1

Ebooks and authors: The math of publishing doesn’t add up

|

 In Math of Publishing Meets the E-Book  ( New York Times , Feb. 28, 2010)  reporter Motoko Rich considers mainly publishers’ profits in her article about the current debate about the pricing of  e-books versus printed ones. She does point out, however, that authors, earning 15% on a book that sells for $26,  would come away with almost $3.90 after paying back any advances on royalties. 

 On my book,  Broken Patterns,  published 15 years ago by Wayne State University Press,  I made 7.5%…on each hardcover–which sold for $44.95 ( you can imagine how many I sold at that price!) and 5% on the paperback, which went for $24.95.   The book, on which I spent 12 years, went on sale a few years later…Used copies are now advertised at 11 cents…Well, you can do the math. (I can’t bear to). 
 
With a new book, Ithaca Diaries, in the works, I’ve been thinking of self-publishing, this time around. But I  read somewhere that self-published authors, using publishing on demand plaforms, sell on average maybe 25 copies—and you have to factor in the costs of marketing, editing and design. 
 
In her Times article, Rich quotes  Anne Rice, the best-selling author of vampire books, as saying that authors have no idea what books cost or what profits publishers make.  “For all I know, a million books at $9.99 might be great for an author,” Ms. Rice says. 
 
Could be.  (Hey, I was an English major–again, no math).  But  even I have figured out that if I had a day job, I shouldn’t quit it, just yet!
 
–Anita Harris

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA.  HarrisCom also publishes Harriscomblog and Ithaca Diaries blog.




Eek #3. Mice? Men? Is it really over?

|

Pink MouseYesterday, Claudio, my super, finally stuffed up the hole around the radiator pipe in the living room with “wool steel”, as he calls it, then sent not one but two carpenters cover up the huge hole in the cabinet wall under the sink.

I’m hoping this means it’s really over with Arthur and Jack–the mice I named after old boyfriends so I wouldn’t feel bad if they got caught in sticky traps or had their necks snapped by the other kind.  I’ve had 12 traps in my 1-bedroom for four months, now,  but  these being smart, sneaky Cambridge mice (men?) I needn’t have worried–they like their freedom and know how to keep their options open.

My landlord refused to poison them (because, he said, they’ll die in the walls and stink up the whole building) so for  months, they often watched me at work in the kitchen or scampered in to the living room when John Stewart came on TV. 

As the Cambridge health inspector pointed out, merely filling the holes means that Mickey and Minnie can continue to propegate—along with Arthur,  Jack and their current insignificant others–and that, at some point, the whole building will be overrun.

But for now, I’m done with worrying about smelly detergent, mint, cats and black shapes scurrying across the floor.  To  my neighbors:  thank you for your support through all of this. And good luck!

New Cambridge Observer is a publication of the Harris Communications Group of Cambridge, MA. We also publish HarriscomBlog and Ithaca Diaries Blog.