Quote:
Originally Posted by theducks
Then why are the advances so big?
With smaller advances, the royalty checks should just start sooner.
Or is it ...
When there is a 'Winner', the publishers keep a lions share? |
The advances for midlisters aren't big at all. (Low 4digits.)
But yes, the publishers get *two* lion's share worth of bestseller profits.
In 2012 Random House made so much money off 50 Shades they gave every single employee a $5000 xmas bonus and still reported record profits.
http://www.stevenpressfield.com/2012...bonuses-story/
The big "advances" you see quoted from time to time as going to big name authors are a smokescreen. What happens is that the publisher quietly agrees to an upfront lump sum they *know* will never earn out at the "standard/quoted" and officially non-negotiable royalty rate instead of openly paying a higher royalty rate. For example, instead of agreeing to something like a 24% royalty on a Steven King book expected to sell 10m copies, they agree to an advance equivalent to a 20% cut of 10m copies and a nominal 12% royalty so the book would have to sell 18-20M to "earn out" before King sees any "royalties".
Publishers do this because it allows them to proclaim to all comers that the royalty rate is non-negotiable and because some authors have royalty-matching clauses in their contracts.
And of course, they get to count King's books in with the mid-list titles that really don't earn out, of which there truly are a horde. But the once that truly underperform are the ones that belong to authors who don't get a follow up contract at all.
Hollywood accounting isn't limited to movies.