- Status
Re: Re:fastest reply in history
Oh, goodie! It's line-by-line time! (Then I really do have to go do something else.)
<BLOCKQUOTE>No, it is not "grim" at all. Remember, very few published books are stocked by stores.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry's playing word-games again. Very few published books are meant for bookstores in the first place. Encyclopedias, law books, textbooks ... they aren't published with bookstore sales in mind. Of the trade books -- the novels, the cookbooks, the general-interest non-fiction -- most are stocked in bookstores.
<BLOCKQUOTE>To clarify your confusion on POD and POD: Print On Demand is not to be confused with Publish On Demand. The two terms have very different meaning and absolutely nothing in common with one another.</BLOCKQUOTE>
"Print on Demand" and "Publish on Demand" are a false dichotomy invented by PublishAmerica to throw dust in the air. There is no difference at all between "Print on Demand" and "Publish on Demand." PA is the only place you'll find those terms distinguished, and nearly the only place that uses the term "Publish on Demand" at all. In short, Larry is lying. Again.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Publish on Demand - Subsidy publishers (also known as vanity presses) with limited distribution channels. They charge fees for most of their services, including reviewing manuscripts for possible publication, publishing manuscripts if accepted, and editorial services, among others. PublishAmerica has nothing in common with this type of business.</BLOCKQUOTE>
None of those things are part of the base definition of a vanity press. A vanity press, as its business model, sells its books to their own authors.
That's the PublishAmerica business model.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Print on Demand - A digital printing technology that is being used by most US publishers to some extent, where books are printed as the demand arises. PublishAmerica is using digital printing to change the publishing world in a revolutionary manner, but most major publishers use this technology, and it is gaining ground all the time.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry is struggling here, and botching it. A pity he doesn't know much about publishing. What he's trying to say is that most US publishers use digital printing for some purposes.
Print on Demand is yet another business model, in which the books aren't printed until after an order is received. Print on demand can use, but isn't required to use, digital printing technology.
<BLOCKQUOTE>On Stocking: For bookstores to stock all books published would mean adding 15 feet of new shelf space each and every day.</BLOCKQUOTE>
We aren't talking about "all books published" (those medical books, engineering reference books, and scholarly monographs, among others) we're talking about trade books. But let's say that it's even true, that it would require fifteen feet of new bookshelf each and every day to shelve all the trade books. That only works if the bookstores never sell any books, and never return any books. We know that bookstores sell or return books each and every day.
The fact is that a typical Barnes & Noble Superstore shelves about half of all trade books published in a given year. To shelve all the trade books published would require only two Barnes&Noble superstores. B&N has more than two. So do the other chains. There are more bookstores than just the chains -- local and regional bookstores, museum shops, university bookstores. Almost all trade books are shelved in one or more. Alas, vanity books (such as PublishAmerica's) are shelved almost nowhere.
PublishAmerica has a continuing probem with not being able to distinguish between "almost all" and "almost none."
<BLOCKQUOTE>Therefore bookstore managers must be selective, so they decide based on what that they think will sell. If they do think it will sell, they will stock it, and vice versa. So, if your book is romance and the store's shelves are overflowing with romance novels, the odds are they won't stock it. And, if your book is a history of agriculture in Tupelo County, Mississippi, the bookstore manager in Seattle may feel the same way.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry's revealing his ignorance of publishing. Again.
If a bookstore's shelves are overflowing with romance novels, it's a good bet that store is moving a lot of romance novels and will be eager to get another one. That history of agriculture in Tupelo County ... sure, not likely to be in a Barnes&Noble in Seattle, but how about museum and university bookstores across the country? How about the regular bookstores in Tupelo County?
"Not all" isn't the same as "not any."
<BLOCKQUOTE>Bookstores will generally stock a book that they think will sell, regardless of whether it is returnable or not, and regardless of whether it is printed on digital or offset presses.</BLOCKQUOTE>
The digital or offset is a red herring. The returnablitiy is a big problem, but yes, bookstores may order non-returnable books. The real killers: The short discount, the cash-up-front policy, the poor production values, the high prices, and the lack of marketing support. Throw in the non-returnability and it's a wonder any PublishAmerica books get shelved at all.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Please do not judge a bookstore's corporate policy by what one local manager or one letter tells you. You can find stories on our website about, for example, two Borders locations in one town: one manager insists that he cannot carry a book, the other orders 40 copies. Bookstore managers are human, they have strengths and weaknesses like all of us, they can make good judgment calls and bad ones. One will like your book, the other may not.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Let's judge the corporate policy by what hundreds of bookstore managers all across the country are saying. Sure, some bookstore managers will bend the rules if a local author comes in and begs, but that isn't how book distribution is supposed to work. Nor is it how book distribution works with legitimate publishers.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Libraries: Again, CIP numbers are not necessary for libraries to order a book. Libraries order our books all the time. We deal directly with the most common wholesaler that libraries use. PublishAmerica has had an account with this wholesaler since our very first day. Hundreds of our books are sitting in libraries all across the nation, and we have many librarians as our authors.</BLOCKQUOTE>
CIP numbers aren't necessary -- but they sure are helpful. Many libraries won't even accept books without CIP numbers as a gift. The most common wholesaler libraries use is B&T. You remember how the short discount through Ingram -- 20% -- was a killer to bookstore sales? The discount PA offers through B&T is just 5%. That discount makes libraries look at PA books like Dracula looks at garlic. When you add in that PA books aren't reviewed by Library Journal, that's the stake through the heart of library sales.
Hundreds of your books? Just hundreds? Out of thousands of titles, with over 100,000 libraries in the United States? That's pitiful. That's pathetic. Isn't it true that those "hundreds" are mostly there as gifts from the authors, or because a local author came in and begged his local librarian to please, please, please order his book?
<BLOCKQUOTE>Please consider this our final word on these issues.</BLOCKQUOTE>
If only it were, Larry. If only it were....
<TABLE><TR><TD>
<a href="http://www.lulu.com/commerce/addreg.php?fBuyContent=102550">
<img src="http://www.lulu.com/themes/common/images/icons/buynowbook_blue.gif" border="0" alt="Buy Atlanta Nights at Lulu!">
</a></TD><TD>Atlanta Nights</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oh, goodie! It's line-by-line time! (Then I really do have to go do something else.)
<BLOCKQUOTE>No, it is not "grim" at all. Remember, very few published books are stocked by stores.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry's playing word-games again. Very few published books are meant for bookstores in the first place. Encyclopedias, law books, textbooks ... they aren't published with bookstore sales in mind. Of the trade books -- the novels, the cookbooks, the general-interest non-fiction -- most are stocked in bookstores.
<BLOCKQUOTE>To clarify your confusion on POD and POD: Print On Demand is not to be confused with Publish On Demand. The two terms have very different meaning and absolutely nothing in common with one another.</BLOCKQUOTE>
"Print on Demand" and "Publish on Demand" are a false dichotomy invented by PublishAmerica to throw dust in the air. There is no difference at all between "Print on Demand" and "Publish on Demand." PA is the only place you'll find those terms distinguished, and nearly the only place that uses the term "Publish on Demand" at all. In short, Larry is lying. Again.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Publish on Demand - Subsidy publishers (also known as vanity presses) with limited distribution channels. They charge fees for most of their services, including reviewing manuscripts for possible publication, publishing manuscripts if accepted, and editorial services, among others. PublishAmerica has nothing in common with this type of business.</BLOCKQUOTE>
None of those things are part of the base definition of a vanity press. A vanity press, as its business model, sells its books to their own authors.
That's the PublishAmerica business model.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Print on Demand - A digital printing technology that is being used by most US publishers to some extent, where books are printed as the demand arises. PublishAmerica is using digital printing to change the publishing world in a revolutionary manner, but most major publishers use this technology, and it is gaining ground all the time.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry is struggling here, and botching it. A pity he doesn't know much about publishing. What he's trying to say is that most US publishers use digital printing for some purposes.
Print on Demand is yet another business model, in which the books aren't printed until after an order is received. Print on demand can use, but isn't required to use, digital printing technology.
<BLOCKQUOTE>On Stocking: For bookstores to stock all books published would mean adding 15 feet of new shelf space each and every day.</BLOCKQUOTE>
We aren't talking about "all books published" (those medical books, engineering reference books, and scholarly monographs, among others) we're talking about trade books. But let's say that it's even true, that it would require fifteen feet of new bookshelf each and every day to shelve all the trade books. That only works if the bookstores never sell any books, and never return any books. We know that bookstores sell or return books each and every day.
The fact is that a typical Barnes & Noble Superstore shelves about half of all trade books published in a given year. To shelve all the trade books published would require only two Barnes&Noble superstores. B&N has more than two. So do the other chains. There are more bookstores than just the chains -- local and regional bookstores, museum shops, university bookstores. Almost all trade books are shelved in one or more. Alas, vanity books (such as PublishAmerica's) are shelved almost nowhere.
PublishAmerica has a continuing probem with not being able to distinguish between "almost all" and "almost none."
<BLOCKQUOTE>Therefore bookstore managers must be selective, so they decide based on what that they think will sell. If they do think it will sell, they will stock it, and vice versa. So, if your book is romance and the store's shelves are overflowing with romance novels, the odds are they won't stock it. And, if your book is a history of agriculture in Tupelo County, Mississippi, the bookstore manager in Seattle may feel the same way.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Larry's revealing his ignorance of publishing. Again.
If a bookstore's shelves are overflowing with romance novels, it's a good bet that store is moving a lot of romance novels and will be eager to get another one. That history of agriculture in Tupelo County ... sure, not likely to be in a Barnes&Noble in Seattle, but how about museum and university bookstores across the country? How about the regular bookstores in Tupelo County?
"Not all" isn't the same as "not any."
<BLOCKQUOTE>Bookstores will generally stock a book that they think will sell, regardless of whether it is returnable or not, and regardless of whether it is printed on digital or offset presses.</BLOCKQUOTE>
The digital or offset is a red herring. The returnablitiy is a big problem, but yes, bookstores may order non-returnable books. The real killers: The short discount, the cash-up-front policy, the poor production values, the high prices, and the lack of marketing support. Throw in the non-returnability and it's a wonder any PublishAmerica books get shelved at all.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Please do not judge a bookstore's corporate policy by what one local manager or one letter tells you. You can find stories on our website about, for example, two Borders locations in one town: one manager insists that he cannot carry a book, the other orders 40 copies. Bookstore managers are human, they have strengths and weaknesses like all of us, they can make good judgment calls and bad ones. One will like your book, the other may not.</BLOCKQUOTE>
Let's judge the corporate policy by what hundreds of bookstore managers all across the country are saying. Sure, some bookstore managers will bend the rules if a local author comes in and begs, but that isn't how book distribution is supposed to work. Nor is it how book distribution works with legitimate publishers.
<BLOCKQUOTE>Libraries: Again, CIP numbers are not necessary for libraries to order a book. Libraries order our books all the time. We deal directly with the most common wholesaler that libraries use. PublishAmerica has had an account with this wholesaler since our very first day. Hundreds of our books are sitting in libraries all across the nation, and we have many librarians as our authors.</BLOCKQUOTE>
CIP numbers aren't necessary -- but they sure are helpful. Many libraries won't even accept books without CIP numbers as a gift. The most common wholesaler libraries use is B&T. You remember how the short discount through Ingram -- 20% -- was a killer to bookstore sales? The discount PA offers through B&T is just 5%. That discount makes libraries look at PA books like Dracula looks at garlic. When you add in that PA books aren't reviewed by Library Journal, that's the stake through the heart of library sales.
Hundreds of your books? Just hundreds? Out of thousands of titles, with over 100,000 libraries in the United States? That's pitiful. That's pathetic. Isn't it true that those "hundreds" are mostly there as gifts from the authors, or because a local author came in and begged his local librarian to please, please, please order his book?
<BLOCKQUOTE>Please consider this our final word on these issues.</BLOCKQUOTE>
If only it were, Larry. If only it were....
<TABLE><TR><TD>
<a href="http://www.lulu.com/commerce/addreg.php?fBuyContent=102550">
<img src="http://www.lulu.com/themes/common/images/icons/buynowbook_blue.gif" border="0" alt="Buy Atlanta Nights at Lulu!">
</a></TD><TD>Atlanta Nights</TD></TR></TABLE>
Re: computer searches
James, I don't mean to debate your information, but the library in my town bought my books and they told me PA gave them 40% off. Now that might be if they buy directly through PA and not through Baker & Taylor. I am not sure.
James, I don't mean to debate your information, but the library in my town bought my books and they told me PA gave them 40% off. Now that might be if they buy directly through PA and not through Baker & Taylor. I am not sure.
Re: Re:Chuck
Don't argue with them. Find a lawyer and put the squeeze on them.
While it's sure to be satisfying, it's ultimately useless. They will either ignore them or throw some other (easily refutable) numbers back at you. Judging by what has been reported here, PA has a bunch of canned responses to any e-mail they're sent (with a special "Don't take that tone with us" macro).
Don't argue with them. Find a lawyer and put the squeeze on them.
Re: A Grumpy Paranoid Shark
I don't think you're grumpy or paranoid. Unfortunately PA brings up a lot of emotions, as I'm sure you're well aware of from each of your clients. We just need an occasional voice of reason and sanity to stop any of us from acting, doing and/or saying something stupid or harmful.
Thanks for your warning.
LynnEtte
I don't think you're grumpy or paranoid. Unfortunately PA brings up a lot of emotions, as I'm sure you're well aware of from each of your clients. We just need an occasional voice of reason and sanity to stop any of us from acting, doing and/or saying something stupid or harmful.
Thanks for your warning.
LynnEtte
Re: my final email to them
Just last week, for example, Barnes and Noble, by far our largest customer, ordered 456 books from PublishAmerica. The week before that it was 512 books, the week before that 448. .................bla bla .. you know the rest......
---....I've followed this thread for almost a year now and this is the same quote posted last year..(minus the mathematics of the poster) ,... they're not changing their stories....
P.A. should be in the recycling business not the publishing....
LawShark,
"...grumpy?... nah.. truthful maybe.."...besides..
JAWS is still one of my favourite movies..
Just last week, for example, Barnes and Noble, by far our largest customer, ordered 456 books from PublishAmerica. The week before that it was 512 books, the week before that 448. .................bla bla .. you know the rest......
---....I've followed this thread for almost a year now and this is the same quote posted last year..(minus the mathematics of the poster) ,... they're not changing their stories....
P.A. should be in the recycling business not the publishing....
LawShark,
"...grumpy?... nah.. truthful maybe.."...besides..
JAWS is still one of my favourite movies..
Grumpy Shark
Grumpy Shark sounds like he works for PA - and you lot have apparently fallen for it by agreeing to his demands
His arguments don't make logical sense to me. If he's genuine perhaps he could explain them in more detail.
Grumpy Shark sounds like he works for PA - and you lot have apparently fallen for it by agreeing to his demands
His arguments don't make logical sense to me. If he's genuine perhaps he could explain them in more detail.
Re: Grumpy Shark
I will vouch for LawShark. He's not a PA representative.
I will also state that I do not see how one group that is taking a second party to court can be held accountable or responsible for another group that is against that same second party and is using perfectly legal means to confront that second party. It would be more appropriate for that first group to refrain from taking part in the other group's activities. Otherwise, you'd have the equivalent of holding all vegetarians responsible for the actions of PETA members.
I will vouch for LawShark. He's not a PA representative.
I will also state that I do not see how one group that is taking a second party to court can be held accountable or responsible for another group that is against that same second party and is using perfectly legal means to confront that second party. It would be more appropriate for that first group to refrain from taking part in the other group's activities. Otherwise, you'd have the equivalent of holding all vegetarians responsible for the actions of PETA members.
Re: PublishAmerica Big Spenders' List
TuppGal...don't you dare quit posting, don't make me come over there! Dave...LOL, you are too cool, talking about the post below this one...LOL
Chris
Now Dave's post is above mine, and I have posted this twice...will delete the other one, on the computer doing this stuff and going crazy!
TuppGal...don't you dare quit posting, don't make me come over there! Dave...LOL, you are too cool, talking about the post below this one...LOL
Chris
Now Dave's post is above mine, and I have posted this twice...will delete the other one, on the computer doing this stuff and going crazy!
LawShark's a good guy
Really. Cross my heart. He's being smart, and ethical.
And he's absolutely right. Track data, keep copies of email, but don't post stuff like lists of names.
And really, don't mess with email and PA for a return of your rights. You're just playing their game and inviting emotional abuse. Get a lawyer.
Really. Cross my heart. He's being smart, and ethical.
And he's absolutely right. Track data, keep copies of email, but don't post stuff like lists of names.
And really, don't mess with email and PA for a return of your rights. You're just playing their game and inviting emotional abuse. Get a lawyer.
Re: Courthouse property search...
I think what lawshark is saying is to try to refrain from becoming too emotional and doing irrational things that may hinder any cause of action against PA. Remember a lawsuit involves a lot of discovery which means getting affadavits, records, and yes, even bulletin board postings may be admissible. I'm not too knowledgeable about the law as I am only a student, but I do know that you shouldn't do something now that will come back to bite you or other plaintiffs in the butt later.
I think what lawshark is saying is to try to refrain from becoming too emotional and doing irrational things that may hinder any cause of action against PA. Remember a lawsuit involves a lot of discovery which means getting affadavits, records, and yes, even bulletin board postings may be admissible. I'm not too knowledgeable about the law as I am only a student, but I do know that you shouldn't do something now that will come back to bite you or other plaintiffs in the butt later.
Author Lists
Chris, don't you dare stop either, whether or not they get posted anywhere. I think you're doing a great thing - if nothing else at least they know they aren't alone. And since you're actively searching and emailing, I'm sure you've reached people who just gave up and never found anyone else.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was trying to tie your hands. And I guess I'm a bit more "in your face" with my arguments/discussions too, because I found no offense in the six-year-old argument. Actually it's a good example: While in the right, the crying/yelling kid is almost as annoying as the bully in the first place. Maybe a bad choice of examples, but the point I got was that sometimes the reaction, however well-intended or right, can be as troublesome as the initial problem if we're not careful.
I think some more investigation would be good about the posting of the list. While I still very much like the idea, as has been said many times here, I'm not a lawyer. After Dave's vouching that this isn't a PA employee, I assume he's aware of the legitimate lawyer status of this person. Therefore the only opinion I have regarding this, from someone in the field, is this one.
And contrary to how much sense something makes, that doesn't make it a good/bad idea legally. We live in a country where someone buying coffee from a fast food chain while driving can sue for spilling it on herself, and a thief can break into someone's house, trip on a skateboard and sue for damages while trying to rob them. And both win. So no matter how much it goes against my personal radar of common sense, I've got to believe the only legal source I've seen on this subject so far.
Chris, don't you dare stop either, whether or not they get posted anywhere. I think you're doing a great thing - if nothing else at least they know they aren't alone. And since you're actively searching and emailing, I'm sure you've reached people who just gave up and never found anyone else.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was trying to tie your hands. And I guess I'm a bit more "in your face" with my arguments/discussions too, because I found no offense in the six-year-old argument. Actually it's a good example: While in the right, the crying/yelling kid is almost as annoying as the bully in the first place. Maybe a bad choice of examples, but the point I got was that sometimes the reaction, however well-intended or right, can be as troublesome as the initial problem if we're not careful.
I think some more investigation would be good about the posting of the list. While I still very much like the idea, as has been said many times here, I'm not a lawyer. After Dave's vouching that this isn't a PA employee, I assume he's aware of the legitimate lawyer status of this person. Therefore the only opinion I have regarding this, from someone in the field, is this one.
And contrary to how much sense something makes, that doesn't make it a good/bad idea legally. We live in a country where someone buying coffee from a fast food chain while driving can sue for spilling it on herself, and a thief can break into someone's house, trip on a skateboard and sue for damages while trying to rob them. And both win. So no matter how much it goes against my personal radar of common sense, I've got to believe the only legal source I've seen on this subject so far.
Listen to the 'Shark, folks
LawShark knows of what he speaks. He has signed his name to past posts if you have any doubt as to his legitimacy.
Bikerpreacher, I suggest asking your correspondents for permission to send their name and/or email(s) to Ann & Victoria for their campaign. That way you can help refute the “10,000 happy authors” hogwash without compromising the current legal wrangling.
LawShark knows of what he speaks. He has signed his name to past posts if you have any doubt as to his legitimacy.
Bikerpreacher, I suggest asking your correspondents for permission to send their name and/or email(s) to Ann & Victoria for their campaign. That way you can help refute the “10,000 happy authors” hogwash without compromising the current legal wrangling.
Re: So true
Gravity said:<blockquote><hr>In every business model I've ever seen, the name of the game is "keep the customer satisfied." If the PA board states they have "11,000" happy authors in the fold, and further, only a small percentage of "whiners" is causing the problems, then wouldn't it logically follow that solving that problem should be paramount? I mean, why hang on to people who (like myself) have categorically stated that as far as they are concerned, they're no longer promoting their works? It's beyond weird, beyond bizarre, it's..well, I don't know exactly what it is. But it ain't smart business.<hr></blockquote>I think I can explain it. I don't guarantee I'm right, but I think my explanation makes sense.
PublishAmerica is run by three people who've unmistakably failed as writers. PA authors who complain about not making sales, or not getting read, are saying that their books are more deserving than Meiners', Clopper's, or Prather's work. And if a real publisher takes an interest in a PA title, that just rubs salt into their wounds, because no publisher ever took an interest in their own books.
Possibly this also explains why Larry Clopper keeps going on about PA thumbing its nose at the literary elite. As a writer, nose-thumbing is the most he can do. His talents don't extend to writing a book that people want to buy and read.
Gravity said:<blockquote><hr>In every business model I've ever seen, the name of the game is "keep the customer satisfied." If the PA board states they have "11,000" happy authors in the fold, and further, only a small percentage of "whiners" is causing the problems, then wouldn't it logically follow that solving that problem should be paramount? I mean, why hang on to people who (like myself) have categorically stated that as far as they are concerned, they're no longer promoting their works? It's beyond weird, beyond bizarre, it's..well, I don't know exactly what it is. But it ain't smart business.<hr></blockquote>I think I can explain it. I don't guarantee I'm right, but I think my explanation makes sense.
PublishAmerica is run by three people who've unmistakably failed as writers. PA authors who complain about not making sales, or not getting read, are saying that their books are more deserving than Meiners', Clopper's, or Prather's work. And if a real publisher takes an interest in a PA title, that just rubs salt into their wounds, because no publisher ever took an interest in their own books.
Possibly this also explains why Larry Clopper keeps going on about PA thumbing its nose at the literary elite. As a writer, nose-thumbing is the most he can do. His talents don't extend to writing a book that people want to buy and read.
Lawshark
Lawshark is the genuine article. He's a real lawyer, is completely familiar with the PA sitution, and has PA authors' best interests at heart.
Given a choice between taking his advice and taking my advice, I'd take his advice.
Another comment: When I'm playing poker, I prefer to keep my cards face down and close to my vest.
Lawshark is the genuine article. He's a real lawyer, is completely familiar with the PA sitution, and has PA authors' best interests at heart.
Given a choice between taking his advice and taking my advice, I'd take his advice.
Another comment: When I'm playing poker, I prefer to keep my cards face down and close to my vest.
Re: It's once again time to play Fun With PA Math!
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>2. Brick and mortar bookstores buy 335 PA books a day. 365 x 335 = 122,274. Divide by 10,000 happy authors and you have 12.2 books purchased each year.
3. Add 2.6 B&N books and 12.2 other bookstore books per year. 14.8 books (say, 15) book purchased by bookstores for each author per year. To sell 500 copies at bookstores would take the average PA author over 33 years.<hr></blockquote>
Please notice that PA doesn't say other brick-n-mortar stores. Bet you a chocolate glazed donut that the B&N figure (2.6 books/author/year) is included in the 12.2 books/author/year.
That means that to sell those 500 copies through bookstores would take over forty years.
(And consider too that those 12.2 books are probably sold to Mom and Dad and Uncle Bob and Auntie Sue when they drop by the bookstore to special order.)
In other news: Atlanta Nights has sold 75 copies! That means that in a week and a half it's already matched the lifetime average for a PublishAmerica book! (Plus, the complete text is available on-line for free from multiple sources. Go to http://www.embiid.net/ to get it in Windows, Rocket, or Palm format.)
(Amount I've spent on promotion: $0.00. Number of copies I've bought myself: 0. Cost for me to publish: $0.00.)
<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>2. Brick and mortar bookstores buy 335 PA books a day. 365 x 335 = 122,274. Divide by 10,000 happy authors and you have 12.2 books purchased each year.
3. Add 2.6 B&N books and 12.2 other bookstore books per year. 14.8 books (say, 15) book purchased by bookstores for each author per year. To sell 500 copies at bookstores would take the average PA author over 33 years.<hr></blockquote>
Please notice that PA doesn't say other brick-n-mortar stores. Bet you a chocolate glazed donut that the B&N figure (2.6 books/author/year) is included in the 12.2 books/author/year.
That means that to sell those 500 copies through bookstores would take over forty years.
(And consider too that those 12.2 books are probably sold to Mom and Dad and Uncle Bob and Auntie Sue when they drop by the bookstore to special order.)
In other news: Atlanta Nights has sold 75 copies! That means that in a week and a half it's already matched the lifetime average for a PublishAmerica book! (Plus, the complete text is available on-line for free from multiple sources. Go to http://www.embiid.net/ to get it in Windows, Rocket, or Palm format.)
(Amount I've spent on promotion: $0.00. Number of copies I've bought myself: 0. Cost for me to publish: $0.00.)
Re: It's once again time to play Fun With PA Math!
No bet, Jim.
I was giving PA the benefit of the doubt and the best possible face on the numbers.
No bet, Jim.
I was giving PA the benefit of the doubt and the best possible face on the numbers.
La tee Da
:hat
I enjoy the Cooler as we have a no-flaming policy and I've found that to get my point across, without the use of some of the more accurate arrows in my quiver, I've had to examine situations with slightly different weapons.
So yeah, I recently ended a short bender, well, short in my case, a real doozie to the rookie, and occasionally, in a drunken haze, I'd stumble in here to read what you kids were up to and the looniness which ensued. From this experience, I've crafted a short poem dedicated to you, the scorned PaVidian, and you the anonymous lurker. Don't forget the professionals and of course, that small group that would email me, when I was on the PA Message board belittling people because, well, that's what I do. My fans.
Put me on a list
Present me as a witness
Don't call me Clopper
PA's a screwed up business
Into the air, your drinks
You need a break, methinks
For, piss and moan, the authors groan
Your every word stinks
And now back to your regularly scheduled retorts.
Thank you and have a swell day.
*hic*
*buuuuuuurrrrrrrrP*
:hat
I enjoy the Cooler as we have a no-flaming policy and I've found that to get my point across, without the use of some of the more accurate arrows in my quiver, I've had to examine situations with slightly different weapons.
So yeah, I recently ended a short bender, well, short in my case, a real doozie to the rookie, and occasionally, in a drunken haze, I'd stumble in here to read what you kids were up to and the looniness which ensued. From this experience, I've crafted a short poem dedicated to you, the scorned PaVidian, and you the anonymous lurker. Don't forget the professionals and of course, that small group that would email me, when I was on the PA Message board belittling people because, well, that's what I do. My fans.
Put me on a list
Present me as a witness
Don't call me Clopper
PA's a screwed up business
Into the air, your drinks
You need a break, methinks
For, piss and moan, the authors groan
Your every word stinks
And now back to your regularly scheduled retorts.
Thank you and have a swell day.
*hic*
*buuuuuuurrrrrrrrP*
Re: computer searches
James, I don't mean to debate your information, but the library in my town bought my books and they told me PA gave them 40% off. Now that might be if they buy directly through PA and not through Baker & Taylor. I am not sure.
I am sure. That means that your library bought your books directly from PA, not through a distributor. Since PA's letter talked about the distributor, that's the question I was addressing.
James, I don't mean to debate your information, but the library in my town bought my books and they told me PA gave them 40% off. Now that might be if they buy directly through PA and not through Baker & Taylor. I am not sure.
I am sure. That means that your library bought your books directly from PA, not through a distributor. Since PA's letter talked about the distributor, that's the question I was addressing.
- Status