.
| Hearsay: |
An interesting piece on the pros and cons of the life of backlist titles. The market is moving toward niche, and other retailers are learning to appreciate the sales-over-a-lifetime of backlist items through online retailers, but booksellers have other concerns that may not make hanging around such an appealling strategy.
Each house has at least one title that seems to buoy the rest of the list. Warner Books’ edition of “To Kill a Mockingbird” sells in the “robust six figures” annually, said Beth de Guzman, the company’s paperback editor in chief. “The Catcher in the Rye,” a major title in Little, Brown’s backlist, sold more than 200,000 last year, according to Nielsen Bookscan, which tracks sales in 70 to 80 percent of the domestic market, but doesn’t include books assigned for college courses — a major source of sales for some books. Penguin Classics — an almost all-backlist imprint that has 4,000 titles, some from the public domain and most with a newly commissioned scholarly introduction — sells “hundreds of thousands” of copies of its most popular titles, including “The Grapes of Wrath,” “The Crucible” and “The Odyssey,” said Elda Rotor, the imprint’s executive editor. Some frequently taught newer titles also have steady sales. Tim O’Brien’s 1990 Vietnam War novel, “The Things They Carried,” routinely sells more than 100,000 copies a year, as does Howard Zinn’s left-leaning “People’s History of the United States,” originally published in 1980.
The backlist can also drive business acquisitions. Simon & Schuster bought Macmillan in 1994 partly for its backlist, which included “The Joy of Cooking.” The cookbook’s heavily updated 1997 edition has sold 1.7 million copies. (Several earlier editions also remain in print.) In 1984, Penguin bought a small English publisher, Frederick Warne, largely for one author on its backlist: Beatrix Potter, whose children’s books sell millions of copies a year. “We bought the company and isolated the key treasure in there,” said Peter Mayer, who was Penguin’s chief executive at the time and is now the president and publisher of Overlook Press.
You know, some times you read an article on publishing that’s supposed to be about thinking outside the box and hope, and you still come away depressed and feeling like you need a shower.
January 2006
December
2005
November
2005
October
2005
September
2005
August
2005
July
2005
June
2005
May
2005
April
2005
March
2005
February
2005
January
2005
December
2004
November
2004
October
2004
September
2004
August
2004
July
2004
June
2004
May
2004
April
2004
March
2004
February
2004
January
2004
December
2003
November
2003
October
2003
September
2003
August
2003
Bookninja © Copyright
The opinions expressed on this site are those of individual participants
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the site owners,
organizers, or other participants.
[powered by WordPress.]
July 31st, 2006 at 9:13 am
Why so depressed, George?
It’s a strange little piece. It claims to be about niche bookselling and the long tail, but it’s really just a string of sales figures for major publishers’ core backlist. It doesn’t say much about anything in particular. The only thing in it that depresses me is the fact that an editor at the NY Times Book Review thinks that Lolita and In Cold Blood are niche titles, and that Hollywood adaptations have something to do with the long tail.
July 31st, 2006 at 10:06 pm
Sounds pretty much like how the music business works: one Rumours or Bat Out Of Hell can make up for a lot of unpaid advances on newer albums that never catch on. But any discussion of the ‘long tail’ potential of a book’s sales curve is pretty well pointless when the book in question is one of the 948,000 titles that sell less than a hundred copies. If the point of the article was to disprove the ‘long tail’ theory as a corrective for sagging book publishing revenues, then the article does eventually do this in a roundabout fashion. But the point could have been made a little clearer in the first place.