What if editors got royalties?

 

by Alison Janssen

 

I *love* editing books. It's my passion. It's something I'm good at. It's my career, it's what I want to be doing in five, ten, a hundred years.

 

And when I say "editing," I don't mean managing a production schedule. I don't mean describing a book's market to sales teams. I don't mean traveling to trade shows, I don't mean trading emails with agents about what our house is seeking, I don't mean negotiating contract details. I don't mean proofreading.

 

I mean editing. Thinking critically about the pace of a novel. Noting areas where characters are making inconsistent choices. Brainstorming solutions to close up plot holes, smooth over clunky timelines, highlight underlying themes. Asking "what if" and "why" in the margins, and not letting up until the text shows the answers. Reading with a keen eye, watching for patterns of overused words, phrases, or sentence types. Engaging the author, as a close and caring outside voice, to ensure that a manuscript reaches its potential.

 

I am incredibly passionate about editing. My passion is tied to an industry that is undergoing major, fundamental changes.

 

Authors, both debut and established, are forging brave new paths, figuring out how to be successful outside of traditional publishing avenues. Creating, essentially, single-author imprints, authors like Amanda Hocking are working towards monumental success. Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Smashwords are facilitating these single-author imprints, allowing authors to upload and sell content (at prices the author controls), and also providing built-in access to readers through forums and author pages.

 

I think it's wonderful that authors are finding direct ways to do what they love and get paid for it. And they're doing it without participating in the "traditional" publishing industry. I don't believe that every writer who tries these tactics will be successful, but that's neither here nor there -- there are successes and failures in any endeavor.

 

It makes me wonder, though ... Can I pursue my passion for editing, and be successful, outside the realm of "traditional" publishing?

 

Put another way: Do editors need publishing houses in order to edit?

 

The quick answer is no, of course not. Right? I mean, I have a freelance website set up. Can I manage my single-editor imprint the same way that Amanda Hocking and J.A. Konrath are managing their single-author imprints? If, in this non-traditional publishing paradigm, part of an author's job is to make their books appealing to readers, then is part of my job to make my editing services appealing to authors?

 

Yes, it is. And taking a lesson from the authors doing well on Kindle, etc, I think one way to make myself attractive is price.

 

Before I get too far down that train of thought, I want to talk about risk. In the traditional publishing world, risk is credited most often to the publishing house: They pay an advance, they pay the salaries of in-house editors, designers, publicists, etc, they pay printing costs. The financial risk for each title released is high, and it's the justification of that risk that sees authors paid a small portion of royalties after earning out their advance.

 

But don't forget that the author has taken a risk, too: She took the time to write the novel, not knowing if it would land her an agent or get a contract. And there's that old saw about time being money, or something.

 

So okay, publishing is risky no matter the paradigm. But what if, rather than a traditional publishing house glomming most of the risk into one big beach ball, each participant in the publishing process took ownership of his/her own little ping pong ball of risk?

 

Which brings me to: What if editors got royalties ... instead of salaries?

 

As a freelance editor, I can choose to help mitigate an author's risk by eliminating any up-front cost to hire me. What do you think, does that sound like an intriguing idea? Let's walk through some what-ifs:

 

An author and freelance editor work together under a royalties-based model, creating a finished manuscript that the author then publishes as an ebook. Let's keep the math and variables simple, and assume that the ebook is published to Kindle, with a 99 cent price point. That means a 35 cent profit for each sale.

 

There are a TON of ways to structure royalties. But I think the most important fators are percentage and term. It makes sense to me that the shorter the term, the higher the percentage. How about two options: Somewhere between 5.5 and 12% royalties for one year, or somewhere between 2.5 and 5% royalties for three years.

 

[ETA: I've fixed my crazy-wonky math from earlier. This is why I'm words, not numbers! The fixed math has also inspired me to revamp some of the original post below.]

 

Now let's assume the ebook sells 1000 downloads per month. That's 12,000 downloads per year. That's a very high number of downloads, but I'm aiming high here to show the top end of the scale.

That's $4,200.

5.5 - 12% royalties for one year would be $231 - $504 to the editor ($3,696 - $3,969 kept by the author)

With the three year royalty structure, assuming sales numbers hold constant over those three years, that's $12,600.

2.5 - 5% royalties for those three years would be $315 - $630 to the editor ($11,970 - $12,285 kept by the author)

 

Considering the rate I quote on my website for freelance editing is a flat $850, all of the above numbers would be a significant pay cut for me. But what happens when an ebook is priced at $1.99, or $2.99? (Clearly I shouldn't attempt math again, so I'll leave you to extrapolate those what-ifs on your own.) But my larger point still stands, I think:

 

By delaying payment into a royalty structure, the financial risk associated with securing good editing is mitigated, and in that case, perhaps it's worth it to the author. Additionally, with my pay rate concretely tied to sales, I have incentive to help promote the book, and the author may believe that a partner in promotion is also worth a royalty-based payment for editors in the long run. Finally, with the proposed royalty structure, I have a high incentive to only work on manuscripts that I believe are great, and only with authors who I believe can handle the sucessful management of their single-author imprint.

 

Consider also what these numbers look like if the novel sells far fewer than 100 downloads per month. What if it only sells 10 per month? That's 120 downloads in a year.

That's $42.

5.5 - 12% royalties for one year would be $2.31 - $5.04 to the editor ($36.96 - $39.69 kept by the author)

With the three year royalty structure, assuming sales numbers hold constant over those three years, that's $126.

2.5 - 5% royalties for those three years would be $3.15 - $6.30 to the editor ($119.70 - $122.85 kept by the author)

 

That's lose-lose for everyone, again underlining the direct incentive I have to help promote the books I work on, and to only work on books I believe in.

 

Now extend this idea out past freelance developmental editing. Can you envision paying a cover designer based on a royalty structure? After all, a vivid cover will certainly help an ebook stand out on a web page full of so-so covers. What about paying a publicist based on a royalty structure? A proofreader?

 

But Alison! Aren't you just describing a publishing company?

 

Yes, I suppose I am. Only the way I'm envisioning it, each "department" own its own risk. Rather than operating as one top-heavy corporation that balances on the author, the future could be more like Voltron, which each component piece operating independently, and becoming more powerful when joined together.

 

Informal poll time! (aka Alison really, really, really loves making Google forms)

 

So, thanks for taking that poll and reading this really long post. I'd love to hear any additional thoughts you have that can't be captured by multiple choice or checkbox answers -- so please, comment away!

 

 

 

 

Comments

[Richard Bush]

The indie pub that's publishing my crime novel, RIVER BOTTOM BLUES, employs a royalty system for paying their editors and cover artists.

[Pepper Smith]

This is not unusual among smaller indie pubs. Everyone takes a part of the risk in bringing the book to market.

[twitter.com/trow125]

I remember being surprised to read a few years ago that translators aren't paid royalties -- the woman who translated "Smilla's Sense of Snow" got a flat fee, even when it went on to become a mega-bestseller in English. Not sure whether or not this also was true for the translator of the Stieg Larsson books.

[Steve Weddle]

I voted but forgot to comment. My comment woulda been something like "Yeah!"

All this here new-fangled webbernet stuff means we all have to re-think how we get paid. Maybe a lower fee PLUS a percentage makes sense. I mean, if you believe the writing will sell, you gotta put your money where your pencil is, but you still hafta have something guaranteed or kitty is gonna go hungry.

[Bryon Quertermous]

This is exactly how Blake Crouch works with his cover artist. Blake new he wanted to get a lot of work out on Kindle at one time and the upfront costs would have killed him. So over the long haul he ended up paying more but had less upfront cost, and his cover artist ended up making more so they both won.

P.S. I'd love you as a my personal editor no matter what the cost.

[Ray Rhamey]

Is there something wacky about your math? 1200 downloads of a 99-cent ebook nets $1188, and 35% of that is $415, not $42,000.

[Alison Janssen]

Ha, yes. Thanks, Ray!

Pesky little things called decimal points. I've fixed the math above.

(I am using the 99 cent ebook = 35 cents to the author number that I yanked from J.A. Konrath's blog, hence the 420/415.80 disagreement.)

[Ray Rhamey]

Alison, I forgot to thank you for the idea. I'm a developmental editor as well, and know the resistance to the fee that exists.

To make this work, wouldn't you need to extract a guarantee from the author that the book will be published in some way?

With a fee, an editor can be compensated even if the revised manuscript never finds a publisher. Seems to me to work a royalty deal with no guarantee of publication would be viable.

[Ray Rhamey]

I meant "wouldn't" be viable. Oops.

[Dale Spindel]

I'm not involved in the book business but your business model makes a lot of sense to me. Also, I loved the Voltron reference.