Publishing Passions (Wrap-Up)
Collaboration with NetMeeting

Insightful Author Perspective

Kathy Sierra, co-creator of O’Reilly’s popular Head First series has an interesting post on “creating a bestseller”. Btw, Head First proves that there are still opportunities to develop a new computer book series and have it do well – congratulations to the entire team that built this one.

I just wanted to add my two cents to Kathy’s post. While I agree with much of what she said, I’m not on board with everything. The first area where our opinions start to diverge is where she talks about the publisher not being solely in business to help an author build a better resume. While this is certainly true, there are other things implied in this part of her post. For example, the casual reader might think that many publishing/authoring deals are a one-sided decision, that the author simply tells the publisher what book to do and the publisher skips their own due diligence stage. I can’t think of any projects I’ve worked on where we simply published a book to help an author build their resume. Sure, we’ve all published books that haven’t lived up to expectations. But believe it or not, the editor, publisher, marketer, etc., go through a lot of industry and segment analysis before deciding whether or not to sign a book. In short, both the author and publisher need to feel they can make money on the project.

Kathy also mentions the self-fulfilling prophesy of an author going into a project not expecting to earn out their advance. Again, I agree that both author and publisher should be as optimistic as possible, there are also market realities to consider. Additionally, the advance on project “A” could be a significantly different number than the advance on project “B”. If the publisher does their homework, they should be paying out an advance that they feel will definitely earn out, preferably in the first year of sales. One of the most unpleasant aspects of my job is facing the prospects of an unearned author advance write-off!

When I was on the authoring side, I wanted to make sure I had enough of an advance to cover my expenses and hopefully cover a good chunk of my time. I say “a good chunk of my time” because I always hoped I’d earn more than the advance, making the project really pay off in the long run. The trap some authors fall into here is dividing their advance by the number of hours they expect to invest in the book – the resulting hourly rate is then compared to the rate they charge as a consultant, for example. If the “book rate” falls too far below their “regular rate”, they look for a higher advance. Negotiations often fall apart at this stage because it’s simply impractical (in all but the rarest of cases) for a publisher to match that sort of hourly rate on an advance.

Despite all this, I accept the fact that some authors are only writing a book for the advance. They assume that’s all they’ll make and anything above that is gravy. Here’s one reason why this isn’t as unhealthy an approach as Kathy suggests: it prevents the author from mortgaging their future and being disappointed. It also helps them from over-extending themselves financially, waiting for the arrival of that “first, big royalty check to make up for the missed mortgage payments.” I’m not trying to “set the bar too low” with this. I’m just trying to encourage fiscal responsibility by both the publisher and the author.

Finally, I wanted to speak to Kathy’s point about the publisher keeping the book available. There’s no doubt that it’s critical for the publisher to keep the book in stock. On the plus side, more sophisticated modeling systems have helped many of the chains/stores do a better job of managing inventory. Don’t be fooled into thinking this is a totally automated process though. I review the in-store inventory levels of a large number of my group’s books every week. When I see a stocking opportunity I alert the sales rep and they present the case to the chain/store buyer. Keep in mind that all stores across a chain are not equal. The A-level, or lead store for chain “X” in New York City should probably stock more copies of your book than their B- or C-level stores in Ohio, for example. These chain buyers are pretty smart. They also have a good feel for what sells in certain pockets of the country. That means that the author might not find their book on the shelves in Davenport Iowa and assume it’s nowhere in that entire chain. Bad assumption. The buyer may have decided to put it only in A-level stores. If it takes off, that same buyer is likely to place a follow-up order and stock the book deeper across the chain.

Also, it’s important not to lose sight of the key online accounts. Sometimes the inventory they sell isn’t at their warehouses anyway – it’s sitting in a wholesaler’s warehouse and gets shipped directly from the wholesaler to the customer. Therefore, “stocking” levels are less meaningful for these accounts as long as they can fulfill through one of their wholesaler partners


Jozef Imrich

Gee Joe,

There is no longer a need to read between the publishing lines ... Thanks for spelling out the insider's insider view in black and white ...

PS: Ach, 'Free Porn' beats 'Raw,' but some of our souls are not for sale yet ;-)

Kathy  Sierra

Thanks Joe, for offering a much better, broader perspective. I left out so many key pieces to this, some of which I hadn't even considered until I read what you said here. I think my main point was a rant against the apathetic meme among computer book authors that says most won't sell enough to earn more than their advance. While it may be realistic, I'm totally unwilling to accept that we all have to just be OK with that. And I believe it's up to the authors, and not the publisher (assuming the publisher is doing their part, and certainly Wiley does!), to go the final mile in turning those percentages around. Some of it might mean doing fewer books, though--because if there are only 100,000 people likely to buy a book on a topic, then if there are 30 *great* books, they'll most likely cannibalize one another. My understanding (but you can correct me) is that the book world works somewhat like the Hollywood model, where you do a lot of books, knowing that the more rare bestsellers help compensate for the less rare books that barely break even. So if we had fewer, better books... everyone would benefit. But that's a side of this business that I really know nothing about. And even some of our early reviews were from people saying, "There are 2,000 Java books... come on, does the world REALLY need another one?" We were counting on the fact that despite those 2,000, there would still be tens of thousands of people who hadn't truly found what they were looking for, because we spent a great deal of time listening to online forum discussions where it became clear that learners were still struggling with certain topics. I believe those holes exist all over the place, but too many new books are trying to fill the same holes that have already been well-filled, rather than work on the ones still not addressed.
Anyway, I'm so thrilled you have this blog, and I look forward to learning a lot more from you about the business I'm still such a newbie in. And thanks to Shel and Robert for nudging you to do this!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)