Eventually, We're Going To Stop Giving It Away For Free

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 in fear of disappointing. Tempting as it may seem, the fault does not lie with The Da Vinci Code and uncountable Atkins diet clones. Let us explain why:

1. Reading Da Vinci takes about two hours, maybe three if you stop to look at the pictures. Unless readers engage in the highly improbable chore of re-reading the book to the exclusion of all other books, there's a lot of empty reading time remaining.
2. Thrilling as they may seem, diet and cooking books rarely constitute full-time reading pleasure. If you find yourself addicted, there are programs. Most are discreet. As long as you stay out of the Malibu facilities.
3. There have always been bestsellers being read by women.
4. There have always been diet fads and associated recipes.
5. The easy answers are rarely the real answers.

The problem at Harlequin, and its solution, are stated quite eloquently by its vice-president of overseas operations:

The key to boosting the division's performance will not be cost cutting, Mr. [Diego] Castelli said. The bottom line is that "we've got to sell more books."

Since this article is ostensibly about TorStar's woes, it is reasonable for analysts to look at divesting the book division as a way of building profits. But to suggest that Harlequin is unattractive because it's branded is sort of funny given that HarperCollins is desperately trying to do just that. Branding isn't the problem; people like to know what they're getting. Comfort is vastly underrated. The problem is that Harlequin stayed on road too traveled. They've been playing catch-up for the past several years, and had already fallen behind reader tastes before that.

We've spent much time analyzing this problem (see link below re: Unsolicited Opinion), and our core conviction remains. Too much sameness in what is being published (we can date the decline to the cowboy/baby/bride era), not enough risk-taking. Rather than embracing younger readers, far too much time was spent alienating them. If the fictional worlds are supposed to reflect, even on a fantastical level, the worlds of real women, there were major missteps. If we may be brutally honest (and, what the heck, we've burned so many other bridges), a major failure of the publisher has been to create a sense of sophistication. Big cities in Harlequin books feel like small towns. We like small towns, but cities are grittier, dirtier, faster. If you're going small town, go small town. If you're going big city, be true. And remember that small towns are as sophisticated as big cities.

• If brevity is the sign of an organized mind, we're in trouble. Read the rest at Booksquare: Eventually, We're Going To Stop Giving It Away For Free

Send author a comment on this post

Bigger? Better? Well, See, Not Everyone Wants Huge Purses

We can't speak for all our readers, but when we go purse shopping, we evaluate based on the following criteria: wallet fits (big wallet, but that depends on mood and season), cell phone has a convenient slot (we have an unfortunate history with cars catching on fire), notebook space (this varies, depending on our mood), space for sundries, and room for at least one book. One never knows when one might have a few seconds to read.

Now, perhaps we're a bit cynical or perhaps because we have a mother who reads the small print just fine or because we're willing to admit to only slight lessening of visual acuity or maybe it's our envy because today's reading glasses are so darn cute, but we're suspicious of the notion that catering to an older readership is behind a new, super-sized paperback format. Maybe it's the $9.99 price tag. We don't know.

So, anyway, there's anecdotal evidence that fiction reading is down. And anecdotal evidence that readers are less likely to try new authors at full price. And hard evidence that used book sales are rising. It makes sense that a new format at a higher price is the first response of the industry.

Now, see, if we were the type to analyze things (and we're not), we'd sit back and think. Sure, small print is an issue, but is moving to a larger book and higher price the only option? What about tiered pricing based on length...oh, oops, sorry, naive moment. Oh well, while we're going crazy, we should suggest the obvious: it's medium is not the message. In other words, it ain't the size of the print.

We leave it to more analytical minds to solve this problem.

• Publishers Look to Up-Size Paperbacks

Send author a comment on this post

If We Can Put A Man on the Moon

We do not believe books are going away -- though, the more we think on the topic, it's not so much the books as the stories our species craves. We love our stories. That many of them are contained in books is a major boon to natural readers. In a way, other methods of delivering stories, television for example, are just expansions of sitting our the campfire. Only the husbands are fatter and the wives clearly married down.

Libraries haven't been just about books since, well, the inception of libraries. They serve many purposes in their communities, and the fact that the Salinas public libraries are closing their doors is a huge blow to that city. Our society has developed a fear of taxes, of contributing to common needs, and this was reflected by the recent election in Salinas. Voters chose against libraries. That we believe they didn't fully understand the consequences of their actions is beside the point.

Just as funding for libraries is scarce, so is funding for education. It has always been our belief that the amount spent on teaching children and adults should exceed the amount spent on the military, but this is not the belief of most. But we've entered into an era where costs greatly exceed revenues, from the federal government on down (it is, as they say, trickle-down economics). The good news is that individuals in communities should have more money to spend on making their cities and towns better places; the bad news is that's not likely to happen.

David Kipen of the San Francisco Chronicle suggests that the time has come to get creative about library funding. He's proposing sharing the wealth, so to speak, and at first glance, it's not such a bad idea. Except for the part where the powers-that-be will never go for it. Even if libraries were just about books, they'd be worthy of serious creative effort. That they're so much more than books is even greater incentive. The question is: how can we preserve libraries for future generations?

• Is time running out on public libraries -- and literature?

Send author a comment on this post

Blogs and Readers

Dan Wickett of the Emerging Writers Network recently posed a question about the role of litblogging (more on this discussion in the future, but we're wondering if this variation of blog will make the next version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary). This was something that made us think. Blogs have great advantages over print media and traditional websites, including immediacy and intimacy. For authors (such as Jill, hint, hint) and publishers, blogs provide a big opportunity.

For readers, the benefits are even greater.

Publishers, who don't seem to get this Internet thing on a grand scale, are realizing the power of blogs. Let's face it, there are a lot of books published every year, with only a limited number of reviewers who can read and discuss those books. Many of those reviewers are in a situation where economics rule. Yes, that means advertisers. Others have editorial rules or other restrictions.

Blogs, by and large, are labors of love. If you're blogging today, you're probably not making huge sums of money. This will likely change in the future, but most litbloggers are writing for reasons other than cash. If you look around the community (and we do strongly recommend you pick a link and follow it and then pick another from where you land and follow it and so on), there is great diversity but commonality: we are obsessive readers and often writers. We are your greatest resource.

Now, before you get all excited, take a deep breath and think. Today, we received a request for a review. Setting aside the fact that we haven't reviewed a book in years (far too picky about all the wrong things; it's an occupational hazard), the request was for something we don't read ever, much less review. We're not sure how this author got our address, but it was clear he was taking the shotgun approach. His request was deleted without reply. We've decided clueless justifies this action.

Yes, this is about doing your homework. You'd think your youth would disappear, but, no, that's not the case. Every publication out there has its own personality; by their very nature, blogs are more nuanced. We won't say niche, but that may very well be accurate. In other words, if you want to work with blogs (and, we suspect, most of us want to work with you), don't load your gun and empty your round. You want to pick the right blog, the right audience, the right situation. This means employing Thought and Analysis.

The interview done at Population Statistics suggests that publishers are doing this. Our experience is that publishers send out free books to just about anyone who asks (hint: letterhead). Their goals don't necessarily jibe with the blog world. While we suspect publishers will have success, we suspect individual authors (most of whom don't have significant promotional budgets) will have more success.

But think. Please think. If you approach a blog with a promotional idea (and this will always mean that you will do some sort of work...ain't no free lunch, even in the blog world), what are you offering? Not to the blogger, who might be eager for a day or two or five or seven off, but to their readers. You want to sell your book (and we want you to do this as well). So give us a reason to offer what is, in effect, free publicity.
In other words, give back to your community. You'll be surprised at the benefits.

And publishers, please, don't stop sending ARCs. You never know what catches the bloggers' imaginations.

• Emerging Writers Network
• Time Warner Book Group's Blog Approach

Send author a comment on this post

In Which Pink Might Be An Appropriate Color For The Elephant

Torstar, parent to Harlequin Books (no, we don't have time to look up the corporate structure, we may not have proper corporate names), has reported another drop in earnings. This is a scary trend. The article is unclear, but seems to suggest that the company's net sales were in line with other publishers (either that or the net sales were in line with the U.S. division -- if only we spoke Canadian). Thankfully, all the balance sheet gobbledy gook is summarized neatly for us:

"In the simplest terms, in book publishing we sold fewer books than we expected, leading to lower revenues and lower profits. . .

A Booksquare reader wonders if the decision to stop publishing Nora Roberts is taking a toll on the bottom line. Perhaps -- her new titles surely positively impacted sales. But we have a feeling that one author wouldn't swing the numbers that much. We've discussed the fact that the publisher isn't growing its audience; given the devotion of the romance readership (and when we say devotion, we remind everyone that most romance readers buy books across all genres), we remain convinced it has much to do with subject matter.

We think Harlequin needs to position itself to move faster. One or two year roll-outs for new lines may be how business works, but what about making changes within existing lines? Tastes change rapidly and even book publishing must be fast on its feet. We're not saying the desire for harder-edged heroines and/or action-adventure stories has waned, but it does feel a little like the moment has passed. We believe a great time to launch Bombshell would have been before Buffy slayed her last vampire.

And this might have happened if authors were trusted more. Harlequin's lines are designed to appeal to specific readers. There is some comfort in knowing, from the perspective of tone and, well, sexiness, what you're getting. But we sense the authors are being asked to play it too safe while the readers want something else. They're certainly voting for that with their pocketbooks. We said, the last time we wrote on this topic, that Harlequin should trust its authors more -- we'll say it again: Trust Your Authors. They're readers, too. You don't have to abandon what works, but be more innovative, push the envelope, see what works. Your authors know how to do this -- we know many of them. They are smart and they are talented. It's possible that the experiment might work; given recent sales trends, it certainly can't hurt.

We cannot help but look at the success of chicklit compared to the relative failures (from a sales perspective) of Harlequin's various "funny" lines. Humor is decidedly subjective, but it's clear from the fact that people are plunking down $12.95 and up for funny books that there's a desire for this type of read. We don't know what the goals for the lines were (we suspect sales are a given -- we're talking style of humor), but it's clear they didn't work...while chicklit continues to thrive. We don't think it's the authors; this type of failure has all the hallmarks of the marketing department driving the editorial process. Whenever marketing gets involved, it is almost a given that innovation will be stymied. We haven't made sufficient study of the marketing species to know for sure, but we suspect they have no real idea of what people really want, especially when it comes to books.

We'd also suggest that short books don't necessarily mean your hero and heroine must be joined at the hip. There is sufficient room to give these people well-rounded lives, friends, and family. Make them real. Make them human. We once read a story where, if he'd been described on the news, the hero would have been a candidate for serial killer. Seriously, this guy was an outsider-loner to the point where we had to wonder what sort of mental problems he had. He didn't even talk to his co-workers. Letting authors create better-developed characters might help. The excuse that there isn't time is a cop-out. Yeah, readers want the romance, but how about mixing it up a little? Give us variety. Give us characters with friends. Hobbies. Flaws.

Previously, we suggested that the publisher consider playing with the sacred happy ending. This was a surprisingly controversial suggestion. We didn't suggest eliminating it -- we simply believe this shouldn't be a one-size-fits-all concept. If women are marrying later, having children later, succeeding in business...and the publisher is looking for younger readers...we think maybe it's time to address a wider range of possibilities for, well, happiness. As evidenced by chicklit sales, there is an appetite for edgier (and we do use the word advisedly) stories with romantic plots. You can fulfill reader expectations while still appealing to a broader range of possibilities.

We cannot allow this discussion to end without a brief foray into the world of marketing and distribution. We'll start with the latter: it's time to re-evaluate distribution. Seriously, if the books aren't on the shelves, they're not going to sell. Since our last rant, we have made it a point to check out the book offerings when we hit our local Target(s). Let's just say it ain't pretty. Perhaps the faithful know when to hit the stores...but the faithful aren't going to grow the business. Carrying a full complement of Harlequin books requires substantial shelf space. Is there a way to, well, maybe tailor the process a bit more for retailers who need it? And maybe somehow have books available for purchase?

Finally, we must discuss the covers and titles. We know they offer visual clues about the contents of the books (though some titles have the ability to both repulse and mislead). Again, we focus on a younger audience -- what kind of covers would work for them? While thematic groupings are nice, is it possible that too much similarity might lead to a sense of same old, same old? Just a thought.

Romance must constantly evolve to stay fresh. The romance is only part of the story. This is why the genre is so broad: if it were just two people falling in love, well, you'd be satisfied after reading one or two books. That the love story happens within the context of the rest of the story is what makes readers pick up book after book. This is the basic rule guiding genre fiction. You have the structure, but everything else is fair game.

• Harlequin heartbreak: Torstar Q3 profit falls to $11.3M from $29.7M on books
• In Which We Offer Our Unsolicited Opinion
• Making Fun of "Babes"

Send author a comment on this post

Our friend, David Thayer, in addition to posting on the subject of blogging and writing says this:

Booksquare,
It seems our minds are wandering down the same jasmine and mock orange scented path. Last week my agent suggested a major revision on a novel he was marketing. I've churned about thirty pages of glorious new prose while blogging weeping and gnashing teeth( mine).
Time will tell if this is a good thing or just a necessity.
David