Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
III. Goodreads Readers
>
Why don't more people read Self-published authors?
Hm... I still think the main thing that "readers" get worked up about is paying (often too much) for something by a new-to-them author that they don't end up enjoying... With all the ability to preview things on 'Zon these days, can't people check things out first?I can usually tell by reading a page or two whether I'm going to find it "enjoyable" or not, so I won't bother buying it if the preview turns me off.
Self-pub or trad pub has little to do with whether I'll like it or not. Some people are going to enjoy a book like Vampire Asylum, some won't. LOL
Doc wrote: "Jim wrote: "Attempting to justify or defend mediocrity within any art form, performance, or product only serves to encourage mediocrity and provides no incentive for mediocre performers to attempt ..."Don't worry, Doc. I think I missed it as well.
In a slightly different vein, I have often wondered how many of our literary greats would have fared in an indie world. It's sobering and slightly amusing imagining Tolstoy trying to get amazon reviews for War and Peace. One might suspect that DNF could crop up now and again! Quality in all of the arts is very much in the mind of the beholder - pop songs outsell symphonies, pop movies outsell art movies, etc. A short while back I did a quick check on the reviews and ratings of a few Nobel prize winners and found the numbers depressingly low compared to those of some chick-lit best sellers.
That's life and we have to accept it even if it does rile us sometimes.
we come far from where we began yet we just of self- publish. know I see that self-publish can go different ways I have also learned a lot about all of you. (see I told you I was not to be trusted)😈😇
Statistics. The chance of finding a worthwhile self published book is vanishingly small. It is like looking for a needle in the haystack only the hay was replaces by a pile of brown smelly stuff. It is now too easy for every wannabee walter mitty writer to inflict their work on us by publishing for 'free' (if they are smart) or paying a bundle to be published by some vanity press or buying amazon's 'services' for 'authors'.
Wmba wrote: "Statistics. The chance of finding a worthwhile self published book is vanishingly small. It is like looking for a needle in the haystack only the hay was replaces by a pile of brown smelly stuff. ..."
Unfortunately the same is also true of traditionally published work. The odds might be slightly better, but hype is all these days and rather too often the latest offering is just that. We mustn't forget that 'publishing' is about making money and not about the quality of the story / writing.
So true. In the old days usually, not always, a curated book by a large publisher had a very high chance of being worth reading. But with self 'publishing' becoming so cheap, and even free, if one is not a sucker for a vanity type press's 'help' they charge for, we are so overwhelmed with massive amounts of pure **** that it makes it hard to find something worth reading. And who really searches for a book just to read? Especially when the odds are so small. Yes, publishing is about making money for businesses, and the sewer sludge of self publishing via vanity type presses has lowered the bar so the big companies often do not even edit work. And if you do not have a big social media following and can tell them how you will promote and sell your book then you might as well self publish and keep all the profits because you are going to do all the work to edit and promote your book because they will not spend their money to make you famous so you can then leave and self publish the next book.
Contrary to what a few of you have said, I think having the grammar and punctuation right is a very important factor in determining the quality of the work. I don't mean a writer should study for four-syllable words and semi-colons all the time; but quality of writing is a big indicator of coherence of thought and idea. Story and grammar and vocabulary are very much linked: a wide vocabulary makes show-not-tell that much better, a good grasp of punctuation makes it that much easier to get the inflections and pauses of speech and dialogue across, etc. etc.All that to say, however much we agree that the story is what counts, the grammar, spelling and punctuation are definite indicators that what we're buying is or isn't drek and thus we choose accordingly.
(Did I get a semi-colon in there? Maybe a couple of posh four-syllable words? I think so – I'm sure I said 'thus' at least once)
Catalina wrote: "Contrary to what a few of you have said, I think having the grammar and punctuation right is a very important factor in determining the quality of the work. I don't mean a writer should study for f..."
Have you taken in account the authors who are not English-native speakers? Do you truly expect them to have a perfect knowledge of English grammar and orthograph? Does that make them less talented or imaginative writers, or their stories inferior to those of native English speakers? Please remember that the World is not made up of only native English-speakers...or readers. I have found from experience that non-English native readers focus a lot more on the story itself, the depth of the characters, the world building and the ideas and imagination put in a novel, than on obsessive examination of how 'perfect' the grammar and orthograph are. Yes, readers have the right to expect a minimum standard of English, but true readers around the World care mostly about the quality of the story itself.
Have you taken in account the authors who are not English-native speakers? Do you truly expect them to have a perfect knowledge of English grammar and orthograph? Does that make them less talented or imaginative writers, or their stories inferior to those of native English speakers? Please remember that the World is not made up of only native English-speakers...or readers. I have found from experience that non-English native readers focus a lot more on the story itself, the depth of the characters, the world building and the ideas and imagination put in a novel, than on obsessive examination of how 'perfect' the grammar and orthograph are. Yes, readers have the right to expect a minimum standard of English, but true readers around the World care mostly about the quality of the story itself.
Catalina wrote: "Contrary to what a few of you have said, I think having the grammar and punctuation right is a very important factor in determining the quality of the work. I don't mean a writer should study for f..."I prefer what is clear and logical. Many of the obsolete grammar rules get in the way of effective communication. But the bigger problem is the words and how they are used or not used to clearly communicate what is actually happening.
In far too many cases no amount of SPAG fixing will make that book worth reading.
Uh, sorry to ask, but what does SPAG stand for, Wmba?
Noun. SPAG (uncountable) (Britain, education) Acronym of spelling, punctuation and grammar: a set of criteria used in marking certain examinations.Also common in USA.
Sometimes spelled SPaG.
May be common in other countries with different spellings accounting for their native language's words.
Indicator of lowest level of editing. Too many writers especially those who prefer pantsing methodology and ignore the significance of the higher levels of editing to focus on endlessly redoing their SPAG versions thinking they are being creative but are really being Walter Mittys pretending to be 'authors'.
The age ole question. I think it comes down to two factors, one being that many readers simply like reading books by well-known traditionally published authors and two they expect self published authors to have errors and be amateurish.
Common sense. An established author with a known level of quality can be relied on to repeat that more than taking a chance on some new 'author' who 'published' on amazon for free which includes no editing at any level was done. Not that those Walter Mittys who inflict their GAN attempt on us got much better results by paying some vanity press for all their wonderful author 'services' that are often no better than a spell checker could do.
As someone who self-published in the 90s before I had internet and published and had printed two books for sale on my https://omegabooksnet.com site as well as a third FREE PDF e-book for download from the site let me say this. Here is why IMHO self-published authors do not get read by more people as compared to Big Publishing authors: 1. to get published by Big Publishing is like getting recording contracts from Big Music or acting contracts by Big Motion Picture Studios, etc., YOU NEED CONNECTIONS! It's not what you know but WHO YOU KNOW! Meaning, if you are a celebrity or a well-known journalist or well-known professor or academic or media person, then Big Publishing will publish you no matter what. Why? Because Americas and folks in most countries these days "worship" celebrities (even if most celebrities do not write their own books but hire ghost writers) and thus will buy the book even if it sucks. And that goes for getting a literary agent as well. Folks I was not going to wait ten years before a literary agent decided to give me a contract! 2. Most self-published folks these days are a lot younger than I am (I am 67) and there are too many ways to self publish these days for free, and haven't grammar and spelling rules changed? (I prefer old school). 3. If you are not a celebrity or well-known academic or media person, then you need to promote and market your books, right? Even so-called vanity publishers won't do it. So the problem with self-publishers, IMHO, is not that they can't write, but that they do not have the marketing skills or the desire to promote and market (and you don't need thousands of dollars either on Google or amazon or whatever ad campaigns.) Build your blog and/or book site, market by Facebook/Twitter/whatever, refer to your books in comment sections on various sites, maybe a friend with a popular site will post your book ads for free (I have a friend who does this and get many referrals from it). It may take years, but eventually if you do the right things it will work. Know the audience you want to appeal to.Authors, if you can't or won't market and promote your books, you have only yourself to blame for lack of people wanting to read your books.
Digital and the internet has destroyed the ability to make money from books photography music and somewhat art.It is now a VERY long tailed phenomenon where a handful of people do quite well, some people do okay, but the large majority do not get their expenses back let alone make minimum wage.
You have to market your book no matter how it is published so why not self publish and make all the profits for your work.
How much marketing do trad publishers do for the books, and how much do the authors have to do themselves? Is the name of the publisher and a newspaper review all the author gets, or do the publishers take care of a whole lot more (social media and ads, etc.)? I'm interested to know if anyone knows offhand or from experience.
Michel wrote: "Catalina wrote: "Contrary to what a few of you have said, I think having the grammar and punctuation right is a very important factor in determining the quality of the work. I don't mean a writer s..." Have you taken into account the authors who are non-native English speakers?Yes. I hope I have never dismissed anyone's story for not having English as a first language, in fact I have a very close non-native English speaking friend who's stories I love better than anyone else's. The characters are well developed and the stories are touching. I didn't mean that bad grammar = bad story, or that a book should be a competition between obsessively good grammar and actual story. (No competition there!)
I think of grammar and SPAG as a bit like clothes, and the story as the person inside. The person, their stories and personality and friends, is obviously the most important thing, no questions asked, and that doesn't depend on language. The two are totally different and independent, but we do see the clothes before we get to know the person. Clothes are used as indicators of how a person wants to be seen. The story can be overdressed, or underdressed, but if editors and beta readers can help you get it right, then the clothes do what they are always meant to do, get across who you are inside – no more and no less.
Then from a purely marketing point of view, random readers and customers can know that this is a book they want to spend their time and money on.
Hope that explains – or maybe I've just totally confused everyone now! Sorry!
As a new writer, self-publishing was the way to go because there was no refusal. I don't think that self-publishing can be called non-traditional any more either. It is also a hard road to travel. There have been several mentions about the difficulties in authors gaining readers and readers discovering authors. Having a place like Goodreads is a great way to find readers for our creations. But in the end, I think it comes down to two things: Being able to get your works recognized (marketing) and the willingness of readers to take a chance on a stranger. As David Chilton says: A mention can go a long way.
Leon
Not so long ago, only a few hundred thousand writers could legitimately claim the title of 'living published author'. The invention of the personal computer, internet, and websites, has resulted in literally millions of writers being able to claim that once prestigious title.To succeed in any endeavor requires ambition, discipline, and skills. There are many sources of information and knowledge available for novice writers to learn and improve upon basic writing skills, conceptual and copy editing processes, and proven marketing, promotional, and sales techniques. They include, but are not limited to public libraries, books and programs, literary forums and lectures, community colleges, and book clubs.
Within such an extremely competitive field, the odds of achieving commercial success are extremely slim. That said; some have. There is no reason why you might not eventually become one of them. I wish you success.
Catalina wrote: "How much marketing do trad publishers do for the books, and how much do the authors have to do themselves? Is the name of the publisher and a newspaper review all the author gets, or do the publish..."Very little unless you are already famous. They expect you to have a following on social media and do your own marketing.
I can overlook some grammar and SPaG problems, as someone poor who is not dressed well, but if they STINK and slobber and are otherwise gross then I really do not want to spend time with them. Same for books. A little bit of imperfection can be overlooked but not so much as to be really annoying, or worse misleading and erroneous factually.
Claiming something does not make it true. And even if it were true being a 'published' 'author' on some vanity press including amazon has zero street cred as a true author.
Wmba wrote: "Digital and the internet has destroyed the ability to make money from books..."Personally I have found the opposite to be true. Many authors now earn sufficient to support their families from their publishing endeavours. There is an increasing number of authors earning 6 (or even 7!) figures a year - all of which was made possible by the self publishing revolution.
From my perspective the divide is no longer trad published vs self published, but one of working author vs hobbyist.
From what I have observed, a working author is one who produces a polished, professional book (whether that is by being traditionally published or by assembling their own team of professionals). A hobbyist is the author who wants to say they have published something and they do not produce a book to the same standard.
A.W. wrote: "Wmba wrote: "Digital and the internet has destroyed the ability to make money from books..."
Personally I have found the opposite to be true. Many authors now earn sufficient to support their fami..."
I don't know where you are getting your statistics, but I have a very hard time believing your claim that quote 'Many authors now earn sufficient to support their families from their publishing endeavours. There is an increasing number of authors earning 6 (or even 7!) figures a year' unquote. Most of the bloggers on this thread said the contrary and recognized how hard it is for self-published authors to even recoup their costs, if even that. As for this 'working author vs hobbyist', I find your declaration both simplistic and wrong, not to say insulting.
Personally I have found the opposite to be true. Many authors now earn sufficient to support their fami..."
I don't know where you are getting your statistics, but I have a very hard time believing your claim that quote 'Many authors now earn sufficient to support their families from their publishing endeavours. There is an increasing number of authors earning 6 (or even 7!) figures a year' unquote. Most of the bloggers on this thread said the contrary and recognized how hard it is for self-published authors to even recoup their costs, if even that. As for this 'working author vs hobbyist', I find your declaration both simplistic and wrong, not to say insulting.
A few make good money. Some break even. Most never recover their expenses let alone make minimum wage.The divide is partly due to too many people who think that if they write it people will want to buy it. There are way too few who have a good marketing plan to help whatever sales the quality of their work deserves.
As noted it is a VERY long tailed phenomenon. The few at the high end of sales are famous or are good at marketing something that is also worthwhile. The long tail is the Walter Mitty wannabees who pantsed some crap and believe they are now 'authors'.
I disagree. Readers DO read self-published work IF/WHEN it’s quality work that resonates with the audience the author is intending to reach. There IS an increase in self-published authors making more money, however, there are several things these authors do to create the income they desire. There are some articles with real research that explains these findings. Furthermore, you can’t self-publish one book and expect to have thousands of readers. I’ve achieved a reasonable amount of success in the last eighteen months, but I’ve also published more than one book, as well as more than one type of book, for a specific audience of people. I’ve also worked really hard to cultivate and maintain a following/audience email list. I learned early on that success as an indie author requires certain things. You can easily find these same suggestions online, just as I did. It’s simply a matter of doing the research and doing the work. IF you stay committed to your goals, you will get to where you want to be. But you have to ask yourself if the work is worth it for you.
If not, don’t worry about it. Your success isn’t based on your sales, but how well you met your originally intended goal(s). If you’re writing to write well and publish work you’re proud of, the number of sales is an extra bonus. But if you’re writing to be heard because you want to be well-known, your stamina will quickly disappear. You’ll be disappointed for quite some time.
PS: you don’t have to go broke self-publishing books. Someone said many don’t break even, but I would propose that many spend too much money in the wrong places.
Michel wrote: "I don't know where you are getting your statistics, but I have a very hard time believing your claim..."I'm looking at my own data and from the numbers shared in author groups. I have seen the rise of 6 and 7-figure authors. A few years ago I didn't know anyone earning 7-figures, this year I've seen a few authors crack that threshold. If you want hard data there is the Author Earnings Report, which analyses Amazon data and breaks down how many authors earned over 10k, 100k etc (they also analyse top selling genres). You can still read the old reports but the more recent information is now behind a paywall.
Michel wrote: "I find your declaration both simplistic and wrong, not to say insulting."
Not sure what you find insulting - that authors who treat publishing as a business are earning a positive return? Working authors are producing titles that are indistinguishable from trad published books - and in many cases are working with the same professionals with regard to cover artists and editors. Hobbyists aren't investing the same time/effort and they are often easy to spot from the awful/home made covers (which is indicative of further issues behind the cover). Working authors are (in increasing numbers) earning good returns from publishing. Hobbyists are struggling.
Readers are buying self published books, but in many cases they might not even be aware of that, as the quality is the same as trad published books. With the rise of self publishing, readers became the new gatekeepers. With millions of books available now, those readers are more savy about how to sort through the rubbish, to find the gems that deliver the stories they want. There are clear indicators of poor quality self pud'd titles - usually covers give them away, followed by grammatical errors or confused/rambling blurbs. Lastly, the sample chapters will usually reveal any issues with lack of editing or formatting. Cover/blurb/sample is a handy rule when judging the potential readibility of a book that many readers use.
A.W. wrote: "Michel wrote: "I don't know where you are getting your statistics, but I have a very hard time believing your claim..."I'm looking at my own data and from the numbers shared in author groups. I h..."
Brava...to all of it.
Christian wrote: "I disagree. Readers DO read self-published work IF/WHEN it’s quality work that ..."Good points, Thanks!
Thank you all, for all the informative points and details. It seems everything boils down to one point - a writer who can also think and act/work like a business person will ultimately succeed.
Richard Paul Evans received the single biggest non-celebrity signing bonus for his book, The Christmas Box. He self-published.
Harshita wrote: "Christian wrote: "I disagree. Readers DO read self-published work IF/WHEN it’s quality work that ..."Good points, Thanks!"
Quality work in self published books is RARE. There are just way too many of those books to bother looking for the one that might be worth reading.
The author has to do a lot of promoting to bring that book to the attention of its intended audience. Most SP authors do nothing except 'publish'. Too many of them do not even do editing and SPAG checking.
A.W. wrote: "Michel wrote: "I don't know where you are getting your statistics, but I have a very hard time believing your claim..."I'm looking at my own data and from the numbers shared in author groups. I h..."
Did you ever read/watch Neil Gaiman's speech, Make Good Art? Sounds like you did! Any self-publishers here who might be feeling down absolutely need to watch it!
FWIW:2018
1. James Patterson : $86 million
2. J. K. Rowling : $54 million
3. Stephen King : $27 million
4. John Grisham : $21 million
5. Dan Brown (tie) : $18.5 million
5. Jeff Kinney (tie) : $18.5 million
7. Michael Wolff : $13 million
8. Nora Roberts (tie) : $12 million
8. Danielle Steel (tie) : $12 million
10. E. L. James (tie) : $10.5 million
10. Rick Riordan (tie) : $10.5 million
2017
1. J.K. Rowling : $95 million
2. James Patterson : $87 million
3. Jeff Kinney : $21 million
4. Dan Brown : $20 million
5. Stephen King : $15 million
6. John Grisham (Tie) : $14 million
6. Nora Roberts (Tie) : $14 million
8. Paula Hawkins : $13 million
9. E. L. James : $11.5 million
10. Danielle Steel (Tie) : $11 million
10. Rick Riordan (Tie) : $11 million
2016
1. James Patterson : $95 million
2. Jeff Kinney : $19.5 million
3. J.K. Rowling : $19 million
4. John Grisham : $18 million
5. Stephen King (Tie) : $15 million
5. Danielle Steel (Tie) : $15 million
5. Nora Roberts : $15 million
8. E. L. James : $14 million
9. Veronica Roth (Tie) : $10 million
9. John Green (Tie) : $10 million
9. Paula Hawkins (Tie) : $10 million
12. George R. R. Martin (Tie) : $9.5 million
12. Dan Brown (Tie) : $9.5 million
12. Rick Riordan (Tie) : $9.5 million
Cphe wrote: "Do you have any data as to who the top 5-10 SPA are?"I don't know, sorry. One year the Author Earnings report listed the top 20-50 indies and their estimated earnings. However that data was pulled rather quickly as (not surprising) those authors weren't too happy about their estimated earnings being disclosed. Unfortunately that website has been pulled and all their data has gone behind a paywall. I'm googling to see if any presentations remain as it had great break downs about best selling genres. There's a few blog posts that discuss old data (2015-2017) that still might be interesting if you are looking for trends.
I would imagine JK Rowling would have to be the top selling self published author! Most people don't realise she retained the ebook rights and all the Harry Potter digital editions are "self published" through her company Pottermore. The top selling indie (that most people have probably never heard of) might be Bella Forrest - rumoured to earn 8-figures/year (ie: in excess of 10m).
The authors I know doing really well are all in mystery and thriller genres.
I really agree with Deborah. Just to add a little more to this discussion; there are obviously difficulties in self-publishing but one of the great advantages is that books are never 'remaindered'. The author retains complete control and can carry on selling books for as long as they want. There is also obviously control in other ways. An author might not agree with how a publisher might want to edit his/her book. For myself, I have been delighted to have self-published. I know that if I had lived in previous eras I would not have been so fortunate. Child bearing and scrubbing kitchens would probably have been my lot. The overwhelming proportion of authors were rich males who dominated society. Creativity is a wonderful thing, whether it is writing or making music or art. You do not have to sell it to enjoy it. The paintings at Lascaux still thrill although whether the artist/s had much of an audience will never be known.
Hello all :) I think that as some people have mentioned, it ties into the presentation of the book. I'm a self-published author and I've learned if you learn your target audience, it's easier to see books, whether you're traditionally published, or self-published. Readers are readers at the end of the day, and we all want to read the very best books :)
Carol wrote: "I really agree with Deborah. Just to add a little more to this discussion; there are obviously difficulties in self-publishing but one of the great advantages is that books are never 'remaindered'...."More than that! If you are not famous then you have to do all the promotion and marketing for your book anyway. If you do all the work then why not SP and get ALL the profits not a small percent of them?
You can truly self publish a good book for only several hundred dollars is you do the bulk of the work and to not hire any so called self publishing 'services' that are over priced and offer little value. Even more if you do not throw thousands at a hard core vanity press scam.
You do need editing! But if you look around you can find a good one at a reasonable price.
And do your own cover!! If you are smart enough to write a book you are smart enough to DIY the cover. Just DL a template and fill it in.
Covers are meant to sell books not win artsycraftsy awards for some alleged book cover "artist' who charged you hundreds if not thousands of dollars for a cover that will never increase sales enough to pay for itself.
For me I think discovery is the biggest catch to self-publishing, you could write an amazing book but unless you do an amazing marketing campaign then few people will read it.
So true. Authors hate promoting and marketing.
But with the humongous pile of slush due to the ease of 'publishing' any piece of crud, the little bit that is good is really hidden so people do not search for it at all.
It comes down to a simple thing to me: Traffic.There are great ignored/unsuccessful books
There are God-awful successful books. Quality is a factor, but not the biggest one to me. The biggest factor is visibility. A reader gravitates to what is known or safe, ie. well-known authors, promoted, and familiar. If they were to see some book that was visible to them a lot, they'd be more likely to read it instead of searching for an obscure, unknown author. Most SBers have zero visibility, zero traffic. No one knows their books exist. Once you get some traffic, more comes.
Once you get some success, more comes. The rolling stone theory.
The gap is huge because of visibility and traffic, not necessarily quality.
That said... quality seriously matters. It hurts all SBers to have others flood the market with poorly edited stuff. Assumptions get made to all SBers. Treat your editing with a professional attitude and readers will be less hesitant to venture outside the trade-pubs.
It is a VERY long tailed phenomenon. Either you promote the bleep out of it with your already huge social media following as the base to start, or you get very lucky and go viral somehow.Slush guarantees that good stuff will be even harder to find and with no curation for quality people do not take a chance on something new by some new author.
Just being good is necessary but not sufficient. You also need to be lucky and work hard at promotion and sales .
Unless you are a celebrity you are simply going to have to do all the work yourself: 1. website (author or indy publisher); 2. you're gonna have to spend some money on an ad campaign even if it comes out of your working paycheck or SS retirement earnings; 3. sell as many as possible locally so at least your authorship is known locally; 4. go to various forums like goodreads to promote; 5. depending on what your genre or non-fiction book is about, find websites that promote similar themes and post links to your site/books in comments as long as the website theme is similar. Number 5 has worked very well for me--my books is about a rock band that succumbs to and then fights evil in music industry, etc. and I have gotten lots of visits from those sites, and likely book sales as well. Plus I post snippets of the books on my website. There are other sites as well like BookBub, but to me anyway that is a hit or miss proposition. Luck? Divine intervention? But you still have to "do the heavy lifting" with marketing.
I have a big problem with your #2: I have a family to feed and I am not going to divert the little money I get from my pensions and put it on a book advertising campaign instead of food on the table or paying bills. More and more, it seems that publishing a book the traditional way is only for the well to do or the connected people. Many people simply cannot afford to 'do the heavy lifting' with marketing, Deborah.
There seems to be a stigma attached to self-publishing, especially for a first-time author. Unless one is known or has proved her/himself in the publishing world, which sometimes speaks more to the quantity of titles sold than to the quality of the writing, the resulting lack of sales--or even interest, can be disheartening, at least. Self-publishing is hard work and, for me, a process of learn as you go. No surprise really since- without a literary agent, most well-known, reputable publishers won't look at an unsolicited manuscript. Of course there are those so-called "self-publishing" companies that will charge exorbitant costs attached to even their least expensive packages, not to mention the hidden costs involved.
I don't mind the "heavy lifting," but it would be nice to come close to recovering costs in the final analysis, no matter the given genre.
Linda wrote: "There seems to be a stigma attached to self-publishing, especially for a first-time author. Unless one is known or has proved her/himself in the publishing world, which sometimes speaks more to the..."I have to agree, there is lots of heavy lifting, which I found out after I published my first book. I have a few reviews, all of them excellent but I still haven't been able to sell a lot. I know people who have read my novel but never left a comment anywhere, even though they said it was great.
Like many self-publishers, I have a limited income so spending on self-promotion isn't high on my list of priorities.
JohnSharpe wrote: "I made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m ..."What has this got to do with Indie publishing?
To me it sounds like something that is too good to be true, which probably means that it is.
Leslie wrote: "JohnSharpe wrote: "I made $64,000 so far this year working online..."It's a spammer, posting the exact same message on several threads. There's a button where you can flag them to a moderator.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Devil's Workshop (other topics)A Prophecy of Dawn (other topics)
Evah & the Unscrupulous Thwargg (other topics)
Vampire Asylum (other topics)
Women and Goddesses in Myth and Sacred Text (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Vicky Adin (other topics)K.D. McQuain (other topics)
Jeff Goins (other topics)
Jenny Blake (other topics)
Chris Guillebeau (other topics)
More...
Who is attempting to justify or defend mediocrity? Did I miss something?