Sentences with phrase «many legacy publishers»

While BuzzFeed produces remarkable works of journalism, it is the viral content that drives their revenue, and many legacy publishers have imitated aspects of BuzzFeed's approach.

Instead, legacy publishers keep searching for the next big thing and, as a result, give us dozens of watered down titles for each «best seller» they have.

So what are legacy publishers?

The problem with this where publishing is concerned is that legacy publishers aren't willing to have a «grown up debate».

The Independent Team argues that legacy publishers, including Hachette, have a history of treating authors and readers poorly.

And getting your panties in a twist over calling a publisher a legacy publisher is like getting them in wad over calling someone an author instead of a writer.

Seeing acceptance by a legacy publisher as my only legitimate path to reality, I spent years languishing, working to improve my craft, waiting for my «turn,» my big break, for a bolt of literary lightning to come down from the heavens and strike me.

Legacy publishers don't like to be thought of as «previous» or «outdated», even though they indeed are by any definition, so they reject the term because it conflicts with their personal identities.

Yes, the terms «legacy publishing» and «legacy publishers» have come into common usage.

What you are describing sounds like how the Big 5 / Legacy publishers are treating their authors.

Some, like Darcy Chan and Jamie McGuire, enter lucrative arrangements with legacy publishers; others like Ruthie Cardello take a look at their numbers and say, «no thank you.»

If legacy publishers weren't worried about the indie press revolution, I doubt they'd be spending this much time, effort, and money trying to discredit and slap labels on indie publishers.

I have read novels published by legacy publishers, wholly vetted by agents and editors from on high that were utter CRAP.

Are legacy publishers and professionals so threatened by self - published authors that this level of effort goes into picking apart an argument in favor of indie authors?

There should be a marginal discount to reflect that over the cost of the paperback — instead many legacy publishers are charging more.

The reason legacy publishers have «gotten away» with as much as they have gotten (though hardly for much longer) is that the individual stakes are so small.

I've read novels by both legacy publishers and indie publishers that were excellent.

Whether it's the latest title from a legacy publisher's hottest author, or a graduate - level biochemistry textbook, there is a severe disillusion on the part of the reading public that ebooks should automatically... [Read more...]

Some articles make it sound like legacy publishers want to slap warning stickers on indie published books, point at the authors and shout «UNCLEAN!

If one purchases a novel, whether in print or electronic form, and enjoys it, does it really matter if it was vetted and published by a legacy publishers or whether it was indie published?

So we shouldn't have trade publisher, legacy publisher, big publisher, independent publisher, small publisher, digital - first publisher, publishing house, publishing imprint, or any of the other dozens of terms for describing publishers either?

In addition to the blacklisting and collusion, you now have the public vilification of this pesky upstart from Seattle who dares to compete and make the legacy publishers look bad on both price and payment.

But how do you decide between a legacy publisher, self - publishing, and the new kind of marketing - centric publishing pioneered by Amazon but soon to be emulated by numerous new players?

Anyone who thinks her legacy publisher will do the marketing for her (or do any meaningful marketing at all) is relying on the theory of legacy publishing and ignoring the reality, which matches the theory maybe one time in a thousand.

Or is it in fact the very advice legacy publishers themselves have been giving to authors for more or less the last decade?

Explain for all to see how you're making smart, enlightened decisions by signing with a legacy publisher.

Never mind what the legacy publishers say.

An author can distribute one - hundred - percent as effectively alone as she can with a legacy publisher.

Many writers I knew were still confidently repeating legacy publishers» talking points about how self - published books are of low quality, nobody makes any money at it, you would ruin your chances of ever landing a «real publisher,» etc..

The indie presses grew up to replace the old, slow legacy publishers of that day.

In digital distribution, legacy publishers offer zero value.

It's more of a talking point to say how legacy publishers are evil.

A poor self - pubbed ebook cover shouldn't mean you're better off with your legacy publisher.

Folks are more and more vocal about how it is past time for legacy publishers to break away from the traditional business plan, especially regarding royalties.

The looks on the faces of those who have never had to consider the difference between what an author earns on a book published by a legacy publisher versus what that author would make if she published the book herself told a story all unto itself.

Hell's bells, if we have to make sure we send an edited manuscript to our agents and editors before they «edit» it — and yes, there are a number of authors who pay freelance editors to go over their work before submitting it because they know there will be no real editing done by their editors at certain legacy publishers — and we have to do our own marketing and promotion and do it on our own dime, why are we giving legacy publishers the majority of money earned by our hard work?

It's even harder to get an agent — something you need to get your foot in the door at most legacy publishers.

Speculation runs from laziness by legacy publishers to too many people thinking they are the next great writer waiting to be discovered and who are taking advantage of the ease of self - publishing digitally.

At first I felt kind of self conscious using the term published author to refer to myself, since, after all, I wasn't published through one of the legacy publishers, who thought of my efforts as «vanity.»

It doesn't matter if the novel is going to a legacy publisher or is being self - published.

There are small and micro presses that will do everything the legacy publishers do and still give us a bigger piece of the pie.

Without us, what would the legacy publishers have?

It's hard to get a publisher these days, especially a legacy publisher.

I guess the easiest way to say it is this: Think and quit parroting the party line given you by your legacy publisher.

Whether it's the latest title from a legacy publisher's hottest author, or a graduate - level biochemistry textbook, there is a severe disillusion on the part of the reading public that ebooks should automatically be exponentially cheaper than print books, and it's a topic that hasn't made much headway in the last several years.

It rankles legacy publishers (and apparently you) that they are no longer allowed to be the gatekeepers of what can be read and who can publish.

That sort of leaves me believing that her numbers aren't even close to what the legacy publisher hoped they'd be.

And, frankly, can you blame an author for signing with Amazon if it does offer the editing, copy editing and proofreading, promotion and placement legacy publishers used to and no longer do?

I know legacy publishers and agents are scared about where the industry is going.

If you are offered a contract by a legacy publisher PLEASE take it to an IP attorney with publishing experience and have him vet the contract before you sign it.