# Self-Publishing Failure



## EdShull (Mar 1, 2013)

An interesting article from Salon.com. Curious to hear thoughts from the people here.

http://www.salon.com/2013/04/02/im_a_self_publishing_failure/


----------



## Victoria Champion (Jun 6, 2012)

No one gets to decide if they are a self publishing success or not with ONE book.


----------



## Anne Frasier (Oct 22, 2009)

looks like it's only available in print, which seems really strange.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

I'm not sure that's an article or simply one person's experience.

His next installment on his quest for the Pulitzer will be that he read somewhere to get published on blogs, meaning write x-number of words not matter what it is or where it appears, to get your name out there. And so that's what he's doing.


----------



## Zackery Arbela (Jan 31, 2011)

I was just about to make a post about this...beat me to it...

I think anyone who goes into self-publishing with the expectation of becoming the next Amanda Hocking or E.L. James is setting themselves up for a massive crash with reality. You've a better chance of winning the Powerball that being struck by that particular bolt of lightening. Even making enough money to pay for more than a cup of coffee is itself a major achievement.

I can't speak for others, but the reason I do it is because I love it. I love to write. I want to put my work out there. If someone actually spends money to buy it, well that's just gravy. I don't muck about with more than the bare minimum of publicity efforts, since that time spent away from writing the next story. far as I can tell, success in this game is a matter of blind luck (read this article about Hugh Howet on the Wall Street Journal for evidence of this...)

I have no expectations of making a living at this (though a man can dream...) The creative process is its own reward, and it is enough.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

That hat...

If he's going for intellectual cool, I think he'd do well to invest in a nice tweed flat cap. Uncompromising in its skull-huggery, the flat cap will make you a hit at all the rich people parties.

Other than that, I think we have a case of someone in love with the idea of being a writer, but unwilling (or perhaps too impatient to) hold out for the long haul. These boards alone are host to a number of steady successes (myself and MANY others), very few ultra successes, and even fewer one-book successes.

The only piece of advice that works here is the same old advice we hear all the time: write more books and self-publishing is a marathon, not a sprint.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

Some people believe their book is the best thing ever. And when that book is not an instant success, they imply readers of a bestselling book are stupid. Awesome.


----------



## CarlG (Sep 16, 2012)

Sounds like the guy is just getting started. He seems to be at the equivalent stage of a person sitting on his bed yawning, having just swung his feet over to the floor from a prone position. Why he is writing about this as though he's already had a crappy day? He not a failure. I didn't see his tough lesson in vanity. I didn't feel his burn. Get up, man. Go to work. I wonder if he's trying for publicity through some sort of reverse psychology; I'm a failure, make me a success. I'm not sure what Salon saw in it.


----------



## R.V. Doon (Apr 1, 2013)

Did he really say hitting the publish button = masturbation?


----------



## 60911 (Jun 13, 2012)

Victoria Champion said:


> No one gets to decide if they are a self publishing success or not with ONE book unless they are deluded by ego, which he admits he is.


Agree. Very few tradpubbed authors tend to be able to write one book that will retire them unless they already have considerable celebrity, but apparently that myth will live to die another day.


----------



## PeggyI (Jan 9, 2011)

But somehow he's got the pull/connections to get himself on Salon. I won't cry for him. He'll do fine.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Well, he made fun of Fifty Shades readers in the article. Cuz that's original and makes you seem fun.

You know what Fifty Shades readers are? People who buy books. I'm guessing this guy is writing novels for people who don't buy books or won't buy self-pubbed books, and that's the first problem.


----------



## Michael Kingswood (Feb 18, 2011)

What a pompous *ss.  Complete and total d**chebag.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

R.V. Doon said:


> Did he really say hitting the publish button = masturbation?


Yes he did. I guess we are all taking things into our own hands.   This guy is quoting outdated and inaccurate information and it makes me wonder if he got all his self-publishing information from some other site. It looks like the same stats I kept seeing. Anyway, he sounds like he's proud that he's written a book, but doesn't actually believe in his book. I mean, he comes off as being embarrassed but I'm not sure if it's because he's not really sure if his book is good, or because he's embarrassed to be self-publishing. He's making all these jokes to make it sound like he did it on a lark--but then he's obviously spent some money for questionable advertising, so I'm not sure what he really wants.

He blew a chance to get some sales from his article because I couldn't find him on Amazon and I went to his page and didn't see any links there either. I don't know if he writes under another name or what. I probably could find it with some digging, but it shouldn't be that hard and if it is, he's not doing it right.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

BrianKittrell said:


> That hat...
> 
> If he's going for intellectual cool, I think he'd do well to invest in a nice tweed flat cap. Uncompromising in its skull-huggery, the flat cap will make you a hit at all the rich people parties.


Dunno. Looks a little golf-like. I'm thinking more like a beat up fedora. Not like the newspaper hound of pulp fiction, but sorta kinda.


----------



## Al Dente (Sep 3, 2012)

I can't take a word of his article seriously. There are so many things wrong with his quest for fame, I could take all day mentioning them. Most notably:

1- You don't write one book with the notion that you're going to be set for life.
2- I found the Amazon page for the "out of print" version of his book. His cover is horrendous. 
3- I checked his Createspace listing for the print book. His cover is horrendous.
4- He didn't bother to start an Amazon Author Central page to help with fan outreach / discovery of his website or social media page.
5- His blurb is far too vague.
6- He has an "I wanna be cool by being cool while cracking jokes about how being cool totally sucks" attitude.
7- I watched his book trailer. I'm sure he tried his best, but it was quite unprofessional, even for an amateur.
8- He published his book in August and pulled it in February only to re-release it as a paperback with an altered title. He's not giving his work a real chance to take off.
9- Finally, according to the article, his friends have told him some of the things I have mentioned, and he acknowledges these faults. Still, he goes through with the bad choices anyway.

I don't say these things to be harsh. I say them because as I slowly learn what to do by learning what NOT to do, these kinds of things make me shake my head. I want to reach out and help, but I fear it wouldn't do any good anyway. What frightens me the most is that this guy teaches writing classes to college students. He probably also offers tips about the business aspect of writing, which is something that he seems not to understand completely.

I know someone who teaches writing classes in my city to college students. He scoffs when I mention that writing outlines can be helpful. He constantly informs me that he tells ALL of his students that "pantsing" is the only way they should ever write a book. He tells his students to throw away their outlines because they are completely useless. I write both ways, depending on the project. When I'm outlining, and I mention it, he blows it off as if what I'm doing is pointless and totally unprofessional / unproductive. 

Guess how many books this creative writing teacher / expert on pantsing has written? ZERO. He half-completes a book during nano and moves on to another idea. Oh, he's also a member of a certain writing forum I refuse to mention. I'm sure you all can guess which one.

Also, please let me get out of the way that I'm not trashing pantsing by any means. I have great respect for anyone who can do it. My goal is to become a creative writing teacher. In my class, I would teach both methods. A teacher should never limit their students in a way that could hinder them in the future.

Anyway, I'm rambling and slightly off-topic as usual. In conclusion, the aspiring author in question needs to show some professionalism and perhaps take some time to get plenty of pointers from other self-published writers. He could go a long way.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

It's really sad that this guy had the connections to be published on major site like Salon, because he doesn't represent most of the hard working self published authors. He wrote one book, which is only available via paperback (Createspace) for $14.99. The fact that he didn't even bother to publish an eBook version shows how delusional he is and how little he really understands about the current self publishing model that he has read about.

Yet, there he is on Salon professing to a self publishing failure when he hasn't even tried! One paperback book, one video book trailer, and an $80 AdWords promotion. Gee, what a shocker things didn't work out like he read they would.

Even worse, his byline says he teaches writing at a local university. I feel bad for his students. They're probably learning some very bad lessons on the business of self publishing.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

PeggyI said:


> But somehow he's got the pull/connections to get himself on Salon. I won't cry for him. He'll do fine.


All it takes is a negative slant on self-publishing to get heard on Salon it seems to me.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Michael Kingswood said:


> What a pompous *ss. Complete and total d**chebag.


I had the same exact thought!


----------



## Vince Dickinson (Mar 5, 2013)

I liked the article. And I think his book will sell now that he's got this article out. Maybe more of us should try this scheme of telling a national magazine that self-publishing doesn't work, and by the way, here's how you can buy my book.

He does have a decent day job, it seems to me. Never put all of your baskets on one egg.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Vince Dickinson said:


> I liked the article. And I think his book will sell now that he's got this article out.


Watch his ranking. He won't get the slightest bounce from this, I predict.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

Eric C said:


> Watch his ranking. He won't get the slightest bounce from this, I predict.


I agree. But if he had an ebook version (not just paperback), I think he would have seen a bounce.


----------



## Vince Dickinson (Mar 5, 2013)

Well, as David pointed out, the Winters guy made a lot of common errors first-time indie authors make, and was told by friends, but still called the process a failure (instead of his obstinate attitude). 

So maybe you're right that he won't get much help. But a lot of people read Salon.


----------



## Zackery Arbela (Jan 31, 2011)

Jut out of curiosity, why does Salon have it in for indie writers? Given their general political stance, one would think they's appreciate those going outside the publishing establishment...


----------



## Soothesayer (Oct 19, 2012)

I haven't read the article (yet), but is that really all the books he has? ONE book?

Does a stand-up comic walk off the stage after he gets a few laughs from ONE joke? How about a fisherman who likes to fish? Does he quit fishing if he hasn't caught anything for an hour?

One book is nothing. I'd say you need a minimum of five books (novels), and really more like TEN novels to make serious money in this game, which will only get more competitive as time goes on. The gold rush is over (sorry marketers). Now it is about quality.


----------



## Joe_Nobody (Oct 23, 2012)

I love articles like this. They discourage people from trying to write a book and publish. It will save many from pain and trauma.
I know that sounds a bit harsh...protective even, but our chosen method of gainful employment isn't for everyone.
The gold rush would've never happened if articles like this had been available in the old days and people would've known the truth.

I cringe every time I post to the March sales thread, or boast of a milestone. That simple text accounting of thousands of sales or piles of money doesn't do justice to the hard work and tears most of us experience when we are starting out.

The line between encouraging those with talent who should be here and providing a false sense of gold-in-them-there-hills is narrow.


----------



## Susan Kaye Quinn (Aug 8, 2011)

PeggyI said:


> But somehow he's got the pull/connections to get himself on Salon. I won't cry for him. He'll do fine.


IDK. I think the guy doesn't really want to sell books. If *I* was going to have an article on Salon, I'd be sure to have my book, you know, FOR SALE at the time.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Salon does have a weird string of anti-self-publishing articles going for it. Perhaps its stymied authors should try writing about vampires or aliens or college students.

There are two problematic ideas here, though. First, that you can win with just one book. And second, that people are just going to magically find and love that book. How is that going to happen when there are thousands of writers with established fanbases ready to bury your new release the moment it goes live?


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

Haha, there are writers like this all over the place, just most of them rarely get decent column inches. I met a lot on the KDP Forums, which is why I no longer post there.  Goodreads is infected too although they're easy to avoid over there. The guy should stop being such a shameless egomaniac and start being proactive. I can't stand woe-is-me indies. He needs to pull his finger out and make an actual effort. Now, I know not to waste any money on a book trailer, though.


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

I'm just reading the article now, but this sentence really made me go "Huh?"



> That first month my Amazon page received fewer hits than hoorayforcongress.com.


What could he mean by that? Do any of you get information on how many hits your Amazon pages get?

It seems like he really knows almost nothing about publishing on Amazon. It's not traditional publishing. It's a whole other game, and if you don't know how to play you aren't going to get good results.


----------



## Error404 (Sep 6, 2012)

I got the feeling from the article that the man was deluded from the beginning, and any and all types of encouragement made him expect to be the next Big Hit in the self-publishing world.  When it didn't pan out, he quit


----------



## D.L. Shutter (Jul 9, 2011)

Some takeaways for me.



> ...as well as the hundreds of dollars and many hours about to go down the drain...Self-publishing is the literary world's version of masturbation, except the results are quite often less thrilling, and you usually end up with a mess


.

Wow. Great F^@#ing attitude! I can just see him pouring his heart and every ounce of passion, sweat and energy into his efforts. His whole diatribe reeks with the pretencious self-pity (and loathing) of a Harvard Emeritus forced to teach summer GED classes at the local community center while hoping and praying for a stray meteorite to come burning down to end his misery.



> The fact remains, however, that half of self-publishers make less than $500 for their efforts, according to an article in the Guardian


.

Actually, the wholly unsupported estimate from Morrison was something like 80%, but regardless, there's your second big mistake: trying to learn about self-pub from the Guardian.

I'm not knocking anyone's cup of tea here, had some spats about the "literary" topic here, but the plain truth is that it's not the hottest selling stuff out there. Especially under the murderously competitive (ha-ha) Thriller category, where's he's listed under.

So, a veritable unknown with a single CS release, no e-book version, that's highly priced with an "artsy" cover that speaks nothing about the story and, while well done, isn't very catching or remotely interesting. I have opinions about the story, based on the blurb, but at this point it's kicking someone while they're down.

Aaaaand he was expecting what result? He's shocked the world didn't clamor for his first release like rabid zombies?

Sorry, but I see he has two choices: Stop reading Salon and Guardian and spend more time here on KB, to get a clue, or take the kick to the ba((s his massive ego has earned him and get over it.

Oh, and a big surprise, Salon runs another negative piece on self-pub. How refreshing.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

Hey, don't be dissin' the aliens, Eddie!

Interestingly, the guy can obviously write. His prose moves nicely and I wasn't tempted to scan, as I normally do online articles and blogs. Maybe he should ditch the hat and start working on this.


----------



## TexasGirl (Dec 21, 2011)

This is a pretty typical freelance article: Do an experiement just to watch it flop and write about it.

I could do this on any number of topics and pitch it: try out for a cooking show and fail, pretend to be a NY subway musician and fail, be a phone sex operator and fail. This is basic stuff for building creds.

Clearly he's not serious about self-pubbing. He just wanted to write the article.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

I'll take the guy at his word. If he says he's a failure, who am I to argue.


----------



## Hugh Howey (Feb 11, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'll take the guy at his word. If he says he's a failure, who am I to argue.


LMAO


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Quiss said:


> Hey, don't be dissin' the aliens, Eddie!
> 
> Interestingly, the guy can obviously write. His prose moves nicely and I wasn't tempted to scan, as I normally do online articles and blogs. Maybe he should ditch the hat and start working on this.


I wasn't dissing anybody, I write aliens too.


----------



## Ben Mathew (Jan 27, 2013)

He just published (or republished) the ebook today. It's priced at $9.99, which is probably not a good idea.

I read the first page. He can definitely write well. If he lowers the price, and changes the cover, he'll give the book a chance.


----------



## cdvsmx5 (May 23, 2012)

Another Fool's joke.


----------



## Cheryl M. (Jan 11, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'll take the guy at his word. If he says he's a failure, who am I to argue.


Right?  *snort*


----------



## Cheryl M. (Jan 11, 2011)

Ben Mathew said:


> He just published (or republished) the ebook today. It's priced at $9.99, which is probably not a good idea.
> 
> I read the first page. He can definitely write well. If he lowers the price, and changes the cover, he'll give the book a chance.


Well don't tell him that! 

I think I may be heartless. I think I may need support group. My thought is if he can't be bothered to figure out how to do it well BEFORE publishing, then maybe he just needs to be suffer in purgatory until he decides to figure it out. I mean, where is he getting his information? From the people that AREN'T self publishing? Because it's not like it's hard to find. Heck, just a few clicks on JA Konrath's blog - which already causes controversy even within self-publishers - and you've got more to work with than what he's done. I can't figure out why there's no ebook.


----------



## A.A (Mar 30, 2012)

I thought the piece was entertaining - but the guy is suffering from the singular pain of wanting to be popular (taking the well-worn path of writing stories about women tortured and killed by serial killers - blech!) whilst desperately wanting to come across as a self-deprecating intellectual whose words hold the gritty realities of the human condition. 
And therefore, he fails at both.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

jnfr said:


> I'm just reading the article now, but this sentence really made me go "Huh?"
> 
> What could he mean by that? Do any of you get information on how many hits your Amazon pages get?
> 
> It seems like he really knows almost nothing about publishing on Amazon. It's not traditional publishing. It's a whole other game, and if you don't know how to play you aren't going to get good results.


He was just making a joke about being as popular and liked as Congress.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

There is a term for people like this:

Pompous arse

He obviously likes the sound of his own voice and revels in his own cleverness. He self-published so he could write a daft and witty article about "How I failed at self-publishing".

Blergh.

Self-absorbed idiot.


----------



## Debra Purdy Kong (Apr 1, 2009)

Zackery Arbela said:


> I was just about to make a post about this...beat me to it...
> 
> I think anyone who goes into self-publishing with the expectation of becoming the next Amanda Hocking or E.L. James is setting themselves up for a massive crash with reality. You've a better chance of winning the Powerball that being struck by that particular bolt of lightening. Even making enough money to pay for more than a cup of coffee is itself a major achievement.
> 
> ...


I agree totally! I keep working at this, and have been for a long time because it gives me tremendous satisfaction. Little by little, I receive a bit more recognition and reviews from more established places, but I have no illusions about selling 70 million copies like E.L. James. And I don't mind working day jobs because those experiences have provided a lot of great writing material.

Last year, Joe Konrath wrote a terrific blog about how much luck plays a part in an authors' success, and how it still baffles him why some books are mega sellers while others--equally as good, if not better--lapse into oblivion. That's why I don't sweat it.


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2013)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'll take the guy at his word. If he says he's a failure, who am I to argue.


Hah, nicely done.


----------



## AmsterdamAssassin (Oct 21, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I'll take the guy at his word. If he says he's a failure, who am I to argue.


Plus, you should never argue with an idiot, because idiots only drag you down to their level, where they can beat you with experience.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

jnfr said:


> I'm just reading the article now, but this sentence really made me go "Huh?"
> 
> What could he mean by that? Do any of you get information on how many hits your Amazon pages get?
> 
> It seems like he really knows almost nothing about publishing on Amazon. It's not traditional publishing. It's a whole other game, and if you don't know how to play you aren't going to get good results.


I got the immediate impression he was trying to make a joke by making up the fact that he could see his Amazon page views. The point being: He felt no one was paying attention to his book on Amazon and that people were more interested in a pro-Congress page (which goes against the grain of public sentiment in numerous polls). It's an overused joke in politics, and it's an overused joke in Internet popularity. It rarely is substantiated on actual numbers.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

PeggyI said:


> But somehow he's got the pull/connections to get himself on Salon. I won't cry for him. He'll do fine.


Getting published on Salon isn't that difficult. Quite often, their articles are pulled from Open Salon, which is a free for all blogging section of Salon. There are some very interesting writers on Open Salon who after time, usually get an article or two onto Salon, which runs so many articles a day that they end up sometimes putting some bizarre stuff onto their main page.


----------



## D.L. Shutter (Jul 9, 2011)

> I think he has achieved what he set out to accomplish...people are talking about him.


And just think, if he had an e-book version, competitively priced, he might be getting curiosity sales right now.

But then I guess he'd be "undervaluing" his work by giving into the low-brow sales gimmicks (like low prices) used by all those unworthy, scab, indie writer's.


----------



## isabellajones (Mar 2, 2013)

I'm a freelance journalist IRL and I have to say for as many misconceptions this writer has made about self publishing, the same can be said for the generalizations some have made here about writing for Salon i.e. that it's not difficult (it is quite difficult), it's a "pretty typical freelance article" (really? That's all it takes is go out and fail at something and write about it? Wow, that's going to be my new business model!), that Salon "has it in" for indie writers (). I do think the author of this piece didn't do his homework, thus why he comes across as delusional.

On the other hand, if you had a great story to tell about how self-publishing worked out for you (Hugh Howey? Amanda Hocking? etc.?), Salon, as well as other media outlets would love to hear your story ... as long as there's a story there to tell. So go ahead ... pitch it!


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2013)

I'm not sure which is funnier, the article, or the fact that folks are getting all worked up and offended thinking it is serious. The art of satire is lost on some folks.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

R.V. Doon said:


> Did he really say hitting the publish button = masturbation?


Yeah. I can't wait. I'm gonna try publishing like ten times in one day and see if I can do it.


----------



## isabellajones (Mar 2, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm not sure which is funnier, the article, or the fact that folks are getting all worked up and offended thinking it is serious. The art of satire is lost on some folks.


It would have artful satire had he described the fame and riches that had come his way from releasing one self-published book.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

Couldn't resist writing a very long blog influenced by this article. Nothing I hate more than whining indies, but with a little effort they can sort themselves out!

http://amillionmilesfromanywhere.blogspot.jp/2013/04/why-your-book-isnt-selling-or-how-to.html


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

I get douche-chills just trying to slog through the piece.


----------



## brendajcarlton (Sep 29, 2012)

Translation: "But enough about me.  What do YOU think about me?"


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The art of satire is lost on some folks.


The irony is that the author is the only one who gets the joke.


----------



## Anne Frasier (Oct 22, 2009)

Ben Mathew said:


> He just published (or republished) the ebook today.


ah, so that's it. the ebook hadn't yet gone live when i first looked. so the whole article was simply bait for the just-released ebook, pubbed on *april 1*...


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Anne Frasier said:


> ah, so that's it. the ebook hadn't yet gone live when i first looked. so the whole article was simply bait for the just-released ebook, pubbed on *april 1*...


Yeah, the ebook is here: http://www.amazon.com/Murderhouse-Blues-ebook/dp/B00C52ELY2/

Too bad Winters has apparently never discovered KB. We'd get him straightened out in a jiffy. 
- better cover
- $3.99
- a well planned Select giveaway with decent promotion (not a Fb ad)
He writes well. Book is probably decent. There's no reason he should have zero sales. There's no reason he should have zillions of sales, either, but if he were going about things more effectively, I bet he'd be doing better than he is.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Becca Mills said:


> There's no reason he should have zero sales.


$9.99 for an e-book? I just watched a thread over on Goodreads in which pretty much everyone had something LESS than that as the price they'd pay for an e-book, unless it was something that was super hyped and their friends were all talking about it AND it was from an established author.


----------



## Duane Gundrum (Apr 5, 2011)

vrabinec said:


> $9.99 for an e-book? I just watched a thread over on Goodreads in which pretty much everyone had something LESS than that as the price they'd pay for an e-book, unless it was something that was super hyped and their friends were all talking about it AND it was from an established author.


He's basically making the same mistakes as most first timers do. He sees the big guys putting their books up for $9.99-$12.99 and figures he'll do the same thing. And he'll probably sell a few, based on any notoriety he builds from his article, although I would not be surprised if it backfires on him. He's one of those "outside experts" who thinks his experience is vast because he's suffered like no one else has before him, and therefore, he's the one everyone is going to turn to because of his momentary fame as a complainer of something all of the rest of us have gone through numerous times.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm not sure which is funnier, the article, or the fact that folks are getting all worked up and offended thinking it is serious. The art of satire is lost on some folks.


If that's his attempt at satire, then let's hope for his sake that his book is satirical, because he's not very good at it. If it's his attempt at link bait, then THAT he seems to be pretty good at.


----------



## 13893 (Apr 29, 2010)

Dalya said:


> Well, he made fun of Fifty Shades readers in the article. Cuz that's original and makes you seem fun.
> 
> You know what Fifty Shades readers are? People who buy books. I'm guessing this guy is writing novels for people who don't buy books or won't buy self-pubbed books, and that's the first problem.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ( ||: this this this this this this this :|| )


----------



## Darren Wearmouth (Jan 28, 2013)

I was most curious about his opening lines regarding the self taken photograph. I suspect he's putting the jokey slant on it to hide his own embarrassment.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm not sure which is funnier, the article, or the fact that folks are getting all worked up and offended thinking it is serious. The art of satire is lost on some folks.


If that was the "art of satire", he needs to go back and work on his art. Sometimes, it really is you (meant towards the writer if he was trying to be funny) and not us poor folk who didn't get it.


----------



## CarmenConnects (Oct 15, 2012)

Soothesayer said:


> I haven't read the article (yet), but is that really all the books he has? ONE book?
> 
> Does a stand-up comic walk off the stage after he gets a few laughs from ONE joke? How about a fisherman who likes to fish? Does he quit fishing if he hasn't caught anything for an hour?
> 
> One book is nothing. I'd say you need a minimum of five books (novels), and really more like TEN novels to make serious money in this game, which will only get more competitive as time goes on. The gold rush is over (sorry marketers). Now it is about quality.


I hope everyone is posting great comments like this on the Salon article site . . . I'm surprised Salon ran the sad sack's story when it obviously is so out of touch with the reality of self-publishing.


----------



## David Kazzie (Sep 16, 2010)

I really do not understand the vitriol against the author of the Salon article. 

He admits to failing. He admits to having the VERY SAME pie-in-the-sky dreams of success that every one of us has. 

He spent money, he worked on a book trailer. He doesn't condemn anyone for pursuing this path. He makes a tired joke about 50 Shades of Grey, and hey, who hasn't? I remember much outrage on these very boards a year ago when people compared 50 Shades to Wool because 50 Shades was allegedly such a terrible book. 

This wasn't an investigative piece into self-publishing. It was one guy's experience. And if you think this isn't the reality for most self-pub authors, you're fooling yourself. 

And one book is nothing? When did writing a single quality book become nothing? I'd rather write one good book than 10 terrible books. 

I'm a little surprised at the tone of this thread.


----------



## Guest (Apr 2, 2013)

David Kazzie said:


> I really do not understand the vitriol against the author of the Salon article.


Because instead of reading it as a tongue-in-cheek look at his misadventures, people are chosing to read it as a personal attack on their honor. They are reading it literarlly instead of paying attention to the use of hyperbole. He pretty much took the starry-eyed newbie concept and ran with it. Moral of the story, self-publishing successfully requires work and can be hard. If you think all you have to do is upload a file and wipe your hands on it, you will fail. Is this really a surprise to anyone here?


----------



## Cheryl M. (Jan 11, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because instead of reading it as a tongue-in-cheek look at his misadventures, people are chosing to read it as a personal attack on their honor. They are reading it literarlly instead of paying attention to the use of hyperbole. He pretty much took the starry-eyed newbie concept and ran with it. Moral of the story, self-publishing successfully requires work and can be hard. If you think all you have to do is upload a file and wipe your hands on it, you will fail. Is this really a surprise to anyone here?


You know, when I first read the article, Julie, I did think it was satire and funny. I also thought it was a pretty darn good marketing effort. But then someone said his book wasn't up for sale. And the bad cover. And the lack of ebook. But he says he's turning it into a trilogy.

(I say all of this with no real knowledge of what his efforts _actually_ were though. We can only go by what we see.)

I think he thought it was funny; in that respect I agree with you. But I don't think it played well. Satire of something poorly researched and apparently poorly executed isn't really satire that's funny or appealing.

Or maybe it is to people that aren't in this side of publishing. I like satire to be smart. Satire of bad publishing advice, using it, and pretending it's good advice isn't smart to me - not when good information is so readily available. He got on Salon. Clearly he knows what's what to a big enough extent that he's capable of better research.

On the other hand, it's probably brilliant. I'd bet that he's gotten a gazillion emails from people telling him how to do it better, and all he had to do was ruffle some feathers to bring the information to him.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

David Kazzie said:


> I really do not understand the vitriol against the author of the Salon article.


I'm not really sensing much vitriol. It's more a collective eye roll.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> They are reading it literally instead of paying attention to the use of hyperbole.


If you look around the internet, everyone is taking it literally. It's a "cautionary piece" about self publishing. How can you do anything but roll your eyes?


----------



## EmilyG (Jan 31, 2010)

"Self-Publishing" is just a red herring in the title. It just makes the indies defensive, the establishment smug, and further drives a wedge between the two.

What would have happened if he was traditionally published:

1. He'd be spine out in the bookstores.
2. His facebook ad would have still flopped.
3. 1000 people would not have known about and downloaded his free book.
4. He wouldn't have been able to write a Salon article.

The real story is if an author (any author) does not market and promote their book and build an audience, people are not going to buy the book. 

There is no free ride no matter how you are published (unless you are James Patterson  ).


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Because instead of reading it as a tongue-in-cheek look at his misadventures, people are chosing to read it as a personal attack on their honor. They are reading it literarlly instead of paying attention to the use of hyperbole. He pretty much took the starry-eyed newbie concept and ran with it. Moral of the story, self-publishing successfully requires work and can be hard. If you think all you have to do is upload a file and wipe your hands on it, you will fail. Is this really a surprise to anyone here?


What line in there would lead some newbie to interpret it as tongue in cheek? I don't see one. And the article DISCOURAGES people who might have some self-doubt from writing and self-pubbing. The guy's pricing his e-book at $9.99 but doesn't mention that. He doesn't mention a lot of things. Assuming it's tongue in cheek like you say, then the author knows better, yet he mis-represents it as a "I've done everything right" scenario, when clearly he hasn't, at least with the price point he hasn't, and with that cover. A newbie's not gonna know the difference. I don't like articles that discourage new and potential writers without representing the truth. If he's trying to be funny, then he should throw in some disclaimer at the end or something.


----------



## David Thayer (Sep 7, 2012)

my takeaway is this: The opening is a version of editorial limbo meant to express humility but also intended to signal that the author is far from humble and like a driver lost in a bad neighborhood is really here just looking for directions.

The Novel is well written and the style is literary which sucks for sales at any price point.

I liked his hat. 

Salon is okay but a postmodernist bent undermines their seriousness of purpose at times. IMO.


----------



## Michael_J_Sullivan (Aug 3, 2011)

The guys is clueless. I think people like this give "professional" self-published authors a bad name. Maybe he should have come here and learned what it takes to do things "right" rather than just throwing something up there and hope that it takes hold. It was evident he didn't have a plan and just because he fumbled in the dark doesn't mean that if properly done it can't succeed. Look at all the people here who have. Heck, I looked him up on Amazon and he doesn't even have an author's page. His categories aren't targeted, and he charges $9.99 for a kindle book. No wonder he's failed.

He does have a kindle by the way - priced at $9.99.


----------



## Vera Nazarian (Jul 1, 2011)

vrabinec said:


> *What line in there would lead some newbie to interpret it as tongue in cheek? *I don't see one. And the article DISCOURAGES people who might have some self-doubt from writing and self-pubbing. The guy's pricing his e-book at $9.99 but doesn't mention that. He doesn't mention a lot of things. Assuming it's tongue in cheek like you say, then the author knows better, yet he mis-represents it as a "I've done everything right" scenario, when clearly he hasn't, at least with the price point he hasn't, and with that cover. A newbie's not gonna know the difference. I don't like articles that discourage new and potential writers without representing the truth. If he's trying to be funny, then he should throw in some disclaimer at the end or something.


Well, it is an April 1st, post, so that's some clue there. *grin*


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

Vera Nazarian said:


> Well, it is an April 1st, post, so that's some clue there. *grin*


So every news article, blog post, editorial, op-ed piece published on April 1st should be taken as a prank/joke? If it was supposed to be funny or satire, I'm guilty of missing it. Next thing, you're going to tell me that YouTube isn't picking a winning video and shutting down?


----------



## Nigel Mitchell (Jan 21, 2013)

I kind of feel for the guy. He was just fumbling through the dark like a lot of us do. There are a lot of articles out there in the media that make it seem like all you have to do is put your book out there and wait for the money to roll in. I do think he gave up too quickly and took a lot of bad advice, but maybe he learned something. Anyway, the fact is that he got himself a lot of free publicity (and I think he got paid for writing it for Salon, didn't he?), so he'll be okay if he decides to pursue it.


----------



## David Alastair Hayden (Mar 19, 2011)

Pretensious and uninformed. But ... enh. 

Media attacks on self-publishing do not bother me. Not at all. Just removes competition. 

The information people need is so readily available these days. Hit a few blogs and KBoards for a day and you'd be way ahead of him. If people don't want to embrace running their publishing business like they should ... It's their creative profession, not mine. 

Help is freely available and given to those who want it. Some people don't want it. They want to put out their book and magically succeed without effort because with the words out there everyone will at last know they are wonderful geniuses and kittens will fart rainbows and world peace will be achieved at last.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

I disagree with the article but could do without personal commentary about the author. By his own admission he was inexperienced and apparently had/has little understanding of how self-publishing works. Going into the thing with faulty info and unrealistic expectations (and apparently embarrassed to be doing it), his experiment was doomed to failure. If he keeps at it, he may figure out what some of the problems are (price point, for example) and eventually make a success of it. He's already learned one valuable lesson - how to attract attention. Maybe this time next year he'll be writing a similar article with a whole new slant - how he finally succeeded at self-publishing. Until then, there's lots of writers here who could set the record straight with their own articles.


----------



## Victoria Champion (Jun 6, 2012)

David Alastair Hayden said:


> kittens will fart rainbows


My kitten already farts rainbows. I thought all kitties did that?


----------



## David Alastair Hayden (Mar 19, 2011)

Victoria Champion said:


> My kitten already farts rainbows. I thought all kitties did that?


Must be feeding my wrong. They only fart demands. ;-)


----------



## cdvsmx5 (May 23, 2012)

cdvsmx5 said:


> Another Fool's joke.


The article wasn't written for KBers.


----------



## Joe_Nobody (Oct 23, 2012)

Ummmm....most of my ebooks are $9.99. Does this mean I don't have a clue?


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2013)

cdvsmx5 said:


> The article wasn't written for KBers.


 "You're so vain, you probably think his blog is about you. You're so vaaaaaiiiinnnnnn." (I'll stop singing now and spare your hearing.)


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2013)

Adam Pepper said:


> If you look around the internet, everyone is taking it literally.


Who is this "everyone?" Other self-published authors who are offended? Self-publishing gurus using his article as linkbait to stir up the masses? Nobody here even heard of this guy until the OP posted the link, and now all of the sudden "everybody" is talking about him? Meanwhile, the people here are talking about him like he is some complete publishing newb despite the fact that the guy has been a professional (paid) writer for a long time with a long list of publishing credits in major newspapers, magazines, and literary publications. People are bent out of shape because he is "discouraging self publishing", but how many self-publishers would have even read the Salon article for self-publishing advice in the first place? Folks are getting snarky because he took a swipe at _Fifty Shades_, when half the people in this thread have done the same thing multiple times on this forum (and his swipe was pretty tame in comparison!).

As a group, it may be wise to finally move beyond our collective whack-a-mole mentality of going after every C-list blogger who dares to post something about self-publishing and spend more time promoting the good stuff going on (What IS Hugh Howey up to today? What has Amanda been up to? And did you hear Elle beat some sense into Amazon?)  Feed the positive news. Starve the negative news.

And eat more chocolate.


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Who is this "everyone?" Other self-published authors who are offended? Self-publishing gurus using his article as linkbait to stir up the masses? Nobody here even heard of this guy until the OP posted the link, and now all of the sudden "everybody" is talking about him? Meanwhile, the people here are talking about him like he is some complete publishing newb despite the fact that the guy has been a professional (paid) writer for a long time with a long list of publishing credits in major newspapers, magazines, and literary publications. People are bent out of shape because he is "discouraging self publishing", but how many self-publishers would have even read the Salon article for self-publishing advice in the first place? Folks are getting snarky because he took a swipe at _Fifty Shades_, when half the people in this thread have done the same thing multiple times on this forum (and his swipe was pretty tame in comparison!).
> 
> As a group, it may be wise to finally move beyond our collective whack-a-mole mentality of going after every C-list blogger who dares to post something about self-publishing and spend more time promoting the good stuff going on (What IS Hugh Howey up to today? What has Amanda been up to? And did you hear Elle beat some sense into Amazon?)  Feed the positive news. Starve the negative news.
> 
> And eat more chocolate.


You're just trying to keep us down and make us feel like we're not stupid. Well, I'm not falling for it.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Who is this "everyone?" Other self-published authors who are offended?


Actually, I was referring to more traditionally-leaning folks who I saw on facebook and other places posting the link as a "cautionary tale" to reaffirm their anti-self publishing stance. I'm not mad at the guy at all. More power to him. I just dont find him as cute and clever as he seems to find himself.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Dara England said:


> I disagree with the article but could do without personal commentary about the author.


Fair enough. But it's the tone of the piece that invites a shot or two at the author.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals (Feb 21, 2012)

It's the second article in a very similar vein on Salon in as many months. I think that's part of it. 

Also, while it may be intended as humorous, it seems to me that the target of the humor is "silly people who actually believe in self publishing(sic)"


----------



## Christa Wick (Nov 1, 2012)

as a counterpoint (I know there are many, but I came across this one yesterday via the passive voice blog)

http://www.munchkinwrangler.com/2013/03/27/a-tale-of-a-rejection-and-the-straw-that-made-the-cup-run-over-or-something/


----------



## Ben Mathew (Jan 27, 2013)

Christa Wick said:


> as a counterpoint (I know there are many, but I came across this one yesterday via the passive voice blog)
> 
> http://www.munchkinwrangler.com/2013/03/27/a-tale-of-a-rejection-and-the-straw-that-made-the-cup-run-over-or-something/


Wow, his story is pretty amazing.

- Puts out his first book on March 14 priced at $2.99
- 106 customer reviews averaging 4.5 stars.
- Ranked #109 Paid in Kindle Store

How did so many people find him? Did he have a fan base somehow? Seems to have a long-running blog. But this was his first book!

My mind is blown.

Here's the book: http://www.amazon.com/Terms-of-Enlistment-ebook/dp/B00BUQWVDC/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top


----------



## mbonady (Apr 3, 2013)

I read a pretty interesting retort to this article this morning from Chuck Wendig... http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2013/04/03/when-self-publishing-is-just-screaming-into-the-void/


----------



## AnitaDobs (Sep 18, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I'm not sure which is funnier, the article, or the fact that folks are getting all worked up and offended thinking it is serious. The art of satire is lost on some folks.


Oh finally... three pages in on this thread and the voice of reason.

I was thinking everyone had lost their minds. I think there's a distinct amount of oversensitivity going on around here.

The article was hilarious, and quite obviously satire. It was very well written too. The whole hat thing in the beginning should have been the biggest 'flag'.

'An article in the New York Times claims that 81 percent of us believe we have a book in us. This sounds painful...'

 Winning sentence

and another:

'Self-publishing is the literary world's version of masturbation, except the results are quite often less thrilling, and you usually end up with a mess..' 

Everyone jumped on the fifty shades thing but deliberately ignored the last part of his sentence:

'Yet despite this jump, the chance of a self-published author hitting it big are as slim as the odds of a "Fifty Shades" reader getting a Mensa card. *(Yes, yes, yes, I wish I'd written those books, so save your angry comments.)*'

There comes a time when people's insecurity is simply projected onto anything else that could remotely be construed as an offence. Pompous Hilarious more like.

'Fast-forward a week. My wife's body lies a few feet off a wooded path in the forest behind a local cemetery. Her right shoe hangs half off and her legs are twisted as if an act of violence has befallen her. This time I am using my iPhone to make a very handcrafted video...'

If he ever writes humor, I'll be buying it.


----------



## Zackery Arbela (Jan 31, 2011)

David Kazzie said:


> I really do not understand the vitriol against the author of the Salon article.
> 
> He admits to failing. He admits to having the VERY SAME pie-in-the-sky dreams of success that every one of us has.
> 
> ...


I think it has more to do with the tone of the article.


----------



## markobeezy (Jan 30, 2012)

This guy sounds like a failure before he ever self-published. If you're looking for a "get rich quick" scheme, self-publishing books is NOT the way to go. If you have a passion for writing and would one day like to quit your day job, then self-publishing is a legitimate route to take. And of course, some people's routes are longer than others


----------



## AnitaDobs (Sep 18, 2012)

I also find it kind of funny that everyone missed this line:

'self-publishing has a long history that includes such luminaries as Marcel Proust and Lewis Carroll.'

Or did everyone miss that line when they were skimming it?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

TexasGirl said:


> This is a pretty typical freelance article: Do an experiment just to watch it flop and write about it.
> 
> I could do this on any number of topics and pitch it: try out for a cooking show and fail, pretend to be a NY subway musician and fail, be a phone sex operator and fail. This is basic stuff for building creds.
> 
> Clearly he's not serious about self-pubbing. *He just wanted to write the article.*


I agree.

I also agree that he can write. I did find the article entertaining. I also selfishly don't mind if this article discourages potential self-publishers.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Who is this "everyone?" Other self-published authors who are offended? Self-publishing gurus using his article as linkbait to stir up the masses? Nobody here even heard of this guy until the OP posted the link, and now all of the sudden "everybody" is talking about him? Meanwhile, the people here are talking about him like he is some complete publishing newb despite the fact that the guy has been a professional (paid) writer for a long time with a long list of publishing credits in major newspapers, magazines, and literary publications. People are bent out of shape because he is "discouraging self publishing", but how many self-publishers would have even read the Salon article for self-publishing advice in the first place? Folks are getting snarky because he took a swipe at _Fifty Shades_, when half the people in this thread have done the same thing multiple times on this forum (and his swipe was pretty tame in comparison!).
> 
> As a group, it may be wise to finally move beyond our collective whack-a-mole mentality of going after every C-list blogger who dares to post something about self-publishing and spend more time promoting the good stuff going on (What IS Hugh Howey up to today? What has Amanda been up to? And did you hear Elle beat some sense into Amazon?)  Feed the positive news. Starve the negative news.
> 
> And eat more chocolate.


Oh, for heaven's sake, Julie. People have every right and maybe even an obligation to post that he is wrong. His post is on Salon, where comments are expected and in my very strong opinion, he is wrong and not to mention offensive. No, I was not amused by his "self-publishing is public masturbation" comment.

There are newbies who will read his peace and if they don't see comments disagreeing, they will believe his experience is self-publishing about what most people experience. It is perfectly reasonable to post the other side of the story. If you don't want to comment, don't. Don't try to tell me what to post and not to post, thank you very much.

I did comment there and here because he comes does this "I know about self-publishing" schtick but doesn't know much and is giving advice about something he hasn't bothered to learn anything about. I don't know what Hugh did today or Elle or Amanda. I don't go around following other people. God, how boring. But do comment if something I see seems to warrant comment. This did.


----------



## bonnerauthor (Jan 18, 2013)

I don't see how this guy considers himself a failure.  In two days he managed five pages of replies here.  No telling how many on other boards.
My opinion, granted I couldn't get through the entire article, I think he started the book more for telling a self-fulfilling tale of failure.  This guy is just trying too hard to be clever.  The whole thing seems forced and may have been picked up by Salon because of a lost wager between editors.  

The worst thing about this is the guy is teaching mush-brained kids in Massachusetts how to write, spawning countless similar articles and self-published books for generations to come.


----------



## Cheryl M. (Jan 11, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> And eat more chocolate.


Oooh, does that mean you're sending me some? I like milk chocolate.


----------



## Guest (Apr 3, 2013)

JRTomlin said:


> Oh, for heaven's sake, *****. People have every right and maybe even an obligation to post that he is wrong.


I never implied people didn't have a right to do whatever they want. I was merely observing that in some cases it is better to ignore something than to feed it. You end up with a situation similar to the Steisand Effect. The more you try to counter, discredit, or remove something, the more attention you draw to it. I tend to limit my venom for actual fraud or scams. If someone is actually trying to defraud authors or scam money, I'll be the first one to scream about it. But worrying about how random newbies may or may not interpret an article I wouldn't have even known about had it not been posted here? I just think sometimes we get upset about the wrong things, and not upset enough about the actual real problems. Folks are free to do what they want. I am not the boss of the internet. I was just observing that there may be more productive ways of supporting or protecting newbies than knee-jerk attacks on an author just because we disagree with him.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

It was a sham. He's actually a good marketer. Write a link bait, forum fodder, controversy seeking article for popular website. Add Kindle version to your book right after. Run free promo. No longer a self-publishing failure.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Alan Petersen said:


> It was a sham. He's actually a good marketer. Write a link bait, forum fodder, controversy seeking article for popular website. Add Kindle version to your book right after. Run free promo. No longer a self-publishing failure.


What a sales bump that'll translate into when he comes off free! What are we talking here, one extra sale? Two?


----------



## A.A (Mar 30, 2012)

Eh, a free run is a free run.

I don't give a rats when someone puts down self-publishing.

But when someone calls all readers of Fifty Shades idiots and basically calls the only reviewer of his book uneducated, I stop finding his article funny.

I mean, since when do we put down reviewers and think that's ok?



> "'Yet despite this jump, the chance of a self-published author hitting it big are as slim as the odds of a "Fifty Shades" reader getting a Mensa card."


For the record, I haven't read Fifty Shades, so I'm not taking that personally. (And a Mensa card isn't that hard to get )



> My book had been reviewed by someone named "Mykala," and this reader gave it five stars... So what if she despoiled my name with a misplaced apostrophe and her hyphenating was lax at best?"


Nice....


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Ben Mathew said:


> Wow, his story is pretty amazing.
> 
> - Puts out his first book on March 14 priced at $2.99
> - 106 customer reviews averaging 4.5 stars.
> ...


He had a decent fanbase waiting among some other writers as well as what sounds like a pretty big firearms forum. Don't get me wrong, he's done very well, and has taken it far beyond that initial push, but when you look at out-of-nowhere authors, almost all of them have had a group of people interested in buying their first book and putting it on the map for other potential readers.


----------



## Guest (Apr 4, 2013)

Anya said:


> For the record, I haven't read Fifty Shades, so I'm not taking that personally. (And a Mensa card isn't that hard to get )


Really? Hmmmm, last I knew, one had to be in the 98th percentile or better to join. Which would imply by default that *97% of the population cannot qualify*. When something can only be obtained by a small percentage of the population, one would generally regard that as hard to get. But perhaps you could clarify?

Or, perhaps, you might acknowledge that you just did what you accused the author of: insulting and minimizing the accomplishments of an entire demographic to make a point?

This is actually what I find funny and yet sort of sad about this whole thing. People get annoyed because he makes sweeping statements, and then they make sweeping statements. Someone earlier made the comment about how it isn't that hard to get an article on Salon, only to have someone else with journalism experience point out that is very wrong. Someone else made a crack about him teaching writing, because apparently anyone can get hired as a professor at a university. Others are calling him a failure and hack, despite the fact that the man has a list of publishing credits (paid publishing credits with major publications that pay more for a single article than some indies earn in a year for a book) longer than my arm.

And no, I'm not saying anyone has to listen to him. Truth be told, I didn't get any impression this was suppose to be a 'warning' or 'how to' article or that he was expecting people to follow his approach. He was poking fun at himself and making snarky jokes. It's fine to not appreciate his humor. It's fine if folks want to argue over the details of the article. Like I said earlier, I have no control over other people's actions. But I think a lot of the pettiness I am seeing on the comments to his article, this thread, and some of the blog posts may be great for rallying the faithful, but are just reinforcing some of the negative stereotypes "non-believers" already have.


----------



## Ben Mathew (Jan 27, 2013)

Edward W. Robertson said:


> He had a decent fanbase waiting among some other writers as well as what sounds like a pretty big firearms forum. Don't get me wrong, he's done very well, and has taken it far beyond that initial push, but when you look at out-of-nowhere authors, almost all of them have had a group of people interested in buying their first book and putting it on the map for other potential readers.


Ah yes. The pre-existing base that I don't have. Drat.

It's now up to #86 Paid in Kindle.


----------

