Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
III. Goodreads Readers
>
Did the rapid success of a few indie authors ruin it for the next wave?
date
newest »
newest »
Gard wrote: "I have a follow up question about the difficulty indie/self-pub authors have getting readers.A few years back, a traditionally-published author told me he'd do it himself if given the chance agai..."
If it did, it certainly wouldn't be the first time. Initial successes often tend to create a bandwagon--and when you find yourself immersed in a crowd, it's always much more difficult to distinguish and achieve than when you're trying something new, something different and unique.
I'm not sure what the point of question is. What does it matter? Things are very different now from when the handful of us went indie back in 2010-- the market is saturated now.It is what it is.
Diatribe is a little harsh, I think. To answer the question though, no, I don't think the success of a few authors ruined it for everyone else.
Certainly, a lot of people jumped on the bandwagon once someone else proved it could work, and that absolutely contributed to the saturation we are now experiencing, but that's the way things work in general. I mean, what would you expect people to do?
Shaun wrote: "Diatribe is a little harsh, I thinkI found it to be pretty critical of traditional publishing. But as this is a discussion that came from how to get more readers - and everyone has agreed there is saturation - who will find the next innovative sales channel? What will it look like? Reading your book on Youtube? Twitch? Yeah there are 500 new small publishers with different revenue structures - but which ones can actually build an audience? Or will it be an individual who cracks the code? The current way may not be dead, but it's possibly becoming as hard, if not a harder puzzle to solve than traditional ever was.
Absolutely not. Lets try to put the size of the world in perspective. Heck, lets just stay in America.
In April, 2012, the Pew Internet and American Life Project conducted a study on eBook, vs. Paper books read in America. From that study it was predicted that on average, every adult over the age of 18 reads 17 books per year. (That sounds high to some who don't read...but it's an average)
As of 2013 there are 210,225,677 Americans over 18— over 200 millions potential buyers for your book.
To help visualize how much room there is for your book, picture a stadium full of 50,000 people. You would need 4204 stadiums full of 50,000 people to account for all those potential buyers.
So here's my question to you. Do you think you could sell one book in each stadium? What about two? Do you think that because a few authors sold one or two books in that stadium that you couldn't? There's room for your book in the world. Heck, I bet you a dollar I could sell ten books in that stadium, and ten in the other 4203 stadiums as well.
Remember, each person in the stadium reads more than one book a year. So you might actually have readers who read both yours, and the other authors book. This isn't a markert where we are competing for sales. Its not like once a person reads Harry Potter, they can never read another book again. Nope, they could read Harry Potter, than two days later, read your book.
There's room for your book.
Peace,
---Demar
It was ever thus.Something gets popular--which means a LOT of people like it---and the swimming pool (or stadium) is crowded)...but eventually the masses move on to the Next Big Thing. Everyone who thought they had a book inside them has or will give indie publishing a try...then when they are done basking in the glow of recognition, they'll move on---because as those of us determined to stick it out know---its a hard work-intensive business...and not for the faint hearted...
So no, I don't think a few ruined it for the many. The many are currently obscuring the few you might say.
But I have more books in me and I am determined to help fund my retirement with them!
Interesting thread. Thank you, Gard.Has the ease of self-publishing saturated the market? Yes. It has also created a whole new dynamic in the author/reader relationship but only where the readers are active in the e-book world. And I don't mean simply using e-readers rather than traditional books. I mean using electronic media to browse and identify the next 'read' instead of relying on bookstores and libraries.
As more and more readers find and browse the e-book world the channels will evolve. It's going to be an interesting decade.
As for 'ruining', well that sounds a little petulant. (Sorry, don't mean to be harsh). It used to be authors bemoaned the inexplicable agendas of publishers. Now it's the readers. I'd rather deal with the readers.
The present self-publishing market reminds me of the old San Francisco 49er's (the 1849 variety). Yes, there was lots of gold lying around and the first few folks who discovered this got very rich very quickly. However, the power of dilution being substantial, it wasn't long before most of the gold was gone and the gold that was left was going into too many pockets to amount to much of anything for any one person. With that said, in the long run all of these industrious folks still found a way to make it and they built one of the greatest cities in America as a result.Okay, enough of the analogies for now!
Dr. Leonardo Noto
Great post..Maybe there is a false sense of security/success for the early self published authors?
When the kindle was new, people wanted to fill it up with whatever.
(That was the mythical "99 cent gold rush" IE John Locke)
At that time the selections were far more limited then they are now.
Due to the fact that there is more competition, there are far better self published books available now than there ever was then.
Because of that..I think people, myself included, have become more discerning.
With that said, a bookworm like myself can fit over 50 books in the pocket of my cargo pants(on my kindle of course) so I doubt that well crafted e-books will be anything, but more desired.
This is good discourse. I guess the new angle is Howey's authorearnings.com report(s). And the backlash. And the backlash to that. What I find great about the report is that everything like that adds clarity to the trade. What I find to be a question mark is how hard is it, really, for a new self-published author to gain traction? The report makes a great case for the top percentage, but what is that percentage?
There is no surefire way, or unexploited marketing channel left.Writing good, and producing high quality books that people talk to their friends about is all that there is..
(This is how it should be anyway)
The real truth is that the promotional websites that you pay to blast your book out there have email lists with more authors emails than reader emails on them.
Anthony wrote: "The vast majority will have their dreams shattered and give up."As long as humans continue to be born, there will always be a new up-and-coming batch of folks with dreams ready to be shattered. It's not like you can pull the weeds from your flowerbed this year and not expect to have to do the same next year.
Sales and reviews are nice, but...Writers will write whether someone is watching them or not and are often too busy tinkering to be upset.
Marketers are not that easily satiated..
Hopefully the marketer gives up first..
Anthony wrote: "Not sure about the analogy, Gregor. Yes, people with dreams will always arise, but the method of following them changes. I suspect this will equally be the case in self publishing."How do you think they'll change? Are you suggesting that new gates will be erected to keep out the flood of low-quality works?
Arabella wrote: "It was ever thus.Something gets popular--which means a LOT of people like it---and the swimming pool (or stadium) is crowded)...but eventually the masses move on to the Next Big Thing. Everyone wh..."
Exactly. Right there with you, Arabella. I just hope I have time to stick it out! :-)
Leonardo wrote: "The present self-publishing market reminds me of the old San Francisco 49er's (the 1849 variety). Yes, there was lots of gold lying around and the first few folks who discovered this got very rich..."Even more people got rich selling picks and shovels to the tide of hopefuls that followed. It's a very good analogy...
Steph wrote: "Leonardo wrote: "The present self-publishing market reminds me of the old San Francisco 49er's (the 1849 variety). Yes, there was lots of gold lying around and the first few folks who discovered th..."Haha! For sure. I'm inundated all day long with people selling "services" for indie authors!
Whoever those successful authors are, I'd like to know what water they drank or what small narrow space of hopeful successful light they stepped into.
Ah, which came first - the chicken or the egg? Surely, the market is more saturated, but it's likely because of stories such as these. So now the question is how to rise above? I'm still trying to figure that out myself.
Robert wrote: "Writing good, and producing high quality books that people talk to their friends about is all that there is..[...]
The real truth is that the promotional websites that you pay to blast your book out there have email lists with more authors emails than reader emails on them. "
You're absolutely right. The best marketing strategy in the world isn't going to help a book that people don't like and talk about.
I laughed at your comment about authors being on the promotional email lists. It makes me think of authors who do a lot of Like-swapping on FB and then proceed to promote their books to each other and wonder why they're not getting sales.
Yes, the hype (and money) of those successes brought every I-can-do-that writer out of the woodwork, but it also brought in thousands of new e-book readers - many of whom bought their first device simply to read those books. They're buying e-books now. For that reason, I think it was a boon to self-pubs. Eventually, the market will settle again.
A few years back, a traditionally-published author told me he'd do it himself if given the chance again, pointing to that PDF diatribe by Konrath and Eisler. Then Hocking was huge, and Hugh Howey, and then everyone seemed to try their methods...
So did that CREATE the problem or challenge? Too big of a rush for that route to success? I'm curious what everyone thinks.