Changing/choosing publisher - any thoughts?

[SarahAndQuack]

I have a first book in press with a publisher who has been absolutely great - I've felt hugely supported. They're not top-line in terms of prestige, though perfectly respectable.

For the second book, would you try for a better press (bearing in mind that would mean writing the whole of the second book before submission, so potentially quite a long period when I wouldn't have 'under contract' for that book on my CV)? Or would you try to stick with what you know? How do you think employers will see this one?

I'm postdoc without a permanent position, FWIW. I'm basically wondering whether or not having the second book under contract would be a stronger position than having the possibility it'd end up published somewhere better?

I find this a really difficult one - I have been advised on multiple occasions by senior academics to publish with the 'big name' presses in my field, despite the fact that this is slower and, yes, requires a whole manuscript in advance even before a decision is made, so delays the process of getting it set up for my CV, too. At the same time, other senior academics tell me that having the book is the thing, and are constantly complaining about these same presses. (And at least one of these presses has recently been turning away all first books, which makes the delay seem even less worth it).

I am, at the moment, still going for the prestige name, but I am starting to think that's actually been the wrong choice all the time (but it now feels too late to change my mind), so if you really like your other press and haven't already got a bit sunk-cost about the process as a whole for your second book (unlike me!), I'd stick with them.

I also suspect that 2 books actually on your CV will beat 1 on and 1 aiming for a better press, especially if a panel is reading the documents quickly - assuming that your existing press are still decent and not PredatoryPublishersRUs, which it sounds like they are not! But it's so impossible to judge whether that is true or can be more than just a suspicion - poll 20 senior academics and I bet 10 of them would vote for each option.

(Sorry, I realise now that this is really more of a rant than a useful answer!)

That's really helpful, thank you! Including the rant bits. I have to admit, I have a senior colleague who's a good friend, whose experiences of a fancy press sound a bit like yours - not awful, not not exactly wonderful either.

FWIW, I met with my current publisher yesterday, and she is keen to have the second book, and I think I will. I feel very secure with her, and I think for my own peace of mind that will matter more than having the stress and worry of negotiating a whole new relationship with people I don't know, which might all come to nothing if they end up turning the book down (or, as I worry would happen, turning it down after lots of tedious back-and-forth).

The press I'm with is not the top rank (CUP/OUP, in my field), and there are probably 5 or so other presses that'd rank ahead of it, but it's somewhere in the rankings shortly after that, I would say. Definitely not predatory.

Thanks very much for talking it through for me!

I think in your circumstance I would definitely go with your current publisher then - it sounds like they'll be great for you (and yes, the tedious back-and-forth which then may end up going absolutely nowhere is definitely the worst part of it all with CUP/OUP!)