KKR on walking away from negotiations

[Vidya]

https://kriswrites.com/2020/01/22/business-musings-power-contracts-negotiation/

She says:

Let’s start with the morals clause. Realize that most traditional publishing contracts now contain a morals clause. Because of some writers who are…um…ick. But, icky Mitch is right: a morals clause can be used to get rid of anyone for any reason.

But let’s move beyond the morals clause (which, by the way, you should never ever sign, even if you live a completely blameless life).

First, it came as a surprise to me that most traditional publishing contracts now contain a morals clause.

Second, it would never have occurred to me to object to such a clause. I live a blameless life, and I’d assume this clause was meant mainly for men in the MeToo era, and since I’m not a man and I haven’t sexually harassed anyone, why worry?

Now I wonder. If we did refuse to sign such a clause, wouldn’t it just make publishers think we must have something to hide or we’d sign it?

I’d think that, but then I’m a suspicious little beast.

[Eric Thomson]

A morals clause?  What the hell is this?  The Victorian Era?

I wouldn't try to negotiate it away if I were faced with one in a contract, I'd simply walk away.  Frack 'em.

[notthatamanda]

Thanks for posting the article. Lots of things to think about should anyone ever offer me a contract for anything about my books (unlikely).

I think morality clauses will be come more common. Maybe there should be a two way street for morality clauses, eg, if an author does something the company can dump them, but if the company does something the author can walk away and get the rights to all their material back.

[okey dokey]

I think we're already doing this when we post on YouTube and many social and forum sites,

[Vidya]

I think we're already doing this when we post on YouTube and many social and forum sites,

doing what? Signing morals clauses? How?

[Lynn]

You think you lead a blameless life. Then some dummy sues you and your publisher for stealing their ideas, because people do that, and suddenly your publisher decides you're more trouble than you're worth and they use the morality clause to dump you. On top of that, a lot of contracts make the author pay for it all too nowadays so even if the publisher decides to fight or settle, you could be stuck with the actual lawyer bills for the publisher. And don't think it can't happen because I knew an author that this actually happened to. I'm not going to tell you who she is because of privacy but it was an eye-opening moment for me.

KKR is right. You have to go in thinking of how any and every clause in that contract could be used against you as a weapon. and if you hear yourself saying, nah, they'd never do that even though they could, you'd better think again hard.

(It was a stupid case and the person suing had no real case, but that doesnt stop the legal bills from adding up!)

[Bill Hiatt]

I can see the argument for a clause that allowed for termination of a contract in the event of a specified infraction, such as a serious criminal offense. However, it sounds like what we're talking about is much more flexible--a moral violation is whatever the publisher says it is. That's truly scary.

Not that I have publishers lining up to court me, but this is just another reason to say no.

[notthatamanda]

I was envisioning something taken out of context. Or perhaps, if you follow someone on social media who does something and then all of a sudden you are guilty by association. Even if you just followed them because you liked their cat pictures or something.

[Lorri Moulton]

That is an excellent article.  Thanks for sharing!

[Vidya]

Lynn, someone sued an author friend of yours for stealing their ideas, and her publisher fought the case and stuck her with the lawyer bills? That’s terrible.

But didn't your friend (or her publisher) get damages since she was innocent? She should have got enough damages to deter people from filing these frivolous lawsuits.

[Lynn]

The contract stuck the author with the bills. All the publisher did was enforce the contract and withhold royalties.

I don't know if she got damages. We didn't keep in touch after some life changes. I seriously doubt it. I doubt the case even went all the way. Which means the publisher would have had no need to worry about damages because they had the wherewithal to take the reimbursement for the legal fees from her royalties. She wasn't a rich author, by any means. She was a working writer.

I do know she was writing "extra" books so she could make the money she needed after they withheld royalties.

[Vidya]

Lynn, while that’s a sad story, it’s surely a one in a million case. Thousands of writers are signing up with publishers without this happening to them.

I HAVE heard before of the dangers of agreeing to any clause where you get stuck with the legal bills in case of a law suit and i’d agree no one should sign such a clause. But publishers would probably say that’s to cover them in case the writer has plagiarized or done something illegal. It would be hard to argue with that if they insisted. I guess that’s where one has to be willing to walk away, as KKR says.

Easy enough to walk away if they offer a paltry five figure advance but what if they offer a substantial six figure one? Walking away becomes way more difficult.

[Lynn]

Maybe for some. I would walk away from any contract that included clauses like that. I have a past that proves it to myself so I don't mind saying that. I am stubborn to the core, sometimes to my own detriment. :D

We'll just have to disagree on the whole "once in a million" thing. NDAs prevent a lot of people from sharing details of getting screwed by big pub.

[Bill Hiatt]

As with morals clauses, provisions for the author to pay all court costs could theoretically be crafted in such a way as to avoid this nonsense. A clause requiring the author pay the legal fees if the author is found to be at fault seems reasonable. If, for example, an author was actually guilty of plagiarism, I can see the author having to cover legal fees in such a case. But to be on the hook for legal fees when the author has done nothing wrong? Ridiculous.

I think a lot of the contract provisions we find so objectionable are either relatively new or weren't enforced as much in the past, right? Many of them I've only heard about recently. If this is a new trend, then maybe the publishers should be giving a larger percentages of the profits to authors. Sometimes, I wonder if the services an average author gets from the publisher are worth the amount of royalties the publisher claims.

[notthatamanda]

Yeah I got that "It's in the contract but it will never happen" once. I walked away from that. Nothing to do with publishing.

[Mammasan]

But to be on the hook for legal fees when the author has done nothing wrong? Ridiculous.

So who should be on the hook for them? The publisher hasn't done anything wrong either. Bottom line, somebody has to pay them.

[cuberoute]

KKR does talk a bit of nonsense from time to time.

For example, I've never seen a book contract that didn't include the author guaranteeing they hadn't plagiarized the book.

That's a morals clause and KKR knows it but then still says don't sign a contract with a morals clause.

Every trad contract you'll ever see has it and no, they will never remove it.

There are moral clauses that publishers put in regarding posting sexist/racist/other-ist things online. Ones about criminal convictions too. The larger the company, the more likely this stuff is going to be in there.

KKR is always talking like she and her husband are running this multinational powerhouse business and dealing with rights and contracts all over the place... except they're not. Have you seen her books racing up the charts in Germany? Seen a television deal?

It's really easy to present yourself as successful and the way to do that is a mixture of vague and specific. Her specific is about how to negotiate rights. Her vague is you never get real verifiable details on these rights sales. There is no "we partnered with X to create this anime series!"

She writes well and convincingly but it's worth taking what she says with a f*cking giant lump of salt. Don't ever sign a morals clause is bad advice and results in losing contracts and payments and work. And I guarantee if she ever showed contracts she has signed, they'd have morals clauses in them.

[Jessica]

I'd say don't sign contracts with vague moral clauses (or any vague clauses tbh). If the publisher wants me to pay if I get caught plagiarizing - fine, than use exact wording in the contract. But clauses that could make me pay for everything that gets to court? Nah, not with me.

[Vidya]

For example, I've never seen a book contract that didn't include the author guaranteeing they hadn't plagiarized the book.

That's a morals clause and KKR knows it but then still says don't sign a contract with a morals clause.

Every trad contract you'll ever see has it and no, they will never remove it.

cuberoute, that’s a good point. So why do you think KKR still says don't sign a contract with a morals clause? Surely, with her familiarity with contracts, she would know every trad contract has it and will never remove it.

That kinda sounds like a deliberate mislead. But why would she deliberately mislead, especially when she knows many who read her blog are trad pubbed authors who know these things and can call her on it?

[Lynn]

Because a vague morals clause is not the same thing as a precisely worded clause with limited scope. Simple.

[Vidya]

Lynn, then I think she should have clarified that and specified we could and should sign a more specific cause relating to morality.

[Lynn]

Because those aren't called morality clauses. That's just what cuberoute is calling them.

And I wouldn't want her telling people what to sign. That's their own business, based on their own needs and wants. Warning someone of what they shouldn't sign without thinking hard about it and being willing to walk away because the repercussions are more severe than one would think reasonably isn't the same thing as telling people what to do.

The whole post is about negotiations. If you don't want to negotiate out a morals clause that isn't strict in scope, you don't have to and you don't have to walk away. That's your choice. You pay the price if it turns into a screw up. Nobody else. You just can't say at that point you weren't warned that it could go bad and be used against you in ways you might not have imagined. :D

[Lorri Moulton]

The whole reason I like self-publishing is I keep the power.  It may not be a lot of power right now...but it's all mine.  Yes, I work with other businesses but not for them.

[CoraBuhlert]

Speaking as someone who deals with contracts a lot in my day job, you should always read every contract carefully. If you don't understand something or if two clauses contradict each other, ask a lawyer. If a clause is overly vague, request that it be specified.

Regarding morals, a clause like, "The publisher reserves the right to cancel the contract, if the author is found guilty of plagiarism or a felony." is fine. A clause like, "The publisher reserves the right to cancel the contract, if the author displays any kind of behaviour that is considered immoral" is way too vague, because that can mean anything.

If the negotiation partner says, "Oh, that's just boilerplate. We'd never invoke that clause", request that the clause be removed. If they'd never invoke it anyway, then why is it in the contract?

Also, if a contract has been changed, no matter how minor the change is, always recheck the whole thing. Because such minor changes can be used to sneak in clauses that had been previously thrown out. And yes, I've seen that happen. When I caught it, the other party claimed it was a mistake and an old draft had been accidentally used. Yeah, right. 

[Vidya]

Wow, Cora, it’s disheartening how tricky people can be. I’d expect better from publishers, but after reading so many of Kris’s posts about how sneaky and scammy they and agents are, I’ll believe anything of them.

[CoraBuhlert]

The contract where the nasty clause was snuck in again wasn't a publishing contract, but a partnership contract for a really dodgy company. I only did translations (I translate legal documents among other things, that's why I see a lot of contracts and also have to read the whole thing, even if nobody else does) for them, because a close relative was involved in the company. I warned him about the company and at least saved him from worse by getting rid of that nasty clause (which was never going to be invoked, of course).

So the lesson is: Be careful. Even if you think the people involved are your friends.

[cuberoute]

For example, I've never seen a book contract that didn't include the author guaranteeing they hadn't plagiarized the book.

That's a morals clause and KKR knows it but then still says don't sign a contract with a morals clause.

Every trad contract you'll ever see has it and no, they will never remove it.

cuberoute, that’s a good point. So why do you think KKR still says don't sign a contract with a morals clause? Surely, with her familiarity with contracts, she would know every trad contract has it and will never remove it.

That kinda sounds like a deliberate mislead. But why would she deliberately mislead, especially when she knows many who read her blog are trad pubbed authors who know these things and can call her on it?

She moderates comments out from people who argue with her so you won't see it. Additionally, she likes to make these grand statements and people nod and agree although they don't entirely understand what she is talking about.

It's part of the whole "vague then specific" thing that she and her husband put on.

The plagiarism clause for example - if that's not a morals clause then what is it? It's not financial or administrative. It's about negative behavior.

When I read her blog I often get the feeling of her fast-talking and hand-waving. She did an extended series on licensing, which I know quite a bit about and it was great, mostly. Full of useful stuff. But when it comes down to real contracts and real licensing, it wasn't so great.

Don't sign a morals clause... guess what, every contract with every business that slightly has its sh*t together has morals clauses. They have vague ones, they have specific ones, they have ones about facebook posts, they have all kinds.

Signing a vague "don't do anything to cause disrepute" clause is stupid. You want clarity. But a clear clause will still include lines like that.

I find KKR alternatively great and frustratingly wrong. I've quite literally seen authors destroy deals because they have zero contract understanding and they've read a blog from someone giving them bad advice. One was an author and illustrator who decided they wanted 12% royalties each, for a total of 24%. It was some average picture book. They refused to budge, the publisher wouldn't go higher than 12% together and because of bad advice, they lost the deal. They never published a thing with anyone in the end.

The good advice she gives is to pretend each clause will be used against you. Then you can really clarify what they mean.

Back around to why she says don't sign a morality clause... because it's part of the show, the style, the pretense.

I wish people would check her book ranks on Amazon. She's giving advice while her ranks are between 600K to a million or more. Some of it is okay but plenty of it isn't.

While someone with poor ranks can give good contract advice, it's not so good when poor ranks also give poor contract advice.

[Vidya]

“Back around to why she says don't sign a morality clause... because it's part of the show, the style, the pretense.”

but why engage in show and style? Why not give the correct advice instead of misleading people?

Btw I did check her book ranks on Amazon long ago. Others did too because she said in a post once that people point to her books’ low ranks and she replies which ones, she has so many. And I think she implied you can’t judge by Zon ranks since her books are wide.

We know some people do claim to make more on other channels but that is rare.

Apart from that, I tried reading some of her books. The writing was competent but the stories themselves didn't interest me. But then I don't read sci fi and though I do read YA, which is why I tried some of her YA stories, I’m selective about that too. I figured her stories would be interesting to some.

I HAVE wondered whether she and Dean really have the hundreds of novels they claim to have. Anyone with that big a backlist should be making a killing on ZON if the rights have reverted and they could just put up a ton of novels. Provided of course that the novels prove popular. Ay, there’s the rub. Not everyone who gives advice, good or bad, is actually capable of consistently writing what appeals to a significant portion  of the public.

[Lynn]

Okay, this is none of my business but.

Here are some completely hypothetical numbers.

To earn 250,000 revenue in a year, a person selling books at 5.99 who has 200 books (suppose they have 200 between the both of them, all priced in the 5.99 range), only has to sell 27 of each of those books a month, at a 65% royalty average.

250,000 / (5.99 x .65) = 64,209.5801
64,210 / 12 = 5,350.8333
5,351 / 200 = 26.755
27 / 5 = 5.4

If someone has 200 books, and those books have audio, paperbacks, and other editions, which these numbers are totally ignoring, and those books are on 5 to 10 distributor websites, that is not a lot of books to sell per title (5.4) per month. If some of those books are still with traditional publishers and being sold in who knows how many bookstores, those are sales that are not even in this hypothetical scenario at all.

Say only half the books sell and the other half do zero sales. That still only pushes the remaining books up to a needed 54 sales per title a month or 10.8 per distributor per title--and that's with half the backlist selling zlich. A complete zero.

The rank on a book selling about 5 - 10 copies a month is not going to be great.

So I just don't see how looking at a few ranks can discount their claims of good income from their books.

To say they aren't selling is to be kind of blind to the fact that selling at higher prices means you have to sell a whole lot fewer books, while ranks will naturally be in the higher digits because you're selling fewer books but making more per sale.

I don't know them, and I don't care if they're making what they say they're making. I read a lot of their posts, and I decide on a case by case basis what I want to think about and what I want to ignore. But I do think a lot of the time, people claiming the numbers they cite (which are vague and in the range of "doing really well" so they could be saying 200k or more or less, who knows?) aren't real haven't sat down and actually done the math to see if it's possible. They're basing it on gut reactions.

I don't doubt that they could be making really decent money (more than decent) with the number of books they seem to have. I don't know (and I don't really care) but I don't think it's anywhere near impossible or even improbable.

[okey dokey]

The trend I don't like is having our books vetted by folks in Third World countries.
They have different views on what is moral depending on their religious and cultural background.
You write a novel about a gay couple? That gets sent to the dungeon jiffy quick.
A rape victim rebuilds her life instead of being stoned to death by her neighbors. Nope. Hide that one from potential readers.
Writers in the Western word went through a long hard battle against censorship. They had to win a lot of court cases to give us the freedom we now enjoy.
Best seller Jackie Susann had to file suit against a Chicago department store because it hid her books behind the counter rather than display them on the shelves.
Now in this new century, our books are being outsourced for vetting to countries with 15th Century coulters.
And our vendors offer us "Terms of Service" deals instead of contracts that can be negotiated.

[LilyBLily]

The trend I don't like is having our books vetted by folks in Third World countries.
They have different views on what is moral depending on their religious and cultural background.
You write a novel about a gay couple? That gets sent to the dungeon jiffy quick.
A rape victim rebuilds her life instead of being stoned to death by her neighbors. Nope. Hide that one from potential readers.
Writers in the Western word went through a long hard battle against censorship. They had to win a lot of court cases to give us the freedom we now enjoy.
Best seller Jackie Susann had to file suit against a Chicago department store because it hid her books behind the counter rather than display them on the shelves.
Now in this new century, our books are being outsourced for vetting to countries with 15th Century coulters.
And our vendors offer us "Terms of Service" deals instead of contracts that can be negotiated.

I think some people would find your comments offensive, although I certainly would not want anything I wrote to be vetted by, say, a Saudi male. That said, I agree that the person who vets anything always has a bias. We would prefer that members of our own society be the gatekeepers, rather than members of some other society. This is yet another reason why New York publishers get reviled by indies, because the editors and agents based there often seem to be from some other society, too. 

As to the contract versus TOS issue, all our software and our credit cards and our subscriptions to viewing services and whatnot are now worded that we must accept their binding arbitration and have given up the right to sue. Individuals actually have very little ability to act on a level playing field. 

[okey dokey]

Who have I offended?
The author?
The Third Word censor?
Someone who would stone a girl because she was raped?

OK. I'll stay away from the forum comment button if folks find my thoughts offensive.
But I don't apologize.

And just because companies force us into Terms of Service, doesn't make it easier for me to swallow.
I think writers have taken a big step backward. Not forward.

[Vidya]

The trend I don't like is having our books vetted by folks in Third World countries.
They have different views on what is moral depending on their religious and cultural background.
You write a novel about a gay couple? That gets sent to the dungeon jiffy quick.

I’m an Indian woman in a Third World country, India. I’m straight. Gay romance is one of my favorite genres to read. it’s also an established genre on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Kindle-Store-Gay-Fiction/zgbs/digital-text/7588788011/ref=zg_bs

so which novel about a gay couple got sent to the dungeon? I assume you know of examples of it happening.

A rape victim rebuilds her life instead of being stoned to death by her neighbors. Nope. Hide that one from potential readers.

again, which novel about a rape victim rebuilding her life got sent to the dungeon? I assume you know of at least one where it actually happened.

Now in this new century, our books are being outsourced for vetting to countries with 15th Century coulters.

I assume you mean countries with 15th Century cultures.

[cuberoute]

“Back around to why she says don't sign a morality clause... because it's part of the show, the style, the pretense.”

but why engage in show and style? Why not give the correct advice instead of misleading people?

The big why can be answered with this: https://wmg-publishing-workshops-and-lectures.teachable.com/courses

and https://www.wmgworkshops.com/craft/ and https://www.wmgworkshops.com/business/

Let's check out DWS's introduction on teachable: "With over twenty-three million copies of his books in print, USA Today bestselling writer Dean Wesley Smith now brings you original fiction every month for the past three years in his own magazine, Smith’s Monthly."

Hmm... wow, twenty-three million copies!

Except they're licensed titles in the Star Trek universe. His original work doesn't sell anything like that.

I worked in licensing too... I guess I could write "ten million copies sold" on some stuff but really that was Disney and Universal etc.

I see KKR and DWS using their business to funnel new authors to their online courses.

That's fine. That's a business. I have no problem with people teaching others.

I do have problems with people who write USA Today Bestseller when it was a licensed title. I do have problems listing tens of millions of copies sold without explaining where those sales came from. I do have problems with people who give business advice and talk a big game but when you look into it, it suddenly gets all fuzzy.

KKR does give a lot of useful and good advice but she also gives terrible advice and it's hard to tease it out sometimes. I like their indie spirit. I don't like "has won twenty-five awards" and it turns out some of those awards are nobody nothings from defunct places that never mattered in the first place.

Don't sign a morals clause is bad advice. Just flat-out wrong. Guess what - if you're an author under a pen-name who wants to keep private, you will have a contract your editor/cover designer and anyone else involved in your work will sign. It will include all kinds of morals clauses around "keep your mouth shut or else".

DWS has a lot of wonky ideas that don't work in the eBook market, especially around pricing. You dig into his catalog and the ranks show how bad the sales are. Yet his blog posts are shared around and people take it on as gospel without that digging.

[elleoco]

The trend I don't like is having our books vetted by folks in Third World countries.

Can you explain this? I didn't think anyone was vetting indie books on Amazon, that the ones that get sent to the dungeon get that done to them haphazardly based on cover, blurb, and complaints.

Hmm... wow, twenty-three million copies!

Except they're licensed titles in the Star Trek universe. His original work doesn't sell anything like that.

I need that explained too. So someone approaches me to write a book in the Star Trek world. I do, and it sells a million copies. I'm not entitled to say a book I wrote sold a million copies?

As to traditional contract clauses, the only time I got far enough with a publisher to see the contract, there was a clause saying  I "indemnified" the company for something like any judgments against it because of the book. I worked for lawyers all my life. Hell would freeze over before I indemnify any company for anything. I didn't try to negotiate, just said no thanks and walked away.

[Mammasan]

Ellen, I just bought your Rottweiler Rescue, am looking forward to reading it. Just a note: your blurb says something about Kindle location. Is that supposed to be there?

[elleoco]

Thanks, Mammasan. Hope you like it. I'll take a look at the blurb. It's been a while, and the 10th anniversary of its publication will be in February.

Edit: Ah, well, here I am on the computer. I can just go take the look, can't I? And I did. The Kindle locations reference is kind of "old fashioned" these days. It's an indication of the length of the book for Kindle readers. I will take it off.

[Mammasan]

Ellen—I read your book, Rottweiler Rescue, and really enjoyed it. I thought your writing and plot were very good and you made me care about the characters which, IMO, is the most important aspect in writing a novel (doesn’t matter how good your plot is if the reader doesn’t care about the characters; if readers don’t care what happens to your characters, readers won’t read the novel). I would give you a five star review except I review under my real name and I kinda don’t want to compromise my anonymity here. Anyway, I jotted down a few typos. If you want them, tell me and I’ll post.

[elleoco]

Ellen—I read your book, Rottweiler Rescue, and really enjoyed it. I thought your writing and plot were very good and you made me care about the characters which, IMO, is the most important aspect in writing a novel (doesn’t matter how good your plot is if the reader doesn’t care about the characters; if readers don’t care what happens to your characters, readers won’t read the novel).

I'm glad you liked it. I don't review either (except an occasional traditionally published book). Sure, I'd be happy to hear about typos that need fixing, but aside from the fact I don't really want to see them in lights here, I don't think this is the place. You can send me a PM in this forum or you can get to my website from the link in my signature, or here it is http://www.oconnellauthor.com/ and there's a contact form there. For that matter email is just ellen@.

[tired1680]

So, people wondering how well KKR does - here's another datapoint:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/403649867/the-diving-universe
606 backers. Now, about 20-30 of those are writing backers; the rest are direct backers.
Only people on KS, only those wanting to get the X edition of this universe on basically a pre-order.

Lastly, the 'morals clause' she's discussing is not a plaigarism clause or the like. What she's discussing is the same thing other groups like the Author's Guild has spoken out about. Details here:
https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/why-we-oppose-morals-clauses-in-book-contracts/

[Pyram King]

You could always have a little fun, by agreeing to a moral clause and  introduce a "no brown M&M clause" https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232420 

Followed up by a "Sanity Clause"

[Bill Hiatt]

The trend I don't like is having our books vetted by folks in Third World countries.

Can you explain this? I didn't think anyone was vetting indie books on Amazon, that the ones that get sent to the dungeon get that done to them haphazardly based on cover, blurb, and complaints.

Hmm... wow, twenty-three million copies!

Except they're licensed titles in the Star Trek universe. His original work doesn't sell anything like that.

I need that explained too. So someone approaches me to write a book in the Star Trek world. I do, and it sells a million copies. I'm not entitled to say a book I wrote sold a million copies?

As to traditional contract clauses, the only time I got far enough with a publisher to see the contract, there was a clause saying  I "indemnified" the company for something like any judgments against it because of the book. I worked for lawyers all my life. Hell would freeze over before I indemnify any company for anything. I didn't try to negotiate, just said no thanks and walked away.

Your question doesn't seem to have been answered, so I'll take a stab at it.

Yes, you could still claim a book you wrote sold a million copies in the circumstances described. I think the point cuberoute was making was that the Star Trek label would attract more readers than DWS would get on his own.

That's true, but the fact remains that it's still his book, and presumably it needed to be good enough to sell well, Star Trek license or not. After all, almost none of our books sell themselves. Most of the indies who make lists advertise the **** out of their books during the week they're trying to qualify. Does that mean all the credit should go to Bookbub and company? Trad pubbed authors often get more advertising and status because of their publisher. Does that mean all credit goes to the publisher? (The publisher would probably like to think so, but really?) Sure, book sales are a combination of many factors, but if I sold 23 million copies, I'd say I sold 23 million copies. And if I sold them under a Star Trek license, sure, that would have contributed enormously, but at the end of the day, it would still be my book.