Best Selling Authors and Self Publishing

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

And if I had suggested you should know about him because he is a top seller, then maybe I could understand what you are trying to say.

Instead, I was implying that as the poster boy for indie publishing, I am surprised you haven't heard of him -- since you can often be found in threads like, um this one?

Threads discussing the state of publishing and self-publishing rarely include romance rankings -- but Howey and Konrath get quoted as gospel.
One would almost think you had no interest in or knowledge of the self-publishing industry



Correct -- the top-selling tradpub authors would be the ones who sell in every airport newsstand, to people who don't usually read, and everywhere else on the planet. No indie will ever make as many sales (or money) as the James Patterson Collective, for example.

Comparing a fairly successful high-end midlister genre author to a fairly successful high-end indie genre author seems fair enough to me, no one except you has implied that anyone thinks indies are expected to reach that one-in-a-million author whose books personally get handed out for causal gifts at the same rate as gift cards.


The vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast, vast majority of tradpub authors don't make it there either.

I could go on for longer, but there is only so many times you can type the word "vast" before getting sick and tired of it.

I think that the word you are looking for is didn't remember him, rather than didn't hear of him. I'm sure the top romance authors gets mentioned in thread here as well. It doesn't mean I pay much attention to them. There are a couple of indies that have been recommended on this board that I have tried, liked and bought their books. He just isn't one of them.

Well, perhaps you wouldn't expect an indie to compare well with one in a million (though a million probably isn't correct. How many authors publish books with traditional publishers in a year. It's got to be far less than 100,000.) But I would have expected the top indie to be in the top 100 of Kindle sales. That's leaving aside all the paper book, audiobook, etc sales, just the ebook sales. If indies aren't in the top 100 in the Kindle store, that says something to me.

The comparison to the top traditional publisher seller was simply to show how big of a difference there still is between traditional publishers and indies. Sometimes the hype doesn't quite match the reality.

[AnemicOak]

It is nice that there are options and they can only likely help both trad and self pubbed authors in the long run.

I think we'll see more hybrid deals like Bella Andre who kept here e-rights and got a seven figure deal for English language print only on the first eight books in her popular Romance series (with more lucrative print only deals after that was a success) which were already making her big money self pubbed as ebooks, or Howey who got a print only deal from S&S for Wool. It'll likely only happen for the cream of the crop of self pubs, but I think we'll see it happen more.

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

It's great that some indie authors are seeing success and making lots of money, but were there any indies in the top 100 selling kindle books in 2014? I didn't see any. Perhaps there is, I didn't recognize all the names and books in the list. Andy Weir started as an indie, but like many if not most successful indies, he turned to a traditional publisher. There is a reason. The question shouldn't be why don't successful authors turn indie, it's why would they?

I found six that are definitely indie authors:

41. A Shade of Vampire by Bella Forrest
62. Stepbrother Dearest by Penelope Ward
73. The Atlantis Gene: A Thriller by A.G. Riddle
86. The Ex Games by J. S. Cooper
96. Sweet Addiction by J. Daniels
97. The Ex Games 2 by J. S. Cooper

With the exception of The Atlantis Gene, the paperback editions list Createspace as the publisher - that's how I know they're indies (I heard A.G. Riddle interviewed on Rocking Self Publishing, which is how I know he's an indie) There were other books on the list that are probably indies, but I couldn't be bothered to take the time to check.

Another two didn't have a publisher listed for the Kindle edition (65. Sleep Tight by Rachel Abbott, and 68. The Billionaire's Obsession by J.S. Scott), so are probably self-published. They didn't list Createspace as the publisher for the print versions, though.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I can see why I haven't heard of him, post apocalyptic novels aren't really my cup of tea, but hey, I'm glad that he's had such success. Still doesn't really put him in Scalzi's category outside the indie fan base. That's not a put down, a number of authors have made good money writing Star Wars, Star Trek, et al novels and are quite well known in that specific group of people.

Why would you not say, of Scalzi, "Still really doesn't put him in Howey's category outside the traditional publishing fan base". There is an unstated presumption implicit in your statement. That Indie is some small less worthy niche market. Which of course is not true. In fact, I'm sure there are huge numbers of people who do not read or care about Science Fiction who have heard of neither.

The purpose usually served in dividing Science Fiction or any other Genre (or even the whole market) between Indie and Traditionally published books is to claim that one is better than the other. I don't subscribe to this view. I just want to read a good book. Unfortunately at the moment the distinction is hard to avoid, as the titles with ridiculously high prices scream at me "I'm traditionally published. I'm three times the price, but three times better quality. Buy me. I'm worth it!" Well, ah, no, you're not.

In so far as I can discern that traditional publishers have any long term strategy, this is it. Don't compete with Indie's. After all, does Rolls Royce compete with Ford? Differentiate their books on quality and charge a higher price. IMHO this is doomed to failure, since it is based on a myth. The myth that because a book is traditionally published it must be of better quality than a comparable Indie published book. If this is the best they can do the long term outlook for traditional publishers seems bleak indeed. They need a realistic vision for the future and they need it yesterday. Time is running out.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

Why would you not say, of Scalzi, "Still really doesn't put him in Howey's category outside the traditional publishing fan base". There is an unstated presumption implicit in your statement. That Indie is some small less worthy niche market. Which of course is not true. In fact, I'm sure there are huge numbers of people who do not read or care about Science Fiction who have heard of neither.

The purpose usually served in dividing Science Fiction or any other Genre (or even the whole market) between Indie and Traditionally published books is to claim that one is better than the other. I don't subscribe to this view. I just want to read a good book. Unfortunately at the moment the distinction is hard to avoid, as the titles with ridiculously high prices scream at me "I'm traditionally published. I'm three times the price, but three times better quality. Buy me. I'm worth it!" Well, ah, no, you're not.

In so far as I can discern that traditional publishers have any long term strategy, this is it. Don't compete with Indie's. After all, does Rolls Royce compete with Ford? Differentiate their books on quality and charge a higher price. IMHO this is doomed to failure, since it is based on a myth. The myth that because a book is traditionally published it must be of better quality than a comparable Indie published book. If this is the best they can do the long term outlook for traditional publishers seems bleak indeed. They need a realistic vision for the future and they need it yesterday. Time is running out.

The indie sf fan base _is_ a subset of the overall sf fan base and is by definition smaller. The idea that indies are the wave of the future and the tradition publishers, who obviously provide no value and simply suck money from the hard working authors, are going the way of the dinosaur does seem to be the narrative being pushed by the indie fan base. I question the accuracy of that narrative.

[dickloraine]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Authors have agents to protect them and negotiate better contracts. No different than sports figures and actors in that regard. I'm pretty sure that Tom Clancy and J.K. Rowlings predated the self publishing possibilities that you talk about. As far as I can tell, things are not greatly different for authors than they were 10 years ago. Once again, it's nice that authors have options, but it's not nearly the game changer you think.

The need to have an agent even as a first time or midlist author is in itself a sign of what is wrong.

Besides, the agent doesn't have a better position in the negotiations. If there is no alternative, what angle does he have to negotiate a better contract? These bad contracts are real, with agents involved.

I am talking about first book contracts mainly here. If your first book was a hit (and you are allowed to renegotiate) then of course you have a stronger position to get better terms.

Oh, standard contracts differ by country too. For example, from what I hear, contracts in germany are much better than in the usa (and agents are still not that common here). Not great, but better and the most atrocious terms aren't in them.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

...

Oh, standard contracts differ by country too. For example, from what I hear, contracts in germany are much better than in the usa (and agents are still not that common here). Not great, but better and the most atrocious terms aren't in them.

Here's what Van Morrison has to say about standard contracts.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

Oh, standard contracts differ by country too. For example, from what I hear, contracts in germany are much better than in the usa (and agents are still not that common here). Not great, but better and the most atrocious terms aren't in them.

Give it time.
MacMillan's hardline CEO, John Sargent, just moved up the Holtzbrinck hierarchy to Executive VP:

http://the-digital-reader.com/2015/0...k-reshuffling/

Top dog Holtzbrinck likes his policies, apparently.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

The indie sf fan base _is_ a subset of the overall sf fan base and is by definition smaller. The idea that indies are the wave of the future and the tradition publishers, who obviously provide no value and simply suck money from the hard working authors, are going the way of the dinosaur does seem to be the narrative being pushed by the indie fan base. I question the accuracy of that narrative.

A cookie cutter statement that has been advanced ad nauseum for nearly a decade.
During which time indies and self published books have mushroomed.
To believe that the statement is valid, one must necessarily believe that the authors of all those indies and self published books are buying them by themselves.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

The indie sf fan base _is_ a subset of the overall sf fan base and is by definition smaller. The idea that indies are the wave of the future and the tradition publishers, who obviously provide no value and simply suck money from the hard working authors, are going the way of the dinosaur does seem to be the narrative being pushed by the indie fan base. I question the accuracy of that narrative.

It is not that Trad Pub provides no value. It is the price to authors of obtaining the services that constitute that value. And, unlike the past going back decades, Trad Pubs now have competitors providing these services or alternatives to them. At the moment, they do indeed seem to be going the way of the dinosaur, but only because of their own lack of vision, bad decisions and failure to adapt. When a market suddenly becomes competitive, it is simply not a viable strategy to behave as if there is still no competition. When there is suddenly a flood of supply of a product and demand remains static basic economics tells us that the price must go down. But instead Trad Pub reacts with special snowflake arguments and attempts to differentiate its books from Indie Published books by claims to significantly greater quality. In my experience, claims which are not justified.

We can glimpse part of Amazon's strategic plan for the industry from its actions. The launch of KDP concurrently with the launch of the Kindle was no accident. Amazon clearly foresaw that if/when ebooks did take off the economic barriers to publication would be slashed, resulting in a demand by authors/prospective authors for publication and distribution services. Amazon acted to satisfy this demand. I'm sure also that Amazon did not fail to consider the implications of a growing ebook market where the only source of ebooks was the Big 5. They just got it so right with KDP. Amazon clearly see a market where they have a ready supply of relatively cheap books which they can sell retail from their website at a price level set so as to maximise revenue. I don't think they see much of a role for traditional publishers in that model, nor for physical book stores.

I'm not sure how the Big 5 see the industry in the longer term. They made a decision not to cater for the flood of authors wanting to self-publish, leaving this field largely to Amazon. Assuming they do not believe that the flood of Indie's is going to go away, I think this indicates that they ultimately see a lower-priced market for Indie's co-existing with a premium-priced market for their own "better quality" titles.

How do you see the longer term future for the industry? How do you thing the traditional publishers see it?

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Thanks for the pointer. Now I've heard of him. I was wondering how he was able to churn out so many titles so fast, but I see that he basically releases his titles a chapter at a time. I've heard that was a popular method of maximizing revenue in the kindle indie world.

I can see why I haven't heard of him, post apocalyptic novels aren't really my cup of tea, but hey, I'm glad that he's had such success. Still doesn't really put him in Scalzi's category outside the indie fan base. That's not a put down, a number of authors have made good money writing Star Wars, Star Trek, et al novels and are quite well known in that specific group of people.

Ok, so John Scalzi gets a $3.4 million dollar deal over 10 years. We are, of course, talking about his advances, not how much he's actually making.

Let's do the math -
advance -
John Scalzi - $3.4 M
Hugh Howey - $0

Yea, they are both apples and oranges comparisons. You compare just Scalzi's advances to Howey's total proceeds. I compare Scalzi's advances to Howey's advances. In the indie world, no advances (except maybe crowd sourcing), so it's not a fair comparison.

I point out that your math only looks at the ebook sales, which Scalzi said was a quarter of his earnings while a book is out in hardback. No idea what Howey makes for audio books, paper book sales and foreign sales. To actually compare them, you would need to look at their total takes. Can't really compare ebook "sales" since Howey is producing chapter books (I think that's the term that they use) that he sales for a buck. Not sure how many chapter books are grouped together to form a novel. The Wool Omni edition, which is Wool 1-5 is 550 pages and sells for $5. So each book is roughly a third of the size of one of Scalzi's novels (a bit over 300 pages for his top three books).

I would also point out that the Scalzi posted his sales figures for Lock In - 2,000 ebooks per month which is used as the high end for all of Scalzi's books in the analysis you posted.

Having actually read the first Wool, I can tell you it is not just chapters but a complete story in itself. I read it for the sole purpose of finding out how it was written.

As per the advances: how long did it take Scalzi's book to earn out or did it?

Now as to your top hundred indies, yes there have been a few. There are also indie New York Times and USA today bestsellers.

Would you like a list of 6 figure indies?
I can think of several in numerous genres.
Blake, Crouch, Ward, R Brown, H Ward, a couple of Joe's and the list goes on.

I know one indie that is now co-authoring with a traditional author. He made the WSJ list.
Another had a TV series on Fox.

Now silly question, does advance money spend better than other money?
I don't get the difference. Other than the timing of the paycheck.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Now silly question, does advance money spend better than other money?
I don't get the difference. Other than the timing of the paycheck.

The timing of the paycheck is the issue.
A lot of (non-big name) tradpub authors seem to be living paycheck to paycheck so advances are effectively payday loans.
The big name guys are in a different league; their deals are effectively lump sum sales. The nominal royalty in the contract is irrelevant because nobody expects them to live long enough to earn out.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Having actually read the first Wool, I can tell you it is not just chapters but a complete story in itself. I read it for the sole purpose of finding out how it was written.

As per the advances: how long did it take Scalzi's book to earn out or did it?

Now as to your top hundred indies, yes there have been a few. There are also indie New York Times and USA today bestsellers.

Would you like a list of 6 figure indies?
I can think of several in numerous genres.
Blake, Crouch, Ward, R Brown, H Ward, a couple of Joe's and the list goes on.

I know one indie that is now co-authoring with a traditional author. He made the WSJ list.
Another had a TV series on Fox.

Now silly question, does advance money spend better than other money?
I don't get the difference. Other than the timing of the paycheck.

Authors like advances for a number of reasons. First, it's sure money. If you don't earn out, you don't have to pay it back. Lot's of people like the idea of surety. Second, an advance allows an author time to do the work needed to produce a quality work. Some authors are known for generating lots of words quickly. Asimov was well known as a very prolific author. Other authors take a long time to write a book. Example, Tolkien took 12 years to write Lord of the Rings (1937 to 1949) with the book finally being published in 1954. Basically, an advance allows the author to not worry about the day to day bills and focus on writing.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

It is not that Trad Pub provides no value. It is the price to authors of obtaining the services that constitute that value. And, unlike the past going back decades, Trad Pubs now have competitors providing these services or alternatives to them. At the moment, they do indeed seem to be going the way of the dinosaur, but only because of their own lack of vision, bad decisions and failure to adapt. When a market suddenly becomes competitive, it is simply not a viable strategy to behave as if there is still no competition. When there is suddenly a flood of supply of a product and demand remains static basic economics tells us that the price must go down. But instead Trad Pub reacts with special snowflake arguments and attempts to differentiate its books from Indie Published books by claims to significantly greater quality. In my experience, claims which are not justified.

We can glimpse part of Amazon's strategic plan for the industry from its actions. The launch of KDP concurrently with the launch of the Kindle was no accident. Amazon clearly foresaw that if/when ebooks did take off the economic barriers to publication would be slashed, resulting in a demand by authors/prospective authors for publication and distribution services. Amazon acted to satisfy this demand. I'm sure also that Amazon did not fail to consider the implications of a growing ebook market where the only source of ebooks was the Big 5. They just got it so right with KDP. Amazon clearly see a market where they have a ready supply of relatively cheap books which they can sell retail from their website at a price level set so as to maximise revenue. I don't think they see much of a role for traditional publishers in that model, nor for physical book stores.

I'm not sure how the Big 5 see the industry in the longer term. They made a decision not to cater for the flood of authors wanting to self-publish, leaving this field largely to Amazon. Assuming they do not believe that the flood of Indie's is going to go away, I think this indicates that they ultimately see a lower-priced market for Indie's co-existing with a premium-priced market for their own "better quality" titles.

How do you see the longer term future for the industry? How do you thing the traditional publishers see it?

Up through the 70's most writers did not make a lot of money writing novels. Most made their money by selling by the word to magazines and newspapers. That's why short stories were so popular. The idea that publishers have never had competition is a bit of a fallacy. For that matter, it's only fairly recently that the big 5 publishers formed.

I've given my view on the future of publishing before here. I think that over time, publishing will go back to the days of having a lot of smaller to middle size publishers rather than large conglomerates as the forces that encouraged the consolidation of the publishing industry dissipate. I think we will see a lot of smaller genre oriented publishers, a la Baen Books, in the future. During it's heyday, Baen Books pioneered using social media to reach out to the fan base and introduce authors to that fan base. I suggest we will see a lot more of this level of marketing via the internet. The major reason that I don't see indie authoring as the big future is I think that most authors would rather have someone else do most of the tasks that one needs to be a successful author. Sure, those willing to do everything can take advantage of indie publishing to keep all the money themselves. But most don't have the willingness or skill to be successful at that. Just my opinion.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Up through the 70's most writers did not make a lot of money writing novels. Most made their money by selling by the word to magazines and newspapers. That's why short stories were so popular. The idea that publishers have never had competition is a bit of a fallacy. For that matter, it's only fairly recently that the big 5 publishers formed.

I've given my view on the future of publishing before here. I think that over time, publishing will go back to the days of having a lot of smaller to middle size publishers rather than large conglomerates as the forces that encouraged the consolidation of the publishing industry dissipate. I think we will see a lot of smaller genre oriented publishers, a la Baen Books, in the future. During it's heyday, Baen Books pioneered using social media to reach out to the fan base and introduce authors to that fan base. I suggest we will see a lot more of this level of marketing via the internet. The major reason that I don't see indie authoring as the big future is I think that most authors would rather have someone else do most of the tasks that one needs to be a successful author. Sure, those willing to do everything can take advantage of indie publishing to keep all the money themselves. But most don't have the willingness or skill to be successful at that. Just my opinion.

Most indies I know do NOT do everything themselves but hire others to do covers, editing etc.
Now if those advances give traditional authors the freedom not to worry about bills, then why do 95% of the big 5 authors have day jobs?

It is a rare author that gets enough of an advance to live on.
I know one author who turned down a 6 figure advance. She self-published and earned the money offered in less than 4 months. That advance would have been paid in 3 increments over 3 years because it was for 3 books. Her name is Breena Aubrey.

So are you telling me that someone that made 3,000,000 for someone else while making 1,000, 000 for themselves is worth more than someone who made 2,800,000 for themselves and 1,200,000 for the distributor.
My math comes up to 4 million either way.