Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Why does everyone keep listing the obvious fiscal irresponsibility of the current advance system (on the part of corporate giants, anyway) in the plus column?  |
The advance system guarantees that if the non-fiction book proposal is accepted, the author knows how much money he or she will probably make by writing the book. This eliminates some of the tremendous financial risk of being an author.
With fiction, the risk reduction, to the author, of getting an advance, is less, since the author generally completes writing the book before selling it. But there still is some risk reduction when you, in effect, sell your book to a publisher rather than planning to rely on royalties.
Indie publication, for an author able to get a major publishing contract, accepts higher risk for more of an upside.
I can see criticizing the publishers for low advances, but not for low royalty percentages. As already noted, the percentages are irrelevant to most major publisher authors. There is nothing new about this. Prominent nineteenth century authors often sold their books outright to the publisher with no possibility of further earnings from that book. If the price is right, this shifting of risk from author to publisher can make a lot of sense.