Comments on: Analysis of the Scott Sigler vs. Howard Henrdix Debate http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/ It's our turn. Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:00:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Joel http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13622 Joel Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:08:55 +0000 http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/24/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/#comment-13622 "It’s just reality, that’s the way it is, and if your content can compete in that new environment, than you go extinct." Precisely. Couldn't agree more. “It’s just reality, that’s the way it is, and if your content can compete in that new environment, than you go extinct.”

Precisely. Couldn’t agree more.

]]> By: Scott Sigler http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-13620 Scott Sigler Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:45:25 +0000 http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/24/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/#comment-13620 One of the things I brought up in the debate is that Mr. Hendrix (who is a really nice guy) talks about the relationship between the AUTHOR and the PUBLISHER - but he doesn't address the CUSTOMER. Howard thinks we're adding to the signal to noise ratio, but a better way to think of that term is "competition." Until Cory Doctorow got the ball rolling, the only real way to reach millions of potential readers was to go THROUGH THE PUBLISHER. Now, we authors can cut that out entirely, and go straight to the customer. Howard talks about quality, and how we need publishers to determine that quality, but that's where he and I disagree - quality is in the eye of the beholder. If Daniel Steele can sell 60 million copies of her books, than guess what? People like her content, and are willing to pay for it. Is it high literature? No. Does it "challenge the reader," as Howard likes to do with his books? No. It just plain sells. People are happy to spend their money on that product. Who will rise to the top with all this "free" craziness? The people with the content that appeals to the most people. Welcome to the new world, where control is finally where it belongs - in the hands of the end user. It's just reality, that's the way it is, and if your content can compete in that new environment, than you go extinct. One of the things I brought up in the debate is that Mr. Hendrix (who is a really nice guy) talks about the relationship between the AUTHOR and the PUBLISHER – but he doesn’t address the CUSTOMER.

Howard thinks we’re adding to the signal to noise ratio, but a better way to think of that term is “competition.” Until Cory Doctorow got the ball rolling, the only real way to reach millions of potential readers was to go THROUGH THE PUBLISHER. Now, we authors can cut that out entirely, and go straight to the customer. Howard talks about quality, and how we need publishers to determine that quality, but that’s where he and I disagree – quality is in the eye of the beholder. If Daniel Steele can sell 60 million copies of her books, than guess what? People like her content, and are willing to pay for it. Is it high literature? No. Does it “challenge the reader,” as Howard likes to do with his books? No. It just plain sells. People are happy to spend their money on that product.

Who will rise to the top with all this “free” craziness? The people with the content that appeals to the most people.

Welcome to the new world, where control is finally where it belongs – in the hands of the end user. It’s just reality, that’s the way it is, and if your content can compete in that new environment, than you go extinct.

]]> By: Chris http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-12876 Chris Mon, 24 Sep 2007 20:29:19 +0000 http://youmakemedia.com/2007/09/24/analysis-of-the-scott-sigler-vs-howard-henrdix-debate/#comment-12876 Hmm, I didn't 'realize there was a debate. I'm looking up some background on it. I think Howard is wrong because no publisher ever will willingly force an author to release free content. They may suggest promotions that entail free stuff, but I doubt that a large publishing firm will every build its business around free content. It's too time intensive. This is the realm of small publishers. Hmm, I didn’t ‘realize there was a debate. I’m looking up some background on it.

I think Howard is wrong because no publisher ever will willingly force an author to release free content. They may suggest promotions that entail free stuff, but I doubt that a large publishing firm will every build its business around free content. It’s too time intensive. This is the realm of small publishers.

]]>