HarperCollins Publishers / Eos / Avon / Voyager

I agree that at first glance, it recalls Macmillan's New Writing program, but despite the lack of advances, New Writing seems to follow the basic trade publishing model, whereas many of the details here seem quite different.

However, there's so little concrete info on this new venture that it's hard to comment. Just what will the profit-sharing consist of, for instance, and how will "profit" be defined? If we're looking at some version of Hollywood accounting, it won't be so great for authors. A straight 50/50 split after discounts, on the other hand, could be attractive. Another thing that makes this interesting, IMO, is the way Harper seems to be planning to market the books.

This NY Times article gives a somewhat fuller account than the GalleyCat item.

A lot of people will be watching with interest, including me.

- Victoria

Well they are talking about "short" novels retailing at $20. That's sounds like a limited market to me.

What I saw on Publisher's Lunch about Bob Miller was that he was going for "mostly nonfiction" and figured established writers (some of whom make more money than the publisher) wouldn't be interested in the profit sharing model. For details, go here and check out the post for April 4, "More On Miller."

Welcome to the world of Rupert Murdoch media.

veinglory said:

Well they are talking about "short" novels retailing at $20. That's sounds like a limited market to me.

Click to expand...

That's what most people want. The "traditional" length of novels is far too long for today's hurried world.

Kensington said:

That's what most people want. The "traditional" length of novels is far too long for today's hurried world.

Click to expand...

I've quit wasting my money on wordy tomes. Anything up to 225 pages is ok.

Kensington said:

That's what most people want. The "traditional" length of novels is far too long for today's hurried world.

Click to expand...

People don't want to spend $20 for a short novel, though--the price point should be more attractive at that length. One of the reasons long novels have become the norm is that people don't want to spend upwards of $20 and get fewer than 300 pages.

Kensington said:

That's what most people want. The "traditional" length of novels is far too long for today's hurried world.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure as I agree with that, although maybe you're right. I think there are two camps. some do like shorter novels but many also want to feel they got the most for their money. IceCream hit the nail on the head, paying $20 for a short novel isn't very appealing, even if it's hard-bound.

I'm on the fence on this whole thing. It will be interesting to see how HarperCollins does this. Definitely something to at least watch.

So what's my incentive to sign with them vs. self-publish?

Next thing they're going to want is for the author to submit a marketing plan along with the manuscript. Maybe even bring along an investor for the fun of it.

Hopefully this fares better than Time-Warner's iPublish project...

And equally hopefully, they aren't taking lessons in how to make money from a need-not-be-named Maryland publisher...

victoriastrauss said:

I agree that at first glance, it recalls Macmillan's New Writing program, but despite the lack of advances, New Writing seems to follow the basic trade publishing model, whereas many of the details here seem quite different.
- Victoria

Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. In fact, the MNW model is more like a drop back in time to the Maxwell Perkins days.

The more info that is released about the HarperCollins venture, the odder it seems--though some of the "innovations" may or may not be confusion on the part of the NY Times, who think "profits" and "royalties" are the same thing.

But the return policy (or rather the "no-return" policy) seems to me to be the least feasible element of the scheme. Why would bookstores stock such books when there are a zillion other imprints to choose from that are returnable?

I'm with you. This is going to be interesting to watch.

Quick note: Angry Robot Books had their official launch today. I think there's going be some great books from these folks. Go check them out! http://angryrobotbooks.com

Also in spring of 2010, Robert S. Miller left HarperStudio (the new imprint that had been announced with great fanfare but few details in 2008) to join Workman Publishing.

What of HarperStudio itself? That innovative, thinking-outside-the-box experiment in not paying advances to authors or accepting returns from bookstores closed in May of this year, having produced perhaps a dozen books.

James D. Macdonald said:

What of HarperStudio itself? That innovative, thinking-outside-the-box experiment in not paying advances to authors or accepting returns from bookstores closed in May of this year, having produced perhaps a dozen books.

Click to expand...

So much for one of the most recent and most obnoxious clichés of modern culture. I guess they succeeded in thinking "outside the box", and it showed.

James D. Macdonald said:

What of HarperStudio itself? That innovative, thinking-outside-the-box experiment in not paying advances to authors or accepting returns from bookstores closed in May of this year, having produced perhaps a dozen books.

Click to expand...

Ooo. Ouch.

How does the morality clause touch these imprints? Are they separate? Did EOS vanish?

http://accrispin.blogspot.com/2011/01/tidbits.html

And now for something completely different:

Harper Collins Avon Imprint goes "digital first".
http://www.avonromance.com/impulse/

They've gone from (in a previously mentioned line, upthread) minimal advances and high royalty to no advances and 25% on "net".

Yay for romance epublishing. Leading the way in paying authors less and less.

jennontheisland said:

And now for something completely different:

Harper Collins Avon Imprint goes "digital first".
http://www.avonromance.com/impulse/

They've gone from (in a previously mentioned line, upthread) minimal advances and high royalty to no advances and 25% on "net".

Yay for romance epublishing. Leading the way in paying authors less and less.

Click to expand...

And I'll also add, closing their submissions to agented authors only, but deceptively telling the unagented they can be an Avon authors too, if they submit to Impulse.

jennontheisland said:

And now for something completely different:

Harper Collins Avon Imprint goes "digital first".
http://www.avonromance.com/impulse/

They've gone from (in a previously mentioned line, upthread) minimal advances and high royalty to no advances and 25% on "net".

Yay for romance epublishing. Leading the way in paying authors less and less.

Click to expand...

From their website:
"Avon Impulse will not pay an advance, but authors receive 25% royalties from the first book sold. After an e-book sells 10,000 net copies, the author's royalty rate rises to 50%. (Contracts will provide royalties for both e-book and print-to-order copies.)"

That seems pretty good to me. 50% after 10,000 copies seems very fair.

Where do you see that the royalties are paid on net? I'm seeing the numbers, but I don't see where it's specified. Not quite sure what "net copies" of books sold is, though.

kaitie said:

Where do you see that the royalties are paid on net? I'm seeing the numbers, but I don't see where it's specified. Not quite sure what "net copies" of books sold is, though.

Click to expand...

In the frequently asked question section. I also don't know what "net copies" means.

Hell, I threw my first novel (rights returned to me) their way, since it was sitting around doing nothing.