So the economy sucks. Every month, retailers post their latest losses and caution that it might get worse before it gets better. For a while, I thought if we just made it through the end of this year and the elections, we’d recover. Now, I’m hearing that retailers anticipate these troubled times will spill over into next year. Perhaps even well into next year. Perhaps beyond that.
Simon & Schuster president and CEO Carolyn Reidy called for CEOs to step up and lead during the deep economic slump and warned that possibly worse scenarios may be on the way. “We have to act now, and turn over every stone for possible savings in our operations, in order to be prepared for what’s coming, which is possibly an even worse scenario in six, nine, 12 or even 18 months,” she told the CEO’s.
– By Cindy Crosby, Publisher’s Weekly, 11/11/2008
“Reidy: Worse Publishing Environment May Be On the Way”
Yikes.
Next year I’m scheduled to release six books back-to-back over five months. This led to my having a twelve-month gap between my last release and my next one. I’m so relieved to not have to worry about a new release right now. This year, I’ve watched many friends angst over their releases and smaller-than-expected print runs. I’ve listened to horror stories of booksellers “skipping” titles (placing no order for a particular title so that it’s not available in any of their stores) or placing minuscule orders. It’s a tough time to release books.
Publisher A has cut their staff by ten percent across the board; Publisher B canceled a number of expensive book contracts and is only offering newbie authors single-book deals; Publisher C is hoping that the slower rate of signing new books at most of the big houses will translate to their being able to pick up projects for smaller advances.
– By Nephele Tempest, The Knight Agency blog, 11/17/2008
“It’s the Economy Stupid”
Smaller advances. Really? Dropping proven authors for writers willing to be paid less. That’s a solution?
What might evolve, in [Reidy’s] opinion is publishers “taking a good hard look at returns causes, effects and practices, and coming up with ways to diminish or eliminate them…”
– By Cindy Crosby, Publisher’s Weekly, 11/11/2008
“Reidy: Worse Publishing Environment May Be On the Way”
Taking a good hard look at the causes of returns–now that sounds like a plan to me. As an author, I admit I’m biased, but I think there are other ways to save money than hoping authors will be willing to take less money for their work. Such as cutting slots.
I just don’t understand why the number of books being produced each month hasn’t decreased. I’m not talking about print runs; I’m talking about number of titles. To me, that makes the most sense. All the lines and imprints that doubled the number of releases (i.e. Aphrodisia’s move from 2 to 4 or HQ Presents move from 4 to 8 12 ) when the economy was better… why haven’t they dropped back down to their former smaller number of releases? When less books are being bought, shouldn’t there be less books on the shelves? Instead of decreasing print runs for all books, dropping proven authors for authors willing to take less money, and offering single book deals, why not release fewer titles and give the books better support? Isn’t it a lot cheaper to produce one title than it is to produce two? And with each title getting more attention (in every respect), isn’t that going to lessen the likelihood that they’ll be returned?
We’re facing a crisis in publishing. I can’t help but wonder what other steps are being taken, or considered, to address it.
No related posts.
And where does this leave aspiring authors – tomorrow’s would-be debut authors?
I’m guessing at the bottom of the heap. Debut authors are a huge financial risk. Publishers are going to bank on their proven moneymakers. Our already slim chance of publication just got cut down to a micro-fragment.
I’m confused
(a natural state – LOL)
How is reducing the number of books being produced helping anyone other than the big name authors?
At least if the book is produced,
the author has a shot at sales.
Or am I missing something?
(wouldn’t be surprising)
About returns,
I’m thinking most booksellers would be happy to address that…
… by moving to POD with their own inhouse printers (a la Amazon).
Might be why the publishers aren’t pushing for the reform.
Come over to the dark side (eBooks) Kimber An…
This is what the aspiring author faced before the economy crashed-
http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2006/02/28/cost-of-the-new-author/
I have a hard time believing our prospects have improved since then.
“Less” screws readers, too. Most of the books I actually enjoy reading don’t get anywhere near the top of the bestseller lists. Cut them because they’re not selling a million copies apiece, and I’ll have to stop buying books altogether.
Kimber Chin, do I get a big, shiney lightsaber?
Seriously though, this could be good for eBooks.
Here’s another inspirational post from before the economy crash-
http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2005/05/19/get-rejecting/
Hi Kimber,
Actually, according that that brief snippet from the TKA blog bigger deals are being canceled, while authors willing to take less money might see increased prospects of one-book deals. (which sounds like a sink-or-swim situation to me, in a bad retail climate)
But in my opinion, the worry isn’t about getting published for the first time, it’s about how well the publishing industry is going to weather the economic crisis and whether or not the bookstores will make it through, too. Because if both continue to suffer, nobody will be getting published. That’s an extreme scenario, of course, but then the tales I’m hearing are extreme, too, and they’re real.
Well, you’re assuming I meant cut the bottom slots.
I don’t see that it helps a debut author to be released in the last slot behind 3 mid-list authors and the better supported #1 and 2 slots. What if there were only a #1 slot, a midlist book, and a debut? Wouldn’t it be more likely that the single midlist book and the debut would get more support? Better covers, better distribution, etc.?
I could be way off base. I’m being honest when I say I don’t understand why things are the way they are.
In the PW article with Reidy, it mentions: Reidy also wondered out loud that with self-publishing so easy, “is it only a matter of time before one of (the major authors) actually strikes out on his or her own?”
Which is an intriguing thought. If most books go to POD, could authors find that they’ll make considerably more if they cut out the publishers?
As an author still trying to break into publishing, knowing how hard it is, I see your point Sylvia that cutting back on the number of books published could be beneficial overall. If a publisher releases 6 books a month and cuts out 1 book from each slot (top, mid, debut) then yes I can see where wach book would be given more attention and support.
That said, as an aspiring author knowing how hard it is to break in, I also understand it would make it even tougher on us. But wouldn’t it also mean that publishers would be buying books they truly loved rather than something they don’t love as much because they have to fill a slot.
Either way, the job of the aspiring writer remains the same: write the best book you can, polish it, and send it out. Then start on the next book. You really have no control over what happens from there.
[...] http://www.romancingtheblog.com/blog/2008/11/18/less-is-more/ [...]
Well, for Harlequin, they just posted a bigger profit than expected I believe. Part of it IMHO isn’t the number of books, but the insanity of publishers still ignoring the digital and other markets. They still haven’t been able to cash in on an industry that rose 52% last year.
But cutting back might help the industry overall. Glutting the market will always backfire, and if the demand has gone down because of the economy, then I believe doing fewer releases. We are in an industry that is profit driven and supply and demand play an big role.
It could be another couple of years of this from some forecasts, but hopefully things will look better sooner rather than later.
And, according to a few industry people I talk to, they said that normally, in this sort of economy, romance has a rise in sales, or stay the same, because people want to escape understandably.
Aren’t books get contracted, edited and go into production at least a year in advance? (At least for NY) I’m not sure how they can contractually and financially justify NOT releasing books they’ve already spent a great deal of money on. The only option left for books that aren’t shipped to retailers (meaning bookstores, WalMart, etc.) is getting pulped. Is that better than being in bookstores? If so, I think you can argue that publishers should stop shipping so many titles immediately. Otherwise, it’ll take at least a year, if not longer, to see any reduction in the number of titles getting pubbed by NY publishers.
And to those who said book sales wouldn’t suffer because people always want entertainment in tough times…ahem. Doesn’t quite count for a recession.
I was in the business of creating P&Ls for a publishing company for several years. No company is going to think twice about axing a book just before its printed, no matter how much marketing had been done. The contract always gives them a buyout (kill fee). Big, midlist, or new. They’ll concentrate on their big names and sure hits, no doubt. They’ll minimize risk, cut staff and advertising. I was there in the 80s when they did it once.
As a reader, I think it sounds like a reasonable idea to cut lines by a book or so, just as Nikki mentioned (top, mid, debut). There are so many releases right now, and because of finances I’m having to be picky.
The books that don’t make it to my cart are added to my wishlist, and to be honest, it might be a long while before they’re bought.
I wish I could buy every book I wanted *sigh*
For authors, couldn’t having to compete with so many other releases during these times lower their sales?
And to those who said book sales wouldn’t suffer because people always want entertainment in tough times…ahem. Doesn’t quite count for a recession.
I was going off of what a Harlequin editor told me. She had been with them for 17 years so I figured she had seen some lean times in there.
I know there will be less hardcover and trade sales, but even Borders has said that romance is either staying steady or improving in mass market.
Just a quick aside before I launch into the rest of the post…but publishers most certainly can, and do, cancel contracted books before they go into production, if they feel they’re unlikely to make a profit on the book. I know, because it’s happened to me.
Pulping books already printed (*before* they’re distributed) however,…not so much. Unless distributors cancel their orders. Which, these days… Scary thought.
Anyway. About Harlequin: They’re pretty quick to reassess what’s working and what isn’t, and to adjust their lines accordingly. Unfortunately, it sometimes feels — to both authors and readers — that some lines get axed before they’ve had a chance to find their readerships. But in this economic climate, the business that doesn’t adapt quickly to sales trends may well lose out.
Which is why they increased Har Presents to eight titles a month, because that’s their best-selling (by far) line. Cutting *that* line back to 4 or 6 titles a month would make no sense whatsoever.
Frankly, I do think the market is glutted (and, believe me, I say this in full recognition that my own career might not survive a cutback). Readers have more choices than ever, true — which, in theory at least, is a good thing. And new authors have more opportunities than ever to become published, even if most of those opps are financially dicey. But the readership BASE isn’t growing, and what base there is has less money to spend.
Which means the pie is getting cut not only into smaller and smaller pieces, but that many of those slivers have become nearly invisible. How this shakes out for any individual publisher, I don’t really know…but it’s really not good for the average, non-big name author.
Two more comments: This author isn’t even remotely interested in self-publishing, with all the sales/promotion/shipping headaches attendant thereto. I’m a writer, not a publisher/marketer/editor/cover artist. And by the time I’d contracted out all that stuff? Not seeing a huge financial incentive here. Call me old-fashioned, but I like the model where somebody pays me for the book, then does all the other stuff, leaving me plenty of time to play with my grandson and write ridiculously long posts on Romancing the Blog.
And as for publishers not getting with the digital program — again, anecdotal evidence based on my own experience, but Harlequin moved into e-books a couple of years ago; now their entire frontlist is available as e-books. After those two years, my e-book sales (in units) make up less than 1/2 of one percent of my print sales. *Availability* doesn’t necessarily translate into *acceptance* — at least, not on anything near a grand scale. So when I read stats that say the ebook industry has grown so much, I have to wonder what such statements are based on…is the e-readership really growing that much (I know it’s growing, but exponentially?), or simply buying more books because there are more titles available?
IOW…I seem to sell around 250 e-books with each title. But now there are more Har books available as ebooks…so their overall e-sales are probably higher. But if numbers per title are remaining stagnant, is that really growth?
Just musing aloud. I do that a lot.
In any case, I certainly agree the industry is facing some huge challenges, and as a result is going to have to rethink some of its models. How this state of flux will impact both authors and readers, however, I have no idea. Guess we’ll just have to hang tight and see.
RE: NY pubs and e-sales
My opinion is that the publishers aren’t giving enough of a discount for the e-version to entice readers to choose e-format over print. When you’re only going to save 20% or less, most readers will continue to buy the print version.
That’s exactly why, as far as Harlequin/Silhouette goes, I prefer the print, because there is not much of a price difference for me.
Sorry, the first paragraph of my last comment was taken from Sylvia’s comment. I was just replying to that.
When you’re only going to save 20% or less, most readers will continue to buy the print version.
Which is a very valid point, although I’m still not sure lowering the price even by half would draw in that many readers *right now.* Not enough to tip the majority of readers from print to digital/electronic, anyway. Too many readers still simply prefer the print experience.
My guess is it’s going to take another half generation or so before reading on a screen becomes natural for the majority of readers. But I don’t know — younger readers don’t seem to be embracing e-books much faster than their elders, from everything I hear.
Because it would seem for every plus to reading e-books (no physical storage, being able to carry a hundred books on vacation in the space of one) there are downsides (still high cost of e-readers, tactile issues, inability to share e-books) that have nothing to do with price or availability. I have no doubt the format will eventually become more widely accepted, if not the preference. But the revolution is apparently not happening nearly as quickly as its proponents expected. Or hoped.
Water dripping on a stone, rather than a tsunami.
Hey Sylvia –
I agree with everything Nikki & Ali said. If I was an author attempting to get into the business it would really freak me out with everything that is going on.
I would love to see more publishers offer e-books but it would have to be at a more reasonable discount.
I don’t think my comment is making sense.
Sylvia,
I agree about the price. Granted, H/S, it would be hard to cut the price. But hardbacks being the same price? that is just idiotic.
I have to echo the concerns about what this proposal means to new authors. We’re already a tiny blip on the screen, I don’t want to be pushed off of it before I get a chance.
~Jana
I work for a non-fiction publisher. We are doing e-book editions (that are available via libraries) and we’re starting to put more titles into POD and SRDP (short run digital printing).
At the house I work for, our gross sales are up, but our returns from bricks & mortar stores are way up, and continue to be high month after month.
Our online bookstore sales are flat, our e-book sales are steady/flat, and our POD book sales are increasing because this is new program for us. Presently, we’re cautious and hopeful for a flat year.
Decreasing title output will likely reduce some costs, but it will also reduce gross (and net) sales, too. Less money coming in means we might have to lay off (more?) staff. Decrasing title output is a complicated choice–just like increasing title output is a business choice that needs to be weighed carefully and well-planned.
As a reader, I wish that some publishers would stop re-releasing old books, or at least make it very clear that it is a re-release. It’s frustrating to pick up a book, read that blurb and think that sounds good and when you get home you realize you bought it several years ago under a different title. A definite waste of money and something that makes me hesitate to buy from the ‘proven winner’ authors.
I honestly don’t know what the answer is, but I’m watching what’s going on. It would seem like fewer titles might be one way to cut costs, but then again, how could they know they weren’t cutting the one that would have taken off? So much of what makes a book succeed is hard to predict. If publishers could perfectly predict sales, every book would be a hit.
All I know for certain is that readers will still want to read and writers will still write.
HQ Presents has moved to 12 books a month.
http://tinyurl.com/58ng9e
Don’t canceling contracted books and only offering one book deals lead to fewer titles being released?
Am I missing something? If a book is canceled, it means it’s not being released — thus no danger of low sales of said book or being skipper or competing for space with another title –more space for another book to be bought.
It’s a terrifying prospect as I watch freinds’ series being canceled, books being canceled, books being skipped, contracts not being renewed and knowing it could happen to me next, but I think that is the end result of such moves.
A year or two down the road, yes. But I’m thinking of more immediate action.
Yes, but that’s not what I was thinking. I was thinking of spreading out/delaying the releases, not canceling them. What seems to be happening or considered is the dropping of authors/books in order to replace them with a title that’s less expensive to acquire. I see that as a dangerous precedent and a plan of action that will take a year or longer to affect change.
I don’t understand how that can be the best choice among all the options. Surely there’s another, better way?
In response to Kimber An and other comments about aspiring and debut authors–
The only good thing (as a debut author I’m trying to think positive here!) is that so much good writing comes out of this country when times get tough.
Think of all the great books and movies of the depression era! Both literary writing and writing for entertainment (to make a superficial distinction) tend to rise to the occasion in order to “survive.”
Though I’m always on the hunt for a good storyline, I know I’ll need to be extra vigilant to have my debut now!
This is going to sound not helpful and not particular hopeful either, but I think aspiring authors should realize we’ve never really had much of a chance.
Getting published in this economic environment vs. last year’s is kinda like the chances of being destroyed by the Large Hadron Collider making either a micro black hole or a strangelet. Either one is a remote possibility although one is somewhat more remote than the other. If I understand my obscure physics conspiracy theories correctly. Which I probably don’t.
Anyway, I think you should take some hope from the hopelessness and know that it can still be done — with as relatively much difficulty as ever. Geez, I’m not helping, am I?
Hey Sylvia, I think we may see a new attitude toward indie publishing, as the industry starts offering less and less for more and more angst and trouble getting through those gates in the first place.
Also, folks like Tor have had amazing success with making the ebook free, and the print book for sale (though this is something initiated by the author and agreed to by the publisher, not the other way around.)
Check out Cory Doctorow. He’s had stunning success with this. A good point he makes is that print books are fetish objects to most readers. While some will buy ebooks, print books aren’t disappearing. And he’s sold more print books of the same title he gave the free ebook away, than other authors he knows who aren’t doing it.
Now maybe Doctorow is just a better writer, or a better marketer, but I think free ebooks are an amazing marketing tool all their own.
Zoe
Yikes — gloomy news everywhere. I wonder if more will take to self-publishing.
An author who wrote a funny, sassy book and found it rejected many, many times has kind of taken matters into her own hands, turning rejection into a web party. She’s holding a funeral for her book! I wonder if this will happen more times than not, as the economy gets worse. Those who’ve been chewed up and spit out by publishers, this is the site for you.
Hello, sorry for being a bit off topic but I need a romance novel readers expertise for an online dating profile I am doing. In short, I want to post an excerpt of a really intriguing scene of the “friction” that exists between a man and a women when they actually notice each other but BEFORE they have actually met. Something like where the guy is confidently staring into the woman’s eyes and beginning his approach, and the woman is excited yet nervous, etc….I think you know where I am going with this. Any recommendations or excerpts you can refer me to are greatly appreciated!
Tied to this post:
[...] romance genre, Twilight, YA I occasionally chance to visit Romancing the Blog, and today, caught a post from last Tuesday about the state of publishing and the book industry in general. What caught my [...]