This might be of interesting for people planning to write a book.www.collegepublications.co.ukExcerpt from their "about us" page... with several objectives in mind: To bring College Publications to a level with Oxford (OUP) and Cambridge (CUP) in terms of publishing capability.To provide the community with a non-profit making, highly prestigious publishing outlet that will break the monopoly that commercial publishers have....Accordingly, College Publications can publish books at a range of 15–25 dollars per average 300 page book, giving substantially better royalties to authors than other publishers. ...College Publications does not take copyright and authors are free to use their material elsewhere, and even to put the book on the web once sales have achieved profitability.Note: I don't have any relation with them, but it sounds quite good. I don't know how it compares to lulu.com.

the big disadvantage of lulu for academics is that it doesn't count as an academic publication...

so how does this work ?is this a "vanity" publisher where you have to pay them ?or is it "publishing on demand" where books are only printed when ordered ?

QuoteOriginally posted by: mjthe big disadvantage of lulu for academics is that it doesn't count as an academic publication...Would this be a reason for not publishing here?Lulu + printing ~ Amazon??

Hopefully, College Publications would count.

It should be the contents of the work and not who publishes it that should be the criterion, yes? Books tend to have reviewers, copy editors(!) and readers.

QuoteOriginally posted by: CuchulainnBooks tend to have reviewers, copy editors(!) and readers.as do my letters to penthouse.Should they count as academic publications ?

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauper[...] my letters to penthouse.Should they count as academic publications ?If you can show us your letters, it might be easy to determine their literary merits.

QuoteOriginally posted by: ferminAccordingly, College Publications can publish books at a range of 15–25 dollars per average 300 page book, giving substantially better royalties to authors than other publishers. Direct publication costs per book are much smaller than this.If somebody is teaching at some research university without a local imprint, why don't they organize one?This would seem a solution for academic authors who want more royalities plus a recognizable imprint.

Playboy Shares Tumble on Q3 losses - Chicago Tribune Nov 6"Shares of Playboy Enterprises Inc. were down 27 percent in early-afternoon trading Thursday, after the Chicago publishing and entertainment concern reported a third-quarter loss and warned investors that advertising will show a sharp downturn in the fourth quarter.In New York Stock Exchange trading, Playboy's already battered shares were off 65 cents at $1.75, a price that gives the company a market capitalization of just $59 million. The stock was trading at about $11 twelve months ago.In the latest quarter, Playboy reported a net loss of $5.2 million, or 15 cents a diluted share, compared to net income in the year-ago quarter of $2.6 million, or 8 cents a share.Revenues declined to $70.4 million from $82.8 million."I believe that Larry Flint's organization is privately held.

QuoteOriginally posted by: AlanQuoteOriginally posted by: ferminAccordingly, College Publications can publish books at a range of 15–25 dollars per average 300 page book, giving substantially better royalties to authors than other publishers. Direct publication costs per book are much smaller than this.If somebody is teaching at some research university without a local imprint, why don't they organize one?This would seem a solution for academic authors who want more royalities plus a recognizable imprint.There are number of issues on the critical path, but the 'hardware' (printing press) is not one of them, I think. Marketing and exposure are more important.

Yes, I agree. And even more important than those: content!

QuoteOriginally posted by: AlanYes, I agree. And even more important than those: content!That's the precondition! edit: typo

Well, it's the usual difference between what should count and what does count. Why do we try to publish in fancy journals? Our research is the same if we don't, but the signalling is not.

Yes, although the reliability and useful half-life of peer-reviewed literature varies enormouslyby field. In mathematics, the journals are very reliable -- if you read something, it is extremelylikely to be correct. Plus, you may find papers 50 or 100 years or older that are still highly relevant to current research. I guess that is the gold standard for everybody else ...