[YADS] Inkitt

The PublishingBros are at it again. Somebody gave Inkitt money, so they probably won't be going away anytime soon. This pitch in TechCrunch is so earnest and patronizing, it ignores how Inkitt's model could likely select against the very things they claim to be seeking.

https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/25/inkitt/

Oh dear. Inkitt seems to be relying on tracking right as the EU is preparing regulations to make using that data much more difficult.

And they think they're competing with Tencent. That's almost adorably hilarious.

This might be a good time to drop a reminder that venture capital gets whirled around at phenomenal speed and rarely comes to anything. The ROI isn't even necessarily dependent on the company's success.

Or, a tl;dr version: don't believe anything you read in TechCrunch.

The article did feel more like a paid advertising post thinly disguised as news. I'm willing to bet Inkitt's simply trying to raise more capital.

I was hit up by them today AGAIN. This time they found me on Facebook and didn't even get my name right. They want me to publish on their platform. Of course I am avoiding, but here is their new pitch.

If you upload one or more of your books onto Inkitt, and share the link with your current followers, we will pay you 15 cents for every read on our website which that link generates. So for instance, if readers come to Inkitt because of your book, then start reading books by other authors on our site, we will pay you for reads of those other books as well. You will retain full copyright of your work, and be free to upload your writing onto as many online platforms besides Inkitt as you like. Works in progress are preferred.

Ouch. Even QuarterReads paid 25 cent per read. (And that was mostly for short/flash fiction. Not a novel.)

This morning, I received the following email from Writer's Digest:



I'd already cancelled my WD subscription, on the basis that they seem to recycle the same two dozen or so Writing 101-style tips in every issue; however, using their mailing list to spam garbage like this strikes me as beyond the pale.

So, the fact that they are offering a 50% royalty on print, but only 25% on ebook is incredibly telling. It means they don't actually expect to sell anything via print.

That's an abnormal (not extraordinary) royalty offer, and a serious red flag.

Wow, Writer's Digest is mixed up with Inkitt? I know that WD has been on the decline for a while, but this is really sad.

Holy shitsnacks, they're dragging Rowling's name into it, as well?

Someone needs to tell Rowling.

Writer's Digest has been huckster central for years, so this isn't that surprising. Sad, though.

If I remember later, I'll mail the WD Inkitt blurb to this address:

https://www.jkrowling.com/enquiries/

(I no longer get mail from WD.)

Hey, I got this marked as one of Writer's Digest's trusted partners (a/k/a they paid us to send it to you) "Free Novel Contest: Submit & Win A Publishing Deal" It's from InKitt. I always check on this sort of thing as I was ripped off years and years ago and I have a hard time trusting anyone now. I love the advice from WD but some of the companies they advertise for just makes me shake my head. I guess it's all a money game.

WD these days is like a hooker on a street corner: she never met a sailor she didn't like. Some of the ads they run are sketchy in the extreme. "Standards? We don't need no steenking standards!"

What always tickles me about JK Rowling being thrown as a proxy weapon against trade publishing is that she's actually an example of the system working.

The second agent she tried, said yes. That suggests agents generally recognise talent. A year on submission for a first novel is not extraordinary or taxing, either; lots of authors spend far longer subbing/being repped.

She *did* get picked up and she *did* get published. The suggestion that her success has somehow circumvented evil gatekeepers is wholly absurd; if they really were out to piss on her career they'd not have published her in the first place.

Harlequin, that's EXACTLY what I think every time I read some vanity or self pub service using her journey as example! If anything her's is a story FOR going the traditional, agent, publisher route.

I mean, I understand they're using her tweets as inspiration to attract new pigeons customers but many of them can easily confuse the images as actual endorsements. Which is exactly what Inkitt's counting on.

Soooo, I've had my book on Inkitt for a couple of months now (the full novel uploaded for less than a month) and I really wish I'd checked here first. I heard about them after someone had asked a very popular author about whether it was worthwhile submitting novels to competitions you have to pay to enter. He said that he wouldn't, and put up a list of competitions being run which didn't require upfront payment. Inkitt was one of them. I assume he just randomly searched for 'free competitions' and...I researched the company a lot before doing it but, I'm honestly pretty clueless about how all of this stuff works. They had a pretty successful BBC interview which was my main motivation (along with wanting an audience) of going with them...

I'm guessing the recommendation would be I pull my story down? I've done a lot of self promotion, and had really positive feedback from readers...but after reading this whole thread, I'm kinda scared!!!

Are Inkitt reviews real?

Hi guys- after many rejections from publishers I published my romance on Inkitt and have 30 reviews so far -- but they seem too good to be true....are they fake?

suzan528 said:

Hi guys- after many rejections from publishers I published my romance on Inkitt and have 30 reviews so far -- but they seem too good to be true....are they fake?

Click to expand...

Here's a thread on Inkitt. <snipped>

Your mileage may vary, but basically, Inkitt is a display service. A very few authors mght hit it big from Inkitt, but most don't. That doesn't have to be a bad thing, but giving up first rights can be a problem if the author wants to later publish that same work commercially.

Harlequin said:

What always tickles me about JK Rowling being thrown as a proxy weapon against trade publishing is that she's actually an example of the system working.

The second agent she tried, said yes. That suggests agents generally recognise talent. A year on submission for a first novel is not extraordinary or taxing, either; lots of authors spend far longer subbing/being repped.

She *did* get picked up and she *did* get published. The suggestion that her success has somehow circumvented evil gatekeepers is wholly absurd; if they really were out to piss on her career they'd not have published her in the first place.

Click to expand...

Amen. Rowling is a case study in the value and efficacy of commercial publishing, and by using her to promote this ridiculous scam, the scammers tip their hand: they are actively trolling for naive, uninformed writer-victims. And Writers Digest is helping them. What a shame. But they've been running ads from vanity presses for ages, so this greedy move is SOP for them. And I say that with regret, because I used to teach in their online school of writing.

I wrote a piece called "What if J.K. Rowling had self-published" that might be of interest.

Apparently Inkitt has brought Georgia McBride of Month9Books on as editorial director which is a HUGE red flag. Also, they're spamming authors on LinkedIn.

Yikes. Thanks for the warning!

So it turns out NaNoWriMo is pushing Inkitt at their participants and winners.

And silencing those who try to warn others about them in the forums.

Maryn said:

Sheesh. What's in it for NaNo, do you think? Could it possibly be kickbacks or payoffs?

Click to expand...

I mean, yeah, Inkitt is one of NaNo's sponsors this year. Which is why they squelched any nay-saying about Inkitt on the forums: Thou shalt not speak poorly of our sponsors.

Non-profits need sponsors, so it's all above board as as that goes; but it's a terrible choice of sponsor, and, if I recall from my more active NaNoing days, not their first terrible choice either. I suspect too that it's the scammers who most actively apply to be NaNo sponsors, since NaNo membership is largely made up of new writers, who we know are the most vulnerable to scams like Inkitt's.