tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post2695386306090702166..comments2024-03-28T02:00:11.260-05:00Comments on A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: More KonrantsJA Konrathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-15444968715872224232014-07-02T13:53:20.215-05:002014-07-02T13:53:20.215-05:00Does that make you the new gatekeeper of ebook pub...<i>Does that make you the new gatekeeper of ebook publishing?</i><br /><br />LOL, no. We're following BookBub's path: if a book has under a three star average, or reviews saying it has typos or poor formatting, we won't offer it in our catalog.<br /><br />Publishers are good for getting paper into stores. As gatekeepers, not so much.<br /><br />ORIGIN was rejected by every major publishers. I think that book got over 30 rejections.<br /><br />I've sold 90,000 copies on my own. Which is more than Hyperion sold of any individual Jack Daniels title.JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-51051626409911913982014-07-02T11:39:12.171-05:002014-07-02T11:39:12.171-05:00Oh, that's funny. I guess the fact that I'...Oh, that's funny. I guess the fact that I've seen the exact same thing from traditionally published books would mean that they suck at their role?T,.L, Knightonhttp://tlknighton.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-63730853404790786052014-07-02T11:09:35.540-05:002014-07-02T11:09:35.540-05:00Hi Joe
I saw this clause on your new website
htt...Hi Joe<br /><br />I saw this clause on your new website<br /><br />http://ebooksareforever.com/faq/<br /><br />Posing questions from libraries it says, "We've seen ebooks that aren't well written, aren't edited, or aren't even formatted correctly. Does eBooksAreForever vet titles?"<br /><br />And your answer is:<br /><br />"Yes. All titles we offer must meet a minimum quality standard. We refuse to sell you poorly produced ebooks."<br /><br />Does that make you the new gatekeeper of ebook publishing?<br /><br />I guess Traditional Publishers do something useful after all. :-)<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-78685723122205763492014-07-02T05:54:03.933-05:002014-07-02T05:54:03.933-05:00"So... is Mr. Zahcarius saying that those fig..."So... is Mr. Zahcarius saying that those figures "serious money" for the person who WROTE the book, but NOT serious money for the company whose investment was to allow an indie author use of a single web page of a massive retail system?<br /><br />Or did he not do the math and realize that every time a book sells on Amazon, the company (which sells –millions- of books) is making as much as one of his author's makes every time one of her books sells?<br /><br />Or did he mean that a retail business "should" earn MORE from a book's sale than the book's AUTHOR earns from it? "<br /><br />This comments is made of so much win that it should be written in all caps. Thank you, Laura, for it.Elkanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-91977329075363917442014-07-02T04:54:10.373-05:002014-07-02T04:54:10.373-05:00One reason Mike doesn't get many comments at h...One reason Mike doesn't get many comments at his blog is that he's a class A A-hole. When the original Justice Department lawsuit was filed, and he wrote something claiming that there was no collusion involved, I left a comment stating that it was a pretty obvious prima fascia case of collusion. He proceeded to excoriate me to no ends, claiming that the case would be thrown out of court. I, of course, told him that would never happen, and that the publishers would clearly lose if that's the way they intended to stonewall the case. He told me I was crazy and had no basis whatsoever for my arguments, so I left, realizing this guy has no ability to reason through even the most obvious points of an evidentiary argument. And of course the publishers lost that case famously, but he still continues to opine on these matters with total confidence that he's right once again. And I predict that no matter how things turn out, he'll continue to claim that he's been right all along, and will continue to be right on all things in the future. Largely because he has no ability to admit past failures on either his part or the industry's.<br /><br />And for that he should be thanked. He's an example of why self-publishers are winning and will continue to gain ground on the ignorant know-it-alls who pass for experts in the publishing industry. As Gandhi said, first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Broken Yogihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02257804418740860542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-48553466356458661742014-07-02T00:59:55.597-05:002014-07-02T00:59:55.597-05:00Joe: "First, publishers had the capital and m...Joe: "First, publishers had the capital and means to INVENT A DAMN EREADER A DECADE AGO."<br /><br />Now now, they did go and create that awesome book discovery website.<br /><br />You know? Bookish?<br /><br />*crickets*<br /><br />Yeah, Bookish is the Big X version of Amazon. That's as far as their technological reach extends.Jim Selfhttp://www.jaself.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-5213809808388839892014-07-01T15:28:50.943-05:002014-07-01T15:28:50.943-05:00Joe, thanks so much for fisking the Salon article ...Joe, thanks so much for fisking the Salon article - I was hoping to hear your input on that pile of drivel!<br /><br />Hope you had a terrific vacation, but I'm glad you didn't stay away too long! There are many of us who miss your particular brand of snark. ;)<br /><br />More than that, though, thank you so much for being the innovator and forward-thinker you are. I'm planning to self-publish my first novel by the end of the year, and reading your blog (and Hugh Howey's, David Gaughran's, Lindsay Buroker's, and all of the other wonderful self-publishing enthusiasts) encourages me to keep going even when the going gets tough. I can't wait to be a proud member of the self-published gang!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17098693994966002376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-84600042800520756862014-07-01T14:02:39.012-05:002014-07-01T14:02:39.012-05:00I agree, Alan. I wonder who they are. I figure the...I agree, Alan. I wonder who they are. I figure they are newbies who wander over to Absolute Write, or old timers who can't wrap their minds around all the changes. <br /><br />I can't imagine the generation coming of age after youtube wanting to wait years to be sifted by agents and editors.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-32166150800483419622014-07-01T13:47:11.127-05:002014-07-01T13:47:11.127-05:00That there remains so many authors querying agents...That there remains so many authors querying agents is somewhat depressing. Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-35372119216637959962014-07-01T13:46:31.883-05:002014-07-01T13:46:31.883-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Alan Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12265515535005420739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-22942909326626050812014-07-01T12:27:31.848-05:002014-07-01T12:27:31.848-05:00Wow! I just read this comment over on Hugh's s...Wow! I just read this comment over on Hugh's site and I had to bring it over.<br /><br />Karl Fields said:<br /><i>Hugh,<br /><br />I don’t think you took it far enough when talking about flukes. It’s become somewhat popular for agents to post their year-end query stats. Here are just a few from 2013:<br /><br />Sara LaPolla – signed two clients out of 3,206 queries received, or .0006 percent<br />Rachel Dahl – 2/3914 (.0005)<br />Jennifer Jackson – 2/6152 (.0003)<br />Natalie Lakosil – 5/2244 (.002) Clearly an outlier ;-)<br /><br />Forget being on an end cap, just getting an agent is something of a fluke.<br /></i><br /><br /><br />Hugh added that his agent signs roughly two new clients a year.<br /><br />!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br /><br />So, yeah, getting an agent and a traditional publishing deal is an "option" alright....yikes. I can't imagine how hard it must have been on authors before the indie option came along.<br /><br />Veronica - Eloheimhttp://www.levelsofcreating.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-87283913106713349502014-07-01T10:46:58.020-05:002014-07-01T10:46:58.020-05:00Am I the only one who looks forward to being pirat...Am I the only one who looks forward to being pirated? Isn't that a sign you've really hit the big time?! =PAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02497429873920084060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-5574316003688521102014-07-01T09:33:11.077-05:002014-07-01T09:33:11.077-05:00One more comment -- Joe, you were right about how ...One more comment -- Joe, you were right about how there are not hoards of traditionally publishing writers coming here and defending publishers.<br /><br />In fact, what happens, is because you allow for anonymous posting, we come here and post our dissatisfaction with publishers.<br /><br />I am traditionally published, but for the kinds of books I take to my publisher, I still need a publisher. My last book sold thousands of copies in hardcover, but almost nothing in ebook form. Some forms of books, mostly illustrated, certain kinds of children's, and coffee-table type gift books, definitely sell hardcover but not ebook.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-5729413823145212332014-07-01T09:30:24.432-05:002014-07-01T09:30:24.432-05:00Okay, I can't quickly find the second comment ...Okay, I can't quickly find the second comment which struck me, so maybe it was somewhere in the comment section.<br /><br />But he said, basically, that what Indies and authors don't understand is it's much easier for a publisher to get a title that's moving well to sell more copies than it is to get a slow-moving title to sell more copies.<br /><br />That was the justification for what so frustrates traditionally published authors: Publishers put a lot out there, see what sells, and gets behind those titles, and ignores the others.<br /><br />I totally get it from the publisher's viewpoint. Yes, of course it's easier to sell more copies of a book already moving than to jump start one that isn't doing much.<br /><br />But if he just admitted to the spaghetti theory, isn't that saying it's a bad deal for authors?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-19504981318286934442014-07-01T09:24:58.023-05:002014-07-01T09:24:58.023-05:00There were two things Shatzkin said that I thought...There were two things Shatzkin said that I thought were eye-opening. First was this:<br /><br />"Remember, in physical retail, selection was the magnet. The books that didn’t sell were helping to pull in the customers for the books that did sell. Stores knew that too. Later work I did demonstrated that there were whole store sections that turned at half or less of the rate of the store as a whole. But if you want, say, a philosophy section that “turns”, it would only have about ten titles in it. If you want a philosophy section people will browse and shop from, you have to carry a lot of slow-moving titles.<br /><br /><br />Tell me if I'm wrong, but didn't he just admit that most traditionally published books don't move much -- and nobody really cares because the slow moving books still help? By this logic, if I were a publisher, I'd be willing to pay peanuts for a book on the shelf, and tell the authors how lucky they are to be on a bookstore shelf. Also, how well can those authors be treated when there are plenty more who would like the honor of being on a bookstore shelf?<br /><br />(Having been on a book store shelf, I can admit that the first time you see your book there is definitely a thrill. The new generation coming up probably won't care, but anyone who came of age when I did still deep down finds it a thrill, which means plenty of people will want it.)<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-41770212949637513422014-07-01T09:08:38.283-05:002014-07-01T09:08:38.283-05:00The thing about Amazon not making serious money on...The thing about Amazon not making serious money on low-priced books isn't relevant, because Amazon sells a lot more than books. A whole lot more. No other bookseller can say that.<br /><br />As for me, I'm just going to put up my little zombie short story collection later today, and eagerly await sales, which I won't have to share with anyone. :DAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02654921759319855048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-3448775774607107292014-07-01T06:58:00.421-05:002014-07-01T06:58:00.421-05:00"It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any ..."It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any serious money when unit prices are only $.99 to $3.99 on most indie books."<br /><br />I guess that depends on what they mean by "serious money." Let's forget about the books that sell well and look only at the books that sell poorly. I'm going to make some assumptions here since I don't have exact data, but I bet they aren't far from the truth.<br /><br />There are over 3 million books available on Kindle and we all know a vast majority of them don't sell well. Let's say that 2 million of them only sell 1 book per month on average. And because they are scoffing at the low price of Indie Books, let's say all of these 2 million are priced a .99 giving Amazon their lowest possible cut of .64. Take .64 X 2 million and you get $1,280,000.00. Pretty serious money right? I would bet that would cover all of the costs associated with hosting the website and all of the storage space necessary to sell ebooks on Amazon. Then you've still got 1 Million + books on top of that which sell much better (ie multiple copies per month).<br /><br />The point here is you don't even have to look at the big bestsellers to see that Amazon is doing pretty well selling ebooks. The poorest performers by themselves would be enough to net Amazon a profit or at the bare minimum cover their expenses. Everything on top of that is gravy.Kirk Jollynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-80770759973310369502014-07-01T02:27:48.830-05:002014-07-01T02:27:48.830-05:00Seriously, I'm curious--does a starting author...Seriously, I'm curious--does a starting author, who writes more slowly (book a year or less--possibly MUCH less) stack up as less well-advised to self publish in your opinion if he does have a traditional offer, since he'll have less "ammo" to become well known on his own with so little product to put out? Is Self Publishing a "high output" game?"<br /><br />Regardless of which way you choose to publish, if your output is only one book a year or every 18 months, you're going to have a hard time building a fan base. If I loved your book, I'd go back to the well looking for more of your work. After a few months of finding nothing I'd give up, and by the time a year passed I'd have forgotten your name.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08562072896434268321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-9068932577990697502014-06-30T22:48:42.857-05:002014-06-30T22:48:42.857-05:00You know, I have a couple of stories up at Amazon ...You know, I have a couple of stories up at Amazon right now in that $0.99 category. I'm sure I'm not alone on that. So how can Amazon make any money on that?<br /><br />Well, let's think. First, Amazon had me upload onto their servers which are part of their normal operating expenses. They plugged my work into their automated system, again part of their normal operating expenses. Then, they pretty much sit back and make their 65 percent on each and every sale. If I sell a lot (my novelette has sold over 600 copies since the end of April when I uploaded it), they make more money than if I sell very little. However, if I sell little, I have little impact except for a few gigs of space on their hard drive.<br /><br />It's not really difficult to figure out how they can make a great deal of money. After all, the few hundred dollars I've earned so far, expanded out among thousands of other people who actually made them more money than I did, well...it's kind of obvious how they're making bank.<br /><br />Maybe it's just me, but if you don't see how this indie thing is currently a win-win for Amazon and the authors, you're not really looking at it. It's not perfect, but nothing is.T.L. Knightonhttp://tlknighton.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-14045736159650064972014-06-30T22:31:46.862-05:002014-06-30T22:31:46.862-05:00"It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any ..."It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any serious money when unit prices are only $.99 to $3.99 on most indie books. "<br /><br />Really? This is laughably absurd. Of course they're making money. I'M making money. We're both making money. Multiply their share of sales by a few hundred thousand copies a week and their cut is looking pretty good. I mean, I'm part of a bundle with one of my books right now and we've already sold 30,000 copies. Another recent bundle buy is above 100,000 sales mark. And these are only two examples. Individual authors are selling thousands of books a month at $3.99, $4.99 and $5.99.<br /><br />Do people like Zacharius not realize how many books we're selling? Maybe they need to check out Hugh Howey and Data Guy's website. It's all there and as much as they'd like to deny it, it ain't wrong. There's a lot of cognitive dissonance going on in this business. Quit drinking the Koolaid and look at the real numbers.<br /><br />The bottom line is this: IT ALL ADDS UP. For us and for Amazon. To think they aren't making good money off of us is ridiculous. Do you think for a minute they'd continue doing this if they weren't?Rob Gregory Brownehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12785299355462748009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-24121919085990458392014-06-30T21:12:03.206-05:002014-06-30T21:12:03.206-05:00@ Martin Luther:
""Over on this Mike guy...@ Martin Luther:<br />""Over on this Mike guy's web page Steven Zacharias said:<br /><br />"It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any serious money when unit prices are only $.99 to $3.99 on most indie books.""<br /><br /><br />I see.<br /><br />On a $0.99 sale, Amazon tkaes a 65% commission, which is $0.64<br /><br />On a Kensington mmpb sale, cover price $7.99, the author's 8% royalty comes to $0.64. <br /><br />So it's pretty hard for a Kensington author to make serious money, either, isn't it? <br /><br />At $3.99, Amazon's 30% royalty is $1.20.<br /><br />I randomly looked up a new Kensingon release on Amazon, and see its list price in digital is $7.59 and its discounted to $5.69. I don’t know Kensington's digital net from Amazon (and chances are the author doesn't either). But to keep it simple, let's suppose it's 70. 25% of 70% of $5.69-$7.59 is the author's royalty, which comes to: $1.00-$1.33 per sale.<br /><br />So... is Mr. Zahcarius saying that those figures "serious money" for the person who WROTE the book, but NOT serious money for the company whose investment was to allow an indie author use of a single web page of a massive retail system?<br /><br />Or did he not do the math and realize that every time a book sells on Amazon, the company (which sells –millions- of books) is making as much as one of his author's makes every time one of her books sells?<br /><br />Or did he mean that a retail business "should" earn MORE from a book's sale than the book's AUTHOR earns from it? <br />Laura Resnickhttp://www.lauraresnick.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-77517806981088262122014-06-30T20:47:04.038-05:002014-06-30T20:47:04.038-05:00I have to add, in 26 years in the biz, my current ...I have to add, in 26 years in the biz, my current publisher (DAW Books) is the -only- publisher I've ever liked doing business with. I don't mean tot say they're perfect--and they don't need to. (I am not perfect, either--and they can verify that!) I mean, it's a good business situation for me and a good business relationship. As long as that remains so for both of us, I hope we will keep doing business together.<br /><br /><br />That said, every other house I ever wrote for treated me like a crack whore and treated my work like something I had defecated in their lobby. (I worked with some outstanding editors over the years. Also, on occasion, with some jaw-droppingly unprofessional and disastrous ones. But I never before worked with a -publisher- that wasn't somewhere between bad and nightmarish to deal with.)<br /><br />Which is why, given all the changes and opportunities in the writing world these days, I might never sign with another publisher again. <br /><br />"Never say never," and this is business, not ideology, so I'll see what the future holds and evaluate opportunities and options as they occur. But one thing I WILL say is that I will NEVER again work with a publisher that does NOT pay me well, treat my work as a valued asset, and treat me like a respected professional partner. Those days are over. I put up with bad treatment for 20 years because there were no other choices. Now there ARE other choices, and I'll never put up with it again.Laura Resnickhttp://www.lauraresnick.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-21726088213093451882014-06-30T20:09:29.281-05:002014-06-30T20:09:29.281-05:00I like doing business with my current publisher
...<i>I like doing business with my current publisher </i><br /><br />I like that you like that, Laura. You're so self-aware, so smart, that I'm encouraged by your attitude. It's nice to see someone happily legacy published, not because they had no choice, but because they chose it knowing the pros and cons, and it turned out well.<br /><br />Keep on doing what you're doing.JA Konrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-62851042578370245742014-06-30T19:21:30.728-05:002014-06-30T19:21:30.728-05:00Joe, great post. Thanks for continuing to put some...Joe, great post. Thanks for continuing to put some sanity on the insane stuff coming from the traditional side. As an author with over a hundred books on the traditional side, it now makes me just shudder to even think of going back into that grind. As you said, it was the only game in town and now it's not.<br /><br />Laura brought something up I see happening with a couple of other friends. They are doing both indie and traditional, but as with Laura, they are well-informed and know what they are doing. They both know that with the slightest slip from their publisher, they are down the road and full-time indie. Both of them call their books with traditional loss-leaders for their indie books. <br /><br />Informed choice. A wonderful thing. Thanks again.Dean Wesley Smithhttp://www.deanwesleysmith.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-73166010435852246422014-06-30T18:58:52.573-05:002014-06-30T18:58:52.573-05:00Over on this Mike guy's web page Steven Zachar...Over on this Mike guy's web page Steven Zacharias said:<br /><br />"It's pretty hard for Amazon to make any serious money when unit prices are only $.99 to $3.99 on most indie books. "<br /><br />==========<br /><br />It is called volume. Everyone going to Amazon to buy their e-books -- I paid nothing for most of my over 3,500 e-books -- to feed their Kindle means that Amazon makes pure profit on most every "sale" of millions per day.<br /><br />I no longer even go to my local public library unless it is to read an out of print public domain hardcover book. I download a Kindle equivalent every so often from the public library when the e-book has been out for six months and the demand lessens and it is available for download.<br /><br />When I do buy print books it is for used books that are cheaper than the Kindle equivalent, if there are any such. I get the used paperbacks for $4.00 to $8.00 (.01 - $4.00 price plus $4.00 delivery) and get them via my Prime membership in two days.<br /><br />The closest Barnes and Noble is in Springfield Missouri. There is a Books a Million in Joplin. Hastings went out of business two years ago in Joplin. There is a used bookstore in Granby, which in a building less than 20 x 20 feet, almost never has anything I want, even though I get up and walk three blocks to see once per month.<br /><br />I buy all my books at Amazon. Twenty-plus to one ratio I get free books, most of which go to my Kindle "Cloud" so I am able to look at the Prime Instant videos on my First-Generation Kindle Fire I bought three years ago. Then there are the $1.99 books of old favorite authors and books republished at a discount from $10 or more by a major publisher of some sort. Not to mention the expensive e-books by White Nationalist or Christian Identity authors that I can download and read on my Prime membership once per month.<br /><br />So tell me and others like me who read more than ever before thanks to having a Kindle how much we need Hachette or Barnes and Noble or traditional publishing. And how we are going to be hurt when Amazon has its way in the end. I don't see it happening.<br /><br />If it does, then I suppose I'll have to download my 3500+ volume e-book library to the Kindle, then go out and buy after Thanksgiving a newer, bigger Kindle with twice as much memory for half the price I paid for my old Kindle three years ago.<br /><br />Hail Victory!!!<br /><br />Pastor Martin Luther Dzerzhinsky Lindstedthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04050943359998853460noreply@blogger.com