Diary of a Mad Editor

Okay, sure . . . I’ve been writing a lot about eBooks and eBook pricing lately. It’s been in the news and on blogs nearly every day  since the January unveiling of the iPad. And maybe I should apologize for that. Some of you have emailed me to say a) that you "don’t care" about eBooks and have no opinion about eBook pricing or b) you don’t even know what the Kindle is, or the iPad. The rest of you who do know and care about eBooks fall into one of two camps: those (like me) who think the big publishers price eBooks too high and those who think eBook prices aren’t quite high enough. Last week, I felt the need to respond to some remarks a writer made about another blog post on the subject of eBooks. The writer in question, Deborah Smith, responded to that post with the following comments:

Okay, you want a point by point discussion of my “whiny” remarks:? Here goes:

1. You say most publishers lose money because they spend “7 figures” on advances. No. Most publishers spend very low five-figures on the majority of books they buy. Ask most authors below the Stephen King range how much they’re paid. The myth of the expensive author overload at publishing houses is just that, a myth. And yes, I am a 25 year vet of NY and small press publishing; I’ve paid my bills as an author and publisher during that entire period; I have made 5-figure, 6-figure and 7-figure advances, also 3-figure and 4-figure; I’ve had one NYT bestseller; and yet, like most in the business, I still find it hard to sustain a dependable income. Yeah, I do know what I’m talking about, and from multiple perspectives.

2. Call me a liar if you’re that ignorant, but I repeat: the overhead to produce an ebook is THE SAME as the overhead to produce a print book minus the small amount devoted to printing costs, which averages 1-3 bucks a book. Advertising isn’t free; editing isn’t free, distribution isn’t free, office supplies and insurance and ET CETERA are not free.

3. So . . . even though distributors get 50 percent or more of the retail price of the ebook . . . uh, what? You have no point, here. It’s a mystery to me what your argument is.

4. Name one publisher or author who is dancing in the street praising ebooks??? you’re kidding me, right? are you so out of touch you haven’t noticed more than a decade of dedicated small press ebook publishers and a growing army of authors who make their living writing ebook only? Did you miss the part where I publish every book at my press in ebook as well as print? I was one of the first authors published in ebook by Warner Books more than six years ago. Yes, Virginia, there is a large and growing and enthusiastic ebook community out there among publishers and authors, and they are eager to make a go of it. Despite folks like yourself, who demand that they give books away dirt cheap and thus, go broke.

5. “Readers simply want to pay a fair price.” Well, duh. Yep. Who says otherwise? I’d like to pay 10,0000 bucks max for a brand-new car, please. To me that’s a fair price. Doesn’t mean it’s a sustainable price for manufacturers, though.

6. “Readers aren’t concerned with paying writer’s bills.” Okay, using your logic, then readers don’t care if books exist. They don’t care if there’s another Asimov or Stephanie Meyers or J.K. Rowling or NAME YOUR FAVE AUTHOR HERE. They want free books, by god, or 99 cent books, and thus they will get . . . books that aren’t worth more than 99 cents. You get what you pay for.

7. “greedy pricing policies.” So . . . if anyone charges anything for any product, that greedy manufacturer is just beggin’ people to steal it? Cause, like, if you ask people to pay for stuff that’s wrong, and they are thus spared the title of “thief” when they take your stuff? Boy howdy, using that philosophy, let’s all go to the local convenience store and grab some beer without paying. Cause, you know, the store asked for trouble when they put a price tag on the Budweiser. Sheesh.

Now, I mistakenly believed my own remarks were fairly clear and reasonable. Maybe not. Perhaps I should have written that blog in big-ass poster printing and posted in on the Goodyear Blimp.

1. I don’t believe I said that the majority of writers receive 6 or 7 figure advances. I was, however, taking issue with the minority who do receive outlandish advances and was suggesting that there is a disproportionately huge gap in the cost of producing and marketing writers like King or Brown or some pseudo-celebrity and some anonymous midlist writer no one has ever heard of and that, while this is not necessarily THE problem with the overall decline in book sales, it is a part of the problem. And this is something many publishing insiders have stated outright as a factor in overall hardships publishers are facing. I did not make this up out of my own imagination.

2. The rather nominal cost of producing an eBook is normally piggybacked on the cost of producing the hardcopy book. So it’s not the same.  And let’s be clear about the cost of producing and marketing a hardcopy book. The price of editing and cover design is pretty well fixed. In fact, the average salary for a book editor is not a whole lot better than the starting salary of a school teacher. Printing costs have declined somewhat over the last few decades. Warehousing costs are fairly stable. Marketing cost vary according to the book and author. It’s not like every book published gets the same level of marketing and marketing budgets have been declining for years. Each book has it’s own budget. And like you said yourself, most writers aren’t making those big advances. So where is all the money going to? It’s certainly not going into the eBook. When’s the last time you’ve seen an full page ad in the NYTROB for an eBook? When’s the last time you saw a writer on a talk show promoting an eBook?  Get real.

3. I believe I stated my point quite clearly. In addition to my previous point, I will add this: DRM-free eBooks are not the industry standard (yet), so when you purchase an eBook from Amazon or a B&N, you aren’t really buying a book that you can resell or trade, you’re buying 1-person license to display that eBook on a screen or reader device. Even without considering production costs, that alone make an eBook less valuable to most readers.

4. Out of touch, am I? Well, what I actually said was that "major publishers" weren’t dancing in the streets. There is a big difference between doing something (while dragging heels and making excuses) and doing something with great enthusiasm and hope for the future. And small presses are not major publishers. More specifically, since you seem to be the only one who doesn’t understand my reference, I was referring to the Big Six publishers. You know, HarperCollins, Macmillan, those guys. Of course, I am aware that many small presses have been publishing eBooks for a long time and that there have been e-publishers doing it even longer than that. And guess what? Most small presses and e-publishers already get that overpriced eBooks are a bad idea. Check around. The average price many of the little guys charge for an eBook is in the $4-$6 range. Now if a small press can afford to charge under $10 for an eBook (and do so willingly, enthusiastically and without complaint and seem to be able to sustain their business) why is it so hard for a billion dollar publisher that produces a couple hundred or so books a year to do it? Maybe you can explain that seeing as how you are so wise and I am so very “ignorant”. Could it possibly be that the little guys are far less retarded (Yes, Sarah P. I said the “R” word) than Rupert Murdock and his gang of robber-barons? I’m just saying.

5. I suppose the difference is most people need a car to get around. Don’t need to read a book by James Patterson. But, since you like the car analogy — check out how the auto industry’s doing of late. Mainstream, big-time publishing is making a lot of the same mistakes. So, you’ve inadvertently proven my point.

6. I never said that eBooks should be free (I did say that digital copies of public domain works should be free or close to it). No, I believe I said "fairly cheap" or something in that neighborhood. And yes, if you are charging more than $10 for an eBook, that is greedy. Hell, I saw one eBook on Sony’s eBook store not too long ago selling for $20. $20? $16? $14? How can you say that’s not greedy and do it with a straight face? The $4-$6 that many small press and e-pubs charge for eBooks sounds about right to me. That’s fair.

I’m a 25 year veteran author and small press publisher with both a New York and small press track record. Agin, like many who spout the "Hateful publishers are to blame" argument, has no obvious knowledge of publishing. 1. Publishers lose money on most books and make a very narrow profit margin on the rest. 2. The machinery involved in writing, editing, designing and marketing a book REMAINS whether the book is an eBook or not 3. Distributors and wholesalers make a far bigger cut on profits than authors and publishers do 4. Few in publishing decry the existence of eBooks or believe they’re going away; Agin seems to have missed a lot of info on the ramping up of eBook departments at major houses, which began many years ago. 5. the issue is readers and ignorant anti-commerce proponents who want content to be free 6. Content is not created by magic, without cost, effort, investment and a need to pay the bills 7. All we want, as publishers and authors, is to be fairly compensated for our work, and not see it given away or stolen. —Deb Smith, Bell Bridge Books

The above comment is from the Kindle Armageddon post I blogged about yesterday. Far be it for me to argue with a woman who is a "25 year veteran" of publishing and writing, but I think I will anyway. Deborah Smith’s angry, whiny comments echo those of many in publishing in recent days. I probably should respond to these point-by-point lest I be misunderstood:

1. Yes, you are right when you say that publishers lose money on most books — but why? Could it possibly have anything to do with with seven-figure book deals for Lying fucktard politicians and fake-ass reality-show celebs with their autobiographies about their sex tapes and addictions to weight loss pills and the like? Could it have anything to do with the failed payola schemes for some books while at the same time not fully investing themselves in books they cannot pre-sell— books that wind-up being remaindered off into oblivion before they even have a solid chance to shine. Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that an ungodly number of books published each year are complete and utter crap? <cough-cough. . .Dan Brown … cough-cough> I’m just saying.

2. The machinery involved in writing, editing, designing and marketing a book is factored into the budget. The editor gets paid a salary — he does not get paid by the job unless he is freelance, nor does he get paid twice for editing an eBook. Writers get paid according to whatever deal their agents strike with the publisher. They get paid an advance and they get royalties on sales, but let’s not pretend that a printed book is the same as the eBook. Even printed books don’t cost as much to produce as they used to. eBooks don’t get the same level of marketing as printed books and you damn well know it. There is no cost for printing or warehousing eBooks. Being as you are a publisher, how much does it cost you to produce and market an eBook? I’m not talking about the printed book, I’m talking specifically about the digital version. If you can tell me with a straight face that your per unit/download cost for an eBook is anywhere near what a printed book cost, I’d have to call you a liar.

3. True, wholesalers and distributors usually get 55% of a printed book. But, whereas the cost of shipping, warehousing and returns are coming out of the publisher’s end. There are no such costs with digital products and the cost of storing files usually comes out of the distributor/seller’s end or is, at very most, a nominal expense for the publisher. So, again, you’re being a bit disingenuous by equating eBooks with printed books.

4. Name one major publisher or writer who is dancing in the streets celebrating eBooks.  Seriously, They’ve done nothing but decry the eBook. "eBooks are just a fad." "eBooks devalue the market." "eBooks mean the death of publishing." Wah-wah-wah. Sure, publishers are publishing eBooks, but only because the technology is forcing them to and readers are slowly starting to embrace that technology. Mainstream publishing is ambivalent at best when it comes to eBooks. At worst, they’d gladly see the market fail and eReaders  and eBooks fade into the twilight.

5. The issue is what’s fair for readers to pay. Readers will pay for and download some content as long as the price is fair and of good quality. And yes, some eBooks should be free — like books in the public domain. Publishers shouldn’t be allowed to profit from electronic versions of public domain works — that would defeat the purpose of the public domain and is anti-democratic. Books not in the public domain are subject to the free market — and what the market will bear is what the readers will pay for content, not what publishers try to force them to pay.

6. No, writing is not magic, but readers, like it or not, are only concerned with what they choose to read, and not with paying a writers "bills". Remember, readers are important too. It is a privilege for writers to be read not necessarily the other way around. Unfortunately, writers often act like they don’t get this, like they are themselves magical and their readers just something they stepped in.

7. Don’t you realize by instituting greedy pricing policies in an effort to "be fairly compensated" you are, in effect, creating a thriving market for thieves and pirates? Piracy will almost certainly always be a small part of commercial activity, but like I said in my earlier post, if they can’t get an eBook fairly cheap, they’ll get it from someone who offers it for free and the more difficult you make it for a sustainable fair-but-cheap market to exist the larger piracy’s dark flag looms. Prohibitive pricing costs writers sales. And besides, if you are unhappy with your royalties from digital content, take it up with your publisher because I can almost guarantee you that if you think Amazon is screwing you, your publisher is probably screwing you worse.

Editing a literary magazine is not always very much fun. What fun there is usually comes with that all-too-brief warm fuzzy feeling of satisfaction and pride the moment an issue is published. The rest of the time you are reading submissions from all kinds of writers from all points on the globe — everyone from distracted housewives and sexually-frustrated teenagers to college professors of arcane subjects and toothless, inbred motherfuckers who live in parts where they have to worry about motorhome insurance who wouldn’t know what a dictionary looked like if the sky cracked thunder and it started raining dictionaries. Submissions of varying qualities and styles, all in an effort to fill open slots in future issues. Most of the time that is a grind. Most of the time, what you have to read is mediocre, uninspired, garbage. Sometimes it’s even worse than that. And then, occasionally, if you are willing to sift through the refuse, something hard and shiny appears in the darkness — a story by a very young writer who you think, "Yeah, this is what I’m looking for." And in that moment, that fleeting, but familiar feeling returns.

Case in point: One Morgan von Ancken, a promising young writer who, just last week submitted a story that I’d decided to publish:

Dear John C. Erianne,

Enclosed, please find my story, "A Study of the Circular Velocity of a
Shooting Star," for your review. It’s an optimistic story about the subtle
way that life repeats, regardless of death, time, or page limits. I’ve
pasted it below, and attached it as a .doc to this email.

I’m a 23-year-old writer and musician who lives in New York City. I studied
English at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, NY, and while I have had numerous
pieces published in various student publications and blogs, this is the
first piece of fiction I have ever submitted to a literary magazine. I wrote
most of it in the back of my band’s van driving up to play a festival in
Maine, looking out the window at the stars, amazed at how bright they were
compared to the city.
I know it’s a leap of faith to seriously consider work from someone who
hasn’t been already published, so thanks in advance for reading. I hope you
enjoy the story.

Cheers,
Morgan von Ancken

Admittedly, I didn’t decide to publish it upon my first reading of it. My first reading of it, I thought it more cubic zirconium than actual diamond, but found enough good stuff in the story that it merited another reading. The story grew on me and I read it a third time and decided I really did like the story and I liked the idea of publishing a story by a young writer no one had ever heard of before. So, I immediately fired-off an email accepting the story. von Ancken’s subsequent reply was unexpected to say the least:

Hi John,

That’s great to hear! I’m glad you enjoyed the story. If I publish it with
you, you get first rights and Internet archival rights, correct? I’m very
new at this, and I also sent the story out to a few other places. When do
you need my final decision by?

Again, I’m very excited, and thanks for reading. I’m going to go buy some
new red shoes in celebration.

Cheers,
Morgan

Final decision? What the fuck? There was a time, five or ten years ago, when I would have become so angry over such a response, I would’ve thrown a chair across the room and told this young writer to immediately go fuck himself. First of all, he’s telling me that his story is a simultaneous submissions — something he didn’t see fit to mention in his initial cover letter. Second of all, while he may be young, he expects me to believe that he’s so new to the process he really doesn’t understand when a publisher agrees to publish a writer’s work, that writer is expected to license certain copyrights to that publisher for that purpose?  No, when a writer pulls this kind of crap, it’s a power-play.  I read this, I’m thinking, this guy wants to have his cake and eat it too. He doesn’t want to grant me any exclusive rights to publish his story because he’s hoping for the bigger, better deal. He wants one of those other publishers to grab-up his story, but he doesn’t want to let go of a sure thing until he’s sure  the other magazines have rejected it.  I’ve been down this road before — usually the writer doesn’t even tell you it’s a simultaneous submission. Usually, they tell you right before the issue is to be published and they withdraw the story at the last minute.

This dude wants me to give him time. Time . . . well, as I said, there was a time when . . . .  But I’ve mellowed somewhat in the past few years. Still, I’d have to be a half-wit not to see his power-play for what it was, so I gave him 48 hours to make up his mind — after which, he’d automatically lose his spot in the issue.  That way, I wouldn’t have to worry about getting blindsided a second time, have him pull the story at the last minute.  I figured, he’d consider that the smart thing to do is agree to allow me to publish his story as a bird in the hand is worth more than two in the bush.  But, no, this was his reply:

Hi John,

Well, I thought about this [translation: I made up my mind the moment you accepted my story, but didn't quite know how to express myself], and I think that I need to see how the piece fares in the world at large [translation: I sent my story to more prestigious literary magazines than yours and I'd rather make my literary debut in one of them]. This may be dumb [translation: I know it's dumb and a bit of a gamble, but I'm a rather ambitious and calculating individual and I believe in order to win big, you have to gamble  big], and it’s almost certainly a little arrogant,[translation: I think I'm a really talented guy and being as you seem to agree, I think I can do better for myself] but the truth is that I expected to hear from you months after I submitted, and your quick response caught me unaware[translation: in other words, you were my last choice and I thought I'd get accepted elsewhere before I'd have to deal with you]. I literally just mailed the thing off to a myriad of other print mags and online pubs.[translation: see previous translation.]

Once I start getting rejection letters, I’m sure I’ll be kicking myself.[translation: I don't really expect to get any rejection letters.]

Anyways, I’m obviously grateful for your consideration, and it’s incredibly encouraging to me that someone with such literary acumen enjoyed my writing. [translation: if you liked my story, I have to believe an editor with even more literary acumen than you will see my genius.] I also plan on submitting my future work to you (although whether you choose to read it or not is up to you). [translation: I don't really anticipate communicating with you again unless I actually do meet with lots and lots of rejection and have to lower my expectations accordingly and I do not expect that you will want to read my future stories . . . although, if I do submit again, I probably won't make the mistake of sending you a really, really good story since I might have to withdraw it, so I'd only send you stuff others have rejected, figuring you probably won't know the difference and would hope you can forget about the time I made a horse's ass out of myself at your expense.]

Hope you understand![translation: If you don't, I don't really give a fuck] Best of luck with the next issue. [translation: although it probably won't be as good an issue without my story in it.]

Cheers,

Morgan von Ancken

So, because I obviously wasn’t his first choice and because I was a little too timely in my response, I get penalized? He’s basically telling me to go fuck myself, but he’s just so cheery about it, it kind of makes my skin crawl. Talk about damning with faint praise! My "literary acumen"? Damn skippy! But that doesn’t mean you can use me as a litmus test just so you can peddle your story elsewhere. The fact that Mr. von Ancken seems to understand that he did something wrong makes his decision all the more disappointing. I have my doubts about him ever submitting another story to me as I have my doubts about ever reading another story written by him. It’s actually my policy not to read future submissions by writers who pull this kind of crap. If they’d do it once, you can’t trust them not to do it again and I really, really don’t like having my time wasted. Besides, if I wasn’t good enough to publish his story this time around — and him with no other offers on the table, then I’m not good enough to publish any future stories he might send me. For my part, I’ve already replaced his story with another one so on one level . . . no harm, no foul. But, on a deeper level I still feel like throwing a chair across the room.