[HN Gopher] Writing books remains a tough way to make a living
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Writing books remains a tough way to make a living
        
       Author : gone35
       Score  : 170 points
       Date   : 2024-01-01 06:37 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.publishersweekly.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.publishersweekly.com)
        
       | dannyw wrote:
       | Authors apparently earn cents of royalties for every physical
       | book purchased. That seems crazy.
       | 
       | I wouldn't mind paying $5 more for a book if >90% of it went to
       | the author.
        
         | mbork_pl wrote:
         | > Authors apparently earn cents of royalties for every physical
         | book purchased. That seems crazy.
         | 
         | Agreed, but it is (somewhat) justified by the sheer length of
         | the chain (printing house, distributors, bookstores etc.)
         | 
         | FWIW, I wrote and self-published a book on a 99% automated
         | platform (e-book only), and I get 80% royalties.
         | 
         | Another (anec)datapoint: I published a book (this time not
         | written by me) in a more "traditional" way (i.e., on paper).
         | The book is pretty niche, had 0 marketing expenses (we
         | basically only relied on word-of-mouth). We kept the costs low,
         | but not too low (we paid a bit for nice typesetting,
         | illustrations, good paper etc.). We did not even try to put it
         | in bookstores and only sold it via Internet (using an ebay-
         | style platform, not even a custom e-commerce solution; we
         | didn't even had a landing page with a our own domain!). This
         | allowed us to break even after a few months, which I think is
         | insane comparing to the "big book" (aka publishing industry).
        
           | Simon_ORourke wrote:
           | > FWIW, I wrote and self-published a book on a 99% automated
           | platform (e-book only), and I get 80% royalties.
           | 
           | Would you mind sharing which platform this is?
        
             | mbork_pl wrote:
             | Sure. While at that, let me also plug my book:
             | https://leanpub.com/hacking-your-way-emacs
        
               | pomian wrote:
               | Thanks for that link! That's very interesting. I am
               | editing two books for two authors at the present, both of
               | whom already published, in paper, and with Amazon I
               | believe. But this looks like a very interesting
               | publishing model. Especially for more technical books.
               | There are a few in progress that I know about. (Is emacs
               | something different than the apple computer?)
        
         | smugglerFlynn wrote:
         | Any book that is $5 more expensive than current market price
         | will instantly lose to thousands of competative cheaper books
         | where authors write about similar topics while agreeing to earn
         | peanuts.
         | 
         | You can try solving this by industry-wide regulations, but that
         | would make average price of books much higher, and will likely
         | steer readers to other medias, shift revenues to already
         | established writers, or both.
        
           | zer0tonin wrote:
           | Are books purchase really so price sensitive? It's not
           | exactly like you're buying potatoes
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I'm not sure it's a continuous supply-demand curve but you
             | get out of the "normal" discounted range--say above $15-and
             | people will really think twice.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | IMO, in the age of Kindle Unlimited, yes. I, myself, have a
             | very hard time justifying purchases over $6. The reason is
             | pretty simple, the higher priced books are not guaranteed
             | to be better, just written by a more widely recognized
             | author.
        
           | EA wrote:
           | OP should just donate $5 to his favorite writers.
        
           | ziddoap wrote:
           | > _Any book that is $5 more expensive than current market
           | price will instantly lose to thousands of competative cheaper
           | books where authors write about similar topics while agreeing
           | to earn peanuts._
           | 
           | I could see this being true for non-fiction, but for fiction?
           | I'm generally not looking at price, I'm looking at whether
           | the story seems interesting.
           | 
           | Two books can both be about space battles (or whatever your
           | topic of choice is), but one can seem extremely interesting
           | while the other doesn't. Similar topics doesn't really mean
           | much compared to everything else (writing style, characters,
           | etc.)
        
           | massysett wrote:
           | "You can try solving this by industry-wide regulations"
           | 
           | Also known as "price fixing".
        
         | jeffwass wrote:
         | A few years ago I met an author who was switching from self-pub
         | to traditional pub for one of his books (usually this is tough
         | to do, traditional publishers typically won't touch a book that
         | started off as self-published).
         | 
         | His take went from 70% on Amazon to just 7% w/ the traditional
         | publisher.
         | 
         | Of course the traditional publisher handles all marketing and
         | distribution, so hopefully the slimmer percentage of a much
         | bigger pie works out.
         | 
         | But I was amazed at how low the final percentage was.
        
         | ryanbigg wrote:
         | Absolutely! When I wrote for Manning, a print book that sold
         | for $45 netted me a huge $4.50 -- 90/10 split. Ebooks were
         | 50/50. Guess the print guys all gotta take their cut.
        
           | stubish wrote:
           | This was Science Fiction/Fantasy with major publishers early
           | to mid 2000s. The 50% ebook royalty dropped to I think 10%
           | not long after.
        
       | jimmyed wrote:
       | Another reason for this is the sheer amount of rubbish literature
       | that is being printed, specially in the category of "Young
       | Adult". There are endless streams of psychopath male leads and
       | damsel in distress characters, with predictable story lines and
       | pretentious dialogues.
        
         | dageshi wrote:
         | It's pulp. If you made it disappear the people reading it
         | wouldn't magically start reading "the good stuff", they'd move
         | onto something else suitably mindless in another medium.
        
         | QVVRP4nYz wrote:
         | > There are endless streams of psychopath male leads and damsel
         | in distress characters, with predictable story lines and
         | pretentious dialogues.
         | 
         | I mean - it sells. Is it readers fault if other authors write
         | unpopular stuff? "Royal Road" is my guilty pleasure. Almost
         | everything there conforms to that quoted scheme but even among
         | mountains of crap there exist various degrees of quality. That
         | said the popularity isn't strongly correlated to that -
         | checking 2 authors I follow one has $300/month on Patreon while
         | other $20k/month.
        
           | mobiuscog wrote:
           | Personally, I think this is where Patreon (and similar)
           | shine. Allows 'true fans' to support directly with a much
           | smaller cut than traditional distribution/publishing
           | mechanisms, whilst also not requiring long-term
           | subscriptions.
           | 
           | If your content is in demand, you do well.
        
           | dageshi wrote:
           | Honestly Royal Road is a treasure. It's the only site where I
           | actively click on t he ads because the ads are all for new
           | stories and there's a decent chance I'll like one.
        
         | drakonka wrote:
         | For many people, reading is a fun escape into an alternative
         | reality that they would never want to live out in real life. If
         | they want to escape into a world of dark romance tropes
         | featuring psychopathic male leads, more power to them and to
         | the authors they're supporting.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | Don't forget that these also have experienced publisher and
         | marketing networks behind them; on their own the books are a
         | dime a dozen, it's the publishers that make it popular.
        
         | greenie_beans wrote:
         | just don't read it if you have a problem with it. and don't
         | waste your emotional energy on hating it. there are a ton of
         | books out there that you would love, why spend your time
         | thinking about books you don't like?
         | 
         | let the readers read what they want, let the writers write what
         | they want, and don't judge people based on their reading
         | preferences. even if it's rupi kaur.
        
       | jimmyed wrote:
       | The largest demographic of readers, who have the ability to make
       | or break a book is middle class white women. If you can convince
       | them to read your book, you have made it.
        
         | mbork_pl wrote:
         | I would say it depends on the book. I don't have such data for
         | my Elisp textbook (which fared pretty well), but I'm not sure
         | it would confirm your claim.
        
           | taopai wrote:
           | > middle class white women
           | 
           | Sachachua enters this category. I am sure she would be glad
           | to read your book.
           | 
           | pd: sacha if you read this, no offense, just joking, hahahaha
        
       | helboi4 wrote:
       | As someone who was considering creating a graphic novel this
       | year, I'm glad to see I'm in one of the most lucrative
       | categories. Especially since I have no desire to write pulp
       | romance novels.
        
       | dageshi wrote:
       | I suspect a younger generation of authors coming up now will
       | almost exclusively self publish.
       | 
       | In the niches of fantasy I read there are no traditionally
       | published authors any more, they all monetise via patreon, kindle
       | unlimited and audible. From what I've gleaned no traditional
       | publisher can compete with this.
       | 
       | I think probably we reach a point where hardbacks become
       | "collectors editions" for successful works only, while paperbacks
       | are print on demand. The vast majority of consumption will be
       | ebook or audible.
        
         | SethMurphy wrote:
         | This would follow the same path as the music industry and the
         | revival of vinyl record albums. Most are collected and not
         | played since streaming is so much easier and portable. I would
         | go further and say that paperbacks will fall almost completely
         | out of favor as they are less durable and could be seen as more
         | of a "waste" environmentally. A bookshelf in a home is still a
         | wall of virtue and interest signals and I don't think that will
         | go away completely.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | There's still a large "I like the feel of a real book even if
           | it's a paperback" contingent. But I assume that is much less
           | true of relatively younger people. (I've gotten rid of a lot
           | of my books that are in the public domain and would largely
           | clear out most of my paperbacks if I could magically get them
           | in digital format.
        
             | panzagl wrote:
             | My daughters (gen Z) prefer physical books, though we'll
             | see if that persists past the first time they have to move
             | apartments themselves.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | Record stores that still exist aroud me seem to have
           | travelled back in time, I now feel like the first days of the
           | CD sales, where they were at a corner in a shop full of vynil
           | records.
           | 
           | Also someone is buying those vynil players with bluetooth and
           | USB connectors.
        
           | greenie_beans wrote:
           | i have some rare paperbacks that have insurable value. this
           | is a counterpoint to the assumption that paperbacks are
           | worthless.
        
             | prosqlinjector wrote:
             | Of course rare books are valuable. The point is that if you
             | want to buy a physical book you probably will pay $10-15
             | more for the nice version. The market for the cheap entry
             | is smaller.
        
           | Qwertious wrote:
           | Paper books have legal value - you have rights to resell it,
           | for instance, that you don't have for ebooks. Until we unfuck
           | those, ebooks will never completely replace them.
           | 
           | Paper books aren't particularly environmentally wasteful - if
           | you buy _one_ extra electronic device (say, an ereader), that
           | basically outstrips the damage of any number of books you 'd
           | buy. That might not be relevant to the _perception_ , though.
           | 
           | Books as expensive wallpaper will definitely keep being a
           | thing while dead-tree books are common, but they're
           | fundamentally about conveying an impression, and impressions
           | can change - if ebooks become the overwhelming majority to
           | the point that office decoration is the _main_ point of
           | books, then anyone who sees the bookshelf will assume you 're
           | a poser doing it for the image, and thus people will stop
           | doing it. So wallpaper-bookshelves can't exist as a sole
           | purpose of books ( _probably_ ).
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | You take away the importance of getting bookstore shelf space,
         | material marketing and book tours (good luck getting that),
         | etc. and publishers add less and less for a huge cut. As I
         | commented ed elsewhere I almost certainly benefited non-
         | monetarily from going with a well-known technical publisher but
         | I wouldn't do it going forward at this point for various
         | reasons.
        
         | falcolas wrote:
         | > In the niches of fantasy I read there are no traditionally
         | published authors any more, they all monetise via patreon,
         | kindle unlimited and audible. From what I've gleaned no
         | traditional publisher can compete with this.
         | 
         | I see this too, but I've also seen the next step: Publishers
         | chase them down for book deals. Azarinth Healer is the one that
         | comes to mind (since I'm working through Book 3 again), where
         | the author monetized via Patreon for years, then got a
         | publishing deal through Portal.
         | 
         | Honestly, it's been a good thing overall. The audiobooks are
         | high quality, and the editing has done the story a tremendous
         | amount of good.
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | Moving from self published Patron into traditional publishing
           | is a bumpy ride. To use your example, Azarinth Healer's
           | author significantly reduced output while working on editing
           | the book without disclosing why they were doing so. They then
           | didn't hand out copies of the edited work on Patron thus
           | massively discouraging people from continuing to support
           | them.
           | 
           | I went through that process a few times with minor variations
           | and it's annoyed me enough that I decided to permanently
           | boycott both Amazon (including AWS) and Patron.
           | 
           | The reverse where traditional authors give fans more access
           | on Patron is less problematic, but also distracts from
           | actually writing.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | A bit of a tangent about Azarinth Healer's journey to
             | follow, with a more generic wrapup...
             | 
             | > To use your example, Azarinth Healer's author
             | significantly reduced output while working on editing the
             | book without disclosing why they were doing so.
             | 
             | Interesting. This drama must have been largely contained to
             | Discord, since I never really saw it come up in Patreon
             | itself. Plus, their output has been a bit unpredictable due
             | to real life mental health complications for years.
             | Notably, though, supporters on Patreon were not charged
             | when they were not producing new chapters.
             | 
             | Ultimately reduced output, especially for the sake of
             | fixing prior works for publishing, is acceptable to me.
             | 
             | > They then didn't hand out copies of the edited work on
             | Patron thus massively discouraging people from continuing
             | to support them.
             | 
             | The author probably couldn't. They can't even keep the un-
             | edited version up on Royal Road, so the contract probably
             | stipulated what could and could not be done with the edited
             | manuscript. And, honestly, I'm OK with that. Since Patreon
             | charges have been turned off for awhile, paying $5 for the
             | edited books is acceptable IMO.
             | 
             | > distracts from actually writing
             | 
             | Authors gotta market their work; even traditional
             | publishers aren't doing that nearly as much anymore.
             | 
             | While output might be the key metric that some readers
             | judge authors by, at the end of the day it's not the metric
             | authors need to worry about the most. An author who can't
             | support themselves by writing will produce even less output
             | than one who is bound by the need to make money.
             | 
             | At the end of the day, I have a hard time being sour about
             | authors - Rhegar included - finding a way to earn a living
             | off writing.
        
         | j2kun wrote:
         | You can print hardcover on demand too these days.
        
       | ghaff wrote:
       | For most non-fiction authors, far and away the biggest monetary
       | benefit of writing books is indirect, e.g. reputational benefits
       | associated with being a published author on a topic. (Going with
       | a recognized publisher can make more sense in this case.)
       | 
       | I did make a few thousand the one time I went with a publisher.
       | I've also self-published and didn't really try to make direct
       | income at all as I had a free downloadable ebook. The only real
       | cut I got was when third parties bought books for me to do book
       | signings.
       | 
       | On the other hand I'm pretty sure I've made tens of thousands of
       | dollars at least in indirect professional benefits.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | I'm convinced this is what most tech oriented books are about,
         | not so much about earning money from a book, but putting
         | "Author of xyz" on their CV and website; "you literally wrote
         | the book on xyz, you are an authority on xyz"
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | Assuming they're going in with eyes open, totally. It's also
           | a good forcing function to dive deeper into a topic than you
           | might otherwise do.
           | 
           | And traditional technical publishers are probably a more
           | effective route for this reason even if you're leaving some
           | direct money on the table.
        
             | tnecniv wrote:
             | The famous mathematician Vladimir Arnold said
             | (approximately) "the best way to learn a topic is to write
             | a book on it." He did that a few times in his career --
             | most notably his excellent book on classical mechanics.
        
       | rafaelbeirigo wrote:
       | The only easy way to make a living is to sell.
       | 
       | Intelectual work like writing, researching, teaching, etc.
       | despite being important, don't have intrinsic appeal such that
       | people naturally and voluntarily put money on it. We are not
       | built like that.
       | 
       | This is where institutions like universities, governments, etc.
       | come in.
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | Of course you need to be good at selling in situations where
         | you can get a good cut. I'm sure there are a lot of car
         | salesmen that are just squeaking by.
         | 
         | But, yes, good salesmen for things like enterprise software can
         | do quite well though you more exposed of the vagaries of the
         | market than someone more removed from the front lines.
        
         | j7ake wrote:
         | Even scientists doing basic research need to "sell" their
         | research proposals and papers to get them funded and published.
         | 
         | Every piece of professional work has an intended audience, and
         | that means selling to that audience.
         | 
         | A work with no intended audience is a hobby.
        
         | prosqlinjector wrote:
         | > This is where institutions like universities, governments,
         | etc. come in.
         | 
         | Science was doing pretty well before it became
         | institutionalized in the early 20th century. It's not without
         | tradeoffs, but these aren't essential components.
        
       | delboytrotter wrote:
       | Being an author is tough, but it's not all bad news. I've made
       | over $2mil over the past 5 years with a self-published book.
       | Certainly not a typical result, but I want to give the authors
       | here some hope.
        
         | lock-the-spock wrote:
         | That is indeed unusual and very impressive, congratulations!
         | Are you willing to share any more details? E.g. fiction or non-
         | fiction, genre, distribution channel, how you made your income?
         | Thank you!
        
         | mobiuscog wrote:
         | Really hoping this isn't a book telling you how to make money
         | by self-publishing, or similar.
         | 
         | Self-publishing as discussed elsewhere, is certainly the way to
         | go, otherwise those profits would have gone to the publishers.
        
         | gwervc wrote:
         | Could you give some more information, like topic, kind of book,
         | marketing strategy?
        
         | ot1138 wrote:
         | That's an unusual and excellent outcome! But congratulations
         | for your success!
         | 
         | I've published three non-fiction books. The first was self
         | published and got noticed by Entrepreneur press. They published
         | the second two.
         | 
         | Despite being a bestseller in the business category, I've made
         | probably only about $30,000 from them. I've been told that mine
         | is also an atypical result as most authors make next to
         | nothing.
         | 
         | Despite having plenty of things to write about, I've since
         | decided there are much better uses for my time.
        
         | kwhitefoot wrote:
         | If you want to give hope you'll have to give a lot more detail
         | than that. I might even say evidence.
        
         | greenie_beans wrote:
         | i'm very skeptical of this claim!
        
       | drakonka wrote:
       | I've been self-publishing fiction for a couple of years. Many
       | years ago I looked down on self-published works, expecting them
       | to be of low quality. I thought if someone self-published it was
       | just because they weren't good enough to get a "real" publisher.
       | 
       | It is true that self-publishing has a lower barrier to entry so
       | there's a lot of crap that gets put out. But even for _really
       | good authors_ who take the work seriously, trad publishing makes
       | little financial sense most of the time. To succeed in self-pub
       | in the most competitive and lucrative genres your book has to be
       | on-par with any traditionally published book. Expectations have
       | risen.
       | 
       | And when you're sitting there looking at a trad deal that will
       | make you a few cents at best from every sale and compare that to
       | the 70-100% royalties you can get self-publishing, the trad deal
       | begins to make much less sense. New writers sometimes think a
       | trad deal will pay off in other ways: they won't have to worry
       | about marketing or other business aspects of putting out a book.
       | But that's not even the case anymore - many traditional
       | publishers expect you to market your own work and build your own
       | following. They won't spend marketing resources on most writers
       | they sign.
       | 
       | Making a living as an author is hard, and making a living as a
       | traditionally-published author is near-impossible.
        
         | chii wrote:
         | > But that's not even the case anymore - many traditional
         | publishers expect you to market your own work and build your
         | own following. They won't spend marketing resources on most
         | writers they sign.
         | 
         | so is the only reason for using a traditional publisher is the
         | cash advance then?
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | For most authors the advances are pretty laughable, too.
           | There is a very small percentage that publishers throw all
           | their weight behind, offer generous advances to, marketing
           | resources, etc. The rest of those they sign are more like
           | "filler".
           | 
           | I can't speak for all writers, but here are a few reasons I
           | have seen some authors going with a trad publisher:
           | 
           | * Reputation. It can just feel cool to say "Oh yeah I have a
           | book published by Tor" (or whatever). This one is pretty weak
           | for me. Trad publishers don't hold that much special prestige
           | anymore.
           | 
           | * Translations. There are some great untapped translation
           | markets out there (like Germany). Some authors self-publish
           | the English version of their books and sell translation
           | rights to a publisher. The publisher then does the work of
           | translating and republishing in the target countries, taking
           | that effort off the author. The royalties are lower, but
           | funding high-quality translations can cost a fortune and for
           | many authors offloading that cost and effort can be worth it.
           | 
           | * Audiobooks. Similar to translations. Author may publish the
           | ebook themselves and sell audio rights. Good narrators can
           | cost a fortune, and many authors can't justify that outlay
           | themselves. A trad audiobook publisher can get access to the
           | best narrators and fund the entire production if the author
           | doesn't have the means or desire to do it themselves.
        
             | kasey_junk wrote:
             | I'd add (for fiction the only market I have exposure to):
             | 
             | - the editor: if a good traditional editor gets involved in
             | your project they can make a huge difference in the quality
             | of your books. Many people seem to think editors are just
             | marking up your punctuation. In reality they are more akin
             | to product managers in software. They help set the tone of
             | the books and ensure that the vision is adhered to.
             | 
             | - which leads me to copy editors. The traditional
             | publishers employ all the best ones. You can hire
             | independent copy editors but their quality is a crapshoot.
             | And you don't find out until it's too late.
             | 
             | - the sales rep network. If reps like your book they will
             | get it in front of people. Independent of marketing the
             | boots on the ground factor can make a huge difference.
             | 
             | Now, you won't necessarily get any of these benefits going
             | with a publisher but you can't get any of them self
             | publishing.
        
               | bachmeier wrote:
               | > if a good traditional editor gets involved in your
               | project they can make a huge difference in the quality of
               | your books
               | 
               | I've also heard about mediocre editors that waste a lot
               | of author time, and bad editors that ruin the project.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | My developmental editor for my semi-technical book was
               | "fine" but he didn't do any of the structural re-
               | factoring I did for my second edition. The company was
               | using a new set of copy editors for the second edition
               | and they were much better than the first.
               | 
               | Overall I can't really complain about the editing but I
               | think the benefits were relatively modest.
        
               | stubish wrote:
               | The major publishers seem to have gutted their editing
               | staff over the last decade or so, and submitted
               | manuscripts changed little before publishing. The primary
               | editor you get barely has time to read it, and an
               | outsourced copy editor (who are probably the better ones,
               | yes).
        
             | sjfjsjdjwvwvc wrote:
             | Do you think I could offer English->German translation
             | services to indie authors as a reasonable side income?
             | 
             | Do you know a good place to get to know them or start out
             | building some connections?
             | 
             | I have been doing it in the past (mostly for ads and other
             | marketing content) but it paid very little (was working
             | freelance for an agency) but I enjoyed it a lot.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | To be honest I'm not sure. It seems like _a ton_ of work
               | to put out a high quality translation. I do not know how
               | much time and money translators spend on each project but
               | can imagine it being a lot. For example, some authors may
               | expect a legit highly-paid translator to work with their
               | own German proofreader etc to ensure quality of the
               | output.
               | 
               | (Tangentially, I think Germany has some special laws that
               | you as the translator would need to be familiar with. For
               | example I think the translator needs to grant rights to
               | the original author to republish the work. Not 100% sure
               | on this, but worth checking!)
        
               | sjfjsjdjwvwvc wrote:
               | Unfortunately there is not much information for this
               | online (atleast from a quick search I didn't find much)
               | Most seems to be related to working together with
               | publishing houses (I loathe the German publishing houses
               | so that's definitely no option).
               | 
               | I would prefer working directly with an independent
               | author - when I have a bit more time I'll check out how
               | to best get in contact with them.
               | 
               | Not sure about the legal side of it, but I have a friend
               | who works in German copyright and who could probably help
               | figure that part out.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | One place to get started might be the Alliance of
               | Independent Authors:
               | https://www.allianceindependentauthors.org/
               | 
               | They are author as opposed to translator-focused, but
               | maybe reaching out to them can be a first step in getting
               | the lay of the land? They might have some information
               | about how their authors tend to use translation services.
               | Although I'm sure there must be some translator
               | communities out there that could provide even more
               | focused info.
        
             | falcolas wrote:
             | > Audiobooks ... Good narrators can cost a fortune
             | 
             | To be specific, between $200 and $300 per finished hour,
             | and a finished hour is about 9,000 words. It can cost more
             | if you want two or more narrators to handle male/female
             | parts (there's a lot more editing involved).
             | 
             | I know at least one self-published author who does create
             | audiobooks for some of their works, but does so at a loss.
             | Even at $15 per audiobook sale (through bookfunnel, so
             | there's little overhead), making back the $3k they pay for
             | the narration is a pretty high bar for a relatively niche
             | market.
        
             | wharvle wrote:
             | > * Reputation. It can just feel cool to say "Oh yeah I
             | have a book published by Tor" (or whatever). This one is
             | pretty weak for me. Trad publishers don't hold that much
             | special prestige anymore.
             | 
             | I think it's a validation thing, largely. If you get trad-
             | published but the book does poorly--well, at least you got
             | trad-published, so you must not be _too_ awful (although...
             | if you 're in certain "hot" niches, there's some _real_
             | crap put out, that looks like it was barely even edited),
             | but your book just didn 't land well. It happens. But
             | you're an author, for sure.
             | 
             | If you self-publish and your book doesn't do well--did you
             | market poorly? Would it have done better with a trad
             | publisher? Are you... in fact so terrible at writing you
             | shouldn't call yourself an author, and it didn't sell
             | because it's total crap? You may never know!
             | 
             | Since there's not real, _real_ money in it unless your book
             | 's such a hit you get movie deals and such (with rare
             | outliers who make it big-enough purely on book sales but
             | don't get adaptation interest) it's largely about _being an
             | author_ , so having that validation up-front has real
             | appeal.
        
           | sturz wrote:
           | It's probably the prestige. Most new authors are likely
           | subsidized by their wealthy families.
        
             | kasey_junk wrote:
             | Most new authors are subsidized by their day job. It's a
             | huge moment in an authors life when they start making money
             | exclusively from writing. A moment most never get to.
        
               | cableshaft wrote:
               | Same deal with most board game designers. The vast
               | majority are subsidized by their day job, and aren't ever
               | going to make serious money from designing games.
               | 
               | I know a guy, for example, that worked two years in his
               | spare time on one game, got picked up by a publisher,
               | ended up in Barnes and Noble and was considered a success
               | by the publisher (they even requested and released an
               | expansion), and the guy got only $9,000 in royalties
               | (with no advance) for all his efforts.
               | 
               | Pretty much the only people making enough money for it to
               | be their sole form of income are either hired directly a
               | publisher or are out there hustling constantly and
               | signing like 8+ game designs a year, or have insanely
               | cheap cost of living (one game designer mentioned how he
               | made net income of $12k one year and was able to survive
               | off that because they live super cheaply), or have
               | somehow landed on a massive evergreen hit, like Azul or
               | Carcassonne.
               | 
               | [1]
               | https://twitter.com/JPacCantin/status/1647455444884156417
        
             | ryanklee wrote:
             | > Most new authors are likely subsidized by their wealthy
             | families.
             | 
             | You think most new authors have wealthy families?
             | 
             | That is a very odd assumption, given how hard it is to
             | write a book... and given how low the returns are... and
             | given how many other ways there are to achieve prestige...
             | and given how little people regard authorship these days as
             | a measurement of it... and given how unlikely it would be
             | for wealth to have an outsized representation in a career
             | generally associated with poverty... and how all old
             | authors were once new authors which would imply that most
             | of them are wealthy too, which, not so.
        
               | sturz wrote:
               | I'm talking about contemporary literature. It has been
               | this way historically and nothing about it has changed.
        
               | ryanklee wrote:
               | What historical data do you have?
        
               | sturz wrote:
               | Wikipedia. Most authors in the western cannon are
               | descendants of aristocracy.
        
               | ryanklee wrote:
               | "Most authors in the Western cannon" as a group is not
               | representative of most authors, Western or otherwise.
        
               | pi-e-sigma wrote:
               | They are the representation of the _successful_ authors,
               | though. Because they are the cannon now. So the OP is
               | right.
        
               | ryanklee wrote:
               | He is not right. His original claim was that new authors
               | are mostly wealthy. All he did was weaken his claim until
               | it was (more, but not actually) supportable.
               | 
               | Further, to address your own point, they are not even the
               | representation of successful authors. There's thousands
               | and thousands of successful authors that aren't even near
               | to being close to the gates of the Western canon.
        
             | IKantRead wrote:
             | I know plenty of authors and none of them are subsidized by
             | wealthy families. All of them do it part time in the
             | evenings out of a labor of love.
             | 
             | It is worth pointing out that there's nothing particular
             | odd if it _were_ the case that writing was subsidized by
             | wealthy families. For the vast majority of the history of
             | writing, writing was subsidized an left to monks,
             | philosophers or aristocrats. It 's only been in the
             | relatively recent time period that writing was a potential
             | occupation for anyone interested with enough skills/talent.
        
               | sturz wrote:
               | In my experience, in NY, the majority of people working
               | in contemporary literature publishing are ivy leage
               | graduates, mostly women, and they live off of their
               | parents. I'm not judging, just stating my observation.
        
               | wharvle wrote:
               | Literary fiction, yes. That market's so fucked that the
               | vast majority of literary magazines don't pay _at all_
               | and you 'll often get sneered at for asking about pay.
               | 
               | Anyone trying to make any amount of money at writing
               | writes genre fic of one sort or another. Fantasy or
               | _maybe_ sci fi, and probably  "juvenile fiction" (tends
               | to sell better to adults, too). Romance (which may or may
               | not actually be straight-up porn, basically). Airport
               | thrillers. Not lit-fic. Never, if your goal is to make
               | any money at all.
               | 
               | And yeah, the publishing-side heavily favors people with
               | money, lit-fic or not, for the reason that making a
               | living at it requires excellent connections to get you
               | directly into a high-paying part of it, or else years and
               | years making less than it takes to live on in places like
               | New York, to work your way up the ladder. Either way,
               | that probably means family money. This phenomenon been
               | mentioned, directly or obliquely, in IIRC all of:
               | _Bullshit Jobs_ (Graeber, 2018), Fussell 's _Class_
               | (1983), and _The Official Preppy Handbook_ (Birnbach et
               | al, 1980).
        
           | greenie_beans wrote:
           | a traditional publisher will distribute your book through all
           | of their sales channels. if you self-publish, it's very hard
           | or near impossible to sell your book at a proper bookstore.
           | the sales reps will also push the books onto independent
           | booksellers, who might love the book and want to handsell it.
        
           | IKantRead wrote:
           | > only reason for using a traditional publisher is the cash
           | advance then?
           | 
           | A few really important things come to mind:
           | 
           | - _Editing_. I 'm not talking about mere copy editing which
           | you can get done reasonably cheaply, but rather having an
           | editor that is reading through everything and giving feedback
           | is _hugely_ important.
           | 
           | - _Layout and printing of the book_ There 's a lot that
           | happens between writing and having a polished book in your
           | hands. You can contract all this out but it adds a lot of
           | work.
           | 
           | - _Distribution_. While the burden of marketing a book has
           | increasingly fallen upon the author these days, if you want
           | your book to be on the shelf at your local Barnes  & Noble,
           | then your much better off going with a traditional publisher.
           | 
           | - _Prestige_. Like it or not, the vast majority of people on
           | Earth still look down upon self publishing. For some types of
           | books this is _less_ important: technical books and fantasy
           | fiction books can go without in many cases (but if you want
           | to use your book for credibility in something like consulting
           | you 'll still want a traditional publisher). But if you want
           | to write on a serious topic it helps a lot to have an
           | academic press publish your work, or if you want to really
           | pursue writing literature you at least want some publisher
           | that is recognized in your relevant community.
           | 
           | Currently I think the only really good use cases for self
           | publishing are the fantasy fiction and niche technical book
           | markets _assuming_ you already have an audience. And even in
           | those cases there are plenty of reasons to go with
           | traditional publishers over self publishing.
        
             | jrmg wrote:
             | Not sure why you're getting so many downvotes. The first
             | two are definitely real issues with a lot of self-published
             | work.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | I did not downvote, but just wanted to mention that the
               | first two do not require a traditional publisher. In fact
               | none of them do, but especially not the first two.
               | 
               | It is true that there are real quality issues with a lot
               | of self-published work because you don't _need_ an editor
               | to publish your book. Heck, you don't even need to do a
               | self-edit pass. Write it and hit publish! But it is
               | increasingly an expectation that you have one, because
               | quality expectations are extremely high, especially for
               | competitive money-making genres.
               | 
               | I started out self-editing and now pay for three
               | professional edits for each release: developmental, copy,
               | and proofread. Professional editors are not exclusive to
               | traditional publishing houses.
        
             | AlbertCory wrote:
             | Correct on Distribution & Prestige. If you claim trad
             | publishing isn't necessary at all, then explain to me how
             | you get:
             | 
             | 1) placed in bookstores
             | 
             | 2) on the "upcoming books" circulars that the trads send
             | out to likely "author talk" venues
             | 
             | 3) reviewed in mainstream media
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | Ingram Spark provides global book store and library
               | distribution.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | In practice, that just means if someone walks into a
               | bookstore and asks for your book, they can buy it without
               | going through Amazon.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | Yup, and if they think it'll sell then book stores can
               | stock up more. Many book stores don't stock unless the
               | book is distributed as returnable (in case it doesn't
               | sell). Whether self pub or trad pub, unsold books
               | returned by stores come back out of the author's cut. In
               | many cases it doesn't even make sense for the author to
               | physically reclaim returned books as the shipping and
               | storage are more expensive, so they get destroyed.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | the funny bit is, you have to set a "retail price" in
               | every country they operate in, and if you set it too low,
               | the bookstore has a loss on each book. So you have to
               | keep increasing the price until the margin is positive.
               | 
               | just in case someone in Australia goes to a bookstore and
               | asks for it :)
        
           | julianeon wrote:
           | No. I think the actual answer is "real-life SEO."
           | 
           | Say you have a Mexican restaurant in NYC. There must be
           | hundreds of them, right? But imagine that someone in NYC
           | googles "Mexican restaurant," and your restaurant is the
           | first search result that comes up. That's worth a lot of
           | money.
           | 
           | Self-publishing is like opening your own restaurant, while
           | being published by a major publisher is like being on the
           | first page of Google. When, say, CNN wants someone to be a
           | panel expert, they might call you. You can get invited to
           | conferences on the strength of that credential, and then
           | build up to greater opportunities from there. In essence
           | you've been socially validated.
           | 
           | That's worth quite a lot of money, though it's up to you if
           | it's worth the cost. If you didn't have any fame going in,
           | then I think it will be.
        
         | taopai wrote:
         | I read some reddit's post regarding to this topic.
         | 
         | The main takeaway was that living, or higher profits came only
         | if you were being aggressive with ads.
         | 
         | Something like reinvesting 50% of the profits in digital ads
         | (google, amazon).
         | 
         | If your book reaches near top #1, you've done it. Now I
         | realized that most of the books I read published on XXI century
         | had been very popular, top of the chart books in some genre,
         | during some years and I found them trough reddit/forums
         | recommendations. Books that you would still find regarded as
         | best in Amazon.
         | 
         | Internet it's pushing Pareto principle to an extreme. The same
         | goes for music, digital art, cinema, teaching, etc. Small
         | artists are sheltering themselves in services like Patreon
         | because they beat the giants in terms of selling.
         | 
         | Also I think people are reading less. My friends don't read.
         | They pay +15/30 USD a month to Netflix and other services.
         | That's money and _time_ "taken away" from reading, books.
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | I know quite a few authors making a living without paying for
           | any ads, but it's definitely a different type of effort. You
           | have to really hone in on social media, getting large review
           | teams, etc to get visibility for your books without ads.
           | 
           | IMO someone starting out is probably best off not spending
           | money on ads. They have too many other things to perfect as
           | they learn, which can only be done by publishing over and
           | over. At least with fiction, you're looking at building a
           | backlist - it's not a "write one breakout book and live off
           | of it forever" kind of thing. After a few books published it
           | can make sense to start setting an ad budget, and using ads
           | successfully is a whole other learning curve to dive into.
        
             | taopai wrote:
             | It makes sense.
             | 
             | Do you have any advice to someone who would start writing
             | fiction books?
             | 
             | I write a lot but only for myself. I don't care about money
             | but I would like to persevere to some day be able to
             | produce quality works in my own language.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | I suggest starting by deciding what you do care about,
               | since it's not the money. What does "producing quality
               | works" mean to you? How do you measure it? If you write
               | only for yourself you can be your own judge of quality.
               | Or do you intend to measure your success in readership,
               | or reviews?
               | 
               | If you decide you care about getting people to actually
               | read your work, the next step would likely be narrowing
               | down your genre and checking out what is doing well in
               | that genre and niche. Look at Amazon top 100 lists for
               | your categories, for example. What's selling? What's
               | getting good or bad reviews? Open the Look Inside
               | previews of the books. What POV are the stories written
               | in, are there any patterns you notice in successful
               | covers or blurbs, etc?
               | 
               | If you don't already read in your chosen genre, you
               | probably want to start. At the same time, you can start
               | writing. I'd personally suggest starting with short
               | stories or novellas. Something you can finish and put out
               | there asap to get the feedback loop going. Self-
               | publishing is low barrier to entry, but there are a lot
               | of balls to juggle. Each thing you put out will provide
               | more information for your next book.
               | 
               | Before publishing your first book, decide if you want to
               | go into Kindle Unlimited (Amazon exclusivity) or "wide"
               | (publishing to all retailers). There are huge pros and
               | cons of each, and some genres are better suited for one
               | or the other. KU can be easier to get traction and start
               | seeing page reads with, but it has its cons as well.
               | 
               | Also, decide if you want to use a pen name.
               | 
               | Try not to get too attached to the first stories you
               | publish. They will probably suck. Personally I would not
               | bother spending money on an editor or cover designer when
               | you start out, but it depends on the genre and your own
               | budget/priorities.
               | 
               | From there it's basically about iterating on what you
               | have with every new book. There's way too much to cover
               | in one comment and more specific genre-based strategies
               | depending on what you're writing, so this is more like a
               | dump of my general thoughts for someone starting out.
        
               | taopai wrote:
               | Thank you a lot.
        
               | dlx wrote:
               | This is great advice! As someone who also is starting out
               | writing fiction and _does_ care about making money in the
               | long run (let 's say I have about a year of runway) would
               | you add anything else to the above advice?
        
           | bodantogat wrote:
           | Also, its very difficult to make money on just one book. Most
           | indie authors start seeing better sales after 5-10 books,
           | having built up a loyal reader base.
        
           | x0x0 wrote:
           | I will say that I think succeeding as an author requires
           | business skills that most of them appear to lack.
           | 
           | Amazon has started getting better at notifying me that there
           | are new books available by an author from whom I've
           | previously purchased books, but for a long time, and even
           | now, I'd say most authors that I read aren't even getting me
           | on an email list to eg tell me there's more stuff of theirs
           | that I can buy. That's really business 101 and they're just
           | not doing it. It's weird.
        
           | boznz wrote:
           | Not just higher profits, but if you are self-published or
           | have no reviews yet then your book is usually on the 400th
           | page on anyone's search.
           | 
           | I have still told nobody I know about my book, it's kind of
           | an experiment, because it would be easy for me to email blast
           | everyone I know to like it, but I really want people to read
           | it without pre-conception and so far no sales, even though it
           | is free! (or 0.99 cents on Amazon as that's Amazon)
        
             | drakonka wrote:
             | Not telling anyone you know is probably smart. _If_ you
             | write outside of the genre your friends group usually reads
             | and a bunch of them visit and buy your book out of
             | curiosity on Amazon, it can negatively impact the
             | categorization of your books.
             | 
             | "oh these people who usually read historical fiction are
             | buying this new medical thriller. We will show this medical
             | thriller to other people with the same buying habits!"
             | 
             | Only readers of historical fiction who aren't your friends
             | probably won't bother picking up a medical thriller.
             | 
             | Regarding reviews, this is why many authors build ARC
             | teams. Reviews are really important, so they send out
             | advance review copies.
        
         | satans_shill wrote:
         | OT Do you have examples of self published authors that you feel
         | really stood out.
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | Check out the romance top 100 on Amazon:
           | https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Romance/zgbs/digital-
           | tex...
           | 
           | I point out romance because that's what I write, but it's
           | just one example. At a quick glance through the first few
           | product pages there, most of those books appear self-
           | published.
           | 
           | To get to #1 in these general categories on Amazon (Romance,
           | Contemporary romance, Paranormal romance, etc), you need _a
           | crapton_ of sales or page reads (if you are in Kindle
           | Unlimited). These authors all stand out because they are
           | making bank right now, as indicated by their presence on this
           | list.
           | 
           | (Of course this does not reflect expenses like ad spend, but
           | that's a whole other story that is near impossible to measure
           | without info from the author themselves.)
        
         | turkeygizzard wrote:
         | Really appreciate you sharing your perspective. I recently
         | wrote a book as a passion project and have been sitting
         | anxiously on a contract. I'm not concerned about the money (I
         | don't think my book will be a huge thing). My main motivation
         | for going trad is the credibility as you somewhat alluded to.
         | Do you think this is misguided on my part? Basically just so I
         | can point at it in the future and say "a professional in the
         | industry thought my book was worth printing with their name on
         | it"
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | First, congratulations on finishing your book and getting a
           | contract! That is a huge achievement.
           | 
           | I do not think your reasoning is misguided at all. If you
           | think a traditional publisher affords you more credibility
           | and a sense of satisfaction, that is reason enough to go with
           | trad - _especially_ since as you say you're not concerned
           | about the money, so there is no reason to worry about a
           | traditional publisher's royalty rates compared to other
           | options.
           | 
           | I believe your reason for wanting to go with a publisher is
           | perfectly valid.
        
             | atlasunshrugged wrote:
             | I have a question for you both (drakonka and
             | turkeygizzard): Would you ever sell all or a portion of the
             | rights to future earnings for your already published books
             | to a third party? We've seen in the music industry PE firms
             | basically acquiring known catalogues for the residuals and
             | I'm wondering why that doesn't seem to happen in the
             | publishing industry.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | It happens quite a bit! I mentioned it in another comment
               | here, but one thing that publishers can be very useful
               | for is audiobook rights and translations. These are very
               | costly to produce and it sometimes makes more sense to
               | offload that part to a publisher. That is definitely
               | something I'd consider doing if the opportunity came
               | along.
        
               | krisroadruck wrote:
               | I wonder how much longer this will remain true.
               | Audiobooks and translations seem like near-term target
               | for AI.
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | That's a good point. I'm already in the process of using
               | voice synthesis to narrate one of my books. It is still a
               | huge time outlay to get to the quality bar I want, but
               | much cheaper than paying for a narrator.
               | 
               | One thing working in favor of human narrators is the
               | fans. Audiobook listeners can get very attached to
               | certain voices, to the point where they'll read
               | _anything_ that narrator works on regardless of the
               | book's author or genre. If I had the budget for it, I'd
               | definitely favor a well-known human narrator over AI for
               | the visibility aspect of working with that person. But
               | most authors don't have the budget to hire popular
               | narrators, which is where less popular or entry-level
               | narrators may find themselves losing work to AI
               | alternatives. The narration quality is still higher with
               | competent humans at this time as well, but that'll
               | change.
               | 
               | For translations, I don't think I'll ever trust AI
               | entirely (just like I don't trust myself as a human
               | writer entirely!) I'd still be hiring a native-speaking
               | human editor and proofreader if generating AI
               | translations. Or more likely, I'd be hiring a human
               | translator who is able to charge competitively by using
               | AI in their workflows (and is also able to handle the
               | quality checks etc for me).
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | True. On this
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGchbES0DhU
               | 
               | 100% of the commenters are Matthew's fans. Did that lead
               | to any sales for me? Not clear.
        
               | atlasunshrugged wrote:
               | Interesting! Do you have an email or way to get in touch
               | by chance? I'd love to connect and ask more as I'm both
               | writing a book and considering trying to build some stuff
               | in this space. Alternatively, I'm at jb2956 at
               | georgetown.edu!
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | Sure! Feel free to reach out at me at liza dot io.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | get on Reedsy. You can put work out for bid, and the
               | quality is quite high, IMHO.
        
               | atlasunshrugged wrote:
               | Yes! I just used an editor from there who gave some
               | phenomenal feedback for a very reasonable price
        
               | johnrgrace wrote:
               | Audiobook natation isn't that expensive - the same
               | narrators being used by publishing houses can do it for
               | $200 an hour with it being 10-12k words per hour.
               | Audiobook production is a few thousand for most books
               | under the current system.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | Accurate. Go on ACX and audition narrators. Also
               | Voices.com.
               | 
               | The "per hour" rate usually means "per finished hour" not
               | "per hour that they spent doing it."
        
               | drakonka wrote:
               | For most self-published authors, a few thousand dollars
               | is a lot to drop into a project that may never pay out.
               | And in many cases if they do have the money, it makes
               | more business sense to spend that budget on editors and
               | cover designers across multiple books.
               | 
               | But there are definitely people who fund their own
               | audiobook production. And narrator royalty share options
               | exist too, which some use (I would personally not). It's
               | just not the default option or choice for many.
        
           | spookybones wrote:
           | Congrats. Is it fiction or non-fiction?
        
         | borg16 wrote:
         | can you link some of your work? I'd like to give it a try :)
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | Afraid not! I write under a pen name. It's not a huge secret,
           | but not something I advertise either for various reasons (the
           | main one being that I'm still not as good as I'd like to
           | be... but I'll get there).
        
         | blockwriter wrote:
         | Yeah, I wish not only self-publishing one's own work, it also
         | creating a small journal for publishing other writers was the
         | first instinct of young writers, especially young writers of
         | fiction, rather than seeking publication through more
         | traditional outlets. I think small collectives of dedicated
         | writer and self-publishers and self-producers is literature's
         | best hope for a new epoch of great writing.
        
         | comboy wrote:
         | So how do I find you guys? Because that's the biggest problem
         | between the two of us. It should be based on my reading
         | history, but goodreads is pretty useless, storygraph is better
         | but still not that great.
         | 
         | I've been recently finding most good books by lengthy talks
         | with GPT4 since I can explain in detail what I want, what I
         | enjoyed and what I didn't, but that only works for books which
         | are already popular (and even with old books, there are some
         | great ones which are niche enough to never become really
         | popular).
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | Unfortunately discovery still usually comes down to some
           | manual sleuthing. It really depends on the genre, but I think
           | you'll find that many ebooks on distributors like Amazon,
           | Kobo, etc are self-published, so we're pretty easy to find!
           | Check out the top 100 category in your favorite niche and
           | you'll _likely_ find a good number of self-published titles
           | there. If you come across an author you really end up liking,
           | most have newsletters and/or a social media presence.
           | 
           | You can also sign up for ebook deal sites like BookBub, which
           | send out deals for books in your preferred genre. They often
           | feature self-published works. BB tends to be quite selective
           | with what books they work with, so hopefully you'd find some
           | nice quality work there (but of course it can always be a bit
           | hit and miss).
        
           | AlbertCory wrote:
           | On Substack, someone gave me "Legends & Lattes" which is a
           | recent book I'd never have known about.
           | 
           | fyi: it's a "high stakes / low conflict" book. Yes, there
           | _are_ orcs, elves, and so forth, but they 're kinda
           | incidental to the plot. Not really sci-fi IMHO.
        
         | Taylor_OD wrote:
         | I've found myself enjoying more and more self published books.
         | I wish a LITTLE more care was put into cover art and small
         | details though. The cover art and book quality seem to be the
         | two things that stick out like a sore thumb on self published
         | works.
         | 
         | Even knowing that a lot of my favorite reads every year are
         | self published, I am sometimes skeptical of a new book because
         | the cover art looks like it was done poorly by someone in 15
         | minutes in photoshop. I guess I'm quite literally judging a
         | book by its cover here but... In a world where you get a cover
         | and a 2 paragraph blurb about a book... That is a significant
         | factor.
        
           | jrmg wrote:
           | I don't think your impressions are entirely off-base here. If
           | the author is so bad at judging the quality of the cover art
           | (or, for me, the typesetting) I think it's possible that it
           | suggests a similar lack of judgement of quality for the
           | writing (or, perhaps, editing) itself.
        
             | jacobsenscott wrote:
             | I would disagree - those skills (cover art, typesetting)
             | are orthogonal skills to writing. These are some of the
             | things (I assume) publishers would do for you.
        
               | zippergz wrote:
               | Also, there are many things that I can judge to be good
               | or bad, but that doesn't mean I can produce high quality
               | examples myself. And getting high quality work from
               | others isn't cheap, so it might be out of reach for self-
               | published authors. Even if they know that the cover art
               | isn't good, they might still use it, if they can't do
               | better themselves and can't afford to hire someone who
               | would do better.
        
             | allwein wrote:
             | Anything is possible, but I don't think judgement of visual
             | aesthetics maps at all to quality of writing.
             | 
             | I'm a damn good technical writer and can break down complex
             | ideas into clear and understandable prose, but I don't know
             | the first thing about fonts or typesetting.
        
             | Taylor_OD wrote:
             | Sure. But only to a point. If it looks laughably bad, then
             | sure it probably doesnt bode well for the quality of the
             | writing. But if the cover is fine/good enough but clearly
             | not something that would come from a trad publishing
             | house... That is when the cover might not be reflective of
             | the work but still hold people, myself often included,
             | back.
        
           | drakonka wrote:
           | This is actually a huge factor - both the covers and the
           | blurbs are hugely important. Self-published covers in
           | competitive genres now have to be on-par with trad covers for
           | a reader to bother clicking on them.
           | 
           | Niches where there may not be much trad coverage can be more
           | forgiving. If you're writing in a small niche that not many
           | other authors cover, you have more wiggle room with the cover
           | art. But very popular genres with a high ceiling really
           | benefit from a professional cover designer (or a
           | professionally-designed premade).
           | 
           | Luckily, there are budget designers out there who are decent.
           | I started out publishing short stories and doing my own
           | covers and editing. My first works _sucked_ and I'm glad I
           | used them more for practice and did not put money into them.
           | Gradually as I started making more, I began investing those
           | royalties in peripheral services: editing and covers. I now
           | pay for covers, developmental edits, copy edits, and
           | proofreads for each new book. I've improved a lot and am
           | steadily building a readership, but my books still barely pay
           | for themselves with the outlay required.
        
           | yojo wrote:
           | Not sure what your standards are, but a notably bad cover
           | also shows the author has invested essentially $0 in their
           | book. You can get passable quality work from sites like
           | GetCovers for ~$10-$30 (I think I paid $25). Though it's
           | possible these are the kinds of covers you're reacting
           | negatively to.
           | 
           | "Real" covers from US-based artists start at more like $300,
           | which is a more substantial outlay for a project that's
           | unlikely to pay it back.
        
             | Taylor_OD wrote:
             | Yeah I guess the issue is that there is a huge gap between
             | notable bad, good, and what seems to come from trad
             | publishing.
             | 
             | I dont think most of the covers are that BAD. They just
             | stick out and its clear this book is self published.
        
           | AlbertCory wrote:
           | I've advertised on Reedsy and gotten an excellent
           | illustrator. It costs. You can query "Albert Cory" on Amazon
           | and judge for yourself.
           | 
           | All the designs I got on 99Designs were crap.
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | They look good to me.
        
             | Taylor_OD wrote:
             | Inventing the Future is you?
             | 
             | Yeah these are right on the cusp. Maybe I'm too discerning
             | here. The font seems to blend into the background a bit
             | more than one would expect and, "a novel" is way more faded
             | than you would ever see in trad publishing.
             | 
             | But tbh most people might not even notice that. I don't
             | really know. It's hard to put a finger on exactly what
             | stand out sometimes.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | that's me.
               | 
               | Trad publishers use offset printing, I believe. I'm not
               | enough of an expert to know what effect that has. In
               | self-publishing, you just provide a PDF.
        
           | boznz wrote:
           | 100% this. I would so love someone artistic to have created
           | my book cover, but the book was a passion project for me to
           | make a Sci-fi book my daughter would have liked, and is being
           | sold for $0 so paying anyone was outside my budget. I have
           | since talked to an artist and we may do an illustrated
           | version together.
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | A few years ago I had beers with a NYT best selling author
         | using trad publishing. Millions of copies sold on multiple
         | continents, translated into many different languages, etc etc.
         | You've heard of him, or at least his one big hit.
         | 
         | He said, at best, over his entire lifetime he may make $200k
         | from that book. He basically has to write a book every single
         | year just to make his mortgage payments, and its a grind.
         | 
         | When I told him I make $8/book self published he nearly fell
         | out of his chair.
        
           | leephillips wrote:
           | A typical royalty is 10% of the retail price. If the book is
           | $30 (cheap these days), then a million copies sold (an
           | extremely rare feat, even for a best seller, but...) is $3
           | million dollars. How does this story add up? (Foreign rights
           | are often a lump sum rather than royalties, but still...?)
        
             | grecy wrote:
             | > _A typical royalty is 10% of the retail price._
             | 
             | For WHO? What publisher is offering 10%??
             | 
             | The best I've ever heard is a fraction of a cent per book,
             | and you don't get a single cent until AFTER all the
             | expenses have been earned back (advance, editing, promotion
             | of the book, flying you all over the place, hotels, staff).
        
               | leephillips wrote:
               | The standard rate from reputable publishers is 10 to 15%.
               | It's what I've gotten from three different publishers
               | (Hachette, No Starch, Packt). The rates for paperback,
               | discounted books, ebooks, audio books, are all a bit
               | different, but that's the ballpark. All these publishers
               | also paid me advances. That's an advance on royalties.
               | You start getting paid more when your earned royalties
               | exceed the advance. There is no deduction for any other
               | expense whatsoever.
               | 
               | This thread is full of utter nonsense about the worlds of
               | publishing and writing.
               | 
               | [Edit: minus the 15% for your agent, if you're
               | represented by one. But as your agent also made sure you
               | got a good contract, you probably come out ahead.]
        
       | Maro wrote:
       | For people in this thread, I strongly recommend Rob Fitzpatrick's
       | book on how to write a book as a business, "Write Useful Books: A
       | modern approach to designing and refining recommendable
       | nonfiction":
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Write-Useful-Books-recommendable-nonf...
       | 
       | Even though I'm not an author I found the advice very useful, it
       | can trivially be applied to building and marketing any product.
        
         | graphe wrote:
         | Most of what they talk about is fiction, romance novels. No
         | wonder it's still popular to be sold, I'm the wrong
         | demographic, to me they're the generic rags with the generic
         | tall strong man and falling woman on the cover. They give them
         | away at the library and nobody wants them still.
        
       | ryanbigg wrote:
       | Been writing tech books now for over a decade, got about 8-10
       | under the belt depending on if you count 2nd and 3rd editions as
       | new books.
       | 
       | Definitely not writing them for the money -- that's about $300 a
       | month usually. Enough to buy a few knick knacks and some meals.
       | 
       | It's more the notoriety of being a "subject matter expert" that
       | counts.
       | 
       | I work full time and then put what I learn from the job into the
       | books to share it with the world. No point hanging onto the
       | knowledge and hoarding it all dragon-like.
        
       | chris-orgmenta wrote:
       | Incidentally I have, sitting next to me, a freelance publishing
       | contracts manager who works contract rights for Hachette and
       | other big players.
       | 
       | Anyway, the problem in the industry, from my point of view (very
       | opinionated):
       | 
       | - The market has-not-priced-in-demographics! Still! Blinkered to
       | the aging readership.
       | 
       | - False expectation of revival or sustaining market size.
       | 
       | - Often the wrong channel/medium. Much non-fiction & fiction
       | simply doesn't need or benefit from traditional publishing
       | houses.
       | 
       | - Industry is still in the process of acknowledging (or is hiding
       | the fact) that brands are so dependant on celebrity names.
       | Celebrity authors are bolstering statistics and making it look
       | more lucrative to the average Joe than it really is.
       | 
       | - Clinging on to old worldviews on IP, to the detriment of
       | innovation.
       | 
       | - Very much haven't got their head around LLM / prior art changes
       | that are forcing us to be less litigious in the coming years.
       | 
       | My associate is more conservative than me, and is also far more
       | knowledgeable than me of course.
       | 
       | I also note the consolidation of publishers was at full throttle
       | this past decade.
        
       | jviotti wrote:
       | I'm in the process of releasing my first book, with O'Reilly,
       | this year (https://learning.oreilly.com/library/view/unifying-
       | business-...). I didn't do it for the money (but for the
       | recognition), but I'm very interested to know how it will
       | economically fare.
        
       | chiefalchemist wrote:
       | Creating is a tough way to make a living. Writing books, writing
       | short stories, music, apps, videos, and the list goes on and on.
       | 
       | And while it's never been easier to create - the tools are
       | plentiful and their prices falling - there's never been more
       | noise to claw through and standout from. Add in shorter and
       | shorter attention spans and more creators produce more quantity
       | because they feel they have no choice.
       | 
       | On the other hand, look at an artist like Banksy. Enigmatic and
       | drops are randon. When Banksy drops people take notice. Aside
       | from a eye / mind for quality and creativity, I think there might
       | be a lesson in the somewhere.
        
         | nprateem wrote:
         | The lessons are:
         | 
         | 1. Low barriers to entry drive down prices
         | 
         | 2. Be first (Banksy)
        
           | chiefalchemist wrote:
           | 3. And if you can't be first, at least try to stand out in
           | some way. As in - FFS - if the internet got any more beige*
           | it would be invisible.
           | 
           | * I use beige as a metaphor (?) for the ultimate bland color.
           | Some (late) nights, I'd even argue it's so bland it doesn't
           | deserve to be recognized as a color.
        
       | greenie_beans wrote:
       | ~99% of the published writers i know have a full-time job to
       | support their book writing.
        
       | max_ wrote:
       | >Lawmakers, publishers, and the public must recognize authors as
       | professionals deserving fair pay and dignity. We urge collective
       | action to build a system that properly values the essential
       | contributions of writers to society. The Authors Guild will
       | continue this fight until the stark income disparities revealed
       | in our survey are remedied by overdue reforms
       | 
       | Do these people really think they can come up with an actual
       | solution to these problems?
        
         | graphe wrote:
         | When I read that I was thinking of changing authors to any
         | other "perceived useless job". Their demand is fit more money
         | because they produce value somehow? What value?
        
           | max_ wrote:
           | Well, I have learnt alot from some books.
           | 
           | The entertainment value is also value.
        
             | graphe wrote:
             | The books they mostly mention are romance novels and all
             | fiction. I have and mostly continue to avoid them because
             | honestly most of them are rags and it's not worth checking
             | out from the volumes of garbage unless they're recommended
             | by a person I know of esteem.
        
       | atlasunshrugged wrote:
       | I wonder if this will get better as the book market seems to get
       | increasingly fragmented (Booktok, Bookshop.org, the resurgence of
       | bookstores in the U.S. and UK, etc.) and as there is more
       | competition in other mediums like with Spotify now competing with
       | Audible. But it does seem like writing is an extremely hits based
       | business -- some books/authors that publishers sign are absolute
       | home runs and make 99% of the money out of any given cohort of
       | books and the rest likely don't return the cost of the advance
       | and investment from the publisher's side of things. Maybe
       | technology will also increase the potential for author earnings
       | here, if today you have to hire someone to record an audiobook or
       | do a translation, maybe that gets automated away in a few years
       | and you can more easily publish in every format and language
       | potentially reaching a larger audience.
        
       | lastofthemojito wrote:
       | One thing that I've found interesting about Iceland is that it is
       | the country with the most authors per capita:
       | 
       | https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24399599
       | 
       | https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/444296-mo...
       | 
       | But of course most of these authors aren't full-time authors
       | whose income comes chiefly from their books. In fact, the
       | Icelandic Prime Minister recently released a novel:
       | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/28/iceland-pm-rel...
       | 
       | Having a small and sparse population, Icelanders seem to have a
       | tradition of wearing multiple hats rather than sticking with one
       | specialization. When the men's football team made their first
       | World Cup, the head coach wasn't just a football coach, he also
       | happened to be a dentist:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimir_Hallgrimsson
       | 
       | It seems like a lot of people lament that more folks can't make
       | it as full-time authors, but I don't really have a problem with
       | that if the demand for their writing isn't there. But if the US
       | were more like Iceland and typical "real" jobs paid a livable
       | wage with reasonable hours, maybe those passionate about writing
       | could still manage to take a shot at it without it being a big
       | deal if their book turned out to be a commercial flop?
        
         | gloryjulio wrote:
         | > But if the US were more like Iceland and typical "real" jobs
         | paid a livable wage with reasonable hours
         | 
         | That's the key issue in general, not just for US. When the
         | system is designed to extract maximum efficiency, there is
         | little room for other stuff
        
           | tw235346nmolk wrote:
           | Maximum efficiency in regards to what metric? (Before you say
           | 'money/the economy', inequality seems to be bad in that
           | respect [1], and that's about the only thing in regards to
           | which US system seems to be highly efficiency ;)
           | 
           | [1] https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf
        
             | burnished wrote:
             | I believe that is what they are referring to, 'the system'
             | being highly efficient at allocating process
             | improvements/efficiency improvements to the owners of
             | capital leading to the income inequality you note
        
             | TimPC wrote:
             | The US is fairly good at creating high GDP per capita. They
             | are 8th behind: Luxembourg, Singapore, Ireland, Norway,
             | Qatar, UAE and Switzerland.
             | 
             | Of those nations: Norway, Qatar and UAE are highly
             | dependent on oil profits and Luxembourg is an outlier as an
             | unusually small affluent nation. Ireland is also known to
             | have an inflated GDP due to it's tax hub status resulting
             | in corporations reporting high revenue numbers there even
             | though that revenue is often disconnected from the country.
             | 
             | I think most nations would be thrilled to have a GDP per
             | capita of $76,399 USD. When the proceeds are that much
             | higher it takes an awful lot of inequality to make the
             | outcomes worse. One of the biggest issues in the US is that
             | health care is not covered by the government so it costs
             | nearly double compared to most comparable countries and
             | access is subject to all the inequality constraints that
             | universal government programs mostly erase.
             | 
             | For example in Canada which has a GDP per capita of
             | $51,987, the split between wages and capital is
             | approximately 90-10 meaning that the average wage
             | (including non-working population) was $46,788. For the US
             | to have the same type of average wage of only $46,788 the
             | share going to capital would have to be 38.8%.
        
         | huytersd wrote:
         | It's more than that. In Iceland you're allowed to just stop
         | working and the government will give you a basic income (along
         | with a recreation stipend!) indefinitely. This gives people so
         | much time for pursuits they're passionate about.
        
           | coredog64 wrote:
           | As usual, I will allow Han Solo to critique your argument.
           | 
           | > There's not enough life on this ice cube to fill a space
           | cruiser.
        
             | huytersd wrote:
             | That's why it works I get it and most people wouldn't want
             | to live in an icy hellscape but if you like spending all
             | your time indoors it's not so bad.
        
               | dahart wrote:
               | Contrary to the name, Iceland isn't an icy hellscape at
               | all. Haven't you heard the quip about Iceland being green
               | and Greenland being ice? Icelanders like spending time
               | outside, and Reykjavik and most cities and towns are on
               | the coast so they're not all that cold. https://www.timea
               | nddate.com/weather/iceland/reykjavik/climat...
        
               | hattmall wrote:
               | I think by most people's standards that's pretty cold.
               | Summer high in the mid 50s. 8 Months of the year with
               | near freezing nightly temps.
               | 
               | What inhabited place would you be comparing it to to get
               | "not all that cold"?
        
               | hydrok9 wrote:
               | an average low of 0 celsius in the winter is a LOT warmer
               | than Canada, except maybe on the west coast. It's
               | probably warmer than the Nordics too, and maybe Russia.
        
               | dahart wrote:
               | It's not very icy, with an average high above freezing
               | year round. That's warmer winter conditions than a lot of
               | the US. Greenland, Alaska, Canada, Siberia, Finland,
               | Mongolia, Svalbard, Norway... there's a pretty long list
               | of inhabited places that are colder than Iceland.
        
           | jrmg wrote:
           | Do you have a source for Iceland having a universal basic
           | income like that? How much is it? I'm not finding anything
           | about it with Google searches, and it seems kind of hard to
           | believe.
        
             | huytersd wrote:
             | It's not universal. It's basically indefinite unemployment
             | payments.
        
               | grecy wrote:
               | Australia has that too. $1500/mo for a single person.
        
         | zthoutt wrote:
         | As someone who has a full time job and has self-published a
         | novel I wrote in my spare time, I do not think that supply of
         | books is the issue. In fact, as I went through the process of
         | learning how to self publish, I met many people who write in
         | their free time, including people I know and friends of friends
         | I don't know. I was actually surprised by how many people there
         | are who have either already self published or who have an
         | unpublished book they work on in their spare time.
         | 
         | From my experience, the issue in the US is on the demand side.
         | People here hardly read, and when they do read, it's usually a
         | super popular book all their friends have read or that Tim
         | Ferris talked about. When I published my book, I was surprised
         | by how many close friends and family bought the book to support
         | me, but have never opened it. And it wasn't until after I
         | published my book and became more aware of the reading habits
         | of those around me that I realized how little most people read
         | these days. There are a handful of people who read 30-50 books,
         | but if you were to take the median so those people don't skew
         | the average, I'd estimate that it'd come in around 1-2 books.
         | Probably half of the people in my life don't read a single book
         | in an average year.
         | 
         | While I never wanted to make a living off my book, I'll admit
         | it was discouraging to see how few people read it cover to
         | cover. I took Mark Dawson's course and got all of the social
         | ads, lead magnet, etc. setup. The ads did work, but I quickly
         | found out that of the subset of people who do read a lot in the
         | US, most are 60+ and want self-published books to be either
         | $0.99 or free. I had multiple angry old ladies reach out to me
         | through my Facebook ad complaining that they weren't going to
         | pay $2.99 for a self-published book and that it was upsetting
         | I'd even try.
         | 
         | It wasn't all bad and I did find readers who genuinely enjoyed
         | my book and supporting self-published authors, but these type
         | of people are a very small percent of the population. If the
         | average person read 15 books per year and was ok paying $10 per
         | book to support authors, I think you'd see a lot more self-
         | published books. From my anecdotal experience, there are plenty
         | of people who aspire to write, but we lack a supportive reading
         | culture to fully cultivate authors (even part-time authors).
         | 
         | EDIT: I'll also add that among the people in the median reading
         | 1-2 books per year, most are listening to those books as
         | audiobooks. I'm not one of those people who say listening to
         | books isn't reading, but for the average full length novel it
         | costs about $10k to get an audiobook made, which is way outside
         | the budget for anyone trying to publish books as a hobby. I
         | paid for an audiobook to be made because I have the income and
         | thought it'd be a fun experience (which it was!), but I will
         | never make enough from the book to cover that expense
        
           | TimPC wrote:
           | The demand side is also that for people who do read their
           | spending may be down. I used to buy roughly $400 in books a
           | year. I now buy maybe 1 book a year and subscribe to kindle
           | unlimited for everything else. I don't think I'm reading much
           | less but authors are certainly making less per read,
           | especially since 30% of my spend on KU goes to Amazon and any
           | book that has a publisher still needs to give the publisher
           | their cut out of the remaining 70%.
        
             | dageshi wrote:
             | I think your $400 a year might be a bit of an outlier.
             | Personally I would say the $140 I'm spending per year via
             | KU is probably more than I was spending before. If you
             | multiply this out by the number of people with KU
             | subscriptions it wouldn't surprise me if that's actually
             | more money flowing directly to authors than before.
        
               | TimPC wrote:
               | I guess it depends how much you like paperbacks but they
               | were fairly good at getting me to buy hardcovers because
               | I wanted something right when it came out and didn't want
               | to wait for a paperback. At $40/hardcover $400 is less
               | than a book a month. A KU subscription is less money
               | flowing into the system than someone buying 1 hardcover
               | per quarter.
        
           | hx8 wrote:
           | After graduating college at the age of 22, I've read between
           | 20-50 books every year.
           | 
           | I'm often surprised at how far ahead of the bell curve I am.
           | I am very rarely able to have a conversation about literature
           | with people in real life. If I'm lucky enough to find someone
           | that's read a recently published book I've also read then
           | they often haven't read anything else by the same author. Or
           | they haven't read the influences the author had for the book.
           | Or they aren't aware of the genre trends the book took part
           | in.
           | 
           | Reading in America is a lonely hobby sometimes.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | I maybe used to read 30+ books a year. (And subscribed to a
             | lot of magazines.) I'm not sure I read many fewer words
             | these days but I read far fewer books--maybe 5-10.
        
             | Tanoc wrote:
             | When I was younger I would read ten to twenty books a year,
             | of all genres. As I've gotten older it's dropped to one to
             | two, entirely history books. Part of the problem is
             | discoverability. There's too much stuff, and places like
             | Goodreads aren't good at sorting through them. Since most
             | things get limited physical releases these days you don't
             | find them at book stores or libraries like you used to. I
             | also refuse to support Amazon in any way because I'd rather
             | give the money to the authors directly. Problem with that
             | is the only way to do that most of the time is with pre-
             | orders or drops, and by the time I found out about these
             | authors or that particular work those are long since over.
        
               | jdriselvato wrote:
               | Goodreads discoverability seems pretty good to me. I'm
               | constantly finding new books through their recommended
               | algo, front page, curated lists and search. What else
               | could they do to improve that?
               | 
               | For example, if I wanted find more beatnik related books
               | (after reading On The Road) I search lists and find this
               | fantastic community scored collection with more books
               | than I'll ever want to read on the subject:
               | https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/89976.Beatniks
        
           | tayo42 wrote:
           | > the issue in the US is on the demand side. People here
           | hardly read,
           | 
           | I got back into reading, but its been an effort. Books are
           | big and expensive, my library actually doesn't have stuff
           | available often so I'm always on a wait list. Its hard tough
           | to find time let alone quiet time to focus on a book. So many
           | distractions around, roommates, city noise, neighbors making
           | noise.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | The thing is when I read more books, I'd pull out a book if
             | I had a dead 15-30 minutes more or less anywhere. Nowadays
             | it's easier to default to Facebook, random links, etc. in
             | those sorts of slots.
        
               | wharvle wrote:
               | Most men, at any rate, wore a jacket almost everywhere
               | (as in: suit jacket, sport coat, blazer) in the heyday of
               | pulp fiction, when quite a few could make working-class
               | wages pounding out words on a typewriter.
               | 
               | What do those jackets have? Big hip pockets. What fits
               | perfectly in those, hardly even affecting the drape, with
               | enough room to spare that they can slip in and out
               | effortlessly? Slim little pulp fiction books. Hell, many
               | are even big enough for a volume of Magazine of Fantasy
               | and Science Fiction to fit OK. Can't cram a glossy in
               | there, but pulps? Yep.
               | 
               | Plus, yes, there were no cell phones, but if you want to
               | carry a book today, where do you put it, if you don't
               | have a bag (and even if you do, that's not convenient, is
               | it?)? Well, on your phone, as an ebook, since that fits
               | in a jeans or trouser pocket, and practically no dead-
               | tree books or e-readers do... oh but look, you have some
               | notifications! And there goes the 15 minutes.
               | 
               | Women often carry purses. And who still reads? It's
               | largely women. I'm sure there are other reasons, but--
               | hmmmm.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I read a lot of books when I wasn't wearing a jacket so I
               | don't know.
        
           | dv_dt wrote:
           | Less reading imho, is a symptom of increasing hours worked
           | (which is also linked to lagging livable pay). The US has
           | been increasing the hours worked. Less leisure time and less
           | disposable income drives a host of negative effects.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_average_a.
           | ..
        
             | hattmall wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure it's just more options, mainly social
             | media. Everyone I know has plenty of leisure time to
             | browser stuff on their phone, but book reading is a distant
             | thought for most.
        
           | nprateem wrote:
           | Self publishing causes a huge increase in noise since there
           | are no barriers to getting published. So there's a big risk
           | you'll pick up some garbage, but also vast supply which
           | drives down prices. It also means new books on popular
           | subjects can be quickly written, so unless you have some
           | credentials the odds are stacked against you. So i think it
           | comes down to marketing one way or another.
           | 
           | I plan to write a book one day, but mainly as an aid to
           | establishing my credibility for courses I'll run, so
           | marketing from the other direction.
        
           | netman21 wrote:
           | I feel this. I write non-fiction in the tech industry. I
           | start every project estimating the potential number of
           | readers. My second book is the only one written for a
           | particular profession. I calculated there were at least
           | 20,000 people in the profession. Over 13 years it has sold
           | about 2,000 copies. I have also written the only history of
           | the IT security industry. I update it every year. It too only
           | sells 2,000 copies per edition. Definitely not a way to make
           | a living.
        
           | gadders wrote:
           | Post a link to your book here as well. I'm intrigued to see
           | what it was about.
        
           | Kaytaro wrote:
           | As much as I dislike publishers gatekeeping what gets read,
           | It's a big ask to commit several hours to a self-published
           | book. This is one thing I like about Japanese light novels, I
           | can look up the release calendar and pick out a few that look
           | interesting. They are a relatively quick read and only around
           | $7 (about half that if you live in Japan).
        
           | dsubburam wrote:
           | While there may be less demand for books, I am less sure of
           | the corollary that there is less reading. I remember when
           | Harry Potter was having its hey day, and the Amazon Kindle
           | was first announced, there were stats showing that worldwide
           | reading blipped up.
           | 
           | I suspect folks these days read faster, and read more words,
           | than people past. Except it might be content like Hackernews,
           | YouTube comments, X/Twitter and other doom scrollers, that
           | make that up.
        
           | pjlegato wrote:
           | > in the US ... people here hardly read
           | 
           | This is not true at all. The empirical evidence shows the
           | exact opposite: Americans tend to read far more than almost
           | all other countries.
           | 
           | This "we Americans are a bunch of ignorant louts who don't
           | read" narrative is a distressingly persistent misconception
           | illustrating self-hating biases popular with certain segments
           | of Americans. Fortunately, it is entirely false.
           | 
           | What does the data say?
           | 
           | * According to the chart on page 14 of [4], the US is ranked
           | about #8 or #9 in the world (of 200+ countries) in terms of
           | "books published per capita."
           | 
           | * The US "title production per capita," or "books published
           | per 1 million inhabitants," is about 1,000 -- not the very
           | highest in the entire world, but pretty high.[3]
           | 
           | * Over 25% of all books sold _in the entire world_ are sold
           | in the United States, which has about 4% of the world 's
           | population. [1]
           | 
           | * More books are published in the US than in any other
           | country but China, which has about 4x the population of the
           | US. [1][2]
           | 
           | * In 2016, the US was by far the largest book publishing
           | market in the world by market value, larger even than China.
           | [4]
           | 
           | [1] https://wordsrated.com/global-book-sales-statistics/
           | 
           | [2] https://www.statista.com/chart/12358/which-countries-
           | produce...
           | 
           | [3] https://internationalpublishers.org/wp-
           | content/uploads/2023/... , page 17.
           | 
           | [4] https://masterenedicion.com/wp-
           | content/uploads/2017/11/BookM...
        
             | BenFeldman1930 wrote:
             | Your data does not answer: how many of these books are
             | actually read (in the US)?
        
           | eslaught wrote:
           | I've been reading about 5-10 books a year for the last 10
           | years or so, after having not read anything of substance
           | (outside of school) for some years prior to that.
           | 
           | Since my reading time is limited, I want to read books that
           | are really good. I have to say, quite frankly, that many
           | books just aren't that amazing (and I'm including both
           | traditional and self-published in this). That makes me
           | reluctant to pick up a book unless it's from an author I
           | already know, comes with a really strong recommendation, or
           | just has a superb opening. If a book doesn't have at least
           | one of those three (or ideally two), I'm just not going to
           | pick it up.
           | 
           | This is all anecdata, but my point is the demand side is more
           | complicated. Even given the competition, the vast
           | availability of both traditionally and self-published books
           | doesn't guarantee that quality goes up, at least in
           | aggregate.
        
             | wharvle wrote:
             | At 5-10 books a year, there's also the "problem" that
             | you've got _more than_ a lifetime supply, just sticking to
             | time-tested, very-likely-to-be-excellent classics. That 's
             | even true for relatively-modern genre fic and such, these
             | days--it's not the 1960s anymore, you can fill shelves and
             | shelves with good-reputation sci fi and fantasy. This is
             | all true even if zero new books are published... ever.
        
           | Dalewyn wrote:
           | >People here hardly read,
           | 
           | I feel it's not so much that people _don 't read_, it's that
           | people _don 't read books_ anymore in lieu of other mediums
           | (most prominently social media) or methods (eg: watching
           | television, playing games with a story component).
           | 
           | We all do plenty of _reading_ in our lives, after all.
        
         | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
         | It would be so great if more professions in the US had part
         | time options. I could make a zillion dollars as a dev for a big
         | tech company, but there's nowhere that pays 80% of that for 80%
         | of the hours. Hell, I don't think I have the option to make 50%
         | of that for 80% of the hours. Salaried careers seem to only
         | have full time positions, and it sucks.
        
           | ses1984 wrote:
           | Specialization is at the core of economic profit. Damn you,
           | economics!
        
           | dingnuts wrote:
           | if you have the soft skills (I sure dont lol) I -think-
           | contracting/consulting can be a solution to this? It's not
           | exactly part time, but you work your contract and then take a
           | break before you pick up the next one, which does give you
           | more flexibility with your time. You could eg work six months
           | on, six months off, that way.
           | 
           | Maybe. I knew a PE who did this years ago, but I wonder if
           | there's any software engineers on this board who have
           | successfully done this
        
             | jermaustin1 wrote:
             | I usually negotiate my contracts to be 20-30 hours per week
             | of work. This gives me ample time to work on side projects
             | (aka playing ck3) and run my Etsy shop.
             | 
             | The soft skills aren't much, you have to remember your boss
             | is also just as social awkward as you, because, they are
             | usually cut from the same software developer cloth. But
             | remaining on good terms with past managers helps a lot. I
             | still have annual dinners with almost everyone I've ever
             | worked with, even if we are all scattered across the US.
        
           | scarecrowbob wrote:
           | "It would be so great if more professions in the US had part
           | time options. "
           | 
           | I agree with this, and I've personally led a life that has
           | had many different kinds of occupations (I've been a
           | musician, a teacher, and a programmer- usually all three at
           | once).
           | 
           | I've come to the conclusion that a lot of the reason for
           | "full-time" employment has to do with making workers
           | unavailable for other projects.
           | 
           | Or, if you prefer, full time jobs aren't there because
           | 40-hours-a-week is how much can be gotten out of a worker,
           | but because that's how much time is necessary to keep someone
           | from getting another job that might interfere with the "real"
           | job.
           | 
           | Many folks, especially folks who do weird stuff that
           | requires, if not great intellect or training, familiarity
           | with a specific system (as is the case with software, for
           | instance) aren't actually working a full time load. That's a
           | really common observation, I think. But the way to understand
           | why that continues to happen is that their employment ensures
           | their availability.
           | 
           | That may see strange, and on some levels it's simply not
           | correct and certainly not how most folks are thinking about
           | full time employment.
           | 
           | But if you push an employer to give you fewer hours, that
           | understanding might make a lot of sense out of why they
           | generally won't allow part-time work- if you've got a side
           | gig, they can't have that take priority over their tasks.
        
           | prosqlinjector wrote:
           | Your value to your company is also not a linear function of
           | your time there. There are high fixed costs to training,
           | liability, insurance, etc. They are paying you to always be
           | available, etc.
           | 
           | With that said, I think it's very possible to find a much
           | more easier development job with a lower salary. You should
           | be able to meet performance expectations in very little time.
        
           | j2kun wrote:
           | The company Galois notably supports this sort of arrangement
           | (you pick your hours and your pay is scaled accordingly). I
           | think their corporate structure could be applied more widely.
        
         | jrmg wrote:
         | Iceland is an affluent western nation with its own language,
         | but a population of less than 375,000 people - fewer people
         | than many cities in other countries. And yet these people want
         | books just as much as any other people - perhaps given the
         | nation's culture even more so.
         | 
         | For supply (and selection) to keep up with demand, it requires
         | a far higher percentage of the population to write.
        
       | graphe wrote:
       | > By far the largest percentage of respondents, 79%, were white,
       | followed by 8% Black, 4% Hispanic, 2% AAPI, and 2% Native
       | American. Twelve percent identified as LGBTQIA+ and 11%
       | identified as disabled, meeting the ADA's definition. The survey
       | did find that diversity efforts were beginning to bear fruit--
       | Black, AAPI, and Hispanic authorship has increased the most since
       | 2019, and LGBTQIA+ and nonbinary authors were also above average
       | among new authors. Sixty-one percent of respondents were women,
       | 34% men, and 5% nonbinary.
       | 
       | What diversity efforts did they do?
       | 
       | >The median book-related income for survey respondents in 2022
       | was up 9% from 2018, adjusted for inflation, with all the
       | increase coming from full-time authors, whose income was up 20%,
       | compared to a 4% decline for part-time authors.
       | 
       | Whatever was to increase income worked. The books they talk about
       | are mostly what I'd consider trash I wouldn't read: generic
       | romance novels and fan fiction with changed names. Low ceiling.
        
       | Procrastes wrote:
       | I've published traditionally and it was a great experience. The
       | publisher (O'Reilly) was great to work with, and the editors made
       | a tremendous, positive difference in the finished work. That was
       | many years ago.
       | 
       | Since, I've moved to fiction and self publishing, and that's been
       | hard, but rewarding. It's hard and expensive to build a following
       | on your own with just books and ads.
       | 
       | Now I have moved to web serials and subscriptions. I'm convinced
       | this is the best time to be a writer. The hardest part, finding
       | an audience, is as easy as sticking to a publishing schedule and
       | engaging with readers.
        
       | OliveMate wrote:
       | Not in response to the article but the general vibes in the
       | comments.
       | 
       | Writing a published book and having it out there is a thought
       | that really resonates me. I wonder what I'd write if I had more
       | time to myself, a clear mind, and /if I was a radically different
       | person who wanted to do it/.
       | 
       | The thought of having written something, put it out there, and to
       | have someone enjoy it is lovely - I'd be happy writing schlock if
       | it came straight from my heart. But in terms of being the sort of
       | person to sit down every day, concentrate, and slave away at
       | it... That isn't me. Props to people who manage to put anything
       | on a single page, let alone finish a whole book.
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | I get that this is the authors guild and activism and lobbying is
       | literally their job, but statements like "survey finds that
       | median book and writing-related income for authors in 2022 was
       | below the poverty level" are meaningless.
       | 
       | What makes one an "author" exactly? Publishing a book? I can do
       | that in 5 minutes online with 3 clicks. Does that mean I qualify
       | for the survey? Well, I made $0 from my writing last year, so I
       | guess that means I'm being exploited and the government isn't
       | properly valuing the essential contribution I make to society.
       | I'll expect my weekly check in the mail.
       | 
       | It's like saying the average software developer makes below-
       | poverty wages from their work...if you consider everyone in the
       | world with an idea for an app in their head to be a software
       | developer.
        
         | spencerflem wrote:
         | No, it would be like counting everyone who made an app as a
         | software developer
        
           | paxys wrote:
           | Go through any of the app stores and look up all the trash
           | that is published on a daily basis that gets single digit
           | downloads. Look at all the new websites registered. Millions
           | of people follow "create a React to-do list" tutorials and
           | write their own. These are all software developers who make
           | zero income from their craft. Yet no one is arguing that
           | software developers as a whole are underprivileged. You can
           | apply this same logic to actors, musicians, real estate
           | agents and a hundred other professions. There's just the
           | understanding that if there are zero barriers to entry you
           | have to have _some_ test that sets the professionals /serious
           | practitioners apart. Otherwise your surveys are always going
           | to tend towards 0.
        
       | throwuwu wrote:
       | Tangential, but do any authors apply the same techniques promoted
       | by software developers for honing their craft? e.g. instead of
       | trying to write the next great American novel you focus on
       | writing a lot of short stories and then analyze them for market
       | fit and expand on the ones that have legs?
        
         | ghaff wrote:
         | I think writers as a whole are far less inclined to concern
         | themselves with market fit than many developers are.
         | 
         | Short stories haven't historically been very lucrative relative
         | to longer works. Although there were some genres, eg SF, where
         | they were a natural entry point.
        
           | throwuwu wrote:
           | Maybe they should be? I suggested short stories as a way to
           | practice and test the waters since they would work well with
           | social media and aggregator sites, people are willing to read
           | a short story they find on reddit or hn but much less likely
           | to read a whole book. Keeping your "demos" short also
           | requires less commitment and takes less time so you can do
           | more of them. The idea isn't to earn money from short stories
           | but to do analytics on them in order to decide which to turn
           | into a novel.
        
         | diamondap wrote:
         | Actually, one software-developer-turned-writer did something
         | close. Check out Chris Fox's book "Write to Market" on Amazon.
         | He sat down and analyzed sales figures for different book
         | genres on Amazon then chose a genre where he thought he could
         | squeeze onto the top ten bestseller list. He's been cranking
         | out books for years and selling pretty well. If you check his
         | author page, you'll see he has quite a few titles out.
        
       | AlbertCory wrote:
       | It IS near-impossible. I have two books on Amazon (search "Albert
       | Cory") which are actually _about our industry_ , and I've
       | mentioned them here many times. Fortunately I'm retired and don't
       | need the income.
       | 
       | One data point for you: I've been taking various angles on my new
       | book, looking for books with that feature, and then finding the
       | agent who represented them. Sounds smart, right? Hasn't worked so
       | far.
       | 
       | One fallout of that is, I've been checking these books out of the
       | library (less $$$ commitment there!) and at least starting them.
       | What dreck people read!
       | 
       | If the main character isn't solving a murder, connecting with
       | their long-lost lover, fighting terrorists, or engaged in other
       | TV-worthy plots, the book will never make it onto bookshelves.
       | Since I don't have to care about people's lousy taste, I don't.
       | 
       | Lastly, the figure of $10K for an audiobook that someone
       | mentioned is way too high, in my experience.
        
       | ffitch wrote:
       | Worries me a bit that an established "natural selection" process
       | pivoted towards quick turnaround. Thirty years ago publishing
       | house would decline 99% of the manuscripts, the rest they will
       | heavily edit, print in somewhat large numbers, and extensively
       | promote. Today they accept more stuff, print in small 3,000-5,000
       | batches, then throw away forever. To me, feels like a young but
       | promising author went from a 1% chance of getting recognized to
       | 10% chance of getting printed and 100% chance of getting
       | forgotten right after.
        
       | CM30 wrote:
       | It's the same with most creative fields really. The vast majority
       | of people earn very little from their work, and a few really
       | skilled/lucky folks at the top of the field earn a fortune.
       | 
       | See also music, art, game design/development, content creation on
       | sites like YouTube and Twitch, blogging, etc.
       | 
       | Part of this is simply due to competition; there was stacks of it
       | before the internet got big, and there's probably a thousand
       | times more now the internet has become normalised. The barrier to
       | entry to writing a book or becoming a writer is extremely low in
       | the grand scheme of things (well, if you have the
       | determination/patience to finish), so enough people do that
       | you're spoilt for choice there.
       | 
       | Add this to how challenging the marketing/sales side of running a
       | business is by default, and how trying to make a sustainable
       | income as an author or creator is basically being a sole
       | trader/entrepreneur, and well, it's not too surprising that most
       | people don't do particularly well from it.
        
         | cruano wrote:
         | On the competition aspect, I think it's also important to look
         | at the consumer side. For me it was wild knowing Mission
         | Impossible struggled at the box office because of
         | Barbie/Oppenheimer, especially because it was such a big budget
         | film and it was actually my favorite of the three. The reality
         | is that most people would maybe go once a month to the cinema,
         | so they have to prioritize what to watch.
         | 
         | To make matters worse, you are also competing with all of
         | history. If you want to read 12 books this year, when are you
         | going to get to the small creators with years-worth of classics
         | to go through?
        
           | PsylentKnight wrote:
           | Agree with your overall point, but the Mission Impossible
           | thing isn't that surprising to me. I think a lot of people
           | are tired of endless reboots/sequels of action-adventure
           | movies. Also I think Tom Cruise can have the opposite of star
           | power these days, a lot of people feel kind of ick about him.
        
             | leephillips wrote:
             | I don't watch movies with certain actors in them. He's one
             | of them.
        
       | WalterBright wrote:
       | It's a lot like picking a career as an artist, a musician, or an
       | athlete. A very small percentage makes a lucrative living, and
       | the rest wander in the desert.
       | 
       | > unconscionable contracts
       | 
       | Self-publishing has never been an easier option than today.
       | 
       | > book bans
       | 
       | As far as I can tell, these are only for R rated books in schools
       | and libraries. Isn't it the same as R movies? Nobody thinks of R
       | movies as being banned.
       | 
       | > action to build a system that properly values the essential
       | contributions of writers
       | 
       | They're valued by the free market, i.e. people freely paying what
       | they believe the book is worth to them. I'm curious how the Guild
       | expects to change this. Have government regulations that mandate
       | payment per word? Government subsidy?
        
         | WalterBright wrote:
         | Many types of books have ancillary results for the author than
         | can be lucrative. For example, writing a solid academic book
         | can get you a job or more pay in an academic setting, or a top
         | job in a technical position.
        
       | paulpauper wrote:
       | Substack is better, imho, if you can serialize it . Monthly subs
       | is recurring revenue, compared to one-time book purchases.
        
       | sleepydog wrote:
       | Anecdotally I have found the amount of books I read has
       | skyrocketed since I got a library card. I used to hesitate at
       | book stores trying to decide if a book was worth $30 and the
       | space on my (already full) book shelf. Now, if I hear about a
       | book that's even remotely interesting, I check it out from the
       | library almost impulsively. If I don't like it, I don't finish
       | it. If I really like it, I buy a copy. The checkout deadlines
       | also provide a nice motivation for me to finish a book.
       | 
       | I went from reading less than 5-10 books a year best to reading
       | 40 books in 2023. And the more I read, the more I want to read.
       | 
       | I am spoiled, living in NYC, as the NYPL and Brooklyn PL between
       | them have a pretty extensive catalog, and it's rare that they
       | don't have a book I want, even recently published books. There's
       | often a wait list though. It's also easy to get a lot of reading
       | done during my commute on public transit. We still don't get cell
       | service on the MTA between stations, so books are the best form
       | of entertainment.
       | 
       | Of course, I suppose if everyone used the library exclusively,
       | writers would make very little money. But I like to think it
       | works out. I bought more books last year than I did before using
       | the library, and attended a few book talks & signings at my local
       | book store.
        
         | Lord-Jobo wrote:
         | Piracy did the same thing for me. If would read more than 50
         | pages in a book i would buy a copy, if not i would delete and
         | move on. I think i fully read 21 in 2023, and ditched probably
         | about as many before 50 pages. I absolutely bought and read
         | more books than in 2022, not even close.
        
           | pstorm wrote:
           | Couldn't you do the same with Kindle samples? Seems lower
           | effort.
        
             | jjice wrote:
             | I may be wrong, but Kindle samples are often much shorter
             | than 50 pages in my experience. Usually too short for me to
             | make a choice as to whether I want to read the book or not.
        
       | ramesh31 wrote:
       | Pulp will be almost completely replaced by AI, no doubt, within
       | the next couple years. I don't see how anyone could possibly
       | consider that a viable career path anymore. The people who
       | consume it couldn't care less or notice, and they'll have it
       | tailored precisely to their own tastes based on advertising data
       | collection. It was never about quality, just sheer quantity of
       | the same thing over and over again (but _slightly_ different),
       | which LLMs are phenomenal at. Same goes for pop music and
       | mainstream cinema on a slightly further timescale.
        
       | fredgrott wrote:
       | A few weeks back one of the VCs now attached to newline co
       | attempted to sell me on becoming dev author through their
       | program.
       | 
       | I of course pointed out that as I market upfront I am getting
       | paid via my substack so essentially I solved the problems his
       | startup is still trying to solve.
       | 
       | And of course he ghosted me.
        
       | donald_piano wrote:
       | https://www.amazon.com/Across-Silicon-Bravely-Stan-Stevens/d...
        
       | Evenjos wrote:
       | I have a 6 book contract with Podium, my debut was in the top 100
       | books of 2023 by Kirkus, and I am nowhere near quitting my day
       | job.
       | 
       | I've paid attention to the publishing industry for years. Like
       | all of the arts, it's oversaturated and there's a lot of churn.
       | 
       | IMO, writers who earn a full-time living as authors fall into
       | three basic categories. They either a) established themselves as
       | blockbuster bestsellers with the Big Five before Amazon
       | democratized the marketplace, circa 2010 and earlier, b) they
       | established themselves as blockbuster bestsellers as early
       | adopters of the Amazon Kindle marketplace, circa 2011 to 2016, or
       | c) they own an advertising agency, are married to someone who
       | owns an advertising agency, they are slick marketing gurus, or
       | they are major social media influencers.
       | 
       | There are exceptions. I see interesting innovations in the web
       | serial space, where I play around. I sell advance chapters on
       | Patreon. Some authors do earn a full-time living that way.
       | 
       | But in general, yes, it is very tough to be a professional author
       | or an artist or a musician or an indie game developer these days.
       | Everyone wants to be one.
       | 
       | I also see cynical authors and artists using AI to 100x their
       | content production so they can nickel and dime their way into top
       | seller spots. The algorithms boost anyone whose works
       | consistently sell and bury everyone else.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-03 23:02 UTC)