http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6619516.html I've seen articles covering layoffs all over the publishing biz, plus Wizards of the Coast. Terrible time for it to happen. My condolences to all who are now suddenly out of work at this time of year.
Overall economy aside, it's already a difficult time for the publishing industry. Bookstores are changing their whole stock model as they shift to selling backlist through their websites . . . the average new hardcover gets about three months on the shelf before aggressive returns hit. There are still lots of people that need to pick a book off the shelf before they buy it, but if the book has already been returned, they're not going to find it. I wish some of the big websites would create virtual book shelves so you could look at spines and then with a click look at covers, something that would help an online browser capture the feel of quickly looking along the shelves of your favorite section.
The online retailer that can recreate the browsing experience is going to reap massive rewards. Not just because they're going to see their sales increase, but because they're going to have a product they can patent and sell to other online retailers. The problem with online retailers today is that they're so directed. You search for what you want by using product names and keywords. But you miss out on so much that way. I can walk in a Barnes & Noble and wander at random from section to section, picking up books as the spirit moves me, sometimes based on the cover, sometimes based on just being random. But their website doesn't give me that. And giving me suggestions based on things I've bought in the past is useful, but it's not even in the same league.
I don't know if it's quite what you're talking about, but they are doing something a little bit like what you are talking about on the Borders website.
Didn't mean to derail the subject . . . I'm still worried about the good folks at Simon & Schuster who just got the rug pulled out from under them at the worst time of year.
Yes, I'm so sorry as well. This is my second Christmas season unemployed. I sincerely hope those laid off can find other positions as soon as possible. --Ted
I once got laid off, at the company's Christmas Eve party. As I was walking in, my supervisor pulled me aside, let me know that the company was letting me go. Yeah, that Christmas party was a downer. :/ The next day, I was having Christmas dinner with my parents and my sister. My sister asked me how work was going. "Got laid off yesterday," I said; I hadn't told anyone yet. Kinda cast a pall on the entire dinner.
If true, that's bad news for Marco (and I can relate, being unemployed myself). But it's also bad news for Star Trek books fans. Insert long stream of your favourite cusswords here. ETA: I just noticed that Robert Greenberger wrote the article, so I assume it's accurate. Insert longer stream of your favourite cusswords here.
Very sorry to hear this. Marco if you're reading this: thanks for the work you've done on the ST books the last few years. I really appreciate the direction you've given to the novels and you got me to look forward to them again. Hope you find the situation you need quickly. Good luck to you.
Oh, shit. I echo Mysterion's comments: I've enjoyed the vast majority of the books you've helped to produce and the overall editorial direction you've helped craft, and I just know I'll miss your input here and behind the scenes. I don't have access to the internal decision-making as S&S, of course, but am pissed off on your behalf, particularly with a young family. I hope that you soon find renumerative employment you care about as much as you obviously cared about the Trek line. Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
No no no! Why Marco??? This is so ridiculous, what is the rationale ?? This just blows. A bit of Trek has a died today. So so lame.
The article linked above mentions that Margaret Clark will still be editing the ST line. Sounds like she'll be doing the job she's been doing plus taking up the load Marco had as well. Good luck to her on this.