Commonwealth
Four Seasons
James Macdonald wrote:
>
> A correspondent writes:
>
> ==========
>
> Mr. Macdonald,
>
> I am just wanting to inquire if it is common for a publishing
> house to ask for "monies up front"? I have a friend (really,
> this isn't about me) who submitted her work to Commonwealth
> Publications and they have recently offered her a contract.
> However, the contract stipulates a "joint venture" in which she
> is responsible for a percentage of the cost of publishing. I do
> not know if this cost is to be deducted from royalties, or if
> she is to "front" this money. As she is a first time author, I
> have heard from other authors that this is a common practice.
>
> I had sent my manuscript to this publishing house in Canada last
> month. Although I have not heard anything back as of yet, I was
> just wanting to get some clear information for my own benefit.
> She submitted (her manuscript genre is thriller/mystery) and she
> was responded to within a matter of days. It has been several
> weeks for my own (I, like you, write science fiction), but still
> haven't heard anything yet.
>
> Do you know anything about them other than what is posted on
> their web site? Have you represented authors to this house? Is
> this form of contract common for new authors? I realize the
> first novel isn't going to make a fortune, I'm just wanting to
> stay on the "up side" of information. If you could offer any
> words of wisdom, I would sincerely appreciate it.
>
> Thanks so much,
>
> [Name Deleted]
>
>
> =============
> So, folks, how about it? Is this legit?
>
> My first reaction is "No." My second reaction is "HELL NO!"
>
> In writing, money flows _toward_ the author. Always.
I have heard many bad things about Commonwealth as I work in the
publishing industry. However, not all vanity, subsidy, co-publishers (or
whatever title you give them) are bad. I am an editor for a small
co-publishing company. We do not do anything unethical. Those of you who
are writers know how hard it is to get published by large royalty-only
houses. My question is this: If you believe in your work, and you can't
find anyone else who will, why would you be afraid to put up money to
back it? We are completely upfront with our authors and they see the
progress along the way. They are welcome to ask any questions or visit
our office to see the validity of what we do. We use professional cover
designers and make four-color top quality covers. It upsets me to see
unethical subsidy publishers giving those of us who do our job ethically
a bad name. I know this is an old message, but I couldn't help but
respond considering my personal feelings on this issue. As an author,
you should not be made to feel ashamed of self-publishing or paying to
have your work published. Many very famous authors started out
self-published, or paying for their work to be published.
The real key is not to refuse to pay to have your work done, but to
carefully research and consider your many options.
Yog Sysop
Yog stirred in the depths when Four Seasons
<fours...@gnc.net> uttered:
>> In writing, money flows _toward_ the author. Always.
>
>
[snip]
>houses. My question is this: If you believe in your work, and you can't
>find anyone else who will, why would you be afraid to put up money to
>back it?
[snip]
My opinion stands -- if you're writing for money, you don't pay
money to have your work published. Ever.
If you have some other reason to want your work published (town
or family histories come to mind), then you should consider
contracting out the work of publication -- taking bids for the
typesetting, printing, binding, and so forth.
As far as ever recouping your investment from sales, while it
has been done, don't count on it. Carefully examine
distribution before you sign any contracts or write any checks.
--
James D. Macdonald
http://www.sff.net/people/doylemacdonald/
Four Seasons
Again, I say investigate all of your options. I guess we don't totally
disagree.
Jerry Bryson
Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > My opinion stands -- if you're writing for money, you don't pay
> > money to have your work published. Ever.
> >
> Again, I say investigate all of your options. I guess we don't totally
> disagree.
I have to go with McD. If *some* profesional editor, someplace, won't
risk paying for the publication, there may be a reason. I tend to take
an editor's rejection as advice.
--
Nescio ne sum, ergo penso sum.
Chuck Rothman
On Mon, 11 May 1998 13:13:52 -0400, Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net>
wrote:
>
>I have heard many bad things about Commonwealth as I work in the
>publishing industry. However, not all vanity, subsidy, co-publishers (or
>whatever title you give them) are bad. I am an editor for a small
>co-publishing company. We do not do anything unethical.
I find the idea of ethical vanity press (even if they use the word
"subsidy" to cover their tracks) a complete oxymoron.
>Those of you who
>are writers know how hard it is to get published by large royalty-only
>houses. My question is this: If you believe in your work, and you can't
>find anyone else who will, why would you be afraid to put up money to
>back it?
It's interesting that, after claiming to be ethical, you use exactly
the same argument that Commonweath did.
>Many very famous authors started out
>self-published, or paying for their work to be published.
Another misleading claim that the "unethical" vanity presses are
constantly using. As usual for "unethical" vanity presses, you blur
the line between self-publishing and hiring an vanity press. And
using the word "many" is also extremely misleading. The handful of
authors who succeeded through self-publishing did the publishing
themselves. They did not hire a publisher to do the job for them.
>The real key is not to refuse to pay to have your work done, but to
>carefully research and consider your many options.
Self-publishing is certainly an option in some cases. However, hiring
a vanity press is a waste of money, no matter how "ethical" they claim
to be. I've seen your web page; you publish novels. Were you
"ethical" enough to tell your clients that they had absolutely no
chance of making back the money they invested?
--
Chuck Rothman
http://www.sff.net/people/rothman
Join Albacon '98!
http://www.sff.net/people/rothman/Albacon
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
>Yog Sysop wrote:
>>
>> My opinion stands -- if you're writing for money, you don't pay
>> money to have your work published. Ever.
>>
>> If you have some other reason to want your work published (town
>> or family histories come to mind), then you should consider
>> contracting out the work of publication -- taking bids for the
>> typesetting, printing, binding, and so forth.
>>
>> As far as ever recouping your investment from sales, while it
>> has been done, don't count on it. Carefully examine
>> distribution before you sign any contracts or write any checks.
>
>Again, I say investigate all of your options. I guess we don't totally
>disagree.
May I recommend a book called HOW TO GET HAPPILY PUBLISHED, by Judith
Appelbaum? The updated fifth edition was published just recently. It
covers vanity presses and self-publication, as well as traditional
publishing, and sets forth the various pluses and minuses clearly.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Updated 4/24/98
TOUCHED BY THE GODS: Now available from Tor in hardcover, $24.95
Beyond Comics, Lakeforest Mall, Gaithersburg MD; http://www.beyondcomics.com
Four Seasons
I will not defend a company through a newsgroup, that seems lengthy and
pointless. If you are of the mindset that you should never pay to have
your work done then you feel that any payment is wrong and you will not
change your mind, no matter how I ramble on. I work for a company that
is ethical and yes, we did inform the author that they are not
guaranteed their money back. Maybe it is because I work for a company
that takes payment, but I think if you are honest with the author and
they choose to pay that you are being ethical. Think what you will. The
argument about larger houses not taking chances is very true. One of our
employees went to the Literary Congress last week and one of the
higher-ups at a large publishing company stated that they were firing
editors and getting rid of their mid-list. Being that you are familiar
with industry terms, I'm sure you know that that means that if you
aren't Jackie Collins or Stephen King, give up. Small presses (be they
vanity, subsidy, or otherwise) are taking up the niche that the large
publishers are leaving open. In the argument between "self-publishing"
and "vanity" publishing, it seems to be almost an issue of semantics.
It's okay to pay to publish your work yourself but not okay to pay a
publisher to do it for you? Where do you get your printing equipment,
binders, cutters, sorters, expensive computers, editing, layout, etc.
Either way, you are paying to be published, the only difference is that
with an actual publisher printing the book, (at least in our case) you
get the copyright and an ISBN number. A self-published book with no
distribution or ISBN number is absolutely impossible to sell. I know
that there are people with the old thought that you never pay to get
published, but that is going to change, with or without you.
--
***********************************
*Amber Feldman, Editor *
*Four Seasons Publishers *
*"Truth is shorter than fiction." *
* Irving Cohen *
***********************************
Four Seasons
Jerry Bryson wrote:
>
> Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > >
> > > My opinion stands -- if you're writing for money, you don't pay
> > > money to have your work published. Ever.
> > >
> > disagree.
>
> risk paying for the publication, there may be a reason. I tend to take
> an editor's rejection as advice.
>
> --
> Nescio ne sum, ergo penso sum.
May I add that that is not always the case. Many times, the larger
houses fill their lists early in the season and refuse to even consider
any other books. Getting picked up by an editor can be as much an issue
as timing as it is talent.
l...@gila.demon.co.uk
Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
What utter rot! Vanity presses have been around as long as publishing
- and nothing's changed as far as I can see. As for your
understanding of publishing, you reveal that you either don't know
what you are talking about or are prepared to lie when you say
>with an actual publisher printing the book, (at least in our case) you
>get the copyright and an ISBN number.
Just in case you _don't_ know - copyright exists from the moment the
work is created, and is the property of the author or creator unless
he or she specifically sells all rights. _No_ reputable publisher
would seek to take all rights. _Anyone_ can apply to get an ISBN
number for a book. So, if you've been telling authors otherwise -
well, I think it's clear just how ethical your company is; or if you
and your colleagues didn't know this much, then you - and they - are
plain incompetent.
The only thing you've said of any substance is the point about
distribution. So, please can you tell us which distributors you use,
how many sales reps you employ, and what advertising budget you have
for the books you produce (_Not_ for advertising your "service"?) If
the only budget put into the books is provided by the writers, how
much goes into overheads (ie, what chunk do you take for providing
the "service")? And how do you plan the advertising you - or the
writers - do? Or are they on their own?
If this is too difficult to answer in the abstract, lets presume I'm
Jane Doe, with a science fiction book I want to sell. Assuming you
expect me to pay for advertising, how much should I expect to put into
it? Will you have people to rep it for me around the distributors,
wholesalers and perhaps the independent bookshops? I'm quite
ambitious, and I do have a bit of money to spend. What's the best way
to get the most bang for my bucks? Which magazines should we be
looking at to advertise in? Is there anything I can do to increase
the chances of getting reviewed? How about awards? I haven't been
doing this sci-fi thing for long, but I've heard of something called
the Hugo and something else called the Nebula. How do I submit my
books for consideration by their juries?
Just a few questions... ones I'd ask any outfit like yours. I'm sure
we'd all be interested to hear your responses.
Liz
Chuck Rothman
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:38:52 -0400, Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net>
wrote:
>I will not defend a company through a newsgroup, that seems lengthy and
>pointless. If you are of the mindset that you should never pay to have
>your work done then you feel that any payment is wrong and you will not
>change your mind, no matter how I ramble on. I work for a company that
>is ethical and yes, we did inform the author that they are not
>guaranteed their money back.
The important question is: do you in form the authors that they have
practically NO chance of getting their money back? Do you tell them
what percentage of your books do earn money for an author? That would
be ethical -- telling the truth about your services.
> One of our
>employees went to the Literary Congress last week and one of the
>higher-ups at a large publishing company stated that they were firing
>editors and getting rid of their mid-list. Being that you are familiar
>with industry terms, I'm sure you know that that means that if you
>aren't Jackie Collins or Stephen King, give up.
I'm familiar enough with industry terms to know that's not true. I
see books all the time written by unknowns. How do you think Collins
and King got started?
>Small presses (be they
>vanity, subsidy, or otherwise) are taking up the niche that the large
>publishers are leaving open. In the argument between "self-publishing"
>and "vanity" publishing, it seems to be almost an issue of semantics.
>It's okay to pay to publish your work yourself but not okay to pay a
>publisher to do it for you?
Because if an author pays the publisher, the publisher has no stake in
the outcome. As the vanity press, you make money no matter how badly
the book fails. So it doesn't make any difference to you whether the
book is good or bad -- as long as someone pays you, you're set. With
a setup like that, you can publish anything by anybody who has the
cash.
How many authors do you reject?
>Where do you get your printing equipment,
>binders, cutters, sorters, expensive computers, editing, layout, etc.
>Either way, you are paying to be published, the only difference is that
>with an actual publisher printing the book, (at least in our case) you
>get the copyright and an ISBN number. A self-published book with no
>distribution or ISBN number is absolutely impossible to sell.
It doesn't take an "actual" publisher to get the copyright and ISBN;
anyone can do it. And it would cost the author far less to do it
herself than to use your services, which gives her a better chance at
making a profit.
>I know
>that there are people with the old thought that you never pay to get
>published, but that is going to change, with or without you.
I doubt it. The only one it helps are the vanity press themselves.
It does nothing for the author or the reading public, since a vanity
press is perfectly willing to publish a godawful book if the author
wants to pay for it.
Four Seasons
In response to your quesitons, I do not run the company nor do I
personally run every department. I will take the print up of your
questions and get answers if you really do want them. But, truthfully, I
think you have a certain opinion that will not change no matter what I
say. My opinions are based solely on what I know as an employee. I do
not run a publishing company nor am I writer. I may have stated things
(ISBN numbers, etc.) that everyone already knows but from my limited
(editorial department) view, it seems to me that there is a hell of a
lot of work that goes into producing one book, let alone thousands. My
point was that having someone else manage that for you seems to be a
better idea (as opposed to "self-publishing"). I realize that you and
many other people have different views, that is why forums like this
continue. I do not intend to try to convince you to believe me, and
quite frankly, I don't care. I was not responding as a sales copy for a
get-rich-quick vanity press. I was only adding my OPIONION of what I do
and my knowledge of the industry from my view. If you all would like to
continue the argument of whether I'm right or you are, I will not
respond.
If you would really like me to find the answers to all of your
questions, then I will. I suspect, however, that you are trying to prove
that the company I work for and all of the others like us are evil. If
this is your only motive, then I will not waste my time composing the
answers.
Good day.
A. Feldman
l...@gila.demon.co.uk
Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
>In response to your quesitons, I do not run the company nor do I
>personally run every department. I will take the print up of your
>questions and get answers if you really do want them. But, truthfully, I
>think you have a certain opinion that will not change no matter what I
>say. My opinions are based solely on what I know as an employee. I do
>not run a publishing company nor am I writer. I may have stated things
>(ISBN numbers, etc.) that everyone already knows but from my limited
>(editorial department) view, it seems to me that there is a hell of a
>lot of work that goes into producing one book, let alone thousands.
Yes, of course there is - no-one's disputing that. But the things you
got wrong are _basic_. They are things anyone working for a real
publishing company would learn in weeks.
My
>point was that having someone else manage that for you seems to be a
>better idea (as opposed to "self-publishing"). I realize that you and
>many other people have different views, that is why forums like this
>continue. I do not intend to try to convince you to believe me, and
>quite frankly, I don't care. I was not responding as a sales copy for a
>get-rich-quick vanity press. I was only adding my OPIONION of what I do
>and my knowledge of the industry from my view. If you all would like to
>continue the argument of whether I'm right or you are, I will not
>respond.
Let's see: some of us here spend a great deal of time fielding
questions from beginners about whether they should pay for
publication. You come here, ostensibly to try and persuade us that
these people would not be wasting their money if they spent it with
you. As soon as hard questions get asked, you turn tail.
>If you would really like me to find the answers to all of your
>questions, then I will. I suspect, however, that you are trying to prove
>that the company I work for and all of the others like us are evil. If
>this is your only motive, then I will not waste my time composing the
>answers.
You can take my questions any way you like. In my opinion, anyone who
spent money with your company without asking such questions would be a
fool. You came here appending your company's name to your own. You
acted as if you were representing them. Now it appears that we are
somehow wrong for treating you as you appeared to want. I don't think
you wanted to have a discussion; I think you wanted to say anything
you felt like, and not be challenged.
Unfortunately, a lot of the people here know a bit too much about the
business to fall for it.
Liz
Jim Bailey
Four Seasons wrote:
>
> May I add that that is not always the case. Many times, the larger
> houses fill their lists early in the season and refuse to even consider
> any other books. Getting picked up by an editor can be as much an issue
> as timing as it is talent.
And? So? Send it someplace else. When all of the advance paying
publishers have made a pass, make a list of the ones that have changed
editors in the meantime and send it 'round again.
And before any of this has happened, the author should have written 2 or
3 more books to start making the rounds just as above.
The pattern that seems to hold for people that buy into vanity
publishing or editing schemes is that they write *A* book, and then
spend the rest of their energy making sure it gets published no matter
what the cost or circumstances. Odds are very strong that it simply
wasn't good enough and that the writer needs to take the lessons learned
from that experience and come back with a new, *better* book.
If the goal is simply personal satisfaction of seeing something you
wrote "in print", take it down to the local/regional printers and get it
done to match your vision.
The good thing about local printers is there is *no* agenda. They give
you a price list for services, then you choose exactly what you want.
They can even tell you how to get an ISBN number and copyright
registration and not charge you for the advice. There's nothing secret
about the business, and they've probably dealt with everybody from major
publishers to local tour guides and might even know some regional
bookstores that would be interested in your particular book.
As was said, unless a vanity press can *guarantee* distribution that
will put the book in bookstores (not vague hints that *some* of their
list has appeared in B&N or Amazon.com), the end result is exactly the
same, boxes and boxes of books that the author has to hawk himself to
earn back the investment.
Best,
Jim Bailey
Keith Stokes
y...@sff.net (Yog Sysop) wrote:
>My opinion stands -- if you're writing for money, you don't pay
>money to have your work published. Ever.
You are entitled to that opinion (I'm not sure what mine is), but at least one
successful fantasy author doesn't agree. Suzett Haden Elgin has been
self publishing for several years and is pushing other authors to do the same.
She likes getting all of the profit, rather than a portion.
Keith
Bruce Baugh
>The pattern that seems to hold for people that buy into vanity
>publishing or editing schemes is that they write *A* book, and then
>spend the rest of their energy making sure it gets published no matter
>what the cost or circumstances. Odds are very strong that it simply
>wasn't good enough and that the writer needs to take the lessons learned
>from that experience and come back with a new, *better* book.
This seems very broadly true, yes. A great deal of the time, the correct
answer is "this work has some strengths, but needs much work". And in
the end, there doesn't seem to be any way to build the craft of writing
except by, well, writing.
And quite often, later on the author is just as glad that earlier work
didn't see the light of day....
--
http://brucebaugh.home.mindspring.com/
Rolegaming, writing tools, miscellany
"These works exist because of a specialized demand, because boys
at certain ages find it necessary to read about Martians, death-
rays, grizzly bears and gansters." - George Orwell on rolegaming
J Steven York
On Mon, 18 May 1998 09:40:18 -0400, Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net>
wrote:
>Jerry Bryson wrote:
>>
>> Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net> wrote:
SNIP
>> I have to go with McD. If *some* profesional editor, someplace, won't
>> risk paying for the publication, there may be a reason. I tend to take
>> an editor's rejection as advice.
SNIP
>May I add that that is not always the case. Many times, the larger
>houses fill their lists early in the season and refuse to even consider
>any other books. Getting picked up by an editor can be as much an issue
>as timing as it is talent.
Which can also be flipped to mean that persistence can sometimes be as
important as talent. The rejection of one editor isn't necessarily
meaningful, just as one point doesn't define a line, but the
rejections of MULTIPLE editors may well mean something, if only that
the book is good, but no great enough to leap off the slush (or the
racks, if published). There are self-publishing success stories, but
the fact is, the successful self-published author needs not just a
base-hit, but a home-run, the first time at the plate. That means
that not only must the book be marketable, but the marketing and
promotion of the book has to be exceptional as well.
It's an extreme risk, though it can be a calculated one. For most
writers though, it's either a last resort, or an attempt to buy
themselves a shortcut. A rejection slip is an extremely frustrating
way not to achieve success, but it's a relatively cheap one.
-------------------------------------------------------------
J. Steven York - Writer, robot-master, back-yard rocket scientist
newsgroup: sff.people.j-steven-york
Steve's Multiplex of the Mind:
http://www.sff.net/people/j-steven-york/
J Steven York
I'll also add that, if one is considering self-publishing, consider
SELF-PUBLISHING. Look in your phone book, and you'll find plenty of
printers and bookbinders. Call them up, tell them want you want, ask
what they can do for you. Any decent home PC these days can
potentially turn out a book indistinguishable from one published in
New York, or you can hire someone to do design and layout. You may
not have (or wish to develop) the skills necessary to turn out a
decent looking book, but those skills can be purchased at a
competitive market rate in an mid-sized or larger city. Learning to
produce and package your book isn't necessarily easy, but it may be
easier than you think, and it doesn't have to cost anything. At the
very least, knowing something about the process will let you know if
what the vanity publisher is charging is anywhere near reasonable.
A vanity press will package all these things, and likely charge you a
large (possibly huge) premium for doing so. That added expense may be
worth the time to do some of your own legwork. You may (probably
will) still fail, but at least you will have learned the process. If
you want to try again, you'll know how to do-so better, and cheaper.
Vanity presses will claim to be selling expertise, and there MAY be
some truth to that, but that greatest expertise most of these
companies have is in separating writers from their money. Remember
THAT is their real business, no matter how sincere and capable their
other efforts may be, YOU are their source of income, not publishing
or selling books. Never, ever, forget that.
Chuck Rothman
On Mon, 18 May 1998 16:23:10 -0400, Four Seasons <fours...@gnc.net>
wrote:
>In response to your quesitons, I do not run the company nor do I
>personally run every department. I will take the print up of your
>questions and get answers if you really do want them.
I think it would be a very good exercise -- for you, especially. You
may learn things about your employer that may change your opinion of
their ethical standards.
>But, truthfully, I
>think you have a certain opinion that will not change no matter what I
>say. My opinions are based solely on what I know as an employee.
But what you know is based on what the actual owners told you, not any
outside experience. If they're behaving unethically to their clients
-- and as a vanity press, that's the usual case -- then they aren't
necessarily telling YOU the truth, either. A lot of the things you
have posted here are standard "unethical" vanity press propaganda; it
sounds like you are only repeating what you've been told..
>I do
>not run a publishing company nor am I writer. I may have stated things
>(ISBN numbers, etc.) that everyone already knows but from my limited
>(editorial department) view, it seems to me that there is a hell of a
>lot of work that goes into producing one book, let alone thousands. My
>point was that having someone else manage that for you seems to be a
>better idea (as opposed to "self-publishing").
But >do< they manage the publicity and distribution? That's what the
questions will determine. And I find it hard to believe that you
can't answer some of the questions yourself. Does the company have a
sales department that works to sell the book to bookstores? You
should be able to answer that one.
Yog Sysop
>May I add that that is not always the case. Many times, the larger
>houses fill their lists early in the season and refuse to even consider
>any other books. Getting picked up by an editor can be as much an issue
>as timing as it is talent.
If this is true, and I have no reason to believe that it is, all
it means is you have a leg up on the _next_ season.
At risk of reigniting an old flamewar, you still have to write
your million words to get good enough to be publishable, and you
still have to write your two million words to get good.
The fact that you hired someone to publish your book doesn't
substitute for writing a publishable book, and isn't a shortcut
to success.
There are special circumstances (regimental histories, for
example) that wouldn't have wide appeal no matter how well
written. But even there, if the writing is good enough, or the
subject compelling enough, the book will sell. _United States
Navy Destroyer Operations in World War II_ went through two
hardcover printings, a subsequent revised edition had four
printings in paperback, and was revised again for yet another
paperback publication.
There are a handful of people who published their own books,
went on to see good sales through bookstores, and subsequently
saw them picked up by major publishers. This happens
infrequently enough to be big news. I don't think that any of
them used subsidy presses, though. Every one of them hired out
the printing. The big thing seems to have been the willingness
to put cases of their books in the backs of their cars and drive
to every bookstore on the coast flogging copies. Without that
vital last step, the rest is meaningless. And that's where the
major publishers have the big advantage -- aside from talented
editors who are able to make a good book better, they have full
sales forces, publicity and marketing specialists, and the
infrastructure to contact the bookstores and to ship the books.
Yog Sysop
> One of our
>employees went to the Literary Congress last week and one of the
>higher-ups at a large publishing company stated that they were firing
>editors and getting rid of their mid-list.
Did this higher-up have a name? What publisher did he or she
represent?
> Being that you are familiar
>with industry terms, I'm sure you know that that means that if you
>aren't Jackie Collins or Stephen King, give up.
This isn't true, for one simple reason: the publishers all know
that Jackie Collins and Stephen King won't live forever. Every
one of them knows that the next John Grisham is sitting in the
slush pile, waiting for them.
> Small presses (be they
>vanity, subsidy, or otherwise) are taking up the niche that the large
>publishers are leaving open.
This seems to be blurring the distinction between a small press
and a vanity or subsidy press. They are two very different
things, I assure you.
> I know
>that there are people with the old thought that you never pay to get
>published, but that is going to change, with or without you.
I never pay to get published. Period, full stop, end of
sentence. I strongly recommend that no one ever pay to get
published. If you feel that having a book with your name on it
is the most important thing (rather than, say, buying
groceries), then check out your local printshop. They'll be
happy to run off a few copies for you. If you want to then sell
the books, good luck to you.
Do you honestly foresee a future in which the majority of books
that you see on the racks will have been published because the
authors paid their own money to print their books?
I don't see that happening.
Peter H. Granzeau
On Wed, 20 May 1998 02:44:04 GMT, y...@sff.net (Yog Sysop) wrote:
>There are special circumstances (regimental histories, for
>example) that wouldn't have wide appeal no matter how well
>written. But even there, if the writing is good enough, or the
>subject compelling enough, the book will sell. _United States
>Navy Destroyer Operations in World War II_ went through two
>hardcover printings, a subsequent revised edition had four
>printings in paperback, and was revised again for yet another
>paperback publication.
Wasn't that one published by the Naval Institute in Annapolis? I
remember the paperback abridgement, _Tin Cans_. I wish I still had
it.
--
Pete