So, how much attention do you give them? Or do you give them a big grain of salt? Elizabeth Chadwick has just posted on her blog on blurbing books going forward I thought I'd share, http://livingthehistoryelizabethchadwick.blogspot.com/2010/03/thorny-matter-of-endorsements.html

If it is a author that I respect I will give a book a second look if I am not sure.  Chadwick is one that would make me look as would Penman and Cornwell.  Case in point the Simon Scarrow book Youngblood's had just such and endorsement from both from Chadwick and Cornwell.  I very well might have put off reading a very well written highly informative book had it not been for the "blurbs" on the back cover.  I respect her for not indiscriminantly endorsing other authors works, it shows her integrity!  IMO.    I just consider the source.

I agree with Letty. I was recently disappointed in a book endorsed by Bernard Cornwell. That's not to suggest his endorsement wasn't sincere. But I didn't think the author's writing resembled BC in any way except for the topic of the story.

There are a few names that I am constantly seeing on almost every one of the latest HF novels, and some of those I know for a fact that they are BFF.

I usually look askance at the endorsements and wonder if the motivation is genuine, frankly.

In the past, it's been a factor at times, a small plus in the quick assessment whether I may be interested in a book.  But it's been overdone lately, and I take it now with a whole spoonful of salt.  I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a negative but it doesn't count for much.