Anything You Can Do, I Can Do Better: the Pros and Cons of Self-Publishing.
Well, it's official. My $0.99 eBook is up and live! But just for you, my blog readers, I am offering a free alternative: leave a comment on this post and I will email you a free PDF copy. (And then maybe you'll be awesome people and review it on Amazon? Good and bad reviews equally appreciated.)
I wasn't expecting it, but I felt a rush of elation when I saw my book's page up on Amazon. Sure, I just slapped it up there, and it's not even a real book, just short stories... but I could suddenly taste authorhood. Not just being a writer, but potentially being read. And it tasted good.
So that got me thinking about self-publishing. Some say that ebooks will replace physical books in the next 20 years, that self-publishing is the way of the future, and that traditional publishers are dinosaurs. Now, as much as I enjoy envisioning Penguin as a giant t-rex stomping around New York, I have to say that I still think traditional publishing is very relevant, still putting up a good fight, and I don't think physical books are going anywhere. So what are the pros and cons of self-publishing? I did some research, and also was born smart, and this is what I came up with:
Pros:
1. No editors telling you what to do. You have free reign over your storyline and prose.
2. More royalties. Comparing the percent that you get between traditional publishing and online self-publishing, you get a bigger slice of the pie. If you're distributing the ebook through Amazon or another online seller, they do take a chunk of the selling price, but it's a much smaller chunk than a traditional publisher takes.
3. You get to decide on your own title, choose your own cover, and do all your own press! You can be as creative as you want, come up with your own slogans and target audience.
4. No waiting for approval, no possibility of rejection, no long nights scouring agent listings or crafting query letters, no waiting years to see your book in print. You just write it and publish it. Boom boom.
Cons:
1. No professional editor to tell you how to improve your book or point out the 37 times you misspelled "tumescent." Unless you hire a professional editor to proofread your book, you are the only one standing between your mistakes and the world.
2. It may be a bigger slice of the pie, but it's going to be a smaller pie. Say your book publishes traditionally for $18.99 in hardcover, and you sell 10,000 copies, and you only get $1 per copy. Sure, that's a small percentage, but it's still a respectable 10 grand in your pocket. An ebook sells for usually between $0.99-$3.99, minus Amazon's cut, you're looking at between 30 and 60 cents per book... and it's going to sell a lot less copies, unless you are a marketing genius or are willing to pour a lot of money into advertising online (which you should do, by the way, but more on that later.) That's because the bigger cut that the traditional publishers take goes toward advertising your book, marketing it, and sending you on book tours. Publishers have media contacts and can get you interviews and reviews. Unless you have a substantial media network, you will be at a disadvantage here.
3. You have to decide on your own title and risk it being terrible. You have to design your own cover, and risk it looking like this:
A word of caution: the one way you can't (or, at least really really shouldn't) go about this is to go half and half. The things the poor author in this article are complaining about are not actually the weaknesses of self-publishing, but rather his failure to convert to the new paradigm. He's taking one element of the new way of doing things--self-published e-book--and trying to apply all the old-school publishing/publicity standards to it--newspaper reviews, radio interviews. Now, someone clearly forgot to tell the dear Mr. Heller that, um, hello? Nobody reads newspapers anymore! He shouldn't be looking to those types of publicity, even for his print books. He needs to go online, buy an ad on Facebook, build a Twitter following, maybe even start a blog. These might seem like frivolous avenues to someone who has been published traditionally, who has had all that press attention and the publishers' help, but direct author-to-reader advertising/publicity is, I believe, a big part of the future.
Thank you to the five of you who still read my blog, and I hope you have an excellent Sunday. If you find yourself bored, I can think of a very pleasant way to spend your afternoon... perhaps reading a short ebook?
Subscribe via email in the sidebar to get direct emails, right in your inbox, every time I post!
I wasn't expecting it, but I felt a rush of elation when I saw my book's page up on Amazon. Sure, I just slapped it up there, and it's not even a real book, just short stories... but I could suddenly taste authorhood. Not just being a writer, but potentially being read. And it tasted good.
So that got me thinking about self-publishing. Some say that ebooks will replace physical books in the next 20 years, that self-publishing is the way of the future, and that traditional publishers are dinosaurs. Now, as much as I enjoy envisioning Penguin as a giant t-rex stomping around New York, I have to say that I still think traditional publishing is very relevant, still putting up a good fight, and I don't think physical books are going anywhere. So what are the pros and cons of self-publishing? I did some research, and also was born smart, and this is what I came up with:
Pros:
1. No editors telling you what to do. You have free reign over your storyline and prose.
2. More royalties. Comparing the percent that you get between traditional publishing and online self-publishing, you get a bigger slice of the pie. If you're distributing the ebook through Amazon or another online seller, they do take a chunk of the selling price, but it's a much smaller chunk than a traditional publisher takes.
3. You get to decide on your own title, choose your own cover, and do all your own press! You can be as creative as you want, come up with your own slogans and target audience.
4. No waiting for approval, no possibility of rejection, no long nights scouring agent listings or crafting query letters, no waiting years to see your book in print. You just write it and publish it. Boom boom.
Cons:
1. No professional editor to tell you how to improve your book or point out the 37 times you misspelled "tumescent." Unless you hire a professional editor to proofread your book, you are the only one standing between your mistakes and the world.
2. It may be a bigger slice of the pie, but it's going to be a smaller pie. Say your book publishes traditionally for $18.99 in hardcover, and you sell 10,000 copies, and you only get $1 per copy. Sure, that's a small percentage, but it's still a respectable 10 grand in your pocket. An ebook sells for usually between $0.99-$3.99, minus Amazon's cut, you're looking at between 30 and 60 cents per book... and it's going to sell a lot less copies, unless you are a marketing genius or are willing to pour a lot of money into advertising online (which you should do, by the way, but more on that later.) That's because the bigger cut that the traditional publishers take goes toward advertising your book, marketing it, and sending you on book tours. Publishers have media contacts and can get you interviews and reviews. Unless you have a substantial media network, you will be at a disadvantage here.
3. You have to decide on your own title and risk it being terrible. You have to design your own cover, and risk it looking like this:
You have to come up with your own marketing strategy, and your own money to put that in place. You have to figure out things like target audience (although you probably ought to know that anyway) and demographics and how much is too much to pay for an add or a review. It's money out of your pocket with no guarantee of a return.
4. No physical copies of your book (unless you order some through a printing website--more money out of your pocket). No bookstores with your book in the front window. No worn library copies of your book.
5. The haters. There will always be people who think self-publishing is a bit of a copt-out, and I can't lie... I'm one of them (unless you fit the profile of someone who should self-publish, below). The thing about all that waiting and stressing and crying and tearing of hair and collecting rejection letters is that it's the gauntlet writers have been running for years. It unites us in misery. And at the end of it, when you finally, finally get that yes, then it means something. You have passed the test, you have received Approval, your right to write has been validated. Of course, then it's a whole new cycle of fear, failure, rejection and misery when your book doesn't actually sell and the critics tank it, but hey. You got published!
When self-publishing is your best bet:
All of the above aside, however, there are certain times when self-publishing is definitely the best idea. You should at least consider self-publishing if:
- Your book is too unconventional for traditional publishing. This was the case for the Fifty Shades of Grey book--to risque and weird for most traditional publishers, and also based on fan fiction. It had to gain popularity with people before the publishers would believe it would sell.
- You already have a large following guaranteed to read and publicize your book. This might work if you are a successful youtuber or blogger. (And if you are a successful blogger who is reading this for some unknown reason, could you tell me how you did it? My last post got 5 views. And that was a high point.) If you already have an online presence, then your marketing is largely built-in, and you're good to go.
- You don't care that much about the book, and just want to have something up, perhaps as a potential stepping stone to getting your real baby published. This can be a double-edged sword, though... if your ebook sells two copies and gets three negative reviews, probably don't mention it in your query letters.
- You're a better marketer than you are a writer. I'm sorry, but in successful self-published ebooks, I see a definite trend: people-pleasing cheap thrills, plots designed to excite more that intrigue, and prose so thin it cracks right under your feet and sends you plummeting down into the icy waters of sensationalism. The truth is that people don't go browsing the $0.99 section of Amazon ebooks for high literature. They're looking for something light, something fun, something cheap to put on their Kindle and take to Mexico for their four-day weekend. If you write this kind of stuff, you should do just fine with self-publishing.
- You've tried everything else, you can't get an agent or publisher, you're about ready to douse yourself and your manuscript in gasoline, and it's self-publish or shove the book in some deep dusty corner of your hard-drive and never think about it again.
While I still aspire to be traditionally published, there's a good chance I'll be self-publishing more things, because A. it's fun and B. it's free and C. it's a way to get my name out there a little more. I think traditional publishing is far from dead, but I also think that the publishers need to re-think their model a little and integrate the new ways of doing things. One great example of innovation is HarperCollins' Authonomy, where prospective authors put their books on the site, other members review them, and the top-voted books get looked at by the editors. Basically, they've turned the dreaded "slush-pile" into a social networking site, and they've gotten bored web-surfers to do the job normally done by grumpy college interns--genius!
One reason I probably won't do very well as a self-published author, or getting published through a site like Authonomy, is that I don't really have mass appeal. I think once people give my writing a chance, they'll enjoy it, but I certainly don't have the flash and pizazz of "Nipples! The Exploding Sewer Plant Hooker Story," and I don't want to. I think I'll have better luck with a few grumpy, nerdy editors than I will with the people in general, because I know I have one thing in common with editors: I love words, I love books, and I love good stories (and conversely, I hate misspelled or misplaced words, I hate ugly books, and I hate stupid/boring/trite/illogical/derivative stories). I'm certainly not saying my writing is High Literature (HAHAHAHAHAHA no), but it's not exactly "Fifty More Shades of Grey: The Illustrated Edition (Now Featuring Even More Spankings)" either.
A word of caution: the one way you can't (or, at least really really shouldn't) go about this is to go half and half. The things the poor author in this article are complaining about are not actually the weaknesses of self-publishing, but rather his failure to convert to the new paradigm. He's taking one element of the new way of doing things--self-published e-book--and trying to apply all the old-school publishing/publicity standards to it--newspaper reviews, radio interviews. Now, someone clearly forgot to tell the dear Mr. Heller that, um, hello? Nobody reads newspapers anymore! He shouldn't be looking to those types of publicity, even for his print books. He needs to go online, buy an ad on Facebook, build a Twitter following, maybe even start a blog. These might seem like frivolous avenues to someone who has been published traditionally, who has had all that press attention and the publishers' help, but direct author-to-reader advertising/publicity is, I believe, a big part of the future.
Thank you to the five of you who still read my blog, and I hope you have an excellent Sunday. If you find yourself bored, I can think of a very pleasant way to spend your afternoon... perhaps reading a short ebook?
Subscribe via email in the sidebar to get direct emails, right in your inbox, every time I post!
Comments
Post a Comment