Best Selling Authors and Self Publishing

[darryl]

Mike Shatzkin recently posted his blog entry entitled "The publishing world is changing, but there is one big dog that has not yet barked" http://www.idealog.com/blog/the-publ...ot-yet-barked/

This post discussed a number of interesting points which have received some attention. However, the topic which gave the post its title appears only near its end, and does not appear to have received the attention it deserves. The Big Dog that has not yet barked? To quote from the post, "No major author of recurring bestsellers has stepped up to take charge of his or her own output."

Like Mike Shatzkin, I would have expected it to have happened already. So why has it not?

Firstly, although sales of ebooks apparently exceed sales of paper books on Amazon, paper books not only continue to constitute a significant proportion of the market but, apparently, the majority. One of the comments to the post suggests that 65% of book sales are print books. Yes, I expect that sales of paper books will eventually shrink to only a small percentage of overall sales. But I also think that this could well take many many years. And while paper book sales remain significant, let's face it, the most effective way for an author to get their books into Brick and Mortar stores and market them is through a traditional publisher. It is easy for self-published authors to provide a print book option for purchasers. For those readers purchasing online, particularly from Amazon, Bricks and Mortar stores are irrelevant, and the Big 5 seem to have little to offer. But the bricks and mortar stores are the province of traditional publishing. Reportedly, even Amazon imprints are being boycotted. Traditionally published books and ebooks are available on Amazon. But Amazon published books or books self-published through Amazon are nowhere to be seen in book stores, newsagencies, Airport Shops etc. It appears that the only way to reach the whole of the market is to be traditionally published. So, the question arises, just what is the size of the market that non-traditionally published authors are missing out on? For most authors, the far more generous terms Amazon offers likely more than make up for potential sales missed. Even if this is not the case, almost all of them are not wanted by traditional publishers for various reasons.

But best-selling authors are different creatures altogether. They are not only wanted by traditional publishers, but courted by them. Anecdotally, as logic would suggest, they are offered far superior terms to those offered to even the best of the so-called mid-list authors. They likely feel some loyalty to the Publishers and People who have contributed to their success. But more important than this is one question. Why they would take such a risk? For instance, assume that the percentage of 65% of sales being paper books is correct (and I don't know if it is or if not what the real figure is). Assume that 50% of these paper book sales are online, with the other 50% being retail sales in bricks and mortar stores (these percentages have been plucked from thin air). To a best-selling author, this could mean that he or she takes a very real risk of being unable to reach up to 1/3rd of their readers (in fact 32.5% being 50% of 65%) if they leave traditional publishing. At what stage does this become worthwhile for them? And if it does, how far will a traditional publisher be prepared to go to keep them? And what about their loyalty to their existing readers?

Assuming that my comments above are correct (and I am no expert on the publishing industry so they may not be) I do not expect to see a defection of a current best-selling author any time soon. And even if I prove to be wrong on this, I don't think there will be many such defections. What I do expect to see is traditional publishing finding it increasingly difficult to secure new authors or attract additional authors from self-publishing. Whilst some new authors will sign with traditional publishers on any terms, I do think those publishers will have to offer much better terms than they currently do even to new authors. They will have to face the hard fact that their titles are competing with self-published and Indi titles, and price accordingly. With higher costs and lower prices they will need to comperhensively review their business practices and become much more efficient.

I also expect that traditional publishing will increasingly come to source their authors from proven self-published authors. The sales pitch will be that we can give you access to this very sizeable and prestigious market where your books are not currently sold. And it would of course need to be accompanied by a commercially attractive offer. I don't know if a true best-selling author is possible outside of traditional publishing at the moment given that self-published authors cannot currently reach a significant proportion of the market. Many future best-selling authors may well come from those who succeed in self-publishing and then take their sales to the next level under a traditional publisher.

Of course, this strategy is only viable whilst print books continue to be a sizeable share of the market. It is not a strategy likely to be viable in the longer term, except perhaps for one publisher in a market niche. If they are to survive and continue to play a significant role in the longer term publishers must come up with a clear and realistic vision of their role in a future market dominated by ebooks. If there is such a role. Some very bad decisions have been made, and opportunities missed. It may already be too late for them to secure their future in the long term. And Amazon will not be sitting idly by!

[fjtorres]

The big name authors haven't abandoned the BPHs because, as earlier Shatzkin columns have pointed out, they don't operate under the so-called industry standard contract terms. Strictly speaking, they don't even receive royalties. If they do, somebody on their negotiating miscalculated badly.
A typical contract for these authors will be based on an estimate of copies to be sold, total, and an advance is negotiated to amount to 50% of that take. The nominal royalties are such that their books might take a decade or more to "earn out", if ever.

In other words, when those guys speak of "selling a book" they are speaking literally.

So, for them the economic math is 50% upfront versus 70% over time. Risk free. Present value math makes that an easy deal to accept since any good portfolio manager working with millions can easily make up the difference. More, the bulk of their book sales are also upfront, clustered in the three month launch window the BPHs care about most, which is why they can get those deals. They don't need word of mouth or even good reviews; their fans will buy them sight unseen no matter what.
Another Alex Cross or Michael Bennett book is going to sell by the million regardless of the reviews.

The other reasons to self publish, content control most notably, also don't apply to them. Patterson, for one, is the editor of his books. He hires the co-writer, gives them detailed outlines, and edits the wordsmithing to his taste. His publisher can afford to give him massive payouts because all they do is print and distribute his books. He even does his own promotion and TV ads. As far as Patterson goes, there is little difference between Ingram Spark or Lightning Source and his tradpub. So why look for an angel he doesn't know when he has a profitable devil he knows at hand?

Those folks are the 1-percenters of the publishing world and money doesn't mean the same thing it does for midlisters and newcomers. They already made their money. They don't have to "sing for their supper" and an extra million or two isn't going to change their lives. They already own their 300 acre writing shack in Maine.

The real question about name brand authors is what do the BPHs do when their cash cows retire. How much is it going to cost to bring into the fold the next Patterson or King or Roberts?

It used to be trapub as a whole got to see and bid on all the good manuscripts that got printed. That is no longer true. The next Grisham that comes along may not be interested in going tradpub unless there is big money and lots of trailing zeroes on the upfront check.

That is going to impact the bottom line.
The likely spiral (already under way) is ever bigger advances for expected bestsellers, ever smaller advances for everybody else, and a bigger focus on digital-only for the small fry. As long as there's dreamers looking to validation by contact the BPHs won't lack for titles at the low end. The high end, though? That will get pricy for them and, more problematic, unaffordable for the smaller tradpubs.

Long term, I worry about the small and medium tradpubs; the BAENS and Angry Robots...

[Cinisajoy]

On the 65% of all books are paper, does anyone have this figure?
What is the breakdown by type of book?
Fiction, nonfiction, craft, textbook, cookbook and children.
The last 4 come to mind for more paper than ebook sales.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

On the 65% of all books are paper, does anyone have this figure?
What is the breakdown by type of book?
Fiction, nonfiction, craft, textbook, cookbook and children.
The last 4 come to mind for more paper than ebook sales.

The answer is I really don't know. I haven't seen any up to date attempt to break it down, and I'm not sure if anyone but Amazon really has much of an idea. The source of this 65% figure was actually a simple comment to the Shatzkin post. It was okay to illustrate my point, but I have no idea how accurate or otherwise it is.

[darryl]

@fjtorres. Good post. One thing we can know for sure about the best-selling authors is that they are certainly given very favourable terms indeed. However, as much as it pains me to say it, so long as the Big 5 have a stranglehold on access to a significant segment of the market, it has something attractive to offer authors. Access to this segment of the market could for some authors be the door to best-selling status. And the next generation of best sellers for the Big 5 could well prove to be top indie authors who want to reach the whole of the market including those buying from physical retail stores. Unlike the Big 5, I wish Baen and Angry Robot and the like every success. But they are not owed a living. They too must adapt and find their place in the changing market.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by darryl

The answer is I really don't know. I haven't seen any up to date attempt to break it down, and I'm not sure if anyone but Amazon really has much of an idea. The source of this 65% figure was actually a simple comment to the Shatzkin post. It was okay to illustrate my point, but I have no idea how accurate or otherwise it is.

I understood your point and that number has been thrown around for 2 years. I am pretty sure the BPH know what percentage of e and p books they sell on the fiction side. I would also bet it would be about 50/50. Just a guess on my part there.

But to me just throwing out that 65% figure without context makes very little sense. I know science textbooks and needlepoint books do not translate well to ebooks.

That would be like me saying 10% of my facebook friends are good authors. The next logical question would be how many of your Facebook friends are authors.

[dickloraine]

One big author who does kind of self-publishing exists, and it is even the biggest: J. K. Rowling does it with Pottermore. She shares some profits with her publisher, but only because she likes to.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by darryl

@fjtorres. Good post. One thing we can know for sure about the best-selling authors is that they are certainly given very favourable terms indeed. However, as much as it pains me to say it, so long as the Big 5 have a stranglehold on access to a significant segment of the market, it has something attractive to offer authors. Access to this segment of the market could for some authors be the door to best-selling status. And the next generation of best sellers for the Big 5 could well prove to be top indie authors who want to reach the whole of the market including those buying from physical retail stores. Unlike the Big 5, I wish Baen and Angry Robot and the like every success. But they are not owed a living. They too must adapt and find their place in the changing market.

It going to vary by genre: romance is about 70-30 ebook, SF is about 50-50, mystery and thrillers will be lower. Litfic is the lowest ebook penetration. For romance going tradpub isn't going to bring in enough added reach to justify the move. SF? It's headed that way...

A point to consider is that Indies these days *can* get into print and B&M so the only stranglehold the BPHs hold is on the payola front tables. But those are reserved for the high advance authors. Not many at any point in time. So, unless that kind of promotion is guaranteed... Well, at life-plus-70 they're going to have ante up a lot of money.

Also, remember, the kind of guys they'll want are going to already be making big money. The same dynamic that keeps the legacy guys in place is keeping the Indies indie.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

One big author who does kind of self-publishing exists, and it is even the biggest: J. K. Rowling does it with Pottermore. She shares some profits with her publisher, but only because she likes to.

She doesn't self publish, she simply held on to the ebook rights to her books. She had a good agent who thought to put that in the contract. There are actually quite a few authors who own the ebook rights to their backlist books. Others are quite happy to allow their publishers to handle all that.

(just as a note, there are quite a few older authors who simply aren't that interested in ebooks. )

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

...

This post discussed a number of interesting points which have received some attention. However, the topic which gave the post its title appears only near its end, and does not appear to have received the attention it deserves. The Big Dog that has not yet barked? To quote from the post, "No major author of recurring bestsellers has stepped up to take charge of his or her own output."

Like Mike Shatzkin, I would have expected it to have happened already. So why has it not?
...

I would imagine that there are quite a few reasons. One reason that authors use publishers is that then all the author has to do is what they do best - write the books and everything else is handled by the agent and the publisher. The publisher provides a lot of services, especially for big name authors. It's not just the advances, it's also the publicity, book placement, editing, artwork, book signing tours, the list goes on. Joe Independent isn't going to appear on Oprah. There is a ceiling to being an ebook only indie.

[dickloraine]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

She doesn't self publish, she simply held on to the ebook rights to her books. She had a good agent who thought to put that in the contract. There are actually quite a few authors who own the ebook rights to their backlist books. Others are quite happy to allow their publishers to handle all that.

(just as a note, there are quite a few older authors who simply aren't that interested in ebooks. )

That's why I said "kind of". It depends what we would call self-publishing. She is traditionally published in print but self-published in ebooks. Kind of the best of two worlds at this point in time. And handling the ebook business herself is self-publishing. Allowing the publisher to do it, is not. That is how I would define self-publishing.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

That's why I said "kind of". It depends what we would call self-publishing. She is traditionally published in print but self-published in ebooks. Kind of the best of two worlds at this point in time. And handling the ebook business herself is self-publishing. Allowing the publisher to do it, is not. That is how I would define self-publishing.

Her position is equivalent to Hugh Howey but in reverse.
She did a print only deal and then much later did the ebook on her own.
Howey did the ebook first and then did a (time-limited) print only deal.

Both are technically hybrid authors which is where most of the jackpot winners will end up for the next decade or so.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

That's why I said "kind of". It depends what we would call self-publishing. She is traditionally published in print but self-published in ebooks. Kind of the best of two worlds at this point in time. And handling the ebook business herself is self-publishing. Allowing the publisher to do it, is not. That is how I would define self-publishing.

The thread started by defining self publish as someone who doesn't have a traditional publisher at all. It seems to me that is what most people mean by self publish. Keeping the ebooks, audio or movie rights to a book doesn't really really count, IMPO. In the this particular case, the publisher did all the heavy lifting first, (i.e. editing, artwork, publicity etc...) She didn't release the ebook until 2011, The first Harry Potter book came out in 1997 and the last one came out 10 years latter in 2007. If you want to count keeping ebook rights, audio book rights and movie rights, then a large number of big name authors are self published, especially older authors, Roger Zelazny for example. If you define self publish in that manner, the whole point of the thread "why aren't big name authors self publishing" becomes less of a question since by that definition, quite a few are.

[dickloraine]

But keeping rights is not publishing. If he wants a movie, he has to find a movie publisher (or more likely a studio asks him for the rights). Maybe there is somewhere an author who actually produced a movie himself, but I don't know of one. Same regarding audio-books. The author could produce it himself or let his publisher handle it. One is self-publishing, the other isn't.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

But keeping rights is not publishing. If he wants a movie, he has to find a movie publisher (or more likely a studio asks him for the rights). Maybe there is somewhere an author who actually produced a movie himself, but I don't know of one. Same regarding audio-books. The author could produce it himself or let his publisher handle it. One is self-publishing, the other isn't.

Michael Crichton use to produce and direct the movie versions of his books. It's pretty unusual, I will admit.

I can think of a few authors who produce their own audio books.

If you really want to be technical, Pottermore is the publisher of the Harry Potter ebooks, Pottermore is a limited liability privately held company that started as a partnership between Rowlings and Sony. So Rowling has a publisher for the ebooks, she just happens to be the owner of that particular company. I'm pretty sure that she had people who did all the work of publishing the ebooks. That's quite likely the case in most big name/big money authors who "self publish". They set up a limited corporation and hire people to do the work.