You pays your money, you takes your choice ...

The Book 2 Book newsletter that I subscribe to today has two snippets in the form of press releases from Authorhouse, the largest print on demand operation in the UK, if not the world. The first of these announces two new publishing packages for hard and paperbacks respectively, each of which includes professional one to one support, custom cover design, ISBN registration, online distribution, custom interior layout, and what they term as "more services". The hardback package also includes personalised back cover and 5 complimentary copies.

The second press release states that the company have launched a new and improved UK website. The new site, which they claim is easier to navigate (anything would be an improvement on the old one) will in their own words "improve the experience for the increasing number of authors choosing to publish a book with AuthorHouse UK".

New features include a special savings and offers section with the latest offers for saving money on publishing packages, marketing services, and books, an author resource area with tips and advice from fellow authors, plus an updated bookstore which makes searching for and purcahsing Authorhouse titles quicker and easier than ever before.

I went to the new site to have a look myself and was pleasantly surprised at how easy it is to find your way around and to obtain information (if not prices) on the various options available. The prices for the publishing packages are there for everyone to see, and at first look compared to my own publisher Authors OnLine Ltd do not appear unreasonable, but the service that Authorhouse provide, judging from what I saw at the seminar that I attended (which admittedly was three years ago), and from talking to those who have published with them, does not begin to compare. I remember when I first spoke to Richard, the boss at Authors OnLine Ltd and mentioned that I had considered Authorhouse, he said to me that everything they could do, he could do better, and probably cheaper, and I believe he was right.

The clincher for me is the Borders and Waterstones packages that they like to tout around. The sum of £999 buys you a basic Borders or Waterstones package whereby they guarantee that 3 copies of your work will be on display for 10 weeks in selected Borders or Waterstones stores (if the Borders ones are still there - one of those in the programme is Dublin). The books are displayed on a special Authorhouse stand - lumped together with all their other titles and therefore advertising to the world and his second cousin twice removed that the books are self published. This stand is not genre specific and is placed slap bang in the middle of the fiction area - fine for fiction writers but not so good for non fiction (of which the majority of self published books are). If you want to add either of these 2 options to your exisiting Authorhouse package you can do so, for £204 for Borders and £175 for Waterstones (why Borders costs more is not stated - perhaps because they demand a higher discount).

My point is though that you do not need to pay extra money for this service - all you need to do is prepare a few publicity materials (information sheet, reviews and so on) and a bit of professional sounding spiel, and ring the stores up. If you say the right things in the right way then they will order copies. It is as simple as that - these copies will be displayed where they belong, in the section that is relevant to your book, if they sell, for considerably more than 10 weeks.

Of course if you really want book stores to stock you, then the books need to be returnable, and this is where the Authorhouse returns package comes in - for the sum of £599 for the first year, you can buy an insurance policy that allows Authorhouse to place your book on sale or return with Gardners, the largest wholesaler in the UK, making it much more attractive to book stores. The problem is that very few if any self published titles make this kind of money - I would have to sell around 450 to 500 books to make this worthwhile - the same number that I have sold in the three years since publication. The sums for the majority of self publishers just do not add up.

Of course if the authors who are stupid enough to sign up to this package (which can be renewed after a year for a further fee of £249) had published with Authors OnLine Ltd and worked as hard as I did, then Richard would have put their books on sale or return for free. This is once again a lesson for would be self publishers to research the market and understand how things, in particular the supply chain works, which most that I encounter fail to do. You pays your money, you takes your choice - I know which one I would make, every time.

The debate re author advances

Stories regarding dwindling author advances have been circulating around the Internet for a while, and Mick Rooney recently discussed this subject extensively on his blog. In many ways this is not new or even big news, but The Times newspaper has got hold of the story, and so now it is.

The article in The Times which was published on July 11th, states that in some cases authors are having their advances slashed by as much as 75 percent. Historians are some of the hardest hit, with some the article states, turning to historical fiction instead in a bid to earn more money. Some who have previously commanded advances of over £100,000 have seen these slashed to just £30,000 (which I have to say still seems an awful lot to me).

Lisa Jardine, Professor of Renaissance Studies at Queen Mary, University of London, said that she was avoiding a new contract because of the uncertain state of the market. “I would not be surprised if I were now offered half of my last advance,” she said. “A few years ago we got really handsome advances to write books that did indeed become quite good bestsellers, but never earned out their advances. Then the publishers started asking jobbing authors to write books that did annoyingly well, but they’ve dried up, too. Now, as far as I know, what has replaced us are books about the history of science.”

Professor Jardine goes on to say that print on demand technology, which has been around for some ten years now in the UK, has shaken publishers confidence in their existing business models, and is a huge issue, causing them to avoid risky authors.

This may or may not be true, but the fact remains that if Jardine and others like her did not earn their advances back, then they were obviously too high to begin with. An advance is just that, an advance against sales, which is offset against future sales. The author only starts to earn royalties once they have sold sufficient books to earn that advance - if they do not, then no royalties are paid. The advance is usually non refundable - and in many cases, is all the money the author will get. Claims that the industry are taking advantage of authors during the recession do not then stand up.

One unnamed historian states that she knows another female author in the same genre who is hawking a book on a very marketable topic and has been offered an advance of just £25,000, which represents three years work. This she says is pretty serious.

To me serious is when you spend five years writing a book (as I did), living off an inheritance and savings. At the end of those five years, after receiving countless rejection letters from agents and publishers, you self publish, only to be told that book stores will not stock you as the books are not returnable. This is the true reality of publishing for the silent majority, and I cannot help feel that many of these historians who are now complaining so vociferously are a bit precious - it is clear to me that they do not live in the real world.

Is cutting author advances such a bad thing - in fact, should authors receive an advance at all? Is it fair that the publisher takes all the risk, shelling out money upfront in addition to the actual cost of publication for a book that may or may not sell? The advance which is usually paid in three parts (a third on signing the contract, one third on delivery of the manuscript and a third on publication), comes directly from the publishers marketing department based on the projected profit and loss sheets which are drawn up when the publisher is considering making an offer. It would be nice if we all earned these mega advances, but the majority of authors are lucky to get more than £10,000 and a substantial number of these never earn their advances back.

These are many factors which decide the level of advance paid - sales of previous books, the authors experience and business acumen, their agents negotiating skills (if they have one), interest from other buyers - all these things play a part. The advance signifies the publishers belief in the author, and the higher the advance generally speaking, the higher the marketing budget.

It is easy to see with all of this that the odds are stacked heavily against the publisher, who is expected to shoulder all the risk, so why continue in this way? It makes no sense and is an outdated method of doing business which is no longer relevant or useful. If advances were abolished then good writers would still earn good money, and publishers more to the point would also make money - since less would be wasted propping up authors whose sales do not stack up. This would leave more to go towards nurturing new talent which the industry so desperately needs. As one commentor on The Bookseller, which published the story today notes, too many have been riding the gravy train for too long, that it has taken on an aura of normalcy, something which is theirs by right, when it is clearly not. To defend this institution is nothing more than protectionism, which keeps new authors out and the double whammy of the recession and new technology has revealed the gaping cracks which were there all the time.

Of course if advances were to be abolished, authors would need to be compensated with considerably higher royalties, and that is matter for the industry to debate and work out. It is time in many ways that the balance of power shifted more equally between author and publisher and this may be one way to redress the imbalance. It remains to be seen how and if this can be done, but if not I fear that the flood of authors choosing to embrace the self publishing route, when they realise that they can and often do earn more, will soon turn into a hemorrhage.

POD takes the lead in the US

Just to prove David Taylor's point (see yesterday's post), for the first time, the number of print on demand titles published in the US has overtaken the number of traditionally printed lithograhic texts, according to bibliographic provider Bowker.

The amount of new books entering the US market decreased in 2008 by 3.2 percent, with a total of 275,232 new titles and editions, down from the 284,370 titles published in 2007. In contrast, Bowker reports that 285,394 'on demand' books were produced last year, representing a 132 percent increase over last year's figure of 123,276 titles. This is the second consecutive year of triple digit growth for the print on demand industry, driven largely by the surge in self publishing. I can see now why Amazon were so keen to expand their own operations.

This represents a huge benchmark for the American publishing industry. Although it remains to be seen whether this is a trend that will continue, I strongly suspect that it will. It would be naive to suggest that this was entirely down to self publishing, as more and more traditional publishers are also embracing POD for their back lists and niche titles, but this is a significiant turning point for the industry that seems so reluctant to accept self published books. It it not easy for such writers here to gain acceptance, and I have had to fight for every inch of press coverage and shelf space that my book has attained, but from what I understand from speaking to American writing friends, things there are even more difficult.

It proves though that print on demand is here to stay, whether the industry likes it or not. It is an undeniable fact that the growth that we see in this sector has been fuelled by the changing dynamics of the market place, with the balance of power shifting from publishers back to the authors. Authors increasingly realise that there is an easier way to market than to go through the endless cycle of submissions and rejections, waiting for that illusive contract, which even if offered, may not offer any more financial renumeration or help with marketing than if you had self published in the first place.

Print on demand - the industry's saving grace

The blog of literary agent and author advocate Richard Curtis has an interesting article today regarding print on demand and how it could prove to be the publishing industry's saving grace, something that I have stated for a long time.

What he has to say makes interesting reading, for he suggests that contrary to popular belief, there is nothing wrong with the publishing industry, despite its current decline, that a different form of distribution would not solve. The different form of distribution that he proposed has nothing to do with wholesalers, but is rather, a different printing method - namely, print on demand.

To those who are not in the know and do not understand why this would be so, it may seem like an extravagant statement, but the reasoning behind it will be clear to those who understand how it works, and there are some statistics to back this theory up, recorded in an interview conducted by Liz Thompson for Bookbrunch, with David Taylor, President of Lightning Source in the UK, the largest print on demand operation in the world. Lightning Source have printed 70 million books in the ten years since their operations began, and their facilities in Tennessee and Pennsylvania hold almost one million digital files.

While the rest of the industry is in the doldrums, Taylor claims that their business has grown by 20 to 30 percent in the last six months alone. Lightning Source print, bind and ship 10,000 books each day on machines that run around the clock. At their plant in Milton Keynes, they are building new, improved facilities the size of a football pitch. Lightning Source continues to thrive at a time when the industry is reeling from an epidemic of returns, with a system based on the exact opposite.

As Taylor told his interviewer, "the recession is focusing publishers' minds on cash, on the amount of inventory they have sitting in warehouses, on the cost of transporting stock. Most global publishers in the academic and STM (scientific, technical and medical) markets are saying they want to get out of inventory, and some pretty radical discussions are now taking place which will allow publishers to do just that. Believe me, it's an exciting time to be part of the business."

The most obvious solution to this problem is not to print so many books in the first place, and to ensure that those that are printed are sold - the best way to ensure that both of these happen is through print on demand, for you know that the books that are printed have already been sold.

In the future Taylor sees the creation of vast digital warehouses, which are in essence a network of servers containing vast archives of POD files linked to Espresso machines, which Blackwells are currently trailing in their Charing Cross store. These are like miniature print on demand machines (known as ATM's for books) that enable books to be printed and bound in a matter of minutes, the time it takes to have a cup of coffee, hence their name.

There is no reason in the future, why such machines should be confined to book shops; they could be set up anywhere, and could be particularly beneficial in developing countries that do not have the same infrastructure and distribution channels in place that we do in the west.

The full article can be read here.

Curtis also provides a useful and interesting link to You Tube where you can see the Espresso Machine in action.

A statement from Ingrams

As John Ingram issues a statement on the Lightning Source website regarding the advantages of print on demand, the lines increasingly become blurred between this printing method as a means of self publishing, and what most would call traditional publishing (i.e.,when the author does not have to meet the cost of publication him or herself).

I find myself agreeing with many of the points that John raises with regard to print on demand, and this will come as no surprise to regular readers of this blog. POD has many advantages to offer author and publishers alike, the ease of making changes to either the cover and/or text, the speed with which the books can be printed, bound and shipped, and most importantly of all, the ability to print books in small numbers without keeping a huge inventory. It seems that the rest of the industry is beginning to realise what authors such as myself have known for some time.

As John so rightly says, the industry needs something to transform it, not revive it. It will be interesting to see what The Money Programme has to say later in the week, when it presents its own analysis of the industry.

An article in the Irish Independent on Sunday poses the question, "Will we see radical new approaches to book publishing and selling over the next few years, some new faces and ideas that reflect our new-found search for meaning in these turbulent times?" I think to the answer to this, has to be yes, if the industry is to thrive and survive, and print on demand undoubtedly has a role to play.

A storm in a tea cup

Following some comments posted on here by one Aaron Shepard a week or so ago, regarding Amazon.co.uk and their plans to implement their own POD service, some interesting things have happened.

Aaron posted on here to say that both Bertrams and Gardners had stopped stocking Lightning Source titles, and that they were only available through what he referred to as 'back order'. This he said, had allowed Amazon.co.uk along with their other sites outside the US, to start listing LSI titles as 'out of stock' or to stop taking orders for them at all.

I was puzzled by these comments, since neither Bertrams or Gardners routinely stock any POD titles, no matter who they are printed by (my own book, which is stocked by Gardners, is very much the exception). Most POD books are available via special order only, which is what Aaron refers to as 'back order'. What this means is that rather than Gardners etc keeping the books in stock, they are printed to order as and when needed. This is the norm for most POD titles, and the reason why they are not normally returnable, hence the fact that the majority of retailers do not keep in stock.

Having said this, no retailer in their right mind would refuse to obtain a book that a customer had specifically requested, for to do so would be commercial suicide. If the customer requests this book, and pays for it upfront, which they would be expected to do so, then the sale is guaranteed, so what has the retailer got to lose? It is money for old rope.

It is true that Amazon.co.uk was showing such titles as out of stock, but when you looked at the details for these books, Amazon also said that they would let customers know when the books were available (expected within 6 to 9 days) and not take their money until then. There is nothing sinister in this at all, so I don't understand what Aaron was so upset about.

I emailed Richard to see what he knew and received the following reply:

"It would appear that Amazon managed to inadvertently route all Lighting Source books to the US printing works thus putting every POD book in Britain 'Temporarily Out of Stock' - and Gardners have not changed their policy, procedure or systems - if you start looking on Amazon now, you will see that they are all beginning to come back to normal. So a bit of a speculative storm in a tea cup - my info is from the President of Lightning Source who is a long standing business friend of mine, so I usually eventually get to the bottom of things."

He is as usual right. The majority of books are now showing as available within 24 hours - so back to business as usual.

I noticed that Paul has also posted some comments on The Bookseller stating that he spoke to I Damien Peachey from the Amazon press office. Damian assured him that although Amazon would prefer to print in house via Booksurge, publishers not signing up will be able to carry on exactly as they have been, with no problems at all. Titles will be available exactly the same as they always have.

I spoke to Paul in person the other night, and he relayed this tale in somewhat more detail. He also stated that he had spoken to the Business Development Manager of a large print on demand company based in both the UK and US, and he has received a letter from Amazon, confirming that printing with Booksurge is not compulsory, and things will continue as normal for all who do not sign up. So now we have it, in black and white, no one is forcing anyone to change printers.

All is well then that ends well. As Richard said all along, it is all a storm in a tea cup.

Amazon UK launches POD service

Around the end of March this year, stories began to circulate around the Internet that Amazon.com were contacting US based print on demand publishers by telephone and telling them that from now on, if they wished their books to be listed directly (i.e have buy now buttons) on Amazon.com, then they would have be printed by Booksurge, Amazon's own printer. This understandably caused a flurry of protests, for various reasons, which I blogged extensively about at the time, and which I will talk more about later on. It culminated in Angela Hoy, proprietor of Booklocker.com together with her husband Richard, filing an anti-trust suit against Amazon, which is due in court at any time.

Everyone in the UK breathed a sigh of relief when Amazon confirmed that we were safe - for the moment, but sadly it seems that this moment has passed, for earlier this week The Bookseller ran an article written by Graeme Neill entitled Amazon UK launches POD service.

The article states that Amazon has launched a print on demand programme in the UK, which means that they can rapidly print and ship individual books following a customer order. The service will allow them to bring previously unavailable titles, such as out of print books or foreign language editions, into print in the UK. Publishers who have joined the programme are listed as Faber, John Wiley and Sons, HarperCollins UK, Cambridge University Press and Allen and Unwin Australia. Amazon state that they will be able to print books in both colour and black and white, and that the books will be 'virtually' indistinguishable from traditionally printed (lithographic) titles.

The article goes on to state that for a limited time, Amazon.co.uk will be offering free set up for publishers with POD ready print on demand files. The service will it seems be offered from Amazon's fulfilment centre in Milton Keynes, the exact same town where POD printer Lightning Source are also based.

The more I read this article the more confused I got, as what the article describes is the exact service that Amazon already have through their partnership, if that is the right word to use, with Lightning Source. The similarities are so similar, that I began to wonder if they had come to an agreement with Lightning Source to print books with their name on in their own fulfilment centre - especially since Cambridge University Press are so I am told, Lightning Source' biggest customer by far.

Somewhat suspiciously, Christopher North, Vice President of media at Amazon.co.uk says that "Amazon will be consulting with its US POD company Booksurge for their 'expertise and experience'". He went on to say that Amazon.co.uk would not require publishers to use its POD service exclusively, adding that "We are offering titles that are being produced by other print on demand providers".

The funny thing is that they said the exact same thing in the States, but this turned out to mean that publishers who refused to print with Booksurge would have to join the inappropriately named Amazon Advantage programme instead, which requires publishers to give Amazon 55 percent off the list price (the same terms that wholesalers demand, when they are not a wholesaler), and pay Amazon $29.95 a year, plus all shipping costs to send the books to Amazon. These terms are even worse than the Booksurge contract, and that is saying something.

If this is what Amazon are proposing to bring into the UK then we should all be concerned, as it will cause ripples that will impact across the book industry for years to come.

This will be a lesson for all of us in unity consciousness - what publishers, large and small will need to do is band together and pool their resources, standing up and saying NO, we will not allow you to do this.

Although I reacted with fury to begin with, now that I have had a chance to think, the threat is a bit overplayed. The laws are different in this country, and the Monoplies and Mergers Commission would never let them get away with this. The court case in America with BookLocker is yet to be decided also, and to push ahead with this prior to the verdict would be stupid in the extreme. The fact is that no one, not even Amazon can force anyone to do anything that they don't want to - people like to think otherwise as thay way they can kid themselves that they don't have a choice, and then don't have to take responsibility.

Amazon do not buy books published by the smaller companies and the self publishing outfits direct from them, but through wholesalers. I know this for a fact, as I been told it many times by many different people. It makes sense for them to obtain my book in this way, since it is stocked by Gardners, who give them a far better deal (and higher discount) than Richard would. All books that have both an ISBN and distribution through either Bertrams or Gardners, the UK's two largest wholesalers (all major POD companies have accounts with both) are automatically fed to Amazon's site by the ISBN agency, and there is nothing that Amazon can do to prevent this. It is how the system works. They can in theory remove any book that they like from their site (and I am sure that they would find a way - they did with Hachette Livre) if they really wanted to, but this would entail an awful lot of work, too much even for the mighty Amazon. I mean think about it for a moment, would they really go to the time and trouble of wading through all those books from all those publishers and removing them from their site - of course not, and more to the point, would they really alienate themselves from companies that provide their most lucrative source of income - no - they know which side their bread is buttered.

I don't think we have reason to panic then quite yet.

The future's bright, the future's digital

Changes have been taking place within the publishing industry this past year or so at an alarming rate, or what seems alarming for a relatively slow moving trade. The industry is notoriously resistant to change, and so to many, these changes have not been easy and the transition far from smooth. The main threats facing the industry, which have been much debated in recent months are of course both e-books and print on demand. Both have been around for some time, with print on demand making great inroads and coming on in leaps and bounds. This is due in part to hard working and professional self publishers such as myself who have worked tirelessly to change perceptions, but also due to economics. While lithographic printing has become more expensive, due to the various costs involved, as the technology has grown and evolved, print on demand has become cheaper. Publishers are then embracing this technology as never before, and beginning to see it as more of a positive than a negative. This can only be a good thing.

The second threat if that is the right word, is e-books. Like print on demand, these too have been available for some time, but unlike print on demand, have been confined mainly to academic texts. This though is changing with the advent of new user friendly e-reader devices, such as the Amazon Kindle and the Sony Reader, recently trialled very successfully I might add, by Waterstones.

What exactly though is an e-book? An e-book is a book that has been digitised so that it can be read on an electronic device instead of a paper copy. This reading device has traditionally been a computer, but can also be one of the new reading devices as mentioned above. Instead of reading the words on a page, you read them on the screen - to advance to the next page, you simply press the next button. The e-readers themselves are shaped very much like books, and weigh about the same.

They offer several advantages over traditional paper books - the most obvious of which is the ability to store up to 100 books on the same device. Think how heavy and awkward it would be if you had to carry around 100 books! This is a real boon for travellers and academics alike, not to mention writers like myself, who need access to lots of different texts at the touch of a button for research purposes. The ability to search quickly and easily within the text is another advantage.

The readers have received a mixed reaction amongst book devotees, with some welcoming them and others seemingly dead against. I fell into this camp myself until I actually saw one in my local Waterstones and had the opportunity to have a play around. They are surprisingly lightweight and very user friendly, with a well lit and lifelike screen that copes well even with bright sunlight. Whether you could use it in the bath is matter for debate - it would not be advisable, since water and electricity do not mix (like i-pods the readers have rechargeable batteries so don't need to be plugged in all the time). Curling up with one of these in bed would not have quite the same feel either, but the readers are here to stay, whether we like it or not, so we had better used to them.

The reaction from authors has also been mixed, with concerns over piracy and copyright. These issues do need to be addressed, but they mask, in my opinion, the underlying cause of this fear. The fear comes not from the technology itself but from it represents - freedom for both author and reader. If e-books catch on then publishers and agents could become obsolete, for instead of relying on them to sell their wares, authors will be able to go direct to the public. There will be nothing to stop them from setting up their own websites (the smart author has already done this anyway), paying a small fee to have their books digitised (Authors OnLine did a splendid job with mine for a very small fee indeed), and a bit more for publicity (easier said than done, depending on who you are). Once these costs are taken off the author gets 100 percent of the royalties. A traditional publisher if you are lucky, pays between 10 and 15 percent, so you work it out.

Publishing companies have good cause to be concerned, for this is a direct threat to their livelihood. They are bound to see their revenues decline, as are agents, as more and more authors begin to cut out the middle men, who have traditionally acted as gatekeepers. The old ways are crumbling to give birth to the new.

The real beneficiaries as always will be the unseen and unheard majority, those who cannot for various reasons get either an agent or a publisher to help sell their wares. There will be (and in reality, already is) nothing to prevent them from setting up their own store fronts in competition with the big boys and girls, who will no longer be able to look down on us from ivory towers, but instead look upon as the equals that we are. This will open up the market as never before, and do wonders to help the self published cause. The future belongs fairly and squarely to us, who embrace this technology with open arms, knowing what it means and the advantages that it offers. Perhaps as author and Sony ambassaor Toby Young says so eloquently in the current edition of Waterstones magazine, that is the real reason why so many are so nervous.

A review of the new Sony e-Reader can be seen here.

YouWriteOn publishes POD books for free

A few days ago, I received the following email from Arts Council sponsored peer review website, YouWriteOn. It reads as follows:

"Dear YouWriteOn member

Arts Council funded YouWriteOn.com will publish the first 5,000 writers who contact us for Free - fiction and non fiction.

To participate follow these 2 steps:

1) Email youwriteon@googlemail.com, and inside your email add your name, address, telephone number, book title, genre, length of your book, and a synopsis up to 50 words
2) We will contact the first 5,000 people who email us by 31st October 2008. Your book will be ready to order by readers as a paperback by Christmas. Open to UK and US residents."

The email goes on to provide further details of previous successes that the site has launched (all fiction, since the site is for some inexplicable reason, closed to non fiction writers, as indeed all other peer review sites are, with the exception of Authonomy), and provide details of how this deal will work.

Books will be available to order direct through the YouWriteOn site, and members will be able to review them and contact each other in the same way as with other works downloaded on to the site. The authors will receive a 60 percent royalty for each copy sold, paid six monthly, as opposed to the usual 12 to 15 percent paid by commercial publishers. The books they say, will be the same quality as bookstore or 'trade' paperbacks, and the author will retain all rights to their work. It goes without saying that the books will not be lithographic, but print on demand.

The offer, which seems a good one, is open to UK and US residents only and the contract is non exclusive - what this means is that if you are made an offer from someone else, or have other reasons to withdraw the work from their site, then you can do without any further obligation.

While this offer is entirely free, the books do need to be in a publishable state, since here is the catch, no editing or proof reading is offered. While it is true that works that have been on the site for some time may have been subject to a form of proof reading on the part of the readers, who point out mistakes so that they can be corrected, this is not the same thing as a professional edit. I can already hear the battle cries of 'vanity press', and believe you me, certain sectors of the industry will seize on this as an excuse to use that term and be very derogatory indeed about the resultant books. It does make one wonder whether this is such a good deal or not. It does though do a lot to help raise POD's profile, and I have to say that in general, YouWriteOn are a very POD friendly bunch, offering US authors affected by the Amazon debacle earlier this year, the chance to advertise their books (once again fiction only) on the site for free.

On the other hand, it this that much different to what other POD providers offer, such as Authors OnLine Ltd? In some ways no, but in others, yes. Authors OnLine and other reputable print on demand providers (there are a few of them) have access to freelancers whose role is to edit and proof read (for a fee) works that they publish or put their name to. They also offer help with marketing (if you ask) that goes far beyond placing it on a website and asking people to review it. On the other hand, they are not as high profile as YouWriteOn, which attracts some heavyweight members, with the chance of being spotted and picked up by one of the big boys (or girls - and several authors have been).

Of course none of this is of any significance to the non fiction writer (and bear in mind that most print on demand books are non fiction, as indeed most books are in general - the market for fiction is small in comparison), since YouWriteOn do not publish such material on their site anyway, yet the free publishing offer does include non fiction. Maybe they are planning to open the site up to non fiction in the hopefully near future, I seem to remember them indicating that to me in an email, but the details are hazy.

The other catch is the relatively low, but nevertheless, competitive cover prices that they hope to set, of between £5.99 and £7.99. With print costs of around 1 penny per page, plus the cover this will not leave much left over to pay the author their royalties. Mind you, 60 percent is still more than the 12 to 15 percent that commercial publishers pay, although the site doesn't stipulate whether royalties are based on net prices (after print costs etc are taken off) or the actual cover price. I would need to see the contract to know that, and seeing as I have nothing to offer them, that might be difficult ...

This seems such a good offer, that it is pity I don't have anything suitable. Perhaps I should consider publishing this blog ... Would you be prepared to buy it in published form - answers in the comments section please ...

Since the books will not have an ISBN (unless you pay extra for one - essential in my opinion), they will not be available in book stores or via the usual Internet retailers (Amazon, etc). This will cost an additional £39.99 through a separate partnership with Legend Press.

If you wish to submit your work, simply email YouWriteOn@legendpress.co.uk. The offer is open to applicants of all nationalities.

The End of Book Publishing as we know it?

My next installment for today features several other articles sent to me via the lovely people at Book2Book. The first of these is a rather long article published in New York magazine entitled The End of Book Publishing as we Know It? The article is too long to detail in its entirety but it basically bemoans the state of the industry, and poses the question, is this the end of publishing as we know it, and can and will it evolve into something better? What that something better is is open to debate, and depends as always on your point of view.

From the authors point of view, it cannot really get much worse, but that depends again on who you are. If you are one of the select few who is guaranteed large advances and healthy sales for every book that you write, then you may not have much to worry about, since you have made your money, but for the majority who struggle to get a foothold at all, then serious changed need to be made, changes that will I hope benefit all, and not just those who actually sell the books.

In its heyday, whenever that was, publishing was a good industry to be working in, the author has a large variety of different houses to choose from, both large and small, and many different outlets for their work. Today things are somewhat different - most of those smaller publishers have since been swallowed up the large conglomerates - the big five publishers who collectively control around 75 percent of the market - in the UK as well as the US. It is the same with book sellers, with independents being forced out of business by the aggressive marketing of the chains and Internet retailers, most notably Amazon. The industry is no longer driven by talent, but by profit, and market forces - in other words, the book buying public, who demand higher and higher discounts. It is an endless and self perpetuating cycle - the more they get used to discounted book prices, the more they demand them, until it gets to the point that nothing is bought at full price. What this means to both author and publisher is less money in the coffers to a) promote new talent and b) spend on producing good quality books. No one is a winner, least of all the public themselves.

The biggest threat comes from the Internet, without a doubt. E-books and print on demand also play a role. Amazon has been busy expanding their share of the market and capitalising on these new trends, by buying up not just Booksurge, a large print on demand company, but also Shelfari, a social networking site, where members are encouraged to upload their book shelves and make recommendations to others. They also launched the Kindle reading device (in the United States only, although I am sure that will change) earlier this year. Editors and retailers fear with good reason that they bent on building an an inclusive publishing business where they control every aspect from sales to publication, with no middle men in sight. The first step began at the end of March when they announced that from now on, any print on demand companies based in the United States would have to use their own printer Booksurge, in order to be listed directly on Amazon.com. This is the first step towards cutting out the middle men, and sceptics say in time, controlling the entire print on demand sector, which is increasingly used by not just self publishers, but also the larger houses to maintain their back lists, what is commonly referred to as the 'long tail'. Control this and you control the entire market. It is the same with the Kindle, why bother with HarperCollins, Borders Books etc when you can sell direct to the public via Amazon and have your books preloaded onto such a device? Certain books now are going straight to Kindle long before they are published as paper copies.

Amazon are also playing hard ball over terms with publishers. When Hachette Livre, the UK's largest publishing group refused to give into their demands for higher discounts, Amazon removed the BUY NEW button from its listings for all the company’s key books. Hachette’s CEO responded with an open letter, saying “Amazon seems each year to go from one publisher to another making increasing demands in order to achieve richer terms at our expense and sometimes at yours.” I know they feel, and the cynic in me says what the hell do they expect, for their have allowed other book sellers to get away with similar behaviour, demanding extortionate fees for prime placement and promotions) for far, far too long, at the expense of the small presses and self publishers who simply cannot compete.

The ultimate fear is that the Kindle could be a Trojan horse. At the moment, Amazon makes little or nothing at all on Kindle books. Pay $359 for the device and you can get e-books for $9.99. Publishers list those same e-books for $17.99, and as with paper copies, charge Amazon around half that price for the privilege. This means that Amazon make around $5 for each book, while the publishers make $9 (before overheads are taken off or taken into account).

The fear is that Amazon are doing what the supermarkets also do - offering a sweet deal now in order to undercut publishers later on. If they succeed in making e-books the dominant medium (and the signs are encouraging), then they will be in a position to pay publishers whatever they feel like, the same as they already trying to do with print on demand through the Booksurge debacle (see my posts about this on the archives from April of this year).

While some are playing a game of watch and wait, others are attempting to take matters into their own hands. HarperStudio and a few others are making ambitious plans. In February of this year, Bob Miller and Jane Friedman met at the bar of the Omni Berkshire hotel for one of their freewheeling chats. “How would you do it differently if you could start all over again,” Jane asked. Bob said that he’d try to reduce advances and returns, put out only a few books, and focus on cheap Internet marketing. “Why don’t you do that?” Jane asked, and within a week they had a deal.

Miller has worked out separate contracts with booksellers and authors - capping advances at $100,000 and reducing returns. Authors will contribute to their own pre-publication marketing.
Miller doesn’t wait for agent submissions, instead accosting writers at conferences, telling them how much more a writer can make under 50-50 profit-sharing. Of course the cynic in me says that all of this, noble as it sounds is really just another term for subsidy publishing, and why the hell shouldn't an author contribute to marketing - after all, whose book is it? When the contract is offered by a small unknown publisher is is subsidy or even worse, vanity publishing, but when the published in question is a large and respected one, then it is profit sharing ...

One unnamed indie publisher has gone a step further, expanding into print on demand, online subscriptions, and even considering a “salon” for loyal readers. He envisions a transition period of print on demand, followed by an era in which most books will be published electronically for next to nothing. High-priced, creatively designed hardcovers become will become limited edition collectors item - the vinyl of the future.

The transition will be hard - some publishers will transform, some will muddle through, and some will simply die. One things for sure; gone are the days when authors were paid in the millions, or even printed in the millions. The industry has to find a new way of being if it is survive.

Perhaps if we really want to turn things around we should listen to Sam Leith from The Telegraph, who states that reading makes you rich and better in bed.

A questionable practise

Going on from what I said yesterday re the Espresso Machine and how Blackwells are embracing this technology, I sent the information on this to Richard, who is of course the boss at Authors OnLine, and he sent an interesting response to the effect that in time this could cut out not only the middle men, such as wholesalers and the like, but also the POD providers themselves. After all, these machines hold the entire inventory for all books available through Lightning Source, the largest print on demand printer in the UK and North America (Booksurge take note), so it should be theoretically possible to bypass the POD providers and just print out books in store.

This may sound noble and full of appeal, but authors will always want and need to have paper copies to sell themselves, and also need the expertise and help that only an experienced publishing company can provide. Richard has many useful contacts who have helped me in various ways, whom I would not have had access to otherwise. It is true that I may have found other ways to form such contacts, but it would have taken considerable time and effort on my part, time which since I returned to work, is in short supply.

Print on demand is in the news this week in more ways that one, since Random House are embroiled in a dispute with some of their authors regarding new contracts for such books. This echoes the dispute in America last year with Simon and Schuster.

The controversy hinges on the definition of the term out of print in the new digital environment, since technically, as long as the publisher pays their annual fee to the POD printer to maintain their files, print on demand titles never are out of print. These new contracts state that rights will only revert back to the author if the publisher cannot supply a physical (paper) or electronic copy of the book within one month, or if there has been no royalty payment for one year.

In other words, the publisher may no longer be actively promoting the work, and may not have sold a copy in over a year, but as long as they can produce a book within a one month cycle, then the author is unable to terminate the contract. Print on demand may have its advantages, but a contract such as this will favour no one except the publisher, and certainly not the author.

A spokesperson for Random House said "When we acquire a new title, we commit to the author to do the very best job we can to publish and sell their book. Understandably, we believe we should have the right to continue to sell that book for as long as there is a viable market for it and responsibly take advantage of all new digital technologies. "We continue to work closely with the author and agent community to implement terms that are fair, but also reflect the fast-changing nature of the modern publishing industry."

What though is a viable market? I think that most would agree that a book has to sell more than one copy per year to be considered so. It does not take a genius to work this out. These proposed contracts then benefit no one except the publisher, who will do basically sod all, locking the author in to a contract which offers no benefit to them at all. They would from where I am sitting, be better off going to a POD provider like I did, and paying to have their work published, as they stand to earn a lot more money. Furthermore, most offer non exclusive contracts which state that if the author wishes to terminate the contract for whatever reason, they can do so with three months notice.

Random House have obviously learnt nothing from Simon and Schuster's example, and I think they will find that they too are forced to backtrack, as no sensible author or agent for that matter, would endorse these contracts.

News from the publishing world this week

There are several interesting stories circulating around the publishing world at the moment, not least of all that concerning the Amazon versus Hachette Livre dispute. The Times reports that the dispute is showing no signs of diminishing, and looks likely to drag on til at least Christmas, if not longer.

None of this is really news at all, since we all saw this happening a long time ago. It started with the abolition of the net book price agreement in 1995, and has got steadily worse since. Those within the industry warned at the time that this would bring nothing but disaster, so I am told (this was long before I began to write), but as per usual, no one listened.

The Times reports that back in the 1980's, a man with a background in the grocery business told a group of publishers: “In the trade I come from, if the retailer says, ‘Jump’, the supplier asks, ‘How high?’,” and the audience looked at him as if he were talking rubbish. Twenty years later, they know exactly what he meant.

Publishers admit that they should never have allowed discounts to get so high, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. The fact is that when an order from a retailer makes the difference between hitting and not hitting targets, and the consequences of rejecting that order is to see the business go elsewhere, then it is very hard to so no, even on such unfavourable terms.

This situation is not confined to publishing, as we see it throughout the retail trade - especially with the supermarkets and the shameful way in which they treat their suppliers - some of whom are forced to sell at a loss. Still, it is heartening to see such support from authors, across the board, it is in our interests really though, as the lower discounts become, the more money there is to pay us with.

It is as usual all about market forces - and what consumers are prepared to pay. It is the same old story, that the public want good quality goods and good service, but are not prepared to pay for it. I see this in my own job on an almost daily basis; it is why my company were forced to equalise shop and Internet prices earlier this month. The result of this has been that there is now so little profit on certain items, that it is hardly worth selling them at all without at least 2 add ons.

It is we are told business, and nothing personal. Tell that though to the members of staff at branches such as mine, who are being forced to close because they are no longer viable. Tell that to the children and dependents of those who work there. The Times states that any negotiator wants to screw out of the market as much as the market can take, but the fact that this happens does not mean that it is morally or ethically right, as everyone has the right to earn a living and maintain a certain lifestyle, where at least their basic needs are met (and beer and cigarettes are not basic needs). Book selling, in fact, publishing in general, makes very little money - Waterstones made a profit, so The Times says, last year, of 2.9 percent, while Hachette’s profit margin was 11.2 per cent. Are they then in a position to negotiate and dictate terms? Maybe not. I do know though that if we do not stop this slide, in retail in general, and not just publishing, then we will be hearing more about Amazon in the months to come, and it will not be long until they drive us all out of business.

Against this backdrop, it is somewhat depressing to read that Amazon has almost doubled its net profits over the last three months (ending June 2008) to $158 million. Sales of books, CDs and DVDs rose 31 percent, while electronics and general merchandise sales were up by 58 percent. City analysts report that the company are benefitting from high fuel prices, since consumers have less money for shopping trips and prefer instead to shop from home. Those consumers should try living here in good old blighty, where our petrol costs almost twice what theirs does!

On a happier note, it seems that the Espresso printing machines, which I mentioned on here some time ago, are finally set to arrive in the British Isles, being rolled out to larger Blackwells stores in the autumn. The machines - nicknamed the ATM for books, are capable of printing and binding books, while customers wait, in a matter of minutes, with a choice of over 1 million titles, many of which are rare or otherwise out of print.

The Espresso Book Machine’s backers claim that it combines the virtually unlimited choice of the Internet with the packaging of a conventional book, which has the potential to make the most obscure of titles easy to buy.

Many readers, especially students, and remember that Blackwells is the leading academic chain, complain that book stores are top heavy with piles of heavily hyped best sellers and celebrity dross from the big publishers, while the independent and small presses,including self publishers do not get a look in. This then will help to equalise things as never before, and can only be a good thing, for both authors and book buyers alike.

The machines, which are 9 feet long and 5 feet high (as I am also- high that is!), allow customers to type in any title that they want, and after seven minutes out pops the book, neatly trimmed and bound, for the same price as the equivalent book off the shelves.

The finished product is like any conventional paperback, although critics say that the illustrations are poor quality, and the books have a rubbery feel. As time goes on, I am sure these problems will be ironed out, and I am also sure that customers will be more than happy with the speed and convenience that these machines afford.

Other chains are less circumspect, stating that they will wait to see how the technology develops and improves, and how popular it proves to be with Blackwells customers.

Good news indeed, and one to watch. I for one will eagerly anticipate the arrival of the first machines, and if I find one near me, will willingly pay for a copy of my own work just to see how it does work, and what these books are like. I will report back on what I find.

Ditch the fat cats !

Job cuts seem to be being spoken of everywhere though, across all sectors of retailing. We often forget that publishing is retail as well, as it is ultimately not about printing, but selling books. It seems that all over the world, in both Britain and the United States, companies are struggling to come to terms with an extremely awkward and challenging environment, one that with a bit of foresight could have been foreseen and quite possibly prevented.

The regular Bookhitch newsletter that I receive says that there is an interesting story floating around that 50 or so years ago a mechanic somewhere in the western United States designed a carburetor that could get 60 miles to the half gallon while powering an 8 cylinder car. Rumour has it that a large oil company found out about this, bought the rights and paid to not only silence the mechanic but also made him sign a piece of paper stating that he would never design anything like this again, for the rest of his life. It wouldn't surprise me, as I have heard similar rumours about drug companies when cures for diseases are found.

This though just goes to underline the point that the solutions have been there all along, the problem is as Bookhitch put it, fat cats with chubby hands in the cookie jar.

The motor industry may on the surface look different to publishing, or for that matter the market that I work in, yet retail when it comes down to it, is retail, and no matter what you are selling, the problems and therefore the solutions, are the same. The problems though start at the top and trickle down. It is inevitably the case that those at the bottom who did not make the mistakes that led to the dire situation that so many retailers now find themselves in, are the first to lose their jobs. We are the ones who pay for our company's mistakes, and not those who actually made those mistakes, meaning that they do not learn from these mistakes.

Every year tens of thousands of books are wasted and pulped. Even though the technology is there to prevent this from happening (print on demand) it both abused and underused. Companies continue to use wasteful and outdated methods, paying lip service to the environment, until they are forced to make changes. This to me is pure nonsense and just does not make sense. Print costs are rising to such an extent that is now almost cheaper to use print on demand, and when it comes to quality the differences are negligible. Yet the publishing industry continues to rubbish this method, concentrating on the negatives instead of the positives.

It seems that in many cases, companies are unwilling to act until they are forced to do so. This would be after all be far too difficult, as it would entail the fat cat CEO's actually doing some work, to earn their obscene salaries. This would never do, as they would miss their round of golf and champagne breakfasts. I acknowledge though that not all companies are like this, and pressure from the public is making changes. I cannot speak for the company I work for, since I do not read the city news (far too depressing) and know what the CEO or MD earns, I do know though that my Store Manager has not had a pay rise that is actually worth anything in 3 years, and that the rise I have been awarded (3 percent, and bear in mind that we earn only 1 penny more than the minimum wage, although this is also set to change, no doubt after I have left) is less than the rate of inflation.

What is the solution? I cannot speak for my sector, which I fear is doomed, unless you work in a superstore, but publishers have to stop printing such high runs and remember that it is only the minority of books that become best sellers. Some books written by well known authors may well need high print runs and even second and third runs, but the majority do not. When you see the amount of books on sale in the bargain bins and in remainder shops such as the Speaking Tree, how much did these cost the publisher and author in terms of lost revenue? How much money, ink and paper has been wasted in the last year that could have been put to better use in actually promoting the books and helping them to sell, and also in paying staff and authors decent royalties, not to mention supporting new authors and giving their work a voice. Could those savings have saved or even created jobs? Maybe it is time to re-think what Bookhitch refer to as the three letter word - print on demand. Maybe it is also time to re-think the absurdly outdated notion that books must be returnable.

People in positions of power think that they are invincible (think Amazon) and resist resolutely anything that they perceive as challenging their position, keeping everyone else down. It is though in times of hardship that those who are at the bottom have the chance to excel and show their mettle, as when the going gets tough, the tough get going. I have proven this ten times over with my own attitude these last 12 months. We should then look to the bottom rather than the top as to how to improve things, going back to the floor, as this is where the action takes place. We are the ones who do the jobs and the real work, so we are the ones whose ideas should be implemented and put into place, or at the very least, looked at. We cannot do a worse job than those who are already in charge.

Perhaps we should also take a leaf from Michael Garibaldi's book, a character from Babylon Five. When he inherited a large research company and sacked the Board of Directors for plotting to kill both him and his wife, and embezzling the company, he replaced them with a team of individuals who had done nothing but complain about how awful the company was, figuring that they were the ones who should be listened to. Mr Garibaldi sounds like my kind of boss, and if some of mine had been more like this, then by now I would be one very happy and fat cat!

A big can of wiggly worms

The picture in tonight post pretty much sums up my present state of mind and so it seemed a highly appropriate choice.

What a can of worms the self publishing thread that I mentioned a day or so ago seems to have caused. It is amazing how quickly these things degenerate and how they seem to bring out the worst in human nature, triggering everyone's defence mechanisms into overdrive, including I hasten to add, my own.

I got home from work yesterday to find 2 messages from the site administrator informing me that some of my comments had caused offence, and that because of the comments that had been posted by certain other members, the thread had now been closed. I cannot speak for anyone else or their motivations, but my publishing insider radar was going off left right and centre, after what I interpreted as some rather personal comments which seemed to be criticising both my work and this blog, and after a link was posted back to here, inviting other readers to see for themselves what I had written on here.

In all fairness though, as the poster of these comments did say to me, the fact that I did actually post links to this site in my signature was an invitation to members to come and visit. It was not so much what was said though, as the way in which it was said. We have made our peace now though and all is forgiven, so all is well that ends well.

It is always difficult to see your work being criticised in such a public manner. Writers have large egos, and over active pain bodies, as much of what we write is very personal to us. The ego reacts so strongly to what it sees as criticism, as it views an attack on what we write as an attack on self. It does not know the difference. Self published authors such as myself seem to face an almost endless barrage of criticism from all quarters, and constant prejudice from the publishing industry in general. It may have been the case 10 years ago that print on demand books were dreadful quality, but things have changed, and their views have not kept pace with this change.

When you have to face this seemingly endless onslaught, and continually justify your reasons for choosing the POD route, it does get very, very tiresome indeed, and to be quite honest, I think that almost everyone would have reacted in the same way - with outrage and anger. It is difficult to face criticism from those who know nothing about your work other than the free chapter posted on your site, which you do not have to provide, and have them making negative comments about a book which they have not even read, let alone seen, simply because it is self published.

It did not help that I have had an awful couple of days at work - since Tuesday we have had just 2 members of staff in all day, running a busy store, for up to 9 1/2 hours with no break. The 2 of us that were in were running around like tits in trances trying to get the store looking good - don't ask me why when they are probably about to close it anyway! All this because some other Managers were coming to the store to do an inspection, and of course, they cannot possibly see it as it is. Well, when one of them asked me what I thought of the company, I told them the truth, and said we were not paid nearly what we are worth. I was utterly surprised to find that he actually agreed with me.

So, to say it has not been the easiest week is an understatement. Tomorrow though is another day, and it is also the first of my three regular days off (I only work four days a week). One week from now I shall be packing my bags and heading for Lundy via the M3.

I don't have to be right, just happy

It was so hot in the shop today that by the time I got home I felt like my uniform was sticking to every inch of my body. It must have been the hottest day of the year, with temperatures at what felt like at least 80 degrees and customers tempers fraying in the heat.

Everyone is on edge at the moment, since there is still no news of when or if we are to close. Our Area Manager had a meeting with the lease holder a week ago, and was supposed to let us know the outcome, but there is still no news.

In the midst of all this, and looking forward to Lundy, I am trying to figure out why the thread on self publishing that I spoke of yesterday is pressing my buttons so much. I am aware that much of the time, like the rest of humanity, I am driven by what has happened in my past, and this is bringing up all my issues to to do with rejection and the general unfairness of how I still perceive to a large extent, the publishing industry is run.

I said yesterday that many authors who are anti POD use the fact that they are commercially published in order to make themselves look and feel superior at our expense, and I am beginning to wonder whether there is an element of me doing the same thing, but in reverse. By painting everyone else to be the bad guys because of their inability to understand and agree with my point of view, I make myself into a victim, and therefore make them wrong. I then use the fact they I believe they are wrong to make myself feel better because I know something that they don't. It is a twisted kind of logic, but unfortunately true; the fact that I feel this I mean, not the fact that it is right.

It is not right for the simple reason that I am not a victim. I chose this route willingly. I may not have known everything that it would entail, but I had enough of an idea to know that it would not be the easiest of rides. The key is though as always, acceptance of what is, and so this only serves to make me aware that I still have work to do here. This gives my pain body much sustenance for it to sink its teeth into, but the fact I at least now recognise this pattern means that there is hope for m yet, and makes the acceptance that much easier. The painas alway comes from resistance, and so I will resist no more and accept that there is room for these views, and that I don't have to be right, just happy.

Facing change

I have been a member of a Book Lovers forum for some time now, where those who are in their own words 'addicted' to books, discuss the various ones that they have read or otherwise, as well as other more mundane issues surrounding their lives. It has, during my time there, become obvious that the majority of the members (with the exception of those who are authors) know very little as to how books are written and published, or how the choices that they as readers make, with regard to how much they pay, and where they obtain their books from, (assuming that they pay at all) impact on those within the industry. The industry is though whether we like it or not, driven by the readers, as they are the reason that we write in the first place. It is not to do with ego, or making money (well, not for most of us anyway), or anything like that, but because we feel that we wish to share something important with the reading public, but also because we have a gift that should be shared.

One of the debates currently going on on the site is one regarding self publishing and readers attitudes towards it. At the moment it seems to have been hijacked by one commercially published author, who is doing her best to come up with all sorts of arguments to prove that she is right and everyone else is wrong. This is of course though all ego. I recognise a certain amount of ego in me, I have to admit, when I read her rantings, but because I recognise it, it means that I can choose not to take her bait and get drawn in to a long and drawn out battle that neither of us would win.

It has though prompted this post on here, and so post I will.

During my time in publishing, I have seen much which is both good and bad (by the normal definitions anyway). I see lots of light and lots of those who appear to be embracing the change which has been brought about by the digital revolution, but I also see an industry (mostly the larger houses I have to say) which is also driven by fear. I see the walls that have been put up by various writing organizations, book reviewers (some refuse to review self published books at all) competition and other award panels (likewise), as well as book stores (who insist on returnability), and even the Internet (think Amazon), to keep self published books out. They cannot though be kept out, and if traditional means are closed to us, and the front door is shut, then as my Reiki Master Rowena Beaumont once said, there is always the back door, the windows and the roof.

I see attacks on self published and in particular print on demand books, on a daily basis, by not just those within the industry, but also increasingly by other authors, most of whom it has to be said are commercially published ones. I detect a large slice of ego in many of these authors, who seem to use the fact they are commercially published, and had the honour of being paid by a publisher to publish their work, and not the other way around, as a stick with which to beat up those who did not have this distinction. They use this as a means to make themselves look better at our expense. The ego is such that it has to make others feel bad or look inferior in order to make themselves look good. It never though works, but has the opposite effect, creating even more of that which they fear. Like it or not, self publishing is here to stay, whether we accept it or not, and once the flood gates are open, they cannot be closed.

Lynn Osterkamp has a particularly enlightening blog that I would recommend and it seems that her views on this are very similar to mine (and most other self publishers I would wager). She says on her excellent blog, that this unfortunate reaction to change was described in depth nearly 40 years ago by futurist Alvin Toffler. He put forth the idea that people find the accelerating pace of change overwhelming. His book, Future Shock, published in 1970 described a feeling of dread connected to rapid technological change, and a difficulty in adapting to it.

An increasingly large proportion of books published in today's market place are self published, by various means, yet these are for the most part not welcomed by the industry. They see these as a nuisance or an obstacle to them doing their work, as they create a market that in their own words 'is top heavy with dross', a market that creates too much choice.

Self publishing is though, where the future lies, in particular print on demand, and such authors are and will continue to make, significant inroads. Unfortunately old attitudes die hard, and these do not change as fast as the technology that now threatens the industry. Change is happening, but not nearly fast enough. Sure some of the houses are using print on demand for their own back lists and to launch new imprints, but they still attack self published print on demand books, as if they were some sort of virus, or something nasty to be wiped off your shoe.

It amuses me to see that many of these imprints also claim that they are utilising this wonderful 'new' technology, when it has been around in the UK now for over 10 years, and there is nothing new about it at all. They claim it as their own only when it suits them to do so.

A respected non profit website in America called Preditors and Editors, which aspiring authors use as a guide to publishers and publishing services offers advice on how to spot a scam publisher. This includes the following - a publisher that gives low or no advances (some of the imprints from the larger houses are now doing this, but offering higher royalties to compensate), publishers whose books are rarely if ever stocked in book stores, especially the large chains, publishers whose books have never made it on to the bestseller lists, been reviewed by 'reputable' sources such as the New York Times, or sell more than 5000 copies on a regular basis.

Such outdated criteria places almost every self publishing company in the scam category, along with the majority of small presses as well. Not though my publisher, as several of their books (including mine) are on the shelves of high street chains, and have also reviewed in the national press and made it on the best sellers lists.

The point is though that this criteria shows an inability to adapt to the changes currently taking place within the publishing world. This inability to adapt is based fairly and squarely on fear; the fear the current out dated methods of publishing are becoming obsolete, at the same time, making the jobs of those within the industry obsolete as well.

It is a scary thing to put yourself and your book out there, knowing that we face such hostility and what can sometimes seem like insurmountable odds. It is not though about us the writers, but about the readers, and those who are touched by the message that we bring. We are the cutting edge of this revolution, the forerunners that will lead the way. Once you get the blurb and the hype, the fact is that a good book is a good book regardless of how it was published or how many copies it sells. A good book to one person might also be an awful one to someone else. It is very much subjective. The readers then should be the judges and not the gate keepers.

It matters not whether a book sells 5 copies or 5000 copies, for those that need to read it will find it. That is how the universe works. It also works according to the universal laws, one of which is like attracts like. If we are constantly driven by fear then we will create even more fear, and all that we fear the most will manifest in our lives. I have seen this happen, more than once. We need to face our fears and work through them, rather than running away, or worse, criticising in order to maintain our own sense of superiority. The world is changing whether we choose to accept it or not, the question is, are we brave enough to face that change and go with the flow.

The rise in print on demand

I have become aware this morning of two articles extolling the virtues of print on demand, in two of the UK's most influential publications, The Economist and the Sunday Telegraph. Both make interesting reading, and are worth detailing here.

The first article in The Economist, is entitled Hard Pressed. The author, whose name is not mentioned, states that he has spent 35 years working in the publishing industry listening to the moans and groans of printing presses at work. Most commercial presses he says, these days use offset printing, but that is rapidly changing to digital (for this read print on demand). As distribution costs have sky rocketed, publishers have set up satellite printing plants to deal with regional markets (this is actually how Booksurge who are at the centre of the Amazon debate began). The economics of offset printing do not lend themselves well to short print runs. This is where print on demand comes in.

These machines, despite their advantages do not come cheap, with the author quoting a figure of around $750,000 for one 60 foot machine. Despite the initial cost, they have several advantages. Firstly, they do not have to print thousands of copies of the same image; the
impression made on successive sheets of paper can be entirely different. This allows publishers to tailor output for different markets - say for example Sydney, London or New York.

Second, unlike the wet inks used by traditional presses, the toners in digital printers are not absorbed into the paper, but form a layer on the surface instead. The images remain crisp and clear around the edges. It also means that they can be used to print on a variety of different mediums - such as packaging, fabrics and metal foils.

The disadvantage is that the cost per page remains the same no matter how pages are printed - against offset printing, where the more you print, the cheaper it becomes.

It has also led to the rise in print on demand publishing, where authors can choose to print their own books, bypassing the traditional agent, publisher route. This is no longer confined to the self publisher, as publishers both large and small also embrace this technology.

The advantages are obvious - you no longer have to guess how many copies to print, but can have them printed 'on demand' as and when the orders come in. It saves time and money, in terms of warehousing, shipping and returns, offsetting the initial higher print costs. At a time when everyone is trying to save trees, then this has to be a good thing.

Xerox, who are according to the article, the leader in digital colour printing, have upped the ante with their new generation of high-end presses, the iGen4. This xerographic leviathan can handle runs of up to 7 million colour pages a month. Their nearest competitor, the Indigo 7000 colour press from Hewlett Packard can handle just 4 million pages a month.

While you cannot tell the difference with books, such machines the article states, do not come close to matching the performance of traditional printing for newspapers and magazines.

The Economist prints about 1.65 million copies a week, with around 122 pages per issue, using eight printing plants around the world. On average, each of these plants handle 100 million pages a month - within a few hours of each other every Thursday, so that as many copies as possible can be delivered to news stands and newsagents first thing Friday morning. The best of today's digital printers would need a fourteen-fold increase in speed in order to match this.

What they lack in speed, the new generation of digital printers more than makes up for in quality. But this too could change, as waiting in the wings are some nifty ideas for applying ink-jet know-how to commercial printing.

Earlier this week, Xerox unveiled plans for a new gel-ink technology, with the consistency of toothpaste. When jetted from the print heads, this turns rock hard when exposed to a pulse of ultra-violet light. Because they are not water or alcohol-based like conventional ink-jet materials, they do not bleed into the paper and will cling to almost any surface, just like the digital inks.

This clever technology pioneered by Xerox's research centre in Canada could provide digital printing with its biggest chance yet to crack open the $400 billion offset market and break into the newspaper and magazine market. Watch this space.

The second article, on the Sunday Telegraph website says how 'new' print on demand technology is revolutionising the publishing industry, since it means that for the first time, publishers can bring back into circulation those classic out of print books that have a relatively small audience.

A new imprint, Faber Finds is soon to be launched with this aim in mind. There have been various impediments along the way, not least of all the industry's somewhat hostile attitude towards POD. It seems that even in these so-called enlightened times, agents and publishers are fearful of what this revolution will mean, and the very real threat that this presents to the industry, as if writers can publish their own works at such low cost, why would these agents and editors be needed at all? The article does not of course state this, and there will be always be a place for such people, but the fear is still there, and needs to be addressed.

Authors though were also concerned, especially given what happened with Simon and Schuster last year, where the company attempted to lock in authors whose books were available via POD, by stating that they were contracted to S&S for as long as the book remained in print, even though they may do nothing at all to promote it, and the author could earn more money from publishing themselves via a POD provider like Authors OnLine Ltd.

To overcome these issues, Faber and Faber put the authors at the very heart of this experiment, by approaching them and actually asking them to select titles for the new imprint. Initial talks were with P D James and John Lanchester, both of whom grasped the potential with great enthusiasm. This was mirrored by the many other writers who were approached, many of whom have written pieces for the new imprint's website and are championing books and writers that they cherish, but which are no longer conventionally (for this read via book shops for large discount via conventional offset printing) available.

Faber realised that authors are also readers, and that, according to Chief Executive Stephen Page, was the final piece of the jigsaw. Faber Finds will have a thriving online community who will be able to suggest books for the list as they buy them, review books and discuss their passions and interests with other visitors to the site.

In this way the technology of online life has been married to printing technology, creating an opportunity (perhaps) that has never existed before. This will bring together many excellent books, as well as writers, readers and the wider literary community to coax life back into some of the more fragile books in our culture.

The books will be available via all the usual channels, from either book stores or online.

This does sound, I must admit, like a imprint which will be very much going places, and will add a lot to the literary world, where publisher, author and reader work together to create a unique community designed to preserve and enhance our literary masterpieces. Whether it is truly unique is as always, open to debate.