Live data from Hacker News

Writing books is not really a good idea

ellegriffin.substack.com

581–590 of 630 posts

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But... many movies and TV shows from 30 years are also still immensely enjoyable today. Or heck, from 70 years ago. Why do you think movies and TV somehow age more than books?

Not the OP, but the first two reasons why TV & movies from 70 years ago age worse are: 1. Quality of special effects 2. Specifically for TV, it was often treated as the medium where you dump scripts that weren’t good enough to be made into a movie.

The vast, vast majority of content from 70 years ago doesn't have special effects at all.

And I'm sorry but that's not how scripts work. Episodic television and one-off movies have entirely different dramatic structures and aren't even remotely interchangeable. You can't just turn a movie into TV.

One of the greatest TV shows of all time, I Love Lucy, is from 70 years ago. And in terms of enjoyment, it hasn't aged at all. Nor did it require special effects. ;)

Above all, the 1950's was called the "Golden Age of Television" for a reason! [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Age_of_Television

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I really don't see any good argument why copyright should last longer than, say, 20 years. Would any potential authors decide it's not worth it to write books if copyright only lasted 20 years? What benefit to society does ~100 years of copyright provide?

How do you solve the Mickey Mouse problem? E.g., you have a character that has created an "empire" that an organization has the means (cultural/monetary) to prevent their creation from entering the public domain. You have to figure out what to do about those rare situations because they're the driving force for extending copyrights. My ideal is like the old system (initial registration plus fixed term renewals). That…

The renewal system you propose seems like a pretty good idea. Not sure you even need the increasing cost. Just making it a small fee would probably mean 98% of works would never get renewed after the first term. Perhaps add a rule that the author can renew for free if he's still alive.

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#583
post #404

I put some effort into writing a sci-fi novel some years back, but I've since realized that the highest income-per-word ratio that I can hope to realize from my creative writing efforts has to come from my perf self assessment.

I’ve always wondered how much of a direct impact your self assessment actually has on your compensation adjustment. At least in my current job, I feel like my manager already has a ball-park idea of the Comp adjustment to give me. It feels like I would probably get more or less the same adjustment no matter what I write so long as I write something reasonable

Even if your manager will mostly rely on their own judgement, the write-ups will be the only thing that future managers (at the same org) can rely on to learn about your work, and also for things like promotion, your manager will probably need to convince a committee, so being able to draw from your self-assessment will help them argue your case.

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was incredibly common back in the early 1900s. Whole books were at first published in one-page installations in newspapers. Including the most famous Czech novel, Good soldier Švejk. Prior to the advent of radio and TV, this was the best way how to hit a huge audience at once. And for the newspaper, it was a way to entice people to buy the next issue.

That was also common in the XIX century as well: that's how Alexander Dumas and Charles Dickens were published.

> That was also common in the XIX century as well: that's how Alexander Dumas and Charles Dickens were published.

It wasn't exactly uncommon in the early XX either, during the "Golden Age" of SFF:

https://www.andrewliptak.com/blog/2015/01/22/the-history-of-...

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. I really don't see any good argument why copyright should last longer than, say, 20 years. Would any potential authors decide it's not worth it to write books if copyright only lasted 20 years? What benefit to society does ~100 years of copyright provide?

How do you solve the Mickey Mouse problem? E.g., you have a character that has created an "empire" that an organization has the means (cultural/monetary) to prevent their creation from entering the public domain. You have to figure out what to do about those rare situations because they're the driving force for extending copyrights. My ideal is like the old system (initial registration plus fixed term renewals). That…

I think Disney's control over copyright law has been greatly overstated because it makes a better story. Yes, they lobby in favour of longer copyright. But they're spending a measly ~$4 million per year on lobbying (total, not specifically on copyright) [1].

The boring truth is politicians in Congress were in favor of copyright extension (at least in 1998). Two reasons given were: 1) copyright industries give the US one of its most significant trade surpluses, and 2) the European Union had recently extended copyright there for 20 years, and so EU works would be protected for 20 years longer than US works if the US did not enact similar term extensions.

I fully expect the copyright on the first Mickey Mouse cartoon will expire in 2024.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/678813/disney-lobbying-e...

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#586

One thing to consider is royalty rate. If you sell 5000 copies for $20 and earn a dollar per copy, you've earned $5,000. (This math is based on 10% royalties on the publisher's portion, which is about half of retail. And no, fiction books don't sell for $20 typically, but I'm using this number to make the math easy.) Now, if you sell 5000 copies of an ebook for $20 and earn 80% royalties, you earn $16 per copy, and e…

Indeed. Royalties are the issue. I just published a book with a well-known editor and I’m making 10% per copy (ebook or print). The book is priced at more than 50$ and yet I’ll only make this amount by selling 10 copies (of course this is before tax). Interestingly, if your editor has an affiliate program you can make as much money by advertising some link that leads to purchases. So as a writer, if you do both you e…

I have had a 300 page, trade sized (6x9)soft cover book in publication since late 2012. Lightning Source/Ingram Spark handles the printing and distribution. It is a very niche title that has sold about 1500 copies with the only advertising a max $1 daily limit google ad that runs only a few days/hours of the week.

Ingram allows publishers (I wear both hats) to set the wholesale cut and whether or not to take returns. Bricks and mortar book stores require you take take returns and give them at least a 50% cut. I never wanted to go there so do not take returns and give a 26% cut, 1% over the Amazon minimum.

My print cost is roughly $5.25 and I clear a little over $6 a copy. I also have a kindle e-book edition available directly through Amazon at a list of $9.99 that nets me $6.70 a copy. I sell print copies about 3:1 over the e-book.

Unless the title is a tome, it can be printed as b&w with a print cost in the $4-8 range. Everything after that depends on your competition (for retail price) and your wholesale discount.

At the end of the day I don't see anyone getting rich on any book sales, print or electronic, that are not best sellers from known authors/celebrities. However, as supplemental income you can definitely make some coin with little post authorship effort whether print or e-book.

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. When I started to treat my writing endeavours as a hobby rather than as a path to fame, glory, riches and world domination, I also started to enjoy the writing process a lot more. Nowadays I only write when I want to write, and I only write what I want to write. It's a freedom I've come to cherish.

Do you finish anything though? A lot of writers find that the effort of finishing the story is a lot more work than writing the early parts and so they have half-finished novels in their files that realistically they will never finished. I'll leave it to the reader to decide if that is okay or not. For me, I know I have too many unfinished projects and so my stories will remain dreams that never get written down.

I've finished 3 novels, and one remains half-written. My downfall is always the world building - I often find it's more fun daydreaming the world rather than having to deal with cantankerous characters who refuse to go where the plot needs them to go, and always argue about everything.

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I look at the question of money and art at two levels: 1. As an individual, what is the right mindset to have about my creativity? At this level, I agree with you. Looking at the economic trends, the only sane way to create and feel good about it is to do it in my free time, focus on the intrinsic reward and have some other job that pays the bills. I'm very fortunate in that my other job takes good care of me. But th…

> about the wealthy Most books are written about the wealthy?

Not always about the wealthy, but often at least through the lens of the wealthy. Rich people write about poor people differently than poor people would write about poor people.

But also, yes, often about the wealthy. Here's synposes of four of the five current NY Times Bestsellers:

> Over twenty years ago, the heiress Patricia Lockwood was abducted during a robbery of her family's estate, then locked inside an isolated cabin for months. Patricia escaped, but so did her captors — and the items stolen from her family were never recovered.

> Until now. On the Upper West Side, a recluse is found murdered in his penthouse apartment, alongside two objects of note: a stolen Vermeer painting and a leather suitcase bearing the initials WHL3.

And:

> While Maisie believes the boy and wants to help, she must maintain extreme caution: she’s working secretly for the Special Operations Executive, assessing candidates for crucial work with the French resistance.

And:

> There, Stone finds that a dual-pronged threat is hiding in plain sight among the stately houses and exclusive coastal clubs, and the incursion isn't easily rebuffed. These enemies have friends in high places, funds to spare, and a score to settle with Stone . . . and only the cleverest plot will draw them out into the open. From luxuriously renovated homes to the choppy ocean waters, the pursuit can only lead to an explosive end.

And:

> Straight as an arrow special agent Kate O'Hare and international con man Nick Fox have brought down some of the biggest criminals out there. But now they face their most dangerous foe yet-a vast, shadowy international organization known only as the Brotherhood.

Directly descended from the Vatican Bank priests who served Hitler during World War II, the Brotherhood is on a frantic search for a lost train loaded with $30 billion in Nazi gold, untouched for over seventy-five years somewhere in the mountains of Eastern Europe.

These are stories about the elite. You may argue "Well, sure, but people like reading about the rich and powerful because they are more exciting to read about." But that is in itself partially a result of a culture we've built that says that your story is less meaningful if you aren't successful or powerful.

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#589
post #402

One thing to consider is royalty rate. If you sell 5000 copies for $20 and earn a dollar per copy, you've earned $5,000. (This math is based on 10% royalties on the publisher's portion, which is about half of retail. And no, fiction books don't sell for $20 typically, but I'm using this number to make the math easy.) Now, if you sell 5000 copies of an ebook for $20 and earn 80% royalties, you earn $16 per copy, and e…

This model assumes the publisher does nothing. At least if you buy a OReilly or Wiley book you know it will be a decent standard. Many ebooks are junk and its not always obvious which ones.

And advertising is a big expense (when you cannot post it on HN)

Afair I read a post about self-published fantasy authors, and the only author who earned over 100k, also paid like 50k for ads

Re: Writing books is not really a good idea

#590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you solve the Mickey Mouse problem? E.g., you have a character that has created an "empire" that an organization has the means (cultural/monetary) to prevent their creation from entering the public domain. You have to figure out what to do about those rare situations because they're the driving force for extending copyrights. My ideal is like the old system (initial registration plus fixed term renewals). That…

Tell them to go away and use trademark law?

So then Trademark begins to be used as a copyright extension mechanism and Trademark law has no expiration? That doesn't seem like a good idea.
Post reply on HN