Day of the Jackal: Wylie and Amazon

Thank goodness.

Self publishing may rarely work for beginning authors, but for established authors with a following, this might be the best way to make money in an industry where few writers make enough with publishers to call it a living.

Kerry (from his gem-studded limo's gold encrusted iphone)

I have a really dumb question. How is this better than having the author put it on Kindle themselves? Is Wylie going to market the e-books? (Although I'd say having an article in the NYTs is pretty good marketing . . .) I actually have this question with all the POD publishers. I just read about one in a thread in the backgrounds and beware section. The terms were that the author does all the marketing and editing and the publisher gives them 30% of the sales. Why wouldn't the author just use create a space and put it up on Amazon and get the better percentage? Am I missing something? Or is it that pdf'ing / preparing the document is that hard for some people that they'd rather pay someone else to do it?

I say thank goodness because it's high time that someone forced the big publishing houses admit to the incredibly bloated nature of their business structures.

Not much activity on this subject - I'm astonished. Doesn't anyone care about the future of publishing?

Everybody keeps on about this future of publishing or that future of publishing but in this case, everybody keeps forgetting:
1) this particular "future" of publishing seems to shoot the authors in the feet;
2) these are established names people already know, so their future is quite comfortably padded.

Blah blah blah, future of publishing. Yet another agents wants to turn his backlist and/or slush into easy money. I see nothing heroic about that. I doubt Wylie, Amazon, and Random House fighting will be good for authors. They are large radioactive monsters and we are the denizens of Tokyo.

Wylie is a wily one. He does not take on unknown authors. He lurks like a spider till an author is already rich and famous, and then pounces; poaches him/her away from the old agent who went to the trouble of finding that author and building his/her career. That's the only reason he thinks he can get away with this.

flyingtart said:

Not much activity on this subject - I'm astonished. Doesn't anyone care about the future of publishing?

Click to expand...

That might be because of the forum. I don't usually go to the e-publishing forum and only found this thread by accident. Might do better in the Roundtable.

Random House not accepting Wylie manuscripts doesn't mean Wylie authors won't get print deals.

The people who are getting hurt (other than authors) are the readers. Kindle and their my-way-or-the-highway attitude isn't good for anyone but Jeff Bezos.

How are authors getting hurt?

In the fight as to whether the agent-slash-publisher or the publisher holds digital rights in a vaguely worded contract, how are authors being helped? How is an agent-publisher charging 50% off the top for uploading a Kindle file a slimmed down author-centred process?

I saw this Saturday and my first thoughts were wait and see. There isn't a lot of information regarding exactly what kind of deal The Jackal is working with his authors or how his structure is going to move forward. If it turns out better for the authors, more power to them. Other than that, I can't give an opinion until I see more information.

I'd think even a 50% off the top deal like that would be better than the current model. I know I've got a weird perspective on the whole business but it just seems to me that the money ought to be flowing toward the author instead of the publisher and I'm all for any turn in the system that enables that to happen more efficiently.

Um, 50% is in the realm of standard for an epublisher (30-50%), and in this case Wylie is acting as an epublisher. So the amount of money flowing to the author is no different than for most non-print producting epublishers.

So other than the fact that he has no experience as a publisher, and is a start up, it involves royally pissing off a major publisher, and will emboil the works in a lawuit, the books are overpriced at $15, and there is a conflict of interest... it is the current model. No, wait, it's not as good as the current model because of the aforementioned.

If we assume Random House is incorrect, and the authors have retained the digital rights, how does it benefit them to publish through Wylie and lose 50% of the revenue. He didn't even provide them with cover art--and I have to wonder who did the editing for the version posted?

Sorry, looks like a step backward to me. The authors are paying even more, and getting even less in return.

I didn't realize epublishers paid royalty rates that high. I assumed it was more like the old Amazon racket at 30%.

My assumption was that Wylie would simply be taking his usual 15% while providing extra service to his authors. The authors get more money, thus his agency does too. Seems to me that would be the way to go, everyone wins, except the already bloated publisher.

Seems I've got a lot of assuming going on. That's probably a bad thing.

I was surprised when I saw he was taking 50%, but it is in one of the inteviews. A digital only publisher will typically have a pretty high royalty. Commercial publishers with a paperback emphasis are often more stingy on ebook royalties.

According to The Author's Guild, Wylie is taking 10-15% after Amazon's cut. And while not necessarily enthusiastic, the Guild backs this move, saying, in regards to Wylie/his authors exploiting their e-rights, "It's fine and proper for these authors and their heirs to exercise those rights, and we applaud the Wylie Agency for finding a way to make it happen."

Also, they note that if the agent is trying to take a bigger cut, this could raise a conflict of interest and be a negative for authors, that in this case, "Our understanding is that Wylie, as agent and publisher, is taking no more than it would as an agent."

here's a link to the Guild's full statement

zpeteman said:

How are authors getting hurt?

Click to expand...

Their books are only available on the Kindle.

Jamiekswriter said:

I have a really dumb question. How is this better than having the author put it on Kindle themselves? Am I missing something? Or is it that pdf'ing / preparing the document is that hard for some people that they'd rather pay someone else to do it?

Click to expand...

This is one of the areas where publishing is experiencing major changes almost daily, and it's hard to see how it'll shake out.

I think that down the line, an author is going to be better off handling their ebook sales themselves, assuming they can hold onto the rights. A publisher giving 50%, or an agent epubbing and taking their 15% out of the 50% an author gets...

...and an author doing it themselves getting 100%. The math seems pretty straightforward, but we'll have to see how it all shakes out.

Keeping up with some of the authors doing their own ebooks, such as Mike Stackpole, suggests that converting a manuscript into the myriad ebook versions isn't particularly difficult for those who make the effort to learn.

When I get to that point, I think 100% rather than 50% or less is worth the effort to figure out how to make various ebook versions. That's assuming I, my agent, or my IP lawyer is saavy enough to wrest the ebook rights from the publisher.

Each writer's MMV, naturally. As with all things, there will be people who will be happy to pay someone else to do something, because it's easier to do that than do the work yourself.

These are all very well established authors. If Rushdie self-published ebooks you know they'd sell regardless. So, yes, for these authors it's probably not the best deal. Especially in this case, where Random House is now closed to them, and the books are available for Kindle only. And don't even have covers!

If it was an agency doing it with new authors, it still wouldn't necessarily be the best deal for the authors. How do they know better offers weren't turned down in favour of the agency's publication? In theory, the agency only taking 15% either way should mitigate this, but what happens to books where a print publisher wants digital rights as well? If the publisher don't intend to use them immediately, or their digital business plan is one the agency doesn't feel is as beneficial to the author as their own (windowing, Agency model, etc) how will that affect the deal?

And that's before other, less scrupulous agencies copy the idea.