Royalties or Screwed Royally?
So you’ve written the book, you’ve fought your way through slush to get an agent, you’ve gotten your book deal, you’ve broken your back to promote it and so now it’s royalty time. Finally you get to enjoy the fruits of your labor. Oops. Not so fast.
Royalty checks go to your agent first not to you and technically they’re suppose to give you your money within thirty days but some take longer. (I’ve been waiting 40 days on one of my checks.) Essentially authors are floating their agents interest free loans when this happens.
I had one agent who changed agencies four times so I have to hunt down checks and royalty statements from his former agencies because they don’t automatically send them to me. I almost always have to ask, especially if it’s just a statement, but I’ve had to shake an agency down for a check (one that was in the five figures.) Twice a year I go through this dance, and yes, these are very respected agencies; one is huge.
I would love to for the publisher to simply issue two checks and two statements. I know it would be a pain in the butt but how fair is it for the author to have to wait around for their money for thirty days of more? Why should an agent, whose cut is only 15 percent get preferential treatment over the author?
Friday, October 2, 2009
Thursday, October 1, 2009
More on the Previously Published
In order to understand this post you’re going to have to read the one before it.
Did I or did I not say Nathan Bransford was nice? Instead of offering up a bit of snark to my comment he, like the nice fellow he is, said this:
"I agree with you. I wish publishers would stick with writers and that chains would order based on their guts rather than on how the previous book did. I just don't think it's fair to pin this on agents. We go to war with the industry we're given. Unfortunately I can't force a publisher to publish anyone's book.”
And of course I don’t expect any agent to take on a project they can’t sell. I don’t remember saying that at all. What I did say is published authors are better bets than just anyone from the slush and it pays to work them (and be respectful to them and not make them feel small on blogs or yell at them in caps) even if their project isn’t quite ready for prime time. Certainly published authors are better risks than those who have never published.
Case in point: An author friend of mine lost her agent (her agent died) and she started to query. She shared many of her rejections with me and while there were many nice ones, there were a lot of patronizing ones as well. She got very little credit for being a previously published . (Ps she had five starred reviews and scads of great reviews, Sales weren’t stellar but she wasn’t in the basement either.)
Trouble was her book had a slow start so that’s why it was rejected. (over thirty times.) A newbie agent finally took her on and helped her shape it. The author, being a pro took her suggestions and ran with them. In a matter of two weeks she’d fixed it. It ended up selling in a major deal and made the NYT best-selling list, the first of five bestselling books.
Moral of the story: Sometimes it pays BIG to take on published authors because even though their project might not be perfect they got the chops and patience to fix it. Now I realize big-time agents don't have to mess with this sort of thing but you'd think the newer ones would be a little bit less dismissive.
Did I or did I not say Nathan Bransford was nice? Instead of offering up a bit of snark to my comment he, like the nice fellow he is, said this:
"I agree with you. I wish publishers would stick with writers and that chains would order based on their guts rather than on how the previous book did. I just don't think it's fair to pin this on agents. We go to war with the industry we're given. Unfortunately I can't force a publisher to publish anyone's book.”
And of course I don’t expect any agent to take on a project they can’t sell. I don’t remember saying that at all. What I did say is published authors are better bets than just anyone from the slush and it pays to work them (and be respectful to them and not make them feel small on blogs or yell at them in caps) even if their project isn’t quite ready for prime time. Certainly published authors are better risks than those who have never published.
Case in point: An author friend of mine lost her agent (her agent died) and she started to query. She shared many of her rejections with me and while there were many nice ones, there were a lot of patronizing ones as well. She got very little credit for being a previously published . (Ps she had five starred reviews and scads of great reviews, Sales weren’t stellar but she wasn’t in the basement either.)
Trouble was her book had a slow start so that’s why it was rejected. (over thirty times.) A newbie agent finally took her on and helped her shape it. The author, being a pro took her suggestions and ran with them. In a matter of two weeks she’d fixed it. It ended up selling in a major deal and made the NYT best-selling list, the first of five bestselling books.
Moral of the story: Sometimes it pays BIG to take on published authors because even though their project might not be perfect they got the chops and patience to fix it. Now I realize big-time agents don't have to mess with this sort of thing but you'd think the newer ones would be a little bit less dismissive.
Previously Published? Buzz Off.
Normally I adore Nathan Bransford and consider his agent blog to be much more respectful to writers than others, but he really dropped the ball today on his post today about previously published authors. I commented and here’s what I had to say;
Goodness gracious. I can't imagine why anyone would find this post encouraging. It's a very, very sad statement on a writers' place in the publishing world.
First of all, editors and agent can have all kinds of failures and still hold their jobs. As a writer, on the other hand, one false move and you're toast. How many people are wildly successful right out of the gate? Why are writers held to such impossible standards? What happened to career building?
Take Dan Brown for instance. His editor stuck with him through several books with lackluster sales and then, surprise,
surprise, he knocked it out of the ballpark.
Like any business, publishing takes a while to learn. Dan Brown figured it out and kudos to his editor and pub company who didn't dump him just because he was a slow starter.
And any agent who is queried by a published author is lucky indeed. They are getting a letter from a person who already knows the business, is a savvy marketer, knows how to take edits and is already been vetted by the publishing world. A published author is frequently miles ahead of the average person who queries an agent (not to diss unpublished authors but there are a LOT of dabblers out there and that's what I mean by "average.")
And yes, if you're a published author, you do hope that agents will treat you a wee bit different from the dabblers, and be respectful of your accomplishments without saying with a sniff, "A debut author is easier to sell."
After all, aren't agents and editors with a track record treated differently than newbies? Why should it be so different for writers? Yes, I understand about the dreadful Bookscan obstacle but most writers are only too happy to take on a pen name. And I do think published authors should follow the “query rules” but no need to yell at them with caps if they don’t.
Sady debut authors are more exciting than "previously published authors." They are so grateful and they don't ask a lot of pesky questions. They are discoveries and therefore celebrated, that is until they have disappointing sales and are the summarily discarded.
There are precious few writers who have hit the big time on their first few times out, but as statistics bear out, more authors fail to earn out than don't. And if you look at the backgrounds of most bestselling authors you will see a slow climb to the top, with many failures along the way. Thank goodness they were helped along by some editors and agents along the way who understood and appreciated their worth.
Next post: a little something about royalties and (big shock) how the author is the last to be paid.
Goodness gracious. I can't imagine why anyone would find this post encouraging. It's a very, very sad statement on a writers' place in the publishing world.
First of all, editors and agent can have all kinds of failures and still hold their jobs. As a writer, on the other hand, one false move and you're toast. How many people are wildly successful right out of the gate? Why are writers held to such impossible standards? What happened to career building?
Take Dan Brown for instance. His editor stuck with him through several books with lackluster sales and then, surprise,
surprise, he knocked it out of the ballpark.
Like any business, publishing takes a while to learn. Dan Brown figured it out and kudos to his editor and pub company who didn't dump him just because he was a slow starter.
And any agent who is queried by a published author is lucky indeed. They are getting a letter from a person who already knows the business, is a savvy marketer, knows how to take edits and is already been vetted by the publishing world. A published author is frequently miles ahead of the average person who queries an agent (not to diss unpublished authors but there are a LOT of dabblers out there and that's what I mean by "average.")
And yes, if you're a published author, you do hope that agents will treat you a wee bit different from the dabblers, and be respectful of your accomplishments without saying with a sniff, "A debut author is easier to sell."
After all, aren't agents and editors with a track record treated differently than newbies? Why should it be so different for writers? Yes, I understand about the dreadful Bookscan obstacle but most writers are only too happy to take on a pen name. And I do think published authors should follow the “query rules” but no need to yell at them with caps if they don’t.
Sady debut authors are more exciting than "previously published authors." They are so grateful and they don't ask a lot of pesky questions. They are discoveries and therefore celebrated, that is until they have disappointing sales and are the summarily discarded.
There are precious few writers who have hit the big time on their first few times out, but as statistics bear out, more authors fail to earn out than don't. And if you look at the backgrounds of most bestselling authors you will see a slow climb to the top, with many failures along the way. Thank goodness they were helped along by some editors and agents along the way who understood and appreciated their worth.
Next post: a little something about royalties and (big shock) how the author is the last to be paid.
Welcome to Ungrateful Author!
This blog is intended to be a tool of empowerment for all writers and authors. I"m an anonymous best-selling author who is a weary of the way authors and writers are often treated by people who should be their advocates, i.e. agents, editors and oddly enough, their fellow writers.
I hope this blog will educate authors about their role in the publishing world and be a voice of the author in the blogosphere. There are countless agent blogs and a few editor blogs but I can't think of a single author advocate blog. Authors often remain silent about publishing matters because they don't want to make waves.
Having been involved in the publishing word for over ten years; I can tell you that a). the writer is the low man on the totem pole (superstar writers being the exception) and is considered by many agents and editors--certainly not all- as a necessary evil b.) if writer complains about anything at all they are said to be "ungrateful."
As a writer you are supposed to be grateful just to be published. Authors hear this over and over again. They hear it from their agent and editor. Sadly they also hear it from fellow writers who haven't yet been published
Authors work for years and years on their craft with no compensation. When they get published it's because they've earned it. No one tells agents and editors that they should be grateful for their jobs, Writers should be afforded the same respect. Unfortunately they rarely are,
The goal of this blog is not to post lots of whiny woe-is-me posts but to be a voice for writers and to be able to openly discuss some of the things most authors find troublling about the publishing business. Stay tuned!
This blog is intended to be a tool of empowerment for all writers and authors. I"m an anonymous best-selling author who is a weary of the way authors and writers are often treated by people who should be their advocates, i.e. agents, editors and oddly enough, their fellow writers.
I hope this blog will educate authors about their role in the publishing world and be a voice of the author in the blogosphere. There are countless agent blogs and a few editor blogs but I can't think of a single author advocate blog. Authors often remain silent about publishing matters because they don't want to make waves.
Having been involved in the publishing word for over ten years; I can tell you that a). the writer is the low man on the totem pole (superstar writers being the exception) and is considered by many agents and editors--certainly not all- as a necessary evil b.) if writer complains about anything at all they are said to be "ungrateful."
As a writer you are supposed to be grateful just to be published. Authors hear this over and over again. They hear it from their agent and editor. Sadly they also hear it from fellow writers who haven't yet been published
Authors work for years and years on their craft with no compensation. When they get published it's because they've earned it. No one tells agents and editors that they should be grateful for their jobs, Writers should be afforded the same respect. Unfortunately they rarely are,
The goal of this blog is not to post lots of whiny woe-is-me posts but to be a voice for writers and to be able to openly discuss some of the things most authors find troublling about the publishing business. Stay tuned!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)