Originally posted by swintek
View Post
There’s no denying it feels different today than it did in the boom era of the ‘80s or, heck, any era, really, before the last half-dozen years or so. I think there’s probably a number of reasons for that unfortunate change — including the speculation and role of social media that you mention — but I suppose, to my mind, the only party I wouldn’t assign fault to is the publisher. I don’t feel it’s their responsibility to print enough copies to please everyone.
The history of the small press is absolutely littered with bygone presses that subscribed to the business model of high limitations to diminish per copy cost, then after the initial burst being buried by frustratingly gradual sales with additional cost of storing stagnant inventory, an inventory that too often never achieves sellout. A few of those and a press is rapidly at risk. The related costs are exponentially more challenging today than they were in the ‘80s, and so in today’s precarious business environment I can’t then blame a press for wanting to more accurately hone their limitations to match that immediate demand to minimize longterm costs and bleed. Forecasting demand is essentially a predictive gamble, so it’s sensible that a publisher err on the side of caution to protect the longterm solvency of their business.
Leave a comment: