AAR

[janet w]

http://jakonrath.blogspot.de/2012/05/harlequin-fail.html

I wasn't sure if this was the right forum to post this -- I not a Harlequin expert but I've read many a Harlequin over the years so of course I hope their authors are happy and feel that they're being treated fairly financially. Take a look and see what you think.

[Carla Kelly]

I'd read this somewhere else, and I find it interesting. I'm probably going to sign another two-book contract with Harlequin for two more regencies. They wanted a three-book contract and I wanted a one-book contract, so we compromised.

But - and here's the fun part - I also recently signed a contract for 3 historical mysteries set in 1780s New Mexico with a small Seattle firm that is wonderfully flexible. They don't insist in regencies. They're even reprinting my very first novel, Daughter of Fortune, as a paperback and an ebook. They like my ideas.

And I have a novel coming out in August about the Winter Quarters-Scofield-Mine Disaster with another company.

Times are definitely changing. I still don't believe in self-publishing, but I'm really starting to like these small, nimble companies. Really.

[HEAreader]

After reading the blog article and comments, I wonder if there is a central website (or perhaps a place on this one) for writers who are self-publishing to get the word out about their books. Obviously, marketing is going to be key to the success of self-publishing. Without the Harlequin mass-market push (Walmart, Target, etc.), many of these writers will not have the exposure they need to build up a fan base.

I see that Amazon is one way to publish, but is that going to be enough publicity for those trying to break into writing? Other smaller companies are opening up, but how will we know about them? Could this site feature them under the writers forum?

[Lillian Sulivan]

[HEAreader]

[quote="HEAreader"]After reading the blog article and comments, I wonder if there is a central website (or perhaps a place on this one) for writers who are self-publishing to get the word out about their books.

I just saw an ad on this page that provided a partial answer to my question: www.discoveranewlove.com - a website for e-books. Right now the site features four (previous?) Harlequin authors, including Catherine Mann and Shana Galen. It would be great to see them join forces and increase their chances of success in the world of self-publishing. I wonder what percentage of HQ fans buy in e-book format, though. I still buy mine in paperback most of the time.

[Carla Kelly]

Two reasons, Lillian - one valid and one maybe less valid now.

1. Having to do the grunt work of publishing takes time away from writing. It just does. I'd rather write and let someone else do the other stuff.
2. I used to think, and still do, to some extent, that a self-published book is generally one where the author couldn't find a publisher who would touch it, even though his/her writing was the greatest thing since Shakespeare. Some books aren't meant to see the light of day for a reason. Now, though, that's changing, as more and more established authors start to branch out and find markets because they're tired of dealing with mega-huge publishers.

What's going on now in the publishing world is interesting and bears watching. I, for one, would like to see more smaller publishers. As it is now, writing for the big guys is scarcely a partnership, and often a study in frustration.

[RRRJessica]

I'm not an author, so not knowledgeable about these things, but I did read Courtney Milan's blog where she says that she actually spent more for her novella in a Harlequin collection than on her self-published novellas, and, of course, made more on each book (if I read it correctly). Now, I do not know how the *time* comparison lines up.

Her post is called "a Take of Two Royalty Statements" and you can read it here: http://www.courtneymilan.com/ramblings/2012/05/09/a-tale-of-two-royalty-statements/

Here is what she concludes: "As an author, I spent 50% more on a traditionally-published [Harlequin] novella. And I made half as much in twice the time." Although she says in the comments she would still publish with a traditional publisher for her debut, so she got something out of it, despite spending more and making less.

If I am reading the post Janet linked to correctly (and I may very well be wrong), it looks like Harlequin treats it authors worse, or at best no better, than any of the Big Six publishers. I wasn't sure at first if this was just some disgruntled author, but then when I read the Milan post, and when I saw that many present and former Harlequin authors (Alison Kent, Kay Stockham, Ruth Axtell etc.), were speaking up in the comments section of that original blog, I felt very disappointed in Harlequin. As a reader, I ask myself if I should think twice about where I put my money, the same way I do when I avoid WalMart because of its labor practices.

That said, I don't know if Harlequin is worse than other romance publishers. Pamela Clare, another author I love to read, says in the thread that at Dorchester she also made very little money despite selling well for them. She concludes:

"I'm a writer, not a monk. I never took a vow of poverty. I never wanted to starve for my art. I expect to be fairly compensated. And so should we all."

I wish I knew which romance publishers treated their authors well. It is really the case these days that romance authors have to be self-published to get a fair deal?
_________________
Jessica T.
http://readreactreview.com

[Linda in sw va]

[Lee]

@Carla - I'm so glad they are reissuing Daughter of Fortune - can I ask again if you would consider writing a sequel to it - I so enjoyed reading about that part of American history. And 2 more regencies??? Could you tell us a little more about those? Can't wait!

[Eliza]

[Carla Kelly]

Lee, I'm not writing a sequel to Daughter of Fortune per se, but I am, in a way. My historical mysteries are set in 1780s New Mexico, when the Spaniards were pulling back from la frontera, and leaving the rancheros even more exposed to the Comanche, their greatest threat. The hero is a brand inspector, a juez de campo, who also solved petty crimes. I read about the jueces in a footnote to a borderlands text, and it said they solved petty crimes. Well, the old mind started working then, and it all came together last fall during a visit to my son in New Mexico. The publisher has signed me to that first book, plus three others, for starters. I'll have #1 done around August 15, and probably do one a year.

The Regencies? Haven't a clue. I start the first one in January, and I'll certainly have a clue by then. Might be another sea story. I like those. Or it might not. Maybe I ought to write one that everyone else writes, about a young miss and her debut, and Almack's and all that. Could be fun. I can guarantee one thing about the Regencies - I won't bother to put a title on them, because it would just be changed, anyway. (

[Lee]

Fantastic, Carla! WRT the regencies, your fans will take whatever we can get. Seriously.

[D Rogers]

Oh, please Carla--no young miss debuts!

How about an older couple? I guess they don't sell? (I used to love Judith Lansdowne's romances about 40ish couples). Or perhaps you could work in an older couple/younger couple contrast, a la Much Ado About Nothing?

Denise

[Carla Kelly]

D Rogers, don't worry. My ego talking here, but if I do write a young miss/debut thing, it won't be like anyone else's. I tend to go my own way.

[Wendy AAR]