropriate menu so that writers can find exactly what they need to learn about in the least amount of time. If you're looking for agency scams, you want to get to those immediately. Not later after wading through failure to pay and any other topics that warrant similar tips. In other words, a potentially lengthy topic with no organization is not the best way to get that kind of information across. Writers will not want to dig through what may become pages and pages of unmenued information.

As well, I have my own site to operate and contribute information to. At Jenna's, I'm merely a participant in the forum because it offers one of the better opportunities for two-way communication.

By the way, what are "tchokes"?

[emeraldcite]

While I think that the idea of a "general tips on scams" topic is nice, it's the type of material that needs more organization with an appropriate menu so that writers can find exactly what they need to learn about in the least amount of time. If you're looking for agency scams, you want to get to those immediately. Not later after wading through failure to pay and any other topics that warrant similar tips. In other words, a potentially lengthy topic with no organization is not the best way to get that kind of information across. Writers will not want to dig through what may become pages and pages of unmenued information

I was doing something like this in the novels section. I was going through and organizing links to different sections of the board. Then the ezboard system went down, and they changed the web addy for absolutewrite, which screwed up all my links.

Then it struck me that even if I got all the material organized and on the web, if they did that again, it would render the FAQ section in Novels useless.

[sfsassenach]

By the way, what are "tchokes"?

Yiddish for "knickknacks."

[DaveKuzminski]

Well, at least I now know that it's not how you strangle a tzar.

[AC Crispin]

The last thing I read from Canada James had him saying that he was quite satisfied with his PA book.

I doubt he's changed his tune. Or, if he did think otherwise nowadays, it would take a very brave man to admit it, after he defended PA tooth and nail before his book was released.

I hope that now that PA has dropped their option clause that James can get a commercial publisher for his next book, though.

No matter how many people sing the praises of PA, I have seen only a handful who, after their PA book is actually released, continue to insist that PA publication is to be preferred over publication by a commercial house.

-Ann C. Crispin

[aka eraser]

Banning should be a very last resort. I'd prefer to see Dave take the high road and just not respond to DJ's latest salvo. It will fade into obscurity as this thread inevitably expands.

If DJ continues then we'll have to consider removing posts and/or other steps.

[DaveKuzminski]

aka eraser, I know you're well intentioned, but some things cannot be ignored. To do so would be to invite those who do not know better to believe a falsehood. Even worse, it encourages those who spread such statements into spouting even worse. Consequently, if you have a reputation that's worth defending, then failure to do so will lose it because your critics will throw all the mud possible until something sticks or is not refuted so that they can then state to others that everything they stated must be true since their last attack wasn't defended against because it was true.

Personally, I agree with you in that I don't want to see anyone banned from this board. Nor do I want to have their remarks stricken, though I must admit there are some instances where clearly hate-filled remarks, that are typically posted by juveniles, should be removed. One does not need a topic where message after message consists of a four-letter expletive followed by the identification of some group or individual. Beyond that, I feel that individuals should be free to state their positions and how they feel regarding various issues.

[CWGranny]

Since all Dave asked was that the points be answered and he isn't supposed to answer them, I got a minute...

* Do you conduct smear campaigns against those who defend you when libeled as a pornographer?
No he didn't -- he never smeared anyone and certainly not anyone who defended him.

* Do you smear others when their opinions or experiences don't match your own?
Uh...that was covered in number one. However, as I remember drawing on my memory of the past...there was a slap fight going on between Dave and some young'un here for a while. I believe both boys gave about as good as they got. They got pink cheeks but probably not much smearing. They sure got all worked up, though.

* Do you ask for private, personal information and then claim you owe them no privacy unless they deserve it *in your opinion*?
I ain't never seen this happen but I think we oughta put this one on the tips list -- "don't give out your private information if you want it to stay private" -- you know, I knew a little ol' gal like that one time. She told her private business to everyone who didn't have the sense to run off first. Then she complained that people were talking about her. Duh. I wonder how that happened.

Gran

[Deejay816]

I am still trying to figure out why Robert Bly would sign with PA (according to the message board, he has done just that). He is a well-known poet and I've taught some of his anti-Vietnam poetry in literature classes. I wonder what they offered him to get him to sign?

Deej

[SimonSays]

Wow, emerald what a sad philosophy. "Why even bother doing it at all, since the board may someday at sometime go down?"

Just imagine if the whole world thought the way you do. "Why bother developing an antibiotic for this bacteria? Eventually the germs will become immune and it will no longer be effective."

"Why bother learning this computer program? In a few years it will be obsolete."

And Dave as for your excuses - if you had posted TIPS instead of website plugs your input would have been right at the top of the board under Jenna's - no need to wade through the muck to get to it.

Yet I can see how it is a far better use of your time and talents to participate on these boards by engaging in childish arguments with the PA defenders.

Do you honestly believe that people who are researching PA are reading every post on these threads - riveted to every tit and tat to help them draw a logical conclusion about PA? I would think they would only get MORE confused, because it is not just the PA defenders who come across as fanatical - and therefore you risk losing your credibility. To be honest, if I hadn't known of P&E before I ever found this site, and the only things I knew about you were based on these posts, I would probably think you were some kind of a nut.

[DaveKuzminski]

The world does not operate according to either of our wishes. I can do only what I believe is best. I have no apologies to make to you for following my own course rather than the one you appear to believe I should take.

Now what are you doing to make things better?

[FM St George]

I'm of the opinion that they've offered him a small advance and the promise of exposure; or even stock in the company.

let's just say that he does his reputation a GREAT disservice being in the company of those at PublishAmerica...

:P

[CaoPaux]

Anyone brave enough to email him and ask? Or shall we flip a coin?

[Nameless65]

What I don’t understand is why he’d want to given how difficult it is to get PA's books into places like B&N and Borders. And it’s not like their royalties are that great either – 8% to 12%? For a published author? Given all the hassle an author has to put up with they should be offering 50%. Whatever deal he got, I think PA is the one that really benefits.

[SimonSays]

What am I doing to make things better?

Well let's see - I suggested that people go out and learn about how the publshing industry works, so they can greatly reduce or totally end the possibility that they will be taken in by scammers in the future.

I fear that this particular suggestion might have been completely drowned out by the sheer volume of attacks on me for suggesting it.

I listed in several posts some key information about how the industry works, being aware of these things will help avoid scammers.

When I see someone with incorrect information or requesting information - I supply what information I have.

I suggested Jenna start a general tips on avoiding scammers board - so that those with real knowledge could share their tips in one easy-to-find place that would be void of this kind of dialogue. I have not posted on the board yet because I was deferring to the experts, not wanting people to have to wade through my meager offerings to get to the info supplied by the experts.

As for anything else - spreading the word about scammers is not my mission in life. My spare time and energies are devoted to other things, that in my eyes at least are more dire - things like poverty, hunger, illiteracy.

But this is obviously your passion, and I know from personal experience that sometimes we get so mired in our passion and our indignation, that we lose sight of the forest for the trees.

It appears to me that you have done that, so I pointed it out. I think if you look back and assess this dispassionately - you would realize that posting some general tips on that other board would probably be more help to more people than all your posts on this board combined. Because you would be reaching people other than potential or actual PA victims and you would be giving them insight that will warn them off to any number of scam agents or publishers.

You are right, I have no control over whether or not those with knowledge, like yourself choose to share what they know on that board - but at least I tried.

[vstrauss]

>>I am still trying to figure out why Robert Bly would sign with PA (according to the message board, he has done just that).<<

Yeah, this is kinda bizarre. The post suggests he made the contact through his literary agent, which suggests either a teensy fib on PA's part or that his agent is senile.

- Victoria

[Deejay816]

Or both!

I thought it was odd when Jamie Farr signed - even if he isn't really that well-known I thought he (and his wife) could have found a better publisher who could have played on the name recognition a little more. But Bly is a writer - has been for years, and has won at least one national award. It's not as if he has faded into obscurity and is using PA as a way to make a comeback. I honestly hope he is not disappointed but cannot imagine that he won't be.

Deej

[DaveKuzminski]

I seriously believe that PublishAmerica will burn the fingers of a few celebrities before the word gets around within their circles as to the true nature of the firm they're dealing with. I can understand some celebrities wanting to be published because it looks better on their resumes. It shows that they were doing something between acting jobs even if it didn't pan out and merely helps to keep their name in front of the public.

SimonSays, if I might suggest this to you, I believe you might feel you're accomplishing more if you open your own web page. I'm not suggesting that you quit hanging out here. Only that you open a site where you can organize matters to your liking. The advantage in doing so is that you'll be upping the total number of pages and sites so that new writers will be even more likely to find a friendly port in which to learn.

[reph]

Tchoke? Oh, that. Leo Rosten (The Joys of Yiddish) gives two spellings: tsatske and tchotchke. Not just a knickknack: a toy, a trinket, a misfit, a loose woman, an ineffectual person - and some other meanings.

[lastr]

The spelling of the camel's name is different between the two. I also noted from their message board that they are no longer accepting children's books as well - must have been one of their last ones.

www.publishamerica.com/sh...Search=Yes (http://www.publishamerica.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?Search=Yes)

Hababy's Christmas Eve
Jamie and Joy Farr
Joy and Jamie Farr decided to put a children’s picture book together when someone asked, “Whatever happened to Jamie’s imaginary camel, Habeeby?” Great idea. Thus the creation of Habeeby and his family

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I seriously believe that PublishAmerica will burn the fingers of a few celebrities before the word gets around within their circles as to the true nature of the firm they're dealing with.<hr></blockquote>
I'm not so sure, Dave. I rather think PA will bend over backwards to treat the well-knowns like royalty. It's not a bad move on PA's part. They're looking for legitimcy and respect in the publishing world. It's far easier to grant concessions to a few than clean up their act for all.

I admit to some curiousity with regards to the quality of the editing these bigger names will receive, advances, and a return policy compared to everyone else's.<img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/Emoterofl5.gif" />

[SimonSays]

Fear not, dear Dave - I was using tchoke solely under it's "knicknack" definition.

If I were to use yiddish to describe you, I would probably say you are a little meshugana - but a mensch.

As for your suggestion that I start my own website - as I said, educating wannabe writers is not my mission - I neither have the time nor the inclination to do so. It is far simpler and less time-consuming to make constructive suggestions to you that will hopefully aid you in your mission.

As for PA and it's name and celebrity authors - I would not be surprised if PA used them as "loss leaders", that is they are willing to lose money on these contracts because they will leverage these contracts to bring in more suckers - uh I mean authors. They may even make good on the promises they make on the website - i.e. market the titles, get them in to brick and mortar stores. They may even offer to let stores return those books - or even more incredibly sell them at a discount. And they may have better luck getting the titles into stores, despite PA's reputation, because of the name recognition - and assumed built-in audience for the authors work. It is a worthwhile investment for PA to do so - and they do appear to be fairly savy business people - they have a business model that makes a lot of money and a contract that appears not so easy to break. So do not be surprised if Jamie Farr's book winds up in a bookstore near you.

[aka eraser]

If PA finagles a different (better) deal for their celebrities and does get them into brick and mortar stores how will that sit with their rank and file authors?

Some may well bask in the reflected glow from the new veneer of respectability but I have a hunch others might mutiny.

It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out for those of us hooked on this long-running soap.

[Ed Williams 3]

..that Mr. Bly would have a pretty savvy literary agent, and that the guarantees that are put into his contract are far different than what the typical PA author gets. This is actually pretty smart marketing - it makes it easier for PA to get more shills if they can point to a few celeb authors on their roster. Only problem for them is, what happens if one of the celebs gets disenchanted and goes public with it? The resultant publicity could be the thing that sinks our good friends over at PA.

[DaveKuzminski]

But aren't most, if not all, writers crazy and special?

[SimonSays]

no - the mensches of this world are few and far between

[DaveKuzminski]

Well, thank you for the compliment. That and a fan letter I received two days ago have done much to make me feel like I'm accomplishing something.

[SimonSays]

I am not the type of person who writes fan mail. But I really do admire what you do - although you may not have realized that in the heat of our...... debate.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Only problem for them is, what happens if one of the celebs gets disenchanted and goes public with it?<hr></blockquote>
This would be bad. However, there is no way in a million years that any 'name' will be treated like the rest of the cattle. No sireee, they will be the new PA royalty. A very good move on their part, I might add.

[Betty W01]

No. Not gonna happen.

Can someone help me out here? I cannot find the post in which the ground rules were laid down under which DK & DJ would be allowed to continue posting. I'd hate to see Jenna ban either of them, so I think another reminder (via a repost of the rules) may be in order. But I can't find the original post!!

If you can, please post the URL, with the subject line, RE: Dave & James, so I can find it again. Thanks...

[DaveKuzminski]

Try p197.ezboard.com/fabsolut...D=74.topic (http://p197.ezboard.com/fabsolutewritefrm32.showMessage?topicID=74.topic) and scroll down near the bottom of the first page for what you seek.

However, it appears that someone has totally removed that particular remark that violated Jenna's ruling.

[FM St George]

I do think that if his agent referred him to PA that either a) he has a VERY bad agent or b) PA has cut him a deal where he gets a decent advance and gets to do the "look at me!" routine while plugging PublishAmerica to all and sundry... I'm willing to bet that he may have a special return policy already being set up for his books.

however, I"ve yet to see the Farrs' book anywhere but on the PA website.

oh, if you want a giggle - check out some of the responses to the welcome given to Mr. Bly - some of the PA authors are making comments like "he has high standards to live up to here!"...

:P

[CaoPaux]

What tickles me pink is that one of the core mantras of the self-published is that only celebs get good treatment from publishers. So if PA grants Bly special favors, won't they be confirming their authors' worst fears? And more laughably, proving that even with PA, only celebs get the goods?

The mind boggles. :\

[DaveKuzminski]

That was part of why I made my earlier statement about them taking a risk by burning the fingers of some celebrities. This is a situation where it might look like a winner for PublishAmerica, but it's actually a lose-lose scenario regardless of which way they go. PA is actually providing ammunition for its critics.

As CaoPaux pointed out, if they give the celebs special treatment, then they undercut their previous efforts at proving they're not like the other publishers who do. If they don't, then sooner or later as I pointed out, a celebrity who signs with them is going to realize he's been screwed by PA without so much as a goodnight kiss. Problem is, celebrities usually have lawyers on retainer who like nothing more than going after someone who might have deep pockets. We've all heard about frequent lawsuits against the tabloids for making up or incorrectly reporting stories about the celebrities. PA certainly isn't immune even if they think their contract will keep them out of a real court. All it takes is for one celebrity with contacts to use those and force PA into a criminal court to face charges of fraud.

[Betty W01]

Dave, thank you!!

Anyone who has questions about how the Dave & James Show came to be canceled :ssh (and how come DJ's most recent post was removed :eek ) can refer to Jenna's last word on how things were to be done from that point on. As Dave posted, it's at p197.ezboard.com/fabsolut...D=74.topic (http://p197.ezboard.com/fabsolut...D=74.topic)

Any complaints, questions, or other backchat about it should be addressed to the management, not posted here. :wha

Thank you... ;)

Carry on...

[Irene Keyes]

I wonder if PA is actually publishing a book by Robert Bly the copywriter and has him confused with Robert Bly the poet.

[CaoPaux]

:rollin

Here's the book in question:

www.publishersmarketplace.com/cgi-bin/displayRights.pl?rights_no=663 (http://www.publishersmarketplace.com/cgi-bin/displayRights.pl?rights_no=663)

[Ed Williams 3]

...is how HB will react to taking a back seat to Mr. Bly. If HB gets on the PA message boards and pontificates on his vast publishing knowledge too much, Bly might come on there and give him an education right in front of all of his fellow PAvidians. Another thing worth considering is that if PA discovers that getting traditional authors makes more money for them, HB and his flock will be forgotten faster than a gnat can blink. However it all works out, this is providing some great theatre, and it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

P.S. Hey Lynn, glad to see you are posting here, and hope things are well with you.

[FM St George]

ah... now here they are promoting him on the PA site as a poet, and he's really a copywriter?

*shakes head*

either way, I'm VERY sure that he didn't just settle for a single dollar advance and his agent getting a cut of that.

[FM St George]

actually, this IS quite hysterical...

the plug on the PA site of:

To all PublishAmerica authors:
We will soon release this news by email to everyone, but let's break it here first:

Today the world famous poet and essayist, and international bestselling author, Robert Bly, has signed a contract with PublishAmerica for his new book, The All-American Frank.

Robert Bly is a winner of the nation's ultimate literary prize, the National Book Award, which has so far only been awarded to the very greatest in American literature. His earlier works have been published by houses such as HarperCollins, Scribners, Henry Holt, and Vintage.

Mr. Bly contacted us a few months ago through his literary agent letting us know that he wanted to join the talented army of PublishAmerica authors, and we were quick, happy, and proud to welcome this legendary author into our midst.

Welcome to PublishAmerica, Robert Bly!

*************

is totally wrong...

BOB Bly, here at www.bly.com is a published author, alright - in a totally different field!!!

the professionalism of PA in putting this one out has me rolling in the aisles... only their inept staff would start trumpeting the WRONG info about an author...

Lordy, this gets funnier by the day... wait until they try to pull their own thread now!

[CaoPaux]

Robert W. Bly (Bob Bly)
Copywriter
www.bly.com/ (http://www.bly.com/)

Robert W. Bly (Robert Bly)
Poet
www.robertbly.com/index.html (http://www.robertbly.com/index.html)

:rollin :rollin :rollin

But it still begs the question why the heck Bob Bly would go with PA. Sure, he's a marketing guru, but...or did I answer my own question? PA caught him somehow, to ensure that at least one of their books got national attention?

I'm sooo tempted to email his agent for confirmation.

[SimonSays]

Oh please CAO, wait until PA sends out a press release touting the signing of Mr. Bly BEFORE you contact Robert Bly, the poet's, agent.

That way, we can all experience the joy of watching PA publicy wipe the egg off their smug, skeevy faces.

[DaveKuzminski]

I'm not convinced that they're talking about the wrong individual in their announcement. Furthermore, there's little likelihood that he and HB will knock heads with each other. After all, not many celebrities spend much time on bulletin boards. For now, I recommend a wait and see attitude.

[SimonSays]

No Dave, PA is definitely touting the wrong Robert Bly.

The book PA is touting on its message board "The All American Frank" is listed on Publisher's Marketplace as being written by Bob Bly, copywriter extraordinaire.

The National Book Award winning poet Robert Bly, is not a copywriter - extraordinaire or otherwise. In addition Robert Bly just published his latest collection of poetry in May 2004.

The Bob Bly they signed writes a lot of "How To books on copywriting, business writing etc.

Apparently they put up the poet's achievements - but the book they are publishing is the copywriter Bly's

[DaveKuzminski]

Ah, now I see where that information came from. I couldn't help but wonder. Well, looks like PA certainly did step in it. Who wants to email the real Bly and his agent?

[FM St George]

my GAWD, this is too funny...

:D

[SimonSays]

I say wait until PA goes Public with their newest author, before alerting the esteemed poet.

My bet is that the press release will be very similar to the message board post.

Just imagine how foolish PA will look when their forced to retract.

[CaoPaux]

We interrupt this Special Edition of WTF for a word from our sponsor.

Copyright necessary? (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4825.htm)

We now return you to the incredulity already in progress.

[James D Macdonald]

Well, since we know that PA monitors this board, they've been warned about their error.

[priceless1]

For crying out loud. I will admit that we don't have near the amount of authors signed as PA does, nor would we want to. But how on earth could one screw up the bio on someone they've just signed? I have no idea how PA does it, but when we put a new author on our News and Events page, we're using the bio the author provided. It's not like we search out a name that sounds like their and slap up any old thing.

One can't even pin the word 'shoddy' on this blunder. It stretches my imagination and pops a few synapses to even consider the lack of professionalism. If I were either Bly, I'd be burying my agent in an unmarked grave.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>P.S. Hey Lynn, glad to see you are posting here, and hope things are well with you.<hr></blockquote>
P.S. Right back atcha, Ed. Things are going great. Far better than they appear to be for PA.

[DaveKuzminski]

Precisely my thoughts, James.

Maybe PA will also point out to their writers that it's patent, not patient, though you might have to be patient in obtaining a patent. Also, they should point out it's copyrights, not copywrites. To keep it straight, just think of it as conferring rights upon the author.

However, I know that's not going to happen. PA has demonstrated through its own rights grabs and false advertising that it doesn't want authors who know their rights.

[aka eraser]

Schadenfreude: Pleasure derived from the misfortune of others.

Until I associated it with PA I'd always thought it an unpleasant concept.

[vstrauss]

Oh. My. God. This is too funny.

- Victoria

[James D Macdonald]

<a href="http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4825.htm" target="_new">www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4825.htm</a>

Woo-wee! The "Poor Man's Copyright." Urban legend, folks. Don't believe it.

This is real blind-leading-blind stuff.

[CaoPaux]

A question for those established in the industry: What is the protocol for sales announcements? PA claims the sale, but the rights are still on PM (if I'm interpreting that listing correctly). I would think the agent would list it as “forthcoming”, or something, but there's no mention of this book at all on their PM page, which seems odd in and of itself.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>What is the protocol for sales announcements?<hr></blockquote>
Personally, we make no announcements until the signed contract is in our hands.

[HapiSofi]

Said Priceless:For crying out loud. I will admit that we don't have near the amount of authors signed as PA does, nor would we want to. But how on earth could one screw up the bio on someone they've just signed? I have no idea how PA does it, but when we put a new author on our News and Events page, we're using the bio the author provided. It's not like we search out a name that sounds like their and slap up any old thing.

One can't even pin the word 'shoddy' on this blunder. It stretches my imagination and pops a few synapses to even consider the lack of professionalism. If I were either Bly, I'd be burying my agent in an unmarked grave.There are a lot of possible scenarios. They all involve bad procedures.

Are you familiar with the volumes of excerpted litcritbits that come out as a series from Gale Research? They're a staple of library reference rooms. If you go back a ways, in one of those volumes you can find a chapter that mixes excerpts which discuss the works of Robert Wilson (author of Einstein on the Beach) with excerpts which discuss the works of Robert Anton Wilson (co-author of the Illuminatus Trilogy). For a mercy, Robert Charles Wilson hadn't made much of a splash yet when that chapter of excerpts was compiled.

So, how could PA screw up that badly? The obvious initial answer that they didn't check. They also may have failed to advise Robert Bly that he was being used as a selling point. Bear in mind that if either Bly has a real agent, he or she wasn't involved in this deal. Real agents don't sell their authors into vanity houses.

[DaveKuzminski]

I can't help but speculate if the author and his agent got into an argument and the contract with PA is what resulted. If so, this one's going to cause massive "firewords."

In the meantime, it also appears that PA's monitor is asleep since that topic hasn't been hastily deleted. Won't matter if they do, I've already copied it. Sleep well, PA monitor.

By the way, for some unknown reason, this board seems to pick up topic subjects from different messages regardless of what was last. I just edited this message to reflect a more appropriate subject title.

Well, at least they didn't claim he was also a famous naval captain known for losing his ship in a mutiny. ;)

[James D Macdonald]

At risk of reviving a two-week-stale flamefest, here's what a PA apologist had to say once upon a time right here at <a href="http://p197.ezboard.com/fabsolutewritefrm11.showMessageRange?topicID=190.t opic&start=61&stop=80" target="_new">Absolute Write</a>:

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>...There is no beef, there are no problems.

What there are, are 5000 authors, yet no complaints at the BBB, no complaints at the AG, and no complaints whatsoever. What you've got are literally several thousand very happily published authors. Check out PA's message board.

Strauss herself backs this up nicely. She long ago lost credibility for her wild accusations. Actually, lots of lawyers who are "well-versed in publishing contract language" have pronouced PA's contract "in order". So has the AFL-CIO, the Christian Writer's Market, Writer's Digest Magazine, and a couple of hundred lawyers who have signed PA's contract themselves. It's a very industry standard contract.

Strauss is making her usual fool of herself. It's just that on this board it seems that no one has heard of her. She's just a whiner looking for a problem. If none exists, she makes one up.

Don't believe me? Then email support@publishamerica.com and they'll send you the facts. PA has 5000 happy authors, and about 5 unhappy ones. That's a better satisfaction ratio than that of most businesses.<hr></blockquote>

That's the sort of thing that the new, naive writers who attempt to reseach PublishAmerica find.

Compared with the slick presentations at <a href="http://www.authorsmarket.net/yourbook.htm" target="_new">Authors Market</a> and <a href="http://www.publishamerica.com/facts/index.htm" target="_new">PublishAmerica</a>, what you see on various messageboards can look like a few disgruntled loonies howling at the moon.

As for basic honesty, look there at AuthorsMarket.net (emphasis mine):

<Blockquote>Another option, used by a growing number of authors, is to go one step up and aim at one of the 350 midsize publishers. Most of those will prove to be impenetrable, but some you will actually find open for business. A good place to compare is www.publishedauthors.net where thousands of authors are showcased. Last time we checked, their most favorite midsize publisher with an open-door policy for new quality talent was PublishAmerica. You can find their website here.</blockquote>

What they don't tell you is that PublishedAuthors.net (like AuthorsMarket.net) is wholly owned and operated by PublishAmerica. While the sign-up form at PublishedAuthors.net makes it look like they'll give a page to someone printed by another publisher, in fact the only people who get pages there are PA authors.

[Ed Williams 3]

...around "THE BLY SCAM." Want to bet on how long this thread will stay up? I'll bet PA doesn't even take responsibility for the mistake, I'll bet the thread just disappears and nothing else is ever said. Below is the sniffer,

Message:
Will the real Robert Bly please stand up?

www.bly.com/Pages/about.html (http://www.bly.com/Pages/about.html)

www.publishersmarketplace...hts_no=663 (http://www.publishersmarketplace.com/cgi-bin/displayRights.pl?rights_no=663)

or

www.robertbly.com/ (http://www.robertbly.com/)

You be the judge.

Frederick A. Babb
www.frederickbabb.com

[lastr]

Frederick A. Babb is one of PA's better selling authors, and not cowed easily. The fall-out should be entertaining. Wonder if PA will blame the mistake on a Troll posting under their own name. They don't have the PA logo next to their original post www.publishamerica.com/cg...e/4796.htm (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/lounge/4796.htm) and could blame it on subversives.

[lastr]

Guess what just disappeared off the PA boards? Robert Bly and Babb's response went to cyberheaven.

[James D Macdonald]

How will InfoCenter deal with their letter (http://p197.ezboard.com/fabsolutewritefrm11.showMessageRange?topicID=209.t opic&start=441&stop=460) from earlier this spring?

<blockquote>
"*And two weeks ago, we also reached an agreement with a top award winning, world-renowned author, who will come to us from Harper Collins. We expect the contract to be signed this week, and an announcement to be made soon."
</blockquote>

It's true that Robert W. "Bob" Bly has been published by HarperCollins, specifically <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0062733842/ref=nosim/madhousemanor/" target="_new">Why You Should Never Beam Down in a Red Shirt: And 749 More Answers to Questions About Star Trek</a> and <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0062733214/ref=nosim/madhousemanor" target="_new">The Ultimate Star Trek Quiz Book</a>.

(The other Robert Bly, the top award winning, world-renowned one, has around twenty books from HarperCollins, including <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060575824/ref=nosim/madhousemanor" target="_new">The Winged Energy of Delight: Selected Translations</a>, June 2004. I can see why they were confused.)

[Ed Williams 3]

..plays out (god, isn't PA predictable?), I thought I would share this sad PAvidian posting,

"My husband nd I went to Gatlinburg for the weekend and I went into BAM in Sevierville and ask about my book SUNSHINE. They told me they could not stock it for it had to come down from corporate. I ask about a future signing and they said that also had to be dealt with by coprporate. I havd 150 book markers in my hand to give them to give out free to their customers and went aheadd and left them anyway. My hibby sh** a brick!! He said they probably thrashed 'em after I left!"

marti2003

7/05/2004
11:42:44


RE: Books A Million!! a joke*

"Books a million upped the price on all our books online. I can't think how they hope to sell any. Yes indeed, they are a joke. Sorry you had a bad experience."

Nothing smarter than running down one of the national bookstore chains right out in public, is there?

[James D Macdonald]

"Books a million upped the price on all our books online. I can't think how they hope to sell any. Yes indeed, they are a joke. Sorry you had a bad experience."

BAM undoubtedly raised the price to make up for PublishAmerica's non-standard short discount through distributors.

How do they hope to sell PA books? They don't. What they're trying to do is avoid losing money on the few that they do sell (to family and friends).

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Are you familiar with the volumes of excerpted litcritbits that come out as a series from Gale Research? They're a staple of library reference rooms<hr></blockquote>.

Yes, HapiSofi, I've heard of it. That is why we only use the bio that is sent in by the author. It virtually eliminates any possiblity of confusion and embarrassment. Perhaps PA should initiate a policy change regarding their gathering of information. Zeal can be good or extremely uncomfortable.

[vstrauss]

>>"*And two weeks ago, we also reached an agreement with a top award winning, world-renowned author, who will come to us from Harper Collins. We expect the contract to be signed this week, and an announcement to be made soon."<<

Wow. I'd almost forgotten about the famous HC author. This is even more mindboggling, because it suggests that PA's Bly confusion has been going on for months. They have had weeks and weeks, and, one assumes, a number of dealings with the author (did they ask him to fill out an Author Questionnaire, I wonder?) to check the information and/or figure out the error...and they didn't. I think this is more than just laziness or carelessness; there must be some truly colossally dumb people in the PA office.

Sheesh.

- Strauss the whiner

[emeraldcite]

Perhaps PA should initiate a policy change regarding their gathering of information.

I hope they don't. It's far more entertaining to watch them screw up this bad. The best part is that many, many authors saw that post, which is now gone. Wonder how many of them know the truth?

Too bad it didn't stay up. It would have been nice to see the famous Bly swoop in and give them a nice little tango with the law...

[CaoPaux]

So, like, this could mean that PA didn't sign the one they wanted to sign...?

:ha :ha :ha :ha :ha

[lastr]

www.publishamerica.com/cg.../10298.htm (http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/main/10298.htm)

Message:
I am going to contact PA about starting a new message
board that focuses on potential scam alerts for authors.
There are so many editors, agents, and others in the
industry that are out to do authors harm, and as we find
them or experience them we should be able to warn
other so as to help protect each other.

[priceless1]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I am going to contact PA about starting a new message
board that focuses on potential scam alerts for authors.<hr></blockquote>
Now I'd love to see that. <img border=0 src="http://www.absolutewrite.com/images/Emoterofl5.gif" />

[Dragon Chow]

I think this is more than just laziness or carelessness; there must be some truly colossally dumb people in the PA office.

Especially when the book they signed is a non-fiction about hot dogs. Didn't they think it strange that an award-winning poet would write a book about hot dogs? Did they even know what the book was about??

Unbelievable... :rolleyes
DC