Fantasy Works Publishing

Hi to you TAMaxwell! You are most correct. Speaking only for myself, I was trying to be modest. I suppose the opposite approach is best. I appreciate your kind words.

JenLeigh said:

Since you boasted that you co-wrote/directed/produced Ryan Gosling Must Be Stopped, then I am assuming you are a person of means. Most authors are not. You are also depicting all agents as honest, upstanding, and competent entities who only have the author's best interests at heart. I know you started it out with a 'what if', but that's a big 'what if'. However, 'if' that was the case, perhaps I would make an exception.

And on a parting note, agents were originally instituted to serve as a buffer between author and publisher, thereby weeding out the rift raft. I'd rather do it myself. I'm not a traditional publisher.

Click to expand...

I . . . what?? I am not a person of means, I just co-created a web series with a friend of mine and did it on the cheap thanks to having incredibly talented friends help us out. And I'm not sure where self-promotion = boasting. Are you going to say the same of your own authors for daring to link to their work in their signatures on social media sites?

And uh, most agents ARE competent and DO have their author's best interests at heart. The idea that this is so rare that it is a big what if is very strange to me as I have had nothing but amazing experiences with my agents and all my author friends have experienced likewise. But I guess it's good to know you are willing to work with quality agents, even if you think almost none exist. You might want to mention that then, because someone with a quality agent will assume you aren't interested in working with them.

(btw, your origin story for agents is not entirely accurate. They weren't just invented to help publishers weed through the riff raff, they also came about to help authors, to make sure publishers didn't screw them over)

Welcome, Jen. I hope the publishing venture does well for you and your authors. For myself, I'm leaving this discussion, since I have nothing to add.

JenLeigh said:

I welcome the comments, both helpful and not, but please allow me to clear up a few issues. Some of the wording on our site wasn't as clear as it could have been, and has since been corrected. On to the other stuff.

Click to expand...

I find it somewhat disconcerting that a publisher would put unclear text on its site. But I'm glad you've sorted that out now.

It's still a bit wobbly, however. On the opening page you have a hyphen where a dash should be, and a space where a hyphen should be, for example.

And every time I try to look at your blog I get an internal server error message. This might be a problem at my end, but do take a look just in case it's something you need to sort out.

The family oriented atmosphere mentioned involves the authors working together and promoting each other. This improves book sales, and the statistics bear that out. Also, it's simply more fun.

Click to expand...

Expecting your authors to promote each others' books as well as their own is not a good idea.

It'll cause them to lose focus, and not promote their own books as effectively. Which will mean you'll lose sales.

And as you take books from a relatively broad range of genres, the cross-promotion you're asking them to do might actually be harmful: you can't realistically promote a New Adult book and an adult title in the same way, or in the same places: this is going to put people off buying your books. I strongly advise against it. By all means ask your authors to promote their own books: but don't ask them to help out your other authors too.

There are absolutely no fees, and there never were. The 'optional' Ingram Spark distribution involves additional commitment from the author. If the author is willing to commit to it, we're willing to pay for it. Ingram Spark is not only for self-publishers, but also publishers.

Click to expand...

It's already been established that the reference to fees was pointed at Ingram Spark, not at you.

Ingram Spark doesn't provide full distribution to bookshops in the way that the term "distribution" is used in the book trade. All it does is place the books in a catalogue, which people can order from if they know the books exist.

And as far as I remember, Ingram Spark was set up specifically for self publishers. I don't know of any good trade publishers which use it: could you perhaps come up with a few names?

I believe we're a little more than authors who possess secondary skills. I have owned five successful businesses, two of which are listed on my bio, the other three didn't really relate. I was at another press for two years before arriving at FWP, and have edited for ten years. I am more than qualified for my current position, and am surrounded by equally qualified colleagues.

Click to expand...

I'd find it really helpful if you'd let us know which press you were at prior to FWP.

I've worked in publishing for thirty years. I've edited for most of the Big Five, I've worked in sales and marketing, I've worked (briefly) in production, I've had a whole stack of books published, and I still don't feel I'm qualified to start my own press. But I am impressed by your confidence.

We don't negotiate with agents. Again, guilty as charged. We want the authors to receive all their royalties. It's a simple matter.

Click to expand...

Authors with good representation earn considerably more than authors without representation, even after they've paid their agents' commission. They have better contracts, too, and their publishers show a better compliance with those contracts.

If your objection to authors paying a commission to their agents is why you refuse to negotiate with agents, you're refusing for the wrong reasons.

Also, we don't deal with lawyers. No great conspiracy there. Recommending our authors have a lawyer look at our contract bears that out. As someone who has offered many contracts, I am surprised at the number of authors who blindly sign with no legal advice and sometimes not even bothering to read it. Of course we don't want that.

Click to expand...

So when you say you don't deal with lawyers, you mean you don't hire lawyers to help your authors with their contracts. You're wise: that would be a clear conflict of interests.

However, if a writer hires a lawyer to check through her contract, would you then refuse to negotiate the contract with that lawyer? There's no conflict there.

JenLeigh said:

Since you boasted that you co-wrote/directed/produced Ryan Gosling Must Be Stopped, then I am assuming you are a person of means. Most authors are not.

Click to expand...

Toothpaste's financial situation is not up for discussion here. It's her own private business, and it has nothing to do with the subject under discussion: your publishing company. I'd appreciate it if you'd bear that in mind.

You are also depicting all agents as honest, upstanding, and competent entities who only have the author's best interests at heart.

Click to expand...

The good agents are. This room at AW exists to help our members find out who are the good agents and publishers, and who are not.

And on a parting note, agents were originally instituted to serve as a buffer between author and publisher,

Click to expand...

No, they weren't.

thereby weeding out the rift raft.

Click to expand...

Oh dear.

I'd rather do it myself. I'm not a traditional publisher.

Click to expand...

What sort of publisher do you consider yourself to be? I assume from that comment you think you're bringing something new to the table: could you elaborate, please?

JenLeigh said:

We don't negotiate with agents. Again, guilty as charged. We want the authors to receive all their royalties. It's a simple matter.

Also, we don't deal with lawyers. No great conspiracy there. Recommending our authors have a lawyer look at our contract bears that out. As someone who has offered many contracts, I am surprised at the number of authors who blindly sign with no legal advice and sometimes not even bothering to read it. Of course we don't want that.

Thanks everyone for your time. I hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure it'll help the agents and lawyers who hang out here.

My question about Ingram Spark was whether it being "optional" related to whether the author would pay the fee for it.

So they favorited a #SFFPit of mine today and I just checked them out.

Of the five authors they list two of them work for the company. The authors who are published have a number of $0.00 books available online that all appear to stunning reviews mixed with reviews that point out proof reading errors on Amazon and good reads.

The also appear to have favorited 100 tweets or more during the event, which seems like a lot for a small house that doesn't seem to have a print book distributed yet. Also, they don't seem to have a printed book on a shelf or available for shipping.

I'm not calling any of these things red flags, or in any way demeaning the publishing house. I just wanted to share the information I found.

I received a star on SFFpit as well, and I don't think I'll be submitting. It could be missing a great opportunity, but they don't appear to be established enough. I assume they are looking to build their list, hence the 100 favorites on SFFpit, but it is a little scary to be one of the first authors for a publisher, and I'm not brave. I wish them the best of course, but I'll wait until they have a bit more of a record before I submit to them I think.

I appreciate you didn't write this with any intent of malice, but allow me to correct a few of your comments:

Only one author works for the company, although two did when you posted this. Only one author was previously published, and her book was and still is for sale online, both print and e-book. It's true one of her books had proof-reading and editing errors. However, that book was published at Crushing Hearts. We had nothing to do with it.

We did indeed favor about 100 tweets. Only a small percentage will submit to a new publisher, so it is to our advantage to favor everything we liked. Is it not? Of course we don't have a print book or any book available yet. We have only been open for two months and that is hardly enough time to publish anything. To do otherwise would be reckless and negligent. When the books are published, there will be printed books available for shipping.

Thanks for checking us out!

I don't blame you, but I hope when you consider us established enough, you'll reconsider

Have any of these questions/comments been answered since? I got a like on both #PitMad and #SFFpit but I'm a little unsure...

Old Hack said:

I find it somewhat disconcerting that a publisher would put unclear text on its site. But I'm glad you've sorted that out now.

It's still a bit wobbly, however. On the opening page you have a hyphen where a dash should be, and a space where a hyphen should be, for example.

And every time I try to look at your blog I get an internal server error message. This might be a problem at my end, but do take a look just in case it's something you need to sort out.



Expecting your authors to promote each others' books as well as their own is not a good idea.

It'll cause them to lose focus, and not promote their own books as effectively. Which will mean you'll lose sales.

And as you take books from a relatively broad range of genres, the cross-promotion you're asking them to do might actually be harmful: you can't realistically promote a New Adult book and an adult title in the same way, or in the same places: this is going to put people off buying your books. I strongly advise against it. By all means ask your authors to promote their own books: but don't ask them to help out your other authors too.



It's already been established that the reference to fees was pointed at Ingram Spark, not at you.

Ingram Spark doesn't provide full distribution to bookshops in the way that the term "distribution" is used in the book trade. All it does is place the books in a catalogue, which people can order from if they know the books exist.

And as far as I remember, Ingram Spark was set up specifically for self publishers. I don't know of any good trade publishers which use it: could you perhaps come up with a few names?



I'd find it really helpful if you'd let us know which press you were at prior to FWP.

I've worked in publishing for thirty years. I've edited for most of the Big Five, I've worked in sales and marketing, I've worked (briefly) in production, I've had a whole stack of books published, and I still don't feel I'm qualified to start my own press. But I am impressed by your confidence.



Authors with good representation earn considerably more than authors without representation, even after they've paid their agents' commission. They have better contracts, too, and their publishers show a better compliance with those contracts.

If your objection to authors paying a commission to their agents is why you refuse to negotiate with agents, you're refusing for the wrong reasons.



So when you say you don't deal with lawyers, you mean you don't hire lawyers to help your authors with their contracts. You're wise: that would be a clear conflict of interests.

However, if a writer hires a lawyer to check through her contract, would you then refuse to negotiate the contract with that lawyer? There's no conflict there.



Toothpaste's financial situation is not up for discussion here. It's her own private business, and it has nothing to do with the subject under discussion: your publishing company. I'd appreciate it if you'd bear that in mind.



The good agents are. This room at AW exists to help our members find out who are the good agents and publishers, and who are not.



No, they weren't.



Oh dear.



What sort of publisher do you consider yourself to be? I assume from that comment you think you're bringing something new to the table: could you elaborate, please?

Click to expand...

stormowl7 said:

Have any of these questions/comments been answered since? I got a like on both #PitMad and #SFFpit but I'm a little unsure...

Click to expand...

As far as I can see, none of the books are out yet (some were published elsewhere before, which is why reviews come up for them). Dates are set for the start of next year. So now isn't a good time to consider submitting to them. Wait and see how they do.

Yeah, that's what I thought when I saw the books - all of them are under "coming soon" type of thing, so I found that a little strange...

Thanks

Polenth said:

As far as I can see, none of the books are out yet (some were published elsewhere before, which is why reviews come up for them). Dates are set for the start of next year. So now isn't a good time to consider submitting to them. Wait and see how they do.

Click to expand...

veinglory said:

And it is fee-charging.

Click to expand...

1. Many small to medium size publishers use Ingram Spark.

2. All distributors charge a fee, whether you are a [publisher or a self-published author. So I really don't understand your comment.

stormowl7 said:

Have any of these questions/comments been answered since? I got a like on both #PitMad and #SFFpit but I'm a little unsure...

Click to expand...

Nope, I don't think any of my questions were answered. And if you're going to submit your work to them, they are questions you'd probably want to know the answers to first.

Super_Duper said:

2. All distributors charge a fee, whether you are a [publisher or a self-published author. So I really don't understand your comment.

Click to expand...

Distributors don't charge up-front fees regardless of whether you sell any copies of your books: they charge a percentage of the resulting income. Publishers which charge the writers they publish are vanity publishers, not distributors, which is an entirely different thing.

Got an R for my Adult DF/H from Jen this morning, probably best in view of this thread.

Old Hack said:

I'd find it really helpful if you'd let us know which press you were at prior to FWP.


I've worked in publishing for thirty years. I've edited for most of the Big Five, I've worked in sales and marketing, I've worked (briefly) in production, I've had a whole stack of books published, and I still don't feel I'm qualified to start my own press. But I am impressed by your confidence.

Click to expand...

I'm troubled by this whole thread, hence my efforts to chase down some facts.

I found a link to the prior press from an interview here: http://amybethinverness.com/2014/09/11/interview-with-jen-leigh/

"Distinguished Press" http://distinguishedpress.com/ There are three books on their 'shop' page, but newer titles listed on their Facebook page, with recent activity. Two of the books I found are by Catrina Taylor, is apparently the pseudonym of the domain owner Catrina Rudd ( same email address, unique spelling of Catrina, etc ). Which makes this venture look more like a small co-op vanity press than a serious publishing venture.

Overall, the venture doesn't look like a resume builder and may explain the reluctance for Jen to mention it by name.

No malice intended, but I think it would probably be better to leave that off of a bio than include it in such an ambiguous manner as to imply previous experience with a successful publisher.

Perhaps malice wasn’t intended, but I don’t know whether to be flattered or disturbed with your obsession of me. You will not find my resume online because, frankly, it’s no one’s business. Unless I’m asking you for a job, don’t expect it.

Distinguished Press’ recent move to a co-op has nothing to do with me, or the work I did for them. I had no involvement with Catrina Taylor’s books. However, I stand behind every manuscript I signed for them.

I have a grand idea. Instead of talking about conspiracies, red flags, ambiguity, my qualifications, and troubles with the whole thread, obtain a copy of our first and latest release. Put your ample free time trolling me and this site to better use–read the book. See? Simple.

Oh, and Mr. Chapman, the next time you contact one of our authors, or former authors, as ‘a contributor for the Absolute Write site,’ please forward your credentials to me, a Curriculum Vitae will do. Also, instead of lurking around the edges, letting me know you planned to interview our authors would have been a simple professional courtesy.

Best wishes.

Ummmm. What?

I did not get the impressing that August 'interviewed' anyone, but merely followed social media cues...simple, basic research that *any* author should do. The shallows of social media don't even need specialized search tools.

Your resume is important as far as it relates to your applicable skills.

I certainly do not get a publisher's permission to contact authors about that publisher. If they don't feel comfortable, they'll tell me off. If they've been coached, I'll know.

Jen, I still want to give you the benefit of the doubt, so I'll just wait to see how your press does in the next year.

Filigree,

I don't know what impression you got, but he did. He interviewed one of my authors as a 'contributor for the Absolute Write site'. She didn't say anything negative so he didn't mention it. Has nothing to do with what 'any author should do'. I rejected him months ago.

It's not important to have my resume online, we disagree. If authors have questions of me, contact me and ask me personally.

It's not about permission, it's about professional courtesy. We should all be decent that way.

None of the professionals that I've dealt with expected me to tell them I would be asking their other authors about their experience. It's a given that conscientious authors will check out a publisher they are interested in. The smaller and newer the publisher, the more important it is to find out how they have treated their other authors, if there are any issues to be aware of.

I did, btw, check out FWP's only release so far. It leaves something to be desired, but I wish you and your authors the best, nonetheless. However, as an example of the work you publish it does not prompt me to put your company anywhere on my submissions list.

[ETA: Just used AW's auto-restore for the first time. Hurrah! AW Admin, this is phenomenally useful. Thank-you thank-you thank-you!]

It's great when publishers do engage here openly and I think everyone welcomes that, but "defending" from criticism just can't happen. That's not how business is done, in any business. Writers have to learn to develop thick skin. This is triply true for publishers.

There's barely any criticism in here, and what criticism there is, is part of the business. Really. Authors do research. Some of them get rejected and post stuff they probably shouldn't (not that that looks like what happened here, but anyway). Agents ask tough questions. (Speaking of which, you still haven't answered Old Hack's, and I have a number of my own that came up as I read through your site which I may post below if I can get them edited to my satisfaction.)

Mistakes happen. Everyone makes them and every business venture has to overcome them. It's how the people involved with that business respond that dictates the fate of the business. Loads of publishers come through here, get some very candid feedback, and successfully solve the problem. Others, don't. Do some research of your own on this board. See how this usually goes, and why we ask these questions.

You are asking authors to enter into a business relationship with you. That's why your résumé is relevant. It shows what you've learned and how many mistakes you've made before and are therefore less likely to make again. You are, in effect, applying to work on the author's book.

I do wish Fantasy Works Publishing good luck. I'm a happy reader of the genre and I'm never against more books coming into the world.

So, more thoughts, mostly for those like stormowl7 who may happen across this thread. Usual disclaimer: I'm not an expert, I'm not half as experienced as the regulars on this forum, and my word is not the only one. Do your own research and figure out if you want to enter into a professional business relationship with any publisher.


Since there seems to be some confusion about what research involves, the following is what I do on EVERY publisher site I look at. (Note this is just the superficial stuff. I'd be checking third parties before subbing anywhere.)


So I open up www.fantasyworkspublishing.com. Nice home site. I'm partial to black background no matter what my web designer friends say.

First thing I notice is that the site is author-centric. A site won't sell that many books for a publisher, but it should be the publisher's main brand presence for industry partners, journalists, reviewers, agents, and so on. Authors wanting to be published are not in short supply. That website needs to serve a lot more than them. That it doesn't is indicative of where the company's brand is focused. Publishers that focus on selling to authors don't sell enough books to be viable. Strike one.

Then I check the books the publisher has out. Only one. OK, new house. That isn't bad--just means wait-and-see a bit, maybe. Let's look at those upcoming titles. Wow, there are a lot. For a small house, that means there's either a lot of rushed editing/production going on, the house is accepting way too many submissions, or there are going to be delays. Strike two.

Oh, "Join Us?" With jobs listed! Awesome, I'm currently looking, and obviously the house is going to need to staff up to get these books done. Ah, paying editors in royalties. Now ranked below e-lance in my job search database. Strike three for the royalties alone--with Amazon sales for the only book in the 600,000-range, those royalties do not make a viable job. I'm also giving strike four for being understaffed, because you won't get good editors with that model, which means either more delays or shoddy editing. When editors do sign on to royalty models (and I've done this, before I knew better) they leave soon after, which is bad for your authors but worse for your company's ops.

I'll give you ball one and ball two on the current editorial team not having any experience listed and not using industry standard editorial titles because it's the playoffs and David Price is pitching. (Ba-dum tish!)

All of the book blurbs I've looked at so far have basic mechanical writing issues.

blurb for The Blood Maker said:

Discover why Las Vegas is really called, Sin City.

Click to expand...

E.g. that's a comma splice. That's not the only example, either. Lots and lots of clunky wording and some bizarre and inconsistent form and style on the blurbs, which make me wonder if the authors are writing their own back cover copy. If they are, this is risky. Back cover copy is crucial and very difficult to write well. It's one of the things a publisher should have expertise in. Strike five.

(The books also seem to be a mix of paranormal romance and sword+sorcery/epic, which seems like an odd mix given, as far as I know, there isn't a whole lot of crossover in readership there but I'll assume this is based on something I don't know.)

When I pull up your author's own pages from a quick Google search--which is what I do every time I want to check out a new author online, by the way--all I see is promotion fluff for other FWP authors. Strike six. Worse, it seems like it's all for the same author at the same time. Seeing Ross Smeltzer a lot right now, the author of FWP's only book, so it's kind of transparent that this is directed promo, which means as a reader I don't trust your authors' judgement, because I know it isn't their own. Strike seven, for wasting your authors' credibility with potential fans like me.

Authors on social media who spam their own and others' stuff? Unfollowed. Unconditionally and immediately. Most of their facebook pages have below 500 likes, which tells me their social media traction isn't going to move copies when the books are released.

Of course, the home page for FWP still lists the company's "individualized and comprehensive marketing plans" on the main page. I presume those go well beyond author's cross-promoting each other on their sub-500-like facebook pages? I won't give a strike here, but I can already see John Gibbons coming out to argue the call.


So, let's pretend I'm a reviewer: I look at your reviewer tab, and I can't read the text because it's red on a grey background. Also, your header starts displaying badly. Strike seven, hire a web designer and don't use BuildYourSite.com. Mostly because you're a professional business and the site should reflect that. Remember, though, that as an author (or any partner) I want to see that the business is financially viable. I'm aware of how tight small publishers have to be run, but it ain't a good sign when the company can't drop $500-$1000 on even a basic freelance web designer. (Good site desigm should cost more. But I'd cut a small house some slack if the first version looks a bit cheaper/simpler.) Where's the money for the book tour and launch material you promise on the submissions page going to come from if the site isn't even set up properly?

Back to that reviewer page: When I highlight it (which I don't do if I'm a journo, because I have an editor screaming at me to bail out the Blue Jays beat guy, who's sick but it's Sunday and who the hell else is gonna do it?), it's asking for my blog's circulation numbers. With many publications, this is privileged information for advertising reasons, and you won't get it. Even asking for it probably gets your email closed.

I'm not a reviewer, but I used to run a student paper which got ARCs from all kinds of publishers, most of which we gave away in contests because we had way too many to review. We never requested ARCs--no time, and anyway how would we know what's coming out in six months time? (This is a student paper--it may not be around in six months time. And those extra ARCs, because it turned out the student body didn't want 'em either, are probably still in the office. You can tell a good student paper office, much like a publisher's office, by how many piles of books and magazines have been repurposed as tables and other furniture the pub can't afford to buy at IKEA.) Even were I somehow aware of the publisher and the book, I'm probably not filling in 8-10 fields. I want ONE field. You get a quick line asking in general if you have any releases ~three months away, my name, my publication, mailing address below signature. Send or do not. There is no try.

Strike eight for the entire review set-up--I hope you're not waiting for them to come to you. Strike nine for the review request design that means even if I do come to you, I'm probably not getting an ARC.

Look how other major publishers do it. They have easy social media contact info on their sites. If I am a journalist, I ping them there. Just like an author checking out a publisher, you can scope that journo out before responding to the offer, if you want. If you're sending out an unsolicited ARC--which you should be doing, complete with press pack--you definitely research the journo so you make sure you're sending the kind of book they're likely to want to review. Journos will have their work history posted online and usually have a full professional profile on any publication they're employed by.


On to the submissions page! Favourite place for wannabe authors like me!

You don't want to hear from agents or lawyers. Strike ten. Completely unprofessional and completely unnecessary. Nothing is gained by putting this out there except signposting that this publisher is going to be hard to work professionally with. I'm actually adding strike eleven here, too, because this is an auto-closer. It's the only reason in this big, long post that on its own would cause me to advise someone against submitting to FWP. Just too many bad signs associated with that approach.

I already mentioned it above, but the only book published isn't exactly lighting up the Amazon rankings. Amazon rankings can be unwieldy, so let's run the press hits for The Mark of the Shadow Grove. General Google first, which is all I'm likely to do if I'm an interested reader or reviewer. I get one blog review in the top 10--on a romance and YA site, oddly, since the book looks like epic fantasy. I'm gonna go ahead and give strike twelve there--props for the review, but it's not well-researched or targeted, which makes me wonder if it's a personal connection. Great start, not enough. (ETA: This book launched on Jan. 15. There should be launch press. It should probably be pre-arranged. This should probably be another strike but I'm not going to bother rewriting all the numbers.)

I tried Google News with the same search. Got a couple stubs--one classified, one site that won't load. Eh, not a strike. Not a plus, either.

I get the book's Goodreads and Amazon pages, too. Five-star reviews from other FWP authors. That's strike thirteen and strike fourteen--one for Amazon and one for Goodreads. Dishonest reviewing. Yuck to me as a reader. The couple non-FWP reviews there say they were sent ARCs by FWP "in exchange for an honest review". I'm not going to call this a problem because I'm not big enough on Goodreads to know if it's common practice or not, but it leaves the same yucky taste in my mouth as an average reader looking for good fantasy. Just looks unethical. Might be the journalist side of me.


Ooh, last stop on the line--I found your blog. There's an excerpt from The Mark of the Shadow Grove:

I saw her close to the fire. I approached her. Instinct—animal’s blood confusing image—controlled my fatigued limbs and I felt no fear, run-on sentence though the flames blazed high and the hilltop was forlorn non-sequitur--what does the hilltop being forlorn have to do with his fear?;. The night was black as deep water . . . . She turned and approached me. “There are no masters here. Only you and me,” she said.

Click to expand...

Credit to Smeltzer--it's actually an intriguing enough excerpt, though I feel like more than a sentence (which should be 2-3 sentences) is warranted for an excerpt. What it needs is an editor. If this is the standard of editing for published works in the launch materials on your blog... strike fifteen.

Actually, you know what, I just read some more of the blog: strike sixteen for not knowing how to use basic Wordpress WYSIWYG editor tools and strike seventeen for more writing errors in the blog posts. This is your professional brand. This is what my fans would see when they check out the publisher. What will they think?

You know what, reading more of the blog and posts here? Strike eighteen for use of "traditional publishing" as a term. Yeah, nitpick, but an important one.


All these things are, are question marks from one possible author. (Because I do write fantasy, in fact.) To be clear, I could find things like this in for every publisher in the world. That's part of doing business and research. I have to balance the question marks with the possible benefits.

The real issue here is that for eighteen possible problems there are next to no redeeming benefits. Seriously. I'm trying to be charitable. I don't like being overly critical. I'm Canadian--I hedge my bets and apologize. Sorry. I just can't find much. Sometimes small presses are good because they can hit market niches well, but I don't see that here. The covers are OK, I guess, but my eye for these things isn't great and they don't jump out at me either (there are a couple I wish the text was clearer, too). I'd give you props for being local if I knew where you were local to, and ideally if I saw some engagement in that local community's literary scene.

Like I said in my other post, lots of publishers come in here with some question marks. Let's call those yellow flags--a kind of "let's wait and see how this goes and how they respond" situation. Let's continue our very, very belaboured baseball riff and say three strikes equal a "yellow flag". We've got six yellow flags, then. I have to ref soccer tomorrow, so two yellows equals a red, where I'm running from the publisher. That's three red flags, cumulatively.

I'll reiterate: one opinion. Some of this will come down to interpretation, and if Old Hack wants to counter any of my surface research, I defer completely to her knowledge on the matter. If you're reading this out there and you want to submit here, it's up to you, absolutely.

Even with some worrying signs, who knows, I guess? I'm just a prospective author who lurks and occasionally posts in BR&BC. I grant I can be cynical because I got fooled into working for a well-meaning but very flawed publisher before I knew better. That's my experience. That's it. What do I know?

This isn't even deep level business criticism, though. I've got no idea how the company culture works, the lack of titles means it's really impossible to judge sales yet, I don't have access to internal or industry metrics on book marketing and performance. This is what VeryBigBeard, Potential Author gleans from an hour or so poking at a potential publisher for my book (which I hope to have ready for sub in late summer--we'll see).

I'll be real interested to see the reaction--that's really why I'm posting this at all, beyond whatever help it might give to others in my position. I bet a lot of my questions can be overturned by that whacky video review booth MLB umpires get to stick their heads into (none of that for me!). And that's great. I want to see businesses succeed--I've had two start-ups die on me so I know what it's like.

Look at these as mistakes. Look at them like a writer looks at mistakes. No matter the intent, something didn't click. Some misunderstanding occurred where it is your job--be it website or story--to communicate clearly. Getting defensive at critique is pointless--it just drives people off and builds walls around the work. How they take critiques says a lot about the ability of a writer to grow--and damn if I haven't been guilty of bad reactions to critiques before. Same is true of publishers. Same is true of any business.

Learn from it. Grow. Be bigger. Make more mistakes. Learn and grow again.

Best of luck to Fantasy Works Publishing and any authors looking for publishers. Hope this was helpful at some level. If not, the mods can ping me and I'll edit/delete/ruminate on the future of the Blue Jays and IFAB's willingness to embrace video replay technology. Toodles.