|
Post by strangewind on Feb 14, 2008 13:18:57 GMT -5
I just want to make another attempt to persuade kouter. POD is not something you should be skeptical of, at all. The jury is very much in, and it works.
Think of it this way: If you KNEW that you could turn a profit on and sell 3,000 books, how many would you print? 3,000 or 10,000?
That's all POD does. Although the per book print rate is somewhat higher if you print 3,000, the total cost is much less than if you print 10,000.
MLP takes advantage of the margins on POD as do a huge number of small publishing houses.
In fact, I'd say that POD is not at all innovative on the part of MLP. What is innovative is what POD allows MLP to do - restructure the contract system between author and publisher.
In a traditional contract system, the publisher guesses what the book will sell, hoping for a certain minimum (say 5000 units, or 10000 units or more). They pay an "advance" based on that speculation. If the book exceeds expectations, the author begins receiving royalties, but gets no bonus for exceeding expectations. If the book falls short, the author keeps the advance and the publisher is on the hook for the shortfall.
MLP's approach evens the field, strangely, for both publisher and author. The author gets a much higher royalty, so if the book exceeds expectations, that author will benefit FAR more than if he'd gone with a traditional system. On the publisher side, the risk is lowered.
In short, the publisher has a better shot at breaking even and the author (if he's good, and a good marketer) has a better shot at making higher margins per unit.
The only thing POD does is lower the cost of entering the market.
MLP is an innovation in relationship, not in technology or process.
If MLP were to fail (God forbid) it won't be because of POD. And when MLP succeeds (God willing) it will be because of the new business model it presents.
This isn't the first time I've heard those "POD, Internet-only" objections. The problem is that those objections miss the point.
MLP is different, but it is a good different. It is a kind of different that is much more in line with modern business practices than the rest of the publishing industry (whose last major innovation in business model came about due to a fellow named Guttenberg).
I'll give you an example - of the last five books I've read, all five were ones I found online through various blogs (one I heard of first at Where the Map Ends). Only one of those did I go to a bookstore to pick up, but I could have more easily done it through Amazon.
So, certainly, MLP will miss those rare souls who only shop in brick and mortar stores. But they'll make up for it in money not spent on useless inventory. Certainly, MLP will pay a little more per inventory item but they'll make up for it in money not spent on useless inventory AND in money not spent on overly optimistic advances.
Humor me. Would you rather hire a guy who paints your house and charges you a little more per paint bucket, but only charges you for the buckets he uses, or would you rather hire a guy who gives you a discount per bucket, but charges you for a set inventory of buckets he doesn't use? Conversely, if you are the painter, would you rather be paid a chunk of money in advance to be counted against your hourly rate in the future, or would you like to be paid a higher overall hourly rate?
Please correct me if I'm wrong about this assessment, Jeff. I'm truly an outside observer only. Sorry for all the word problems!
But the model makes so much sense it hurts my brain and my pride that I never thought of it.
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Feb 14, 2008 19:56:05 GMT -5
Oy that painting analogy was all whack yo! ;D But I understand what you're trying to say. Yes POD has advantages and I think Jeff's use of WTME as a initial magnet is a good strategy.
One downside of POD however is the price and the stigma POD has due to cheesy online vanity publishers. I don't know about you guys but when i'm on amazon and I see a paperback selling for $21.99 and published by Lulu or Author house, I'm thinking there's a 99% chance that its a rough, amateurish, un-edited pile of mess crammed into a glossy cover. I'm not going to pay twice the price of a normal book for the same quality of stuff I can read for free off the internet.
The major challenge I see for MLP is to differential itself from these POD "turkeys" out there. So long as the editing and Quality control is there to produce a high quality product I dont think there will be a problem, but perhaps that's something that can be highlighted for the MLP site so that when people see it, they know its a _real_ publisher and not some book maker for hire operation. Not that it doesn't do that already, but just something to be conscious of.
The other downside, for the writer and maybe its just me perhaps, is that psychological difference between a POD and a Traditional publisher. Seeing that first book published, validation that you haven't been wasting years of your life, ect ect. Jeff talks about this in both MLP and WTME. The fantasy of being published and selling millions of copies and putting yourself on easy street so that you no longer have to work but just write write write. Sounds nice eh? With the POD model this seems an even greater inporbablilty. But I think from Jeff's experience he knows that that dream is pretty much an illusion. I must say that I was pretty disheartened to read how little Jeff has made from his 6 (traditionally) published novels.
I guess it boils down to why you write and I think Jeff addresses this pretty well in Tip #1. With this in mind perhaps the MLP model is the way to go for sure. Maybe I'm just suffering from a little, "it sounds too good to be real" syndrome. Afterall, MLP is the only publisher in existence that publishes exclusely the exact stuff that I love to write. Its actually kinda mind boggling when you think of it like that.
Thanks again Jeff for starting this venture. I just hope my work is quality enough to someday be considered for submission to MLP and hopefully aid in making it grow into success.
~Kirk
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Feb 15, 2008 9:17:53 GMT -5
You guys make my day every day.
Love the discussion. Thank you.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by rwley on Feb 15, 2008 9:34:00 GMT -5
Hi Kirk, and Jeff and everybody else;
I'm going to throw my 2 cents worth in, just because I can. I've had personal experience with POD publishers. My first novel which came out last fall and does not fit into the MLP's genre structure, was picked up and published by PublishAmerica. If you are at all familiar with POD, I'm sure you've heard of them. I did not pay them anything. They did some editing, I did some and I would have benefitted from some additional editing, but I didn't do it, and they designed the book cover. They do NO marketing. I have to do it all. Spring Arbor, a distributor, did pick up my book and book stores can order it through them. Amazon and B&N both carry it.
Is it a literary masterpiece that so far no one has discovered? No. It's a good book, at least I've been told by those who have read it. Would I have preferred to go some other route? Yes. I don't have the contacts, time, money etc to pursue an agent who can pursue a publisher who can pursue a great marketing strategy. Have I made any money? Ask me in March when I get my first royalty check.
I have a second book in production right now with a more traditional publisher. It's non-fiction, and the publisher is Tate Publishing in OK. They pay a higher royalty rate than many other traditional publishers, but they asked for an "author contribution" of nearly $4000 up front. I didn't have it, but my mother, God bless her, believes enough in me that she put it up. When my book sells 5000 copies, that money is given back to the author, in this case to Mom. They design, edit, layout, market, all of it. The editing process is much more extensive than the process I went through with PA; and I believe the finished product will be a much higher quality product as well. I've heard negative things about Tate as well. We have all heard that if a publisher asks for money up front, they're not legitimate, no ifs, ands or buts, and we should all just run the other way. I don't know it that's really true or not. I read the contract completely, several times before I ever signed it. So far, I'm happy.
All that to say this; publishing is a rough world. It's hard to break into it, it's hard to make a living at it; but I don't care. I write. I have stories to tell that I want people to read. I don't care if I ever sell a million copies of anything. I, too hope to have some projects that will be quality enough for MLP over the next few years. I love this stuff, and I love what Jeff is doing. I was so excited when I found WTME and got in early on the newsletter for MLP. I believe the plan he has laid out will work, both for him as the publisher and for his authors. I actually think it will be bigger than even he can imagine, because God will bless the efforts to spread His Word in whatever manner it takes.
No one thought Tolkien would be as popular as he is. They were children's stories for goodness' sake. Same with Narnia. And Narnia is much more blatantly Christian than LOTR. The Word will get out. Jeff is just offering one more method for reaching a lost and dying world with the Good News in a form they can understand.
Okay, I've had my say. I don't know if it's even worth the 2 cents, but there it is.
Robi
|
|
|
Post by strangewind on Feb 15, 2008 10:17:24 GMT -5
I agree that MLP will have to fight some stigma against POD perception, but I bet you'd be amazed at how many quality published, normal POD books you have on your own shelf today. Also, large print runs don't necessarily mean quality packaging.
Furthermore, and here's the key: the majority of customers of MLP will not know...and will not care if they do know... that the book is published POD. All they'll know is that they ordered it online. The book they get will look like a book, it'll read like a book, and its going to resell like a book.
By the time someone is finished reading a MLP book and passes it along or resells it at a used book store, no one will ever know, care, or think about the publishers "back end" processes.
I think it is writers like us who have the strongest concerns about POD, but it isn't POD that is really the problem. The real problems are the traps of self-publishing and vanity press.
If you see a shoddy, unedited book available online, there's a good chance that its problems are due to an unscrupulous vanity press or a lazy self-published author, not the POD process as concept. Its also important to note that, when done well, self-publishing results in just as high quality of a book product as through traditional publishing. There are numerous self-published novels that have gone on to become successful.
In terms of reputation, everyone in publishing (at least Christian publishing) knows Jeff or can find out about him pretty easily. MLP is going (and fact already does) to look like a respectable small publisher with a twist on the relationship model...because that is what it is going to be.
I really thing think that making sales won't be a challenge for MLP because of its model. Making sales will be a challenge because selling books is hard. If MLP has a book that sells a thousand copies...heck, even 500, that's going to be HUGE. I don't think it would be disingenuous for MLP to, at least for starters, mark its in-house "bestseller" status at 350. [caveat: I'm sort of pulling the numbers out of the air for illustration, so take them with a grain of salt.]
MLP is, like any other publisher, still going to be relying on one out of ten (or twenty, or whatever) of its books to be something of a "breakout" hit (say, maybe selling 3000+ copies) to help keep the company in the black, but its advantage is, once again, that it lowers its own risk on the front end by lowering the author reward on the front end. Of course MLP does run the risk on the back end. If it has a runaway bestseller, they'll be paying out a lot of gross in royalties, but I think that would be a lovely problem to have.
Keep in mind that there are many fairly well-marketed books from mass publishers that do not sell 500 or 1000 copies.
To the average reader, as long as the cover art on the books is top flight and the bindings don't come undone (and Jeff has way too much experience to let either of those things be overlooked), MLP will have a reputation more similar to Gray Wolf Press, or a small university press (although specializing in genre) than it will to the dicey reputations of "pay to play" publishers.
I say this with respect, but the POD concerns, in my opinion, do not apply. That isn't to say that Jeff won't have to explain it (far more knowledgably and eloquently than I ever will) for a while longer until MLP has product in the street. Once the books are out, I think this POD concern (for lack of a better term) will evaporate.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Feb 18, 2008 9:02:58 GMT -5
I don't know, Strangewind, you do it pretty eloquently!
Great discussion, you guys.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by Kristen on Feb 23, 2008 22:25:32 GMT -5
Using POD for this venture is genius, because MLP is targeting a microniche. Traditional publishing works great if you're selling a million copies of whatever Oprah's reading this week. But when you take a niche market like Christian fiction and then narrow it down further to Christian Spec-Fic, you're talking about a relatively small percentage of the book-buying population.
On a traditional press, the smaller the print run, the greater the cost per volume, and vice versa. In POD, the cost per volume is constant. Traditional printing methods are inefficient for small quantities. POD is ideal for small print runs.
Now if Oprah picks up one of MLP's books, then Jeff better line up a traditional printer, because there is a point above which the price per volume on a traditional press would drop below that of the POD printer.
Besides, when you're dealing with a microniche, getting the product into the hands of the people who want it is the key. The only sure way to do that is through targeted marketing, as Jeff mentioned earlier, on sites in the same microniche. That's far more efficient than sticking the novels in a big-box book store with a million other books and hoping the right reader walks by.
Is that 2 cents or 4? I lost track ...
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Feb 24, 2008 1:31:04 GMT -5
And of course, while I agree that it is a microniche in the CBA market, I have to wonder just how many fans of spec fic are Christian, and have been going to the secular market because they are the only ones offering something close to what they want to read. If MLP and other alternative sources take off, we might see that microniche grow exponentially.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Feb 25, 2008 8:53:57 GMT -5
May it be according to the words of your mouth.
0:-)
|
|
|
Post by Divides the Waters on Feb 27, 2008 1:54:32 GMT -5
I've assembled quite the list of self-published or tiny-press efforts at spec fic from a Christian point of view (and a number of out-of-print efforts, as well). I'm thinking that a label devoted to solely that audience will be a welcome thing indeed.
|
|
|
Post by myrthman on Feb 27, 2008 2:19:47 GMT -5
New guy chiming in here.
What is POD? All I can think of is the not-so-popular-anymore Christian hard rock band or something slimy out of one of our books that we love so much to read and write.
|
|
|
Post by rwley on Feb 27, 2008 3:20:41 GMT -5
If I may; and sorry, Jeff, if I'm stepping on your toes here, and please correct me if I'm wrong. POD is Print On Demand. The publisher will only print the books as they are requested; either by a bookstore or an author or an individual reader. The POD publisher does not print a run of, say 10,000 copies and then do a mass distribution to all its client bookstores, etc. It is what is says. Prints each book on demand from a reader. I think I got it right. Robi
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Gerke on Feb 27, 2008 9:12:55 GMT -5
You did, Robi. Myrthman, think of POD publishing as the inkjet printer attached to your PC. But when you hit Print, a few loose pages don't come out--a whole bound book comes out. POD printing takes the electronic files for a book's cover, innards, fonts, etc., and spits out a finished book. Robi is right that the distinctive of POD is that you print only the number of copies of a book that you need right then. Regular publishers print tens of thousands of units and ship them to warehouses. POD eliminates that by printing out exactly how many you need (based on how many orders you have, for instance) and shipping them directly to the consumer. I'm using LightningSource ( www.lightningsource.com) for my POD printing needs. Check 'em out for more information on POD. Jeff
|
|
|
Post by kouter on Feb 27, 2008 21:05:15 GMT -5
I've been doing some more research on the POD model for publishing and I think i'm now fully convinced this is the only way to go for Christian Spec-Fiction.
I'm just glad God equipped someone like Jeff with all the skills, experience, ability and drive to put something like MLP together. Else I'd probably still be pursuing the usual Agent->rejectionx100->book deal(maybe)->big ado about nothing premire->big let down in sales and recognition route. Either that or self publishing which I have no interest in taking on.
All I have to do now is just sit back and wait for Jeff to fall in love with my novel and publish it!! ;D (No pressure Jeff!)
LOL J/k
I'll just keep working and praying that my work will someday be the quality MLP is looking for.
Keep it up Jeff!
~Kirk
|
|
|
Post by rwley on Feb 27, 2008 21:14:36 GMT -5
Yeah!!! A convert!!!
|
|