Why authors choose to go ‘indie’, and why the standard varies.

[Kevin2960]

There are always arguements For and Against "Indie Authors", I'd hate to get into that, but read books by Authors who are members here on MR, The quality that I have found on the whole is excellent,

In case people DON'T realise it, we have a Lot of high quality Indie Authors here, look around, check them out, read the books, support the authors who are a big part of our community on MR,

I for one go out of my way to READ indie authoirs on purpose!

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by Namekuseijin

BTW, I can understand grammar issues, but I think it's unfathomable that bad spelling or typos are still a reality in face of widespread usage of computers and word processors. Lamer even for an ebook to suffer from such non-issue.

What if you have a really stupid computer?

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by Namekuseijin

I wonder if it ever occurred to any authors to set up a self-published blog, write away short stories or chapters as blog entries and have a donate link through pay pal somewhere in the page and if so, how well it turned out in financial terms?

You should try this. You'll make BILLIONS!

[spellbanisher]

Was Homer an Indie author? I don't think he had a publisher.

[Scott Nicholson]

I've done it both ways and what's happening right now is (a) all those who couldn't get published the Old Way have gone ahead and flushed their manuscripts into the market, and (B) most of those published under the Old Way are leaving the Old Way as fast as they can.

"Indie" will rapidly become meaningless because within two years 99 percent of the available books will be indie, simply because they will swamp the Old-Way books.

If you're in Group (A), you probably will never know if you are a bad writer, and even some bad writers are making a ton of money. If you are in (B), you probably have a heads-up because your publisher has been forcing you to do your own marketing.

Really, it's not that hard to tell an achingly bad indie book, because it usually reveals itself in the product description (which is written by the author). Just read the description and see if you want to put up with that author for 300 pages. After that, heck, it's only 99 cents in most cases.

Scott

[lee_frey]

Websites like Amazon and Smashwords lets you download a sample, up to half of the book, before you buy. So what's the harm of choosing an Indie?

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Scott Nicholson

I've done it both ways and what's happening right now is (a) all those who couldn't get published the Old Way have gone ahead and flushed their manuscripts into the market, and (B) most of those published under the Old Way are leaving the Old Way as fast as they can.

"Indie" will rapidly become meaningless because within two years 99 percent of the available books will be indie, simply because they will swamp the Old-Way books.

If you're in Group (A), you probably will never know if you are a bad writer, and even some bad writers are making a ton of money. If you are in (B), you probably have a heads-up because your publisher has been forcing you to do your own marketing.

Really, it's not that hard to tell an achingly bad indie book, because it usually reveals itself in the product description (which is written by the author). Just read the description and see if you want to put up with that author for 300 pages. After that, heck, it's only 99 cents in most cases.

Scott

270,000 books are published in the US alone every year. The claim that 99% of these are going to stop publishing within two years and go indie (thereby cuttting out the 91% of the market that is DTBs) makes absolutely no sense.

Originally Posted by lee_frey

Websites like Amazon and Smashwords lets you download a sample, up to half of the book, before you buy. So what's the harm of choosing an Indie?

Time. People are busy and don't want to dedicate even 30 minutes of valuable reading time to sifting through dreck.

Spending 8 hours reading a $15 book means I'm spending about $2 an hour for entertainment. I'm paid a lot more than $2/hr at work, I value my time at much more than $2/hr, and I don't have huge amounts of free time to read. I don't want to take on a part time job as a dreck-sifter.

[Keryl Raist]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Time. People are busy and don't want to dedicate even 30 minutes of valuable reading time to sifting through dreck.

Spending 8 hours reading a $15 book means I'm spending about $2 an hour for entertainment. I'm paid a lot more than $2/hr at work, I value my time at much more than $2/hr, and I don't have huge amounts of free time to read. I don't want to take on a part time job as a dreck-sifter.

How do you find new books/authors then? I'm sitting here in a library, every single book is trad published, and it would still take me much more than 30 minutes to find a good (according to me) book by an author I've never read before. Either researching online for something I might like or wandering about the stacks takes time.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

I can see the advantage of control, but there's also the issue of rushing to publication too fast. As a writer, I wouldn't want to make a book available within days of finishing it.

I normally let something sit at least a few days if not longer - then read through again to look for holes and errors once it's no longer fresh in my mind.

Make that a few months, at least, for me. If you care about the quality of the work (and we're talking a book, not a blog post), I think it's a really bad idea to rush into publication. While the year-long delay is chafing, I know for a fact that every one of my books is better for time away from it at every stage: editing (with my editor), reviewing the copy editing, proofing the galleys, etc. That's definitely a value added in traditional publishing, and if you're publishing indie, it seems to me you need to find a way to allow for that process on your own.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by Keryl Raist

I write fantasy, and though it's unlikely to happen to me because I've got a small market, it's still possible that if you sell your rights to the publisher, they can do whatever they like to your characters. Especially in fantasy you see this happen. You create characters that take off, and next thing you know there's a huge pile of other books based on those characters doing things you don't want them doing.

Why do you think a publisher could, or would, do that?

Yes, really successful writers sometimes get to farm out their characters (if they choose to), and thus print money. But a publisher that simple stole a writer's characters would be asking to be sued up the wazoo.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Keryl Raist

How do you find new books/authors then? I'm sitting here in a library, every single book is trad published, and it would still take me much more than 30 minutes to find a good (according to me) book by an author I've never read before. Either researching online for something I might like or wandering about the stacks takes time.

The amount of dreck from a well known publisher is not so high. Also, world of mouth and reviews works for finding new books.

Another thing is that you know about good books already by authors you might have read. So there is really no reason to filter through unknown books just to find an equally good book. What you want to find is the extremely good book by a new author.

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by starrigger

Make that a few months, at least, for me. If you care about the quality of the work (and we're talking a book, not a blog post), I think it's a really bad idea to rush into publication. While the year-long delay is chafing, I know for a fact that every one of my books is better for time away from it at every stage: editing (with my editor), reviewing the copy editing, proofing the galleys, etc. That's definitely a value added in traditional publishing, and if you're publishing indie, it seems to me you need to find a way to allow for that process on your own.

I'm not an author, but it astonishes me that anyone would even consider releasing a book that isn't their best in every way they can imagine. First impressions are very very difficult to change, and with readers those impressions have a multiplier effect. If a reader finds a book to be sloppy or have poor attention to detail that reader will also probably tell his friends about the book, depriving the author of that reader as a future fan as well as of everyone he tells. On the other hand, if a reader is impressed by a book he will probably tell his friends about it, providing the writer with an opportunity to make even more fans.

Still, it must be reiterated; readers can be very unforgiving. Once a reader develops a bad impression of an author he may never be willing to read another work by that author again. It's hard enough to get people to read a work by an author they are unfamiliar with. A writer gets few chances to build a fan base; he shouldn't ruin his chances with carelessness or impatience.