Re: Our "publish then filter" future...

When traditional publishers and authors talk about "the way we've always 
done it", it reminds me of a restaurant owner telling a convenience 
store owner "the best way" to run their business.  They're not 
necessarily qualified to make those suggestions, no matter how 
successful their own business (type) is,  The eBook/POD model is not 
always the best choice for authors, but it is definitely different than 
pbook models.  We know this.  We also know that a new author can get 
their "foot in the door" easier with other publishers if they have 
something published, even if self-published.  This is as true with books 
as it is with jobs -- you can get a new job easier if you already have one.

In my book (in reference to eBooks/POD-books), if it works, use it.  If 
you can afford it, and you think it will work, maybe do it.  If it's new 
and untested, test market it -- several times in different ways.  Keep 
track of these tests, as they may apply to other things later.

I don't spend much time listening to the "that's the way we've always 
done it" crowd, as it's like Congress -- we used to have no national 
debt.  Since we haven't changed tactics in spending for more than 200 
years, we now have a virtually unpayable debt, and it certainly won't be 
paid in my lifetime.  To me, the traditional way is not necessarily the 
best way, and it is not best for every author, for the very same reason.

> It should come as no surprise, then, that I am not swayed by the
> arguments of the "traditional publisher" camp of e-book publishers.
> This camp says that since the traditional model "works", that this
> model should be, will be, and must be, essentially preserved in
> our e-book future.

I'm not swayed by their arguments at all, because it's outdated, 
outclassed by technical considerations of eBooks, and is rarely a right 
fit for authors who want to keep their copyright and/or other control of 
their work.

> In my opinion, it doesn't matter what the "traditional" proponents
> may try to say, though, since the dynamics of the publishing
> marketplace are naturally moving, like a freight train, towards the
> "publish then filter" model. It is a foregone conclusion. To say the
> future will be like the past is like spitting in the wind (pardon me
> for being so graphic!)

With today's technology, there is little reason for mainstream 
publishers.  Excluding marketing considerations, and the ability to make 
a decent cover, authors can handle virtually all of the elements 
themselves.  The Internet is gradually overtaking traditional 
bookstores, so those that choose to live in the past may well become a 
footnote in history.  While eBooks aren't as popular as what the 
marketeers projected 10 years ago, POD books are selling quite well in 
some markets.  I know it's not the same thing, but the technology is 
closely matched.  If I'm printing enough copies of a given work, it's 
easy enough to get an offset printer to handle it, and increase my 
bottom line.  Otherwise, why give up my copyright?

> Not only that, the sheer number of titles is making it much more
> difficult for the works produced by the smaller "traditional"
> publishers to even be seen -- their marketing call saying that "we
> only pick the finest books to publish" is getting lost in the noise,
> especially in that most readers won't even recognize the publisher
> ("yes, I know 'Random House', but who are you?") Most self-published
> authors usually set-up their own "publishing house" name anyway,
> making it very difficult for the traditional e-book publishers to
> stand out from a very large crowd -- to build a reputation.

Actually, we came up with a workaround to that little problem.  It's the 
main reason I opted to make a free (although it will be highly reviewed) 
movie before we started selling our books.  It's difficult enough to get 
started in most industries, but book-selling has so much competition.  
The objective in marketing any new company or product is to create brand 
recognition.  Getting it's hard -- keeping it is mostly maintaining your 
standards, and taking care of your customers and vendors.  I can't go 
into details now, as the movie is still in production, but I can say 
that our objective is to get the name Wallstone into the public 
consciousness, at the lowest price, with the greatest return.  That's 
what we're gonna do.  (I'll tell you about it after July 1st, when the 
movie is released.)

> As an example of adjusting the traditional model, one idea I floated
> ten years ago was the "book marketing agent" model. In this model, the
> agent treats the huge mass of self-published titles as a sort of
> "giant slush pile" (and it behooves self-published authors to make
> their e-books freely available to such agents -- I have a couple ideas
> to enable this handshake), and for the titles the agent believes they
> can market and make money -- to approach the authors with a marketing
> (not publishing!) contract. This is essentially a splitting up of the
> multiple tasks the traditional publisher does.

Ours is based on that idea.  In essence, we sell the work ourselves and 
through retail outlets, and once it hits half-life, we offer it as a 
licensed resalable book at half of wholesale - for most novels, this 
means we should match our earlier bottom-line in net sales.  Not a 
perfect plan, obviously, but the model has return value to the author 
because people who wouldn't have bought their writings earlier will with 
the discounted groups, made up in volume sales.

> I cannot predict the specifics of how it will all shake out, but I
> am certain that the "publish then filter" will become the dominant
> publishing model in the future, and those who adapt to it, such as
> implementing new ideas to take advantage of this eventuality, will
> be the ones to profit. After all, entrepreneurs succeed when they
> come up with solutions to problems (e.g. consumer aggravations)
> , and the aggravation book buyers will have is trying to find a
> "good read" from among the millions of available, essentially
> self-published titles.
One of the ideas we came up with is to offer a reciprocal deal to other 
publishers, matching their wholesale discount.  In essence, "I'll give 
you 50% of the retail for books you sell for me, if you let me sell your 
books at the same rate on my site."  For eBooks, this should work (not 
tested yet), as it's a win-win scenario.  Because there are varying 
prices for POD books from different vendors, it wouldn't necessarily 
work so well with pbooks.

Danny Stone
Publisher/Producer
Wallstone Entertainment

------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Post a message:   ebook-community [[at]] *
Unsubscribe:      ebook-community-unsubscribe [[at]] *
Switch to digest: ebook-community-digest [[at]] *
Switch to normal: ebook-community-normal [[at]] *
Put mail on hold: ebook-community-nomail [[at]] *
Administrator:    ebook-community-owner [[at]] *

(* == yahoogroups.com)
-------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ebook-community/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:ebook-community-fullfeatured-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    ebook-community-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/