Publishers and Editors

We are reminded that we used to be much more on top of things. Old age is rough. Really rough. However, today we received word of many changes. Being lazy and jetlagged (not mutuallly exclusive concepts), we’ll start with the easy and work our way up to rough over time. Tanya Staratt is now Tanya Staratt, late of Harlequin, Toronto office. Word is she’s gone next month. She was a great person to work with, despite the fact that our work and her publisher never seemed to find common ground. Shannon Godwin is leaving Silhouette, presumably for another job in […]

Let us begin with a bit o’advice: limiting your audience is bad. Creating barriers to your products, never good. Unless maybe it’s the waiting list for the Birkin bag. Books are not Birkin bags. Just making sure we’re all on the same page. We do not use any MSN services. We don’t. We won’t. We’re sorry. We don’t have a lot of faith in any current digital rights management system (this will likely change as the systems become more sophisticated and consumer-friendly). Penguin, of all publishers, should be thinking innovative rather than hamstrining itself. Of course, what do we know?

Oh sure, maybe it’s because we get scared when the phone rings. It’s like the telegram of yore…nothing good can come from voice communication. Yes, probably major publishers should contact us via email for advice on running their businesses. That will reduce the likelihood of us staring at the Caller ID display with a mix of terror and confusion. We get that “star” (and we use the term with the highest level of appreciation and disdain) books make bucks. Something (maybe cyncicsm) tells us that the initial sales rush is like that of a horror film…no legs, lots of remainders.

Back when the story was hot, hot, hot, the world was rife with speculation about the fate of Miramax Books. What would happen to this fine publisher? Would it move in with step-parent Disney or stay with the Weinsteins? Even then, we knew the truth: you don’t lose assets without good reason. Disney didn’t get to be Disney by allowing high profile divisions to slip away. Sure, high profile producers get the boot, but, let’s face it, in Hollywood, you can always find another high profile producer (note: this type of thinking is dangerous and usually ends up in tears.

Publisher’s Weekly tells us that Simon And Schuster will be entering the direct-to-consumer sales game later this year. This should be an interesting experiment, at least in part because it will let us know if consumers know their publishers. Also, it will let us know if publishing houses have a clue from e-commerce (given the average publisher website, we’re currently betting no — but we have been surprised before. Once.). In the silver lining department, we wonder if Simon and Schusters stated goal of making backlist titles more readily available will translate to more exposure for authors. Yes, there’s an

We received a tip this morning of interest to those who write historical romance (leaving us so far out, we could be in). Word on the street is that Avon is desperately seeking historical romance in 90,000 to 100,000 word range. Apparently, they’re simply not getting quality submissions. Nothing in the Western vein, though Native American stories will be considered (we will, in the interest of keeping this post focused, refrain from offering our thoughts on this particular sub-genre of the romance world). Study current USA Today bestsellers for an idea of what they’re seeking. Yes, we find this tough

Was it just yesterday that we sat cross-legged, scribbling notes on a post about Penguin, etc (and, today we realize that we missed “Pearson” in our alliteration game; such is the problem with karmic bliss)? At the time, based on our hobby of analyzing corporate woes (hey, we could drin–oh, never mind), we realized that someone had to go. You must, please, pardon our cynicism. We don’t know Dennis Stevenson, and we’re certainly not privy to his thought process, especially when it comes to making life-altering decisions. It’s simply that we spent far too much time working in Hollywood. You

Publisher’s Weekly is taking a long, hard look at the problems plaguing Penguin Putnam (the fact that we dove headfirst into alliteration makes us as uncomfortable as it does you). The problems are myriad: recovering from a lousy implementation of a distribution system, ye olde balance sheet problems (outflow exceeds income), and changing of the guard at the head of the Putnam division. What does this mean for most of us? Well, probably not much. We cannot predict the future, but that will not stop us from offering our opinion. Curing corporate woes requires coordinated effort. The way we see

Before we get started, we must say, again, that while many ills can be laid at Harlequin’s feet (and we can detail them, if provoked), ripped bodices are not on the list. We reiterate our plea to journalists everywhere: drop the cliches. They make you look like hack writers. Try to come up with something fresh for us to rant about. We need a good challenge. Now that we’ve settled that, let us delve into the conundrum that is TorStar profits and why they’re dwindling. More than one Booksquare reader thought we were up to this task, and we live

Pay attention: we are about to dip our toes into the water of the mighty Sincere. We think Random House is moving in the right direction with its investment in Vocel. Yes, you read it right. The publishing giant is making a bold, brilliant move. Now, all they need to do is contact us, and we can skillfully guide them to success. RH has noted that many people today reach for their cell phones before they reach for their glasses in the morning (we do hope they did not pay a market research company to provide this information). They also,