Monday, December 19, 2005
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Thursday, November 24, 2005
Chapter 11
The snow's coming down steadily here but over on A Half Life Of One Chapter 11 has just gone up.
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
When Kennedy was shot
It was a cold night on the 23rd November 1963, exactly forty-two years ago. I was fifteen years old and I remember it as if it was yesterday.
My two pals and I were sitting outside in the porch chatting and laughing. Gordon said the Stones were better than the Beatles. David snorted derisively. "The Hollies are the best, I'm telling you."
Suddenly my Uncle George rushed out, wide-eyed. "Kennedy's been shot," he gasped, "They think he's dead." He scuttled back into the house to watch the news bulletins.
I went to bed that night thinking that the Russians had killed him and that the ballistic missiles were already cruising through the night skies. I was terrified, certain that I wouldn't wake up again.
My two pals and I were sitting outside in the porch chatting and laughing. Gordon said the Stones were better than the Beatles. David snorted derisively. "The Hollies are the best, I'm telling you."
Suddenly my Uncle George rushed out, wide-eyed. "Kennedy's been shot," he gasped, "They think he's dead." He scuttled back into the house to watch the news bulletins.
I went to bed that night thinking that the Russians had killed him and that the ballistic missiles were already cruising through the night skies. I was terrified, certain that I wouldn't wake up again.
My next big idea in publishing
A few posts back I told you I had come up with a new big idea in Publishing.
The concept came to me during that fascinating post I put up about marginal pricing. Remember the airline industry? Ryanair selling seats for nothing and still making a profit?
I said I would reveal the idea on this blog. Well, I've had second thoughts. About revealing the idea that is. Remember, I am a businessman as well as a would-be writer. The thing is, I think the idea has legs. And is therefore worth something.
What I'm going to do instead is set up a little business to test the concept and see if it has legs. My youngest son. who is something of an internet whizz has agreed to help. Become a partner in fact.
So, when we make our first million, remember you heard it here first. You just didn't hear what it was, that's all.
The concept came to me during that fascinating post I put up about marginal pricing. Remember the airline industry? Ryanair selling seats for nothing and still making a profit?
I said I would reveal the idea on this blog. Well, I've had second thoughts. About revealing the idea that is. Remember, I am a businessman as well as a would-be writer. The thing is, I think the idea has legs. And is therefore worth something.
What I'm going to do instead is set up a little business to test the concept and see if it has legs. My youngest son. who is something of an internet whizz has agreed to help. Become a partner in fact.
So, when we make our first million, remember you heard it here first. You just didn't hear what it was, that's all.
The trouble with being successful
One of the amazing things about running a small business is the emtional roller coaster ride to which you're subjected.
Last week I talked about the challenge I faced when a couple of the six companies I control unexpectedly posted losses. We analysed what had happened and (hopefully) took some steps to get them back into profit.
This was done against the backdrop of the oil industry where activity worldwide is exploding on the back of the high oil price and the growing need to replace diminishing oil reserves. And all my companies are in the oil game.
To cope with this increased activity, during the past week I've authorised expenditure of about £800K for new machines and tools and raised a futher £200K for working capital to pay for all the new guys we're hiring.
The Government calls this "investment" and proudly takes the credit for encouraging industry to grow.
But it isn't. It's borrowing. Believe me, I'm at the sharp end and I know.
And that's the funny thing about business. The more successful I am the deeper I get into debt.
Can't wait for the next slump.
Last week I talked about the challenge I faced when a couple of the six companies I control unexpectedly posted losses. We analysed what had happened and (hopefully) took some steps to get them back into profit.
This was done against the backdrop of the oil industry where activity worldwide is exploding on the back of the high oil price and the growing need to replace diminishing oil reserves. And all my companies are in the oil game.
To cope with this increased activity, during the past week I've authorised expenditure of about £800K for new machines and tools and raised a futher £200K for working capital to pay for all the new guys we're hiring.
The Government calls this "investment" and proudly takes the credit for encouraging industry to grow.
But it isn't. It's borrowing. Believe me, I'm at the sharp end and I know.
And that's the funny thing about business. The more successful I am the deeper I get into debt.
Can't wait for the next slump.
Is it cost effective?
Given that it's possible to build up a steady readership of your blog is this a cost effective way of promoting a novel? In my case A Half Life Of One.
Since I started this blog I've learnt just how difficult it is to come up with new, interesting and amusing things to say every day. That isn't entirely a bad thing of course. The challenge stimulates the brain and definitely aids creativity. It's certainly helped my writing and freed up my writer's block.
I've also appreciated the feedback I've had. A number of people have made some very perceptive remarks about A Half Life Of One's shortcomings. If I ever re-write the book again I'll definitely incorporate these suggestions. It's also good to hear from other people out there and to discover you are not alone.
A major drawbackfor me is listening to the sound of my own voice pontificating every day. It's funny but a blog almost by definition forces you to take a particular view or attitude on things. But in reality I don't see the world in black and white. That's one of my strengths as a businessman incidentally.
The biggest downside for me though is definitely time. To do this properly I reckon I would need to spend two or three hours a day blogging. And I just can't afford the time. A professional writer, on the other hand, might consider this a good investment.
What about the future? Well, I've published around about two thirds of A Half Life Of One. So I'll keep going as best I can until that's finished. After that? A party maybe? Or a wake?
Since I started this blog I've learnt just how difficult it is to come up with new, interesting and amusing things to say every day. That isn't entirely a bad thing of course. The challenge stimulates the brain and definitely aids creativity. It's certainly helped my writing and freed up my writer's block.
I've also appreciated the feedback I've had. A number of people have made some very perceptive remarks about A Half Life Of One's shortcomings. If I ever re-write the book again I'll definitely incorporate these suggestions. It's also good to hear from other people out there and to discover you are not alone.
A major drawbackfor me is listening to the sound of my own voice pontificating every day. It's funny but a blog almost by definition forces you to take a particular view or attitude on things. But in reality I don't see the world in black and white. That's one of my strengths as a businessman incidentally.
The biggest downside for me though is definitely time. To do this properly I reckon I would need to spend two or three hours a day blogging. And I just can't afford the time. A professional writer, on the other hand, might consider this a good investment.
What about the future? Well, I've published around about two thirds of A Half Life Of One. So I'll keep going as best I can until that's finished. After that? A party maybe? Or a wake?
Never apologise
I make no apologies for the silence on this blog for the last few days. I've been thinking. And anyway, silence is golden.
There are two main strands to my thoughts which I'll address in the next few posts.
Firstly, what is this blog for?
The answer has to be that it's a platform to attract readers, some of whom at least will go on to read my book A Half Life Of One.
So how effective is the blog as a promotional tool? That depends. If you're prepared to put a lot of work in and post every day you can definitely build up a readership. Maybe thirty or forty visitors a day. Of whom about half will take a look across at my sister site wherein resides A Half Life Of One.
I guess as time goes by it might be possible to build up the blog readership to, say, a hundred or so visitors. Which means perhaps fifty people might read the book.
And, of course, there will be a steady trickle of curious visitors in the years to come. So, being optimistic, maybe 100 people will read the book in the next few years.
Is that a success or failure? I dunno. But it's better than the alternative.
There are two main strands to my thoughts which I'll address in the next few posts.
Firstly, what is this blog for?
The answer has to be that it's a platform to attract readers, some of whom at least will go on to read my book A Half Life Of One.
So how effective is the blog as a promotional tool? That depends. If you're prepared to put a lot of work in and post every day you can definitely build up a readership. Maybe thirty or forty visitors a day. Of whom about half will take a look across at my sister site wherein resides A Half Life Of One.
I guess as time goes by it might be possible to build up the blog readership to, say, a hundred or so visitors. Which means perhaps fifty people might read the book.
And, of course, there will be a steady trickle of curious visitors in the years to come. So, being optimistic, maybe 100 people will read the book in the next few years.
Is that a success or failure? I dunno. But it's better than the alternative.
Monday, November 21, 2005
Friday, November 18, 2005
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Going Bust
Referring to that earlier post about our management accounts.
Well, I went into work this morning and called together the key people in the management team. Everyone's in a state of shock. I asked them all to please keep our new strategy under review because if we've got that wrong we're in trouble. In addition, everyone agreed we still haven't got our implementation right. We discussed ways of improving efficiency and getting more jobs through the shop.
I told everyone not panic. One month's accounts don't mean too much. Stay positive. I'm convinced your doing the right thing.
Even though inside I was churning, fear's icy fingers grabbing at my intestines.
Sometimes you just have to tough it out. If the next two months are bad tho', that's when it will really get interesting. Like I said, time doesn't work the same way for small companies. Three bad months in a row and we'll have to take some really tough decisions.
Well, I went into work this morning and called together the key people in the management team. Everyone's in a state of shock. I asked them all to please keep our new strategy under review because if we've got that wrong we're in trouble. In addition, everyone agreed we still haven't got our implementation right. We discussed ways of improving efficiency and getting more jobs through the shop.
I told everyone not panic. One month's accounts don't mean too much. Stay positive. I'm convinced your doing the right thing.
Even though inside I was churning, fear's icy fingers grabbing at my intestines.
Sometimes you just have to tough it out. If the next two months are bad tho', that's when it will really get interesting. Like I said, time doesn't work the same way for small companies. Three bad months in a row and we'll have to take some really tough decisions.
Do idiots have feelings?
You know, some days I just feel so stupid. I mean, even more stupid than usual. Today is one of those days.
Feeling stupid in turn gives rise to feelings of inadequacy. Feelings of inadequacy that are exacerbated when I read blogs written by people a whole lot cleverer than me.
When its blogs about books I read in my stupid state I wonder if these clever people are actually superior sentient beings to me. I can't express this very well because I'm stupid. But maybe you can see what I mean. Do clever people get more out of Shakespeare than I do? Or even my beloved Fitzgerald? That sort of thing. Does that make me a lesser person as a result.
It reminds me of that debate: Is an African life worth more than a European one? Or is that an invalid analogy?
Somebody clever out there explain this to me, would you?
Feeling stupid in turn gives rise to feelings of inadequacy. Feelings of inadequacy that are exacerbated when I read blogs written by people a whole lot cleverer than me.
When its blogs about books I read in my stupid state I wonder if these clever people are actually superior sentient beings to me. I can't express this very well because I'm stupid. But maybe you can see what I mean. Do clever people get more out of Shakespeare than I do? Or even my beloved Fitzgerald? That sort of thing. Does that make me a lesser person as a result.
It reminds me of that debate: Is an African life worth more than a European one? Or is that an invalid analogy?
Somebody clever out there explain this to me, would you?
The Unpublished History - Part 4
From August 2004 through to July 2005 I continued to re-write A Half Life of One. In its original version a lot of it took place in flashback (I'll explain why once its published if anyone is interested), but I switched this to a straightforward historical sequence to try and build up the tension as events unfolded.
On July 18th after maybe a dozen re-writes I submitted the book to Curtis Brown in London. A month later they sent me back a form postcard of rejection - unsigned.
On July 27th I e-mailed three chapters to Wade & Doherty. Two days later they turned it down by e-mail saying the following:
"Dear Bill,
Many thanks for sending us this material, which I read with interest. Although it’s certainly inventive, I’m afraid it just doesn’t quite grab my imagination in the way that it must for me to offer to represent it. So I must follow my gut instinct and pass on this occasion. I’m sorry to be so disappointing, but thanks for thinking of us. Of course this is a totally subjective judgement, so do try other agents and I wish you every success. "
I don't know if this is a form rejection or not but at least it was extremely prompt (and courteous), and for that at least Wade & Doherty deserve thanks.
Finally, on August 4th I sent the first three chapters out to Greene & Heaton. They said no thanks on the 25th via an unsigned form letter.
In total I sent the book out to 13 agents. 3 didn't read it. At least 2 read the first three chapters for certain. No one really liked it.
Incidentally, to put things in perspective, the Ampersand Agency, who did read the book and took the trouble to make detailed suggestions, currently receive over 100 submissions a week and sound a little overwhelmed right now.
I'm not sure whether I should have given up at this point or not. How many agents do you need to turn your book down before you know it's no good? Should I have tried sending it directly to a few small publishers? Maybe I should have paid to have it professionally edited or reviewed?
Or maybe I should simply have cracked on with writing my next book.
On July 18th after maybe a dozen re-writes I submitted the book to Curtis Brown in London. A month later they sent me back a form postcard of rejection - unsigned.
On July 27th I e-mailed three chapters to Wade & Doherty. Two days later they turned it down by e-mail saying the following:
"Dear Bill,
Many thanks for sending us this material, which I read with interest. Although it’s certainly inventive, I’m afraid it just doesn’t quite grab my imagination in the way that it must for me to offer to represent it. So I must follow my gut instinct and pass on this occasion. I’m sorry to be so disappointing, but thanks for thinking of us. Of course this is a totally subjective judgement, so do try other agents and I wish you every success. "
I don't know if this is a form rejection or not but at least it was extremely prompt (and courteous), and for that at least Wade & Doherty deserve thanks.
Finally, on August 4th I sent the first three chapters out to Greene & Heaton. They said no thanks on the 25th via an unsigned form letter.
In total I sent the book out to 13 agents. 3 didn't read it. At least 2 read the first three chapters for certain. No one really liked it.
Incidentally, to put things in perspective, the Ampersand Agency, who did read the book and took the trouble to make detailed suggestions, currently receive over 100 submissions a week and sound a little overwhelmed right now.
I'm not sure whether I should have given up at this point or not. How many agents do you need to turn your book down before you know it's no good? Should I have tried sending it directly to a few small publishers? Maybe I should have paid to have it professionally edited or reviewed?
Or maybe I should simply have cracked on with writing my next book.
The reading room
What do you read when you visit the reading room? The what? Oh, that's one of many euphemisms for the toilet. Or the lavatory if you prefer. Or how about the can, john, privy, bathroom, cludge, crapper, throne, shitter, smallest room, place of easement, khazi, long drop, loo or bog?
This morning I read a little of Delia Smith's Complete Cookery Course. All about blind baking.
It wasn't what I thought it was.
This morning I read a little of Delia Smith's Complete Cookery Course. All about blind baking.
It wasn't what I thought it was.
Worse than sex
Not many great posts today I fear. I've got to go into work.
Once a month we produce our management accounts. Usually around the fifteenth to allow all the suppliers' invoices to come in.
Last night when I looked at the draft figures it became apparent that two of our main companies had run up losses. If you want to know what stress is, it's when you see red ink in your management accounts. The room swam and I nearly passed out. Seriously.
Our most profitable business had a bad month because of a glitch in orders from its two main customers. Hopefully, this is a one-off. The other company is more problematic. It's going through a period of restructuring but the results are still to show through and we don't really understand why. And if you don't understand what's going wrong in your business it's hard to put it right.
Of course, these being small companies the problems are exacerbated. Time works differently when you're small a small company. It accelerates. When things go wrong you have a lot less time to put things right compared to a big company.
Big companies make mistakes all the time and lose millions and carry on regardless. You don't have that luxury in a small company. Your balance sheet is so tiny there is no margin for error. One mistake can wipe you out.
Don't let me put you off starting your own business though. When it goes well it's better than sex.
When it goes badly, it's still better than sex. Well, virtually anything is at my age.
Once a month we produce our management accounts. Usually around the fifteenth to allow all the suppliers' invoices to come in.
Last night when I looked at the draft figures it became apparent that two of our main companies had run up losses. If you want to know what stress is, it's when you see red ink in your management accounts. The room swam and I nearly passed out. Seriously.
Our most profitable business had a bad month because of a glitch in orders from its two main customers. Hopefully, this is a one-off. The other company is more problematic. It's going through a period of restructuring but the results are still to show through and we don't really understand why. And if you don't understand what's going wrong in your business it's hard to put it right.
Of course, these being small companies the problems are exacerbated. Time works differently when you're small a small company. It accelerates. When things go wrong you have a lot less time to put things right compared to a big company.
Big companies make mistakes all the time and lose millions and carry on regardless. You don't have that luxury in a small company. Your balance sheet is so tiny there is no margin for error. One mistake can wipe you out.
Don't let me put you off starting your own business though. When it goes well it's better than sex.
When it goes badly, it's still better than sex. Well, virtually anything is at my age.
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Boozer's Gloom
The reason I don't post much on a Monday is because I'm usually suffering from boozer's gloom after the weekend's excesses.
For me the weekend starts on a Friday at 5.00pm and ends around 10.30pm Sunday night. With short breaks in between.
Not that I drink that much. I mean, it's not on an industrial scale. The thing is tho', alcohol is a depressant and I am that way inclined.
I'm usually all right by Tuesday. Which is why you're getting all these posts today.
For me the weekend starts on a Friday at 5.00pm and ends around 10.30pm Sunday night. With short breaks in between.
Not that I drink that much. I mean, it's not on an industrial scale. The thing is tho', alcohol is a depressant and I am that way inclined.
I'm usually all right by Tuesday. Which is why you're getting all these posts today.
Carnegie, Churchill, Jesus, Shakespeare, Plomley
If I could have been anybody who's ever existed I'd like to have been Roy Plomley.
He's the guy that invented Desert Island Discs, the British radio programme that been going for ever.
Thanks to one simple idea he managed to live an lifestyle that involved about six hours work a week, leaving him with enough time and money to do all the things he really wanted to do. After he died his wife lived off the royalties. And I dare say their children will too for as far ahead as most of us care to peer into the future.
Just one good idea. Why can't I think of something like that?
He's the guy that invented Desert Island Discs, the British radio programme that been going for ever.
Thanks to one simple idea he managed to live an lifestyle that involved about six hours work a week, leaving him with enough time and money to do all the things he really wanted to do. After he died his wife lived off the royalties. And I dare say their children will too for as far ahead as most of us care to peer into the future.
Just one good idea. Why can't I think of something like that?
Nobody Knows Nothing
In an earlier post entitled "Me, James Joyce and Nora Barnacle" I modestly suggested that due to shortcomings in their understanding of economics the whole of the publishing industry was based on a flawed business model. What I had in mind was the concept of profit maximisation which all companies claim to embrace whereas in fact virtually none do. I looked at this issue in the later post "The Economic Of The Madhouse" using the airline industry as an example.
To my surprise TNH rather took exception to my stance.
TNH said in a comment, "Do you really think we don't know our own numbers? Economists may have "won Nobel prizes for their work on costing, breakeven analysis and profit maximisation," but as an industry we live and die by our grasp of those issues".
I hadn't twigged at the time that TNH works in the publishing industry and obviously knows the business inside out. So in answer to the question "Do you really think we don't know our own numbers?" my answer now would be, No, the publishing industry doesn't know its own numbers and hasn't grasped the same issues that brought the airline industry to its knees.
There, I've said it. I can already hear the howls of outrage echoing across the ether. Pause a second tho', TNH, before you push the nuclear button and wipe my blog off the face of the ionosphere.
I am second to no-one in my admiration of your knowledge of the publishing industry. Ah. Finger hesitating, huh?
Becauseyou know the publishing game so well I am sure you'll agree that your industry is definitely not one where profit maximising is practised. Take the analogy of the airline industry. All those empty seats left unoccupied because of a flawed ticket pricing model.
Is it possible that the publishing industry doesn't sell every last book that it could because it too has the same outdated pricing model? It isn't just price here either. Do you think the industry really has adopted the kind of low-cost model that Ryanair employs so successfully? I'm sure it constantly trims costs like every other industry, but we're talking about revolutionising the business model here. I don't think so. I'm sure you don't either (see, I can make assumptions about what you're thinking too).
While we're at it, having a flawed business model is only part of your industry's problem.
Take a look at the macro environment in which the publishing industry operates. Media and Entertainment. Where the internet is changing everything. In ways which we are only beginning to understand. And that change is about to accelerate. The known unknowns and the unknown unknowns as Donald Rumsfeld said (and I never in a million years foresaw that I would ever quote him.) The fact is, nobody in any industry today (or in the past come to that) knows what's going to happen next. Sure, we all construct our marketing plans and profit projections but these are just comfort blankets. You cannot, in the end, impose order on chaos.
Rememeber it's all about share of mind and pocket. And there are huge swathes of the market that traditional publishing doesn't serve: men, young men, young people for a start. These folks attention has gone elsewhere. And that's just the start of its shortcomings.
Sure, you're going to tell me that more books are published now than ever before and that more people are reading today than ever did in the past. Maybe. How about that as a share of the expanding world population? Is it growing faster or slower? What about the share of disposable income people spend on books as a proportion of the total spend on leisure? Is it growing? If the answer to either of these questions is negative then your industry is falling behind and will ultimately die.
Okay, that's enough for now. Gee' I wish I could resist a good argument.
Right, I'll just slip on my steel helmet and hunker down in this dugout before the shells start whizzing back over.
To my surprise TNH rather took exception to my stance.
TNH said in a comment, "Do you really think we don't know our own numbers? Economists may have "won Nobel prizes for their work on costing, breakeven analysis and profit maximisation," but as an industry we live and die by our grasp of those issues".
I hadn't twigged at the time that TNH works in the publishing industry and obviously knows the business inside out. So in answer to the question "Do you really think we don't know our own numbers?" my answer now would be, No, the publishing industry doesn't know its own numbers and hasn't grasped the same issues that brought the airline industry to its knees.
There, I've said it. I can already hear the howls of outrage echoing across the ether. Pause a second tho', TNH, before you push the nuclear button and wipe my blog off the face of the ionosphere.
I am second to no-one in my admiration of your knowledge of the publishing industry. Ah. Finger hesitating, huh?
Becauseyou know the publishing game so well I am sure you'll agree that your industry is definitely not one where profit maximising is practised. Take the analogy of the airline industry. All those empty seats left unoccupied because of a flawed ticket pricing model.
Is it possible that the publishing industry doesn't sell every last book that it could because it too has the same outdated pricing model? It isn't just price here either. Do you think the industry really has adopted the kind of low-cost model that Ryanair employs so successfully? I'm sure it constantly trims costs like every other industry, but we're talking about revolutionising the business model here. I don't think so. I'm sure you don't either (see, I can make assumptions about what you're thinking too).
While we're at it, having a flawed business model is only part of your industry's problem.
Take a look at the macro environment in which the publishing industry operates. Media and Entertainment. Where the internet is changing everything. In ways which we are only beginning to understand. And that change is about to accelerate. The known unknowns and the unknown unknowns as Donald Rumsfeld said (and I never in a million years foresaw that I would ever quote him.) The fact is, nobody in any industry today (or in the past come to that) knows what's going to happen next. Sure, we all construct our marketing plans and profit projections but these are just comfort blankets. You cannot, in the end, impose order on chaos.
Rememeber it's all about share of mind and pocket. And there are huge swathes of the market that traditional publishing doesn't serve: men, young men, young people for a start. These folks attention has gone elsewhere. And that's just the start of its shortcomings.
Sure, you're going to tell me that more books are published now than ever before and that more people are reading today than ever did in the past. Maybe. How about that as a share of the expanding world population? Is it growing faster or slower? What about the share of disposable income people spend on books as a proportion of the total spend on leisure? Is it growing? If the answer to either of these questions is negative then your industry is falling behind and will ultimately die.
Okay, that's enough for now. Gee' I wish I could resist a good argument.
Right, I'll just slip on my steel helmet and hunker down in this dugout before the shells start whizzing back over.
Shoving your head into a hornet's nest
This is not a blog about publishing.
Let me repeat that. This is not a blog about publishing. If you really want to know about that benighted industry go take a look at The Grumpy Old Bookman's blog.
This is a blog about writing. Something very different.
However, because I'm an idiot and because I think I know a little about business, I've allowed myself to get sucked into a discussion regarding the viability of the traditional publishing industry.
To make matters worse, I've got into a fight with people who are a lot cleverer than me. As a contest it's a bit like me stepping into the ring with Mike Tyson in his prime. Not even in his prime, in fact.
However, I have my pride, and even tho' I'm going to get pummelled, I'm going to defend to the death the wild assertions I've been making. If you're at all squeamish, go visit another blog for a couple of days.
Any writers out there, bear with me for a couple of posts while I address some of the hares I've set running then we'll get back to the real business of writing and marketing our masterpiece.
Let me repeat that. This is not a blog about publishing. If you really want to know about that benighted industry go take a look at The Grumpy Old Bookman's blog.
This is a blog about writing. Something very different.
However, because I'm an idiot and because I think I know a little about business, I've allowed myself to get sucked into a discussion regarding the viability of the traditional publishing industry.
To make matters worse, I've got into a fight with people who are a lot cleverer than me. As a contest it's a bit like me stepping into the ring with Mike Tyson in his prime. Not even in his prime, in fact.
However, I have my pride, and even tho' I'm going to get pummelled, I'm going to defend to the death the wild assertions I've been making. If you're at all squeamish, go visit another blog for a couple of days.
Any writers out there, bear with me for a couple of posts while I address some of the hares I've set running then we'll get back to the real business of writing and marketing our masterpiece.
Monday, November 14, 2005
Blessed are the naysayers
In over thirty years in business I guess I've owned around a dozen companies. Most of them have been reasonably successful. Today I'm down to six. A couple of them make pretty good money and one is expanding round the world at a dizzying rate. The remainder put bread on my table. So I guess I'm doing something right.
In all that time whenever I've consulted the professionals - lawyers, accountants, bankers - they've always given me a load of reasons why my ideas will never work. This negativity seems to be endemic in Scotland.
So when I reveal my big idea for Read On Demand, do me one favour, will you? Pause for a moment before you shoot the idea down in flames.
Thanks.
In all that time whenever I've consulted the professionals - lawyers, accountants, bankers - they've always given me a load of reasons why my ideas will never work. This negativity seems to be endemic in Scotland.
So when I reveal my big idea for Read On Demand, do me one favour, will you? Pause for a moment before you shoot the idea down in flames.
Thanks.
Sunday, November 13, 2005
The Economics of the Madhouse
Before I can reveal my new business model which is going to revolutionise the way books are published and sold I need to explain some of the economic theory behind this brilliant new innovation.
Often described as the dismal science Economics it is anything but. Indeed, for those prepared to study the research carefully it can be the path to riches beyond the dreams of avarice.
To illustrate what I mean let's take a look at the airline industry, which is a particularly good example of the way innovative thinking can completely transform the way business is transacted.
Warren Buffett, the billionaire US investor, famously observed that between 1947 and 2003 the airline industry has managed to loose a cumulative 5 billion dollars. That's right. 5 billion dollars. And that's despite the fact that it has been run by the brightest and best business brains that money can buy. Or, to put it another way, your granny who in the same period put her money in a biscuit tin under the bed, managed significantly to outperform all those Harvard-educated whizz-kids who've been running the world's airlines.
The reason these guys managed to loose so much money is that they had the wrong business model in the first place. And the reason they had the wrong model is because accountants don't talk to economists. Economists know all about marginal costing and pricing and profit maximisation and accountants don't. What accountants think they know all about is breakeven analysis. But actually that in itself is a pretty contentious and poorly understood discipline.
Anyway, as a result of the accountants' ignorance here's what's been happening in the airline industry for years.
First off the airline goes out and buys a new fleet of planes and the CEO asks the accountants to work out what the breakeven figure (the load factor) is per plane. Let's say the plane seats two hundred people and the accountants work out that to break even the company needs to sell 100 tickets at £300 a pop. Unfortunately, that's the wrong answer to the wrong question but nevertheless our airline CEO gets his marketing guys (who are also very highly paid of course) together and asks them if they can sell that many tickets on average per flight. It's a stretch but the marketeers say they can if they increase the marketing budget and indeed, with a bit of luck they might sell 120 seats at that price on certain popular flights.
Indeed, that's exactly what happens and the following year at the company's AGM the CEO announces record profits, the first the company's made for years. Unfortunately, the champagne goes a little flat when he also warns of tougher times ahead due to competition from the new breed of low-cost airlines that have sprung up all over the place. Reassurringly, he explains that though these new compeitors will prove troublesome for a while there is no way they can make a profit at the prices they are charging and he's sure that they will soon go out of business. One shareholder stands up and asks if the company is really maximising its profits with the current fare structure. Of course, is the answer, the company is sweating its assets hard and squeezing every last penny of profit out of its planes.
Except of course it isn't.
With a load factor of 60% the plane is flying 40% empty - that's 80 seats adding absolutely nothing to the bottom line. The marginal (ie extra) cost of filling those seats is next to zero. So if the airline sold them at, say £10 each that's another £800 profit per flight. A profit it would not otherwise have made. A not inconsiderable sum, especially when multiplied by the number of flights the airline runs every year. In other words, the airline is failing to maximise its potential profit. But the airline didn't sell those seats because it had a rigid pricing structure and a lot of people stayed on the ground because they couldn't afford to travel at that price.
The first airline in the USA to realise how crazy all this was was Pacific Southwest Airlines . Later on, in Europe, Michael O'Leary saw what Southwest was doing and decided to apply the same principles to Ryanair. From here on I'll concentrate on Ryanair as that's the airline I'm most familiar with.
Ryanair is the world's most profitable airline and it's growing exponentially. Its genius was the way it took marginal costing and inverted it. In other words, it sold the cheaper, marginally profitable and previously unsold seats first. This simple inversion of logic revolutionised the way the industry worked. In particular, it gave Ryanair an unbeatable marketing edge. It could sell you a seat for a pound if you bought one far enough in advance. Even its competitors in the industry couldn't understand how Ryanair could do it. Everyone predicted Ryanair and the other low cost operators that followed would soon go bust. They were wrong because they simply didn't understand the economics the way you and I do now.
In fact, if you think what Ryanair did was clever, you ain't heard nothing yet. Ryanair has even worked out a way to make money from the seats they give away for virtually nothing. Sounds incredible, but it's true.
The point I'm trying to make here is that looking at the way a business operates in a totally different way can have a profound effect on the business model.
Of course, the traditional airlines are all now desperately trying to fight back by adopting the Ryanair pricing model in a more or less half-hearted way. But for them it's too little too late. Soon they will be as extinct as the dodo, which also couldn't fly.
In my next post I'll explain how the traditional publishing industry is about to go the same way as the airlines when I introduce my new Read On Demand business model.
Often described as the dismal science Economics it is anything but. Indeed, for those prepared to study the research carefully it can be the path to riches beyond the dreams of avarice.
To illustrate what I mean let's take a look at the airline industry, which is a particularly good example of the way innovative thinking can completely transform the way business is transacted.
Warren Buffett, the billionaire US investor, famously observed that between 1947 and 2003 the airline industry has managed to loose a cumulative 5 billion dollars. That's right. 5 billion dollars. And that's despite the fact that it has been run by the brightest and best business brains that money can buy. Or, to put it another way, your granny who in the same period put her money in a biscuit tin under the bed, managed significantly to outperform all those Harvard-educated whizz-kids who've been running the world's airlines.
The reason these guys managed to loose so much money is that they had the wrong business model in the first place. And the reason they had the wrong model is because accountants don't talk to economists. Economists know all about marginal costing and pricing and profit maximisation and accountants don't. What accountants think they know all about is breakeven analysis. But actually that in itself is a pretty contentious and poorly understood discipline.
Anyway, as a result of the accountants' ignorance here's what's been happening in the airline industry for years.
First off the airline goes out and buys a new fleet of planes and the CEO asks the accountants to work out what the breakeven figure (the load factor) is per plane. Let's say the plane seats two hundred people and the accountants work out that to break even the company needs to sell 100 tickets at £300 a pop. Unfortunately, that's the wrong answer to the wrong question but nevertheless our airline CEO gets his marketing guys (who are also very highly paid of course) together and asks them if they can sell that many tickets on average per flight. It's a stretch but the marketeers say they can if they increase the marketing budget and indeed, with a bit of luck they might sell 120 seats at that price on certain popular flights.
Indeed, that's exactly what happens and the following year at the company's AGM the CEO announces record profits, the first the company's made for years. Unfortunately, the champagne goes a little flat when he also warns of tougher times ahead due to competition from the new breed of low-cost airlines that have sprung up all over the place. Reassurringly, he explains that though these new compeitors will prove troublesome for a while there is no way they can make a profit at the prices they are charging and he's sure that they will soon go out of business. One shareholder stands up and asks if the company is really maximising its profits with the current fare structure. Of course, is the answer, the company is sweating its assets hard and squeezing every last penny of profit out of its planes.
Except of course it isn't.
With a load factor of 60% the plane is flying 40% empty - that's 80 seats adding absolutely nothing to the bottom line. The marginal (ie extra) cost of filling those seats is next to zero. So if the airline sold them at, say £10 each that's another £800 profit per flight. A profit it would not otherwise have made. A not inconsiderable sum, especially when multiplied by the number of flights the airline runs every year. In other words, the airline is failing to maximise its potential profit. But the airline didn't sell those seats because it had a rigid pricing structure and a lot of people stayed on the ground because they couldn't afford to travel at that price.
The first airline in the USA to realise how crazy all this was was Pacific Southwest Airlines . Later on, in Europe, Michael O'Leary saw what Southwest was doing and decided to apply the same principles to Ryanair. From here on I'll concentrate on Ryanair as that's the airline I'm most familiar with.
Ryanair is the world's most profitable airline and it's growing exponentially. Its genius was the way it took marginal costing and inverted it. In other words, it sold the cheaper, marginally profitable and previously unsold seats first. This simple inversion of logic revolutionised the way the industry worked. In particular, it gave Ryanair an unbeatable marketing edge. It could sell you a seat for a pound if you bought one far enough in advance. Even its competitors in the industry couldn't understand how Ryanair could do it. Everyone predicted Ryanair and the other low cost operators that followed would soon go bust. They were wrong because they simply didn't understand the economics the way you and I do now.
In fact, if you think what Ryanair did was clever, you ain't heard nothing yet. Ryanair has even worked out a way to make money from the seats they give away for virtually nothing. Sounds incredible, but it's true.
The point I'm trying to make here is that looking at the way a business operates in a totally different way can have a profound effect on the business model.
Of course, the traditional airlines are all now desperately trying to fight back by adopting the Ryanair pricing model in a more or less half-hearted way. But for them it's too little too late. Soon they will be as extinct as the dodo, which also couldn't fly.
In my next post I'll explain how the traditional publishing industry is about to go the same way as the airlines when I introduce my new Read On Demand business model.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
The Unpublished History - Part 3
On September 2002 I sent the first three chapters of A Half Life Of One off to Curtis Brown, the literary agents. At the time the book was called "The Banality of Goodness".
I sent the mss to their Edinburgh office since I thought the book's Scottish setting might interest them. Three weeks later Giles Gordon - who has since died - wrote back to say that his list was full and that he wasn't reading any new submissions. This was something of an anti-climax.
On 4th October I submitted the book to Caroline Davidson. She returned it unread. At the same time I sent it out to Capel & Land. They replied seven days later with a polite form letter saying thanks but no thanks.
On 16th October I sent it to Author Management. Mr James Rouche, the owner, wrote back to me on the 23rd. He'd obviously read the three chapters I'd sent and made the following observations: "Clearly you have put a lot of thought, and I suspect a lot of personal experience into the book but the story just failed to enthuse me sufficiently.....I do know that, unaltered, I believe the book could be submitted to another agent with a good chance of success."
This response was obviously quite encouraging but I have had "rave rejection slips" in the past for other books which remain unpublished. All the same, unless he was just being polite maybe the book did have a slim chance of being published.
I decided to re-write the whole thing once more, this time trying to make the hero a little more sympathetic or, to put it another way, less like me.
On June 14th 2003 I parcelled up the first three chapters and sent them off to McLean & Slora, another Edinburgh agency. They returned them unread about a year later saying they had closed down.
In the meantime, on June 20th I sent the book to Gregory & Co in London. A form letter promptly declined my submission.
On July 22 I sent the book off to David Higham. They replied on August 10 with a form letter rejecting the book.
On July 29th I sent a copy to Sheil Land. They turned it down on the 15th Sept.
On August 12th I sent it out to the Ampersand Agency. Mr Peter Buckman wrote back asking to see the complete manuscript. Boy, was my heart pounding when I sent that parcel off. This was the first time anyone had ever asked to see a book of mine. A few weeks later Mr Buckman wrote back with a list of suggestions to improve the book, all of which I agreed were valid. I re-wrote the book incorporating his suggestions and sent it back to him. On the 29th March he wrote back with a very detailed critique of the revised manuscript stating the reasons why he wouldn't take it on. You can imagine my disappointment. To be honest I was devastated. I shoved his letter - and the book - into the back of a desk drawer and left them to gather dust.
A couple of weeka ago I re-read the letter and actually it's not as negative as I thought at the time. And the criticisms Mr Buckman makes are perfectly valid. Actually, his main concern revolves around who the book is aimed at. I'll publish the full letter (I've obtained Mr Buckman's permission to do this) once I've rolled out the whole of A Half Life. You can then see how your view matches up with that of a professional.
It was the last paragraph of his letter, though, that really left me in a quandary. He wrote:
"I think you have talent and could write a saleable book once you've decided what sort of book you want to write. Maybe you should put A Half Life.. aside and concentrate on something new. If you want to try an idea on me - in abbreviated form - you know where I am."
The trouble was, I wasn't ready to give up on A Half Life just yet.
I sent the mss to their Edinburgh office since I thought the book's Scottish setting might interest them. Three weeks later Giles Gordon - who has since died - wrote back to say that his list was full and that he wasn't reading any new submissions. This was something of an anti-climax.
On 4th October I submitted the book to Caroline Davidson. She returned it unread. At the same time I sent it out to Capel & Land. They replied seven days later with a polite form letter saying thanks but no thanks.
On 16th October I sent it to Author Management. Mr James Rouche, the owner, wrote back to me on the 23rd. He'd obviously read the three chapters I'd sent and made the following observations: "Clearly you have put a lot of thought, and I suspect a lot of personal experience into the book but the story just failed to enthuse me sufficiently.....I do know that, unaltered, I believe the book could be submitted to another agent with a good chance of success."
This response was obviously quite encouraging but I have had "rave rejection slips" in the past for other books which remain unpublished. All the same, unless he was just being polite maybe the book did have a slim chance of being published.
I decided to re-write the whole thing once more, this time trying to make the hero a little more sympathetic or, to put it another way, less like me.
On June 14th 2003 I parcelled up the first three chapters and sent them off to McLean & Slora, another Edinburgh agency. They returned them unread about a year later saying they had closed down.
In the meantime, on June 20th I sent the book to Gregory & Co in London. A form letter promptly declined my submission.
On July 22 I sent the book off to David Higham. They replied on August 10 with a form letter rejecting the book.
On July 29th I sent a copy to Sheil Land. They turned it down on the 15th Sept.
On August 12th I sent it out to the Ampersand Agency. Mr Peter Buckman wrote back asking to see the complete manuscript. Boy, was my heart pounding when I sent that parcel off. This was the first time anyone had ever asked to see a book of mine. A few weeks later Mr Buckman wrote back with a list of suggestions to improve the book, all of which I agreed were valid. I re-wrote the book incorporating his suggestions and sent it back to him. On the 29th March he wrote back with a very detailed critique of the revised manuscript stating the reasons why he wouldn't take it on. You can imagine my disappointment. To be honest I was devastated. I shoved his letter - and the book - into the back of a desk drawer and left them to gather dust.
A couple of weeka ago I re-read the letter and actually it's not as negative as I thought at the time. And the criticisms Mr Buckman makes are perfectly valid. Actually, his main concern revolves around who the book is aimed at. I'll publish the full letter (I've obtained Mr Buckman's permission to do this) once I've rolled out the whole of A Half Life. You can then see how your view matches up with that of a professional.
It was the last paragraph of his letter, though, that really left me in a quandary. He wrote:
"I think you have talent and could write a saleable book once you've decided what sort of book you want to write. Maybe you should put A Half Life.. aside and concentrate on something new. If you want to try an idea on me - in abbreviated form - you know where I am."
The trouble was, I wasn't ready to give up on A Half Life just yet.
Ginny Bloody Amazing
There are times when the internet is absolutely bloody amazing.
I first read about the novelish "Ginny Good" by Gerard Jones when I started using his writers' website "Everyone Who's Anyone in Adult Trade Publishing". At the time I was searching for an agent for my own novel A Half Life Of One.
Gerard has a very distinctive voice and eventually I decided to order his book from Amazon. I placed the order on the 3rd November and the book arrived today (12th) by air freight from America.
The book cost £5.13 and shipping costs were an amazing £2.75.
So there you have it. Advertised on the net, sourced on the net, ordered on the net and delivered to my door at the click of a button.
A few years ago that would have been pure science fiction.
I only hope the book is worth reading.
I first read about the novelish "Ginny Good" by Gerard Jones when I started using his writers' website "Everyone Who's Anyone in Adult Trade Publishing". At the time I was searching for an agent for my own novel A Half Life Of One.
Gerard has a very distinctive voice and eventually I decided to order his book from Amazon. I placed the order on the 3rd November and the book arrived today (12th) by air freight from America.
The book cost £5.13 and shipping costs were an amazing £2.75.
So there you have it. Advertised on the net, sourced on the net, ordered on the net and delivered to my door at the click of a button.
A few years ago that would have been pure science fiction.
I only hope the book is worth reading.
Friday, November 11, 2005
Guest blogging
If anyone fancies doing a bit of guest blogging here just let me know.
You can do a day if you want. You'd be giving my brain and me a break.
Don't worry if you're up to it either.
I don't have any standards at all.
You can do a day if you want. You'd be giving my brain and me a break.
Don't worry if you're up to it either.
I don't have any standards at all.
Ah, soul
I do believe we have a soul though.
This is not a religious belief, although I believe the soul is where we might undergo that sensation we often describe as a religious experience.
It's more the place within us where all our thoughts and feelings exist that shape our thoughts and deeds. Not our brain exactly, something more.
This belief is why there's a lot of references to our soul in A Half Life Of One.
I don't know what happens to the soul after we die. I'll just have to wait and see.
This is not a religious belief, although I believe the soul is where we might undergo that sensation we often describe as a religious experience.
It's more the place within us where all our thoughts and feelings exist that shape our thoughts and deeds. Not our brain exactly, something more.
This belief is why there's a lot of references to our soul in A Half Life Of One.
I don't know what happens to the soul after we die. I'll just have to wait and see.
Me and God
I don't believe in God.
Steady on. Calm down. I'm not saying there isn't one. Or several for that matter. I'm just saying I don't believe in Him/Her.
It's that old thing about self-determination and free will that gets me. Why go to all the bother of creating the Universe and everything just to put a few billion humans on it and see how they turn out? I mean, come on. If you're God you know the answer in advance, right. Besides, it isn't fair. We're on trial for a hundred years max and then we spend the rest of eternity in Hell? That length of punishment is entirely disproportionate to the crime. For most of us, at least.
So save yourself the bother, God. Stop faffing around and send us straight to heaven or hell in advance, would you. No-one will complain. And a few hundred million people won't have to go through the appalling suffering your little game has created.
Of course if there is a God, just by saying this I've condemned myself out of my own mouth. Oh, well. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe.
Or, in my case, what you don't believe.
Steady on. Calm down. I'm not saying there isn't one. Or several for that matter. I'm just saying I don't believe in Him/Her.
It's that old thing about self-determination and free will that gets me. Why go to all the bother of creating the Universe and everything just to put a few billion humans on it and see how they turn out? I mean, come on. If you're God you know the answer in advance, right. Besides, it isn't fair. We're on trial for a hundred years max and then we spend the rest of eternity in Hell? That length of punishment is entirely disproportionate to the crime. For most of us, at least.
So save yourself the bother, God. Stop faffing around and send us straight to heaven or hell in advance, would you. No-one will complain. And a few hundred million people won't have to go through the appalling suffering your little game has created.
Of course if there is a God, just by saying this I've condemned myself out of my own mouth. Oh, well. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe.
Or, in my case, what you don't believe.
Setting Targets
If this blog was a business I'd set it some targets to hit during its existence.
So here they are:
1 Make seven people laugh out loud while they're at work
2 Make three people so angry they choke on their cornflakes
3 Make twenty-five litterati-types turn up their noses
4 Save one person's life (probably mine)
5 Give hope to two people
6 Offend eleven self-righteous people
7 Finally, encourage six people to read A Half Life Of One to the end
So here they are:
1 Make seven people laugh out loud while they're at work
2 Make three people so angry they choke on their cornflakes
3 Make twenty-five litterati-types turn up their noses
4 Save one person's life (probably mine)
5 Give hope to two people
6 Offend eleven self-righteous people
7 Finally, encourage six people to read A Half Life Of One to the end
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)