You are viewing your 1 free article this month. Login to read more articles.
The trade and broader media is debating a shift in industry power towards the US, following confirmation of the Penguin Random House merger, and news that HarperCollins UK will no longer manage Harper’s international business.
Brian Murray, president and c.e.o. of HarperCollins worldwide, explained his rationale for moving international responsibility back to the US. “It’s important that all businesses around the world are operating with the same strategy in the same direction,” he said. “A lot of our major distribution partners, like Amazon, Apple and Google, are based in the US, and we need strategies that are concerned with every country . . . We need to make sure our data and strategies are completely synchronised.”
But he added local teams were also important. “We also need local expertise and local knowledge. Our UK team is fantastic, we have never been more pleased with our editors and publishers there—the results speak for themselves,” he said.
One UK agent, who preferred to remain anonymous, argued that the concept of “Commonwealth rights”, often sold alongside UK rights, would disappear with a dominant New York keener to secure those territories to boost its tough domestic sales.
Meanwhile, Curtis Brown agent Gordon Wise commented about the HarperCollins development. “There is considerable background and expert sales knowledge based in the UK dealing with the traditional Commonwealth markets. If that was pulled back to New York, that would be a considerable waste of knowledge . . . America has not always had a great reputation for understanding the intricacies of other world markets outside America.”
Oneworld publisher Juliet Mabey predicted that the confirmation of a New York base for the merged Penguin Random House would not be the last such move. “With the only truly global bookseller based in the US, this may just be the first of many. British companies may well find themselves in a David and Goliath situation versus US publishers in the scramble for rights,” she said.
Kate Nash, sales and marketing director at Myrmidon, said: “It would be a sorry future were the UK to become a backwater, rather than a global player, for acquisitions and editorial excellence. Digital is a huge opportunity for UK publishers of all sizes to reach world markets and we need to keep the UK at the forefront for the health of our industry as a whole.”
But Faber c.e.o. Stephen Page said: “Global businesses want to have a power centre. They operate all around the world and they need a global leadership model somewhere. In some cases it would be more surprising if it was in London rather than New York.
“Speaking for companies like Faber, Bloomsbury and the Independent Alliance, I don’t see a change in the opportunities in front of us and before British publishers generally. There is an enormous wealth of talent here, and a powerful nexus of distribution around the world,” he added.
Society of Authors chief Nicola Solomon said she felt “slight concern about a sense of things moving to the US” because “we do not want to see attention shifting away from the UK.”
“There might also be plus points. In the US, publishers have shown much more willingness to raise the royalty rates for authors on e-books,” she added.
However, agent Ed Victor disagreed. “Shift in power to the US? The shift in power is to Germany. Penguin is a minority stakeholder and we know there’s a provision for a buyout. I have no doubt that is what will happen,” he said.