The History Press reviews Irish imprint
01.07.10 | Catherine Neilan
The History Press is reviewing its Irish imprint in light of the difficult trading environment.
The company has entered into consultation talks with the four permanent members of staff in the Dublin office to "determine their future". Last year The History Press Ireland published 25 titles and had plans for 30 in 2010.
The publisher sent a statement to Irish Publishing News, which said it "remains committed to publishing for the Irish market, to its Irish authors and trading partners. Following the conclusion of this review process, The History Press will issue a more complete statement of its plans for the Irish business".
The History Press has not yet filed its accounts for the calendar year 2009, however in 2008 it made a pre-tax loss of £1.7m on a group turnover of £12.8m.
The History Press Ireland was founded in October 2005 as Nonsuch Ireland, an imprint of Alan Sutton’s Nonsuch Publishing.
Stuart Biles, chief executive of The History Press, told The Bookseller: "As you are no doubt aware, it's a difficult market [in Ireland] at the moment because the economy is very tough. As a result we are in consultation with the staff in the Dublin office."
He declined to comment further until the process has been concluded.
Comments on this article
By Me, just me!
'No one was available for comment!' 'Accounts 'not yet filed for the calendar year 2009' It isn't rocket science, you know - last time I checked Octopus Investments Eclipse VCT1-4, it seems the History Press has had an inward investment since it started of approximately £93,000 per month - over a million big ones a year!, and that on top of the loss of £1.7M a year. Some one should tell the investors that they've an investment in a 'Zombie' company, kept afloat on investors' money to satisfy the 2.5%-3% management fees that Octopus Investments charges every month. The trick is simple, borrow someone else's money and charge them for the privilege of losing it. What would I do if I was in charge - well, I hate to say it, but the staff levels are too high, the expenses to great and they're publishing the wrong books for the market place in too small a quantity to make a difference. It seems like someone at THP has finally twigged this.01 Jul 10 16:09
By Alan Sutton
I fear the malaise may be much deeper. Employees at the French subsidiary, Editions Alan Sutton have now been informed of a 15% pay cut and it appears that once more the History Press has simply run out of cash. Their funds are supplied from the Eclipse Funds of Octopus Investments, and information publicy available from the Eclipse Reports reveal that since December 2007, Octopus has dripped in cash at the rate of £90,000 per month. This cannot continue, so interesting news must surely be on the horizon.01 Jul 10 16:35
By plus ca change
Perhaps Alan can advise on how to turn things around: he certainly has a strong track record?01 Jul 10 16:54
By bseller
Why should Alan advise THP? Their expert team know everything - how to steal companies, how to screw creditors and authors. It's easy isn't it - after all it's only a loss of £1.7 million and best of all - it's not even their money!01 Jul 10 17:08
By Me's former other half
Well nobody is really covered in glory in any of this are they? Pre-pack administrations cheat everybody including competitors who in non pre-pack situations can bid for assets in an auction where the best price can be realised for the creditors. Hopefully then the authors then get to move to a company who will actually pay their authors and their printers. THI clearly have gone from guddle to muddle to mess. Of course it will all end in tears. The business model is unsustainable and without drastic surgery is doomed. But is it appropriate for Alan Sutton and me (I don't mean me I mean he who calls himself me) to gloat like this? With a trail of broken companies, unpaid creditors and staff suddenly thrown out of work behind him is Alan Sutton really qualified to sit in judgement. His new company is also built on leveraged finance as far I am aware so time will tell whether it goes the same way as the others.02 Jul 10 10:23
By Alan Sutton
I don't know who 'Me' is, but he is mistaken in respect of the cash in Amberley. It is all share capital plus loan capital from shareholders. There is no bank borrowing or third party borrowing. All royalties are paid up to date and all creditors are paid up to date. In respect of gloating, that is not the right term. The loss to me personally from the unnecessary pre-pack has been in the region of £6m, so I now have to start from scratch and build again. Nevertheless, a slight and quiet schadenfreude us surely allowed? How was it possible that the THP directors could justify a pre-pack when there was stock in the warehouse with a retail value of £32m? Could it be that they wished to run the argument they could not sell stock quickly enough, or is it just possible that they wanted the benefit of the stock for their new company?02 Jul 10 10:43
By Peter Tuffrey
I am an author of over 30 titles for the History Press and royalties are due on December 30th and 30th June. Early in January this year I asked one of the commissioning editors how many copies of one of my books they had sold. Just over 400 was the reply. Royalties were paid six weeks late. Interestingly in one of the emails between myself and the editor this person had inadvertently included an internal email to one of her colleagues which was headed More Royalty Fun. Nasty you might conclude. Well yes especially when I asked the same person how many copies the same book sold by June and the reply was the same just over 400. The same reply as in January. How is an author to trust a publisher when lies are told about books sold? Something is going sadly wrong especially when after a rethink the reply was 453. Three weeks ago the History Press accountant told me to leave it two weeks before asking how many books I had sold and the royalties I was due. I left it three weeks telephoning the person yesterday reminding them that the royalties were due on 30th June. The individual told me they couldn't tell me anything because the figures had not been calculated and could I leave it another week. Strange because during our conversation last week I was told by a manager that it was estimated I was due over £200. What is going on here?02 Jul 10 11:32
By C
I'm expecting my royalty cheque this week. After all, there is a three month period for calculation of royalties (1 April to 30 June) and they should be paid within three months of the end of March - that time is up. I'll report back next week as to whether I got a statement and cheque, or not.02 Jul 10 11:45
By Disinterested
Peter, do you think it's possible that your books are just, um, a bit boring? I mean you clearly find Doncaster fascinating but with thirty titles in print if your books aren't selling then perhaps you're suffering from the law of diminishing returns...02 Jul 10 12:33
By Me's Former Other Half
Loan capital - sorry that does sound like borrowed money!!!! I am glad that Amberley have everyone paid to date. It still doesn't help those people who were casualties of the previous collapses. Maybe if it is profitable some of the loot could go to those people. Unpaid printers end up bust and unpaid authors get sickened off the whole process.02 Jul 10 14:13
By Alan Sutton
I think 'Me's former other half' fails to understand. It is usual for shareholders to have investment in shares and investment in loans; the fundamental point is that it is all coming from the shareholders and not as borrowed money from other sources or 'leveraging' as he likes to put it. The share capital remains in the business, the loan capital becomes repaid to the shareholders once the Company has grown to its required and designated size and throws off surplus cash. Perfectly normal.02 Jul 10 16:55
By Deanne Burton
Who says Peter Tuffrey’s books are not selling? They are in shed loads and have done for years and they’re not only about Doncaster. Disinterested doesn’t seem to have done any research just liking to see his/her name in print or could they have been put up to this by the embarrassed staff at the History Press?02 Jul 10 17:02
By Deanne Burton
Who says Peter Tuffrey’s books are not selling? They are in shed loads and have done for years and they’re not only about Doncaster. Disinterested doesn’t seem to have done any research just liking to see his/her name in print or could they have been put up to this by the embarrassed staff at the History Press?02 Jul 10 17:02
By Deanne Burton
Who says Peter Tuffrey’s books are not selling? They are in shed loads and have done for years and they’re not only about Doncaster. Disinterested doesn’t seem to have done any research just liking to see his/her name in print or could they have been put up to this by the embarrassed staff at the History Press?02 Jul 10 17:03
By Deanne Burton
Who says Peter Tuffrey’s books are not selling? They are in shed loads and have done for years and they’re not only about Doncaster. Disinterested doesn’t seem to have done any research just liking to see his/her name in print or could they have been put up to this by the embarrassed staff at the History Press?02 Jul 10 17:05
By Deanne Burton
Who says Peter Tuffrey’s books are not selling? They are in shed loads and have done for years and they’re not only about Doncaster. Disinterested doesn’t seem to have done any research just liking to see his/her name in print or could they have been put up to this by the embarrassed staff at the History Press?02 Jul 10 17:22
By Peter Tuffrey
It’s an amazing fact, but Mr Disinterested has a writing style very similar to that of someone I have been dealing with at the History Press; an interesting coincidence. Undoubtedly my books may be boring to some, but over the past twenty years they have sold very well. In my message I was not referring to the level of sales, more that my royalties had not been paid. Am I alone?’02 Jul 10 17:26
By Edmund Snee
It appears after all of this tiresome news of the last two years that it would make sense for the owners of the History Press to sell the UK company also. In the hands of a reputable publisher, perhaps royalties would then get paid as they fall due. Do the History Press not realise that they are functioning improperly?03 Jul 10 09:44
By Edited
Please don't continue to make unsubstantiated comments about individuals at THP. Thanks, Philip03 Jul 10 10:45
By Independent Viewpoint
To me, the answer seems simple. The chief executive of the History Press should make a statement, either in this blog, or to the Bookseller, that all royalties have been paid. If he can do that (and it is true) then the Press are in the clear. If he cannot do that, it seems probable that the History Press are trading insolvently.03 Jul 10 17:45
By author
History Press used to pay royalties on a whoever-shouts-most basis (I was told by my publisher there to be patient and persistent), alas that's no longer the case. I am sick and tired of having to shout for what should be a just and fair payment for my work. What I get is emails with 'more royalty fun' and 'I though you would like this' and 'I thought he was paid' forwards in the middle. Such level of incompetence is hard to comprehend. However, I would like to show the emails to the Society of Authors and The Bookseller - not that such complaints will lead to anything. It's now clear to me that the managers at History Press think that not paying their authors is very funny. I bet they are heaving a good laugh at our expense. History Press have certainly lost my goodwill!03 Jul 10 22:39
By THP are...
This comment has been removed after a complaint was made-Katie Allen.05 Jul 10 11:57
By Same old same old...
Yawn... every time there's an article on here about THP, the staff and ageing, embittered leader of Amberley salivate at the chance to 'dig some dirt'. Please change the record and let's not forget who got the companies now under THP banner into such trouble in the first place. You cannot rewrite history AGAIN, surely. It's incredibly distasteful in the current climate to read that you're rubbing your hands together in the hope that many talented, hard working young people might be put out of work. It's not surprising though, and gives everyone a glimpse of your true character.05 Jul 10 17:16
By Martin Investor
Katie, could you please let me know why the comment made by 'THP are...' was removed? Was it in any way factually incorrect or defamatory? If you could e-mail us the complaint it would be fantastic: martin_investor@yahoo.com Thanks!05 Jul 10 20:40
By This looks like fun, can anyone join?
The History Press ride to the defence . . . . hoorah! About time to. The only problem they have is no talented managers to guide their talented youngsters. Talented managers would sell books, create revenues AND PAY MY ROYALTIES.05 Jul 10 20:41
By David R N Livesley
Well said Same old same old, how the merry go round keeps a'turnin'.....Funny how the current management team at the History Press seem to be so professional and yet the old guard continue to mutiny...and from my viewpoint it seems to have no effect....lots of blather about missed opportunities etc. However their comments make for a mildly more interesting comments section on this site and gives Philip Jones something to watch over..... Whatever did happen to Ray...he certainly had an interesting and I would dare say refreshing view on the world of publishing..... Yours as ever toiling at the toilet of life....05 Jul 10 20:51
By A Commissioning Editor
Commissioning editors are the lifeblood of a publishing company! They bring together the ideas of authors and their own and turn those ideas into successful books. A good commissioning editor learns from experience, often from working for different companies, in different positions. They're creative, talented and bursting full of ideas. They don't wait for the books to fall in their laps, they don't take nine months to take an idea from initial proposal to contracted book. They're hungry for the new books, always looking for that successful one that will be a best seller. You need commissioning editors who can commission, publishing directors who support and value their staff's decisions and sales departments who can go out and sell them. Getting back to the History Press, their last e-mail newsletter sent to me proudly stated that the History Press had a 25 per cent share of the local history market. That's a big come down from the days when the NPI Media Group could claim a 70 per cent share of that very same market with Sutton, Tempus, Nonsuch and Phillimore. What will it be next year? A 15 per cent share of that self-same market? The company is in decline, it is obviously failing and its decline reminds me of the last year or two of MG Rover including the bosses at the top fleecing the poor staff at the bottom (as well as the authors and suppliers).05 Jul 10 22:09
By Alan Sutton
It is disappointing to see History Press seniors masquerading as David Livesley or hiding behind ‘same old’ anonymity to make personal attacks. They should be brave enough to put their true names to their blogs. I know from experience that they enjoy sending anonymous letters, but in this instance openness would be appreciated by many of my authors who find their books locked into this company. I think they should brave — as Tony Morris was with his interesting statements — and make a definitive and categorical statement that all royalties have been paid up to date. I have little doubt they have some talented youngsters — that is not the point. The talented youngsters will find that due to incompetence the so-called ‘six month pay cut’ turns into ‘an indefinite pay cut’ and I suspect redundancies loom. Time will tell. As Herbert Asquith said in his famous 1910 speeches, ‘We had better wait and see.’06 Jul 10 11:09
By philip.jones@bookseller.co.uk
Thanks for the comments, I am now closing this thread because it appears to have run its course. We have removed comments which are abusive towards particular individuals and not relevant to the news article. If you have any problems with this, please email me at the above account. Cheers - Philip Jones06 Jul 10 11:24
