Self-Published By Choice - interesting article

Thanks for posting that!

 

There are some articles out there that explain why some people choose traditional publishing over self. For instance:

Why I Chose a Traditional Publisher | Nathan Bransford, Author

Nine Reasons Authors Still Choose Traditional Publishing | Writing Forward

You might also enjoy this one by an old acquaintance of mine on why she does both:

Why I Choose to Self-Publish and Traditionally Publish by CJ Lyons

I read the article in the first link and I think she gets it mostly right, with a few notable errors. I don't have time to comment on them this am, but hope to make time to get back and make a few comments later.

PS- recently read the Plains of Kallanash and really enjoyed it. Well done.

 

And on the subject of traditional v. self, no discussion can really be complete without this classic slug fest between Lee Child and Joe Konrath around the Authors United controversy:

A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Lee Child Chimes In

 

I really should slip in just four quick comments about the original article. If you are thinking of using it as guidance in your choices she gets at least three things wrong (or misses them) and there is no further reason you should exercise caution in following her advice:

1) She claims there is no competition and that self-publishing is a utopia of "empowerment and abundance." She claims that there is no competition between fiction writers or in the entertainment world at all. This is simply factually wrong and shows a fundamental lack of knowledge about basic economics and the industry. Considering she says this is her number one reason for choosing to self pub and it is factually and logically bankrupt that is a hole beneath the water line.

2) On Money she is correct that you make more per book, but then gets her stats all messed up, and relies on a stats site published by an anonymous guy that has been critiqued and debunked by people with real Phds and proper qualifications rather than "the stats guy." But what she fails to mention is that the up front costs are put in by the author and can be significant. While you "earn" more per sale, you don't make anything until your costs are covered. Ignoring that is more than convenient but I think there is a reason for that.

3) Control. She is correct that you do have to do everything yourself. While some people like this, most people are not capable of becoming experts in all areas and having connections in all areas. Truth is our economies are functioning now with more specialists and less generalists. She misses the whole point and value of specialization in this section.

But the real reason to take her website with a HUGE grain of salt is that her first book came out yesterday. When she published these thoughts she was an unpublished author, with, from what I can tell, no experience in the industry. It was pure theory with no insight or experience to back it up. She should be publishing these thoughts when she has been at this for five years or more when she has some experience. In fact considering she had a pre-sale for her books, her first day sales are anemic to say the least. I would go so far as to say terrible. So one should ask oneself, is it prudent to take advice from someone who has never worked in the field and can't seem to do basic economics.

There are many reasons one might consider self publishing as the right option, but Ms. Sicoe's is not the person to give you career advice. I don't see why one would take her advice in the area based on a day or so in the industry and a handful of book sales.

Pauline has significantly more experience and knowledge (and sales!) in this field than this lady does. In this case Pauline should be writing the article rather than just posting it!

Around the area of the choice to self-publish I would pay some particular attention to the article above by CJ Lyons, and not just because she is someone I know. She has been in the industry for years, has had her fair share of successes and failures in both traditional and self publishing, and has built herself a career as a writer that has allowed her to stop practicing medicine.

 

Russ,

I feel truly sorry (not sure if that's the right word. concerned about?) for anyone who makes the extremely important decision on how to put their novel out into the world based on a single article from a blog.

Truthfully, I seriously doubt anyone will be basing their decision on either Ms. Sicoe's article or on CJ Lyons' article.

My reasons for self publishing are intensely personal:

1. I hate the concept of agents and publishers being the ones to decide if I'm good enough. I'd rather let the market decide.

2. I like the concept of owning a business, and self publishing gives me that opportunity with little risk and while doing something that I enjoy. The $2000 or so that I put into producing my book isn't going to break me even if I never sell a book.

3. I see little value in the deals and support that publishers are giving debut authors. $5000 plus paying for the services that I spent $2000 on is meaningless to me, and it just doesn't seem like the publishers do a whole lot for you on the marketing side.

EDIT: Clarifying that last remark about marketing. I get that publishers do invest in marketing and that the increased availability of your book is an advantage. On the other hand, I don't think that the amount of marketing they do is any guarantee at all of success. If your book is good enough, I think it will succeed based on the marketing that you can do personally. If it's not good enough, no amount of marketing will help.

 

I tried to just let this statement go, but I can't.

If I had ten books waiting on my "to read" list, I'd still buy any book that came to my attention if I thought it would entertain me. The same thing goes if I had 10 or 100 or a 1000.

People who read a lot, read a lot. (dispute that - I dare you )

Only a few books become mega best sellers. Only a few authors become so successful that they can support themselves. There's no reason, however, that my book can't succeed if:

1. I've written something that readers want to read.
2. I can bring it to the attention of enough of those readers.

Neither of those conditions is dependent on if another author has written a book that people want to read.

 

I cannot disagree with your formula for success, it is quite accurate.

BUT

People's budgets and book selling budgets are not infinite, they are limited. Writers, whether we like to talk about it or not, are competing for limited dollars. The pie does have sizes, people do have to, and do, make choices on where to spend their money. As writers you are competing over a limited resource. The public will not buy equal amounts, or even reasonable amounts of all books published. You are competing against other authors for a piece of that pie. Hopefully you engage in positive competition, but it is competition nonetheless.

and

Readers have limited time and attention spans. Point 2 of your plan makes that point. One must compete for the attention of the reader, and many well informed commentators have talked about the problem of how swamped the indy field is with authors competing for your attention. In fact there is discussion now in some circles about the need for "gatekeepers" in the self pub world and how they are evolving and why they may or may not be beneficial.

The last Codex study I read specifically polled people about how they make their book buying decisions, there is a reason that the group sponsoring that study spent the money to get that data. They want to be better than others at selling their books to consumers. That is indeed competition. And to be fair, the people with access to that kind of data may have a competitive advantage over those who do not.

In fact based on the explosion of self pub, some experts fear there is now a shortage of readers, and proportionately the competition may be more fierce than ever.

 

You should write an article about why self-publishing is the right choice for you, because if some random person described themselves the way you described yourself above and said "how should I publish" I would say they are a classic candidate for self publishing.

The only comments I would make is that you won't likely get into bookstores, but many people are cool with that. And secondly while that $7,000 (or so) may not be significant to you, it would be to a lot of people.

There are lots of people that self-pub is the right choice for. It sure looks like you are one of them. But the idea is currently being over sold and on bad reasoning.

The reason I sometimes consider the self-pub route is a lot like 2. for you. I think it would be fun, and I don't need the money and can afford to take a loss on the project if I chose to do it.

 

The person buying the beans could buy brand A today and brand B tomorrow. Or both.

While the competition in publishing is different, and mutual co-operation can be effective between the right people, the lady who wrote the article is wrong that there is no competition in publishing or the entertainment industries, and it is simply a land of "abundance."

And I try to reference the material I refer to, and was in too much of a hurry earlier.

Here is the piece discussing gatekeepers in self pub and that we are headed for a too few readers situation:

In Self-Publishing, The Gatekeepers Are Dead. Long Live The Gatekeepers! | Thought Catalog

Although I should caution people Howey is a sometimes controversial and not generally accepted analyst.

 

Nor are pundits on web forums.

 

Which is why I source my materials. I never claim to be an authority, and rarely offer an original opinion.

I don't even aspire to the title of "pundit".

 

Among the Indie community Howey is viewed with much respect and is generally considered a smart guy who knows what's going on.

 

The people with degrees in statistics who have examined his data and analysis find it flawed. Some of comments are a bit far out, and his strange reasons for keeping the qualifications and identity of the "data guy" a secret are more than a little suspicious.

And there are many within the indy community who don't think much of him.

 

yet no 'tone down the snark' on this comment:

I see how things work round here....

Thanks.