Cameron Chapman's Blog, page 7

What I'm Reading: Indie vs. Legacy

So I was thinking about my reading habits due to a few discussions on various websites, and I realized something: for the past six months or so, I've been reading a ton of indie published books and books published by very small publishers, and very few legacy published books. In fact, most of the legacy published books I've read in the past six months were purchased a long time ago and have been sitting in my to-read pile for awhile.

Since I got my Nook Color back in the spring, I've read ebooks by Amanda Hocking (indie), Zoe Winters (indie), Lindsay Buroker (indie), Greta van der Rol (small press), Kimberly Menozzi (small press and indie), Poppet (small press), Calista Taylor (indie), and Randolph Lalonde (indie). Print books I've read this year only include Stephen King's Dark Tower Series (which I started reading last year) and Cherie Priest's Boneshaker. Oh, and some books I either picked up at places like Big Lots (when they're $2 apiece for a hardcover), or books that have been shared among myself, my mother, and my grandmother (like John Grisham's A Painted House).

But as far as the books I actually spend my own money on? Those are about 90% indies at this point. And there are a few reasons why:

I can buy more books for the same amount of money. Even at the high end of the indie spectrum, I can buy two indie ebooks for the price of one legacy published ebook. On the low end of the indie price scale, it's 10:1.
A lot of indie authors give away free ebooks. I read the free ones, and then when I'm looking for something else to buy, I buy their paid books (as long as I liked the free ones).
With free downloadable samples, I don't worry about quality. If the downloaded sample has quality issues, I just don't buy the book. And honestly, I've run into more poor formatting with legacy published books than I have with indie published ones. And by "poor formatting" I mean 18 pages of front matter so I only get to read 2 pages of actual content before the free sample runs out. And in very few cases is that enough to actually hook me into buying the book. Indie authors, on the other hand, generally only have 2-3 pages of front matter and then a solid 18-20 pages of actual book that I can base a purchasing decision on.
I'm directly supporting authors. When I buy a $2.99 ebook from Amazon that's been indie published, I know that the author is making over $2. When I buy a $9.99 ebook from Amazon that's been legacy published, the author is getting what? $1? Maybe? And the publisher is getting the other $6. Sorry, I'd rather support the author directly. That's not to say that the publisher isn't adding value to the book, but I have yet to see where they're adding 6X more value than the author…

Now, I realize that my reasons are not going to be the same as everyone else's. And I honestly was kind of surprised that my reading habits had changed so drastically in so little time. Prior to ebooks, I'd never knowingly purchased a self-published book before. I'd read one rather poor example that my parents bought, but only because it was written by someone in my dad's hometown and was a fictionalization of real events. So it was interesting from a personal standpoint (it even mentioned some of my family members—like we all didn't know that "Ruby" in the book was actually Garnet in real life…), but it wasn't a particularly good book and I wouldn't have read it if it weren't for the personal connection.

But I'm reading some fantastic indie published fiction. At least as good as what the legacy publishers are putting out in the same genres, and often better. Any of the authors I mentioned above are well worth reading, and the best part is that you can generally pick up one of their books for less than the cost of a latte at Starbucks.

I'm curious, what are your reading habits? Do you read indie books often? Not at all? Have your buying habits changed in the past year or so?

Writing: Career or Hobby?

I was driving home from the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 midnight release one night (my husband's airsoft team always does an appearance at these things) and we got talking about creative pursuits as a career vs as a hobby. It started out, I think, with a discussion of the music industry. Individual recording artists are often upset about the low royalties being paid out from services like Spotify. They get a fraction of a cent for each time their song is played, meaning they have little chance of gaining any kind of real income from these plays. And so they decry the industry and these services, and say they're what is killing the music industry.

Independent movie producers say the same kinds of things. They only make a few cents (if that) whenever their movie is streamed via Netflix. Unless their film is viewed millions of times, they won't make much money off of it.

I hear the same kind of thing coming from a lot of authors. If they're forced to sell their ebooks at $.99, they're only making $.35 on each sale. They have to sell thousands of copies to make any money. (The same things are said at $2.99, $4.99, and pretty much anything under the price of a mass-market paperback.)

Part of this has to do with the number of celebrities we see in each of these fields, and pretty much every other creative field. We see the J.K. Rowlings, the Stephenie Meyers, the Stephen Kings, of the world, and we think that that's what success looks like. We think that all we should need to do is write something great (or not so great, depending on your opinion) and the riches should follow.

Part of this, I think, comes from the bottleneck that happened in popular culture during the 90s and early 2000s. People had more access to the arts than ever before. Cable TV was a mainstay in most (American) households. Most people had CD players and purchased CDs on a regular basis. We went to the movies regularly, as opposed to just for special occasions. We consumed these things at levels that were unheard of before. And because of this, there was a lot of money flowing into publishing, the music industry, and the movie industry.

But at the same time, the cost of producing all these things was still relatively high, and so there was a lot of money for a relatively small number of professional artists. Your average joe musician couldn't produce a studio-quality album without spending a lot of money (which they often didn't have), and so there was a definite difference in quality between your indie artists and your mainstream ones. You could pick out an indie film or a self-published book or an indie album from a mile away in most cases. And not for positive reasons.

Then, in the past half decade or so, things began to change. It became even easier to consume the things above as these forms moved online (both to legal and illegal sources). But it also became infinitely easier to produce these things. Cheap video cameras have made it possible for almost anyone to make a film (an the technology has only gotten better, making it possible to make a film that's indistinguishable in many ways from anything coming out of the big studios). Consumer-friendly software and prosumer audio equipment have made it possible for anyone to record a decent album. Ebooks and POD have made it affordable for anyone to publish a book. And social media has made it a million times easier to get the word out about all of these things, even if you have no marketing budget.

But, the problem is that we're not really consuming much more than we were ten years ago. There are more people, so consumption is up. But there's also a lot more (legal) free content available, so we don't have to pay for things like we used to. I don't have to go buy an encyclopedia (or go use the one my library bought), because I have Wikipedia. I don't have to go buy the latest Stephen King bestseller, because I can read a new indie author who's getting great reviews and releasing their book for free.

So we have no bottle-neck anymore. There's a lot of money exchanging hands, but there are now a whole lot more hands on the receiving end of these transactions than there used to be.

So what does this mean for creatives?

The thing I've seen over and over again among writers, musicians, and, to a lesser extent, filmmakers, is that they just want to focus on their art and forget about the business side of things. This is why they spend so much effort on finding an agent or a publisher, to manage the business side of things (or a manager, recording label, etc.).

But what more and more artists are finding is that even if they find the agent/publisher/recording label/studio/etc., they still aren't making much money.

The thing is, there's just not enough money to go around for everyone. So the creatives who really want to make it, need to think of their "art" as a business. If they're not willing to put the time and effort into it, to figure out diverse ways to bring in income from their art, then they're better off just treating it as a hobby. Something they do for fun, but that isn't ever going to pay the bills.

If you're serious about it, then treat it as a career. Think of it as a business. Consider all the ways you can make money from your creative endeavors, and pursue the ones you can. Don't whine about there not being enough money to go around. Go out and earn your share of it. Provide value and you'll make more money. If you're not making money, then look at what you're doing wrong. Look at what's wrong with what you're doing, and how you can fix it. It might not be that there's anything inherently wrong with what you're doing, simply that there are others out there who are doing it better. In that case, figure out how you can do it better.

The same things that have made it possible for you to get your work out there without an agent, manager, etc., are the same things that are making it harder for you to earn a living from it. Stop blaming it. Without it, you'd be stuck with the old system, and might not be making any money at it.

I hear people who aren't taking advantage of all the independent options out there complaining about the indie options that are taking away from their opportunities. To those people, and this may sound a bit harsh, but all I have is this to say: get over it. It's not anyone's fault but your own if you're not taking advantage of opportunities that are out there. And if you've honestly looked at those opportunities and decided they're not for you, don't blame the people who have decided they are the right option for them.

If you want to go the traditional route, then that is entirely your right and your prerogative. But don't blame others because you choose not to pursue opportunities. And don't complain when you don't get the results you wanted. You chose your path, now live with whatever that brings.

I'm sure that some people will find this offensive. Some people will find it harsh. That's fine. Feel free to respectfully disagree in the comments.

I'm pursuing my goals of writing in the ways I see that are most likely to get me to where I want to go in my career. If I were writing for a hobby, then I'd have a regular 9-5 job instead of freelance writing and editing. But I'm not ashamed to say that I'm in it for the money. I'm in it to earn a living. I'd probably do it even if I weren't, honestly, but I'm certainly not going to complain about the people who do it for a hobby and give their writing away.

That's fine. It's their right to do so. I'm not going to bitch about them devaluing the entire market. My work stands on its own merit. Just because one thing is free doesn't automatically mean everything else needs to be free. I don't not pay for movies just because I can watch videos for free on YouTube. I do both. And I think most people do both. We need to get past this all-or-nothing mindset.

What next?

If you're a creative, look at all the options out there. Think about how each one fits in with your overall goals. For some, it's all about prestige, and they're not going to be happy unless they pass through the gatekeepers that are legacy publishers. That's fine. For others, it's about the money, and those might pursue both traditional and self publishing options. For still others, it's all about the audience, and for them self-publishing for free online might be their best bet.

But whatever path you choose, don't disparage those who have gone down their own path, and who don't hold the same goals as you. I don't think anyone is in this to make it more difficult for other writers. No one is choosing a path specifically because it interferes with your chosen path. They're doing it because it fits with their aspirations in relation to their art.

An Experiment with KDP Select

Earlier this year I published a women's fiction book, Hold My Hand, but have done very little to promote it (I sent it to a couple of review sites, but so far no reviews have been posted). Sales, as could be expected, have been dismal.

So yesterday, when I logged into my Amazon KDP (Kindle Direct Publishing) dashboard, I was very intrigued by the new KDP Select program. Basically, KDP Select lets indie authors add their books to the Kindle Owners Lending Library in exchange for a 90-day exclusive with Amazon (you also get 5 days of free promotion during that 90-day period). Now, the best part is that you earn a royalty every time your book is loaned out. There's a royalty pool each month, and you get paid based on the number of times your book is loaned, based on the percentage of the total number of loans.

The book will still be for sale during this time, but only via Amazon. It's in the process of being un-published from everywhere else (though I'll probably put it back up once the 90-day exclusive is over). I'm hoping that if nothing else, this will get the word out about the book, and hopefully even get some reviews. If, at the end of the three months, there's no change in sales and it hasn't been borrowed much, then I'll have to rethink some things about the book (probably the cover first).

So, I'll post an update at the end of the 90-day period and let everyone know how it went. I'm also interested in how others who are trying the program fair, so if you are, please let me know in the comments how it goes (feel free to post a link to your own blog if you write a post about it).

My Writing Routine

After reading this post over on John August's blog, about what his writing routine is, I thought I might write the same kind of post to detail my own writing habits. I write for a living, both blog articles and copywriting, as well as do some blog editing. On the side, I write novels, novellas, and screenplays. I've also written two non-fiction books.

When and Where Do You Write?

I start my writing day sometime between 7:30 and 9:00 every morning. I'm most productive when I get to my desk before 8:00, but that doesn't always happen. The bulk of my work writing is done at my desk. It's a giant wooden desk I salvaged from the magazine where I used to work, and was used by my late editor. I like to think that it has good vibes left over from him.

I start with email and checking social media. Then I usually get down to researching whatever it is I need to write for the day. I usually start out with some kind of outline, even if it's just a handful of bullet points, and then I get down to actually writing. Many posts I can finish in a single day, though some take longer. Books are a different story entirely.

I break for a quick lunch sometime between 11:00 and noon. I'm usually back at my desk within about 20 minutes, and sometimes I even eat at my desk. Then it's usually back to work until 2:00 or 3:00 at least. At that time, I usually take a break. Sometimes I have errands to run, while other times I just watch a little TV or take a walk. Depends on the day. I'll work for another hour or two before dinner (we usually eat between 4:00 and 5:00), and then, depending on whether I finished my work for the day or not, I'll either go back to my office for a couple more hours or I'll bring my laptop into the living room, and either do more work or spend time doing other things online.

My fiction writing is mostly done either first thing in the morning, on breaks during the day, or just before bed.

What Hardware Do You Use?

I've got a 2+ year old 13″ MacBook Pro as my primary computer. I recently upgraded it to 8GB of RAM, which has made a huge difference. I also work with a 23″ external LG monitor most of the time, and use the MBP screen as a secondary monitor (often either streaming video while I work or with things like email open in it).

I have a rooted Nook Color that also has Kindle and Kobo apps on it. I don't use it as much as I ought to, but I do use it some. And it got me to transition to reading ebooks way more than paper versions.

My phone has become a huge part of my day. I have a Motorola Droid X2, and have a very love-hate relationship with it. I hate the screen, except for the fact that it is PHENOMENAL in direct sunlight. It's e-paper-like. I use it to read ebooks all the time now (with both Kindle and Nook apps).

Now, I don't do all of my writing on the computer. I use notebooks a lot. Within arm's reach of where I'm sitting, I have ten notebooks. I carry one in my purse. I have them on my nightstand. And I have a stack of unused ones on my bookshelf, waiting for their day to come. I'm partial to college-rule, spiral bound notebooks. I usually pick them up during back-to-school sales for $.15 each, and buy enough to last me for the year.

Pens are a huge thing for me, too. I have ball point pens I got at the dollar store that I love. I'm a huge fan of ultra-fine point pens, including the Pilot G-2 with the .38mm tip and the various Uniball ultra-fine tips. I also sometimes use Pentel R.S.V.P. pens. For editing I use PaperMate Flair pens or colored gel pens. I occasionally use fountain pens, too, though I find them to be too much of a hassle to keep up with for daily use. My favorite is a Lamy Safari in charcoal gray. I use Noodler's Polar Black ink when I do, though, because it's waterproof and freeze-proof (both of which standard fountain pen inks are lacking).

What Software Do You Use?

I'm a software junkie. I regularly have to go clean out my applications folder just to free up space on my hard drive. It's crazy. Right now, I use TextWrangler for most of my day-to-day work writing, because I hand-code all of my articles for uploading them to WordPress (which I also use on a daily basis). For notes I use Evernote (which I also have on my phone). I use Google Docs a lot for my writing, as that way I can access it from my phone when I'm not at home.

For specific writing software, I have four go-to programs:

Bean: a super-basic, simple word processor for the Mac.
Scrivener: a fantastic planning and organizing tool for larger prose projects.
Celtx: my go-to screenwriting and pre-production application.
Write or Die: I've been using the online version for when I need distraction-free writing and a tight deadline.

I also use OpenOffice.org for some things (like dealing with edits or opening more complex Microsoft Word documents). I've also used Adobe Story for screenplays, though I've found Celtx's interface more enjoyable to work with.

For creating ebooks, I use Calibre, Sigil, and Adobe Digital Editions. I use InDesign for laying out print books and PDFs. One of these days I'm going to experiment with using Scribus for print book layout, because it's free. I've gotten as far as downloading it and opening it, but haven't done much beyond that.

Other basic software I use on a daily basis includes Firefox, Chrome, Thunderbird, and Hootsuite.

What Would You Change About How You Write?

I wish I had more time for writing fiction. I love my day job (writing about web design and tech, as well as a bit of designing), and can't imagine doing anything else, but it leaves me without a whole lot of time for working on novels and screenplays.

I also wish I was more of a morning person. I would love to be one of those people who could get up at 5AM and spend a couple of hours writing. But I have a natural tendency to stay up late (I usually go to bed sometime between 11 and 1), so getting up at 5 would mean very little sleep.

Why $2.99 Doesn't Devalue Your Work

There seems to be a certain camp in the writing and publishing worlds that feels like selling a novel at $2.99 is somehow devaluing that novel, and novels in general. The idea seems to be that readers will refuse to pay more than $2.99 for novels eventually, and that will somehow topple the publishing industry.

But no one is asking whether readers should pay more than $2.99 for most books. We've just accepted that paperbacks are priced at $8.99-$16 and that hardcover books are priced at $20-$30. And so we feel like ebooks should be priced somewhere along that line, too. But does anyone know why a mass market paperback is priced at $9? Or a trade paperback at $16? Or why a hardcover book is $25?

In the 1960s, a paperback book might cost anywhere from 25¢ up to around $.75 or so depending on the length, publisher, genre, author, and specific year (you can find evidence of these prices by looking at old book covers from that era). Now, a lot of these books were shorter than what we're used to these days, coming in at around 150-200 pages. They were "pocket books", in their truest sense: they would fit in your pocket.

So, if we look at a book that was 50¢ in 1965, and adjust the price for inflation, we're looking at a book that would be $3.59 in 2011. (A 25¢ book would be $1.80, a 75¢ book would be $5.39 in the same year.) So your average mass-market paperback would be $3.59, and some books would be as low as $1.80. Now, outside of a used book store, I haven't seen prices that low in my lifetime (at least not that I remember).

Even if we consider the length to be double on modern novels, that still means we should be seeing books that are only $4 on shelves, and some ranging up as high as $11 or so. But just about every mass market paperback I see is $9-$12. Trade paperbacks (which weren't really around in the 60s) run as high as $20. So while books are longer than they were in the 60s (the shortest modern novels are usually around 300 pages), we've set a new baseline price. We expect to pay at least $9 for a new paperback.

And so a lot of people think that selling an ebook for $2.99 is devaluing books in general. People look at that price and think the author doesn't view themselves as "worth" a higher price. But lets break down the numbers:

First of all, if I sell a novel at $2.99 on Amazon, I'm going to earn roughly 70% of the cover price: $2.07 or so after Amazon deducts their delivery fee. Now, if I have a book published through a legacy publisher and the mass market paperback is selling for $9, if I'm lucky I'll make 10% of that: $.90. So I'm already making more than twice as much with the $2.99 ebook. Even if I'm splitting that royalty with an ebook publisher, I'm still probably making more money.

Second of all, you eliminate a lot of expenses with ebooks. Covers are less expensive for a couple of reasons: 1) I don't have to buy high resolution print-ready artwork which is often significantly more expensive than web-sized artwork; 2) I don't have to design a spine or back cover, just the front. Both of those mean a cost savings. Something a lot of publishers don't want to admit. I also don't have printing or storage costs. For many books, this probably runs somewhere around $2, between printing, shipping, and storage in a warehouse somewhere (plus the labor to deal with all those books). And the production process is often faster, too, because there are no print proofs, no print galleys, etc. Everything is done digitally, which means there's a ton of room for workflow improvements (whether publishers are actually taking advantage of that is another story).

Third of all, you eliminate the gigantic time lags that are inherent to any print publishing schedule. Everything can be done quickly, files sent instantly, etc. And so it's possible to publish more books in less time for less cost. That's a big savings.

So let's say that the above adds up to a $3 savings per book (which I think is being conservative, though if anyone has any hard data about these things, let me know and I'll revise), which now puts the paperback as only twice as expensive as the ebook, while I'm still earning more than twice the royalty.

But here's the big thing that most people overlook: at $2.99, more people are reading more books. At $2.99, a book is an impulse purchase. We don't have to plan for it, or budget for it. We can just buy it if it looks like it might interest us. Even when I'm broke, I can usually spare $2.99 for a book. It's cheaper than a movie ticket (cheaper than a movie rental, even, in some places). It's definitely cheaper than going out to dinner. And it provides hours of entertainment. The best part is that I can buy an ebook and then keep it on my phone and read it whenever and wherever I want. (As an aside, if you're looking for a phone that makes a great ebook reader, the Droid X2 is fantastic for that, even if it's lacking in other areas. It even remains readable in direct sunlight, much like epaper.)

As authors, we need to think about the long-term relationship we have with readers. If books keep getting more expensive, they're going to be viewed as a luxury item by many. And that's not what I want my books to be. I want them to be practical, to be read, and to be accessible to pretty much anyone who wants to read them. I'd rather have 1,000 readers at $.99 than 100 at $10, even though in the short term the $10 readers will earn me more money. And I'd much rather have 1,000 readers at $2.99.

I was talking with a friend on Facebook who was lamenting the size and price of new paperbacks. She said that she missed the days of small paperbacks that could fit in your pocket and be read in an afternoon. And I agree. I like a book that I can read in an afternoon. Sure, longer books are great sometimes, too. But what's wrong with a book that's light and fun and a page-turner? The answer was that those books aren't as profitable for big publishers. They need the longer books to justify the much higher prices. $2.99 changes that. $2.99 is a great price for shorter books, for page-turners, and for books that are meant to be read in an afternoon.

I only charge $.99 for my novellas. They're all around 20,000-30,000 words long (which would work out to around 60-90 pages if they were printed). I feel like that's a very fair price for what they are. And besides, my novella series is meant to gain attention for my work. I'm writing them to share with people, and to get fans. At $.99, more people are willing to take a chance. Sure, some people just "collect" $.99 ebooks and never read them, but I have my own collection of books I've picked up at a discount that I have yet to read. What's wrong with that?

At some point I may increase the price of the books, but for now I'm comfortable with $.99. And sometimes I feel like that makes other authors out there look down at my work, as if I've somehow shit in their corn flakes (that might be a little crude, but have you seen the way some of these people talk about $.99 ebooks and their authors?)

The point is that low cost ebooks make it easier to get people to try reading. At $.99 to $2.99, a teenager who's on a very limited budget can afford to buy a book a week. A single parent can afford to buy a book a week. I like the idea that someone can buy my book rather than a cup of coffee one day (and I'm not talking about Starbucks, either). I like the idea that my books are accessible to pretty much everyone. And I like the fact that I'm building a readership who will hopefully stick by me as I write longer works and charge more. Some will, and some won't. But offering a $.99 "intro" is a great way for them to try me out and decide whether I'm worth more to them. It's kind of like there are certain authors whose books I sometimes read, but I only buy them used, because I don't have an unlimited budget for books and there are other authors who are "worth" more to me. But I would completely buy their books as ebooks if they were priced lower than the paperbacks.

For me, I'd rather have ebooks be priced lower and sell more, and entice more people to read, than keep raising the prices and drive more people to view reading as a luxury. Other people feel differently about it, and that's fine. But for me, I'm going to price as low as I think I should for a book, rather than as high as I think I can.

Transparency in Indie Publishing, Month 10

Wow, it's hard to believe that I've been self-publishing for ten months now! I hit a big milestone this month: I sold my 1,000th ebook! This is a huge deal to me, since most self-published books never sell more than a couple hundred copies. I've also had my best sales month to date.

As far as marketing this month, I've been plugging a little bit on Google+ and Twitter, which I know has generated a few sales. And I had a couple of new reviews on Amazon (if you've read either of the books and feel like leaving a review, I really do appreciate them!), some of which were really favorable. One of my favorite quotes from a review of The Great Healion Race:

This is not Edward and Bella, living in perfection for all eternity. These are two adults with overwhelming baggage as the ballast for their journey. I especially appreciated how Ms. Chapman allowed her protaganists to be messy, angry and human.

Seriously, that's one of the nicest things anyone has ever said about my books. Because that's exactly what I was going for: complicated people who have messy, screwed-up lives, and find a way to love each other anyway.

Below are my sales numbers for this month. I saw a drop in sales for the second book, but a big jump in the first book. Hopefully that will translate to more sales for the second book in the next couple of months.

Aboard the Unstoppable Aerostat Fenris

Amazon US: 102 (last month was 89)
Amazon UK: 3 (last month was 1)
Barnes & Noble: 14 (last month was 7)
Smashwords: 1 (last month was 0)
TOTAL: 120  (last month was 97)

The Great Healion Race

Amazon US: 53 (last month was 58)
Amazon UK: 0 (last month was 2)
Barnes & Noble: 5 (last month was 5)
Smashwords: 0 (last month was 1)
TOTAL: 58 (last month was 66)

Total sales reached 178! By far my best month yet. Which is really great since I had a rather nasty review on a rather influential blog. I was afraid it would have a negative effect on my sales, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I'm hoping to have the third book out in late January. The fourth will hopefully follow sometime in February.

I'm hoping to release at least two more books in 2012, and I might push for three or four. I have one that's half-finished that I want to finish, and two others planned, and I have a fourth in a different genre that just needs a final round of edits. So I think it's do-able to manage four books this year. Maybe.

"Swearing is a Sign of a Small Vocabulary"

This is one of those things I keep hearing from writers, all over the internet. And I have to say that it drives me crazy. Fucking crazy.

There is a time and a place for swearing in writing (and in real life, I might add). Not every character you have is going to swear like a trucker. But some of them might. And if that's what they would say in real life, then that's what they should say in your book. Doesn't matter if what they'd say is "fudge" or "motherfucker". If they'd say it, it's your responsibility as a writer to write it.

As for the "small vocabulary" bit, could anything possibly be more condescending? Swears are words, like any other. They only have the power we give them. I know plenty of highly intelligent people who swear like there's no tomorrow. And I know plenty of less intelligent people who do the same. It has nothing to do with a lack of vocabulary or any particular level of intelligence.

So please, please, as writers, stop belittling people who swear, or characters who swear. If your characters don't swear, that's fine. But if they do, that's fine, too. Sometimes it just fits with your character, even if it's the opposite of how you speak in real life.

I guess, for me, it comes down to something one of my high school English teachers told us: why use three words when you can say the same thing in one? Why would I say "oh now, this thing didn't go at all how I'd planned," when I could just say "FUCK!" and express the same thing? So yeah, I'm going to blame my English teacher for persuading me to swear.

A Quick Note About a Common Self-Publishing Misconception

This is going to be short and sweet.

I recently came across someone on a forum talking about how they wouldn't recommend self-publishing ebooks via Amazon because then you only get the Kindle crowd. And my eyes bugged out of my head.

When you self-publish your own ebooks, you can distribute through as many platforms as you like. That means you can publish on Amazon for the Kindle via KDP, on Barnes & Noble for Nook via PubIt!, and on Smashwords for everywhere else. You can also self-publish on your own site or other sites you find (so long as it doesn't interfere with their terms of service, and if it does, I'd run away from that site as quickly as I could). Let me repeat:

You can publish on Amazon, B&N, Smashwords, and elsewhere, simultaneously.

You don't have to pick just one. These are not publishers who expect you to turn over your rights. They're distributors. They allow you to publish to particular platforms, nothing more, nothing less.

Do yourself a favor and publish to as many platforms you can manage if you're self-publishing. Don't limit yourself!

Pushing for 200 Sales!

There's less than 10 hours left in November (in the EST time zone anyway), and I'm having my best sales month yet for The Steam and Steel Chronicles. I would really LOVE to break 200 sales this month, but I'm still a ways away from that. Not so far that I don't think it's possible, though.

But I need your help! If you haven't bought the books yet, now's your chance. They're only 99¢, available for a variety of ebook reader platforms (including Kindle and Nook), and are sure to entertain you (I hope).

Here are the links to buy them:

Aboard the Unstoppable Aerostat Fenris:

Barnes & Noble | Kindle/Amazon US | Kindle/Amazon UK | Smashwords | Goodreads

The Great Healion Race:

Barnes & Noble | Kindle/Amazon US | Kindle/Amazon UK | Smashwords | Goodreads

If you've already purchased them, then please pass along the links to someone you think might enjoy them. Post a link on your Facebook page or on Twitter. Send out an email. Or even buy them as Christmas gifts for family members.

What am I offering in return, you might ask? My unending gratitude. And it will give me more motivation to get the third and fourth books finished (the first draft of the third book is already done, and I'm about 75% of the way through the fourth book). Nothing extraordinary. (Though I am planning some pretty awesome stuff for the release of books three and four…)

See? I'm not at all above begging for sales! I just think it would be really awesome to end this month on an even higher note than it's already at, since winning NaNoWriMo and having great sales anyway.

NaNoWriMo Day #28: I Won!

I hit the 50,000 word mark last night and have now officially "won" NaNoWriMo. I've still got about 8,000 words left to write for the fourth book in The Steam and Steel Chronicles, but I'm going to push to finish it by the end of the month. I'm really loving the way this series is turning out, and hope everyone who's read the first two books will like the second two.

I'm also going to work on a short story that will fit in between books one and two, and will focus entirely on Stig. Since book four focuses mostly on Isabell, I feel like it's only fair!

So, I'll be finishing up soon and will put the books away for a few weeks before I begin editing them, and hopefully will have them out in January or February. I'm aiming to release them about a month apart, and I'm 99% sure that I'll be pricing both at 99¢ each. I feel like that's a good/fair price for these books.

Once the series is finished, I'll also be releasing a print version of all four books combined, and possibly a special, limited edition print book. I'll keep everyone updated on those.