# How to Succeed in the Current Market



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

First off, I'm writing this because another member here asked me to.  So I'm going to try and break down, as simply as possible, what I think are a couple of the best ways to succeed in the current ebook market.

Of course, I can't go into every detail or possibility, so some will naturally be left out or broader statements made.

Firstly, you must have craft, but only enough craft to allow for a good story.  Nowadays (contrary to popular opinion amongst writers) readers are increasingly LESS demanding of writing craft and more demanding of the author delivering a good story.  And a good story is one that pulls us in, sometimes regardless of the writer's ability to hone a perfect sentence.

The next thing you must have is speed and you must create volume.  This is to give you the BEST chance at success.  Are there writers who succeed without putting out a large volume of work?  Yes, but its much harder to accomplish.  The less work you put out, the less chance you have of success.  You can argue this point all you want.  And I don't care if some world-crushing literary light only had one book in his whole life and he was feted by the entire literary establishment. 

If you can't put out a large volume of work, quickly, than you will have more difficulty finding success in this business.

Once you have (just) enough craft, and you have speed and are willing to create volume, you must choose your genre and your niche.  The best way to do this is to study the markets on all retailers.  That means not just Amazon, but Kobo, B&N, iTunes.  You study the top selling INDIE books in every genre that you have a chance in, and you read widely.  You sample widely.  You don't necessarily to read deeply, you don't need to have read thousands of sci-fi books to write in the genre.

The caveat here is that I assume, at some point in life, you've read enough that you understand plot and story an structure at an innate level.  Most writers have, because we love reading enough to have done that work, mostly in childhood.  If you haven't, it will become a problem, in all likelihood.  Although other good areas to have bolstered this ability is by watching movies and TV and thinking about how they achieve what they achieve.

After you've sampled widely, and after you've made a study of the bestseller lists in the genres and niches that you feel you could write in, you must then choose a story and a plot that is in line with what some of the other current bestsellers are doing.  That means using elements and pieces, taking the basic underpinnings that other authors are finding success with, and making them your own.

An example (hypothetical, of course).  I am on the lists and I see that there happen to be a fair amount of recent books that have cyber-terrorism as a backdrop.  And these books are all doing very well, very recently.  There's jus a smattering of them but they're clearly doing well, selling a lot.  I try to dig deeper and see if I can identify a market there.  Is it a fluke or is a trend occurring?  In the end, I have to just go for it.  So I come up with a plot composed of that backdrop and using story elements that seem to appeal to the readership.  

I try to identify what is so appealing about these books.  Is it the cyber-terrorism itself, is it fear of our machines, is it end of the world stuff?  Is it the hero getting to be a nerdy computer programmer and that somehow plays into the readers' deepest desires because they're mostly nerdy computer programmers themselves?

This is somewhat tongue in cheek, but the point is to get you thinking deeply about the reason behind these books' success.  If they're truly filling a need, it behooves you to understand the need as best you can.

Once you have a handle on it, you write a story, and you must find a way to use your own talents and ingenuity to make it come alive and make the characters real, to transport the reader.  This is the craft element that I was referring to earlier.  Craft is you making this somewhat "generic" piece of genre fiction your own, while still including the stuff that the fans of the genre and niche want.

It's up to you to get good at identifying needs and then providing the readers what they want.

In order to do this work, you must be fast.  I say that at a minimum, you want to be doing 2-3k words of nearly publishable fiction per day, five days a week.  That gives you the ability to churn out 10-15k words a week, and so you're getting out a short book a month, or perhaps a few shorter serialized books a month.

If you get a hit, you keep churning out books in the series while continuing to look for other opportunities.  if the book doesn't hit, you move on.  You do not continue to beat a dead or dying horse.  Series' can be resurrected in the future, if necessary.  But for now, if it's not a hit--you just move on.

What is a hit?  A hit is a book that allows you to gain readership quickly, so that each following book makes more and more money, until you hit a tipping point in which you become able to write full-time.  It will not necessarily be a straight shot up, there will be ups and downs.  But in general, sales and earnings are going up from one month to the next, with the occasional dip.

In terms of workflow, you should endeavor to do as much as possible yourself, only farming work out when you absolutely must, and paying as little as possible for each stage of production.

I do all writing myself, I edit my own work with no revisions from any other person.  I used to have my partner read and revise all my work but I got better and faster and now I just do it myself.  My partner does my covers because I'm not so good at it.  Many self-pubbed authors do their own covers quite well--like Bella Andre and Holly Ward.  

Every piece that you farm out will slow you down.  Each single piece of production should be as streamlined as humanly possible.  If you find that your skill set will not allow you to turn out good enough work, then you must outsource.  But be aware that this will slow you down.

In the end, no matter whether you do everything DIY or you farm out large pieces of your business, you want to make this a volume business.  You want to get as much work out as you can, and then--when you get a hit--you want to keep beating that drum, whilst looking for more opportunities.

This is just scratching the surface, but if you actually use this blue print, and if you write even faster and work harder, I'd be surprised if you do not succeed beyond what the average writer will accomplish using traditional methods.

This method isn't easy and most will not and cannot do it.  But most writers will not succeed in this business over the longterm.  If you really decide you must succeed, then you can do it with the proper work ethic and mindset, assuming you have some basic skills in place before you begin.

If you do not have the skills, you will not succeed no matter what you do.  If you have the skills, then you must maximize your efficiency and business sense.

More can be said about pricing and so forth, but much of that can be solved by studying the bestsellers.


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

Good post, thank you for taking the time to write it


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Might be useful to provide your baseline definition of 'success'.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sever Bronny said:


> Good post, thank you for taking the time to write it


You're welcome! I'm open to questions, too. That was just a top line group of big picture suggestions to work from...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> Might be useful to provide your baseline definition of 'success'.


Success in this case refers to building a career in which you can eventually write full-time, if desired. Success will vary from person to person, but here I assume that the writer eventually wants this to be their "job."


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

Hmm, this is all looks to be surprisingly accurate... I imagine you will be insulted and belittled quite heavily as a result  

The one thing I disagree with is not outsourcing some elements of your work. This depends on your genre and whatnot, of course.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Wonderful post.  
I want to add that sentence structure is not near as important as making sure you can write a readable story.  If one has too many obvious errors,  the book will not sell.  Keep your reader in the story.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

dirtiestdevil said:


> Hmm, this is all looks to be surprisingly accurate... I imagine you will be insulted and belittled quite heavily as a result
> 
> The one thing I disagree with is not outsourcing some elements of your work. This depends on your genre and whatnot, of course.


Haha, yes, I hope to get slammed with hateful responses anytime now 
As for outsourcing, I knew that one would be controversial. I say that you do AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE YOURSELF.

For some, that means outsourcing covers and editing.

But look at Bella, does her own covers and they're some of the best in the business&#8230;.I'm lucky to have a partner that does awesome covers, so that's just nice if you can get it.

As for editing, I got to a place where I edit my own work and don't hear many complaints. It took me a few years of being heavily edited and critiqued by my partner and stuff with agents, editors, etc. But if you're good enough, you can do that if you like.

Speed is king from where I stand.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Speed is king. Our attention spans are so short. Here's a quick question, can any of you say who was the top author in your genre last month? Unless it's a household name, I bet you can't. Even I, who watch my genre lists on a regular basis can only tell you Stephanie Laurens has been on there consistently. And I look and watch every day the top 20. 

Here are some other time sucks to think about.

I write in Wordpress. That way, it's just as easy for me to write a blog post and have it programmed to tweet out and facebook out with a new chapter of a work in progress as clicking a button. That is the real key to helping me build up steam this summer and a plan I will be going back to since I will no longer be exclusive with Amazon. That's a perk I think I want back, the ability to give whatever percentage of my book for free as I want when I want to who I want. 

I also like Wordpress because I can tag things easily, see how much I wrote in a day, and one click backup everything. And while I can't write offline, I CAN write on my work in progress on ANY computer in the world with Internet. As much as I travel and the # of computers I use in my household, that's a godsend.

I do use an editor, but she edits AS I write. So as soon as I finish a chapter in wordpress, I tag her, tell her and she edits it. Then we do a run through at the end.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> Wonderful post.
> I want to add that sentence structure is not near as important as making sure you can write a readable story. If one has too many obvious errors,  the book will not sell. Keep your reader in the story.


I've seen books with misspelled titles, let alone interiors!! do very well on the charts. Reader forgiveness is quite surprising...


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> Haha, yes, I hope to get slammed with hateful responses anytime now
> As for outsourcing, I knew that one would be controversial. I say that you do AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE YOURSELF.
> 
> For some, that means outsourcing covers and editing.
> ...


There's certainly not a 'requirement' to outsource, but the people need to learn those other skills themselves. My covers are pretty abysmal -- but I took some time to learn photoediting to make them 'usable' 

And here I thought spending 3 years working on your masterpiece was the best way to attain success...

The problem is people are brainwashed by what a writer 'should' be that they self-sabotage themselves from the beginning.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I do use an editor, but she edits AS I write. So as soon as I finish a chapter in wordpress, I tag her, tell her and she edits it. Then we do a run through at the end.


Yes, this is exactly what I mean. Streamline your production, people! Stop being so slow. Elizabeth needs an editor, fine, so she gets someone who edits AS she writes, not after. Don't make excuses to be slow.

And this is why you, Elizabeth, among other reasons, are killing it!


----------



## No longer seen (Aug 17, 2013)

I want to add my thank you before the controversy gets started.

My hat's off to writers who can do their own covers.


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Speed is king. Our attention spans are so short. Here's a quick question, can any of you say who was the top author in your genre last month? Unless it's a household name, I bet you can't. Even I, who watch my genre lists on a regular basis can only tell you Stephanie Laurens has been on there consistently. And I look and watch every day the top 20.
> 
> Here are some other time sucks to think about.
> 
> ...


That's ... that's genius.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

dirtiestdevil said:


> There's certainly not a 'requirement' to outsource, but the people need to learn those other skills themselves. My covers are pretty abysmal -- but I took some time to learn photoediting to make them 'usable'
> 
> And here I thought spending 3 years working on your masterpiece was the best way to attain success...
> 
> The problem is people are brainwashed by what a writer 'should' be that they self-sabotage themselves from the beginning.


Yeah, it's sad how so many writer/artist myths just kill potential writers where they stand. At the same time, its true that most will fail, sadly. Even with some success, keeping going is not easy.


----------



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

dirtiestdevil said:


> Reader forgiveness is quite surprising...


Depends on the genre.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> In order to do this work, you must be fast. I say that at a minimum, you want to be doing 2-3k words of nearly publishable fiction per day, five days a week. That gives you the ability to churn out 10-15k words a week, and so you're getting out a short book a month, or perhaps a few shorter serialized books a month.


While writing well, and writing quickly may be the ideal, I wouldn't say it is a _must_. There are a lot of very talented writers who work full time and have family commitments, who may only be able to get 500 words out per day. I would hate for them to think it's hopeless if they can't put out 2,000 a day, because it isn't.

If you can only do 250 a day, fine, do 250 a day. If you can only get 500 words written, then write 500 words. The most important thing is to do it. Whether it's a little or a lot, _just do it._


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> While writing well, and writing quickly may be the ideal, I wouldn't say it is a _must_. There are a lot of very talented writers who work full time and have family commitments, who may only be able to get 500 words out per day. I would hate for them to think it's hopeless if they can't put out 2,000 a day, because it isn't.
> 
> If you can only do 250 a day, fine, do 250 a day. If you can only get 500 words written, then write 500 words. The most important thing is to do it. Whether it's a little or a lot, _just do it._


That is a recipe for continuing to write. It is not a recipe to succeed in the current market.

That doesn't mean you should stop writing, but you should probably adjust your expectations, as that type of slow output will hamper the chances of you making a living at this work.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

KJC said:


> Depends on the genre.


Yes, some genre's are less forgiving of bad prose, poor plot, etc. This also factors into the decision of what to write.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> You're welcome! I'm open to questions, too. That was just a top line group of big picture suggestions to work from...


I have a question. My approach is quite a bit different in that I only plan to release two novels a year. All titles are in a series of related trilogies, and all are designed to build on each other. My goal is to build a long term following similar to what I've seen authors like Butcher do (yes, I know I'm nowhere near his level but some day I hope to be). I figure that in four years when I have three trilogies and a number of novellas out my initial readers will still be buying books, and hopefully telling their friends about them.

Is that sort of slow growth suicidal? Am I risking readers forgetting about me at that pace? I try to use myself as a benchmark. I don't care how many years go by. If Sanderson or Butcher releases a new book in a series I love I'm all over it. Is it naive to assume my readers might do the same?


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

this is probably the best post ever. I agree, speed is king.my goal for 2015 is to put out one novel every single month. and I know that I can do it, because I get faster with every novel I write.It really is true that the readers forget about you if you don't constantly produce. sad but true, but that's just the way of the business.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

dirtiestdevil said:


> I've seen books with misspelled titles, let alone interiors!! do very well on the charts. Reader forgiveness is quite surprising...


These titles are they well known authors or are they brand new never heard of authors? 
I am so tired of reading that readers will forgive anything. It sounds like an excuse that well so and so does it so I can too. You know what it does not matter because most high school graduates only read on a 5th grade level.
So please keep contributing to illiteracy.  
I beg of all authors put out the best work you can. 
Otherwise in 3 generations we will have a bunch of illiterate people that can't do anything.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Hutchinson said:


> It's helping me fight the mindworm that just churning out wordcount is pointless, that each word must come out gold and somehow after that still be edited heavily. Bad mindworm! Better to put up 94k words more and see what finished material comes out of that and if it's readable *enough*, bring it here for marketing advice. That's the going plan for the next sixmonth anyhow.


Here's an insider secret. A poor writer, no matter how much they edit, will still end up with a bad book at the end. A good writer, even with less editing, will still have a decent book. 
You get better by writing more books.
Do the math...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> I have a question. My approach is quite a bit different in that I only plan to release two novels a year. All titles are in a series of related trilogies, and all are designed to build on each other. My goal is to build a long term following similar to what I've seen authors like Butcher do (yes, I know I'm nowhere near his level but some day I hope to be). I figure that in four years when I have three trilogies and a number of novellas out my initial readers will still be buying books, and hopefully telling their friends about them.
> 
> Is that sort of slow growth suicidal? Am I risking readers forgetting about me at that pace? I try to use myself as a benchmark. I don't care how many years go by. If Sanderson or Butcher releases a new book in a series I love I'm all over it. Is it naive to assume my readers might do the same?


It's not suicidal. But you have to realize there's a risk associated with writing slower and fewer books. Less swings at the ball. So you might end up finding your audience, but if there's a way to do more, to write some shorter novellas in the mix, get creative. Think how to put more work out there...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> this is probably the best post ever. I agree, speed is king.my goal for 2015 is to put out one novel every single month. and I know that I can do it, because I get faster with every novel I write.It really is true that the readers forget about you if you don't constantly produce. sad but true, but that's just the way of the business.


I remember when u first arrived here and it was obvious you were going to do well, and nothing's changed since.  And I'm not just saying that cuz you complimented my post, lol


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> It's not suicidal. But you have to realize there's a risk associated with writing slower and fewer books. Less swings at the ball. So you might end up finding your audience, but if there's a way to do more, to write some shorter novellas in the mix, get creative. Think how to put more work out there...


The goal is novel, novella, novel, novella, etc. So far that's working great. That means putting out something every quarter, though I don't expect the novellas to have nearly as much draw. Anyway, thanks for the advice! Guess time will tell me whether or not my pace is working.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> These titles are they well known authors or are they brand new never heard of authors?
> I am so tired of reading that readers will forgive anything. It sounds like an excuse that well so and so does it so I can too. You know what it does not matter because most high school graduates only read on a 5th grade level.
> So please keep contributing to illiteracy.
> I beg of all authors put out the best work you can.
> Otherwise in 3 generations we will have a bunch of illiterate people that can't do anything.


If readers stop caring about spelling, my job only gets easier


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> The goal is novel, novella, novel, novella, etc. So far that's working great. That means putting out something every quarter, though I don't expect the novellas to have nearly as much draw. Anyway, thanks for the advice! Guess time will tell me whether or not my pace is working.


You seem to have a leg up because you're smart and approaching things very analytically. I think it could work for you, despite your pace. But TRY and write faster anyway


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> You seem to have a leg up because you're smart and approaching things very analytically. I think it could work for you, despite your pace. But TRY and write faster anyway


My day job makes that challenging. Startup hours are insane (but fun). On the up side both books are selling _extremely_ well, especially the audiobook. In another year or so I'm hoping CellScope will be acquired and I'll have more time to write. In the meantime I'm happy with my progress =)


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> My day job makes that challenging. Startup hours are insane (but fun). On the up side both books are selling _extremely_ well, especially the audiobook. In another year or so I'm hoping CellScope will be acquired and I'll have more time to write. In the meantime I'm happy with my progress =)


Yes, you're a successful person so that means a) you're more likely to succeed at any endeavor and b) your time is limited. I get it. But part of your success right now is timing. Stay aware of that&#8230;last word of caution from me


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> Yes, you're a successful person so that means a) you're more likely to succeed at any endeavor and b) your time is limited. I get it. But part of your success right now is timing. Stay aware of that...last word of caution from me


Definitely something to consider. Thanks, gorvnice.


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

.


----------



## Z. Rider (Aug 15, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> I have a question. My approach is quite a bit different in that I only plan to release two novels a year. All titles are in a series of related trilogies, and all are designed to build on each other. My goal is to build a long term following similar to what I've seen authors like Butcher do (yes, I know I'm nowhere near his level but some day I hope to be). I figure that in four years when I have three trilogies and a number of novellas out my initial readers will still be buying books, and hopefully telling their friends about them.
> 
> Is that sort of slow growth suicidal? Am I risking readers forgetting about me at that pace? I try to use myself as a benchmark. I don't care how many years go by. If Sanderson or Butcher releases a new book in a series I love I'm all over it. Is it naive to assume my readers might do the same?


I'm only planning on releasing 2-3 books a year too. You've gotta find the balance between quality, quantity, and sanity, and everyone's tolerance meter is calibrated differently for each metric (as is their ability to produce to their desired level of quality in a given amount of time).

I wouldn't consider growth of 2-3 books a year suicidal-it's probably not fast money, and maybe we'll have to spend more and/or work harder on promotion to increase our visibility, but I don't think moderate output is a track to failure.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Z. Rider said:


> I'm only planning on releasing 2-3 books a year too. You've gotta find the balance between quality, quantity, and sanity, and everyone's tolerance meter is calibrated differently for each metric (as is their ability to produce to their desired level of quality in a given amount of time).
> 
> I wouldn't consider growth of 2-3 books a year suicidal--it's probably not fast money, and maybe we'll have to spend more and/or work harder on promotion to increase our visibility, but I don't think moderate output is a track to failure.


Aptly said. But a word of caution.

This is not a roadmap I would advise anyone to follow who wanted to become a full-time writer in the current market.

Some may find a way to succeed releasing a couple of books a year, or even three. But most writers in the current market who are finding success, are producing much more content than that.

It's simply the way the industry is working. In fact, it's always the way it worked--but previously, gatekeepers forced us to be slow, which greatly decreased our chance of success.

For any writer to arbitrarily enforce that same slowness on themselves is a huge mistake that I will always try and point out, given the chance.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

Chris Fox said:


> Is that sort of slow growth suicidal? Am I risking readers forgetting about me at that pace? I try to use myself as a benchmark. I don't care how many years go by. If Sanderson or Butcher releases a new book in a series I love I'm all over it. Is it naive to assume my readers might do the same?


I'm the same way. It doesn't matter to me how long I have to wait between releases, When it comes to my favorite authors, I buy whatever they release, whenever they release it. However, there have been times when an author lost me because they didn't have other titles available. Those were the authors I liked enough that I would have bought another title from them, had they had one available, but I didn't love them enough to make a point of watching for their next release. Oh, and they also didn't have a mailing list, so they gave me plenty of opportunity to forget all about them.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> I'm the same way. It doesn't matter to me how long I have to wait between releases, When it comes to my favorite authors, I buy whatever they release, whenever they release it. However, there have been times when an author lost me because they didn't have other titles available. Those were the authors I liked enough that I would have bought another title from them, had they had one available, but I didn't love them enough to make a point of watching for their next release. Oh, and they also didn't have a mailing list, so they gave me plenty of opportunity to forget all about them.


This is an important point. Readers, even when they really like an author, will not wait all that long for the next book.

More and more, people's attention spans are fast-moving, and they're distracted, pulled in a million directions.

I know it makes authors uncomfortable and nervous and they feel pressured by this kind of thinking, but sorry--it's how it is. I've had a lot of readers lose interest in one of my series when I took a couple of MONTHS off. Now maybe my readers just have the attention spans of gerbils.

But I think more and more, the expectation is for quick rewards in all facets of life. You can rail against it, or you can accept and work with it.


----------



## Z. Rider (Aug 15, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> It's simply the way the industry is working. In fact, it's always the way it worked--but previously, gatekeepers forced us to be slow, which greatly decreased our chance of success.
> 
> For any writer to arbitrarily enforce that same slowness on themselves is a huge mistake that I will always try and point out, given the chance.


I think most of us who have chosen to write fewer books get that more books = more visibility = more backlist = more chances to sell. We aren't (most of us at least, I think) arbitrarily enforcing slowness on ourselves or encouraging it in others. We're doing what feels appropriate for us given our needs, abilities, and constraints. I have my set of goals posted on my wall, and if I can achieve those goals in 2015, I'll consider myself to have "succeeded in the current market" for that year. This time next year, I'll write up a new list of goals to shoot for. Full-time writer would be a nice thing, but it's not on my goal list for 2015. (Other really cool (to me) things _are_, and I knew when I sat down and thought about what I really wanted that I was going to be doing things differently from the typical indie success story. I'm okay with that.)


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Z. Rider said:


> I think most of us who have chosen to write fewer books get that more books = more visibility = more backlist = more chances to sell. We aren't (most of us at least, I think) arbitrarily enforcing slowness on ourselves or encouraging it in others. We're doing what feels appropriate for us given our needs, abilities, and constraints. I have my set of goals posted on my wall, and if I can achieve those goals in 2015, I'll consider myself to have "succeeded in the current market" for that year. This time next year, I'll write up a new list of goals to shoot for. Full-time writer would be a nice thing, but it's not on my goal list for 2015. (Other really cool (to me) things _are_, and I knew when I sat down and thought about what I really wanted that I was going to be doing things differently from the typical indie success story. I'm okay with that.)


You sound like you're very aware of your choices, why you're making them and what that means as far as tradeoffs go.

Unfortunately, many writers do not possess your level of understanding of those tradeoffs.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

There's a few risks to waiting. One is your readers outgrowing you. For example, I was there, Day One, for the release of Shopaholic and Baby. I had preordered it and drove to the actual bookstore to get it. I haven't even read the sample of Sophie Kinsella's latest Shopaholic series. I'm different now. I'm older. I'm wiser. I'm not in my 20s finding the antics of lying to my spouse funny (when I think about it, that's really WHAT Becky does all the time). 

Another risk is whatever unseen magic that's going on for your current success disappears. There is an author who had the #1 book in the Nook and Amazon store in 2011 just now getting another release out and she never beat my Kindle Store ranking this past summer. Granted, three years is a long time and none of you are suggesting that. New releases by their very nature are exciting. It's far easier to get someone to tweet you or email you when you have a new release than trying to build buzz on a title that's a year old. Ebooks are forever, but there's always the next big thing happening now that impacts that immortality lifestyle.

I am always afraid my next release won't do well. Right now, I am making more per month on a consistent basis than ever before and I'm going into month six of those numbers. But I think I will always have that fear, and that's okay, because that fear is what pushes me to get stuff done. In the break between posts here, I added 900 words to my WIP. Typing (toothless is upstairs, my dragonnaturally speaking). In about an hour. I already feel elated and back in the saddle ready to have a 7k day tomorrow (dictating)


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> There's a few risks to waiting. One is your readers outgrowing you. For example, I was there, Day One, for the release of Shopaholic and Baby. I had preordered it and drove to the actual bookstore to get it. I haven't even read the sample of Sophie Kinsella's latest Shopaholic series. I'm different now. I'm older. I'm wiser. I'm not in my 20s finding the antics of lying to my spouse funny (when I think about it, that's really WHAT Becky does all the time).
> 
> Another risk is whatever unseen magic that's going on for your current success disappears. There is an author who had the #1 book in the Nook and Amazon store in 2011 just now getting another release out and she never beat my Kindle Store ranking this past summer.


You know of what you speak, and beautifully stated. It's true that when you are lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, how dare you not capitalize?

This is the kind of hubris that leads to the flameouts and the "one and done" or "two and done" writers. They think that current market conditions will last forever, and so they take their sweet time&#8230;snore&#8230;snore&#8230;Rip Van Winkle&#8230;snore some more&#8230;and they wake up, blinking their drowsy little eyes. Ready to finally publish their new book only to find:

CRICKETS

And that is a big, painful comedown. It hurts. I've had versions of that happen to me, more than once since 2011.

I've been able to come back from it through putting in place the steps I wrote in my OP.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> More and more, people's attention spans are fast-moving, and they're distracted, pulled in a million directions.


Our attention spans are getting much shorter, there is no doubt about that. The important thing is to stay in front of your reader, in one way or another. If not with a new release, with an update about your WIP. This is why a mailing list is so critical. It's also where we differ in regards to publishing frequently. If you can stay in front of your readers and keep them engaged, there is no reason you can't be successful with two or releases per year.

Another good way to keep people engaged and in a buying mood (really important) is to recommend great books by other writers in your genre. Books in the same price range as yours, not free. Discuss them on your blog--it will give you an opportunity to connect with readers in a way that isn't all about your books, and ;earn a lot more about what they like and what they don't. Most importantly, it gives you an opportunity to condition them to _buy!_


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> Our attention spans are getting much shorter, there is no doubt about that. The important thing is to stay in front of your reader, in one way or another. If not with a new release, with an update about your WIP. This is why a mailing list is so critical. It's also where we differ in regards to publishing frequently. If you can stay in front of your readers and keep them engaged, there is no reason you can't be successful with two or releases per year.
> 
> Another good way to keep people engaged and in a buying mood (really important) is to recommend great books by other writers in your genre. Books in the same price range as yours, not free. Discuss them on your blog--it will give you an opportunity to connect with readers in a way that isn't all about your books, and ;earn a lot more about what they like and what they don't. Most importantly, it gives you an opportunity to condition them to _buy!_


If this methodology works, it would be undertaken by someone who is very shrewd in terms of marketing. There are even less writers who are capable of what you describe, than the kind who can do what I espouse.

John Locke is one such example. I am not here to debate his methods, only to say he was/is a marketing genius.


----------



## kathrynoh (Oct 17, 2012)

Great post, thanks for this. Just what I needed to read atm.

Also, thank you for helping me answer something I've been tossing over in my brain lately. I've got a three book series out that I wouldn't say is a hit but is making enough to support me. I just released a standalone in a potential new series that isn't doing so well. Was wondering if I should do a spin off from the first series or continue with the second one. Now I'm thinking I'll keep going with the first series until it dries up.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

ゴジラ said:


> I like this post. My cold, cynical heart agrees with most of it.
> 
> A caveat: If you always publish books with typos (for example), you'll grow a reader base that doesn't care about typos. If you've published cleaner books in the past, God have mercy on your soul if you release a typo-riddled book to those readers. Dooooon't do it. Set expectations for your readers early on (whatever those expectations may be) and maintain it.


Agreed. And definitely some genres are not accepting of typo-ridden work, or are not accepting of shorter work, etc. etc.

Part of researching where to expend your energy is on finding what kinds of niches will allow you to write fast and do the kind of work that can earn you a living. And there are more than one, but some are better fits than others depending on your tastes, abilities, current conditions.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

kathrynoh said:


> Great post, thanks for this. Just what I needed to read atm.
> 
> Also, thank you for helping me answer something I've been tossing over in my brain lately. I've got a three book series out that I wouldn't say is a hit but is making enough to support me. I just released a standalone in a potential new series that isn't doing so well. Was wondering if I should do a spin off from the first series or continue with the second one. Now I'm thinking I'll keep going with the first series until it dries up.


I'd go with the first series, but if possible, use your successful series to market the standalone, unless they are 2 different genres. In terms of marketing, I mean linking to it in back matter, etc.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

ゴジラ said:


> I like this post. My cold, cynical heart agrees with most of it.
> 
> A caveat: If you always publish books with typos (for example), you'll grow a reader base that doesn't care about typos. If you've published cleaner books in the past, God have mercy on your soul if you release a typo-riddled book to those readers. Dooooon't do it. Set expectations for your readers early on (whatever those expectations may be) and maintain it.


Yep. I'll also add that scheduling editors and getting covers in advance does not slow you down. Once you have a schedule and keep to it, you can produce a bunch of books in a year that all have had other eyes on them. (I put out six books in 2014. A friend of mine put out 8. We both use editors and proofreaders).

*I'm not getting into the self-editing debate, just saying that one doesn't have to sacrifice outsourcing for speed.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Deanna Chase said:


> Yep. I'll also add that scheduling editors and getting covers in advance does not slow you down. Once you have a schedule and keep to it, you can produce a bunch of books in a year that all have had other eyes on them. (I put out six books in 2014. A friend of mine put out 8. We both use editors and proofreaders).
> 
> *I'm not getting into the self-editing debate, just saying that one doesn't have to sacrifice outsourcing for speed.


You sound like you have a good process. However, it does slow you down--it has to. Another pair of eyes on the work, reading, commenting, and then going back to make changes. Especially if there are multiple rounds. I am not stating that people are wrong to use editors.

I am stating, unequivocally, that each time you send something to another person to do, it slows you down. This can be managed in many different ways, as Elizabeth showed upthread when she talked about her process.

But it needs to be managed because each time you need to schedule with another person, and communicate, and pay them, and on and on--you get slower.

This is just a logical statement, and it's not a judgment.

I say, be fast. You decide what is necessary, what you need, your skill set, and how to best get from A to Z.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

Can i just say brilliant post and responses and thank you for taking the time!

I'd love to see you continue it a little further down the pipeline and mention how to be fast with all the marketing and networking that is a time suck and causes a bottle neck in production. Do you set a specific time, number of hours each day? Automate? Farm it out?


----------



## Mip7 (Mar 3, 2013)

There is undeniable truth to this post, but I wish to point out that by foregoing the polish on your manuscripts you may be stopping three feet short of gold. And not bothering to learn to craft good prose may be seriously limiting your potential.

Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like. It's tempting to jump right in there without first learning the craft, especially when it seems the indie market is creating a dumber and less demanding general audience to sell too. I do not envy the future generation, who isn't even being taught cursive in school.

But that good story told so hackishly, or even that decently-written novel that would be markedly improved if the writer simply went through it three more times and polished it before uploading -- the quality of writing could very well be what keeps a literary agent from emailing you, or a publishing company, or even a movie option agent. It could also be what keeps that extra level of sales from pushing it into territory that saves it from the 30-day cliff.

I take my hat off to those of you who learn the craft first and THEN follow the advice in the first post, and especially to those who polish their work before presenting it. And there's more like me out there, many of whom are browsing the kindle store as we speak.

Why not do both? Spend 2015 learning the craft. Then come back in 2016 and do it right.


----------



## EC Sheedy (Feb 24, 2011)

Good post.  It gave me lots to think about.

I get it, this need for speed. And I fully accept it is a workable course of action for many authors. I see and rejoice in their successes when they are talked about on these boards. I envy them and would like to be one of them, but neither my fingers nor my writing brain work fast enough to produce good work at warp speed. Isn't going to happen--for me.

And while many writers can and do produce quality work at a fast pace, many others only produce a mess of words. I guess what I'm trying to say is _do what you can, but know what you're doing_--and try to avoid the stress that comes with feeling you "should be" doing something you're not comfortable with.

Like everyone else on these boards, I'm a reader, too, and I don't read second books from authors whose first offering is a soup of grammatical errors, typos, and otherwise mangled prose. I think readers deserve better. So in the words of that old cop show, the name of which I can't remember, "Be careful out there."


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

Arkan9 said:


> There is undeniable truth to this post, but I wish to point out that by foregoing the polish on your manuscripts you may be stopping three feet short of gold. And not bothering to learn to craft good prose may be seriously limiting your potential.
> 
> Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like. It's tempting to jump right in there without first learning the craft, especially when it seems the indie market is creating a dumber and less demanding general audience to sell too. I do not envy the future generation, who isn't even being taught cursive in school.
> 
> ...


Because nobody, not even mcdonald's, expects their burgers to turn out perfectly every time. A quick bite to eat, a quick dollar earned!

It's great people want to write the next great novel and spend all that time perfecting the prose. The world needs writers like that -- but those writers just need a 2nd or a 3rd job in the meantime!


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

Thanks for this post. It is definitely a recipe for success, I just cannot work at that pace (or couldn't in 2014). I'm going try to do just that in 2015 and had already (before reading this) worked out how to gain the benefit of both worlds, short novellas and long stand-alone books. I think it's this years essential strategy.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

Over the last six months, after KU came in and the goalposts moved yet again, I started thinking about variables, those you can control and those you can't. And as many people have said (can't be dealing with quotes and stuff because I'm sitting on a bus typing on an iPhone haha), the number one thing you can control is your output. So you have available time divided by all the tasks that need to get done, and the one I decided to concentrate on was new words. Out went most blogging, social media, low output stuff like Twitter, goodreads and guest posting, and up went the words. In the second half of the year my promotion basically was perma frees plus the odd big promo. I figured my best chance of success was to have significantly more books out. I can write fast but rushing makes for bad books, so I wanted most of my available time to be used on writing. I got 506k, which isn't bad considering I work full and part time. Only works out to 1384 words a day, which is easily manageable in an hour and a half or so.

All the best to everyone for 2015!


----------



## ThomasDiehl (Aug 23, 2014)

While much of the OP seems to be common wisdom among KBoarders, this paragraph here stuck out to me and is worth reading a few times:


gorvnice said:


> Once you have a handle on it, you write a story, and you must find a way to use your own talents and ingenuity to make it come alive and make the characters real, to transport the reader. This is the craft element that I was referring to earlier. Craft is you making this somewhat "generic" piece of genre fiction your own, while still including the stuff that the fans of the genre and niche want.


Indeed, don't just write something popular because it sells, write something that is popular and yours. That's what'll make it worthwhile for readers.


----------



## No longer seen (Aug 17, 2013)

Arkan9 said:


> There is undeniable truth to this post, but I wish to point out that by foregoing the polish on your manuscripts you may be stopping three feet short of gold. And not bothering to learn to craft good prose may be seriously limiting your potential.
> 
> Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like. It's tempting to jump right in there without first learning the craft, especially when it seems the indie market is creating a dumber and less demanding general audience to sell too. I do not envy the future generation, who isn't even being taught cursive in school.
> 
> ...


My own model of prose is there's four kinds:

1. Lousy -- grammar and punctuation errors, etc.

2. Functional - The story works

3. Enhanced -- the emotional tone of the story is increased by metaphor, word choice etc.

4. Literary - dense, obscure, hard to read

"Literary" is way off subject here. Eschew unless you're seeking academic accolades.

I'd say Stephen King, Nora Roberts (at least in her standalone romantic suspense novels), and Dean Koontz are at #3.

You can make millions of dollars at #2 - Tom Clancy did. John Grisham continues to. They tell stories that are nearly compulsive to read if you enjoy 
that type.

However, they did NOT produce clumsy, typo-ridden prose -- or their editors smoothed it out. Reading Grisham is very smooth and easy. You don't pay attention to the prose, just the story.

#1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in erotica. Stick to the story. Edit out errors. Enhance if you wish/can.

P.S. This post refers only to the craft of prose style. The craft of constructing stories, character arcs, settings ets IS more fundamental and important. You 
DO need that. It is the nuts and bolts of storytelling.

Readers may not understand why a book doesn't work for them. May feel a lot less annoyed over a boring character than a typo, but they won't be buying your next book either.


----------



## hermione47 (Nov 5, 2014)

I guess this post (like many others on this board) only invites one type of reply: brilliant, bravo, perfect, etc.
And yet I'm sure many of you dream (although you may not admit it) to make it really big, and I mean JK Rowling big (not one of the many e-book names you often cite, that the man in the street wouldn't have heard of). 
Do you think (it's not rhetorical, but a genuine question) that by following your advice, there is any possibility of this happening?


----------



## Lefevre (Feb 1, 2014)

Thanks for the post. Interesting tactic.

As a reader I will NEVER buy a "series" book unless the entire series is available, and I rarely buy a book under 40-50 thousand words minimum. 

I am glad this method has worked for you, and your have found (your definition of) success. Has it had the same results in all genres?


----------



## Jennifer Lewis (Dec 12, 2013)

I've been writing in a small niche lately and I notice there are a couple of authors in the same niche who are killing it. They both write way faster than me (seems more like a book a week than a book a month!). Their books are short--maybe only 30K--but each is a complete story and they sell for $2.99. And based on reviews and sales they are producing stories that readers love and want more of. I'd never heard of either of them and I doubt anyone else has. They don't bother putting their books in print, either. I admire their productivity and success! I have no intention of attempting to write that fast because it just doesn't fit my hedonistic lifestyle, but it supports what the OP says  I know from first hand experience that you can make money writing slower, but not as much.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> That is a recipe for continuing to write. It is not a recipe to succeed in the current market.
> 
> That doesn't mean you should stop writing, but you should probably adjust your expectations, as that type of slow output will hamper the chances of you making a living at this work.


I admire your passion, but not your maths. 500 words a day is 15,000 words a month, quite ample for seizing the moment with a monthly blitz of KU or putting together a serial or a short novel in 3 months. Okay I am ignoring editing time there, but the point is to remember the old mantra that successful authors have preached to wannabes for over a century - write something every day. Training you to put that mantra into practice is the whole idea behind NaNoWriMo.

As to attention spans shortening. Nonsense on stilts. The whole idea of attention span is pop psychology and the figures that the pop psychologists give have altered little since the 1970s when I and my school friends laughed at the teachers who talked about the theories that they lapped up from their lecturers. Attention span theories come from the educational world and is based on how long you can keep a child's attention on tasks that they have not chosen. Just try to take a copy of _Divergent_ out of a kid's hand because they have been reading for 20 minutes and can't possibly be paying attention any more.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

I wish that people would at least be honest. How about you say I hear what the OP is saying, but I don't want to write that fast. I don't want to make more time to write. I want to make excuses about why I can't do it. I want to hang on KB and say I don't have an hour to write.

Someone on KB wrote it's impossible to write and go to school and work. I thought are you serious? I worked full-time, went to school full time, and I wrote. I also was a single mom raising two young kids. Then I quit my job to write full time. At the time I did that, I was stupid enough (or desperate) to live off the equity in my house with the intention of writing one year like a mad woman to see how it goes. This was all before the invention of the Kindle.

Now I have over 150 books written, various lengths from 5k to 65k. Being J.K. Rowling isn't my dream, but it would be nice. I don't need to be her. You know why? *Because I make about $20,000 per month! *Believe it or not, and it comes from *publishing often*.

Recently, I decided to try to get with a certain publishing company. (I mostly publish my own works and am with a few small companies also.) This bigger one took well over a year to publish my book. I had been used to writing to trends. So by the time they put my book out, the trend was saturated! What's the point? Now I see them throwing my book everywhere trying to make money from it, and I'm shaking my head because I've already moved on several times over.

Who needs a literary agent or a big publisher when they are so slow and you can make a living yourself? You can keep a closer watch on the trends and hit them at their height or on the rise rather than when they're dying because you're sitting on your hands waiting for some executive to decide you're worthy.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Mizuki said:


> I wish that people would at least be honest. How about you say I hear what the OP is saying, but I don't want to write that fast. I don't want to make more time to write. I want to make excuses about why I can't do it. I want to hang on KB and say I don't have an hour to write.


This seems awfully dismissive. It's not all black and white. We don't fit into two categories, super author and bored slacker who wants to play at writing. There's a broad spectrum of writers here. In my case I do have an hour a day to write, and I use it for exactly that purpose. I'm still only going to turn out two novels a year. I have a full time job that pays me about the same that you make from writing, so I don't need to crank out fiction at your pace. Even if I didn't I'm still not convinced it's necessary.

My first novel has only been out for 8 weeks and I've sold 1200 copies. The rate of sales is growing quickly, too (thank you audiobooks). I have a 4.9 star on Amazon, and similar numbers on both Goodreads and Audible. I'm not bragging, merely illustrating that there is another way to success that doesn't involve cranking out a novel a month. I understand that to you and many other authors here The One True Way (TM) is to pump out fiction as fast as humanly possible. Clearly that works for you and a lot of authors. Awesome, rock on.

I believe there is another way. I think a quality approach can work, and that if your series is good then your readership will grow. So far that route is working and working well for me. I'll keep using it until it doesn't.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

This is really awesome stuff. Thanks everyone who had contributed - I particularly love the writing in Wordpress idea. Genius. It's all coded and ready to drop into Sigil to make an epub which is magnificent, in itself.  

However, it has confirmed a lot of things I've believed for a while about writing and success. I want to write for a living. I also have a form of dyslexia. This probably sheds a fair bit of light on my intelligence levels and the sheer bloody mindedness with which nature endowed me. If someone who failed every maths exam since they were nine decided to try and be the next Stephen Hawking I'd probably chuckle into my sleeve. Nonetheless, pig headed looner that I am, I've decided to have a go at a correspondingly daft career plan.

So to those who have the time, the agility and the general all round suss to produce multiple books in a year, do it all yourself and make big bucks I am incredibly in awe and impressed. And I am also delighted for you. I have no idea how anyone achieves the output rate required to make money writing when they need to be writing full time, before they start to write the numbers of books they need to write to give up the day job. Unless the books are quite short. 

Actually, thinking about it. That's a good point. How long are the books in question here? 

OK, back to what I was saying.

As a writer I have about two and a half hours to write for three days of each week of the British school term time. There's no more give in the schedule and I have to do all the social networking in that as well. As you can imagine, I've had to re-evaluate how I can swing any kind of career in writing. I have proved, through my own work, that the OP here is bang on with the how to make money side. And yet I am no less serious about my career it's just that the constraints of duty and time mean that the most successful avenue is closed to me. I could give up but I prefer striving to discover another way (did I mention I was bloody minded?). So if anyone in my situation is reading this post and weeping quietly into their soup, here's what I'm doing. I don't know if it will work as it's based on bog standard, traditional tenets of marketing. The direction is up, so far, but it's a very slow curve. Than again. It's always going to be long haul for the slow writer rather than a sprint. On the upside that does leave me free to write whatever I please because any trend I've followed will have well and truly turned up its toes before I've finished writing it into a book. 

So, I just wanted to post some ideas for anyone else out there who is just as serious about their career but who has duties of care towards elderly relatives, children, pets etc which take up much of their time and which they simply cannot walk away from. 

THING ONE
If you can only produce books slowly you need to make them stand out. The way I do that is to try and make them different; the way JK Rowling, Jasper Fforde, Douglas Adams or Terry Pratchett defined different. Something nobody has ever seen before. My theory on this is that while different is exceptionally hard to sell, if it catches on, suddenly it's the new um... I dunno... paranormal romance? The way you make your stuff stand out is up to you. All of us are different. Avoid over analysing it. Just be.

THING TWO
If you can only produce books slowly they have to be quality. Just as in real normal marketing you have a choice of producing something expensive, that's taken a long time to build or you bash 'em out cheap with lower margins so it is with books. Many books, cheap is not an option for the slow writer. You have to pitch your books as beautiful pieces of artwork (whether you believe they are or not) because nothing but pure fabulousness would take so effing long to produce right!? Phnark! That means I spend a lot of money on editing because, with so little time to interface on the internet after writing, the way I sell books is face to face at school visits, signings and events. Yep, I sell as many, if not more, dead tree than I do ebooks. The trade off is that to get them into libraries and shops they have to be indistinguishable from trad pubbed. That means they have to be edited by someone who knows all the minutae that I lack the time to research like what kind of dashes and quotation marks to use, British versus American spelling (one or the other but not both in the same book) etc. 

Likewise, I'm rubbish at covers so I sketch stuff up and get a firm of designers to draw it properly in a computer. I could draw it properly on a computer, yes, but if I did it would take time and my books would take three, rather than two years each to produce.

THING THREE
Apply all the book marketing advice you can. Sure it hurts to make the first book of your series free when it took two years to write plus those other 13 you spent learning how to write a book in the first place. But if it means you're now selling as many books per month as you were per year it's worth it. Get links in there to your mailing list. Team up with other authors making boxed sets or just recommend each others books in the back matter. Pool your resources, share ideas, start a collective, create an anthology. Do whatever you can do while sitting watching batman with the kids or day time TV with the elderly relatives so that you can keep your writing time for writing. 

THING FOUR
Forget how far you have to go, plan ahead, sure but set yourself achievable targets and aim for those, one at a time. If you have to admire the scenery, look back at how far you've come. Avoid comparing others to yourself; they may be more prolific, or they may live alone with no dependants and bags of time for writing. 

THING FIVE
It is possible to write a whole novel with pre school kids in the house, although you may well fail to write a single full sentence without being interrupted with a request for juice.

Good luck to all the stellar folks producing bucket loads of books and to those of us doomed to be snails whether we want to be or not.

Oh and THING SIX
If you write at glacial speeds, write shorter books! 4 books in 6 years looks bad but it was actually 100,000 words a year; not a bad rate of production if you're writing stuff that's a sensible length... which I wasn't... but I still love the results.

Cheers

MTM


----------



## A past poster (Oct 23, 2013)

anniejocoby said:


> this is probably the best post ever. I agree, speed is king.my goal for 2015 is to put out one novel every single month. and I know that I can do it, because I get faster with every novel I write.It really is true that the readers forget about you if you don't constantly produce. sad but true, but that's just the way of the business.
> 
> Yes, it's a treadmill.


----------



## Z. Rider (Aug 15, 2014)

M T McGuire said:


> It's always going to be long haul for the slow writer rather than a sprint.


I like all your Things. They're very sensible for writers who are on another path, either by circumstance or by choice, and it highlights how you really do have to consider that path you're going down, because while each way through the woods shares some of the same scenery-permafrees, mailing lists, boxed sets, set achievable goals, etc-they go over different terrain. If you're going to spend a year writing a book for what's hot in the market _right now_, you'll be running after the train as it pulls out of the station. If you're going to only put out a book or two a year, you'll want to appeal to the widest audience in that genre, which means you want to appease the picky readers along with the "as long as it hits my story buttons" readers. If you're only writing a book or two or three a year, you need to set expectations--and your goals--according to _your_ genre and _your_ speed and _your_ ability to market.

If you can't play the numbers game, you need to play an even more strategic one. Or, maybe more accurately, a differently strategic one.


----------



## A past poster (Oct 23, 2013)

Richard Stooker said:


> My own model of prose is there's four kinds:
> 
> 4. Literary - dense, obscure, hard to read
> 
> ...


I disagree with your definition of "Literary." Think of the work of Alice Munro, Harper Lee, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, John Updike, Alice MeDermott, etc. Their work is literary, and it is not dense, obscure or hard to read. They cannot be grouped in your category #3 with Stephen King, Nora Roberts (at least in her standalone romantic suspense novels), and Dean Koontz.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> This seems awfully dismissive. It's not all black and white. We don't fit into two categories, super author and bored slacker who wants to play at writing. There's a broad spectrum of writers here. In my case I do have an hour a day to write, and I use it for exactly that purpose. I'm still only going to turn out two novels a year. I have a full time job that pays me about the same that you make from writing, so I don't need to crank out fiction at your pace. Even if I didn't I'm still not convinced it's necessary.
> 
> My first novel has only been out for 8 weeks and I've sold 1200 copies. The rate of sales is growing quickly, too (thank you audiobooks). I have a 4.9 star on Amazon, and similar numbers on both Goodreads and Audible. I'm not bragging, merely illustrating that there is another way to success that doesn't involve cranking out a novel a month. I understand that to you and many other authors here The One True Way (TM) is to pump out fiction as fast as humanly possible. Clearly that works for you and a lot of authors. Awesome, rock on.
> 
> I believe there is another way. I think a quality approach can work, and that if your series is good then your readership will grow. So far that route is working and working well for me. I'll keep using it until it doesn't.


I apologize. I was not speaking about authors such as you or as many authors in this thread who have said specifically they have a plan. I should have said I meant those who have said I have no time, or who get angry when they see suggestions for speeding up and give excuses. I absolutely did not mean authors who had deliberate methods they are using. Of course this isn't the only way. I have read on KB of authors who make what I make with a whole lot less books. So I am not dismissing you or others like you. The very fact that I am at this level of income with more books, to me, shows I'm possibly of lesser talent? skill? or whatever. I wish it took a lot less work to get to this.

I should have said I didn't mean those who weren't making excuses, who do have plans. I meant those who were dismissive of this method and wanted to cling to basically doing nothing and complain about that.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

That's fair, Mizuki. Write more. Market better. Both apply to all authors not content with where they are at. As long as an author is taking action in one or both areas they're on the right track, in my opinion.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

I got to thinking about this last night.  The more I thought about it, the more I got to thinking readers and authors may be looking at 2 different things grammar wise.  It seems that authors are thinking about dialog tags, sentence structure and comma usage as grammar.    Now those things I would not notice unless the story is really bad.  
What I am talking about specifically is singular/plural, contractions/possessives, masculine/feminine, obvious misspelled words except for hte I know that is the.  Homonyms that really do not fit and totally change the meaning.  

Let me give you a couple of examples of what I mean and why they took me out of the story.  
First one that comes to mind is Herd of Staffs.  The line was The Herd of Staffs made me feel very welcome at the hotel.
Reason for taking out of story, the visual.  I pictured a bunch of shepherds crooks in the hotel lobby.
Next one is My father is dying.  I must find the wizard to cure fathers illness.
How many fathers?
Last one that really led me to the giggles.  A woman was hunting for a new rich HUSBAND.  She went to the Catholic Church looking for divorcees and widows.
For the record a widow is always female.  Widower is the male.    

Now what I do expect is regionalism.    I do not expect Erskine Caldwell to sound like John Grisham.  I will give a few examples.
If I am reading Marti Talbott's Highlander series, I expect to see Scottish regionalisms.
If I am reading Caddy Rowland's Gastien series, I expect French (1890's to be exact).

I would also expect to find that Erskine Caldwell and our own Evening Star (Stella) would not sound anything alike.
Erskine is poor white southern (Tabacco Road and God's Little Acre) style and Stella is British.  I expect different dialects.

Another example would be Lisa Grace and Sibley Jackson.  I would certainly hope on language usage that they use very different words.  Lisa is Christian Fiction and Sibley Jackson is very hot gay romance.

Now yes in some books I expect regional slang.
Rather like Rufus the Jamaican in Wayne's series.  I expect that accent.  So yes some words are misspelled for an English speaking character but are correctly spelled for a Jamaican character.  You know what I mean, Mon.

Oh and in non-fiction, if you are passing yourself off as a "professional writer", proofread your book to make sure you don't mix up east and west.  (Note that was the actual term the person used to get to write about a person. )(I know I called the subject of that book.)    
Or if you put in medical advice, please give the sources where you found the information.
So make your non-fiction very well written.

So now you know this reader's expectations.  This may mean something and it may mean nothing.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

I do want to add one more thing - even Holly Ward has been quoted as saying that readers forget about you if you don't constantly produce. So....


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

cinisajoy said:


> I got to thinking about this last night. The more I thought about it, the more I got to thinking readers and authors may be looking at 2 different things grammar wise. It seems that authors are thinking about dialog tags, sentence structure and comma usage as grammar. Now those things I would not notice unless the story is really bad.
> What I am talking about specifically is singular/plural, contractions/possessives, masculine/feminine, obvious misspelled words except for hte I know that is the. Homonyms that really do not fit and totally change the meaning.
> 
> Let me give you a couple of examples of what I mean and why they took me out of the story.
> ...


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

KB is great. i just learned about this board a few weeks ago, and I didn't have access to any of this information. I had never heard of genrepulse and the various other advertising groups. I learned of Bookbub over the last year. Never before that. I almost never market my books except through my Facebook page and before that Myspace. I hated both because I'm not social at all. I've done advertising here and there. Still hate it.

So my marketing method was to keep putting out books. I don't believe I put out dreck. Lol. I do have a degree in English. I enjoy the "technical" side of English, meaning grammar and such. I don't like Shakespeare. I write simplistically because I enjoy it, shorter because I get bored.

There are many methods. The business side of writing must also be looked at analytically. A friend wanted to write gory horror in romance books, and her sales were low. She would often complain that less readers wanted to read her books. She was bitter against the romance authors who made more. She was advised listen try writing romance without the gore, or switch over to horror. See how it goes. She's separated the two, and her romance sales increased some.

We can be stubborn, but we can't force people to want to read what we want them to. We can accept what we get, or test out various methods. What works and what we enjoy (can live with) is where we end up.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Hey All, 

There's an important aspect of my strategy that people seem to be missing...and I want to expand on this a bit here.

The reason why volume and output are so incredibly key to succeeding in this business, is the LUCK FACTOR.  Now, everyone agrees that there is luck involved in any individual book achieving success or breaking out.  We cannot control for all of the factors that play into a particular book doing well or perhaps underperforming our expectations.

And this is why output becomes more and more important if we really want to give ourselves the best chance of succeeding at writing as a career.  If we have talent, if we have ability and craft and the desire--then we want to eliminate the LUCK FACTOR as much as possible.

Think of a baseball player.  If he only gets up to bat ten times in a season, he could have a few bad nights and his batting average might look far, far worse than it truly is.  Of course, he could also get lucky and his average will look far better than it is.  But if we believe in our own talent, than we WANT the luck to be eliminated over the longterm.  And so we endeavor to create volume, create more "at bats" if you will.  The more times we step up to that plate, the better our chances of showing our skill.

The faster we work, the more volume we put out, the quicker the longterm arrives for us.  FACT.

In other words, the longterm has not so much to do with TIME.  It has to do with OUTPUT.  Time is only a factor in as much as it limits production.  But for someone who produces fast, they can get out 10 titles in the time it takes you to produce 1.  So their longterm of getting to 10 sales is equal to your short-term of getting 1 title out.

My longterm is your short-term, and your longterm is like ten lifetimes for me--I am going to have opportunities you never dreamed of, because my work rate gives me those opportunities.

Now, there is another important component to what I am encouraging writers to do.  As a publisher, the more work you have available to package, the more "products" you have to sell.  And so, a writer who only has three or four or even eight individual books out--that writer has limited ways to package said material.  

Whereas a volume writer who has fifty or a hundred titles, many in the same genre--that volume writer has so many packaging combinations at their disposal.  Think of JA Konrath as an example.  Go and look at his backlist and the way he combines and packages different books to add to his real estate.  All of those old titles packaged in new ways is adding to his bottom line substantially.

It's a very big advantage to have at your disposal in a very difficult and finicky industry.

The other thing this provides you, is that once you hit what I call "the tipping point," each individual book or story you produce now has the entire backlist working behind it, giving it more weight.  So now, when I write a book--that same book doesn't just have one chance to produce earnings for me.  I use that one book again, and again, and again in different ways over the years.  So that one book, even if it doesn't perform great out of the gate, will still have many chances to contribute to my bottom-line.

That one book I write now, also has the weight of my backlist behind it, meaning that each book I produce makes me more and more money, because it will have exponentially more chances to earn due to packaging, rebranding, re-releasing in a compilation, etc.

The fewer titles you produce, the more each title stands on its own, vulnerable to the whims of the industry, vulnerable to luck of the audience, vulnerable to only having one or two swings of the bat in hopes of getting a home run.

In fact, the fewer titles you produce, THE MORE PRESSURE you put on your writing.  Many writers still get this backwards.  They incorrectly feel that writing fast puts so much pressure on you--when the reality is the opposite.  The more I write and produce, THE LESS pressure I have on me to do well on any given title, and the more I can relax and know that the long-term is going to arrive faster for me.

These points are very important philosophically to why I am using this strategy, so please consider them carefully...

BTW, I am planning on answering most of the posts left in this thread since I was on last night.  There's a lot of great stuff here, but since I'm also writing today, I need to come back later to do that.


----------



## D.J. (Dec 17, 2014)

Coming out of lurking to say this is a great thread! Love the discussions here.

My two cents: Writing slow isn't something to be ashamed of, but I've noticed many writers on Kboards who'll say something like "I've published 5 books in 6 years. Why am I not making money?" I wouldn't expect to make much if you can't write at least 2 books a year, but there's nothing wrong with it if quickly making a living isn't your goal.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Arkan9 said:


> There is undeniable truth to this post, but I wish to point out that by foregoing the polish on your manuscripts you may be stopping three feet short of gold. And not bothering to learn to craft good prose may be seriously limiting your potential.
> 
> Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like. It's tempting to jump right in there without first learning the craft, especially when it seems the indie market is creating a dumber and less demanding general audience to sell too. I do not envy the future generation, who isn't even being taught cursive in school.
> 
> ...


I don't think anyone here has said to not learn the craft of writing. In fact, the opposite. What was said was that manuscripts don't necessarily have to be perfect. That's were the polishing thing comes in, and often writers get so caught up in it that they take years to publish.

I personally have been learning the craft for nearly 50 years now. I started when I was very young, once I realized that people actually got paid to write all those books I was reading. I've wanted to be a writer ever since.

Gorvince, the only thing I'd say differently relates to craft and art. For me, the _craft_ of writing is knowing how to put a story together: plot, characterization, dialogue, paragraphing, POV, punctuation, spelling, grammar and so on. The _art_ is in knowing how to tell a good story. Anyone can learn the first, but I'm not sure about the second.

Whatever path we take as writers, as long as we go into it knowing what we're doing, and the consequences of our actions, then it's the right path. You may be a "slow" writer, or a "fast" one, and be the next J K Rowling, so long as you can tell a good story. But it's just as true that you don't have to be a "best seller" to do well in this life.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

D.J. said:


> Coming out of lurking to say this is a great thread! Love the discussions here.
> 
> My two cents: Writing slow isn't something to be ashamed of, but I've noticed many writers on Kboards who'll say something like "I've published 5 books in 6 years. Why am I not making money?" I wouldn't expect to make much if you can't write at least 2 books a year, but there's nothing wrong with it if quickly making a living isn't your goal.


See my post above for more on this...


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Gorvnice (and other experienced authors) how do you tackle the subject of research as it applies to time between releases? My first novel required an enormous about of research. I needed to learn about anthropology, neuroscience, genetics, helio-seismology and a host of other topics. The result is a genre breaking book people seem to love, and one of the things they most frequently compliment in reviews is the authenticity and the way all the science lines up.

If you're cranking out a full length novel every month or two how do you handle research? Don't readers call you on inaccuracies, or does that not impact sales enough to matter?


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

she-la-ti-da said:


> But it's just as true that you don't have to be a "best seller" to do well in this life.


So true! There are many writers out there who don't know you can make a living self-publishing and never get on NY's radar.

I once was trying to collaborate with a writer. I told her I was making a living. We were in the same genre. She was unpublished. She stopped speaking to me because I self-published, and she had a goal to be recognized by a NY pub. Not even a hey, we're going in different directions...

There's nothing wrong with having that dream, but darn, we're not navel lint! Lol.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

I have to do research for each for my stories, and I still use one of the strategies from when I wrote nonfiction articles. I specifically schedule research time and have specific questions I need answered on a piece of paper in front of me. This helps me avoid what I call falling down the rabbit hole. I also have specific places I use for information, which also helps. Another strategy is to always make sure you're getting the biggest bang for your time buck. This means get more than one story out of a session of research. For example, if you're researching anthropology, there is probably a whole host of novels, novellas, and short stories your brain imagines from just one round of research. Even if all you do is write down your story ideas with a notation to the research, you have preserved that time spent researching for use at a later time.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Different genres require different levels of research. Readers will always call you out on inaccuracies. So do as much research as you need to in order to either make it accurate, or accurate-sounding enough to get by. Assuming you're writing fiction, anyway. Make the writing sound authentic and give the readers confidence you know what you're writing about.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

For me, I go only as deep in my story as I'm willing to research. That means, I'm not going to write a story on neuroscience, genetics, etc. Unfortunately, right now I have what I consider an excellent story idea that requires both of those. I have put off the book because those subjects intimidate me.

On the other hand, I have written books that require extensive research on the region the book is located in. I spend days online looking for what I need, official city websites, citizen's blogs, etc. I create folders named with the cities I need and add in all the research I have found for that location. Even so, I tailor what I use. That means, if I don't know a fact, I'm not going to write any scene that requires me to be that extremely detailed. 

For me, I hate reading books that dump page after page of specific details like style of clothing, buttons, material, etc. It drives me nuts and bores me. I know I have a readership who is also bored with that extreme detail. So I don't bog down my work with it. That's just my preference.

Even still, when I sent a book to my editor (who happens to be a college press editor or something fancy like that) she commented on how well I had researched my region.

Aside from this, I've seen people call authors on research and frankly don't know what they're talking about.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

Oh I forgot, a friend and I visited a particular city this year because of a NY Times bestselling author's books. We discovered she either lied about a particular place or she took creative license. It was so far off the mark, I couldn't believe it. She's never been called on it that I know of even by people who live in that city. Maybe they don't care.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

Faster! Faster! 
Speed is the name of the game. But I think the accumulation of titles eventually does hold you up at a higher level of income, even without constant releases. 
I've got about 50 titles after about a year and a half of work. They're between 5k words and 75k words. Last month I moved across the country and only published a few short titles and put together some boxed sets. That was nothing compared to my November output. I still made between three and four grand. However, I know that income would start to slip pretty fast if I stopped producing and marketing all together. 
I plan to get back on the fast train in January because five to ten grand a month is looking pretty doable from where I'm standing. Once I hit that level, I'm thinking of writing longer books so that I can hit the next milestone. You know... $20k plus.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

For research I went to live in Seattle for 3 months, but mostly I wrote a bit of a story, guessed at the research and looked it up later or if I had wi-fi looked it up on the spot. What annoys me is someone getting my city (London) wrong, such as the Seattle author Elizabeth George who has been writing about London for 25 years and boasts about her research trips there. Yet she gets Chinatown's geography completely wrong and thinks that the Metropolitan Police = Scotland Yard, rather than being the police force for the entire metropolis (hence their name). The thing is that these mistakes would pass over the head of most non-Londoners. So don't overdo the research. And for the record there is a location blunder in _Seattle in Shorts_ relating to the Microsoft bus, because I misunderstood which bus my Microsoftie source was talking about.

A three month research trip does not fit in with the theme of this thread in terms of writing fast, but it was a cunning ruse to beat nearly 40 years of procrastination (I could not afford to not finish novel after spending so much money). It was also a good excuse to visit a great city, I'm now planning my Waikiki Beach novel


----------



## Jennifer Lewis (Dec 12, 2013)

It really saves time on research when you make up a new country and set your book there


----------



## Sonya Bateman (Feb 3, 2013)

Jennifer Lewis said:


> It really saves time on research when you make up a new country and set your book there


LOL so true! That's why I have a made-up town. 

By the way, I am in love with your covers! And also, I have a cousin named Jennifer Lewis. I'm sure you're not her... or ARE YOU?


----------



## SA_Archer (Dec 20, 2013)

Chris Fox said:


> I have a question. My approach is quite a bit different in that I only plan to release two novels a year. All titles are in a series of related trilogies, and all are designed to build on each other. My goal is to build a long term following similar to what I've seen authors like Butcher do (yes, I know I'm nowhere near his level but some day I hope to be). I figure that in four years when I have three trilogies and a number of novellas out my initial readers will still be buying books, and hopefully telling their friends about them.
> 
> Is that sort of slow growth suicidal? Am I risking readers forgetting about me at that pace? I try to use myself as a benchmark. I don't care how many years go by. If Sanderson or Butcher releases a new book in a series I love I'm all over it. Is it naive to assume my readers might do the same?


I did an urban fantasy serial that is now 4 novels long. I've been sporadic with releases, but published as fast as I could from December of 2011 until this past Fall. I make less than $300 a month across all markets, and new releases can count on 10 sales in the first month. That is with a mailing list and periodic paid promotion and 4+ stars. Your mileage may vary.

I am switching to romance now with weekly releases.

Sent from my Zio using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Jennifer Lewis (Dec 12, 2013)

S.W. Vaughn said:


> LOL so true! That's why I have a made-up town.
> 
> By the way, I am in love with your covers! And also, I have a cousin named Jennifer Lewis. I'm sure you're not her... or ARE YOU?


I don't think I'm your cousin. I'm very short of cousins, in fact--I don't have even one! It's a common name. I'm glad you like the covers


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

Z. Rider said:


> I like all your Things. They're very sensible for writers who are on another path. ...If you can't play the numbers game, you need to play an even more strategic one. Or, maybe more accurately, a differently strategic one.


Thanks. ;-) I guess it is another path but it's not one I'd have chosen. Ideally, I'd have far more time. But then again, if I'd looked at my time constraints when I started out, I wouldn't have 4 books out so in my own frame of reference I've achieved a great deal. The aim for this year is to learn how to make those two hours of writing really count. I wrote a 103k book, a 145k book, a 115k book and a 150k book as well as a 50k book and a batch of shorts. However, I also binned at least 150k, over the course of the series I wrote, which means that if I can nail a more efficient way of working I've a lot more books in me over the same amount of time.

As I've finished the series, I have a bit of slack to experiment. I'm also hoping to diversify away from just books into other written stuff but that's very early days yet, so we'll see how it one goes.

Cheers

MTM


----------



## JeffAmbrose (Dec 11, 2014)

@ Chris Fox ... about research.

The key for me is to research continually, gathering a little string each day for future projects, and trusting my subconscious mind to make connections. 

Also, research is cumulative, and unless you change series or world or subjects, there will come a point when research you did for Novel-A will apply for Novel-M.


----------



## Chinese Writer (Mar 25, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> If you're cranking out a full length novel every month or two how do you handle research? Don't readers call you on inaccuracies, or does that not impact sales enough to matter?


I usually write my rough draft all the way through first. Anything I have to research I just write it based on a quick thumb through of my reference books or a web search. I make note to check on those areas and just continue with the draft. Then, on my re-write, I would post my questions on online forums and ask subject experts on the one or two details I need in my story. I find that I've read and watch enough mysteries to get the research part close enough to only have to change a few details in the manuscript. So I basically only research what I need instead of gathering and shifting through everything first.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Um, I am a historical fiction author who just wrote a novel length book in a month. But I am well-read in my research already. No one gets "fast" on their first book. It takes time. But now, with seven titles published, I can map out a storyline in a few hours. 

I really recommend Writing Fiction for Dummies. I LOVE that book. It really gives such a great primer on everything we are talking about here, how to pick a corner of the market to target, how to make a story develop from just an idea etc. From that book, you can go on to find other books with more detailed information in them. I reread Writing Fiction for Dummies every year, it's THAT good.


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

I _could_ produce faster--I've written 100k in one month this year. But right now I'm more interested in tweaking my manuscripts, jacking up the quality as high as possible before release. My books are also 100k - 180k each. Ideally though, I'd like to release three to four a year.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

Re: research
I'm like Walter Mosley. I typically write about things I'm familiar with already so I don't have to spend time researching. Except for two books, I write contemporary. I also have lots of interests and will, per Ray Bradbury, read widely in my spare time to familiarize myself with different fields.  And as mentioned by Jennifer Lewis, I make up my own towns/cities, but they are based on where I live and places I've been to.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Nomadwoman said:


> Can i just say brilliant post and responses and thank you for taking the time!
> 
> I'd love to see you continue it a little further down the pipeline and mention how to be fast with all the marketing and networking that is a time suck and causes a bottle neck in production. Do you set a specific time, number of hours each day? Automate? Farm it out?


Thanks. As far as marketing and networking go, some of it depends on your own natural abilities and inclinations. Some people (Hugh Howey, H.M. Ward) can really mix and mingle and seem to enjoy it for its own sake.

I am much more reserved and I spend just a little time on Facebook and so forth. So I have a limited presence, and as is obvious, I don't even have a "true" presence on kboards. For promotions, it's much the same. Making use of freebies doesn't take a lot of time, nor does 99 cent price drops, or creating compilations, box sets, etc. These are all promotional activities that work and take relatively little time.

Same with making sure all books are available widely for distribution.

Most of the best marketing power comes from just getting the nuts and bolts right. That means cover, blurb, title, price points&#8230;these things can make or break a book. Also keywords. Targeting the right keywords to be paired up with similar books, and doing the same with categories.

All of these little activities add up to big results long-term.

Now, I don't do bookbub but some have had great success. I've done just a little paid advertising and to limited effect, but enough to use occasionally.

I don't like or advocate putting too many eggs in one promotional basket, so to speak. If every bit of income is through freebies, or all of it comes from Bookbub ads, or something similar--to me, that's playing with fire. I want to have diversity of approach.

This is another reason why having many books out is key. It allows to diversify your promotional approach.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Arkan9 said:


> Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like.
> &#8230;.
> I take my hat off to those of you who learn the craft first and THEN follow the advice in the first post, and especially to those who polish their work before presenting it. And there's more like me out there, many of whom are browsing the kindle store as we speak.


In my OP, I state that having craft is important. But the rest of your post is full of misinformation and attempt to guilt writers into changing their business strategy to suit your opinion of what is "good" and what is "bad."

I'm not at all concerned with good and bad. I'm only concerned with what works in my business.

I don't care if you are saddened by the state of things. People are saddened by all kinds of stuff--saddened that Twilight was so popular, saddened that nobody appreciates poetry, or that readers aren't discriminating enough about typos and grammar anymore.

That means very little to me, because I respond only to my readers and my audience as a whole. Even if individual readers of my work are upset about a plot choice, a price point, a lag between books in my series&#8230;.I don't care unless enough readers feel that way so it impacts my bottom line.

This is business.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

EC Sheedy said:


> Like everyone else on these boards, I'm a reader, too, and I don't read second books from authors whose first offering is a soup of grammatical errors, typos, and otherwise mangled prose. I think readers deserve better.


They key phrase here is "I think." You think the readers deserve better, but ultimately, the readers speak with their purchases. So if they decide grammar and mangled prose doesn't bother them, than it doesn't bother me either.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

hermione47 said:


> And yet I'm sure many of you dream (although you may not admit it) to make it really big, and I mean JK Rowling big (not one of the many e-book names you often cite, that the man in the street wouldn't have heard of).
> Do you think (it's not rhetorical, but a genuine question) that by following your advice, there is any possibility of this happening?


Nobody can plan to be JK Rowling big. You do realize that she's one of the biggest authors to come around in the history of books, right? I mean, she's THAT big.

If you're asking, does my strategy give you a shot at being that big? I guess my answer would be, why not? Since nobody can control that kind of success, I suppose it could happen.

But that's not what this is about. This is about giving yourself the best chance to write as a profession. Almost nobody can write full-time, even now, with all of the opportunity. I'm trying to show a way that offers the best path I've seen towards doing so.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Robert Reade said:


> Thanks for the post. Interesting tactic.
> 
> I am glad this method has worked for you, and your have found (your definition of) success. Has it had the same results in all genres?


Thanks for your response. No, this method hasn't worked the same in all genres. It seems to suit some better than others. I think that's a fluid situation, but I've found my niche. Everyone should try and find theirs


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I admire your passion, but not your maths. 500 words a day is 15,000 words a month, quite ample for seizing the moment with a monthly blitz of KU or putting together a serial or a short novel in 3 months.


15k words a month is not much, actually, so we disagree entirely. I'm advocating for 10-15k words a WEEK, minimum.

You do realize that in my scenario, I'm writing 4 times as fast on average as you're suggesting. That means over the course of 12 months, instead of 6 short 30k word novels, I've put out TWELVE sixty thousand word novels or the equivalent of maybe 24 novellas.

So actually I do not agree with your statement, and it's that kind of thinking which hampers writers' ability to succeed. The two ways of working are not even close to the same.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

ChrisWard said:


> &#8230;[T]he number one thing you can control is your output. So you have available time divided by all the tasks that need to get done, and the one I decided to concentrate on was new words. Out went most blogging, social media, low output stuff like Twitter, goodreads and guest posting, and up went the words. In the second half of the year my promotion basically was perma frees plus the odd big promo. I figured my best chance of success was to have significantly more books out...


This is my resolution for 2015. Congrats on achieving it in 2014!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> I believe there is another way. I think a quality approach can work, and that if your series is good then your readership will grow. So far that route is working and working well for me. I'll keep using it until it doesn't.


My contention is not that it's impossible to do what you're doing.

My contention is that your way, on average, will lead more authors to fail, than my way would. Because your way, by definition, creates far fewer chances to have a successful book.

Not to be cruel, but if one of your 2 releases, tanks, you will be in deep trouble. Not to mention if both tank.

Whereas if I put out 24 or 35 releases a year, I can have 10 or 15 bombs and I'm not too bothered.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Z. Rider said:


> If you can't play the numbers game, you need to play an even more strategic one. Or, maybe more accurately, a differently strategic one.


It's always a numbers game. Producing high-quality work is the best chance you've got. But I think, unless you have NO CHOICE--Literally, NO CHOICE, then I would always choose volume.

And as I've stated before, the truth is that the worst writer honing their work for twenty years will not touch a really decent writer who's spent three days on their work. The decent writer will almost always be better, even if they take 1/100th of the time to write and edit their work.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> So now you know this reader's expectations. This may mean something and it may mean nothing.


I don't care about any individual reader's expectations, at least not from a business perspective.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> Gorvnice (and other experienced authors) how do you tackle the subject of research as it applies to time between releases? My first novel required an enormous about of research. I needed to learn about anthropology, neuroscience, genetics, helio-seismology and a host of other topics. The result is a genre breaking book people seem to love, and one of the things they most frequently compliment in reviews is the authenticity and the way all the science lines up.
> 
> If you're cranking out a full length novel every month or two how do you handle research? Don't readers call you on inaccuracies, or does that not impact sales enough to matter?


My same advice applies here as well. Simply that anything that slows down production is something to be streamlined. I do most research through google, I try and use places and areas I'm somewhat familiar with, and I also fictionalize towns and so forth at times so as to be able to create my own place without concern for accuracy.

I do only as much research as is absolutely necessary for the genre and the story, and nothing more.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Half Pint said:


> Faster! Faster!
> Speed is the name of the game. But I think the accumulation of titles eventually does hold you up at a higher level of income, even without constant releases.


Yes, this is a side effect of the strategy which I hadn't yet mentioned, since it's a "down the road" kind of thing. But eventually, with enough titles, you can actually start to work less and less and make more and more money.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

FictionFugitive said:


> The second book of my crime thriller series So Damn Beautiful takes place in a ghost town in Nevada and involves prostitution. I researched the region and the way legalized brothels are run out there for days on end.
> 
> Readers (right down to my editor) nitpicked every one of these research-proven facts and challenged their accuracy. Why would there be a brothel in the middle of nowhere!? Why would the women behave like that!? I even had to carefully explain to one reader who called it misogynistic "male fantasy" that yes, it certainly is misogynistic male fantasy, but I didn't invent it!
> 
> ...


This is a great example of what writers THINK readers want VS what they actually want, in reality. Readers have a tendency to complain about all sorts of things. What a good business person needs to be able to do, is to see through the complaining to the actual question of whether it impacts book buying on a massive level or not.

The things that impact need to be addressed, those that don't--don't.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Brenna said:


> Much as I would LOVE to produce faster, I would never skimp on outside professional editing.


You should do what is necessary for your books to succeed. Some people do in fact need outside professional editing.
I can say unequivocally that I do not. Are there complains sometimes? Yes. Actually, there are complaints about almost everything, and I choose to fix or address things that I believe have impact on my business, and ignore the rest.

Some people need editing and some people use it as a crutch, even though they could very well self-edit. Some people perhaps save time by using editors, but on the whole, I say that whatever you do--make sure you streamline the process as much as humanly possible.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

I can't imagine a process that would make me leave writing any faster. That isn't a condemnation of someone who considers writing nothing more than a business. I am just saying that it would be these are appalling ideas (the OP--admittedly I haven't read the whole thread) for to me.

For some of us, writing is not 'just a business'.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

As for research, do the minimum to get the story across to your market. If your market requires accuracy (historical fiction does, for example, most of the time), do that.

But don't get bogged down in it, in my opinion. EL James wouldn't have been so huge if she'd written for actual BDSM practitioners who live in the Pacific Northwest. Instead she went fast and loose with geography, landmarks, the distance between Seattle and Portland, and pretty much every single aspect of BDSM culture/practice, and wrote something that appealed to millions. She didn't write for experts, because they weren't her audience.

I agree with a lot of what Gorvnice says. Pick an audience, write for them and their expectations. Be prolific. Personally, I get my stuff professionally edited and try to squelch as many typos and errors as I can (they breed in the night, I swear), because the audience I'm aiming at is used to reading main trad published books and will expect clean prose.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> I can't imagine a process that would make me leave writing any faster. That isn't a condemnation of someone who considers writing nothing more than a business. I am just saying that it would be these are appalling ideas (the OP--admittedly I haven't read the whole thread) for some of us.


This process isn't for most. I've said that repeatedly. Most writers will leave the business anyway. Most writers will never have any great level of commercial success, and even those that do, often leave after a time for various reasons.

However, if someone truly has the drive and motivation to write and to earn a living, then I would say RIGHT NOW I've outlined something that gives a better chance of success than most.

Personally, I enjoy all of my writing immensely, and I don't want to run screaming for the hills at all. I am so thankful every day that I get to write for a living.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

No Cat said:


> Personally, I get my stuff professionally edited and try to squelch as many typos and errors as I can (they breed in the night, I swear), because the audience I'm aiming at is used to reading main trad published books and will expect clean prose.


I've said repeatedly that different genres have different expectations with regards to prose, and to choose accordingly. Some people need editing, and some don't. Some who have editing go through round after round, some just do a quick once-over with a second pair of eyes.

My caution is to those who don't realize who much time they lose with editing, with multiple rounds of edits that may not greatly improve the MS or the ability to sell to their audience, and also the idea of farming out large pieces of the business and spending money to do so.

All of these things are drags on your profit and your production. Some may be necessary, but they are still drags on your profit and production.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> I've said repeatedly that different genres have different expectations with regards to prose, and to choose accordingly. Some people need editing, and some don't. Some who have editing go through round after round, some just do a quick once-over with a second pair of eyes.
> 
> My caution is to those who don't realize who much time they lose with editing, with multiple rounds of edits that may not greatly improve the MS or the ability to sell to their audience, and also the idea of farming out large pieces of the business and spending money to do so.
> 
> All of these things are drags on your profit and your production. Some may be necessary, but they are still drags on your profit and production.


As an anecdotal note, it's timely that you note this--I was re-reading *Million Dollar Productivity* last night by Kevin J. Anderson, and he related a tidbit from Mike Resnick:



> Mike Resnick, who has won more major awards than any other writer in the history of science fiction, once told me his philosophy of diminishing returns in editing. He can get a story 95% perfect (by his measurement) in several drafts, at which point he could either work for another month to nudge the story a percentage point or two better (subtle differences that few, if any, of his fans would notice), or he could spend the same amount of time and effort writing a whole new story. "Which would my fans rather have?"
> 
> Finish the story. Send it out. Then write another one.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

ゴジラ said:


> Did you visit Forks? Apparently they love the publicity. I can't imagine they're too fussed about accuracy.


I substituted at Forks High School for the 96/97 school year. After my husband and I both devoured the Twilight books and saw all the movies, we visited Forks again in the summer of 2013. We wanted to see how Twilight had changed the town. (It is by no means a city!)

It had not changed much at all -- except they built a new modernized high school.

We spoke with many locals we had known before. The folks in Forks are mostly fussed about the movies being filmed in Oregon and Canada instead of in Forks and Port Angeles.

Stephenie Meyer admits she only picked Forks after Googling where in the US gets the most annual rainfall. She's been there now, but she never visited for research, and yes, she made up all the details besides the rainfall. All this said, it's uncanny how close she got to the feel of the place.

/OT


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> On a related anecdotal note, it's timely that you note this--I was re-reading *Million Dollar Productivity* last night by Kevin J. Anderson, and he related a tidbit from Mike Resnick:


Yes, depending on the genre and the writer and length of story, I think it's quite possible to get to what is salable with a single review and fix of obvious grammar, typos, and poor sentence structure. Sometimes a bit of rewriting of story is necessary as well.

The longer the book, the more intricate the story, the more demanding the readers of the genre--the longer the editing timeline will take.

This should be factored into your genre and niche decisions as far as what to write.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I've said repeatedly that different genres have different expectations with regards to prose, and to choose accordingly. Some people need editing, and some don't. Some who have editing go through round after round, some just do a quick once-over with a second pair of eyes.
> 
> My caution is to those who don't realize who much time they lose with editing, with multiple rounds of edits that may not greatly improve the MS or the ability to sell to their audience, and also the idea of farming out large pieces of the business and spending money to do so.
> 
> All of these things are drags on your profit and your production. Some may be necessary, but they are still drags on your profit and production.


Do you just use your own eyes or do you let someone else do proofreading? Just a curiousity?

Though I must say if you write like you post, you are probably a pretty good writer.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> Do you just use your own eyes or do you let someone else do proofreading? Just a curiousity?
> 
> Though I must say if you write like you post, you are probably a pretty good writer.


I now proof and edit my own work in one sitting, typically.

Back in the day, I had manuscripts that had gone through 2 years of significant edits and polishing, and in the end, I'm not sure they were much better than the first drafts.

I used to have my partner go through and suggest edits and fixes, and over time, I've stopped doing that and now I'm able to come up with polished (enough) work through my one-stop revision process.

Certainly, I need to write relatively clean the first time around, and there is also more pressure on me to catch things in my own books, since nobody else will catch it for me anymore. Seems to work just fine, if anything I think I might be cleaner now than I was previously with all the help.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I now proof and edit my own work in one sitting, typically.
> 
> Back in the day, I had manuscripts that had gone through 2 years of significant edits and polishing, and in the end, I'm not sure they were much better than the first drafts.
> 
> ...


I would bet they are because you do write so much. And know what to look out for.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

In the past year, I've published seven books.

I'm a mid-speed writer and don't think I can write any faster. What has increased my writing speed enormously is that I outsource stuff. That is editing and formatting.


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

There's also something to be said for joy of the process. The sheer joy of business, the sheer joy of writing, the joy of marketing, and the joy of pure quality. What this thread is about is maximizing production--a coldly clinical, perhaps ultra utilitarian approach.

And it works. Statistically, it works, we've heard it time and again. OP has much wisdom to depart on that front.

Yet there are a lot of new writers watching this thread--and speaking as someone who pounded away at music for 16 years, watching that light dim steadily until the creativity and joy of it all was nothing more than a brutal number--I'd strongly advise all professionals in any creative craft to keep that joy alive *and above all other considerations*.

If one can find the joy in all aspects of publishing, one _also_ has a greater chance of success. Forcing yourself to produce optimally at all times has its consequences, and one of those consequences can be the dimming of that light of joy. Then it's just another job, isn't it?

Many of us will fail at the endeavor of writing professionally--statistically, that is a fact. But if we fail, let us fail joyfully, doing what we love. For me, I refuse to watch another craft dim to darkness for the sake of income.

Yes, the closer we are to machines, the better we'll do at this--business, writing, etc. Corporations are sociopaths in that regard. Yet I incorporated, because this _is_ a business, and I take it very seriously, I do. Yet (and I said it in another thread, naming this and this source) the optimal level of income, measured by happiness, is $75k a year.

Which is good news for us all, because 75k a year is, I think, a worthy and realistic goal. Will that require pounding out ten books a year every year until diminishing returns kicks in? For some, yes. Will cranking out that ten increase the odds of success? Absolutely, there's no denying that.

But is it a _requirement _for success?

Thankfully, no, for that is the essence of indie publishing


----------



## Melody Simmons (Jul 8, 2012)

Great post!  A good story and likable characters are the key indeed!  I think if one loves what one does (write / design / music / art) one will automatically produce large volumes of work...it is inevitable since one will be putting in many hours.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

I guess my question when someone posts about a path to success is always "Is it working for YOU?" and "If so, show me the money."


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> I guess my question when someone posts about a path to success is always "Is it working for YOU?" and "If so, show me the money."


Applause.


----------



## Guest (Dec 31, 2014)

It was the best of posts; it was the worst of posts. (Apologies to Dickens)

Craft vs. good story: It isn't either or. Can be both, can be neither.

Speed kills: It may work for some, not for others. Just because some punks fly on the highways at 90 mph+ doesn't mean I want to, even though I'd get where I'm going sooner. And, just because some poster here says 2-3k daily is a "must" to "succeed" doesn't mean it's true for me or many others. I aim for 1,000 words 5 days a week and can turn out 4 novels a year, but I don't feel rushed or slow; find your own comfy pace. NO one can tell how quickly or slowly a work was written. I found myself at the Louvre looking at the Mona Lisa once, and this gnarly old man clambered up and squinted at the painting. "I could paint that in an hour," he said. I turned to him and replied, "We don't know how long it took the artist, and frankly, we don't care."

Success: Isn't necessarily writing full time. I live a balanced life with drafting in the morning, editing the previous day's draft, reading in the afternoon among other pursuits, family and TV and sports in the evenings and on weekends. No one can define success for someone else--it's personal. Sometimes one doesn't know success has arrived until it does; or, sometimes success is the journey and has nothing to do with materialism.

Series: Not all readers want a series. One poster said he wouldn't buy a series unless it was finished. How does he know it's finished? Did the writer kick off?

Studying the market: This isn't buying porkbelly options. If you write to catch a popularity wave you will likely fail. How many books did Balzac write? Hundreds? Who reads him today? If you want your book to be the equivalent of the pet rock or the hula hoop, find out what's hot today, lock yourself in the bathroom and longhand the sucker on rolls of toilet paper, similar to that On The Road guy. This is the worst advice I've seen on here. 

Set your own sail: Write what you love to read. Write with passion, perseverance, dedication to the craft and make reading a regular part of your day. Never stop learning the craft. Exercise your imagination like a muscle, making it strong and vivid and useful. Fiction's for those who want to see how others cope with the human condition, who not only want to see it but feel it. Fiction's prime directive is to convey emotion. Non-fiction is to convey information. As for value of this information for myself, I don't weigh it higher than the old guy at the Louvre.


----------



## Gene Bathurst (Dec 3, 2014)

I just wanted to chime in and say thanks for this great post and taking the time to both write it and respond to questions. And all the contributors! Best threat I’ve seen so far.

"A poor writer, no matter how much they edit, will still end up with a bad book at the end.  A good writer, even with less editing, will still have a decent book.  
You get better by writing more books.”

Lots of great advice here, and interesting points of view. it’s very inspirational. And really gets across the need for speed. 

It does make me consider dropping blogging entirely in favour of writing stories. And seeing higher goals. Numbers game. Sounds about right.

I am writing as a hobby after work so 500 to 1000 words a day is about the most I can manage. I don’t want to push myself so hard now I quit and stop, however (keep the joy alive!). 

And I’m definitely one who needs to do editing.

I’ve been working on a couple short stories to help promote the novel, as well as two novellas, but those are going slowly. 

Two questions come to mind:

1) Do people find short stories worthwhile as promotion, or does the 99 cent price for 3,000, or 10,000 words turn people off, except for the sale period when it’s free?

2) Do you write outlines first, or do you flow with the story and see where it takes you? I still spend much time trying to figure out the structure, character outlines, that sort of thing.

Very much appreciate any responses!

cheers,
Gene B.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Darla, I agree with a lot of what you're saying, but...

If you look at the type of stuff within genres you like writing that sells, and you can write a similar book within 2-3 months, how can that NOT be a strategy that (providing you can tell a decent story) will get you at least some success. Because we can move fast, bandwagon-jumping is an excellent strategy for self-published writers, providing you like writing in that subgenre.

Problem is, this is not what I've been doing. I've had a plan, and books I've wanted to write for a long time, but those ideas are now coming to an end. In deciding what to write next, I will definitely look at what sells and write something similar. In fact, I'm already doing that with one series.

Silly me for deciding to write TWO series at the same time.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

DarlaBooks said:


> Set your own sail: Write what you love to read. Write with passion, perseverance, dedication to the craft and make reading a regular part of your day. Never stop learning the craft. Exercise your imagination like a muscle, making it strong and vivid and useful.


I'm tempted to quote this twice. It's exactly how I feel. If you write stuff you don't like to read, you'll be competing against people who work just as hard as you and also love the material. That's really, really hard to beat.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

cinisajoy said:


> These titles are they well known authors or are they brand new never heard of authors?
> I am so tired of reading that readers will forgive anything. It sounds like an excuse that well so and so does it so I can too. You know what it does not matter because most high school graduates only read on a 5th grade level.
> So please keep contributing to illiteracy.
> I beg of all authors put out the best work you can.
> Otherwise in 3 generations we will have a bunch of illiterate people that can't do anything.


That is the best advice on this post. I love you. When I was growing up my English teacher said the best way to learn grammar and writing skills was to read all you can. Now I tell my son, "Hey, this book your reading is all wrong. Don't use this as an example or you'll flunk your English class."


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> It's always a numbers game. Producing high-quality work is the best chance you've got. But I think, unless you have NO CHOICE--Literally, NO CHOICE, then I would always choose volume.


This has been a fascinating discussion and I respect your position. It's working for you and that's wonderful. But there are many paths to success, and yours is but one. I know a person can find success with a couple releases per year. I've seen it.

Mass producing books works for you right now, but how many people will be able to keep up that pace, and for how long? When will the burn out set in? I ask when, not if, because it _will_ set in, eventually. It reminds me of when I was writing advertising copy. In the beginning, I loved it. I was living the dream--I was a bonafide professional writer (why doesn't KBoards spell check know how to spell bonafide?). But after years of racing to meet the next deadline, barely sleeping, living on coffee and Maalox, I burned out so badly that when I left, I didn't write again for many, many years.

I worry about people setting themselves a pace they won't be able to keep up for long.

A lot depends on what our goals are. If your goal is to get in, make a boat load of money and get out, then writing fast is probably the way to go. If your goal is to write for the rest of your life, then pacing yourself is probably a better option.

Whether you write quickly or take your time, you can still cross the finish line. What each writer needs to decide is whether they want to be a sprinter or a marathon runner. Just be aware, nobody sprints a marathon.


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

vlmain said:


> Nobody sprints a marathon.


Well put.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> I guess my question when someone posts about a path to success is always "Is it working for YOU?" and "If so, show me the money."


I don't need to show anyone the money. Show yourself the money, I already showed myself this works. I don't really mind if you or others choose to disbelieve me, or don't like the strategy. For those who understand the logic, and for those who've already done some of this, they know.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> In the past year, I've published seven books.
> 
> I'm a mid-speed writer and don't think I can write any faster. What has increased my writing speed enormously is that I outsource stuff. That is editing and formatting.


You write in a more difficult genre. Choosing genre and niche is part of this path. All this business is, is understanding and accepting trade-offs. Some trade-offs will make it more difficult to earn a living. That's fine too.


----------



## Shaw (Dec 27, 2014)

Great thread. Lots of interesting stuff here. 

I'm curious, gorvnice: while you're bopping around trying different genres, looking for that hit, do you keep all these attempts under one name? Or start a new pen-name for each genre? Or somewhere in between?


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

DarlaBooks said:


> It was the best of posts; it was the worst of posts. (Apologies to Dickens)
> 
> Craft vs. good story: It isn't either or. Can be both, can be neither.
> 
> ...


I guess there is nothing wrong with studying the market if you can find a niche you can live with. I did that when I switched genres myself, but I didn't hate writing the new genre, so it was fine. The worst advice I've ever seen is study the market and copy the best selling authors. I have my own writer's voice and my own idea for stories. Why would I want to copy in a business where standing out is essential?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sever Bronny said:


> Will cranking out that ten increase the odds of success? Absolutely, there's no denying that.
> 
> But is it a _requirement _for success?
> 
> Thankfully, no, for that is the essence of indie publishing


No, it is NOT a requirement for success. It is a "best odds" for success.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> It's always a numbers game. Producing high-quality work is the best chance you've got. But I think, unless you have NO CHOICE--Literally, NO CHOICE, then I would always choose volume.
> 
> And as I've stated before, the truth is that the worst writer honing their work for twenty years will not touch a really decent writer who's spent three days on their work. The decent writer will almost always be better, even if they take 1/100th of the time to write and edit their work.


Amen. No choice. Gorvnice, what length are your books, just for info. I could produce a lot more output if I wrote shorter books and I'm wondering about that as an option.

Cheers

MTM


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> I don't need to show anyone the money. Show yourself the money, I already showed myself this works. I don't really mind if you or others choose to disbelieve me, or don't like the strategy. For those who understand the logic, and for those who've already done some of this, they know.


Sorry, but I require proof of success before I follow advice. Call me cynical, or maybe call me a former CFO.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

DarlaBooks said:


> Success: Isn't necessarily writing full time.
> Studying the market: This isn't buying porkbelly options. If you write to catch a popularity wave you will likely fail. How many books did Balzac write? Hundreds? Who reads him today? If you want your book to be the equivalent of the pet rock or the hula hoop, find out what's hot today, lock yourself in the bathroom and longhand the sucker on rolls of toilet paper, similar to that On The Road guy. This is the worst advice I've seen on here.


What's wrong with pork belly options?

My advice is geared to those who want to earn a living, to make a full-time job from writing.

My advice is not about creating the art, the Mona Lisa, that you so admire.

My advice is for those who want to understand the clearest path with the best odds of success. I don't care if you find the pet rock or the hula hoop to be beneath your standards. You are free to do and make whatever you want.

The advice I've given is based not on WHAT you write, but on HOW you can write in such a way as to give yourself chances to succeed in a financial sense. For those who don't have an interest in the business, financial or monetary side of this--or for those who cannot or do not want to work in such a fashion&#8230;I am happy to say that I don't expect you to.

I don't expect even the folks who SAY they want to do this, to actually do it.

Writing is a tough road and there are no guarantees. There still needs to be talent, craft, desire, and passion.

I can't tell you how to get those--you either get them or you don't. This is a way of thinking about selling ebooks for self-publishers that want to earn a good living.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer (May 14, 2014)

Amazing post. I'm making a full-time living right now and I started back in June. My books aren't mega-sellers, but I have 19 of them. Writing fast and in a decent genre is almost a surefire way to make a living. 

Honestly, no proof is needed because this isn't the first time any of this has been said. I realized a long time ago that this is a numbers game. I still care about my books, but writing fast is the quickest way to quit your day job. 

Some writers get caught up on one or two books, and it's hard to make a living from a couple of titles if they aren't best sellers.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> Sorry, but I require proof of success before I follow advice. Call me cynical, or maybe call me a former CFO.


I don't particularly care. It's like if I told you that if you drive from here to there, you can get from point A to point B faster. You say, "well show me the proof. Drive and I'll follow right behind you and time it."

Nope. You can drive and time yourself. The methods are there to be tried and you can quickly see results or lack of them yourself. Many people in this thread and others like it have corroborated this style, I've just expanded on some pieces of it.

Not interested in proving myself to you or anyone else. My proof is what I do every day, my life, and my own happiness with how this strategy has worked for me.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

M T McGuire said:


> Amen. No choice. Gorvnice, what length are your books, just for info. I could produce a lot more output if I wrote shorter books and I'm wondering about that as an option.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> MTM


I tend to write shorter, novellas for the most part. Anything from 10k words up to 35k words mostly these days.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I can't tell you how to get those--you either get them or you don't. This is a way of thinking about selling ebooks for self-publishers that want to earn a good living.


Well, I earn a VERY good living and have from Month One, and I follow exactly 0% of your steps, so I'd say, it's a WAY, sure. It is a just-fine way, if that's how one wants to approach this job. It's just not the only way.

(Note that in my genre, Contemp Romance, the best-selling self-pubbers do write long, much longer than I see advocated on KBoards. I know because i'm up there on the bestseller list on Audible with them, and all our audiobooks are 9-12 hours long, or even longer. We're talking 90-120K. Many, many readers in this genre do NOT like novellas or serials.)


----------



## NoBlackHats (Oct 17, 2012)

I think visibility and success are a three-legged stool:

- Availability.  How many books do you have out?  How many places can they be bought?  How visible is your work? 

- Perceived quality/popularity:  reviews, covers, blurbs, blogs, best-seller lists, word of mouth, etc.  Also, is your work in a genre that is popular?  (I can see how the horror/romance combination may be problematic).

- Marketability.  What tempts the buyer to buy? (sale, KU, series, timely theme, featured on a newsletter, etc)

I see a lot of authors who produce tons of product...but can't edit, or who don't market.
I see a lot of authors with one or two books out who market them to death...but don't keep writing.  I also know authors who don't bother with a decent edit (self or paid) or cover, because they think their content is so good.

To hit it outta the park, you've got to have some of EACH of these factors.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Gene Bathurst said:


> Two questions come to mind:
> 
> 1) Do people find short stories worthwhile as promotion, or does the 99 cent price for 3,000, or 10,000 words turn people off, except for the sale period when it's free?
> 
> ...


Personally, I think you can make money and get readers with shorts in certain genres, but novellas tend to work better. At a certain point, I found diminishing returns the longer my books got.

As for outlining, I choose to mostly roughly sketch scenes in my mind, with varying levels of detail depending on how complex the narrative is. The longer I've been writing, the less I need that structure. In the early days, I sometimes had very complicated and long outlines, but now I mostly don't because they slow me down. I also like to let my story surprise me a bit


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> Well, I earn a VERY good living and have from Month One, and I follow exactly 0% of your steps, so...
> 
> It's a WAY, sure. It's just not the only way.


I've said over and over again what you just stated. It's not the only way, it's just a more LIKELY way to accomplish this. You, Wayne, Hugh, and plenty of others prove that my way is not the only way. But my way is far more reproducible than most other ways.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

MichaelWallace said:


> I'm tempted to quote this twice. It's exactly how I feel. If you write stuff you don't like to read, you'll be competing against people who work just as hard as you and also love the material. That's really, really hard to beat.


I love what I write no matter what genre. Even the genre's I don't tend to read in, I still love writing. I think this idea is just a mental block, but perhaps some just don't enjoy branching out.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

Sever Bronny said:


> If one can find the joy in all aspects of publishing, one _also_ has a greater chance of success. Forcing yourself to produce optimally at all times has its consequences, and one of those consequences can be the dimming of that light of joy. Then it's just another job, isn't it?
> 
> Many of us will fail at the endeavor of writing professionally--statistically, that is a fact. But if we fail, let us fail joyfully, doing what we love. For me, I refuse to watch another craft dim to darkness for the sake of income.


Beautifully stated, Server.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> That is the best advice on this post. I love you. When I was growing up my English teacher said the best way to learn grammar and writing skills was to read all you can. Now I tell my son, "Hey, this book your reading is all wrong. Don't use this as an example or you'll flunk your English class."


No, this is not good advice for writers. The best advice is to write what the market dictates. That's if you want to succeed anyway. If you want to simply feel superior intellectually then of course, by all means, focus on things your readers don't care about.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> This has been a fascinating discussion and I respect your position. It's working for you and that's wonderful. But there are many paths to success, and yours is but one. I know a person can find success with a couple releases per year. I've seen it.
> 
> Mass producing books works for you right now, but how many people will be able to keep up that pace, and for how long? When will the burn out set in? I ask when, not if, because it _will_ set in, eventually. It reminds me of when I was writing advertising copy. In the beginning, I loved it. I was living the dream--I was a bonafide professional writer (why doesn't KBoards spell check know how to spell bonafide?). But after years of racing to meet the next deadline, barely sleeping, living on coffee and Maalox, I burned out so badly that when I left, I didn't write again for many, many years.
> 
> ...


I've said from the beginning and repeated again and again, that this is not by any means an easy path. No path in writing and selling is easy. No path. Nobody who does this for a living has had an easy go of it, and if you think I'm saying that, then you're wrong and I've miscommunicated.

This is hard work. You can burn out.

You can and will have setbacks, and you'll feel pain and suffering and discouragement.

But this way I'm talking about works NOW in this current market, given what is happening RIGHT NOW.

As for making boatloads of money and getting out--which would you rather have, the boatload of money and a choice? Or no boatload of money and a choice?

Both situations are equal, only in one you have a boat filled with money


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Shaw said:


> Great thread. Lots of interesting stuff here.
> 
> I'm curious, gorvnice: while you're bopping around trying different genres, looking for that hit, do you keep all these attempts under one name? Or start a new pen-name for each genre? Or somewhere in between?


I have more pen names than I know what to do with. Part of the fun for me, and you can do it and still create backlists for many names if you write fast.


----------



## Someone (Dec 30, 2011)

> > 1. Lousy -- grammar and punctuation errors, etc.
> 
> 
> ....
> #1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in erotica.


Said someone who has no experience with moving a lot of books in the erotica genre. As well as someone who I suspect has no experience in writing in the genre, thus knows nothing about the true state of the erotica market.

Why does this _junk is unacceptable everywhere but erotica_ happen here the way it does? Why is it even allowed? I can only imagine the member and prod response if I posted 
#1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in science fiction.

You and many others would say, as someone who does know SF, that I don't know what I am talking about and you would be quite miffed at my comment.
Well right back at ya'.

How about we speak about what we know instead of attacking the readers and writers of a genre we don't know.
How about if we set aside our favorite punching bag unless, when we do talk about it, we know of what we speak.

I know some will find this petty but take your genre, fill in the blank ( #1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in _________ ), and let me know if you would let such a condescending untruth go unchallenged. You wouldn't and I won't either.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> I guess there is nothing wrong with studying the market if you can find a niche you can live with. I did that when I switched genres myself, but I didn't hate writing the new genre, so it was fine. The worst advice I've ever seen is study the market and copy the best selling authors. I have my own writer's voice and my own idea for stories. Why would I want to copy in a business where standing out is essential?


Perhaps it's bad advice for your needs. I'm trying to give the best advice that has the best chance of working, I'm not trying to tailor this to every writer's needs. Anyone can tailor this advice, but some things will make your life more difficult than others.

Perhaps some writers are not able to write in more than one style, but it can be cultivated with effort and practice.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

D. Zollicoffer said:


> Amazing post. I'm making a full-time living right now and I started back in June. My books aren't mega-sellers, but I have 19 of them. Writing fast and in a decent genre is almost a surefire way to make a living.
> 
> Honestly, no proof is needed because this isn't the first time any of this has been said. I realized a long time ago that this is a numbers game. I still care about my books, but writing fast is the quickest way to quit your day job.
> 
> Some writers get caught up on one or two books, and it's hard to make a living from a couple of titles if they aren't best sellers.


You sound like you have taken the journey yourself. No "show me the money" required when this is the case. As for the others, try a bit and see. Come back with results, I'm happy to be wrong. As for myself, I know what works.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> I tend to write shorter, novellas for the most part. Anything from 10k words up to 35k words mostly these days.


Brilliat.thanks for that. My strategy for this next year is to dump the 100k behemoths or at least mix it up a bit while I work on the next one.

Cheers

MTM


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Miranda_Dean said:


> I think visibility and success are a three-legged stool:
> 
> - Availability. How many books do you have out? How many places can they be bought? How visible is your work?
> 
> ...


Yes, everything you say I agree with. Which is why this can't work for everyone. Those lacking skill, those lacking smarts, those lacking open-mindedness, time, flexibility, drive or desire or passion.

For the rest, they must practice through repetition, study, trying to improve, trying to get better and faster, watching the markets closely, staying focused and working through the hard times.

But those same qualities are necessary for almost any degree of success, except perhaps time. Some slower authors will succeed because of timing, luck, and skill. They will never realize just how close they came to failure


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

By the way, if you want to get even more "out there," just look at how I started this thread.  I wrote something eye-catching, based on the needs of the kboards market.  I wrote something that I intended to be both attention-grabbing, but also filled with what I truly believe and am passionate about.

A good writer can do that with almost anything, if they have the desire to do so.

I wrote responses fast, and even where I made some punctuation or grammatical mistakes, I was forgiven.  I churned the replies out fast to keep people interested.

There is nothing out there that is different from in here.  Look at the number of views this thread already has, and I've just "shown you the money."

Seacrest Out.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> Well, I earn a VERY good living and have from Month One, and I follow exactly 0% of your steps, so I'd say, it's a WAY, sure. It is a just-fine way, if that's how one wants to approach this job. It's just not the only way.
> 
> (Note that in my genre, Contemp Romance, the best-selling self-pubbers do write long, much longer than I see advocated on KBoards. I know because i'm up there on the bestseller list on Audible with them, and all our audiobooks are 9-12 hours long, or even longer. We're talking 90-120K. Many, many readers in this genre do NOT like novellas or serials.)


It's true, classics of the genre like Lace and Queenie are not exactly short.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> By the way, if you want to get even more "out there," just look at how I started this thread. I wrote something eye-catching, based on the needs of the kboards market. I wrote something that I intended to be both attention-grabbing, but also filled with what I truly believe and am passionate about.
> 
> A good writer can do that with almost anything, if they have the desire to do so.
> 
> ...


Some people are here with popcorn, but most are here because we want to sell better.

Also, the fact that people seemed to take offense at the "show me the money" comment was a classic case of how people on the internet get offended for no reason at all. Because the writer of the comment fully agreed with the OP.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Some people are here with popcorn, but most are here because we want to sell better.
> 
> Also, the fact that people seemed to take offense at the "show me the money" comment was a classic case of how people on the internet get offended for no reason at all. Because the writer of the comment fully agreed with the OP.


Nobody got offended by the show me the money comment. You can say show me the money all day long, but I guarantee that even if I did show you my results, there would still be doubters and naysayers ready with a host of reasons as to why what I'm doing can't apply to them.

If you want to try it, try it. Nobody's forcing anybody to do or try or believe anything--at least not from my POV.

As for who has popcorn and who doesn't, just like with my books--it makes no difference to me. I write because I love it, and this is practice for me in its own way. This is still playing with narrative, making stories--this story happens to be what I believe right now.

The Seacrest Out thing was just a lame joke.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Someone said:


> ....
> #1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in erotica.
> 
> Said someone who has no experience with moving a lot of books in the erotica genre. As well as someone who I suspect has no experience in writing in the genre, thus knows nothing about the true state of the erotica market.
> ...


Sorry, but I write erotica and I edit the crap out of it. I've also had great reviews from readers that thank me for that. Some erotica writers are as serious about putting their most professional foot forward as any other writer. Some of us, quite a few, actually, make the NYT bestseller list. We don't want to come off like an idiot who doesn't know their from there anymore than another writer.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

You are my hero today gorvnice.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Half Pint said:


> You are my hero today gorvnice.


LOL, that's why I do this. For the accolades.


----------



## Maggie Dana (Oct 26, 2011)

Arkan9 said:


> There is undeniable truth to this post, but I wish to point out that by foregoing the polish on your manuscripts you may be stopping three feet short of gold. And not bothering to learn to craft good prose may be seriously limiting your potential.
> 
> Yes, you might very well create a good business churning out poorly-crafted novels. In fact, as the OP states, it is probably your best chance for immediate success---sadly. We all see it when we read the samples of best-selling indie books full of grammar issues, typos, poorly-structured paragraphs, tom swifties, point of view shifts within a scene, thinker attributes, and the like. It's tempting to jump right in there without first learning the craft, especially when it seems the indie market is creating a dumber and less demanding general audience to sell too. I do not envy the future generation, who isn't even being taught cursive in school.
> 
> ...


Yes, THIS ^^^^^ a hundred times, this.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Maggie Dana said:


> Yes, THIS ^^^^^ a hundred times, this.


Nope, a hundred times wrong. This oft-repeated advice is kryptonite for authors, especially young and impressionable ones, who want to make a living. You have to get good, but good is completely subject to what readers happen to want now--not what some person tells you they want.

And besides, where did I ever say "write poorly crafted novels?" That's just a fiction that some people come up with because my advice threatens their ideas about what constitutes a real writer.

I hate to say it, but if the establishment had had its way, almost none of us would've been considered "real writers."


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> Some people are here with popcorn, but most are here because we want to sell better.
> 
> Also, the fact that people seemed to take offense at the "show me the money" comment was a classic case of how people on the internet get offended for no reason at all. Because the writer of the comment fully agreed with the OP.


I'm for popcorn. I'm here because I just knew this post would say something like readers are forgiving or can't spell either, so don't worry if you have no craft. I also figured Cinisajoy, who is an avid reader and worth listening to, would chime in that it's not true. I had to see if I was right. I was on both counts.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

The biggest problem is who now decides what's good or not. Those of us focusing on making a living at this know the reader is king and queen. It doesn't matter if other authors or entities think my stories are awful, it only matters what my customer wants. So all of this nuance about who edits and what and how many typos etc is silly. It doesn't matter. All that matters when you're trying to pay bills is does the work put in give a return to keep the lights on and food in the fridge? It's not the place to discuss literature as an art form, it's just a business post. The two things are not dependent on one another.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> I'm for popcorn. I'm here because I just knew this post would say something like readers are forgiving or can't spell either, so don't worry if you have no craft. I also figured Cinisajoy, who is an avid reader and worth listening to, would chime in that it's not true. I had to see if I was right. I was on both counts.


I never said don't worry if you have no craft. Sorry. I could also have predicted that members would come in, and wrongly paraphrase what I say.

What I said is that I let the market dictate what I do. When I need to up my game in a certain area, I do. When I see that readers don't care about certain things, I try to follow their lead.

Not individual opinionated readers who post here, but my actual readers that read my books and buy them. Those are the people that I try to understand. Rather than doing whatever suits me or my little pet peeves, I try to look and understand my readers en masse and deliver the experience they seem to want right now.

Sorry I can't agree with you about not needing craft.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> The biggest problem is who now decides what's good or not. Those of us focusing on making a living at this know the reader is king and queen. It doesn't matter if other authors or entities think my stories are awful, it only matters what my customer wants.


Yes, there are always those who will complain that we are debasing the form, that literature is dying, that readers are becoming illiterate.

So I guess I'm supposed to try and save literacy now on top of earning a living as a writer?


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Yes, there are always those who will complain that we are debasing the form, that literature is dying, that readers are becoming illiterate.
> 
> So I guess I'm supposed to try and save literacy now?
> 
> Please, I'll leave that to the elites.


I have a 42 year old sister who has a doctorate degree in Shakespeare and ten years of experience as a college professor. She works as a waitress and lives with my other sister. Good luck saving literature! Personally, I'd rather be rich.


----------



## Someone (Dec 30, 2011)

Katrina
Regarding your posts about not publishing error ridden erotica. Yeppers, agree completely. That is exactly why I posted what I did.
I, too, take great care with my erotica as anyone who wants to move erotica does. Considering how well aware I am of the many, many erotica authors who don't publish his #1 type of books, it really miffed me to see such a condescending falsehood said about the genre, especially when I know had his OP said the same about another other genre, all hell would have broken lose. Can you imagine if I or anyone would post about romance readers not caring about lousy grammar, typos, and overall bad quality? Or had I said it about SF? But have someone say it here about erotica and what do you know? There is no problem here whatsoever, just another slug at KB's favorite punching bag.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

Writing fast isn't easy.  If it were, there wouldn't be so few pulp writers (there are very few for the amount of work out there that is "pulpy".)

Learning how to write faster is improving my fiction writing, which is already spelling and typo free and full of the kind of language use that marks a lot of "literary" or "ornate" prose.  If I'd experienced the freedom of "writing faster is ok!", I'd at least HAVE the drawer full of novels and short stories that I could publish now.  Instead it's mostly a lot of plot sketches and half finished stuff and random scenes and a little finished work here and there.  And it would be written well by litterateur standards.  I'd just have a bunch more of it.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Hutchinson said:


> Writing fast isn't easy.


Writing fast isn't easy. Writing slow isn't easy.

Slow writers can and do succeed.

But it is a much harder road to success when you write slow, and the road is already hard enough.

That about sums it up!


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Richard Stooker said:


> #1 is what will alienate almost all readers, except in erotica. Stick to the story. Edit out errors. Enhance if you wish/can.


Please note it was NOT the OP who said this.


----------



## Someone (Dec 30, 2011)

No, it was not in the OP or said by the OP. I used _his OP_ in hopes that would clarify that but it doesn't look like it helped. Oops. It was hard to describe a post that was in reply to another post so I thought his OP might work. It didn't. My bad.
To be clear, the erotica slight was in Richard Stooker's post and he was responding to someone who mentioned different levels of quality.

Cherise
Thanks for pointing that my use of OP wasn't the best choice. I wouldn't want to mislead anyone or put words in anyone's mouth so TY; I appreciate it


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

Someone said:


> Katrina
> Regarding your posts about not publishing error ridden erotica. Yeppers, agree completely. That is exactly why I posted what I did.
> I, too, take great care with my erotica as anyone who wants to move erotica does. Considering how well aware I am of the many, many erotica authors who don't publish his #1 type of books, it really miffed me to see such a condescending falsehood said about the genre, especially when I know had his OP said the same about another other genre, all hell would have broken lose. Can you imagine if I or anyone would post about romance readers not caring about lousy grammar, typos, and overall bad quality? Or had I said it about SF? But have someone say it here about erotica and what do you know? There is no problem here whatsoever, just another slug at KB's favorite punching bag.


I just ignore it usually, the same way I ignore the write fast thing, which is huge advice in the erotica genre. Of course I've read the KMathews post. But the thing is, KMathews writes fast and carefully. Her stories are not riddled with typo after typo, at least not the ones I've read. Her stories are strong. No one ever stops to think maybe that had a little something to do with her success. Some just think write a hundred stories of dribble and I'll make ten grand a month. I don't believe this is what she had in mind. Otherwise her own stories wouldn't be so well crafted. Selena Kitt, who has made the NYT list is the same. The guidelines she has her authors at Excessica use are as strict as any other publisher. But writing is like any other job. Some show up to work because they want the money and some show up because they love their job and want to do it to the best of their ability.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

If I could write that fast then I could make a dent on my To Be Written pile that currently stands at 169. I think about what will be the most effective titles to work on based on the market. However that means that in Russell Blake's terms I am still one of those foolish authors that writes what my muse gives me, its just that my muse gives me a lot to choose from. Horses for courses and all that palaver.

Having a big backlist is always going to be a winner and writing at speed to catch-up when like me you are just starting out. I have health problems that have seriously derailed my writing and publishing plans, but while I would never be in the weekly publishing stakes I might one day make it into the Book a Month club. 

Aaron is advocating speed, shorter books, self-editing, and self-design. It is not just speed that attracts criticism on kboards, those other three (which are closer to my heart) are also often railed against. I don't think that people should worry too much about the advice to speed misdirecting new authors as the prerequisite to develop your own craft means that no-one is going to have that speed out of the box and many will never be comfortable publishing at that rate. Of course he has not said that many will be able to match that speed, quite the opposite in fact.

Me, I'm still a long way off the Book a Month Club, but with better health I don't see that as an impossible aim.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> I guess there is nothing wrong with studying the market if you can find a niche you can live with. I did that when I switched genres myself, but I didn't hate writing the new genre, so it was fine. The worst advice I've ever seen is study the market and copy the best selling authors. I have my own writer's voice and my own idea for stories. Why would I want to copy in a business where standing out is essential?


Tell that to NoCat and Dana G, both of whom freely admit that they study the market to see what is selling and then put their own spin on what is hot. There is no copying, although I will say that, after studying bestsellers in my own genre, there are definitive patterns that repeat over and over and over. Themes that repeat over and over and over. Coincidence? Nope. Writers would do well to study the bestsellers just to get a feel for the themes and patterns in them.

I remember that I read about a writer who intentionally set out to try to writer a bestseller by hitting the themes of the day. She outlined the successful books, and saw the patterns in them, and then wrote a book that fit into these patterns. She succeeded - I believe she got her book quickly into the top 100. So, yeah, not a bad strategy at all.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> Tell that to NoCat and Dana G, both of whom freely admit that they study the market to see what is selling and then put their own spin on what is hot. There is no copying, although I will say that, after studying bestsellers in my own genre, there are definitive patterns that repeat over and over and over. Themes that repeat over and over and over. Coincidence? Nope. Writers would do well to study the bestsellers just to get a feel for the themes and patterns in them.
> 
> I remember that I read about a writer who intentionally set out to try to writer a bestseller by hitting the themes of the day. She outlined the successful books, and saw the patterns in them, and then wrote a book that fit into these patterns. She succeeded - I believe she got her book quickly into the top 100. So, yeah, not a bad strategy at all.


I'm sure it works, I'd just rather be the one copied.


----------



## Someone (Dec 30, 2011)

There is a lot of difference as well as a fine distinction between just copying best sellers and writing into the currently popular tropes.
NoCat has consistently said she follows the charts and while mimicking the attributes of the best sellers, she puts her own spin on the popular tropes. She isn't copying the books; she's picking the tropes that are working.
There is a difference and one that, IMO, counts.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

anniejocoby said:


> ...after studying bestsellers in my own genre, there are definitive patterns that repeat over and over and over. Themes that repeat over and over and over.


That is the definition of genre.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> But my way is far more reproducible than most other ways.


That is the key, here. There are outliers who can make it without doing what you advocate, Gorvnice. Rosalind is one, for sure, because she repeatedly says that she writes what she likes and doesn't study the market. But she's an outlier. There are other outliers who captured lightning in a bottle on their first try and made a fortune on relatively few books. Stephenie Meyer and EL James are two names. Then there are others who hit it out of the park on their first try, had the one hit and then pretty much weren't heard from again (at least not very much). I can think of two books that were HUGE - massive, everybody had heard of them, and had major movies made of their books, with A-list stars and directors. In both of these instances, the authors pretty much failed completely to produce anything else worthwhile. I'm sure that there are more.

Those are outliers. I don't want to pattern my career on outliers, because it depends too much on the capturing lightning in a bottle thing. It depends entirely too much on luck and on things that I have no control over. I'd much rather approach this whole thing like a business - looking at the best chances for success, and patterning my career on that. That means, for me, speed and studying the market.

Case in point - my last series. It never has performed well. It's my latest series, yet it sells about 1/5 of my other books on all channels. Why? The books were the same quality as my others, probably better (I think that I get better with each book for obvious reasons). But I didn't study the NA market, at all. I wanted to be different. Tattooed bad boys? Pfft, I'm going to write about a genuinely nice guy. I swore I was going to zig, where everybody else in NA is zagging, and I was going to stand out because my books are different.

Cut to now. Well, didn't work out that way. Learned my lesson, and those are three books down the drain. That was six months where I could have been writing something that would, you know, make me serious money. I swore after completing that series that I would never again write a book without knowing the genre conventions, the patterns and the themes that readers want. Because, like it or not, the readers want more of the same.

Unless you're an outlier, then you can write what your heart desires.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Cherise Kelley said:


> That is the definition of genre.


But its more granular than that. Yes, there are broad themes, but there are also very granular things that all the bestsellers I read have in common.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

katrina46 said:


> I'm sure it works, I'd just rather be the one copied.


It's not about copying their style. It's about studying what works and following the formula. Create your own style, write with your own voice, but you can still study what works without giving up your unique voice.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

It's hard to argue with anything the OP says. And I don't want to. They're right.

The evidence is everywhere. If you study the bestseller lists you see the strategy in motion. You see negative confirmation too: books released that hit the bestseller lists and reach a sales rank of sub 4000 (perhaps sub 1000 with KU) and sell thousands of copies, but the next book comes out more than six months later - to crickets. I've been in that camp twice and I've learned by my mistakes. Meanwhile, others who released book 2 while book 1 was still hot, continue to sail in the rankings - and build their mailing list, the only real buffer against slow releases.

The evidence is also in forum posts and blogs by people who are selling bucket loads.

As the OP says, there isn't just _one_ way to success. There's just one way that's more likely to get you there.

The only alternative to fast writing and frequent releases (that I've noticed - there may be more) is the bigger book and higher price strategy. Actually, I call it a strategy, but I suspect it's accidental. Doesn't mean that it couldn't become one. I think this works by pushing the book higher up the popularity lists. Unlike the bestseller lists, price is a factor in positioning on the popularity lists. The higher the price, and the higher the sales, the higher the book rises. Big books (at least in the epic fantasy genre) are common enough and buyers don't mind the extra price tag. The book still has to sell well though, meaning that cover, blurb and the look inside feature must be optimal.

For myself, I'm sticking with the first strategy.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> That is the key, here. There are outliers who can make it without doing what you advocate, Gorvnice. Rosalind is one, for sure, because she repeatedly says that she writes what she likes and doesn't study the market. But she's an outlier. There are other outliers who captured lightning in a bottle on their first try and made a fortune on relatively few books. Stephenie Meyer and EL James are two names. Then there are others who hit it out of the park on their first try, had the one hit and then pretty much weren't heard from again (at least not very much). I can think of two books that were HUGE - massive, everybody had heard of them, and had major movies made of their books, with A-list stars and directors. In both of these instances, the authors pretty much failed completely to produce anything else worthwhile. I'm sure that there are more.
> 
> Those are outliers. I don't want to pattern my career on outliers, because it depends too much on the capturing lightning in a bottle thing. It depends entirely too much on luck and on things that I have no control over. I'd much rather approach this whole thing like a business - looking at the best chances for success, and patterning my career on that. That means, for me, speed and studying the market.
> 
> ...


Off topic, but I'm just really curious how you see Stephanie Meyers as an outlier? Vampire Diaries and Buffy had already made young girls in love with vampires and werewolves extremely popular. EL James wasn't the first bestselling author to do BDMS. The most sucessful yes, but Harold Robbins was getting bestsellers with it way back in the eighties. Not trying to be argumentative. I'm just really wondering what makes you see them as outliers. Or do you mean they made a fortune on a few books? A lot of writers do that, too. I'm just trying to clarify where you are coming from here.


----------



## unkownwriter (Jun 22, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> The biggest problem is who now decides what's good or not. Those of us focusing on making a living at this know the reader is king and queen. It doesn't matter if other authors or entities think my stories are awful, it only matters what my customer wants. So all of this nuance about who edits and what and how many typos etc is silly. It doesn't matter. *All that matters when you're trying to pay bills is does the work put in give a return to keep the lights on and food in the fridge? It's not the place to discuss literature as an art form, it's just a business post. The two things are not dependent on one another.*


It always happens when someone wants to discuss the business side of writing. Can't write fast, that's bad writing. Can't write to market, that's bad writing. Can't refrain from editing something to death, that's bad writing.

Why, oh why, can't we please think of Literature? sob

Re: research: Do only as much as you can to convey the feeling to the story. You'll probably need to dump 95% of what you spent so much time learning, because the reader won't care.

Re: love what you write. Or write what you love. I get mixed up. I'll tell you right now, I love everything I write. I'm so danged tickled when I finish something, or when the day's writing has gone well, I can't begin to tell you. The closest thing I can describe is when I first saw my children's faces, and couldn't believe I'd helped make that precious thing.

I write in all sorts of genres, just as I read in all sorts of genres. I don't think there's a single kind of book I haven't/wouldn't read, so long as the story is interesting. Honestly, I don't understand writers who {believe} they can only write one type of book. Break out of that box! Don't be afraid! Even if you don't like it, at least you've stretched yourself as a writer.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with writing to market. Nothing, as long as you're writing good stories. Surprisingly, readers don't really want the bright, shiny new thing (with some exceptions being books that are surprise hits), but want more of the kind of book they like, just different. So, put your voice into the story, make it yours.

Or, you know. Just do what you want. Isn't self-publishing fun?


----------



## lilywhite (Sep 25, 2010)

.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Writers like to think that anything they're doing is good writing--what everyone else does is bad writing.

I've not said anything about good or bad.

For me, it's all about what the market (aka readers) actually want.  Give them that.

If you think that you're a special snowflake whose amazing new world and new concept will revolutionize literature--far be it from me to tell you you're not.  I'm happy for you if you're the next J.K. Rowling.  Why wouldn't I be?

And I'm glad when Wayne says he's hitting the top of the charts, or Rosalind is killing it.  

Whatever you do, it's fine with me.  But if we're talking business, if we're talking reproducibility, if you want to know what has the best chance of success for the most writers, I'm going to say: study the markets, write fast. Give the readers what they want NOW.

That's what I'll say, again and again, until it stops working or I see evidence to the contrary.

If you try and do what I do, maybe only 1 out of 1000 can do it.  Those are terrible odds.

If you try and do what Rosalind or Hugh or Wayne does, I think you're looking at 1 out of 100,000 or less (Note: in actuality, I don't know the odds at all).  

So I suppose if you succeed, you deserve even bigger congrats from me, and I'm only too happy to give them to you.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

I completely agree with the OP's approach for those who want to make a living as a writer.

Not everyone wants to. Some people write what they love and don't care about making a living at it. For them, success is measured differently. Having an actual book published, getting a few reviews, making a few bucks -- that is success for some.

I wanted to leave my job and write full-time. That was a dream of mine forever, but you never know until you do it whether you can 1) write a novel, and 2) write something that will find an audience, and 3) find an audience is big enough to support you full time.

When I first decided I wanted to become a published author, I was working full time at a professional job (research and policy analyst) and had a family with two teens who needed a lot of attention. I had only so much extra time for writing, but I took it and wrote regularly and probably 1,000 words a day every day on average.

I wrote two books and published them within two weeks of each other and then wrote the third over the course of the next four months so that I had three books released in 6 months. This was a genre bender series that didn't sell all that well - 1,200 copies total in 6 months. Oh, I was very happy regardless because people were reading them and reviewing them and liking and sometimes raving about them. But I made only a few hundred bucks a month. My husband kept looking at me askance, wondering when I would start making real money.

Then I decided to write a contemporary erotic romance because I thought it might sell better and have a wider audience. So I changed sub genres and wrote my book. It took exactly 6 weeks to write. I had it pro edited and a pro cover. For whatever reason, it took off and sold 5000 copies in its first month and has sold consistently well ever since. Still, the 120K+ sales for the series is a DROP IN THE BUCKET compared to a friend of mine whose indie published contemporary romance novel was on the NYT for weeks and has sold (Edited: probably closer to 300K+ copies in_ three months_. And that is nothing compared to the heavy hitters in my genre, who sell a million copies (HM Ward), ten million copies (Sylvia Day), 100 million copies (EL James). Big sellers sell hugely compared to my paltry success but even my 120K copies meant I could quit my job and write full-time and make a quarter million in two years.

All this is by way of saying that you can't plan on writing a novel that sells as well as EL James or Sylvia Day or Holly Ward or Hugh Howey or Russell Blake. It's hard to know what book will take off and sell like hotcakes. My friend who sold 100K in three months had no idea her book would sell that well. That's luck and magic and it happens without warning or planning. It was her third novel, her first and second selling well on their own, but nothing like her third. Now, she is on her way to becoming one of those big sellers.

So you can't plan on writing a huge seller. If you want to make a living as a writer, what you can do is take every step possible to set yourself up for success. That means knowing your particular market and niche, developing your craft to a point where you know what makes a story work, have competent prose, and put out quality work in enough volume that if you happen to stumble on a successful concept and story, you are ready for that success.

You can plan your business and you can plan your production schedule and you can plan your time for writing, editing, publicity, etc. The more you plan, up to a point (some people can get caught up in planning to the exception of actually, you know, writing) the more chance you have of succeeding. For some, that might mean planning on writing a series a year. Or a novella a month. Or a novel a month.

Once you have an audience, you can start to plan on how to feed that audience and keep them satisfied. Depending on the size of your audience, you will have to write more or less to make a living. If you have a huge audience, you can write less. If you have a smaller audience, you may have to write more.

You won't ever develop an audience unless you actually write your book. Most preferably three. Readers always read faster than authors can write. So for those who want to write as a career, volume is your friend. You may luck out and write that one book that finds a huge audience, but most likely you won't so don't plan on it. Your best bet, if you want to do this gig full time, is shoot for a volume of quality great stories.

In the end, story rules. For the author who wants a career, the only quality that matters in the end is that determined by readers -- readers who are willing to keep buying your books.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> In the end, story rules.


There's not much I would disagree with in your post.

Luck will factor into everyone's results. The more you put out there, the smaller of a factor luck becomes, and the bigger of a factor your craft, talent, passion and skill become.


----------



## NoCat (Aug 5, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> Tell that to NoCat and Dana G, both of whom freely admit that they study the market to see what is selling and then put their own spin on what is hot. There is no copying, although I will say that, after studying bestsellers in my own genre, there are definitive patterns that repeat over and over and over. Themes that repeat over and over and over. Coincidence? Nope. Writers would do well to study the bestsellers just to get a feel for the themes and patterns in them.
> 
> I remember that I read about a writer who intentionally set out to try to writer a bestseller by hitting the themes of the day. She outlined the successful books, and saw the patterns in them, and then wrote a book that fit into these patterns. She succeeded - I believe she got her book quickly into the top 100. So, yeah, not a bad strategy at all.


Technically, I didn't study the market to see what was hot and write that. I picked what I wanted to write, THEN studied the market for that genre to make sure I was hitting the reader expectations. So I didn't exactly go after a trend, just studied what I wanted to write to make sure I did it properly. Not that there is anything wrong with looking at the market first if you don't already have a genre or idea in mind. I just happened to have the series and genre in mind beforehand.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> That is the key, here. There are outliers who can make it without doing what you advocate, Gorvnice. Rosalind is one, for sure, because she repeatedly says that she writes what she likes and doesn't study the market. But she's an outlier. There are other outliers who captured lightning in a bottle on their first try and made a fortune on relatively few books. Stephenie Meyer and EL James are two names. Then there are others who hit it out of the park on their first try, had the one hit and then pretty much weren't heard from again (at least not very much). I can think of two books that were HUGE - massive, everybody had heard of them, and had major movies made of their books, with A-list stars and directors. In both of these instances, the authors pretty much failed completely to produce anything else worthwhile. I'm sure that there are more.
> 
> Those are outliers. I don't want to pattern my career on outliers, because it depends too much on the capturing lightning in a bottle thing. It depends entirely too much on luck and on things that I have no control over. I'd much rather approach this whole thing like a business - looking at the best chances for success, and patterning my career on that. That means, for me, speed and studying the market.
> 
> ...


Yep, that's the 'sad' truth about writing for money... often it's the path of LEAST resistance (in terms of story ideas, plots, etc) that do the best. Just like every episode of crime dramas on TV are basically the same... People enjoy the same storylines over and over -- but with a little different packaging each time out 

Notice how it is only other 'writers' who protest this thought? Poor ones at that, I'd wager.

Just like every other hipster 'musician' who complains about the top mainstream music sucking... TRUE artists like them aren't recognized!


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

dirtiestdevil said:


> Yep, that's the 'sad' truth about writing for money... often it's the path of LEAST resistance (in terms of story ideas, plots, etc) that do the best. Just like every episode of crime dramas on TV are basically the same... People enjoy the same storylines over and over -- but with a little different packaging each time out
> 
> Notice how it is only other 'writers' who protest this thought? Poor ones at that, I'd wager.


Just curious, but are you the writer who said not long ago you can make money with only one erotica story using a brand new pen name? If so, you should be weighing in on the fast theory here. As I remember that writer didn't seem to think it took a large back list. I was always fascinated with his point of view. I was almost sure it was you, but I could be wrong. Could you let us know?


----------



## Sever Bronny (May 13, 2013)

Reading all the posts in this thread has given me a very clear perspective on exactly what it is I need to do in 2015. 

Thank you all


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

dirtiestdevil said:


> Notice how it is only other 'writers' who protest this thought? Poor ones at that, I'd wager.


There is really no need to be condescending. Believe it or not, those who write fast are not the only ones making a decent living with their writing. There are success stories on both sides.


----------



## Someone (Dec 30, 2011)

> Annie Jacoby said
> Case in point - my last series. It never has performed well. It's my latest series, yet it sells about 1/5 of my other books on all channels. Why? The books were the same quality as my others, probably better (I think that I get better with each book for obvious reasons). But I didn't study the NA market, at all. I wanted to be different. Tattooed bad boys? Pfft, I'm going to write about a genuinely nice guy. I swore I was going to zig, where everybody else in NA is zagging, and I was going to stand out because my books are different.


*If you are thinking about/internally debating the write to and into the market thesis, don't miss what Annie said in the quote above* 
It's helpful times a ton

Annie. Thanks for such a helpful post and example of _write to and into the market_. Thank you much for sharing what has to be tough to admit to yourself. Considering how it feels when something you put a lot of time and effort in doesn't take off, it's hard not to place blame on everything but your own error. I know I've blamed everything from the wrong keywords, trying to make it about the cover, to algo changes for my duds. It's just a lot easier to cast blame elsewhere and, when you are in denial, you can still look at your duds as unrealized potential instead of having to admit they're duds. Knowing how hard it is to come to that realization - been there-done that - sharing it with others is all the harder. That makes it real. And then sharing it somewhere where the blame buck is so readily passed. TY Annie; sharing information about this series is very honest, informative, and appreciated.

Although it's a total bummer, your experience with that series really hits the _don't copy but write into market expectations or else_ point home. Sorry it had to happen, but you realizing the why, in the long run, will be an invaluable experience. ( and, if they will just admit that you know what you speak of, for others too )

For any doubters, that Annie is right about the series, look at it. It's a very good case involving an author who knows how to sell books. An author who knows the gig and knows the good and the bad of it.
So, if she isn't right, what is up with this series not selling when her other one is?
Promotion? She says there has not been a difference there. Covers? They look good, are genre specific, and thus are doing the part they need to do. So we know it probably isn't them. Blurbs? Read them; they work. Writing quality? One of her series does sell and the later one doesn't. Uggh, that makes it tough to argue that it's her the writing. Timing? The series not doing well isn't her first series, her first series is selling well and these 2 genres have a lot of cross over. A lot of crossover. Nahh, can't be the new author factor. Category? The books are listed in the proper category. Keywords? Can't tell that by looking but I think with 1) the books being in the right categories and 2) her other series doing well and that series being in a very good cross over genre, if it was due to keywords, it probably would have worked itself out by now.

So what gives? What keeps this series on the runway while her other one is flying? 
IMO the problem is exactly what she states she believes the problem is. Her other series adheres to popular trope and market expectations and, as a result, does well. She states she boo-booed and didn't do that with the other series and, unfortunately, she says the market isn't giving her a pass. If there is a better argument, please speak up. What she thinks is the problem isn't fixable/very hard to fix so I'm sure she would love to explore the idea of it being anything else. Love it

If you are counting on or need your writing to produce anything more than hobby money, establish and maintain a garden of hardy perennials before you give orchids a try. Instead of fighting the write to the market ideation, combine Annie's experience and knowledge with logic and listen to the answer. Occam's razor says Annie, unsure of the market's expectations, broke away from the popular trope and, unfortunately, the market is telling her they aren't down with that.

** Umm, yeah. About using a green thumb example on New Years? Well, although there's quite a few months to go, I'm already pretty much done with winter.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> Off topic, but I'm just really curious how you see Stephanie Meyers as an outlier? Vampire Diaries and Buffy had already made young girls in love with vampires and werewolves extremely popular. EL James wasn't the first bestselling author to do BDMS. The most sucessful yes, but Harold Robbins was getting bestsellers with it way back in the eighties. Not trying to be argumentative. I'm just really wondering what makes you see them as outliers. Or do you mean they made a fortune on a few books? A lot of writers do that, too. I'm just trying to clarify where you are coming from here.


Stephenie Meyer and EL James are the very definition of outliers. Unless you somehow think that making $100 million plus on three or four books is common.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

katrina46 said:


> Just curious, but are you the writer who said not long ago you can make money with only one erotica story using a brand new pen name? If so, you should be weighing in on the fast theory here. As I remember that writer didn't seem to think it took a large back list. I was always fascinated with his point of view. I was almost sure it was you, but I could be wrong. Could you let us know?


I did comment on the first page!

And yes, one erotica story (with no back catalog) can sell VERY well -- the same as any other book though! It comes down to your marketing strategies and whatnot. The top 100 books are rarely any good. Not from a writing standpoint, not a story standpoint, and not from a quality standpoint! I don't mock or belittle them... because they sell! And you would be wise to learn from them!

Customers > authors


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> Stephenie Meyer and EL James are the very definition of outliers. Unless you somehow think that making $100 million plus on three or four books is common.


Well, in the context of what you were saying, I thought you were referring to their work. You said you didn't want to pattern your career after an outlier. If you are talking about their sales why wouldn't you want that?


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

dirtiestdevil said:


> I did comment on the first page!
> 
> And yes, one erotica story (with no back catalog) can sell VERY well -- the same as any other book though! It comes down to your marketing strategies and whatnot. The top 100 books are rarely any good. Not from a writing standpoint, not a story standpoint, and not from a quality standpoint! I don't mock or belittle them... because they sell! And you would be wise to learn from them!
> 
> Customers > authors


So you don't need a huge back list to be successful. Gotcha. Thanks.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

vlmain said:


> There is really no need to be condescending. Believe it or not, those who write fast are not the only ones making a decent living with their writing. There are success stories on both sides.


And how many beer-gut, rabid sports fans are to have their NFL game critiques taken seriously? Consider the source!

I wouldn't write them off entirely, of course. But 99.99999% of what they spew is utter nonsense!

The whole point the OP was trying to make is:

Do some people write slow and make a ton of money? Yes!

Do some people write fast and make a ton of money? Yes!

Now, which group has more "full-time" authors to its name? I know of MANY MANY MANY authors making a good monthly income from writing fast and comparatively few who do from writing slow.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

katrina46 said:


> So you don't need a back list to be successful. Gotcha. Thanks.


Backlists don't help sell a new book. Your new book helps sell the backlist!

(mailing list/fan base aside...)


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Someone said:


> *If you are thinking about the write to the market thesis, don't miss what Annie said in the above quote above*
> It's helpful times a ton
> 
> Annie. Thanks for such a helpful post and example of _write to the market_. Thank you much for sharing what has to be tough to admit to yourself. Considering how it feels when something you put a lot of time and effort in doesn't take off, it's hard not to place blame on everything but your own error. I know I've blamed everything from the wrong keywords, trying to make it about the cover, to algo changes for my duds. It's just a lot easier to cast blame elsewhere and, when you are in denial, you can still look at your duds as unrealized potential instead of having to admit they're duds. Knowing how hard it is to come to that realization - been there-done that - sharing it with others is all the harder. That makes it real. And then sharing it somewhere where the blame buck is so readily passed. TY Annie; sharing information about this series is very honest, informative, and appreciated.
> ...


Yup. I tried eight ways to Sunday trying to goose that series. I changed covers three times. I tried to rebrand all of my series so that it looked like one long one, therefore the last series might have more carry over from the others. I completed the series. I ran a jillion ads for the freebie. Nothing took. Nothing worked.

Eh, well, it is what it is. But I learned a valuable lesson - never fly blind, which is what I was doing, having not read any books in that genre. Always get a lay of the land, otherwise you'll be pissing in the wind.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

No Cat said:


> Technically, I didn't study the market to see what was hot and write that. I picked what I wanted to write, THEN studied the market for that genre to make sure I was hitting the reader expectations. So I didn't exactly go after a trend, just studied what I wanted to write to make sure I did it properly. Not that there is anything wrong with looking at the market first if you don't already have a genre or idea in mind. I just happened to have the series and genre in mind beforehand.


This is me too. I don't mean to say that I don't write to a market and its tastes. I write pretty solidly to the Contemporary Romance market, but more similarly to what is tradpubbed, to what I'd call "traditional" contemporary romance. I think I've done reasonably well because I understand and share reader expectations, not because of any special magic. I like the genre, but I have a specific kind of story I like that isn't always easy to find, and that's the kind I tried to write. I just write what works for me, because I'm my own best judge of what's funny, what's sweet, what's tender, and what's hot. And because I have mainstream taste, what works for me works for at least a percentage of other romance readers as well.

I merely meant that I don't follow trends, not as others have said that I don't understand tropes on a...I guess on a sort of molecular level. I didn't have to "study" them, because I know them. My first book is a basic Cinderella story. That kind of story resonates, with me and with readers. It also didn't hurt that I used to be a professional marketer, specializing in marketing to women, and I knew that New Zealand was a great setting for romance.

I don't follow trends, though, because I've never been hip in my life, and I'm surely less so now. The whole BDSM billionaire/erotic romance/shifter thing just sort of gobsmacked me then, and still does, but you know what? Not all successful romance features those trendy things. In fact, most of it doesn't. Besides, if I tried to follow a trend, I'd be a day late and a dollar short. So I write what appeals to my much more traditional sensibility, and it works OK--at least everything has sold reasonably well. (And yeah, I write all nice guys! Maybe that works better when you write for more of a 30+ audience than for the NA audience. Older women know that bad boys are usually just jerks.  )

We'll see, though. KU has changed a lot of things, and I'm doing my best to change up my strategy in response. Not what I write, because as I said, what appeals to me generally appeals to my readers too, but how I market. In my case, that means becoming a hybrid and taking a series out of Select, as terrifying as that has been, and putting it up wide. The jury's still out.

I do think that quality matters, forever and always. Just because people don't specifically comment on clunky writing doesn't mean they don't notice. They may not even be able to put their finger on what they noticed, but they'll be less likely to read an author's next book than a book by somebody who is as adept at storytelling, but whose writing flows more smoothly. That doesn't mean polish for years. For me, it means polish for weeks, but polish HARD. Basically, as with covers and blurbs, why put obstacles in a reader's way? The smoother you make that path, the easier you make it to say "yes," the more books you will sell. Yes, I will click on this attractive cover. Yes, I will click to look inside, because the blurb made me smile. Yes, I will click on "Buy Now." Yes, I will click through page by page until I've read the whole book. Yes, I'll click to buy the next one.

To each their own. Many paths, as others have said.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

People who don't like what I'm saying should do a few things.  

Tell people you really want to be a doctor, but you don't have time to study and go to med school.

Try and go sledding up a slope instead of down.

Say you want to run a marathon, but get angry when someone says it will be difficult unless you train and run lots of miles every week to prepare.  Just explain to them that you only feel like running a couple miles a week and it will be fine.

Do some of these activities.  Do them just how you want to do them, and get upset when people tell you that doing them that way is more difficult.

These things I'm telling you are common sense, people.  I know we don't like it--I never said I like it.  I just said that it seems to be the way things are currently, in the market.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

dirtiestdevil said:


> Backlists don't help sell a new book. Your new book helps sell the backlist!
> 
> (mailing list/fan base aside...)


Well, yeah, that was true before indie publishing came of age. But if you write relatively slower than the average erotica writer and those stories sell well you wouldn't have to write extremely fast to do as well. At least that's what I took away from what you said on that other thread. I mean you said you could release one story and make hundreds of dollars right away. Correct? As I recall quite a few writers disagreed with you. So I'm asking if you believe that or if you've changed your mind about needing high volume to make money. Since this post does focus on speed among other things, I don't think it's off topic to ask how you feel now? Simply put, do you feel you need to write fast to make money or not?


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

katrina46 said:


> Well, in the context of what you were saying, I thought you were referring to their work. You said you didn't want to pattern your career after an outlier. If you are talking about their sales why wouldn't you want that?


I do want that. Who wouldn't? But I'm trying to say that I'm not going to bank on making a fortune on a few books. I don't think that any one of us can count on that. I have a better chance of winning the lottery than hitting the jackpot on my first try. That's all. I'm saying that I can't count on that, and I shouldn't.


----------



## katrina46 (May 23, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> I do want that. Who wouldn't? But I'm trying to say that I'm not going to bank on making a fortune on a few books. I don't think that any one of us can count on that. I have a better chance of winning the lottery than hitting the jackpot on my first try. That's all. I'm saying that I can't count on that, and I shouldn't.


Now that I can understand.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> I didn't have to "study" them, because I know them. My first book is a basic Cinderella story. That kind of story resonates, with me and with readers. It also didn't hurt that I used to be a professional marketer, specializing in marketing to women, and I knew that New Zealand was a great setting for romance.


In a nutshell, these qualities make you a bit of an outlier. You used to be in marketing, so you have business sensibilities ingrained in you that many writers do not have, and particularly understand promotions, etc.

Also, you happen to love to read and write in a VERY popular genre (romance). What if you happened to love to write and read a very unpopular genre such as poetry or gothic short stories? Would you write in a popular genre to make money?

These things are to show that although you are very talented, and extremely smart and your books are amazing looking--you are an outlier. You didn't change to fit the markets, your tastes HAPPENED to fit the markets.

Most of us are not in that class, and if we want to earn a living, we have to change what we write. This isn't to fault you, because you have to work just as hard as anybody to do this. But you did happen to already enjoy a popular genre as home base.

For someone like myself, that wasn't going to happen and I had to adjust. That is one big reason why your style is not going to be reproducible for others. Telling people, just write what you love leaves out one big point&#8230;IF what you love happens to already be a hot genre. Then we agree


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> In a nutshell, these qualities make you a bit of an outlier. You used to be in marketing, so you have business sensibilities ingrained in you that many writers do not have, and particularly understand promotions, etc.
> 
> Also, you happen to love to read and write in a VERY popular genre (romance). What if you happened to love to write and read a very unpopular genre such as poetry or gothic short stories? Would you write in a popular genre to make money?
> 
> ...


Simple, you should have been born with some better taste!


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> In a nutshell, these qualities make you a bit of an outlier. You used to be in marketing, so you have business sensibilities ingrained in you that many writers do not have, and particularly understand promotions, etc.
> 
> Also, you happen to love to read and write in a VERY popular genre (romance). What if you happened to love to write and read a very unpopular genre such as poetry or gothic short stories? Would you write in a popular genre to make money?
> 
> ...


Well, my favorite thing to read is thrillers, and I don't write those, because the stories in my head are romance. I'm compromising, though, by writing romantic suspense. That's my experiment to the market. I've found it's MUCH easier to stand out in Rom Suspense (I've written two, and my new series for a publisher will be all Rom Susp), because the market is the same size (# of readers), with maybe 20% as many books as Contemp Rom, and a smaller number than that of authors--it's a very few authors doing great in that subgenre.

If what I liked to write were something really unmarketable, of course it would be different. But there are many, many, many subgenres and flavors of basic romance, action/adventure, sci-fi/fantasy, etc., and even Women's Fiction sells quite well, within literary fiction. I think most authors can probably find a way to write a story they'll enjoy while still making it fit within genre conventions, if they want to.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> People who don't like what I'm saying should do a few things.
> 
> Tell people you really want to be a doctor, but you don't have time to study and go to med school.
> 
> ...


There are Paleo folks who train for marathons by not running that much and do pretty well.


----------



## TonyU (Dec 14, 2014)

Question:  If I were going to write to trend, what genre should I target?  My ideas all tend to be darker.  I like writing about damaged people.  Is New Adult the place for me?  Is that a hot enough genre to which to devote my time?  Maybe something like a Sons of Anarchy with female lead?  Or am I missing the boat?

And that's a lot of questions.    I ask because the book I just started working on is a southern gothic thriller and from everything I'm reading here, that's destined to crash and burn.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

TonyU said:


> Question: If I were going to write to trend, what genre should I target? My ideas all tend to be darker. I like writing about damaged people. Is New Adult the place for me? Is that a hot enough genre to which to devote my time? Maybe something like a Sons of Anarchy with female lead? Or am I missing the boat?
> 
> And that's a lot of questions.


You would do quite well with a NA Sons of Anarchy type book. In NA, it's all about motorcycle clubs, underground fighting, rock stars and rich guys. One or more tattoos is pretty much mandatory.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Someone said:


> *If you are thinking about/internally debating the write to and into the market thesis, don't miss what Annie said in the quote above*
> It's helpful times a ton
> 
> Annie. Thanks for such a helpful post and example of _write to and into the market_. Thank you much for sharing what has to be tough to admit to yourself. Considering how it feels when something you put a lot of time and effort in doesn't take off, it's hard not to place blame on everything but your own error.


Not necessarily an error. Not all books have a wide audience but that doesn't mean the story shouldn't be told.

That's why my advice to new authors would be this -- is your book part of a popular genre? Does it provide readers of that genre with what they expect but with your own twist?

If you don't fulfill their expectations, they will be dissatisfied. My first series is a perennial small seller, bouncing between $500 - $1200 a month in income. The readers who love the series LOVE the series and often write me asking when the final book will be out and urging me to continue. But I have had bad reviews by readers who felt that there wasn't enough of what they expected from the part of the genre bend that they like, mostly romance.

Thing is, it is like a waste of my time to write in the series now because it earns so little compared to my Contemporary Erotic Romance series. The numbers are so small in comparison, but I am determined to finish the series and then not look back. Who knows? Perhaps some day, my genre-bending series will be a hit, but I doubt it. It doesn't satisfy any of the genre tropes and expectations so only really eclectic readers like it.

So my advice is this -- if you have a story you absolutely must tell and feel is worthwhile, tell it. Put it out there. It will find an audience if there is one. If you want to be a full-time author making a living at publishing, then you have to be more strategic. That means understanding the market. If you have a preferred genre, you have to have a good grip on what the expectations are for books in that genre. Make sure you give that to the readers at a minimum and then give them your special touch. That is what will create your audience, for your brand. That is what will earn you a living.

I have readers waiting for my next book and dang but I can't write fast enough to satisfy them.


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

This whole thread has been an engrossing read.
I really appreciate everyone's comments and opinions.
As a writer, I mostly agree with the OP, but everyone has valid and interesting takes on the situation.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

The thing I find amazing about threads like this is just how many people argue with the premise in a way that the OP never put out there. Every time someone posts about how they found success, or how doing X can help you find success or up your chances or _whatever_, you can start a countdown in your head to the first person who will post how that's not the _only_ way, and you won't be counting long.

Never mind no one said it was the only way and the argument is false. Never mind that saying something increases your chances of success is in no way a blanket condemnation of other ways.

If you buy more lottery tickets, your odds of winning increase. That doesn't mean that someone who buys one ticket will never win it, but the odds are better if you purchase more. Just statistically, that can't even be argued. But people try it.

There's also a matter of craft. The more you write, the better you'll likely get. Read _The War of Art_, the pottery story. Half the class could only make one pot as perfect as possible. The other half was instructed to make as many pots as they could in the same time with no thought to quality, just volume. The one perfect pot was okay, but the side that threw pot after pot after pot made better ones. That's because they got more _practice_. Whether that's 500 words a day or 5000, doing it brings benefits. Publishing more often brings benefits. You get to see how the audience responds and how what you've written holds up in the market. It stands to reason that more probably brings bigger benefits than less. I will never understand why that concept comes up against such opposition.


----------



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

Rosalind James said:


> Well, I earn a VERY good living and have from Month One, and I follow exactly 0% of your steps, so I'd say, it's a WAY, sure. It is a just-fine way, if that's how one wants to approach this job. It's just not the only way.
> 
> (Note that in my genre, Contemp Romance, the best-selling self-pubbers do write long, much longer than I see advocated on KBoards. I know because i'm up there on the bestseller list on Audible with them, and all our audiobooks are 9-12 hours long, or even longer. We're talking 90-120K. Many, many readers in this genre do NOT like novellas or serials.)


I have no idea about romance genres, but audio is definitely something I know a bit about now. It's my experience, and only MY experience, as a listener that i will not buy a short audio book, but will instead buy it on Kindle (used to do that a lot, now I just don't buy it at all) purely because I don't want to "waste" a credit on a short book. If its a short book in a series I enjoy, I'll grumble a lot and curse, then use "real cash money" instead.

So I think, that audio needs to be over 10 hours FOR ME to use a credit, and preferably 12 hours or more. I am not special. So the idea of spending a credit on short audio is probably pretty universal. If I had lots of shorts, I would bundle them before making them into audio. However, I noticed that Sean Pratt and David Wright HAVE released Yesterday's Gone (the serial) as episodes AND a bundle. Maybe they know something is coming where serialized audio is concerned. I don't know.


----------



## LeonardDHilleyII (May 23, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Speed is king. Our attention spans are so short. Here's a quick question, can any of you say who was the top author in your genre last month? Unless it's a household name, I bet you can't. Even I, who watch my genre lists on a regular basis can only tell you Stephanie Laurens has been on there consistently. And I look and watch every day the top 20.
> 
> Here are some other time sucks to think about.
> 
> ...


Fabulous!


----------



## a_g (Aug 9, 2013)

Sela said:


> So my advice is this -- if you have a story you absolutely must tell and feel is worthwhile, tell it. Put it out there. It will find an audience if there is one. *If you want to be a full-time author making a living at publishing, then you have to be more strategic. That means understanding the market.* If you have a preferred genre, you have to have a good grip on what the expectations are for books in that genre. Make sure you give that to the readers at a minimum and then give them your special touch. That is what will create your audience, for your brand. That is what will earn you a living.


This is going over my monitor.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

katrina46 said:


> Well, yeah, that was true before indie publishing came of age. But if you write relatively slower than the average erotica writer and those stories sell well you wouldn't have to write extremely fast to do as well. At least that's what I took away from what you said on that other thread. I mean you said you could release one story and make hundreds of dollars right away. Correct? As I recall quite a few writers disagreed with you. So I'm asking if you believe that or if you've changed your mind about needing high volume to make money. Since this post does focus on speed among other things, I don't think it's off topic to ask how you feel now? Simply put, do you feel you need to write fast to make money or not?


This question wasn't asked of me, but it points to one of the misunderstandings that some folks seemed to be having with my posts.

Writing fast is NOT a requirement for success.

Writing fast gives you the BEST CHANCE of building a career in this business.

Writing to trends or writing in hot genres are not a requirement for success.

Writing to trends and in hot genres gives you the BEST CHANCE, the greatest odds of sustaining a career.

For those who don't want to write fast, or can't, or for those who simply want to write in their preferred genre, even if it's smaller and more difficult to sell well--there's no reason you can't do that. And there's no reason that individual authors won't find success doing so. But it will be more difficult, the odds more stacked against you--and luck may play an even bigger factor than it does for the high volume, hot genre writers.

In a very difficult business such as writing, the last thing I personally want to do is make my life more difficult. Writing slower makes my job harder. Writing in smaller genres or tinier niches makes my job more difficult. Poor pricing choices, not working in a series, not conforming to reader expectations of the common tropes--any time I go against the grain, my road gets tougher.

Personally, the road is hard enough without intentionally setting up more obstacles in my path.

As to whether you agree with my statements, whether you think I'm just BSing or that it's not the way I'm painting it--I really don't care so much. Of course I'd like for newer writers who might be trying to figure this world out, to have a chance at getting hold of good information without the mythologies surrounding writing that tend to hurt their prospects.

And perhaps for some who are struggling to find a strategy or perhaps need a tweak or two, maybe these posts have helped. Otherwise, I hope people enjoyed their popcorn.


----------



## Donna White Glaser (Jan 12, 2011)

In reading through this, it seems like the title could easily be "How to Increase the Odds of Success in the Current Market." In that sense, writing faster while sustaining craft skill is an obvious, no-brainer path. True-possible not the only path, but the one that would be able to generalize more easily than other approaches.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Donna White Glaser said:


> In reading through this, it seems like the title could easily be "How to Increase the Odds of Success in the Current Market." In that sense, writing faster while sustaining craft skill is an obvious, no-brainer path. True-possible not the only path, but the one that would be able to generalize more easily than other approaches.


And let me tell you why I didn't put THAT as my title. Because, in my opinion, the way I phrased the title was more eye-catching and more likely to provoke. And that's something to be understood, because it's no different from the way I use book titles and covers.

What is going to get eyes on the page? What will make my target audience's heart rate speed up a fraction?

We want to be entertained. Being informed is often secondary. Sorry if that upsets people.

Yes, I oversimplified at times, I made broad, sweeping statements. Most of them, I believed, but there are nuances to everything that can be explored. As this thread has continued, we explored the nuances more fully together.

When I write, often times, as I develop the series and the characters, more and more my stories veer away from the "trendiness" and become more true to my inner sensibilities. Of course, I don't push it TOO far, but I can definitely start to throw things in that might not have been acceptable to do in Book 1 of a series.

This thread and my posts in it are not just informational--they're living examples of how to get an audience, how to both inform, write with craft, and also entertain. If I made you angry, I don't care. If I made you happy, great.

But what I did was ply my trade, I tried to accomplish certain goals. Now, this thread had nothing to do with money for me. I'm not pitching myself as a teacher and charging for classes. What I was doing was having some fun, but also putting some information out there that I find valuable. I write because I like to write--even here, for no monetary gain.

So I guess maybe I'm not a TOTAL sellout after all.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> This question wasn't asked of me, but it points to one of the misunderstandings that some folks seemed to be having with my posts.
> 
> Writing fast is NOT a requirement for success.
> 
> ...


THIS.

Success in writing can be defined in many different ways. However, if you want a successful career that supports you above the poverty level, you have to be smart or lucky. It's easier to be smart than lucky. Luck comes out of the blue and is a persnickety b*&^%. You can't plan for her.

You can be _smart_, be strategic, and be persistent. Being smart in the publishing market means knowing your market, knowing what the tropes are, and making sure you give your readers that and a bit more. The bit more will make them _your_ audience (not only your audience as in ownership, but you will be one of their go-to authors). Then, write as much as you can to keep them happy. To paraphrase Ferris Bueller, the publishing market moves pretty fast. If you stop writing and goof off for a while, your readers will forget you.

Writing volume is a smart strategy. That's why people advise new authors to write series and write a lot. The Liliana Nirvana technique works. Except for George RR Martin. But we all know George is an extreme outlier. If you think you are a George RR Martin, then sure, write a novel ever five years.  Good luck with that!

Knowing what is hot in your preferred genre is a smart strategy for an indie. That is an indication of your reader's interests. You can make a career writing to trends because this is the new world of indie publishing. We write fast. We can respond to trends. Before the Kindle, and let's face it, it was the Kindle that led to this even being possible, publishers didn't want to take on new projects if the "market was saturated" and so probably turned down Amanda Hocking and probably would have turned down Bella Forrest who wrote the bestselling Shade of a Vampire series. Vampires being a hard sell and all that crap. The thing is that readers will still read vampires if something new comes along. If you really really love vampires, write that something new.

So indies are lucky that they can respond to trends in a way that trad pubs can't.

If you want to have a successful career, you would be smart to write in volume and write in the hot genres. This won't guarantee you a six-figure income but you will be a helluva lot more likely than if you write that literary tome or collection of poems. You can still write well, and write important material, but you will have to balance art with craft and business to find that happy medium.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> THIS.
> 
> Success in writing can be defined in many different ways. However, if you want a successful career that supports you above the poverty level, you have to be smart or lucky. It's easier to be smart than lucky. Luck comes out of the blue and is a persnickety b*&^%. You can't plan for her.


All of this was very well said. I don't know who you are, you never showed me your sales or whispered your titles, but I'm fairly certain you're doing well in this business.

To the trained eye, someone who is fake stands out like a sore thumb amidst the real thing.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> And let me tell you why I didn't put THAT as my title. Because, in my opinion, the way I phrased the title was more eye-catching and more likely to provoke. And that's something to be understood, because it's no different from the way I use book titles and covers.





gorvnice said:


> This question wasn't asked of me, but it points to one of the misunderstandings that some folks seemed to be having with my posts. Writing fast is NOT a requirement for success. Writing fast gives you the BEST CHANCE of building a career in this business.


You are forgetting your author brand name. Once we saw your user name we knew what to expect, especially those of us who were reading the other thread that suggested you write this one. The problem with provocative titles in a forum is that with a long thread that someone read previously they will be responding to the most recent posts or the title, not to the content of a lengthy OP. E.g., when you later commented that people only writing 500 words per day will never succeed that is what will be responded to, not your OP. So it was sensible to close the thread reminding people of what you originally posted.

Writing a lot is going to be one of the best ways to avoid having to wait for the big breakout, but it also has disadvantages as some readers negatively judge an author putting too much up too quickly, as a reviewer of one of your books did, but downloaded it anyway and liked your writing. So even wrong steps can lead to right results. The more books, the more chances of getting lucky (regardless of what Lee Child thinks).


----------



## Chrisbwritin (Jan 28, 2014)

shelleyo1 said:


> The thing I find amazing about threads like this is just how many people argue with the premise in a way that the OP never put out there. Every time someone posts about how they found success, or how doing X can help you find success or up your chances or _whatever_, you can start a countdown in your head to the first person who will post how that's not the _only_ way, and you won't be counting long.
> 
> Never mind no one said it was the only way and the argument is false. Never mind that saying something increases your chances of success is in no way a blanket condemnation of other ways.
> 
> ...


I appreciate the idea behind this. I truly do, and I respect your opinion. And, while I agree that writing more will help many writers improve by way of flexing that muscle and giving the person the more OPPORTUNITIES for improvement, the idea that just writing mindlessly will make you a better writer is a flawed concept (which is why I'm glad you said "most" and "probably" . Practicing is not the same as doing something repeatedly without thought. It's just...not. And this becomes an even less stable theory when applied here because we aren't repeating the same exact sequence over and over when writing a book. Each book is unique. If you re-wrote the SAME book over and over again, 50 times (i.e. revising?), then I agree. One could surmise that it would get at least marginally "better", if only because blatant errors would become more apparent. But with different works, it doesn't pan out. If I wrote in a vacuum where I never read reviews or worked with an editor or read craft books or any of the myriad things I do to improve, my books would not necessarily improve just because I wrote 100 of them (which is a distinction I think you get, but that some reading might not if we just throw down the pottery example). You only have to go to Amazon and click around to see the truth in that. There are authors who wrote their first awful, unedited, terrible book five years ago, slapped a set of blinders on, and have continually put out equally awful, terrible books. Over and over and over again. It seems so unlikely. Like such a willful act of self-sabotage, but it's a fact. It seems like picking nits, I bet, but I promise that's not my intention. My intention is to point out that, YES. Authors who want to improve their craft and are actively trying to do that can speed the process up by applying it more and working those muscles. But authors who don't can very easily bury their heads and just write, and never get any better at all. I think there has to be acknowledgement of this being a conscious choice, or else allll the people out there churning out book after book after book to crickets and/or bad reviews who don't pause to acknowledge that something has to change will have false hopes that they are eventually going to get somewhere, when the truth is, that's very unlikely.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I DO think that actual practice makes (closer to) perfect, but I also think we need to remember that doing the exact same thing, over and over again and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

*ETA In case I came off as a person who doesn't agree with producing solid content quickly as a means to increase and/or maintain visibility in this market, that was NOT my intention. I write under two pen names and put out over half a million words a year (2-3 releases a month, ranging from 15k-60k words apiece) so I DO think content is king. Just that loads and loads of bad content without an eye to improving craft isn't going to help anyone, least of all the author putting it out.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

shelleyo1 said:


> The thing I find amazing about threads like this is just how many people argue with the premise in a way that the OP never put out there. Every time someone posts about how they found success, or how doing X can help you find success or up your chances or _whatever_, you can start a countdown in your head to the first person who will post how that's not the _only_ way, and you won't be counting long.


Perhaps it would be best to avoid using phrases like, _you *must* write fast, you *must* publish frequently,_ and _ a minimum of 1,500 to 2,000 words a day_. Then, maybe people would be less inclined to jump in to say, "no ..."

Just an observation.


----------



## Joel R. Crabtree (Aug 6, 2012)

Gorvnice, thank you for this thread, your opinions, and information. Also thanks to everyone else who has commented. It is daunting to begin as a new (self-published) author, as some may well remember, and there is a LOT of information about how to be successful, much of it contradictory. 

You have given us a glimpse at what I would call "power writing"  which has been discussed before by other authors who encourage learning to write faster. I am curious about some of the other aspects of business success in your style. You mention numerous pen names, how do you manage them? Are they all under one company umbrella? How do you market each name for branding purposes? Do you just let the book speak for itself without name branding?

I am also curious as to the top genres you return to the most. Are there one or two that you have had more success on a 'volume' basis than others? How important are reviews to your strategy and is there a target review number in general?

I understand if you don't wish to indulge any of this information. Thanks again.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> All of this was very well said. I don't know who you are, you never showed me your sales or whispered your titles, but I'm fairly certain you're doing well in this business.
> 
> To the trained eye, someone who is fake stands out like a sore thumb amidst the real thing.


I'd love to share my data and titles because I think it's proof that indies can make a really good living at self-publishing, but I don't need the flood of 1-star reviews on my books that I know would result. I write erotic romance and I know there is a lot of disdain out there for erotica and romance. Who needs the aggravation? My readers love my books. I know my income but here is a screen shot from my bank account for my best month last year and this year:

http://sela2015.tumblr.com


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> You are forgetting your author brand name. Once we saw your user name we knew what to expect, especially those of us who were reading the other thread that suggested you write this one. The problem with provocative titles in a forum is that with a long thread that someone read previously they will be responding to the most recent posts or the title, not to the content of a lengthy OP. E.g., when you later commented that people only writing 500 words per day will never succeed that is what will be responded to, not your OP. So it was sensible to close the thread reminding people of what you originally posted.


I'd appreciate if you pull the quote where I said someone writing 500 words per day will NEVER succeed. In fact, looking back to the post I think you are referring to, I actually said this: "You do realize that in my scenario, I'm writing 4 times as fast on average as you're suggesting. That means over the course of 12 months, instead of 6 short 30k word novels, I've put out TWELVE sixty thousand word novels or the equivalent of maybe 24 novellas.

So actually I do not agree with your statement, and it's that kind of thinking which hampers writers' ability to succeed. The two ways of working are not even close to the same."

That was what I said in response to the comment that 500 words per day was a sufficient pace for my kind of strategy, or that it would yield sufficient volume to give a writer a good shot at earning a living. I don't think that's a very good pace to become a full-time writer. Personally, I write 500 words in about ten minutes. Even if it takes you 20 minutes to write 500 words, I think 20 minutes a day doesn't sound like the dedication of a serious writer.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> Perhaps it would be best to avoid using phrases like, _you *must* write fast, you *must* publish frequently,_ and _ a minimum of 1,500 to 2,000 words a day_. Then, maybe people would be less inclined to jump in to say, "no ..."
> 
> Just an observation.


You MUST write fast to give yourself the best chance of succeeding.
Sorry you don't like hearing that, but it's true from where I stand.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Joel R. Crabtree said:


> Gorvnice, thank you for this thread, your opinions, and information. Also thanks to everyone else who has commented. It is daunting to begin as a new (self-published) author, as some may well remember, and there is a LOT of information about how to be successful, much of it contradictory.
> 
> You have given us a glimpse at what I would call "power writing" which has been discussed before by other authors who encourage learning to write faster. I am curious about some of the other aspects of business success in your style. You mention numerous pen names, how do you manage them? Are they all under one company umbrella? How do you market each name for branding purposes? Do you just let the book speak for itself without name branding?
> 
> ...


Thanks, and I'm glad this has helped if even a little. Yes, these ideas are not really new. I hoped to provide some further insight, to get people thinking about the underpinnings of the philosophy of writing fast and writing to the market.

Why does it work? How does it work?

The big difference why it didn't work in the past was that under the traditional system, you couldn't get a book written and to market fast enough to capitalize on a trend. Often times it would be a year to write a novel, and perhaps two years before it was sold and then out on bookshelves. Five trends could have come and gone in that time.

Nowadays, I can spot a trend and respond in weeks or even DAYS. Big, big difference. A universe of difference.

Sorry that I can't--or won't--divulge more of my specific strategies. But I promise they all become clear if you study all the bestseller lists and specifically look at what other successful indie writers are doing--what strategies they employ. And then perhaps you will add some new ones to the list when you publish!

Best of luck.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

P.J. Post said:


> The Market is everywhere and everyhow publishers and book buyers come together, specifically the Market is everyone who might ever purchase a book.


This entire post was so awesome that I briefly thought of asking it to marry me. People should read it again and again, so they can realize that what I'm saying here is nothing new or controversial in business circles.


----------



## over and out (Sep 9, 2011)

Gorvnice, I really appreciate the time you've taken to post and reply and I've learned a lot from your post.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> I'd love to share my data and titles because I think it's proof that indies can make a really good living at self-publishing, but I don't need the flood of 1-star reviews on my books that I know would result. I write erotic romance and I know there is a lot of disdain out there for erotica and romance. Who needs the aggravation? My readers love my books. I know my income but here is a screen shot from my bank account for my best month last year and this year:
> 
> http://sela2015.tumblr.com


I can't say I'm surprised to see the numbers, because I'm not. You already indicated your numbers through the way you expressed your knowledge of this business we're in. But it's still good to see it there in black and white--I'm very happy for you.

Keep going, bigger things are around the corner!


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You MUST write fast to give yourself the best chance of succeeding.
> Sorry you don't like hearing that, but it's true from where I stand.


Don't presume to know what I do and don't like to hear. I was responding to Shelleyo1's comment about how people always manage to start commenting about how there is never just one way to do something (I'm paraphrasing).

My _observation_ (note "observation" not "objection") was that when you choose strong statements, such as "you _must_ do this, or you _must_ do that, it invites contrary opinions.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> Don't presume to know what I do and don't like to hear. I was responding to Shelleyo1's comment about how people always manage to start commenting about how there is never just one way to do something (I'm paraphrasing).
> 
> My _observation_ (note "observation" not "objection") was that when you choose strong statements, such as "you _must_ do this, or you _must_ do that, it invites contrary opinions.


I like to invite contrary opinions, because unfortunately or fortunately, people get bored without them.

We are, after all, in the entertainment business. Are you not entertained 

At the same time, I do have something to say, and I mean it. I'm not trolling.

Whether or not you like it, I mean you in the plural sense, asking me or others to phrase things differently. What Shelley was pointing out was that I NEVER EVER stated it was the only way to succeed. People assumed that because they didn't like my tone or because they work differently than I espouse.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Colleen Cross said:


> Gorvnice, I really appreciate the time you've taken to post and reply and I've learned a lot from your post.


Thanks! I'm glad if it's given you anything new to chew on.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

By the way, all of my MUST statements were to do with my personal strategy.  The strategy of writing to market and writing to trend, for me, means you MUST do certain things.

People that want to tweak it should know that the further they get from my original statements, my original MUSTS, the further they get from this particular strategy.

For those who have a handle on this business, they will tweak and adjust and do things very differently--but they KNOW why they're doing it.  They don't tweak a strategy because it makes them feel better, or because they don't like to think of themselves or their readers a certain way.  

People who know, don't just arbitrarily change winning strategies because it doesn't fit with their schedule.

I hate to say it (no I don't really) but LIFE does not conform itself to our perfect little schedules.  

This writing process is what I found to work, not because I wanted to do it that way, but because it was the only way I found to produce and then reproduce good results.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

To me there is a big difference between making a pot and writing a book.
The big difference is if you are making a pot, you have been shown how to make a pot.  Anyone can put words on a page even if they have never been shown the mechanics of how the language works.
If one does not know they are making errors, they will keep making them.  
Now if you make an error in a pot, you will know rather quickly and can see where you need to fix the next pot.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

Darn, it's already noon on Jan 1 and I haven't released a new book yet. So much for my resolution of a new book every half day.


----------



## TonyU (Dec 14, 2014)

Deke said:


> Darn, it's already noon on Jan 1 and I haven't released a new book yet. So much for my resolution of a new book every half day.


You're such a slacker.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

vlmain said:


> While writing well, and writing quickly may be the ideal, I wouldn't say it is a _must_. There are a lot of very talented writers who work full time and have family commitments, who may only be able to get 500 words out per day. I would hate for them to think it's hopeless if they can't put out 2,000 a day, because it isn't.
> 
> If you can only do 250 a day, fine, do 250 a day. If you can only get 500 words written, then write 500 words. The most important thing is to do it. Whether it's a little or a lot, _just do it._





gorvnice said:


> That is a recipe for continuing to write. It is not a recipe to succeed in the current market.
> 
> That doesn't mean you should stop writing, but you should probably adjust your expectations, as that type of slow output will hamper the chances of you making a living at this work.


As requested. You're welcome.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> As requested. You're welcome.


I did not say it COULDN'T work to write 500 words a day.

I said it is not a RECIPE for success. A recipe means that you wouldn't hand that out on a sheet of paper as a way to BE A SUCCESSFUL FULL-TIME AUTHOR.

So if I'm giving you my recipe, why would I put in ingredients that would make it less than the very best it can be?

Writing 500 words a day is NOT a recipe for success, it won't give most writers the best chance to succeed.

Are there people who succeed writing only 500 words a day?

Yes, there are authors who've become tremendously successful that wrote one short, tiny book in their entire lives!

Is that a good recipe for most authors? Of course not! That's absolutely terrible, illogical, atrocious advice to give to newbies or writers that are impressionable and trying to sort all of this out.

The world is filled with exceptions. You can always, always, always find somebody somewhere who has found the path through to success in a way that is unexpected and remarkable.

But if that's what you're hanging your hat on--to simply defy the odds and hit the lottery based on doing things backwards, making things more difficult for yourself&#8230;then I would say that you are not at all likely to reach your goal.

And I would never, under any circumstances, tell a writer to follow such a path.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I'll say it again, even more clearly.

Someone, theoretically, can become a full-time writer, even have a huge hit--and write less than 500 words a day.

But this is my simple point.  I can write 500 words in about ten minutes.  A slower writer can do it in 20-40 minutes.

In what world do we live, where someone who does an activity for 10-40 minutes a day is considered a full-time professional?

Are you a professional runner because you go for a 3 miler every day?  Are you a professional marketer because you go and spend 30 minutes on Twitter and Facebook?

To be a professional means you've devoted most of your "working day" to this thing--whatever it is.  That means you are involved in this activity and devoted to it as a pursuit.

The people who want to do this, and want to believe they can achieve great things or difficult things in this industry by spending twenty minutes or an hour a day on it--they are simply fooling themselves.  It doesn't work that way, and it never will.  

The very few people who stumble into success in such a manner will not even know how they did it--it will be as if they were struck by lightning walking across the street one day.

That is not a recipe for success.  That is just dumb luck.

And I find it highly ironic that some of the same folks who get upset about poor grammar and poor craft are the very ones espousing poor work ethic.  Writing takes a high degree of craft, skill, talent and WORK ETHIC.

And I'll take someone with a great work ethic over someone with great grammar any day of the week.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

You can _start_ your writing career writing 500 words a day but I think it would only be an extreme outlier who could make a living writing 500 words a day. Think George RR Martin outlier.

If you write 500 words a day, it would take 160 days to write an 80,000 word novel. You could write book 1 and book 2 of your series in a year at that rate. That would be a great start to your writing career. In a year and a half you would have your three book series ready to go. You'd have time to build a social medial presence and author platform of website and blog and FB page etc. You could then publish that series all at once. Voila! Debut author with a finished series.

If you can write decently and if you have a great story, you might sell well out of the gate. Your first book in the series might take off and you could sell a hundred thousand books over the course of a year if you were lucky. That would be enough to let you quit your day job and be a full time author. However, without constant promotion, and a lot of luck, your sales will start to taper off. If it takes you another 6 months to write a new book, that may mean you go through lean months until your next release.

This is when volume will be your friend. This is when you can speed up your production. You quit your day job right? Now you can write full time. That means, for writers like me and even like Hugh Howey, 3 hours of writing a day. 3,000 words a day when I'm working on a new project. That means I can get an 80K novel written in a month to 6 weeks, given a few days off here and there. 6 weeks is a good pace. Then, editing time which is about 3 weeks. Then formatting and publication - 1 week. You could write a novel every 10 weeks. That's 5 novels a year. Depending on how well your first series is selling, you can write more quickly or more slowly.

Gorvnice is right. If you want to have a career as an author, volume is your friend. You should write as much as you can and treat it like a job. When i'm writing a novel, I write 3 hours a day and sometimes 5. I spend the rest of my day doing promotion, on social media, working on editing other projects, etc. My day never ends as I can do promo at any time of the day or night.

I work harder now than ever before, but it's a great life, being your own boss.  I wouldn't go back to wage slavery unless forced to and I had what would be considered a professional job that used my brain and education.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> You can _start_ your writing career writing 500 words a day but I think it would only be an extreme outlier who could make a living writing 500 words a day.


Sure, you can start anything out slowly, and building up over time. You can go from being a couch potato, to running a mile a day, to eventually doing ultra marathons too.

But I think it's extremely important to differentiate between what "is possible" vs "what tends to work."

Lots of things are possible in this world. Lots of people approach activities from an untraditional standpoint and somehow they make it work for them.

But unfortunately, people tend to want to make those "outliers" the norm. In other words, people want to say, "well I can do just what J.K. Rowling did, too! Because I'm so special!!!"

The reality is far tougher than that. Everyone wants to say how tough it is to write, and how hard it is, and how noble. But people don't want to take the next step and admit that the sheer difficulty of this business of writing and selling books, means you have to WORK INSANELY HARD to have even a remote chance.

And you have to be passionate, talented, you have to love writing and business and all of that. That's just to have a damn chance at this thing.

Of course, we elevate these folks who come out of the blue and become superstars because we want to believe it can be us. If we write a few hundred words a day instead of watching CSI, then maybe we can become J.K. Rowling too! And even better, we do it writing exactly what we love and what makes us feel special. And then everyone will say how amazing we are, too!!!!

But these are simply fantasies we tell ourselves to avoid facing the tough truths. Most people who write 500 words a day will not start a wonderful, long writing career. They may make a little money, they might sell a few books. But they won't go much further unless they get extremely lucky.

And I'd rather work hard then depend on dumb luck.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Oh, and let's face a little other dirty secret about human nature.

If we tell ourselves we're going to do 500 words a day, and that's what we shoot for, in all likelihood we will accomplish FAR LESS than that, on average.

Tell yourself that your goal is 500 words a day, I'm betting you don't even end up averaging 100 words a day by the end of the year.  It's human nature to set goals and then fail to reach them.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Mark E. Cooper said:


> I have no idea about romance genres, but audio is definitely something I know a bit about now. It's my experience, and only MY experience, as a listener that i will not buy a short audio book, but will instead buy it on Kindle (used to do that a lot, now I just don't buy it at all) purely because I don't want to "waste" a credit on a short book. If its a short book in a series I enjoy, I'll grumble a lot and curse, then use "real cash money" instead.
> 
> So I think, that audio needs to be over 10 hours FOR ME to use a credit, and preferably 12 hours or more. I am not special. So the idea of spending a credit on short audio is probably pretty universal. If I had lots of shorts, I would bundle them before making them into audio. However, I noticed that Sean Pratt and David Wright HAVE released Yesterday's Gone (the serial) as episodes AND a bundle. Maybe they know something is coming where serialized audio is concerned. I don't know.


I would far rather you paid real cash money for my audio, anyway. I get more that way than if you use your member credits.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> This question wasn't asked of me, but it points to one of the misunderstandings that some folks seemed to be having with my posts.
> 
> Writing fast is NOT a requirement for success.
> 
> ...


I want to thank you again for sharing what you have shared, just in case you are starting to feel unappreciated.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Cherise Kelley said:


> I want to thank you again for sharing what you have shared, just in case you are starting to feel unappreciated.


Thanks! I don't feel unappreciated, but it's still good to know if someone is getting something out of this. But I welcome the dissent as much as I welcome those who agree.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

oakwood said:


> I can't take this thread seriously anymore.


Haha. Well, it's serious business for some of us, even the part of it that's a bit for flair.

There are always lots of comfort blanket mythologies out there, in any field, that helps people to sleep better at night. Such as telling themselves that they're working hard for their dreams, when in reality, they are doing anything but.

I don't mind bursting a few bubbles now and again.

Besides, if you try it and do the work, you'll see that what I'm telling you is true. And yes, it works in many different genres, especially very popular ones--for ebooks. And it works right now. Whether this advice will still be good in a year or five years, I can't say. And it's not my job to be an oracle and tell people what will be working in five years anyhow.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> ...we elevate these folks who come out of the blue and become superstars because we want to believe it can be us. If we write a few hundred words a day instead of watching CSI, then maybe we can become J.K. Rowling too! And even better, we do it writing exactly what we love and what makes us feel special. And then everyone will say how amazing we are, too!!!!
> 
> But these are simply fantasies we tell ourselves to avoid facing the tough truths. Most people who write 500 words a day will not start a wonderful, long writing career. They may make a little money, they might sell a few books. But they won't go much further unless they get extremely lucky.
> 
> And I'd rather work hard then depend on dumb luck.


This dream -- of being an outlier with your first book -- is what keeps people writing and publishing books without any kind of plan other than _I will write this great book I thought up and publish it and then success!_ Outliers always keep the dream alive. The reality is much less attractive. The reality is that 50+% of all authors who publish books will make less than $10K a year. If you look at Authorearnings.com you will see that few authors make a living publishing books. It's better for indie authors than trad pub, but it's still hard and few are able to do it.

I was all for going the traditional route of getting an agent and publishing through a publishing house. I had queried my PNR series to about 2 dozen agents, but didn't get a bite.

Here's the article that made me decide to self publish my PNR in June 2012. That and JA Konrath's blog.

These two paragraphs in particular:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/may/24/self-published-author-earnings

"Those who want to do best at self-publishing, they found, would be well advised to focus on romantic fiction. Romance authors earned 170% more than their peers, while authors in other genres fared much worse: science-fiction writers earned 38% of the $10,000 average, fantasy writers 32%, and literary fiction authors just 20% of the $10,000 average.

It's also best to be female, educated and in your early 40s: the survey's "top earners" - those who indicated they could live exclusively off their earnings - were 68% female, and 33% had a degree, compared to an average of 28%. High earners also dedicated more of their time to their writing, churning out 2,047 words a day on average, as compared to 1,557 for the rest of the sample."

Female- Check. 40s - Check. Degree - Check. 2,047 words a day? More than check. Romance genre - check. Self-published - check. $100K in 2013, $150K in 2014.

So it's not just opinion that writing in a hot market and writing in volume is a strategy for success. The numbers back this up. There are outliers like Hugh Howey in SF but they are the outliers and you can't plan to be an outlier. Being a mid list author like me is good enough to make a living at indie publishing. Writing in a hot genre is a help. Writing in volume is a help. Neither is a surefire way to succeed but will put you in the best position to do so. Far better than to write less and in a slow genre and hope for Lady Luck to shine down on you and recognize your literary brilliance.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Chrisbwritin said:


> the idea that just writing mindlessly will make you a better writer is a flawed concept (which is why I'm glad you said "most" and "probably" . Practicing is not the same as doing something repeatedly without thought. It's just...not.


Mindlessly is the key word here, a word you used by assuming that people would be mindlessly throwing down words. I absolutely agree that countless hours of mindless writing won't do much. But who actually writes that way over and over? The whole point of the pot story in the book is that when set to produce volume, the pots _did_ get better. If they had been mindlessly doing it, they'd have thrown a glob of clay on the wheel, turned it until it had a hollow in the middle and tossed it aside while shouting a number. But they made pots, and made each one better than the last.

Anyone who write 100 short stories and doesn't improve from #1 to #100 must be as tone deaf as a singer who repeatedly hits the same note.



> en less stable theory when applied here because we aren't repeating the same exact sequence over and over when writing a book. Each book is unique. If you re-wrote the SAME book over and over again, 50 times (i.e. revising?), then I agree. One could surmise that it would get at least marginally "better", if only because blatant errors would become more apparent.


Oh, we disagree here, because we see things differently. If I rewrite the same book 50 times, I'm learning a completely different set of skills than it takes to write a first draft and get a new story completed from start to finish. I'm learning revision and editing, which are different skills. The sequence is the same from book to book even if the story is different. You start, you flesh out, you finish. The different content doesn't affect the act of writing. At least it doesn't for me, but I know people have unique ways of working.



> But with different works, it doesn't pan out. If I wrote in a vacuum where I never read reviews or worked with an editor or read craft books or any of the myriad things I do to improve, my books would not necessarily improve just because I wrote 100 of them (which is a distinction I think you get, but that some reading might not if we just throw down the pottery example).


I get the distinction, but I don't completely agree. In a vacuum . . . maybe. But no one trying to make a career out of writing is likely writing mindlessly in that vacuum.



> Authors who want to improve their craft and are actively trying to do that can speed the process up by applying it more and working those muscles. But authors who don't can very easily bury their heads and just write, and never get any better at all. I think there has to be acknowledgement of this being a conscious choice, or else allll the people out there churning out book after book after book to crickets and/or bad reviews who don't pause to acknowledge that something has to change will have false hopes that they are eventually going to get somewhere, when the truth is, that's very unlikely.


I think that there are people who are going to fail at being writers no matter what they do. But people who _can_ make it? I think they up their odds by producing more work. But they're also going to practice and not just write grocery lists. If someone who claims the desire to be a writer can write 10 novels and never improve, they need a different hobby.

We agree more than we don't, though. I think we just have a slightly different perspective.


----------



## funthebear (Sep 26, 2014)

Sever Bronny said:


> [...] Yet (and I said it in another thread, naming this and this source) the optimal level of income, measured by happiness, is $75k a year.
> [..]


You're conflating mood on a day-to-day basis with overall life satisfaction. More money = more satisfaction. When you get to the ultra-wealthy, I've read (anecdotally) this stops being the case, but that's 1MM+/year.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

shelleyo1 said:


> The whole point of the pot story in the book is that when set to produce volume, the pots _did_ get better. If they had been mindlessly doing it, they'd have thrown a glob of clay on the wheel, turned it until it had a hollow in the middle and tossed it aside while shouting a number. But they made pots, and made each one better than the last.


Whatever the point of the person who first used the pot illustration in this thread the point inherent in the story is that there is a teacher present saying to the ungifted - try again until I'm happy with the standard of your pottery. I worked as a university lecturer and had first year students get all snowflaky, "Well my sixth form (high school) teacher never said anything about my grammar and spelling." To which the obvious reply was, "Yes, and now we have to undo the damage of their silence."

Someone writing a lot without outside comment will not learn that there is a problem. Another set of eyes is not enough, those eyes must have a bit of a mouth to go with them. Reading a lot is more likely to improve someone's grammar than writing a lot, but there is a downward spiral if editorial standards plummet in mainstream fiction and too many self-publishers think that writing is enough to improve their grammar, especially if combined with reading a lot of work by other self-published authors. This reduces the pool of well-written books that might make a grammar novice stop and think, "Wait, I didn't know that effect could be a verb" or whatever. If a writer is not being brought up short by criticism or confronted with well-written work they will go on writing in that same imperfect way that grates on many potential fans. In the pot illustration they are the student who objects to the star pupil getting all the attention and leaves accusing the teacher of bias and saying that their pot is good enough and anyone who says that it isn't it just propping up an outdated and oppressive system.


----------



## Writer&#039;s Block (Oct 29, 2014)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I also like Wordpress because I can tag things easily, see how much I wrote in a day, and one click backup everything. And while I can't write offline, I CAN write on my work in progress on ANY computer in the world with Internet. As much as I travel and the # of computers I use in my household, that's a godsend.


I really don't know why I didn't think of that before... doh!

I've been playing around with laptops, tablets and various cloud storage solutions... But WordPress, that's truly inspired.

Thank you, you're a genius!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I worked as a university lecturer&#8230;(lots of words)
> *******
> Reading a lot is more likely to improve someone's grammar than writing a lot, but there is a downward spiral if editorial standards plummet in mainstream fiction and too many self-publishers think that writing is enough to improve their grammar, especially if combined with reading a lot of work by other self-published authors. This reduces the pool of well-written books that might make a grammar novice stop and think, "Wait, I didn't know that effect could be a verb" or whatever. If a writer is not being brought up short by criticism or confronted with well-written work they will go on writing in that same imperfect way that grates on many potential fans. In the pot illustration they are the student who objects to the star pupil getting all the attention and leaves accusing the teacher of bias and saying that their pot is good enough and anyone who says that it isn't it just propping up an outdated and oppressive system.


You really don't seem to get "it." And "it" is that in the current marketplace, READERS get to determine what they find important and what they don't find important.

Teachers with high intellectual standards have absolutely ZERO to do with this new world. Once upon a time, a teacher such as you describe, might have been a gatekeeper--this teacher might have run a small press, a magazine, been a literary agent, even an editor at a big house.

But nowadays, this teacher you've described has absolutely no place in the industry at all. I don't need that teacher, that agent, that editor or that publisher.

My audience tells me whether I have a problem or not. And guess what? If my audience doesn't notice it, you can bet that I really don't mind if some teacher reads my sample pages and throws their kindle across the classroom.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> You really don't seem to get "it." And "it" is that in the current marketplace, READERS get to determine what they find important and what they don't find important.


No you don't get it. I was responding to the claim that an illustration involving a class teacher was being used again a claim that writing alone will improve your writing. I was not commenting on the subject of how many sales you are going to make. But at the speed that you write you are even less likely to develop your writing skills through writing, as it leaves less time for other activities that might open you to the criticism that makes you realise that something that you we convinced was right is in fact wrong and may have led some of your readers to stop buying any more of your books. That's business, which I thought you were interested in discussing. Grammar is a marketing tool in that it gives you a more convincing Look Inside and does not put off those who buy one book from buying any more from you. It's not personal, Aaron, it's business.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> No you don't get it. I was responding to the claim that an illustration involving a class teacher was being used again a claim that writing alone will improve your writing. I was not commenting on the subject of how many sales you are going to make. But at the speed that you write you are even less likely to develop your writing skills through writing, as it leaves less time for other activities that might open you to the criticism that makes you realise that something that you we convinced was right is in fact wrong and may have led some of your readers to stop buying any more of your books. That's business, which I thought you were interested in discussing. Grammar is a marketing tool in that it gives you a more convincing Look Inside and does not put off those who buy one book from buying any more from you. It's not personal, Aaron, it's business.


Writing does improve your writing.

It really does.

As does putting work up and seeing what the readers (the paying customers) say about it. I've gotten way tougher criticism from my readers, I assure you, then a sharp-tongued professor ever doled out on their best day.

Nothing will make you improve faster than the pressure cooker of having your work seen by thousands of people, who are then going to tell you exactly what they think of it. The readers don't care about your feelings. They are ruthless. 
They don't have moderators telling them to be civil, nor do they have questionnaires at the end of the semester which will reflect badly on them if they are too mean and cruel with their comments.

Readers will absolutely tear you apart if you aren't giving them what they want and what they feel they deserve.

They pay good money to be entertained and if I don't do it, I don't eat.

And you think a teacher is going to beat that?


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You really don't seem to get "it." And "it" is that in the current marketplace, READERS get to determine what they find important and what they don't find important.


I believe she was referring specifically to improving grammar, not the _it factor_ and what sells.

If a person with poor grammar writes, and writes, and writes without reading examples of well written books, they will continue to make the same mistakes they have always made, because there is nothing to compare their writing to. It takes both--reading a lot of well written books, _and_ lots of practice writing.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> I believe she was referring specifically to improving grammar, not the _it factor_ and what sells.
> 
> If a person with poor grammar writes, and writes, and writes without reading examples of well written books, they will continue to make the same mistakes they have always made, because there is nothing to compare their writing to. It takes both--reading a lot of well written books, _and[\i] lots of practice writing.
> _


_
People with poor grammar, if it is that severe, will not sell and the few readers they get will let them know in no uncertain terms. It's a great self-correcting system. It doesn't need people fretting over it in order to save it from the unwashed masses._


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> I believe she was referring specifically to improving grammar, not the _it factor_ and what sells.
> 
> If a person with poor grammar writes, and writes, and writes without reading examples of well written books, they will continue to make the same mistakes they have always made, because there is nothing to compare their writing to. It takes both--reading a lot of well written books, _and_ lots of practice writing.


Also the "it" in question had nothing to do with an "it" factor.

That must be my poor communication skills at work, though.


----------



## Dolphin (Aug 22, 2013)

ʧ said:


> You're conflating mood on a day-to-day basis with overall life satisfaction. More money = more satisfaction. When you get to the ultra-wealthy, I've read (anecdotally) this stops being the case, but that's 1MM+/year.


As far as I can recall, $75k is, in fact, right about where scientific studies have shown that further increases in income are not reflected by an increase in self-reported satisfaction/wellness/happiness. Once you can afford food, shelter, and other necessities, there are very few gains in happiness that can be realized through income.

Beyond that $75k plateau, more money ≠ more satisfaction. But more money does continue to = more money, so there's that.

Regarding Wordpress, Google Docs is another strong cloud-based option. It's even easier to share with other people than WP, has a robust Word-style track changes feature, it's just as cloudy, and it's more secure (WordPress sites are prone to security vulnerabilities for a variety of reasons that don't apply to Google's elite ninja data warriors-please, please, please make regular backups of your WordPress databases if you're using them to host your work).

As for the whole editing/craft debate: I don't read finish reading books that have significant craft issues, nor pay for additional books from their authors. Hi! I exist! It's actually been a couple months since I was last able to find a book I was willing to finish (and frankly, I finished the last one despite strong reservations).

Yet I know that I'm in the minority. A great many of the DNFs I've discarded lately have been extremely successful books-books cherished by others, books with 4+ stars on Goodreads, books on Best of 2014 lists, tradpub and indy alike. I think they're trash, but nobody cares. Nobody cares at all. Their authors will continue to put out work that I consider utterly substandard. That'll be their job, in fact-they'll continue working as full-time, financially solvent authors. And I will have to choose for myself whether I should bash away at a manuscript until it's the kind of flawless work that could not fail to delight _me_, or accept that edits and revision have diminishing returns and stop. Move on to a new project. Produce more work. Bang out a few more raffle tickets secure in the knowledge that I'm basically a semi-autistic outlier, but only a tiny minority of other readers are the same.

I don't especially like the second option. I just know that it's the only one that's sensible past a certain point.


----------



## Chrisbwritin (Jan 28, 2014)

shelleyo1 said:


> Mindlessly is the key word here, a word you used by assuming that people would be mindlessly throwing down words. I absolutely agree that countless hours of mindless writing won't do much. But who actually writes that way over and over? The whole point of the pot story in the book is that when set to produce volume, the pots _did_ get better. If they had been mindlessly doing it, they'd have thrown a glob of clay on the wheel, turned it until it had a hollow in the middle and tossed it aside while shouting a number. But they made pots, and made each one better than the last.


I said "mindlessly", whereas, in your original post, you phrased it "with no thought to quality", which I think is pretty much the same thing? Maybe not, but if we're tossing that part of things aside, then I agree completely. Most authors who write a lot with the intention of improving will likely get better. I think where we will have to agree to disagree is that I actually think MANY writers (not most, but enough) actually do write that way, over and over again, without reading craft books, editing, sending to beta readers, looking at successful books in the market etc. Do I think that makes sense? Nope. But we also live in a society that requires hairdryer manufacturers to remind consumers not to blow-dry their hair whilst in the shower.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chrisbwritin said:


> But we also live in a society that requires hairdryer manufacturers to remind consumers not to blow-dry their hair whilst in the shower.


LOL. That made my day, right there. Very funny and very true.

Edited to add: At the same time, some of the stupidest people I know are smart people.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Aaron, 
I sampled your book.  You understand grammar.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> Aaron,
> I sampled your book. You understand grammar.


Actually, some of my early books have major grammatical mistakes. Readers pointed it out to me as part of their one-star reviews. And I did my very best to fix those mistakes in future works.

Thanks for sampling.


----------



## Luis dA (Jun 1, 2014)

For me the most valuable part of this thread is the OP’s startling revelation of what the infamous “writing is hard work” means for a writer. He puts numbers to the common notion that writing is hard work. Just as we don’t expect a laborer or professional to work whenever they feel like it, or a few days a week or several hours a day, and then complain that they aren’t successful, we shouldn’t expect a writer to become successful by working as mood allows. 

Putting aside the exceptional, be it genius, luck, or one book wonder, he tells you that if you’re not writing or writing and editing eight hours a day, plus additional promotion work, you’re unlikely to find success. 

Folks here might argue with the numbers, provide any number of anecdotal evidence of success achieved without such a schedule, or adhere to the definition of what constitutes success, and what success means to them, etc, but his point is sound. If writing is what you want to succeed at, if you are a writer, and not just one who claims to be a writer but writes when the moment moves her, then you do what people who work for a living do; you work fifty hours a week on the job of writing. 

Those who have a day job that isn’t writing, well, understood—you’re unlikely to be able to also have a second full time job, in this case writing. That only means that you work as a writer fewer hours, and on a schedule 15-20 hours a week (plug in own numbers). 

We can debate the numbers all we want. What I think that every aspiring “I wanna be a writer” should know is that sans the exceptions citied, without putting in the hours of work every day vs. when the muse speaks to them, they’re not serious. 

If this sounds like another “this is what you must do” sermon, I apologize in advance. It’s just that it’s easier to write this way than fill it with all the necessary bifurcation. 

Understood, creative creation isn’t the same as stamping out cookies with a cookie cutter (hmm, apparently there are exceptions), and so when unable to write because it’s just not coming, the serious writer is then turning to revising work, marketing, learning craft. Walks in the woods, taking in a movie, a visit to the coffee shop to think; maybe tenured college professors can get away with this, but no one else, and not writers who wish to succeed at their craft. Alternatively, to argue with this point because you can write 4000 saleable words in three hours, market all you need in one hour, and still then take in the walks and visits to your favorite watering hole before taking a nap the rest of the day, is fine too, if you can and want to do that. For most folks, that’s an unlikely scenario on a daily basis. 

Good luck, everybody.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Luis dA said:


> For me the most valuable part of this thread is the OP's startling revelation of what the infamous "writing is hard work" means for a writer. He puts numbers to the common notion that writing is hard work. Just as we don't expect a laborer or professional to work whenever they feel like it, or a few days a week or several hours a day, and then complain that they aren't successful, we shouldn't expect a writer to become successful by working as mood allows.
> 
> Putting aside the exceptional, be it genius, luck, or one book wonder, he tells you that if you're not writing or writing and editing eight hours a day, plus additional promotion work, you're unlikely to find success.


Thanks for putting it this way. I'm glad you've hit upon a point and said it better than I was able to.

However, I'm not necessarily stating that you need to be writing 8-10 hours a day. Some writers Like Russell Blake seem to do something of that nature.

Others, like myself, manage to get most of it done in a few hours of work--although I definitely have my days where I put in 10, 12, or more hours.

The other piece of it is that I go on kboards, study Amazon and B&N and Kobo--for fun. That's what I do when I'm just hanging out, and yet--it's also part of my job. If you add in that stuff, and Facebook and Twitter and reading news articles, I'm ostensibly working another twenty or so hours a week doing the "fun" stuff. I don't consider it work, but for those who do, add that into the mix as well.

Beyond that, I'm ALWAYS thinking about story. When I watch a great show, like The Affair on Showtime (that's a plug for my new fave show), I anticipate what the writers are trying to do. I wonder why they chose a particular line of dialog or setting. Sometimes, if I notice a scene dragging or a plot line I don't enjoy, I try to dissect where things went wrong.

I'm doing that stuff constantly as well. Thinking about story, about plot, about characters and dialog. I do that because it's fun for me.

I trained myself to write fast so that I can get more writing done in less time. Writing is exhausting mentally. It takes a lot of emotional and mental energy to write, and the longer it takes, the more draining it becomes. So nowadays I can write about 1,000 words in 20 minutes. I end up knocking out my 3k words in about 1 hour, but it's broken up throughout the day, typically.

And that 1 hour of work is the result of many, many, many hours of training--of practicing, writing, editing, revising, thinking, analyzing. I didn't say just anybody could do what I do.

But there are writers who are at that level who can do a version of it. Some of them do it, and some of them have various mental and emotional and intellectual blocks that keep them from putting that into motion.

My post is to encourage the very few who can do this--to do it. Give yourself a chance to succeed.

For others, who still need to learn craft, who don't have time, who don't share the spirit of this philosophy--just don't do it. It's absolutely not a one size fits all kind of situation.

When I say that my methodology gives the best chance at success, I mean it. But you can only use the method if you're capable of using it. Some writers are, and most will not be. But again--the other methodologies, such as writing small amounts of words per day, writing when the mood strikes, writing in small niche markets, writing only what you love and think is special regardless of the business side of things&#8230;Those other methodologies are not going to give anybody better results.

You will either get lucky and think you figured something out, or you will not.

The style I am espousing gives you a chance to really make this a craft and take some of the luck out of things. But that means you need to put in years and years of hard work to implement it. And most professions demand the same.


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> I tend to write shorter, novellas for the most part. Anything from 10k words up to 35k words mostly these days.


And now we know the REST of the story!


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

Chrisbwritin said:


> I said "mindlessly", whereas, in your original post, you phrased it "with no thought to quality", which I think is pretty much the same thing?


It is. But the point is that they were _told_ to make as many pots as they could with no thought to quality, just volume, to free them of the perfectionism that holds so many creative people back--can't move on until this is perfect, it will never be perfect, etc. The whole book is about the freedom to create, and how granting yourself that will actually make you better at your craft. It's really worth reading, no matter what your discipline is. It was written for artists, but it applies just as well to writing or any other discipline, IMO.



> I think where we will have to agree to disagree is that I actually think MANY writers (not most, but enough) actually do write that way, over and over again, without reading craft books, editing, sending to beta readers, looking at successful books in the market etc. Do I think that makes sense? Nope.


I don't classify people like that as writers. They're dabblers and scrawlers. I'm a professional writer. It's how I've made my living for years now. The person you're describing is the worst kind of hobbyist--one who doesn't care about what they're doing. The OP's advice isn't going to help someone like that, and I don't really think it's designed for them anyway.



> But we also live in a society that requires hairdryer manufacturers to remind consumers not to blow-dry their hair whilst in the shower.


And instructions on a box of toaster Pop-Tarts.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8kThoZpF_U


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

DarlaBooks said:


> And now we know the REST of the story!


Not sure what that means. But if you're assuming I churn out short smut, you'd be dead wrong.


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> Not sure what that means. But if you're assuming I churn out short smut, you'd be dead wrong.


I would think that it more likely to differentiate you from Sela whose goto wordcount in 80k. If she can write 80k every week I would be well impressed. You have mentioned writing a book a week and wordcounts of 10-35k in comments since the OP. Those were vital factors that would have told the rest of the story if mentioned in your initial advice.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> You have mentioned writing a book a week and wordcounts of 10-35k in comments since the OP. Those were vital factors that would have told the rest of the story if mentioned in your initial advice.


From my OP: "That gives you the ability to churn out 10-15k words a week, and so you're getting out a short book a month, or perhaps a few shorter serialized books a month."

Not sure where the confusion is, because I was pretty clear about the length of book and if you want to make it longer, then obviously it might take two months rather than one. That's not very complicated.

And I refer to everything as books, because to me they're all mostly interchangeable. More writers should look at it that way, and then they'd realize they don't need to write 300k magnum opus's every time out&#8230;the readers don't require it in most genres, and you make better money when you write at differing lengths.

But so many writers are still stuck in the "novels are king" mindset, and it hampers their ability to make business choices.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I would think that it more likely to differentiate you from Sela whose goto wordcount in 80k. If she can write 80k every week I would be well impressed. You have mentioned writing a book a week and wordcounts of 10-35k in comments since the OP. Those were vital factors that would have told the rest of the story if mentioned in your initial advice.


I think he mentioned a daily word count... how many 'books' that translates into for each person obviously depends on their total word count. Whether you write short or long, the speed doesn't really change.


----------



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

dirtiestdevil said:


> I've seen books with misspelled titles, let alone interiors!! do very well on the charts. Reader forgiveness is quite surprising...


Readers not realizing has also probably got a lot to do with it ...


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Readers not realizing has also probably got a lot to do with it ...


 

No argument there!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

I figure a misspelled title would be on purpose.
Not an error.


----------



## Diane Patterson (Jun 17, 2012)

Mercia McMahon said:


> I would think that it more likely to differentiate you from Sela whose goto wordcount in 80k. If she can write 80k every week I would be well impressed. You have mentioned writing a book a week and wordcounts of 10-35k in comments since the OP. Those were vital factors that would have told the rest of the story if mentioned in your initial advice.


I know several professional indie authors (meaning: they make their sole income from their writing, and in many cases it's a good income too) who write an 80-100k book at least every two months and in some cases much less time. Which would be somewhere between 10 and 15k per week.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Diane Patterson said:


> I know several professional indie authors (meaning: they make their sole income from their writing, and in many cases it's a good income too) who write an 80-100k book at least every two months and in some cases much less time. Which would be somewhere between 10 and 15k per week.


Yeah, the funny thing is, my word count goals in my OP are actually a bit conservative. There are definitely some big time authors who are doing in the 5k to 7k range, daily. I know Bella Andre once said that she does 6k words a day on average.

So, you know--don't shoot the messenger. I'm just saying&#8230;.


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2015)

gorvnice said:


> Not sure what that means. But if you're assuming I churn out short smut, you'd be dead wrong.


It means that it's far easier to crank out a bunch of 10k stories or 35k novellas than it is to write the same number of novels. My experience is that most readers "in the current market" want novels, even long novels and will pass by or resent short stories. I wish it were not so, otherwise the 200 or so short stories I have would sell better. Most of them I've kept in the drawer or bundled without many sales.

I made no reference to smut. If you sell enough to satisfy you, good on you. If you think you can tell what the market is or says from only your sales, you're fooling yourself.

Fast or slow may be good; learning and practicing the craft also good; but the old saying, there's no accounting for talent or taste also has much truth. I don't believe there's ever been a baby born who could write, but some writers seem to have inborn talent with the language, with stories, characters. Speed has little to do with talent.

And what shall it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul? Translated to writing: what shall it profit a writer if he gains riches but never turns out a timeless work? Yeah, I know, we can debate the value of that last effort. But each year I return to certain "classics" that intrigue me, mostly for the iconic vivid characters who never fade though the plots can. Captain Ahab, Tess, Huck Finn, Gatsby, David Copperfield, and all the others. I don't know how much money those writers made but to me they were successful because they're still read. All of that you may brush aside as having nothing to do with your advice. But I do know that in most of these cases, the books were not written in a few months, but in years. Oh, but of course they weren't written "in today's market."

And while I'm being unladylike and ranting here, claiming to discern today's market, or even tomorrow's market with a large degree of hubris as you do, is where I get off. The "market" is not a monolith. There are many markets, and some of us write to a mere splinter of it that turns our gears.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> I'll say it again, even more clearly.
> 
> Someone, theoretically, can become a full-time writer, even have a huge hit--and write less than 500 words a day.
> 
> ...


Mwah hahahargh! Why yes of course, I'll Euthenase both my parents, kill my husband and put my six year old son into the workhouse, then I will have more than two hours to write each day and I will be able to call myself a 'professional' writer with a proper 'work ethic'. Phnark snortle.

So on one level, you're saying that there are many different ways to achieve writing Nirvana but that if people want to shorten the odds of succeeding they should write a lot of stuff, regularly. This is spot on and I agree with it absolutely - even if it's not an option that's open to me right now.

However, on the other hand, you're implying that your way of working is the 'only' way by suggesting that anyone who writes more slowly than you do is unprofessional. That comes out sounding... well... a little to the nasty side of cocky.

For a thread full of writers we all seem to have very little imagination when we come to make sweeping statements about the lives and attitudes of others about whom we know nothing.

There is no one true way there is only the best way for each of us. The paths which are open to you are not open to us all. Fair play to anyone who has the time and skill to do what you're doing, it clearly works and sure and it may be the best way for you but it isn't the only way. And because that kind of schedule would involve me riding roughshod over the people who love and need me it wouldn't work for me. Or at least, not if I wanted to come out of it with an in tact family or consider myself any kind of human being afterwards.

Unfortunately, I can only speak for my own experience but I'll try to avoid sweeping statements that belittle others. Personally I manage to write around 150k per year on 6 hours a week, 38 weeks of the year. With all the other stuff going on, that's about as far as I can push it without burning out or ceasing to do the other things I do properly. I have to spend time with and interact with other humans every now and again.

That's a decent total and I'm quite chuffed with it but it isn't enough to do the write fast publish regularly thing so I have been compelled to take another path. I don't have the money to pay for child care to write all day every day. I get to write some of some days, which is great. Fact is, I appreciate that eventually, the duties of care I face right now will be different and I'll get to write more. I may even get to the point where I can be 'professional' about it and write from 9 - 5 every day like the grown ups. But that time isn't now. Not because I don't want it to be now, not because I lack the balls for it to be now but for the very final reason that it simply, physically cannot happen at this time.

So until I can write all day 9 - 5 what do I do?

Should I stop writing because I don't have the hours in the day or churn the words out quickly enough to be 'professional' about my writing? Should I completely miss the e publishing wave - these kinds of things are always about being first to market - because I don't have enough time to do it 'professionally'? Should I just leave it to the 'professionals'; watch the wave pass until I have the time at my disposal to be a 'proper' writer? Or should I get off my arse and pursue my dream, in however small way, as best as I can? Well I've never been one to hang around. Sitting about doing nothing is just daft. Any groundwork is better than none. It's better to start and write a little every day right? Because something is better than nothing at all. I could have given up, maybe I should have done, but I haven't. I kept trying. I'm a professional writer. By my standard which is that of an ex business woman. As in, if someone asks me for an article, I quote them a price, I give them a deadline and I deliver what they are asking for on the date agreed (hopefully with an air of calm, courteous efficiency, at least that's what I aim for). Professionalism and a good work ethic are more than hours spent they are an attitude; a behaviour.

Therefore, because I have to fight tooth and nail for every moment I get at a computer, writing, I get monumentally pissed off when others who have no idea what is going on in my life and are in no position to judge belittle my work ethic, my professionalism and my dedication to what I do as somehow second class because I don't do it full time.

So the feeling of being judged clearly goes both ways.

There is no one true path there is only the path that works for each of us. Some are lucky and are able to take a route that shortens the odds of success. Some of us are not. Nobody is wrong. We've all set out on the path to pursue our dreams. A lot of folks never get that far. So we should probably give ourselves a mutual pat on the back for that, in itself.

Apologies if this is rather strongly put, it's a subject close to my heart.

Cheers

MTM


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

DarlaBooks said:


> It means that it's far easier to crank out a bunch of 10k stories or 35k novellas than it is to write the same number of novels. My experience is that most readers "in the current market" want novels, even long novels and will pass by or resent short stories. I wish it were not so, otherwise the 200 or so short stories I have would sell better. Most of them I've kept in the drawer or bundled without many sales.
> 
> I made no reference to smut. If you sell enough to satisfy you, good on you. If you think you can tell what the market is or says from only your sales, you're fooling yourself.
> 
> ...


Hmmm&#8230;you did cover a wide area of topics there. Not sure where to begin.

I've been clear about book length, and I've stated over and over again that it varies based on genre, and that anyone doing this should factor that into their choices. I know I did. I used to read a lot of sci-fi, so I could have envisioned going in that direction--but I don't want to have to write long novels.

From a business perspective, it's a big time commitment to work on an 80k or maybe a 120k word novel, only to have it sink like a stone in the marketplace. I know, because I've done it on more than one occasion, and it hurts badly.

As for writing timeless work--that's really not within my control. I think ideally we'd all like to write something timeless and beautiful. As cynical as my advice might sound at times, I feel that I'd like to have that timeless book as well.

But it's really not something I can control.

Also, I feel like I've come to terms with my own abilities and talents. And to be quite frank, I don't believe I have the kind of gift required to be a major literary talent. I think I'm good enough to SEE and UNDERSTAND how good the very best writers are. And to know that I'm not in their league.

It's okay, it really is. I'm very happy with my place in the writing world. I get to do this for a living, to entertain, to make my readers laugh and cry and transport them into a different life. Sometimes my writing may even elevate beyond that for short bursts, and that's cool too.

But if you detect hubris in my words, that's more of a style that comes from my personality, which can be on the abrasive side. I've had to sit and learn and take advice and check my ego at the door on many, many occasions. And I'm sure I'll have to do it again in about five minutes. So, take that for what it's worth...


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

gorvnice said:


> From my OP: "That gives you the ability to churn out 10-15k words a week, and so you're getting out a short book a month, or perhaps a few shorter serialized books a month."


Indeed but then you told us in reply to me standing up for 500 word a day writers producing 15k per month:



gorvnice said:


> 15k words a month is not much, actually, so we disagree entirely. I'm advocating for 10-15k words a WEEK, minimum.
> 
> You do realize that in my scenario, I'm writing 4 times as fast on average as you're suggesting. That means over the course of 12 months, instead of 6 short 30k word novels, I've put out TWELVE sixty thousand word novels or the equivalent of maybe 24 novellas.
> 
> So actually I do not agree with your statement, and it's that kind of thinking which hampers writers' ability to succeed. The two ways of working are not even close to the same.


Have you had to slow down to writing just 10-35k?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

M T McGuire said:


> I'll Euthenase both my parents, kill my husband and put my six year old son into the workhouse, then I will have more than two hours to write each day and I will be able to call myself a 'professional' writer with a proper 'work ethic'. Phnark snortle.
> 
> So on one level, you're saying that there are many different ways to achieve writing Nirvana but that if people want to shorten the odds of succeeding they should write a lot of stuff, regularly. This is spot on and I agree with it absolutely - even if it's not an option that's open to me right now.


It's not incumbent upon me to tell someone that "anybody can do this" and it's great if you can only find a few minutes a day to squeak out a few words.

Listen, I just don't see it that way.

If you're able to write a few hours here and there, to consistently put out some work--that's great! Is it the kind of work a professional writer is going to do?

No, it's not. I'm sorry to say that, but it's true. And why is that upsetting or offensive to you?

It's not an insult to say that being a professional writer takes extreme dedication and hours and hours of work on a daily basis.

This is not any sort of comment on you or your commitment to bettering yourself, or perhaps making money--any of it.

But I'm talking specifically to writers who want to succeed in the market in terms of making a full-time living at it. And in order to do that, certain steps will likely need to be taken.

If that hurts, if that is painful to read, I'm truly sorry. But I don't accept that I said anything wrong, or intentionally cruel or dismissive.

I am, however, dismissive of those who want to try and muddy the waters in order to elevate themselves and their choices by spreading misinformation to newer authors. It's important for new authors to get some real glimpse, from people who do this for a living, just what it entails.

I'm not saying you've done that here--but there are members who post a lot of poor information and mythology simply because they want to believe it. And I will not pretend that I agree with those people.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Mercia McMahon said:


> Indeed but then you told us in reply to me standing up for 500 word a day writers producing 15k per month:
> 
> Have you had to slow down to writing just 10-35k?


Those are the lengths of what my books tend to be--it has nothing to do with my writing pace. I think you're confused.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I'll break things down even a little further for those who care.

I've got a lot of names going, and they all have varying degrees of success, in very different genres.

But I've essentially had about five or six different names that were making a "living wage" on their earnings, and I hit probably four or five distinct genres.  I've been doing this thing since late 2010, and so I've had a lot of time to experiment.

Do the math of how much work I've produced in 4 years, given the fact that I had 5 trunk novels already complete and ready to put up from my "traditional publishing days."  So if I've written a couple million words since late 2010, spread out over all of those pen names, and I've managed to create viable careers for those independent names…that's how I know this strategy I've used is reproducible.

It's not blind luck, and I know it.  

I know it because I started from scratch again and again.  Why?  Because diversity is good for business.  Why?  Because I wanted to see if I could do it.  Why?  Because I wanted to try and sell even more books, and each time I fine-tuned my targeting until I truly broke out.

Now I tend to focus on a certain area because of the success I had.  But that doesn't take away from the fact that I essentially was able to create 5 different careers for five different names that were all just little ol' me.

I've written 120k word novels, and I've written 5k shorts.  I've done stand-alones and series and serials.

The point is, I'm not someone who just did one thing and that happened to work.  I did a bunch of things, and I continuously tried to refine my methodology until I came upon the type of method that had the best success over and over again.

I know that I did these things, and it's quite easy to continue to answer questions and continue to tell you why the logic is sound.  The logic isn't from out of my imagination, it's from years of doing this and only this.

If, instead of being offended or hurt, you actually thought about what I'm saying here, you'd realize there is tremendous opportunity for you.  I've told you that the only thing stopping you is YOU and not luck at all.  I've told you how you can remove luck as much as possible, and instead focus on YOUR OWN DETERMINATION.

That should be something hopeful, something uplifting and inspiring.  I hope that it is, for some of you at least.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> If, instead of being offended or hurt, you actually thought about what I'm saying here, you'd realize there is tremendous opportunity for you. I've told you that the only thing stopping you is YOU and not luck at all. I've told you how you can remove luck as much as possible, and instead focus on YOUR OWN DETERMINATION.
> 
> That should be something hopeful, something uplifting and inspiring. I hope that it is, for some of you at least.


It is for me.

Thank you again.


----------



## Daniel Kenney (Sep 18, 2014)

Gorvnice, Thanks for the post and for your followups. 2015 will be my year to substantially increase my volume and posts like this are the kick in the pants I need. Question, you suggested you've played around in multiple genres/categories with multiple pen names. Totally appreciate you not wanting to give up pen names and I really don't care. But I am curious if you could say anything more about the categories/genres. I'm really curious to get the perspective of someone who has basically applied the same high production strategy to a variety of different genres and would love to give your thoughts. I.E. based on your own experience as a business person, are their certain genres you won't write in anymore?  Thanks! Dan


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Daniel Kenney said:


> Gorvnice, Thanks for the post and for your followups. 2015 will be my year to substantially increase my volume and posts like this are the kick in the pants I need. Question, you suggested you've played around in multiple genres/categories with multiple pen names. Totally appreciate you not wanting to give up pen names and I really don't care. But I am curious if you could say anything more about the categories/genres. I'm really curious to get the perspective of someone who has basically applied the same high production strategy to a variety of different genres and would love to give your thoughts. I.E. based on your own experience as a business person, are their certain genres you won't write in anymore? Thanks! Dan


It's true that I don't want to get too specific, for multiple reasons. One reason is that if you are doing this properly, within a few hours of work you can start to get a sense of what genres work for what strategies. So I don't want to spoon feed people everything.

I will say that, for me, I am staying away from genres that absolutely demand very large novels in order to be read. I simply won't sacrifice that much time and effort, only to have a big flop on my hands. I did it in the past and it's just no longer worth it for me.

But there are genres, and there are niches. What's happening in one today can be different a week from now. That's a good thing, because it means you can find opportunities if you're diligent and watchful of the markets.

Best of luck!


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> It's true that I don't want to get too specific, for multiple reasons. One reason is that if you are doing this properly, within a few hours of work you can start to get a sense of what genres work for what strategies. So I don't want to spoon feed people everything.
> 
> I will say that, for me, I am staying away from genres that absolutely demand very large novels in order to be read. I simply won't sacrifice that much time and effort, only to have a big flop on my hands. I did it in the past and it's just no longer worth it for me.
> 
> ...


I want to echo the thanks and say I really appreciate your OP and all your follow-up posts. I know you're right about what approach will have the best chance of success in the current marketplace -- and that's all we can really talk about since we can't say anything about the unknown unknown marketplace of the future to quote Rummy.


----------



## Ancient Lawyer (Jul 1, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Writing does improve your writing.
> 
> It really does.
> 
> ...


I've been biting my tongue - hard - but I think you're massively missing the point.

(1) Given that the reader is king - or queen - then of course if you give them what they want, you should sell well.

but...

(2) I don't think Mercia is talking about gatekeepers. I think she's talking about basic standards of production. And learning. You don't always need a teacher to learn, but you do need to learn somehow. Crappy grammar and spelling do put readers off. It's a basic thing.

After that, everything else is to play for - the craft (to use an over-used word).

But not everyone can write to the market. And Jeez, what a depressing prospect, if all you ever do is to give people what they want. It changes. It changes over time, and on a sixpence, readers can suddenly lose interest in a genre. You can write Dan Brown-alikes one day, or 50 Shades of Grey; next thing you know, the readers - and the market - will have rushed off somewhere else.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

JessieCar said:


> I've been biting my tongue - hard - but I think you're massively missing the point.
> 
> (1) Given that the reader is king - or queen - then of course if you give them what they want, you should sell well.
> 
> ...


Writing for market is a depressing prospect FOR YOU. I don't at all find it depressing, I find it invigorating!

I know people's tastes change. That's exactly why I need to be willing to change with them. If I only do the same thing over and over again (because I personally love it so much), and then people's tastes change and they don't want that thing anymore&#8230;

I'm screwed. Then I keep producing what I personally love and feel comfortable producing, but the readers have moved on.

Then how do I make my living as a writer?

You've proven my point for me. The reason why "trend chasing" and writing to the market demands is so important, is because it changes all of the time.

Those few writers who've gotten successful because they happened to enjoy writing what the market wanted at that particular moment--those few writers have no idea that their success is mostly based on luck. Because if the market hadn't been interested, those few writers would not have adapted.

If you refuse to adapt, you cannot adjust, you can only hope that the world someday comes into alignment with you.

I believe in coming into alignment with what the outside world tells me it requires. It's served me very well so far.

That it causes some writers anger and bitter frustration is not surprising to me at all.


----------



## Ancient Lawyer (Jul 1, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I know people's tastes change. That's exactly why I need to be willing to change with them. If I only do the same thing over and over again (because I personally love it so much), and then people's tastes change and they don't want that thing anymore...


But...don't companies and developers spend vast amounts trying to spot trends? And yet even they seem to get it wrong all the time. I'm not saying you're wrong - I'm sure your sales figures say otherwise - but I'm not convinced you can write 'to' the market.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> It's not incumbent upon me to tell someone that "anybody can do this" and it's great if you can only find a few minutes a day to squeak out a few words.
> 
> Listen, I just don't see it that way.
> 
> ...


Because the subtext of what you say is that unless I write full time my work is crap and my intent is weak. Which is complete bollocks! ;-)

Why would that not be upsetting or offensive to you?

Because obviously the 15 years of writing all day every day in my job before I became a Mum don't count. You're not to know about them but it does illustrate the dangers of making sweeping statements.



gorvnice said:


> But I'm talking specifically to writers who want to succeed in the market in terms of making a full-time living at it. And in order to do that, certain steps will likely need to be taken.


Sorry, my bad. I do want to make a full-time living of it one day. Perhaps I didn't make that clear enough. I just can't give up my family commitments to work on it full time now. I think unless you're ever a carer or a parent it's hard to explain that. It's ok. I don't expect you or anyone else to get it unless you have kids or have to worry about/drive long distances to visit people you love who are long term sick.

I have been really enjoying reading this thread and I am grateful to you for sharing the stuff you've learned. It's great. I just didn't appreciate the side swipe at people like myself. It's a bit like saying para olympians aren't 'proper' athletes because some of them don't have functioning legs. Just madder than a box of frogs. I'm not even sure you meant it like that it just comes across like it over t'interweb.

Some of us have to follow a different path. That doesn't necessarily make us inferior. I know nothing about you, I wouldn't judge the quality of your work solely on the time you spend writing each day right now. I'd either reserve judgement or I'd read some of your books and decide for myself. I don't fall into either 'camp' on how to do it I think an author should find their niche and do what is right for them to succeed.

I'm also absolutely with you on the surest way to make money writing. I am certain that it is, pretty much, to do what you're doing. But unfortunately as I explained, not everyone can do that. And for all your saying that there are many ways to do this, the message in your words to me is clearly something to the contrary; that this is a big boy's game, there's only one way to do it and the little people shouldn't ask questions or try to play.

Yet surely, if volume and a back catalogue is key then it's even more important for those of us who have other commitments to start as soon we can. If I write well enough and keep refining the process so I get the maximum of publishable words out of my time, I should knock out a couple of 70k novels in a year. Or one 70k and three novellas. That should work the same way eventually. It will just take longer. I'm on stage one, you're on stage... I dunno... four? nah, ten more like! ;-) You probably move from stage to stage in a year, I take three because I have stuff to do, human stuff; bad patches which I have no intention of describing on the internet. They take time and emotional stamina. Horses for courses.

If someone you loved got sick would you refuse to visit them in hospital in order to stay on track with your writing or would you take time out each week, alter your schedule so that you took that little bit longer to achieve your goals? Would you be dismiss someone who did as lightweight about their career? And if you were that person, would you be a teensy weensy bit peed off with someone who called you an amateur and cast aspersions on your ability to write because you did?

I'll trundle off now because I'm only going to get bolshy and sound ungrateful when actually, I really appreciate the information you have given and that you're answering questions (even the bolshy ones from me) and talking to people.

A bientot.

MTM


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

JessieCar said:


> But...don't companies and developers spend vast amounts trying to spot trends? And yet even they seem to get it wrong all the time. I'm not saying you're wrong - I'm sure your sales figures say otherwise - but I'm not convinced you can write 'to' the market.


Sure, you will get it wrong sometimes. That's why volume is so important, because it gives you the ability to try and try again, and if you're focused in the right area, at some point you should hit. Maybe it won't be a bullseye, but you might get close.

And we don't spend money to do this, so we don't lose money if we miss. Big companies spend money and lose money when they're wrong.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

The way I figure it, there are things the market likes, and there are things I want to write. The sweet spot is where those two things overlap. If I try to do one thing without the other, I will probably fail.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

M T McGuire said:


> Some of us have to follow a different path. That doesn't necessarily make us inferior.
> 
> Yet surely, if volume and a back catalogue is key then it's even more important for those of us who have other commitments to start as soon we can.
> 
> If someone you loved got sick would you refuse to visit them in hospital in order to stay on track with your writing or would you take time out each week, alter your schedule so that you took that little bit longer to achieve your goals? Would you be dismiss someone who did as lightweight about their career? And if you were that person, would you be a teensy weensy bit peed off with someone who called you an amateur and cast aspersions on your ability to write because you did?


I don't think someone using a different path is inferior. If I say a "strategy" is inferior, that doesn't mean the person is. You sound like a very high quality person to me, who is doing your very best. Your circumstances aren't ideal and you're working with them to the best of your ability, trying to strike a balance. That seems very sensible to me.

However, what you are being forced to do right now, by circumstance, is not exactly ideal. And you seem very aware of that. Because we both agree it's not ideal, I'm not going to tell people that I think such a strategy is an ideal strategy for success, because it's not. But sometimes we do what we can with our circumstances, and that's admirable.

But I can't really spend post after post going over all the variables people might face in their lives in order to not do my particular strategy. I never said it made you a bad writer, or that you're a failure. What I said, over and over again to the best of my ability, was that I believed my strategy gives writers the best chance to make a living in the longterm. Best chance is important, because it's not to say you can't do it other ways. But you need more luck, and it becomes more difficult. That is all I was saying.

Now, you are completely correct, as far as I'm concerned, that the best thing to do is start from where you're at and work hard to build that catalog. There's no reason to wait on it, but simply to work as fast and hard as you can under the circumstances. Your backlist will grow, and I'm sure that if you have that hunger and that fire in your belly, at some point circumstances will change again and allow you to employ a more ideal strategy.

Finally, in regards to a sick relative--of course I would say that the humane and mature thing to do is to take the time to be with that person and take care of them, instead of writing more. And I've had to do that too, in my life.

Nothing I've said in this thread is intended as a comment on any individual person's situation that they face. It's a comment on a strategy to have a shot at the writer's life, and it's speaking from an ideal standpoint. As your situation changes, the strategy must change. That doesn't mean the strategy is bad, or that changing it is good. It just is what it is and we deal the best we can.

I hope that makes my viewpoint more clear, and thanks for coming back to further discuss.

You sound like you're working very hard, and I stand in awe of that.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

MichaelWallace said:


> The way I figure it, there are things the market likes, and there are things I want to write. The sweet spot is where those two things overlap. If I try to do one thing without the other, I will probably fail.


I agree. Ideally we want to merge the two, but sometimes it's not entirely possible.

Also, I've had the liberating experience of jumping into a genre I had no interest in, and finding that I love writing in it.


----------



## Ancient Lawyer (Jul 1, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Sure, you will get it wrong sometimes. That's why volume is so important, because it gives you the ability to try and try again, and if you're focused in the right area, at some point you should hit. Maybe it won't be a bullseye, but you might get close.
> 
> And we don't spend money to do this, so we don't lose money if we miss. Big companies spend money and lose money when they're wrong.


In terms of earning a living (and learning the craft) I don't think you're wrong about volume. But I think what worries me (to echo in part what Mercia said much better in her post above) is the idea of a OSFA strategy of writing.

Or a OSFA strategy for writers. It always troubles me when someone - however experienced - starts going on about what one MUST do in order to succeed (to make a living, to be a bestseller, whatever).


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

JessieCar said:


> In terms of earning a living (and learning the craft) I don't think you're wrong about volume. But I think what worries me (to echo in part what Mercia said much better in her post above) is the idea of a OSFA strategy of writing.
> 
> Or a OSFA strategy for writers. It always troubles me when someone - however experienced - starts going on about what one MUST do in order to succeed (to make a living, to be a bestseller, whatever).


I'm just not sure how many times I can restate this. I never said you HAVE to do it this way, or that anybody can or should do this in order to succeed.

Actually, I've kind of said the opposite. What I've said is that I think this is a more ideal strategy, for the current marketplace, than the typical advice given to "write what you love," etc. But I've also said that it's not for everyone, not for most people.

That you and others keep hearing me say you HAVE to do this and THERE IS NO OTHER WAY, is something I can't really change. I must be doing a bad job of communicating this point.

There is a difference between a superior strategy, and THE ONLY STRATEGY THAT WORKS.

While I admit that I firmly believe my strategy is superior to most of what's bandied about around these parts, I'll never say it's "the only strategy that can work." That would be plain silly, since there are plenty of people around to disprove that theory. I know they exist, I'm happy for them, and they're very talented and intelligent, hardworking writers.

But they don't have the best strategy 

What I'm saying is that I believe I've given a superior strategy to the "write what you love," "don't worry about volume," "don't chase trends" camp.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> I don't think someone using a different path is inferior. If I say a "strategy" is inferior, that doesn't mean the person is. You sound like a very high quality person to me, who is doing your very best. Your circumstances aren't ideal and you're working with them to the best of your ability, trying to strike a balance. That seems very sensible to me.
> 
> However, what you are being forced to do right now, by circumstance, is not exactly ideal. And you seem very aware of that. Because we both agree it's not ideal, I'm not going to tell people that I think such a strategy is an ideal strategy for success, because it's not. But sometimes we do what we can with our circumstances, and that's admirable.
> 
> ...


Thanks for clarifying that, I finally got there. ;-) Absolutely agree that as a strategy to do what I'm doing is not advisable. I do still get my stuff edited but if there's enough coming through then after the first, initial gap, the time spent in editing shouldn't matter! ;


----------



## Ancient Lawyer (Jul 1, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I'm just not sure how many times I can restate this. I never said you HAVE to do it this way, or that anybody can or should do this in order to succeed.
> 
> Actually, I've kind of said the opposite. What I've said is that I think this is a more ideal strategy for the current marketplace, then the typical advice given to "write what you love," etc. But I've also said that it's not for everyone, not for most people.
> 
> ...


Well, that may be true. That we are misunderstanding what you're trying to say. What I do know (and keep finding out) is that I've got a lot to learn. ;-)


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

JessieCar said:


> Well, that may be true. That we are misunderstanding what you're trying to say. What I do know (and keep finding out) is that I've got a lot to learn. ;-)


Hey, so do we all. I am learning every single day, every hour. I still get confused, bummed, disappointed and discouraged.

It's all good, and I enjoy the challenge, it makes me think hard about why I'm saying what I'm saying. So thanks!


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

_What I said, over and over again to the best of my ability, was that I believed my strategy gives writers the best chance to make a living in the longterm. Best chance is important, because it's not to say you can't do it other ways. But you need more luck, and it becomes more difficult. That is all I was saying._

You did say this, over and over and the ensuing mayhem is proof that communication is always a problem. People hone in on words that have meaning to them in particular and miss the other words, and then miss the context and the intent.

Your strategy is *not* the _only_ strategy that can work for *a successful career as a full-time author in the long term,* but it is perhaps the _best_ strategy that can work for *a successful career as a full-time author in the long term.*

Some authors may find success writing what they love.

Some authors may find success writing 500 words a day.

Some authors may find success writing in their non-bestselling market.

A lot of them are lucky that the stars aligned in their favour, and it is far more likely that any given author can be successful due to your strategy than due to luck.


----------



## Ancient Lawyer (Jul 1, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Hey, so do we all. I am learning every single day, every hour. I still get confused, bummed, disappointed and discouraged.
> 
> It's all good, and I enjoy the challenge, it makes me think hard about why I'm saying what I'm saying. So thanks!


Thanks for starting the thread.


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

This is an awesome post as well as timely! Thank you. I needed to read it and now need to apply it to my 2015 strategy. Prolific being the key word for me this year. I've done long books for the past three and half years. I've even parlayed a standalone novel into a series with plans for book 3 for the first part of 2015. However, this is the year I embrace what the market is telling me instead of bucking it. Annie's post hit home. I wrote an NA series that does all right despite splitting the genre. But it's not enough, not the breakout I was thinking it would be. So I appreciate everyone's input on this thread so I can finely tune my _skillz_ and write to the market and up the output. Thank you for all the great advice and sharing personal experiences when it comes to writing. I'm just sad that no one shares their titles in their signatures anymore. I would love to read some of your work.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

Joel R. Crabtree said:


> . I am curious about some of the other aspects of business success in your style. You mention numerous pen names, how do you manage them? Are they all under one company umbrella? How do you market each name for branding purposes? Do you just let the book speak for itself without name branding?


^THIS
Not asking for personal details at all - only curious in a general way about whether to operate a website and twitt for each pen name or use one website and social media for the different pen names (letting everyone know them) which defeats the individual branding, or no social at all which would leave a lot more time for writing

Thanks again for this it is absolutely brilliant and exactly my plan for 2015 after faffing about being precious (read perfectionist) since 2011


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Nomadwoman said:


> ^THIS
> Not asking for personal details at all - only curious in a general way about whether to operate a website and twitt for each pen name or use one website and social media for the different pen names (letting everyone know them) which defeats the individual branding, or no social at all which would leave a lot more time for writing
> 
> Thanks again for this it is absolutely brilliant and exactly my plan for 2015 after faffing about being precious (read perfectionist) since 2011


I don't think setting up a website and all for each name is so important unless the name starts to take off a little bit and get a following. But I will say, I am a bit old school on this. My PR/social medial/Ad game is super weak. I just didn't ever get around to figuring it out&#8230;

So, I do Twitter and stuff but not on every name. A website is fine, too, but don't overdo it before your name even has any audience. I think if you start building some traction, then having a place to let people to know releases and such is a good idea. But this is definitely an area where I encourage you to figure out what works, especially if you happen to enjoy it or are naturally talented at this kind of thing.

I don't see it as a make or break kind of activity, though. I think it's still very possible to succeed with no media presence, just books and lots of 'em.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> I don't think setting up a website and all for each name is so important unless the name starts to take off a little bit and get a following. But I will say, I am a bit old school on this. My PR/social medial/Ad game is super weak. I just didn't ever get around to figuring it out...
> 
> So, I do Twitter and stuff but not on every name. A website is fine, too, but don't overdo it before your name even has any audience. I think if you start building some traction, then having a place to let people to know releases and such is a good idea. But this is definitely an area where I encourage you to figure out what works, especially if you happen to enjoy it or are naturally talented at this kind of thing.


Interesting this should come up because it's something I have been thinking about a lot, lately. I use social media a lot in my day job, and I am very savvy with websites and blogging. The problem is, I hate it. I do it when and if I have to, but the thought of blogging ranks right up there with having my appendix removed.

Social media can be a really powerful tool, but it can also be a time suck. And is the time I would spend building Facebook pages, writing blog articles, and putting out tweets be better spent writing? I think so, but that's just me and I admit my opinion is influenced by my dislike of blogging, and tweeting, and whatever else.

Then there is the question of how much access do we want to give our readers. Sometimes being up close and personal can be a good thing, but it can also backfire. We've seen that a number of times. Author makes a comment about something, some takes offense, all bleep breaks loose.

So much to think about ...


----------



## Hope (Nov 28, 2014)

I cannot thank you enough for starting this thread, Gorvnice.  It has answered so many questions for me.  I appreciate all of the rebuttals as well.  it has allowed me to see both sides of the story.  I have relatively few titles up, but I am a fast writer by nature, so I am going to really focus on this in 2015.  My biggest problem is discipline…sigh.  I am going to change that though.  I swear I am!


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> My contention is not that it's impossible to do what you're doing.
> 
> My contention is that your way, on average, will lead more authors to fail, than my way would. Because your way, by definition, creates far fewer chances to have a successful book.
> 
> ...


I'm late to replying to this, but I just got back from Yosemite. Happy New Year Gorvice and the rest of the thread!

I don't think you're being cruel. I _do_ think my plan is risky, but I also think it has a very high chance of reward. I believe you can engineer a best selling series, one that crosses genres and enchants readers. Nearly every author that has done this didn't create 14 different series under 5 pen names. They didn't crank our 35 short releases a year.

They created one or two 100k plus releases each and every year that people loved. Jim Butcher and Brandon Sanderson are the best examples I can think of. I learned of both through word of mouth, from enthusiastic fans who yearned to share that fandom with other people.

Are your pen names doing that? Do you see explosive revenue from your series? If the title you've listed in your signature is one of your pen names I'm going with no. You probably sell a ton of copies, but are you building a rabid fandom of people who are yearning to buy anything you produce? That's what I'm aiming for. I want to be Butcher. You want to be DWS. Both approaches can be effective, though yours is a much less risky path.

In your scenario if one of my two releases (or god forbid both) fail, then the whole series is a failure. I'd have to start over with a new one, and that would take at least another year. It's a long, slow game. But you know what? It's working. My mailing list is growing very quickly, as is the fan base in places like Goodreads and Audible. That _could_ change tomorrow. The 2nd book could bomb. Or sales could suddenly tank. But if that happens I will have learned some very valuable lessons along the way, and I'll also have created a high quality backlist series that I am proud of.

I'll create a separate post about taking a 10x startup approach to indie publishing, but I'll give the gist here. Aim really high understanding that several failures in a row are very possible. Refine your process with each attempt until you find the right recipe. You'll probably argue that's exactly what you're doing, but that's where we disagree. Having a writing coach continuously tear apart my prose over multiple drafts increases my skill as a writer. Firing off a draft to 25 beta readers and listening to their feedback helps me understand my audience and tailor my books accordingly. These things take time. A lot of time.

But I'm improving rapidly. Each release is stronger than the one before, more likely to capture the kind of reader I'm after. During the years it takes me to build that readership I bet you and every other prolific writer here will out gross me. In the long run, if I'm right, that will change. Guess we'll have to see where I'm at in a year. In the meantime I'm pretty happy. New Years day was my first 100 sale day.


----------



## Shaw (Dec 27, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> That's what I'm aiming for. I want to be Butcher. You want to be DWS. Both approaches can be effective, though yours is a much less risky path.
> 
> I'll create a separate post about taking a 10x startup approach to indie publishing, but I'll give the gist here. Aim really high understanding that several failures in a row are very possible. Refine your process with each attempt until you find the right recipe. You'll probably argue that's exactly what you're doing, but that's where we disagree. Having a writing coach continuously tear apart my prose over multiple drafts increases my skill as a writer. Firing off a draft to 25 beta readers and listening to their feedback helps me understand my audience and tailor my books accordingly. These things take time. A lot of time.


Looking forward to reading that post. Can you address, either here or there, how/where you found a writing coach? Way back in my school days I had one for a little while, but she was a poet and not a fiction writer and so, while I loved working with her, I think taking her critique to heart threw me a little off-genre at the time.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> I'm late to replying to this, but I just got back from Yosemite. Happy New Year Gorvice and the rest of the thread!
> 
> Are your pen names doing that? Do you see explosive revenue from your series? If the title you've listed in your signature is one of your pen names I'm going with no. You probably sell a ton of copies, but are you building a rabid fandom of people who are yearning to buy anything you produce? That's what I'm aiming for. I want to be Butcher. You want to be DWS. Both approaches can be effective, though yours is a much less risky path.
> 
> In your scenario if one of my two releases (or god forbid both) fail, then the whole series is a failure. I'd have to start over with a new one, and that would take at least another year. It's a long, slow game. But you know what? It's working.


Hey Chris! Happy New Year and welcome back. Glad you responded with your thoughts.

A couple of things, here. You make a bit of a wrong comparison when you say my style is a DWS style. Other than the speed piece of it, my style goes against the DWS style in a number of ways. I believe in writing to trend and choosing genre based on audience size, whereas Dean does not. I believe in low-priced funnels in book 1 of the series to get the most readers into my work, after which I increase the prices. I will do promotion where it makes sense to me. All of those factors make my style quite different from his.

You point to my sig book and make an assumption that's very incorrect. That sig book was one of the first books I ever published back in late 2010/2011. That group of novels were from my traditional publishing attempts, which I put up all at once as my "backlist." None of those books were written in the style I'm now advocating. The style I'm using now has come from working in this arena (self-publishing) for approximately 4 years, and making a living at it.

I have tried to stay away from giving my sales figures for a number of reasons. I'll just say your assumption there is wrong also.

Now I'm going to give you some tough love on why your theory about your strategy might also be wrong. You compare yourself to traditional authors like Butcher, and say, "hey, they did it. That's a viable way to make a great career in this business!"

I never said it wasn't viable, Chris. What I said was that it's a like playing the lottery, with very poor odds of success. The methodology we've been discussing on my thread has better odds for success, because we have many many more tickets, and eventually, we get enough of them and we can remove a lot of the luck from the process.

In my methodology, you don't NEED a hit to survive and thrive. So in that way, it's a little like DWS. If you do enough volume, you WILL make some money at this (provided you have enough craft and sense to give people a halfway decent story). If you do enough volume, the money will come in, and even without a big breakout success, you can make a very decent living as a writer.

So that's one way to succeed. My hope, however, would be that as you continue writing to the market, and continue building a backlist and volume, you're also honing in on that "hit book," whether by building a name little by little, or by "getting lucky" with a particular breakout book. Once a book breaks out, you can mine that for a long time, if you're smart about it.

So again, even without a breakout success, you can succeed with volume. Even without a breakout book, you can succeed with slowly building your name(s). However my slow is much different than your slow, Chris. When I say build a name slowly, I'm talking about over a period of a few months. Whereas you're talking YEARS, potentially. And in my scenario, I can build 2 or 3 or 4 names at once, while you have just the one.

I'm not trying to tear you down here. I'm really exploring the difference in philosophy, because they are profound. And newer, less experienced writers (as well as some very experienced ones) don't understand this very well.

We are in a new world where the gates are wide open to production and distribution. Anyone using the outdated methods of traditional authors should have a clear understanding of what they are giving up. You're giving up the chance to work like an indie--you're giving up the very advantages that we've been blessed with, in order to copy the type of path that was the most difficult.

Becoming the next Butcher, or the next Grisham, or the next Child--these people succeeded in a very different system with very different rules. That they succeeded is amazing. That you would force yourself into that mold when you have so many other options, honestly shows me your inexperience in this industry.

To continue with my tough love, I'm going to also break down the next piece of this. You have a plan that involves putting out massive books over the course of 2-3 years in order to build a strong following. You might very well achieve that, Chris.

But I have put out hundreds of titles now, and I'm pretty aware of how quickly books fall in the rankings--even the successful ones. So even if you have a "hit" title, and even if it continues to earn some scratch, the visibility in the stores as well as the money begins to ebb away--sometimes, quite rapidly--month by month by month. Actually, it's even quicker than that. So a book that makes it to the top 1,000 at Amazon, in three months could be ranked in the 20,000s and in eight months, it might be 100,000.

Some of this will depend on your next releases, and whether they do the trick you're hoping they do. But you, my friend, are walking a tightrope with your release schedule. Let me tell you--a year in this business is a lifetime. Readers move on, they forget--and the algo's are constantly, constantly churning. You may have to do a rebrand and a rerelease by the time your next book comes out.

And how will you feel if after a year of writing and slaving, you release the next book in your series and it just doesn't perform? Now, you've squandered the success of book one by waiting so long to publish, and book two has flopped. Now you have to start on a new series, potentially...using the same dang strategy? How is that a winner?

Listen, I think you're a smart dude. I can tell you have your head on your shoulders, and already your book is doing well. For a first book, it's incredible. I bet you might actually do a version of what you're trying to do. You might.

But if, in a year or 2, your next books comes out and doesn't perform, and then the next is just meh...we won't hear about you, we won't get the follow-up with you coming and telling us what happened. It will just be another quiet exit, and the mythology of the author will continue. The mythology of slaving away and churning out a book or two a year, trying to be the next SO and So....

I've seen a lot of authors try and do what you're doing. I've seen a lot of authors have some success on one book, and then fail to follow it up quickly and properly with a second and third, and lose their momentum. They don't have a clue about algo's, about the way this all really works. It's not magic and fairy dust like everybody jokes about. It is a fast and steady machine with gears and conveyor belts and it will eat you up and spit you out unless you learn how to feed that machine properly.

I say this with love, not just to you, but to any writers bothering to read this and really consider it.

You can doubt me, because I'm fairly anonymous here. But my logic is sound, and those who've been making a living in SELF-PUBLISHING (not traditional) will understand that what I'm telling you is basically accurate.

Do I think you can do it? Yes. I think you've got a lot of obvious qualities that gives you as good a shot as you can have with your particular strategy. Do I think your strategy is ideal, that it should be told to other authors as an example? No. I think your strategy is a tightrope walk, one slip from complete and utter oblivion.

Writing for a living is enough of a tightrope walk without intentionally making it harder.

Best of luck and thanks for continuing the conversation.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Thank you for taking the time to write out an in depth reply, Gorv. This kind of discussion is invaluable, and will help not just me but other authors trying to pick the best path through indie publishing. You have experience. I have theory. I definitely recognize that. I believe my theory is sound because I have executed it successfully in other mediums. But at the end of the day there is simply no substitute to experience, which you have and I lack.

I'll throw up a thread about my strategy, and I invite you to come shred it. If you can poke holes in my theory then I want to know about them so I can refine my theory.



Maisy said:


> Didn't you say earlier you had a EDJ that paid you very well. I would guess you have a very large start-up budget/money to fuel your hobby. How much does marketing play into 2 giant book/year plan? I wonder how much you're relying on marketing instead of volume to stay relevant.


Yes, I have a day job that pays me extremely well. I have both the capital and the time to experiment. I realize not everyone does.

Marketing _is_ my 2 giant book a year plan. You don't choose between marketing and volume to stay relevant. You market to create volume _so you stay relevant_.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> Thank you for taking the time to write out an in depth reply, Gorv. This kind of discussion is invaluable, and will help not just me but other authors trying to pick the best path through indie publishing.
> 
> I'll throw up a thread about my strategy, and I invite you to come shred it. If you can poke holes in my theory then I want to know about them so I can refine my theory.


Hey Chris, I appreciate the discussion too! But if you want my opinion on your larger strategy, I welcome you to cross-post it here. I'm going to mainly just keep to this thread for awhile, so I probably won't comment on your post in the wider cafe. But if you feel like posting part of it here, I will try and reply!

Either way, I really do respect your choices, I respect the way you appear to be going about this, and I would love nothing more than to be able to eat my words in the coming year.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

Making money in this market?  Difficult to do as the stats show that most independent authors are selling bupkis. But if you want to go by best practices then it seems this works:

--specialize in a genre
--write in series 
--permafree as that funnel to your work.

As far as techniques, I think a writer has to be reliable quick in their releases, or they should wait until they have 2-3 books in a series done and then post them in rapid succession.  I also think many shorter novellas are probably a more profitable endeavor than fewer longer novels.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Chris Fox said:


> I'm late to replying to this, but I just got back from Yosemite. Happy New Year Gorvice and the rest of the thread!
> 
> I don't think you're being cruel. I _do_ think my plan is risky, but I also think it has a very high chance of reward. I believe you can engineer a best selling series, one that crosses genres and enchants readers. Nearly every author that has done this didn't create 14 different series under 5 pen names. They didn't crank our 35 short releases a year.
> 
> ...


And now, a cautionary tale. There was a poster here once who got off to a really fast start. He posted his numbers in every thread he could, and he sold like 1,000 copies his first month. I believe that he stayed in the top 4000 for several months. With no promotion.

He waited only 7 months to put out his second book. I just checked his rankings, and, for both books, they're in the 240,000+. He has no third book out that I can see, and it's been around 7 months since his last release.

I guess the takeaway from this is not to rest on your laurels, ESPECIALLY if you have a hot first book. It's easy to believe that having a hot book means that your fans will wait for you to publish your next one. But you have to realize one thing - these "fans" are inundated with product. They forget about you the second they move on to the next book. They may write you love letters - I've gotten them. But they write these love letters and sign up for your mailing list when they're in the afterglow of finishing your awesome book.

Holly Ward, who has sold 80 bazillion copies, has been quoted as saying that if you don't produce on a regular basis, your fans will forget about you.

Lastly, I'm a case in point. On my own books! I was just listening to the audio version of my third novel, End of Illusions. Before I listened to the audiobook version of it, I was thinking, in my mind, that this was a weak book. I listened to the audiobook and I was blown away, and I realized that it wasn't weak at all. It got me so excited about my first series again that I decided to start writing a prequel for it. The lesson there was that, even in my own mind, about my own books, I have forgotten them. Forgotten what I loved about them. Forgotten how much they moved me. I have moved on, in my mind, and written six other books since my first series. And I've already forgotten my last book I have written. All my books are kinda fuzzy in my mind, and none of them pack an emotional punch for me, until I start either reading them again or I listen to the audiobook. And then I say "wow. That ain't bad!"  Now, if I can "forget" my own book, I'm pretty sure that I'm going to forget how much I love so and so's book. And I don't even read that much - I just have a lot on my mind, as does everyone. A lot going on.

Take from this what you will.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> He waited only 7 months to put out his second book. I just checked his rankings, and, for both books, they're in the 240,000+. He has no third book out that I can see, and it's been around 7 months since his last release.


This is what I was talking about in my response to Chris. This phenomenon is all too common in this industry. I've seen numerous authors put out a book that does fairly well. But because they don't have a depth of experience with e-books (or perhaps publishing in general), they think that this one book doing well is enough. They think their fans will wait for six, seven months, maybe even a year.

People like Annie and myself have had that horrible sinking feeling of putting a book out and hearing crickets. I've personally waited too long to put out the next book in a series, and lost a HUGE chunk of my readership that I NEVER RECOVERED. I never got those people back, my series was never as big again, even though I kept putting more books out.

So I know how finicky this business is, and how quickly things can turn. I don't enjoy it. If it sounds like this stuff makes me happy, perhaps it's just that I accept it--and I find the challenge of it invigorating. But please don't misunderstand, it would be a lot better for me if I could put books out a little less quickly and still maintain visibility, ranking, money, etc.

Back in 2011 it actually was a little easier to do that. I had a book that was in the top 1,000 for about a year straight. Things seemed stickier back then. Now the churn is incessant. It's getting faster and faster.

So Annie has just pointed out the importance of knowing the way things could be in five or six months. Maybe your readership will wait--but maybe not. Personally, I find that I need to have new books out much more quickly--and that even after a month, a drop off in readership begins to be visible. I know that sounds insane, but it's what I've found.

Maybe it's because my writing isn't good enough. Maybe my books are so generic that the readers just go somewhere else to get it. That's very, very possible.

But you better be a damn special snowflake if you want to be the author whose fans wait around for a year or more and then jump right out and buy the next release when it comes.


----------



## WordSaladTongs (Oct 14, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> This is what I was talking about in my response to Chris. This phenomenon is all too common in this industry. I've seen numerous authors put out a book that does fairly well. But because they don't have a depth of experience with e-books (or perhaps publishing in general), they think that this one book doing well is enough. They think their fans will wait for six, seven months, maybe even a year.
> 
> People like Annie and myself have had that horrible sinking feeling of putting a book out and hearing crickets. I've personally waited too long to put out the next book in a series, and lost a HUGE chunk of my readership that I NEVER RECOVERED. I never got those people back, my series was never as big again, even though I kept putting more books out.
> 
> So I know how finicky this business is, and how quickly things can turn. I don't enjoy it. If it sounds like this stuff makes me happy, perhaps it's just that I accept it--and I find the challenge of it invigorating. But please don't misunderstand, it would be a lot better for me if I could put books out a little less quickly and still maintain visibility, ranking, money, etc.


This mimics my own experience on two series. Waiting a year between releases after selling 3,500 of book 2 in one series and closer to 12,000 of book 1 (serial installments of the first season and the season 1 compilation) in another series left me with very few sales on the follow ups in both series. It's a horrible feeling to watch a new release fail after having some solid numbers on the prior volumes. It hurts in a lot of ways you might not even realize and if you let it, it can completely suck the fun out of writing.

But, unlike Annie and Gorvnice, I've had to simply accept the fact that my output is never going to match that of SM, HM, Russel, Viola and others. I just can't do it, and my career is going to suffer for it. It took some time, but I'm finally okay with that. I'm lucky, I'm not trying to escape a job or anything. But, you know, I wanted to be a STAR! I COULDA BEEN A CONTENDER!

But really, could I have? No, probably not, because part of being a contender as an indie in this market is (IMO) having a brain that works that way--that can create these ongoing, consistently entertaining sagas day after day. It's not like digging a hole. I can Tommyknocker the [crap] out of some digging, going down a foot every single day until I've got a giant, useless hole in my backyard. Writing 2,000 words a day of entertaining story that people want to read so bad they pay you for isn't like that. Not everyone can do it.


----------



## WordSaladTongs (Oct 14, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> But you better be a damn special snowflake if you want to be the author whose fans wait around for a year or more and then jump right out and buy the next release when it comes.


Sorry to double post, but I just thought of something else. While every fan is an author's reader, not every reader is a fan. That's the real issue (IMO). While my follow ups did crappy because I kept waiting 7, 8, 12 months between books (I've been at this since 2011 and I like to be consistent in my failures) my alsoboughts show the consistency of my true fans (I hate that word, but it's an important distinction). I've got a group of dedicated "fans" who buy everything I put out, which is evidenced by my alsoboughts.

Sometimes you can create a true "fan" with just one book, but not often. Creating a large enough fan base to reach that full-time income relies on converting casual readers to fans. The way you do that is to release books quickly so that the casual readers, all hopped up on curiosity from recently reading your book, can buy another--and another, until they become "fans."


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

WordSaladTongs said:


> Sorry to double post, but I just thought of something else. While every fan is an author's reader, not every reader is a fan. That's the real issue (IMO). While my follow ups did crappy because I kept waiting 7, 8, 12 months between books (I've been at this since 2011 and I like to be consistent in my failures) my alsoboughts show the consistency of my true fans (I hate that word, but it's an important distinction). I've got a group of dedicated "fans" who buy everything I put out, which is evidenced by my alsoboughts.
> 
> Sometimes you can create a true "fan" with just one book, but not often. Creating a large enough fan base to reach that full-time income relies on converting casual readers to fans. The way you do that is to release books quickly so that the casual readers, all hopped up on curiosity from recently reading your book, can buy another--and another, until they become "fans."


Hey, thanks so much for posting about your experience. And I want to say that I don't think there's ANYTHING WRONG with not wanting to be a book writing machine. As you said, you're aware of what happened with the gap between your releases, but you just don't want to--or can't--write at that hyper speed kind of pace required to avoid those longer gaps.

I think that's just fine, and I would never dream of telling you that you're "lazy" or "not a real writer" or anything of the kind.

You know what you're doing, you understand the trade-off (through painful experience and heart ache).

My goal with this thread is to help aspiring writers, or writers who are still trying to find a workable strategy, to understand what's at play. I think your thoughtful posts about your own experience very much helps to continue that process.

Thanks so much for that. And keep doing what you're doing!


----------



## WordSaladTongs (Oct 14, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Hey, thanks so much for posting about your experience. And I want to say that I don't think there's ANYTHING WRONG with not wanting to be a book writing machine. As you said, you're aware of what happened with the gap between your releases, but you just don't want to--or can't--write at that pace.
> 
> I think that's just fine, and I would never dream of telling you that you're "lazy" or "not a real writer" or anything of the kind.
> 
> ...


I would *love* to be a fiction-writing machine, I'm just not built that way. I get where you're coming from with this thread, and it's something people need to read (IMO, IMO, IIIIMMMMOOOOOO!!!!!).


----------



## Deborahsmith author (Jul 23, 2013)

I wish Chris the best, really, and nothing's impossible. But regarding any comparison to trad pubbed authors like Butcher and how they made their big hits -- they had a massive publishing machine behind them. I wrote for the big houses for more than twenty years before leaving to write for my own small press. I was in category romance and then in single-title women's fiction, getting a lot of promo and seeing the behind-the-scenes pre- and post- pub marketing process. The  networking, the powerful bargaining deals between the pubs, the wholesalers, the booksellers, the distributors -- that system puts a lot of books in front of a lot of readers. The money that's dumped into print editions when it's assumed that 50 percent or more of the print run will be pulped or remaindered is staggering--but it's all part of the deals to get the author in those feature spots by the cash registers at the major bookstores. All of this and much more is what propels the breakout hits. I'm sure a rare circumstance could put an indie author who writes one or two books a year into that league, but, for one thing, a big part of trad authors' prestige, branding and discoverability is their strong presence in those trad bookstores. Snark at that as you will, but it continues to be a defining difference for the industry and for many readers. (I miss the days--haven't seen my books in a store in years...)


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

I get it. I hear the cautionary tales about fans evaporating if you wait too long to release. Here's the thing.

You shouldn't try to make your book HOT until you have two or three books. There a millions upon millions of potential readers who have never seen or heard of my books. When the first trilogy is complete THEN I will turn on the massive marketing and really try to take the world by storm.

It's nice that my book is doing well right now, but that's secondary to how it does after sequels are out. Everything to date is effectively small scale market testing. Does it matter iff two thousand readers forget you when you market to twenty thousand once more content is available? What about two years from now when I have two complete trilogies? Every time I release a new book the existing books become relevant to any reader not yet exposed to the series. It's all about economy of scale. There are a vast sea of potential readers, and getting your series in front of them is a very valid route to success.

Maybe I'm wrong. I am just an upstart newbie. As you've seen so far I'm very public about my numbers, so if I fail that will be very public. If it turns out I'm wrong you will hear me admit that.



anniejocoby said:


> And now, a cautionary tale. There was a poster here once who got off to a really fast start. He posted his numbers in every thread he could, and he sold like 1,000 copies his first month. I believe that he stayed in the top 4000 for several months. With no promotion.
> 
> He waited only 7 months to put out his second book. I just checked his rankings, and, for both books, they're in the 240,000+. He has no third book out that I can see, and it's been around 7 months since his last release.
> 
> ...


You've held Holly up as an example more than once, Ann. Holly markets to the romance genre, a voracious audience with a very short memory. So do you, and many of the authors on these forums. I'm aiming at a different audience. These are the readers who faithfully return to series _for decades_. Is it arrogant to want to tap into that type of readership? Maybe. But I'm gambling it can be done.

Nor am I resting on my laurels. I'm just not shoveling B quality material out the door without user testing, and if I released monthly or even bi-monthly that's exactly what I'd be doing. Samsung releases phones constantly. Apple releases one phone a year. Apple is doing just fine.

Again, I understand that you guys are speaking with the benefit of experience and that what I'm attempting to do sounds crazy. You're welcome to your opinions, and I'm glad you're posting them. But I will remind you that you don't know me, and correlation does not equal causation. You've seen other people fail, but that doesn't mean everyone will. You've discovered a methodology that works for you, but it doesn't mean it's the only one.

Smart business people are always evolving, and I will stay agile. But you are never going to convince me that there is One True Way to do this, or that intelligent marketing cannot overcome a massive backlist. I know otherwise from the startup world.


----------



## Charmaine (Jul 20, 2012)

WordSaladTongs said:


> Sometimes you can create a *true "fan"* with just one book, but not often. Creating a large enough fan base to reach that full-time income relies on converting casual readers to fans. The way you do that is to release books quickly so that the casual readers, all hopped up on curiosity from recently reading your book, can buy another--and another, until they become "fans."


This reminds me of the *Rule of 1000* in art.
Basically, to have a career, a person only needs 1000 true fans. 
1000 people who will buy anything you put out is enough to sustain you. 
It's just a matter of finding them


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Deborahsmith author said:


> I wish Chris the best, really, and nothing's impossible. But regarding any comparison to trad pubbed authors like Butcher and how they made their big hits -- they had a massive publishing machine behind them.
> 
> All of this and much more is what propels the breakout hits. I'm sure a rare circumstance could put an indie author who writes one or two books a year into that league, but, for one thing, a big part of trad authors' prestige, branding and discoverability is their strong presence in those trad bookstores. Snark at that as you will, but it continues to be a defining difference for the industry and for many readers. (I miss the days--haven't seen my books in a store in years...)


Right, and I think this is where a little definition of what a breakout hit means, and what Chris is trying to achieve versus what I am personally recommending as a general strategy with best odds of success.

I think when Chris is talking about a breakout, he's referring to ONE BOOK that in and of itself, will sell perhaps a million copies or more. Likely more. And that the next book, perhaps six months or a year later, will sell EVEN MORE. He's talking about Lee Child, Grisham, Rowling, type of success. The very biggest of the big.

And when you're talking those kinds of numbers, the best shot for that kind of career is still defined typically by the backing of a major publishing house and the kind of muscle they can put on a project.

We do have examples of indies that sell a million or more copies, but typically at lower prices, and many times they do it over multiple books--not just one title.

So Chris is looking to do something altogether stratospheric in nature. He's set his sights high, and I tip my hat to him for that.

When I talk about a "breakout book," my standards are a bit more modest. I'm thinking of a book that sells across multiple platforms, landing on "bestseller lists" at those stores. A book like that has broken out, but it's still in the company of many other authors and many other books.

If you have a breakout book on Amazon where you get to the top 1,000 in the entire store, you'll likely be on multiple lists and have lots of visibility, you'll get tons of exposure through also boughts and emails from Amazon and the like.

If you're working in a series, your next book can use the first breakout book as a kind of trampoline to help catapult you even higher up, especially if book 1 is still high on the charts by the time you release #2.

This is my definition of a hit book, or a hit series. In all likelihood, over the course of a few months or a year, you'll have multiple titles out and have made thousands, or hundreds of thousands of dollars from it.

So Chris and I have very different goals. But I think if you look at the lists, you'll see that there are many more authors working like I've just described, and succeeding at it. And that's why I recommend it, even though Chris is obviously a super bright, really successful dude who will likely go on to do great things in this industry.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> You've held Holly up as an example more than once, Ann. Holly markets to the romance genre, a voracious audience with a very short memory. So do you, and many of the authors on these forums. I'm aiming at a different audience. These are the readers who faithfully return to series _for decades_. Is it arrogant to want to tap into that type of readership? Maybe. But I'm gambling it can be done.
> 
> Nor am I resting on my laurels. I'm just not shoveling B quality material out the door without user testing, and if I released monthly or even bi-monthly that's exactly what I'd be doing. Samsung releases phones constantly. Apple releases one phone a year. Apple is doing just fine.
> 
> ...


I posted a response above, that also fleshes out some more of the disconnect, Chris. Please do read that. But I want to also tell you that I LOVE your analysis of this, I LOVE your approach, and I'm absolutely psyched at the way you're bringing your start up "tech" mentality to our business.

I would never say you can't do this. You seem like EXACTLY the kind of person who could execute this strategy, but as you have said, it's a high risk, high reward strategy that excites you.

I'm offering writers a medium to low-risk, pretty high reward strategy that on the whole is easier for more writers to execute. But I LOVE what you're bringing to the table around here. We need more minds like yours on kboards.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

_My goal with this thread is to help aspiring writers, or writers who are still trying to find a workable strategy, to understand what's at play. I think your thoughtful posts about your own experience very much helps to continue that process._

I think you've done that quite well. I know some people have taken offence at your posts and read insult where none was intended, but that's their problem.

In the end, each author has to navigate their way between issue of quality, quantity, love, money, business and art to find their happy place. For authors starting out, it's really fantastic to have access to so many authors relating their experiences in the publishing world, their insights and advice. It really helps see what the options are, and to start to think about how you, as an individual, want to approach publishing.

For some, that may mean going the traditional route and writing a manuscript with the idea of submitting to agents, getting a trade publisher, and signing a contract. There are a few huge advances given out recently that show big publishing is able to attract what it considers worthwhile material and is willing to take a huge chance but also from what I have read and heard, advances are getting smaller, making it harder to make a living as a trade published author. There are also a lot of previously-trade authors getting their rights back and going indie, publishing their backlist and starting a new career as a self-publisher.

For others, it's self-publishing all the way. Self-publishing appeals to the more entrepreneurial among us, who like to be in control and don't want to wait the glacial time it takes to get books to market in the traditional system. Self-publishing means learning business as well as art and craft and some people don't like that, don't want to bother with it, and so prefer trade. Others find the business side enjoyable at best, tolerable at worst. For self-publishers, being flexible and ready to respond to changes in the marketplace is key, for it moves fast. Writers who can create volume probably have the greatest chance at earning a living at writing simply because it provides a better chance at visibility, but there is no certainty.

The best advice for the newbie author wondering about this brave new world of publishing is to do as much research as you can about publishing, your genre(s) and markets, know yourself and what motivates you and makes you tick, and then try to fashion a strategy based on those main issues. Knowing yourself is pretty key. If you only write in a less-mainstream genre that doesn't support many authors, and you can't imagine writing in other more mainstream genres, you might have to modify expectations and might not be able to make a living as an author. If you are a slower writer, you may find it harder to succeed in the indie world where volume seems to work to increase visibility. Amazon algorithms seem to reward volume. In that case, if you really don't want or can't increase your output, then you have to adjust your expectations and plans accordingly. Maybe trade might be a better fit. Maybe you can't quit your day job unless you write that breakout hit that brings in life-changing dollars. Writing that breakout hit is not predictable nor can you plan for it. The best plan of attack is to keep writing, keep publishing, and be flexible, adaptable, nimble.

You may luck out and write that breakout hit. If so, the opportunity is there waiting for you to take it. If you don't write a breakout hit, you may still write good-selling books, and if you write enough of them, you can live off the proceeds.


----------



## bobbic (Apr 4, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Speed is king. Our attention spans are so short. Here's a quick question, can any of you say who was the top author in your genre last month? Unless it's a household name, I bet you can't. Even I, who watch my genre lists on a regular basis can only tell you Stephanie Laurens has been on there consistently. And I look and watch every day the top 20.
> 
> Here are some other time sucks to think about.
> 
> ...


Elizabeth, are you saying that you post your WIP to your blog as you write it? Then when it's finished, you put it up for sale? I guess I don't get what you mean by you can't write offline. I've often thought about posting a chapter of a finished work to my blog, but haven't done much more than occasional excerpts. Thanks!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> Amazon algorithms seem to reward volume.
> 
> You may luck out and write that breakout hit. If so, the opportunity is there waiting for you to take it. If you don't write a breakout hit, you may still write good-selling books, and if you write enough of them, you can live off the proceeds.


Thanks for your comments, Sela. You've stated what I feel, much better than I was able to, and much more concisely too!

But bottom-line, is that Amazon (as well as other platforms) reward volume. I didn't create that circumstance, I just responded to it. And I've been trying, sometimes in vain, to explain that philosophy in this thread, so that other authors can consider all of those options you just mentioned.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I posted a response above, that also fleshes out some more of the disconnect, Chris. Please do read that. But I want to also tell you that I LOVE your analysis of this, I LOVE your approach, and I'm absolutely psyched at the way you're bringing your start up "tech" mentality to our business.
> 
> I would never say you can't do this. You seem like EXACTLY the kind of person who could execute this strategy, but as you have said, it's a high risk, high reward strategy that excites you.
> 
> I'm offering writers a medium to low-risk, pretty high reward strategy that on the whole is easier for more writers to execute. But I LOVE what you're bringing to the table around here. We need more minds like yours on kboards.


I agree that the Write. Publish. Repeat. methodology has serious merit for most authors. It's hard to go wrong pumping out book after book if your goal is to make a living selling fiction. A large backlist is a huge advantage, as is constantly refreshing reader memory with new releases.

Like you've said we have different goals. I want to be a house hold name in 10 years. Man that sounds arrogant, but you know what? It's why I find this whole indie thing so fun. I'm chasing the impossible, because falling short still means becoming a successful author in my own right.

It also helps that I love marketing. Breaking out requires you to be excellent at craft and marketing. I'm neither yet, but I hope to be both. In any case I do love discussions like this. It's a pity that there have been ruffled feathers, but I'm sure many, many lurkers have learned quite a bit from this thread.

I'm not going anywhere, regardless of how my next two books do. I have a lot to learn and I'm in this for the long haul. I fully expect to fall on my face along the way, but I'll just keep getting back up and trying. That more than anything else is critical to success.

It's not about luck. Rather, luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

Chris Fox said:


> It's not about luck. Rather, luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.


Love that!


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> You shouldn't try to make your book HOT until you have two or three books. There a millions upon millions of potential readers who have never seen or heard of my books. When the first trilogy is complete THEN I will turn on the massive marketing and really try to take the world by storm.


I am at the stage I have a seven part series. I all but neglected marketing while writing it.

While I'm not going to turn on massive marketing (I wouldn't know how) I'm willing to learn how I can create my own market. Additionally, this year I plan to write a few shorter works - think novellas, novelettes - that tie in (and will abundantly refer) to the main series. I'll hoard them for a while so I can release them one after the other, while at the same time promoting the main series (I hope to have learned how by then).

I think I have over two hundred serious fans who will buy anything I write in that world. Someone here said you need a thousand to make a living.

I'm not in hurry. Time is on my side.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Chris Fox said:


> Like you've said we have different goals. I want to be a house hold name in 10 years. Man that sounds arrogant, but you know what? It's why I find this whole indie thing so fun. I'm chasing the impossible, because falling short still means becoming a successful author in my own right.


I don't know about a household name, since the vast majority of people don't even read anymore. You'd have to be an actor or rock star for that to happen.  BUT I know hundred of authors personally that have accomplished huge success writing 2-4 a year, in genres that aren't romance, and without chasing trends.

Be true to yourself, is the best advice.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> BUT I know hundred of authors personally that have accomplished huge success writing 2-4 a year, in genres that aren't romance, and without chasing trends.


I needed to edit my post for clarity and to take out some unneeded sarcasm.

I'd just want to point out that these numbers you've cited don't account for a lot of factors. Are these 100 or more authors you know self-publishing? Have they been successfully writing full-time in the last year or two? How do you know them so well that they share their business strategies with you?


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

I have a ton of writer friends. I've been in the industry and attending conferences for 12 years now. That gives you ample time to meet people. I am also co-owner of a large group for indie authors. Yes, I know a lot of romance authors. Everyone does. But I know a ton of people making a killing at genres that people swear you can't make a killing in. I make a killing in mystery - cozy mystery at that. 

And since you won't post your sales numbers, I don't feel any obligation to list my friends.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jana DeLeon said:


> I have a ton of writer friends. I've been in the industry and attending conferences for 12 years now. That gives you ample time to meet people. I am also co-owner of a large group for indie authors. Yes, I know a lot of romance authors. Everyone does. But I know a ton of people making a killing at genres that people swear you can't make a killing in. I make a killing in mystery - cozy mystery at that.
> 
> And since you won't post your sales numbers, I don't feel any obligation to list my friends.


I don't mind if you don't list your friends 
Your comment just struck me as a bit of hyperbole, but I'll take your word for it.

Also, I'm absolutely sure that there are many genres in which you can succeed, and I certainly haven't tried to discourage anyone from finding their niche. I just advocate doing so in a highly analytical fashion. Thanks for responding. PS I edited my previous post to be less snarky.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> I want to be a house hold name in 10 years. Man that sounds arrogant, but you know what? It's why I find this whole indie thing so fun. I'm chasing the impossible, because falling short still means becoming a successful author in my own right.
> 
> ... It's not about luck. Rather, luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.


First, I admire you for being upfront about your goal of being a household name. Kudos for having such a high goal. There's nothing wrong with having such a goal. One day, I hope to write a series worthy of Game of Thrones, but with more romance. How's that for shooting for the stars? If you shoot for the stars, even if you fall, you will at least know you tried. If you have the skill, knowledge and are there ready and waiting, lady luck may tap you on the shoulder. I think luck does play a role, even for the very well prepared, but that's just me. I'm Irish.


----------



## Luis dA (Jun 1, 2014)

I think it’s wonderful that experienced authors are providing so much heartfelt advice about the methods that helped them achieve full time jobs as writers. I also believe that their advice is sound regarding how to achieve success in the current world of independent publishing.

I think that Chris has a plan and he’s going to stick to it no matter what, or until he has amassed enough experiential facts that convince him to change.

There is a major impediment for most people who’d like to publish monthly or bi-monthly. Even for those who write fast and clean, if they have a full time job, plus family responsibilities, it’s tough to produce quality prose and package it for prime time in the few remaining hours of each day. 

I think that given that constraint, a writer who realizes they’ll ONLY be able to produce two novels a year, and therefore not utilize the power of frequent publishing, may decide that they might as well publish closer to what suits their fancy in style, genre, marketing, etc.

Not talking about writing and publishing now, but in general, a popular click-magnate headline is Something – Secrets to Success. That article may list the guaranteed, no-fail secrets for achieving success in whatever. Even when people agree that, the steps if followed are certain to gain them great success, few people will follow them if having to do so makes them feel uncomfortable. 

I’ll define great success as anything that’s uncommon. Making a good living as an author is uncommon. It’s much more uncommon than making a living as an MD.

The secrets to success in most things are known. The problem exists not in not knowing what to do, but in making the determination to do it and not give up easily. What keeps us from doing something as following a model for success, may be as simple as being a single mom with six kids, or as complicated as having a lofty image of ourselves that rebels against doing something below ourselves. There’s little point debating with such facts, or such ideals if the people involved don’t mean something to us. This is why my hat’s off to the people here who continue wanting to help others to see their way to what they believe are secrets to success.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

We shouldn't interpret the fact that a writer doesn't release often when laziness. They may be working very diligently on their book and for some folks it takes a long time to get a story right.  But the bottom line of this thread is that this is no market for slow writers.  The smartest thing a slow writer can do is not publish in until they have a few books done…even it that takes years.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

Deke said:


> We shouldn't interpret the fact that a writer doesn't release often when laziness. They may be working very diligently on their book and for some folks it takes a long time to get a story right. But the bottom line of this thread is that this is no market for slow writers. The smartest thing a slow writer can do is not publish in until they have a few books done...even it that takes years.


Well said, Deke. It takes time to master your craft, and accumulating a body of work while doing so is very smart.



Sela said:


> First, I admire you for being upfront about your goal of being a household name. Kudos for having such a high goal. There's nothing wrong with having such a goal. One day, I hope to write a series worthy of Game of Thrones, but with more romance. How's that for shooting for the stars? If you shoot for the stars, even if you fall, you will at least know you tried. If you have the skill, knowledge and are there ready and waiting, lady luck may tap you on the shoulder. I think luck does play a role, even for the very well prepared, but that's just me. I'm Irish.


I think your goal is _awesome_. I also agree that luck plays a role, but only for those who are ready to capitalize on her when she drops by.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> I don't see it as a make or break kind of activity, though. I think it's still very possible to succeed with no media presence, just books and lots of 'em.


Well that is sweet music to hear especially as a number of threads here tout building the mailing list as one of the major, or THE major, way to build sales. 
It does make sense not to go that route until people begin to hunger (I think Anne said she didn't have a website when she started but threw one up when the ball rolled and it all took off)
To drill down to your weekly to-do list - You publish 1 & 2 at the same time then 3 soon after and that drives sales from being on the just pubbed list?
And/or you continue to churn out shorts in various genres, say one a week?
Do you juggle around with keywords post-publication when sales start to slip or focus purely on new work?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Nomadwoman said:


> Well that is sweet music to hear especially as a number of threads here tout building the mailing list as one of the major, or THE major, way to build sales.
> It does make sense not to go that route until people begin to hunger (I think Anne said she didn't have a website when she started but threw one up when the ball rolled and it all took off)
> To drill down to your weekly to-do list - You publish 1 & 2 at the same time then 3 soon after and that drives sales from being on the just pubbed list?
> And/or you continue to churn out shorts in various genres, say one a week?
> Do you juggle around with keywords post-publication when sales start to slip or focus purely on new work?


When I hear other authors talk about their extensive mailing lists, I get jealous too. I don't by any means do everything I can do to maximize my reach and profit--I pick and choose just like anyone else. So within all my advice is the maxim: First try and make your daily word count and your schedule of releases as robust as possible. Once you've done that, you can begin to craft the other piece of it, which is everything from ads to social media, mailing lists, giveaways, posting on message boards, you name it.

But first we write and we publish. Everything else is secondary, imo.

As far as the release schedule of a series, I personally put them out as I write them. So book 1 is released and my intention is to follow it up mighty quickly with book 2. But if, after a short time, I sense that book 1 is really underperforming, I actually will instead switch and try to start another series.

So I'll wait and keep an eye on book 1 that's underperforming. Maybe sales will pick up on it. If they don't I may need to do a re-brand and a re-release to try and jumpstart. But I will NOT continue beating a dead horse. In other words, if the series isn't performing, I don't continue releasing simply because I'm in a hole or because I owe anybody anything.

In the traditional world, series were cancelled all the time, and if they underperformed, that was that. Same with TV shows, where if the ratings are really suffering--the show might just get pulled mid-season. It happens, it's a sad fact.

In terms of release schedule, it really depends on genre and story length. I say, write as short as your market will bear, and price as high as it will bear. Factor those constraints into what genre you are going to work in.

But if I choose a genre, I absolutely work within the confines of what's acceptable there. So if what's acceptable is FREE and 200k word epic novels, then that is what I would provide. However, personally that seems a bad choice of genre to work in, so I would pass. But I'm merely stating that I tend to work within the expectations of the niche market I'm studying and publishing within.

So if it was possible for me to write a series of books that were 5k in length, maybe I would release a new book in the series every other day....

Hope that helps.

P.S. You asked about keywords. I don't tend to do a lot of going back and re-working keywords for older titles, especially because I have too many to keep up with, and mostly it didn't appear to help matters when I did. I would re-do keywords if I did a whole new rebrand with new cover, title, etc. Keywords are very important to get right the first time around...


----------



## Chrisbwritin (Jan 28, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I needed to edit my post for clarity and to take out some unneeded sarcasm.
> 
> I'd just want to point out that these numbers you've cited don't account for a lot of factors. Are these 100 or more authors you know self-publishing? Have they been successfully writing full-time in the last year or two? How do you know them so well that they share their business strategies with you?


I won't speak for Jana, but I will tell you that there is constant discourse between many many indie authors in dozens of places outside of public boards like this one, and in those places, data is shared pretty regularly. You don't need to know someone "so well" in the general sense of the word to be willing to share data and talk strategy. You just need to be in a space where people are all in the "same boat" so to speak so that there are less concerns that information won't be misused. "Same boat" doesn't have to mean financial equals. It just needs to mean that I would say certain things in public and reserve certain things for the company of likeminded people. With a larger board like this that is open to professional, novice authors, hobby writers, and readers alike, I'm much less likely to share specific data for many reasons.


----------



## folly (Apr 1, 2012)

Deborahsmith author said:


> I wish Chris the best, really, and nothing's impossible. But regarding any comparison to trad pubbed authors like Butcher and how they made their big hits -- they had a massive publishing machine behind them. I wrote for the big houses for more than twenty years before leaving to write for my own small press. I was in category romance and then in single-title women's fiction, getting a lot of promo and seeing the behind-the-scenes pre- and post- pub marketing process. The networking, the powerful bargaining deals between the pubs, the wholesalers, the booksellers, the distributors -- that system puts a lot of books in front of a lot of readers. The money that's dumped into print editions when it's assumed that 50 percent or more of the print run will be pulped or remaindered is staggering--but it's all part of the deals to get the author in those feature spots by the cash registers at the major bookstores. All of this and much more is what propels the breakout hits. I'm sure a rare circumstance could put an indie author who writes one or two books a year into that league, but, for one thing, a big part of trad authors' prestige, branding and discoverability is their strong presence in those trad bookstores. Snark at that as you will, but it continues to be a defining difference for the industry and for many readers. (I miss the days--haven't seen my books in a store in years...)


I always loved your books! I live in Atl. so loved the close to local feel. Glad to see you on here.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> When I hear other authors talk about their extensive mailing lists, I get jealous too. I don't by any means do everything I can do to maximize my reach and profit--I pick and choose just like anyone else. So within all my advice is the maxim: First try and make your daily word count and your schedule of releases as robust as possible. Once you've done that, you can begin to craft the other piece of it, which is everything from ads to social media, mailing lists, giveaways, posting on message boards, you name it.
> 
> But first we write and we publish. Everything else is secondary, imo.
> 
> ...


Thanks again for responding to the questions on this thread - it's made it really in-depth interesting.
I get where you're coming from on the series thing but what is your opinion in regard to those who say their series really took off at Book 3 when 1 went perma etc. Have you tried this and it hasn't worked out, or as you say you don't want to waste the time


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Nomadwoman said:


> Thanks again for responding to the questions on this thread - it's made it really in-depth interesting.
> I get where you're coming from on the series thing but what is your opinion in regard to those who say their series really took off at Book 3 when 1 went perma etc. Have you tried this and it hasn't worked out, or as you say you don't want to waste the time


You're welcome, thanks for sticking it out with me! 

Sure, it can happen that someone's series takes off after doing a certain promotion or perhaps after they get a number of books out.

But perhaps I should be more clear about what I mean in terms of seeing good performance. All of it is relative to where you're at in terms of your career and what you need in terms of earnings based on the size of your backlist, what your new releases tend to make, etc.

Let's just say, for example, that I am writing book 1 in a series and I put it up on sale, exclusive to Amazon. And then let's say that within the first day, it has only 1 sale, no borrows. I'm already concerned.

You might say I'm crazy, but having published a lot of titles now (into the hundreds), I'm aware that the micro results are substantive. No sales or only 1 or 2 sales in the first 24-48 hours, in a VERY POPULAR NICHE OF A POPULAR GENRE, gives me pause.

Remember that I've purposely chosen this niche because I happen to know it's going to allow me to sell a lot of copies, and I know my audience is large and voracious. So right away, that means some of my customers aren't biting at all.

I don't give up, but I might not start book 2 just yet. Instead, I'll be watching book 1 very carefully and perhaps working on a different series for a bit. So let's say that it's been four or five days, and my underperforming book has only sold 6-8 copies at 99 cents. I'm pretty bummed. Even if it's sold 10-15, I'm concerned, because I've seen first books in a series sell 15-20 copies out of the gate.

I may, at this point, try and rebrand with a new cover, new blurb and new title. Just to see if there was anything "off" in my presentation.

Again, I'll continue watching and working on something else, while I see how it performs.

Because for as many people that you may find whose work didn't take off until they hit book 3 or 4 of a series, etc, there are even more people whose series simply NEVER TOOK OFF. And they kept beating that horse, wasting precious time and energy and getting less and less results.

I don't work that way.

Everyone has to make their own call as to what is underperforming and what is good enough to continue on with. For some people, what I'm advising is blasphemy. How dare I just not continue writing a series after seeing mediocre sales for a few days?

But remember, my process is all about maximizing my returns and maximizing my chance for a breakout book. I've had a few breakout books (at differing levels of breakout status). They tend to do well out of the box. Not always, but usually, you see the sales rolling in almost immediately, because you're filling a need. And the customers respond immediately.

The other piece to remember is that with our speed, our volume, we can afford to wait and see how book 1 continues to perform, meanwhile writing other things that we feel give us a new chance. And if after 2 or 3 weeks, things pick up for the underperforming book, then we can easily get right back on task to deliver book 2.

The problem I see with churning out 2 and 3 and 4 in a series, waiting for that special something to kick in--is that we really have no way of knowing if it's just that our premise didn't hit the mark. I've found that even book 1 in a series without a follow-up can sell extremely well on its own.

At the same time, I don't think its a terrible idea to put book 2 out close on the heels and see what happens. I just tend to be very picky. If I don't see the sales rolling in, I move on. But to be honest, most of the time I have seen the sales roll in on almost any series I've started and felt I did a decent job with. It's been rare that I've had to completely give up after book 1.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Or you could all try what Mark Victor Hansen and Jack Canfield did.    For how to do this, go read the sample of the 20th Anniversary of Chicken Soup for the Soul.
Seriously,  it took them hard work and dedication.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

And remember, I am NOT telling you to follow my process to the letter.  I'm giving you a window into my thought process, and its very fluid as to what I do and when I do it with stuff like this.  So if we get too picky, you're bound to miss the point. 

The point is to be fast, to watch the market, and to be ruthless.  If you feel a book is underperforming, it probably is.  But if you feel that 10-15 sales in the first week is strong for your market and where you're at right now, then by all means write book 2 and keep going.

You need to know your own market and what the expectations are.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> Or you could all try what Mark Victor Hansen and Jack Canfield did. For how to do this, go read the sample of the 20th Anniversary of Chicken Soup for the Soul.
> Seriously, it took them hard work and dedication.


I didn't get to where I am without hard work and dedication, Cin. I'm sure you're not hinting otherwise, but just in case you think that my results come from screwing around and having a laugh. I've been relentlessly dedicated to understanding ebooks and selling in these markets, and when I have a hit, I am tenacious.

But I don't pride myself on beating dead horses (when it comes to my books--perhaps when it comes to internet arguments I do).


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> But I don't pride myself on beating dead horses (when it comes to my books--perhaps when it comes to internet arguments I do).


Does that mean you beat live horses? That's messed up, man.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> Does that mean you beat live horses? That's messed up, man.


I knew that would be used against me


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I didn't get to where I am without hard work and dedication, Cin. I'm sure you're not hinting otherwise, but just in case you think that my results come from screwing around and having a laugh. I've been relentlessly dedicated to understanding ebooks and selling in these markets, and when I have a hit, I am tenacious.
> 
> But I don't pride myself on beating dead horses (when it comes to my books--perhaps when it comes to internet arguments I do).


No, I thought it was fascinating how they got there and you are advocating about the same principle. 
Note, they were with a small publisher and were rejected 144 times before finding the small publisher.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> No, I thought it was fascinating how they got there and you are advocating about the same principle.
> Note, they were with a small publisher and were rejected 144 times before finding the small publisher.


I am also fascinated by how people achieved success in any field, since there are nearly always parallels in broad terms.

But in terms of specifics, what's needed to sell ebooks as a small indie, is much different than the process that the traditional authors undertook, even the ones with independent presses. The game is completely different now as are the means of distribution and customer acquisition.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Aaron,  
They were not with a big publisher.  They actually did 5 things every day in terms of marketing to get sales up.  I thought some of their ideas could help you guys.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

cinisajoy said:


> Aaron,
> They were not with a big publisher. They actually did 5 things every day in terms of marketing to get sales up. I thought some of their ideas could help you guys.


Sounds good. I think people should check that out, then.


----------



## Deborahsmith author (Jul 23, 2013)

folly said:


> I always loved your books! I live in Atl. so loved the close to local feel. Glad to see you on here.


Hey folly! Thanks! I'm here lurking, mostly. Sort of a triple hybrid these days: ex trad, small press author/publisher, and indie. I see the insanity from all angles.


----------



## Deborahsmith author (Jul 23, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> I'll break things down even a little further for those who care.
> 
> I've got a lot of names going, and they all have varying degrees of success, in very different genres.
> 
> ...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Deborahsmith author said:


> Gorvince is following a path that has taken a lot of the household-name authors to the big time. Especially in genre fiction, where many of the star authors like Nora Roberts and Stephen King spent years writing multiple books per year (and some still do). I know a long list of 7-8 figure-income multiple No. NYT bestselling authors who produced fifty books or more in relative obscurity before cracking the ceiling. I'd love to see some stats on the top tiers re: how many came up through the trenches that way. Keep in mind that "Household Name" status is conferred on a bright and shiny few, but there's a relatively large group of authors the general public doesn't recognize yet they're extremely prolific and extremely wealthy.


And believe me, I'm not at all saying that anyone can or will become a NYT bestseller. Or that you can only make a living if you have a NYT or USA today bestseller.

To the contrary, I think if you focus on volume, providing readers with what they're searching for in the hot genres, and really being ruthless in moving on if something isn't working...

If you do those things, you have a great shot at amassing enough sales over time to go full-time at this thing. Might take a year to get there, maybe less, maybe a bit more if things go against you. But you can get there.

And then there's always the chance to get a BIG breakout hit book. We want that, we shoot for that, but we don't need it to survive.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

cinisajoy said:


> Aaron,
> They were not with a big publisher. They actually did 5 things every day in terms of marketing to get sales up. I thought some of their ideas could help you guys.


Actually I've been following Canfield on some webinars recently as he's selling courses with his 'publisher' and he puts a huge amount of the success of "Soup" down to the power of LOA of which he is a huge exponent


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Nomadwoman said:


> Actually I've been following Canfield on some webinars recently as he's selling courses with his 'publisher' and he puts a huge amount of the success of "Soup" down to the power of LOA of which he is a huge exponent


Is LOA, Law of attraction?

I'm not going to get into debating wether Canfield has anything to add to this discussion. Personally, I think anyone who's broken out in any endeavor probably has something worthwhile to say.

But if we're really tackling the nuts and bolts of our indie ebook business, then I think Canfield probably adds very little to the discussion that pertains to the nitty gritty here. Perhaps I'm wrong about that.


----------



## Eva Lefoy (Jan 25, 2014)

Hmm I put out 16 works last year and didn't see too much success.

Is it because they are not all in the same genre?

Also, what about anthologies. Do they help or hurt your visibility? 

I don't see this business currently fostering reader loyalty. There's so much competition that readers are shopping in price, not quality. It's hard to built loyalty even with a release a month!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Eva Lefoy said:


> Hmm I put out 16 works last year and didn't see too much success.
> 
> Is it because they are not all in the same genre?
> 
> ...


Okay, so let's ask a few questions. Did you do a series or were they mainly stand alone pieces? What length was your work? And what made you choose the particular books that you decided to write?


----------



## Eva Lefoy (Jan 25, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> Okay, so let's ask a few questions. Did you do a series or were they mainly stand alone pieces? What length was your work? And what made you choose the particular books that you decided to write?


Ha! I was just going to edit my post but you were too quick!

I have one series MM with 3 books, a fourth to follow. 1 other FF series with 2 books, 1 more to follow. The rest are standalone some are MF some are GLBT. Two are anthos.

Is it just romance that's so glutted? I feel the call to drop it and try self-help, cookbooks and scifi while keeping my hand in the romance pie. Romance will wear you out quickly!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Eva Lefoy said:


> Ha! I was just going to edit my post but you were too quick!
> 
> I have one series MM with 3 books, a fourth to follow. 1 other FF series with 2 books, 1 more to follow. The rest are standalone some are MF some are GLBT. Two are anthos.
> 
> Is it just romance that's so glutted? I feel the call to drop it and try self-help, cookbooks and scifi while keeping my hand in the romance pie. Romance will wear you out quickly!


Hey, So I did run and take a look at your titles on Amazon, just a glance. What I saw really was sort of a mishmash of different genres, which is fine...but each book was pretty short.

That's not necessarily bad, but shorter work can be a bit tougher to really gain traction, even in erotica/romance. I would say upping the word count from like a 5-7k book to maybe a 10-15k book can do wonders there...

The other thought I had, just from reading your blurbs and the opening pages, was that--Yes, you can write. But I don't see you writing for your readers. There's a little too much grit and realism. And normally, that's a good thing. But when your job is to provide fantasy, having too much realism (like having someone have "morning breath" in porn) can work against you.

I hope you don't take this as harsh criticism. You asked so I'm doing my best to give you some thoughts.

My advice to you would be to stay in romance. Pick your very favorite genre, that you also feel seems to have a decent market. Is it m/m stuff? Then go and read the top 5 or 6 books in the m/m category, and really analyze the openings, the blurbs, the covers, and the sexual stuff that goes on.

I think your writing is solid, everything is right there, but you're just being too darn quirky for your own good! Try playing it a little more up the middle, and throw in some quirkiness just here and there, for spice.

That's my 2 cents!


----------



## Eva Lefoy (Jan 25, 2014)

And so this is the year I'll try to pick a genre!

Wish me luck! Sometimes we can be too open minded for our own good 

Eva


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Eva Lefoy said:


> And so this is the year I'll try to pick a genre!
> 
> Wish me luck! Sometimes we can be too open minded for our own good
> 
> Eva


I do wish you luck! I know it can be hard to settle on one genre, but it could be good for you to really settle into a niche for a time. And just remember, it's not prison--you don't have to stay there forever! But give yourself a chance to settle in, think about what the big guns of the genre are providing, read their reviews and see what customers are so happy about, and then look at their whole package in terms of blurb, cover, opening pages.

Even take notice of what follows their titles in parentheses, such as when they say stuff like (m/m romance menage) or whatever. Some of that stuff helps to make sure they indicate properly what they are to their readership, and I didn't notice any of that on your titles, but I may have missed it...

I think you'll find this helps quite a bit!


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

I am sure this strategy works very well, but I am way too focused to direct my attention in so many different places. It's one pen name and one genre for me. Romance is a huge genre, so it's not like I'm limited.

It will take me a little longer to play around with what works, but them's the breaks. I can write 10k words a week easily, and I get get to about 15k words a week without getting too crazy. If I figure I need equal time to write and edit/brainstorm, that's still over 350,000 words a year (with two weeks of vacation). That's nearly 4 full length novels, or 5-6 short novels, or 7+ novellas, or a crap ton of short stories.

One thing--
I understand your reasoning for not farming out your covers or editing, but most successful writers do not design their own covers. Those who do typically have some kind of art or design background.

In any other business, it would be absurd for people to insist on doing everything themselves. No one open a restaurant and insists on doing all her own plumbing.

Similarly, in any other business, it would be absurd to expect to spend no money putting out a product or to expect an instant ROI. I see so many writers on here who are not willing to spend even a few hundred dollars on their books. No one is saying you should drop 10k, but even a little money can help you get a great cover, great editing, a great blurb, and the marketing that gets you visibility.

Not that anyone should listen to me. I have one book out and I'm still in the red after spending too much money on it.


----------



## DGS (Sep 25, 2013)

Crystal_ said:


> I am sure this strategy works very well, but I am way too focused to direct my attention in so many different places. It's one pen name and one genre for me. Romance is a huge genre, so it's not like I'm limited.
> 
> It will take me a little longer to play around with what works, but them's the breaks. I can write 10k words a week easily, and I get get to about 15k words a week without getting too crazy. If I figure I need equal time to write and edit/brainstorm, that's still over 350,000 words a year (with two weeks of vacation). That's nearly 4 full length novels, or 5-6 short novels, or 7+ novellas, or a crap ton of short stories.
> 
> ...


Stop believing the lies you tell yourself. I don't have any art background, but I designed all 6 of my covers simply by looking at what the BEST do and copying the styles. (and asking for feedback). It would be absurd to ask for people to do everything themselves? Not if they can - if they can do it good enough. I agree once you have the $ and the person who understands what you want, hire them out. Blurb - it's a marketing skill, learn copywriting basics in a week. Enough with the 'great'. GOOD is selling great right now.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

There's no doubt that making a good cover is difficult and takes time to learn.  But it can be learned, and it even can be learned "on the job" so to speak, provided you have a little bit of talent and a lot of determination and drive.

However, I'm by no means saying that everyone needs to do their own covers.  

What I am saying, is that every piece of business that you farm out should be considered carefully.  Because each piece you farm out costs money and potentially slows down your process.  What if your go-to cover designer is sick or on vacation?  What if your editor gets inundated with projects and you get inspired and bust out a new book, only to be told they're backlogged?

Not to mention those who outsource formatting, too.  And those who have ten beta readers and multiple rounds of edits…

I'm NOT saying that having these things is wrong.  I'm saying that each layer you add to your process complicates it.  My advice, for the best odds of success, is that you learn every piece of this business from the bottom to the top.  You should ideally feel at least "competent" at every element of producing an ebook.

This will also allow you to choose the best resources if and when you do actually farm stuff out.  If you have spent some time trying to design covers and studying covers, etc, then even if you ultimately make the decision to have someone else make your covers--you will be better at choosing the right designer for your work.

I've seen some indies choose pretty poor covers that someone else designed.  The indie author actually doesn't know what sells because they didn't take the time to really learn about that craft, so they choose a designer or a cover that "they think" is awesome, but it's just not good for the market.  Whereas if the indie author spends time trying to learn the art themselves, they're forced to become knowledgable in a way that can only help them down the road.

Again, these traits are just what I believe give you the ideal chance for success in this market.  

Plenty of authors farm stuff out and are successful.  And I would never suggest otherwise.

Lastly, I've noticed more and more new authors talking about how they're "in the red" since producing a new book.  They buy expensive covers, editing, and advertising and start their fledgling careers in the hole.  I personally think that's a pretty poor way to approach indie publishing, but that's just me...


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

My book is still in the red. I dropped over $5,000 on editing, covers, marketing and an audiobook. I expect to earn out in February, and that's assuming my sales tank in mid January (which I've assumed they will). If they don't I'll earn out sooner.

I think advocating people make their own covers is _terrible_ advice. If you're one of the very, very rare people who are amazing at art and typography then by all means knock yourself out. Most people are not and their 'good enough' efforts aren't.

We've all heard the maxim jack of all trades, master of none. In 2015 things will get more competitive. There will be more and more books to compete with. Good has been working for many authors, but you will go against great books with increasing frequency. Good enough cuts it today. It won't in 2016.

If you want to succeed you need the best product possible. Shelling out a few hundred dollars for an amazing cover is the best decision you can make. Note that my covers are NOT great. They are good. I am having them rebranded for that very reason.

If you expect to succeed as an indie you need a team of professionals, each of whom is great at their trade. That includes cover design, editing, narration and marketing. If you're able to do most or all of those things and make it work, awesome. Almost everyone is not.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> My book is still in the red. I dropped over $5,000 on editing, covers, marketing and an audiobook. I expect to earn out in February, and that's assuming my sales tank in mid January (which I've assumed they will). If they don't I'll earn out sooner.
> 
> I think advocating people make their own covers is _terrible_ advice. If you're one of the very, very rare people who are amazing at art and typography then by all means knock yourself out. Most people are not and their 'good enough' efforts aren't.
> 
> ...


You make some great points. At least, they sound great.

But then again, and I don't say this to be a jerk--you're still in the red. On your very first book.

Now, I do think you're going to earn out, so I can't totally give you crap for that. I think you're already WAY more successful than a lot of indies, so once more, I have to give credit where credit's due.

But saying that my advice is bad for most authors is also incorrect. If most authors approached indie book selling the way you have, not only would they not sell very much, but they'd also be deep in a financial hole that most couldn't afford.

The great thing about my advice is that you don't lose significant sums of money if you screw up. Sure, you might lose some time and you might feel emotionally down about that--but you don't lose cash.

Everyone says this business is getting tougher. Now you might not believe me--but I'm having the best months of my career, the best I've had since 2012. So while everyone else says things are getting harder, getting worse, things for my business have been improving by the day.

Why? Because I taught myself to be flexible, taught myself every nook and cranny of this industry. I look at everything I can, I study it all, and I adjust again and again and again. I never say "I won't do X" because "X" could work tomorrow. And then I'll do it.

So you say that learning to make covers is a bad idea. A lot of indies make their own covers successfully, and a few of the very biggest names have made their own covers. Not to mention all the no names like me who are doing it. Even if you just practice making covers and never put them out--it's a good idea to learn.

Same with formatting. Same with everything, really. When you start getting intimidated by a piece of this business, you start saying, "I can't." And as the lists of things you can't do grows, the list of things you can do shrinks. And soon, you can't adjust because that adjustment would force you to do things that aren't in your wheelhouse.

My strategy gives me choice. I can just as easily hire cover artists as you or anyone else. But I have a choice, because I also know how to do it myself. Same with editing. I can hire an editor, I can get beta readers. But my system doesn't depend on it at all. Anything you can do, I can also do. But I have a choice in the matter, whereas someone who goes along for a time in your methodology, will start to fear doing things themselves.

I can adjust on a dime. I can start putting out a different style of book tomorrow. If trends change, if my genre isn't working, if Amazon unveils some shiny new plan--I can put books out to meet those demands within days.

This is what indie publishing means to me. I realize it's not for everyone--but it's also not a bad strategy. I personally think it's the very best strategy right now, or at least I haven't seen evidence for better. The moment I do, I'm only too happy to change as I've done a million times in the past.


----------



## daffodils321 (Oct 31, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I'm NOT saying that having these things is wrong. I'm saying that each layer you add to your process complicates it. My advice, for the best odds of success, is that you learn every piece of this business from the bottom to the top. You should ideally feel at least "competent" at every element of producing an ebook.
> 
> This will also allow you to choose the best resources if and when you do actually farm stuff out. If you have spent some time trying to design covers and studying covers, etc, then even if you ultimately make the decision to have someone else make your covers--you will be better at choosing the right designer for your work.


I think what you are saying is very true. Each author must assess their strengths and weakness (like in any business adventure) but I think it is critical that an indie take the time to learn and understand all of these different elements--cover design, blurbs, different types of editing, formatting. Otherwise, I think its super easy to hire the wrong person if you choose to go that route. Part of the reason I design my own covers right now is because I want to understand how those things work. What elements grab readers and what doesn't. That way even if I hire out in the future I'll better be able to assess their work. I look at it like being a manager. Sure you can walk into a place and just be in charge but you're probably going to do a better job if you make sure you understand how all the "menial" tasks are done. And Photoshop really isn't that hard to learn. It's actually a lot of fun.

Just wanted to add I think cover design is genre dependent. If I wrote fantasy and sci-fi where original art seems much the norm I'd hire out.


----------



## Molly Tomorrow (Jul 22, 2014)

Chris Fox said:


> If you expect to succeed as an indie you need a team of professionals, each of whom is great at their trade.


I can see both sides of the argument, but the absolutes are killing me. This statement is just flat-out false. I don't mean in a "well that's your opinion" kind of way. It's just literally wrong. And we're not talking a couple of outliers here. You don't even have to look outside this thread to find examples of this not being true.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

daffodils321 said:


> Otherwise, I think its super easy to hire the wrong person if you choose to go that route. Part of the reason I design my own covers right now is because I want to understand how those things work. What elements grab readers and what doesn't. That way even if I hire out in the future I'll better be able to assess their work. I look at it like being a manager. Sure you can walk into a place and just be in charge but you're probably going to do a better job if you make sure you understand how all the "menial" tasks are done. And Photoshop really isn't that hard to learn. It's actually a lot of fun.


How many people have had that experience? You know, where the outside manager is hired, the person who comes in and basically doesn't know how to do any of the jobs. They can only "manage." Those managers, I've found, aren't as good as the types who can literally do every job. Usually better than anybody else can, AND they can manage.

I understand there are effective managers of both styles, but it always helps if you can do everything AND manage too. That's best case scenario, because you understand the ins and outs so well.

That's what I'm advocating here. I've seen PLENTY of authors, good authors, hire terrible cover designers. Or they get a good cover, but not really a good cover for their particular niche. Covers can look good and still not be best for the genre the writer is trying to serve.

If you force yourself to study the markets and study what the bestsellers are doing, you'll start to notice lots of little details. And if you have to create a cover, deal with the elements, see why one cover sells and other doesn't&#8230;it changes how you approach the business.

If I have to do a cover rebrand, I can do it in a few hours. I don't have to pay another $50-300 just to try something new.

This is called being efficient. This is called knowing your business and your craft.

We don't just need to know the craft or writing anymore. We need to know the craft of covers, of blurbs, of design, pricing--the craft of running a business.

Don't be afraid of it--embrace it! If you have the mojo, if you're excited and motivated and talented, you can do it.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Nomadwoman said:


> Thanks again for responding to the questions on this thread - it's made it really in-depth interesting.
> I get where you're coming from on the series thing but what is your opinion in regard to those who say their series really took off at Book 3 when 1 went perma etc. Have you tried this and it hasn't worked out, or as you say you don't want to waste the time


Let me chime in with my experience. Another cautionary tale, as it were.

My last series has never taken off. Period. Tried new covers (three different covers), promoted the hell out of the first book (it's permafree), finished the series. I knew after the first book hit that there was going to be a problem. It underperformed from the get-go, which is why I made it permafree after it had been out for like a week. Others on the board encouraged me, said that it will probably turn around when the series was completed. I had a sinking feeling that the series was never going to take off. Ever.

The second book hit, I promoted the first one, got 13,000 downloads. My sell-through rate was less than 1%. At that point, I was saying "uh oh." My third, and final, book was published, and things didn't improve.

If I had it to do all over again? I would take Gorvnice's advice, and stop throwing good money (and time) after bad. I had to write a second book, because the first one ended in a cliffhanger, but I would have written a small novella just to answer the question of what happens next, and then moved on. An underperforming series will give you warning signs that you have to heed quickly, lest you sink in months writing books for the series - months where you could be writing your next hit, instead of spending time on something that will never pay off. My warning signs were right there when I published the first book of that series, and I should have paid more attention to them.

Live and learn.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Molly Tomorrow said:


> I can see both sides of the argument, but the absolutes are killing me. This statement is just flat-out false. I don't mean in a "well that's your opinion" kind of way. It's just literally wrong. And we're not talking a couple of outliers here. You don't even have to look outside this thread to find examples of this not being true.


I've never said you HAVE to do it my way to be successful. But people hear it. Whereas Chris just said you need a team of professionals or you WILL NOT succeed in 2015. And that's just false, from my POV.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

anniejocoby said:


> An underperforming series will give you warning signs that you have to heed quickly, lest you sink in months writing books for the series - months where you could be writing your next hit, instead of spending time on something that will never pay off. My warning signs were right there when I published the first book of that series, and I should have paid more attention to them.
> 
> Live and learn.


Great points, Annie. And I'll scare people even more. Usually, you can tell within hours or days that a book isn't going to perform.

Occasionally, it can take longer for the book to get into the system, so maybe algo's kick in and things improve, etc.

Still, I think every author needs to figure out for themselves what is "enough" sales to warrant continuing a series. For each author, the number will vary. But I see no reason to pump out book after book (especially full-length novels) in a series that isn't performing.

It just doesn't make good sense to me and I don't do it.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I know there are a couple of big authors (Wayne and R. Blake come to mind) whose series didn't get going until the 3rd or 4th book or something along those lines.

As always, there's nothing guaranteed about any one methodology.  Sometimes you might need 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 books for a series to hit.  My thing is, how do you know when to give up?

Also, I believe that if you're a good enough writer, you can have multiple hits and multiple hit series.  So why just beat the dead horse on 1 series in hopes it someday catches on?  If you're that good, just start another series and maybe it will break out faster this time…

In my opinion, Russell and Wayne were always going to have a hit series or a hit book if they kept writing.  So whether it was their 3rd book of a series, or if they'd moved on it might have been book 1 of some other series.  A good writer hopefully has more than just 1 hit series or hit book inside of them.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

It isn't always about saving money now. Sure, I could save a couple hundred dollars by designing my own covers, but in the time it would take me to learn how to use a new program, since I'm not a designer, and then the time it would take me to design the cover, I probably could have written another book. Sometimes, it's about efficiency.

And will the couple hundred dollars I save today by doing it myself cost me thousands in missed sales because my cover was just okay? 

The same is true for editing. Some readers are forgiving of minor errors, some are not. How many sales would I miss by not having my book professionally edited? No one knows. It's a guessing game. 

One thing I can state with all certainty--I have never seen a book receive a poor review for having too nice a cover or being too well edited.


----------



## KOwrites (May 23, 2011)

daffodils321 said:


> I think what you are saying is very true. Each author must assess their strengths and weakness (like in any business adventure) but I think it is critical that an indie take the time to learn and understand all of these different elements--cover design, blurbs, different types of editing, formatting. Otherwise, I think its super easy to hire the wrong person if you choose to go that route. Part of the reason I design my own covers right now is because I want to understand how those things work. What elements grab readers and what doesn't. That way even if I hire out in the future I'll better be able to assess their work. I look at it like being a manager. Sure you can walk into a place and just be in charge but you're probably going to do a better job if you make sure you understand how all the "menial" tasks are done. And Photoshop really isn't that hard to learn. It's actually a lot of fun.
> 
> Just wanted to add I think cover design is genre dependent. If I wrote fantasy and sci-fi where original art seems much the norm I'd hire out.


THIS. I design my own covers including interiors for paperback POD. I learned InDesign and Photoshop and took a few classes with Lynda.com but also just learned by doing. It isn't always easy nor is it about saving money and time as much as it is artistic control in which I own creative design and even time. Powerful stuff.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> It isn't always about saving money now. Sure, I could save a couple hundred dollars by designing my own covers, but in the time it would take me to learn how to use a new program, since I'm not a designer, and then the time it would take me to design the cover, I probably could have written another book. Sometimes, it's about efficiency.
> 
> And will the couple hundred dollars I save today by doing it myself cost me thousands in missed sales because my cover was just okay?


We never know if something creates missed sales unless we do it both ways and test it out. You could definitely miss out on sales if you make a crummy cover. I don't tell people to make crummy covers, shrug their shoulders and move on.

I say, study the best in the business and make your stuff look as good as theirs. If you can't tell the difference, then you've got bigger problems than just not being able to design a cover...


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> Great points, Annie. And I'll scare people even more. Usually, you can tell within hours or days that a book isn't going to perform.
> 
> Occasionally, it can take longer for the book to get into the system, so maybe algo's kick in and things improve, etc.
> 
> Still, I think every author needs to figure out for themselves what is "enough" sales to warrant continuing a series. For each author, the number will vary. But I see no reason to pump out book after book (especially full-length novels) in a series that isn't performing.


The problem I have with this is that it sounds a lot like the tradpub produce model, where a book is given a couple months to live or die, and if its sales numbers aren't bonkers, it's killed and the books are returned or stripped and returned, and the print quietly dies, never to be seen again.

There isn't a set of hard numbers that will tell an author whether a series is performing properly or not. That has to be a judgement call only each indie can make. Your series selling 100 copies a month might not be performing to your satisfaction, but another indie with those numbers might be skipping their way to the bank in joy that they're getting the sales.

I think it's dangerous to suggest that indies should stop writing a series that they love writing because the series isn't performing to some unknown parameter.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Katherine Owen said:


> THIS. I design my own covers including interiors for paperback POD. I learned InDesign and Photoshop and took a few classes with Lynda.com but also just learned by doing. It isn't always easy nor is it about saving money and time as much as it is artistic control in which I own creative design and even time. Powerful stuff.


It's good for others to see that there are writers out there doing this. Yes, there's an initial time investment. But it pays for itself in both saved time and saved money in the future, when you can do what you need, when you need it, at a moment's notice.

You won't ever say "I'm still in the red on X book." People really downplay this, but it hurts to think you're out money on a book, that you LOST money. It's a downer. And it's bad enough when a book isn't selling without feeling like you dropped anywhere between $100-1,000 or more.

If my book flops, I shrug, wince and move on to the next. It's a lot easier to do because I didn't spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to put it out there. I think that's a big advantage for the new author, but again, YMMV


----------



## Deborahsmith author (Jul 23, 2013)

Gorvince said:

That's what I'm advocating here. I've seen PLENTY of authors, good authors, hire terrible cover designers. Or they get a good cover, but not really a good cover for their particular niche. Covers can look good and still not be best for the genre the writer is trying to serve.

If you force yourself to study the markets and study what the bestsellers are doing, you'll start to notice lots of little details. And if you have to create a cover, deal with the elements, see why one cover sells and other doesn't...it changes how you approach the business.

If I have to do a cover rebrand, I can do it in a few hours. I don't have to pay another $50-300 just to try something new.

This is called being efficient. This is called knowing your business and your craft.

We don't just need to know the craft or writing anymore. We need to know the craft of covers, of blurbs, of design, pricing--the craft of running a business.

Don't be afraid of it--embrace it! If you have the mojo, if you're excited and motivated and talented, you can do it.
[/quote]

Smart advice. Both my partner and I do cover design at our small press (although she's the main designer, I just help with overflow.) Neither of us have art/design formal training but we have a LOT of informal training in related art interests. She taught herself Photoshop years ago and has now won an embarrassing number of cover art awards in the ebook competitions. I'm not in her league but can handle both ebooks AND print design, which is way more tricky in the technical aspects. But the important thing, like Gorvince said, is all of the above forces an author to totally understand what elements work in each genre and sub-genre, and why. You can hire the best designer out there but if you don't know what's happening in the current cozy mystery covers or the latest thrillers, etc. you'll end up with art that looks ordinary or dated or uses stock photos we've all seen a thousand times already or includes elements that aren't appropriate for the genre. I've seen that a lot in the indie covers, often posted by authors who say they spent $$$ and hired some great artist.


----------



## daffodils321 (Oct 31, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I posted a response above, that also fleshes out some more of the disconnect, Chris. Please do read that. But I want to also tell you that I LOVE your analysis of this, I LOVE your approach, and I'm absolutely psyched at the way you're bringing your start up "tech" mentality to our business.
> 
> *I would never say you can't do this. You seem like EXACTLY the kind of person who could execute this strategy, but as you have said, it's a high risk, high reward strategy that excites you.
> 
> I'm offering writers a medium to low-risk, pretty high reward strategy that on the whole is easier for more writers to execute. But I LOVE what you're bringing to the table around here. We need more minds like yours on kboards.*


I think this is an excellent contrast between the two approaches.

Just wanted to say I really appreciate you starting this thread. Your approach may not exactly match mine but I think I've benefited immensely from this discussion. Hope to see more of this type of thing on kboards.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> I think it's dangerous to suggest that indies should stop writing a series that they love writing because the series isn't performing to some unknown parameter.


Dangerous to whom, exactly?

I firmly believe that if I have talent to pen a hit book, then I have that ability. So I don't need to worry about "missing my big chance." If I pull the plug on a series, I've learned and grown and my next book or my next series has an even BETTER chance of hitting. I didn't lose anything by moving on.

And I also don't take anything off sale or strip anything. I just don't write the next book. But if book 1 in that underperforming series begins to sell, I'm ready to jump back in at a moment's notice.

Also, I always try rebranding and so forth before moving on. But I don't advocate being too attached to my work either...


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You won't ever say "I'm still in the red on X book." People really downplay this, but it hurts to think you're out money on a book, that you LOST money. It's a downer. And it's bad enough when a book isn't selling without feeling like you dropped anywhere between $100-1,000 or more.


I agree. It might be a matter of semantics or mindset. Instead of thinking that you're in the red on a title, look at the money and time you put into it as an investment. Play the long game.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

daffodils321 said:


> I think this is an excellent contrast between the two approaches.
> 
> Just wanted to say I really appreciate you starting this thread. Your approach may not exactly match mine but I think I've benefited immensely from this discussion. Hope to see more of this type of thing on kboards.


Hey, thanks! I know it's not for everyone, and I know the way I've stated things can ruffle some feathers. But I think perhaps there are writers who might think of things a little differently, question some assumptions, and perhaps make a little more money because of it...


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

I do everything myself as well. I use Thinkstock for images, Adobe products for Muse, Indesign, Photoshop, Illustrator and I"ve even made projects in Adobe Edge Animate and Flash. It's half for control/freedom to do what I want and half to save time and money. I am not beholden to anyone else's schedule.

If I had to place a value on my skills with each release, it would easily be in the thousands for time hours and expertise. I am 100% self-taught with no formal education in graphic design or coding. All I have is a degree in Political Science and a love of technology and thirst to always be learning. I love the Classroom in a Book series for Adobe Products, tv.adobe.com (I first learned to do the minimum in the free and open source GIMP and Inkscape). Just watching a few tutorials on tv.adobe.com will make you go "OMG I can definitely make my money back with the amount of digital advertising and other items I can MAKE with all of the products.

For ebook formatting I use Jutoh.

I also recommend the Nondesigner's Guidebook to Design and Writing Fiction for Dummies (which has a surprising amount of information about genre targeting, marketing, and story structure). I tease my business partner that by now, she and I both have a Master's in Ebook Marketing and Production with our JAFF being our thesis project.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> I agree. It might be a matter of semantics or mindset. Instead of thinking that you're in the red on a title, look at the money and time you put into it as an investment. Play the long game.


Well if you keep spending money on losing titles, its not semantics. How can you justify putting out book after book that loses money? You just can't. With my methodology, you don't lose money, so you can keep working and keep putting stuff out, even if sales are slow.

But sales shouldn't stay slow. If you're not improving, if your sales aren't getting better, if you aren't seeing signs of hope as you put out more books, YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING WRONG.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Oh meant to add, if you can't afford higher end stock photography sites, keep an eye on Inkydeals.com they have great packages of materials you can use to practice with. And their licensing allows for commercial use. With layers and vector graphics, you can learn to modify with just a few tutorials.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> If I had to place a value on my skills with each release, it would easily be in the thousands for time hours and expertise.


Despite all of the time I spend on kboards bickering, I would need to be paid somewhere on the order of what Paris Hilton makes per appearance to do work for anybody else.

Learning these skills makes you very profitable and your time very valuable, I have no doubt of that. Thanks for chiming in, because I know there are a lot of us doing this stuff! But it's nice to see some proof.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> We never know if something creates missed sales unless we do it both ways and test it out. You could definitely miss out on sales if you make a crummy cover. I don't tell people to make crummy covers, shrug their shoulders and move on.
> 
> I say, study the best in the business and make your stuff look as good as theirs. If you can't tell the difference, then you've got bigger problems than just not being able to design a cover...


Sure, the difference between between terrible and good should be obvious to just about anybody. It's the difference between good and the wow factor that I'm willing to pay for.

I understand what you're saying, but to me, the money I would save is not worth the risk. And I just don't see how taking time away from my writing to design covers and do my own editing is going to make me more successful. If anything, it seems it would be more likely to hinder my progress.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> Well if you keep spending money on losing titles, its not semantics. How can you justify putting out book after book that loses money? You just can't. With my methodology, you don't lose money, so you can keep working and keep putting stuff out, even if sales are slow.


How do you know when you're about to publish a loser title? You can't know if it's a loser. No one knows what titles will hit and which will fail.

I don't disagree with your methodology on the whole, just some elements of it. Doing most of the work DIY makes great sense to me. Figure I publish a book with a total outlay of $100, not including the hourly wage I'd pay myself for the time invested in it. Rather than looking at that $100 as lost money, I see it as an investment on the book. The book sitting up on markets isn't costing me anything--I'm not losing any more money from it sitting there on Amazon, Kobo, etc. Once I've made $100 in sales off of it, everything else made on that book forever is profit. And while I wait for that investment to pay for itself and then profit, I'm working on more titles and releasing them.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Not to contradict you vlmain, I do agree there gets to be a point where hiring out is best. I hire out my editing as a time saver and to improve the end product, so it's a win-win. But I think getting one's hands dirty at least a few times makes an author-publisher informed about the product or service he or she is getting. For example, if I'm hiring a cover artist, there are certain things I can say and communicate that make it easier for a graphic artist better than me to make me a cover. The clearer communication can be a time saver and money saver because you have a better chance of getting what you want and treating your freelancer with respect because you know what a pain in the butt it is to cut out an object from a background and properly mask it into a new image.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

gorvnice said:


> You won't ever say "I'm still in the red on X book." People really downplay this, but it hurts to think you're out money on a book, that you LOST money. It's a downer. And it's bad enough when a book isn't selling without feeling like you dropped anywhere between $100-1,000 or more.


I can't speak for Chris, but having read his message, I don't think that's what he was saying, at all. Being in the red is a business term that simply means you haven't broken even or turned a profit _yet_. It does not mean you lost money.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> It's good for others to see that there are writers out there doing this. Yes, there's an initial time investment. But it pays for itself in both saved time and saved money in the future, when you can do what you need, when you need it, at a moment's notice.
> 
> You won't ever say "I'm still in the red on X book." People really downplay this, but it hurts to think you're out money on a book, that you LOST money. It's a downer. And it's bad enough when a book isn't selling without feeling like you dropped anywhere between $100-1,000 or more.
> 
> If my book flops, I shrug, wince and move on to the next. It's a lot easier to do because I didn't spend hundreds or thousands of dollars to put it out there. I think that's a big advantage for the new author, but again, YMMV


This can work if you get really good at cover design. And editing. And marketing. If you're doing 100% of the work your only investment is time. The thing is, time is money.

How much do you earn per product over its life? Thousands of dollars? Tens of thousands? An initial investment of a few hundred dollars is a tiny drop in the bucket. Even if you have some flops the successes should easily pay for them.

How many more products could you produce if you focused on writing and let other professionals you trusted handle covers, editing and other tasks? What if all the time you invested in learning InDesign had been spent mastering your craft?

I'm capable of designing both a mobile app and a server backend. I can also do the IT at my startup. Do I? Nope. I specialize on one task, which allows me to master it. Other people do the same in their respective tasks and the company as a whole is stronger for it.

We live in a unique age when you can easily find talented professionals to do anything you need done. From eLance to Fiverr those people are out there and waiting to take your money. Is there a larger up front cost? Sure. Is it worth it if you want to mass produce, or focus on a few amazing products? Yes, in my opinion.

My book will earn out in 4 months. I will still be selling that book in 20 years. I'm not sweating the initial investment to make it great. Take a peek at the artwork (not typography) on my covers. Can any of you who've said you do covers produce that kind of genre specific masterpiece?

If so, my hat is off to you. You are both a phenomenal artist and (presumably) a great writer. That rocks. I am not, and while I understand the basics of typography I'd never attempt the artwork. Having a VA, a writing coach, an artist and an amazing narrator have been a godsend. Maybe I could do it all if I tried, but why would I when I can find inexpensive and amazing help?


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Not to contradict you vlmain, I do agree there gets to be a point where hiring out is best. I hire out my editing as a time saver and to improve the end product, so it's a win-win. But I think getting one's hands dirty at least a few times makes an author-publisher informed about the product or service he or she is getting. For example, if I'm hiring a cover artist, there are certain things I can say and communicate that make it easier for a graphic artist better than me to make me a cover. The clearer communication can be a time saver and money saver because you have a better chance of getting what you want and treating your freelancer with respect because you know what a pain in the butt it is to cut out an object from a background and properly mask it into a new image.


I absolutely agree. It is important to understand what works and to be able to communicate that with your service provider. No doubt about it!


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> For example, if I'm hiring a cover artist, there are certain things I can say and communicate that make it easier for a graphic artist better than me to make me a cover. The clearer communication can be a time saver and money saver because you have a better chance of getting what you want and treating your freelancer with respect because you know what a pain in the butt it is to cut out an object from a background and properly mask it into a new image.


So true! Dabble in all the elements of publishing so that you can at least pick up the lingo and be able to talk to the freelancers you hire with some degree of confidence and knowledge. I've freelanced for enough people that I can tell almost immediately if the client even really knows what they're asking for. I can't charge enough to handhold a client through every element. It helps so much to be able to start from a common baseline of understanding. The smarter (or at least more familiar) an indie is with every element of the business, the better off you're going to be if you start adding freelancers to your business.


----------



## Sylvia R. Frost (Jan 8, 2014)

I've actually given authors tutorials on Photoshop. So I'm all for author's getting their hands dirty, ESPECIALLY if it makes them more educated clients in terms of trends. I've had many a newbie author come to me with request for a cover that I just know wouldn't sell. And what can you do but offer the advice and move on?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> This can work if you get really good at cover design. And editing. And marketing. If you're doing 100% of the work your only investment is time. The thing is, time is money.
> 
> How many more products could you produce if you focused on writing and let other professionals you trusted handle covers, editing and other tasks? What if all the time you invested in learning InDesign had been spent mastering your craft?


I am not completely alone in this. I have a business/writing partner who also produces and handles certain aspects of the business. So in that sense, I've got a leg up because there are 2 of us and we can switch off on tasks, etc.

But the issue with what you're advocating, in my view, is that eventually in order to produce the kind of speed of production that really moves the chains, you need to get some help that is available to you 24/7. Otherwise, you get slowed down. And then you have to look over their work, pay them, discuss things, guide them.

In my business, we're both working for our business, creating everything--it's all streamlined and we bank all the profits.

It's so easy that it's scary. I hear what everyone's saying, but my experience is that it's EASIER to do it yourself, be as fast as you need to be, control your costs and all elements of production.

Being an indie author is like no other business around right now. We have ZERO overhead, zero inventory, almost no upfront production costs. The only barrier to producing content or product is how fast I can write, design a cover, and then upload.

I end up working a couple hours a day now, on average (although I break it up and I also do a lot of "fun" stuff like kboards that is essentially market analysis). But I actually don't need to work that much anymore. Because I work smart, fast and streamlined.

But again YMMV!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

vlmain said:


> And I just don't see how taking time away from my writing to design covers and do my own editing is going to make me more successful. If anything, it seems it would be more likely to hinder my progress.


I don't see it as taking time away from writing. Writing always comes first, but let's be honest. I'm not going to write all that many hours of the day. And if I'm a fast writer (which I think indies should train themselves to be), then I need even less time.

That means I have free time with which to practice cover design, study the markets, read kboards and the passive voice, Konrath's blog, all of that. And so for me, learning and practicing those other elements necessary to this business falls into time outside of writing time.


----------



## daffodils321 (Oct 31, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> How many people have had that experience? You know, where the outside manager is hired, the person who comes in and basically doesn't know how to do any of the jobs. They can only "manage." Those managers, I've found, aren't as good as the types who can literally do every job. Usually better than anybody else can, AND they can manage.
> 
> I understand there are effective managers of both styles, but it always helps if you can do everything AND manage too. That's best case scenario, because you understand the ins and outs so well.
> 
> ...


Believe me, I understand the manager thing well since I was the young manager hired because of my degree. I still feel bad for the people who had to deal with my while I learned the ropes.

Your are so right about those little details. It's easy to read all those SP how-to articles and books and think you've got this down. And those will give a nice foundation but I believe if you really want to know the market, you've got to put in the hours studying the lists, reading the best sellers. But my first job taught me a lot but one thing in particular--you will never really understand how anything works until you throw yourself in and get your hands dirty. That's why I'm designing my own cover, learning formatting ect. Every mistake I make is one I won't make in the future.

I'd also like to comment on the craft thing because I think that is overlooked a lot. I decided to self publish two years ago. But since then I haven't released a lot because I'm in my late twenties and only have been writing seriously for two years. In that time, I've written somewhere in the neighborhood of a million words. I suppose I could have inflicted my _very bad_ early work on unsuspecting readers, but that didn't seem very nice to me. It's only now after crossing that million word mark that everyone references that I'm getting pretty positive feedback from betas and ok reviews from the stuff I do have published. Or my favorite from a family member, "This is a lot better than that book last year that I probably should have told you not to publish." Yah, relying on family for crits is not the way to go 

I think there is a lot of wisdom in the approach advocated here. But if you don't have the experience writing there's a lot of chance you won't have the ability to implement it. And it's easy to think your first book is good and sink a bunch of money into it. I guess, my take home point is, yes, learn covers, blurbs and everything else. But you have to know how to write a good story first. And I think its easy to get discouraged if you go out and learn all that packaging stuff but didn't realize how many (thousands) of hours you will probably have to put in to get to achieve a craft level that will enable you to really sell books.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> I am not completely alone in this. I have a business/writing partner who also produces and handles certain aspects of the business. So in that sense, I've got a leg up because there are 2 of us and we can switch off on tasks, etc.
> 
> But the issue with what you're advocating, in my view, is that eventually in order to produce the kind of speed of production that really moves the chains, you need to get some help that is available to you 24/7. Otherwise, you get slowed down. And then you have to look over their work, pay them, discuss things, guide them.
> 
> ...


Ahhhh. A partner definitely makes everything easier. I'm hoping to marry mine in the next year 

I guess my issue with what you're advocating is the same one you have with me aiming to be a breakout success. You make the assumption that because you can do the entire process all authors should be able to. Most people will churn out terrible covers if they do it themselves. Almost no one is a good enough self-editor to turn out a quality manuscript. The vast majority of people need help, because they cannot do everything at a high enough level of quality to satisfy the market. If you can, that makes you an outlier in that regard.

You mention the weakness of relying on outside contractors. That's why you build strong business relationships, and you plan in advance. My cover art is commissioned long before the book is finished, and the person I use can do them in just a few days as long as I give him a week's notice. That may not be fast enough for your production schedule, but if that's the case its very possible to find someone who can.

Even you admit to needing a partner to make this happen. Two people is infinitely better than just one, which is what most indies have. Very few of us have a partner willing and able to help turn out quality products. If people here fall into that category, or can do it all themselves then absolutely do so.

Just recognize that most people cannot, which is why you see a huge quantity of poorly crafted, poorly marketed products. I was floored at all the other releases that came out within two weeks of mine in the SF category on audible. Most still have 0 reviews three weeks later, whereas I already have 55. That's not meant to sound like bragging either, that's meant to illustrate what happens when you intentionally craft a quality product in a market dominated by mediocrity.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

One thing I haven't even touched on here is quality of life.  I actually have found that the more streamlined we've gotten, the more free time I have to devote to outside pursuits.  

So it's the reverse of what people seem to be assuming.  Some people seem to think that this would be a very time-consuming operation to pursue.

But it's not.

My life is not living and breathing writing, working 24 hours a day, getting migraines as I struggle to type out my next piece of genre dreck.  

I love what I write, I enjoy it--and it takes me a couple hours a day.  And then I spend some time on kboards, drinking coffee, reading articles, looking at the bestseller lists.  Go on Twitter…

And the rest of my day is totally free to do what I please with.  I don't have employees to pay or check their work.  I don't do unnecessary business operations such as conferences, book signings, and I don't keep extra print books on hand that I need to manage.  I don't answer to anybody, and nobody works for me--and yet I own a very profitable business that could afford to hire employees.

But why do it in our kind of business?  Why create extra headaches?

So many people are bringing outmoded business models into this mix.  We are not big pharma, we are not tech, we are not manufacturing.  We are lucky enough to be able to exist completely independently of 99 percent of the crap that every other business has to deal with.

So we should use only those elements that are absolutely necessary to do our job and nothing more.  At least, that's what makes sense to me.


----------



## daffodils321 (Oct 31, 2014)

anniejocoby said:


> Let me chime in with my experience. Another cautionary tale, as it were.
> 
> My last series has never taken off. Period. Tried new covers (three different covers), promoted the hell out of the first book (it's permafree), finished the series. I knew after the first book hit that there was going to be a problem. It underperformed from the get-go, which is why I made it permafree after it had been out for like a week. Others on the board encouraged me, said that it will probably turn around when the series was completed. I had a sinking feeling that the series was never going to take off. Ever.
> 
> ...


Hey Annie,

I just wanted to say I've read many of your posts and benefited immensely from your openness and honest assessment of your business strategy. It's very generous of you to speak so frankly about everything.

I really appreciate what you are saying here about knowing when to move on. I know I'm facing a fourth rewrite on one of my books (what I'd call my learner book because it's where I've applied most of the craft stuff I've learned over the past two years) but I've pretty much decided to ditch it and unpublish. It's just not a strong enough story or series to invest more time in, and in its current form I'm not comfortable having it out there. And it's keeping me from moving on to what (I hope) are much more commercial concepts.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

I spend even less time than you doing this, no more than an hour a day. So I get the quality of life thing. That's exactly why I like hiring other people to handle parts of the business.



gorvnice said:


> So many people are bringing outmoded business models into this mix. We are not big pharma, we are not tech, we are not manufacturing. We are lucky enough to be able to exist completely independently of 99 percent of the crap that every other business has to deal with.
> 
> So we should use only those elements that are absolutely necessary to do our job and nothing more. At least, that's what makes sense to me.


Outsourcing your labor to immensely qualified contractors wasn't even possible fifteen years ago, so I'd hardly call that outmoded. I'm also very curious to see if your experience changes in the years to come. The indie bubble is bursting, and right now that matters less to you because you're already positioned. What about new authors who have to learn everything you've spent the last several years doing? What will the landscape look like in 2018 when they hit their stride?

I've seen the rise and fall of tech bubbles, mortgage boom and busts and several other industries. People often find a way to make things work, and because those things are working they are eager to share that wisdom. Until those things don't work any more. In my not so humble opinion new authors should be watching where the market is going, not where it is.

It IS tightening, and it will get harder to succeed. Quality will matter more and more. I've seen the exact same thing in the app world over the last several years. When I first started anyone could put out an unpolished app and make a fortune. Now you'd better have incredible UX, brilliant graphics and a novel idea or you will fail. Times are changing, and what works today may not tomorrow.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

fWIW the bubble has always been bursting. I think the problem is there is no bubble because there is no inventory to spoil. You really can publish darn near for free using free images, free software. There is no charge for most publisher accounts (yet). When I came in late 2011 the boom days were over, so said many who were rushing to the bottom of pricing. Tales of woe will always be louder than tales of triumph because the second you say "hey I rocked this" people come to knock you down. I see new authors publishing smartly all over these boards , and Kdp select was supposed to kill everything 2 years ago and nook is also supposed to be dead etc etc


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

I'll clarify what I mean by bubble =)

Simple supply versus demand. There are more authors producing more product, and the rate of eReader adoption is falling. In 2011 there was far less competition and a much steadier flow of new readers.

There will always be a market, and not having overhead makes this a great business to be in.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> Most people will churn out terrible covers if they do it themselves. Almost no one is a good enough self-editor to turn out a quality manuscript. The vast majority of people need help, because they cannot do everything at a high enough level of quality to satisfy the market. If you can, that makes you an outlier in that regard.


It's true that most writers will ultimately fail at this if their goal is to make a career of it. No matter which route they choose, the odds are against it.

My question is, what strategy gives the best odds, the best chance of success?

Although having a great partner has probably done wonders for my business, it isn't strictly necessary, which is why there are plenty of examples of authors who are self-pubbing and managing most of this on their own. But lots of us have a friend, relative or spouse who can pick up some of the duties if the business gets successful and busier.

So although you may be right that I am an outlier of a sort, my strategy allows for people to do this with varying levels of success.

Whether you are terrific at making covers or need to eventually outsource--you can still use this model.

Whether you have a USA Today hit or just routinely crank out books in the 15-20,000 range in the kindle store, you can still use this model.

If you have an editor, or do it yourself, you can still use my model.

At it's core, it's about being streamlined, writing to the market, making it a volume business, and being able to adjust on a dime. Of course there's a lot that goes into it, but it doesn't require my exact circumstances to be a success and write full-time.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> I'll clarify what I mean by bubble =)
> 
> Simple supply versus demand. There are more authors producing more product, and the rate of eReader adoption is falling. In 2011 there was far less competition and a much steadier flow of new readers.
> 
> There will always be a market, and not having overhead makes this a great business to be in.


The best way to combat those conditions is still through volume. I feel that I'm beginning to protect myself against that kind of market volatility by creating enough content that, even if the worst case scenario occurs and I'm making pennies per title--I will still make good money.

So again, it's about having a choice and having options. If the business turns against me, I still have options.

If my business continues on as it has been so far, I have HIT BOOKS that I created in multiple genres, with each title producing very good earnings. But I don't rely on that continuing. I don't rely on my hit books because I've had the experience of my hit books fading away into obscurity, also.

The way I'm tailoring my business is to be flexible. A volume business is by definition more flexible, because it's far easier to produce less, than it is to suddenly start doing more.

It wouldn't be hard for me to change my business to produce longer books and have fewer releases per year. How would that be difficult?

How hard would it be for me to hire a cover designer?

I have choices, and I advise other authors to consider that as well. Don't build your business so that it can only work in the current market, make it adaptable to change.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

daffodils321 said:


> Hey Annie,
> 
> I just wanted to say I've read many of your posts and benefited immensely from your openness and honest assessment of your business strategy. It's very generous of you to speak so frankly about everything.
> 
> I really appreciate what you are saying here about knowing when to move on. I know I'm facing a fourth rewrite on one of my books (what I'd call my learner book because it's where I've applied most of the craft stuff I've learned over the past two years) but I've pretty much decided to ditch it and unpublish. It's just not a strong enough story or series to invest more time in, and in its current form I'm not comfortable having it out there. And it's keeping me from moving on to what (I hope) are much more commercial concepts.


Aw, thanks so much for the kind words! Some might think that it's wrong to abandon a series prematurely, but I don't agree with that anymore. Do what's right for you! I won't unpublished mine, but I don't put my effort into anymore, either. It's sad, though. I did like that series.


----------



## IreneP (Jun 19, 2012)

I'm not saying there aren't some valid points here - but it is still a little depressing. Speed at all cost - even over editing, etc. Write in the markets that are selling, abandon the other work.

It is certainly *a *path - but I'm not sure this advice is right for everyone.

I don't think of myself as someone who only follows the muse and ignores the material, but I can't go quite this far.

I'd also be interested in seeing some kind of a/b evaluation of readers gained through the mass-production approach vs readers lost through the quick-edits, etc. I have no idea how one would set that up, though.

Thanks for offering up the advice for discussion, though.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Most of the indies I know who are successful, as in making a living off their book sales, spend $$ on their books, but the amount varies. Most of the cost is for editing, covers and promotion. Does it help to use professionals? It can if you don't have the skills or artistic sense to design your own covers, format your eBook, or edit your own work. 

These are full-length books in Contemporary and Erotic Romance that compete directly with traditionally published books. They appear on the NYT and USA Today bestsellers lists. 

Can you be successful without spending any money for freelance pro services, like editing, covers, promotion? Sure. I am not sure how often books that are totally done by the author hit the NYT or USA Today bestsellers lists. It would be interesting to know.

I pay for pretty much all these services -- editing, covers, promotion. I have done a few covers myself, but I always pay now for editing and promotion. It's just easier. 

But it can be done if you have skill.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

IreneP said:


> I'm not saying there aren't some valid points here - but it is still a little depressing. Speed at all cost - even over editing, etc. Write in the markets that are selling, abandon the other work.
> 
> It is certainly *a *path - but I'm not sure this advice is right for everyone.
> 
> ...


All I can tell you is that I've sold very, very well with my methods. I won't get into exact sales figures because it will devolve the conversation into me having to prove something, and even then--there will always be an excuse as to why my methods somehow become invalid for others.

If I truly believed that I was losing my readership because of editing, I would simply edit more. Actually, I've found the reverse. The less I've edited (over time I have edited less and less and less), the better I'm selling.

Maybe you find that depressing. I am not saying my writing is getting worse, I think I just write cleaner now. And the mistakes I do make aren't distracting MOST readers from the story I tell.

I enjoy this. It's not depressing for me. If it depresses you or anybody else, by all means, do something else. 

But for some of us, making up stories for a living is really invigorating, even if the stories are of the mass production variety. I don't find that it's lessened my enjoyment of the craft or the art. In fact, to the contrary, I enjoy my work more now because I see that my readers are happy and waiting for the next book. They tell me they can't put my stuff down.

And I find ways to add in the spice that I enjoy without sacrificing the kinds of plot lines and characters my readers seem to enjoy the most.

What's depressing is that you're viewing it in a vacuum, picturing this soulless process that's devoid of everything but $$$$ and bottom line calculations. But on a day-to-day basis, it's really not like that for me. I write the things I know will sell and I make them fun for myself, I make characters I find interesting in situations I find neat.

I love throwing the readers curve balls, but at the right time.

I enjoy putting some of my own little life experiences and moments into the world, using things that matter to me. But I do it all within the constraints of the genre. I respect the genre. I respect the readers. They teach me what they want and I listen to them at all costs.

It's not depressing when you're in it and doing it. At least, not for me.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

I would never advocate for speed over all else. To me, story rules, so telling a great story that resonates with readers is still the best goal. However, it's hard to know if the story you have written is a great story that will resonate with readers. That only comes with getting the book in front of enough readers who are most likely to find it compelling and that requires a getting enough readers to start off so that your book gets put in front of even more readers. To do that, you need a great cover, a great blurb and preview and great reviews so that Amazon algorithms put your book in front of more and more readers. Your book has to be priced competitively so that readers who don't know you will give your book a try. 

Discoverability is the key. Visibility is the key. Telling a great story well is the absolute minimum, but that alone will get you exactly nowhere without visibility and discoverability. 

Edited to add that speed and volume help you by giving you the opportunity to pivot and respond and learn. But speed without the great story is going to get you nowhere too.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> I would never advocate for speed over all else.


The difference is that I always assume whoever I'm speaking to has the craft and storytelling down.

Here's why.

If you don't have the craft down to a pro level, you cannot be good enough to go full-time. You'll need more practice, you'll need more stories under your belt. So my advice would never apply to such a person.

The only people who can implement my advice are writers who've already put in the years of practice, who've written a few novels, who've perhaps already churned out a million words as teenagers, in college, maybe trying in the traditional system for a bit.

But to my way of thinking, if you haven't at least gotten that far, you probably shouldn't be considering going pro anyway.

Can a beginner theoretically do what I'm saying? Yes, if they had the absolute best circumstances such as a mentor, lots of time to write, and a lot of natural writing, artistic and business talent. Those people do exist but they're rare.

Still, I don't say speed at all costs to a newbie--it's for those who already have the craft down pat. Many of us do. Those who don't, need not listen.


----------



## David Alastair Hayden (Mar 19, 2011)

Indie publishing, the only industry where the bubble is always bursting but never actually bursts ;-)

Indie Publishing, Bubble Bursting Established 2011.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> The difference is that I always assume whoever I'm speaking to has the craft and storytelling down.
> 
> Here's why.
> 
> ...


Completely agree. There will be the odd author who has a breakout novel with their first book, but it's highly unlikely. Writing is a craft that takes work. Not only do you have to be able to string sentences along into paragraphs and paragraphs into pages, and pages into long manuscripts, you have to master story and character and plotting and pace. Those are harder. If you can't write a proper sentence, and many of them, and if you can't plot or write character or master pace, the volume is going to do nothing -- except perhaps make you better. So writing a whole lot as in practice is a wise move. Don't expect your first novel to be a winner. It may be but you will probably not write something publishable unless you have been writing a lot of short stories or other works of fiction -- or are a wunderkind...


----------



## Kenzi (Jul 28, 2014)

This entire thread is fascinating. Writing fast and writing what the market dictates isn't anything new. It reminds me of the old pulp writer mentality. I've been reading _Secrets of the World's Best-Selling Writer: The Storytelling Techniques of Erle Stanley Gardner_ and that's pretty much what he did. Some months he wrote as much as 100k (while also practicing law, by the way), and he spent a lot of time communicating with editors and finding out exactly what they wanted--and then writing stories that fit their needs.

That's the same method in the OP, except instead of editors, you're writing directly for the readers.

When I first started in the romance industry ten years ago, even then it was a numbers game--"build your back list" was the prevailing advice for writers who wanted to succeed. If you write slower, it will take you longer to build the back list, that's all.

It's definitely possible to be less prolific and still build a career--writers have been doing that for ages now, after all. In one of her workshops, Courtney Milan said that you need an "event" every 90 days to keep your name in readers' minds. At this point, I think that's more like every 60 days, but the event doesn't need to be a new release necessarily--a boxed set, a joint promo...if you think outside the box and market yourself intelligently, you'll do just fine.

One thing to keep in mind is that if you write fewer books, each individual one carries more importance. It needs to be bigger (which isn't the same as longer), better and "stickier"--something that will resonate deeply with readers and stick in their minds.

There are many paths and many ways to build a career. The OP outlines one of those ways, and for those of us who have lots of stories swarming around in our brains, it's a good one. Take what works for you and lose the rest.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Sela said:


> If you can't write a proper sentence, and many of them, and if you can't plot or write character or master pace, the volume is going to do nothing -- except perhaps make you better. So writing a whole lot as in practice is a wise move. Don't expect your first novel to be a winner. It may be but you will probably not write something publishable unless you have been writing a lot of short stories or other works of fiction -- or are a wunderkind...


Yes, and I think some of the discrepancy between viewpoints lies here, also.

People like you and I make the assumption that a writer penning their first book (or maybe even their first 3 or 4 or 5 books) is going to have to struggle a bit to get the craft down. But no matter how much they edit and re-edit and do all of that stuff--it will be very difficult for them to have a breakout book.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try. First of all, some newer writers WILL have breakout books despite the fact that their craft isn't great yet. Secondly, because you need to go through that process to get better.

But there's also a large number of us who've written 5-10 novels, perhaps 1-2 million words, and have been doing this thing for the better part of our childhood and adulthood. Those are the folks I'm speaking to, and there are plenty of them out there.

They may be relatively new to indie publishing, but that doesn't mean they don't have major writing chops.

I feel like some people who've criticized what I'm advocating here are missing that basic piece of things. I consider 1 million words (composed of novels, short stories, screen plays, etc) plus lots of reading and movie watching and tv watching...I consider that the basics of craft. That is a minimum in my book. You don't get basic craft by churning out one novel and reading Philip Roth.

I think basic craft as a writer means you can really tell a good story. Some people are gifted with that naturally, but most of us have to toil for years to get it.

However you get it, and once you get it, my advice is still good. I've always said it won't apply to most writers.

But I'll say it again. The amateur writer with shaky craft cannot get to where they need to be even after a dozen or two dozen drafts of a book. Whereas a pro writer with really solid craft can be where they need to be on draft 1. It's just how it is, imo.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> The only people who can implement my advice are writers who've already put in the years of practice, who've written a few novels, who've perhaps already churned out a million words as teenagers, in college, maybe trying in the traditional system for a bit.
> 
> But to my way of thinking, if you haven't at least gotten that far, you probably shouldn't be considering going pro anyway.
> 
> Can a beginner theoretically do what I'm saying? Yes, if they had the absolute best circumstances such as a mentor, lots of time to write, and a lot of natural writing, artistic and business talent. Those people do exist but they're rare.


I did. Without a mentor, and while working a day job. I thought, "Could I write a book?" I'd never written any fiction, not even a short story. Never. Not even in school. I sat down and wrote a book in six weeks without showing it to anybody. And I quit my job. I polished the heck out it and wrote two more. I published them, and that first book has been a bestseller in two languages and in audio. (I mean a many-day, overall-top-100 bestseller.)

I'm sure I am not at all unique. I did have an extensive writing and editorial background, and I'd read a LOT. Knowing how to express yourself very well in writing is, I think, critical, as well as understanding how a story works, and knowing enough about people to create compelling characters.

That million words/thousand hours thing has been pretty well proved not to be true. I've written a million words NOW. In fact, I'm writing at a 500,000 word/year pace now. But my first book is still many readers' favorite. It wasn't crappily written, however, and I didn't just push it out there. I still don't. I still polish the heck out of my stuff, and I think that's extremely important. You never see missed opportunities. You don't see the readers who don't carry on because of your errors, of the holes in your story that even a group of beta readers would have found, much less an editor.

If you just want to make a "living," this may well be great advice. If you want to make more than that, I'd say, not so much. Every very successful author I know has professionally created covers and professional editing, often both content editing and copyediting. You're going up against books that are polished and professionally presented, and the pricing advantage indies used to have is being eroded by the month. I pretty much agree with what Russell Blake said recently--indies need to up their game to compete in this marketplace.

(By the way--you mentioned that I had marketing expertise and that helped me in knowing how to promote. I didn't promote, other than setting the first book free a couple times. What I did was have a great hook, a great series title, and good blurbs and covers--not made by me. Again, as with editing--people don't know what they don't know. The cover may look "just fine" to an author, and so may the editing, because that author doesn't know enough about graphic design or editing to see what isn't good enough about either. I see this often on this board.)


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Sela said:


> So writing a whole lot as in practice is a wise move. Don't expect your first novel to be a winner. It may be but you will probably not write something publishable unless you have been writing a lot of short stories or other works of fiction -- or are a wunderkind...


I think this is one of the things I love most about this new indie publishing world. We can publish our practice works and keep writing and no one is going to stop us except ourselves. Musicians busk and play small venues and practice all the time while they do it and get paid, graphic artists take commissions and practice every time they create a new piece of art. Now, writers can write a short story for practice, publish it, and then write the next one. If the story sucks, no great loss--no one buys it and it sinks into obscurity. If a few people buy it and try it out, hey awesome--the writer just got paid for a practice session. I consider every story I write as practice for the next one, and now I don't have to consign those stories, that work, to a query-go-round or a drawer or nowhere on a hard drive.


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> I did. Without a mentor, and while working a day job. I thought, "Could I write a book?" I'd never written any fiction, not even a short story. Never. Not even in school. I sat down and wrote a book in six weeks without showing it to anybody. And I quit my job. I polished the heck out it and wrote two more. I published them, and that first book has been a bestseller in two languages and in audio. (I mean a many-day, overall-top-100 bestseller.)
> 
> I'm sure I am not at all unique. I did have an extensive writing and editorial background, and I'd read a LOT. Knowing how to express yourself very well in writing is, I think, critical, as well as understanding how a story works, and knowing enough about people to create compelling characters.


Rosalind, I think you are the exception that proves the rule. If you look at the numbers, the vast _vast_ majority of authors do not have a breakout success with their first novel. Most authors who publish are not read by anyone except their friends and families and their books sink into obscurity. Only the ones who have either inherent skills or have written already a great deal -- whether fiction or non-fiction and who have read extensively -- breakout with their first novel. The rest take a few novels or more to breakout. I did with my fourth novel. It is still my biggest seller. I wrote a LOT before ever published, and I published three full-length novels that were not breakout successes, before I wrote the book that did break out -- about 3/4 of a million words in total before I broke out. I've been writing all my life on and off but I still benefit from an editor and beta readers. I could probably publish my stuff without it, but one thing readers have rarely if ever complained about is my writing.

So you are the exception, at least from what I have read and from my knowledge of the indie contemp and erotic romance fields. More power to you! Sounds like your background in writing and your extensive reading allowed you to absorb a lot of skills that put you in good stead when it came to writing your first novel.  Congrats!


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> But I'll say it again. The amateur writer with shaky craft cannot get to where they need to be even after a dozen or two dozen drafts of a book. Whereas a pro writer with really solid craft can be where they need to be on draft 1. It's just how it is, imo.


In my mind there are three levels of craft. Amateur, professional, and incredible. The last is the kind that enthralls readers, and that's what I inspire to learn. I believe the only way to do this is to learn, and that requires feedback from readers. Showing beta readers a draft exposes problems with your books, and teaches you how to make future drafts better. It's the sort of deliberate practice that will help you quickly and efficiently master your craft. It means slower production, but higher quality. That's its own kind of efficiency.



gorvnice said:


> Whether you are terrific at making covers or need to eventually outsource--you can still use this model.
> 
> If you have an editor, or do it yourself, you can still use my model.
> 
> At it's core, it's about being streamlined, writing to the market, making it a volume business, and being able to adjust on a dime. Of course there's a lot that goes into it, but it doesn't require my exact circumstances to be a success and write full-time.


You've explicitly stated reasons not to have outside covers made, and not to have outside editing. That's part of the reason I originally disagreed with you. Get top notch professional products made. That trumps all other considerations in my book. Write them quickly and efficiently, but realize that speed is secondary to quality.

I'm not advocating one book every two years, or even one book a year. I'm saying two novels and time allowing two novellas per year. People like you and Annie have said that's too slow, yet I see authors publishing much more slowly who are doing great...because they release great quality books that resonate with readers.

I also don't see any allowances made for genre. Romance readers, as I've stated before, are voracious with short memories. Readers of epic fantasy couldn't be more opposite. They want to find a world to lose themselves in for hundreds of hours. They want total immersion, which requires a great, polished story. Most balk at the idea of 15,000 word installments. I know, I'm one of them. I buy a ton of books, but I'd never shell out cash for even one of my own novellas.

That means in general fantasy authors have to produce longer work, yet the genre is still both hugely popular and hugely profitable. Give them quality as fast as you can produce it, and they'll be loyal for life.

I'll close by saying this, gorv. If you live in California I'd love to buy you a beer some time. Thank you so much for this 18 page debate, for taking the time to share your wisdom with newer authors. This discussion is my favorite thread to date.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> I did. Without a mentor, and while working a day job. I thought, "Could I write a book?" I'd never written any fiction, not even a short story. Never. Not even in school. I sat down and wrote a book in six weeks without showing it to anybody. And I quit my job. I polished the heck out it and wrote two more. I published them, and that first book has been a bestseller in two languages and in audio. (I mean a many-day, overall-top-100 bestseller.)
> 
> I'm sure I am not at all unique. I still polish the heck out of my stuff, and I think that's extremely important. You never see missed opportunities. You don't see the readers who don't carry on because of your errors, of the holes in your story that even a group of beta readers would have found, much less an editor.
> 
> If you just want to make a "living," this may well be great advice. If you want to make more than that, I'd say, not so much.


I'm glad you're still here adding to the discussion and offering a counterpoint to my narrative, Rosalind. I greatly admire and respect what you've accomplished. But saying you're not unique...eh, you're the equivalent of that dude who never picked up a baseball, but when he tried one day, realized he could throw a 90 mph fastball. 

Those people do exist, but they are very, very rare. As Sela has said, most of us write A LOT before we ever get to the level you got to on book 1.

But the fact that you're relatively new makes me think that your understanding of what you need in terms of editing and so forth may change by the time you get 5 or 10 years into this. Maybe you'll still need the same process--but my guess is that you won't.

As for my advice, I'm more than making a living at this. I have said over and over again that there's possibility for anything from just making a living, to having a breakout book and going far beyond that. If I honestly thought I needed to do more editing to go to the next level, I would. But...I'm going to be egotistical here...I'm already at the next level.

I don't think you're going to convince me that I should up my game, because I'm always upping my game with what I feel needs bettering. I have no problem paying for editors and covers if that time comes. My work and my style and methodology continues to evolve from day to day based on what's happening in the ebook world.

But actually, part of the reason I do less editing now is because of my evolving interactions in this world. I started to succeed more and more, the less editing I did. It was a natural process that still continues.

I don't do things just because everyone says it's good. I suppose maybe that's the biggest outlier piece about me. I have no problem throwing out every conventional piece of wisdom if I see something in the world that goes against that wisdom. And I don't mind taking risks and falling on my face.

I'm not afraid of writing a bad book or a book readers hate. I'm not afraid of bad reviews, hate mail, or grumpy readers.

And consequently, I do get some bad reviews and angry readers. But by far, I've gotten a readership that has stood up for the past few years now and seems to be continuing to grow. And I've built brands in different genres.

And I've seen that there are other authors out there doing the same, even if they don't post about it here. But a few of them do, so...

As for editing, I think it's a bit of a side issue. As long as somebody makes sure not to be slowed down too much by it, I think having editors is fine, and probably necessary for most. Just not me.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

Rosalind James said:


> I did. Without a mentor, and while working a day job. I thought, "Could I write a book?" I'd never written any fiction, not even a short story. Never. Not even in school. I sat down and wrote a book in six weeks without showing it to anybody. And I quit my job. I polished the heck out it and wrote two more. I published them, and that first book has been a bestseller in two languages and in audio. (I mean a many-day, overall-top-100 bestseller.)
> 
> I'm sure I am not at all unique. I did have an extensive writing and editorial background, and I'd read a LOT. Knowing how to express yourself very well in writing is, I think, critical, as well as understanding how a story works, and knowing enough about people to create compelling characters.
> 
> ...


You simply hadn't written explicit fiction. You wrote plenty, and learned to hook readers and lead them to purchasing decisions. It may sound like a marketing failure, but I always feel bad that I don't buy your books. They seem so relaxing and pleasant and evocative. I feel that I would enjoy reading them greatly if I got one. But I don't because I have a backlist already a gajillion miles long. But creating that feeling in someone who is middle aged and female and with lots of disposable income? That's something you brought to the table even if you hadn't written a short story before. Obviously a lot of other women just hit click and enjoy the nice stories. The 10000 hours/million words things isn't actually that you can just throw time and energy at something and become good. It says that if you already bring to the table elements for success (which you did), then you will be more likely to have put in that time or be willing to do so.

Talented people in whatever want to spend the time more often than people without the talents. That's all it means, it's not really at all about someone just typing "go me" 500k times and turning into a great or interesting writer as a result.

You're a very inspiring success story because you thought you were starting from scratch, but you had a set of skills that made success much more probable even if they weren't "writing fiction" and "marketing fiction ebooks". It helps those of us who really don't have any skills to pay those bills get a better bead on what they need to do aside from writing the stories down in the first place.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> You've explicitly stated reasons not to have outside covers made, and not to have outside editing. That's part of the reason I originally disagreed with you. Get top notch professional products made. That trumps all other considerations in my book. Write them quickly and efficiently, but realize that speed is secondary to quality.
> 
> I also don't see any allowances made for genre.
> 
> I'll close by saying this, gorv. If you live in California I'd love to buy you a beer some time. Thank you so much for this 18 page debate, for taking the time to share your wisdom with newer authors. This discussion is my favorite thread to date.


Hey Chris, agreed--it's been great having a spirited discussion and not getting angry about it. I love your thoughts and I enjoy that you shed a new angle on things that makes me dig deeper into my thought process.

But by the way, I've stated how important genre is on numerous occasions. I don't tell people--you MUST write X genre because I don't believe that's true. But I believe you need to factor genre conventions into the equation. And I personally won't be writing epic fantasy for that reason, until I can get away with writing shorter work for that market.

The moment it opens up in that way, and I believe it could someday--I'll be there with my laptop, waiting.

And I know my quality is good because my readers go on to the next book and the next. I'll stack my reader loyalty against anyone in town, because I think I tell a dang good story, even without the fifty beta readers 

But you know if I'm in Cali we will get a beer for sure. Thanks for keeping it going...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

BTW I have access to the best beta readers in the world--my actual audience.  I've been putting out dozens and dozen of books for the last 4 years and seeing how they respond, and then consistently adjusting to what I get back from them.  

It's worked fine for me  

But use this method at your own risk, of course.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> But the fact that you're relatively new makes me think that your understanding of what you need in terms of editing and so forth may change by the time you get 5 or 10 years into this. Maybe you'll still need the same process--but my guess is that you won't.


My experience is actually the opposite of this. As I've improved as a writer, I've been able to realize how much beta readers bring to the table--how much better they've made my books. Most of my most-quoted lines and readers' (and my own) favorite parts in my books have been things I wrote after beta feedback, after I was able to see the book from the "outside" and where my internal vision didn't translate onto the page.

My latest book (not published yet--tradpub) is my first one where I had an editor, and it was an eye-opening experience. Until now, I've done all my own editing. That's why I recommend that people don't. I was a professional copyeditor for 10 years, and had 10 more years of experience self-editing my own copy, but she helped me improve my book so much, I booked her for the novel I am writing now, despite the fact that she's expensive. I will invest in that for the same reason I invest in professional covers, and why I pay well above the average for the fantastic actress who narrates my audiobooks--because I will make that money back many, many times over in increased sales.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> My experience is actually the opposite of this. As I've improved as a writer, I've been able to realize how much beta readers bring to the table--how much better they've made my books. Most of my most-quoted lines and readers' (and my own) favorite parts in my books have been things I wrote after beta feedback, after I was able to see the book from the "outside" and where my internal vision didn't translate onto the page.
> 
> My latest book (not published yet--tradpub) is my first one where I had an editor, and it was an eye-opening experience. Until now, I've done all my own editing. That's why I recommend that people don't. I was a professional copyeditor for 10 years, and had 10 more years of experience self-editing my own copy, but she helped me improve my book so much...


Well you're coming at this from a very different angle from me. I started with the trad pub side, and I had agents and editors having me rework and revise and revise. I never did get a deal, but I went through so many rounds of edits. I continued that process for a long time, but I think at a certain point, a lot of those lessons simply hit home and I didn't need to keep hearing them again.

That's just me. But I've seen a bit of a similar process for some other folks. Personally, I just think that the Trad Pub view of slow writing, multiple revisions upon revisions is mostly mythology born out of a culture of slowness=greatness, which I don't agree with at all.

That's where, I suppose, I'm just biased. I don't think any editor is so expert that their view of how to change a story is that meaningful. I think oftentimes it's just that one editor's opinion, and that the book is basically what the book is. Perhaps for very complex books, they may need a lot more TLC, but I don't think many writers are working in such complexity as to require that level of editing help.

Some are, and that's fine.

I think most writers have been fed a line of crap about more editing = better writing, and I think it's only true for newer authors who haven't yet learned the craft to where it's inside of them and a part of the way they think.

Again, this is simply opinion. I think agents and editors are mostly unnecessary to the new world of writing, kind of like how in music the producer and label aren't nearly as important. They exist, but more on the periphery. They are not requirements to making a living at this.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I don't write slowly. I write a half-million publishable words a year, WITH many, many rounds of revision. And yes, the version I eventually publish is much, much better than the first draft, especially after I've seen what didn't make it from my brain and vision of the characters onto the page. 

That may not be true for you, but I suspect it is true for most writers. If you're going to give people advice about "what works," I think it's better to go with "what works for most successful authors," and most people don't nail it without any revision or feedback at all, no matter how many years they've been writing. I didn't when I wrote copy, and I was a pretty good copywriter. My blurbs take me days--not full-time, but going back to them and thinking and rephrasing--to get right. I could write an "acceptable" version in a half-hour, but it sure wouldn't sell as many books.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> BTW I have access to the best beta readers in the world--my actual audience. I've been putting out dozens and dozen of books for the last 4 years and seeing how they respond, and then consistently adjusting to what I get back from them.
> 
> It's worked fine for me
> 
> But use this method at your own risk, of course.


It sounds like you've learned most of what an editor can teach you. You are also willing to create disposable brands. I and most other authors still have a lot to learn, despite successful novels and/or stories. The day may come when I don't need a great editor, and when I can forgo beta readers. But as long as I'm still learning a lot from every pass I'll keep using them, and I can say that I have benefited immeasurably for the process. I send surveys to my beta readers. I take them out to coffee. I pick their brain in a way I don't get from reader emails or the reviews they leave.

I believe every author will benefit from them until they consider themselves a master of their craft, so while you clearly don't need them any longer telling every one else that they can get by without them may not be the most efficient path to success. If I'm a mediocre author pumping out mediocre work I'm not going to become a master simply by writing more.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> I don't write slowly. I write a half-million publishable words a year, WITH many, many rounds of revision. And yes, the version I eventually publish is much, much better than the first draft, especially after I've seen what didn't make it from my brain and vision of the characters onto the page.
> 
> That may not be true for you, but I suspect it is true for most writers. If you're going to give people advice about "what works," I think it's better to go with "what works for most successful authors," and most people don't nail it without any revision or feedback at all, no matter how many years they've been writing. I didn't when I wrote copy, and I was a pretty good copywriter. My blurbs take me days--not full-time, but going back to them and thinking and rephrasing--to get right. I could write an "acceptable" version in a half-hour, but it sure wouldn't sell as many books.


Well, I get what you're saying, and I allow you may be right...

Perhaps I'm overstating what most writers can accomplish, and perhaps the way I do it can't really be replicated by 99 percent of writers...

I admit, you may be correct.

But my belief, based on carefully watching these ebook markets and what's selling...my belief is that things are changing. I feel you're talking about the past, Rosalind. In the past, everything you say was very much true.

However, now the gates are wide open and there are teenagers on wattpad getting 10 million readers. Now there are kooks on YouTube who became stars by making goofy videos.

And I think now there are people out there who don't mind reading fiction that is fast and furious and not always perfect. I write for those people and see other books that have even less craft and polish than me--and they sell BETTER than I do.

I'm not saying every genre is like this, but I do believe the world of ebooks is opening things up to a new kind of reader and a new kind of author. I intend to understand how the new reader thinks and what he/she/it wants--and I intend to BE that.

Anything that slows that process down, to me, is just not needed. I throw it overboard. And so to me, this is like when the stock market drops and everyone tightens up their purse strings and stops investing. That's when the real investors make their money.

Right now, when everyone's saying the ebook market is tightening up--and it is--that is where I've found even more money and more opportunity. I encourage others to do the same.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> Well, I also don't want to put out crappy books. That's true too. Even if they would sell.
> 
> My readers are picky. Perhaps some readers in some genres or subgenres aren't, I don't know.


I think that makes sense. And this is why I continue to harp on the fact that genre MUST be taken into consideration. And not just the large genre, but the niche markets, too. There is room for everyone here, and I love that we all co-exist in this ecosystem.

But there are absolutely markets and genres with different expectations, where the readers are picky--but not in the same way yours are.

My readers are picky about story and entertainment value and I have to deliver both at a very high level. I respect the hell out of my readers even if they don't care when I occasionally misspell a word or have a funky page break.

Reading is changing and readers are changing. Hopefully, we will open up the joys of reading to those who up til now have been more interested in movie and video games and music. We need to appeal to more than just the voracious readers of the past.

And I think those of us who are providing entertainment in this new, faster way, are doing just that. And I don't think my books are crappy. I never said, put out crappier books. I never said, my books have gotten worse and worse and worse.

I would admit that the majority of authors, up until this recent time period, probably have worked the way you (Rosalind) and other similar-minded authors work. But I believe that's just because most of you have come over from the traditional side of things. Not you specifically, but many have.

And now that things are open, you're going to be seeing a lot more folks, especially younger ones, who have none of that mindset or old baggage. They're going to make me look like an old fogey stuck in the mud. Hopefully, I can keep learning from them...


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Rosalind James said:


> An unedited first draft? Well, yeah, that's kinda the definition of a crappy book, to my mind. I don't want to write that book.
> 
> And now I have some more of my book to write and polish, so I'll sign off.


Yep, that's your definition of a crappy book. I'm so glad my readers don't seem to feel that way about it.

And I'm very happy for you, if you are putting out that very high quality of work. I am not here to tear you down or insult your work. I've said that you are an inspiration and unique, and obviously a huge success.

It's interesting to me that you, and others who share your feelings, seem to need to indicate that what I'm doing is "crappy work" or advocating others to do crappy work--simply because it doesn't fit the way you do things.

But that's okay. I'm very content and secure in my business practices, even as I keep trying to evolve. And I hope maybe some authors get a glimpse of alternate methods of doing things. There certainly is no one right way.

And as far as I'm concerned, there's room for everyone--even if I don't think your method is the ideal. Even if I don't think it's reproducible or perhaps as "current" as what I'm advocating. I wouldn't ever dare to call someone else's work crappy.

But that's just me. YMMV of course!


----------



## IreneP (Jun 19, 2012)

Just to be clear, I think it is advising people to self-edit that really bothers me.

Write whatever you want, whyever you want. Follow a muse, follow the market, follow what your pet hamster whispers to you in a dream. Whatever floats your boat. 

But I'm with the others here who think an editing process that involves outside input is part of putting out a quality product.

And honestly - if you are happy with the self-editing, that may  work fine for you. But you were advising people how to succeed. I think MOST authors will be more successful with some form of outside editing. I actually enjoy getting feedback on my work. It gives me valuable insight into how I'm connecting with my readers. 

Also, having run a small business for many years, I can tell you that many, many people who don't like a product will NEVER tell you. They won't return it. They won't complain (at least to your face), they just won't return. In the long-term those are customers (readers) you may have lost permanently. So, if you are counting on your readers to be your editors and beta-readers, I think that is a flawed plan.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

IreneP said:


> Just to be clear, I think it is advising people to self-edit that really bothers me.


I've stated my process. And actually, what I've said (over and over and over again) is that whatever you farm out, you should try and be highly aware of the trade-offs in doing so. I've said MULTIPLE TIMES that although I find self-editing works for me, it makes total sense to send out for editing and beta readers.

I acknowledge that many--if not most--writers use that system. I do not. That is all I've said. I think some writers may not need it, but I've also said that they would likely already need to have their craft at a pretty high level. Which would mean they are sophisticated enough to judge what they do or don't need.

Nobody should take anything I say and just run with it. Who the heck am I? Just some anonymous poster on a message board. If someone tries to live their life or write completely in accordance with some anonymous poster's rants, then they have issues to be sorted out that has nothing to do with me. I'm giving people a window into a thought process, a style, a way of working and thinking about working in this industry.

People do what they want. Nothing I say can truly influence someone to do anything. If someone takes a piece of my advice and tries it and it works--great. if it doesn't, fine. They throw it out and move along to the next.

I think more writers should feel free to write and find their way, find their style. Things are open now and there will be new blood coming into this world and I embrace that. I'm not afraid of competition like so many writers are (indies and trad writers alike). Everyone's afraid of the tsunami of crap, of too many bad books and all that jazz.

I welcome more competition! I thrive in this new world. I feel up to the task, not intimidated at all and ready to change on a dime to what happens next.

So for me, this is all good fun. I've achieved more than I ever dreamed I would, and now I'm setting my sights on different horizons. But I certainly don't worry about someone revising too little and exploding their whole world. That's silly. If you need revision, do it.

Some of us--at least I--don't find I need it. If that offends you, please don't watch the news because there's lots worse stuff out there.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

anniejocoby said:


> Let me chime in with my experience. Another cautionary tale, as it were.
> 
> My last series has never taken off. Period. Tried new covers (three different covers), promoted the hell out of the first book (it's permafree), finished the series. I knew after the first book hit that there was going to be a problem. It underperformed from the get-go, which is why I made it permafree after it had been out for like a week. Others on the board encouraged me, said that it will probably turn around when the series was completed. I had a sinking feeling that the series was never going to take off. Ever.
> 
> ...


Wow Annie that is unbelievable because your covers are all the same - I mean in a good way, a great way. I've been looking at you full of admiration for your branding and yet a series suddenly blows out. Which is why I think what the Gorv says is true - do the work yourself and move on with flexibility to each innovation.
Do you feel like sharing what it actually was that halted that series? Although, and I hate to come back to the acting profession but as I watch the successes and blow outs over the years it strikes me as more and more the same - it's a matter of chemistry, energy, star alignment. Which is why we keep on plugging until it all lines up


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

Katherine Owen said:


> THIS. I design my own covers including interiors for paperback POD. I learned InDesign and Photoshop and took a few classes with Lynda.com but also just learned by doing. It isn't always easy nor is it about saving money and time as much as it is artistic control in which I own creative design and even time. Powerful stuff.


Humble opinion here but your covers look as good or better than many who call themselves pros


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I do everything myself as well. I use Thinkstock for images, Adobe products for Muse, Indesign, Photoshop, Illustrator and I"ve even made projects in Adobe Edge Animate and Flash. It's half for control/freedom to do what I want and half to save time and money. I am not beholden to anyone else's schedule.
> 
> If I had to place a value on my skills with each release, it would easily be in the thousands for time hours and expertise. I am 100% self-taught with no formal education in graphic design or coding. All I have is a degree in Political Science and a love of technology and thirst to always be learning. I love the Classroom in a Book series for Adobe Products, tv.adobe.com (I first learned to do the minimum in the free and open source GIMP and Inkscape). Just watching a few tutorials on tv.adobe.com will make you go "OMG I can definitely make my money back with the amount of digital advertising and other items I can MAKE with all of the products.
> 
> ...


Thank you thank you for the rec on Jutoh - you should get an affiliate commission. I've been looking for formatting since my 'pro' took six weeks of back and forth just for Kindle and a complete time suck for me because whatever program he uses throws typos in. This time it changed every S into an s, or not even every S, just some and I would correct them all, type out the corrections send them back to the format Pro, he'd fix them and the new draft would have a whole bunch of new s instead of S. AND - the pro charges hourly so what should have been $75 ran up to hundreds. This is why I want to go rogue and do it myself.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Nomadwoman said:


> Wow Annie that is unbelievable because your covers are all the same - I mean in a good way, a great way. I've been looking at you full of admiration for your branding and yet a series suddenly blows out. Which is why I think what the Gorv says is true - do the work yourself and move on with flexibility to each innovation.
> Do you feel like sharing what it actually was that halted that series? Although, and I hate to come back to the acting profession but as I watch the successes and blow outs over the years it strikes me as more and more the same - it's a matter of chemistry, energy, star alignment. Which is why we keep on plugging until it all lines up


Yes, I do, in hindsight, have a good idea on why my last series underperformed. I've posted this on another thread, but, in a nutshell, I believe that the problem was that I didn't follow the market on my last series. NA is all about bad boys who fight underground, sing in a band, or are part of a motorcycle club. Or are a billionaire. Or somebody dies (or at least has a serious disease). My NA series had a wealthy girl and a poor boy. Which might have worked, if said poor boy had tattoos and an attitude and fought in his spare time. No, said poor boy was a nice guy who was a struggling artist. He was the kind of guy who was pretty realistic. Bottom line was, I didn't follow the market. I kinda knew the market, and knew what was selling, but I didn't go along with it. And...it bit me in the behind.

This is why I've been such a strong advocate, lately, of writing to market.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Oh, and one more thing - my last series did have a bad boy alpha billionaire. But he was cast as the bad guy. That probably didn't help, either.....


----------



## IreneP (Jun 19, 2012)

So, are you Aaron Niz?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

IreneP said:


> So, are you Aaron Niz?


LOL, no, last I checked Annie and I are not the same person. In fact, if you go back and check my old posts, you'll find a few where I tell her about some glitches with Amazon's also boughts and why I thought her series might have been struggling...she just happens to share a similar mindset I guess.


----------



## IreneP (Jun 19, 2012)

gorvnice said:


> LOL, no, last I checked Annie and I are not the same person. In fact, if you go back and check my old posts, you'll find a few where I tell her about some glitches with Amazon's also boughts and why I thought her series might have been struggling...she just happens to share a similar mindset I guess.


Sorry, that was confusing (or maybe I'm just exceptionally blonde, today).

Gorvnice - what I meant to ask was if you are the author displayed in your signature.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

IreneP said:


> Sorry, that was confusing (or maybe I'm just exceptionally blonde, today).
> 
> Gorvnice - what I meant to ask was if you are the author displayed in your signature.


Oh, haha. Yeah I misunderstood completely. Yes, Aaron Niz is what I published my first five or six books under.


----------



## dragontucker (Jul 18, 2014)

I was first excited when reading this thread but now I feel a little depressed. Is writing in romance really that much more profitable than fantasy and other genres?


----------



## kmalexander (Jan 8, 2015)

@dragontucker

Don't worry about it. Seriously. Just keep writing what you want to write and focus on perfecting your craft.

Yes, romance is a huge market, but so is fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, etc. etc. etc. Don't chase the market, chase the stories you want to tell.


----------



## dragontucker (Jul 18, 2014)

kmalexander said:


> @dragontucker
> 
> Don't worry about it. Seriously. Just keep writing what you want to write and focus on perfecting your craft.
> 
> Yes, romance is a huge market, but so is fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, etc. etc. etc. Don't chase the market, chase the stories you want to tell.


Thanks. I am writing in fantasy and getting email signups. Also doing the same in comedy/adventure. I am just concerned they will not lead to making a living though. I will try to stay positive.


----------



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

dragontucker said:


> I was first excited when reading this thread but now I feel a little depressed. Is writing in romance really that much more profitable than fantasy and other genres?


Fantasy takes longer to build than romance by what I've read on this forum. In my experience your fantasy readers once fans, will be extremely loyal. And they aren't concerned about paying a pretty penny for your works, though they will expect full novels (in Epic Fantasy). They tend to be patient as well. They don't hop to the newest thing very quickly.

I don't know much about what romance readers do.


----------



## Philip Gibson (Nov 18, 2013)

Rosalind James said:


> I think it's better to go with "what works for most successful authors," and most people don't nail it without any revision or feedback at all, no matter how many years they've been writing.


Would I be being too pedantic if I say I would have thought that a writer as respected as Salman Rushdie with his decades of publishing successful historical novels would have known how to spell 'medieval' without resorting to editors and proofreaders?

Apparently not.



> _Here's my brief statement about the awful events in Paris. Vive Charlie Hebdo!_
> 
> Religion, a mediaeval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms. This religious totalitarianism has caused a deadly mutation in the heart of Islam and we see the tragic consequences in Paris today. I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity. 'Respect for religion' has become a code phrase meaning 'fear of religion.' Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect. - Salman Rushdie


Philip


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

kmalexander said:


> Don't worry about it. Seriously. Just keep writing what you want to write and focus on perfecting your craft.
> 
> Yes, romance is a huge market, but so is fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, etc. etc. etc. Don't chase the market, chase the stories you want to tell.


+eleventyquazillion This can't be said often enough.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Philip Gibson said:


> Would I be being too pedantic if I say I would have thought that a writer as respected as Salman Rushdie with his decades of publishing successful historical novels would have known how to spell 'medieval' without resorting to editors and proofreaders?
> 
> Apparently not.
> 
> Philip


Um, that's probably the British spelling for that word. There's one other word that commonly puts an extra "a" in it when it's spelled the British way, but I can't think of it. But I can think of words like colour instead of color and things like that.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

I thought of it - anaesthesia instead of anesthesia. And that's just one word that I can think of, I'm sure that there are more.


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

anniejocoby said:


> Um, that's probably the British spelling for that word. There's one other word that commonly puts an extra "a" in it when it's spelled the British way, but I can't think of it.


Encyclopaedia?

Annie, I assume you've tried recategorising your underperforming series as straight contemporary romance or women's fiction or somesuch? I would have thought you could do _something_ with it.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

anniejocoby said:


> I thought of it - anaesthesia instead of anesthesia. And that's just one word that I can think of, I'm sure that there are more.


Also orthopaedics and orthopedics


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Lydniz said:


> Encyclopaedia?
> 
> Annie, I assume you've tried recategorising your underperforming series as straight contemporary romance or women's fiction or somesuch? I would have thought you could do _something_ with it.


That actually wouldn't be a bad idea. Not the contemporary romance thing - I think that it would sink like a stone even more in that category, just because that genre is too competitive. But women's fiction - that's not a bad idea at all. I wonder if the pitchforks would come out for me if I do that.

Off to try that. Will report back later if successful. Thanks Lydniz!


----------



## Lydniz (May 2, 2013)

anniejocoby said:


> That actually wouldn't be a bad idea. Not the contemporary romance thing - I think that it would sink like a stone even more in that category, just because that genre is too competitive. But women's fiction - that's not a bad idea at all. I wonder if the pitchforks would come out for me if I do that.


Can you put a more genre-suitable cover on it in a hurry?


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Philip Gibson said:


> Would I be being too pedantic if I say I would have thought that a writer as respected as Salman Rushdie with his decades of publishing successful historical novels would have known how to spell 'medieval' without resorting to editors and proofreaders?


It's just an alternative spelling of the word. Many words with Ancient Greek or Latin roots have them.
It's becoming rare, but it's not especially British usage, and certainly not wrong.


----------



## anniejocoby (Aug 11, 2013)

Lydniz said:


> Can you put a more genre-suitable cover on it in a hurry?


I think I can. I can always go back to my old covers, which I've been thinking about doing anyhow. Maybe even the first covers I used. Those would definitely be more genre-suitable for women's fiction. The second covers would be better for contemporary romance.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

anniejocoby said:


> That actually wouldn't be a bad idea. Not the contemporary romance thing - I think that it would sink like a stone even more in that category, just because that genre is too competitive. But women's fiction - that's not a bad idea at all. I wonder if the pitchforks would come out for me if I do that.
> 
> Off to try that. Will report back later if successful. Thanks Lydniz!


Um, surely you should use a different cover for women's fiction?


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

I should have read ahead.


----------



## M T McGuire (Dec 6, 2010)

On


anniejocoby said:


> Um, that's probably the British spelling for that word. There's one other word that commonly puts an extra "a" in it when it's spelled the British way, but I can't think of it. But I can think of words like colour instead of color and things like that.


Only if it's a very archaic one.

Cheers

MTM (British)


----------



## funthebear (Sep 26, 2014)

Always google first: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mediaeval


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Word count will be the new God this year - readers are complaining vociferously across multiple reviews and platforms about shorts.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

M T McGuire said:


> Only if it's a very archaic one.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> MTM (British)


lol

We still see a lot of those spellings in the medical field. It's not a British thing, it's a Greek thing.


----------



## Incognita (Apr 3, 2011)

EC said:


> Word count will be the new God this year - readers are complaining vociferously across multiple reviews and platforms about shorts.


No kidding. I've had a couple of complaints about a book in one series only being 62K (the rest of them are between 82K and 92K).


----------



## Evan of the R. (Oct 15, 2013)

EC said:


> Word count will be the new God this year - readers are complaining vociferously across multiple reviews and platforms about shorts.





ChristinePope said:


> No kidding. I've had a couple of complaints about a book in one series only being 62K (the rest of them are between 82K and 92K).


Tossing this one back to the OP.

Gorvnice, you mentioned that you tend to write shorter, mostly novellas, 10k to 35k words.

Are you planning to change that in 2015?

Does that length still seem like a viable path to success in the current market?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Evan of the R. said:


> Tossing this one back to the OP.
> 
> Gorvnice, you mentioned that you tend to write shorter, mostly novellas, 10k to 35k words.
> 
> ...


There's pushback on shorter works, but then again, there always has been--and I've been doing shorter stuff since 2011. Like some here have pointed out, at times readers complain that it's too short when you give them a 65k book&#8230;

But I still think shorter is a viable path if you do it right and keep people extremely entertained. I look at it like providing television episodes. If you don't have a high entertainment value, it will not work.


----------



## KelliWolfe (Oct 14, 2014)

EC said:


> Word count will be the new God this year - readers are complaining vociferously across multiple reviews and platforms about shorts.


This has always been the case, and the doomsayers have been loudly proclaiming the death of shorts since I started self-publishing in 2011. Oddly enough my romance shorts are currently outselling my erotica shorts on both Amazon and B&N, and they're picking up on Kobo.


----------



## Nomadwoman (Aug 25, 2011)

If they don't want short they should be willing to pay more than 99c. The economics of writing 80k for less than a buck do not translate (oh plus pro cover, edit blah blah blah)


----------



## horrordude1973 (Sep 20, 2014)

I write extreme horror, like lots of intense gore, rape, torture, etc...my books are all 30K to 40K words, I do about a book a month to 2 months. I have 15 titles out right now. I get around 1000-1200 sales a month plus another thousand borrows give or take doing it this way and seems to be slowly increasing with each new title. 

My newest book is a horror/comedy so going to put that on all platforms for a month or two and see how it does.


----------



## CLStone (Apr 4, 2013)

A comment about short works: for one series, my books started getting progressively longer. Like one book in the series is actually 160k words. And this was young adult romance. They took forever to write because of the plotting and trying to work everything out, and for editing, it was taking forever to get through.

So for my own sanity, I said I was going to limit books in the series to 100k words.

A LOT of them noticed and thought I was shortening the books and asked why the books were now shorter.  They are by no means short books, but they get used to a size from your pen name/series and they notice.

That said, a lot of them will think 100k is 'short' if they really like the books and read through them quickly. It's perception, they don't actually know how many words or pages are in a book, just that if they get through it quickly and want more, they'll think it's too short.

So it really is perception. But if they really like it, and you set a standard 'this is my word count', they just accept it. 

What they don't like is when a story cuts off on a cliffhanger and doesn't really end and they have to buy another segment to see how it goes. But then, there's some that if the story is good enough, they will buy it anyway. So even then, there's writers who do that and have a following. 

I wouldn't really go with what readers say they want. Are they buying them? Then it's good, leave it alone and only change it if there's something you want to try.


----------



## doolittle03 (Feb 13, 2015)

I just spent several hours reading this thread from beginning to end. Thank you, Gorvnice, Annie, Chris, Sela, Elizabeth and everyone who contributed their perspective and experience. I filled my purple Indie notebook with notes on everything from cover to genre, to word count, to short vs long, to ditching a series---and I'm wildly inspired again and back from the dead. 

Before I kill two series, (I made the same mistake Annie describes--thank you so much for sharing that!) I'm going to take a breath, re-brand and watch what happens but I won't invest more time in them unless they improve. (If they do pick up in the future, I'll dive back in.)

I woke up tired and discouraged this morning ... I'm gobsmacked by the generosity of the authors in here.


----------



## C. Rysalis (Feb 26, 2015)

I haven't read the whole thread (there are words I should be writing right now!) but I wanted to comment on output. As someone whose first language isn't English, writing and editing a 4K word chapter that reads like something written by a native speaker takes me 15-20 hours. There's something I have to translate and / or google phrase search in every single paragraph. And my paragraphs are short by choice. 

Now here comes the big 'but': my ebooks will be released as professionally edited 100K word chunks of my still ongoing web serial, which already sees several hundred recurring readers who get caught up on the new weekly chapter every Sunday. If I succeed in drawing ebook buyers to the serial, I think (or hope) I can avoid the short attention span dilemma. I'm sure some will just read the free serial and never buy another book, but hopefully enough people will like the story enough to shell out a few bucks for a heavily edited ebook with some bonus content.

The web serial approach works for Drew Hayes: http://www.amazon.com/Super-Powereds-Year-Drew-Hayes-ebook/dp/B00BIJ05F2


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

C. Rysalis said:


> The web serial approach works for Drew Hayes: http://www.amazon.com/Super-Powereds-Year-Drew-Hayes-ebook/dp/B00BIJ05F2


I LOVE the Superpowered books!

But now that I know I can read them for free on the web, I am less likely to buy them, not more. I don't get how that is supposed to help him.


----------



## C. Rysalis (Feb 26, 2015)

Cherise Kelley said:


> I LOVE the Superpowered books!
> 
> But now that I know I can read them for free on the web, I am less likely to buy them, not more. I don't get how that is supposed to help him.


You wouldn't shell out a few bucks for something you love to read it on your Kindle instead of online? 

Anyway, a free web serial is like a big, infinite round of freebie promos or giveaways that don't cost anything. They attract new readers, and some of those new readers actually buy the book! I know a bunch of mine will. It's probably more useful for unknown indie authors than anyone remotely famous, but it works for me.


----------



## L.B (Apr 15, 2015)

Just read the whole thread. One of the best on here. Thanks to Gorvnice!


----------



## Motley (Jul 9, 2013)

Spent 2 days reading this thread and learning so much. Thank you so much govrnice and everyone for the opinions, ideas, tips and discussion.

I'm glad to see the high volume method works since it's what I do. Back in the banner days of content mills, I would write a lot of articles quickly and make good money. I believe I have the talent, craft and knowledge to write marketable fiction. I love doing it. I've won a few contests and had shorts published, so I have some evidence I don't suck.

Since I know I'm lazy, I'm in the process of pre-writing series so I can release all at once or drip feed finished works regularly and keep the flow going. I've read that keeping your name in the New Releases lists can help.

Anyway, thanks everyone!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Since this thread got bumped, I'll just say…

the market may have changed.  When this was written, it was current.  Now, it's old advice.  Things don't stay the same forever, and that's painful.

In the next few months, we'll see what strategies are still profitable, which tactics are now losers, and what new goodies we can come up with to give Amazon what it wants.

The goal is still the same: feed the beast.  Give it what it wants.  Find out what that is and do it.  Do it well, now more than ever, as reader engagement will net you a premium profit.  Becoming an EXCITING writer is more important than ever.  Packaging is still key, but packaging without good content to back it up is now going to get severely punished.

More to come as we discover the new lay of the land...


----------



## BGArcher (Jun 14, 2014)

So I have to be honest, yesterday I totally freaked out seeing this news. I'm apart of this forum and a few others, and I consider my day job to be writing erotic shorts. They sell well and while my actual passion is longer works (mystery's, thrillers, romances and screenplays) They are pretty easy to write and put out in a timely manner. We of course DON'T KNOW how much this change will effect short story writers bottom lines, but I think it's pretty obvious that it it will most likely be a lower dollar amount. And here's the thing, that bummed me out yesterday... But today I woke up feeling inspired and MAD AS HELL. I have a lot of dusty Scrivener files on this macbook pro that are longer mystery's and romances that have been sitting there because I've been so focused of late on bringing up my daily income. 

I can either moan and groan about these changes and worry (without actually knowing what will happen) or I can roll up my sleeves, dust off those old files and get back to work. 

This change doesn't mean I'll stop writing shorts either. There's a two week window here where the old model still works, and besides, at the end of the day this doesn't really change much. I'll still be writing as much as I can, as fast as I can. Maybe in the short term my monthly take home will be less, but I'm not in this for six months or a year, I'm here to make a CAREER. In the long game the longer works are what really matter anyway. 
After all, this sure as hell is better than the days where I was a bartender.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

BGArcher said:


> So I have to be honest, yesterday I totally freaked out seeing this news.
> 
> But today I woke up feeling inspired and MAD AS HELL.
> 
> ...


Damn if your post didn't just bring tears to my eyes. I guess I'm a sap like that.

But gosh darnit, I just want to marry this post of yours, I love it so much.

THIS is a winning attitude. THIS is exactly what it means to be a real pro. And you have my utmost respect (that and a dollar can get you a pack of gum).

Writing is a painful business, and I always say that we just get our teeth kicked in again and again and again. If you can't handle the pain, this is not the business for you.

Take pride in getting knocked down, feeling like you can't go on...and then somehow managing to crawl to your knees, stand up, and start walking once more.

I still remember one particular day back before ebooks came along and saved my butt...

I'd had about four novels rejected in five years trying to go the traditional publishing route. And after my fourth novel got its most recent rejection, we were out of editors to send to. Another failed novel, and after five years I was no closer to publication.

I thought for sure I would quit. But the next day I started working on my next novel, and a true feeling of triumph came over me. I realized that if this latest blow hadn't killed my will to write, than nothing would. I was untouchable.

I would never stop.

So I say, cherish those painful, devastating failures. Because if you can continue after these things happen, then you are a pro and you will have to succeed someday.

That is the victory, and I love the fact that you said all of this way better than I just did. But since I'm a writer, I had to respond with my silly words. Thanks for your lovely, inspiring post.


----------



## Chris Fox (Oct 3, 2014)

I also love your attitude, Archer. The industry will always change, and some of those changes will kick you squarely in the crotch. It's all about adapting. Keep writing, keep changing.

Gorv, good to see you back. I've learned a lot since this thread, and one of the best lessons was to increase my output. My novels are doing great based on marketing, but you're so right about feeding the beast. At the time I thought I could only handle 2 novels a year. I'm up to four novels, and two non-fiction. That's increasing as I practice.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer (May 14, 2014)

BGArcher said:


> So I have to be honest, yesterday I totally freaked out seeing this news. I'm apart of this forum and a few others, and I consider my day job to be writing erotic shorts. They sell well and while my actual passion is longer works (mystery's, thrillers, romances and screenplays) They are pretty easy to write and put out in a timely manner. We of course DON'T KNOW how much this change will effect short story writers bottom lines, but I think it's pretty obvious that it it will most likely be a lower dollar amount. And here's the thing, that bummed me out yesterday... But today I woke up feeling inspired and MAD AS HELL. I have a lot of dusty Scrivener files on this macbook pro that are longer mystery's and romances that have been sitting there because I've been so focused of late on bringing up my daily income.
> 
> I can either moan and groan about these changes and worry (without actually knowing what will happen) or I can roll up my sleeves, dust off those old files and get back to work.
> 
> ...


Same here! I was REALLY upset yesterday, but now I'm feeling more inspired than ever. I've already written 5,000 words today.


----------



## Sonya Bateman (Feb 3, 2013)

gorvnice said:


> Since this thread got bumped, I'll just say...
> 
> the market may have changed. When this was written, it was current. Now, it's old advice. Things don't stay the same forever, and that's painful.
> 
> ...


Hey, gorvnice! Glad you're back! 

And a few of the posts in this thread seem to be eerily prophetic of the new KU... spooky!


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chris Fox said:


> I also love your attitude, Archer. The industry will always change, and some of those changes will kick you squarely in the crotch. It's all about adapting. Keep writing, keep changing.
> 
> Gorv, good to see you back. I've learned a lot since this thread, and one of the best lessons was to increase my output. My novels are doing great based on marketing, but you're so right about feeding the beast. At the time I thought I could only handle 2 novels a year. I'm up to four novels, and two non-fiction. That's increasing as I practice.


So glad to hear about your progress, Chris. You struck me from the get-go as the exact type of person to do well in this business. Keep on keeping on my friend!


----------

