PDA

View Full Version : RWA Recognized publishers lose status!



Cathy C
08-12-2005, 06:33 PM
I guess I'm not really surprised to see this, but it is a hard thing for those authors who are with these publishers. While it doesn't mean that much to new writers (having RWA status, that is) it does impart important information to those seeking to get published:

1) That the publisher is not selling 5,000 copies of ANY of the books in their catalogue over the course of a year; and/or

2) That the publisher does not regularly have national distribution of their titles; and/or

3) Asks an author to PAY to get their book published.

Since any of these are negative things to authors who want to make a career of romance writing, it's something to consider before pursuing these publishers.

That said:

************
Notice from Allison Kelley, RWA Executive Director re: publishers

***********Permission to forward granted***********


In response to policy changes adopted during the March 2005 board meeting,letters were sent to each publisher who qualified for RWA recognition based on proof of sales of a single work of fiction, requesting proof of ongoing sales of romance fiction in the quantities required by RWA. Publishers were asked to respond by May 31, however, two publishers asked for more time. The deadline to respond to RWA's request was therefore extended until June 30,
2005. As of this date, the following publishers are being dropped from RWA's list of recognized publishers, as they either failed to respond or they have responded they no longer meet RWA's requirements for recognition (see 7.2.1 below):

Genesis Press

Hawk Publishing

High Country

ImaJinn Books

Medallion Press

Rainbow Books

SANDS Publishing



Five Star Publishing was removed from RWA's list of recognized publishers, pending review of reported contract changes that require authors to participate in the costs of production and distribution. RWA is in dialogue with this publisher.

PAN status will not be revoked for authors whose contracts were dated during a time when such publishers met RWA-recognition requirements.

The staff continues its efforts to reach publishers who have not responded to requests for additional proof of qualification.

For your convenience, the changes to policy are provided below:


MOTION: Policy Definition of Subsidy and Vanity Publisher

Potter moved, and Kerstan seconded, that the Policy and Procedure Manual should be amended as follows:

1.35. "Subsidy Publisher" or "Vanity Publisher" means any publisher that publishes books in which the author participates in the costs of production or distribution in any manner, including publisher assessment of a fee or other costs for editing and/or distribution. This definition includes publishers who withhold publication or distribution costs before paying
royalties (net proceeds) and publishers whose authors exclusively promote and/or sell their own books.

7.2.1. To be an "RWA-Recognized Publisher," a publisher must be a royalty-paying publishing house that (1) does not offer is not a subsidy or vanity publisher contracts to RWA members, (2) has been releasing books on a regular basis via national distribution for a minimum of one year, and (3) has sold a minimum of 1,500 hardcover or trade paperback copies or 5,000 copies in any other format, including print on demand, of a single romance novel or novella or collection of novellas in book form, in bona fide
arms-length transactions, and continues to sell a minimum of 1,500 hardcover or trade paperback copies or 5,000 copies in any other format of a subsequent romance novel each year.

7.2.5. Revoking recognition. Recognition shall be revoked if Publisher fails to meet one of the standards of recognition.

7.2.5.1. Complaint must be made to the Board by the Executive Director or Member.

7.2.5.2. Allegations will be presented in writing to the publisher, which will then have 30 days to respond to the allegations.

7.2.5.3. The Board will make a final decision as to whether the publisher has failed to meet one or more RWA Publisher Recognition standards.

7.2.5.4. If the Board finds that one or more of these standards have not been met, Publisher recognition shall be revoked.


The main motion was unanimously adopted as amended on a roll call vote.

jdkiggins
08-12-2005, 07:04 PM
Thanks for the information, Cathy. It's good to know these things prior to submitting a query and syn.

veinglory
08-12-2005, 10:10 PM
I though the requirement was only 1000 sales?

This is interesting but I would also like to see which epublishers retained their status--does anyone know where that is listed?

Susan Gable
08-12-2005, 11:24 PM
I though the requirement was only 1000 sales?

This is interesting but I would also like to see which epublishers retained their status--does anyone know where that is listed?

It's 1500 hardcover or trade, or 5,000 mmpb or ebook.

Ellora's Cave, I imagine, kept their status. They seem to be doing very well, but they're not just ebooks. They're doing a lot with their trade pbs.

Susan G.

Sheryl Nantus
08-12-2005, 11:42 PM
It's 1500 hardcover or trade, or 5,000 mmpb or ebook.

Ellora's Cave, I imagine, kept their status. They seem to be doing very well, but they're not just ebooks. They're doing a lot with their trade pbs.

Susan G.

true - I see a LOT of their books in almost every Borders/B&N/Waldenbooks I go into...

of course, usually on the bottom shelves, but...

:)

Cathy C
08-12-2005, 11:55 PM
Update on Medallion Press from another loop. It sounds like their removal might just be a matter that they didn't file on time. I know they've been doing a huge amount of publicity, including multiple full-page ads in Publisher's Weekly, and a major booth at BEA. That one had surprised me, because they're regularly appearing to be selling a lot of books. I'll bet that someone screwed up the paperwork on that one.

Irysangel
08-13-2005, 07:44 AM
Wow, yeah, I was wondering about Medallion. I've seen them splashed all over the place in the RT mag, but I've never seen their books at B&N, come to think of it.

I thought they were a small time press but still legit. They're seriously NOT a vanity are they?

Susan Gable
08-13-2005, 06:22 PM
true - I see a LOT of their books in almost every Borders/B&N/Waldenbooks I go into...

of course, usually on the bottom shelves, but...

:)

Sheryl, for the life of me I can't remember where I saw this information (it might have actually been here, and maybe it was Cathy who said it. <G> My brain is just mush lately!) but I heard Ellora's Cave will be getting an entire bookself display at Waldens. Their very own bookcase. That's a big deal. So they're def. on the expansion. :)

Susan G.

Sheryl Nantus
08-13-2005, 06:52 PM
Sheryl, for the life of me I can't remember where I saw this information (it might have actually been here, and maybe it was Cathy who said it. <G> My brain is just mush lately!) but I heard Ellora's Cave will be getting an entire bookself display at Waldens. Their very own bookcase. That's a big deal. So they're def. on the expansion. :)

Susan G.

w00t!

good smut sells!

:D

veinglory
08-13-2005, 07:31 PM
It hardly seems fair to require 3x the sales for ebooks.

Susan Gable
08-13-2005, 08:12 PM
It hardly seems fair to require 3x the sales for ebooks.

As my momma is fond of telling me, life isn't fair. There's a hel* of a lot about the publishing business that isn't fair, too.

There's a rationale behind it, but as I said, my mind's mush. I do recall one epublisher that tried to get in by selling copies of an ebook for a penny each. (And like one person was buying up boatloads of copies of it.) Hmmmm...sounds like something another not-so-reputible publisher might do, doesn't it?

Susan G.

Cathy C
08-14-2005, 06:44 PM
Well, Medallion has decided to take the bull by the horns and respond in public about the matter. The letter raises some very good points, but I don't know if I agree with all of them. Anyone else want to comment?

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

From Helen A. Rosburg, President,CEO, and Editor-in-Chief, Medallion:

Please feel free to post this letter wherever you see
chatter concerning Medallion Press's RWA designation.

August 12, 2005

Tara Taylor Quinn President
Gayle Wilson President-Elect
Kathy Carmichael Secretary
Connie Newman Treasurer
Allison Kelley Executive Director
Nicole Kennedy Public Relations Coordinator
Romance Writers of America, Inc.
16000 Stuebner Airline Rd Suite 140
Spring, Texas 77379

To the Board of Directors of the Romance Writers of America:

It has been brought to our attention, by several of our romance
authors, that your organization no longer considers Medallion Press, Inc. a legitimate publisher according to your guidelines. We were surprised we did not receive official notification directly, but instead discovered it was posted on several RWA internet loops.


Accordingly, we request this letter be published in its entirety in the RWR Report so all members may understand the nature of the process that eliminated Medallion as an RWA approved publisher. We will also send copies of this letter to all our own RWA member authors.

We are dismayed you declared Medallion Press no longer a legitimate publisher. In July of 2004 we met all of your qualifications without incident by showing sales of 5000+ copies of USA Today Bestselling author Nan Ryan's The Last Dance.

Several months prior to Book Expo America 2005, we received a call from your office alerting us to the fact that you would be sending out a letter asking us to re-qualify for RWA approval. We were also told at that time that we had done nothing to warrant the re-qualification, but that your organization was having trouble with a particular publisher and chose not to single them out. Therefore, we would have to go through the laborious process of re-qualifying.

We object strongly to this action for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the rules you use for qualification seem arbitrary. How does selling 5000 copies of a single title justify a publishing house's legitimacy? While in theory it may indicate the publisher has standing in the industry, showing orders and proof of payment means nothing at the end of the day when within a few months many or possibly all copies of said title could be returned to the publisher, meaning the author does not then receive royalties on
those returns. The average return rate for fiction books is now at 40%.

Secondly, our small staff is devoted to running this company at top speed. We have come a long way in a relatively short time and we continue to keep our eye on the prize. It is extraordinarily time consuming to go through reams of orders to add up 5000 sold copies of a specific title; it is equally time consuming, and expensive, to have our accountants spend time locating copies of checks as proof of payment for those 5000 copies. We are an independent publisher and we do not sell 5000 copies of a single title to just one source, but to a wide variety of sources. We would not have to produce a single piece of paper, but mountains of it.

Instead of asking for confidential documentation showing 5000 mass market books of a single title have been sold, you might be better off asking for proof that the publisher is a "vendor of record" at a traditional brick-and-mortar chain bookseller such as Barnes & Noble, Borders, Books-A-Million, or through national distributors such as Ingram or Baker & Taylor. This means far more to an author's career than selling 5000 books.

We are extremely proud of our authors and the books they have written. We have a diverse and dynamic talent pool at Medallion and we know every one of our authors, be they romance or horror writers, are well on their way to having successful writing careers. Their mass market novels can be found in bookstores across the country, and the world, and many of them are selling more than 5000 books prior to their book's date of publication.

To punish authors because of the way RWA views a publisher's legitimacy is an unfair practice. The burden of proof should be on the author, not the publisher. It is the author who receives the benefits of membership in RWA, not the publisher. Let the authors prove they were paid an advance. It should not matter how large or small the advance, and they should provide evidence of a contract that shows they will be paid royalties. At that point an author should be considered published. It should not matter that the
publisher seeks membership with your organization or not.

In recent years publishing has exploded. There are many new publishers, small presses, e-book publishers, and independent publishers all holding their own. As long as they publish romance and do not charge their authors to publish their books, it should be good enough for RWA.

Medallion Press will not re-apply for membership. However, we urge you to reconsider the penalties you impose on our authors simply because we choose not to belong to ANY writers' organizations. RWA is an organization of its members and we believe it is time to let your members determine how they evaluate publishers. You know we are a legitimate publisher and know the lengths we go to for our authors. We respectfully request you evaluate your policies so they work for your membership and not against it.

Sincerely,
Helen A. Rosburg President/CEO & Editor-in-Chief
Leslie Burbank Vice President
Medallion Press, Inc.

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

As I say, it raises some interesting points. Comments?

Irysangel
08-14-2005, 07:24 PM
Sounds a bit like sour grapes to me. ;)

So let me get this straight. They claim to qualify by selling 5k copies, but then they say that qualifying is stupid and time-consuming and that it shouldn't matter.

What should matter is where you can sell your books, like B&N and Borders.

Uh, okay. Sounds like someone doesn't have the paper to back up their claims to me, and is now just complaining.

I've *never* seen a Medallion book in any of the multiple Barnes & Nobles that I frequent, nor Books A Million. Never seen one in a grocery store, nothing. I don't live near a Borders/Waldenbooks/anything else so I can't comment on those. All I see of Medallion is big full page adverts in RT, but anyone can buy those.

So I dunno. I mean, reapplying can't be *that* big of a deal, can it? Any company worth their salt will keep records on hand for bragging rights, especially if there's a 'best seller' in the mix. That they won't provide (or don't have) these records throws up a bigger flag in my mind than anything else.

Just my $.02

veinglory
08-14-2005, 11:44 PM
Their reponse seems fair to me. Why should they do days of unpaid work getting proof when they get no direct benefit.

I determine publisher legitmacy from groups that do the research. RWA doesn't, so I don't think it matters who they consider legit unless you want to join RWA. (Not high my list of things to do).

I mean I don't agree with what RWA thinks about gay people (we don't have 'romance') so I guess I'm not bothered which publishers they think are legit.

Carlene
08-15-2005, 01:38 AM
I, too, think their response was fair and to the point. I think RWA is an eliteist (sp?) group that's in bed with Harliquin/Silhouette and NO ONE ELSE is good enough. Yes, I'm a member of RWA but doubt I'll renew. Mainly because I'll never write another romance and don't see the benefit.

Just my opinion.

Carlene
www.crdater.com (http://www.crdater.com)

veinglory
08-15-2005, 02:14 AM
Yep. I don't doubt RWA is a good service for people in the narrow demographic of those writing trad romance for the big traditional houses (or trying to). But romance is a broader field than that.

Irysangel
08-15-2005, 06:40 AM
I'm not a member of the RWA either, but Medallion is a business. the RWA is a business. Medallion being in the RWA is good for Medallion's business.

Medallion declaring that they're not going to play in the RWA sandbox anymore? Okay, go right ahead, but it's not hurting anyone but Medallion.

Seriously though, it's not days and days worth of work. Any publisher worth their salt SHOULD keep records of how many novels they've sold. If they know of at least one person that's sold 5k books, she should have proof in her royalty statements. They don't keep THOSE on hand? They can't look those up? Scary.

Mind you, there may be more to it than just showing a few statements, but as a legit publishing house, why are hurt feelings playing into this at all? It's a business. All businesses have to show their records.

I don't necessarily agree to RWA's standards and find some of their 'rules' humorously stupid, but Medallion putting their foot down is not going to hurt anybody but Medallion in the long run.


Just my opinion.

veinglory
08-15-2005, 06:54 AM
Hmmm. Good point--but right at the moment their is a fair amount of anti-RWA feeling and they might manage to cash in on that.

AnneMarble
08-15-2005, 08:44 AM
I've *never* seen a Medallion book in any of the multiple Barnes & Nobles that I frequent, nor Books A Million. Never seen one in a grocery store, nothing. I don't live near a Borders/Waldenbooks/anything else so I can't comment on those. All I see of Medallion is big full page adverts in RT, but anyone can buy those.
I've seen Medallion books in both Borders and Barnes & Nobles. Are you looking for them among the mass market paperbacks? They are published in mass market size, so they might be harder to see among all the mass market books.

Interestingly, before I saw their books anywhere else, I saw one of them in a Wal-Mart. (Probably the Nan Ryan title.) I know authors who have commercially published years whose books can't get on the shelf at Wal-Mart, so the fact that Medallion got distribution there surprised me.

Irysangel
08-15-2005, 03:13 PM
Have you really? I stand corrected. Perhaps it's just the ones I'm frequenting. :) I am looking in the mass market paperback, though. Maybe I'm just not looking hard enough.

Susan Gable
08-15-2005, 09:47 PM
I'm not a member of the RWA either, but Medallion is a business. the RWA is a business. Medallion being in the RWA is good for Medallion's business.
Medallion declaring that they're not going to play in the RWA sandbox anymore? Okay, go right ahead, but it's not hurting anyone but Medallion.
Seriously though, it's not days and days worth of work. Any publisher worth their salt SHOULD keep records of how many novels they've sold. If they know of at least one person that's sold 5k books, she should have proof in her royalty statements. They don't keep THOSE on hand? They can't look those up? Scary.
Mind you, there may be more to it than just showing a few statements, but as a legit publishing house, why are hurt feelings playing into this at all? It's a business. All businesses have to show their records.
.

You make excellent points here. I don't understand why it should be at all difficult for any publisher to know which books have sold X amount of copies. After all, authors are paid based on the number of books they've sold.

My royalty statements not only indicate the number of books sold during that particular royalty period, but also a running total of the accumulated number of books sold for each novel I have with them. This is BASIC information needed. So, how come they don't have a spreadsheet that has this information within easy reach??

As for RWA being "in bed with Harlequin/Sil," excuse me while I :ROFL: :roll: .

Okay, I feel better now. RWA does not cater to H/S. In fact, I daresay there's still more respect to be had for the single title authors. (And I say that without any sour grapes, etc. even though I'm a H/S author. Even within the RWA community, there still can be pockets of the "sneering attitude" that looks down on category romance.)

However, I will point out that last year, Torstar (the parent company of H/S) released almost HALF of all the romance novels published last year. (I can't find my 2004 figures at the moment, so I'll present the 2003 - total romances released - 2093. Number published by Torstar - 1,141. More than half in 2003.)

So, there's more opportunity for aspiring romance authors within the Torstar family. Or just as much as all the other romance publishers combined. So, yes, you will find a large number of published authors who work for Torstar's various imprints/lines. It's a fact of numbers. Yes, you'll find a lot of workshops relating to those imprints/lines. Again, it's a fact of numbers. It's not some great conspiracy on the part of RWA.


Susan G.

Susan Gable
08-15-2005, 10:04 PM
It has been brought to our attention, by several of our romance
authors, that your organization no longer considers Medallion Press, Inc. a legitimate publisher according to your guidelines. We were surprised we did not receive official notification directly, but instead discovered it was posted on several RWA internet loops.

I hope that's not the case, because they did deserve the decency of being notified by the organization that they'd lost their status. A little courtesy goes a long way.



Several months prior to Book Expo America 2005, we received a call from your office alerting us to the fact that you would be sending out a letter asking us to re-qualify for RWA approval. We were also told at that time that we had done nothing to warrant the re-qualification, but that your organization was having trouble with a particular publisher and chose not to single them out. Therefore, we would have to go through the laborious process of re-qualifying.

Actually, I think the organization should periodically check on all the publishers. Just selling that number of books ONCE shouldn't be enough to merit continued recognized status. The point is supposed to be that the publisher is successfully selling romance novels. (And RWA has defined "successfully" with the numbers 5,000 mmpb, and 1500 trade or hardcover copies of ONE novel. That's not an enormous amount.)


We object strongly to this action for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the rules you use for qualification seem arbitrary. How does selling 5000 copies of a single title justify a publishing house's legitimacy? While in theory it may indicate the publisher has standing in the industry, showing orders and proof of payment means nothing at the end of the day when within a few months many or possibly all copies of said title could be returned to the publisher, meaning the author does not then receive royalties on those returns. The average return rate for fiction books is now at 40%.

Hey, good point. I move that the standards be changed to indicate that the author has BEEN PAID for 5,000/1500 copies. There. That makes it more indicative of success for RWA's members.


Instead of asking for confidential documentation showing 5000 mass market books of a single title have been sold, you might be better off asking for proof that the publisher is a "vendor of record" at a traditional brick-and-mortar chain bookseller such as Barnes & Noble, Borders, Books-A-Million, or through national distributors such as Ingram or Baker & Taylor. This means far more to an author's career than selling 5000 books.

No, it doesn't. I think PA could meet that standard, and that says nothing.


It is the author who receives the benefits of membership in RWA, not the publisher.

Disagree on that. The publisher will find itself receiving more ms submissions if it's accredited. (That may or may not be a good thing. <G>) It gives them "higher standing" in the romance community.


Let the authors prove they were paid an advance. It should not matter how large or small the advance, and they should provide evidence of a contract that shows they will be paid royalties. At that point an author should be considered published. It should not matter that the
publisher seeks membership with your organization or not.

Again, I point out that this particular method would allow PA to qualify as an RWA-recognized publisher, and that would be a very BAD thing.


As long as they publish romance and do not charge their authors to publish their books, it should be good enough for RWA.

<sigh> PA, PA, PA. (And for anyone who doesn't understand why that's not a good thing, I point you to the Neverending PA thread on this board for a very thorough education.)


Medallion Press will not re-apply for membership. However, we urge you to reconsider the penalties you impose on our authors simply because we choose not to belong to ANY writers' organizations.

The authors already recognized as "published" based on previous Medallion books will not be stripped of their PAN status. Any future authors will have to submit to Medallion with their eyes wide open - knowing that it may be right for them to do it, but that RWA will not grant them PAN status with that particular sale.

Susan G.

veinglory
08-15-2005, 10:08 PM
Publishers do tend to know amounts sold per title/month, but having a copies of every checque to prove the sales -- I think that would take some time if most of your sales are not from 1-2 big chain stores or distributors. Also, I think it is likely Medallion is being honest--they are the ones who know what is hard and what is easy for them to do.

There is simply a mismatch, for whatever reason, between what RWA wants publishers to do and the ability and/or motivation of some to do so. Where you sympathies lie, and to what extent, depends on each persons particular bias. And I admit that so long as RWA explicitly excludes gay romance I will continue to be biassed against them as much as I try to be fair and acknowledge what a great organisation they are for those demographics they deem acceptable.

I don't think either side being deliberately awkward but I do suspect that a more streamlined and effective communication system and recognition process would help both sides and avoid the need for taking the problem public like this...

Carlene
08-15-2005, 11:15 PM
Well, silly me! I thought I'd stumbled upon an adult site where people discussed thoughts, ideas and even had GASP opinions about romance publishing! Apparently I was wrong. If you don't like what someone says, thinks or their opinion, just laught at them. Nothing like an open mind to keep one learning. Now I know why there are so few people posting here.

Oh, am I supposed to put some silly faces here to emphasis my point?

Susan Gable
08-15-2005, 11:30 PM
Well, silly me! I thought I'd stumbled upon an adult site where people discussed thoughts, ideas and even had GASP opinions about romance publishing! Apparently I was wrong. If you don't like what someone says, thinks or their opinion, just laught at them. Nothing like an open mind to keep one learning. Now I know why there are so few people posting here.

Oh, am I supposed to put some silly faces here to emphasis my point?

Well, I thought my facts (the numbers, etc.) backed up my rationale for explaining what made me have the OPINION that your statement was silly. I didn't just "laugh" - I provided reasoning to substantiate my opinion. Or am I not allowed to have an opinion that contradicts yours?

Edited to Add: Carlene, I wasn't laughing at YOU. I was laughing at an idea I found to be slightly absurd. I apologize if you think I was mocking YOU, because I wasn't. In this business it's really important to learn to seperate yourself from your work and your ideas. (i.e. a rejection isn't personal, isn't about your overall self, it's about that particular piece of work. Same principal applies here.) Thick skin and a sense of humor are critical parts of a writer's armor, in many situations. :)


Susan G.

Susan Gable
08-16-2005, 03:06 AM
Here's a post that I thought folks might find interesting and adds to the discussion. This is from Debra Dixon, an outstanding writer (wonderful author of one of my favorite craft books, GMC: Goal, Motivation & Conflict - as well as numerous novels) but Deb is also involved with Belle Books, a small publisher that specializes in Southern books. (www.bellebooks.com (http://www.bellebooks.com) ) So Deb knows about being a small press publisher as well.


FROM DEBRA DIXON, ChapLink Advisor
Permission to forward granted.

Guidelines for publishers are not new in the industry.

Ingram, the largest wholesaler in the country, routinely makes decisions about which publishers it will continue to service and stock in its warehouses. *Ingram* decides who's big enough, who's selling enough books per title, how many titles signal a serious player, whose business terms they like, etc. And believe me, when the word goes out that Ingram is raising the bar again, small presses worry about their sales, their marketing efforts, etc. For a while it seemed like Ingram was purging publishers every few months.

Qualifying for services and inclusion in business networks is a fact of life in this world. Ingram does not consider the authors when making a decision to drop a publisher from its vendor pool. The publishing industry is a business.

RWA publisher recognition helps RWA answer the following *business* questions about a publisher:

Does the publisher have a current romance title/program?

Does the publisher require any investment by the author?

Does the publisher distribute on a national basis?

In sufficient quantity to generate nominal income and build an audience for the *career-focused* author?

These are reasonable questions of great interest to our members.

RWA's recognized publisher policy offers multiple methods of documenting each part of the recognition criteria. As a previous RWA board member and business person, I helped created the list of documentation that would satisfy RWA's publisher recognition policy. Is it difficult to pull the necessary paperwork? No. Remember that I'm a small business consultant and have been for 20 years. I know business operation.

Ingram's I-Page, their web-based inventory, purchasing & ordering system, allows Publishers to print a record of a book's total orders for the current year and previous year. That's pretty simple--one page totaling multiple orders, all neatly arranged in a little Ingram table from Ingram's website.

That info is free to the publisher and takes about a minute to gather, including logging into Ingram. Not every publisher will sell heavy through Ingram or B&T but there are still methods of gathering information that are fairly easy.

Last time I checked, the author was able to provide documentation in the form of royalty statements and copies of cancelled royalty checks to help nail down the sales figures. I think that's in conjunction with printing invoices to confirm actual stock existed, etc. Believe me, there are choices available to the publisher who would like to become RWA recognized.

RWA's concern is to advance the professional interests of CAREER-FOCUSED ROMANCE writers. Maintaining the RWA Publisher Recognition Program provides answers to important business questions that individual career-focused authors would not be able to obtain. Think of Publisher Recognition as the "USDA inspected" stamp. <g> Not every publisher cares about applying for RWA recognition. That says nothing about their legitimacy. It simply means that the individual author must look for other ways to evaluate the publisher's performance because RWA does not have the information.

I can drag out the historical ChapLink posts regarding publisher recognition if we have new presidents who haven't been down that road and need some backstory. Holler if you'd like to see those loooong posts from me.

--Debra Dixon

Irysangel
08-16-2005, 03:10 AM
And I admit that so long as RWA explicitly excludes gay romance I will continue to be biassed against them as much as I try to be fair and acknowledge what a great organisation they are for those demographics they deem acceptable.

Fair enough. :)

Truthful, too. I tend to think of RWA as a club more than an organization (6 of one, half a dozen of the other maybe, but not in my eyes). It's like the Lions Club, or the SCA, but it just happens to deal with publishing.

Me, I'm cheap. I can't see spending $100 + just to be part of the club, no matter who/what they represent.

Mind you, this is also because I'm unpublished. *g* I'm aiming for the big agents and the big houses (but oddly enough, not H/S), and if anyone should bother to pick up my lovely little novel, I'd certainly join the RWA for networking if nothing else.

veinglory
08-18-2005, 06:10 PM
I am toying with joining the romance guild in my country of citizenship. If I go to writing half time it will have to be there as I would cease to qualify for US residency.

Susan Gable
08-18-2005, 11:51 PM
Fair enough. :)

and if anyone should bother to pick up my lovely little novel, I'd certainly join the RWA for networking if nothing else.

But the networking can help you a LOT into getting published. Honestly, the networking opportunities are some of the best benefits of going to say, the National conference. You get the opportunity to meet a lot of people - agents, editors, authors...and all that "schmoozing" can be of big benefit to you.

That's the biggest WHY of why it's worth the money.

Just MHO, as always. But I do know many people who've made connections at various RWA functions that have gone on to serve them well in their careers.

Susan G.

Irysangel
08-19-2005, 07:09 AM
No, I know it. I just don't have the money right now and can't justify spending the extra cash when it could go for say, groceries or gas. :)

(And LORD is gas expensive this week.)

Susan Gable
08-19-2005, 08:14 PM
No, I know it. I just don't have the money right now and can't justify spending the extra cash when it could go for say, groceries or gas. :)

(And LORD is gas expensive this week.)

Oh, I hear you on THAT! Pretty soon more of us will be deciding on things like that: groceries or gas. I don't even want to KNOW what heating the house is going to cost this winter.

<sigh>

I'll be telling my family to put another sweatshirt on. :)

Susan G.

Sheryl Nantus
08-19-2005, 08:17 PM
I'll be telling my family to put another sweatshirt on. :)

Susan G.

one for the whole family?

wow... that's going to be a tight fit!

:ROFL:

(totally weak joke, I agree...)

Susan Gable
08-19-2005, 08:43 PM
one for the whole family?

wow... that's going to be a tight fit!

:ROFL:

(totally weak joke, I agree...)

Yeah, but sharing body heat may help, too. <G>

Susan G.

Sonarbabe
08-19-2005, 09:17 PM
But the networking can help you a LOT into getting published. Honestly, the networking opportunities are some of the best benefits of going to say, the National conference. You get the opportunity to meet a lot of people - agents, editors, authors...and all that "schmoozing" can be of big benefit to you.

Susan G.

You know, that was why I finally bit the bullet and joined RWA. When it was first suggested to me, I was thinking, $100??? Do they know how little an E-5 makes in the Navy?? I'm working now, so I went ahead and joined. I can't get away to go to conferences right now, but just stating that I'm a member looks really good on a query, because the agents I queried to wanted to know what organizations I belonged to. Sheesh, I was a newbie, had no other publishing credits to my name (I refuse to admit that I actually succumbed to a vanity press :Ssh: )and I knew that if I could just get someone to listen to me, they'd like what they saw. (Conceited of me, I know)

To make a long post just a little longer, I'm hoping that when my agent queries to the publishers, the fact that I belong to RWA will be worth at least a point in my favor. Know what I mean?

Robin Bayne
09-25-2005, 03:21 AM
authors already recognized as "published" based on previous Medallion books will not be stripped of their PAN status.



Chiming in late here--I think that is extremely unfair. Several years ago, about 30 of us were told our publishers had been "suspended" and we WERE kicked out of PAN.

My (previous) publisher later re-qualified and re-applied, but was denied not due to sales figures but due to an unwritten, arbitrary "rule" concerning physical book size. It still bugs me, but I've left that organization and that publisher has gone on to have Walden's stock their books. :Shrug: