The New Never-Ending PublishAmerica Thread (NEPAT)

akaa1a · Mar 22, 2006

Purple Pony = Darf

Ilovepensandpaper · Mar 22, 2006

midlander said:
On March 2nd PA cancelled the contract for my second book due to paragraph #24. It was released on September 26 and sold 22 copies in the last royalty period. Bear in mind...I am NOT complaining about them doing this. Fortunately they cancelled the contract without my ever asking them to do so.

However, yesterday for the 2nd time since March 2nd, I requested they cancell the contract for my first book for the same paragraph #24.

My first book was released on June 19, 2004. In the four royaly periods since, according to PA anyway, it has sold 34, 20, 33 and 12 in the last royalty period. A grand total of 99 sales. This does not include the 160 copies I foolishly ordered myself. Thankfully I have sold all of them at full retail value.

I have not purchased any copies since December 2004 nor do I plan to. I also am NOT spending anything further to promote the book. The only promotion being done is it being on my web site...not with any referrence to PA.

Most sales for both books have been through B&N not PA....which means they get less money since they give B&N a 40% discount and only 15% for people who order through them.

Today, I again got a NO reply from them. They said "We are not inclined to discontinue your first book at this time. Conside this our final word on this until we advise otherwise."

I don't believe I have grounds for arbitration, nor could I afford it if I did have grounds. Yes, I have many of their rude emails, no they have not done any marketing of either books other than list them on line. I have no way of knowing if their royaly statements are correct or not so I don't know if I am being shorted.

This is so so frustrating since I have a small commercial publisher interested in picking up my work...but they want the rights to publish the FIRST book at this time. They believe it would need to be released prior to the second book.

Anyone have some advise???? It would be greatly greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Larry~
http://www.larrya.us

I sent a registered letter and several emails to PA about releasing me from my contract. Nothing yet...

Gabriele · Mar 22, 2006

AnneMarble said:
Anyway, what's Icelandic for Purple Pony?

Rauður hestur, or something like that.

icerose · Mar 22, 2006

Ilovepensandpaper said:
I sent a registered letter and several emails to PA about releasing me from my contract. Nothing yet...

Took me two years. Concentrate on something else, don't let them drag you down, okay?

I will celebrate when every Publish America prisoner has recieved their parole at last.

Sara

vicki · Mar 23, 2006

Ol' Fashioned Girl said:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Debate/index.php?showtopic=4

This is the 'debate' between James McDonald and Shelaugh Watkins. Enjoy!

And welcome to AW, by the way!

Thanks for the link and the welcome! I checked out the debate. It wasn’t proven one way or the other whether PA is or isn’t a vanity publisher, but it doesn’t seem to matter either way. A British man coined the term “vanity publishing” and wrote his definition at a time when off-set printing was the only way to get books printed.

James D. Macdonald was trying to prove that PA is a vanity publisher although it doesn’t fit the Bristish guy’s definition, though it almost does, but not exactly. He persisted with trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole to prove his argument, but he failed.

Maybe it is time to coin a new term for publishers who publish POD books without charging a fee upfront. J. D. Macdonald used the term “down back” to describe how authors pay to be published by PA.

Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

aruna · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

Of course it does. As you say, printing technology has changed but the essence of vanity publishing is "paying to publish" - ie, printing your own book.

I have corresponded with Jonathan Clifford, the man who coined the expression "vanity publishing". He counts PublishAmerica as a vanity press - just operating under a very sly business model.

triceretops · Mar 23, 2006

Hi, Vicki, and welcome to AW. The fact that PA has been trying to slip under the wire and term themselves a traditional publisher has been going on since their inception. And of course they've had practice since their first company was named EricaHouse, and was strickly a vanity operation.

Their source of income is derived almost entirely from the large bulk purchases that their authors make--50 to 100 copies seems to be the norm. At about an average of $10.00 apiece (with author's discount) it can add up to a nice little take.

If you removed all author purchases, the company would collapse financially, unlike a real commercial publishers, who do not make their profit off of their authors.

It's still vanity when you buy back your own product for resale.

Tri

michael henderson · Mar 23, 2006

see you after the duration

SEE YOU AFTER THE DURATION - the Story of British Evacuees to North America in World War II was published by PublishBritannica and is now published by
PublishAmerica

Anne Marble: Does anyone know what happens to authors who were already published by PublishBritannica said:
http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/smilies/e2sling.gif[/img]

TracySutterer & GaryRogers · Mar 23, 2006

What Is All The Confusion About?

Maybe it was due to my health scare about two months ago - or maybe it is because I take a handful of medications to keep me alive. I just do not understand the debate.

PUBLISHAMERICA.COM is a reverse vanity printing house. Period - End of Story. There is nothing to debate; all the evidence was presented and verified when Mr. Dolan won his arbitration case against PublishAmerica. Period - End of Story.

Argile Stox

aruna · Mar 23, 2006

[email protected] does not bounce.

xhouseboy · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
James D. Macdonald was trying to prove that PA is a vanity publisher although it doesn’t fit the Bristish guy’s definition, though it almost does, but not exactly. He persisted with trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole to prove his argument, but he failed.

Maybe it is time to coin a new term for publishers who publish POD books without charging a fee upfront. J. D. Macdonald used the term “down back” to describe how authors pay to be published by PA.

Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

Have to totally disagree with you there, Vicki.

One has only to read the PAMB to realise that PA is a Vanity Publisher.

The sensible authors who mistakenly fell into the PA trap mostly jump ship and continue on the hard road to real publication; the vanity models remain to massage each other's ego day in day out. And when any of their former colleagues on the board get sick of it all and leave PA, they are derided as failures - when the exact opposite is true.

Most of the regular PA cheerleaders would never have been published in the traditional sense - not in a million years. And yet a fair number float around that board convincing themselves that they are part of some sort of elite movement that is extremely difficult to gain membership to, while deluding no one but themselves. They must know the down, and yet refuse to acknowledge the truth. To acknowledge the truth now would mean their own vanity taking a right hammering, and they don't want that.

PA is a vanity model, no two ways about it. Not everyone is aware of this when they sign up, so devious is the manner in which it has been constructed. Those that cling on would most likely have chosen vanity publishing, anyway. To others, it is anathema.

orraloon · Mar 23, 2006

Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

They're not even printers. Why even try to dignify what they're doing? Rip-off merchants, thieves, any such description fits their operation.

Ol' Fashioned Girl · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

From one of the Big Three's own lips in the recent Dolan arbitration win, Mr. Meiners told the world that the main source of income for PA was from its own authors. That's good enough for me.

Sparhawk · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
James D. Macdonald was trying to prove that PA is a vanity publisher although it doesn’t fit the Bristish guy’s definition, though it almost does, but not exactly. He persisted with trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole to prove his argument, but he failed.

<<SNIPPED>>

Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

HI Vicki and welcome,

Maybe we read different boards, because I thought Jim's case was valid, coherent and well spoken. It's not so much hammering a round peg into a square hole, it's calling a spade a spade, despite the spade's insistance on being called a rake. Publish America is a Vanity Printer, plain and simple, as Meiners confessed during arbitration, PA's biggest cash cow is PA's own authors. That alone coming from him should tell anyone all they need to know about Publish America.

Anyway, it's informative reading no matter how one interprets it. Welcome to AW

DaveKuzminski · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
James D. Macdonald was trying to prove that PA is a vanity publisher although it doesn’t fit the Bristish guy’s definition, though it almost does, but not exactly.
...
Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

Vicki, it's important that you keep in mind there are more facts which distinguish PublishAmerica as a vanity publisher. At URL http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25187-2005Jan20_3.html is an article from The Washington Post which interviewed Larry Clopper, president and co-founder of PublishAmerica. He had this to say about PA:

The phrase "traditional publisher" has no particular definition; in fact, Clopper says, he and his partner came up with it to distinguish themselves from publishers that charge fees.

In other words, Clopper was comparing PA to other vanity publishers, not to trade publishers like Random House because he knew that PA couldn't qualify as a trade publisher because they didn't offer the same kind of support and contracts.

This was later born out in the arbitration hearing between Phil Dolan and PublishAmerica where Willem Meiners admitted that PA's primary market was its own authors and the hearing resulted in a victory for Mr. Dolan. Only a vanity publisher seeks sales from its own authors. Trade publishers do not.

The fact that Publish America uses a different business model is not proof that it isn't a vanity publisher anymore than the kind of press equipment used by the actual printer. What matters is that PublishAmerica uses a model that sells to its own authors which is the quintessential proof that it's a vanity publisher regardless of the fact that the money is paid after the fact rather than before.

endless rewrite · Mar 23, 2006

run for the hills, oh evil ones!

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:05 am Post subject:

Thanks for the warning. I will not go over there anymore. I have seen what they can do, and I almost joined them, but in the back of my mind, a voice whispered: What are the motives of these people? They profess they are to Expose PA, but it runs deeper than that. They really want to humiliate PA writers, in order to feel better about their own writing, and perhaps to curry favour with competing publishers. Anyway, I figure that we are all in the process of evolving, and nobody has the right to mock us. Do people laugh at the early efforts of Hemingway or Faulkner? Nobody should be made to feel shame about his or her writing, if a sincere effort was made. Life and writing is all about learning, and how could we ever learn, if we never made mistakes? Who do these people think they are, anyways? Is their own writing perfect? I would like to sell more books too, but look at it all as a process, in which I grow as a writer, and hopefully get some exposure, and respect as such. The last time I looked, we writers were covered under the HRA, along with all other human beings. Now, if a certain person wants to cut and paste this, and mock me with it, let him. I believe the U.S. slander laws are similar to Canadian ones, in that it is illegal to hold a person up to ridicule, through writing.

This is the latest response to the perfectly calm and rational email sent to a PA author that was posted on the board, resulting in numerous hysterical reactions.

I don't get it, where does all this conspiracy crap come from? Like slagging off PA is going to get noticed by a publisher - please...

I remember this author posting on here and there was no ill feeling. 'what they can do...I almost joined them' Good lord what dark arts are practiced by the posters on here? Well apart from Uncle Jim's penchant for the odd virgin sacrifice and as we all know those are becoming increasingly difficult to source. (put that goat down, Research Guy!)

What about those people who post on the thread who aren't novelists, like well, me? Even in the deluded, they are all against us, grassy knoll conspiracy world of PA, what would my motive be? I would have emailed Janet and asked her but I couldn't because you needed a password to get in touch.

Now I wouldn't need to invest in a NICE-O-MATIC if PAMB'S CRAP-O-MATIC wasn't so damn prolific but it was either that or spend the day sitting on my hands.

As I was waiting for my NICE-O-MATIC to charge, I was thinking, if 'it is ilegal to hold up a person to ridicule through writing' - wouldn't PA be out of business?

Gravity · Mar 23, 2006

I firmly believe most of the PA cheerleaders are in the denial phase of their nightmare. I know I was. It was back in late 2002, when my book hadn't been out long, that I first started hearing the rumbles about the company. To be honest, my first reaction was numb disbelief: "It can't be. You mean they lied?" As I read more, the sensation grew worse, like a tarantula skittering down low across my coccyx. Within another month or so, I knew it was true; this boy had been had...and by pros. All that to say, I feel for the ones just now starting their journey with the Stooges. They're in for one hell of a ride.

John (now mercifully free)

xhouseboy · Mar 23, 2006

endless rewrite said:
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:05 am Post subject:
As I was waiting for my NICE-O-MATIC to charge, I was thinking, if 'it is ilegal to hold up a person to ridicule through writing' - wouldn't PA be out of business?

And critics would have to look for a new source of emloyment.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again. As soon as you accept the coin, you're out there. It's what you constantly strived for, but doesn't always measure up to what you imagined it might be.

A thick skin is a basic requirement.

James D. Macdonald · Mar 23, 2006

Hi, Janet -- please cut-and-paste the other responses to you from here to the PA message board.

You can start with these, if you like:

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26537&page=70&pp=25

I hope you'll drop back by a year from now to let us know how it all went for you.

=============

Oh, I see in the same soon-to-be-deleted thread on the PAMB:

If I want to get rich with it, well that's up to me and how much effort I want to put in to it.

That isn't true, my friend. No matter how much time, effort, and money you put into publicizing and marketing your PA book, your sales will be tiny, your readers will be few, and your income will be negative.

That's because Publish America's business model can't work (for you the author, that is -- for Larry, Miranda, and Willem it's working just fine).

rekirts · Mar 23, 2006

I believe the U.S. slander laws are similar to Canadian ones, in that it is illegal to hold a person up to ridicule, through writing.

Slander laws (which fall under the heading 'defamation laws' here and I think you really mean libel) are much more complicated than most people think they are. This website gives a rundown of Canadian defamation law. It's not too long and quite interesting.

Some points:

*snip*
Defamation must be a direct attack on an actual reputation, not an alleged reputation that a "victim" believes they deserve. A judge will assess the statement against the evidence of the victim's reputation in their community
*snip*
The defamatory remark must be clearly aimed at the plaintiff. General, inflammatory remarks aimed at a large audience would not qualify as the remarks must be clearly pointed at a specific person. *snip*

There are a number of special defences available against defamation:
The "defamatory" remark was basically accurate.
*snip*
Citizens are entitled to make "fair comment" on matters of public interest without fear of defamation claims. A good example of this is a letter to the editor on a matter of public concern. The author of the remarks may even go so far as to presume motives on the part of the person who's actions are being criticized provided only that the imputation of motives is reasonable under the circumstances. The rule of thumb is that the fair comment must reflect an honestly held opinion based on proven fact and not motivated by malice. It should be noted, however, that some provinces have enacted laws which give their citizens varying rights to "fair comment."

It also says: 'It is a tricky and slippery field of law, based on statutes, English common law and many defences. No wonder it has been called a "peculiar tort". And remember, defamation tort law protects your reputation, not your feelings.'

To whom it may concern: If you diginity and feelings are hurt, that does not constitute defamation. Telling the truth about PA does not constitute defamation. Printed defamation is called libel, spoken, slander.

ResearchGuy · Mar 23, 2006

TracySutterer & ArgileStox said:
...PUBLISHAMERICA.COM is a reverse vanity printing house. Period - End of Story....

Meaning, if I read you right, that the fees are tacked on at the end (higher price), not the beginning (up-front fee). Reversal in order, but still a vanity/subsidy press. Only the payment mechanics differ, but the model is still that the author pays.

--Ken

postshy · Mar 23, 2006

Well, I am back from the land of the Living Dead..

Otherwise known as ex PAdom. It is now March 23rd and I have received neither cheque, nor statement from PubliSHAMerica. As a result of my correspondence with Jessica, I have been given the old time-worn excuse "my cheque was lost in the mail" and will neither be replaced nor put a 'stop' payment on until 5/29 (of what year?).

I reminded them that I have never had a problem with mail from them, or anyone else before, and it is highly unlikely that this is what I am dealing with now. Of course, I did post on this Forum some time back that I was anxiously awaiting my cheque which (for the third time) I would be drawing to the attention of the IRS. No, Research Guy, I do not expect them to run to my aid, but a trickle of water can eventually cut a mighty chasm.

Both my daughter and friend have received their cheques quite safely and, IF mine were sent out, I am sure it would have been received by now since it would have been in the same batch because we all live in roughly the same area. I also have family and friends in Maryland and their mail has always reached me safely so nix that excuse.

Welcome, Vicki, and please accept my pity, the awakening can be horrendous and some never get over it and run away to hide under a dark rock in shame. I told Jessica right up front that any "rude and demeaning e-mails" sent to me in response to my e-mail would be published on the Internet. To be honest, she was extremely professional and prompt in her replies. However, she still seems to think that I am a fool just because PA got me in their clutches originally.

However, they have also taken to "parroting" all my e-mails back to me so I guess Vic is seeing the handwriting on the wall. A little late, since I have kept every e-mail on file since the inception of my dealings with PA, including their so-called "amendment contract" which would have sucked me in even deeper into their coils.

Well, that's all for now, but I would be interested to know how many others have "lost their royalty statement in the mail."

postshy/Roberta

vicki · Mar 23, 2006

Like I said, it doesn’t really matter whether it was proven that PA is a vanity publisher or not. By all accounts, it is an accepted fact that PA is a vanity publisher, so no-one would sign a contract thinking otherwise. First-time authors must know that the world is not waiting to buy their first offering.

Bonnie Gibson said:
I'm making quilts now, and have made much more off one quilt (couple weeks work) than I have made with royalties from PA in over a year. Not counting the time it took to write two books.

My quilts don't lie to me either.

Bonnie

An author friend of mine from the UK is a quilter. She has friends in Washington State, and visited them a while back. They introduced her to a friend of theirs, who was a quilter. At the end of her stay, she gave them a thank you gift -- an unusual paperweight that she’d already bought in Canada before she visited.

Back in the UK, she bought a zippered jerkin from Marks and Spencer and sent it to her friends in Washington (they’d greatly admired the jerkin worn by her husband, and asked if she could buy one in the UK and ship it out to them).

Several months later, she received a letter from America asking if she could find another paperweight similar to the one that had been so greatly admired by all their friends. The quilter, in particular, dearly wanted something similar for her special display of ornaments. She couldn’t find the exact same paperweight but she did find a dandelion head in full seed that was captured in a clear spherical resin. It was a beautiful paperweight, which she bought and sent to the states.

Several more months later, she heard from her friends in Washington again, saying that her quilter friend and her husband, who’d moved to the Blue Mountains after retiring, had lost their home and everything in it. The chimney of the house they’d built themselves had caught fire during the night and the whole house had been destroyed.

My friend in the UK remembered being shown the quilt that this American friend, who’d lost everything, had been working on during her visit. The quilt was in the colors of the US flag, so she set to and made a quilt in the same colors and sent it to the quilter who had lost all her quilts.

Last year, my friend’s first novel was published and she wrote to her American friends and told them about her novel. They wrote back and congratulated her. Then, at Christmas, they added a note to their annual Christmas letter saying that they hadn’t bought her book but they would pick one up somewhere along the line.

My friend had sent four gifts to friends who couldn’t be bothered to buy her book. It is just one of numerous disappointments she has had since her book was published.

So Bonnie, be a quilter by all means, but don’t be a quitter. If you enjoy writing, keep going, one day you might actually succeed. I hope you do.

AnnaWhite · Mar 23, 2006

vicki said:
James D. Macdonald was trying to prove that PA is a vanity publisher although it doesn’t fit the Bristish guy’s definition, though it almost does, but not exactly ... Until a new term is coined, PA can claim that it is not a vanity publisher – it just doesn’t fit the definition.

Like Aruna, I have also been in email contact with the "British guy", Jonathan Clifford. I believe the definition of "vanity press" which PA supporters love to quote was written before the days of PublishAmerica. Jonathan says in his email: "I have a large file on the Publish Britannica/America Brigade."

Interestingly, Jonathan also says: "Any company which charges to publish books under its own name or prints an undisclosed number of copies which it claims are their property is a vanity publisher - whatever it may try and tell you to the contrary."

I think there could be lots of ad-hoc definitions for a vanity press, but let's face it - what does it really mean? If one stops quibbling on definitions, a vanity press is simply a publisher that prints books for the purpose of satisfying an author's vanity, rather than the public readership.

On another topic, I have been away from the AW boards for a couple of weeks, as I have a few overwhelming work deadlines to meet until mid-April. So I've been a bit slow publishing stories on the True Stories about PublishAmerica Website.

I had a short breather today, and have uploaded two new stories: Diana's and Sandy's (if you opened the site recently, you may need to press your Refresh or Reload browser button).

I skimmed through the NEPAT backlog today, and was very happy to read about the new releases. Congratulations! :PartySmil

And all the best with your writing careers!

I still remain bound by the PA fetters, and at the moment have no time to do anything about it. But I'll be back on board when I finish this job...

endless rewrite · Mar 23, 2006

you've got mail

Hi Janet

You sent me a private message as soon as I commented on your post. You asked if we could discuss things through email and keep it off the boards. I emailed you what I believe was a supportive and polite email back and thanked you for your response and explained mine. Happy to comply, still am.

Thank goodness my nice-o-matic is fully charged or I would be mightily pissed at your latest addition on the PAMB.

Still wishing you all the best.

The New Never-Ending PublishAmerica Thread (NEPAT)

Giggle Collector

Come...Tell me about it

Lost in School Work

On a wing and a prayer

michael henderson

Coffee Fanatics

On a wing and a prayer

In the Yellow Woods

Hand? What hand?

Jenna's Cabana Boy

Preditors & Editors

Seen 'em come, seen 'em go

In the Yellow Woods

Your Genial Uncle

NOooooo!!!

Resident Curmudgeon