Reading that article was fantastic, certainly answered my questions and more - as @JF Dubeau noted, the company only owes us so much transparency and that is more than most would give, which is something I appreciate (especially when profit sharing, which makes sense and should be fair but also has a rough history in publishing and music!)

1. The change to the royalty structure was announced on July 31st before the contest began.

2. You can find a breakdown of this in Adam’s Medium article here.

3. Work is still being done behind the scenes on what the new offerings will be for Quill authors, but for the moment our information is that Quill authors receive the same structure as fully funded Inkshares authors.

4. Much of the basis for the royalty structure was based on information Inkshares gleaned through two surveys they sent to the authors who already have funded books, as well as a hangout they held to talk to their authors directly. 

5. The royalty restructuring is a direct result of a change in leadership at the company that happened a few weeks ago. Former CEO Jeremy Thomas was replaced by current CEO Adam Gomolin. 

6. The reason for the change to a profit-sharing model is explained in the article in detail, but can be summed up as: Sharing revenue was draining money from the company, so they are switching to sharing profit so that the costs of making a book are taken care of before either the company or the author receives money from a book.

I don’t post much on forums. I don’t even lurk. I probably should because. Who is this asshole injecting his stupid opinion into our forums, right?

The changes don’t bother me. Some of you may (and already have) rolled their eyes saying that, of course I don’t mind the changes. After all, I’m one of the privileged few.

Fair enough! I am so far very lucky. I can’t deny my good fortune and while I’m nowhere near the level of success some have assumed I’m enjoying, it’s been a good run and that run is all because of Inkshares. As a quick clarification, I’m still working full time as a marketing director. I have yet to receive any sum of money that would be considered life-changing and the number of groupies that knock on my door is still at a manageable two or three per day. Perhaps four on weekends.

And that’s the crux of it really. If you’re anything like me, an aspiring writer who’s only just starting to build his career and reputation, money shouldn’t be your focus. If it is, more power to you and I get that the changes in royalties are a concern but money isn’t part of my plan at this stage. I’ve so far not made that much money from royalties anyways, so moving the dial 15-30% one direction or another has very little impact on my life. The visibility, contacts, opportunities and pure, distilled experience I’ve gained so far however? I can’t even begin to put a price on that. Money will come. I have no doubt. If I put in the work (20-40 hours a week on top of my current job) and I keep learning and growing as a writer, I’ll either build up to where I have enough fans of my work that I can do this full time, or I’ll get a lucky break that will allow me to move ahead in the industry.

I’m very lucky so far because I’m (hopefully) following in the footsteps of the incredibly talented @Mike Mongo, but I’m looking forward to the next writer who’ll be following in my footsteps (unless these footsteps lead off a cliff. DO NOT follow these footsteps!). Then the next writer. And another. Because that’s what’s being built here. There are a ton of people on this platform who are embarrassingly talented and creative. I feel ridiculous being a trailblazer for them, knowing that they will outshine me like the sun outshines the moon. I’m hoping to ride their coattails like a bronco into the sunset.

So yeah, I’m cool with the changes. I can’t ask you to be cool with them, but I can tell you where I come from and hope you understand and maybe share my feelings. I’m even cool with the lack of transparency. Why? Because Inshares isn’t a vanity press. They’re not a self publishing service either. In other words, I’m not an Inkshares client. They don’t owe me transparency and in many ways it is a curtesy that we get as much as we do (truth is that it’s a synergy thing where they benefit from our feedback, but the bottom line is that transparency isn’t owed to us).

I’ve written this stupid essay three times, each from a different angle and each time with a different level of aggression.

The big takeaways are these:

• The terms are what they are and they’re not aimed at ‘screwing us over’
• The invitation to leave isn’t meant to be dismissive but at the same time there’s only so much resources that should be put into keeping a disgruntled supplier, especially in such a saturated market
• The increased revenue from getting a bigger share of royalties will help make books more financially viable on their own, keep investors happy, allow for growth so that more services can be added and the current ones improved. It’s an investment by the authors in the future not of Inkshares but of their success as authors on Inkshares
• Communication is nice to have and I believe it is Inkshares’ philosophy to have as much of it as possible, but if they don’t have time to tell us everything they’re doing I’m fine with that too. I’d rather they work on publishing, marketing and selling books
• Every success on Inkshares benefits all of the authors on the platform. The rising tide lifts all boats