15 = 21
~ ~ There are fifteen days. And there are fifteen working days. They are not the same. So when the issuing agency said that non-priority ISBN numbers would be delivered in 15 days, I took them literally. Lacking the qualifiers--just a few extra words--fifteen days is two weeks plus a day. Well, that would have been last Friday. No ISBN numbers. And no answers to emails or phone calls to clarify my misassumptions or express my disappointment that such a lofty author-oriented site cannot say with precision what they mean. And all the more disgust that an extra $75 is charged if you your purchase without the two week's ransom. So much for my timeline. Even so, books in hand by June 1 (a date projected with just this kind of glitch built in) seems likely!
~ ~ Ach! Editing one's own words. Thanks to Jim M, who sent a few edits and a few kind words (now on the ReadersSay page) and pointed out to me, as no one else had and as my eyes missed yet again: in the preface, where I talk about the change in the rhythm of my life, I thought I had said, and read over and over that I had said "I stopped wearing my watch" when in fact, I said "I stopping wearing my watch." Now that I think of it, another reviewer DID say "what is this sentence about?" not understanding the verb. I re-read it, saw STOPPED, and went on. Scary stuff.
~ ~ I talked with someone at Barnes and Noble yesterday about establishing a relationship with the chain (and with their wholesalers) to get the book into wider distribution. The trade-off, of course, is that I make only a buck or two, after everyone in the middle takes a cut. The advantage is that many more books might be sold if it is more widely available than by going through one-book-at-a-time distribution out of our dining room. I have to have the book to send them (June 1); then it takes six weeks (or is that six working weeks?) to hear if it has been accepted. That puts it about middle of the summer. That should work.
~ ~ And here is where I wish I had more retail experience. How best to track and record state taxes, net sales, mailing lists (convertible to printable labels) et cetera, without a lot of duplication in two or three different programs? Can it all be done through Access (about which I know next to nothing. Again.) and then imported into Excel for calculating number columns at the end of the tax year? Doh!
Comments
For the accounting stuff, start very simply. Use a shoe box and a spreadsheet. If the business grows to be more complicated than that, the shoe box and spreadsheet will still be handy as inputs into a real accounting system.
Also, I don't recall how often Ceasar expects remittance of the sales tax, but I believe it may be monthly. There is a VA state form for remittance of sales tax (you should be able to find it on the net). If you collect, be sure to remit. Tax collectors get very upset about taxes that are charged to the end consumer but not remitted.
And don't forget to watch your bank account! Give yourself a limit on how much up front withdrawing you are going to do. Ideally, you would have a separate account for this affair. A key accounting dictum for small businesses is "always reconcile to cash." In other words, when someone adds up all the receipts in your shoe box, both your sales and expenses, they should by one means or another, tie back to your bank account. Then they will feel pretty good that they have captured the transactions in your business.
Posted by: Carl | March 21, 2006 6:40 AM
I've just had a brilliant idea. Rather than editing your manuscript, simply pump the entire thing into Babelfish. First translate the manuscript to Italian. Next, take the Italian version and translate it back into English. Genius! Here is a sample:
"Every morning that the first month in mine sabbatical ambivalent, I has watched the lights of the tail of the automobile of Ann?s, disappearing through the pines while it has gone for job, tremuli beyond the siluette of the trees, red against black, on and from sight and the sound. Hour was the supplier. And that what I becomes - the caretaker, giardiniere, a renter diseduta on my own earth?"
I think I may be on to something here. It's more genuine if you read it out loud and affect an Italian accent.
;)
Sean
Posted by: Sean Pecor | March 21, 2006 4:19 PM
Hi Fred...Do you follow Richard Bell's 'Wild West Yorkshire' columns online. He
self-publishes all his own natural history/sketching books and talks a lot about specifics of the process in his daily diaries.
Posted by: marci | March 21, 2006 8:14 PM
Scary indeed that so many - including me, a copy editor - missed a glaring typo that made nonsense of a sentence. I'll bet everyone who checked it was reading online.
I hope you looked at a high-quality print version for your final check! Or better still, that someone else did - it's much harder to see your own mistakes. As far as I know, it's still much harder to read text online than in print, even if you're using the best monitor for text (the average monitor is much better for graphics and games; I don't know how laptop screens rate). The studies I've seen compared reading speed, comprehension, and user satisfacton, rather than impact on ability to "see" errors, but I would think spotting the nitpicky stuff would be even more impacted onscreen.
The book publishers I work for still have us editing manuscripts that are printed, with double line spacing and large, sharp type. Exactly the way it was done before word processors came on the scene. Archaic! But maybe a good thing.
Posted by: Lin B | March 23, 2006 8:52 AM