The Shatzkin Files


Agents have to do it, but their new service offerings change the publishing ecosystem


Agents work for authors and sell books (mostly) to big general trade publishers, but there’s really a partnership at work there. Nearly all the books big publishers buy, and almost without exception those for which big money is paid, come to them from agents. There’s a symbiotic dependency between them.

Publishers depend on agents to sort through the possibilities to discover new talent, develop proposals to a professional level, and handhold and cajole the author through the lengthy process of actually delivering the manuscript a contract calls for. Agents live in a world where the big publishers are really the only source of substantial revenue.

So they have lunch a lot to discuss what amount to joint efforts. I don’t know if it is unique to publishing, but our industry’s convention that the buyer (the publishing editor) pays for the seller’s (the agent’s) lunch must be very unusual. By constantly monitoring what the editors are looking for and are inclined to buy and each house’s current frame of mind of what will work and what won’t, agents get the information that, in turn, directs them to what will sell. What will “sell”, to an agent, means what people who are personally known will want to buy. It doesn’t require the agent to think in terms of what the public will buy; that’s the publisher’s job. The agent’s job is to deliver what the publishers have decided is commercially viable.

There is, in general, a great deal of mutual respect here. Obviously, there is a point where the partnership becomes adversarial: publishers want to pay as little as they can for books and agents want to get as much as they can. But, in general, these competing interests are resolved in ways consistent with the need both sides have to continue working together in the future. There are only six very large houses and only a small handful of others that can occasionally play at that level. And while the agent community is somewhat less consolidated (you can be a very successful agent with only one or two big clients; you can’t be a very successful big publisher with only one or two big authors), both sides do each deal knowing there will be a next deal they’ll want to do with each other coming along soon.

This symbiosis is important to remember when we consider that one of the big publishers’ defenses against disintermediation is their ability to curate, to filter. There is a school of thought (which is an attractive one to publishers thinking about their role in the increasingly digital world of books) that when content choices become more plentiful, reliable branded filters become more valuable. All sides recognize that the principal brand value lies with the author. I am increasingly coming to the view that the big publisher name — Random House or Simon & Schuster — also communicates “value” to the consumer, although it doesn’t describe the potential reading experience with anything like the specificity that the author name does. The agent name, of course, means nothing at all to the public. So the publisher is essentially getting credit for a filtering process for which they are the last step after agents have done a lot of weeding out before them.

Two years ago, when we were organizing the first Digital Book World conference, we foresaw that ebooks would lead to much cheaper and more accessible self-publishing opportunities that some authors, at least, would be keen to explore. When we started to organize a panel on the subject, we learned that the rules of the AAR (which is, effectively, the agents’ trade association, although it doesn’t act as such in many ways because of its highly independent-minded membership and the potential for restraint-of-trade violations) were interpreted by many to mean that agents could neither set up publishing operations nor charge authors for services. In that ancient time, very few agents would openly discuss the possibility of working with authors in anything but the time-honored way of selling their proposals to publishers on commission.

But times have changed. A quick check of recent news and announcements in our office turned up nine agencies with announced digital propositions. These range from Waxman Literary Agency’s Diversion Books, an ebook publisher, to the Ed Victor Agency’s Bedford Square Books publishing arm working through Open Road, to, in most cases, consulting services for the agency’s clients on ebook development and distribution.

The other seven on our list right now are The Knight Agency, BookEnds, Dystel & Goderich Literary Management, McDermid Agency, Levine Greenberg, Curtis Brown UK, and Andrea Brown Literary Agency. There are certainly some we’ve missed. And there will undoubtedly be more in the weeks to come.

The Knight Agency did a really nice job of laying out the suite of services they’re going to provide through their offering. It’s very impressive, including content editing, line and copyeditor referrals, ISBN number assignment, copyright registration, cover copy, cover design and consultation, file conversions to ePub and mobi, uploading files to major retailers, dynamic pricing, metadata, search engine optimization, marketing plans, subsidiary rights, royalty tracking and payments, oversight of existing contracts and obligations, and, down the road, arranging for print publication through POD or other means.

But what really surprised me was that the Knight Agency says they are absorbing all costs except copy-editing and working for 15% of the revenue. The range of services they are offering, even without the copy-editing (which can be anywhere from $500 to $3000 or more, depending on the length and complexity of the manuscript), requires real humans to spend real time doing the work. They seem to be offering to design the cover at their expense, which is a value of anywhere from $200 to $2000. The Knight Agency is undertaking a substantial investment in each book that will be done in this program and, if I’m reading them right, will only get that money back at 15 cents on the revenue dollar before they earn any profit.

That’s a commitment! And even though the service is being offered only to existing clients of the agency (at least for now), it’s an impressive one.

So with that context, I’d offer a few observations.

I don’t know what other agents have planned, but Knight has definitely thrown down a marker that other agencies will be highly challenged to match. (Of course, the first thing to see is how well Knight can do against their own checklist!)

Many of the agents, but not Waxman with Diversion, are specifying that their services are only for existing agency clients. That’s a good way of putting a toe in the water and it’s a good way to minimize the concern of publishers. But it’s not likely to last as the policy for any of them that do this kind of work successfully. If their ebook publishing services actually work and the business is shifting in that direction, why would you turn down an opportunity that came from outside the client base. Why would you turn down the opportunity to offer the same suite of services to all the clients of some other agency that doesn’t want to build this themselves? (That’s an opportunity almost certain to arise for all of them.)

Publishers are also working on self-publishing services. Distributors have been noodling for some time about packaging these services for agents. Knight has promised to do a lot, including a substantial per-book investment, for 15% of the revenue. Are any of these other players now going back to the drawing board to reconsider their pricing? I would think so.

How everybody is going to feel about these agent service offerings is going to depend a lot on how they’re used. To the extent that they are used as leverage by authors with big backlists to push publishers to higher ebook royalties, the big houses won’t be pleased with them. But if they turn out primarily to be “farm systems”, giving exposure and building awareness for an author who can then “graduate” to a “real” publishing deal, everybody might be all smiles. If that’s what happens, these services become something like the new digital world’s equivalent of an agent getting an author to write a piece for the New York Times Sunday Magazine or to start blogging to build a following: a career-building step that leads to a major house. If that ends up being the prevailing effect, everybody will be smiling.

Let’s remember that Amanda Hocking went from self-publishing to a major publisher deal and that Barry Eisler decided that taking Amazon’s offer to publish him was more appealing that truly doing it himself.

Perhaps for as long as five or ten years, the print component will remain an important part of any book’s total revenue potential. None of these agents can do much to help there (although a distributor could.) Even if what Knight offers turns out to be high quality across the range of services and what they’re offering to cover out of their pocket versus what they’re planning to take in revenue is sustainable (hard to say from here), they’re still going to want to sell lots of books to publishers. Will this service offering help them or hurt them in that regard? Will publishers see them as developing competition? Or will the commercial proposition of each book on offer remain the key element of each negotiation?

We’ve come a long way in the past two years, from a time when many agents thought getting involved with self-publishing was a non-starter to a moment now when, in the words of one agent I spoke to last week, “none of us has any choice” but to provide digital publishing advice or capabilities to their clients. The next two years will probably bring much more change than that.

We’re putting together a new Publishers Launch Conferences show called eBooks for Everyone Else for both New York (on September 26) and San Francisco (on November 2). More details will be announced shortly. “Everyone else” is anybody without an IT department, and we always knew agents would be an important part of our audience (along with authors and small- and midsized-publishers) and our program. Looks like that show will be very well timed.

  Back to blog

  • http://twitter.com/twliterary Ted Weinstein Lit.

    Ahem, another agency doing digitial publishing with its clients, Ted Weinstein Literary Mangement: http://bit.ly/qDywlA

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Thanks, Ted. Sorry to have missed you in our fast sweep. I’m sure you’re not alone!

      Mike

  • Pingback: If Agents Don't Become Publishers, Will They Disappear? | The Passive Voice

  • Eric Christopherson

    Interesting times, Mike. I’m a DGLM client who plans to meet shortly and discuss this opportunity with my self-pubbed works.

    I’m wondering, though, what your evidence is that a big publisher’s name communicates value to the consumer? Most people I know outside the biz don’t even know the names.

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      No evidence, just conjecture.

      I think most heavy book readers (and most books are bought and read by heavy readers) know the big house names, particularly the old established ones like Random House, Simon & Schuster, and Penguin. When you have a slew of self-published stuff to wade through, I am guessing that many people would take those names to mean that a professional had invested in this project somehow. I don’t think this would apply to many imprint names, particularly newer ones that are not genre-based. So, within the Hachette group, for example, I’d be going for branding things Little Brown as opposed to Grand Central or other imprints they might own. How many people know Little Brown? Many don’t, of course, but heavy readers might well and certainly more know that name as an established publisher than know Grand Central or Hachette Book Group.

      Mike

  • http://kindle-author.blogspot.com David Wisehart

    The Knight Agency is offering vast suite of services for which they seem to have little or no expertise.

    David

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      All of the necessary expertise can be acquired. I make no judgments or claims about how successful they’ll be at offering these services. I don’t know them. The people who will try them first will be their own clients who have experience working with them and can make these decisions.

      Skepticism is rational but what they presented was extremely well thought through.

      Mike

  • http://twitter.com/RobynBradley RobynBradley

    Mike, I love your blog…I always carve out time to thoroughly read your posts. Curious to know your thoughts on the brouhaha that surrounded the BookEnds announcement — specifically people’s concerns around conflicts of interest? (Just read the comments…or check out Courtney Milan’s open letter to agents: http://www.courtneymilan.com/ramblings/2011/07/26/an-open-letter-to-agents/ )

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      The ethics and morality here are situational, not structural. And I know a lot of agents who are devoting a *great deal* of effort to understand self-publishing mechanics. We’re about to announce a conference, referred to in the post, and agents are as much a target audience for us as authors are (even though there are obviously a lot more authors in the world than agents.)

      I think it is wisest not to take an ideological position here. If the agency invests in knowing more about digital, they’ll have to get paid for it. If you’re entering a business relationship with them, you’re free to ask questions about how they approach or deal with what you think might be conflicts of interest. If you’re working with an agent that doesn’t know more than you do, of course you wouldn’t have them handle that aspect of the business for you.

      But generalizing about this — particularly generalizing emotionally — doesn’t really help anybody chart a wiser course. (I’ll admit I didn’t read part 2.)

      Mike

      • http://twitter.com/RobynBradley RobynBradley

        I think that makes sense. I’m trying to remain open minded about it all. And I think agents could bring a lot to the table in helping a self-pubbed author advance his or her career. (I recommend reading part 2 — Courtney used to be a lawyer, and she digs deep and provides strong definitions for what she means by conflict of interest etc. It’s worth the read, methinks.)

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Well, you’re right that the second part is much better. And she did a bit of a mea culpa about what annoyed me in the first half.

      But I still think it is situational, not structural. (Lawyers like structural.) Look: an agent is selling your book and twelve other books at the same time to largely the same set of editors, certainly the same set of publishers. How do you know you aren’t being steered to a house because the agent wants to curry favor with the house or the editor? If an agent is going to be shady, they can be shady within the current context. They don’t need a future context. And if they’re honest and upstanding, they’ll manage the conflicts that come with the new models ethically just like they do the conflicts that come from the present model.

      Or at least that is one not-an-agent, not-a-lawyer’s position!

      Mike

  • one small literary agent…

    The question really  is whether it is right for agents to be publishing as well and how this potential conflict of interest plays out. Our small agency thinks that there are and will be plenty of e book publishers/distributors etc for authors to avail themselves of, and that agents should participate in that process in their traditional role just as they do for printed books. We already provide editorial services to our clients as part of our agenting, and we are now placing our author’s works, particularly fiction, with e book publishers if we are unable to place them with a printed book publisher. We see this as both a viable alternative and springboard to potential traditional print publishing.

  • http://profiles.google.com/lexidick Lexi Dick

    As a self-publisher who has sold 39,000 ebooks in under a year, I read with interest the list of what an agent acting as a publisher could do for me for his 15% that I haven’t done for myself. 

    There’s marketing, but given that publishers these days tend to only market blockbusters they’ve paid a big advance for, and expect their lesser authors to DIY, I suspect agents are promising more than they would deliver. So for me (who’d be unlikely as a new author to be taken on anyway) the only attraction would be the possibility of more foreign deals than the single one I’ve accessed alone. Maybe I should start actively chasing subsidiary rights…

    Lexi Revellian

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Yes, you should start chasing subsidiary rights and perhaps an agent can help you do it without changing anything about you handle your ebooks.
      Congratulations on your success.

      Mike

  • Pingback: Shatzkin on New Business Models for Agents | AARdvark

  • http://www.rosemarydibattista.com Rosemary

    Mike,
    This is the most logical and least hysterical–as in crazy, as opposed to funny–post I’ve read about this trend. Thanks so much for such a thoughtful analysis.

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Thanks very much. We strive to be even-tempered and even-handed.

      Mike

  • Pingback: Twitted by KindleZen

  • http://twitter.com/hauntedcomputer Scott Nicholson

    Mike, I’m sorry but your argument that the publisher name of Random House or S & S serving as a quality filter has a major flaw-ask the next 10 readers you see who is the publisher of the book they are reading. I’d guess maybe one will know. It’s meaningless to readers. And in ebooks, the only easy way to tell the difference is a corporate book will be three to five times higher in price. Readers are fast catching on to the fact that they have been artificially limited in their choices, and the mediocre books from NY are no better than the typical well-produced books of the indie author.

    And of course the ultimate bullet in the bucket of BS is that agents are plucking indie authors from the Kindle lists and packaging them to publishers. They are not developing a farm system at all. They are cashing in on proven winners. Total laziness in a difficult environment. But publishers made their first mistakes when they abdicated product development solely to agents…monopoly of access led to lots of bad habits and inbreeding that certainly hasn’t made their difficult transitions any easier. Indeed, agents and publishers still seem two years behind everyone else.

    Maybe agents “have to,” but authors don’t.

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      I find your first comment unresponsive to my point and the second one confirming it.

      It isn’t about whether people remember the publisher of the last book they read. It is about whether they know the name of the publisher as a legitimate entity that is known for professional work. There are really only a few widely known, but Random House and Simon & Schuster certainly qualify.
      And in the second point I think you demonstrate the farm system effect I’m describing. It doesn’t mean agents are cut out; publishers don’t *want* agents cut out! The point to self-publishing being a farm system isn’t to disintermediate agents; it is to demonstrate some market appeal by the author or book before the big publisher makes an investment.

      Mike

  • Anonymous

    Hmm. The most obvious conflict of interests is not between an agent steering their client to their own service rather than to one of the 6+ existing publishers they sold to, which is a non-issue really – they’ll do the best selling because they get 15% of the total, but between an agent steering their client to their service and not another agent-cum-publisher, who might offer the client a better deal or more. You see 15% as amazing… most self-published authors would agree… except they’d consider it amazingly high. Real value probably will come at the point where the e-pub  recovers costs at a high percentage… say 15%, for the first pre-agreed number and then drops to a book-keeping percentage thereafter – perhaps as much 3%?  I think your assessment that  ‘it’s only our clients’ is a (for now) situation. is correct.  What I do foresee happening – while agents still big 6 leverage, is either covert or overt ‘we won’t represent you unless you publish through us.’  If agents do follow the ‘farm strategy’ of making sure that e-sales are a minor affair for clients it will undoubtedly keep them sweet with their current sweethearts, of course they run the real risk of losing their authors to other e-pubs who will be in it for the primary reason of selling.  I don’t actually think either publisher or agents have yet managed to re-evaluate and come to terms with the change relationship with authors (who own the principle brand: their name – the publisher’s brand is unknown to 99% of the customers. Most publishers have avoided investing in their brand letting authors do the legwork and carry the cost).  Before this the branded item could only be sold if the author was really nice and very accepting of all the conditions set by agents and publishers. Yes, he could change agents or publishers, but really, the market was tiny and even changing weighed against him.  Now suddenly, as the brand owner who can put a product in all the e-retailers – a product as well supported and probably better presented and packaged than any publisher will do – for minimal amounts of cash (you could do the ultimate Rolls Royce job with original artwork from the best for $7000… and the equivalent of a big 6 job for $500-300, and do very well for a lot less, nothing even, if you have the skills or contacts) things are different.  The relationship just changed: the agent needs to do great things to retain that client, not the client fight to get representation. The publisher can be sure the author will walk if he doesn’t see a lot more value than he could get by self e-pub. After generations of doing business the other way around, I haven’t seen that this has got home to the publishing establishment… actually all I’m hearing is ‘LA! LA! LA!’ ;-)    

    • one small literary agency

      Just one point Davemonkey – some agents, like us, a small 2 person agency, submit to many publishers, sometimes up to 75 or more, depending on the project. I agree with you post otherwise..

      • Anonymous

        Point taken. Some agents work very hard for their money, and some really do exercise fiduciary responsibility. And quite frankly authors could probably use this kind to deal with agent-turned-publishers too. The math isn’t quite as prohibitive as it may appear, in the medium term – If the world goes e-book and more (rather than Amazon closing out the rest) e-retail space opens, the author should be realizing more money than he did in the old 94% for us, 6% for the author days (yes, sometimes only 85% for us, but basically the author as the producer got the smallest share, and had had to pay the agent out of that).  With disintermediation the author might have a reasonable slice to pay the agent who was really working for the author, instead of the agent not wanting to get up the nose of publishers he couldn’t afford to offend. And say 5% of 80% of the cover price, is a lot more than 15% of 6 or 8 or even 15% of the cover price.  Something agents should start thinking about. 

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      It is still the case that self-publishing success stories are few and far between, that brand-name publishers are selling tons of books at prices self-publishers can’t dream of, and that self-publishing authors would make more money with big publishers. (I wrote a post about this analyzing John Locke’s success and revenue a couple of months ago.) What you posted here might be on target in a few years, but it sure isn’t yet.

      Mike

      • Anonymous

        Mike, yes, and which industry is it that chases trends instead of being with or ahead of the curve again? :-) But you’re missing the point. The ‘success story’ that you refer to is indeed few and far between. But 90% of the established authors who make a living know by now that this is unlikely for them. They still have a market – say 100K readers at the sort of distribution and publicity they never get (spend on ‘bestsellers’) and about 25K at what they do get. They have a hard-core of fans who track them down and buy anything they produce. Depending on how long they’ve been there that’s anywhere from 2.5-10K. The rest of their normal sales will buy their books if they see them. For the last 20 years they’ve barely made a living, their publisher treats them as disposable, and their agent puts in minimal effort. I know a lot of these guys. The number of them quietly putting up work – often shorts or novellas and novelettes in popular series, or OOP work, is large and growing – it is this that the agent-publishers have heard about are planning to exploit IMO. (The costs in doing it are minimal, and profits are not vast, but there is lot of it.)  They DON’T make a fortune. But they are almost all finding that 2.5-10K + some that recognize their name, plus some they never had exposure to, at $3.50 clear profit per sale. And suddenly they’re earning a healthy chunk towards the mortgage or rent, and sometimes not far off that minimal advance they were getting. They’re not success stories that Mike Shatzkin would ever hear of… but the money is there quarterly, they know from day-to-day what they’re selling and what they’ll get (not a year or 18 months later) there are no late payments and opaque accounting, and editors not getting around to it.

        At which you say – so what? there are lots more of these meat-heads out there. Publishers can trawl up another grateful bunch of bottom feeders, who’ll take anything and live on Ramen. True. But that discounts the fact that each meat-head is an investment, and the old meat-heads are talking to their friends who are higher up the food chain. And what they’re saying is ‘I can’t believe how good this is! You should give it a go. You’d make a fortune!’ And Joe who was cadging drinks at the last Con they went to, and sleeping in a friend’s room, is buying the drinks and has own room,  while Fred, who sells 50% more than Joe in the past, is wondering if someone might buy him lunch, because advances are down. Do you think he’s not listening? This is a classic exponential situation, Mike, and it’s getting close to the critical point, I think. It’s about 10-15% now I reckon. And there is a fixed pool of spend out there. Given a choice of meat-head they know and like, and new meat -head, which one is going to win most of the time? 

        You predict trends and advise the industry and are far more knowledgeable than I will ever be about it, but I’d say the time has arrived to do things to make large publishing more attractive to authors in ways which compare to self publishing and offer better value than it does.  Finally, spend that money on accounting systems and introduce much overdue quicker settlement.  Accept that if you don’t reach a decision within the option period (which almost never happens, and authors grin and bear it) the author will have it up on Kindle the day after the option ends.  Every book just became an auction, because there is always another buyer. You’re the bright guy, you tell them the rest :-) .

      • /blog Mike Shatzkin

        There are, for sure, big publishers proceeding precisely as you suggest. It takes a while to build systems and change procedures in very large companies. But it’s happening.

        One important thing to remember: for the biggest authors with the most powerful agents, the advance is the payment. So royalty rates and speed of accounting and payment are moot.

        Mike

  • http://claudenougat.blogspot.com Claude Nougat

    This is a refreshing, even-handed approach to the agent-turned-publisher conflict, thanks Mike!

    I just wonder though how much an agency can help an author in the area of book marketing? That really has never been an agent’s forte, has it? Publishers already have given up much of their marketing efforts, pretending from new authors that they have their own blog and a Twitter following of at least 500 or 600 to be even considered for a contract (or so I’m told). But I assume agents are even less well-placed to help an author in this all-important area…

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Actually, some agents have been trying their hand at marketing for a while. Apparently the Knight Agency has had somebody in a marketing role before they went to their new service offering.

      Everybody’s either learning or relearning marketing. It is likely that publishers and agents, working with multiple titles, will learn it better and faster than authors. When you read John Locke’s “how I did it” book, you realize that many of the techniques he suggests would work at least as well for a coherent list as it does for an author alone.

      Mike

  • http://MintRight.com Stanislav Mamonov

    Hello, Mike,

    Another great post on an important topic.   As I mentioned to you @ BEA – we’ve developed an ebook distribution offering specifically designed for agents and their clients.   MintRight provides ebook conversion and comprehensive distribution to Amazon, B&N, Apple, Sony & Kobo as well as an international network of retailers.   MintRight dashboard gives both agents and their clients direct control over ebooks and provides transparent financial reporting.

    MintRight has partnered with Folio Literary Agency to develop the service and the first ebooks that include both new and back list titles have been released in the past 6 weeks.   Many more exciting titles are the in the pipeline and we would be delighted to partake in the conference in September.

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Congratulations on being in the thick of the literary agent game. There should be a lot of action there.

      Mike

  • Anonymous

    I’m late to the party however, I think agencies embarking on digital propositions should ask themselves a number of questions as they decide what to offer, how to offer it and to whom:
    - what strategic issues are facing your agency? Agencies differ in terms of size, reputation, type and number of clients, succession matters, profitability and so on. These factors should/could lead to different choices.
    - what critical issues are facing you clients?
    - what services do you think authors will value and pay for? Ask this question for current clients as well as potential clients, debut authors as well as well-established authors.
    - what competencies will you need to offer those services? And, how will you acquire those competencies? For example, partnering could extend an agency’s competencies without taking on the responsibility of new staff.
    - how will you find the right mix of clients for these services, a mix that will generate profit and future growth?
    - what will differentiate you in the market for talented authors?

    Making money from a percent of author advances and ongoing book revenue is very different from making money through professional services. Literary agents will need to consider different ways to leverage their time and expertise.

    Just a few thoughts as always.

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      I think your checklist is a good one. I’ve been having a lot of conversations lately about all this with a very smart agent that has demonstrated to me that the right strategy differs from agency to agency. I’d add to your list that agents increasingly are going to have to ask whether some sort of split-fee relationship with the agencies that have already developed these capabilities might be a better course. Of course, if the agency just offers consulting services, that’s moot.

      Mike

  • Mike Segroves

    Mike,

    I agree with your premise but this isn’t something all that new on the scene.  Arthur Klebanoff of Scott Meredith began publishing eBooks for his clients under the name Rosetta Books back in 2001;  Richard Curtis began ereads.com shortly thereafter.  But both of these were preceded by Joshua Bilmes of JABerwocky Literary Agency who started publishing his clients thru peanutpress.com as early as 1998.  While Joshua worked under the umbrella of peanut press, he was providing many of the services of a publisher for his clients for titles where the rights had reverted from their paper publisher.  

    • /blog Mike Shatzkin

      Yes, that’s true. What is different is that the prior attempts were outliers; today this is becoming mainstream.

      Peanut Press was the original name of the Palm platform, I believe.

      Mike

  • Pingback: Agents and Publishers – a Changing Relationship (via @mikeshatzkin) | Literarium – The Blog

  • Pingback: Industry News–Aug 15 | RWA-WF