A self-publishing renaissance? Most writers making less than $1k a year

[Alan]

Jonathan wrote: " It's not so good for writers, who are having to compete for their piece of the pie..."
They (we) always did. The trouble was that the competition was to gain a publisher's attention, and that meant writing something he thought he could sell. Now you write something you enjoy writing, and pray it sells. A different environment, and more exciting - though this has its problems for the really good writers who are now having to compete in a much wider market place, and for the readers who face so much to choose from (and so much of it absolute dross!) that finding a book you like, and/or finding an author worth following, become much more difficult.
From the author's point of view, it also means acquiring some sort of marketing skills (or a hell of a lot of luck!) and that is not necessarily in the author's comfort zone!

[Shaun]

I'm self published and I wrote something that I enjoyed writing. If other people read and enjoy it then thats fantastic. Of course I'm having to grow to understand marketing better because, lets face it, if I want to continue polishing my books then that requires some kind of money to offset those costs. I guess with any form of market anyone enters there will always be competition, and at the end of the day it is understanding what that market wants and desires.

[Amy]

http://www.asterling.com/2014/05/fact...

I don't know how much traction I'm getting, but I'll keep going in the hope that if I reach just one or two people, it will be worth it.

[V.W.]

Tannera wrote: "I speak to many authors on LinkedIn. Here's what I learned in the past few years:

I'm still baffled by the number of writers who write a first draft and then publish without editing and a decent c..."

Editing, cover design, and marketing don't necessarily have to cost a lot, but the would be author needs to be aware of what is needed, how it is done, and put in the time to learn the skills if he or she can't pay for them to be done by others.

[Shaun]

Tannera wrote: "I speak to many authors on LinkedIn. Here's what I learned in the past few years:

I'm still baffled by the number of writers who write a first draft and then publish without editing and a decent c..."

Couldn't agree more regarding the editing. When I got to the editing stage of my book I was skeptical if it was needed or not. After handing it over to an editor and getting it back I got the shock of my life. There was a whole lot of material for me to correct and change myself. At the end of the day, as authors, we are putting out products for people to read and if it's not polished, or it's faulty, readers will not come back for round two.

If I purchased any other product on the market and it hadn't been tested to make sure it was fit for purpose or working, I'd be pretty annoyed. I write for the love of it, but at the same time remaining professional and treating my writing the same way I would my own business, is important to me.

[[deleted user]]

Tannera wrote: "If writers don't have money for editing, cover design, and marketing, they should wait until they do so..."

Iam sorry, but I strongly disagree with that statement. So, only the writers who have money to spare for editing, cover design and marketing should publish their books? This would basically make the financial status of the author more important than the litterary value of his/her work and would kill countless stories of potential intellectual value. This is a slap in the face of all the hopeful authors who are struggling to simply put bread on their table.

[Mary]

Blurbing is what really gets me.

[S. Usher]

Yeah, and I see published books with typos too. Accidents happen.

As someone who had a big ol' MAJOR typo in her description, I can empathize with both sides here. I take supreme pride in my work, but I also am not perfect. I'm willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Mostly because I've been on the other side of the coin when I realized, with the utmost horror, that I was talking about someone's terrible "paste."

[Jim]

I have monitored some lively debates within several discussion groups in which the participants agreed to disagree (sometimes rather heatedly) about the relevance of adhering to standard rules of grammar, punctuation, spelling, and syntax.

No matter how good the writer's ideas and concept may be, most readers will not tolerate a poorly written book. If for no other reason, a writer should take the time to proofread and correct technical errors out of respect for their potential readers. Don't insult their intelligence or underestimate your own.

[Micah]

I've been pretty shocked recently with the number of typos in traditionally published books by well known authors.

That stuff is annoying, but it's not nearly as annoying as grammatically correct but naive or confusing writing.

Which means that most of the bad self-published works I've sampled really need something more than just proofreading. They need copy editing and/or substantive editing. And that's going to run into a lot more money.

Even for simple editing most of the services I've seen available will cost in excess of $1,000. A good looking book cover is going to cost probably $200 - $800.

So even without marketing costs, if your cover and editing come in at $1,400 and you're making $2.50 per sale, you're going to need to sell 560 copies just to break even.

And the one common thread I see in articles about how to improve your book sales is "you need more works in your catalog." I'm all for doing it right and paying to put out the best product you can, but I can't blame writers who know they're unlikely to recover their costs to pay that kind of money until they start actually making enough sales to cover their costs.

$1,400, BTW is about 4% of the median annual personal income in the US. Don't know why I put that in there...I just like stats like that ;D

[Kevin]

I agree that editing is a necessary part of the process, despite the expense. However, there are aspiring editors willing to work with aspiring authors, which could be a great arrangement for both parties.

Concerning covers, check out my cover artist - Steven Novak (novakillustration.com). He's great, fast, and reasonably priced.

[Mary]

There's always, of course, do-it-yourself with PD art.

[[deleted user]]

While so many people on this thread seem to get stuck on typos and grammatical errors in self-published books and say that editing is thus a must to make a good book that will attract readers, I find that view very narrow, in that it ignores the actual scenario quality and style of the book. I have read plenty of grammatically correct books that had expensive-looking covers, only to find the story either uninspiring, repetitive, silly or downright boring. What makes a good book in my mind is how much it can entertain and grab the attention and imagination of the readers with interesting characters, fascinating plots and innovative ideas. I would much better have substance than only appearance in a novel. And as Micah reminds us in no. 114, the costs of editing, marketing and giving a professional cover to a book are substantial, more than many independent authors can afford. As for typos and spelling errors being an insult to the intelligence of readers, please get off your high horses! Not everyone had a chance to study English or litterature in college or university. Some authors may also have English as a second language.

[Kevin]

In my experience, editing improves the quality of the story as well as improving the grammar. My editor (Arlene Prunkl) made substantial changes to both of my stories, immensely improving their quality.

And while authors can try to edit, most are too close to their work to be able to critique it like an editor.

[colleen the convivial curmudgeon]

Micah wrote: "I've been pretty shocked recently with the number of typos in traditionally published books by well known authors.

That stuff is annoying, but it's not nearly as annoying as grammatically correct but naive or confusing writing.

Which means that most of the bad self-published works I've sampled really need something more than just proofreading. They need copy editing and/or substantive editing. And that's going to run into a lot more money."


Thank you. I always find it amusing/annoying how whenever the issue of editing comes up, people always act like what's meant is one or two typos or homophones or something. I guess it's a straw man way of stepping around the issue...

Usually the SPA books I've read which needed a good editor had much more substantial problems - such as, as you say, grammatically correct but confusing writing. Or overly correct and stilted writing, as a converse.

[Aaron]

Michel wrote: "While so many people on this thread seem to get stuck on typos and grammatical errors in self-published books and say that editing is thus a must to make a good book that will attract readers, I find that view very narrow, in that it ignores the actual scenario quality and style of the book. I have read plenty of grammatically correct books that had expensive-looking covers, only to find the story either uninspiring, repetitive, silly or downright boring. What makes a good book in my mind is how much it can entertain and grab the attention and imagination of the readers with interesting characters, fascinating plots and innovative ideas. I would much better have substance than only appearance in a novel. And as Micah reminds us in no. 114, the costs of editing, marketing and giving a professional cover to a book are substantial, more than many independent authors can afford. As for typos and spelling errors being an insult to the intelligence of readers, please get off your high horses! Not everyone had a chance to study English or litterature in college or university. Some authors may also have English as a second language. "

As a person with not only poor grammar but someone who has read entirely too many fan-translated and worse machine translated, hello ATLAS translation software. My standards for grammar are very...very low. That being said your story flow, dialog, and your ability to convey your idea's matters to me. So I don't understand some of my friends that have come up to me going "Hey man can you check out my book I'm trying to get it published." so I read it and well the grammar was solid everything else is normally unbelivably dull.

One thing I have always liked more then publishing books wholesale is serial writing. If your like anyone I know you have 1000 book ideas just pick one of the better ones that's short and start throwing it online and linking it to friends you trust and will read it. Then just consistently write another part like every week, then you get weekly feedback and learn how to keep a book schedule.

Full disclosure: Not a writer, I have a good number of writing friends though and am one of those guys they bounce things off of in development who will tell them their book/short story/serial is trash and what I liked and didn't like.

[Mary]

Even if your story is stunning, it really helps to have at least workmanlike prose. Otherwise, the story isn't going to get across.

And if you use, say, sentence fragments out of sloppiness, you lose the chance to use them to indicate the POV character's fragmented thoughts after a bad shock. (Concept and example shamelessly stolen from Patricia C. Wrede's Wrede on Writing: Tips, Hints, and Opinions on Writing)

[Jim]

Having a couple of years experience in this mad world I think these are some of the things I've learned

1) The book has to be 'right', properly edited, well written, good cover. These are vital, the book will fail without them, but on their own these are useless because there's millions of the damn things out there and your book will sink without trace.

2) Reviews on Amazon are nice but... A good review lifts the spirits, makes the book page look good and if anybody finds the page and reads the review, they might well buy, but the review doesn't break down the most difficult hurdle which is getting the person to go onto the page.

3) A review on a blog, or a mention on a blog swap is nice, it raises awareness, people realise you're out there and might even click on the link to look at the book.

4) Facebook and twitter? For me twitter is something I do all the time. I never read twitter, (OK if my computer sends me a message saying someone has mentioned me or asked me a question on twitter then I'll respond but that doesn't happen often) life is too short to keep up with the endless stuff. I suspect that my problem is that twitter encourages you to follow people like those you're following so all us writers are just following each other on twitter, vaguely hoping that someone will retweet our link to the three non-writers in their following.
Facebook I think I can work better, and I'm slowly building a following and making a point of linking to people who aren't writers. I've also got a facebook page for the book https://www.facebook.com/TsarinaSector? which might give ideas to others who are looking for ideas

5) A blog. Yes I've got a blog http://jandbvwebster.wordpress.com/ and you get the stats back with wordpress. The first thing you realise is that people don't really like to read writers writing about writing. I can empathise with this, I don't like writing about writers writing about writing :-)
So I just write about all sorts of things and am slowly building up a following.

But all this takes time. It'll take you two or three years of steady work, blogging, facebook, interacting on Goodreads, to build up a presence and then you'll slowly slowly start to get yourself known.

I cannot remember who said it, probably a lot of people, "I became an overnight sensation after twenty years hard work."

So I've only got another eighteen years to go :-)

[Jim]

Jim wrote: "Having a couple of years experience in this mad world I think these are some of the things I've learned

1) The book has to be 'right', properly edited, well written, good cover. These are vital, t..."

Jim,

Astute observations, presented in an intelligent, entertaining format.

Thank you for sharing your experiences and insight.

Jim

[Alan]

Michel wrote: "So, only the writers who have money to spare for editing, cover design and marketing should publish their books? This would basically make the financial status of the author more important than the litterary value of his/her work [...] This is a slap in the face of all the hopeful authors... "
Jonathon replied: "Or they could learn the skills themselves. ..."

Aye there's the rub! A professional editor would check for speling and grammer, and also for quality of writing. As a retired teacher, I think I have the skills to copy-read my own work (spelling and grammar!) - but even so, a few errors creep through, as they do in professionally edited work. On the other hand, no-one (and I mean that!) can check their own writing quality - that is to be judged by the reader. A good editor will be a useful intermediary here, but quality will usually come through with or without an editor, and rubbish will hopefully fail - and you still need to find the right editor, and there are people out there who will enthuse over absolute rubbish if it has enough action scenes and blood on the floor!

Then there are the questions of cover images and cover blurb.
I did my own cover images - and I am quite pleased with the results, though they were intended for the electronic environment and will need some adjustment if they ever get to paper. I also have to face criticism from the occasional idiot on Goodreads who simply has different tastes from my own - but that's life, I guess.
As for the cover blurb - now this is one area where I recognise my own weaknesses (though I admit I haven't yet done anything about them). Time will tell - or maybe I will find a professional.

[Jim]

Just to agree with Alan. I don't think anybody can check their own writing quality. At the very least you know what you mean (which might not be what you wrote :-) )

[Aaron]

@Alan

As a reader your cover blurb for Shades of Smoke is exactly how I love blurbs. I linked it around to my other reader friends with mixed results. Most agreed with me that it was great because it told us what to expect without spoiling anything. I just normally hate blurbs that sit their and spoil the first 50-60 pages of the book worse if it's more. Shades of Smoke reads more like a checklist of things that are in the book.

*Limited Magic
*Illusionist protagonist
*Coming of Age
*Revenge
*SF concepts? maybe they understand some higher level physics and use it in their magic?

That's what I got out of that blurb.

Compared to the Game of Thrones blurb where all I get is okay so it invovles lots of bloody politics in some kind of historial/fantasy setting.

or

Compared to Blood Song where the only needed part for me was "Raven's Shadow is the first volume in a new epic fantasy of war, intrigue and tested faith". All that was said in the other part was badass Assasin protag.

All that being said I'm not sure what actually makes books sell to people outside of me and my friends, Heck I know a decent amount of people that don't even read blurbs they just go off cover and title and read the first few pages.

[Alan]

Aaron wrote: "@Alan
As a reader your cover blurb for Shades of Smoke is exactly how I love blurbs. ..."

Hey, thanks (bigtime!)
The blurb was mostly written by Graham, my co-author - I thought it was right at the time, but I have had some criticism since, and I was getting ready to rewrite it. I shall make sure he sees your comment.
Now ask your friends what they think of the cover? That has also been criticised, in another conference.

Cheers

Alan

[Jason]

Yeah, I'm certainly not quitting my day job anytime soon. What I've found is that it's all about being a good marketer, not a good writer. Hence why we see so much crap going into reprint after reprint, while talented authors languish in obscurity.

Unless you've got $100k to drop on marketing, or a "big 6" backer, you're boned. I even have a cousin-in-law who is a "household name" level celebrity, but I would rather stab myself in the face with a fork than go to her for help. She doesn't even know I write, and that's how I like it.

The other problem is the push for formulated garbage writing. There are so many series out there now where if you've read one, you've read them all. I'd rather have 500 devoted fans of work I believe in than millions for writing crap.

[[deleted user]]

Jason wrote: "Yeah, I'm certainly not quitting my day job anytime soon. What I've found is that it's all about being a good marketer, not a good writer. Hence why we see so much crap going into reprint after rep..."

Jason, I like your opinion!

[Jason]

Michel wrote: "Jason wrote: "Yeah, I'm certainly not quitting my day job anytime soon. What I've found is that it's all about being a good marketer, not a good writer. Hence why we see so much crap going into rep..."

Of course, just because I believe in something I wrote doesn't mean it's not crap. ;)

[Alan]

Jason wrote: "What I've found is that it's all about being a good marketer, not a good writer..."
Agreed absolutely! I and my co-author Graham agreed before we started on the Kindle route that being picked up by a big publisher and getting rich would be nice, but we were both more interested in the fame and status. Needless to say, even after getting some good reviews, some of them from big names (Amazon Top 500), we are still poor and obscure.

We also agreed that to hit the Big Time you needed to:-
A) Have reasonable quality work (spellchecked, etc - not necessarily good writing. As you said, "crap going into reprint after reprint". Name no names, though we could all think of a few!)
B) Have either (i) a lot of luck, or (ii) a lot of investment in marketing.

I guess its a good job I have a decent pension and am only in it for the glory, not the dosh!

PS - Jason - I got the sample, but there is a fair pile of TBR ahead of it!

[Jim]

After retiring from a 33-year career with the H.J. Heinz Company in 2001, I created a personal bucket list of goals; determined to accomplish all of them before I was no longer around to do so.

One of the items was writing a novel. I did; and that was reward unto itself. Though it is still nice to receive the quarterly sales report and royalty check, I have since focused upon the other goals - only one remaining.

[Micah]

Jim wrote: " only one remaining..."

Unless that remaining goal is "come up with more goals" then I think you've actually got 2 goals remaining!

I'd be terrified of running out of goals!

[Aaron]

We almost need a recommend obscure Sci-fi/Fantasy thread with say a rule of no book with more then 100/300/500 ratings?

*no recommending your own book

[Mary]

a list would be simpler

[D.W.]

Jason wrote: "Yeah, I'm certainly not quitting my day job anytime soon. What I've found is that it's all about being a good marketer, not a good writer. Hence why we see so much crap going into reprint after rep..."
That's not completely true. I sell great and I never put a dime into marketing.

[Jim]

Micah wrote: "Jim wrote: " only one remaining..."

Unless that remaining goal is "come up with more goals" then I think you've actually got 2 goals remaining!

I'd be terrified of running out of goals!"

Micah,

You make a good point and I do not disagree. However, the original 6 goals were all extremely challenging. For instance, the final one is visiting all 50 states with a three-day minimum to count as a visit (Only 7 states to-go).

After that, 4 adult children, 4 grandchildren (so far), and a fairly active social life guarantee that I won't be bored.

By the way, I follow your postings and enjoy them - always interesting and informative.

[C.T.]

I'm currently self-published, and I think its a positive thing. I'm just now starting to really market myself, and I have an artist friend working on some pictures to help me. I approve of the idea of certain reviewers and blog sites becoming 'gatekeepers' over time, even if my works never get a 'seal of approval'.

The way I see it, indie authors are in a similar position as indie game developers. You work hard and put yourself out there, and the market will tell you if your going the right way. Readers know what they want, and it's our job to give it to them.

[Alan]

C.T. wrote: "I'm currently self-published, [..]. Readers know what they want, and it's our job to give it to them."
Our job . . . yes, basically I agree with you. However, there is one major problem, and that is making the readers aware of what we have to offer. Marketing is a ghastly business, but without it the good stuff gets buried in the dross. And with it, there is still a lot of good stuff that just doesn't reach breakaway point.
Your 'gatekeepers' comment ought to be the answer, but we haven't got there yet. Good luck!

[Laz]

Have you read the notes of successful indy authors? Start with Hugh Howey. He has written several articles on how he achieved his success.

Editors and beta readers are a must. There are very few people who can craft a product without someone doing some quality control.

[Amy]

http://www.chameleonmedia.co/

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Alan wrote: "Your 'gatekeepers' comment ought to be the answer, but we haven't got there yet. Good luck! "

There are groups of different bloggers/readers, etc who wouldn't have a problem gatekeeping. The biggest issue is that of the thin-skinned author. No one wants to put in hours of unpaid volunteer time to get harassed, attacked, doxxed and/or possibly physically attacked. A lot of the bloggers I know have stopped accepting SPA work for that reason. Now that grapevine is mostly alerting readers of who NOT to read.

I think, before any blogger/reader becomes a serious gatekeeper, SPAs/Indie writers will have to learn to police themselves regarding behavior.

[Jim]

MrsJoseph wrote: "Alan wrote: "Your 'gatekeepers' comment ought to be the answer, but we haven't got there yet. Good luck! "

There are groups of different bloggers/readers, etc who wouldn't have a problem gatekeepi..."

Mrs. Joseph,

Your analysis of the blogger/reader gatekeeping issue is fact-based and your recommendation is worth heeding. Too many SPA's and Indies unforunately lack the self-discipline, maturity or communication skills to funciton appropriately in such forums as is constantly demonstrated in their posted comments.

[C.T.]

Jim wrote: "MrsJoseph wrote: "Alan wrote: "Your 'gatekeepers' comment ought to be the answer, but we haven't got there yet. Good luck! "

There are groups of different bloggers/readers, etc who wouldn't have a..."

I'm new enough to the world of publishing and book forums that I haven't experienced this, though I don't doubt what you say at all. I have had a hard time getting input on my book, but if someone doesn't like it that isn't worth attacking them over. I've been working on this for a few years now, and I'm really to the point where I just want someone to read it. If they don't like it that's fine. I've had worse done to me than have someone say they hate my writing.

As far as these blogs go, there is certainly the problem of security for bloggers who speak out on the things they don't like. But I think it's only a matter of time before certain reviewers fall under the umbrella of a large company that will provide them with the insurance and legal protection they need. Assuming there's already something like that that I haven't heard of yet.

[Steve]

Penny wrote: "I just came across this article about self publishing and the average earning of writers. It's a topic that comes up fairly often and this is the first time I've seen a study on the topic reference..."

interesting article, thanks for sharing, i'd add that most writers these days have other jobs, writing has become, by the nature of the internet, a second career for many

[Jim]

MrsJoseph wrote: "I think, before any blogger/reader becomes a serious gatekeeper, SPAs/Indie writers will have to learn to police themselves regarding behavior. ..."

Which is true but alas impossible. The people who cause the problems haven't the self-control to police themselves and by definition, if they're indie or self published, there's nobody with the power to block them. I suppose Amazon could start but that would mean them actually paying people to read the stuff that Amazon publishes and I suspect that is not in their business plan

[Alan]

Jim wrote: " The people who cause the problems haven't the self-control to police themselves [..] if they're indie or self published, there's nobody with the power to block them...."

A bit cynical - but very true!

And the comment about Amazon is even more cynical ... and at least equally true!

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Jim wrote: "Which is true but alas impossible. The people who cause the problems haven't the self-control to police themselves and by definition, if they're indie or self published, there's nobody with the power to block them. I suppose Amazon could start but that would mean them actually paying people to read the stuff that Amazon publishes and I suspect that is not in their business plan "


Totally agree. With both points.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

C.T. wrote: "I'm new enough to the world of publishing and book forums that I haven't experienced this, though I don't doubt what you say at all. I have had a hard time getting input on my book, but if someone doesn't like it that isn't worth attacking them over. I've been working on this for a few years now, and I'm really to the point where I just want someone to read it. If they don't like it that's fine. I've had worse done to me than have someone say they hate my writing.

I have a feeling that this is based in education: I (and many others) had in class critiques. I also was in theatre and those...ooooh, boy! So while I know critical comments hurt (I once got into an argument with my roomie over a name I made up: "Jaysan" It was brutal, lol) I also know to keep my mouth shut online and bitch to my husband in private (poor man). But this is an activity not really happening in schools today (AFAIK).

C.T. wrote:As far as these blogs go, there is certainly the problem of security for bloggers who speak out on the things they don't like. But I think it's only a matter of time before certain reviewers fall under the umbrella of a large company that will provide them with the insurance and legal protection they need. Assuming there's already something like that that I haven't heard of yet. "

There's not but if it happens, I think a lot of people would volunteer.

[Jim]

Help, the web's broken. People are agreeing with me :-)

Actually I think we are in agreement and I think the agreement is wider. I was told of someone putting together a short list for a prize. It was for indie writers and the first way they winnowed them was to cut out those who weren't any good (for whatever reason) and another way they were cutting the list down to something manageable was discarding people who were notoriously 'badly behaved.'

[Brian]

I'm one of the lucky few who have been able to make a comfortable living as an independent writer. I say few, but that is only compared to the vast number of new writers who have hit the scene since self publishing was made available to the masses. There are, in fact, thousands of us out there who do very well.

Often I've been asked what I did to build a fan-base and get the attention of the reading public. For a long time I didn't really have the answer. And though I still haven't figured it all out, after the past two years, I am beginning to narrow it down.

First-COVER!!! And not just any old cover made at your PC from cheap stock art or a picture your husband or wife came up with. If you want attention, this is the first thing people will see. If your cover screams "amateur", the reader will assume you are one of those people who doesn't bother with editing, proofing, or beta reading. They imagine themselves sifting through page after page of double words, misspellings, plot holes, and grammatical errors. A professional cover tells the reader that you care about your work and that you might be worth taking a chance on.

Second-Editing-Once you have your cover, you need a good editor. I don't mean a over-priced proofer. I mean a real editor. And so you know - a real editor costs real money. Your English teacher at your old high school is NOT an editor. An editor is an editor. And be certain you understand the type of editing you need. I recommend two. A developmental editor and a line editor. This can get pricey. But then you must ask yourself if your work is worth the expense. Especially if you intend to publish and sell to the public.

Third-Proofing. Editing is not proofing. Proofing is proofing. Use at least three GOOD proofers. Pay them! If you don't, you'll get what you pay for.

Fourth-Send your book to five beta readers. Be sure they read books in your genre. That may seem to go without saying. But I've read several critiques from beta readers that began with "I don't normally read in this genre." Once you get your feedback, look to see if three betas agree about the same issue. If so, you should take it seriously. If not, still pay attention, but you may decide to ignore the advice.

Now you're ready to begin. Yes. You've only just begun. But you will certainly be off to a good start.

[C.T.]

MrsJoseph wrote: "C.T. wrote: "I'm new enough to the world of publishing and book forums that I haven't experienced this, though I don't doubt what you say at all. I have had a hard time getting input on my book, bu..."

From bad grades to good grades, I've had quite a lot of criticism from my teachers and parents. I've also got good friends who aren't afraid to tell me when they don't like something I'm doing. But for the most part, I'm not an aggressive, confrontational guy. I'd rather get along with people, but that's not possible in every situation so I'll avoid the irrational folk and do my own thing. If I agree with the criticism I'll change something. If I don't agree with it, I'll think about it but eventually shrug it off.

I can't speak for all of my generation or the one after me (I'm 26), but there are a lot of people out there who feel entitled to things. They get aggressive when they think someone is attacking them, most likely because they were never taught the difference between an attack and constructive criticism. That's when they get dangerous.

[Jim]

A writer, like any other artist, must possess a strong ego. I do not mean conceit; there is a difference. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines ego as "the self as distinguished from others".

The only problem with having a strong ego is that the possessor tends to be extremely sensitive to negative criticism.

The lesson to be derived from criticism, whether constructive, positive, negative or even hurtful, is that it is just an opinion; and one opinion is as good as another. Learn from every criticism and become better at whatever you do.

[Laz]

Following Brian's excellent comments (#155), you might find it more cost effective to work with the beta-readers first, as they will also catch editing and proofing errors, thus saving time and iterations (and thus cost) on those steps. But don't skip any of the steps!

Plus, beta readers evaluate all levels of the story (plot, characters, in addition to editing, etc), and may be a bit more gentle with their criticism.