10/12: It's A Big Jungle Out There
If anything does keep me doing in-depth blogging, it's going to be the raw ego-boost of the links thrown my way from a few people who are much better bloggers than me. I've been giving Gary a hard time lately, but he's on that list. So is Dirk Deppey. Yesterday was a massive ego-stroke, because I actually made the title of yesterday's Journalista post, "A Better Breed of Publisher." Deppey's response to my thoughts on the Zuda contracts are worth reproducing in full:
Publishing contracts fascinate me. During my time printside with the Journal, I never missed an opportunity to quiz publishers and creators about business, and while I'm by no means an expert on the subject, I can tell you the following about the sort of contracts offered by the more reputable indy publishing houses:
1. They don't require you to sign away your copyrights or trademarks.
2. They usually offer royalties of somewhere between 12-18% of the cover price, after advances (if any) have been recouped - which is to say, once the printer, distributors and retailers have taken their cuts, the remaining profits are split pretty evenly down the middle between publisher and creator.
3. They don't require exclusivity, nor do they include "non-compete" clauses.
4. The rights to published properties revert back to the creator after a certain, set period of time and/or period of inactivity on the part of the publisher.
5. The creator usually has veto power over ancilliary licensing and promotional uses of the work.
Much is made over "industry standards" in publishing contracts, but this only reflects the fact that the traditional comics industry has some astonishingly shitty standards. The above is actually less reflective of what you'd get in dealing with companies like Tokyopop and DC Comics, and more reflective of the prose-publishing industry, which actually has standards. It's the difference between doing business with a shark who only sees you as an intellectual-property sharecropper, and someone who actually respects you for the work you create - and it's a big difference.
Moral: If you respect your rights as a creator, don't do business with someone who doesn't likewise respect those rights. The alternative isn't self publishing; it's doing business with a better breed of publisher. Others have successfully held out for better. If your work is good enough, or meaningful enough to you, then you should too.
Okay, let's put it like this. If you are being offered the kind of deal that Deppey describes at the same time that you're being offered a standard comics-industry deal-- and let's assume the advances are equal, too-- then of course you should take the former deal. What are you, stupid?
But let's take a look at my situation. I have two properties I've been shuttling around to bookstore publishers for years, three more I've added to the stack more recently, and one more on the way. I've learned a lot in the last six months, and I think every step we've taken has gotten us closer to a sale. But... no sales yet. I'm making plans to change that in 2008. But I'm not betting the farm on it, just because others have succeeded in doing so.
This "better breed of publisher" isn't better in every respect-- it takes seemingly FOREVER to make up its mind to publish ANYTHING, and it doesn't have much side freelance work to go around.
Meanwhile, doing Divalicious has not only given me a decent advance and my initial entry point into the bookstore market, it's led to a lot more freelance work and allowed me to get started on a public-speaking career.
5% of something is worth more than 15% of nothing. And 5% of three or four somethings...?
I write a lot. I like writing. And when I've got a plan, I'm pretty fast. The idea I have for my Zuda submission is harder to execute than some scripts, so it's taking more time, but it's still moving along pretty quickly now. My standard deal with artists is a 40-60 split or some kind of advance on same. So by my calculations, the Zuda contracts would make me about $800 for a twelve-hour day. Or $5600 for a body of work that will have taken seven or eight working days.
If Zuda doesn't bite, we end up with another creator-owned property, with which we can do whatever we choose. But assume it does.
The trademark will rest with DC. I don't expect the rights to revert back in time to do me much good. And they'll be able to adapt it however they want, up to and including hiring a second creative team onto it if my artist and I prove "difficult." There are royalties offered, but certainly not on a par with the percentages Dirk cites.
On the other hand, this would be my first work for any branch of DC, a profile-raiser for my other work, an interesting experience and a way to build contacts. My Rolodex for the comic-book industry is still pretty thin, and if this is half the ice-breaker that Divalicious was...
So is that $5600 worth it to me?
That'd be a HELL YES.
I can't afford to make everything I do a long-term investment. (Or a short-term investment, either... hence, those pitches for bookstore publishers.)
Dirk makes an eloquent case in his conclusion, but I don't buy it. I don't believe that the prose-publishing industry "respects my rights" any more than the comic-book industry does-- I think that each market's offerings are determined by commerce, not "respect." In time, I think the bookstore market will exert pressure that forces DC, Marvel and Tokyopop to become more like it, but that doesn't mean I should ignore the advantages of working with each group in the meantime.
My work, all my work, means a great deal to me. (My speed's a double-edged sword... I'm proud of it but always wondering if I'm going faster than I should.) But the reason so many artists make bad deals is they let their emotions get the better of them-- the eagerness to find an audience at any cost, or the desperation for validation, or the pride of ownership, even if these things have no practical value. (I did pick an idea that I think would be more profitable in Zuda's hands than in my own.)
Today's marketplace presents clear opportunities for those who can think "art" with one part of their brain and "business" with another. That's never come naturally to me, but I'm trying hard to learn.
Publishing contracts fascinate me. During my time printside with the Journal, I never missed an opportunity to quiz publishers and creators about business, and while I'm by no means an expert on the subject, I can tell you the following about the sort of contracts offered by the more reputable indy publishing houses:
1. They don't require you to sign away your copyrights or trademarks.
2. They usually offer royalties of somewhere between 12-18% of the cover price, after advances (if any) have been recouped - which is to say, once the printer, distributors and retailers have taken their cuts, the remaining profits are split pretty evenly down the middle between publisher and creator.
3. They don't require exclusivity, nor do they include "non-compete" clauses.
4. The rights to published properties revert back to the creator after a certain, set period of time and/or period of inactivity on the part of the publisher.
5. The creator usually has veto power over ancilliary licensing and promotional uses of the work.
Much is made over "industry standards" in publishing contracts, but this only reflects the fact that the traditional comics industry has some astonishingly shitty standards. The above is actually less reflective of what you'd get in dealing with companies like Tokyopop and DC Comics, and more reflective of the prose-publishing industry, which actually has standards. It's the difference between doing business with a shark who only sees you as an intellectual-property sharecropper, and someone who actually respects you for the work you create - and it's a big difference.
Moral: If you respect your rights as a creator, don't do business with someone who doesn't likewise respect those rights. The alternative isn't self publishing; it's doing business with a better breed of publisher. Others have successfully held out for better. If your work is good enough, or meaningful enough to you, then you should too.
Okay, let's put it like this. If you are being offered the kind of deal that Deppey describes at the same time that you're being offered a standard comics-industry deal-- and let's assume the advances are equal, too-- then of course you should take the former deal. What are you, stupid?
But let's take a look at my situation. I have two properties I've been shuttling around to bookstore publishers for years, three more I've added to the stack more recently, and one more on the way. I've learned a lot in the last six months, and I think every step we've taken has gotten us closer to a sale. But... no sales yet. I'm making plans to change that in 2008. But I'm not betting the farm on it, just because others have succeeded in doing so.
This "better breed of publisher" isn't better in every respect-- it takes seemingly FOREVER to make up its mind to publish ANYTHING, and it doesn't have much side freelance work to go around.
Meanwhile, doing Divalicious has not only given me a decent advance and my initial entry point into the bookstore market, it's led to a lot more freelance work and allowed me to get started on a public-speaking career.
5% of something is worth more than 15% of nothing. And 5% of three or four somethings...?
I write a lot. I like writing. And when I've got a plan, I'm pretty fast. The idea I have for my Zuda submission is harder to execute than some scripts, so it's taking more time, but it's still moving along pretty quickly now. My standard deal with artists is a 40-60 split or some kind of advance on same. So by my calculations, the Zuda contracts would make me about $800 for a twelve-hour day. Or $5600 for a body of work that will have taken seven or eight working days.
If Zuda doesn't bite, we end up with another creator-owned property, with which we can do whatever we choose. But assume it does.
The trademark will rest with DC. I don't expect the rights to revert back in time to do me much good. And they'll be able to adapt it however they want, up to and including hiring a second creative team onto it if my artist and I prove "difficult." There are royalties offered, but certainly not on a par with the percentages Dirk cites.
On the other hand, this would be my first work for any branch of DC, a profile-raiser for my other work, an interesting experience and a way to build contacts. My Rolodex for the comic-book industry is still pretty thin, and if this is half the ice-breaker that Divalicious was...
So is that $5600 worth it to me?
That'd be a HELL YES.
I can't afford to make everything I do a long-term investment. (Or a short-term investment, either... hence, those pitches for bookstore publishers.)
Dirk makes an eloquent case in his conclusion, but I don't buy it. I don't believe that the prose-publishing industry "respects my rights" any more than the comic-book industry does-- I think that each market's offerings are determined by commerce, not "respect." In time, I think the bookstore market will exert pressure that forces DC, Marvel and Tokyopop to become more like it, but that doesn't mean I should ignore the advantages of working with each group in the meantime.
My work, all my work, means a great deal to me. (My speed's a double-edged sword... I'm proud of it but always wondering if I'm going faster than I should.) But the reason so many artists make bad deals is they let their emotions get the better of them-- the eagerness to find an audience at any cost, or the desperation for validation, or the pride of ownership, even if these things have no practical value. (I did pick an idea that I think would be more profitable in Zuda's hands than in my own.)
Today's marketplace presents clear opportunities for those who can think "art" with one part of their brain and "business" with another. That's never come naturally to me, but I'm trying hard to learn.
Labels: Webcomics
Posted at
10:07 AM
1 Comments:
This does a good job of summarizing a lot of my own thoughts on the matter. A lot of the response to Zuda has been: "Webcomics can do better than this. You can succeed without this."
There has been an assumption made that, if desired, any webcomic can manage to sell itself to the non-comics publishing industry, or self-publish and succeed on its own.
Which... I just don't think is true. More and more folks are managing to make a living from webcomics with every year, but it is by no means an automatic bet. There *are* people who would see more profit from Zuda, I'm sure of it - not even taking into account the ability to create a Zuda property as a side-project for those who the skill and the speed to do so.
I can't argue with the people saying that the comics industry standard should be better than they are. It's true - they should. But a lot of people seem to be confusing that with meaning one should never agree to these terms, and I don't think that is nearly as accurate.
Post a Comment
<< Home