View Single Post
Old 11-16-2009, 06:33 PM   #15
MaggieScratch
Has got to the black veil
MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.MaggieScratch knows the square root of minus one.
 
MaggieScratch's Avatar
 
Posts: 537
Karma: 7960
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania
Device: Nook Color, Nook Simple Touch
No. I think what he is saying is that authors need to be compensated for their ebooks in the initial advance if the publishers want electronic rights included in the deal (which it seems they do now).

Previously, agents saw that not a lot of revenue was being generated from ebooks and allowed it to be a throw-in on the deal. Richard Curtis is warning that agents need to understand that in the future, ebooks will generate a larger percentage of the money in the deal and agents need to structure the book deal to reflect that, whether on the front end (the advance) or the back end (ebook-specific royalty rates). Most agents will agitate for the money upfront as they make a percentage.

I know this kind of goes against what I wrote previously, but I've thought on it further now. I do wish Mr. Curtis had been clearer in his post.
MaggieScratch is offline   Reply With Quote