Writing computer books not recommended...
Thanks to Simon I ran across Why Computer Books Suck [ Go ]. I'd have to agree with her points 100%. Having been a co-author this year on a computer book for today's leading publisher, I'd just comment that not only is the whole book process messed up but I'd also rather have all my fingernails pulled, eat glass and drink acid before writing another computer book. I absolutely loved this section:
There's no money in it
Let's say you pour three months' worth of blood, sweat, and tears into your 500-page computer book. After taking three more months to reformat it, the publisher sends you galley proofs so you can review them and create an index. Of course, you get only a week or two for that. You mark a few minor, last-minute corrections on the proofs. You must then use the hard copy (that's right, hard copy) to create an index manually (that's right, manually). Of course, you can have the publisher do it for an outrageous fee, but most authors choose to index their own books. And most authors do a lousy job of it. By that time the author is too burnt out to do it justice, even though everyone knows the index is the single most important section of any computer book.
Finally, you're finished. The publisher dawdles for another month or so, occasionally sending you messages asking for files you've already sent them twice, and that sort of thing. Finally the book goes to print. If you're lucky, you see a couple of copies on the shelf at Border's.
Now suppose the book's list price is $40. Typically, the writer's cut is a percentage of the "net" which is a fancy way of saying half the list price. Supposedly this is to cover the cost of publishing the book. (Why does it cost that much? I'm not sure, but maybe it has something to do with the fact that three months' labor is required to reformat a book.) What this means is that if your royalty is 15%, you get 15% of $20, or $3. But that's only for domestic retail sales. Chances are, your contract contains lots of loopholes for things like international sales, book clubs, and anything else you can dream up, so on average you might get $2. That's 5% of the revenue from the sale of the book. The publisher gets the remaining 95%. Think about these two facts for a momont:
Are you now suffering from severe cognitive dissonance?
Yup. Right on the money. When I emailed my editor asking about sales of the book -- AFTER he emailed me about it first he never even responded. As near as I can tell, royalties for a computer book might cover sales tax on a decent dinner out but not necessarily the dinner itself. And, finally, when I asked a professional literary agent about writing computer books, his response was "The game is rigged by publishers against the authors. If you can write ANY OTHER type of book than a computer book that's what I recommend".
Writing Computer Books? Not Recommended.
Well that's as disappointing as it is instructive. Thank Scott.
I've always harboured a desire to author a good computer book, now I think I've got better things to do with my time. Unless...
I wonder if a way could be found to get Amazon, Barnes & Noble et al. to sell PDF books on their website from independent publishers. That is, you and I get together and write our book. We hire an editor on a percentage basis (would that work? Is that a better deal than most editors get now?) and supply the finished PDF for distribution directly to the on-line stores.
After all do computer books get marketed in the way that, say, a Grisham novel does? What does the publisher do other than supply a, seemingly incompetent, management and paper distribution function?
I know some people have tried selling e-books themselves via their own websites. But has anyone made a serious attempt to get the likes of Amazon to distribute independent efforts?
If that doesn't work is there a way to make money via a super-efficient publishing system. Same as above, the publisher is soley responsible for taking the finished PDF, printing and distribution on a percentage basis. Would anybody do it?
I'm probably showing my naivety again...