Why don't more authors self-publish?

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by apbschmitz

But it seems to me that as a reader you will still want some entity sorting through the mountain of manuscripts and matching your taste in writing with the material at hand. Who really has the time or inclination to wade through it all?

Because the people Twilight certainly captured MY tastes.

Maybe I'm just weird, but I tend to like books that would never in a million years get traditionally published because they don't have broad enough "appeal".

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by apbschmitz

From the writer's end it doesn't look much better. In the this particular moment there is an expectation that as an indie self-publisher, you're the writer, the production house and the marketing staff. But the inefficiencies in that seem so great, and the barriers to any wide awareness of any particular writer's work so high, that I have trouble imagining that this is a model with legs.

Yea, this. I do not think from the readers point of view it matters who published the book. I could not even tell you the publishers of 10% of the books on my shelf, never mind the ones on my Nook. Its the writer that cares about the marketing, distribution,etc that a publisher can get them. I do not think that is going way, but I do see it moving more and more to ebook land.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Todd Young

I figure most aspiring authors will be going down the indie route within a couple of years. At the same time, you'd have to think the slushpile at traditional publishers are getting smaller. Maybe all publishers will end up picking indies from Amazon and elsewhere.

In a conference on the future of the book I went to, they basically saw the traditional publisher as a force that is cut out of the new model that is emerging.

People said that iTunes and similar distribution models would end the traditional music business because musicians would be able to record and distribute their own music without having to go through a record company.

But in practice this has only happened at the margins, and often with bands that became known when they were traditionally published. In the vast majority of cases, consumers are still buying music produced by traditional record companies in the traditional way.

I think the same thing will happen with books - big publishers aren't going away because they offer too many important services to authors and consumers. But, at the margins, there will be some additional offerings...especially among authors who already have a following.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

People said that iTunes and similar distribution models would end the traditional music business because musicians would be able to record and distribute their own music without having to go through a record company.

But in practice this has only happened at the margins, and often with bands that became known when they were traditionally published. In the vast majority of cases, consumers are still buying music produced by traditional record companies in the traditional way.

A key difference here, though, is that in the e-Book world, you either "go indie" or you get your books set at 9.99 for eternity, or so it seems. The music industry adapted to the iTunes model and stopped insisting that $12 for a CD was the ONLY way to buy a song you wanted.

Maybe book publishers will wise up, too. But if more and more people say "why spend $10 per e-Book when I can buy $2.99 indie books that are just as good in many cases", the authors may have to make an uncomfortable choice.

I mean, what's the latest King eBook selling for? $20? And a Philip K. Dick collection of 16 stores for $21? No thanks.

So it's not quite the same as the iTunes-not-killing-the-music-industry thing. iTunes didn't KILL the music industry, but it did force some major changes. We'll see if book publishers are more resistant to that change...

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

People said that iTunes and similar distribution models would end the traditional music business because musicians would be able to record and distribute their own music without having to go through a record company.

But in practice this has only happened at the margins, and often with bands that became known when they were traditionally published. In the vast majority of cases, consumers are still buying music produced by traditional record companies in the traditional way.

I think the same thing will happen with books - big publishers aren't going away because they offer too many important services to authors and consumers. But, at the margins, there will be some additional offerings...especially among authors who already have a following.

Bands have recorded, produced and distributed their own music since the late 70s. What the corporations had a stranglehold on then, and now, is radio and TV airplay. People will only buy what they know to exist, which in the majority of cases is the corporation-produced music they hear on the radio.

I don't see that same problem with ebooks. Corporation-produced books share the same shelf space as writer-produced ones and they can all be sampled in the same way.

[Elfwreck]

Q: Why doesn't Stephen King self-publish his next book?

A: Because he'd have to edit it, find/make a cover, figure out formatting, figure out submission requirements for a swarm of ebook stores, figure out POD formatting & submission requirements, and do a ton of accounting & tax management tracking. Right now, the publisher covers all that.

Q: But he could make more money!

A: What, he doesn't have enough money now?

Stephen King, James Patterson, JK Rowling ... don't need to put up with the hassles of self-publishing to get rich. They *are* rich. It's mid-list authors who stand to benefit most from self-publishing, from taking on the half-a-dozen or more jobs that publishing companies do for them.

For authors who *want* to control all those aspects, self-pub is a terrific option. For authors who enjoy editing their own works, who like doc formatting, who have artistic skills and love cover design (and want to make three or four different covers for the same book, one for the sci-fi market, one for the mystery market, one for the mainstream lit market), self-pub offers opportunities that publishers will never give them.

For those who just want to write stories ... self-pub is something they might put up with because it can make more money. For those who are already making millions off the stories they've written in the past--why bother? Yes, it's very possible that if they self-pub they could make *double* on their next book. Or more. In exchange for which, they'd have to take substantial time away from what they love doing--writing--and practice a swarm of skills they never cared to develop.

When your income from your craft is $12,000 a year or less, that swarm looks like a reasonable value. When your income from your craft is over $250,000/year ... why bother, unless you're going to enjoy it?

[emellaich]

I'm not sure this adds anything new, but as an analogy consider this:

I've started businesses before. I'm quite comfortable with producing an ebook. I can, and would, figure out editing, formatting, covers, pricing, marketing, publishing, customer service and more. What I can't do myself, I could easily hire out.

So, why don't I just write a book and sell it . Right, that would be your reaction to everything I wrote.

Some people are quite comfortable writing but would rather have a publisher AND an agent so that all they have to do is write and cash checks (probably small checks, but that's their choice).

The change that I do expect is increased competition will drive down the cost of these services. For, example I wouldn't be surprised to see super-agents who will self-publish for you. They would handle all the details, including promotion, for a percent of the revenue.

[MeiLin]

It's easy to hire out editing and production services, even marketing. I hire out my edition and production, and have a distributed proofreading squad.