Return of a Man Named PAMB and its Quotes

Not to derail--but the BBB rating page for PA has been reset.

Who did they pay off to get that F rating removed and a "No Review" put in its place????

http://www.bbb.org/greater-maryland/business-reviews/publishers-book/publish-america-llp-in-frederick-md-32010985

I have never trusted BBB. I have seen too many scammers get around their rating system. It doesn't surprise me that PA has yet again come up smelling like a half dead rodent.

Gillhoughly said:

Not to derail--but the BBB rating page for PA has been reset.

Who did they pay off to get that F rating removed and a "No Review" put in its place????

http://www.bbb.org/greater-maryland/business-reviews/publishers-book/publish-america-llp-in-frederick-md-32010985

Click to expand...

The page also says:

"BBB's information on this company is being updated, and no report is available at this time."

I'd keep an eye on it and see what happens.

there was a report on the news that everyone who paid the annual dues to join the BBB suddenly all had A+ ratings...

Gillhoughly said:

Not to derail--but the BBB rating page for PA has been reset.

Click to expand...

Typical government.

BBB's not a government agency, it's a private business.

Well, aren't I just the idiot today? Sheesh!

no you're not, you're just priceless. They do act like a gov't agency sometimes.

Unimportant said:

It's cuz the period at the end of the sentence is included in the html link. Erase the period at the end and it'll go through.

This is the photo on the page the link goes to:

I'm pretty sure that's not the last PA convention!

Click to expand...

...correct me if I'm wrong, but based on the banner on the far left, isn't that BookExpo America from 2006?



Talk about your shoddy editing job... didn't even remove the actual tradeshow's logos from the banners, or blur it out or anything.

AlexPiper said:

...correct me if I'm wrong, but based on the banner on the far left, isn't that BookExpo America from 2006?. . . .

Click to expand...

Think of it as an "artist's impression" of a PA conference. Con artist's impression.

--Ken

ResearchGuy said:

Think of it as an "artist's impression" of a PA conference. Con artist's impression.

Click to expand...

Oh, I know; the idea that they'd have a conference that big -- much less that they'd have other publishers exhibiting there, or C-SPAN -- is ridiculous. But I'm just sort of bewildered that they left the picture recognizable enough that someone out there who's never attended BEA (i.e., me) could figure out from the banners that it was BEA 2006.

Still, it seems unusual to me. My impression has been that PA usually leads people along by telling them a form of the truth, but with ambiguous language ("'available' in bookstores") and weasel-words ('at the publisher's discretion') that leaves them an out. They're usually fairly careful not to actually engage in outright lies they could be caught in, which this picture fairly demonstrably is.

I thought one of the problems with the first PA convention was that their authors started comparing notes...hard to see how they'll avoid that. Especially since the honeymoon seems to be wearing off in weeks or days rather than months.

I could see a happy newbie buying a ticket, but becoming a cluebie before the convention. At that point, they usually have tried and failed to get answers, and they might figure the convention would be a good place to buttonhole PA management.

I wonder if PA has considered how many of their attending authors will have promised their families & friends to tweet or blog about the exciting events right from the convention floor via cell phone? Twitter didn't exist last time PA had a conference...

God, I get exhausted just thinking about having to pile so many lies upon lies for this many years. I wonder how, if at all, the Stooges maintain any kind of grip on reality when everything they do, every day all day, automatically has to be coated in lies and deceit.

In some ways it must be like repeating the same word over and over until it loses all meaning - thinking and speaking of nothing but automated lies about books and publishing must eventually render you somewhat numb and confused about what you are actually doing and saying.

The psychologist in me would like very much to get a real, honest interview with a person like Miranda - but then the thing about people like Miranda is that honest interviews are very hard to come by, isn't it?

DreamWeaver said:

I thought one of the problems with the first PA convention was that their authors started comparing notes...

Click to expand...

We did, DW. We compared notes on how we'd been verbally abused, how mistakes had been injected into our manuscripts, how royalty checks didn't add up to what our own records showed, how we believed names were simply made up to appear as though they had a much larger staff.

What was really creepy is that they watched us all like hawks - and that's why they hired armed guards at the banquet. They feared a revolt. And golly, we got to PAY for the honor.

PA sez:

Our shopping cart requires that you choose a shipping option to activate your reservation.

Click to expand...

PA honed the skill of getting blood out of a turnip.

I would LOVE to see the brouhaha when all those PA authors get together and compare notes.

TheTinCat said:

but then the thing about people like Miranda is that honest interviews are very hard to come by, isn't it?

Click to expand...

Well, it has to be pretty bad when her own public defender couldn't get a straight story out of her twice and had to fire himself.

"The case went to trial in March 1998 but quickly ended in a mistrial on the second day after Charles Plath, Prather's public defender, announced he had been misled by his client and he could not properly defend her.


Too bad you can't interview Plath, but what he knows is prolly under attorney/client privilege. I suspect he would have a very clear memory of HER!

Gillhoughly said:

her own public defender couldn't get a straight story out of her twice and had to fire himself

Click to expand...

I read that as "had to set fire to himself". Which made me laugh...

TheTinCat said:

I read that as "had to set fire to himself". Which made me laugh...

Click to expand...

I've had a client or two where that would have been preferable to dealing with them.

So, everything's been great except for the fact that it sucks.

priceless1 said:

We did, DW. We compared notes on how we'd been verbally abused, how mistakes had been injected into our manuscripts, how royalty checks didn't add up to what our own records showed, how we believed names were simply made up to appear as though they had a much larger staff.

What was really creepy is that they watched us all like hawks - and that's why they hired armed guards at the banquet. They feared a revolt. And golly, we got to PAY for the honor.

Click to expand...

Did I walk into a joke or is this true? You had armed guards at the banquet?