LJ Entry on Some of the Grim Truths of Publishing

[Teresa Edgerton]

An insider's look at the financial side of publishing:

http://alg.livejournal.com/84032.html

I knew some of this. Knowing the rest is certain to give me nightmares for months to come.

 

[Carolyn Hill]

Depressing article.

But the hypothetical example is a hoot:
"a mass market romance novel called Crichton is an Idiot by a brand new author named Aeryn Sun"

I wanna read that book!

 

[John Jarrold]

Yep, that all sounds very familiar. But that's in a BIG market, the US. In the UK, think 800 hardbacks and 4 to 5,000 paperbacks, which are very common sales figures for a first SF novel (if it's even published in hardback, which some aren't). So if, as an editor, you have only acquired one book by that author, you may well not be allowed to take on a second novel, sdince those sales figures make no financial sense...

 

[Coolhand]

Yikes. The more I learn about the publishing industry, the more my hopes of getting anywhere shrivel up an die like a scuba-diving slug in the Dead Sea. From reading that article, it looks like you're actually worse off getting published and doing badly than if you'd never got published at all, what with the old financial blacklist.
Eek.

 

[John Jarrold]

Oh, it's unalloyed fun in publishing...!

 

[Patrick Mahon]

I'll ask the obvious question then: if this is the reality of the financial situation, how do the publishing houses (other than the major ones that publish bestselling authors) survive?

The numbers in this article would seem to suggest that most small to medium sized publishers should be going to the wall with alarming regularity!

And you say the numbers are smaller in the UK, John - so presumably this makes the fixed costs an even bigger drag on profits?

On this basis, why does anyone set up in publishing?!

 

[John Jarrold]

Good question! Of course, those authors who do work have ongoing sales and as they build up a backlist this makes money regularly for both the publisher and the author. And most publishers are aware that they need to take on the best new writers they see, for future development.

That said, the general publishing mantra is that if the company as a whole makes 10% profit, on gross turnover, it's doing well...

 

[Brian G Turner]

It's a great article - really pleased to see it.

Oftentimes you'll get aspiring writers complain that they are writing art - and any publisher who rejects such "art" is obviously a stupid ignoramus.

But the article puts a proper perspective on it - selling books is a business.

And much as though some aspirants may tell themselves that they have written something better than anything in the genre, the publishers are concerned with tracking what is actually selling in the genre - ie, what the consumers are actually buying - and looking to serve the needs of that market.

I used to be a completely up-my-own-hole aspirant, with a bitter and cynical view of publishing and its rejection of pure art.

Then I showed off my masterpeice to a crit group, where people such as LittleMissAttitude, in no uncertain terms, pointed out that I was actually a crap writer who didn't understand either the genre or the readership I was trying to write for.

Since then I've tried to ensure that I learn about publisher not simply as a process, but a business, and I'm eternally grateful that my bitter-twisted self-indulgent ego was given the kicking it deserved. Because of that, I can now aspire to be a serious writer - someone writing for actual markets, with actual readers, in a style that conforms not simply to wants, but needs. And maybe I'll make it one day (heck, I figure I will if I really want to and devote the necessary time to everything).

Or so I like to think. Even still, reading some more recent works, I've realised that I may not even have got that right - yet.

I think it's overall a very important point that the publishing business as a business is very much emphasised at every point. I've always seen writer as similar to sports. Doesn't matter how talented you are, there are always huge hurdles to surmount. The ones who make it, I figure the ones who dare challenge those hurdles and devote themselves to achieving that goal.

2 far too long c.

 

[John Jarrold]

It took Iain Banks almost fifteen years from his first submission to getting published...

 

[chrispenycate]

I enjoyed that article. Masochistic ? No. I’m just not really an aspiring writer (so what are you doing in this forum?)
I’ve been comparing it to something I know, the music business ; there are many parallels, and not that many differences,
The initial expense is higher with a CD, as you can’t expect the musician to do all his preparetory work at home, so advances for unknowns disappeared in the seventies. Requests for rewrites, modifications, and such are considerably more difficult, so the product is what it is, take it or leave it (not entirely true, but close) The margin between the price that it costs you, and the price you can expect from the distributers (or even directly from the record shops) is much smaller ; an extra middleman, and a tradition of direct sales rather than sale or return. And books have no equivalent to the “direct performance sale” where, at a concert or festival, the middlemen are all eliminated and the artist sells himself directly, obtaining all the mark ups ; it’s largely this that makes it possible to break even on a production run of a couple of thousand.

Electronic publishing (the literate equivalent of i-tunes) could change the equations, largely by eliminating those masses of unsold books, but also by eliminating printers, middlemen and transport. Still, as we’ve seen, dedicated readers are not yet ready to buy in this format, and won’t be until a good standard hardware and software solution is found, and prices for electronic formats reflect the savings made by the publishers, rather than the “what the market will bear” mentality (an E-book the price of a hardcover? When you’ve had to put your data in that format anyway, to run the printing press, no warehousing, for short runs no printing at all, no returns ? Surprise, surprise, someone’s cashing in) And the international market becomes a useful addition, rather than an annoyance. Still, the railway station market, the impulse buyers, beach side kiosks and supermarket shelves, will be unaffected(I’ve no idea what percentage this is of total sales, as aeroports and stations are frequently served by branches of the big bookselling chains)
As a Sci-Fi reader I can imagine a row of computer screens next to the shelves, where you can browse a far larger catalogue than is physically present, and whence you can download your choices through a standardised infrared interface, automatically debiting your account and informing the publisher and the author of the sale. As a frequent flyer I can see the shelf stackers, the till operators and above all the buyers who decide what readers are going to like getting seriously upset about it. But mostly the E-books would be good for the mes of this world, who go into a store and order (if ever the reader became available)