Self-Publishing & Big Five Dominate Book Market...

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

It's relatively new and is filtering through (started about middle to end of Aug). There will always be some books that don't fit the perfect pattern shown depending on buying habits, date of publication and other things taken into account, but a few things changed in Aug. More recent reviews are weighted more heavily (I got this from an email from Amazon telling me how they were improving reviews along with some other info). There's been some other "inside" discussions of publishers being told to get books to the 200 review mark to have more algorithmic benefits. The 100 reviews is just ONE of the 'Marks to hit.' Obviously high sales numbers is going to also affect the algos.

I have no problem with the algorithms always changing--that has to happen. But there's been a plethora of emphasis on certain targets. Goodreads (The CEO talked about it) has had a "100 reviews or more" gets shown more and in certain places. Maybe that is where Amazon got the idea that it was a good thing to do.

All of the rules would be okay except that as producers/authors/etc figure out these gates, they just jump over them.

From what I understand, the UK has always been under different algos and even the rules for being an associate and what is paid out is different. The products there have never enjoyed the huge numbers of reviews that get done on the US side. I don't investigate that as much or keep track. I"m sure there are algos but I don't think they are the same.

Keep an eye on it. Maybe I"m wrong. I hope I am wrong because an arbitrary number that keeps rising just pushes people to add dishonest reviews.

Did Amazon say in an email that books needed a 100 reviews?
What was the exact phrasing that Amazon used?
Weighting newer reviews more heavily makes perfect sense especially on older stuff.
I am assuming this was an email to all sellers not just ebooks.
Please clarify.

Goodreads reviews do not equal Amazon reviews.
What I hate is authors that say you reviewed on Amazon, now put the review on Goodreads.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Did Amazon say in an email that books needed a 100 reviews?
What was the exact phrasing that Amazon used?
Weighting newer reviews more heavily makes perfect sense especially on older stuff.
I am assuming this was an email to all sellers not just ebooks.
Please clarify.

Goodreads reviews do not equal Amazon reviews.
What I hate is authors that say you reviewed on Amazon, now put the review on Goodreads.

I don't require or even ask for reviews (and it shows). I've always felt that I write the book, someone buys the book, obligations are pretty much over. Reviews are great, but how can an author just go around expecting someone to do them?

I don't know who got the email. I know I got the email and it only addressed the weighting of reviews (newer being more "relevant" and a couple of other things.)

SEPARATE from that: The 100 reviews was separate and came largely from other sources (most of it hearsay, backed by some evidence that was SHOWN, but when you look at things on a case-by-case basis...it can be easy to see what you expect to see.) I did notice that after August, my books appeared to hit a sudden reduction/cliff in sales except for the newest one. That is why I went looking for information. Every year there are discussion about new algorithms. In my case, the heboughts/sheboughts where I can follow them have been reduced. There's a list on every author page that shows other authors being bought so you can track that list to see if it changes or if the same authors largely stay in that list. You can then click on those authors and go see if the he/boughts show your books in the list or if they have been pushed out by books with more reviews. Not scientific. But you can track that now and then to get a glimpse of what your audience is reading. This can be helpful to determine if your audience is largely a cozy reading audience or a UF reading audience...etc.

The 200 reviews came from an author who said her publisher told her that she needed to try to reach 200 because better Amazon algos would kick in for her if she could reach that number. It wasn't the first time I'd heard that (the first time the number was actually 100 and that was probably a year ago).

[Cinisajoy]

Very true on the also boughts.
I just wanted a bit of clarification. Thanks.

Hey on reviews, what about that one "poor" author that got at least 1000 1 star reviews the day the book came out.
Apparently, her readers didn't like the ending.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

I don't require or even ask for reviews (and it shows). I've always felt that I write the book, someone buys the book, obligations are pretty much over. Reviews are great, but how can an author just go around expecting someone to do them?

If any author tried to "require" a review from me, that would be the last I ever bought from them. As you say, an author's business relationship with a customer stops with the sale of the book.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

If any author tried to "require" a review from me, that would be the last I ever bought from them. As you say, an author's business relationship with a customer stops with the sale of the book.

HarryT,
Not only did those authors lose any future sales, they also lost the Amazon review.

Now I have had authors give me their books specifically for reviews and those I didn't mind doing both places. It was the books I had paid for that irritated me.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by HarryT

If any author tried to "require" a review from me, that would be the last I ever bought from them. As you say, an author's business relationship with a customer stops with the sale of the book.

I agree.


The only time I've seen any type of "requirement" of a review are where authors will offer Arc's, either on their own or through Netgalley, in exchange for a review and require might be too strong of a word. I suppose if you got an Arc with the understanding you'd give a review you might not get one the next time they're offered if you hadn't followed through. I don't know any other way they could at all "require" a review. I have seen requests along the lines of "if you enjoyed this book please consider leaving a review at your favorite site/vendor...", but that's very far from a requirement.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

I agree.


The only time I've seen any type of "requirement" of a review are where authors will offer Arc's, either on their own or through Netgalley, in exchange for a review and require might be too strong of a word. I suppose if you got an Arc with the understanding you'd give a review you might not get one the next time they're offered if you hadn't followed through. I don't know any other way they could at all "require" a review. I have seen requests along the lines of "if you enjoyed this book please consider leaving a review at your favorite site/vendor...", but that's very far from a requirement.

I was thinking more along the lines of an ARC. I used to do them, but readers do tend to feel an 'obligation' with the ARCs and honestly, I don't want anyone feeling "obligated." But I've seen authors try the hard line with giving books away and "expecting" reviews. Heck, I used to review for a large review site. I got PLENTY of email from authors asking me "when" I'd be reviewing the book and letting me know they had provided the book on condition of a review...blah, blah. There were the days of trad book too. One author went so far as to contact the guys who RAN the site and asked them to ask me to get on with it. Sometimes publishers were guilty as well--they'd send letters basically saying, "If you don't review x percent of what we send, we will no longer send..."

Reviews are unpaid by design/ethics and I don't think all authors are aware of just how many books a review site gets. I knew it was time for me to quit when the admins sent me TWO boxes of books that had piled up. We had over 12 reviewers and we each got one to two boxes. And I mean boxes that were packing-sized boxes, probably 48 long by 24 tall? And I already had several other books in the queue. I love books. I love to read. But it should never be an obligation whether it's an ARC, a gift, a review copy, the back of the cereal boxes...stop signs, okay. Those you are obligated to read or at least not ignore!!!

[AnemicOak]

Unsolicited Arc's (which review sites get tons of) are different than when they're specifically offered by authors in exchange for a review. IMO if an author is offering an Arc specifically in exchange for a review, and I request one based on that, then I've entered an agreement with them to fulfill that condition when at all possible. If I don't want/plan to meet that condition then don't request the Arc. Not that I've ever requested an Arc that way. I have gotten a few in contests and those I've felt no obligation to read or review.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Unsolicited Arc's (which review sites get tons of) are different than when they're specifically offered by authors in exchange for a review. IMO if an author is offering an Arc specifically in exchange for a review, and I request one based on that, then I've entered an agreement with them to fulfill that condition when at all possible. If I don't want/plan to meet that condition then don't request the Arc. Not that I've ever requested an Arc that way. I have gotten a few in contests and those I've felt no obligation to read or review.

I don't even view it as a requirement when a request is made. I do get requests, but I also understand that ESPECIALLY with ebook, they may forget all about it. Or try it and not like it and just move on. I do get the tiniest bit irritated when readers request a print copy and then disappear. Lately I've had a lot of requests for print review copies and I can't accommodate them all. Nor can I guess which ones are most likely to actually do a review (although I do try by looking for a website or checking the Amazon/GR profile to see if they've done any reviews lately.) The ebook reviewing isn't a huge deal one way or the other. I'm not out much even if I have to gift the book because they don't know how to transfer it. But print copies are a whole 'nother bag of monies.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Really?
Because filtering "Science Fiction & Fantasy" & "Last 30 Days" on Amazon UK gives me 6,947 hits, 519 of which are 4 stars and above.
So reading the samples is out unless I've pre-selected them somehow.
And that's just the last 30 days, I've given up

I check out the Humble bundle / story bundle stuff but other than that my only halfway reliable guide to what I will like is publishing imprint. Unless I spend more time looking for books than reading them, which kind of ruins the idea of reading for pleasure.

So, personally, I seem to be stuck in TradPub land as it currently seems to be my best filter mechanism. On the plus side SF Gateway alone can keep me stocked for several lifetimes so I'm not too worried about it.

I literally do not understand what this ^^ is supposed to mean.


What it sounds like, reminds me of Wentworth, from The Wee Free Men:

Wentworth was sitting on a large, flat stone, surrounded by sweets. Many of them were bigger than he was. Smaller ones were in piles, large ones lay like logs. And they were in every color sweets can be, such as Not-Really-Raspberry Red, Fake-Lemon Yellow, Curiously-Chemical Orange, Some-Kind-of-Acidy Green, and Who-Knows-What Blue.

Tears were falling off his chin in blobs. Since they were landing among the sweets, serious stickiness was already taking place.

Wentworth howled. His mouth was a big red tunnel with the wobbly thing that no one knows the name of bouncing up and down in the back of his throat. He stopped crying only when it was time to either breathe in or die, and even then it was only for one huge sucking moment before the howl came back again.

Tiffany knew what the problem was immediately. She’d seen it before, at birthday parties. Her brother was suffering from tragic sweet deprivation. Yes, he was surrounded by sweets. But the moment he took any sweet at all, said his sugar-addled brain, that meant he was not taking all the rest. And there were so many sweets he’d never be able to eat them all. It was too much to cope with. The only solution was to burst into tears.

The only solution at home was to put a bucket over his head until he calmed down, and to take almost all the sweets away. He could deal with a few handfuls at a time.

Problem is, I feel sure that cannot be the case here.

Also, I am sure that tradpub sells more than enough sweets to overwhelm several cities of Wentworths. (Even if you need the sea of indies to overwhelm a country of him.)

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Problem is, I feel sure that cannot be the case here.

Also, I am sure that tradpub sells more than enough sweets to overwhelm several cities of Wentworths. (Even if you need the sea of indies to overwhelm a country of him.)

The technical term is analysis paralysis. A very real effect that results from an abundance of choice.

Here's one unavoidable example:
https://www.bizfusion.nl/blogposts/A...ogrammers.post

Another example is the case of cuban ballplayers coming to the US and freezing at the choices in a typical supermarket after growing up in a environment where product variety was constrained by outside forces. Suddenly seeing even just three brands of a given product was two more than they were used to. Where western consumers grow up surrounded by choice and internalize concepts like "good, better, best" marketing and added-value differentiation and develop strategies to weed out "noise"--products they don't need or want--those young men simply saw a wall of product and couldn't cope. Being highly-paid professional athletes with multimillion dollar salaries, their agent-provided life coach would teach them the basics, usually along the lines of "until you learn your own tastes, look at the price and buy the most expensive". A perfectly valid strategy when you have money to burn though not without risk, as many a lottery winner or entertainer facing bankruptcy court has discovered.

Shopping is a learned skill. Some schools teach it, usually under home economics. Different people evolve their own shopping strategies according to their own tastes and preferences and none is intrinsically better so long as they don't land them in bankruptcy.

In the book business, built up over the centuries around an economy of scarcity and top-down control, the ebook evolution has brought about a very fast switch to an economy of abundance and many people haven't yet internalized the new paradigm. Which is where the "volcano of crap" "tsunami of dreck" stories from pundits and bloggers and the "all indie titles are unedited junk" overgeneralization come from. People used to leisurely strolls through "big" bookstores with 30-50,000 titles of all genres and formats see a Kindle store with 4M titles and suddenly the old shopping strategies fall apart. Life isn't long enough to individually inspect 4million titles. Or even 200,000.

Some adapt and develop new strategies.
Others simply stick with the old and grumble.

To each their own.

"People are entitled to their own opinions..."