The BCIC is clearly an extension of the merging of publishing houses into larger media conglomerates. And if I'm not mistaken, Reese Witherspoon acquires the movie rights to the books she promotes in her book club, so her focus is arguably less literary merit than popular (and potential) movie appeal. It's unfortunate.
"If an author’s last book sold poorly, the retail accounts will say they’re not buying many of the next book. It isn’t merely a matter of risk-averse editors."
But don't you think that retail booksellers make this call because they know that publishers don't have any real strategies for promoting their own products? Like I agree, Barnes & Noble is not going to want a second book from someone whose debut sold poorly, because that is the only data point Barnes & Noble has. But if the publisher demonstrated that a ton of muscle was going behind a different, innovative marketing strategy for that author, and that strategy sounded like it made sense, I think it's at least possible that Barnes & Noble would factor that into its calculations.
The problem is that publishers don't have any levers they feel like they can pull besides picking somebody who is already famous, who is connected to one of these book clubs, who has a great sales record for a past book, or even who has a great sales record for self-publishing this one (as we saw with that one recent acquisition). So the track record basically *is* destiny, not because Barnes & Noble is unimaginatively assuming that, but because they know the publisher will treat it that way too. If I'm literalizing the metaphor of "track," this is less like the trolley problem and more like one of those old-timey movies where the woman is tied down with a locomotive coming straight at her -- not so much a calculation as a foregone conclusion.
I think that all sounds right. One editor I know explained it as a narrative business, so if you can spin a narrative to accounts about why this book will be different then they be more likely to buy. "The debut came out in COVID, so sales were low, but for this book the author has changed genres and is planning an extensive live event tour" or whatever.
But no disagreement publishers have few strategies or levers to pull these days beyond "they're famous and connected to celebrities"
I represent what may be a small book-buying group. When I see a stamp for one of those book clubs on a book, I'm LESS likely to buy it. It makes the book feel mass-produced. Ditto if the back cover is just a list of "This is my new favorite book" blurbs followed by famous authors' names. Especially if those blurbs are punctuated with exclamation marks! I'm more likely to read a book someone has personally recommended or that I've found on the shelves of a well-curated independent bookstore. Or one thoughtfully promoted on a Substack. Those books make me feel like I've discovered something special, custom-written for me.
All that for THE TELL and it only sold 100K? An Oprah pick back in the day sold 5x that. It seems the real story is about how the celebrity book clubs, all aimed at the same reader, have divided up their target market.
This is true. Oprah's club itself is now less powerful than Reese and Jenna I believe. Although FWIW remember that 100k from Circana is probably just hardcover sales. It isn't out in trade paperback yet, and audiobook and ebook sales are huge these days. So the total sales of the book will likely be a lot higher.
100k bookscan is probably 125k actual sales (or less given that most sales were probably through Amazon, not venues that don't report). Audio might be 20k but that's only a $1/book in royalties. Ebook sales have no correlation to print sales but let's say another 25k. Which means the book is probably $250-350k unearned. The publisher's p&l might bear that, but I'm dubious that the paperback of a memoir, generally a hardcover genre, will make that back without all the initial publicity.
Alright did some checking. THE TELL bookscans 70K copies, so 100K must be the actual sale (I bet that's rounded up from 90Kish, but whatever). The ebook bookscans 39K and that's probably close to the current net given how much Amazon dominates the ebook market. So using these numbers and standard royalties it's earned out around 435K hc + 146K e = 681K. So $319K unearned. The p&l can probably bear it, that is, despite the unearned the publisher is still making money, but still. Then again, big book thinking prioritizes gambling on the big book, not winning all your bets.
Yeah, I think the number of ARH (American Reading Hours) per year may be fixed. It's like when the French kept splitting their estates into smaller and smaller properties. Or was that the English? At any rate no English or French monarch was eve on Oprah's list, which I think proves my point
Thank you for making the point about bookstores - I've long wondered where publisher obsession with track comes from (since two books from the same author can be quite different and failure of book A to breakout is statistically unrelated to book B's ability to breakout (it's not like all the consumers considered book A and rejected it, they likely never knew it existed)). I would love more information on how bookstores/accounts use track to make their decisions. I feel like this was an aspect the otherwise helpful Walrus article missed.
Yes I hope to write about this more in the future. I do think a switch in genre or type of book is more likely to get buy-in from sales and accounts. Which does make sense. Like, on one extreme you have book 4 in a 5 book series. If the first 3 books didn't sell well, very unlikely the next will outside of a TV adaptation. But, if the author is doing something different then it might break out.
Another reminder of how separate "industry" is from the act of writing. When I was first published I mistook the two for the same thing and got really stuck with my writing. Now I just keep writing what interests me. When a story's done I submit it and if anyone wants it, then great. If not, at least I've enjoyed writing it. I may as well, as I have no influence over industry anyway 🙏🏻
As an SF author, I'm wondering if any of this affects SF books, fantasy or speculative, since I don't think I've seen any of those recommended by the BookClubs.
If they don't, I'm curious about what affects SF books
If anyone has any Substacks to recommend that talk about SF, please share!
I suppose lots of indie journals with book clubs could use the same dynamics for good? E.g. Substack publications with weight can help out less-recognized / up-and-coming authors?
The BCIC is clearly an extension of the merging of publishing houses into larger media conglomerates. And if I'm not mistaken, Reese Witherspoon acquires the movie rights to the books she promotes in her book club, so her focus is arguably less literary merit than popular (and potential) movie appeal. It's unfortunate.
Yeah that's a good point I wish I'd included!
"If an author’s last book sold poorly, the retail accounts will say they’re not buying many of the next book. It isn’t merely a matter of risk-averse editors."
But don't you think that retail booksellers make this call because they know that publishers don't have any real strategies for promoting their own products? Like I agree, Barnes & Noble is not going to want a second book from someone whose debut sold poorly, because that is the only data point Barnes & Noble has. But if the publisher demonstrated that a ton of muscle was going behind a different, innovative marketing strategy for that author, and that strategy sounded like it made sense, I think it's at least possible that Barnes & Noble would factor that into its calculations.
The problem is that publishers don't have any levers they feel like they can pull besides picking somebody who is already famous, who is connected to one of these book clubs, who has a great sales record for a past book, or even who has a great sales record for self-publishing this one (as we saw with that one recent acquisition). So the track record basically *is* destiny, not because Barnes & Noble is unimaginatively assuming that, but because they know the publisher will treat it that way too. If I'm literalizing the metaphor of "track," this is less like the trolley problem and more like one of those old-timey movies where the woman is tied down with a locomotive coming straight at her -- not so much a calculation as a foregone conclusion.
I think that all sounds right. One editor I know explained it as a narrative business, so if you can spin a narrative to accounts about why this book will be different then they be more likely to buy. "The debut came out in COVID, so sales were low, but for this book the author has changed genres and is planning an extensive live event tour" or whatever.
But no disagreement publishers have few strategies or levers to pull these days beyond "they're famous and connected to celebrities"
I represent what may be a small book-buying group. When I see a stamp for one of those book clubs on a book, I'm LESS likely to buy it. It makes the book feel mass-produced. Ditto if the back cover is just a list of "This is my new favorite book" blurbs followed by famous authors' names. Especially if those blurbs are punctuated with exclamation marks! I'm more likely to read a book someone has personally recommended or that I've found on the shelves of a well-curated independent bookstore. Or one thoughtfully promoted on a Substack. Those books make me feel like I've discovered something special, custom-written for me.
All that for THE TELL and it only sold 100K? An Oprah pick back in the day sold 5x that. It seems the real story is about how the celebrity book clubs, all aimed at the same reader, have divided up their target market.
This is true. Oprah's club itself is now less powerful than Reese and Jenna I believe. Although FWIW remember that 100k from Circana is probably just hardcover sales. It isn't out in trade paperback yet, and audiobook and ebook sales are huge these days. So the total sales of the book will likely be a lot higher.
100k bookscan is probably 125k actual sales (or less given that most sales were probably through Amazon, not venues that don't report). Audio might be 20k but that's only a $1/book in royalties. Ebook sales have no correlation to print sales but let's say another 25k. Which means the book is probably $250-350k unearned. The publisher's p&l might bear that, but I'm dubious that the paperback of a memoir, generally a hardcover genre, will make that back without all the initial publicity.
Alright did some checking. THE TELL bookscans 70K copies, so 100K must be the actual sale (I bet that's rounded up from 90Kish, but whatever). The ebook bookscans 39K and that's probably close to the current net given how much Amazon dominates the ebook market. So using these numbers and standard royalties it's earned out around 435K hc + 146K e = 681K. So $319K unearned. The p&l can probably bear it, that is, despite the unearned the publisher is still making money, but still. Then again, big book thinking prioritizes gambling on the big book, not winning all your bets.
Thanks for doing the digging!
Yeah, I think the number of ARH (American Reading Hours) per year may be fixed. It's like when the French kept splitting their estates into smaller and smaller properties. Or was that the English? At any rate no English or French monarch was eve on Oprah's list, which I think proves my point
Going to file this in the (rather voluminous) "why do I write?" folder. Sigh.
Thank you for making the point about bookstores - I've long wondered where publisher obsession with track comes from (since two books from the same author can be quite different and failure of book A to breakout is statistically unrelated to book B's ability to breakout (it's not like all the consumers considered book A and rejected it, they likely never knew it existed)). I would love more information on how bookstores/accounts use track to make their decisions. I feel like this was an aspect the otherwise helpful Walrus article missed.
Yes I hope to write about this more in the future. I do think a switch in genre or type of book is more likely to get buy-in from sales and accounts. Which does make sense. Like, on one extreme you have book 4 in a 5 book series. If the first 3 books didn't sell well, very unlikely the next will outside of a TV adaptation. But, if the author is doing something different then it might break out.
Maxine sounds amazing. I would have liked to have met her.
Another reminder of how separate "industry" is from the act of writing. When I was first published I mistook the two for the same thing and got really stuck with my writing. Now I just keep writing what interests me. When a story's done I submit it and if anyone wants it, then great. If not, at least I've enjoyed writing it. I may as well, as I have no influence over industry anyway 🙏🏻
As an SF author, I'm wondering if any of this affects SF books, fantasy or speculative, since I don't think I've seen any of those recommended by the BookClubs.
If they don't, I'm curious about what affects SF books
If anyone has any Substacks to recommend that talk about SF, please share!
I really enjoy Misfits&Dreamers
I suppose lots of indie journals with book clubs could use the same dynamics for good? E.g. Substack publications with weight can help out less-recognized / up-and-coming authors?