Poll: What is your #1 method of ebook discovery

[BearMountainBooks]

I looked into some of the book reviews pages on youtube after seeing the mention. Lots of them out there haven't been updated in a year or more. There are some very active ones. Obviously as a writer, I was interested in the number of followers, how to submit and so on. But Youtube doesn't lend itself to contacting the reviewer and some of the links to other sites (like GR or FB) are obviously not kept updated. (That's all fine if the reviewer doesn't want to be contacted, of course).

Of the three or four I sampled, every single one was reviewing a print book, which I found fascinating. They were also younger--I'd say in their twenties. Interesting demographics.

[grumbles]

Found the poll closed but I would have selected "other". I find almost all my books by searching the library (libraries) by date books are added. Since I'm only interested in epub format and I will not under any circumstance deal with Kobo again my only source for mainstream publishers is the library.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by grumbles

Found the poll closed but I would have selected "other". I find almost all my books by searching the library (libraries) by date books are added. Since I'm only interested in epub format and I will not under any circumstance deal with Kobo again my only source for mainstream publishers is the library.

There are many other sources of epub books.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by grumbles

Found the poll closed but I would have selected "other". I find almost all my books by searching the library (libraries) by date books are added. Since I'm only interested in epub format and I will not under any circumstance deal with Kobo again my only source for mainstream publishers is the library.

Google Play? Direct at the publishers?

[Smashwords]

Originally Posted by KenMagee

I ticked 'favourite authors' which turned out to be the most popular choice (26%). It's what I do but it made me sad to realize how that puts new authors at yet another disadvantage.

Hi Ken, don't feel sad. The first time I did the survey, favorite author was the #1 choice as well. With this knowledge, there's actually much an author can do to become a favorite author - it'll all about earning the attention, trust and loyalty of a reader. If the author thinks in those terms, they start asking questions that lead to answers that help them focus on what matters most. Indie authors actually have some advantages here. Indies have more creative, promotional and pricing flexibility than do the big authors from large publishers. Indies can iterate more quickly (new and better covers, experiment with description wording, keywords, descriptions, fresh book revisions, etc).

[Ravensknight]

Originally Posted by Smashwords

(new and better covers, experiment with description wording, keywords, descriptions, fresh book revisions, etc). .

ie, release the same piece of drek over and over and over instead of actually waiting until it is a finished product...

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Ravensknight

ie, release the same piece of drek over and over and over instead of actually waiting until it is a finished product...

That comment wasn't really necessary (even if it's true in some cases.)

[Ravensknight]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

That comment wasn't really necessary (even if it's true in some cases.)

When ever someone wholesale endorses indies as some sort of magical unicorn rainbow solution, there always needs to be a countering voice.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Ravensknight

When ever someone wholesale endorses indies as some sort of magical unicorn rainbow solution, there always needs to be a countering voice.

Non-indies publish with Smashwords as well. Several small publishers publish there (Gemma Halliday Presents is one and there are a couple of fantasy publishers too). Also, this was Smashword's thread--I hate to see mobileread regulars to be overly...well, how about "a tad rude" to visitors, especially on their own thread. Everyone on this forum knows very well that there are some issues with indie publications. It's an easy target. I don't think anyone, including Smashwords, is in denial about it, so it's simply not necessary to go around pointing it out at every opportunity. That wasn't the purpose of the thread--he simply mentioned one possible advantage of being indie (whether we take advantage of those advantages or not!)

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Non-indies publish with Smashwords as well. Several small publishers publish there (Gemma Halliday Presents is one and there are a couple of fantasy publishers too). Also, this was Smashword's thread--I hate to see mobileread regulars to be overly...well, how about "a tad rude" to visitors, especially on their own thread. Everyone on this forum knows very well that there are some issues with indie publications. It's an easy target. I don't think anyone, including Smashwords, is in denial about it, so it's simply not necessary to go around pointing it out at every opportunity. That wasn't the purpose of the thread--he simply mentioned one possible advantage of being indie (whether we take advantage of those advantages or not!)

How about this. This is a old saying in the sales world, you only get one chance to make a good first impression. Thus IMPO, it behooves an author to make sure that anything they put out is as polished as they can get it.

More to the point of the thread, because of the normal release cycle for name authors (typically Spring and Fall), Summer is when I tend to try out new authors and genres. This summer I've tried authors like Brad Thor, Elizabeth Peters, Holly Black, Victor Kloss, Shae Ford and Taran Mattaru for the first time. Some are established already, some have been around for a long, long time, some are indies. I tried out other authors as well, but those are the ones that I liked well enough to make it through the book. I've given other authors a shot as well during the summer months over the years.

I tried one other author this week based on the recommendation in another thread. This particular author was an indie, IMPO, badly in need of a good editor. Not because there were misspellings and the like, but rather because the writer simply didn't know how to hang a book together. It was like some guy at a bar telling a story, jumping to the punchline without giving enough lead in to make it funny. There was very little set up and the set up was pretty unbelievable. I did finish the story, mostly because there were little nuggets that made me think he has the ability to be a decent writer, but odds are, I'm not going to buy anymore of his books, because unless he polishes up his writing a lot, it's just not worth the effort for me. That's the danger of iterating in public.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

How about this. This is a old saying in the sales world, you only get one chance to make a good first impression. Thus IMPO, it behooves an author to make sure that anything they put out is as polished as they can get it.

More to the point of the thread, because of the normal release cycle for name authors (typically Spring and Fall), Summer is when I tend to try out new authors and genres. This summer I've tried authors like Brad Thor, Elizabeth Peters, Holly Black, Victor Kloss, Shae Ford and Taran Mattaru for the first time. Some are established already, some have been around for a long, long time, some are indies. I tried out other authors as well, but those are the ones that I liked well enough to make it through the book. I've given other authors a shot as well during the summer months over the years.

I tried one other author this week based on the recommendation in another thread. This particular author was an indie, IMPO, badly in need of a good editor. Not because there were misspellings and the like, but rather because the writer simply didn't know how to hang a book together. It was like some guy at a bar telling a story, jumping to the punchline without giving enough lead in to make it funny. There was very little set up and the set up was pretty unbelievable. I did finish the story, mostly because there were little nuggets that made me think he has the ability to be a decent writer, but odds are, I'm not going to buy anymore of his books, because unless he polishes up his writing a lot, it's just not worth the effort for me. That's the danger of iterating in public.

This is all entirely true. Every word of it. I was never arguing the truth of the matter.

Since you brought up interesting points, I'd like to add to your "You can only make one first impression."

You often have to make your own chances. That's going to mean mistakes and some bad efforts. That's just the breaks. The publishing world cannot train and/or edit every writer out there. Sending in a manuscript doesn't guarantee it will be read. Once slots are full everything is sent back as "no thanks" usually without any hint of whether it was read or just rejected. Even if there are a few comments, they can be mere hints.

Getting an agent doesn't mean getting published either. Writing, by its nature, means rewriting. Art of any kind is a learning experience. Some writers keep trying and get better. Some do this via editors. Some keep right on doing the same thing over and over without improving anything.

Thank God I live in a time where I've had a chance to try. The masses of published stuff (indie and otherwise) may not please readers. That's just the nature of the business. It's very similar to art and music in that respect.

I only made my earlier statement because the truth of all this is known and not every thread has to beat a dead horse. Also, I love Elizabeth Peters, but she has some bizarre works out there. And she definitely improved over time with her writing, especially when she found her niche. She was trad all the way (except possibly for one of her non-fiction Egyptology books. I'm not sure about that one.) Her growth and her collection of works is an inspiration to anyone who takes the time to study how her writing changed over the years.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

This is all entirely true. Every word of it. I was never arguing the truth of the matter.

Since you brought up interesting points, I'd like to add to your "You can only make one first impression."

You often have to make your own chances. That's going to mean mistakes and some bad efforts. That's just the breaks. The publishing world cannot train and/or edit every writer out there. Sending in a manuscript doesn't guarantee it will be read. Once slots are full everything is sent back as "no thanks" usually without any hint of whether it was read or just rejected. Even if there are a few comments, they can be mere hints.

Getting an agent doesn't mean getting published either. Writing, by its nature, means rewriting. Art of any kind is a learning experience. Some writers keep trying and get better. Some do this via editors. Some keep right on doing the same thing over and over without improving anything.

Thank God I live in a time where I've had a chance to try. The masses of published stuff (indie and otherwise) may not please readers. That's just the nature of the business. It's very similar to art and music in that respect.

I only made my earlier statement because the truth of all this is known and not every thread has to beat a dead horse. Also, I love Elizabeth Peters, but she has some bizarre works out there. And she definitely improved over time with her writing, especially when she found her niche. She was trad all the way (except possibly for one of her non-fiction Egyptology books. I'm not sure about that one.) Her growth and her collection of works is an inspiration to anyone who takes the time to study how her writing changed over the years.

I think part of the problem with especially Indies is at least 50% think that they have the greatest story ever and they need no help whatsoever and no one is going to see it until it is published.
Over the last 5 years I have only met three authors that didn't need a second set of eyes. The other good indies all have editors and invest in their books.
Most that think they don't need an editor/proofreader really need one.

But then we have had this discussion before.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

This is all entirely true. Every word of it. I was never arguing the truth of the matter.

Since you brought up interesting points, I'd like to add to your "You can only make one first impression."

You often have to make your own chances. That's going to mean mistakes and some bad efforts. That's just the breaks. The publishing world cannot train and/or edit every writer out there. Sending in a manuscript doesn't guarantee it will be read. Once slots are full everything is sent back as "no thanks" usually without any hint of whether it was read or just rejected. Even if there are a few comments, they can be mere hints.

Getting an agent doesn't mean getting published either. Writing, by its nature, means rewriting. Art of any kind is a learning experience. Some writers keep trying and get better. Some do this via editors. Some keep right on doing the same thing over and over without improving anything.

Thank God I live in a time where I've had a chance to try. The masses of published stuff (indie and otherwise) may not please readers. That's just the nature of the business. It's very similar to art and music in that respect.

I only made my earlier statement because the truth of all this is known and not every thread has to beat a dead horse. Also, I love Elizabeth Peters, but she has some bizarre works out there. And she definitely improved over time with her writing, especially when she found her niche. She was trad all the way (except possibly for one of her non-fiction Egyptology books. I'm not sure about that one.) Her growth and her collection of works is an inspiration to anyone who takes the time to study how her writing changed over the years.

Quite a few writers have "reading groups", i.e. a group of authors who will give them feedback. The most famous being the Inklings of Tolkien and Lewis fame, but I've read a number of more modern authors who talk about the same thing. My point isn't that Smashword is bad (I've never really explored it so I have no real opinion) or that indies are bad, but rather than iterative publishing has it's draw backs.

A true editor doesn't just check spelling and grammar, he points out the flaws and makes suggestions on how to improve. From some of the accounts that I've read, it can take just as long going back and forth with an editor as it took to write the original manuscript, at least for new authors. I imagine that once an author gains experience with the craft, that back and forth can drop quite a bit.

I suspect that the Baen practice of pairing name writers with unknowns had three advantages. First, it increased the output of the name writers and second, it helped spread the craft of writing to some new writers who needed some polish. Last, it introduced the lesser known authors to potential readers and made it more likely that people would take a chance on their solo work.

[BearMountainBooks]

Baen's also had (has?) one of THE BEST online critique groups out there. Bar none. I was on in for a few years. No better teachers out there. One of my books actually made it up to Toni's desk (where it sat for 4 years before I pulled it due to getting an agent).

There are ways to improve--but the author has to want to improve--even if they think they don't need it. And yes, there are storyline editors and copy editors. Storyline is probably more important than copy editing, but both are critical for the end product.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Baen's also had (has?) one of THE BEST online critique groups out there. Bar none. I was on in for a few years. No better teachers out there. One of my books actually made it up to Toni's desk (where it sat for 4 years before I pulled it due to getting an agent).

There are ways to improve--but the author has to want to improve--even if they think they don't need it. And yes, there are storyline editors and copy editors. Storyline is probably more important than copy editing, but both are critical for the end product.

Four years. I don't think that I would have that kind of patience.