Psychological advantage in showing POD book to publisher?

[JohnJStephens]

As a newbie, is POD useful as a way of illustrating how something might appear as a real book? I have no intention of following this route, but I am curious.

Now I know that the publishers/agents only wish to see the plain double-spaced, wide margin loose-leaf manuscript. The manuscript in POD form does not interest them at all, I have learned, because this only gets the way of their judgement in assessing the manuscript in terms of marketability.

I can relate to this 100% in that double-spaced, wide margin, loose-leaf pages are easy to read and annotate. But doesn't this ignore the psychological factors that apply when assessing a book? Is it REALLY possible to form a complete assessment of a book from the manuscript, without holding it in book form as well?

Now even though most people will reply 'yes, they can!' because publishers and agents are experts, I still have a few niggling doubts. Not that these are important. I am, after all, a newbie + 10 days. I cannot believe that it was only 10 days ago that I was in the happy state of never having heard of Publish America!

Maybe an answer to this question lies with those authors who had their manuscripts accepted after going the POD route? How many (if any) had their manuscripts became 'acceptable' after going POD, but not before?

I would also have thought that POD print runs would be useful to agents/publishers when it comes to assessing manuscripts. Why, for example, don't they employ their own pool of beta readers to read the manuscript? If these people are representative, in some way, of the reading public, do they not need to read the manuscript in book form, for their feedback to be realistic?

Just a few thoughts and questions from someone who is VERY new to the book publishing process...

[Jamesaritchie]

You don't have to be an expert to tell whether or not a manuscript will become a good book. If anything, seeing something in POD form is a huge psychological disadvantage.

In fact, the reverse is true, in that it's much easier to see what's wrong with a book while it's still in manuscript form. And certainly a heck of a lot easier to fix it. Seeing the flaws is at least as important as seeing the promise, and being distracted by all the elements of a finished book in any form would be much too distracting.

Now, some agents and publishers do have a pool of beta readers. I won't go near one. Either an agent or an editor can tell or they can't, and if they can't they're in the wrong business.

But, no, seeing something in book form is a disadvantage, not an advantage. And proportionally speaking, a minuscule number of books have gone from POD to mainstream.

[Julie Worth]

I can relate to this 100% in that double-spaced, wide margin, loose-leaf pages are easy to read and annotate. But doesn't this ignore the psychological factors that apply when assessing a book? Is it REALLY possible to form a complete assessment of a book from the manuscript, without holding it in book form as well?


Good post, John. I’ve used POD paperbacks for submissions and I’ve never gotten a complaint. Quite the opposite, I’ve gotten complements. If trade paperbacks were difficult to read, then you’d expect they’d be difficult to market to the reading public, but no, they sell very well. And in my experience, beta readers much prefer a paperback to a 500 page ms, even when they’re adding annotations. So, can editors and agents be that different from regular people? Anyway, don’t they already look at printed books from time to time? Don’t they assess books already in print? Of course they do! That said, I would never send anyone a paperback when they’ve expressed rigid requirements as to format. And I would never send one with PA’s logo on it. Or any logo. The books I send have none at all, and often are personalized submissions with a letter to the agent or editor printed on the back.

[Jamesaritchie]

That said, I would never send anyone a paperback when they’ve expressed rigid requirements as to format.


I think this is the key. If an editor doesn't mind a paperback, then send one. But in all honesty, I don't know a single editor at a pubishing house of any size who wants to see anything other than a manuscript.

If a writer sent me a POD instead of a manuscript, I wouldn't even respond, and I certainly wouldn't read it. It would hit file thirteen so fast and hard you could hear it for miles.

But if the editor doesn't mind, that's another story. Just make absolutely sure the editor doesn't mind, or all you'll get is a very polite, and sometimes very sweet, rejection. Editors seem to reserve the strongest praise for things they don't actually read.

[Avalon]

For what it's worth, I worked in book production for 18 years and have been a freelance copyeditor for several years now. I can look at a manuscript and visualize it in pages without so much as a flicker of effort. Completely reflexive. Having to edit a manuscript on lettuce leaves would be annoying, but it would have no effect on visualization of the final product. I'd even know how many pages the final book would be (once I did a little basic math regarding characters per lettuce leaf). It might make me think a little differently about the /writer/, but the words stand (or fall) alone.

As a beta reader, though... hmmm. I think it would be easier for me to beta read a printed and bound book. However, not having a printed and bound book would not stop me from beta reading for someone.

My two cents only. Your mileage may vary.

[Aconite]

Printing your manuscript in TNR, left- and right-margin justified, single-spaced, also makes it look nice. Beta readers may praise you for the look of the thing; it does look more book-like. Editors receiving such a manuscript groan, "Oh, God, another clueless newbie."

My vote would be, stick with the standard manuscript instead of a POD book. It's what the pros do.

[Julie Worth]

If a writer sent me a POD instead of a manuscript, I wouldn't even respond, and I certainly wouldn't read it. It would hit file thirteen so fast and hard you could hear it for miles.

I assume you're not actually an editor? In any case, what if you received a paperback and a manuscript in regular format? Surely you would not hold it against the author in that case, and you might even appreciate the convenience of reading a paperback. And what about the New York editor who rides the subway. Having nothing else handy, she might pocket your book and read that.

Or so goes my fantasy.

[Jamesaritchie]

I assume you're not actually an editor? In any case, what if you received a paperback and a manuscript in regular format? Surely you would not hold it against the author in that case, and you might even appreciate the convenience of reading a paperback. And what about the New York editor who rides the subway. Having nothing else handy, she might pocket your book and read that.

Or so goes my fantasy.

I'm a part-time editor now, working whenever someone gets behind and calls, and have been a full-time editor. I've also worked for a few editors, and agents, and probably will again. I don't consider a paperback a convenience, but only one more thing I don't need. It's really double the work, not a convenience. If I'm reading a manuscript while commuting, I can mark it up as I go. If I do this with a book, which is nearly impossible, I then have to transfer everything I do to the manuscript. And in truth, trying to mark up a book really is a pain in the you know what.

Of course, if I don't like what I'm reading, be it manuscript or paperback, it doesn't matter. I'll read two or three or five pages and stop, never to read again. But if I do really like what I'm reading, I need to be able to make notes on the pages, to mark up the lines, etc. A paperback is useless for this.

So if a writer sent both a paperback and a manuscript, the paperback gets tossed. I don't need it, don't want it, can't use it.

And I've yet to meet an editor who had nothing else handy for a commute. Generally, what you have on a commute of any kind is far too much to read, far too much to edit. No editor I know ever goes home empty-handed. They take home enough work to keep them up till midnight.

If I wanted two sources for a manuscript, neither would be a paperback. The things are a pain in the butt. But if I did want two sources, one would be a paper manuscript in proper format, and the other would be a CD with the manuscript on it in exactly the same format. A paperback may be easier to read than a laptop, but a laptop, with a properly formatted manuscript on it, is far easier to work with than a paperback, even when commuting.

I've never done this with novels, but I did once work at a magazine where writers were always asked to send both a paper manuscript and a CD with the manuscript on it in the same format, and it worked out pretty well.

There's simply zero need for a paperback that I can see. It's more work, more bother, not what I need or want, and sure as heck NOT what I ask for. And when an editor doesn't ask, don't send. Editors ask for what they want, and if they don't ask, it means they don't want it.

As a writer and as an editor, one change in formatting I'd really like to see is line numbering. This wasn't possible in typewriter days, but it's a click of a button now. I've found line numbering really speed things up when editor/writer are talking on the phone about a manuscript, and when you're editing a manuscript you have in both paper and electronic format.

Page numbers are good, but you still often have to count down the lines. I haven't talked to any other editors about this, so maybe it's just me, but I'd love to see that change in manuscript format.

[maestrowork]

Is it REALLY possible to form a complete assessment of a book from the manuscript, without holding it in book form as well?


But that's the thing, they don't want to see it in book form. They want to simply focus on the words themselves, and not the layout, fonts, etc. etc. Just the words. That's why we have ms. standards, so everyone's ms. would look the same, so the agents or editors can simply focus on the words. They don't want to read a book (they read plenty of books already, I am sure). They want to read what you have to say in those typed words.

For a beta though, a bound book would be wonderful.

[Julie Worth]

Scribbles note: No paperbacks to James Ritchie!

[banjo]

It seems to me that if you can produce a POD, you can certainly produce a word processor manuscript with much less effort. I would submit my work in the format requested.

If you just wanted to see how your work will look as a book, you could print out a bound galley at less cost than printing a single POD copy. On the otherhand, if you plan to manage, market and sell your own product POD seems to be the way to go. You could always test the market waters with a few galleys or POD copies and it you get the desired results and want to go mainstream, you could still submit to a publisher or agent. IMHO

[Monet]

I'm with James on this one. Another major thing to consider is that most won't read a self-published or vanity book. If they get a 'paperback' sent instead of a manuscript, to me, that is just saying it is already self-published and I'd deep six it without a thought. They aren't going to analyze it and try to determine if it is just a 'copy' of a manuscript or if it is self-published. They don't have the time.




Matter of fact, if you have it made into book form, isn't that actually self-publishing even if you don't sell a copy or put a ISBN on it?

[maestrowork]

Matter of fact, if you have it made into book form, isn't that actually self-publishing even if you don't sell on copy or put a ISBN on it?

Not necessarily. It's no different than you going to Kinkos. I don't think it's considered "published" unless you start marketing/distributing it? I will leave this for the lawyers.

[Aconite]

Hi, banjo. Welcome.

You could always test the market waters with a few galleys or POD copies and it you get the desired results and want to go mainstream, you could still submit to a publisher or agent.
The problem with that plan is that once you've tested the market waters that way, you've self-published. Getting commercial publishers to look at a self-published book is a lot harder than getting them to look at a manuscript (plus, there's the headache of trying to market a self-pubbed book in the first place). If your goal is to publish with a commercial publisher, better to go that route from the start, if you can.

[banjo]

What is wrong with going the POD route from the outset? Bypassing the querries, the rejections, the two year wait to get you work published? If you have a good book, good marketing plan, a known and adequate market available, you should be able to do just fine.

It seems to me the biggest advantage of going mainstream is their distribution system. If writers manage to crack that nut, what do we need them for?

[maestrowork]

If you have a good book, good marketing plan, a known and adequate market available, you should be able to do just fine.

Without going through the editorial process, how do you know it's a good book with a good market? People are in publishing business for a reason...

Everyone thinks their book is wonderful...

It seems to me the biggest advantage of going mainstream is their distribution system. If writers manage to crack that nut, what do we need them for?

And how do you think a self-pubbed writer could crack that nut?

[Aconite]

What is wrong with going the POD route from the outset? Bypassing the querries, the rejections, the two year wait to get you work published? If you have a good book, good marketing plan, a known and adequate market available, you should be able to do just fine.
Sure, IF all of those things are real and in place and everything goes as you suspect. But notice the very small number of authors who have managed it. And realize that for POD self-pubbing, "success" is usually defined as "got picked up by a commercial publisher."

Then there's the issue of scale. For a self-pubbed POD to sell as many as 5,000 copies is a great achievement. For a commercially published novel to sell only 5,000 copies is a disaster. If you want to reach the greatest number of readers, you need to go with the commercial publishers. If your target market is narrowly defined and specialized--niche--you may do all right as a self-pubbed POD, but consider your definition of "all right."

It seems to me the biggest advantage of going mainstream is their distribution system. If writers manage to crack that nut, what do we need them for?
Their expertise in editing, their marketing skills, their publicity departments, their economies of scale, their legal departments, their sales forces....

[banjo]

Of course I agree you need a good editor, perhaps more than one and you choose whether or not you follow their advice. But in either case you tighten up your book until it is very good book. I'm assuming you have taken the time to learn your writecraft well, before you write the book.

You print up a few galleys and distribute them and pay attention to what your readers think. And I'm not talking about your friends and family. You run your work past a few writers workshops and readers clubs, and take note of their reaction.

If it looks good at this point, you could set up some inimate book signings, perhaps in intimate settings such as a private home. You visit your local small bookstores and ask them to carry your book and arrange for a signing there. You contact your local libraries and offer to give readings to get the word out.

If you become your book's best salesman, which you'll have to do even in the mainstream publishing world. You approach the venture as an entrepreneur, you should be able to sell quite a few copies. And better yet, you'll get to keep the lion share of the proceeds, which will in turn defray the cost of printing more copies.

I'm not saying this is the only way to go, but I think it is a very good option. And if nobody thinks your book is good enough to buy, go back to the drawing board and perfect your craft.

However this way you would not have wasted the time sending querries and awaiting responses. Nor would you have wasted that long period from the time the publisher accepts your work, to the time he actually puts in on the street. Also you maintain editorial control of your work, you retain all of the rights, and you wouldn't be sitting on your hands while you hope the publisher puts an adequate marketing budget behind your book, which he may not.

I could be wrong, but this seems a more proactive approach given the technological advances that make self-publishing a more productive possibility today, than it has been in the past.

And if a publisher is a straight shooter, why wouldn't he consider distributing a book whose market you've effectively tested with good results?

[maestrowork]

There are many paths to success.

Always be prepared for failures.

[banjo]

Aconite


Okay, say you sell only 5,000 copies. At $20.00 a pop that is $100,000. Say you production costs amount to 50%. You walk away with $50,000.

On the other hand, say you go the mainstream route, where you might get 5% of the cover if that. You'd have to sell $1,000,000 wort of books to equal that $50,000.

I'm sure we can sell 5,000 copies in a year, minimun, if our book has any redeeming virtue at all. And since the average mainstream book doesn't hit the market for two years, we've got two advance years of sales to boot.

As a unknown novelists about to publish his first book, this seems like the way to get out ther with a bang if my book is good. Talk about creating a "BUZZ". If it sells well for me, I'm sure some mainstream press will find me. And if a sudio becomes interested, I still have all the rights to sell them!

As to your second point: I don't think most publishers have a much better record than you and I, if we write a good book. My understanding is, less than 5% of the books they publish, support their business. I think it is significantly less than 5%.

Yet from what I read in Writers Market, they usually only give pennies as an advance to new writers. And since they are as professional as you indicate, they should certainly know a winner once they read it. Do you think as a new writer they'll pay you and advance that is worthy of and outstanding first novel? Frankly I doubt it.

[banjo]

Maestrowork

Your advice is sound and I shall heed it. Having said that, I'm going to give it a try and test the waters.

I have a lot of books in me, and if the first one doesn't do what I want , I'll wait for the second or the third one. But if we write because we love it, what else are we going to do?

[Aconite]

If you become your book's best salesman, which you'll have to do even in the mainstream publishing world.
arrrghhh!!!!!!!!!! Not this one again! This myth won't die!

Commercially published authors are not expected to peddle their own books. You are expected to assist with publicity--show up at booksignings, participate in readings if you enjoy doing so--but it is NOT your responsibility to market the book. You , as an author, cannot possibly do as much as the markeing and publicity departments of your publisher can do for your book. Marketing makes the difference between whether your book makes money or loses money, and there is no way a publisher is going to leave it in the hands of an amateur. Publishers have full-time professional marketing and publicity departments for a reason.

You approach the venture as an entrepreneur, you should be able to sell quite a few copies. And better yet, you'll get to keep the lion share of the proceeds, which will in turn defray the cost of printing more copies.
If it worked this way in real life, lots of authors would be doing it. They're not.

However this way you would not have wasted the time sending querries and awaiting responses.
No, you've spent it peddling your book, instead. While you're waiting for responses, you should be writing your next book. While you're busy selling your first book, you're not writing.

Nor would you have wasted that long period from the time the publisher accepts your work, to the time he actually puts in on the street.
That "wasted" time is going into such trivial things as editing, copyediting, and proofreading your book, having original cover art designed, sending out advance review copies, putting your book on advance order forms, and sending the sales kit around with reps. All of those things will greatly affect your sales.

Also you maintain editorial control of your work, you retain all of the rights,
Vanity publishers are very fond of convincing people that commercial publishers snatch your book out of your hands and take all the rights. Editors work with you to improve your book, and unless you're written work for hire, publishers don't take all rights. (I should say, commercial publishers don't. I know at least one vanity publisher that does.)

and you wouldn't be sitting on your hands while you hope the publisher puts an adequate marketing budget behind your book, which he may not.
Given that the publisher stands to lose money if your book flops, what's their motivation to inadequately fund the marketing? And how are you going to market your own book? Out of your own pocket? Publishers' marketing people know how to get the most bang for every buck, and they have avenues open to them that you don't.

New authors think "marketing" and "publicity" are ads in magazines and author tours and cardboard dumps at the front of the store--the things publishers don't do for every author. That's only part of the picture, and it's just the icing. Publishers market every book. Catalogues, advance covers, advance review copies, your book cover, your cover copy, jacket blurbs--this is all marketing, and it's provided for every book in a publisher's line.

I could be wrong, but this seems a more proactive approach given the technological advances that make self-publishing a more productive possibility today, than it has been in the past.
It make the parts that rely on technology more feasible, but nothing else.

And if a publisher is a straight shooter, why wouldn't he consider distributing a book whose market you've effectively tested with good results?
First, because publishers aren't distributors.

Second, because whatever number you've sold is a number that will have to be subtracted from projected sales when the publisher calculates them. If you manage to sell 5,000 copies (which would be really amazing--most PODs sell under 100 copies) and projected total sales for your book are 10,000, the publisher can only sell 5,000 more--which, in commercial publishing, is a disasterously low number. They'd lose money on the book.

Third, a publisher will consider picking up a successful self-published book, if sales projections are favorable. But it's a hell of a lot more work to go that route than to just submit your manuscript to them in the first place.

[maestrowork]

Banjo, your figures are flawed.

Okay, say you sell only 5,000 copies. At $20.00 a pop that is $100,000. Say you production costs amount to 50%. You walk away with $50,000.

First of all, no one is going to pay $20 for a paperback. Try $16. Then you have to give discounts to bookstores (if you ever get them in the stores) or online outlets (at least 20%), unless you sell them directly from the trunk of your car (which could happen). What about marketing cost. Remember, if you self-pub, you will have to do EVERYTHING on your own, out of your own pocket.

And if you fail, do you have $50,000 to throw away?




On the other hand, say you go the mainstream route, where you might get 5% of the cover if that. You'd have to sell $1,000,000 wort of books to equal that $50,000.

The standard royalty is 10-15% for paperback, a little less for mass market.

I'm sure we can sell 5,000 copies in a year, minimum, if our book has any redeeming virtue at all.

That's a little optimistic, even considering the best marketing plan ONE person could work out. But for argument's sake, I'll make that assumption, that you could sell 5000 copies a year...


And since the average mainstream book doesn't hit the market for two years, we've got two advance years of sales to boot.

True. But you forget that you need upfront cost. If you go tradition, you spend $0.00. If you self-pub, you will have to pay for editing, design, printing, shipping, marketing, etc. So, using your example, you will need at least $50,000 up front for the first year (considering you print and sell 5000 copies), then use your profit for the next year... so it's pretty much a wash, too, until the end of the 2nd year...


If it sells well for me, I'm sure some mainstream press will find me. And if a sudio becomes interested, I still have all the rights to sell them!

And Oprah will come knocking! It's good to dream big, but it's also good to plant your feet firmly on the ground. Yes, if the book sells 5000 or 10,000 copies in a year or two, a publisher might come knocking and you will become one of those "self-pub success stories." But the statistics is against you. The odds of a self-pub book (non niched fiction) breaking out is really abysmal.


less than 5% of the books they publish, support their business. I think it is significantly less than 5%.

That is certainly not true. If that's the case, the publisher is doing something very wrong and they should quit their business.


Yet from what I read in Writers Market, they usually only give pennies as an advance to new writers.

That's not true either. I'm a new writer with a small press and I got more than that for my advance.

[victoriastrauss]

It seems to me the biggest advantage of going mainstream is their distribution system. If writers manage to crack that nut, what do we need them for?Even publishers find this a hard nut to crack sometimes. For writers, it's waaaayyyy more difficult, even if they do true self-publishing. As for POD books...they aren't really distributed at all (at least in the industry sense of the term, which means "physically placed in bookstores"). They're simply made available to order.

The average POD-published book sells just over 100 copies.

- Victoria

[Aconite]

Okay, say you sell only 5,000 copies.
You seem to have misunderstood my point. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that your self-published book, whatever it is, will sell AS MANY AS 5,000 copies. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that a commercially published book would sell that few.

At $20.00 a pop that is $100,000. Say you production costs amount to 50%. You walk away with $50,000.
If you can convince 5,000 people to spend $20 on an author they've never heard of, who has no distribution. And you're forgetting to factor in expenses other than production: marketing and publicity, the cost of your time and effort in selling and promoting the book, and so on.

On the other hand, say you go the mainstream route, where you might get 5% of the cover if that
I don't know what commercial publishers you've been looking at that offer only 5%, but that's a very low number.

I'm sure we can sell 5,000 copies in a year, minimun, if our book has any redeeming virtue at all.
*sigh* Everybody thinks they're different, and even though this model hasn't worked for the majority of people who've tried it, it will work for them. Tell me, how many self-published books do you have onyour bookshelves, compared to commercially published ones? Why do you assume your self-published book will be different, and people will buy it?

And if a sudio becomes interested, I still have all the rights to sell them!
See my above post re: rights.

As to your second point: I don't think most publishers have a much better record than you and I, if we write a good book. My understanding is, less than 5% of the books they publish, support their business. I think it is significantly less than 5%.
Publishers know that not every book is going to turn a profit. For example, publishers often take on new genre writers expecting them to start making money for the publisher by their third book. They consider it an investment. And sometimes books flop. With a commercial press, you get your contracted advance regardless of how the book does, plus royalties if the book earns out your advance. If you're self-publishing, if you lose money, it comes out of your pocket.

Yet from what I read in Writers Market, they usually only give pennies as an advance to new writers.
You might be surprised at how many pennies. See http://www.justinelarbalestier.com/Musings/Musings2004/firstnoveladvances.htm and http://www.tobiasbuckell.com/archives/001423.html, as well as some of the trade publications that list sales.

Do you think as a new writer they'll pay you and advance that is worthy of and outstanding first novel? Frankly I doubt it.
Why shouldn't they? If it's outstanding, they know they'll have to offer me a good advance or I can take it elsewhere. The real question is, of course, is it as good as I think it is?

[banjo]

No need to get excited, we're just talking here.

A close friend and fellow new writer, released his first novel barely a month ago. He's sold over 500 POD copies to date and he's just gotten his book into Barnes and Noble. I'm not sure that giving his name and the book title here wouldn't be considered selling, and I don't wish to violate the board's rules. I'll recheck the rules. But his second book in the series is already written and he's currently writing the third. He's also written a sitcom and a screen play.

On the strength of reading his first work he's already been offered to rewrite the script on a small independent movie. He also generated good interest at the recent Pitch Fest, held locally within the past month. We think he's on his way.

In any case, instead of waiting around a couple of years for a publisher's stamp of approval, he hit the bricks himself. And both he and I believe that is the way to go. He's a very good writer and the first two books are page turners.

I realize that figures don't lie, but liars can figure. A good book is a good book and it will find its own way on its own merits. I've bought and tried to read many mainstream books, some by authors whose work I've enjoyed in the past, that stunk so bad I wouldn't waste my time to finish.

There are many reasons to go the POD route, besides the possibility that the book isn't really that good. I'm sure you can think of a few on your own so I will not bore you any more.

As far as the rest of you comments...we will see.

[Aconite]

No need to get excited, we're just talking here.
Who's getting excited? I just see writers writing.

I'm not sure that giving his name and the book title here wouldn't be considered selling, and I don't wish to violate the board's rules.
Nah, that'd be fine.

But his second book in the series is already written and he's currently writing the third.
Good on him!

He's also written a sitcom and a screen play.
Cool. Has he sold them?

He also generated good interest at the recent Pitch Fest, held locally within the past month. We think he's on his way.
Unless interest translates to sales, though, it's not very helpful. He sounds like he's having a good time, though, and if that's what he's interested in, then maybe he made the right choice for himself.

I realize that figures don't lie, but liars can figure.
Perhaps you didn't mean to imply that anyone here was lying.

As far as the rest of you comments...we will see.
Yep. Good luck to you and your friend.

[Torgo]

Well... we picked up a self-published book a while back. It did OK. I do get POD books in the slush now and again and can't say I mind it too much, although it doesn't confer any sort of advantage or disadvantage, I'd say. A book with a PublishAmerica imprint would make my hackles rise, obviously.

[victoriastrauss]

A close friend and fellow new writer, released his first novel barely a month ago. He's sold over 500 POD copies to date and he's just gotten his book into Barnes and Noble.Those are pretty good initial sales figures for a POD book. Hope that volume keeps up for him.

When you say Barnes and Noble, do you mean the book is stocked nationally? Or at individual stores?

I too would be interested in knowing your friend's name and the title of his book. I don't think it would violate any board rules.

In any case, instead of waiting around a couple of years for a publisher's stamp of approval, he hit the bricks himself. And both he and I believe that is the way to go. He's a very good writer and the first two books are page turners.If this is true, it's a shame. Instead of selling 500 copies in the first month of release, he would have sold thousands.

- Victoria

[brinkett]

You seem to have misunderstood my point. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that your self-published book, whatever it is, will sell AS MANY AS 5,000 copies. It's very, very, very, very unlikely that a commercially published book would sell that few.

Depends what you mean by commercially published. If you're including small presses, then note that some small presses do initial print runs of 1000-2000 copies, and not all books will get a second printing. Flip through a recent edition of Writer's Market to get an idea of the average print run for a small press. I agree that self-published fiction will likely sell less than commercially published fiction. I'm just pointing out that it isn't at all unusual for a commercially published book to sell less than 5000 copies.

[Aconite]

Depends what you mean by commercially published. If you're including small presses, then note that some small presses do initial print runs of 1000-2000 copies, and not all books will get a second printing.
Okay, fair enough, if we're including small presses. I think we can agree to eliminate those titles that were printed as limited editions, though, and talk about those intended for wide distribution.

[brinkett]

Okay, fair enough, if we're including small presses. I think we can agree to eliminate those titles that were printed as limited editions, though, and talk about those intended for wide distribution.
I was talking about those intended for wide distribution by small presses. Many small presses run on a shoestring--they can't afford print runs of thousands.

[Aconite]

I was talking about those intended for wide distribution by small presses. Many small presses run on a shoestring--they can't afford print runs of thousands.
We'll have to agree to disagree that 1-2,000 copies could constitute wide distribution. I'd consider that pretty limited.

[brinkett]

What I meant is that their normal print run is low--it's not low because they're printing a limited edition. As I said, flip through an edition of Writer's Market to get an idea.

[Aconite]

What I meant is that their normal print run is low--it's not low because they're printing a limited edition.
I meant I'd consider 1-2,000 copies limited distribution, even if the print run isn't intended as a limited edition.

[brinkett]

Okay, but given the number of presses that do print runs of lower than 5000, I think it's misleading to say that very, very, very, very few commercially published books sell less than 5000 copies, unless you qualify the statement a little. A lot of authors publish through small presses, and their expectations should be realistic, just like those of self-published authors.

[Aconite]

Correction noted. "Very, very, very, very few commercially published books intended for what I, but not brinkett, would consider 'wide distribution' sell as few as 5,000 copies." How's that? ;)

[banjo]

To Aconite

To be clear, my use of the qoute, "Figures don't lie, but liars can figure." was in support of my belief that statistics, properly configured, can be use to support any position.


To all

I did mislabled digital printing as POD. I was referring to Digital Printing all along. This is how I was proposing to print my books, and self-publish them. This is also the vehicle that the author I previously discussed is using to produce his books.

The book is entitled, "Veil"
The author is Reginald Cook
Self-Published as Thunderhouse Press
ISBN 0-9771154-1-0

I appreciate the information you have all provided. May I assume that POD or Digital Printing are essential interchangable in your discussions of Self-Publishing?

[brinkett]

Correction noted. "Very, very, very, very few commercially published books intended for what I, but not brinkett, would consider 'wide distribution' sell as few as 5,000 copies." How's that? ;)
I think it would be better not to throw out numbers and just say that most self-published fiction won't sell as well as commercially published fiction.

[Aconite]

To be clear, my use of the qoute, "Figures don't lie, but liars can figure." was in support of my belief that statistics, properly configured, can be use to support any position.
Thanks for the clarification.

I appreciate the information you have all provided. May I assume that POD or Digital Printing are essential interchangable in your discussions of Self-Publishing?
Not quite. Digital printing is a technology; Print on Demand is a business/sales model. (N.B. Some people--like Victoria--disagree with this, and say that, strictly speaking, POD is a technology. See her article for more information: http://www.sfwa.org/beware/printondemand.html.) With POD, books are printed as they're ordered. With digital printing, that isn't necessarily the case.

[Aconite]

I think it would be better not to throw out numbers and just say that most self-published fiction won't sell as well as commercially published fiction.
It's a true statement, but I think most would-be self-publishers are looking for some numbers to make it all real, and I would do the same, in their shoes. Maybe it would be better to talk about sales figures for small presses and major houses, compared to self-publishing?

[brinkett]

It's a true statement, but I think most would-be self-publishers are looking for some numbers to make it all real, and I would do the same, in their shoes. Maybe it would be better to talk about sales figures for small presses and major houses, compared to self-publishing?
Well, we already tell them that most self-published fiction will be lucky to sell 100 copies--Victoria did so right here in this thread. If that doesn't make them think twice, I don't know what will. But yes, if you're going to throw out numbers, make sure they're real.

I recently read an interview with the head of Penguin Canada--he said most novels don't sell more than 400-500 copies, that only the real superstars will sell more than 5000, and that he expects 20% of his list to carry the other 80%. I don't know if the rough proportions are the same for American publishers. To tell an author publishing into the Canadian market that their book will sell 5000 copies because it's commercially published would be dead wrong, and might be for other markets too.

For anyone interested:

http://sharifkhan.blogspot.com/2005/07/interview-with-publisher-of-penguin.html

[Aconite]

I recently read an interview with the head of Penguin Canada--he said most novels don't sell more than 400-500 copies, that only the real superstars will sell more than 5000,
He says, "Most novels sell only about 400 or 500 copies. If it’s a good seller it will sell 5000 copies if it won an award and got great reviews. It is only superstars that sell more...."

But later he says, "For a 10% royalty you will get $3.5 dollars on every copy sold. So what we will do, is advance the author, through his or her agent x amount of money, say $35,000 dollars because we expect to sell 5,000 or 6,000 hardback and 10,000 copies in paperback, so we figure its worth about $35,000." So he may be talking about hardcover sales only in his figures above.

[Aconite]

To get back to John's original post: POD-dy Mouth (http://girlondemand.blogspot.com) asked agents and publishers if someone with a POD copy should send it (as opposed to a manuscript). The short answers:

Agent One: No.
Agent Two: Maybe, but eventually you'll need a single-sided, double-spaced copy.
Agent Three: No.
Editor One: No.
Editor Two: Fiction, no. Nonfiction with a lot of charts or drawings, maybe.

[banjo]

Oh, by the way the book in my example is a 6x9 soft cover. And the true price is $19.95 I spoke to the author and in fact he has sold "just" under 500 copies in a little over a month.


Am I correct in assuming that he is already at the lever of average sales, self-published, in just over a month? If so that is most encouraging to me. I believe he will achieve the 5000 book mark, and never slow down. It really is a remarkable first effort.

[Aconite]

Are you by chance associated with a publishing house or literary agency? Please don't take offence, I'm just curious.
I'm not offended at all. My answer is, I wish. I'm not associated with any agency or publishing house. (If any of them would like to make me an offer of employment, they can PM me.) Nor do I have anything against self-publishing per se. I just think it's a really bad idea for most people, and that if they understood the details, they might come to the same conclusion.

It is not, however, in my best interests as a writer to unduly delay the publication of my work, because of the workload of the publisher.
If speed is your primary consideration, self-publishing may be right for you. If getting your book out to people to be read by many is, then self-publication isn't the way to go.

Even if I don't do as good a job at marking, cover design, jacket blurbs and the like, as a large house, I can perform adequately for the purpose.
I hope that's so. I honestly have no desire to see your book flop. I'd love it if, years from now, I could sit in a writers' conference somewhere and tell the story about that blockbuster self-published book and how I (*laughing root beer out my nose as I say this*) warned the author that self-publishing wouldn't get him far to general gales of laughter. What I'm afraid of, instead, is that you're going into this without a full understanding of what it involves, and with unrealistic expectations.

Nor is my work on the vanity level. And while I am not quite published yet, I prefer not to be confused with someone who cannot write. I've been told that I am very good, and of course I believe every word of it! (smile)
POD and other self-publishing has an image problem, unfortunately, and going that route means you'll have to overcome that to be taken seriously. Your book, which may be a work of brilliance, will be lumped together with the Buffy the Vampire Slayer fanfiction written by a 14-year-old who thinks grammar rules are SO last week and the rantings of a KKK member with a new theory of racial genetic inequality. That's a tough place to start from.

Now if I were offered an advance that I deemed worthy, a reasonable publication date and fair contract terms, I could be inticed. That seems unreasonable to some, but nothing less is acceptable to me. So I'll probably have to do it all myself. And that's okay.
What kinds of terms do you think are worthy? Are you familiar with standard publishing contracts and practices? Michelle Sagara, bless her heart, posted her first contract online (she has since become an established author), with discussions about the various clauses and provisions and such. It's in at least 12 parts; start here: http://www.livejournal.com/users/msagara/16534.html. It may be useful to you to know more about the details of commercial publication and POD before you make a decision.

Best of luck, truly, whatever decision you make.

[Julie Worth]

To get back to John's original post: POD-dy Mouth (http://girlondemand.blogspot.com/) asked agents and publishers if someone with a POD copy should send it (as opposed to a manuscript). The short answers:

Agent One: No.
Agent Two: Maybe, but eventually you'll need a single-sided, double-spaced copy.
Agent Three: No.
Editor One: No.
Editor Two: Fiction, no. Nonfiction with a lot of charts or drawings, maybe.

One of those agents (Agent Three) said: A paperback is good for a flight, but that's about it.

So that answers my question. You submit both ms and paperback, clearing stating that the paperback has not been published, and what happens? The paperback gets read when it's the most conveinent thing avaliable. And if you're the only one in line with a paperback, that gives you a leg up, doesn't it?

[victoriastrauss]

I recently read an interview with the head of Penguin Canada--he said most novels don't sell more than 400-500 copies, that only the real superstars will sell more than 5000, and that he expects 20% of his list to carry the other 80%. I don't know if the rough proportions are the same for American publishers.I'd suspect the proportions (20% carrying 80%) are similar, but the actual sales numbers he's giving have to be for the Canadian market, which is much, much smaller than the US market (or, based on those numbers, the UK market). Even so, I wonder--400-500 copies strikes me as incredibly low, even for a small publisher with limited print runs, let alone Penguin Canada, which is a division of a giant conglomerate.

- Victoria

[Aconite]

One of those agents said: A paperback is good for a flight, but that's about it.
And one of the other editors said, flatly, "Get real." Given the context, I think that to interpret the flight comment as a point in favor of sending a POD is a stretch.

[Julie Worth]

And one of the other editors said, flatly, "Get real." Given the context, I think that to interpret the flight comment as a point in favor of sending a POD is a stretch.

You’re missing my point. The agents were asked if they’d accept a paperback instead of the normal ms, and one said get real, one said he’d read it on a plane but he’d want the standard format later, and the third said basically the same as the second—he was open to looking at a paperback in the first instance, but he would eventually want the standard ms. So if you sent both in the first instance, you’d potentially have an advantage without pissing off anyone.

[brinkett]

I'd suspect the proportions (20% carrying 80%) are similar, but the actual sales numbers he's giving have to be for the Canadian market

Yes, he's talking Canadian sales only. And sadly, Canadians read quite a bit, apparently. Makes you wonder. Then again, not many of the books on my shelf are published by Penguin, now that I think about it.


Even so, I wonder--400-500 copies strikes me as incredibly low, even for a small publisher with limited print runs, let alone Penguin Canada, which is a division of a giant conglomerate.

Hmm... maybe he was talking about hardcover only, as Aconite suggested.

[victoriastrauss]

Nor is my work on the vanity level. And while I am not quite published yet, I prefer not to be confused with someone who cannot write. I've been told that I am very good, and of course I believe every word of it! (smile)Unfortunately, if you POD (or self-publish via digital printing), you will be confused with exactly that someone--or rather, the thousands of someones who've taken this route because their books weren't ready for prime time. This is known as the POD stigma, and it's very real.

Now if I were offered an advance that I deemed worthy, a reasonable publication date and fair contract terms, I could be inticed. That seems unreasonable to some, but nothing less is acceptable to me. So I'll probably have to do it all myself. And that's okay.The premise of the first two sentences doesn't match the logic of the last two. Why are you assuming that you couldn't get a decent advance and a good contract from a commercial publisher? What's unreasonable about that? You don't know unless you try. Give it a year. Then, if you still feel the commercial route is not for you, return to the idea of self-publishing.

It's often assumed that anyone who tries to turn writers from POD/self-publishing must be elitist, or technology-averse, or somehow threatened by the existence of different publishing methods. Nothing could be further from the truth. What bothers us is the idea of good books never getting the readership they deserve because the authors, whether from impatience or frustration or misconceptions about the commercial market, made a too-hasty decision to go the non-commercial route. If you're a talented writer with a marketable book, we'd like to see you succeed, and believe that you deserve better than the likely oblivion of POD.

- Victoria

[Aconite]

one said he’d read it on a plane but he’d want the standard format later
Actually, what he said was, "No. I want to be able to make notes and/or make copies. I want the version I can submit to my contacts with the houses. A paperback is good for a flight, but that's about it."

The operative word here being, "No."

[Julie Worth]

Actually, what he said was, "No. I want to be able to make notes and/or make copies. I want the version I can submit to my contacts with the houses. A paperback is good for a flight, but that's about it."

The operative word here being, "No."

Suit yourself.

[Aconite]

Suit yourself.
Hey, if you want to interpret something obviously meant as a dismissive comment by an agent who has just said "No, I don't want PODs" as circumstances under which an agent would read a POD, go right ahead.

[Tish Davidson]

Now if I were offered an advance that I deemed worthy, a reasonable publication date and fair contract terms, I could be inticed. That seems unreasonable to some, but nothing less is acceptable to me. So I'll probably have to do it all myself. And that's okay.


Sounds like you are hung up on getting a big advance. Remember that if you have a good book it will sell through its advance and you will get additional monies as royalties twice a year. It isn't like your advance is your only payment. If you believe your work is good, you would expect it to sell though and generate more income. Plus, earlier you mentioned retaining rights for film, etc. Normally the writer retains these rights when the book is sold to a print publisher. I'm not sure you really understand mainstream publishing contracts or what mainstream publishers do to prepare a book for publication and distribution. No where in your self-publication calculations did I see you account for the cost of publicity, which you will bear in self-publishing, but that the publisher will pay for in traditional publishing.

[Tish Davidson]

Suit yourself.



Why did you even bother to ask the question, since you are so determined to believe that submitting a POD paperback is a good thing? You seem bent on getting someone to tell you you are right. Well, you aren't. Submitting a POD paperback screams amateur. It is stupid, stupid, stupid, and if it doesn't piss editors and agents off, it is because they'll toss it instead of read it. But if you are so sure you are right, go ahead. Less competition to people who actually listen to the advice of people who know what they are talking about.

[Julie Worth]

Why did you even bother to ask the question, since you are so determined to believe that submitting a POD paperback is a good thing? You seem bent on getting someone to tell you you are right. Well, you aren't. Submitting a POD paperback screams amateur. It is stupid, stupid, stupid, and if it doesn't piss editors and agents off, it is because they'll toss it instead of read it. But if you are so sure you are right, go ahead. Less competition to people who actually listen to the advice of people who know what they are talking about.

Sheesh! Well, I must be a rank amateur then! In any case, this is a quote from an agent in a communication to me, for those with an open mind:


Nice little promo tool!
I haven't gotten to your ms yet, due to being very busy at the moment, but this handy reading copy will move you up in the pile!

Thanks again

[Tish Davidson]

Sheesh! Well, I must be a rank amateur then! In any case, this is a quote from an agent in a communication to me, for those with an open mind:


Nice little promo tool!
I haven't gotten to your ms yet, due to being very busy at the moment, but this handy reading copy will move you up in the pile!

Thanks again




Hope you check the agent out on Preditors and Editors before you sign anything.

[emeraldcite]

Play nice and be civil otherwise I'll shut this thread down.

Thank you in advance for your kind consideration and compliance with this announcement.


We're all heading up the same river in the long run.

[Aconite]

We're all heading up the same river in the long run.
Are we spawning? Nobody told me we'd be spawning. I have objections to spawning. And bears. I have objections to bears, too.

[MacAllister]

Are we spawning? Nobody told me we'd be spawning. I have objections to spawning. And bears. I have objections to bears, too.

Ha. City girl.

[Aconite]

Ha. City girl.
Ha back at ya. Cityfolk don't know enough about spawning or bears to know to object.

[MacAllister]

Cityfolk don't know enough about spawning or bears to know to object. Urm--okay. Ya got me, there.

[batgirl]

Yes, he's talking Canadian sales only. And sadly, Canadians read quite a bit, apparently. Makes you wonder. Then again, not many of the books on my shelf are published by Penguin, now that I think about it.


Yep, we read a lot, but Canada's population is tiny in comparison to the States or UK. So that has to be taken into account.
I do think his numbers are whacked, though. I tried to google up something more solid, and only found a Saturday Night article mentioning that Canadian sales figures are a closely guarded secret for the most part.
I have several Penguin titles, but pretty well all Penguin UK.
-Barbara