Saturday, August 05, 2006

I think I mentioned that my admission that we were taking Google ads on this blog generated flak from commentators. All well and good. That's why there is a comments section - and I've never felt the need to monitor or referee it.

However, I suspect that most of the comments are overlooked. So here are a few recent ones. And I'd love to have more.

Some of the comments are rather pompous. For instance my jokey piece yesterday on a new form of literary agency elicited:

I can't quite decide if this post displays a complete contempt for agents, a complete contempt for publishers, a complete contempt for authors, or a complete contempt for all three. Quite funny though.

For goodness sake! On the other hand this next commentator clearly understands more about marketing than the average publisher:

Is it any wonder that us "ordinary readers" have become increasingly cynical about the whole kitten caboodle and now blog amongst ourselves about great reads and pass the word around? Most of us are ignoring the review pages, the 3 for 2's and increasingly the prizelists.Plenty of us have been quietly exchanging great reads through international online reading groups for years and there's a potential audience that no one seems to have taken any notice of, do publishers even know they exist? Have you typed "reading group" into Yahoo groups lately?
Word of a good read spreads around these like a bush fire and likewise we telegraph the turkeys well in advance!
The Book Bloggers Book Prize when it comes to fruition will have a far bigger audience than many people realise and I don't think it will cost a penny to be shortlisted.The awards dinner won't wreck your cholesterol because it will be virtual, no new outfits to be bought, but just wait;the book that wins will truly deserve to be read.

And here are some wise words about brands in publishing and their importance or non-importance:

Very few consumers walk into a bookshop or browse Amazon and select a book on the strength of the publisher's brand. Penguin used to have that influence, but I would doubt that many book buyers would know if they have bought a Virgin book (Losing my Virginity excepted) even though Virgin has such strong brand recognition. Product reliability and quality is a major factor in the success of many of the companies in this list and this drives consumer loyalty. With a product as varied and variable as a publisher's booklist it is difficult to meet consumer expectation on each and every title (based on the last one read), making loyalty to one publisher brand extremely unlikely.

Please keep the comments coming. I really appreciate them

#    |  Comments [8]  | 
8/5/2006 4:57:31 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Now if the Google ads were really based on smart marketing, we'd have ads for opticians and magnifying glasses...

Thanks for acknowledging that yesterday's post about literary agencies was a joke. My lower jaw has now slowly returned to the normal position. It was the £5,000 to transfer the file on to another agent that got me. That's potentially worse than moving your fixed rate mortgage on to a new lender, before the end of the term, you know.

And if you don't like my comments, blame that Mr Kellogg for his open letter. He gave me the courage to "dare" after reading and enjoying for some time.
8/5/2006 9:58:26 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
This post certainly demonstrates the skill with typography that I've come to expect from Macmillan Publishers.

(Irony, Richard, irony. I shall point it up every time I use it from now on).
Derek
8/6/2006 6:54:05 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Can't say I've improved the typography but I've made the quotes a bit bigger. As I've said, this blog is all about learning.
Incidentally, whilst the literary agency piece involved tongues in cheek I do think there's a case for a fee-for-service agency system. Why should a literary agent automatically earn a percentage of an author's income for the term of copyright (70 years after death of the author in the UK)? A publisher is obliged to have the book printed and distributed. An agent sometimes simply cashes the percentage.
8/6/2006 2:58:13 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Odd how few people recognise sarcasm in a comment!

8/6/2006 7:13:05 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Crimeficreader

*Mr* Kellogg? For your information, sir, I sponge for a living. :D
8/6/2006 8:39:05 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
I apologise, Alan.
Do drop the "sir" though - I'm more of the madam variety. :D
8/7/2006 11:04:06 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Complete with drawing room, piano player, and "appropriately" dressed young ladies? ;)

(This, good reader, is known as a "thread hijack".)
8/7/2006 12:18:46 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
I knew I'd regret the choice of that particular word...

I've never felt comfortable gate crashing a party, so my input into a thread hijack ends here.