Welcome to AW, kevinkliu.
I'm going to offer a different perspective on the self-publishing debate.
Which particular self-publishing debate are you offering your different perspective on? This thread is meant to be about the benefits or otherwise of using Kindle Direct Publishing, not about self-publishing in general.
I published exclusively on Amazon (Createspace and KDP) and intentionally ignored B&N, libraries, Apple, Google Play, etc. etc.
So you chose to put all your eggs in one basket. Fair enough: it's your book. But why leave money on the table like that?
Here's why:
After spending all the hassle of producing both Nook and Kindle versions of a book, practical experience shows that
you make only 10% the sale on Nook as you would on Kindle.
Your wording doesn't actually make sense: I think what you're trying to convince us of is that sales on the Nook (why the Nook, specifically? what about all those other formats you refer to in your earlier paragraph?) amount to only ten per cent of sales on Kindle. Did I get that right?
If so, then you've got a problem: the discussion you've linked to doesn't prove the point you're trying to make. Out of the ten or so comments in that thread, only one person suggests that sales elsewhere equate to about ten per cent of Kindle sales (but that person doesn't provide any hard numbers): the rest suggest other proportions, or ask questions for themselves.
As for allowing only Amazon to carry your book online versus distributing to retail? Remember that even if your book gets carried at Barnes & Noble, they'll probably only stash a few copies somewhere on a bottom shelf because you're not a traditional publisher, who's paid significant sums for better book placement and promotion.
Most self-publishers whose books get carried by Barnes & Noble don't work with print editions: they e-publish, so their books won't get on any shelves at all in Barnes & Noble.
However, self publishers who do produce print editions and get them into Barnes & Noble (which is far harder than you probably realise) will find that their position on the shelves is not dictated by their publishing method: it's dictated by where their name falls in the alphabet. The paid-for locations are the front tables, end-caps and dump-bins. And you'll find that bookshops only have a couple of copies of most of the titles they carry, as there isn't enough shelf-space to fit many more in.
But, even a few sales count, right?
Hell, yes!
Yes, but not the way you think. When you offer your book outside Amazon's channels, you in fact make a few sales. But guess what? Every one of those sales takes away from your overall Amazon ranking.
You're suggesting that every time a book sells anywhere other than Amazon, the Amazon ranking for that book falls.
If that's true, explain to me, please, how Amazon knows that a copy has just sold at a bookshop in Northumberland, or in a supermarket in Sydney, or on eBay or some other website. It can't; therefore it can't be true that "every one of those sales takes away from your overall Amazon ranking".
You're also implying that people who buy books anywhere other than Amazon would have turned to Amazon to buy that same book if they had been unable to find it elsewhere. This is not the case.
At present, Amazon is the king of "related items" and impulse buys; having a good product ranking means tons of referrals from similar products. And getting your book into the top 20 of a category means that casual browsers are wayyy more likely to discover your book.
But most writers aren't going to get their books into the top twenty of any category, so restricting ones books to Amazon only in the hope of taking advantage of the "related items" thing is a little over-hopeful. Especially as it means missing out on sales in every other format.
How do I know this? I wrote a book and published it exclusively with Amazon. It's done better than I ever would have dreamed;
Congratulations! I remember the first time a book I'd written hit a major best-sellers list: it's a great feeling, isn't it?
a print ranking of 10,000 on Amazon equates to 10 sales/day or about $600 profit.
No, it doesn't.
While many people have offered such interpretations of Amazon's rankings I've yet to see one which is accurate in any way. It might have meant that for you: but it won't mean that in other genres, or for other books, or at other times. All a print ranking of 10,000 on Amazon equates to is that for a couple of moments, only 9,999 other books on Amazon sold more than yours did.
You can expect the kindle version to make roughly the same amount depending on your genre. Not bad for passive income.
No, you can't. You might have found this to be the case: but if you look at the self-publishing diaries that some of our members have been kind enough to keep here, you'll see that most of them sell far more e-books than print copies. And suggesting that selling books in any format is "passive income" is dismissive to our many members who work very hard to achieve their sales.
What about people who don't own kindles? First off, if you're using a POD, you're already offering a print version, so there's that option. Second off, Kindle offers apps nowadays for all kinds of devices. And third, I've had about a dozen folks email me directly over the last year complaining they can't get to my book and I simply email them a copy of the PDF and tell them to pay it forward
What about people who prefer to read books on their iPad, or their Nook, or any other dedicated e-reader? They can't use a Kindle app on that, they're unlikely to be able to read a PDF on their device, and if they want to read an e-book then a print edition is no substitute.
Looking forward to your spirited responses!
Yep.