rolanni: (Saving world)
rolanni ([personal profile] rolanni) wrote2011-06-23 05:00 pm
Entry tags:

PSA: Employment Opportunity

For those of a clerical bent of mind, who live within commuting distance of Waterville, Maine. The pay's not great, but there is group health insurance. All info here

Re: The pay's not great?

(Anonymous) 2011-06-24 02:12 am (UTC)(link)
Publishers, as a general class, believe in higher math and creative accounting...for them. My old royalty statements from Dell and Bantam were real head scratchers, as in how did they get THAT for a total of royalties due and what 'n the hell are they using as a basis for their nasty little reserve against remainders and returns.

Anne in Virginia

Re: The pay's not great?

[identity profile] rolanni.livejournal.com 2011-06-24 02:19 am (UTC)(link)
Royalty statements have actually gotten more transparent and informative. You needed a native guide and a philosopher to understand our old (1980's) Del Rey statements. The late 20th and early 21st century statements we've gotten from Meisha Merlin, Baen, and Ace have been logical and easy to parse.

Re: The pay's not great?

(Anonymous) 2011-06-24 10:51 am (UTC)(link)
I am so glad to hear royalty statements are better now. In the 80s your recourse to the suspicion that you were being, in a word, cheated, was to hire a lawyer and demand a reconciliation to print. That was an expensive proposition indeed to prybar out of the publisher and usually the lawyer's fees for the exercise came out far ahead of any royalties regained. Only the mega-seller authors bothered or had the resources, just to try and keep the publisher at least minimally honest to contract, although their efforts did, I believe, help start the trend toward more transparent and informative contracts.

Anne in Virginia