Wake
Up, Gotham
Vendor
Survey 2001
FROM PUBLISHING
TRENDS (JUNE 2001)
As
the old nursery rhyme has it: “Three wise men of Gotham
/ Went to sea in a bowl; / If the bowl had been stronger
/ My story had been longer.” The ever trenchant respondents
to Publishing Trends’ annual survey on publisher
services to wholesalers and retailers have cast publishers
in the image of those merry fools of Gotham, setting
sail not in a bowl but on a schooner made of spreadsheets.
As they blithely pursue efficiencies, say booksellers,
publishers are sinking amid evaporating sales representation
and operational fumbles that are putting the industry
comically out of touch with the real world. “Publishers
are trying to save money by hiring work-at-home moms,”
one account typically relates. “Unfortunately, they’re
moms first, reps second. Wake up, New York.”
Indeed, a blend of Monty Python and Grand Guignol characterized
this year’s responses, which, though scattered with
Ds and Fs — in fact, average grades slipped a notch
— were by and large free of last year’s splenetic rage.
Confirming the theme of disconnection, we note that
this year’s question on Internet resources — a category
suggested by an independent bookseller concerned about
online sales support and links from publishers to account
sites — was largely ignored by accounts, even after
we specifically explained its import. While some houses
have plowed resources into online databases, it seems
accounts aren’t firing up their browsers (but see below
for a few exceptions). As a national chain explains,
“We utilize vendors’ web sites on a very infrequent
basis.”
Lonelier
at the Top
Backlash
against New York jarred survey champion Random House.
A regional chain cut to the chase: “They want to run
our business for us! NY attitude sucks, but rep compensates.”
As a wholesaler explains further, Random is “attempting
to micromanage their business, and the result is that
they are not providing info as needed to us. Their performance
is perceived to be lacking compared to previous years.”
The heavy artillery of Bertelsmann’s corporate
warship prompted other complaints about meddling management
and stricter contractual terms. As an independent bookseller
notes, “New procedures for ‘managed’ titles confusing.
Refused returns have increased greatly this year. Inflexibility
of credit dept. lowers grade.” Meanwhile, last year’s
“SAP disaster” seems to have been downgraded to a mere
calamity. “Warehouse problems were horrible, now OK,
but still more inaccuracies in shipments than most large
publishers,” one account says, confirming the Cs cropping
up for Random’s shipping, which received low As and
Bs last year. “Great sales force and Internet support,”
a bookseller adds, “but inaccurate shipping, a host
of receiving problems, and consistent technical ordering
glitches make for overall lower evaluation.”
As a wholesaler marveled, “Amazing that two good companies
can merge and slip in all areas other than sales and
marketing.” Respondents observed that Random’s combined
warehouse still does not match levels achieved two years
ago, in the pre-merger era. A national chain notes,
“Warehouse problems in 2000 were made worse by lack
of proactive communication between operations areas.”
But the warehouse isn’t the only problem — behemoth
lists are again a source of dismay: “All Little Random
imprints in one sales call is a tremendous amount for
the rep to present and the buyer to absorb.” And not
all reps are created equal, even in Random-land: “BDD
department is excellent. The trade rep is very responsive
and timely; she is even taking our orders for the Random
rep.”
Ranking second overall, Simon & Schuster
won accolades for improved fulfillment and operations.
“Old reliable,” one bookseller sighed, while another
cheered, “The best all-around.” A national chain notes
that S&S “finally resolved most of the endemic database
problems,” and a bookseller adds: “Turnover in credit
dept. has been a horror, but sales dept., publicity,
and fulfillment are commendable.” But not everyone sent
flowers with their survey. “Prompt Plus was very reliable
for new release ship dates, but is now bad,” says a
bookseller, apparently forced to work through reps even
though better discounts would apply to EDI orders: “Reps
getting better ship dates just recently. Event ordering
by phone gets 45% whereas EDI gets 46% (so we go through
rep which is not the most efficient).” Others faced
“continual shipping problems” and hassles receiving
credit for shortages, while a wholesaler expressed “growing
concern with out-of-stock titles, defective books, and
price discrepancies.” Still, a chain looked upon such
vagaries with a perfectly saintly attitude: “Great house
with opportunity to improve.”
Mixed messages hit HarperCollins, with breezy
comments such as “refreshingly competent” and “no complaints”
accompanied by grouchy rants: “VERY unreliable on ship
dates for new releases; in general has gone downhill
in past several years in most service aspects.” On the
whole, Harper gained ground for complete statements,
prompt ship times, and improved stock availability,
and was one of the few houses commended for Internet
services. One indie praised Harper as a “very
proactive Internet resource,” while a wholesaler added,
“online support great.” Unfortunately, “Availability
of titles still a big issue,” a wholesaler writes. “Serious
problems with stock allocations, reprints, and initial
order cuts,” says another. And the incredible shrinking
sales force has caused the ultimate lapse. “We have
very little contact with this company — no longer have
a trade rep,” a bookseller writes. “We just don’t have
the time to handle our needs for these titles via telephone
or the Internet.” An indie scolds: “No representation
in Texas except telephone reps! BAD!!” Consequently,
a national chain observes: “Fiscal conservatism compromises
commitment to sales.”
Fourth-ranked Houghton Mifflin found comparatively
smooth sailing, with a national chain applauding the
publisher’s “good sales, good books,” and another bookseller
chiming in, “They are great with sales! Rep in touch
all the time; have really gotten better in the past
few years (after warehouse disaster with PRI)!” Quibbles
included remarks that Houghton’s packing slips are “very
difficult to read” and one particularly sour bookseller’s
note: “Timeliness of shipments needs improvement — worse
than anyone else in this survey.” Perhaps most worrying
was the comment from this underserviced bookseller:
“I don’t have a sales rep for this vendor. Nor do we
frequently order from them.” Quid pro quo, eh? Mayday
broadcasts for reps lost at sea also haunted Time
Warner Trade. As a regional chain puts it, “I could
not remember my rep’s name when I filled out this survey
. . . how’s that for service?” Another bookseller notes
that TWTP “seems to know least about how a bookstore
operates.” (National chains seem to fare better with
this publisher, as one praises a “strong focus on sales
and marketing,” and another calls the publisher a “leader
in information exchange.”) As far as the rest of the
business, a wholesaler lauds the publisher’s “extremely
prompt shipping,” though an indie cautions that “shipments
are very fast, but accuracy has been sacrificed.”
Meanwhile, grades for St. Martin’s remained mostly
unchanged, an unfortunate result considering the failing
marks it received last year. This time around, complaints
were aptly summarized by one bookseller: “Dealing with
Holtzbrinck is a constant nightmare. Their excellent
sales reps are undermined by an incompetent back office.”
Consequently, as another bookseller adds, “We won’t
buy directly from them except frontlist, and they still
routinely lose our orders.” Concerns still circled around
the publisher’s long-promised but apparently still missing-in-action
direct EDI link. “VHPS needs to implement an EDI ordering
system,” a bookseller urges. “VHPS and Norton
are the only major trade publishers that do not have
this capability.” Among other concerns, several booksellers
sounded this desperate plea: “Horrible freight costs
— please — go to a standard discount with no freight
charge.” A national wholesaler also cites “ongoing barcode
problems,” while an indie complains that “co-op is a
joke.” Speaking of co-op, Workman raised hackles
on that issue, as a wholesaler explains: “There is extra
concern in regard to the recently announced co-op policy,
which is not compatible with the industry.” Alas, Workman
was again chastised for its antiquated procedures. “They
must be the only company in the world still using carbon
paper!” one account stammers. “Makes me nuts! Did
they buy a 30-year supply in 1975??”
Off
the Shoals?
Penguin Putnam pulled itself out of a last-place
ranking last year and on balance received kinder, gentler
criticism this year. “Warehouse finally working
well,” says a wholesaler. “Still a few shipping problems,
but much better than before,” adds another, and a bookseller
says: “Trade rep delivers the results we need and keeps
me posted via the Internet.” Indeed, a national chain
deemed Penguin “a leader in information exchanges.”
But we’re not off the shoals yet. “Steadily improving,
but still the most bureaucratic and slow-moving of all
the major publishers we deal with,” one bookseller writes,
while accounts cited customer service reps’ “attitude
problems” and unremitting paperwork disputes. “They
are impossible with processing claims, for both returns
and co-op,” one bookseller explains. “We’ve had a group
of claims that they haven’t processed for a year (at
two months we called; we’ve sent copies several times;
people leave; calls are not returned; promises to fix
the problem are not kept; now they’re trying to say
the claims are ‘too old’).” And though “ship times have
improved from last year,” a wholesaler says, duplicate
shipments and unordered merchandise persist.
Prayers for Scholastic to ditch Penguin Putnam’s
fulfillment services were answered on July 1, when a
new back-office agreement went into effect with HarperCollins.
The industry response? “Thank god they left Penguin!”
exults one bookseller. “Alliance with HarperCollins
has helped,” says another. In any case, post-Harry improvements
boosted Scholastic’s grades in almost all areas. “Overall,
given the challenge, I give them pretty high marks for
handling Harry Potter,” an account explains. However,
a wholesaler cites “continued problems with sales rep
for our account” and another regrets a “combative ‘us
against them’ attitude from sales management.”
Finally, PGW again draws exasperated grunts from
accounts. “Can’t seem to get act together,” one bookseller
says. “Never seem to have the bestselling books in stock,”
adds another. A national chain notes that PGW “tries
hard,” but the “nature of multiple sales distributors
is inherently difficult, particularly in inventory management.”
Missing paperwork, mis-numbered cartons, and slow shipping
of backlist orders from the West coast to the East topped
the laundry list of complaints. While PGW “has improved
turnaround time,” a bookseller says, “customer service
staff can be terse,” and a regional chain blasts “prehistoric”
EDI systems. Others were more lenient, even in the face
of adversity. “They will ship one book in ten boxes
instead of ten books in one box,” an account says, “but
overall performance OK.” Fortunately for PGW’s sake,
signs of complaisance were noted elsewhere. “Poor fulfillment,
but we try to be understanding,” a bookseller says.
Such tenderness despite PGW’s many shortcomings may
in fact be a matter of geography. After all, Berkeley
is a world away from Gotham.
©2001
Publishing Trends
