[clarky07]

while i agree with most of your comment, i think you are selling publishers a bit short of what they actually do. They also provide several services such as editing, marketing, designing, making ebooks, etc. They also take some of the risk out of publishing.

obviously all of these things can be done individually by third parties freelance and not using a publisher, but most indie books don't because they likely can't afford it and they suffer from a quality standpoint because of it. publishers can still bring plenty of value, they just need to adapt.

[secabeen]

Even if copy-writing, editing, marketing, cover design, and all of the like can be done by freelancers, most writers don't want to spend their time organizing all of those people, paying them, dealing with the taxes, etc. Some of the best people in those fields are staff at the publishers, and aren't even available for freelancing, nor do they want to freelance.

[clarky07]

I agree. that's mostly the point of my comment. :-)

[facepalm]

Are those services valuable enough for what publishers charge, though? I don't think all those services enter into the cost equation to the same degree. I would guess marketing to be a much, much larger expense than say editing (which presumably is a somewhat constant cost per page, while marketing is open ended).

Maybe it makes sense for authors to bond together to alleviate risks. Again, the question is, what is the right price for that service.

I'd say publishers are just a normal business. They provide some services that have some value. But they are not the gatekeepers they used to be anymore, hence authors should be able to get much better deals now.

As for marketing, a single person with a million followers on Twitter can probably achieve more than a whole traditional PR section of a big publisher? Or a recommendation on the front page of Amazon...

Sure PR still has some value (getting into newspapers and so on). But it's not the only way anymore.

[ekianjo]

> They also provide several services such as editing, marketing, designing, making ebooks, etc

And you know what? They are incredibly bad at most of this. I have a friend who's recently been accepted by a publisher, and he gets virtually no support from them for promotion of his books. Their sole job seems to be putting the books on the shelves in a few places.

At the same time, if you were a marketing guy, you wouldn't want to waste your time working in such companies anchored in centuries of immobility.

[vacri]

Some publishers are just plain bad, but to be frank, there are plenty of authors who are also just plain bad[1], and their work is often saved in editing. I've been exposed to the publishing world through my mother's bookshop and small publishing business - and some publishers are worth the weight in gold, others aren't worth crossing the street to spit on. The problem is that until you're established in the industry (or know someone who is), you don't really know how to tell between them; what services are not being offered or being done poorly.

[1]My housemate's mother used to be an editor for a publisher as well, and in her words "You know the saying that everyone has a book in them? It just isn't true..."

[clarky07]

I'll second what vacri said. of course there are bad publishers. just like there are bad software developers. that doesn't make them all bad.

[icelancer]

>while i agree with most of your comment, i think you are selling publishers a bit short of what they actually do. They also provide several services such as editing, marketing, designing, making ebooks, etc. They also take some of the risk out of publishing.

They do not do any of this for new authors, yet they take huge cuts anyway.

[clarky07]

is that so. i'd love to know which publishers you are referring to that do absolutely nothing for the publishing of their books. No editing, no marketing, no design, probably not even paying for the cost to print the books are they? How about getting the books into barnes and noble and walmart?

[icelancer]

They MIGHT get your book into B&N and other large bookstores (Walmart is a different story). But so what? It just sits on the shelf. Is that really worth giving up 2-3x more royalties to be able to say your book that might sell 1-2 copies in physical stores is available down the street? (Which it often won't be.)

If you self-publish and are wildly successful, you can always sign with a publisher to get an in-store deal later when you have more leverage.

I've been through both paths. James Altucher also wrote about it on his blog and I totally agree with him.

[clarky07]

If you have a platform like James you should absolutely self-publish IMO. If you are an unknown trying to break into it, I think you should go with a publisher if you can get one to take you. It very much depends on where you are. Publishers have value, it just depends on where you are in your writing career as to how much value.

And if you are going to go the self-publish route, you really need to have someone help you with the roles a publisher traditionally fills, such as editing. I say this as someone who has self-published a book. I didn't even consider traditional publishing, but I did use a professional editor.