Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
As expected, Konrath takes Shatzkin on, point by point:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/0...-shatzkin.html
Sample:
Quote:
Mike: 5. Current indie successes where the author name or even the book itself was “made” by traditional publishers. Another factor any author self-publishing has to consider is the likelihood of success, which is much greater if the books are backlist (have some fame in the marketplace) or even if just the author has been previously published. Successes like Howey’s, from a total standing start with no prior writing track record, are quite different from others who have reclaimed their backlists and used them as a platform to build a self-publishing career.
Joe: Mike, reread what you just said.
"others who have reclaimed their backlists and used them as a platform to build a self-publishing career. "
First of all, these backlist books obviously weren't selling for the legacy publisher, or else the legacy publisher never would have returned the rights.
Second of all, if the authors who got their backlists returned were able to build a career, WHY THE HELL WOULD ANYONE SUBMIT TO LEGACY PUBLISHERS EVER AGAIN?!?
Pardon my yelling, but what you just said shows your absolute inability to understand what's happening here.
To rephrase what you just said:
Legacy publishers couldn't sell the same books that went on to make self-published authors successful.
|
|
As I read that, the only thing that stands out is that if Konrath honestly believes what is quoted there about authors reclaiming backlist books then he really doesn't have a good handle on what's going on there at all.
The economics of an author republishing his or her backlist electronically are very different from those of a commercial publisher deciding whether to devote one of their limited number of publishing slots to the same books.
Commercial publishers often let books revert because even though they might sell a steady trickle if left in print (which may require a new print run on the publisher's part), there's a brand new book in competition for that slot which the publisher expects will sell better.
As for the bolded part, commercial publishers are still better at getting author's names out there than the majority of self-publishers. The model of launching a career with a commercial publisher and then releasing books yourself after your name's out and the rights have reverted still works just fine for a number of authors.
Selling a thousand copies a year of each of 20 backlist books with very little upfront cost makes a lot of sense for a single author, doing new print runs for that entire list and convincing bookstores to stock them may not make sense for a commercial publisher. Sure, the commercial publisher may go electronic only, but if they're working from an older contract they may need to keep physical copies in print to retain the rights.
Different business models have different profit thresholds, so a model that's viable for a self-published author may not be viable for a commercial publisher, and vice versa.