# Please delete



## 99896 (Dec 19, 2017)

[removed]


----------



## Logophile (May 13, 2018)

So a ton of (well-written) shorter works racks up reads faster than longer works?


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

I've known people who makes 5 figures a month off short erotica and novellas. They just publish everyday. Short authors tend to have catalogs in the hundreds across several different pen names and then you gotta figure they do get some sales. I mean not everyone can do it, but making six figures has always been hard or we'd all be doing it. I'd never say short stories are the fastest way to go in KU, but if erotica is someone's thing it can and is being done.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

I think there's some sort of slider between lengths of work and number of works available you can play with. In general, more titles = more page reads, no matter how long those titles are. They all gotta grip the reader to make them want to read it all the way through, though. Otherwise, you'll need even more titles if people are only reading a percentage of the work vs the whole deal.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

If you're all-in with KU, the difficulty is a self-fulfilling prophecy. IMO, the only sensible reason to be all-in KU is if you have a shot at a bonus.

If not, you're giving up diversification (just like stocks) and giving up all those non-Amazon readers, in return for (possibly) more money--and you're accepting the high risks of becoming a dolphin in the tuna net, as discussed elsewhere.

Note that I'm not anti-KU. I'm anti-all-my-eggs-in-one basket non-diversification.

Here's my rough breakdown of my income streams:

6 KU books in English (via my co-author who's all-in KU) including the audio versions 25% (about *10% page reads,* 10% ebook sales, 5% audioboooks)
15 non-free KU books in German 20% *(10% pages reads)*
20 non-free wide books on Amazon 15%
20 non-free wide books on Kobo 5%
20 non-free wide books on Apple 11%
20 non-free wide books on B&N 11%
20 non-free wide books on Google Play 8%
24 Audiobooks in English 3%
2% other (print, small vendors from Smashwords and D2D distro)

You'll note that about 20% of my income is from KU page reads--and only half of that is directly linked to my own account. The other 10% is from a co-author. Diversification of risk. Even if Amazon shut me down completely for a while (or shut down my co-author) I'd survive.

I'm also living on half my income, and I try to keep 6 months of basic living expenses (pay the bills, no frills) on hand. The rest is retirement savings and business expenses (a lot of translation expenses), much of which could be suspended in an emergency.

My point is not to brag, but to demonstrate how to be prudent within a highly variable, high-risk business. I see too many authors quitting their day jobs and assuming their income will keep rising or at least stay steady, especially if all-in with KU. There's no guarantee of that--not with KU. Thinking like a businessperson includes risk management and holding reserves against lean times--like a farmer or a retailer.


----------



## Randall Wood (Mar 31, 2014)

x


----------



## Dolphin (Aug 22, 2013)

This is a bizarre, unhelpful way of looking at things--especially when it's being sold with a sensational, clickbait title. There's no accounting for sales, as already mentioned. Many people will even go on to buy books that they've previously borrowed. There's no accounting for the added visibility on Amazon. There's no accounting for the non-zero costs, whether in time, money, or both, to distribute wide instead of being Amazon-exclusive. There's no accounting for the subset of the market--a rather large one, in some genres--that looks first or _only_ to KU for their next read. The dollar figure per page, or even per book, is useless in isolation.

Time was, people made six- or seven-figure incomes off of $0.99 sales (or a KU borrow amounting to a paltry 76 KENP in your model). Nobody thinks that's remotely practical now, yet some authors are currently enjoying the mints they've made out of their KU catalogs. The dollars and cents of royalties are just one data point among many.

I'll never really understand the animus against KU. I need to stop trying to rebut it; it's not like I'm personally invested in the program. I just want people to think more clearly, carefully, and rationally about this stuff. KBoards has taught me so, so much, and I hate to think that there are inexperienced prawns out there potentially being led astray by this kind of half-baked, emotionally driven nonsense.

*ETA:* And not for nothing? But making six figures puts you in the top 20% of American household incomes. That's an absurdly high bar, no matter how you accomplish it. To do it as a writer is _really [expletive]ing hard_, no matter how you're distributing your books, and was virtually impossible before ebooks--read: Amazon--changed the game.

We spend a lot of time rubbing elbows with one percenters in communities like KBoards, but let's keep things in perspective. I would be dumbfounded if you'd told me ten years ago that I could possibly achieve such an income by telling people stories on the internet. I'm not entitled to it. I don't need to earn that much to live--even if I had a family to support, I wouldn't need that much money. I know because _virtually every human being on the planet gets by with less._

Six figures is not the floor to go full-time. It's success beyond most people's wildest dreams.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

kw3000 said:


> I'm honestly not certain about that. Is that what the numbers say to you? That'd be kinda cool if true as I'd assumed longer is better, but again, not sure.
> 
> Everyday?  Wow, that is impressive. And, this is an interesting perspective. I don't write erotica and likely never will, but I appreciate your insight.


Well, you know, when you're writing 3-5k you can crank out 2 or even 3 a day. I did it myself for a while. I just decided that I like writing romance better. But 3k stories do add up when you have hundreds and you have an unlimited supply of free days to promote and keep them visible.


----------



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

The median income in Michigan is 50K (and we have some very rich communities). Some of our poorer communities are rural but in portions of Wayne (mostly urban) the median income is 20K. I think 100K might be middle class for areas where the cost of living is on the high end. It’s a pipe dream for the bulk of Michigan residents, though, and we’re far from the poorest state.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

ParkerAvrile said:


> According to who? I live in the United States. the six figures annual income is hardly "beyond most people's wildest dreams," indeed, the low six figures is just what you need to keep up with the Joneses in anything but some very rural areas. Yeah, I know, the same fine folks who say the average household earns $60K/a year will come back and splain to me how most people in the world live on $2/day. That is just not true. They must think we don't ever get out in the world. Or even out in our own neighborhoods. $100Kish is middle class. It's struggling in some areas like NYC, SF, etc. It is not a high income or anything to startle your neighbors, who are likely earning more...
> 
> $108K/yr is not success beyond anyone's wildest dreams who lives in our century and who pays their own bills. It is not even well-to-do. This is not 1988, it's 2018. The same people who think $108K/yr is big money probably think a $20 million pot split over 1 million+ books is big money too. So I don't see the point of arguing math with those people. KU is a small pot being chased by a lot of people. If you are getting a large share of the pot, keep doing what you're doing. Most won't. I don't know why this is even controversial. There's a lot of money in the world, and very little of it is in the KU pot.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


Entirely depends on where you live. That would be a solid income pretty much anywhere in Texas, but definitely upper middle class in the valley and probably most areas outside the biggest cities. I can't think of many jobs that pay that much. It's 2-3x what most teachers get paid.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

*How much does a Programmer make in Seattle, WA?*
The average salary for a Programmer is $81,982 per year in Seattle, WA, which is 11% above the national average. Salary estimates are based on 107 salaries submitted anonymously to Indeed by Programmer employees, users, and collected from past and present job advertisements on Indeed in the past 36 months. The typical tenure for a Programmer is 1-3 years.
*
How much does a Senior Programmer make in Seattle, WA?*
The average salary for a Senior Programmer is $120,301 per year in Seattle, WA, which is 41% above the national average. Salary estimates are based on 44 salaries submitted anonymously to Indeed by Senior Programmer employees, users, and collected from past and present job advertisements on Indeed in the past 36 months. The typical tenure for a Senior Programmer is 2-4 years.

Oh interesting... I found this nugget of info: the Seattle household income median was $80,000 in 2015.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

Yeah, I thought it was just a bit of a fun exercise and not making big claims to anything.

For the $100K many of us could definitely live on less but when you are self-employed you do have to factor in things like SE taxes, insurance, savings/retirement, and your business expenses (covers, editing, advertising, etc.) as well - which I don't think was subtracted in the original math, lol.


----------



## Dolphin (Aug 22, 2013)

ParkerAvrile said:


> According to who? I live in the United States. the six figures annual income is hardly "beyond most people's wildest dreams," indeed, the low six figures is just what you need to keep up with the Joneses in anything but some very rural areas. Yeah, I know, the same fine folks who say the average household earns $60K/a year will come back and splain to me how most people in the world live on $2/day. That is just not true. They must think we don't ever get out in the world. Or even out in our own neighborhoods. $100Kish is middle class. It's struggling in some areas like NYC, SF, etc. It is not a high income or anything to startle your neighbors, who are likely earning more...
> 
> $108K/yr is not success beyond anyone's wildest dreams who lives in our century and who pays their own bills. It is not even well-to-do. This is not 1988, it's 2018. The same people who think $108K/yr is big money probably think a $20 million pot split over 1 million+ books is big money too. So I don't see the point of arguing math with those people. KU is a small pot being chased by a lot of people. If you are getting a large share of the pot, keep doing what you're doing. Most won't. I don't know why this is even controversial. There's a lot of money in the world, and very little of it is in the KU pot.
> 
> _Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


I'm sorry, but you're living in a very privileged bubble.

Worse, it evinces a shocking lack of compassion or understanding for the struggles of average Americans--to say nothing of below-average Americans--who do indeed get by on much less than six figures.



Paranormal Kitty said:


> Entirely depends on where you live. That would be a solid income pretty much anywhere in Texas, but definitely upper middle class in the valley and probably most areas outside the biggest cities. I can't think of many jobs that pay that much. It's 2-3x what most teachers get paid.


Not a single state in the Union had a median _household_ income higher than $76.2k in 2016, the most recent year with data available from the U.S. Census Bureau. The nation-wide median was $59k. Incomes certainly haven't increased by a third or more since then (though your rent easily might have done).

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

kw3000 said:


> That was definitely my intention. I'm not out to rankle anyone...this business is tough enough as it is.
> 
> Yep, this is all important stuff to take into account too. I think I need a degree in math to keep track of all of this. lol


I'm a former accountant but a writer now - there's a reason for that, lol.


----------



## Dolphin (Aug 22, 2013)

kw3000 said:


> Again with the sugarcoating.  And I'm picking up that this thread has you a bit bothered, that genuinely sucks. But honestly, you're mistaken, there's no emotion behind my posting any of this. It really was just an exercise in figuring out the math required to make six figures...it doesn't extend any deeper than that. Perhaps I should've made that more clear in my original post, though I thought my tone had been playful enough. Maybe not.


Fair enough, OP. I apologize for disparaging your motives.


----------



## Desert Rose (Jun 2, 2015)

C. Gold said:


> *How much does a Programmer make in Seattle, WA?*
> The average salary for a Programmer is $81,982 per year in Seattle, WA, which is 11% above the national average. Salary estimates are based on 107 salaries submitted anonymously to Indeed by Programmer employees, users, and collected from past and present job advertisements on Indeed in the past 36 months. The typical tenure for a Programmer is 1-3 years.
> *
> How much does a Senior Programmer make in Seattle, WA?*
> The average salary for a Senior Programmer is $120,301 per year in Seattle, WA, which is 41% above the national average. Salary estimates are based on 44 salaries submitted anonymously to Indeed by Senior Programmer employees, users, and collected from past and present job advertisements on Indeed in the past 36 months. The typical tenure for a Senior Programmer is 2-4 years.


$80k self employed is not the same as $80k salary, though, because of the employer contribution to Social Security and Medicare.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

Dragovian said:


> $80k self employed is not the same as $80k salary, though, because of the employer contribution to Social Security and Medicare.


Indeed, those salaries also didn't include stock options, bonuses, raises, and the most important one: health care.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

ParkerAvrile said:


> It is much more expensive to be self-employed than it is to have a job with benefits. A teacher making $60K/yr is keeping more money than an author making $100K/yr.


Yes, definitely. Quite honestly I have made a rough estimate of needing about double of what I would need to make on a salary. That might sound high but I have seen other estimates in writer's group that came to a similar conclusion. Most people spend at least 10% on advertising to get to 6 figures (unless they are very prolific writers), taxes are going to be another 30-40%, etc.

Edit: Roughly double of pre-tax income on salary.


----------



## Dolphin (Aug 22, 2013)

ParkerAvrile said:


> I'm living in such a privileged bubble that I have actually noticed that if you have a seven-figure net worth you can easily be driven into bankruptcy by one accident or illness if you're self-employed. There's no economic good news. There's the reality that $100K/yr is just not a big income in a country without a safety net, and if you think it is and go crazy, you will usually end up in a bad place. As I have observed many times happen to people around me.


Now imagine living the same way, except on $60k a year. Or $20k. More and more of those median incomes are going to freelancers, just like you.

I mean...I just can't anymore with this stuff, y'all. This is too much. I hope your fortunes never sink so low that you come to understand how the other 80% is truly living.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

ParkerAvrile said:


> ...
> 
> I'm thinking the real number is probably four times what you made in your job, but *math guys assume a spherical chicken*.


So do physicists. It's the only way to do the math in a reasonable time frame.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

Dolphin said:


> Now imagine living the same way, except on $60k a year. Or $20k. More and more of those median incomes are going to freelancers, just like you.
> 
> I mean...I just can't anymore with this stuff, y'all. This is too much. I hope your fortunes never sink so low that you come to understand how the other 80% is truly living.


Aiming for a 6 figure income is a common aspiration, it doesn't mean everyone is out of touch or unsympathetic to others or isn't even in those shoes themselves. And I'm happy to live on less, but it does take at least double.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Even half of $100k seems like a lot to me, and still more than most jobs pay around here outside of health care. Perhaps the moral of the story is move somewhere dirt cheap if you want to do this for a living, haha.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

Dolphin said:


> Now imagine living the same way, except on $60k a year. Or $20k. More and more of those median incomes are going to freelancers, just like you.


Yeah, I've lived on less than $25k/year my entire adult life. I'm pretty sure that growing up my whole family lived on even less, although they didn't really discuss that with me.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

JulesWright said:


> Aiming for a 6 figure income is a common aspiration, it doesn't mean everyone is out of touch or unsympathetic to others or isn't even in those shoes themselves. And I'm happy to live on less, but it does take at least double.


I used to make 70k before I semi retired, at least some years. I bounced around between 40k-70k. I used to tell people 70k isn't that much money and they always looked at me like I'm nuts, but I know lots of people who make at least 60k and none of them are living lifestyles of the rich and famous. There's never anything wrong with aiming higher. Most people making 100k are ambitious people who worked hard and paid attention to the business side of things, not just in writing, but in anything. They're the ones who walked into their bosses office and said I want to move up in the company. Tell me what I have to do.


----------



## Mip7 (Mar 3, 2013)

Thanks for the inspiration. I went right to the 80K Novel category and with a series I see I only need 1,000 people fully reading each book? That is quite easily doable in a good indie genre like space opera or doomsday survival. Heck if I couldn't get that I would consider the effort a flop anyway.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

katrina46 said:


> I used to make 70k before I semi retired, at least some years. I bounced around between 40k-70k. I used to tell people 70k isn't that much money and they always looked at me like I'm nuts, but I know lots of people who make at least 60k and none of them are living lifestyles of the rich and famous. There's never anything wrong with aiming higher. Most people making 100k are ambitious people who worked hard and paid attention to the business side of things, not just in writing, but in anything. They're the ones who walked into their bosses office and said I want to move up in the company. Tell me what I have to do.


Yes, I absolutely agree. I aim for higher mostly for financial security reasons. I honestly don't care much about material possessions. My biggest financial goal is to buy a house and get it completely paid off.

And yes all the 100K + earners that I see here and other writing groups appear to work very hard, so it's not a life of luxury. Same in other professions.


----------



## C. Gold (Jun 12, 2017)

ParkerAvrile said:


> OMG! I did hear it from a physicist. But I swear he said chicken...


It was chicken, at least in my physics departments.



Jeff Tanyard said:


> Perhaps he told the joke in terms of increasing egg production. Works the same either way.


Oh, we made spheres of the chicken eggs too.


----------



## DrewMcGunn (Jul 6, 2017)

Hey Ken, you're thinking of this all wrong. Shoot for 100,000 CAD.  
Now, it's 20% easier to get there. lol

Not to put words in anyone else's mouth, but my own income hasn't been in shouting distance of $100k, ever. Most of the people I know and work with are in similar boats. In my neck of the woods, middle class starts at around $38,000, upper incomes start at around 120K. The value of the dollar is somewhat relative, related to where one lives. Middle income in Seattle is a lot higher than Muleshoe, Texas

While some folks' comments struck me as privileged, I agree with those who say that one needs to make at least twice your existing income before quitting a regular job with benefits, for all of the reasons folks have specified. Making more than that, would be even better.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

ParkerAvrile said:


> If you look clear-eyed around you, you can see what people spend who have houses and cars and college educations and travel and all the other things you want. You can see how they're living and what they must be earning. If you assume nobody has any money and they're all just running up their credit cards, let me ask you this. Do you think the banks are stupid? That they are loaning money to all these millions of people who don't earn enough to pay it back?


Again, it entirely depends on where you live. Everyone I know making $40k or so lives in houses like this and drives new-ish cars. Six figures seems to me like winning the lottery because I've just never known many people making that much. Even taking out half, it's still pretty comfortable if you're single or your spouse has their own income...or in some places even to support a family of four on.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

ParkerAvrile said:


> If you assume nobody has any money and they're all just running up their credit cards, let me ask you this. Do you think the banks are stupid? That they are loaning money to all these millions of people who don't earn enough to pay it back?


Let's say there are loads (millions) of people who get credit cards to make payments on their other credit cards, or their car leases, even mortgages, then get second mortgages to pay off their overloaded credit cards, a few of which they used to pay the processing fees on the second mortgage, the excess money from which goes into jet skis, a cruise and new iPhones for everyone in the family. Banks love these people. Banks are not stupid. They're greedy as hell. Half of their CC customers will pay enormous interest on their balances. Then banks will increase their credit limits. The few who can't make in the end give up their houses -- to the bank. It's crazy.

The problem for many is, once they hit the $100,000 lifestyle, they leverage it into a $150,000 lifestyle, but they're only taking home $60,000 - if they're lucky.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

ParkerAvrile said:


> It is much more expensive to be self-employed than it is to have a job with benefits. A teacher making $60K/yr is keeping more money than an author making $100K/yr.


I think we're goong overboard now because this simply isn't true. Being self-employed, you're only paying a 6-7% increase in taxes. Yes, you have to pay your own health insurance and contribute to your own retirement, but the self-employment tax, health insurance, retirement, and expenses isn't going to make a difference of $40K. It's all semantics, and I get that it's much more difficult to survive on royalties from publishing. But if you're making 100K as an author, you are doing better financially than a teacher earning 60K. They have to pay taxes too, among other things such as spending thousands on their classroom.

That's to say nothing that anyone in my family here in Appalachia would dream of earning anything over 30-40K. Teachers are paid sub 30K after years of experience in my hometown.

Money is relative. I'd love to live in LA. It's not going to happen on either a writer's income or a teacher's husband. I've been working out a lot these past few months so I can snatch a wealthy husband. I'm kidding. I think.

Edit: What. The. Hell. Apple. This is what I get for allowing my phone to update.

Edit 2: wine. Lots of wine.


----------



## Paranormal Kitty (Jun 13, 2017)

ParkerAvrile said:


> One of my friends who is truly frugal moved to Harlingen... so OK I made wide sweeping generalities... but honest to God most people in Texas live in San Antonio or Houston or Dallas or Austin...
> 
> In a brief forum post I talk about most of the people because that's ... most of the people, isn't it?
> 
> ...


I don't think it was negativity. I was just showing you that what "poor" means depends on your perspective. Since I've never known anything else, that's why $100k seems like a whole lot to me when it only takes half that to be solid middle class. I mean, I grew up exceedingly poor by your standards, but I wasn't unhappy and I still went to college. And I never said anything about people who earn that much not putting their pants on one leg at a time...just that I didn't know many or if I do, I don't know what they're making. It's not like I pick my friends based on what they earn.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

My family runs their own business. The majority of my social circle are self-employed. I know the costs. If I have insurance, I’m not worried about fighting that battle. Bankruptcy really has an uneccasary stigma to it, and that’s also not something I’ll concerm myself with. Either of these things are one bad thing away from most people. It’s pointless then to worry about it. If you’re so pessimistic about it, then why even try?

You don’t need to argue with me. I’m not quite arguing with anyone. I don’t need an education on the matter. I was just simply pointing out the flaw in some number crunching. I won’t get into politics but there’s a change on the horizon R.E. healthcare.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

K.B. said:


> I think we're goong overboard now because this simply isn't true. Being self-employed, you're only paying a 6-7% increase in taxes. Yes, you have to pay your own health insurance and contribute to your own retirement, but the self-employment tax, health insurance, retirement, and expenses isn't going to make a difference of $40K. It's all semantics, and I get that it's much more difficult to survive on royalties from publishing. But if you're making 100K as an author, you are doing better financially than a teacher earning 60K. They have to pay taxes too, among other things such as spending thousands on their classroom.
> 
> That's to say nothing that anyone in my family here in Appalachia would dream of earning anything over 30-40K. Teachers are paid sub 30K after years of experience in my hometown.
> 
> ...


Extra self employment taxes are about 7k. Health insurance for a young couple is another 8k, or more like 10-12k for a family (this can go way up). And because it's not great insurance, add another few thousand to medical expenses. Lack of retirement/pension is probably another 5-10k. Paying for your own equipment is another few thousand.

A six figure author income is not super far from a 60k job with great benefits. It's more, but it's not that much more.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Biggest point I would make is that gross is not net. It really depends how much it costs you to make whatever-amount. 

But there are 1000+ Authors grossing 100k plus on KDP alone, amd I would guess many more when you factor in wide authors. Which I am quite sure is a whole lot better than tradpub numbers.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

Yeah, it definitely varies depending on what your advertising and production expenses are for producing and marketing your books, and also living expenses will vary widely as well.  

For myself, I definitely factor in a lot more things than just the difference in self-employment tax. I'm going with estimating that I need to gross roughly double at least what I feel I need to live on, and I can continue to adjust as I go along.  I'm actually already self-employed but don't make my living from my fiction yet.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

Crystal_ said:


> Extra self employment taxes are about 7k. Health insurance for a young couple is another 8k, or more like 10-12k for a family (this can go way up). And because it's not great insurance, add another few thousand to medical expenses. Lack of retirement/pension is probably another 5-10k. Paying for your own equipment is another few thousand.
> 
> A six figure author income is not super far from a 60k job with great benefits. It's more, but it's not that much more.


Yes, my argument wasn't that it's substantially more, but rather it's not as if 100K is a bad deal. Additionally, nowhere within a five hour radius of me are teachers making that much money. I think we are all looking st this from our own perspectives which is why this has now spiraled. I know for me, a good insurance plan would cost about $300 a month. I'm single, 28, and mostly healthy. The calculation will be different for anyone else.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Considering that the average annual wage in the US is presently around $56K, and that means half the population earns below that, I would think that $100K would be awesome income for most of us -- from whatever source.  

To the OP: thank you for charting out the KU numbers for us. Very interesting, and very informative.


----------



## It&#039;s A Mystery (Mar 14, 2017)

Just to add in some data that includes sales, I had 633,397 page reads last month and 2,067 sales from two books of 50,000 in length.

Those page reads are roughly 45%-55% of earnings for me.

This has me on target for roughly $100k, but these books were released in January and April so this is unlikely to last!


----------



## Evenstar (Jan 26, 2013)

Good grief, this is a fun argument from a British point of view.

The average salary in the UK is around 27k GBP ($35k ish?), so even _half _of 100k is nearly_ twice _the average income.

Of course, we don't pay for health care so I'm sure that saves a chunk.

I want to tell some people to take a reality check, but it's a tomatoes tomatoes argument. It's all relative!


----------



## JaclynDolamore (Nov 5, 2015)

ParkerAvrile said:


> I just don't like this negativity of 80% of Americans are poor. They're not. 80% of Americans don't live in Brownsville or Harlingen ... they live where they were raised or they move to a place they can get in the game.


It's not that 80% of Americans are poor, it's that a household income of 50k is not poor in a lot of places (and people do live in them, sure MORE people live in cities but I live in the cheap "just beyond reasonable commuting zone" of the DC/Baltimore areas and there are people here. I swear I'm not imaging them all). Or people live in cities but they just adapt; you buy a 15 year old Toyota that never dies, live in an apartment or buy a house in an reasonably safe but uncool out of the way neighborhood, you go without health insurance for a few years when you're young, you buy your clothes at a thrift store and go to the library. You still have money for splurge purchases and wine and an annual vacation and Netflix. You're not POOR. You're fine! Are you one terrible medical disaster away from bankruptcy? Well, sure, but most of us in the US are, but you just have to cross your fingers on that one. For most people I know in my generation this is just the way we live. The economy is becoming more and more freelance and service based and most of those people are never gonna make 6 figures.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

ParkerAvrile said:


> I was a homeless runaway. I've been poor. And it is not how 80% is living. It just isn't. Some terrible things had to happen for that to happen. It's a minority of people who are in that situation.
> 
> If you look clear-eyed around you, you can see what people spend who have houses and cars and college educations and travel and all the other things you want. You can see how they're living and what they must be earning. If you assume nobody has any money and they're all just running up their credit cards, let me ask you this. Do you think the banks are stupid? That they are loaning money to all these millions of people who don't earn enough to pay it back?
> 
> I assume if others can do it, I can do it. Maybe I can't break off any large slice of the KU pot, but there are other ways to make money. I can find some of those. I refuse to be sold the idea that 80% of Americans accept living in poverty. They just... don't.


I agree with you, except for the part about banks not being that stupid. I lost my job in 2008 because they were all just that stupid.


----------



## going going gone (Jun 4, 2013)

It's hard to make $100K as a fiction author, full stop. 

About 1000 indie and 1000 trade published people working in English do it right now, via various mixes of formats, vendors, and so on. Plenty of them are in KU. A few are hybrid. Some started indie and are now with Amazon imprints. Every year, that 2000 will include new names that push out some old names. Amazon and its commitment to the e-reader shifted who the 2000 were in a dramatic way from 2010-now. As Amazon changes other things, expect other shifts in the future.

Despite the courses and podcasts and systems saying anyone can be one of them, anyone can't. Certainly EVERYone can't. Who exactly can? About 2000 people, and that's as far as I'd be willing to commit.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

Dolphin said:


> Six figures is not the floor to go full-time. It's success beyond most people's wildest dreams.


That's true in isolation. But I quit a secure six-figure day job (at 51 years of age) after building a 30-year career and putting 3 kids through college, so it was done only when I could roughly match what I'd earned in terms of lifestyle. I took moving to a low-cost area into account, and all the savings for not having to commute, etc. Because I worked so hard and risked so much (can't go back after 4 years out of the former biz) I jealously guard that success. So on one hand it's success beyond wild dreams; on the other, it's no better monetarily than what I had before. What I really value is the freedom and independence.

***

It's important to define whether we're talking about gross or net when we say "income." For the self-employed in the US, 100K gross is not nearly as much as 100K net (after taxes and everything else). My rule of thumb is that I keep half my gross. It may be more like 60%, but that rule of thumb keeps me comfortably within margin.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

K.B. said:


> Yes, my argument wasn't that it's substantially more, but rather it's not as if 100K is a bad deal. Additionally, nowhere within a five hour radius of me are teachers making that much money. I think we are all looking st this from our own perspectives which is why this has now spiraled. I know for me, a good insurance plan would cost about $300 a month. I'm single, 28, and mostly healthy. The calculation will be different for anyone else.


Yes, it's not a bad deal in most places, but people tend to compare self employment income and salary apples to apples, and that's not the case. Teachers also get particularly good benefits, depending on the state. In California, for ex, teachers can make a lot after years (the payscale is public info), but in other states, teacher incomes start and stay low. You should probably knock 30% of the average self-employment income when comparing to a full time job with benefits.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie (May 30, 2011)

JaclynDolamore said:


> It's not that 80% of Americans are poor, it's that a household income of 50k is not poor in a lot of places (and people do live in them, sure MORE people, live in cities but I live in the cheap "just beyond reasonable commuting zone" of the DC/Baltimore areas and there are people here. I swear I'm not imaging them all). *snip*


I live in Michigan in a not so hip town. 50k here is an upper-middle-class income. To put things in perspective the average cost to rent a nice home is just over $700 a month. You can get a much cheaper place in the $500's. And it's not just rent, everything is cheaper than it would be in a big city. So a self-publishing income of even $20,000 a year would be a life-changing for some.

And really that's what it boils down to. It's not inconceivable to self-publish part-time while also working. With a little focus bringing a modest 5k-10K year from writing books is the equivalent to giving yourself a pay raise. So there are different ways of looking at things, I'm often surprised we don't see more discussions about self-publishing as long-term supplemental income.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

For those who think 100K is an astonishing amount of money to earn that's fine but you need to account for the differences - you have to also pay for all of your writing expenses (covers, editing, advertising, etc.) plus all of your benefits, SE taxes if you live in US, etc.

So if living on 50K sounds reasonable, you will probably need to gross somewhere around 100K in your writing earnings.  You can go with a smaller figure than needing double but the lower you go the more unrealistic it is - in my opinion.  You will need to run a very tight ship and have very low writing expenses and not have to pay a lot for health insurance, etc.  It's better to have a margin for error, money to put into savings, etc.


----------



## richard.r.fox (Jul 13, 2013)

I average about 2.2 million page reads a month with 25 titles. Give readers what they like to read and they'll keep reading.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

Here is an actual example of how the math might work, looking back until I found a month that was very close to your 9,000, with no real advertising dollars sent. This is February for me:

US

Sales: 2,161.01
KU: 4,746.58
Total: 6,916.93

UK
Sales: 376.70
KU: 624.99
Total: 1,001.69

CA
Sales: 126.46
KU: 205.16
Total: 331.62

AU
Sales: 307.56
KU: 201.71
Total Royalty: 509.27

Totals income after → USD conversion: 8,909.05

Total number of books: Irrelevant, because older books sell almost nothing, so it’s only the new books/ongoing series that account for 90% of this. That's the treadmill aspect of this. YOu can find tons of people who make no more (or even less) than they did in 2012-2013 in spite of having 5X the titles.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Gentleman Zombie said:


> I live in Michigan in a not so hip town. 50k here is an upper-middle-class income. To put things in perspective the average cost to rent a nice home is just over $700 a month. You can get a much cheaper place in the $500's. And it's not just rent, everything is cheaper than it would be in a big city. So a self-publishing income of even $20,000 a year would be a life-changing for some.
> 
> And really that's what it boils down to. It's not inconceivable to self-publish part-time while also working. With a little focus bringing a modest 5k-10K year from writing books is the equivalent to giving yourself a pay raise. So there are different ways of looking at things, I'm often surprised we don't see more discussions about self-publishing as long-term supplemental income.


I hear what you and some of the others are saying about living in cheaper areas of the US.

But then you have the issue of fewer jobs. Even in the outer fringes of my metro there are people still having trouble finding decent jobs. So -- they go where the jobs are: the City. Which is more expensive. Either it's more expensive to live there, or the commute in your beat up Ford Taurus makes it more expensive (and hope it never breaks down).

I never have looked at any creative activity as something I would ever make a living off of. Just not happnen'. For most of us.

The part time publishing thing (as you mention), and try to make as much as you can without sacrificing quality, etc. -- that's probably the best plan for most self publishers.


----------



## Guest (May 15, 2018)

Dragovian said:


> $80k self employed is not the same as $80k salary, though, because of the employer contribution to Social Security and Medicare.


Yes, this here. There is a reason I keep my day job. Well, I actually LIKE my day job. But I have also done the math (no degree, I'm just a numbers person lol) calculating what I would actually have to publish (in terms of genres and frequency) to equal my income from my day job. And I have to include in that not just my salary, but my health insurance, five weeks paid vacation, 401K, profit sharing, life insurance, continuing education opportunities, and the assortment of other benefits I get. I would need to gross around $100,000 a year just to replace everything I get from the day job.

Yes, I COULD live on much less. But why? So I could have the "privilege" of saying I was a full-time author? I don't see the point in doing without things I can currently afford just so I can tell other people I write full-time. My pride does not require such sacrifices.

I think the real takeaway from this thread shouldn't be whether or not it is possible to make X amount self-publishing. The takeaway is that folks need to really think about this as a business and make plans as a business. Determine what your goals and objectives are from a professional outlook, and make decisions based on that. It is easy to get caught up in the hype and think "If I just do X,Y, Z then I will be a superstar!" But the reality is that the percentage of people doing this full time is low (as it is in EVERY creative industry. This reality is not unique to self-publishing!) But not every musician needs to be Pink or Adele. There are actually a lot of musicians that aren't household names making what they need to make doing what they love. And it may not be full-time income, but it serves their goals.


----------



## Nicholas Erik (Sep 22, 2015)

kw3000 said:


> Yikes, that's a little scary to consider. A treadmill. You raise a good point though, about the 90% of income coming from newer books. I guess there's never a point where you'd be able to rest on your laurels...unless you really knocked it out of the park with a huge breakout book and then you were able to bank a ton. That'd be a pretty rare occurrence though, not something you could count on, and likely akin to planning your retire believing you'd win the lottery. Thanks for your input.


I think it's much better to think of it as a job (if you want to do this full-time), rather than a treadmill. With a normal job, if you don't show up for two months or six months, you don't get paid. Same thing here. I think where authors get in trouble - myself included - is thinking you can take a lot of time off, and have "passive" income hold you over. There are plenty of books or posts on the internet promising that, but it's not reality. Passive income decays rapidly into no income, even if you have a great/popular product. This is just like any other occupation: you don't continually work, you don't get paid. That's not really a marketable notion - replace your job! Except, um, with another job where you pay more taxes and your own health care (if you're in the US), but in exchange you get to call all the shots, (which may actually be a negative, depending on levels of self-discipline or lack thereof!) - but it is certainly more accurate than "write a couple books and live off your backlist."

Nick


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Dolphin said:


> I'll never really understand the animus against KU. I need to stop trying to rebut it; it's not like I'm personally invested in the program. I just want people to think more clearly, carefully, and rationally about this stuff. KBoards has taught me so, so much, and I hate to think that there are inexperienced prawns out there potentially being led astray by this kind of half-baked, emotionally driven nonsense.


I'm a huge believer in rational decision-making, but I find KU hard to think through clearly (which I need to do for an upcoming series). I think it's because there are so many unknowns. If it were just a matter of realizing KU represents X amount of the reading market overall, and Y amount within my genre, then I could look at the payout and my sales on other platforms and come to a sensible decision. But there are all these additional unanswerable questions:

- What's causing authors to be accused of illegitimate page-reads? Since I have no reliable info on this front, I have no idea how likely it is to happen to me and no way to protect myself. Best case scenario: the problem has no impact on me, and I benefit greatly from the large KU readership, increased visibility, and marketing tools. Worst case: I lose my account, ending my writing career. That's a huge spectrum of impact, and I could land anywhere along it.

- What percentage of KU authors are being accused of illegitimate page-reads? Ten percent? One eighth of one percent? Since we're dependent on self-reporting, and self-reports are scattered across many different author communities, we have no way of knowing how large this problem is. Some problems, while terrible, are very uncommon, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to worry about them, but we really have no idea how common this one is.

- How many KU subscribers are there? Is the number growing? If so, how fast? Will the other platforms and Amazon sales (as opposed to borrows) whither further, or is the current situation relative stable? In other words, is going wide an opportunity to gain visibility with relatively stable readerships who are being deprived of good reads by KU's dominance, or is it more akin to arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic because a tipping point has been passed?

- Is Amazon going to radically change KU again? If so, when? Will books like mine benefit or be harmed?

Reasoning is like building a house: it only works if you have the parts you need. You might be able to fudge if you're missing a few relatively unimportant bits, but if key elements are missing, it just won't come together. Which is to say, I suspect most decisions about KU aren't based on fully reasoning out the situation because that's just not possible. These decisions are more heuristic, and heuristics are highly vulnerable to emotional influences, personality tendencies, and so forth.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

I have an Amazon Seller Central Account and one with Merch Amazon (t-shirts).  I do very little with either one at this point, but I do still have them.  People do sometimes lose their accounts on those two platforms but I do feel that most of them seem to be based on issues that could have been avoided.  I feel that if I follow the TOS of those programs that there is very little chance of me losing my account, although occasionally Amazon does do some strange things.

I feel very differently about the KU situation and that there isn't a lot I can do to protect myself against my account being threatened other than not participate in KU.  It very well could be that I wouldn't run into any problems at all, but it feels very high risk to me because I do see writers who appear to do be doing nothing wrong and making repeated attempts to get in touch with Amazon through multiple channels and getting nowhere.  It may be a small percentage, I don't know, but again it feels very different from other programs and I personally would prefer to not put my writing career through this so I'm going to keep all my books wide.  I do know many people are quite successful with KU and I think that's great.  It's also possible Amazon will get this sorted out.  I certainly hope so.  I agree with Becca that it's hard to make a rational decision with so much unknown.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

K.B. said:


> I think we're goong overboard now because this simply isn't true. Being self-employed, you're only paying a 6-7% increase in taxes. Yes, you have to pay your own health insurance and contribute to your own retirement, but the self-employment tax, health insurance, retirement, and expenses isn't going to make a difference of $40K. It's all semantics, and I get that it's much more difficult to survive on royalties from publishing. But if you're making 100K as an author, you are doing better financially than a teacher earning 60K. They have to pay taxes too, among other things such as spending thousands on their classroom.


FWIW, my spouse's medical and other benefits (not including paid leave) are worth $48,000. He's a professor at a state university. His benefits are worth about 60% of his salary. Outstanding employer-provided health insurance is worth ... well, it's pretty much priceless, since there's no way to buy an equivalent product on the open market ... but it costs his employer more than $2,000/month. Giving that sort of thing up is probably a central impediment for many Americans who'd like to go full-time as writers or artists, or who'd like to start a small business.

Also, salary alone is deceptive. An awful lot of people live reasonably nicely but have no money in the bank. Something goes wrong -- job loss, accident, sick child -- and they quickly fall into a cascade of mounting credit card debt and loan defaults. You can go from living in a nice home with two cars to bankrupt and moving in with family in just a few months. A study a couple years ago found that something like 70% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, and many have no savings at all. A $50K salary with $300K in the bank ≠ a $50K salary with $0 in the bank and a car loan.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

JulesWright said:


> I agree with Becca that it's hard to make a rational decision with so much unknown.


Several caught in the bot fiasco have had their accounts restored. Until those stories evolve further we won't know how they did it or if they're under any kind of probation.

In the meantime, I think a rational position is if you're in KU and so far unaffected, sit tight. If you note any suspicious activity in you KU reads, report it. If the next sweep gets you, pull out of KU immediately and go wide. It appears the second "infraction" brings the threat of account suspension, not the first, and the only way to avoid it is to leave KU completely.

Later, if the scam-bot situation disappears, reconsider KU.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

Yeah, those who haven't received any notice are fine for now. Unfortunately there is also the situation of people's page reads being cut retroactively, so people could end up spending money on advertising and think they are doing fine until they get to the end of the month. Kind of makes it hard to plan for your advertising. Anyway, I would prefer to avoid it all. Maybe Amazon will get it sorted out. I certainly hope so. They don't appear to have any sort of grip on the fraud to me, so I don't feel it's a good situation for me long-term anyway, but I do respect anyone who feels it's a good situation for them.



Dpock said:


> Several caught in the bot fiasco have had their accounts restored. Until those stories evolve further we won't know how they did it or if they're under any kind of probation.
> 
> otiIn the meantime, I think a rational position is if you're in KU and so far unaffected, sit tight. If you note any suspicious activity in you KU reads, report it. If the next sweep gets you, pull out of KU immediately and go wide. It appears the second "infraction" brings the threat of account suspension, not the first, and the only way to avoid it is to leave KU completely.
> 
> Later, if the scam-bot situation disappears, reconsider KU.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Dpock said:


> Several caught in the bot fiasco have had their accounts restored. Until those stories evolve further we won't know how they did it or if they're under any kind of probation.
> 
> In the meantime, I think a rational position is if you're in KU and so far unaffected, sit tight. If you note any suspicious activity in you KU reads, report it. If the next sweep gets you, pull out of KU immediately and go wide. It appears the second "infraction" brings the threat of account suspension, not the first, and the only way to avoid it is to leave KU completely.
> 
> Later, if the scam-bot situation disappears, reconsider KU.


My understanding (which could be incorrect) is that the first infraction generates page-stripping and a nastygram; the second generates account suspension, with restoration if you complain; and the third generates permanent account closure. Personally, I'd get out after that first infraction. Even if you get out of KU right away, people who've borrowed your book get to hang onto it as long as they like, so illegitimate page-reads could theoretically show up months after a book's out of KU. Seems like a small chance, but permanent account closure is a frightening threat.

_Trimmed a response to a post I later decided had better be deleted. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## JaclynDolamore (Nov 5, 2015)

jb1111 said:


> I hear what you and some of the others are saying about living in cheaper areas of the US.
> 
> But then you have the issue of fewer jobs. Even in the outer fringes of my metro there are people still having trouble finding decent jobs. So -- they go where the jobs are: the City. Which is more expensive. Either it's more expensive to live there, or the commute in your beat up Ford Taurus makes it more expensive (and hope it never breaks down).
> 
> ...


We are talking about writing as a career here, though, so...you could live anywhere. I know plenty of full time writers who don't live in the city for their jobs, but because Cities Are Cool. Which, hey, we all make choices. I envy that my DC friends can go write together at a Starbucks, but I don't envy that their mortgages cost 6 times more than mine and usually for a smaller house and garden...I'm sure they feel the reverse. And people get tied to cities for family, kids' schools, whatever. I would never tell anyone to quit a good job to take up the erratic income of a writer unless you've really got it together, mind you. But if you never had a good job to start with, and you never had any debts either, it's a little easier then!!


----------



## 91831 (Jul 18, 2016)

Evenstar said:


> Good grief, this is a fun argument from a British point of view.
> 
> The average salary in the UK is around 27k GBP ($35k ish?), so even _half _of 100k is nearly_ twice _the average income.
> 
> ...


Hahaha, I was getting ready to post something along these lines!
People keep mentioning teachers on $60k dollars, that's about £45k here, and the only teachers on that over here are those in management (or at least in middle management who have been working for 10 years and are probably doing exam marking on top!).
I think if I were grossing $50k+ in writing, I'd be that spherical cow jumping over the moon!


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

I think the ultimate takeaway here is that, again, everyone's situation is different. My needs aren't the same as someone else's, and so that drives my outlook on the matter. Some here could be fine making 25K as a full-time writer. Others need 100K for it to make sense, and some need more. I make more money as a freelance writer than I could hope for in the work force here, and I'm not anywhere close to 100K.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

evdarcy said:


> Hahaha, I was getting ready to post something along these lines!
> People keep mentioning teachers on $60k dollars, that's about £45k here, and the only teachers on that over here are those in management (or at least in middle management who have been working for 10 years and are probably doing exam marking on top!).
> I think if I were grossing $50k+ in writing, I'd be that spherical cow jumping over the moon!


 That's kind of apples and oranges, though, since the taxes are so different. Your tax chart says overall you guys pay way more, but then I THINK you get some sort of personal allowance where you don't pay on that money and it's much higher than our standard deductions. Correct me if I'm wrong. I just remember reading that once somewhere. Our 100k is probably not your 100k. I don't mean that snarky. I just get why this would be an interesting conversation for you.


----------



## 91831 (Jul 18, 2016)

katrina46 said:


> That's kind of apples and oranges, though, since the taxes are so different. Your tax chart says overall you guys pay way more, but then I THINK you get some sort of personal allowance where you don't pay on that money and it's much higher than our standard deductions. Correct me if I'm wrong. I just remember reading that once somewhere. Our 100k is probably not your 100k.


Yeah, we get a personal allowance of 11,800GBP (it increased slightly this year). Which means we don't pay tax on that amount, but then on anything over it. We generally refer to having 2 tax brackets Higher and Basic, the higher meaning you pay a greater rate on higher earnings. However, throughout the brackets, your tax rate varies a little but most tend to use 20% on the basic and 40% on the higher - although it doesn't necessarily work out that way.

An example I have is that if I earn 21,000 GBP (The minimum to repay student loans on the latest loan plan) then I'd pay about 1,800 GBP in tax on this.
I'd also pay about 1,500 GBP in National Insurance - this is a payment that contributes to the NHS (so we get free healthcare), Benefits (if we get made unemployed we can claim a small sum each week to help towards living or claim statutory sick pay if we take time off work sick), state pension (what you get when you retire if you don't have a very good private pension), etc.
If you have a work pension or student loans to repay, this gets taken out on top.

Seriously though, 100k over here (in GBP) would put you into the higher bracket and you'd see a good chunk stripped from you - I think you'd lose about 33kGBP in tax and NI on that much. Obviously, you take out business expenses and you're only taxed on what you actually take home in the end.

$50k works out to be about 35-39k GBP and you could live quite comfortably on that over here.
You can play with UK incomes here:
www. tax.service.gov.uk/ estimate-paye-take-home-pay (I put in spaces because links). 
NB: This is not for self-employed people, but gives a rough guide.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> That's kind of apples and oranges, though, since the taxes are so different. Your tax chart says overall you guys pay way more, but then I THINK you get some sort of personal allowance where you don't pay on that money and it's much higher than our standard deductions. Correct me if I'm wrong. I just remember reading that once somewhere. Our 100k is probably not your 100k. I don't mean that snarky. I just get why this would be an interesting conversation for you.


US and UK overall tax burden is similar, but UK residents get a lot more safety net with that.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/27/tax-britons-pay-europe-australia-us

The recent tax changes in the US mean bigger earners (like six and seven figure authors) will pay less than the above. But yes health insurance is high. I pay 900 a month just for me for not good insurance. In California where I was until a year ago, it would be twice that, and I believe it is projected to go up 20% or so this year thanks to removal of the individual mandate, which means you have fewer young, healthy people in the pool. If you are budgeting, budget for that.

We moved to a lower cost state once hubby retired. Writers cannot live anywhere, not if they have employed spouses in specialized jobs. We paid off all debt which is what I recommend doing with extra writing money. Not having a mortgage is huge. (And so is my non-CA, paid off house!)

Most people will not earn a great living from writing fiction, but more people are doing it now than ever before, that is for sure.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

evdarcy said:


> Yeah, we get a personal allowance of 11,800GBP (it increased slightly this year). Which means we don't pay tax on that amount, but then on anything over it. We generally refer to having 2 tax brackets Higher and Basic, the higher meaning you pay a greater rate on higher earnings. However, throughout the brackets, your tax rate varies a little but most tend to use 20% on the basic and 40% on the higher - although it doesn't necessarily work out that way.
> 
> An example I have is that if I earn 21,000 GBP (The minimum to repay student loans on the latest loan plan) then I'd pay about 1,800 GBP in tax on this.
> I'd also pay about 1,500 GBP in National Insurance - this is a payment that contributes to the NHS (so we get free healthcare), Benefits (if we get made unemployed we can claim a small sum each week to help towards living or claim statutory sick pay if we take time off work sick), state pension (what you get when you retire if you don't have a very good private pension), etc.
> ...


Thank you. I've always been curious because when I just look at the UK it's like 40% on a little over 46,000 and that seems crazy, but I knew there had to be things I didn't know about that made it all work out.


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Wow, the YMMV acronym sure applies here. The poster making the potential 6-figures said his backlist sales were negligible - meaning his new releases were what propelled him.

That's great for him, and his success surely beats my high 5-figure income, but my backlist sales are 50% of my income. No KU. No promo. No mailing list. No ARCs.

We need some kind of YMMV smiley.


----------



## 91831 (Jul 18, 2016)

katrina46 said:


> Thank you. I've always been curious because when I just look at the UK it's like 40% on a little over 46,000 and that seems crazy, but I knew there had to be things I didn't know about that made it all work out.


Aye, it's the general idea, but it's nuanced up and down the brackets.

If you earn over (I think it's roughly) 120kGBP you lose your right to the tax-free allowance.
Over 150k GBP and you go into an even higher bracket of about 45%.

_Edited. Drop me a PM if you have any questions. - Becca_


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Let's steer clear of those purely political comments, everyone. I know a discussion like this one tends naturally in that direction, so just as yourself, "I am I still making a point about writing/publishing, or am I moving beyond?"

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## BGArcher (Jun 14, 2014)

Crystal_ said:


> Extra self employment taxes are about 7k. Health insurance for a young couple is another 8k, or more like 10-12k for a family (this can go way up). And because it's not great insurance, add another few thousand to medical expenses. Lack of retirement/pension is probably another 5-10k. Paying for your own equipment is another few thousand.
> 
> A six figure author income is not super far from a 60k job with great benefits. It's more, but it's not that much more.


That's true, but you're missing out on something. Let's say you make $100K, before taxes. If you have an LLC set up, You may only pay yourself $75K, and keep the rest in the LLC for tax purposes. Furthermore, you can put a fair amount away in IRA'S (both a personal and a business account) on top of a business 401K, that is not taxed. So that way, your keeping more of your money, and lowering the rate that you're taxed on. To put it another way, I would way rather make a 100k working from my home office than being a public school teacher making 60K. Between budget cuts, and the fact I won't be spending the better part of a month each year being ill because of those lovely students, it can be a major quality of life difference.


----------



## AYClaudy (Oct 2, 2014)

cadle-sparks said:


> It's hard to make $100K as a fiction author, full stop.
> 
> About 1000 indie and 1000 trade published people working in English do it right now, via various mixes of formats, vendors, and so on. Plenty of them are in KU. A few are hybrid. Some started indie and are now with Amazon imprints. Every year, that 2000 will include new names that push out some old names. Amazon and its commitment to the e-reader shifted who the 2000 were in a dramatic way from 2010-now. As Amazon changes other things, expect other shifts in the future.
> 
> Despite the courses and podcasts and systems saying anyone can be one of them, anyone can't. Certainly EVERYone can't. Who exactly can? About 2000 people, and that's as far as I'd be willing to commit.


That 1000 making $100,000 Figure was/is so surprising. But it's good to keep things in perspective. The NFL has more football players than amazon has indies making 100,000. And that's gross not net.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

I've pruned away a small political derailment. Carry on.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

Don't let her fool you. Not only did she prune away a political derailment, she pruned Heath Ledger too.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

I'm taking this out of context of the discussion, I realize, but I was floored by the questions.



ParkerAvrile said:


> Do you think the banks are stupid? That they are loaning money to all these millions of people who don't earn enough to pay it back?


That was a banking _business model_ for years. Remember 2008?


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

K.B. said:


> Don't let her fool you. Not only did she prune away a political derailment, she pruned Heath Ledger too.


If only. Then I could restore him.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> If only. Then I could restore him.


You did miss the blatant one, though. Just saying respectfully.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Shelley K said:


> That was a banking _business model_ for years. Remember 2008?


Nope, we *totally* don't remember. Because if we did, we might get into debating the causes of the Great Recession, and that would lead to a Great Threadlock.

Soooooo ... how 'about that KU, eh??


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

katrina46 said:


> You did miss the blatant one, though. Just saying respectfully.


Please report it. I read this thread while my kids were arguing over one of those restaurant on-table computer kiosks ... must've missed it.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> Also, salary alone is deceptive. An awful lot of people live reasonably nicely but have no money in the bank. Something goes wrong -- job loss, accident, sick child -- and they quickly fall into a cascade of mounting credit card debt and loan defaults. You can go from living in a nice home with two cars to bankrupt and moving in with family in just a few months. A study a couple years ago found that something like 70% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, and many have no savings at all. A $50K salary with $300K in the bank ≠ a $50K salary with $0 in the bank and a car loan.


This cannot be emphasized enough--as an indie, like many businesspeople, you have no real financial support system that's not of your own making. Your company won't bail you out, and you can't depend on your paycheck never losing ground. Going back to Benjamin Franklin-style (or, in today's terms, Dave Ramsey-style) self-finanacial-management is vital. If you can't live on less than you're making and sock away savings against a rainy day, don't quit your day job. If you already did, get one back if you can, especially if you can get benefits over pay. Living paycheck to paycheck without a genuine guaranteed paycheck is a recipe for disaster.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

David VanDyke said:


> This cannot be emphasized enough--as an indie, like many businesspeople, you have no real financial support system that's not of your own making. Your company won't bail you out, and you can't depend on your paycheck never losing ground. Going back to Benjamin Franklin-style (or, in today's terms, Dave Ramsey-style) self-finanacial-management is vital. If you can't live on less than you're making and sock away savings against a rainy day, don't quit your day job. If you already did, get one back if you can, especially if you can get benefits over pay. Living paycheck to paycheck without a genuine guaranteed paycheck is a recipe for disaster.


I think earlier you said you should have at least 6 months in the bank. I'd double that before quitting your day job. Also, if you get a windfall, save it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

K.B. said:


> Edit: What. The. Hell. Apple. This is what I get for allowing my phone to update.
> 
> Edit 2: wine. Lots of wine.


Apple folks....

you can turn off the smart punctuation thingies...

Go to Settings > General > Keyboard, and then turn off the "Smart Punctuation" toggle.

https://www.howtogeek.com/344310/how-to-turn-off-smart-punctuation-on-your-iphone-and-ipad/


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> Thank you. I've always been curious because when I just look at the UK it's like 40% on a little over 46,000 and that seems crazy, but I knew there had to be things I didn't know about that made it all work out.


This is true, but you only pay the 40% on the amount over £46k. So you have (what was it?) £11kish tax free, then anything from £11k to £46k is taxed at 25%, and anything above that at 40%. So if you earn $50k per year, for example, you'll only pay 40% on £4k.


----------



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

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Apple folks....
> 
> you can turn off the smart punctuation thingies...
> 
> ...


I just tested this and I'm really hoping it worked.

Edited: It did.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I just tested this and I'm really hoping it worked.
> 
> Edited: It did.


I'm on my iPad 99% of the time. After the update, I HAD to find a solution. 

Betsy


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Nicholas Erik said:


> I think it's much better to think of it as a job (if you want to do this full-time), rather than a treadmill. With a normal job, if you don't show up for two months or six months, you don't get paid. Same thing here. I think where authors get in trouble - myself included - is thinking you can take a lot of time off, and have "passive" income hold you over. There are plenty of books or posts on the internet promising that, but it's not reality. Passive income decays rapidly into no income, even if you have a great/popular product. This is just like any other occupation: you don't continually work, you don't get paid. That's not really a marketable notion - replace your job! Except, um, with another job where you pay more taxes and your own health care (if you're in the US), but in exchange you get to call all the shots, (which may actually be a negative, depending on levels of self-discipline or lack thereof!) - but it is certainly more accurate than "write a couple books and live off your backlist."
> 
> Nick


Lack of self-discipline and lack of strategy. There are some writers who put up books, do well, and couldn't tell you why it worked out for them, but most have a plan AND the self-discipline to work everyday to carry it through. I had horrible writers block yesterday and I still got over 2,000 words. Didn't have a choice. I have to get the book out there by the end of the week, so I sat there and muddled through it.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

Not to bring the thread back to the original topic or anything, but there was a survey I saw that showed that most authors making 100K+ had an average of 34 books out. That seems about right.


----------



## Not any more (Mar 19, 2012)

C. Gockel said:


> Not to bring the thread back to the original topic or anything, but there was a survey I saw that showed that most authors making 100K+ had an average of 34 books out. That seems about right.


One time while I had too much time on my hands, I did a perusal of the Top 100 writers in the whole store and the Top 100 writers in SFF. Other than a couple of outliers such as the guy who wrote The Martian, all of the writers on the list had at least 25 books published. The average was 45, which was skewed by Nora Roberts and a few others.


----------



## Crime fighters (Nov 27, 2013)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Apple folks....
> 
> you can turn off the smart punctuation thingies...
> 
> ...


Thank you so much for that.


----------



## going going gone (Jun 4, 2013)

C. Gockel said:


> Not to bring the thread back to the original topic or anything, but there was a survey I saw that showed that most authors making 100K+ had an average of 34 books out. That seems about right.


This one?

https://www.writtenwordmedia.com/2017/06/07/100k-author/

I link to it off my Twitter every few months!


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

cadle-sparks said:


> This one?
> 
> https://www.writtenwordmedia.com/2017/06/07/100k-author/
> 
> I link to it off my Twitter every few months!


It wasn't this one, actually! But if the same result came in two studies it must be true, right?


----------



## Desert Rose (Jun 2, 2015)

Dpock said:


> In the meantime, I think a rational position is if you're in KU and so far unaffected, sit tight. If you note any suspicious activity in you KU reads, report it. If the next sweep gets you, pull out of KU immediately and go wide. It appears the second "infraction" brings the threat of account suspension, not the first, and the only way to avoid it is to leave KU completely.


Plenty of the people I've seen reporting stripped pages and nastygrams didn't have any suspicious activity prior to Amazon deciding to strip their page reads, though. So, there's no way they could have tried to get on Zon's good side from the start.


----------



## 88149 (Dec 13, 2015)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Apple folks....
> 
> you can turn off the smart punctuation thingies...
> 
> ...


Betsy, this needs its own thread.


----------



## Arches (Jan 3, 2016)

brkingsolver said:


> One time while I had too much time on my hands, I did a perusal of the Top 100 writers in the whole store and the Top 100 writers in SFF. Other than a couple of outliers such as the guy who wrote The Martian, all of the writers on the list had at least 25 books published. The average was 45, which was skewed by Nora Roberts and a few others.


Very interesting information. I'm not surprised Nora screwed up the average. She amazing. At 67, she's still writing excellent books and is as productive as ever.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Lydniz™ said:


> This is true, but you only pay the 40% on the amount over £46k. So you have (what was it?) £11kish tax free, then anything from £11k to £46k is taxed at 25%, and anything above that at 40%. So if you earn $50k per year, for example, you'll only pay 40% on £4k.


Oh, yeah, I think you are the one who told me about the personal allowances a long time ago.


----------



## L_Loryn (Mar 1, 2018)

C. Gockel said:


> Not to bring the thread back to the original topic or anything, but there was a survey I saw that showed that most authors making 100K+ had an average of 34 books out. That seems about right.


It's comforting knowing I don't need to worry about making 100k+ until I've got 34 books out.

Then, I suppose, if I'm still only dragging in pennies, I need to reevaluate things.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

C. Gockel said:


> Not to bring the thread back to the original topic or anything, but there was a survey I saw that showed that most authors making 100K+ had an average of 34 books out. That seems about right.


Thirty-four, with the bulk of them selling. I'm more concerned with my older books selling than with new launches "succeeding". I've seen loads of shelves with twenty or more books where only the latest is selling while the older ones rank in the mid to high 000,000s or even millions. A book ranking at 150,000 or higher isn't earning much.


----------



## CassieL (Aug 29, 2013)

Dpock said:


> A book ranking at 150,000 or higher isn't earning much.


I have a trilogy ranking around there or even a little higher in the Amazon US store that made $500 last month. Times that by 10 for thirty titles and that's $5,000 per month on backlist. Add in one strong new series running at the same time and $100K in revenue seems possible even with "bad" ranks on most of the titles. It's when the books are in the millions that they're really not earning anything. And, of course, that assumes that U.S. Amazon ebook store is where earnings are coming from, which is not true of all titles.


----------



## 91831 (Jul 18, 2016)

Lydniz™ said:


> This is true, but you only pay the 40% on the amount over £46k. So you have (what was it?) £11kish tax free, then anything from £11k to £46k is taxed at 25%, and anything above that at 40%. So if you earn $50k per year, for example, you'll only pay 40% on £4k.


This was the nuance I was trying to think of last night, but I was so tired by that point I couldn't remember how to explain. Thanks for doing so!
This is why a 100k salary comes in at being taxed at roughly 33% rather than 40%.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

K.B. said:


> Thank you so much for that.


You are welcome!



hardnox said:


> Betsy, this needs its own thread.


It kind of has one...

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,263309.0.html


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

kw3000 said:


> That's pretty cool, I hadn't heard that, thanks for sharing.
> 
> Just to game that out for fun...pretending 80% of your income came from KU page reads and 20% came from sales, and your books were all about 80k in length, 34 books could look like this:
> 
> ...


Since we're talking ...

At 34 books wide you'd need*:

$0.99 = 25,714 or 756 sales per title
$1.99 = 12857 or 378 per title
$2.99 = 4390 or 129 per title
$3.99 = 3272 or 96 per title
$4.99 = 2608 or 76 per title

I actually feel more confident looking at this. I just have to write 24 more books! That will be in about 12 years at the rate I'm going. Ha, ha, ha, ha ... But I feel like I have at least 24 more books in me.

* This uses Amazon's royalty rates and adds 5-cent delivery fees. Most vendors have no delivery fees and pay more for 99-cent and 1.99 books.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Cassie Leigh said:


> I have a trilogy ranking around there or even a little higher in the Amazon US store that made $500 last month. Times that by 10 for thirty titles and that's $5,000 per month on backlist. Add in one strong new series running at the same time and $100K in revenue seems possible even with "bad" ranks on most of the titles. It's when the books are in the millions that they're really not earning anything. And, of course, that assumes that U.S. Amazon ebook store is where earnings are coming from, which is not true of all titles.


I'm not doubting you in the least but using the TCK sales calculator, 150,000 translates into one sale or borrow a day. I know that's a guess, but it aligns with my personal experience fairly well.

I experimented with a book at $4.99 with a KENP of 777, so either a sale or full-read borrow brought in the same revenue. Theoretically, if it ranked at #150,000, it would earn $104 a month, so three of them ranked the same would bring in $314. A book with a more average length of 350 KENP at $2.99 would earn about $55 a month, so three books ranked at 150,000 would earn about $164. Thirty books would total $19,600 yearly. That's still very respectable for backlist books. Those thirty books would need an average rank of 50,000 to earn $100,000 a year.


----------



## CassieL (Aug 29, 2013)

Dpock said:


> I'm not doubting you in the least but using the TCK sales calculator, 150,000 translates into one sale or borrow a day. I know that's a guess, but it aligns with my personal experience fairly well.
> 
> I experimented with a book at $4.99 with a KENP of 777, so either a sale or full-read borrow brought in the same revenue. Theoretically, if it ranked at #150,000, it would earn $104 a month, so three of them ranked the same would bring in $314. A book with a more average length of 350 KENP at $2.99 would earn about $55 a month, so three books ranked at 150,000 would earn about $164. Thirty books would total $19,600 yearly. That's still very respectable for backlist books. Those thirty books would need an average rank of 50,000 to earn $100,000 a year.


The series I referenced is wide and also sells better in the UK than US. You don't see the full picture when you focus on Amazon US rank.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Dpock said:


> Thirty-four, with the bulk of them selling. I'm more concerned with my older books selling than with new launches "succeeding". I've seen loads of shelves with twenty or more books where only the latest is selling while the older ones rank in the mid to high 000,000s or even millions. A book ranking at 150,000 or higher isn't earning much.


I write a lot of novellas with the sole intent of always have free days to promote. It works to move the back catalog so far. The second I start to see a drop I do a free day and I go right back up within a day or two. All the stuff I wrote a year ago still makes me money everyday. Sometimes, it even still hits the sub charts out of the blue. I think you are right. I don't spend tons of money on launches. It's my back catalog that keeps me going.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Dpock said:


> I'm not doubting you in the least but using the TCK sales calculator, 150,000 translates into one sale or borrow a day. I know that's a guess, but it aligns with my personal experience fairly well.
> 
> I experimented with a book at $4.99 with a KENP of 777, so either a sale or full-read borrow brought in the same revenue. Theoretically, if it ranked at #150,000, it would earn $104 a month, so three of them ranked the same would bring in $314. A book with a more average length of 350 KENP at $2.99 would earn about $55 a month, so three books ranked at 150,000 would earn about $164. Thirty books would total $19,600 yearly. That's still very respectable for backlist books. Those thirty books would need an average rank of 50,000 to earn $100,000 a year.


As Cassie says above, this illustrates how focusing solely on Amazon US rankings skews reality big, big time.

I once sparked a shitstorm here when I said that when I look at someone's rankings on Amazon US, and they're in KU, my rule of thumb is that their books at 10,000-20,000 are earning exactly the same as mine at 100,000 - 200,000.

Why?

1. Amazon US is 25% or less of my total earnings. My straw poll concluded that this is not an uncommon percentage amongst successful wide authors. So just times four everything you see my books doing on Amazon US.
2. Rank propped up through ghost borrows if you're in KU. Ghost borrows = no income.
3. Most books earn more through a sale than a full read. But fewer people in KU read the whole thing.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

katrina46 said:


> I write a lot of novellas with the sole intent of always have free days to promote. It works to move the back catalog so far. The second I start to see a drop I do a free day and I go right back up within a day or two. All the stuff I wrote a year ago still makes me money every day. Sometimes, it even still hits the sub-charts out of the blue. I think you are right. I don't spend tons of money on launches. It's my back catalog that keeps me going.


I keep forgetting I have those free days to use... Aside from that, when you use them, do you pair them with a paid promotion? The free days I have used I just made them free. The results have lacked excitement.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Patty Jansen said:


> As Cassie says above, this illustrates how focusing solely on Amazon US rankings skews reality big, big time.
> 
> I once sparked a s***storm here when I said that when I look at someone's rankings on Amazon US, and they're in KU, my rule of thumb is that their books at 10,000-20,000 are earning exactly the same as mine at 100,000 - 200,000.


I have no doubt that's true. A KU subscriber makes no real commitment when they borrow and there's a fair chance they're continually deleting the books they didn't get to make room for more downloads. Still, the rank boost from their borrows is useful if you want to stick in the top charts for visibility and sales. My guess is only one-in-five borrows leads to a full read.

For me and for now KU is just a tool that includes a varying bonus. We'd all be better off without it, including those other platforms.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

It depends on whether your books are read through or not. One way to tell is to look at how your rank corresponds to your page reads. If your rank is much better than your page reads would suggest, something about your book may not be compelling enough to (a) get people to pick it up (cover/blurb/concept), and/or (b) keep people reading (writing/story). Another way is to see if you have a lot of "DNF" reviews on Amazon or Goodreads. I know people say they don't look at Goodreads. If you're a relatively new author, that's one of the best ways I know of seeing how your work is resonating--I don't know why you wouldn't look (if you care about resonating better/selling better. Some people don't, and that's fine, of course.)

It also depends of course on how long your books are and how much each of those reads nets you (after advertising, if any).


----------



## Laran Mithras (Nov 22, 2016)

Goodreads lets me know when I'm hitting the ball right.  

Even if I put almost nothing into it. It is a great barometer on almost all aspects of writing.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Paperback Writer said:


> Amanda makes good sense (as always  ) about how a state/area can have richer and poorer and in-between communities. Here is an interesting list of the richest and poorest area codes in the US.
> 
> Under the button to view slideshow there is a link that says "show all" and avoids the annoying clicking through one photo at a time.
> 
> https://www.gobankingrates.com/making-money/economy/richest-poorest-area-codes/


I was surprised to see northern coastal California mentioned. It's beautiful there (west of the pot growers, right on the coast). I lived in Marin much further south for a few years and loved it. Today it's out of reach for 99% of the population.


----------



## Wayne Stinnett (Feb 5, 2014)

Making six figures just from KU and making six figures in total are two different things. KU comprises less than half my total income. Some genres may be more than that, and some less. The other half being *sales*. With sixteen novels published (all in Select), my earnings are just over $300K currently, and should top out, on October 31st, somewhere near $600K.

So, it can be done, even in KU.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Paperback Writer said:


> Amanda makes good sense (as always  ) about how a state/area can have richer and poorer and in-between communities. Here is an interesting list of the richest and poorest area codes in the US.
> 
> Under the button to view slideshow there is a link that says "show all" and avoids the annoying clicking through one photo at a time.
> 
> https://www.gobankingrates.com/making-money/economy/richest-poorest-area-codes/


My problem with list like these is that they rarely show the whole picture. My cousin lives in Southwest, Missouri and she's not poor. It's true her earnings are low because she lives in a small town, but you can seriously buy a nice house there for 20k. I know because the reason so many family members of mine moved their is because when my uncle retired he moved there from St. Louis because he retired with about a million and it felt more like 2 million living in that little town.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Dpock said:


> I keep forgetting I have those free days to use... Aside from that, when you use them, do you pair them with a paid promotion? The free days I have used I just made them free. The results have lacked excitement.


Sometimes I do. That's obviously when you get the best results, but since I have more than one pen name sometimes I'll just set a free day on both. It still picks up my income. They're tied to series, though.


----------



## CynthiaClay (Mar 17, 2017)

> Not a single state in the Union had a median _household_ income higher than $76.2k in 2016, the most recent year with data available from the U.S. Census Bureau. The nation-wide median was $59k. Incomes certainly haven't increased by a third or more since then (though your rent easily might have done).


My husband and I were earning $150k. This was just slashed by our employers to $100k, and this has made our money tight. We live in Miami. Food prices have soared. Groceries and restraint food prices have tripled in price. Gas prices have hiked (but we have a Volt, so suffer less on that score. Many other prices have gone up. Most people in Miami can not afford their own homes and home prices are ridiculously high. Rent prices are crazy high. The women who work in the Einstein Bagels we used to frequent have to bring their children to work on Saturdays and Sundays because there is no affordable daycare for them. The children have to sit still and be quiet all day during their mother's shifts. Yes, absolutely cost of living prices have climbed by a third. We saw a family walking home with their groceries and the little boy spilled the whole carton of milk he carried. Milk runs from $3 to $6 here, so we stopped our car and gave them $5 to replace the milk.

So these threads that explain profit margins and the answers that people give on how to manage the business of their writing are providing all of us with an important, needed service.


----------



## CynthiaClay (Mar 17, 2017)

Jeff Tanyard said:


> Who needs a degree when you have the Khan Academy?  Start with something easy like the Power Rule:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"And then put the spherical cow (or chicken) in a box and lock it, and ask people whether it is giving milk (or eggs) or not."

[Just thought I'd add to the joke.]


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> As Cassie says above, this illustrates how focusing solely on Amazon US rankings skews reality big, big time.
> 
> I once sparked a s***storm here when I said that when I look at someone's rankings on Amazon US, and they're in KU, my rule of thumb is that their books at 10,000-20,000 are earning exactly the same as mine at 100,000 - 200,000.
> 
> ...


Why would you assume they're getting fewer UK sales than you are? My US sales are about 70-80% of my income but my UK sales have a way better ROI on ads. My US and UK ranks are usually comparable.

KU actually makes up more of my income the more books I publish. IME, KU readers see much more likely to tear though my entire backlist than paying readers are. My older books have a buy to borrow ratio 2x more skewed to borrows.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

Evenstar said:


> Good grief, this is a fun argument from a British point of view.
> 
> The average salary in the UK is around 27k GBP ($35k ish?), so even _half _of 100k is nearly_ twice _the average income.
> 
> ...


That's why I moved back to Japan. I'm making about $30K a year or so from teaching and that's more than enough to live comfortably in southern Kyushu. The money I make from writing on top of that is just pure extra cash.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Evenstar said:


> Good grief, this is a fun argument from a British point of view.
> 
> The average salary in the UK is around 27k GBP ($35k ish?), so even _half _of 100k is nearly_ twice _the average income.
> 
> ...


It depends on the reality you know. My cousin came from absolutely nothing, but he didn't want to be poor, so he worked three jobs when he got out of high school and really focused on working his way up in his main job. By the time he was 40 he was making 150k a year. That is his reality. Not everyone wants to work so hard, which is understandable. I imagine he got very little sleep in the early years, but he wanted to give his kids every advantage in life and that was his focus. I went from being a single mom working for minimum wage to a machinist making up to 70k. It took a few years. I focused. If someone tells themselves they can't make 100k they probably won't. I will say you don't have to have a best seller to make 100k writing. You have to have a strategy that keeps your back catalog moving and then do more of that as you add to it. There are people making over 10k a month and they have never hit the charts.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

It is certainly possible. In a few months I will have done much better than that for six years in a row, starting from zero. 

Have some sort of plan. Can be looser or more exact.  

I started with three books at once and a fourth three months later. Worked very well. 

Cover, blurb, title, concept, story, writing. Know what readers in your niche want. 

Free books still work. I built my audience and continue to grow it with free offers. 

KU and free books only work to the extent that you have really appealing books. Your ranks should match up well with your page reads. If they do not, try to figure out why. 

Many people who do great publish 8 or more books a year, but not everybody. You probably do need to be able to produce at least 4. There are exceptions. 

Romance is extremely competitive now but the landscape is ever changing and Amazon may be making real changes. 

What does not change is that entertaining books will sell, so try to get better. 

If you have some success and want more, double down. Work more not less. Grab hold of your moment or it will become somebody else’s.

Different things work for different people. This is YOUR one and only life and nobody else’s career.  Try things amd see. That is how you become a better writer and marketer and how you find your best path. 

There is no shame in NOT being a full time writer. It is not for everybody. Most fiction writers will not make a living off fiction. It can still be awesome to do. 

Make sure you are working off your own definition of success not somebody else’s.


----------



## RScott (Nov 8, 2017)

David VanDyke said:


> It's important to define whether we're talking about gross or net when we say "income." For the self-employed in the US, 100K gross is not nearly as much as 100K net (after taxes and everything else). My rule of thumb is that I keep half my gross. It may be more like 60%, but that rule of thumb keeps me comfortably within margin.


I really appreciate you sharing those numbers David. I live outside the US and am subject to the 30% tax hold back. After expenses and advertising, I too end up with around 50%~60% of gross. I always wondering if i was losing out on a lot of income from the 30%, but it sounds like its not too bad in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

David VanDyke said:


> It's important to define whether we're talking about gross or net when we say "income." For the self-employed in the US, 100K gross is not nearly as much as 100K net (after taxes and everything else). My rule of thumb is that I keep half my gross. It may be more like 60%, but that rule of thumb keeps me comfortably within margin.


This is true. When asked, I tend to quote my _before tax net_ (so minus advertising, covers, editing, web services, hardware / software purchases) but not subtracting taxes. I do this because if you asked a salaried person what they make they wouldn't give you the after tax amount (nor would they know it.) That said, if you're self-employed, payroll taxes are higher.

I still don't really understand how much I pay in taxes. We've gotten tax refunds every year I've been at this gig. Two kids, mortgage, health insurance premiums, and retirement accounts I guess figure into it. It's super confusing, probably by design.


----------



## David VanDyke (Jan 3, 2014)

RScott said:


> I really appreciate you sharing those numbers David. I live outside the US and am subject to the 30% tax hold back. After expenses and advertising, I too end up with around 50%~60% of gross. I always wondering if i was losing out on a lot of income from the 30%, but it sounds like its not too bad in the grand scheme of things.


Not too bad, no, but can't you get that 30% remitted somehow? I thought most people could, if they file the right paperwork?


----------



## RScott (Nov 8, 2017)

David VanDyke said:


> Not too bad, no, but can't you get that 30% remitted somehow? I thought most people could, if they file the right paperwork?


Nah no dice for me. I live in a country without a tax treaty with the US. Automatic 30%. Which, if its on par with what US residents pay more or less, is okay since it's pretty hassle free in terms of admin.


----------

