Magazine Writing - Up Front Payments or Part Ownership?

I'm doing a bit of very informal research for a new magazine startup I may become involved with. We've been discussing different payment models to bring in a stable of 20 regular writers. Details on the niche and actual publication are irrelevant at this point. If you've written for print magazines or even online features (not talking SEO Web content here), I'd love to hear your thoughts.

In short, the one model the publisher is considering is to offer an ownership share allowing those writers to profit directly from the publication and its later sale in a few years' time - after 6 months they would also be paid outright a decent fee for each article, and that would become a more industry standard salary after the first year.

The other model would be no ownership shares, but direct payment up front for each article. They would still be committed to writing one feature (or column / department) every other week.

Please keep in mind that it's an extremely lean setup without many of the overhead costs of typical publications that you're hearing horror stories about at the moment - all of those industry trends are certainly being accounted for, and what I will say about the niche is that it's hugely in-demand even in the current economy.

You can get more specifics on the models on my freelance writing blog. You can leave comments there or here in this thread as to what you would prefer from the writer perspective.

On the blog, I've shared a few of my own thoughts regarding pros and cons of each. Right now I'm just trying to assemble some casual writer feedback to pass along to the publisher to be considered in any decisions on that front.

 

I saw your topic in your blog but as I stumbled here, here is what I feel personally. I think it would be wise to choose an upfront payment for each one of the articles. Any writer would be urged to read that you are giving out so an so dollars for each article that is accepted. On the other hand, if you give part ownership to that article, a writer might not get too much interested as the magazine would be relatively newer and the fact that his earnings would be slow.

I will be glad if my suggestions come to any use of your decisions and may you have a great future with the magazine publishing! All the best !

 

I prefer just to get paid for the articles I write. I would not want ownership in the local paper or online magazine I write for--I like to be a free agent.

I would not have a problem investing in a new magazine or publication by writing articles for less than I normally would if I believed that it had potential or allowed me to write on a topic that I was passionate about.

Hope that helps.

 

Thanks for the feedback folks. One thing important to note that I probably didn't make as clear in my post here is that it wouldn't be on a freelance basis either way. So writers wouldn't be "free agents." The publisher's plan involves an employee arrangement instead (based on the article requirements of one every other week on a part-time basis, and then a more typical industry salary beyond the first year, meaning in either situation writers wouldn't be able to write for directly competing publications).

 

In this case, I would say that it depends on what the 'competing publications'
were. As an example, I don't write about plumbing so if you had a niche magazine about plumbing (and dear God, I hope you don't ) I would be happy to accept the ownership agreement--since you aren't taking food out of my mouth by preventing me from writing about anything I actually make money on.

If you were to start a magazine about insurance or finance topics, you'd be hurting my budget since those topics are my bread and butter and your pub. forbids me from writing for competing publications. In that case I wouldn't be willing to take ownership but would want upfront payment to replace the income I would lose elsewhere.

So ultimately, I think it depends on how wide ranging your 'competing publications' clause is.

 

Now that's a tricky one. But would the writers still be able to write for other publications so long as they aren't direct competitors to this one? Or would they be restricted to write only for this particular publication?

 

Depending on the magazine, I think having some ownership might be a good entertaining thought but if the magazine is not something i would desire to have ownership in then I'd like payment up front.
Just my opinion..

 

Writing for non-competing types of publications wouldn't be a conflict of interest, and based on my discussions with the publisher so far wouldn't be a problem on his end. As an example, I've done a good bit of Web content in a very similar but not exactly "competing" niche (mostly a different geographic focus). I ran it by him as an example, and he didn't have a problem with it. Basically the idea was that if that article could work well in this mag, then it should in this mag and not to a competitor. Hope that makes sense.

 

I've written for print magazines. And I can tell you that the second option is going to be more attractive to people who do not have a vested interest in the startup. (Friends, colleagues, people you're working on it with who may be able to contribute on the writing end also) People who aren't closely familiar with you, honestly, aren't going to give a rip whether your magazine flops or flies. They're going to want their money upfront instead of waiting around as a partner, hoping that it's a success, but willing to bite the bullet with you in case it isn't.

 

Just to clarify because of all of the "you"s - it's not my magazine or my project and at this point I'm not even involved officially in any way (folks in other places I'm gathering feedback from keep responding in that sense too, so I want to make sure that's completely clear to everyone everywhere).

Having written quite a few print and online features, I do understand the perspective on the writer side that you're talking about though, so thanks for sharing it. All of the most recent comments will be sent over to the publisher tomorrow morning (trying not to overwhelm him with it all today since I already bombarded him with a lot of comments saying many of the same things). So far it's a relatively unanimous view, which I'm not at all surprised by. I let him know I expected as much up front, so I imagine it will be interesting for him to see it all as it comes in (since he comes from an industry where the partnership models are probably received much more positively).

 

I may be wrong here, but I understood that if you wrote for the magazine under either option, you would not be allowed to write for a competing magazine. Is that correct? And you would have to commit to article every other week under either option, right? Because some of the responses seem to still be for an ownership vs. freelance situation.

 

Yes, that's right. In this comparison neither would be freelance. In either case, it would be more of a part-time employee relationship with regular pay based on a regular bi-weekly commitment. So the freelance vs employee issue isn't a part of this particular question / discussion. I can only tackle one side of things at a time.

 

I'm probably going out on a limb, here:

For me, it would depend on the subject matter of the magazine. If it was a topic or topics that I was extremely interested in I would be more willing to consider the ownership share.

It would also depend on how much I was required to write, durning that time period. I would be willing to take the risk, if the assignments weren't excessive.

~MLS

 

Thanks MLS. I'm actually finished collecting feedback on this issue for now, so I'm going to close the thread. I appreciate everyone's willingness to share their thoughts.