Home » Contracts, PG's Thoughts (such as they are), Royalties » End the Discount Double-Cross

End the Discount Double-Cross

16 November 2015

From The Authors Guild:

In our last installment of the Fair Contract Initiative, we detailed how publishers’ outdated accounting practices consistently delay and minimize authors’ royalty payments. But that’s not the end of the story. In another common practice, publishers routinely use contract provisions to slash authors’ royalties to mere pennies per copy sold.

Standard trade royalties are based on a percentage of the publisher’s list price. But publishers have come up with a variety of clever methods to base royalties on the much lower net amounts they actually receive from booksellers and wholesalers. Then they add insult to injury by cutting the royalty rate itself by as much as two-thirds. When an author gets paid on less than half the list price, that’s bad enough. When an author gets paid only one-third the normal rate on that reduced price, the word “pittance” seems appropriate.

So-called “deep discount” clauses let publishers offer titles to booksellers and wholesalers at big markdowns. They stipulate that a publisher’s sale at a discount of over 55%, for example (a number that appears to be the new standard), the author’s royalty suddenly drops from, say, 15% of list price to 15% of the far smaller amount the publisher actually receives. A standard deep discount clause looks something like this: “On copies of the Work sold by the Publisher at a discount of greater than 55% from the publisher’s retail price through channels outside of ordinary retail trade channels, the author will be paid a royalty of 15% of the Publisher’s net proceeds.” (Many smaller publishers, which pay royalties on net proceeds to begin with, often slash the royalty rate in half on discounts from 50–70%, and by 2/3 for greater discounts.) Thanks to that drop in royalty payments the publisher makes out like a—well, the word “bandit” springs to mind.

It seems fair that when a publisher sells a book at a deep discount, the author’s take might be reduced proportionally. But there’s no proportionality in many standard “deep discount” clauses.

. . . .

We’ve seen these discount double-crosses applied for sales to book clubs and book fairs, for “special sales” in bulk outside the usual book trade, for large-print editions, for export editions. Let’s say the publisher sells our sample book in bulk for just $2.00. The discount double-crossed author would get one thin dime per copy, a royalty cut of an astounding 93%—even though the net to the publisher would decline by less than 33%.

. . . .

Even crazier, some reductions can apply even to direct sales from publishers to readers, despite the fact that the publisher gets to keep the share of the transaction that would normally go to a retailer or wholesaler. If anything, an author’s royalty rate on such direct sales should be higher than normal.

. . . .

The documented decline in authors’ incomes stems in part from these unconscionable reductions in royalty payments. Unless publishers begin to see authors as partners rather than patsies, many authors will no longer be able to afford to deliver publishers the quality work the industry was built on.

Link to the rest at The Authors Guild and thanks to Jacqueline for the tip.

PG says some authors get excited when they see their books in Costco. Unfortunately, it’s almost certain that their Costco sales will fall under the deep discount royalty structure, generating only tiny royalties.

Then, there are publishers who sell virtually everything at “deep discount” so the author never receives the royalty rates that are listed first and most prominently in their publishing contract.

PG has mentioned this before, but perhaps it bears repeating. During PG’s legal career, he has helped clients with a wide range of business contracts, including agreements prepared by many of the largest and most successful companies in the world.

Standard publishing contracts from large traditional publishers stand out in the constellation of business contracts for their one-sidedness and, in some cases, outright duplicity for anyone who fails to read them very carefully. The way that Randy Penguin and its cohorts write their standard contracts is not the way that Apple, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Disney, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, American Express, Merrill Lynch and similar entities write their contracts.

PG doesn’t agree with many initiatives undertaken by the Authors Guild, but he’s pleased to see their latest efforts to shine a light on some of the most abusive contract provisions routinely employed by Big Publishing.

However, the cynic in PG holds little hope that AG’s efforts will bring about any meaningful reform. Treating authors badly is too much a part of the corporate and cultural DNA of traditional publishing to change. These dinosaurs will die before they evolve.

Contracts, PG's Thoughts (such as they are), Royalties

58 Comments to “End the Discount Double-Cross”

  1. Waiting for the dinosaurs to die – and turn into something useful: oil.

    It may take longer than my lifetime for the latter part – or their death might release authors from contracts, though it seems unlikely.

  2. Finally.

    I’ve been seeing this for years from writer friends. Unfortunately, the information they shared with me was confidential. They said I could use it as a general bit for my blog, but not in specific, even when I asked to send to others with the name and personal information removed.

    Not only are deep discounting clauses being used for paper books in a myriad of ways, but they’re also being applied to ebook sales. So, if a trad pub is offering the first book in a series for $1.99 on Kindle, you can bet that sale will be accounted as a deep discount…and the author will get even less than 15% of net, minus agency fees.

    It’s really ugly in trad pub contract and royalty land these days. That’s why I continually tell writers who want to be trad pubbed to hire a LAWYER to negotiate their contracts, not an agent (even if it were legal for an agent to do it, which it is not. [sigh]). But do these writers listen? Nope.

    Okay, stepping off my soapbox now.

    • No, Kris, please stay on the soapbox. If your words save another writer (besides me), it’s worth the wood you’re standing on.

    • Kristine, I believe it was you and I that had this discussion once before and I mentioned that no traditional book account should be considered a deep discount account….and this certainly should not apply to ebooks even if they are sold at $1.99.

      • Yep, we had this discussion. And even though no traditional publisher **should** do it, most are. I just can’t get permission to share the actual statements (with the personal data removed) I’m seeing from my writer pals on this. It’s horrible. I hope that the Authors Guild actually acts on this rather than just issues press releases.

        • Why wouldn’t an author want the information shared with their name and title blocked out? Nobody would have any idea what book it was.

          • Because the publisher had them sign a non-disclose in order to get the contract in the first place? And the reason for non-discloses is to be able to sue any and all that dare to disclose? Which should suggest just how bad the contracts really are if they’re afraid of them becoming public.

            • Is that a guess or do you know that for sure? didn’t think this was a settlement issue and royalty statements are not confidential information

              • But in many cases the actual contracts are ‘confidential information’ — information that the publishers don’t want the rest of their pen of writers to know that they might have given one of their peers a ‘better deal’.

                Tell you what, I understand you’re part of trad-pub. Can you give us (not just me, anyone that wants to look) links to the last five contracts your company has offered? Remove the names/info of course — but please leave the royalty/deep discount (if any) percentage info — so we’ll have a better understanding of the type of contracts and policies you’re defending.

                • I consider contracts to be between us and the author. We don’t have confidentiality clauses in our contracts and there are organizations like RWA that shares this type of info and analyzes various contracts. Our deep discount clause is very fair and agents and authors have not had problems with it.

                • @ Steven Zacharius

                  “I consider contracts to be between us and the author.”

                  But just up this very thread you said: “Why wouldn’t an author want the information shared with their name and title blocked out? Nobody would have any idea what book it was.”

                  So, with that info blocked, who would know?

                • I was referring to a royalty statement analysis where I offered to help Kristine and her friends privately. I never heard back so I was asking why not just the info here about the royalty statement.

                  I’m not posting contracts here. We have thousands of authors that can share if they like.

                • As I said before most publishers have had their contracts reviewed and commented upon by big writer’s organizations like RWA. If and when an author submits to us and we are able to come to an agreement on publishing terms, we will at that point send out our contract. When dealing with the agents we already have standard boilerplate language with each of the major agents.

                • @ Steven Zacharius

                  Sorry for wasting your time and the time of all TPV readers, I really should have Googled you before bothering to reply to your posts as your position on this ‘self publishing craze’ and how ‘honest and hardworking trad pubs’ are seems to be well known to many other TPVs.

                  http://www.thepassivevoice.com/2014/01/a-response-to-kensington/

                  Suggests that the more things change, the more they stay the same …

                • So glad you do your research Allen. And yes you should believe everything you read on the Internet rather than listening to someone who was giving their opinion based on knowledge of the traditional publishing business rather than just supposed facts from many anonymous people. This is exactly why I’m generally reluctant to give any opinion at all, even though many people here privately email me thanking me for participating in this forum. Even Krisitine who originally commented on this discussion had a long private conversation with me about the deep discount problems she was seeing when she first posted comments on this topic a while ago. Perhaps she will join in and let people here know how I offered my help to her and any authors that had any problems or questions about their deep discount issues. Good luck with your future publishing endeavors.

  3. So many good reasons here to go indie. Why sign a contract when you may never get paid half the royalties they promised?

    I’m grateful to Amazon, even on the rare occasion I’m annoyed with them.

  4. Yes, finally Authors’ Guild does what it should have been doing for years. These discounts need to be written out of contracts.

    • The Authors Guild isn’t doing what it should have been doing for years. It’s merely talking about what it should have been doing for years… and still not doing anything.

      • No, they’re not doing anything, nor do they have the power to do anything. It’s easy for an inexperienced writer reading their blog to extract the meaning that the AG is actually doing something about it, which is good for their image, but does nothing concrete for writers.

        And that said, this new attitude they’re displaying toward publishers may help educate a few thousand newbies to the fact that the publisher is neither their savior nor their friend, nor some entity that needs to be spoken to deferentially. Experienced writers figure this out eventually, but newbies continue to have penguin-shaped stars in their eyes.

        So on the writers’ side, at least they’re saying things that need to be heard, and new writers are hearing it. On their side, it’s great PR and great quotes for recruitment material.

  5. It’s both infuriating and deeply discouraging when publishers violate our trust. Yet the reason many authors continue to sign these contracts, as I did for many years, is because the advances give us an income (however modest) that allows us to continue writing without living in a cardboard box.

    Having reached Social Security age, I can now afford to write without an advance. Believe me, I’ll be self-publishing my next series. Wish me luck.

    • Claire Merriam Hoffman

      You’ll do great, Jackie.

    • I was going to ask if you’d be able to reissue your Regency A Lady’s Point of View. Then I decided I should check Amazon first. Not only is it available for sale, bit I already bought it a couple of years ago. 🙂

      BTW nearsighted people will LOVE that book! Check it out and give it a try…

  6. A Big 5 author I know was absolutely thrilled to be on the Costco tables. I mentioned that she might want to check what her contract had to say about deep discounts. She was much less happy with that table space after talking with her agent.

  7. This issue infuriates me everytime I look at a royalty statement and it’s one of the many reasons I’ve gone indie. It’s good to see it finally being dragged out into the daylight.

  8. However, the cynic in PG holds little hope that AG’s efforts will bring about any meaningful reform. Treating authors badly is too much a part of the corporate and cultural DNA of traditional publishing to change. These dinosaurs will die before they evolve.

    Agree. As long as authors are willing to concede those provisions to publishers, the publishers will take them.

    If we want the guy on the other side of the table to give something, he has to have a reason. Since supply to publishers is so high, he doesn’t have one now.

    With downward pressure on prices, declining market share, and a healthy supply of low cost submissions, he’s not about to change based on moral suasion.

  9. Maybe traditional publishing is just more lucrative for these authors, even if they’re being treated ‘unfairly,’ which I’m not sure they are.

    Didn’t they sign a contract? Did they read it first? Maybe that’s the problem, I don’t know.

    This is a story that doesn’t affect me. I see a lot of those on this site, I have to say. Mainly articles directed toward older people that are trying to do something mid-life.

    I hardly ever see anything that will help me sell my books better, though I guess P.G. doesn’t really focus on that as he doesn’t have any experience with it.

    I guess I’m saying that I’m tired of the site’s current focus on old and tired aspects of the industry that most of us have long ago moved on from…if we were ever a part of to begin with.

  10. Maybe I’m just suffering from an advanced case of Anti-ADS, but… Isn’t this exactly what Amazon was offering publishers before they were forced into the agency model? A fixed royalty based on the list price no matter how much they discounted at retail?

  11. Deep discount clauses should not be misused or abused by any publisher whether big or small. Ebooks should never be part of a deep discount in my opinion and I don’t know of any publisher that would do this. The clause is designed so that when a publisher is giving away extra margin to make a sale; that since the publisher is receiving less, the author would receive less as well. It’s a perfectly good scenario if not abused and depending on what the deep discount percentage is. Accounts like Costco, Amazon or any other standard traditional book outlet should not be deep discounted. It should be limited to special sales accounts where discounts can be very substantial.

    • The problem with the clause is that there isn’t a graduated drop in author royalties. If the deep discount is set at 52.5% and the publisher sells at a 53% discount, the author royalties change from a % of gross to net, and this effectively halves the authors royalties and the money goes straight into the publishers pocket. This also means the publisher makes more money at 53%+ discount, than they do for say 48-50%. If you make more money at 53+%, what’s the incentive to sell at a 48-50% discount?
      It’s not a perfectly good scenario.

      • When the publisher is making a deal they are not doing it based on trying to cheat the author out of a higher royalty. They are generally going with standard terms that the specific account would get. Each publisher uses their own threshold for what the deep discount clause is and ours is much higher than 53%.
        And there are many times when the publisher is selling the books at a 70% discount which is far higher than normal as well.

    • But this is not a perfectly good scenario, unless the author’s royalty decrease is graduated. If it isn’t, with a 0.5% increase in discount a publisher can halve an authors royalties and pocket the money. The author and publisher are not both receiving less, in fact, the publisher can make MORE money by deep discounting.

      For example: At a 52.5% deep discount point, there is no incentive to discount between 48-53% as the publisher share is less than it is outside this range.
      So to make it easy let’s say a $10 print book, with 10% author royalties. At 52.5% discount: author makes $1, publisher makes $3.75 ($10×47.5%-author’s $1). But at 53% (deep discount), author now makes 10% of NET = $0.47, publisher makes $4.23.
      A 13% increase in publisher revenue simply by changing the discount by 0.5%.

      • I’m not trying to do the math here for every possible scenario. But let’s see what happens at a 65% discount. The publisher is receiving only $3.50 less the author royalty of $.35 based on 10% of net.. So from the remaining $3.15 the author is paying for the manufacturing, distribution, overhead, etc….. There are reasons for these clauses. And there are accounts that get even more than 65% discount.

  12. There are very many “good scenarios if not abused” facets of publishing. However, I’ve seen too many abuses over the years to easily believe publishers will do something just because they should.

    • If it is in the contract it will be used.
      If it can be used it will be abused.

      Applies to contract clauses as much as technology.

      Where there is a will there is a way.

  13. “These dinosaurs will die before they evolve.”

    Somehow that finish left me longing for the sudden appearance of a literary asteroid. 🙂

    • The dinos didn’t die overnight when their nemesis hit.
      It took time for the ecological change to weed them out. At one point some of them actually sighed in relief that the disrupted ecosystem had stabilized and soon the old status quo would soon return.

    • “Somehow that finish left me longing for the sudden appearance of a literary asteroid.”

      Isn’t self-publishing the Chicxulpub? 😉

      • Kindle 1 was the impact.
        Indiepub is the firestorm that came from the impact.
        The ecological change is still rippling all over. The end of omerta is just the latest in an ongoing series of repercussions. With more to come.

  14. Steve, you write: “When the publisher is making a deal they are not doing it based on trying to cheat the author out of a higher royalty.”

    You may want to ask the Harlequin 4 per-centers about that. I’d say carving out a wholly owned subsidiary in Europe to take 50% of e-book net is done entirely to make sure athors don’t get the amounts contracted as royalties. Ask Ann Voss Peterson.

    • I’ve commented on the Harlequin case before and I agree with you 100%. Just like I think that big companies in general should not be allowed to shift assets overseas to avoid paying tax here. It’s not right.

    • My point I’m trying to make is that there is a reason that publishers have deep discount clauses. When they are being used it’s generally not to increase a discount from 52% to 53%…..it’s normally 50% to 60% or higher. You should negotiate the rate where the deep discount kicks in. It shouldn’t be 52%…get the most you can. But if the publisher is going to get very very little from the sale on this title, they have to pay the author a smaller royalty too. When people here are jumping on the bandwagon and just saying the deep discount is awful….it’s not awful if applied properly and used in the right manner which is to get a sale made into a special account that will make the book available to more readers.

      • ” But if the publisher is going to get very very little from the sale on this title, they have to pay the author a smaller royalty too.”

        What everyone is up in arms about is that the publishers pay a lower royalty ‘percentage’ when playing their deep discount games.

        If you were getting $3 when they sell a book at $10 — would you be okay with only ten cents if they ‘deep discount’ it to $4?

        • It’s not a game we’re playing. We’re talking about giving away most of the margin on the book when we sell to an account that is getting an enormous discount. There are going to be times when the author is getting a net receipt amount that isn’t much different from what the publisher is getting after the costs of manufacturing and distribution. From what I’ve seen here, I thought most of you were primarily ebook authors and this wouldn’t apply at all…but for the rest of you, you should simply negotiate the highest threshold for the deep discount to apply. Publishers are not going to deliberately sell to an account at a higher discount to avoid paying you a full royalty.

          • “It’s not a game we’re playing.”

            It’s always been a game, Steve, a game of seeing what they can get away with.

            The first part of the game was always ‘overpricing’ each book, the better the bookstore be able to claim they were giving the customer a ‘sale’ on said book.

            And since you brought up ebooks, let’s take a gander at those games, shall we? Please remember that this is something that they are already (for no known good reason) pay lower royalties on. Marking them up past paperbook prices was done for two reasons. One was to try to prop up their paper sales — which isn’t working very well. The second (and here’s where your ‘gaming’ comes in) is when they do drop the ebook prices those ebooks will be considered ‘deep discount’. This on a product that costs them nothing after it’s ‘made ready’ (maybe edited and a quick bit of cover art) for sale.

            It’s all a game, and always has been. The only difference is that sites like this one allow writers (and writers to be) see some of the pitfalls before falling into one.

            • Publishing is a business and not a game. Publishers have millions and millions of dollars invested in their businesses. It’s not a matter of seeing what they can get away with. Contracts have always been a negotiation and that’s why bigger authors have better contracts and the same holds true for any business.

              Publishers never overpriced a book for bookstores. I don’t know where you’re getting that sort of information from. Not all bookstores discount books either; it’s up to them.

              I don’t know of publishers that deep discount ebook prices. Share some examples of a major publisher that does this even if you want to do it privately. We have never considered an ebook a deep discount. Publishers also do not mark up the price of an ebook higher than the print book. This is happening at the retail level because retailers can discount the printed book but now with agency they can’t discount the ebook. So if they discount the print price to a very low margin, which normally wouldn’t be sustainable with a physical store, it makes the price lower than the ebook. This is not being done by the publisher. And ebooks do not cost the publisher nothing. This is a huge misconception. When we’ve paid an author an advance and print sales have dropped while ebook sales have taken a share of the market; publishers are amortizing their investment over another format. It is definitely not free. Digital imprints where advances aren’t given are a different matter and with that your comment would be more appropriate.

  15. “Publishers have millions and millions of dollars invested in their businesses.”

    No, ‘Stockholders’ have millions and millions of dollars invested in ‘the publishing’ businesses.

    And they want as much of a return on their investment as quickly as possible. If that means gaming the writers’ contracts and playing other games to do it — they will.

    “And ebooks do not cost the publisher nothing. This is a huge misconception.”

    Really? Do those ebooks cost ‘so much more’ to edit/cover/set-up that they require a ‘lower’ royalty percentage than paper/hard books? You have to do all those things to get your paper/hardback books ready for the presses as well. And unlike having to do more print runs if a book sells out, the ebook has a couple ‘one time’ costs and then the rest is pure profit.

    “When we’ve paid an author an advance and print sales have dropped while ebook sales have taken a share of the market; publishers are amortizing their investment over another format.”

    An advance which is less and less we keep hearing, but still doesn’t explain the big royalty differences between ebooks/pbooks — which is why so many writers are turning indie — 70% royalties beats 25% or less of whatever the publisher claims they actually got from selling it.

    You seem to be right as far as you go, though to be honest it looked more to me like you were just trying to get the high score at buzz-word double-speak bingo …

  16. At a certain point I stop my part of the discussion like when I’m being told I’m using double speak lingo. But as a matter of fact, my company is privately owned and millions and millions have been invested by my family. We are not a big 5 publisher but we are one of the larger publishers of romance and the largest in westerns. We are also probably the largest privately owned mass market publisher.

    I’m not getting into the debate over royalties as it has been discussed enough times here already. Contrary to what you say the biggest authors are not going indie. There are several authors that have done very well and that is great but the big NYT authors are not moving to self publishing. They still want an advance, print distribution which in their case will be hundreds of thousands of copies, and the services that a publisher has to offer.

    I will now out of the conversation now since I think we will start going round and round.

  17. Most of us, yes, are indie or hybrid published. That doesn’t mean we never produce print books, and indie no longer means e-books-only.

    What the argument boils down to is that when a publisher does an e-book version of a book they already intend to produce in print, the MARGINAL costs of doing the e-book are virtually nil. And this makes the 25%-35% royalty hard to understand. That said, publishers ARE making e-versions of some books on par with the print version, and even slightly higher. If you have the time to look back on comments to other posts, you’ll find many examples quoted and “I didn’t buy the e-book because…” statements made.

  18. We publish many hybrid authors and have many indie authors that submit material to us each week. However, most indie books are primarily ebook only or the print component is POD, which is a totally different animal and with a very small distribution.

    When a publisher acquires the book, the ebook is part of the entire publishing program. Our offer is based on the distribution we’re expecting to sell in print and ebook based on prior numbers from that author or from a comparative author. Every publisher has access to bookscan sales as well as ebook sales of books that were from traditional publishing houses….so we have a pretty good idea of what we expect to distribute. So it’s not a matter of the cost being marginal for the ebook. It’s part of the entire profit and loss when we make our offer. The cost of the advance is spread over the total distribution of the book in print and digital.

    The ebook versions form publishers should not be higher than the print versions. I’d like to see examples of new titles that are like that. Because of Agency pricing, there are indeed examples of books being similarly priced between the print and digital format. I don’t happen to agree with that pricing structure and our digital books are priced lower than the print book….but that is the publisher’s decision and the consumer’s decision as to if they want to pay that price.
    I know there are many quotes here where people say I wouldn’t buy that book because it was more than $9.99, yada yada yada, but you’re also talking to a group that are primarily indie published and who continually praise the advantages of the low prices of KDP. I think we have to keep in mind that most bestsellers are sold at traditionally higher prices but I do agree that ebooks should be lower priced than print books.

  19. Allen, you write: “Sorry for wasting your time and the time of all TPV readers…”

    I don’t believe it’s necessary to insult Steve or suggest he’s somehow above the rest of us or stating more than his informed opinion. Slinging snark is not what I’m about when I visit TPV. I’d hope in this age of terrible stuff happening outside the writing world, we could treat each other with more respect.

    • But I ‘did’ waste your time — and your time to reply, wrong of me.

      Just staying on TPV links it’s still amazing reading, currently going through:

      http://www.thepassivevoice.com/2014/01/why-authors-and-trad-pub-dont-reveal-authors-earnings/#comment-162474

      led me to still more (good thing PG fixed those links he played with the other day! 😉 )

      • It’s only a waste of my time if someone didn’t listen to both sides of a discussion. There are obviously plenty of people here that do. In reading the comments in the link that you so generously dug up from two years ago, I was glad to see that there were authors that are published with us still or were published with us in the past that did come online to say good things. Not every author is happy with their publisher; that happens. But some of the comments were just absolutely ludicrous, like the comment that I need an editor because I had a typo in my response.
        Also, just so people know….there have been many many authors that write to me privately asking about reversion of their rights and I always respond to them immediately. If the book isn’t selling and we don’t have inventory I have generally agreed to reversion, even if it wasn’t due. There was one author who was afraid to comment because she though I might not give her rights back…..I don’t punish authors, that’s not the way I work. I’m as straight forward as you’re going to find. There’s no bull from me. You posted the article with Joe Konrath which was a very good discussion and went on and on for about a week. At least Joe was respectful and we debated intelligently. We don’t have to see eye to eye, but we had a good conversation and there was tremendous response to it. I have nothing to hide, no agenda and I’m just here to give my two cents and sometimes correct things that I know are totally way off base. That happens, it’s the internet.
        The comments as to what’s going on at Kensington if the CEO can spend all this time online are also ludicrous. Thank you for the person who mentioned I used to post on Genie. In fact we currently publish an author that I met from the AOL Writer’s Den, John Gilstrap. We probably met 20 years ago online. I go to conferences, speak on panels and have been the guest speaker at the Long Island RWA meeting and always enjoy doing so. Being the CEO of a company is more than just running numbers all day. It’s about dealing with readers and writers as well. My email address is on our website and I reply to every email that is sent to me. Anyhow, goodnight to all.

      • Hey Deb? Reading that link tells me two things. One it that Seven most likely expects negative feedback from his posts here; and two, I’m a rank amateur at snark compared to what’s on that link! (Marc was having a field day with him!)

        But it was a waste asking to see the types of basic contracts his company hands out or any other proof of what he says, nor does anything seemed to have changed in his outlook at/of indie/self-pub writers in the past two years — perhaps because he believes what he says, perhaps because the truth would not do his company (or trad-pub itself) any good …

        (still reading through that link, though I should have started a scorecard for the number of strike/counter-strike/knock-downs it has going in it …)

        • Allen take everything as gospel that you read there. Anytime when you’re ready to become a traditionally published author I’d be happy to put you in touch with any major agent in NYC that we have dealt with or any of our current authors to let them explain what it’s like to be published by Kensington. In fact, maybe TPV would like to do a series in talking with agents and currently published authors from major publishers to see what their publishing experience is like.

          If you want to think Marc had a field day with me, that’s fine. I can handle it. Let me know how the score card comes out. And btw, to use one of the comments from that link….you could use an editor because my name is Steven, not Seven. 🙂

          Enjoy, I think we’ve had enough correspondence with each other.

          • Didn’t mean to miss the ‘t’, and when the screen refreshed I saw you’d ‘already’ said goodnight …

            ETA

            And I always need several beta readers before bothering the editor with it!

    • You would think, right? Thank you Deb.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.