Harlequin author Ann Voss Peterson earned $0.11 per book sold

Top100EbooksRank · 05-09-2012, 12:03 AM

A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Harlequin Fail
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2012/0...quin-fail.html

Short excerpt:

Quote:

If you do a (very) little digging into publishing companies, you'll discover that while the industry standard royalty rate for mass market paperback sales is 8% for US retail, Harlequin pays its series authors only 6%.

The royalty goes down from there.

All Harlequin series authors know that US retail royalties are going to be lower than industry standard going in. We also know that Harlequin pays rather low advances. My largest and most current advance was only $6,500 per book, but here's the kicker; the books are widely distributedand sell a lot of copies. I have NEVER failed to earn out in my first royalty statement. That's right, ALL of my books have earned out and then some.

So why can't I afford to write for them any longer?

Let me share with you the numbers of a book I wrote that was first published in January, 2002, still one of my favorites. My life-to-date statement says this book has sold 179,057 copies so far, and it has earned $20,375.22. (bold text by Joe) That means the average I've earned is a whopping 11 cents per copy. If you use the cover price to calculate (the number used in the contract), which was $4.50 at the time of release, I've earned an AVERAGE of 2.4 % per copy.

GA Russell · 05-09-2012, 01:40 AM

Thanks Top 100! I've bookmarked this to give me encouragement in my quest to self-publish.

teh603 · 05-09-2012, 07:13 AM

Well, this is a company that was briefly classed as a vanity self-publisher and is responsible for a good chunk of the talk about how "getting published is expensive."

That having been said, I'd bet some of the audience reactions to Harlequin repackaging their old stuff was because the author wasn't using their social networking resources well enough. A post on facebook or an author blog saying, "Hey, everyone, Harlequin's re-releasing my old stuff and you can pick up anything you missed!" should help defuse it.

mr ploppy · 05-09-2012, 07:40 AM

Do you think they would be interested in a violent skinhead romance? I was thinking I might be able to get a bidding war going with them and Mills & Boon. There's millions of 50 year old ex-skinbyrds with nothing to read.

kennyc · 05-12-2012, 09:10 PM

And not atypical for the traditional publishing business. I am sooooo glad there is a new game in town!

dadioflex · 05-14-2012, 05:47 AM

Interesting read but I think JAK's rant at the end is pointless rabble-rousing. Like so many other popular figures who made a name for themselves with a single issue, he's starting to believe his own rhetoric.

Peterson had ten years with Harlequin and will probably do VERY well self-publishing, but someone fresh to the game, isn't going to have the accumulated marketing that being a Harlequin author gives her.

How can you object to the royalty Harlequin was paying when no-body else was fighting to publish those books and make the investment?

Old publishing is dying, at least let it die in peace.

kennyc · 05-14-2012, 06:54 AM

Well two things, she was likely 'locked in' to a bad contract -- this is reprehensible and taking advantage of artists just as the music business has and most other commercial art firms have done in the past

and two the old publishers clearly will not "die in peace" as you put it. They are doing everything they can to stop the advance of 'new publishing' as is evidenced by the collusion in the agency model and refusing to allow ebooks in public libraries among other things.

dadioflex · 05-15-2012, 09:00 AM

Okay. So you're saying she shouldn't have written those books? It takes two parties to make a bad contract valid. If a writer signs the contract put in front of her, and neither she, nor her agent if she has one, pipes up about improving the terms, then whose fault is that?

Let's say that Harlequin aren't prepared to negotiate on contract terms (unusual - the first contract you see is rarely the best one. Particularly after ten years working with them.) and adopt a take it or leave it attitude. She loses out on the work because she's priced herself out of the job. Somebody else comes along and accepts the same contract. How much of your anger are you going to direct at the second author? Capitalism is not a meritocracy. God knows, it is not.

Two people are potentially competing for the same contract (obviously it'll be many more than two people) and Harlequin has to decide who they'd rather have. All things being equal the better writer gets the job. If their first choice won't accept the terms, they move to the next writer. If neither of them sign then Harlequin changes their terms until somebody bites. The terms change to reflect the market rate. There is no obligation upon Harlequin to pay more than people are willing to work for. There isn't even the concept of a minimum wage under these circumstances.

Do you typically pay more than the asking price when going to the mall?

When a business makes a decision out of self-interest, it is demonized. When the little man does the same he is lionized. Both are taking what they consider to be the rational, logical decision. Business is never going to win that popularity contest.

She did the sensible thing. Stuck with the company that was paying her more than anyone else was offering until she had enough of a name to strike out on her own.

I don't really understand how the old publishing model is doing anything whatsoever to get in the way of the new publishing model. They barely intersect, and typically only when an old, moneyed, publisher decides to heap fame and riches upon a previously self-published author. Old publishing is only doing harm to itself. Nothing Harlequin does can stop you writing a romance and putting it out as an e-book, but if their own terms are unacceptable to their existing writers, they're clearly going to lose more talent. I suspect they'll take another look at their standard terms and make them more attractive to counteract both this and whatever negative publicity may be generated. They won't be doing it because their former terms were evil or reprehensible, they'll be doing it because market forces have determined that they have to in order to remain competitive.

EDIT: Something I was hoping someone might pick up on, was the similarity between writing romances for the likes of Harlequin and franchise novels like Star Wars etc. As I understand it they also suffer from lower royalties (split with the franchise owner I imagine) leading to many NYT bestsellers probably making a good deal less than you would imagine.

GA Russell · 05-15-2012, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dadioflex

Capitalism is not a meritocracy.

Agreed! When I was growing up I was taught that it is.

pdurrant · 05-15-2012, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Top100EbooksRank

A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Harlequin Fail
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2012/0...quin-fail.html

"That means the average I've earned is a whopping 11 cents per copy."

Adobe earns $0.22 for every ADE copy-protected ebook sold.

AnemicOak · 04-21-2016, 11:26 PM

Yes, I know this is a very old thread. However I thought it worth bumping to post that the class action lawsuit related to the issue in the OP now has a proposed $4.1 million settlement...

http://www.harlequinsettlement.com

pendragginp · 04-24-2016, 10:25 AM

GOOD.

pdurrant · 04-24-2016, 04:49 PM

Well, it's good for the lawyers - they get about $1million out of it. The authors who started it get $5,000 each and their share of the payout. It will be interesting to see what that $4.1 million actually turns into in terms of equivalent royalties.

05-14-2012, 06:54 AM	#7
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,872 Karma: 118716293 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire	Well two things, she was likely 'locked in' to a bad contract -- this is reprehensible and taking advantage of artists just as the music business has and most other commercial art firms have done in the past and two the old publishers clearly will not "die in peace" as you put it. They are doing everything they can to stop the advance of 'new publishing' as is evidenced by the collusion in the agency model and refusing to allow ebooks in public libraries among other things. Last edited by kennyc; 05-14-2012 at 06:57 AM.

05-15-2012, 09:00 AM	#8
dadioflex Dyslexic Count Posts: 526 Karma: 5041991 Join Date: Aug 2008 Device: Palm TX, Advent Vega, iPad, iPod Touch, Kindle	Okay. So you're saying she shouldn't have written those books? It takes two parties to make a bad contract valid. If a writer signs the contract put in front of her, and neither she, nor her agent if she has one, pipes up about improving the terms, then whose fault is that? Let's say that Harlequin aren't prepared to negotiate on contract terms (unusual - the first contract you see is rarely the best one. Particularly after ten years working with them.) and adopt a take it or leave it attitude. She loses out on the work because she's priced herself out of the job. Somebody else comes along and accepts the same contract. How much of your anger are you going to direct at the second author? Capitalism is not a meritocracy. God knows, it is not. Two people are potentially competing for the same contract (obviously it'll be many more than two people) and Harlequin has to decide who they'd rather have. All things being equal the better writer gets the job. If their first choice won't accept the terms, they move to the next writer. If neither of them sign then Harlequin changes their terms until somebody bites. The terms change to reflect the market rate. There is no obligation upon Harlequin to pay more than people are willing to work for. There isn't even the concept of a minimum wage under these circumstances. Do you typically pay more than the asking price when going to the mall? When a business makes a decision out of self-interest, it is demonized. When the little man does the same he is lionized. Both are taking what they consider to be the rational, logical decision. Business is never going to win that popularity contest. She did the sensible thing. Stuck with the company that was paying her more than anyone else was offering until she had enough of a name to strike out on her own. I don't really understand how the old publishing model is doing anything whatsoever to get in the way of the new publishing model. They barely intersect, and typically only when an old, moneyed, publisher decides to heap fame and riches upon a previously self-published author. Old publishing is only doing harm to itself. Nothing Harlequin does can stop you writing a romance and putting it out as an e-book, but if their own terms are unacceptable to their existing writers, they're clearly going to lose more talent. I suspect they'll take another look at their standard terms and make them more attractive to counteract both this and whatever negative publicity may be generated. They won't be doing it because their former terms were evil or reprehensible, they'll be doing it because market forces have determined that they have to in order to remain competitive. EDIT: Something I was hoping someone might pick up on, was the similarity between writing romances for the likes of Harlequin and franchise novels like Star Wars etc. As I understand it they also suffer from lower royalties (split with the franchise owner I imagine) leading to many NYT bestsellers probably making a good deal less than you would imagine. Last edited by dadioflex; 05-15-2012 at 09:06 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Free (Amazon) Flee by JA Konrath & Ann Voss Peterson [Chandler #1]	Fbone	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	1	12-24-2011 02:33 PM
Free (Kindle/Nook/Sony) Embers of Love: book 1 by Tracie Peterson	arcadata	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	3	10-01-2011 12:15 PM
Free (Kindle) The Message Promise Book by Eugene H. Peterson	arcadata	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	1	06-27-2011 04:37 AM
Free (Kindle) he Message: The Book of Proverbs by Eugene H. Peterson	arcadata	Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links)	1	06-27-2011 04:36 AM

05-09-2012, 01:40 AM	#2
GA Russell Montreal wins Grey Cup! Posts: 7,583 Karma: 31484197 Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Raleigh, NC Device: Paperwhite, Kindles 10 & 4 and jetBook Lite	Thanks Top 100! I've bookmarked this to give me encouragement in my quest to self-publish.

05-09-2012, 07:13 AM	#3
teh603 Autism Spectrum Disorder Posts: 1,212 Karma: 6244877 Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Coastal Texas Device: Android Phone	Well, this is a company that was briefly classed as a vanity self-publisher and is responsible for a good chunk of the talk about how "getting published is expensive." That having been said, I'd bet some of the audience reactions to Harlequin repackaging their old stuff was because the author wasn't using their social networking resources well enough. A post on facebook or an author blog saying, "Hey, everyone, Harlequin's re-releasing my old stuff and you can pick up anything you missed!" should help defuse it.

05-09-2012, 07:40 AM	#4
mr ploppy Feral Underclass Posts: 3,622 Karma: 26821535 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Yorkshire, tha noz Device: 2nd hand paperback	Do you think they would be interested in a violent skinhead romance? I was thinking I might be able to get a bidding war going with them and Mills & Boon. There's millions of 50 year old ex-skinbyrds with nothing to read.

05-12-2012, 09:10 PM	#5
kennyc The Dank Side of the Moon Posts: 35,872 Karma: 118716293 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire	And not atypical for the traditional publishing business. I am sooooo glad there is a new game in town!

05-14-2012, 05:47 AM	#6
dadioflex Dyslexic Count Posts: 526 Karma: 5041991 Join Date: Aug 2008 Device: Palm TX, Advent Vega, iPad, iPod Touch, Kindle	Interesting read but I think JAK's rant at the end is pointless rabble-rousing. Like so many other popular figures who made a name for themselves with a single issue, he's starting to believe his own rhetoric. Peterson had ten years with Harlequin and will probably do VERY well self-publishing, but someone fresh to the game, isn't going to have the accumulated marketing that being a Harlequin author gives her. How can you object to the royalty Harlequin was paying when no-body else was fighting to publish those books and make the investment? Old publishing is dying, at least let it die in peace.

04-21-2016, 11:26 PM	#11
AnemicOak Bookaholic Posts: 14,391 Karma: 54969924 Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Minnesota Device: iPad Mini 4, AuraHD, iPhone XR +	Yes, I know this is a very old thread. However I thought it worth bumping to post that the class action lawsuit related to the issue in the OP now has a proposed $4.1 million settlement... http://www.harlequinsettlement.com

04-24-2016, 10:25 AM	#12
pendragginp Guru Posts: 985 Karma: 4567263 Join Date: May 2009 Location: The End Of The Earth Device: Several	GOOD.

04-24-2016, 04:49 PM	#13
pdurrant The Grand Mouse 高貴的老鼠 Posts: 71,504 Karma: 306214458 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Norfolk, England Device: Kindle Voyage	Well, it's good for the lawyers - they get about $1million out of it. The authors who started it get $5,000 each and their share of the payout. It will be interesting to see what that $4.1 million actually turns into in terms of equivalent royalties.

Advert

Advert