I don't know about the ebook to pub thing, but presumably there'd be something that to indicate that it was published before in ebook form.

A book going from ebook to print isn’t considered a reprint (since it’s never been in print before). Traditionally, from an epublisher, the book gets an ebook release first and then goes to print several months later.

I think for readers, the advantage is clear, and I imagine publishers will be as clear as they are with print books when it’s a reprint. (IOW, check the copyright and or the blurb)

For authors, the deal will be as good as their understanding of industry contract norms, thier understanding of the print distributon process, their understanding of the original deal, and their ability to negotiate a contract (the life blood of an author’s career) , because these marriages do open a can of worms in that they add another layer of contracts to the process.

For example, when a house sets up a subsidiary sale, but then wants a new contract rather than just selling the rights under the subsidiary clause already in the contract, an author should immediately see a red flag. Not that there is necessarily something wrong, but there must be a reason and that reason should be investigated, determined and evaluated. The reason could be because the house doesn’t want to pay the standard 50 percent subsidiary royalty because that percentages works out to be higher than the percentage they’re suggesting in the new contract per print book. There is also the possibility the house is looking out for the author and because the deal would work out to be less than the standard print percentage the author would get, the house decides to sacrifice their bottom line so the author does not lose out. Iow, the house decides to protect the author to their own detriment. It’s a possibility and shouldn’t be ruled out. It also should not automatically be assumed.

The catch is the author won’t know which situation they’re looking at unless they have the foresight ask to see the pertintent clauses of the deal the Epub house has with the NY pub. It will be on the author to avoid assumption and be proactive in making sure they are actually getting a good deal and not being misled through assumption or false assurances. Everything in the publishing world is controlled by contracts which means everything is in writing. Which means authors should see everything in writing before they make decisions.

None of which makes a bit of difference to the reader. Nor should it. Readers should just get to enjoy the product without all the background noise, but authors don’t have that luxury. Authors have to understand what’s good for the house is not always good for the author, that all opportunities are not worth the cost, and the devil is in the details. And the details in these marriages are not just in their contracts but in the contracts between their pub and the NY house. And that means more legalese, more research, more negotiating-things many authors wish they could just ignore as they are more comfortable creating than running the business side of their careers, but which if overlooked could seriously hurt them financially and/or restrict them in the future.

So are these marriages good? For the readers yes. For the houses, probably. For the author, it completely depends.

On the Mysteria/Bewitched, Bewhatever, there was no mention on the copyright page of its previous print history. Here is the link to the graphic.

The Mysteria book is not the only ebook to print that this has happened to but I can’t, off the top of my head, recall the others.

As I said in the initial post last year, “I don't think these authors don't intentionally want to mislead the reader about the freshness of their content” but it happens. and it can lead to unhappy readers.

That’s the point I was trying to make in the Susan Grant example. Readers don’t know that it is a charity anthology or that purchasing one book is really a charitable donation and to get a bigger, fuller story, you have to buy a second anthology. There’s no mark on the inside cover to let you know that this was previously published in “e”.

As the “e” market grows bigger, I see this as an increasing problem. Readers should have the choice whether to purchase a rewritten novel or not. Some readers, TP e.g., might like it. Other may not. I don’t necessarily blame the authors but a book is inextricably connected to the author. like it or not. To the reader, the buck stops with the author. For reprints not clearly marked, to early novels being put forth as “new” books, etc.

But when I love an author, I want everything off their back list, so we have 2 scenarios A) I stalk eBay, Half.com and my local UBS stores looking for all the back list or I can B) Buy them brand new when they are re-issued and the author gets their cut. Just MHO.

Many many books that are consider classics Tolkien or CS Lewis were expanded and re-written reprinted updated again and again by their authors and some even by others.

To think that once a book is written it remains stagnant is to ignore what has always gone on in publishing.

Until I visited the website, from what I've gleaned from the talk of reviewers, I assumed Samhain was an erotic romance e-publisher.

I think this is because most review sites seem to focus on erotic romance. Sadly, we don’t have any power over what the review sites choose to place their emphasis on. We make all of our books available to them for review and actively seek review sites that will take the non-erotic and especially non-romance books, but those are very difficult to find in the online community and those that aren’t online sometimes require a print copy, so sometimes reviews have to wait until the book goes to print.

Is Samhain now going to earnestly solicit non-erotic titles?

We’ve always earnestly acquired all genres. I think I can safely say that when you read interviews with me, you don’t see me asking for erotic romance. I’m asking for sci-fi, for multiculturals, for inspirationals, and westerns, etc.

What about “multicultural� titles-how are they going to deal with those?

Exactly the same way we always have. Just like every other book.

Angela, the Samhain/Kensington imprint is not erotic romance only. Samhain publishes all genres of fiction (and even some nonfiction).

I am aware of this, but aren’t the best-sellers erotic romance releases? I went to the website a few days ago and there are only a few straight historical authors. Until I visited the website, from what I’ve gleaned from the talk of reviewers, I assumed Samhain was an erotic romance e-publisher. As I reiterated before, the beneficiaries of e-publishing have traditionally been erotic romance and rarely any straight (meaning no suspense or erotic content) romance authors seem to have broken out the way erotic romance authors have. Is Samhain now going to earnestly solicit non-erotic titles? Are they going to be a new venue for publishing through NY channels? What about “multicultural” titles–how are they going to deal with those?

I’m just asking these questions because I want to know whether Samhain is establishing themselves, through this deal with Kensington, as a new publishing house/imprint into and of itself (in the same vein as Zane’s Strebor Books imprint with S&S)?

I tried to read Iris Johansen’s Eve Duncan series because I used to love her romances. The Delaneys anyone? I actually found her staccato dialogue-heavy style didn’t translate well to longer novels. I managed to read until Eve hooked up with Joe, and then I completely lost interest.

I am not worried about ruining my image. Hell, I have no image. *g* Like I said on my blog, I’m not ashamed of any of my books. Do I think that they suck? No. Would I love a chance to clean them up? Absolutely.

What I do worry about is a reader buying one of my older books (if they get better distribution), and then assuming that’s what ALL my books are like. (ie Jordan Summers writes light, semi-humorous contemporary fantasy that has a few typos. *ggg*) I worry about them picking up the new book from Tor (which has someone getting attacked and eaten in the first scene and only has two love scenes) and being upset because it isn’t an erotic romance and doesn’t read like one. Or worse, them picking up my older work first and based on their dislike of it, never picking up anything by me again.

In a world where a majority of readers only give an author one chance to win them, the coupling of epubs with N.Y. pubs is a major concern for ‘unestablished’ writers, who are currently writing for different publishers. Keep in mind, just because old work is released by a N.Y. pub doesn’t make you one of their authors. (ie I write for Tor, Harlequin and EC. Pocket is a great company, but I wouldn’t be considered one of their authors if EC sold them my Atlantean’s Quest series as is.)

Where would we be if writers (and for that matter directors) had always had this power of revision? Would many of our favorite and classic books/movies even be recognizable today? Remember what King did to The Shining? Whose vision is better? Does anyone really know? Does it even matter?

Much as many would hate to admit it, romance novels areour history. They give us a snapshot of the mores and folkways of the times in which they were written. I’ve been reading them long enough (30+ years) to have seen all the various trends in them. I would hate to see them all ‘updated’ to reflect popular mindsets and views. The bodice-rippers were what they were. As were the sweet doctor/nurse stories, the rampaging sheikh stories, and whatever else the flavor of the moment was. And that’s okay. Some authors I’ve read long enough to see them evolve and grow (or in some cases devolve, but that’s another post). This is true in all genres. You change as a person, and your writing changes with you. We’re not static, but if you change what you’ve written in the past, how will we know that?

I have SEP’s ‘Glitter Baby.’ Is it her best? No, of course not, but you can certainly see the kernels of talent that eventually grew into a fabulous author. None of us sprang from our parents head full-fledged primo writers. Its a process that takes time, but if no one sees that process how would they know? Would that not have a chilling effect on future authors?

Lots of interesting points raised here. Is it good to revise a book before re-releasing it? Probably, if only from a craft perspective. Even if it’s not updated to reflect changed values, etc., the chances are the author’s gotten better and would like to revise the work to the level he/she is capable of now as opposed to then.

Then there’s the very real factor that any book a reader picks up by an author is potentially the first and/or last. If somebody reads a book written many years and much progress as a writer earlier, it doesn’t matter how much better the author’s work is today. That work is the first and possibly last impression the reader has to judge by. I know that I read a re-release by an author I love that was very early work…and it did not compare favorably to her current work. If I’d read that book first, would I have read and bought her current books? Maybe not. So yes, I can understand why an author might not be universally thrilled to have old work re-released without the opportunity to revise first.

Angela, the Samhain/Kensington imprint is not erotic romance only. Samhain publishes all genres of fiction (and even some nonfiction).

Anne Frasier debated on her blog whether releasing her old category romance novels would hurt the reputation she was building as a gritty fiction writer. Her out of print titles haven't been re-released and part of that may be due to a decision on her part and part may be due to the fact that Moxie Press, who inquired about reprinting them, folded.
Personally, I loved some of Frasier's older novels.

I don’t think it should hurt Ms. Frasier’s newer books. She’s now writing under a different name than her romance and unless you are kind of “in the know” you might never realize they were the same author is her old romance were repubed under Theresa Weir. They (her Theresa Weir) books are wonderful and I’m constantly looking for the few I still don’t have. I would love to see them rereleased!

And even then, if Samhain had a reputation for excellent all-around romance/women’s fiction, would Kensington be able to say “nope” if an author on the roster wrote something out of the “box”?