Don't Expect the "Truth" about Self-Publishing from Someone Who Runs a Vanity Press

Earlier this month, I told you about a scam called "Beneaththecover.com," which purports to offer authors inside news and expert advice about the publishing industry when, in fact, it's just a front for a bunch of vanity press and book promotion hucksters selling their wares.  This point was driven home the other day when one of their so-called "experts," vanity press publisher Yvonne DiVita, offered this outrageous lie in a post she had the chutzpah to title "POD Myths Dispelled - Get The Scoop Here":

In today’s emerging digital world, if you truly want to attract that big name publisher, use a professional POD firm to self-publish because the big name publishers are watching.

The best way to attract a publisher is to write a good book, not blow thousands of dollars having it printed in POD form by a vanity press. If anything, printing your book in POD is more likely to prevent a publisher from taking you or the book seriously.

DiVita is one of a pack of POD vanity press hucksters who prey on the gullibility, desperation, and ignorance of aspiring authors. She argues that vanity presses aren't merely printers but real publishers because they pay more attention to their authors than real publishers do.  What she neglects to mention is that vanity presses like hers make the vast majority of their money off their authors, not from booksales, and that all that attention they slather on their clients (not authors, ladies and gentlemen, clients)  is to convince them to spend even more on their worthless services.  She writes:

IF authors don’t sell enough books with their publisher, POD or otherwise, the author isn’t trying hard enough. I’ve worked with traditional publishers, and they require an extensive marketing plan from authors before they will consider publication. And research shows that books published by traditional publishers sell around 150-300, on average.

That's right, blame the author for the fact that their POD vanity press books aren't sold in stores and are unlikely to sell to anyone but the client... and then back it up with pointless "facts."

I've had over two dozen books published by real publishers. No editor has ever asked me for an "extensive marketing plan" before considering my books.I've also asked a few published friends...and they have never been asked for marketing plans, either. But they are novelists, and perhaps they would be asked for one if they wrote non-fiction. So let's give DiVita the benefit of the doubt and say publishers want marketing plans along with non-fiction book proposals. To which I say... So what?  How is that a persuasive argument for going to vanity-press instead of a real publisher? You'll need a marketing plan either way. The key difference is that a real publisher will pay you and a vanity press will ask for your credit card number.

I've scoured the web and I can't find any "research" that backs up her outrageous claim that most books published by genuine publishers sell only 150-300 copies.

The closet statistic I could find to her numbers was a 2004 Bookscan study that tracked sales of 1.2 million books sold that year. According to their figures, the average book of any kind published in 2004 sold 500 copies. The study noted that only 25,000 titles sold more than 5,000 copies each, 500 sold more than 100,000 copies and only ten sold more than a million copies. But the figures are controversial, because the sales were not broken down by genre, like fiction or non-fiction, nor did they differentiate between titles from large publishers or small ones, traditional publishers or vanity presses.

But lets pretend her figures are right. How is that an argument for going to a vanity press? Authors published by real publishers whose books only sold 500 copies in 2004 were still paid to be published.  They earned money, though not as much as they'd hoped.

By comparison, most vanity press authors will lose money because they paid to be published. But don't take my word for it, let's look at the 2004 sales figures from iUniverse, the biggest name in self-publishing:

18,108: Total number of titles published

792,814: Number of copies printed

14: Number of titles sold through B&N's bricks-and-mortar stores (nationally)

83: Number of titles that sold at least 500 copies

Out of 18,000 titles and nearly 800,000 copies printed, only 83 authors sold more than 500 copies. Good God. Think of all the money that authors lost ...and how much iUniverse made. That's the business that DiVita is in...and it's a profitable one. For the printer, not the author. 

So what is the truth about POD self-publishing companies? It's obvious. Vanity presses are in the "author services business", not the publishing business which, in a rare bit of candor, even DiVita concedes on her vanity press website:

Windsor Media Enterprises specializes in author services. We  offer idea development, manuscript critiquing, editing, proofreading, formatting and cover design, for new and existing authors.

And for that, they charge you a price and that's how they make their money. That is their business. And if your book,  by some miracle, manages to sell a few copies, they make a little more. 

A vanity press will tell you any lie they can to convince you that they are real publishers (when they are merely selling editing and printing services), that self-publishing is the route most successful authors take (it's not), and that you have as much of a chance to sell books with them as you do going with a traditional publisher (you don't).

Is Yvonne DiVita really someone qualified to give writers sound advice? Or is she someone with a clear conflict-of-interest hoping to coerce naive authors into buying her product? The answer is obvious, and it came right from the founders of Beneaththecover.com  when they tried to solicit my brother Tod into being one of their experts:

Beneath the Cover is a cooperative venture for building marketing platforms of everyone involved.

That's what should be written on the masthead of their home page, not "Where book industry professionals who know almost everything go to discuss news, insights, and evolving industry issues." And it should be stated in big print on each and every piece of "advice" that they give.

Comments

[Richard S. Wheeler]

Bookscan covers about 70 percent of the book market. It obtains sales results from retailers such as WalMart and Costco and Barnes and Noble, but does not cover sales made through distributors such as Anderson News and the Levy Company, which stock the grocery and drug store and airport racks. That means most mass-market sales are not recorded by BookScan. If commercial publishers in New york sold only 150 to 300 copies on the average, they would be out of business. To put matters in perspective, one of my mass market titles, Badlands, sold over 80,000 copies net.

[Mary Schmidt]

"DiVita is one of a pack of POD vanity press hucksters who prey on the gullibility, desperation, and ignorance of aspiring authors."

Mr. Goldberg, three things:

1. Would you slam DiVita to her face? One of the good rules of conduct in blogging is to write what you would say to someone's face.

2. I'm not gullible, desperate or ignorant - and I may "self-publish" more than one book this year. Why? Marketing. And, thanks to the Web World, I don't have to jump through traditional publishing hoops to get my work out there.

3. Be careful in quoting snips from someone's blog post. Taking things out of context and then slamming them is misleading, to say the least.

As Yvonne (who - yes - is a friend of mine) noted in her post, "I will be the first person to admit that not all POD publishers are created equal. Some are more reputable than others. Some offer more services than others. Some call themselves publishers when they are really just printers. And some go above and beyond in service to their authors. So, please, don’t think we all use “duct tape and coat hanger wire” to create your book. We don’t."

Just as there is a huge difference in authors and their books (Example: Michael Cunningham and The Hours versus writing television series adaptations) so there are differences in POD. Just as you label Yvonne a "huckster" - in reviewing your credits, I could label you a "hack."

[Dan Williams]

Thanks again, Lee, for this well-researched even deeper discussion of some statements of certain vanity press groups that seem to be quite misleading for the unwary authors who pay to have their books published. If 18,000 books were published by iUniverse in 2004, and if they netted $1,000 per book, then they earned over $18 million dollars. Meanwhile how much did the authors earn? No where near that amount.

But two things are bothering me. First, suppose a vanity press group did not mislead an author? Suppose all the statistics were shown upfront, all the costs, all the risks. In other words, no scam was involved. In such a case, can self-publishing or POD work for a particular writer? If you offered your own books as ebooks, paid for on-line by credit card, and downloaded to the client's laptop, and let's say you did very well with sales of !00,000 -- is this not a legit use of the technology? And is it not better than making the reader go to a bookstore and loading up on 20 physical books when they could be on a hard drive? I don't know the answers. These are just questions I'm turning around in my mind.

Secondly, it just seems there's something not quite right with the publishing world. It's hard to get an agent, if not impossible. There seems to be an awful lot of "commercial" books published that really aren't of very high quality. And the average person can't do anything about it. Therefore, could these be some of the reasons for the increasing use of the vanity press? Could the Publishing World provide the same services and run it all as an ebook download for unestablished writers? (Because maybe the Publishing World is not meeting the aspirations of an awful lot of writers who are turning to the vanity press.)

Anyway, your exposee performs a real public service. It could emailed to Members of Congress to get their take on it. Me? I'm still recovering from the freezing rain we had yesterday. Your life was in danger if you just took one step forward.

[Lee Drake]

Hmm, while there are certainly POD companies that do take advantage of inexperienced authors are you saying that there are no services that Yvonne offers that are of value to a new author? That all authors show up on publishers doorsteps with their precious "first book" that is in perfect shape and ready-for-publication?

Yvonne believes (and many other people do too) that the internet will fundamentally change how books, music and other media are published, purchased and consumed. If you don't believe this then you're hiding under a rock.

I think you're underestimating the impact that POD will have in the next few years. It's a serious threat to both books-and-mortar atores, and to publishers in general - and they'll fight it tooth and nail no doubt. Publishers, like music producers, have had a lock on what the public sees and buys because they control the advertising and marketing dollars and dissemination of the printed book as part of their stranglehold on authors. Do you believe that in your relationship with your publisher they are NOT extracting a huge amount of money from you to pay for those marketing, production and distribution costs? They don't demand it up front - they get it in the back end by paying you a pittance for each book they sell.

In the music world it's been easily shown that their equivalent of "print on demand" which is "download the mp3" CAN make an individual artist money - when they do a good job of promoting and selling their work. There are tons of music artists out there now who make all thier money through downloads. They don't need a music producer to "promote them" or their talents. And guess what - if they get famous enough that they do - well the producers are all clamoring for them to get contracts.

Why is POD any different? In the old days of real printing presses there was signficant setup costs to POD and they demanded you print and pay for a certain number of stocked books to make the cost of setup profitable for the. No longer so for POD - you can have just one book printed, or none until someone buys, and for the most part the cost to the provider is the same. POD <> Vanity press.

Are there still POD vanity presses out there that take advantage of authors - almost certainly. But lumping Yvonne in without knowing her and speaking with her authors is perhaps a bit of vitriolic misassignment of blame on your part.

You repeately point out in YOUR POST that Yvonne is straight up and unapologetic about how she makes her money - and that she doesn't pull punches or hide her goals. You then go on to describe her as a huckster. Hucksters lie. In my experience with Yvonne - she doesn't. Her points may certainly be argued but attacking her professional credibility and her ethics is not justified by the quotes you took.

I'd suggest that you owe Yvonne personally an apology, and that you consider responding in the future with a more reasoned approach backed by facts, and leave out the personal attacks.

[Jeremy Wright]

No offence, but it's odd that you question her "facts" while using only your subjective experience as a basis for your "facts".

Having had 2 books published by mainstream publishers (total of more than 100,000 copies sold worldwide, thanks), I'm biased towards them. Having seen dozes of friends land book contracts with "real" publishers (including Penguin, McGraw-Hill and O'Reilly) due directly to their POD (new term to me) books to me means that perhaps there's some truth.

Obviously Yvonne is espousing her viewpoint. She's a POD publisher and author and believes in it. She does it *because* she believes in it. In the same way, you've obviously considered POD books, but decided that mainstream publishing is the way you'd do your future books.

Fine.

But that doesn't make POD, or Yvonne, an idiot, liar, charlatan, etc. She's just someone trying to make the magic happen.

Anyways, it's Family Day here in Canada, and this vitriol isn't making me any smarter.

[Kristi Holl]

Thank you for continuing to blow the whistle on these phony "publishers." I'm about ready to cancel my subscription to WRITER'S DIGEST. I started counting the big colored ads in there for vanity and subsidy presses, and it makes me angry that they are helping their readers get duped.

[Phil Gerbyshak]

Lee - While I can't tell what your intentions are with this post, it's clear you've read only the headlines of Windsor Media and not dug deep. While I have not published with them, I have spent plenty of time talking to Yvonne and her team about one day partnering up to create a book I can be proud of. Some of the services WME offers includes blog coaching, editing, coaching, marketing help, connections to those who might be interested in your work, and much more. It's like getting a designer, an editor, a book coach, a blog coach, a PR firm, AND a book published, all in one.

I would agree that many of the firms like an iUniverse or an AuthorHouse may not be out for the best interests of the authors, but to lump WME in with this grouping is silly at best, ridiculous at worst.

Additionally, the non-fiction market is VERY different from the fiction market. If you don't have a platform, you're not getting published with a traditional publisher. Your platform gives the traditional house the comfort that you have a chance to sell enough books to earn your advance back. With such a glut of business books, many cost the publishers money, and they don't invest as much as they could on a marketing plan. Sure, 5 years down the road, when their backlist sells 10 copies of your book to your high school class president for giveaways at your reunion, you'll get your $5 in royalties.

Last point: in a traditional publishing house, the most money you will ever make is because of your advance. If you print on demand, you could potentially sell 500 copies of your book when you're out speaking at a profit of $3-$7 per book, vice $1 or potentially less per book if you went with the traditional house. Sure, you COULD get more exposure with the big house and sell more books, but how many books at Borders or your local B&N have a print date of 2004 or earlier? I'd guess few, if any.

If the bone you have to pick is with the POD (focusing on the PRINTING of your book), please put your attention there. You make some great points, but by personally attacking and lumping Yvonne DiVita and the team at WME in with the POD houses, you've lost any credibility you might otherwise have had with me, and no doubt with many others who would otherwise enjoy your work.

[Shel Holtz]

Lee, your diatribe would have a lot more credibility if it were backed up with accurate information. Sadly, it's not. It would have been had you taken a minute, picked up a phone, and spoken to Yvonne. Instead, you chose to make assumptions and present them as fact.

I have written five books, all published with legitimate publishers. (For the record, these are Ziff-David Press, AMACOM, Kaplan Publishing, and McGraw-Hill. My next book will be published by Jossey-Bass, a Wiley imprint.) Why do I mention this? Because for my current book and my last one, Yvonne has been my agent. That's right, Lee; she represents authors who publish with "real" publishers. I'm not sure how she can have that conflict of interest you allege when she's making money off of genuine advances and royalties.

Your inaccuracies don't end there, however. You write fiction, which means you are knowledgable about the FICTION publishing world. I write business books and every single proposal I have submitted was required by the publisher to include a marketing plan. Maybe that's not a requirement for novels. It most certainly is for non-fiction.

Also, I know many, many non-fiction authors who pay publicists to help move their books. Every agent I have had has recommended this based on the certain knowledge that if you're not Tom Peters or Malcolm Gladwell, the publisher will do little to publicize your book; you're filling out a catalog and marketing is up to you. That's a fact in the business book world. Knowing the fiction publishing business does not, evidently, make you an expert on the publishing business at large.

Finally, I would point out that the world of publishing is changing dramatically, regardless of how mired you are in the past. Take a look at Blurb.com and Lulu.com, where people are self-publishing -- and they can include their books in the bookstore, where some have achieved enviable sales (with solid content to support reader demand) -- all without a traditional publisher.

Bottom line, Lee: Yvonne (through Windsor Media) has represented me well with mainstream publishers, ironing out a lot of little issues in the publisher contract. She is fair and honest and did not deserve the attack you leveled against her...something you would have known if you had done an iota of research rather than shooting first and asking questions later....if at all.

[Cleta]

Holy cats!

If it walks like a cheating vanity press, talks like a cheating vanity press, and swindles people like a cheating vanity press, it must be--

In reading this entry, I was highly amused with the amount of similarities Mr. Goldberg has shown between Beneaththecover (Ms. DiVita) and the tripe PublishAmerica baits the unsuspecting aspiring writer with.

Even in my experience publishing short stories, I've gotten paid for that work, not the other way around.

[Steve Samson]

Lee Drake,

If Yvonne was "straight up" and "unapologetic about how she makes money" she wouldn't write bullshit like this -- "In today’s emerging digital world, if you truly want to attract that big name publisher, use a professional POD firm to self-publish because the big name publishers are watching." And if she was straight up she wouldn't dare call herself a publisher because she absolutely is not.

[Cleavon]

Lee you missed this gem from Yvonne in an earlier blog of hers entitled "Yes, Virginia, Self-Publishing is a Respectable Way to Go" --

"Like traditional publishers, we expect author participation in sales and marketing, but, unlike traditional publishers, we don’t desert our authors and expect them to “go it alone,” which we’ve seen happen again and again with big publishing houses.

So, Virginia, I understand your confusion and reluctance. Self-publishing is a risk, but, in the end, it’s a risk that most POD (Print On Demand) firms will partner with you on, and which you can manage far better than the risk of sending off the final result of your sweat and tears to a publishing house that has already moved on, once they have accepted your work."

You are so right Lee-- all of her advice seems aimed at convincing people that the best thing they can do for their career is to write her a check.

Like you said, when an author goes with a real publisher, the risk isn't with the author IT IS WITH THE PUBLISHER. When an author goes with a real publisher, the author GETS PAID UPFRONT. When an author goes with a real publisher, he gets all the editing services Yvonne's sells FOR FREE. When an author goes with a real publisher, the publisher doesn't expect them to go it alone, they have a sales force putting the book in stores nationwide.

I am not sure why you keep fighting these print-on-demand vanity presses, Lee. As far as I am concerned, anybody who gives them their money is an idiot who deserves to have their bank account emptied.

[Lee Goldberg]

Shel,

You wrote: "for my current book and my last one, Yvonne has been my agent. That's right, Lee; she represents authors who publish with "real" publishers. I'm not sure how she can have that conflict of interest you allege when she's making money off of genuine advances and royalties."

She's an agent AND runs a vanity press AND sells editing and promotional services? My God, talk about a raging conflict-of-interest. How can you not see that, Shel? It's shocking. I can't think of a single reputable, respected agent who also runs a vanity press operation...and I know a lot of agents.

I wonder how many of her clients she steers towards her vanity press... and how many of her authors were her vanity press clients first.

If, for example, she gets paid to publish an author's books through her vanity press AND also gets a commission acting as the author's agent when selling the sub-rights to outside parties, then she is double-dipping, which is highly unethical to say the least.

I will agree with you that print-on-demand is a technology that could change publishing. I have nothing against the technology, but I do have a problem with POD vanity presses that try to scam authors by claiming to be genuine publishers.

For the record, Shel, I know a thing or two about non-fiction as well.

My first book, UNSOLD TELEVISION PILOTS, was published when I was 18 years old by McFarland & Co, a very small publisher in Jefferson, NC.

What did they charge me to publish my non-fiction book? Not a penny.

What did *I* risk? Nothing.

What have I earned from the book? I have made well into six-figures in royalties, sub-rights sales, TV options, and writing & producing fees on two network specials (on CBS and ABC) based on the books.

Since then, I have written many non-fiction books and novels. Not once have I ever had to pay a penny to get them into print.

I even have some experience with print-on-demand -- iUniverse reprinted my early books UNSOLD TELEVISION PILOTS and MY GUN HAS BULLETS when they fell out-of-print and the rights reverted back to me.

What did it cost me to reprint them through iUniverse? Not a penny.

They were published for FREE through the Authors Guild's Back-in-Print program or I never would have done it.

Bottom line, you are throwing your money away going to a vanity press. Real publishers pay you, not the other way around. DiVita offers a printing service (and, apparently, agent represention!).
---------------
Phil,

You wrote: "Additionally, the non-fiction market is VERY different from the fiction market. If you don't have a platform, you're not getting published with a traditional publisher. Your platform gives the traditional house the comfort that you have a chance to sell enough books to earn your advance back."

I am familiar with the non-fiction market through personal experience with my books, like SUCCESSFUL TELEVISION WRITING.

In my opinion, the ONLY way going the vanity press route makes any financial sense is with a non-fiction title AND an existing platform for selling it.

For instance, if you are a sought-after motivational speaker, who regularly speaks to packed auditoriums, then having a book to sell in the lobby afterwards makes sense. Or if you teach a class and have a regular stream of students who can buy your work as "required text," then it can be lucrative (I've sold hundreds of copies of my traditionally published SUCCESSFUL TELEVISION WRITING at seminars and classes here and abroad). But without such a platform, you are doomed to failure, especially if you go the vanity press route.

So in that regard, the demands of self-publishing and traditional publishing are the same...and hardly an argument for going to a vanity press.

Lee

[Lee Goldberg]

Phil,

You wrote: "I would agree that many of the firms like an iUniverse or an AuthorHouse may not be out for the best interests of the authors, but to lump WME in with this grouping is silly at best, ridiculous at worst."

There is no discernible difference between what iUniverse is selling and the services that DiVita is offering, except that she probably charges a hell of a lot more for them.

Lee

[Lee Goldberg]

Mary,

You wrote:

"1. Would you slam DiVita to her face? One of the good rules of conduct in blogging is to write what you would say to someone's face."

Yes, I would. In fact, I posted my comments first on her blog before posting here.

You wrote:

"2. I'm not gullible, desperate or ignorant - and I may "self-publish" more than one book this year. Why? Marketing. And, thanks to the Web World, I don't have to jump through traditional publishing hoops to get my work out there. "

That makes no sense at all and it vividly shows your lack of experience and naivete about publishing.

If you are published by a real publisher, you have ALL the same marketing opportunities on the web that you would have going to a POD vanity press. What makes you think you would have *more*?

There are no "hoops" to jump through in traditional publishing "to get your work out there" that you won't face in the vanity press world. In fact it is far, far HARDER to "get your work out there" when it's published by a POD vanity press than a traditional publisher. Plus, with a vanity press, YOU have to pay for EVERYTHING, from printing through publicity.

And yes, you're right, Michael Cunningham is a far better writer than I am. But we share something in common. We didn't pay publishers, they paid US.

Lee

[Mark A. York]

Their so-called work isn't out there. That's the part they refuse to see. A pdf file wating to be printed isn't published. Even for free it sucks.

[k.o.]

Hmm. I'm bewildered by your post, Lee. Publishers' Weekly recently declared 2008 "the year of the author," and named Lulu.com, a self-publishing company, as one of the best ways for people to publish. Self-publishing and subsidy publishing are among Publishers' Weekly 2008 Top Trends -- and their list highlights big gains in using print-on-demand technology to target niche audiences.

Industry stats are readily available. Raintoday.com reports that the MEDIAN number of copies sold by a first-time author penned book is 5,000 (12,000 if you use a book agent), and the average author royalty if you sign with a big publishing house is $1 a book. Do the math. Woo-hoo. Don't expect to get rich.

Consider two additional limiting facts:
-- Less than 1 percent of manuscripts submitted to trade publishers are accepted.
-- Most authors have to hire and self-fund a book agent ANYHOW, especially if they hope to be picked up by a big publishing house.

More importantly, Lee, if you define success in terms of book sales, your thinking is myopic. A book helps build credibility, particularly for small business owners. Self publishing and subsidy publishing is a good alternative to a traditional publishing house. While you may not recover your investment in book sales, as a small business consultant with a book (even a self published or subsidized book) you may substantially increase your billable rates and speaker fees.

On a final note, hiring Yvonne does offer folks one irrefutable advantage. Unlike most book agents or big publishing houses, Yvonne is an expert at online marketing and SEO-PR -- and as such she can help folks effectively promote their books to search engines, delivering an captive audience far beyond friends and family.

[k.o.]

p.s. amazed you've been allowed to blog during the writers' strike. isn't that kinda like crossing the picket line? ;)

[Lee Goldberg]

K.O,

The Publishers Weekly article you refer to, "15 Trends to Watch in 2008," was actually an opinion piece by Mike Shatzkin, who isn't on the staff of the magazine (he is founder & CEO of the Idea Logical Company).

It was Shatzkin who called 2008 the year of the author, NOT Publisher's Weekly, and neither he nor the magazine cited Lulu as the best way for people to self publish.

What he wrote was predictions, and here is what he actually said, verbatim:

"5. Christmas 2008 will be the first one in which sales of customized books, enabled by the Internet and print-on-demand, will become substantial. Make-your-own books have been creeping into public consciousness for a couple of years: Apple has made it easy to produce one-off picture books and author-services sites like lulu.com have enabled author-generated books for some time. Travel book publishers have played with the concept. What is new is that technologies like SharedBook are moving make-your-own and assemble-your-own into consumer areas like food and sports. So far, this is outside the mainstream of the book business, but consumers will buy enough of these to create interest among publishers and online booksellers."

Hmm. Seems to me you miss-characterized not only who made the comments (Shatzkin rather than PW) but what was actually said. I'm sure it was an accident.

You wrote: "Consider two additional limiting facts:
-- Less than 1 percent of manuscripts submitted to trade publishers are accepted.
-- Most authors have to hire and self-fund a book agent ANYHOW, especially if they hope to be picked up by a big publishing house."

I don't know if that statistic is true, but let's say that it is. All it means is most of the manuscripts suck and are unsaleable. You would have to PAY someone to publish that slop. And that's where the vanity presses come it.

And here's the truth about agents, K.O. Authors don't "hire and self-fund" agents, at least not reputable ones. Legitimate agents charge authors NOTHING...no reading fees, no submission fees, NOTHING. The agents make their living off commissions on what their authors earn from advances and royalties...THAT is the agent's incentive to get authors great deals.

You have obviously been drinking the vanity press industry Kool Aid.

As far as the "Raintoday" numbers....from what I can gather, their report is based on interviews with 200 authors of business books, hardly representative of the business as a whole. And while I couldn't verify your figures, I found this:

(http://www.whillsgroup.com/pages/6932_how_many_copies_do_business_books_sell_.cfm)

//"We asked authors how many copies of their first business books sold. Here is some of the data we found:

4,500 Median number of copies sold of the first book that an author wrote where the author did not use a book publicity or marketing service

5,000 Median number of copies sold of the first book an author wrote where the author did not use a book agent

10,000 Median number of copies sold of the the first book an author wrote where the author did use a book publicity or marketing service

12,000 Median number of copies sold of the first book an author wrote where the author did use a book agent//

Book agents typically don't represent authors on vanity press deals because there's no commission in it for them (since vanity presses don't pay authors, authors pay them) and their clients will get screwed (vanity presses make most of their money from selling services to authors, not from selling books to the public).

You wrote: "Self publishing and subsidy publishing is a good alternative to a traditional publishing house. While you may not recover your investment in book sales, as a small business consultant with a book (even a self published or subsidized book) you may substantially increase your billable rates and speaker fees."

Anybody with a credit card can have anything printed as a POD book. It's hardly an accomplishment. It's no different than going to Kinkos. Your audience or clientele would have to be pretty stupid and unsophisticated to be impressed by that!

PS - The WGA Strike ended last week.

Lee

[Richard S. Wheeler]

I've just completed revisions to my novel that were requested by a veteran New York editor with life-long experience and an amazing record of successes. He is with a commercial publisher. Like other commercial publishers, mine subjects manuscripts to content editing, line and copyediting, proofing, and skillful packaging. Most of the time they succeed in creating a respectable and marketable product.

Distinguished commercial publishers don't fear the flood of vanity material; on the contrary, their product's presence in brick-and-mortar publishing and Internet locales is more secure than ever because they offer quality. Can readers and customers sort it out? You bet.

Vanity presses may churn out tens of thousands of booklike objects, but nearly all of these are just a waste of paper and the public knows it. That is why places like Barnes and Noble do a lively trade, and vanity presses are not a cloud on their horizon.

[Shel Holtz]

You must be confused. I have never published with a vanity press. The rights to several of my early books have reverted back to me, allowing me to resell them. Fortunately, the book for which Yvonne served as my agent is in its third printing and doing just fine.

You may call it "conflict of interest." I call it offering a turnkey operation.

But that's neither here nor there. You're still making assumptions (a lot of "ifs" in your comment) and you still haven't picked up the phone to ascertain the truth. It's just something in which you clearly have no interest -- it's far more lurid to speculate.

[Tom Collins]

Lee,

You say it cost you nothing to publish. Oh, really? Do you have an agent?

If so, then the publishing of your books is costing you $15,000-$20,000 on the back end for each of those "100s of thousands of dollars" you brag about.

Did you hire a proofreader before submitting your manuscript to an agent or "real" publisher, as almost every professional in the industry advises?

Same for a professional copyeditor?

Depending on how those professionals charged and the length of your manuscript, those would have run you another $1000-$5000.

Oh, and those prep costs are upfront, before you found out whether your work would be published.

If you're claiming your first book got published by a "real" publisher without an agent and without any of those other prep costs, then congratulations, you won the lottery.

But if you're running around claiming that every author who writes a worthy book will have that same experience, who's the one misleading aspiring writers?

We're very open about the services we provide and the investment that's involved in our publishing model. With POD, as we practice it, that investment goes into quality editorial, design, and pre-press values, instead of printing thousands of books that may or may not sell.

Have you looked at any of our books? Susan Reid's wonderful new book, Discovering Your Inner Samurai? God Spare Life (the autobiography of the first black female orthopedic surgeon in the U.S)? Leadership: Thinking, Being, Doing (New and Revised Edition), by Lee Thayer? (Dr. Thayer has multiple previous books published by "real" publishers; he brought Leadership to us after he self-published the first edition at xLibris.)

We also don't use the xLibris/Lulu model that accepts any book an author offers us. We don't use a small number of design templates and we don't charge extra for true editing. Each of our books is unique, customed designed for that author's message.

In fact, one of the major benefits we offer that you cannot get from your "real" publisher is direct author input and ultimate control over the creative process of going from manuscript to book.

Not that the simpler POD models are inherently wrong (as you seem to think about every approach but yours), but from the beginning we've limited ourselves to providing individual service, including full editorial, layout, and design. That commitment, sadly, means not all authors can afford us. But we're very proud of the work we produce and the people who choose to work with us.

Returning to your back-end costs (yes, one could find a double entendre there), your "real" publishers paid you, what, a 5% royalty on the first book? Maybe, 1/2-1% on the sub-rights?

Sticking to the book royalties, if you've made $100,000 on the 5% royalty, you'd have made $600,000 on our 30% royalty system if you'd had the entrepreneurial stomach to self-publish.

That money went to your "real" publisher; that's what they charge for their publishing services.

So your book actually cost you half a million dollars in lost-opportunity costs. If you don't think that's a real cost, check with any competent investor.

(You might say, oh but it wouldn't have sold so many if you self-published. Your book? What happened to your claim that all you need to do is write a "good" book to have it immediately recognized and snapped up?)

Lee, you really do live in lottery-land if you actually believe that all a writer needs to do is write a good book and a major publisher will offer him/her a deal. You don't do authors any favor by spreading such nonsense.

And you don't do yourself any credit with your dogmatic, reactionary attitudes toward new publishing models.

Join us in the new millenium, huh?

Tom

[Mary Schmidt]

Lee,

I didn't say "post on her blog" - I said, "say to her face." Big difference.

As for my being naive - unfortunately, it's you who is naive about how the Web is changing the world, including for the "real" publishers and authors (as well as movies, music and television.) I can publish right now, today and not have to look for an agent, hope a "legitimate" publisher has interest, then hope I get marketing help and so on. (I've read that unless you're an "A list" author, your chances of being promoted is slim to none. Far less titles are being published every year and small presses are struggling.)

And, I know published authors (not "vanity") and have been approached by a "real" publisher in the past about writing a book, so I do have some idea of how the process works (or doesn't.)

Question for you: Where does someone like Seth Godin fit into your world view?

As for POD books and clients being pretty stupid about being impressed - we're not going for "impressed"(at least those of us who want to deliver value) - we provide something they can use in a readily accessible format. And that product is also marketing tool for us - just like one of your screenplays - even unpublished - may get you another gig.

Certainly there is a ton of misleading crap published by POD companies - but the same could be said of any publisher. If Jackie Collins, Joan Collins and Ann Coulter - to mention just three - can be published by "legitimate" publishers - well there goes that credibility. (I loved the judge's statement in the lawsuit Joan Collins' publisher filed against her. "You knew she couldn't write when you paid her the advance.")

Lastly, if Yvonne's clients feel she has delivered value, then she has. Why does she upset you (and several of your commenters here) so much? Really?

[Lee Goldberg]

Tom,

You wrote: "You say it cost you nothing to publish. Oh, really? Do you have an agent? If so, then the publishing of your books is costing you $15,000-$20,000 on the back end for each of those "100s of thousands of dollars" you brag about."

I didn't pay him anything out of my own pocket, Tom. He got a percentage of what I earned from the deals he found and negotiated for me. He got paid by the publisher and so did I. I didn't pay him.

There is a HUGE difference between giving an agent 15% of the $15,000 advance that a publisher is PAYING ME to publish my book than to PAY a vanity press $5000 up front out of my pocket to publish my book that will probably never earn back my investment.

In the agent scenario, I am MAKING MONEY. In the vanity press scenario, I AM LOSING IT. The agent gets paid when I get paid. I am not taking ANY financial risk.

You wrote: "Did you hire a proofreader before submitting your manuscript to an agent or "real" publisher, as almost every professional in the industry advises? Same for a professional copyeditor?"

You should cancel your subscription to Writers Digest, they are miss-leading you. I have never, ever, hired a proofreader for any of my books. Why? Because I have this newfangled software called Microsoft Word that has a spell-check and a grammar check. And my agent also reads the book. And the publishers, the ones who PAY YOU, also have a team of copyeditors and proofreaders.

My Microsoft Word came bundled with my computer, so what have I spent on proofreaders and copyeditors?

Nothing.

I don't know of any authors who hire professional proofreaders to read their books before they submit them. Because most writers I know can write.

You wrote: "Depending on how those professionals charged and the length of your manuscript, those would have run you another $1000-$5000."

Only if you have been suckered by the horde of vultures who prey on the gullibility and desperation of aspiring authors. The vanity press industry thrives on the ignorance and credit card limits of their clientele.

You wrote: "Oh, and those prep costs are upfront, before you found out whether your work would be published."

The only "prep costs" an author might have are:

+ Time spent writing the book
+ ink cartridges for a printer
+ reams of printer paper to print out drafts
+ travel, book purchases, etc. associated with researching the subject matter of the book.
+ phone bills (calling your agent and/or editor and/or looking for one, a broadband connection for surfing the web)
+ stamps and envelopes (for sending your manuscript to agents and editors)
+ coffee, Diet Coke, and large quantities of junk food (to keep the creativity flowing)

Lee

[tod goldberg]

The other important difference, Lee, that Tom doesn't quite grasp, but which I'm happy to illuminate for him, is that your books are available in stores, whereas if you self-publish your book, it's available out of the trunk of your car.

[Lee Goldberg]

Tom wrote: "Returning to your back-end costs (yes, one could find a double entendre there), your "real" publishers paid you, what, a 5% royalty on the first book? Maybe, 1/2-1% on the sub-rights?"

I got 12% royalty on my first book and split the sub-rights, if memory serves, 50/50 with the publisher. I owned 100% of the TV & Film rights. The publisher earned -- and deserved -- every penny they made from the sale of the book because they took the initial financial risk of publishing and distribution (my book wasn't POD, by the way, it was a hardcover...so the publisher actually did more than create a PDF file). The book was also unagented, I made the sale by sending the manuscript to the publisher myself. (The subsequent TV options, producing deals, and script fees arising from the book were agented)

So there goes your silly "back end" costs argument for blowing your cash with a vanity press.

Whether you want to believe it or not, most vanity press books don't sell anywhere near what even a poorly performing, traditionally-published book does.

It would have been foolish and costly to have gone the vanity press route with my first book instead of signing with a real publisher...I never would have made the money that I did nor had the national exposure that I received.

Lee

[Lee Goldberg]

Shel wrote: "You may call it "conflict of interest." I call it offering a turnkey operation."

I refer you to the Association of Author's Representative's Canon of Ethics:
(http://www.aar-online.org/mc/page.do?sitePageId=10337)

Here are some relevant excerpts:
------------
5. Members shall not represent both buyer and seller in the same transaction. Except as provided in the next sentence, a member who represents a client in the grant of rights in any property owned or controlled by the client may not accept any compensation or other payment from the acquirer of such rights, including but not limited to so-called "packaging fees," it being understood that the member's compensation, if any, shall be derived solely from the client. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a member may accept (or participate in) a so-called "packaging fee" paid by an acquirer of television rights to a property owned or controlled by a client if the member: a) fully discloses to the client at the earliest practical time the possibility that the member may be offered such a "packaging fee" which the member may choose to accept; b) delivers to the clients at such time a copy of the Association's statement regarding packaging and packaging fees; and c) offers the client at such time the opportunity to arrange for other representation in the transaction. In no event shall the member accept (or participate in) both a packaging fee and compensation from the client with respect to the transaction. For transactions subject to Writers Guild of America (WGA) jurisdiction, the regulations of the WGA shall take precedence over the requirements of this paragraph.

6. Members may not receive a secret profit in connection with any transaction involving a client. If such profit is received, the member must promptly pay over the entire amount to the client. Members may not solicit or accept any payment or other thing of value in connection with their referral of any author to any third party for any purpose, provided that the foregoing does not apply to arrangements made with a third party in connection with the disposition of rights in the work of a client of the member.

8. The AAR believes that the practice of literary agents charging clients or potential clients for reading and evaluating literary works (including outlines, proposals, and partial or complete manuscripts) is subject to serious abuse that reflects adversely on our profession. For that reason, members may not charge clients or potential clients for reading and evaluating literary works and may not benefit, directly or indirectly, from the charging for such services by any other person or entity.
------------

Most reputable literary agents are members of the AAR and abide by their canon of ethics. I checked to see if Yvonne is a member. She's not.

[Cleavon]

Tom says to Lee that "you don't do yourself any credit with your dogmatic, reactionary attitudes toward new publishing models." But it's not a new publishing model, that's the lie. It's an age-old way profit-making model for the people who make their money off of writers who can't sell their books to real publishers. Vanity presses are nothing new; the only thing that has changed is the technology.

[Steve Samson]

Hey, Lee, Yvonne Divita's book was published by the notorious vanity press 1st Books/Authorhouse in 2004 ("Dickless Marketing: Smart Marketing to Women Online"). She must have learned something from the experience because then she started her own vanity press.

[Matt Knox]

Lee,

To be fair, Yvonne only represents 2-3 authors per year as an agent and the AAR requires that an agent represent 10 authors in 18 months directly quoted from AAR:

To qualify for membership, the applicant for membership in the literary branch of the AAR must have been the agent principally responsible for executed agreements concerning the grant of publication, translation or performance rights in ten different literary properties during the 18-month period preceding application.

I personally know several agents who represent A level authors who don't qualify because they don't represent 10 authors in 18 months.

Your initial posts and comments, while intended to do good, are, if nothing one sided.

You have intentionally left out details that don't support your position.

[Lee Goldberg]

Matt,

Is that any reason for her not to abide by those same basic ethical standards?

And if you believe I have left out details that don't support my position, I encourage you to share them here.

Here is my position -- that the "advice" and "news" offered by beneaththecover.com is actually aimed at steering people to the marketing and self-publishing services of their so-called experts. In Yvonne's case, she's hyping her vanity press, so when she advises writers about the wonders of self-publishing, she's actually trying to sell her product. It's a sales pitch masquerading as advice and news...which, in my opinion, is an attempt to fool aspiring writers for personal gain.

I also believe that it's a mistake for authors to pay to be published (because 9 times out of ten, they are simply throwing their money away), and that it's miss-representation for any vanity press to claim to be a "publisher."

Unlike Yvonne, who gives biased "advice" to sell people on her vanity press, I am merely sharing my opinion.

Lee

[Richard S. Wheeler]

A writer is an independent entrepreneur who brings to publishers a product that was completed at his or her own expense.

These costs of maintaining an office, doing research, etc., are not usually considered publishers' expenses. They are costs of doing business, and I deduct them from my gross writing income to determine my net income from writing.

It is nutty economics, or sheer ignorance of the way commercial publishing operates, to argue that traditional publishers "charge" or "load" these expenses on authors, and thus are little different from vanity publishers.

[Tom]

Lee (and Richard),

Okay, you don't like thinking about the back-end costs, lets get real about your front-end costs. Here's what you fork over to your "real" publishers for their publishing and marketing services: the present dollar value of your copyright in your manuscript.

Now, Lee, in a moment of clarity above, you mention that you believe your publisher "earned -- and deserved -- every penny they made from the sale of the book because they took the initial financial risk of publishing and distribution." As you've seen from the comments by people who actually know us, our authors are equally convinced that they got good value for the publishing services we provide.

Do you recognize the risks you undertook by signing over your rights for $15,000? Are you truly unaware of what would have happened to your books (and happens to many authors who sign away their rights) if your book had not sold enough copies when the initial marketing budget ran out?

Everything worked out for you. Again, great and congratulations. But please don't pretend that signing with a "real" publisher under the old model is a realistic possiblity for most authors or a smooth road to riches for all who get deals.

You won't hear us maligning those traditional publishers we've all been calling "real" here. They have a business model and they work it for their profit. Lots of folks have pointed out the problems with the "blockbuster" mentality and the whole area of "remaindering" 40-60% of most books they print.

I may not agree that's the best way to publish in this millenium, but I sure won't go around calling them -- or even you --names.

Tom

[Marea]

Lee said:"Unlike Yvonne, who gives biased "advice" to sell people on her vanity press, I am merely sharing my opinion."

Lee also said:"Having had 2 books published by mainstream publishers (total of more than 100,000 copies sold worldwide, thanks), I'm biased towards them."

Hmmmmm...

[Lee Goldberg]

Marea,

You wrote: "Lee also said:"Having had 2 books published by mainstream publishers (total of more than 100,000 copies sold worldwide, thanks), I'm biased towards them."

I never said that. You have me confused with someone else.

But for the sake of argument, let's say that I *did* say that...what's your point? Yvonne's bias is that she's got a profit motive behind her "advice" -- she wants to get people to pay her to publish their books. What would my bias be? That I made lots of money through traditional publishing? That I want to see my fellow writers MAKE money rather than SPEND it?

I am not selling something with my opinions, Yvonne is.

Lee

[Lee Goldberg]

Tom,

You wrote: "Do you recognize the risks you undertook by signing over your rights for $15,000? Are you truly unaware of what would have happened to your books (and happens to many authors who sign away their rights) if your book had not sold enough copies when the initial marketing budget ran out?"

No, I don't recognize the risks.

In your scenario, if the book doesn't earn out, it goes out of print and the rights revert back to me. If I want, I can take the book to another publisher, or to iUniverse (which, because it's a reprint and I am a member of the Authors Guild, will make it available as a POD title for free), or do whatever I want with it. I am not out a penny. My initial publisher took the financial risk...and absorbed the losses.

I might have a hard time getting a big advance next time, but it doesn't prevent me from staying in the game...and getting PAID for my next book.

If I went to a vanity press, I am taking ALL the risk. And the odds against me succeeding are even greater, because POD titles are not backed by a national sales force, are rarely reviewed, are not respected (meaning I can't join professional organizations that might increase awareness of me and my books), and are not available nationwide in brick-and-mortar stores, etc. And if the book fails, which is extremely likely, I lose everything I paid to the POD company.

The POD company makes money, but I lose big time. Because the fact is, POD vanity presses make the majority of their money off authors, not from book sales to outside parties.

Not only that, but I have probably burned any prospects for the book with a real publisher...and emptied my bank account doing it.

Tom wrote: "Everything worked out for you. Again, great and congratulations. But please don't pretend that signing with a "real" publisher under the old model is a realistic possiblity for most authors or a smooth road to riches for all who get deals."

Of course it's a realistic possibility...if your book is any good. One of the big reasons writers go the POD route is because they have written unsaleable crap that no agent or publisher will get near. But all the vanity presses care about is whether or not your check will clear and the writer can pretend that his book has been "published."

First time authors are published every day by real publishers. Every author I know was a "first time author" once...and I know hundreds of them. And they all got PAID for it.

But I will agree with you that going with a real publisher doesn't guarantee a smooth road or riches. There are many obstacles in your way. Going with a real publisher, however, won't cost you anything and will give you a much better chance of achieving success.

Lee

[Mark A. York]

"if you self-publish your book, it's available out of the trunk of your car."

Of course Tod you left out after they buy copies of their own book. You have a kind streak tonight. It's not warranted. These folks are farther afield than the PA crowd!

Lee,

I will do my best to show you that you don't even half of the facts. The
problem with this is that it has required me to spend several hours
reading,
and rereading your several posts and comments, and then researching the
facts, as they are publicly available.

It irritates me---I shouldn't have to do this because you shouldn't be
giving such erroneous, knee-jerk reactions to people and things.

I expect that you will fully publish and respond to this post, as I
didn't
waste several hours of my day to for you to lipstick my comments.

But before I get into the details of my research, let me first commend
you
--- you have a unique way of generating traffic to your site.

It's worked --- by picking fights with sites with greater traffic than
your
own, you have successfully generated more traffic to your own site.

Bravo, I commend you for a great marketing ploy.

But what's really interesting to me is that, if, as you claim,
beneaththecover.com is of no consequence, that you would pay attention
to
them at all.

If anything, your "rants" (as some have called them) simply bring
attention
(and publicity) to a site, and its contributors that you would prefer
not to
be promoted. But the mere fact that you're addressing it at all is
helping
to promote their site and their cause.

Which is why, if you're being honest, your only reason for criticizing
and
harassing contributors to beneaththecover.com is to create traffic to
your
own site.

From what I can tell, the purpose of beneaththecover.com is to create
conversations around book industry issues. Your willingness to dive head
long into a discussion about POD and self-publishing is only furthering
their cause.

So, do you intend to help them accomplish their goals, by engaging in
conversation? If so, to what end? You accuse beneaththecover.com of
existing
for purely marketing reasons. Are you not doing the same by engaging
them,
and their followers in discussion?

Let's examine the facts that you have misrepresented---
Beneaththecover.com,
by my count, has 19 contributors and a half dozen guest contributors.

Of those 19 contributors, 1 contributor, Yvonne Divita, specializes in
self-publishing. 1 set of contributors --- the Greenleaf Group --- is a
"co-publisher," a hybrid of traditional publishers (able to generate
distribution akin to any New York publisher) but paid for at the
expense of
the authors (which you may call a "vanity press" if you insist, but
for an
entrepreneur or business owner is a perfect model, in fact, according to
their website they had 2 New York Times best-sellers in 2007---how
many POD
or supposed "vanity presses" can claim that?).

Thats 2 out of 19 contributors that could potentially be construed as
POD or
self-publishing experts.

Let's look at marketing and PR service contributors. By my count,
there are
three Publicists/PR firms on the site. Rick Frishman has one of the
oldest
and largest PR firms in the book industry, PTA (Planned Television
Arts);
the fact that you don't recognize his name is irrelevant, though it does
show that you are not very conversant with heavyweights in the book
industry. And the lesser known but successful Annie Jennings. Third, you
have Nessie Hartsock who does PR specializing in blog and online PR.
Nettie's background and list of credentials is incredible -- you want
to be
critical of her because she contributes educational articles to a
site, and
the only payment she expects in return is hoping to get a client?

It's interesting that you haven't attacked either Rick, Annie, or
Nettie --
is it because you know that they are established experts and you don't
wish
to pick fights with someone you know would knock your block off?

Let's look at marketing --- there's the site's founder, Michael Drew,
who,
according to his bio, formerly was a publisher, and in his current
business
is responsible for helping 36 authors become New York Times best-
sellers. So
he sounds like he knows what he's talking about (though, let's take your
position at face value that the site only exists to get him clients -- I
would ask you, so what? Is it wrong for a business owner or consultant
to
use education to get more clients? The authors he's worked with appear
to
have been published by New York publishers, so he's apparently not
targeting
self- published or POD authors).

Then there's Jim Barnes. He's the editor of Independent Publisher,
one of
the largest trade publications for small and independent publishers. I
suppose you would discount him because he doesn't discuss industry news
about New York publishers but, rather, focuses on small and independent
publishers. Did you know that he runs the IPPY awards at BEA? The IPPY
awards is one of THE largest book award ceremonies and everybody,
including
New York publishers, attend. In fairness, Independent Publisher is
owned by
the self-publishing company the Jenkin's Group, and they clearly use
their
publication to help promote their services. Again, I'd ask you, so
what? Kim
Dushinski is a co-owner of Marketability (which has been in business for
more then 10 years), a Colorado firm that specializes in educating
authors
and "directing" authors to other industry experts.

Out of the 19 contributors, 6 are involved in PR or marketing and 2 are
involved in self-publishing. At this point, less than 1/2 of the
contributors on the site have anything to do with self-publishing,
POD, or
marketing and PR. On its face, your assertion that the point of this
site is
just to generate clients for PR/Marketing firms or POD or self-
publishing
vanity press is, at best, inaccurate, and, at worst, intentionally
misleading.

At this point, more then half of the contributors have nothing to do
with
vanity publishing or marketing.

So, what do the rest of the contributors do? What is their purpose?
This,
to me, is where beneaththecover.com gets impressive.

In your comment on beneaththecover, you said there were no published
authors. Wrong, hotshot! Just goes to show that you didn't take the
time
to read the bios of ANYBODY on beneaththecover.

First, though, let's look at journalists---beneaththecover.com has three
journalists, including a pulitzer-nominated business investigative
journalist, Dean Rotbart.

First, there's Evan VanZelfden, whose claim to fame is writing about the
video game industry. Why he chose to write on beneaththecover.com is
beyond
me, but I can't see what he possibly has to benefit from writing on this
site. Then we have Dean Rotbart, an investigative business journalist
for
the Wall Street Journal who was nominated (albeit in the 1980's) for the
pulitzer for an investigative piece he did. I suppose you could argue
that
Dean's reason for contributing is that he offers consulting advice to
business owners about how to get media (though this seem like a stretch
because everyone knows that a publicist is only as good as his/her
contacts
and Dean's contacts in the media for business owners won't easily
translate
to PR for book authors).

Finally, there's Andrew Grabois, a book industry insider for 20 years.
Until
the summer of 2007, he was the journalist and research on staff for R.K.
Bowker, the company that issues ISBN's. Andrew doesn't own his own
consulting firm, and has no products or services t