Support for Indie Authors discussion

Hi Afficus,
This is a pretty broad question that kind of touches on some things that are discussed across the board as well as some things that we try to steer away from. Success is pretty subjective. One person may jump for joy at a single sale while others complain that they o my sold one hundred books today.

For me personally, I have written more books in the last five years than in the twenty as an author before that. I'd say that's pretty darn successful.

I'm doing all right, depending on the perspective. If "success" means becoming and overnight best seller and being able to buy a mansion and a yacht with my royalties, I'm failing. But, if "success" means getting my work out there, seeing it sell and occasionally seeing a nice review or hearing from readers that they enjoyed the book, then I'm doing very well.

I know the reason I am not selling as well as some is due to my choices of genres. I don't really write in any popular genre. Even my love stories are not quite what most people would label as "romance". But, that's fine. I am writing the kind of books I enjoy reading and gaining a small following. Frankly, it may be better this way. I don't think I could handle being rich or famous.

I'm writing in a niche genre, I'm crap at self-promotion, and my stuff is a little polarizing I'm sure (I make no attempt to be all-audiences, and indeed wouldn't want to be). Much as I'd love to be successful in a traditional sense (make a living at this), my personality probably won't allow it, so I'm learning to see success as being as simple as having a venue to do what I love and to present it to a potential audience, which in turn fires me up to keep doing it.

Who knows, maybe in a few years I'll have a bit of a crowd who specifically seeks out my stuff. That would be enough for me.

Also, writing is cathartic and keeps me sane. That's successful on a personal level.

Nothing makes a humorist sadder than his biggest laughs coming from his most serious statements.

I have been writing, off and on, since I was eleven. Thirty-nine years! I've only been self-publishing for two and a half years. So... *quick math* I have put out about seventeen books a year. Most of those are short stories. Some are collections of stories.

Afficus wrote: "That's good. I like short stories. I prefer them, tbh. =P "

I like books of all lengths pretty much equally, except... time for reading is so limited these days, so sometimes short stories or novellas are better as I can get through them faster. And I could make more time to read, but then I would cut into writing time. And I can't do that. Besides, for the first forty-seven years I was more a reader than a writer, so now I've flipped them.

Afficus wrote: "What type of promotion do you normally do for your books? "

The "push it out of the nest and hope it can fly" variety.

I've done a couple paid ads, or put my stuff out for free with the KDP program, or signed up with promotion sites, the usual stuff. But networking is not a strength of mine, unfortunately. It's the creative process I like.

Afficus wrote: "Would you say feel better about your newer releases or your older ones (as you, I assume, took longer to write and finish them)?"

Hmm... I can't say that I feel any better about one over the other. A lot of what I'm publishing now were ideas I had back in the nineties, just updated a bit since that was a gasp worthy number of years ago. Mainly what I feel great about is the ability for all of my work to see the light of day in a simple and painless manner.

Ebooks were really a dream come true for me. I was an early adopter as a reader and when the Kindle came along,it was a no brainier to go indie.

Afficus wrote: "Were you traditionally published before?"

I've been traditionally published, and let me tell you it is a pain. Had to wait over a year after all edits, because you're in a queue waiting your turn in line to be published. And I got lucky. After my publisher folded they gave all authors their rights back, but most wouldn't and you would be locked in for the entire length of the contract.
While a publisher helps a bit with covers, blurbs, editing, and other parts of the process, to me it felt too restrictive in the long run. Was approved by two more publishers for the sequel of the first book, but I didn't like the terms of the contract. A 70/30 split in favor of the publisher is a let down. (But we're completive with other publishers!) Nothing I've seen from a publisher I couldn't do myself.

BTW, my published sold no better than my self pubbed books have.
So I don't see being an indie authors as something I struggle with, rather as another part of my long journey through life.

And just because I seem so dour, I don't actually have a problem with publishers, I just feel that right now I give myself the best chance to succeed. Who knows if that will change in the future.

Hello, I have published two books so far, and about rewriting the first one to publish as ebook, book tow is a cook book which some other Indie publisher would like to republish. I would regard all of that as a success, however, each individual measure success in different ways. So, get on with whatever​ you have to do, and do your best. Thanks

Interesting points regarding traditional and self published book results. I have authored 7 books so far with mixed results. One of these i paid for the promotion with Outskirts Press. They did a fair job of promoting the book ,but it was costly and i discoverd. That self publishing through Kindle and Createspace,achieved similar results.
Along the way i have tried out suggestions from several sources..
One of these ,designed to get publicity was to offer giveaways on three of my books. In the hope that i would garnish some exposure and a few reviews. The cost was high in postage. There was an impressive entry data,for each giveaway ,but i got zero feedback and zero reviews. A costly mistake.
However trial and error is the way we learn. Today i have sat back and am beginning to engage more with other authors in forums like these. Fom them we can all make our books better.

As far as our successes go, anytime we publish a book, that's a success. Anytime we make someone happy, that's a huge success.

As for struggles, we tend to write books that are difficult to finish. I personally am fond of writing sentences that I then struggle to punctuate.

As to how we are doing: we're doing well enough to keep do it (more or less). Is there anything else I'd rather be doing? No. So, on the balance, I'd say we're doing fine.

Afficus wrote: "Riley wrote: "Afficus wrote: "Were you traditionally published before?"

I've been traditionally published, and let me tell you it is a pain. Had to wait over a year after all edits, because you're..."

As I said, they performed the same. Most publishers aren't going to do a whole lot to promote your work, they expect you to still do that work, until your book starts making regular money. *Note: all evidence is subjective.*

I measure my success by "Are people being entertained?", and when people come to me and tell me they've read through half the first book in one night because they couldn't put it down, I know that I've succeeded.

Financial success is a byproduct of the above. I publish to entertain, but like many others I would like to see a return. My biggest financial "struggle" is getting back into the black, mainly because I opted for digitally painted covers, and those cost a lot. I use quotes because eventually it will happen and I don't consider it something I actually struggle with. It was money well spent.

Thomas wrote: "I measure my success by "Are people being entertained?", and when people come to me and tell me they've read through half the first book in one night because they couldn't put it down, I know that ..."
Thomas, I also measure my success by the readers' responses...
Are they entertained? did they enjoy? was it a page turner? I don't expect to get my financial investment back. I wrote the book because I wanted to get the story out there. I am not trying to launch a new career which is different than many of you. I think that goal would lead to different decisions on my part.

Riley wrote: "Afficus wrote: "Were you traditionally published before?"

I've been traditionally published, and let me tell you it is a pain. Had to wait over a year after all edits, because you're in a queue wa..."

This is a great post, Riley. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Statistics have to come into it somewhere.

If we entertain one, two, three people, maybe we'd be better in the aural tradition, as roving story tellers. It worked well in the days before literacy/printing became all the rage.

And when the crowds get too big, we can publish?

theSexDetective wrote: "If we entertain one, two, three people, maybe we'd be better in the aural tradition, as roving story tellers. It worked well in the days before literacy/printing became all the rage."

If it were possible to support a family off of this, I'd be all for it! But we'd be competing against TV, internet, and radio. It'd be hard to build a following.

You could do it as a street performer, but I imagine it would be much harder to get people to stop and listen to you speak (as opposed to someone stopping and listening to street performed music for a minute).

Serious answer: If you don't publish, it's quite likely impossible to be successful, whatever the measuring stick.

I think if we've written a book to make money, then success would be viewed as getting back more money than we put into publishing and promoting the book. I think most writers would like to make money on their product.
I'm a relatively new author, thus not doing as well as the more established writer, but I have hope. I recently read that the success of a book depends a lot on its genre and the celebrity status of the author. Some time in my after-life I'll be a celebrity.