Big time authors not happy either

[SeaKing]

Originally Posted by ebusinesstutor

I liked the quote:


As a professional marketer I know how critical a good marketing plan is to success. It sounds here like many of the publishers don't have a marketing plan for their author's book except to distribute it to the bookstores.

Publishers should be list building, using social media, connecting with the fan base and using other methods to market the books. Instead, most are continuing to do things the way they always have.

Authors can't become expert marketers, proofreaders, etc. overnight, nor should they. I think we will see an upsurge in services like ebook marketing, proofreading, cover design, etc. for self-publishing authors.

Mom called them "old sticks in the mud." Change takes too much effort. They didn't start the business, they just came along to run it, and that is all they want to do. Get their salaries, figure out how to qualify for the next bonus, and live the good life.

If worst comes to worst, they will hire a law firm and a lobbying firm.

"Status quo" forever!

[Rhialto]

Originally Posted by stonetools

The Selfish Gene was published by Oxford University Press

Silent Spring was published by Houghton Mifflin .

Watership Down was published by Rex Collings Ltd, which seems to be an imprint of BPH Penguin.

These were all traditionally published, So I'm not sure that they are arguments against the need for a traditional publisher. Certainly, they are far different from the usual self-pub fare.

Of course they were traditionally published. There was almost no alternative in those days. Times have changed. My point is that getting an advance from a BPH should not be a pre-requiste for publishing, and that many of the best books in history were written in absence of an advance from a publisher.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by kennyc

As I said (and you conveniently left out when you quoted me) today's TPH editors are really nothing more then project managers trying to keep their jobs and manage legal aspects of locking authors and works in, shuffle manuscripts through the process and improve their standing in the food chain and contribute to the corporate bottom line.

I always read the acknowledgments -- often, for some reason, I read them first -- and they almost uniformly contend otherwise. The the book I am currently reading is fairly typical:

Of course, it never would have happened without Roger Scholl, my editor at Crown Business, who made a big bet on an unknown author and also proved a great collaborator. His enthusiasm for this project and patience with me has been beyond anything I could have hoped for. I would also like to thank his assistant, Logan Balestrino, as well as Paul Lamb, Dennelle Catlett, and everyone else at Crown who believed in this project and has worked to make it a success.

Perhaps such thank yous are the literary equivalent of the mandatory standing ovation. But, well, I've read this so often in recent years that it can't all be a lie, can it?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

I always read the acknowledgments -- often, for some reason, I read them first -- and they almost uniformly contend otherwise.
.
.
But, well, I've read this so often in recent years that it can't all be a lie, can it?

I notice that the assistant is also singled out. Obviously an entire team was involved and the "editor" was managing the team overseeing the project. That is a textbook definition of a Project Manager.

Having known my share of Project Managers I can attest that Project Managers *can* be collaborators in guiding the productive types to successful results. The best ones are even really good at it.

Looking at the job descriptions of most of the BPH "editors" I'd have to agree they do more Management and delegation than the old time editors.

John W. Campbell they're not.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

I always read the acknowledgments -- often, for some reason, I read them first -- and they almost uniformly contend otherwise. The the book I am currently reading is fairly typical:


Perhaps such thank yous are the literary equivalent of the mandatory standing ovation. But, well, I've read this so often in recent years that it can't all be a lie, can it?

Ah, but again that says NOTHING about what they actually do, now does it? It's a f'n title ONLY. They are project managers primarily.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

I notice that the assistant is also singled out. Obviously an entire team was involved and the "editor" was managing the team overseeing the project.

Author Bryce Hoffman also thanks his agent's assistants, and assistants of Ford executives.

The book is an hagiographic portrait of a folksy corporate leader known for schmoozing with working level employees. Thanking of assistants seems to me in this spirit. Maybe the editor is really a project manager, or really a rainmaker, or, for all I know, a really vindictive SOB who wise authors flatter. But I wouldn't draw conclusions from the mention of assistants.

I don't know if Maxwell Perkins had assistants, but Alfred Knopf must have had them.

[Edward M. Grant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

However, its clear to me that many important books of certain genres simply would not get written without the help of the BPHs. They aren't the dinosaurs or ogres that they are caricatured to be on this forum and on the contrary, continue to do essential work in bringing important authors and books to market.

And how many important books of those genres are sitting in a trunk because no publisher would buy them?

About a dozen publishers turned down the billion-dollar Harry Potter franchise, for example. If Rowling had given up before trying number thirteen, we would never have heard of it.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Edward M. Grant

And how many important books of those genres are sitting in a trunk because no publisher would buy them?

About a dozen publishers turned down the billion-dollar Harry Potter franchise, for example. If Rowling had given up before trying number thirteen, we would never have heard of it.

And therein lies a tale....

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by Edward M. Grant

And how many important books of those genres are sitting in a trunk because no publisher would buy them?

About a dozen publishers turned down the billion-dollar Harry Potter franchise, for example. If Rowling had given up before trying number thirteen, we would never have heard of it.

Actually, what you should be celebrating is not that a dozen publishers saw no merit in an offering by an untried "welfare mother" (that's how conservatives would describe her) but that a publisher did have the balls to put their money down on what was a giant gamble. Just goes to show that if you keep trying , and if you have something good, some publisher will likely invest in you, and share the financial risk of developing your book from a manuscript and bringing it to market.
Notice that's "likely", not "certainly." Contrary to popular belief round these parts, there are good and valid business reasonms for a publisher to turn down an aspiring author, and forego what is a risky business proposition. (Most books don't turn a profit for the publisher).

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by Rhialto

Of course they were traditionally published. There was almost no alternative in those days. Times have changed. My point is that getting an advance from a BPH should not be a pre-requiste for publishing, and that many of the best books in history were written in absence of an advance from a publisher.

THe point is that in the absence of an advance to cover the author's research and may be living expenses, some great books wouldn't get written.

It is a great honor to win the National Book Award. Winning it confirms my belief that I am the luckiest of authors. Part of my luck is that I managed to have the same publishing house and the same people with me for so many years. As some of you know, the early years when I was writing my biography of Robert Moses, The Power Broker, were not so easy. But things became easier when I finally hooked up with Knopf in 1970. Since then Knopf has had two presidents. To research and write books as long as mine, and I do try to keep them short, requires a lot of support in a lot of ways from a publisher. And I've always been grateful for the help that my publishers have given me. Bob Gottlieb has been my editor, through this all, and what I said in the dedication to this book sums up my feeling. Bob Gottlieb, 30 years, four books, thanks. Watching with Bob and me and in all books has been Katherine Hourigan. She is so much a part of all my books, that it's difficult to find words to express my gratitude to her. Doing the ads for all my books has been Anita Bonn. I feel that I've really been quite blessed in this. Those who have come to Knopf later in the game, later in life in the game, like Paul Bogards and Gabriel Brooks, it meant a lot to me too.

LINK

[Edward M. Grant]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Actually, what you should be celebrating is not that a dozen publishers saw no merit in an offering by an untried "welfare mother" (that's how conservatives would describe her) but that a publisher did have the balls to put their money down on what was a giant gamble.

A dozen publishers turned down billions of dollars in revenue.

Think about that.

They looked at the book and said, 'nah, that's crap, that is.' Readers looked at it and said 'that's brilliant, have a few billion dollars.'

In most industries that would have resulted in internal enquiries and people would have been sacked, up to and including CEOs. But in publishing we're supposed to feel grateful that someone was finally willing to let Rowling hand them a product that was worth billions.

[BeccaPrice]

The problem is, nobody can predict what will grab the public's attention. Who could have told that a bad Twilight fanfic would become a sensation? How many "Blockbusters! sure to be a best seller!" novels have we seen that turned into duds?

Unless the author is a Big Name with a track record, there's no way to tell short of a crystal ball - and accurate ones are notoriously hard to find.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by kennyc

And therein lies a tale....

"In the bearded-Spock Universe they never had Harry Potter books or movies and mankind went on to enslave the galaxy."

Works for me.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

The problem is, nobody can predict what will grab the public's attention.

Yes, that's it.

Of the hundreds of thousands of books that are written and ignored every year, there must be a few that could have been the next sensation with some first rate (or second rate) editing, and the right kind of marketing plan. But even with a staff the size of Random House, a publisher can only read through a tiny portion of them. So if a publisher is lucky enough to find a golden reader unusually attuned to the mass public mood, it still is one of those needle-haystack deals. And as you sort of say, such golden readers may not really exist. Perhaps the couple readers Random House thinks are golden have been on a lucky streak soon to end.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by kennyc

So goes the buggy whip, so goes the dinosaur. The asteroid has struck, some will survive some will not.

I like this!

It seems that the further the BPH's continue their resistance, the further they retreat back to the "old ways".

They appear to be almost paralysed more than challenged with what is now and what lays ahead with ebooks and the digital age.

Those authors who did very well with the old legacy methods will certainly support that system. Why bite the hand that feeds them?