• Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.

The Zharmae Publishing Press

Round Two

Behind the door of a small house.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
190
Reaction score
27
In fact, if 40 sales are typical of its books, then most people would be better off self publishing.

If 40 sales are typical, how much longer could Zharmae continue to put out new books? Even with the royalty system the outlined in the contract, there still isn't enough money to keep the lights on.
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
If a publisher isn't making money from the books it publishes it has a few choices.

1) Go out of business.

2) Publish better books, better.

3) Find other ways of generating cash.

Lots of new publishers take option one. Very few startups manage to achieve option two. Quite a few go for option three, and ask their authors to contribute to their own publication, thus transforming the publisher into a vanity press.

Incidentally, I just saw this on Zharmae's website:

Zharmae actively reviews work submitted through Bowker Manuscript Services. The benefit to you, the writer, is that there are many wonderful publishers also reviewing the work submitted on this website. You have a greater chance of having your work acquired by using this service. You may submit your work on BMS and alert us to your submission there. To use their manuscript service please go to www.bowkermanuscriptsubmissions.com. This is, however, not our primary means of reviewing work.

Writer Beware has discussed Bowker Manuscript Services:

Bowker (yes, that Bowker) has just launched its own submission service, Bowker Manuscript Submissions (BMS for short). BMS allows authors to upload book proposals into a database, which publishers can search according to their needs and interests, and contact authors directly if they want to read more. Cost to authors: $99 for six months. Membership is free for trade publishers. POD services and vanity publishers must pay a subscription fee.

Hold up a moment. POD services and vanity publishers? Why would authors need a submission service to contact fee-based publishers, which have no barriers to entry? Why would a submission service allow fee-based publishers to troll its database? Authors who use BMS can choose not to be contacted by fee-based publishers--but still.

The answer is twofold. First, BMS isn't a service for writers; it's a service for publishers. The verbiage on BMS's website makes this abundantly clear: "BowkerManuscriptSubmissions.com was initiated as a cooperative effort between Bowker and the Publishing community for Publishers looking for new authors and desiring an efficient way to discover and evaluate new manuscripts." So why not include fee-based publishers? After all, they need manuscripts too.

We have a thread about it at AW too.


I just asked a few of my agent-friends if they use it: they all said no, because they get so many submissions via their usual routes they don't need to go looking anywhere else for new writers.
 

Filigree

Mildly Disturbing
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 16, 2010
Messages
16,441
Reaction score
1,529
Location
between rising apes and falling angels
Website
www.cranehanabooks.com
I've asked a couple of agents and editors (about Bowker, back when that thread started) and they say they don't use the Bowker manuscript 'service'. They get more than enough submissions as it is. Moreover, even though I couldn't get anyone to say in quotable form, I got the strong impression they thought less of authors who used for-pay manuscript and query services.
 

CaoPaux

Mostly Harmless
Staff member
Super Moderator
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
13,952
Reaction score
1,746
Location
Coastal Desert
Zharmae actively reviews work submitted through Bowker Manuscript Services.
I'd love to hear how, considering the BMS site is gone (last cached 8/13), as are its info pages on Bowker's UK and AU sites. (And its FB page and Twitter feed, for the sake of completeness.)

(And, yes, I'm in the course of updating the Other section. Notetaking should wrap up this weekend. :cool:)
 

folclor

Left-Handed Writing Fairy
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 20, 2013
Messages
390
Reaction score
34
Location
Alberta
Website
www.angrypossumpublishing.xyz
I don't think 40 books is typical. They just posted to Facebook today about one author's book being in the 4,000s on the Amazon best seller ranking. It's most likely just that I don't have any sort of following at this point and they're probably putting the time and energy into authors who actually had followings to begin with.

And, yes, I do know that it's not my job to sell my book. As the author, it's not my specialty. I'm betting that most books sell better than mine, though.
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
I don't think 40 books is typical. They just posted to Facebook today about one author's book being in the 4,000s on the Amazon best seller ranking. It's most likely just that I don't have any sort of following at this point and they're probably putting the time and energy into authors who actually had followings to begin with.

And, yes, I do know that it's not my job to sell my book. As the author, it's not my specialty. I'm betting that most books sell better than mine, though.

Being in the 4,000s in Amazon's rankings doesn't suggest that a book has sold more than 40 copies: it suggests that 4,000 or so more books have recently sold more copies than it.

What best-seller list was that on? You might find it's a small sub-list, in which case that ranking is nothing impressive.
 

shelleyo

Just another face in a red jumpsuit
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
2,126
Reaction score
342
Being in the 4,000s in Amazon's rankings doesn't suggest that a book has sold more than 40 copies: it suggests that 4,000 or so more books have recently sold more copies than it.

What best-seller list was that on? You might find it's a small sub-list, in which case that ranking is nothing impressive.


If it's 4,000 or so in the entire Kindle store, it's probably sold about 35-50 copies in the last 24-36 hours. Of course, that can go up or down depending on the entire sales volume, but it doesn't usually vary too widely. We've tracked sales on dozens of books, and the numbers are pretty reliable.

The thing that changes most often is how high you need to be ranked to get on the category top 100 lists. That can vary a ton from week to week, and it will tend to vary at least a little from hour to hour. We used to be able to get on on the top 100 erotica list with a rank around 3700 in the entire Kindle store (which took about 40 sales). Now it's usually closer to 3000 overall before you hit #100 in erotica. It's the same with other popular categories. Stiff competition.

You're right about the sub-lists. Some really niche sub-lists don't have much competition, and a book can be in the top 100 for a niche category while ranked 100 or 200k overall. It's important to look carefully at the list before being very impressed.
 

dondomat

Banned
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
225
I don't think 40 books is typical. They just posted to Facebook today about one author's book being in the 4,000s on the Amazon best seller ranking. It's most likely just that I don't have any sort of following at this point and they're probably putting the time and energy into authors who actually had followings to begin with.

And, yes, I do know that it's not my job to sell my book. As the author, it's not my specialty. I'm betting that most books sell better than mine, though.

Well good luck, and I hope your book sales are just gathering speed. I read the start of your book and while my editor goggles caught lots of tiny slip-ups, my reader goggles saw a great pulp adventure. Like a manga version of a Colin Wilson yarn about spider worlds or space vampires. Sorry, that's the closest I can get--I don't read urban fantasy usually :D
 
Last edited:

Dhewco

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
665
Reaction score
20
Any updates on this publisher? I'm weighing the pros and cons after reading this entire thread.
 
Last edited:

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
I still wouldn't submit my work to them. But you must make your own decisions.
 

mrsmig

Write. Write. Writey Write Write.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
9,884
Reaction score
7,172
Location
Virginia
At least they appear to have dumped the business model of paying royalties on net profit:

Authors may expect Royalties of 25% of Gross Revenues Received for Print and eBook sales. Generally Zharmae does not pay advances. If one is to be offered, Zharmae will initiate that conversation, and authors should not assume an advance will be available to them. Advances, if offered, are from $0.05+ per word.


 

victoriastrauss

Writer Beware Goddess
Kind Benefactor
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
6,704
Reaction score
1,314
Location
Far from the madding crowd
Website
www.victoriastrauss.com
"Gross Revenues Received" can mean a lot of things, depending on how the publisher defines it. At best, it means net income (not list price), but it could also mean "revenue after discounts and expenses." You'd have to see the contract to know for sure.

- Victoria
 

Dhewco

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
665
Reaction score
20
Well, I need a small e-press/POD publisher that would be a fit for my book. I queried some 20 agents or so about 10 years go and didn't get past the 50 page stage. I think I've tidied up the writing and it's better, but I would rather use my agent hopes on my newer works.

However, I feel there should still be a home for my older story. The search recommendations on the Scifi board (querytracker, for example, which I hadn't considered...never realized they had publishers) led me to Zharmae, I guess I'll keep looking. There were others on those search engines.
 
Last edited:

Round Two

Behind the door of a small house.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
190
Reaction score
27
However, I feel there should still be a home for my older story. The search recommendations on the Scifi board (querytracker, for example, which I hadn't considered...never realized they had publishers) led me to Zharmae, I guess I'll keep looking. There were others on those search engines.

If you put out a book that nobody buys/reads because the publisher didn't get it into the market and THEN you go to an agent with a new project, the agent is going to look at the sales of your previous work and the low sales could very well work very against you.
 

Dhewco

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
665
Reaction score
20
I wasn't going to mention the previous book in the new book's queries, to be honest. It's like some advice areas recommending that you don't mention self-pubbed books to an agent/publisher, they don't count. At least, that's what I thought.

Also, the newer works I plan on querying are still in draft stages. (One has only been through one and the other isn't even finished yet.) I wanted to send the older work (which has been through several drafts, a critique group, and other stages) to publishers while I perfect the new stuff.


BTW, I really don't use parenthesis (sp?) this much in my writing, lol.
 
Last edited:

Round Two

Behind the door of a small house.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
190
Reaction score
27
I wasn't going to mention the previous book in the new book's queries, to be honest. It's like some advice areas recommending that you don't mention self-pubbed books to an agent/publisher, they don't count. At least, that's what I thought.

Unless you plan on writing under a pseudonym, the agent/prospective publishers will know. They'll simply plug your name into Bookscan and get the data they're looking for.

And where this has practical implications is if an agent/publisher thinks the work they've got is a debut, and submit it for review/award consideration, they're going to be pissed when they find out that it's not really a debut.
 
Last edited:

Dhewco

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
665
Reaction score
20
I was thinking of getting them interested in me before letting them know about the previous novel. I never thought that an agent would care about previous work that didn't count.

Okay, then, I have a minor dilemma. A decade ago, I put a novel (my first, the one the inexperience agent tried to rep) on Lulu for about three days. It didn't sell any copies and I changed my mind and pulled it.

Should I mention that?


Note to mods: I'm sorry if I'm pulling this way off topic. I'll stop it after this post.
 

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
If an agent likes your submission and considers offering representation then she will definitely Google your name to see what else you've been up to. This includes looking for any previous publications: it also includes finding out if you tend to be a tosser online. I know agents who have declined to offer because they've discovered the author runs a rant-filled blog, for example.

I don't think your Lulu book is going to be a problem.

Debut status is important: but publishers can do all sorts of clever tricks to make a book a debut book, even when the author has published before. It's something to bear in mind but it's not necessarily going to be a deal-breaker.
 

Dhewco

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
665
Reaction score
20
Thanks guys, I appreciate the advice. I decided to give it another go on the older novel. It's been touched up a lot, with a new beginning. I've redone the query, so maybe I'll find an agent with it. I need to find a new forum here. I keep commenting and pulling us off topic, lol.
 

traveo2343

Publisher at TZPP
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
Location
Saint Paul
Website
www.zharmae.com
Hi Old Hack, it's been a while, I hope all is well.

@Dhewco, they are right, you do need to make your own decision on who to work with. There are pros and cons to working with anyone. But having a clear idea of what your reason for working with a particular publisher or agent is, will give you a better idea of who is the best to partner with. I would suggest contacting the company, speaking with the staff, contacting and speaking with authors. Reading through forums like Absolute Write and others. But you won't know who is going to be the best fit for you until you actually work with them.

After doing this for a few years. I think I can say fairly accurately, if you are looking for an advance, we are not for you, simply because we do not pay advances. We do seem to do well with those who are looking for a high level of interaction with their publisher, and for those who are looking for a long term home for their work.

I will be the first to say that we have work to do on our Marketing and Sales departments, but I also think that is true of most companies. I do agree with Old Hack's comment about publishers having 3 options when faced with sluggish sales.

In TZPP's case, BK or Closure is not a contractual option (thank you Investors!). I think that trying to diversify product offerings when the core product of a company is struggling is ridiculous, so option #3 is a no go. That leaves Publishing Better Books, Better. Now I don't agree that option #2 is as simple as Old Hack makes it out to be. But I do think that it is a discussion worth having.

As many of your know, my background is Economics, and my investors have me write an Economic Forecast and Analysis annually for them. So I am faced with having to objectively review the industry every year. I think it is more accurate to better define what it means to publish so that you can better target what precisely needs to be done better. I don't think that it is as simple as changing one single thing and realizing a fix, but it is an overall comprehensive set of changes that need to occur.

In most cases, it is more about better supporting and executing marketing and sales. And having the right people on staff to help make that a reality.

I'll be around, and I'm sure I'll have several people who will want to respond, so I'll check back in.

BTW - Can you believe that the first post on this thread was back in September 2011!! You all have been fun, trying at times, but good overall. :)

PS - Hope you like the changes we've been working on with the website and with Blog Z and Radio Z.

PPS - @Victoria, we define Gross Revenues Received as being the gross amount of funds actually deposited. You have a current version of the contract in your inbox as of just a few weeks ago. I am still dealing with the loss of submissions from not being listed with Ralan and his insistence that you approve of our contract before he will allow us to be relisted. So, I will be honest and state that I feel his deference to you and unwillingness to engage us on your behalf is a around about effort to keep us from the market. Further, that the SFWA is a Union (and in many respects acts like one) and does work to preclude non-advance paying publishers from a qualified group of authors. I am well aware of the reason why you dissuade authors from certain publishers. But I think this is related to the above discussion of publishing better books better. To have access to the best work, a publisher has to have access to the best work. I also understand that I'm opening a pandora's box on commentary about author rights and modern contract standards in the industry, with these comments of mine, but it is worth talking about.

If authors were truly selling their rights to publishers, they would not receive royalties. The main standard is to grant (lease) rights to a publisher, and I think that acknowledging what we are really doing and calling it what it is, would be better for everyone. Books do not start to seriously make money on the investment until 3-5 years after publication. I think that Authors should commit to Publishers or Agents for the long haul, I also think that Publishers should commit to better representation of a fewer lot of authors for a longer term.

Anyways - I look forward to the multitude of comments.

Feel free to connect with me on twitter @traveo2343 or email me if need be you can find my contact information on the TZPP website.

All the best,

TRG
 
Last edited:

Old Hack

Such a nasty woman
Super Moderator
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 12, 2005
Messages
22,454
Reaction score
4,956
Location
In chaos
Hi Old Hack, it's been a while, I hope all is well.

All is well. Apart from the review copies you promised me, which never did arrive.

As many of your know, my background is Economics, and my investors have me write an Economic Forecast and Analysis annually for them. So I am faced with having to objectively review the industry every year. I think it is more accurate to better define what it means to publish so that you can better target what precisely needs to be done better. I don't think that it is as simple as changing one single thing and realizing a fix, but it is an overall comprehensive set of changes that need to occur.

So what changes are you making?

I am still dealing with the loss of submissions from not being listed with Ralan and his insistence that you approve of our contract before he will allow us to be relisted. So, I will be honest and state that I feel his deference to you and unwillingness to engage us on your behalf is a around about effort to keep us from the market.

If you market your books effectively, writers should be able to find you easily enough. If what's on your own website isn't impressive enough to make good, knowledgeable writers submit their work to you, then it's up to you to change that. If you're not getting enough good submissions, or if the ones you're getting are not good enough, I strongly doubt that this is because Ralan.com does not list you on their website; and if Ralan.com does not list you, I strongly doubt that it excludes you in an attempt to "keep [you] from the market". That, with all due respect, is a ridiculous assertion.

Further, that the SFWA is a Union (and in many respects acts like one) and does work to preclude non-advance paying publishers from a qualified group of authors. I am well aware of the reason why you dissuade authors from certain publishers. But I think this is related to the above discussion of publishing better books better. To have access to the best work, a publisher has to have access to the best work. I also understand that I'm opening a pandora's box on commentary about author rights and modern contract standards in the industry, with these comments of mine, but it is worth talking about.

You want access to the best books out there? Easy. Publish great books really well. Sell them in good amount. You'll soon have agents knocking on your doors, and will have more great books offered to you than you know what to do with.

If authors were truly selling their rights to publishers, they would not receive royalties. The main standard is to grant (lease) rights to a publisher, and I think that acknowledging what we are really doing and calling it what it is, would be better for everyone.

It is acknowledged. It's not a secret. This is something that almost everyone understands, surely?

Books do not start to seriously make money on the investment until 3-5 years after publication.

This is not my experience.

Authors should commit to Publishers or Agents for the long haul,

Authors do usually have a long-term relationship with their agents, and with their publishers if all goes well. But you can't expect authors to sign multiple deals with a publisher if that publisher does not work well for them.

I also think that Publishers should commit to better representation of a fewer lot of authors for a longer term.

Publishers don't represent authors. Agents represent authors.

Publishers should not over-extend themselves, I agree. But why should they publish authors for a longer term? Good contracts have strong reversion clauses, so that if a book isn't selling well the rights revert to the author. Why should the author and the publisher be tied together for a "longer term" if the book under contract isn't selling well? It just doesn't work.

Feel free to connect with me on twitter @traveo2343 or email me if need be [email address removed][/QUOTE]

Please delete your email address: it'll be harvested by spam-bots if you leave it out in public like that.
 

Round Two

Behind the door of a small house.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
190
Reaction score
27
Books do not start to seriously make money on the investment until 3-5 years after publication.

A couple of questions if you have time.

(1) Where did you get that 3-5 year figure?
(2) Are you able to put a dollar amount on "seriously make money?"
 

traveo2343

Publisher at TZPP
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
Location
Saint Paul
Website
www.zharmae.com
Hi Old Hack,

You should have the books to you this next week. We have had issues in the past shipping to the UK, please let me know if you have not received the books by next Friday.

+++

The question of what changes are being made is a good one. As of right now TZPP is getting back to our core program.

1. We have folded excess imprints, and refocused our energies on those areas with strong and immediate prospects.
2. Bolstered the ratio of editor to author. Previously I had allocated 24-48 authors per editor. We have reduced that to 8-12 authors for each editor. Allowing them to provide more attention to each author.
3. Grew our Managing Editorial department (copy edits, proofing, reviews, typesetting, art & design) from 3 last year to 17 staff presently.
4. We are growning our marketing staff to 7 and in the process of bringing on a national sales staff of 10 for the North American Market.
5. Systematically putting each book through a standard and tailored marketing program, which now includes:
a. Preparing a comprehensive marketing kit (interviews, press releases, pre-written articles, ad banners, etc)
b. Sending a Monthly Newsletter out to Bookstores, Retail Partners, Influencers, Print and Broadcast Media.
c. Blog and Review Tours
d. Radio Z (blogtalkradio[dot]com/radioz)
e. Blog Z (zharmaeblog.wordpress[dot]com)
f. Consistent and engaging social media marketing
g. tailoring additional marketing activities to each book

+++

I agree that the better you promote a product the easier it is to find and engage with that product's maker. As I had said in my previous posting, my quip to Victoria was a personal feeling related to the current situation, I would not call it indicative of a systematic problem with publishing better books or the quality of books that we do publish.

Again, I would call this situation what it is: a large private market (Ralan) that is relying on the word of an individual affiliated with a union (Victoria and the SFWA). Ralan will not list us without Victoria's approval. Victoria won't give approval because she has personal and moral reservations against several sections of our contract.

If this were really about letting authors make up their own mind about our contract then this would not be a problem. But I am suggesting that this is something else, because Victoria and the SFWA by proxy are keeping us from Ralan's market of good sci-fi writers.

The assertion that we are being kept from the market because of them is not ridiculous, it's true, and it does impact who see's us. Yes, we still receive quite a bit of material and every month our submissions grow, but not being listed with Ralan has stymied the number of passive quality submissions that we receive.

+++

I don't know that everyone understands fully the language related to rights licenses and grants. I think on the surface people do, but they use the word "sell" in placing rights with publishers. My experience suggests otherwise.

+++

ROI is referencing the long term viability of work. The author who is being paid an advance will see an immediate ROI on their work when they receive the AAR. I am saying that with the new economics at play, coming into the industry as a younger publisher, 3-5 years is a more appropriate ROI expectation, especially when we are talking about the myriad of rights that are available for exploitation in a book.

+++

So I've seen a lot of authors who question the value of working with a publisher, and I've discussed this with other colleagues in the industry, authors are moving publishers almost as much as publishers are moving through authors.

The Agent represents the author to the Publisher yes, but it is the Publisher's job to represent the author and their work to the public, which was my meaning in the word representation. And you are right, this is a reference to not overextending ourselves beyond what we are capable of supporting.

I don't agree that the reversion clause should be a tool for anything other than the business aspect of the relationship. TZPP's reversion clause is author initiated and is based solely on the performance or lack thereof of the book - if the book sells less than 100 units in a year, the author can request a reversion. I have reverted several authors whose sales failed that benchmark - all of those were author initiated. I have several authors who have not yet to sell 100 units, and I have no plans to revert them unless they request that I do so.

I have mentioned my goal of working with the author for the duration of their career, many times on this thread, this is because growing an author is a long term investment in a talent oriented resource. It appreciates in value overtime. As a Publisher, I get a better, more stable ROI by investing in the author over 20 years than I do by squeezing out a short term return over 2 or 3 years. Because we work with all staff, artists, and authors on performance based contracts, everyone else in the process also benefits by the longer term nature of the relationship. I know this is always a concern of an author, but I have no intention of removing a book from publication, doing so is inconsistent with TZPP's long term goals.

+++

@RoundTwo

(1) Where did you get that 3-5 year figure?

This figure is based on TZPPs internal revenue model. Obviously the goal of any publisher is to return the expense of publishing a book during its Frontlist period, and earn profit in the backlist. Because TZPP is revenue nuetral, we don't have that same immediacy in need and are able to cost out the ROI over a longer period, with the model suggesting long term consistency in ROI via backlist sales.

In our model 3-5 years represents the first 3-5 books they publish, we assume that we will have a 20 books from the author at minimum over the average length of their relationship with TZPP.

Frontlist sales goal is 2,500 units. Backlist minimum sales target is 100 units/year. We figure (and this is becoming our experience) that Rights Buyers begin initially being interested in work with the first in the series, but really want to see a few years performance and audience build-up before making a commitment to the work.

(2) Are you able to put a dollar amount on "seriously make money?"

By year 3 most serial work is well established, is building a loyal audience, and the author is beginning to move onto their next series. We have begun to prep bibles for film producers and are actively engaging other rights buyers. The audience build is strong enough to realistically begin promoting the audio rights to outside buyers. Language Rights will already have been licensed or are in a position to do so.

A dollar mount, conservatively on this would be the effective cultivation of subsidiary rights and actual profit return to the Publisher and our Investors. TZPP does not earn a profit on any of the books below 2,500 units sold, in fact I personally absorb losses on all books below that threshold.

Ideal minimal revenue per title, per year, is $15,000. Preferred Performance of each author per year is revenue of $250,000.

I can achieve this in 2 ways:

1 - Cultivate as many opportunities for each of the authors that I publish.
2 - Focus on fewer rights and publish more authors.

The first method is the current model we operate under, and requires a longer relationship with the author. The second model is simpler but would significantly shift the production quality of work we put out, along with the sales expectations.
Under the second model I would pay advances but that would be based on a sales expectation of 50-100 units. It would also negate author access to Editor and Publisher.

The costs of publishing a book using FMV are significant ($11k for a completely freelanced book), and the peculiarities of the publishing industry and the limited and unfriendly distribution channels make it very challenging (PPB is another $6k and factoring in the costs of Marketing and Sales staff is even higher). My pockets are not as deep as a lot of people might think they are.

+++

I look forward to more comments and questions.
 
Last edited: