Marketing question...

[Silverhand]

After several heated conversations in my writing group, I want to bring my question to a more knowledgeable source.

Let me start out by saying that I am the Vice President of Marketing and Sales (Which includes acquisitions) for my company. Obviously, my job is to acquire product, market it accordingly, and of course, make sure the company can make money. This is all simple stuff and kind of irrelevant, but I wanted to let you know where I am coming from.

Ok, so my question. Why do agents / publishers not care about authors seeking beta readers and presenting them with their preliminary findings?

I mean in my world, I drool when a customer can present me with demographic information, test data both singular and group based, among various other marketing tools. I expect each person who comes into my office to have done research, to know their product in and out, and to TELL me about it, using either verbal or written proposals. Not that agents / publishers aren't busy, because I know they are, BUT I am busy too. It is my JOB to collect as much data as I possibly can before making a decision on what, when, how, and why a certain product to work.

Thus, why WOULDN'T an agent / publisher want to hear about what my beta-readers think of my work? Is it just a pride thing? Do they feel that they are the only ones qualified to determine the authenticity of their own chosen beta-readers? I mean if they care about what the public thinks, as in who is goin to be reading the material, then why descredit an authors source automaticly? What does it hurt to at least look who is giving you a review and making your decision then? I mean, I assume that they do this already, but with their paid readers, so again, why NOT take into account contests, beta-readers, review sites, etc etc?

In conclusion, I ask this question because I market myself aggressively. I am not published, but have taken the time to contact several well established national websites who review fantasy. My theory is that if I come to a publisher or agent with a strong website, following, and a strong portfolio of reviews, then my chances of making it to the next level are drasticly increased.

Anyways, each one of these sites were kind enough to review the work, write down what they thought, post the material on their sites, and give me written documentation. Yet, my writers group, the writers assosciation I belong to, and even a publisher I talked to at a convention, say that these reviews are meaningless. Uh, I am HANDING them a demographic and marketing proposal done by ME! It IS legit. It is backed up with contact info. It does come from sites they have mass followings. So, why the heck when I have done the work that they PAY people to do, is my information which comes from legitimate sources, not important enough for an agent / publisher to take seriously?

Discuss. Explain. Help...?

[veinglory]

I think test data, focus groups etc are mined for information using a fairly standard, valid methodology -- generally the company providing the info won't have 'fudged' it too much. However the author as a private individual picking beta readers by some uncontrolled method is almost always going to be providing dross rather than real information. e.g. You can compare 'A focus group of target 25-35 year old females said they would 'probably' or 'definitely' buy my product if it were available' versus 'some guys I know from the pub said it was great.'

[Aconite]

Why do agents / publishers not care about authors seeking beta readers and presenting them with their preliminary findings?
What's to stop me, as an author, from stacking my deck with beta readers who will give me positive feedback whether it's accurate or not?

Even if the author doesn't stack the deck, who is to say the beta readers are being honest with the author? Some people think being nice means saying you like something even if you didn't.

Who is to say the beta readers are qualified to judge quality, or are knowledgable about the market? Joe Schmoe and Jane Lane may love your breathtakingly original idea about the little boy waking up at the end of his adventure and finding out it was all a dream, but that may be because they've never read another science fiction book in their lives and don't have a clue about the genre. Or maybe they don't have the writing skills themselves to be able to tell whether something is well written or poorly written.

Beta readers are people who self-select to be part of an evaluation group. They are therefore not representative of the general population. You can't tell from beta reader reaction how the book is going to go over in general.

[maestrowork]

Because what YOUR betas say or think is not scientific and lack credibility, unless YOUR beta happens to be Stephen King or John Irving. Marketing research and analysis are usually done objectively and probably by a third-party firm, using focus groups that are carefully selected and representative of the current market. Would you listen to your vendor if he said, "my customer X thinks we are great" or "our products are going to sell to 14-18yos all over the world and they're going to love them"?

Uh, I am HANDING them a demographic and marketing proposal done by ME! It IS legit.

No, it's not.

[scribbler1382]

Who's going to vet these "sources"? Even if you provided a hundred positive reviews, that could very well translate into no sales. I think the problem here is that in the business world, you look for metrics that worked for company or product A and then know that all you have to do to make company or product B successful is duplicate them. It doesn't work that way for publishing. There's no formula. And even if you could figure out the formula that worked for project A, chances are it would never work again for any other projects. In which case, the response/validation you're trying to duplicate would basically be meaningless.