June 29th, 2009 • Kate

winnerThanks to Anna, for reminding me I promised to give another free copy of Vacations From Hell to a random commenter on my post about blurbs.

The random winner (thanks to is Sonia! Sonia, please email me at with your mailing address, and I’ll get a copy of Vacations From Hell off to you!

In other news, have you seen John Green’s post about big advances vs. small advances? What’s your take? Would you rather have more money up front, or the possibility of more later? Basically, are you a gambler? You can post your comments here, or add them to the already fascinating discussion on John’s blog.

Filed Under: Slushpile

Tags: , , ,

5 Responses to “Win!”

  1. Mattia Says:

    I didn't real every comment to his post, but I looked and saw that one argument that nobody used is the tax argument. Smaller advance would be better because you could, theoretically stay in a lower tax bracket and whatever expenses you write off would take a bigger chunck out of that (proportionally). Advances against royalties are supposed to be taxed in the year recieved. I'd rather be taxed on, say $30,000 one year and another $30,000 spread over several years than on a $60,000 chunck.

  2. Stephanie Perkins Says:

    I read John’s post this morning and agreed with what he said.

    As far as money is concerned, I’m a saver rather than a spender, so my natural inclination is to go with the possibility of more money later (assuming that means it’s also probably more of a steady thing).

    But I say this from a lucky position. My family is okay financially, and we’ve never been desirous of riches. Money to live comfortably (quality food, no problem paying the mortgage, and — cough cough — unlimited movie tickets), of course, but our happiness isn’t dependent upon new cars or the latest electronics or fancy jewelry. But if we were struggling, perhaps my answer might be different. We might NEED a larger advance to pay our rent for a while or for doctors' appointments or groceries. I’m thankful this isn’t the case.

    So instead of looking for a huge sum of money, I’d rather have a smart editor (!) and hope she can teach me to become a better writer. Because career longevity — THAT'S what I want.

  3. Rie Says:

    I agree with John. For one reason, longevity. The longer you have your name out there the more likely it's going to be recognizable, which in turn will increase your revenue. I would say the small advance for the first and maybe second book, but once you become established I'd say take the big advance.

  4. tamara Says:

    I think we all want longevity…but I have to say that I'm in the camp that couldn't afford to turn down any kind of advance. And the bigger the advance the happier I'd be. We're totally blue collar, my husbands company is hanging on by a thread and I can't find a job in the town we live in. I have to wonder how many people in today's economy find themselves in the same position we're currently in. My guess would be a lot. A large advance would be a kind of Cinderella story as far as I'm concerned. I absolutely agree that, in the long run, it's not the smartest way to go. But I'd take it anyway, and worry about the rest later.

  5. Blee Bonn Says:

    I've heard a lot of pros and cons about big vs. small advances. For me personally, I think I'd have to wait until that glorious day came to me and then talk it over with my agent.