1Glacierman
I will be using this thread for announcements primarily aimed at prospective members.
We will be re-organizing the Press when the current book (The Tale of Sinuhe) has been released. When the re-organization is complete, we will solicit the next round of proposals and that notice will be posted here for prospective members.
Non-members may message me, either here as Glacierman or on the CP group forum as Admin, if you have questions or comments.
Thanks for your interest in our project.
--Richard/Glacierman (CP group Admin)
We will be re-organizing the Press when the current book (The Tale of Sinuhe) has been released. When the re-organization is complete, we will solicit the next round of proposals and that notice will be posted here for prospective members.
Non-members may message me, either here as Glacierman or on the CP group forum as Admin, if you have questions or comments.
Thanks for your interest in our project.
--Richard/Glacierman (CP group Admin)
2consensuspress
Just a heads-up to those who might be interested in the next CP book: we are in the process of assessing CP in view of fine tuning how we operate prior to beginning the selection process for the second book. We'll likely not make any final decisions until sometime in January.
3Pendrainllwyn
I am interested in the next CP book but am not a member so will post here.
Grifgon's bidding proposal is excellent and has a lot of support. It got me thinking.
It seems to me that Consensus Press achieved three things.
(1) Getting a fine press edition of Sinhue published, a book that otherwise might never have been published by the fine press community.
(2) Creating a process by which CP members had a say not only in what title would be published but also how the book would be made. Materials, typeface etc.
(3) Publishing a book from a new press.
If (3) is very important to the members then please ignore me! If (1) and (2) are what's important and (3) is just a way of achieving (1) and (2) then an alternative could be considered.
Go through the bidding process that Grifgon lays out in post #3 under Legal Structure and picking up the proposal at "The members elect a proposal: "The Book of Ecclesiastes. Folio size. Comic Sans. Handmade paper. Hot pink leather binding." The proposal is sent out far and wide, and is open to bids. We receive six bids:"
May I suggest a twist? Instead of saying to the prospective bidders "We want you to bid to print and bind 80 copies of a book for CP" which puts the bidding press in the role of behind the scenes sub-contractor, say to them, "We want you to bid to print and bind this title from your press. We would like you to add to the colophon the statement "We thank the members of CP for proposing and supporting this title". In return we will guarantee you 80 pre-orders."
What advantages might this have?
(1) It would allow a press to consider what public demand for the title might be like and bid on the basis of a limitation of, say, 250 rather than 80 which should allow them to produce the book at a lower cost.
(2) It helps de-risk the project for the press. I expect every small/private press would love to announce a new title knowing that there are 80 clients already lined up.
(3) CP members could be offered a discount for their idea proposal and first round pre-ordering.
(4) This fits into a bidding press's normal business model. They have the opportunity to make more money this way so may have more interest in the project.
(5) With the 80 members pre-ordering the book, all the money goes directly to the winning bidder and there are no legal structure issues.
(6) By the bidding press "adopting" the book it should dramatically reduce the amount of admin for CP post the winning bid being accepted. There will be no distribution concerns for example.
(7) With less to do, CP could increase the number of titles they get published. As soon as a bid is accepted CP can start planning the next book.
(8) CP get name recognition in books issued by multiple presses.
(9) Non CP members can have the opportunity to enjoy fine press editions of books like Sinhue.
- Of course, Consensus Press members would still get the title they were interested in published and would still have a say in materials, typeface etc.
Disadvantages (some significant disadvantages) include
(1) CP as a press morphs into a lobbing group. True, albeit a lobbying group that has much more influence than each member individually responding to a survey asking "Which title would you like to see us publish next?"
(2) CP members wanting CP to be exclusive. We want to be the only people who can buy the book.
Of course, the two ideas can co-exist. CP could arrange it such that a press could bid on one or both basis. CP could retain it's ambitions as a publisher and create a new activity whereby it speaks with one collective voice to influence what existing presses publishes.
Just a thought.
Grifgon's bidding proposal is excellent and has a lot of support. It got me thinking.
It seems to me that Consensus Press achieved three things.
(1) Getting a fine press edition of Sinhue published, a book that otherwise might never have been published by the fine press community.
(2) Creating a process by which CP members had a say not only in what title would be published but also how the book would be made. Materials, typeface etc.
(3) Publishing a book from a new press.
If (3) is very important to the members then please ignore me! If (1) and (2) are what's important and (3) is just a way of achieving (1) and (2) then an alternative could be considered.
Go through the bidding process that Grifgon lays out in post #3 under Legal Structure and picking up the proposal at "The members elect a proposal: "The Book of Ecclesiastes. Folio size. Comic Sans. Handmade paper. Hot pink leather binding." The proposal is sent out far and wide, and is open to bids. We receive six bids:"
May I suggest a twist? Instead of saying to the prospective bidders "We want you to bid to print and bind 80 copies of a book for CP" which puts the bidding press in the role of behind the scenes sub-contractor, say to them, "We want you to bid to print and bind this title from your press. We would like you to add to the colophon the statement "We thank the members of CP for proposing and supporting this title". In return we will guarantee you 80 pre-orders."
What advantages might this have?
(1) It would allow a press to consider what public demand for the title might be like and bid on the basis of a limitation of, say, 250 rather than 80 which should allow them to produce the book at a lower cost.
(2) It helps de-risk the project for the press. I expect every small/private press would love to announce a new title knowing that there are 80 clients already lined up.
(3) CP members could be offered a discount for their idea proposal and first round pre-ordering.
(4) This fits into a bidding press's normal business model. They have the opportunity to make more money this way so may have more interest in the project.
(5) With the 80 members pre-ordering the book, all the money goes directly to the winning bidder and there are no legal structure issues.
(6) By the bidding press "adopting" the book it should dramatically reduce the amount of admin for CP post the winning bid being accepted. There will be no distribution concerns for example.
(7) With less to do, CP could increase the number of titles they get published. As soon as a bid is accepted CP can start planning the next book.
(8) CP get name recognition in books issued by multiple presses.
(9) Non CP members can have the opportunity to enjoy fine press editions of books like Sinhue.
- Of course, Consensus Press members would still get the title they were interested in published and would still have a say in materials, typeface etc.
Disadvantages (some significant disadvantages) include
(1) CP as a press morphs into a lobbing group. True, albeit a lobbying group that has much more influence than each member individually responding to a survey asking "Which title would you like to see us publish next?"
(2) CP members wanting CP to be exclusive. We want to be the only people who can buy the book.
Of course, the two ideas can co-exist. CP could arrange it such that a press could bid on one or both basis. CP could retain it's ambitions as a publisher and create a new activity whereby it speaks with one collective voice to influence what existing presses publishes.
Just a thought.
4abgreens
>3 Pendrainllwyn: New to the idea of CP and not an original member either, but as a member of a small ecological business that just became an employee-owned coop, I am interested in groups that don't follow dominant models for getting things done. (And am aware of how much work it is to get things done in almost any model or using any approach.)
I don't know where I stand on specifics yet, but I so admire the creativity in both the original CP and Pendrainllwyn's ideas above.
I don't know where I stand on specifics yet, but I so admire the creativity in both the original CP and Pendrainllwyn's ideas above.
5consensuspress
>3 Pendrainllwyn: CP isn't meant to be a book packager for other publishers. Like Nawakum Press, we contract with others for actual production and pay them to produce the books we publish as exclusives to our members. Most of our members find that exclusivity very attractive.
6Tuna_Melon
>5 consensuspress: I don't recall if Consensus Press explicitly qualified the attractiveness of exclusivity, but I think that's probably a safe assumption.
That being said, I quite like the suggestion from >3 Pendrainllwyn: as an outside-the-box idea. It seems like a logical concept (in that all parties: proprietors and membership) could gain some value from it, but is also not something I recall having previously discussed in the Consensus Press vision.
I know that there have been talks of having more books published, possibly even two in tandem. (I'm still looking forward to book #1 making it across the finish line at the moment.) Perhaps this twist of an approach from >3 Pendrainllwyn: could be considered for some books? If the membership was also interested in this approach, there wouldn't be anything preventing us from having one edition of a book be CP exclusive (monogram, limitation, binding, etc.) while agreeing that a proprietor could reuse the same text block (save for the colophon) and other design elements, as is frequently the case when a press releases different tiers. Maybe the idea sticks; maybe it gets abandoned? That's the fun of it all though. We get to talk about ideas.
It's a neat idea that could be discussed at the very least. Also, once the discussions happen that define the process for new membership inductees, I look forward to more of these fresh ideas firsthand (instead if the more arduous copy/pasting between member and non-member threads).
@ >3 Pendrainllwyn: and >4 abgreens:. Please keep following the progress of the press to see about when you can formally join in. Like the rest of the membership, I don't know what that looks like or means yet, but I do think fresh ideas will be welcome and may be just the crux of what helps define Consensus Press as somewhat of a living, changing, organism in the long term, allowing us to push the bounds of experimentation for what we're doing.
>3 Pendrainllwyn: Consider this post my way of saying a personal genuine thank you for fresh ideas.
That being said, I quite like the suggestion from >3 Pendrainllwyn: as an outside-the-box idea. It seems like a logical concept (in that all parties: proprietors and membership) could gain some value from it, but is also not something I recall having previously discussed in the Consensus Press vision.
I know that there have been talks of having more books published, possibly even two in tandem. (I'm still looking forward to book #1 making it across the finish line at the moment.) Perhaps this twist of an approach from >3 Pendrainllwyn: could be considered for some books? If the membership was also interested in this approach, there wouldn't be anything preventing us from having one edition of a book be CP exclusive (monogram, limitation, binding, etc.) while agreeing that a proprietor could reuse the same text block (save for the colophon) and other design elements, as is frequently the case when a press releases different tiers. Maybe the idea sticks; maybe it gets abandoned? That's the fun of it all though. We get to talk about ideas.
It's a neat idea that could be discussed at the very least. Also, once the discussions happen that define the process for new membership inductees, I look forward to more of these fresh ideas firsthand (instead if the more arduous copy/pasting between member and non-member threads).
@ >3 Pendrainllwyn: and >4 abgreens:. Please keep following the progress of the press to see about when you can formally join in. Like the rest of the membership, I don't know what that looks like or means yet, but I do think fresh ideas will be welcome and may be just the crux of what helps define Consensus Press as somewhat of a living, changing, organism in the long term, allowing us to push the bounds of experimentation for what we're doing.
>3 Pendrainllwyn: Consider this post my way of saying a personal genuine thank you for fresh ideas.
7Glacierman
>6 Tuna_Melon: "I don't recall if Consensus Press explicitly qualified the attractiveness of exclusivity, but I think that's probably a safe assumption."
It's inherent in the concept of a members-only press.
It's inherent in the concept of a members-only press.
