Hybrid Publishing Love

Hybrid Publishing Love

Konradbak | Dreamstime.com

Hybrid publishers get a lot of down news–lately and forever. There are some, for sure, that maybe deserve it. We at thewordverve have been a hybrid publisher since 2010 (incorporated officially, State of Georgia). And I love it. It’s persevered with low overhead and a wealth of ideas, and a lot of “winging it.”

Just one example of recent instances where hybrid publishing gets the thumbs down: Tate Publishing, one of those, bit the dust. I never tried to pursue any of their sadly left-behind authors in that wake.

Not my style.

Furthermore, thewordverve is a one-imprint pony. We publish the best that we have the pleasure of working with, beyond the editing, and we also publish at times on a more project-driven level. Good cause, and all that. That’s our imprint.

We exist because of our referrals. Clear as daylight. And for that, I’m eternally driven and appreciative.

This year, we’ve been venturing into a more “traditionally published” era, where a select group of books are chosen, and we (the author and publisher) are equally invested in the endeavor. Equally. If not more so on thewordverve. This is not something we can do lightly; the return must be visible somewhere out there in the darkness. We shall see where this takes us. So far so good. We’re still small potatoes out there, but with a vision bigger than most would expect from small potatoes.

So does that make us big potatoes? With cheese, please.

At the same time, there are some authors who prefer to reap the higher royalty and pay for the upfront fees. They want a publisher behind them. Is this bad? No. Absolutely not. They are still our chosen few. And we honor them.

Our goal is to spread the love, the words, no boundaries.

We’re a unique group. #teamV. Positive mojo to all who participate in this crazy industry. Message: Hybrid publishers are not all bad.


Share this post

Leave a Reply