A Different Best-Selling Perspective

Thanks for posting that article, it was very interesting, and I think everyone considering self-publishing should take the time to read the whole thing.

A couple of things puzzled me though. I don't think she really went "all in" with self-publishing and has enough data to compare the two (for herself). The first self-pub project she talked about she said the work she put out wasn't properly edited.

But those are only minor points and it's a good, balanced article. She said she plans to self-pub other stuff (while still publishing stuff through trade houses). It will be interesting to see her views in six months, whether she is more or less in favour of self-publishing after she has put out another couple of releases.

Thanks for the link,

Dave

dgaughran said:

A couple of things puzzled me though. I don't think she really went "all in" with self-publishing and has enough data to compare the two (for herself). The first self-pub project she talked about she said the work she put out wasn't properly edited.

Click to expand...

She did put out another book with two other authors, and included the numbers for that so far.

I did wonder, at times, if she was referring to self-pub-e-books or just e-publishing in general - as here:

We are not leaving traditional publishing any time soon. But we’re not ignoring e-publishing either.

But overall, she touched on so many things a writer (self-pub or commercial) should know about the publishing business - worthwhile reading without doubt.

Awesome article. Thanks for the link. I definitely think that should be required reading, too. Lots of good info there.

Interesting, and a different view. Thanks.

I still think she missed the main point of Konrath's posts - which is why should you give up royalties when you can contract out these same people?

So, really that should be the main argument. Is it more productive to contract out for editors, etc? Or is it more productive to give away a share of your profits.

For unknown authors the latter is the resounding answer, but they also have another choice - and that's the DIY route. Established authors should never go the DIY route because, like she said - she has a reputation. But new authors often don't have a choice. They can either wait around for someone to pick them up or they can get busy.

I can totally see her argument though - if you're an established author and get consistent money and book deals that easily pay for your lifestyle and you don't care about trying to make more money, then there's no reason to rock the boat. Why cause upheaval and stress when the status quo is perfect as it stands?

But some people aren't making enough money to support their lifestyle so they need to take risks in order to increase the possibility of payout.

(And just FYI - Konrath had the same editing issue when he slapped up his Newbies Guide on Amazon - some people were appalled at the lack of proper editing)

ColoradoMom said:

Established authors should never go the DIY route because, like she said - she has a reputation.

Click to expand...

I think you can maintain a reputation and go DIY, as long as you remain committed to producing quality work. I think the stigma of self-publishing is changing. Sure, there are plenty of poorly edited, designed and formatted books, but there are more and more savvy authors entering the field.

I've been thinking about the amount of new ebooks and PODs made available daily, and I think, like most things, the cream will rise and the crap will settle, and readers will still be able to find quality work.

Chaos,

Thanks. Great article.


ColoradoMom,

You say that the following should be the main arguement. I not only disagree, but can't understand why you would conclude what others should think.

"I still think she missed the point of Konrath's posts - which is why should you give up royalties when you can contract out these same people?"

TMarchini said:

Sure, there are plenty of poorly edited, designed and formatted books, but there are more and more savvy authors entering the field.

I've been thinking about the amount of new ebooks and PODs made available daily, and I think, like most things, the cream will rise and the crap will settle, and readers will still be able to find quality work.

Click to expand...

From what I can see, there are also many more unsaavy authors entering the field then ever before. Writers who are simply looking for a quick fix (self-pubication in some form) but whose work doesn't warrant publication in any form.

Don't you think that today, more than ever before, it's harder for the cream to rise to the top because of the quantity of crap that's in the way?

ColoradoMom said:

I still think she missed the main point of Konrath's posts - which is why should you give up royalties when you can contract out these same people?

So, really that should be the main argument. Is it more productive to contract out for editors, etc? Or is it more productive to give away a share of your profits.

Click to expand...

It's lovely that you have the money upfront to hire a high-quality cover artist, a copy editor and a content editor, a marketing expert/publicist, a printer, and all the other people that go into making a book successful, but not all of us do.

Also it would take me quite a while to work out how to get bricks-and-mortar bookstores to carry my books, it I ever figured it out at all. It is quite reasonable to leave the publishing side of things to a publisher if you can or don't want to learn/pay for it up front. And publishers have an economy of scale that may well allow them to get these things quicker and cheaper than I could even after years of study.

It's a matter of horses for courses.

zegota said:

It's lovely that you have the money upfront to hire a high-quality cover artist, a copy editor and a content editor, a marketing expert/publicist, a printer, and all the other people that go into making a book successful, but not all of us do.

Click to expand...

But if her publisher sells as few as 10,000 ebooks at $4.99 each, she's just paid them $25,000 for those services. That seems a bit excessive.

I can understand her wanting to stay with what she knows rather than to take a risk on something new that might cost her livelihood if it doesn't work out, but her financial numbers don't really make sense to me. Yes, hiring those people will cost a significant amount of money, but much less than the publisher's cut of royalties on a popular book. Or even a not-that-popular-but-not-hopelessly-bad book.

movieman said:

But if her publisher sells as few as 10,000 ebooks at $4.99 each, she's just paid them $25,000 for those services. That seems a bit excessive.

I can understand her wanting to stay with what she knows rather than to take a risk on something new that might cost her livelihood if it doesn't work out, but her financial numbers don't really make sense to me. Yes, hiring those people will cost a significant amount of money, but much less than the publisher's cut of royalties on a popular book. Or even a not-that-popular-but-not-hopelessly-bad book.

Click to expand...

There is a difference between real cost and opportunity cost. If someone offers me ten million dollars if I can pay them one million dollars, and I can't oblige, you wouldn't really said I "lost" any money.

Likewise, it's not quite right to say the choice is between paying $5000 for a self-publisher, or $25,000 for a traditional publisher. The choice is paying a $5000 real, out-of-pocket cost, or paying no real cost, but losing out on a greater opportunity cost. For those who truly can make the choice, than obviously the contractors are a better long-term choice (assuming, of course, that you can get the same quality of service, which is something I have yet to see proven).

However, for most authors, the choice is made for us. We don't have $5000 and all the time required to put into a risky venture. Most of us are lucky to steal an hour or two to write a day alongside our day jobs.

zegota said:

However, for most authors, the choice is made for us. We don't have $5000 and all the time required to put into a risky venture.

Click to expand...

And you won't have it so long as you're paying the publisher two to three times as much as you make on each ebook sale.

Not to point out the obvious, but publishers do more than just "publish" the book.

There's connections with agents and bookstores and advertising both inside the publisher with books of the same genre and outside with being able to offer deals such as free books for a limited time, contests with other authors and so forth.

Many people really have no idea what a publisher does, from what I've seen here and elsewhere. A good publisher does a lot more than just slap a cover on it, toss an editor at the manuscript and send it out into the big wide world.

But what do I know...

Sheryl Nantus said:

Not to point out the obvious, but publishers do more than just "publish" the book.

Click to expand...

It's possible that some didn't read the entire blog, which listed (almost) all the people involved and what they did... all of which have to be handled/paid for by the self-publisher. If people think that's 'nothing', it will no doubt be reflected in their finished work...

Sheryl Nantus said:

Not to point out the obvious, but publishers do more than just "publish" the book.

Click to expand...

And, as pointed out, that was covered in the blog.

I don't think anyone would deny that traditional publishing is likely to be the best solution if you want books in print, because self-publishing fiction is close to impossible in that market. But ebooks are a very different market and currently the royalties are massively biased to the publisher rather than the author.

TMarchini said:

I think you can maintain a reputation and go DIY, as long as you remain committed to producing quality work.

Click to expand...

I mean, like she was referring to, with editing herself and doing her own cover... I do all that stuff but if I was big time I'd hire people for sure.

movieman said:

And, as pointed out, that was covered in the blog.

I don't think anyone would deny that traditional publishing is likely to be the best solution if you want books in print, because self-publishing fiction is close to impossible in that market. But ebooks are a very different market and currently the royalties are massively biased to the publisher rather than the author.

Click to expand...

depends on the publisher.

scope said:

Chaos,

Thanks. Great article.


ColoradoMom,

You say that the following should be the main arguement. I not only disagree, but can't understand why you would conclude what others should think.

"I still think she missed the point of Konrath's posts - which is why should you give up royalties when you can contract out these same people?"

Click to expand...

Uh - it's called an OPINION. Her point was ... why should she do all the work when she has all these fabulous people to do it for her - and my counter was - why give up those people? Why not just hire them yourself?

Not rocket science.

zegota said:

It's lovely that you have the money upfront to hire a high-quality cover artist, a copy editor and a content editor, a marketing expert/publicist, a printer, and all the other people that go into making a book successful, but not all of us do.

Click to expand...

Uh, yeah. LOL...I'm not sure I should even respond because obviously you didn't read my post...but here goes...

Listen carefully - I AM A PUBLISHER THAT DOES IT ALL MYSELF. HOWEVER, IF I WERE IN A POSITION TO HAVE CONSTANT MONEY COMING IN FROM 20 YEARS OF PUBLISHED FICTION WRITING I'D HIRE THOSE EXCELLENTE PEOPLE INSTEAD.

Clear? Good.

movieman said:

But if her publisher sells as few as 10,000 ebooks at $4.99 each, she's just paid them $25,000 for those services. That seems a bit excessive.

I can understand her wanting to stay with what she knows rather than to take a risk on something new that might cost her livelihood if it doesn't work out, but her financial numbers don't really make sense to me. Yes, hiring those people will cost a significant amount of money, but much less than the publisher's cut of royalties on a popular book. Or even a not-that-popular-but-not-hopelessly-bad book.

Click to expand...

Isn't that $25,000 more than she would have been able to generate by herself? Let's forget the 'buts'.

And as for your second paragraph, it makes no sense for the very reason you state: "I can understand her wanting to stay with what she knows rather than to take a risk on something new that might cost her livelihood if it doesn't work out...." The fact that her financial numbers don't make sense to you is immaterial.

ColoradoMom said:

Uh - it's called an OPINION. Her point was ... why should she do all the work when she has all these fabulous people to do it for her - and my counter was - why give up those people? Why not just hire them yourself?

Not rocket science.

Click to expand...

Well, the simplest answer is that many, if not all, of those people work for the publisher, not freelance.

Sheryl Nantus said:

depends on the publisher.

Click to expand...

It's true for most large publishers, though.

That's actually the strongest argument for going with a small press these days. The profit split tends to be much more equitable with a small press - often a 50-50 split between publisher and author, instead of 75-25 as is the norm for larger presses. No 15% agent fee helps, too.

I do think this is one thing which will almost certainly change for large presses, though. Royalty split will become more even. As ebook sales percent grows, small presses will be able to distribute even more widely than they already can, and the value of going large press will diminish. Large press royalties will (I think) be forced to increase in order to compete.