Sep 7 2008
Do You Want to Know All of the New ePresses?
I know last week I said I was going to address the software problem but as I wrote it up, I realized I had said the same thing before. Basically, DRM is awful and suppressing the adoption of ebooks. Moving on, I have two questions for the readership that arose during the reading of two press releases from new epress publishers. I’ll address the first one today and that is, do you readers want to know about every epress I get a press release for?
Recently a new epublisher broke onto the scene with a blogpost from Lori Perkins. Ms. Perkins, an agent who sold Jenna Jameson’s porn star memoir for six figures, announced
of my clients are starting an epublishing venture and they are buying so much of my clients’ work. It’s an erotic romance ebook publisher that’s buying short stories and novels, but the novels have to be 50,000 words (that’s 200 pages), so I’m editing back a ton of these titles to fit.
I wondered whether Ms. Perkins was working as an editor and had a financial interest in the epress as well as agenting. In response to my blog post, an author, Jill Elaine Hughes, came forward to announce that Ms. Perkins was her agent and that Ms. Hughes was selling previously unsaleable work to this new epress. (Hughes disputes this statement, asserting her unsaleable work is not going to this new epress other than one work.)
In the comments, Ms. Hughes declared that her new epress publisher was going to blow the competition out of the water.
As of August 25, 2008, there are over 60 epresses in business according to Emily Veinglory’s site. Both press releases actually scare me rather than entice me. One site referred to themselves as equal opportunity smut peddlers; the other press release indicated that it would be releasing a full length novel a day.
I am leery of new publishers these days. I don’t want to point people in the wrong direction, but I don’t want to keep information that others would be interested in knowing about. I am not inclined to promote publishers that I feel are taking advantage of the erotic romance label knowing full well that they are going to be publishing erotica or porn dressed up as erotica.
So what’s the consensus here. Do you want to know about all the new and shiny when it comes to epresses?
Related posts:
Sep 07, 2008 @ 05:59:02
Since they start up every day, personally, no. I want to know about them after they’ve been running a year, and people are happy as authors, as readers, as reviewers. I only became interested in subbing to Samhain after an overwhelming chorus of positive comments from many different sources, convinced me this company was in it for the long term. That’s the kind of info an author needs.
Wow. Red flag or what? Why would a new press want an unpubbed author with unsaleable work? Even if Ms Hughes is a previously undiscovered genius, I’d be a lot happier if this press started out with some surefire winners – just because it will make the press successful, and success breeds success.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 06:07:57
Jill Elaine Hughes (not Jillian Hughes) is still insistent all over the web that we will all see, that we are terrible, nasty people for disbelieving her, that we are harrassing Ravenous Romance and Lori Perkins.
She is also claiming now that many major bestsellers have sold work to Ravenous, and that our eyes will pop open when we see the list, and then we will realize how dumb and naive we are to dare suggest Ravenous might not be a million-seller from the very second it starts up.
But for those who didn’t read the original post/comments, Lori is part owner of the epublisher and does not earn commission from her sales to the epublisher (contrary to what Ms. Hughes insisted several times in comments.) So she is an agent who owns a publishing house and submits some of her clients’s work there. Is there anyone who still thinks this isn’t a conflict of interest?
Lori has apparently decided she herself will not submit to Ravenous, that she will let other agents at her agency handle those submissions for her clients. I appreciate that she’s trying and honestly don’t know Lori would deliberately do anything bad, but the fact remains this is an unomfortable situation, one most agents would not get themselves into.
All in all, an extremely interesting situation. I’ll sure be watching closely. If it were another small, startup ehouse though? Probably not. Ravenous starting up itself isn’t news; it’s the more scandalous aspects around it that make it news. If not for that it would just be yet another one of a dozen ehouses that appear and disappear per month.
Bottom line, really, is it’s up to you. If the story interests you and you want to keep writing about it, go for it. If not, don’t.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 08:08:25
:-O
Uh… you’re kidding, right?
Sep 07, 2008 @ 09:39:36
As someone who has purchased and loved the ebook format I find that most of these little known presses sell books that are little more than porn. This offends me because ebooks are a great inovation and these presses give a bad rep for all ebooks. Its hard to be take seriously when the public is told this is what ebooks are selling. So no don’t promote little known presses with questionable books.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 09:57:54
There was some discussion about this on another writer’s forum, and when the question of conflict of interest came up, an author (and client of Ms Perkins) became a bit – ah – defensive over the possibility. Personally, it doesn’t sit well with me – a literary agent with a financial stake in a publisher. It totally screams conflict of interest.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 10:10:50
You asked for input, so here’s mine. There’s been a big move during the past couple of years for epresses to also put out print books. These are the ones who bear watching. These small press/epubs dangle the brass ring of print publication in front of the unpublished. What author doesn’t want to see her book go to print? Some (hopefully, not all) of these POD small presses are pouring crapola onto the online print market, such as Amazon and B&N. I know of one publisher in particular whose author stable has swelled to nearly 600 writers under contract in just two years. This same publisher is putting out books from the owners and editors under pseudos. Or often they publish under their real names and edit under a pseudo. Last time I looked, one of the owners had FIVE books listed in the top 25 for that publisher on Fictionwise. In all, she’s published more than a dozen books during the couple of years they’ve been in business. If you ask me, that’s a BIG red flag. But in the early stages of these publishers, how’s an author to know? I’m just surprised that very few authors from this publisher have been crying foul all over the internet. I think, like me, they’re afraid of the fallout. Unfortunately, there’s no law against what these people are doing, but I think it’s a shame. Readers are already leery of POD books, and who can blame them?
Sep 07, 2008 @ 10:26:34
I find Ravenous Romance to be a bit different than any old ‘new’ epub on the block. Sure, there is some suspicion as to Lori Perkins involvement, but how many times have people on this site and others looked with a wary eye at new epubs run by nobodies with absolutely *no* experience in publishing whatsoever? And now that there is an epub that has experienced people running it, that’s not good enough either.
What exactly do people want?
When I look at Ravenous vs. Brown Paper Bag (another newbie), there is a HUGE difference in these two epublishers. Ravenous has hired a PR company, offered a free book on their site before they open, have a contest running, and seem to have a gameplan (The gameplan could be a failure, but at least they have one). Also, they are run by people who have dinero.
I would much rather risk subbing to Ravenous than to Brown Paper Bag. Out of ALL the epubs that exist right now, none of them were started with this kind of experience in publishing/agenting. Doesn’t guarantee me anything, but it sure as hell makes me feel more confident in their abilities to pull off their plan.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 10:27:20
Not really – I think you’d end up spreading yourselves too thin. Perhaps mentioning the big news like bad deals, ones to stay away from but EREC blog has picked the subject and is running with it, so I’d rather get my news re ebooks from there, and my Romance/print news from here.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 10:43:29
Kristin, I agree I’d feel more comfortable subbing to Ravenous than BPB or any other startup. But it’s still a startup. The owners have publishing experience, yes, but not in erotic ebooks which is a very different market. It may be less risky, but it’s still a risk, if you know what I mean.
On reflection, I think my first comment in this thread was a bit harsh. I meant for it to sound light-hearted but as the day has gone on I’ve thought my light-hearted intentions didn’t translate well. So the real purpose of my comment here is to apologize. I find Ms. Hughes’s attitude extremely condescending and rude, but that’s no reason for me to respond in kind. So I do apologize for that.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 11:23:21
I would note that I list only erotic romance epublishers and my list is somewhat less than complete. A list of all epublishers that include romance as a genre would be a bit unmanagable, more like 200 companies with changes (opening and closing) every few days.
If anyone feels like doing a good deed it would be useful to have a list of sweet romance epublishers.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 12:17:12
I agree with Anion that two of the biggest problems with the announcement of Ravenous were the questions around Perkins’s connection to it (agent, editor, co-owner, all of the above) and the ‘they’re going to blow away the competition’ comments from at least one very enthusiastic author. Combined, those things raised more concern than interest, I think, especially when we’ve seen so, so many epress businesses go awry.
As for the experience/reputation of some of the principals, yes, that can certainly buy some initial clout for a business, but even the most famous and reputable of folks have been involved in clunker endeavors. So not everyone is going to sign on to the cheerleading squad simply because of a recognizable name or two. Especially when those intended to be part of the readership are basically being told they don’t get the market as well as upstart startup publisher #3,678.
Of course that depends on the market in question. I admit to being supremely uneducated about the porn market. But then, Ravenous didn’t name itself ‘Ravenous Porn Publishing’ so I’m not exactly sure what’s up on that front. I’m no enemy of porn, or non-Romance erotica, but both of those things differ generically from Romance, and Romance readers often depend on those generic differences in choosing books. If you try to sell one thing as something else generically, Romance readers may feel taken, as many did when Juno tried to “reclaim” the term “Paranormal Romance.” No one knows the power of the “Romance” label more than those who sell and purchase the genre, and many readers feel that if you’re calling it capital-R Romance, you’d better be delivering genre Romance.
So if Ravenous believes it will eliminate its competition, I guess the first thing would be to determine who, exactly, it considers its competitors.
As for knowing all the new epresses, I can barely keep up with the existing ones. Although in some ways we won’t know how newsworthy a press may be until it’s been reported on, so . . .
I also agree with Emily Veinglory that it would be nice to have the epresses distinguished by the type of Romance (and other genres) they publish, including and especially non-erotic Romance.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 12:57:16
I also agree with Veinglory about having a list of epublishers that accept books other than erotic romance and paranormals. Sometimes I get the impression that that’s all romance epublishers currently carry.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 13:10:21
I like reading your articles about epresses but simple announcements don’t rate more than a glance and I’m picky about who I give my credit card to online. The Ravenous Romance thing got more attention from me because of the potential COI but not much more than a look.
So if something has news interest (not just PR) I want to see it. PR alone is not in my opinion worth more than a mention in a round up article.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 15:46:36
I would love to see this blog help keep the epress coming and goings in order. I’ve gotten totally lost on that subject lately, and Dear Author has been so helpful in every other writing and publishing regard. Why not?
And…there are still presses that publish sweet romances? No…really? :)
Sep 07, 2008 @ 16:39:24
Well me, for one. Or at least, I don’t care if it’s print or eformat. In fact I have four books coming out in print in the next two years, three in print first then to eformat, and one the other way around. Samhain is the publisher of the latter, and I honestly didn’t consider the print option as an incentive when I considered them. My audience is always going to heavily be the online one because that’s where they look for their fix, so I have no great expectations from the print side.
I wouldn’t touch RR with a ten-foot pole for the following reasons
(a) Jill Elaine Hughes
(b) Romance = Porn in their books…wot? How many people jerk off to Barbara Cartland?
(c) Their arrogance and ignorance of the present epress environment
(d) Hate the name of the company with the passion of a thousand fiery suns
(e) Too recent a start up to have any real data on revenues, author sign up etc.
(f) The whole ‘no unagented submissions’ thing is just stupid for an epress.
Even if they are as successful as Ellora’s Cave in a year or two years, I still wouldn’t touch them. If I want to write porn, I will go to a company which understands what porn actually is, and who market it to the right people. I don’t want my gay romances sold as porn (because they’re not), and I won’t deal with people who don’t distinguish, and don’t even know there’s good reason to do so.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 17:22:02
Reporter sites need to start looking beyond the “Happy-ometer” income machine and seriously soliciting the experiences of individual authors or checking out contracts on their own.
The EC contract, for example, is a pure horror. It has gotten grabbier and grabbier until the company is trying to claim, for a “lifetime”, any work in any subgenre (complete with subsidiary rights) they feel suits their publishing model. And it’s up to them to decide that, NOT the author. This is a greedy throttling of authors’ creative and financial freedom, plain and simple. And here’s more: Their sales have been plummeting, yet they still have nothing resembling a consistent or reliable print and distribution programme, and they offer no advance in spite of the “gimme, gimme it ALL” nature of their contract.
So please, people, let’s turn some focus on established epubs, who can do a whole lot of damage to careers while doling out their monthly “pacifier” checks.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 19:25:20
The EC contract is negotiable, and the negotiations are relatively painless. Most authors end up with a tailored version of the basic contract. The fact that many authors with EC also have work elsewhere and are still selling it elsewhere speaks fairly well of contract negotiations.
Also, although people keep saying that sales are down, my sales aren’t. I can’t speak for anyone else.
Advances – I’m not interested, because I enjoy getting the monthly cheque. If I sold to a big print publisher, sure, I want my advance because it can be up to two years before the author sees any royalties. But where the book is up on the site inside a year, and earning from the first month, I’m not too worried about advances.
What worries me most about the big publishers is the e-rights grab. I’d very much like you to look into that. Now the big six are seriously going into e-publishing, their royalty rates are, quite frankly, far too low. The economics of the e-publishing process provides for more for the author, more like 40% of cover price than the paltry 6% e-Harlequin is offering. With the print market in long-term decline, the ebook market the only growth sector, the publishers stand to make a real killing and a massive margin on ebook sales.
New publishers – I think information about them after they’ve been in business for a year might be nice, but I’m not sure about putting it on this blog. Keep to the reviews and the news and the opinions, and pointing up any problems you might spot.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 20:55:10
If ebooks and epublishing continue to be treated as leery ventures, then they will only ever be criticised. Despite the fact that tons of print pubs have also come and gone, we still stick a heavier onus on ePresses. Prejudice much?
The future is e, that is undeniable. As a young industry, it is still finding its feet but we, as consumers and industry personnel, aren’t quite sure how to assess epublications and epublishers, and that is not a happy standing.
New publishers, imprints and calls for submissions are always items of interest for writers. Having genre categories, although very useful, can lead to endless sub-genres and multiple listings, not to mention checking on actual claims.
My suggestion is that if epress news is relevant but not popular enough, perhaps a separate section could be added to DA?
Ultimately Jane, if you feel all publishing news – regardless of format – is relevant to DA then I’m happy to read about it.
Sep 07, 2008 @ 21:32:57
Personally I’d like to hear about new publishers whether they are electronic or print. So if you have information on any of them to share, I’ll read it.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 04:22:56
That has really troubled me for a long time, and I keep wishing someone would seriously address it. And I know there are authors out there with books at other pubs not because they were able to negotiate the options clause away, but because they intentionally write material EC doesn’t want. They still have to offer it to EC first.
The problem arises when those authors want to make the jump to NY, and they still have to offer up every project to EC. What agent would take you on, if you had to give an epublisher first crack at everything you ever write?
But this:
worries me even more. The fact that HQ is paying authors the same 6% on the ebook–and using the excuse of “Well, ebook sales are in the two or three digits, so it really amounts to nothing”. Well, if ebook sales are so minimal, give the authors 40%. If they’re only making an extra 50 bucks on the e-version, it’s not going to kill the publisher to give them that. Or are they hoping that in the e-happy future, ebook sales will subsidize their bizarre and antiquated system of shipping dead-tree books only to have them pulped a month later?
It’s not prejudice–it’s a question of media. Information (fact, rumor, innuendo) spreads on the internet. Epublishers operate on the internet. Their authors operate on the internet. Their readers feel at home on the internet. When an epress goes down, the information is just one click away.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 05:42:15
This is simply untrue.
As Lynne pointed out, EC’s contract is negotiable. I’m really very confused by the statement you’ve made about EC grabbing “any work in any subgenre (complete with subsidiary rights) they feel suits their publishing model.” My option clause said “The next work of erotic fiction” (which is standard with any publisher afaik), not “the next work in any and every genre”. The idea that EC would want to waste their editor’s time by forcing authors to submit, say, a sweet romance they know isn’t suitable for their house, is frankly ridiculous. (I sold a book in another genre, non-erotic, to a different, larger print house while my option clause was still active, and got a very nice congratulatory email from my editor and a member of EC management, so clearly they weren’t worried about my option clause.) And when I emailed them and asked to have the option clause removed, I got a very friendly response an hour later telling me no problem, my new contract sans option was attached. I also negotiated subsidiary rights and length of term. Not to mention, EC has a fair exit clause.
I’ve also heard rumors about sales crashing, but I haven’t noticed it. Do I believe sales there are lower than they were four years ago? Yes, but the reason why is competition. Four years ago EC was practically the only game in town. Now they’re not, plain and simple. I still make a heck of a lot more money with them than than anyone I know makes elsewhere, and I’m far from a Big Name there. Since my first book released with them my sales have been quite steady, and have actually gone up, the way any author’s do as they form a strong backlist.
Not offering an advance is no big deal either. Again as Lynne pointed out, an advance is just that–royalties in advance of release. So I get my royalties on the back end, so what? I knew that going in. If I wasn’t okay with that, I didn’t have to submit to them.
You are correct about their print program, though–it’s dismal, and they should frankly be ashamed of how poorly managed it is. It costs both them and their authors countless royalties every day. And I’m not saying EC is perfect and wonderful. It has its problems just like any other house. I would never claim it doesn’t.
But your information about the contract is incorrect. All contracts are negotiable; no house (or very, very few houses), no matter how big or small, offers a contract that is completely 100% author-friendly. Of course they’re going to try and take what they can get. To claim they’re sleazeballs because of that is naive. Your information about sales crashing is also incorrect, at least in my experience and the experience of all the other EC authors I know.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 08:18:58
IF you can get them to respond to your emails. Maybe authors with agents have better luck…
Exactly. People who write for EC obviously write erotic fiction, any subgenre of which might (in their minds, but not in reality) fit their publishing model. I have had no fewer than four works of “erotic fiction” tied up for a minimum of two months each while my editor has decided they didn’t fit the EC publishing model…something I full-well knew when I sent them to her. Still, I was contractually obligated to let her see them. It’s absurd.
Have you been keeping up with discussions on the authors loop?
Sep 08, 2008 @ 08:29:56
I am so happy that you guys mention other ePresses that might be of interest or that you can recommend based on a book review or whatever.
I would have never found out about a ePublisher like Drollerie Press without this and other Romance sites mentioning them. They do have interesting stories and good editing and your talking about them was a good thing.
As far as all this blah blah blah about Ellora’s Cave.
I just think they are missing the boat and here is why.
Can you download an eBook published by EC from the Kindle service? You know, just click a button on the Kindle and buy one using Amazon’s great functionality in under a minute. I know you can with Samhain’s eBooks but does Ellora’s Cave even want to participate in generating more sales that way?
Ok, let’s go over to the Sony eBook store. I see Samhain is there too. The only Lora Leigh books I see there are from other publishers even though she started and was a great success on EC. Again, does Ellora’s Cave even want to participate in generating more sales that way?
We could go over to Fictionwise next since they allow purchases and downloads for iPhone eBooks which is another smart move but I think you would find the exact same thing.
The point is that these new distribution systems… Kindle, Sony eReader, Fictionwises iPhone eBook Application. They are generating new sales because they are getting promoted and sold to new eBook readers who might not be on the internet initially looking for eBooks but they just bought that gadget.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 08:32:33
I have spoken to at least one author who was accepted by EC but dropped when she tried to negotiate the contract–although I do not know the details of what happened.
My figures also suggest their sale are dropping although still the best around– and I do not think competition is the only factor. Other things are playing in like the collapse of their formerly attractive print option, some interesting acquisition choices, their increase in volume and a perception by some major online reader-bloggers of a decrease in quality, and more press about their contract.
I certainly know several authors who chose other presses due to the unfavorable clauses, and would admit it certainly deterred me. I doubt they are negotiating the ‘life of copyright’ contract period? And personally I prefer to just sign a favorable boilerplate. (I also think they hit the MM wave later and so aren’t riding it as well as some other companies.)
Sep 08, 2008 @ 08:43:28
If you want the option clause removed, why are you signing the contract with it in there? I don’t mean to be rude or unfeeling here, but if the option clause was a problem for you, you shouldn’t have gone ahead and signed the contract anyway. Every publisher I’m aware of has an option clause in their contract, it’s not like EC is the only one.
If Contracts isn’t responding, email Raelene. Email your own editor. Keep emailing them. Tell your editor you can’t sign the contract until the clause is removed and so may have to take your work elsewhere. The longest I’ve heard of anyone waiting to hear back from Contracts was a couple of weeks (I’m not saying it might not take longer, just that’s the longest I’ve heard of). I have never once heard of an author asking to have the option clause removed who didn’t get a reply in the affirmative, and that’s not all agented authors. The majority of the ones I know are unagented.
I’m sorry you had to submit erotic books that you knew wouldn’t work for EC but you’re the one who signed the contract and obligated yourself. That was your choice.
Did you explain to your editor why the book wouldn’t work for EC when you sent it to her? Was she not willing to give it a faster pass for you, when you explained and asked if she would?
And no, I don’t keep up with the authors loop. I have quite a few friends who are also with EC. We talk amongst ourselves. But again, I agree sales are probably lower than they were in 2004 or 2003 or 2005 or whatever, because increased competition is bound to have an effect, that and the fact that two years ago erotic romance was the hothothot genre and now some readers are tiring of it. EC’s average sales are still higher than any other epub, from the info I’ve seen. It’s not like books went from selling thousands of copies to only dozens of copies in the space of two months. That to me is a crash.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 09:36:15
From the perspective of a print published author, let me be the first to tell you–all publisher contracts are grabby! Why wouldn’t they be? That’s why people have agents and contract attorneys (I have both.)
The trick is not to sign a contract that has a grabby clause or that is non-negotiable in a way you can’t live with. If you sign the contract anyway, then you are perpetuating your own misery.
Frankly, I dislike Harlequin’s ebook royalty rate. Each and every time, I attempt to negotiate it (or more accurately, my agent does.) We know it’s an uphill battle, but the minute authors stop asking, they forget about it. I can live with them saying no right now. I have high hopes that someday, they’ll adjust.
Harlequin has been known to change clauses if enough people balk at them–the pseudonym clause as an example (which I fought vehemently on my first contract…at the risk of losing said contract, yes. It was THAT important to me.)
I’ve said this so many times…it’s not about selling. It’s about selling WELL. That includes being able to live with every single contract clause. About trusting your publisher to act fairly. If you don’t, then don’t sign. If your work is good, it will find a home elsewhere. There is no publisher (except maybe Harlequin/Silhouette with category books) that is the only game in town.
Does that mean taking longer to get published in some circumstances? Yeah, it does. But you have to believe in yourself and your work and the worth of said work. If you don’t, who will?
Epress or Print makes no difference.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 10:32:20
Entirely up to you.
As a side comment on the publisher itself, it is fairly easy to do the talk, question is can they do the walk? Only time will tell, as hype does fade away. Nothing posted about a new epublisher is going to change my standard procedure of “wait and see”… and as jaded as I am I have become EXTREMELY difficult to please as it pertains to erotic romance. A lot of pubs out there (including at least one imprint from a large publishing house) are publishing porn in lieu of erotic romance. That is the plain truth and what has a good number of us veteran erotic romance fans quite skeptic and sticking to our respective lists of autobuy authors. *shrug* It isn’t as easy to establish a reader base now as it used to be in the good ol’ days in which Ellora’s Cave was pretty much the standard in erotic romance.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 10:47:34
Exactly.
I haven’t seen EC’s boilerplate contract in some time. I stick with the one I worked out with them.
I’ve requested adjustments here and there with all my publishers. While I may not always get exactly what I want, I get a contract I’m satisfied with.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 11:31:44
That’s the truth.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 11:50:31
In the boilerplate contract at most houses, this might be the case. My agent, however, negotiated my Kensington Aphrodisia contract so that their only option is on “erotic historical romance.” So, if I wrote an erotic contemporary or paranormal romance or even a more traditional historical, it would not fall under the option.
What I’m not sure of when it comes to EC’s option clause is how, structurally, it works. As I understand my option clause, I am required to submit the next optioned project I write and must give them some period of time (usually six weeks) to respond with an offer. But I am not required to ACCEPT that offer. If my agent and I don’t like the terms, we can shop it elsewhere after the six weeks expires. The only caveat is that we can’t sell it for WORSE terms than Kensington offered us.
I don’t see how that could work with EC, though. Since they don’t pay advances, I don’t see how there could be any “comparison of terms” element in the option clause. It would seem that they either offer to publish it and you must accept, or they decline the work. But that does sort of “trap” the author, because you don’t have the ability to decline their offer even if you have the chance of getting better terms elsewhere.
Am I making sense?
Also, not ALL publishers/epublishers HAVE an option clause. None of my contracts with Cobblestone Press have them, and they do not even appear in the boilerplate.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 13:02:52
Maybe a monthly “New Press Update” might be the right way to go?
Sep 08, 2008 @ 13:07:51
To paraphrase some one else (cough*Karen*cough) it’s your blog, do what you want.
My buck-fifty, you are geared primarily for readers not authors, you just have a lot of regulars who are both. So if you think the press release of a new epress would benefit your fellow romance readers, then post away. But if it’s not your cup of romance tea, then delete away.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 13:35:26
What Julia Sullivan said!
I like to hear about new epresses, then I can keep an eye on them. But it’s true what others have said above–the real news about epresses has to be at least a year into their business model.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 14:07:57
On one of the thread drifts: No, not all publishers have such a grabby option clause in their boilerplate. The last time I saw an example, Loose Id’s boilerplate was still asking for first refusal only on a new book in a series/universe they are currently publishing, not on any new erotic romance manuscript.
On the original topic: epubs come and go. I’m not sure if it’s worth mentioning them here unless they do something out of the ordinary, whether good or bad.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 14:20:51
On a different bit of thread drift: no, I’m not particularly interested in being in dead tree format just for the sake of it. What I’m interested in is maximising my income and maximising my readership. While I certainly did the “take it out every five minutes and stroke it” thing with an author copy of each of my dead tree credits, I don’t need a print edition to feel validated as an author. I’ve got my royalty statements and fan mail for that.
And one of the things I don’t want is a publisher that overextends itself by jumping into the print market simply because it’s perceived to be higher status, without understanding the different risks involved and having the financial backing available to weather those risks. What I want a publisher who will still be here in five years. So long as I’m writing in a sub-genre that’s only covered by small press, I see no particular advantage to print over ebook.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 14:34:10
Samhain doesn’t, and neither does PD Publishing. So far as I know, option clauses are the exception for e- and small presses, not the rule.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 14:54:45
Since this thread is about hearing about new publishers, I’ll address that (and not go for the EC grabby contracts discussion, since I have pretty strong feelings on it… not the least of which being IF you can get them to reply to your emails…months to wait for a reply to an email, not to mention have negotiations start is NOT appropriate).
I would very much like to hear, even in a monthly new pub roundup-type post, the news. It’s nice to see who is out there. I also think that while it is very prudent to research and be wary of brand new presses, I think the current trend of immediately saying that all new epresses will go under and/or implode is not a positive one. Sure, some may go under, but then again, look at the number of restaurants/speciality stores/other businesses that fold on a pretty regular basis. Ever hear the rates of how many new bars actually make it? It’s good to be cautious. Writers have to watch out for their rights, but in my experience this needs to happen more with the experienced publishers than the new ones. Let each publisher stand and all fall on its own please.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 15:24:08
I didn’t say all publishers I’m aware of have “such grabby” option clauses, I said they have option clauses (again, that I’m aware of; I said “that I’m aware of” originally because I knew I couldn’t speak with 100% accuracy about every publisher out there. Apparently some don’t, so there you go.)
And again, if you don’t like it, don’t sign the contract. It’s that simple. I really do sympathize with people who feel ill-treated. I’m not saying everyone who feels that way is crazy or a liar or unprofessional or anything of that nature, I’ve acknowledged that there are some problems at EC, and that not all experiences are/have been as positive as mine (I don’t think they’re the devil, though, either. I can’t imagine any reason why I would be treated so much better than everyone else. It’s not like I have dozens of books with them and am one of their best sellers; I don’t and I’m not. I’m not active on the loops, I don’t do a lot of promo anywhere, I don’t see any reason at all why my reatment would be different.)
But the bottom line is, you signed the contract. If Contracts wasn’t getting back to you and you felt you were being treated badly, you could have withdrawn your submission and gone elsewhere. The choice was yours.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 16:33:59
The “previously unsaleable” work remark in the OP referring my book sales to Ravenous as work that couldn’t past muster elsewhere is _completely untrue_. Ravenous only purchased _one_ previously existing manuscript from me (which by the way was significantly retooled for Ravenous’ specs). All my other sales to Ravenous are for original projects developed especially for them. The “previously unsaleable” remark is derogatory to both me and Ravenous and totally inaccurate, and I would appreciate a retraction, please. Thank you.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 16:52:46
Uh, but isn’t that exactly what you said here:
Sep 08, 2008 @ 17:26:25
The books referred to in that blog post are NOT the books sold to Ravenous. I _never_ said as much.
The backlog of books my former agent couldn’t sell referred to above(because he was an agent who did not understand the specific markets I wrote for, hence, he was fired) are NOT the books that were sold to Ravenous. They will be sold to print publishers via my new representation. Note that I specifically said in my original post that the Ravenous sales “doesn’t even include the rest of the backlog of stuff my old agent couldn’t sell.”
Please issue the retraction.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 17:47:38
This irks me. It sounds uber-snooty. How is the publisher “important”? Would a better word be reputable?
And the attitude? Not making me want to buy your books.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 17:50:15
Perhaps you can say all contracts are grabby, but some are more grabby than others. I cannot think of another erotic romance epublisher that takes rights for length of copyright and whose boilerplate option clause is for the entire genre rather than just direct sequels. EC is the best selling of the lot, but their contract does differ from almost all the others in these respects.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 17:52:46
This isn’t a reference to Ravenous? The description of the “very important” publisher here, as well as the “coming soon” details, strongly echo a lot like the terms you used to talk about Ravenous here and elsewhere.
Yeah, the words my eye keep going to in that sentence are rest of. Especially in conjunction with this sentence: “Not only did my agent get me these deals practically overnight, she's asking how quickly I can produce new material that she can sell shortly thereafter.” (emphasis mine)
Your blog post read to me as a statement that your new agent sold to Ravenous, among other publishers, material your old agent couldn’t sell. If you didn’t mean that, it sure wasn’t clear to me based on that blog post.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 17:56:38
You obviously misread the post.
My new agent is indeed taking over some titles my old agent didn’t sell (because he marketed them improperly, not because they are unpublishable. This is why I fired him and sought better representation). But _none_ of those books in the backlog are being sold to Ravenous. They are being marketed to the traditional print market. This is why the “previously unsaleable” work remark against me and Ravenous is derogatory and incorrect.
Please issue the retraction.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 18:04:57
To Jill Elaine Hughes/Jamaica Layne:
You remain the biggest negative against going into business with Ravenous.
Grow the fuck up, will you? Or you’ll be back here in six months being mocked for losing your shit all over a reviewer or a reader. Mind you, I’ve never heard of you before, and somehow, I think I probably won’t hear of you again other than for your ill-advised public snitfits.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 18:39:32
I don’t think you need to bother reporting on new e-pub’s, Jane . . . unless red flags are a-waving from the start. Between EREC and Piers, people find out about start-ups in fairly short order. What’s more important, I think, is that you and other bloggers continue to issue alerts re. fishy goings-on and delve into same. That’s what I’ve found most helpful.
Don’t spread yourself too thin!
Sep 08, 2008 @ 18:41:56
Just remember, KZ, if you divide the Janes by Emily and Piers, you still come up with three and a half people :)
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:06:19
Ann, I really don’t think out-and-out profanity is at all called for or necessary in this situation.
Dear Author posted false info (probably unintentionally) about me. I am asking for a retraction to prevent misleading information getting out about myself and my publisher, that’s all. As a former editor and journalist myself, I know that it is important for reputable publishers of reliable information (as Dear Author indeed generally is) to post retractions when someone points out that they are wrong.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:18:23
I read your post, Hughes, as suggesting that you wrote a ton of stuff in the past that hadn’t sold but is now going to RR. Have edited post to reflect your clarification, such that it is.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:31:05
See, and I don’t think arrogance or rudeness is called for or unnecessary in your demands or in your comments on the previous post, but you did.
I guess you’ll have to learn to fucking live with it.
(For future reference, a polite clarification, or even an email to Jane, would have been classier and not reinforced your image as someone who can’t cope with the slightest hint of criticism. I can’t wait to see how you handle reviews.)
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:36:26
Many thanks, Jane, for your prompt and professional attention to my request. It is must appreciated. I also appreciate the reporting and reviewing Dear Author does on the genre very much.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:42:42
biting tongue…biting tongue…
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:43:47
Hush, Anion. She can be taught.
(On the other hand, I’m beyond help :) )
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:51:40
veinglory, I can’t speak for epublishers, but in print, trying to get all your rights for everything you’ve ever done and will ever do in the future seems par for the course in print nowadays. That said, negotiating terms down significantly is just part of the game. It’s not a big deal. In my experience, I expect my publishers to try and tie me up forever and I say no and we negotiate. I’ve had print publishers go for “all works of fiction” in option clauses. I just cross it out and we start whittling.
Just sayin’. It’s not a big deal unless they won’t negotiate. At least in my “dead tree” world.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 19:54:11
Replying to Veinglory:
Sadly, I know of publishing contracts that grab all future works in a genre as a standard clause. Poor writer party didn’t know how to read the contract.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 20:47:43
They do have a specific time frame in which they must respond with either an offer or a rejection. There is nothing in the contract requiring the author to accept that offer. Merely that the author is required to allow EC to make the offer, period. Last I checked the time period was 60 days from submission of a novel.
So it’s not really a trap. It can be negotiated away, or one can simply not accept an offer made. 60 days doesn’t seem excessive to me, considering the length of waits normal within the industry.
EC isn’t perfect but I really don’t get why it’s seen to be as the devil either when, if you’ve ever seen the EC contract, it’s really not as grabby as it seems. Even the lifetime of copyright has a straightforward out clause for the author.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 21:11:13
Sadly, I know of publishing contracts that grab all future works in a genre as a standard clause
I do not think that that is an enforceable clause in the US, given the precedent of the Olivia de Havilland and Curt Flood cases. I am not a lawyer, but I do have a lawyer.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 21:39:50
I was speaking only for erotic romance epublishers–I know very little about commercial print publishing and how contracts there often work. I have seen the contracts for quite a few of the extant erotic romance epublishers and none other than EC contracted for a period longer than 7 years and took first refusal for the genre.
And to be clear, EC is still a great choice for an ebook writer, but not without issues to consider relative to other epublishers now selling almost as well.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 21:50:13
There are a lot wrong with most small press contracts but not many writers will want to have a public stoush with a publisher if they can get out quietly somehow.
I’m just curious about contracts generally.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 22:31:53
Found this on RR submission guidelines page:
What rights will you buy?
World rights in all formats. We will work to sell your subsidiary rights to a traditional print publisher on your behalf, as well as in translation throughout the world. We will pay you a percentage of any subsidiary-rights sale.
AND
Will you publish a print edition of my book?
No. If your book stands out, we will try to place it with a traditional print publisher.
I’m wondering what that means, exactly, and what kind of percentage (royalty?) an author would end up with for a print edition. It’s almost as if they’re still acting as packagers – and/or agents, so I’m thinking the back-end take for an author who goes into print will be much less than if they’d sold their work to a publisher, directly. A traditional print publisher isn’t going to offer more than 8% or so, right? Then once RR takes their cut, what’s that leave the author?
Also, they ask for world rights in all formats, but give no guarantee they’ll even seek print or translation for your work (only if it “stands out,” which one would assume would be the case for all their acquisitions – otherwise, why sign them at all?)
And there’s no mention on how long they own world rights in all formats…
What am I missing?
Sep 08, 2008 @ 22:47:07
The RR contract has a three-year renewal clause. Either the author or the publisher can choose to terminate the contract at the time of the three-year renewal; if neither does so, then the contract renews automatically for another three years, and so on. They do not “own” world rights, they buy the right to “distribute” world rights. The copyright remains with the author.
The practice of selling print rights to a print publisher is not at all unusual—in fact, back when print publishers were still made up of “hardcover” houses and “paperback” houses, it was very common for the original hardcover house to sell paperback rights as subsidiary and then take 50% of the resulting monies. This is still done to a certain extent with paperback reprint rights. This move seems very prudent on RR’s part, since as packagers they already know how to sell work to print houses, and will get print distribution for their top authors without having to invest huge sums of money into print themselves.
Sep 08, 2008 @ 22:56:10
Well, yes, it sounds peachy for RR, but not so hot for the authors. You’re comparing apples and oranges in your example, IMO. Hardcover/Paperback vs. electronic/print. And fifty percent? So if they’re able to negotiate 8% royalties for print, the author gets 4%?
Sep 09, 2008 @ 02:00:27
Wait, and there are agents actually agreeing to that clause? No, that is not particularly author-friendly; what’s more it is not remotely agent-friendly. What agent agrees to take 15% of a couple of hundred bucks, but then 15% of only 50% of whatever monies are made from the sale of those subsidiary rights? If your agent believes your work will sell to a print house, why hasn’t s/he sold it to one? You do realize that by bringing an agent in on this deal, you’re agreeing to take only 35% of any subsisidary rights sale?
What they’re saying is, they deliberately take rights they have no real plans to use, and then will keep a chunk of the money–a far larger cut than an agent would take–in order to sell reprint rights, when the author should be keeping those rights for themselves anyway. The chances of RR finding a print house to reprint its best selling work, especially with the market where it is today, is pretty slim indeed.
True, they won’t have to invest in print themselves, which saves company resources. But what it also means is they actually have no control over which of their authors go into print; just because a book is a huge seller for them doesn’t necessarily mean it will sell (it probably will, yes, but it’s no guarantee). It also opens the door wide to favoritism, as has happened at so many other ehouses, where the special inner circle get print books etc. but the general group gets nothing. How does RR define ‘top author’? By sales? By, say, participation in a Yahoo loop? By how many friendly emails one of the writers sends their editors? How? Just sales?
What expertise do they have selling ficton? Foreign rights? I don’t think this is such a huge deal, honestly, because the chances you will do anything with those rights are so slim–it’s erotic fiction, it’s probably short, etc. etc. But it’s still not, like, See how great and helpful and friendly they are. It’s a grab of rights there is no guarantee they’ll ever exploit, and if they shop your work around chance sare you won’t be able to later.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 03:46:52
Ugh, this is what happens when I post while half-asleep. I should clarify that the main concern for me in this clause being boilerplate is whether or not there is a clear definition given to authors of who is eligible for the “print program”; what the criteria is. What makes a book “stand out”? Who makes that decision? Is this going to turn into a situation where all authors are equal, but some are more equal than others?
As I said, these are rights that should stay with the author, but if you’re comfortable signing them away that’s your decision (not one I would necessarily make, but still your decision.) But this isn’t a case where RR is being oh-so-great, is the point.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 06:05:36
A couple of interesting story categories here, from their submissions page:
Environmental Erotica
In this category, the heroine is always concerned with the health of the environment, and she is looking for and finding love in all the wrong places, and saving the environment while she’s doing it.
Celebrity Romance
This category addresses every woman’s fantasy of a night with a famous celebrity, rock star or athlete. The identities of the celebrities must be thinly veiled and fictionalized, but with recognizable tip-offs.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 06:09:44
How many stories of this kind can there possibly be?
The fanficcers will be wetting themselves over this. Real Person Fiction has suddenly gone legit.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 06:58:08
That celebrity romance thing is going to get them in trouble if they go ahead with it. At the very best, some folks in the meanstream press will notice those titles and make fun of it in some magazine article online or off-line, earning RR only plenty of ridicule and mockery. At the very worst, the management of Daniel Radcliffe is not amused by the thinly-veiled erotic story of the creepy old man in raincoat who met a young actor backstage after the end of a play…
Sep 09, 2008 @ 07:09:28
No they won’t. Fan Fiction flies under the radar because fans do not make any money out of it. That’s why their was sub a hubbub from the fanfic writers about the now defunct Fanlib.com. Real Person Fiction is a completely different genre and most people who write Fan Fic do not have anything to do with RPF. It is seen as crossing the line.
This is the kind of thing that you find on sites like literotica. None of the main Fan Fiction sites will touch it. Fanfic.net has a section for you to report it.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 08:11:48
I thought the people behind Ravenous (I keep wanting to make myself a burger when I think of the name of their little venture) called themselves professionals.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 10:15:37
I think only time will tell.
Sep 09, 2008 @ 11:27:46
From what I’ve been able to gather on the ‘net (and much of it requires the use of Google cache, because pages have been deleted), Ravenous is signing 12 and 13 book contracts with a few authors. If you Google “Ravenous Romance” and “13 book deal,” for example, you’ll find Sephera Giron’s (she is published with Leisure) MySpace blog. But you’ll need to use Google cache to view it because she deleted it. Post also says she’s been hired to write daily horoscopes for them, and is editing an astrology anthology for them.
Jordan Summers » Blog Archive » Cosmic Floating
Sep 09, 2008 @ 13:37:09
[...] before anyone asks, yes, I’ve seen these posts. I find them [...]
Sep 09, 2008 @ 19:49:03
Ah, you haven’t read lesbian fiction *g*
Sep 09, 2008 @ 19:51:12
Clearly not the right stuff anyway :) (But if anyone wants to send me some for review, I would *love* to receive it. We hardly ever get any for Uniquely Pleasurable, and I know we’re missing out.)
Sep 09, 2008 @ 20:59:31
Any particular romance genre?
Sep 09, 2008 @ 21:01:09
Personally, anything but historicals, but for my team, anything – we’re pretty eclectic. So long as the writing doesn’t suck :)
Sep 10, 2008 @ 07:21:20
I’ll contact you off-list.
Sep 13, 2008 @ 12:19:35
In case anyone is interested, Miss Hughes had this to say on Jenny Rappaport’s blog regarding her own book:
Ohh, right. Most erotic romances out there are plotless drivel. Nice.
Sep 13, 2008 @ 15:42:07
But Anion, didn’t you know? Ms Hughes is a cut above everyone. She has the best manners, the best publisher, the best inside gen on how to succeed in epublishing….
She’s an angel sent to earth, truly. Why don’t we recognise her genius?
Sep 13, 2008 @ 15:59:56
Spare me. The only rule I have with blogging is to not praise my own work. At least she’s doing it under her own name, instead of a fake profile.
Sep 13, 2008 @ 18:23:57
I know, Ann. It’s my own shortcoming, and it truly shames me. If only I were smarter, faster, better… Why, oh why, am I so bound by the restrictions of my frail, earth-bound humanity? Trapped in my prison of flesh and bone, I can only wonder from afar.
And yes, Ann, that is very true. I do give her credit for that. But then, I give Donald Trump credit for being an egotistical ass under his own name, but I still think he’s an egotistical ass.