NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/misc/writing/2844

Text File | 1992-09-10 | 3.6 KB | 79 lines

Newsgroups: misc.writing
Path: sparky!uunet!scorn!scolex!charless
From: [e-mail] (AutoPope)
Subject: Re: Publisher production times
Organization: The Somewhat Contagious Operation, Inc.
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 08:32:04 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (Account for Usenet System)
Lines: 67


Concerning my whinge about long publishing delays,
[e-mail] (Fred Welden) writes:
>
>Another possibility is that publishers are cutting the length of their
>lists.  Blockbuster bestsellers used to carry quite a few mid-list books
>along with them.  If the number of mid-list books being published per
>year is being reduced, and the number of saleable manuscripts coming in
>is not, then the backlog is growing.  Perhaps you should take the
>increased lead time as one of Len Olszewski's judo compliments--they
>liked your book so much they just had to have it, even though they're
>already committed up to March-April 1994.

Maybe. The midlist sure isn't thriving. But there's something
distinctly odd about the entire situation ...

Note that I'm based in the UK; this is a British publisher, so market
conditions may be different. Print runs are sufficiently small that
I wouldn't expect the price of paper to have a major impact on
overall costs; typical midlist runs are on the order of 10-15,000
copies, with the real profit kicking in when US publication occurs.

>...    So if the publisher is saying 2 years, they're sitting on the
>book for some reason.  Why don't you call your publisher, ask to speak
>to the head of the Production Department, and ask him or her why the
>lead time has increased?  If you sound curious rather than well-peeved,
>you might get a civil answer.  Mention how much you like the way their
>books look and you almost certainly will.  You would have from me, when
>I was in the business.

The publishing company in question is a new start-up which
formally launched its list last week.  (On the other hand they're
run by Anthony Cheetham, who has a track record for building big
publishing companies, and there's some serious money behind him.)
They bought up Weidenfeld & Nicholson (who were pretty much
moribund) and sank a fair amount of effort into acquiring new
writers rather than going straight for bestsellers -- that being
more financially prudent for a start-up.  There seems to be a
fair amount of disorganization there (they only moved into
their offices two months ago and are merging their start-up
infrastructure with W&N's) but I'm not convinced that the delay
is the direct result of this.

The thing is, I know a fair number of other British midlist writers
who are in the same quandry with different publishers.  It
seems to be slipping _everywhere_.  Simon Ings' novel _Hothead_
took two and a half years to come out; Nichola Griffith's
_Ammonite_ is taking the best part of eighteen months; I don't
know anyone who _hasn't_ been complaining about the publishing
cycle slowing down over the past five years or so ...

The only trend I can point to at the same time that I think might
be connected is the way that the medium-scale UK publishing
houses were bought up and merged with various media conglomerates
over that period, and that midlist sales slumped from an average
15,000 per book to as low as 5000 per book over the past two
years.

Any ideas what the connection is?
>
>--
>--Fred, or another blind 8th-century BC  |  [e-mail]
>        Hellenic poet of the same name.  |


--
this signature rescued by the .sigfile liberation front