Why I prefer one-book deals
NB: in this post I don’t discuss the publishing model for digital publishers, who often offer multi-book contracts and don’t pay an advance at all, or some of the newer indie publishing houses. I have no personal experience of these publishers so will be focusing on ‘traditional Big 5’ publishing here.
I’m probably a minority here, I know. I know because I’ve asked a lot of my friends who are authors and they’ve pretty much all said they prefer the security of a two- or maybe even three-book deal.
But I prefer one-book deals.
So far in my publishing journey (8 trad books in the UK, 2 in the US - so far!), I have, in fact, only signed one two-book deal, and that was under much duress!
I have also turned down two two-book deals in favour of a one-book deal.
I thought maybe it might be interesting to explain why, because I haven’t heard anyone talk much about this at all.
My two-book deal story
When my debut went out on submission I got offered two publishing deals on the same day (hurray right?! But actually also, argh, because choosing between two publishers is its own weird minefield).
One of the offers was a one-book deal, the other was a two-book deal.
The one-book deal was for SIGNIFICANTLY more money. Five times more in fact.
I had just finished doing the Faber Academy course at the time and so I asked my tutor’s advice.
I felt really torn - I obviously wanted to take the higher offer but I also wanted the ‘security’ of the two-book deal.
She told me in no uncertain terms to take the one-book deal.
It was such a fundamental conversation in my publishing journey that despite usually having the memory of an ant I can still remember what she said:
‘There’s no point in taking the two-book deal. If the first book does well, you’ll be annoyed you sold the second book to them for so little money. And if the first book flops, they’ll kill the second book anyway.’
It was blunt advice and I was a bit shocked, but it really helped open my eyes.
I asked her to elaborate on what she meant - surely if the first book didn’t do well, they’d try even harder with the second?
I think she might have sighed at me 😂, conscious she was about to puncture the dream I had of the publishing industry being this kind and caring place full of benevolent behaviour, rather than a business just like any other.
She explained that publishers don’t throw good money after bad.
If your first book with them flops, the likelihood of them pushing the second book anywhere near as hard is minuscule.
From that moment on, I was firmly ‘team one-book deal’.
The reason they offer the second book as part of the contract is almost an insurance tactic in case your book does do better than expected.
A way of securing you for the future at a lower rate!
There are, of course, some exceptions to this. If you are writing a series, then it might make sense to sell the series in one contract. (Although I’m still not wholly convinced as I have had friends who’ve sold series and watched their publishers’ enthusiasm wane with each book…)
Also, if you have a long and successful track-record with a publisher and all is going well, then I can see it might make sense to sign a multi-book contract.
Anyway, I took the one-book deal, with the higher advance.
And thankfully, it worked out OK - I have since signed five more individual contracts with that publisher.
But yes, there was the possibility that they might have dropped me after that first book.
At any point in the future they might drop me too.
But - call me Pollyanna if you like - I do firmly believe that if you’ve done it once, you can do it again, and that there’s ALWAYS the possibility of getting a new book contract, even if it takes a lot of time and perseverance and swearing and writing and possibly changing your name...
A couple of years ago, my publishers did try to offer me a two-book deal but I turned it down and they were happy to offer me a one-book deal instead (my publishers are great!)
And the VERY best thing about the arrangement I have is that all my books are single-accounted.
This is the main reason I prefer one-book deals.
Not sure what it means? Let me try to explain!
The perils of joint accounting
When you sign a two-book deal with a traditional publisher, the likelihood is that your contract will be joint-accounted.
If you’re not sure about this, ask your agent or check your contract.
What it means for you is that before you start to earn any royalties on your books, you will have to pay back the advances on both books.
So, let’s say you have a £20k deal for two books (this is a common debut deaI).
If the first book does really really well and pays back its £10k advance within a few months, you won’t receive ANY royalties for it until it has paid back the whole £20k advance.
Not great, right?
This means you might not earn anything, even if one of your books does well, because the other book wasn’t as successful.
Even though, as I’ve talked about before - you have almost no control over how your book sells →
Whereas if you have TWO separate one-book deals for £10k each, as soon as the first book earns back its £10k, you’ll start being paid royalties, even if the second book doesn’t sell a single copy.
I am so grateful to have single accounting on my books. My third novel, The Perfect Father, is the only one of my novels to have earnt out in the UK thus far and I get royalties twice a year for it.
Which I wouldn’t get if that book had been part of a multi-book contract.
I have friends who say they like the security of having a two-book deal, knowing that their publisher is going to give them two shots at the game.
And I can kind of understand that, but there are inevitable downsides to being tied into a publisher for more than one book.
For example, what if your first book does really badly, or you really don’t enjoy the experience of working with that publisher?
This does happen a lot, sadly.
Or what if your editor leaves midway through your contract?
This also happens a LOT more than people realise (spoiler alert: it’s happened to me, twice!)
You are still tied in to that publisher for A WHOLE OTHER BOOK.
Which if it’s being published in hardback before the paperback, might mean another two or more years of dealing with a publisher who you feel frustrated or disappointed with. Or an editor who doesn’t ‘get’ your writing.
There’s nothing more soul-destroying.
It’s literally like being trapped.
I know it’s possible to buy yourself out of book contracts, but really, that’s not the kind of thing any author wants to have to deal with.
Why I did sign a two-book deal
As I mentioned, I have signed a two-book deal.
But only one of them.
And if I’m honest, I’m not happy about it! When the offer came in, I asked my agent to go back to the publisher and ask for a one-book deal.
They said no.
One thing that all authors who want to be traditionally published have to accept is that it’s a buyers’ market, and my choices were:
a) turn down the two-book deal
or
b) suck it up 😆
I sucked it up. They were offering to make my book a lead title, I loved the editor and to be completely honest, I didn’t have any other offers on the table.
Which kind of made deciding easier 😂
I’m midway through that deal so I’ll report back on how I’ve found the experience once my second novel is published.
But I’m definitely out of my comfort zone (but I’m also a massive commitment phobe, so this probably makes sense!)
And yes, my editor left her job right after the first book came out 😭
I suspect some of what I’ve said here might ruffle a few feathers, so as usual, please remember this is just MY experience and MY thoughts.
I’m not an expert and I definitely don’t want to tell anyone what to do.
I 100% think this is a personal choice but I do also think it’s important to draw attention to the fact that a two-book deal isn’t a guarantee of ANYTHING, other than you being tied to a publisher for an unchangeable amount of money, no matter what happens to your first book.
So do weigh everything up, and DEFINITELY talk to your agent, before assuming that a two-book deal is ‘better’ ☺️
