Let me put this as simply as possible:
Hugh Howey says:
Quote:
|
“Our data suggests that even stellar manuscripts are better off self-published.”
|
The problem is that the data doesn't support that conclusion. What the data does say is that a self-published Amazon author will earn more royalties for a given volume of sales than a commercially published author, which is a very different thing.
The reason I am criticizing the report for not giving the size of the field is because you cannot make the statement that it's better to choose one option over the other without that data.
It's like he's saying the blue car is faster because it goes 100 miles, which is nonsense. You can't measure speed without both time and distance.
I wouldn't care about him leaving out the relative size of the field
if his conclusion didn't require it.