THE Group for Authors! discussion
Start Here
>
Introducing Our New U.S. Giveaways Program–A More Powerful Book Marketing Tool for Authors and Publishers!
message 101:
by
Paul
(new)
Dec 01, 2017 04:46PM
Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for flying with Amazonian Airways. We are pleased to announce our new Expedited Arrival program. On previous flights, we followed the traditional course of delivering passengers to their intended destination and landing at a fully appointed airport. But now, through a more vertical approach to the ground, we're rolling out a new method of passenger delivery that guarantees the earliest possible arrival at ground level. We hope and expect you will all be as thrilled by this new program as we are, and that you will appreciate the new opportunity this provides. We do regret that we will no longer be able to deliver our passengers alive, but we are sure that the time savings aspect more than compensates for this slight inconvenience. If you do, for some reason, find that you're not fully satisfied with this program, we simply remind you of the need to respond in a civil and responsible manner. Thank you.
reply
|
flag
Alexandra wrote: "IMO, this is a way Giveaways can benefit an author. As well as the notifications that a user has entered a Giveaway and (if they don't change the default) that they've shelved a book "To Read". These things are telegraphed to those who are on their Friend list and who Follow them, showing up in those users Feeds.These are ways Giveaways can gain exposure for a book.
If the desire is simply to gain reader reviews, which I think is a bit short sighted in light of the above, I think there are better methods."
I agree 100%.
They are not wrong about information being shared about who has shelved a book, and through that upping the exposure. I have shelved many a book after seeing a friend shelve it and loving the sound of the premise, and likewise for friends who have entered giveaways for titles.
But... I also have 7875 books on my want to read shelf (meaning I might eventually buy them) and 2753 "owned-but-not-read". I don't wait to buy books until I have read the ones I have, but once a book has been added to my shelf it has a 1 in almost-8000 chance of being purchased and, if it is purchased, a 1 in almost-3000 chance of being the next book I read.
I honestly feel like things like BookBub are much better marketing tools (for around the same money, as I understand it) through which a higher volume of people will have purchased or downloaded your book. Again, they might not get around to reading it for ages, if at all, but it still boosts your Amazon rating which boosts your likelihood of increased sales. Which, in the long run, increases your chances of reviews.
Paul wrote: "Ladies and Gentlemen, thank you for flying with Amazonian Airways. We are pleased to announce our new Expedited Arrival program. On previous flights, we followed the traditional course of deliverin..."Bwahahaha!
Yeah, it's a bit like that...
Figgy wrote: "Alexandra wrote: "IMO, this is a way Giveaways can benefit an author. As well as the notifications that a user has entered a Giveaway and (if they don't change the default) that they've shelved a b..."Yup.
There are also groups on GR where authors can offer books to readers and request a review. I think those reader-to-author direct transactions tend to be more successful as far as a posted review than a general giveaway.
I'd advise staying away from author groups where other authors are offering books to be reviewed while also agreeing to review books, even if not direct swaps. Those tend to be highly suspect and fishy, and the resultant reviews tend to look like book promotion not reader reviews - which is a huge turn off to consumers.
Alexandra wrote: "I'd advise staying away from author groups where other authors are offering books to be reviewed while also agreeing to review books, even if not direct swaps. Those tend to be highly suspect and fishy, and the resultant reviews tend to look like book promotion not reader reviews - which is a huge turn off to consumers."Oh, absolutely! I have an author friend who participated in one of those, and the other person waited to see what my friend rated their book before giving them exactly the same rating in return...
Figgy wrote: "Oh, absolutely! I have an author friend who participated in one of those, and the other person waited to see what my friend rated their book before giving them exactly the same rating in return... "Yup. Even when not direct swaps, when you have a group of authors giving each other reviews the intention tends to be to help promote the book, and highly motivated to skew positive so as to not upset the other authors and get a negative review of their own book. I've also noticed they rarely include the required disclosure.
Those groups are highly problematic.
But some of the groups that are with readers and allow authors to offer a free copy for review can be good.
Well my curiosity got the better of me and I had a look at the giveaway page to figure out average # of entries for ebook giveaways. The ebook giveaway that is "ending soonest" with 5 hours left, offering 100 copies, has 336 entries. From the looks of the rest of the page, this number of entrants seems about average, with most giveaways offering 100 copies! There are only 2 ebook giveaways with more than 1000 entries!
On the print giveaway "ending soonest" page, 17 giveaways have over 1000 entries, with the remaining 13 giveaways having nearly 1000 entries, and most include at least Canada in their eligibility. Usual # of copies being given away is about 5. Once Canada and the other English speaking countries are taken out of the mix in the new giveaway program, I expect the average # of entrants for print giveaways to be 1000-ish.
I would personally be livid if I paid $120 or $600 for an ebook giveaway that resulted in 200-300 entries. I had more entries than that within the first 5 minutes of a (free) rafflecopter giveaway. My average Amazon giveaways offer 2 copies and result in 400 entries. That costs me $6.34.
In order to successfully make this change, Goodreads needs to either support their branding "more powerful marketing tool" and "marketing value" with some worthwhile figures, or lower operating costs to authors. The numbers above (for ebooks) are completely unacceptable imo when coming with a price tag to authors of $120+.
Marie Silk wrote: "Once Canada and the other English speaking countries are taken out of the mix in the new giveaway program, I expect the average # of entrants for print giveaways to be 1000-ish. "Was there an extra zero in this one by mistake? Otherwise, I totally agree with everything you've said.
In terms of comparison of value for money, NetGalley, from memory, has an annual fee, or it might be a fee per book, of around $120, but they can give away a lot of copies within that and there IS an expectation of review, so you're bound to get more exposure that way than through a Goodreads giveaway. And I believe NetGalley have stepped up the protections on the ebooks they handle, these days, so you don't have to worry about people pirating them.
I honestly don'y understand why you would choose Goodreads over NetGalley (or Edelweiss) for promotion, given the emphasis on returns on NetGalley, and the fact that most NG members are on book-social sites and/or reviewing elsewhere.
Thanks Betsy. I liked the info about all of them: John Mutter, Jenn Risko, Richard Jobes, etc. anyway, Jenn’s profile of on the deck with a drink and hatching her latest plan to take over the universe so she can keep John Mutter in fine wine and calamari-this cracked me up with a good laugh. Thanks. I signed up for the Shelf Awareness newsletters for Readers and Book Trade Professionals. Many website organizations like this have led me into a boring state of mind. Hope this is different.Betsy wrote: "Karl wrote: "Hi Betsy. Your words are well taken. You made me think of something related to your paragraphs. I feel the theme of your paragraphs in my gut. I often wondered why GR didn't impress up..."
Paul wrote: "The giveaway program seemed marginally worthwhile when there were no fees. With a fee, it's obviously a suckers' choice. Done."Right on, Paul. I'm done with it.
While we're all raising hell about the GR fee(s), how much are they? Thanks.Gary wrote: "Paul wrote: "The giveaway program seemed marginally worthwhile when there were no fees. With a fee, it's obviously a suckers' choice. Done."Right on, Paul. I'm done with it."
Karl, the new fees would be $119 or $599, depending on the giveaway you select.For marketing value comparison, here are some numbers from my last two targeted Amazon ads:
40K impressions, total cost $12.50
28K impressions, total cost $9.67
I don't have an issue with GR making money or charging for giveaway features. It's the amount of money, plus changes for the worse (auto-adding books, excluding international), that are the problems.
I think a "service fee" of $10-$20 per giveaway might more accurately reflect the marketing value of a print giveaway.
Marie Silk wrote: "I don't have an issue with GR making money or charging for giveaway features. It's the amount of money, plus changes for the worse (auto-adding books, excluding international), that are the problems. "Just want to point out that GR auto-adding a giveaway book to the user's "Want To Read" shelf isn't new. It's always done that, it defaults to that when entering a giveaway, the user can unclick that box, but rarely notices or chooses to. (I'm with you on disliking that feature though).
In fact I'm not seeing anything provided here that's actually new, beyond the addition of being able to offer e-books.
You're right, it all looked pretty much the same to me, but some clarification on the auto-adding being listed as a new giveaway feature would be helpful. I assumed this meant the checkbox would disappear. Can someone answer this? Will giveaway entrants still be able to opt-out of adding the book to their list??
Marie Silk wrote: "Karl, the new fees would be $119 or $599, depending on the giveaway you select.For marketing value comparison, here are some numbers from my last two targeted Amazon ads:
40K impressions, total..."
I agree, Marie. I might pay $10 to do a giveaway. But honestly, we would be paying almost entirely for exposure. We get some exposure from giveaways, but I have not seen any real results in terms of sales from giveaways. In the GR ads, you pay for clicks, and I don't mind that. I know what I'm buying. But the giveaways are not clear at all in that regard.
Figgy wrote: "I am not an author, I am a reader and a semi-professional book reviewer, bookseller, freelance editor, and a publishing assistant for independent authors and I honestly think this whole thing is a ..."You echoed my thoughts perfectly!
You can't dress up this news as being positive for indie authors, even though GR are trying to! It's simply bad news all round for indie authors. What a shame.
As a "microscopic" indie, I ran 8 GR giveaways for 18 physical books, I think. Only 16% resulted in someone reading and reviewing a book. The actual "cost per review" (if you put it that way) came out to $57. The total sales result of all giveaways was zero. So paying $120 to run a giveaway would not be cost effective, for me. Your mileage may vary.
Marie Silk wrote: "but some clarification on the auto-adding being listed as a new giveaway feature would be helpful. I assumed this meant the checkbox would disappear.Can someone answer this? Will giveaway entrants still be able to opt-out of adding the book to their list?? "
It's bad enough that GR users are auto-opted IN, if they don't have even the option to opt out I'll be extremely displeased.
Personally I don't even use the Want To Read shelf, because of how GR uses that shelf to market to users. I have custom shelves for books I want to read.
Not that GR cares particularly much about what I think, obviously. But, in fairness I do suspect that will not be the case, and that the auto-opt in feature they're touting will be the same one that already exists.
First, thanks to Paul for his Amazonian Airways post. Next, I won't be participating at all in the New Giveaway program. It's just way too expensive for me. I understand that Goodreads has to make some money to keep this website going. Advertising should take care of that. Goodreads is owned by Amazon now and Amazon isn't exactly struggling to survive. The new policy is built on the backs of people like me who are struggling financially. Writing and art are not "hobbies." They are what I do for a living. That happened after my job (and many others) got outsourced to New Delhi, and at my age, it's impossible to replace that job.
Here's something to think about. When only the affluent can afford to give away books, then the types of books available to readers will de facto be limited to those writers who are affluent. The low-income writers won't be able to giveaway anything at prices like Goodreads' $199 and $599. Many low-income writers are very good writers but far fewer readers will get a chance to try out this new author and read something new from a different perspective. This new policy has a strong class aspect to it favoring the affluent.
C.J. wrote: "I understand that Goodreads has to make some money to keep this website going. Advertising should take care of that. "Goodreads drives *a lot* of sales to Amazon, and not simply with advertising.
All the readers here talking about books they've read, books showing up through our Feeds with Friends shelving and reviewing, etc. It's typical to check out book pages, book blurbs, what those on our Friend and Following lists are saying, find books that interest us and purchase the books on Amazon.
I do it *all the time*. So, yeah, advertising is one revenue stream, but it's most definitely not the only one. I'd be willing to bet it's not even the biggest one. I'd bet the biggest one is readers on GR talking about books with other readers.
GR drove sales to Amazon even before there *was* any advertising and even *before* Amazon owned GR.
I reiterate:"Message 8"
I have been a member of Goodreads' author program since the middle of 2013. That's about 4 and a half years.
During that time, I have listed 124 Giveaways for my library of six historical fiction novels.
I have mailed about 300 print editions of my novels to Goodreads members.
(Goodreads') new and improved Giveaway Program would have cost me $24,276 at the $199 level and $74,276 at the $599 level.
I have a total of 115 reviews.
Very impressive new revenue generation for Goodreads and Amazon as they reach deeper into author's pockets I suppose.
I will have given away 200+ copies of my books on Goodreads by the end of this calendar year.
Considering postage at "about" $3 apiece plus the cost of the book at "about" $4, that's an additional expense of $1,400. That's a lot less that 24 or 75 thousand!
Goodreads' ¤new and improved¤ Giveaway Program will have a reduced participation rate from grumpy old men such as I.
There is no bang for the buck.
reply | edit | delete | flag *
Alexandra wrote: "I do it *all the time*. So, yeah, advertising is one revenue stream, but it's most definitely not the only one. I'd be willing to bet it's not even the biggest one. I'd bet the biggest one is readers on GR talking about books with other readers."I have seen WAY more people add books to their "to-read" shelves based on my status updates (quotes) when reading, than on reviews and shelvings alone... and likewise I am more likely to add something to my "need-it-now" shelf when I see some great quotes being posted.
Edward wrote: "I reiterate:"Message 8"
I have been a member of Goodreads' author program since the middle of 2013. That's about 4 and a half years.
During that time, I have listed 124 Giveaways for my library of..."
I think that is conclusive for all of us.
The new giveaway system is patently unfair - and unproductive - when it comes to supporting struggling authors. I will no longer be participating in giveaways on Goodreads as an author or as a reader.
Philip wrote: "Edward wrote: "I reiterate:"Message 8"
I have been a member of Goodreads' author program since the middle of 2013. That's about 4 and a half years.
During that time, I have listed 124 Giveaways fo..."
Yep. I think most of us are in this boat.
I repeat. Not only are readers going to see fewer giveaways, the type of book they have access to will change. When only the affluent author can afford to give away books, then the types of books available to readers will de facto be limited to those writers who are affluent. The low-income writers won't be able to giveaway anything at prices like Goodreads' $199 and $599. Many low-income writers are very good writers but far fewer readers will get a chance to try out this new author and read something new from a different perspective. This new policy has a strong class aspect to it favoring the affluent.
This change is practically about removing indie authors from the GR giveaway system and making some money from the few that remain. I would be surprised to see more than 5-8% of giveaways after this new system starts. (Deduct giveaways that were still started as free, just overlap with paying ones.)"we are no longer able to provide the marketing value of getting your book in front of the community of readers" Anyone with some knowledge about media marketing and some technology background knows that the "able" statement is not true to say it mildly. You don't want is a true statement. The actual cost of the giveaway system is negligible compared to the costs of operating GR, which is otherwise free. Of course, there is a marketing value of a GR giveaway that you want to monetise. This way of implementation is clearly about filtering out indie authors and expect big publishers to start paying you.
Other cons:
- The current option that you are not expected to leave a review is a basic thing liked by readers and agreed by authors. If you start nagging readers to leave reviews, they will either not opt in, or get frustrated. None of these is good for the authors.
- Forcing books to the TBR shelves will also not be welcome by participants. Indirect spam to their friends even less so.
Bottom line:
- Remove indie authors.
- Turn the giveaway system more invasive.
- Present it as "We are doing this for your own good!"
Zoltán wrote: "Other cons:- The current option that you are not expected to leave a review is a basic thing liked by readers and agreed by authors. If you start nagging readers to leave reviews, they will either not opt in, or get frustrated. None of these is good for the authors."
Additional to that, it comes very close to violating Amazon's prohibition against posting reviews where a free book was provided with a review expected/required in exchange.
Meaning, IMO, any resultant reviews would be iffy regarding posting them to Amazon.
Both Amazon and GoodReads have strengthened their language regarding providing free books in the hopes of obtaining reviews to make it very clear reviews are, and must be, completely optional.
Start nagging winners of giveaways to post reviews, sending them unwanted email "reminders", is not only likely to be left ignored and unread as the spam it obviously is, or cause reader/GR user annoyance, but negates the spirit of GR and Amazon TOS.
"- Forcing books to the TBR shelves will also not be welcome by participants. Indirect spam to their friends even less so."
This part isn't new. The giveaways have for years now auto-added the book to a user's Want To Read shelf, unless the entrant unticks the box when entering.
For users this telegraphs to it's not so bad. We're used to seeing those on our Friend list shelve books, and is part of what we like to see - unless we choose to filter those updates from our Feeds, which users can do.
I *do* have an issue with it defaulting to adding the book to the Want To Read shelf, rather than allowing the entrant to do that themselves separately if they choose. But it's not part of any new issue regarding giveaways, as it's not a change.
Alexandra wrote: "Zoltán wrote: "Other cons:- The current option that you are not expected to leave a review is a basic thing liked by readers and agreed by authors. If you start nagging readers to leave reviews, t..."
A valid point about the Amazon and GR TOS. By paying for the 'advanced services', you'd automatically flag those reviews for deletion.
My point about the TBR shelves was, that right now you have the option of not adding it. For instance, for some books, I don't check it. I leave a review for practically every book I read, but for some books on the giveaway list, I'm not putting them on my to-be-purchased list. If I win, I will leave a review for those as well. If I don't, I'm not buying them. But at last it's my choice how I handle this.
For instance, in some cases you may not want to scream to the world that you want to read "How to become a good father/mother" until the right time comes :) (Privacy may be involved as well...)
Zoltán wrote: "My point about the TBR shelves was, that right now you have the option of not adding it. For instance, for some books, I don't check it."Yes, although the default now, as it has been for years, is to add it. So, yes, you can chose to untick it and not add the book.
Which is why I say it's not a new feature.
If GR is going to change it so that you cannot even deselect it, which I have not seen stated, that would be a huge problem and a huge issue. As well as stupid, since readers could still manually remove it, while being additionally annoyed and inconvenienced. It's simply be yet another change that would make GR functionality *worse* for users.
However, as I read it they're simply referring to the exact same feature we have now, and have had for years, the book auto-added to the Want To Read shelf unless the user notices and chooses to untick the box. I certainly hope that is the case.
Personally I never use the Want To Read shelf for anything, because I am displeased with how GR uses that shelf to market to readers. All books I'm interested in reading are shelved on custom shelves.
The only new things I see in this "new" program are the fees and the addition of e-books.
still waiting for anyone in a bigger league saying this would be worth it to them either. this pricing system means GR is shafting the big guys almost as much as the little guys.
James wrote: "still waiting for anyone in a bigger league saying this would be worth it to them either. this pricing system means GR is shafting the big guys almost as much as the little guys."I feel like the big ones will just give the whole goodreads giveaway option a miss, as they currently send physical books direct to reviewers, use NetGalley for ecopies, and run competitions for free copies on Twitter and Facebook.
Figgy wrote: "I feel like the big ones will just give the whole goodreads giveaway option a miss, as they currently send physical books direct to reviewers, use NetGalley for ecopies, and run competitions for free copies on Twitter and Facebook. "I'm guessing the same. Giveaways used to be thought of, and touted as, a perk/gift for GR users. A way for publishers and authors to do a little something nice for readers. Great PR for both them and GR. But nothing worth paying that much for.
Turning it into a marketing scheme in order to monetize it just taints the whole deal, IMO.
The BPH will probably use their marketing dollars for advertising on GR, rather than bothering with Giveaways. For buzz they'll continue to use NetGalley and that other one I can't recall at the moment. Where they can choose who they approve for a copy, based on criteria such as approval/review ratio and number of followers, if they have a blog, etc. GR Giveaways cannot be equated to that.
The real losers here are the GR users who enjoyed the Giveaways, even though it was very rare to actually win one. Readers who don't have book blogs, or large follower numbers or aren't Top Reviewers on Amazon. Regular readers, who rarely win ARCs, most especially from the big guys.
And GR loses, since, IMO, GoodReads needs the Giveaways to tout as a enticement for new users. In fact, I think GR needs them more than either readers or authors do.
GR is shooting itself in the foot.
It's clear and concise:"For a Few Dollars More"
The new Giveaway program is a clear example of a monopolistic policy. Amazon bought Goodreads, or rather "swallowed" it like sharks gorge on smaller fish. It may not be scandalous enough for an anti-trust lawsuit. But it draws the blood out of the Giveaway idea. Giveaways are no panacea. It is not unusual for giveaways to appear for sale on the Amazon book list. Indie authors go through a lot of trouble and costs trying to spread the news about their hard-earned books, with mostly limited results or none in terms of sales. This costly program kills the Giveaway incentive for the "little" authors.
I've seen some of my giveaway books listed for sale on Amazon and/or eBay the day of receipt!
Would the site like NetGalley that you were trying to think of be Edelweiss?
Susanna - Censored by GoodReads wrote: "Would the site like NetGalley that you were trying to think of be Edelweiss?"Yup, thanks!
One really big plus for GR Giveaways was the fact that winners are picked at random, and so regular readers had as much chance of winning as anyone else. Pretty low chances for those with many entrants, but still at least equal.
Charging publishers a significant fee means, it looks to me, that Giveaways will be much less attractive to them than other services that charge, but allow them to approve/reject requesters based on their criteria.
This, I think, will significantly diminish this benefit to GR users, if publishers choose to pull out in order to ensure a better ROI for their businesses.
I don't even have a dog in this hunt. I stopped bothering with Giveaways years ago, and am not a publisher or author. Yeah, I was hopeful adding e-books would mean I could participate, but find it won't, so - oh well. No big loss for me. Giveaways could be completely done away with and it wouldn't hurt me any. In the list of things I've got issues with GR about, this isn't even an honorable mention.
But looking at the big picture I can see how GR users will lose, publishers and authors will lose, and therefore GR will lose, with this decision.
My advice to indie authors - check out the many Reader groups here that allow authors to offer free copies of their books to readers. Connect with readers that way. But I advise to stay far away from the author groups that are authors reading/reviewing each others books - even if not direct swaps.
Like the giveaways,This thread is dead.
But ...
Indie authors take note:
The CreateSpace we know and love
will be next to get swallowed up.
Kindle's Amazonaconda is hungry.
Watch.
Marie Silk wrote: "Can someone answer this? Will giveaway entrants still be able to opt-out of adding the book to their list?? "
I entered a giveaway today so I could get an answer to this question. The check box for shelving the book is gone, and in its place the language, "As part of entering this giveaway, this book will be added to your Want to Read shelf".
Marie:I imagine you could "un-shelf" the book manually from your bookshelves in your profile.
Not until after the Giveaway ends, or you're no longer eligible.
Susanna - Censored by GoodReads wrote: "Not until after the Giveaway ends, or you're no longer eligible."Why not?
I entered a giveaway today and still the the option to shelf or not to shelf.
I wonder if the checkbox is still on giveaways that were created prior to Jan 9th. This is what it looked like for the one I entered, created on Jan 12th: 
Alexandra wrote: "Susanna - Censored by GoodReads wrote: "Not until after the Giveaway ends, or you're no longer eligible."Why not?"
Read the terms of the giveaway.
Susanna - Censored by GoodReads wrote: "Read the terms of the giveaway. "Well, that is a bunch of crap. Oh well, I already had two other reasons why I'd never participate, that's simply #3.
Yep. It's only an additional reason here, too.
