Kindle Unlimited

[psychotick]

Hi,

Yeah, actually my borrows just doubled too. But the records don't tell me whether thats KU or Prime in action. And anyway, borrows have always been a minor part of my sales. Might get a few extra cups of coffee at the Robert Harris, but won't be booking holiay flights to go with on it!

Cheers, Greg.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

Authors don't have to take part in KU just because they're selling on Amazon, however. If you're self-published you have to be part of Kindle Select, right? So just don't sign up for that.

You are correct if you choose Select you are in KU...but you don't have to.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

There's some interesting analysis of Kindle Unlimited from super star indie author Hugh Howey on his website. Of particular note, the first comment on the post has this to say:

As a “small” indie author, this change is awesome. In the 4 days that we’ve had KU, my borrows have QUADRUPLED, which in turn has raise my sales rank, which in turn has lead to more full price sales as well. I roughly expect that KU is going to push my earnings up 50% or more per month.

We certainly live in interesting times.

Posts like this drive me crazy. If you had 2 borrows and you QUADRUPLED to 8 titles that is a much different situation than going from 200 to 800. And earnings going form $30 to $45 is a 50% increase but again - who cares. Give me numbers that mean something and I "MIGHT" be interested but not when reported this way.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

For what is worth, here is my article on Digital Book World regarding KU.

 

[Steerpike]

Posts like this drive me crazy. If you had 2 borrows and you QUADRUPLED to 8 titles that is a much different situation than going from 200 to 800. And earnings going form $30 to $45 is a 50% increase but again - who cares. Give me numbers that mean something and I "MIGHT" be interested but not when reported this way.

Although Howey himself says that his own borrows have tripled (in his response to that comment). Given that Howey was at one point was selling something like 20,000 to 30,000 books per month, my guess is we're talking a substantial number of books of his. But since Howey is now established, you can't really extrapolate from his experience to that of an unknown author. If the first commenter wasn't getting hardly any borrows before, then you're right that quadrupling it doesn't say a whole lot!

 

[MichaelSullivan]

Although Howey himself says that his own borrows have tripled (in his response to that comment). Given that Howey was at one point was selling something like 20,000 to 30,000 books per month, my guess is we're talking a substantial number of books of his. But since Howey is now established, you can't really extrapolate from his experience to that of an unknown author. If the first commenter wasn't getting hardly any borrows before, then you're right that quadrupling it doesn't say a whole lot!

Yeah but Hugh's book was a "Featured" title - and splashed all over the front page of KU. Of course his sales went up .... but I doubt the other person had such premium placement. We agree that you can't compare these two author's experiences.

 

[Devor]

It's still early to know what the sales impact is. I mean, every last user of KU is still on their free trial. Even if it takes off, it would cannibalize normal sales. I'm pretty optimistic, but there's a lot that this might shake up, and a lot of dust to settle.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

It's still early to know what the sales impact is. I mean, every last user of KU is still on their free trial. Even if it takes off, it would cannibalize normal sales. I'm pretty optimistic, but there's a lot that this might shake up, and a lot of dust to settle.

Agreed we won't know the true affect for several months.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Well here's a strange curve ball in the KU debate. I just published a shorty - 6000 words, figuring it's better to be finished and out of my hair then malingering on my computer as I change one word in it every week. But that's by the by. Since it's so short I put it at 0.99c. I also put it in Select and allowed borrowing. That means it's in KU.

Now look at the returns to me. If I sell a copy of The Session, it gains Amazon 64c and I get a wopping 35c. If on the other hand someone borrows it in KU, Amazon gets whatever they get and I get around $2.

I love these economics!

Cheers, Greg.

 

[MichaelSullivan]

Hi,

Well here's a strange curve ball in the KU debate. I just published a shorty - 6000 words, figuring it's better to be finished and out of my hair then malingering on my computer as I change one word in it every week. But that's by the by. Since it's so short I put it at 0.99c. I also put it in Select and allowed borrowing. That means it's in KU.

Now look at the returns to me. If I sell a copy of The Session, it gains Amazon 64c and I get a wopping 35c. If on the other hand someone borrows it in KU, Amazon gets whatever they get and I get around $2.

I love these economics!

Cheers, Greg.

Yep for low-priced works a borrow is actually better than the "full payout." I think you'll see a lot more shorts and serials in KU.

 

[stephenspower]

Amazon's post on pricing, full of claims, but no underlying data:

The important thing to note here is that at the lower price, total revenue increases 16%. This is good for all the parties involved:

* The customer is paying 33% less.

* The author is getting a royalty check 16% larger and being read by an audience that's 74% larger. And that 74% increase in copies sold makes it much more likely that the title will make it onto the national bestseller lists. (Any author who's trying to get on one of the national bestseller lists should insist to their publisher that their e-book be priced at $9.99 or lower.)

* Likewise, the higher total revenue generated at $9.99 is also good for the publisher and the retailer. At $9.99, even though the customer is paying less, the total pie is bigger and there is more to share amongst the parties.

 

[Devor]

Stephenspower, we have a policy against extensive quoting from offsite sources. It gets read as "duplicate content" by search engines. I've cut the quote to what seemed like the gist of it, although even that is somewhat long. Please bear that in mind for the future.

 

[stephenspower]

Fair point. I thought since it was essentially a press release that I could put the whole thing.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Stephen this is just Amazon's argument with Hachette being put out as a press release. I'm not sure why since the court battle doesn't really involve us as authors. We're just the road kill staked out in the arena while the two monster trucks of publishing duel it out.

Personally as an indie I don't charge either $14.99 or $9.99 for a novel. My price point is $3.99 for a novel. My thought is that Amazon's right on this, there is price elasticity at these higher prices and there's not a huge justification for having ebook prices so high. And as for the 30% I get 70%. To get the same royalty per sale at only 30% my book would have to be priced at $9.31. At that price I would absolutely expect to lose sales and have increased returns, neither of which is good for me.

But, and I would stress this, the price elasticity is going to occur at only two parts in the distribution. At the dearer end where book price becomes significant to readers - say above 5 or 6 dollars or in the free zone where readers will download anything simply on the off chance that it might be okay. In the middle it will be far less important, and in fact there are actually sweet spots according to some. Smashwords did a survey and found that $3.99 was one such point - hence the reason I use it.

Cheers Greg.

 

[Trick]

My thought is that Amazon's right on this, there is price elasticity at these higher prices and there's not a huge justification for having ebook prices so high.

I definitely agree that amazon chose a good price range for the 70% because they have teams of analysts and number crunchers who figure these things out. I would still use Amazon without joining Select but if they make KU mandatory for certain prices (which I think will happen) I wouldn't be surprised if it was for those of us between $2.99 and $7.99, negating the 70% very quickly. Could an author make more on KU? Sure. Will they if they're a relatively unknown self pub? I think not.

I will add that 90 day exclusivity is not that bad. It's almost like testing the market. Once it's up, one could spread their work around with sales numbers from Amazon if they were impressive. It's not Select that seems to be the issue, it's just KU. Since they go hand in hand, I'm leery of taking part.

 

[stephenspower]

Here's John Scalzi's excellent response to Amazon's post, wherein he shows that Amazon's post only makes sense if (1) the only thing publishers sell is ebooks through Amazon and (2) all books are interchangeable.

@Trick, yes Amazon has teams of analysts to derive their numbers, but just like in math class they should show their work so we can see the underlying data and assumptions, which likely favor their business model, not objective reality. Their "facts" shouldn't be blindly accepted. That investors have been blindly accepting their data-free quarterly reports for decades is no reason anyone else should.

 

[psychotick]

Hi Trick,

I don't see Amazon making KU (and thus Select) compulsary at any stage. Not even for books in certain price ranges. It would be seen as an anti-competitive practice, and while I'm sure they'd love to do it, the law suits from the other publishers would likely be horrendous. They could well get slapped down hard.

And Stephen I agree, it would be damned nice to see Amazon's data. But the reality is that they aren't going to show it any more than they're going to let us see their algorythm. It's a business advantage to them like a certain chicken cooker's secret recipe. They'll keep it secret.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Trick]

@stephenspower. I have no intention of accepting Amazon's numbers without knowing the conclusions favor Amazon most of all. We live in a capitalist society, which I favor. I heard, so clearly it's not fact, that Amazon has never claimed a taxable profit. it's believable based in their practices. I don't love Amazon by any means. I just think their resources might benefit me if properly used.

 

[stephenspower]

@Trick, yes, that's true re partnering with them.

 

[Trick]

@psychotick, I don't think KU would be mandatory for Trad publishers or big name self-pubs. Just for the little guys. It's already quite uneven with the separate pool and random payment. KU is mandatory for Select users. Amazon could just say that the "benefits" of Select now extend to all small time self-pubs. They are not the most above-board company. Don't get me wrong, they are not evil, in my opinion, they are just out for themselves and ignore certain morals of doing business. I've heard it said that business needs no morals but anyone who's ever been screwed over by a big company has to know that is simply not true.