The right direction

Macmillan ceo John Sargent reported a new ebook policy for the house yesterday, blending enhanced, premium price e-versions with a delay of "several months" on other titles: "Our goal is to give the consumer what they want, when they want it, at a fair price. In 2010 we will publish our bestsellers in several ways. Some bestsellers will be enhanced with additional content and priced to reflect their increased value to the consumer. These will be published at the same time as the hardcover and will be available for three months as special editions. We will publish other bestsellers, without enhancements, several months after the hardcover release. We will adjust the number of special edition bestsellers we publish based on the market response. Working with our authors, we will continue to experiment with new models going forward."

(From Publishers Lunch)

Yesterday we criticize; today we praise.

Amazon's take


The NY Times Sunday Magazine published a typically lame interview with Jeff Bezos over the weekend, in which Amazon's "royalty" to authors who publish through them is favorably compared to that of traditional publishers'. Amazon gives authors 35 percent; publishers' royalty rates depend on a whole number of factors, but would generally be in the 10-15 percent range.

It's a completely misleading comparison. For one thing, publishers pay advances up front against the royalty; Amazon does nothing of the kind. The publishers are taking a real risk on the work, and the writer, generally before the book has been written. And without that risk, most books simply wouldn't be written at all.

Publishers also have real expenses associated with the book beyond marketing it - things like editing and physically producing it, for starters. And the way sales actually break down, the publisher is generally only getting 50 percent or less on the sale, so the author earns in the area of 20 to 30 percent of what the publisher gets.

And publishers don't turn around and sell copies of the books where authors don't make any money - as Amazon does when it sells "used" books.

Traditional publishers certainly can be criticized, but Amazon is in no way a white knight here. The changes in the industry that Amazon is trumpeting have generally not helped writers, and Amazon could clearly care less about that.

I'm not saying it's their job to care, but don't try and give me any impression to the contrary.

Book wars


In case you haven't heard . . .

Amazon.com extends Internet price war on books

By HILLEL ITALIE (AP)
NEW YORK — The book price wars are no longer just for pre-orders.
Amazon.com was offering hardcovers of John Grisham's "Ford County" and Barbara Kingsolver's "The Lacuna" for just $9 on Tuesday, the official release date for both books. Hardcovers generally have a list price of $24 or higher.

The price wars are driving publishers nuts. Even though no publisher has directly supported the lower prices with steeper than normal discounts (at least none have admitted it), the discounts are seen as decimating price points and killing or at least harming independent bookstores, who are losing sales because they generally can't offer to sell the books for less than they pay.

(The usual discount to book stores is 50 percent. That means the store paid somewhere in the area of half the list price to get the title. There are all sorts of promotions and other complications, but it's a useful rule of thumb. Oh, and authors generally get in the area of 6 to 12 percent, depending on the type of book, how many ultimately sell, the contract, etc. Yes, the guy or gal who wrote it gets the least amount of money in the process.)

There's some anecdotal evidence that the deeply discounted books are eating into the sales of other books a little lower in the pecking order, but given how slowly publishing works, it may be months before the real impact of this known.

At least somebody thinks people want to read books, and that they're worth bargaining over. The only problem is whether anyone will be able to afford to publish books when this is over.

Or write. But that's another subject . . .

Publisher math


Me: I'm getting the copy edit first thing Tuesday?
Editor: First thing.
Me: That means it'll be there when I get up and am ready to work?*
Editor: First thing.
Me: Overnight?
Editor: Overnight.
Me: Overnight Express, or Supersaver?
Editor: (mumbles) Supersaver.
Me: Which means 10:30. If the UPS route isn't screwed up.
Editor: Whatever.
Me: And you need it back when?
Editor: This Monday.
Me: Monday?
Editor: That's a whole week. Seven days.
Me: Seven? I get it Tuesday. I have to finish it Friday by about five. Unless I send it by mail. Then I have until Saturday.
Editor: UPS. I need it first thing Monday.
Me: First thing.
Editor: I get in at 8, and I need it on my desk.
Me: Eight is first thing?
Editor:That's right.
Me: For you, not for me.
Editor: It doesn't matter to me when you start working.
Me: So you're giving me two and a half days to do this -
Editor: Two and a half?
Me: I told you last month, the one day this month I won't be here is Wednesday. You said you'd make a note of that.
Editor: I did.
Me: Two and a half days to go through a copy edit is not a lot of time.
Editor: What two and a half days? You have all the way until Monday.
Me: First thing.
Editor: First thing.

* A lot earlier than you think. A whole lot earlier than 10:30 a.m.

The problem with Kindle . . .


. . . You can't throw it across the room when you come to a part of a book you don't like.

Well, actually you can - it's just that you're going to seriously regret it after it lands. Unlike a paperback.

I was thinking about this fact while listening to some of the speakers at the BEA book industry conference this past weekend. And while it started as an irreverent, wise-ass remark-toid, it provoked ideas about the future of books that are, maybe, more relevant.

Books - the physical objects - have played a critical role in transferring and preserving knowledge for two or maybe three thousand years. They've gone through relatively few major changes in that time, each one connected to technology. They've also also evolved as mass entertainment media. While they've never really been dominant in that role, it's been as critical in their history as the transfer of knowledge has.

Like the printing press, the possibilities of electronic/digital media and networks has once again thrown the fundamentals into flux. Books' role as the primary reservoir of knowledge has been challenged if not superseded by the internet. Go into any elementary school and ask the kids what they are using for their research projects. The first answer they give will be "the internet."

You can debate whether that's good or bad, but the bottom line is, it's a fact.

As entertainment media, books face a similar, though not quite as fundamental challenge. For the moment at least, they are physically the most efficient means of providing a long-scale imaginative experience - or whatever it is that a novel delivers. But that, too, is changing, and whether people will lose the taste for that form of entertainment - as they have mostly lost their taste for poetry - remains an open question.

Most people in the industry today think that books will basically migrate on-line, where they will resume their traditional role as reservoirs of knowledge and providers of entertainment. I don't know that that's a good assumption. Even if it is, their nature will surely change. If you look at the books being produced in medieval monasteries and those being produced after the invention of cheap paperbacks (and the distribution system that made their sale on a mass market level possible), you can't help but realize the difference is so vast that you're essentially talking about a different product.

For the sake of argument, let's assume that books do migrate and survive successfully to the electronic realm. Digital media makes a large number of things possible that ink and paper can't, at least not economically. Graphics are only the beginning; video, audio, live links to other media - the possibilities are vast.

Given that, it seems logical that the electronic or digital version of a book will be considered, should be considered, more valuable than a print version. If, for example, you're reading about a World War II battle - Dieppe - and you can instantly see a map of the battle site, view newsreels, etc., etc., that's worth more to you than simply being able to read the text.

Yes?

Well, duh. It's not a radical assumption at all. But I didn't hear anyone mention that at BEA, and in fact have yet to hear anyone point that out when discussing E-books. On the contrary, E-books' value is seen primarily in terms of their distribution system - they're cheap (and quick) to get to market, since you don't have transport costs, etc., etc. (Amazon and Google are doing their best to corner and add to the transport costs, but that's another post.)

The nature of books, storytelling, knowledge transfer and the book industry are all very much in flux. But the people who are mostly looked on for direction mostly don't seem to have much of a clue. We're often not even picking the right people to listen to.

Panel after panel at the BEA featured people who were supposedly experts on topics simply voicing opinions from very limited positions. Can a group of authors, none of whom actually make their living publishing books, really provide insight on the role of publishers either in the present or the near future?

It's an interesting, if difficult, time to be a writer. I'm not sure whether it's a consolation knowing everybody else is confused, too.

What's wrong with publishing today


The publishing industry's major convention, Book Expo or BEA, is being held this weekend in New York City. It's not really of much immediate use to writers, except as an excuse to party, and if you're a writer, since when do you need an excuse?

Yeah, I went anyway.

Friday morning before hitting the floor I ran down one of my old editors at Starbucks a few blocks away. Without getting all dopey-eyed about it, the guy was one of the best fiction editors in the business.

I say was because he was so good his publisher gave him cookbooks to edit.

No joke. This encouraged him to get another job, which quickly turned out to be so ludicrous he left publishing all together.

Well not all together; he does free-lancing now and then, but that's about it. He's given up looking for an editing job, at least for the time being. Nobody's hiring, and the people who are hiring want him to edit . . . cookbooks. He's doing pretty well in other fields.

Editing fiction is a lot more difficult than people - especially writers - think. It's a strange kind of talent. A big part of it has to do with handling the writers who, rumor has it, can be difficult to deal with. Even when they arrive in the office unarmed.

Anyway, my former editor looked a hell of a lot more relaxed than while he was at the publishing house. I'm not sure whether that says more about the publisher, or me.

Talking about writing


So we're hanging out in the hotel penthouse, ten or twelve of us, all writers and the guru. And mostly we're talking about country-western music.

Until David Hagberg (who still hasn't bought me a beer, or seen me completely sober), says something along the lines of, "It's good to have so many writers together. You can talk and be understood."

Everyone else agreed; someone even said they could talk about craft and not be looked at strangely.

There was unanimous agreement, people saying how marvelous it is to talk about craft, until the circle came around to me.

"The hell with craft," I said. "I'd rather talk about baseball."

They made me buy the next round.

Copyright

Copyright Critics Rationalize Theft

Writers, composers, designers and other
content creators need to fight back.

by Mark Helprin

. . . Their work is peculiarly vulnerable in that it is easy to appropriate....

Were this vulnerability unaddressed, the producers of intellectual property would be put out of business unless they were independently wealthy or worked either as amateurs or drew salaries at the pleasure of, and beholden to, boards, committees and overseers of every type. Always at risk, the independent voice, the guarantor of political freedom and personal dignity, would be dangerously depressed along with the arts that sustain civilization. Amateurs alone are insufficient -- unless one believes that the work of Herman Melville, Thomas Eakins and Aaron Copeland does not merit full-time employment.

Full article here.

Letter to the editor


The copy edit from hell goes back. Excerpt:

. . . Finally, what is up with [copy editor]? If he's not making snotty remarks in his queries, he's rewriting the copy and screwing crap up. This is the second ms. in a row where he's gone over the wall. . . .

Remind him that I have access to heavy weapons and enjoy using them . . .

Planning for success


Overheard at the other end of the bar:

Writer One: We're having a big meeting on publicity and the launch for my new book next week.

Writer Two: Why bother? Publishers really have only two plans: A) Throw the book out there and hope it sells, B) Wonder why the hell they bought this book in the first place.

Writer One (taking a long hit from her drink): Maybe I'll get a good lunch out of it.

Tightening the cycle


The most interesting conversation I had at NY Comicon had nothing to do with the conference or even the comic-related industry, but about book publishing. Basically, he was questioning the present book production timeline. The timeline generally means it takes a book twelve months - at least - from the day it's submitted to the day it's published.

That's an incredibly long delay. In some cases, a good hunk of that delay is due not to editing or production concerns, but to the fact that publishers still try to leave time in the process for book reviews to be prepared. The only problem is that those reviews are a) diminishing and b) have little to no effect on sales.

Will it change?

It should. Some books already skirt much of the delay - I happen to be working on one - but in those cases everyone seems to get unnaturally nervous about the accelerated timeline. The problem is that the publishers aren't really geared for such quick turn-around - and neither are authors. The present model - and that includes advances, salaries and staffing - needs a long timeline in case things go wrong. It shouldn't, but that's the way things are.

For now, anyway. With everything that's going on in the economy and in the industry, maybe it'll change.

Catching up on expenses


So the Guru calls up and asks: "Remember that time last year when Xxxx* was around and we were in that place and he got a little excited and things got hairy and someone called the police and the fire alarm went off and we had to sneak out by pretending we were with the paramedics?"

Me: "Vaguely."

Guru: "Do you happen to remember what you had to drink? I'm filling out the expense report . . ."


* Name redacted to protect the guilty from probable and multiple parole violations

We only work with legends

So a good friend calls up and starts talking about this book project he's got out at a publisher. And of course the unwritten rules is that even among friends, you don't talk too much about the project itself, because you don't want to jinx it, so he's talking about the editor...

Him: He's great. A real editor. A throwback type who really edits.
Me: Uh-huh.
Him: You know what I mean. Really helps improve the book. Understands what writing is all about.
Me: Uh-huh.
Him: A legend. Old school. An editor's editor.
Me: Wait a second. Who are we talking about?
Him: Xxxxxxx.
Me: Xxxxxxx?!? Are you kidding? . . . I've never seen him sober.
Him: I rest my case.

Then again, Xxxxxxx has never seen me sober, so maybe I'm old school, too.

The modern dilemma . . .

So should I be p'd that a complete set of Deep Black (all six books) has been pirated and is available on-line, or disappointed that it's the only one of my series that anyone cared enough about to post in its entirety?

Copy editor hell

Some days after wading through a long and harrowing copy edit, I like to grab a beer and sit out on the front bench, watch the cars go by, and think of the nervous breakdown the copy editor who worked on Fight Club must have had . . .

Thrillerfest

The International Thriller Writers Association held its annual dinner and group therapy session last night in New York. The Guru was there, of course, holding court in a corner of the Hyatt bar, a place where more books have been inspired and brain cells killed than any other place in Manhattan.

My only disappointment was that David Hagberg wasn't wearing a tux. On the other hand, he did have some clothes on, so I should count my blessings.

Prior to the real start of festivities downstairs, ITW gave out awards:

BEST NOVEL
The Ghost by Robert Harris (Simon & Schuster)

BEST FIRST NOVEL
Heart-Shaped Box by Joe Hill (William Morrow)

BEST PAPERBACK ORIGINAL
The Midnight Road byTom Piccirilli (Bantam)

2008 ThrillerMaster Award for recognition of her illustrious body of work and many contributions to the field was granted to Sandra Brown.

But Jim Rollins' recounting of the "best" Amazon reviews ever received by members was what stuck with me. A couple (paraphrasing):

"All your books really suck, but this latest one was by far the worst..."

"This book is so bad I'd un-read it if I could . . ."

Amazing how mothers can turn on their children...

Closer . . .

It figures that a Romance publisher would get it:

Harlequin is the first publisher to release entirely enriched eBooks

TORONTO, July 9 /PRNewswire/ -- Harlequin Enterprises Limited (http://www.eharlequin.com/), the global leader in series romance and one of the world's leading publishers of women's fiction, announced today the launch of their Enriched Edition eBooks. With this launch, Harlequin becomes the first publisher to offer entire eBooks that are enriched with interactive buttons that hyperlink to Web sites with more information about the content.

Won't be long now until it all comes together.

My kind of book party

The authors of Dinner Party Disasters: True Stories of Culinary Catastrophe, which Abrams published last month, saw their book’s thesis live in action at a recent dinner party, when fists flew over the presidential election just as guests were finishing their entrées.

Twenty-two movers and shakers of Litchfield, Conn., gathered last weekend at the home of a local couple for a dinner party to honor the book’s author, Annaliese Soros (first wife of financier George Soros), and her contributor, Abigail Stokes. Dinner Party Disasters promises to guide readers “through the faux pas that other hostesses have made so that you don’t make the same mistakes.” It contains instructions for putting together the “perfect mix of guests, food, décor, entertainment, and preparation, ensuring your next gathering will be a rousing success.” It is unclear whether or not the party’s hosts had read the book prior to the event.

As entrées were being enjoyed, a McCain supporter and an Obama supporter, having exhausted their verbal arguments, lunged at each other with fists flying. Eventually the kitchen staff came to the rescue and separated the two men, but not before some blood was shed and the well-heeled guests were shaken up. After a cooling down period, the rambunctious guests returned to the table (with revised seat assignments) and ate dessert.

“It’s funny now, but it wasn’t so funny then,” said coauthor Stokes. “The irony was that as the evening began we all kidded around about how someone should stage a disaster at one of these book parties—and lo and behold, it happened.”

I would've waited until after dessert to throw the first punch, but that's a personal preference.

Prince's party

I was always under the impression that Dogboy could barely read, and that the closest he came to the book world was the display of porn behind the gas station where he buys his smokes and ammo. Then yesterday he calls up and says he was at the year's biggest literary bash - Prince's party out at BEA in LA Friday night... and Saturday, and Sunday . . .

Me: Why were you at Prince's?
Dogboy: He parties, bro. He was rockin'.
Me: Yeah, but how'd you get an invite?
Dogboy: P Diddy invited me.
Me: The rapper?
Dogboy: He's a lot more than a rapper, dude. Now he's a literary impresario.
Me: You're white trailer trash. Why was he hangin' with you?
Dogboy: Because he knows cool. And hey, Guru was looking for you.
Me: Guru? My editor? He was there?
Dogboy: No shit. He was like, where is DeFelice? Why the hell isn't he here? But I covered for you.
Me: How?
Dogboy: I told him you were too stuck up to be at a party like this. I mean, Vana White's old house? Come on.
Me: Thanks.
Dogboy: From now on I'll just say you're in jail. Better?

Reviewers

This was in Publishers Marketplace today:

PW Cuts Reviewers Pay
The price of gold has risen sharply in commodities market, but the "gold standard" for book reviewers is headed in the other direction. The NBCC blog posts this letter received by a member from the Publishers Weekly reviews editor:

"Dear Reviewer,

We are under constraints to reduce our expenses and must reduce the fee we pay to reviewers. Any reviews assigned after June 15 will be billed at $25 per review. However, you will be credited as a contributor in issues where your reviews appear. Please know that we value the work you do for us. Your astute reading and writing are what make our magazine so valuable in the industry and we regret this necessary action. All of us here are also experiencing change but we expect that we will continue to be the gold standard in book reviewing."

I'll kick in another fifty on the reviews of my books . . . maybe even more . . .