If you're looking for an old favorite or a lost “gem,” many long out-of-print titles by popular authors are finally available again. Every week, we feature a handful of titles from the hundreds on our site. Be sure to check out the latest featured titles!
You Wanna Turn Us Off Too? Murdoch Voices Harper Opposition to Amazon's $9.99 Cap
Business World reports that HarperCollins owner Rupert Murdoch took a swipe at Amazon's $9.99 e-book price, boosting Macmillan's lonely public stand against the retailer's rigid pricing tactics. "We don't like the Amazon model of selling everything at USD 9.99," he said, calling for a renegotiation of Harper's deal with Amazon, and Amazon said it's ready to hear what he has to say.
Murdoch acknowledged that he stands to lose money by opposing $9.99. "They pay us the wholesale price of USD 14 or whatever we charge," he said, referring to the wholesale price that Amazon might pay to Harper for a $28.00 e-book. "But I think it really devalues books and it hurts all the retailers of the hard cover books." Amazon takes a loss on such transactions but has used the loss-leader strategy to gain a dominant position for its Kindle e-book reader. It's worked so far but publishers have worried that a day of reckoning will come in the form of a demand by Amazon that publishers lower their wholesale prices to accommodate that $9.99 retail price.
Though he didn't refer to Macmillan, Murdoch's position mirrors Macmillan's and clearly indicates that the new e-book retail model introduced by Apple as part of its iPad tablet rollout has united the publishing community. "Apple, in its agreement with us, which has not been disclosed in detail, does allow for a variety of slightly higher prices," Murdoch coyly said.
E-Reads has learned that at a specially convened board meeting of the Romance Writers of America, the organization reaffirmed its stand against allocating conference space to publishers promulgating subsidized, vanity or similar self-publication programs.
After a controversy erupted last fall about granting permission for conference space to a publisher that had recently announced formation of a self-publication venture for romance authors, RWA formed a task force to evaluate the emerging publication landscape, review definitions and recommend options. These options are limited by the organization's non-profit charter, which some officers feared might be compromised by permitting subsidy publishers a seat at the table.
Fiduciary obligations notwithstanding, there were strong moral grounds for RWA's opposition, some of it bordering on outrage. Those sentiments were supported by the Mystery Writers of America and the Science Fiction Writers of America.
Though the task force and RWA board deliberated diligently and judiciously they were under some pressure to clarify their position in view of the impending annual conference taking place in Nashville in July, where the publisher in question and possibly others in the self-publication field need to know their status. Also, it was incumbent on the board to clarify whether self-published books qualified for RWA's prestigious Rita awards.
The task force modified or expanded some definitions but RWA's fundamental position is unchanged.
Michelle Monkou, the organization's president, announced its findings thus:"RWA will extend invitations to a wide pool of publishers. Invitees may only represent their non-subsidy/non-vanity publishing programs (imprints, divisions, or lines) at RWA’s conference. Space for spotlights, workshops, and booksignings will be allocated to lines, imprints, or divisions that best meet the requirements for 'Qualifying Markets'. This new process of evaluation will likely increase opportunities for small presses and e-presses that previously have been excluded.
"The potentially broader array of publishing companies present at RWA’s national conference in no way signals a change in our mission or core values. RWA has no intent to tell publishers how to conduct their business, but as a professional writers’ association, RWA stands firmly against any attempts to directly solicit RWA members to pursue vanity/subsidy publishing or other author-financed forms of publication. Members can be assured that publishers and agents allowed to participate at our national conference will have met this criterion."
It is notable that the name of the publisher that started the fracas was not specified in Ms. Monkou's memo (you can refresh your memory here), but we hope that the underlying message is that the parties have reached an accommodation that will enable the Nashville conference to proceed without distraction.
Publishing's Weekend War: 48 Hours That Changed an Industry
The facedown lasted from Friday evening to Sunday afternoon but when it was over the landscape of the book business was permanently altered. On Friday, in reaction to Macmillan's refusal to play the Kindle pricing game by Amazon's rules, the retailer punished Macmillan by extinguishing the publisher's Buy buttons on the Amazon website.
Obviously, Amazon hoped this tactic would bring Macmillan to its knees. Instead it triggered another wave of customer outrage as Kindle owners reacted just as they had in 2009 when Amazon reached into their Kindles and recaptured files without notice or explanation. Though the response of the author community was mixed, many authors were angered at becoming victims of a war they scarcely understood but they too blamed Amazon.
Amazon also underestimated the possibility that other major publishers might support Macmillan. This turned out to be a well founded concern. In the past few weeks all of the big houses except Random House conducted discussions, and in all likelihood negotiations, with Apple to forge a new retailing model that would return control of e-book pricing to the publishers, who had become alarmed that Amazon's insistence on a $9.99 price cap would force them to accept lower wholesale terms. Conditions were ripe for mutiny, and on Friday the test of wills began. By Sunday, as Amazon realized that this was a fight it could not win, it capitulated.
I stated that this might well be a turning point for the book industry - both e-book and print - and I stand by that statement.
I also made a prediction that publishers will no longer be able to hold the line on the current 20-25% royalty rate offered to authors. In fact I guaranteed that they won't be able to, and I stand by that guarantee as well. Authors, and more importantly their powerful literary agents, have viewed the new landscape and found it rich with the potential for profit. They perceive the current royalty level as arbitrary and without basis in the economies of e-book production and distribution. The current rates cannot and will not hold. Just as Amazon blinked in its stare-down with Macmillan, Macmillan and its Big Six companions will also blink in the inevitable confrontation with authors.
Amazon Blinks in Macmillan Facedown: "We Will Have to Capitulate"
Boy, that didn't take long!
Remember the pinkie bet I made ten minutes ago? I wagered that once publishers' hands were untied from the $9.99 price ceiling on e-books we would see an increase in the royalty percentage paid by publishers to authors on e-book revenue. Well, I'm halfway there to winning it. Amazon's Kindle team has just released a statement accepting Macmillan's position even though disagreeing with it. The statement in part says:
"We will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan's terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books."
The Kindle spokesblog added that "We don't believe that all of the major publishers will take the same route as Macmillan." Perhaps not, but they will now be encouraged to do so by Macmillan's stand. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say this may be a defining moment in the history of the e-book industry.
Guaranteed: E-book Royalties Will Rise When Publishers' Hands Untied
I don't know if people still make pinkie bets, but when I was a kid that's what we called friendly wagers with no money at stake - just the satisfaction of being right. And I'm making a pinkie bet right now: If publishers can untangle themselves from the current e-book pricing model that ties their hands with a $9.99 ceiling, author royalties will rise. Any takers? Warning - before you extend your pinkie, you must know that I never bet on anything I'm not absolutely certain about.
Currently the e-book royalty offered to authors by five of the Big Six is 25% of the publisher's net receipts, and Macmillan's is even lower. Indeed, it's the lowest in Big Publishing: 20%. And because it is, Macmillan has attracted less support from the author community for its facedown of Amazon than it would otherwise receive. Here for instance is a line from a Silicon Valley blogger that called Macmillan "evil": "they're trying to force all ebook vendors to adopt the new contract, while forcing authors to accept a below industry average (20% vs. 25%) on ebook royalties."
If, as a result of negative publicity, Amazon relents on its rigid pricing formula, e-book revenues will increase and it will be so much harder - indeed, it will be intensely embarrassing - for publishers to continue parceling out the mingy royalty they now proffer. How much higher will the royalty go? Publishers will kick and scream over every point they have to give up, but in time someone will blink and go to 50%, and the rest of the industry will follow.
You can get the house on that, but I'll accept a friendly pinkie.
Richard Curtis (who is happy to disclose that E-Reads pays 50% royalty to its authors, and has paid it from Day One, 2000).
Business World reports that HarperCollins owner Rupert Murdoch took a swipe at Amazon's $9.99 e-book price, boosting Macmillan's lonely public stand against the retailer's rigid pricing tactics. "We don't like the Amazon model of selling everything at USD 9.99," he said, calling for a renegotiation of Harper's deal with Amazon, and Amazon said it's ready to hear what he has to say.
