Interview with F. Paul Wilson and Alan M. Clark

Joe sez: F. Paul Wilson is one of my favorite writers. He was first published back in the 1970s, and has since put out more than fifty books with legacy houses. At first glance, he doesn't seem like the sort who would embrace self-publishing ebooks.

But that's what he did. I've been talking with Paul about this for years, and he and I were two of the first authors to becom
e involved in the Amazon Shorts program (now defunct). When KDP came around, Paul got his backlist up, and I collaborated with him, Jeff Strand, and Blake Crouch on the ebook horror novel DRACULAS.

So along comes Kindle Fire, being released today, and Paul is right there to take advantage of this new color technology with his beautifully illustrated (by Alan M. Clark) children's ebook, THE CHRISTMAS THINGY.

How did THE CHRISTMAS THINGY come about?

FPW: We have to go way back to the 70s when I wrote it for my two daughters. I would read it to them every Christmas season. I’d change my voice for all three characters—do a British accent for Mrs. Murgatroyd and hold my nose for Thingy's voice (he has no nose, after all). Kids always love that one the best. As the girls got older and learned to read, they’d take over the voices of Jessica and Thingy. It’s been a great family tradition.

JAK: Never a thought to publishing it?

FPW: Well, sure. But it needed illustrations and I’m no artist. But sometime in the 80s, as I was admiring Jill Bauman's paintings at a NECon art show—she has a wonderful sense of whimsy—it occurred to me that she'd be perfect to do a few illustrations. Jill was game. The studies she did came out so well—just line drawings but she'd added a sweetness to Thingy—that I sent the package around to a few publishers. No one in the strange world of children’s books would give us the time of day.

JAK: Hard to believe.

FPW: I was informed by someone in the field that having a white middle-class protagonist is quite a handicap in that world. Jump to June of 2000. The girls were off to college and THINGY moldered in a file cabinet. I’d just handed in the final Sims novella to Cemetery Dance when Rich Chizmar asked me if I had any fiction lying about. I told him my trunk stories were long gone except for this children’s Christmas story from way-back that he wouldn’t be interested in. He said to email it to him. He fell in love with it and within 36 hours he had Alan Clark signed up to do the artwork. I don't think Cemetery Dance has ever produced a book so quickly. It was released in hardcover December 1, a little late for the Christmas season, but I loved it.

JAK: Alan, how did you come to be involved?

AMC: I've known Paul for quite a while and I remember talking with him about the children's book and knew he was excited about it. I thought it was a delightful story and was thrilled to take on the task of adding imagery to it. I've always loved children's books and felt fortunate to have the opportunity to explore the medium and process.

JAK: What was it like working with Alan? How was the collaborative process?

FPW: Christ, what a nightmare. The guy’s an egomaniacal sonofabitch.

No seriously, it was a joy. Alan has done his share of fiction writing and so has great respect for the written word. But in his genome he's an artist, and he thinks in images and colors. As we'd talk on the phone—we're on different coasts—he'd keep asking me about backgrounds and bleeds and color schemes, and what was I okay with. Finally I had to say to him, "You're the artist. I did the words, you do the pictures. Really, I'm not qualified on the graphic side. And I trust you." As you can see, he came up with a beautiful book.

JAK: Your turn, Alan. How was the collaborative process?

AMC: Paul is easy to talk with and quite willing to discuss ideas. I made only one suggestion for the text. The story originally opened with dialogue, and I asked if he could add to it some visual element that would give me something to focus on for the first illustration. He added description of Mrs. Murgatroyd bending to pick up the broken pieces of a plate she'd dropped, having been startled by something Jessica said just prior to the opening of the story. Mrs. Murgatroyd is simultaneously asking Jessica to repeat what she's said so that we then know what it was. This allowed me to have an illustration facing the opening text that shows Mrs. Murgatroyd dropping the plate.

FPW: That’s right! Completely forgot about that.

JAK: What made you decide to go digital?

FPW: We went digital now because we can. Cemetery Dance did a hardcover first, and that sold out. Then they did a paperback—same trim as the hardcover—and that’s gone. The rights reverted and a few months ago Alan called and asked what I thought about an ebook of THINGY. I said if we can do justice to your art, then absolutely.

For me it’s a matter of wanting all my work available in every existing format. I write to be read, so I’ll jump on any platform that puts my work before readers. All my books are available as ebooks, include the backlist titles I’ve self-published. Listen, if someone comes up with a way of synching a book with brain waves, I’m there.

AMC: My publishing company, IFD Publishing, released the e-book of THE CHRISTMAS THINGY with the help of my partners, Eric Witchey and Elizabeth Engstrom.

As an illustrator, writer and publisher, I've benefited from this exciting evolution in books. Let me give you a brief history lesson. As a small press publisher, I know the cost of adding color images to a traditional book. The expense of hiring an illustrator aside, it's very costly to print full-color illustrations. That’s why, until recently, publishers on a budget have largely restricted color work to what’s necessary to sell a book—the cover and advertising.

As an illustrator who does primarily full-color work, when I was first starting out in the 1980s, I was frustrated by the fact that the jobs that helped a rookie get in the door in freelance illustration were mostly black and white illustrations for magazines and, rarely, for books. I'm talking about the pre-digital days of paste-up, when even continuous tone, now known as grayscale, was too expensive for low budget publications. This work was primarily line art. I was not practiced at pen and ink and so my line work did not represent my skills well. I was a painter.

In the 1990s, publications began printing from digital files, and suddenly black and white illustration, whether line art or grayscale, cost nothing extra in the printing phase. When this occurred, I started IFD Publishing and put out several lavishly illustrated books. Still, color was expensive and so color content was minimized.

When the iPad came out, and I saw how popular it became as an e-reader, and how it rendered full-color in high resolution, I realized it cost nothing now to add full-color art to a book—an ebook, that is. The physical, or traditional color books, such as the hardcover and the paperback of THE CHRISTMAS THINGY, were very expensive to produce. I saw the opportunities for IFD Publishing with e-publishing and here we are. Paul liked the idea and so we now have THE CHRISTMAS THINGY available for all e-reader formats.

JAK: What were the trials of mixing text and full-color illustrations?

AMC: Because we want the files for the book to function properly on all the different readers, we faced restrictions in layout. In the traditional or physical book you can do fun things with the text, like having it interact with the images on the page. Not so in an ebook because the user can resize the text, altering the layout. We had to keep the illustrations independent from the text. On the other hand, the advantage of the ebook version is that you can blow up the images and explore them in detail.

FPW: Whatever you did, Alan, the result is stunning.

JAK: Agreed. THE CHRISTMAS THINGY turned out beautifully in ebook form. Are either of you planning to do any projects specifically as ebooks?

AMC: Thank you for the compliment. We do not at this time have a project to work on together, but I'd be pleased to work with Paul anytime.

FPW: Tom Monteleone and I are collaborating on a series of YA books that was temporarily derailed by looming deadlines on a number of previously contracted projects. But the decks are cleared now and we’ll be back to full speed ahead this week. We plan to launch it as an ebook exclusive and move to paper later.

JAK: Many readers of this blog (me included) believe that paper will someday soon be a subsidiary right. Print books will never disappear, but they may become a niche market, like vinyl records. You both have been in this biz for a while. Your thoughts on this?

AMC: I agree with your prediction. There are many who love books so much, I don't think traditional books will stop being made, but I believe it will be limited to those most in demand. There are e-publishers now who make their books available in a POD (print on demand) edition alongside their digital edition.

FPW: I published QUICK FIXES – Tales of Repairman Jack as an ebook and planned to leave it that way. But so many readers pleaded for a paper edition to put on the shelf with the rest of the series that I had to make a trade paperback available.

That’s a good example of why paper books, though they’ll fade in importance, will never go away. They’re physical objects to which we can attach memories and reference times in our lives. I have books that have sentimental value, that trigger memories when I see them on the shelf. I’ll never read them again but the physical package itself has value for me. That is, until I move and have to pack them up. Then I kind of hate them.

JAK: If we do transition to mostly digital, what are the plusses and minuses for artists and writers?

AMC: Because e-publishing costs next to nothing, publishers have the ability to pay the writer a higher percentage of each sale and still make a profit. But because it costs next to nothing and because there are little or no filters in the way of editors--anyone can decide they are a publisher, start an account with an ebook distributor and publish books--everyone who believes they are a writer can put a book on the market. There's a lot of vanity publishing going on, and much of it gets equal billing through the distribution points.

If we look at it like a river of publishing and the readers as fishermen, all the vanity books muddy the waters and make it difficult to distinguish a nice trout from a mealy carp. What IFD Publishing has done is to create a collective of writers/artists with good reputations who support each other's efforts and work to publish books of high quality. We believe that if we are consistent with this our reputation for good quality will allow our books to rise closer to the surface where they can be recognized.

FPW: I think we all know the plusses for writers—rapid transition to publication, lower cost of putting work before public, lower cost for the reader, higher royalty for the writer, etc. I do see limitations for artists, however, especially because choices of media are narrowed. Alan’s art for THE CHRISTMAS THINGY was designed for high-gloss paper and so it looks great on a high-gloss screen. But other art might be designed for a matte surface, and so you aren’t going to fully appreciate it on a Nook or iPad.

As for me, I’m delighted that people can store THE CHRISTMAS THINGY in their e-readers and tablets and computers and even their smartphones. They can call it up and see Alan’s art and read my words to their kids, or their kids can read it to each other, year after year. Christmas isn’t going away, and neither is THE CHRISTMAS THINGY, now that it’s an ebook. It will remain available to future generations. Because ebooks never go out of print. As someone likes to say, ebooks are forever.

Joe sez: Thanks, Paul and Alan.

I'm getting my Kindle Fire today, and I'll give my review after I've played with it for a bit. But for those who have one, or an iPad (or any other tablet reader with a Kindle app), THE CHRISTMAS THINGY is a must buy. It also looks damn good in black and white.

One of the things I find interesting about the ebook revolution is how quickly ebooks are being embraced by the public. At the same time, paper books aren't disappearing any time soon (in fact, I am working on a deal to release limited edition, signed and numbered hardcovers of ORIGIN, TRAPPED, and ENDURANCE.)

I get a lot of emails and comments about YA and children's ebooks, and if they'll become as popular as adult novels. Yes, they will. It might take another season or two, but Nook Color and Kindle Fire are steps in the right direction. I can easily predict a whole generation of parents and grandparents reading THE CHRISTMAS THINGY to their children and grandchildren on ereaders.

And they won't have to pay $100.00 for a rare, out-of-print hardcover.

Tweet

Stirred

This November 22, the final Jack Daniels novel is being released on Kindle.

STIRRED, co-written with Blake Crouch, also concludes his Luther Kite/Andrew Z. Thomas series (Desert Places, Locked Doors, Break You).

We'd like to launch STIRRED with a lot of early Amazon reviews. So earlier I put out a call for reviewers.

And we got quite a few. So many that we have to stop taking requests, because we can't fulfill them all. Thanks all who responded.

Now here are some quick facts about Stirred.

Q: Do I have to have a Kindle to read Stirred?

A: No. You can download Kindle aps for your computer or phone, and read it that way.

Q: What about for paper readers?

A: That version won't be released until February.

Q: Do I need to have read your earlier books?

A: No. Stirred can be read and enjoyed without any knowledge of our previous titles.

Q: Is Stirred being released on Kindle only?

A: Yes. But it is DRM-free, so it can be easily ported to any format.

Q: What is Stirred about?

A: Lt. Jacqueline "Jack" Daniels has seen humanity at its most depraved and terrifying. She's lost loved ones. Come close to death countless times. But she always manages to triumph over evil. Luther Kite is humanity at its most depraved and terrifying. He's committed unthinkable acts. Taken human life for the sheer pleasure of it. He is a monster among monsters, and no one has ever caught him. Each is the best at what they do. Peerless. Unmatched.

Until now...

In Luther's experience, people are weak. Even the strong and fearless break too easily. He wants a challenge, and sets his depraved sights on Jack. But with a baby on the way, Jack is at her most vulnerable. She's always been a fighter, but she's never had so much to fight for. So he's built something especially for Jack. His own, private ninth circle of hell--a nightmare world in a forgotten place, from which no one has ever escaped.

It's J.A. Konrath's greatest heroine versus Blake Crouch's greatest villain in Stirred, the stunning conclusion to both Konrath's Lt. Jacqueline "Jack" Daniels thriller series and Crouch's Andrew Z. Thomas series.

Only one can survive. And it won't be whom you think.

Q: How do I get Stirred?

A: You can preorder it on Amazon. Right now it is $2.99. The price may go up soon.

Q: Why might the price go up?

A: I've seen enough evidence to show that $2.99 may not be the ideal price point for ebooks. A slightly higher price can earn more money, while still being a bargain for readers.

Q: Is this really the last Jack Daniels book?

A: Yes.

Q: Does Jack die?

A: Several characters die. You'll have to read the book to find out if Jack is among them.

Guest Post by David Gaughran

David sez: Joe features a lot of great writers on his blog who are selling insane amounts. I always get a kick out of those stories and learn a lot. I’m not one of those guys, but maybe I can address the question of whether to self-publish from another angle.

I tried the traditional route for eighteen months – collecting over 300 rejections – before deciding to take control of my career. Self-publishing had been on my radar for a while. I was reading the heretical thoughts of Dean Wesley Smith and Joe Konrath who said we didn’t need a publishing deal, that we could publish ourselves.

Some critics say that people like Joe are repetitive: banging the same drum over and over. I don’t know about anyone else, but I needed that. I was so wrapped up in various myths that the message had to be repeated again and again before it got through to me.

Eventually, I confronted my assumptions and found them to be flawed. I decided to self-publish some shorts to see if I could sell anything (and if I enjoyed the process), but held that novel in reserve as it was still being considered by a few NY agents.

I still had a lot of doubts. While I was convinced of the viability of self-publishing, and had serious concerns about the sustainability of the traditional model, I was less sure about my own abilities to handle things like promotion and platform-building: I had no blog, no Facebook page, I didn’t even have a Twitter account (something I swore I would never do).

Well, it turned out that I enjoyed all that stuff and was kind of good at it. After five months I’ve sold over 1,000 books, I’m getting 20,000 visits a month to my blog, and I have 10,000 followers on Twitter. Not bad for an unknown, unpublished writer.

I don’t take this as proof that the Gatekeeper was wrong. For starters, I still haven’t released the novel that attracted all those rejections. I pulled it from the last agents that had it after I sold 150 copies of my two short story titles in my first month.

I was having lots of fun, enjoyed connecting with readers for the first time, and found an aptitude for promotion which surprised me. But that wasn’t why I decided to self-publish the novel. It was because I was convinced I could sell more and make more on my own.

My logic was this. I hadn’t snagged an agent yet, but I was pretty sure it was only a matter of time – I was getting closer and closer. I don’t know if an agent could have placed my book, but let’s assume for the sake of argument that they would have got me the average advance: $5,000.

When I release it in December, it will be priced at $4.99. It’s a long novel, and I think the genre (historical fiction) allows higher prices, and I like the idea of earning $3.50 per copy. To beat that average advance, and to cover production costs and some promotion, I need to sell around 2,000 copies.

Joe likes to say e-books are forever, which sometimes draws a reaction. But if you are self-publishing, you will own the rights to that content for as long as you live (and your heirs will own it long after that too). Maybe it will be consumed as a holo-novel or something we can’t conceive of yet, but you will still own those rights.

But to avoid clouding the argument, let’s assume I only earn off it for ten years – maybe tastes will change or I will forego the internet and pushing my books for a simple life. Can I sell 2,000 copies in ten years? Well, if I can’t I shouldn’t be in this game. That’s less than one book a day.

In fact, I would say that any writer good enough to attract the average advance could do that too. Even if you are pricing your book at $2.99, earning $2 a copy, you only need to need to sell one book a day over ten years to beat that advance.

There are lots of nice things about a publishing deal (from the outside at least, I’ve never had one). You get your book published for free and they throw in a little promotion. However, the only real selling point, for me, is access to bookstores.

Let’s be honest here, on a $5,000 advance no-one is going to be walking into Barnes & Noble facing a wall of my books. I’ll be lucky if they don’t have to order it. And it’s probably going to be the last money I see from that book, at least until I get the rights back – if I ever can.

As I said above, I easily beat that deal if I can sell a book a day for ten years, which is more than doable. In fact, the way things are going, I might even beat that advance before my book would have hit the shelves by the traditional route.

In short, I can’t afford to take a publishing deal.

Some writers are worried about how much writing time they will have to sacrifice if they decide to strike out on their own. But I can tell you that I am writing more than before. Self-publishing is immensely satisfying, incredibly motivating, and my productivity has soared.

But there are other considerations. Just recently, huge formatting/editing/proofing errors have been spotted in major releases from Neal Stephenson and Terry Pratchett. If this is the level of quality control the Big 6 have for new books from their big writers, I shudder to think what is happening lower down the food chain.

I can’t afford to take the chance that could happen with my book or that I would be stuck with a crappy cover. I know that if I do it myself, the formatting, editing, and cover will be top quality because I work with experienced, committed professionals of my choice, and I have final approval of everything.

When you enter a business relationship with someone (which is how I look at a publishing deal), there are going to be issues if the two parties have divergent views. During the London Book Fair in April, publishers were defending their paltry royalty rates, saying they needed a bigger share of the cover price to help them combat piracy.

At the last Frankfurt Book Fair, the story had changed. Now they say they don’t need to raise royalty rates because authors are doing fine because they charge so much for e-books.

I shouldn’t need to tell you that this is all backwards and speaks nothing to the money going into their pockets at those higher prices. It’s also shows contempt for readers forced to pay that premium so publishers can get a juicy cut. I can’t afford to grant an exclusive license to sell my products to someone who has such an outdated view of the marketplace.

Even if snagging a traditional deal was one of my career goals (which it no longer is), I would still self-publish. Then, with some solid sales numbers, I could approach a publisher from a position of strength, instead of one of desperation.

I’m not going to tell anyone to self-publish; that’s a very personal decision. But if you want to take back control of your career, if you like the idea of connecting directly with your readers, and if you think you deserve more than the smallest slice of the book’s profits, then you should know that there are thousands of us ready to help you take your first steps.

Joe sez: David says a lot of really smart things in this blog entry, which doesn't surprise me because his blog is also very smart. His ebook, Let's Get Digital, is a must read for anyone considering self-pubbing. I recently bought, and read, his story Transfection and I'm happy to say it is terrific, and well worth the 99 cents.

Of the many memes being parroted by writers, one of the most destructive is "Most self-pubbed ebooks don't sell."

When you are arguing a point involving a new technology, such as ebooks, it is essential to make sure your argument also encompasses the older technology. The fact is, most legacy-pubbed books don't sell. Why do newbie writers continue to believe that signing with a publishing house is a guarantee of success? It isn't. You may get a modest advance--$5000 is still considered the average--but in today's publishing climate that may be the only money you ever see. And you can do far better on your own, even if you're selling modestly.

I've recently blogged about how ebook sales are far outselling paper sales. Bookstores are closing. The midlist is disappearing. David has a smart post about how declining paper sales aren't offset by rising ebook sales for legacy publishers, which points to Big Trouble for the Big 6.

So getting a legacy deal isn't about getting into print anymore. Which means you'd be signing with a Big 6 publisher in order for them to release your ebook.

Guess what? The Big 6 suck at releasing ebooks. They charge too much. Their royalties are too small. Often their formatting is sub-par (I've gotten into fights with my publishers to force them to reformat ebooks of mine riddled with errors.)

But exactly how bad a job do they do compared to self-pubbers?

I'll show you, with my numbers.

Hyperion has published six of my novels as ebooks, and Hachette has published one of my novels, and so has Berkley. That's eight novels, going back t0 2004.

On my own, I've published six novels, going back to 2009.

All totaled, my eight legacy pubbed ebooks have sold a little over 100,000 copies on Kindle.

All totaled, my six self-pubbed novels have sold over 235,000 copies on Kindle. And I made twice as much money per copy sold as I did on my legacy ebooks.

So my legacy pubbed ebooks have sold an average of 12,500 copies each, while my self pubbed ebooks have sold an average of 39,100 copies each.

Think about that. Ebooks that have had the support of three major publishers have only sold 1/3 of what I've done myself through KDP.

David is making a wise move, pulling his novel from submission and self-publishing it. Here's a quick recap of some of the reasons why.

1. Getting a legacy deal is difficult, and often doesn't happen even if the book is good. (All the novels I've self-pubbed were rejected by legacy publishers.) You can spend a looooong time looking for a legacy deal--time you could have been earning money via self-pubbing.

2. If you do land a legacy deal, you will get lower royalties.

3. If you do land a legacy deal, it will take 6 to 18 months before that book is for sale.

4. If you do land a legacy deal, the publisher has total control of price, title, and cover.

5. Ebooks are outselling paper books, bookstores are closing, and ereaders keep getting more advanced while coming down in price.

6. If you do land a legacy deal, you likely won't ever get your rights back.

7. If you do get an advance at a legacy deal, it will take a long time to earn out, if ever. Higher ebook prices mean fewer sales, and lower ebook royalties mean smaller checks.

So why are you still looking for a legacy deal? I can think of a few reasons.

Vanity. You want the prestige (whatever it may be) of signing with a legacy house.

Validation. You want the gatekeepers to tell you your book is good enough.

Dreams. You always wanted to see your book at a library, or on the shelf at a bookstore, and those dreams die hard.

Less work. You want a publisher to take care of things like promotion, editing, and cover art.

Money. You're getting a big advance that will amount to a life-changer.

Of those five reasons, the only one that makes sense from a business standpoint is money, and the chances of you getting a large advance from a legacy publisher are about the same as you being struck by lightening. This is a lottery dream, and not a smart business plan.

And as for those who believe legacy publishing is less work than self-publishing, you need to go back to 2005 and read my blog. I worked much harder as a legacy published author than I do as a self-pubbed author. I also make a much better living now than I did then.

If you're reading this, you're probably a writer, and these issues matter to you. Which means you need to gather as much information as you can, and think long and hard about your goals and how to reach them.

As David asks, can your really afford to take a legacy deal?

Tweet

Guest Post by Barry Eisler

Joe sez: There are plenty more guest posts I will be running throughout the rest of the year, but I'm going back to Barry Eisler today because it is a directly related to a recent post of his. This is about publishing misapprehensions.

Barry sez: Two weeks ago, I wrote a guest post here called The Bogeyman and The Axe Murderer. There was some substantive discussion of the post, which was about why many authors fear a potential future Amazon monopoly while remaining sanguine about the current New York one, but most of the substance was eclipsed by reaction to several charged analogies and metaphors I used, including a "house slave mentality." I have to take some of the blame for this relative lack of substantive discussion, and if I could write the piece over again, I'd change the rhetoric. Not because I agree with all the criticism my rhetoric occasioned (much of which, in my view, was misplaced), but because when enough people find cause to be outraged about your language, the reaction eclipses your underlying argument, and it's my argument I want to discuss, not my presentation of it.

By the way, for anyone interested in the pros, cons, and merits of the slavery analogy, I highly recommend this superb recent piece by Mike Stackpole, Degrees of Slavery, along with the exceptionally civil and substantive comment discussion that accompanies it.

Anyway, among reactions to my post, two far-reaching misapprehensions stood out -- misapprehensions that I think could inhibit people from understanding as clearly as they might the new choices facing writers today, and what those choices mean for the industry as a whole. So let's address those misapprehensions here, and see if we can clarify them.

1. All Legacy-Published Authors Are Making A Mistake.

In fact, I can think of many legitimate reasons an author might want to go the legacy route (and the self-publishing, and Amazon-publishing ones, too), and here's an online conversation I did with Amanda Hocking and agent Ted Weinstein discussing several of them. I've repeatedly said that for me, publishing is a business, not an ideology, and I don't think it's legitimate to criticize someone's tactics without first understanding his objectives. The key is not your chosen means (legacy, self, Amazon), but rather the degree to which those means maximize your chances of achieving your objectives.

So let's talk about those means for a moment. I think the most accurate way to understand the current choice between legacy- and self-publishing is this. Both systems, statistically speaking, are lotteries. If you measure the number of authors published in each system overall against the number who are making a living wage in that system, I don't think you can reasonably conclude that the odds of making a living wage through publishing are particularly good either way. It's so obvious that it shouldn't need saying, but neither system remotely guarantees success.

All this being the case, authors have to do some additional analysis to make a sensible decision. Reasonable questions to ask would include, How much is the advance? How much do I need the advance? Do I think that with higher self-publishing royalties, I can beat the contract (to see what I mean with that concept, follow the last paragraph in this Daily Beast interview)? If so, how long do I expect beating the contract will take? How important is paper distribution to me, and how important is digital? How important to me is control over things like pricing and packaging? How important is time-to-market? How much do I like, and how good am I at, running my own business vs. outsourcing business management to someone else? How much do I trust my potential business partner to manage things well? How much do I hate what legacy publishers are doing today vs how much do I fear what Amazon might do tomorrow? Which system gives me more personal power to influence my odds of success, and how important is that power to me? Etc. If you make a decision without asking such questions, you're making a mistake, at least in your process (though you can still get lucky in your result). If you are asking these questions, then regardless of the path you choose, you're making an informed decision, and for you, the right one.

Speaking only for myself, it's difficult for me to imagine going back to the legacy world (and at least as hard to imagine, at this point, that they'd have me). I'm very attached to control over packaging and pricing; time-to-market is important to me; I love the dramatically higher per-unit royalties self-publishing affords me. In other words, in general, I expect self-publishing will be, for me, more profitable and more pleasurable than was legacy-publishing. (Incidentally, I've also found all these personal objectives have been well served in my experience with Amazon as the publisher of The Detachment. In fact, I've found that, given my various personal objectives, a business model where I publish some works with Amazon and others on my own is the ideal mix). But that's just me. If your objectives are different, it makes sense that you would choose a different course of action. When I write these posts, I'm always far more interested in trying to tease out objective and widely applicable lessons from my own experience than I am in talking about the experience itself.

So, to reiterate: I don't think self-publishing is for everyone, or that legacy-publishing is for no one. And publishing with Amazon has been great for me, but it doesn't follow from that that it would be great for everyone. If you're conscious of your objectives and you ask the right questions, you'll have the best chance of choosing the course that's right for you.

One last thought. We now live in an era where writers feel they ought to clarify that they don't think legacy publishing is necessarily a bad decision, and where self-published authors like Amanda Hocking feel they ought to publicly justify their decision to take a legacy contract. Whatever you think about the respective merits of the two routes, this is an astonishing development. Can you imagine, five years ago, someone publicly explaining why she took a seven-figure legacy offer? It would have been inconceivable, because the decision would have explained itself. No longer.

2. New York Publishers Are Evil And Publishing Would Be Better If They Died.

As I've argued many times, I believe legacy-publishing business practices have become overly self-serving because of a longstanding lack of competition in the industry. But I don't believe these practices make legacy publishers evil; in fact, I think these practices are just a natural part of legacy publishers' humanity. Power corrupts, as the saying goes, and monopolies, by virtue of human nature, always come to serve themselves at the expense of the wider society (that's why we have laws against them). But it doesn't follow from this that any monopoly needs to perish, or that I would personally want it to. After all, when someone is sick, you don't want him to succumb to the disease; you want him to get better. Similarly, what I want for New York publishing is not for it to die, but to reform.

And I want New York to reform not just because even New York would benefit from more enlightened business practices (not to mention the benefits to readers and authors). I also want New York to reform because Amazon needs healthy competition, too. If New York disappears as a counterweight, then current fears about an Amazon publishing monopoly will have substantially more basis in fact. Yes, I expect Amazon will still face competition from a host of players like Apple, Google, Kobo, Smashwords, and others, and from newly emerging author website bookstores, too (check out Joe's store right here), but the more competition, the better, so I hope everyone stands with me in cheering New York on in its efforts to reform its business practices.

Now, if you ask me to bet on the likelihood that New York will successfully adapt to the advent of digital and the emergence of Amazon as a publisher, I would have to regretfully decline to bet very much. As I noted in my previous post, companies coddled by a lack of competition get flabby, and New York, which hasn't faced real competition in living memory, is now squaring off against a formidable competitor indeed. I don't think it's likely legacy publishers will be able to adapt and survive. And though I hope I'm wrong about that, my hope doesn't lead me to want to protect New York from competition, either.

Maybe I'm clarifying here more than is really necessary, but I've learned from recent experience how willing and even eager people can be to mischaracterize arguments they find threatening. So again: the fact that I'm predicting an outcome doesn't mean I'm hoping for it. I predict that one day I will be dead, but that doesn't render me particularly enamored of or eager for that outcome. Similarly, though I don't think New York's chances are good, come on, guys, I'm cheering you on. I want you to step up, not give up.

Which brings me back to the question I asked in my previous post -- a question no one, as far as I know, has yet tried to answer:

If there's a better way than Amazon to reform New York’s previously unassailable quasi-monopoly and all the suboptimal business practices the monopoly has enabled, what is it?

One way of answering this question would be to deny the legacy publishing model is suboptimal at all. You could also respond by acknowledging some degree of suboptimal behavior, while denying that the behavior is the result of a lack of competition. I doubt I'd be persuaded by such arguments, but I would welcome them because they'd be on point.

But if you accept my "Suboptimal New York business practices are the result of a lack of competition" premise, then what I'd like to hear is your solution for getting New York to improve. Personally, I'm thrilled by the advent of self-publishing and the emergence of Amazon publishing because I can't think of any more potent combination of competitive pressure on New York. But I'd be very interested in the views of others on this point -- thanks.

Joe sez: I don't have anything to add to Barry's points, because he's correct and they don't need bolstering from me.

But I will expound a bit about authors supposedly making mistakes by signing legacy deals. Because a lot of them ARE making mistakes.

If you hit yourself in the face with a hammer, I'm going to call you stupid for doing so unless you can really justify it using facts and logic. Otherwise, you're wrong in doing so.

If you don't like being told you're wrong, stop being wrong.

I've always stated that is important to set reasonable goals in your career, and to separate goals (things within your power) from dreams (things that require a "yes" or "no" from someone else in order to happen.)

Your dream could be to get published by a legacy house. That means your goals should be to write a terrific book, then send out ten queries a month to top agents. If stars align, your goals can help you reach your dream.

Then, once you have a legacy deal, your next goal could be to write another book for that house.

But is this really a worthy goal in today's publishing climate? Is it even a worthy dream to begin with?

Many authors defend legacy publishing without fully understanding their reasons for doing to. They don’t back up their opinions. They don't feel they have to. For the past 100 years, we writers haven’t had a real choice if we wanted to earn a living–it was legacy or nothing. So we pursued legacy.

I see that attitude still being expressed, even though there is now a choice. And based on everything I know, having been on both sides of the issue, self-pubbing is a far better choice.

But rather than argue with my facts and figures and logic, some folks choose to attack me, or my tone. There are reasons for this. Some of it is envy (though people will deny this vehemently.) A lot of it is fear.

Most authors are scared of something. Scared of their publishers, of losing a contract, of not getting a contract, of bookstores closing, of ebooks, of piracy, of going it alone.

As far as ebooks go, many are ignorant. They simply don't 'get' it.

But once they are aware of what is happening, several things can happen.

They can accept it, and look for ways to benefit from it.

They can ignore it and hope it goes away.

They can blindly trust their publishers.

They can refuse to accept it, and get angry at people like me.

They can become even more scared, but instead of acting, they become defensive.

And in those cases, authors are being stupid. They are being wrong.

If you're still accepting legacy deals as-is, you really aren't thinking about the future. That isn't being business savvy. In fact, it's the opposite.

If you're fully aware you're getting bad terms on ebook royalties when ebooks are growing so quickly, just to get a paper version in bookstores when both paper and bookstores are receding so quickly, explain how that is wise. Unless you're a bestseller or getting a ton of money upfront, it makes no sense.

Publishers KNOW this. Their contracts are becoming wickedly draconian in regard to erights. They refuse to offer more to authors because they need to replace their lost paper sales. They need to cover their overhead.

What are they offering you in return for helping to save their industry?

Legacy publishing is a poor choice for a lot of reasons, all based on facts, not opinion. People may draw different conclusions from those facts, which stimulates discussion. Or people can walk away because I used strongly worded, inappropriate metaphors. Which is fine. We live in a world where children get a Certificate of Participation if they lose. Let’s coddle everyone, walk around on tip-toes, making sure no one gets offended by anything or gets their little duck feelings hurt because it might destroy the fabric of society. I personally don't care if I'm liked or not, or even if people listen to me. But if you want to debate, debate my points.

And FYI--pointing fingers saying “You’re an offensive jerk” isn’t smart. It’s every bit as childish as what I'm being accused of.

There are plenty of things to be rightfully outraged about. My blog ain’t one of them… unless you work for the Big 6.

Since April 2009, I've been blogging about ebooks, and the changes in the industry. If you really want to see how legacy publishers have reacted to those changes, take a day off and read my blog from then until now.

If that seems like a lot of work and you want to get a head start on making an informed decision, here's Barry again.

Barry sez: First, various functions legacy publishers have always provided (whether in theory or in fact) are and always will be critical. Editing, line-editing, copyediting, proofreading, cover design, pricing decisions (in digital, dynamic ones), branding, promotion -- all continue to be required for the production of a quality book and to maximize the chances that the book will be discovered by the largest possible audience.

Second, the primary reason legacy publishing has traditionally been able to take 85% of an author's earnings is distribution. Because no author could cost-effectively distribute her books in paper without a distribution partner, legacy publishers have been in a position to charge an 85% monopoly rent for paper distribution. The other services they provide -- enumerated above -- are add-ons. How can we be confident about the relative value of distribution vs the add-ons? Because if those other services could be disaggregated from distribution, no author in his right mind would pay anywhere near 85% for them, and publishers would not have the negotiating leverage to charge such an amount.

Today, with the advent of digital distribution, an author can distribute her works 100% as effectively as any publishing conglomerate. In digital distribution, authors and legacy publishers stand on an entirely level playing field -- which is another way of saying that in digital, an author simply doesn't need a publisher to distribute. So what legacy publishers are saying to authors today -- the new legacy publishing value proposition -- is this: "Before, when we handled distribution plus, we charged you 85%. Now you don't need us for distribution anymore, and we're only going to handle the plus part -- and you'll still have to pay us the same 85%."

Obviously, this is unsustainable.

Now as long as digital doesn't become too big a proportion of distribution generally, publishers can continue to try to stake their claim to that 85%. But the bigger the share of digital distribution, and the smaller the share of paper, the more absurd becomes legacy publishing's argument that it can still make a reasonable claim to that antediluvian 85%.

Put those two developments together, and what you get is a massive disintermediation and disaggregation play. Authors still need the same editing etc. functions they needed before, but now we can get them via a variety of emerging business models, many of which have nothing at all to do with legacy publishing. All of which means that legacy publishing will have to reinvent itself and reprice its drastically reduced list of value-add services if it wants to survive. Meanwhile, with legacy publishing's paper lock broken, new entrants, including literary agencies and authors like Bob Mayer, are offering authors various collections of add-on services for various rates of remuneration. So whether legacy publishing survives or not, today authors have more publishing choices than they ever had before.

Personally, I don't think there ever was a time of "pure" indie publishing. After all, Amanda Hocking needed Amazon's, B&N's, and Smashwords' distribution to get her books to readers -- she didn't sell through her own website. And even if she had sold through her own website, she would have been reliant on her website hosting company, on Paypal for billing services, etc. If you think about it, even an old-fashioned paper indie author was reliant on Kinko's for printing services and on Oldsmobile and a network of gas stations for his distribution platform. No one accomplishes anything in business entirely on her own, and I'd argue that notional concepts of independence are less important than the presence of actual choice. No man is an island, nor ever was; what matters instead is the effectiveness, desirability, and range of vessels available to carry us to our hoped-for destinations. For authors, there used to be only one such vessel, which was as expensive and inefficient as monopolies always are. Now there are many, and we're living in a different world as a result.

Joe sez: Self-publishing isn't a cult. It isn't an ideology.

Criticizing legacy publishers isn't a case of being ungrateful, or envious, or bitter.

My dream has always been to reach a lot of readers, and make a living doing something I love.

While pursuing this dream, my goals have changed throughout the years. My goals used to be about sending queries to agents and publishers. I got more than 500 rejections, remember? This was my goal because it was the only way to fulfill my dreams.

Then my goals were to self-promote as much as possible to help spread my brand and sell my paper books. Again, this was the logical thing to do.

Now my goals are to self-publish my work in as many formats as possible, and occasionally partner with a company (such as Amazon) in order to boost sales and reach more readers. I came to this conclusion the hard way, through experience.

Ask yourself once more, what are your dreams? What are your goals?

Now ask yourself if legacy publishing is the best way to reach those dreams and goals.

Blake sez: I think what's not been said succinctly is what this has all been pointing toward:

Taking a midlist deal from a legacy publisher is dumb-ass thing to do.

The "average" advance for a first novel is about $6,000.

How sad to be a good enough writer to get a book deal, but with such poor business sense and such a potent need for a stamp of approval that you squander the money you could be making.

People say but taking that midlist deal is a career builder. Yes, it is. A career of being repeatedly fucked that culminates with getting dropped. The odds are overwhelmingly in favor of that scenario. I've been in this business since 2004, and the number of people who were first published when I was and still are being published is a fraction.

Do you think it's easier now than it was then?

With the rarest of exceptions, publishers support books they pay lots and lots of $$ for. And only some of those are successful. If you get big money for a book up front, take it and run. No one's saying that's not a smart thing to do. I think Amanda Hocking was masterful in leveraging her ebook sales into a killer major print deal.

But midlist, for the most part, stays midlist. And considering the current royalty structure for ebooks, midlist is an even worse place to be now than it was a few years ago.

I haven't heard anyone here say that all legacy-published authors are morons. Because no one believes that. Some are making fat bank. Good for them. Ride it out. But if you have a first novel, or are considering publishing again, and you're taking less than $25,000, I think it's safe to say that's a stupid, stupid thing to do.

Some people would say that number should be way higher.

You want some numbers?

On my first novel, Desert Places, which was published in 2004, I have earned a total of $13,114 from my publisher. That took six years, and I was paid an advance of $6,000.

Since I re-published it myself one year ago, I have made $17,677, on Amazon US alone. That doesn't include Kobo, Apple, Smashwords, Createspace, Barnes & Noble, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon Fr.

And this isn't my top seller. It's only cracked the top 1000 once. This is a 7-year-old novel.

Now, there's been a lot of talk about tone. So if this comment just hurt your feelings. I apologize. Go to this website, and have one on me:

http://www.freehugscampaign.org/

Joe sez: Blake originally posted that in the comments, and I asked for permission to put it in the actual post.

Right now, I'm holding up a big sign that says, "If you do this, you're stupid."

A lot of people don't like hearing that. My guess is that those who don't like that comment are those who resemble that comment.

If you don't think you're being stupid, tell me why. Explain for all to see how you're making smart, enlightened decisions by signing with a legacy publisher. Show me actual numbers of how it is working for you.

But I don't see anyone doing that. I just see the same group of morons, circle-jerking each other about what an ass I am, without offering anything to prove me wrong.

Because they can't prove me wrong.

So attack the messenger, not the message.

But me being a jerk doesn't make you any less stupid.

Tweet

Guest Post by Lee Goldberg (and Konrath talks numbers)

Lee sez: There was a turning point when I realized that I’d completely shaken free of all of my previous, deeply held perceptions and beliefs about publishing….and fully embraced an entirely new publishing model.

It wasn’t when my out-of-print backlist, which the publishing industry deemed played out and worthless, started pulling in $70,000 a year for me in ebook royalties.

It wasn’t when I signed a 12-book digital, print and audio deal with Amazon’s 47 North imprint for The Dead Man, a monthly series of original books that Bill Rabkin & I created, and that we are writing with a dozen incredibly talent authors, and that we began in February as a self-publishing venture.

And it wasn’t last week, when I agreed to a two-book digital-print-audio deal with Amazon’s Thomas & Mercer imprint for my new novel King City and a sequel.

It was Tuesday, when I delivered Mr. Monk is a Mess, my 14^th Monk tie-in novel to Penguin/Putnam and informed them that my 15^th book, the last in my current contract and due this coming May, would also be my last book in the series.

In other words, I quit.

They were surprised, of course.

I am walking away from a hugely successful book series, one published in multiple languages around the world, and from the certainty of another three-book contract and an increase in my advance.

There was a time, not so long ago, when the idea of ending a hit book series, in hardcover, with a major publisher would have been inconceivable to me and just about every author I know.

But the publishing world has completely changed.

The Monk books, like the Diagnosis Murder novels that I wrote before, were licensed tie-ins. That means I was hired for an advance, and given a tiny royalty, to write books based on characters that belong to someone else. I was a hired hand…albeit one paid very well by tie-in standards.

I had a great fun writing those books, took enormous pride in them and, until recently, considered myself very fortunate to have the gig.

And in that old world, I was.

But now, in this new world, my attitude has completely changed.

I am still very proud of the books…which is why I find it incredibly frustrating that I have written 22 novels that I dearly love but that don’t belong to me.

They belong to studios.

It’s frustrating because if they belonged to me, I could be earning so much more money from them now…and, more importantly for my family, in the future.

I won’t make that mistake again.

Instead of writing two books a year for Penguin/Putman, I will be writing that many books… or more…for myself that I own.

Some I will self-publish, others I will write for Amazon’s imprints.

But they will be mine.

I know what you’re thinking. What about those books for Amazon? Haven’t you just traded one master for another?

Every aspect of the deals that I have with Amazon’s imprints on The Dead Man series and the King City books are far, far, FAR more author-friendly and potentially lucrative than anything I ever had before…as are my chances at success with such a savvy partner, one who, incidentally, operates the biggest and most successful bookstore on the planet.

And I own King City. If I end up writing 15 books in that series, all of those books, now and in the future, will be mine.

Ah, but what about all those writers who are doing The Dead Man books for us? Aren’t we exploiting them? Aren’t they making the same mistake I’d have made if I’d signed to do more Monk books?

Nope.

That’s because unlike the old school publishers (and, let’s face it, publishers are what Bill and I have become with The Dead Man), we have thrown away the old rules of doing business with writers on licensed properties.

In fact, what we are doing is revolutionary in the tie-in world.

We are splitting all of the publishing royalties from digital, print, audio, and foreign translations on The Dead Man books 50/50 with the writers.

Our success is their success…and vice-versa.

We’ve made them our partners.

(And publishers of tie-ins should follow our lead…or there won’t be any tie-ins anymore, because it won’t make any financial sense for writers to write them).

The Dead Man series relaunched on Oct. 24^th and is already doing amazing business. Our next book comes out later this month.

And King City is coming in May.

It’s a bold, exciting new world for authors and I haven’t been this excited about writing since I was a teenager.

Joe sez: I've had several conversations with Lee where we discussed him making this move (both his wife and I have been trying to convince him for years) and it's great to see him finally embracing the future.

Work for hire, in this publishing climate, is a damn stupid thing to do.

Lee is also correct that publishers should follow his lead. It would be a smart, and fair, thing to do.

But publishers haven't shown any evidence that they are smart or fair in this new publishing climate. All they've done is make mistake after mistake.

They won't offer better tie-in terms, because there will always be young, hungry, eager writers willing to work for pennies just to be associated with a well known intellectual property.

Writers do fan fic for free. If given the opportunity to do a real book based on a property they love, they'll do it.

I can understand this. There are a few IPs which, if offered to me, I'd consider. It would be worth the pay cut.

But--and this is important--it would only be worth it to me because I already have a lucrative writing career and a known name. I write several books a year.

Lee can also write several a year, but he had sold his soul to the company store. Penguin/Putnam was making him write so many Monk books, he didn't have much extra time to pursue his own projects.

A company infamous for this is Harlequin. They keep offering multi-book deals with low advances and small royalties, and authors have to keep writing them just to stay afloat. But that leaves them no time to write other projects, where they'd get better royalties.

Because publishers have been in control for so long, they've forgotten their place. I'm happy to remind them:

Publishers get paper books into stores.

That is the main thing they do. The one thing that writers can't easily do.

But guess what? Bookstores and paper books are becoming a smaller and smaller share of the market, while ebooks are becoming bigger and bigger.

Why would anyone still want to work with a publisher? Especially while earning 17.5% royalties on ebooks?

Now, publishers may eventually wise up and offer 50% to authors, which at the agency model rate is 35% of the list price. This is better, but still not wise for authors to take when we can get 70% on our own.

Q: But Joe, legacy publishers still get paper books into stores. Isn't that worth something?

A: Not much.

Here are my latest royalty statement figures for my six Hyperion titles and my Hachette title, for Jan 1 - June 30, 2011. Paper sales are hardcover and mass market combined.

Whiskey Sour paper sales: $1450.00
Whiskey Sour ebook sales: $5395.00

Bloody Mary paper sales: $463.00
Bloody Mary ebook sales: $2591.00

Rusty Nail paper sales: $226.00
Rusty Nail ebook sales: $3220.00

Dirty Martini paper sales: $415.00
Dirty Martini ebook sales: $3370.00

Fuzzy Navel paper sales: $485.00
Fuzzy Navel ebook sales: $3110.00

Cherry Bomb paper sales: $224.00
Cherry Bomb ebook sales: $3864.00

Afraid paper sales: $1608.00
Afraid ebook sales: $12,158.00

Looking at those numbers for the first half of this year, you can see how much ebooks are outselling print in my backlist. Any author would be foolish to take a 17.5% ebook royalties from a legacy deal, or even 35% royalties, just so they can have a book in print.

Q: But all of those are old books. We all know paper sales are greatest at the release date, then they trickle off. Did your total paper sales beat out your total ebook sales for these legacy titles?

A: Whiskey Sour, which was published in 2004 in hardcover and 2005 in paperback, has earned me $52,474 in paper sales, and $11,453 in ebook sales.

So six years ago, paper sales made a difference.

Cherry Bomb, my last novel with Hyperion, was published in 2009 and has earned $20,782 in hardcover and $10,759 in ebooks.

But the ebook thing didn't really start taking off until 2010, which is when the Cherry Bomb paperback came out. The Cherry Bomb paperback has earned $3901. That's about 1/3 of what it made as an ebook, and 1/6 what Whiskey Sour made in paperback.

Q: Isn't that because your series is dying?

A: Shaken, the 7th Jack Daniels novel that I published with Amazon, is doing very well. This series is not dying at all.

Q: How well is Shaken doing?

A: I can't disclose details due to an NDA. But I'll discuss more about Shaken in a bit. First let me prove my point with paper vs. ebook sales.

Afraid, which came out in 2009 and had a hardcover release in the UK and a paperback release in the UK and US, has earned $29,183 in combined paper sales, and $27,657 in ebook sales.

Dead tree books are, well, dead. And any author would be foolish to release a book with a legacy publisher because they believe paper sales will make up for the lower ebook royalty rate. Especially when legacy publishers set the price, which is always too high.

If I had these above titles back, I'd be earning a lot more than I am now.

Q: Really? How much more?

A: I'm glad you asked. Here are my top four self-published books.

Origin (rejected by publishers) has earned over $72,000 since April 2009.
The List (rejected by publishers) has earned over $82,000 since April 2009.
Endurance (rejected by publishers) has earned over $71,500 since June, 2010.
Trapped (rejected by publishers) has earned over $85,000 since June 2010.

Why the hell would anyone want to continue publishing with legacy houses? Even if they raise royalties to 35%?

Q: But I heard that Amazon imprints like Thomas & Mercer and Encore also offer 35%.

A: First of all, Amazon is not a legacy publisher.

Second, even though I'm unable to discuss the royalty amounts in my Amazon contracts, or how much Shaken (published in ebook in October 2010 and paper February 2011) has earned, I will say that I'd absolutely sign with Amazon again.

And an extra word on Amazon's NDA, which some people on the internets seem to think is suspicious. As Lee mentioned in the comments below, Amazon is changing all the rules on how publishers deal with authors. I've never been treated better, or gotten better terms. If Amazon wants to keep those terms hush-hush because they think other publishers may try to emulate their contracts, I'm happy to remain silent on the issue.

But publishers will have to do MUCH MUCH BETTER than they're doing now if they want to even come close to offering what Amazon offers me.

Q: Would you ever sign with a Big 6 publisher again?

A: I can't say that I would never sign with a legacy publisher again. If they offered me a huge amount of money, I'd consider it. If they became really progressive with their contract terms, I'd consider it.

But they'd have to do a lot to convince me that they're worth the big chunk of royalties they're taking.

I'm not the only one who understands this. Lee Goldberg is the latest in a growing number of authors who are coming to this realization.

There will be many, many, many more.

I'm in this business to make money and reach as may readers as possible. I've got hard evidence that I can make more money on my own than I can with a big publisher behind me. This isn't speculation; it's cold, hard facts.

If you can self-pub, then also sign with an Amazon imprint, even better.

Q: But aren't you worried Amazon will gain so much control they become a monopoly and then start cutting royalties?

A: As Barry Eisler recently pointed out, and I've said many times before, why worry about what might happen in the future with Amazon when we're currently getting the shaft with legacy publishers? You need to be concerned about the tiger chomping on your leg right now, not the lion you might meet someday.

Q: I thought you're on a blogging hiatus.

A: I am. This was a guest blog.

But I will say that I'm getting tired of critics bemoaning my blog and attacking my guest bloggers.

I understand that this is a scary time. Change is frightening. This is nothing less than a revolution, and no wars are fought fairly.

But I still get irritated when some pinhead starts criticizing me, or my blog, and does such a poor job doing so.

Attack the argument, not the person. Focus on the facts, not tone. Offer counterpoints based on logic and experience, not feelings.

I don't care what you think of me. I want to hear you debate my points.

There are a lot of writers who have done well playing the social network game (I'll follow you if you follow me!) and are spouting their uniformed opinions, which amount to nothing more than masturbation and speculation.

I talk the talk because I walk the walk. Since 2009, I've made over half a million dollars self-publishing. I've worked with three major legacy publishers for novels, and half a dozen more with anthologies.

I know what I'm talking about. I've played for both teams, and the self-pub team is better, hands down.

You're welcome to post your numbers and prove me wrong.

Otherwise, take your pill. It's the one in the bottle marked "Shut the hell up."

Tweet

Guest Post by Selena Kitt

Selena sez: I’ve always been a proponent of higher ebook prices.

Not the crazy $12.99 more-than-the-paperback prices that legacy publishing is so fond of so they can continue to pay Manhattan rents—but higher than $0.99, certainly. Even for a short story.

That’s right, once upon a time, my short stories were selling for $2.99. And yes, they were selling.

But things changed. The indie market got more crowded. Authors started selling their full-length novels for $0.99 and some even gave them away for free. Blogs popped up everywhere telling Kindle owners where to find free and cheap ebooks.

So I decided to experiment with my prices. I lowered the prices on all my stories to $0.99—that was everything from 3K-15K. Everything else (some of which was priced as high as $5.99) I lowered to $3.99. And I left them that way for three months. A full quarter of ebook sales.

What did I discover?

At first, I found that lowering my price to $0.99 shot me up on a few bestseller lists. That increased my e

xposure, which was great. And I also found that my sales of those $0.99 titles doubled. Stories that had previously been selling 50 a month were now selling 100.

Sounds good, right?

But, of course, at $0.99 I was getting a 35% instead of the 70% royalty I’d been making when I was selling them at $2.99. I was now making roughly $35 a month on a story that had previously been taking in about $100 a month—a loss of $65 a month in income. Multiply that by twenty-five short stories (which is about what I have out there) and that’s a $1650 a month loss.

Worth it?

At first, I thought it might be, given the exposure. The higher you are in the rankings, the more people see your name, the more sales you make, right? But over time, more and more (and more!) indie authors started selling their stuff at $0.99 too, and those lists became overrun with cheap books.

I’d pretty much decided to quit the experiment when I read a comment from Konrath on his blog confirming my suspicion—that authors don’t make money at anything less than $2.99. Which meant, and I’ll quote Joe here:

“My data also shows that novels outsell short stories, even though I've priced my shorts at 99 cents. It stands to reason that if I switch shorts to $2.99, I'll sell fewer, but I bet I make more money. So the next step is to raise novels to $3.99-$4.99 and short stories to $2.99 and see what happens. Assuming I have the guts to do so...”

I’ve now changed all my short story prices back to $2.99, and raised my novel prices to $4.99. I imagine I’ll run this experiment for another three months and see what happens. If logic prevails, I’ll sell fewer books, but make more money.

But as Joe pointed out, doing this takes guts. Moving beyond the magical $2.99 price-point for novels, pushing those higher, to make room for short stories at that price, is a risky proposition. Will the market bear it?

Honestly, I think it will. And here’s why—Kindle readers are tired of $0.99 cheapies. The shine is off the new toy, people have stopped loading their Kindles up with freebies and cheapies, and have started getting more discerning about what they download. Many Kindle readers are starting to shy away from the $0.99 price point because they’ve read some stinkers and don’t want to travel down that road again. What was once a huge draw for Kindle readers—oooh, look, cheap books for my new toy!—has now become the opposite.

Of course, I could be wrong.

Which is why it’s a scary experiment!

Apropos for Halloween, don’t you think?

So let’s kick off this frightening new price point with a $2.99 story very fitting for the season, shall we?

HUNTING SEASON – A Love Blood Story by Blake Crouch and Selena Kitt

For those of you scratching your heads, wondering how in the heck the pair of us ending up writing together, given that our genres are so vastly different, I’ll explain. Back at the beginning of the year, I’d posted some of my sales numbers on Joe’s blog, which at the time were astronomical (I was making $30,000 a month at Barnes and Noble alone!) and Joe jokingly said, “If you ever want to collaborate, let me know!”

I’d just finished reading and reviewing DRACULAS – and being the huge horror fan that I am, how could I resist? I emailed him to say, “I know you were kidding, but I’d love to collaborate with you guys.” And to my surprise, Joe Konrath and Blake Crouch actually took me up on the offer! They were planning a sequel to DRACULAS called WOLFMEN, and wanted me on board, along with a fourth writer (who has yet to be disclosed).

It made perfect marketing sense to cross-pollinate their audience and mine, which were both large, but vastly different.

Of course, no one knew if this great idea would work in practice…

So Blake Crouch agreed to take me out for a test run, and that’s how this story was born. The collaboration process was, I must say, an amazing success, and I couldn’t be prouder of the result. I really think this story is something special—but I’m probably a little biased!

If you want to know more about how HUNTING SEASON: A Love Blood Story was written, what the process was and how things developed, there’s an interview between myself and Blake included as bonus material at the end.

It’s available on Amazon and Barnes and Noble for… you guessed it.

$2.99.

Is it worth it?

You be the judge!

HUNTING SEASON – A Love Blood Story by Blake Crouch and Selena Kitt

This 8,000 (approx) word collaboration by thriller/suspense/horror writer Blake Crouch and erotic romance author Selena Kitt includes bonus interview material with the authors about the upcoming sequel to the Konrath, Crouch, Strand and Wilson bestseller DRACULAS.

-------------

He’s a butcher.

She’s the trophy wife of a trophy hunter.

They used to be high school sweethearts, but that was two decades ago, and times have changed.

Meet Ariana Plano...40 years old, miserable, stuck in a loveless marriage to the worst mistake of her life.

Meet Ray Koski...40 years old, miserable, a lonely butcher who can do nothing but immerse himself in the drudgery of his work.

Once a week during hunting season, she brings her old teenage flame game meat for processing. They do not speak. They rarely make eye contact. Some histories are just too painful.

But this week will be different.

This week—a shocking encounter twenty-two years in the making—will change everything.

Joe sez: In November, I'm going to raise some of my prices on shorts, just to see how it goes. In December, I'll do the same with novels.

No gain without risk. I'm on a lot of bestseller lists, and raising prices may make those ebooks fall off, resulting in fewer sales. But will they be so many fewer I earn less money? Only way to find out is to try it.

As for HUNTING SEASON, it was a really fun, very twisted horror story, perfect for Halloween.

And yes, it was worth the $2.99.