 [ Amazon | B & N | Mystiske Galaxy ] | The Death of Print / Publishing, Part MCCLWTFXVIII Dorchester Publishing meddelte for nylig blev de droppe deres massemarkedet linie og flytter til en e-book/print-on-demand model. Dorchester præsident John Prebich beskriver hans virksomhed som pionerer, dristigt fører os ind i den elektroniske grænse. Dette har ført til en ny runde af "print er ved at dø," og e-bøger er vejen for fremtiden. Der er en næsten religiøs iver til det. JA Konrath foreslår enden er nær for kommercielle forlag, og selv-udgivelse er vejen at gå. Hans anonyme kilder hævder, at sælge-through på trykte bøger er lige så slemt som 20%. Han beskriver en (hypotetisk) kommercielt offentliggjort forfatter, der får en $ 50K forhånd og 30% sælger-through, der sælger blot 9000 trykte eksemplarer i det første år- Men vent, lad os bakke op og tage et kig på Dorchester, der har været i problemer et stykke tid. "Dorchester haft alvorlige likviditetsproblemer i løbet af 2009." (Tak til Nick Mamatas for dette link.) Overgangen til e-bøger / Pod er ikke så meget et dramatisk skridt ind i fremtiden, da det er et desperat forsøg fra en udgiver til at opholde sig i erhvervslivet. Som for Konrath, har han gjort et fremragende stykke arbejde at positionere sig selv som en forkæmper for selv-udgivelse. Jeg er ikke i tvivl om han talte med nogen, et eller andet sted, som rapporterede sælger-through kunne være så slemt som 20%. Men "så slemt som" generelt betyder den lave kanten af The Bell Curve. Ikke den normale eller den gennemsnitlige, men det værst tænkelige scenario. At tilbyde en alternativ datapunkt, mine bøger har en sell-through omkring 80%. Jeg er ikke bekendt med nogen, hvis sælger-through er nede på 20-30%. Jeg er sikker på det sker, men at basere sin argumentation på disse tal er i et ord, fjollet. Hvad angår resten af eksempel, ja, jeg sælger mere end 9000 trykte eksemplarer i et år, og mine fremskridt er langt lavere end $ 50K. Jeg siger ikke Konrath forbillede kunne ikke ske. Det er muligt. Det er muligt at blive ramt af lynet syv gange , også. Men det er ikke normen. Vent bare, du siger. 80% sælger-through betyder stadig 20% tilbage, right? Gør det ikke mere mening at gå elektronisk / PoD, hvor der ikke er afkast, og du kan få 100% sælger-through? Det afhænger. 80% af hvad? 100% af hvad? Konrath foreslår, at hans hypotetiske forfatteren vil sælge 5000 e-bøger i det første år. Jeg er nysgerrig, hvor dette tal kommer fra, især i betragtning af en New York Times rapport, hvor "udgivere påpege, at e-bøger udgør stadig en lille splint af det samlede salg, 3 til 5 procent." Hvis jeg skulle vælge, jeg 'ville tage 80% af en 20K oplag over 100% af de <1000 kopier mine bøger har solgt elektronisk. Konrath hævder også, at: "Den væsentligste årsag vi har brug for udgivere, er til distribution. Vi kan ikke komme ind i Wal-Mart eller grænser på egen hånd. De kan. Så vi acceptere 8% royalties med henblik på at sælge en masse bøger. Men hvis forlag ikke længere udskrivning bøger, der er ZERO grund til at underskrive med dem, fordi de ikke længere har denne fordel. " Distribution er en del af, hvad min forlægger gør for mig ... men det er ikke det eneste. De betaler fagfolk til at skabe min omslag, og at redigere, skrift, og læse korrektur på min bog. De gør arbejdet med at konvertere mine bøger i elektroniske formater. De betaler for reklame og salgsfremstød. Dybest set, de gør et ton af arbejde til at sælge mine bøger, som tillader mig at bekymre sig om at skrive dem. Publishing er under forandring. Mit gæt er, at vi i sidste ende vil ramme en ny balance punkt mellem print og e-bøger, og jeg tror, e-bøger vil være en større andel af bogsalg, end de er i dag. Jeg er ikke hamrende selv-udgivelse, enten. For nogle mennesker, er det rigtige valg. Konrath sikkert gør det til at virke. Min ven John Fitch V solgt mere end 100 bøger i sidste måned, hvilket er det sgu godt, selv-offentliggjorte rute. Begge e-bøger og selv-publicering har deres styrker og fordele. Og jeg kan tage fejl - det er muligt, print og / eller kommercielle publicering er på vej ud. Men jeg har hørt om den forestående død af print og kommercielle udgivelse i mere end et årti, og det bliver en lidt gammel. 90 kommentarer til The Death of Print / publishing, Part MCCLWTFXVIII | |
Copyright © 2012 Jim C. Hines - Alle rettigheder forbeholdes | ||
My main criticism of Konrath's arguments is that he says this as though it's sound advice for new and unpublished authors - and says it from the comfort of having the benefit of the years of hard work of both himself and his publisher. Those are things that a new and unpublished author just don't have. As you say, selling through 100 copies of a self-published book is pretty good, things being what they are.
Heck, I'd take 20% of the 20K print-run over your 100% of basically nothing. Even with 8% royalties… that's still a lot more, financially speaking, than the alternative.
Definitely. Cat Valente said the same thing when she released The Girl Who Circumnavigated Fairyland online. It was an incredibly successful book … but Cat is also an author who already has an audience. A brand new author doing the same thing would likely have gotten a very different result.
The cartoon… Hilarious. I LOL'd.
I agree with you that Dorchester isn't doing this to be progressive, they're spin-doctoring their financial decline. If they are financially declining badly enough for this, I can see where it's possible other publishers may eventually follow suit. But they may not.
I *do* actually think ebooks are the future, or at least they will be, IMO, the new MMPB. But, I don't think print will ever die completely.
I agree also that “as low as 20%…” doesn't mean that's how low everybody's sell-through or most sell-through is.
As for first year sales as a totally new indie ebook author, I think 5,000 copies are a bit high unless you have backlist or previous publishing experience/platform. I only sold about 3,000 copies of my debut novella in digital my first year. That's just my one experience, some people sell better than me, some sell worse than me, but I don't think 5k copies in one year would be the average for a brand new indie.
What I think will happen is that as stigma lowers, more people will choose to self-publish who “can” successfully get pro-cover art, editing, etc. And who “can” market and build a platform online, because of bigger profit potential for whatever stage they're at in their career. ie We should compare apples to apples and not a self-pubbing author to someone who gets a giant fabulous NY advance, because most people are on the midlist, some of them low on the midlist. In that case, self-pub might be financially smarter.
Commercial publishing will probably evolve, rather than die, but it won't be the only “acceptable” way to publish anymore. And that's as it should be, since this “revolution” has already happened in music and film.
My understanding is that 50% sell through is average. And talking to authors isn't going to get you straight answers, because actual print runs aren't listed on royalty statements.
Go drinking with some editors. Then you get more realistic numbers. And 20% does happen, and is becoming more common. Do you think Dorchester would be getting out of the PBO biz if they had an 80% sell through? Of course they wouldn't.
I'm curious where that number comes from, particularly given a New York Times report in which “publishers point out that e-books still represent a small sliver of total sales, from 3 to 5 percent.
Selling 5000 ebooks a year is the low end of what I'm averaging with my six top sellers. High end is over 10,000 a year.
Consider if that is only 3% to 5% of the market. What will I be earning when ebooks are 40% of the market?
If I had to choose, I'd take 80% of a 20K print run over 100% of the <1000 copies my books have sold electronically.
Over the course of several years, I'd say that's a mistake. Especially in this publishing climate. Work out the numbers for three, five, and ten years.
On a trade paperback, earning $1.50 per book, selling 16,000 copies you'd make $24,000. Not bad. But you won't sell as many in year two. Or year five, if your book is even still in print then.
5000 ebooks a year would earn you $10,000. But next year, you have the potential to sell even more, as the ebook becomes more popular. My numbers have been steadily climbing. This holidays season will likely be huge for ereaders.
They pay professionals to create my cover art, and to edit, typeset, and proofread my book. etc.
Og så får du mellem 6% og 15% af dækslet pris, som de sætter.
Tror du virkelig det er en bedre forretning end at betale for disse omkostninger selv og derefter tjener 70% af en pris, du har angivet? Virkelig?
Men jeg har hørt om den forestående død af print og kommercielle udgivelse i mere end et årti, og det bliver en lidt gammel.
Udskriv aldrig haft direkte konkurrence før. Ikke ligesom den trussel, Kindle, rejser. Og i stedet for at stige til den udfordring, er forlagene gør en kæmpe fejltagelse efter den anden. Bureauet model tabt penge for udgivere og forfattere, og fremmedgjorte læsere. Ebook priserne er kunstigt oppustet. DRM er gammeldags og koster kunder. Forsøger at eftermontere kontrakter at få fat i erights er forkasteligt. Der er ikke en eneste grund til, at forlagene ikke har deres egne eReaders og hjemmesider med indhold til download. Men i stedet for fremad, er de kæmper for at holde tingene på samme.
Det er en kamp de ikke vil vinde.
"Salg 5000 eBøger et år er den lave ende af hvad jeg gennemsnit med mine seks bedste sælgere. High end er over 10.000 om året. "
Hvilket er fantastisk, og jeg har sagt i bemærkningerne til LJ, at jeg er imponeret over, hvor godt du har gjort dette arbejde. Men du synes at tro, at din sag på nogen måde er normal.
Du har gjort et fantastisk stykke arbejde med at positionere sig selv som en forkæmper for selv-udgivelse, og bruge denne platform til at fremme dig selv og dit arbejde. Men du synes at tro, at nogen kan gøre det samme.
Det minder mig lidt om når folk først begyndte at lægge deres romaner online. Cory Doctorow gjort det arbejde. Så gjorde John Scalzi. Begge disse var folk med allerede eksisterende publikum (som du havde, takket være din kommercielle udgivelse succes), og de gjorde det, da det var en ny ting. Der nogen, der sætter en bog online i dag kommer til at se en meget anderledes og meget mere skuffende resultat.
"Tror du virkelig det er en bedre forretning end at betale for disse omkostninger selv og derefter tjener 70% af en pris, du har angivet? Virkelig? "
Ja. Fordi de fleste selv udgav forfatterne ikke sælge de tal, du gør. Din basere dine argumenter ekstremer. Din 20% sælge gennem er den lave ekstreme af The Bell Curve. Din succes som en selvstændig offentliggjort forfatter, er den høje ende. Hvis du har data, der viser ellers, ville jeg elske at se det.
Fordi de fleste selv udgav forfatterne ikke sælge de tal, du gør.
I forhold til hvor meget traditionelt offentliggjort forfattere tjene? Er det ikke den gennemsnitlige stadig 5000 dollars per roman?
Det er svært at leve som en forfatter, periode. Men hvis du er god nok til at tiltrække en stor udgiver, ville du være bedre tjent med at holde dine rettigheder og selvstændige pubbing, medmindre du bliver tilbudt en stor aftale.
Jeg har aldrig sagt, at hvis du selv pub, kan du gøre $ 15ka måned som mig. Men i det lange løb, tror jeg du kan tjene flere penge på bøger end på tryk. Tiden vil vise, hvis jeg er korrekt.
$ 5000 var medianen forhånd for en * først * roman, ifølge Tobias Buckell undersøgelse . Gennemsnit var over $ 6000.
$ 5000 er medianen * forhånd *-ikke medianen af, hvad forfattere tjener. Undersøgelsen omfattede ikke, hvor mange forfattere tjent, og hvad slags royalties de så efter at tjene ud. Forskuddet * må ikke * være den eneste indtægtskilde for en bog, og det er mærkeligt, at forfattere i dag søger at forskuddet som den er, alt, hvad de tjener på en bog. Jeg kan forstå frygten for ikke at tjene ud, og man derfor ønsker at gøre så mange penge up front som muligt. Men (og her er, hvor et hus, der ikke fokuserer på blockbustere og støtter midlist for de kommende år har den fordel, en sjælden ting i dag, jeg kender) det virkelig er til alles fordel, hvis forskuddet er tjent ud, hellere før end senere og begynder at udbetale royalties med det samme.
Hvis selv-udgivelse er det rigtige for en bestemt forfatter at gøre, så jeg har ikke noget imod det. Jeg har et par venner at gøre livets ophold på deres eget forlag arbejde, især Howard Tayler af Schlock Mercenary. Det er * meget *, når det virker (og ja, kan ting som redigering blive udliciteret til freelancere, det er sådan jeg har lavet meget af min leve det år, jeg arbejdede freelance). Men det er også vigtigt ikke at se bort fra, at forlagene ikke bringe en masse på bordet, især stærke uafhængige forlag, der kender deres niche og kan markedsføre / sælge til det bedre end en forfatter kan. Dette er især tilfældet, når de sælger til børn / YA fiktion i skole og bibliotek markeder, som er uden for NYT bestseller listen og nedlægningsoperationen / sell-gennem numre talt i boghandlere.
(To clarify why I think it's as much to the benefit of the author to earn out as the publisher: the author who earns out early tends to be the author that publishers go back to for more, as opposed to books that don't earn out at all (considered “failures” at even astronomical sales numbers, because they didn't earn out the investment).)
But it's all moot with self-publishing, yes. Just wanted to clarify that point.
Now I'm curious — how easy is it to do foreign sales of self-published titles? Probably half of my income is from foreign sales of my books, which come about because my agent is able to sell the US editions overseas. If I was self-publishing, I'd be on my own for that, without the connections my agent has.
I know that's a little off-thread, but it's something that came to mind as I was reading your comments…
I can't imagine that foreign sales (as opposed to translations) are an easy sell, since you're effectively able to reach an online audience. IMHO, while eReaders are well past “early adopter” phase, I'm willing to bet that most folks reading off a device aren't noobs either, and can get around country and DRM restrictions.
I think foreign sales (that aren't foreign language) will be a harder sell for ALL authors, not just self-pubbed as e-readers become more popular.
I am not going to debate about self-publishing or merits, but as a bibliophile, I will comment on my dislike for ebooks. Why do I not like ebooks? Well yes, there are advantages, like having your entire library on a flash drive, but E-readers are far from perfect at this point. Reading on a computer or Ipad are obvious options, but the LCD strains your eyes and neither are very light weight nor portable. Sure you can take your ipad or labtop anywhere, but the battery life on either of these is minimal at best and they're rather heavier than an actual book even a hardback. Then we move to e-readers, which are rather pricey (they are at least 150 bucks plus the cost of books). They are more light weight, portable, and have an amazing battery life, but no color (so no comic books, no picture books, or even children's books) and limits in the formats and what work on each e-reader. There also is not complete availability yet. There are some major limitations with this format.
The big problem with the ebook format is that it takes away the entire collect ability of books. There are no first prints or rare editions. Absolutely no way to get an ebook signed or to personalize it for someone. It takes away a lot of what makes books a collection and not just something you have. Ebooks are great for a casual reader who picks up their latest copy of Twilight or Harry Potter or even someone who devours Danielle Steel and Stephen King with gusto, but not so much for the people, like me, who have a rather eclectic taste in books (I also read comics) and want/need an actual PHYSICAL copy of the book. After all, saying you have an ebook of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is nice and all, but saying you have a signed first edition (idk if such a thing exists, I'm just saying) is freaking GOLD.
Exactly.
I remember years ago when the music world went cd my nephew (a raging music nut) had a very hard time with the format. Personally, music-wise, I could care less what format it's in. I'm all over the mp3 player. CD's are packed and closet-bound.
But a book is something different. I like my music, but I freaking love books. I may, someday, go with an ereader but I want nothing to do with a world where I can't hunt for a signed copy of one of my favorite, obscure authors.
Just one old fart's opinion.
Five years ago, I would have agreed with you. I've since met entirely too many converts - and become one of them myself. In my (anecdotal, convenience sample) experience, once someone decides to try an eReader, they quickly switch over nearly entirely.
I still buy print books (I bought a print version of Red Hood's Revenge, for example), but find that I end up reading a digital copy (which I also bought after realizing the paperback sat on my shelf for two weeks).
“Ebooks are great for a casual reader who picks up their latest copy of Twilight or Harry Potter or even someone who devours Danielle Steel and Stephen King with gusto, but not so much for the people, like me, who have a rather eclectic taste in books (I also read comics) and want/need an actual PHYSICAL copy of the book. After all, saying you have an ebook of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is nice and all, but saying you have a signed first edition (idk if such a thing exists, I'm just saying) is freaking GOLD.”
Well, first off, let me note the irony that Harry Potter is not available in ebook.
Second, wow, what a dismissive paragraph. I read about 3-8 books a week (dependent on how much time I have). I'm very eclectic, reading history, politics, literature, and various genres. Oh, I read comics too.
4 years ago, I couldn't imagine doing that. Since then, my husband and I have halved our paper book collection of 3000+ books, replaced nearly all of it in ebook. We'll continue doing this. We'll regain an entire room in our home. We won't be buying MORE bookcases (last count was 18). We won't pay hundreds of dollars to move these the next time we move houses.
In addition, my eyes enjoy being able to change the size of the text more and more as I approach 50. My hand appreciates not having to hold a 3 pound history book, and the comfort and ease mean I read more and for longer sessions. I enjoy being able to clip out quotes and save them in order to write about them later, or merely think about them. And, as a very avid reader, having multiple books on my device is great, because I can change what I'm reading easily, depending on my mood.
I think you're really missed the boat on your characterization of ebook readers.
In addition, once upon a time I collected first editions, and got them signed. Over the years, I would not actually READ those books, instead trying to keep them pristene. Somehow, now, that seems illogical. I value the books (e or otherwise) more for the words in them.
At Marcon, I was on a panel with a gentleman who couldn't read regular books due to eyesight conditions, and most of what he wanted to read was not available in large print. His eReader let him keep reading. Good point.
I didn't think I'd hit this point at 48, but there it is, due to a confluence of eye issues. I'd be bereft if I couldn't continue w/ my avid reading. And even though I prefer paper books for cookbooks still (I'm loathe to bring my ereader into the kitchen), I'm starting to get more of them in e format, because their print is so darn tiny! I purchased a waterproof cover for my iPad to read recipes in the kitchen. I'd use my Kindle, but the iPad really is better for things with illustrations and photos, and the LCD eyestrain isn't as much of an issue with one recipes.
And that gentleman is correct - large print is quite rare, and usually much more expensive!
That really is one of the great benefits of e-books. I've got a friend who's blind, and for my first book, I had to just convert my manuscript to plain text so her computer could read it for her. The idea of e-readers being able to do text-to-voice is awesome. Likewise, the ability to adjust the text size for easier reading.
Det er. I used to panic that my eye issues would curtail my reading. That literally depressed me - I was the kid who'd get punished in school for reading books while the teacher was talking. My parents, when they had to punish me, did so by taking *away* books! I'm so relieved that I'm able to continue feeding my book addiction .
Mine problemer med alt det glitter og glam på selv-udgivelse er, hvordan meget lidt fokus på de faktiske tal. Selv Mark Coker (det er det navn, tror jeg, ejeren af smashwords) indrømme, at det er svært for indie forfatteren at gøre meget ved selvstændig udgivelse, fordi den "typiske" self-pubbed forfatter sælger kun en håndfuld bøger.
Der er 600.000 + værker noteret nu på Kindle. Af de mega-succeser, vi hører, er, hvor mange det stik modsatte? Hvor mange af dem har kun solgt 5-10 eksemplarer, og hvorfor vi ikke høre mere om de hårde facts, om virkeligheden, i stedet for glimmer og glamour og mega succeser?
Jeg er ked af, men hvis jeg har tænkt mig at have nogen derude fortæller forfattere skønheden i selv-udgivelse, så de skal opdrage på de hårde fakta, også.
Min sælge gennem er over 80%, og jeg helt sikkert gøre mere end 5k en bog. Jeg er åben over for en forfatter at gøre, hvad de behøver at gøre at skrive en karriere-det være sig selv pub, epub eller traditionel. Men jeg tror også dem, der taler om de områder skal være på forkant og ærlig om både de gode ting, og de barske realiteter.
Etablerede forfattere med en veletableret tilstedeværelse, der har en efterfølgende kommer til at have en meget lettere gang med selv-udgivelse end den typiske Joe Blow, der læser om mega-succes, men hvis han bliver uddannet på disse ting? Han er i en brat opvågnen.
Jeg husker at læse en artikel, hvor Smashwords optaget de fleste selv-udgivelser ikke sælge mange eksemplarer. Som stadig arbejder for dem, fordi de gør en fortjeneste på den store mængde af bøger, de tilbyder. Men ja, for hver Konrath hævder at gøre seks tal fra selvstændig offentliggjorte e-bøger, hvor mange andre gør seks bukke?
It's always taken 30s to 1m for Smashwords' site to load for me, so maybe they aren't not the best example.
Personally as an author, I largely intend to make available work that's already existent elsewhere where the rights have reverted to me. As Laura pointed out on Facebook (and has been mentioned here), promotion is a big part of things. I'd say that role of matching reader to author is the primary venue in which publishers can distinguish themselves.
I don't put nearly as much value in the covers, editing, and proofreading side of things. Or rather, I think they're extremely valuable - but going through a publisher isn't the only way to go anymore. A huge thing for me when shopping (the eventual) novel will be considering how - and how much - the publisher plans to market the work. Those connections are really the only thing I can't hire a freelancer to do at this point (or do myself).
When my contribution to the Chain Story goes live, I'll be interested in seeing what correlations end up existing between readers and direct income for me. That will be a HUGE defining moment for me in terms of how bullish I am for true independence. Remind me to let you know how it comes out.
No, you're right, there are skilled freelance editors and proofreaders (that's one portion of my income, as a matter of fact!
) and artists. But my point isn't that they aren't available, but that many, many authors won't use them. I have no idea how many readers will actually think, “I've read three self-published books that absolutely sucked, I won't do it anymore.” I just think it's a possibility. Because as a freelance editor, I know how much cr** is really out there.
Plus, there's the fact that those services don't come cheap. Not good ones.
Natalie, you are absolutely correct. I've also met quite a few people that complained about professional digital books that were poorly formatted, not proofread, and the like. Enough so that I've started to let people know that I do ePub and Mobi conversion as a freelancer.
But that's part of the business aspect of writing. If a home contractor builds things on the cheap, they get poor returns on their business pretty quickly. The same thing will happen with digital publishing. I mentioned the Chain Story - it's a project that Mike Stackpole put together that's pretty much by invitation. But that also means that the folks contributing are pros, and are doing the best they can to put together a quality product.
That kind of consortium (or imprint) - where there's a reasonable expectation of self-policed quality - can help deal with the problems of both discovery and quality. (We all share audiences with each other.) It's the role publishers have had in the past - and what I really feel they need to emphasize now if they want to survive in the future. I hope they do so - but I'm not sure (or optimistic) the folks in boardrooms far removed are able to see that. It would make things MUCH easier for good emerging writers like myself.
“If a home contractor builds things on the cheap, they get poor returns on their business pretty quickly. The same thing will happen with digital publishing.”
It did! E-publishing has been around for more than a decade. 13 years ago, it was deemed the revolution in publishing. Becoming a publisher was so easy, dozens or even hundreds of publishers appeared overnight, their owners and staff often having very little business or publishing/editing experience. And yes, people stayed away in droves after sampling horribly formatted, edited, and proofread books. Though it didn't help that affordable eReaders flopped until recently, it took a very long time for the good e-publishers to overcome the stigma.
As for the “shared audiences” aspect…IMO, the Internet makes us feel like our small, intimate community is everyone there is. There are far, far more people who aren't part of the community than are. (Unfortunately! LOL)
Re: On-The-Cheap. You're absolutely right - but I think that's an always ongoing process, not a limited time one. There's still turnover in print publishers as well for similar reasons. For a comics analogy, for every Dark Horse there's four or five failed imprints.
Re: Shared Audiences. Yes, it's a smaller pool. That's really where sunk costs come in. If you're investing $5K in a book (through editors, artists, proofreaders) then after selling 500 copies at $9.99 everything after that is profit. (I believe you could probably find those services for a LOT less, though.) I understand 500 copies sold would be a disastrous print run.
Will reality bear that out? I think it might - but I can't tell you that for sure yet. Few people are being transparent about their finances.
Just a nit, if you're $5,000 into the project and sell 500 at $9.99, you're still $5 in the hole before you account for extra shipping, your time to process orders, market, and sell the book.
You're right about the $9.99 - I was modifying numbers on the fly and mis-added. Not to mention that I'm pulling them out of thin air.
However, if you're digitally distributing, there are no costs of shipping, processing, etc. There is a time investment, absolutely. Adjust your numbers accordingly and figure out what your own break-even point is. My basic thrust of that was that eliminating the physical costs does lower sunk costs to a point, thus allowing smaller “sale runs” to be profitable.
Okay, well then you have to figure in server costs, hosting, bandwidth, etc.
But yes, lowering sunk cost will make lower runs possible, but I believe that's the argument for small presses.
I think what Natalie is trying to express–without putting words in her mouth–is the continued value readers put on the gatekeeping that publishers do, so yes, you can self-publish and find editors, and cover artists and people to format for you, but for many readers, that doesn't assure them that someone, even one person at a publisher, has said “yes, let's spend the money to publish this because the readers need to read this.” Right, wrong or indifferent, I think it's for this reason that the author/publisher relationship is one of mutual gain, and I think this is why many readers won't/don't buy self-pubbed books–they want to know someone has already “sorted” for them. I also believe this is why publishers as a brand are becoming more significant in the digital market–the reader wants to trust your sorting ability!
Oh, no, please don't put such intelligent, eloquent words in my mouth! LOL
But yes, that is exactly what I mean. In a much more intelligent, eloquent way.
If someone puts out a truly professional-level product and has set up their own imprint, there is absolutely no way most readers will think it's self-pubbed. Because when people think about self-pubbed drek, they're thinking about crappy covers and crappy editing. And if the cover looks good, and the sample they read on their device looks good, I highly doubt it will cross their minds to dig deep enough to find out if it's self-published.
It's easy to forget that the average reader who is not in any way involved in publishing circles has a much more shorthand way of determining “self-published crap” they don't know who all the small presses are or what every imprint is, or even who the publisher is of most of their favorite authors.
Zoe, et al:
You're talking about two different, but complementary functions. One is quality, one is brand recognition.
That gatekeeping function is important - but a traditional publishing model isn't the only way (or maybe not even the best way) to do it. We've all read drek that was put out by a pro publisher. We've all heard that publishers don't always accept and reject MS's based on quality alone. That said, you're right, once someone finds a trusted brand it takes effort to get them beyond it.
Sampling - as Zoe mentioned - can overcome this. We see it all the time in grocery stores. You try it, you like it, you get more. (Heck, look at Free Comic Book Day as another example.)
I think the marketplace is a lot more chaotic than any one model. How this (growing) slice of the pie divides out, and whether (and how) publishers position themselves will make a huge difference in their bottom lines.
I think a very big part of Smashwords not being such a big market for so many indies is just what you said about site load time. It's just way too slow. And that turns off consumers who might otherwise have shopped there.
Den virkelige skønhed i Smashwords, dog er deres Premium Distribution, der får en indie til mange andre butikker som Sony, iBookstore, Kobo, & B & N (indtil PubIt ankommer, på hvilket tidspunkt de fleste vil distribuere direkte via B & N)
JA Konrath siger: "5000 eBøger et år ville tjene dig $ 10.000. Men næste år, har du mulighed for at sælge endnu mere, da ebook bliver mere populært. "
Mener du det format, eller bestemt bog på dit eksempel?
Uanset hvad, jeg synes, det er defekt logik. Bestemt, e-bog format har en længere hale, men hvorfor skulle folk købe en bog, der er to eller tre år i modsætning til den strøm af nye selv-udgivne bøger, der vil komme, da det nu er så let for os at gøre? Ja, hvis du gør godt, vil folk købe din backlist, men ikke i stadigt stigende tal.
En ting, IMO mangler denne diskussion er spørgsmålet om kvalitet. Self-udgivelse ofte (ikke altid, naturligvis) betyder meget dårlig kvalitet. Hvor mange gange vil en læser blive brændt, før de begynder at finde ud af, om en bog er selv offentliggøres og beslutte ikke at tage en chance? Redigering, marketing og omslag bliver meget kort proces.
Mangler også omtale af de sidste 15 års banebrydende ske ved e-forlag. Det er ikke bare "print eller selv udgive." Der er andre muligheder!
Jeg er enig, at det ikke bare print eller selvstændig pub, og jeg har opfordret indie forfattere før til at søge en lille presse eller epub fordi det at være indie ikke var noget, de virkelig "ønskede" at gøre. De havde lige købt ind i denne idé om, at alt deres arbejde ville blive "ødelagt" af et forlag. Jeg er kontrolfreak og SKAL have kreativ kontrol, men det er opvejet af det faktum, at jeg virkelig elsker virkelig selv-udgivelse. Det handler om det. Og for nogle mennesker, kan dette ikke være tilfældet.
Men når det kommer til epubs ... Jeg kender de største i min genre er Ellora Hule og Samhain, og derefter Løs ID bliver nævnt en masse så godt. Alle gode udgivere for det. Men jeg gøre mere på min egen end en masse af Samhain og Løs ID forfattere (jeg er ikke sikker på om EF, fordi jeg ikke ved meget om, hvad den gennemsnitlige EF forfatteren gør nu, men jeg kender adskillige Samhain og Loose ID forfattere.)
Så for mig ville det ikke megen mening at gå efter en ePub. Men selvom der er mange øer, som sælger meget mere end mig, der er mange øer, som sælger en masse mindre end mig. Og det handler ikke kun om pris. Jeg har set indie-bøger med anstændige omslag sælge på 99 cent, som blev klassificeret over 100.000 i Kindle-butikken. Hvilket betyder, at de sælger et eksemplar eller to hver uge eller to mest sandsynlige.
En epub er helt sikkert noget for folk til at overveje og se ind i, men ... hvis nogen kan markedsføre og få deres navn derude, og tage sig af de facetter af selv-udgivelse, IMO de er bedre stillet indie, både for den kreative / personlige belønninger, og pengene.
Lad mig give dig perspektiv en af de små frites Jim er bekymret over (ja, ville det være mig). Jeg er lille forfatter arbejder hårdt på at bryde ind i den scene. Mens jeg har haft en vis succes i accepter, dette har hidtil været med ikke-Advance betalende forlag. Jeg har royalties op foran og alligevel, jeg ikke slutte min dag job helst snart!
Jeg ved, hvor meget arbejde mine forlag sat til at markedsføre min bog, fordi jeg gør det min virksomhed at kende. Med små presser og epublishers, arbejder forfattere i samråd med deres udgivere til markedet. Alligevel ved jeg, at jeg ikke kunne gøre den slags salg Konrath der hævder, ikke på min egen.
De siger, den bedste markedsføring strategi er at have backlist. Men hvad nytter det at have en stor backlist bøger, hvis ingen ved, hvem du er? Min eneste frelsende nåde i at starte op er, at min forlægger, er der sideløbende mig. Gennem dem, har jeg salgsfremmende muligheder med andre forfattere, at de kun er åbne for andre i samme forlag. Ikke at nævne jeg har en bedre chance for at få min bog revideret på Blogger sites. Allerede har jeg set dørene lukket for mig, blot fordi nogle anmeldere har endnu ikke tilsluttet sig eReader samfund. Som jeg har gjort min forskning, har jeg lagt mærke til endnu flere døre er lukket til selv-udgivne bøger. Måske dette er en bestemmelse, der skal afhjælpes, men faktum er, at jeg i dag læst 50 + Ya gennemgang blogs og kun én (1) var åben til at gennemgå selv udgivet bøger. Hvis ingen vil gennemgå de selv udgav bøger, hvor er det forfatteren at få ordet ud, at deres bog er til rådighed? Gæst blogging muligheder og forfatter interviews vil sandsynligvis blive spærret til dem på de samme steder. Uden anmeldelser (gode eller dårlige), ville jeg ty til at tegne annoncer på populære sites (som gennemgå websteder osv.). For en selvstændig offentliggjort forfatter, er disse penge kommer ud af deres lomme, penge, som de ikke har råd til at bruge, når deres indkomst er så usikker. Publicering i ebook, gør de lokale bog signings, ville osv. ikke være troværdige, og merchandising (bogmærker osv.) for ebøger er en anelse latterligt, efter min mening.
Men lad mig tilbage et skridt videre. Jeg har kendskab til forlagsbranchen felt, som jeg ville ikke have vidst et år før. Hvis mig et år siden skulle selv offentliggøre, ville det have været en katastrofe. Ikke alene ville jeg have haft den nødvendige viden for at fremme mine værker (viden, som jeg opnået gennem patientens vejledning af mine forlag, og gennem hjælp fra venner), men jeg ville have offentliggjort noget, som ikke ville have været klar til markedet. Ansættelse af en editor, vil ikke garantere dig en god bog. Der er glubske fejl, jeg kunne have gjort i den historie, jeg var så stolt af jeg ikke kunne se sine fejl. Jeg har læst selv udgav bøger før, og jeg vil være ærlig med dig. Mens der er perler, der er også forfærdelige bøger derude! Hvis der er en fejl i historie, som jeg ikke kan se eller er for blinde til at lytte til redaktørerne, når de fortæller mig, og jeg går videre og selv-udgive? Ingen mængde af perfekt grammatik og syntaks vil være i stand til at dække det op. Enhver læser, der læser denne bog vil blive efterladt med tvivl i mig som forfatter, vil fortælle deres venner for at undgå mig, (hvis de husker mig på alle), og vil undgå eventuelle fremtidige arbejder jeg kunne producere. Backlist ville ikke blive spare mig der!
At tale med en etableret (eller endnu bedre, en bestseller!) Forfatter om selvstændige udgivelse er en helt anden historie end de fleste forfattere, der vil følge den selv-udgivelse markedet. Jeg er enig med Jim, at din sag er det ekstreme. Det er den drøm, der fortæller folk, det kan gøres. Men det er ikke sandsynligt. Heck, det er omtrent lige så sandsynligt som min første bog rammer Bestseller hitlisterne! Ønsker du at opbygge en læserskare langsomt med en etableret udgiver (eller tre) er en meget mere realistisk end selv-udgivelse, der perle samler støv i skuffen, og forventer at tjene til føden ud af det.
Jeg er stor fortaler for digital publicering med et velrenommeret forlag. Jeg taler om det hele tiden, fortaler for det, har jeg deltaget i workshops og har skrevet om det så godt. Jeg elsker digital publicering. Men digital publicering er ikke selvstændige udgivelse, som ikke alle dyr er hunde.
Jeg sælger et helvede af en masse mere end 5.000 digitale bøger om året, og jeg ville stadig ikke selv offentliggøre, Jeg tror heller ikke det er rentabelt for 90% af forfattere. Jeg udgiver med store NY udgivere og små digitale første forlag, og jeg er ikke enig i, at en forfatter er "bedre" selvstændige udgivelse end at vælge traditionel udgivelse i mangel af en stor aftale.
Jeg * gør * tjene flere penge fra mine digitale bøger end mine trykte bøger, hvilket hovedsageligt skyldes de højere royalties for de digitale bøger - men mine forlag gøre det tunge løft. Tunge løft Jeg har ikke noget ønske om at gøre mig selv. (Men det betyder ikke, jeg behøver ikke at fremme. Vi alle gør.)
Endnu vigtigere, tror jeg ikke jeg ville have den samme eksponering, uden at vægten af et forlag bag mig. Samvær med en udgiver, er en stor faktor i, hvorfor mit navn er kendt i mit lille hjørne af genren.
Nej, det har de ikke opfundet mig. De havde ikke gøre mig. De skriver ikke mine bøger eller noget af det. Men de fremmer mig. De giver mig gode covers og markedsfører mine bøger. Læsere gå til deres hjemmeside og Facebook-side, deres Twitter-konto. De har mere til stede end jeg gør, flere penge, mere opmærksomhed og mere magt. Hvis de bruger det, og hvis * jeg * kan bruge til at få opmærksomhed for mit arbejde, det er uvurderligt.
Folk ønsker at ignorere, fordi det gør hele Rah-Rah sætte din bog om Kindle dig selv og gøre en gazillion dollars argument lettere at fordøje, når man ikke fokuserer på alle de faktorer, der får en forfatter, hvor han eller hun har nok en base for at virkelig gøre en go selv-udgivelse.
Uanset om en forfatter vælger at selv offentliggøre eller ej, er ikke min virksomhed. Der er unægtelig, succeshistorier som Konrath. Men jeg foretrækker, at vi ser på * alle * de faktorer, når vi diskuterer det - kendsgerningerne viser virkeligheden vil være overvældende flertal af dem, der gå denne rute vil ikke finde den succes, de * tror * de vil.
Fra et ikke finansielle overslag håber jeg, print aldrig dør ... bøger ikke bryder, når du lægger dem i lommen og sidde på dem, de ikke kræver batterier, og de vil ikke overophede og forårsage brand, hvis du falder i søvn med dem i din seng. Længe leve print!
"Så vi flytter til e-læsere, som er temmelig pebret (de er mindst 150 kroner plus omkostningerne af bøger). De er mere lys vægt, bærbare, og har en fantastisk batterilevetid, men ingen farve (så ingen tegneserier, ingen billedbøger, eller endog børnebøger) og grænser i de formater, og hvad arbejdet på hver enkelt e-reader. Der er heller ikke fuld adgang til endnu. Der er nogle store begrænsninger med dette format. "
Tænk fremad. Disse problemer vil forsvinde over tid. Vendepunktet er nået, og med de store drenge (Amazon, Apple, B & N, Borders) hoppe ind i kampen, vil det ikke være længe på alle før alle ovenstående vil blive fastsat. Og Kindle vil sandsynligvis være omkring 99 dollar lige i tide til jul.
Jeg er enig med Angela om udgiveren branding bliver endnu mere vigtigt - læsere ønsker en pålidelig og troværdig kilde til bøger og dette vil blive stadig vigtigere i en verden, hvor selv-pubbing er så tilgængelig og populær - jeg tror også Amazons ratings / Anmeldelser vil tjene som dørvogtere på herpå. Nogle er shill anmeldelser, ja - men du kan normalt få øje på dem. Hvis folk kan lide en bog, kommer de til at sige det. Hvis tilstrækkeligt mange kan lide det, og det lyder godt, er andre folk vil købe det. Hvis folk finder ekstreme fejl og forfærdeligt at skrive, kommer de til at sige det. Og folk vil ikke købe det. Cremen vil stadig stiger til toppen. Eller i det mindste den populære ting vil stadig stige til toppen
Ja, tænke fremad er vigtig. Ligesom hvordan du vil læse disse ebøger i et andet årti. Vil læserne så har de samme standarder som dem, der nu? Vil de være bagudkompatible? Og hvad med 2 årtier fra nu? Da vi alle gerne sammenligne denne overførsel til den digitale musik revolution, vil jeg minde alle om, at 2 årtier siden at have en CD på din computer, der kan afspille musik-cd'er var en fiks idé. Og at folk stadig har musik-på-vinyl samlinger, hjul-til-hjuls bånd, kassetter, audio digital tape osv. Hvor godt kan du købe udstyr til at spille nogle af disse standarder? Som vi bevæger os til at acceptere en skærm, der skaber et abstraktionslag mellem os og indhold, disse spørgsmål bliver mere vigtigt (og hvis du ikke synes, det er, forske i Library of Congress, og den indsats, de går igennem til stadighed opdatere deres nedarvede datastandarder, er det et stort problem).
Jeg kan tale for mindst ePub-format, jeg tror der vil være programmer for lang tid, som vil være i stand til at håndtere det, da det dybest set er herliggjort HTML i en zip-fil med et indeks-fil. Så, så længe vi har på nettet (rimelig, hvis), jeg tror EPUB vil håndtere det.
Nu DRM ... jeg tvivler på, at vil være omkring i 2, 20, 200 år. Hvis der er noget, vil de servere, der har brug for at tillade anvendelsen i sidste ende blive lukket ned.
Men filformatet selv, jeg tror, har en rimelig levedygtighed på lang sigt.
Det giver mening for mig. DRM dræbte en legit musikfil inden for et år for mig, mens jeg stadig kan åbne op for gamle Word Perfect filer fra 12 år siden. Så jeg kan se de filformater outliving DRM.
Men på længere sigt, der er filer, der er så gammelt det er svært for mig at åbne dem. Så hvor let vil det være at læse dagens EPUB fil i 20 år? Jeg ved ikke - det er en grund til jeg ville ønske, vi ville få en fælles standard e-bog format, en som bedre kunne bygge bagud-kompatibilitet til fremtidige udgivelser.
(Ja, jeg vil ikke købe DRM ting. Selv om jeg virkelig ønsker det ... ja, med undtagelse af DVD'er.)
Jeg har ikke rigtig stødt på et "åbent" format, som jeg ikke kunne åbne op år senere. Selv når jeg gravede min oprindelige bog af poesi (Microsoft Office 4), jeg havde mere problemer med at finde en måde at få det ud disketten end at åbne filen. OpenOffice.org håndteret det lige så behændigt. Men, det var ikke så mange år siden.
Jeg tror, at problemet vil komme i medier, ikke formater. Kom noget fra en 7 "diskette vil være sværere end at regne ud filformatet for filen.
Jeg betragter EPUB at være temmelig kompatible. Men, jeg også gøre den antagelse, at XML og Zip-filer vil være omkring i lang tid.
I betragtning af HTML er mindre end 2 årtier gamle, og som har så vindingerne af den standard, jeg ikke har så meget tro på, at det vil være omkring de kommende årtier. Efter alt, blev XML skulle dræbe HTML for et årti siden. Og CSS endnu ikke er implementeret ordentligt med alle browsere. For ikke at nævne alle de standarder i HTML3, der har frarådet siden 4 kom dog mange år siden.
Eller sagt på en anden måde, jeg kan huske, da Rammer var alle de vrede. Næppe se dem længere.
Ja, jeg er faktisk temmelig trist, at XHTML ikke rigtig få nok kritisk masse til at være den eneste sande standard. Men så igen, jeg er programmør og som mine tags til at være store og små bogstaver og lukket.
While I'll agree that HTML may not be the presentation format of choice in 30 years, I do think that there will always be a converter that will take HTML 1, 2, 4, 12 and change it into whatever is the current form. Kind of like how calibre will convert ebook formats, there will be a program that will take the “old broken HTML 5″ (text, HTML, XML, bob) and convert it into the “new hotness of AwesomeFileFormat” of the future.
As long as I don't lose the file, even decades down the line, I'll still be able to crack it open, pull out the lovely words, and jam them into the current “best” format.
Well, I am not getting major deals, but I'm doing better than the median in that survey, plus my sell-through is excellent, so I'm getting good royalties, too.
I agree with Lauren in that self-publishing is not the magical charm. Dorchester isn't necessarily a sign of inevitable things to come. Other publishers do need to respond, but Dorchester had been suffering from financial problems for a long while. This is desperation, not innovation. Most authors will be better off with a reputable digital publisher, unless they are extremely tech and marketing savvy.
Short and sweet:
published, self-published and hybrid (I guess) - all non-fiction works on a specialty subject. Got paid a flat fee for the traditional book, made a TON on the self-pub (pre-electronics stuff - cost $2.80, cover price - $24.95, book not available but still in demand); sold 1500 copies of the “hybrid” (found a small press interested, we split some of the tasks); several hundred of those copies found their way to the Boy Scout 100th Jamboree, made a decent return.
Hate ebooks, will never be a “convert” (I LIKE having lost a room to books, having to buy bookcases and having to haul them around when I move. If you don't you're a traitor, lol)
Really dislike the concept of self-pubbed fiction. (Non-fiction I can understand and have participated in and it IS a different beast); way too much unfinished, unprofessional crap to wade through that I have attached the stigma to all and won't even waste a dollar “trying it out”.
But here's my hand grenade tossed into the salad: what would happen if the traditional publishers finally give in and realize that they can make more money simply licensing their imprint (or “an” imprint to wannabe self-pubbers? Seems to me that if electronics and self-pub are the dire threat to traditional that some seem to think it is, the above is a potentially viable and lucrative way for the traditionalists to stay in business.
(Some Self-pubbers are ALREADY doing something like this with websites, publishing “company” names & etc., such as the guy who's going around allowing folks to think he's Eggleton the artist now Bob the author.)
Just speculatin…
@David (re the “hand grenade in salad” which is a wonderful image!): Ultimately, the quality will doom (or not) those publishers. There's a big difference between just offering imprint licenses up for sale and vetting those who want to buy the imprint.
I actually think the latter isn'ta horrible idea - save that it violates Yog's Law. If it was points on net for the imprint, that would be fine.
It would work like this: I approach, say, Tor (because their name is short and I'm on my lunch break!) to get their imprint on my self-published novel. They love it, think it fits with the work they've “imprinted”. I sell it, and they get a percentage cut for the publicity/imprint. My buddy Bob wrote a crappy story that's Heinlein with the names filed off, and they turn it down because they don't want to be associated with crap.
That solves both getting the book in front of an audience and the “gatekeeper” quality problem.
I've definitely seen crappier proposals.
Konrath has shown what is possible with self-publishing. He's got experience with it, he's very savvy about it, and he's done a lot of legwork leading up to it. He was published in print prior to doing it. New authors, 99% of them anyway, have none of this. I think there's a pretty big learning curve to make self-publishing work well. It takes a large investment in time, effort, and some money. The majority of those looking to publish aren't willing or are unable to do this, which is why I think self-publishing will probably be unsuccessful for most who try. It's really like going into business for yourself, which is not what most writers who don't have a great deal of understanding about the industry want to hear.
I'm getting published in print. I believe it ups my odds of establishing a name for myself for more than self-publishing, even if I don't stand to earn a great deal of money. If, at some point, I've written several books and continue to sell and have a following, I might likely look into self-publishing some material. As it stands now however, I much prefer the ability to keep writing and leave the bulk of the other issues to a publisher. The money trade-off is more than worth it.
JA Konrath says: “5000 ebooks a year would earn you $10,000. But next year, you have the potential to sell even more, as the ebook becomes more popular.”
Do you mean the format, or the particular book of your example?
By all estimates, ebooks are 5% to 10% of the current bookselling market. But this number will go up. As a result, I've seen sales on all of my titles steadily increase, as more and more people buy ereading devices.
Either way, I think this is faulty logic. Certainly, the e-book format has a longer tail, but why would people buy a book that is two or three years old as opposed to the flood of new self-published books that will be coming, as it is now so easy for us to do? Yes, if you do well, people will buy your backlist, but not in ever-increasing numbers.
Publishers stay in business because of backlists, not frontlists or bestsellers (many of which lose money.)
A strong backlist sells year after year. In the case of ebooks, every book is new if you've recently bought a new Kindle. Which is why I've had books in the top 1000 bestsellers for 16 months.
Now I'm curious — how easy is it to do foreign sales of self-published titles?
My agent sold audio rights to my self-pubbed titles. She's working on foreign rights.
the LCD strains your eyes and neither are very light weight nor portable
E-ink has zero eye strain. And the new Kindle weighs less than a paperback and is only $139.
“By all estimates, ebooks are 5% to 10% of the current bookselling market.”
I believe you meant “by some estimates” there. There's a link in the original post to a NYT article guessing 3-5%. Here's another estimate putting it at 1-3%. The New Yorker puts it at 3-5%.
Can you back up your 5-10% claim?
E-ink has zero eye strain
Point of order, e-ink has a similar eye strain as ink on paper. So if you want to say the differences between the old tech and the new are negligible, sure. To say it's “zero” is misleading. Most people don't notice the strain as fast as they notice it with backlit devices, however it does strain the eyes. Reading, in any format, is not what our eyes evolved to do.
Can you back up your 5-10% claim?
Hvorfor? Hvem bekymrer sig?
If it's even smaller than 5-10%, that gives it even more room to grow. Which means even greater future sales.
I care about whether or not I can view you as a credible source of information. If you exagerate your claims and cannot or will not back them up, then the answer is no. That's helpful to know.
I care about whether or not I can view you as a credible source of information. If you exagerate your claims and cannot or will not back them up, then the answer is no. That's helpful to know.
If you don't think I'm credible, read my blog more carefully.
The real percentage number is immaterial to my argument, which is that THE EBOOK MARKET HAS A LOT OF ROOM TO GROW.
If it makes you feel better, I'll change the statement to: “I haven't seen a single estimate that states the ebook market is more than 10% of the entire bookselling market.”
You claiming it is much less than that number speaks to my point, not against it.
I have read your blog, which is one of the reasons I question you as a source of good or reliable information, in part for the reasons noted in the original post.
Your 5-10% quote above was an inaccurate statement on your part, which is why I challenged it.
You're correct that both my numbers and yours support the larger argument you're making. It's an argument I agree with, actually. I don't think there's any question that e-books will grow and become a larger share of the market.
However, you might consider that your arguments would be stronger if you were less careless about the numbers you toss about, both uncited statistics and made-up hypotheticals.
Seconded. Sloppy arguments mean that it's difficult for me to argue my (somewhat advocacy) point as well. It wasn't difficult to find a source for a 3-5% market share for eBooks .
More quotes:
http://www.davidderrico.com/may-2010-e-book-sales-29-3m/
According to this, ebooks are 8.48%.
You might consider that your arguments would be stronger if you were less careless about the numbers you toss about, and searched for more accurate, up to date statistics.
Konrath, this is getting a little sad. You said “all” estimates fell into your quoted range. It took me two minutes on Google to disprove that.
I never claimed the numbers I tossed back were the only ones, or even that they were the best. I was only pointing out your sloppiness in claiming all estimates fell into the same range.
If you feel that finding a May quote to trump my Feb-April citations gives you some sort of win here, well, whatever keeps your ego happy, I guess.
My other post disappeared, so please delete this one if if comes back.
Your 5-10% quote above was an inaccurate statement on your part, which is why I challenged it.
Seconded. Sloppy arguments mean that it's difficult for me to argue my (somewhat advocacy) point as well. It wasn't difficult to find a source for a 3-5% market share for eBooks.
Ok, you want to play? We can play the stats game. You two can go first, because the three stats you quoted are waaaaaay out of date. Show me a stat within the last few months. Things have changed a lot since Feb, March, and April, which were the links you posted.
While you look for recent figures, here is one:
The Association of American Publishers' latest data reports that e-book sales grew 163 percent in the month of May.
Over the past month (May), for every 100 hardcover books Amazon.com has sold, it has sold 180 Kindle books.
You were so quick to pounce on me. You should have done some more Googling.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6700Z620100801
Random House is at 8% and predicts mroe than 10% soon. Which was where–if memory serves–I got the 10% number I quoted.
But STILL none of this does anything to refute my original point.
Your other comment went into Wordpress' automatic moderation queue. I just got back online, so haven't had a chance to do anything with it. However, since you used that comment to reply to people over in LiveJournal, I'm gonna leave it in moderation. If you want to respond to folks in LJ, do it there.
[ETA: Ah, and I see that you have. Cool, and thank you!]
Like I said above, the three stats I gave were a result of 2 minutes on Google to disprove your claim that all estimates showed the same thing. If you feel my Feb-April stats are “waaaaaay out of date,” whereas your May stats are wonderfully shiny, then dude, whatever makes you happy.
“But STILL none of this does anything to refute my original point.”
Never claimed it did. See my comment where I say I agree with that particular point. I wasn't trying to refute your point; I was simply challenging you out on sloppy wording and/or careless number-flinging.
I'll also note that somewhere in the mainstream press and/or on other publishing related blogs, the Amazon data comparing e-book sales to real book sales have been largely denounced as self-serving and marketing hype. I believe, if I remember correctly, that the question asked as “ahhh, but to what set of real book sales - new releases, hardbacks, etc.) If I can find the link, I'll add it in here, but I'm sure someone involved in the discussion has probably already found it.
Actually, Mr. Konrath, I am - or was - kind of on your side. I have a few self-published works on Amazon, and just spent a large part of the last weekend talking about how publishing has to change.
As some others might know, I've also pointed out the large growth in the eBook market before now.
I think we're well past the first-mover stage, and are on the brink of mass adoption. I'm cautiously bullish on the economics of eBooks ( here and here , for example).
I can't find the particular stat at the minute, but I believe it was Penguin that expected digital products to be over 10% of its sales by the end of 2010. But see, here's the difference - I just pointed out that I don't remember the particular statistic. Det er alt. I'm not citing it as an absolute fact - just as a half-remembered article.
Since both Jim & I have said that we actually agree with large portions of your argument, I'm staggered that you find it necessary to treat us as enemies.
Du kan også læse Mike Stackpole har dissektion af "Kindle outsell Hardcovers" historie . Har læst det hele - han både viser, hvorfor overskriften 's meningsløs, men hvordan det faktum, at overskriften eksisterer er yderst vigtigt.
Konrath, er dette at få en lidt trist. Du sagde "alle" skøn faldt ind i din citerede rækkevidde. Det tog mig to minutter på Google at modbevise det.
Med ud af aktuelle tal. Og så hoppede på mig for at være forkert, da du var forkert.
Jeg har aldrig påstået de tal, jeg kastet tilbage var de eneste, eller at de var de bedste. Jeg blev først opmærksom på dine sjusk i at hævde, alle skøn faldt i samme område.
Så jeg var ved at blive sjusket, men du var ikke?
Hvis du føler at finde en Kan citere at trumfe min februar-april citater giver dig en slags sejr her, vel, hvad holder dit ego glad, tror jeg.
Det handler ikke om at vinde en internet debat. Det handler om ebook markedet bogstaveligt talt vokser måned-til-måned. Hvis vi ikke har ramt 10% endnu, vil vi snart. Men forfattere stadig holde underskrive med udgivere. De synes stadig, den gamle model virker. Det giver ingen mening for mig. Du synes at mene, det stadig giver mening.
Kan alle gøre, hvad jeg gør? Nej, men jeg har aldrig sagt, at de kunne.
Jeg har sagt, at forfattere er nødt til at tænke, hårdt og længe, om fremtiden for denne industri. De skal være opmærksomme på deres kontrakter. De har brug for at sætte mål og gøre det math når det kommer til fremskridt. Vi har uddannet til at træffe alle de stumper, vi har været udbudt, og være taknemmelig for dem. Vi har endda forsvarer dem, at give os de scraps.
Industrien er under forandring. Jeg mener, at vores mentalitet skal ændre sig med det. Jeg tror også at spille "hvem har en bedre statistik" Spillet er et stort spild af tid, tilslører det vigtigste punkt: ebøger vil kun blive større.
Tal til dette emne, ikke min brug af ordet "alle".
"Med ud af aktuelle tal. Og så hoppede på mig for at være forkert, da du var forkert. "
Yes … my April figures were, in your words, “waaaay out of date.” If only I could have found current numbers like you did, from May.
Seriously?
“They still think the old model works. It makes no sense to me. You seem to think it still makes sense.”
It makes sense for me. I make between $25K and $50K a year from my writing. I recognize that you make more, and that's great. I think it's awesome that you've been able to succeed with your writing. I also believe that, given the choice between signing with a major publisher and trying to imitate your path, most people are going to be far more successful with the former choice. Not all, but most.
“The industry is changing. I believe our mentality should change with it.”
I agree with you. But I also think if you want to continue being a prophet of the New Publishing, you need to stop being sloppy with your claims.
I'm staggered that you find it necessary to treat us as enemies.
If you want to argue against my points or opinions, fine.
If you want to devolve an argument to a degree of percentages that aren'ta necessary part of the argument, I think it's silly. Especially when I'm getting called on incorrect stats that currently seem correct.
There are a lot of folks who really, deeply, truly resent me and what I'm doing. If I overreacted, it's knee-jerk, and I apologize. I seem to be defending myself a lot lately. Which is odd, when you consider my intent.
A mish-mash of thoughts on this topic:
I believe publishing is in upheaval that will lead to tremendous change. I believe e-books will continue to grow and grow and grow, ad infinitum. I believe self-publishing, as easy an inexpensive as it now is, has become a suddenly more viable and positive option for authors, and I intend to try it, just to see how it goes. Making a little money is better than making none.
But it's odd. Every so often in these discussions, someone makes a statement that implies that e-publishing is new, just because of the recent onslaught of e-book readers. Some of us, in fact, have been published in e-book format since 1997 (2000 in my particular case) or even earlier. The “revolution is here!” cry has been heard constantly for 13 years. E-book sales have increased from .1% of total revenues to 2/3/10/12/whatever percent (depending on what kinds of books are being measured and by whom, which of course makes the actual percentage meaningless). Hardly enough to justify calling it revolution.
E-books are not new. There are innovations in the market that will help boost e-book sales, hopefully significantly, but there is no reason to believe that print books will disappear (most e-publishers also publish the majority of their books in print, too) or that self-publishing will take over the entire industry in a sudden wave. I expect a far more complicated result.
What I believe will happen is far closer to what is happening to the television industry than the music industry, as a comparison. Some people watch TV live, some DVR it, some watch online at the network website or another website, some download to iTunes. Similarly, some people love e-books, some love print, and some are hybrids and love both. Coexistence and variety are the present and the future, not wholesale change from one thing to another. And I think that's excellent.
Other people call me a prophet. I never said I was.
Men jeg har været temmelig på mål forudsige de sidste 18 måneder.
Ignorér det på eget ansvar.
Nå, for at parafrasere hver investeringsforening investering brochure derude, ikke fjerdedel ikke en tendens gør.
Så lad os se. I 1 kvartal vi går fra 3-4 til 8-10 procent. Jeg spekulerer på, hvad der skete i dette kvartal? Ligesom måske indførelsen af en stor spillers enhed med ophobet efterspørgsel, der har solgt omkring 4 millioner enheder, som også forårsager den eksisterende fronten leder til at skære priser, som også mødtes efterspørgsel (Jeg antager, da nævnte virksomhed fritager ikke salgstal for deres enhed).
Så, 4 millioner plus nye apparater på markedet, som kan opføre sig som ebook læsere. Jeg spekulerer på, hvad alle disse mennesker gjorde med deres nye enheder?
Jeg kan ikke tage æren for denne idé. Den blev smidt ud af et stort navn redaktør for en af de døde træer publikationer på et panel, jeg deltog i sidste måned. Så, du ved, de kan være partiske.
Det bliver spændende at se, hvor tallene er i 4Qtr CY 2010 (dvs. julehandlen). 1Qtr CY2011 bør også være et godt kvartal for ebøger, som alle, der har fået læsere til ferien os købe deres eksperimentelle bøger til deres nye enheder.
Og ærlig talt, fra et par procentpoint tallene kunne kun gå op, eller formatet dør. De var de eneste to muligheder. Så store spørgsmål er, hvor markedet vil bosætte sig (10 år efter "digital download revolution" på musik, er 60% af solgte enheder stadig fysiske medier), og vil dette tal være høj nok til at gøre industrien (det kan være en hytte industri, men det er stadig en branche) rentabel.
Jeg har studeret e-bogsalg og tendenser i et stykke tid nu, og har blogget om dem så godt (Mr. Konrath sendt et link til en af mine indlæg). Han er korrekt, at e-bøger øjeblikket tegner sig for 8-10% af bogsalg. Disse 3%-tallene var ikke fra april - de blev offentliggjort i april, men var 2009 numre. Eftersom e-bogsalg er en fordobling og tredobling hvert år, sidste års statistik er en evighed gammel. Hachette og Simon & Schuster både sagde e-bøger var 8% af deres 1. kvartal, at omsætningen i 2010. Flere store forlag har bekræftet disse tal, og har sagt, at de forventer e-bøger at tegne sig for 10% af deres 2010 salg.
http://www.davidderrico.com/tag/sales/
Som for Apple, er de ikke gøre så stor en indvirkning på e-bogsalg, som du måske tror. Faktisk er de en ubetydelig del af e-bogsalg: sandsynligvis mellem 1% og 5%. Amazon er stadig den dominerende aktør, med 70-80% af e-bogsalg. Og det er ikke alle mennesker læser på iPads: 80% af Amazons salg er at mennesker, der ejer Kindle.
http://www.davidderrico.com/e-book-market-share-amazon-at-75/~~V
Et andet punkt, Konrath salg er helt sikkert den høje ende af The Bell Curve. Men jeg er ingen, der ikke tidligere NY udgivelse stamtavle. Og jeg solgt over 6.000 e-bøger i de første 6 måneder af dette år. Jeg gør ikke det rige, men jeg vil gøre det bedre end $ 5000 gennemsnitligt NY forhånd tal i år. Og da de fleste mennesker er enige om, at e-bøger vil fortsætte med at øge deres markedsandel, forhåbentlig 2011 vil se endnu lysere.
Selvfølgelig er det langt fra let, og jeg har arbejdet meget hårdt på mine romaner og redigering og korrekturlæsning og e-bog formatering og dækslerne og blogging og meget mere. Jeg er sikker på de fleste selv udgav romaner ikke gøre meget godt på alle. Og mens jeg nok jeg klarer sig bedre end de fleste, er det endnu værre end mindstelønnen. =)
Hej David,
Amazon absolut stadig synes at være førende pakken i elektronisk salg, selvom jeg ville tage nogle af deres krav med et gran salt.
Tillykke med succesen af din bog! Det er awesome. Det absolut lyder som om du har gjort en masse arbejde, og det er betaler sig. Alle tanker om de vigtigste ting, du har gjort sig fortjent til succes?
Sure, Amazon brugt nogle kloge ordlyd og er temmelig hemmelighedsfuld, når det kommer til hardware salg - jeg er sikker på at de har deres grunde (nogle siger, det er at fange andre virksomheder flat-footed, som når B & N løb ud af Nook lager i løbet af ferien) . Men de har givet nogle ret faste tal på e-bog markedsandel, og ved at analysere alle de data (herunder Apples vildledende udsagn om "Downloads", som formentlig omfatter freebies), er jeg temmelig overbevist om, at Amazon andel er i 70 - 80% interval.
Tak! I have put in a lot of work; I hope nobody hits that “Publish” button thinking it's a path to easy or sure riches — it is definitely neither. But (getting back to the point of your post), the traditional publishing route is neither easy nor likely to be financially lucrative either. Even most trad-pubbed authors have day jobs. But, today, going it alone makes more sense for more people than ever before — although it's still not for everyone: you need to be willing to work hard, take risks, and either have the skill and time to do lots of disparate jobs yourself (cover design, editing/proofreading, formatting, web design/blogging, promotion, etc.), or be willing to pay others out of your own pocket to help. But Konrath and others are proving it IS a legitimate option, something to at least consider alongside the traditional publishing route. And I think most would agree that the self-publishing option looks better and better over time, as e-book market share increases and traditional publishers are in more and more financial trouble. Bottom line: big publishers have huge advantages in the print world (economies of scale, distribution, etc.), but those advantages often turn into disadvantages in the e-book world, as their overhead and reliance on print cause them to resist e-books, overprice, delay releases, block TTS, embrace invasive DRM, etc. And their distribution advantage is mostly nullified when my e-books are available worldwide on the virtual shelves of Amazon, B&N, Apple, Kobo, and Sony.
To answer your last question: I think the most important factors to earning success as a writer are to write a good book, edit and proofread it fanatically, design a good cover and write a good description, do your research (on writing, formatting, promotion, and the business end of publishing), and spend time becoming a member (not just a spammer) of various online communities.
I guess I don't understand the all-or-nothing philosophy that so many seem to have with regards to paper vs. plastic
I am an avid reader, and have been for years. I initially thought I'd “never” be interested in one of the new e-readers - until I got my hands on one. Then I realized how incredible it was to not need to fill my suitcase with books instead of clothes for the times I wasn't sure what I might want to read next.
Anyway, I have a Kindle. But just because I enjoy using my Kindle DOES NOT mean that I am no longer purchasing “regular” books now either! I still purchase paper books - primarily in a few categories: books for my children, books that I *know* are meaningful to me for one reason or another, or books for a collection. As an example, I am currently collecting the Powell's Indiespensible books that come out every couple of months…and yes, I read them.
To me, there is too much talk of one *over* the other, rather than how they can work together to complement each other. Unfortunately, the publishers have had a large part to play in this. Like many, I am fuming over the Publisher's Model they have implemented, and will refuse to pay over $10 for any book. It goes on a wish-list until the price goes down, or I buy a used copy to avoid giving the publisher my money for their highway robbery.
Are publishers hurting themselves and their customers (and, by extension, their authors)? Helt. Are they still a valuable part of publishing, provided they can get their heads out of their butts? Bestemt. I look forward to a day when the talk is no longer why one is better and needs to take over, but how they can complement each other in so many different ways and how they can be used to take advantage of that.
beth, it's easy to understand the “all or nothing” position.
I've had a chance to check out ebook readers and they do nothing for me. I have no problems packing an extra suitcase to carry them on trips. In fact, I usually bring an extra carry bag ON the trip to fill up with books I find while traveling.
I spend ALL DAY in front of the computer, reading, writing and editing. I do not watch TV (unless forced to do so) and I consider it to mark the end of my 'day' when I can lie down and read a real book, feel the paper between my fingers, enjoy the heft - even enjoy waking up because I just dropped it on my face.
I do not ever expect to stem the tide, but to me, the switch over is another symptom of the “enabling” electronic society we are living in. The real world ended when they put a picture of fries on the cash register at McDonalds so that folks who can't read could still work there.
The same goes for self-publishing (whether you are successful monetarily at it or not): “enabling” where it is a substitute for hard work, patience and sacrifice is yet another way that we lower the common denominator, approaching the point where the only thing that will sell is “crap”, because the market has become conditioned and the only thing anyone will invest money in is “crap” that is guaranteed to sell.
Some things SHOULD be hard, and art is one of them. (We'll never see a movie like Casablanca in the theaters again - films that make you think and work to follow a story just don't appeal to mindless audiences - instead we get blockbusters like 'Dumb and Dumber' that celebrate! stupidity.)
Clearly, this is not MY world any more.
Steve, I respectfully disagree. I do not believe that allowing people to self-publish is going to “lower the common denominator”. I believe that crap is published by traditional authors as well - and that traditional publishers, in many ways, look for what is going to sell rather that what might truly be a great story. You're just as likely to get crap on both sides of the aisle, not just self-publishing. I also believe that the “crap” you refer to will be read by some, but will be just as likely to be outed as such by others, allowing people who are truly looking for a terrific story to find it - regardless of how it was published.
Because the argument isn't about “the reader.” The argument is about “Traditional Publishing Is Dead!” That leads to the “one or other, not both” preconcepts.
But that is my point - traditional publishing is not dead and does not have to be so. There are valid arguments on both sides, and publishers certainly have their place. There *is* room for both, and my library will happily attest to that.
lol - there's room for both until you can't charge your batteries anymore, but by then we'll have lost the art of printing, so it will look like a race to the finish line, going backwards.
Beth, I am entirely aware that I was voicing a personal view and that one person's crap is another persons (smelly) diamond.
Everyone looks for what will sell as their mission is to turn a profit. However, current circumstances allow producers to appeal to a much wider market now and they have all discovered that the bigger the market, the greater their sales. Quality across the board has suffered - one only need walk into WalMart to know this.
Spend some time with the young uns these days and you'll see the opposite side of the coin - the sense of entitlement. They are 'owed' a whatever (be it a video game or having their book published).
Genre conventions are another example: there used to be a time when something like Dragon*Con would never have made it - fans would have shunned the commercialism (and did and do), so instead the producers go and appeal to non-fans, water everything down (so that now the big appeal is waiting on line to get an autograph from some actor) and everyone else thinks that it's a “great marketing opportunity”.
There used to be a concept that if it couldn't be done right, it wasn't worth doing - or was at least worth waiting for the time when it could be done right. Now no one seems to care, since they've figured out that if they spend as much on the advertising bushwah as they do on the product itself, they'll make their money back.
Go look at so-called “reviews” on the web. None of the mass appeal “reviewers” are saying anything substantial (you have to dig to find the under-trafficked sites for that) - instead all they say is 'way cool, go read' (or worse yet - it's just like the video game!).
My perspective is over a half-century though, so YMMV. It's not anti-new fangled gizmo, it's anti the way the new fangled gizmos are being used. For the most part, the way I see it, instead of being used by those who can to improve things, they are being used by many who shouldn't.
Since I happen to like The Black Swan , my take on all of this is:
I don't want to know about where the #1 writer is, I want to know how steeply the curve falls off for the next 10,000 authors.
See, someone has to be #1, and to make a system viable, #1 has to be making a living at that.
Do we follow #1's advice (hey it works for me? Try it and you'll be like me). Well, only if something similar worked for #2-#100. Then you know the advice works. If the #2 author in a field also has to work a day job to make her modest living expenses, #1 is a fluke, and the drop-off on that curve is too steep for me to want to play.
If the #10,000 author is happy with the money he's making, then it's a good market.
And that's assuming that everyone is being transparent with their numbers, which is a problematic assumption right there.
As for e-books: I still want one with a solar panel and hand crank before I'm going to bury print media. But that's a post for another topic.
I'd like to think that print isn't dead and never will be. I happen to really like physical books. I also like the convenience of ebooks, though for me, I'm very rarely in a situation where having an ereader would be useful, thus they're not worth the investment. Give us a generation growing up on ereaders and we'll see where the scales will finally balance out. I also love bookstores. It just gives me a great feeling to be in one. You can't get that shopping online. I honestly do not like looking for books online. I appreciate reviews and those who take time to do good reviewing (fewer and far between these days it seems), but I'll take word of mouth from people I know and physically browsing a bookstore to find things I want to read.
The point of all this is that people read for different reasons in different ways and like different things. Ebooks won't take over. They will certainly dominate a specific market of readership and perhaps that market will continue to grow over the years as children grow up doing most of their reading digitally. This would make me rather sad. There's something to be said for the physical book and browsing in bookstores and such. It offers a very different experience and appreciation for books and stories that you can't get digitally. It's not always about the convenience to read and buy whenever you want, though that has it's place too.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by christinerose, Lisa Shearin, Harry Connolly, Sheila Lamb, Jabberwocky Literary and others. Jabberwocky Literary said: RT @jimchines: New Post: The Death of Print/Publishing, Part MCCLWTFXVIII http://bit.ly/d7FqmI [...]
[...] is premature for a number of reasons. (Not the least of which is the technical reasons I listed in an earlier blog post.)
[...] The reality is: more and more people are buying e-books. It's easy to upload your book to a site like Smashwords for free. Pro authors like JA Konrath are riding the wave and doing very well, even going so far as to turn down print publication offers in order to self-publish electronically. Konrath's enthusiasm for this Brave New World of publishing is contagious, and he has a large following and (of course) his skeptics. [...]
[...] Jim Hines Smart Bitches Dear Author JA Konrath [...]
[...] a blog post arguing that the end of traditional print publishing may be near. Jim C. Hines wrote a rebuttal, and there's even a bit of back-and-forth between Jim and JA in the comments. Not since Bud [...]
[...] [...]
[...] Ch-ch-ch-changes August 15, 2010 tags: e-books, eBooks, publishing, publishing news, writing by Rebecca August has been an interesting month in publishing. Dorchester Publishing, home of Leisure Books and Love Spell, announced that they were “transitioning to e-book and trade” starting in September. While JA Konrath discusses this as a possible “beginning of the end”, others such as Jim C. Hines discuss this move as a way for Dorchester to remain viable. [...]
[...] many people have heard how Joe Konrath is making a big success in self-publishing. Here's another point of view, with Konrath and other chiming in with sales numbers & figures to back it [...]