3 ms·

>In the case of books, you'd see that by cuts in editing, by authors shortening the amount of time that they spend writing a book, and through authors dropping

>In the case of books, you'd see that by cuts in editing, by authors shortening the amount of time that they spend writing a book, and through authors dropping out and leaving the field to less talented writers with fewer alternative income sources. I just spent $10,000 editing and producing my latest book that's going to be self-published. Comparing the royalties I'll get with self-publish (not using CreateSpace BTW, though I have no problem with them) including those fees - not even half of which would be picked up by a publisher, mind you - with a publisher who absorbs ALL of my editing/producing costs is STILL a joke. Publishers are predatory towards anyone but the somewhat-ready-to-breakout writers. They do nothing for the established writer except salve his ego and they do nothing for the startup writer who begs for help.

HelloMcFly 12y ago
I'm not a writer, so I'll defer to you on that perspective. As a reader, I love publishers and editors. I've waded into the self-published world more than most, and I don't see myself buying self-published work again in the future without significant (outlier-level) crowd-sourced reviews like Wool or The Martian.
- icelancer 12y ago
  I don't blame you. Most self-published stuff is garbage. ... Have you noticed that most PUBLISHED stuff is garbage, too?
  - HelloMcFly 12y ago
    I have noticed that the proportional amount of garbage is lower among published works, and that the resulting breadth of content is much easier to wade through to find quality content.
Shamanmuni 12y ago
It's not just a matter of how much money the writer will get. And even when talking about that, you assume that any published book will sell, and that's not true. When you publish through a publishing house, they assume the financial risk. I hope you get back your $10.000 (and much more), but it surely is not a given, most books don't sell much. It's the same situation we have with startups and VC's, the publisher can never be sure if a book by a small author will succeed before it's on the market. It's always a gamble. So they even those who succeed with those who don't. And more important, to many new and more established writers, the editors in publishing houses provide serious value in the form of advice and guidance. It's easy to think that because you read books you surely know how to write a good one. But that's similar to thinking that because you use applications you surely know how to code a good one. And lastly, good publishing houses serve as brands for consumers. People won't see a self-published technology book with the same eyes as if it was published by O'Reilly (for example). From past experiences they probably feel guaranteed of a certain level of quality from the O'Reilly book that a small lone author almost never can provide I'm not claiming that the publishing system is a panacea or that all editors are amazing. But you described it as mostly useless, bordering on a ripoff, and I think it's far from the truth.
- icelancer 12y ago
  >When you publish through a publishing house, they assume the financial risk. Of what? The cost of the books? Because advances have gone basically to zero. I was offered none. As far as your other questions: Books won't sell unless you curate an audience prior to writing it. And if you do that, the need for a publisher disappears quickly.
  - Shamanmuni 12y ago
    From what you say I assume that you think a publishing house's only job is to take your manuscript to the printer. Well, no, there's much work involved in the editing and design process prior to that. There's people working on the logistics and marketing of books. There're legal, financial, technical and administrative issues (as in any business). And paying all those, plus the books, costs money. I don't know with which publishing houses you've been in contact with, and I think most of what you say comes from a bad experience with dubious publishers. But, in a serious one you work with an editor, whose job is to read your manuscript and tell you what's good and what can be improved, and how it can be improved. A good editor with some knowledge of the field your book is about is an enormous help.
    - icelancer 12y ago
      That's the rub, isn't it? A "serious" publishing house is only attainable if you are already going to sell thousands of books, and if you are, then their services are not usually worth the cut of royalties that it costs, plus the multi-book deal you generally have to sign. It's far cheaper to contract out editing/marketing/etc to new places. James Altucher has written about this extensively, and his stuff is very widely read (certainly far more than I). Most of the publishers I've spoken with are well-regarded non-fiction houses who have done medium and big time projects. Their cut of royalties were usurious, to say the least. When I compared what I got with what I would be paying them, it was insane. That's where my perspective comes from.

HelloMcFly 12y ago

I'm not a writer, so I'll defer to you on that perspective. As a reader, I love publishers and editors. I've waded into the self-published world more than most, and I don't see myself buying self-published work again in the future without significant (outlier-level) crowd-sourced reviews like Wool or The Martian.

icelancer 12y ago
I don't blame you. Most self-published stuff is garbage. ... Have you noticed that most PUBLISHED stuff is garbage, too?
- HelloMcFly 12y ago
  I have noticed that the proportional amount of garbage is lower among published works, and that the resulting breadth of content is much easier to wade through to find quality content.

Shamanmuni 12y ago

It's not just a matter of how much money the writer will get. And even when talking about that, you assume that any published book will sell, and that's not true. When you publish through a publishing house, they assume the financial risk. I hope you get back your $10.000 (and much more), but it surely is not a given, most books don't sell much. It's the same situation we have with startups and VC's, the publisher can never be sure if a book by a small author will succeed before it's on the market. It's always a gamble. So they even those who succeed with those who don't. And more important, to many new and more established writers, the editors in publishing houses provide serious value in the form of advice and guidance. It's easy to think that because you read books you surely know how to write a good one. But that's similar to thinking that because you use applications you surely know how to code a good one. And lastly, good publishing houses serve as brands for consumers. People won't see a self-published technology book with the same eyes as if it was published by O'Reilly (for example). From past experiences they probably feel guaranteed of a certain level of quality from the O'Reilly book that a small lone author almost never can provide I'm not claiming that the publishing system is a panacea or that all editors are amazing. But you described it as mostly useless, bordering on a ripoff, and I think it's far from the truth.

icelancer 12y ago
>When you publish through a publishing house, they assume the financial risk. Of what? The cost of the books? Because advances have gone basically to zero. I was offered none. As far as your other questions: Books won't sell unless you curate an audience prior to writing it. And if you do that, the need for a publisher disappears quickly.
- Shamanmuni 12y ago
  From what you say I assume that you think a publishing house's only job is to take your manuscript to the printer. Well, no, there's much work involved in the editing and design process prior to that. There's people working on the logistics and marketing of books. There're legal, financial, technical and administrative issues (as in any business). And paying all those, plus the books, costs money. I don't know with which publishing houses you've been in contact with, and I think most of what you say comes from a bad experience with dubious publishers. But, in a serious one you work with an editor, whose job is to read your manuscript and tell you what's good and what can be improved, and how it can be improved. A good editor with some knowledge of the field your book is about is an enormous help.
  - icelancer 12y ago
    That's the rub, isn't it? A "serious" publishing house is only attainable if you are already going to sell thousands of books, and if you are, then their services are not usually worth the cut of royalties that it costs, plus the multi-book deal you generally have to sign. It's far cheaper to contract out editing/marketing/etc to new places. James Altucher has written about this extensively, and his stuff is very widely read (certainly far more than I). Most of the publishers I've spoken with are well-regarded non-fiction houses who have done medium and big time projects. Their cut of royalties were usurious, to say the least. When I compared what I got with what I would be paying them, it was insane. That's where my perspective comes from.