Friday, October 14, 2005
Bad Girls
I guess that's me.
There's a discussion going on over at Smart Bitches, regarding royalties for e-books and major print houses. I have to take some credit (er, shit stirring responsibility) for this as it was 'I' who contacted Candy about this issue. I had no idea it was so taboo to speak of money or contract matters.
The few authors that have commented on the subject (those with traditional print publishers at least) are very reluctant to discuss anything to do with contracts. My impression is that they don't want to appear militant, or be labeled as 'difficult to work with'. Nice Girls.
This is where my enormous naivety of the publishing world kicks in. Frankly I find the whole 'don't ask don't tell' attitude annoying and immature. Prior to devoting my time to writing I worked in business for 20 years. Contracts, distribution agreements, joint partnerships were a way of life, and equitable to both parties (otherwise there's no incentive to sign on the dotted line). I was never treated like a slightly backward airhead given a pat on the head and a 'there there dear, trust us, this is as good as it gets' spin. Which is why the secrecy/mystique surrounding publishing contracts ticks me off... empowered with the complicity of the authors themselves. It's like some underworld masonic cheer leaders cult, and they will sanction 'hits' on you.
Why is asking questions bad? I'm not attacking anyone. If the way this company is doing business is fair and equitable, fine and dandy.. tell me that. Tell me, tell me! But don't answer me with 'we don't talk about it because we don't want to be seen as trouble makers'.. All that does is make me wonder, trouble for whom? if everything is above board--fair and equitable, why would there be trouble?
Perhaps I'm coming at this from a slightly different angle than most. Publishing is not my God. If I'm never published the world will still turn, and I'll continue to write my stories. Writing is my passion, publication is just a nice bonus.
I'll keep asking my questions. I'll find out everything I can. And I will walk away from a deal that sucks eggs.
There, I've outed myself. I'm an opinionated Bad Girl.
Enjoy,
X
There's a discussion going on over at Smart Bitches, regarding royalties for e-books and major print houses. I have to take some credit (er, shit stirring responsibility) for this as it was 'I' who contacted Candy about this issue. I had no idea it was so taboo to speak of money or contract matters.
The few authors that have commented on the subject (those with traditional print publishers at least) are very reluctant to discuss anything to do with contracts. My impression is that they don't want to appear militant, or be labeled as 'difficult to work with'. Nice Girls.
This is where my enormous naivety of the publishing world kicks in. Frankly I find the whole 'don't ask don't tell' attitude annoying and immature. Prior to devoting my time to writing I worked in business for 20 years. Contracts, distribution agreements, joint partnerships were a way of life, and equitable to both parties (otherwise there's no incentive to sign on the dotted line). I was never treated like a slightly backward airhead given a pat on the head and a 'there there dear, trust us, this is as good as it gets' spin. Which is why the secrecy/mystique surrounding publishing contracts ticks me off... empowered with the complicity of the authors themselves. It's like some underworld masonic cheer leaders cult, and they will sanction 'hits' on you.
Why is asking questions bad? I'm not attacking anyone. If the way this company is doing business is fair and equitable, fine and dandy.. tell me that. Tell me, tell me! But don't answer me with 'we don't talk about it because we don't want to be seen as trouble makers'.. All that does is make me wonder, trouble for whom? if everything is above board--fair and equitable, why would there be trouble?
Perhaps I'm coming at this from a slightly different angle than most. Publishing is not my God. If I'm never published the world will still turn, and I'll continue to write my stories. Writing is my passion, publication is just a nice bonus.
I'll keep asking my questions. I'll find out everything I can. And I will walk away from a deal that sucks eggs.
There, I've outed myself. I'm an opinionated Bad Girl.
Enjoy,
X
Comments:
<< Home
As someone published, with friends published with Harlequin, Bantam, Kensington, St. Martin's, Dell, and Berkley, I'll tell you this much. Most publishers other than Harlequin don't go to great lengths to tell you to keep your mouth shut, but they all do it to some extent.
When we had a pow-wow and shared contracts, Kensington and St. Martin's were the first that I saw who jumped from 6% to 8% royalties on paperbacks. Harlequin refuses to budge, and since they were the conglomerate on category romance (still are, only category is in a slump), RWA didn't kick up too much of a fuss, so authors had little to guide them or help them fight this monster.
Harlequin has a "boilerplate" contract, but the savvy author or author with a savvy agent or contracts attorney can negotiate somewhat.
Three things that most authors in this group were told by their publishers never to discuss with anyone, were (1) advances, (2) contracts, and (3) print runs. Publishers don't want Author A knowing that Author B got more money, better promotion, or special treatment of any other kind.
Another reason authors don't talk about money has to do with the Internal Revenue Service, for obvious reasons, even though the IRS has the resources to find these things out.
As for the 6% royalties on Harlequin's ebooks, which started this conversation, Harlequin is reversing the order that epublishers such as Ellora's Cave use. Books some out in print first, electronics later. The up side for authors is that Harlequin has longer arms as far as distribution and promotion. The down side is that anything below 20 to 25% is rape. The book covers are already in place, the manuscripts are proofed, etc - the publisher just doesn't want to play fair. They're also getting by with it as long as authors (especially new ones who proclaim "But this is Harlequin!") sign those agreements.
Most of my friends don't even know that I'm already published in both print and epub, much less that I stand to make as much or more with each epub book than I do the print ones. Unless I'm a NY Times best selling author (which I'm not), with epub I am paid monthly, as opposed to twice per year, I'm paid more promptly, my publishers have their terms ON THEIR WEBSITES, and I know for certain that I am being treated fairly.
There isn't a secret society keeping information from the public or fellow unpublished authors. There are just a lot of scared writers whose livelihoods depend upon those publishers buying their next book or promoting the ones they've already sold.
Does this help?
When we had a pow-wow and shared contracts, Kensington and St. Martin's were the first that I saw who jumped from 6% to 8% royalties on paperbacks. Harlequin refuses to budge, and since they were the conglomerate on category romance (still are, only category is in a slump), RWA didn't kick up too much of a fuss, so authors had little to guide them or help them fight this monster.
Harlequin has a "boilerplate" contract, but the savvy author or author with a savvy agent or contracts attorney can negotiate somewhat.
Three things that most authors in this group were told by their publishers never to discuss with anyone, were (1) advances, (2) contracts, and (3) print runs. Publishers don't want Author A knowing that Author B got more money, better promotion, or special treatment of any other kind.
Another reason authors don't talk about money has to do with the Internal Revenue Service, for obvious reasons, even though the IRS has the resources to find these things out.
As for the 6% royalties on Harlequin's ebooks, which started this conversation, Harlequin is reversing the order that epublishers such as Ellora's Cave use. Books some out in print first, electronics later. The up side for authors is that Harlequin has longer arms as far as distribution and promotion. The down side is that anything below 20 to 25% is rape. The book covers are already in place, the manuscripts are proofed, etc - the publisher just doesn't want to play fair. They're also getting by with it as long as authors (especially new ones who proclaim "But this is Harlequin!") sign those agreements.
Most of my friends don't even know that I'm already published in both print and epub, much less that I stand to make as much or more with each epub book than I do the print ones. Unless I'm a NY Times best selling author (which I'm not), with epub I am paid monthly, as opposed to twice per year, I'm paid more promptly, my publishers have their terms ON THEIR WEBSITES, and I know for certain that I am being treated fairly.
There isn't a secret society keeping information from the public or fellow unpublished authors. There are just a lot of scared writers whose livelihoods depend upon those publishers buying their next book or promoting the ones they've already sold.
Does this help?
# posted by 
: 10/14/2005 2:25 PM
: 10/14/2005 2:25 PM
It does, thanks.
I'm sorry for the need to post anonymously but I appreciate you stopping by and commenting.
The whole question that originally sparked the conversation over at Smart Bitches, was a conversation I was having with my critique group. Most of whom are published with e-pubs and some are making verra good money. The conversation turned to harlequin, at time it was the dream of most of us to pub there, and the rumour that they'd be branching out into e-publishing.
Knowing the rates most e-pubs offer their authors, I have to say I was shocked (as in gasphorroroutrage) at the low percentage rates Harlequin was offering. I've since learned that this is a pretty standard clause amongst the publishing houses.
Still my argument remains... when these clauses were introduced e-publishing was the ugly step-child, and wasn't a consideration (to either the author or the pub house) as a subsidiary right.
Times change. And it seems foolish to me that this clause isn't being revisited, or e-books aren't being separated from that clause and renegotiated.
Again, thanks for the input.
X
I'm sorry for the need to post anonymously but I appreciate you stopping by and commenting.
The whole question that originally sparked the conversation over at Smart Bitches, was a conversation I was having with my critique group. Most of whom are published with e-pubs and some are making verra good money. The conversation turned to harlequin, at time it was the dream of most of us to pub there, and the rumour that they'd be branching out into e-publishing.
Knowing the rates most e-pubs offer their authors, I have to say I was shocked (as in gasphorroroutrage) at the low percentage rates Harlequin was offering. I've since learned that this is a pretty standard clause amongst the publishing houses.
Still my argument remains... when these clauses were introduced e-publishing was the ugly step-child, and wasn't a consideration (to either the author or the pub house) as a subsidiary right.
Times change. And it seems foolish to me that this clause isn't being revisited, or e-books aren't being separated from that clause and renegotiated.
Again, thanks for the input.
X
Aaaah. Well, on subsidiary rights, an author who publishes regularly (as in 4-5 books a year, depending upon their success) needs a good conracts attorney or agent, IMO. I know that I learned a great deal from my 1st agent. He did subsidiary rights for the likes of Tom Clancy and others when he worked for one of the Big Houses. Anyway, most authors don't pay attention to subsidiary rights, which include electronic ones. The uninformed author gets screwed royally, because this is where the publisher really takes them to the cleaners unless those authors are aware. Publisher pays maybe 10-20% for foreign sales. When China, Japan, Denmark, and other countries are reading ebooks from their cell phones and PODs, that's a lot of business that the authors are missing out on with electronic sales.
Again - authors need to be informed. If they're not, they'll be taken advantage of. These companies are not in business to hand out money. Know your rights and your worth.
Again - authors need to be informed. If they're not, they'll be taken advantage of. These companies are not in business to hand out money. Know your rights and your worth.
# posted by : 10/14/2005 3:06 PM
: 10/14/2005 3:06 PM
Thanks for stopping by, Harridan (love the name.)
I guess my frustration is I want to discuss contracts in very general terms and everyone seems to be interpreting that as I want to peek at their paycheck.
I have an inkling of how publishing contracts are drawn up (just enough to be dangerous LOL). But I was mostly interested in the republishing/electronic clause (forgive me if I have the wrong terminolgy). It's my understanding that that clause encompasses (or can) selling the story in condensed form to magazines, foreign sales, audio books, e-books, and in some cases even movie rights.
So as someone who has never even seen a publishing contract, this one little clause fascinates the heck out of me because it could potentially be the biggest money maker for an author, yet it's shrugged off like chump change. Maybe that's exactly what it is. I don't know. I just figure if it's important enough for the publisher to include it, there's got to be some money there.
X
Post a Comment
I guess my frustration is I want to discuss contracts in very general terms and everyone seems to be interpreting that as I want to peek at their paycheck.
I have an inkling of how publishing contracts are drawn up (just enough to be dangerous LOL). But I was mostly interested in the republishing/electronic clause (forgive me if I have the wrong terminolgy). It's my understanding that that clause encompasses (or can) selling the story in condensed form to magazines, foreign sales, audio books, e-books, and in some cases even movie rights.
So as someone who has never even seen a publishing contract, this one little clause fascinates the heck out of me because it could potentially be the biggest money maker for an author, yet it's shrugged off like chump change. Maybe that's exactly what it is. I don't know. I just figure if it's important enough for the publisher to include it, there's got to be some money there.
X
<< Home
