Support for Indie Authors discussion
Archived Author Help
>
Standards and gatekeepers
date
newest »
newest »
Nice. He was a pretty prolific painter. :D
Riley wrote: "That's right, Dwayne, we're like Leonardo Davinci...or Raphael... or Michelangelo... I've been trying to think of one that cusses like a sailor and doesn't seem to give a crap like I do...but I can..."Well, if you're talking artists, I can't help you, but if you're talking Ninja Turtles, that would be Raphael. ;)
I know it can be hard to focus the big picture when ten bucks looks like a big paycheck, but we are not the "failures" in the industry anymore. Take a look at what Indie authors earn compared to traditionally published authors. 
http://authorearnings.com/report/janu...
As Dwayne says: "Hey. This is a renaissance!!
It really is. We all have challenges to face, as individuals and as a group. But the "no gatekeeper" model is winning. That's obvious.
The downside is that we are running short of excuses. The challenges we face are the challenges all authors face. Are we as individual authors ready for that?
As a group we're doing okay, but it's still daunting when you consider that the 18% probably includes far more writers than all of the others combined. That 54% for small or medium publishers may be hundreds or even thousands of authors dividing that part of the pie, while our 18% may have millions, each trying to get a share.
Ken wrote: "As a group we're doing okay, but it's still daunting when you consider that the 18% probably includes far more writers than all of the others combined. That 54% for small or medium publishers may ..."Keep in mind that authors like us (that have their business) are in the 8% of "single author publishers", so indies' are really 26%. And the small to medium publishes are much bigger than hundreds or even thousands: that applies to the Big 5.
Except it doesn't apply to the Big 5 (or the medium publishers). Those portions don't include every author they published; it include every author they published plus every author they rejected. And that is millions of authors.
In addition, keep in mind that however many of us are trying to get a share of the pie, that pie is growing. Indie authors have helped make the pie about one-third bigger than in was previously.
It's true that most indie authors don't make much -- but before they made nothing. "To these aged eyes, that's what winning looks like."
As a writer, I pay attention to other writers and note whether they're indie or trad published.But to be perfectly honest, as a reader I don't. WHile I love owning printed books, I'm on a tight budget so I'll always see if the ebook is cheaper than the print version (which it almost always is).
And when browsing ebooks on any platform (Amazon, Smashwords, and so on), there is no big red flag saying "this is indie published", so I won't know unless I look it up on Goodreads or such. But I make my reading choice based on the blurp, and, I have to admit, the cover, and the reviews if I can find them easily.
Yes, I have downloaded books I personally thought were crap. But I could not tell you now if they were indie or trad. And other readers may have loved it. If I really didn't like the book I won't rate or review it (because a negative review stays forever, and no review is negative enough, I think).
And then I'm on to the next interesting blurp that I may or may not buy on impulse...
Ken wrote: "As a group we're doing okay, but it's still daunting when you consider that the 18% probably includes far more writers than all of the others combined. That 54% for small or medium publishers may ..."Well, if the title on that graph is to be believed, that is not including most of us at all. That is showing the data on 120k titles that comprise of Amazon's top sellers. Meaning, there are less than 120k authors represented. The idea is that indies are 'making it' in larger numbers than ever before. Now, what that doesn't show is how many authors, traditional or indie, currently writing or long dead, are actually out there. So sure, there may be millions more of us, but not *all* of us aren't selling.
Christina wrote: "Well, if the title on that graph is to be believed, that is not including most of us at all..."The methodology is covered in the article. And, yes, that is 120,000 books that account for half of Amazon revenue. There was a note that B&N's stats looked similar (as I recall). So it's an industry snapshot. But as a snapshot, it doesn't include a lot of non-indie authors, either.
It says that ~5% or so of eBooks produce half the revenue (assuming an inventory of ~2 million eBooks). That's to be expected. The interesting part is that this is book revenue. Indie books are typically priced lower that Big 5 books (less than $5 vs $7+ in many cases) but indies books account for ~37% more revenue than the Big 5. That suggests that in that top 5% or so indie books are outselling Big 5 works but close to 2:1. That's a lot of indie work in that top 5%.
You are correct in that the graph doesn't indicate the total number of books in each of their categories. I don't recall if the article attempted to address that. (One could back it out but it would take some work.)
Edit: The question of breakdown for the other half of Amazon's revenue is not addressed (as I recall). If that other half was dominated by indie authors, that would change the perspective, wouldn't it?
Another thing to consider is that traditionally published authors might have more backstock than indie authors. No indie author has been publishing for 10+ years -- many traditionally published authors have. Those who make it into that 120,000 books are the successful ones, whose books tend to stay in print. Backstock is a key sales driver. Combine that with the variations in our popularity across genres, and it becomes even more evident how well indie work is selling.
Owen wrote: "Christina wrote: "Well, if the title on that graph is to be believed, that is not including most of us at all..."The methodology is covered in the article. And, yes, that is 120,000 books that ac..."
When you put these figures in front of me, Owen, I do believe the gatekeepers are running scared. They will do anything to discourage the rise of the indies. Including bashing the quality of indie books. We should not help them in their battle.
The gatekeepers are no guarantee of quality.
"THE RISE OF THE INDIES"Mmm... Sounds like a readable book?
;)
Mod
Mmm... Sounds like a readable book?
;)"
Sure does. Go for it.
Anthony wrote: "When you put these figures in front of me, Owen, I do believe the gatekeepers are running scared. They will do anything to discourage the rise of the indies. Including bashing the quality of indie books. We should not help them in their battle..."And some of them have. Two years ago, when we started, we heard quite a bit about bashing from industry sources. Then we stopped listening so I've no idea how that's gone. But I could not agree more that we shouldn't help such people.
Honestly, all the bashing has done for me is give me a longer list of authors I will never read. Anyone with something negative to say, be they indie or trad, isn't worth wasting my time.
There are several popular authors, traditionally published, that I have refused to read because their work is so poorly written. And they are a lot of indie-bashers favorite Authors too.
Mod
I'm like Donatello Myself, as I imagine many other authors are.
Christina wrote: "Honestly, all the bashing has done for me is give me a longer list of authors I will never read. Anyone with something negative to say, be they indie or trad, isn't worth wasting my time."I never read any of them, so I can't stop reading them. To the best of my knowledge, I have never bought or finished a "bestselling" book (although I'm unclear on what a "bestseller" is considered to be) so my market power there is just about nil.
Dwayne wrote: "Anthony wrote: ""THE RISE OF THE INDIES"Mmm... Sounds like a readable book?
;)"
Sure does. Go for it."
Great! I've got a title. Now, I've just got to think of a plot, characters, genre, world, twist...
Mod
Plot: Indies rise and take over the literary world
Characters: Howard Hatchet (drunken writer of cozy mysteries), Petunia Lovelace (sweet little writer of Gothic horror and erotic westerns), Brent Sterner (writer of children's books and how to manuals), Lucinda Peacock Evans (writer of fantasy and science fiction), M.B.Z. Wentz (because at least one writer has to only go by their initials).
Genre:Absurd humor or historical science fiction.
World: Earth. 2015. Summer.
Twist: Lucinda is really a best-selling traditionally published author of children's chapter books, hell bent on sabotaging the rise of the Indies.
There. Now you can write the rest.
Can Lucinda come to a really, really sticky end, please? Perhaps she could be crushed by a falling bookshelf full of indie books?
I think the characters from her children's books should come to life and stab her to death with pencils.
Perhaps Lucinda is writing a book depicting how the evil Indies are plotting to take over the literary world in order to discredit them, and the characters come to life and terminate her with a giant bottle of Wite-Out.
Dwayne wrote: "Anthony wrote: "Great! I've got a title. Now, I've just got to think of a plot, characters, genre, world, twist..."Plot: Indies rise and take over the literary world
Characters: Howard Hatchet (d..."
LOL,
...and target audience one million angry indies. It can't fail!
Mod
Why, Beezus, why?
Dwayne wrote: "Charles wrote: "I think the characters from her children's books should come to life and stab her to death with pencils."Why, Beezus, why?"
'Cause Charles is the literary reincarnation of Hieronymus Bosch.
;@
...or just because...
Dwayne wrote: "Anthony wrote: "Great! I've got a title. Now, I've just got to think of a plot, characters, genre, world, twist..."Plot: Indies rise and take over the literary world
Characters: Howard Hatchet (d..."
Damn! you need to keep going with this - it sounds like a lot of fun!!!
I would have to remove 1,000 tentacles from my book if there were a literary standard for indie authors to publish by.
Dwayne wrote: "Charles wrote: "I think the characters from her children's books should come to life and stab her to death with pencils."Why, Beezus, why?"
I told you Beezus was a right b*tch! She and Henry definitely went on to star in their own twisted version of Natural Born Killers.
Mod
Nightmare on Klicketat Street.
I need to do a parody of Beezus / Ramona and Henry sometime. I once did a parody of Little House in the Big Woods. I should brush it off and publish it some day.
One thing that I've never seen defined is "commercial viability". So the theory is, big publishers want the next Twilight/Hunger Games, right? so how do they know what books are commercially viable and which ones aren't? I mean new authors, who have no track record to lean on. Since no one seems to know why this book has 100,000 sales and that one just like it, also well-written 2,500, it's almost like a guessing game.Or did I just answer my own question?
Dwayne wrote: "Charles wrote: "Ramona was their first victim."Nightmare on Klicketat Street.
I need to do a parody of Beezus / Ramona and Henry sometime. I once did a parody of Little House in the Big Woods. I..."
Did you know Beverly Cleary is 99 years old?
And back on topic, I'm pretty sure you did indeed answer your own question, Sam. Luck has more to do with it than anyone will admit. Yes, the publishers will use their influence to push trends on the reading public, but one author gets the spotlight over another is based on many factors, not the least of which is being in the right place at the right time.
Sam wrote: "so how do they know what books are commercially viable and which ones aren't? I mean new authors, who have no track record to lean on. Since no one seems to know why this book has 100,000 sales and that one just like it, also well-written 2,500, it's almost like a guessing game.Or did I just answer my own question? ..."
You did. Although it's not possible (as far as I know) to get firm numbers, it appears that publishers have no better idea if a book will succeed than random person. They do have "templates" based on popular genres, but there's not much evidence that those templates are do all that much good.
How "commercial viability" might be defined depends. One fairly reasonable definition (for a publisher) is that a book earned out its advance.
I got to see a Picasso painting the other day. The real deal! Pretty exciting as he's one of my favorites.