PDA

View Full Version : Can a successful self-published book be re-queried?



EmpoweredOKC
03-23-2010, 05:17 AM
My book, solely POD, sold 3000 copies quickly @ $21.95 each, garnered 10 100% 5-star reviews, and has attracted orders for boxes of 50 at a time, all with NO paid publicity. Sales are going up, not staying level. I know that 3k sales is nothing in the big picture, but I'm pleased that a POD with no publicity has passed a $60,000 net.

If my book has achieved decent results, it is tactically advantageous, or just plain tacky, to resubmit queries on the grounds that the book now has a proven track record of marketability? Not in a "See, I TOLD you this would sell!" sense, but in the sense that the book is clearly a viable product that I'd like to see in more markets. Should I re-query, or move on to the next product and simply cite this as a "previous publication"?

Cella
03-23-2010, 05:29 AM
I have no idea how to answer your question but just wanted to say Way to Go!

Keep up the good work!

:D Cella

agentpaper
03-23-2010, 05:38 AM
I don't think it's tacky, per se, but you're going to run into a lot of obstacles. Mainly because agents and editors may see it as it's sold everything it's going to. I don't think it'll hurt to requery it, but keep in mind it may be more difficult for you to have someone want to pick it up. Another option would be to write another book, query that one and then let them know that a previous book was self published and sold x number of copies. But that's just my .02.

Oh, and congrats. That's really great for Self pubbed POD. Great job! :D

William Haskins
03-23-2010, 05:50 AM
yes it happens sometimes...

http://blogcritics.org/books/article/book-review-everyday-cat-excuses-why/

beatrix potter self-published the tale of peter rabbit after a dozen rejections, as well.

good luck.

Danthia
03-23-2010, 05:18 PM
If it's done well and is selling well, you probably lose nothing by querying an agent about it. Just be sure to be very clear about the situation, what you've done, how the sales are going and how you're looking to take the work to the next level. They may not be interested because of rights issues, but self pub'd books do cross over into traditional publishing, so it's possible.

Jamesaritchie
03-23-2010, 07:47 PM
Absolutely. Publishers take on many self-published book that are successful.

EmpoweredOKC
05-02-2010, 01:18 AM
Thanks! Sales are actually continuing to increase each month.

Margarita Skies
05-02-2010, 03:01 AM
Thanks! Sales are actually continuing to increase each month.


Based on all the information you've given here, you are an awesome writer! Would you please give me the name of your book so I can go buy it? :D

Kelsey
05-02-2010, 03:41 AM
Vince Flynn had so many rejections for his first book, Term Limits, that he self-published. It ended up being one of the top-selling books in the Twin Cities area, and only then was it published big time. S&S, I think.

So it's been done.

Terie
05-02-2010, 12:02 PM
The threshhold I've heard for self-published books to garner interest is 5,000, though some now put it closer to 10,000. Sounds as if you're there, or close, so sure, if you want to try for a commercial publisher, you're definitely in a position to query. Be sure to include your sales figures in your query letter.

ETA: Don't mention the Amazon reviews. That kind of stuff is meaningless (see the threads on recent Amazon review debacles), and besides, if an agent or editor is interested, they'll go look at the Amazon listing.

Bufty
05-02-2010, 02:49 PM
Congratulations, Empowered, and I wish you continued success.

Is this non-fiction? Out of curiosity, did you have an existing platform or access to an initially known base of prospective readers?

profen4
05-02-2010, 04:04 PM
My book, solely POD, sold 3000 copies quickly @ $21.95 each, garnered 10 100% 5-star reviews, and has attracted orders for boxes of 50 at a time, all with NO paid publicity. Sales are going up, not staying level. I know that 3k sales is nothing in the big picture, but I'm pleased that a POD with no publicity has passed a $60,000 net.

If my book has achieved decent results, it is tactically advantageous, or just plain tacky, to resubmit queries on the grounds that the book now has a proven track record of marketability? Not in a "See, I TOLD you this would sell!" sense, but in the sense that the book is clearly a viable product that I'd like to see in more markets. Should I re-query, or move on to the next product and simply cite this as a "previous publication"?

John Grisham's first publisher for A Time To Kill couldn't sell the 5000 book print run, so Grisham tried to sell them on his own. He did, and he ended up landing a a contract with a big pub because of it. So good luck.

And tell us the name of your book, please. I want to read it.

Rjo
05-02-2010, 06:24 PM
And tell us the name of your book, please. I want to read it.[/QUOTE]


Me too.

One would think that with these results, and so soon, agents or publishers would come knocking on your door, and you wouldn't have to query anyone. But maybe I'm being a naive newbie.

At any rate thanks for posting this thread. It makes me see POD as a viable alternative to the traditional routes in trying to get something published "in today's market."

Axler
05-02-2010, 06:32 PM
It would be unusual for an editor at a mainstream publisher to solicit the writer unless they made contact at writer's conference or something or other.

It would be even more rare for an agent to seek out the writer. The best bet is a query letter.

Congrats on your success!

waylander
05-02-2010, 06:35 PM
Kristin Nelson blogged about this on April 26th
http://pubrants.blogspot.com/

Chumplet
05-02-2010, 06:38 PM
A writer I met last night at a conference queried the sequel to her self-pubbed book, got an agent, and now that agent is shopping both books.

Terie
05-02-2010, 07:00 PM
At any rate thanks for posting this thread. It makes me see POD as a viable alternative to the traditional routes in trying to get something published "in today's market."

Um, no. It is much more difficult to find the kind of self-publishing success that will lead to a commercial contract than it is to find an agent or publisher the usual way. Self-publishing is NOT a means to get a commercial deal.

The average number of self-pubbed/POD books sold is 75. Very VERY few sell 5,000 or more, and of those, most are by people who don't want commercial deals. (For example, a self-help lecturer who sells his book at lectures might well prefer to keep 100% of the profits himself.)

If you want to self-pub, have researched it thoroughly, and have decided that it's the way you want to go, that's fine. But do it because you think it's best for you, not because you want to capture an agent or commercial publisher's eye; the chance of that happening is vanishingly rare. Yes, it obviously happens, but statistically, it's much more rare than a manuscript getting picked up off the slush pile and resulting in a contract.

Axler
05-02-2010, 07:24 PM
Very true.

But by the same token, with POD the playing field, if not exactly even, is at least a bit more broad. There are options to explore rather than consigning an unsold manuscript. to the tinderbox.

According to a recent report by Bowker, out of the one million plus books published in the US in 2009, well over 700,000 were produced by non-mainstream publishers.

Rjo
05-02-2010, 07:30 PM
Um, no. It is much more difficult to find the kind of self-publishing success that will lead to a commercial contract than it is to find an agent or publisher the usual way. Self-publishing is NOT a means to get a commercial deal.....

Okay. Thanks for the advice. Guess I'll stick it out a little longer here on Square 1.

Terie
05-02-2010, 07:49 PM
According to a recent report by Bowker, out of the one million plus books published in the US in 2009, well over 700,000 were produced by non-mainstream publishers.

Well, yeah. Corporate annual reports, government publications, and other such material (which make up a good chunk of that 700,000) weren't meant to be purchased by general readers. That really is a meaningless statistic.

veinglory
05-02-2010, 07:58 PM
3000 sales in a period of, say, two years or less is a damned good result. Well done!

profen4
05-02-2010, 09:37 PM
Um, no. It is much more difficult to find the kind of self-publishing success that will lead to a commercial contract than it is to find an agent or publisher the usual way. Self-publishing is NOT a means to get a commercial deal.

The average number of self-pubbed/POD books sold is 75. Very VERY few sell 5,000 or more, and of those, most are by people who don't want commercial deals. (For example, a self-help lecturer who sells his book at lectures might well prefer to keep 100% of the profits himself.)



This is very true. There aren't many fiction POD's that have any notable sales. I can think of maybe 3 or 4 that managed sales above 1000 units.

Jamesaritchie
05-02-2010, 09:52 PM
John Grisham's first publisher for A Time To Kill couldn't sell the 5000 book print run, so Grisham tried to sell them on his own. He did, and he ended up landing a a contract with a big pub because of it. So good luck.

And tell us the name of your book, please. I want to read it.

No, not really. I wish the Grisham myth would die, but it goes on and on and on.

scope
05-03-2010, 12:20 AM
My book, solely POD, sold 3000 copies quickly @ $21.95 each, garnered 10 100% 5-star reviews, and has attracted orders for boxes of 50 at a time, all with NO paid publicity. Sales are going up, not staying level. I know that 3k sales is nothing in the big picture, but I'm pleased that a POD with no publicity has passed a $60,000 net.

If my book has achieved decent results, it is tactically advantageous, or just plain tacky, to resubmit queries on the grounds that the book now has a proven track record of marketability? Not in a "See, I TOLD you this would sell!" sense, but in the sense that the book is clearly a viable product that I'd like to see in more markets. Should I re-query, or move on to the next product and simply cite this as a "previous publication"?

Some background information:
>Is this fiction or nonfiction?
>For children or adults?
>Genre?
>Based on your sale of 3000 books are you saying that after all costs ("net", as you say) you have pocketed $60,000? Also, that sales are increasing even though you have done no promotion at all? If that's the case let me throw out a hypothetical to you. I understand you want to be published by a traditional publisher. However, if making money from your writing is an important factor, why not continue the POD roll you are on with THIS book until it dies off? Meanwhile, if not done already, you can write your next book. That way you will have made (net) six figure money from the POD book and have another book ready for submission to an agent or a traditional publisher.
Before submitting to an agent or traditional publisher you could shut down your POD operation but be able to refer to your POD book and what in time would seem to be excellent sales figures.

Axler
05-03-2010, 04:53 AM
That really is a meaningless statistic.

I cited Bowker's own report as to the number of aggregate ISBN sales, divided between mainstream publishers and basically everybody else.

Until you know exactly the type of publications all the ISBN's were applied to, your objection is fundamentally meaningless.

veinglory
05-03-2010, 04:56 AM
Generally the burden of proof is on the assetion, not the objection.

Axler
05-03-2010, 07:26 AM
Inasmuch as I cited the source of the assertion, then the objection should be directed toward that source.

Wayne K
05-03-2010, 07:34 AM
I'm still waiting for that title.

Mark_Young
05-03-2010, 01:18 PM
Typically, agents don't like hearing about self-published works, especially POD. In fact some sites I've seen say that they don't even consider it being published and they say they really don't care.


But that's because there's not a whole lot of people out there doing as well as you are. That must've been some amazing work.


I'd skip the agent at this point. An agent is supposed to help you get out there using their own reputable name as means to get your story up and going. And normally I'd say that's the best route to go if you're unheard of. Some people don't like it because of the 15% they take out, but I think it's worth it. But selling 3,000 copies is a major accomplishment for a first-time author. I'd be surprised if I sold 500 copies of my stories in a year. You don't need to give 15% to an agent to help publicize your name and story, for an agent to fight tooth and nail to show that some sort of measurable profit might be made from your work. You have 3k copies!

I'd go straight to a publisher. BTW, I'd like to see a link to your book or some sort of information on it. Also, who is printing your work?

Toothpaste
05-03-2010, 06:09 PM
Mark, the thing is an agent does far more than get newbies published. If that was their soul purpose then people with small publishers wouldn't feel a need to sign one, nor would very well published authors keep theirs once their career took off.

Agents are there to support your entire career as an author. Not only do they sell your work (for usually far more than you would do on your own and thus, even with the 15%, you tend to make more with them than without), they negotiate contracts, and sell other rights as well. This last point I think is very important to mention as it can easily be forgotten. I'm working on selling two new books at the moment (with the help of my agent), but at the same time my agent is working on selling yet more foreign rights for my already published books, as well as film rights etc.

Forget the usual having someone in your corner and there to support you when things aren't going as well as you'd like, agents have a very practical job and do far more than just sell one book to one publishing house.

I don't know what the right thing to do in this particular situation, it depends on many circumstances. But getting an agent for the author's next work, or even this one, isn't such a bad idea.

Amadan
05-03-2010, 11:17 PM
I'd skip the agent at this point. An agent is supposed to help you get out there using their own reputable name as means to get your story up and going. And normally I'd say that's the best route to go if you're unheard of.

Ask yourself why Stephen King and all the other big names still have agents. It's not like they couldn't call any publishing house in the world and say, "Hi, I've just written a new book, are you interested?"

EmpoweredOKC
05-03-2010, 11:39 PM
Thanks! the book is a non-fiction title for a niche market--those of you who said "I want to read it!" might not be so quick, because it's a clinical manual for the treatment of rape trauma and sexual abuse. The book has been picked up by treatment centers and university classrooms as a course text, as well as by colleagues and clients; I acknowledge that having a built-in audience in need of the book has helped. It would fit into the self-help/psychology category.

Knowing that the topic is clinical treatment of sexual trauma, still want to read it?

Thank you all SO much for the feedback and advice! It's been invaluable!

Mark_Young
05-04-2010, 02:11 AM
Thanks! the book is a non-fiction title for a niche market--those of you who said "I want to read it!" might not be so quick, because it's a clinical manual for the treatment of rape trauma and sexual abuse. The book has been picked up by treatment centers and university classrooms as a course text, as well as by colleagues and clients; I acknowledge that having a built-in audience in need of the book has helped. It would fit into the self-help/psychology category.

Knowing that the topic is clinical treatment of sexual trauma, still want to read it?

Thank you all SO much for the feedback and advice! It's been invaluable!


I'd love to read it. I read child psychology and child development books so that I could write about a 12-year-old girl and her troubles with society. If I'm going to write mysteries in the future, I'd like to see this.






Mark, the thing is an agent does far more than get newbies published. If that was their soul purpose then people with small publishers wouldn't feel a need to sign one, nor would very well published authors keep theirs once their career took off.

Agents are there to support your entire career as an author. Not only do they sell your work (for usually far more than you would do on your own and thus, even with the 15%, you tend to make more with them than without), they negotiate contracts, and sell other rights as well. This last point I think is very important to mention as it can easily be forgotten. I'm working on selling two new books at the moment (with the help of my agent), but at the same time my agent is working on selling yet more foreign rights for my already published books, as well as film rights etc.

Forget the usual having someone in your corner and there to support you when things aren't going as well as you'd like, agents have a very practical job and do far more than just sell one book to one publishing house.

I don't know what the right thing to do in this particular situation, it depends on many circumstances. But getting an agent for the author's next work, or even this one, isn't such a bad idea.

I knew that, but I've met writers who tell me that an agent doesn't do anything else but get you published and organize and negotiate contracts. Since I'm not actually published, I kinda stay away from that specific area on what all they do (and don't) do. Actually the only local agency to me are lawyers and tell you all the different things they'll do for you, the list is longer than I expected.

Toothpaste
05-04-2010, 03:34 AM
Well those writers are wrong. Or are with some mediocre agents.

And if you don't really know what agents do (despite saying that you knew all of what I shared, so I'm a bit confused), then why are you giving advice on agents? Your opinion is definitely not fact, and in this case is just wrong.

Btw, there is no judgment in what I'm saying, being wrong about something with which you've had little experience makes perfect sense. Several years ago I too would have been in the same boat. Before I had an agent I had no clue just how much work they do for an author and all the things they do that I'd never even thought of. With experience comes knowledge, and if you have it, share it. If you don't, why add confusion to an already complicated situation?

triceretops
05-04-2010, 03:56 AM
The biggest mystery here is, at least for me, why would you want to change your option right now when this book is doing so well by your admission that the sales are increasing at the moment. You're still getting the author's chunk of the proceeds, and will continue to do so. You just want larger distribution?

Tri

willietheshakes
05-04-2010, 04:35 AM
Inasmuch as I cited the source of the assertion, then the objection should be directed toward that source.

"a recent report by Bowker", with no link and no direct quote, hardly counts as a cite.

scope
05-04-2010, 06:19 AM
Well those writers are wrong. Or are with some mediocre agents.

And if you don't really know what agents do (despite saying that you knew all of what I shared, so I'm a bit confused), then why are you giving advice on agents? Your opinion is definitely not fact, and in this case is just wrong.

Btw, there is no judgment in what I'm saying, being wrong about something with which you've had little experience makes perfect sense. Several years ago I too would have been in the same boat. Before I had an agent I had no clue just how much work they do for an author and all the things they do that I'd never even thought of. With experience comes knowledge, and if you have it, share it. If you don't, why add confusion to an already complicated situation?

A big ditto, ditto, ditto........

scope
05-04-2010, 06:28 AM
The biggest mystery here is, at least for me, why would you want to change your option right now when this book is doing so well by your admission that the sales are increasing at the moment. You're still getting the author's chunk of the proceeds, and will continue to do so. You just want larger distribution?

Tri

And this leads back to the question I posed on my post #24, part of which asks what you think about your book re continued POD vs a traditional publisher.

Mark_Young
05-04-2010, 06:56 AM
Well those writers are wrong. Or are with some mediocre agents.

And if you don't really know what agents do (despite saying that you knew all of what I shared, so I'm a bit confused), then why are you giving advice on agents? Your opinion is definitely not fact, and in this case is just wrong.

Btw, there is no judgment in what I'm saying, being wrong about something with which you've had little experience makes perfect sense. Several years ago I too would have been in the same boat. Before I had an agent I had no clue just how much work they do for an author and all the things they do that I'd never even thought of. With experience comes knowledge, and if you have it, share it. If you don't, why add confusion to an already complicated situation?


I know for a fact that they charge 15% commission. I know for a fact they are a stronger voice to the publishing world than your own. Generally speaking, I know that. It was actually out of a how-to book that stated what agents do and don't do (the title of the chapter was actually just that) and it was contrary to what I've told others based on my own research.

But most things an agent will do for you for sure isn't necessary for the charge in this case. For example, a publisher gets a Joe-blow person out of no where among the slush pile. They get a similar outlined story submitted by a literary agent. "Oh, that agent's payroll is based upon how well the books sell, and the last time we took a manuscript from her it was from an author that now makes our company hundreds of thousands of dollars." They're going to take the one from the agent because they're reputable and for the most part reliable.

The middle-man agent isn't necessary for that. It's a book already selling a few thousand copies with sales rising. They don't need convincing from a professional reputable literary agent charging 15% commission to convince them that this book will sell; it's already there and the publishers are losing a piece of the action the longer they wait.

From the looks of it, the biggest reasons an unpublished author would need a literary agent aren't needs at all. If my first book sold 3k copies, why would I need to pay an agent 15% of the profits to help convince a publisher that they'll sell and promote a book with increasing sales or fight tooth and nail to try and negotiate the best deals from the needed workers [editors, book cover artists, etc.] for it?

Toothpaste
05-04-2010, 07:16 AM
It's already been stated that in this particular situation possibly the OP does not need to get an agent. However, there is more to be considered than just this one book. If the OP is interested in a full time career as an author an agent is a very sound investment. And considering the OP posted asking about agents etc, I'd say it's reasonable to think that might be the case.

Now, you ask why would you get an agent to negotiate a book deal when you already have a book doing well and publishers ought to jump on it?

Well, an agent can get you through the doors easier (as you said), though it isn't impossible to do it yourself. Just harder. An agent will know which editors are looking for the kind of work the OP has written. This is a step you seem to be ignoring in your all things being equal scenario. You've started your situation with MSs on the editor's table. It's still a lot of work to choose which editors make sense to submit to.

Further everyone seems to think that a publishing house has the author's best interest in mind, and that an agent is just some evil middle man there to steal the author's hard earned money. The ironic truth is it's the publisher that will try to get an author to sign the most basic contract possible for the smallest advance possible giving them the most rights. It's the agent who negotiates a higher advance, who makes sure that things like e-book rights are carefully addressed (this is an area that I have seen multiple agents blog their frustration about editors about - you do know some contracts offered authors can say something like "and we get rights to everything including media that might be invented in the future" right?). It's the agent who has the vested interest because a) the agent makes more money the more money the author makes and b) (and this so many people refuse to believe but I don't care because it's true) a quality agent cares about his client, wants his client's books to sell because he is as passionate about the books as the author is.

Aside from all this, there is great piece of mind having an agent make submissions for you, to have someone who knows the industry, knows the people in the industry and knows how to put together a submission. I get to focus on the next book knowing that all that is being taken care of for me. So yes, maybe this book doesn't need an agent to sell it to a publisher (then again, maybe it does), but I get the impression that the OP was looking for more of a long term situation.

I understand that the writing business isn't new to you, and I ought to trust that you know what you are talking about, but it's quite clear that the world of agenting IS new to you. The way you constantly repeat the 15% thing is evidence of that. Only people who have never worked with an agent find that number extravagant and note worthy.

Mark_Young
05-04-2010, 08:36 AM
Further everyone seems to think that a publishing house has the author's best interest in mind, and that an agent is just some evil middle man there to steal the author's hard earned money. The ironic truth is it's the publisher that will try to get an author to sign the most basic contract possible for the smallest advance possible giving them the most rights. It's the agent who negotiates a higher advance, who makes sure that things like e-book rights are carefully addressed (this is an area that I have seen multiple agents blog their frustration about editors about - you do know some contracts offered authors can say something like "and we get rights to everything including media that might be invented in the future" right?).

Um... yeah. I knew all that, every word. Actually I figured it was common knowledge. I can read fine print and ask questions, even going to the dentist office, before I sign anything.



It's the agent who has the vested interest because a) the agent makes more money the more money the author makes and b) (and this so many people refuse to believe but I don't care because it's true) a quality agent cares about his client, wants his client's books to sell because he is as passionate about the books as the author is.

Of course. And good agents aren't rare either.



Aside from all this, there is great piece of mind having an agent make submissions for you, to have someone who knows the industry, knows the people in the industry and knows how to put together a submission. I get to focus on the next book knowing that all that is being taken care of for me. So yes, maybe this book doesn't need an agent to sell it to a publisher (then again, maybe it does), but I get the impression that the OP was looking for more of a long term situation.

I understand that the writing business isn't new to you, and I ought to trust that you know what you are talking about, but it's quite clear that the world of agenting IS new to you. The way you constantly repeat the 15% thing is evidence of that. Only people who have never worked with an agent find that number extravagant and note worthy.


Ah. That's the part I didn't consider: beneficial long-term relationship. This makes sense (which is why I' prefer an agency that are interested in multiple fields because my writing dream is to publish a book in every genre and at least 2 non-fiction. But beggars can't be choosers.).

Terie
05-04-2010, 12:55 PM
Fifteen percent of a larger advance = more money to the author.

For example (and I'm using simple figures here, not necessarily realistic ones, cuz I'm bad in maths :D), let's say I went to a publisher and negotiated a 1,000 advance. My take: 1,000. Now let's say I have an agent, and she makes the deal and negotiates a 10,000 advance. My take: 8,500. Guess which deal I prefer?

Also, as Toothpaste mentioned, foreign rights. Most publishers can't sell nearly as many foreign rights as a good agent can, and the author makes more money on foreign rights.

So even a book that's doing reasonably well self-published might well do better with an agent and a commercial publisher. The author is the one who needs to determine which way to go. In particular, if the book could do well in foreign markets, an agent could make that happen where the author probably can't.

shaldna
05-04-2010, 03:51 PM
Alright, and be honest, how many of those did you buy yourself?

Terie
05-04-2010, 04:00 PM
Alright, and be honest, how many of those did you buy yourself?

He self-published. He bought them all. :)

The point is that he's reselling them to buyers at a high enough volume to be of potential interest.

(Er, or 'she'.)

Rjo
05-04-2010, 04:55 PM
Thanks! the book is a non-fiction title for a niche market--those of you who said "I want to read it!" might not be so quick, because it's a clinical manual for the treatment of rape trauma and sexual abuse. The book has been picked up by treatment centers and university classrooms as a course text, as well as by colleagues and clients; I acknowledge that having a built-in audience in need of the book has helped. It would fit into the self-help/psychology category.

Knowing that the topic is clinical treatment of sexual trauma, still want to read it

No thanks. And I think you have said this in the first place.

Axler
05-04-2010, 07:14 PM
"a recent report by Bowker", with no link and no direct quote, hardly counts as a cite.

Since I cited the source, it does indeed count as a cite. Anybody can look at the same "recent report" and find the "direct quote" I referenced...if they're not too lazy or too askeered to operate a search engine.

Libbie
05-04-2010, 07:21 PM
Since I cited the source, it does indeed count as a cite. Anybody can look at the same "recent report" and find the "direct quote" I referenced...if they're not too lazy or too askeered to operate a search engine.

Keep snapping that pennant.

veinglory
05-04-2010, 07:29 PM
No thanks. And I think you have said this in the first place.

Why? This isn't a promotional post. The only relevance may be that this is a niche audience so the success does not imply a larger market. However I suspect an academic or scientific press might be interested in picking up this title. Someone like Wiley-Blackwell or Oxford University Press (who make many specialist books and handbooks like this).

Axler
05-04-2010, 07:46 PM
Keep snapping that pennant.

I will if you will.

shaldna
05-04-2010, 07:59 PM
He self-published. He bought them all. :)

The point is that he's reselling them to buyers at a high enough volume to be of potential interest.

(Er, or 'she'.)


Ahh. So, the need to resell is there, but not necessarily the interest.

Obviously if he is reselling them sucessfully that's a good sign.

willietheshakes
05-04-2010, 08:58 PM
Since I cited the source, it does indeed count as a cite. Anybody can look at the same "recent report" and find the "direct quote" I referenced...if they're not too lazy or too askeered to operate a search engine.

The point being, YOU made an assertion, and aside from the very vague "recent report by Bowker", you've done absolutely nothing to support it. And no, that's not a cite -- that's nothing more than "I heard this from a guy I know, so it must be true" or "I read it in the Encyclopedia Britannica once, so you should take my word for it".

It's not my responsibility to validate your points, and your failure to provide any reasonable way for someone to actually look at and analyze the material you're "quoting" means that your assertions have no more credibility than "I read it on the interwebs, so it must be true".

But hey, by all means call me lazy or askeered. That sort of thing is typically the last refuge for someone who realizes they don't actually have a leg to stand on.

Wayne K
05-04-2010, 09:03 PM
I just wonder about a self published author who is shy about the title of their book, and still sell like that.

Dude, you need a better sales pitch than "You don't want to read my book"

veinglory
05-04-2010, 09:11 PM
This isn't a sales pitch, it is an 'ask an agent' post.

Axler
05-04-2010, 09:25 PM
And by a pleasant coincidence, it's not my responsibility to prove anything to you... especially when the information is available to anybody who--as I said--can work a search engine.

Just to be clear...I didn't call you lazy or askeered. You're reading into things again.

Nor did I quote anything from the Bowker report.

I mentioned information I read in the Bowker report, which is not the same as making an assertion, beyond the fact I asserted that the information was in the report and I read that selfsame report. Therefore, that makes my reference to the information in that particular Bowker report a citation.

All there is to it.

So what problems are you having here, anyway?

Do you doubt the existence of the Bowker report or that I read the Bowker report or is it that you just disagree--in advance--with anything in the report that might not fit your subjective perceptions about publishing?

If you're so intent on proving me wrong--you're not very clear about what--look up the Bowker report yourself and mine it for your own quotes and citations to prove me wrong--but about what, I still have no idea.

willietheshakes
05-04-2010, 09:33 PM
And by a pleasant coincidence, it's not my responsibility to prove anything to you... especially when the information is available to anybody who--as I said--can work a search engine.

Just to be clear...I didn't call you lazy or askeered. You're reading into things again.

I mentioned information I read in the Bowker report, which is not the same as making an assertion, beyond the fact I asserted that the information was in the report and I read that selfsame report. Therefore, that makes my reference to the information in that particular Bowker report a citation.

All there is to it.

So what problems are you having here, anyway?

Do you doubt the existence of the Bowker report or that I read the Bowker report or is it that you just disagree--in advance--with anything in the report that might not fit your subjective perceptions about publishing?

I'm not having any problems, thanks.

I just don't blithely believe in things that I can't see for myself. And your steadfast refusal to provide a link even out of courtesy isn't doing anything for your credibility.

Nor, for that matter, is your apparent unawareness of what an actual citation is, and how one works, vis a vis intellectual clarity.

Old Hack
05-04-2010, 11:20 PM
It looks to me like we might be heading for a bit of a storm here.

That storm could be very nicely bypassed if Axler simply provided a link to the article he says he cited earlier; and if he doesn't, then we can all let it drop because really, there's no advantage to be gained by us all harping on about it. Not if we're playing nicely.

Meanwhile, those are good sales the OP has made but note, please, all of you, that they're for a pretty specialised subject area, it's a non-fiction book, and that the OP seems to have access to its niche market. Do not assume that fiction would do so well; and do not assume that even sales of this magnitude would garner a positive response from an agent or editor, as I've seen many of them demand sales in excess of 10,000 in order to interest them in a self-published book.

Axler
05-04-2010, 11:40 PM
I cited the information in the Bowker report. I cited that information because I had read that report. My obligation does not extend any further than that since I'm not referencing secret or arcane knowledge that is difficult to locate. Quite the contrary.

You made the quantum leap in illogic that because I cited the information in the report I was therefore making a point, when I patently was not.

You argued further that my non existent point had no validity...which of course makes your argument stupendously invalid. I had made no point so there was no point to argue, except a retreat into a difference of opinion about what constitutes a citation.

Your point seems to be that you won't believe in the existence of the Bowker report because you refuse to seek it out for yourself.

If there was an asteroid in Earth orbit the size of Delaware, it would still be there regardless of your steadfast refusal to go outside and look up.

Intellectual clarity, indeed.

This little medley you started with me over what--according to your most recent post--amounts to semantics is starting to have a whiff of bullying about it.

Maybe we should take this private.

amergina
05-05-2010, 12:49 AM
Cheese Louise!

http://www.bowker.com/index.php/press-releases/616-bowker-reports-traditional-us-book-production-flat-in-2009

Axler
05-05-2010, 01:02 AM
See how easy it is when you know how?

willietheshakes
05-05-2010, 01:05 AM
I cited the information in the Bowker report. I cited that information because I had read that report. My obligation does not extend any further than that since I'm not referencing secret or arcane knowledge that is difficult to locate. Quite the contrary.

You made the quantum leap in illogic that because I cited the information in the report I was therefore making a point, when I patently was not.

You argued further that my non existent point had no validity...which of course makes your argument stupendously invalid. I had made no point so there was no point to argue, except a retreat into a difference of opinion about what constitutes a citation.

Your point seems to be that you won't believe in the existence of the Bowker report because you refuse to seek it out for yourself.

If there was an asteroid in Earth orbit the size of Delaware, it would still be there regardless of your steadfast refusal to go outside and look up.

Intellectual clarity, indeed.

This little medley you started with me over what--according to your most recent post--amounts to semantics is starting to have a whiff of bullying about it.

Maybe we should take this private.

Nope, no bullying.

If you don't want to have credibility as others understand it, that's just fine by me. You'll note that I wasn't the only person to ask for a cite and to be frustrated when you wouldn't provide one.

That's fine. You didn't have a point, so you didn't need to support it. Rock on.

willietheshakes
05-05-2010, 01:06 AM
See how easy it is when you know how?

Aww, you're so sweet when you attempt to be condescending.

But at no point was the issue my not being able to find the report.

Soccer Mom
05-05-2010, 01:17 AM
Knock it off. Stop hijacking the OP's thread. Axler? Stop playing coy. It isn't flattering. If you make an assertion and someone asks for the link, just offer it. This drama was very unnecessary. I've cut out the snippy bits and sent them off to camp.

Back to our topic now. Any more OT sniping will be ported to the Landfill.

Axler
05-05-2010, 01:32 AM
I didn't hijack the thread. I made a comment quite a few posts ago which was definitely on-topic, in direct response to another post.

If the topic went in another direction than it was initially intended, hey...I didn't grab the controls.

I even suggested to Willie that he and I take this "discussion" private so as to keep the thread from being further derailed. He declined.

Point of fact--nobody asked me for a link to the Bowker report. Not you, not Willie, not nobody.

There were a couple of sneery challenges...but they don't count.

Anyone asks me for something, I'm happy to cooperate.

As you said...back to the topic. I'm done here.

CaoPaux
05-05-2010, 02:03 AM
Yes, you are. For a week, this time.

ETA: I've restored the posts for the sake of context. (With apologies and great gratitude to Soccer Mom for steppin' in while I was Elsewhere.)

CaoPaux
05-05-2010, 05:35 AM
Cheese Louise!

http://www.bowker.com/index.php/press-releases/616-bowker-reports-traditional-us-book-production-flat-in-2009Well, waddya know. Writer Beware analyzes the figures therein: http://accrispin.blogspot.com/2010/05/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics.html

Cathy C
05-05-2010, 06:01 AM
EmpoweredOKC, you might have a real good seller here, specifically BECAUSE it's a niche. And it's a niche where there's little competition. If you've sold 3,000 to clinics, there are another 3,000 colleges and libraries that a publisher could reach. That would be enough to pay production costs and a solid print run, plus a nice advance. Now, the question would be what publisher would be best suited? It might be a University Press could handle this nicely, and be in a position to sell it to the right people. UPs are typically second-tier markets, in an agent's eyes, with little available in the budget for an advance, so let's look at bigger fish. McGraw-Hill Business could be a good fit too and an agent would be happy to sell to them.

Yeah, I think you need to approach a few agents who already work in medical texts and/or self-help (although this really isn't self-helpish as much as, as you say, a clinical guide.) I could float you a few names if it would help. But I agree it's time for you to take this book to the next level. You're in a rare position that you CAN, so my opinion is go for it! :snoopy:

Stacia Kane
05-05-2010, 07:10 AM
Dittoing Cathy. 3k isn't stupendous as far as attracting publishers, but the fact that it's niche, it's growing, and it's good enough to attract colleges makes me think it's definitely something an academic publisher might like to get its hands on.

And really? As I've said to others, the worst that can happen is they'll say no. Agents aren't going to hunt you down and shoot you for having the temerity to query them.

Just emphasize in your query that colleges are starting to use it as a textbook, and that you do own all the rights, and you're looking to move to the next level. Along with your credentials of course. ;)

Good luck! I think it sounds fascinating, actually, and like something I'd find useful.