First time advances

[HConn]

Courtesy of John Scalzi: (http://www.scalzi.com/whatever/)

A first-time author takes an informal survey (http://www.justinelarbalestier.com/Musings/firstnoveladvances.htm) of advances received by other first-time authors.

And a more complete survey of romance publishers. (http://www.karenafox.com/money.htm)

[michelle217]

Those are great links. Thanks for sharing them. Just goes to show that anyone who thinks they can give up their day job immediately after having one book published is fooling themselves. :eek

[Writing Again]

Admittedly this was over twenty years ago, but the largest advance I ever received for a novel was $2,000.

Only one novel I ever wrote paid more than the advance -- That netted me a check for $30 so on that novel I made a grand total of $1,530.

[Jamesaritchie]

Lot of apples and orages and mixing of publishers in that survey. To get an accurate picture of advances you first have to separate the publishers into appropriate groups or the numbers are all screwed up.

[triceretops]

John, those are great links and the info is appreciated. If you decide to do non-fiction books, count me in. I'll gladly turn over my woefully minuscule figures.

Tri

[DarkHaven80]

I heard first time books get around 2000 or less; I'd say it's pretty accurate from the website. And of course it DOES depend on genre and what's hot at the time. Dissapointing sure, but another reason not to get into writing expecting money :eek

[maestrowork]

I for one don't care much about advances. I care more about the actual royalties. ;)

Of course, if someone's going to give me a six figure advance, I'm not going to say no. That's money in my pocket. But $2000? I can take it or leave it.

[katdad]

Thanks for the info. It matches what I've learned in other places.

A first time novel will usually get $10,000+ if it's a normal genre novel (romance, mystery, etc.), and maybe in the $25k range if it's well received by the publisher.

If that book is a reasonable success then the next will likely sell for more, assuming it's either a sequel or within the same genre and of the same quality.

[Writing Again]

Of course, if someone's going to give me a six figure advance, I'm not going to say no. That's money in my pocket. But $2000? I can take it or leave it.

As I said, at the time $1,500 was standard. Minimum wage was $1 an hour and you could live for six months on $1,500.

I also earned $2 an hour and lived better on it then than I do on $20 an hour today. I believe that in order to get an equivalent advance today you would have to receive $15,000.

[vstrauss]

Ther are sizeable publishers that are still paying $1,000 as a first-time advance. $5,000 isn't unusual for a first-time sf/fantasy or mystery author. It's not totally unreasonable to hope for $10,000 for a genre novel but all things being equal (i.e., the publisher not identifying the first-timer for a special push or deciding that the novel is especially marketable), it is pretty optimistic.

Of course, it does depend on genre; I think that you can probably expect to be paid more for a debut commercial mainstream book than for a debut genre novel. Also, we're talking about large houses here; smaller publishers pay less. And of course if your book turns out to be successful, you'll earn beyond your advance.

My first advance, in 1982, was $2,500. My second, in 1984, was $5,000. How many industries are there where people can expect the same starting wage now that they might have gotten 20 years ago?

- Victoria

[James D Macdonald]

One big disadvantage to taking a six-figure advance is -- if you don't get six-figure sales, your next book will be very hard to market indeed.

[rtilryarms]

Yes, that is why I routinely turn down those $*00,000 offers!

[STORMTURNER]

I've heard horror stories that you should have at least 2 novels finished before you consider accepting an advance.

I also joined a writers group here in Atlanta and was told by a member that she and her artist received each a $12,000 advance early this year from a major pubco for a children's book, which still has not been published.

I can only hope to get there some day.

[vstrauss]

>>I've heard horror stories that you should have at least 2 novels finished before you consider accepting an advance.<<

Why?

>>she and her artist received each a $12,000 advance early this year from a major pubco for a children's book, which still has not been published.<<

A year to two years is a normal lag time. Publishers buy ahead.

- Victoria

[maestrowork]

I've heard 18 months lag time is pretty standard now. Sometimes shorter, sometimes longer.

[SRHowen]

Does anything in this biz move faster than a snail?

Shawn

[maestrowork]

Does anything in this biz move faster than a snail?

Rejections.

[Vulpes Sapien]

Sigh. I told my husband about all of this and he said, "You're telling me that you're busting your ass every night over this and you'll get paid a couple thousand for it?" "Well, maybe less," I replied.

So now my husband thinks I'm insane. (Not necessarily a new consideration, actually.) Of course, I've been trying to write stories since I stopped eating the crayons, and I'll continue to write whether anyone ever pays me. But ... money would be nice, too.

[HollyB]

Also courtesy of John Scalzi (http://www.scalzi.com/whatever/):

The Real World Book Deal Descriptions (http://www.scalzi.com/whatever/002860.html) (based on Publisher's Lunch weekly deal reports)

[SRHowen]

true true but even some of those go at a snail's pace.

Shawn

[scullars]

Hello, first time posting here, but wanted to pass along this link on Jervey Tervalon, who had the misfortune of being requested to return his $41,000 advance to his publishers. Maybe there should be an escrow account written into the terms with a time limit stipulation as to when the publisher is allowed to request a return of an advance.

<a href="http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/02/books-tervalon.php" target="_new">www.laweekly.com/ink/05/02/books-tervalon.php</a>

[James D Macdonald]

Let's see -- failed to turn in the book he'd contracted for, and was late to boot. Yeah, do something like that and they might ask you for the advance back.

[Victim 655321]

Agreed. Working with publishers is a business relationship, founded on contractual agreements. You don't follow through with your end of the agreement, they're under no obligation to follow through with theirs.

[HapiSofi]

Jim, begging your pardon, and allowing for the fact that we only have a single source of information on the story so far, it does sound to me like Mr. Tervalon got screwed. He'd talked to the house about what he was going to write as his third book of the contract, and they'd approved. The contracted-for version of what he was going to write was pretty darn sketchy. He wasn't writing a series.

Have you had full documentation on the particulars every time you and your publishers have verbally agreed to a change in what "book n of most recent contract" was going to consist of? Was the resulting book turned in even slightly late? I expect you'd feel ill-treated if your publisher had then declared that the book you delivered didn't fulfill the terms of the contract, and demanded that you pay back the advance.

These changes happen all the time. Authors have a rough idea of what they're going to want to write, the description goes into the contract, and later on they find they've got a different book coming out of their keyboard. If it's just a matter of swapping one non-series work of fiction for another, comparable work, there's no reason for the publisher to balk.

I'm also more than a little startled by the house so aggressively dunning Mr. Tervalon for the advance. I'd have expected them to draw up an agreement whereby they'd get first proceeds, up to the amount of the original advance, from the resale of the book to another publisher.

It sounds to me like the editor who originally liked Mr. Tervalon's work left the house, and the publicist who was familiar with it left as well. And if the only way to get his first novel past the acquisitions committee was to get rid of the interracial romance, I have to assume that the house doesn't have a lot of inherent sympathy for his subject matter. Did they truly not send the first one out for reviews, and him an unknown writer? That's just not right. Neither is leaving him without an editor for a prolonged period.

I wish I knew how the first two books shipped and sold, and whether the contract called for joint or separate accounting on the three books. I also wish I knew whether Atria's the kind of place that judges its editors on their profitability without regard to other circumstances, and whether Atria's handing back any other books this season, and what the house's overall profitability looks like just now.

At the point that things went to hell for Mr. Tervalon, after he'd delivered his book, Atria had three choices. They could formally accept the manuscript as delivered, which under most publishing contracts would mean he'd be due an additional on-delivery payment for it. Second option, they could put off acceptance while requesting various editorial changes. He makes the changes, they accept the revised manuscript, he gets his on-delivery, the book goes into production. Very common. Third option, they could declare that the book was wholly unacceptable, and ask for the return of their advance. That third option is a thing one seldom sees done. Fiction writers don't commonly forget how to write fiction between one book and another.

Fact is, Atria signed a newbie writer to a three-book non-series contract. They paid him a very substantial advance, and put his first two books into print. You don't do that if the man can't write.

There doesn't appear to have been any editorial negotiation. He doesn't mention his replacement editor asking to see how the book's coming along while he's writing it. Her rejection of it comes as a surprise to him. She also makes no attempt to get him to fix whatever it is she doesn't like about it. And I hate to give this one away, but you know, authors quite often run a little late on their manuscripts. Unless there's some reason for a book to be non-negotiably date-dependent -- like, it's about Halley's Comet, and it has to appear before the comet does -- refusing to accept a manuscript on grounds of non-catastrophically late delivery is what you do when you want to reject it anyway and are looking for an excuse.

This is what agents are for. Mr. Tervalon doesn't seem to have one. This leads me to wonder an odd thing: is that $41,000 Atria wants back the advance on the third book, or the advance on all three books? Normally I'd assume it's the advance on the third book.You don't ask for the advance back on books you've already put into print. But if it's just the advance on the third book, then I have to assume that Atria signed an unagented newbie writer to a six-figure contract. If Tervalon can't write, what the hell were they doing? And if he can write, what the hell are they doing now?

Non-series three-book contracts aren't an arbitrary arrangement. When you offer one to an author, you're betting that this is going to be an ongoing relationship. You're also betting that you'd rather have his next couple of books contractually tied up, so that you don't suddenly find yourself bidding against your competitors at Charnel House or Banana Books. The author in turn is betting that you'll do a good job on his books.

It takes a while to build a new author. It's truly said that publishing is an industry that introduces hundreds of thousands of new products every year, as opposed to the handful introduced by car or soap manufacturers. To the public, every book is an unknown product. That's rough. It's a little less rough when you have a known author, or a known series, or at least a known set of genre expectations. Still, a new author takes some doing. You want them to stick around so you get the benefit of all the work it took to teach the sales force to remember their name. If all goes well, they'll want to stick around too.

There's risk on both sides. All the parties to the contract knew that when they signed. If Atria is now regretting having done so, they're hardly the first publisher to be in that position, and it doesn't make it right for them to retroactively reassign all the risk to Mr. Tervalon.

Let me repeat before I end this that I have the story from a single source, and that authors have a great talent for coming up with plausible explanations. Interpretations may change. Still, it does appear to me that Mr. Tervalon has taken some hard knocks from his publisher.

[HapiSofi]

No responses at all?

[Kate Nepveu]

We are stunned speechless by your eloquence and good sense, and also trying really hard to get some papers out the door. =>

[aka eraser]

I'm nodding over here!

[triceretops]

Well, I'm still gaaaa...gaaaaa over a $41,000 advance on one book, or was it three? Who cares! How, in the name of "oh my Gawd" did this guy swing THAT advance WITHOUT an agent?! Even if his claim is posted for all eyes to see; even if it was for a three-book-deal, I don't believe it! I'm sorry, folks. Can anyone, anywhere verify this financial feat? I did
read the story, but I'm going back to reread this post and blog/website over again. Then I'm going to go surfing and hope I can catch a wave that points me to this miraculous feat.

I'd also like to know who his publisher was, the one who cut loose with all this money for a moderately known quantity.
Cause' I'm gonna' send them everything I've got!

[James D Macdonald]

The publisher was Atria, and there's nothing unbelievable about a $41K advance. The only question was whether it was for just one book or for all three, since that was unclear in his article.

You don't need an agent -- it's just that having one is a good idea.

[triceretops]

Gotcha, Jim. I found him. He belonged to Atria, a sub of Viacom, and was very well known for three previous titles, one of which hit the NYT bestseller list in 1994, I believe. He's won some awards too. I now doff my ole' fedora to him, and while I'm at it, I'll eat it too.

Tri

[Jules Hall]

Maybe there should be an escrow account written into the terms with a time limit stipulation as to when the publisher is allowed to request a return of an advance.

There is a time limit. It's called the Statute of Limitations, at least in Britain. Over here, if they don't ask for the money back for 7 years from the date they pay it to you, it's tough luck.

Also, it's hard to see why this guy's complaining. He got $41,000 and they're asking him to repay $20,000 of it over 10 years. So, he gets to keep a reasonable amount of money for a novel, and a sizeable 10 year loan at zero interest.

And the novel hasn't been published, so he can now find another home for it.

Sounds to me like he got the better end of the deal. The publisher lost $21,000 and didn't get a book they could publish.

[HapiSofi]

He made the New York Times bestseller list? This is the writer they left without an editor? This is getting weirder by the minute. No wonder Tervalon talks about not getting any signing tours or postcard mailings this time. He'd have warranted that level of promotion on his earlier books. And the $41,000 advance for one book suddenly makes sense too.

Atria's being petty. If they basketed the accounting on that multi-book contract, and Tervalon's got a track record with them of successful books plus one bestseller, they'd have made money on the deal even if his last book tanked.

[scullars]

Jervalon elaborated in a post at a board at Af-Am Literary Book Club that he believes advance money should be seen as seed money ("money that a publisher is willing to risk to get a product they can sell") as opposed to a de facto loan that it apparently is in this case, where the publishers can call in the money and threaten to sue to get it back.

He also stated that if a writer completes a book in good faith after discussion with his editor, then he has fulfilled the end of his deal. "Otherwise, publishers can throw out a little money and if they don't like what you provided, (the market has changed, your sales sucked for your last book) though you discussed and worked with your editor, and then demand the money back."

As for the British statute of limitation, 7 years sounds to me like a long time (at least it's a long time not to touch money that will probably be needed). I would opt for 2 years if I could put it in a contract.

[STORMTURNER]

I was hoping to tell my boss to kiss my 'you know what...' but if it takes that long to get it to the market/public, I would hope I could request top scale. I don't want to spend a year on a book then wait two more years to get paid. I think I'll take the advance and keep my day job.

[James D Macdonald]

Absolutely. "Don't quit your day job" is standard advice. Also: if you do lose your mind and decide to go full-time freelance, first pay all your credit cards down to zero. Then cut them up. Know that from now on the only way you'll ever buy anything is if you already have the cash in hand. No money, no honey.

[scullars]

I've long since given up the idea that my writing will financially sustain me. I'm just aiming to bolster my income a bit.

Two years might still be a long time limit for a free-and-clear advance; maybe just a year, and after that, the money is MINE, no lawsuits.

Sequeing a little: my 'fun' project for 2005 will be paying down my debts and making it a challenge to meet certain time deadlines. I know I have added stress to my writing thinking that if I could just sell a story or my novel, what little money I gained would go toward paying down my bills. But that's ass backwards thinking. I'm going to get rid of the bills, free up my creative process from economic worries.

Thankfully, I do have a short story coming out in 2005 (Masques VI by J. N. Williamson and Gary Braunbeck). Maybe, with the exposure, I can sell more short stories. Also, I have an agent shopping around my second novel, that has gone through a re-write based on suggestions from one of the most generous rejections I've received so far. So, for 2005, I've got my fingers x'd for a more productive year.

[vstrauss]

One reason a story like Mr. Tervalon's attracts a lot of attention is that what happened to him--having to return his advance--is one of those big mythic writers' fears, but is actually pretty rare.

There's more story here than any of us know.

- Victoria

[triceretops]

Victoria, I think you nailed it right on the head here. This is only the second time I've heard of such an advance recall.
It's a pretty rare event, indeed. Usually a compromise or settlement is reached between the pub and the author. I think there's more to this story than we realize. Turning a manuscript in late can technically be a breech of contract but it is seldom enforced, owed to the many writers who suffer an acute illness, accident, or other misfortune beyond their control. I asked for another six months on my second book and got it with no problem.

I think Mr. T's problem lies somewhere else, here. Something more disagreeable or catastrophic.

Tri

[James D Macdonald]

It's entirely possible that someone at Corporate, one of the beancounters far removed from writing, said, "Get rid of all the books that haven't had final acceptance."

Weird stuff happens. I don't know all the ins and outs of this one.

The usual thing that happens is, if you sell the book that they didn't accept, you have to repay the advance out of your new advance.