2009 Fall Book Preview With Covers

[Therin of Andor]

BillJ wrote:

---

I've noticed a couple of posters who'll come running to 'save the day' whenever someone questions a production or creative decision made by Pocket.

To the extent where I get PMs asking what Pocket Books pay me in commission.

ST fans often have an extraordinary expectation of their entitlement to the lowest of low prices always, maximum page count always, no double dipping ever, regular/uninterrupted supply of quality product, but only to the likes of each indivividual.

Pocket creates ST tie-ins for several demographics at a time. They don't assume that every fan is a completist. I never really saw the need for Pocket's first original hardcover, but I've come to love my hardcovers, and thrilled to own all 50+ titles. I will keep buying trades if that's the only way we'll get those prestige titles in the current economical climate. Generally their page counts are higher, and I know the authors are rewarded with a higher royalty.

I feel disappointed for those ST fans who can't afford off-the-shelf ST books as they are released. I couldn't imagine how frustrated I'd be if I couldn't afford new ST novels, comics and DVDs as they are released every month, but I guess I've made certain lifestyle choices (such as no owning a car, buying a house with a spare bedroom) to ensure I can always support and store my habit.

I do get miffed when certain fans call for the abolishment of a certain line of ST products, that I happen to like, simply because they can't afford them, or think that a certain format has fallen from favour. I trust that Pocket know what they're doing. They've held a ST license since 1979, seem to know the markets well, have experimented and tweaked to take account of feedback, and generally continue to churn out successful, reasonably priced products.

It that makes me an apologist for ST tie-ins, well... I'm sorry.

[seigezunt]

geez, why the whining? Just buy em used on amazon if you are too cheap, like me.

[BillJ]

Therin of Andor wrote:

---

To the extent where I get PMs asking what Pocket Books pay me in commission.

Don't even understand what that has to do with the discussion.

ST fans often have an extraordinary expectation of their entitlement to the lowest of low prices always, maximum page count always, no double dipping ever, regular/uninterrupted supply of quality product, but only to the likes of each indivividual.

Never said anything along those lines. Once again this is value vs. costs for New Frontier: Treason, a book that has roughly the same word count as Before Dishonor for twice the price.

Pocket creates ST tie-ins for several demographics at a time. They don't assume that every fan is a completist. I never really saw the need for Pocket's first original hardcover, but I've come to love my hardcovers, and thrilled to own all 50+ titles. I will keep buying trades if that's the only way we'll get those prestige titles in the current economical climate. Generally their page counts are higher, and I know the authors are rewarded with a higher royalty.

I liked the hardcovers too. Felt like I was actually getting something more for the additional cost.

I feel disappointed for those ST fans who can't afford off-the-shelf ST books as they are released. I couldn't imagine how frustrated I'd be if I couldn't afford new ST novels, comics and DVDs as they are released every month, but I guess I've made certain lifestyle choices (such as no owning a car, buying a house with a spare bedroom) to ensure I can always support and store my habit.

This was never about affording the book. Once again it's about value vs. costs. I have Mere Anarchy and several of the Mirror/Myriad Universes titles sitting on my shelf. Again, I felt there was something of value there that made them worth the additional price.

I do get miffed when certain fans call for the abolishment of a certain line of ST products, that I happen to like, simply because they can't afford them, or think that a certain format has fallen from favour. I trust that Pocket know what they're doing. They've held a ST license since 1979, seem to know the markets well, have experimented and tweaked to take account of feedback, and generally continue to churn out successful, reasonably priced products.

I never said to abolish the Trades, just that there should be additional value there. As far as 1979 goes, isn't Simon and Shuster a subsidiary of Viacom, which owns Paramount?

It that makes me an apologist for ST tie-ins, well... I'm sorry.

Wouldn't expect anything less.

[Therin of Andor]

BillJ wrote:

---

Don't even understand what that has to do with the discussion.

You raised the topic of "posters who'll come running to 'save the day' whenever someone questions a production or creative decision made by Pocket." Can we not come running to that topic any more?

Once again this is value vs. costs for New Frontier: Treason, a book that has roughly the same word count as Before Dishonor for twice the price.

The only reason "Treason" wasn't in hardcover was because Pocket has dropped the line in favour of trades. "Treason" was made to stand tall beside the other "New Frontier". I didn't bother calculating word counts but "Treason" felt like a typical meaty NF read to me. "Before Dishonor" is part of the MMPB TNG Relaunch, recent titles of which are also MMPB.

I liked the hardcovers too. Felt like I was actually getting something more for the additional cost.

Then think of trades as cheaper versions of the hardcovers. Nice big cover art, stand on the same shelf as your hardcovers, but half the price.

This was never about affording the book. Once again it's about value vs. costs. I have Mere Anarchy and several of the Mirror/Myriad Universes titles sitting on my shelf. Again, I felt there was something of value there that made them worth the additional price.

And "Treason" is probably meatier than the average MMPB. You are complaining that "Treason" was a MMPB sized book in trade guise, but it's just a easily seen as an economical version of a hardcover.

As far as 1979 goes, isn't Simon and Shuster a subsidiary of Viacom, which owns Paramount?

Simon & Schuster is is a licensee of Star Trek, but they compete with all other potential licensees when contracts are up for renewal.

[Sci]

BillJ wrote:

---

As far as 1979 goes, isn't Simon and Shuster a subsidiary of Viacom, which owns Paramount?

Negatory. Simon & Schuster is a subsidiary of CBS Corporation, the corporation which owns CBS Studios, which in turn owns Star Trek and its trademarks.

[BillJ]

Sci wrote:

---

Negatory. Simon & Schuster is a subsidiary of CBS Corporation, the corporation which owns CBS Studios, which in turn owns Star Trek and its trademarks.

Same difference. Usually in-house subsidiaries have a leg up on the competition when it comes to licensing. Which is why I don't find the 1979 remark impressive. An in-house company has to 'screw the pooch' pretty badly to have the license taken away.

[Allyn Gibson]

BillJ wrote:

---

Usually in-house subsidiaries have a leg up on the competition when it comes to licensing. Which is why I don't find the 1979 remark impressive. An in-house company has to 'screw the pooch' pretty badly to have the license taken away.

If the recent Superman litigation is anything to go by, a licensee, even one in-house, still has to pay fair market value for the property.

[Sci]

BillJ wrote:

---

Same difference. Usually in-house subsidiaries have a leg up on the competition when it comes to licensing. Which is why I don't find the 1979 remark impressive. An in-house company has to 'screw the pooch' pretty badly to have the license taken away.

In other words, you're making an assumption with no facts to back it up. Gotcha.

[Thrawn]

BillJ - New Frontier: Treason is being reprinted in mmpb.

Just thought I'd make sure you were aware of that.

[BillJ]

Allyn Gibson wrote:

---

If the recent Superman litigation is anything to go by, a licensee, even one in-house, still has to pay fair market value for the property.

Of course. But then the profits and control of said property also stay in house.

Sci wrote:

---

In other words, you're making an assumption with no facts to back it up. Gotcha.

Do a little research from time to time.

BillJ - New Frontier: Treason is being reprinted in mmpb.

Just thought I'd make sure you were aware of that.

Just saw it on TrekMovie. Which was all I was asking for to begin with. Though I could have sworn one poster mentioning the great things about Trades was that they weren't going to be taking up MMPB slots.

[Thrawn]

BillJ wrote:

---

Just saw it on TrekMovie. Which was all I was asking for to begin with. Though I could have sworn one poster mentioning the great things about Trades was that they weren't going to be taking up MMPB slots.

Fair point, and I'd actually prefer that they weren't reprinted and we got more books instead. But that's not too big a deal (I can wait another month), and this at least solves your problem.

[Sci]

BillJ wrote:

---

Do a little research from time to time.

It is the obligation of the person making the claim to provide research to support his claims, not the obligation of the person to whom he is making his claim.

Show me some actual evidence that in-house licensees have an unfair advantage over other potential licensees and that an in-house licensee has to really mess things up to lose their license -- and that, by implication, in-house licensees do not gain and then keep the license by planning and producing higher-quality work in comparison to other potential licensees -- and I'll buy what you're selling.

Otherwise, you are talking out of your ass.

[Therin of Andor]

BillJ wrote:

---

Though I could have sworn one poster mentioning the great things about Trades was that they weren't going to be taking up MMPB slots.

They usually don't. So a spare MMPB slot may be filled later, as often happens with a schedule published 18 months in advance.

[Jbarney]

Saw the cover for The Romulan War. I have not read all of the ENT novels, but I plan to. I was just wondering if other fans feel the same way I do:

Since the Romulan War in historical terms is one of the oldest events in the trek universe, (introduced/mentioned near the beginning of TOS's 1st season and further trek history has tied the establishment of the UFP as being very close to when the conflict with the Romulans would have unfolded....

Is there anyone else out there who is a little concerned the coming book The Romulan War may not be enough? I guess I am just voicing a concern that the entire conflict is going to be explored (limited?) in just one book. Its something that is concrete in Trek history and I hope the coming novel is merely a set up for a good series of books. Just seems to me the Romulan War should be more than just one book. I hope that is the case.

[Sci]

Jbarney wrote:

---

Saw the cover for The Romulan War. I have not read all of the ENT novels, but I plan to. I was just wondering if other fans feel the same way I do:

Since the Romulan War in historical terms is one of the oldest events in the trek universe, (introduced/mentioned near the beginning of TOS's 1st season and further trek history has tied the establishment of the UFP as being very close to when the conflict with the Romulans would have unfolded....

Is there anyone else out there who is a little concerned the coming book The Romulan War may not be enough? I guess I am just voicing a concern that the entire conflict is going to be explored (limited?) in just one book. Its something that is concrete in Trek history and I hope the coming novel is merely a set up for a good series of books. Just seems to me the Romulan War should be more than just one book. I hope that is the case.

It's getting more than one book. This one is just being marketed under the single title.