SST Publications

[Sock Monkey]

Anybody have any thoughts in regards to the SST email today?

For those who didn't receive it, Paul announced that he'll be publishing Stephen Graham Jones's DON'T FEAR THE REAPER, the second book in his Indian Lake trilogy. This book will be limited to 500 copies. He has also decided to increase the previously announced (and sold out) print run of MY HEART IS A CHAINSAW from 400 to 500 copies to (a) match the print run of REAPER and (b) help battle the rise in paper costs by raising his print run therefore reducing his price per unit, in lieu of a raise in the price points of his books.

First, I applaud Paul's transparency as to why he is doing what he is doing. A simple email detailing this information supplants speculation with clarification and, at the very least, allows the customer to understand his thought process regardless if they agree or not.

Second, I don't have much issue with the change, but it is the second such change that the press has recently taken. Any more post-sell-out print run increases might give me pause. It's a dangerous precedent to set. One that I wouldn't like the industry to head towards.

Any other thoughts?

[Martin]

Anybody have any thoughts in regards to the SST email today?

For those who didn't receive it, Paul announced that he'll be publishing Stephen Graham Jones's DON'T FEAR THE REAPER, the second book in his Indian Lake trilogy. This book will be limited to 500 copies. He has also decided to increase the previously announced (and sold out) print run of MY HEART IS A CHAINSAW from 400 to 500 copies to (a) match the print run of REAPER and (b) help battle the rise in paper costs by raising his print run therefore reducing his price per unit, in lieu of a raise in the price points of his books.

First, I applaud Paul's transparency as to why he is doing what he is doing. A simple email detailing this information supplants speculation with clarification and, at the very least, allows the customer to understand his thought process regardless if they agree or not.

Second, I don't have much issue with the change, but it is the second such change that the press has recently taken. Any more post-sell-out print run increases might give me pause. It's a dangerous precedent to set. One that I wouldn't like the industry to head towards.

Any other thoughts?

I have an issue with any publisher changing the print runs of previous offerings. With that said, the small press industry is in a genuine supply crunch. I am finding myself a bit more forgiving about these things at the moment. I will add that I have no dog in this particular fight as I have zero interest in these books. I will also add that communication goes a long way and Paul's note today explained the situation well. If the first 400 of Chainsaw state they are limited to 400 and the last 100 state a limitation of 500, that would change my views.

[sholloman81]

I have an issue with any publisher changing the print runs of previous offerings. With that said, the small press industry is in a genuine supply crunch. I am finding myself a bit more forgiving about these things at the moment. I will add that I have no dog in this particular fight as I have zero interest in these books. I will also add that communication goes a long way and Paul's note today explained the situation well. If the first 400 of Chainsaw state they are limited to 400 and the last 100 state a limitation of 500, that would change my views.

These are pretty much my feelings verbatim. Normally, I would be very against this sort of thing; however, with where the supply crunch is and due to Paul's open communication, this one actually doesn't bother me that much (and I do have the previous book and the current one on pre-order). I also appreciated Paul stating that he wouldn't have done this if it was a stand-alone book instead of part of a trilogy which makes sense to me as well.

[bookworm 1]

I love that Paul. And right out and said why he was doing this. I don’t have a stake in this series. I tried to read My Heart is A Chainsaw and didn’t even make it 100 pages in. Something about SGJ’s writing doesn’t resonate with me.

[Sock Monkey]

I love that Paul. And right out and said why he was doing this. I don’t have a stake in this series. I tried to read My Heart is A Chainsaw and didn’t even make it 100 pages in. Something about SGJ’s writing doesn’t resonate with me.

I find his sentence structure odd. It took me a bit to get into it, but once I caught the rhythm, things smoothed out for me. You did make it a hundred pages, so I don't needing more time to get used to it would have solved the problem.

[bookworm 1]

I find his sentence structure odd. It took me a bit to get into it, but once I caught the rhythm, things smoothed out for me. You did make it a hundred pages, so I don't needing more time to get used to it would have solved the problem.

This was my third and final attempt to read an SGJ book. Every author is not for everyone. And this is one that obviously isn’t for me.

[goathunter]

I have an issue with any publisher changing the print runs of previous offerings.

I don't mean to single you out, but...why? When I buy a book, it's because I want that book. I don't buy it because it's one of only X copies. I couldn't care less if it's one of X or one of X^Y. The book is either worth the price to me, or it is not. The limitation doesn't matter in the least to me.

Again, I'm not judging, just genuinely curious: do you care about the limitation because you're just buying the book because of its scarcity? Or is that you think the price should go down if the limitation is later changed, and that rarely happens (though there are all kinds of reasons why that might be)? Something else I'm overlooking?

(I also couldn't care less if a book is numbered 1, 700, or is a PC. It's the same book.)

[Martin]

I don't mean to single you out, but...why? When I buy a book, it's because I want that book. I don't buy it because it's one of only X copies. I couldn't care less if it's one of X or one of X^Y. The book is either worth the price to me, or it is not. The limitation doesn't matter in the least to me.

Again, I'm not judging, just genuinely curious: do you care about the limitation because you're just buying the book because of its scarcity? Or is that you think the price should go down if the limitation is later changed, and that rarely happens (though there are all kinds of reasons why that might be)? Something else I'm overlooking?

(I also couldn't care less if a book is numbered 1, 700, or is a PC. It's the same book.)

Feel free to single me out. It is the only way I know of to ask me to clarify the intent in what I said. I buy books to read and collect. The actual limitation means little to me. When I add that book to my collection, I want it correctly to reflect what it is. So if I have a book that is '236 of 300' I am not comfortable with another copy of the same book that states '301 of 500'. Is there now a '236 of 500' in addition to my copy? I believe I stated that communication goes a long way.
I believe this instance is getting the attention it is due to the manner in which Borderlands handled a limitation change in their Little Book series. I have that book and learned of the existence of different limitation pages from this forum. That books was part of a series which I chose to collect all of. That single series has three or four different limitations on books within the series. Again, the only communication I have had on that is from here. If I remember correctly Borderlands marketed the series as each book being limited to 500. Several years ago I had some serious issue with Borderlands. I went several years passing on anything they published. The little books intrigued and I could buy them from CD so I jumped back in.
I will state again, I have no issue with what was done here and feel that it was communicated well. I will add that any time a publisher does something that makes me think of Borderlands it is not a good thing.

So, to answer your questions directly:
Do I care about a books limitations? No, I am not buying a book due to its scarcity.
Do I think a price should be adjusted if a limitation change occurs? No, Publishers should price the books at a level that allows them to release the books with a profit margin that works for their business model. (The current supply chain issues is requiring the current change to prevent retail price changes. Again, I think he is doing the correct thing in the current marketplace.)
Is there something you are overlooking? For me it may be that my experience with a publisher who should not be in a position to work directly with his customers jades my feelings. So maybe?

Hope that explains my thoughts.

[goathunter]

Hope that explains my thoughts.

I had forgotten about that particular situation with that Borderlands book. I do agree that that was really screwed up.

I was thinking of cases like Subterranean announcing 26 lettered editions, then changing it to 52 when it sells out in minutes. I don't see a problem with that, but I've seen plenty of people give them hell over it, even though the book in question was still months away from being published (so not the situation as with the Borderlands book). (The last time I saw Subterranean do that, there were several people on TDT complaining that the lettered they bought was now somehow worth less.) Same with the SST, and the key, as you said, is communication.

Thanks for the clarification!

[Martin]

I had forgotten about that particular situation with that Borderlands book. I do agree that that was really screwed up.

I was thinking of cases like Subterranean announcing 26 lettered editions, then changing it to 52 when it sells out in minutes. I don't see a problem with that, but I've seen plenty of people give them hell over it, even though the book in question was still months away from being published (so not the situation as with the Borderlands book). (The last time I saw Subterranean do that, there were several people on TDT complaining that the lettered they bought was now somehow worth less.) Same with the SST, and the key, as you said, is communication.

Thanks for the clarification!

I find that people often like to complain online from the anonymity of a keyboard. I also often find that the complaint has merit but the level that the internet megaphone amplifies it is excessive. In regard to changes made after the sale. Does the limitation size matter to me? No, but I do expect to know the details of what I am buying. If something comes up that requires a change, I expect to be notified of the change. If the change is not acceptable, I will cancel my purchase. I am not familiar with the Sub Press change so I can't speak to it.

[RonClinton]

While qualifying that I think Paul’s reasoning was sound and thoughtful in that it ensures continuity of the complete set, I would say that I think the reason most disapprove of post-sale changes is because it violates the most fundamental pact between merchant and consumer: When you buy something, it should be delivered *as advertised.* If I order a new red BMW, but BMW decides later to build all black cars, I don’t want to be given a black one….sure, it’s still a BMW, but it’s not what I ordered. I made a reasoned consumer decision based on the information at hand, but if the merchant alters that information, then my decision may or may not have been different at the time of purchase.

Again, this does not reflect on the SST issue, but is rather just feedback on Hunter’s general question.

EDIT: It looks like Martin echoed my thoughts above as I was writing this, so forgive the somewhat redundancy of my post.

[sholloman81]

Generally speaking, I am also against raising a limitation number after the fact unless there is an extremely compelling reason to do so. I have never purchased a book with the intention of reselling it. I have never even sold a book online. That being said, if I should ever need to part with one of the limited editions from my collection due to something like a money, health, or space issue, then I like the idea of being able to recoup what I spent if not outright turning a profit. Obviously, fewer copies of a book available should raise aftermarket prices. Because of that, I can see why some collectors might get upset when limitations are changed after the fact. Also, while it is ok to be bummed, I feel like people should complain less when they miss out on things that are by definition limited, whether they be books, concerts, or other events/items. I've missed out on many a limited edition item/event for a variety of reasons, some of them completely out of my control such as tech issues, and I never once thought about contacting the seller/vendor to complain or pressure them to make their item/event less limited. Just my personal opinion. I'm sure others feel differently.

[swintek]

I don't mean to single you out, but...why? When I buy a book, it's because I want that book. I don't buy it because it's one of only X copies. I couldn't care less if it's one of X or one of X^Y. The book is either worth the price to me, or it is not. The limitation doesn't matter in the least to me.

Again, I'm not judging, just genuinely curious: do you care about the limitation because you're just buying the book because of its scarcity? Or is that you think the price should go down if the limitation is later changed, and that rarely happens (though there are all kinds of reasons why that might be)? Something else I'm overlooking?

(I also couldn't care less if a book is numbered 1, 700, or is a PC. It's the same book.)

I think you and I, Hunter, are the only ones here who feel this way. I've tried my best to elucidate my perspective on this matter previously in this thread (starting here: https://forum.cemeterydance.com/foru...197#post190197), but, alas, nobody- at least publicly- agrees with us. "Exclusivity" seems to be the primary concern. In Ron's analogy above- he's still getting exactly- as a physical object- what he wanted: A Red BMW. Not a black one.There's now just 100 more folks who are getting a black one, too. That's not changing what he signed up for one bit- just how many get it. There is a difference here- or maybe it's just me.

[RonClinton]

I think you and I, Hunter, are the only ones here who feel this way. I've tried my best to elucidate my perspective on this matter previously in this thread (starting here: https://forum.cemeterydance.com/foru...197#post190197), but, alas, nobody- at least publicly- agrees with us. "Exclusivity" seems to be the primary concern. In Ron's analogy above- he's still getting exactly- as a physical object- what he wanted: A Red BMW. Not a black one.There's now just 100 more folks who are getting a black one, too. That's not changing what he signed up for one bit- just how many get it. There is a difference here- or maybe it's just me.

That’s an excellent point, and my chosen BMW analogy was in hindsight a fairly poor one that had little relevance to the collectible market, and my main point regrettably got somewhat buried by it.

[slayn666]

SST (or SubPress, for what it's worth) increasing a limitation prior to publication, notifying their customers, and providing a sound reasoning for doing so is fine in my book. A situation has changed, the publisher is doing what they can to address it, and they have provided ample notice so that anyone that feels aggrieved by their actions can request a refund.

Borderlands changing limitations on a whim, not generating an entirely new signature sheet and instead having two different ones, one with the original limitation and one with the actual limitation, and not telling anyone, leaving customers to find out via word of mouth and Ebay listings, is a load horse shit.