Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenophon
That's why I recommended that content creators/owners (think publishers in the eBook world) slice out a level of distribution. That change alone wipes out a 2x markup (in most cases), and changes the slice going to the author from 7-15% to more like 18-30%. And when I consider the services provided by the folks between author and me, it doesn't seem unreasonable to pay them 2/3 of the money. If eBook sales-volume went up drastically, I could see the cut that goes to the retailer going down quite a bit, and the publisher's cut going down modestly (in percentage terms, of course) -- that would leave a larger percentage for the authors.
Don't forget that slush-pile diving is both expensive (in time) and aesthetically painful for the diver. The typical submission leaves you wanting to gouge your eyes out with a spork! Editorial judgement, branding, publicity, copy-edits, proof-edits, type-setting and design, artwork... And let's not forget financial risk! The publisher fronts the advance, but the author need not pay it back if actual sales don't cover it.
I don't resent publishers who provide real services to both authors and readers. Nor do I resent retailers who make it easy for me to find good product. Those folks all add value. I'm not even sure I resent the distributors (at least in the paper world). After all, they save publishers from having to deal with each individual bookstore in the world (and bookstores from having to deal directly with every publisher) -- although I often think their markup is much larger than the value of that simplification.
In the world of bits, however, it's not clear that the distributors add any value at all. And I certainly resent paying when there's no value added.
Xenophon
|
See, that's my beef with the whole industry. Who gets to decide what is trash and what is treasure? What are their qualifications to do this, are they all marketing gurus, are they all ex-writers, or are a lot of them in the positions because of cronyism and nepotism? Why are they the ones deciding instead of the public at large? They are gatekeepers, another level between the writer and the reader that is rapidly becoming pointless.
If I want to write a detective novel about a lesbian octopus bringing up a family of crabs (Not that I do) I don't need somebody telling me its worthwhile or not. And by worthwhile we all know that means 'marketable' or even 'profitable'. I am now free to write The Big Tentacle and put it out there, suckers and all for anybody to read, and maybe if they like it, donate.