To complain or to emulate?
Why successful self-publishing authors and artists should never give up or give in.
"Hugh Howey's postapocalyptic thriller "Wool" has sold more than half a million copies and generated more than 5,260 Amazon reviews. Mr. Howey has raked in more than a million dollars in royalties and sold the film rights to "Alien" producer Ridley Scott.
And Simon & Schuster hasn't even released the book yet.
In a highly unusual deal, Simon & Schuster acquired print publication rights to "Wool" while allowing Mr. Howey to keep the e-book rights himself. Mr. Howey self-published "Wool" as a serial novel in 2011, and took a rare stand by refusing to sell the digital rights. Last year, he turned down multiple seven-figure offers from publishers before reaching a mid-six-figure, print-only deal with Simon & Schuster.
"I had made seven figures on my own, so it was easy to walk away," says Mr. Howey, 37, a college dropout who worked as a yacht captain, a roofer and a bookseller before he started self-publishing. "I thought, 'How are you guys going to sell six times what I'm selling now?' ""
================
Now, THAT'S motivation... Time to start getting my scraps into digital files and out of my gray matter....
Complaint/Issue:
ReplyDeleteDue to the way blogger/blogspot posting works, I am seriously contemplating setting up a separate, different tool, a combo of forum and CRM. Since my mind is more "database oriented", I have never really liked blogs ever since they came out. They seem intentionally obfuscatory, confusing, limited, and too "code rich". The designers of blogs don't seem to understand the "KISS" principle. Of course, they do, but they would not be able to sell support services if these things worked the way *I* want them to.
I think I may be on to a product ID, or just a brute-force use of CRM software.
Complaint/Issue:
ReplyDelete2013-03-14 1154
Why in blogspot when using Konqueror does the "Preview" button not preview, but instead ends up nuking the text content in the box? It is tech implementation such as this that reminds me of "save and save often", "edit in a native tool, THEN post online", and "copy and paste elsewhere" content that may be subject to wanton, spurious events.
Part 1 of
ReplyDeleteAfter reading about Samsung Group on a Wikipedia page (on 2013-03-16), and stumbling on information of Samsung investing in small companies in the USA, I felt compelled to post excerpts of something I wrote in August 2012 when I was in SK. I am hopeful that DSME would take an interest in me. Failing that, Samsung, Hyundai, and others might.
This is a draft document I wrote 2012-08-11
I want to become a contributor to Korea, to the Korean Wave, and to Korean naval architecture.
I want to become an inspirer of ideas for those in Korea who are:
-- not college graduates
-- who are naval architecture students in jeopardy of flunking
-- motivated designers but who want a practical direction to pursue
-- interested in ships
-- interested in creating ship designs
-- interested in creating animation or game programs in ship environments
Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering, would you be interested in helping me, a foreigner, to become part of a new, experimental startup company of which I would be (for immigration as well as local, factual reasons) deemed a crucial member? I am not seeking creation of a competitor to DSME, but an educational experiment, jobs-creation program, and Hallyu/Public Relations opportunity for the Republic of Korea. How often is it that a foreigner dreaming of becoming Korean actually arrives in Korea, proposes an idea that spans many fields, career paths, and stands to globally increase Korean mind share?
I chose DSME as my first corporate sponsor choice because I was told that DSME has the best reputation for naval shipbuilding. I also read on your web site that DSME has an unparalleled level of shipbuilding quality. I chose DSME because despite there being potential suitors among shipbuilders in Japan and China, both are countries where it would take me a very, very long time to naturalize due to language. I have never meaningfully studied Mandarin. I did years ago study Japanese and managed to learn all the Hiragana and Katakana. But, even if I wanted to or were invited to live in Japan, Hiragana and Katakana alone are not sufficient to being able to fit in or read the local papers or follow directions. Korean, despite complex syllables and verb endings, is somewhat easier and I can slowly read words, despite having no real vocabulary.
I have, among other dreams, a desire to see one or more of my ship designs "Koreanized" and presented at the next BEXCO and naval ships-related conventions. Although my designs originated outside of Korea, if I were a Korean citizen or permanent resident on track to becoming a citizen of Korea, then in fact and in humor, we could call my designs (after some Koreanization) "Korean".
Let us consider this: Considering naval architecture, marine engineering, and ocean engineering, how many people in this world, who lack a degree in such fields, actually while away their time designing entire naval vessels, stem to stern, mast to keel, port to starboard, laying out general arrangements, calculating hull performance and efficiency, and design the vessel to theoretically last for 40 years?
I have seen numerous hull drawings on the Internet, but I have never seen original, internal general arrangements produced by individuals who are not professional naval architects.
Let us consider this: Even among naval architects and marine engineers, how many certified, qualified, experienced architects and engineers undertake or even have the time to design, single-handedly, an entire naval cruiser/destroyer/frigate at a level of detail that could pass for the preliminary designs of such a vessel?
I am not an engineer, not an architect, and have no letters -- not even a college degree -- to my name. I do not say this to boast. I say this to show that with passion, some individuals who are weak in some areas, can be exceptional in other areas. Of course, it also helps to find and read many journals, magazines, and student handouts.
Part 2 of
ReplyDeleteSTART A SMALL COMPANY
I wish to start a small company. My backup plan would be Japan, or even China. However, I am sure that so long as my hobby is only dealing with notional ships, not existing ships, and for recreation or for helping DSME stir passion for the country to fund a new fleet of ships but at the Cruiser level, then this can be a great win for the Republic of Korea.
I see several ways to help spread the Korean Wave, or Hallyu:
-- create a company in which employees design paper plans and digital models in which movies, dramas, screen plays, and comics, as well as magazine commentary
-- create a design school catering solely to non-Korean-speaking, college-level foreigners who will come to Korea just to learn naval architecture and marine engineering and return to their home countries, as employees of local DSME/Korean local design offices
-- include Koreans who are of specific age ranges and who are unemployed, but who have some English skills and want to expand on those all day long
-- design ships that meet needs or expectations of a set of countries, involve their own experience designers (instead of explicitly transmitting the model to overseas on their first exposure), and make the project last at least a year, generating local revenue for the ROK
An even fantastic, if not fantastical, idea is that DSME would build several of these ships, which, using UK parlance, would be "fitted for but not fitted with" the major weapons systems, thereby significantly reducing the build costs. These ships would be fielded to the seas as trainers. Nations would get to take turns "taking the ships out for a spin", to build up naval commander and sea-borne war fighting team experience. Essentially, the ROKN and DSME would be "minders" as various nations would "try out" unparalleled Korean know-how.
By extension, consider the opportunity to make Korea the "GO TO" nation for regional Fleet Training. Korea would not only build regional ships, but also "populate" them with crews of Korean influence. It would be Korea's chance to strengthen ties without being seen as a true vassal-making state. Korea could conceivably (in terms of Reunification) make tepid and incremental steps to somehow involve North Korea in very small, but meaningful, and stabilizing ways. The goal is not to spark an arms race or threaten Japan or China or Russia or India, but to simply seize an opportunity to expand Hallyu, derive benefits from it, and maybe even make up for some recently aborted, externally interfered with, deals Korea had hoped to benefit from.
Conceivably, my last paragraph of ideas -- if implemented as independent companies without any involvement from DSME -- might be perceived as competitive to DSME and possibly politically threatening to the ROK. However, these need not even be threats to DSME nor Korea. I hope to provide what DSME can easily observe is a subsidiary, an experiment that could last 1 year, or -- if it becomes self-sustaining and very profitable -- several years.
It would be different (I think) from the other vocational schools operated by DSME and others because my plan includes the mandatory and exclusive usage of English throughout the school day. This would maximize the return on investment for those Koreans who lament having taken all those years of English studies, but who then end up working in places where they don't even use a fraction of what they learned.
Part 3 of
ReplyDeleteLOCAL MILITARY CONTROL
Korea is eventually going to take over operational control of her own troops, with some tangible but less authoritative USA cooperation/involvement. However, Korea has a regional need to protect her contracted goods and a global need to display her reputation and commitment to global security. At some point, the ROKN may by combat or economic or good will direct or offer her blue-water capable fleets to offshore protection and displace other nations that "jump in there first". With the ROKN gaining more exposure, some nations simply may by default request the ROKN to act as the protector.
The Sejong Dehwa class of destroyers are potent, but, at some point, they will have to be superseded. The difficult part of introducing a "KCX: Korean Cruiser, Experimental" is that because such a ship would be mightier and more heavily armed and have to carry the weight of a greater reputation, they will possibly cause a problem in the traditional ROKN ship naming scheme.
Thus, this brings up a heavy question: Given that King Sejong is one of if not the greatest king of Korea, what names can be chosen for such a ship, without insulting or diminishing the stature of King Sejong? Such as ship, deployed far from home, acting as a trainer vessel, taking on missions of global security, and carrying newer technologies, all the while making numerous port visits to spread Hallyu surely must carry a name equal to or higher than even King Sejong. Short of waiting for the Sejong herself or the entire class to retire or be decommissioned, then for the moment, I can only think of a modification such as "King Sejong II", but something else must be reasonably able to used. However, it had to be known that combatants greater in capabilities than the Sejong would eventually come along. Korea definitely cannot and should not wait for the decommissioning of the DDG-991 to avoid the issue of surmounting King Sejong's name. (Edit 2013-03-16: 1713: Before I went to Korea, I had thought of the KCX/KCGX and naming it "Cheonan", but once I got to Korea, "Cheonan" as a potential name slipped for several reasons.)
Part 4 of
ReplyDeleteMORE ENTERTAINMENT
To further enhance the capabilities of spreading Hallyu from The Company, products I have created can be exploited:
Drawings:
Ships:
I have created on paper at least 5 naval frigate/destroyer/cruiser types. I designed each of them to be more capable than the USN's USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class. Some are to be on par with the JMSDF Atago, in terms of bulk and power projection. Aside from more missile shots (which, technically, can be augmented in other ships by adding "quad packs") and the Korean enhancements of the USN's Aegies radar and Korea's stealth/deception qualities in the ROKN DDG-991 hulls, the Sejongs and Atagos probably are on par with each other. There may be some potential risk to the Atago class in uncharacteristically heavy seas due to her larger block structure. But, the Sejong class has a lower freeboard, and risks shipping much more green water onto her flight deck than the Atago or even the Akizuki class. Depending on the sea wave lengths, it might be possible that the Sejong class could ship more water due to her waterline length. The USN's DDG-51s forward superstructure, atop the pilot house, appears to be a horrid mess of "radar/radome festooning", to my eye, and definitely the Sejong class looks more attractive in this area, and should avoid the USN-like festooning if at all possible. In several of my designs, I adopted the Atago/Kongo flight deck style and higher freeboard via a fuller main deck simply to address the uncertainty of the seas, and the ships I design are meant to operate in multiple sea states and weather conditions.
Student or entertainment-oriented designers could be tasked with assignments to improve upon this, ideally improving upon my own designs. Students might work on subjects such as overall and local section modulus, bending moments, failure modes, and other aspects of the ship. Entertainment-oriented designers might work on presentation aspects and set-building for live-action drama or for animated sequences and frames.
Part 5 of
ReplyDeleteSoftware:
Databases: Personnel management, Screenplay
Around 1994-2007, I periodically developed a space locations/compartment tracking database application that identifies and helps locate compartments within two of my ships I design.
Around 1994, I created a muster and personnel assignments tracker database. These are customized to the naval environment, not merchant marines or mariner context, although they could be adapted. They are simply database programs, and very little about them would be proprietary since they are blatantly obvious, fact-collecting and analysis matters. No one can patent or copyright the design I arrived at, and no one can patent to prevent me from furthering my developments as they are extensions of things I used to do while in the USN, they apply to database understanding, and they are not proprietary to any industry nor any company.
After 2003, I created a screenplay/dialog tracking application. It is an extension of my crew muster/tracking database and is my own way of getting around and not being otherwise locked into some proprietary screenplay program on the market, most of which cannot in any way be adapted by the user to meet the needs of the users. I refuse to let a commercial program limit my imagination nor pay for a "customization" that I can do for myself and make available to other users.
None of these databases have been offered for sale nor have they been presented to potential competitors nor potential sponsors. They are not collateral for anything to anyone or any creditors, and they are my own, personal projects which are intended to get me out of debt and to help create a collaborative screenplay management system suitable to not only my fictional ship characters (crew as well as non-crew), but for any situation or set a user wishes, just by changing some items in the database and editing the forms to correspond. If I sell them as licensed products, the price pain point I perceive to be acceptable is somewhere between USD $45-$80 locked and $80-$250 unlocked.
As for my drawings, I once (in 2006) was told that they should price as art, and such pricing should cost something like USD $3.00 per square inch, or possibly it was $30 per square foot. Since one of my drawings measures approximately 24 inches x 36 inches, in the first case, the drawing would be 24"x36"=864 square inches x $3, pricing at $2592 per sheet, and there are 5 sheets. That would make the drawings cost $12,960 per set. If the second case is the one I actually was told, then 2'x3'= 6 square feet, and that x $30/square foot, and that means $180 per sheet. A drawing set of 5 sheets means $900. There most certainly is a lot more detail in two dimensions on paper and more value to a ship enthusiast and a screenplay writer in the naval genre than in a $200-$500, 3D IGES Aegis destroyer model which the recipient cannot edit nor obtain ownership rights over.
Part 6 of
ReplyDeleteKit Models:
Scale-sized kit models of various actual sizes could be built and sold at various prices. 1/600 and 1/250 probably would appeal to many hobbyists who crave great detail. Rapid prototype tests could be performed by using 3D printing to avoid the large expense of building and destroying or modifying moulds that are initially insufficient or flawed. Final pricing at the consumer level could be around USD $80 for the 1/250 (2.36 ft) scale model and $15 for the 1/600 (.984) scale model. A generally available intermediately-sized model at 1/300 scale (1.968 ft) should sell for around $25. The models should be affordable, not exclusive. They should be exciting, be non-toy-like, and offer features not usually implemented in a consumer-level scale model. The US pricing should scale or compare reasonably to Korean Won pricing. Pricing in the rest of the world should be reasonable, and commensurate with pushing and unleashing the Korean Wave, not restraining or curtailing. But, even in won, the price should be roughly W40,000 won for the 1/250 scale model and W20,000 for the 1/600 model.
For special hobbyist cases, a 1/100 (5.9 foot) model could be built, with much greater detail.
For very special, library, collector, and military purchases, 1/25 and 1/50 scale (23.6 and 11.8 foot, respectively) models could be built.
All models would ideally have some moving parts, such as:
-- rotating, stacked radar array faces (4),
-- sliding hangar bay doors
-- rotating, trainable CIWS, 50-mm chain guns, and main gun, base or barrel as appropriate
-- rudders and propellers that turn axially on their respective shafts
-- twin pairs of active, dual fin stabilizers
Enhancements to the basic model, producing a larger, 1/100 scale (5.9' model) model:
-- greater detail on the stacked, rotating radar faces
-- cutaway-like sonar dome on which the dome housing would be detachable (snap on/snap off), port and starboard
-- detachable (snap on/snap off) sideshell on each side of the ship to reveal internals, at each watertight compartment
-- notional retractable fin stabilizers that also retain axial movement
Further enhancements to the 1/100 scale model, producing an even larger, 1/50 scale model:
-- greater details on the internals, behind removable (snap on/snap off) sideshell, at each watertight compartment
-- drawer-like decks within each watertight compartment to reveal the innards of each deck
-- optional stern flap or bulged keel, according to each model prototype
-- removable covers of the forward superstructure to reveal the Flag TOEC/Flag CIC, Bridge, and some other spaces
-- removable covers of aft superstructure to reveal the port and starboard hangar bays, the VLS
-- LED lighting to indicate Green, Yellow, and Red deck
-- sliding padeye and extendable UNREP hoses
-- retractable reel mechanism to pay out and reel in a thin wire representing the Towed-Array Sonar
-- deployable and retractable anchor chains, both centerline and outboard
-- deployable accommodation ladders