Defensive Posturing: E-Book Author Takes On The 'Old Guard' At Crime Writing Festival [UPDATED]
from the the-more-things-change,-the-more-they-wish-things-wouldn't dept
[UPDATE: Some comments (namely Steve Mosby's and David Hewson's) have pointed out that there is more to this story than simply the post by Stephen Leather I used as the basis for this one. While other accounts of this event differ slightly, the overview remains pretty much the same. However, there is a glaring omission from Leather's post that is mentioned in others. David Hewson's take on the event, as well as Mosby's, mention that Leather admitted to using sock puppets to comment in forums to drum up business for himself. This, in and of itself, would be unpleasant enough. But there appears to be evidence that Leather's sock puppetry goes beyond simple PR and into harassment of other writers, including writing one-star reviews on Amazon and setting up Twitter accounts in their names in order to, for lack of a better term, screw with them. This obviously goes far beyond shady PR tactics.While I believe that the points raised by Stephen Leather's post, as presented on his blog, are still valid, these other issues call Leather's character into question. I based this post solely on Leather's take which, in retrospect, was unwise. This gives the appearance that I (along with Techdirt) approve of these other actions or have simply chosen to disregard them. This is not the case. I was unaware of these aspects until they were raised in the comments, and that is no one's fault by my own.
I would encourage you to read the other postings to more fully round out this picture of Stephen Leather. Again, I feel the points he raised were valid but I do not want to give the impression of implicit approval of his other actions.]
There's something about disruption that stirs up a certain amount of animosity in those on the receiving end. It sometime seems to be almost a "fight-or-flight" response, brought on by those whose "sure thing" has become about as fiscally wise as "buying a home" or "selling the farm to buy Facebook shares."
E-book mystery writer Stephen Leather got to experience this phenomenon in person while visiting the three-day Harrogate Crime Writing Festival, with the dual purpose of rubbing elbows with other authors and adding some background for his upcoming e-book called Inspector Zhang Goes to Harrogate.
The "fun" began when Leather, at the behest of another author, appeared on a panel whose very name stacked the deck against him: "Wanted for Murder: the e-book." As pretty much the sole representative of e-publishing, Leather was outnumbered four-to-one, joining a publisher, another writer (with few e-book sales), an agent and a bookseller. Even with this huge advantage, the old guard couldn't keep itself from deploying mockery, ignorance and condescension when addressing Leather's comments.
What surprised me was how the audience seemed so set against cheap eBooks. Rather than taking my view that books are best sold at a price that readers find attractive, the general feeling of the audience seemed to be that books were already – as one man said – ‘cheap as chips’ while Norwegians had to pay £40 for one of Jo Nesbo’s books. When I explained that I had sold half a million eBooks last year, most of them for less than a quid, I was surprised to hear a few boos and hisses rather than the applause that I had expected.Can you feel the hate? This doesn't sound like authors supporting other authors. This sounds like the tortured noises of a large animal backed into a corner by a previously unrecognized aggressor. I's now up against the wall, in an unfamiliar position, and unsure of what move to make next.
It gets simultaneously uglier and stupider from there:
The most surreal moment for me came when the President of the Publisher’s Association, Ursula Mackenzie, was trying to defend their policy of maintaining eBooks at a high price. Basically she was saying that books needed to maintain their value and that 20p and free eBooks needed to be stamped on.The old argument about "devaluation" is now in play. No matter how many times it's stated, it's still nothing more than a willful misreading of the situation. Unknown (or unsigned) writers selling cheap e-books doesn't devalue your product. Innovations and the removal of barriers lower the costs associated with your product, especially in regards to the digital version. Publishers seem to think that consumers should pay physical prices for digital items. It's not a matter of "devaluing" anything. It's a matter of publishers overvaluing their goods in order to preserve the margins they're accustomed to.
I understand her view, but I’m a big fan of selling eBooks at lower prices providing you can get high volumes of sales. And I’m happy enough to give books away if it helps to bring in new readers.
When faced with this fact, publishers and certain authors start throwing out statements concerning the costs of editing and marketing books as the reason why their e-book prices are unable to square with reality. Publishers also use these same statements to explain why they're "entitled" to the largest cut of the proceeds. Leather had his own thoughts on this, but no one's interested:
Mark turned to the conversation around to the cost of books and how much went to the publisher, and asked Ursula to justify why the publisher’s took the lion’s share. She put forward the old arguments about editing and marketing and I tried to explain that with eBooks, an author with a large fan base can use fans to edit and proof-read. Everyone seemed to think that meant I thought writers could do away with editors, and of course that’s not the case. But not every writer needs a hard edit, some writers need little more than proof-reading and fact-checking and that can be done through fans. And my Jack Nightingale series is edited by a full-time editor on my agent's staff so those books need very little editing by my publisher. Yes, I know that some authors need a lot of editing. But I don't.No one claims that Author A's strategy in the e-book game will work for Author B, but the publishers seem to think that their strategies and methods will work for all authors and that these associated costs will always exist (at increasing price points), hence the "need" for higher prices.
Leather also discussed piracy in a reasonable fashion, stating that he felt pirates "helped market his books." This was greeted by negativity ("...I thought I was about to be lynched...") and name-calling. Pointing out that DRM doesn't work and negatively affects paying customers was greeted with complete denial by the publisher's representative. When Leather questioned why a writer who sells most of their books through Amazon (not exactly known for leaving much on the negotiating table) would need an agent, agents in attendance began firing off "nasty tweets" about him.
But there's one moment in Leather's post that stands out from all the rest of the petty defensiveness of the panel, and gives an indication that some very fundamental misunderstandings of economics, consumer behavior and basic math might be what's holding back certain publishers and authors from seeing how Leather's strategy might work for them.
So I explain to Ursula – and the audience – that I can write a short story in five days and am happy to sell that at the Amazon minimum of 72p which generates me an income of 25p. At this point Ursula – who runs one of the biggest publishing houses in the UK – asked me “so you’re happy to work for 5p a day, are you?” The audience laughed and clapped, and I was frankly gob-smacked. I couldn’t understand why they hadn’t seen the fallacy in her comment. She was assuming that I spent five days writing a story and then sold one copy. She can’t possibly have believed that, could she?She might. Many publishers and authors might. So many of them seemed completely focused on making the largest profit they can from the fewest possible sales. It seems like a good idea, but, as has been shown here before, lowering your prices can increase both sales and your net income. Keeping your prices artificially high in hopes of earning more per sale can cost you more in the long run. Leather isn't selling one copy at 5p. He's selling thousands.
Of course I don’t work for 5p a day. My Inspector Zhang stories sell about five or six hundred copies a month. Each. So one story sells 6,000 copies a year. So over the next ten years it could sell 60,000 copies which means I’d get £15,000, which is £3,000 a day and that’s probably more than she gets paid.It doesn't get much more condescending than that. Assuming that 72p purchases will never add up to "real" money is keeping a lot of publishers and authors from making as much as they could. There's a hint of snobbishness to that line of thought: that somehow self-publishers who sell at low prices are lesser artists and should be mocked, pitied or ignored.
So be it. When the walls come crashing down around you, I'm sure the gate you've spent so much time maintaining will make all the difference in the world. And while you're admiring the distance between you and these upstart outsiders, these upstart outsiders will be more than happy to be mocked and pitied all the way to the bank.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, ebooks, mathematics, pricing, stephen leather
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's not different from what we see from the shills around here. They are present stories of successful artists that make tons of money without caring about piracy, DRM and by monetizing their works in other ways along with selling their content for dirty cheap prices and their reaction is the same. Name calling, angry twitting (commenting), fallacies and false accusations.
In the end I feel sad for them. Sure there will be blood before this war ends but they are the losing end. And they are the only ones that refuse to see it and engage in new, constructive ways of doing their business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A prime example of the first two stages of grief even.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I wonder whether she realizes that price-fixing is highly illegal in a lot of countries.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On a brighter note, I've seen Leather's name come up on a few occasions while browsing Amazon and I believe now would be the time to throw some money his way, especially as I have a few flights coming up this month with time to spare for reading. Do we have any fans here who might suggest a good starting point? I'll be buying ebook format, of course...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pft..
This is a clear and present fallacy. Self published authors will have a greater piece of the pie once they've become established and recognized names in the industry. To otherwise argue is to have ones head in the sand ostritch style.
It is my belief that successful Self ePublished Authors will have assembled their own 'in house' marketing & editing departments. Gone are the days when dead tree publishers get to rob the author(s)using industry clout and lawyerly weasle words. Terry Goodkind, (Wizards First Rule,) is one such successful Author who's taken things to the next level.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: pft..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In the end, it will be neither the old guard (the publishing houses, agents, and authors who support them), or the upstarts (self publishing authors) who will decide what shape the publishing industry will take--the consumers will vote with their money on what model of publishing will work (and it will be something completely different than what exists now).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes,I know, you eliminate all the middle men. But it ends up in the same place after a while - too many authors, too little space, not enough sales per author.
Selling for dirt cheap (or giving them away hoping they do something else profitable) gets us back to the same cycle that happened in music. End result? Recorded music sales are way down, and remarkably, tours aren't selling out, venues are closing, and business sucks. Moreover an entire generation has been trained not the pay for music.
In books, it's worse - because there is no real upsell available. Authors are not out doing 20,000 seat arenas every night. Speaking tours for most have limited appeal.
Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Cell phone market. Too many manufacturers, little space. The ones that do it right get the money. Simple market rules. Just because you write something it doesn't automagically make you entitled to get money for it. Get over it.
End result? Recorded music sales are way down [clipped]
Care to offer a citation that includes indie labels and artists that don't rely on labels at all? I think you'll be surprised. Tours might not be selling out because they are damn expensive. Linkin Park here is selling for over $200 the cheapest ticket. A local well known group is offering tickets starting at $20 and guess what, the tickets are sold out. Maybe it's not a market issue but a greed issue?
Moreover an entire generation has been trained not the pay for music.
Yet they flock to live shows to get close to their stars. Which requires money.
Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there.
There are things you wouldn't want even if it was for free. And there are things you'll pay a load of money to have. Price is not a measure of size of imagination. I'd love to see you discussing about Paulo Coelho selling for 99 cents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: End result? Recorded music sales are way down
Excepting they are not. Even the RIAA admit sales are going up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's me right there. I watch a lot of Youtube reviewers, and two of them recently were at a convention nearly three hours drive away. I watch their shows for free, but I took the time and spent the money to get out there and meet them. I paid for an autograph and considered it money well spent. They were basically double paid by me in a way, since the convention organisers had paid them to appear as special guests, and I had to pay to get into the convention. Yet I don't care at all, I'm happy I paid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Moreover, for the moment the "good and cheap" option is fairly limited, not that many top line authors are there. When that market gets crowded, we get to where we are now, but instead of making dollars per book, they are netting pennies - and no lnoger able to afford promotion or marketing.
It's a race the bottom, and it usually ends up with a crash.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
When there's an oversaturation of authors, there's going to be more competition. It's no longer easy to sit back and let your book sell, you have to be proactive like every other business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Since "the other way" is ending, that's not an important question. The important question is "can a good author make a decent living through writing in the new paradigm," and the answer is (obviously, in my opinion), yes.
But the landscape is changing. We're seeing a democratization happening, where more good artists can make a decent living through their art than ever before, but fewer will be able to become multimillionaires doing it.
As a consumer, I think this is an excellent and long overdue development as it leads to a greater variety and amount of wonderful works. People who are used to making millions, or who aspire to making millions, probably have a different opinion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
The costs of promotion and marketing is coming down just like manufacturing and distribution. Besides, authors don't need to make dollars per book if they can sell many more ebooks.
Hypothetical math question:
Author makes $2 for selling a $20 hardcover. Makes 70 cents for selling a 99 cent ebook. How many ebooks does the author need to sell to make more from ebooks than hardcovers?
Answer: 3 ebooks per each hardcover. And it is probably a lot easier to sell 3 ebooks @ 99 cents each than a single hardcover for $20.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Here in the Netherlands I came across a brand new book in a rather well known webshop:
Paperback: 19.90 euros
e-book: 15.95(!) euros
Yeah, that's almost 20 dollars for a goddamn e-book! Race for the bottom?! It's about friggin' time we put an end to the 'the sky is the limit' pricing policies of these demons called publishers!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Tough. Welcome to the free market. Try being better next time.
"Selling for dirt cheap (or giving them away hoping they do something else profitable) gets us back to the same cycle that happened in music."
Oh, you mean that business where profits have only been going up for decades? Gee, that's real sad. I think I'm going to cry...
"Recorded music sales are way down, and remarkably, tours aren't selling out, venues are closing, and business sucks."
If by recorded music you mean CD's, then I'm there with you. And that's a good thing. Die plastic pieces of crud. DIE!
In regard to the rest, I don't believe you. Every time a big name star comes to my puny country (Portugal), the venue sells out. And I'm not talking about YOUR big name stars. Even our own "stars" sell the place out.
The business if as fine as it has always been.
"Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there."
HAH, that's a laugh. Who's smarter: the guy selling an article for X and failing or the guy selling one for X/10 (X divided by 10) and succeeding simply because he has a higher yield or is simply more efficient.
Free market is like natural selection: only the strong survive. If you can't make it, then good riddance. Stop polluting the gene pool and die off already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As it is now, then, but without the gatekeepers and middlemen. This is a bad thing?
"Selling for dirt cheap (or giving them away hoping they do something else profitable) gets us back to the same cycle that happened in music"
Not really, as other factors that killed music sales such as unbundling don't apply, but go on...
"Recorded music sales are way down, and remarkably, tours aren't selling out, venues are closing, and business sucks"
Oh, I see. You've taken several issues with a wide-reaching and highly varied number of reasons and tried blaming them all on one thing. The real arguments are far more complex, and your beloved industry isn't really helping, as many of the problems are caused by its own kneejerk reactions to the marketplace.
"Moreover an entire generation has been trained not the pay for music."
Which is the music industry's fault for ignoring the realities of the market and not adapting. Of course people *do* still pay for music, they're just not going to be paying for mansions for corporate hacks who churn out crap. That might be the real "problem", and if so, good riddance.
Again, the music industry has a huge number of problems, of which piracy isn't really the largest. The attempts to ignore the real problems and try to scapegoat piracy for everything is one of the major reasons they failed so badly.
"In books, it's worse - because there is no real upsell available. Authors are not out doing 20,000 seat arenas every night. Speaking tours for most have limited appeal."
Different industry, different expectations, different rules. It took morons over 10 years to understand that "leverage free" and "meet demand" didn't actually mean "sell t-shirts", so I can understand the slower-minded having problems here too. We won't wait for them to catch up, though, we'll just buy from the people who get it.
"Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there."
...and I'll be buying hundreds of those long before I buy a $20 ebook from a greedy asshole who won't charge what it's actually worth, and I rarely buy physical books at the moment. Guess which player ends up left in the game? It's not the one who refuses to sell me a cheap ebook...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That is the nature of the beast isn't it? There was once a time when authors, through a gatekeeper, had a lock on all the eyeballs. They had a guaranteed audience during that "golden" era. They could release and the publisher could "guarantee" a certain number of sales with little effort on the part of the author.
Now times have changed. The market has been opened. The gates have been torn down. Now there is real competition for authors. Now they have to fight for the eyeballs. No more free rides. It is now a survival of the fittest situation. Despite what you believe, this is actually good for authors. It forces them to not only be better writers, but also better people. More open, more accessible. More human.
End result? Recorded music sales are way down, and remarkably, tours aren't selling out, venues are closing, and business sucks. Moreover an entire generation has been trained not the pay for music.
Recorded music as in physical album sales are down. That is for sure. But over all the total music industry's revenue is growing. What has happened to legacy gatekeeper labels is that a whole lot of competition appeared over night when the internet could support the distribution of music and the income is being spread to more artists. Same thing that is happening in publishing.
Face it, there are no more free rides.
In books, it's worse - because there is no real upsell available. Authors are not out doing 20,000 seat arenas every night. Speaking tours for most have limited appeal.
Obviously, you are not creative enough. Private readings, early access, special edition copies of books, etc.
Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there.
Or people who understand economies of scale. One thing that people like you complain about is the idea of going from analog dollars to digital dimes. However, the problem with that line of thinking is that you are not thinking in scale. 10,000 digital dimes is worth a lot more that 100 analog dollars.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"What we need is less consumer choice! Some writers will just have to stop writing for the good of the book industry as a whole! The government should hand out book licenses like they hand out taxi licenses, because I am absolutely clueless about basic economic principles!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
if 'everyone' was an astronaut, then astronaut pay would be crappy...
2. i'd like to be a legacy parasite, too! why oh why don't i get paid FOREVER (plus 70 years)for all the houses, buildings, mechanical systems, subdivisions, roadways, etc i've drafted/designed over the years ? ? ? those freetards are making a mint off of *my* creative output, why don't i get royalties ? ? ?
3. i make incredible stuff out of wood (really), don't i 'deserve' to have money rain on me like katrina ? everytime one of you freeloaders uses the bowl i made, don't i 'deserve' a cut ? for, like, for-freaking-ever ?
4. and, lastly, my pet hobbyhorse i am now riding as often as possible: IF so-called intellectual property is 'valuable', they why don't the holders of said IP pay taxes on it like i do my house ? ? ? FREETARDS ! ! !
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sky must be green on your world.
If any venues are closing it's probably because collection societies are squeezing them out of the market.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes,I know, you eliminate all the middle men. But it ends up in the same place after a while - too many authors, too little space, not enough sales per author.
Selling for dirt cheap (or giving them away hoping they do something else profitable) gets us back to the same cycle that happened in music. End result? Recorded music sales are way down, and remarkably, tours aren't selling out, venues are closing, and business sucks. Moreover an entire generation has been trained not the pay for music.
In books, it's worse - because there is no real upsell available. Authors are not out doing 20,000 seat arenas every night. Speaking tours for most have limited appeal.
Dirty cheap / free is the easiest sale in the world, and that's why sellers with no imagination go there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When picking up a book by an author you've never read, it's a real gamble on whether you're going to like it or not. So in a traditional setting you read the blurb, flick through a couple of pages to see if the font doesn't hurt your eyes, put everything on black and give the wheel a spin.
Since becoming a successful author IS so difficult, maxiumum exposure is desired, and that's where ebooks can excel. Whether giving them away for free, or at a low price, there is no longer that gamble as a consumer as you 'pick up' the book.
I see your point (where publishers/editors are meant to weed out the crappy books), and it's a good debating point (too many authors, too little space). I was against ebooks for a long time mainly because I enjoy the physical feel of a book in my hands, but I've come to appreciate the value of ebooks too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yep, that's one of the things that makes me laugh. I'm much, much, more likely to try out a new author if the price is cheaper and unless I sit in the bookstore reading the first chapter (for free!!!) before I buy, I'm never going to buy an untested author blind at full price.
No, what has always happened is that I buy books by a couple of favourite authors at full price, then discover new authors second hand or borrowed. In other words, most of my methods for discovering new authors net the publisher and the author exactly $0, and always have.
Now, I load up my Kindle before trips and I don't mind checking out new authors for a reasonable price - i.e. around what I'd pay for a second hand book (usually far less than $5 US). I don't feel ripped off even if I don't care for the book once I've read it, because I've spent little money on it, and will pay more (or even buy a physical copy) for a book by the same author later if I enjoy it.
It's win/win. The publisher and author get more than they would have done otherwise (a cut of $1 will always be more than a cut of $0) and may stand to make future sales, while I get the convenience of getting books without having to drive to a store or wait for delivery.
Yet again, the arguments against ebooks are not only misguided, but seem to completely misunderstand how customers actually consume their content to begin with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MIxed feelings here
On one hand, being able to keep his cool in the face of such ridiculous mockery has got to take some superhuman effort, and for that I applaud him.
However, on the other hand the fact that he basically sat there and allowed himself to be used as a verbal punching bag like that is seriously disappointing at best.
Given the obviously hostile audience and others on the panel, he may not have gotten very far with any rebuttals, but just sitting back while the inane accusations were made just makes it look like they are actually true, and he's in no way helping himself and others by letting lies like that masquerade as truth when he could have at least tried to counter them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: MIxed feelings here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: MIxed feelings here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not an assumption as it's truly what she believes. I can't count the number of times I've run into this very thinking, and once they have it, I have to detract a bit to correct them.
I do this by stating: "So, you like making $25,000 year when your company's making millions?"
Once you tell this to people, shockingly, they shut the hell up as they realize why their only getting a cut.
It would have been interesting to see this woman's face if she had been told this and realize where her salary truly comes from.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That and a special software that electrifies the keyboard of an AC troll :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
I have read a number of books that were "professionally" edited that still contained typos, grammatical errors and even plot holes. All things that a "professional" editor is supposed to catch. Imagine if I was able to inform the authors prior to publishing. The books would have been better than they were.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
Maybe the same principle could be applied to editing books.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
I've had the same experience multiple times. I actually wrote a publisher one time to point out many errors and they sent me a copy of the book error free. On them. Which I thought was great and a very classy move on their part.
I need to check when I get home to see which publisher that was because they've done things like that with me before.
One time I purchased a book that at the halfway point restarted the entire book from the first page. Which was a huge problem, so I informed the retailer I purchased it from and asked for a refund. They declined and said, "Tough." Want another copy? Buy it again. (Which I couldn't do without risking another bad copy since it was in a pack that was wrapped with a few other books. The other 2 of which were error free.) I wrote the publisher describing the situation and I received a response within hours asking for my address so they could send me two copies for free (one for myself and one to lend to a friend to get some more fans of the series). Which again, was beyond unexpected and a very great move on their part. Or at least the part of whoever was responding to my email.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
Fast forward a few years and Feist writes a new book, set a few decades afterward, called "Wrath of the Mad God". It is chock full of plot holes, like the fact the Minwanabi are somehow back in existence, with absolutely no explanation how. Somehow, the AUTHOR wrote them back in and his editors missed that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
2. Who said anything about fans offering to pay Stephen Leather for the privilege of editing his book? Did I miss something?
3. You are saying that because you have encountered some "professionally" edited books that were edited poorly, the work of fan-editors would obviously be superior to the work of a "professional" editor. Am I correctly understanding you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
"1. I haven't written a book, but yes, I imagine the focused involvement of a professional editor in the creation of my work would be rather more valuable than "1000 people looking at [my] work for free"."
Why? If the aim is to find mistakes and suggest improvements, what can one supposedly trained professional find that 1000 literate and interested people cannot?
"2. Who said anything about fans offering to pay Stephen Leather for the privilege of editing his book? Did I miss something?"
Yes, you did.The people who would volunteer would be fans who would happily get a free book for the privilege of paying for their time, and would gladly offer it if they could improve the final product for all readers. Payment need not be in pure dollar form.
"3. You are saying that because you have encountered some "professionally" edited books that were edited poorly, the work of fan-editors would obviously be superior to the work of a "professional" editor. Am I correctly understanding you?"
I believe you're not. The point is that professional editors make mistakes - they are human, after all. Fans may make the same mistakes, but the likelihood is greater that other fans would catch the mistakes before press and thus make the end product higher quality than a single person may have been able to. Think about open source software - the fact that it's open source doesn't instantly guarantee that it's better, but neither does it make it worse. More eyeballs, the more likely it is that mistakes are found and corrected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Using fans to edit and proof-read???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Buying a home
Buying a house to use as an investment, and not as a home, is a completely different story, and IMO everyone who got burned by that got exactly what they deserved. Investing is gambling, pure and simple, and the first rule of gambling is to never bet anything you cannot afford to lose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Buying a home
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Buying a home
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Buying a home
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Buying a home
Not true. Home ownership has advantages and disadvantages, and it isn't always one-sided.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Economy
I end up spending about the same (if I cancel my library subscription) but the profit generated will be better. A larger percentage of this will go to writwers, who in turn will have to spend more time writing.
I don't really bother with the library often anymore, and especially my second hand purchases have suffered, which previously did not net the author anything.
Another change is that I almost always have most of my books with me, I read a lot more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Economy
A year ago I spent $100 on e-reader (gift-card again). Since, according to my VISA bills, I have spent $127 on books. All but one on books I have never read before - shows the power of impulse purchase only a click away.
Did authors make more money because I switched to ebooks? Quite likely. Do I care if they did? Resounding NO. I pay to be entertained and honestly couldn't care less if they can make living solely out of writing books. I may be called short-sighted or primitive, but I will only start worrying when I can no loner find a good book for a price I am willing to pay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Economy
Not that you care, but authors DO make more money on ebooks�if they're self-published.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it just me?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The publishing industry seems to be concentrating its efforts entirely on the former, then blaming the latter if it fails.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Lets get serious!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"my books are on e books. People tell me they love books for their tactile quality and their smell. I do not write to be sniffed. If I did want people sniffing my products I would be a florist"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I get the feeling book publishers must be thinking the same thing as the movie theaters. Oh no we can't possibly sell at a better price and actually make more money. On E-books its even more stupid because the cost of reproduction has to be extremely low.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This on top of the overall power costs of running a theater are enormous. Likely, the overall theater model needs to change, drastically, but until somebody figures out how that works, we're stuck with overpriced popcorn, sodas, and candy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nothing they put out matters that much to me.I do not need their stuff nor do I want it.
They are Censored from my Wallet just like they want to Censor me.
Buy & Support INDIE & Local Art.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What nonsense. She can moan all she likes, but she can't stop self-published authors from pricing their books however they want. Those authors are presumably reading and taking note of J.A. Konrath's blog posts on the matter, and pricing at $2.99 - that apparently being the price at which revenue is maximized.
It's getting to a point where it looks like wilful ignorance. The market has spoken. Authors are routinely bypassing publishers and making a nice profit on their own. It's not going to change because she, or any other publisher, wants it to change or has a couple of arguments as to why it should change. Frankly, if that's all they've got, they deserve to go out of business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For what it's worth, I was the other author on the panel, and I just wanted to add a few comments. I fully expect to get torn to shreds, but anyway.
First, maybe the odds were stacked against Leather a bit. But it was a panel about ebooks, so they had a publisher, an agent, a bookseller and two authors. I suppose I was meant to be the author 'against' ebooks or self-publishing, but I'm not really. I don't think anybody on the panel or in the audience was. The fact that Leather ended up alienating 99% of the room should tell you more about how he came across than people's attitudes to those things.
The "working for 5p a day" thing - I presume, as with most of this article, that you've read Stephen Leather's blog and are basically reviewing that, rather than the event itself. Ursula MacKenzie never said that. Opinions on this vary, but my very clear memory is that the moderator, Mark Lawson, said that, and obviously as a jokey aside, following a heated discussion on value. Leather is being disingenuous by insinuating people don't get the maths. Obviously they do. It's not exactly difficult, is it?
Last of all - because you're commenting on Leather's post, not the event itself - you've not mentioned sockpuppetry. In front of about 700 people, Leather admitted he manufactures fake online identities to create buzz around his books: interacting with him, themselves and readers, without those readers knowing those identities are not Leather himself. The audience didn't like that, for some reason. Evidence has emerged since of him bullying other self-published writers - and worse. You can read more at my blog if you want.
To me, that seems like more of a story than reproducing his blogpost for him, but obviously - since you must have done your research - you're totally fine with that kind of behaviour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That Leather engages in douchey behavior, however, doesn't affect the underlying argument (nor, I think, is there any kind of implication that it's OK).
Since you've been so kind to give us some context, I'll offer some in return. Trade groups such as the Publisher's Association have been making all kinds of nutty, angry, sky-is-falling types of arguments such as reported in this article for a long while now. In fact, what is reported here is really pretty mild compared to a lot of it. This article is, in my view, really about that more than Leather specifically.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Name that planet
You can read more on my blog too, though Steve Mosby and Jeremy Duns are really the ones you should be reading to find out the truth about what's been going on here. If you're actually interested in what's happening that is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Name that planet
This article was less about Leather and more about the PA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ideal Capitalism
Anyway, back when the internet was not yet even a dream, people realized that capitalism didn't work exactly according to theory. The problem was that in real life there are a few variables not accounted for. One of which is barrier to market entry. If i were selling hotdogs outside a sporting event, and i was the only one there, i could hypothetically charge whatever price i wanted. Someone else could see that i was making great margins from my dogs, but to join the market he would need to invest in his own hot dog cart, inventory, probably some sort of licensing, etc. In the "ideal capitalist" market there would be no barrier to entry. Maybe everyone already has a hotdog cart in their garage and hotdogs rain from the sky? It didnt make any sense, but it described the way capitalism would ideally operate. But anyway, the idea is that the easier the market is to enter the lower prices are driven until margins are in danger of vanishing, at which point no one can make a profit so people exit the market and go do something else. Selling philly cheesesteaks maybe.
anyway, just look at where the book industry is going! They may be the closest a market has ever been to being "ideal." Computers are cheap and lots of people have them anyway. You can write a book with just about only a time investment. If you distinguish yourself in the market and make a profit, bully for you! If you can't, you can keep working your day job and lose out on just about nothing.
Clearly the market operating as it WAS ALWAYS MEANT TO (but never could due to technological limitations) should not be shunned, or fought against, or legislated against. The problem is that some people made a killing in the distorted market, and the playing field becoming leveled means they will only be able to make money based on their merit. Horror!
Anyway, long story short, capitalism is at work in the book market and I say good. The only ones who will be able to survive are the extremely talented or extremely savvy, or those who are willing to write at cost to themselves with no real hope of making money solely for the love of creation. Fat cats will either join the idealized market or find another job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What he said
In the last two weeks, following Leather's admission on stage to 500 people, that he used sock-puppet accounts to promote himself, Jeremy Duns has uncovered a wealth of evidence which details numerous nefarious habits Stephen Leather possesses.
A quick look at that evidence and a rebuttal is in order I feel. Or, an acceptance that all is not as it seems, and maybe speak to someone else and get their view.
FWIW, I was in the audience at that panel. I'm a reader primarily, in my late twenties and male. I was appalled at what Leather said. He managed in the course of 20 minutes to insult readers, editors, publishers, agents, and the online community. It wasn't about ebooks, pricing or self-publishing. The people on the panel were in agreement in the main on most things. It was about Leather's personality and his choice of words.
As has been pointed out, perhaps a read of Steve Mosby's blog, or Jeremy Duns' twitter timeline for the past 10 days would be in order, for a fuller picture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Name that planet
Find it easier to get irate about meaningless sky-is-falling predictions from a talking shop than real-life fraudulent behaviour and harassment by an individual you wish to admire (because he's touting an economic model you - foolishly - think will one day reward you too)?
Fine. At least we know where you're coming from.
I love the way that people who have no experience or knowledge of the publishing industry pontificate about where it's gone wrong. You amuse us no end, honestly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Name that planet
You say it like you're some kind of fucking Borg.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not even... It's a matter of publishers overvaluing goods in order to INCREASE the margins they're accustomed to...
Once through the initial publishing phases, editing, typesetting, etc... Ebooks have a next to zero distribution cost,... No warehousing, no shipping (other than giggling electrons), and low advertising costs (what does storage space for a book's sale page run on an Amazon server, anyway?!). To tell us otherwise is pure lying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was really just passing by to correct Tim's misrepresentation of what happened on the panel, but:
"Once through the initial publishing phases, editing, typesetting, etc... Ebooks have a next to zero distribution cost,... No warehousing, no shipping (other than giggling electrons), and low advertising costs (what does storage space for a book's sale page run on an Amazon server, anyway?!)."
If you're self-publishing a .99 ebook then that storage space costs you 70% of your income, doesn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]