I don't know much about the particular costs inherent in paper book publication. Only the accountants in houses like Harper-Collins and Random House know those, and they ain't sayin'.
So how can I estimate the price of a paper book? By analogy.
The 1970s were the heyday of the boardgame. Game designers like James Dunnigan, John Hill, and Frank Chapman were each turning out a new game every month. They produced famous games like PanzerBlitz, The Battle for Hue, and Harpoon.
At a time when the cost of a new game was $8, the physical content--the box, board, dice, playing pieces, and rulebook--cost $1.88.*
In truth, the games were underpriced. They should have been priced $9.40--five times the unit cost.** This difference between the price they charged and the price they should have charged killed many game companies, including the innovative leader S&T. How innovative were they? Innovative enough that their chief competitor, Avalon Hill, hired them to design a game for them.
So if, as Mr Bransford said, the physical costs total $1.50, then books should be sold to readers for $7.50. I don't see that happening.
On Amazon, I see Donald Rumsfeld's Known and Unknown*** marked down to $19.46 from $36.00. That tells me that the unit cost TO PRINT THE BOOK is either $3.73 (re: $19.46) or $7.20 (re: $36.00). If those costs are wrong, then 1) the TradPubs practice voodoo accounting or 2) the TradPubs' cost structure is so badly out of whack that it would be easier to replace it with a new model than it would be to fix it.
Number 1 on the New York Times Bestsellers List in Fiction is James Patterson's Toys, listed for $27.99 but marked down to $14.28. Did Little, Brown and Company spend $5.60 or $2.86 on the paper? Who knows? I don't. Does Little, Brown and Company know?
The problem with taking apart the TradPubs' pricing model is that no one knows how they arrive at their prices. It makes no difference whether you are inside or outside the industry. Why is James Patterson priced at $27.99 and selling at $14.28 while Donald Rumsfeld is priced at $36.00 and selling at $19.46? The pricing is illogical and the discounts are unpredictable.
This pricing structure is inefficient and unmanageable. It is doomed to fail or to fall. It will fail whenever and wherever it has to compete against a more efficient pricing structure. It will fall when the weight of accumulated bureaucracy becomes more costly than it can support.
Next time: Lurching Toward a New Pricing Paradigm
____________________
* This is the reason I do not believe Mr Bransford's estimate that the paper and distribution costs of a new book total $1.50. I do not believe that paper costs LESS today than it did 40 years ago.
** This '5x' scheme makes pricing tractable. Labor costs are subsumed in the markup. In fact, all costs that are 'amortized' are subsumed. But management can do cost breakouts and work to keep their labor costs within set goals.
*** You can love Rumsfeld or hate him, but you know his book is gonna sell.
++++++++++++++++++++
If you have not read Joe Konrath's interview of Mark Coker, the founder of Smashwords, please do so. The read was worth my time. I bet it will be worth yours, too.
Be sure to read the comments. Mr Coker's answers to readers' comments are included there.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Sunday eBook Review
 |
Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
Product Details
- Format: Kindle Edition
- File Size: 274 KB
- Print Length: 384 pages
- Page Numbers Source ISBN: 0061059056
- Publisher: HarperCollins e-books; Rei Rep edition (January 16, 2007)
- Sold by: Amazon Digital Services
- Language: English
- ASIN: B000W5MIGC
- Average Customer Review: 4.6 out of 5 stars (118 reviews)
2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked: I don't like fantasy, but I love Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. Of all the books in the series, for my money, this is the best.
Roller coaster or walk in the park?
Roller coaster, but a slow roller coaster. It is the Terry Pratchett style, the characters he creates, and the Discworld scenery that makes this book a winner.
2.2. What I did not like: The cover of the eBook sucks. The editor at Harper-Collins who was responsible for getting this book to Kindle format needs to be fired 'pour encourager les autres'.
2.3. Who I think is the audience: Anyone who reads English and is over the age of 12.
2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read? 12 and up-- yes. Under 12? You read it first and judge for yourself if you want to give it to your little innocents.
2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? Oh, yeah.
2.6. Other:
Hogfather is the first Discworld book I read. After reading all the other--and buying most of them--it is still my favorite in the series.
Hogfather will introduce you to DEATH; his granddaughter, Susan; and to Terry Pratchett's unique style (Footnotes in a fantasy novel? No, funny footnotes in a fantasy novel.) Hogfather is both laugh-out-loud funny and profound.
The Hogfather is Discworld's version of Santa Claus. What happens when the Hogfather is kidnapped? DEATH takes his place. Why? To keep the residents of Ankh-Morpork believing the lies that hold the world together. Meanwhile, Susan chases the kidnappers to save the Hogfather.
You won't forget it. I didn't.
2.7. Links:
Terry Pratchett @ http://www.terrypratchett.co.uk/
His books @ http://www.terrypratchettbooks.com/
2.8. Buy the book: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=node%3D1286228011&field-keywords=hogfather
Friday, March 25, 2011
The Journey of Heart of Stone 0.3
This week in formatting: Nothing new since 0.2 post. I plan to read and correct the galleys this weekend.
This week in cover art: No news. Sent Carl Graves an email to ask when I may expect cover art.
If you have not read Joe Konrath's most recent blog post, please do.
Amanda Hocking inked a four-book deal with St. Martin's Press (Macmillan) for $2 million.
I got money that says the TradPub defenders crow about this, and I will give 10-to-1 odds.
My thoughts? Wait until the four books are delivered and see if Ms Hocking signs a second deal with St. Martin's.
This week in cover art: No news. Sent Carl Graves an email to ask when I may expect cover art.
* * *
If you have not read Joe Konrath's most recent blog post, please do.
* * *
Amanda Hocking inked a four-book deal with St. Martin's Press (Macmillan) for $2 million.
I got money that says the TradPub defenders crow about this, and I will give 10-to-1 odds.
My thoughts? Wait until the four books are delivered and see if Ms Hocking signs a second deal with St. Martin's.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
The Ghost of George Washington's Expense Account
16 June 1775, George Washington accepted the Continental Congress's offer of commission to the post of commander of the Continental Army--which came with the rank of lieutenant general--with these words:
Washington served about 8 years as commander of the Army. If we suppose that his salary to have been twice that of a major general, then he would have earned just under $32,000 during that time. For comparison, had someone served the entire war as a private, his salary for those 8 years would have been $576.67.
When the war ended, Washington submitted his expense account. The total? $449,261.51
I recall skimming a volume entitled George Washington's Expense Account some years ago. Marvin Kitman annotated Washington's account with some humor. The following entry--made just 6 days after Washington was commissioned--is instructive:
In his defense, Washington created the Continental Secret Service--that is, spies--and paid them from his own pocket. He was keeping these accounts daily and had to provide against the chance that his books would be captured by the British. Therefore, he hid payments to his spies under the term '&c'.
But the notion that these payments amounted to $180,000 beggars the imagination.
But Washington's expense account and his creative use of &c is background to my point.
Nathan Bransford defended the TradPub ebook pricing in his blog. His defense amounts to 'hey, paper doesn't cost that much, so the publisher doesn't save a lot with the ebook format.'
These are his 'back-of-the-envelope' calculations:
Let's look at these figures, bearing in mind that they are not definitive, because they come not from a publisher but rather from someone defending publishers. For convenience, we will call this The Agency Model (Bransford is acting as the publishers' agent. He acts with apparent authority, so absent a positive denial by the publishers, we can reasonably rely on his presentations.)
The first thing I noticed was that Mr Bransford said only $1.50 of $24.99 goes to 'paper, shipping, and distribution'. I object. Mr Bransford has tendered facts not in evidence. Worse, he has conflated three accounts that have no business being together. Why should the cost of paper be included in the same ledger account as shipping and distribution? But in the interest of moving things along, I will stipulate to this item.
However, I raise second and third objections to Mr Bransford's use of 'etc.' and 'other costs' without account details. I see an entry for paper. Does 'etc.' cover the cost of ink? The cost of typesetting? The cost of printing? What is it that 'other costs' covers that 'etc.' does not?
I presume that, unlike Washington, Mr Bransford is not using 'etc.' to cover the cost of espionage, but I've been wrong before.
Of course the costs of editors, copyeditors, typesetters, secretaries, marketeers, lawyers, rent, utilities, communications, and transportation are amortized. This is the 'nut' the publisher has to crack before breaking into 'hopefully some profit'.
So what has Mr Bransford not told us and what has he told us?
What he has not told us is the details of 'etc.' and 'other costs'. Nor has he given a line by line accounting of the cost so that each individual item can be analyzed. The ghost of George Washington's expense account is haunting the halls of the New York publishing houses (and those in London and Toronto, too).
What Mr Bransford has told us is the percentages.
According to Mr Bransford, the retailer (the agent in the publisher's Agency Model) gets 30% of the gross; the writer gets 17.5%; the publisher gets 52.5%. The publisher is taking the lion's share.
What is wrong with this picture?
I shall examine that next time.
__________
* That sum was more than the salary of a Continental Army major general over a period of 5 months.
** This is deceptive. The publisher's share is 70%; 25% of 70% is 17.5% of the total.
Sir, I beg leave to assure the Congress that as no pecuniary consideration could have tempted me to have accepted this arduous employment, I do not wish to make any profit from it. I will keep an exact account of my expenses. Those I doubt not they will discharge, and that is all I desire.Congress readily agreed to these terms; that is, to reimburse Washington his expenses rather than pay him a salary. Congress approved a schedule of salaries for the Army that began at six and two-thirds dollars a month for a private and topped out at one hundred sixty-six dollars a month for a major general. There was no approved salary for a lieutenant general. The Army had only one of those--Washington--and he was to be reimbursed for his expenses, vice salaried.
Washington served about 8 years as commander of the Army. If we suppose that his salary to have been twice that of a major general, then he would have earned just under $32,000 during that time. For comparison, had someone served the entire war as a private, his salary for those 8 years would have been $576.67.
When the war ended, Washington submitted his expense account. The total? $449,261.51
I recall skimming a volume entitled George Washington's Expense Account some years ago. Marvin Kitman annotated Washington's account with some humor. The following entry--made just 6 days after Washington was commissioned--is instructive:
To cash paid for Sadlery, a Letter Case, Maps, Glasses, &c &c &c. for the use of my Command... $831.45*In his book, Mr Kitman noted that Washington made liberal use of the terms 'sundries' and 'ditto' and '&c' (et cetera). So liberal in fact that they made up 40% of Washington's accounts.
In his defense, Washington created the Continental Secret Service--that is, spies--and paid them from his own pocket. He was keeping these accounts daily and had to provide against the chance that his books would be captured by the British. Therefore, he hid payments to his spies under the term '&c'.
But the notion that these payments amounted to $180,000 beggars the imagination.
But Washington's expense account and his creative use of &c is background to my point.
Nathan Bransford defended the TradPub ebook pricing in his blog. His defense amounts to 'hey, paper doesn't cost that much, so the publisher doesn't save a lot with the ebook format.'
These are his 'back-of-the-envelope' calculations:
$24.99 hardcover:[I found that 'hopefully some profit' so droll.]
$12.50 to the bookstore (roughly 50% retail price)
$2.50 to $3.75 to the author (between 10-15% of the retail price)
$1.50 for paper, shipping, distribution (again, approximately. UPDATE this would be for a high-print-run book, HarperStudio cited $2.00 as average)=Around $8.00 to the publisher, which is split between overhead (rent, paying editors, copyeditors, etc.), marketing, other costs, and hopefully some profit assuming enough copies are sold.
$9.99 e-book (agency model):
$3.00 to the bookseller (30% of the retail price)
$1.75 to the author (25% of the publisher's share)**=
Around $5.24 to the publisher, split between overhead, other costs, and hopefully some profit
Let's look at these figures, bearing in mind that they are not definitive, because they come not from a publisher but rather from someone defending publishers. For convenience, we will call this The Agency Model (Bransford is acting as the publishers' agent. He acts with apparent authority, so absent a positive denial by the publishers, we can reasonably rely on his presentations.)
The first thing I noticed was that Mr Bransford said only $1.50 of $24.99 goes to 'paper, shipping, and distribution'. I object. Mr Bransford has tendered facts not in evidence. Worse, he has conflated three accounts that have no business being together. Why should the cost of paper be included in the same ledger account as shipping and distribution? But in the interest of moving things along, I will stipulate to this item.
However, I raise second and third objections to Mr Bransford's use of 'etc.' and 'other costs' without account details. I see an entry for paper. Does 'etc.' cover the cost of ink? The cost of typesetting? The cost of printing? What is it that 'other costs' covers that 'etc.' does not?
I presume that, unlike Washington, Mr Bransford is not using 'etc.' to cover the cost of espionage, but I've been wrong before.
Of course the costs of editors, copyeditors, typesetters, secretaries, marketeers, lawyers, rent, utilities, communications, and transportation are amortized. This is the 'nut' the publisher has to crack before breaking into 'hopefully some profit'.
So what has Mr Bransford not told us and what has he told us?
What he has not told us is the details of 'etc.' and 'other costs'. Nor has he given a line by line accounting of the cost so that each individual item can be analyzed. The ghost of George Washington's expense account is haunting the halls of the New York publishing houses (and those in London and Toronto, too).
What Mr Bransford has told us is the percentages.
According to Mr Bransford, the retailer (the agent in the publisher's Agency Model) gets 30% of the gross; the writer gets 17.5%; the publisher gets 52.5%. The publisher is taking the lion's share.
What is wrong with this picture?
I shall examine that next time.
__________
* That sum was more than the salary of a Continental Army major general over a period of 5 months.
** This is deceptive. The publisher's share is 70%; 25% of 70% is 17.5% of the total.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
The Journey of Heart of Stone 0.2
This week in formatting: Got the galleys back from Rob Siders. He sent the galleys in a Kindle file attached to his email. He also sent an example of edits to a galley file in an attached .pdf. I loaded the first onto my Kindle and paged through it to see how it looked.
I got a chill from the excitement of seeing Rob's beautiful work. I really did.
All squadrons at Officer Training School displayed their mottoes on their banners. I recall that one squadron had the motto 'The Standard Is Excellence.' From what I have seen, Rob Siders lives up to that squadron's motto. I like that.
This week in cover art: No news.
The Monday crush is getting to me. Sometimes I don't dig out of the Monday hole until 6pm Wednesday.
The worst part is that the crush causes delays in my writing schedule. My daily goal is 1,000 words. I have not met that goal in . . . well, I'm not gonna tell you how long. That would embarass me. And now I have galleys to review.
The next novel to be written is Navel of the Moon. Think of it as Harlequin romance science fiction.
After Navel of the Moon will come a thriller, Radio Winnemucca. Along the way and assuming I can get cover art for them, I shall publish some shorts (less than 7,500 words) and longs (more than 7,500 words).
Joe Konrath posted an exceptional exchange between him and Barry Eisler. Will do you good to read it.
I got a chill from the excitement of seeing Rob's beautiful work. I really did.
All squadrons at Officer Training School displayed their mottoes on their banners. I recall that one squadron had the motto 'The Standard Is Excellence.' From what I have seen, Rob Siders lives up to that squadron's motto. I like that.
This week in cover art: No news.
* * *
The Monday crush is getting to me. Sometimes I don't dig out of the Monday hole until 6pm Wednesday.
The worst part is that the crush causes delays in my writing schedule. My daily goal is 1,000 words. I have not met that goal in . . . well, I'm not gonna tell you how long. That would embarass me. And now I have galleys to review.
The next novel to be written is Navel of the Moon. Think of it as Harlequin romance science fiction.
After Navel of the Moon will come a thriller, Radio Winnemucca. Along the way and assuming I can get cover art for them, I shall publish some shorts (less than 7,500 words) and longs (more than 7,500 words).
* * *
Joe Konrath posted an exceptional exchange between him and Barry Eisler. Will do you good to read it.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Sunday eBook Review: Once is not enough
Nathan Lowell, Quarter Share
Product Details
|
1. Short review:
2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked: Quarter Share was light and easy to read. When a book is easy to read, much effort has gone into making it so.
Some books are roller coasters: Blackhawk Down, The Hunt for Red October, New York Dead. Some books are a walk in the park: Little Women, The Little House on the Prairie, Two Years Before the Mast. Both types can be enjoyable. Nowadays, roller coasters are in fashion with the New York publishing houses and walks in the park are out. Thanks be to the small press Ridan Publishing for not bowing to fashion.
Quarter Share is not a roller coaster. Quarter Share is reminiscent of Two Years Before the Mast. It is a book about ordinary people coping with everyday problems . . . in a space merchantman. The book is low on tension but high on personal interaction.
I think the book's biggest shortcoming is that everybody gets along. In a crew of at least forty members, I would expect some tension between crewmen. Maybe a fist fight or two.
I would also expect there to be more quarter-share crew aboard than just Ishmael and Pip, the protagonist and his messmate.
If you want a roller coaster ride, this book will not give you that. But if you want a walk in the park, this book gives good value for your money.
2.2. What I did not like: Typos, typesetting errors, and one odd word choice. Examples: In the first chapter, 'later' was written where 'latter' was intended; there is one instance where closing quotes were given but the same speaker continued in the following paragraph; the one odd word choice was 'acclimating', used where 'becoming accustomed' would have been better. I mention it because it kicked me out of my reading mind-set. 'Acclimate' to me relates to weather and climate, not to shipboard routine; 'accustom' or 'habituate' is better for that.
If you play the pro game, play at the pro level. Were Mr Lowell an indie author, I might be inclined to give him slack. (Probably not.) But Mr Lowell published through Ridan Publishing, a small press. Ridan Publishing had the job of editing and proofreading Quarter Share. They dropped the ball.
2.3. Who I think is the audience: I and others like me. I am an avid blue-water sailor--sailboats, not powerboats. I read science fiction. I have read Two Years Before the Mast, Moby-Dick, and the entire Horatio Hornblower series. When I was young, I read the whole of the Tom Swift and Tom Swift, Jr, series. So did I get the audience right? Lessee . . .
Call me Ishmael. Yeah I know, but in this case it's really my name: Ishmael Horatio Wang. My parents had an unfortunate sense of humor. If they had known what I'd wind up doing with my life, they might have picked a different one--Richard Henry Dana, perhaps.So the book begins. What do you think? Did I get the audience right?
2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read? Yes. No worries. No profanity; one 'darn'. No sex. Some left-handed hints at nudity but nothing overt.
2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? Yes. Looking forward to Half Share.
2.6. Other: I sampled Quarter Share first by podcast here http://www.podiobooks.com/title/quarter-share. I learned two things: 1) I don't like having books read to me, and 2) I liked as much of Quarter Share as I heard.
To me, there are two downsides to the Solar Clipper series.
The first is the name of the series: Solar Clipper. From that name, I expected tales of lightsailships cruising our solar system. 'Taint so. As mellow as Solar Clipper sounds, I think Stellar Clipper would have been better.
The second--and this is big--is the production schedule. As of today, only Quarter Share and Half Share are available on Kindle. I want 'em all, and I want 'em now.
One last item. Ishmael refers to the space between the stars as the 'Deep Dark'. I like that. It is an evocative image.
2.7. Links:
Nathan Lowell @ http://nathanlowell.org/
Trader's Diary @ http://solarclipper.com/
Friday, March 18, 2011
The Journey of Heart of Stone 0.1
This week in formatting: Thursday, 17 March 2011 (2011.03.17), Mr Rob Siders wrote for clarification on some formatting marks in my manuscript. I answered, and that day we exchanged five emails about the manuscript. Mr Siders's questions about small matters give me confidence in his diligence and attention to detail.
This week in cover art: No news.
+++++
By the end of August 2001 (2001.08), I had added 40,000 words more to Joyce. It occurred to me that the book was wandering, because I did not know what motivated the main character.
I was a member of two writers' groups in Austin, Texas. Sunday, 09 September 2001 (2001.09.09), as I was driving home from one group, the reason the character did what he did hit me. When I got home, I rushed to my computer. It is good that I type by touch, because I beat out 800 words despite the fact that I could not see my computer screen for the tears in my eyes.
Tuesday, 11 September 2001 (2001.09.11), . . . well, we all known what happened that day. For Joyce, one other thing happened. My other writers' group met. Few members came that night. My offering of the 800-word prologue I had written Sunday was the only manuscript brought to the group. Many liked the emotions, but I took a pounding for writing in present tense. (I was reading William Gibson at the time, admiring his style, and his use of present tense influenced mine.) I later changed the tense to simple past.
More to come.
This week in cover art: No news.
+++++
By the end of August 2001 (2001.08), I had added 40,000 words more to Joyce. It occurred to me that the book was wandering, because I did not know what motivated the main character.
I was a member of two writers' groups in Austin, Texas. Sunday, 09 September 2001 (2001.09.09), as I was driving home from one group, the reason the character did what he did hit me. When I got home, I rushed to my computer. It is good that I type by touch, because I beat out 800 words despite the fact that I could not see my computer screen for the tears in my eyes.
Tuesday, 11 September 2001 (2001.09.11), . . . well, we all known what happened that day. For Joyce, one other thing happened. My other writers' group met. Few members came that night. My offering of the 800-word prologue I had written Sunday was the only manuscript brought to the group. Many liked the emotions, but I took a pounding for writing in present tense. (I was reading William Gibson at the time, admiring his style, and his use of present tense influenced mine.) I later changed the tense to simple past.
More to come.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Feed Me! Thursday recipe
Keith's Too Easy Cream of Broccoli Soup
(This recipe requires a large, heat-proof blender. Mine is a Braun. Do not use a hand or wand blender. Therefore, it does not scale; that is, you cannot double the recipe. You must make multiple batches.)
1/2 medium onion, cut into 4 pieces
1 t salt
1 small carrot, cut into thumb-width pieces (or 1/2 large carrot, cut into thumb-width pieces)
1 rib celery, cut into thumb-width pieces
1 T olive oil
1 clove garlic, mashed
1 jalapeno pepper*
In a 3-quart pot, heat the olive oil over high heat. Add the onion, salt, carrot, and celery. (For more flavor, caramelize the onion before you add the carrot and celery.) Last, add the garlic (mashed on the cutting board with the flat of your chef's knife) and the jalapeno. You don't want the garlic to burn (trust me; you really don't want the garlic to burn), so cook it for not more than 1 minute. Then add
2 C water
1 crown broccoli, quartered
I trim, peel, and cut the broccoli stem and add it, too.
Cook covered on low heat. How long? Oh, an hour, maybe two. Who cares. You cannot overcook this. As long as there is water in the pot, everything will be fine. When you can poke a blunt chopstick into any piece of vegetable, the veggies are ready for the next step.
Spoon the veggies and liquid into a large blender. Grind some fresh black pepper into the blender. Put the cover on the blender and cover the top of the blender with a tea towel. First, blend at low speed; increase the blender speed to its highest setting. While the blender is running at its highest speed, pour in
1/2 C cream.
You will be tempted to substitute milk or some other dairy product or (gag) soy milk. Don't. The cream will capture air and add volume and lightness to the soup.
Serves four . . . or me. (I like this soup a lot.)
*If heat is not your thing, you can leave out the jalapeno. Or you can seed the jalapeno and caramelize the hulls for a surprising smoky flavor.)
(This recipe requires a large, heat-proof blender. Mine is a Braun. Do not use a hand or wand blender. Therefore, it does not scale; that is, you cannot double the recipe. You must make multiple batches.)
1/2 medium onion, cut into 4 pieces
1 t salt
1 small carrot, cut into thumb-width pieces (or 1/2 large carrot, cut into thumb-width pieces)
1 rib celery, cut into thumb-width pieces
1 T olive oil
1 clove garlic, mashed
1 jalapeno pepper*
In a 3-quart pot, heat the olive oil over high heat. Add the onion, salt, carrot, and celery. (For more flavor, caramelize the onion before you add the carrot and celery.) Last, add the garlic (mashed on the cutting board with the flat of your chef's knife) and the jalapeno. You don't want the garlic to burn (trust me; you really don't want the garlic to burn), so cook it for not more than 1 minute. Then add
2 C water
1 crown broccoli, quartered
I trim, peel, and cut the broccoli stem and add it, too.
Cook covered on low heat. How long? Oh, an hour, maybe two. Who cares. You cannot overcook this. As long as there is water in the pot, everything will be fine. When you can poke a blunt chopstick into any piece of vegetable, the veggies are ready for the next step.
Spoon the veggies and liquid into a large blender. Grind some fresh black pepper into the blender. Put the cover on the blender and cover the top of the blender with a tea towel. First, blend at low speed; increase the blender speed to its highest setting. While the blender is running at its highest speed, pour in
1/2 C cream.
You will be tempted to substitute milk or some other dairy product or (gag) soy milk. Don't. The cream will capture air and add volume and lightness to the soup.
Serves four . . . or me. (I like this soup a lot.)
*If heat is not your thing, you can leave out the jalapeno. Or you can seed the jalapeno and caramelize the hulls for a surprising smoky flavor.)
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
The Economics of Publishing 0.0
Economic systems have four components:
1. Production;
2. Consumption;
3. Communication; and
4. Distribution.
1. Production.
Theoretically, the author is the only one engaged in production, but we do not live in a theoretical world. In practice, the author is the major engine in production. He also needs draft readers, an editor, and--in today's market--an artist to create a jacket.
2. Consumption.
Theoretically, the reader is the only consumer. But in truth, the purchaser is the consumer, be he only one or the agent for many; that is, a library.
3. Communication.
When communication flows from the publisher to the public, it is called marketing. "Hey, we printed this book. Check it out and buy it." At the low end, communication just puts the book on the shelves or on Amazon. At the high end, communication trumpets the book's arrival in the press and launches the book (think Harry Potter VII). If your name is not J K Rowling or James Patterson, any promotion your book gets it gets because you do it. And J K Rowling did not get it either with her first book
When communication flows from the public, it flows to the writer who maintains a website. Writers with websites build communities of readers and fans who talk back to their favorite authors. Are writers using this to deliver to readers books based on reader input? I don't see anyone doing that, but I'm sure it can be done. What I see is that readers become attached to a continuing protoganist (think James Bond or Stone Barrington) and tell the writer they want more. The writer obliges, but he was going to do so anyway.
As far as I know, no publishing house pursues reader input. This may be because publishers are somewhat insulated from readers. They have no direct contact with the readers. What concerns them is input from their distributors. That is where they see their money.
Can communication generate revenue for writers? So far the revenue from communication has been indirect, via increased sales, but it seems that there is an oppotunity here to generate revenue directly.
4. Distribution.
Distribution means getting the book from the writer to the reader.
This is the point where the old-form publishing houses outmuscled the writers. This is where the old-form publishing houses added value to the product: distribution.
In the 20th century, distribution was a major obstacle for writers. The big publishing houses had the majority of the shelf space in bookstores. Random House could penetrate thousands of bookstores with its products, 'cause it had staff dedicated to getting books to those stores. How many stores could a solo penetrate each day? One.
That changed in the 4th quarter of 2010. Amazon announced that eBooks outsold mass-market paperbacks for the first time. It won't be the last.
Amazon also announced profits of $415 million on $12.95 billion in sales. Amazon will be with us for a few more years.
Any writer can get shelf space on Amazon. It is the same shelf space that Random House and Harper Collins gets.
To make it clear, the tide has turned in distribution. The largest value-added contribution of the old-form publishing house has disappeared on Amazon--and make no mistake, Amazon is the largest book retailer in the world.
The old-form publishing house do not like this situation. They rebelled at Amazon setting eBook prices. Amazon retreated and made peace. And attacked the old-form publishing houses where they were weakest: at the point of sales. Brick-and-mortar bookstores are failing. Will they survive? I think they will in some form. But we will soon see the dawn of the day when Amazon can dictate terms to Harper Collins.
The old-form houses never improved the efficiency of their distribution. They didn't have to. With wireless delivery of eBooks, Amazon has cut out the need for the old-form's inefficient distribution net.
Distribution generates revenue. As badly managed as it was, distribution was the strength of the old-form houses. By controlling the means of distribution, they controlled writers.
If you don't believe distribution generates revenue, ask Amazon. Their business is distribution.
Okay, so where are we?
1. Production.
Those elements of production that the old-form houses used to do--proofreading, editing, formatting, creating cover art--have been severed from the publisher. Many publishers now outsource as much as they can. Writers have access to those same sources. And others.
2. Consumption.
Things have never been better for readers. Oh, yes, there is a flood of crap out there, but there was a flood of crap before. Now the crap is cheaper. But so is the cream.
3. Communication.
Again, things have never been better for readers. Writers are online and accessible to their readers.
4. Distribution.
For the first time since the 18th century, writers have access to a viable means of significant distribution. Advances against royalties are gone. This means that the crap that is published will not earn anything. The old-form houses paid advances for crap and did not earn it back. They took a risk with every publication. But the new model risks nothing.
Under the new model, when a book wins, the distributor wins; but when a book loses, the distributor stands pat. This model fits the book publication dynamics better than the old advance-against-royalties model.
Under the old model, the publisher won with the winners and lost with the losers. Publishers wanted to diminish their losers, so they tended to ride the winning horses more and more. If a winning horse was not available, they looked for a horse that looked like a winner they knew; that is, a writer whose subject and style mimicked some famous writer's. It is no accident that Dean Koontz and Dan Brown (Flight of the Old Dog) followed soon after Tom Clancy. Unconsciously, the gatekeepers narrowed the gate.
Under the new model, the writer is often the publisher. His distributors win with him but they don't lose with him. The gate has widened. Writers no longer have to fit into what's fashionable. What they have to do is find an audience and keep that audience happy.
1. Production;
2. Consumption;
3. Communication; and
4. Distribution.
1. Production.
Theoretically, the author is the only one engaged in production, but we do not live in a theoretical world. In practice, the author is the major engine in production. He also needs draft readers, an editor, and--in today's market--an artist to create a jacket.
2. Consumption.
Theoretically, the reader is the only consumer. But in truth, the purchaser is the consumer, be he only one or the agent for many; that is, a library.
3. Communication.
When communication flows from the publisher to the public, it is called marketing. "Hey, we printed this book. Check it out and buy it." At the low end, communication just puts the book on the shelves or on Amazon. At the high end, communication trumpets the book's arrival in the press and launches the book (think Harry Potter VII). If your name is not J K Rowling or James Patterson, any promotion your book gets it gets because you do it. And J K Rowling did not get it either with her first book
When communication flows from the public, it flows to the writer who maintains a website. Writers with websites build communities of readers and fans who talk back to their favorite authors. Are writers using this to deliver to readers books based on reader input? I don't see anyone doing that, but I'm sure it can be done. What I see is that readers become attached to a continuing protoganist (think James Bond or Stone Barrington) and tell the writer they want more. The writer obliges, but he was going to do so anyway.
As far as I know, no publishing house pursues reader input. This may be because publishers are somewhat insulated from readers. They have no direct contact with the readers. What concerns them is input from their distributors. That is where they see their money.
Can communication generate revenue for writers? So far the revenue from communication has been indirect, via increased sales, but it seems that there is an oppotunity here to generate revenue directly.
4. Distribution.
Distribution means getting the book from the writer to the reader.
This is the point where the old-form publishing houses outmuscled the writers. This is where the old-form publishing houses added value to the product: distribution.
In the 20th century, distribution was a major obstacle for writers. The big publishing houses had the majority of the shelf space in bookstores. Random House could penetrate thousands of bookstores with its products, 'cause it had staff dedicated to getting books to those stores. How many stores could a solo penetrate each day? One.
That changed in the 4th quarter of 2010. Amazon announced that eBooks outsold mass-market paperbacks for the first time. It won't be the last.
Amazon also announced profits of $415 million on $12.95 billion in sales. Amazon will be with us for a few more years.
Any writer can get shelf space on Amazon. It is the same shelf space that Random House and Harper Collins gets.
To make it clear, the tide has turned in distribution. The largest value-added contribution of the old-form publishing house has disappeared on Amazon--and make no mistake, Amazon is the largest book retailer in the world.
The old-form publishing house do not like this situation. They rebelled at Amazon setting eBook prices. Amazon retreated and made peace. And attacked the old-form publishing houses where they were weakest: at the point of sales. Brick-and-mortar bookstores are failing. Will they survive? I think they will in some form. But we will soon see the dawn of the day when Amazon can dictate terms to Harper Collins.
The old-form houses never improved the efficiency of their distribution. They didn't have to. With wireless delivery of eBooks, Amazon has cut out the need for the old-form's inefficient distribution net.
Distribution generates revenue. As badly managed as it was, distribution was the strength of the old-form houses. By controlling the means of distribution, they controlled writers.
If you don't believe distribution generates revenue, ask Amazon. Their business is distribution.
Okay, so where are we?
1. Production.
Those elements of production that the old-form houses used to do--proofreading, editing, formatting, creating cover art--have been severed from the publisher. Many publishers now outsource as much as they can. Writers have access to those same sources. And others.
2. Consumption.
Things have never been better for readers. Oh, yes, there is a flood of crap out there, but there was a flood of crap before. Now the crap is cheaper. But so is the cream.
3. Communication.
Again, things have never been better for readers. Writers are online and accessible to their readers.
4. Distribution.
For the first time since the 18th century, writers have access to a viable means of significant distribution. Advances against royalties are gone. This means that the crap that is published will not earn anything. The old-form houses paid advances for crap and did not earn it back. They took a risk with every publication. But the new model risks nothing.
Under the new model, when a book wins, the distributor wins; but when a book loses, the distributor stands pat. This model fits the book publication dynamics better than the old advance-against-royalties model.
Under the old model, the publisher won with the winners and lost with the losers. Publishers wanted to diminish their losers, so they tended to ride the winning horses more and more. If a winning horse was not available, they looked for a horse that looked like a winner they knew; that is, a writer whose subject and style mimicked some famous writer's. It is no accident that Dean Koontz and Dan Brown (Flight of the Old Dog) followed soon after Tom Clancy. Unconsciously, the gatekeepers narrowed the gate.
Under the new model, the writer is often the publisher. His distributors win with him but they don't lose with him. The gate has widened. Writers no longer have to fit into what's fashionable. What they have to do is find an audience and keep that audience happy.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Sunday eBook Review
Nathan Lowell, Quarter Share
Product Details
|
1. Short review:
2. Long review:
2.1. What I liked: Quarter Share was light and easy to read. When a book is easy to read, much effort has gone into making it so.
2.2. What I did not like: Typos, typesetting errors, and one odd word choice. Examples: In the first chapter, 'later' was written where 'latter' was intended; there is one instance where closing quotes were given but the same speaker continued in the following paragraph; the one odd word choice was 'acclimating', used where 'becoming accustomed' would have been better. I mention it because it kicked me out of my reading mind-set. 'Acclimate' to me relates to weather and climate, not to shipboard routine; 'accustom' or 'habituate' is better for that.
If you play the pro game, play at the pro level. Were Mr Lowell an indie author, I might be inclined to give him slack. (Probably not.) But Mr Lowell published through Ridan Publishing, a small press. Ridan Publishing had the job of editing and proofreading Quarter Share. They dropped the ball.
2.3. Who I think is the audience: I and others like me. I am an avid blue-water sailor--sailboats, not powerboats. I read science fiction. I have read Two Years Before the Mast, Moby-Dick, and the entire Horatio Hornblower series. When I was young, I read the whole of the Tom Swift and Tom Swift, Jr, series. So did I get the audience right? Lessee . . .
Call me Ishmael. Yeah I know, but in this case it's really my name: Ishmael Horatio Wang. My parents had an unfortunate sense of humor. If they had known what I'd wind up doing with my life, they might have picked a different one--Richard Henry Dana, perhaps.So the book begins. What do you think? Did I get the audience right?
2.4. Is the book appropriate for children to read? Yes. No worries. No profanity; one 'darn'. No sex. Some left-handed hints at nudity but nothing overt.
2.5. On the basis of reading this book, will I buy the author's next book? Yes. Looking forward to Half Share.
2.6. Other: I sampled Quarter Share first by podcast here http://www.podiobooks.com/title/quarter-share. I learned two things: 1) I don't like having books read to me, and 2) I liked as much of Quarter Share as I heard.
To me, there are two downsides to the Solar Clipper series.
The first is the name of the series: Solar Clipper. From that name, I expected tales of lightsailships cruising our solar system. 'Taint so. As mellow as Solar Clipper sounds, I think Stellar Clipper would have been better.
The second--and this is big--is the production schedule. As of today, only Quarter Share and Half Share are available on Kindle. I want 'em all, and I want 'em now.
One last item. Ishmael refers to the space between the stars as the 'Deep Dark'. I like that. It is an evocative image.
2.7. Links:
Nathan Lowell @ http://nathanlowell.org/
Trader's Diary @ http://solarclipper.com/
Friday, March 11, 2011
The Journey of Heart of Stone
This is the continuing tale of my novel Heart of Stone from conception to publication and, God willing, to sales.
+ + + + +
Heart of Stone began as a nightmare.
I dreamed a fight sequence. I dreamed a sailboat that fought with death rays to protect its master. I dreamed this dream more years ago than I care to tell.
I determined to turn this dream into a short story. But the story got out of hand and became a novella, 30,000 words long. I titled it Joyce.
I wrote Joyce in 10 days in June of 2001 (2001.06). Yes, I sustained an output of 3,000 words a day for 10 days. Furious, it was, living in the jaws of the muse.
I put it down for a month before I read it. I thought it was decent. (To date, I have made only three small amendments to the original.) But when I finished reading it, I said to myself, "This story is not done."
So I began to turn Joyce into a book.
I liked Joe Haldeman's structure of his novel All My Sins Remembered: three novellas with short interludes to link them together. I adopted that structure for the book.
+ + + + +
Today, Heart of Stone is in the hands of Rob and Amy Siders [http://www.52novels.com/]. Has been since 09 March 2011 (2011.03.09). That date would have been 08 March 2011, but I sent them a bad manuscript not once but twice. Third time was the charm.
I also have cover art scheduled with Carl Graves [http://extendedimagery.blogspot.com/]. I first contacted Mr Graves 26 January 2011 (2011.01.26). On 18 February 2011 (2011.02.18), Mr Graves confirmed he had enough information to begin. What information? 27 January 2011 (2011.01.27) Mr Graves asked for the "title/genre/synopsis of your book"; he said he would "be able to do so [come up with a cover art concept] by the second week of March if that suits[.]" Note that. Mr Graves is scheduling a month and half in the future.
More to come.
+ + + + +
Heart of Stone began as a nightmare.
I dreamed a fight sequence. I dreamed a sailboat that fought with death rays to protect its master. I dreamed this dream more years ago than I care to tell.
I determined to turn this dream into a short story. But the story got out of hand and became a novella, 30,000 words long. I titled it Joyce.
I wrote Joyce in 10 days in June of 2001 (2001.06). Yes, I sustained an output of 3,000 words a day for 10 days. Furious, it was, living in the jaws of the muse.
I put it down for a month before I read it. I thought it was decent. (To date, I have made only three small amendments to the original.) But when I finished reading it, I said to myself, "This story is not done."
So I began to turn Joyce into a book.
I liked Joe Haldeman's structure of his novel All My Sins Remembered: three novellas with short interludes to link them together. I adopted that structure for the book.
+ + + + +
Today, Heart of Stone is in the hands of Rob and Amy Siders [http://www.52novels.com/]. Has been since 09 March 2011 (2011.03.09). That date would have been 08 March 2011, but I sent them a bad manuscript not once but twice. Third time was the charm.
I also have cover art scheduled with Carl Graves [http://extendedimagery.blogspot.com/]. I first contacted Mr Graves 26 January 2011 (2011.01.26). On 18 February 2011 (2011.02.18), Mr Graves confirmed he had enough information to begin. What information? 27 January 2011 (2011.01.27) Mr Graves asked for the "title/genre/synopsis of your book"; he said he would "be able to do so [come up with a cover art concept] by the second week of March if that suits[.]" Note that. Mr Graves is scheduling a month and half in the future.
More to come.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)