A Goodreads user asked Nadine Brandes:

Which do you think is better: self publishing or traditional publishing? Thank you!

Nadine Brandes I wouldn't dream of telling you one or the other, because each of them have their pros and cons. It really depends on the writer's vision and preference for their book.

Self-Publishing allows a writer to have complete control over the entire publishing process--from writing the book to picking a cover to formatting it to pricing, etc. I've seen a lot of authors do very well with self-publishing and it often means a greater percentage of profit on each book sale. However that means that the writer has complete control over the entire publishing process. :P That means that instead of just being a writer, they also have to figure out how to get books printed, where to hire a cover designer, how to find a good editor. Self-publishing also requires you to front the bill on all those things. Phew! It can be overwhelming and self-publishing can be a complete flop if the author doesn't take the time to educate themselves on how do to those things properly.

So, for the author who wants complete control and doesn't mind doing the whole enchilada...then self-publishing is a good fit.

Now Traditional Publishing I am more familiar with because that is how my Out of Time Series was published. The author relinquishes control on a lot of things -- such as having to figure out formatting and printing and such. But the publisher also chooses the cover designer, the editors, the pricing, etc. However, in my experience (and from a lot of stories I've heard from author friends), the author's opinion is taken into account. The publisher will not (usually) just slap a cover on your book and say, "Deal with it." They want you to be happy, too.

However, publishers often have a lot of contacts--with bookstores, with sales, with designers. Publishers also tend to know the market much better than we do because they see what books are successful and what flops, they see what readers are buying and what's getting rejected. They provide a lot of knowledge and wisdom in this area.

The larger publishing houses also often have some sort of marketing team or plan or publicist. They can help get your books in front of audiences that you can't reach, or they can get you interviews with big magazines, or they can get your books into the hands of well-to-do reviewers.

However, with traditional publishing, the percentage of profit off of each book that you get is usually significantly smaller than when you self-publish.

Personally, that cost is worth it to me because I don't want to deal with the behind-the-scenes. I want to focus on writing and connecting with my fans. But some authors prefer--and enjoy--the depth of involvement that goes into self-publishing.

So all that to say, I don't think one is better over the other in general. But one is better than the other for each individual author, depending on their preferences, goals, skills, and visions. It's up to the author to figure that out. :)

Does this help?

flag