And Then I Said No

So . . . the other day I said no to a contract from a major New York publisher.

Not that it was a terrific offer or anything.  There didn’t seem to be a lot of enthusiasm, the money wasn’t great, and the contract was non-negotiable.

(Non-negotiable contracts are a thing now.  Because publishers are so threatened by Amazon and other signs of change that they say to themselves: “Instead of expanding our business, let’s just squeeze the artists!”)

But I declined to be squeezed.  Instead I looked at the offer and said, “You know, I could self-publish this and make more money.”

And that’s because we all have options now.  For all my complaints about Amazon, they send me money every thirty days, and that’s more than a New York publisher has ever done.  My ebooks aren’t selling brilliantly, I’m not consistently in the Amazon Top 100 or anything, but I have a lot of books out there producing a comfortable number of sales every month, and generating new readers.  It’s not a living exactly, but it’s enough so that I don’t have to take every crap offer that comes along.

And apropos Amazon, I’ve been watching the Amazon/Hachette conflict, though I haven’t had the time to comment on it.  Suffice it to say that it continues, and as usual the principal victims are authors.  Who are beginning to respond, most notably with a two-page ad in the New York Times signed by more than 900 authors, and sponsored by Santa Fe author Douglas Preston.

Which resulted over the weekend in the most amazing email to every Amazon author.  In it, Amazon misquoted George Orwell and otherwise reiterated what they’ve said before, which is that they want ebooks to be cheaper.  Which is fine as far as it goes, though of course cheaper ebooks will benefit Amazon and harm its competition, the brick-and-mortar stores, which won’t be able to sell hardbacks for $9.99.

As John Scalzi noted, Amazon’s plan makes perfect sense if you assume that Amazon is the only retailer in the market.  Which is what it wants to be, and will be if its plans mature.

(And I could point out that Amazon is absolutely lousy at explaining its decisions.  They’re really terrible at it.  I mean, deliberately misrepresenting Orwell?  And in a way that practically screams “Orwellian!”  They  can’t open their mouth without sticking a great big size-12 foot in it.  You’ve got to wonder who’s steering this PR effort, anyway.)

And meanwhile, pre-order and buy buttons have started vanishing for Disney products.  So Amazon is trying the same tactics on Disney, which it may think is vulnerable because Disney’s products are priced higher than comparable goods from other companies.

But this is Disney, who are notoriously careful with money— and the Rat is more cutthroat than, well, anybody, and people seem willing to pay a premium for their Disney products, which they can obtain readily from a lot of other suppliers besides Amazon.  So it should be fun watching that fight from the sidelines.

Elsewhere, I’ve read some comments about how publishers are full of very smart people who are looking carefully at the situation, and how traditional big publishers aren’t going away any time soon.  Which is probably true— they are multi-billion-dollar enterprises, for all they’re stuck with a 19th Century business model and mid-20th Century distribution— and they’ll be here for a long time to come.  Non-negotiable contracts, and all.

As long as Barnes & Noble stays in business.  Because they’re the last big bookstore chain, and if they fail, the whole shebang goes crash.

Do I have any confidence in Barnes & Noble?  Well, umm, I have maybe already commented on that.