April 13, 2010

The "tin cup strategy"

by Dennis Johnson

MobyLives has restrained itself from commenting on a recent Publishers Weekly report that struck an accusatory tone against publishers for pressing indie booksellers to make timely payments and for “treating everyone as an identical risk.” In response to this seemingly outrageous tactic, the report said the American Booksellers Association has “set up a new subcommittee to work with publishers.”

Well, Moby may have restrained itself, but Melville House‘s former distributor, Don Linn, did not. As he puts it in a scathing comment on his blog, “So much wrong here.”

Says Linn,

… this story makes me want to bang my head against the wall not only as a stand-alone but also in the context of what has been a years-long concern I’ve had about what a good friend calls indies’ “tin-cup marketing strategy”. It also points out the ineffectiveness of the ABA in bringing real solutions to the very real problems all independent retailers face.

Even before Amazon’s spectacular rise, many (not all) indie booksellers have taken what can only be described as a whiny approach in appealing to customers. We hear pitches like, “We’re special so we deserve your support”‘; “The competition is undercutting our prices”; and “Communities need independent bookstores”. As much as I love you, you don’t deserve or have a right to anything; you’re not the only business facing price competition; and communities only need you if you make yourselves indispensable to your community.

And while you may feel like you “deserve” better credit terms than others and that your credit risk is somehow different from some other credit risk, it’s just not true. Publishers and distributors already act as the bank with relatively generous terms and, in case you haven’t noticed, you get to return anything you choose to at anytime for full credit forever. So spare me the whining about credit, which is an extension of the “we’re special so cut us some slack” tin-cup strategy.

Dennis Johnson is the founder of MobyLives, and the co-founder and co-publisher of Melville House.

6 Comments

J.A. Pak at 12:39 pm on April 13, 2010

I read this post the other day and nodded along because I’ve always thought there was something very, very strange about the whole publishing model, from advances to the actual selling of the books. Learning about it the first time around was sort of like learning about sex — “Uh, you’ve got to be kidding, right?”
J.A. Pak at 12:39 pm on April 13, 2010

I read this post the other day and nodded along because I’ve always thought there was something very, very strange about the whole publishing model, from advances to the actual selling of the books. Learning about it the first time around was sort of like learning about sex — “Uh, you’ve got to be kidding, right?”
Paul Oliver at 10:11 pm on April 13, 2010

I have often wondered about the x’s and o’s of just how important indie bookstores are to indie publishers. Most of my favorite indie stores have entire segregated shelving for notable small presses, something that they don’t do for larger publishing houses.

But does that give them license to claim special circumstances? Or is it an outcome of small presses providing a product that specifically fits into the indie bookstore model?

I don’t know how I feel about this “rant.” I know I agree with it from a technical standpoint. The rules are the rules. I just think there is a rift between the publisher and bookseller that often goes unnoticed. It has to do with the notion that both believe themselves more important than the other.

The fact is though that frozen credit creates a bookstore without “special orders” for customers and new titles for the shelves. In time it will mean a “Going Out Of Business” sign and one less place to sell books for the publishers.

Of course liberal credit limits and no collection policies mean monetary loss for publishers and in turn less work being published.

It could drive one to drink. Lucky for all of us the entire book industry already drinks profusely.
Paul Oliver at 10:11 pm on April 13, 2010

I have often wondered about the x’s and o’s of just how important indie bookstores are to indie publishers. Most of my favorite indie stores have entire segregated shelving for notable small presses, something that they don’t do for larger publishing houses.

But does that give them license to claim special circumstances? Or is it an outcome of small presses providing a product that specifically fits into the indie bookstore model?

I don’t know how I feel about this “rant.” I know I agree with it from a technical standpoint. The rules are the rules. I just think there is a rift between the publisher and bookseller that often goes unnoticed. It has to do with the notion that both believe themselves more important than the other.

The fact is though that frozen credit creates a bookstore without “special orders” for customers and new titles for the shelves. In time it will mean a “Going Out Of Business” sign and one less place to sell books for the publishers.

Of course liberal credit limits and no collection policies mean monetary loss for publishers and in turn less work being published.

It could drive one to drink. Lucky for all of us the entire book industry already drinks profusely.
Michael at 11:43 am on April 14, 2010

There are many curious details of the contemporary American publishing model, some of them probably simply outdated, many of them actually wrong. But the benefit of being able to return books is somewhat overstated in the article, and I always understood it to be a form of compensation for the standard industry discount. I don’t think clothing or housewares or groceries are marked up only 40 to 45% and I know that CDs and other forms of recorded music weren’t, and I’ve noted that before in a comment on this site. Also, there’s a misunderstanding about independent bookstores’ seeking to loosen credit terms. Indies aren’t asking to be exempted from the rules. They’re asking that the rules be applied uniformly across the industry, to include e-tailers and chains. B&N and Amazon don’t pay their bills with the speed (in the the total amount) that Indies must to keep open with publishers. Everyone knows that they pay when they want and negotiate how much they will actually pay. Indies get dictated to, or the doors close, period. Larger retailers like the chains dictate to the publishers. That’s the discrepancy.
Michael at 11:43 am on April 14, 2010

There are many curious details of the contemporary American publishing model, some of them probably simply outdated, many of them actually wrong. But the benefit of being able to return books is somewhat overstated in the article, and I always understood it to be a form of compensation for the standard industry discount. I don’t think clothing or housewares or groceries are marked up only 40 to 45% and I know that CDs and other forms of recorded music weren’t, and I’ve noted that before in a comment on this site. Also, there’s a misunderstanding about independent bookstores’ seeking to loosen credit terms. Indies aren’t asking to be exempted from the rules. They’re asking that the rules be applied uniformly across the industry, to include e-tailers and chains. B&N and Amazon don’t pay their bills with the speed (in the the total amount) that Indies must to keep open with publishers. Everyone knows that they pay when they want and negotiate how much they will actually pay. Indies get dictated to, or the doors close, period. Larger retailers like the chains dictate to the publishers. That’s the discrepancy.