Sales numbers

[c.e.lawson]

I know some of these questions are difficult, if not impossible, to answer, but I'm throwing them out there anyway.

Can anyone give me an idea for sales numbers in the genre of historical fiction? I mean, what does "best seller" mean? How many of those books sell in a year? Ken Follett is number one on Barnes and Noble's best seller list with his new book World Without End and also has Pillars of the Earth on the list (which I'm assuming has been revitalized due to the success of his new novel?). What does that mean in terms of numbers?

And what kind of range of sales can a decent book of historical fiction by a first-time unknown author in a fair to good publishing house expect?

Thanks,

c.e. (definitely NOT making plans to retire to a tropical isle)

[Codger]

Book sales figures seem to be a mysterious, slippery area to explore. I've never discovered a site, publisher, or otherwise, who routinely reported sales, and explained the composition of the sales numbers.

And yet, I just read an article that claims that "On the Road" is still selling 100,000 copies per year. (US? Internationally? Which edition?) How would anyone know?

It's a black art.

[willietheshakes]

There are now systems in place (Booktrack in the US, I believe, and BookNet in Canada) to monitor actual sales of books through retailers (as opposed to sales TO retailers) on an ongoing basis. This information is, however, proprietary and fairly hard to come by for most writers (though the publishers do have it).

[jchines]

I suspect you're thinking of Bookscan in the U.S. For me, Bookscan seems to capture about 2/3 of my sales. It's a lot better than nothing, but it's far from an exact science.

[c.e.lawson]

I was afraid those were the types of answers I was going to get. Thank you Codger and willietheshakes. Keeping those numbers hidden sure seems to put writers at a disadvantage, which, I suppose, is the purpose. Individual authors must know their own numbers, though. Is that something EVERYONE keeps underwraps? Is this an unspoken rule?

[willietheshakes]

I suspect you're thinking of Bookscan in the U.S. For me, Bookscan seems to capture about 2/3 of my sales. It's a lot better than nothing, but it's far from an exact science.

Yup, that's what I was thinking of. It may be BookTrack in the UK...
The ratio of unreported sales is due, I think, to the fact that not all retailers report to the system (in Canada, for example, Amazon doesn't). And yes, your 2/3 ratio is about the same as my experience.

[maestrowork]

I was afraid those were the types of answers I was going to get. Thank you Codger and willietheshakes. Keeping those numbers hidden sure seems to put writers at a disadvantage, which, I suppose, is the purpose. Individual authors must know their own numbers, though. Is that something EVERYONE keeps underwraps? Is this an unspoken rule?

In a way, it's kind of like salaries. Some people don't mind saying "I make $125,000 a year plus 25% bonus) and some see that as a private matter. I'm not sure why hiding one's sales numbers would put a writer at a disadvantage. There are many ways for industry insiders to get info, such as Bookscan. I treat that kind of information as a "need-to-know." Not that I'm secretive, but at the same time it's something between my publisher and me. I guess if I'm selling 2 million copies a year, I may see it as a bragging right, but I'm not there yet.

[c.e.lawson]

Hi maestrowork,

Thanks so much for your perspective. When I said writers have a disadvantage in terms of not knowing the sales numbers of books, I meant across the board in their genre and across genres, which could help in terms of things like a writer planning for marketability, increasing the odds of success, choosing the best agent or publishing house, knowing when an offer is fair, etc. I mean having a base of knowledge with which to negotiate and make crucial business decisions, I don't mean in terms of asking any one individual author how much money they make. I agree that's personal information. So maybe it's just the nature of the beast - writers and publishers and bookstore chains all have their own reasons to keep these numbers to themselves. But it sure seems like a big, black void for a newbie venturing out there.

[maestrowork]

Oh, the writers would know -- usually by way of the royalty statements.

[CheshireCat]

It's a black art.

Yeah, pretty much. And while being published with a mega-house is usually perceived by authors as a good thing, the sprawling size of those multi-media companies can make any kind of accurate accounting an iffy business. Sometimes their left hand doesn't seem to have a clue what the right hand is doing.

There are now systems in place (Booktrack in the US, I believe, and BookNet in Canada) to monitor actual sales of books through retailers (as opposed to sales TO retailers) on an ongoing basis. This information is, however, proprietary and fairly hard to come by for most writers (though the publishers do have it).

One reason to make great connections in the industry if you can. I can get my hands on the Bookscan/Booksense lists, but not from my own publisher; my agent has a pal at another house, and we get them that way.

I suspect you're thinking of Bookscan in the U.S. For me, Bookscan seems to capture about 2/3 of my sales. It's a lot better than nothing, but it's far from an exact science.

For me, Bookscan represents, as far as I can tell, a much smaller percentage of my sales. Like a lot of commercial genre fiction authors I know, I get the majority of my sales in the big box stores, the chains, and a whole lot of grocery stores and pharmacies.

Since I know absolutely all retail sales CAN be tracked (the bar codes and scanners that are virtually everywhere make that true), I've asked myself more than once (color me cynical) if it's in the best interests of the publishers not to have A Complete List of all sales, nationwide, every week.

And, no, I can't think of a good reason -- unless it's to make sure their failures aren't obvious, or because for some reason they prefer the voodoo mysticism of the New York Times list.

Hi maestrowork,

Thanks so much for your perspective. When I said writers have a disadvantage in terms of not knowing the sales numbers of books, I meant across the board in their genre and across genres, which could help in terms of things like a writer planning for marketability, increasing the odds of success, choosing the best agent or publishing house, knowing when an offer is fair, etc. I mean having a base of knowledge with which to negotiate and make crucial business decisions, I don't mean in terms of asking any one individual author how much money they make. I agree that's personal information. So maybe it's just the nature of the beast - writers and publishers and bookstore chains all have their own reasons to keep these numbers to themselves. But it sure seems like a big, black void for a newbie venturing out there.

I'm not being cynical when I say that it's definitely in the best interests of the publishers to keep newbie writers in the dark. Seriously. If you don't know the "average" advance, then they can at least try to pay you less; if you don't know from other writers that this or that copy-editor truly sucks (and some do), you're less likely to protest changes made in your work; if you don't know that another author at your house asked for and got a bigger promotional budget, you're less likely to ask for that yourself.

True, your agent should be able to level the playing field a bit. But the truth is that agents, like editors and writers, vary widely in their knowledge and abilities.

Information, knowledge, is power. Find all the info and knowledge you can, triple-check it for accuracy (the deals reported in Publishers' Marketplace, for instance, are almost always inflated in advances or printruns -- or both), and try to use it wisely.

Oh, the writers would know -- usually by way of the royalty statements.

If you're lucky enough to have statements that are actually NOT written in ancient Greek, sure. ;) Seriously, one of my publishers has the most informative and easiest-to-understand royalty statements in the industry; I recently received a statement from another publisher that was so unbelievably cryptic neither I nor my agent, both veterans in publishing, had a clue how many copies had sold, what editions had been printed, or whether I had made decent money on the project. There was no check, mind you, but this book paid nicely in the last royalty period, is still out there selling, and all we could do was scratch our heads and ask the publisher for a reconciliation to print. Dunno if we'll get it.

But I told my agent that if I should be asked to do another project with them, she had my permission, in advance, to tell them their lousy royalty statements would likely be a deal-breaker.

When you've seen firsthand how much information an author CAN be given, it's just impossible to settle for less than that.

[Jamesaritchie]

Thanks so much for your perspective. When I said writers have a disadvantage in terms of not knowing the sales numbers of books, I meant across the board in their genre and across genres, which could help in terms of things like a writer planning for marketability, increasing the odds of success, choosing the best agent or publishing house, knowing when an offer is fair, etc. I mean having a base of knowledge with which to negotiate and make crucial business decisions, I don't mean in terms of asking any one individual author how much money they make. I agree that's personal information. So maybe it's just the nature of the beast - writers and publishers and bookstore chains all have their own reasons to keep these numbers to themselves. But it sure seems like a big, black void for a newbie venturing out there.

I've never had a problem getting exact sales figures from any publisher. You just have to realize a percentage of sales usually lag one royalty statement behind actual sales. Publishers do tend to under report initially as a hedge against returns, but this doesn't mean all sales aren't listed.

As far as I know, you can also audit any publisher out there, if you like. You certainly can all the large publishers. It's your money, and you have a right to know where it is.

It's really not all that difficult to get pretty exact numbers for complete genres, but you do have to put the numbers together from Bookscan, from annual reports, etc. Though Publishers Weekly is usually pretty darned accurate in such matters.

But I'm really not sure the numbers have any meaning at all to writers. You can't make business decisions based on such numbers. Publishing is about writing the best book you can write, in the genre you most love to read, finding a home for it, and hoping the reading public loves it. If the reading public hates it, you won't make much money at all, regardless of genre. If the reading public loves it, you can get stinking rich in any genre.

Overall genre sales numbers simply have no meaning for individual writers. Your historical novel may sell five million copies, and you best friend's historical novel may sell five hundred.

I mean, no one could have predicted that a 35,000 word, poorly written love story would be on the NYT Bestseller list for 150 weeks, and sell more than twelve million copies, or that a children's novel from an unknown writer would outsell everything else ever written, and force the NYT Bestseller list to come up with a list just for children's books?

Just write the book you would love to read, find a home for it, and hope the reading public loves it as much as you do.

[dantem42]

Hi maestrowork,

Thanks so much for your perspective. When I said writers have a disadvantage in terms of not knowing the sales numbers of books, I meant across the board in their genre and across genres, which could help in terms of things like a writer planning for marketability, increasing the odds of success, choosing the best agent or publishing house, knowing when an offer is fair, etc. I mean having a base of knowledge with which to negotiate and make crucial business decisions, I don't mean in terms of asking any one individual author how much money they make. I agree that's personal information. So maybe it's just the nature of the beast - writers and publishers and bookstore chains all have their own reasons to keep these numbers to themselves. But it sure seems like a big, black void for a newbie venturing out there.

Writing fiction isn't like writing software. Obviously if you're writing software, to a great extent you have to look at the market segments. You don't want to put together a package that no one needs, especially if you could've figured it out ahead of time.

But you do your best if you write what you feel in your heart you should write and need to write. Whether it's a Western or fantasy, if it's great stuff that people can't put down, and you do all the work of landing a good agent and so on, you will sell. It may be a long, hard road, but you'll get there.

On the other hand, trying to tailor what you write to the "market" is usually doomed to failure. By the time you grind your way through the process, things will have gotten stale. There are for example a host of Harry Potter lookalikes out there now, none of them doing particularly well. The same with The Da Vinci Code wannabes. Ditto about a hundred thrillers of guys in Kevlar running around Afghanistan chasing Al Qaeda.

[David I]

You asked about "bestsellers". That's an even vaguer area than sales--as JAR points out, 'sales' will all become clear at some point down the road. But bestsellerdom has more to do with velocity than total sales. A lot of books flying out in a slow week can bump someone onto the bestseller list without total sales being high. Similarly, someone can have serious sales over time without hitting the bestseller list. And someone can have fast sales, but be in the same week that King and Grisham and Sparks and Roberts and Koontz all release new books. The number of books it takes to get you onto the list varies wildly from week to week. (And some lists don't measure actual sales, but copies ordered, or other nonspecific info.)

Let me put it another way: I know someone who made a national bestseller list. And still works other jobs and lives pretty much like everybody else. I could also name writers who have never been within spitting distance of the bestseller list who are fulltime writers and make a decent living at it.

Sales only have a loose connection with bestsellerdom, and both have only a loose connection with income. Sure, there's a relationship, but not as tight as one might expect.

All of which has nothing whatsoever to do with writing.

[PeeDee]

The original question is of passing interest to me too, since my Rome novel is (duh) a historical novel, and so's my next novel (when did I go from science fiction writer to literary historical writer? Help!) I know the gist of the SF/F numbers and the basics there. I know nothing about the historical fiction side of things.

[Jamesaritchie]

Similarly, someone can have serious sales over time without hitting the bestseller list. .

Louis L'Amour spoke once about one of his westerns, maybe To Tame A Land, though I can't remember for sure, that sold 2,000,000 copies, but never once hit any of the big bestseller lists. It sold with week in, week out steadiness, and earned him a lot of money, but never did hit enough sales in a single week to make the big lists.

[ORION]

As was just in the paper recently- book orders & sales for lists can be machinated. Hitting a bestseller list is not always indicative of sales - it's indicative of publisher and book seller support.
What I write for?
Those emails which are sent to me from readers who are profoundly moved by my words and the characters in my book.
That's the real joy of writing.

[c.e.lawson]

I appreciate the thoughtful answers being posted here by experienced, published writers. Please don't misunderstand me. I'm not in anyway trying to choose my genre in terms of what sells better. I am well into a historical drama set in ancient Sparta and I chose that setting/era for several reasons, none of which have anything to do with any perceived marketability. I have no plans or desire to change my book. (really, dantem42, that's not it at all)HOWEVER, I have heard "rumors" that historical fiction is not selling well these days. And it is my opinion that if I wrote a contemporary drama set in a place that I know, I would be able to finish the story much more quickly, as the research required for ancient Sparta is significant for me, being no historian. And my husband made an off the cuff remark to me last night that I could stay at home and write full time if I could make 15 - 20K per year writing. LOL! I have no idea what that means in terms of ANYTHING! How difficult is that to do in my chosen genre? Where does one even start to find indications of that? Since writers are paid by royalties, I started with sales numbers.

I am absolutely brand new to the business side of writing. I haven't even finished this novel to begin the querying process. And some of these questions have started floating around in my head. If I am fortunate enough in the future to be able to make choices regarding agents or publishing houses, then wouldn't an agent or a publishing house with a stellar selling record, compared to an agent or a publisher with low numbers for historical fiction, possibly be the better choice or at least one important factor in making my choice? I love writing, and I will continue to write whether or not I eventually get paid for it, but I also do not want to enter the business side of any sort of venture completely ignorant.

As CheshireCat said, knowledge is power. At least it certainly can't hurt.

Overall genre sales numbers simply have no meaning for individual writers. Your historical novel may sell five million copies, and you best friend's historical novel may sell five hundred.

Yes, Jamesaritchie, I know what you mean. So many factors come into play for a novel's success. But when deciding how much time/effort/sacrifice to make for this craft, some sort of idea of averages, medians, trends, should give at least an indicator of possible chances for "success" as defined by any one's individual needs, shouldn't it? Perhaps not. :)

Sales only have a loose connection with bestsellerdom, and both have only a loose connection with income. Sure, there's a relationship, but not as tight as one might expect.

Fascinating point, David I. I already feel I'm getting a better handle on this nebulous concept of book sales from the answers given here. That's why I posted the question. Thank you. And no, I agree it has nothing to do with writing, but I still think it has something to do with planning one's days, commitments, and future.

ORION - I hear you loud and clear, really I do. But I'm in that catch 22 where I might be in the position to get plenty more of those e-mails from readers if I had more time to write, which I would have if I could stay home and write! I wouldn't have even asked this question if I were a stay at home mom and could write while the kids were in school. Between my job, my five year old and my nine year old (and I guess I should throw in my dear husband ;)), writing time is precious and my novel is slow-going.

I don't mean to sound cynical, especially when I've found a craft that gives me as much unbridled joy as this one does. I'm just trying to gather some information.

Thank you all for your time and well-thought out answers. I do appreciate each and every one of them.

c.e.

[lkp]

c.e.lawson, check out this blog: http://readingthepast.blogspot.com/. It's written by a librarian who knows an enormous amount about historical fiction. One of the many things she does on this blog, is post the deals she finds for historical novels.

I don't think there is any intrinsic problem with selling historical fiction these days, though certain plots and storylines are more popular than others (I think Sparta would be attractive to many). You'll need an agent with a track record selling the stuff, however.

[c.e.lawson]

Thank you lkp! I'm going to check out this blog right now. I appreciate your help and encouragement. And yes, I hope I'm not the only one who finds my Spartan warriors attractive. Oh, wait...you were talking about the concept, not the actual warriors? ;)

c.e.

[David I]

$15-20k?

It's possible, but the whole business is inherently unstable for most writers.

What you might want to consider is trying to work out a set of writing-related jobs that are sure to get you to the lower of those figures, and then let your writing be the supplement rather than the base. This is the reason that so many writers teach a few classes (which usually meet once a week), or do freelance editing, or write magazine articles. These leave them the freedom to spend a good chunk of time writing, but also provide a more reliable foundation than the sales of a book.

I know some writers who have had some very good years of income from their writing, but still keep classes, book doctoring, or freelance journalism running alongside.

[wayndom]

According to Richard Curtis (in either Be Your Own Agent, or Beyond the Bestseller), publishers avoid releasing sales figures because to do so would disallow them from cheating their authors.

Curtis explains that when paying royalties, the publisher pays a percent of the cover price of each edition sold, MINUS returned copies. If authors/agents can't find out how many copies were printed and how many sold, they can't check the accuracy of the royalty statements. Curtis is quite adamant that publishers cheat their authors...

[wayndom]

The original question is of passing interest to me too, since my Rome novel is (duh) a historical novel...

Why the "duh"? Rome is still a populated city.

[Jamesaritchie]

According to Richard Curtis (in either Be Your Own Agent, or Beyond the Bestseller), publishers avoid releasing sales figures because to do so would disallow them from cheating their authors.

Curtis explains that when paying royalties, the publisher pays a percent of the cover price of each edition sold, MINUS returned copies. If authors/agents can't find out how many copies were printed and how many sold, they can't check the accuracy of the royalty statements. Curtis is quite adamant that publishers cheat their authors...


I think Curtis has reason to believe this, but I think he also takes the agent's view and just assumes publishers are the bad guys. And with some pubishers, he's dead on.

But I've never had a problem finding out exactly how many copies were printed, or how many were sold. With the publishers I've dealt with, at least, this is just not very difficult to do.

I'm not at all sure what Curtis means by "minus the returned copies." They do not take away the royalty you get from a sold book because another book was returned, which is how this sounds. They do sometimes hold back money against returns, which is the only sane way of doing it, but this all balances out on the next royalty statement.

From my experience, publishers only hold back sales numbers from the general public, not from agents or writers. I suspect Curtis believes publishers are holding back numbers because he thinks his clients should be making more than they are.

But you can audit a publisher. I've seen it done several times, and so far, the numbers have always checked out. Believe me, Curtis may think publishers are hold back numbers from agents, but I guarantee they aren't holding numbers back from the IRS, and this can be checked. And publishers know this can be checked.

But I'll also say the best friend a writer can have is not his agent, but his editor. I've had editors give me facts and figures that even my agent couldn't find out.

Publishers, at least the big ones, are in the business of making money, but they are not in the business of cheating agents and writers. I'm not saying a publisher will always do what's best for the writer. They do not. But neither do they cheat, or hold back numbers. Doing so would be stupid because they will, sooner or later, get caught.