- Status
I wonder just how long it will take before some of the retailers get wind of that loophole and close it since they'll be paying out cash to PA in return for nothing.
Now I'm interested in learning whether authors receive any royalties for books purchased using points.
Now I'm interested in learning whether authors receive any royalties for books purchased using points.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 207
- Reaction score
- 114
- Location
- Schenectady (really)
- Website
- www.sff.net
Well, PA is not in the business of helping writers. No publisher is. In both cases, their business is selling books -- PA to the authors, mainstream publishers to the general public.Gratian Gasparri said:
People invest a lot of time, effort, and ego into their writing, and, when starting out, often can't understand why they aren't rewarded. They take it personally if their work doesn't immediately sell and can't understand that the rejection isn't personal.
Years ago, George Scithers at Asimov's explained how authors should deal with rejections: "We're not rejecting you. We're rejecting pieces of paper with words typed on them."
And that's the key. A rejection doesn't mean you're a bad person or a bad author. It just means that the editor didn't want to buy your work. And that is not necessarily a reaction to the quality.
Gratian Gasparri said:
Wonder how long before PA realizes their own writers are getting free books?
Laura J. Underwood (A Little Bit of Travis Tea--My ATLANTA NIGHTS can poke out your EYE OF ARGON any day!)
DRAGON'S TONGUE forthcoming from Meisha Merlin in the Summer of 2006. Preview a copy at http://www.embiid.net.
New supply again?
Hi all, glad to be back and doing okay. I'm going to catch up on all the back posts in a day or two.
When my computer came back from the shop, my book was "not available" and "not in print" so I was delighted. It had been removed from all the online book stores. I thought my dozens and dozens of letters had finally done some good.
Then suddenly 3 more appeared. Then 19, 11 were "new" and today when I returned from vacation, 3 had been sold and I moved up again on the best seller list. A few months ago no NEW books were available. I haven't had a contract since May. Since all the suppliers report that none are available, it seems a bit strange.
On Amazon PA says 8002 books. However, many do not have a contact and many others are not happy.
They no longer have a contract but the book is still being sold.
Also I have not received a royalty check. My CPA is writing the the IRS.
Just for the record, although I'm not posting much and as involved as I was, my interest is still the same and I will be delighted to take part in any action against PA.
Hi Kevin, good to see you again.
Molly (aka Eighter)
Hi all, glad to be back and doing okay. I'm going to catch up on all the back posts in a day or two.
When my computer came back from the shop, my book was "not available" and "not in print" so I was delighted. It had been removed from all the online book stores. I thought my dozens and dozens of letters had finally done some good.
Then suddenly 3 more appeared. Then 19, 11 were "new" and today when I returned from vacation, 3 had been sold and I moved up again on the best seller list. A few months ago no NEW books were available. I haven't had a contract since May. Since all the suppliers report that none are available, it seems a bit strange.
On Amazon PA says 8002 books. However, many do not have a contact and many others are not happy.
They no longer have a contract but the book is still being sold.
Also I have not received a royalty check. My CPA is writing the the IRS.
Just for the record, although I'm not posting much and as involved as I was, my interest is still the same and I will be delighted to take part in any action against PA.
Hi Kevin, good to see you again.
Molly (aka Eighter)
NicoleJLeBoeuf said:
Ah, should have remembered that bit. Saw one but not two.
But no, it's not the Matrix.
Another clue: Movie is based on a bestseller that was really popular with librarians in the early to mid 80s because the subject was, in a sense, librarians.
Oh, and just so we're staying on subject DOWN WITH PA. May Larry Clopper's schemes catch up with him in the middle of the night!
Like Kyle the Kite... *evil grin*
Laura J. Underwood (A Little Bit of Travis Tea--My ATLANTA NIGHTS can poke out your EYE OF ARGON any day!)
DRAGON'S TONGUE forthcoming from Meisha Merlin in the Summer of 2006. Preview a copy at http://www.embiid.net.
Long post about PA Forum mindsets and the quoting of PA Forum posts
It's a shame - most of us here don't have the ability to post on the PA forums, so we can only respond here and hope the authors drift over here and read our responses. But the ones who need to read what we have to say usually have written us all off as clueless "bashers," so they don't read our forum.
It's one of the subtler cult-like behavior traits of PA: isolate your victim from the outside world. Because PA has so thoroughly entrenched an "us vs. them" mentality in their victims, their still-fooled victims tend to only trust info received via PA or the PA Forums--in fact, I'd hazard a guess that most of their still-fooled victims don't read much else, webwise, other than the PA forums.
If only those PA authors would open up a bulletin board geared towards "inviting those nasty bashers to try to debate our publisher with us"! They seem so confident that PA is the way to go, they ought to have no problem with hosting a public question-answer forum in which they defend PA to all comers. And if PA's big three forbade them to do so, maybe that would get them thinking.
Maybe we should start a thread, here, in this "nest of bashers", inviting PA authors to come ask questions. I know that this thread is generally considered the one to invite PA authors to, but it's so long and so very obviously anti-PA that we only get the PA deserters. Maybe a thread called "PA Authors: Defend Your Publisher Here," and make it clear that it is for PA Authors who still defend PA to challenge us "bashers". The point is to get the "bashers" and the "defenders" talking somewhere out from underneath the Three Stooges' thumbs.
(Yes, I know that the Three Stooges will be reading this post. I think that should they proactively warn their victims against participating in such a thread, they would be shooting themselves in the foot. It's one thing to encourage a mindset that tends towards keeping discussions within the flock; it's quite another kettle of fishy smells to actively and explicitly discourage it. The latter would surely be suspicious behavior on their part. "Don't go talk to those sinners! They'll--they'll brainwash you! Yeah!")
On the subject of mistaking PA Forum messages for being the actual sentiments of AW Forum members, might I suggest a stylistic trick? Use the "quote" markup when quoting PA Forum messages:
It's a good idea also post the URL of the orginal post, even if you know the post might get deleted. That's just good basic attribution practice.
For everyone who has ever been confused: PA Forum messages always start with the word "Message:" on one line. Why? I don't know. Bad programming in the PA Forum software, I guess. Most of the time people past PA Forum message text into AW Forum messages, they include that line, so that's one way you can tell it's a PA Forum post being quoted.
Hi T42 - I know that you know that the sentiments weren't Caopax's, so I won't beat that dead horse, but it's probably also worth mentioning that there's no way of knowing whether the original author of the "poor PA" message is actually reading these boards. Since they're still in denial, I'm going to guess that they're not. In which case, your response will unfortunately miss the target.T42 said:
It's a shame - most of us here don't have the ability to post on the PA forums, so we can only respond here and hope the authors drift over here and read our responses. But the ones who need to read what we have to say usually have written us all off as clueless "bashers," so they don't read our forum.
It's one of the subtler cult-like behavior traits of PA: isolate your victim from the outside world. Because PA has so thoroughly entrenched an "us vs. them" mentality in their victims, their still-fooled victims tend to only trust info received via PA or the PA Forums--in fact, I'd hazard a guess that most of their still-fooled victims don't read much else, webwise, other than the PA forums.
If only those PA authors would open up a bulletin board geared towards "inviting those nasty bashers to try to debate our publisher with us"! They seem so confident that PA is the way to go, they ought to have no problem with hosting a public question-answer forum in which they defend PA to all comers. And if PA's big three forbade them to do so, maybe that would get them thinking.
Maybe we should start a thread, here, in this "nest of bashers", inviting PA authors to come ask questions. I know that this thread is generally considered the one to invite PA authors to, but it's so long and so very obviously anti-PA that we only get the PA deserters. Maybe a thread called "PA Authors: Defend Your Publisher Here," and make it clear that it is for PA Authors who still defend PA to challenge us "bashers". The point is to get the "bashers" and the "defenders" talking somewhere out from underneath the Three Stooges' thumbs.
(Yes, I know that the Three Stooges will be reading this post. I think that should they proactively warn their victims against participating in such a thread, they would be shooting themselves in the foot. It's one thing to encourage a mindset that tends towards keeping discussions within the flock; it's quite another kettle of fishy smells to actively and explicitly discourage it. The latter would surely be suspicious behavior on their part. "Don't go talk to those sinners! They'll--they'll brainwash you! Yeah!")
* * *
On the subject of mistaking PA Forum messages for being the actual sentiments of AW Forum members, might I suggest a stylistic trick? Use the "quote" markup when quoting PA Forum messages:
You do that by using the word "quote" in square brackets ([...]); use quote="whover you want" to get that "originally posted by whovever" verbiage to show up. End the quote with "/quote" in []s.So'n'so from the PA boards said:
It's a good idea also post the URL of the orginal post, even if you know the post might get deleted. That's just good basic attribution practice.
For everyone who has ever been confused: PA Forum messages always start with the word "Message:" on one line. Why? I don't know. Bad programming in the PA Forum software, I guess. Most of the time people past PA Forum message text into AW Forum messages, they include that line, so that's one way you can tell it's a PA Forum post being quoted.
MyPoints
Of course, who knows whether PA finds a way to leave gift certificate purchases off the royalty statement?
(I'm a MyPoints member, so I guess I should do what the PA Forum poster did and invite y'all to PM me your email address so I can have 'em send you an invite, if you wanna sign up. There. Obligatory plug taken care of.)
They ought to. If you buy merchandise with MyPoints points, or with an Amazon gift certificate bought with MyPoints points, someone's still paying for it. It's just not you.DaveKuzminski said:
Of course, who knows whether PA finds a way to leave gift certificate purchases off the royalty statement?
(I'm a MyPoints member, so I guess I should do what the PA Forum poster did and invite y'all to PM me your email address so I can have 'em send you an invite, if you wanna sign up. There. Obligatory plug taken care of.)
Last edited:
Publishers want their authors to succeed
Mainstream publishers want their authors to succeed. When the author's books sells, the publisher makes money. It's a win - win situation.
The publisher takes a risk by buying a manuscript and paying the author an advance against future royalties. The author takes a risk in that the chosen publisher will do their best to produce a quality product and will promote that product, the author's book, to the best of their ability given the marketplace.
Both sides have given up something of value. Both sides have received value. Both sides have expectations. Both sides have responsibilities. This is a business arrangement.
Publishers are not charity foundations looking to give the unsung, unpublished, writer a chance at publication in exchange for gratitude, eternal loyality and servitude.
Writers are not entitled to publication. Just because you've written a book does not mean it is your divine right to see that book standing proudly, cover to cover, with the titles of Steinbeck, Rowling or King.
It is difficult to get published. It is a challenge. It is hard work. Writing the book is only the very first step in becoming an author. Authors who see success just over the horizon, don't give up. They don't let one rejection or a hundred rejections act as a barrier or as an excuse for failure.
Stephen King’s Carrie was the fifth novel he’d written. James Patterson’s first mystery was turned down by 31 publishers (but later won an Edgar Award). Mary Higgins Clark’s first story took 6 years and 41 rejection slips before it was finally published. Her first novel was, as she puts it, “a commercial disaster.” Her second, Where Are the Children? was a bestseller. Janet Evanovich’s first three attempts were, in her own words “sucky un-sellable manuscripts.” Time and time again bestselling authors have learned the same lesson: With great diligence, and unwavering devotion to the craft of writing, “sucky” can eventually turn into sublime.
Don't let one experience with one publisher hold you back. Don't judge yourself or the quality of your writing by that one publisher.
Dee
Mainstream publishers want their authors to succeed. When the author's books sells, the publisher makes money. It's a win - win situation.
The publisher takes a risk by buying a manuscript and paying the author an advance against future royalties. The author takes a risk in that the chosen publisher will do their best to produce a quality product and will promote that product, the author's book, to the best of their ability given the marketplace.
Both sides have given up something of value. Both sides have received value. Both sides have expectations. Both sides have responsibilities. This is a business arrangement.
Publishers are not charity foundations looking to give the unsung, unpublished, writer a chance at publication in exchange for gratitude, eternal loyality and servitude.
Writers are not entitled to publication. Just because you've written a book does not mean it is your divine right to see that book standing proudly, cover to cover, with the titles of Steinbeck, Rowling or King.
It is difficult to get published. It is a challenge. It is hard work. Writing the book is only the very first step in becoming an author. Authors who see success just over the horizon, don't give up. They don't let one rejection or a hundred rejections act as a barrier or as an excuse for failure.
Stephen King’s Carrie was the fifth novel he’d written. James Patterson’s first mystery was turned down by 31 publishers (but later won an Edgar Award). Mary Higgins Clark’s first story took 6 years and 41 rejection slips before it was finally published. Her first novel was, as she puts it, “a commercial disaster.” Her second, Where Are the Children? was a bestseller. Janet Evanovich’s first three attempts were, in her own words “sucky un-sellable manuscripts.” Time and time again bestselling authors have learned the same lesson: With great diligence, and unwavering devotion to the craft of writing, “sucky” can eventually turn into sublime.
Don't let one experience with one publisher hold you back. Don't judge yourself or the quality of your writing by that one publisher.
Dee
Okay, The brownies are done! Susan and Aka just be here before hubby get's home because the boy just doesn't share. He doesn't play well with others either
Well Susan your welcome to come to Texas and see us anytime and hopefully when I'm through with PA they will know what a good Texas Whoop *** is. Am I suppose to say that here? You know? Whoop ***? Is that one word or two words? I've got to stop eating so many brownies...I can't think....
Okay, hubby is suppose to fix my computer so if you all don't see me for awhile it's because the puter is down, or PA sent the cops after me
Have a great weekend!
Mem
Well Susan your welcome to come to Texas and see us anytime and hopefully when I'm through with PA they will know what a good Texas Whoop *** is. Am I suppose to say that here? You know? Whoop ***? Is that one word or two words? I've got to stop eating so many brownies...I can't think....
Okay, hubby is suppose to fix my computer so if you all don't see me for awhile it's because the puter is down, or PA sent the cops after me
Have a great weekend!
Mem
http://www.publishamerica.com/cgi-bin/pamessageboard/data/main/11698.htm Message: Hi Guys said:
There are so many mainstream authors here on AW, I just have to ask, and I'm not being mean or funny, when your books come out, do you tell everyone you know how many errors you have found? One other question, is this statement good or bad,"in a book of approx 40,000 words 4 isn't bad?"
Just really curious.
Nicole, before I get off the computer just wanted to say thanks for the advice and what a great idea to invite them over for some good, honest debates. (On our part anyway) I got kicked off my first week on PA's thread. It took me weeks to get back on. I was on for 15 minutes. I asked one question and followed it up with some facts and was taken off the boards promptly and never allowed on again.
Have a great weekend!
Mem
Have a great weekend!
Mem
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 701
- Reaction score
- 130
- Location
- Bolingbrook, IL
- Website
- www.idiorhythmic.net
Royalties on Gift Certificates
I don't know what LS royalty statements look like (I'm still in the set up phase with them for Jintsu titles) however I know from being in the Amazon.com's Advantage program that Amazon.com only reports how many copies of a title sold. The publisher doesn't get to know: who a title sold to, for what price, how the customer paid, etc. Just "X number of copies sold in Y amount of time."
I can't see any reason for LS to report customer purchase information to publishers so all PA should see is number of copies sold. The author might be engaged in a very different experiment than he first thought, depending on whether the number of copies he bought matches up with the number of copies reported on his PA royalty statement.
NicoleJLeBoeuf said:
I don't know what LS royalty statements look like (I'm still in the set up phase with them for Jintsu titles) however I know from being in the Amazon.com's Advantage program that Amazon.com only reports how many copies of a title sold. The publisher doesn't get to know: who a title sold to, for what price, how the customer paid, etc. Just "X number of copies sold in Y amount of time."
I can't see any reason for LS to report customer purchase information to publishers so all PA should see is number of copies sold. The author might be engaged in a very different experiment than he first thought, depending on whether the number of copies he bought matches up with the number of copies reported on his PA royalty statement.
From the PA thread on rejections....
This is something to be very sad about if it's true, this PA author rejected legit publishers to go yet again with PA. What I can't understand is the loyalty? Why? It's not like PA is putting money into their wallets or anything, I guess just the high of seeing your name on a book's cover is all I can figure.
And Nicole (god I love your name), my money says PA will never put up any kind of board for the PAvidians to interact with anyone outside of PA. Cults like to keep the flock in an embryonic environment, outsiders can contaminate things, you know. Think about it - in communist Russia, what did they do? Tried to keep free TV and radio out, so that people wouldn't learn the truth. PA is doing the same thing, albeit on a much smaller scale.
Basically, the New Three Stooges shouldn't be running a car lot, much less a publishing house. Remember, Dorothy Deering had a very limited education and made millions off her scam lit agency and publishing house. Let's face it, most of us writers think that we're writing masterpieces, and that belief fuels vanity publishers like PA. Larry and Curlem simply realized that they could apply the vanity publishing model to POD technology, which saves them from having to warehouse anything. Just print the books as needed, know that each title will move 50-75 on average, and the money just keeps on rollin' in. That's their hope.
Watch the new releases section on the PA pages each week, if those numbers keep falling then life might start getting a little dicey at the great and mighty pirate ship...
This is something to be very sad about if it's true, this PA author rejected legit publishers to go yet again with PA. What I can't understand is the loyalty? Why? It's not like PA is putting money into their wallets or anything, I guess just the high of seeing your name on a book's cover is all I can figure.
And Nicole (god I love your name), my money says PA will never put up any kind of board for the PAvidians to interact with anyone outside of PA. Cults like to keep the flock in an embryonic environment, outsiders can contaminate things, you know. Think about it - in communist Russia, what did they do? Tried to keep free TV and radio out, so that people wouldn't learn the truth. PA is doing the same thing, albeit on a much smaller scale.
Basically, the New Three Stooges shouldn't be running a car lot, much less a publishing house. Remember, Dorothy Deering had a very limited education and made millions off her scam lit agency and publishing house. Let's face it, most of us writers think that we're writing masterpieces, and that belief fuels vanity publishers like PA. Larry and Curlem simply realized that they could apply the vanity publishing model to POD technology, which saves them from having to warehouse anything. Just print the books as needed, know that each title will move 50-75 on average, and the money just keeps on rollin' in. That's their hope.
Watch the new releases section on the PA pages each week, if those numbers keep falling then life might start getting a little dicey at the great and mighty pirate ship...
Last edited:
PA is so St**** that they sent me the wrong letter
Guess what guys, I sent PA a letter stating that I wanted results by the end of the day and they are so dumb that they sent me another persons letter. Funny though because his name is the same as my husbands I hope he doesn't mind me doing this because I emailed him and told him what happened and told him to join us over here. I just thought you all would get a kick out of the letter written to him. I'm trying to write this fast so I can get off the puter so bear with me but here it is and sorry it is so long.
Mem
I also got a letter from them today saying they don't like my tone and demanded an apology. I told them it would be a cold day in hell more or less and demanded an apology from them As of Monday morning I will be taking actions against PA. (media, lawyers and whatever else it takes)
Dear Mr. *********
Your accusatory tone is way out of place, especially given that you, and
your lawyer, obviously know very little about the publishing industry.
For an attorney to make such a statement with such an obvious lack of
knowledge about PublishAmerica or the publishing industry, is sheer
nonsense, and does nothing but clarity the attorney's credibility. We will
expect an apology from you, and from your attorney, and we will not be
ceasing anything.
>>Before I signed my contract with PublishAmerica,
>>I thoroughly reviewed your web site and believed
>>that you were not a Print On Demand organization.
No, that is impossible. The issue is explained in detail with a prominent
link on our homepage to http://www.publishamerica.com/facts/index.htm. It is
also very common knowledge that we use print on demand, as do most major
publishers to some extent.
>>Your web site claims you are a "traditional
>>advance and royalty paying book publisher."
Yes, that is true, and that has never been credibly challenged.
>>From the national news stories I've read (the Washington Post
>>article, dated January 20,2005 as one example) PublishAmerica
>>is widely viewed as a Print On Demand organization
Yes, all publishers use this technology, and it is gaining ground all the
time.
>>and does not follow "traditional" means of distribution.
No, no one is making such a statement. We use all the same distribution
methods, such as Ingram, the world's largest book wholesaler, as do all
traditional publishers, including all major publishers.
>>Books are not printed and distributed until ordered.
True, and there's nothing wrong with that. A brief glance at our web site
would show that.
>>Before signing my contract I read on your web site that
>>"The majority of our books that are sold retail are sold
>>in physical brick and mortar bookstores," and your books
>>"are available through most major bookstores." Again,
>>according to the facts in many national news reports,
>>this is not true.
Yes, it is true. Actually, like all traditional publishers, our books are
available through ALL bookstores throughout the US and most of Europe. Just
last week, for example, Barnes and Noble, by far our largest customer,
ordered 456 books from PublishAmerica. The week before that it was 512
books, the week before that 448. Each and every day, brick and mortar
bookstores purchase PublishAmerica books roughly 335 times.
>>In the eyes of some who have worked with the local
>>print-on-demand house, however, PublishAmerica misleads
>>its many authors into believeing their works will find
>>a nationwide market."
The key phrase here is "in the eyes of some." In the eyes of 11,000 authors,
however, this is not the case.
>>"Some writers organizations will not accept PublishAmerica
>>authors or offer only limited memberships. Those organizations
>>include the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America,
>>the Mystery Writers of America and the Authors Guild." This
>>hardly attests to the fact that PublishAmerica is a
>>"traditional advance and royalty paying book publisher."
No, it does not have any bearing on "the fact that PublishAmerica
is a traditional advance and royalty paying book publisher."
Many such organizations have long ago lost credibility, and it would appear
that they are rarely taken seriously. We've seen them mocked many times.
They are very small with very little traffic and even less influence.
Fortunately, few people take them seriously, and we rarely hear their name
mentioned from any of our 11,000 happily contracted authors or the hundreds
of prospective authors with whom we are routinely in contact. These consist
of hundreds of professional people, including lawyers, doctors, and
professors, plus many previously published authors and celebrities.
Normally we don't even respond to occasional preposterous bits of comedy
that may show up on the web. To refute them implies that they are credible,
which they are not. Negativity on the web may be found concerning all
publishers.
Our reputation in the industry is, and always has been, stellar, and we
cherish our authors, as their number steadily grows. We have had, throughout
our history, very few problems of any kind. In our hundreds of thousands of
business transactions, we have had an extraordinarily small number of
complaints, and to our knowledge, all have been resolved. We are growing
rapidly, with upwards of a million books sold, in physical brick and mortar
bookstores and elsewhere.
Here are some credible comments about our practices, followed by more
information about our operations:
Virtually no day goes by without PublishAmerica being in the news. Among the
celebrities that have recently been congratulating PublishAmerica and our
authors are First Lady Laura Bush and Second Lady Lynne Cheney. An
increasing number of our authors have recently been or will soon be on
national TV, including celebrity actor Jamie Farr whose promotions included
a trip to Hollywood Squares.
Writer's Digest did a detailed study of a publishing contract that was
almost identical to ours and gave it a clean bill of health. Our contract
terms are very much standard for the publishing industry. PublishAmerica is
operating under the watchful eyes of highly credible industry authorities
such as the National Writers Union, an AFL/CIO affiliate who states that
ours "is not at all a bad contract", and Christian author advocate Sally
Stuart who recently told a writer, "you should be OK working with this
company." Such verdicts, plus the sheer numbers of our results, speak for
themselves.
>>3) There are many documented cases, which I can provide, showing
>>that PublishAmerica puts minimal marketing efforts into books and
>>is "relying on its authors to largely sell their own books"
>>(Washington Post, Jan 20, 2005).
No, there are not "documented cases." But such marketing efforts are very
standard in the publishing industry's 50,000 publishing companies. The fact
that the majority of these publishing companies differ from the top handful
is very normal.
>>My contract was less than one week old when I initially asked
>>to be released from it. Because of this, there has been little
>>expenditure of resources on my project.
Production is continuing normally.
>>PublishAmerica has released other authors from their contract.
All publishers do this, and traditional Publishers treat authors
differently. Some authors get large advances, others get small advances.
Some get additional marketing services, and some do not. These are all very
common market driven practices in the publishing industry.
>>I know PublishAmerica has many happy authors,
>>however, I do not believe your advertising was truthful.
As you can see, you are sadly mistaken. Again, we will expect your apology.
>>I am, however, prepared to proceed further with my complaints...
>>...Maryland Office of Attorney General, Consumer Protection
>>Division, the Better Bussiness Bearue of Maryland...
That would be fine. All of these offices are well aware of our
upstanding business practices, have received our explanations,
and have previously declined to take any action.
>>If email proves too onerous in our further communication I would
>>be glad to be available for a phone conversation or stop by your
>>office in downtown Frederick--my wife stumbled accross your new
>>location last week when running around town.
We will not discuss these issues while you are here, nor probably further at
all, but we prefer email for that anyway if you do have further questions.
We would welcome you, however, to take a brief tour of our offices. If you
give us a range of dates and times that are good for you, we will let you
know when is convenient for us.
Thank You,
PublishAmerica Author Support
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
Inbox
Guess what guys, I sent PA a letter stating that I wanted results by the end of the day and they are so dumb that they sent me another persons letter. Funny though because his name is the same as my husbands
I hope he doesn't mind me doing this because I emailed him and told him what happened and told him to join us over here. I just thought you all would get a kick out of the letter written to him. I'm trying to write this fast so I can get off the puter so bear with me but here it is and sorry it is so long.Mem
I also got a letter from them today saying they don't like my tone and demanded an apology. I told them it would be a cold day in hell more or less and demanded an apology from them
As of Monday morning I will be taking actions against PA. (media, lawyers and whatever else it takes)Dear Mr. *********
Your accusatory tone is way out of place, especially given that you, and
your lawyer, obviously know very little about the publishing industry.
For an attorney to make such a statement with such an obvious lack of
knowledge about PublishAmerica or the publishing industry, is sheer
nonsense, and does nothing but clarity the attorney's credibility. We will
expect an apology from you, and from your attorney, and we will not be
ceasing anything.
>>Before I signed my contract with PublishAmerica,
>>I thoroughly reviewed your web site and believed
>>that you were not a Print On Demand organization.
No, that is impossible. The issue is explained in detail with a prominent
link on our homepage to http://www.publishamerica.com/facts/index.htm. It is
also very common knowledge that we use print on demand, as do most major
publishers to some extent.
>>Your web site claims you are a "traditional
>>advance and royalty paying book publisher."
Yes, that is true, and that has never been credibly challenged.
>>From the national news stories I've read (the Washington Post
>>article, dated January 20,2005 as one example) PublishAmerica
>>is widely viewed as a Print On Demand organization
Yes, all publishers use this technology, and it is gaining ground all the
time.
>>and does not follow "traditional" means of distribution.
No, no one is making such a statement. We use all the same distribution
methods, such as Ingram, the world's largest book wholesaler, as do all
traditional publishers, including all major publishers.
>>Books are not printed and distributed until ordered.
True, and there's nothing wrong with that. A brief glance at our web site
would show that.
>>Before signing my contract I read on your web site that
>>"The majority of our books that are sold retail are sold
>>in physical brick and mortar bookstores," and your books
>>"are available through most major bookstores." Again,
>>according to the facts in many national news reports,
>>this is not true.
Yes, it is true. Actually, like all traditional publishers, our books are
available through ALL bookstores throughout the US and most of Europe. Just
last week, for example, Barnes and Noble, by far our largest customer,
ordered 456 books from PublishAmerica. The week before that it was 512
books, the week before that 448. Each and every day, brick and mortar
bookstores purchase PublishAmerica books roughly 335 times.
>>In the eyes of some who have worked with the local
>>print-on-demand house, however, PublishAmerica misleads
>>its many authors into believeing their works will find
>>a nationwide market."
The key phrase here is "in the eyes of some." In the eyes of 11,000 authors,
however, this is not the case.
>>"Some writers organizations will not accept PublishAmerica
>>authors or offer only limited memberships. Those organizations
>>include the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America,
>>the Mystery Writers of America and the Authors Guild." This
>>hardly attests to the fact that PublishAmerica is a
>>"traditional advance and royalty paying book publisher."
No, it does not have any bearing on "the fact that PublishAmerica
is a traditional advance and royalty paying book publisher."
Many such organizations have long ago lost credibility, and it would appear
that they are rarely taken seriously. We've seen them mocked many times.
They are very small with very little traffic and even less influence.
Fortunately, few people take them seriously, and we rarely hear their name
mentioned from any of our 11,000 happily contracted authors or the hundreds
of prospective authors with whom we are routinely in contact. These consist
of hundreds of professional people, including lawyers, doctors, and
professors, plus many previously published authors and celebrities.
Normally we don't even respond to occasional preposterous bits of comedy
that may show up on the web. To refute them implies that they are credible,
which they are not. Negativity on the web may be found concerning all
publishers.
Our reputation in the industry is, and always has been, stellar, and we
cherish our authors, as their number steadily grows. We have had, throughout
our history, very few problems of any kind. In our hundreds of thousands of
business transactions, we have had an extraordinarily small number of
complaints, and to our knowledge, all have been resolved. We are growing
rapidly, with upwards of a million books sold, in physical brick and mortar
bookstores and elsewhere.
Here are some credible comments about our practices, followed by more
information about our operations:
Virtually no day goes by without PublishAmerica being in the news. Among the
celebrities that have recently been congratulating PublishAmerica and our
authors are First Lady Laura Bush and Second Lady Lynne Cheney. An
increasing number of our authors have recently been or will soon be on
national TV, including celebrity actor Jamie Farr whose promotions included
a trip to Hollywood Squares.
Writer's Digest did a detailed study of a publishing contract that was
almost identical to ours and gave it a clean bill of health. Our contract
terms are very much standard for the publishing industry. PublishAmerica is
operating under the watchful eyes of highly credible industry authorities
such as the National Writers Union, an AFL/CIO affiliate who states that
ours "is not at all a bad contract", and Christian author advocate Sally
Stuart who recently told a writer, "you should be OK working with this
company." Such verdicts, plus the sheer numbers of our results, speak for
themselves.
>>3) There are many documented cases, which I can provide, showing
>>that PublishAmerica puts minimal marketing efforts into books and
>>is "relying on its authors to largely sell their own books"
>>(Washington Post, Jan 20, 2005).
No, there are not "documented cases." But such marketing efforts are very
standard in the publishing industry's 50,000 publishing companies. The fact
that the majority of these publishing companies differ from the top handful
is very normal.
>>My contract was less than one week old when I initially asked
>>to be released from it. Because of this, there has been little
>>expenditure of resources on my project.
Production is continuing normally.
>>PublishAmerica has released other authors from their contract.
All publishers do this, and traditional Publishers treat authors
differently. Some authors get large advances, others get small advances.
Some get additional marketing services, and some do not. These are all very
common market driven practices in the publishing industry.
>>I know PublishAmerica has many happy authors,
>>however, I do not believe your advertising was truthful.
As you can see, you are sadly mistaken. Again, we will expect your apology.
>>I am, however, prepared to proceed further with my complaints...
>>...Maryland Office of Attorney General, Consumer Protection
>>Division, the Better Bussiness Bearue of Maryland...
That would be fine. All of these offices are well aware of our
upstanding business practices, have received our explanations,
and have previously declined to take any action.
>>If email proves too onerous in our further communication I would
>>be glad to be available for a phone conversation or stop by your
>>office in downtown Frederick--my wife stumbled accross your new
>>location last week when running around town.
We will not discuss these issues while you are here, nor probably further at
all, but we prefer email for that anyway if you do have further questions.
We would welcome you, however, to take a brief tour of our offices. If you
give us a range of dates and times that are good for you, we will let you
know when is convenient for us.
Thank You,
PublishAmerica Author Support
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
Inbox
This is exactly the response I got in the beginning of January...now how could that be true that those were the real numbers then, and now??? I think that its a canned response and isn't the correct number
T42 said:Guess what guys, I sent PA a letter stating that I wanted results by the end of the day and they are so dumb that they sent me another persons letter. Funny though because his name is the same as my husbands
Mem, that's pretty much one of their usual cut-and-paste jobs, and is exactly what I was afraid you'd get. Never mind that it's not even yours! This is hardly the first time they've sent out someone else's mail, either. Boy, I'll tell you what, they've really got it going on. What an outfit!
DaveKuzminski said:
They won't, they get their money from the sources who are giving them away. However, the person doing this is wasting a lot of time doing surveys, etc. to make that little bit back in gift certificates and it will eventually become another useless endeavor in the bid for success with PA. He thinks he's getting the books for free but he's spending a lot of hours working to buy his own books. If he worked a part time minimum wage job he could make 3 times as much if his problem is cash.
Since PA isn't all that great at keeping accurate books; since he's let it be known he's doing it; inquiring minds want to know...
Re: long thread
In other words: creating a forum for "defenders" and "bashers" to meet and converse is something PA doesn't want to happen, but is something that maybe we could accomplish.
Jenna and others who've been around the block longer than I: How would you feel about me starting a thread here called "PA Authors: Defend your publisher here," and trying to get the word out? Would you recommend me not? Or is this a sticky-worthy idea?
I shall pass the compliments on to the pair of spectacular human beings responsible.Ed Williams said:
Oh, that I know. I even said so, mentioning how isolation of the members/victims is standard behavior with cults. But what I was suggesting is that we set up a thread here at AbsoluteWrite challenging the defenders to come challeng us. Obviously PA wouldn't mention it or allow mention of it at the PA forums, but word might get around via blogs and the existing rah-rah YahooGroup (Chris: no relation to my email to you) enough for more of the gung-ho "what you say bout my publisher?!" defenders to come on over and yell at us and maybe stick around for responses. PA can't stop them... and if PA treats them badly for coming over here and defending PA, maybe they won't feel quite so inclined to defend them.
In other words: creating a forum for "defenders" and "bashers" to meet and converse is something PA doesn't want to happen, but is something that maybe we could accomplish.
Jenna and others who've been around the block longer than I: How would you feel about me starting a thread here called "PA Authors: Defend your publisher here," and trying to get the word out? Would you recommend me not? Or is this a sticky-worthy idea?
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,795
- Reaction score
- 1,732
- Location
- Gone around that next bend.
- Website
- www.frankbaron.com
Nicole posted:
I don't think Jenna wants yet another PA thread on the go. PA authors have always been welcome here, whether to laud their publisher or bemoan it. At least a few of the former group have posted here over the last couple of years.
I wouldn't expect an influx of happy PA authors even if a special thread was created. They would, quite rightly, expect counter-arguments to their position and before you know it we'd be "taking it outside" (where the dedicated thread-hunter will find earlier, similar posts).
I don't think Jenna wants yet another PA thread on the go. PA authors have always been welcome here, whether to laud their publisher or bemoan it. At least a few of the former group have posted here over the last couple of years.
I wouldn't expect an influx of happy PA authors even if a special thread was created. They would, quite rightly, expect counter-arguments to their position and before you know it we'd be "taking it outside" (where the dedicated thread-hunter will find earlier, similar posts).
Hmmm... let's just assume this was a slow week for PA because of the bad press, and that on average they sell 500 books a week to B&N.
makes for 26,000 books a year. Divide that by 10,000 (since PA admits
1000 of their authors have never sold a single book) and you are looking
at an average of 2.6 books per author per year sold to BN.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,704
- Reaction score
- 1,315
- Location
- Far from the madding crowd
- Website
- www.victoriastrauss.com
I burst out laughing when I saw this. This is, almost word for word, the rebuttal they've used in other letters to people who asked about Writer Beware or Preditors & Editors.
This is a lie (gee, is anyone surprised?) The article they're referring to was written by Ann Crispin and me and involved POD contracts. Of the several publishers we contacted, PA was one of two that refused to talk with us (we noted this in the article), and its contract had four of the seven bad clauses we cited.
- Victoria
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 6,704
- Reaction score
- 1,315
- Location
- Far from the madding crowd
- Website
- www.victoriastrauss.com
At one point, the old AW had a thread like this. A few PA boosters participated, but it attracted just as many angry anti-PA people, and the discussion wasn't pretty. I agree with Frank that we should avoid a proliferation of PA threads, and simply make room for everyone here.NicoleJLeBoeuf said:
- Victoria
Just a quick drop in...when I wrote them back I also told them that they needed to keep "the many happy authors" they have straight so they know what letter goes to who when they are sending the oh so famous letter. (Same one everyone get's) What's really funny is how they always "don't like our tone" and demand an apology. Ha...night all....
Mem
Mem
- Status