ESPAN

Today’s guest blogger is Knight Agency agent and YA author, Lucienne Diver. Thanks for joining us, Lucienne!

I admit that I’ve been so busy lately that I’m behind the times responding on the furor over RWA’s policy toward e-publishing.  Here, though, are my two cents, for what they’re worth.

Advances serve a very important purpose – providing something for authors to live on while they research, write and wait for publication and then for the resultant royalties to accumulate.  I can understand an organization meant to protect and educate writers advocating this system.  However, I also agree that times are changing and ventures like profit sharing arrangements and agreements by which advances are deferred or minimized in exchange for putting what would otherwise be advance money toward advertizing and promotion are equally valid.  My problem comes from both the failure to set new standards and the fact that the standards that currently exist are inconsistently applied.  E-book authors are held in a sort of limbo, where for some RWA contests they’re considered published (and therefore unable to enter in the unpublished categories) and for others they’re not (like the RITAs, I believe).  It’s an inconsistency that is very vexing.   Either the e-published writers are considered published (perhaps by some standard like a monetary minimum on royalties or recognition of their e-publisher) and granted the same considerations or they’re not and therefore don’t have their interests represented by the organization.  Like Deidre, I believe that standards should be set and that we should recognize the contribution of non-traditional publishing options.  Look at how many wonderful authors began with e-publishers—not to mention that entire genres like erotica that might not have picked up by the major houses in quite the same way if their Internet success (and thus clear cut audience) hadn’t been so apparent.  Am I, as an agent, going to advocate for the advance against royalties model for my authors?  Absolutely.  Do I recognize that there are other valid paradigms to consider which are producing professional works?  Absolutely.

I think, however, that the issue goes far beyond one writers organization’s policy.  We’re at the stage, not just in our industry but in all of them, that science fiction has long predicted—where the pace of technological advances is quickly outstripping the laws and policies to deal with them.  (Note the problems inherent in the text-to-voice function of the Kindle 2 and other devices and advertising allowed on sites where narrative or excerpts are published with no profit-sharing for the writers.)  We need to anticipate and stay ahead of the lightning-speed changes in technology and our approach to it if we’re not to be left behind.

-Lucienne Diver

Share on Facebook

Today’s guest blogger is author Shiloh Walker. Welcome, Shiloh!

I’m currently straddling a fence.  I write for four different publishers-two are print and two are epublishers.

I started out in ebooks-my first published book was from Ellora’s Cave, a book I’d written with the plan to submit to Silhouette.  It was rejected about the same time I found Ellora’s Cave.  I had been hunting for more books by a couple of authors I found in the SECRETS books by Red Sage, found some books by Angela Knight there, gobbled them down, bought more by other authors, gobbled them.

I had my rejection letter in hand and decided, I’m going to do some rewriting on this book and send it to them.  If I recall correctly, that was in late summer 2002.  I sent it in that fall and sometime later, a couple of weeks, I think, I get a response back-they wanted it.  I was happy-thrilled beyond belief.  But I had no idea just how much the decision to revamp that story was going to change my life.  I had no idea how much money I was going to make.  I had no idea what in the world I was getting into.

Epublishing has a lot of appealing options.

Epubs take a variety of story lengths-from 10k up to over 100k and everywhere in between.  You won’t find that huge variety in traditional print publishing.

Epubs, because their costs are much lower, can afford to take some risks that print publishers can’t.  If a book flops at an epub, there’s no advance the publisher has to eat and there’s no print costs the publisher has to eat, and there’s no fat pile of books to deal with, either.

Since there are fewer costs with epubs, authors get higher royalties.  In my experience, it ranges from between 35%-45% of the cover price.

If you tell stories that go a little outside of normal-say, like me, you’ve got a habit of killing husbands (fictionally-not literally), then epublishing can be a great place.

However, it’s not going to work for everybody.  Those it does work for, it doesn’t work in the same way for each of us.

Initially, I was writing and working full-time.  In 2004, I quit work and just wrote.  At that point, I was only writing for my epublishers and I had a release out about every 4-6 weeks.  You sell the most copies the month of release and keeping up a steady stream of releases those first few years is how I was able to make writing my full-time job.  It worked for me because I write fast.

It works for me now because I have a fairly substantial backlist in a short amount of time, and for epubbed authors, having a good backlist is crucial.  If you only have one or two stories out a year, it’s going to be hard to get to the point to where you can write for a living.

It works for me because I have a lot of ideas that aren’t long enough for the 90K I need for my traditional pubs.  It works for me because sometimes I write in genres that don’t sell all that great-like fantasy romance.

In the past six years, I’ve written more than fifty ebook titles.  Some are shorter stories, some are almost as long as my New York titles.  I hit EC right as they were on the cusp of becoming huge, and I hit it right when erotic romance was really starting to take off.  I started a vampire series just when the current paranormal trend was really getting big.  For me, things just fell into place all at the right time.

Epublishing can be a great outlet for a writer.  But it’s not for every writer.

If you don’t write fast, it will take a lot longer to build that backlist, and without that backlist, it will be a long time before you can even think about writing to support yourself and your family.

If you’re looking at epubs as a ‘springboard’ to print publishing, make sure you understand-that it can be a gamble.  It has worked that way for some, but it doesn’t work for everybody and it’s probably getting to the point where it’s going to be harder to use epublishing as a way to launch yourself to New York.

There’s also the ‘erotic’ aspect.  The ebooks that sell the best are erotic romance.  I believe I’d heard that inspirational romances in ebook are starting to get bigger, but the bottom line, if you’re looking at things from a financial perspective, the money lies in erotic romance.  So if you don’t write erotic, epubs might not be your best route.

Right now, epubs serve a different purpose for me than they did a few years ago.  Since I’m writing for Berkley and Ballantine, I focus my longer books for them.  Anything over 90K, I keep for that venue.  But a lot of the stuff I write is shorter-I couldn’t make it 90k without padding and over-inflating and basically ruining the book.  So those shorter works, I write with the goal of putting them with my epubs.  That keeps my name ‘current’ for the readers, continues to build my backlist, and sometimes, those ebooks are a refreshing change of pace.  The intensity and pressure from deadlines aren’t as present, for me, with epublishing.

Writing for both works-for me.  It works for others.  Maybe it can work for you.  Or maybe you just want to wade into the ebook waters first.  Whichever it is, if you’re interested in pursuing epublishing, make sure you go into with your eyes wide open.  Do your research, figure out what your writing goals and decide if you can maintain the pace needed to build up a backlist and establish a reader base.

It can be one hell of a ride.  But it can also be a rough one at times, especially if you have unrealistic expectations. If you research and prepare, it can smooth out some of those bumps.

Shiloh Walker

http://shilohwalker.com

Share on Facebook

Today’s guest blogger is Tina Burns, publisher, Liquid Silver Books. Thanks for joining us, Tina!

When ESPAN first approached me to reply to the Pershing/Knight RWA discussion I was excited, I had good stuff to say on the subject. A week later, the stuff has been said. Angela, Raelene, and Treva hit their hammers well on the proverbial nails.  Author upon author posted their well thought out and emotional opinions.  What more could I have to say?

I researched the parallelism of what we’re going through now as an industry (print and digital) to the music or gaming industry, neither of which I have a good depth of knowledge to sound like I know what I’m taking about.  I could rehash topics the other ladies brought up. Hours later, still at an impasse, I remembered that I’d already responded in a single comment, so I went to re-read what I’d written.  And found my topic.

My quote: RWA does nothing for me as a publisher. It’s an AUTHOR organization.

The more I thought about this statement I made (yes, in the heat of a personal/semi-professional moment), the more I began to realize that I was wrong (strange I know, but it does happen).  RWA does affect me as a publisher, because it affects my authors. But let’s broaden this out; it’s not just about LSB.

• Authors are limited or banned in entering RWA sanctioned contests because they are epublished.
• Authors are limited in the status recognitions they can receive from RWA because they’re epublished.
• Authors are limited or banned from contributing to RWA functions because they’re epublished.
• RWA authors join epublishers with unethical business practices because of lack of available education on epublishing.
• Epublishers are limited or banned from contributing/participating to RWA functions, circling back to lack of education on epublishing industry.

If there’s all these “can’ts” and “NOs” from RWA in regards to epublishing, why would an RWA author want to contract with an epublisher?  Why would an author want to write to her (or his, no bias here) best ability and strive for a top seller at an epublisher that they can’t enter a contest they’ve dreamed of entering since they put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard)? There are many more “why’s” to this equation but I want to bring it closer to home for me again.

CONFESSION TIME:

Seven years ago, I wouldn’t even touch a book with romance in it, or on it with a ten foot pole. (…and a collective gasp was heard through the crowd) As a reader, I was “better” than that. Yet in looking back at my reading habits at the time, I always felt there was something missing from them.  The sci-fi books would have been better but I couldn’t put my finger on why.  The thriller just didn’t cut the mustard. The satires had no satisfaction. Thank the heavens I decided to take a chance on a book** that knocked my arrogant opinion upside the head; otherwise I’d still be that stodgy ol’ reader sneering at the “bodiced heroines”.  That chance led to another romance book, to another romance author, to a new way of reading books (on my computer), to a job as a proofreader, to writing four romance books, to eventually becoming the Publisher of one of the top epublishers in the market today.  All that happened to lil’ ol’ me from taking that one small step; how much of an impact can we have on our future as a whole?

That’s what this should be about: taking chances, education, rallying the troops to help all involved, from aspiring authors, epubbed authors, print authors, RWA board members to work together to bring this industry, the only thriving book industry, into the future.

I want my authors to be happy with their choice of Liquid Silver Books as a publisher. I want all authors to be happy with their choice to epublish. It shouldn’t be something they have to hide; epublishing shouldn’t be anyone’s skeleton in a closet. Write what you love, write for who you want, write for you.  Educate yourself, your fellow RWA members. Work and strive for equality for your writing.

Tina Burns

Publisher

Liquid Silver Books

**Never Too Much by Lori Foster

Share on Facebook

Today’s guest blogger is Treva Harte, from digital publisher Loose Id.

As the cleanup hitter (which would be scary except the previous blog articles have already hit home runs) I want to discuss viewing e-publishing with a career focused eye and add a few things to what Deidre, Angela and Raelene have already discussed.

Electronic publishing is or soon will become part of any professional romance author’s career focus for the following reasons:

–Anything in a professional writer’s contract, including distribution of e-rights, is of interest to the professional signing that contract.

–Traditional print publishing companies are now including e-books as part of their releases and are looking at how electronic publishing models can change their industry.

–Electronic publishing can create new markets for mainstream print and give authors who know that market an “in” when print publishers want authors to deliver that product.

–Romance writers, should they choose to e-publish, can make money and have a writing career.

I emphasized the last point because the benefits of e-publishing which were previously touched on – ability to take on new authors and/or risky stories, less stress, monthly paychecks, backlists, easier submissions process, shorter time to publication, possible print – are absolutely true.  But making money—either short or long term—is a consideration.

All authors invest in whatever publisher they publish a story with.  Their stories are intellectual property and the smart author does his or her best to sell that property to the right market.

All publishers invest in authors, whether the publisher pays an author an advance or a royalty check. An author focused on a career will check on how any publisher will invest in him or her before signing a contract. An accessible, attractive, professional website, an understandable submissions process, books that come out regularly and on schedule, responsible, knowledgeable editors who work closely with authors, providing advertising in many venues, offering carefully constructed legal contracts, and, of course, giving regular royalties are all signs that the company takes pride in its reputation and is going to invest time, effort and money in its authors. Before a manuscript is released the publisher should have paid for cover art, multiple rounds of edits and quite possibly advertising. (Loose Id even has an Author Development Editor to help authors before they formally submit stories to us.) After publication most e-publishers send out books for review and provide other marketing such as scheduled chats on author and reader lists. Wise publishers offer as many avenues to help their authors as they can since they are in partnership with the author to have their books succeed and to have author careers grow.

I have no desire to tell RWA how best to conduct its mission. My own mission is to continue to help run a very profitable business in a way that is best for Loose Id and our authors. It’s unlikely RWA will affect the company’s or the e-publishing industry’s growth if it ignores us, as mentioned in a previous blog.

I might suggest, however, that a thoughtful e-publishing education for those who have a writing career is important to the membership of RWA and will affect them, whether or not RWA takes on that mission.  The e-publishing industry would be happy to assist you and any other organization who chooses to meet that challenge because we want informed, aware authors in our community and the writing community as a whole. It’s part of our investment in authors. I’m sure that RWA wants to invest in having informed, aware authors as well.

- Treva Harte, publisher, Loose Id

Share on Facebook

Today’s guest blogger is Raelene Gorlinsky, Ellora’s Cave publisher.

ESPAN asked for an upbeat and positive article about e-publishing, so let’s chat a bit about why you as an author may want—or not want—to consider submitting books to an e-publisher.

For me, the major issue with RWA’s stance on e-publishing is that they are saying there is only one “right” way—only one publishing model that is fair to authors. I think authors are intelligent business people who deserve information on the benefits and risks of all the options available, and can then make their own choices for their career.

Remember, this is not an either/or situation. A great story is a great story, regardless of format. And digital is not going to replace print; there will be readers for both. You can have books at both primarily print houses and at e-publishers. (And with either, your book is most likely to at some point be available in both digital and print formats.) You have the opportunity to individually evaluate which path is likely to be best for you and for each book you write—and the answer will not only be different author by author, but may vary for different books from the same author.

So let’s take a look at some of the reasons you as an author should consider to go the e-publishing route. You must evaluate if or how each of these fits into your career plan.

E-publishers are more able to take a chance on new authors or risky stories. That gives you more freedom to write the type of story you want, reach niche markets and subgenres.

It all comes down to the business reality of “Can we sell enough copies of this book to cover costs and make a profit?” The massive advantage of e-publishing is that we can take chances on books that the big print publishers won’t touch. If you’ve got to sell minimum 10,000 or so copies of a mass market paperback to make a profit, and have to commit money up front (an advance) to the author that the book may never earn, then of course a sensible publisher only wants books aimed at the middle-of-the-road majority, ones they feel are a “sure thing”.

E-pubs will look at the advantages of a great book aimed at a small niche market or by an unknown author with a quirky style or in a chancy sub-genre that is just reaching for popularity. An e-publisher can cover costs on a much smaller number of sales, and so is willing to take the risk of offering opportunities to authors that big publishers won’t give them. (Remember, NY rejected erotic romance until e-pubs had built up the reader market for it and turned it into a successful genre with big sales.)

More flexibility in story lengths.

Print publication requires some physical size and pricing considerations. Readers just don’t perceive a book with a quarter-inch width to be value for the money (unless it’s a free promo item). So short stories and novellas have to be batched into anthologies for print. And a publisher can sell only so many anthologies, meaning the available slots are very limited. They also recognize that many readers won’t pay for a full anthology book if they don’t love all the authors contained.

But a digital book can be any length, and can be priced accordingly. And readers seem to love buying individual short stories. So there is a huge market within e-publishing for that shorter story that NY has no space for.

A monthly paycheck.

No, most e-pubs do not routinely offer advances. But most pay royalties monthly (a few quarterly, I’ve heard), based on actual sales. Many authors feel they manage better with a steady income rather than a big chunk once or twice a year. Or they want a combination—most of the Ellora’s Cave authors who’ve now sold to traditional NY pubs are continuing to write for EC for that very reason. They’ve told me they want or need that monthly “paycheck” from their e-pub to carry them between advances from NY.

Less stress due to being able to work at your own pace, fewer deadlines.

Submission process is easier, cheaper, generally faster. Doesn’t require an agent.

Being able to get published more quickly, and have more books come out in a shorter period of time—thereby building your name recognition and fan base.

Backlist, backlist, backlist!

An e-book doesn’t go “out of print” until the contract expires (if ever), unlike print books that disappear from the store shelves within a few months and are not available anywhere once the print run is sold out. New fans of an author purchase backlist heavily, so the story generates continuing income. Many an e-pubbed author is making more from backlist than frontlist.

Many e-publishers also eventually issue some or all of their books in print.

So, again, it isn’t an “either/or” choice—just a choice of where your book starts.

So make your decisions based on what is right for your career and your life. There is no need for “us” versus “them” in the publishing industry. It’s all “we.”

Raelene Gorlinsky, Publisher
Ellora’s Cave Publishing Inc.
http://redlinesanddeadlines.blogspot.com

Share on Facebook

I want to thank ESPAN for inviting me to post here and believing that I was the right person to respond to some of the points in Ms. Pershing’s Friday post. However, after some thought and further conversation with Kristen Painter, I’ve realized that I’m not the right person to do so because there is no one person who can speak for an entire industry or organization. In looking around the internet, at various blogs, forums, Twitter, and groups, hundreds of you have already spoken out and many have done so eloquently and passionately, with facts about your business and careers for anyone who cares to listen.

Not only do I believe I’m not the right person because I’m only one person, but also because RWA is not an organization for publishers but is an organization for authors. Despite the fact that I’ve done much to educate authors over the years, not solely about my publisher but about epublishing in general in a fair, pragmatic, cautionary, balanced and non-cheerleading type of way, the fact remains that I work from a publisher point of view and am not unbiased. Inside the community of writers and authors, however, epublished authors and publishers hope that RWA will step in and provide further education.  I respect the work RWA has done at both a national and local level in the past and hope they will recognize the evolving publishing climate and move to work with a growing segment of authors within a new publishing model.

Because, however much I believe in RWA as an organization for authors, and appreciate the spirit of author advocacy in which they operate and have set its current standards we—by which I mean epublishers like the one I currently work for—are operating as legitimate businesses with a committed business model and we have no intention of changing that business model to suit the demands of some who wish to will it away..

In truth, we have said from the beginning that the epublishing business model is not one suited to every author nor every publisher. But it’s not a model that’s going to disappear. While I thoroughly enjoy attending romance and writing related conferences, my other passion is the broader scope conferences that examine the crossroads of publishing and current technology, like the O’Reilly Tools of Change in Publishing, BEA, Digital Book 2009 sponsored by IDPF and others. It’s at these conferences that we learn that publishers throughout the industry are exploring alternate models of operating in order to continue to grow, stay in business and/or continue publishing and producing within the various genres. And let’s be frank: these conferences are not inexpensive, and the individuals who present and share their knowledge are not unknowns. Technology and publishing—dare I say, digital publishing—is not a niche market or even a new market. These conferences would not exist nor sell out if the subjects addressed weren’t crucial to the publishing community.

Because I see that cooperative commitment to education and exploration of the terrain of digital technology and publishing at conferences (as well as on online discussions at blogs and Twitter from non-romance publishers) I am sorry that the RWA national board, with Ms. Pershing as spokesperson, has chosen to take the most recent stance on epublishing. Not because that validation is necessary for publishers to continue operating, but because this is a model of publishing that RWA can learn about and educate their membership about proactively, in preparation for a constantly evolving publishing landscape, which is going to include this business model on some scale.

I have always been honest in my presentations, both online and in person, about the state of epublishing. The business model is one that makes it easy for any person with a computer (or access to one at their local library), a website and some content to open an epublisher. Indeed, as in any business, there are those who will take advantage of authors, have questionable clauses in their contracts, and generally not “do right” by the author and their works.

There are those within the RWA who would include the no (or token) advance portion of the business model as an indication of nefarious intent, but it is not. It is different, yes, and it is an integral part of the business model that allows a variety of books, authors, genres, word counts and story ideas to be published.

The enthusiastic interest and reception editors and publishers from various epublishers have received at the local chapter and specialty chapter levels has demonstrated there is an interest and belief in epublishing from many authors. One indication of this has been the sheer volume of attendance at the workshops on epublishing I, and others, have presented over the years, whether at RWA Nationals in 2008, or as recently as this month at the Lori Foster Get Together, where, at a conference of approximately 300 people, at least 50 people tried to attend the workshop I presented on epublishing (I say tried because the hotel didn’t have a conference room big enough to accommodate the workshop and it was standing room only so we had many people unable to get in). In other words, at a conference held by an established author for NY, nearly 20% wanted more information on the epublishing model—and of those who could attend, all sat through a two-hour workshop on the subject on a Saturday morning at a conference designed for a casual get together, not a workshop-oriented day. The interest is real.

Whether or not RWA makes epublishers “eligible” at the national level, the epublishing business will continue as usual, and authors will continue to seek out and show interest in epublishing. In fact, RWA’s position to choose not to educate its members at the national level harms its membership and fosters an environment ripe for any person interested in taking advantage of authors or in operating as an “author mill”. Because, if all of epublishing was truly out to operate dishonestly, the less education out there, the easier the mark. Indeed, in that case, it would behoove epublishers to either remain silent—or encourage RWA at the national level to continue on their current course—rather than offering education and continuing to campaign for awareness within RWA, as a number of editors/epublishers have done.

Moreover, these same epublishers wouldn’t offer workshops online and at conferences, or write articles and blog posts about publishing, the craft of writing, promotion and other educational topics because they would not want authors to have access to any information that might increase their awareness of contracts or anything to do with the business of publishing..

Despite claims or accusations to the contrary, any interest I have shown in RWA understanding epublishing’s business model or any efforts I’ve made to educate authors on the same come not through an attempt to become an RWA eligible publisher but because I am intimately aware of the pitfalls of epublishing. I understand that it’s not for everyone and I acknowledge that there are less-than-reputable publishers operating and that there are things that could be done better. I believe most anyone who works within epublishing will acknowledge the imperfections and pitfalls. However, these imperfections occur in all levels of publishing, not just epublishing, and those same imperfections are the reason why RWA has been a vital and important part of so many authors’ careers—for their ability to advocate for and educate authors.

It’s for this reason that I hope, no I challenge RWA to not turn its back at a national level on authors who want to start a career, pursue a career or continue a career within the publishing world that includes epublishing. These authors are looking for leaders in an organization that will advocate for them in a variety of publishing settings, a variety of word counts and a variety of genres. I believe RWA can be this organization, because its members are already doing this at some local and specialty levels. This isn’t about recognizing publishers, because the publishers aren’t the heart and soul of this incredible organization. We will continue to advocate for ourselves within our business model whether or not we are RWA eligible. It’s about recognizing authors, who want to pursue their passion and love of writing and shape it into a career, as being as needful and deserving of advocacy whether they choose a traditional path or one less traveled.

- Angela James, Executive Editor, Samhain Publishing

Share on Facebook

Thank you, Deidre, for your thoughts on how RWA might improve.  And thank you, Kristen, for inviting me to answer some of Deidre’s points on this chapter’s web site.

First let me correct some misinformation.  There was a rumor flying around the internet a couple of weeks ago and repeated in Deidre’s blog: << That disappointment intensified recently when it became apparent that RWA had not only neglected to plan a single digital workshop for this summer’s annual convention, but had refused to allow one of the industry’s best e-publishers the chance to officially discuss their program.  I believe both situations reveal that the organization is not keeping pace with current trends in the industry.>>

Here is the actual story: Out of 400 workshop proposals this year, only two focused on digital publishing; one was deemed by the Workshop Committee to not be of the caliber needed, the other was by Deidre’s publisher, Samhain, which is not on the list of RWA Eligible Publishers (From RWA’s Policy and Procedure Manual, section 1.17. “Eligible Publisher” means a romance publisher that has verified to RWA in a form acceptable to RWA, that it: …..(3) provides advances of at least $1,000 for all books; and (4) pays all authors participating in an anthology an advance of at least $500).  RWA policy prohibits a non-Eligible publisher from offering a workshop.

There is, however, a history of RWA attempting to present digital publishing information at conference: Last year, RWA brought in a highly qualified speaker, Michael Smith, Executive Director of the International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF) to speak at the PRO Retreat. The attendance at this session was extremely low. It is impossible to justify the expense of providing qualified speakers if members aren’t interested in attending the sessions.  This year, RWA has asked a literary attorney to hold a session on “What Authors Should Know About Their Digital Rights.” The staff has not yet received a response.  They are, however, still trying to put together a panel on digital publishing, but only if it can offer in-depth and unbiased information.

Deidre writes:  << I would also like to note that in Diane Pershing’s recent RWR letter she stated that RWA must consider the needs of all its members.  I find that logic flawed because by insisting that e-published authors aren’t legitimate, haven’t achieved a recognizable benchmark—and that their publishers aren’t legitimate either—RWA is by default only representing the needs of a portion of the membership.  No wonder valuable, talented members are leaving the organization or discussing doing so.>>

This is upside-down logic.  E-published authors are only one segment of RWA’s 10,000-member population.  What of the huge majority that constitutes the rest of the membership?  I stand by my original assertion that by governing in the interest of all its members and not the few, RWA is doing its fiduciary duty.  As for members leaving and/or threatening to leave, I have been in RWA for 19 years and on the board for five.  Each year members threaten to leave because they are displeased with something.  Some do; most don’t.  No organization can make everyone happy, but RWA goes on, no matter what.

About my June column: I wrote it in the spirit of offering information on how the board makes decisions, not ammunition in a war of words.  I have received quite a lot of  support for it, from members both unpublished, print-published and even digitally published, and from the industry itself.  Obviously that was not the opinion of some,  who felt attacked.  It’s always amazing how two, three, or four people can see the same words strung together and come away with totally different reactions.  As I wrote, all of us look at any situation through our own, subjective pair of glasses. There are several pairs of glasses through which to view RWA and its attitude toward digital publishing.

Deidre wears two pair of glasses.  The first point of view is that of an author whose publisher is unhappy, an author who thinks RWA is preventing her from entering the RITA contest.  RWA is doing no such thing. Of 1,112 entries in this year’s RITA contest, 64 entries were published by small (non-NY) publishers.  34 of the entries were from publishers whose primary format is print. The remaining 30 entries were from publishers whose format is primarily electronic, Deidre’s publisher being one of these.

Deidre is also speaking as an agent, a successful agent who has taken on some digitally-published authors and negotiated nice contracts with print publishers for them, precisely because of the following and name recognition they achieved through digital publishing.  I went to the Knight Agency Web site where recent sales and great deals for their clients are rightly trumpeted.  These deals were with a number of publishers, but I didn’t see one primarily digital publisher on that list. Does she represent any authors who are remaining in the digital format and not moving over to print?

There are a number of other points of view among digitally published authors.  They fall into several groups, from those who have signed with a publisher who basically runs an author mill (lots of authors signed, publisher cleans up because of quantity, authors earn out very little if anything) to the top two or three digital publishers. This group has expressed quite a variety of demands:  (1) Some feel that because they have signed a book contract, they should be eligible to enter the RITA and join PAN, and they want their publisher to have a spotlight at conference.  (2) Others believe everyone who has signed with a publisher should be eligible to enter the RITA, but do understand the restrictions of PAN.  (3) Others want their own contest, something between the RITA and the Golden Heart.  (4) Another group wants to be able to enter the Golden Heart because they are not yet eligible for PAN.  (5) And still others totally support the point of view that they see themselves as having achieved a certain rung up on a ladder, with more rungs to climb.  They see their careers in digital publishing as a stepping stone, a way to gather experience and readership while they wait for the rewards at the top of the ladder.

Many voices, many views.  The board will be discussing all of this at the board table in July, by the way, and members are, as always, invited to drop in and observe the meeting.

Here’s another pair of glasses: The newer members, not yet PRO, but working on their craft and trying to learn all they can about the industry.  And how about the unpublished-but-working-on-it PRO members who have chosen not to go the digital route and keep submitting to print publishers, as they feel that is their best chance of earning good money? Lastly, there are PAN members who have been print-published recently or for years, who like their “advance-paying/lower royalty rate” choice, who look at the business model of “no advance/high royalty rate,” and have trouble understanding why anyone would gamble that way with a book that took so much time and effort.

10,000 members, all with different, subjective points of view.  RWA represents them all.

Deidre writes: <<Incidentally, remember that an advance is against royalties, a prepayment of income that will flow to the author.  It’s not a flat payment that implies the promise of promotion or publicity. It is money the publisher is largely confident they will recoup from sales, therefore it represents very little risk.>>

Actually, it implies that the publisher believes enough in the book that it is sure it will recoup its investment.  When there is no investment, that phrase, “a prepayment of income that will flow to the author,” is invalidated.  Will any income flow to the author?  Ever?  An advance is a guarantee that, no matter what happens with the book, there will be payment to the author for her work.

Deidre writes: << RWA’s current stance on e-books is that a publisher must offer at least a $1,000 advance in order to qualify for legitimacy.>>

What is meant by “legitimacy?”  Members in PAN?  Since July 1, 2007 RWA has added 316 new members to PAN. 75 authors’ qualifying titles were published by small, non-NY publishing companies. 19 of the 75 qualified with books by publishers whose primary form of publication is print. Of the remaining 56, 37 qualified with books published by either Samhain, Loose ID, or Ellora’s Cave, which leaves a total of 19 authors who qualified for PAN with other electronic presses.  Does legitimacy mean number of entries in the RITA contest?  See above for stats on that.

Is Deidre again talking about that comped workshop space at conference? I am curious as to why digitally published authors fight so hard for their publishers’ rights, but fight so little for their own.  But let’s go back to that conference again.

There are hundreds of publishers whose business model is to make money by signing many authors and selling small quantities of each book. This model does not produce significant income for any author. There are other publishers who do a much better job with regard to acquiring and editing the books, but publish almost exclusively in electronic format.  For every author who does well under the “no advance/higher royalty rate”  business plan, there are many more who earn very little money because  of the limited distribution channels and lack of impulse buys.

All digital publishers are not created equal.  As recently as 2007, one start-up digital publisher filed for bankruptcy after acquiring the works of an estimated 154 RWA members, and in 2006, two individuals completely unknown to RWA set up a table near registration and started pitching their publishing company to RWA conference attendees. Authors were harmed by the actions of both companies. In response, RWA consulted with its attorneys, and RWA’s Executive Director spent hours corresponding with authors and publishers in hopes of having rights reverted to authors.

Whether intended or not, publishers receive tacit endorsement by being featured at RWA’s conference. Most conference attendees expect RWA to help them navigate the path to publication. RWA has limited workshop space available and therefore must limit free workshop space and access to RWA members at appointments to those publishers that offer a minimum advance for every author. It is the only means of assuring every single one of the authors will realize income from signing with that publisher. RWA’s mission and tax-exempt purpose relate to the business of writing, i.e. the commercial exploitation of an author’s intellectual property. Why would an organization that advocates for authors’ careers encourage its members to relinquish rights without minimum compensation? I must also wonder why an agent would support the practice.

No publisher is banned from conference. Those who cannot offer the basic minimum to meet RWA standards to all authors may still attend. However, they must pay the registration fee and make their own arrangements for space to meet with authors.

Deidre writes: << For instance, HarperStudio has created an initiative whereby authors will forego advances and traditional royalties in favor of a fifty-fifty profit share.  No advance, no returns, and a larger share of royalties… perhaps RWA will soon feel the need to denounce   Harper Collins.>>

Nope, not denouncing Harper Collins at all, but consider the authors they will be asking to join this initiative—established print authors with reputation and readership.  A no-advance model, even a 50-50 model will always benefit those at the top.  Brad Pitt can work for no upfront money and accept a nice piece of the net profits of his next film, but what about the actor in the same film with three lines?  He’s still considered a pro, has his SAG card.  Is he to work for no money?  How will he live?  After all the percentages have been counted, he has a really good chance of getting nothing at all.

What does RWA do with all of the authors not at the top of the ladder, who are not published by the top two or three digital publishers?  For authors who have slaved away for years on their books and then sold them to digital publishers and who get nearly no recognition, sales or financial return, who else will speak for them if RWA does not?

Deidre writes: <<RWA’s position makes me wonder if they’re unaware that New York publishers are now paying 1/3 of the “advance” upon publication? Or sometimes even later than that, since with some hard cover contracts, that last 1/3 or ¼ isn’t paid until a year after publication? And sometimes it’s not even until the paperback version is published? To translate, the traditional definition of an “advance” has changed so drastically that it amazes me that RWA would continue to use it as the only measure of validity.>>

Actually, the RWA board’s published members have not experienced receiving any part of their advance a year *after* publication, but thank you, Deidre, for bringing it to the board’s attention.  The office will follow up on this.  Even so, most career-focused authors have books in various stages of completion and publication, so there is a steady flow of money to them.  And whenever the money does get there, there will be money, in the thousands of dollars.  It is guaranteed.  Can the same be said for the digital model?

She writes: <<Meanwhile, let’s talk about RWA’s position that e-published authors who make more than $1,000 in royalties are a rare exception.  As an agent, I have seen a fair number of statements for clients writing for Ellora’s Cave and Samhain.  The majority of these writers have passed that $1000 benchmark within the first few months.  I’m sure some of the smaller e-publishers sell fewer copies of titles, but lumping all e-publishers together and stating that most of their authors don’t earn $1,000 a title is misleading>>

Deidre wants Ellora’s Cave and Samhain to be treated differently, their authors treated differently, because many may actually be earning money with this business model (although, from the new PAN applications, it doesn’t seem that the “majority” of authors at either publisher is doing as well as Deidre claims).  She is arguing for an exception to be made for these two publishers, one of which happens to be hers.  And you know what?  If I wrote for either house I would most likely feel the same way. But if many are already eligible for PAN and many can enter the RITA, what are we talking about?  That “legitimacy” again?  That comped workshop space at conference?

Here’s where I don the pair of glasses of president of RWA, which offers a different point of view.  RWA issues a challenge to Ellora’s Cave and Samhain:  Pay your authors a minimum $1000 advance against royalties.  If they’re already doing so well, you will lose nothing.  You will be showing good faith in the authors you sign that you believe in them and their potential.  And Romance Writers of America will be thrilled to accept Samhain’s digital workshop proposal for next year and offer comped workshop space and editor appointments for both publishers—and any others who accept this challenge—at next year’s conference in Nashville.

Deidre writes: <<If RWA truly wants to protect authors, then it’s time to join the 21^st century, where the rules of the digital market are changing daily>> and <<RWA, protect your membership by becoming innovative and fully educated about the changing face of digital publishing.>>

Actually, RWA is quite happily ensconced in the 21^st century.  Everyone on the board of directors studies the market, reads online and print journals.  RWA’s staff keeps the board apprised of everything in the industry that’s happening on a regular basis, including in the digital market.  Decisions are based not on a market that’s “changing daily,” but on the most reliable information, supported by facts, rather than anecdote.

Up until a few years ago, print publishing was pretty much the only game in town.  RWA has adapted to the rise of digital publishing in a steady and, yes, careful manner (broadening PAN and RITA entry requirements, all First Sales reported in the RWR, etc.); it is not adapting quickly enough for some, but RWA does not and should not ever move more quickly than is prudent.  With any proposed change, it is the responsibility of the board and staff to gather input and data from a variety of sources, after which there are task forces and/or committees formed to study the results and make suggestions.  These suggestions are discussed and debated at the board table for hours, passed on to RWA’s lawyer if necessary, checked against Bylaws and the Policy and Procedure Manual, all before any final decision can be made.  A board of directors has a fiduciary duty to act in what it believes is the best interest of the organization.

The Association of American Publishers estimates total Net Sales for all books in 2008 at $24.3 billion.  That study also indicates that e-book sales increased by 68.4%. There is no doubt that the growth is impressive.  However, the study also shows that, even though the segment is growing rapidly, it still represents less than 2% ($113 million) of total book sales, in all categories.  http://www.publishers.org/main/IndustryStats/documents/S12008Final.pdf.

RWA is aware that technology will make the future of publishing more and more dependent on the digital model; not only does it conserve paper and is more portable, but younger readers, used to cell phone and lap tops and every new gadget, will, as they age, bring those preferences with them.  There is no doubt that we are currently and for the future in the age of electronic delivery of product.  RWA is not trying to stem the tide; it is advocating for fair treatment for its members.

Calling RWA out of step with the times because it does not think the “no advance/high royalty rate” business model is fair to all its authors is a rather narrow way to define the organization.  Just because something is currently popular with those who have chosen to embrace it doesn’t make it necessarily right.  Or wrong, either.  Time alone will tell, and, in time, RWA will make any changes necessary to further the professional interests of its members.  That’s what RWA is all about.

The publishing industry is in a constant struggle to survive, authors’ numbers dip and rise and dip again; they are dropped, they are signed, and nothing is ever certain.  This is why RWA must be a strong and loyal advocate for them.  RWA believes it is crucial to stand firm in our conviction that an author has a right to guaranteed payment for her work.

Thank you for this chance to respond.

Diane Pershing

Share on Facebook

Hi, Kristen Painter, ESPAN president here. After RWA president Diane Pershing’s letter in the June RWR, I had a conversation about RWA’s stance on epublishing with my good friend, talented author, and owner of The Knight Agency, Deidre Knight. She had so much wisdom and industry information to bring to the topic that I asked her to guest blog here at ESPAN. This is what she had to say…

Many of you know me as founder of the Knight Agency, which represents a powerhouse roster of bestselling authors of fiction and nonfiction.  Some of you may also be familiar with my romance novels, such as the recently released RED KISS (Signet) or the e-book, BUTTERFLY TATTOO (Samhain, 4/09). Since I come from the perspective of dual publishing careers, I’d like to address some of the recent issues and discussions within RWA concerning digital publishers.

Perhaps it’s the very fact that I’ve spent the past thirteen years championing writers in a wide variety of genres, and especially those of women’s fiction and romance, that RWA’s missteps regarding e-publishing have been so frustrating  to witness.  That disappointment intensified recently when it became apparent that RWA had not only neglected to plan a single digital workshop for this summer’s annual convention, but had refused to allow one of the industry’s best e-publishers the chance to officially discuss their program.  I believe both situations reveal that the organization is not keeping pace with current trends in the industry.

RWA’s current stance on e-books is that a publisher must offer at least a $1,000 advance in order to qualify for legitimacy.  Never mind that many digital authors far exceed that amount in royalties, or sell more than 5,000 copies of print editions of their e-published titles. The problem with RWA’s simplistic criteria is that it ignores one crucial fact.  Our industry is changing radically, with traditional publishers seeking innovative models for overhauling their distribution and content.

For instance, HarperStudio has created an initiative whereby authors will forego advances and traditional royalties in favor of a fifty-fifty profit share.  No advance, no returns, and a larger share of royalties… perhaps RWA will soon feel the need to denounce HarperCollins.

Incidentally, remember that an advance is against royalties, a prepayment of income that will flow to the author.  It’s not a flat payment that implies the promise of promotion or publicity.  It is money the publisher is largely confident they will recoup from sales, therefore it represents very little risk.

I say this to counter RWA’s claim that e-publishers do not invest in or take risks on their authors because they don’t pay advances.  In short, RWA dismisses e-publishers’ validity, despite the fact that they pay four times as much in royalties, simply based on the timing of their payments. RWA’s position makes me wonder if they’re unaware that New York publishers are now paying 1/3 of the “advance” upon publication? Or sometimes even later than that, since with some hard cover contracts, that last 1/3 or ¼ isn’t paid until a year after publication? And sometimes it’s not even until the paperback version is published? To translate, the traditional definition of an “advance” has changed so drastically that it amazes me that RWA would continue to use it as the only measure of validity.

Meanwhile, let’s talk about RWA’s position that e-published authors who make more than $1,000 in royalties are a rare exception.  As an agent, I have seen a fair number of statements for clients writing for Ellora’s Cave and Samhain.  The majority of these writers have passed that $1,000 benchmark within the first few months. I’m sure some of the smaller e-publishers sell fewer copies of titles, but lumping all e-publishers together and stating that most of their authors don’t earn $1,000 a title is misleading.  It’s like comparing royalties earned at St. Martin’s Press to those from a tiny print publisher of romances. All print publishers are not created equally any more than all digital publishers are.

If RWA truly wants to protect authors, then it’s time to join the 21^st century where the rules of the digital market are changing daily.  As I write this, a new initiative between Scribd.com and Simon and Schuster was just announced, a partnership to bring digital content to members of this emerging community. Considering the priority that print publishers are obviously placing on developing digital content, for RWA to disavow e-publishers is a disservice to all their members.

RWA, protect your membership by becoming innovative and fully educated about the changing face of digital publishing.  Start sending a board member to events such as the recent http://www.idpf.org/ Expo.  Seek input from agents and publishers (which, to my knowledge, you have not done—at least on the digital front that we are discussing.)  Create a specific board position, someone who can serve as digital liaison, much like there is a chapter liaison or PRO liaison.

I’m concerned by the emerging culture of elitism that I and many other RWA members see.  RWA has drawn a line in the sand that is clearly hurtful, and serves to alienate and exclude a growing sector of their membership.  The organization seems more concerned with being proven correct than in honoring the needs and feelings of an ever-expanding portion of their membership.

I would also like to note that in Diane Pershing’s recent RWR letter she stated that RWA must consider the needs of all its members.  I find that logic flawed because by insisting that e-published authors aren’t legitimate, haven’t achieved a recognizable benchmark—and that their publishers aren’t legitimate either—RWA is by default only representing the needs of a portion of the membership.  No wonder valuable, talented members are leaving the organization or discussing doing so.

Consider, too, that e-publishing can be a tremendous beginning point for many authors, leading to even bigger careers with mainstream publishers.  Within my own agency, I signed on e-authors such as Rhyannon Byrd, Dakota Cassidy, and Joey Hill, and in each instance, their track record in e-book format caught New York’s attention, as did the reviews they’d earned.

Not only did I sell digitally published authors to houses such as Random House, Penguin Putnam and Harlequin, but their e-readership followed them to print, launching them with a huge built in advantage in such a tough market.  In many cases, authors who begin with e-publishers choose to continue writing for those companies, even as they forge ahead with traditional New York houses.  Surely, RWA can see the value in these examples, and how e-publishing could potentially benefit their members.

As a third generation entrepreneur, I’ve learned firsthand that you either change with the times by adapting to the market or you are left behind.  When the automobile first came along, buggy whip manufacturers saw themselves as being in the whip business, when they should have understood that they were in the transportation business.  We are now in the literary content business, and the physically published book is only one of several delivery formats, yet another “device” to hold, much like the Sony Reader, the Kindle, or your iPhone.  Like the buggy whip manufacturers, RWA must modify their organizational model or be left behind…their membership along with them.

Let me end on this note: I love New York publishing. I love the people, the editors, the executives and the books these individuals create, sometimes against incredible resistance of many kinds.  But to say that traditional publishing is the only legitimate model ignores the fact that even these companies are struggling —from having to drop authors and editors due to economic downturn, to contemplating new distribution models, to grappling with understanding the fast-changing world of digital publishing.  If RWA’s very model of “legitimacy” wrestles to understand and adapt to these new times, then certainly RWA should follow that lead.

- Deidre Knight

Share on Facebook

Last weekend I attended a release party. A fellow author from one of my publishers and I had discovered that we live in the same city. Her book was just released in print and she invited me to a party she was having at her home. I asked her, is this a big bash? And she said no, just a few friends over for cookies and she’d do a reading. I pictured a few of her girlfriends who like romance and decided it would be great to meet another e-pubbed author in person – all my writer acquaintances are on-line. So I went.

Well there had to be a hundred people there, all total strangers to moi. Release Author was waaay too busy to talk, which was fine, she was the hostess and the star of the moment – enjoy! But I was interested to know if she’d gotten her print book into any local bookstores, how she’d done it, what other kinds of promo she’d planned, to talk about our writing processes, and our e-publishing experiences – I’ve never met a real life romance author in person!

I repeated my story of how I knew Release Author over and over to the other guests– we write for the same publisher. Then one of them asked me, “So, do you have your book in your purse there?”

I replied, “Sort of.” And pulled out my Sony Reader. (‘Cause none of my books are out in print yet.)

One woman turned up her nose and said, “Don’t you miss turning the pages?” (She also asked me, “Can you really make a living writing romance?”)

Strangely, the men were most interested. (Yes, the crowd was half men). I showed them how it worked and they were fascinated, and one man confessed to me he actually wanted to write a book (not romance!).

I think Release Author had not really shared with her friends that her book was out in electronic format first. They seemed surprised. They seemed surprised that our publisher is primarily an e-book publisher. They seemed surprised that such a thing even exists. So I had to wonder if Release Author had actually done a very good job of promoting her e-book and e-publishing in general – or is she one of those who believe that only a print book is a real book?

What do you think?

Share on Facebook

March 8-14 is Read an E-Book Week!

Times and technology are changing — and changing quickly. While e-books have been around for several years, it took the marketing savvy of the folks at Amazon to really bring the idea to the public marketplace.

Now the big debate isn’t paper or plastic, it’s Kindle or Sony. The ladies at Dear Author regularly post about e-reading technology and their most recent post, How to Decide Between the Sony and the Kindle eInk Readers, is merely the latest in an ongoing debate.

If the nifty gadgets don’t convince you, how about this article from EPublishers Weekly called 30 Benefits of EBooks. Top of the list? Ebooks promote reading at a time when people spend more time in front of screens, than in front of books. Also, they’re environmentally friendly.

John Siracuse of Ars Technica gives a clear-eyed view of the changing face of e-book technology over the years with The once and future e-book: on reading in the digital age.

For writers debating the merits of e-book vs traditional publishing, please keep in mind that, as Angela James notes in this article, A Different Way Isn’t the Wrong Way.

However you choose to read, remember that the platform isn’t the most important thing. It’s All About the Story.

Share on Facebook