on self publishing

[pwalker8]

Here is an article from an author who has taken the step into self publishing that I thought some here might find of interest.


https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/why-...hing-the-goat/

Trigger alert. PJMedia is a conservative opinion site. I don't want to get involved in politics, I thought the article was of interests purely from the stand point of why a specific author decided to move to self publishing. I personally have never read a book by Roger Simon and never heard of him before running across the article. So please, let's leave politics out of it.

[Dr. Drib]

Thanks for this.

He's a [well]-known author of the Moses Wine detective series, and also a writer of screenplays.

I read one of the Moses Wine books years ago. The covers below my jog the memories of elder readers.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Thanks for this.

He's a [well]-known author of the Moses Wine detective series, and also a writer of screenplays.

I read one of the Moses Wine books years ago. The covers below my jog the memories of elder readers.

Ah, ok. I got the impression from the article that he wrote fiction, but I had no idea what sort of fiction. Thanks for the info.

[DuckieTigger]

He did one thing right. A lower price for pre ordering. On top of that it is ebook only. Without losing money, the pre order price of $2.99 cannot be done in paper, let alone hardcover. Comes september first, and the price will go up. That tells me that he understands clearly that while self publishing it cannot be justified to match pbook and ebook prices for no other reason than to match them. It also shows that he believes in the value of pre ordering. Publishers? They use the pre order numbers to gauge how big the initial print is, but they don't give anything back for that trust in an unpublished book. There is an incentive to pre order even if you are not yet convinced. ETA: Rereading the last sentence, it can be easily misinterpreted. I meant, hopefully obviously, that here in this case there is an incentive to pre order. The way the article was written peaked my interest.

Did you? I did. After reading the blurb it doesn't interest me topic wise. But topic really doesn't matter if it keeps me reading. Not obvious how all those elements tie together, if done right it will keep me reading. Maybe I even learn something about mountain climbing or tennis while being entertained. If the book turns out to be so horrible to be a waste of even $3, then I highly doubt he would put his reputation on the line like that.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

He did one thing right. A lower price for pre ordering. On top of that it is ebook only. Without losing money, the pre order price of $2.99 cannot be done in paper, let alone hardcover. Comes september first, and the price will go up. That tells me that he understands clearly that while self publishing it cannot be justified to match pbook and ebook prices for no other reason than to match them. It also shows that he believes in the value of pre ordering. Publishers? They use the pre order numbers to gauge how big the initial print is, but they don't give anything back for that trust in an unpublished book. There is an incentive to pre order even if you are not yet convinced.

Yup.
Wise move: pre-order discounting lets him beef up launch day sales numbers just like the big boys, which moves his ranking up. Better visibility. (Yes; Amazon pre-orders are counted on the day ordered, but there's a cumulative element to rankings so he doesn't start at zero.) And all the preorders might lead to more and quicker reviews.

Not something every author can do but given his existing fanbase it should pay off big. Wouldn't surprise me if he launches with a high ranking.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

He did one thing right. A lower price for pre ordering. On top of that it is ebook only. Without losing money, the pre order price of $2.99 cannot be done in paper, let alone hardcover. Comes september first, and the price will go up. That tells me that he understands clearly that while self publishing it cannot be justified to match pbook and ebook prices for no other reason than to match them. It also shows that he believes in the value of pre ordering. Publishers? They use the pre order numbers to gauge how big the initial print is, but they don't give anything back for that trust in an unpublished book. There is an incentive to pre order even if you are not yet convinced. ETA: Rereading the last sentence, it can be easily misinterpreted. I meant, hopefully obviously, that here in this case there is an incentive to pre order. The way the article was written peaked my interest.

Did you? I did. After reading the blurb it doesn't interest me topic wise. But topic really doesn't matter if it keeps me reading. Not obvious how all those elements tie together, if done right it will keep me reading. Maybe I even learn something about mountain climbing or tennis while being entertained. If the book turns out to be so horrible to be a waste of even $3, then I highly doubt he would put his reputation on the line like that.

I'm not following what you mean in your last paragraph.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I'm not following what you mean in your last paragraph.

I am saying that I would never buy this book at any price purely based on the blurb. The only reason I preordered is because I like how he wrote his article. If his book is written in a similiar style, it will be a good read for the price I am paying.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

I am saying that I would never buy this book at any price purely based on the blurb. The only reason I preordered is because I like how he wrote his article. If his book is written in a similiar style, it will be a good read for the price I am paying.

Ah, ok.

No, I didn't buy the book. I just thought it was an interesting explanation of why he decided to go the indie route. I'm always interested in what real authors have to say about the business.

I suspect that one would find that some publishers provide a lot of value to their authors, while other publishers provide value to some of their authors and yet other publishers provide little value to their authors. I use the term publisher with regards to the imprint rather than the overall corporate holding company. At least that is the sense I get from what various authors say.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I suspect that one would find that some publishers provide a lot of value to their authors, while other publishers provide value to some of their authors and yet other publishers provide little value to their authors. I use the term publisher with regards to the imprint rather than the overall corporate holding company. At least that is the sense I get from what various authors say.

Are you actually surprised? You recognize yourself that best sellers sell. Ignore individual imprints for a second. For all intents and purposes each imprint operates on their own. It doesn't matter if the differences in each imprint comes from the staff or from orders of the holding company, or even higher up from the holding company that owns each Big5 (or Big6 if you want to include Amazon). Let's look at one imprint at a time.

For each imprint the same holds true: bestsellers sell. Smaller imprint, smaller scale bestseller. A bestseller is simply a better performing author or book than the others. Some bestsellers are created and others are rising. From a business's standpoint there is possibly a good reason to treat bestsellers favorably to maximize profits. Your best resources (advertising budget, better editors,, guidance, advise) have to go to the most promising book. If everybody gets treated the same, then the bestsellers will leave and find a better publisher. Most superstar bestsellers never leave because they get that extra special treatment. Why would they if their advance is so gigantic that the book never has a chance to technically "earn out".

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Are you actually surprised? You recognize yourself that best sellers sell. Ignore individual imprints for a second. For all intents and purposes each imprint operates on their own. It doesn't matter if the differences in each imprint comes from the staff or from orders of the holding company, or even higher up from the holding company that owns each Big5 (or Big6 if you want to include Amazon). Let's look at one imprint at a time.

For each imprint the same holds true: bestsellers sell. Smaller imprint, smaller scale bestseller. A bestseller is simply a better performing author or book than the others. Some bestsellers are created and others are rising. From a business's standpoint there is possibly a good reason to treat bestsellers favorably to maximize profits. Your best resources (advertising budget, better editors,, guidance, advise) have to go to the most promising book. If everybody gets treated the same, then the bestsellers will leave and find a better publisher. Most superstar bestsellers never leave because they get that extra special treatment. Why would they if their advance is so gigantic that the book never has a chance to technically "earn out".

I didn't say that I was surprised. I was giving that as a theory of why some authors seem to love their publisher while others seem to be dissatisfied. Sure it makes perfect sense.

If I were a mid-list author who has a solid fan base and has the ability as well as the desire to do his or her own marketing, I think that I would seriously consider going indie, especially if I was a genre writer. Between ebooks and audiobooks, you will likely make up any lost paper book sales. Of course, marketing becomes the major issue.

[D.E.M.]

"If I were a mid-list author who has a solid fan base and has the ability as well as the desire to do his or her own marketing, I think that I would seriously consider going indie, especially if I was a genre writer."

I've been told on good authority that a lot of publishers are dropping their mid-list authors.

"marketing"

It always is. Most successful writers are great at selling themselves.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by D.E.M.

"If I were a mid-list author who has a solid fan base and has the ability as well as the desire to do his or her own marketing, I think that I would seriously consider going indie, especially if I was a genre writer."

I've been told on good authority that a lot of publishers are dropping their mid-list authors.

"marketing"

It always is. Most successful writers are great at selling themselves.

I doubt that last sentence is nearly as true as you think it is. Many famous authors have been recluses, Harper Lee being one of the most famous examples.

Mid-list authors who lose audience and don't sell a certain number of books tend to get dropped by publishers. It's been that way for years. It's hard to make a living as an author.

[leebase]

Curse you. You enticed me to read the article which enticed me to buy the book. I think it’s a dollar more now that it’s not a pre order.

Listening to why he chose to indie publish would convince me why I’d want a publisher. Imagine that if he had a good publisher what OTHER book he could write with the energy of publishing and marketing this book himself.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by leebase

Curse you. You enticed me to read the article which enticed me to buy the book. I think it’s a dollar more now that it’s not a pre order.

Two dollars. My preorder was $2.99, same as price at release. Now $4.99.

[D.E.M.]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I doubt that last sentence is nearly as true as you think it is. Many famous authors have been recluses, Harper Lee being one of the most famous examples.

Mid-list authors who lose audience and don't sell a certain number of books tend to get dropped by publishers. It's been that way for years. It's hard to make a living as an author.

I did write the word "most."

And I doubt that this "Many famous authors have been recluses, Harper Lee being one of the most famous examples" is as true as you think it is.

Lee became a recluse after Mockingbird became a raging success. I remember seeing pics of her in Life magazine on the set of the movie. Is this a real recluse? And in her early years in NYC she worked the contacts like a pro. How did she get Tae Hohoff to edit her book? By networking.

Other than Portis and Pynchon, I can't think of a successful literary author (and I am only referring to them) who is a true recluse. I'm not even sure Portis qualifies. He was a successful reporter in NYC for years. And he wasn't a recluse, he just shunned the spotlight. If Hollywood makes two successful adaptations of your book you can do that.

In my childhood, you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing Mailer, Vidal, and Capote on some talk show. Updike didn't do that but he wrote constantly for NYRB which kept his profile up there. Roth was a constant self-promoter. A bad review would bring on an irate letter. Currently, Margaret Atwood is totally on board with Hollywood style self-promotion. Didion modeled for an ad.

I've made my point. The myth of the reclusive literary fiction writer is just that. A myth. The only one who really rates is Pynchon and maybe De Lillo. Oh, Donna Tartt. But she had a blazing start, and part of her image is the dark glowering reclusive Literary Lady. Also she's effectively Big Five. Little Brown is a division of Hachette.

If you want to sell, you'd better promote yourself.