Self-publishing

"90% of Science Fiction is crap," (Wait for the outrage to subside) "then again, 90% of EVERYTHING is crap."

I may not have run a publishing company, I respect that. But I have done my homework.

Having worked in book publishing, I know anything marked 'short story', 'novella', 'sci fi', 'fantasy' or worst of all, 'poetry' is likely to be dumped staright into the bin.

Saying 90% is crap is far, far too kind.

Of the manuscripts sent to publishers, probably 99% of laugh-out-oud bad.
 
"90% of Science Fiction is crap," (Wait for the outrage to subside) "then again, 90% of EVERYTHING is crap."

I may not have run a publishing company, I respect that. But I have done my homework.

Having worked in book publishing, I know anything marked 'short story', 'novella', 'sci fi', 'fantasy' or worst of all, 'poetry' is likely to be dumped staright into the bin.

Saying 90% is crap is far, far too kind.

Of the manuscripts sent to publishers, probably 99% of laugh-out-oud bad.

Yup! And that's why we are going around you all. :)
 
BdBoop -

Sidestepping publishers won't make terribly books sell. It gets them out there for friends and family to buy, but a terrible book is still a terrible book, even in electronic format.

Publishers do not reject books purely because they lack literary merit - but because they lack sales potential.

I don't mean to be smashing peoples dreams here - I'm just trying tp put aross the reality of publishing.

Selling a book succesffuly is no easier than launching a band and setting out to conquer the world.
 
My nephew shopped a book for a year - and when he self-publishes that one, I will let you know. The book he did release is doing great. So: I'm sorry, but I just can no longer swallow the premise that you all should be the arbiters of what people need to have access to, i.e. what will, in your estimation, 'sell.'
 
Bd -

It's not about being an 'arbiter', it's about having an understanding of what works and what does not work.

It's not a 100% science, and of course some self-published books will find a niche market, and some way sell well. But based on the last ressearch I saw, around 95% do not.

At one stage, the average sale for self-published books (excluding academic books, which work better) was around 38 copies. Sales of over 100 were almost unknown.
 
Bd -

I don't recall a lot about the survey I saw, but I may try to find it. It was a couple of years ago now.

The conclusion was that people like academics often do well, because they can email colleagues around the world, or speak at seminars and reach a ready audience. Likewise, someone like a motivational speakers or TV host can basically market their own book.

But people selling fiction or memoirs....most sales will be to friends and family.
 
I guess there is more money in self-publishing.

Not for 99.999% there isn't.
Sturgeons law applies even to writers. 90% of all writers never see the light of day. Out of the rest, they have a chance, but that's all.

Think of it this way, what's the failure rate of new businesses? 75% 80%? Franchises I know can be even harder. In the creative fields, what's unemployment for actors in their field? 95%? Musicians have it a little better, but not by much. Artists? Dear gawd!

I got to interview an author once about the job career and as she put it, more people are in love with the IDEA of being a writer, than with the actual effort of BEING a writer.

So, this is not a surprise that so many don't make it. It's always been that way. Self publishing only makes it somewhat easier. Unfortunately, it lowered the bar for putting out crap too.
 
What cracks me up is Nicholas Sparks SUCKS. But who is on the best-seller list every time he farts? BTSOOM, but his publishers are making big bank, so more of the same it is!
 

Forum List

Back
Top