# Has there been an algo change? Sales really low



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Is it just me? October is _dire_ on Amazon so far! October usually does really well for me.

And my free downloads are double the normal amount on GP but sales are exactly the same?

What's going on people!!


----------



## alawston (Jun 3, 2012)

My sales have been in freefall for a while due to a lack of new material, but October has been pretty bad so far for me.

Though at the same time, KU reads seem to be holding up, so it doesn't seem to be a visibility issue for me. I think I just need to get new material out.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Nope. Significantly higher than October last year, which by my standards then also wasn't bad. I'm releasing a new book next week and will do a big push for the series.

I'm having a Bookbub on 4 November on a different series.

Stuff I've been doing over the past two years is paying off: working on my mailing list and working on multiple series at the same time.

Google Play? Blah. OK, I guess at one point I would have been excited about a REALLY steady $100 per month, but no longer. I can never get that figure to budge, but at that rate, it's a good way behind Amazon US, UK, Kobo and even B&N.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Algo changes won't change sell-through. Unfortunately, Amazon just doesn't have good sell-through from permafree anymore. :/ For me, I get more than double the sell-through rate on Play than Amazon now.

I don't think there's been an algo change. Have you had a new release lately? As time goes on, it's going to be harder and harder to maintain sales on Amazon. Each month, more and more people add new books, worsening Amazon's churn-based system.


----------



## The Bass Bagwhan (Mar 9, 2014)

Briteka said:


> Algo changes won't change sell-through. Unfortunately, Amazon just doesn't have good sell-through from permafree anymore. :/ For me, I get more than double the sell-through rate on Play than Amazon now.
> 
> I don't think there's been an algo change. Have you had a new release lately? As time goes on, it's going to be harder and harder to maintain sales on Amazon. Each month, more and more people add new books, worsening Amazon's churn-based system.


Not quite relevant to the OP, but I agree that things are going to get worse and it's interesting to consider whether or not Amazon will ever introduce some kind of kulling, quality control system to limit the amount of books published (or accepted). Otherwise the future will have tens of millions of books that can clog the Search engines and become an unsustainable system. Theoretically from an IT perspective it's not a problem, but from a practical viewpoint you'd think that Amazon would want to put a cap on the amount of titles available simply to keep the shopping "experience" a good one - if that makes sense.
If you think visibility is hard now, imagine in five years time? But issues of visibility works both ways, because if Amazon decides that customers can't find their preferred titles due to over-saturation of the market, it will start swinging an axe at non-performing books.


----------



## James R Wells (May 21, 2015)

Graeme Hague said:


> Not quite relevant to the OP, but I agree that things are going to get worse and it's interesting to consider whether or not Amazon will ever introduce some kind of kulling, quality control system to limit the amount of books published (or accepted). Otherwise the future will have tens of millions of books that can clog the Search engines and become an unsustainable system. Theoretically from an IT perspective it's not a problem, but from a practical viewpoint you'd think that Amazon would want to put a cap on the amount of titles available simply to keep the shopping "experience" a good one -- if that makes sense.
> If you think visibility is hard now, imagine in five years time? But issues of visibility works both ways, because if Amazon decides that customers can't find their preferred titles due to over-saturation of the market, it will start swinging an axe at non-performing books.


The explosion in quantity of data is everywhere, and while the numbers at Amazon are big, the pace of increase at Amazon is actually slower than many other areas (consider the insane amount of video that now gets created, or files in any kind of business).

The solution in pretty much all cases is not to limit the quantity of content, but rather to find better ways of sorting through it. I predict that Amazon will provide users with improved search tools, because they want people to easily find the good stuff and thus buy it and thus $ to Amazon.

If Amazon doesn't, third parties will. If anyone here tires of that author thing, a golden business opportunity is to create apps that are very good at helping a user to find great stuff that matches their tastes. The revenue model is already in place with affiliate links.

From Amazon's point of view, it's likely far easier to accept titles and let them sink into obscurity (storage is cheap), rather than expending the effort to try to remove nonperforming titles and deal with ornery authors who get cut out.


----------



## Douglas Milewski (Jul 4, 2014)

Amazon has already implemented search tools to help the user. Their automated ranking system does the job. A few days back, there were some links to articles on Amazon A9.


----------



## Not any more (Mar 19, 2012)

What I'm waiting for is Amazon to implement a charge for publishing. I don't expect it to be very high, but enough to filter out the "publish on a whim" and stuff (scamphlets) that no one buys.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Douglas Milewski said:


> Amazon has already implemented search tools to help the user. Their automated ranking system does the job. A few days back, there were some links to articles on Amazon A9.


A9 is Amazon's advertising company that also wrote their search algo. It has nothing to do with their recommendation engine and promotional ecosystem. Unfortunately, Amazon's recommendation engine and promotional ecosystem push people towards new releases. Amazon's search engine doesn't put as much weight on new releases, but the algo is so bad, no one really uses it to find books. This is why there's so many cliffs on Amazon compared to other retailers. Unless Amazon drops their search algo completely and leases something like Google's search algo, this will continue.


----------



## North Star Plotting (Jul 11, 2015)

Yea, certainly seems like there has been algo change. Non-KU books are being pushed lower and lower. KU-enrolled books are being pushed higher. Makes sense, from Amazon's POV at least. Another way to squeeze people into KU or Bust.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

They aren't though. KU borrows are still acting as a sale for best seller lists, and they're treated as less than a sale for the Poplists. If you have a book that gets one borrow or sale a day, it's easy to see this.


----------



## EmparentingMom (Jun 20, 2011)

I've been wondering the same thing - I'm still getting some sales, but page reads on Amazon.com have really plummeted. But an algo change wouldn't affect read-through, would it? My permafree is still performing, and sales haven't really changed. So why would page reads suddenly disappear, and just in .com?


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

My sales haven't changed much, but yesterday (Sunday) I had a HUUUUGE spike in downloads of one of my permafrees.  Not sure why.  It's not even in a "hot" genre--a MG/YA title.  I'm not complaining about that, obviously... just curious as to the cause.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

James R Wells said:


> From Amazon's point of view, it's likely far easier to accept titles and let them sink into obscurity (storage is cheap), rather than expending the effort to try to remove nonperforming titles and deal with ornery authors who get cut out.


This makes sense. Gatekeepers cost money.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

No no, I'm not saying algos and read through are related at all. That is for two totally different sites. Amazon sales are down for all my books. 

Google free downloads are way way up but sales remain the same. I've been digging a bit deeper. It seems to be coming from India. The flirting games is getting 300 downloads a day there, but they don't seem to buy any books. Still on the plus side they review a lot


----------



## Guest (Oct 6, 2015)

October started off well for me (but I did a promo on the 1st). It's early days. We'll have to see how it goes.


----------



## blubarry (Feb 27, 2015)

I've noticed something off since the big shakeup a few weeks ago when the server went down. I had been humming along with my usual sales and about 125k pages read per day, but had an immediate drop of about 25-30k pages per day that finally rebounded in the last few days. I don't know that the change was related to the server issue, but the timing was odd.


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

via Imgflip Meme Maker


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

North Star Plotting said:


> Yea, certainly seems like there has been algo change. Non-KU books are being pushed lower and lower. KU-enrolled books are being pushed higher. Makes sense, from Amazon's POV at least. Another way to squeeze people into KU or Bust.


I've noticed the same effect. They seem to have changed the weighting of KU vs. non-KU books to favor the former.


----------



## anotherpage (Apr 4, 2012)

Evenstar said:


> Is it just me? October is _dire_ on Amazon so far! October usually does really well for me.
> 
> And my free downloads are double the normal amount on GP but sales are exactly the same?
> 
> What's going on people!!


Are you in KU or not with these books that you are not seeing sales on?


----------



## anotherpage (Apr 4, 2012)

Boyd said:


> I just had 2 new releases for October and it's shaping to be my best month ever. If it hadn't been for those two, it probably would have been blah- as the bulk of my sales are going to the new title.


Hey Boyd all your books are in KU. Did you ever with your series put the first book as permanent free or did you find setting it at 99 cents just as good?


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Graeme Hague said:


> Not quite relevant to the OP, but I agree that things are going to get worse and it's interesting to consider whether or not Amazon will ever introduce some kind of kulling, quality control system to limit the amount of books published (or accepted). Otherwise the future will have tens of millions of books that can clog the Search engines and become an unsustainable system. Theoretically from an IT perspective it's not a problem, but from a practical viewpoint you'd think that Amazon would want to put a cap on the amount of titles available simply to keep the shopping "experience" a good one -- if that makes sense.
> If you think visibility is hard now, imagine in five years time? But issues of visibility works both ways, because if Amazon decides that customers can't find their preferred titles due to over-saturation of the market, it will start swinging an axe at non-performing books.


The web has been growing unchecked for over two decades, so much so that we ran out of IP4 addresses in North America. There are still pages out there that were created in the 90s. They're indexed on Google, but no one will ever find them because they have no relevant content. The same is true for books. We'll quickly see 10 million, then 20 million. That number will continue to explode.

Amazon has no reason to police their content, because anything that isn't top notch will quickly fall to the bottom. Instead of a book languishing at 2 million rank, it will be 20 million. That doesn't make any difference to Amazon. Things will get more competitive for authors, but those writing great books, and writing them to market will still sell.

This is why it is so critical for every author to build a following. If you have a fan base, then people will always be interested in your back list. At any time you can run a sale on a 5 year old series, and breathe life back into it.


----------



## romanticauthor (Apr 17, 2014)

I've noticed a decline since KU2, and it's only getting worse for me month by month. I unchecked the boxes to renew my books in KU2, and I've seen even more of a decline since then. I've still got a ways to go until they are free to be placed in other retail outlets, but I'm really looking forward to doing so.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Chris Fox said:


> The web has been growing unchecked for over two decades, so much so that we ran out of IP4 addresses in North America. There are still pages out there that were created in the 90s. They're indexed on Google, but no one will ever find them because they have no relevant content. The same is true for books. We'll quickly see 10 million, then 20 million. That number will continue to explode.
> 
> Amazon has no reason to police their content, because anything that isn't top notch will quickly fall to the bottom. Instead of a book languishing at 2 million rank, it will be 20 million. That doesn't make any difference to Amazon. Things will get more competitive for authors, but those writing great books, and writing them to market will still sell.
> 
> This is why it is so critical for every author to build a following. If you have a fan base, then people will always be interested in your back list. At any time you can run a sale on a 5 year old series, and breathe life back into it.


This very much sounds like "quality rises to the top", and I very much disagree with that. As someone who reads quite a bit, I can say without a doubt that there's very little difference in quality between the one romance book released today that will go on to become a best seller and the other 100 released today that will sell ten copies in their first month only to fall to the bottom. Amazon's not a good gatekeeper for books. Their review system is horribly flawed, and the subpar books rise to the top of lists everyday. The new gatekeepers will be promo sites like Bookbub, which will fill the role that trade-publishers used to fill for readers. Amazon needs to first fix their review system. Something about it turns reviewers off.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

That's definitely not what I'm saying. Quality is meaningless if no one knows about it. Marketing causes things to rise to the top. Amazon doesn't care who successfully markets a book. As far as they're concerned that's our responsibility.

Fixing their review system will do nothing to sell more books for the average author. What_ will_ sell more books is building a large audience that will propel each new release to immediate success. We can't control Amazon's algos, but we can take advantage of them by building the largest audience possible.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

Briteka said:


> This very much sounds like "quality rises to the top", and I very much disagree with that. As someone who reads quite a bit, I can say without a doubt that there's very little difference in quality between the one romance book released today that will go on to become a best seller and the other 100 released today that will sell ten copies in their first month only to fall to the bottom. Amazon's not a good gatekeeper for books. Their review system is horribly flawed, and the subpar books rise to the top of lists everyday.


I agree that the 'marketplace' has never been a mechanism which allows the cream to rise to the top. The only thing that makes good books stand out is when individual reviewers and critics bother to point them out. If the critics and reviewers refuse to do their job, then good books die. If a system develops in which Amazon has 20 million books in KU, the critics are going to be utterly overwhelmed by the sheer mountain of crap that will need wading through, and they'll be likely to give up. Even now, book bloggers say they're overwhelmed with too much to review. With 20 millions books in KU, Amazon's algos will be so deluged with crap they'll no longer be able to find any good books for you, either.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

bpmanuel said:


> With Flirting Games on Wattpad, have you noticed an uptick on your sell through rate? I noticed your views aren't huge, though, and have you had it featured yet there? I was wondering what sales changes and effects you've had.


I don't really use Wattpad to its real potential. I just don't have the time. I put books up there for short periods then take them down again (that's why views are low). I know I should engage more, and I do mean to, but it just doesn't happen. I'm the same with facebook. I know its a good tool, but I simply don't have time. I'd prefer to be here with what I do have.



Briteka said:


> Amazon's not a good gatekeeper for books. Their review system is horribly flawed, and the subpar books rise to the top of lists everyday. The new gatekeepers will be promo sites like Bookbub, which will fill the role that trade-publishers used to fill for readers. Amazon needs to first fix their review system. Something about it turns reviewers off.


I don't think lots of reviews really makes a difference. Case in point is Google Play, I have over 9000 reviews there for the same book that has only 80 on Amazon, but the downloads are much the same.



kalel said:


> Are you in KU or not with these books that you are not seeing sales on?


None of my books are in KU. I think that might be part of the problem... But I'm not a fan of it


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

brkingsolver said:


> What I'm waiting for is Amazon to implement a charge for publishing. I don't expect it to be very high, but enough to filter out the "publish on a whim" and stuff (scamphlets) that no one buys.


When I first heard about KDP back in late 2009 (it was DTP then), I couldn't believe Amazon allowed someone like me to have a book for sale on their site right next to the Pattersons of the world. I remember researching like a mad woman, expecting to find that original information was wrong because there just _had _to be a charge for such a thing. I have never gotten over the feeling it's too good to be true, even though it is true.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

It's going to get harder for authors, but that's just like any maturing industry.

Prepare.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

I'm kind of curious who gets to decide what's good and what's not good. Entertainment is subjective. I would rather watch paint dry than things like Dancing With the Stars, Scandal, Grey's Anatomy, Glee, etc. Does that mean those are terrible shows or are they just not for me? People have different taste. Quality is entirely subjective. I love shark movies, for example. Many of the movies I love in that genre (they can't all be Jaws) are subjectively terrible. That doesn't mean I'm not entertained. On the flip side, people point to "great" books that you couldn't pay me to wade through. Other than outright scammers and scrapers, what is the definition for quality? Who gets to decide what is quality? Just because you don't like it that doesn't mean someone else won't or it's terrible.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Chris Fox said:


> The web has been growing unchecked for over two decades, so much so that we ran out of IP4 addresses in North America. There are still pages out there that were created in the 90s. They're indexed on Google, but no one will ever find them because they have no relevant content. The same is true for books. We'll quickly see 10 million, then 20 million. That number will continue to explode.
> 
> Amazon has no reason to police their content, because anything that isn't top notch will quickly fall to the bottom. Instead of a book languishing at 2 million rank, it will be 20 million. That doesn't make any difference to Amazon. Things will get more competitive for authors, but those writing great books, and writing them to market will still sell.
> 
> This is why it is so critical for every author to build a following. If you have a fan base, then people will always be interested in your back list. At any time you can run a sale on a 5 year old series, and breathe life back into it.


Agree.

A couple more thoughts...

Amazon is no longer a store. It is an algo-driven search engine for products. It's algo has problems, just like Google's algo had problems in the past. It used to be easy to game, just like Google was easy to game. And it will evolve, just like Google's algo evolved.

Visibility on Amazon will become increasingly based on optimizing the user's experience (again, just like Google). That will probably entail personalized results - what *you* see will be different than what *I* see for the same queries - and rolling algo changes rather than periodic updates. Quality of listings will probably be based on a formula that takes into account purchases, also-boughts, author profile visits, sales rank, sales momentum, stickiness and lots of other factors. (Quality of listings may or may not be consistent with your opinion regarding quality of content.)

Bezos is a data guy. Amazon's algo is in its infancy. It will become much harder to game. And it will become much harder to form accurate and reliable long-term expectations.

Circling back to what Chris said, the most dependable path to success as an indie is to build a following.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I'm kind of curious who gets to decide what's good and what's not good. Entertainment is subjective. I would rather watch paint dry than things like Dancing With the Stars, Scandal, Grey's Anatomy, Glee, etc. Does that mean those are terrible shows or are they just not for me? People have different taste. Quality is entirely subjective. I love shark movies, for example. Many of the movies I love in that genre (they can't all be Jaws) are subjectively terrible. That doesn't mean I'm not entertained. On the flip side, people point to "great" books that you couldn't pay me to wade through. Other than outright scammers and scrapers, what is the definition for quality? Who gets to decide what is quality? Just because you don't like it that doesn't mean someone else won't or it's terrible.


Some of this is objective. For instance, it is absolutely frustrating to see so many books hit the top spots with pages of one-star reviews complaining about bad editing and grammar. And I'm not talking about just typos. I'm talking about problems that repeat throughout an entire book like not knowing the difference between than and then or their, they're and there.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Briteka said:


> Some of this is objective. For instance, it is absolutely frustrating to see so many books hit the top spots with pages of one-star reviews complaining about bad editing and grammar. And I'm not talking about just typos. I'm talking about problems that repeat throughout an entire book like not knowing the difference between than and then or their, they're and there.


And what if those reviews remain after a book has been corrected and edited? What happens if some people love the story and just don't care? Who gets to decide what others can enjoy?


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> And what if those reviews remain after a book has been corrected and edited? What happens if some people love the story and just don't care? Who gets to decide what others can enjoy?


No one gets to decide. But that isn't what you asked. The point is that Amazon isn't good at filtering those things out, meaning readers have to look somewhere else, now that trade-publishers don't hold the keys.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Briteka said:


> No one gets to decide. But that isn't what you asked. The point is that Amazon isn't good at filtering those things out, meaning readers have to look somewhere else, now that trade-publishers don't hold the keys.


Someone does decide. Readers. They vote with their wallets. Books reach the top of the rankings based on the number of people who purchase them. Not reviews. Not perceived quality. Sales drive rank.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Briteka said:


> No one gets to decide. But that isn't what you asked. The point is that Amazon isn't good at filtering those things out, meaning readers have to look somewhere else, now that trade-publishers don't hold the keys.


Amazon shouldn't filter those things out. It's for the readers to decide. Asking Amazon to be a gatekeeper and decide what's quality and what isn't is opening a big can of worms that I don't think most people want to deal with when reality hits.


----------



## Cheryl Douglas (Dec 7, 2011)

I've noticed a dip the last couple of days too, about 20% down in fact. Thankfully I have a new release in a couple of days and some promos planned for the next couple of weeks, so fingers and toes crossed that things will turn around.


----------



## Natasha Holme (May 26, 2012)

September/October has been the worst sales ever for me in my whole 3.5 years. I usually sell around fifteen per month. Have sold ONE in the past month.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Amazon shouldn't filter those things out. It's for the readers to decide. Asking Amazon to be a gatekeeper and decide what's quality and what isn't is opening a big can of worms that I don't think most people want to deal with when reality hits.


I'm not suggesting Amazon should do something to filter them out. I totally agree that it would be a huge crapfest if they attempted to. I'm saying that a lot, and I'd even say most, readers have a need for those books to be filtered out, and Amazon's system doesn't do it, meaning that those readers have to look somewhere else.

I was replying to this. Specifically the second idea. I do agree that Amazon won't police content.


> Amazon has no reason to police their content, because anything that isn't top notch will quickly fall to the bottom


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Chris Fox said:


> Someone does decide. Readers. They vote with their wallets. Books reach the top of the rankings based on the number of people who purchase them. Not reviews. Not perceived quality. Sales drive rank.


Correct. Sales drive rank. Quality doesn't. My point about reviews is that if Amazon had a better review system, perhaps a book that should have 2.5 stars will hit the new release list with 2.5 stars, instead of an inflated 4.5 stars from a mailing list push that always garners higher ratings than normal and more ratings than average. This could act as a gatekeeper so that readers know if they're getting a quality product or not, leading to an increase of good books rising and a decrease in bad books rising.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Briteka said:


> Correct. Sales drive rank. Quality doesn't. My point about reviews is that if Amazon had a better review system, perhaps a book that should have 2.5 stars will hit the new release list with 2.5 stars, instead of an inflated 4.5 stars from a mailing list push that always garners higher ratings than normal and more ratings than average. This could act as a gatekeeper so that readers know if they're getting a quality product or not, leading to an increase of good books rising and a decrease in bad books rising.


How does Amazon even identify the flood of reviews from mailing list subscribers? Even if they can, why are those reviews not valid? They're fans of a given author, and are giving the book the rating they feel it deserves.

If they feel it's a 5 star book, and you feel it's a 2.5 star book, why is your opinion more valid?


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Chris Fox said:


> How does Amazon even identify the flood of reviews from mailing list subscribers? Even if they can, why are those reviews not valid? They're fans of a given author, and are giving the book the rating they feel it deserves.
> 
> If they feel it's a 5 star book, and you feel it's a 2.5 star book, why is your opinion more valid?


I'm not saying Amazon should do anything about the flood of reviews. I'm saying they should have a better system so that MORE people review.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

Briteka said:


> My point about reviews is that if Amazon had a better review system, perhaps a book that should have 2.5 stars will hit the new release list with 2.5 stars, instead of an inflated 4.5 stars from a mailing list push that always garners higher ratings than normal and more ratings than average. This could act as a gatekeeper so that readers know if they're getting a quality product or not, leading to an increase of good books rising and a decrease in bad books rising.


But again, who decides what is a "quality product", what is your standard?

If I have a large and enthusiastic mailing list, why shouldn't they be allowed to leave a review? Your statement above sounds as though followers who leave a review are biased and their opinions should be discounted in favour of some reader you deem as less biased and more likely to leave a lower review?

Isn't this why everyone says how important a mailing list is, to get those first reviews, to get that release day bump to give your book algorithm love? Are you saying that those with a large mailing list should some how be penalised? Because that kind of sounds like sour grapes rather than an actual quality concern.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Briteka said:


> Correct. Sales drive rank. Quality doesn't. My point about reviews is that if Amazon had a better review system, perhaps a book that should have 2.5 stars will hit the new release list with 2.5 stars...


Forgive me if this is a silly question, but how would you determine if a book "should have 2.5 stars"?



Briteka said:


> ... instead of an inflated 4.5 stars from a mailing list push that always garners higher ratings than normal and more ratings than average.


This may just be splitting hairs, but the term "inflated" suggests undeserved.

I devote a considerable amount of time making sure the subscribers on my lists love me. I shower them with exclusive content they enjoy. That seems to have made them more inclined to leave me reviews, and positive ones at that. But that doesn't mean the reviews are unwarranted.

*EDIT:*



AliceWE said:


> But again, who decides what is a "quality product", what is your standard?
> 
> If I have a large and enthusiastic mailing list, why shouldn't they be allowed to leave a review? Your statement above sounds as though followers who leave a review are biased and their opinions should be discounted in favour of some reader you deem as less biased and more likely to leave a lower review?
> 
> Isn't this why everyone says how important a mailing list is, to get those first reviews, to get that release day bump to give your book algorithm love? Are you saying that those with a large mailing list should some how be penalised? Because that kind of sounds like sour grapes rather than an actual quality concern.


These are very good points.

Regarding Amazon's review system, it's actually pretty good at this stage in the game. Sure, there are aspects that are less than desirable. But those aspects can be found on platforms that host reviews for movies, TV shows, video games, etc. Review systems will always be easy to game because the algos that run them are very limited and take a back seat to user-generated content.

Ideally, we'd see third-party review platforms stepping in to fill the gap. Such platforms - or in the case of books, individuals - would presumably earn a reputation for delivering what its customers value most. An example is Consumer Reports. Another is Roger Ebert.

People trust them. They have a reputation.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

But reviewers aren't really a measure of quality, not the way movie reviews in a newspaper are. Amazon reviews are a measure of how much you satisfy the reader, which often includes a lot of stuff that most discerning people consider terrible (over use of tropes, fan service, lack of subtelty).

If you meet genre conventions, you get good reviews. That's why the average romance novel has higher reviews than the average women's fiction it lit fic novel.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

AliceWE said:


> But again, who decides what is a "quality product", what is your standard?
> 
> If I have a large and enthusiastic mailing list, why shouldn't they be allowed to leave a review? Your statement above sounds as though followers who leave a review are biased and their opinions should be discounted in favour of some reader you deem as less biased and more likely to leave a lower review?
> 
> Isn't this why everyone says how important a mailing list is, to get those first reviews, to get that release day bump to give your book algorithm love? Are you saying that those with a large mailing list should some how be penalised? Because that kind of sounds like sour grapes rather than an actual quality concern.


I'm not saying Amazon should penalize mailing list reviews. I'm saying mailing list reviews are always inflated and over represented. Let's say you have a book littered with grammar and spelling mistakes. This is something that most readers would not like to read, but you can utilize your mailing list to gloss over these errors because the people on there will almost always ignore these flaws. Unfortunately, Amazon's review system doesn't draw a high rate of reader engagement. If it did, perhaps the people that disliked the book because of all the errors would write reviews, pointing these flaws out and giving a more accurate view of the book to readers.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Anarchist said:


> Forgive me if this is a silly question, but how would you determine if a book "should have 2.5 stars"?
> 
> This may just be splitting hairs, but the term "inflated" suggests undeserved.
> 
> ...


Amazon has a very bad review system. If you're wide, you can see the difference in the number of reviews between Amazon and other retailers. The main problem is that Amazon asks for reviews on their apps and devices that aren't for their site. The reviews are used for data gathering and their targeted ad network, but a lot of readers actually think those reviews are for the product pages. Perhaps Amazon could actually use that space for product page reviews instead of data collection.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Briteka said:


> I'm not saying Amazon should penalize mailing list reviews. I'm saying mailing list reviews are always inflated and over represented. Let's say you have a book littered with grammar and spelling mistakes. This is something that most readers would not like to read, but you can utilize your mailing list to gloss over these errors because the people on there will almost always ignore these flaws. Unfortunately, Amazon's review system doesn't draw a high rate of reader engagement. If it did, perhaps the people that disliked the book because of all the errors would write reviews, pointing these flaws out and giving a more accurate view of the book to readers.


What you're saying is true. As I mentioned, review systems are easy to game.

But consider this...

What if I write a book and my target audience isn't bothered by spelling mistakes? I read books in one niche with that perspective. I've found that terrible writers can have great ideas, and so their mistakes don't bother me. I recently read a book in that niche; it has nearly 200 reviews with an average of 4.7. The book is littered with spelling and grammar mistakes. I didn't care.

It would be a terrible idea for Amazon to apply a blanket rule on all niches regarding such mistakes.


----------



## Kessie Carroll (Jan 15, 2014)

I haven't had many sales lately, but I got lazy with my promos while I was writing like a maniac. I'm trying to get back into the promo boat, though, and today's freebie is doing all right. I'm not expecting things to really pick up until I release the next books in my series. At the rate I'm going, they'll all be done at the same time.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Why would they ever want to limit how much content is in their store?

It gives them a big, huge number to put on their banners to suggest that they have more content than anyone, and a continual flood of new stuff combined with how algo work means that authors are constantly paying for advertising that sends people not to their own sites, but to Amazon, giving them free paid advertising for the low, low price of keeping thier thumb on the scales.


----------



## AllyWho (May 16, 2015)

Briteka said:


> I'm not saying Amazon should penalize mailing list reviews. I'm saying mailing list reviews are* always* inflated and over represented.


But you are, you keep bringing up the example of reviews that come in via a mailing list and then saying they are inflated and over represented and implying they some how shouldn't be allowed.

Again, I think you are applying your subjective opinion. It really does sound like you want to thump people with large mailing lists and fans eager to get their hands on the author's next book. Or do you just want to penalise those people who work hard to generate interest and send out numerous ARCs so they have a large number of reviews lined up for release day? It's a marketing strategy and I would argue it only works if an author is giving readers exactly what they want. Otherwise they simply wouldn't have people lining up to read and review.


----------



## Guest (Oct 7, 2015)

I do feel like borrows don't affect ranking as much anymore. Sales seem to be the only thing to change ranking.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

AliceWE said:


> But you are, you keep bringing up the example of reviews that come in via a mailing list and then saying they are inflated and over represented and implying they some how shouldn't be allowed.
> 
> Again, I think you are applying your subjective opinion. It really does sound like you want to thump people with large mailing lists and fans eager to get their hands on the author's next book. Or do you just want to penalise those people who work hard to generate interest and send out numerous ARCs so they have a large number of reviews lined up for release day? It's a marketing strategy and I would argue it only works if an author is giving readers exactly what they want. Otherwise they simply wouldn't have people lining up to read and review.


Having more reviews from non-mailing-list reviewers isn't penalizing mailing list reviews. It's giving a more accurate picture of the product. I understand what you're saying, but as a reader, it's frustrating because the review system for self-published books breaks down. And as an author, it's going to end up hurting me in the future as more and more readers look for outside gatekeepers because Amazon is failing. We already have some readers on this board saying they won't read self-published books unless they're recommended to them by people on Goodreads and the like because of the quality issues and the failure of Amazon to properly vet those books. I really don't like that. I don't want to have to rely on Bookbub randomly accepting me just so I can gain new readers. I don't want to add even more book groups and reading sites that I have to be actively engage with just so I have a presence there. I'd prefer if Amazon did a better job of propping up good books, and the easiest thing they could do is to actually get people to review.


----------



## Nic (Nov 17, 2013)

Briteka said:


> Having more reviews from non-mailing-list reviewers isn't penalizing mailing list reviews. It's giving a more accurate picture of the product. I understand what you're saying, but as a reader, it's frustrating because the review system for self-published books breaks down. And as an author, it's going to end up hurting me in the future as more and more readers look for outside gatekeepers because Amazon is failing. We already have some readers on this board saying they won't read self-published books unless they're recommended to them by people on Goodreads and the like because of the quality issues and the failure of Amazon to properly vet those books. I really don't like that. I don't want to have to rely on Bookbub randomly accepting me just so I can gain new readers. I don't want to add even more book groups and reading sites that I have to be actively engage with just so I have a presence there. I'd prefer if Amazon did a better job of propping up good books, and the easiest thing they could do is to actually get people to review.


I am one of those who'll read a self-published book only if it is a) recommended by someone whose taste matches mine, b) negatively reviewed by someone whose taste is the opposite of mine, or c) free - in case I never read the author before.

The sorry fact is that most books are below par, and not just a few notches, even well-edited, typo-free books are so horribly bad so often, that I try my best to avoid them. My time for reading is finite, and I am a relatively slow reader. I don't want to spend that time reading books which I don't enjoy.

By the way, being a bestseller is also no guarantee of being a good book. I've read my share of bestsellers this year, and of them all only one book was worth a three-star rating. Lately bestsellers have become a matter of hype and marketing, rather than a craze based on some kind of quality, as it used to be.


----------



## D-C (Jan 13, 2014)

I can't type a long reply (I'm on my phone) but I wanted to drop by and mention it's not all about reviews. A9 (the algo) considers how long a customer stays on your books product page, where their mouse hovers, click to conversation ratio, drop-off percentage etc etc Number of reviews is just one factor in whether a book actually sells (on a side note, number of reviews is more important than rating - which is why all those ranty 1 star reviews on the Stephen King lookalikes actually help a book rise higher in rankings). 

Back to the OP, I've seen a drop off in KU but I haven't promo'd lately and my book 2 rolled out of KU and killed visibility for that series, so there's that. Otherwise sales are consistent. I'm not seeing any evidence of an algo change.


----------



## DashaGLogan (Jan 30, 2014)

If I'm not wrong, permafrees are now out of the also bought list.
It is so with mine.


----------



## RBK (Nov 28, 2014)

Personally, I'm seeing a slightly worse October than the six months prior to it (after an excellent summer). But seeing as I haven't put anything out or advertised for quite a while, I'm not too disappointed or surprised.

Still selling nicely. Just looking forward to getting a couple more series instalments out.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

DashaGLogan said:


> If I'm not wrong, permafrees are now out of the also bought list.
> It is so with mine.


Mine too. I even asked Amazon, they played dumb.

D-to-the-C - Love those covers!


----------



## RBK (Nov 28, 2014)

Just to add, my perma-frees still show in also boughts (for now at least).


----------



## North Star Plotting (Jul 11, 2015)

DashaGLogan said:


> If I'm not wrong, permafrees are now out of the also bought list.
> It is so with mine.


Yes, this killed all my permafrees, across multiple pen names and genres. I emailed them about it and they said...blah blah blah.


----------



## Talbot (Jul 14, 2015)

With permafrees gone it'll be $.99 all day, every day. There's a profit for Amazon.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Briteka said:


> I'm not saying Amazon should penalize mailing list reviews. I'm saying mailing list reviews are always inflated and over represented. Let's say you have a book littered with grammar and spelling mistakes. This is something that most readers would not like to read, but you can utilize your mailing list to gloss over these errors because the people on there will almost always ignore these flaws. Unfortunately, Amazon's review system doesn't draw a high rate of reader engagement. If it did, perhaps the people that disliked the book because of all the errors would write reviews, pointing these flaws out and giving a more accurate view of the book to readers.


The logic doesn't seem sound here, Briteka. People who have large mailing lists have them because tons of people love their books. If all those many people hadn't loved the books, they wouldn't have joined the mailing list. Therefore, assuming an author's books are getting in front of readers' eyes (which is, of course, a big assumption), mailing list size is a good indicator of reader satisfaction.

I know it's hard to accept, but grammar and spelling mistakes don't matter/aren't noticeable to a substantial subset of readers. Is it "most" readers? I honestly don't know. As a college writing teacher who cares about mechanics, I sort of hope it's not! But it's definitely a good number.

It makes sense, right? If there are all these _writers_ out there who don't know the difference between "then" and "than," "there" and "their," then there are also tons of _readers_ who don't know the difference. To them, the words are interchangeable, and the errors slide by unremarked. And there's probably another set of readers who could recognize the errors but who get so wrapped up in a good story that they tend not to notice them. These groups of readers do not need Amazon to filter out books with errors, either actively or passively, through a low review average. Rather the opposite, in fact -- if Amazon filtered out the stories they loved just because they contain these (to them) invisible/insignificant errors, they'd be friggin' pissed.

People who join the mailing lists of error-prone authors don't ignore the errors in their reviews _because_ they're on the mailing list. They're on the mailing list because they don't see/care about the errors, and love the stories. They represent a sizable body of readers, and their reviews simply reflect their tastes and priorities. If someone's books inspire passionate commitment on the part of many readers, well, good for her/him.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Becca Mills said:


> The logic doesn't seem sound here, Briteka. People who have large mailing lists have them because tons of people love their books. If all those many people hadn't loved the books, they wouldn't have joined the mailing list. Therefore, assuming an author's books are getting in front of readers' eyes (which is, of course, a big assumption), mailing list size is a good indicator of reader satisfaction.
> 
> I know it's hard to accept, but grammar and spelling mistakes don't matter/aren't noticeable to a substantial subset of readers. Is it "most" readers? I honestly don't know. As a college writing teacher who cares about mechanics, I sort of hope it's not! But it's definitely a good number.
> 
> ...


This.

Also, to reiterate something I mentioned earlier, all review systems are easy to game. That's never going to change.

A lot of book buyers take that into account. In the same way they're disinclined to believe an unfamiliar movie critic who claims Michael Bay's latest train wreck is "the roller coaster thrill ride of the summer," so too are they disinclined to believe 5-star book reviews from folks who are unknown to them.

That's where reputation comes into play. We look for reviews from people we trust.

For example, I bought all of Jason Gurley's material based on Hugh Howey's testimonial. Howey has reputation in my eyes. When I choose films to watch, I look up Roger Ebert's reviews. When I bought my car, I reviewed Consumer Reports. When I'm looking for new restaurants to try, I ask friends and family with similar tastes to my own.

Again, it's a matter of reputation.

With regard to restaurants, I might visit Yelp, but I assume many of the reviews are unreliable. Restaurant owners incentivize reviews, to the point that Yelp issued a formal statement prohibiting the practice. It still happens, of course. As noted, review systems are easy to game.

Amazon is trying to patch up major problems in its review system. But it will always be unreliable.

Personally (disclaimer: I'm a shareholder), I want Bezos to focus his attention on killing off his competition - not on perfecting Amazon's review system. As flawed as it is (and necessarily so), it's good enough to ensnare unwary consumers.

That might sound unpalatable, but this is business.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

Becca Mills said:


> I know it's hard to accept, but grammar and spelling mistakes don't matter/aren't noticeable to a substantial subset of readers. Is it "most" readers? I honestly don't know. As a college writing teacher who cares about mechanics, I sort of hope it's not! But it's definitely a good number.
> . . .
> 
> People who join the mailing lists of error-prone authors don't ignore the errors in their reviews _because_ they're on the mailing list. They're on the mailing list because they don't see/care about the errors, and love the stories. They represent a sizable body of readers, and their reviews simply reflect their tastes and priorities. If someone's books inspire passionate commitment on the part of many readers, well, good for her/him.


I agree with this completely. I'm one who originally poo-pooed all those *bad* books with typos and spelling errors. Then I read one . . . I'm not going to name the book, but really, it was in seriously bad grammarian shape. Yet, I read it all the way to the end. Why? The obvious answer, the characters and story held my interest. I wanted to know how things turned out. On a broader note, I believe a writer owes the reader the best craftsmanship he/she can muster. The problem is our bests differ.

Re: the OP
I had a very nice September (but did do a promo); October so far, definitely meh . . . But I'm with others on this thread who have no new releases, so I'm guessing that's my problem.

I am beginning to love the word "algos" though. I blame them for pretty much everything these days. We have a new puppy, and it's calming to blame his wildly unpredictable peeing on the algos.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

brkingsolver said:


> What I'm waiting for is Amazon to implement a charge for publishing. I don't expect it to be very high, but enough to filter out the "publish on a whim" and stuff (scamphlets) that no one buys.


They could, but if nobody is buying them, they won't clutter up the store either. They'll fall into obscurity. I'm not worried about those things. I didn't like them when KU first came out and a bunch of those books came out, and were borrowed by a ton of 'friends' from a certain forum. That caused those books to look legit enough to then draw in unsuspecting borrowers who only had to look through a page or two to trigger the 10% payment. It's harder now with page reads because they would need a lot of unwary borrowers to make it worth their while now.


----------



## X. Aratare (Feb 5, 2013)

Evenstar said:


> Mine too. I even asked Amazon, they played dumb.
> 
> D-to-the-C - Love those covers!


I wanted to just add this info point that my perma free is still showing up in Alsobots and the series page is also showing up on each book's page.


----------



## AngelaQuarles (Jun 22, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> The logic doesn't seem sound here, Briteka. People who have large mailing lists have them because tons of people love their books. If all those many people hadn't loved the books, they wouldn't have joined the mailing list. Therefore, assuming an author's books are getting in front of readers' eyes (which is, of course, a big assumption), mailing list size is a good indicator of reader satisfaction.
> 
> I know it's hard to accept, but grammar and spelling mistakes don't matter/aren't noticeable to a substantial subset of readers. Is it "most" readers? I honestly don't know. As a college writing teacher who cares about mechanics, I sort of hope it's not! But it's definitely a good number.
> 
> ...


Yep. Grammar and punctuation does not trump a compelling and emotional read. You can have the most well written book grammar-wise, but if the _story_ isn't compelling, it won't matter. But you can have an awesome story trump a typo free one every time. As Larry Brooks points out in Story Engineering, concept and theme can carry a book with less than stellar prose. Of course, as a writer who also cares about craft, I invest in several editing stages, but I know that ultimately it won't matter if my story doesn't resonate with my target audience.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

EC Sheedy said:


> I am beginning to love the word "algos" though. I blame them for pretty much everything these days. We have a new puppy, and it's calming to blame his wildly unpredictable peeing on the algos.


You get a LOL for that


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

> ...
> Restaurant owners *incentivize *reviews, to the point that Yelp issued a formal statement prohibiting the practice. It still happens, of course. As noted, review systems are easy to game.
> ...


Totally off-topic, but just want to say I hate the word "incentivize." I don't think it's a real word (even the program here doesn't recognize it, as it puts the red squiggly line underneath as I type it), despite the fact that it's fallen into relatively common usage--mostly in corporate-speak, which we all know is bass-ackward to begin with. We humans just love to turn nouns into verbs, verbs into nouns, etc.


----------



## goneaway (Jul 23, 2015)

TheForeverGirlSeries said:


> I do feel like borrows don't affect ranking as much anymore. Sales seem to be the only thing to change ranking.


I'm seeing this as well. But then again I think everything seems strange lately. Rankings not updating for hours, sales not registering for a day, disappearing page reads... I don't know, something is just off.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Jena H said:


> Totally off-topic, but just want to say I hate the word "incentivize." I don't think it's a real word (even the program here doesn't recognize it, as it puts the red squiggly line underneath as I type it), despite the fact that it's fallen into relatively common usage--mostly in corporate-speak, which we all know is bass-ackward to begin with. We humans just love to turn nouns into verbs, verbs into nouns, etc.


Feel better for having gotten that off your chest?


----------



## DashaGLogan (Jan 30, 2014)

Jena H said:


> Totally off-topic, but just want to say I hate the word "incentivize." I don't think it's a real word (even the program here doesn't recognize it, as it puts the red squiggly line underneath as I type it), despite the fact that it's fallen into relatively common usage--mostly in corporate-speak, which we all know is bass-ackward to begin with. We humans just love to turn nouns into verbs, verbs into nouns, etc.


Try spelling it with an s and then ask Christian Grey about it.


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

Anarchist said:


> Feel better for having gotten that off your chest?


Yes, actually, thanks for asking.  And who's Christian Grey?

*ETA: never mind, I thought it was referring to a writer.


----------



## stoney (May 24, 2015)

Briteka said:


> Having more reviews from non-mailing-list reviewers isn't penalizing mailing list reviews. It's giving a more accurate picture of the product. I understand what you're saying, but as a reader, it's frustrating because the review system for self-published books breaks down. And as an author, it's going to end up hurting me in the future as more and more readers *look for outside gatekeepers because Amazon is failing*. We already have some readers on this board saying they won't read self-published books unless they're recommended to them by people on Goodreads and the like because of the quality issues *and the failure of Amazon to properly vet those books*. I really don't like that. I don't want to have to rely on Bookbub randomly accepting me just so I can gain new readers. I don't want to add even more book groups and reading sites that I have to be actively engage with just so I have a presence there. *I'd prefer if Amazon did a better job of propping up good books, and the easiest thing they could do is to actually get people to review. *


If I wanted gatekeepers, I wouldn't self-publish, I'd hop on the merry-go-round of querying to get into The Big Publishing Houses. So I'm quite glad Amazon isn't in the habit of 'vetting' and 'gatekeeping' the books they allow for sale on their site.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks (Joe),

A reminder that political discussions are not allowed here and would be far afield of the topic.

Posts that stray have been and will be removed.  Reviewing the thread now.

Please PM me if you have any questions so as to not derail the thread, thanks.

Betsy


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

stoney said:


> If I wanted gatekeepers, I wouldn't self-publish, I'd hop on the merry-go-round of querying to get into The Big Publishing Houses. So I'm quite glad Amazon isn't in the habit of 'vetting' and 'gatekeeping' the books they allow for sale on their site.


Gatekeepers don't exist for you as a writer. They exist as a protection for buyers. Everyone thinks they're a competent writer these days and most aren't. There's no reason readers should just have to "trust" because most of the time, they're just going to be disappointed. Sellers of everything in the world are happier when regulations go away, but that never actually leads to good things for consumers. I'm not asking for Amazon to go through books and vet them. The readership can do that all on their own, and it would be fair and honest. Amazon just has to set up a proper system to allow that.


----------



## Maria Romana (Jun 7, 2010)

This thread has wandered somewhat far afield of Evenstar's OP, so I thought I'd bring it back. Yes, my Amazon sales have gone down in flames over the last month or two. You could blame it on a slow release pattern, but I've had a slow release pattern all along (for five years now!), and my sales have never tanked like this. At the same time, I'm actually seeing a little bump at other retailers, through no particular effort of my own. My inclination is to think this is all about KU2. Authors are apparently flocking to Amazon and abandoning other retailers faster than readers are. The die-hards on B&N, Google Play, and Apple still need stuff to read...


----------



## ChristinaGarner (Aug 31, 2011)

Maria Romana said:


> This thread has wandered somewhat far afield of Evenstar's OP, so I thought I'd bring it back. Yes, my Amazon sales have gone down in flames over the last month or two. You could blame it on a slow release pattern, but I've had a slow release pattern all along (for five years now!), and my sales have never tanked like this. At the same time, I'm actually seeing a little bump at other retailers, through no particular effort of my own. My inclination is to think this is all about KU2. Authors are apparently flocking to Amazon and abandoning other retailers faster than readers are. The die-hards on B&N, Google Play, and Apple still need stuff to read...


Thanks for bringing it back home 

Just thought I'd add that my overall sales have been decent--no drop off except for right before school started. (I write YA.) However, what I've noticed are wide swings. There are multiple times in the past 30 days where I went from selling two books to fifteen, back to five. Just up and then way down. I just ran a promo so of course that's been way more of a spike, but prior to that it's been all over the place as well.


----------



## ChessDesalls (May 15, 2015)

Evenstar said:


> Is it just me? October is _dire_ on Amazon so far! October usually does really well for me.
> 
> And my free downloads are double the normal amount on GP but sales are exactly the same?
> 
> What's going on people!!


Right? Mine were kind of meh this month (and at the end of last month) until I had a new book release. I'd kept hearing about how summer sales plummet and then October goes back up again. Maybe we have something to look forward to?

 Chess


----------



## Donna White Glaser (Jan 12, 2011)

My permafree mysteriously switched to the Paid List on Sept. 28th even though it was still priced free. My sales (and downloads, of course) nose-dived and haven't recovered. Sales since then have been showing wide fluctuations. BTW, my permafree has been free since Sept. 2013 and aside from the first two weeks has never had an issue with reverting. I had to contact KDP to get them to fix it but that took 24 hours and the damage was done.


----------



## Redgum (Mar 12, 2015)

Cheap Amazon Kindle ebooks are about quantity not quality. I have seen some of the most deplorable books shifting massive numbers, these are often only 20k in length, which is not even a novella, even though they're marketed as "novels" and they often have typos and spelling errors and you name it. Why do they sell? Because they are immediately followed by another, then another, then another, and sooner or later they find a readership. Many of these writers knock out dozens of these "novels" a year. That is why they sell. Because each new release pumps all the back catalog right up again. This way also attracts a lot of reviews, and the thing snowballs. 

You could write the next Crime & Punishment and release it as a standalone and it would sell 6 copies in its first month then disappear into the void, and that is why some people criticize Amazon Kindle.


----------



## Jenny Schwartz (Mar 4, 2011)

Chess, totally off-topic, but oh my goodness! Your covers are fab!

And my low-to-nonexistent sales are continuing in Oct   Just released a new book, so we'll see, now...


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

I don't know if there has been an algorithm change, but the KDP dashboard is definitely glitchy. I still have sales showing up on my "month to day" overview that are not showing up on the dashboard graph.

BTW, 20000 words falls squarely within novella territory.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

CoraBuhlert said:


> I don't know if there has been an algorithm change, but the KDP dashboard is definitely glitchy. I still have sales showing up on my "month to day" overview that are not showing up on the dashboard graph.
> 
> BTW, 20000 words falls squarely within novella territory.


Sales show up in the graph when the occur. Sales show up in the MTD table when the payment goes through. For international sales, this may not even occur in the same month.


----------



## kyokominamino (Jan 23, 2014)

Not just you, dear. I think October 2nd hit and my book sales drop SO dramatically that I (a) immediately booked an advertising gig with someone a fellow UF author recommended (b) resigned myself not to check sales until I have at least one promotion from my series. The drop was so abrupt, too. I'm even more confused because the PNR boxed set I'm in, Secret Worlds, is still live, and I've had steady buys ever since it launched but now it's down to almost nothing. @[email protected]

The only consolation is my KU reads haven't gone anywhere (yet) and I hope it stays the same, since that can make up for my sales drop.

Wishing you luck and that sales recover later on, but the sad thing is I think my October 2014 was also really heinously slow. Hang in there!


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Patty Jansen said:


> Sales show up in the graph when the occur. Sales show up in the MTD table when the payment goes through. For international sales, this may not even occur in the same month.


Which is why it is so odd to have "month to date" sales show up before the graph is updated. And no, it's not leftover September sales, cause I checked.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Geez.

I've only had a mailing list for about a year. The same people still review who always reviewed (that was one of the criteria for getting an ARC--you had to have reviewed, preferably multiple books). Of COURSE if an author is popular, lots of their early reviews will be from people, ARC or not, who've been waiting eagerly for their next book. 

For me, that accounts for maybe .1 or .2 stars' worth of difference. The early reviews will be 4.7 or 4.6. The reviews will settle in at 4.5 or 4.6. Is that a humongous difference? Doesn't seem like it to me.

And no, I don't tend to satisfy that many genre tropes. 

Totally disagree that quality--of the reading experience for that group of readers--doesn't matter. All the marketing in the world won't sell a book readers aren't entertained by. 

People generally write reviews if they particularly enjoy a book, or if they're particularly disappointed. For example, many readers will only review those of a favorite author's books that they DIDN'T like. Anybody with a lot of reviews will have these. "I loved all the author's books--EXCEPT THIS ONE." But "this one" will be the only one they review.

In that sense, the reviews tend to get biased DOWNWARD. Because after an author gains a following, people will tend to review if they didn't like it as much as they expected to.

Check any bestselling author's reviews, and you'll probably see that pattern. You'll see at least one "most helpful" review that says something along the lines of "Soooo disappointed." 

I can count the time to "Soooo disappointed" in hours after release. Including from my ARC folks. I get 3- and 2-star reviews from ARC reviewers.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Also, if you're not going to release every couple months, you have to do promos--a LOT of promos. There's more churn. There are more books out there. You have to keep promoting, and/or keep releasing. I think, OP, you haven't had a release for a long time? And very few this year? There are just so many books coming out.

I've been writing ahead for about a year now (at the same rate as always, but not releasing immediately due to the tradpub thing), and have really seen this. I get pretty hammered by the cliffs now, which didn't used to happen. This business changes a lot, and that's the big change I see on Amazon now. The churn is faster.


----------



## stoney (May 24, 2015)

Briteka said:


> Gatekeepers don't exist for you as a writer. They exist as a protection for buyers. Everyone thinks they're a competent writer these days and most aren't. There's no reason readers should just have to "trust" because most of the time, they're just going to be disappointed. Sellers of everything in the world are happier when regulations go away, but that never actually leads to good things for consumers. I'm not asking for Amazon to go through books and vet them. The readership can do that all on their own, and it would be fair and honest. Amazon just has to set up a proper system to allow that.


I don't disagree the review system sucks. I don't disagree that searching on amazon is a nightmare. I even don't disagree that 'gatekeeping' (which is a really loaded term, especially among indies) is more for reader experience than writers.

I would like it explained to me how Amazon vetting books that go up for sale on their site is ANY different than agents and publishers deciding on whether to publishing your book or not.

As a _reader_, I find the idea insulting. I don't need anyone telling me as a reader that one book has been 'approved for reading' while another has not by some arbitrary and unenforceable OBJECTIVE criteria.

And yes, yes you did say that you wanted Amazon to vet the books by complaining that they don't.

So what is your solution to the reviewing problem? Not allowing ARC reviews? Making a book wait until it's been released X number of days before the reviews are allowed? That those readers on ARC teams or on mailing lists are no longer allowed to write reviews at all? I'm not sure I understand what your real objection is here.

Or are you just mad that books _you_ think are dreck are getting good reviews? Because honestly that's how you're coming across.


----------



## horrordude1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

My sales have dropped by almost half starting in Sept....I have a day here and there they spike real high then really low the next day.

I've released a book every month this past year though my last 2 or 3 releases while in the same genre have been different than some of my usual stuff. I write horror normally grounded in reality (road trips gone bad, kidnappers, etc) where my last couple releases involved evil non-human clowns or talking sock monkeys which have been hit or miss. 

If pre-orders are any indicator my newest one should do well. I barely had any pre orders for the last two releases, but on this new one I've had more than double the pre-orders, so maybe that will help kick things loose for me. but yes its been both frustrating and sickening banging my head against the wall trying to promote and get sales back up. I do have things in KU but considering releasing the new book wide.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Neither myself nor the authors I regular speak with have noticed an algo change. The reality is new releases and sales don't stick as long as they used to. Building a core readership is more important than ever. Summer is a big slump for most authors unless they plan sales/releases to avoid it. My sales always start going down in July and continue to drop through Sep, with Sep being my worst month for backlist sales. But I usually have a release late Sep which turns things around for Oct. 

I have a 19k newsletter list, built organically. Right now, my latest release (approx 2.5 weeks ago) has 187 reviews with a 4.7 rank. I don't do ARCs. I don't ask for reviews. Apparently, I'm just gaming the system with my newsletter list? I suppose I'm also gaming the bestseller lists because that release hit USAT at #41 and NYT at #13 and I don't use preorders. 

It's always a joy to come here and be reminded that my gaming the system (or luck, my other favorite topic) is probably the reason I have sales because quality couldn't possibly exist at the top of the sales charts. And then some people wonder why the bestselling authors have basically left this forum instead of sticking around to give advice.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> And then some people wonder why the bestselling authors have basically left this forum instead of sticking around to give advice.


It's unfortunate that informative topics and advice from the most successful authors have tended to be met with disbelief, derision and scorn by a small but vocal minority of kboards posters.

Not to mention backlash in other forms.

The meaningful topics have continued to shrink over time, and its getting increasingly rare to see kboards posts about our business that have the potential to help and inform both new and experienced self-publishers.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Rosalind James said:


> Geez.
> 
> I've only had a mailing list for about a year. The same people still review who always reviewed (that was one of the criteria for getting an ARC--you had to have reviewed, preferably multiple books). Of COURSE if an author is popular, lots of their early reviews will be from people, ARC or not, who've been waiting eagerly for their next book.
> 
> ...


Perhaps you release quality books.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

Jana DeLeon said:


> Neither myself nor the authors I regular speak with have noticed an algo change. The reality is new releases and sales don't stick as long as they used to. Building a core readership is more important than ever. Summer is a big slump for most authors unless they plan sales/releases to avoid it. My sales always start going down in July and continue to drop through Sep, with Sep being my worst month for backlist sales. But I usually have a release late Sep which turns things around for Oct.
> 
> I have a 19k newsletter list, built organically. Right now, my latest release (approx 2.5 weeks ago) has 187 reviews with a 4.7 rank. I don't do ARCs. I don't ask for reviews. Apparently, I'm just gaming the system with my newsletter list? I suppose I'm also gaming the bestseller lists because that release hit USAT at #41 and NYT at #13 and I don't use preorders.
> 
> It's always a joy to come here and be reminded that my gaming the system (or luck, my other favorite topic) is probably the reason I have sales because quality couldn't possibly exist at the top of the sales charts. And then some people wonder why the bestselling authors have basically left this forum instead of sticking around to give advice.


Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Briteka said:


> Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


There you go - I am the greatest writer that's ever lived. You nailed it. You're so smart.

And you essentially just accused me of gaming reviews, because the people who read my books couldn't possibly like them that much. Completely making my point about why successful authors don't bother here.


----------



## Briteka (Mar 5, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> It's unfortunate that informative topics and advice from the most successful authors have tended to be met with disbelief, derision and scorn by a small but vocal minority of kboards posters.
> 
> Not to mention backlash in other forms.
> 
> The meaningful topics have continued to shrink over time, and its getting increasingly rare to see kboards posts about our business that have the potential to help and inform both new and experienced self-publishers.


Most best selling authors have left Kboards because they were attacked by going against the hivemind, which is exactly what's going on here in your post and the one you quoted. If you disagree that Amazon's system is broken, then disagree and move on. But drop the victim complex. You aren't a victim, you're simply someone that disagrees with another person.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Briteka said:


> Most best selling authors have left Kboards because they were attacked by going against the hivemind, which is exactly what's going on here in your post and the one you quoted. If you disagree that Amazon's system is broken, then disagree and move on. But drop the victim complex. You aren't a victim, you're simply someone that disagrees with another person.


No, I disagree specifically with YOU putting authors down who are successful. You have a tendency to do that a lot.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Briteka said:


> Most best selling authors have left Kboards because they were attacked by going against the hivemind, which is exactly what's going on here in your post and the one you quoted. If you disagree that Amazon's system is broken, then disagree and move on. But drop the victim complex. You aren't a victim, you're simply someone that disagrees with another person.


Wait, who said I was a victim? I am still posting here, lol. I'm talking about what happened to those who felt the need to leave (of which there are many, and they've given explicit reasons in many instances).

As far as the "hive mind", I don't see how it's a hive mentality to make calculated business decisions and to find agreement amongst other successful authors. First of all, many of the successful names have taken issue with my stand, so I hardly get along with all those folks.

But I certainly do respect their opinions and I try very hard not to insult or dismiss them in a way that would make them want to leave the forum (I hope).

When people post strong opinions, they're bound to disagree and things can and will get heated. In truth, I actually believe that overly policed forum moderation and lack of understanding of the industry and its players have hampered kboards as its grown. Many times the best and most informative threads are locked, and the pot-stirrers who have grudges and axes to grind intentionally say and do things to get those threads locked.

Perhaps it's unavoidable but I don't think the moderators have found a good way to deal with issues that this forum has that continues to drive out the best and most knowledgeable authors.

My way of handling it would be to ban the most flagrant posters who consistently insult and demean others--and other than that, I would let the "controversial" threads take their course and trust the posters to do most of their own self-policing. Overly moderating these threads leads to a powder keg constantly waiting to explode. Airing stuff out works better--let people get things off their chest and then move on.

And ban people that can't handle intelligent debate without resorting to ad hominem.


----------



## D-C (Jan 13, 2014)

Briteka said:


> I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


You don't have to be a Nobel prize winner to sell good books (and write well) and it's arguable that literary greats actually don't sell that much (whereas genre authors do). You're comparing apples to oranges. I'm not surprised Jana's offended. She has a right to be. You can't swing your axe and then tell her to stop complaining and move on. Jana obviously has fans and that doesn't happen overnight, nor does it happen to poor writers. It takes good books to garner good fans.


----------



## Cookie Monster (Apr 6, 2014)

Briteka said:


> Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


This comparison makes no sense. The audience for Jana's books and the audience for Nobel Prize winners are different. Jana's books are obviously satisfying to her audience, and so have earned high review ratings from her readers. Apparently 8/10 of the Nobel Prize winning books didn't satisfy their audiences as well as Jana's books satisfied her audience.

That's the only legitimate conclusion I can draw from that data, because Jana's books and Nobel Prize winning books are not in direct competition with each other. Quality is subjective and decided by readers in a book's audience. Review averages are not a ranking system of all books against each other, and aren't meant to be that, so using them that way makes no sense.

There is no way to measure objective quality of a book, because readers all value different things in the books they pick up. We're not dealing in vacuum cleaners here, where you can do a one-to-one comparison of any of them and find it meaningful.  (Although subjectivity of reviews does also apply to vacuum cleaners, too!)


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> Wait, who said I was a victim? I am still posting here, lol. I'm talking about what happened to those who felt the need to leave (of which there are many, and they've given explicit reasons in many instances).
> 
> As far as the "hive mind", I don't see how it's a hive mentality to make calculated business decisions and to find agreement amongst other successful authors. First of all, many of the successful names have taken issue with my stand, so I hardly get along with all those folks.
> 
> ...


Excellent points.

On other forums I frequent, members are allowed to "like" or "dislike" posts. Members gain a reputation over time. Those who fall into disrepute receive less attention/engagement as it becomes clear that few people like them (there's usually a good reason).

Moderators only step in to deliver bans on flagrant fouls (blatant racism, threats, repeated personal attacks, etc.).

People are inclined to get along, even when opinions differ. But sometimes, we express ourselves in ways that reflect some type of inner frustration. Maybe we're constipated, our sales are down, or the baby just upchucked on our favorite shirt. And so our posts become a bit more acidic than normal.

Online, that situation is like kindling next to a match; everyone wants to get the last word and doing so often comes at the cost of tact. So debates get heated and escalate to subtle (or not so subtle) ad hominem.

Best thing to do is to step back, say "let's agree to disagree" and move on. No grudges. No hurt feelings. Ultimately, all of us have similar goals. More sales, bigger lists, more visibility, more momentum, etc.

Regarding algorithms and review systems - and specifically, how they work or _should_ work - we're going to disagree. It'd be boring if we didn't. And more than a little odd since none of us have enough data to make assertions with authority. Why not all of us say, "let's agree to disagree" and move on? 

Any takers?


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Briteka said:


> Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


You cannot possibly be suggesting that Amazon reviews should peg all books on some smooth, objective scale, with, I don't know, _King Lear_ at 5.0 and some obnoxious, plagiarized scamlet at 0.1. That is not how readers read or think. Someone who read one of Jana's books is not sitting there thinking, "Well, I was forced to read _King Lear_ in 10th grade, and I didn't really understand it, but I magically know that's the best book written in English. And though I haven't read it, I just know _Ulysses _is a 4.9 ... so judged against _King Lear_ and _Ulysses_, I can tell _Trouble in Mudbug_ ranks at 2.3." I mean, seriously??

No, people read Jana's books because they love humorous cozy mysteries with a paranormal touch. They judge her books against other similar books and think hers are way better than most of them. Similarly, people who read literary fiction might ask themselves if _Mrs Dalloway_ is better than _Ulysses_. But maybe they really don't care for experimental modernism and don't like either of those books. Instead, they like Dickens and George Eliot.

Reviews are subjective and personal, yes. But more than that, they're bestowed _in context_. Books are "good" or "bad" within their genre(s), not on some all-inclusive and supposedly objective scale. Amazon's review system is not broken. It simply reflects the ways people actually read and think. No one is sitting there thinking, "Well, I absolutely love this book and have read it six times, but I know all the books I love are actually crap, compared to Borges, so I really can't give it higher than a 2.0."


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Re: the OP:

My sales are down 26% over September at this time but up 84% over last year at this time.  You win some, you lose some. 

ETA: I haven't had a new release since late June so there's one cliff I've fallen off. Plus I haven't had a big promo push since August. Cliff two. There may have been an algo change but I can't know which of the three are causing my decline in sales over last month.

As to the discussion about the review system and book quality and whether we need gatekeepers to monitor "quality", it is true that a number of bestselling books have numerous spelling and grammatical errors. It is also true that a number of books with perfect spelling and grammar have sunk into oblivion in Amazon's system. That is because the most important factor in the ranking system on Amazon is _sales_. Sales are not related to grammar and spelling but to how many people actually decide to buy a book. Books that sell a whack load do so usually because many readers want to read them and are willing to pay. That willingness to pay is due to a number of factors that have little to do with spelling and/or grammar and more to do with story and characters and pace and plot and buzz.

That's what most readers / customers care about the most.

We don't need no 'stinkin gatekeepers...


----------



## Christine_C (Jun 29, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> You cannot possibly be suggesting that Amazon reviews should peg all books on some smooth, objective scale, with, I don't know, _King Lear_ at 5.0 and some obnoxious, plagiarized scamlet at 0.1. That is not how readers read or think. Someone who read one of Jana's books is not sitting there thinking, "Well, I was forced to read _King Lear_ in 10th grade, and I didn't really understand it, but I magically know that's the best book written in English. And though I haven't read it, I just know _Ulysses _is a 4.9 ... so judged against _King Lear_ and _Ulysses_, I can tell _Trouble in Mudbug_ ranks at 2.3." I mean, seriously??
> 
> No, people read Jana's books because they love humorous cozy mysteries with a paranormal touch. They judge her books against other similar books and think hers are way better than most of them. Similarly, people who read literary fiction might ask themselves if _Mrs Dalloway_ is better than _Ulysses_. But maybe they really don't care for experimental modernism and don't like either of those books. Instead, they like Dickens and George Eliot.
> 
> Reviews are subjective and personal, yes. But more than that, they're bestowed _in context_. Books are "good" or "bad" within their genre(s), not on some all-inclusive and supposedly objective scale. Amazon's review system is not broken. It simply reflects the ways people actually read and think. No one is sitting there thinking, "Well, I absolutely love this book and have read it six times, but I know all the books I love are actually crap, compared to Borges, so I really can't give it higher than a 2.0."


Perfectly stated. Readers rate books based on how much they enjoyed reading them. It doesn't make any sense to expect ratings to be standardized and objective measure of artistic worth, because that's impossible and also not how people behave in real life.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Briteka said:


> Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


There isn't a problem. Jana is a bestselling author with a lot of people who eagerly await her next book. She consistently delivers the kind of book those readers want. She was formerly traditionally published and sold a lot there, too, because she is an excellent genre writer. A literary fiction writer who wins the Nobel Prize is going to have a LOT of people picking up the book who are unfamiliar with him/her, and who aren't going to like the book. Literary fiction in general--the author tends to take more risks, even from book to book, so many people who liked Book A won't like Book B. But mostly, people will pick that Nobel Prize book up and think, "Meh. Boring," and give it 3 stars. That isn't going to happen much to Jana, because she's found her readership and is satisfying her readers.

Reviews are READER reviews. That is different from a past review system in which literary magazines or whatever reviewed a few books based on artistic merit. That means that under a reader review system (or for any product review), people are just giving their opinion about how much they enjoyed the product. That's an inherently different review system from the past, and will give a different result. But it's not broken. Readers say how much they liked a book. There you go.

Readers can and do use the review system to figure out whether the flaws for others will be flaws they care about. They do that by reading the lower-star reviews and seeing if those things matter. If there are a lot of spelling and grammar errors, if the book is written simplistically (which many readers appear to enjoy), trust me, people will have pointed that out, and readers who care will avoid that book.

I'd say it works all right.


----------



## Guest (Oct 8, 2015)

My Amazon sales have been declining for a long time, but I haven't noticed any change specific to October that would mark a major shift in the algos.

Regarding forum moderation, I actually would like to see a "reputation" meter, based on upvotes / downvotes from other members. It would then be interesting if there were an ignore feature that you could customize based on the reputation score.

Either way, I'm just glad KBoards doesn't do passive-aggressive crap like disemvoweling. Yeesh.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks, just got home and saw the reports.  Giving you time to cool off and me time to fix dinner and read the thread.  Back in a bit.  My goal is to reopen the thread, just give me some time.

EDIT:  Folks, I'm going to reopen the thread.  

Fair warning:  Attacks/personal comments about fellow members are inappropriate and will result in bans.  I've left posts in place that might have otherwise been removed as responses to those posts made much larger points quite civilly and I didn't want to gut the conversation.

Be nice to each other. 

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Guest (Oct 9, 2015)

For the record, I would like to point out that I was a neutral 3rd party observer in all of this.


----------



## Kevin Lee Swaim (May 30, 2014)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Folks, just got home and saw the reports. Giving you time to cool off and me time to fix dinner and read the thread. Back in a bit. My goal is to reopen the thread, just give me some time.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Mod


What we really want to know is what was for dinner?


----------



## Not any more (Mar 19, 2012)

I just checked on a book I'm doing a promo on. When a book tops the 29K ranking on 12 sales, I would say that sales overall are probably down.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Blimey! Didn't expect such a heated discussion over an innocent question.

And for those who rather pithily suggested that their sales are fine, and that it is me, and not an algo change. I'm just letting you know that I found your high tone rather hurtful. Sales are fine, just down on what I expected based on the rise I had last year at this time. I fully expect them to have bounced significantly by the end of the month simply because my Halloween book always goes mental at the end of October and I have plenty of promos booked to ensure that too.

The question was not intended to find a scape-goat for my sales. I was being flippant about the algo change (as someone else amusingly pointed out, you can jokingly blame algo's for anything you like) - in fact it was more just checking out how everyone else was doing and saying that my own numbers were definitely down on what I thought they should be. Nothing drastic though!

As to the comments about a lot of successful authors leaving due to the atmosphere of the boards, well..... let's just say it takes an awful lot to make me bristle like this... It's just so untrue. Most successful authors leave because they don't have the time. Hugh, Elle, Holly, to name a few I've known, all pop in from time to time. I've been here nearly three years and I have never seen a collective nastiness like there is on other forums, occasional individuals yes, but in general this is such an amazing and supportive board, regardless of people's success or lack of it, and I'm proud to work alongside most of the authors here and call some of them "friend".

There was one thread recently where I felt everyone jumped on a new member in an inappropriate way, it happens (extremely rarely) when certain topics come up. But I reacted to it the way we are supposed to. I simply reported it to the moderators as perhaps being a little over heated and a touch unkind. But when an author I had previously admired a great deal came in and called the members here a nest of vipers, I was really upset, especially as it came around the same time as the legendary Harvey was passing away. That author lost my respect for ever. I don't always agree with everyone, and I don't always agree with the moderators here, but I hold them (and pretty much all of you) in very high esteem. I will defend kboards and try to uphold the wonderful spirit of this place for as long as I am welcome here. And if anyone wishes to take that up with me then please feel free to pm me, I'm fine with that.

(all of this is assuming I am not now hounded off the place for this post  )

And finally... on the topic of reviews. I agree with* everyone *

Betsy, Ann, I know this particular post is skirting the edge of appropriate, but I humbly ask that you don't edit it, simply because I so rarely speak out unless I really feel pushed to say something, as I did in this case. I would prefer it was simply closed if you feel it necessary. After all, it has strayed well off topic


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Evenstar said:


> Most successful authors leave because they don't have the time. Hugh, Elle, Holly, to name a few I've known, all pop in from time to time.


They didn't run out of time for exchanging information with other authors. They're simply on other forums where they're not treated disrespectfully, called lucky, or outliers. It is a waste of time to try and help people who don't want it.

I am also one of the people who said there is no evidence of an algo change. I wasn't being mean. I'm reporting what approx 1k authors have concluded on a private loop. ALL are reporting down sales, but none of us can find evidence of an algo change. Late summer is usually a bad sales time for most people. New releases spike net income, but if I looked at individual sales of backlist books, the still start dropping in July and do not pick back up until Oct. That has been consistent for the past four years. Sep. is my worst month for non-new release sales.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Jana DeLeon said:


> I am also one of the people who said there is no evidence of an algo change. I wasn't being mean. I'm reporting what approx 1k authors have concluded on a private loop. ALL are reporting down sales, but none of us can find evidence of an algo change. Late summer is usually a bad sales time for most people. New releases spike net income, but if I looked at individual sales of backlist books, the still start dropping in July and do not pick back up until Oct. That has been consistent for the past four years. Sep. is my worst month for non-new release sales.


I agree with what you are saying about the algos - the original questions was light-hearted. And I am in full agreement regarding the universal sales around late summer/September. It was the tone of the post that I took personal offence to. I love your books Jana, I've read nearly all of them and I even have some in paperback, and I think your comments on using your mailing list to get early reviews was intelligent and aspirational. I admire it and would like to build my own mailing list up just exactly as you have outlined. But I am not going to pretend not to have been offended by the implied suggestion... because I was. But we all have better things to do than debate it. I just wanted to put it out there to be noted. I like it best when we all support each other with hugs and chocolate and really good advice


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Evenstar said:


> I agree with what you are saying about the algos - the original questions was light-hearted. And I am in full agreement regarding the universal sales around late summer/September. It was the tone of the post that I took personal offence to. I love your books Jana, I've read nearly all of them and I even have some in paperback, and I think your comments on using your mailing list to get early reviews was intelligent and aspirational. I admire it and would like to build my own mailing list up just exactly as you have outlined. But I am not going to pretend not to have been offended by the implied suggestion... because I was. But we all have better things to do than debate it. I just wanted to put it out there to be noted. I like it best when we all support each other with hugs and chocolate and really good advice


The implied suggestion of what, exactly? I don't see where anything I said was offensive. I only offered information about algos based on collective information from other authors. It was not I that suggested anything about gaming or reviews or newsletter lists except to say they're a good thing and not unethical or someone pushing subpar work to the top of lists as another has suggested. But I will push back when someone who doesn't even reveal their own pen name researches MY work then attacks it, suggesting I have somehow gamed my way to where I am. Anyone who has worked as hard and as long as I have to build a career would fight that sort of nonsense.

ETA - I don't use my newsletter to get early reviews. I don't ask for reviews at all. I simply let them grow organically. But what people need to take into account is that I write series. Readers who are seven books in are people who love the series. If they didn't, they'd have stopped reading it. So my reviews are likely to be high because it's big fans that keep going. It's not magic. Just simple logic that some refuse to see. Not you, but others.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

Briteka said:


> Step off the cross. No one accused you of gaming anything. It is well within the rules to send mailing list readers to your books, and it's well within the rules to have ARC reviews. And it also sucks that Amazon's review system breaks down for self-published books. I just went through your books, and you have a higher rating average than 8/10 of the last Nobel prize winners in literature that I could find. You're either the greatest writer that's ever lived, or there's a problem with Amazon's review system.


Quite frankly I'm surprised this comment and the other you made about Jana were left undeleted. What you wrote above and before was a direct attack on her integrity and writing ability. I don't know Jana and I've never read her books, but my jaw dropped when I read what you posted. It's insulting, rude, and nasty.

She told you how she achieved her ranking and sales - good old fashioned hard work. Her covers are great, she writes well, and she built up a mailing list of 19k fans. None of that is easy or gaming Amazons system somehow.

Also most people who buy great works of literature, rarely finish them. There have been numerous studies and articles posted on that subject. I don't really know what else to say. Except, that I'm completely flabbergasted by the overt snobbery and condescending tone you've taken with your fellow authors.

You are obviously an intelligent person, so you can make your point without resorting to those tactics.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Jana DeLeon said:


> The implied suggestion of what, exactly? I don't see where anything I said was offensive. I only offered information about algos based on collective information from other authors. It was not I that suggested anything about gaming or reviews or newsletter lists except to say they're a good thing and not unethical or someone pushing subpar work to the top of lists as another has suggested. But I will push back when someone who doesn't even reveal their own pen name researches MY work then attacks it, suggesting I have somehow gamed my way to where I am. Anyone who has worked as hard and as long as I have to build a career would fight that sort of nonsense.
> 
> ETA - I don't use my newsletter to get early reviews. I don't ask for reviews at all. I simply let them grow organically. But what people need to take into account is that I write series. Readers who are seven books in are people who love the series. If they didn't, they'd have stopped reading it. So my reviews are likely to be high because it's big fans that keep going. It's not magic. Just simple logic that some refuse to see. Not you, but others.


No, no. I'm in full agreement regarding the reviews issue. "gaming the system" is a ridiculous suggestion, of course you are not. But I was trying to avoid getting drawn into that particular argument, and I did fully understand what you meant about how your newsletter works, I perhaps phrased that badly.

The bit that got my hackles up in your post was this:

_It's always a joy to come here and be reminded that my gaming the system (or luck, my other favorite topic) is probably the reason I have sales because quality couldn't possibly exist at the top of the sales charts. And then some people wonder why the bestselling authors have basically left this forum instead of sticking around to give advice. _

It suggested to me (in a sarcastic way) that I (as the original poster) don't have quality because my sales are not as good as yours, rather than because of algos. (Which yet again I would like to point out was just supposed to be a lighthearted post, not one saying that Amazon was screwing me or anything bitter like that). And I'm nearly always pretty defensive on behalf of the forum, because I like it here and it's upsetting when people leave or when people suggest this place is rotten. It's not, at least not in my personal experience.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Evenstar said:


> It suggested to me (in a sarcastic way) that I (as the original poster) don't have quality because my sales are not as good as yours, rather than because of algos.


Not what I meant for you to take away, and my post wasn't directed to you at all. What I was answering to is the implication that most everything on the bestseller list is poorly written, and only there through luck or gaming the system. That particular person keeps pushing a "quality" agenda, but as far as I'm concerned, quality is defined by what readers want to read. This isn't a literary only forum. Audience takes time to build. There are plenty of great books, not on bestseller lists, because it simply doesn't happen overnight for the vast majority of authors.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Many authors have left the forum because they got too busy to post or just moved on.

But plenty have openly stated that they left because of the backlash their posts got (and I did make sure to say it was from a vocal MINORITY).

I feel the majority of posters here are great and interested in learning and sharing advice and improving.  But some are not, and I don't feel the balance has been handled well over the years.  The knowledgable posters have not been protected, and many of the bad apples have flourished due to the way certain issues are handled.

With the best of intentions, of course.  I understand it's a difficult situation, trying to moderate a forum as large as this one.


----------



## Anna Drake (Sep 22, 2014)

Slow? Slow? After a lovely several months, my sales have flatlined. I think it's due to not having published a new book recently. I hope so, anyway. That's something I can control, but I can't do a thing about an algo.


----------



## Gator (Sep 28, 2012)

brkingsolver said:


> I just checked on a book I'm doing a promo on. When a book tops the 29K ranking on 12 sales, I would say that sales overall are probably down.


If you had 12 sales in one day on Amazon.com for a promo and only hit 29K in sales rank, then your eBook hasn't finished climbing. Expect it to hit around 10K.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Life gets a lot better when you develop a thick skin.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Boyd said:


> I say that too... but it's easier said than done.


Truer words...

It took me years. I was an absolute mess when I was young.


----------



## mica (Jun 19, 2015)

I agree with what Jana said and it basically comes down to '_write books people want to read and hopefully share with others by leaving reviews, telling their friends and/or talking about it on social media._'

I pay a lot of attention to the authors who are selling and topping the charts in NA, erom and contemporary romance and they are mostly writing series and they write books that are engaging and entertaining. These authors find loyal readers who buy each and everyone of their books. They are releasing a new book every 30, 60, 90 or 120 days. They are active on one social media site, usually facebook or twitter.

I see it as they work smart, not hard.

I lurked on this forum for a while, before I joined and posted a comment. I have listened to a couple bestselling authors explain why they left this forum. Some because of heated discussions, some because of backlash, some because of 1 star bombing, some because they felt they didn't have anything new to say/contribute and some because they got busy. 
No forum is perfect and most forums have the same problems. I just wish the big sellers wouldn't leave because I for one can learn from them and I just love hearing success stories.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Boyd said:


> I was one of the early ones who said my sales were going well, but I had new releases. I do apologize if what I said was hurtful, that wasn't my meaning or intent.


What you said was definitely not hurtful, someone would be hard pushed to find an insult in it! But you are so sweet for apologising regardless. You remind me exactly why I like this forum. Thank you x

And yes, usually I do have a nice thick skin and tend to find the positive in most things, but I'm suffering a little from trying to keep my Grandmother alive and I think I've been over-sensitive today. Mostly Kboards cheers me up and I love learning new things.

I don't consider myself anywhere close to being a big seller, but my sales pay our mortgage and all our bills, so I do consider that a success even if I can't quite buy that new Land Rover I've got my eye on... baby steps


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

I think our friendly, supportive Writer's Cafe has had its day . . . 

I propose we move to the dark side and open Writer's Bar. This could be a place where we go and enjoy far too many of our usual libations--which would provide us the excuse to say whatever the he** we want! There would be dim lighting, fattening fingerfood, a bartender name Algo, and lots of "Let's take this outside!" events to be enjoyed by all. 

Tongue currently pressed hard against my cheek which is ineffective because of my overly thick skin.

p.s. I want to be Evenstar when I grow up . . .


----------



## Not any more (Mar 19, 2012)

Gator said:


> If you had 12 sales in one day on Amazon.com for a promo and only hit 29K in sales rank, then your eBook hasn't finished climbing. Expect it to hit around 10K.


Nope. 12 sales on a promo day, hit 29K then dropped to 38K. Reads are on track with last month, sales have fallen off a cliff. When I had 78 sales on a promo last month, I barely scratched a ranking of 58,000. Since rankings are a comparison, I would say sales overall are down.


----------



## Chrissy (Mar 31, 2014)

Boyd said:


> Evenstar said:
> 
> 
> > What you said was definitely not hurtful, someone would be hard pushed to find an insult in it! But you are so sweet for apologising regardless. You remind me exactly why I like this forum. Thank you x
> ...


Ditto


----------



## James R Wells (May 21, 2015)

Just wanted to note as a mostly observer/reader that I'm grateful for the many insightful posts on KBoards, that have materially helped me a great deal in just a few months. It's unfortunately easy for any of us to perceive something less positively based on negative exceptions - it's a sampling bias built into human nature (which has a very useful root cause - we're all more inclined to notice negative things because they're more likely to require action).

On the scale of the Internet (a low bar, I know), the ratio on KBoards of helpful material compared to unhelpful is exceptionally high.



Evenstar said:


> I don't consider myself anywhere close to being a big seller, but my sales pay our mortgage and all our bills, so I do consider that a success even if I can't quite buy that new Land Rover I've got my eye on... baby steps


I too want to be here when I grow up. Sounds like a fantastic success.

To the OP original question - I just went past 90 days and have seen a small decline but still chugging along with a far longer tail than expected from a July promotion.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

I don't think there's been an algo change. Things feel slow, but that's the time of year. I just keep my nose to the grindstone this time of year. I'm trying to write five books in five weeks for my pen name. It's kind of a fun experiment.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I'm trying to write five books in five weeks for my pen name.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Boyd said:


> I'm getting close to trying something like that. I'd love to hear how it goes for you!!!


I should finish up book two today (I might have to do one chapter tomorrow because I have to go to bed early for a spa day tomorrow morning). Then I start book three on Monday. I'm editing as I go, so I build my master file when I finish a chapter and everything goes off to my editor as soon as I'm done. I've already gotten last week's book back and I'm ready for the big finale today.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I'm trying to write five books in five weeks for my pen name. It's kind of a fun experiment.


That's very easy for some wealthy authors to do. They just hire ghostwriters.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee (Jun 3, 2014)

Avis Black said:


> That's very easy for some wealthy authors to do. They just hire ghostwriters.


I don't hire ghost writers. I do all the writing myself.


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

EC Sheedy said:


> I think our friendly, supportive Writer's Cafe has had its day . . .
> 
> I propose we move to the dark side and open Writer's Bar. This could be a place where we go and enjoy far too many of our usual libations--which would provide us the excuse to say whatever the he** we want! There would be dim lighting, fattening fingerfood, a bartender name Algo, and lots of "Let's take this outside!" events to be enjoyed by all.


YES please! I want to go to the Writer's Bar... Can we call it Guinan's? I've always wanted to visit a bar called that and can it serve a smoking drink like Chech'tluth? I also want loaded nachos please, I'm really in the mood for nachos tonight. I think the owner should be called Algo, so we can rant about him like Bezos, the barman should be someone friendly... I nominate Yoda, I reckon she mixes a mean mojito, and could dispense wisdom at the same time.



EC Sheedy said:


> p.s. I want to be Evenstar when I grow up . . .


Good grief, why??


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

*************


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

brkingsolver said:


> Nope. 12 sales on a promo day, hit 29K then dropped to 38K. Reads are on track with last month, sales have fallen off a cliff. When I had 78 sales on a promo last month, I barely scratched a ranking of 58,000. Since rankings are a comparison, I would say sales overall are down.


That doesn't make sense? Were all those sales on .com? 78 sales on .com in a single day will push you down under 5k ranking easily (you should have hit about 2k rank I think looking at my own data). 12 sales might get you into the 20k ranks, so 29k ranking isn't totally crazy and seems about right...


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Last week I hit 2300 with 100 sales. Sales reporting to rank is really laggy, though.


----------

