Today on J.A. Konrath’s blog, Konrath interviewed pro-published writer Barry Eisler, who has just turned down a $500,000 offer from a mainstream publisher in favor of self-publishing his own book. Eisler explained that this level of advance would take forever to earn out at the royalty rates paid by traditional publishers—and by selling through Amazon, he can charge less and keep 70% of the proceeds.
There’s a lot of discussion about how the traditional publishing market is falling behind the times and failing to keep pace with the electronic world, and how paper is going to recede into a niche market just like LP records, You could fill at least a couple of rows of Scalzi’s bingo card just from this article alone. For example:
Joe: I believe [publishers have] gotten their business model mixed-up. They should be connecting readers with the written word. Instead, they’re insisting on selling paper.
Barry: Yes. There’s a saying about the railroads: they thought they were in the railroad business, when in fact they were in the transportation business. So when the interstate highway system was built and trucking became an alternative, they were hit hard.
Likewise, publishers have naturally conflated the specifics of their business model with the generalities of the industry they’re in. As you say, they’re not in the business of delivering books by paper–they’re in the business of delivering books. And if someone can do the latter faster and cheaper than they can, they’re in trouble.
Joe: You say they’re aware of it, and some evidence points to that being true. The agency model is an attempt to slow the transition from paper to digital. Windowing titles is another one. So are insanely high ebook prices.
Barry: All signs that publishers are aware of the potential for digital disintermediation, but that they don’t understand what it really means.
It’s all very fascinating to read, and I’m certainly not going to argue against the idea that publishers could do a better job connecting with readers, but as often as the same points they make get raised here over and over, it would be a little redundant to recount it in too much detail. And it’s worth pointing out that, due to his existing name recognition, Eisler is one of perhaps a few hundred authors on the planet who are in a position to turn down a half million dollars with the knowledge that they could readily make it back in self-publishing. Not every self-publishing writer is going to be a Barry Eisler—or even an Amanda Hocking.
And speaking of Amanda Hocking, here’s the other half of that juxtaposition: as one well-paid professionally-published author moves into self-publishing, Amanda Hocking—the recent nine day wonder of the self-publishing world—is rumored to be shopping a four-book series to major publishers, with advance bids reportedly in excess of $1 million for worldwide English rights. Undoubtedly, that is going to confuse those fans who saw her as Dorothy vs. the publishing industry’s Wicked Witch of the West.
What are we to take from this? It seems pretty clear that publishing is no longer going to be an “either or” proposition. Just as some authors start in pro-publishing and move to self-publishing (such as Konrath and Eisler), others will start in self-publishing and go pro (like Hocking and, for that matter, John Scalzi). And it’s conceivable that authors could dabble in both.
I’m not so sure that I’d count traditional publishers out of the running yet. Konrath and Eisler make some salient points, but Hocking made some points of her own in her misconception-clearing post the other day:
And just so we’re clear – ebooks make up at best 20% of the market. Print books make up the other 80%. Traditional publishers still control the largest part of the market, and they will – for a long time, maybe forever. Ebooks will continue to gain ground, but I would say that we have at least 5-10 years before ebooks make up the majority.
Saying traditional publishing is dead right now is like declaring yourself the winner in the sixth inning of a baseball game when you have 2 runs and the other team has 8 just because you scored all your runs this inning, and they haven’t scored any since the first.
And all ebooks aren’t self-published. Even if ebooks end up being 80% of the market, at least half of those sales will probably come from traditionally published ebooks. So publishers will still control the majority of the market.
Publishers may be struggling right now, caught between the waning paper and nascent electronic markets, but sooner or later at least some of them will figure out how to make the transition—and will be stronger for it than the ones who end up going bankrupt. As Mike Shatzkin pointed out the other day, paperbacks started as a specialty item and took a pretty long time to catch on in their day—but now everybody does them. It could be the same for e-books.
(Kassia Kroszer also has an interesting analysis of the Eisler vs. Hocking situation at Booksquare.)