Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
III. Goodreads Readers
>
How to Help Self-Published Authors and Raise the Quality Bar
date
newest »
newest »
Martyn V. wrote: "R.F.G. wrote: "I would posit that the cost for your cover art will tend to blow a serious hole in the $5,000 expense per book figure, as good cover art can be a significant part of the expense."I..."
No, mainly because I'm not trying to 'win'.
Consider, I have three covers that were done by a graphic artist / author who does work for trad houses as well as some self-pub work to make rarer texts available. The third cover was done long before I was ready for it, but it looks nice.
The man's work can fetch $3,500 or more per cover, and while I probably could have paid as little as $25 per, I did actually pay $100 per plus a little extra for an adult beverage (propina). As I said, the man wants to see those on tight budgets have access to good cover art.
My point (similar to yours) is that an author doesn't always have to spend a crap-ton of money to get a quality cover, or editing, as there are competent professionals out there who aren't trying to get a NYC fee off each and every author.
R.F.G. wrote: "My point (similar to yours) is that an author doesn't always have to spend a crap-ton of money to get a quality cover, or editing, as there are competent professionals out there who aren't trying to get a NYC fee off each and every author."That's also why it bothers me that Deborah Plummer doesn't give a breakdown of her 5,000 dollars, but still claims the amount is 'normal' for self-publishing a novel.
The way I see it, if you self-publish, you have to be creative--try to learn how to do things yourself, or barter other professionals in exchanging skills.
Martyn V. wrote: "R.F.G. wrote: "My point (similar to yours) is that an author doesn't always have to spend a crap-ton of money to get a quality cover, or editing, as there are competent professionals out there who ..."I agree.
My editor goes over my work for the fun of it, and my writing is not a genre she normally reads. I believe the man who did my last three covers will accept less on the next one or two (as I be a bit broke). Formatting involves time and patience, but no more time and patience than crafting a good sword does (trust me, the sword takes a lot longer than the formatting).
Some people strive to keep writing and publishing an elitist preserve, by stipulating it takes many thousands of dollars to produce anything of quality, when the fact is it can be done for far less. I could state that the only way to have a good sword would be by spending thousands of dollars, but simply making the statement doesn't make it true. As my father once said: "A turd is still a turd even if you wrap it in hundred dollar bills."
There are many ways around spending a lot of money if a person is diligent. Some people just aren't quite as clever as they'd like others to think, so they waste money and hope others will do the same.
R.F.G. wrote: "Some people strive to keep writing and publishing an elitist preserve, by stipulating it takes many thousands of dollars to produce anything of quality, when the fact is it can be done for far less. "This. This is what I think her whole blog post boils down to. Not just with her comment on the cost of self-publishing, but also with her comments on the rewards.
In her post and in the comments, she claims she's including the costs of overhead (travel expenses, reading material) into the amount a self-published ebook costs to make. She says she ALSO levels those costs against any royalties she makes on the self-published book. Which is how she explains her comment in the blog that she makes a 2% difference in royalties between her self-pubbed and traditionally pubbed books. Is she applying any costs to her traditionally published works? It doesn't look like it. If she applied travel expenses, reading material, and other associated costs to the traditionally published works, I'm sure that would be a straight loss if she's claiming a loss of 58% of her royalties on the self-published book with those costs.
Shaun wrote: "R.F.G. wrote: "Martyn V. wrote: "Some people strive to keep writing and publishing an elitist preserve, by stipulating it takes many thousands of dollars to produce anything of quality, when the fa..."In addition there is a beginning trend for publishers to push the costs of editing and proofreading as well as marketing over to the new author, all those wonderful incentives involved with being traditionally published are disappearing if you're not already close to being a best-seller.
There's no way I could afford the kind of money you are talking about. I'm retired and on a fixed income, and I'm not going to ask my wife for the money. I spent $50 on a book I published last year, I'll make about a grand over the course of a year. On the other hand, someone volunteered to edit one of my previous books, and I can already see the difference.
Shaun wrote: "R.F.G. wrote: "Martyn V. wrote: "Some people strive to keep writing and publishing an elitist preserve, by stipulating it takes many thousands of dollars to produce anything of quality, when the fa..."Ehm, Shaun, be careful what you quote, because now it reads like I said something someone else said. Other people are quoting your quote.
Eep. Sorry. Should be okay if people quote me now.
I recently left a linked in subgroup because I felt some of the behavior was sketchy. I'd like to know what you think.The founder created a support group for other writers in the same genre (very short books). I thought swapping Facebook likes and following each other on twitter was great.
Then he listed our books and prices and links on Amazon and encouraged each other to buy them. I thought that was okay but then he started to push the people should buy the whole package all at once so we could push our numbers up just before Christmas. I didn't participate.
He encourage people to swap reviews. I felt a uneasy with direct swaps but I'm honest, no matter what, and gave people what I thought they deserved. But then, he started reviewing books using only the look inside feature. He asked me to swap and I sent him a copy of my book. He posted a review which was obviously based on other people's comments and a quick skim. Pointed out to him that there was no rhyming in my book and asked him to read the entire thing. I refused to review his book based on the look inside feature. He insisted he could not send me a copy because he didn't have an e-book. Apparently even the manuscript was unavailable. So, in return, I offered to critique the parts that were available on the peak inside feature. It needed a LOT of work. (I I see now that he tried to fix some of the problems I pointed out.)
I became more and more uncomfortable with the numerous five-star reviews on books I thought were three-star or four at best. I no longer participate in the sub-group but I really like the larger group.
Anyway, are these things typical? It seems to negate the value of reviews completely.
Bonnie wrote: "I recently left a linked in subgroup because I felt some of the behavior was sketchy. I'd like to know what you think.The founder created a support group for other writers in the same genre (very..."
Bonnie, sadly this is becoming typical. However, you were right to get out while you could. This is NOT appropriate or honest behavior.
I think there's nothing wrong with giving a review of "would not purchase/read" based on an awful "look inside" sample. If I were to do that, though, I would certainly disclose that fact. I would never feel I could give a five-star (or any type of positive) review on a book, based only on the sample. Not even for my favorite authors.
What that author (and others like him) is doing is illegal at worst and unethical at best.
I'm glad to hear this. Is there anything that can be done about it?
Explain your point of view if you're invited to do it again, Bonnie, and then back away. The more authors who refuse to participate, the less "profitable" the practice. Maybe the rest will get the message, little by little.
Robert wrote: "This is a very interesting post...My two cents may not be relevant to the discussions thus far in the post, but I could not refrain from commenting..
I think that traditional authors and indie a..."
Yes, yes, and yes to all of this.
I'm not a fan of review swapping either. It seems like a win-win but there's no way of possibly knowing that and doesn't seem legitimate.Classic way to get reviews isn't to go around asking for them, if you do there should be a certain time period for it. Doing it all the time makes you seem needy(I'm using needy although I'm sure there's another word). It's better to let the readers read and let the reviews follow.
Lots of author-publishers don't understand fully that what they're releasing is a product, a product that should go through the same product life-cycle as any other product. They jump from the R&D phase to release, and they skip quality control, user acceptance testing, etc.. Not to mention the fact that many have no understanding of the post-release customer service aspects of unleashing a product onto the market. The customer (the reader) is always right. Even when you feel they're wrong, they're right.
Gregor wrote: "Lots of author-publishers don't understand fully that what they're releasing is a product, a product that should go through the same product life-cycle as any other product. They jump from the R&D ..."Gregor, you've said this so clearly that we can only hope some of those premature publishers read your post. There are steps to be followed. Skipping a step (or three, or four) releases a product that isn't ready, and will ultimately not stand the test of time.
I love that this thread exists. There are some wonderful indie books out there, but you still have to dig through too many not-so-great ones to find them. I'd love to see all indie authors upping the quality bar. I think part of the problem is simply that too many indie authors just don't know what they need to do to publish a quality product.If any of you are interested, Phantom Owl Press is looking for guest bloggers to talk about something they learned while publishing a book. Some of you have shared some great advice that sounds exactly like what they're looking for.
More info here: http://phantomowl.blogspot.com/2014/0...
Linda wrote: "I may be the iconoclast, but I consider any kind of review swapping, group purchasing plan, all of that stuff to be just plain unethical. I guess it's technically legal if you disclose the details prior to publishing a "review," so that the innocent consumer at least knows you might be biased, but I find the whole practice repugnant."It is repugnant, because it corrupts the system. The idea that a review can be taken at face value is diminished until reviewing itself can become suspect.
Martyn V. wrote: "Linda wrote: "I may be the iconoclast, but I consider any kind of review swapping, group purchasing plan, all of that stuff to be just plain unethical. I guess it's technically legal if you disclos..."Reviewing has always been suspect as anyone who has spent any time on eBay knows.
Martyn V. wrote: "Linda wrote: "..I consider any kind of review swapping, group purchasing plan, all of that stuff to be just plain unethical."Curiously I have a review that begins: "I recieved [sp] a copy for free in exchange for an honest review."
I was going to comment on the review as I had not provided any quid pro quo. I decided not to rather than start some kind of an exchange with a stranger. The person had bought the book and I did ask for reviews at the end. It could be the reviewer got the book during a Select freebie promo.
I looked at the person's other reviews and every review written started off the same way. It appears 'suspect' but I have plenty of other reviews so I'm not giving it any thought.
Ken wrote: "Martyn V. wrote: "Linda wrote: "..I consider any kind of review swapping, group purchasing plan, all of that stuff to be just plain unethical."Curiously I have a review that begins: "I recieved [..."
The person is probably just confused about their disclosure obligation. A reader who receives & reviews an ARC from the author/publisher/netgalley is required by FTC regs (in the US) to disclose the fact. There actually is no requirement of disclosure when one has bought the book on the open market in an arms length transaction, even if the book was free, but I think that a fair number of people just think that they need to disclose that the book was free no matter where they got it.
I wouldn't worry about it. As a reader and reviewer, I don't find it "suspect" at all. A lot of reviewers (including me) review ARCs and use that same type of disclosure.
The line "I received a copy for free in exchange for an honest review." apparently is necessary to get buy some watch dog program on Amazon that will kick a review off if there isn’t a record of the person buying the book from Amazon. I’ve done review swapping but I always give an honest review. In my One Man’s Opinion video reviews I clearly state that I will not review anything I consider less that three stars. That doesn’t mean I drop the bar it just means I won’t review things I didn’t like.
This is one of them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZixNEu... .
I think that is the point though. Being honest. Also the idea that if you can’t say something nice saying nothing at all is not a lie. As long as you’re up front about it.
Stephen wrote: "The line "I received a copy for free in exchange for an honest review." apparently is necessary to get buy some watch dog program on Amazon that will kick a review off if there isn’t a record of th..."That's not correct. I review books that I've bought elsewhere (or checked out from the library) on amazon all the time without any sort of a disclosure. It doesn't show up as a verified purchase, but it is absolutely possible to review it without any kind of a disclosure (which in my case would often be a lie) that I got it for free. Especially if I didn't get it for free because I bought it at Barnes and Noble or Powell's.
Stephen wrote: "The line "I received a copy for free in exchange for an honest review." apparently is necessary to get buy some watch dog program on Amazon that will kick a review off if there isn’t a record of the person buying the book from Amazon. ..."As Moonlight Reader noted, this isn't correct. Whilst I haven't posted that many, I've never had any problems posting reviews for my library borrows or brick & mortal purchases. Nor have I ever been contacted after the fact re: such reviews. (FTR, no posted review of mine has ever been deleted, except by me.)
From the little that I know about such deletions, I get the sense that they occur b/c circumstances surrounding the review and/or the reviewer make them suspect.
It's on the Read to Review site of good reads take it up with them.
Stephen wrote: "It's on the Read to Review site of good reads take it up with them."I don't know where that is, so I can't take it up with them. I am correcting misinformation on this thread, not in the universe.
Amazon Review Guidelines:"Who can create customer reviews?
Anyone who has purchased items from Amazon.com."
So technically, if you don't buy from Amazon, you aren't allowed to review there.
Danielle wrote: "Amazon Review Guidelines:"Who can create customer reviews?
Anyone who has purchased items from Amazon.com."
So technically, if you don't buy from Amazon, you aren't allowed to review there."
It doesn't say that you had to have purchased the particular item that you're reviewing from Amazon. You just need to have an account with them and have bought something from them at one time.
Gregor wrote: "Danielle wrote: "Amazon Review Guidelines:"Who can create customer reviews?
Anyone who has purchased items from Amazon.com."
So technically, if you don't buy from Amazon, you aren't allowed to r..."
I did an exact copy, so it does state you have to buy from Amazon. Look at the very second question. It's exactly what I posted.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/community-he...
Danielle wrote: "Gregor wrote: "Danielle wrote: "Amazon Review Guidelines:"Who can create customer reviews?
Anyone who has purchased items from Amazon.com."
So technically, if you don't buy from Amazon, you aren..."
Yes, but it doesn't say you can only post reviews for the items you've purchased on Amazon. (They have records and could enforce this if they wanted to.) It just says that you can post reviews on Amazon if you've purchased items through them before. If I buy a toaster from Amazon, I can review books on Amazon all I want without ever having purchased a single book from them.
How much do you guys think reviews help for self-published books? I know a lot of readers immediately start judging your book based on the reviews they see, but I've also seen self-published books that are top sellers with only 2 or 3 reviews...which I find quite strange haha! How did these books spread so much without any reviews? www.niharsuthar.com
I am a top 10,000 reviewer on amazon. I swear to all of you that there is no requirement that a book be purchased on amazon in order to review it, AND I do not need to post a disclaimer that states that I got it for free if I post a review there. You have to have an account, and you have to had made one purchase before they will allow you to post a review.
One of the other pages say they will delete them if not bought from them, but I'm on phone now instead of laptop. It started with the guideline of authors reviewing. As long as no one marks it as unhelpful, they let it slide. It tells the authors to flag the reviews as unhelpful to get them to delete them. It also says their system will catch some of them and remove them as well. What they enforce and what the guidelines allow are not the same thing. But don't be surprised if a review disappears on books not purchased from them.
Danielle wrote: "One of the other pages say they will delete them if not bought from them, but I'm on phone now instead of laptop. It started with the guideline of authors reviewing. As long as no one marks it as ..."I have no idea what you are looking at, but you are completely incorrect here.
Also, unhelpful reviews are NOT deleted. This is an urban legend that makes authors think that if they get all of their friends to downvote a review it will be deleted. It's also incorrect.
Leaving a review that says "I received this book for free" doesn't have anything to do with Amazon. It's part of the new FTC guidelines. http://booksspeakvolumes.com/2013/04/...This also doesn't necessarily mean that if someone posts this disclosure at the top of their review that they received their book in a "review swap" (which I also agree can lead to biased reviews).
Most likely that reviewer received a free ARC (advanced reader's copy) from the publisher/author. Many authors and publishers give out tons of ARC's before their book is released to get some buzz about their book going before it's release date.
Considering the reviewer is getting something for free without the author doing something for them in return (like reviewing their book) I personally consider ARC reviews to be just as reliable as any other review. Furthermore, if you see a disclosure at the top of a review, that means the reviewer is doing what they're supposed to be doing, which I think should speak to their reputation as a reviewer.
Just wanted to clear that up.
Linda wrote: "Danielle wrote: "One of the other pages say they will delete them if not bought from them, but I'm on phone now instead of laptop. It started with the guideline of authors reviewing. As long as n..."Yep.
I always wondered about that. The whole, 'I recieved this book in exchange for an honest review'. Is it courteous to do to let readers know before they read the review pretty much? Does it help or just a way to let the reader of the review know before hand?
Justin wrote: "I always wondered about that. The whole, 'I recieved this book in exchange for an honest review'. Is it courteous to do to let readers know before they read the review pretty much? Does it help or ..."It's a disclosure that is required by the FTC in the U.S.
I've reviewed products at Amazon for over 14 years, I've been a top 1,000 reviewer and I'm in the Vine program. I blogged for a couple of years and at least 3/4 of what I reviewed (and as per my agreement with the authors, copied up at Amazon), I didn't buy there. Nothing I've ever posted has been deleted and Amazon has never contacted me and said there's a problem - the Verified Purchase thing hasn't even existed for most of the time I've been reviewing.The wording that you quoted just means that in order to post a review at Amazon, you have to have created an account and verified you're someone who exists by purchasing something. That's it. I can't post reviews at Amazon UK because I don't live there and can't have stuff shipped there (although theoretically I could have it sent to someone there if I knew someone). It's as simple as that.
As several someones have said, when you see, "I received this book in exchange for an honest review," it's because the FTC requires it. If you check out review blogs, they're required to post the same thing if they accept books for review (at least they'd better).
Oh okay, that makes sense. Thanks Ladies.
Reading the rules if you give a bad review no disclosures are necessary. It is only if you are endorsing a product. A negative review is not an endorsement.
"Full disclosure: If you received a free product in exchange for your review, please clearly and conspicuously disclose that that you received the product free of charge. Reviews from the Amazon Vine™ program are already labeled, so additional disclosure is not necessary."This is one of the Amazon guidelines cut and pasted directly from their review guidelines. The FTC requires the disclosures for "Advertisements" not consumer reviews. As a blogger yes you need to have a disclaimer/disclosure but as a consumer you are not. Reviews on Amazon, goodreads, etc, are not considered ads unless you are paid for the review. Your own blog yes, another site no.
BUT, it is always a good policy to disclose that you received and ARC, Free copy for honest review, etc. So the person reading the review, can vet for possible bias.
This is an exact quote from the FTC website.
"The revised Guides also add new examples to illustrate the long standing principle that “material connections” (sometimes payments or free products) between advertisers and endorsers – connections that consumers would not expect – must be disclosed. These examples address what constitutes an endorsement when the message is conveyed by bloggers or other “word-of-mouth” marketers. The revised Guides specify that while decisions will be reached on a case-by-case basis, the post of a blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered an endorsement. Thus, bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service. Likewise, if a company refers in an advertisement to the findings of a research organization that conducted research sponsored by the company, the advertisement must disclose the connection between the advertiser and the research organization. And a paid endorsement – like any other advertisement – is deceptive if it makes false or misleading claims."
This is the example that is referred to the most in the FTC discussion."Example 7: A college student who has
earned a reputation as a video game
expert maintains a personal weblog or
‘‘blog’’ where he posts entries about his
gaming experiences. Readers of his blog
frequently seek his opinions about video
game hardware and software. As it has
done in the past, the manufacturer of a
newly released video game system
sends the student a free copy of the
system and asks him to write about it on
his blog. He tests the new gaming
system and writes a favorable review.
Because his review is disseminated via
a form of consumer-generated media in
which his relationship to the advertiser
is not inherently obvious, readers are
unlikely to know that he has received
the video game system free of charge in
exchange for his review of the product,
and given the value of the video game
system, this fact likely would materially
affect the credibility they attach to his
endorsement. Accordingly, the blogger
should clearly and conspicuously
disclose that he received the gaming
system free of charge. The manufacturer
should advise him at the time it
provides the gaming system that this
connection should be disclosed, and it
should have procedures in place to try
to monitor his postings for compliance."
Again it is mentioning a blog and he is considered an "expert" not a "consumer"
"Stephen wrote: "It's on the Read to Review site of good reads take it up with them."Moonlight Reader wrote:
"I don't know where that is, so I can't take it up with them. I am correcting misinformation on this thread, not in the universe."
LOL
:)
emphasis added
Nihar wrote: "How much do you guys think reviews help for self-published books? I know a lot of readers immediately start judging your book based on the reviews they see, but I've also seen self-published books ..."Nihar, I can't tell you that some readers won't decline to purchase a book due to lack of reviews, but I can tell you that my recent novel sold copies every day for 8 weeks without a single review (and with no promotion or marketing.) It's probably just a coincidence, but oddly enough, now that I have a few reviews (2 5's and a 4) sales have slowed.
I've also seen other books that have 30+ 5-star reviews that sell only a few copies every month.
Reviews are overrated. A good book will sell itself.
I think the only time you'd need to be concerned is if a book has nothing but bad reviews, and several of them. That would indicate a consensus among readers that the book sucks.
Nothing but good reviews isn't great either. They are sometimes assumed to be only from friends and family.
I always advise to invest your energy in writing the best that you can and constantly working to improve your ability, rather than worrying about ratings and reviews.
(Note: my references are in regards to reviews on Amazon.)
J.T. wrote: "...Again it is mentioning a blog and he is considered an "expert" not a "consumer" "J.T., w/ all due respect, I don't believe that the issue hinges on whether or not someone is an 'expert', as opposed to an everyday 'consumer'. Rather, think that the primary focus (more relevant statement?) of that example is the following:
... Because his review is disseminated via a form of consumer-generated media in which his relationship to the advertiser is not inherently obvious, readers are unlikely to know that he has received the video game system free of charge in exchange for his review of the product, and given the value of the video game system, this fact likely would materially affect the credibility they attach to his endorsement. Accordingly, the blogger should clearly and conspicuously disclose that he received the gaming system free of charge. ... (bold added for emphasis)
etc: pesky typos
ETA: J.T. wrote: "...As a blogger yes you need to have a disclaimer/disclosure but as a consumer you are not. ...
Sorry, this is absolutely incorrect. All one needs to do is look at the brief statement in GR's giveaway FYI.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
They Still Call Me Sister (other topics)They Still Call Me Sister (other topics)
Reprobate: A Katla Novel (other topics)
Aspen Allegations (other topics)
Reprobate: A Katla Novel (other topics)
More...
In my case, I paid my cover artist's going rate, although she gave me a discount for ordering six covers at the same time. And yes, the largest part of my book budget went to the cover.
Would you like to reconsider your estimate? :)