WTF do publishers think they're doing ?

[Namekuseijin]

Originally Posted by outlander78

Two things are inevitable:
2. The amount of junk is going to increase, as every literate net-connected person can write and publish.

as goes the old saying: "Knowledge and Reason speak, ignorance shouts."

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Not saying that all authors are so short-sighted, Lexi; just those who make the deliberate choice to sign multiple contracts for a book in different countries, to make more money. That's the cause of geographical restrictions; the publisher has no say in the matter.

How would they make more money? I would have thought they would sell the same number of real books however number of publishers there was, and if there was just one publisher worldwide for ebooks they would sell more because people wouldn't be forced to pirate it if they lived in the wrong country.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

True, but the title of this thread, "WTF do publishers think they're doing?", is wrongly putting the blame on the publishers. Publishers aren't to blame for geographical restrictions.

They are when they are the worldwide publisher, like Leisure Books. Nowhere in the UK can you buy them in epub format (at least the ones I would want), but you can in America. All we have is crappy Topaz versions.

[GhostHawk]

Publishers in general are trying very hard to do 2 things.

A: Hang onto their jobs

B: Make money without sacrificing any of their current position or perks.

Either one won't do, they want both, and they are praying desperately that this whole ebook foolishness will go away if they ignore it.

[Anke Wehner]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

How would they make more money? I would have thought they would sell the same number of real books however number of publishers there was, and if there was just one publisher worldwide for ebooks they would sell more because people wouldn't be forced to pirate it if they lived in the wrong country.

Consider that a publisher in the UK or Australia is vastly more likely to advertise a book in the UK or Australia, respectively. (And to get bookshops to order them to put on the shelves, whatnot.)
Book markets in different countries might have other conventions, too - different styles of covers that sell well, different size of books/quality of paper. Different spelling.

Mind, I would vastly prefer having free choice with what ebook edition to buy, just like I have with print books, so I can buy the un-Americanised version of a book by a British author, or pick up the one with the cover I love, or, well, just pick the cheapest I can find.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Anke Wehner

Consider that a publisher in the UK or Australia is vastly more likely to advertise a book in the UK or Australia, respectively. (And to get bookshops to order them to put on the shelves, whatnot.)
Book markets in different countries might have other conventions, too - different styles of covers that sell well, different size of books/quality of paper. Different spelling.

Another reason is that it's pretty common for a book not to make back its advance in royalties. Two (or more) publishers means two (or more) advances for the author. Two advances are likely to total more than one.

[fidjit]

Interesting discussion and I"m still none the wiser who sets marketing/pricing strategies , author, agent or publisher

I shot an email to Andy in regards to this and expressed my "concerns" and asked exactly that question ( while of course praising his writing efforts )

Don't expect a reply but then......

( p.s. further investigation shows that there may be two publishers involved here Headline and Bantam )

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

• It may not be in an author's best interests to sign over exclusive international digital rights. It certainly weakens their bargaining position, and puts them in a real bind if they are highly popular abroad but unpopular at home, since the "home" publisher may be less enthusiastic about the author.

Are we sure that those global license rights have to be negotiated with a regional publisher at all? Maybe the proper long-term holder for them is with the Agent?
Considering a lot of publishers have effectively outsourced content acquisition to the literary agencies and that quite a few of the established autors are taking their backlist directly from Agent to retailer, maybe the middleman that gets squeezed out of the loop is the publisher?

My point is that publishers need to start thinking global in the ebook era.
An australian publisher holding global english rights to an author who strikes it big in the UK would be cutting its figurative throat if it neglected that product line solely because it isn't popular in its home market.

The whole point of globalization is that money is money and nobody can be too picky about where sales come from if they expect to survive.

There are plenty of english speakers in Japan and China and it would be reasonable for those people to prefer to read their Harry Potter in the original. The same can be said for spanish speakers in the US who would prefer to read Allende's ZORRO or Garcia Marquez' works in their original form.

Authors who insist on sticking with regional publishers are putting themselves at a disadvantage and leaving good money on the table. And, considering the flood of content that ebooks are going to enable, that extra bit of money from out-of-home market revenue could be the difference between success and failure, economically speaking.

Remember, that we're talking global *language* rights not absolute global rights.
Translated editions are rightfully separate products in this model.
So it would be perfectly reasonable for a french author to sell french language rights to a French or Canadian global publisher, the english rights to a british or australian publisher, and the spanish rights to a mexican or argentinean publisher. In a model of language-based rather than regional rights, each edition would be handled by the player best equipped to promote that edition on a world-wide basis. And in a world of cross-regional migration, where there are more spanish-speaking people in the US than in Spain, where there are more english speakers in China than the US, geographically-limited rights simply make no sense at all.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

True, but the title of this thread, "WTF do publishers think they're doing?", is wrongly putting the blame on the publishers. Publishers aren't to blame for geographical restrictions.

Well, it was the publishers that set up the system from the beginning. And they can change it by offereing less money for non-world-contracts. So I do not think the blame question is so easy as you want to believe.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Another reason is that it's pretty common for a book not to make back its advance in royalties. Two (or more) publishers means two (or more) advances for the author. Two advances are likely to total more than one.

But the advance would be based on what they think it is likely to sell. A book sold worldwide would sell more than a book released in one country.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

But the advance would be based on what they think it is likely to sell. A book sold worldwide would sell more than a book released in one country.

Yes, nut not as much as today with the regions.

The advance is also a gamble (bet). And it should be easier for a publisher to gamble för smaller sums so 10 smaller markets would get 10 gambles that are more than what one publisher would be willing to gamble for all the markets.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Considering a lot of publishers have effectively outsourced content acquisition to the literary agencies and that quite a few of the established autors are taking their backlist directly from Agent to retailer, maybe the middleman that gets squeezed out of the loop is the publisher?

The only thing publishers are "outsourcing" to agents is that first line of defense from the morass known as the Internet Slush Pile. Getting an agent hardly guarantees you'll get offered a contract, let alone get published.

Plus, I'll eat my typewriter the day an agent pays an author for anything, let alone for an advance.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

My point is that publishers need to start thinking global in the ebook era. An australian publisher holding global english rights to an author who strikes it big in the UK would be cutting its figurative throat if it neglected that product line solely because it isn't popular in its home market.

On the contrary. An Australian author, who has ambitions to or reasonable expectations of selling well abroad, who signs over complete and total international rights to one publisher, is slashing their own throat and holding the wound open.

Distribution is currently the easiest part of the business. It doesn't make all the other stuff easy as well. Again: An American publisher, especially a small one, is not going to have the resources to mount an effective campaign for one of its authors abroad. To do it right, you need to know how to market it; you need business relationships with the retailers; you need to know who are the important reviewers, media outlets and other business contacts; you need to be able to do business abroad (which is going to include face time -- not cheap); you need to know how to pay your taxes; and you need to know whether the book really is going to sell abroad in the first place.

Would a French publisher know how to effectively market a book in Canada, Morocco, Algeria and the Congo (which has more French speakers than France)? Would a publisher in India know how to optimally market a book in the US?

Same Language != Same Culture.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

The whole point of globalization is that money is money and nobody can be too picky about where sales come from if they expect to survive.

Tell that to Borders. International expansion unquestionably contributed to their demise.

And no, "money is not always money." Getting people to buy Your Stuff takes resources -- time, money, staff, prestige, influence. Your returns on international same-language businesses will be much lower than working on your home turf.

Again if you are a small author on a small publisher and you don't have big expectations for international business, then yes it makes a lot of sense to just throw it out there. But if you want to make a serious go of it, pushing and publishing a book abroad is going to result in a lower return on your marketing bucks and other resources.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

There are plenty of english speakers in Japan and China and it would be reasonable for those people to prefer to read their Harry Potter in the original.

Perhaps, but with a book like that the value of selling it in Chinese to the Chinese, and in Japanese to the Japanese, utterly overwhelms what you can make on the expats and JET students.

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Remember, that we're talking global *language* rights not absolute global rights.

That's nice, but again you're talking about a very small audience. And it doesn't change the fact that a small American publisher isn't going to know Jack Squat about pushing a book in Australia or the UK, let alone make their money back trying to sell to expats in Germany, France or Thailand.

Heck a book that sells well in New York City could bomb massively in Los Angeles, St. Louis and Albany. I'd say international sales expertise is probably beyond most publishers.

[Fbone]

I think it's possible that an agent may sign with a local publisher to test the waters. If his author's book does well and there are signs of interest in other countries, further contracts become more valuable.

This works to both the publishers and authors benefit.

[dncharles]

Australian book market? Indian book market. Freak'n northern Madagascar book market - whatever.

These day there is only one market for everything- this planet: true for music, soon-to-be true for film (thanks Ted Hope and others) and would be true for books were Amazon not as greedy as it is (more greedy than authors, Harry T!).

Thank God for bookdepository.com and the open publishing domains for breaking the backs of these giants one tiny chip at a time...

[Anke Wehner]

People who spend a lot of their time in international communities on the internet shouldn't forget that there still are a lot of people who don't. (I know I sometimes have to remind myself that a lot of readers in Germany are not comfortable enough with English to read untranslated novels for fun...)

I do hope the industry can soon figure out a model that does not cause authors to lose money, but that does not include blocking people from buying books.

If someone lives in Australia, and somehow heard of a book that no Australian publisher has picked up yet, not allowing them to buy the book from an American vendor is quite likely to cause frustration and ill-will.