# That Can't Be Right!



## Ankari (Jun 16, 2012)

I read a little info blurb on Steven Erickson and it stated that he has sold 250.000 books from his Malazan Book of the Fallen series.  That is only 25,000 per each book!  He noted that _he is surprised._ that his book is mainstream fantasy.  250,000 books is mainstream?  Even if you were to consider only the English speaking population, that sounds like s small number of book sold.  

What is the idea number of books an author wants to sell to be considered successful?


----------



## Christopher Wright (Jun 16, 2012)

The confessions of a semi-successful author - Fiction - Salon.com

As of 2004, it appears 25,000 is considered a good number...


----------



## Robert Donnell (Jun 16, 2012)

I have heard that it is worse than that, with the average being 800 books sold per title.


----------



## Philip Overby (Jun 16, 2012)

I think a lot of beginning writers think they are going to sell their book to a major publisher and become a millionaire.  The truth is only a very, very small margin of writers become rich.  I'm sure Erikson makes enough money to live as a full-time writer, but he probably has other things that he makes money doing also (maybe).  For every Stephen King and JK Rowling, there are hundreds if not thousands of writers who just make enough money off their books to be comfortable.  

Selling books isn't like selling records.


----------



## Telcontar (Jun 17, 2012)

Heh. If that is news to you, just wait until you find out how few sales a book needs to get on the NYT "Bestseller" list.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Jun 17, 2012)

Telcontar said:
			
		

> Heh. If that is news to you, just wait until you find out how few sales a book needs to get on the NYT "Bestseller" list.



I'm guessing 3000 to 5000 per week depending on the other books on that month's list. I would think the number required would be seasonal too with December being a better sales month than January for example.


----------



## Ghost (Jun 17, 2012)

Phil the Drill said:


> I think a lot of beginning writers think they are going to sell their book to a major publisher and become a millionaire. [...] Selling books isn't like selling records.



Haha, now all those writers who want more than anything to be rich will become musicians. Nobody tell them how unlikely it is to become a millionaire based on record sales alone, even if they sign with a major label. It'll keep them out of the slushpile for a few years.


----------



## Philip Overby (Jun 18, 2012)

Ghost said:


> Haha, now all those writers who want more than anything to be rich will become musicians. Nobody tell them how unlikely it is to become a millionaire based on record sales alone, even if they sign with a major label. It'll keep them out of the slushpile for a few years.



I guess you're right about that.   

There are plenty of poor musicians as well, even if they have a hit album.  Basically, if you're in writing for the money, then go do something else.  Yeah, you may strike it rich, but I don't think that's why most people write.  They do it because they love it.


----------



## Steerpike (Jun 18, 2012)

Phil the Drill said:


> Basically, if you're in writing for the money, then go do something else.



This. 

I've heard this said by virtually every writer I've talked to, from very successful ones to mid-list authors making a very modest living, to those who have had some successes but can't quit their day jobs.

The fact is, no matter how good of a writer you are, the odds of becoming rich as a writer are slim. It can happen (heck, it can even happen if you're not that good of a writer), but one has simply to think about the sheer number of aspiring authors out there, many of whom are quite good, and then look at the extremely small number of people who 'strike it rich' to see that it is unlikely. If you're out primarily for money, putting the same time and energy into virtually any job out there, instead of putting it into writing, is likely to lead to greater financial reward. Of course, writing has rewards apart from any financial incentive, which is why we do it.


----------



## Robert Donnell (Jun 18, 2012)

Jesus Steerpike what a buzz kill, hell I was trying to deceide between a Bently and a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport with my Amazon.com $4.02 royalty check.


----------



## boboratory (Jun 18, 2012)

I'm going to pull a link from another thread, on io9. "The Most Successful Self-Published Sci-Fi and Fantasy Authors"

Some of these numbers *LOOK* good, but take out Amazon's portion, and your other costs, and the fact that in Amanda's case, she's been at this a few years now to even get to those numbers, it makes one want to make sure you have a map of your local plasma donation centers...


----------



## SeverinR (Jun 19, 2012)

Very few writers are full time professional writers.
Don't expect to quit your "day" job.

Writing is an art form, like all other art forms, very few make good money or become famous.

Fortune and glory can't be your goal, or you won't even get out of the starting gate.

When dealing with the arts:
MOney for nothin and your chicks for free, is more like nothin in money and chicken fee.


----------



## Steerpike (Jun 19, 2012)

Robert Donnell said:


> Jesus Steerpike what a buzz kill, hell I was trying to deceide between a Bently and a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport with my Amazon.com $4.02 royalty check.



I'd go with the Bugatti. How many royalty checks do we need to save? My last one was over $50, and I was quite pleased (I suppose I'm easily pleased).


----------



## TWErvin2 (Jun 19, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> I'd go with the Bugatti. How many royalty checks do we need to save? My last one was over $50, and I was quite pleased (I suppose I'm easily pleased).



A royalty check is a royalty check. Cash it and it spends. I made enough with a couple of my royalty checks equivalent to making a truck payment (I have a 2007 Chevy Colorado)--a _long_ way from a Bently or a Bugatti, and normally my checks are _a lot _smaller. So we'll have to work harder 

I know three authors who earn a living writing, and more than a few that supplement their regular income, or are mainly supported by a spouse.

One author, for example, received a low six figure advance. Sounds great, but that had to go for two years, and after agent and taxes, it's a lot less than it at first appears. Plus, one never knows if the next novel(s) will get a contract (or even sell well if they do)--and if it doesn't, especially early in a career, the residual royalties (for as long as the works are in print and out there) won't cover much as far as living expenses. And many publishers are willing to cut loose a midlist author (not offer additional contracts) in favor of giving another author a shot--or just being conservative and focusing efforts elsewhere.  The past few years, in the industry, new contracts for works have been harder to come by and advances and favorable royalties are harder to obtain. Blame some of that on the economy.

Actually, if you Google 'how many books' or 'how many novels equals a bestseller', there are several blogs and articles that discuss the totals.


----------



## Flemming Hansen (Jun 21, 2012)

I've spent 3000$ and more on camera equipment, purely for the love of photography. So actually earning a bit of money by doing what I love, is a great win in itself. Writing is a waaaay cheaper hobby then photography, and far less dangerous then riding a motorbike or jumping or a cliff. AND! You can drink coffee while doing it! PLUS! It's bloody awesome to add '...oh, and I write novels' when people ask what you do for a living. Let's face it. Even if the royalty check only states two dollars, it's still the best two dollars you've made in your life. Besides, who knows? There still is that one in a million chance that you compose that perfect story that will earn you a nice new Bugatti.

Cheers ;-)


----------



## Caged Maiden (Jun 21, 2012)

Another vote for Bugatti.  Also, I'd be thrilled if I got published even if I never made any "real" money.  I balance my books twice a year for my business and have never been out of the red, so there you go.  Any success is a success.  Some people shoot for the moon and fall pretty hard when they run out of fuel.  Me?  I aim at nothing and cheer when I hit something.  It might not be a recipe for success, but I'm loving my life, and I'd rather be a marginal success than a stressed out nut case because of the pressure I put on myself.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jun 27, 2012)

Well I'm in that article and I made more than $200K on my self-published books so I consider that pretty good.  Yeah some of the people on that list were selling for $0.99 - $2.99 but others (like me) sold for $4.95 - $6.95.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jun 27, 2012)

Ankari said:


> I read a little info blurb on Steven Erickson and it stated that he has sold 250.000 books from his Malazan Book of the Fallen series.  That is only 25,000 per each book!  He noted that _he is surprised._ that his book is mainstream fantasy.  250,000 books is mainstream?  Even if you were to consider only the English speaking population, that sounds like s small number of book sold.
> 
> What is the idea number of books an author wants to sell to be considered successful?



There is no way that number can be right for the Malazan books.  I'm not sure what the actual number is but my Riyria Revelations sold through Orbit is over 105,000 copies and the first came out in Nov 2011 and the third in Jan 2012.  

That being said...from talking to other traditionally published authors 5,000 - 10,000 is considered a "good run" for their books.

And yes, many authors do have to have day jobs, but I suspect there are more earning a living than you might suspect. I actually think that on a purely financial basis its the self-published authors who are out earning the traditional, Because they keep such a higher percentage of the money.  Depending on "where" and "how" my Orbit books are sold I make as little as $0.31 and as much as $1.75.  When I was self-publishing I made $3.47 to $4.87.


----------



## Ankari (Jun 29, 2012)

> And yes, many authors do have to have day jobs, but I suspect there are more earning a living than you might suspect. I actually think that on a purely financial basis its the self-published authors who are out earning the traditional, Because they keep such a higher percentage of the money. Depending on "where" and "how" my Orbit books are sold I make as little as $0.31 and as much as $1.75. When I was self-publishing I made $3.47 to $4.87.



Great post, Michael.  May I ask why you switched from self publishing to traditional?


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jun 29, 2012)

Ankari said:


> Great post, Michael.  May I ask why you switched from self publishing to traditional?



It wasn't a monetary decision. A book that is good enough to be traditionally published will (unless really poorly executed) sell more through self-publishing. There are many reasons for this (that I'll get into if anyone is interested) but let's just accept that for this purposes of this post.

It had to do with "branding myself." The fantasy community is pretty tight-knit and readers routinely are watching what books are coming out from imprints such as: Tor, DAW, Orbit, Baen, Angry Robot, Ace, etc.  By switching I expanded my audience and it made it easier for my foreign rights agent to sell my books overseas (I've received about double my US advance from overseas advances, and while some of those came while I was self-published, it also made it easier to land some of the bigger countries, and to do so with more substantial deals).  

It also opens the possibility for awards such as Locus, Nebula, Gemmell, etc. There is a certain amount of "credibility" that comes from having a third-party vet the work. When self-published the book may be just as high of quality as the traditional standards but there are still many readers who will say, "Well, if it was any good, why didn't a traditional publisher put it out?" The assumption is that it was "tried and failed" despite the fact that many self-published authors aren't even entertaining the option of traditional since they are earning so well on their own.  Also I know self-published authors who have been offered - but declined so the original statement about "not being able to" is false, but no one knows that.  It's the perception that prevails.

It also is a lot easier...My traditional publisher lifts a large burden of tasks from me: Editing, PR, sending out ARC's to bloggers. This means I can spend more time writing the next book(s).  

There are many other reasons, but the long and the short of it was that I felt it was a better move for my "career" even if it wasn't the best "financial" decision.  As long as my bills are being paid (and they are - I write full-time). I don't care about "maximizing income" I'd rather reach more people and have less money than the other way around.


----------



## J.P. Reedman (Jul 12, 2012)

I know someone  who had a book published by a mainstream publisher. They did no PR for it, and it sold about 1000 copies.
Alternatively, there is a local author called Kit Berry who self published her 3 fantasy books after 4 or 5 years of trying to get published with no success (even though she had an agent.) She sold about 2000 copies of each book on her own, and then was picked up by a mainstream  publisher.


----------



## Graylorne (Jul 12, 2012)

> By switching I expanded my audience and it made it easier for my foreign rights agent to sell my books overseas



Funny, Michael, I read this post of yours only today, and just now I saw on of of our local forums that your Riyria books 1 and 2 are going to be published in Dutch by Luitingh. So I'd say, welcome in the Netherlands.
(If you're interested, it's at Fantasy Realm - Frontpage)


----------



## mijo (Jul 13, 2012)

Robert Donnell said:


> Jesus Steerpike what a buzz kill, hell I was trying to deceide between a Bently and a Bugatti Veyron Super Sport with my Amazon.com $4.02 royalty check.


I vote Bugatti.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jul 13, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> Funny, Michael, I read this post of yours only today, and just now I saw on of of our local forums that your Riyria books 1 and 2 are going to be published in Dutch by Luitingh. So I'd say, welcome in the Netherlands.
> (If you're interested, it's at Fantasy Realm - Frontpage)



Thanks for the heads-up. I knew the Dutch publication book was approaching but wasn't sure exactly when. I keep a kind of "screenshot" scrapbook so thanks for the link. My agent tells me that Luitingh is a very highly respected fantasy publisher in the Netherlands, so I'm very pleased that they wanted to pick up the series.


----------



## Graylorne (Jul 13, 2012)

Yes, with Luitingh you come in at the top. They're active and run a good line of books. Their Fantasy-line is at Welkom bij Dromen & Demonen.


----------



## Lawfire (Jul 13, 2012)

MichaelSullivan said:


> It wasn't a monetary decision. A book that is good enough to be traditionally published will (unless really poorly executed) sell more through self-publishing. There are many reasons for this (that I'll get into if anyone is interested) but let's just accept that for this purposes of this post.



I am interested.


----------



## Ravana (Jul 14, 2012)

MichaelSullivan said:


> A book that is good enough to be traditionally published will (unless really poorly executed) sell more through self-publishing.



Just keep the above qualifier in mind while reading his explanation… 'cause it won't apply to a book that _isn't_ good enough to be traditionally published.

Well, that may not be entirely true: a book that isn't good enough to be traditionally published is all but guaranteed to sell more through self-publishing.…


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jul 14, 2012)

Graylorne said:


> Yes, with Luitingh you come in at the top. They're active and run a good line of books. Their Fantasy-line is at Welkom bij Dromen & Demonen.



Good to know - and thanks for the link.


----------



## Devor (Jul 14, 2012)

Ravana said:


> Just keep the above qualifier in mind while reading his explanation… 'cause it won't apply to a book that _isn't_ good enough to be traditionally published.
> 
> Well, that may not be entirely true: a book that isn't good enough to be traditionally published is all but guaranteed to sell more through self-publishing.…



A book that isn't good enough to be published, but is published anyways, is what we call . . . let's keep it family-friendly and go with "the problem with traditional publishing."

It might be true that self-publishers do better for a good book, but I don't think a mega-seller would have done as well, like Harry Potter orGRRM. It's hard to top being sold at WalMart and grocery stores.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jul 14, 2012)

Lawfire said:


> I am interested.



I did a post on the money breakdown. You can see it here.


----------



## MichaelSullivan (Jul 14, 2012)

Devor said:


> It might be true that self-publishers do better for a good book, but I don't think a mega-seller would have done as well, like Harry Potter orGRRM. It's hard to top being sold at WalMart and grocery stores.



True, as I note in my "show me the money post". But those mega-successes will be targeted that way when they are sold. Night Circus is a great example. It has a HUGE rollout but it had a seven figure advance.  If you are getting the standard $5,000 - $10,000 you aren't going to be in Wallmart and won't hit those numbers.


----------

