What is a vanity publisher/vanity press and why does everyone hate them?

So I guess the question is, are Vanity Presses bad because vanity presses are bad, or did just a few unscrupolous vanity presses give them a bad rep? Because it's one thing if a vanity press intentionally misleads a writer with hidden costs, outright lies on sales...etc..., it's another if that's a vanity press industry practice.

And as the venerable Old Hack said, trade publishers keep your rights for an X amount of years. Trying to get those back before the contract is up would be very difficult as well, so the rights of the book should not be the issue.

Obviously there are differences betwen self publishing and vanity press, but again, in most self publishing, you don't get a hard copy either, and really that's where a lot of the cost is for the vanity press author. So, the only real issue I see is the morality of certain vanity presses that "trick" an author into signing with them and force them to buy books or pay for service. I don't know...if an author doesn't read the contract closely, seems to me the onus is on them. Otherwise, it's fraud on the press. I would be curious to see if there was any authors who used these vanity presses, got a X amount of books published, and was able to do well for themselves marketing and selling their own books.

In any case, I have no horse in this race. I will never vanity press or self publish (Never say Never!). This is most just professional curiosity. It's just the more I look at the different options in publishing, the more I dislike what a lot of them are doing to the industry.

Old Hack said:

If signing away your rights were the defining factor then trade publishing would come under the vanity publishing umbrella.

Click to expand...

How about signing away your rights and paying a sales-to-author focused firm to publish your book, whether you pay on the front or back end? I think that works well as a simple definition of a vanity press.

Debeucci said:

So I guess the question is, are Vanity Presses bad because vanity presses are bad, or did just a few unscrupolous vanity presses give them a bad rep? Because it's one thing if a vanity press intentionally misleads a writer with hidden costs, outright lies on sales...etc..., it's another if that's a vanity press industry practice.

Click to expand...

Vanity presses were notorious for persuading writers that theirs was the usual way of publishing, or that theirs was the new and advanced model of publishing. Through the use of cleverly-worded articles they'd persuade writers to use their services without actually lying. For example, telling them that their books would be "available" from bookshops--which isn't at all the same as being on the shelves in those bookshops.

Many of the services available from them now they've been rebranded as self-publishing service providers are pointless. They won't result in more sales, or a significantly better book. And yet writers still buy those services. It's sad.

And as the venerable Old Hack said, trade publishers keep your rights for an X amount of years. Trying to get those back before the contract is up would be very difficult as well, so the rights of the book should not be the issue.

Click to expand...

Contracts aren't always for a fixed number of years. They're often limited by sales: once a book stops selling, the publishers might well put it out of print and revert the rights to the author.

Obviously there are differences betwen self publishing and vanity press, but again, in most self publishing, you don't get a hard copy either, and really that's where a lot of the cost is for the vanity press author.

Click to expand...

Do you mean that most self-publishers don't get printed copies of their books? That's only if they're self-publishing electronic editions. If they self-publish print editions then they might well get copies; and vanity published authors who publish electronic editions still pay through the nose, just for different things: editing, marketing, book formatting and so on, much of which isn't done well for them.

So, the only real issue I see is the morality of certain vanity presses that "trick" an author into signing with them and force them to buy books or pay for service. I don't know...if an author doesn't read the contract closely, seems to me the onus is on them.

Click to expand...

The problem is that many people who use vanity publishers do so because they don't know enough about publishing to know what the limitations of vanity publishing are. They think that they're publishing the same way as anyone else.

Otherwise, it's fraud on the press. I would be curious to see if there was any authors who used these vanity presses, got a X amount of books published, and was able to do well for themselves marketing and selling their own books.

Click to expand...

It's not fraud if the vanity publishers are careful enough with their wording, and most are very careful.

In any case, I have no horse in this race. I will never vanity press or self publish (Never say Never!). This is most just professional curiosity. It's just the more I look at the different options in publishing, the more I dislike what a lot of them are doing to the industry.

Click to expand...

Who do you refer to when you say "a lot of them"?

richcapo said:

How about signing away your rights and paying an sales-to-author focused firm to publish your book, whether you pay on the front or back end? I think that works well as a simple definition of a vanity press.

Click to expand...

Not all vanity presses expect you to license your rights to them, though, so that won't work.

The best definition I've heard is still this: a vanity publisher is one which makes the bulk of its money from the writers it publishes, and not from selling the books it publishes onto new readers.

I'm involved in a sport that costs a fair amount of money (for equipment) to play. It's always bugged me that some guys spend into the thousands of dollars but are not competitive.

I used to have a Sports Car Club of America license, and it amazed me the way some amateur drivers/car owners would spend $$$$ to get a trophy.

In both cases, it's an expensive hobby. I suspect that there are some writers like this: "I've got a couple of grand, and I'll spend it to see my Great American Novel in print."

Dennis, couldn't they spend that money just so they can play and not care about winning? My wife does ironmans, and she spent a cars worth of money on her tri-bike. She'll never never in a billion years, with a 6 hour head start, be competitve, but she is doing it for herself. I see nothing wrong with that.

Old Hack,
I'm going to give an unrelated example.

In the 1920s, it was tough to make a living as an actor. Many great actors couldn't make a living because there wasn't much of a vetting process and entry into market was easy. A professional actor would always be competing for jobs that someone new would work for free (or even pay to work) just to get the exposure. In turn, the large production companies took advantage of the situation. Hours were long, pay was low, etc...

So finally, some of the most influential actors got together and formed a union. They helped set minimal pay standards, benefits, medical, etc...In return point of entry into the acting career was vetted to an extent. It helped maintain a minimal standard (not very high I assure you) of competency for professional actors.

Fast forward to year 2001ish when SAG went on strike. Producers said fine, we'll just use "real" people, and bam...reality tv is born. And while there is good reality television (Top Chef, Singing shows and such), there is a crap ton of bad ones (Hi Snookie!) and the people who suffer, along with the viewers of course, are the professional actors who could have had a show in that time slot.

That's sort of how I view what self-publishing is doing to trade publishing and writers as a profession. It could be just the changing times and I'm an old fogey thinking old school, but when people are giving away books and paying less to read an author's book than it takes to buy a cup of coffee....hm....i have issues with that. BTW, I'm totally going off subject. Sorry, I 'll delete this if you like.

The current self-publishing craze ....

It's bad, all the way around, for folks who want to, and have the talent to, make a living as writers.

As to the hobbyists, self-publishing, or even vanity publishing, is cheaper than photography, safer than skydiving, and takes less room than model railroading.

But the endless mudflats will smother the excellent new authors, the same way the endless mudflats have smothered excellent new musicians. We've seen this happen. And here we have the Konraths of the world urging publishing to take the same path that music already went.

James D. Macdonald said:

As to the hobbyists, self-publishing, or even vanity publishing, is cheaper than photography, safer than skydiving, and takes less room than model railroading.

Click to expand...

... yep. Vanity publishers are best for people with interests like these. There are a substantial number of people who just want to have a printed book with their stories in them for the sake of vanity or just self satisfaction of having done that. And if they make a few sales, all the better, just to give them a feel of having gotten a book published in a nominal sense. That's all they're really looking for. For them, vanity presses are fine, so long as they don't hook up with one that's a scam and set on fleecing them or taking all rights, which is never a good thing no matter what the circumstances.

For any writer who is serious about becoming an author, though, they should avoid vanity presses at all costs. There's really nothing to be gained by them. It might be tempting to get your novel published in this fast-track way, especially if you're having difficulty getting an agent or publisher, but you'll be selling yourself short and sabotaging your career in a way.

So don't do it. Keep trying to get an agent or publisher and if it doesn't happen with one book try with another and another and keep at it till you succeed.

I'm not sure when the term Vanity publishing came to mean Scam Publishing. I've always just thought of vanity publishing as self-publishing. At least that's what it meant in the 70s. No real publishers wanted your work but you still thought it was literary gold, so you'd pay a print shop to produce a few hundred copies and you'd sell them downtown out of your trunk. The vanity came from the fact that you were too vain to realize your book was crap. It's been said, and I don't know if it's fact or urban myth, that "Jonathan Livingston Seagull" was vanity press but it became popular through word of mouth until he attracted a real publisher.

The term "vanity publishing" was created by Jonathan Clifford. It has a very specific meaning, and it has never equalled self-publishing.

Old Hack said:

The term "vanity publishing" was created by Jonathan Clifford. It has a very specific meaning, and it has never equalled self-publishing.

Click to expand...

It's always fun to find out you've been wrong for 40 years.

(Dalton) said:

Oh, so it isn't something difficult to avoid then (relatively). I thought that they were like well hidden wolves in a herd of sheep. If I'm asked to pay to get my work published then I'm out, regardless.

Thanks for the quick response, friend.

Click to expand...

(Dalton), you sound like a hell of a nice guy.