This will be my last post on agents for a time, maybe ever. I’m going to sit back and watch this agent stuff work itself out. Don’t worry, I will be doing lots of other posts about indie publishing, about writing, and about my challenge which, with luck, I’ll be finally getting back to here shortly. (This estate stuff is killing me.)
But one last quick fling into logic, then I am done with talking about agents and publishing until a court moves to shut this down or it just keeps going and going.
Traditional Publisher vs Agent Publisher
1) Costs
– Agent publisher puts up all costs for anywhere from 15 to 65%.
– Traditional publisher puts up all costs for anywhere from 70-85%.
Conclusion: Better to go with an agent publisher if (and only if) your expenses earn out and you get any money on the back end, while in traditional publishing you get the money on the front end. If you don’t have enough sales, better to go with traditional. So I’m calling this a draw.
2) Distribution
– Agent publisher can get your books in the same place you can as an indie publisher.
– Traditional publisher can get your books everywhere if your book is deemed worth it.
Conclusion: Slight win for traditional publisher, but less as major chains cut shelf space and electronic publishing grows.
3) Difficulty of Submission
– Agent publisher due to the numbers of backlist and front list their clients will have will be selective in which book they will work on. Can be mailed to directly for submission.
– Traditional publisher will be selective depending on what their sales force thinks will sell. Can be mailed to directly for submission.
Conclusion: Draw, unless you already have an agent, then slight win for agents. If you already have a traditional publisher, large win for traditional publisher.
4) Resources:
– Agent publisher is doing this on a shoestring budget. Agents are losing their traditional income as traditional publishing changes, thus the reason they are going this way. They will do everything cheaply or outsource to someone who also takes a percentage, changing the percentage the author can get.
– Traditional publisher, even in tight times, has very deep pockets and if your book is chosen as marketable, no shortage of funds to put behind it.
Conclusion: Win traditional publisher by a long, long ways.
5) Possibility of Insolvency
– Agent publisher will be very close to insolvency during this transition, since they are either small corporations or sole proprietorships. They could shut down at any moment or hold your money without warning. Once your income streams are set to go to an agent from Kindle and B&N and so on, it will be very difficult to change those streams and control if an agent suddenly shuts their doors.
– Traditional publisher is also hurting, but backed in most cases by very large multi-national corporations. No doubt some of these companies will fail and your book moved to another imprint or sold as an asset in the bankruptcy.
Conclusion: Both are dangerous at the moment, but slight win to deep pockets of traditional publishers.
6) Advances
Agent publishers will not give an advance. You will just let them publish your book for no advance and hope you get money out the other end after their expenses are recovered.
Traditional publishers give advances of all sizes. These are loans that as long as you turn in an acceptable book, you do not have to repay. And expenses do not have to be taken from the advance. You get to keep the up front money with a small chance of royalties on the back side.
Conclusion: Are you kidding? Totally toward traditional publishers. Why have someone else publish your book and get no advance?
Summary
In my opinion, if you are not going to indie publish, keep the costs low, do the work mostly yourself or hire it out up front for a flat fee, you are better off by a long ways staying with traditional publishers.
And just to be clear here:
I still publish with traditional publishers. My wife still publishes with traditional publishers. I don’t see that changing at the moment.
We are doing both indie publishing and traditional publishing, both without agents at the moment.
I have nothing against writers using agents, although I think right now a couple year wait-and-see attitude is a safe one. But if you are going to use an agent, make sure you split payments on traditional deals, and don’t let your agent slow you down or harm you in any way on the agent publishing side. And if you are thinking of hiring an agent, for heaven’s sake, check them out financially.
Now I will head back to my own writing and getting this estate settled. Tonight I should be in Canada, at a wonderful writer’s conference in White Horse in the Yukon, but because of the estate and court issues, I am here. Sorry folks in White Horse. I really, really wanted to see your wonderful area. I’m sure you won’t miss me, though, with Kris there. (grin)
Dean,
Thanks, I’ll look up Adventure House.
Actually it is the older generation who seem to take to EReaders the quickest. It’s due to a simple concept called sizable text. I know it makes a huge difference to my wife, who has bad reading vision, and is constantly loosing her glasses.
With her IPad even if she has once again lost her glasses she can keep on reading. This is a woman who reads one or two books a day, every day. She reads on the buss. She reads in bed. She reads watching TV. She reads, well, we don’t go there.
And of course as she just said one of the biggest advantages is that she can carry her library with her. Since she started using her IPad for reading using the KOBO application last fall she has bought 240 books. I’ve also loaded a bunch of Project Gutenberg books (Ann of Green Gables, etc.) on it for her.
My wife is pretty young, she’s only fifty. I know of a lot of people in their seventies and eighties who have made the move, and are not likely to go back. Once you switch, EReading is just too damned convenient.
And then of course there are people like me. My left arm doesn’t work properly. It is missing several bones. That’s why I now play guitar left handed. I cannot bend my left hand. I can strum, I can’t chord.
This means that holding a book is difficult. Holding an IPad, which is lighter, isn’t as hard.
What I’m trying to say, and rambling all over the place from Turkey overload (Thanksgiving is hell on the waist line) is that in my experience people will tell you that they will never switch from paper to electronic. Until they try it, at which point paper looses its draw.
As to what Laura said, I’m coming to think that if some totally honorable man or woman was to set up a literary agency, insist on all payments being split payments, and really work for their writers, that they could make a killing. Because writers would welcome an honest advocate.
Unfortunately in our society honesty is all too often equated with lack of intelligence.
And no, I’m not interested. I’ve got enough work on my plate already.
Wayne
“What I believe is that massive, well-funded corporations withd decades of experience are no more going to disappear from publishing that they have disappear from other industries in the digital age”
Have you seen Kodak’s stock price lately?
Sixty years ago they were important enough for Bester to make them one of the business clans in ‘The Stars My Destination’, ten years ago they were a master of producing film and distributing it around the world, today they look to be a good candidate to be bought up for their patent portfolio. All because of the transition from film to digital cameras.
However, I agree with Dean that there are significant drawbacks to e-readers which make them less likely to wipe the floor with print books than digital cameras did with film. So I don’t expect print to die out for quite some time yet — certainly not in the next nine months and probably not in the next nine years — but if POD becomes the norm then the distribution benefits trade publishers have offered in the past largely disappear and so does one of the main reasons for new writers to try to find a publisher for their books.
And then? Perhaps in ten years Google and Amazon will be buying out failing publishers for their backlist portfolios.
Edward, on your comment : “…but if POD becomes the norm then the distribution benefits trade publishers have offered in the past largely disappear and so does one of the main reasons for new writers to try to find a publisher for their books.”
You assume facts clearly not in evidence, as they say. You assume that writers will learn how to format and design books. Most writers will never take a free program and convert a Word.doc file and upload it electronically. Remember writers want to be taken care of like small children by their agents and publishers. That alone will take a couple of decades to die out and I don’t see it happening unless the courts smack down this agent as publisher issue. (Likely, but might not happen.) But even if newer writers are forced to go to the slush pile of indie publishing for “traditional publishers” to find them, 99% of these indie writers will never get around to doing a POD.
I hope like hell I will be wrong on this. I really do, but so far I am not seeing it at all, even with the indie boom into electronic publishing. So many new writers are still under the belief system that it takes a lot of money to produce a book, even though a bunch of us are saying it can be done for around $50.00 total through CreateSpace.
I hope, I hope, I hope I am wrong in ten years and all writers who are still functioning can do these things themselves and agents are only left to help the old-time bestsellers with their walkers. But if I was a gambling man, (which I am not, I am a poker player) I wouldn’t bet on this happening.
Big Six – several places have the same list, I like the one from Fiction Matters
Hachette Book Group
HarperCollins
MacMillan Publishers Ltd
Penguin Group
Random House
Simon & Schuster
Mike Shatzkin refers the to six large publishers that way too. Just like we refer to the four large music publishers as the Big Four.
Wayne
Wayne, I hear that term so much, I always wondered what they were. (grin) Luckily, I never limited myself to those. And of course, you know most of those are owned by much larger international corporations? You do know that, right? And there are a few thousand other publishers that don’t fall into ownership of those or their parent companies. Of course, many are small like Sourcebooks and Kensington and Harlequin and so on. (grin) Sorry, but I think the idea that gets spread that there are only six publishers so silly and insane as to hurt writers. Agents started this bull when they started trying to convince writers that after six rejections, there was no point in sending out their manuscript. Thus this myth of “the big six” was born and I’ve been laughing about it ever since. But sadly, I shouldn’t laugh because it really does hurt new writers who just don’t know any better.
But I suppose if writers are so silly as to think there are only six publishers, again I have swamp land in Florida with a very large bridge to sell them.
And you really, really think those “big six” publishers and their parent international companies are all going to just stop producing “dead tree” books as you call them in nine months?
Wayne, on some of your points you were making a lot of sense until you started getting off into paper books going away in nine months and then talking about “big six” publishers. Sorry, my blog. Just can’t let that sort of silliness stand here.
You can defend all you want, but when you talk about the “big six” from now on out, I want a parent company (if there is one), and the number of imprints and publishing companies under each “big six” listed as a note so writers will understand that even under those big six there are a ton of publishers and thousands of imprints. And there are a ton of publishing companies doing just fine that aren’t owned by the parent international corporations of those that you listed. Fair enough? Otherwise take the “big six” silliness elsewhere. That kind of thinking just damages writers and I won’t allow it here. Sorry.
“I get the feeling a lot of indie publishers haven’t been around the internet block enough to know the risks of just going all in on one income stream. Even if Indie publishing is the future, I would prefer to have my future income coming in via a lot of different routes…”
Dean’s sounded off on this one before, and I am in complete agreement with him on the subject: LOTS of little streams! =)
Many small streams might add up to something the same size as one big river; but you’re never faced with having all your eggs in one basket (how’s that for mixed metaphors?) when Bad Things Happen.
Because Bad Things always happen.
It’s best to be flexible.
That’s one real advantage to indie publishing, though. Because you keep your rights, you’re never actually losing the flexibility to take advantage of new streams as they crop up. You have to pay attention so you can see the opportunities, but hanging on to your rights means you’re at least *able* to take advantage when you see them.
Kevin, on that one you and I agree completely. Lots of small streams turn into a big river. Kris and I learned that very early on in freelancing. So many of our friends were shocked we were with more than one publisher each under varied names. Then they lost their series or got cut and had no money and had to rebuild.
My best was one fine year not too far in the past I had books coming out from six different publishers. And Kris had books from a number of those same publishers and one other besides. Great fun, lots and lots of cash streams when you start adding in short fiction sales and Hollywood options and overseas sales. And that was way before indie publishing was even a thought. Now with indie publishing I try to teach the same thing. Spread out where possible. And as much as humanly possible and that time allows. And spread names and if you can, spread genres.
But again, and I need to say this more, my focus here and when I teach is to help people make a living with their fiction.
OK, I just tossed out another 3000 words.
Publishing, Right, Wrong, Otharwise!
I also included a new spreadsheet.
At which point I have to bitch. Dean, some of your numbers that you posted early in this thread are wrong. When I did the first version of the spreadsheet I just plugged them in. This time I calculated them, and some of them didn’t match. I ended up checking the math, and I’m damned sure I’m right.
But please check me, once again it is 5:00 AM, and I could be dreaming while I type.
I also found an old post of Joe Konrath’s with prices, and pulled it into the spreadsheet. Same problem. I’m going to email him tomorrow about that. His post, which is over a year old, has never been corrected. I didn’t see where anyone had complained about the numbers, so I’m guessing that no one ever checked them.
I’m off to bed. Or at least I’m going to try and go to bed. After I tell Mike Shatzkin about the post, because I think he is going to be interested too.
Wayne
Wayne, good article, even though I still don’t agree with some of your conclusions, you are more than welcome to them. I watch this industry very, very closely and I know the scale of it, and your belief that paper books will vanish shortly is just not possible. You can think I am blind all you want. But I have no doubt you will still be predicting this in two or three or four years. Yes, the industry is changing, yes electronic books will be a major part of distribution to readers, but if you really believe that every person on the planet in nine months or even nine years will always turn to a device to read, you are wrong. Flat wrong. And that I would bet on. Oh, wait, I am, with a lot of my income, actually. (grin)
I put up my predictions on my front page. Way, way different than yours. (grin)
As for numbers on your calculations, Wayne, not sure what you mean. I sell books for $4.99, not $2.99 as Joe likes. If I made some math issues, sorry about that, but seems to me the numbers you came up with at $2.99 show the same trends, but that is only at a glance.
Dean,
Mike Shatzkin and I agree on general terms on how the switch to electronic books will happen. You need to read his post to get his exact wording – he thinks 80% digital in two years. I think about nine more months.
Add in the general concerns here about digital accounting at the traditional publishers, the issues with agents, and where does this leave most writers who are depending upon the traditional publishers to deliver their works to the public?
Mike Shatzkin and I agree in general. We apparently made similar predictions, even though we had never heard of each other until I found that reference to him on your blog the other day. What happens if the market hits 80% digital? Will it be financially feasible to manufacture Dead Tree Books if the market for them has shrunk that much?
Of course if advances in the technology of the On Demand Single Book Publishing Machine make it so that 300 page paperback books can be printed for $9.99 or less, then yes, I think that Dead Tree Books will survive. In fact I think that they could see a huge renaissance.
As to pricing, when I ran the numbers through the spreadsheet what I got was:
Traditional publisher with agent = 75 cents
Spreadsheet Calculated = 75 cents
Traditional publisher without agent = 88 cents
Spreadsheet Calculated = 88 cents
Agent /publisher with rescue company for production = $1.70
Spreadsheet Calculated = $2.08 – $0.38 better for the writer
Agent/publisher at 50% of net = $1.75
Spreadsheet Calculated = $1.75
Agent/publisher at 15% only (not likely to survive) = $2.98
Spreadsheet Calculated = $2.97 – rounding error
Indie Publish yourself = $3.50
Spreadsheet Calculated = $3.50
When I ran Joe Konrath’s numbers:
Some of the numbers I got were different.
Konrath – $7.99 Paperback 8%, Publisher & Agent = 64 cents
Spreadsheet Calculated = 64 cents
Konrath – $13.00 Trade Paperback 8%, P + A = 75 cents
Spreadsheet Calculated = 98 cents – 23 cents better for writer
Konrath – Hardcover first 5K P+A = $2.50
Spreadsheet Calculated = $2.50
Konrath – Hardcover Second 5K P+A = $3.13
Spreadsheet Calculated = $3.13
Konrath – Hardcover Sales over 10K P+A = $3.75
Spreadsheet Calculated = $3.75
Konrath – $9.99 EBook on Amazon = $1.75
Spreadsheet Calculated = $1.75
Konrath is where I got the rest of the numbers I used to pad out the spreadsheet. If anyone is willing to provide me with any additional numbers to help make the spreadsheet more useful, I’ll happily incorporate them. I’ll also happily incorporate suggestions.
I’m going to sit on it while I await feedback. Curiously the spreadsheet downloads are running about 50-50 at present for OpenDocument and Microsoft Office formats.
Wayne
Wayne, the problem on your numbers at least with mine are that the “rescue company” takes 30% of GROSS PRICE, before the KIndle amount is taken out. So if you sell a book for $4.99, both Kindle and the Rescue Company take $1.50. Leaving $1.99 (or $2.00) remaining which the agent then takes 15% of which is 30 cents, which leaves $1.70. You missed the GROSS selling price the rescue company takes. That is our difference. Not on my side for a change. (grin)
I think Shatzkin is wrong more than he is right which is why I seldom push his blogs here. So quoting Shatzkin to me is not a good argument. (grin) And I am convinced you are both wrong on your timing and numbers, but Mike Stackpole and I have disagreed on this for years as well. So I guess time will tell.
Gack, I’m obviously not awake yet. Some of that is repetitive.
The other thing that I forgot to cover, yes, it doesn’t seem to make much difference whether the price is $2.99, $3.99, $4.99, or $5.99. It all still works out the same.
What I’m looking into now is exactly how price affects profit. We know that if you try and sell an ebook for $1 million that customers will walk away. We know that if you try and sell if for $0.10 that you aren’t going to make money.
Me being me, and interested in the math, I’m wondering about working out a formula to help writers determine what is the best ebook pricing.
Wayne
Dean said: “And spread names and if you can, spread genres.”
Spread genres, I totally get. And I understand the necessity of spreading names under the old system. I’m curious if you feel that is still valid or worthwhile for an indie or mixed indie/trad writer today, though? I can think of some reasons why it would be more advantageous to write everything under a single name, but this isn’t an area I feel really confident in my understanding.
Wayne,
Mike’s not predicting 80% of publishing will go digital – he said “narrative text”, which I’m reading as fiction plus non-fiction books of the all/mostly text variety.
And yeah, I think that in those areas, an 80% guess in two years or less is not an unreasonable guess. As I mentioned elsewhere, there’s no hard numbers, but it seems very likely fiction will pass the 50% mark in the first months of 2012 in the post-holiday sales spike. The real question will be when/at what percent things slow down. Will the holdouts only represent 20% of the market, or more, or less? We’ll have to wait and see.
But we’ve already seen that “dead tree” books can be produced and sold effectively one at a time. Not for MMP (which I think probably see the most reduction of use as digital grows). A 250 page novel only costs about $3 to print as a POD trade paperback. The absolute *worst* case for print is that everything will go hardcover collector books and POD trade paperbacks.
The other thing to keep in mind is that narrative text is only a part of the whole pie. There’s a lot of other kinds of books out there.
Although some publishers seem to be at risk for shooting themselves in the foot in some of those areas as well: ex, selling e-textbooks for the same price as the physical ones. Like fiction, this could leave enormous room for smaller and more nimble companies to produce very high quality works for a much lower price, and gain substantial market share as more elementary, high schools, and colleges move to tablet readers over the next five years.
Most of this is “wait and see”, though. The only thing we can guarantee is that things will change, because like Laura said, they always have. So be ready: because every little change probably represents opportunities to add a few more of those little streams to your proverbial big river.
Actually it is the older generation who seem to take to EReaders the quickest. It’s due to a simple concept called sizable text. I know it makes a huge difference to my wife, who has bad reading vision, and is constantly loosing her glasses. — Borean
Now that I think about it, yes that is why I do a lot of reading via ePub. Father time has not been good to these eyes and the ability to enlarge the text when needed is a reason I tend to shun books more and more.
Of course if advances in the technology of the On Demand Single Book Publishing Machine make it so that 300 page paperback books can be printed for $9.99 or less, then yes, I think that Dead Tree Books will survive. In fact I think that they could see a huge renaissance. — Borean
Wayne, check the pricing for anybody who has access to a Canon 990 master press. In quantity runs of a 100 minimum, double sided, booklet folded, prep for bind the costs are .055¢ for 4 page faces. Another $2.50-3.00 for cover, trim and spine. All up its about $7.50. That is the in-house price in a large Fortune 10 company. Your target price is achievable today.
Ah, Gross. That explains it. I’ve corrected the spreadsheet, and I’ll upload version 1.001 after I get back from driving my wife somewhere.
Agreed. Shatzkin is off on a lot of things. On this though he is right, the market for Dead Tree or paper books is changing at a breakneck pace. I know that the vast majority of people involved don’t have a clue what is happening, no matter what their position is, whether they are working for a publishing company or as a writer.
I’m only a small player. I’m also a geek. I do Linux, and other weird technologies. It gives me a different view than most.
Oh, and if anyone wants to suggest improvements to the spreadsheet, please do. I’m going to add a section for Advance Money. What else should I add?
Wayne
Sounds interesting. Only problem is that I can’t find it on the Canon site. I did find a reference to a Canon Digital Color Press, but I didn’t find a model 990.
Wayne