• Café Life is the Colony's main hangout, watering hole and meeting point.

    This is a place where you'll meet and make writing friends, and indulge in stratospherically-elevated wit or barometrically low humour.

    Some Colonists pop in religiously every day before or after work. Others we see here less regularly, but all are equally welcome. Two important grounds rules…

    • Don't give offence
    • Don't take offence

    We now allow political discussion, but strongly suggest it takes place in the Steam Room, which is a private sub-forum within Café Life. It’s only accessible to Full Members.

    You can dismiss this notice by clicking the "x" box

News The Unbound / Boundless Publishing Disaster

Invest in You. Get Full Membership now.

AgentPete

Capo Famiglia
Guardian
Full Member
Joined
May 19, 2014
Location
London UK
LitBits
0
United-Nations
This topic emerged in last week’s Huddle.

Before the Huddle, I knew almost zero about Unbound, other than the generally favorable buzz that most of the publishing industry seemed to share about them.

Frankly, what’s happened is shocking and disgraceful.

It makes you wonder what other disasters are in store with this publishing model. (And in passing, what a great resource the Huddle is)

 
The indie publishing sphere so full of scammers it makes every interaction I have full of suspicion. It taints everything and this is just the icing on the cake.
I think you’re right to be suspicious. I don’t know what happened to Unbound, but they seem to have burnt through money. Nor do I know if their publishing model ever worked properly (does anyone here know?)
 

I am thinking that this guys problem could be solved if he had published it as an audiobook and sold it from his youtube channel. I actually would probably listen to this guy as a narrator. He knows enough about not popping his p's and somehow his voice goes with nerd books.



So the publishers used AI for editing. This really sounds like someone applying MBA principles to publishing. So a sped up version of what is happening to trad publishing in slow motion.




I would like to be albe to read this piece. So someone joins so they can brief us all on the news here?
 
Last edited:
I was a customer of Unbound, and so forever after, I got emails from them and now from Boundless.

I bought two art books from them - Birds and More Birds by Jim Moir. I'm a big fan of his art as well as his comedy (for which he goes by the name of Vic Reeves). I remember wondering why someone so successful in other fields, and who has had earlier books published by Virgin Books and Michael Joseph, needed to use this crowd-funded model. But I paid in advance and got my name in the back of the book for the privilege.

They were a big concern with many successful authors on their lists. Watching the video above makes me so angry that they could treat writers that way and there is seemingly no redress.
 
Invest in You. Get Full Membership now.
Okay, so the author crowded funded the costs of publishing, then Unbound published the books, helped with picking a cover according to the video, but also according to the vid, didn't put in much effort.
So, I know this was trendy and the future and as the vid-guy said, "Brilliant, with the crowd-funding, no book could ever lose money" but how, exactly is this model different from vanity publishing?
Bit of editorial advice? The better vanity publishers always did that.
The primary difference would seem to be that instead of the author putting up the publishing expense money and coming up with a hefty check, the author finds folks online willing to toss in a bit here, a bit there, until they reach the same amount, and then the publisher uses that money to fund the publishing bit.
I admit, very little danger of loss to the publisher. And the author doesn't lose the money. But I do wonder how the suckers who were fleeced in this arrangement will feel about supporting the next author with a similar plea.
Finding faceless others to foot the bill, instead of facing personal or coroporate debt, is only genius in the sense of running a good scam. I admit, a very good scam, for a while. but like all houses of cards, eventually a breeze comes.
PT Barnum underestimated the frequency at which suckers, and those who would prey upon them, were born.
 
Okay, so the author crowded funded the costs of publishing, then Unbound published the books, helped with picking a cover according to the video, but also according to the vid, didn't put in much effort.
So, I know this was trendy and the future and as the vid-guy said, "Brilliant, with the crowd-funding, no book could ever lose money" but how, exactly is this model different from vanity publishing?
Bit of editorial advice? The better vanity publishers always did that.
The primary difference would seem to be that instead of the author putting up the publishing expense money and coming up with a hefty check, the author finds folks online willing to toss in a bit here, a bit there, until they reach the same amount, and then the publisher uses that money to fund the publishing bit.
I admit, very little danger of loss to the publisher. And the author doesn't lose the money. But I do wonder how the suckers who were fleeced in this arrangement will feel about supporting the next author with a similar plea.
Finding faceless others to foot the bill, instead of facing personal or coroporate debt, is only genius in the sense of running a good scam. I admit, a very good scam, for a while. but like all houses of cards, eventually a breeze comes.
PT Barnum underestimated the frequency at which suckers, and those who would prey upon them, were born.
I would say creative people wanting to see their babies perform in the real world much resemble Gypsy Rose Lee's Ma. Stage mother's have nothing on us.

If those people get a copy of the book and contributed the price of a copy of the book-then they probably feel square. Those who pledged thousands to Brenden Sanderson were probably spending bitcoin anyway.. Money is far too imaginary these days. It's why farmland is disappearing into portfolios. The wealthy have realised the most valuable thing in the world is not gold, of which there is not enough to back all their imaginary money, but arable land with water.
 
Good point, PJ. If that's what people were contributing. I don't really trust the crowd-funding model to be that straightforward.
To be fair to Sanderson, his dupes got 5 books and a ton of merch out of their donations. Gonna guess it was not quite the equivalent of the $41,754,153 he collected.
As for the authors on UnB (and frankly isn't the name a bit of a tipoff), they didn't lose money. They didn't get paid for the work. This, of course, from the perspecitve of future folks running this scheme, will look like cash left on the counter. Future versions will almost certainly have the authors putting up their homes, cars, savings as collaterial, just in case, you know.
 
Good point, PJ. If that's what people were contributing. I don't really trust the crowd-funding model to be that straightforward.
To be fair to Sanderson, his dupes got 5 books and a ton of merch out of their donations. Gonna guess it was not quite the equivalent of the $41,754,153 he collected.
As for the authors on UnB (and frankly isn't the name a bit of a tipoff), they didn't lose money. They didn't get paid for the work. This, of course, from the perspecitve of future folks running this scheme, will look like cash left on the counter. Future versions will almost certainly have the authors putting up their homes, cars, savings as collaterial, just in case, you know.
It was basically seldayne.
"I was a customer of Unbound, and so forever after, I got emails from them and now from Boundless.

I bought two art books from them - Birds and More Birds by Jim Moir. I'm a big fan of his art as well as his comedy (for which he goes by the name of Vic Reeves). I remember wondering why someone so successful in other fields, and who has had earlier books published by Virgin Books and Michael Joseph, needed to use this crowd-funded model. But I paid in advance and got my name in the back of the book for the privilege."

I think the way forward has to be the equivalent of rock n roll guitar and garage startups. Costs very little and anyone can do it. It is the one advantage of the digital revolution. The really shocking thing about unbound-was it was ebooks???
 
Invest in You. Get Full Membership now.
I should say, that as a customer, I think I got a good deal - a beautiful, hardback book with my name printed in the list of supporters delivered on the day of publication. It cost me no more than the cover price of the same book that I see for sale in gallery shops at places like the Arnolfini and Tate Liverpool.
 

I am thinking that this guys problem could be solved if he had published it as an audiobook and sold it from his youtube channel. I actually would probably listen to this guy as a narrator. He knows enough about not popping his p's and somehow his voice goes with nerd books.
That’s a good point. Actually, two good points, viz:

1) At the time (and today, but less so) authors really wanted the kudos of being “properly” published, i.e. not vanity. Although I know very little about Unbound, they did have a generally positive reputation in the trad (and very conservative) publishing business, i.e. they were seen as “one of us”, not some weird, wild upstart with barmy ideas. I suspect that reputation enabled them to attract some “name” authors who otherwise wouldn’t have gone the self-pub route. Lesson to be learned: your publishing relationship is strictly business (believe me, that’s how the publisher sees it). Don’t go the trad route simply because you want your ego massaged / self-confidence bolstered.

2) “Why should this idea be a book?” is a question we should asks ourselves more often. Sometimes, the honest answer is that it shouldn’t, it might be better suited to another medium.

So the publishers used AI for editing.
Again, I didn’t know that. Bastards!

I remember wondering why someone so successful in other fields, and who has had earlier books published by Virgin Books and Michael Joseph, needed to use this crowd-funded model.
Yes, we discussed this in Huddle a bit. Sometimes celebs have wacky ideas that simply aren’t commercial. But more likely, it reflects a persistent shortcoming in publishers’ imaginations. “You’re Vic Reeves, aren’t you? So do us a joke book!” sort of thing.
They were a big concern with many successful authors on their lists. Watching the video above makes me so angry that they could treat writers that way and there is seemingly no redress.
Writers are simply trade creditors, and they get paid last, if at all.

Watch for this in your contract – if the publisher goes under, you must be able to get your rights back asap.
Okay, so the author crowded funded the costs of publishing, then Unbound published the books, helped with picking a cover according to the video, but also according to the vid, didn't put in much effort.
Yeah, shocking, actually.
So, I know this was trendy and the future and as the vid-guy said, "Brilliant, with the crowd-funding, no book could ever lose money" but how, exactly is this model different from vanity publishing?
Main difference is that some books would actually be sold (presold) commercially. Vast majority of vanity books never sell any copies at all.
Bit of editorial advice?
Unbound sound really bad in the areas that trad publishing is usually quite good at, i.e. editorial, cover design, etc. Big red light there.
I admit, very little danger of loss to the publisher.
If publication is conditional on 100% prefunding, there is ZERO risk to the publisher! No bloody risk at all! Which makes it even more bizarre that they went spectacularly bust. Smells v bad, as does the apparent prepack administration…
But I do wonder how the suckers who were fleeced in this arrangement will feel about supporting the next author with a similar plea.
Bad news for all authors thinking of crowdfunding.

All I can say is, this does happen to other crowdfunding projects too, not related to books. It’s a risk funders take.
Finding faceless others to foot the bill, instead of facing personal or coroporate debt, is only genius in the sense of running a good scam. I admit, a very good scam, for a while. but like all houses of cards, eventually a breeze comes.
The basic business model (get projects 100% funded before publication) is almost riskless, see above. It ought to have been a stable, if a bit dull, business. Something doesn’t smell right.
PT Barnum underestimated the frequency at which suckers, and those who would prey upon them, were born.
Yes. The thing about vanity publishing is that it ruthlessly exploits the hopes of naive (and often not so naive) authors. This is still very much happening today, e.g. the glut of “writing courses” out there with high sticker prices and invisible results.

People always want the quick (if expensive) solution to a problem that actually cannot be resolved quickly. That’s the historic pitch of so many scammers.
Future versions will almost certainly have the authors putting up their homes, cars, savings as collaterial, just in case, you know.
You may jest, but I can totally see this happening. Yes, totally.
The woman who is currently heading up the surviving entity says it doesn't, and that was the problem.
Ha! Well, there you have it. I’m guessing now, but possibly there simply weren’t enough authors who could get their friends/family to pony up 20k a pop?
 
This topic emerged in last week’s Huddle.

Before the Huddle, I knew almost zero about Unbound, other than the generally favorable buzz that most of the publishing industry seemed to share about them.

Frankly, what’s happened is shocking and disgraceful.

It makes you wonder what other disasters are in store with this publishing model. (And in passing, what a great resource the Huddle is)


Oh! Give that guy a tissue and a good lawyer! How dare a corporate business break someone up so much with shoddy work then empty promises. I hope you get your book back, mate.
 
Invest in You. Get Full Membership now.
Agent Pete: The basic business model (get projects 100% funded before publication) is almost riskless, see above. It ought to have been a stable, if a bit dull, business. Something doesn’t smell right.

The problem comes in because editors and publishers need Bentleys, too. A fundamental rule to running a perfect scam is to not get too greedy. But people run scams because they are greedy.
Taking out the $10 million you want over 20 years doens't seem like nearly as good an idea as taking it out, all at once. The mob calls it a bust-out scheme. In business they call it "Mergers and acquisitions" though they acknowledge it is really "asset mining."
 
"Mergers and acquisitions" though they acknowledge it is really "asset mining."
M&A in publishing has been bad news all round. It’s killed off so many decent medium-sized publishers, folk who had a flair for certain genres / publishing approaches.

Publishing is almost by definition idiosyncratic and quirky; the polar opposite of typical conglomerate culture.
 
I really feel for this guy, his emotion at the end about getting his book back touches the heart. It's such a shame he didn't just self-publish with what he describes as already having a larger audience. Even after what happened to him, it doesn't even seem like an option from the words spoken in the video. But the idea of it being published by a publisher (regardless of whether it's a 'real' or credible publisher still seem to evade his notion of publishing). I don't know if waiting 5 years for any royalties is normal, but it's a major red flag to me and so why he published or moved to publish another book with them, I do not know. Perhaps he'll get some publicity out of getting his work back, if that's an option, and could perhaps lure another - hopefully reputable - publisher. If a publisher goes bust, who owns the rights of the work (hopefully that's in the contract). I wonder if he's considered contacting the administrators and asking or paying (I know that would hurt) to get his rights back as the administrator decides what happens with assets and they want to receive money to pay the debtors (I know he's a debtor, but he said getting his book/s back are his main concern).
 
If a publisher goes bust, who owns the rights of the work (hopefully that's in the contract).
This is a crucial point.
The publisher will tend to want to retain whatever contractual rights they have in the event of administration or “making an arrangement with their creditors” since IP assets are pretty much all publishers are likely to have left if they crash and burn.
From the author’s point of view, though, this can be devastating. Needs careful language in the contract to revert rights to the author in this situation.
I wonder if he's considered contacting the administrators and asking or paying (I know that would hurt) to get his rights back as the administrator decides what happens with assets and they want to receive money to pay the debtors (I know he's a debtor, but he said getting his book/s back are his main concern).
As I understand it, it was a “pre-pack” administration or similar, i.e. the former company’s assets now have a new owning entity, so his rights will now belong to someone else.

The new CEO says the company will now rely on a more typical publishing model of acquiring books with advances and traditional contracts, but she admitted that some authors may want their rights back.

She doesn’t say what her attitude would be to authors who really, really do want to reclaim their rights!

There will be quite a few of those. It could be, with some strategic behind-the-scenes negotiation, that some will indeed succeed in getting their rights back. I wouldn’t give up at this stage, but it will be hard.

Publishers’ Weekly has a good summary.
 
This is a crucial point.
The publisher will tend to want to retain whatever contractual rights they have in the event of administration or “making an arrangement with their creditors” since IP assets are pretty much all publishers are likely to have left if they crash and burn.
From the author’s point of view, though, this can be devastating. Needs careful language in the contract to revert rights to the author in this situation.

As I understand it, it was a “pre-pack” administration or similar, i.e. the former company’s assets now have a new owning entity, so his rights will now belong to someone else.

The new CEO says the company will now rely on a more typical publishing model of acquiring books with advances and traditional contracts, but she admitted that some authors may want their rights back.

She doesn’t say what her attitude would be to authors who really, really do want to reclaim their rights!

There will be quite a few of those. It could be, with some strategic behind-the-scenes negotiation, that some will indeed succeed in getting their rights back. I wouldn’t give up at this stage, but it will be hard.

Publishers’ Weekly has a good summary.
I think for the ones who want their rights back, publicity is the key. That is, telling their story about essentially being ripped off and the bad publicity this would garner for the new entity. I suppose the problem also is the worry for those wanting their rights back is how this could be used not to pay back royalties, unless the new 'owner' has already stated they won't be paying (isn't that what he says on the video or am I mistaken). Also, how can this new entity move forward, surely too much negative press and so who'd want to publish with them, but then I think about how desperate some people to get a 'real' publisher and so perhaps they might tip-toe forward.
 
Invest in You. Get Full Membership now.
I think for the ones who want their rights back, publicity is the key. That is, telling their story about essentially being ripped off and the bad publicity this would garner for the new entity.
Yes, definitely the right time for some intense conversations. This guy (Tom Cox, no relation!) suggests that he has actually got some rights back, so there may be a precedent.
I suppose the problem also is the worry for those wanting their rights back is how this could be used not to pay back royalties, unless the new 'owner' has already stated they won't be paying (isn't that what he says on the video or am I mistaken).
Yeah, they’re calling royalties due from the old company “goodwill payments” and while they’re technically correct, this is rather tone deaf.
Also, how can this new entity move forward, surely too much negative press and so who'd want to publish with them, but then I think about how desperate some people to get a 'real' publisher and so perhaps they might tip-toe forward.
It’s interesting. They’re reverting the publishing model to trad advance / royalty payments (and not much on the advances, I’ll bet). So this also means they have to commission books that people actually want to buy. Which wasn't really true previously.

They’ve also got a couple of money hawks involved now... they really won’t be looking for that much cash (effectively they're a start-up, although with baggage) and I suspect that, if they’re around in 12 months time, they’ll have a new story to tell the trade, authors and agents. It could be done. But yes, I’d have totally changed the name!
 
Yes, definitely the right time for some intense conversations. This guy (Tom Cox, no relation!) suggests that he has actually got some rights back, so there may be a precedent.

Yeah, they’re calling royalties due from the old company “goodwill payments” and while they’re technically correct, this is rather tone deaf.

It’s interesting. They’re reverting the publishing model to trad advance / royalty payments (and not much on the advances, I’ll bet). So this also means they have to commission books that people actually want to buy. Which wasn't really true previously.

They’ve also got a couple of money hawks involved now... they really won’t be looking for that much cash (effectively they're a start-up, although with baggage) and I suspect that, if they’re around in 12 months time, they’ll have a new story to tell the trade, authors and agents. It could be done. But yes, I’d have totally changed the name!
Bountiful? or Boundisfullofit? Pounded? BoundofFlesh? UnWounded? Ponzi Publishing?
 
Back
Top