Wow, well said. --Kris Jackson 774-276-0116 ... Wow, well said. --Kris Jackson 774-276-0116 On May 1, 2012, at 12:54 AM, Katherine AsheMessage 1 of 35 , May 1, 2012View SourceWow, well said.
On May 1, 2012, at 12:54 AM, Katherine Ashe <kateashe@...> wrote:
Sandy, the future is with us. And the literary quality of indie books is what we make of it. This is perhaps the time of greatest opportunity that writers have ever had. We owe it to ourselves to put the finest work possible out to the public at a price that anyone can afford.
With Amazon's 70% royalty to the author we can afford to sell at low prices and aim for quantity. Everybody wins -- except the publishers clinging to their outmoded economics, and their authors who are so insecure and convinced of their need for a well known colophon that they will take 15% royalty and do their editor's bidding.
On 4/30/2012 8:40 PM, sandyfoster morrison wrote:
Katharine -I so appreciate your scope of knowledge and capacity to decipher the codes that govern this industry. It is as I had suspected, both as a reader and from "rejects" from NYC agents. It's not personal. I totally got that from the get-go. It's - as I was saying - survival. Whether the "fittest" or the most palatable for the lowest common denominator is in question.I have listened to published friend's rants about undercutting the market. And ironically, the claim that self-pub books are not literary in the least. And...I have decided that tomorrow waits for no one, all I've got is today, and it's MY time to grow a bank of readers.Therefore, onward to smashwords and market-priced ebooks for the reader's benefit. Likewise, I will lower my Kindle price as soon as this first 3 months is done. Perhaps I could change the price now, but the end-date seems a fitting ritual for once again establishing a clear line of demarcation, which I will remember as a new beginning.Thanks for being here everyone...SandyJust Because You're Dead Doesn't Mean You're Gone -http://www.amazon.com/Just-Because-Youre-Dead-Doesnt/dp/0615567509/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335641752&sr=1-1hardcopy and kindle ebooktwig and viva bookstores in san antoniohttp://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/pages/Sandy-Foster-Morrison-Author & Psychotherapist/260581160658772"Do not go where the path may lead; go instead where there is no path and leave a trail”. Ralph Waldo Emerson
From: Katherine Ashe <kateashe@...>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 4:57 PM
Subject: Re: [IAG-members] microsoft & nook
From the 1980's onward the big New York publishing houses (I don't speak of the small independent publishers) have been growing ever more decadent. By decadence I mean editors, fearful for their jobs -- and for good reason -- were no longer making choices based on literary merit, but on how easily a book could be "pitched" by sales staff; then by how similar a manuscript was to already successful books (even easier for sales staff.) Fear, as the dominant though hidden element in employment, resulted in agents being nearly incapable of taking on new authors -- agents' value to their agencies was based upon the aggregate earnings of the authors they represented. Now and then they could venture a work buy a new author -- if it was a slim volume.
Look at the mass of books in the big chain bookstores: non-fiction commissioned by the publisher, celebrity books sold on the celeb's name, reprints, fiction by the few autors who excelled in self-promotion or made their 'names' before the 1980's, CDs and videos, comic books (I'm astounded by the shelf space Barnes and Noble gives to this new genre that caters to child-level literacy.) The implication is that the publishing/ bookselling chains have lost faith in the existence of serious readers. But we're here, and Amazon has been proving it.
Amazon, indie publishing, and the tremendous reduction in the cost of producing ebooks, as opposed to physical books, has opened a new world for readers and authors alike. Horses are magnificent animals, but there was a lot of abuse underlying their use for transportation; bookstores were very pleasant, but a lot of abuse and pain underlay them as well -- never seen by the browser, but felt by the author, the edtor, the agent... accepted as a normal part of their lives because that was how it was. The bookstore and publishing business that was free, literate and wholesome died in the 1980's when the 'bottom line" and the accounting and sales departments came to overshadow literary taste and the editorial dept.
On 4/30/2012 3:11 PM, Kris Jackson wrote:I remember a quote once similar to "There is nothing sadder than an idea whose time has come and gone." It is very strange to think that this quote may apply to the book itself. Such may be the case, however. In Star Trek, Capt. Jean-Luc Picard was considered quirky because he liked to read physical books, instead of the e-readers everyone else had been using since at least the original series in 1966. And all of us know that, except for in-person sales events, we sell more ebooks than physical books.
The term "survival of the fittest" is often misapplied by non-scientists. It does not mean an all-out tooth and nail battle with only the toughest surviving. It means that the organism that is best fitted to its ecological niche survives. The toad that most resembles a clump of earth gets eaten last. For us, it means we provide the product that the reading public most wants. And actually, the book business has always been about that. Ask Gutenberg.
On 4/30/2012 2:45 PM, sandyfoster morrison wrote:Hi, IAG friends -I'm wondering what you all think of this: http://www.cnbc.com/id/47228151 I'm a fan of indiebound brick-and-mortar stores and feel disloyal as I contemplate lowering my ebook pricing and expanding beyond Kindle. It appears ebook is far and away the wave of the future. Going in - this past December - I had no clue the book business would feel like a survival-of-the-fittest struggle?Your thoughts?SandyJust Because You're Dead Doesn't Mean You're Gone -http://www.amazon.com/Just-Because-Youre-Dead-Doesnt/dp/0615567509/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335641752&sr=1-1hardcopy and kindle ebooktwig and viva bookstores in san antoniohttp://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/pages/Sandy-Foster-Morrison-Author & Psychotherapist/260581160658772"Do not go where the path may lead; go instead where there is no path and leave a trail”. Ralph Waldo Emerson
Katherine, I have nothing against a free education all the way to earning a PhD as long as it is purely merit based and what students pay in fees areMessage 35 of 35 , May 6, 2012View SourceKatherine,I have nothing against a free education all the way to earning a PhD as long as it is purely merit based and what students pay in fees are based on that competition and merit with the value of the major to the nation and society factored in.Students that compete in this merit based system and score near or at the top academically in majors/fields that society needs the most to stay competitive in a global economy should be rewarded by paying nothing while students that work toward degrees in fields that offers little to the nation should pay the most.Sort of like this:The fee structure would be based on a graduated system.The top 10% in any major would pay the least and those fields most valuable to the economic health of the nation would be free.Students ranked in the middle would pay somewhere between 40 to 60% of tuition and fees depending on the major.The bottom 10% academically majoring in fields that offers little or nothing to the economic health of the nation in a competitive global market place, would pay 100% of all college costs, while someone majoring in a valuable field where people are needed the most would pay maybe 75% of total costs.As it is, studies show that half of the students that start college never finish and many that start difficult and demanding majors end up changing majors to less demanding fields that have a higher unemployment rate beyond college. The fee structure of a system that offers a free ride would take this into account.For example, when my wife was earning her MFA at the Chicago Art Institute, the president of that university said that more than 90% of art majors would never work in their field. I've seen the results of that art major (and I have nothing against the arts but the arts are a luxury that few are successful at). At the local Sunday farmer's market, there is a young woman that paints cute art on children's faces for a tip. I talked to her once and discovered that she had earned an MFA in art from the San Francisco Art Institute (that info was also on her Website) and this was the best she could do to earn money in the arts.Should that young face painter with an MFA in art have been given a free education paid for by taxpayers all the way to the end. Our daughter is finishing her second year at Stanford, and her BA is in biology. It is a tough field of study much more difficult than a liberal BA or MFA in art or writing (I have an MFA in writing and paid my own tuition as it should be for that major). Tuition at Stanford runs about $18,000 a quarter or close to $60,000 annually.One of my former students earned her BA in dance. There are degrees that are luxuries, which cater to the dreams of individuals and then there are degrees that are valuable to society and the nation.Lloyd Lofthouse
--- On Sun, 5/6/12, Katherine Ashe <kateashe@...> wrote:
From: Katherine Ashe <kateashe@...>
Subject: Re: [IAG-members] Re: microsoft & nook
Date: Sunday, May 6, 2012, 1:48 PM
You have a point about the value of the end product, but since democracy depends upon the education of the voters, it should be accessible to all who can qualify academically, for as high as they can go. At pain of sounding socialistic, maybe we should make higher education as free to students as k-12? or improve k-12 to better qualify our population as capable voters.
On 5/6/2012 11:52 AM, Lloyd Lofthouse wrote:
It doesn't matter if it is the public or private sector, education is a business in the US and turning a profit and/or holding onto jobs counts as much as it does in any industry.At least in education, 50% of the end product is usually better than the one that the fast food, sugar and tobacco industries lead to and the 50% that does not lead to a job in the field of study leading to a degree was mostly due to poor student choices.
--- On Sat, 5/5/12, Kris Jackson <kris@...> wrote:
From: Kris Jackson <kris@...>
Subject: Re: [IAG-members] Re: microsoft & nook
To: "IAGemail@example.com" <IAGfirstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Saturday, May 5, 2012, 4:46 AM
"If the material is available free on the internet, they should have an option of email that lists the urls where the material is available as part of the cost of the course."
No. Colleges are in bed with the textbook publishers. They require that each student buy a book. Getting one for free cuts into their business model.
On May 4, 2012, at 5:07 PM, "joanszechtman" <u2nohoo@...> wrote:
> If the material is available free on the internet, they should have an option of email that lists the urls where the material is available as part of the cost of the course.