Hi Everyone:

I was looking at the Amazon page for the book Getting Started With Horse Poker by Chris Wallace, Michael Mizrachi, and Robert Mizrachi and immediately noticed this statement:

"They had offers from Poker Publishers, but she wasn't happy with the terms ..."

I have a problem with this. Anyone who reads it is going to think that they're talking about Two Plus Two Publishing LLC, and I never heard from these people.

The reason I bring this up is that I've now seen similar language in a couple of other books, and again, we never heard from those people either. Perhaps I'm too sensitive, but I wish stuff like this wouldn't be written.

Also, I haven't read any of the book and thus have no comment on it.

Mason

Wow i didn't know chris wallace wrote a horse book as well as being a great rapper. RIP.

Are there any other poker publishers in the universe other than Two Plus Two Publishing LLC?

I know of three others.

Also, I just noticed the book says “independently published” which means it probably went through Amazon. And for someone who is known, going through Amazon should cost very little and produce a good royalty. I’ve also told a couple of inquiring authors that they should look at what Amazon offers.

Mason

Apparently it was someone who shopped the book around and “They had offers from poker publishers but she wasn’t happy with the terms.” Obviously, in my opinion, she didn’t know what she was doing.

Mason

Ok, "She" is acting as a 'Literary Agent' for the Authors of the Book.

I assume you're taking issue because

A) the inference from shoppers is that Two Plus Two is among the unnamed "Poker Publishers [sic]"
B) the further inference is that your company offered unfavorable terms
C) this could dissuade future authors/editors to work with your company

Is that about right? If so, only you know the likelihood of each. (Well, sort of... this is an "if A, then very likely B" situation.) From my view in the cheap seat, Two Plus Two has been the industry leader for decades when it comes to the niche of poker publications. Any author/editor worth their salt will still have you on their short list, regardless of one particular Amazon bio.

So yeah, in my opinion... you might be overthinking this one. But you know the industry better than I do, LDO.

It’s even more than what you say. 2+2 has always paid the highest royalties by far of any poker publisher. During the poker boom our authors made 4 to 5 times with us than what they would of made with our competitors, and they will still make a lot more today than what they would with our major competitor. Also, we have a lot of expertise and work closely with our authors and often make the book much better which is also good for sales.

I don’t know Chris Fox but he needs to change what he wrote and apologize to us.

Perhaps someone can show him this thread.

Mason

It's funny, I now feel like someone talking to a person who is afraid to fly in an airplane why there is little to no justification for their fears.

I don't doubt any of this for a second.

The question is whether or not other people will automatically doubt the above, all based on the statement. If potential authors and editors are likely to be turned off by Two Plus Two – despite your history – than yes, Wallace's words carried some force and effect, and he might need to choose his words more carefully.

But I must repeat one part of my previous post:

The bolded is the only subset of people you need to be worried about. Sure, maybe thousands and thousands of customers who read that passage who suddenly think that Two Plus Two was among the rejected publishers. You shouldn't be concerned about Joe and Mary Six-Max seeing that phrase while perusing the bookstore for a reference on HORSE. Their opinions and knowledge about your royalties, history, expertise and editorial skills mean little to your business.

No, the people for whom that blurb matters are those who actually write poker books – i.e. the people who might approach you about being their publisher. They already know you as a long-time industry leader. (This was what I meant when I said "the industry leader for decades" in my post.) And Wallace's choice of words in an Amazon description will mean nothing.

In fact, conversely, any author who does make the leap in logic that Two Plus Two offers lousy deals – all based on his/her interpretation of that one sentence – is not likely poker-savvy to warrant your brand on the spine in the first place. You don't want 'em anyway. It's like a vegan giving a bad review of a steakhouse.

All this said...

Where is this blurb? I just went to the Amazon listing and saw no such text. Maybe it has been removed. Cardoza must have some muscle to Fox's house.

So, to be clear, you're going out of your way to be offended about something that might not even be about you?

Questioning the competency of someone who you don't know without any evidence other than that they couldn't reach an agreement with an unknown publisher, is much more offensive than what you are getting mad about to begin with (and you don't even know they are talking about you, which they probably aren't.

Grow up.

Maybe they don't want to deal with a person who constantly makes up scenarios to get mad about, and then accuse them of "not knowing what they are doing" without evidence or provocation.

It's either "would've" or "would have", not "would of". Not a great advertisement of your editorial services.

Sorry, but that was my reaction to each post.

The next time we need an editor I'll keep you in mind.

Mason

That's been our experience. We've even had lengthy threads in the past disputing what we have claimed about our business.

This isn't true with potential poker authors. And since we quit using editors in the field years ago, I doubt if it's true with any of them.

That's right.

By the way, there's a particular well known author who years back chose to go with another publisher because of inaccurate information that he was told about us. This cost him, by my estimate, at least $1 million dollars in royalties and today he recommends us to other authors.

Whether it means nothing or not, why does he even say it in the first place?

Go here:

https://www.amazon.com/Getting-Start...B3LLLC19&psc=1

click on "Look Inside"

start reading "A Few Words at the Start." The Look Inside function should take you right to it.

Mason

you forgot the part where he created a post about it because he's starved for attention.

Could you give an example of that (without naming the authors in question, use pseudonyms)? That's quite a big claim. I presume D&B might have something to say about that.

A lot of book deals are an advance then something like 15% of royalties after advance has been recouped. If you are paying 4 or 5 times more, then you are either paying almost what self published books get OR the other publishers pay next to nothing.

Total non story here. Mostly about someone's big ego.

There is still somewhat of a stigma to self publishing, so it is natural they would claim that and it may be true.

I have a book not about poker, and have been told major publishers would be interested. I put about $10K into producing it. I pay for Amazon pay per click ads. It is generating a little income now. If it sells really well without much continued advertising, it will generate a lot.

Publishers spend on editing, formatting, promotion etc. and the author does not need to spend time as much time on those and managing work on those. There is also credibility for your services etc. in the book being published by a publisher, particularly a major publisher. However, with a publisher, you lose some control over the book and you cannot be sure if the publisher will continue to market and advertise it strongly.

I don't know if most authors get an advance and 15% royalties. That is probably what a reasonably successful established author of non best sellers gets. It is a reasonable assumption that if the authors did not like the terms and self published, they were not offered 15% and an advance.

For years Cardoza was our major competitor and paid 6 percent of retail list as a royalty. We have authors who were paid over 25 percent. My understanding based on a conversation with a D&B author is that they paid 10 percent to start and then once a lot of books are sold it goes up.

If we were to accept a new book today due to kindles and other things that Amazon does it becomes complicated, but we pay at least 30 percent as royalty of what we receive.

Also, when you say 15 percent that’s a wholesale price number and is actually the way we do things. So, we have authors who got over 50 percent royalty. Also, we don’t have a set royalty rate. It varies depending on book and author and what we think the sales might be.

Mason

While some of what you say is true, I think a lot of it is way off. Amazon has changed everything. This is all explained on the Amazon pages for publishers. And thanks to Amazon the stigma of self publishing is essentially gone.

For a printed book Amazon, for US sales, pays 60 percent minus the print cost per book. So, the higher the book price the higher the true royalty. A publisher like us cannot compete directly with Amazon any more. For kindles they pay 35 percent of retail list unless you price the kindle under $10 where they pay 70.

Mason

i hear ya man, just last week i was watching a reality show and the girls were dishing gossip about a new mystery boyfriend who had a huge dong and all i could think about was that now everyone would be texting me and asking why i had such poor taste in women that i'd date a reality tv star

immediately tweeted to the producers asking them to apologize and include a segment in the next episode clarifying it wasn't rickroll


but seriously mason, most likely they just put that blurb in themselves for cover because they had a bit of insecurity regarding self publishing - same way dudes who feel the need to state their dongs are big on internet message boards are probably coming from a place of deep insecurity themselves regardless over whether said dong is large or not

rickroll for mod

It was probably that publisher which pays 6% royalties whose terms they didn't like.

However, if you get royalties from a publisher, you get it without expenses. Those Amazon royalties are not as high effectively as they seem.

That bragging about the publisher wound up getting the book a lot of free publicity.