William C. Dietz's Words for Hire #3 - Publishers

My last two columns were focused on the ultimate source of most tie-in work: the film, television and gaming industries which typically create and produce the properties that novelizations and tie-ins are based on. Now it’s time to consider the publishers who purchase the rights and produce the actual books.

And who better to talk to on that subject than Betsy Mitchell, VP/Editor in Chief of Del Rey Books, and Ginjer Buchanan, Editor in Chief of, ACE/ROC Books. Both being very well known to the SFWA community because of their long time involvement with Science Fiction and Fantasy.* As with previous columns, I asked the interviewees a series of nearly identical questions and in some cases summarized their answers.

My first question focused on the overall size of the market. Mitchell replied by saying that Del Rey had published 85 fiction books, 25 of which were tie-ins during 2008.

Buchanan explained that “The ACE list consists of 5 mass market titles per month, and 2 or 3 HC (hardcover) or trade. The ROC list consists of 3 mass per month, and 1 or 2 HC or trade. Some of the mass markets are reprints from the previous year’s HC/Trade list, of course.”
Where tie-ins are concerned she said, “We have a media related imprint named Boulevard, which publishes all kinds of things, including media related science fiction/fantasy. It’s generic to the mass market division, by which I mean that a book can be Berkley Boulevard or NAL (New American Library) Boulevard. The big tie-in last year was The Dark Knight novelization (by Dennis O’Neil), which was done as Berkley Boulevard.

“There was only one ACE tie-in in 2008. It was the novelization of the animated film Gotham Knight, which was released on DVD the month before Dark Knight.”

I asked both Mitchell and Buchanan what percentage of total revenues were derived from their imprints and from tie-ins. Not surprisingly both declined to answer citing the proprietary nature of such information, although Buchanan was willing to say that, “The science fiction and fantasy imprints are contributing significantly to the company, particularly over the last five years with the rise of urban fantasy.”

The question, and their answers, served to remind me of the fact that the publishers we work for are competing with each other. And nowhere is that more visible than with the realm of properties like the Dark Knight where it isn’t unusual for the licensor to receive numerous bids. Typically the highest bid wins but other factors play a part in the outcome as well.

When asked why ACE/ROC went after Dark Knight in particular Buchanan said, “It was going to be a big movie and it was offered. One of the reasons we got it, I think, was that Warner Bros. insisted that the novel not be put on sale prior to the movie’s release and we agreed to do that. Others may have been reluctant to do so. As a result we were able to get the rights for a reasonable price.”

As for how that business decision turned out Buchanan said: “It made the NY Times Best Seller list, which made both us and DC (Comics) very happy!”

The decision to go ahead in this case worked extremely well—but had the movie bombed sales for the novelization could have tanked as well. The point being that each time a publisher buys the rights to publish a tie-in novel they are rolling the dice. A reality that most authors understand but may not think about much.

After twenty years at a major corporation I know companies tend to measure the things they consider to be most important--so I asked both Mitchell and Buchanan if tie-in related revenues are totaled and tracked for corporate accounting purposes. Both responded by saying that while their companies track individual books they don’t track tie-ins as a group.

I think that’s interesting because it runs contrary to the theory that a tidal wave of tie-ins is sweeping original novels off the shelves. Were that the case I believe publishers would measure the performance of the category as well as individual books.

And when I asked Mitchell if she could provide me with the average profit margin for a mass media tie-in novel she responded by saying “I have no clue. I can say they have the same chance of failure or success as other projects.”

Buchanan answered the question this way. “It wouldn’t be any different than for a regular novel. We do a profit and loss calculation for every book., thus you have to do a P&L on a tie-in…”

One of the perennial questions we authors ask our agents and each other has to do with the size of an average midlist print-run. What is it anyway? Fifteen thousand? Twenty-five thousand? Most of us want to know. And for good reason. Because if we knew what the average is it would be easier to locate ourselves on the publishing food chain and figure out whether we should keep writing or look for a real job. (Not that there are many right now.) And it might come in handy during negotiations too!

That’s why I put the question to Mitchell and Buchanan. But it turns out that there’s no such thing as an average tie-in. Each project is associated with a franchise--and some franchises pack more marketing punch than others do. That means each license is acquired for a different price and will incur a different level of expense depending on the print run, the cost of hiring an author, and related factors. All of which makes it difficult if not impossible to generalize.
Here’s what Mitchell had to say: “Without using actual numbers, we don’t sign up a tie-in unless we expect it to result in a significant print run. We don’t publish “midlist” tie-ins, in other words. Our goal is not just to fill a space on the list; it’s to bring in sales.”
That’s an important point. Because there are critics (you know who you are), who see tie-ins as midlist dreck that publishers put on shelves because they’re too lazy or too stupid to buy original novels.

But what Mitchell is saying is that “no,” publishers don’t produce tie-ins because they’re lazy, they’re trying to put a book on the New York Times best seller list ala Buchanan’s Dark Knight anecdote. They aren’t casting about for a way to plug a midlist slot, they’re trying to hit the ball out of the park, and that’s what they have in mind when they hire you. They aren’t looking for some hack to grind out 350 pages worth of filler, they’re looking for a true professional who can capture a universe, and deliver a satisfying experience to hundreds of thousands of readers.

Of course not all of the properties publishers buy become runaway hits. But many do extremely well even if they don’t achieve formal best seller status as Buchanan points out: “There’s tie-ins and novelizations. Most of the tie-ins that are done here are NAL mystery titles like Murder She Wrote, Monk, Psych, and Burn Notice. They’re doing quite well—and they’re genuine tie-ins--original novels, not novelizations. Monk and Murder She Wrote are done in hardcover, in fact.”
By the same token there are those who assume that tie-ins must be less costly to produce since novelizations are clearly derivative, and when an author writes a tie-in they have the advantage of an already fleshed-out universe, and an existing cast of characters. That perception simply isn’t true as Mitchell pointed out when she told me that tie-ins can be more expensive--since both the licensor and a writer-for-hire must be paid.

And Buchanan agreed, adding, “Depending on the level of oversight exercised by the licensor they can be more time consuming. So if time is money, I guess they can be more expensive…”
So, what about shelf life? Ahhh, there’s the rub, as a best selling author with one heck of a strong back list once said. “In general tie-ins have a shorter shelf life,” Mitchell observed, “since once the property had had its time in the public eye readers often move on. Licensors also will restrict the time a book publisher can keep the books in print—a typical license term would be five to seven years. That said, if a publisher has term of copyright in a book and the license is allowed to continue, some tie-ins can remain in print for years. One example is our Dark Angel titles, which keep going back to press years after the show went off the air.”

Buchanan agreed: “I think tie-ins are pretty ephemeral because of the nature of what they are.” Later she added, “A successful original novel is going to stay in print longer. Tie-ins aren’t bought with the notion that you’re going to make money over the long run.”

And here’s why you should care…. Even though the typical work-for-hire contract involves a fixed fee paid in one, two, or three payments some tie-in authors ask for and get a small back-end royalty. Usually one-percent but sometimes more. Although the trade-off for the royalty might be a smaller advance. So if the book earns out, and remains on the bookshelves for a long time, there is an opportunity to make more money.

Plus, every book that has your name on it constitutes an advertisement of sorts, and the more eyeballs that see it the better. So while it isn’t the most important deal point, potential shelf life is a legitimate criteria.

Based on what these two industry experts have said so far, choosing the right property is key to making a profit. With that in mind I asked both interviewees about the criteria they use while shopping for tie-in rights. Mitchell answered this way: “Advance buzz, pedigree of the property (for example, do the creators have bestsellers in their backgrounds?), and the history of the brand.”

“I think that the most successful books aren’t tied to heavily-arced series,” Buchanan observed, “where you have to watch every week in order to know what is going on. Lost and Heroes being the current prime examples. On the other hand, Eureka, while it has some thru-story elements, is a series in which every episode is a stand-alone. Thus, every book can be stand-alone too. That’s at least partly why the mystery show tie-ins have been so successful, I think. Neither Monk nor Jessica Fletcher change all that much from one week to the next.”

Of course every business has to deal with competition, and from the perspective of a flinty-eyed tie-in writer, the companies that Del Rey and ACE/ROC see as competitors are potential clients! Mitchell identified Harper as “….a big buyer.”

And Buchanan pointed to Mitchell’s operation. “Del Rey has more of a program—and so does Simon Shuster. The assumption is that if there’s something hot they’ll be in there—but that doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily get it or that they will be the only other bidders. I’ve lost projects to Harper and TOR, too.”

In a follow-up question I asked Buchanan why ACE/ROC puts out less tie-ins than other publishers do. “Two reasons,” she answered. “First, other publishers are paying more money for them. There have been several things I went after but I was outbid. Del Rey and Simon Schuster, for instance, have tie-in programs more or less, so their incentive to acquire projects is perhaps higher.

“Second, we used to do more when we were owned by MCA which also owned Universal Studios and Television. We would get first look at whatever was being developed, like the film ET, and all of the Spielberg television projects. That's how I came to do fifteen Quantum Leap novels.

“Now, since there aren’t that many publishing companies that share parentage with movie studios or television networks, things tend to be shopped more.

“Currently, other than the NAL mystery tie-ins the only license we have going is Eureka novels. They will probably be done in Berkley Boulevard.”

Then, as in previous columns, I asked both interviewees to address the question of what they’re looking for where tie-in writers are concerned. Mitchell replied by saying that the most important criteria are, “Their love of the property, ability to meet deadlines, and lack of ego.”
Each element of Mitchell’s comment is worth consideration. If you’re interested in tie-in work it’s important to realize that the licensors be they film/television producers or game developers all eat, sleep, and drink their franchise. It’s everything to them and they are looking for people who understand the property and love it as much as they do. And editors have their favorites too… Ginjer Buchanan wrote Highlander: White Silence for Aspect.

So any writer who shows up for work hoping to simply churn out some words for a pay check should be warned: If you can’t find something you genuinely like about the project you should probably pass, because the principals including your publisher are likely to sense your lack of enthusiasm and never invite you back. Oh yeah, and they might generalize to your original work, so why take the chance?

Meeting deadlines is always important, regardless of what kind of project you’re working on, but it’s usually absolutely critical where novelizations and tie-ins are concerned, because they are typically tied to the release of a movie or a game. So to miss a deadline is to miss the opportunity to leverage the marketing effort, and for the purposes of a work for hire project, the author is part of a team that’s depending on him or her to deliver the goods.

And there is no room for ego where work for hire is concerned. For example if you are invited to write a novel tied into a game, you will typically be expected to not only work with whatever editor is in charge of the project, but a team of people who work for the licensor. They tend to have flat reporting structures and pride themselves on very egalitarian cultures. Which means everybody gets to question your assumptions, comment on your outline, and suggest changes. And this process may require you to participate in meetings where you’ll need to look out for your publisher’s interests as well, because your editor won’t be able to participate in all of them, not given all the other projects they are responsible for.

Interestingly enough you may be asked to provide input that won’t impact your book. I happen to enjoy that process, and find it to be a wonderful counterpoint to my solo writing, but it isn’t for everyone. In fact some critics are of the opinion that the process is potentially usurious since the group might adopt one or more of your ideas without paying you for them. So if that possibility troubles you don’t do it.

Here’s what Buchanan is looking for where authors are concerned and it tracks with the points that Mitchell made. “Reliability. That’s number one, two, and three! Also I would say that if you’re writing a tie-in you need to know that you’re playing in someone else’s sandbox. You can’t be adverse to taking input from someone other than an editor. And you can’t be contentious about that input. It takes a certain mindset, a certain way of viewing one’s own writing, to be able to do that.”

One of the things that usually comes up during any discussion of work for hire is the extent to which writing tie-ins might help or impede a particular author where his or her original fiction is concerned. With that in mind I asked both interviewees the following question: “Would Del Rey/ACE/ROC be more or less likely to buy an original novel from someone who has written tie-in novels for them (or others)—or would it make no difference at all?”

Mitchell indicated that, “Writing a tie-in can give a publisher a good sense of an author’s personality under fire, as it were. A good experience on a tie-in project can certainly cast a good light on an author’s future prospects.”

And Buchanan agreed. “Well, if someone had proved to be reliable we would be more likely. It would depend on what the project was. From my point of view as an editor if someone has written a tie-in novel for us it would make me more willing to consider their original work.”
I thought both responses were interesting since some members of the Science Fiction and Fantasy community seem to believe that once an author soils him or herself by accepting work-for-hire they will never be taken seriously again! Apparently this isn’t so…. Not where publishers are concerned anyway.

Finally, I asked both interviewees about the recession, and whether they were going to cut their lists. Mitchell responded by saying that Del Rey is “holding steady” and does not plan to reduce the number of tie-in slots.

And Buchanan said, “Nope. None of the lists here are being cut. We had a terrific year last year—including the final quarter—and for as far as it goes, this year seems to be starting out well. Of course, the fact that accounts—particularly the brick and mortar stores—are cutting initial orders pretty much across the board will have an impact. But we will see how things develop.”
My next column will focus on the art of the tie-in deal featuring interviews with two prominent agents. If you would like to provide feedback regarding my column, or make suggestions regarding future columns, please send them to bill@williamcdietz.com. *Disclosure: William C. Dietz has written tie-ins for ACE/ROC and Del Rey, as well as original novels for ACE/ROC.