tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post4648170200265146594..comments2023-11-03T05:49:10.841-04:00Comments on Storytelling Rules: "The Good News is You Write for Harlequin...."Maureen McGowanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00494408580378817045noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-17599145269431896292011-07-18T13:11:29.358-04:002011-07-18T13:11:29.358-04:00I think I'll choose whether or not to get rile...I think I'll choose whether or not to get riled up about this if/when I'm in your position, that is, being published by Harlequin! Until then, I'll observe from the sidelines...and keep my fingers on the keyboard, writing, editing, polishing.PM Kavanaughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18158084685117474279noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-87087312829456562892011-07-12T09:16:05.931-04:002011-07-12T09:16:05.931-04:00Totally agree with everything you said. As I said ...Totally agree with everything you said. As I said before - getting your backlist, revamping your titles, finding the actual word file or whatever... all pains in the butt.<br /><br />I'll take my 15% for now.Stephanie Doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448686465587131952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-43598475672495915392011-07-12T08:38:35.604-04:002011-07-12T08:38:35.604-04:00Interesting, Molly. Digital royalties and the disc...Interesting, Molly. Digital royalties and the discussion around them are going to be a point of contention until a publisher gets it right. <br /><br />It will be interesting to see which one does, and how the other publishers react..Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-71138857076002084382011-07-11T12:27:00.135-04:002011-07-11T12:27:00.135-04:00I think the backlist thing is going to be TOTALLY ...I think the backlist thing is going to be TOTALLY about the author TOTALLY. And for sure those huge names are getting different royalty rates - they have to be. Those books getting reprinted every three years aren't getting the same contracts I am.<br /><br />And I've been thinking why I'm not so up in arms about this - is it because I have an agent? Probably. She gets fifteen percent to be the cool head and she is. She's said she thinks this will change and soon. I believe her.<br /><br />Then I thought, well, maybe it's because I don't have another contract with Harlequin - but backlist is backlist and with a single title launch that backlist will hopefully see some action. So, i should really care. Why don't I?<br /><br />Was I going to get those rights back? No. not for a while. And even if I did get them this really all boils down to - I'm so lazy. I know that I wouldn't have self-published. So, right now, this seems like free money I dont have to do anything to get. I don't even have to opt out. I just have to go with the flow.Molly O'Keefehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15171236688541657736noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-70297124774250029272011-07-11T12:03:11.011-04:002011-07-11T12:03:11.011-04:00There was an opt out date, but not all the authors...There was an opt out date, but not all the authors were notified? That seems . . . wrong. I'm always impressed by the authors who seem to be able to navigate through publishing without an agent. I feel like I lack some kind of gene or something that would let me do that. This is one of those instances, where even having that gene wouldn't help.Eileenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09803986849921870941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29864506.post-40602026018923385832011-07-11T10:53:38.734-04:002011-07-11T10:53:38.734-04:00The reaction to that news was interesting for sure...The reaction to that news was interesting for sure... Made me shake my head when you told me about it. <br /><br />I think it yet again proved why an author wants/needs to have an agent if they want to play in a big sandbox. Someone to deal with this stuff, parse through it, explain it and if needed fight.<br /><br />Personally? (and who cares what I think, I don't write for Harlequin) I'm not sure I buy the justification they've given for the lower digital rates for series books, because, when it comes to back lists, I think readers will be buying their favorite authors, not the lines... They may buy the new releases by lines, but not sure that's how they'll buy the back lists... but I'm guessing. Harlequin might have market research to prove me wrong.<br /><br />That said, I might buy the argument that they have a HUGE number of books to digitize (way more than in their single title imprints) and that they may not sell more than a handful of most titles, so perhaps they can't afford to promise as high a royalty rate on those books, because they need to cover the costs of the digitizing and getting them out there... But that would have been a pessimistic reason (we don't think these will sell well enough) so I can see not using it.<br /><br />I do predict that the agents of some of the already big name former series authors will opt out and negotiating higher rates... That's what I'd do if I repped Tami Hoag or Nora Roberts or Jennifer Crusie, or Tess Gerritsen or Suzanne Brockman or any of many now NYT bestsellers who have series romances in their back lists... Or maybe it's such a small drop in the bucket for those folks they won't care... But I'll bet those are the titles that will sell best. The titles that are rare and hard to find in print, yet readers are curious about... (and readers will be buying those by author, not line)Maureen McGowanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00494408580378817045noreply@blogger.com