Re: More comedy from the Publishers Weekly Boards
"Carl Ross," who claims to work in publishing in New York, continues:
<blockquote>
Submitted by: Carl Ross ([email protected])
11/24/2004 12:27:01 PM PT
How many of most publishers books can be found in bookstores across America? Not many. The major publishers pretty much own the space in bookstores because they put money behind the books they put out which draws customers into their stores. To think any small publisher is going to get your book much presence in bookstores is being both naive and dumb. There is no definition for "traditional publisher" that applies to all publishers. People can pretty much run their businesses the way they like to as long as they adhere to the law and their contracts. Only authors that can't write are concern about editing. Good writers don't want their work edited. I really don't understand this complaint. Most royalties to authors are low. Only a small percentage of writers get rich or live good off the royalties from their books. If you're looking to make a lot of money than writing books is not the best way to achieve that goal. None of you complainers and whiners has suffered any real losses. And if you had done any research or had an agent you would have known that Publish America was not Random House. Be thankful you got a royalty check from Publish America cause most authors never see one and often times never even see a statement. The royalties never seem to be enough to recoup the initial small advance. </BLOCKQUOTE>
and
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Submitted by: Carl Ross ([email protected])
11/24/2004 7:50:03 PM PT
Tim and others. A publisher do not have to aggresively market their books. All they are obligated to do is to make them available to the public unless a stated dollar amount of an author tour is detailed in the contract. It's all about the contract. Something most of you Mindsight Whiners (and that's where all these negative comments are coming from) know nothing about. If you guys where writers and not whiners you'll be writing more books instead of all this bitchin' but of course you're not. Writing books and placing them with other publishers; and when you PA contracts expired reacquiring the rights and querying that book to another publisher. You'll be surprise how fast time flies when you're busy doing something you like (writing); but you guys aren't writers. Most of you wrote one or two badly conceived and written messes and struggled to get a publisher until PA came along. It won't be any different for any of you if you found another publisher. None of your books will sell many copies. Hell, even your family and friends don't purchase and read the crappola you guys spew to paper. And most of you whiners and complainers think you're too good to do one iota of promo in your own behalf. You complain that PA don't respond fast, well a major editor at a publishing house would hang up in your face if you show yourself to be a bug. THERE IS NO DEFINITION FOR TRADITIONAL PUBLISHER. </BLOCKQUOTE>
Poor guy, unaware that he's talking to an audience of publishing professionals over there. Alas, if he were aware of his audience he'd undoubtedly be a better writer.
It strikes me that "Carl" is probably one of the happy authors somewhere between the happy day when the book is accepted and the happy day when the author's copies arrive. He hasn't yet reached the less-happy day when he enters his first bookstore to try get his book shelved, and the utterly miserable day when he gets his first royalty check. He's parroting the PA party line. What this gives us is an inside view of a PA author's impression of what exactly it is that PA is and does, and what a PA author thinks the rest of the publishing industry is. We've seen this before: <a href="http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/8/prweb146480.htm" target="_new">All Authors Are Created Equal</a> by the indefatigable Terri Von Rieman, for example. It's good to see that they're still beating the same drum.
True enough, there is no legal definition of what a "traditional publisher" is -- that's what lets PublishAmerica describe itself as a "traditional publisher." Still, we all know what a traditional publisher is and does -- they're the guys who get books onto bookshelves in bookstores or onto wire-rack spinners down at the bus station. They're the ones who publish the books we read, who publish the authors we've heard of.
Line-by-line time.
How many of most publishers [sic]
books can be found in bookstores across America? Not many.
Most publishers don't publish books. Most publish newsletters, magazines, catalogs, newspapers, and other material unsuited to bookstore distribution. Others publish textbooks, legal/medical/engineering reference books, or maps that aren't meant for bookstore distribution. Vanity publishers' books aren't found in bookstores. Among the remainder, the publishers who print trade books, the novels, the how-to books, the recipe books, the diet books ... those publishers' books are found in bookstores across America. They're out there hustling to get their books onto the shelves. They're trying to get the whole print run out there, because it isn't earning them any money sitting in a warehouse. The ones that the public buys are reprinted, the rest are replaced by others in the never-ending quest to sell authors' books to readers.
The major publishers pretty much own the space in bookstores because they put money behind the books they put out which draws customers into their stores.
The major publishers don't own the stores. But tell me, "Carl," are you claiming here that the major publishers
do promote their books?
To think any small publisher is going to get your book much presence in bookstores is being both naive and dumb.
Naive
and dumb? And this from "Carl"? Goodness!
Small publishers get small presence in bookstores (which is why they're
small publishers). But still, they get their books onto shelves. Local and regional publishers get their books into local and regional bookstores. How do they do that? Through promotion and marketing. Is that spelled out in their contracts? No. There's no need to do it, since that's the business they're in -- selling books. They don't leave the distribution and marketing in the hands of amateurs.
There is no definition for "traditional publisher" that applies to all publishers.
This is true, and that's what's keeping Willem, Larry, and Miranda out of jail -- for now.
People can pretty much run their businesses the way they like to as long as they adhere to the law and their contracts.
Laws like the ones against false advertising? Like the ones against printing books to which you don't own the rights? Like the contractual requirement to pay royalties, however pitiable, that the contract specifies? Those laws and contracts?
Only authors that [sic]
can't write are concern [sic]
about editing.
!!!
Good writers don't want their work edited.
!!!!
I really don't understand this complaint.
You know, "Carl," I believe you.
Most royalties to authors are low.
I'm having a hard time understanding what you're saying here, "Carl." Are you talking about the royalty rate, or about the size of the royalty checks?
Royalty rates from traditional publishers are based on cover price. Unlike PA -- which not only has a low 8% rate, but bases it on net. The checks can range from small to quite large. And the traditional publishers have paid advances, usually in the multiple thousands of dollars, to the authors. Compare that to PublishAmerica.
Only a small percentage of writers get rich or live good [sic]
off the royalties from their books.
True enough. Very few writers go into this business in order to get rich, either. For most it's a hobby that pays for itself, or a profitable second job. But tell me -- where's this obsession with "getting rich" coming from? The people who are complaining about PA aren't claiming that PA didn't make them rich -- they're claiming that PA mislead them into signing a contract based on the belief that PublishAmerica was a real publisher, a publisher with a bookstore presence, a publisher that played fair, a non-vanity press.
If you're looking to make a lot of money than [sic]
writing books is not the best way to achieve that goal.
Again true, but again that isn't the complaint.
None of you complainers and whiners has [sic]
suffered any real losses.
Is your argument here that it's only a
small scam? Or are you claiming that PublishAmerica prints worthless books?
And if you had done any research or had an agent you would have known that Publish America was not Random House.
What, the authors would have found out that PublishAmerica is a vanity press beforehand, rather than after the fact? Legitimate agents don't send material to PA, true enough. But this is blaming the victim for falling for a professional con-artist's spiel. Con men go to jail every day, even though they too might argue that if the little old ladies had only done some research they would have found out that the stock being touted was worthless.
Be thankful you got a royalty check from Publish America cause [sic]
most authors never see one and often times [sic]
never even see a statement.
This is an astounding statement. Are we talking about "most authors" as in "counting all the people who've ever written a book, whether they ever submitted it, whether it was ever bought"? Or are we talking about "counting all the people whose books have been accepted by legitimate publishers," or are we talking about "folks whose books have been accepted by trade houses?"
If it's the first case, true, most will never see a royalty check because most will never sell. If it's the second case, also true, because a good part of the publishing world doesn't work on royalties at all -- those textbook writers, for example, usually don't get royalties. If we're talking about folks who write for the the trade, then nope, sorry, wrong. Even if the book never earns out, the advance is an advance against
royalties.
The royalties never seem to be enough to recoup the initial small advance.
This is a nonsensical statement. I can't figure out what what "Carl" is going on about. Any help from the Peanut Gallery?
Moving right along....
Tim and others. A publisher do [sic]
not have to aggresively [sic]
market their books.
No, they don't
have to unless they plan to
stay in business. Have you ever noticed that while traditional publishers don't
have to aggressively market their books, somehow they all
do?
All they are obligated to do is to make them available to the public unless a stated dollar amount of an author tour is detailed in the contract.
Again, if they plan to stay in business, they will promote and market their books. If by "make them available to the public" you mean "move heaven and earth to get them onto physical bookstores," they do it -- without having it specified in the contract. If all they do is list the books with Ingram, Amazon, bn.com, and on their own website, then either a) they're a vanity press, or b) they're staring down the barrel of Chapter Eleven. Did I ever tell you about my four-state book tour? Somehow that happened, without my having to arrange it, and without it being specified in my contract. How did that happen, "Carl"?
You're paying too much attention to the contract, and not enough to the whole panoply of things assumed in the phrase "traditional publisher."
It's all about the contract.
You just go on thinkin', Butch. That's what you're good at.
Something most of you Mindsight Whiners (and that's where all these negative comments are coming from) know nothing about.
Be honest, "Carl," it's something you're pretty ignorant on too. Let me fill you in on something, though, my friend. People you'd never suspect, folks who have never posted anywhere outside of the PA boards, have told me horror stories.
If you guys where [sic]
writers and not whiners you'll [sic]
be writing more books instead of all this bitchin' but of course you're not.
And who's to say they aren't, "Carl"? When did complaining about wrongs done to you become a bad thing? Can I come to your house, steal your manuscript, and expect you to go write another book instead of complaining?
Writing books and placing them with other publishers; [sic]
and when you [sic]
PA contracts expired reacquiring the rights and querying [sic]
that book to another publisher.
And let PA go on with its fraud, and let Willem suck in other, newer, writers? That would be immoral, "Carl." How about the writers whose careers have been derailed by publishing with PublishAmerica? How about the ones who, after their experience with PA, say "If this is what traditional publishing is like, I don't want any part of it"?
You'll be surprise [sic]
how fast time flies when you're busy doing something you like (writing); but you guys aren't writers.
Seven years is forever in publishing, "Carl." And you know something else? These folks you're pleased to call "whiners" are acting
exactly like writers.
Most of you wrote one or two badly conceived and written messes and struggled to get a publisher until PA came along. It won't be any different for any of you if you found another publisher. None of your books will sell many copies. Hell, even your family and friends don't purchase and read the crappola you guys spew to paper.
Are you claiming that PA publishes badly conceived and written messes? That PA publishes "crappola"?
And what of the PA authors who have well-written and delightful books? They aren't getting bookstore distribution or sales either.
And most of you whiners and complainers think you're too good to do one iota of promo in your own behalf.
Oh, baloney, "Carl." Have you read Molly Marx Brent's story of her adventures? Or Rebecca Easton's? Those folks went above and beyond. PublishAmerica's business plan is designed so that even if you do all the promotion that they suggest, and you do it perfectly, you'll still fail.
Let me assume that you're a PA author, "Carl." Come back in a year and tell all of us how well
your promo efforts worked.
You complain that PA don't [sic]
respond fast, well a major editor at a publishing house would hang up in your face if you show [sic]
yourself to be a bug.
"In your ear" is what you probably mean, but ... "not respond fast" is an understatement. "Not respond at all" would be closer. And we've seen PA not respond at all to perfectly reasonable requests from perfectly polite authors.
I do wonder how many major editors you've met. Where exactly in publishing in New York did you say you work?
THERE IS NO DEFINITION FOR TRADITIONAL PUBLISHER.
And Willem, Miranda, and Larry should get down on their knees and thank God for that fact.
But like pornography, while we can't define it, we all know it when we see it. Tell me, "Carl," what do
you think when you hear the phrase "traditional publisher?" Is what comes instantly to mind "vanity press"? That's what PublishAmerica would have us believe.