 | 7 Apr 08 |
Today, I’m going to talk about two separate issues; one serious and one for promotion and fun. We’ll start with the serious…
Harper-Collins announced last Thursday that they are forming a new publishing group that will eliminate or reduce advances, and offer the authors profit sharing in return. Here’s the article.
What I want to do is point you all to BookSquare.com where Allison outlined her thoughts in the comments and I thought she nailed it. So I’m not going to repeat it.
Instead, I asked my tax accountant son this: How would you feel about doing all the taxes you’ve done this season BUT you don’t get paid anything until all your clients get their refunds (yes I know not everyone gets refunds, but go along with me here).
Horrified, he said emphatically, “NO. Why would I work that hard, for free or until they felt like paying me?”
Exactly. So I told him about the no advance model being considered by a publisher. A model that would mean an author most likely would spend months or a year writing a book, and then wait a year after that until the book was published, and then, maybe, begin to see some income.
He thought that was a bad deal for authors.
Okay now for more the lighter part of the blog. I was hoping to pick your brains about an idea I had. Since I’m not actually working on a book this second, I was thinking about ways to start promoting my new series. BLOOD MAGIC comes out in March 2009 so it’s a good time to start. My idea was to either change my existing blog on my website, or set up a new one, to start introducing readers the world of witches and witch hunters.
I want to make it fun and somewhat interactive.
I had a couple ideas, like posting pictures of hot men that I think resemble what my witch hunters look like. I already used this picture INSERT PICTURE HERE on my blog.
Some other subjects I could talk about might be:
Curses—because my witch hunters are cursed
Witch Jokes
Paranormal Parables
Just stuff that might be fun and interactive in some ways.
So do you all have any suggestions? –And– Feel free to comment with your opinion on Harper-Collins new publishing group that will pay little or no advances.
Award winning author, Jennifer Lyon, always wanted to be a witch. Since her witch-powers never materialized, she went onto Plan B and now she creates magic in her books. In her new series, the author of the acclaimed Samantha Shaw Mystery Series (written as Jennifer Apodaca) introduces the Witch Hunters, legendary men who must overcome a curse to team up with witches and fight evil.
Subscribe to Posts 
I think that’s a horrible idea. I’ve always thought the current system was unfair to the author. I’ve read that 8% – 25% of the cover price goes to the author. Then your agent receives 10% – 15% of your earnings. The person that created the characters, poured their hearts into every page, and wrote the book is making very little compared to the publisher and now they want to pay you after they’ve made all their money. I think it stinks.
As far as your blog, whichever way you choose, I’ll be sure to follow. As I’m sure many others will. I love the picture. He’s hot.
by HollyD April 7th, 2008 at 7:08 amRipping off authors, it’s not a new concept, just a new way to do it.
Often authors aren’t getting enough in the first place, houses aren’t investing in their authors today, advances are smaller and smaller, and sometimes royalities no existant. Sad sad comment.
by Cele April 7th, 2008 at 7:16 amHollyD, it’s going to be interesting to watch and see if this particular business model is picked up by other publishers. On the pic, that’s Jason Momoa of Stargate Atlantis. He is hot!
Cele, true enough! There are still editors that fight hard to build authors though. Just want to add that!
by Jen April 7th, 2008 at 9:05 amAs a non-professional when it comes to traditional publishing (my day job right now entails writing for the internet), what this sounds like to me is a way to get the work of writers without having to pay them what their work is worth, as well as a way to limit access to traditional publishing to an already-established elite while at the same time continuing to perpetuate the stereotype that those who self-publish or use alternatives to the traditional publishing establishment are by definition inferior writers whose subjects and/or ideas are marginal at best.
Now, maybe I’m reading the whole thing wrong, but that was the impression I got from reading the linked article.
by Elaine April 7th, 2008 at 9:09 amElaine, I’d say you grasped it. I’ve seen other models like this (one that I can think of) and it did get some brand new authors started, but they quickly moved up to solid advances.
by Jen April 7th, 2008 at 10:15 amJen, the entire pay me later slant angers me.
by Karin April 7th, 2008 at 10:49 amAs far as a fun idea for the blog, I like what you have thought of so far, but maybe you could give us a blurb of the first book so we can have better handle on what it’s about??
The HC deal is like throwing spaghetti against the wall to see if it sticks…the publisher isn’t getting behind the book, they just hope something they put out there will stick and make them a gazillion dollars.
by Amy Addison April 7th, 2008 at 10:50 amThat’s a horrible idea to cut out advances!
One fun idea for your website…”Which Witch” trivia questions. You describe a witch and we have to figure out “which witch” it is!
by Erin April 7th, 2008 at 11:05 amKarin, I’m surprised there’s not more anger bubblilng out on the Internet over the HC proposal. As to a blurb for the book–yeah I should do that.
Good analogy Amy!
Erin, yeah, it’s not in the favor of authors, that’s for sure. And THANKS! Great idea.
by Jen April 7th, 2008 at 11:48 amJen, I think you should redesign your website and have a front page focus on the newest series. You can do any that you suggested, just keep it fresh. For example, Tess Gerritsen has “creepy biological facts” which is very loosely related to her books, but it’s something she knows about and is interested in and she’s used some of them in her books (i.e. someone waking up in the morgue.)
Hot guys are always good
I just don’t really like to see the author’s interpretation of their character because often I have my own impression and it might not match :/
by Allison Brennan April 7th, 2008 at 12:38 pmGood suggestions, Allison. Thanks!
by Jen April 7th, 2008 at 12:47 pmA mystery writer friend/colleague/mentor just signed with a new publisher (not HC as I recall) and she said, ‘no advance but double royalties.’ I’ll have to see how she likes it compared to (or with? always mess that one up), her former publisher.
I write for two e-pubs and don’t get an advance, although I get royalty checks from one of them twice a month, which is nice. The other pays quarterly. My other publisher is small press, and small (very small) advance.
Not worrying about sell-through might be nice, but I’m not in a place to be able to decide if this model would be something I’d want. I agree with whoever said it makes more sense for the new author, or the outside the box genre — on the publisher’s side. But given a choice between no book at all, or a no-advance but good royalty for a book, I can see authors giving this a chance.
by Terry Odell April 7th, 2008 at 1:16 pmNo advance but double royalties. Hmm. Interesting concept. VERY thought provoking blog, Jen. Sorry I’m reading so late. I’ve been dealing with healing daughter, quick trip to Denver and my NEWLY broken toe. What a joy.
by Natalie April 7th, 2008 at 11:29 pmTerry, I agree that some new authors will go for this. It’s the more seasoned authors who know the pitfalls in the road that could prevent any monies from EVER reaching the author. It happens.
I heard authors like the e-pubs who pay faster royalties consistantly very much.
Natalie, how did you break your toe?
by Jen April 8th, 2008 at 7:08 am