self-publishing vs traditional publishing

[liquidownage]

I've been considering self-publishing - with iUniverse, for example, it's only a few hundred dollars, you retain all rights to your book, and it's automatically listed on amazon, among other sites. what I'm wondering is this - there has to be a catch. what's the disadvantage of self-publishing (other than the obvious fact you pay upfront fees instead of a big house paying you)? You still collect royalties and your book is still listed on Amazon for anyone to buy...

Do you have to do all the marketing yourself? if so, how hard is this? I'd appreciate any information anyone has - thanks!

[Sheryl Nantus]

the biggest problem I see with self-publishing (which may be an excellent idea for certain nonfiction books and others with a small niche audience) is distribution - you won't be able to get them into brick/mortar bookstore due to the no-return policy and not everyone wants to buy a book online, sight unseen and pages unturned, despite what the vanity presses and self-pubs want you to think.

if you're willing and able to do a big push in the marketing area, go for it... but do your research and read up on the work needed - you'll spend a LOT of time and money marketing instead of writing your next book...

[veinglory]

Also the book costs about $20 and many readers never buy self-published books due to the patchy (e.g. generally bad) quality. Most PODs sell about 30 copies.


If you do go POD, shop around. The smaller outfits often provide a better service.

(Trad is best because they edit, promote, distribute and therefore *sell*).

[liquidownage]

lol sheryl - what's wrong with PublishAmerica? I'd never looked at them before, but after you mentioned them, I did - their site says they don't require you to pay any upfront fees. how do they scam you?

also, veinglory, I know traditional is best - but it's also clearly much harder to obtain, which is why I'm looking around in the first place. I didn't know the quality was bad or that they were expensive, though. thanks!

[LloydBrown]

lol sheryl - what's wrong with PublishAmerica?

Read the 20,000+ posts on PA here on Absolute Write, under Bewares & Background Checks.

[Mike Coombes]

This is always a really touchy subject with the self-published, but one has to consider... if you can't get your work published the traditional way (publishing house pays you), maybe it's because it's not as good as you think it is?

[A.REX]

This is always a really touchy subject with the self-published, but one has to consider... if you can't get your work published the traditional way (publishing house pays you), maybe it's because it's not as good as you think it is?

This is usually absolutely true! Yet, "Maybe" is the big key word in this statement. I've finished 2 manuscripts, both scored top three in big ligit writing contests (but to me that isn't the real test. The real test is when you hand it to a friend and they read it, and before you can get it back another friend has read it, loved it and passed it on and on) but I haven't had an agent express interest in it either... maybe historical fiction just isn't moving like it used to (my next novel is a thriller).
I'll give them about 5 more years of rejections before I self publish so at least my kids will have a decent hard copy.

So don't give up or burn your work if you know its good- meaning, if you've spent the time in writing workshops, college writing courses, writing groups, read the books and done your homework. If your writing is good and the agents and pubs are just too swamped with crap (because they are) then maybe after time has passed, its a good option to self pub.

[maestrowork]

If you have spent so much time perfecting your skills, planning, outlining, writing, revising, then revising again, then again...

WHY NOT WAIT a little longer to get a traditional publisher? Your book deserves that.

What's the rush? It's not like you're going to die tomorrow, are you?

[Jaws]

We've got some definition problems here.

(1) The term "traditional publisher" is anywhere from meaningless to misleading. It's a term that appears to have been popularized in the early 1990s by Northwest Publishing, Inc., a vanity publishing scam that ended up with both principals in jail (in fact, they're still there). Instead, what I think was meant is "commercial publisher," which refers to any publisher whose revenues come from the stream of commerce. That includes small presses, university presses, and the behemoths in New York.

(2) "Self-publishing" and "vanity publishing" are not at all the same thing. There is a very, very narrow set of circumstances in which "vanity publishing" may make sense; in particular, the author must not intend to make a profit (or probably even break even), get his/her works into bookstores, or build a publishing career on the basis of that book. The paradigmatic appropriate vanity publishing project is the family geneology, with its potential audience of perhaps 50 to 75 people, if the individual who wrote that geneology is not capable of the (increasingly simple) tasks necessary to get a manuscript ready for self-publishing.

(3) It's not self-publishing if somebody else's identity is on the book. iUniverse, for example, is not self-publishing—it's relatively low-cost vanity publishing, because the imprint on the book is iUniverse (and the ISBN is iUniverse, and one must place orders through iUniverse, and…).

All of the above said, keep in mind that there is a lot of deception in the publishing industry, fostered by the culture of secrecy in the industry. (Example: As an author with a commercial publishing contract, ask to see a copy of the cost-sales—sometimes called profit/loss—analysis prepared during consideration of your most-recent book.) My concern is not with legitimate self- and vanity publishing; it is with the pervasive fraud (and misconduct just short of fraud). Think of it like buying a used car: There are honest used car dealers out there; just don't count on the one you approach being one of them.

[katdad]

I suppose the question to ask is: What is your goal?

If you simply want other people to read your stuff, run off 50 copies at Kinkos and hand them out to folks. It's a lot cheaper than having them run off by a printer.

If you self-publish (meaning pay someone to print your book), you'll run the risk of being like a friend of mine, who drives around with a car trunkful of his books, trying to sell them to friends and even strangers he meets. Sigh.

[inexperiencedinker]

I have a question to add, as I see a lot of vague "appropriate circumstances" for self publishing or vanity publishing. I liked the genealogy example though.
My mother recently broke her leg in an accident, which is requiring many surgeries to repair. She is bored, and has tinkered with the idea of writing a mystery novel. She wanted to be a bit satirical, and base it on local characters in the small town where she lives (about 250 in town, 5000 in area). She would be the woman in the wheelchair, who sees the murder through binoculars (she's a dork!) and I get to be her sleuthing daughter who figures it all out. All of the prominent local folk would be the suspects, victims, and eventual murderer. This would probably sell very well in the local restaurant or grocery store, but not anywhere else. Would vanity publishing be a good idea for this piece, as it is only local interest? She is not really interested in creating the next best seller, but something to occupy her time while she heals, and that can be humorous for the community to enjoy. Any suggestions?

[veinglory]

You might look at getting a local artist or photographer for the cover and going straight to a nearby printer for perfect bound copies? These should be just as good as a trade paperbacks and somewhat cheaper so long as the printer has the right equipment? Doing this will avoid overheads and shippings costs.

[sassandgroove]

Jaws, I appreciate your post. It is very informative. I am new to this publishing part of writing, as in I still only have rough drafts in binders. BUt my understanding of Self-Publishing was a person or even a group start their own publishing company, where they find a printer (not a vanity press) and the imprint would be their company name, and they would distribute the books under the umbrella of the company. I don't see that defined anywhere. This is different from both buying prints from a vanity press or being published by a "Traditional Press." Am I wrong?

[Aconite]

Sassandgroove, Jaws has an excellent page on his site where he defines the terms. He'll link you there, I'm sure. In the meanwhile, you can get started here: http://www.sfwa.org/beware/vanitypublishers.html. Roam the rest of the Writer Beware site, too, and follow the links. It's a good way to start your publishing education.

[Jaws]

Here's a start on understanding the difference between vanity press and subsidy publishing:
Sanitation Engineering (24 Jan 2005) (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2005/01/sanitation-engineering.html) at Scrivener's Error (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com), my blawg.

As a general principle, no, that description of the "local-interest mystery" is not an appropriate candidate for self-publishing (or vanity publishing). With even fewer exceptions than for nonfiction, fiction almost never is—even in the eyes of many self-publishing cheerleaders (about whom, see Autobibliophilia (04 Aug 2004) (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2004/08/autobibliophilia.html) and the next few days' entries). Last, but not least, what was described practically screams "I wanna get sued for defamation/invasion of privacy/infringement of publicity rights"; the very project itself is a bad idea.

[inexperiencedinker]

Here's a start on understanding the difference between vanity press and subsidy publishing:
Sanitation Engineering (24 Jan 2005) (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2005/01/sanitation-engineering.html) at Scrivener's Error (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/), my blawg.

As a general principle, no, that description of the "local-interest mystery" is not an appropriate candidate for self-publishing (or vanity publishing). With even fewer exceptions than for nonfiction, fiction almost never is—even in the eyes of many self-publishing cheerleaders (about whom, see Autobibliophilia (04 Aug 2004) (http://scrivenerserror.blogspot.com/2004/08/autobibliophilia.html) and the next few days' entries). Last, but not least, what was described practically screams "I wanna get sued for defamation/invasion of privacy/infringement of publicity rights"; the very project itself is a bad idea.

Thank you for the advice Jaws. And although my mom is injured it was not in the head. Most of the characters, her close friends, own business' in the area and it might be a boon in advertisement if nothing else. She has plans on asking, before writing, who wants to be included and who doesn't, as well as their comfort level. It's a small enough town that they don't allow lawyers, they just go out back and duke it out. :box:. Seriously though, it IS small enough that people would feel comfortable speaking up if they didn't want to be included...and I do mean EVERYONE. One man owns 2 of 3 bars, and 1 of 2 eateries. You can still smoke in the Chevron. Everyone meets after church at the bar. (happily dreaming of home now) Maybe I'll suggest she have the interested parties sign waivers....
thanks.

Back to my original question...would a commercial publisher be interested in something so local?

[Aconite]

Back to my original question...would a commercial publisher be interested in something so local?
No. A commercial publisher would expect minimum sales of a few thousand copies to make it worth publishing the book, and you're not going to come anywhere near that. And verbal agreements with townsfolk would not satisfy their legal departments.

[MadScientistMatt]

If it's good enough, people in other towns might be interested. A funny small-town story doesn't have to take place in your own small town. There's probably folks hundreds of miles away who might recognize their own local versions of the characters. If it's well-written and does not depend too much on in-jokes, it could have national appeal.

[HapiSofi]

Self-publishing is a terrible idea in almost all cases. You need to have a look at some of the many threads on this subject in the Bewares Board.

[scarletpeaches]

I always say if the book's good enough, someone else will pay YOU to publish it.

[HapiSofi]

If it's good enough, people in other towns might be interested. A funny small-town story doesn't have to take place in your own small town. There's probably folks hundreds of miles away who might recognize their own local versions of the characters. If it's well-written and does not depend too much on in-jokes, it could have national appeal.Yup. Peyton Place didn't just sell in New Hampshire. Get the particulars right, and the appeal's universal.

[Jamesaritchie]

Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period.

Traditional puvblishing means they pay you, and they distirbute the book nationally. Everything else is nitpicking and truly meaningless. There are bad apples everywhere, but they don't.

Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period.

[Jaws]

Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period. Traditional puvblishing [sic] means they pay you, and they distirbute the book nationally. Everything else is nitpicking and truly meaningless. There are bad apples everywhere, but they don't. Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period.
With all due respect, Mr. Ritchie, your statement is incorrect, both in terms of industry usage and as a matter of law. There are distinct legal and industry meanings for "self-publishing" and "vanity publishing," and they are by no means equivalent. "Traditional publishing" is legally a meaningless term (particularly as, if one wishes to be technical, "traditional" publishing from the time of Gutenberg to the mid-19th century is closer to vanity press!), and has come into industry usage around the margins only since the early 1990s, when it appears to have been popularized by Northwest Publishing, Inc.… a vanity press.

The legal distinction between self-publishing and vanity publishing matters a great deal for, among other things, taxation, disposition of assets in bankruptcy or other business dissolution, ownership of subsidiary and derivative rights, and a wide variety of other matters (most of which I cannot explain both accurately and concisely in nontechnical language).

[inexperiencedinker]

the universal appeal didn't really occur to me before. I just assumed no one would care about backwoods humor, lol. I guess funny is funny. thanks for the advice

[HapiSofi]

the universal appeal didn't really occur to me before. I just assumed no one would care about backwoods humor, lol. I guess funny is funny.It sure is.

Years ago, I wrote a funny essay describing a particular turn of behavior. As soon as it was published, I swear I must have had a dozen of my friends get in touch and say "That's about me, isn't it?" That was when I knew I'd gotten it right.

You don't even have to understand it. I know of cases where an author observed precisely enough that readers could see what was going with a character, even though the author himself didn't understand it. The readers were right, too.

Trust the tale, trust the telling, and let everything around it sort itself out.

[MadScientistMatt]

the universal appeal didn't really occur to me before. I just assumed no one would care about backwoods humor, lol. I guess funny is funny. thanks for the advice

There's quite a few successful backwoods humor authors, with quite a few different styles. Some current ones that come to mind are Patrick McManus and Jeff Foxworthy. Jeff Foxworthy often comments that he has random fans ask him, "How do you know so much about my family?"

[Mike Coombes]

Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period.

Traditional puvblishing means they pay you, and they distirbute the book nationally. Everything else is nitpicking and truly meaningless. There are bad apples everywhere, but they don't.

Self-publishing and vanity publishing are exactly the same thing. Period.

I have to agree. Jaws, you're splitting hairs. 'Traditional' publishers (meaningless though that term seems to be to you) pay an advance. They pay royalties on sales. They promote (hopefully) and distribute.

Anything else is vanity. You pay.

[victoriastrauss]

'Traditional' publishers (meaningless though that term seems to be to you)It's also meaningless to anyone in the publishing business. It's a bogus term coined by dishonest vanity publishers to try and obscure their dubious dealings.

Unfortunately the term has come into common usage. Plenty of dodgy publishers call themselves "traditional" these days. About the only thing you can be pretty sure of, if a publisher claims it's "traditional", is that it won't ask you for an upfront fee (which doesn't rule out a back-end fee of some sort). Everything else is open.

- Victoria

[Aconite]

Anything else is vanity. You pay.
By that reasoning, renting is the same thing as paying a mortgage.

[scarletpeaches]

It's all about who gets the green.

[sassandgroove]

I still think everyone is ignoring Small Presses that are started by people who want to self publish, and are smart enough not to go to a vanity press and smart enough to be able to start a company, and so they start a company to publish themselves and others, like Small Beer. The press that they use I doubt is a vanity publisher. THere are three publishing categories, vanity, self and commercial. four if you count scams like publishamerica. that is my two cents!

[HapiSofi]

I still think everyone is ignoring Small Presses that are started by people who want to self publish, and are smart enough not to go to a vanity press and smart enough to be able to start a company, and so they start a company to publish themselves and others, like Small Beer. The press that they use I doubt is a vanity publisher. THere are three publishing categories, vanity, self and commercial. four if you count scams like publishamerica. that is my two cents!Yeah. Small Beer is brilliant. Kelly Link and Gavin Crawford could get work anywhere in the industry about thirty seconds after expressing a willingness to take it. I'm entirely prepared to say that any small press operation that can match their expertise in editing, writing, design, packaging, marketing, and general industry know-how is a good bet for success. So far, I've seen exactly one that meets those specs.

[Alex_Cohen]

Yeah. Small Beer is brilliant. Kelly Link and Gavin Crawford...I absolutely agree except with the part about Gavin Grant's last name being Crawford. I don't think that's true.

[HapiSofi]

I absolutely agree except with the part about Gavin Grant's last name being Crawford. I don't think that's true.You're right. This has my week for weird errors. Just a couple of days ago I put Gulag Archipelago into a list when I meant One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.