The new publishing business model

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

(I also take it as implied that there are those who believe that, since I have not been vetted by a reputable publishing house, my work must therefore also be c**p, QED, and therefore my opinion on the matter isn't worth much... which I suppose negates the point of the previous paragraph thoroughly...)

That's a bad assumption to make. I have read many self-published books that I have enjoyed and I continue to buy self-published books (which is, unfortunately, how I also discover the real drecky books that I complain about). I haven't read your books because the subject matter hasn't appealed to me, but that doesn't mean they are not good, only that I haven't read them.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

To answer Bob's question: If a service bureau came to me and said, "If you pay $X, you can expect a Y-Z% return on investment in terms of sales for our services," and assuming I had the $X (and believed their figures)... yes, I would consider such a service. I would especially consider it if their services included things I could not do for myself. I have, so far, never received a credible offer like that, which is why I've never used one.

If you ever get such an offer RUN from it as fast as you can. No reputable editor or service bureau can legitimately make such a claim. There are too many variables that are beyond their control, not least of which is that the subject matter of your book -- no matter how well written the book is -- simply doesn't appeal to more than 5 people. The most any legitimate vendor can promise is to work with you to improve your book.

Unlike you, I find at least 5-6 books that I want to buy every month, if not more frequently. Last year I bought almost 300 books and there were still more that I wanted to buy. This year my pace has slowed quite a bit but I've still bought 26 books since January 1.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by rhadin

That's a bad assumption to make.

It may or may not be a bad assumption... but it is definitely the vibe I get from some of the comments in this thread. However, I wasn't singling anyone out (YOU know who you are! ), and I don't take it personally... I was just pointing it out.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

As this question sort of got passed up, I'd like to bring it up again: Is there some part of "impartial third-party post-filtering, instead of publisher pre-filtering" that does not make sense?

But every book needs some editing so with only post-filtering you will get lower quality.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tompe

But every book needs some editing so with only post-filtering you will get lower quality.

Books would continue to be edited... that happens regardless of the filtering process. "Post-filtering" takes place after the book is released, in P2P and portal reviewing processes.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Books would continue to be edited... that happens regardless of the filtering process. "Post-filtering" takes place after the book is released, in P2P and portal reviewing processes.

But you said that the post-filtering was instead of pre-filtering. So what mechanism would make editing take place before post-filtering? Why should an author pay for editing before releasing the book? Or did you think about some other method?

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

"Post-filtering" takes place after the book is released, in P2P and portal reviewing processes.

1.) Peer-to-peer systems like bittorrent are useful only for free, DRM free material-- you could not share files that had to be DRM-keyed to individuals since by definition files shared on a P2P network need to be bit-for-bit exactly the same. So that means all books would have to be given away for free-- where would the publisher benefit from that?

2.) People downloading from P2P systems as a whole do NOT make comments unless there is something profoundly wrong with the download-- as in, virus infected or deceptively named.

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Actually, I'm not assuming that the majority of slushpile books are good... merely that more than .000001% of them are good, and that the present system isn't rescuing enough of them for consumers.

I realize publishers only want to print those books they think they can profit from. However, they are publishing so few, only those with the absolute highest chance of a good return, that other books that might make a passable return are not even being considered... in other words, publishers pick the sure things, but a lot of potential also-rans are being lost.

This model is simply designed to rescue some of the also-rans. Yes, it will also result in some bad stuff being released, too... but the third-party post-filtering services should be enough to keep most of those at bay.

And it's not as if all of the bad stuff will be released by this model... there will be plenty of potential authors who won't go through that extra work, just as they don't now, and their works will still sit. (Along with some good works too, unfortunately, though I guess it's hard to get up sympathy for a great book you've never seen.)

Smashwords. LuLu. Amazon's Createspace and DTP. Manywords. All of these are avenues to get books published that currently are languishing on the slush-heaps of major publishers.

Hell, if one has the financial wherewithal to pay an editor and then BooksJustBooks printing fees, one can release through Amazon with HC, TPB, MMPB *and* ebook format! (Granted, this requires a tad more up-front money than going the CreateSpace/DTP route... And one has to figure out where to *STORE* all the copies. )

Derek

[delphidb96]

Originally Posted by rhadin

That's a bad assumption to make. I have read many self-published books that I have enjoyed and I continue to buy self-published books (which is, unfortunately, how I also discover the real drecky books that I complain about). I haven't read your books because the subject matter hasn't appealed to me, but that doesn't mean they are not good, only that I haven't read them.

I cannot begin to count the number of 'drecky' books I've purchased from bookstores and via the ebook stores. Many of which are *NOT* self-published. Sure, *some* of the "worst offenders" fall into the self-published category, but some come from real publishing companies - Silhouette comes to mind. (On the ebook side, I've found decent works from Elora's Cave - all two of them - but tend to throw out the rest as more toxic than straight cyanide gas. )

Derek

[K-Thom]

Actually, I'm not assuming that the majority of slushpile books are good... merely that more than .000001% of them are good, and that the present system isn't rescuing enough of them for consumers.

Steve, you seem to be a very cruel guy. You yourself admit that 1 in 100 million books (okay "more than") might be worth rescuing. Let's even say it's 1 in 100.000. For this one book you would let pitiful readers worldwide wade through 99.999 books of somewhat "editorially enhanced" material?! My, I'd call Amnesty International if I ever came across such poor souls ...

You get the idea? Publishers don't want to wade through all of this stuff. That's why they reject on thousands with even looking at it. How long do you think it would take review sites to be sick of all this material? One year? One month? More likely one week ...

Okay, but back to your main idea, the service itself. It is already offered, of course mostly for printed books, but you hardly find any publisher with some self-esteem who would offer that kind of service himself. Even in a subcompany.
Any respected publisher would risk his own good reputation ever being connected to that sort of vanity press. By fellow publishers, by authors, by bookstores, by the readers themselves.

Did you ever consider such a service for yourself? In Germany, you'd get a service from BoD (Google-translated, folks) for 849.- to 2000.- Euros and above. And I know of vanity press cases where wannabe authors had to pay up to 8.000 Euros (that's about 12.000 US$ ...).
You might get it for about 1000.- Euros, if you're lucky and have some connections (know it, been there). Editorial service, cover illustration, typography, graphic design. Basic stuff, but indeed well done for that price.
Still quite a lot of money for your average Joe the plumber. Without ever knowing if he/she might ever sell enough copies (digital or printed) of the title to ever generate enough revenues.

So, who's the one to let the authors sort the wheat from the chaff of such a service? Or warn them in advance if their stuff really isn't worth it?
The "third party" again? That's a lot to ask from the community, being an unbiased, unprejudiced and conversant advisor. And that for free? This third party itself would offer a service to readers and authors which would be a business model in itself ...

[ardeegee]

I was just now browsing through some of the many comments on the linked "slushkiller" article, and found this, also interesting, link:

http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2002/02/25/slush/

[MaggieScratch]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

And though I haven't been rejected (you can't really say you've been rejected when they refused to even consider looking at the book!), I do have the feeling that there are probably better authors than myself who have been similarly snubbed, and could use a better outlet for their work.

(I also take it as implied that there are those who believe that, since I have not been vetted by a reputable publishing house, my work must therefore also be c**p, QED, and therefore my opinion on the matter isn't worth much

I think perhaps you are naive and/or uninformed about how commercial publishing works. You are not alone in this. There are entire Internet fora dedicated to discussing and explaining the process and helping authors to get their work published.

It does not necessarily follow that your work is "crap" and I think it would be silly to make such an assumption. It's hard to tell as you don't seem to have given it a chance by trying to obtain agency representation so you can try to commercially publish. I think now that you have established a platform and a readership, you might find it easier than you think. However, you seem to have hit upon a system that works well for you, and if you prefer to keep on with it, I wish you the best, as I wish all my fellow authors.

It also does not logically follow that your opinion is not worth anything. As I said, there are Internet fora set up for these things, and all kinds of ideas (including some quite similar to yours) have been kicked around. Publishing seems Byzantine and unwieldy and ripe for a rework, but as things are now it succeeds very well at getting books to readers, which is the desired result. As I posted previously, I think the system will evolve somewhat in the coming years.

After all, if we don't discuss ideas, how will we know what is and isn't workable?

True enough!

[Fat Abe]

Originally Posted by MaggieScratch

Unknown last name? The URL of the site wasn't a clue? The author of the famous and infamous Slushkiller essay is Teresa Nielsen Hayden, who at the time she wrote it was an editor at Tor, one of the few remaining publishers who accepted (and I believe still does) unagented work.

Thank you so much for filling in the blank. I still have no idea who Teresa Hayden is, but I'll try to remember her name. I need to find a few SlushDivers to help me fish my manuscripts out of the gutter. Could Terry lend a helping hand?

Ardeegee and others wonders why avid readers, with supposedly good taste, would want to sample from the Slush pile? Same reason that Hugh Grant got involved with a street walker. Something is/was missing from his life. He needed some excitement. Who knows? Honestly, the number of tier one writers on this planet is miniscule. While I wait for V.S. Naipaul or J. M. Coetzee to write their next book, what am I supposed to read? Why not the smorgasbord of books- semi-pro & amateur novels from Smashwords? Where on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest, do the smash works fall? Umm, 3 - 5. But I give these men and women an A+ for effort. None will ever win the Nobel prize for literature, but then again, neither will I. You cannot eat caviar every day of the week. Enjoy the beans and bark, every now and then. Laugh at life's bad jokes, and don't think the sky is falling all around you every time you read a bad book. (Personally, I fall asleep whenever I read Toni Morrison- so, if any of you feel insulted by that, take a powder).

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

1.) Peer-to-peer systems like bittorrent are useful only for free, DRM free material-- you could not share files that had to be DRM-keyed to individuals since by definition files shared on a P2P network need to be bit-for-bit exactly the same. So that means all books would have to be given away for free-- where would the publisher benefit from that?

Um. That's quite the assumption, and I can think of a dozen ways round that without trying too hard. Yes, some of them involve a custom client...but we're talking about book-length material, it's NOT a lot of data.

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Um. That's quite the assumption, and I can think of a dozen ways round that without trying too hard. Yes, some of them involve a custom client...but we're talking about book-length material, it's NOT a lot of data.

Even IF you had a technical way around it, do you have a cultural one? P2P is about private individuals sharing files between one another. How many people do you think will be willing to give away their bandwidth to non-free content? With free (or freely pirated) material, people seed out of a sense of community and because they want the system to work. But a for-profit business selling DRMed content? Screw them. Let them pay for their own bandwidth. People will download and drop out immediately.

Also, the smaller a torrent (or some other vehicle of P2P content) the more susceptible it is to dying. If you want a torrent to last, you have to bundle dozens or hundreds of things together so that there are more likely to be people both uploading and downloading at any given moment. Anything offered only as individual files will, sooner rather than later, be collected together by someone and made available as a much more convenient (and longevous) batch. Which, if not large enough, will be gathered together with other torrents by the end user and, when one has enough files, burned to CDs or DVDs, with the source (and any comments thereon) forgotten about and irrelevant. And with most of the files never even given more than a quick glance, if that.

You think slushpiles are a black hole? That is nothing compared to the archives of a media hoarder (I don't know how much media I have hoarded away on DVDs, but it is in the mid-single digit terabytes.)

[DawnFalcon]

P2P is used for a lot of uses, you're conflating it solely with the darknet there. That's RIAA propaganda, please don't do it.

Also, why is a smaller torrent prone to dying, naturally? Well, it's down to client settings, essentially people share X torrents. With a custom client, this is entirely avoidable. In the same way, the project tracker is under no obligation to accept user torrents.

You can't do this in isolation, no, it would have to be part of a community effort. Also, honestly, I'm not quite sure where the torrent thing comes from: it's not from anything I've said, I'd use a wiki-based platform (possibly a distributed one) and not torrents!