New magazine
May. 15th, 2007 11:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
First issue includes:
- A guest editorial by Pat Cadigan
- A column by Adam Roberts
- An interview with Charles Stross
- Reviews of Ink by Hal Duncan, The Merchant and the Alchemist's Gate by Ted Chiang, and Gradisil by Adam Roberts.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 10:48 am (UTC)On the other hand, get back to me when their published reviews meet their guidelines (especially the "no one but you could have written this review" one) and they have enough of a business plan in place to be able to pay people.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 12:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 02:01 pm (UTC)That's a very fair criticism, and I take your point. We're working toward it.
and they have enough of a business plan in place to be able to pay people.
We could only hope. If you know of a business plan model that could make that happen, please share. To date, it's all out-of-pocket for Jonathan and me, and my guess is that, say, Amazon links ain't going to net us enough to pay our contributors more than a few cents each, for instance. Considering we've still got a dozen pieces in the pipeline that will be going up over the course of the next couple days, and that we plan to keep that speed up for the duration, at even $50 per review we're looking at a cost of $850 per (roughly) "issue". Not chump change for Jonathan and me to shell out.
--gabe chouinard
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 02:05 pm (UTC)Going to steal all the Caps Lock keys in the world. BE RIGHT BACK.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 03:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 03:32 pm (UTC)We do have a few things a bit different in the pipeline though, but you'll have to wait to see those ;-)
Jonathan M - Scalpel Magazine.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 03:40 pm (UTC)Another option, of course, is to start up a separate money-making venture and funnel the profits from it into support of Scalpel; then it's still out of pocket, but as your "pocket" has increased by $850 or however much, there's no net loss to you other than your time and effort. Running two startups at once is pretty hectic, though.
I certainly wish you the best with it. Roberts's column was terrific and I'd love to see more like it. I hope you can encourage your reviewers to really let loose, not be so shy with their I-statements and opinions (speaking as a reviewer, I am so tired of reading and writing reviews where the reader is referred to as "one" and the reviewer's voice is buried beneath equivocations), and have a good time telling people what they think. I'd be willing to take a bit of a pay cut for a venue that encouraged that sort of writing--or make a donation to it, or pay to read it--and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 03:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:01 pm (UTC)Also, I point you to Chizine and Baen's Universe.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:07 pm (UTC)As for reviews... we're encouraging as best we can, and I hope that some of our own contributions will go some way toward illustrating more precisely what we're looking for. It comes down to those contributing reviewers, and how willing they are to dig in and produce the kind of stuff we want.
But in the end, we're still in the nebulous stage. After all, this mag went from concept to launch in... what? A few days over a month? So we'll evolve.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:07 pm (UTC)In the narrow sense, because it relies on the whim of a relatively small population - certainly smaller than your readership - and isn't as directly tied to your performance as a magazine (I suggest) as actually taking money every time someone wants your content.
In the broader sense, because Rose's question was about business models, and I don't think of taking donations as being part of regular business practice. Regular charity practice, sure - heaven knows, I work for a charity. I have no problem with sf entities running on their fannish energies and without a "professional" structure of payment/cash flow to sustain them; but in a sense, what I'm trying to bottom out here is whether Rose's aspiration of payment from a venue like Scalpel is a reasonable aspiration for anyone in the field.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:09 pm (UTC)Baen's Universe is funded by Baen Publishing.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:10 pm (UTC)If that was true, there wouldn't be any need for Scalpel, because there would be dozens of good paying venues for us all to begin with.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:30 pm (UTC)And if so, whenever it's discovered, I'm stealing it straight away.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:35 pm (UTC)Of course, now I've probably jinxed us.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:37 pm (UTC)Scifiction ran a long time with a rather large patron, but even it ended up collapsing.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:40 pm (UTC)...my first Chizine story (online publication) was published in 2002 or 2003.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:42 pm (UTC)Now which magazine just switched over from print to free web-based?!?! Now I'm all confused....
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:43 pm (UTC)See also the Subterranean Press magazine, I guess. (Which I have the feeling I should be looking at more than I am.)
no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-15 04:44 pm (UTC)