Only connect
I had it in mind to write today about pricing strategy, until I heard Richard Nash speak this morning at Booknet Canada’s Technology Forum.
Defining the strategic world view that underpins Cursor, his current venture, Nash invoked E.M. Forster’s Howard’s End: “Only connect.” In Nash’s words: “Publishing is not an end. It is a means to an end.”
I’ve written before that publishers need to start with the reader and back up from there. Nash convinced me this morning that I had missed the opportunity. The lesson is: Start with the community and find out how to serve it, now and in the future.
Publishing will still be part of the solution, but “it is not an end”.
I haven’t forgotten the pricing piece. Maybe tomorrow.
Edited May 12 to add: Interviewed at The Literary Platform, Nash adds some detail on his thinking about the Cursor business model.
Comments
I agree one hundred percent that publishing is a means not an end - in artistic terms, it is one way of communicating art among many. In monetary terms, it is one way among many of connecting producers and consumers. And he is right to point to the importance of building relationships with your readers in order to create an ongoing and mutually beneficial relationship.
But Nash is wrong in saying the community comes first. He is making a mistake that business-thinkers ofetn make - of seeing a community and then monetising it - the problem with that is that cultural communities have grown up because they’ve already found their core - they not only don’t need your add-on, they resent you suggesting they do. Nor is it possible to “grow your own community” because ultimately it will have an empty core.
Communities form around great ideas. Your jobis to put out the great ideas and ensure people know they’re there. Publishing is one means among many to doing that.
Posted by
Dan Holloway on 03/25 at 11:17 AM
Thanks for your post - you make several great points.
Hopefully Richard will be able to weigh in here, but I think he’d agree with your idea that communities don’t need publishers. He would also embrace the whole of your last paragraph.
The presentation didn’t come across to me as “find a community and monetize it”. Instead, I heard a call to respect communities by first seeking to understand them. Nash cautioned publishers assembled in the room, “If you continue to just pump out content you think you can sell, you will fail.”
Posted by
Brian O'Leary on 03/25 at 04:23 PM
Hi Dan, yes, we’ve chatted about this issue before. It is a chicken-and-egg thing, isn’t it! My experience is quite concretely that there is value one can offer an inchoate community of writers—if one does offer that value, some members of the community will happily pay for it, if one doesn’t, one is kicked to the curb. In the community of Soft Skull writers and readers, I and my colleagues and volunteers offered value, and folks were delighted to have it. I think we could have done a much better job, and aim to in the future. It’s also quite clear that in the universe of writers and readers, publishers have largely refused to participate in communities, despite the community wanting their participation, because the publisher couldn’t figure out a way to make money! Look at all those midlist writers effectively abandoned by their publishers, despite a cult fan base, and circle of disciples around them!
Posted by
Richard Nash on 03/25 at 06:40 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Enjoy this post? Share it with others.