Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
Bulletin Board
>
Sites Needing Certain Amount of Reviews and Ratings
date
newest »
newest »
Justin wrote: "When it comes to promoting and marking our books whether it be free or setting a budget it goes without saying that there are tons of places to go to do so. But has anyone come across a site which ..."Many possible perspectives:
1. The site wants to use readers other than their own to weed out unsuitable books.
2. They are more interested in their own reputation than the authors they supposedly promote.
3. They assume they are such good reviewers that they need only sup on the best, but they're too lazy to find it for themselves.
4. By stocking only "top shelf" material, they hope to attract better paying advertisers.
5. Their view of indie authors is so narrow that they actually think they are promoting in the best way possible.
6. They haven't a clue, so they chose their rules arbitrarily.
7. Someone told them a restrictive submission policy is a good thing, and they bought into it because their own opinion is no better than their reviews.
8. Wrote their submission policy while drinking or heavily medicated.
9. Restricts the flow of submissions to a level manageable for their limited staff.
10. They simply copied their submission policy from another site that they liked.
Enough!
There's also the possibility that they're just ... fill in your favorite expletive...!!
Trying to guess the reasoning behind someone else's business model may be good mental exercise, but it's unlikely that you'll ever learn the truth. Any business asked why they are doing something 'a bit on the nose' will only give you a PR answer that reflects favorably on the business. Truth is never their first option.
The vast majority of avid readers never post a rating or review. Those reviews that have been solicited, purchased or swapped are seldom taken seriously by the reading public. A sincere voluntary review is a personal opinion and, therefore, subjective. Readers that post such reviews do so to share their opinion with other readers, not the author, publisher, or supporting website. For all of these reasons, the professionalism and veracity of any literary site that bases its promotional decisions upon reviews are questionable and probably not worth an investment of time, money, or effort.
Jim wrote: "The vast majority of avid readers never post a rating or review. Those reviews that have been solicited, purchased or swapped are seldom taken seriously by the reading public. A sincere voluntary r..."Jim, I have to disagree. I think there are a lot readers who blog (Hence, the review policies.) and many not only do a good job, but have a large following. Some review as a hobby. Some review as a web business. This is no different from reading a book or movie review in a newspaper or magazine, which is generally written by a paid professional. Readers like certain reviewers, appreciate their taste, and follow their recommendations.
Submitting a book for review to a well run and popular book review blog is absolutely worthwhile.
Like anything else, you can find good and bad. However, painting all avid online reviewers with the same negative brush is, in my opinion, not realistic.
From a reader's perspective:Yes, many reviews are crap, but the lack of even a handful of positive reviews points to certain issues with the title. Specifically, that the book is either "bad," or boring. Think about it. A book with only negative or meh reviews probably has either structural or editing errors...or does not appeal to enough people to have earned an audience.
Are there exceptions? Sure! But if, generally speaking, that is the rule, why would a site entrusted to promote great titles market something that's iffy?
Oh, and most of these sites receive hundreds of submissions a day. Can you imagine screening each and every one?
It can also mean the book is brand new.It can mean it hasn't been marketed very well.
Brand new is one of the big problems. It's very hard for a small press or independent author to get enough pre-release reviews to get in with any of these sites.
And there's also the problem of making initial sales.
Now, I'm not saying it's wrong to use reviews as a way to weed out titles, but perfectly good books go unnoticed all the time.
And Jim is right that a LOT of readers don't post reviews. I'd say that it's about 1 in 100.
Lady Echo wrote: "From a reader's perspective:Yes, many reviews are crap, but the lack of even a handful of positive reviews points to certain issues with the title. Specifically, that the book is either "bad," or..."
Are there self-published books with issues? Yes. Tons of them.
However, Jennifer is also correct in that there's a problem with reviewers who will not give a new book a chance. Traditional publishers were always on the lookout for new talent, many having their own established Acquisitions Department. And yes, traditional publishers also wrote in-house reviews--tons of them.
Granted, the market has changed radically. The traditional publisher may soon go extinct. However, the business of books still has some of the same rudimentary problems. Someone has to accept the responsibility to look at page one and decide if they're going to turn to page two. That is the book business. Expecting others to find new talent for you by hiding behind a stringent submission policy is not a wholly honorable business model, nor is it good for the industry.
Conversely, self-published authors have to accept responsibility for actually being the publisher. That includes editing, proofreading, layout and marketing, among many other ancillary duties.
Where is the balance in all this? Frankly, I don't think the book industry has sorted it out yet. I think we can look forward to many more changes in the coming decade or two.
Lady Echo, I honestly do not know any indie authors who do not want to give their readers a quality product. Are all of us successful? Not a chance! But many excellent, hardworking young authors are caught in a whirlpool of frustration caused by an industry in the midst of great change.
Does this somewhat-less-than-modest rant make sense to you?
I think everyone is getting a bit off course here, this isn't about reviews as a whole or about the meaning to which they stand it's about why promotional and marketing sites say you need a certain amount of high reviews in order to use their service.
A reviewer asking that you already have X number of 5-star reviews before they'll write one seems, to me, to be like entry-level jobs that require experience, agents that require you to be previously and successfully published, etc.
Well Joe that seems correct although I'm thinking more along the lines of sites that will promote and market if you such however many number of required reviews. If they needed a certain amount in order to leave their own review that would be quite hypocritical
Justin wrote: "I think everyone is getting a bit off course here, this isn't about reviews as a whole or about the meaning to which they stand it's about why promotional and marketing sites say you need a certain..."I'm assuming that you're talking about all the websites that e-mail readers with free and bargain offers on a daily basis. I wonder if it occurs to them that their restrictions mean that they're all e-mailing out the same books every day. This means they're redundant.
Justin wrote: "But has anyone come across a site which states something along the lines of "book has a minimum of 5 reviews & 4.0 stars on Amazon.com", why is this? "If you're talking about sites like Bookbub, it's because they are overwhelmed with submissions. It might seem arbitrary to you, but when you have in excess of 100+ submissions a day you need some criteria to start wading through them all. For example, for a romance novel you now need a minimum of 100 reviews simply because there are so many applications for a few spots in that category.
Jim wrote: "...the professionalism and veracity of any literary site that bases its promotional decisions upon reviews are questionable and probably not worth an investment of time, money, or effort. "
You obviously don't market much, because that statement is wrong on a number of levels. Bookbub is a prime example of where a minimum number of reviews and averages are needed (before you even consider submitting) and they also have the best ROI of any advertising site. With a long tail to a BB ad you can easily make back the cost of the ad a few times over. My last promo spot put my novel at #23 overall on Amazon and the tail lasted well over a month with significant sell through.
It is often those sites with the more stringent criteria who will give the greatest return.
A.W. wrote: "If you're talking about sites like Bookbub, it's because they are overwhelmed with submissions. It might seem arbitrary to you, but when you have in excess of 100+ submissions a day you need some criteria to start wading through them all. For example, for a romance novel you now need a minimum of 100 reviews simply because there are so many applications for a few spots in that category."I agree with A.W. on both points. The sites that require more reviews, and a high average rating in order to promote your book are sites that a. have a ton of authors submitting to them and need something to help whittle down their entries and b. they are trying to maintain a high standard for their readership so that when they market your book their readers trust that it's actually quality.
Is this frustrating for a newer author with fewer reviews under their belt? Yes. Of course it is. But there are ways to generate reviews that can get you started. For just $25 you can list your book on a site like StoryCartel.com which is like a smaller more indie friendly version of NetGalley. Alternatively, you can list on NetGalley for a much larger sum of money (the best way to go about this might be to share slots with someone else).
The way both of those websites work is that they put your book in front of potential readers who agree to leave an honest review in exchange for having received the free copy. Authors can gain dozens to hundreds of reviews from this process and in the case of NetGalley they can earn them even before their book is published.
To be clear the money paid in both of those cases goes to the company that organizes the website, not to the reviewers, so they are simply getting a free book in exchange for a review.
I strongly recommend doing either one of these if you are in need of additional reviews. Just remember, the readers have only agreed to leave honest reviews not necessarily kind ones, so be prepared to encounter people who don't necessarily like your work.
At any rate, this can be a useful resource to get you to the number of reviews that you need in order to promote your work with companies like Bookbub, or the Midlist. Both of which are hugely helpful when it comes to promoting your work specifically because they are so picky about who they promote.
I wasn't even thinking about Bookbub but don't they charge you? That in itself makes the review and ratings requirements irrelevant though I get what you mean, they need them so they don't get any more requests then they already are.I was thinking of lower such sites but also ones that offer to promote you during free days. Of the same caliber pretty much.
Justin wrote: "I think everyone is getting a bit off course here, this isn't about reviews as a whole or about the meaning to which they stand it's about why promotional and marketing sites say you need a certain amount of high reviews in order to use their service."Remember that promotional and marketing sites are looking to make money off of your book, just as much as you're trying to get people to buy and read your books. It is a waste of their time to promote or market a book that doesn't have a chance. Does that make sense?
Davida wrote: "Justin wrote: "I think everyone is getting a bit off course here, this isn't about reviews as a whole or about the meaning to which they stand it's about why promotional and marketing sites say you..."Yes that makes sense. I just wonder why some sites set the bar so high with the expectations of only allowing an author on their site if they have 10-15 4 star reviews or higher. If an author had that many reviews from the start then what's the purpose of that author wanting to go with that site to begin with? In the end it's about guarantees and money, just as much as an author wants guaranteed results from them the company wants guaranteed success by allowing the author in.
Justin wrote: "Yes that makes sense. I just wonder why some sites set the bar so high with the expectations of only allowing an author on their site if they have 10-15 4 star reviews or higher. If an author had that many reviews from the start then what's the purpose of that author wanting to go with that site to begin with? In the end it's about guarantees and money, just as much as an author wants guaranteed results from them the company wants guaranteed success by allowing the author in."I think you may have answered your own question there, Justin. :-) It is precisely those guarantees that companies want to make which they can't do if they don't insure some level of quality. Low quality books won't sell no matter how much marketing and a promotion is done. (Of course, we've all seen exceptions to that, but as a general rule...)
And 10 - 15 reviews isn't much in the scheme of things when you look at books that sell well. (Don't get me wrong, I know how difficult it can be to get even that many reviews, I won't pretend it's easy without a publisher footing the bill, but it is possible.) But take a look at the amazon pages for books that you know are best sellers. They measure their reviews in the hundreds and thousands. So, when a marketing company 'only' requires a number of reviews that is lower than 50 they are being kind to us indie folks.
There is also an element of (I believe), "why should we promote you if you haven't done the work to promote yourself?"
For those of us who choose to go indie, the onus is on us to act as publicists and marketers for our own work. It's the other side of getting to publish on our own terms. It can be done, and it doesn't even have to cost an arm and a leg, but it's a lot of work, and I think that's what these companies are trying to make sure of... that the author has taken responsibility for the book and is doing his/her best to help it reach readers.
Tour last two comments are spot on Virginia. Marketing and Promoting isn't easy but it's what we have to do. Also exactly right, if you can't promote yourself how can you expect anyone else to?
I mean I get the idea don't get me wrong, sites want to make sure the book is credible but it just seems like there's more to it. The example I gave up top is just one of many as I've seen more ridiculous ones such as book needs 10 5 star reviews in order to be listed or promoted.
What are your thoughts on sites that ask that your book needs a certain amount of reviews and certain ratings in order to be featured?