• Guest please check The Index before starting a thread.

TANSTAAFL Press

Karen Junker

Live a little. Write a lot.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
551
Location
Bellevue, WA
Website
www.CascadeWriters.com
Please move this post to wherever is appropriate.

Old Hack and Julie -- and anyone else -- I do understand and respect writers and other professionals who like to get paid for their time. I believe in it.

That said, I think there is a pervasive sentiment in the SFF and Romance communities that encourages pros to pay it forward -- to give back to others what was so freely given to them in their own early days. Many people attend cons and speak on what they know for the sheer love of it.

Same with the organizations running the cons. I know of more than one SFF literary con which is supported by donations from the organizers. For example, when I started the small genre event that I ran for many years, I mortgaged my house for the operating costs (which were somewhere between 80-100 thousand dollars for the first 4 years total). We charged people $140-175 to attend. We never even came close to breaking even, so I sold my house and moved to a smaller house in a less snazzy neighborhood -- and scaled down the event to a retreat that could pay for itself. A few years ago, we formed a board and registered as a non-profit with a budget based on keeping it a small event and making it as affordable as possible while still breaking even.

That event now costs $245 or $125 to the attendees, depending on what level of participation they choose. We offer scholarships, which I fund from my own income and donate to the organization. We do not offer catering as part of the package, because it's just not affordable. Incidentally, it is difficult to find event space that will let you just pay for the meeting rooms if you are *not* paying thousands of dollars for food to the venue.

As I said, I am not familiar with other, larger literary events -- but I do know that some of them are businesses that are making money. Some are not, but may have subsidies in the form of donated space at a university or conference center through local city or county grants. Some get grant money from the government or schools where they take place for operating costs.

To give you an idea what a small workshop would cost to put on:
Rent 3-4 meeting rooms that seat up to 100 people for 4 days: $2000-10,000
Airfare or travel for 3-20 speakers:$1500-4000
Meal stipends for 20 speakers for 4 days:$2400-3000
Insurance: $1200/yr.

This means you need 30 people to pay $245 to attend just to cover those costs -- it doesn't include having a website, printed materials at the event, paying for booths at cons to promote the event, bookkeeper, tax preparer, etc. Also, you never know how many people will sign up. This year, the event I started (I am no longer the organizer, though I am on the board) planned for up to 100 attendees and we got 40. It was great -- the attendees got a lot of individual or very tiny group time with the pros. We are going to be doing some creative fundraising to raise money for future events.

Cons like to have a little extra money in the treasury for start-up costs for the following years.

So, yes it is a good thing when a con can offer to pay for speakers. Some don't or can't -- and it is not always because they are greedy bastards out to make a buck off the backs of the talent.

If you find an event that offers you money, I say go for it!
 

JulieB

I grow my own catnip
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
2,403
Reaction score
213
Location
Deep in the heart o' Texas
I'm conrunner, and I get it. But when the organizers of a professional conference or convention are making money off of the deal, the speakers had darn well better get paid.

And I agree that no one's going to get rich off of attending fan-run conventions. Not the fans running it nor the speakers. The dealers are there for a profit, though. And if this press - or any other - can make decent money doing the circuit and selling books, then more power to them, I say. But they shouldn't expect to get paid to sit on panels.
 

Karen Junker

Live a little. Write a lot.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
551
Location
Bellevue, WA
Website
www.CascadeWriters.com
Agreed.

I work with another small SFF press in the same area--they have worked the same con circuit as TANSTAAFL for the past couple years -- and I'm pretty sure they're not yet rolling in dough. It's tough for small presses -- there are a lot of 'indie' (as in self-published) networks that are pretty effective for promotion, but the indie small presses don't always have access to them. One of the women in my writers' group self-pubbed and has sold 95K books in the past year or so by blogging and networking with self-publishers who don't always accept promo from small presses.
 

Sage

Currently titleless
Staff member
Moderator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
64,562
Reaction score
22,369
Age
43
Location
Cheering you all on!
We define a list of costs that TANSTAAFL Press is going to incur. The author has the right to pay some, all or none of these cost. As gross receipts come in, the expenses are paid back to TANSTAAFL and the Author in exact % that they were paid. After those initial costs are recouped (by both parties) then royalties start being paid in a sliding scale based on participation. If the author provided nothing, the amount might be (this is a negotiation point so these numbers are just for argument sake) 50% of all further income (minus expenses that are defined by contract) goes to the Author. This could slide all the way up to 85% if the author chose to pay those expenses himself.
As an author, this makes me question what motivation you would then have to promote the books where the author paid the expenses. You wouldn't need to promote it to make money on the book. The author's already paid to make your expenses $0, so every book bought is a little extra money to you, but only at 15% of the book's price. Why put marketing money and time into that book instead of the one that still needs to break even, and then, once it does, you get back as much as 50% of the book's price? So now the author who pays you to publisher their book may get screwed twice--once by paying up front for costs that may never be recouped by them, and again by the fact that it's more financially sound for you to focus your time and money on those that didn't.

And why should the author spend that money to go through you, rather than spend it on their own for the same services and self-publish for 100% of the royalties?
 

TGondolfi

Registered
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
While busy with the building of the TANSTAAFL platform and my own author's platform, I finally returned to the discussions within this thread.

Contract: I've passed my "investment platform" contract by even a favorable leaning audience and they panned it. So I've ditched it in favor of more basic percentage contract. I'll note that I feel that the contract is worse the author but with two exceptions everyone I've shared the percentage contract with prefers it. SAGE has a very good point in that there might be an implied conflict of interest within the investment platform. But then you could say the same thing as I'm publishing my own works vs others (unless you see me at a convention pitching them as hard if not harder than my own).

As I've stated many times, TANSTAAFL Press is NOT a vanity press and me being willing to change (after valid input) to a more industry standard compensation should show that.

Just FYI TANSTAAFL Press will be signing two additional authors this year (already in the works) with another author in the wings.

Conventions vs Compensation: There is no longer any debate on this topic. I have interviewed three authors who do get compensation for being GOH and / or panelist for conventions. Sometimes these are nothing more than a free booth, but it is being done. It is part of the plan for TANSTAAFL Press to get to that point to lower costs, not to make a living (although there are authors who do make a living doing just this as was presented to one of the NW writer's organizations that I'm a part of).

Yes, at this time TANSTAAFL Press is not burning up the world, but we are profitable in our second year and our sales have grown over 40% from year one with every indication that we will have similar or more growth into year three. We now have seven titles in print with the expectation that this time next year we will have eleven. We have a growing fan base and are FINALLY taking making the move to get a significant presence in online sales. (For those interested, from Jun 21 through Jun 25th the first book of the CorpGov Series is free on Amazon).

I want to thank those of you who have given CONSTRUCTIVE feedback even if I initially didn't accept it until I had data. It was never far from my mind as I have moved forward.

Thomas Gondolfi
www.tanstaaflpress.com
 

TGondolfi

Registered
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
And why should the author spend that money to go through you, rather than spend it on their own for the same services and self-publish for 100% of the royalties?

SAGE: So I have two responses to this... (see the first below as a full blown post). But moving into your specific question above.. I encourage and even help new authors do their own self publishing. I'm even creating a college level course on "Fundamentals of Indie Publishing" to give at our local Community College (hasn't been approved or even pitched yet.. need to complete all of the preliminary work and test it on an audience). I look at TANSTAAFL Press as a farm team (to use a baseball euphemism). I want to bring new, untried authors on and if they get a better contract from another press, or want to go it on their own I will actively encourage it...

As far as the 15%, I feel it is worth that much of the gross for my time hauling the books, pitching the books to thousands of fans, the scut work of getting the book from .word into a hands on book and into the ebook venues.

Yes there is a built in conflict of interest that you very clearly pointed out.. AND I AGREE... You have every right to feel there is a problem until you see me at a convention pitching my other author's books as hard if not harder than my own (see my comment on Farm Team above).

Look, I want to make a living at my writing. The Press is an adjunct to it, not something I consider as a true revenue stream. I won't print a book that I am not 100% passionate about (mine or others). I am an entertainer.. and as such I don't care whether Bruce or any other of my authors is doing the entertaining.

Thanks for your input and very sharp analysis, Sage.

Thomas Gondolfi
www.tanstaaflpress.com
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
6,396
Location
west coast, canada
I want to bring new, untried authors on and if they get a better contract from another press, or want to go it on their own I will actively encourage it...
Apparently you're doing well at this, as the only authors on your website appear to be yourself and Bruce Graw, which is pretty much where you started two years ago, right?


You have every right to feel there is a problem until you see me at a convention pitching my other author's books as hard if not harder than my own (see my comment on Farm Team above).
As you only have one other author, and he's part of the 'team', I assume that if he was dissatisfied, he would mention it the next time you met up.

Look, I want to make a living at my writing. The Press is an adjunct to it, not something I consider as a true revenue stream. I won't print a book that I am not 100% passionate about (mine or others). I am an entertainer.. and as such I don't care whether Bruce or any other of my authors is doing the entertaining.
And the bolded, to me, is the crux and why this discussion of TANSTAAFL as a publisher is somewhat pointless: you're pretty much saying that it's a hobby. A way for you and your friend to get your books out there and not look 'self-published'. It gives you another arrow in your bow when you're looking for stuff to do at Cons, and theoretically gives your words more weight because you're a 'publisher'.
This would also, perhaps, explain why it took you two years to notice that your original 'investment platform' wasn't appealing to authors. But, that's cool, because it's only the two of you, you can play by any rules you like.

Good luck, and all the best.
 

truantoranje

Registered
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
47
Reaction score
6
Location
MidWest, USA
Wow, I was just about to submit a story to their "Enter the . . . " open call. Glad I found this thread first. They sound hinky as hell.
 

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
First non-principal book published in Feb (current rank: 300k eb, 7m pb), with two by another author scheduled for next year.
 

petrepan

Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
SAGE: So I have two responses to this...

Just an outsider perspective on this thread.

AbsoluteWrite offers some great warnings so writers can be careful about who they submit to, and I'm grateful for that, but I have noticed over the past five years or so that this community does have a tendency to squash start-ups--to the point where I've heard legitimate agents complain about some of the attitudes on here. As a former small business owner I'm pretty sympathetic to start-ups as they stumble and fail and improve through their first years, and I'm always willing to give a new small press a chance. I usually adopt a "watch and wait" approach to these kinds of things, and I've seen at least two little presses bloom despite a lot of naysaying and major initial mistakes.

So as I've been watching and waiting over the past year, I'm happy to see Tom's changed his contract completely due to the feedback he's received, and I've been quietly watching as the press's author number has doubled in size. I'm very very curious to see if the press handles the schedule they've promised for Enter the Apocalypse, and I'd like to see a more aggressive publicity strategy via Twitter.

Some positive changes and some places for continued improvement. Best of luck to you, Mr.! Just wanted to offer a little encouragement as the press continues to find its legs.

Jen Finelli
byjenfinelli.com
(Check out my SFWA-qualifying SF humor in the Escapepod!)
 

Thedrellum

Grr. Argh.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
852
Reaction score
57
Location
Houston, Texas
Website
www.patreon.com
Hey, petrepan, I know you probably can't tell me, but I'm curious as to who these legitimate agents are. I can't imagine any of the agents I know having a problem with the way things are handled here on AW.

As others have said on AW before, very little in publishing is an entry-level job. The difference between many other small businesses and publishers is that a publisher who takes on a writer is using up their first publication rights and, if things go south for the publisher, may result in tying up a writer's work for years if not perpetually. This has happened again and again with new publishers listed on AW (see the grayed-out threads in the list of publishers), and I don't think any talk on AW has been responsible for the failure of any of those publishers. As a writer, you know as well as I do that the more publishers there are, the better it is for all of us, as long as those publishers are good ones.
 

akaria

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
579
Reaction score
61
Location
Brooklyn represent!
I'm curious about these new presses doing well despite stumbling at first. If they are succeeding at putting good books in the hands of lots of readers that's something to celebrate. Name them!

A press doubling the number of authors it has means nothing if all those authors are only selling a handful of copies. Are those authors hitting best seller lists? Are they getting lots of reviews in relevant blogs? For example, Musa Publishing had dozens of authors. Many of them sold less than 50 copies a year. They went out of business about a year and a half ago.
 

Round Two

Behind the door of a small house.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
190
Reaction score
27
I'm curious about these new presses doing well despite stumbling at first. If they are succeeding at putting good books in the hands of lots of readers that's something to celebrate. Name them!

A press doubling the number of authors it has means nothing if all those authors are only selling a handful of copies. Are those authors hitting best seller lists? Are they getting lots of reviews in relevant blogs? For example, Musa Publishing had dozens of authors. Many of them sold less than 50 copies a year. They went out of business about a year and a half ago.

Exactly. Consulting Nielsen Bookscan, none of the TANSTAAFL titles I checked had any sales record which means that all of the sales of print books are likely going straight through Amazon (Createspace). If that's the case, given the sales ranks, I don't think there's anything approaching 50 copies a year of the titles. If there was much chance for longterm success, the first books from the line should have been selling in the thousands. It's now years later and there's no reason to suspect that simply by the virtue of existing, TANSTAAFL is going to start selling enough books to be viable.

Also, the idea that the press would act as a farm team is not moored in reality. When larger publishers (even well-established small publishers) look at what they're going to acquire, one of the big considerations is previous sales history. It's better to be unpublished than it is to be published with poor results.
 

VeryBigBeard

Preparing for winter
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
2,449
Reaction score
1,505
As someone who works in start-ups:

It seems to me that the author, not the publisher, is the start-up. The author has the idea, the product, and the experience the end customer wants.

The publisher is the capital--the investment into the venture, if you will. So a publisher that doesn't have experience in the industry and that doesn't have capital backing is kind of useless to an author.

This is an oversimplification, and I've got nothing against new publishing ventures. I just think you can tell a lot about them based on whether the team has experience, is open about the challenges ahead, has capital backing either from an Amazonesque company or can offer an advance, and ideally has a few decent authors already recruited before it announces to help get that initial boost with mainstream readers and reviewers.

You know, all the stuff I look for before joining a start-up.

This is a business partnership, not a playground. If the publisher can't offer the author distribution, sales, and an advance then that publisher's not appealing at all and I think it's completely fair to help new prospective authors understand their options, and I think it's also fair to point out when publishers are offering nothing but fancy talk. Small publishers--which tend to be the overwhelming majority discussed here--can work for some authors but they're not a good fit for everyone, and the good small publishers know that and specialize enough to make money within their niche. I say this as someone whose local literary scene is almost entirely small-publisher based (Atlantic Canada), and as someone who learned a lot when I first joined AW that I very much needed to know.
 

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
AbsoluteWrite offers some great warnings so writers can be careful about who they submit to, and I'm grateful for that, but I have noticed over the past five years or so that this community does have a tendency to squash start-ups--to the point where I've heard legitimate agents complain about some of the attitudes on here.

That's the direct opposite of my experience.

I've not seen any squashing of start-ups, but I have seen people voicing legitimate concerns. And I've heard several well-established, successful agents praising AW and the work we do here.

I've heard a few agents criticising AW and BR&BC, but without exception they were scammy or dodgy agents.

As a former small business owner I'm pretty sympathetic to start-ups as they stumble and fail and improve through their first years, and I'm always willing to give a new small press a chance. I usually adopt a "watch and wait" approach to these kinds of things, and I've seen at least two little presses bloom despite a lot of naysaying and major initial mistakes.

Those new presses which "stumble and fail" do so at the expense of the authors they publish. And those books can't be republished, so they are sacrificed in order for those new publishers to learn their trade. Which is why we advise people to wait, and to give new publishers a couple of years to show their abilities before submitting their work to them.

Jen Finelli
byjenfinelli.com
(Check out my SFWA-qualifying SF humor in the Escapepod!)

Rather than spamming us with your sales pitches like this, put a link in your signature. Thanks.

Exactly. Consulting Nielsen Bookscan, none of the TANSTAAFL titles I checked had any sales record which means that all of the sales of print books are likely going straight through Amazon (Createspace). If that's the case, given the sales ranks, I don't think there's anything approaching 50 copies a year of the titles. If there was much chance for longterm success, the first books from the line should have been selling in the thousands. It's now years later and there's no reason to suspect that simply by the virtue of existing, TANSTAAFL is going to start selling enough books to be viable.

Also, the idea that the press would act as a farm team is not moored in reality. When larger publishers (even well-established small publishers) look at what they're going to acquire, one of the big considerations is previous sales history. It's better to be unpublished than it is to be published with poor results.

Yep.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I would consider it "squashing" if many or most of those start up did great and our fears were proved unfounded. It is not like AW in itself has any significance effect on their success.

Instead, in the tracking I do of erotic romance publishers over the last ten years the vast majority did poorly and are now closed. If anything AW leaned slightly too optimistic in that many that received an overall positive reception are now closed or have proved to be a mixed blessing.

The tone of these forums is a slightly optimistic reflection of the actual chances that a start-up publisher will be a good choice for an author.