Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

For that matter, PRIDE & PREJUDICE was published by a military publishing house -- because Jane Austen's brother was a stockholder. It worked out okay.

I was just trying to gently point out that the system has always been rigged, but that the publishing houses were always in complete control and now they are not. There is now far more power now to the reader to decide what they wish to engage with than there ever has been in the past, despite the obvious flaws that exist in the system. No system is perfect, but I would certainly suggest that this is worth a read:

http://davidgaughran.wordpress.com/20...

I always figured the point of the super cheap box set is access to each other's fan bases. Author X has a following, she's friends with Y and Z, and she thinks her fans may like Y and Z's books, plus she might pick up a few of Y and Z's fans, or readers who have been on the fence about all of these writers will go, "Ooh! Ninety-nine cents!" and give it a go. I'll buy box sets of things I'd never buy individually, and I've occasionally been pleasantly surprised by some of their contents.

As long as said seventeen-year-old is literate, I don't see anything wrong with employing one as a reader. The person who reads the slush pile is weeding out the chaff. They are not approving publication. Anything they think worthwhile will get passed along. It's a common task for interns, who are usually college (or occasionally high school students) because it's good training for them, and not a job anyone else wants. The reason it is not a job anyone else wants is that the contents of the slush pile are mostly awful. Think of the ten worst SPA things you've ever seen and multiply those by the hundreds. Someone's got to weed those out and pass along the competently written stuff.

Here's something else to consider.... Traditional publishing has limited resources. There are only so many gatekeepers and they can't read everything. Long waits hoping your work will be read is not feasible to someone trying to make a living. Look at art.

Take art, what would have happened if Van Gogh and Monet didn't strike out on their own. If Picasso had listened to his critics. The impressionists were pilloried by the traditional art community. And women artists, there would be no Georgia O'keeffe.

Candace wrote: "Here's something else to consider.... Traditional publishing has limited resources. There are only so many gatekeepers and they can't read everything. Long waits hoping your work will be read is no..."

This is an excellent argument for reading submission guidelines carefully.

Candace wrote: "Here's something else to consider.... Traditional publishing has limited resources. There are only so many gatekeepers and they can't read everything. Long waits hoping your work will be read is no..."

Gatekeepers for SPA's: it's an easy problem to solve.
Let's say Amazon is interested in providing their OWN corporate rating system (isn't that what publishers/editors do?); when I put up book X, they submit it to their 'gatekeepers' for review. Who are those gatekeepers? Simple; Amazon keeps stats on reviews such as the ones I've written. They know how many I've written, what the average number of stars I've given are, and how many readers have found my reviews helpful. So they recruit perhaps 200 reviewers from that list, offer them a pittance per review, then select among the 200 for the ones they think are best, say 100 of those. From that they get an average, say 4.2 stars. Anything over 4 is 'recommended', over 4.5 is 'highly recommended'.
Now you've got a brand name, and readers will understand that the rating is coming from a bunch of readers, not editors/publishers who are trying to sell books. I expect reader trust will follow, and if Amazon says 'highly recommended', those books will sell, large numbers of them. Just as now that 'NY Times Best-Selling Author' tag sells.
And if Amazon, using such a system, decides NOT to rate a book/author, that too says a lot. Discerning readers will proceed with caution.
But it can't be a system that's paid for by authors. We already see that in the lists that come out daily touting cut-rate and free books. You can't get a free listing; you have to pay for it, so objectivity is gone forever.

Linda wrote: "The Amazon review system is quite possibly the single most corrupt "rating" system in publishing.

To base gatekeeping of SPAs on Amazon reviews and reviewers would only be to invite even more corr..."

This may be true, but the question was about getting published, not whether or not the system was gamed against the indie author. It doesn't matter how corrupt the rating system is, if your book never gets published. These are two different issues.

It might help if Amazon's publishing software were a little more sensitive to grammatical and spelling errors, but that's not a big fix. For one thing, too many of these authors can't recognize those errors, or don't know how to fix them. Worse, at least some people think they are a nicety.

My own sister (not the one who used to work in publishing) was trying to persuade me that a publisher wouldn't (and shouldn't) care if an MS was riddled with grammar, spelling, and usage errors as long as the story was good, because the editor could fix that. She did not believe me that it was a) a major turn-off and b) that editing someone who either can't easily spot errors or doesn't care about them is a nightmare.

An Amazon gatekeeping review system would be awful, even without payments. My head spins at the possibilities.

D.C. wrote: "It might help if Amazon's publishing software were a little more sensitive to grammatical and spelling errors, but that's not a big fix. For one thing, too many of these authors can't recognize tho..."

But Amazon does have one in their Kindle Singles program. You have to submit your work for inclusion to a live editor. The premise is since the writing is held to a higher standard the royalty price caps are removed so you can charge $.99 and still qualify for 70% royalty rate. But the nice thing about it, is that it's more open to new writers than the more traditional venues.

Linda wrote: "@Candace -- I was responding to Jack's suggestion that Amazon employ (for a pittance!) reviewers to be gatekeepers.

Given that a percentage of the "top" reviewers on Amazon are known to be paid "r..."

Unfortunately, it's the best system we've got. And it's way better than no system at all. Could it be better, of course. Just requiring paid reviews to be identified as such would be a big improvement. But that's never going to happen.

As far as gatekeeping goes, I agree with D.C. that Amazon does not need to be in that business. IMHO, they, and other ebook distributors, have already done as much as they should; on-line previews. I judge a book more by reading the first chapter than by its reviews. The people who review may have totally different tastes than I do. If ebook distributors do any more than this, perhaps they should require SPAs to provide a preview.

That would not make self-pubbing any more difficult to the author.

Note the part of my comment about writers NOT PAYING ANYTHING. That would eliminate those paid reviewers at Fiverr, wouldn't it?
But never mind; it was only a thought.

Candace wrote: "D.C. wrote: "It might help if Amazon's publishing software were a little more sensitive to grammatical and spelling errors, but that's not a big fix. For one thing, too many of these authors can't ..."

Yes, but it's selective, which means that works that are highly error prone are probably not very likely to end up in the program. It's also for works between 5000-30000 words, which is well under novel length.

It's probably a good alternative to traditional publishing for some writers (and is making me wonder what I've got batting around in progress that I might want to submit) but it's not a way to improve the general quality of self-published work.

I agree it's selective, but it doesn't stop you from publishing in the general categories. But I like that you can get around the royalty restrictions on price for shorter works. I really wish they'd drop that and just go to a 70% flat rate. I don't like charging the customer the same amount for shorter works. I work just as hard on them, although not as long. 35% of $.99 makes it not worth publishing.

Wow! I appear to have stuck a foot into the hornet's nest. Up to my neck.
I wasn't aware of any of this stuff. My naivete is showing!

Linda wrote: "Going back to the original question of the thread, I think it's interesting to note that the objective seems to be the "easiest" route to publishing success. Again, the definition of "success" is ..."

"If you say, 'That's hard work!' I will smile and agree with you."

I'll smile, too. (Or perhaps it's a grimace.) This is exactly the reason why I'm still trying the TP route. I've worked hard to master my craft, and now I'm working hard to find an agent. I'll only go the SP route if-and-when I've exhausted all possibilities of joining the ranks of authors whose work I admire and delight in.

Joyce wrote: "Linda wrote: "Going back to the original question of the thread, I think it's interesting to note that the objective seems to be the "easiest" route to publishing success. Again, the definition of..."

Depending on what you write, you might want to try small and/or e-presses, where submissions usually don't have to be agented. Advances are thinner on the ground, but but you have most of the other advantages of traditional publishing. Or disadvantages, as the case may be. And with ANY publisher, do your homework carefully.

Owww..and the world keep on spinning..

Take into account that the large TPs and many of the smaller ones are looking for books that are marketable, not necessarily of any great quality.

And I've been seeing way too many typos and other glaring goofups in even the Big House books, although I will say I have not found nearly so many in books from DAW.

Renee wrote: "Take into account that the large TPs and many of the smaller ones are looking for books that are marketable, not necessarily of any great quality."

Case in point - "Fifty Shades of Grey" is a best seller, but it's hardly a literary masterpiece.

An interesting thread. I decided to try the self publishing route after reading about Hugh Howey's experience with Wool. This is my first month having published. Already I see a distinct problem with self publishing. I spend more time marketing than writing. But perhaps that is just my problem. It does seem though, from what I have read, that mid-list authors make more money self-publishing than going the traditional route.

Gary wrote: "An interesting thread. I decided to try the self publishing route after reading about Hugh Howey's experience with Wool. This is my first month having published. Already I see a distinct problem..."

That is absolutely a truism - spending more time marketing than writing, but I'm not sure that it's a "problem". As far as my own marketing is concerned I feel like I am a much more devoted and enthusiastic promoter of my own work than any paid marketer could ever be. It can be overwhelming at first, but once you get a plan in place and start to see it be effective, it really is rewarding and often more effective than paying for a service. It's certainly cheaper anyway.

David wrote: "Gary wrote: "An interesting thread. I decided to try the self publishing route after reading about Hugh Howey's experience with Wool. This is my first month having published. Already I see a dis..."

Self-publishing is not an easy option... but, if you want to keep control and enjoy discovering things for yourself it can be fantastic.

I do spend a lot of time promoting, but I enjoy meeting new people & love the interaction.

As for "vanity" press ... do you want to throw away loads of your money and still not sell books?

Only big publishers can get you into the top of the charts and pay you properly.

I never understand why anyone would pay thousands for someone else to get most of the cut. Then you also have to buy loads of books "at a discount" - if I wanted to be a bookstore I would do it.

I have learnt so much about the "publishing" business since I choose to do it all myself. If I ever were to eventually get an agent & book deal my eyes would be wide open... publishers are not wizards, they are businesses! The best will choose quality & sell good books, the rest sell any old rubbish and call it a book because they can!

HA!

Renee wrote: "Take into account that the large TPs and many of the smaller ones are looking for books that are marketable, not necessarily of any great quality.

And I've been seeing way too many typos and oth..."

Quality as a whole has been suffering in the TP. The publishing houses have slowly been cutting costs and laying off editors. Where before, a book might be seen by multiple editors throughout the publishing process, now they are seen by one person, one or two times, and the final copy is not professionally proofed. I understand they have to do this to remain competitive, but the cachet to some extent is just that. Many SP works are professionally edited by private editors. The TP houses have also cut back on marketing, expecting the author to do a lot of what traditionally had been their job.

Joyce wrote: "Linda wrote: "Going back to the original question of the thread, I think it's interesting to note that the objective seems to be the "easiest" route to publishing success. Again, the definition of ..."

Here it is four years later, and I'm what has happened in the meantime?
I had such a promising "come-on" from a major publishing house and gave them exclusive consideration... didn't hear a word for TWO YEARS, wrote them and withdrew from consideration... then six months later got a form rejection letter.
So now I am indeed self-publishing after all.

Ultimately the answer as you've found is that easier is a matter of some debate. Is it easier to let the publisher do all the work of publishing and cover design, etc? Yes. But its not easier to find a publisher who will take your book and put it on a shelf, and in the end you have to do most of the publicity anyway, for a fraction of the sales profit. Its a lot of work to publish your own book... but its a better path in terms of control and earnings.

I agree, Christopher.
And as of yesterday, I succeeded in cutting through the worst of the hassle to publish my book, Mars, in paperback using Kindle direct to print. Or whatever Amazon calls it.
But if you've published an ebook recently, you're seeing the suggestion. My first effort, not great. I gave up.
But I decided to give it a go, and to that end I bought a program called Vellum. Which really does take the hassle out, most of it!
You don't need a lot of things, like a table of contents. Vellum creates one for you, and if you don't strip yours out, you'll have two. So jump ahead of where I was.
Anyway, you upload your .doc or .docx file. Simple. Vellum then starts doing stuff.
Go to the 'print setup' and choose your size. I'm going with 6x9. Once selected, it's automatic for the next book.
Look through the Table of contents. You'll find a few 'unassigned' names. Click on that, go to that point, either change 'unassigned' to something like 'By the Author' or delete that page. Ditto 'About the Author'.
When you're done, there's a button on the right that says 'Generate'. Select that. It begins formatting your document in various formats, including PDF. The others are if you go 'wide' and publish to Apple, B&N, etc. PDF is what Amazon wants. Make sure it's the way you want it before you print it; print books can't be un-printed. You can always go back and rework your file, then re-upload, but why? Do it right the first time.
On to your ebook. You can go directly to print, THEN publish the ebook if you want. Amazon's Print option will do that for you. But my books are already in ebook format (and not doing very well right now! Audio books are doing much better!)
Time to upload your new PDF file. Simple, straightforward, and there shouldn't be any problems if you've done it right. I didn't have problems.
I used Amazon's PDF Cover Creator. Just follow the directions. My book Mars had a very nice ebook cover, but I didn't have the original cover and in any case, I can't deal with Photoshop or GIMP. But Amazon has various pics you can use and I chose a nice pic of Mars. Provided the title, subtitle, and author name. Poof, a front cover!
Upload a photo of me, plus a short bio for the back page. Add a blurb of what the book's about. Done.
Four hours later, Amazon approved it and listed the book as available for purchase. I ordered a proof copy just for grins, but I don't expect problems.
CreateSpace takes much longer and I find it more of a hassle.
Email me if you need more info.

After 14 months of writing, re-writing, and polishing my manuscript, I evaluated all of the publishing options, including costs, format options, technical support, and distribution. I chose a vanity press.

I spent the next three months working with a copy editor, conceptual editor, layout design artist, professional narrator, and website designer. Finally, the work was published and distributed in four formats: Paperback, e-book, audio book on CD, and Audio download; all of which were made commercially available internationally and remained so from Aug. 9, 2011 through Jan. 1, 2017, when the publisher declared bankruptcy and closed down.

The total fee charged by the publisher for the support, manufacturing, and distribution services listed above was$3,890.00.

A total of 1,029 units were sold from Aug. 9 2011 through Dec. 31, 2016 (485 paperback, 480 e-book, 36 audio books on CD, and 28 audio downloads). I was paid a total of $2,358.34 in royalties by the publisher.

Obviously, my initial investment resulted in a loss o $1,531.66. That said; I am quite pleased that over 1,000 people purchased some format of my novel. I have enjoyed successes during my life, writing is just not one of them.

Every novice author must decide for themselves which publishing method is best for them - traditional, vanity, or self. I personally have no regrets regarding my choice.

I'm pretty happy with my choices too.
I publish ebooks directly to Amazon Kindle. The process is simple, and Amazon will help you publicize your books. So will a number of independent promoters such as BookSends, Ereader News Today, and Book Barbarian (SF and Fantasy, first in a series or stand-alone books only).
Income so far, since I first published Combat Wizard in 2014, about $100,000. Not from CW alone, obviously; I have since published another 15 books and 4 boxed sets. I also have 11 books on Audible and I'll soon have all my books available in print format.
So far, that format hasn't made money from the two I've had up for a year, but with all 15 I hope to increase my income. Meantime, I got the satisfaction of donating a book to my local library as well as others, including one in the town where I grew up. As a longtime library user, finding my name along with better known authors in their listing was quite a boost!

Taking a physical book to your library is one of the great feelings. Control is, too.