Wednesday, July 11, 2007

"Commencing with RWA's 2008 National Conference, for official publisher participation, a romance publisher must verify to RWA that it: (1) is not a Subsidy Publisher or Vanity Publisher; (2) has been releasing romance novels via national distribution for no fewer than three years, with no fewer than two full-length romance novels or novel-length romance anthologies published in each of three
consecutive years; (3) provides per book advances of at least $1,000 for all books; and (4) pays all authors participating in an anthology an advance of at least $500."

"3. The Board updated the definition of Subsidy Publisher or Vanity Publisher to: âEURoeany publisher that publishes books in which the author participates in the cost of production or distribution in any manner, including publisher assessment of a fee or other costs for editing and/or distribution.âEUR This definition includes publishers who withhold or seek full or partial payment of reimbursement of publication or distribution costs before paying royalties, including payment of paper, printing, binding, production, sales or marketing costs; publishers whose authors exclusively promote and/or sell their own books; publishers whose primary means of offering books for sale is through a publisher-generated Web site; publishers whose list is comprised of 50% or more of its books written by authors who are principals in the publishing company; and publishers whose business model and methods of publishing are primarily directed toward sales to the author, his/her relatives and associates."


  1. Not surprising. RWA is consistent in its quest to snub small press & e-pubs.

  2. Sorry that was a terse posting but I was at work where any non-work internet use is a bit risky...

    Many epublisher seem to be reading having *any* outside distribution is getting out of the second point--seems to me that unless 50% or more of sales are forom other places the website is 'primary'?

  3. Exactly, Emily. It does read "primary." Sounds to me like a publisher had better sell 50+% elsewhere, or it'll fall into this bogus "vanity" category.

  4. Every time I think maybe RWA is coming around, they do something like this. :-(

  5. ...Sometimes, I don't think that the RWA really understands their members or what is going on in the Romance community.

  6. I didn;t bother renewing my RWA membership in February, and now I'm even more glad. I honestly believe they will continue to follor the person agenda and prejudice of the board members (whoever they are each year) until the organization see's a difference in money. Why should they listen to opinions or care about the multiptude of opinions if people keep saying "Oh, that's just RWA, change takes times" and keep forking money over to them via memebrships and contests.

    Obviously change doesn't take time as they just changed the status of a few ePublishers and ePublished authors in a simple move.

    I highly recommend authors keep thier money, and find ways to support each other with free (or run on donations) communities like Romance Divas, who obviously strive to give writeres of all romance subgenres what they need and want.