Michael A. Stackpole's Blog, page 6

Robert E. Howard’s Adventures in Science Fantasy

Earlier this year I had the honor of supplying the introduction to Adventures of Science Fantasy by Robert E. Howard. The book is published by The Robert E. Howard Foundation. They promote the works of Robert E. Howard and scholarship concerning same. It’s a very dedicated group which looks past glib dismissals of Howard’s work as escapist fare, and examines it for its literary merit.

In preparation of the essay I read through all the stories, some of which I’d never seen before, and some I’d not read in ages. What really struck me is that they were a product of their time, and I don’t mean that in a strictly Depression-era sense. There are what I refer to as “writer generations.” I think they last about 20 years, which is about the time it takes for a writer who grows up reading one author to start being published. Thus one can look at Edwin Arnold’s Gulliver of Mars as a direct antecedent of Edgar Rice Burroughs’ A Princess of Mars, and then on to Howard’s Almuric—that novel being included in this collection.

Another point about this collection is that it really shows Howard and his skill off in number of stories that would be considered outliers. Howard, as were many of the writers of his day, could craft all sorts of stories. The fact that we remember them for very few tales and iconic characters means these others stories are gems.

The collection is limited to a printing of 200. I just got my three contributor copies in the mail. Given the numbers I received, this collection will be sold out very quickly. Hit the link above and place an order now if you’d like to own this wonderful volume. (I will be more than pleased to sign copies at Phoenix Comicon, Origins, Gencon and DragonCon.)

Is the removal of DRM really significant?

On Twitter, Tim W. (@hawkins8142) send me a link to a BBC article about TOR books deciding to remove DRM (digital rights management) software from their ebook titles. It’s a good article and correctly points out that other publishers (including indies) have been going without DRM for a while now. In fact, the TOR announcement has been burning through Twitter and otherwise being touted as a grand victory of sorts.

In response, I suggested that this move was meaningless because a lack of DRM still doesn’t mean that books purchased for use on a Kindle can now be read on a Nook or vice versa. A number of folks replied to my tweet (@mikestackpole) to point out to me that software programs like Calibre exist to make translation possible. Most of them noted that now, without DRM, it would no longer be illegal to copy and translate books so ones bought for one machine, they can now be read on all of them (including machines which, in theory, will be released in the future).

I’d like to clarify my response and respond to some of the responses.

First, I want to thank everyone for pointing me toward Calibre. I’ve actually known of the program for several years and have played with it. Likewise many others. I explored them when I was creating my own ebooks. I have a pretty good handle on their strengths and weaknesses. I agree that they are very powerful tools for folks wanting to do such translation. I really am thankful that you were thoughtful enough to share their existence with me, apparently out of the belief that my comment meant that I didn’t know how to do that translation myself. You’re all very kind.

Second, the very existence of these programs, the fact that they have to be pointed out to people and the fact that they require the use of a computer to do the translation, goes to the point I intended to make. The vast majority of people who use e-readers and tablets do so without using a computer, often with no desire to use a computer, and often enough without sufficient computer expertise to make these programs work. And while TSCasey (@targaroth) is undoubtedly correct, that folks who can’t do the translation will just ask computer literate folks to do it for them—as they always do—the real fact is that they don’t know enough about computers to even understand that there is a possibility of translation.

Those of us who are early adopters, who are computer savvy, who are interested in digital books are at risk of forgetting some simple truths about readers in general and people who have bought dedicated e-readers. I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve had conversations with people about what I do, who profess to be Star Wars® fans, who profess to have read the novels, and who even tell me that I, Jedi is the best book they’ve ever read, who have no clue as to the name of the author. It astounds me, and not just because I wrote the book, but because, as an author and avid reader, I’ve trained myself to catalog author names and titles. Unfortunately, this is not a trait shared with the vast majority of readers, or such is my experience.

With e-readers, the thing I’m discovering is that most all of them have their book purchases tethered to the company that has its name of their e-readers. Okay, so this is like assuming that if you own a Ford you can only buy gas at the Ford filling station—a stupid idea. But owners of e-readers don’t drive past other gas stations when looking for books. They might hit a link in an email, but chances are they’ll just go to the store portal on their device and purchase from there, or do a quick search when they hear about a book on the radio or television. Because of that fact, because they only shop in one place, the issue of DRM is completely invisible to them. For those users, it is a complete non-issue.

It’s arguing color to folks who can only see in black and white.

I’m not arguing that TOR’s move to get rid of DRM is a bad one. Frankly, it will save them some money, so they can pass those savings on to us. (We know they’ll do that, right?) My point is that it’s immaterial. Anyone who knew enough to know DRM was in place also knew enough to work around DRM. And, sure, now that DRM doesn’t exist we can do the translation without having to worry about the FBI and ICE crashing through the door for our violating the DMCA. (Though I don’t think anyone cracking DRM for personal use only was losing any sleep over that possibility.)

Perhaps I’m cynical, but I see this sort of announcement as misdirection as we look at the Department of Justice suit and other issues facing ebooks. To whit, I’d like to make a couple other points.

First, the lack of DRM does not mean that files are going to be compatible going forward. This isn’t to say that I believe folks are out there putting together new, proprietary formats so we’ll all have to repurchase books. What I am saying is that anyone who believes that DRM free files guarantees this is simply being silly.

Second, the whole issue of price fixing has not been resolved by the settlement the DOJ has entered with a handful of publishers. As I’ve pointed out previously, the settlement still allows the publisher to set a price for the books (wholesale or retail, it doesn’t matter) and retailers are prevented from discounting the books so they sell at a loss. To maintain their current profit margins, publishers will be encouraged to raise their prices such that retailers cannot discount them enough to make ebooks more economically attractive than print books. As nearly as I can tell, as long as the heads of the publishers don’t have dinner to discuss the matter, they’ll be able to do the math and keep prices right where they are.

There is one hope for readers. The book market is what is known as a pull-market. This means that the products we desire are the ones that will be offered for sale. If readers choose to buy the books that are reasonably priced, and eschew books which are deceptively priced, or priced to protect sales of paper books, those high pricing tactics will stop. They become no longer viable or profitable.

Is losing DRM on some books a tiny victory? Sure, and you can celebrate it. For a short while. But if you let that distract you from the bigger issues and what’s really going on, you do yourself far more mischief than you could ever desire. If the democratization that technology provides is to reach its full potential, we have to keep up pressure on the important issues. Once we have them solved, everything else falls into place.

The Anti-Trust Suit Settlement—A Layman’s Opinion

Let me state from the outset, if the title is not enough of a warning, that I am not a lawyer. My opinion on the settlement, if nuanced at all, is not informed by the law. I’m reacting to what I read via news stories and in commentaries by folks who know more law than I do. In other words, you’re getting exactly what you’re paying for here.

That said, the settlement of the anti-trust, price-fixing lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice against Apple and a number of publishers is fascinating for what it does and does not do. Apple, McMillan and Penguin are fighting the suit, Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Shuster have settled and Random House was never charged. The suit was brought because, it is alleged, that the “Agency model” was a conspiracy by which publishers agreed to raise prices of ebooks paid by consumers.

Whether or not the suit has merit, and there is some doubt that the government will be able to make it stick, it’s the settlement that concerns me. The Passive Voice blog has been all over this situation, and I’ve linked back to the cogent documents so you can study along. The settlement, agreed to by Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Shuster, contains the following provisions:

1) For a period of two years,

2) Publishers will not be able to set a restricted retail price for their product.

3) Retailers will be able to set their own price for an ebook, but they cannot discount the book below their own discount. (In short, the retailer cannot sell ebooks at a loss.)

4) Publishers cannot “retaliate” against retailers during this time.

5) The “favored nation” status that prevented a publisher from selling at a lower price to one retailer over another is gone.

6) The Agency Pricing discount of 30% off the top that retailers pay publishers can remain in place.

7) There are compliance procedures being set in place (that I don’t bother discussing) so the government can make sure that the publishers are complying with the agreement.

Okay, so what does that all mean?

First off, the suit was brought because prices were too high to the consumers. Notice any relief/rebates to consumers? Me, neither. Your tax dollars aren’t getting you any return on your investment there.

Second, let’s apply numbers to the above. Amazon has tried, for ages, to keep ebook prices at $9.99, to make ebooks attractive. Under this settlement, then, a publisher releases a book at a $13 price point, Amazon discounts it to $10, breaking even on the deal, at the 70/30 Agency Model split level. Amazon could then say to publishers, any book priced over $13, we’ll only buy at a 50% discount. So, a $15 book drops to $10. In this latter case, the publisher makes $7.50 and Amazon clears $2.50. The $15 price point is more profitable for Amazon than the $13 price point, and it appears they’re giving consumers a greater discount. So, the impetus for Amazon to want books priced below $15 is exactly what? Zero. And for the publishers, their max profit potential is at $20 or above, so why would they price things lower?

So, the settlement doesn’t guarantee lower prices for readers. In fact, by doing the same math above that I’ve done, or by just reading this blog post, publishers can independently decide what the best price points are when selling ebooks. This isn’t changing business practices, this is just forcing folks to modify spreadsheets.

Third, since when haven’t publishers colluded on price points? Publishers aren’t stupid. They look at what the prices are on various books that their competitors put out. If someone jacks the price of paperbacks from $4.99 to $5.99 and sales don’t take a hit, everyone will do that. When I was in the gaming industry and we went to price a product, we looked at the competition, decided what the market would bear, and that’s what we used as our pricing guideline.

I know, you’re thinking that’s small-time stuff, but it happens with big publishing, too. In fact, allow me a digression. This is a true story.

I was visiting my parents in the fall of 1997 when I got a call from the Roc editor. Roc, who published the BattleTech novels via a license from FASA, was going to be reprinting the Warrior trilogy the following year. Those were my first novels. I remembered them fondly and well.

The editor reported that they had a problem. While the second book in the series was short enough that they could print it to the spine/case size they wanted (they wanted to make sure they could get 24 or 48 books to the case), the first and the third books in the set were “too long.” Therefore, they wanted to edit these books.

I calmly replied that if the second book was short enough, so was the first, since it was shorter by about 5,000 words. The editor said they’d adjust the type size or leading and that would take care of that. The third book still had to be cut. I noted that I don’t write to be cut, and further pointed out that if they cut a single word, the missing passages would be posted to the Internet and Roc would take heat for the cuts. The editor allowed as how this was true, but those fans “should get a life.” I pointed out that “those fans” were the folks who paid for our lifestyles.

Then I came up with a radical plan. I said, “Hey, those books will be the ’10th Anniversary Editions.’ Just slap a starburst on the cover stating that, and charge a buck more for the books.” I’d seen the prices being offered for original copies of the books on collector sites, so I knew folks would be happy to pay $6.99 for the reprints.

Lo and behold, that is exactly what Roc did. No “rising price of paper” nonsense, it was just a move to cover getting fewer books into a case—at the suggestion of an author. [Note: yes, that increased my return on the books, but since royalties seldom got paid on those books—back then or even now—my benefit has been largely illusory.]

And let us not forget, way back in 2009, that after years of telling readers that book prices were climbing because of the “rising cost of paper,” that publishers came out and said that the reason they couldn’t sell ebooks for less than printed books was because the actual cost of creating a physical book was only 10% of the cover price. How curious that the DOJ didn’t land on folks for that little bit of fiction.

Fourth, out of this settlement there will be a huge commotion noting that Amazon is the only winner, and predicting that Amazon will turn into a rapacious monster, Walmarting suppliers into charging less, while jacking prices to consumers. People will note that this ruling will allow Amazon to solidify its hold on the market, thus smashing what appeared to be a monopoly only to turn around and guarantee one.

I disagree with this assessment, for the following reasons:

1) Amazon, in the past, has reacted very badly when faced with negative backlash from its consumer base. One might recall that the first time Amazon tried to raise a book price over $9.99, the infant Twitter community called for a boycott. News went viral and Amazon backed down. Moves to raise prices or lower discounts to indie authors would engender that same backlash.

2) Lowering discounts to indie authors would allow Apple, Barnes & Noble, Google and Kobo to appeal strongly to indie authors, offering them deals that include promotion. One must remember that the best of the indie authors are those who have built an audience and can carry that audience with them. Amazon would, in essence, be providing their competitors with the means to establish “exclusive content.” While it might not hurt Amazon’s bottom line for a long time, it would establish its competitors as the new darlings of indie publishing, and brand Amazon as being greedy. It’s literally more trouble than it’s worth for Amazon.

3) Hello Piracy! Piracy occurs when the perceived value of an item is much less than its actual cost. Were Amazon to jack prices, pirates and rival retailing sites would spring up all over the place. Authors would band together to create coop sites to sell directly. Webstore sites would establish dedicated and low cost author packages, and set up websites where they aggregate the author stores so they can promote books. When you think about it, the very concept of anyone having a monopoly on virtual products in the information age is just silly.

4) Though I do not think publishers will use the two years of the settlement wisely, they really should be thinking about establishing their own stores. I mean, if an author can do it, so can Random House. Moreover, publishers should secure deals with authors that allow authors to sell books from their own websites, returning to the publisher the same amount of money any retailer would send them. I’d happily retail books at their full MSRP off my website and send my publisher checks (just to have them send me a smaller slice back six months later); since the 30% I’d make now is a heck of a lot more than the eventual cut I’ll get through my royalties.

All in all I think the settlement, and any likely outcome of the lawsuit, is a badly done show of shadow puppets. The suit started for relief to the consumer, but nothing in the settlement provides any relief to the consumer. (Sure, there may be class action suits that follow.) As nearly as I can see, the only folks who benefit are the new employees that get a two year stint making sure the publishers comply with the terms of the settlement. Otherwise, nothing has changed.

And if you want to check me on that latter assumption, let me ask you this: Since news of the settlement was released, have you noticed a single site/retailer/publisher announcing price rollbacks, or even predicting same? Neither have I.*

Nothing in the settlement prevents publishers or retailers from charging consumers more. How they arrive at their prices has changed—for the next 24 months, that is—but we’ll still end up paying. That’s how the game is played.

* An article in the New York Times indicates that Amazon will be cutting prices, but as of noon on 12 April 2012, I’ve not found a press release or comment on the Amazon site that provides more information on this move.

The Anti-Trust Suit Settlement—A Layman's Opinion

Let me state from the outset, if the title is not enough of a warning, that I am not a lawyer. My opinion on the settlement, if nuanced at all, is not informed by the law. I'm reacting to what I read via news stories and in commentaries by folks who know more law than I do. In other words, you're getting exactly what you're paying for here.

That said, the settlement of the anti-trust, price-fixing lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice against Apple and a number of publishers is fascinating for what it does and does not do. Apple, McMillan and Penguin are fighting the suit, Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Shuster have settled and Random House was never charged. The suit was brought because, it is alleged, that the "Agency model" was a conspiracy by which publishers agreed to raise prices of ebooks paid by consumers.

Whether or not the suit has merit, and there is some doubt that the government will be able to make it stick, it's the settlement that concerns me. The Passive Voice blog has been all over this situation, and I've linked back to the cogent documents so you can study along. The settlement, agreed to by Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Shuster, contains the following provisions:

1) For a period of two years,

2) Publishers will not be able to set a restricted retail price for their product.

3) Retailers will be able to set their own price for an ebook, but they cannot discount the book below their own discount. (In short, the retailer cannot sell ebooks at a loss.)

4) Publishers cannot "retaliate" against retailers during this time.

5) The "favored nation" status that prevented a publisher from selling at a lower price to one retailer over another is gone.

6) The Agency Pricing discount of 30% off the top that retailers pay publishers can remain in place.

7) There are compliance procedures being set in place (that I don't bother discussing) so the government can make sure that the publishers are complying with the agreement.

Okay, so what does that all mean?

First off, the suit was brought because prices were too high to the consumers. Notice any relief/rebates to consumers? Me, neither. Your tax dollars aren't getting you any return on your investment there.

Second, let's apply numbers to the above. Amazon has tried, for ages, to keep ebook prices at $9.99, to make ebooks attractive. Under this settlement, then, a publisher releases a book at a $13 price point, Amazon discounts it to $10, breaking even on the deal, at the 70/30 Agency Model split level. Amazon could then say to publishers, any book priced over $13, we'll only buy at a 50% discount. So, a $15 book drops to $10. In this latter case, the publisher makes $7.50 and Amazon clears $2.50. The $15 price point is more profitable for Amazon than the $13 price point, and it appears they're giving consumers a greater discount. So, the impetus for Amazon to want books priced below $15 is exactly what? Zero. And for the publishers, their max profit potential is at $20 or above, so why would they price things lower?

So, the settlement doesn't guarantee lower prices for readers. In fact, by doing the same math above that I've done, or by just reading this blog post, publishers can independently decide what the best price points are when selling ebooks. This isn't changing business practices, this is just forcing folks to modify spreadsheets.

Third, since when haven't publishers colluded on price points? Publishers aren't stupid. They look at what the prices are on various books that their competitors put out. If someone jacks the price of paperbacks from $4.99 to $5.99 and sales don't take a hit, everyone will do that. When I was in the gaming industry and we went to price a product, we looked at the competition, decided what the market would bear, and that's what we used as our pricing guideline.

I know, you're thinking that's small-time stuff, but it happens with big publishing, too. In fact, allow me a digression. This is a true story.

I was visiting my parents in the fall of 1997 when I got a call from the Roc editor. Roc, who published the BattleTech novels via a license from FASA, was going to be reprinting the Warrior trilogy the following year. Those were my first novels. I remembered them fondly and well.

The editor reported that they had a problem. While the second book in the series was short enough that they could print it to the spine/case size they wanted (they wanted to make sure they could get 24 or 48 books to the case), the first and the third books in the set were "too long." Therefore, they wanted to edit these books.

I calmly replied that if the second book was short enough, so was the first, since it was shorter by about 5,000 words. The editor said they'd adjust the type size or leading and that would take care of that. The third book still had to be cut. I noted that I don't write to be cut, and further pointed out that if they cut a single word, the missing passages would be posted to the Internet and Roc would take heat for the cuts. The editor allowed as how this was true, but those fans "should get a life." I pointed out that "those fans" were the folks who paid for our lifestyles.

Then I came up with a radical plan. I said, "Hey, those books will be the '10th Anniversary Editions.' Just slap a starburst on the cover stating that, and charge a buck more for the books." I'd seen the prices being offered for original copies of the books on collector sites, so I knew folks would be happy to pay $6.99 for the reprints.

Lo and behold, that is exactly what Roc did. No "rising price of paper" nonsense, it was just a move to cover getting fewer books into a case—at the suggestion of an author. [Note: yes, that increased my return on the books, but since royalties seldom got paid on those books—back then or even now—my benefit has been largely illusory.]

And let us not forget, way back in 2009, that after years of telling readers that book prices were climbing because of the "rising cost of paper," that publishers came out and said that the reason they couldn't sell ebooks for less than printed books was because the actual cost of creating a physical book was only 10% of the cover price. How curious that the DOJ didn't land on folks for that little bit of fiction.

Fourth, out of this settlement there will be a huge commotion noting that Amazon is the only winner, and predicting that Amazon will turn into a rapacious monster, Walmarting suppliers into charging less, while jacking prices to consumers. People will note that this ruling will allow Amazon to solidify its hold on the market, thus smashing what appeared to be a monopoly only to turn around and guarantee one.

I disagree with this assessment, for the following reasons:

1) Amazon, in the past, has reacted very badly when faced with negative backlash from its consumer base. One might recall that the first time Amazon tried to raise a book price over $9.99, the infant Twitter community called for a boycott. News went viral and Amazon backed down. Moves to raise prices or lower discounts to indie authors would engender that same backlash.

2) Lowering discounts to indie authors would allow Apple, Barnes & Noble, Google and Kobo to appeal strongly to indie authors, offering them deals that include promotion. One must remember that the best of the indie authors are those who have built an audience and can carry that audience with them. Amazon would, in essence, be providing their competitors with the means to establish "exclusive content." While it might not hurt Amazon's bottom line for a long time, it would establish its competitors as the new darlings of indie publishing, and brand Amazon as being greedy. It's literally more trouble than it's worth for Amazon.

3) Hello Piracy! Piracy occurs when the perceived value of an item is much less than its actual cost. Were Amazon to jack prices, pirates and rival retailing sites would spring up all over the place. Authors would band together to create coop sites to sell directly. Webstore sites would establish dedicated and low cost author packages, and set up websites where they aggregate the author stores so they can promote books. When you think about it, the very concept of anyone having a monopoly on virtual products in the information age is just silly.

4) Though I do not think publishers will use the two years of the settlement wisely, they really should be thinking about establishing their own stores. I mean, if an author can do it, so can Random House. Moreover, publishers should secure deals with authors that allow authors to sell books from their own websites, returning to the publisher the same amount of money any retailer would send them. I'd happily retail books at their full MSRP off my website and send my publisher checks (just to have them send me a smaller slice back six months later); since the 30% I'd make now is a heck of a lot more than the eventual cut I'll get through my royalties.

All in all I think the settlement, and any likely outcome of the lawsuit, is a badly done show of shadow puppets. The suit started for relief to the consumer, but nothing in the settlement provides any relief to the consumer. (Sure, there may be class action suits that follow.) As nearly as I can see, the only folks who benefit are the new employees that get a two year stint making sure the publishers comply with the terms of the settlement. Otherwise, nothing has changed.

And if you want to check me on that latter assumption, let me ask you this: Since news of the settlement was released, have you noticed a single site/retailer/publisher announcing price rollbacks, or even predicting same? Neither have I.

Nothing in the settlement prevents publishers or retailers from charging consumers more. How they arrive at their prices has changed—for the next 24 months, that is—but we'll still end up paying. That's how the game is played.

Why Selling Direct is Vital for Authors

News hit this morning that Google has decided to no longer sell ebooks through independent bookstores. Instead Google will focus on selling ebooks directly through Google Play. Their collaborative effort with bookstores had been an attempt by both parties to crack Amazon's dominance of the ebook market.

Writers having their own websites and/or taking other steps to make their digital books available directly to consumers is becoming even more important. A recent survey by Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project reported two very important numbers. First, 19% of Americans now own a ereader device of one sort or another, with the Kindle leading the pack. Second, 21% of Americans had read an ebook in the last year. If you click through to the article, you'll find a chart at the end which notes that a lot of people find ebook reading preferential to print book reading in a number of categories.

So, the big takeaway is this: If your work is not available in electronic form, you are invisible to those readers.

Combine that with the Google story, and a second takeaway is this: ebook markets can be very volatile. Only by having work available from your own website can you guarantee that your work is available. (More on this in a bit.)

A third news story follows up on the investigations into whether or not the Agency Model of ebook distribution violated Federal anti-trust laws. Apple and a couple of publishers are resisting settlement offers which would scrap their agreement. The investigators allege that the Agency Model, which lets publishers set prices and limit discounting, allowed publishers to collude and set higher prices for ebooks than was the norm, hurting consumers.

What's gone underreported in all this is the effect the Agency Model has had on Independent authors. Prior to Apple's establishment of the Agency Model, Amazon paid indie authors 35% of the cover price of their books. Once the iBookstore opened, Amazon matched Apple's payment rate of 70%. Barnes & Noble offers 65% of cover and Google—at least when they were selling through indie stores—offered 45-55% of cover price.

By way of contrast, books purchased through my online store return me 95% of cover price. I also turned around last year and, as an experiment, offered the Delux version of In Hero Years… I'm Dead on a data disk for $6—the same price as the download. That effort returned 65% of the cover price (less manufacturing costs, obviously). Manufacturing costs were low enough, in fact, that I could offer the disks to independent bookstores at a normal discount and still make a little money.

It would be really easy to read the above and draw the conclusion that I'm predicting a coming catastrophe, where the Feds force Apple to scrap the Agency Model, and Amazon turns around and uses its clout to go back to offering authors 35%. Apple and the other outlets would follow suit, maximizing their profits, and authors would find their internet income slashed effectively in half. Fact is, that could happen. I don't expect it to, but I'd not be surprised if it did.

By setting up your own website store, by judiciously printing up CDs for direct sales at conventions or to independent bookstores, authors benefit either way. Let me provide another example. I have a trilogy of novels, the Fiddleback trilogy, which I sell for $5 each, or in an omnibus collection for $12. Because of Amazon's pricing structure, which returns 35% of cover price for anything over $9.99, I don't list the omnibus edition via Amazon. If someone comes to my website, I provide the book in the Kindle format (as well as epub). Amazon's readers would actually be saving money if they could buy the omnibus edition, but Amazon's lack of flexibility on this point means their readers pay more.

Corporations act in their own enlightened self-interest. (How enlightened it is can be a matter of debate.) Authors need to do the same thing. Right now, smart money has us driving sales to larger sites, like Amazon, because sales there help trigger that important "Other users also purchased…" sales offers. But as we build our audiences, as we bring them to our websites, we might as well benefit from their willingness to support us.

3,000 customers willing to spent $2 a month with an author will generate over $60K in revenue for that author when the author sells direct. I've been a writer for a long time, and $60K is a good chunk of change. And it doesn't matter if you don't have that many readers, or you don't generate $24 worth of copy in a year. Every penny you make over what it costs you to maintain that store is profit. No one is stupid enough to refuse to pick up a $5 bill lying on the ground simply because it isn't a $50 bill. Pick up enough $5 bills and you have $50.

Profit is the name of the game.

And if writers don't start realizing that, corporations will be happy to profit off their ignorance for as long as it takes for writers to get wise.

March: In like a Lion, out like a Dragon

I've been MIA for most of March, at least from the online world. I mean, I've been around a lot in the physical world. This is what my schedule looked like:

• March 1-4 StellarCon (Greensboro, North Carolina, with a surprise sleep-over in Charlotte on the night of the 1st.)

• March 6-7 Plumbing disaster at the house because of a 6 foot long root ball in the outgoing sewer pipe. (Thanks, Dane, for eliminating that.)

• March 8-11 Bob Vardeman comes for a visit, on the 10th we sign books at the AZ Renaissance Faire.

• March 12-16 Las Vegas for the Game Manufacturer's Association Trade Show (GTS) (Sounds like fun, but I never left the hotel and worked really hard helping make the show work. I'm a GAMA board member (emeritus).)

• March 19-20 Quick run to Orange County, CA for meetings

• March 22-28 Midsouthcon (Memphis, TN) Had a stunning time at the show.

• March 29-April 5 Nasty cold, sinusitis, allergies…

• March 30-April 1 Worked the International Horror and Science Fiction Film Festival in Phoenix. (It's part of the Phoenix Film Festival and I do the Science Fiction Film programming.)

Somewhere in there I managed to do laundry. I should also note that after Vegas, I was so tired, I never went out for St. Patrick's Day. I really do enjoy traveling and getting to see new places and meet new people, but it can take a toll. I'm sure I picked up the cold in Vegas, and I could feel the onslaught coming as I returned from Memphis. As the plane was coming into Phoenix, my ears weren't repressurizing.

Despite that, March was a fantastic, even life-changing, month. Brian Fargo started the Wasteland 2 Kickstarter project while I was in Las Vegas. First I knew of it was an early morning call from Brian. The project had been live for all of three hours at that point and had raised over $250,000! Within 36 hours it reached its goal of $900,000 and within 48 hours cracked $1 million. As I write this the total was $1.98 million, with 11 days to run.

At the GTS show I'd been talking up Kickstarter because a number of game companies had used it successfully to fund games. I've contributed to a number of those efforts. I was talking to folks to learn more about putting a program together (for a print edition of In Hero Years… I'm Dead), and then telling game retailers that they wanted to monitor Kickstarter as a place to see new game projects. Seeing what folks backed, and having "retailer friendly" pledge levels for games, is a great way for game stores to participate in these bootstrapping efforts.

Then Wasteland 2 kicks off, dwarfing any effort the game industry had tried. I suddenly went from being a guy who was interested in Kickstarter to being the Kickstarter Guru. (This meant I pointed people to the folks I'd talked to and learned so much from about Kickstarter.)

I am incredibly excited about the Wasteland 2 project. For those of you who don't know, before I wrote books, I designed games. The original Wasteland was a fantastic experience. Alan Pavlish, Brian Fargo, Ken St. Andre and I got together and scoped out a computer roleplaying game the like of which had never been seen before. We did things in there which were groundbreaking and yet, in the intervening quarter century, have seldom been visited again. Because we were doing something entirely new, we had no boundaries, no limits, and we pushed the game for all we could, bearing in mind that we were limited to machines with 64K RAM.

I remember tons of phone conversations with Alan that began because Ken had called him, tried to get Alan to do something, and they just weren't communicating well. Ken would call me to vent. I'd listen, figure out what it was he wanted to do, and mentally translate it into something a programmer could work with. Then I'd call Alan, we'd mull things over, and not only come away with something that would let Ken do what he wanted, but a whole bunch more. This is precisely why, in Wasteland, you see a door that won't open and you don't have the key, you can pick the lock, you can shoot it off, you can blow it up (and so much more). If I recall correctly, there were 14 different ways to open doors, and depending what you did to open a door, you'd find different things on the other side.

Wasteland's strongest point was that actions had consequences. Radical concept, I know. Because of that, how a player approached the game would determine the result he'd get. It allowed us to provide a different gaming experience for different players. It required more than just a hack and slash mentality—sure, you could get to the end that way, but if you used skills and smarts, the path would be different, and often more rewarding.

This is what so excites me about Wasteland II. I remember all the things we wanted to do but couldn't, simply because of the limits of machines back then. The game's scope will be huge, and the things players can do, the strategies that will win the game, will likewise expand. Being able to add atmosphere through music and voice acting will make the game that more immersive. In the original game we could only supply a small slice of a world, but now we'll be able to provide a vast landscape overflowing with adventure and discovery.

Needless to say, I am incredibly psyched about working on this project. I'll certainly be posting more updates as things move along. This is going to be a blast.

And if that was the only project that came together in March, the month would have been one to remember. There's more news, but it will have to wait. Just as much fun, different venue, and equally exciting.

My Mom’s Birthday Giveaway

As you may recall, last month, on 3 February, I gave away copies of A Gathering Evil for free through Amazon and the Kindle Store. That was a Friday, and, by happenstance, the day after my brother’s birthday. (I know, seems like a random fact, but it will tie in nicely later.) I’m still gathering data on how well that giveaway went in terms of promoting the book and its sequels. I’ll blog on that more as I finish up with some charts and all, but the prelim report is that it worked out very nicely.

Note: that is not a blanket endorsement of the Kindle Select Program. My sample size is one book, which was the first in a trilogy. I’d had that book out for several years on the Kindle, so I had a solid baseline of sales figures on which to judge the results. Right now all I’m comfortable in saying is this: if an author has an old, dead series, working a promotion through the Kindle Select Program can breath some life into it.

Anyway, I was talking to my parents on the phone, telling them about the giveaway. My mom, not a techie, for whom email consists of my father printing out notes and typing up replies, listened and locked in on one very important fact. My sale was the day after my brother’s birthday. And she asked a very important question. “So, what are you going to do for my birthday?”

This was not one of those whiney or wheedling questions. It was more a statement of fact. It was taken as given that I’d be doing something for her birthday. She merely wanted to know what I was going to do.

Not being stupid and, because I’m her son, being rather quick on my feet, I said, “I’ll repeat the experiment. That’s the soul of science, after all, repeatability. It’ll just be better this time.”

She allowed as how it would be better.

So, this is where I need your help.

A Gathering Evil is the first of a trilogy of books I originally wrote for Game Designers Workshop. They were developing the game Dark Conspiracy at the same time I was writing the novel. I was working from partial rules. Loren Wiseman, the developer, was pulling stuff from the novel to put into the game. It was great fun. GDW coined the label “techno-horror” to describe the genre, and I agree. As I used to tell folks, “Vampires have SPF 666, and you’ve got really big guns.” (This was in the pre-sparkle vampire phase.)

Here’s a link to the first chapter, which you can read for free. I also put the link to the free giveaway at the end of it.

The Kindle offer will run from 12 AM Pacific time on 5 March 2012 to 12 PM the same day. The offer is for a free copy of the novel, A Gathering Evil. This giveaway is open to all world territories.

To snag a copy of the book, click here. Please feel free to share/retweet/favorite that link all over the place.

Just so you know, last time you guys were great at helping me get the word out. In 24 hours we gave away 2,000 copies of the book worldwide. I know we can do better than that. Heck, we have to.

My mother wants us to do better!

This is the woman who, for years, wondered when I’d get a real job. She’s not a fiction reader, much less a science fiction/fantasy reader, but once she realized this was what I was going to do, she got on board. When she was in the hospital getting her knees replaced, she had copies of my books in the hospital room so she could convince staff and visitors to buy.

So, in her honor, on her birthday, you get the present! Click on the above link or on the picture at the top of the post and let everyone else know.

Note: Nook, iPad, Sony and other reader device users, I know it bugs you when Amazon has all these deals set up for Kindle users. I feel your pain. I have something special in the works that I will only make available for epub readers. March is turning into a killer road month for me (I’m out of town more than I’m in), but I’ll let you know when its ready. You’ll have it first and the others will just have to wait.

Again, thanks for making my mom’s birthday wonderful!

My Mom's Birthday Giveaway

As you may recall, last month, on 3 February, I gave away copies of A Gathering Evil for free through Amazon and the Kindle Store. That was a Friday, and, by happenstance, the day after my brother's birthday. (I know, seems like a random fact, but it will tie in nicely later.) I'm still gathering data on how well that giveaway went in terms of promoting the book and its sequels. I'll blog on that more as I finish up with some charts and all, but the prelim report is that it worked out very nicely.

Note: that is not a blanket endorsement of the Kindle Select Program. My sample size is one book, which was the first in a trilogy. I'd had that book out for several years on the Kindle, so I had a solid baseline of sales figures on which to judge the results. Right now all I'm comfortable in saying is this: if an author has an old, dead series, working a promotion through the Kindle Select Program can breath some life into it.

Anyway, I was talking to my parents on the phone, telling them about the giveaway. My mom, not a techie, for whom email consists of my father printing out notes and typing up replies, listened and locked in on one very important fact. My sale was the day after my brother's birthday. And she asked a very important question. "So, what are you going to do for my birthday?"

This was not one of those whiney or wheedling questions. It was more a statement of fact. It was taken as given that I'd be doing something for her birthday. She merely wanted to know what I was going to do.

Not being stupid and, because I'm her son, being rather quick on my feet, I said, "I'll repeat the experiment. That's the soul of science, after all, repeatability. It'll just be better this time."

She allowed as how it would be better.

So, this is where I need your help.

A Gathering Evil is the first of a trilogy of books I originally wrote for Game Designers Workshop. They were developing the game Dark Conspiracy at the same time I was writing the novel. I was working from partial rules. Loren Wiseman, the developer, was pulling stuff from the novel to put into the game. It was great fun. GDW coined the label "techno-horror" to describe the genre, and I agree. As I used to tell folks, "Vampires have SPF 666, and you've got really big guns." (This was in the pre-sparkle vampire phase.)

Here's a link to the first chapter, which you can read for free. I also put the link to the free giveaway at the end of it.

The Kindle offer will run from 12 AM Pacific time on 5 March 2012 to 12 PM the same day. The offer is for a free copy of the novel, A Gathering Evil. This giveaway is open to all world territories.

To snag a copy of the book, click here. Please feel free to share/retweet/favorite that link all over the place.

Just so you know, last time you guys were great at helping me get the word out. In 24 hours we gave away 2,000 copies of the book worldwide. I know we can do better than that. Heck, we have to.

My mother wants us to do better!

This is the woman who, for years, wondered when I'd get a real job. She's not a fiction reader, much less a science fiction/fantasy reader, but once she realized this was what I was going to do, she got on board. When she was in the hospital getting her knees replaced, she had copies of my books in the hospital room so she could convince staff and visitors to buy.

So, in her honor, on her birthday, you get the present! Click on the above link or on the picture at the top of the post and let everyone else know.

Note: Nook, iPad, Sony and other reader device users, I know it bugs you when Amazon has all these deals set up for Kindle users. I feel your pain. I have something special in the works that I will only make available for epub readers. March is turning into a killer road month for me (I'm out of town more than I'm in), but I'll let you know when its ready. You'll have it first and the others will just have to wait.

Again, thanks for making my mom's birthday wonderful!

It’s a bad sign if…

A rather enigmatic Tweet by Dean Wesley Smith pointed me toward a Tweet by a literary agent, Terrie Wolf. Allow me to quote:

Terrie Wolf ‏ @AKA_Terrie

Authors, listen up. Unless you’ve passed the bar – don’t argue contract law with agents/editors. We get it. Promise. #pubtips

Here’s a big #pubtip: Any time someone with a financial interest in a deal suggests that you don’t need to get lawyers involved, or that you should trust their read (they being a non-lawyer) on a contract, run. Fast. Far. Nope, not far enough. Why are you stopping? Keep running. Like the wind.

Contracts mean lawyers and lawyers are like guns: if the other side has one, you sure want one (or two, and much bigger caliber). Not because, in this case or any other, you’re expecting to engage in a battle. Absolutely not. Because lawyers have trained their entire adult lives to be able to negotiate the arcane language in a contract. Phrases that mean nothing to laypersons—and even the best agent is a layperson in this regard—can be critical, based on a precedent set yesterday. Agents are likely to be current on the business—we hope so anyway—but I don’t expect the same to be true of contract law, where a case outside publishing sets a precedent which alters one contract can change them all.

And the idea that an editor should be trusted vis a vis a contract? Remember, editors work for the publisher, not the writer. Editors are not lawyers. Publishers have a legion of lawyers who write up the contracts, and your editor may have no say in which of the myriad contracts you get offered. Sure, the editor may negotiate piddling little details, like the number of author copies you get, or deadlines—things which really don’t matter—while it’s company policy that decides what your split on ebooks or how your advances will get paid out.

Publishing contracts are notorious for having wordage that doesn’t apply. Even in the 90s the clauses about authors being able “purchase the printing plates” after a book went out of print showed up, despite the fact that no one was using that sort of printing plate any more. Heck, my mid/late 90s Star Wars® contracts demanded I turn the book in on disk and include two copies of a physical manuscript! An agent counseling writers not to argue contract points with an editor is downright scary.

I don’t want to shift this into a discussion of whether or not writers need agents, but looking at the above quote, I wonder if some agents are needed. Authors must remember, agents work for you, not the other way around. If I want to discuss/whine about/argue points of contention in a contract, that’s what I get to do. I’m the boss; and if I’m not happy, nobody is happy. The employee’s job is to explain things to my satisfaction or decide I’m not worth the trouble and quit.

Or, in this case, say to me, “Good questions. I don’t have a law degree, so you should consult an IP lawyer to get these things ironed out.”

Bottom line for all authors is this: without us, without our practical application of imagination, skill and hard work, agents have nothing. Editors have nothing. Publishers have nothing. Booksellers have nothing. Because of that, there is no vice in our wanting to make sure that contracts say what we’re told they say, and will do what we are told they will do. Any agent or publisher who will counsel you to abandon that point, clearly isn’t working for you.

It's a bad sign if…

A rather enigmatic Tweet by Dean Wesley Smith pointed me toward a Tweet by a literary agent, Terrie Wolf. Allow me to quote:

Terrie Wolf ‏ @AKA_Terrie

Authors, listen up. Unless you've passed the bar – don't argue contract law with agents/editors. We get it. Promise. #pubtips

Here's a big #pubtip: Any time someone with a financial interest in a deal suggests that you don't need to get lawyers involved, or that you should trust their read (they being a non-lawyer) on a contract, run. Fast. Far. Nope, not far enough. Why are you stopping? Keep running. Like the wind.

Contracts mean lawyers and lawyers are like guns: if the other side has one, you sure want one (or two, and much bigger caliber). Not because, in this case or any other, you're expecting to engage in a battle. Absolutely not. Because lawyers have trained their entire adult lives to be able to negotiate the arcane language in a contract. Phrases that mean nothing to laypersons—and even the best agent is a layperson in this regard—can be critical, based on a precedent set yesterday. Agents are likely to be current on the business—we hope so anyway—but I don't expect the same to be true of contract law, where a case outside publishing sets a precedent which alters one contract can change them all.

And the idea that an editor should be trusted vis a vis a contract? Remember, editors work for the publisher, not the writer. Editors are not lawyers. Publishers have a legion of lawyers who write up the contracts, and your editor may have no say in which of the myriad contracts you get offered. Sure, the editor may negotiate piddling little details, like the number of author copies you get, or deadlines—things which really don't matter—while it's company policy that decides what your split on ebooks or how your advances will get paid out.

Publishing contracts are notorious for having wordage that doesn't apply. Even in the 90s the clauses about authors being able "purchase the printing plates" after a book went out of print showed up, despite the fact that no one was using that sort of printing plate any more. Heck, my mid/late 90s Star Wars® contracts demanded I turn the book in on disk and include two copies of a physical manuscript! An agent counseling writers not to argue contract points with an editor is downright scary.

I don't want to shift this into a discussion of whether or not writers need agents, but looking at the above quote, I wonder if some agents are needed. Authors must remember, agents work for you, not the other way around. If I want to discuss/whine about/argue points of contention in a contract, that's what I get to do. I'm the boss; and if I'm not happy, nobody is happy. The employee's job is to explain things to my satisfaction or decide I'm not worth the trouble and quit.

Or, in this case, say to me, "Good questions. I don't have a law degree, so you should consult an IP lawyer to get these things ironed out."

Bottom line for all authors is this: without us, without our practical application of imagination, skill and hard work, agents have nothing. Editors have nothing. Publishers have nothing. Booksellers have nothing. Because of that, there is no vice in our wanting to make sure that contracts say what we're told they say, and will do what we are told they will do. Any agent or publisher who will counsel you to abandon that point, clearly isn't working for you.