Backlash against Author Douglas Preston

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by nomesque

OK, so I'm sure it's not quite that easy for many, given multi-book contracts and the like. But still... talk about open possibilities...!!

Yeah, that's the rub. Most are locked into long contracts.

But yeah, if they weren't there's opportunity to sell their own books etc.

But theirs still the risk that the market will drive prices way down in terms of what people are willing to pay, that piracy will eat into their sales etc. and they could still come out behind.

Keeping in mind that the successful authors are going to have more lucrative contracts with publishers currently, and be getting higher % of sales, so things aren't as bad for say John Grisham in the current set up as it is for up and coming or moderately successful authors who are really getting screwed as they have no leverage to negotiate deals with publishers.

So those types probably aren't very thrilled about the digital revolution. But it could be a boon for moderately successful authors once they're out of their current contracts and can just sell e-books directly to consumers and not have publishers taking a huge chunk of their profits.

[hidari]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

Yeah, that's the rub. Most are locked into long contracts.

But yeah, if they weren't there's opportunity to sell their own books etc.

But theirs still the risk that the market will drive prices way down in terms of what people are willing to pay, that piracy will eat into their sales etc. and they could still come out behind.

Keeping in mind that the successful authors are going to have more lucrative contracts with publishers currently, and be getting higher % of sales, so things aren't as bad for say John Grisham in the current set up as it is for up and coming or moderately successful authors who are really getting screwed as they have no leverage to negotiate deals with publishers.

Perhaps an ebook authors guild may help solve some of these problems, as in by passing the publishers and helping each other to self-publish on-line.

[Scott Nicholson]

The problem is they DID give up control. They can't cackle with glee and go off and slap old books up at Amazon, unless they were "lucky" enough to go out of print in the 1990s before publishers starting locking things up.

I was lucky because under my deals, I get rights back after seven years no matter what. So I'll lose a combined, er, 30 years or so worth of ebook income I could have had (for some bizarre reason, the publisher is not even making the ebooks available after the paper copies go out of print). Based on a couple of months of selling a few of my own books, I predict this will cost me maybe $60,000 over those seven years, or more than I made on the advances for those books. For this reason, I don't think signing a book deal is an automatic no-brainer anymore.

Yes, my agent was an idiot, but I was a bigger idiot, because I knew changes were coming. They just came a lot faster than I figured, and most authors have this crazy idea they are going to break out, get publisher love, and all their books will always be in print and in the stores.

In some ways, getting published was the worst thing I could have ever done for my writing career...

Scott Nicholson
hauntedcomputer.blogspot.com

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by hidari

Perhaps an ebook authors guild may help solve some of these problems, as in by passing the publishers and helping each other to self-publish on-line.

Sure, but only for those not locked into contracts.

Those that are would be sued for breach of contract by joining the guild and self publishing.

Again, it's a great opportunity for up and comers etc., but those locked into contracts are getting screwed now worse than ever.

[nomesque]

Originally Posted by Scott Nicholson

The problem is they DID give up control. They can't cackle with glee and go off and slap old books up at Amazon, unless they were "lucky" enough to go out of print in the 1990s before publishers starting locking things up.

I did specifically say manuscripts that were rejected by publishers

Yeah, that's the rub. Most are locked into long contracts.

Just what sort of contracts are most authors under? I was assuming that most would have a 2-3 book deal, not much more...?

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by nomesque

I did specifically say manuscripts that were rejected by publishers

I think many contracts would not let them publish it elsewhere if it was rejected. At least if they have multi-book contracts. If you sign a contract to publish X number of books with a publisher, I doubt you can take even a manuscript they rejected elsewhere until you've published X number of books with them and satisfied the contract.

Just what sort of contracts are most authors under? I was assuming that most would have a 2-3 book deal, not much more...?

That's going to vary greatly. Successful authors will have longer contracts as publishers give them better deals to lock them in long-term to keep them from going to a competitor.

And up and comer will have a shorter one usually, as publishers want them to prove themselves first before committing long term.

[Billjr13]

I generally dont pay the hardback price for hardback books. I will get some books when they are new but they will be on sale/promo price. At B&N I get 30% to 40% of for being a member. I would say in the last 10 years a majority of fiction books I buy are from the bargain tables. A lot of those books are cheaper than the paperback books. If I can get the ebook for the same price as the Hardback on sale as a new release I would consider it. If it is more than the hardback I wont buy either version, (or if I really want it I will buy the Hardback on sale.
Because of shelf space I have not bought very many physical books in the last two years, but I have over 85 ebooks since I got my Sony.
$9.99 is what I think most realitivly new ebooks should cost. I think older ebooks should cost no more than the paperback price. If ebooks costs rise significantly my purchases will drop. I wont pay extra for the privilage of reading on my Sony reader and I really don't like the idea of having to wait three months after a pbook is published to inflate sales of a hardback novel.
I have yet to have an author sign an ebook for me but I have had an author sign a pbook of an ebook I read then bought a physical book at a signing because I liked their work.

[ficbot]

*shrug* Lots of people don't make enough money doing only what they love. Even people who do love their jobs have to put up with sucky aspects of it (for example, I love my work as a teacher but had a positively grueling morning shepherding a group of 5-year-old Lost Boys through a dress rehearsal for the school production of Peter Pan. Hell on earth! Ugh!) Lots of other people supplement their creative endeavors by teaching lessons, doing commercial projects etc. Such is life. I simply do not buy the argument that authors deserve to be special flowers and avoid having to tarnish themselves with non-writing tasks. If you want to *just write* then do it as a hobby or be like Emily Dickinson and stick it all in a drawer. If you want to have it be your career, then you have to deal with it as *work* and do the marketing, the PR, whatever.

Personally, I learned through my dismal and brief career as a freelance journalist that I am a much better writer than I am a businesswoman, and I couldn't hack that lifestyle. So I write for fun, publish what I want to where I want to, and if I make money then fine, and that's nice, but I am not relying on it to pay my bills. In the back of my mind, I suppose there is still the dream that one day the publishers will discover me and I will be the next JK Rowling or whatever, but I don't really base my self-worth, identity or career prospects on that happening. It's up there with winning the lottery or inheriting a tom of money from a long-lost relative.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by ficbot

*shrug* Lots of people don't make enough money doing only what they love.

That's different that being very successful and making X amount of money for writing good books.

And then seeing the X decrease even though you're books are selling just as much because all of a sudden e-books took over and your profit per copy drops despite doing the same quality of work.


True, every job has it's ups and downs, but most of us don't have to worry about seeing our incomes drop when we're doing the same quality work.

Not counting layoffs etc. as that's different from still working the same and getting paid less which is what some successful author's fear with e-books. A layoff would be like a publisher going out of business and leaving the author looking for a new contract.

So must jobs just don't have this kind of risk. As long as you have the job, your income will stay the same or go up. Salary cuts are very uncommon when you're doing your job at a high quality, but that's a risk authors face in this case.


And of course anyone can "just write" as a hobby etc. But that doesn't meant the talented, successful authors who are making a great living writing (and have been for years) should have to do that because because have moved from physical or digital. Or that they should make less money selling the same number of copies of their next best seller because X number of copies were e-books etc.

If anything, e-books are a great opportunity for fledgling authors like yourself. You don't have worries that authors who have successful careers have in terms of seeing profits shrink for no other reason than a move to e-books.

It's not that authors should be treated specially, or put on some pedestal. It's that those who are successful shouldn't see a drop in revenue when they're selling the same number of copies because people are now reading e-books vs. paperbooks. The person reading the e-book is enjoying the same content as the person reading the e-book, so I don't see why e-books should be much cheaper than the print copy, or why authors shouldn't make the exact same amount for the content they created regardless of the format it's being consumed in.

And again, that latter point is more a problem with greedy publishers, and hopefully as we move more fully to e-books they'll gradually die off as authors move to self distribution, where all they need is someone to edit the book and get it to the e-book stores.

[hidari]

@dmaul1114: I think you bring up some good points. For me the price of ebooks is not a problem. I think they should be priced as the market sees fit.

But, well established authors will just have to bear the brunt of the new medium or hope that publishers treat them better.
I work free lance and only have part-time guaranteed work that could fall away any month.Most of my work varies month to month but I make it. Why should these writers not be able to do the same? Maybe the established writers will see their profits fall as well as the publishers. It happened in the music industry.

[fastesthamster]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

But many expect e-books to be $9.99 from the get go when the hardcover comes out, due a sense of entitlement or whatever you want to call it, and that's the problem that get's authors and publishers riled up.

Or due to a sense that an ebook is inferior in many ways. I can't give it to my friends to read, I can't sell it on, etc.

What's the stat? One book is read by five people? So ebooks should be 1/5 of the price (or something along those lines).

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by hidari

NO apology necessary. I am enjoying the thread. Trust me, my views on Tolkien, Fantasy, and pulp fiction are enough to drive MR posters ballistic... so this is a friendly chat.

Interesting that you mentioned Tolkein, since he had a "day job" that he didn't quit.

I envision a future where there are far fewer people who do nothing for a living but write, with most writers being people who write "on the side" because they want to. I'm okay with that future. Most authors I read are like that, and put out at most one book per year, maybe one book every two or three years, but they go for quality, not quantity. (I remember one writer on here talking about putting out 3 to 5 books a year, like that was a good thing.)

[llreader]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Interesting that you mentioned Tolkein, since he had a "day job" that he didn't quit.

Besides academic writers, I can think of two others that kept their day jobs, too, Gene Wolfe (mechanical engineer and editor of an engineering mag) and Vernor Vinge (professor of mathematics at UC San Diego, I believe). I doubt writing is a good career choice, based on the writers I know. They all teach classes or do other things to make ends meet.

[llreader]

Originally Posted by Scott Nicholson

The problem is they DID give up control. They can't cackle with glee and go off and slap old books up at Amazon, unless they were "lucky" enough to go out of print in the 1990s before publishers starting locking things up.

I was lucky because under my deals, I get rights back after seven years no matter what. So I'll lose a combined, er, 30 years or so worth of ebook income I could have had (for some bizarre reason, the publisher is not even making the ebooks available after the paper copies go out of print). Based on a couple of months of selling a few of my own books, I predict this will cost me maybe $60,000 over those seven years, or more than I made on the advances for those books. For this reason, I don't think signing a book deal is an automatic no-brainer anymore.

Yes, my agent was an idiot, but I was a bigger idiot, because I knew changes were coming. They just came a lot faster than I figured, and most authors have this crazy idea they are going to break out, get publisher love, and all their books will always be in print and in the stores.

In some ways, getting published was the worst thing I could have ever done for my writing career...

Scott Nicholson
hauntedcomputer.blogspot.com

I'm curious, how much leeway does a writer actually have to negotiate a contract? Now that ebooks have gone mainstream, I can't see publishers letting authors out of that part of the deal without a real fuss.

[Barcey]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

That's different that being very successful and making X amount of money for writing good books.

And then seeing the X decrease even though you're books are selling just as much because all of a sudden e-books took over and your profit per copy drops despite doing the same quality of work.

...

I have yet to see anyone argue that authors should be making less money because it's an e-book. I personally think that authors were getting a raw deal on paper copies (which is not surprising because they've been negotiating from a position of weakness - they're already risk vested when they're negotiating with the publisher).

What readers will not accept is that they have to pay more for e-books because the authors signed a bad contract with the publishers. Having the author's cut tied to the list price for e-books is just wrong.

Take a $24 list price hardcover. Say the wholesale price is $12 to Amazon. Remove the $2 printing costs. Remove the risk of returns. The publishers are making more net profit on a $10 e-book paying the author less and trying to tell the readers they have to pay more to support the poor authors.

The publishers then have the nerve to guarantee Amazon/Apple 30% for performing an electronic transaction. If they really cared about the author why aren't they guaranteeing them 30%.

What baffles me is the authors then support the publishers and make their readers out to be the bad guy. I guess they've been drinking the kool-aid too long.