Harlequin and earning a living question

Wait...even worse news: Blaze is being axed in 2017.

Apparently Harlequin is starting a sexier, grittier, Cosmo Red Hot type of line to replace it.

Sorry if this is a derail. I just heard on an author loop that Harlequin is shutting down its 'Blaze' imprint. Not sure if this is true or not, or whether the imprint is going digital only...or what. Off to investigate.

Pisco Sour said:

Sorry if this is a derail. I just heard on an author loop that Harlequin is shutting down its 'Blaze' imprint. Not sure if this is true or not, or whether the imprint is going digital only...or what. Off to investigate.

Click to expand...

It's true. Dear Author has a writeup about the closing of Blaze and Historical and Romance going digital only. :-(

http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/update-closing-harlequin-blaze-harlequin-historical/

Evangeline said:

It's true. Dear Author has a writeup about the closing of Blaze and Historical and Romance going digital only. :-(

http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/update-closing-harlequin-blaze-harlequin-historical/

Click to expand...

Evangeline, am I reading it wrong? I thought it says that you can buy e-books and print books, but only online. The distribution channels are changing (i.e. you can't buy one in Walmart) but you could buy a print book from Amazon, for example.

puzzled,
Evelyn

Evelyn_Alexie said:

Evangeline, am I reading it wrong? I thought it says that you can buy e-books and print books, but only online. The distribution channels are changing (i.e. you can't buy one in Walmart) but you could buy a print book from Amazon, for example.

puzzled,
Evelyn

Click to expand...

It's been speculated that the print copies through Amazon are going to be POD. Otherwise, you would have to subscribe to Harlequin's Direct-to-Consumer to obtain print versions--unless you're in the non-North American market (maybe UK?): so far, it's business as usual with foreign editions of Harlequin category titles.

Evangeline said:

It's been speculated that the print copies through Amazon are going to be POD. Otherwise, you would have to subscribe to Harlequin's Direct-to-Consumer to obtain print versions--unless you're in the non-North American market (maybe UK?): so far, it's business as usual with foreign editions of Harlequin category titles.

Click to expand...

That makes sense. Thanks!

Hey, it's my 100th post! I'll have to open up a bottle of virtual champagne to celebrate

Evangeline said:

It's been speculated that the print copies through Amazon are going to be POD. Otherwise, you would have to subscribe to Harlequin's Direct-to-Consumer to obtain print versions--unless you're in the non-North American market (maybe UK?): so far, it's business as usual with foreign editions of Harlequin category titles.

Click to expand...

I'm going to guess they won't be POD but more like the Avon Impulse line where they produce a short print run that will be available for purchase at various online retailers. POD costs would push the print price too high.

CEtchison said:

I'm going to guess they won't be POD but more like the Avon Impulse line where they produce a short print run that will be available for purchase at various online retailers. POD costs would push the print price too high.

Click to expand...

That's probably what it is.

I do wonder what the hotter line will be named.

I also wonder if this shake-up will change the editorial methods. Harlequin is known to be extremely thorough in assessing submissions. It can takes months and months to get a response back on a partial! They might need to be quicker in order to keep up with the changing market--and I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.

I'm not sure that taking a long time to asses submissions is them being thorough: it sounds more like they have a big backlog, that's all.

Nor am I sure that improving their response time would help them respond to the market in a way which would change the type of book they publish: the whole editing and printing cycle is pretty much fixed in terms of the time it takes (and I think Harlequin has a speedier system than many), and I suspect that's where much of the time goes.

Old Hack said:

I'm not sure that taking a long time to asses submissions is them being thorough: it sounds more like they have a big backlog, that's all.

Nor am I sure that improving their response time would help them respond to the market in a way which would change the type of book they publish: the whole editing and printing cycle is pretty much fixed in terms of the time it takes (and I think Harlequin has a speedier system than many), and I suspect that's where much of the time goes.

Click to expand...

These three lines are going to be digital-first, so printing schedules are kind of moot.

The digital-first lines of NY romance imprints boast about the quickness of acquisition to retail availability; Harlequin E did as well. If that's the case, I would believe that continuing the same practices for ostensibly revamped ebook lines--despite remaining category romance--would undermine the reasons for going digital-first.

Evangeline said:

These three lines are going to be digital-first, so printing schedules are kind of moot.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

It's not the format which dictates where the books are sold; it's the rights the publisher holds. I realise that some writers are going to happily license world rights but many do not, and that does affect where the books are available. There are quite a few which I can buy here, which are not available in the US, and vice versa.

Evangeline said:

These three lines are going to be digital-first, so printing schedules are kind of moot.

The digital-first lines of NY romance imprints boast about the quickness of acquisition to retail availability; Harlequin E did as well. If that's the case, I would believe that continuing the same practices for ostensibly revamped ebook lines--despite remaining category romance--would undermine the reasons for going digital-first.

Click to expand...

It still takes months to adequately produce a book, even in digital-format. You've got all of the regular stages, save the physical printing of the pages, which is replaced by a "release" date. There's not much time saved, and the schedules can be even tighter.

If you google simply -harlequin money writing- you'll come across some interesting blogs.

Writing Mom said:

Thanks for "being blunt" but I did say that I haven't even submitted yet, and I'm also doing this because I enjoy it. I haven't decided if I'll submit to them or somewhere else, that's why I'm here asking questions and wanting to hear from experienced published writers. I may never be published anywhere and not have to worry about it at all. No wonder I haven't visited this site in a long time...

Click to expand...

Did you write targeting one of their category lines specifically? Because if you didn't you can't submit to their single title programmes without an agent.

You can't just send them any old romance without an agent it would need to be targeted to a specific catagory line. You know that right? Also one needs to be aware they keep closing different lines and their "write for us" guidelines are rarely up to date regarding which lines have closed down or are about to close down, or are about to go digital only. So it would be prudent to check boards like this etc... to find out those things before submitting. Not that I've ever submitted to them myself but I know the drill.

To add to what Gingerwoman is saying: HQ has always had unwritten guidelines as well, particularly for their sweet and inspirational lines. You can't use this word or that trope, and this line must have an adorable kid in the story or your tale is toast. I prefer publishers with understandable, relatively stable guidelines that have some resemblance to what they actually do/don't want to see.

And they've always been slow. I had an agented submission with them for 9 or 10 months, I think it was, before they passed on it. Fun thing about that was that some months later, they contacted me directly saying they liked a snippet posted on a web site, and asking me to sub something! I did; they passed. It's a strange house and getting stranger, IMO.

jennontheisland said:

I'm sure they'd take as many books from you a year as they could publish. It comes down to how many actually publishable books a year can you write, and how little are you willing to live off of.

Short answer: nope.

Click to expand...

Off Topic- OMG always when I see a Seeley post it turns out to be because I've accidentally clicked the begining of the thread and it's from 2011. Are you writing again? Or just keeping up your interest in the industry?
(Forgive me if this takes more than one reply we'll take it to PM.)

On topic- Yes I've head a lot of examples of what Debb is saying over the years from other writers. It's a pity they can't make their website super up to date and on target about what they really want.

I can't speak to Harlequin, but I will say that if you have an entrepreneurial spirit and are willing to invest money, self-publishing is by far the best way to make money in romance. For other genres like YA, Women's Fiction, Mystery & Thriller, I still recommend the average bear to go on a querying adventure if their goal is to hit the big time, but I know TONS of people making their living self pubbing romance. ((CAVEAT: Historical Romance and Inspirational Romance are two romance categories where it might be a little harder.))

Here's what you have to be willing to do though, and it's not nothing:

1.) Write at least THREE phenomenal books. Yes, you heard me, not just one, but three. The self-pub market, like HQ, needs highly frequent releases, and most self published authors don't see ROI until after the third novel. You can go one of two routes, three interconnected books with different couples, or,three different books with the same couple. If you do three with the same couples I recommend NOT having a HFN at the end of each book, but a cliffhanger. Yes, readers will rake you over the coals for it. But they will also buy your next book. It's a new world out there kiddo. Which brings me to point two.

2.) Study what's selling in the Ebook markets. Just ebook. Not paperback. Not what you have on your shelves. Not what editors say the trends are. Ebooks. Amazon most specifically. The ebook market moves at lightening speed. For example stepbrother romance used to be super hot, but that trend has faded. Sci-fi romance is surging with lots of alien mail order brides. Shifters, what I write, remain steady. Whatever you write you must know what people are /really/ reading. Now write the novel of your heart, but make sure you're hitting the tropes of the genres of at least one hot property. If you're curious about the kinds of things that do well in indie e-book, check out my podcast, here: https://soundcloud.com/start-with-substance-678730910

Also, whatever you write must be just as good or better than anything you'd shop to a house. That means ....

2.) Get a highly trained team of professionals to produce your book. NO this doesn't have to cost tens of thousands of dollars, but you will need to spend money. Average cover costs range from $150-$300 for a good solid cover (not including paperback.) You can good to great copy-editing for a 60k novel in the $600-$900 range. (I've gotten quotes from Big Five people freelancing as low as $900 for 60k, so it can be done, and I don't even write clean. If you wanted to go a little cheap you can go even lower.) Formatting is /easy/ and you can do it yourself with Vellum. I wouldn't spend anything on the first book in terms of marketing. As I said you won't see ROI until Book 2 at the very soonest, unless you take off.

All in all, I'd budget not spending more than $1500 on the first book. It can be done, and more importantly, once you publish the first book you'll see what reader reception is. How are your star ratings? Is the book selling? Etc. Etc.


3.) Congratulations, your first book is out! Now as you publish book 2 & 3, it's time to start putting money into your series. There are lots of strategies, putting the first one free, getting a Bookbub, etc that can catapult your income. You need to learn about all of them. If you do, you'll reach the elusive stage number four...

4.) Profit!

As a new author I did around 10k on one book for its first year, and my launch was around the low end for the kind of authors I know. (So that's around double what a basic Harlequin advance is, sounds like.) Now I make anywhere between 2k-6k a month profit depending on promotions etc. Since that first "book", I've released one novel, one category length 40k novel and one novella within the series in addition to my original "book" (which was really a 100k series of serial novella.) I am making /peanuts/ to the authors I know who are releasing more than I am or are better writers and more keyed onto the genre than I am. People who can do this well make anywhere from 4-7k on the regular, especially those who have built out their back lists.

But it's a lot of work. And a different kind of work then querying and just focusing on your writing.

SylviaFrost said:

I can't speak to Harlequin, but I will say that if you have an entrepreneurial spirit and are willing to invest money, self-publishing is by far the best way to make money in romance.

[snipped]

As a new author I did around 10k on one book for its first year, and my launch was around the low end for the kind of authors I know. (So that's around double what a basic Harlequin advance is, sounds like.) Now I make anywhere between 2k-6k a month profit depending on promotions etc. Since that first "book", I've released one novel, one category length 40k novel and one novella within the series in addition to my original "book" (which was really a 100k series of serial novella.) I am making /peanuts/ to the authors I know who are releasing more than I am or are better writers and more keyed onto the genre than I am. People who can do this well make anywhere from 4-7k on the regular, especially those who have built out their back lists.

Click to expand...

I don't think that second quoted paragraph supports your first. Not judging by the sales figures many of my romance-writing, trade-published friends have told me. Not even for their UK sales figures, and they can all boost those with sales to America and several other countries, which further adds to the numbers.

Harlequin advances are notoriously low, as they have a specific business model which involves publishing a large number of titles every month, and not promoting individual titles to any real degree. Other publishers of romance pay higher advances, publish fewer books, and promote the socks off each one--so increasing sales and justifying those higher advances.

I don't think that second quoted paragraph supports your first. Not judging by the sales figures many of my romance-writing, trade-published friends have told me. Not even for their UK sales figures, and they can all boost those with sales to America and several other countries, which further adds to the numbers.

Harlequin advances are notoriously low, as they have a specific business model which involves publishing a large number of titles every month, and not promoting individual titles to any real degree. Other publishers of romance pay higher advances, publish fewer books, and promote the socks off each one--so increasing sales and justifying those higher advances.

Click to expand...

Most romance books on the best-seller lists are self-published now. So even if my numbers are off, for romance self-publishing seems to be the route for greatest numbers. The numbers I quoted are on the low end for authors just getting started. I also have friends who make 10k-30k a month regularly and one or two who do 100k months -- yes that's not a typo. Those that can rank below #100 on the Amazon store for new releases consistently and have their back lists sit in the low #200-#300s, earn about that much with KU reads. So there's a big range. But the minimum for people who write semi to market and publish more than once a year and are semi serious seems to be around 2-4k. But YMMV *shrugs*.

SylviaFrost said:

Most romance books on the best-seller lists are self-published now. So even if my numbers are off, for romance self-publishing seems to be the route for greatest numbers.

Click to expand...

I just had a quick look on Amazon UK, and there wasn't a single self-published book in the Romance section's Top Ten.

If I restrict the view to just books for Kindle then that might change: but all Kindle lists are going to contain a larger proportion of self-published writers because it's the easiest format to self publish in.

I didn't look too hard, I'll admit, but I didn't find any other romance lists where self published books outnumber trade. Could you provide a link or two which show this? Thanks.

[/QUOTE]The numbers I quoted are on the low end for authors just getting started. I also have friends who make 10k-30k a month regularly and one or two who do 100k months -- yes that's not a typo. Those that can rank below #100 on the Amazon store for new releases consistently and have their back lists sit in the low #200-#300s, earn about that much with KU reads. So there's a big range. But the minimum for people who write semi to market and publish more than once a year and are semi serious seems to be around 2-4k. But YMMV *shrugs*.[/QUOTE]

I have friends who make hundreds of thousands of pounds a year from their writing. I have friends who make nothing. It's easy to cherry-pick a few of our friends in order to prove a point. But that doesn't mean it's a reliable trend, or that one writer's sales figures and earnings are going to be easy for others to duplicate.

Old Hack said:

I just had a quick look on Amazon UK, and there wasn't a single self-published book in the Romance section's Top Ten.

If I restrict the view to just books for Kindle then that might change: but all Kindle lists are going to contain a larger proportion of self-published writers because it's the easiest format to self publish in.

I didn't look too hard, I'll admit, but I didn't find any other romance lists where self published books outnumber trade. Could you provide a link or two which show this? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Why are you looking at the UK Amazon? Yes, Mills and Boon are headquartered in the UK, but the romance market is completely different from the US (e.g. the sexy covers that sell well here do nothing for readers overseas). It's obvious that Sylvia is referring to the North American market. I too know many "midlist" selfpub authors making 10k+ a month. There have been a number of workshops on this at RWA conferences over the past few years.

You can also look at Hugh Howey and Data Guy's Author Earnings report. Mark Coker at Smashwords frequently releases market reports. And a simple google search will probably turn up blog posts from successful romance authors. The writing world is a lot larger than AW. Honestly, this poo-poohing over legitimate information being shared by experienced romance writers is probably why most longtime romance writers take their conversations elsewhere.

Evangeline said:

Why are you looking at the UK Amazon? Yes, Mills and Boon are headquartered in the UK, but the romance market is completely different from the US (e.g. the sexy covers that sell well here do nothing for readers overseas). It's obvious that Sylvia is referring to the North American market. I too know many "midlist" selfpub authors making 10k+ a month. There have been a number of workshops on this at RWA conferences over the past few years.

You can also look at Hugh Howey and Data Guy's Author Earnings report. Mark Coker at Smashwords frequently releases market reports. And a simple google search will probably turn up blog posts from successful romance authors. The writing world is a lot larger than AW. Honestly, this poo-poohing over legitimate information being shared by experienced romance writers is probably why most longtime romance writers take their conversations elsewhere.

Click to expand...

I don't think Old Hack was being derogatory about self-publishing, just advising caution. It's very true that lots of authors are doing very well self-publishing but those who are selling thousands a month are still in the minority. If you (general you) publish expecting thousands of sales then there's a chance you could be disappointed. Also, Old Hack is from the UK. Amazon defaults to the UK version when you type it in on a British computer.

The Amazon US bestseller list does indeed have some self-published romance books in the top ten unless I'm missing the publishers somehow.

Evangeline said:

Honestly, this poo-poohing over legitimate information being shared by experienced romance writers is probably why most longtime romance writers take their conversations elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Really? I've been here for quite a while and don't plan on going elsewhere. Where are these other wonderful boards you speak of?

Evangeline said:

Why are you looking at the UK Amazon?

Click to expand...

Because I live in the UK.

Yes, Mills and Boon are headquartered in the UK, but the romance market is completely different from the US (e.g. the sexy covers that sell well here do nothing for readers overseas).

Click to expand...

I know. I was indirectly involved with HM&B for a while, I was a member of the UK's RNA for years, and I have lots of friends who write, edit, and/or represent romance.

It's obvious that Sylvia is referring to the North American market.

Click to expand...

It wasn't obvious to me. I didn't see her refer to America, specifically, in her posts, but I might have missed her reference. And why would any writer want to restrict themselves to the American market only? True, it's a large market: but a writer who sells her books into territories worldwide is going to do a lot better than a writer who remains isolated in the USA.

I too know many "midlist" selfpub authors making 10k+ a month. There have been a number of workshops on this at RWA conferences over the past few years.

Click to expand...

There are plenty. But that doesn't mean they're the norm, or that the average romance writer who is trade published does worse.

You can also look at Hugh Howey and Data Guy's Author Earnings report.

Click to expand...

Trust me, I have. It's hugely flawed and it frequently misinterprets its own data. There are a few discussions of it at AW. I remember one where one of our very successful self-published members, who happens to also be a mathematician, explained where they'd gone wrong. I'll look for a link if I have time.

Mark Coker at Smashwords frequently releases market reports. And a simple google search will probably turn up blog posts from successful romance authors. The writing world is a lot larger than AW. Honestly, this poo-poohing over legitimate information being shared by experienced romance writers is probably why most longtime romance writers take their conversations elsewhere.

Click to expand...

I'm just telling you how the view looks from my side of the hill. If you don't want to hear any opposing views then by all means, take your conversations elsewhere. But if you want to see the whole picture I hope you'll stay here, and continue with the discussion.

Anna_Hedley said:

I don't think Old Hack was being derogatory about self-publishing, just advising caution. It's very true that lots of authors are doing very well self-publishing but those who are selling thousands a month are still in the minority. If you (general you) publish expecting thousands of sales then there's a chance you could be disappointed. Also, Old Hack is from the UK. Amazon defaults to the UK version when you type it in on a British computer.

The Amazon US bestseller list does indeed have some self-published romance books in the top ten unless I'm missing the publishers somehow.

Click to expand...

Thank you. In my opinion self publishing can be brilliant: but it can also be disastrous. It's important to take into account all the information you can before making any decisions, and to seek opinions from all sides of the many fences which surround us. All I'm trying to do is to provide one of those different views. (How many metaphors do you think I can mix into one paragraph, do you think?)

Writing Mom said:

But how many times a year can a writer be published with Harlequin? Say for example, if you get a contract for a book and they pay you $6,000 up front (a complete guess), that isn't enough to live on for a year. But is it possible to do this 4 or 5 times per year?

Click to expand...

Going back to the original question, I saw this on a Harlequin editor's blog:
Note: the blog post was written in 2009.

If you sell one book to us don’t quit your day job. But if you can write 3 – 4 books a year, you will have a career.
https://mallevallik.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/the-career-no-guidance-counselor-suggests-romance-writer/