Quote:
Originally Posted by ardeegee
I see a parallel between this topic and people who remain in slushpiles-- they are convinced that they have a great book, and no matter how often the professionals who spend their lives day in, day out tell them that they don't (probably politely at first, probably less so after many repeats) they are sure that if they just keep repeating it over and over, the pros will change their mind. Here, pro editors and publishers are telling you why your business model just won't work, but you remain convinced that if you keep telling them over and over (ignoring their reasons given) they will eventually come to believe that your plan is as brilliant as you think it is.
|
Whereas there is nothing wrong with the current publishing model, nor the fact that it allows a great many potentially good books to languish in slush piles?
I do see your point, and it is not unexpected, nor unwelcome. Professionals usually have a vested interest in the status quo, which is why I'd expect to hear dissenting comments on a new business model. Many authors are also familiar with hearing "no" from publishers numerous times, until they get picked up by the one who says "yes" and publishes their book. And I'll point out that there have been a few positive comments on this model from others.
At any rate, this is just a discussion about an idea. When old business models are struggling under a changing market, new models must be considered and evaluated, lest the entire industry decay or collapse. There is certainly room for other ideas, and for further development of this idea, which you or anyone else are free to suggest.