Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
This topic is about
Green Power
II. Publishing & Marketing Tips
>
Is it easier to try self publishing than going with a vanity press?
That sounds pretty terrible. More and more, with print-on-demand services and ebooks, self-publishing just seems the best way to go. There are lots of genre publishers that are great though, for niche markets.
I have not worked with this publisher, but I have seen these type of complaints about them. I have seen complaints about other vanity presses also, but I'm sure there are some good ones.Personally, I electronically self-published. It has worked well for me, although it was a learning experience and I have not hit the threshold of sales I would like to achieve yet. I like having control over the cover design, the price, where it is made available, etc.
I think it would be nice to have a good agent that sells my work to trade publishers too. I first tried that to a small degree, but I had no previous experience in the publishing world and did not get enough interest. I quickly made the decision to self-pub and have been happy with that decision.
Every Author dreams of being picked up by a publishing house or agent willing to back their work but the truth is it doesn't happen often. More authors are being picked up from self-publishing now than ever before. My experience was that publishers such as Vanity Press and Balboa Press weren't interested in you as an author, just your pocket and how much money they can make. I did not want to do an injustice to my work. My dream was bigger than that. I am a happy self-pub author. Hope this helps. Good luck!
I tried for a few years to get a publisher for my books and a producer for my screenplays. Even though I was an Emmy award winning cameraman, and had a screenplay make it to the cut of 100 (from 3,400) in the Nicholl Fellowships, neither of my screenplays ever made it to the screen. Two novels, same outcome.I considered many times the idea of vanity press, but somehow never tried it...
Years later, my own mother brought the idea of self-publishing on Amazon to me. I tried it. I am concerned about the future of it, and that so many of us are going with one or two of the venues, but for now, it's the game I know. I am barely in the black, as I did hire an editor for my last book, a memoir... and that means I need to make quite a few sales to earn back the outlay... but I am in the game, and it feels like good fun. Who knows. Write well, publish, repeat.
S.A. wrote: "Every Author dreams of being picked up by a publishing house or agent willing to back their work but the truth is it doesn't happen often. More authors are being picked up from self-publishing now ..."Nope. Not true. I've had some broach the subject with me and I'm not interested. I'm doing this my way, staying true to the story and stories that may follow, not willing to compromise for marketability or gimmickry.
But yes, vanity presses are only there to take your money. You can do it yourself for much less and, if you're willing to take some time to learn, you'll put out something better for yourself than they would for you. It matters more to you. It's your book.
I'll never make money, but that's not my definition of success.
Publish America is a scam. Go put the phrase "Atlanta Nights" into the search window here at Goodreads, or into Google, to see what I mean. Or go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_...Another place to check them out, or any other possible publisher that you are doubtful about, is Writer Beware: http://www.writerbeware.com/
It will be far more profitable for you to self-publish.
Thank you Amazon. There was a time when vanity press was one of the few avenues authors had if they couldn't get picked up by a publisher. As such, it encouraged a predatory environment. I would never have tried to write a book under the old system. There were just too many gate keepers. Now there's a ready made market that authors have open access to, and print on demand services for those who still want paper. I would never use a vanity press (even a reputable one) when print on demand is available. It just makes more sense to print as needed, rather than print the hundreds of copies needed to break even then pray you can sell them. I'm just not that optimistic.
POD is also far less wasteful, and you don't wind up in the remainder bin. There's no coming back from Remainderworld.
Self publishing and being an Indie Author is a better way to go in my opinion. Vanity publishing has always had a bad rep - and books from them are often not picked up by major distributors - but Indie Authors are gaining the same respectability as Indie Filmmakers. I went Indie with my last two books via Amazon and Draft2Digital, and I'm happy with the results for my e-books. I did paperbacks via Create Space, and do well selling them myself at events. However, I don't sell many via retail stores.
It depends what you want. Self publish and you control the quality at every step of the process. From full input in cover art and ensuring a professional edit to determining what retailers you will use and setting the price. Then you get to keep 100% of any royalties earned.
Or you could go with a scam vanity press and pay thousands of dollars for home made cover art, no editing, no control over price and kiss most of your royalties goodbye (assuming the over priced poorly made product ever sells a single copy).
Personally I think it's an easy choice but I'm constantly amazed at the people who pay thousands to scammers and then wonder why they have never sold a book...
I've been contacted by these vanity press folks and they even show me the contract. What a deal! I can keep everything I already have, including responsibility for publicizing what I write, and they get part of my royalties and all rights to whatever I produce in the future -- apparently for life. They indicate that they might do something to help, but actually promise to do nothing. How could anybody pass that up? Either go with a real publisher, who never has to beg for authors, or self-publish. I used to do the former, and now I do the latter.
At the very minimum, if you are thinking of getting into bed with a publisher or an agent or a book doctor, contact Writer Beware. The lady in charge there, Victoria Strauss, has a list of bad eggs. They can't run it on the page (due to lawsuits) but if you email her and ask her about the people you are considering, she will tell you if they're on the bad list or not.It is tough enough to be a young writer. There is no reason to let criminals shear you like a sheep as well.
Jonathan wrote: "It's a lot less expensive, certainly, but I wouldn't say it's easier. I've found self-publishing to be a lonely, largely thankless process. (Which should in no way be construed as an endorsement of..."For me, it wasn't real difficult, but I'm in the IT industry. That helped a lot. Yes, the process is thankless, but when people you don't know begin buying your book and leaving good reviews, thats priceless. It makes the effort worthwhile.
I think self-publishing shouldn't be easy. Writing isn't easy. You have to learn the craft, work hard to produce a quality product, and then work even harder to get someone to buy your product. Quality matters. If you buy a poor quality product, you probably won't buy another one, or anything else from that company.
Self-publishing should make you put in a certain amount of effort. As our grandparents would probably say, it builds character. :)
Carl wrote: "Self-publishing can be a lonely process at times, because you basically are running a small business, but my experience has been that it is far from thankless. Each time a reader tells me they enjo..."Also you can blow a whole lot of money on an on-demand publisher (I don't really care for the term "Vanity Publisher" which is a disparaging moniker of the traditional publishing industry insinuating that anything NOT from a traditional publisher is crap) and get very little in return. I'm not sure that I have done any worse (and probably have done better) by self publishing an e-book for just a couple hundred bucks all together instead of dropping thousands on some shady company long on promises but short on results. It's been more work certainly, but I know no on-demand publisher is going to care more about promoting my work than I do.
Carl wrote: "David wrote: Also you can blow a whole lot of money on an on-demand publisher (I don't really care for the term "Vanity Publisher" which is a disparaging moniker of the traditional publishing indus..."That's true. I suppose my irritation is more directed at traditional publishers who DO use the terms interchangeably. I bristle every time some one says that I "Vanity Published" on Amazon. There are certainly a lot of shysters out there and you should be careful to avoid then. Just hold to the old saying "If it sounds too good to be true..."
Linda wrote: "Carl wrote: "I think it's important..."Quit stealing my lines! ;-)"
You know, great minds think alike.
Yes, when I referred to POD, I was thinking of Create Space and Inkscape. Especially since these can be linked to Nook and Amazon's distribution system. When I speak about Vanity Press, even the good ones, all I can picture in my head is a garage full of unsold books I had to pay for, and getting dinged by bookstores wanting a refund on the books they couldn't sell.
I've heard Scribd is pretty good and Oyster. Any experience with either?
David wrote: "I've heard Scribd is pretty good and Oyster. Any experience with either?"The question isn't always if they are or are not good, it's whether or not you can reach the market you're interested in. Currently, the big three (Amazon, Nook and Apple) command about 85% of the market share in the US. If you are trying to reach a niche market that predominantly reads from other venues then they might be a good fit. Smashwords also distributes to most of the major outlets other than Amazon, but the publishing format is not as friendly as Amazon's or Nook's.
I've only really published on Amazon and overall I've been pleased, but I also don't want to miss out if something better or perhaps in addition comes along too.
If I were you, my first task would be to make the work as good as it possibly can be. This would include getting some good beta readers and proofreading. Then, find as professional a cover as you can manage or afford. When you self-publish, you are stepping into the ring with the big boys. Do it as good as Harper and Row would do it, or Bertelsmann.Only then is it worth bothering about where to push it out.
As far as learning to promote, Holly Lisle (a GoodReads author who's been doing it successfully for quite awhile) has a website, HowToThinkSideways.com, and she is extremely generous with passing on what she's learned, much of it free.
Jonathan wrote: "nd if you get a lot of positive feedback, that's great--but it doesn't materialize for all of us. Actually, the response to my e-published novel has been almost uniformly positive, but no more than a couple dozen people have read it. At this point, it would be kinda fun to get a negative review; I'd know that the reader had dug into the book and paid attention to the little details.Writing is and should be difficult, no argument there. I spent years carefully writing and editing my novel. But I'm not a publicist and I haven't the faintest idea how to promote it. "
You have to promote. Get on review sites and ask for reviews in exchange for a free review copy. I actually just hit 150 reviews on GR two days ago and it was a lot of hard work. I probably sent out nearly 2000 requests, but that's just the footwork you have to do yourself if you self-publish.
Submitting to a publisher that pays and supports its authors, whether it be a small or large press, should always be the first port of call.
Self published here and glad. Sales are a tad slow but at least its moving...
Greg wrote: "Submitting to a publisher that pays and supports its authors, whether it be a small or large press, should always be the first port of call."Not necessarily. It depends a lot on what you write. There are things that are never, ever going to interest a publisher no matter how "good" they are, but there may be a niche market.
I'm a hybrid, at least partly because even specialty publishers are not interested in the huge untapped market for LGBT Christian fiction. There's no reason to waste their time and frustrate myself, especially since I can interest a publisher in my more straightforward m/m romances.
If you're a writer of an established genre, operating within genre expectations, it may well be the best place to start. Small and e-publishers are often more flexible than the big boys, too.
Linda wrote: "Greg wrote: "Submitting to a publisher that pays and supports its authors, whether it be a small or large press, should always be the first port of call."The key word there is "submitting." Some of us aren't very submissive. ;-)"
Yes!
That's not unusual, Jonathan. Multiple award winner Jack Cady had a nine year hiatus between releases because publishers couldn't figure out where to slot his books. He wound up breaking that by going with an Australian publisher. Shame there wasn't CreateSpace for him then.
Back in 1997 I lost £2000 to a vanity publisher. I wrote a book, tried all the usual channels before going to a vanity publisher. This guy took my dream of being a writer and basically turned it into a nightmare. He used so many legal loopholes to con me out of my money it left me devastated.For me self publishing is the way forward, because the only thing it costs is time. You have to ask yourself how badly do you want your book to succeed. There is plenty of online support to help you through the process and most of it is free. Once you have written your books there are plenty of websites where you can get exposure, some free some charge a minimum fee.
So yes, do it yourself, its not rocket science and you'll be surprised by the results.
Renee wrote: "Linda wrote: "Greg wrote: "Submitting to a publisher that pays and supports its authors, whether it be a small or large press, should always be the first port of call."The key word there is "subm..."
How do you get pictures online.
Easiest way is to host on Photobucket, then use the html coding provided.
Renee wrote: "Easiest way is to host on Photobucket, then use the html coding provided."thanks
I believe Balboa Press is also to be wary of.
Well I think publishing it is not so difficult. But marketing the work is where the hard work lies.
publishing isn't difficult it's the damn marketing! if you write genre fiction or anything mainstream good for you as you most likely to have sales. as for someone who writes far out stuff with no market, no amount of money you throw at it will improve. don't expect to get rich off this venture. it's not happening . I made 60$ in royalties off one book that's been in print 10 years even sank 2500 to some whack so-called marketing firm. >_<
I've seen lots of horror stories about Publish America.I'm self published and very happy to be so. Of course it does mean one has to do everything (or pay to get someone to help) but it does bring a lot of freedom. The deadlines are mine, the royalties are mine, and although a steep learning curve it is worth it.
I agree that self-publishing gives you a lot more freedom and royalties than you would get from a traditional publisher or even a vanity press. And, I didn't find the process all that challenging or difficult. Smashwords, Amazon KDP and CreateSpace all have fairly easy-to-follow instructions and templates you can use. The challenges really lie in finding a good editor who won't cost you an arm and a leg and good quality cover art that isn't too expensive. And, of course, as everyone else has stated, marketing and promotion are the biggest headaches to contend with. But, in my opinion, self-publishing is definitely worth the time and effort. Just make sure you're putting your best work out there and not just throwing some poorly edited, nonsensical words on a page and calling it a book! Readers are a discriminating lot and they expect to get a good quality product for their money.
Carly wrote: "My preference would be, in order:1) Agent and big 5 (or is it 6 now?) publisher.
2) Decent sized, quality small press.
3) Self publishing. *Note- I would much prefer to self publish than have t..."
That's how I'd rank them, frankly, and two and three are what I've gone with. Four is way down on the list, and frankly the only justification I can see for four is someone who needs to have a book available (such as a lecturer, or a professional of some kind), can't interest a selective publisher, and doesn't have the time and inclination to round up the professionals to produce a quality self-published book. Even then, choose a reputable one who can provide a quality product (usually the vanity organs of major publishers are a fairly safe bet).
Linda wrote: "I've been the #1 route, because at the time it was the only viable option (1980s, 90s). Never, ever, ever again.What do you get from a traditional publisher, large or small?
1. An advance agai..."
I've been happy with my publisher experiences BUT, I've only used a small publisher, and you can bet I did my homework very, very carefully before I submitted to them.
I will freely admit that Linda's tales of her experiences tend to make me not regret that I don't write in a genre that's likely to ever interest a major publisher.
There is a certain loss of creative control, but I've been happy with the services I've received. If I wasn't, I'm sure I'd be singing a different tune.
I'm not discussing contractual specifics in a public thread, but I'm comfortable with the terms I have, and particularly as regards rights, they're not terribly restrictive. I don't get advances (which many will see as a drawback to a small house) but the checks arrive regularly in the mail.
I make very little money off my self-published work, but I do have the freedom to do as I please with it.
Even with the published stuff, my soul feels uncompromised, BUT self-publishing does mean I can keep the things I feel very personally about as I want them. I don't need to try to make the weird stuff commercial.I've had to make substantial changes a couple of times to fit publisher guidelines, but they weren't things I felt strongly about. The only time they did want a change I thought wasn't true to the story, they did come around to my way of thinking.
I am happy with my editor, which I think is probably the single most important factor in having a positive publishing experience. I shudder at the idea of trying to find one I like as well in the open marketplace. I can edit myself competently, but she is better at it than I am.
I have not been doing any of this all that long, but frankly, the hybrid approach has been letting me feel that I am having my cake and eating it too.
Linda wrote: "I suspect there are many traditionally published authors who are very happy with the arrangement and do not feel they have sold their souls. Like you, D.C., they are happy with their editors. The..."Well even if I never agreed with you, Linda (and I do much of the time), you are an interesting voice crying in the wilderness and you make people think, which is always a positive.
You certainly make me think I might well not be happier with a big publisher, and I might have assumed otherwise. I may make less, but I think I have more control with the smaller one. I definitely have a friendlier contract, and I suspect the rapport with the editor is priceless. So even if I woke up one day and started writing books with a broader market, I might think a small or e-press was the way to go.
You make an extremely valid point about producers who don't know what a book should really look like. I'm fairly terrible at formatting, but I know about front matter, paragraphs, font size, etc.
I click on things (almost always self-published) with some frequency that are just an unreadable mess. It could be the best story in the world, but I'm not going to bother because it's impossible to read easily and life is too short. There is a standard, and the standard exists for a reason. More to the point, that standard is not arbitrary. It's easy for most people to read, and frequent readers expect it.
I am going to suggest that if you can write a decent first draft and are fuzzy on the technical stuff, you and the world may be much happier if you send it to a publisher. I've seen decently written things compromised by poor production.
At least some of the badly written, poorly produced, and heavily defended stuff out there is not salvageable, frankly. It's existence is not a positive for the profession. I don't want to stifle anyone's voice, but there are amateur outlets where this stuff belongs.
I don't know what to do about it either, besides not pretending that it doesn't exist.
Thanks for that, Linda. It's similar to what I've been hearing from other TPAs, several who have made known best seller lists, even the ones who have tried to cloak it positively, still hanging onto the glamour (in the classic sense of the word) of being a stabled author have had to cop to the loss of control, having to submit their ideas for next books for approval, etc. And now we see established, successfully TPed writers going out on their own to become SPAs.
Gotta stop and give some serious thought to the whys of that.
Linda wrote: "Here's an example of something to think about."Bestseller" used to mean something. If your book made the New York Times list of best-selling books, it meant that people were actually buying it a..."
You're right. That is a terrible gaming of a system.
That said, the idea of a boxed set from related-genre, competent authors who respect each others work seems like an interesting idea. Not to get the label, but to increase readership.
Linda wrote: "I suspect there are many traditionally published authors who are very happy with the arrangement and do not feel they have sold their souls. Like you, D.C., they are happy with their editors. The..."I think traditional publishing is like most other businesses. They are more concerned with their own bottom line than that of the author. That may sound bad, but that's the nature of business.
The author not only has to learn how to write properly, but also needs to know something about editing. Editors will do what they want if you allow them and will be glad to do it all for you -- for a price.
The author needs to know how to read and intrepret a contract. Publishers will take whatever you allow them to take. Even an author who has never been published before has the right to negotiate the best deal for both sides.
The point is, if you are going to materially participate in a business, you had better know the business from beginning to end. I have known people who went broke because they relied on someone else to know and run a business without proper supervision. Writing is an art, but selling written material is a business.
SPAs will always be scrutinized with a skeptical eye, as they should be. Anyone can publish a book now. The gate has been opened and a lot of people want in. Should there be a gatekeeper for SPAs? Maybe, if someone is seriously interested in quality control. I don't like the idea of gatekeepers for SPAs. I think self expression is good, even if the person isn't very good at expressing ideas.
There are never easy answers. Is SP easier than TP? In some ways, yes. It's easier to publish something, that's for sure, but it may not be easier for some authors to publish a quality product. Some will be good at editing and cover design, others may need a lot of help with it. In that way, SP may not be so easy.
If there's even one or two books in the box set worth reading, they can be a bargain, and I have bought them. I've always assumed they're loss leaders to try to increase readership for the participating authors, but it didn't occur to me it was to edge onto a best-selling list. It probably won't prevent me from ever buying them again, but I might think a little harder about it.It will make me very cautious if anyone ever approaches me about a box set, not that I have a huge following.
Affecting and influencing the existing system is not a new notion. Arguably, the number of people involved has simply increased since the ability to self-publish via the internet became a reality.
To give you an old example, Ian Fleming only got published in the first place because the publishing house was already managing his brother's books and this gave him sufficient influence. Otherwise, James Bond would have stayed in the slush pile. At the time, the author and work was considered thus, by Paul Johnson of New Statesman: "Mr Fleming has no literary skill, the construction of the book is chaotic, and entire incidents and situations are inserted, and then forgotten, in a haphazard manner."
Call me an optimistic fool by all means, but I believe that cream will generally rise to the top. In this case, that means the readers will decide what they want to read and those books will do well. Whether they are deserved of such success, or well-written literary works, is not a new debate either. See my first example!
Also worth considering is the fact a renowned and leading publisher was found to have employed a seventeen year old girl on her school holidays as a reader over the Summer. Hardly inspires confidence in the average author submitting really, does it?
I do enjoy reading your comments Linda and I frequently agree with them. Just a few of my own thoughts for consideration!
To give you an old example, Ian Fleming only got published in the first place because the publishing house was already managing his brother's books and this gave him sufficient influence. Otherwise, James Bond would have stayed in the slush pile. At the time, the author and work was considered thus, by Paul Johnson of New Statesman: "Mr Fleming has no literary skill, the construction of the book is chaotic, and entire incidents and situations are inserted, and then forgotten, in a haphazard manner."
Call me an optimistic fool by all means, but I believe that cream will generally rise to the top. In this case, that means the readers will decide what they want to read and those books will do well. Whether they are deserved of such success, or well-written literary works, is not a new debate either. See my first example!
Also worth considering is the fact a renowned and leading publisher was found to have employed a seventeen year old girl on her school holidays as a reader over the Summer. Hardly inspires confidence in the average author submitting really, does it?
I do enjoy reading your comments Linda and I frequently agree with them. Just a few of my own thoughts for consideration!
Linda wrote: "The best way to increase readership is to write a book people want to read."Of course it is :)
And sometimes the reviewers are right, but they haven't taken into account what will capture the attention of the majority of the reading public.
I’ve learned a lot from that experience. Therefore, I decided to self publish my next thriller, “The True Virus”, with Amazon. Again, it didn’t cost me a dime and I control the price. Now that my seven year contract is up with Publish America, I’ve gone ahead and created my own cover and reformatted my original manuscript into a Kindle format. I have to say that I am pleased with the results I’m seeing with both of my books.
Note> Check Predators and Editors website. http://pred-ed.com/pebpublisham.ht >>
American Star Books / PublishAmerica (aka PA, aka AmErica House): Conflict of interest. Also runs literary agency. A vanity press with a poor contract. Numerous writer complaints. Author mill and plagiarist. Strongly not recommended. Rated F by the BBB.