Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbob
This actually might be interesting because it would allow for authors who might be rejected get discovered. I'm sure there are books that have been rejected by several publishers only to go on later to be big hits.
|
Which, of course, is the whole point to this thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbob
So, Steve... I'm wondering, if this is such a good idea and business plan... why don't you become the "new century" publishing company?
|
Because I'm one guy, not an editor or proofer, not a CEO, and with no capital. I simply don't have the financial resources or wherewithal to do the job. I could work for such a company, in the packaging department (prepping works for digital formats, creating covers, etc). But that would be about it for me.
The idea was to suggest new directions for existing publishers, those trying to figure out their future business model, to try. I'm not surprised by the resistance to the idea, of course, because it is very radical compared to the existing model. It has its good points and bad points. But that's why it deserves to be discussed.
Keep in mind that I am not saying that all publishers would have to adopt this model, nor would all authors be required to follow it (which, I suspect, some here have wrongfully assumed)... present and future authors could continue to do what they do now, assuming what they do is working for them. But this would provide a new avenue for other authors, particularly those whose work has languished in the slush pile but deserves to be seen.
And again, I oppose the idea that publishers should tell consumers what is and is not worth reading. I know how that sounds, too... but consider this: I have read plenty of books, books that I enjoyed greatly, that never won an award or ended up on the NYT Bestseller list. I've got a houseful of 'em. In boxes next to comic books. When I turn on the TV, I don't need
Masterpiece Theatre to entertain me... I am thoroughly amused watching
Chuck. In short, what I read may not be the award-winning best, but it is still entertaining to me... and that's good enough for me.
Now, consider: A publisher gets 50,000 submissions, they accept 10 "Masterpiece Theatre"-level works to publish, and the rest never leave the slush pile. I go to my bookstore, I look at all 10 books, and none of them interest me. But maybe some of those 49,990 others would have been enjoyed by me. So what service has that publisher done for me? Nothing.
The proposed plan would get more good books out there... maybe not more "Masterpiece Theatre"-level works, but at least more "Chuck"-level works. The P2P sites and portals would be reviewing them all, and separating the wheat from the chaff. Consumers will find the books they want by going to their trusted portals.
Maggie, I don't know how existing bookstores would fit into this model, unless they A) allow visitors to access book portals online for browsing and searches of books that are not necessarily at the store, and B) find a way to sell e-books at the storefront level. Otherwise, this alternative publishing process would be going on parallel to the bookstores continuing to sell books provided by traditional publishing houses, maintaining the schism between pub houses and vanity press, or between pub houses and self-published e-books.