Image 01

Green Lamp Media

We Make Stories

Posts Tagged ‘Print on Demand’

Things Publishers Fear: #5 ~ Authors

Wednesday, May 5th, 2010

Writing
Creative Commons License photo credit: alancleaver_2000

About This Series
Things Publishers Fear is an occasional series about the realities of publishing in the modern era. For the record, survival is not guaranteed, nor is it always deserved.


Authors

I wrote the bulk of this article across on my personal blog, but it warrants a full exploration here on Green Lamp Media. You might wonder why publishers could fear authors, the life blood of their business? Let me explain the reasons.

Currently the bulk of authors are in a fairly powerless position relative to publishers. Publishers have money, access and publishing slots. Publishers finance the editorial and production work that goes into a book and have the relationships that ensure distribution, advertising and shelf space. This has been changing rapidly over the last few years.

One way it has been changing is self-inflicted, publishers shedding costs by shedding editors (and, some would argue, quality as they do it). But the other more visible way it is changing is in economic terms as the cost of making a text widely available drops very close to zero via effective digital publishing.

Why should you sell a paper publisher your digital rights when there is no need?

In 2006 when I was only starting to think clearly about digital change (and had only been writing a blog for some 4 months) I wrote a post called Authors Will Drive Change, it was part of a short series of articles on what was changing the publishing industry.

The point is that publishing is no longer just about books and even more it is no longer about waiting for a publisher to decide your work is good enough for print. Options abound and as more and more writers realise that they will take advantage of it.

E-books will push this change even more. There is no reason why authors’ royalties should be the same on e-books as they are for paper books and in many ways there is no reason why the authors cannot sell e-books themselves rather than through a publisher. Why should you sell a paper publisher your digital rights when there is no need?

What I didn’t address back then and what has become clearer now, is how established authors will also drive change and in doing so, make a much bigger impact. After all, if ebooks begin to account for 20-30% of the market (or more) and of that major authors generate the lions share of sales then their departure from your lists will make a huge dent in revenues.

But even authors with moderate (still impressive but not BLOCKBUSTER) sales can see the benefit of direct sales and cutting the publisher out. The most recent example of this is JA Konrath who writes The Newbies Guide To Publishing blog. He has been posting for some time now about his rather impressive success in selling books via Amazon’s Kindle device:

In short, this market is perfect for a one-person operation.

I’d certainly entertain an offer from a large publisher, if they wanted to buy rights for one of my books. But I’m not going to go out looking for the opportunity. Especially since I’ll make more money in the long run if I keep my rights.

I could even make more money in the short run.

According to my recent royalty statement, my horror novel AFRAID sold about 54,000 copies in all formats, earning me around $27k.

If I released a Jack Kilborn ebook on my own, and it sold like my current ebooks are selling, I’d make $20k in a year.

It’s doubtful I’ll make $17K next year on AFRAID, since it’s no longer getting coop on bookstore shelves. But I’m sure I’d make $20k, or more, on a self-pubbed ebook.

So in two years I can make more money on my own on a self-pubbed ebook than a book released by a major publisher in hardcover, trade paper, paperback, and ebook formats, supported by a tour and advertising.

Unless it’s a big offer, I can’t imagine selling rights to my work ever again…

And There Is More
The IDPF released the figures for February ebook sales. They are pretty stunning. I’ve written elsewhere about my skepticism regarding ebooks and the industry’s obsession with price and a single format, but when one sees figures like this, it is almost understandable that they get excited and distracted by them.

Mike Shatzkin writes about what this seemingly rapid shift towards digital means for the print side of the business and it is an interesting perspective:

If by the end of 2012, 25% of sales for a new book are digital, then about half of new book sales will be made through online purchases if we count the print book sales made through online retailers (mostly Amazon.)

Online print sales can be served through inventory generated on demand. So, if these estimates are right, we are less than three years away from a publisher (or author) being able to reach half the market for a book without inventory risk!

Having half the market reachable without print-run risk or inventory storage; having half the customers connecting with their reading through online paths that make them at least theoretically identifiable; and having a quarter of those customers reading through a medium that enables interactivity will make all the changes we’ve seen so far in trade publishing appear trivial. And if the very perspicacious Carolyn Reidy, her unnamed counterpart, and I are right, that disruption is going to take place before many books now under contract reach their publication date.

Personally I caution about moving from current trends towards future results. I’m unsure if the sales will continue at their current level never mind continue to explode in such an impressive fashion. However, even if we allow that Mike and the trends are half right and we see say 33% or 40% of the market reachable via no-risk required methods by 2012, then the savvy authors like JA Konrath will see little reason to work with a publisher at all. Why, if they don’t require the finance that is one of a publishers strongest assets, would they?

as the market becomes more digitally biased, the greater the risk that lead and mid-list authors see first the advantage of retaining their own digital rights

This is not to say that publishers don’t offer more than finance, they do and in abundance, but for some authors, the skill set that publishers offer is affordable and at a more reasonable cut than they currently allow publishers to keep.

In my view, as the market becomes more digitally biased, the greater the risk that lead and mid-list authors see first the advantage of retaining their own digital rights, then later the advantage of retaining all rights and exploiting them for themselves.

The future, for all that it offers great promise to authors and thus they WILL drive change, may not offer such great promise for publishers and certainly not as they currently exist and hence why publishers fear Authors!

  • Share/Bookmark

Things Publishers Fear: #2 ~ Google

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

Yay!
Creative Commons License photo credit: Max Braun

About This Series
Things Publishers Fear is an occasional series about the realities of publishing in the modern era. For the record, survival is not guaranteed, nor is it always deserved.


Google

Where to start with the fear of Google. The 12 million scanned books. Yes that will do for now!

It is not just that publishers are rightly pissed at the fact of Google’s actions (and the gall they have shown in continuing with them throughout the process of first suing and then reaching a complex and variously hated/despised/grudgingly accepted settlement) they fear the implications of Google’s actions.

Fearing the fact

When I say the fact I mean that Google has, at the very least, stretched the idea of fair use to the limit and in doing so created a tool of great value. A searchable database of all the works they can. Nothing will now put the genie BACK in the bottle. The database exists the power of publishers as possessors of that POTENTIAL database is gone, broken forever by the reality of Google Books. Search there and you’ll see its amazing capacities even if only partly, and in a hampered way, realised.

You may not think that this is important but it has created a database that publishers do not:

    a) control
    b) understand and
    c) know how to profit from

If publishers had been involved in the creation of such a database they might have built in any number of changes, made any number of demands and would in any case have had different interests from each other, so much so that they probably would never have made this a reality (and why should they if does not benefit them?). But now they are presented with a fait accompli and one that, even with a settlement, leaves them disadvantaged and with a database that hardly favours them.

Maybe these things are their just deserts, perhaps you feel they have created this situation by failing to move with the times and invest in technology and rights databases, but this series is designed to take the publishers viewpoint and from that perspective, those three things are very worrisome indeed and justify some fear, regardless of the historical reasons for their existence.

Fearing the potential

Any sensible publisher, though, reserves their real fear for the potential of Google and its database. Google are very well placed to benefit from every digital trend you can envisage. The massive textual database they have built compliments this in innumerable ways. Mobile results can be enriched with tourist info from books, history texts and restaurant reviews, not to mention news stories from newspaper and magazine publishers (as if any content producer will escape). What is more so much of the database will contain books that singly have little of value but as a whole collection and cross-referenced are worth considerable sums (public domain works, government publications and the like).

The database brings the reality of competition with EVERY SINGLE BOOK EVER PUBLISHED into sharp focus for publishers as new books face increased real challenges from books published 10, 20, 300 years ago and in every conceivable context, on a phone, laptop, desk computer, iPad, iPod, wi-fi enable device, anything that connects to the cloud and has a screen (not to mention an increase in POD). So if the web enabled a flood of amateur (and let’s face it not always terribly good) content, Google’s books database enables a flood of real professional content that rings true with quality and which at a time when being published was harder than it is now has the stamp of publishers approval. This onslaught threatens directly the lifeblood of all publishing, the new book trade, in ways that all publishers rightly fear.

The potential of Google Books is that by supplying information from a vast accessible anywhere database you reduce the overall demand for new or fresh paid content. What’s even more frightening is that Google is a private company and access to that enormous database will be, for all intents and purposes, at their whim.

How do you like them apples? Well, as a publisher, I don’t like them much, but as William James said: “acceptance of what has happened is the first step to overcoming the consequences of any misfortune.”

  • Share/Bookmark