# Amazon Does Own The Market



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

"B&N represents less than 10% of the US ebook market now -- possibly even less than 5% -- and they are shrinking fast. Apple represents something like 7-10%, while Google is maybe 5-7%, and Kobo well under 5%. Those percentages hardly justify the effort of doing an AE report on them... the numbers would tell us very little about the overall US ebook market, whereas we're getting arguably 75%-80% of it with Amazon (remember that the trad-pub-reported 65% doesn't include no-ISBN indies or Amazon exclusives)."

Per data guy in the comments section on JA Konrath's blog, August 3 2015

****

As for my own thoughts, I acknowledge that the US market is not the whole market for ebooks.  But it's certainly the largest market, and I'd be shocked if Amazon UK isn't also the biggest ebook seller for that region.  The smaller markets such as France, Australia and Canada (among others) cannot hope to make up the gap, in my opinion.

What does this mean?

I'm still in wide release with many of my books because I'm concerned about being overexposed and having all my eggs in the Amazon basket.  But I can't deny that it becomes increasingly difficult to justify being wide if some of these other platforms don't start pushing and innovating, competing better.

Pretending the problem doesn't exist is not the solution.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Doing everything they tell us to do is also not the solution.

Whatever extra boost we're giving them about 65% (Which still isn't what 'own' means) that lets them give zero craps about us is our own damn fault. The current indie firing solution is 'slit out own throats fo short term gain'.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

I think it is important for SP writers not to confuddle the "X has Y market share" with how well *they* find they can sell their books in various markets. This depends on genre and type of book/short story etc.

Make your decisions based on your experience, not market share of whatever device.

My fantasy sells better on other platforms so it stays wide. I've pulled my Space opera/hard SF into Select because it sold better on Amazon. 

Try it. Make a decision based on what happens to your sales.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

So what are you saying, give in and let them pay us pennies? No thanks. I'll stay wide until the last day the last store that is not Amazon closes.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Vaalingrade said:


> Doing everything they tell us to do is also not the solution.
> 
> Whatever extra boost we're giving them about 65% (Which still isn't what 'own' means) that lets them give zero craps about us is our own damn fault. The current indie firing solution is 'slit out own throats fo short term gain'.


Indies can't be blamed for abandoning ship with platforms (such as Nook) who refuse to make their books easily discoverable, who don't give lots of promo opportunities and doesn't have any real customer service (for authors) to speak of...

And indies can't be blamed for going into KU when it provides the antidote to those discoverability problems.

I agree that the steady flow of indies streaming into KU and away from the other platforms is not good for the longterm health of the ecosystem, but I lay much of the blame at the feet of those platforms such as Google Play and Nook (and kobo and iBooks to a lesser extent because I think they've made some attempts) who do nothing to help the situation.

Indies are hungry to sell at other platforms but those platforms make it very difficult. They don't court indies the way Amazon does. They have poor discoverability and they promote traditionally published books almost to the exclusion of everything else.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> So what are you saying, give in and let them pay us pennies? No thanks. I'll stay wide until the last day the last store that is not Amazon closes.


I certainly never said that. I'm wide release with a large part of my catalog.

I said that it's a problem--and it is, partly because of what you stated. Amazon needs healthy competition but the facts are the facts as far as marketshare goes, and we need to take a hard look at what that means for our businesses.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> I think it is important for SP writers not to confuddle the "X has Y market share" with how well *they* find they can sell their books in various markets. This depends on genre and type of book/short story etc.


This is true, but the marketshare is still the marketshare overall, and it is a major issue for many of us, across many genres.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

> Make your decisions based on your experience, not market share of whatever device.


As Patty says, everybody needs to see what works for their particular situation. It's still possible to make good money on other markets, at least for now.

It saddens me that someone like B&N couldn't pull their head out of their butts and beat Amazon for book sales. They had the infrastructure in place, and all they had to do was copy what Amazon was doing right. Been more open to indies, given us tools to make it easier to upload, sell and update books.

Heck, Smashwords could give Amazon a run for their money, if they upgraded their site, did something about Meatgrinder, and really put some effort into it. Pay like Amazon does, rather than quarterly, drop the minimum payment required, and so on. I do like that they'll pay into Paypal. Amazon should do that.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

This is a random post from an Amazon Evangelist, and there's no reason to assume it is accurate. In fact, if he's basing it on the same "analysis" as his blog, it's most likely wrong.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

she-la-ti-da said:


> As Patty says, everybody needs to see what works for their particular situation. It's still possible to make good money on other markets, at least for now.


Yes, it is. But the trend-line so far doesn't look great. I hope it changes.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> This is a random post from an Amazon Evangelist, and there's no reason to assume it is accurate. In fact, if he's basing it on the same "analysis" as his blog, it's most likely wrong.


Your comment is confusing, because it's hard to tell if you are calling me or Data Guy an Amazon Evangelist. But since I don't think either he or I is such a thing, I can't say I agree.

I'm far from an Amazon evangelist. KU 2 was absolutely brutal on my sales and I complained and griped about it here and elsewhere for a long time. I don't think Amazon cares a whit about authors beyond what happens to suit their bottom-line, and if that changes, we get hit as hard as we need to get hit to satisfy their corporate interests...at least, that's how it seems to me.

And I do think KU payments will continue to decline...

That being said, I believe the facts and the numbers and what my own data (from five years of publishing hundreds of titles in wide release) tells me. And that's that Amazon dominates the ebook market more and more every year.


----------



## waltercan (Aug 19, 2015)

You guys have probably talked this to death in other threads, but isn't it the case that with B & N they never saw it i their interests to cater to indies?  Maybe it's not incompetence but what they intended.  What I mean is B & N was first and foremost a bookstore which is also heavily reliant on major publishers.  Is it possible that they saw their online store as simply an extension of their brick and mortar stores and therefore followed the same strategy?  If the big publishers don't want to see the success of Ebooks then why should a company such as B & N which is heavily tied to the same business model?  Can you blame B & N for giving visibility to the same books and publishers that are paying their physical stores to feature those books?

I'm not saying this is a good long-term business practice by B & N, but I can understand why they'd do it.

Again, I'm sure you've already discussed this many times over in other threads over the years, but just wanted to add my 3 cents.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I certainly never said that. I'm wide release with a large part of my catalog.
> 
> I said that it's a problem--and it is, partly because of what you stated. Amazon needs healthy competition but the facts are the facts as far as marketshare goes, and we need to take a hard look at what that means for our businesses.


Well, I"d never speak for anyone else, but when I couldn't get sales wide I said what a lot of people said. I don't have a choice. The other sites are broken. Then it turns out I was doing some things wrong. I fixed them. My sales kicked in and I am confident I can make a darn good living wide. The sites aren't broken. I was doing it wrong. They may not own as much as Amazon, but they still do well enough to pay my rent.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

waltercan said:


> Can you blame B & N for giving visibility to the same books and publishers that are paying their physical stores to feature those books?
> 
> I'm not saying this is a good long-term business practice by B & N, but I can understand why they'd do it.
> 
> Again, I'm sure you've already discussed this many times over in other threads over the years, but just wanted to add my 3 cents.


Your points are correct, of course. B&N's reluctance to champion indies makes a lot of sense in context with their close relationship with trad publishing.

But again, you can't blame indies for going elsewhere with a situation like that in place, and it also stands to reason that B&N has essentially self-destructed in the ebook space because of that very reason.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> Well, I"d never speak for anyone else, but when I couldn't get sales wide I said what a lot of people said. I don't have a choice. The other sites are broken. Then it turns out I was doing some things wrong. I fixed them. My sales kicked in and I am confident I can make a darn good living wide. The sites aren't broken. I was doing it wrong. They may not own as much as Amazon, but they still do well enough to pay my rent.


All the sites still command enough of an audience (for now) to enable you to have such a situation. But we do have to look at trends and look at the realities of the market. This problem is getting worse, not better.

And just because some people are able to make money (I'm not arguing that), does not mean you make AS MUCH money in wide release. I also sell well on other platforms, but I see it as essentially a wash. The only real benefit is being more diversified in my approach and having some protection in the event that things sour with Amazon for one reason or another.

That benefit will start to look less and less appealing if marketshare continues to slide Amazon's way...


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> Your comment is confusing, because it's hard to tell if you are calling me or Data Guy an Amazon Evangelist. But since I don't think either he or I is such a thing, I can't say I agree.
> 
> I'm far from an Amazon evangelist. KU 2 was absolutely brutal on my sales and I complained and griped about it here and elsewhere for a long time. I don't think Amazon cares a whit about authors beyond what happens to suit their bottom-line, and if that changes, we get hit as hard as we need to get hit to satisfy their corporate interests...at least, that's how it seems to me.
> 
> ...


I wasn't calling you an evangelist. Yes, Amazon dominates the ebook market, but we don't know the numbers. No one does. There's also no reason to assume that Amazon is increasing its market share. It may be, but my data says otherwise. Still, I'm very well aware that my personal success with other vendors can't be used to make assumptions about market share. My own assumptions are more along the lines of huge increase in non-Amazon device market share must equal a decrease in Amazon ebook market share. I could be wrong, but it seems like a solid hypothesis.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Briteka said:


> This is a random post from an Amazon Evangelist, and there's no reason to assume it is accurate. In fact, if he's basing it on the same "analysis" as his blog, it's most likely wrong.


I don't know. Last year Forbes reported that Amazon had a 65% share of total ebook sales. And I don't think that was counting indies, just trad pubs.

*Edit* 
Link here: 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2014/02/10/amazon-vs-book-publishers-by-the-numbers/


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Vicky Foxx said:


> I don't know. Last year Forbes reported that Amazon had a 65% share of total ebook sales. And I don't think that was counting indies, just trad pubs.


Yes, that's the last published number.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> My own assumptions are more along the lines of huge increase in non-Amazon device market share must equal a decrease in Amazon ebook market share. I could be wrong, but it seems like a solid hypothesis.


I think that is one reason why Apple could definitely be gaining ground. But Amazon will need to shed an awful lot of customers for things to truly change, and Apple will have to make discoverability better for the majority of authors to benefit from that shift.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> Yes, that's the last published number.


In any case, its been born out time and again, from various sources.

I actually think (and I admit its just my personal hunch) that Amazon's marketshare is closer to 85 or 90% if you include KU.


----------



## waltercan (Aug 19, 2015)

I'm very new to all of this, but my initial impression of the ebook market is that up until now the only other player that was interested in giving Amazon serious competition with ebooks was Apple.  And from what I can tell they weren't able to make much of a dent.

Google has the resources and overall market to give Amazon a run for its money, but I've learned in other areas of business that having the resources to do something and having the ability to do it don't always go together.  Google would have to adopt a very customer-centric mentality of catering to both authors and readers.  Getting a corporation to adopt that kind of thinking is very difficult.  It would be great for all authors and readers if it did happen, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> All the sites still command enough of an audience (for now) to enable you to have such a situation. But we do have to look at trends and look at the realities of the market. This problem is getting worse, not better.
> 
> And just because some people are able to make money (I'm not arguing that), does not mean you make AS MUCH money in wide release. I also sell well on other platforms, but I see it as essentially a wash. The only real benefit is being more diversified in my approach and having some protection in the event that things sour with Amazon for one reason or another.
> 
> That benefit will start to look less and less appealing if marketshare continues to slide Amazon's way...


Well,I'll just ask. After ku2, and having no idea what ku3 will bring, and knowing full well they aren't going to continue to pay half a cent a page for long, don't you think the possibility of things souring with Amazon is reason enough?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

waltercan said:


> I'm very new to all of this, but my initial impression of the ebook market is that up until now the only other player that was interested in giving Amazon serious competition with ebooks was Apple. And from what I can tell they weren't able to make much of a dent.


My impression is actually that Kobo has shifted and is truly trying to compete. They're doing an awful lot of indie-centric promos these days, and I believe it signifies a shift in approach. But Kobo is so very small, still, and I'm not sure whether this will pay off the way it needs to in the coming months or years. But I do think they're really trying, at least, unlike Nook.

Apple is likely giving some effort from everything I've heard, but I go through D2D and find that its quite difficult to keep my visibility high there. Searching on iBooks, for me, is quite poor--and its generally difficult to come into contact with books below the top few hundred best sellers in any given category.

Google is essentially dead for now--and nobody knows what they will look like when they reopen. But if they've brought in the Oyster folks than it stands to reason that they may begin fighting for a piece of the subscription pie--and who knows how that will look?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> Well,I'll just ask. After ku2, and having no idea what ku3 will bring, and knowing full well they aren't going to continue to pay half a cent a page for long, don't you think the possibility of things souring with Amazon is reason enough?


Yes, I do! 

But its only reason enough if I can still manage to sell a decent number of books on those other sites (right now I can, barely). If the board keeps tilting in Amazon's favor, I may have to just give in and be exclusive out of necessity, which will truly stink.

I don't think we're there yet, but I do have some big concerns based on what I've seen in the last few years.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm really sad about B&N. I used to sell great there, but now not so much. Now 43% of my sales come from Amazon, but I'm glad to see my Apple numbers are growing too, and I think it could become what B&N used to be for me. For now my plan is to keep building my readership, so if everything goes to hell, my readers will follow me wherever I choose to go.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> My impression is actually that Kobo has shifted and is truly trying to compete. They're doing an awful lot of indie-centric promos these days, and I believe it signifies a shift in approach. But Kobo is so very small, still, and I'm not sure whether this will pay off the way it needs to in the coming months or years. But I do think they're really trying, at least, unlike Nook.
> 
> Apple is likely giving some effort from everything I've heard, but I go through D2D and find that its quite difficult to keep my visibility high there. Searching on iBooks, for me, is quite poor--and its generally difficult to come into contact with books below the top few hundred best sellers in any given category.
> 
> Google is essentially dead for now--and nobody knows what they will look like when they reopen. But if they've brought in the Oyster folks than it stands to reason that they may begin fighting for a piece of the subscription pie--and who knows how that will look?


Kobo is going to do audio. I'm on a waiting list to hear about what they're going to offer.

I second the about "you're doing it wrong" comment. Each site has particular quirks. Learn them, upload your books according to them and start to sell regularly.

I think the major mistake a lot of people make is that they assume that Amazon is as important in non-US countries as it is in the US. I think the major challenge for non-US sales is that the market is very fragmented, so there's a lot of uploading/tweaking to do.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Kobo is going to do audio. I'm on a waiting list to hear about what they're going to offer.
> 
> I second the about "you're doing it wrong" comment. Each site has particular quirks. Learn them, upload your books according to them and start to sell regularly.
> 
> I think the major mistake a lot of people make is that they assume that Amazon is as important in non-US countries as it is in the US. I think the major challenge for non-US sales is that the market is very fragmented, so there's a lot of uploading/tweaking to do.


As of right now, there is money to be made on other platforms. I don't dispute that at all.

How could I, when I make money at those platforms myself?

But I do dispute the notion that the wider numbers somehow aren't of import to individuals.

Yes, individuals can do well at various stores and in various markets--but in order for those other platforms to stay healthy, they will need to have authors en masse keeping their books on those platforms so readers will not keep leaving and following their favorite authors over to Amazon (where many are becoming exclusive).

Instead, we have the opposite thing happening. Many authors are leaving and taking readers along with them to Amazon. And so you have fewer indies sticking it out in wide release. Despite the fact that you or me or others can still make money in wide distro, the larger picture is that Amazon is sucking up marketshare and isolating those alternative platforms, leaving them with less and less readers.

You or I may not see those changes at first, but the wider reports seem to indicate that it is in fact occurring. That's why Nook's sales are down substantially, etc. Even if I make good money at Nook, it doesn't change those issues.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> As of right now, there is money to be made on other platforms. I don't dispute that at all.
> 
> How could I, when I make money at those platforms myself?
> 
> ...


I seriously think it matters a lot less than people here make it out to be. People have multiple devices and multiple apps on those devices.

Is the near-monopoly of google in search engines bad for customers?
Is the near-monopoly of Windows OS in PCs harming anyone?
Do we need another Facebook that's just like Facebook-only-different because OMG monopoly?

When these companies become very large, they cannot do whatever they want, because millions of customers will be up in arms, governments even.

I think the future for non-Amazons is in niche markets, and they can be very lucrative for the right books and the right people.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I'm still in wide release with many of my books because I'm concerned about being overexposed and having all my eggs in the Amazon basket. But I can't deny that it becomes increasingly difficult to justify being wide if some of these other platforms don't start pushing and innovating, competing better.
> 
> Pretending the problem doesn't exist is not the solution.


It is a real problem.

We have to remember who each of these retailers are and their origins.

B&N is a brick and mortar book store that developed an online retail arm to sell books online and an eReader for ebooks. Apple is a computer hardware company that created an online store to sell music and now books and film etc to users of its computer hardware, including the iPod and iPhone and computers. Kobo is the Nook of the rest of the world -- the Kobo eReader is the tool used to capture a share of the eReader market and online book sales but it is primarily a brick and mortar bookstore.

Amazon is an online retailer that started by selling books as an entree into the online sell-everything business. Amazon is really the only business that started out as a means to sell products online -- aka a retailer using technological developments to sell books, ebooks and everything else. That is is _raison d'etre_ and so that is what it focuses on. Selling things online. It's not an add-on to the main business like brick and mortar stores such as Barnes & Noble and Chapters/Indigo or a computer hardware producer like Apple. Selling products online is the primary focus, not the side business. Hence, Amazon is the innovator and makes being the best online retailer job one.

I think because of that focus, Amazon does things best and has the most customers and probably the happiest customers. That doesn't mean that an author can't sell books on these other retailers or make money from them, but the experience will not be as good as Amazon because the online store at those other retailers is just a secondary concern. As long as the other retailers are primarily interested in print books in B&M stores or computer hardware first, they will not put in the effort to improve their storefronts and customer service and they will remain second to Amazon.

I am impressed with Amazon and will always sell via KDP and probably make most of my income there. However, I never forget the story about the Gazelle Project. In the Gazelle Project, Amazon had a program that was actually called the Gazelle Project, which treated certain suppliers (small publishers) like a lion does sick gazelles -- preying on them in a battle over margins. If you read The Everything Store, you see that their lawyers actually had to rename the program for appearances. They are the weakest and have the least power to negotiate. I wonder if, in the world of eBooks, whether indies are like the sick gazelles with the worst bargaining power and thus most likely to give the most concessions / accept the worst terms. Indies who depend solely on Amazon for income, such as those who are exclusive with all their books, are the most vulnerable. If Amazon lacks competitors, there is no reason for them to not demand / take more.

It's business. So the more and better competition Amazon has, the better off we are as indies. Those competitors need to get their acts together and improve to better compete with Amazon. I have hope for Apple and Google could be huge, if it put its mind to it.


----------



## Steve Vernon (Feb 18, 2011)

Kobo ISN'T any sort of brick and mortar bookstore. You are thinking of Chapters/Indigo who ORIGINALLY owned Kobo - but they haven't owned Kobo for some time now.

Still, I do have to wonder about if going wide is really the way that is going to work for me.

Kobo used to be my single shining hope - but not lately. I know they've been making some big talk about big changes but my sales - which used to be lively - have dried right up.

On D2D my monthly sales consist of almost strictly my permafrees. No follow-through what-so-ever. Nook and Apple earn me next to nothing.

I've moved about a dozen of my e-books into KU over September and I've seen my cash flow improve. As some folks know I have a VERY large promotion planned for the end of October - a promotion that includes Kindle, Kobo, Apple, Nook and Googleplay.

Honestly - if I don't see many results by November on Kobo, Apple, Nook or Googleplay I may throw it all into KU.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Sela said:


> It is a real problem.
> 
> We have to remember who each of these retailers are and their origins.
> 
> ...


It seems to me Google intends to, or else why the Oyster thing? And they absolutely could give Amazon a run for their money, even win the race eventually.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Steve Vernon said:


> Kobo ISN'T any sort of brick and mortar bookstore. You are thinking of Chapters/Indigo who ORIGINALLY owned Kobo - but they haven't owned Kobo for some time now.


Yes, sorry I wasn't clearer. But the point remains that Chapters / Indigo (brick and mortar) was the primary business, not the online retail store.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I don't think its a hopeless case.

But Amazon is the 800 lb gorilla and everyone knows it.  It is what it is.

Every author, every business involved with publishing, has to figure out how to approach Amazon's dominance in the market.  Everyone has to address the problem of exclusivity and the incentives and drawbacks around the KU program.

Pretending this issue doesn't exist is simply tantamount to sticking one's head in the sand.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I don't think its a hopeless case.
> 
> But Amazon is the 800 lb gorilla and everyone knows it. It is what it is.
> 
> ...


I don't just pretend the problem doesn't exist, but I do think ignoring Amazon's whims hurts them most. If they have any fears at all it's that more writers will figure out they can survive without KU. My goal is to be set enough at the other sites that when KU3 comes around I could care less what they do.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> I seriously think it matters a lot less than people here make it out to be. People have multiple devices and multiple apps on those devices.
> 
> Is the near-monopoly of google in search engines bad for customers?
> Is the near-monopoly of Windows OS in PCs harming anyone?
> ...


Amazon is doing the majority of the sales--period. Yes, that's bad for other businesses who compete with them. Google was bad for other search engine businesses, which is why most of those are now defunct.

No one ever said it was bad for customers. It's possibly not even bad for authors, but depends on where you stand and what you think may happen in the future if Amazon gains total dominance the way Google has with search.

But it is a fact that Amazon commands a large percentage of the ebook market, especially the US market which is largest. And saying that niche markets are where its at is certainly not true from a pure numbers perspective. But yes, individual authors can definitely profit in niche markets, for as long as they last.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> I don't just pretend the problem doesn't exist, but I do think ignoring Amazon's whims hurts them most. If they have any fears at all it's that more writers will figure out they can survive without KU. My goal is to be set enough at the other sites that when KU3 comes around I could care less what they do.


This strategy works as long as other platforms continue to survive and have a customer base. My contention is that Amazon is steadily eroding that customer base. We shall see if that changes over time or not.


----------



## Maggie Dana (Oct 26, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> Indies are hungry to sell at other platforms but those platforms make it very difficult. They don't court indies the way Amazon does. They have poor discoverability and they promote traditionally published books almost to the exclusion of everything else.


You nailed it.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

> Amazon is doing the majority of the sales--period. Yes, that's bad for other businesses who compete with them. Google was bad for other search engine businesses, which is why most of those are now defunct.
> 
> No one ever said it was bad for customers. It's possibly not even bad for authors, but depends on where you stand and what you think may happen in the future if Amazon gains total dominance the way Google has with search.


I've come to the conclusion that I really don't care about monopolies.

People *say* they want competition, but really, they don't. They want product compatibility and ease of access. If the main player in the game isn't providing that or makes another dick move that pisses off a good number of people, *that* is when competition arises and flourishes.

I don't think any of the other stores will go away. Oh, they will, but there will be different ones.
I also don't think Amazon will be around forever.

But "forever" in publishing is, like, a year away. We're nimble and can move quickly. Why worry?


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Patty Jansen said:


> I think it is important for SP writers not to confuddle the "X has Y market share" with how well *they* find they can sell their books in various markets. This depends on genre and type of book/short story etc.
> 
> Make your decisions based on your experience, not market share of whatever device.
> 
> ...


Yes, this.

There are a lot of factors such as genre, marketing strategies, how US-centric your writing is, etc... which influence how individual writers do on different platforms. There are some writers for whom being exclusive to Amazon absolutely makes sense, because they write in genres where Amazon dominates, their work is very US-centric, their marketing is focussed on Amazon or they simply failed to gain traction at other vendors, etc... And there are writers for whom it makes sense to go wide, because they get good sales elsewhere.

My personal experience is that for me, the Amazon share of my total sales has been steadily shrinking, whereas other vendors are growing. And of the non-Amazon vendors, Kobo is the biggest for me, followed by B&N (though my sales there have been slipping since they redid their site) and Scribd. Meanwhile, Apple is not a big venue for me, even behind small niche stores like DriveThruFiction (which has been very good to me indeed).

So in short, not every indie is the same.



Patty Jansen said:


> Kobo is going to do audio. I'm on a waiting list to hear about what they're going to offer.
> 
> I second the about "you're doing it wrong" comment. Each site has particular quirks. Learn them, upload your books according to them and start to sell regularly.
> 
> I think the major mistake a lot of people make is that they assume that Amazon is as important in non-US countries as it is in the US. I think the major challenge for non-US sales is that the market is very fragmented, so there's a lot of uploading/tweaking to do.


This, too.

Amazon may be the biggest player in the US, but that's not necessarily true elsewhere. For example in Germany (figures from 2014), Tolino (basically a local Nook equivalent) has a 45% share of the (still rather small) e-book market, while Amazon has only 39%. The remaining 14% are split between Kobo, Apple, Google Play, Sony (still popular with early adopters) and smaller players.

Other countries have similar quirks and the biggest local player may be a company you've never heard of.

And while it makes sense for US-centric writers to focus mainly on Amazon, non-US-centric writers are probably better advised to take the global view.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

If you can write in a language other than English, I think it's possibly good news.  If you can get translations done that are cost effective and move books in foreign languages, good as well.

But these markets are very small.  I have a good friend who does well in French and that market is really tiny comparatively, although he's quite happy with it.  Niches are all well and good and nobody's saying you can't be very satisfied with them.

But they are not the big market, they're not even close.  The amount of copies moved on the US Amazon side is enormous, and the other stores and niches are not really comparable.

It bears noting.  It's not just being myopic to only think of US ebooks. It's practical for many authors, and again--it seems to me that the trend line is only going more and more in Amazon's direction.  My Amazon UK and Australia sales and even Canadian sales are getting bigger, and they are definitely dwarfing platforms like Kobo and iBooks.

And I do sell on Kobo and iBooks also.  Its just not in the same league as Amazon, and unfortunately, the big picture numbers as reported by reputable sources bear that out on a large scale.

The fact that individual indies can have varying results has little to no impact on that.  And although small pockets of indies may thrive in niche markets, its simply not doable for the vast majority of indie authors.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Sela said:


> It's business. So the more and better competition Amazon has, the better off we are as indies. Those competitors need to get their acts together and improve to better compete with Amazon. I have hope for Apple and Google could be huge, if it put its mind to it.


The main problem is that Apple and Google have very little motivation to get their act together. They're rolling in piles of filthy lucre already, so ebooks don't matter to them. They *might* be thinking of guarding their flanks, making sure they offer at least a decent shopping experience for apps/books/music/video so that Amazon isn't so well positioned to sweep in with a killer hardware innovation -- something like the Fire Phone ... but, you know, actually good. Then again, they might be confident that Amazon won't come up with a killer hardware innovation, especially after the phone flop. So long as Amazon isn't threatening the dominance of Android phones and iPhones, Google and Apple might be satisfied to let Amazon hold sway over online media retail.

And yet, the Oyster acquisition suggests otherwise for Google. Dunno.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Just a bit more data to keep the chains moving...this was posted in the Oyster shutting down thread:



Crenel said:


> http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/press_releases/9_9_15_bn_2016_q1_financial_results.html (emphasis mine)
> 
> *The NOOK segment (including digital content, devices and accessories) had revenues of $54 million for the quarter, decreasing 22.4% from a year ago. For the quarter, digital content sales declined 28.0% to $37 million and device and accessories sales declined 6.2% to $17 million.
> *
> It's one thing to recognize that you're seeing acceptable revenue from the NOOK platform _currently_. It's another thing entirely to ignore published facts from the most authoritative source and to assume, by ignoring those facts, that what you are currently experiencing _individually_ is a relevant indicator regarding the future of the platform.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

gorvnice, as far as I recall (sorry, if I have you mixed up with someone else), you spent a lot of time analysing bestselling titles in your genre at (presumably) Amazon.com and using these as a model for your own work. And since you specifically target your books at what American Amazon customers like (which is not necessarily the same thing customers at other platforms or in other countries like), it's no surprise that your books sell best at Amazon.

However, this is not everybody's strategy or experience.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> gorvnice, as far as I recall (sorry, if I have you mixed up with someone else), you spent a lot of time analysing bestselling titles in your genre at (presumably) Amazon.com and using these as a model for your own work. And since you specifically target your books at what American Amazon customers like (which is not necessarily the same thing customers at other platforms or in other countries like), it's no surprise that your books sell best at Amazon.
> 
> However, this is not everybody's strategy or experience.


I am pointing at data, Cora. If you continue to point back to my experience even as I point to data from sources outside myself, I'm not sure how else I can frame it so as to make sense.

The numbers Nook came out with about their own sliding profits in the digital space were not coming from me. They came from Nook. The data in my OP came from Data Guy, who analyzes this market and has the numbers to back it up.

There are other corroborating sources.

And just because you or I or someone else sees their individual sales going up at Nook will not take away the fact that Nook's overall numbers are sliding down a cliff.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

she-la-ti-da said:


> Heck, Smashwords could give Amazon a run for their money, if they upgraded their site, did something about Meatgrinder, and really put some effort into it.


Hasn't the Meatgrinder been gone or toned down for like ever now? And even then it was only to go wide with their aggregation?


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Also, if the numbers are true and we represent a *super secret magical special* 10-20% bump in market share, then we're especially to blame for our woes in terms of market share and health of the environment. That would mean that we're holding a 15% or so swing in the game and getting absolutely no power or control over the industry out of it.

If we're making up 15% of the market, we could command a lot of concessions if we could actually get organized, but we don't and we're totally to blame for that. On the whole, we pretty much just lay back and take whatever anything any of the platforms gives us.

Honestly, how many of us do try and open up dialogues with _any_ platforms aside from d2d and Smashy because they're here on the boards (and even then, having a dialog that isn't hurling abuse for not towing the party line of a party they aren't part of)? Hell, we _know_ they have people that watch this forum. If some money makers made it clear they weren't going to get jerked around or preach to the choir for some bennies, maybe they would deal more fairly with us.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> If you can write in a language other than English, I think it's possibly good news. If you can get translations done that are cost effective and move books in foreign languages, good as well.


As you like data points, here's some.

Most Canadians speak English. Rakuten Kobo dominates the Canadian book market and Canada dominates the (Japanese equivalent to Amazon owned) Rakuten Kobo.

Most Irish people speak English. Until about 18 months ago the Irish were charged a whispersync tax because they were a country without an Amazon store (you do know about the whispersync tax don't you?). Now the Irish can shop in the UK store, but still don't get access to KU.

Most South Africans speak English. No country in the entire continent has an Amazon store, so whispersync taxes make your Amazon prices uncompetitive with your Apple or Google prices if you are wide. If you are in Select your prices are uncompetitive with a competitor's Apple or Google prices. There is no KU in the whole of Africa.

More Indians speak English than in the UK and India ranks 2nd to the US for English speakers. India has an Amazon store, but only recently became the first Asian store to get KU. In Europe and the Americas only the recently opened Netherlands store lacks KU.

Most Australians speak English. They have a store (that New Zealanders are now allowed to use), but no KU.

Most New Zealanders speak English. They used to have to shop on Amazon.com and pay the Whispersync tax. Now they can use the Australian store, but even if Australia gets KU the Amazon policy is that New Zealanders will not gain access to it.

So many Dutch speak English that Netherlands has long been considered one of the national dialects of the world's most diverse language. Netherlands got it's own Amazon store about a year ago, but not yet a KU.

Speculative fiction in Germany is dominated by English language texts. It has an Amazon store shared with Austria and Switzerland and a KU to itself.

This language is not what you think it is.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Also, if the numbers are true and we represent a *super secret magical special* 10-20% bump in market share, then we're especially to blame for our woes in terms of market share and health of the environment. That would mean that we're holding a 15% or so swing in the game and getting absolutely no power or control over the industry out of it.
> 
> If we're making up 15% of the market, we could command a lot of concessions if we could actually get organized, but we don't and we're totally to blame for that. On the whole, we pretty much just lay back and take whatever anything any of the platforms gives us.
> 
> Honestly, how many of us do try and open up dialogues with _any_ platforms aside from d2d and Smashy because they're here on the boards (and even then, having a dialog that isn't hurling abuse for not towing the party line of a party they aren't part of)? Hell, we _know_ they have people that watch this forum. If some money makers made it clear they weren't going to get jerked around or preach to the choir for some bennies, maybe they would deal more fairly with us.


I think on the whole, all these platforms, including Amazon, are dealing pretty fairly with us.

Lessee:

- I don't have to wait up to 5 years anymore for a yay or nay from an editor
- I don't have to wait up to two years after the yay to see my book listed for sale.
- I get between 35 and 80% of the book's list price, not 25%
- I get this in the month after the money has been collected by the vendor, not nine months later
- My sales reports are itemised, and online
- If I don't like the terms, I can leave immediately
- They will sometimes throw programs my way which may (or may not) be beneficial for me to participate in. I decide about this. The longest contract I sign about these deals is three months (not five or more years)

In all, I would say a lot of writers are pretty happy about the state of affairs. Sure, they could always be more happy and things could be more fair, but enough of us have enough memories of our trade days that we see no reason to pick up the rusty old pitchforks again. Rest assured that we won't forget where the pitchforks are.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Except you're not just an author. Yeah, I guess that's a pretty sweet deal for an author still in the 'trad vs self' mode, but we're _publishers_ getting jerked around by retailers.

Do you think TOR is threatened with a lock-out over a missed pre-order, has artificial limits on what they can price a book at to get full payment, has the vendor spy on their website for competing links (hi, Apple!) or has to suffer the indignities of getting their books randomly pulled because a completely unrelated publisher did something naughty?

These sales channels aren't the equivalent of our publishers, _we're_ the equivalent of our publishers and they're retailers. They need to start treating us like it.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Except you're not just an author. Yeah, I guess that's a pretty sweet deal for an author still in the 'trad vs self' mode, but we're _publishers_ getting jerked around by retailers.
> 
> Do you think TOR is threatened with a lock-out over a missed pre-order, has artificial limits on what they can price a book at to get full payment, has the vendor spy on their website for competing links (hi, Apple!) or has to suffer the indignities of getting their books randomly pulled because a completely unrelated publisher did something naughty?
> 
> These sales channels aren't the equivalent of our publishers, _we're_ the equivalent of our publishers and they're retailers. They need to start treating us like it.


Methinks you're hunting for a reason to want to be jerked around. Even for small publishers (I have a number of friends who have run small publishing businesses for quite some time), things are miles better than they used to be, and this is averaged over all the retailers. Sure, things could always be better and issues could be ironed out, but few people see the need for pitchforks.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I do think it would be better in some ways if indies had some organization that could leverage for bargaining power.  Maybe we wouldn't have all agreed on what to do about the change in terms with KU, but we certainly could've pushed for more fairness for children's book authors. 

In cases where there has been clearcut mistreatment of a subset of authors, it would be nice to have some ability to push for better treatment.  

Of course, I get that there would be downsides to any sort of lobbying effort, including possible favoritism and even corruption...but still, the inability for indie authors to leverage their worth to demand fairer terms (such as 1 month exclusivity when enrolling in KU instead of the onerous 3 months we currently face) from Amazon and other platforms is unfortunate.

We do have a lot of worth and value but we're very scattered and only the very biggest indie names can make any kind of demands.  Whereas if we were a bit organized, we might at least be able to throw our weight around when it matters, and occasionally it does.


----------



## CaraS. (Jul 18, 2014)

katherinef said:


> I'm really sad about B&N. I used to sell great there, but now not so much. Now 43% of my sales come from Amazon, but I'm glad to see my Apple numbers are growing too, and I think it could become what B&N used to be for me. For now my plan is to keep building my readership, so if everything goes to hell, my readers will follow me wherever I choose to go.


I was published by a small press ebook only publisher for one of the first e-book readers, Rocket, back in the late 90s AND only B&N sold to that market then. Just think where they could be now if they had been innovative. I still don't understand why the Rocket disappeared and it took YEARS to bring out other e-readers. Possibility I suppose of financing, etc, lots of middle-men.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

And this, from Nook's year end reporting in 2014:

Digital content sales were $62 million for the quarter and $246 million for the full year, declining 18.7% and 20.6%, respectively, due primarily to lower device unit sales.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/barnes-noble-reports-fiscal-2014-year-end-financial-results-2014-06-25

In 2012, Nook's digital content sales GREW by leaps and bounds. In 2013, their content sales flat-lined and their device sales plummeted. And ever since then, they've been dropping 20% or more each year. It's a downward spiral and it's very hard to imagine they will pull out of it.

These are just the figures. With Nook losing that marketshare, I have to imagine it will be mostly Amazon (and probably to a lesser extent iBooks) who will benefit. Another few percent each year, and by the time Nook does truly die (and it's really only a matter of when, not if) Amazon will likely have gone from the 75% marketshare it holds now to 80-85%.

This is just what will likely be the case. Amazon is playing a very tough, very smart game and they're winning in the biggest market in the world. And they're winning massively. The rest of the players are essentially fighting over the crumbs, the table scraps.

I'm not going to argue what that means for authors or customers. I'm merely pointing to a reality that we all need to deal with and be aware of so we can make the best business decisions going forward. Pretending it's not happening because you personally sell books on those other platforms is really missing the point.

That's how the trad pubs thought, and that's why Amazon and indies ate their lunch.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> These are just the figures. With Nook losing that marketshare, I have to imagine it will be mostly Amazon (and probably to a lesser extent iBooks) who will benefit. Another few percent each year, and by the time Nook does truly die (and it's really only a matter of when, not if) Amazon will likely have gone from the 75% marketshare it holds now to 80-85%.
> 
> This is just what will likely be the case. Amazon is playing a very tough, very smart game and they're winning in the biggest market in the world. And they're winning massively. The rest of the players are essentially fighting over the crumbs, the table scraps.
> 
> ...


I think this is likely right, but it's also important to keep in mind that Apple and Google are not like traditional publishers, which are relatively small companies owned by multinationals to which they have to answer. Apple is the most valuable company in the world; Google the fourth more valuable. they are rolling in mountains of money. If either decides to get serious about ebook sales, they could change the playing field. We're assuming they won't because ebooks are not important to them.


----------



## Evil Overlord (Apr 22, 2011)

she-la-ti-da said:


> Heck, Smashwords could give Amazon a run for their money, if they upgraded their site, did something about Meatgrinder, and really put some effort into it. Pay like Amazon does, rather than quarterly, drop the minimum payment required, and so on. I do like that they'll pay into Paypal. Amazon should do that.


I'd love to use Smashwords, but I've always found them more trouble than they're worth. Same with B&N (and for no return) last time I tried them. Part of my trouble is that many of the sites are geared toward a Word document input, while I'm taking trouble to format EPUBs the way I want them. I could drop back to Word, but then I'd lose some of the fine control.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> Apple is the most valuable company in the world; Google the fourth more valuable. they are rolling in mountains of money. If either decides to get serious about ebook sales, they could change the playing field.


Everyone has been saying this for the last few years. It's not to say it couldn't happen, but I guess at some point we need to ask ourselves if there's much reality behind this concept.

Seems to me they've ceded the battle over ebooks to Amazon, because, as you've pointed out, the money is really in devices and other arenas. It's just not worth it for Google or Apple to allocate the kind of resources they'd need to use to fight Amazon for a piece of a pie that in their eyes is mostly inconsequential.

They want to provide enough content and a good enough experience in their bookstores so as not to give anyone reasons to go to a different device. But most people don't choose their device based on the book selection it provides. So Google and Apple only need to be just okay to do the job there.

Simply put, they don't care very much and there's no real indication that they're ever going to.


----------



## TrevorSchmidt (Sep 23, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> ed the battle over ebooks to Amazon, because, as you've pointed out, the money is really in devices and other arenas. It's just not worth it for Google or Apple to allocate the kind of resources they'd need to use to fight Amazon for a piece of a pie that in their eyes is mostly inconsequential.


Not sure if you mean e-reading devices or otherwise, but I know Amazon and BN often operate at a loss for their device sales and make it up through content.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

TrevorSchmidt said:


> Not sure if you mean e-reading devices or otherwise, but I know Amazon and BN often operate at a loss for their device sales and make it up through content.


My point was that, Apple and Google care more about their phones and tablets and computers then they do about having a great ebook store that competes with Amazon's store.

Amazon has enough marketshare and has always focused on this type of content, it fits the mission of Amazon's store and they've gobbled up enough of the pie to invest serious resources into the fight.

Whereas players like Google and Apple really don't have enough of a vested interest in the content of the bookstore the way Apple has in music, or the way it has in movies.

They've accepted defeat when it comes to ebooks in the sense that they're clearly not battling and pushing the way they do in their device sector or movies/tv or music.

And despite the fact that, yes, they COULD do it, they have the money and the tech and everything needed--they're not doing it. They don't appear to care much beyond providing some semblance of a store and the bare minimum of competition so as not to completely be out of the picture. But that's not going to cut it longterm as far as giving indie authors choices and a competitive marketplace to balance the dominance of Amazon.


----------



## TrevorSchmidt (Sep 23, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> My point was that, Apple and Google care more about their phones and tablets and computers then they do about having a great ebook store that competes with Amazon's store.
> 
> Amazon has enough marketshare and has always focused on this type of content, it fits the mission of Amazon's store and they've gobbled up enough of the pie to invest serious resources into the fight.
> 
> ...


I can see your point. Right now more than 98% of my sales come from Amazon and it's a little disconcerting...I do have some Amazon-exclusive content but in a lot of cases I can't justify bringing my books to iBooks or Google since I've only sold 1-2 copies there period. If the landscape changed and they decided to be more friendly to indies I might go wide, but Amazon is offering a better deal for me at the moment.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

TrevorSchmidt said:


> I can see your point. Right now more than 98% of my sales come from Amazon and it's a little disconcerting...I do have some Amazon-exclusive content but in a lot of cases I can't justify bringing my books to iBooks or Google since I've only sold 1-2 copies there period. If the landscape changed and they decided to be more friendly to indies I might go wide, but Amazon is offering a better deal for me at the moment.


For me, it's more like 80% of my revenue comes from Amazon, and I also have some exclusive content which fosters that dynamic. But that's part of my point. Nowadays, most authors who are serious about this have some degree of exclusive material with Amazon. 
Notice I said MOST, not ALL. And "most" is all Amazon needs to dominate, which they are doing.

Whereas NO other sites have any exclusive content.

So Amazon has a stable (getting increasingly larger) of authors going partially or fully exclusive with them. Beyond that, they MOVE A METRIC TON OF EBOOKS every single day. So they already own a huge piece of the pie and provide an overall better customer experience.

This is only getting worse. It is what it is.

Indies need to be aware and plan accordingly.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> Everyone has been saying this for the last few years. It's not to say it couldn't happen, but I guess at some point we need to ask ourselves if there's much reality behind this concept.
> 
> Seems to me they've ceded the battle over ebooks to Amazon, because, as you've pointed out, the money is really in devices and other arenas. It's just not worth it for Google or Apple to allocate the kind of resources they'd need to use to fight Amazon for a piece of a pie that in their eyes is mostly inconsequential.
> 
> ...


I was thinking this way as well, but the acquisition of the Oyster employees by Google doesn't fit the don't-care pattern, right? That's what's giving me some pause.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> I was thinking this way as well, but the acquisition of the Oyster employees by Google doesn't fit the don't-care pattern, right? That's what's giving me some pause.


We don't really know what the Oyster deal means.

Sure, Google has an ebook store. They even have some staff working on that bookstore.

But they're essentially working at what appears to be the equivalent of an outpost in the North Pole or something. They're not competing, not innovating, not doing much but trying to keep the chains moving in some elementary fashion so as to take up some amount of real estate.

Maybe bringing in the Oyster folks means they're interested in having some bit of a footprint in the subscription ebook space--just to have it, like they have a bookstore. They want to have it on offer, but that doesn't mean it will be any better for us than their current bookstore has been.

If Google or Apple was really taking the fight to Amazon in the ebook space, we'd know it.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

I imagine, given lifecycle of software projects and such, that even if bringing in some of the Oyster people means anything, we won't see an end product of it for 2-5 years at the soonest. Meanwhile, we have rent and bills to pay.


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

Nook has a forum just like this one, so they do provide opportunities for promotion. Look for nookboards. On your website, you can build links to your nook books, many of the paid advertisers give their readers links to Nook, Kobo, and Apple.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> We don't really know what the Oyster deal means.
> 
> Sure, Google has an ebook store. They even have some staff working on that bookstore.
> 
> ...


This sounds about right to me.

To motivate Google and Apple get serious about competing across the board on media retail, I think Amazon would have to have a hardware product like the Fire Phone become a big hit. So long as most people are happy to get to Amazon via an iPhone or Android phone, I doubt Apple and Google will care how big a retail destination Amazon becomes.

Still, though, I do think it's worth keeping in mind that Apple and Google =/= Kobo and B&N. Not wanting to do something is different from being helpless.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Martitalbott said:


> Nook has a forum just like this one, so they do provide opportunities for promotion. Look for nookboards. On your website, you can build links to your nook books, many of the paid advertisers give their readers links to Nook, Kobo, and Apple.


I don't consider that kind of promotion to be at all competitive with what Nook provides their traditionally published books, nor to be competitive with what Amazon does. It's just too little, too late to matter.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Annie B said:


> I imagine, given lifecycle of software projects and such, that even if bringing in some of the Oyster people means anything, we won't see an end product of it for 2-5 years at the soonest. Meanwhile, we have rent and bills to pay.


Exactly.

Allow me to use a sports metaphor for a moment.

I used to watch a lot of Tour de France coverage, and one of the most common scenarios that occurred on every stage was the "breakaway." A few riders would break from the main group (the peloton) and try to get far enough ahead to win the stage before the main field caught up.

Inevitably, 9 times out of 10, the breakaway riders would be caught in the last few kilometers.

But occasionally, for various reasons, the peloton would allow the breakaway to get far enough ahead that they'd be unable to reel them back in, even if they worked as a group to try and do so.

I believe that in the early days, the Big Five and Apple and Google and B&N and Borders (remember Borders?) could've crushed Amazon like an ant. But they didn't care about what Amazon was doing, they were too busy fighting amongst themselves for various things.

By the time they took notice, Amazon had already broken far enough away as to make catching them a bit problematic. Even then, a concerted effort from the Big Five and B&N and Borders still might've been able to reel in Amazon, but it would have taken lots of effort and resources, and they all probably thought eventually Amazon would slip up and do the job for them.

Now, it's too late.

The breakaway has succeeded. There will be no catching up.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> The breakaway has succeeded. There will be no catching up.


... probably.


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> I don't consider that kind of promotion to be at all competitive with what Nook provides their traditionally published books, nor to be competitive with what Amazon does. It's just too little, too late to matter.


Well, that's the difference between us. You are negative and I am positive. Both or us are right and wrong according to our own outlook. "Defeatist" is not in my vocabulary. There is always something else to try.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> I think it is important for SP writers not to confuddle the "X has Y market share" with how well *they* find they can sell their books in various markets. This depends on genre and type of book/short story etc.
> 
> Make your decisions based on your experience, not market share of whatever device.
> 
> ...


^^ That X1,000

I think it's best to experiment and see what works for you.

That being said I remain torn, until I see the results of my current experiments as to what works for me. 

I also am in favor of rolling with the changes, whatever those changes may be.

(Okay, I got REO Speedwagon stuck in my head now LOL )


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Now, it's too late.
> 
> The breakaway has succeeded. There will be no catching up.


Only if we're going to continue with all the quitter talk like this thread.

If you're even right at all, the onus of all this is on us for serving ourselves up on a silver platter with an apple in our mouths and then acting like we're just poor victims of fate.

For all the talk of hard work and there being no luck people like to bandy about, they sure like hurling their fates into the arms of others for literally no good reason.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

There is no such thing as a company that gets the majority market share and just keeps it forever as a forgone conclusion. Microsoft was once a startup. Apple was, too. Blackberry used to have the majority of the smart phone market and when iPhone came out, people predicted it would never usurp Blackberry. When iPad came out, everyone laughed. What a stupid name . . . and then when Android launched it was "oh, no other operating system will EVER take over iOs, it's too established!" Um. 

But regardless, we are micro in terms of scale to what's being discussed as macro factors of the overall market. As others have shared, just because Amazon has 80% of the marketplace doesn't mean they are 80% of my earnings. So making strategies based on market share is a flawed methodology if you don't take other factors into consideration, especially what Cora points out about international appeal of your writing.

Finally, it always tickles me that we are supposed to be up in arms about market share of ebook vendors and how it means everyone else is DEAD but yet PRINT has not given up its majority market share of book sales and indies are more or less told it's a lost cause and dead. Um . . . 

More and more I feel that there are always going to be two types of working authors out there. And this isn't wide vs KU, but those with a strategy and proactive plan to forge ahead and those with a strategy that has them in a reactive position. Both have merits for the marketplace, but those two types of authors are never going to see eye-to-eye on anything.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Martitalbott said:


> Well, that's the difference between us. You are negative and I am positive. Both or us are right and wrong according to our own outlook. "Defeatist" is not in my vocabulary. There is always something else to try.


I don't consider myself negative for admitting the situation and dealing with the facts and data at hand. And I don't consider it to be positive to create a rosier outlook than is warranted given the reality at hand.

I'm doing well at this business, I'm not complaining. There's a difference between trying to paint an accurate picture and whining.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Vaalingrade said:


> Only if we're going to continue with all the quitter talk like this thread.
> 
> If you're even right at all, the onus of all this is on us for serving ourselves up on a silver platter with an apple in our mouths and then acting like we're just poor victims of fate.
> 
> For all the talk of hard work and there being no luck people like to bandy about, they sure like hurling their fates into the arms of others for literally no good reason.


Listen, you can blame indies all you want, but in my eyes the big players were the ones who had the chance to balance things out. That was the Big Five, Borders, B&N, Google and Apple. They didn't want to or didn't see the need.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

I dunno. I'm with Patty. Monopolies aren't necessarily bad. I will continue to keep up with things and go wherever best suits my business. At the moment, that's in multiple places.  We're no more serving ourselves up on platters than someone who puts Microsoft Office as their main system in their office building is. We're choosing what works best for us. If something better comes along, we can switch or integrate. 

People are always going to want good books to read. We provide the good books. The means and mode might change, but that reality doesn't alter much. If Amazon dies tomorrow, we'll still be making things that people want and something will rise from the ashes to give people what they demand. Maybe I'm overly optimistic, but I'm looking at thousands of years of human history and storytelling, so... maybe, maybe not.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> There is no such thing as a company that gets the majority market share and just keeps it forever as a forgone conclusion. Microsoft was once a startup. Apple was, too. Blackberry used to have the majority of the smart phone market and when iPhone came out, people predicted it would never usurp Blackberry. When iPad came out, everyone laughed. What a stupid name . . . and then when Android launched it was "oh, no other operating system will EVER take over iOs, it's too established!" Um.
> 
> But regardless, we are micro in terms of scale to what's being discussed as macro factors of the overall market. As others have shared, just because Amazon has 80% of the marketplace doesn't mean they are 80% of my earnings. So making strategies based on market share is a flawed methodology if you don't take other factors into consideration, especially what Cora points out about international appeal of your writing.
> 
> ...


EAW, you make great points as always. But we still need to deal with the figures and the facts and make some strategy and predictions based on that. I'm making my own strategy and I believe I'm in good shape for the near term and long term, but time will tell.

People need to make their own decisions, but they'll be better with the facts at their fingertips and dealing with reality instead of wearing rose colored glasses.

Niches will pay off. I've said it again and again. But the macro does impact the micro, especially for those of us trying to build larger scale businesses.

If you are happy enough with niche markets, I'm not telling you its wrong or bad. But all authors will never and can never work in the niche markets. They're niche for a reason--they're smaller. Period.

The numbers don't lie and they do impact all of us, and they impact Amazon's policies, you can be sure.

As to what to do about it--I laugh when people say I'm defeatist. Just because I don't sit around and brag about my success does not mean I'm defeated. To the contrary, there are still tons of opportunities.

But I believe opportunities come from an honest appreciation of market factors. It's definitely helped me to make a better, stronger business these last five years.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Annie B said:


> I dunno. I'm with Patty. Monopolies aren't necessarily bad.


I never said this was bad either, although I don't think it's by definition good.

It's a major factor that indies all too often try and downplay. Those writers who've only started selling in the last year have no real basis of comparison around how much Amazon is dominating this space versus 2012 or even 2013. People start selling and they think their individual numbers are showing larger trends.

In fact, the numbers tell us that the larger trend is very much going Amazon's way. What that means for each of us will differ, but pretending its not important is just bad business, imo.


----------



## John Ellsworth (Jun 1, 2014)

I project a sea change in all of this when the delivery of an ebook from a writer's own website becomes as seamless and automated as Amazon's email delivery system of ebooks. I say this because there are those of us who are quietly building our email lists and who, if we stay focused, will one day have enough names to own a real audience of mostly committed shoppers for our products. In my experience it is expensive to build my email list. It is also an expensable outlay (think Schedule C of your tax return). But I also view it as my best hedge against the unreliability factor of allowing third party retailers to offer my books for sale. Let's say my goal is 30,000 names on my email list. With those numbers of vetted shoppers, the release of a new book, or the promo of a backlist book, becomes an event that can rival what Amazon or Bookbub can produce as a single event. At least that's the incentive. Same for sales of others in the series by virtue of sales of the first, or the promo, or whatever.

Say what you want, _for me_ I choose the alternative of potentially becoming my own outlet as preferable to choosing among lesser evils, i.e., Zon vs. Wide vs. Hybrid etc. It won't happen overnight, but each month the list grows by 700-1000 names, thanks to the Nick Stephenson/Mark Dawson systems. And who knows, maybe someday Zon will give up its exclusivity thing and people with long lists can have the best of both worlds.

I'm just saying, _I believe_ there are alternatives.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

John Ellsworth said:


> I project a sea change in all of this when the delivery of an ebook from a writer's own website becomes as seamless and automated as Amazon's email delivery system of ebooks. I say this because there are those of us who are quietly building our email lists and who, if we stay focused, will one day have enough names to own a real audience of mostly committed shoppers for our products. In my experience it is expensive to build my email list. It is also an expensable outlay (think Schedule C of your tax return). But I also view it as my best hedge against the unreliability factor of allowing third party retailers to offer my books for sale. Let's say my goal is 30,000 names on my email list. With those numbers of vetted shoppers, the release of a new book, or the promo of a backlist book, becomes an event that can rival what Amazon or Bookbub can produce as a single event. At least that's the incentive. Same for sales of others in the series by virtue of sales of the first, or the promo, or whatever.
> 
> Say what you want, _for me_ I choose the alternative of potentially becoming my own outlet as preferable to choosing among lesser evils, i.e., Zon vs. Wide vs. Hybrid etc. It won't happen overnight, but each month the list grows by 700-1000 names, thanks to the Nick Stephenson/Mark Dawson systems. And who knows, maybe someday Zon will give up its exclusivity thing and people with long lists can have the best of both worlds.
> 
> I'm just saying, _I believe_ there are alternatives.


Now you're speaking my language. As I've said, smart indies appreciate the underlying realities and build their businesses stronger because of it.

Nicely done and congratulations on having a savvy strategy, John. There's a reason you've done so well thus far...


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

John Ellsworth said:


> I project a sea change in all of this when the delivery of an ebook from a writer's own website becomes as seamless and automated as Amazon's email delivery system of ebooks. I say this because there are those of us who are quietly building our email lists and who, if we stay focused, will one day have enough names to own a real audience of mostly committed shoppers for our products. In my experience it is expensive to build my email list. It is also an expensable outlay (think Schedule C of your tax return). But I also view it as my best hedge against the unreliability factor of allowing third party retailers to offer my books for sale. Let's say my goal is 30,000 names on my email list. With those numbers of vetted shoppers, the release of a new book, or the promo of a backlist book, becomes an event that can rival what Amazon or Bookbub can produce as a single event. At least that's the incentive. Same for sales of others in the series by virtue of sales of the first, or the promo, or whatever.
> 
> Say what you want, _for me_ I choose the alternative of potentially becoming my own outlet as preferable to choosing among lesser evils, i.e., Zon vs. Wide vs. Hybrid etc. It won't happen overnight, but each month the list grows by 700-1000 names, thanks to the Nick Stephenson/Mark Dawson systems. And who knows, maybe someday Zon will give up its exclusivity thing and people with long lists can have the best of both worlds.
> 
> I'm just saying, _I believe_ there are alternatives.


Pure wisdom here. I wish I'd built an email list back in 2011 when I first started. My career would be 100% better now than it currently is. But it's never too late.

The best insurance against being susceptible to Amazon's whim, is to have access to your own customers. Right now I'm building a new pen name from scratch. My goal isn't quick profits - it's building an email list. The first book is being given away for free, in exchange for an email sign up. I'd rather give the book away myself using instafreebie, than doing so on Amazon.

After that, the plan is to release the other books wide. Always, with a quick email to the list that a new book is out. I wish I'd done this earlier.

But only staying in KU is a risk I don't think I'm going to take anymore. Because it's much to easy to be subject to their whims. Have a back up plan guys.. have a back up plan!


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

It's funny that Borders is getting brought up when what killed Borders was handing over their online business until it was too late and the process of trying to separate killed them.

Also, 'monopolies aren't bad'? Where do you live and what ISP do you have? That crappy service and awful package you get plus the huge null services spaces in the middle of their little fiefdoms? The miles upon miles of black net super-high speed fiberoptics that will never be turned on? The fact that they can get away with a name like Cox? That's what monopolies do. They's a bunch of Cox


...es.


*looks sternly at Vaal.* --Betsy


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Also, 'monopolies aren't bad'? Where do you live and what ISP do you have? That crappy service and awful package you get plus the huge null services spaces in the middle of their little fiefdoms? The miles upon miles of black net super-high speed fiberoptics that will never be turned on? The fact that they can get away with a name like Cox? That's what monopolies do. They's a bunch of Cox
> 
> ...es.


No idea who Cox is, but...

I guess most people in cities worldwide have a realistic choice between two ISPs, who are both equally bureaucratic, and as efficient and deficient as your experience dictates. My dear husband frequently suffers from Grass-is-greener-itis and we have swapped regularly between providers, medical insurance companies, phone companies, etc. etc. All it does is create paperwork, and, towards the end of the "so happy I switched" window, a lot of ulcers. Of course, in Finland EVERYTHING is better. Then again, if we lived in Finland, Russia would be better, or Germany, or god forbid, the US.

Methinks it might be time to bury the angry and suspicious and get on with life.

If my internet works, I'm happy. If my computer has an operating system, if I can list my books in a place where people can buy them, if there is a bookshop in a local shopping centre somewhere, I'm happy. I do not care about brand, monopoly or little guy vs big guy.

I lived in a small town in northern Australia where we had only a choice of one provider for the vast majority of services. Choice does not necessarily make people happy. It does not always make sense, and it does not magically make a better society.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Becca Mills said:


> Still, though, I do think it's worth keeping in mind that Apple and Google =/= Kobo and B&N. Not wanting to do something is different from being helpless.


As of a couple of weeks ago that is Rakuten Kobo you are referring to. The Japanese Amazon rebranding Kobo with its own name does not suggest leaving Kobo as a Chapters-esque digital outlet for the world's print chains. So more like Apple Google and Rakuten Kobo =/= B&N.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Mercia McMahon said:


> As of a couple of weeks ago that is Rakuten Kobo you are referring to. The Japanese Amazon rebranding Kobo with its own name does not suggest leaving Kobo as a Chapters-esque digital outlet for the world's print chains. So more like Apple Google and Rakuten Kobo =/= B&N.


Hmm, yeah, forgot about that. Hopefully Kobo can draw on those deeper pockets, now.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> Hasn't the Meatgrinder been gone or toned down for like ever now? And even then it was only to go wide with their aggregation?


Nope. Meatgrinder is their conversion machine. You can upload epubs now, but they won't convert them to any other format. You still have to upload a .doc, and hope like hell you got it right, if you intend to go anywhere other than Smashwords. I don't know if other sites pick them up through Smashwords, except maybe Overdrive.

Authors have been talking to Smashwords for years about what needs to be done to that platform. We're ignored. Mark Coker is a member here, he can read the posts where people complain about the conversion, the interface, and whatever. Yet, nothing is done. Oh, yeah. Upload an epub. Yay. It's like moving forward in inch when you need to jump a yard.



> If the big publishers don't want to see the success of Ebooks then why should a company such as B & N which is heavily tied to the same business model?


Money? It's been years now, and these places have to see the huge money to be made in ebooks. Report after report shows that print is not where it's at, at least online, yet they ignore them and soldier on, right into bankruptcy.

If your business is selling books, why not get off your butt and sell what the customers want?

The only hope I see is that Kobo and Google buckle down and actually compete with Amazon. I don't think it's likely to happen, but hey, let's dream. I think Kobo could do it, but they need to get going. I'd love to sell books through Kobo. They reach people Amazon doesn't, and I've heard their device is good.

I know that supporting other markets is important, because we don't want Amazon to be the only place to sell books. But while these other markets are navel-gazing and pondering what to do, I need to make money. Where am I going to do that?

With Oyster gone, there goes my last place I was "selling" anything. So, I look around and what do I see? I see the biggest retail store, where I'm currently making the most money I've ever made from my books, and my business sense says, go there. Go all in. Hit that mother like it's a new vein of gold just waiting to be picked out.

Do I like it? No. But I don't have forever to make any money. My golden years ain't so golden, and they're slipping by so fast. I'm limited in what I can afford to do, until more money comes in. So it doesn't make any sense to keep banging my head against the brick wall other retailers put up. With limited resources, I need to go where the money is. And that's Amazon.

About the learning what works at other stores: maybe somebody having success there could start some threads and share their experiences. Give some facts, tips, things that don't work. Just like people do for Amazon. We have thread after thread about Amazon, and people wonder why no one knows anything about other sites.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Martitalbott said:


> Nook has a forum just like this one, so they do provide opportunities for promotion. Look for nookboards. On your website, you can build links to your nook books, many of the paid advertisers give their readers links to Nook, Kobo, and Apple.


To clarify, nookboards.com, as far as I know, is a privately owned forum, like kboards.com. It was started by a former Kboards member back in 2009, I think; in the days when we were known as kindleboards.com...and later changed hands a couple of times, apparently, but I'm pretty sure it still has no affiliation with Nook or B&N other than being part of the affiliate program. You can see some similarities in the forum structure (there used to be more but both forums have evolved since 2009).

(And, Patty, Cox is a cable company/Internet provider in the US.)

Betsy


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

she-la-ti-da said:


> About the learning what works at other stores: maybe somebody having success there could start some threads and share their experiences. Give some facts, tips, things that don't work. Just like people do for Amazon. We have thread after thread about Amazon, and people wonder why no one knows anything about other sites.


The reason you don't see threads about what works at other stores the way you do with Amazon is fairly simple.

It's quite difficult to sell an appreciable amount of books on Kobo or iBooks or Google or Nook.

If a store is generally selling 70 percent less than Amazon, then it stands to reason that authors will also be selling--on average--70 percent less. If authors were somehow selling more, that would mean the store was doing more.

Sure there will be outliers who sell very well. But by definition, most authors will do much more poorly, because the platform itself is not selling enough books.

The way that most authors have sold a lot of books is through store promotions, which usually needs to come from a personal invitation from that store. You need to network with someone at iTunes or somehow get a promo. That's about the size of it, regardless of what folks say about tweaking little keyword or title or blurb things.

Because discovery on those sites generally isn't as efficient as Amazon, promotion is just about the only solution. And even if you are able to get promotion from the site (or through a Bookbub ad or the like), the numbers still won't be close to Amazon numbers in the majority of cases.

This goes back to the OP, in which its been made clear that the pie is so largely gobbled by Amazon that a huge seller on iBooks is still not going to see what a huge seller on Amazon sees for revenue. It's just math.

Those who say I'm being negative are really misstating my point. It's simply the truth. My saying it is being honest about our situation, not trying to diminish authors or those other platforms.

Those platforms diminish themselves by refusing to improve and innovate and do things that would help indies on the whole be discovered at their stores.

Apple might be trying a bit harder, but as someone who has struggled mightily there, I can say that their discoverability isn't on par with Amazon. It's not even close. Just because they're doing promo for select indies doesn't change the overall issue.

Promo is great. But promo needs to go hand-in-glove with discoverability through search and algo's and lists and so forth. If a customer can only generally come in contact with the top couple hundred books in each main genre category (and in many instances, far fewer per category), that means THOUSANDS of books are going unseen at all times. And they literally are nearly impossible to find. That's the problem that those other stores face--the issue that Amazon has solved for indies, which along with their tremendous customer base, makes it very difficult to compete with.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> Promo is great. But promo needs to go hand-in-glove with discoverability through search and algo's and lists and so forth. If a customer can only generally come in contact with the top couple hundred books in each main genre category, that means THOUSANDS of books are going unseen at all times. And they literally are nearly impossible to find. That's the problem that those other stores face--the issue that Amazon has solved for indies, which along with their tremendous customer base, makes it very difficult to compete with.


For indie authors, discoverability is _the_ problem. _Period_.

Amazon has the best discoverability system in place.

The other retailers just can't compete on that front. They do offer personal curation, recommending books based on personal contact with reps etc. Dan does a lot of that at D2D as does Mark Coker. Apple picks up some books by whatever method they have in place and I have had amazing results from my Apple promos.

BUT -- the day-to-day discoverability is just not as good anywhere else other than Amazon.

As a new writer, there are two main paths to success:

1. You have to fluke out and write a book that has what it takes to get Amazon's algorithms to kick in all on its own -- aka sell lots of books over a short period of time with no promo or anything -- in other words, be an outlier.

2. You have to have a great marketing sense out of the gate and deep pockets to get your book in front of enough readers who leave reviews so that Amazon's algorithms kick in and help you out even more.

There are more meandering paths to success but those two are the main ones I have read about. Success breeds success on Amazon. Amazon promotes what's already selling. That's the plain truth of it.

Simple. Write a bang-up book that readers want to read.  Do enough promotion so that readers know your bang-up book exists, buy it, review it and get some word of mouth going. Keep writing more bang-up books that readers want to read. Keep promoting your books so that they are visible enough that you get enough sales and reviews so that Amazon's algorithms kick in and help you sell even more.

Bingo bango.

YMMV


----------



## TessOliver (Dec 2, 2010)

Every word Sela said.  

Sela, you have such incredible insight. Your posts are always spot on.


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

Vicky Foxx said:


> Pure wisdom here. I wish I'd built an email list back in 2011 when I first started. My career would be 100% better now than it currently is. But it's never too late.


Ditto. I also started in 2011 and I only have 4 on my mailing list that I recently started. I curse when I think of what could have been.

Talking about owning the market, I've just had a surprise for Amazon in Brazil. Exchange rates have probably hit that market hard, but they are not sitting back and taking it on the chin. I have 4 translations (Shorts that include the English version). A few weeks ago I did a free promo and good sales followed and it shot up the charts, then died. They emailed me to say they had chosen all four of my books to put them on promo if I accepted. Long and short is, one starts next week reduced from 6.99 reals to 2.00 reals. At the current exchange rate that's around 50 cents. The promo lasts for 7 days. I don't think they would have noticed me if it wasn't for the good ranking I had at the time they first wrote to me. They also have a separate page for these promos to give them visibility. Not sure if they email them, but I'm guessing they will.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> For indie authors, discoverability is _the_ problem. _Period_.
> 
> Amazon has the best discoverability system in place.
> 
> ...


Yes, we're in complete agreement here.

Also, thanks to KU--a program I have issues with--there are multiple paths to visibility on Amazon. They've created various discovery channels on Amazon ranging from KU, to category searches with depth that no other site can match, to recommendations and emails and lists...

No other site even comes close to having as many paths of discoverability, as many channels with which to break into the customer's consciousness.

The non-Amazon platforms have to find ways to innovate so as to provide that ability for customers to find new work. Curation isn't cutting it.

This can't be a manual gig. A few hard working employees doing little promos and putting together lists and so on.

With Amazon its automated and goes on 24/7, round the clock.

The other platforms simply refuse to put the resources towards REAL discoverability, and so they continue to lose.

And so you won't find kboards threads telling you how to succeed on these other platforms, because simply put--it's almost impossible. And when someone says they are doing well at Kobo or iBooks or Google Play or Nook you must always put it in perspective. It's relative.

The threads would be here if it was really true, if a lot of authors were doing well. They would be coming up with "How to sell on iBooks" or "How I sold a hundred thousand copies on Nook" if it was happening.

The data and evidence is all around us, but people don't want to deal with it. Why? Because it's frightening. Yes, reality can be scary. But if authors tune out the evidence, they only hurt their own businesses.

Tell these sites to get their asses in gear or you'll be going exclusive with Amazon. Force them to get better.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

7seasonsgirl said:


> I would love to hear form those who have sucess with the other platforms.


There are authors making decent money on Apple, on Nook, on Kobo. But there are relatively very few of them.

I've done very well, at times, on Nook and Kobo. But I've also been doing this for years and I've seen sales across the board DECREASE month after month after month at these non-Amazon platforms. Now, you could say this is just a phenomenon peculiar to me, except that the numbers released by Nook, the numbers postulated by Data Guy and Forbes, etc. all agree with what I'm seeing.

So yes. Bella Andre makes a killing at Kobo and iBooks. So what

We can't judge the success of a platform based on the performance of the top 5 percent of indies there. You need to judge it based on the overall quality of the platform, the discoverability and the promotions and the visibility they offer indies as a whole.

Those who tout the viability of niche markets also miss the point. As discussed, depending on your needs, you may be able to sell enough in France or Canada or on certain platforms to feel that its worth your while. But if the overall platform is BLEEDING CUSTOMERS AND BLEEDING MARKETSHARE TO AMAZON then eventually you won't be able to sell there either.

These platforms need to have accessibility and viability for more than just a handful of authors who are being promoted or curated.

You know what? Amazon does curation too.

Amazon has an imprint.

Amazon has promos and subscription service and categories up the wazoo, hot new release lists and emails going out.

So what do these other platforms need to do?

INNOVATE!!

They need to innovate the way Amazon does, or at least try. Give a little effort. Apple and Google innovate as well as anyone and yet they've done absolutely nothing in terms of innovation when it comes to their ebook store.

These other platforms are being left in the dust. And it's ridiculous. You get on the phone with someone at Nook who's high up on the digital food chain and they know LESS THAN NOTHING. They are completely ignorant of what's going on, just spinning their wheels over nonsense about creating some button on the author dashboard that is absolutely meaningless.

This is what we are up against.

Pure incompetence and total lack of effort, total lack of resource expenditure. And so they are getting their butts kicked all over the place.

I, as an Indie, am certainly not happy about Amazon's total market dominance. I think competition is healthy and I think it provides security for authors to have choices.

But our choices are quickly diminishing, and I for one don't intend to sugar coat that.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

7seasonsgirl said:


> _Those who tout the viability of niche markets also miss the point. As discussed, depending on your needs, you may be able to sell enough in France or Canada or on certain platforms to feel that its worth your while. But if the overall platform is BLEEDING CUSTOMERS AND BLEEDING MARKETSHARE TO AMAZON then eventually you won't be able to sell there either.
> _
> 
> I forgot to mention, that indeed Apple did much better with my French titles. But I think that this is because it's a smaller market, and it was easier to be discovered. The sell-through from the permafree to the second book was 30% which is great for me and 100% from the second to the third. But even with these numbers Amazon does better and KU works incredibly, which is a surprise for me. I had no idea that KU works so good in Amazon.fr. As for KOBO, I hear everyone talk about how KOBO dominates the Canadian market, and maybe it's the case, but I never saw it. I sold in French much better than in English, but the numbers were very low. Again, I sell more French and English Books in Canada with Amazon.ca.


What you're saying matches my experience and the experience of my friend who works exclusively in the French speaking markets. It's just how it seems to be, and how the numbers are going.

Why on earth would we want it to be this way? We want a vibrant, thriving marketplace with Amazon having stiff competition, better incentives, and we want Nook and Kobo and ibooks breathing down Amazon's neck.

But that just isn't what's happening.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> Those platforms diminish themselves by refusing to improve and innovate and do things that would help indies on the whole be discovered at their stores.
> 
> Apple might be trying a bit harder, but as someone who has struggled mightily there, I can say that their discoverability isn't on par with Amazon. It's not even close. Just because they're doing promo for select indies doesn't change the overall issue.
> 
> Promo is great. But promo needs to go hand-in-glove with discoverability through search and algo's and lists and so forth. If a customer can only generally come in contact with the top couple hundred books in each main genre category (and in many instances, far fewer per category), that means THOUSANDS of books are going unseen at all times. And they literally are nearly impossible to find. That's the problem that those other stores face--the issue that Amazon has solved for indies, which along with their tremendous customer base, makes it very difficult to compete with.


I'm going to make this point very tentatively because it's speculative: I think the sales challenge on the other sites is not just about search engines and lists and also-boughts and all that other stuff that Amazon does so well to create visibility. I think Amazon is also much better than the other sites at attracting heavy readers, by which I mean people who read _a lot_ of books. People for whom reading is a major activity. People who would identify themselves first or second or third as "readers" when asked about their hobbies or leisure time.

I'm basing this idea on my experience at Google Play. My books have outstanding visibility there because I got in fairly early, right after TK/BB posted her thread here. All three of my books are on the Science Fiction & Fantasy > Contemporary best-seller list there (which, unlike at Amazon, is a mixed free/paid list). My first book has been on that list for a couple years, now, and the other two for ten months or so. The lists are incredibly sticky, which is terrible for new authors but should be great for people like me, who've managed to get on them. But for me, sell-through is surprisingly low at Google -- way lower than at Amazon. I've moved lots and lots of free books, and the free books have generally gotten good ratings/reviews, but nevertheless, sell-through to the paid one is low. It's high enough to keep the book listed, but percentagewise, it doesn't compare to the 'Zon.

My suspicion is that most of the people who are downloading books from Google Play are reading on their phones. That's certainly doable, but I don't think it's optimal, and I bet a lot people feel the same way. I'd only do it if my Kindle were inaccessible -- if I found myself with an unexpected wait for a doctor's appointment or something. Eink is just way easier on the eyes, especially as you get older. So, my guess is that Google Play serves mostly occasional readers, not heavy readers -- folks who like to have a book on their phone in case of unexpected waits, but who don't go out of their way to read. Or, like a lot of young people, they may prefer paper books for most of their reading, keeping an ebook on their phone for use in a pinch. Picking up two or three ebooks a year is generally enough for these kinds of readers, and I think Google Play is set up to cater to them. That's why Google doesn't bother to churn those lists and gives them so little depth -- the appetite for new material is lower there than it is at Amazon.

The same thing may be the case at iTunes, though I think using the iPad as a reading device is more of a thing, and there might be quite a few heavy readers who do that. Still, I bet most very HRs who want to eread gravitate to dedicated ereaders, and in that realm, Amazon is king. The two other eink purveyors, B&N and Kobo, are small potatoes.

So, this is another possibility: that Apple and Google are they way they are as book retail sites not because they're incompetent but because their set-up suits the nature of their shoppers. What strikes us, as publishers, as bad about the sites might strike the sites themselves as just fine. They're selling devices on which people *can* read books, but most people don't use their phones for book-reading most of the time, so Google (and perhaps Apple) keeps that end of their pool shallow. If Android phone shoppers were dissatisfied with Google Play's book offerings, Google would probably hear complaints and change things up. (And maybe they're in the process of doing that, with the Oyster hires.) Conversely, more Amazon shoppers are heavy readers and demand variety and depth in their book-shopping experience, and the Amazon book store is designed to satisfy them.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Gorvnice you are still missing the point that what you say is true if your primary market is Amazon's primary markets, i.e., US and UK. There is no discoverability boost from KU if you are selling in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Ireland, etc. So being exclusive to Amazon is problematic if Google, Apple or Rakuten Kobo are going to get you into those markets with a better (i.e., Whispersyncless) price. 

You don't need personal contacts at other retailers. Google, Apple, and Rakuten are three of the smartest online businesses in the world. If you sell they will notice. As Sela pointed out above it is no different with Amazon. If you don't sell there they won't notice and Amazon Publishing only come knocking on your door if you are already doing well.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> Gorvnice you are still missing the point that what you say is true if your primary market is Amazon's primary markets, i.e., US and UK. There is no discoverability boost from KU if you are selling in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Ireland, etc. So being exclusive to Amazon is problematic if Google, Apple or Rakuten Kobo are going to get you into those markets with a better (i.e., Whispersyncless) price.
> 
> You don't need personal contacts at other retailers. Google, Apple, and Rakuten are three of the smartest online businesses in the world. If you sell they will notice. As Sela pointed out above it is no different with Amazon. If you don't sell there they won't notice and Amazon Publishing only come knocking on your door if you are already doing well.


Right now, those other markets are very, very small. If they continue to grow, someday they may become a good antidote to Amazon's US and UK dominance. But that again assumes that Amazon won't simply allocate more resources to the issue and begin to dominate in those other locales.

Amazon seems to know how to play the resources game better than just about anyone. They aren't perhaps as focused, but they do bring in money in France bigger than most anyone else, and my Australian and Canadian Amazon sales are closing in on Kobo.

Google has essentially been shut down.

Promos ARE in fact hugely important to moving large numbers of books on iBooks and Kobo. I know because I've gotten promos and not gotten promos and the difference is enormous, because they don't have natural discovery systems--which is what Sela also pointed out.

Nook is failing at a pace that is astounding--they are incompetent.

So again, lets' keep it simple. Kobo is TINY, even in Canada--relative to Amazon's overall market. I do very well on Kobo and I know that for a fact, and the numbers from Data Guy don't dispute that at all. Kobo is trying, but they are small and they need better discoverability for the majority of authors to do well.

iBooks is bigger than Kobo, but their store leaves a lot to be desired, imo. They absolutely require promo opportunities to move books on a larger scale. Only a handful of big name authors do well on iBooks. Their marketshare is not good. But they likely have the best opportunity to challenge Amazon if they ever really commit to doing so. Hasn't happened yet.

And Google and Nook are pretty much non-starters, for different reasons. Google doesn't care and Nook is incompetent.

These are just my opinions, but they're backed by data. Saying that niche markets outside the US are viable is not accurate when taken as part of the bigger picture. Non US markets are still SMALL. They are smaller population-wise, and many have non-English speakers, and many have not fully adopted ebooks yet.

You aren't going to sell much in France without French translations. If you do translate, its an expensive and time consuming upfront cost. And then the sales are still relatively small. But perhaps that market will grow--I believe it will. Amazon is competing very well there.

In the English speaking markets like Australia and Canada, Amazon competes very well with Kobo based on my numbers. And Amazon seems to be growing while Kobo appears fairly flat or even worsening to my eyes. I don't have hard data to back that up, just my own anecdotal data. perhaps I'm wrong. But either way, both are small markets. Very small.

Time will tell how those non US markets grow and how Amazon fares if they do grow.

Authors content to mine niche markets, or non US markets, will do fine for a time. But the overall health of these other platforms will be determined by how they do in the big markets, the big picture. If they continue to bleed marketshare than they may not even exist in a year or two, and certainly it will become harder and harder to justify wide distribution as sales shrink.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

By the way, let's even assume that it is financially worthwhile to mine the non US, non-English reading markets like France and Germany and Brazil and Japan, etc.  

There are certainly authors having translations done and moving books in those markets.  But you know what?  Only the biggest, most successful authors can afford the up-front cost and that kind of infrastructure to do it on any real scale.

So once again, for the vast majority, mining those other countries where translations are necessary--they won't be able to afford it.  They won't be able to create the infrastructure to partake, and so once more it will be the top authors who are able to clean up in those markets.  That is in fact what's already happening.

Don't believe me?  Check the stores in those other countries and you'll find translations for the most popular traditional and indie authors, and not many others.

What I'm talking about is the viability of selling ebooks for the majority of indie authors working right now in the US--the biggest market by far in the world right now for ebooks.  The most easily affordable, streamlined market to enter for the vast majority of authors working and trying to make it right now.

All this stuff about niche markets, about foreign markets--its really a very difficult task for a new author to undertake.  And even experienced authors will struggle to gain footholds, and meanwhile they can just plop a book into KU and have a real shot at discovery.

The conversation on kboards speaks for itself.  How many threads have been created about foreign translations?  About foreign markets?  About big sales on Kobo and ibooks and Google?

Very, very few.

there's an obvious reason.  All of the data points to it.

Createspace?  Print?  Amazon has a way for indies to do it.
Audio?  Amazon has a way for indies to do it.
Amazon owns these innovations and everyone else is playing catch-up....

Time to face reality, and stop sticking our heads in the sand.  Amazon is winning big.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> My point was that, Apple and Google care more about their phones and tablets and computers then they do about having a great ebook store that competes with Amazon's store.


No. Google cares about Internet advertising; that's where most of their money comes from. But it's probably already peaked; even my iPad now has an ad-blocker, because the Web is unusable without it.

Apple do care about device sales. But they're running out of ideas for new devices, and the existing ones are 'good enough' for most people. When you're #1, the only way to go is down.

I suspect both will be looking at other income streams in the not too distant future.

Personally, I've sold more books on Smashwords and B&N lately than I have on Amazon. probably because most aren't in KU. Though, given how low my sales are in general, that's not saying much.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Personally, I've sold more books on Smashwords and B&N lately than I have on Amazon. probably because most aren't in KU. Though, given how low my sales are in general, that's not saying much.


This is the issue with people saying they have "good sales" on B&N or Kobo or Google. What does good mean?

The hard numbers from relatively objective sources tell us that sales on these other platforms are only going to be so good. Good enough is basically dependent on where you sit expectations-wise.

But if we're looking at the actual data, then I think objectively speaking we've seen Amazon grow its marketshare by an enormous amount since 2012. And with the advent of KU, I think its even bigger than we realize. KU is like a whole new store, and a store where Amazon gets to keep the authors for itself.

What will this mean in 1 or 2 years? Will Google really be up to speed by then? I just don't see it.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> All this stuff about niche markets, about foreign markets--its really a very difficult task for a new author to undertake. And even experienced authors will struggle to gain footholds, and meanwhile they can just plop a book into KU and have a real shot at discovery.


For many on kboards these are not "foreign" markets. I might live in the UK where Amazon is even more dominant than in the US, but Ireland is not foreign to me, it is my home. The way that Amazon runs its affiliate schemes actually encourages me to concentrate on selling in the UK store (which Republic of Ireland customers can now join as well), because the only payment I get from Amazon.com is Amazon.com gift certificates, which I'm not allowed to spend on eBooks because I live in the UK. The Australian market (which Australians on kboards say tilts in a Rakuten Kobo direction) may not be a big market for you, but I presume that you are not Australian. A local author may not only want to sell well at home, but might be able to build up sales on the strength of being a local made good or working the local conference circuit. Personal anecdote is next to useless when dealing with the vagaries of an international market that Amazon is far from dominating.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> For many on kboards these are not "foreign" markets. I might live in the UK where Amazon is even more dominant than in the US, but Ireland is not foreign to me, it is my home. The way that Amazon runs its affiliate schemes actually encourages me to concentrate on selling in the UK store (which Republic of Ireland customers can now join as well), because the only payment I get from Amazon.com is Amazon.com gift certificates, which I'm not allowed to spend on eBooks because I live in the UK. The Australian market (which Australians on kboards say tilts in a Rakuten Kobo direction) may not be a big market for you, but I presume that you are not Australian. A local author may not only want to sell well at home, but might be able to build up sales on the strength of being a local made good or working the local conference circuit. Personal anecdote is next to useless when dealing with the vagaries of an international market that Amazon is far from dominating.


You have to realize that you and others are still a very small amount of authors in comparison to the amount of authors working in the major markets. I don't deny (and never will) that there will be handfuls (maybe even hundreds or thousands) of authors making money in niche markets, "foreign" markets, and on and on.

It doesn't change the fact that for the vast, vast majority of authors, those markets are not really available or sustainable and Amazon is basically becoming the only choice.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You have to realize that you and others are still a very small amount of authors in comparison to the amount of authors working in the major markets. I don't deny (and never will) that there will be handfuls (maybe even hundreds or thousands) of authors making money in niche markets, "foreign" markets, and on and on.
> 
> It doesn't change the fact that for the vast, vast majority of authors, those markets are not really available or sustainable and Amazon is basically becoming the only choice.


You do realise that there are more English speakers outside the US than within, and that's not even counting countries where another language is spoken but where a great number of people also read English? A lot of these people can't even buy on Amazon.

Calling those markets insignificant is really missing the entire point of the internet. There are many people whose aggregated non-Amazon sales are not insignificant (like 30-50% of the total). I've left three series wide that have 40-50% of their sales outside Amazon. Then again, I only sell for about $1500 a month so I can't possibly have a valid opinion on any subject to do with sales /snerk. Since obviously I'm too much of a prawn to count, ask Annie Jacoby or any of the many other five-figure-a-month writers who have a significant % of sales on non-Amazon sites.

Also, sales percentages at Amazon vs non-Amazon shift all the time. A lot of readers buy on more than one platform.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Gorvnice - I don't know what you want those of us making decent money on the other vendors to say? We don't agree with you and politely have said so, and it doesn't matter what percentages you or others share from articles and quarterly filing reports.  Off the top of my head I can think of three easy ways Amazon could see major market share fall in 6 months or less. 

None of us really know what happens behind closed doors at ANY corporate HQ. More surprising company names have suffered from illegal practices and creative accounting. 

Other major corporations with the power to reach just as many people, or more, as Amazon, on a daily basis have yet to flex a muscle in selling ebooks. My guess is they are waiting for paper to become less profitable. Others just haven't yet. Facebook processes millions of dollars in app purchases, how long until we sell content to read there? Or somewhere not invented yet? Or someone like Bookbub with scads of data from affiliate programs and their own trackings starts to sell ebooks . . . 

And there's more things that CAN/COULD happen. And that is why those of us seeing wide as an insurance policy can't be persuaded to base our strategies on Amazon centric methodologies just because Amazon has the major market share. We aren't worried about right now, we are worried about how our actions today impact our future abilities to adapt. No figure of market share can change that for me, not even 99%. I will always want long term the ability to sell my books any way I choose to sell them. Without that, I am not comfortable with my position. And others feel similarly. Nobody is wrong or not "decent money" enough to contribute. 

I understand you are personally troubled that you are mostly wide and don't want KU to mean more money. And I think one way to perhaps feel better about your strategy is that sometimes money today can mean less or no money tomorrow. For those making insane amounts of money in KU, they have a very nice cushion to weather changes. Or they might have enough readers now to recover from a major algorithm change. It's the authors in that middle section that *just* start seeing "this could be my JOB" type monthly earnings that lose it all when the stupid program changes every 6 months to a year. There is value to many aspects of being wide including adaptability and openness for opportunity. These values will be different to different authors. If you want to see more money while staying wide, my friend, I think you're either going to have make plans to go after it like we all do when we first start figuring out Amazon for the first time or make compromises with your ratio of wide to KU.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

As I've said before, if you specifically chase Amazon customers, you'll sell best at Amazon. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

As for those foreign and niche markets you dismiss, do you have actual data regarding the marketshare of Amazon vs. Kobo in Canada or Australia? Do you have actual data for marketshares in France, Italy, Spain, etc...? Because your experience, which heavily tilts towards Amazon, does not necessarily reflect actual marketshares. Purely annecdotally, in Canada I sell three times as many books via Kobo than via Amazon. For Australia, Amazon and Kobo are about even. In Spain, I sell a lot better at Casa del Libro, a local retailer most people here neither know nor bother with, than via Amazon ES (without having any Spanish books). In Italy, Amazon and local retailer Book Republic are about equal for me.

Germany is the one market where I do know marketshare figures and here the Tolino alliance has a 45% marketshare, whereas Amazon has 39%. These figures are from late 2014. We don't have the 2015 figures, but I wouldn't be surprised, based on personal observation, if Tolino's marketshare hadn't increased even further. Though my German sales figures don't reflect the marketshare, because I sell a lot better at Amazon DE than at the various Tolino stores. And yes, I have German translations available, because I am a professional translator and can do them myself without any upfront costs. By the way, translation threads pop up regularly here at KBoards, though you probably don't notice them, because the subject is not relevant to you.

KU doesn't help much in Germany either, because Germans dislike subscription services in general and those who do use subscription services usually opt for a local alternative (which aren't accessible to indies) over KU, because KU is too US/UK-focussed and doesn't have enough German books. In fact, I don't know a single person in Germany who has a KU subscription.

Besides, you may have noticed that Mercia, Patty and I aren't American, ditto for several other KBoarders. Those foreign niche markets you dismiss may be our home markets. And our books may not necessarily appeal to American mainstream tastes quite as much, because we are not American, which will of course affect sales at Amazon, which is very US-centric. Others like Eilzabeth may have hit upon a niche with hungry readers and a remarkably international appeal.

I don't really care what is best for the "average indie author", because there is no such thing as an average indie author. We are all different, with different goals, paths and strategies, and we must do what is best for our career. If that is Select and KU, then so be it. And if wide distribution is best for our career, then that's what we'll do.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Gorvnice - I don't know what you want those of us making decent money on the other vendors to say? We don't agree with you and politely have said so, and it doesn't matter what percentages you or others share from articles and quarterly filing reports.
> 
> If you want to see more money while staying wide, my friend, I think you're either going to have make plans to go after it like we all do when we first start figuring out Amazon for the first time or make compromises with your ratio of wide to KU.


First off, I don't mind people disagreeing with me. I like it. I like having to think through my viewpoints and perhaps change them to become more accurate. Happens all the time. And I feel my business is better for it.

Secondly, the fact that you wouldn't be swayed by any number of quarterly filings or objective analysis of the market is very telling. You're essentially saying you're not interested in evidence, which means nothing could change your mind.

But the objective total numbers reported by Nook, or Data Guy, or Forbes, tell a very striking, very important story. Sorry if you don't like the story, but not liking it doesn't change it. And if you're not going to be swayed by any numbers or any analysis, then obviously there's nothing I can say or comment on that will matter to you.

Whereas you and others can actually change my mind. I'm not saying it would be easy. I've taken a position intentionally, and I'm going to defend it because I do actually believe what I'm saying. But I'm not tied to it. I've been wrong a million times in the past and I adjust when I realize it.

I'm open to hearing reasons, evidence and arguments that are compelling. But I can't see how just having someone tell me, "sorry we think you're wrong" is supposed to make me feel any differently.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> I don't really care what is best for the "average indie author", because there is no such thing as an average indie author.


You may not, nor do you have to. But I can tell you that the platforms who sell books do care--or at least they should. Because if the average indie can't sell books in wide release, they will continue to stream into Amazon. And no, it won't be "more for you" on those other sites. It will mean less money and less customers on those other platforms, and Amazon continuing to increase its marketshare as its been doing for the last few years.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Then again, I only sell for about $1500 a month so I can't possibly have a valid opinion on any subject to do with sales /snerk. Since obviously I'm too much of a prawn to count, ask Annie Jacoby or any of the many other five-figure-a-month writers who have a significant % of sales on non-Amazon sites.


I never snarked on you or anyone else about their sales figures. In fact, I rarely if ever comment directly about someone's argument strength being tied to the strength of their sales.

What I have said is that sales are relative to expectations, so what you or someone else might consider low, I might consider very high sales. Or someone else might say their sales are great and I think they are low.

Funnily enough, I find that far more people assume things about my sales numbers or lack thereof, even though I've never commented on my numbers in anything more than the vaguest of terms.

I base the strength of someone's argument on the quality of the evidence and reasoning they present to me. Some people are more comfortable in discussing cold hard sales figures, but I don't find that to be productive on a public forum for me. And I don't think its necessary for bigger picture discussions, which is the kind of stuff I usually enjoy discussing here.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You may not, nor do you have to. But I can tell you that the platforms who sell books do care--or at least they should. Because if the average indie can't sell books in wide release, they will continue to stream into Amazon. And no, it won't be "more for you" on those other sites. It will mean less money and less customers on those other platforms, and Amazon continuing to increase its marketshare as its been doing for the last few years.


We don't know if the "average indie", whoever they may be, cannot sell books in wide distribution. There are authors here who do well in wide distribution and they're not necessarily among the top-selling indies either. There are others who can't gain traction outside Amazon, no matter what they do.

Every author is different. For me, it makes sense to have my books in wide distribution, because my sales on Non-Amazon platforms are steadily growing and the Amazon algorithm magic has rarely worked all that well for me. For you, it might make more sense to go exclusive, in which case more power to you.

I really don't see the point of this thread, since you seem to have your mind made up that Amazon will rule the world and won't listen to other points of view anyway. So why don't you just put your books into Select and test your theory?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> I really don't see the point of this thread, since you seem to have your mind made up that Amazon will rule the world and won't listen to other points of view anyway. So why don't you just put your books into Select and test your theory?


The point of this thread, for me, is to have a discussion about a theory I have. That's it. As for books in select, I have them. I've said that. I also have some wide.

Don't see what your point has to do, frankly, with my OP or my position. My position is about the larger market, but you seem inclined to try and make it about personal sales--both yours and mine. I don't care about either, as it applies to this concept.

We can discuss your sales if you like, but they have no bearing on overall numbers.

I can point you to another thread on the front page right now where Phoenix Sullivan says she moved all of the titles she represents into KU because of just the kinds of points I'm raising. And there are many more like her.

I don't particularly mind if people have a hard time fathoming why I created this thread or what its purpose is. My intention is not to do anything but create conversation that helps me think about my business in new ways.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> We don't know if the "average indie", whoever they may be, cannot sell books in wide distribution.


Also, we do know. It's why Amazon has nearly 80 percent marketshare. That means the average indie will struggle to sell wide, because the numbers do not bear out the ability of massive amounts of indies to sell in wide distribution.

That's just a basic fact. You can't have the average indie selling where the market doesn't exist. And Amazon owns the vast majority of it, which is why indies do in fact continue to move into exclusivity with Amazon.


----------



## Dobby the House Elf (Aug 16, 2014)

That seems about right. From other markets I make 1/3 of my income. Still makes it worth it not to go all in with Amazon


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

gorvnice's point is valuable, IMO. We all spend a lot of time looking at our own individual positions vis-a-vis the retailers, but those positions may tell us little about the bigger picture. For instance, imagine someone who's selling 10K books a month at B&N. From that person's perspective, B&N is a fantastic sales site. B&N rocks that person's world. It's crazy-sell-everything-all-the-time at B&N for that person. But if that person's 10K sales are the only sales B&N makes each month, B&N is doomed. And what a shock it will be for that person when B&N goes belly-up; he/she thought they were doing great.

That's an extreme example, obviously, but the point holds anyway -- from any one author's perspective, a particular retailer could appear to be much stronger than it actually is (or much weaker). By mixing an awareness of individual position, which may be idiosyncratic, with the bigger picture, one (hopefully) can better prepare for what might be coming down the road. Personally, I think digital retail is highly unpredictable and giving to surprising shake-ups, so it's not easy to be prepared. But it's still a good idea to make the attempt. It might help.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

No I didn't say I was not interested in evidence, I just see things as there is MORE evidence than just a slice of data for a single moment in time.  Business is a very difficult discipline, I hear there are entire universities dedicated to it and even people who study it for years and year and get a degree still aren't guaranteed success.  

As a collective, I see most discussions amongst indie authors to be very short-sighted. And I understand, for a long time NONE of our opportunities were available and everyone more or less operated like it was all going to end tomorrow. I did that last year. Now, I am becoming comfortable with the # of readers I need to buy books from me each month to make a living at this. It's not that many. 500 readers buying a $4 book from me is $2,000. And Amazon does not HAVE to be who provides me those 500 readers . . . I have 1-year. 3-year. and 5-year plans. And even a where I hope to be in 10-years. 

You say we need to accept that Amazon owns the market place right now for big picture planning and I submit that big picture planning is even bigger than that.  

Everyone's strategies are different. I wish you well, mate!


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

I am 50.8% Amazon, 49.2% everything else. That's a drop of about 2% at Amazon this month.


----------



## doolittle03 (Feb 13, 2015)

It's an interesting discussion as usual and very helpful. Thanks everyone.

I'm a Canadian who could not sell my Canadian-set novels on Kobo to save my life. After almost 2 years of this, I decided to put everything in Select before I knew KU 2 was in the wind, thinking that 1.35 was better than nothing. I accepted that I was unknown and had to build a readership with borrows, sales and free offers and there seemed to be no way "in" to do this at the other retailers. So lots of Amazon love from me.

But here's the thing: there are almost no sales on Amazon anymore either. Borrows, yes, but very, very few sales. I'm feeling the Amazon glass ceiling. It's been a good experiment and I don't regret it but Select is not a long-term plan. As long as authors continue to go wide to grow even a small base of readers who buy (because borrows and payouts are not stable), Amazon might find itself capped at its current share. They might be capped in any case as some segments of the market are simply out of their reach.  

The data you presented along with my experiences, and the counter-discussion tells me "prepare to diversify and be cool with small sales on other platforms for a few years." I'm the canary in the coalmine.


----------



## Ricky Sides (Sep 16, 2009)

Hi there,

This is an interesting discussion, and I couldn't have happened upon it at a better time. I've been struggling with the decision of whether or not to remain with Smashwords and hope things improve, or pull my books out and go exclusive with Amazon. As it stands at the moment, I might make half last year's earnings from Smashwords distribution, and frankly that's an optimistic outlook on my part.   

Yesterday, I pulled the plug on my Smashwords distribution. Why? Because KU has had a detrimental impact on my Amazon earnings and Smashwords just isn't making up the difference anymore. Now I'm waiting for Barnes and Noble to drop my books. The other vendors have done so already. Once B&N follows suit I'll be entering my list in Select. At this point, I have very little to lose and everything to gain.

Does anyone know how long it takes B&N to drop Smashwords' titles once they are unpublished these days? 

Have a great day,
Ricky


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> No I didn't say I was not interested in evidence, I just see things as there is MORE evidence than just a slice of data for a single moment in time.


I've been trying to point to the fact that this is far more than just a slice of data for a single moment in time. Amazon has been increasing its marketshare by leaps and bounds since 2012. A large part of that obviously came from B&N hemorrhaging customers and losing the device battle, and there's still a few more percent to gain as they continue to fall apart...

And then Amazon continues its momentum with KU. Believe me, KU is a huge game changer and a lot of marketshare is being taken by Amazon through KU. That amount of people going exclusive makes an enormous difference--it has to. When you have authors streaming into an exclusive program, they clearly are leaving other platforms and taking readership with them.

That doesn't mean the other platforms will be ghost towns overnight, but they are definitely struggling to keep their authors and customers. You can't lose that many authors and especially the bigger selling authors (like Hugh Howey) and not lose customers, too.

As to whether a big player, a Google, an Apple, or some other entity will come into the game and change the landscape--it will be very difficult to do and not likely worth their time and money. But if it happens, that would be absolutely wonderful, there's just no sign of it occurring right now.


----------



## Maria Romana (Jun 7, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> I'm going to make this point very tentatively because it's speculative: I think the sales challenge on the other sites is not just about search engines and lists and also-boughts and all that other stuff that Amazon does so well to create visibility. I think Amazon is also much better than the other sites at attracting heavy readers, by which I mean people who read _a lot_ of books. People for whom reading is a major activity. People who would identify themselves first or second or third as "readers" when asked about their hobbies or leisure time.


Wow, I love this theory, as it fits with my experience. Currently, I am seeing as many freebie downloads on Google as I am on Amazon, yet the sell-through at Amazon is much better. At the same time, although my freebie downloads on B&N are much lower than either of these, my actual sales at B&N are closer to Amazon's (ie, high sell-through rate). The conclusion I've been drawing from all this is the same as yours: that there is a difference in the type of reader/buyer on these platforms _currently_. It appears that Amazon's ebook buyers are a more serious reading bunch, and so are B&Ns, just a lot less shoppers overall at B&N.

But again, that is the current state of affairs. As mentioned upthread, if either Google or Apple has their eye on Amazon's "serious reader" market, they could easily go after them, and Google's assumption of the Oyster assets implies that perhaps they will. The constant need/desire to upgrade ebook reading devices favors competition in this marketplace. Every time a consumer wants a new device, they're going to explore what the competitors have to offer for their reading pleasure as part of the decision. I say the future is decidedly *un*settled.


----------



## Mark E. Cooper (May 29, 2011)

I feel VERY lucky right now. My sales are 50% Amazon, and 50% everywhere else. I have tried select back in the day, and trialed KU1.0, but I never did get borrows. The introduction of both KU has cut my income at Amazon. I am seeing a slow decline right now as more people borrow instead of buy. Without my wide sales, I might eventually need to get a "real" job again <shudder>


----------



## Maria Romana (Jun 7, 2010)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> I feel VERY lucky right now. My sales are 50% Amazon, and 50% everywhere else. I have tried select back in the day, and trialed KU1.0, but I never did get borrows. The introduction of both KU has cut my income at Amazon. I am seeing a slow decline right now as more people borrow instead of buy. Without my wide sales, I might eventually need to get a "real" job again <shudder>


I'm also 50/50 now, Mark. My Amazon sales are slowly falling, while my sales at other vendors are slowly rising. Since I haven't done anything different marketing-wise, I'm assuming all of that is due to KU. As some authors bail on Google, Apple & B&N to be exclusive at Amazon, the field is more open to thrive at these competitors. Maybe their market share isn't as big, but it's becoming easier to shine with fewer stars in the sky.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Maria Romana said:


> Wow, I love this theory, as it fits with my experience. Currently, I am seeing as many freebie downloads on Google as I am on Amazon, yet the sell-through at Amazon is much better. At the same time, although my freebie downloads on B&N are much lower than either of these, my actual sales at B&N are closer to Amazon's (ie, high sell-through rate). The conclusion I've been drawing from all this is the same as yours: that there is a difference in the type of reader/buyer on these platforms _currently_. It appears that Amazon's ebook buyers are a more serious reading bunch, and so are B&Ns, just a lot less shoppers overall at B&N.
> 
> But again, that is the current state of affairs. As mentioned upthread, if either Google or Apple has their eye on Amazon's "serious reader" market, they could easily go after them, and Google's assumption of the Oyster assets implies that perhaps they will. The constant need/desire to upgrade ebook reading devices favors competition in this marketplace. Every time a consumer wants a new device, they're going to explore what the competitors have to offer for their reading pleasure as part of the decision. I say the future is decidedly *un*settled.


Thanks for the response, Maria. Yeah, it seems like Google is well positioned to go after readers, simply because of its deep pockets and a world half full of devices hooked directly to GP. Then again, Android is not an ereader platform, and so far as I know, Google doesn't have its finger in the eink pie. So any effort on their part to go after heavy readers might be hampered. Then again again, the number of heavy readers is probably pretty small, all in all. Mega-sellers happen when lots of occasional readers are tempted to read a particular book. So are heavy readers worth going after, or will they just be ceded to Amazon?

Dunno. In my head, I'm thinking of Amazon, B&N, and Kobo as one sort of platform -- reading-centric book retailers. And I imagine iTunes and Google as another sort of platform -- device-experience-centric book retailers. For Amazon and Kobo and B&N, ereaders are created to promote and enhance the reading experience, because the goal is to sell books (for their own sake, for Kobo and B&N, and largely to get people onto the site, for Amazon). But for Google and iTunes, books are created (i.e., made available through the apps stores) to enhance the device experience. It's not a clean line -- Amazon's Fire is a tablet, for instance. But all in all, the two types seem to have different mindsets, perhaps to the extent that Google and iTunes don't really see themselves as competing with Amazon on the ebook front, only on the device front. (And yet the Oyster people ... hmm.) As for the retailers who truly are competing with Amazon, I suspect their gooses are cooked here in the U.S., and there is no meaningful non-U.S. B&N goose, right?



Maria Romana said:


> I'm also 50/50 now, Mark. My Amazon sales are slowly falling, while my sales at other vendors are slowly rising. Since I haven't done anything different marketing-wise, I'm assuming all of that is due to KU. As some authors bail on Google, Apple & B&N to be exclusive at Amazon, the field is more open to thrive at these competitors. Maybe their market share isn't as big, but it's becoming easier to shine with fewer stars in the sky.


I think the author drain will contribute to B&N's demise, but Google and Apple can shrug it off, no problem. What's it to them, financially? Nothing.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> I think the author drain will contribute to B&N's demise, but Google and Apple can shrug it off, no problem. What's it to them, financially? Nothing.


From the indie perspective, there will be slim pickings (as there already is) on Google. Apple might be slightly better, but essentially it will make much more sense in the future to be exclusive to Amazon then to be in wide distribution with tumbleweeds blowing through the ghost town of those bookstores.

Being open isn't much of a victory if no customers are coming through the doors...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> But, as Amazon moves more and more toward the best-seller model ('this book sold a lot, therefore I will push it into recommendations, and it will sell more'), there will be slim pickings on Amazon, too, for those who can't hit the threshold required for Amazon to push their books.
> 
> I've sold ebooks on Apple and B&N in the last few months that haven't sold on Amazon for years. With the algorithm changes over that time, no-one finds them on Amazon any more, unless they explicitly look for them.


Amazon doesn't have a best seller model, but a "fresh and new" model. In other words, the older a book is, the less oomph it gets with algo love, recommends, etc. Which is why I've always said that the best indie work model is a very high turn out rate of titles, because Amazon has simply made that model a necessity for us.

Unless your one book every six months or year can have such a massive sales spike as to get you through until the next big release, those slower releasing authors will always be falling off the edge of the treadmill.

Amazon made it this way, folks, not me.

But in any case, you need to do more repackaging, rebranding, relaunching of old stuff completely to capture that "fresh and new" feeling from the Zon.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Amazon has a model where books that sell well get promoted and sell more. It's the digital equivalent of putting Stephen King novels by the door of the book store.


I agree with half of your statement. It's true that there is a feedback loop wherein a book selling well creates momentum within Amazon's very complex system of recommendations, lists, rankings, etc.

However, you don't need to be Stephen King or anything close to it to move books on Amazon. I've got enough data to know that for a fact.

You can be solidly mid-list or even solidly below mid-list and still do very well, but it requires a much higher output frequency to work. You can't put out a book every five or six months and make consistent money on Amazon UNLESS the book is a big seller.

But if you consistently release work that just sells okay, the momentum will build in a different way through volume. It works. You don't need to be a bestseller, not at all. And if you think that you do, then my contention is you've been going about this the wrong way.

And although I get crap for saying this--it might mean releasing new work every single week. Take that as you will.


----------



## Ricky Sides (Sep 16, 2009)

How is anyone going to release a new book once a week?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Ricky Sides said:


> How is anyone going to release a new book once a week?


It could be a serial, it could be short. It could be, like Amanda Lee and others, that you write 7-10k words a day. And then you could put out a 40-50k word book every week--although it might mean putting in tremendous hours.

I didn't say that was a necessity, but its a choice that can be made if an author finds that's what they need to do to sell.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

I just call the shots like I see them. And after six pages of this thread, I see a lot in the way of complaining and very little in the way of solutions.

If Amazon really dominates the market as completely as you say they do, then the logical solution is to pull your books from everywhere else and go exclusive through KDP Select. OTOH, if people are still having success at the other retailers (which they are) and you don't want to go exclusive with Amazon, then the solution is to learn how to be successful at the other retailers. It should come as no surprise to anyone that an Amazon-centric strategy will only really produce results on Amazon.

It seems to me, gorvnice, that you'd rather sit on the fence and wait for people to bring grass to you. It's hard to say which side is greener, but dude, pick a side.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> And although I get crap for saying this--it might mean releasing new work every single week.


This strategy would only work at places that give preferential placement to new releases. To my knowledge, Amazon is the only retailer that does that.

Pre-orders, OTOH, can be an effective way to boost visibility on places like Apple and Nook, provided that you can get enough people (via mailing lists, etc) to pre-order the book. As with anything in life, success breeds success.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> I just call the shots like I see them. And after six pages of this thread, I see a lot in the way of complaining and very little in the way of solutions.
> 
> If Amazon really dominates the market as completely as you say they do, then the logical solution is to pull your books from everywhere else and go exclusive through KDP Select. OTOH, if people are still having success at the other retailers (which they are) and you don't want to go exclusive with Amazon, then the solution is to learn how to be successful at the other retailers. It should come as no surprise to anyone that an Amazon-centric strategy will only really produce results on Amazon.
> 
> It seems to me, gorvnice, that you'd rather sit on the fence and wait for people to bring grass to you. It's hard to say which side is greener, but dude, pick a side.


I don't have a problem with straight shooting, Joe. Just don't try and get my thread locked by taking cheap shots and we're good, dude. 

As for your other points about me, I tend to disagree. I'm not on the fence at all. In fact, I think I've staked out my position very clearly.

Right now, I have a portion of my catalog in wide release and I make good money at Kobo and Nook and a bit less at iBooks. I've been doing this for five years and I've seen my sales steadily decline across those channels even as I release more content, while seeing that they are also losing marketshare to Amazon.

Meanwhile, my Amazon sales have risen year on year, along with Amazon's marketshare.

With the advent of KU, I've had to put more of my catalog exclusive in order to reap the benefits of visibility, recommendations, page reads and all the goodies Amazon hands out like candy.

While I still have plenty of stuff in wide release, I sort of see the writing as being on the wall. I intend to stay wide and continue to mine the vein as long as its feasible, but my instincts tell me it will be diminishing returns.

In all likelihood, I'll have my entire catalog in Amazon's store exclusively within 2 years. I hope I'm wrong.

As for whining, it's tough for me to really see this as whining because I've never been happier with the state of my business. For me, this is an intellectual exercise that helps me consider my thoughts about the state of the business and see and hear varied perspectives.

Thanks for being part of that.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> This strategy would only work at places that give preferential placement to new releases. To my knowledge, Amazon is the only retailer that does that.


The discussion that piece of advice came from was strictly in regards to Amazon. Which is why it applied to Amazon.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

If you aren't already exclusive with Amazon and aren't positing an argument for exclusivity, then starting a thread titled "Amazon Does Own The Market" qualifies as complaining--especially if you focus not on what YOU are doing, but what on the other retailers AREN'T doing FOR you.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> If you aren't already exclusive with Amazon and aren't positing an argument for exclusivity, then starting a thread titled "Amazon Does Own The Market" qualifies as complaining--especially if you focus not on what YOU are doing, but what on the other retailers AREN'T doing FOR you.


Well again, its fine--but we disagree.

In my estimation, a company who has close to eighty percent marketshare (and climbing) does own the market, especially when the last 20 percent is spread thin over entities in various states of duress.

Google--basically shut its doors to indies.
Apple--treading water.
Nook--dying.
Kobo--extremely small.

Between those four players, you essentially have opponents of Amazon in varying states of distress, while the mighty Zon fills its belly with easier and easier low-hanging fruit.

I do focus on what I'm doing, Joe. I'm not sure how you could know or understand what I'm doing in my own business when I haven't gotten into specifics, nor do I care to. This discussion, from my POV, is about the larger macro aspects of this industry and how it trickles down to us indies.

You can't possibly know how my business is faring nor how I'm combating these challenges when I purposefully and intentionally have said that it's not my interest to discuss it in this thread. I'm talking about the stuff that appeals to me.

You don't happen to see the point, which is totally fine.

I do.


----------



## Ricky Sides (Sep 16, 2009)

I haven't seen anyone complaining so much as reporting the various states of their business strategy and what is working. I for one appreciate the feedback. Isn't complaining about people complaining a bit of a paradox?

What I have read in this thread was useful in helping me reach the conclusion that what is happening to me is not unique. This has been a useful thread. I thank the original poster for creating it.

Oh, and I'd still like to know if anyone has info on how long it takes Barnes and Noble to take down your books once you unpublish at Smashwords.

Have a great day,
Ricky


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

karenharley said:


> I'm enjoying this thread. Don't lock it, please!
> 
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the topic of the State of the Platforms and How They're Trending seems pretty relevant to me and not whiny at all.


Thanks for getting it! I understand this type of discussion doesn't appeal to everyone. For those who don't see the point and aren't interested, feel free to move along.

Plenty of other threads on the front page.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

And I just want to say it again.  Joe, I welcome your contrarian opinion (to my contrarian opinion).  That's what keeps the chains moving.

All I'm saying is, let's discuss the theory I've posited and keep my thread open.  You have interesting viewpoints and I enjoy hearing them, and I enjoy hearing from others that think I'm totally off base.

But when folks start saying the thread is pointless and so on, then I'd just as soon they move along because its clearly not for them.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

I think your analysis of the market is very short-sighted, gorvnice, and relies much too heavily on yourself as the primary data point. If that's your point with this thread, so be it. In five years, I very much doubt that Amazon will dominate ebooks the way it does today, especially if Bezos is no longer at the helm.

Google just hired everyone working for Oyster.
Apple dominates devices in a way that Amazon has failed to do.
Nook has been "dying" for years now, but so was Apple before Jobs came back.
Kobo outpaces Amazon in many international markets, which have not yet adopted ebooks as heavily as the US and still have a lot of growth potential.

Navel-gazing is not analysis. You can't extrapolate how well or how poorly you're doing on each of the other retailers to how well those companies are doing on the market as a whole. It's called the ecological fallacy--and retorting with "you don't understand my business the way I do" is begging the question.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> I think your analysis of the market is very short-sighted, gorvnice, and relies much too heavily on yourself as the primary data point. If that's your point with this thread, so be it. In five years, I very much doubt that Amazon will dominate ebooks the way it does today, especially if Bezos is no longer at the helm.
> 
> Google just hired everyone working for Oyster.
> Apple dominates devices in a way that Amazon has failed to do.
> ...


I don't see it as navel-gazing, Joe.

I've brought up data points from these sources:
1. Nook's own earnings reports
2. The Forbes market breakdown
3. Data Guy's market breakdown
4. My own data (I have hundreds of titles over all platforms with five years of numbers to back me up), as well as the anecdotal data of people like Hugh Howey, or Phoenix Sullivan who does lots of intensive market analysis and decided to put her entire catalog into KU recently

I don't think you can remotely call what I've stated here as me simply using myself as the only data point. The interesting thing is, what you accuse me of is actually what most of the dissenting opinion has consisted of in this thread.

The folks telling me I am wrong simply point to themselves and say, "I sell well in wide distribution, so there." Or they say, "I know plenty of people selling on Apple." Which is really not even the argument I'm making, since I continually acknowledge that people are still selling on other platforms currently.

The dissenters in this thread don't point to even one outside objective data source, whereas I've given three sources. They poo-poo my sources while not even coming up with one piece of objective evidence to counter my claims.

So how am I navel-gazing again? I simply don't agree.

Your points about the market have some validity, granted, but saying that because Steve Jobs brought Apple back from the dead means Nook could do the same is kind of like saying lightning could strike. Sure, it could happen, but I'm not about to bet on it.

My market analysis is based on five years of trends and the current situation. I'm hoping it could change, and I would totally agree that something could shake things up and turn everything on its head. But again, I don't see that sort of wishful thinking as being superior to my supposed navel gazing analysis.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

Look at the starting points, though. Five years ago, the ebook market was basically an Amazon project, and the other players were just starting to get in on it. Five years ago, ebook readers were a lot more important for e-reading than phones or tablets, and Amazon dominated the ebook reader device market. The field looks a lot different now, with the rise of tablets and phones as ereading devices, the failure of Amazon to win the device wars, the entry of bigger players like Apple and Google, etc. And that's saying nothing of subscription services and new tech startups, which have a tendency to eat the bigger players' lunch.

To say that in five years the market won't look substantially different from how it looks today is short sighted indeed. Can you imagine if anyone had said that five years ago?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Look at the starting points, though. Five years ago, the ebook market was basically an Amazon project, and the other players were just starting to get in on it. Five years ago, ebook readers were a lot more important for e-reading than phones or tablets, and Amazon dominated the ebook reader device market. The field looks a lot different now, with the rise of tablets and phones as ereading devices, the failure of Amazon to win the device wars, the entry of bigger players like Apple and Google, etc. And that's saying nothing of subscription services and new tech startups, which have a tendency to eat the bigger players' lunch.
> 
> To say that in five years the market won't look substantially different from how it looks today is short sighted indeed. Can you imagine if anyone had said that five years ago?


Sure, it's very likely that some day a new entity (or perhaps some configuration of an older entity) will innovate and change the book selling game. I could see subscription models and the like doing that in the future.

But my analysis is based around what I see as having happened over the last few years and what I imagine will occur in the next few years--so we're talking about a span of probably 6-10 years total (including the past).

I hardly would consider that short-sighted analysis. More like medium-term analysis.

No, I'm not looking fifteen years into the future. I don't really see the point in trying to look that far in advance for my purposes. We might be writing for video game holograms by then.

I'm just talking about "current" state of the game and where its likely to go in the near to slightly longer-term future. I see Amazon as dominating the space for the next few years at least, unless a major shakeup occurs (which there is absolutely no sign of yet).

If that's the case, then within a year or two, it will be difficult to justify being in wide release and Amazon will have a pretty good stranglehold on the indie author market. What that means and how to deal with it is every author's own strategy based on their business model.

I have mine. Some others have talked about theirs.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> To say that in five years the market won't look substantially different from how it looks today is short sighted indeed. Can you imagine if anyone had said that five years ago?


Isn't that funny?

That's exactly the point I'm making.

People keep saying that because they are currently selling right now in wide distribution, everything is just hunky dory.

But they are acting as if the market isn't constantly changing and that the macro trends have no effect on future conditions.

I'm actually arguing your point, Joe. I'm saying that RIGHT NOW some indies are doing okay in wide release (although certainly far fewer than were doing so in 2013). Many are even fat and happy in wide release at those platforms.

But the trend is not good. The big picture numbers don't dispute that at all.

What looks okay to some right now is actually a deteriorating landscape, and its only on the micro level that these changes aren't felt so much.

Like many things (including the revolution that some trad pub people still don't think has occurred), people don't believe change is happening until it really smacks them in the face.

My argument here is that careful analysis shows us that a big change is happening in regards to Amazon's increasing market dominance. And it will eventually impact every single indie author.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I don't see it as navel-gazing, Joe.
> 
> I've brought up data points from these sources:
> 1. Nook's own earnings reports
> ...


I don't think you're wrong at all. Amazon does own the eBook market. It owns it in terms of number of customers buying eBooks, but also in terms of satisfied customers and innovation.

I think Apple could compete as could Google. Whether they do or not is another question. Kobo is bigger outside the US but Amazon seems determined to compete there as well.

I want competition, because I think its healthier for the market as a whole and for indies in particular, since we are small and don't have any real bloc power. That said, I want the other competitors to be as good as Amazon and I don't think indies should be expected to sacrifice so they can get their sh*t in order. They should get their sh*t in order and show us that they can compete. So far, I don't see it and I am a died-in-the-wool Apple fanatic. I would LOVE to see them improve enough to take a bigger market share and do as good a job selling indie books as Amazon does. Until then, I will keep my books on Apple when they are selling well there and put them exclusive on Amazon when that seems to be in my best interest. My best selling series still is doing well in wide distribution so I will keep it on Apple. I've had great months on B&N but usually only during a Bookbub month. Kobo is a pittance as is Google Play.

Please don't lock this thread. I think it's important for indies to discuss the eBook market in the larger sense.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

Again, ecological fallacy. 

You keep shifting the goalposts of this debate, gorvnice, and then argue that I'm either off-sides or running the ball in the wrong direction.

I think we both agree that the market is going to look very different in five years than it does now. You think that Amazon will be more dominant, whereas I'm more skeptical. You seem a lot more interested in convincing people that you're right, even though you're not doing the things that you should be doing if you are right. 

So again, what is the point of this thread?


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

I don't think gorvnice is wrong at all. 

It's called hedging your bets, or having a contingency plan. 

I don't have confidence iBooks or Google wants to compete with Amazon when it comes to indie publishing. Indies are messy, hard to deal with, and expensive.  Right now Amazon is basically passing out free money to indie authors, at a loss to themselves. 

It's not sustainable. But they are willing to do it, to make it an undesirable market for their competitors. And it's working Scribd and Oyster are history. B&N and Smashwords are stagnant. 

The only hope is a new player, with deep pockets, coming onto the scene. That entity is going to have to be willing to lose a lot of money courting the indie community. Again, something I don't think interests any of companies we're currently dealing with. 

What everyone needs to be thinking about is this: How are you going to survive if/when Amazon pulls a dick move? 

Every successful business has a contingency plan, no matter how unlikely the issue. We do safety drills at work, just in case there's an emergency. The government has plans for unlikely events like UFO invasions. 

So even if you don't think it's likely.... prepare for it anyway.


----------



## L.B (Apr 15, 2015)

Every single person I know who reads on IOS devices and Android devices uses the Kindle app. The only way that is going to change is if Google and Apple decide to really go after the book market and invest in it. With Google buying Oyster, that might happen, but you are looking at years away for either of them to shift the balance from Amazon, if at all.

If that's the case, i'm not sure why any NEW indie author would look anywhere but at select right now. PLanning for something years away that might or might not happen doesn't seem like a solid business plan. I appreciate the people who are already doing well wide would and should stay there, but I don't know why any new indie would.

Then, as we know the indie market share is growing, it stands to reason that Amazon's share of the pie will get bigger and bigger for a while at least.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Joe Vasicek said:


> If you aren't already exclusive with Amazon and aren't positing an argument for exclusivity, then starting a thread titled "Amazon Does Own The Market" qualifies as complaining--especially if you focus not on what YOU are doing, but what on the other retailers AREN'T doing FOR you.


I don't see complaining. I see an attempt to alert other indie authors a trend that may have an impact on their sales environment. Gorvnice did note that other platforms don't offer the visibility-related tools that Amazon offers, but that's something many of us have remarked on at one time or another, with varying levels of frustration.



gorvnice said:


> From the indie perspective, there will be slim pickings (as there already is) on Google. Apple might be slightly better, but essentially it will make much more sense in the future to be exclusive to Amazon then to be in wide distribution with tumbleweeds blowing through the ghost town of those bookstores.
> 
> Being open isn't much of a victory if no customers are coming through the doors...


Yeah, but what if Google's and iTunes's customers are primarily two- to three-books a year readers? The reduced selection of books on those platforms may not be noticeable to people who read only occasionally: a smaller selection of titles will have plenty that's new to them. They may, in fact, keep right on shopping at Google and iTunes because those sites come pre-installed on their phones, and they're not frequent enough readers to bother installing the Kindle app and going to Amazon.

In other words, there may be device use habits that, when combined with the sheer number of people who own Android phones and iPhones, continue to send a substantial number of shoppers toward GP and iTunes. In that case, the flight to Amazon might reach a balancing point where those who choose to stay wide begin to benefit from the reduced competition on the non-'Zon sites. The shoppers on those sites may not be so valuable individually, because they tend to buy way fewer books, but there'll be so many millions more of them, because the devices they use are so numerous compared to dedicated ereaders. And all those eyes will be concentrated on fewer books, to those books' benefit. Possible?



B. Yard said:


> Every single person I know who reads on IOS devices and Android devices uses the Kindle app. The only way that is going to change is if Google and Apple decide to really go after the book market and invest in it. With Google buying Oyster, that might happen, but you are looking at years away for either of them to shift the balance from Amazon, if at all.


Yeah, when I got a smart phone, just about the first thing I did was put the Kindle app on it. But I'm a frequent reader, and most of the folks I hang out with are also frequent readers. Being a frequent reader is, however, atypical.

It'd be interesting to know what percentage of people have the Kindle app on their phones. Do even occasional readers tend to gravitate toward Amazon?


----------



## Chrissy (Mar 31, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> Yeah, but what if *Google's and iTunes's customers are primarily two- to three-books a year readers*? The reduced selection of books on those platforms may not be noticeable to people who read only occasionally: a smaller selection of titles will have plenty that's new to them. *They may, in fact, keep right on shopping at Google and iTunes because those sites come pre-installed on their phones, and they're not frequent enough readers to bother installing the Kindle app and going to Amazon*.


What you suppose may just work for two-to-three-books-a-year readers until... the book they want doesn't appear on Apple or Google.

Infrequent readers often hear about the books they buy through media buzz or other people. So NOT finding the hot new book on their usual sites may eventually move them on to Amazon.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Chrissy said:


> What you suppose may just work for two-to-three-books-a-year readers until... the book they want doesn't appear on Apple or Google.
> 
> Infrequent readers often hear about the books they buy through media buzz or other people. So NOT finding the hot new book on their usual sites may eventually move them on to Amazon.


Hmmm ... yes. A recommended book could be a trigger to download the Kindle app, and once they do that, it may seem easier to them to just switch over entirely to Amazon. Who wants their books spread across multiple apps?


----------



## Chrissy (Mar 31, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> Isn't that funny?
> 
> That's exactly the point I'm making.
> 
> ...


What are you saying the "big change" happening in regards to Amazon's increasing market dominance is?

Amazon started off with a large segment of the ebook market.

In time, Amazon loss a bit to the others [BN, Google, Apple, Kobo].

Now, Amazon's market share is back to growing again, in large part because the others by poor action, inaction action or negligence are NOT competing effectively.

This really isn't news.

I understand people wanting to hedge their bets and go wide. It makes great business sense.

Are you saying that overtime that the business decision to go wide won't help because Amazon will be so dominant?

Are you saying that you suspect Amazon will abuse their power?

What are you saying?  Just trying to understand your point.


----------



## L.B (Apr 15, 2015)

Becca Mills said:


> Yeah, when I got a smart phone, just about the first thing I did was put the Kindle app on it. But I'm a frequent reader, and most of the folks I hang out with are also frequent readers. Being a frequent reader is, however, atypical.
> 
> It'd be interesting to know what percentage of people have the Kindle app on their phones. Do even occasional readers tend to gravitate toward Amazon?


Well the Google kindle app has millions of downloads and has half a million reviews. I'd say it's very, very widely used. And Android is the biggest mobile operating system in the world.

Amazon have positioned themselves as the place for books on almost all the major devices. They're going to take some shifting, and as I say, I think it could take years if at all.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chrissy said:


> What you're saying the "big change" happening in regards to Amazon's increasing market dominance is?
> 
> Amazon started off with a large segment of the ebook market.
> 
> What are you saying?  Just trying to understand your point.


Back in 2011, 2012, Nook was a major player and was absolutely a rival for Amazon. Again, just go look at their earnings reports in 2012, before they lost 40% digital marketshare over the last 2 years' time.

The entire ebook market was just developing in 2010, 2011 and the volume and scope wasn't even remotely what it is now. Indies were not making routinely millions of dollars a year or in the six figures. In fact, you could find one or two or three indies doing that kind of business back then, most of them posted on kboards.

Since then, the business has matured and Nook rose and fell.

Amazon's marketshare has drastically increased in a maturing market in the last 2-3 years. That means there is more money to be made now, and Amazon is the one who's made most of it.

The biggest change, apart from Nook's implosion, is that Amazon started the KU program. With that first iteration of KU, I believe Amazon struck a deathblow to Nook, Oyster, Scribd, and to a lesser extent, Kobo and iBooks and Google.

Look at where those entities are now. Oyster, gone--within a couple years of KU coming on the scene. Scribd is dying. Google is temporarily shuttered to indies.

Nook is flailing and flailing.

What am I saying? I keep repeating it, and the evidence is so incredibly clear to those who can see. How do so many companies go under, how does Nook crash and burn, and nobody thinks it means anything to us?

That, to me, is the height of self-centered thinking. Thinking that the wider implications don't have any bearing on us.

How short-sighted.

Same attitude big publishing had. The same reason Amazon is eating their lunch now, as well.

When it comes to how that will affect us, certainly our choices will be more limited and we will need to find ways to drive traffic, control customers and retain them for our own use. We may need to sell from our own storefronts, we may need to be prepared to take enormous pay cuts, we may need to churn out much more content to make the same money in the future.

Lots of things could happen. Some of them will, some won't.

A good business prepares for these uncertainties to the best of its ability.

Many people worry about much sillier things that they have no control over (like a poor review) as opposed to thinking and analyzing the market for strategy purposes.


----------



## 555aaa (Jan 28, 2014)

I also picked up on this part of Becca's post.



Becca Mills said:


> Yeah, but what if Google's and iTunes's customers are primarily two- to three-books a year readers? The reduced selection of books on those platforms may not be noticeable to people who read only occasionally: a smaller selection of titles will have plenty that's new to them. They may, in fact, keep right on shopping at Google and iTunes because those sites come pre-installed on their phones, and they're not frequent enough readers to bother installing the Kindle app and going to Amazon.


This (above) all about the split in the market - the active readers, who are a small population but read a lot, and are price sensitive, vs. the occasional readers, who are a bigger percentage of the overall "buying stuff" public. There's a whole ecosystem of advertisers and marketing and author support (like this board for example) which serves the former, but almost none of that works for the latter. If I'm a person that reads a book a year, am I going to subscribe to your e-mail list? Am I going to use a membership service for books? No. Am I going to read your series? No. But I will use a membership service for other stuff, and if books are an add-on, that's just gravy.

There's nothing wrong with this split, and Amazon probably has been the most adept, in the U.S. anyway, at serving the needs of both groups.

And as far as occasional readers not finding their books on Google Play or iBooks, that is not a loss for those platforms as long as they can keep selling them TV shows and movies and games and music. The value for them for each book sale is really the value in the engagement of that customer with their platform.

Eventually Amazon will become uncool, and maybe it's already there, because for younger folks, its the place that their parents shop. The cool kids are all going to go someplace none of us know of yet, and then we'd better be ready.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Again, ecological fallacy.
> 
> You keep shifting the goalposts of this debate, gorvnice, and then argue that I'm either off-sides or running the ball in the wrong direction.
> 
> ...


Well, I'm supposedly shifting goalposts and you keep questioning the point of the thread, even though you're participating. I'll leave it for others to read and decide who's being inconsistent between the two of us. 

As for me not doing what I should be doing if I believe this stuff--how do you figure?

I'm diversified, and I'm preparing my catalog for an eventual transition over to full exclusivity that I believe to be almost inevitable. We're not quite there yet. If we were, this thread would be pointless and everyone would just say, no kidding. We're all exclusive now.

Lol.

This is obviously a position that involves a great deal of speculation. So what? I enjoy speculating. I feel there's plenty of evidence to back up my speculation, and I think others have said they appreciate thinking about this stuff too.

You don't enjoy it. Feel free, once again, to not participate if its unpleasing to you to do so.

And finally, I don't necessarily put out all of my business strategy for public consumption. Although we indies are "in this together" we're also competing in some ways for finite resources. I'm helpful as much as I can be, but I'm not going to lay out my entire business plan and philosophy and strategy for all to see on a very widely read public forum.

That would be silly.

But rest assured, Joe. I have a strategy and plan that deals with the issues I've raised here, and I think it will make my business stronger even if some of these things don't come to pass.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

Gorvnice,

Why are you so concerned about the way the rest of us run our business, then tell us we aren't qualified to say anything about yours?

How can you compare Amazon and Nook favorably in one breath when your thesis (inasmuch as you have one) depends on the two being polar opposites?

Where do you get off accusing me of antagonizing you just to shut the thread down and bringing up the drama at TPV (yes, I saw that before you edited your post), then say that you enjoy a good debate?

I'm not the only person on this thread--or the only one lurking, for that matter--who doesn't understand what you're trying to say. If you don't really have a position and are just trying to suss things out, that's perfectly fine, but for the purposes of discussion you have to take a clear position and defend it. From the way you keep changing the goalposts, either:

1) you're a lot more confused about this subject than I thought you were,
2) you're not being fully honest with yourself, or
3) you're only really interested in winning, though what you hope to win I really have no idea.

This thread is like an Escher painting on crack. I'd be able to contribute more intelligently if I knew what we were actually trying to talk about.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Gorvnice,
> 
> Why are you so concerned about the way the rest of us run our business, then tell us we aren't qualified to say anything about yours?
> 
> ...


Joe, I apologize for bringing TPV into this. But I don't like how you continually inject heated invective into conversations that lead to threads being locked.

I've tried to ask you to curb that habit, and I've tried to ask nicely. I enjoy sparring with you when you're keeping it clean not heading into the danger zone. In actuality, I don't really mind your style--but it does tend to get things shut down in this particular place. If we were on a different forum, I'd have just let you have it back in the same fashion with no problem.

But kboards is a different place, even less permissive than some other forums, and I feel like you push the envelope sometimes and it leads to threads being locked. I don't know how else I can say it.

Finally, you don't seem to enjoy this thread. I still don't understand why you can't just move on.

Otherwise, if you want to discuss my argument, please specifically point to my inconsistencies so I can discuss them with you. I really don't know what you're confused about, honest.


----------



## Guest (Sep 28, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> Joe, I apologize for bringing TPV into this. But I don't like how you continually inject heated invective into conversations that lead to threads being locked.
> 
> I've tried to ask you to curb that habit, and I've tried to ask nicely. I enjoy sparring with you when you're keeping it clean not heading into the danger zone. In actuality, I don't really mind your style--but it does tend to get things shut down in this particular place. If we were on a different forum, I'd have just let you have it back in the same fashion with no problem.
> 
> ...


I would love to discuss your argument if I knew what it actually was. The subject of Amazon's dominance interests me, which is what initially drew me to this thread. Every time I try to argue your position, though, you keep changing it.

Whatever. Guess it's time to move on.


----------



## Chrissy (Mar 31, 2014)

I agree that indie authors/publishers should be very aware/mindful of what's happening to book distributors like BN, Kobo, Apple and Google.

I agree that as their market share decreases somewhere down the line probably sooner versus later their changes in market share will greatly influence what an indie author can earn on their sites.

I also realize and agree that Amazon's dominance and power in the book selling world is growing.  However, they don't have that same dominance YET world wide.  I think we as indies need to be mindful of that and not always think just US sales although the US has the largest book selling market NOW.

A lot can change.  If the world wide economy goes down, what will that do to ebook sales?  If the political climate changes and Amazon becomes the next AT&T or Microsoft in the eyes of the government and it decides to break Amazon up or passes laws that stifle their growth. Then what?

A lot can and will happen.  

I think the advantage a thinking indie author has over trad publishers is that we're more agile.  So I believe we can and will adjust as the evidence reveals itself.


----------



## TrevorSchmidt (Sep 23, 2015)

Right now 4 out of 7 of my books are in KU2. Right now it's a matter of exposure. If I wasn't in KU at all hardly anyone would find my books, making my Amazon sales as abysmal as my sales in other outlets. I am planning a series right now that will never go in KU and will start wide from the start. It's hard to keep my options open when only one of the options is making me any real money, but long term I would rather have a footing in multiple outlets just in case something drastic changes.

The world has gotten pretty complicated hasn't it?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks, there have been reports . . . . some unhelpful posts/responses that seem designed to derail the discussion have been removed.  We're watching the thread and watching one or two posters particularly.

Please . . . it should be perfectly possible to disagree courteously.

And it might also be wise to keep in mind that, sometimes, a person just isn't going to change their mind . . . sometimes we just have to learn to accept that.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Chrissy said:


> If the political climate changes and Amazon becomes the next AT&T or Microsoft in the eyes of the government and it decides to break Amazon up or passes laws that stifle their growth. Then what?


Interesting suggestion.

I wonder if the company could kill all competition in small corners of the retail world while retaining serious competitors (Wal-Mart, Target, Pet-Co, drugstore.com ... whatever) in other areas. Ebooks have got to make up a pretty small percentage of Amazon's revenue. Amazon might become a monopoly in the area of ebooks and still not strike the government as monopolistic overall. If so, we could be stuck operating in that kind of environment with no regulatory recourse.


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

I just think being negative about the possibility of making sales on any venue other than Amazon is misleading to new authors. I'm not a bestseller, but I do very well and going wide saves my bacon.

Right now, Amazon is only 57% of my sales so saying the other 43% has no value is silly. A sale is a sale I didn't have before, no matter where it comes from.

Sorry I misunderstood about the nook board error. But it is still a place to promote no matter who owns it.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Martitalbott said:


> I just think being negative about the possibility of making sales on any venue other than Amazon is misleading to new authors. I'm not a bestseller, but I do very well and going wide saves my bacon.
> 
> Right now, Amazon is only 57% of my sales so saying the other 43% has no value is silly. A sale is a sale I didn't have before, no matter where it comes from.
> 
> Sorry I misunderstood about the nook board error. But it is still a place to promote no matter who owns it.


I think if we look only at individual authors, we will find a variety of experiences, with some making more revenue on non-Amazon vendors while others make far more on Amazon, while still others can't give their books away on Apple, etc. When we look at the market as a whole, we see that Barnes and Noble is shrinking, Apple has great potential but is not as easy to gain traction, Google Play is now not even accepting new authors and Amazon keeps growing. It's good to keep an eye on the larger picture even as you do what works best for you on the individual level. Better to know what's going on in the larger arena so that you're not blindsided when one of your vendors goes bankrupt or telescopes a major policy change or is being investigated by the IRS or Justice for various and sundry issues.

I'm not saying to run to Amazon and go exclusive -- or the opposite. Everyone has to do what works best for them and their business and goals. I want a healthy competitive market. I'm suggesting that Amazon really does it the best and that if the other vendors don't do better at discoverability, authors will keep giving Amazon exclusive material. That's not good for those other vendors, and is not good for the overall market, so if those vendors want to compete, they have to _compete_.

That means better customer experience to attract readers and better discoverability to attract authors. Having millions of readers is of no value to me if they can't find my book unless the curators decide to feature it.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Martitalbott said:


> Right now, Amazon is only 57% of my sales so saying the other 43% has no value is silly.


Except nobody ever said that your sales have no value. Obviously your sales are real and very valuable.

This thread, for me, was about where I see things currently and where I believe that means things are likely headed. And for some authors, sales will be booming on Kobo as long as Kobo is around, which may be a very long time.

But the whole picture is a very different story, and the whole picture absolutely impacts individuals. It has to. The whole is made up of individuals.

It's like when unemployment is too high. Just because unemployment is high doesn't mean that you can't make tremendous money and have a booming, successful career. All it means is that life has gotten tougher for more folks.

That's what I'm pointing to with the data about Amazon's marketshare. Life has gotten tougher for many indies trying to go wide. And life is tougher for those stores in terms of retaining customers and authors.

It has no ability to predict that any one person won't be able to kick butt on any one platform. So congrats on your wonderful sales, I certainly wouldn't tell you that the money you've made isn't of value.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Chrissy said:


> I agree that indie authors/publishers should be very aware/mindful of what's happening to book distributors like BN, Kobo, Apple and Google.
> 
> I agree that as their market share decreases somewhere down the line probably sooner versus later their changes in market share will greatly influence what an indie author can earn on their sites.
> 
> ...


I believe Amazon is under investigation right now in several countries, including the US, after a formal complaint lodged by trade publishers. We'll see where that goes. It probably won't go anywhere in the US, but the EU seems to be much more controlling of companies that do business there.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Martitalbott said:


> I just think being negative about the possibility of making sales on any venue other than Amazon is misleading to new authors. I'm not a bestseller, but I do very well and going wide saves my bacon.
> 
> Right now, Amazon is only 57% of my sales so saying the other 43% has no value is silly. A sale is a sale I didn't have before, no matter where it comes from.


But Marti, if gorvnice is correct about the way things are headed, authors in your position are the ones with the most to be concerned about. I think that's his point: if you're relying on the non-Amazon sites for a good chunk of your sales, you should be planning now for what you'll do if one or more of them goes belly-up. Hopefully that won't happen. But if it does, the people who sell on the non-Amazon sites will be the ones damaged, and the higher their off-Amazon percentage, the greater the possible loss.

Maybe I'm totally not getting his point, and he can correct me if that's the case. But my understanding is that the thread is intended as a warning, so that people who are selling outside Amazon can figure out what they're going to do if one or more of the sites close down or become unproductive.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> Maybe I'm totally not getting his point, and he can correct me if that's the case. But my understanding is that the thread is intended as a warning, so that people who are selling outside Amazon can figure out what they're going to do if one or more of the sites close down or become unproductive.


Not really a warning. It's a bit of a theory, a thought experiment, a thing to consider.

Nobody knows where this is all headed.

But I do feel like the data right now makes a surprisingly strong case that, yes, Amazon has pretty much won the war. That doesn't mean a new war can't break out in the future.

In the meantime, what the conquering army will do, how other territories will react as they feel the pain of the king's wrath--whether some places will end up pillaged, bunt to the ground...time will tell.

It is best to be prepared and have game plans for various scenarios, I've found.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

People who are wide are actually better positioned to weather market shifts than those who rely only on one sales channel, because whenever something goes wrong with a vendor (algorithm changes, bankruptcy, software issues, content freakouts), there are other channels to take up the slack.

Even if B&N should die (and B&N has been dying for ages and somehow is still around) and Scribd dies off completely as well, there's still Apple and Google and Kobo, all of which are unlikely to go anywhere in the foreseeable future, as well as those international stores and niche vendors like ARe or DriveThru, which govrnice dismisses as irrelevant, but which can be very relevant indeed for authors working in the niches they cater to (and which are actually more resilient than the likes of B&N, because they have a devoted customer base in their niche and actually care). Unless Jeff Bezos manages to crown himself dictator of the world, it's extremely unlikely that all of Amazon's competitors everywhere in the world will die off. Amazon will always have competition, though it may not be the players we expect.

Besides, authors who are wide usually have a strategy, though it's one that goes beyond Amazon and its algorithms. They're not the ones who need the warning, because they are mostly better positioned to adapt to changes than those who rely solely on one vendor.


----------



## Guest (Sep 29, 2015)

CoraBuhlert said:


> People who are wide are actually better positioned to weather market shifts than those who rely only on one sales channel, because whenever something goes wrong with a vendor (algorithm changes, bankruptcy, software issues, content freakouts), there are other channels to take up the slack.
> 
> Even if B&N should die (and B&N has been dying for ages and somehow is still around) and Scribd dies off completely as well, there's still Apple and Google and Kobo, all of which are unlikely to go anywhere in the foreseeable future, as well as those international stores and niche vendors like ARe or DriveThru, which govrnice dismisses as irrelevant, but which can be very relevant indeed for authors working in the niches they cater to (and which are actually more resilient than the likes of B&N, because they have a devoted customer base in their niche and actually care). Unless Jeff Bezos manages to crown himself dictator of the world, it's extremely unlikely that all of Amazon's competitors everywhere in the world will die off. Amazon will always have competition, though it may not be the players we expect.
> 
> Besides, authors who are wide usually have a strategy, though it's one that goes beyond Amazon and its algorithms. They're not the ones who need the warning, because they are mostly better positioned to adapt to changes than those who rely solely on one vendor.


THIS.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

CoraBuhlert said:


> which govrnice dismisses as irrelevant, but which can be very relevant indeed for authors working in the niches they cater to


They are only irrelevant to the argument I'm making, Cora.

They are not irrelevant to the argument you and others are making, which has pretty much nothing to do with my argument.

Your argument is that many indies are doing quite well outside Amazon, in various markets, with various platforms. But remember--many is a relative term.

I'm talking about much larger numbers than you, and its for a reason. If unemployment is at 20%, you could sit there all day and talk about the thousands and thousands of people having wonderful careers. But that has nothing to do with what that 20% figure means to a lot of other folks.

And so your assertions about indies and non-Amazon markets has similarly very little to do with my argument about the macro trends in the largest market in the world and what that might mean for the health of some of those other platforms (and their customer bases).

Like pointing to the thousands of success stories in a country with 30% unemployment, you really continue to miss the point of my position about what this data means for a lot of indies NOT doing so well in those other places.

Smaller markets, by definition, cannot hope to feed large quantities of authors.

So what you keep pointing to is not valid for the vast majority of indies. By definition its only working for a subset right now, and that will be the way it is unless those markets expand exponentially in the coming years.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

"there's still Apple and Google and Kobo"

One of which has had its doors shut to indies for months because it can't clean up all of the pirating on its site...this is not exactly blowing my socks off with excitement about Google being a place of refuge in the future.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

CoraBuhlert said:


> People who are wide are actually better positioned to weather market shifts than those who rely only on one sales channel, because whenever something goes wrong with a vendor (algorithm changes, bankruptcy, software issues, content freakouts), there are other channels to take up the slack.


I'd like to think that, since I'm on all the sites myself. But in truth, I wouldn't know how to get the other channels to "pick up the slack" if my Amazon sales disappeared. If I knew of a way to dramatically increase my sales on the other sites, I wouldn't be waiting around for an Amazon disaster; I would already have gone for the increase.

Dunno. I've put close to three years into getting established on the other sites. They still only account for 20-30% of my sales.

I'm not sure being wide represents actual planning, on my part. Not in any specific way, at least. It's more of a gut reaction against the idea of putting all my eggs in one basket. But I'm generally not a fan of thinking with my gut. It's too full of ice cream and In N' Out burgers to make good decisions.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

Becca Mills said:


> I'd like to think that, since I'm on all the sites myself. But in truth, I wouldn't know how to get the other channels to "pick up the slack" if my Amazon sales disappeared. If I knew of a way to dramatically increase my sales on the other sites, I wouldn't be waiting around for an Amazon disaster; I would already have gone for the increase.
> 
> Dunno. I've put close to three years into getting established on the other sites. They still only account for 20-30% of my sales.
> 
> I'm not sure being wide represents actual planning, on my part. Not in any specific way, at least. It's more of a gut reaction against the idea of putting all my eggs in one basket. But I'm generally not a fan of thinking with my gut. It's too full of ice cream and In N' Out burgers to make good decisions.


What she said.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

All this talk of the 'inevitability' of this seems to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

If it's actually inevitable, it'll likely be scaremongering threads like this that make it so. It's all just a distraction that keeps people from realizing they have choices and power.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Hey, here's a fun question:

Okay, so we have the 65% number, which is pretty much the only honest number we have. Then have have the super-secret awesome Indie bump fo 10-20% specifically for Amazon.

...but what percentage of the _indie_ market is Amazon supposed to be?

No, seriously: what does it matter to use how many people who only buy Stephen King or GRRM or other NAME books are buying them on Amazon? And it's kind of stupid to ask how much marketshare Amazon has among people committed to ONLY publishing on Amazon.

So what really matters is how much marketshare among people who aren't just published on Amazon does each channel represent?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

How big a market matters too. We've all seen Amazon's percentage of the market grow, but if the market is growing in actual size at a greater rate then the other vendors can still see gains in revenue even if they are losing market share. 

But all of this is being based on reports that HAVE agendas. Stockholder reports are brilliant at making people look at the right hand and completely ignore what the left hand is doing.  Accounting is a creative endeavor, this is why we have a field of forensic accountants. Even Data Guy and others, these are all people IN the industry and Data Guy in particular has made it clear they are tracking the indie rise. (NOT accusing anyone of being liars, just saying the analysis is presented framed in a certain way)

I think we should be MORE concerned that ebook growth is stagnating. That's the real danger for us because for most of us that's where our bread and butter lie. If ebook use declines, we will see our earnings decline. And it's not like that hasn't happened to pretty cool technology before. Laser disc. I remember when my school had a laser disc player and it was the cutting edge thing and we all thought that would win . . . but it only was available from 1978 to 2000. I have more confidence in ebooks since they are built upon HTML which is a staple of the Internet . . .  but innovation is always there. If someone figures out a new way to make immersible experiences well . . .  Paper will always have a place, even if it becomes like Candles in the famous Konrath metaphor (we have electricity, but people still sell and buy candles) because it doesn't have to be plugged in. But anything digital is not safe from innovation and technological gains. In fact, just about every major media format has had a life span of about 30 - 40 years before it's replaced by the latest and greatest for good.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

EAW--don't confuse the product with the medium it is viewed/read/played on.  Yes, laser discs came and went (and in substantially less time than 30-40 years) but we still are viewing digital movies, on more kinds of devices than ever before.  The vinyl record and the CD have come and kinda gone (yes, I know vinyl is making a comeback, but still) but we are still listening to music.  5 1/4 inch floppy disks, 3 1/2 inch disks, Bernoulli drives are gone (and data CDs except for backups) but we're still saving Word documents or their equivalent.

EBooks are here to stay.  We just don't know what we'll be reading them on in ten years or what they'll look like.  Unless technology is discovered to beam it directly into my brain.

Betsy


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> EAW--don't confuse the product with the medium it is viewed/read/played on. Yes, laser discs came and went (and in substantially less time than 30-40 years) but we still are viewing digital movies, on more kinds of devices than ever before. The vinyl record and the CD have come and kinda gone (yes, I know vinyl is making a comeback, but still) but we are still listening to music. 5 1/4 inch floppy disks, 3 1/2 inch disks, Bernoulli drives are gone (and data CDs except for backups) but we're still saving Word documents or their equivalent.
> 
> EBooks are here to stay. We just don't know what we'll be reading them on in ten years or what they'll look like. Unless technology is discovered to beam it directly into my brain.
> 
> Betsy


I agree with you, stories will always be sold. I wouldn't be surprised though if the "ebook" is something different when I am 50 or 60. Heck, pop up books might be holograms at that point . .  We can only dream, right?


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

Sela said:


> I think if we look only at individual authors, we will find a variety of experiences, with some making more revenue on non-Amazon vendors while others make far more on Amazon, while still others can't give their books away on Apple, etc. When we look at the market as a whole, we see that Barnes and Noble is shrinking, Apple has great potential but is not as easy to gain traction, Google Play is now not even accepting new authors and Amazon keeps growing. It's good to keep an eye on the larger picture even as you do what works best for you on the individual level. Better to know what's going on in the larger arena so that you're not blindsided when one of your vendors goes bankrupt or telescopes a major policy change or is being investigated by the IRS or Justice for various and sundry issues.
> 
> I'm not saying to run to Amazon and go exclusive -- or the opposite. Everyone has to do what works best for them and their business and goals. I want a healthy competitive market. I'm suggesting that Amazon really does it the best and that if the other vendors don't do better at discoverability, authors will keep giving Amazon exclusive material. That's not good for those other vendors, and is not good for the overall market, so if those vendors want to compete, they have to _compete_.
> 
> That means better customer experience to attract readers and better discoverability to attract authors. Having millions of readers is of no value to me if they can't find my book unless the curators decide to feature it.


But then, you are comparing KU to non KU. I am comparing sales out of KU to Nook and the others. Amazon does nothing for me in the field of discoverability unless one of my books hits the top 100, which is my doing not their's.

Personally, my sales are down across the board. Is that because readers from other booksellers have gone to Amazon's subscription service, or is it because I did not publish a new book in September? Hard to say.

Amazon's market share has always been at the top. No big surprise there. I was fortunate enough to get an invitation to list my books on Nook when it first started, so I have watched them change and grow. I just don't see the doom and gloom people are talking about here.

KU is death to authors like me who refuse to abandon non-Amazon readers who have been with me since 2010. I feel like it's go KU or die. Not a happy choice.


----------



## Marti talbott (Apr 19, 2011)

Becca Mills said:


> But Marti, if gorvnice is correct about the way things are headed, authors in your position are the ones with the most to be concerned about. I think that's his point: if you're relying on the non-Amazon sites for a good chunk of your sales, you should be planning now for what you'll do if one or more of them goes belly-up. Hopefully that won't happen. But if it does, the people who sell on the non-Amazon sites will be the ones damaged, and the higher their off-Amazon percentage, the greater the possible loss.
> 
> Maybe I'm totally not getting his point, and he can correct me if that's the case. But my understanding is that the thread is intended as a warning, so that people who are selling outside Amazon can figure out what they're going to do if one or more of the sites close down or become unproductive.


There is nothing I can do if one or more goes under. I don't see that happening. People have predicted Nook's demise for years and they're still there.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I think we should be MORE concerned that ebook growth is stagnating. That's the real danger for us because for most of us that's where our bread and butter lie.


A local NPR show is doing a piece on this^ topic at 12 noon, EDT.

https://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2015-09-29/pixels-vs-pages-e-books-take-a-hit

You can listen live at http://wamu.org/ or get the podcast.

Betsy


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> A local NPR show is doing a piece on this^ topic at 12 noon, EDT.
> 
> https://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2015-09-29/pixels-vs-pages-e-books-take-a-hit
> 
> ...


Thanks Betsy!! I'm listening now. And this is one reason why I am making preparations to go after print markets with a passion, starting with attending BEA next year to see what I can see.


----------



## Desert Rose (Jun 2, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> So what you keep pointing to is not valid for the vast majority of indies. By definition its only working for a subset right now, and that will be the way it is unless those markets expand exponentially in the coming years.


But Amazon isn't "working" for the vast majority of indies, either. Even there, only a fraction of indies manage to make any money.

I guess I'm just missing the point of this "thought experiment." Because it seems more geared towards "let's contemplate how Amazon will inevitably take over and how screwed we're likely to be" than to actually working out any kind of strategy.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Dragovian said:


> But Amazon isn't "working" for the vast majority of indies, either. Even there, only a fraction of indies manage to make any money.
> 
> I guess I'm just missing the point of this "thought experiment." Because it seems more geared towards "let's contemplate how Amazon will inevitably take over and how screwed we're likely to be" than to actually working out any kind of strategy.


I wonder if the best strategy would be to have (at least) one series wide and (at least) one series in KU, either under the same pen name or openly linked pen names. That way you'd maximize audience-building on Amazon while also attempting to build audience on the other sites.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I think this is a bit like the OP's post from--when? Some months ago, about basically "the way to succeed." These things may be true in generalities, but people's careers aren't general. They're specific. And what works best for one author isn't what works best for another.

Personally, I'm putting a lot of energy into my hybrid path (trad & indie). All my stuff though is focused on Amazon. My hybrid deals are with ebooks, audio (Audible Studios), & translation (AZ Crossing). That's because I have an Amazon audience (I found that out going wide). A Nook audience too, but the numbers just aren't there, or on the other sites, to make up what I lose on Amazon. Sure, Amazon became only 60-70% of my sales--but that's because my AZ sales dropped so much! 

But hybrid works for me because I write long & slow for a successful indie in my genre (About 40K/month, but 100K+ books.) From what I've observed, the megasuccessful indies write much faster. So for me, Amazon Publishing is a good bet because they keep me more boosted in between books. Which is why I'm signing a contract for 2 more books w/ them this week. Similar thing with audio & German. If I wrote faster and/or shorter, I'd stay fully indie, and I'd have series wide (esp. the one that's got more worldwide appeal) & series in Select (the very American ones). But I don't.

On the other hand, if I wrote faster & shorter, I'd be writing different books, and I'm confident that I wouldn't have had the success I've had.

I list all that as an example of my particular circumstances, which have led to my particular choices. Other people's choices will be different, because their books and audiences are different.

I just don't think that, in publishing, you can say, "This is the way to go." In distribution, in what kind of books to write, whatever. There isn't One Path.


----------



## Covervault (Mark) (Sep 29, 2015)

I'm really not surprised. Amazon is really rockin' it. Anytime I want to look for a title I just automatically go to amazon, it's almost like a natural instinct. However it's nice to visit our local B&N and actually feel a real book once in a while, look at the construction, smell the paper and beauty that goes into it.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> I think this is a bit like the OP's post from--when? Some months ago, about basically "the way to succeed." These things may be true in generalities, but people's careers aren't general. They're specific. And what works best for one author isn't what works best for another.
> 
> I just don't think that, in publishing, you can say, "This is the way to go." In distribution, in what kind of books to write, whatever. There isn't One Path.


I don't really see this OP as being equivalent to me saying "there is one way to go."

I haven't at all been prescriptive here. I've been descriptive. I'm describing the general market and stating that the macro will definitively impact the micro. Just as you found that going wide was tougher sledding--because it is, generally speaking.

Does that mean every single author will find it as difficult? No, and expectations vary. You likely saw the difference writ large because you are accustomed to large volume sales and so the smaller differences that might go unnoticed by some, stuck out clearly to you.

In any case, certainly plenty of authors do very well in wide release. But my post is not about what works for individuals, although people want to make it about that.

My post is about how larger markets impact all of us, and how I believe some of these changing markets (and Amazon's growing dominance) will continue to have effects as time goes on.

I haven't said what any individual needs to do to address the situation, because as you say, everyone's situation is unique. But we all still breathe the same air, and we will all need to deal with these challenges, one way or another.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Dragovian said:


> But Amazon isn't "working" for the vast majority of indies, either. Even there, only a fraction of indies manage to make any money.
> 
> I guess I'm just missing the point of this "thought experiment." Because it seems more geared towards "let's contemplate how Amazon will inevitably take over and how screwed we're likely to be" than to actually working out any kind of strategy.


I haven't felt the need to address strategy specifically because I think diagnosing the issue will then necessarily lead every author to consider their own way forward.

But some examples of possible strategies would be:
1. All exclusive with Amazon
2. Creating much more content (aka working more hours)
3. Establishing your own storefront from which to sell books
4. Controlling your customer base through mailing lists, social media, website etc
5. Teaming up with other authors 
6. Trying to establish a union or lobbying group for leverage
7. Becoming a hybrid author
8. Focusing on building infrastructure for translations across multiple languages

And that's all just off the top of my head. Every author will find ways to combat such changes to their market, but it's not up to me to feed people answers. I think discussing the problem naturally leads one to contemplate their own solutions.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I don't really see this OP as being equivalent to me saying "there is one way to go."
> 
> I haven't at all been prescriptive here. I've been descriptive. I'm describing the general market and stating that the macro will definitively impact the micro. Just as you found that going wide was tougher sledding--because it is, generally speaking.
> 
> ...


Thank you -- the part bolded is what I took your OP to be saying and I agree with it completely. 

Sometimes it amazes me at how hard it is to communicate on this medium, given that we are all writers and are supposed to be masters of the written word and conveying meaning. But we all also read with a particular intent and see things through our own lens.

It's hard to know what is going on with the larger market because we don't have all the information. We have only partial information and the information we do have is not always the best. Still, we have to make business decisions based on that partial not always complete or trustworthy information. Whether it's Amazon stock performance or reports, B&N performance, Author Earning reports, publisher reports, or our own data from vendors, etc. that's all we have to go on. I think posts like this are useful to help hash out what is going on and what are some strategies to deal with the flux of the marketplace. What are the implications for indies if Amazon continues to garner more and more of the market? Is it gaining more and more of the market? What happens if B&N falters? I made serious money at B&N for a couple of months this year, but it has petered out. Same with Apple. I've tried KU and it seems to be performing well but I have no idea how long the good performance will last. I am a hybrid in the sense that I have a series in KU and other series outside in wide distribution, trying to see what works and what doesn't. Like everyone else, I'm trying to be smart and do what works for me as an individual but I need to keep tabs on the larger picture.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Thanks, Sela.  It is hard to communicate about this stuff, and people read and view through their own lens, as it applies to their own personal experience.

Which is why so many think that I'm dismissing their sales on Kobo or non-US markets when in reality I'm not doing that at all, from my view.  I have very good and necessary sales in non-US markets, and I have sales that I care a lot about on Kobo and Nook and iBooks.

But I think my message is not a particularly pleasant message, so it will not be received with smiles and exclamations of joy.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I don't really see this OP as being equivalent to me saying "there is one way to go."
> 
> I haven't at all been prescriptive here. I've been descriptive. I'm describing the general market and stating that the macro will definitively impact the micro. Just as you found that going wide was tougher sledding--because it is, generally speaking.
> 
> ...


Thanks. I see better what you're saying now.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

You want to notice something really interesting.. take a look at The Top 10 kindle bestsellers on Amazon. 

While Indie sensation Brittainy Cherry is definitely killing it, look at who is publishing the rest of the top 10: 
Thomas & Mercer - AmazonCrossing - Montlake Romance -47North

Yup.. all of these are Amazon imprints. 

Now look at the publication dates.. they are all October 1, 2015. 

So all of these in-house hit books were magically published on the same day? I swear I've seen some of them before that date.. researching now to see if i can prove it. 

But if Amazon is fiddling with dates and algorithms to push their own books, then they really aren't playing fair. They are in fact heavily rigging the system in their own favor. It's their system, and they can do what they want. But if they decide that indies are too heavily competing with their in-house imprints, whats to stop them from tweaking the system further?

That's the stuff you have to think about. Especially, if you are planning for longevity.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Actually, there's a perfectly good explanation.

Amazon has a program called "Kindle First" -- each month they offer 6 (used to be 4) titles from their imprints that are due to be released the _following_ month for FREE to prime members (or $1.99 to non Prime members).

Each customer can only choose one of the 6, but what this means is that there are large numbers of folks who 'bought' those books on SEPTEMBER 1.

So it's not really too surprising that, as of the day the titles are _officially_ released, they're high in the 'best seller' list on the Zon.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Actually, there's a perfectly good explanation.
> 
> Amazon has a program called "Kindle First" -- each month they offer 6 (used to be 4) titles from their imprints that are due to be released the _following_ month for FREE to prime members (or $1.99 to non Prime members).
> 
> ...


Oh that makes sense.

And it's still rigging things in their favor in my book. They are counting a months worth of sales.. as sales made on one day. It's also obvious they are moving quickly into becoming publishers themselves.

We didn't lose gatekeepers, we just handed the keys over to a new owner.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Actually, there's a perfectly good explanation.
> 
> Amazon has a program called "Kindle First" -- each month they offer 6 (used to be 4) titles from their imprints that are due to be released the _following_ month for FREE to prime members (or $1.99 to non Prime members).
> 
> ...


That's good info. It shows how Amazon is essentially able to push its imprint books very effectively, which is what Data Guy's recent author earnings report showed as well.

Amazon imprints are doing very, very well relative to the rest of the industry. Not really shocking.

But whether or not we like it, Amazon is doing these sorts of promotions as just one tiny part of their constantly changing innovations and experiments with their store.

I can barely name one or two innovations or programs from stores like Google Play, iBooks or Kobo or Nook. Where Amazon has dozens and dozens of little programs, big programs, advertising (paid and unpaid), kindle scout, curation, imprints, Kindle Unlimited, and the list goes on and on...

It's like Roger Federer is playing a match at the US Open against a high school tennis player.


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2015)

Vicky Foxx said:


> We didn't lose gatekeepers, we just handed the keys over to a new owner.


Those of us who went exclusive with Amazon, anyway.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Those of us who went exclusive with Amazon, anyway.


If you didn't go exclusive with your entire catalog (and I'm one who has both exclusive content and wide content), you see clearly how much more difficult it is to gather the necessary sales revenue on ALL THE OTHER PLATFORMS COMBINED just to match what Amazon can do with KU and selling exclusively.

Right now, for me, it's kind of a wash--but I feel I gain slightly with having some diversification against any crazy move on Amazon's part (of which I've been subjected to a few).

But when I say it's a wash, what I mean is that I get about 20-30 percent on ALL OTHER PLATFORMS COMBINED (with decent rankings on those platforms) and 70% or 80% on Amazon (percentages fluctuate monthly). If I go exclusive, I can make up most of the difference with KU and the page reads and elevated visibility it brings my titles.

Other than not wanting all my eggs in one basket, there's very little reason to keep trucking with platforms that do not compete, or as far as I can tell, even want to compete.

Which is why it gets more and more difficult to justify wide release.


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> If you didn't go exclusive with your entire catalog (and I'm one who has both exclusive content and wide content), you see clearly how much more difficult it is to gather the necessary sales revenue on ALL THE OTHER PLATFORMS COMBINED just to match what Amazon can do with KU and selling exclusively.
> 
> Right now, for me, it's kind of a wash--but I feel I gain slightly with having some diversification against any crazy move on Amazon's part (of which I've been subjected to a few).
> 
> ...


Did you honestly think it would be easy?

In some ways, learning to sell well is a different game for each retailer. In other ways, it's not dependent on the retailers at all, it's dependent on the readers. A dedicated fanbase is retailer-agnostic.

Earlier this year, I came to the realization that I was depending far too heavily on Amazon to do all of my marketing for me. In doing so, I had become dependent on Amazon for almost all of my sales. I vowed that I would break out from that dependency and learn how to market more effectively on my own.

If 70% to 80% of your sales come from Amazon, which is more likely?

1) It's the fault of the global ebook market, in which you are merely a prawn?
2) It's the fault of shortcomings in your own marketing and business strategy?

Retailers don't owe us sales. The onus to market our books is on us, not them.

That's what it means to be "indie."


----------



## DCWolf (Sep 29, 2015)

I wonder what the stats are on audio books. More and more people I know opt for "books on tape" while commuting (especially in places like LA where commutes can be crazy).

I saw this (from this report http://authorearnings.com/report/january-2015-author-earnings-report/)

_Amazon.com alone visibly sells over 560 million ebooks and 420 million print books a year in the U.S. *When you include the 70 million audiobooks Amazon.com sells annually *(split 60/40 between digital downloads and CD format), you get roughly a billion books of all formats that are being sold by Amazon.com each year - a number that is very much in line with the reported 41% share Amazon holds of all new-book sales of all formats in the U.S. and their 64% share of all online print book sales._


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Earlier this year, I came to the realization that I was depending far too heavily on Amazon to do all of my marketing for me. In doing so, I had become dependent on Amazon for almost all of my sales. I vowed that I would break out from that dependency and learn how to market more effectively on my own.


As a group, many of us have become much too dependent on Amazon. Remember when we used to discuss marketing strategies, reaching out to book bloggers, running mailing lists, and making connections with readers?

Back in 2011 that was the game and how it was played. But then KU came along and made it easy, but slowly easy is morphing into mandatory. I think we've reached the point where playing the long game is key. Yes in the short term, you won't make quick kindle bucks if you're not exclusive. You'll have to work hard to gain an audience. You might have to learn how Facebook ads work. You may need to find out who the influential reviewers/bloggers are in your genre.

I just spent a week researching a specific genre. I wrote then wrote a 1,700 word analysis of the genre. This included average rankings, average # of reviews, potential influences, and top authors (w/rankings). That will be information I use for going wide, and trying to get reviews on launch day.

And I still need to finish writing the damn book. But the people who are selling on iBooks and elsewhere are working their buts off to do so. And since many of them have been around since 2011 and are still at it, they are my examples for longevity. Marketing is hard work, but relying on KU to do all the work isn't sustainable.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Vicky Foxx said:


> You want to notice something really interesting.. take a look at The Top 10 kindle bestsellers on Amazon.
> 
> While Indie sensation Brittainy Cherry is definitely killing it, look at who is publishing the rest of the top 10:
> Thomas & Mercer - AmazonCrossing - Montlake Romance -47North
> ...


Agreed, Vicky. Amazon is a big black hole to authors. What is going on with the algorithms? What is going on with Amazon imprints? How is visibility affected by KU, whether in or out?

I don't think you can argue that there is anything fair or not about it. It's business. Amazon is a retailer and can put its own products up front in the store just the way store brands are put on the most desirable shelf space in order to garner sales over competitors. The trick is to get selling well enough that Amazon promotes you into that desirable shelf space. You need outside help to get Amazon to notice your books -- reviews, sales, promos, etc. Once they notice you, they promote what sells to make even more sales. That's the fact of life on Amazon. At least, as far as I understand it.


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2015)

Vicky Foxx said:


> As a group, many of us have become much too dependent on Amazon. Remember when we used to discuss marketing strategies, reaching out to book bloggers, running mailing lists, and making connections with readers?
> 
> Back in 2011 that was the game and how it was played. But then KU came along and made it easy, but slowly easy is morphing into mandatory. I think we've reached the point where playing the long game is key. Yes in the short term, you won't make quick kindle bucks if you're not exclusive. You'll have to work hard to gain an audience. You might have to learn how Facebook ads work. You may need to find out who the influential reviewers/bloggers are in your genre.
> 
> ...


Totally agreed. KDP Select has slowly been making indie authors dependent on Amazon since day one. The price of exclusivity is independence.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Did you honestly think it would be easy?
> 
> If 70% to 80% of your sales come from Amazon, which is more likely?
> 
> ...


Well it's relatively easy on Amazon because they actually move lots of books relative to those other retailers, so the audience exists. And so yes, sales on other platforms will tend to reflect the larger trends in that respect (the point of my OP).

I don't view it as a failure of my strategy. If a platform doesn't have an audience, and they don't compete with Amazon and don't offer good visibility, good promotional tools, good site experience for readers, etc etc.

Why should I view it as MY failure?

That would be silly. I'm doing my job and they should do theirs.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Here's a recent podcast with Liliana Hart and Joanna Penn on the subject:

http://www.thecreativepenn.com/2015/09/21/dont-go-exclusive-build-a-long-term-career-as-an-author-on-multiple-platforms-with-liliana-hart/

One thing I took away from that was that there are over 1 billion active Apple devices out there. That's a lot of potential readers. A lot of things she said made sense. I know Joanna talked about launching her fathers book on Kindle first, and then taking it wide.

I think the point that's being made is..

Are you working for Kindle or are you making Kindle work for you?

I'm not a big money maker yet.. never was. I've sold some and made more money than others. But I'm on the low end of the spectrum. So take my advice for what it might be worth. But I'm trying to push myself up from where I'm at now. And for me that means finding a way to not be dependent on Kindle.

I just don't trust them.. not that I think Amazon is evil. But they are a business and my financial well-being isn't necessarily part of their long term goals.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Everybody agrees: All thing being equal, it's better not to be exclusive with Amazon.

Unfortunately, all things are not equal.

Now the question is, why are so many exclusive?  What's happening in the market?

The answer is simple.  Amazon does such a better job of selling your books, and the other platforms don't.  They are pretty bad at it, relative to Amazon.  They have far fewer customers than Amazon, fewer promotional opportunities, their websites aren't as good, their stores don't have as much material, and they don't innovate new and helpful programs.

An indie author cannot possibly hold themselves responsible for the failure of these large companies.  These companies need to do their jobs, or Amazon will continue to suck all the air from the room.

And no amount of trying and struggling in wide release will make up the difference.

I've already stated some ways that indies can adjust, but hoping that you'll sell more books on platforms with dwindling customer bases is not the smart long term strategy.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Vicky Foxx said:


> Here's a recent podcast with Liliana Hart and Joanna Penn on the subject:
> 
> http://www.thecreativepenn.com/2015/09/21/dont-go-exclusive-build-a-long-term-career-as-an-author-on-multiple-platforms-with-liliana-hart/


Also, I scrolled down on the page this podcast was located on, and found this....

"This podcast is sponsored by Kobo Writing Life, which helps authors self-publish and reach readers in global markets kobo writing lifethrough the Kobo eco-system."

They mention midway through the podcast that Kobo sponsored their podcast. It doesn't make what they're saying wrong, but obviously you need to consider the fact that this conversation was sponsored by a platform that competes with Amazon.

Liliana does make some good points about iBooks surging. We shall see. Liliana Hart is one of the only big-name indie authors I've ever heard who says they make more money on ibooks than Amazon. She makes some claims about iBooks, but so far we have no objective data about their place in the market.

Out of all the platforms, iBooks is the only credible threat to Amazon's dominance. But they need to do a lot more before they truly become a meaningful alternative. So far, we just have mostly talk and excitement from people who firmly believe that the device gap will eventually pay off in book sales down the line.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

Liliana has some sweet promo options being offered to her by Apple, so that's a giant part of it. It's not stuff that they do for the average (or even just well-selling but not Hart level) author. For her, it probably makes a lot of sense to keep that going. 

Not really completely relevant to bigger picture though, not unless Apple is going to take the sweetheart type of treatment they give a few huge names and start working out ways to get that kind of visibility more accessible to the rest, and do this while they somehow grow their market share a lot more.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Annie B said:


> Liliana has some sweet promo options being offered to her by Apple, so that's a giant part of it. It's not stuff that they do for the average (or even just well-selling but not Hart level) author. For her, it probably makes a lot of sense to keep that going.
> 
> Not really completely relevant to bigger picture though, not unless Apple is going to take the sweetheart type of treatment they give a few huge names and start working out ways to get that kind of visibility more accessible to the rest, and do this while they somehow grow their market share a lot more.


Well I would've said that but it might have sounded like sour grapes coming from me. And maybe that's what it would be.

I have struggled mightily to gain any visibility on Apple through D2D, and I think that it's a very different story if you get lots of promo deals like the very biggest, choice names get at any of these sites.

The question I'm posing is how does the average indie fare who doesn't have a rep, doesn't have special access to the best promo spots, doesn't have any kind of "in" with a given platform?

Only Amazon seems to be a place where such an indie can thrive and make really great sales. And I think that is why there is so much more exclusivity happening.

All these people talking about how great these other platforms are, or how much potential Apple has...it's all talk, from what I can tell. The results speak for themselves, and the results are that people are struggling to make the good money in wide release And it is not from a lack of trying, imo.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

I think on a case by case basis, some people will do well wide, but as you pointed out earlier, that doesn't necessarily mean it will last or that the other markets are healthy. I think it can be useful to look at where the larger trends are headed and whose business is dealing with changes and adapting.

I don't know why pointing out a fairly well known thing like "so and so is getting special treatment" is sour grapes   I mean... it's reality. There is a level of success at which the persons involved are no longer playing on anything that resembles the same field as anyone else... I am still very much indie midlist and even I am not playing on same field I was a year ago. I have so many more opportunities for visibility than I used to, just by being more successful. Success breeds more of itself when handled well, I've found. Unfair or not, that's how it works. Keeping on top of things and paying attention to where the markets are at is part of that, I think.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> The question I'm posing is how does the average indie fare who doesn't have a rep, doesn't have special access to the best promo spots, doesn't have any kind of "in" with a given platform?
> 
> Only Amazon seems to be a place where such an indie can thrive and make really great sales. And I think that is why there is so much more exclusivity happening.


The 'average' indie doesn't thrive on Amazon. The 'average' indie book has a ranking of a couple of million.

The 'average' indie writer makes a few bucks when they release a book, then it drops out of the Amazon rankings after a few weeks, and disappears.

KU has only made that worse, by pushing books in KU higher in the rankings than non-KU books.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Agreed, Annie.

I have those kinds of opportunities on one or two sites and I can absolutely see the difference it makes.  And I'm also very aware that the majority of indie authors are not getting that treatment.  And in the case of Apple, I can see how much harder it is to get visibility and move books when I don't have those special goodies in place.

When people say, "well that's a failure in your business strategy, don't blame the platforms" I think that's completely wrong.

Authors should not have to be part of some special group of insiders to gain visibility and move significant numbers of books at a platform.  And if you move outside the top few hundred books, visibility shouldn't plummet immediately to nearly zero.

This is the major difference between Amazon and those other platforms.  I've NEVER been part of a major Amazon promotion, and I've still made my living there for five years.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> The 'average' indie doesn't thrive on Amazon. The 'average' indie book has a ranking of a couple of million.
> 
> The 'average' indie writer makes a few bucks when they release a book, then it drops out of the Amazon rankings after a few weeks, and disappears.
> 
> KU has only made that worse, by pushing books in KU higher in the rankings than non-KU books.


The average indie does have the opportunity for their books to be found on Amazon.

There are not barriers in place that prevent new books from unknown authors being discovered the way there is on those other sites.

Old books will struggle because Amazon's system rewards new output.

And yes, Amazon pushes books that sell. But they don't create impossible barriers to entry the way the other sites do.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

I don't know if they are barriers to entry so much as just inefficient systems that aren't designed to help get things people want in front of eyeballs. Search systems on some of the non-Amazon sites range from frustrating to impossible, for example. I don't know if that's a deliberate neglect thing so much as a failure to just adapt to selling things like books online.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Edward M. Grant said:


> The 'average' indie doesn't thrive on Amazon. The 'average' indie book has a ranking of a couple of million.
> 
> The 'average' indie writer makes a few bucks when they release a book, then it drops out of the Amazon rankings after a few weeks, and disappears.
> 
> KU has only made that worse, by pushing books in KU higher in the rankings than non-KU books.


I agree with this, and I also think that KU is becoming its own gatekeeper. There's no better way to filter out self-published books from the eyes of readers than to push them all into KU. If the news that Amazon is removing trade-published books from KU is accurate, then guess what we have? The two-tier system everyone was afraid Amazon would use against self-published books.

You have to implement a successful strategy to make it on any vendor. For instance, how do I make more than $10k a month on Play? I have over a hundred books there, many in series supported by a permafree. I give away hundreds of free books a day, and I have a sell-through rate of over 20 percent. This is a strategy that used to work on Amazon, but doesn't anymore. For one, all those same books have a much lower sell-through rate on Amazon, and Amazon's obsession with churn means it's almost impossible to keep sales steady, unlike Play.

So strategies are different for different vendors, but you just can't expect to go to other non-Amazon vendors and just hope you do well.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> The best chance to thrive is to write a book readers want, and get a lot of them to buy it in the first few weeks. If that doesn't happen, it's gone.


Well I agree basically with that premise. But ANY AUTHOR can do that, at any time, with any book.

Which is absolutely not the case with the other platforms.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> I agree with this, and I also think that KU is becoming its own gatekeeper. There's no better way to filter out self-published books from the eyes of readers than to push them all into KU. If the news that Amazon is removing trade-published books from KU is accurate, then guess what we have? The two-tier system everyone was afraid Amazon would use against self-published books.
> 
> You have to implement a successful strategy to make it on any vendor. For instance, how do I make more than $10k a month on Play? I have over a hundred books there, many in series supported by a permafree. I give away hundreds of free books a day, and I have a sell-through rate of over 20 percent. This is a strategy that used to work on Amazon, but doesn't anymore. For one, all those same books have a much lower sell-through rate on Amazon, and Amazon's obsession with churn means it's almost impossible to keep sales steady, unlike Play.
> 
> So strategies are different for different vendors, but you just can't expect to go to other non-Amazon vendors and just hope you do well.


It's awesome that you do so well on GP. Imagine if they actually opened their doors to indies instead of being shuttered due to rampant out-of-control piracy. Imagine if they didn't randomly discount books so that Amazon would then discount them...

Then they might really be good!


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> It's awesome that you do so well on GP. Imagine if they actually opened their doors to indies instead of being shuttered due to rampant out-of-control piracy. Imagine if they didn't randomly discount books so that Amazon would then discount them...
> 
> Then they might really be good!


Neither of these things affect me. I'm already a member, and I purposely price my books so that the discounted price is what I price the book for on Amazon. 

But yes, Play could do better. For instance, I get a much higher ROI on my Facebook ads for Play than I do Amazon. But do I know why this is? Heck no, because I don't fully understand how Play sells books. I have theories, but because Play is so confusing, I can't really verify anything.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I'll say it again.

Individuals can do well on any given site.

But what we need is for MASSES of individuals to do well on non-Amazon sites, and that will only happen when those platforms get their acts together.  As long as they keep making stupid mistakes and being easy to beat, they will never be competition for Amazon.

And indies are smart to stay away from places like Google Play if GP can't do the basics right.  Kudos for you making money, but it still changes nothing for the big picture.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> Well I agree basically with that premise. But ANY AUTHOR can do that, at any time, with any book.
> 
> Which is absolutely not the case with the other platforms.


This is absolutely NOT true.

Other venues have real people scouring the inventory and picking out books for promos. Kobo does this. Apple does this. Write a great book. Hope it catches their attention. Go direct. Network, because these people who scour the inventory at Apple and Kobo are reading forums like these.

If you want equal great opportunities for all books, that's not gonna happen, because all books are not equal. It's just that on non-Amazon venues, the road to getting these opportunities are different. How many people moaning about non-discoverability of books on certain platforms actually go to those stores and instead of moaning about "I can't even find my books!" see which books do get displayed in searches and try to tailor their uploads to that?


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> I'll say it again.
> 
> Individuals can do well on any given site.
> 
> ...


This just seems odd to me. Masses of people don't do well on Amazon....


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> This just seems odd to me. Masses of people don't do well on Amazon....


Yes they do, relative to the other platforms.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> This is absolutely NOT true.
> 
> Other venues have real people scouring the inventory and picking out books for promos. Kobo does this. Apple does this. Write a great book. Hope it catches their attention. Go direct. Network..


I think those are pretty poor ways of creating overall discoverability for books.

I never said Amazon was perfect--I said their discoverability systems are far superior to the competition. And I've stated those systems--everything from KU to Kindle Scout, Imprints, alsoboughts (that work), tons of lists, categories and keywords that go deep and work, recommendation emails, advertising, as well as kindle daily deals and big promos for key authors.

And what do Kobo and GP and iBooks have?

Curation. A few promos if you network.

Sorry. Doesn't cut it. Not even close.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Does Amazon have the best discoverability tools out there for indie publishing?

Yup they do. That's not even an argument. 

Does Amazon have the best interest of your publishing business at heart?

No. They are concerned with their own best interest. If we happen to benefit, great. But Amazon isn't doing all this for us.. they are doing it for themselves. 

And that's where being dependent on them is dangerous. One change in policy and an author could suddenly find their sales plummeting.  Not so long ago, most of us were pricing somewhere between $2.99 and $4.99 USD. For promotional reasons some were pricing at .99. And back then everyone was chastisng those .99 centers about devaluing books. 

Now.. we've digressed to .0051 a page. Why? Because Amazon changed the game and we handed pricing control over to them. Sure you can sell your book for more. But you'll lose access to all the cool tools that actually help you sell. 

For me, the new pen name is going wide. And yes, I'm scared. Because if I can't make going wide work, I'll be forced into select. 

And then I'll be spending my time hoping nothing changes that drastically effects my publishing business.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> That's good info. It shows how Amazon is essentially able to push its imprint books very effectively, which is what Data Guy's recent author earnings report showed as well.


This was not a new discovery by Data Guy, but Author Earnings finally giving up on their misleading conclusions. From the outset their purpose has been to say "indies are doing better than the Big Five" despite a big segment of the pie-chart belonging to Amazon Publishing which makes clear that for eBooks it is a Big Six. More to the point only the Random Penguin outsell Amazon Publishing (on Amazon) so they are the Big Two.

BTW there are over 3,000,000 books on Amazon. You will only get new-book discoverability on Amazon if you write in a genre that isn't getting hundreds of new publications a month. I think it was Lindsay Burocker who recommended releasing first into a more obscure genre and then switching it to the popular one once traction has been achieved. It is also a good idea to avoid genres targeted by Kindle First.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Mercia McMahon said:


> BTW there are over 3,000,000 books on Amazon. You will only get new-book discoverability on Amazon if you write in a genre that isn't getting hundreds of new publications a month.


And Authors Earnings will only get data on you if you're one of the 200k or so books that sold during the day they crawled, making Authors Earnings completely pointless.


----------



## Guest (Oct 1, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> Well I agree basically with that premise. But ANY AUTHOR can do that, at any time, with any book.
> 
> Which is absolutely not the case with the other platforms.


See, this is where you're demonstrably wrong.

Readers are readers are readers, no matter how they read their books. The very essence of going wide is focusing on readers, not on the retailer.

Sent from the far side of the moon using Tapatalk


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> This was not a new discovery by Data Guy, but Author Earnings finally giving up on their misleading conclusions.
> 
> BTW there are over 3,000,000 books on Amazon. You will only get new-book discoverability on Amazon if you write in a genre that isn't getting hundreds of new publications a month.


These are statements made without any evidence on your part. Please, I'm happy to see any objective reasons you have as to why Author Earnings' findings are incorrect, and please--back it up with some data. Raw numbers or industry reports. Because I've seen no hard evidence from you or Briteka to back up your statements.

As to the notion that the best way to get discovered on Amazon is to write in a non-competitive genre--I find that to be a bit simplistic.

I write in very competitive genres and have been able to get visibility for new pen name after new pen name--and I'm not using my social media, mailing lists or anything other than Amazon's own internal promotion and discovery to do so.

In order for a less competitive genre to gain visibility for a title, you need to be working in an UNDERSERVED market. If you simply write a book in a genre that nobody reads, it won't help even a bit.

The things you're saying don't ring true to anything I've observed in this industry.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> And Authors Earnings will only get data on you if you're one of the 200k or so books that sold during the day they crawled, making Authors Earnings completely pointless.


You keep saying these things. Data Guy has explained this in a very detailed fashion, far more than I care to get into. It's all at the Author Earnings site, along with tremendous resources, the raw data and the analysis. You, as usual, just make blanket statements with nothing to back it up.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> See, this is where you're demonstrably wrong.
> 
> Readers are readers are readers, no matter how they read their books. The very essence of going wide is focusing on readers, not on the retailer.
> 
> Sent from the far side of the moon using Tapatalk


You can't focus on readers that don't exist.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Vicky Foxx said:


> Does Amazon have the best discoverability tools out there for indie publishing?
> 
> Yup they do. That's not even an argument.
> 
> ...


I basically agree with everything you say here. KU 2 absolutely turned my business upside down and cut my earnings nearly in half. And it happened with two weeks notice.

I was livid and pulled a huge portion of my books out of KU.

Unfortunately, even though you are correct to be concerned, going wide is not a longterm solution as long as the other platforms continue to not compete and bleed customers and authors to Amazon.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

> Curation. A few promos if you network.
> 
> Sorry. Doesn't cut it. Not even close.


OK then. Which magnificent tools does Amazon have that make a difference?

None. Most books sell a copy or two and then sink to over 2 million. If they sell more, they get recommended to other readers. But guess what? This also happens at other stores. So what is this magic at Amazon?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> OK then. Which magnificent tools does Amazon have that make a difference?
> 
> None. Most books sell a copy or two and then sink to over 2 million. If they sell more, they get recommended to other readers. But guess what? This also happens at other stores. So what is this magic at Amazon?


Did you not read my response previously? Amazon has amazing tools that make a difference. 
All of their top 100 lists for all the various categories, and then those lists break down to smaller and smaller niches, allowing readers to find books that would normally be obscure or invisible on other stores.

Amazon's keywords actually WORK. Other stores either don't have any way for you to use keywords, or in the case of Nook, they have keywords and then they don't actually index them. So your book isn't even searchable by the keywords you input there.

Amazon has also-boughts that work, that are robust and consistently updating. If you get paired with a high selling book in their also-boughts, you can zoom up the charts right on their coattails.

Amazon has Kindle Unlimited, and they also have the countdown promotions. You can change price, you can be in KU and get page reads and extra visibility.

Amazon has emails that get sent out to those who follow you or have bought previous books of yours.

Amazon has the kindle scout program, and they have imprints where they are bringing in indie authors and making them part of Amazon's stable.

They have promotions that go all the way from Kindle Daily Deals down to smaller promos and emails consistently going out.

They have the Hot New Releases list, and they have advertising like pay per click, etc.

Even though some of these tools work better than others and some (like their pay per click adverts) are not working well, Amazon continues to innovate and constantly make new systems of discovery all the time.

By the way, almost any single avenue or tool that Amazon uses is better than the very best tool on those other sites. So Kindle Unlimited is literally a better discovery channel for authors than any other discovery channel on any other platform. But then again, so is Amazon's also boughts and so are their lists and categories.

It amazes me that you would ask what the difference is.

I WANT THOSE OTHER PLATFORMS TO WORK. It helps me if they do. I'm not like Hugh Howey who thinks the world would be better if Amazon ran everything.

I believe we absolutely need a competitive market where customers go to more than one place for ebooks, and where indies can sell their books and get fair treatment.

But pretending it exists when it doesn't is not helping anybody.

These other platforms aren't cutting it, and they have very little of value to offer indies, which is why indies are flocking to Amazon in droves and going exclusive.


----------



## WDR (Jan 8, 2014)

I must say, this has been a fascinating discussion! Lot's of good opinions and observations. So, just to throw my own hat into the ring, here are some random thoughts I have on the matter:

*1. The Success
*
Love him or hate him, Bezos has a genius with identifying sales markets as Jobs was at product design and quality. It was Bezos who early on pushed Amazon into the ebook market and on the heels of that move, made it easy for independent writers to self publish by making it simple to sell their products through Amazon. Bezos is an avid reader, which is why he started Amazon in the first place. So, perhaps he was thus positioned to note that there was a significant number of writers with good quality stories that were being rejected by the publishing establishment; he saw the untapped potential in making it easy for authors to self publish. Or, as is the case with many of Silicon Valley's success stories, he was just damned lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time to strike gold. Whatever it is, Amazon was at the gates first to allow authors to self publish and sell their books directly to the public through Amazon's retail system. Being first to market is often the best when it comes to holding market share. The only way you can be bumped from that lofty position is if someone comes along with a better product. Amazon recognizes the goldmine that self publishing has become and keeps striving to hold onto their advantage.

*2. "The more successful a business becomes, the more removed it becomes from what made it successful in the first place."
*
IBM, Microsoft, Blackberry, Apple Computer (now Apple, interesting history), Dell Computer, Harley Davidson, nearly all of the American automotive industry, etc. I could list others, but I'd have to do too much looking up to make sure I was covering my fact checking&#8230;. Each of these companies suffered collapse or were [nearly] wiped out of existence. Only Apple has actually bounced back and exceeded its previous existence.

Amazon runs this risk as well. The bigger they become, the more risky it becomes to hold on to their success. The more competition Amazon removes from the market, the more of a vacuum gets created. That only leaves space open for a startup to attract investment that they can take on Amazon head to head. The more money Amazon makes, the more attention gets attracted to that and entices someone to try.

According to the AAP, publishing generated nearly _*$28 billion*_ in profit for 2014 and 2015 is proving to be bigger than that. AAP draws its numbers from reports by its membership. AAP does not collect sales information on self-published titles, which cuts out a huge percentage of the current bookselling market. Numbers from Authors' Earnings and other sources suggest that the market for books is significantly larger when you take ebook sales from independent writers into account. That part of the market could be as much as 40%-50% more than the $28 billion reported. And we all know, once an ebook is published to the open market, it incurs no further production costs. So that $11B-$14B is pretty much pure profit up for the taking, 30% of which gets pocketed by the retailer; over $3B-$4B is free profit for which they had to do nothing other than run a few servers.

Amazon is not losing money on self-published writers. If anything, they are making money hand-over-fist with no effort. The $11 million kitty they put up each month is less than 1% of what they make in profit on selling our work.

With so much money to be made-and the market is growing!-can you really believe that no one else is going to make an attempt to get a piece of this pie? When Apple entered the market, they announced they were going to offer authors 70% share of the sales proceeds. Amazon moved quickly and matched that 70%, up from their original 35%. The alternative would have been all the authors rushing to put new work into Apple first, and then expanding that to Amazon once the market had moved on for any given title. Amazon knew that all too clearly and had to move instantly to counter Apple's position.

Keep that in mind when you worry that Amazon is going to drop the hammer on independent authors if they gain a monopoly in the publishing market. If Amazon pulled a stunt like that, it would be like pouring blood and meat into a tank of sharks and then jumping in wearing a bacon bathing suit.

*Point 3, The Competition...
*
The Big-5 view the movement in publishing towards self-publishing much in the same way the Big-3 American automobile makers viewed foreign auto makers back in the 70s and 80s. They are ignoring it much in the same way. Like hitting a hornet nest with a stick and then believing you won't get stung if you just close your eyes. Self-publishing is not going to go away. The bottle has been opened and the genie is out.

I see B&N as having shot themselves in the foot (or head) with the whole Nook/No-Nook fiasco. At the very least, they lost credibility with self-publishing authors and they haven't made their customers very happy.

Apple and Google seem to have the best position in the market to compete against Amazon. But both are playing their cards close and they haven't played a hand in over a year. Apple has been through two major OS updates where they could have introduced something new, but have not. Google has bought out Oyster, we'll have to see what they are up to over the next few months. Neither one has inspired any confidence in me that they are going to do something significant.

However, both have strong histories of pulling rabbits out of a hat and amazing us. So, stay tuned.

Kobo is trying. At least they are personable and the crew they have in North America are sensitive to the needs of independent writers. But there does seem to be a disconnect between the corporate headquarters and the North American division, giving us mixed signals. There was that earlier fiasco where they seemed to have shot themselves in the foot, much like B&N, but I get the impression that Kobo is trying harder to recover from that mistake.

There was a tiny competitor that popped up in England called Bitbooks. They were selling ebooks for bitcoins. The programmer behind it at least gave it a go before discovering just how difficult it is to get into that market. But it is a good indication that there are small competitors out there who are willing to give it a try. This is what Amazon must be afraid of at all times: these little competitors popping up. At some point, a genius is going to wade in and come up with a good solution that will rocket them into the market.

*4. Discoverability*

This is what independents crave and need. We need it to be easy for their books to be discovered by readers. If a reader likes Book-X, then they'll surely like Book-Y. This is why Amazon is so successful over the competitors. Their book recommendation system is working. Apple does have Booklamp, a technology that could bring discoverability to a whole new level. But it has been two years since Apple acquired this company and nothing has come of it. If Apple can't do anything with it, then I fear the project is probably dead. (I hope I am proven wrong.)

Without discoverability for books that are not new and don't sell too many copies, no bookstore can compete with Amazon online. Such books are just not visible anymore. There are always new readers entering the marketplace. A book that was popular six years ago and now forgotten can have a whole new audience, but only if those new readers are made aware of it. How many of you read M. L'Engle's _A Wrinkle in Time_ when you were in middle school? I bet nearly all of us did, especially fans of science fiction and fantasy. Well, guess what? There is a whole new crop of seventh graders who just started school two months ago and are about to discover it again. With a good discoverability algorithm, your book could be magically recommended to new readers who haven't discovered it yet. You could be having repeat surges in sales every few years.

None of us needs to be a Top 10 writer on the bestsellers lists to be a success. As independents, we can make enough money for a good income on mid-list sales. We just need our titles to be found more easily and not bumped in favor of the newest. A hot new title could result in your book seeing a sudden surge in new sales because they have similar themes or styles to them. The reader just has to be made aware of your title somehow.

The only way the competition is really going to get a hand over Amazon is if they really work on the discoverability. Rather than older titles being relegated to the dead books abyss, good discoverability and recommendations could maintain a strong and healthy churn in the sales lists. And that translates into more money for everyone.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> This is absolutely NOT true.
> 
> Other venues have real people scouring the inventory and picking out books for promos. Kobo does this. Apple does this. Write a great book. Hope it catches their attention. Go direct. Network, because these people who scour the inventory at Apple and Kobo are reading forums like these.
> 
> If you want equal great opportunities for all books, that's not gonna happen, because all books are not equal. It's just that on non-Amazon venues, the road to getting these opportunities are different. How many people moaning about non-discoverability of books on certain platforms actually go to those stores and instead of moaning about "I can't even find my books!" see which books do get displayed in searches and try to tailor their uploads to that?


I disagree with this.

I say get rid of individual curation entirely except for purchasing decisions for imprints. But when it comes to discoverability, offer curation that is done by algorithm. Pure unadulterated computer algorithm generated curation. BY that I mean no individual at a retailer picking books to recommend based on their own taste and notion of 'quality'. And I say that as an author who has benefitted from that kind of individual curation. I was happy to get that individual attention on Apple but I can see how, if I hadn't received it, my book would likely still not be selling on Apple.

Instead, have algorithms searching out what is selling, what has velocity, what is being bought at the same time, and then recommend that book to people who bought similar books, or books in that category, or similar books that are getting good reviews and visits to the product page and are being read through.

Oh, that sounds like Amazon. 

It's much better for indie authors in general to have algorithms at work that recommend books to readers based on their previous purchasing behaviour and based on customer interest. Every book then has a chance to be recommended to a reader who has shown an interest in buying that kind of book. The readers will decide if the book is what they are looking for, not some Creative Writing grad doing an unpaid internship or someone with particular tastes and prejudices.

There are a variety of reasons why indie books languish in the 2,000,000+ ranks. Here are some:

1. Quality. The book is just not up to snuff. It hasn't been edited or proofread. The book does not meet genre expectations. There are craft issues.
2. Genre. The book is in a very obscure genre / subgenre and has no audience or a very difficult to reach audience.
3. Cover. The cover is not competitive. It does not signal genre. It is amateurish.
4. Blurb. The blurb is not compelling. There is no hook.
5. Categories. The categories are wrong. 
6. The preview. There are too many errors and the story lags. There is no compelling opening to hook readers into clicking purchase.
7. Lack of reviews. The author has not done their research and found where they can ask for reviews in return for free copies. They have no organized beta reader group or ARC system in place. They have not found book blogs to send their book for a possible review. 
8. No early sales. This is a hard one but it is possible, if an author plays their cards right, to generate sales during a debut. They have to have a social media platform already created and have people ready to buy those first copies. It can and is done every day by debut authors who have done their homework.

If the author treats this as a business and attends to the factors listed above, they have a better chance of getting Amazon's algorithm notice. If an author writes a book with no plan and then posts it on Amazon with no editing, home made cover, and no way of getting reviews or have no sales generated from outside Amazon, of course the book likely won't sell. I think there are a lot of books out there that do not sell for lack of professionalism on the part of the author, whether its professionalism in craft or marketing.

Unless an author is a total outlier with magic pixie dust falling on their head from above, if they simply put a book on Amazon, they really can't expect it to sell.

YMMV


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Sela said:


> I disagree with this.
> 
> I say get rid of individual curation entirely except for purchasing decisions for imprints. But when it comes to discoverability, offer curation that is done by algorithm. Pure unadulterated computer algorithm generated curation. BY that I mean no individual at a retailer picking books to recommend based on their own taste and notion of 'quality'. And I say that as an author who has benefitted from that kind of individual curation. I was happy to get that individual attention on Apple but I can see how, if I hadn't received it, my book would likely still not be selling on Apple.
> 
> ...


And why oh why do people continue to believe that only Amazon has this? I don't get it. I get the Kobo recommended emails. There is an alsobot strip at Kobo. Ditto Google Play. And B&N. Dunno about Apple. I don't have any iThings.

Each of those sites has its own algorithms that are NOT the same as Amazon's, but that can be played. Price pulsing, for example, still works very well on B&N.

The things about business & quality have nothing to do with platform. If you do all those things, your books will rise in the other stores as well...

Oh, wait. Sometimes it just doesn't catch on, even if you do all the right things.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> Amazon's keywords actually WORK. Other stores either don't have any way for you to use keywords, or in the case of Nook, they have keywords and then they don't actually index them. So your book isn't even searchable by the keywords you input there.


I'll just take this as an example. If you think Amazon's antiquated and broken keyword system gives them a leg up on search, especially compared to Google's search algorithm (which is the main tool used in Play discoverability), maybe you should take a step back and reevaluate. I mean does it make sense to you that Amazon's keyword and search system, which people have to manipulate by stuffing keywords in the title just so they can get a somewhat relevant keyword ranking, is superior to Google's search algo?

Here's the difference between the way discoverability on Amazon and Play works. Amazon utilizes a browsing discoverability system (of which, the search function is by far the weakest link) that concentrates on churn. It takes a snapshot of the most popular books that a customer may be interested in and serves those books to them. Google's discoverability system takes their search algorithm and the data profile they have on each person and uses them to serve each customer with the most relevant books based on search terms. This is the reason sales on Play are steady while Amazon suffers all the cliffs. You can say one system is better than the other based on taste, but I personally like Play's system better as an author because my sales never die. They stay steady or grow. Amazon is better because of their email blasts and ability internal promotional opportunities, but that has nothing to do with the discoverability system itself.


----------



## 555aaa (Jan 28, 2014)

Books linger around the two million ranking because.... it's a RANKING system. Mathematically, most books HAVE to have a bad rating.  And the more that the system that 'recommends' books uses rankings, the more the distribution of sales in the population of books gets skewed.  There's only 100 books in the top 100. That's what the top 100 means. So the more books that get added, the worse off most books will be. And there's like 5x as many print books as ebooks at Amazon.

When this whole indie revolution thing came out, everyone hoped that there'd be this explosion of new and diverse creative output. But what has evolved is a system where authors have to write to the mass market. Amazon is right there in the eye of the vortex of that mass market. That's where they want to be, so the discovery model skews towards a distribution which is winner take all.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> And why oh why do people continue to believe that only Amazon has this? I don't get it. I get the Kobo recommended emails. There is an alsobot strip at Kobo. Ditto Google Play. And B&N. Dunno about Apple. I don't have any iThings.
> 
> Each of those sites has its own algorithms that are NOT the same as Amazon's, but that can be played. Price pulsing, for example, still works very well on B&N.
> 
> ...


That's absolutely true -- sometimes a book catches even when you do nothing right and conversely, a book doesn't catch on even when you do everything right.

If you're arguing that Apple or Kobo or Google Play's algorithms are as extensive or as good as Amazon's, well, I don't think I can agree with you. I think the variability between Amazon and other retailers for the same author suggests that all platforms and algorithms are not equal.

I want the other retailers to succeed. I think its far better for indies to have a competitive market. I think it's a smarter business strategy to be in wide distribution and to not rely on a single retailer for their livelihood. However, I don't feel that Apple or GP or Kobo is truly competitive with Amazon -- yet. I hope they will.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2015)

There once was a grasshopper in a mountain valley who was merrily munching the villager's wheat crop. It was mid-summer, and the winter wheat was just about ready to harvest.

He looked up the mountain slope and saw swarms of bees, busily pollinating the sagebrush, lavender, and wild dandelions. Unlike the grasshopper, who ate at his leisure, the bees worked very hard and produced very little.

"Hey bees," said the grasshopper. "What are you doing?"

"We're making honey," they said.

"Honey? What's that?"

"It's sweet and nourishing, and lasts forever. It will get us through the long, hard winter, which will soon be upon us."

The grasshopper laughed. "Who cares about the winter when there's enough wheat for all of us to eat our fill? You'd be a fool not to fill your belly with it."

"But you didn't prepare that wheat," the bees said. "It was prepared by someone else. One day, the wheat will be gone, and you won't have anything to get you through the long winter."

"You know, you're right," said the grasshopper. "How can I make some of this honey?"

"You have to make it flower by flower," said the bees. "No one is going to hand it to you. It's hard work, and doesn't produce immediate results, but look at how many flowers there are, just waiting to be pollinated! Fly as far and as wide as you can, giving individual attention to each one, and they will give you what you need to make your honey, which will last you through the long winter."

So the grasshopper tried it. But after a few half-hearted attempts, he gave up.

"The flowers aren't even trying to compete with the wheat," he said. "Here is so much food, handed so readily to me, but all the flowers give me is this nectar and this nasty pollen. Do they expect me to do everything myself? There's no way this can continue. The wheat field will just keep getting bigger, until the sagebrush and lavender and dandelions and other weeds are all gone."

Then a swarm of locusts came and began to ravage the wheat field. The grasshopper ate faster and faster, knowing that if he slowed down, someone else would get the wheat before him.

"Now the flowers definitely can't compete!" he said. "Look at how many locusts there are. How can the sagebrush and lavender and dandelions possibly feed us all? They're not even trying! I feel sorry for the bees, because they're going to starve. I mean, if I can barely get enough with all these locusts flying about, the bees must be starving."

The bees, of course, paid the grasshopper no mind. And when the harvest was over, and the wheat was stored up in the storehouses where the locusts couldn't get them, the bees flew higher up the mountain still, to the meadows above the treeline where the wildflowers grew in abundance.

"The bees are gone," said the grasshopper. "I'm starving, and so are they. Poor bees."

Then the winter came. The grasshopper, now starving, wandered the empty fields looking in vain for something to eat. He chanced upon the beehive and stumbled to the entrance.

"P-p-p-please, may I come in from the c-c-c-cold?" he asked the bees.

"Certainly, friend!" said the bees. "Come in and warm yourself up!"

The grasshopper came in and stared in astonishment at what he saw. The honeycomb was full to bursting with honey of every kind, from the sagebrush and lavender, from the clover and the wildflowers, from the bindweed and mallow and dandelions and all the other plants that couldn't "compete" with the wheat while it was in season. A solitary tear came to the grasshopper's eye at the beauteous bounty laid out before him.

"Where did all this come from?" he asked. "When the locusts came, I thought you had starved!"

"No," said the bees. "Unlike you, who only ate what was given to you, we went wide and made this honey ourselves, one flower at a time. Like the villagers, who only made the wheat for themselves and not for you, we too have stored up food for ourselves. And though we went far and wide to get it, it doesn't matter where it came from, because now it is here, stored up safely for ourselves to keep us through the winter."

"Can I have some?" the grasshopper asked.

"No," said the bees, "because the analogy has already been pushed past the breaking point, and Joe Vasicek needs to do other things right now. Sucks to be you."

Moral of the story: grasshoppers get sales, but bees build a readership. If you want people to be reading your books five, ten, or twenty years from now, focus on readers, not on algorithms.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> There once was a grasshopper in a mountain valley who was merrily munching the villager's wheat crop. It was mid-summer, and the winter wheat was just about ready to harvest.
> 
> Moral of the story: if you want to get through the long hard winter, be a bee, not a grasshopper.


I loved the story.

It was great.

But I am not the grasshopper in your analogy. I am preparing, my friend.

I could write a whole story about a little worker bee that prepared the wrong way and made assumptions about honey that never came true--and it might not be as good a story as the one you wrote...but it would be more accurate a metaphor.



Keep the stories coming...


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> I loved the story.
> 
> It was great.
> 
> ...


There are honeybees, there are carpenter bees, there are bumblebees, and then there are hornets and yellow jackets and...

Yeah, analogy stretched to the breaking point. Time to do other things.


----------



## 555aaa (Jan 28, 2014)

You know, the whole kindle thing feels a lot like the iPod. Remember when that was the hot thing? This dedicated, single-purpose device that was very good at what it does? It was (is) tethered to a proprietary storefront that dominated its market. There were all these competitors (the Zune? Remember that?) that never went anywhere. 

Where are you now, iPod? I have a couple in the house, but I forget where they are.

Hey Joe, all (almost all) our bees died this year.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joe Vasicek said:


> There are honeybees, there are carpenter bees, there are bumblebees, and then there are hornets and yellow jackets and...
> 
> Yeah, analogy stretched to the breaking point. Time to do other things.


BTW I really did love the story, I wasn't joking.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2015)

555aaa said:


> Hey Joe, all (almost all) our bees died this year.


Oh dear. Colony collapse disorder does throw a kink into the analogy...



gorvnice said:


> BTW I really did love the story, I wasn't joking.


Hey, no problem. I'm a writer--it's what I do.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Joe Vasicek said:


> "Can I have some?" the grasshopper asked.
> 
> "No," said the bees, "because the analogy has already been pushed past the breaking point, and Joe Vasicek needs to do other things right now. Sucks to be you."
> 
> Moral of the story: grasshoppers get sales, but bees build a readership. If you want people to be reading your books five, ten, or twenty years from now, focus on readers, not on algorithms.


That's a variation on the little red hen fable, I think. 

We all want to win readers/customers. Algorithms get your book in front of them. If an author writes a book that the reader loves, it will hopefully make them a repeat or loyal reader. But you have to get your books in front of those readers in the first place. That is where a discoverability engine comes into play. That is where algorithms come into play.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2015)

Sela said:


> That's a variation on the little red hen fable, I think.
> 
> We all want to win readers/customers. Algorithms get your book in front of them. If an author writes a book that the reader will love, they will hopefully make them a repeat or loyal reader. But you have to get your books in front of those readers in the first place. That is where a discoverability engine comes into play. That is where algorithms come into play.


Algorithms are part of it. But readers were discovering great books long before the algorithms suggested books for them to read.

Conventions, readings, street teams, email newsletters, giveaways, blogs, social media, getting out and talking with people--and of course writing a fantastic book that people are going to want to talk about and share. There are a lot of things we can do to increase discoverability that don't depend on the algorithms.


----------



## Guest (Oct 2, 2015)

karenharley said:


> My, this thread has evolved. That was exquisite, Joe V. The moral of the story I get is, see what happens when threads aren't locked.


Yes indeed. And in that spirit, I'm just going to drop this here:






Good night.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Joe Vasicek said:


> Algorithms are part of it. But readers were discovering great books long before the algorithms suggested books for them to read.
> 
> Conventions, readings, street teams, email newsletters, giveaways, blogs, social media, getting out and talking with people--and of course writing a fantastic book that people are going to want to talk about and share. There are a lot of things we can do to increase discoverability that don't depend on the algorithms.


I agree that there are a lot of things to do besides getting your book some algorithm love. I would never suggest that algorithms are the be all and end all of book selling. They are one component of reaching your audience.

All those things you mention can be useful in selling your book, but Amazon has far more customers than any individual author can hope to reach through those means you mentioned.

For example, I write in a genre with indie books that have sold 10 million copies. So I know that there are potentially 10M readers out there who might like my books. How do I reach those 10 millions potential readers or even a sliver of that audience?

Going to conventions, doing readings, have a street team, doing giveaways or sending out my newsletter -- those work but are all very limited in comparison to the actual audience that exists for books like mine. I have little hope of reaching more than a thousand or five using those means you list. I have lots of Facebook likes, but of course only 10% ever see any of my posts. I have seven thousand email subscribers but when I send out an email, only a fraction see my email or open it. I have a street team but it's small and while they help during a release, they are a small number. Conventions are for superfans and for a few authors. I have never gone to one. I don't see the value because of the cost. I think Facebook ads are a better investment but YMMV.

Even if I do all those things, I might reach up to 10K potential readers during a promo or release but I know there are 1000x the number of potential readers who might like my books. That's where Amazon's algorithms kick in. That's the value of algorithm love. They get my book in front of readers who are looking for books like mine and Amazon has a LOT of readers. They have big data. So if their algorithms see that my books are being bought by readers who like those big mega selling books, they will be sure to try and sell them to those readers.

Algorithms will not trump a book that readers want to read but they take a book with an audience and get it in front of them better than others I have experienced.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

karenharley said:


> My, this thread has evolved. That was exquisite, Joe V. The moral of the story I get is, see what happens when threads aren't locked.


Or maybe . . . see what happens when people can debate intelligently and courteously so that fights don't break out forcing the thread to be locked.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Going to link to a post here that gives even a bit more data about the relative sizes of the stores. In the original OP, they were under the impression that it took 3000 sales to hit #1 in Kobo. But by the end, we realized a mistake had been made and in actuality the book hit #1 after approximately 215 sales.

215 sales on Amazon will get you to a rank of just about #500 in the overall store. And to hit #1 at Amazon? You need to get 7,000 sales in a day...
http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,223356.0.html

After the revision in Kobo numbers, the OP's new percentage breakdown estimates of the relative sizes of each store began to match what we have been suspecting, close to Data Guy and Forbes and the like, with Amazon hovering at about 70%.

Now, the OP involved some guesswork, but there was some thought put into it. And I think, if anything the poster's estimates verged on the optimistic side for stores like iBooks. That being the case, it's still very conceivable that Amazon is coming in around 80% of the market.

We definitely need more hard numbers about iBooks rankings to understand more.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> These are statements made without any evidence on your part. Please, I'm happy to see any objective reasons you have as to why Author Earnings' findings are incorrect, and please--back it up with some data. Raw numbers or industry reports. Because I've seen no hard evidence from you or Briteka to back up your statements.





Mercia McMahon said:


> This was *not a new discovery by Data Guy*, *but Author Earnings* finally giving up on their misleading conclusions. From the outset their purpose has been to say "indies are doing better than the Big Five" despite a *big segment of the pie-chart belonging to Amazon Publishing* which makes clear that for eBooks it is a Big Six. More to the point only the Random Penguin outsell Amazon Publishing (on Amazon) so they are the Big Two.


The evidence comes from Author Earnings themselves from Day One onwards. In the pre-KU days it looked like with a statistician on board they could make something of the Author Earnings reports, although they already needed to factor out the Kindle First effect. KU wrecked the reports and KU2 buried them. Data Guy has got more engaged recently with his critics, because he knows that few remain interested other than the fan-boys the reports are written to succour.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> The evidence comes from Author Earnings themselves from Day One onwards. In the pre-KU days it looked like with a statistician on board they could make something of the Author Earnings reports, although they already needed to factor out the Kindle First effect. KU wrecked the reports and KU2 buried them. Data Guy has got more engaged recently with his critics, because he knows that few remain interested other than the fan-boys the reports are written to succour.


So once again, you've made no cogent argument. Just repeated your belief that Data Guy's numbers and analysis isn't worthwhile.

It's fine that you hold this opinion, but you can't expect to be taken seriously when you refuse to back up your opinion with any meaningful argument, logic or hard numbers.

Usually how it works is if someone puts out a theory with hard numbers, you combat that theory by showing competing evidence or debunking their numbers and methodology by pointing out, in detail, where they went wrong.

You haven't done any of those things. All you've done is said you disagree, but you can't show your reasoning.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> So once again, you've made no cogent argument. Just repeated your belief that Data Guy's numbers and analysis isn't worthwhile.


No I stated that it could have been made worthwhile before KU. That discoverability knees-up that you praise KU for repeatedly in this thread is a major problem for taking any meaningful statistics from Author Earnings because it ruins their prime methodology of guessing incomes from rank. Under KU1 and KU2 that rank boost may be given to a book that the down-loader never opens and so the publisher makes zero income from that part of their ranking. Until Amazon drop ranking boosts for downloads the Author Earnings income reports are meaningless as their main calculation is based on being able to guess sales income from sales ranking. As KU2 is encouraging long-form texts back into Select the problem has intensified.

It was Russ Grandietti, Senior VP for Kindle Content who claimed that Amazon Publishing was 2nd in the store. He did not say behind the Random Penguin, who who else could be the top-selling publisher? I can't find the citation: I thought it was in the Jan 2015 DBW piece but its not, maybe in a longer report of that address and pretty much buried the income aspect of Author Earnings.

Hugh Howey's executive summaries on Author Earnings reports have from the outset played down Amazon Publishing. Their initial large-scale report  [URL=http://authorearnings]http://authorearnings.com/report/the-50k-report/[/url] gave Amazon Publishing at 7%, SMP at 18% and the Big Five at 39%. In summary Hugh spins this as:


> The picture emerging from relative ranking on Amazon bestseller lists is that self-published authors have captured a large piece of Amazon's total market share, more than any other single publisher and often more than all five major publishers combined. Looking at daily sales rankings for 54,000+ titles reaches well beyond outliers and beyond even what might be considered midlist e-books.


Having said that Amazon Publishing are selling one book to every four sold by the Big Five (i.e., less than one book per Big Five publisher per Amazon Publishing sale) then why talk of a Big Five and not resurrect the nomenclature of Big Six?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> No I stated that it could have been made worthwhile before KU. That discoverability knees-up that you praise KU for repeatedly in this thread is a major problem for taking any meaningful statistics from Author Earnings because it ruins their prime methodology of guessing incomes from rank. Under KU1 and KU2 that rank boost may be given to a book that the down-loader never opens and so the publisher makes zero income from that part of their ranking. Until Amazon drop ranking boosts for downloads the Author Earnings income reports are meaningless as their main calculation is based on being able to guess sales income from sales ranking. As KU2 is encouraging long-form texts back into Select the problem has intensified.
> 
> It was Russ Grandietti, Senior VP for Kindle Content who claimed that Amazon Publishing was 2nd in the store. He did not say behind the Random Penguin, who who else could be the top-selling publisher? I can't find the citation: I thought it was in the Jan 2015 DBW piece but its not, maybe in a longer report of that address and pretty much buried the income aspect of Author Earnings.
> 
> ...


It seems to me that you are conflating two issues. The first issue is whether KU has made it impossible for Data Guy to create a realistic model for sales numbers and ranking estimates. From reading DG's explanation of his analysis, I didn't have a problem with how he factored in average page reads to account for KU borrows.

Not every book that is calculated for sales ranking is in KU, so you can look at what it takes from a pure sales perspective to hit a given rank.

We have a lot of data on this. The fact that a borrow is weighted equal to a sale is not something I particularly like, but we've been able to create decent enough models to account for it (usually sales/borrows comes out to about 50-50 for most books in KU).

My point is, you're just flat wrong that DG's analysis is broken because of KU. KU adds an extra wrinkle, but DG has come up with a formula that accounts for the page reads and creates an average that works to fit the model. Again, if you don't like his formula, please address the formula directly and specifically tell me why it fails.

Are you even aware that he's created such a formula to account for "ghost borrows" and page reads? (I cut and pasted DG's theory and formula in the post directly following this one fyi)

And again, not every book in Amazon's store is in KU, so we can still model sales ranks and numbers off of non KU books and compare and contrast with KU books, thus making a model that roughly correlates to reality. Is it perfect? No. But it's far from useless, and I believe it's close enough to be of great use to us.

Your second point has to do with Amazon's imprint and its effect on the overall store. You seem to be saying that DG and Hugh are downplaying Amazon's imprint's success. I don't see that as being the case. In fact, in the latest report, they clearly highlighted the success that Amazon's own books are having in the store. I don't see what that has to do with the topic at hand.

If Amazon's imprint is having uncommon success in the store, if they in fact have become The Big 6, I don't understand how that makes Author Earnings useless. In point of fact, the only reason you even think that is because Author Earnings pointed it out to you.

You can't say their data is useless and then use pieces of their data to argue your own point. If their data is that useless, then any insights you've gleaned from it would be similarly useless.

But again, you know that their data and models work. They tell a story you don't particularly find appealing, but that's not enough reason to dismiss their work out of hand. If you want to argue against their model, then put DG's model and mathematical formula on display in this thread, take it apart and show us why it's so wrong.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

*BTW, I did decide to dig up Data Guy's formula. So if you want to say his data is useless, please critique the following with some hard data of your own, pointing out EXACTLY where his formula falls apart...
*
Traditionally-published authors and Amazon-published authors get the full sale price for each KU download. So for AE purposes, we just needed to calculate KENP payouts for indies.

We knew that our September 2015 spider run collected the details of 60.9% of Amazon's daily paid downloads (direct sales+KU borrows), of which a total of 245,000 were of indie books in KU. We knew that our data set represented 60.9% of the total, because we knew which ranks our spider captured the sales from, and which it didn't. We treat the other 39.1% it didn't capture as being distributed similarly -- which is the maximum-likelihood hypothesis, absent any evidence or compelling argument to the contrary.

For September, this meant that there were:

402,300 daily paid downloads of indie books in KU

Some were direct sales, some were KENP-compensated downloads. For our charts to be accurate, we had to separately calculate the author earnings from each.

We already knew the regular page counts of each of the books in our data set (it's one of the pieces of data grabbed by the spider -- shown for all books in column AD of our September 2015 spreadsheet). So the only remaining parameters we needed for our model were:

-- KUBVB%: the Average borrow-vs-buy percentage for KU indies

-- KENPIF: Average pagecount-to-KENP inflation factor

-- KURT%: Average KU read-through percentage for a borrowed indie book

For KUBVB%, a Kboards poll had given us a starting point of 50% borrows/50% buys, which we later validated to within a few percent against Amazon's KU 1.0 payout and pot size announcement.

The switch to KU 2.0 changed author compensation, obviously, but there's no real reason for it to change reader behavior. So we stuck with 50/50.

For KENPIF, I've seen it vary widely (my own books average 1.9), but most indies are reporting an KU-to-KENP ratio between 1.5 and 2.0. I plugged in 1.6.

For KURT%, taken on its own all we can say for sure is that it'll lie somewhere between 0% and 100%... which is hardly helpful.

But here's the kicker:

We also know from Amazon's July KU 2.0 announcement that the total Kindle pot size was $11,500,000 and that the per KENP payout was $0.00578, so we also know the following must be true:

(KU indie paid downloads * regular page count of each) x KUBVB% x KENPIF x KURT% x $0.00578 = $11,500,000

So plug in any reasonable estimate for KENPIF, and the above the formula gives you the corresponding KURT%.

And even better, any combination of KENPIF x KURT% that gets you to the $11,500,000 payout will give us the correct indie KU author earnings, whether it's a KENPIF of 2.0 multiplied by a KURT% of 68%, or a KENPIF of 1.43 multiplied by a KURT% of 95%, or anything in between. For the spreadsheet, we went with a KENPIF of 1.6, and a KURT% of 85%, which hit the $11,500,000 right on the nose. But if you don't like those numbers, feel free to plug in your own into the spreadsheet and let it recalculate. As long as the combination results in $11,500,000 of KU page-based payouts, it won't change author earnings... or anything else, for that matter.

LINK TO FULL POST: http://authorearnings.com/calculating-indie-author-earnings-under-ku-2-0/


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Only if your books are already selling well enough to be pushed by those algorithms. Otherwise, they your keep books _away_ from your potential readers.
> 
> If you have a thousand fans eager to buy your next book the day it comes out, you'll probably find many more as the algorithms see high sales and start pushing the book to others. But you first need to find those thousand fans when you're a new writer whose books are not being pushed to them, and rankings are down in the millions a few weeks after release.


Books can start getting pushed through the internal Amazon machine with just a handful of sales in the early going. You don't need thousands or even hundreds of fans lined up waiting to get the machine to start promoting your book.

What you do need, is a book that fits into a fairly popular genre/niche and your branding and overall content (including metadata) needs to resemble books that are similar and are fairing well in the store.

The machine is trying to recommend books to people who liked similar work. Is it perfect? No, but it's a damn sight better than anything else we've seen yet.

If your book is either unlucky (poor timing), badly branded, or perhaps not written for a popular niche or genre--then you very well might find that book fading into the millions in the rankings before long. All of us have experienced that phenomenon who've written for long enough. But just because you have a dud (or two or three) doesn't mean that the system is failed.

Amazon doesn't owe me or you a living. They've set up the best possible discovery system--not a perfect one--and we need to do the rest, which means feeding the machine what it likes.

If you don't enjoy that or don't want to do it, that's a decision you've made. Which is fine. But it's not a problem with Amazon's ebook store.


----------



## Desert Rose (Jun 2, 2015)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Only if your books are already selling well enough to be pushed by those algorithms. Otherwise, they your keep books _away_ from your potential readers.
> 
> If you have a thousand fans eager to buy your next book the day it comes out, you'll probably find many more as the algorithms see high sales and start pushing the book to others. But you first need to find those thousand fans when you're a new writer whose books are not being pushed to them, and rankings are down in the millions a few weeks after release.


Exactly. Algos that only push already-discovered books do not do anything to help discoverability.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Dragovian said:


> Exactly. Algos that only push already-discovered books do not do anything to help discoverability.


See my post above. That is absolutely not what the algo's do.

If you don't want to write popular books, don't want to write genre fiction, don't study the market or try to understand what the Amazon machine rewards in terms of content, branding, metadata and release schedules, then that is a decision you've made.

It's not Amazon's job to sell books that customers don't want. If the customers aren't interested in the kinds of books you write, then they won't buy it and Amazon won't sell it.

If you are writing books customers want but they can't find you, I submit that your problem lies in branding, metadata or some other misunderstanding of the market that is keeping your books out of customers' hands.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> For KUBVB%, a Kboards poll had given us a starting point of 50% borrows/50% buys, which we later validated to within a few percent against Amazon's KU 1.0 payout and pot size announcement.
> 
> The switch to KU 2.0 changed author compensation, obviously, but there's no real reason for it to change reader behavior. So we stuck with 50/50.


I kindly omitted recalling that the entire statistical basis of post-KU AE was one brief kboards post from Hugh Howey. When several people responded in the next day or so it seems to be half and half sales and borrows that is what AE has worked on ever since. The problem is the numerous counter examples including the NYT publicised counter-example of HM Ward. You cannot work out any income from sales rankings if you guess that everyone has a 50.50 split. To get technical: Data Guy deals with statistical matters on a verificationist principle that when faced with a problem you arrive at a solution. That is so 19th century. Anything worth its salt nowadays works on a non-falsificationist principle where you seek to falsify your solution until you arrive at a solution that cannot be easily falsified. AE is good enough to provide enough evidence to keep those who already believe firm in their belief, but it is not the sort of statistics that will convince anyone who examines the basis for their numbers from a non-falsificationist perspective.

AE never produced good statistics, but there was hope for making the sales to income guess reasonable until Amazon began using sales rank to boost the then newly-launched KU. No skin off Amazon's nose as they do not want us to know these sales statistics.

Even within the weak AE statistics Hugh Howey tried to argue against his own pie-chart. Gorvince, you have a short memory, this sequence of comments is your response to my comment that the Amazon Publishing data from AE was not new, just newly acknowledged in the executive summary.

Govrince, I'll leave you to your fandom, but next time you complain that Big Pub ignores AE statistics you'll know why.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia, you are arguing philosophy, not statistics.  Literally.  

As far as I can tell, you're using philosophical terms to address mathematical models.  

I think if you want to combat Data Guy's data, you should address the statistical issues with his data.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Only if your books are already selling well enough to be pushed by those algorithms. Otherwise, they your keep books _away_ from your potential readers.
> 
> If you have a thousand fans eager to buy your next book the day it comes out, you'll probably find many more as the algorithms see high sales and start pushing the book to others. But you first need to find those thousand fans when you're a new writer whose books are not being pushed to them, and rankings are down in the millions a few weeks after release.


Yes, but there are ways you can boost visibility. KU borrows help with that, as does advertising. Most of the ads that will accept books without a high review count are pretty much Amazon-only. But you don't have that with the other vendors, unless you can get Bookbub.

Seems the best thing to do would be go in Select first, advertise and get your review count up. When you have enough reviews to get noticed by Bookbub, that's probably the time to experiment with going wide.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Perry Constantine said:


> Yes, but there are ways you can boost visibility. KU borrows help with that, as does advertising. Most of the ads that will accept books without a high review count are pretty much Amazon-only. But you don't have that with the other vendors, unless you can get Bookbub.
> 
> Seems the best thing to do would be go in Select first, advertise and get your review count up. When you have enough reviews to get noticed by Bookbub, that's probably the time to experiment with going wide.


I don't believe KU actually does anything if you're not already selling. If your book is invisible on Amazon, it'll be just as invisible in KU. KU by itself doesn't offer any extra visibility.


----------



## Davout73 (Feb 20, 2014)

Mercia McMahon said:


> ... but next time you complain that Big Pub ignores AE statistics you'll know why.


Big Pub ignores AE because the results AE produces do not jive with what they think the book market is. The fact that Big Pub puts their faith in a reporting system that discounts the majority of ebooks sold is more than enough proof of this.

AE, and DG thru AE, has always put the data they used for each report available for download, and they've laid out their methodology for arriving at their conclusions. Disagree with them all you want, but until you dive into the same data they used and produce a different result with a reasonable methodology, all you doing is proselytizing.

AE's conclusions are wrong? Prove it.

Dav


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Davout73 said:


> Big Pub ignores AE because the results AE produces do not jive with what they think the book market is. The fact that Big Pub puts their faith in a reporting system that discounts the majority of ebooks sold is more than enough proof of this.
> 
> AE, and DG thru AE, has always put the data they used for each report available for download, and they've laid out their methodology for arriving at their conclusions. Disagree with them all you want, but until you dive into the same data they used and produce a different result with a reasonable methodology, all you doing is proselytizing.
> 
> ...


You can't prove the conclusions wrong because like all evangelists, the message is carefully curated so that the followers will spread it without question. It's quite simple, contrary to what people claim, AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market, a fraction much lower than all the other agencies that AE just can't help but call out. Nothing can be accurately concluded from the information because the data is so incomplete. It doesn't matter who collects and analyzes that data, it would be true for everyone. Except most other people KNOW this, and would not attempt to use the data to create a narrative and call out the much better data models that contradict the false ones.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Briteka said:


> I don't believe KU actually does anything if you're not already selling. If your book is invisible on Amazon, it'll be just as invisible in KU. KU by itself doesn't offer any extra visibility.


That's true. You put any old book on Amazon or in KU, with no promotion, no ARCs, no early reviews, no audience, no nothing in other words, your book will likely sink rapidly into oblivion. You need those first sales, borrows and reviews to get Amazon's algorithm love. Once you do, THEN you have proved that your book CAN move. You provide Amazon with data with which to sell your books to customers looking for books like yours.

Amazon WANTS to sell your book to customers who want to buy it, because that's how it makes money. But first, it has to know that there are customers who want to buy your book. If there are no customers who are interested in a book like yours, or your book in particular, Amazon can't force people to buy it. They can put it in front of people, but if those people don't click or read the preview or purchase, the algorithms will think there is no interest in your book and it will sink down into the depths. If there are no reviews after a period of time, Amazon algorithms will not see your book as having any readers who find it worth their time to leave a review.

An author has to think like a publisher. Do publishers run off a print copy of a book and then plop it on a shelf and leave it up to the bookstore to sell the books? NOPE. (well maybe they do but not if they think they have a bestseller they don't and it is up to the indie author to act as if their book is worth the effort) They send out ARCs months in advance. They arrange book tours. They buy paid advertising. They get competitive covers produced and have people edit the book and write copy for it. Then they pay Barnes and Noble or other retailers some up-front cash called co-op to place the book in a preferential location for greater visibility. There's probably a lot more they do in addition to this, but that should be enough to suggest that if indies want their books to be visible to Amazon algorithms, they have to do the legwork.

In other words, they do all the things that will help get the readers to notice the book once it is available and buy it.

Indies have to do the same. They should try to get early reviews, to get early sales, etc. and be as competitive as possible if they want to benefit from Amazon's algorithms.


----------



## TrevorSchmidt (Sep 23, 2015)

Sela said:


> An author has to think like a publisher. Do publishers run off a print copy of a book and then plop it on a shelf and leave it up to the bookstore to sell the books? NOPE. (well maybe they do but not if they think they have a bestseller they don't and it is up to the indie author to act as if their book is worth the effort) They send out ARCs months in advance. They arrange book tours. They buy paid advertising. They get competitive covers produced and have people edit the book and write copy for it. Then they pay Barnes and Noble or other retailers some up-front cash called co-op to place the book in a preferential location for greater visibility. There's probably a lot more they do in addition to this, but that should be enough to suggest that if indies want their books to be visible to Amazon algorithms, they have to do the legwork.


While I agree with most of what you've said, when I worked at Barnes & Noble I can tell you that only 1 in 10 books at best got any sort of promotion. Traditional publishers put all of the marketing behind the Stephen Kings, etc, that they know will provide a return. Generally we would get a new book in and plop it down in the stacks. We scanned ISBNs every month and if the book hadn't sold what amounted to about 30,000 copies in about 9 months we would pull it. If it was a mass market paperback we would strip off the cover and recycle the book for a tax write-off. If it was trade paper or hardcover we would send it back to the publisher for a refund.

The point is, the big 5 don't promote for crap unless you're a proven author and they know they'll get a return on their money. This goes double for first time authors who get a mass market deal. Based on how many stores Barnes & Noble is down to, each book would need to sell about 40 books in each store or it'll get pulled from the shelves. My store had about 100,000 to 150,000 books on the shelf at any one time. The math does not bode well.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

Um, stripping the cover was so they could send them back to the publisher for a refund as well, not a tax write-off (cheaper to recycle the book and just mail a stack of covers than a full book). Returns are one of the things that have always been harmful for trad publishers, a cost they pass on to the writers, unfortunately.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

TrevorSchmidt said:


> While I agree with most of what you've said, when I worked at Barnes & Noble I can tell you that only 1 in 10 books at best got any sort of promotion. Traditional publishers put all of the marketing behind the Stephen Kings, etc, that they know will provide a return. Generally we would get a new book in and plop it down in the stacks. We scanned ISBNs every month and if the book hadn't sold what amounted to about 30,000 copies in about 9 months we would pull it. If it was a mass market paperback we would strip off the cover and recycle the book for a tax write-off. If it was trade paper or hardcover we would send it back to the publisher for a refund.
> 
> The point is, the big 5 don't promote for crap unless you're a proven author and they know they'll get a return on their money. This goes double for first time authors who get a mass market deal. Based on how many stores Barnes & Noble is down to, each book would need to sell about 40 books in each store or it'll get pulled from the shelves. My store had about 100,000 to 150,000 books on the shelf at any one time. The math does not bode well.


Agreed, which sucks for trad pub authors and which is why I put the proviso in my statement that big pub does the legwork for books they think will be bestsellers. Same as Amazon. The algorithms promote books that are already selling so the trick for the indie author is to get those first sales so that the algorithms see that the book is selling and promote it to those customers who are most likely to want to buy that book.

Indies need to do the things that get Amazon algorithm love. Write a book with an audience. Get the book in front of that audience to get those first sales and reviews. THEN, when Amazon algorithms see your book _can_ sell and has an audience, they will start to sell your book.

I suspect so many indie books languish in the ranks because the authors have no idea what is necessary to get the attention of Amazon algorithms.

To be sure, it's not always easy to do, but if you do nothing to get your book early sales and reviews, unless you are an extreme outlier, your book will not sell.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Briteka said:


> I don't believe KU actually does anything if you're not already selling. If your book is invisible on Amazon, it'll be just as invisible in KU. KU by itself doesn't offer any extra visibility.


Yes, if you do absolutely nothing to promote your book, it may as well be invisible. But I never said "just put your book in KU and do nothing with it." So what purpose does this comment serve?


----------



## Davout73 (Feb 20, 2014)

Briteka said:


> Except most other people KNOW this, and would not attempt to use the data to create a narrative and call out the much better data models that contradict the false ones.


Well here's the thing, people say they know AE is wrong, yet when asked to show how, they can't. Or they won't. We're supposed to accept them at face value. If anything, AG and Big Pub could be looking at the data AE has pulled, and be able to say "You're wrong in your conclusions, and here's why" and they could show their work. If AE's conclusions are that wrong, it shouldn't take that much time and effort to show that, should it?

Dav


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

KU does have its own search category. I go there all the time to find new KU books by searching for keywords. I think it's inaccurate to say KU does nothing for visibility. It can't possibly display all 1 millio+ books in KU on the front page, but by using the KU search bar, I can find what I want as long as the authors have made the effort to put in keywords that'll enable me to find their stuff.


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> I think that is one reason why Apple could definitely be gaining ground. But Amazon will need to shed an awful lot of customers for things to truly change, and Apple will have to make discoverability better for the majority of authors to benefit from that shift.


Kindle books can now be read on ANY device with a downloadable app. So I assume that means iPads and iPhones too. Which means that you can own an iPhone or Samsung tablet and still buy and read from Amazon Kindle. Am I correct in inferring this? (I don't own either an iPhone or a Samsung.)

Asking this question now because I, too, have been wide, but am rethinking, because my non-Kindle sales have plummeted.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Richardcrasta said:


> Kindle books can now be read on ANY device with a downloadable app. So I assume that means iPads and iPhones too. Which means that you can own an iPhone or Samsung tablet and still buy and read from Amazon Kindle. Am I correct in inferring this? (I don't own either an iPhone or a Samsung.)
> 
> Asking this question now because I, too, have been wide, but am rethinking, because my non-Kindle sales have plummeted.


My understanding is that the Kindle app works on pretty much every device, including Apple products.


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2015)

Briteka said:


> ...It's quite simple, contrary to what people claim, *AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market*, a fraction much lower than all the other agencies that AE just can't help but call out...


Sorry if this is discussed elsewhere (I must have missed it) but if Amazon is only a tiny fraction of the ebook market, can you please tell me what retailers has the far larger portion? If Amazon is a tiny player, who are the dominant ones?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Tilly said:


> Sorry if this is discussed elsewhere (I must have missed it) but if Amazon is only a tiny fraction of the ebook market, can you please tell me what retailers has the far larger portion? If Amazon is a tiny player, who are the dominant ones?


I've not reread this thread, but AE = Author Earnings not Amazon.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Monique said:


> I've not reread this thread, but AE = Author Earnings not Amazon.


I suspect Tilly knows that. Briteka implied that AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market; that tiny fraction being Amazon. So Tilly was asking if Amazon is a tiny fraction of the market, who's got the larger portions.

That's how I read it anyway. I had a bowlful of popcorn in the way so I might have gotten it wrong.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> I suspect Tilly knows that. Briteka implied that AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market; that tiny fraction being Amazon. So Tilly was asking if Amazon is a tiny fraction of the market, who's got the larger portions.
> 
> That's how I read it anyway. I had a bowlful of popcorn in the way so I might have gotten it wrong.


Ah, could be. The quote didn't quite make sense and seemed to be citing AE=Amazon as tiny fraction. There's a big difference between owns the market and is a tiny fraction, surely, we all know the truth is in between.


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2015)

Monique said:


> I've not reread this thread, but AE = Author Earnings not Amazon.


Yes I know  but Author Earnings culls the Amazon ebook data. So I take Briteka's comment to mean that AE's data and therefore Amazon sales, are only a tiny fraction of the ebook market. Not to put words in her mouth, but if Amazon only sells a tiny fraction of all ebooks, I'd kinda like to know who does dominate the market? Or am I missing something rather obvious?


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I took the post to say the data was a tiny fraction of the market, not nec. that Amazon was a tiny fraction. Simply that the data represents a sliver of a much larger set and any broad conclusions are suspect because of that.

I don't see how anyone could make an argument that Amazon is a tiny fraction of the market. How big their share truly is and how big it globally are up for debate, but tiny fraction doesn't seem remotely possible. If someone does truly believe that, I'd also love to know why.


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2015)

Monique said:


> I took the post to say the data was a tiny fraction of the market, not nec. that Amazon was a tiny fraction. Simply that the data represents a sliver of a much larger set and any broad conclusions are suspect because of that.


That's what I'm confused about. I know AE only compare the top bestsellers within Amazon and that obviously ebook sales are a subset of total book sales that also includes paperbacks and hardbacks. But then Briteka does specifically say she is talking about ebooks and then further remarked that: _AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market, a fraction much lower than all the other agencies..._

Her comment about the AE data (ie: sales culled from Amazon) *being lowered than all the other agencies* made me assume that retailers X, Y and Z combined, are who actually dominate the ebook market, not Amazon. Which is why I wondered who the other agencies are that hold the main share?

Or am I way off target? It's morning here and I'm not fully caffeinated yet...


----------



## Rues_Corner (Feb 5, 2015)

I'll admit that I am only THIS week getting the courage to go wide...but after a ton of research it does seem fairly accurate to say that iBooks is #2 worldwide. I hope it is worth all the "hoop jumping" to expand my distribution.

I just got sick of being treated like a second class citizen on Amazon. I get that they are all-powerful - but Kindle Unlimited? Really?

Not on my watch


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Tilly, hellifiknow.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

Tilly said:


> That's what I'm confused about. I know AE only compare the top bestsellers within Amazon and that obviously ebook sales are a subset of total book sales that also includes paperbacks and hardbacks. But then Briteka does specifically say she is talking about ebooks and then further remarked that: _AE only has data for a tiny fraction of the ebook market, a fraction much lower than all the other agencies..._


Those other agencies would be those will full statistics, i.e., publishers and retailers. Author Earnings is not analysing the bestsellers on Amazon: they could do, but choose not to. They analyse on one day every few months books that are in the Top 100 of most of Amazon's categories,sub-categories, and sub-sub-categories. That weights the results against the Big Five, who tend to focus on the top-level categories. Author Earnings is designed to cheer the troops, not persuade outsiders: what is known as apologetics.

Briteka has made this point before, she is referring to an analysis of one day every few months more than it being on one retailer in one market. I agree with her.

It so happens I've just published about the holes in Author Earnings' statistics. http://mmmporium.com/ukauthorearnings


----------



## mach 5 (Dec 5, 2015)

I did really well under KU1 and rather abysmally under KU2. I will be going wide middle of the month when everything is done with its 90-period. 

I am not going wide because I will sell a lot (although once upon a time I did) on Apple, Nook, Kobo, etc., but because my Amazon readers will borrow over buy if given the option and I do not make as much on borrows as I do buy and the money on borrows dribbles in page by page per reader. So I am leaving KU to make more money on Amazon. The money I make on other platforms by being wide is "found change."

While I think KU is bad for writers, that is not a universal truth and at best is limited to "working writers." Just like the controversy with free and 99c pricing, no writer has to develop their strategy based on what is good for all authors.

That does not mean I won't try KU again, just under a different name, with a different genre, with different (longer) lengths than I currently employ and a much more targeted strategy.

Good luck to everyone however you go!


----------



## ImaWriter (Aug 12, 2015)

Richardcrasta said:


> Kindle books can now be read on ANY device with a downloadable app. So I assume that means iPads and iPhones too. Which means that you can own an iPhone or Samsung tablet and still buy and read from Amazon Kindle. Am I correct in inferring this? (I don't own either an iPhone or a Samsung.)
> 
> Asking this question now because I, too, have been wide, but am rethinking, because my non-Kindle sales have plummeted.


You are correct. I have both Apple and Samsung devices and each have the Kindle app on them.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Richardcrasta said:


> Kindle books can now be read on ANY device with a downloadable app. So I assume that means iPads and iPhones too. Which means that you can own an iPhone or Samsung tablet and still buy and read from Amazon Kindle. Am I correct in inferring this? (I don't own either an iPhone or a Samsung.)
> 
> Asking this question now because I, too, have been wide, but am rethinking, because my non-Kindle sales have plummeted.


Yep, I do about 90% of my reading on my iPhone on my kindle app.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

I always find it adorable that people think their books are so super-special that people will download yet another app just to read it instead of reading the many books the native app for thier device provide.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Vaalingrade said:


> I always find it adorable that people think their books are so super-special that people will download yet another app just to read it instead of reading the many books the native app for thier device provide.


Nope, but my promo site signup form asks what devices/apps people are reading on. I've asked the same question to 3600 people on my mailing list. What I've taken away from about 600 replies so far is that almost everyone has either a Kindle or the Kindle app on some type of device. And also that the vast majority of people read on more than one brand/type of app. The avid readers use almost everything.

The only people who seem very non-flexible about their reading habits are those who only read in paper.


----------



## mach 5 (Dec 5, 2015)

Vaalingrade said:


> I always find it adorable that people think their books are so super-special that people will download yet another app just to read it instead of reading the many books the native app for thier device provide.


How is it more "adorable" than the people who think their books are so super-special that people will pay for them when there are so many free books available?

And as Patty says, many readers use more than one app. I buy ebooks from both Amazon and Ibooks. The only thing I don't like splitting between the apps is a series. But I'll split the same author between apps. Then there are all the people who buy from one store without DRM and go through the trouble converting it in calibre or similar to get it on the device of their choice that no longer has its own store, etc. If you are satisfying a reader's need, no matter how not special your story is, that reader will jump through a hoops. (For the record, I advocate having as few hoops as possible between your reader and your buy button.)


----------

