"The Report" (imperical data on self publishing $)

[Serack]

Published 2/12/14, this seems to be making pretty big waves among publishing and author circles:

http://authorearnings.com/the-report/

[Orbweaver]

Some important follow-up discussion can be found here: http://lonetrout.com/authorearnings/

[meg_evonne]

Both interesting sites and data. I also wish the 1st report hadn't started with the rating score comparisons. The 2nd addresses it well.

As a life long sales person and in regards to same rating issue, I don't think it's that complicated. I am far more likely to rate and rate slightly higher the little guy. The big fish will do fine no matter what. Therefore I invest my time and support for the little guy. The buyers of indie's know that survival in a tough market needs our support. Of course you still have to have quality product.

The premise I can't get over is, if you have a name then readers will find you, readers will find you. However, unless you become a marketing guru, getting reviews into traditional reviewing sites still seems the best way to obtain initial recognition.this is the last big lock traditii Al houses have on the little guy. Anyone have an answer for me on that one?

Also the largest gap I see in quality is in the professional editing step. It gets short shift or no real attention by many (most) self-publishers? Any thoughts on that issue?

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

Also the largest gap I see in quality is in the professional editing step. It gets short shift or no real attention by many (most) self-publishers? Any thoughts on that issue?

The anecdotal evidence I have from people doing editing for non-traditional publishers is that it drives them crazy to be in a position where they're not given time to edit properly or where authors without even a basic grasp of grammar get to overrule them, fwiw.

[Serack]

Here's a thoughtful post that throughly discusses the shortcomings of "The Report" in what appears to be a truely fair and unbiased manor.  (I wish I were a better speller...)

http://dearauthor.com/ebooks/how-not-to-lie-with-statistics/

Both interesting sites and data. I also wish the 1st report hadn't started with the rating score comparisons. The 2nd addresses it well.

I saw an excellent commentary that blew that score comparison out of the water.  Using the original data I believe

[The Deposed King]

I'm quite interested in knowing how much authors make per book indie versus traditional.

However realizing this is most likely impossible....

I will say, it look to me like its production, production, production.  If you've a big backlist your base income will be much higher, un-respective, of how much you make in the initial couple (1-2) month sales.

As an example:
Ignoring his #1 amazon best seller, I'm mainly jealous of Chris Nuttal's 34 book back list, mainly because it took him 34 books to get to that top seller.  I'm sure there are other ways to win.  But as far as I'm concerned, grinding out the books will get you there.

I will say, as an author whose been in the Amazon Rank 900+ that as far as I can see (keeping in mind I've only really ever gotten as high as the 900-1000 rankings) that they look fairly accurate.  And 2.99 gets you about 2 bucks a book.  Also my experience has shown that you get most of your blow out sales (after you're first book gets noticed) in the first 4-5 weeks.  And frankly once my first book got noticed up about 3-4 months after I published it, I had the same 1-2 months of hot and heavy sales before it petered off.  Now the first book only ever got to peak sales of 50 a day.  While my latest book 120+

I've also seen that in my series.  I get a 50-70% buy through rate from my first book to my 2nd.  And that if they buy the second its pretty much a lock they're going to buy the rest.  I think its like 90% that do the second buy the third and the third to fourth to fifth just pretty much plain buy them all straight through.  Also sales in my last book in the series bump everything.  I go from 1-3 sales on my first book, after things have died down, to low teens after my latest mainline book has caught.  With spikes in the low twenties.  And my follow through sales actually get higher percentages when my sales are low.  Versus when they are high and this I attribute to being more highly visible on the search lists, when you have half a dozen books showing up on the top 100 lists.  Versus when you're being found by people with keyword searches, or also bought.

For instance its been since november I published a book and sales had dropped like a rock this month.   But the buy through from books 1-4 is incredible.

Sales -
Book 1 = 75
Book 2 = 75
Book 3 = 79
Book 4 = 80

With only one day to go in the month.

Anyways sorry if I hi-jacked your thread as this is supposed to be more of an imperical data thing.

 



The Deposed King

[Shecky]

The anecdotal evidence I have from people doing editing for non-traditional publishers is that it drives them crazy to be in a position where they're not given time to edit properly or where authors without even a basic grasp of grammar get to overrule them, fwiw.

As a freelance copyeditor who has done work for the entire spectrum of the trad-to-self-pubbed, I can attest that it's usually the traditional publishers that leave less time to do the work. Also, the self-pubbers who actually look for professional-level editing are both more aware of the basic mechanics and more likely to accept both corrections and suggestions. It's an expensive proposition, paying for the full gamut of editing services yourself up front, but the ones I've worked with all view it as a sound investment. This, of course, doesn't address the ones who don't look for editing services or don't want to pay for them, which is why there's been talk of offering a "Professionally Edited" tag for self-pubbers who bite the bullet and choose the full-editing route, so that potential readers can at least know that it won't be a grammatical or storyline nightmare (story may still suck, but this happens along that entire aforementioned spectrum ).

[meg_evonne]

...there's been talk of offering a "Professionally Edited" tag for self-pubbers who bite the bullet and choose the full-editing route, so that potential readers can at least know that it won't be a grammatical or storyline nightmare (story may still suck, but this happens along that entire aforementioned spectrum ).

This offers two advantages. First, I'd be far more likely to pick up a debut author and, second, it might get a list of professional editors and an chance to see their work. I'd love to have editor's names listed right beside the author's or on the e-book flap for example. I've long thought that there is an illusive editor out there that I love. I'll adore an author and then, boom it turns to trash. It also explains my strange eclectic book shopping and genres...

The anecdotal evidence I have from people doing editing for non-traditional publishers is that it drives them crazy to be in a position where they're not given time to edit properly or where authors without even a basic grasp of grammar get to overrule them, fwiw.

  Lost suspected.

As to DK's interesting number crunching, wow. I actually understood it too, but sigh at the thought of having to track those numbers... :-)

[superpsycho]

In publishing, the issue boils down to volume. Unless an e-book is a surprise hit, the marketing reach of traditional publishing means their volume will be multiple times more than the vast majority of e-books.

Traditional publishing gives you two major advantages. The first is that marketing reach; everything from print ad space, to book signing and the talk show circuit. Second, is the support they provide to the Author's in developing their skills, including professional editing.

The total volume of e-books is up but it's divided among a lot of books. So, except for a few noted exceptions, the average individual traditional published book will have a higher volume of sales compared to the average individual e-book.

[Shecky]

In publishing, the issue boils down to volume. Unless an e-book is a surprise hit, the marketing reach of traditional publishing means their volume will be multiple times more than the vast majority of e-books.

Traditional publishing gives you two major advantages. The first is that marketing reach; everything from print ad space, to book signing and the talk show circuit. Second, is the support they provide to the Author's in developing their skills, including professional editing.

The total volume of e-books is up but it's divided among a lot of books. So, except for a few noted exceptions, the average individual traditional published book will have a higher volume of sales compared to the average individual e-book.

Trad-pub "marketing" is far less advertising (what most of the general public thinks of as "marketing") and much more the ability to get shelf space (whether physical or virtual). Just having it out there where people can see it makes it far more likely to catch someone's attention. That being said, the rapidly inflating presence of social media's word-of-mouth effect is really starting to make inroads on those and other aspects of marketing, and word of mouth is the wild card in all of this.

It's a big, nebulous, churning, rapidly evolving world in publishing right now, and trad pub is working hard to incorporate those changes. Will it succeed? Says the Magic 8-ball, "RESULT UNCLEAR." We'll see.

[superpsycho]

Trad-pub "marketing" is far less advertising (what most of the general public thinks of as "marketing") and much more the ability to get shelf space (whether physical or virtual). Just having it out there where people can see it makes it far more likely to catch someone's attention. That being said, the rapidly inflating presence of social media's word-of-mouth effect is really starting to make inroads on those and other aspects of marketing, and word of mouth is the wild card in all of this.

It's a big, nebulous, churning, rapidly evolving world in publishing right now, and trad pub is working hard to incorporate those changes. Will it succeed? Says the Magic 8-ball, "RESULT UNCLEAR." We'll see.

Visibility is what marketing is all about, whether a storefront, self space or facebook. The difference is publishers will do it for you, while a self-publisher, either hires someone or they do it themselves. Automatically, as a self-publisher you don't have access to a lot of channels because you haven't got the connections or pull. Yes, you can use social media but that's a lot of work and can be very time consuming. It also requires some knowledge of what you're doing or your chances of success are small. Yes it can be done but only if you willing to stick to it.

The problem for a writer, is doing it yourself means being taken away from the writing and perfecting your craft. Most people starting out are both writing and working at a day job. They have little time to spend on getting the word out or learning the 'ins and outs' of the web. Again that doesn't mean it can't be done but it helps to have friends, family or belong to a group that can bring their talents and knowledge together. A friend that's into social media can help spread the word. Another that knows websites can help with a blog.

Marketing takes man-hours and a minimum understanding of the channels you're working. It's part of what a publisher does. Self-publishers are starting from scratch. The chances of getting recognized by a publisher are small for beginners. Self-publishing gives people a chance to get noticed and succeed where they couldn't otherwise. But the odds that you'll make big money doing it are small.

[The Deposed King]

Visibility is what marketing is all about, whether a storefront, self space or facebook. The difference is publishers will do it for you, while a self-publisher, either hires someone or they do it themselves. Automatically, as a self-publisher you don't have access to a lot of channels because you haven't got the connections or pull. Yes, you can use social media but that's a lot of work and can be very time consuming. It also requires some knowledge of what you're doing or your chances of success are small. Yes it can be done but only if you willing to stick to it.

The problem for a writer, is doing it yourself means being taken away from the writing and perfecting your craft. Most people starting out are both writing and working at a day job. They have little time to spend on getting the word out or learning the 'ins and outs' of the web. Again that doesn't mean it can't be done but it helps to have friends, family or belong to a group that can bring their talents and knowledge together. A friend that's into social media can help spread the word. Another that knows websites can help with a blog.

Marketing takes man-hours and a minimum understanding of the channels you're working. It's part of what a publisher does. Self-publishers are starting from scratch. The chances of getting recognized by a publisher are small for beginners. Self-publishing gives people a chance to get noticed and succeed where they couldn't otherwise. But the odds that you'll make big money doing it are small.

I'm perhaps biased.  Having succeeded with the whole, if you build it they will come philosophy.  Even if you start with a really campy cover.  For me it only took a few months, with a decent enough book but one that was by no means without any number of editing flaws still in need of work, and I was organically generating a peak sales of 50 a day.

Now I'm sure that if you work facebook and the internet and all your advertising options you can hit it bigger than I did and a lot faster too.  That said I still believe there is a way/chance to make it organically without great advertising skill in the self-publishing genre.

Sure its faster, quicker and possibly more certain you'll get your look, than if you throw yourself on the mercy of the amazon's organic search system.  But even so....

Lets just say that my first book had all kind of errors upon release and no advertising or internet foot presence and still found its way to working author success.




The Deposed King

[superpsycho]

I'm perhaps biased.  Having succeeded with the whole, if you build it they will come philosophy.  Even if you start with a really campy cover.  For me it only took a few months, with a decent enough book but one that was by no means without any number of editing flaws still in need of work, and I was organically generating a peak sales of 50 a day.

Now I'm sure that if you work facebook and the internet and all your advertising options you can hit it bigger than I did and a lot faster too.  That said I still believe there is a way/chance to make it organically without great advertising skill in the self-publishing genre.

Sure its faster, quicker and possibly more certain you'll get your look, than if you throw yourself on the mercy of the amazon's organic search system.  But even so....

Lets just say that my first book had all kind of errors upon release and no advertising or internet foot presence and still found its way to working author success.

The Deposed King

You're a decent story teller and with your brother's help, you've been able to get your work up to a level people enjoy reading. Even with the errors in the first book, the story was there and you continue to sharpen your skills. But I doubt if you're making a ton of money. People view success differently. To some any sales at all is a success. For others it's being able to pay the bills each month. If the majority of your reviews are positive, that can certainly be considered a success, it all depends on your expectations.

If a writer is prolific enough and can tell a decent story, they can make a good living doing nothing but book e-books. And there are a lot of traditional published writers who don't make big money either. However, I would guess that most e-book authors are hoping to be picked up by a publisher at some point.

As you know, I have a lot of respect for aspiring authors and do what I can to help and encourage them to succeed but I don't tell anyone it's easy. I think you'll agree that often the hardest part for many, is just getting a story finished.

[Sully]

Conversely, The Deposed King, I know a couple somebodies who have several books on Kindle who haven't had much success at all, despite being definitely readable, and making an attempt at advertising.

[superpsycho]

Conversely, The Deposed King, I know a couple somebodies who have several books on Kindle who haven't had much success at all, despite being definitely readable, and making an attempt at advertising.

There are variables. A book may be readable but compared to other books in the genre it doesn't standout or that market is saturated --more authors than readers.

It's the same with advertising, there's a lot of factors that go into marketing. It's just not a good ad but where it's placed. Just putting up a blog isn't enough, who have to know how to get search engines to the page.

One of the best ways to get a book on Amazon started, is make the first day free, so all your friends and family can get it. Then they can do reviews over the following week or two after the book's release. If the reviews make the book sound interesting, and the first people that buy it agree (and right more reviews) then it might pick up speed from there.

The author should pay attention to the reviews, good and bad. That way you're always improving and correcting the weak areas with each new book. Just readability often isn't enough. There has to be some emotion for the reader at the end of the book. The first, is that it was satisfying.