# New KU Payout & Program Change MEGA Thread--Now with Poll! (MERGED)



## horrordude1973

Email I got today:



> Hello,
> 
> Today we have a few exciting announcements to share related to the KDP Select global fund. The first is that we're adding a bonus of $7.8 million to the May KDP Select global fund on top of the previously announced $3 million base fund, bringing the total fund to $10.8 million. We are also pleased to report that:
> 
> • KDP Select authors are on track to earn over $60M in the first half of 2015 from books read in Kindle Unlimited and the Kindle Owners' Lending Library.
> 
> • Total royalties across subscription and a la carte sales earned by KDP Select authors in the US are on track to more than double in the first half of 2015 compared to the same period last year.
> 
> • Authors have continued to renew their titles in KDP Select at rates in excess of 95% each month since Kindle Unlimited launched.
> 
> These trends give us the confidence to look forward and share that the KDP Select global fund will be in excess of $11M for both July and August.
> 
> We're always looking at ways to make our programs even better, and we've received lots of great feedback on how to improve the way we pay KDP authors for books in Kindle Unlimited. One particular piece of feedback we've heard consistently from authors is that paying the same for all books regardless of length may not provide a strong enough alignment between the interests of authors and readers. We agree. With this in mind, we're pleased to announce that beginning on July 1, the KDP Select Global Fund will be paid out based on the number of pages KU and KOLL customers read.
> 
> As with our current approach, we'll continue to offer a global fund for each month. Under this new model, the amount an author earns will be determined by their share of total pages read rather than their share of total qualified borrows. Here are a few examples illustrating how the fund will be paid out. For simplicity, assume the fund is $10M and that 100,000,000 total pages were read in the month:
> 
> • The author of a 100 page book which was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> • The author of a 200 page book which was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $2,000 ($10 million multiplied by 20,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> • The author of a 200 page book which was borrowed 100 times but only read half way through on average would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> We will similarly change the way we pay KDP Select All-Star bonuses which will be awarded to authors and titles based on total KU and KOLL pages read.
> 
> We think this is a solid step forward and better aligns the interests of readers and authors. Our goal, as always, is to build a service that rewards authors for their valuable work, attracts more readers and encourages them to read more and more often. We welcome your continued feedback and ideas about how we can further improve Kindle Direct Publishing and Kindle Unlimited.
> 
> In the coming days we'll share more details about this change. In the meantime, for further information (such as how we measure pages read) you can read more here: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN.
> 
> Best Regards,
> The Kindle Direct Publishing Team


----------



## ChristinaGarner

I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this new Select development... How about the rest of you?

Hello,

Today we have a few exciting announcements to share related to the KDP Select global fund. The first is that we're adding a bonus of $7.8 million to the May KDP Select global fund on top of the previously announced $3 million base fund, bringing the total fund to $10.8 million. We are also pleased to report that:

• KDP Select authors are on track to earn over $60M in the first half of 2015 from books read in Kindle Unlimited and the Kindle Owners' Lending Library.

• Total royalties across subscription and a la carte sales earned by KDP Select authors in the US are on track to more than double in the first half of 2015 compared to the same period last year.

• Authors have continued to renew their titles in KDP Select at rates in excess of 95% each month since Kindle Unlimited launched.

These trends give us the confidence to look forward and share that the KDP Select global fund will be in excess of $11M for both July and August.

We're always looking at ways to make our programs even better, and we've received lots of great feedback on how to improve the way we pay KDP authors for books in Kindle Unlimited. One particular piece of feedback we've heard consistently from authors is that paying the same for all books regardless of length may not provide a strong enough alignment between the interests of authors and readers. We agree. With this in mind, we're pleased to announce that beginning on July 1, the KDP Select Global Fund will be paid out based on the number of pages KU and KOLL customers read.

As with our current approach, we'll continue to offer a global fund for each month. Under this new model, the amount an author earns will be determined by their share of total pages read rather than their share of total qualified borrows. Here are a few examples illustrating how the fund will be paid out. For simplicity, assume the fund is $10M and that 100,000,000 total pages were read in the month:

• The author of a 100 page book which was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

• The author of a 200 page book which was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $2,000 ($10 million multiplied by 20,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

• The author of a 200 page book which was borrowed 100 times but only read half way through on average would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

We will similarly change the way we pay KDP Select All-Star bonuses which will be awarded to authors and titles based on total KU and KOLL pages read.

We think this is a solid step forward and better aligns the interests of readers and authors. Our goal, as always, is to build a service that rewards authors for their valuable work, attracts more readers and encourages them to read more and more often. We welcome your continued feedback and ideas about how we can further improve Kindle Direct Publishing and Kindle Unlimited.

In the coming days we'll share more details about this change. In the meantime, for further information (such as how we measure pages read) you can read more here: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN.

Best Regards,
The Kindle Direct Publishing Team


----------



## horrordude1973

there is more here on how they determine page count. Most of my books are novellas so not sure I'm liking this:

https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN


----------



## Kristopia

Just saw this in my inbox. It's an interesting change, and one that may be of good benefit to authors of longer works. It wasn't fair to those authors to be making the same amount as some short story writers.  If it works, I might just reconsider putting my novel back in Select.


----------



## cinisajoy

So now we will get non-fiction filled with fillers.  Great.  Thanks for nothing..
Off to send Amazon a letter.


----------



## horrordude1973

Mine are all novellas, so I need to figure something out here. Maybe start doing collections instead of individual releases. There is more here on how they will determine pages.

https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN


----------



## Bob Stewart

It also means variable payments based on how far someone's read in a particular book. We'll have to wait and see how it effects us...


----------



## Alex Rogers

Just got my email and immediately checked the boards. Not sure how I feel about this one.


----------



## SunnyDay913

I'm confused...does this eliminate the 10% rule?


----------



## ChristinaGarner

horrordude1973 said:


> there is more here on how they determine page count. Most of my books are novellas so not sure I'm liking this:
> 
> https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN


Agree. One of my upcoming strategies involved novellas. Sigh...


----------



## horrordude1973

I don't know if I should wait and see how this effects me or if I should be proactive and do something now. I hate to wait too long and lose money, but I hate to jump the gun and lose money too.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

carinasanfey said:


> Surely it's a bit unfair to announce this two weeks before it starts? I'm at the start of a ninety day period with some of my titles and not happy that the terms of KU are going to change after sixteen of those ninety days, with no way for me to pull my titles. Of course, there are presumably clauses allowing for this in KDP's terms and conditions. Sigh.


No doubt.


----------



## Wifey

"If you no longer want your book(s) to be included in KDP Select you may unenroll from the program by contacting us with the ASIN of the book you would like to remove."


----------



## GeneDoucette

My new book is coming out 7/14.  I was holding it out of Select because unlike the novellas that preceded it-- priced at $2.99--this is priced at $3.99.  I didn't see the benefit in that gap in the borrow rate vs. the buy rate.  The $3.99 book is longer, though.  I'm not sure yet if this changes my approach.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

I foresee 600 pages of front matter ...


----------



## Guest

horrordude1973 said:


> Mine are all novellas, so I need to figure something out here. Maybe start doing collections instead of individual releases.


Don't panic just yet. A 200 page or higher book has to be REALLY GOOD for me to finish it. (I'm not alone. There's a lot of readers like me.) So just because a person who writes a 200 page or higher book QUALIFIES for more money IF readers finish the book doesn't mean the "if" will happen every time.


----------



## Sara C

So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


----------



## Charnell

So instead of a flat rate, you get paid by the page. If they actually put out a way to track how far someone reads into a book that would be great. Then authors would know what works and doesn't work.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

cinisajoy said:


> So now we will get non-fiction filled with fillers. Great. Thanks for nothing..
> Off to send Amazon a letter.


Exactly.


----------



## Wifey

carinasanfey said:


> *cue mass exodus*
> 
> Definitely removing my main name stuff. No idea what to do with my cat serials - I wrote those specifically for KU and they cant really work outside of it.


Yep. Sent my request already.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


They were using a very inflated example of what the fund would be set at. The reality will be much different.


----------



## lyndabelle

Feel like I'm playing in Vegas. The "HOUSE" will always change the rules to give itself the advantage. I was waiting to see what changes would happen because of the shorts. Looks like Box Sets might be making a comeback.


----------



## Charnell

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


We'll really have to see after the first month how many total pages are read. I feel like their example has a high $$$ pool and a low pages read count.


----------



## Sara C

ChristinaGarner said:


> They were using a very inflated example of what the fund would be set at. The reality will be much different.


Oooookay, that makes much more sense. If sales were borrows, I would make $26,000 on just the second and third in my series...that seemed wrong, haha.


----------



## GeneDoucette

it's interesting, one of the things I heard a lot around here is Select benefiting short fiction more than long, and Amazon should pay out lending $ based on sale price instead.  This seems like a variant solution to that complaint.  I was expecting to see more support for it around here.


----------



## Louise Lintvelt

I would love  to hear more on how this affects children's authors where 24-32 pages is full length for illustrated works and considering the artwork required to make an engaging kids read the KU payout over the last 6 month has been low. In addition Amazon finds it hard to accurately estimate page count on fixed layout picture books...hmmm


----------



## D-C

Charnell said:


> So instead of a flat rate, you get paid by the page. If they actually put out a way to track how far someone reads into a book that would be great. Then authors would know what works and doesn't work.


I like this idea; it's fairer than the existing model and should bring some novel writers back into the fold (not me, because I'm happy on Apple, Nook & Scribd since KU gave me the push to go wide with my novels). It also seems fairer that writers get paid per page. A good book (that keeps its readers), regardless of length, gets paid more. I find it interesting that Amazon can even pay per page. This is pretty amazing-and potentially groundbreaking-stuff.

Edited to add: I have a scifi 40k to 50k per book series in KU and I'm happy to keep it in on the pay-per-page terms. Depending on what the first month shakes out at.


----------



## Charnell

carinasanfey said:


> More thoughts - sorry, still trying to get my head around this, so my opinions are coming out in dribbles.
> 
> I think this could be a good thing for authors - IF we had had fair warning of it. Sixteen days in which to change one's entire strategy? Not cool.


Unfortunately that's the game we play, giving up control to Amazon. If they completely dropped X genre or Y program tomorrow there wouldn't be a thing we could do about it.


----------



## ufwriter

My biggest question is how much is each page worth? Right now, we're getting about $1.34 per borrow. Will that now mean we only get $1.34 if someone reads 200 pages?


----------



## MatthewBallard

As an author of long fantasy works enrolled in KDP select, I approve of this change.


----------



## Jim Johnson

carinasanfey said:


> More thoughts - sorry, still trying to get my head around this, so my opinions are coming out in dribbles.
> 
> I think this could be a good thing for authors - IF we had had fair warning of it. Sixteen days in which to change one's entire strategy? Not cool.


Reread the T&Cs. Amazon doesn't have to give us warning. Perception of fair or not, we need to be nimble to adjust on the fly.


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## dianapersaud

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


I need to double check my math. First I had $1.50 now I'm getting your numbers.


----------



## SunnyDay913

I think a lot of us were gearing up to write a novella series specifically for KU and now I, for one, am going to need to seriously rethink that strategy.


----------



## horrordude1973

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


most of my books are 20-35K words. They have a whole new metric now on how they are determining page counts its on the link I posted earlier.


----------



## Fannin Callahan

carinasanfey said:


> Surely it's a bit unfair to announce this two weeks before it starts? I'm at the start of a ninety day period with some of my titles and not happy that the terms of KU are going to change after sixteen of those ninety days, with no way for me to pull my titles. Of course, there are presumably clauses allowing for this in KDP's terms and conditions. Sigh.


Same here. If I could opt out now, I probably would. With such a big change, looks like they'd give you the option to opt out. But you're right, I'm sure somewhere in the fine print, they are covered on this. In some ways, I think it is a good thing, they may be trying to get rid of some of the "junk" and "filler" books, which overall would make it a better venue for everyone, but seems something like this should have been rolled out with more notice.


----------



## geronl

I think we would need to see the details before people start fleeing.


----------



## ChadMck

I write shorter works so I'll use this as an opportunity to test out the other markets and see if I can gain any traction there. I've been wanting to test those other places but KU made it pretty hard to leave. The new changes aren't necessarily bad. It would actually be an amazing tool if Amazon gives us information on how far the person reads into the book. If a number of readers stop reading around the same point we would be able to reverse engineer what happened in our writing. Did we get too boring? Etc. 

Change will always be happening. This is way better than an email banning books. I'm in an inflatable raft paddling against the tide hoping one day I'll make enough money to buy a bigger boat to make navigating the waters a little easier


----------



## Monique

dianapersaud said:


> I think it will be more like $1.50 per borrow (for a book that is 150 pages read all the way through. I'm guessing $0.75 if it's read halfway?)
> And $1 per borrow for a short story (10 pages)- I wonder if they would pay $0.50 if only 5 pages are read. That's still a better deal for shorts. Not such good deal for longer works.


Your math is off, I think. I'm pre-coffee, but it's per page read. Using your example. A 150 page book read all the way through would get $15 and a 10 page book with 5 pages read would get $0.50. Obviously, it's not going to be 10c a page read. More pages is more read-through opportunity.


----------



## Rykymus

This is actually a great idea.  Think about it.

On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.

Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)

Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.

I see nothing but good with this idea.


----------



## geronl

This is about bonuses, not royalties, I think


----------



## dianapersaud

Tulonsae said:


> The announcement says it's paid by pages, not borrows. So, if you got $1.50 for 150 pages, then that's .01 per page, which means a short story of 10 pages would be $.10, not $1.


I must be doing something wrong with my math because I'm getting $10-20 per book read and I know Amazon isn't going to pay that much. Will have to check their example again.

I did it in Excel and I'm getting the following:
100 page book if read at 100% then it would be $10 a book (so $1000 which is what is on their website. But that is ASSUMING the fund is 10 million and 100,000,000 pages are read.

For 200 page book it would be $20 per book.

If the fund is 3 million, the payout per book would be 
100 page book read completely: $3
200 page book read completely $6

again, that is based on 100,000,000 pages read.

If that number increases to 1 million pages read, then the first example becomes $1 per book instead of $10; and $2 per book instead of $20.

There are an awful lot of variables in this. I really don't think it's better for the author. I guess we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## Fannin Callahan

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


Overall, I tend to agree with you.


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I am cautiously optimistic about this since the sheer bulk of everything I have is full novels. I will still keep doing my shorts for my witch series. I'm not making any decision until I see my first payout.


----------



## JalexM

Not sure how I feel about this, I just put my novel on select. I wonder how long I have to opt out. If July goes well for borrows then I might stay in since my novel is 400 pages. If that one cent a page metric is correct(based on my calculations).
One positive is that we'll be able to see how many pages someone read. A con is my next book will be along novella  so I guess I won't put it in select.


----------



## Susanne123

Ultimately the readers will have the final say in how much they enjoyed our books. Did they finish it? Yes or no. That's powerful feedback for us.


----------



## 77071

I would like to know exactly how long a page is (like word count) and how much it's worth when it's read.  It would be nice to have a steady number to work with.

I'm fine with being responsible for getting the reader to read more than 10 percent.  I'd just like to know what the numbers are.  Will this be more, less, or about the same earnings?


----------



## EC Sheedy

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


This is how it first struck me.

Now all I have to find out, going forward, is if readers grade my books 10% or 100%. I will begin nail-chewing... NOW!


----------



## D-C

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


I agree (As I mentioned in my brief post above). I'm happier being paid per page. It's the 'scamlets' that really irked me.


----------



## mrforbes

> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


+10


----------



## Anna Drake

Wow. This is a game changer. Does this mean they'll tell us for each book how many pages were read? I imagine not everyone who passed the 10 percent mark read all the way to the end of each book. Accounting will be interesting.


----------



## Mike McIntyre

So if someone takes his/h time reading your book, you will be paid for that borrow in increments over months?


----------



## mel p

Maybe a stupid question, but what happens if I have a 400 page book that gets borrowed. The reader only gets 200 read in the first month and then finishes the last half of the book the next month. Do I still get paid for 400 pages being read, but divided onto two different payouts?


----------



## M.B. Ryther

I wonder how this is going to affect Book Report, since it estimates earnings based on a flat borrow rate.


----------



## JalexM

HSh said:


> I would like to know exactly how long a page is (like word count) and how much it's worth when it's read. It would be nice to have a steady number to work with.
> 
> I'm fine with being responsible for getting the reader to read more than 10 percent. I'd just like to know what the numbers are. Will this be more, less, or about the same earnings?


"To determine a book's page count in a way that works across genres and devices, we've developed the Kindle Edition Normalized Page Count (KENPC). We calculate KENPC based on standard settings (e.g. font, line height, line spacing, etc.), and we'll use KENPC to measure the number of pages customers read in your book, starting with the Start Reading Location (SRL) to the end of your book. Amazon typically sets SRL at chapter 1 so readers can start reading the core content of your book as soon as they open it.

This standardized approach allows us to identify pages in a way that works across genres and devices.

When we make this change on July 1, 2015, you'll be able to see your book's KENPC listed on the "Promote and Advertise" page in your Bookshelf, and we'll report on total pages read on your Sales Dashboard report. Because it's based on default settings, KENPC may vary from page counts listed on your Amazon detail page, which are derived from other sources."

We'll learn July 1st


----------



## Cherise

Here is the longer thread on this

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,216477.0.html


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Rykymus said:


> I see nothing but good with this idea.


The downside for us is knowing how much is coming at the end of each month. At the moment, we know how many borrows reached the 10% point, and with a ball-park figure per borrow, we can estimate how much money is coming in.

With this system? How is it going to work - will Amazon tell us how many pages of our books have been read? And will that be live data, on a daily basis? Or will they just say at the end of the month: you had n pages read?

[Ninja'd: answered in the post above - thanks! Still haven't got my email.]

I'm waiting to see YodaRead's thoughts on this.


----------



## D-C

M.B. Ryther said:


> I wonder how this is going to affect Book Report, since it estimates earnings based on a flat borrow rate.


Good point. Might be worth asking in their thread.

Their data is scraped from the reports, so it'll be a matter of reworking their system to read Amazon's data (however Amazon break it down).


----------



## Atunah

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


This post made my reader ears perk up. It puts a lot of good points up. And without using that math with all those zeros 

I used to subscribe to KU when it first came out, within 4 months it was so flooded with shorts in the genres I read I could not find anything anymore and many of the actual books I put in my wishlist had been pulled out of it. I was left with basically reading Amazon publishing Montlake titles. Which many of those I read already in the previous 2 years with the prime lending monthly KOLL. Shorts, chopped up books, serials, scamlets, that is what I had to wade through by then to find the occasional book. I cancelled and told them why I did so.

If this new system can bring novels back and it maybe even get some publishers in the pot, it would have value for me again as a reader. I have Scribd, but having to read the books on a tablet has kept me from really using it to its full advantage. Its why I had such hopes for a amazon subscription service and was so exited when it first came out.

I am taking a wait and see stance for now. I'll probably know within 2-3 months if there is value again at that point.


----------



## Sarah09

I was wondering when something like this would happen. It was only a matter of time.



Anna Drake said:


> Wow. This is a game changer. Does this mean they'll tell us for each book how many pages were read? I imagine not everyone who passed the 10 percent mark read all the way to the end of each book. Accounting will be interesting.


It will be curious to see how this works. How will it be accounted someone reads 50% one month then 400% in the next month, such as in July 28th and August 2nd. Yes, the accounting will be interesting. Hopefully, it doesn't turn into a big mess.

I do wonder how this will affect profitability for authors. It will be interesting to see.


----------



## cinisajoy

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


The only thing I see bad is will the quality of books go down. But then again, if they added filler at the beginning, no one would read the book. If they add it to the end, no one would keep clicking. If they add to the middle, that is where readers would stop.

Stay tuned next month for the "I only made x on my book, why aren't people finishing my book" threads.


----------



## geronl

JalexM said:


> Amazon typically sets SRL at chapter 1 so readers can start reading the core content of your book as soon as they open it.


There goes my idea for a 10-page prologue, lol


----------



## Caddy

Well, I only wrote shorts for KU as I would never put my novels exclusive. So, I have to think about this and see what this really means. I'll probably pull my Sibley Jackson stuff, but not sure until I know more about the pay-out per page. Right now people on here are figuring it all different ways. I suck at math so I'm not going to attempt it. 

I was going to make a series of the first Sibley one anyway and go wide, so perhaps it just happens earlier. 

How can we figure out what the payment will be if we don't know the money in the pot for the month? I'm at a loss here.


----------



## geronl

What if they read it twice...?


----------



## ketosis

This could be something good, IF the total pages read isn't astronomical.  I'd like KDP to say how many pages were read last month across KU, but if the fund was 10m and the total pages read were 175,000,000, you'd essentially get $0.057 every time someone read your story.  So, if you had a 100 page story, you'd get $5.70.  Obviously, the number of the pot or total pages read will be much different, but KDP should give us actual numbers of pages read recently instead of examples that may or may not be close to their current figures.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


I generally agree. Any built in advantage should be based on quality, and the best way to determine quality is probably pages read.

But still, it's hard to guess what the real impact will be in terms of actual dollars distributed among writers, and unpredictability is scary. I've just barely got started with my new series, and I'm not really making much money anyway right now, so I'll probably stay in and see what happens.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

PaulineMRoss said:


> The downside for us is knowing how much is coming at the end of each month. At the moment, we know how many borrows reached the 10% point, and with a ball-park figure per borrow, we can estimate how much money is coming in.
> 
> With this system? How is it going to work - will Amazon tell us how many pages of our books have been read? And will that be live data, on a daily basis? Or will they just say at the end of the month: you had n pages read?
> 
> [Ninja'd: answered in the post above - thanks! Still haven't got my email.]
> 
> I'm waiting to see YodaRead's thoughts on this.


I actually told people I thought they were going to tweak the payout system to favor length a few months ago and people jumped all over me. I think, for someone like me who really only writes novels (other than a few shorts for my most popular series, which I will continue to write because they are a way to keep that series constantly fresh) I think this could conceivably mark a huge change in my bottom line (in a good way). I honestly can't say until I see that first month, though. We can dream and guess and wonder -- but until we see hard numbers it's impossible to say. So, for now, I shall wait and see how things go.


----------



## Shelley K

It might take Amazon a few months to get things adjusted, but I'm betting this is part of a plan to lower their monthly fund, and the rate's going to end up as some fraction of a penny per page averaged across all of KU. Whether it'll bring a borrow more in line with a sale on something like a $2.99 book remains to be seen. Super short stuff at .99 could very well end up earning less than the .35 it would garner with a sale. 

While payment based on length is one issue, payment based on pages read sounds like some kind of logistical nightmare to me.


----------



## geronl

exactly.

This might not hurt anyone except books that do not get read


----------



## Designist7

Kristopia said:


> Just saw this in my inbox. It's an interesting change, and one that may be of good benefit to authors of longer works. It wasn't fair to those authors to be making the same amount as some short story writers. If it works, I might just reconsider putting my novel back in Select.


I never get these emails. Is there a place I can sign up to receive them regarding KDP etc?

Thanks!


----------



## 555aaa

I like the idea.

But some people - like me - think that Amazon knowing where I am in the books I have is kinda creepy. And I don't always read from the beginning to the end. And I might buy a book, and then not read it for a month, and then read the first three chapters, and then come back and read the rest later. Non-fiction in particular is often not read serially from start to finish. It seems fraught with difficulty. Also perhaps the thinking is most people don't read most of the books they buy? Amazon knows to what extent this is true but we don't.

I would prefer that they just scale payment by word count and call it good.


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson

Hey, it wouldn't be KU without some ginormous plot twist.  

(This is why I have some books in and some not.)


----------



## JKata

So Amazon usually gives us the KU fund for the month, but I don't think it has ever given us any numbers regarding the total number of pages read in a month. Without an inkling of how many pages on the average KU readers read in a month, it's really difficult to make an estimate of how much authors will get paid per page.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Shelley K said:


> It might take Amazon a few months to get things adjusted, but I'm betting this is part of a plan to lower their monthly fund, and the rate's going to end up as some fraction of a penny per page averaged across all of KU. Whether it'll bring a borrow more in line with a sale on something like a $2.99 book remains to be seen. Super short stuff at .99 could very well end up earning less than the .35 it would garner with a sale.
> 
> While payment based on length is one issue, payment based on pages read sounds like some kind of logistical nightmare to me.


Amazon doesn't really care about the size of the fund. I mean, they don't want it to be huge, but this is all about directing people to put longer works in KU. It was only a matter of time. They've been trying to lead us to their length (just like they led us to their preferred prices). I didn't expect them to change the payout process until Janurary -- so they're working quicker than I expected. It has been almost a year since the program launched, though.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

Louise Lintvelt said:


> I would love to hear more on how this affects children's authors where 24-32 pages is full length for illustrated works and considering the artwork required to make an engaging kids read the KU payout over the last 6 month has been low. In addition Amazon finds it hard to accurately estimate page count on fixed layout picture books...hmmm


Very interesting point. I imagine there will be some bugs that need working out.


----------



## MonkeyScribe

It's more democratic, that's for sure. Everyone gets paid the same per page read. And no way does padding your book make sense. That just gets the book abandoned sooner.

What it does mess up is strategy. If you've been working with certain assumptions, those assumptions are now dead and buried. But we always knew this was a risk.



Shelley K said:


> It might take Amazon a few months to get things adjusted, but I'm betting this is part of a plan to lower their monthly fund, and the rate's going to end up as some fraction of a penny per page averaged across all of KU.


It already is, even in terms of royalties for full sales. My 350 page book at 3.99 earns me $2.70, or less than a penny a page.


----------



## Daniel Kenney

As a kid's author, my first thought is....Did you really need to make it even more difficult for kid's authors to make money self-publishing?

Too bad. I hope in the future, they tweak it according to genre. Newberry award winners have made a substantial contribution to the world of literature and in general, these books have been smaller than adult genre books? Does that necessarily mean they are easier to write and less worthy? I certainly don't think so. I, of course, understand what they are trying to do but this seems too simple of a solution. Think about graphic novels with pictures in them? Often, the pictures are a huge part of the book? Will pictures be counted?

Frustrated.

DK


----------



## Monique

Let the wagering begin. 

I'm going to say just under a penny per page will be the sweet spot. It will start higher (to woo people and keep them in) then be adjust down.


----------



## Guest

I'm pulling all of my short stories off of Select today. They can go pound sand...


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## ruecole

Daniel Kenney said:


> As a kid's author, my first thought is....Did you really need to make it even more difficult for kid's authors to make money self-publishing?
> 
> Too bad. I hope in the future, they tweak it according to genre. Newberry award winners have made a substantial contribution to the world of literature and in general, these books have been smaller than adult genre books? Does that necessarily mean they are easier to write and less worthy? I certainly don't think so. I, of course, understand what they are trying to do but this seems too simple of a solution. Think about graphic novels with pictures in them? Often, the pictures are a huge part of the book? Will pictures be counted?
> 
> Frustrated.
> 
> DK


Agreed. And with their new page count method for Kindle books, your print page count will no longer apply. Our kids' books just got a whole lot shorter. 

Rue


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Hi, folks, I've merged two similar threads on this topic. Sorry for any confusion.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

cinisajoy said:


> So now we will get non-fiction filled with fillers. Great. Thanks for nothing..
> Off to send Amazon a letter.


If they are filled with nothing then presumably readers will stop reading before reaching the end of the book and the authors won't earn as much as they think


----------



## Desert Rose

On the one hand, argh, I write shorts, and make most of my money on borrows. On the other, yay, this makes me feel better about going wide as each book ends its initial 90 day enrollment in KDP. I wish, though, that they were more upfront about their page count estimates; seems like they should be able to give us a word count average instead of "we're going to standardize stuff and work from that."


----------



## naughty kim

I'm probably wrong, but my read on the email is that KU payments will henceforth be paid based on " paid out based on the number of pages KU and KOLL customers read. "  The email doesn't give a specific minimum number of pages.  The only numbers provided, and it was for the sake of comparison with the old paradigm, was 100 pages and 200 pages.

My read on this is that the key is TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES READ.  Unless they come up with updated numbers, so long as a customer reads the entire story (not just 10%) then we will get full payout.  

As i said, the email was absent specif information regarding pages, only that the 10% threshold is bye bye.

Interesting.

(Seems to be directed at scammers)


----------



## Fannin Callahan

The more I think on this, the better I like it. I was just telling a friend the other day that the amount of (what I perceive to be) junk on Amazon will eventually harm the name. The scammers and junk writers will not find it so attractive. Even though what I am working on right now is episodic, I am doing my best to make it fantastic, and I am sure most other serial writers are doing the same. If people won't read more than 10%, then something is wrong with the material. Something I'm sure we'd all love to stay on top of. The problem I have with KDP in general has always been the whole exclusive to Amazon. I don't think that is what I want, and this will give me a chance to opt out, even though I'd be doing it for a very different reason! Also, it bites that we really can't figure out how much each page is worth if we don't know how much the overall pool will be (and that is my understanding).


----------



## LoriP

ruecole said:


> And with their new page count method for Kindle books, your print page count will no longer apply.


I think I missed where they talk about how they determine page count. Can anyone point me in the right direction?


----------



## Doglover

Well, It's all Dutch to me. I am not sure what they are saying. It gives an example of if a 100 page book is read one hundred times etc - supposing it is only read halfway? I get nothing? Supposing it is less than 100 pages? And is this going to get rid of the silly self help pamphlets? I have just started a series aimed at KU and not sure now what to do as it was intended to be novella length. I don't really want to make them novel length. And the other thing is whose idea of page numbers are we talking about? If there is a paperback linked the page numbers look a lot healthier than if it is just a kindle version. Is the answer to make the font size bigger? Geez! I am totally flummoxed.


----------



## Fictionista

I predict:

- authors producing (genuinely)longer works (less shorts etc.)

- others attempting to game the system by producing longer works, but full of boring filler etc.


----------



## ketosis

LorrainePaton said:


> I think I missed where they talk about how they determine page count. Can anyone point me in the right direction?


To determine a book's page count in a way that works across genres and devices, we've developed the Kindle Edition Normalized Page Count (KENPC). We calculate KENPC based on standard settings (e.g. font, line height, line spacing, etc.), and we'll use KENPC to measure the number of pages customers read in your book, starting with the Start Reading Location (SRL) to the end of your book. Amazon typically sets SRL at chapter 1 so readers can start reading the core content of your book as soon as they open it.

This standardized approach allows us to identify pages in a way that works across genres and devices.

When we make this change on July 1, 2015, you'll be able to see your book's KENPC listed on the "Promote and Advertise" page in your Bookshelf, and we'll report on total pages read on your Sales Dashboard report. Because it's based on default settings, KENPC may vary from page counts listed on your Amazon detail page, which are derived from other sources.


----------



## Silly Writer

At least use of us who have held off on publishing The Complete Set in fear of sabotaging individual borrows know one thing... It doesn't matter anymore. I'll be throwing up a complete set immediately as it will pay the same as borrowing the 6 individual episodes now.

Actually, maybe even more, because if they can read the entire serial without downloading six times, they may keep reading more often.

So there's our silver lining.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Monique said:


> Let the wagering begin.
> 
> I'm going to say just under a penny per page will be the sweet spot. It will start higher (to woo people and keep them in) then be adjust down.


You're right on that. I'm not sure I can take another board temper tantrum. I guess it's good I have work to do and a video game to focus on.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


^^ this ^^ 
I have a book of 17 short stories. I could have published them separately but felt that this would be cheating the readers.


----------



## cinisajoy

Amazon does not think this will hurt the readers.    The CSR I talked to figures it will be a help to the readers.
Yes, I called.


----------



## JalexM

lilywhite said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure I want to know if/when a reader just gives up on my book.  That's the ONLY part of this I don't like. But there's no way to implement this without telling us.


I'm already emotionally unstable about my books as it is, I don't want to see if people didn't finish it.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## 4eyesbooks

I really hope there are some adjustments made for our genre.  We produce high quality picture books which are short in length...not sure how they will measure our KENPC.  This sounds troubling, but we will wait and see how this shakes out before making any decisions.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

Wow! Just saw my own e-mail. This is an attempt by Amazon to fix a problem they had with KU. Those who pubbed shorts at 99c were geting 35c for a sale and roughly $1.80 per borrow. It made KU incredibly good for writers of short fiction. For novels priced at say $3.99 as mine are, instead of getting $2.65 per sale we were getting $1.80 per borrow. It was worse again for those selling their books at higher prices. 

Now this rebalancing as they will no doubt call it, will make it better for those who write novels. But it will change incomes drastically for those who write shorts, and in the long run, many of them may drop KU altogether.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## ruecole

Tulonsae said:


> Pictures don't count as a page? Only words?


Even with pictures, my MG novel is 50 pages shorter on Kindle than it is in print. I know they're creating a new way to measure page count, but they say it can still vary from the page count on your product page. So, yeah, pictures or not, our children's books are bound to end up shorter. 

Rue


----------



## Shelley K

lilywhite said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure I want to know if/when a reader just gives up on my book.  That's the ONLY part of this I don't like. But there's no way to implement this without telling us.


I'd pay to know if there's a spot readers tend to give up on a book. That would be incredibly valuable information to have, actually. We are going to (allegedly) be able to see how many pages have been read throughout the month, so taking the book's rank into consideration and trying to judge borrows based on that, it might become obvious if readers aren't getting all the way through something.

I'm about to put a long novel into KU. I was going to anyway, but I'm interested to see what happens with it.


----------



## 77071

psychotick said:


> Those who pubbed shorts at 99c were geting 35c for a sale and roughly $1.80 per borrow.


Since when have borrows been that highly paid?  Am I missing something??


----------



## MonkeyScribe

The more I think about it, the more I like it. Probably the most fair way to pay people ever devised (leaving aside the actual amount of the payouts, of course). Every single writer gets paid a set amount per page of engaging material that makes a reader move to the next page. It's then a question of reaching as many readers as you can.


----------



## LoriP

Thank you for the info about page counts. I guess I'll have to reconfigure how I show my prologues...


----------



## delly_xo

I wonder, I wonder, I wonder...how is this going to affect the algorithms?!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ruecole

4eyesbooks said:


> I really hope there are some adjustments made for our genre. We produce high quality picture books which are short in length...not sure how they will measure our KENPC. This sounds troubling, but we will wait and see how this shakes out before making any decisions.


I hope so, too!

Rue


----------



## cinisajoy

HSh said:


> Since when have borrows been that highly paid?  Am I missing something??


The KOLL before KU.


----------



## EC Sheedy

4eyesbooks said:


> I really hope there are some adjustments made for our genre. We produce high quality picture books which are short in length...not sure how they will measure our KENPC. This sounds troubling, but we will wait and see how this shakes out before making any decisions.


Perhaps someone should contact Amazon and ask how they'll handle photo/picture heavy books. This does sound troubling if you produce work in this genre. (I don't, but I do see the problem.)


----------



## Philip Gibson

> When we make this change on July 1, 2015, you'll be able to see your book's KENPC (revised page count) listed on the "Promote and Advertise" page in your Bookshelf, and we'll report on total pages read on your Sales Dashboard report.


That will be SO interesting. More information is always good in my opinion.

Philip


----------



## KelliWolfe

cinisajoy said:


> Amazon does not think this will hurt the readers. The CSR I talked to figures it will be a help to the readers.
> Yes, I called.


Unfortunately the readers are only part of the ecosystem. I'm just glad I'm moving out of the shorts and into novella/novel length fiction.


----------



## Nick Marsden

The way I see it, this will stop the scammers from flooding KU with Wikipedia articles disguised as books. It might also be the death of short fiction on KU. That sucks for people who pump out only short fiction, but it evens out when compared to novels. My one novel should be "priced" higher than a 2000 word short story or a 10k word novella. People who write short fiction should consider collections now. Place the short fiction on KDP for .99 or 1.99, then collect 200 pages of shorts in a collection and put it in Select. That way, the short fiction can go wide, while the collectors edition can get the borrow money at a higher price.


----------



## Guest

This is a good thing for those people subscribed to KU. They no longer need to wade through pages of short stories, pamphlets etc to get to the type of books they like. 

Those people who produce ridiculous scamphlets and short stories cut written by a ghost writer quickly, skimp on editing etc to gain those borrows will either have to improve their quality or quit. 

I would suspect that the vast majority of people who frequent these boards are interested in producing quality works, so should have less to fear. Our goal is to have the full book be interesting enough for someone to read it completely. 

Short stories will lose out financially, but again if you create quality work and keep producing it, those who borrow and enjoy one short story will borrow the others. This system will simply encourage people to keep producing quality work.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

psychotick said:


> Hi,
> 
> Wow! Just saw my own e-mail. This is an attempt by Amazon to fix a problem they had with KU. Those who pubbed shorts at 99c were geting 35c for a sale and roughly $1.80 per borrow. It made KU incredibly good for writers of short fiction. For novels priced at say $3.99 as mine are, instead of getting $2.65 per sale we were getting $1.80 per borrow. It was worse again for those selling their books at higher prices.
> 
> Now this rebalancing as they will no doubt call it, will make it better for those who write novels. But it will change incomes drastically for those who write shorts, and in the long run, many of them may drop KU altogether.
> 
> Cheers, Greg.


Yeah, it really wasn't fair before. You could throw up 10 5000-word erotica shorts and make 13 dollars for one read through of each, while a writer with a 50,000 word novel was making 1.30 for one read-through. The imbalance was unsustainable in the long term.

I just wish we had a real estimate of pages per month across all of Amazon.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18

This sounds good to me. It should fix the problems (like padding) we've always brought up when discussing Amazon changing to pay less for shorter works and more for longer works.

I just did the math on 2 of my own books. Amazon's per page calculations will be different, of course, but just to get an idea, I took one book priced at $3.99 and one at $4.99 and figured how much per page (using my own Create Space paperbacks for the page count) those books currently earn. The $3.99 one brings in $.008 per page and the $4.99 one brings in $.009 per page. So I think Monique is right that the payout will end up being something less than one cent per page and that will probably mean my short story will earn less on a borrow than the $.35 it earns on a sale. Maybe the full length novels will earn more on a borrow than they have been, though.


----------



## 31842

I have a full novel and a short in Select, and I think this is a step in the right direction (I wish it was just a payout based upon the set price like Scribd, but "if wishes were horses" and such.)  I wonder if they have some system in place to mark whether the pages are actually flipped through, or if someone who uses the table of contents to go to the final chapter will trigger a payment as if all the pages are read.  I know there are several reference books I use where I've just used a few late chapters and nothing else.  I'm wondering how that will count.  Also if we're going to see a spate of scammers who promise to borrow your book and click the last chapter in the TOS...


----------



## Guest

My main works are between 40 - 60k words each and are not in KU since the first one is wide, so it can be permafree. My latest project will be 60 - 90k words and I was planning on trying select anyway so nothing has changed there. 

I have a half dozen short erotica titles that are about 5k words. I put them in select and I will keep producing them and putting them in select because they can be written in an afternoon and people seem to like them. I'll just produce a couple a month rather than just one every now and again when bored. 

The one thing I do wonder about is how clear they will make it for us to know how many pages have been read. They haven't been too eager to offer that sort of detail before.


----------



## 77071

Here's the thing, for me as a reader, this will probably pull me back in.  It's embarrassing to admit, but I often obsess over whether I'm borrowing too much or reading too little when I am in KU as a reader.  For instance, if I read almost ten percent...the author doesn't get paid at all.  If I read over ten percent and then stop, I feel like I'm cheating somehow, because they get paid but I didn't finish the book.  This takes the pressure off me to finish all the stuff I start (which I can never do).  

I wonder how other readers will feel about this, if any way at all?  I think there's still benefits in releasing shorts, by the way, the same as there is a benefit in freebies: getting eyes on your work, visibility, finding new readers, and of course, the fact that some people just like short stories.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## dianapersaud

Nick Marsden said:


> The way I see it, this will stop the scammers from flooding KU with Wikipedia articles disguised as books. It might also be the death of short fiction on KU. That sucks for people who pump out only short fiction, but it evens out when compared to novels. My one novel should be "priced" higher than a 2000 word short story or a 10k word novella. People who write short fiction should consider collections now. *Place the short fiction on KDP for .99 or 1.99, then collect 200 pages of shorts in a collection and put it in Select. That way, the short fiction can go wide,* while the collectors edition can get the borrow money at a higher price.


That goes against Amazon TOS. If it's in select, it can't be anywhere else.


----------



## JumpingShip

I think I like this idea. Right now I have two versions of boxed sets that I didn't want to put in KU because I'd lose money big time. One is about a thousand pages long. Now I can put them in to increase visibility. 

I wonder if this will mean more money available in the pot because we'll eliminate all those paid borrows on books read to 11% counting as a full read? Now they will get only a fraction of the same payout, leaving the rest of the money in the pot, thus increasing the amount available to be split? Does that make sense? 

I was also thinking what if someone is in the middle of reading a book when the month changes, but I guess that won't matter as those pages would just tally in the new month.

I think my books come out of KU in about mid-July, which kind of stinks because I'll have no idea if it's worth it to keep them in or not since the first payout won't be until mid-August.


----------



## Susanne123

One thing that interests me is how people read. Just last night I was reading an ebook that needed to go back to the library, so I was in a rush. It was a good book, but I skimmed parts, tapped from page to page, speed reading. Would that be considered reading a page?


----------



## Guest

Is this the beginning of the end of the exclusivity requirement? One can only hope...

Also, this makes it a lot easier to decide whether or not to put my short stories in Select. I just republished one of my old shorts on Saturday, and went wide it--thank goodness for that!


----------



## josielitton

I'm currently working on a story that I deliberately structured for four parts because of the now-soon-to-be-defunct KU pay-out strategy.  Before I decide to simply do it as a single novel instead, I'd like to understand what impact more frequent publication has on increased visibility and everything that flows from that.

My plan was to publish the four parts in a burst over about a 21 day period timed to extend the "30 day cliff" all the way from Sept. into Nov. Now, instead, I'd be looking at just a straight 30 days.  I can see that costing me but, on the other hand, I can also see the benefit of keeping a KU reader inside a story, happily turning pages, rather than ask her to go through the process of borrowing the next part, and the next, and the next.

Anyone else wrestling with this and have thoughts about the best way to go?


----------



## Vinny OHare

I have read the changes announced today on KDP and the first thing that popped into my head was there are going to be book promotion sites popping up left and right that will guarantee that your book will be downloaded and read in it's entirety. I also think that it would be a good way to get your Amazon account banned so don't fall for any of that.

The second thing this does is allow Amazon to do a clean up. Imagine if a book is downloaded 10,000 time but never finished being read by anyone. I am sure that it will have an algorithm attached to it and be placed at the bottom of the rankings or even better Amazon will remove the title. There are probably thousands of Paleo diet books that would fall into this category right now. 

I see this as the Amazon clean up that needed to happen. As you can imagine I see all the books a month in advance that are submitted and can easily see when a "Guru" announces what topic will be hot the following month. First it was paleo, then step brother romance, btw July looks to be parenting tips grrr.

I see more authors writing serials that pull the reader in and probably a 0.001 page view amount or something low that authors can't figure out easily.  

You may also see more promotion sites go away if they decide they are changing the affiliate structure to match this. I know some sites depend on this for revenue.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

As a reader and KU member, this makes me happy as I like longer fiction.  I guess.  I have read some stuff in KU shorter than what I usually buy because, well, it was included.  Actually, as I think of it, for me, unlike Atunah, it probably won't have much impact.  I don't have trouble finding things I like to read in KU.  And I usually finish what i read so it won't change my habits much.

Betsy


----------



## Guest

Also, new possible ways to scam the system:

Make 1,000 page books full of filler and form groups where people agree to "read" (ie scroll through) each others' books.



Space out your paragraphs with extra line breaks, so you can spread things out across more pages.



Or you could also


space it out


like this.


Or just write shorter paragraphs, with lots of one sentence paragraphs thrown in to spread things out.

There are a lot of new ways to game the system. It's going to be interesting to see what the scamleteers do in the coming weeks and months.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Joe Vasicek said:


> Is this the beginning of the end of the exclusivity requirement? One can only hope...
> 
> Also, this makes it a lot easier to decide whether or not to put my short stories in Select. I just republished one of my old shorts on Saturday, and went wide it--thank goodness for that!


I won't say they'll never end exclusivity but they're definitely not ending it soon. It doesn't benefit Amazon to end it. I personally believe they'll probably never end exclusivity but something catastrophic could happen and I might change my mind.


----------



## Shelley K

Joe Vasicek said:


> Also, new possible ways to scam the system:
> 
> Make 1,000 page books full of filler and form groups where people agree to "read" (ie scroll through) each others' books.
> 
> Space out your paragraphs with extra line breaks, so you can spread things out across more pages.
> 
> Or you could also
> 
> space it out
> 
> like this.
> 
> Or just write shorter paragraphs, with lots of one sentence paragraphs thrown in to spread things out.
> 
> There are a lot of new ways to game the system. It's going to be interesting to see what the scamleteers do in the coming weeks and months.


No, your formatting doesn't matter. They're going to calculate every book's "page count" in KU according to their own system, so there's no way to game it. It's also the only way to make it fair, given that they're going by pages read.


----------



## Monique

Joe Vasicek said:


> Is this the beginning of the end of the exclusivity requirement? One can only hope...


What makes you think this has any potential impact on exclusivity?


----------



## Guest

Shelley K said:


> No, your formatting doesn't matter. They're going to calculate every book's "page count" in KU according to their own system, so there's no way to game it. It's also the only way to make it fair, given that they're going by pages read.


No, you just have to figure out the new system and exploit it. It's like those black hat SEO games that people play with Google. Every system can be gamed.


----------



## Guest

Monique said:


> What makes you think this has any potential impact on exclusivity?


Because I hope it does...


----------



## books_mb

I'm glad that they finally switched to a payment system that is fair. I personally won't profit from the change, I suppose I'm more or less in the middle when it comes to book length within KU, but authors with full length novels will profit and they should. It will also make KU as a whole more attractive for readers who prefer longer books. As for filler material ... scammers will always find a way to game the system. Before the change it was Wiki articles, now it's filler material ... not the end of the world.


----------



## RyanAndrewKinder

I am confused by this change because I am not sure how it will work on many levels.

Will we be able to get stats that show us how many pages were read?

Using my nonfiction book of writing prompts as an example: My book isn't meant to be read in one go. It's meant to be leafed through across the course of time. Do they constantly pay out the more pages are read? Or will payment per customer only be based on their first month of borrowing? Won't this harm nonfiction authors  (writing, cooking, etc.) that are meant to be read across a wider swath of time at a leisurely pace?


----------



## 13893

I'm depressed. The new KU payout may end up being good or bad or net/net the same. But I hate change, and I hate not knowing. I think it's the bleeps that Amazon doesn't just SAY what they intend the page rate to be.

What the bleep would be so hard about that? You know they have a figure in mind. And it's crazymaking - like not knowing whether an abusive parent is going to be in a good or bad mood today.


----------



## Caddy

But, stilll, at a penny a page, you would need a 350 page novel to make $3.50. Right? A 60,000 word novel isn't 350 pages. So a 60,000 word book priced at $4.99 and NOT in select make $3.50 with less pages. The program STILL does not pay as high of a rate as when not in Select for novels, unless you price your novels at $2.99 or less when not in Select.

If I take my 6 serialized stories that have a total of 60,0000 words, at a penny a page (estimating 50 pages) it would get me $3.00 IF AND WHEN the person reads all of it. It could sit there forever waiting to be read.

Or I could take those same stories and turn them into a novel and go wide, making $3.50 as soon as they are bought and make money on other sites as well. Gay romance sells on a few other sites quite well. 

Or, even better, take the serials down...write the story more in-depth (say I take the first two 10,000 words ones and add enough story (good story, not crap) to make it a 60,000 novel and make it a trilogy or something...and make $3.50 three times.

Yeah. I always said if the rate went down to .50 per borrow I was out. Looks like it just did. NOt going to do anything right this instant, but it looks like my pen name will be making changes at some point.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

MaryMcDonald said:


> I wonder if this will mean more money available in the pot because we'll eliminate all those paid borrows on books read to 11% counting as a full read? Now they will get only a fraction of the same payout, leaving the rest of the money in the pot, thus increasing the amount available to be split? Does that make sense?


This is what I was thinking... In theory, writers who do better with reader retention would get a much greater percentage of the overall pie.

What about erotica writers who put a sex scene at the beginning of the story? How many people read that sex scene, cross the 10% line, and then never pick up the book again? Books like that will be getting a much smaller percentage of the pie going forward, which should mean more money going to books that keep readers turning pages all the way to the end.

In fact, it could even get to the point where the number of readers you get is way less important than reader retention. Someone with a very modest following and good reader retention might outearn someone who gets a lot of initial interest through their cover and marketing, but loses most readers very early on.


----------



## JustRoman

That is an excellent approach from Amazon!
Basically what it means that a good writer who put effort in his novel writing 200+ pages will earn more if his books are actually worth something,
(I hope I would be like that lol but even if not then i'm just not worthy)


_edited to conform with forum decorum . . . no name calling and to remove the implication that the only good books are long books-- Ann & Betsy_


----------



## EC Sheedy

books_mb said:


> I'm glad that they finally switched to a payment system that is fair. I personally won't profit from the change, I suppose I'm more or less in the middle when it comes to book length within KU, but authors with full length novels will profit and they should. It will also make KU as a whole more attractive for readers who prefer longer books. As for filler material ... scammers will always find a way to game the system. Before the change it was Wiki articles, now it's filler material ... not the end of the world.


Agree, but I think the "filler writers" will have a tough go of it. Readers will inevitably stop reading at a certain fill level. And Amazon will stop paying. Done deal...


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

We have a pretty good idea that Amazon knows $1.35 is the sweet spot. In other words, novels will stay IN KDP Select if they make $1.35, and we know this because we gave them a years' worth of data . I would suspect that just as we see them tinker with the pot money each month, somewhere they've decided that XXX pages will be a 100% payout when fully read of $1.35. Now, is XXX 300? Is it 200? Both of those numbers would allow Amazon to keep titles in the program and probably pay LESS each month.

We know May is $10.8 million and paid $1.35 per borrow, so there was 8,011,357 total borrows or titles at least read to 10%. How many of those 8.1 million borrowed books were novella length or shorter (less than 150 pages?). We don't know. 

I personally don't believe ANY of these changes has to do with being more fair. If that was the case, why can't we make 70 cents on a .99 book by now instead of .35? Hmm? I think it has to do with Amazon trying to figure out a way to pay less each month, pay a "fair" borrow rate that they've decided for novel length work, and not worry about what it means for short stories or serials because usually they're priced at 99 cents anyway, so any payment more than $.35 is a boon for the author/publisher. 

I would expect titles that would normally sell for .99 for length will be worth $.35-$.50 a borrow under the new system when read to 100% completion. I would expect 200-300 page novel length works to be worth about $1.35-$2.00 for 100% completion (because they're NOT going to suddenly start paying us MORE than what they were before with the KU or KOLL program), and 400-500+ pages will make a little more since the number of titles that fill that category are fewer in volume in the Select program than the shorts, novellas, or novel length.

It's just like when they normalized freebies to no longer count 1:1 when converting back to the Paid rankings etc. Amazon no longer wants to PAY $1.35 per read of a 10 page short story. 

Amazon is NOT worried about losing the short story writers out of KU, they're trying to entice more longer works into the program. On some levels, this will be at the expense of shorter form writers, in other ways it won't because a shorter work can generally still be written and read faster than a longer work, so volume will play into it and not cause the short form writers to lose their entire lunches right away. But I would absolutely expect less earnings for the same # of borrows on any title less than 300 pages long. Because even IF 200 pages is the threshold for the "full borrow rate" we're used to seeing, you're still going to lose out on not every borrow reading 100% of the book. The percentage of readers that DNF will be the income loss.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Sever Bronny

Hiyas guys -- haven't posted in a while, but I'm around 

From my perspective, this rewards reader engagement, which is always good. Writers with engaging works stand to benefit most, and it will incentivize us to write "gripping" novels (not that we're already not incentivized, but you know what I mean =P)

In the current system, in order for author A to get paid a borrow on her 1000 page novel, a reader needs to make it to page 100. On the other hand, author B with a 100 page book only requires the reader to get to page 10 for her to get paid the same amount. 

This levels the playing field. 

But I wonder what the actual results will look like ...


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

I no longer have a dog in this race. I went wide some months ago, and I'm pleased with what I've done.

I had planned to use KU to launch my new pen name, and now I'm glad that I can wait to see what the payouts will be before I take that step. I'm honestly much more interested in selling my stories, or letting them be borrowed for full royalties in Scribd and Oyster, than I am in random "take what we pay you, but you won't know until a month and a half after you sign up" shenanigans.

The new pen name may well launch wide after all...


----------



## ketosis

I think a lot of people here have a sky is falling mentality because of the change.  Knowing Amazon, they all ready know that many people were leaving and wanting to leave Select because of the variable borrow rate every month.  At least for July, and possibly August, they aren't going to have some massively small payout amount.  I don't even think it will be as low as a penny a page at first.  I'm not saying it would be some giant number like ten cents a page as per their numbers example they gave out, but I would think at least three cents.  They want to draw more people into Select and KU and keep them there.  They'd be willing to spend the small chunk of change right now to make sure that happens.  Eventually, yes, I believe it will go down to around a penny a page, but they aren't stupid enough to do that right out of the gate.


----------



## katherinef

I've been reading a 500-page book for three years now. I read a page or two from time to time. I wonder how Amazon would count that, or is it not possible to borrow a book for that long? And I also wonder what their new page count will look like. My books always appear 50 or 100 pages shorter than their paperback version, so I hope they'll fix that. I don't trust these page counts, though. How do they even track if someone read a page or just glanced at it? Even the percentages I get from Scribd look random at times. I don't know how this will work, but I'm still glad I don't have anything in KU.


----------



## EC Sheedy

katherinef said:


> I've been reading a 500-page book for three years now. I read a page or two from time to time. I wonder how Amazon would count that, or is it not possible to borrow a book for that long? And I also wonder what their new page count will look like. My books always appear 50 or 100 pages shorter than their paperback version, so I hope they'll fix that. I don't trust these page counts, though. How do they even track if someone read a page or just glanced at it? Even the percentages I get from Scribd look random at times. I don't know how this will work, but I'm still glad I don't have anything in KU.


Sometimes I long for the good old days when a page calculation (roughly) was 250 words. I know, I know--there are a zillion variables, but 250-300 words equaling a page would be an easy peasy calculations.

I'll go brush my gray hair now.


----------



## P.T. Phronk

I'll make less money from this change, but I like it. It's finally fair.

It never really made sense that short story writers got the same sized slice of the payout as novel writers. Now, for all writers, the payout is more proportional to the amount of work that went into writing. Like many traditionally published stories, we're paid per word (ish).

The only people who I can see being against the change are short story writers (like me) who were previously getting more than their fair share. 

Most importantly, it's good for readers. This will encourage more variety in length in KU, and books that are exactly as long as they need to be, rather than padded or shortened. We writers should ALWAYS have been writing things that are the proper length, but at least we're more financially incentivized to do it now.


----------



## A Woman&#039;s Place Is In The Rebellion

T. M. Bilderback said:


> I had planned to use KU to launch my new pen name, and now I'm glad that I can wait to see what the payouts will be before I take that step.
> 
> The new pen name may well launch wide after all...


Similar boat. I've been working on a new series that I plan to launch in Select. I'm finishing book 1 this week and already intended to hold it back until the next 2 books are written. The timing may work out so that I'll get to see where the chips fall before making a decision. In theory, I don't mind the change because I write novels anyway, but I don't love the idea of getting paid for a book in fits and starts. If the reader is like me and takes a long time to finish a book, it may not be because the book isn't good but because I have 2 little constant distractions.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Joe Vasicek said:


> Also, new possible ways to scam the system:
> 
> Make 1,000 page books full of filler and form groups where people agree to "read" (ie scroll through) each others' books.
> 
> Space out your paragraphs with extra line breaks, so you can spread things out across more pages.
> 
> Or you could also
> 
> space it out
> 
> like this.
> 
> Or just write shorter paragraphs, with lots of one sentence paragraphs thrown in to spread things out.
> 
> There are a lot of new ways to game the system. It's going to be interesting to see what the scamleteers do in the coming weeks and months.


It should be word count and not page count that matters. Lots of us have said that all along.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper

Page count is simply just a quantifiable way of measuring reader engagement and thus, indirectly, quality of storytelling (whatever that means), which is a good thing. I believe it's what all writers want who are serious about their craft. The problem is that the mechanism Amazon uses to "quantify" page count is not going to be perfect. It may or may not hurt picture book writers. And there will undoubtedly be those who will find ways to cheat the system, but it's almost certainly not going to be as easy. I like the change, but I still don't like the program. I don't like exclusivity, and the uncertainty month-to-month is enough to keep me out of the program with all but a few books.


----------



## scottnicholson

Why does anyone assume this is even remotely about writers?


----------



## geronl

The next step is for someone to write a book that requires readers to skip to the last page to begin the story.

lol


----------



## delly_xo

Any thoughts on how this will impact the Algo? Thinking about it in terms of pages read as opposed to borrows past 10% makes my brain hurt. The only thing that seems fair would be books that have a higher percentage of pages read would fare better than books that were "borrowed" a lot but barely read.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sever Bronny

So now the grand question: how many pages will it require to equal the current payout rate? What we need is some approximate math. 

(fund amount) / (Total pages in KU) X pages read

Or something like that--damn it, Jim, I'm a writer not a mathematician.

Anyone care to make some educated guesses how many total pages there are in KU?


----------



## pwtucker

Man. Talk about a thunderbolt out of a blue sky. I've been planning to quit my job and move come July 31st in large part due to my income from 20 to 35k serials enrolled in the KU program. Now - what? If my borrows go from $1.35 to $0.75 at a penny a page, then in effect my income may be reduced by a third to half. Dare I quit my job now? If not, I'll have to sign a whole new lease to stay put and see how the KU changes shake out. 

If I understand correctly, KU will now pay by the page, whether said page is in a 75 page serial or a 750 page novel. Thus longer novels will no longer be penalized, and shorter serials won't benefit from the elevated KU borrow rate. In effect, there's no benefit to writing any given length for money's sake: we all now need to write for engagement so as to get the most pages read, regardless of length.


----------



## Guest

lilywhite said:


> I literally cannot FATHOM saying "I'm pulling all my books and going wide" an hour after a piece of news like this, with no time to reflect, and NO HARD DATA.


I never understood that either, but . . . whatever.


----------



## A past poster

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> We have a pretty good idea that Amazon knows $1.35 is the sweet spot. In other words, novels will stay IN KDP Select if they make $1.35, and we know this because we gave them a years' worth of data . I would suspect that just as we see them tinker with the pot money each month, somewhere they've decided that XXX pages will be a 100% payout when fully read of $1.35. Now, is XXX 300? Is it 200? Both of those numbers would allow Amazon to keep titles in the program and probably pay LESS each month.
> 
> We know May is $10.8 million and paid $1.35 per borrow, so there was 8,011,357 total borrows or titles at least read to 10%. How many of those 8.1 million borrowed books were novella length or shorter (less than 150 pages?). We don't know.
> 
> I personally don't believe ANY of these changes has to do with being more fair. If that was the case, why can't we make 70 cents on a .99 book by now instead of .35? Hmm? I think it has to do with Amazon trying to figure out a way to pay less each month, pay a "fair" borrow rate that they've decided for novel length work, and not worry about what it means for short stories or serials because usually they're priced at 99 cents anyway, so any payment more than $.35 is a boon for the author/publisher.
> 
> I would expect titles that would normally sell for .99 for length will be worth $.35-$.50 a borrow under the new system when read to 100% completion. I would expect 200-300 page novel length works to be worth about $1.35-$2.00 for 100% completion (because they're NOT going to suddenly start paying us MORE than what they were before with the KU or KOLL program), and 400-500+ pages will make a little more since the number of titles that fill that category are fewer in volume in the Select program than the shorts, novellas, or novel length.
> 
> It's just like when they normalized freebies to no longer count 1:1 when converting back to the Paid rankings etc. Amazon no longer wants to PAY $1.35 per read of a 10 page short story.
> 
> Amazon is NOT worried about losing the short story writers out of KU, they're trying to entice more longer works into the program. On some levels, this will be at the expense of shorter form writers, in other ways it won't because a shorter work can generally still be written and read faster than a longer work, so volume will play into it and not cause the short form writers to lose their entire lunches right away. But I would absolutely expect less earnings for the same # of borrows on any title less than 300 pages long. Because even IF 200 pages is the threshold for the "full borrow rate" we're used to seeing, you're still going to lose out on not every borrow reading 100% of the book. The percentage of readers that DNF will be the income loss.


^^This.

Amazon wants to get rid of the junk, and this is how they decided to do it. They've been criticized because the program has too many shorts and not enough novels that people want to read. They'll tweak the numbers in the pot to pay exactly what they want to pay. The first few months will probably be dazzling--unless you forgot, the first few months of borrows with KDP were over $2--but then the amount paid per page will be cut and cut and cut until they are paying what they want to pay. Unless Amazon devises a different method to pay them, I feel badly for the authors of children's books.


----------



## [email protected]

delly_xo said:


> Any thoughts on how this will impact the Algo? Thinking about it in terms of pages read as opposed to borrows past 10% makes my brain hurt. The only thing that seems fair would be books that have a higher percentage of pages read would fare better than books that were "borrowed" a lot but barely read.


I'm very curious about how this will affect ranking.


----------



## ketosis

JohnA Passaro said:


> Shrewd move by Amazon.
> 
> It is hard enough to have someone buy your book, now they have to read it too to get paid.
> 
> If a normal sized book gets paid out 2-4x a borrow rate then I would say it will be equivalent, as most people do not read the books that they borrow.
> 
> Else authors take another cut in pay.


You'll get paid per page read, so they don't need to read the entire thing to get paid. If you have a 300 page book and in the month they borrow it they only get 150 in, you'll get paid for those 150 pages that month. If they read the other 150 pages the next month, then you'll get paid that month for the other 150 pages.


----------



## Monique

Sever Bronny said:


> So now the grand question: how many pages will it require to equal the current payout rate? What we need is some approximate math.
> 
> (fund amount) / (Total pages in KU) X pages read
> 
> Or something like that--damn it, Jim, I'm a writer not a mathematician.
> 
> Anyone care to make some educated guesses how many total pages there are in KU?


We can do that math, but Amazon will simply adjust the fund to get the payout to what they want it to be.


----------



## geronl

Tulonsae said:


> More than likely, Amazon will measure pages "visited". If you think about it, the technology already exists to do that for webpages. I'm sure it's not hard to count pages in their apps/kindles.


true, its basically just reformed html anyways


----------



## Guest

Monique said:


> Let the wagering begin.
> 
> I'm going to say just under a penny per page will be the sweet spot. It will start higher (to woo people and keep them in) then be adjust down.


Remember that bestseller lady that went to the New York Times and told them that she was pulling out of KU because borrows were eating her sales and she was making much less money 2,99 compared to 1,34?
I think this adjustment is a response to her and others like her like Rosalind James.
My guess: $2,99 for 250 pages. So about a penny per page.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## 13893

EC Sheedy said:


> Sometimes I long for the good old days when a page calculation (roughly) was 250 words. I know, I know--there are a zillion variables, but 250-300 words equaling a page would be an easy peasy calculations.
> 
> I'll go brush my gray hair now.


sing it, sista. The Amazon page calculation sux.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Based on what Amazon says are the "page counts" for two works I have listed that don't yet have print versions, it looks like 320-340 words count as a page. So, if we arbitrarily say Amazon wants to shoot for .01 per page, a 10K word short story will garner about .30 if it's read to completion. A 100K word novel would earn approximately $3.00, again if finished. These sums would certainly be more in line with what you would get paid for a sale, assuming you priced the short story at .99, like most do, and the novel in the $3.99 range.

My guess is this is what Amazon's goal is: to bring KU borrow earnings more in line with sale earnings to keep the non-scammer writers in the program and to weed out the gamers. The system has the added benefit of rewarding on merit, as others have mentioned. Write a good book that people finish, you get more money.

In regards to knowing whether people finish my books or not, I would LOVE that sort of information. If I could determine that many people quit reading my book at a certain point, what better indicator could there be for cluing you into a possible problem spot with your story? I'm hopeful that we will be able to glean this kind of information from the reports they will be providing.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

loganbyrne said:


> I think a lot of people here have a sky is falling mentality because of the change. Knowing Amazon, they all ready know that many people were leaving and wanting to leave Select because of the variable borrow rate every month. At least for July, and possibly August, they aren't going to have some massively small payout amount. I don't even think it will be as low as a penny a page at first. I'm not saying it would be some giant number like ten cents a page as per their numbers example they gave out, but I would think at least three cents. They want to draw more people into Select and KU and keep them there. They'd be willing to spend the small chunk of change right now to make sure that happens. Eventually, yes, I believe it will go down to around a penny a page, but they aren't stupid enough to do that right out of the gate.


Assuming that a page is in the general vicinity of what calculated by Amazon on our book pages now (if we don't have a paper edition), there is no way it'll be three cents a page. They're gonna pay me $10 for my 100K word novel? Really?

I understand that they're coming up with a differnt calculation for what constitutes a page, which I predict they never really give us all the details on, but it's not going to be radically different than what's on the book detail page.

Someone else asked about algorithms - it shouldn't impact rankings at least since those occur when the borrow occurs, not when a reader hits 10%.


----------



## dgrant

geronl said:


> The next step is for someone to write a book that requires readers to skip to the last page to begin the story.


I actually know several romance readers who do this: after being burned enough times by love stories that weren't romances, they flip to the back to make sure there's a HEA before reading the book. Know a few mystery readers who do that, too, which always boggled me a little. Scifi and Fantasy readers don't seem to do that, but they will wait until the duology / trilogy / series is finished before starting the first one. (Mystery and SF/F both got burned by incomplete series due to the midlist death spiral & ordering to the net, and seem much warier about series.)

Anyone else known readers to do that?


----------



## Jacob Stanley

TuckerAuthor said:


> In regards to knowing whether people finish my books or not, I would LOVE that sort of information. If I could determine that many people quit reading my book at a certain point, what better indicator could there be for cluing you into a possible problem spot with your story? I'm hopeful that we will be able to glean this kind of information from the reports they will be providing.


This would be great, but I'm betting they just give us an overall pages read per day statistic with no mention of the number of readers.


----------



## Fannin Callahan

I don't see where a penny a page is coming into this. Based on a 10 million dollar pot, my math says it would be 10 cents per page. Of course there is no way to know how big the pot will be, but they are saying in excess of 11 million for the next two months. Their example gives a hundred pages, read through 100 times, would pay 1000 dollars. 100 x100 is 10,000, that's 10000 pages. 1000.00 divided by 10000 pages is .10 not .01 Right? This is my calculator speaking, not me.


----------



## TromboneAl

"Today we have a few exciting announcements to share related to the KDP Select global fund."

I ran this through Google Translate, and it returned:

"I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help."



Bob Stewart said:


> It also means variable payments based on how far someone's read in a particular book.


Dear Reader,

Thanks for choosing to borrow my book. If you decide to stop reading, be sure to page through to the end and check out a special offer for a free book!

(just kidding)


----------



## Bbates024

pwtucker said:


> Man. Talk about a thunderbolt out of a blue sky. I've been planning to quit my job and move come July 31st in large part due to my income from 20 to 35k serials enrolled in the KU program. Now - what? If my borrows go from $1.35 to $0.75 at a penny a page, then in effect my income may be reduced by a third to half. Dare I quit my job now? If not, I'll have to sign a whole new lease to stay put and see how the KU changes shake out.
> 
> If I understand correctly, KU will now pay by the page, whether said page is in a 75 page serial or a 750 page novel. Thus longer novels will no longer be penalized, and shorter serials won't benefit from the elevated KU borrow rate. In effect, there's no benefit to writing any given length for money's sake: we all now need to write for engagement so as to get the most pages read, regardless of length.


That is exactly how I understood the change. I think this is in direct response to Authors of longer works feeling slighted about the pay rate. I also think this is interesting because the borrow rate really wont matter as much as pages read. It makes having 700 borrows a day worthless if people are not reading the books. It will change how people run promotions.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Jacob Stanley said:


> This would be great, but I'm betting they just give us an overall pages read per day statistic with no mention of the number of readers.


That's my guess too, but it may be possible to look at the number of borrows vs the number of pages for each book and make some guesstimates based on that. At the very least, you'll have a better idea if people are finishing your books or not.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Fannin Callahan said:


> I don't see where a penny a page is coming into this. Based on a 10 million dollar pot, my math says it would be 10 cents per page. Of course there is no way to know how big the pot will be, but they are saying in excess of 11 million for the next two months. Their example gives a hundred pages, read through 100 times, would pay 1000 dollars. 100 x100 is 10,000, that's 10000 pages. 1000.00 divided by 10000 pages is .10 not .01 Right? This is my calculator speaking, not me.


We have no idea how many pages get read, so we can't figure it out that way. What we know is that Amazon can set the formula to anything they want to wind up with the numbers they want. And we can speculate that they're not going to lower the payout for a full length novel to 50 cents or raise it to $6. one cent per page will get a full length book around $3 per borrow depending on how they calculate pages, which may be a bit high but will at least in the vicinity.


----------



## Fannin Callahan

edwardgtalbot said:


> We have no idea how many pages get read, so we can't figure it out that way. What we know is that Amazon can set the formula to anything they want to wind up with the numbers they want. And we can speculate that they're not going to lower the payout for a full length novel to 50 cents or raise it to $6. one cent per page will get a full length book around $3 per borrow depending on how they calculate pages, which may be a bit high but will at least in the vicinity.


So basically their example is BS. They will just keep lowering the overall pot til they get it to the penny a page rate. Okay, I get it. That is probably a very good supposition. The example makes it look pretty good. I hadn't thought of a deliberate move to lower the overall pot, but you're right. That's exactly what they'll likely do.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

delly_xo said:


> Any thoughts on how this will impact the Algo? Thinking about it in terms of pages read as opposed to borrows past 10% makes my brain hurt. The only thing that seems fair would be books that have a higher percentage of pages read would fare better than books that were "borrowed" a lot but barely read.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It won't change it at all. You get the ranking boost when it's borrowed, not when it is read past 10 percent. You will still get the ranking boost when it's borrowed here.


----------



## Doglover

Well, I am very confused. Maths has never been my strong point, but me and my trusty calculator have been over this umpteen times and still can't figure it out. According to my email from Amazon, the author of a 100 page book which is downloaded and read 100 times will earn $1000. That is what it is saying. Therefore, if that author's book is only downloaded and read once, is that 1000 divided by 100, which is $10 per book. Since I cannot see Amazon paying us $10 per download, one of us must be mistaken and it is probably me, cos, as I said, maths is not my thing.


----------



## Atunah

That 10 million is just an example though they put up. 

I think Monique had a good amount earlier, I think it was monique. Just under 1 cent per read page. 

I would have just done away with mentioning the pot if I were Amazon. Nobody needs to know that. 
Just pay .008 cents ( did I get the decimals right)  per read page. Use the pot and whats left roll over after paying out some all star bonuses. 
That would give a clear indication each month exactly how much a author would earn per read page. Less anxiety. But I guess they want to keep their options open as far as how much to pay based on whats coming into the pot. 


Mind you, this is just my thinking out loud, nothing to do with actual program.  

20 pages read = 16 cents
100 pages read = 80 cents
150 pages read = $1.20 (close to current KU payout)
200 pages read = $1.6
300 pages read = $2.40
400 pages read = $3.20

If a book is priced at 3.99 for an assumed 300 pages book and you guys get 70 percent that would be what, 2.79? Minus some send fee? So that would bring this more on par with royalties of sold books. Given that readers actually read your book all the way through of course. 
It would still work well with 0.007 I think. 

If I messed up some math forgive, its just what I would have done. Its not what they are doing though so each month payout per page read will be different. 


They couldn't really base this on price of book or else all the scamlets would suddenly cost 9.99.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

Bbates024 said:


> That is exactly how I understood the change. I think this is in direct response to Authors of longer works feeling slighted about the pay rate. I also think this is interesting because the borrow rate really wont matter as much as pages read. *It makes having 700 barrows a day worthless if people are not reading the books*. It will change how people run promotions.


This is the biggest unknown. How skewed is it really? Do some writers have radically better reader retention than others? The payments could be way out of proportion for some if they do.

One writer may have 60 borrows a week, but average only 5 pages out of 20 read on each borrow. Another writer may get 20 borrows a week, but average 15 pages read on each borrow. The two would make the same amount of money.

It will be really interesting to see how it all adds up in the end. I think it sounds fair, except maybe for writers of children's books. Illustrated pages should count for more since it's a whole different level of work required.


----------



## pwtucker

I've done a little math.

Say a select global fund of $11,000,000
Say about 8,000,000 books are in KU (based on May fund/$1.34)
Say most of these are novellas, bringing the page average down to 100 (about a 35k novella)
Say you publish a 100 page novella (again, about 35k words)
One borrow a day would pay you about $1.40, or roughly about $0.0137/page.

Here are some other variations on average page number on all KU books borrowed:

Say a select global fund of $11,000,000
Say about 8,000,000 books are in KU (based on May fund/$1.34)
Say most of these are serials, bringing the page average down to 75 (about a 22k novella)
Say you publish a 100 page novella (about 35k words)
One borrow a day would pay you about $1.83, or roughly about $0.0183/page.

Say a select global fund of $11,000,000
Say about 8,000,000 books are in KU (based on May fund/$1.34)
Say most of these are longer novellas, bringing the page average up to 150 (about a 50k novella)
Say you publish a 100 page novella (about 35k words)
One borrow a day would pay you about $0.91, or roughly about $0.0091/page.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

I think that this will be very good for writers. This is all about making customers HAPPY. Happy customers stay and read. Reading pays. I expect that this is step one of improving the store. In step two, I expect Amazon to begin ranking works by percent completed. So works that readers complete will trend higher in searches than works that readers don't complete. This is about making customers HAPPY. I suspect that this system will cry havok with permafree. WTF reads will hurt sales because free books may not get finished as often. On the other hand, if page reading matter, then books with engaging previews will trend higher.

So this isn't just a game changer to Select, this is a game changer to the *entire book search process*.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Tulonsae said:


> Do you think they will continue to report number of borrows?


They may not, but with some calculations based on your book's ranking, you should be able to arrive at a reasonable number, assuming your title isn't a top seller. People moving dozens or more per day will have a tougher time making a determination, but those folks probably aren't as concerned about possible flaws either.


----------



## JumpingShip

On the upside, we'll be getting paid that first 9.9% for the first part of every book that is then not finished. We weren't getting that before. Unless they only pay per page beyond 10%, in which case, that kind of sucks but not sure how they would do that unless they have some other kind of threshold. I think it will be a flat page rate. It's the only way I can think of where they can account for books read from one month to the next. If you read a three hundred page novel with one hundred of those pages in July, and the rest in August, you'd be paid for the one hundred in July, and the balance in August.


----------



## horrordude1973

I'm thinking of putting my novellas into some collections and putting the collection of like my 4 book series and such into one volume. Putting that on KU. And then taking the single title out of KU so they can buy them individually and I get paid or borrow the longer version.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

This is why authors drink.


----------



## Sever Bronny

Hmm, Amazon could now theoretically implement a new quantifier: reader retention rate / ranking.


----------



## MyraScott

You've got a decimal in the wrong place- that would be $1 for a 100 pg book in their example.

I imagine it will be a penny a page or something less than that.


----------



## Nick Marsden

Okay, take a breath everyone! 

This is early yet. And we are all jumping to a lot of conclusions.

First, this is only about KU. This is the program where someone can borrow a book at a time and they have to return that book before they can start another one. So, they will either finish it quickly, or they will not finish it all. They won't be holding onto it for weeks before reading it (at least the vast majority will not). That would be a waste of the subscription fee. 

Second, we have no idea how the pricing is going to boil down. This is a huge change over the 10% model. We can't assume that they will be shooting for the $1.50 (or whatever) royalty price. 

Third, for short fiction writers, this will just mean you'll have to pump out a solid number of works per month. Novelists release 60-100k novels every 3-4 months (unless they are insanely prolific or pretty slow). If you can release a 20k short every month, you're still golden. Some people do more than that. 

Finally, this will force ALL writers in KU to concentrate on quality. That means different things for different people. Romances are gonna have to be more romantic, Thrillers more thrilling, and erotica more erotic. Everyone has to up their game! This is the fun part. Keeping the readers turning pages means you will be writing more. I mean, come on, don't you write more when you are writing something fun and exciting? 

Yes, I think this move was meant to help readers by weeding out the crap in KU than it was to help authors commercially (though it is more fair to everyone as far as I can tell). If you're not writing that crap, it's just going to be that much easier for KU readers to find you! If you are writing that crap (I mean, REALLY??) this is an opportunity to improve your writing and please your readers.


----------



## Eskimo

I might have missed something here, but I don't see where Amazon is paying a penny a page. If the following is accurate ...  if they read one-half we'll get half-a-penny a page. If they only read 40%? Will we get anything at all?


"The author of a 100 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

"The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $2,000 ($10 million multiplied by 20,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

"The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed 100 times but only read halfway through on average would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages)."


----------



## 13893

Fannin Callahan said:


> I don't see where a penny a page is coming into this. Based on a 10 million dollar pot, my math says it would be 10 cents per page. Of course there is no way to know how big the pot will be, but they are saying in excess of 11 million for the next two months. Their example gives a hundred pages, read through 100 times, would pay 1000 dollars. 100 x100 is 10,000, that's 10000 pages. 1000.00 divided by 10000 pages is .10 not .01 Right? This is my calculator speaking, not me.


And when their examples for KOLL first rolled out, the examples assumed $5 a payout per borrow.


----------



## EC Sheedy

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> This is why authors drink.


    

And it was morning here when the announcement was made. I'm in trouble...


----------



## Fannin Callahan

Nick Marsden said:


> Okay, take a breath everyone!
> 
> This is early yet. And we are all jumping to a lot of conclusions.
> 
> First, this is only about KU. This is the program where someone can borrow a book at a time and they have to return that book before they can start another one. So, they will either finish it quickly, or they will not finish it all. They won't be holding onto it for weeks before reading it (at least the vast majority will not). That would be a waste of the subscription fee.
> 
> Second, we have no idea how the pricing is going to boil down. This is a huge change over the 10% model. We can't assume that they will be shooting for the $1.50 (or whatever) royalty price.
> 
> Third, for short fiction writers, this will just mean you'll have to pump out a solid number of works per month. Novelists release 60-100k novels every 3-4 months (unless they are insanely prolific or pretty slow). If you can release a 20k short every month, you're still golden. Some people do more than that.
> 
> Finally, this will force ALL writers in KU to concentrate on quality. That means different things for different people. Romances are gonna have to be more romantic, Thrillers more thrilling, and erotica more erotic. Everyone has to up their game! This is the fun part. Keeping the readers turning pages means you will be writing more. I mean, come on, don't you write more when you are writing something fun and exciting?
> 
> Yes, I think this move was meant to help readers by weeding out the crap in KU than it was to help authors commercially (though it is more fair to everyone as far as I can tell). If you're not writing that crap, it's just going to be that much easier for KU readers to find you! If you are writing that crap (I mean, REALLY??) this is an opportunity to improve your writing and please your readers.


I totally agree. This new approach seems to me to be very fair, so far anyway. We'll see how it plays out.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Yeah Amazon examples are bumpkiss. I think we CAN safely assume that $1.35-$1.50 is the 100% payout because we have a year's worth of KU payouts now. The variable we don't know is what does Amazon want the PAGE COUNT of a 100% borrow pay out to be if the book is read 100% by the reader? 

That will take about 6 months to see. The first few months they will pad that pot with whatever they have to do to make the loss on income gradual. We saw this last summer when the borrow rate for July 2014 was about 20 cents lower than the norm of about $2. By December, we all knew $1.35-ish was where Amazon wanted the borrow rate to be. Because they'd announce the pot to be $X million, and then just arbitrarily ADD more millions once they did the month's calculations to make sure the borrow rate didn't drop below the number they decided would keep titles in the program.


----------



## Guest

This is bad for picture book authors like me. My books can take up to 6 months to write and draw and paint, arguably just as hard as a novel to produce, I'm talking solid artwork too, not just found clip art. 
Whilst I understand the need for changes, I could also argue this: A well crafted, entertaining short story, or novella, can be infinitely more valuable than a hap- hazard rushed novel. Likewise, a great novel can easily out weigh dozens of rushed shorts.
I think what I am trying to say is this; we all hate bad books/art, but I predict we will now see a flood of poorly written novels over the coming months. For every true artist, there are 20 cash grabbers out there, trying to play the game. Always has been always will.
Id love to see some genre off-shoots, that would support the ethical artist, and the reader who enjoy that particular genre. So a children's channel, or a short romance or thriller channel. I am quite aware Amazon doesn't have to do anything they don't want to, but I think going wide may well be the new way for those outside novel creation.
I have a very quick question? With a new kdp account, can you choose NOT to opt into select from the start, and can you also release a single book within an account to select...therefore experimenting with certain titles on a release by release approach?
Sorry for the loaded response to this thread, trying to rack my brain for my method going forward. I have several books ready and want to be sure what I`m signing up for.

Thanks,

Andy


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I personally don't believe ANY of these changes has to do with being more fair. If that was the case, why can't we make 70 cents on a .99 book by now instead of .35? Hmm?


Sure you can (or at least you can get paid more than $.50). You just have to distribute through D2D or Smashwords.


----------



## daffodils321

I hope AMZ gives up some kind of way to gauge what's happening more so than how many pages are being read. Without, for example, knowing how many times your book's been borrowed/downloaded the number of pages read doesn't tell you nearly what it could. 

I don't have a problem with this change. Honestly if people don't read to the end they probably aren't going to read your next book. And it seems to me that should be your goal. To make the current book good enough that is sells your next release. Personally, if readers aren't reading my book I want to know so I can adjust my product accordingly. But without proper stats you won't know that....


----------



## Anna Drake

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> This is why authors drink.


Exactly!


----------



## Guest

Jacob Stanley said:


> What about erotica writers who put a sex scene at the beginning of the story?


Oh boy! We already have 2 special needs categories with this new system:
Children's books: because of pictures
Erotica: because if you're a really good writer, no one will read past page 1.


----------



## geronl

TromboneAl said:


> Dear Reader,
> 
> Thanks for choosing to borrow my book. If you decide to stop reading, be sure to page through to the end and check out a special offer for a free book!


I like it!


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## geronl

Hang on... what about Prime members who can borrow it... what do I get for that... anything...


----------



## daffodils321

Andrew Murray said:


> This is bad for picture book authors like me. My books can take up to 6 months to write and draw and paint, arguably just as hard as a novel to produce, I'm talking solid artwork too, not just found clip art.
> Whilst I understand the need for changes, I could also argue this: A well crafted, entertaining short story, or novella, can be infinitely more valuable than a hap- hazard rushed novel. Likewise, a great novel can easily out weigh dozens of rushed shorts.
> I think what I am trying to say is this; we all hate bad books/art, but I predict we will now see a flood of poorly written novels over the coming months. For every true artist, there are 20 cash grabbers out there, trying to play the game. Always has been always will.
> Id love to see some genre off-shoots, that would support the ethical artist, and the reader who enjoy that particular genre. So a children's channel, or a short romance or thriller channel. I am quite aware Amazon doesn't have to do anything they don't want to, but I think going wide may well be the new way for those outside novel creation.
> I have a very quick question? With a new kdp account, can you choose NOT to opt into select from the start, and can you also release a single book within an account to select...therefore experimenting with certain titles on a release by release approach?
> Sorry for the loaded response to this thread, trying to rack my brain for my method going forward. I have several books ready and want to be sure what I`m signing up for.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andy


You never had to put anything into Select even from the start if you don't want to. Every time you publish a new book you click a box for whether or not you want it in Select. And you can take it out/renew every 90 days. I'm assuming you don't have a kdp account yet?


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## geronl

ok!


----------



## jonathanmoeller

I confess this is fortuitous timing for me, since I’ll get to gather first-hand data of how the new scheme works. At the end of April, I put one of my older series into KU, seven full-length novels in all. So in May and June, I’ll see how the old payment structure worked, and then I can compare it with July’s results.

Beyond that, I won't speculate until additional data is available.


----------



## Crime fighters

MyraScott said:


> *You've got a decimal in the wrong place- that would be $1 for a 100 pg book in their example.*
> 
> I imagine it will be a penny a page or something less than that.


No. That's exactly what the email says. I'm sure they're overstating the payment, but that's what the email says.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Monique

lilywhite said:


> I don't understand why you would predict that. Poorly written novels don't get finished, hence those people who write them won't get paid. Getting paid specifically and only when you keep readers turning pages seems to me to be an excellent reason to increase quality, not diminish it.


I think that's what I like the most about this. It takes the focus off just hooking/tricking/luring the reader into opening the book and maybe getting to the 10% barrier and instead rewards books that readers enjoy and want to keep reading.


----------



## Guest

daffodils321 said:


> You never had to put anything into Select even from the start if you don't want to. Every time you publish a new book you click a box for whether or not you want it in Select. And you can take it out/renew every 90 days. I'm assuming you don't have a kdp account yet?


I have an account but have not published yet, working on a website. My issue now is that I used createspace and kindle kids creator to do my book and I feel stuck to amazon now. Pretty gutted. They look great too, if I say so myself. I am presuming if you don't enroll in select, its hard to gain traction for a new author? My only other though would be to put them in for 90 days, to see how they stick and then fetch them out after. 
Maybe I should just write my 500,000 word Russian billionaire Sc-fi romantic shape-shifter novel instead?


----------



## Bob Stewart

drno said:


> Oh boy! We already have 2 special needs categories with this new system:
> Children's books: because of pictures
> Erotica: because if you're a really good writer, no one will read past page 1.


Perhaps the "Kindle Edition Normalized Page Count" will give bonus pages for multiple orgasms and cuddly, anthropomorphized protagonists?


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## ArchangelEST

Doglover said:


> Well, I am very confused. Maths has never been my strong point, but me and my trusty calculator have been over this umpteen times and still can't figure it out. According to my email from Amazon, the author of a 100 page book which is downloaded and read 100 times will earn $1000. That is what it is saying. Therefore, if that author's book is only downloaded and read once, is that 1000 divided by 100, which is $10 per book. Since I cannot see Amazon paying us $10 per download, one of us must be mistaken and it is probably me, cos, as I said, maths is not my thing.


Their numbers were just examples. Not the actual numbers they'll be paying anyone.


----------



## Atunah

Nick Marsden said:


> First, this is only about KU. This is the program where someone can borrow a book at a time and they have to return that book before they can start another one. So, they will either finish it quickly, or they will not finish it all. They won't be holding onto it for weeks before reading it (at least the vast majority will not). That would be a waste of the subscription fee.


Actually no. You can download 10 books at a time. You can have some of them sitting there for weeks easy. If you borrow the 10, read 2 and replace those 2 with new books to read and read those, the other 8 are still sitting on your kindle. They'll sit there until you return them. You can return them without even opening if you want. You can read as many books a month as you can stay awake for basically. Always with being able to have 10 books out at a time.


----------



## Guest

lilywhite said:


> I don't understand why you would predict that. Poorly written novels don't get finished, hence those people who write them won't get paid. Getting paid specifically and only when you keep readers turning pages seems to me to be an excellent reason to increase quality, not diminish it.


Because this is exactly what short story writers are beginning to get tagged with...lumped in with the scammy, quick-buck, ghost writer stuff, which I also hate. When people can`t make a quick buck with shorts, they will migrate to the longer book and churn out garbage. 
Like I said, a great short story can be equally as satisfying as a great novel. People enjoy quick, commute reads too. I sense a little snobbery by some folk, regarding short works. I don`t get that. Shorts have a craft of their own. Having to tell a compelling story in a smaller space.
My main bone of contention, is what this will do for my picture book aspirations. If it wasn't hard before, for a children's book writer...boy. My last one took 5 months to create. I`m not here to argue or fight btw. It is wonderful for novel writers, but for my particular niche, its bad news.
I`m sorry, its just my opinion.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Guest

drno said:


> Oh boy! We already have 2 special needs categories with this new system:
> Children's books: because of pictures
> Erotica: because if you're a really good writer, no one will read past page 1.


What does this mean?


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## ruecole

Andrew Murray said:


> Because this is exactly what short story writers are beginning to get tagged with...lumped in with the scammy, quick-buck, ghost writer stuff, which I also hate. When people can`t make a quick buck with shorts, they will migrate to the longer book and churn out garbage.
> Like I said, a great short story can be equally as satisfying as a great novel. People enjoy quick, commute reads too. I sense a little snobbery by some folk, regarding short works. I don`t get that. Shorts have a craft of their own. Having to tell a compelling story in a smaller space.
> My main bone of contention, is what this will do for my picture book aspirations. If it wasn't hard before, for a children's book writer...boy. My last one took 5 months to create. I`m not here to argue or fight btw. It is wonderful for novel writers, but for my particular niche, its bad news.
> I`m sorry, its just my opinion.


I feel the same. The old way wasn't fair to novel writers, but the new way (if the payout does end up working out to a penny per page) is equally unfair, if not even more so, to short story and children's writers. 

Rue


----------



## RuthNestvold

I have to admit, this is actually making it tempting for me to put my 200,000 word fantasy novels back into Select.


----------



## Jerry Patterson

lilywhite said:


> This is not how KU works.


I think what he's referring to is that after a reader has 10 KU books he has to return one before getting another book. You can only have 10 books at a time with KU.


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## NoahPorter

This doesn't fix anything.


----------



## cinisajoy

Caddy said:


> But, stilll, at a penny a page, you would need a 350 page novel to make $3.50. Right? A 60,000 word novel isn't 350 pages. So a 60,000 word book priced at $4.99 and NOT in select make $3.50 with less pages. The program STILL does not pay as high of a rate as when not in Select for novels, unless you price your novels at $2.99 or less when not in Select.
> 
> If I take my 6 serialized stories that have a total of 60,0000 words, at a penny a page (estimating 50 pages) it would get me $3.00 IF AND WHEN the person reads all of it. It could sit there forever waiting to be read.
> 
> Or I could take those same stories and turn them into a novel and go wide, making $3.50 as soon as they are bought and make money on other sites as well. Gay romance sells on a few other sites quite well.
> 
> Or, even better, take the serials down...write the story more in-depth (say I take the first two 10,000 words ones and add enough story (good story, not crap) to make it a 60,000 novel and make it a trilogy or something...and make $3.50 three times.
> 
> Yeah. I always said if the rate went down to .50 per borrow I was out. Looks like it just did. NOt going to do anything right this instant, but it looks like my pen name will be making changes at some point.


Caddy,
I just estimated your 60,000 total words at 200 pages. This is using a 300 words per page word count. How were you getting 50 pages?


----------



## Atunah

judygoodwin said:


> KU still skews towards shorter fiction, overall. Because it only makes sense for a subscriber to KU to pay 9.99 a month if what they are reading equals that amount or above. So the person who likes to read the 1000 page novel isn't likely to be a KU subscriber. The KU subscriber is likely one who likes to read serial fiction or short books that would quickly add up in cost. Yes, they'll get some novels because of perceived value, but I think short fiction is going to be just fine. It's just going to have to be GOOD short fiction, or it won't be read. And those awful long novels won't benefit.
> 
> I agree that Amazon will find the average length of the book and cater to that length for the target payment of 1.35. Wouldn't we all love to know what's an average length book in KU!!


Not for me. I unsubscribed because of so many shorts. For me 9.99 is valuable if I can read at least 4 books a month on a plan. A regular sized book for me is 300-450 pages. Its what most books I read are at. I wasn't going to pay 9.99 to have to wade through 200 pages of shorts to find a novel here and there. So yes, the current model was much more for those that like to read shorts. The future model will be for both, shorts readers and novel readers if more authors put their books in it again. So isn't that a win win for both readers and authors? If books go back in, I might subscribe again. Those that are already in it and like shorts, can continue to do so. For them not much changes. But for those of us that want to read books, it could be a way to take part again.

Mind you, I read a lot of romance and that genre and subgenres have been flooded with shorts, many of them miscategorized. So in other genres it might not be as hard to find the novels, but romance? Forget about it. Its a catchall.


----------



## horrordude1973

this whole thing has fried my brain today. Past few months i started puling in a really good income on KU, but I write short novellas so this is messing it all up.

I don't want over react and do something crazy..but I don't want to do nothing and watch my income bottom out a few months from now. I feel sick


----------



## JalexM

judygoodwin said:


> KU still skews towards shorter fiction, overall. Because it only makes sense for a subscriber to KU to pay 9.99 a month if what they are reading equals that amount or above. So the person who likes to read the 1000 page novel isn't likely to be a KU subscriber. The KU subscriber is likely one who likes to read serial fiction or short books that would quickly add up in cost. Yes, they'll get some novels because of perceived value, but I think short fiction is going to be just fine. It's just going to have to be GOOD short fiction, or it won't be read. And those awful long novels won't benefit.
> 
> I agree that Amazon will find the average length of the book and cater to that length for the target payment of 1.35. Wouldn't we all love to know what's an average length book in KU!!


I don't see it that way, it's still cheaper to get longer books through KU. Just because it's longer doesn't mean it takes that much longer to read. If I really like a book I could read a 1000 pager in two days.


----------



## katrina46

I actually like this better just because I never really liked earning less than 2.99 on my erotica. Now a lot of erotica writers are already talking about pulling out or bundling. Most of us have decent sized catalogs. We can unpublish and republish in bundles raising the sales price to 6.99 or 7.99. The short smut will stay out and earn 2.99 again. I only participated in KU because if was hard to sell erotica out of it, so I'm hoping this is a step back to getting real royalties again. Maybe not, but I'm hoping just going by what I'm hearing from some.


----------



## Cheyanne

I think this is definitely more fair in regards to short books and novels.

I'm mostly upset about the fact that I just paid $100 to Book Report so it would add up my borrows for me. *sigh*


----------



## Greg Dragon

Not to stir the pot (though I am) but the cancelling Select option may not be what we are assuming (like immediate opt-out). I emailed KDP to remove a number of my books after receiving the email and this is what they sent me:



> Thank you for contacting us!
> 
> I understand that you would like to remove some of your eBooks from KDP Select. Currently, you have 3 days to cancel enrollment. To do so, go to the book's "Enrollment Details" and uncheck the box next to "Keep this book enrolled in KDP Select." This option will not be available after the initial 3-day period, nor will it be an option in subsequent terms for that book, including if you've previously cancelled its enrollment. Also, once you begin using your free promotion days, the cancellation period will end. At this point please allow your KDP Select enrollment period to expire.
> 
> To learn more about KDP Select, be sure to check out our Help pages:
> 
> https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A6KILDRNSCOBA
> 
> I realize that this is not the response that you had hoped for, and sincerely apologize for any disappointment that this may cause.
> 
> Regards


Figured I'd try my luck since I wanted those titles out in the first place, but it is what it is. Maybe they plan to change this closer to the date? Who knows.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

scottnicholson said:


> Why does anyone assume this is even remotely about writers?


Scott's right. This has nothing to do with authors. It's probably a result of reader complaints about the spam-a-lot shorts and the lack of novels.

But, without a borrow rate comparable to royalties from a sale, many authors - not all, but a lot of them - won't put their novels back into KU. I won't.

It has nothing to do with authors, and everything to do with Amazon's customer complaints about what's available in KU.


----------



## Tim_A

I write 100K novels. I was always a bit bummed that I only got the same as people churning out 10K or less shorts, but you know it was what it was. This new scheme seems to be a lot more fair, and it rewards reader engagement too, since if authors start padding short works with dross, readers will simply stop reading. Maybe it'll signal an end to the ghastly "20% padding with bits of the next novel" too. As a reader, I hate that.


----------



## GeneDoucette

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Yeah Amazon examples are bumpkiss. I think we CAN safely assume that $1.35-$1.50 is the 100% payout because we have a year's worth of KU payouts now. The variable we don't know is what does Amazon want the PAGE COUNT of a 100% borrow pay out to be if the book is read 100% by the reader?
> 
> That will take about 6 months to see. The first few months they will pad that pot with whatever they have to do to make the loss on income gradual. We saw this last summer when the borrow rate for July 2014 was about 20 cents lower than the norm of about $2. By December, we all knew $1.35-ish was where Amazon wanted the borrow rate to be. Because they'd announce the pot to be $X million, and then just arbitrarily ADD more millions once they did the month's calculations to make sure the borrow rate didn't drop below the number they decided would keep titles in the program.


I feel like the "$1.35-$1.50 is the 100% payout" is an overly simplistic way of stating this. The new approach is a complete redistribution of their monthly pool. They can absolutely pay more than a penny a page or so and still end up putting less money in the fund overall, because they're no longer paying out $1.35 to 20 page stories and what-have you. Their example is, of course, ridiculously high, but I could see someone with a 150 page book making more than $1.50 for a 100% read-through and Amazon still coming out ahead.


----------



## Guest

lilywhite said:


> I can tell you I'm gonna take a big hit on the erotica pen name, but I still think it's fair.


I was wondering how this would impact erotica writers as they are the ones selling most in the short story formats. What is the new strategy? Anyone know?

I'll probably get decimated as I write short detective fiction.


----------



## katrina46

GeneDoucette said:


> it's interesting, one of the things I heard a lot around here is Select benefiting short fiction more than long, and Amazon should pay out lending $ based on sale price instead. This seems like a variant solution to that complaint. I was expecting to see more support for it around here.


Well, not all but some of the complainers didn't count on their books having to be read all the way through before getting the full payout. This can hurt long as much as short work. I can't tell you how many books I've started and not finished. At least they're being fair and screwing both sides.


----------



## Craig Halloran

It's my opinion that things were much better before KU happened. Life was simpler. I liked it. I miss it.


----------



## cinisajoy

judygoodwin said:


> KU still skews towards shorter fiction, overall. Because it only makes sense for a subscriber to KU to pay 9.99 a month if what they are reading equals that amount or above. So the person who likes to read the 1000 page novel isn't likely to be a KU subscriber. The KU subscriber is likely one who likes to read serial fiction or short books that would quickly add up in cost. Yes, they'll get some novels because of perceived value, but I think short fiction is going to be just fine. It's just going to have to be GOOD short fiction, or it won't be read. And those awful long novels won't benefit.
> 
> I agree that Amazon will find the average length of the book and cater to that length for the target payment of 1.35. Wouldn't we all love to know what's an average length book in KU!!


How long do you think it takes to read 1,000 page novel? Let's estimate that at 300 words per page. I read 300 words per minute. That comes out to 1,000 minutes which works out to 16 and a half hours. If I read 2 to 3 hours a day, that is one week to finish said novel. I could read 4 in one month and that would be advantageous to my wallet. $10 versus $40. 
I know 2 readers that read much faster than me. Heck one is twice as fast on word count and I think she reads many hours a day. So that 1,000 pages would keep her occupied for 1 day.


----------



## Kristopia

Rykymus said:


> This is actually a great idea. Think about it.
> 
> On the flat rate, KU is flooded with shorts, as no one wants to lose a few dollars every time their longer works are borrowed. If they pay based on length, everyone will pad their work, killing the quality of the books. If they pay based on price, everyone ups their price and sales decrease.
> 
> Paying based on number of pages read hurts no one. Ten 5,000 word shorts or one 50,000 word book... same number of pages read, so same payout. Now, it's about making all those pages worth reading, instead of making the first 11% worth reading. Better quality, better diversity of length. Now, it can be about the story again, instead of about playing KU for all it's worth. No longer do you have to break up what should have been a novel, and turn it into a serial. (Which we would all agree is usually not good for the story, as it was not the way it was written.)
> 
> Now, you can write what you want, the way you want. Just make all the pages worth reading. Everyone wins, including the reader.
> 
> I see nothing but good with this idea.


This is what I'm thinking, too. Payment by page is, to me, a good option for KU in order to cull the people trying to make a profit with poorly done work. If your work is good, people will read to the end, and you'll get paid for it.

I do feel for the children's picture book authors, though, as this could really harm their ability to stay in KU


----------



## Bbates024

I think it will be interesting to see the calculations cause it wont be divided by 8 million anymore. It is going to be 11 million divided by how many pages are read. So you could be looking at say 11 million(cash) divided by 110 million (pages read) or it could be much smaller or larger. It is going to be really interesting on how this turns out.


----------



## Charnell

cinisajoy said:


> How long do you think it takes to read 1,000 page novel? Let's estimate that at 300 words per page. I read 300 words per minute. That comes out to 1,000 minutes which works out to 16 and a half hours. If I read 2 to 3 hours a day, that is one week to finish said novel. I could read 4 in one month and that would be advantageous to my wallet. $10 versus $40.
> I know 2 readers that read much faster than me. Heck one is twice as fast on word count and I think she reads many hours a day. So that 1,000 pages would keep her occupied for 1 day.


Exceptions do exist.


----------



## katrina46

drno said:


> I was wondering how this would impact erotica writers as they are the ones selling most in the short story formats. What is the new strategy? Anyone know?
> 
> I'll probably get decimated as I write short detective fiction.


I had said in an earlier post a lot I know are planning to bundle and raise sales prices and keep short 2.99 out, but it's early. Shorts are flexible. There's all kinds of ways to go. I could do a seven story bundle in a week and charge 6.99. Right now I'm probably going to unpublish the short ones in KU and bundle them today. After that, I'll write a lot of bundles (they do best anyway) and keep the 2.99 out for the 2.09 royalty. My last bundle did okay and I'd been meaning to do more, so it really doesn't bother me.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Guest

Atunah said:


> I unsubscribed because of so many shorts.


What you need is the option t search on book length. But I agree, too many writers who were getting 3 buck per sale lost money putting their books in KU. I think this is meant to bring them back. But It will only happen if they pay a nice amount per page to cover the lost sale.


----------



## cinisajoy

katrina46 said:


> Well, not all but some of the complainers didn't count on their books having to be read all the way through before getting the full payout. This can hurtslong as much as short work. I can't tell you how many books I've started and not finished. At least they're being fair and screwing both sides.


Since you asked, I will give you this week's totals. I have downloaded 63 this week. 
Note no kboarders are included in the did not finish. These are all non fiction...cookbooks and puzzle books.
Of those 63, so far 21 have either been started and not finished or just deleted because they were the same author as the ones I started. So roughly 1/3.


----------



## katrina46

lilywhite said:


> Erotica sold -- outright sold, not borrows -- before KU. We'll adapt. I don't worry too much. Erotica is a vice, and people will pay for it.


Thank you. I'm actually excited. I'm off to create bundles and raise prices now.


----------



## Jane Killick

If everyone under the old system got the same money for a borrow, 
but in the future it depends on how many pages read, then those shorts
Will be getting less money. With the same size pot, that should mean 
More money for novels than under the current system. Do you not think?

Some people have been asking, "but what if this?" And "what if that?"
I suspect that Amazon would be happy to tolerate the odd anomaly if
It mostly works well and solves the current issue of shorts and spamflets.

I was going to try Select with my next lot of releases anyway.
This hasn't changed my mind. My only fear is I might like Select
Too much and want to stay. At heart, I believe in wide.



Greg Dragon said:


> the cancelling Select option may not be what we are assuming (like immediate opt-out). I emailed KDP to remove a number of my books after receiving the email and this is what they sent me: (an email that said "no")


Email them again quoting the Amazon email about the new Select rules and option to opt out. I'll bet you just got a response from someone working off the old script.


----------



## RJ Crayton

I completely agree with Elizabeth (copied below). This is about Amazon trying to pay less money. They could have made it more fair by just paying less to shorter works or 99 cent works. Instead, they've introduced a per page payout. Given that they see the stats on how much is read, what is the likelihood that KU borrowers, have a higher DNF rate? If they don't like it after 30 percent, they just return it. A high DNF rate is going to cut into how much authors earn. To say readers have to meet a certain threshold for a payout is one thing. To say we're only going to pay based on how much they read, is just a way to pay authors less. If they read more than the free sample, then I feel like authors should get a set, tangible, clear payout. This has way too many variables from month to month. There's fairness and there's logistical nightmare. This is the ladder.



Elizabeth Ann West said:


> We have a pretty good idea that Amazon knows $1.35 is the sweet spot. In other words, novels will stay IN KDP Select if they make $1.35, and we know this because we gave them a years' worth of data . I would suspect that just as we see them tinker with the pot money each month, somewhere they've decided that XXX pages will be a 100% payout when fully read of $1.35. Now, is XXX 300? Is it 200? Both of those numbers would allow Amazon to keep titles in the program and probably pay LESS each month.
> 
> We know May is $10.8 million and paid $1.35 per borrow, so there was 8,011,357 total borrows or titles at least read to 10%. How many of those 8.1 million borrowed books were novella length or shorter (less than 150 pages?). We don't know.
> 
> I personally don't believe ANY of these changes has to do with being more fair. If that was the case, why can't we make 70 cents on a .99 book by now instead of .35? Hmm? I think it has to do with Amazon trying to figure out a way to pay less each month, pay a "fair" borrow rate that they've decided for novel length work, and not worry about what it means for short stories or serials because usually they're priced at 99 cents anyway, so any payment more than $.35 is a boon for the author/publisher.
> 
> I would expect titles that would normally sell for .99 for length will be worth $.35-$.50 a borrow under the new system when read to 100% completion. I would expect 200-300 page novel length works to be worth about $1.35-$2.00 for 100% completion (because they're NOT going to suddenly start paying us MORE than what they were before with the KU or KOLL program), and 400-500+ pages will make a little more since the number of titles that fill that category are fewer in volume in the Select program than the shorts, novellas, or novel length.
> 
> It's just like when they normalized freebies to no longer count 1:1 when converting back to the Paid rankings etc. Amazon no longer wants to PAY $1.35 per read of a 10 page short story.
> 
> Amazon is NOT worried about losing the short story writers out of KU, they're trying to entice more longer works into the program. On some levels, this will be at the expense of shorter form writers, in other ways it won't because a shorter work can generally still be written and read faster than a longer work, so volume will play into it and not cause the short form writers to lose their entire lunches right away. But I would absolutely expect less earnings for the same # of borrows on any title less than 300 pages long. Because even IF 200 pages is the threshold for the "full borrow rate" we're used to seeing, you're still going to lose out on not every borrow reading 100% of the book. The percentage of readers that DNF will be the income loss.


----------



## Hugh Howey

drno said:


> I was wondering how this would impact erotica writers as they are the ones selling most in the short story formats. What is the new strategy? Anyone know?
> 
> I'll probably get decimated as I write short detective fiction.


Uh ... it means keep writing what you're writing, if the readers are enjoying it.


----------



## AllyWho

What about books that are read outside of supported devices?

For example, I used to buy all my books from Amazon (before we had kindles Downunder) used Calibre to turn the mobi files into epubs and uploaded them to my kobo. How will Amazon know how many pages I have read?

I now use the Kindle app on my ipad mini. What happens if I download a whole lot of books and then turn off the wifi connection. Again, how will Amazon ever know the number of pages I have read?

Amazon still gets paid the monthly subscription, but potentially the author will never get paid if you read on an unsupported device that Amazon can't track.


----------



## Guest

Bob Stewart said:


> Perhaps the "Kindle Edition Normalized Page Count" will give bonus pages for multiple orgasms


One of these days, Amazon is going to come up with a way to collect user data on that...


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Guest

katrina46 said:


> I had said in an earlier post a lot I know are planning to bundle and raise sales prices and keep short 2.99 out, but it's early. Shorts are flexible. There's all kinds of ways to go. I could do a seven story bundle in a week and charge 6.99. Right now I'm probably going to unpublish the short ones in KU and bundle them today. After that, I'll write a lot of bundles (they do best anyway) and keep the 2.99 out for the 2.09 royalty. My last bundle did okay and I'd been meaning to do more, so it really doesn't bother me.


Thank you!


----------



## cinisajoy

AliceWE said:


> What about books that are read outside of supported devices?
> 
> For example, I used to buy all my books from Amazon (before we had kindles Downunder) used Calibre to turn the mobi files into epubs and uploaded them to my kobo. How will Amazon know how many pages I have read?
> 
> I now use the Kindle app on my ipad mini. What happens if I download a whole lot of books and then turn off the wifi connection. Again, how will Amazon ever know the number of pages I have read?
> 
> Amazon still gets paid the monthly subscription, but potentially the author will never get paid if you read on an unsupported device that Amazon can't track.


You said buy. Two different animals.
Kindle Unlimited only allows 10 books out at a time. I don't think you can Calibre them. You have to return one of the 10 to get another one.
So at best you are only hurting 10 authors.


----------



## Guest

I have just realised how long I`ve spent reading this thread. I haven't done a lick of writing. I need to get on with it and stop worrying. 
I think experimentation is the key now, adapting and trying stuff. Write better, write faster and enjoy it.
I think I`ll take myself away from this topic now, it`s too distracting. Who knows how this will pan out. Good luck all. The cream will rise to the top, as the old saying goes.


----------



## JumpingShip

cinisajoy said:


> How long do you think it takes to read 1,000 page novel? Let's estimate that at 300 words per page. I read 300 words per minute. That comes out to 1,000 minutes which works out to 16 and a half hours. If I read 2 to 3 hours a day, that is one week to finish said novel. I could read 4 in one month and that would be advantageous to my wallet. $10 versus $40.
> I know 2 readers that read much faster than me. Heck one is twice as fast on word count and I think she reads many hours a day. So that 1,000 pages would keep her occupied for 1 day.


I'm one who dislikes short stories (even though I've written a few.). I want a book I can sink my teeth into and if it's any good, I don't want it to ever end--the longer the better.

I'm looking at my sales/borrows of the later books in my series, and they seem to be pretty consistent. If one has twenty borrows, the one after it has eighteen, for example, at any one time. I take that to mean that some have read the first one and moved on to the next, while some readers haven't progressed to the next book yet. At least, that's what I hope.  I would be really disappointed if it was a huge dropoff.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

AliceWE said:


> For example, I used to buy all my books from Amazon (before we had kindles Downunder) used Calibre to turn the mobi files into epubs and uploaded them to my kobo. How will Amazon know how many pages I have read?


Assuming you meant borrows here. I am pretty sure that doing so with a borrow violates the terms of service for Prime/KU (NOTE: I am not moralizing, just pointing this out). Technically it certainly is possible. In any case, the author would never have been getting paid under the current system because it would never show you reaching ten percent.



AliceWE said:


> I now use the Kindle app on my ipad mini. What happens if I download a whole lot of books and then turn off the wifi connection. Again, how will Amazon ever know the number of pages I have read?


Again, if you never turn the wifi connection on again, the author would never be getting paid under the current system. But eventually you'll want another book if you're a KU subscriber. And as soon as you turn wifi on, Amazon will find out how far you read, even if you've already "returned" the borrow via browser or another device. if you actually remove the book from your device with the wifi off, then Amazon won't pick it up. Which is possible, but probably not a large enough number of instances to be concerned.

Basically unsupported devices won't be a big issue with this change.


----------



## cinisajoy

Oh shoot,
In my call to Amazon this morning I inadvertently lied.  I only have 8845 kindle purchases.  Not nearly 9000.
Now back on topic, let's all see what next month brings.


----------



## Lisa Blackwood

More calculations? So not awesome.   I like simple.


----------



## DC Swain

Marian said:


> Unless Amazon devises a different method to pay them, I feel badly for the authors of children's books.


I don't think any sane person would be self publishing children's books for the money   

I'm currently all in, but was in the process of moving my first in series to permafree, with the rest in Select. I'm going to push ahead with that plan until at least the end of the year, then I'll re-evaluate.

I don't see this as pushing me quickly away from Select. I like to think that my writing is good enough that people will want to read the whole story (usually 24-ish pages), whereas the scamlets probably only get read the first couple of pages.

For me it will come down to two things that influence if I stay or go:
1. How illustrations are included in the page count. As has been mentioned, this could drastically reduce kids book authors' page counts;
2. The payout per page. If it dips under 1c per page, I'll definitely reconsider. Happiness for me would be in the 2-3c range;

Will wait and see what happens, but for now I don't think any of us should be making big decisions without data - and at least 4 months data to see where payouts start levelling out.


----------



## AllyWho

edwardgtalbot said:


> Basically unsupported devices won't be a big issue with this change.


thank you 
I was just thinking it through as a possible scenario, so good to hear it won't be an issue. Now I'll just worry about slow readers! lol


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

This change means different things for writers of different types of books, but I think the minimal-text, art-heavy picture books for preschool children will fare the worst. All of the "positive" things people have mentioned about this change... it will reward "reader engagement," and help ensure "high quality" writing, and benefit writers who craft stories that people want to read to the end... are meaningless when you have around 30 print pages consisting of maybe one page worth of text.

A children's book could be _fantastic_ by all of those criteria... and the financial reward would be... a cent? Less than a cent? Maybe a dime? It's basically giving it away. Does anyone other than Amazon benefit? Not the reader, who doesn't get a better book (assuming it's already excellent in this example), and certainly not the writer, illustrator, publisher, etc.

It's true, we don't "know" if they'll factor in images... but how can they? If you understand how images are actually handled in a Kindle book, you'll see there is no relationship between images and pages unless you go the fixed-layout approach, which not all books for preschool kids do. Even if they do, the page count is still tiny compared to novellas, novels, and many nonfiction works. For those that use a fluid layout, Amazon _could_ assign a relationship between images and page counts... but doing so would open a gaping hole that scammers would ride through, laughing on their way to the bank. While Amazon is not saying specifically that they're using "word count" instead of "page count," the calculation of "page count" described so far appears to be all based on text. Don't have much text because preschoolers aren't ready for that? Tough!

I understand the "don't panic yet" sentiment for most works; in many cases, it probably makes sense to wait and see how this will play out. For picture books for preschoolers, well, it looks like the baby was thrown out with the bath water. I only have one book that is affected, and its KDPS enrollment ended yesterday. Great timing. While I was considering putting it back in after a few weeks, that seems pointless.

As for "this isn't about writers," I guess it depends -- to loosely paraphrase a former president -- on what about is about. It's not a change done _for_ writers, of course. Anyone who understands Amazon, or business in general, will understand that it's a change _for_ Amazon, period. They're good about putting the customer first _most of the time_, but in the 18-20 years I've shopped with them, I've seen ample evidence that they're willing to put the company's needs over the customer's needs from time to time. So if "about" means "for," then of course it's not about writers. On the other hand, we're discussing in a forum for writers an email sent to writers, and writers are an indispensable part of the supply chain for the product in question, so beyond the narrow scope of who ultimately benefits from the change, I'd say it's very much about writers.



dcswain said:


> I don't think any sane person would be self publishing children's books for the money.


Why not? I wouldn't want to give back the money I've earned on mine.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18

Caddy said:


> But, stilll, at a penny a page, you would need a 350 page novel to make $3.50. Right? A 60,000 word novel isn't 350 pages. So a 60,000 word book priced at $4.99 and NOT in select make $3.50 with less pages. The program STILL does not pay as high of a rate as when not in Select for novels, unless you price your novels at $2.99 or less when not in Select.


IMO this comes down the the old[ish] argument about whether KU readers are people who would buy if they couldn't borrow. I can only go by my own behavior as a KU subscriber. At a guess 90% of my KU borrows are books I'd never have bought. KU has me trying new authors right and left. If I find one I like, I'll read all that author's books, at least those in the same genre, and depending on how much I like them and the price, I may buy those not in KU.



dgrant said:


> I actually know several romance readers who do this: after being burned enough times by love stories that weren't romances, they flip to the back to make sure there's a HEA before reading the book. Know a few mystery readers who do that, too, which always boggled me a little.


I started doing this after _Gone With The Wind_ and continued until Kindle. Flipping to the end of a paper book to check out the ending was easy. Getting to the end of a Kindle book without buying it first isn't possible. By the time KU came along and I could do it again, at least on KU books, I was out of the habit.



RJ Crayton said:


> what is the likelihood that KU borrowers, have a higher DNF rate?


Again, going by my own behavior as a KU subscriber, very high. I borrow anything that looks vaguely likely - books I'd never have bought or even bothered to download a sample for. However, the rate of those I blow off is also very high. There are many I don't get past the first page, many more that don't get anywhere near that 10%.

As to the argument about shorts being better for subscribers or no one being able to get their subscription's worth if they read long, etc. Unh unh. I read a novel every couple of days. I buy some and borrow some and believe me I get my $10 a month worth out of KU. However, I was going to cancel my subscription because like Atunah I'm sick of paging through hundreds of things that don't interest me, inflated by #1 through 20 of some series of short stuff to find something that does interest me. If this new system helps with that, I'll stay subscribed.


----------



## Rayven T. Hill

I'm betting that whoever made up that example at Amazon did their calculations wrong and thought it was $1.00/book, when in fact, it's $10.00.


----------



## books_mb

horrordude1973 said:


> this whole thing has fried my brain today. Past few months i started puling in a really good income on KU, but I write short novellas so this is messing it all up.
> 
> I don't want over react and do something crazy..but I don't want to do nothing and watch my income bottom out a few months from now. I feel sick


Sorry to hear that. Changes like these always remind me how volatile this writing career is and how dependent we are on the details of the system. The way I see it, there's nothing to do but to hope the Sword of Damocles misses once more so that you can go on just a little bit longer. I'm certainly not going to make any long-term plans with this income but rather expect it to be gone someday (soon?).


----------



## DC Swain

Crenel said:


> Why not? I wouldn't want to give back the money I've earned on mine.


I'd have to agree with you there on mine too - I wasn't meaning to demean us, it was just a throwaway comment. I've well and truly earned enough from my picture books for this to be a self-sustaining hobby with a few nice dinners out as a bonus.

It's an interesting time for us all and, as always, we need to keep adapting to whatever the changing landscape throws our way.


----------



## Vinny OHare

lilywhite said:


> I've got more than one review saying, "I read it in one sitting" (at 70k words, no less!) Now to figure out how I made them do that, and I'll be ahead of my own game.


Put in the front of the book that every time you finish a book and Angel gets it's wings so please comply lol


----------



## horrordude1973

books_mb said:


> Sorry to hear that. Changes like these always remind me how volatile this writing career is and how dependent we are on the details of the system. The way I see it, there's nothing to do but to hope the Sword of Damocles misses once more so that you can go on just a little bit longer. I'm certainly not going to make any long-term plans with this income but rather expect it to be gone someday (soon?).


I've been writign full time for almost 2 years now..income has been steadily climbing for the past year. I just hate to see it bottom out. if there is a small drop and I can pull it back up again, I'll be ok. I just don't want to sit and watch it all drop then scramble.


----------



## Melody Simmons

Sounds to me like authors and readers were getting  annoyed with all the 20-50 page books out there, and the short serials...though they could have just said all books under say 100 pages belong in a different lower-scale category instead of introducing the pay-per-page read system...

As for the way people read, well I sometimes scan pages fast to get to the end - so if one pages quickly and skims over content will that also count or do they have a method to determine the speed at which one reads or time spent on a page also?


----------



## David Berndt

James Joyce would be pulling out of KU right now


----------



## Caddy

cinisajoy said:


> Caddy,
> I just estimated your 60,000 total words at 200 pages. This is using a 300 words per page word count. How were you getting 50 pages?


Per serialized portion. Each one at 50 pages, all six episodes are 300.  At a penny a page that would be $3. That's less than the royalty of a 60,000 novel priced at $4.99 and not in Select. Plus, I get paid right away AND I can have it on other sites making money.


----------



## a_g

How is this affecting anyone who is not already in KU? I'm hearing a lot of gloom and doom and for many writers in KU, it's not boding well _at the moment_. I agree we need more information before declaring this a disaster.


----------



## Harvey Click

I'm happy with this change. It's not fair for 10-page stories to make the same on a borrow as 400-page novels, plus the new system rewards writers who keep their readers turning the pages.


----------



## Melody Simmons

lilywhite said:


> I've got more than one review saying, "I read it in one sitting" (at 70k words, no less!) Now to figure out how I made them do that, and I'll be ahead of my own game.


Sorry to inform you but readers can be impatient or like me need to read fast because time is limited, and they may skip over pages to get to the end, or skim through pages fast, which is what will be more beneficial I guess...but what if one moves the slider to the end without reading the pages in between or turning them individually? Will that count?


----------



## cinisajoy

Doglover said:


> Well, I am very confused. Maths has never been my strong point, but me and my trusty calculator have been over this umpteen times and still can't figure it out. According to my email from Amazon, the author of a 100 page book which is downloaded and read 100 times will earn $1000. That is what it is saying. Therefore, if that author's book is only downloaded and read once, is that 1000 divided by 100, which is $10 per book. Since I cannot see Amazon paying us $10 per download, one of us must be mistaken and it is probably me, cos, as I said, maths is not my thing.


Let me try to write this out.
(number of pages times reads)/10 because 10 is how I am getting that $1000. 
Page count in book won't change. that last number won't change. Only times read will change
so here is how to figure that
(100 times 100)/10=$1000 (100 times 1)/10=$10.
I think someone at amazon missed a decimal.


----------



## David Berndt

For those of us writing series, this can prove interesting if they give us enough useful data. Is my readership increasing, or did it start to drop off dramatically at book 5? 

Instead of sales we now have a means of knowing reader engagement.


----------



## books_mb

I hope that they throw in new stats as well. The number of borrows is not really a good indicator anymore. Number of pages read would be a lot more meaningful. By the way, anybody know how they count? Say a reader opens a book, reads page 1 and then skips to page 87. Do they count this as 2 or 87 pages?


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## katrina46

a_g said:


> How is this affecting anyone who is not already in KU? I'm hearing a lot of gloom and doom and for many writers in KU, it's not boding well _at the moment_. I agree we need more information before declaring this a disaster.


I wouldn't declare it a complete disaster just yet, but more a call to create a new strategy. What I'm most interested in is to see if Select enrollments take a nose dive. I would think the last thing they'd want is for writers to be trampling each other seeing who can wide faster. The whole point of KU was to starve their competitors while avoiding the 70% percent payout. This one could backfire on them.


----------



## Atunah

Melody Simmons said:


> Sorry to inform you but readers can be impatient or like me need to read fast because time is limited, and they may skip over pages to get to the end, or skim through pages fast, which is what will be more beneficial I guess...but what if one moves the slider to the end without reading the pages in between or turning them individually? Will that count?


I bet they have an algorithm to figure this out. They can now tell how fast I read already, they tell me how long it will take me to read a book or a chapter and that also works when wifi is off. So if one just slides across the book, they'll know.

I read pretty fast too, but I don't skip or skim. I read book from 1st page to last and I very rarely DNF a book. I also don't read samples. I can read a book in 3-5 hours, depending on the page count. A 200 pages I can sometimes read in 2. A 350 probably around 4. So I can easily read a book in one sitting. Not sure what 70,000 is in pages. I spend a weekend once reading 5 books in the "Fever" series over a weekend. Late Friday to Sunday. And that was me still doing other stuff. Nothing has made me turn pages before or since quite that obsessively. 

They would not be doing this if they didn't have a way to track the speed of reading, which they already have with chapters left to read and time left in book on kindles. All that can be done with wifi off and as soon as the mothership calls home, that info is send.


----------



## Charnell

For such simple math, they made the e-mail explanation very confusing.

$10,000,000 pot
100,000,000 pages read
Divide the pot from the pages read, you get $.10 per page.
100 page book, read 100 times (100x100) is 10,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $1,000 royalty.
200 page book, read 100 times (200x100) is 20,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $2,000 royalty.
200 page book, read 100 times (200x100) is 20,000 pages read. Oh wait, it was only read halfway (20,000x0.5) which is 10,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $1,000 royalty.


----------



## Misty Archer

I am interested in people's comments about readers skipping to the end first to see what happens.

I have always been fast reader, reading 2-3 novel length books a day when I have the time.  However I was ill for some months years ago, bedridden and suffering from overwhelming fatigue due to the medication I was on and was consequently incapable of finishing a book.  I would read the first sentence over and over and had forgotten what it was about before the end of the sentence.  I found this massively frustrating, but it did give me an insight into why some people don't read for pleasure. 

I took to skipping to the end of the book as I knew that I would have no chance of reading for long enough with enough concentration to ever find out what happened.

When I got better I found that I couldn't lose the habit of skipping to the end and stopped reading as much as I found it spoilt my enjoyment of the book.

Kindle stopped me doing that and made my reading far more linear.  Although in theory it would be just as easy to skip to the back, I never do it now.

On the new payment system for KU - I would welcome anything that resulted in books being written that were more about reader engagement, and less about money.  If authors are writing engaging works and they have good read through figures for their other books, they may have nothing to worry about.  

Of course this will all depend on how many pages are read and how exactly Amazon calculate the payouts.  Short story writers may still find that they are paid better than novelists as people may be more likely to read all the pages in the book as it is short, and thus may feel they want to read more of the same authors work.  I know if I don't feel engaged enough to finish reading a novel I am highly unlikely to read another one by  the same author.


If I like a book I will often read everything that author has written, and if I don't finish a book it is because I have felt no engagement at all with the characters.

The people who should do well are those with great story telling skills - regardless of whether the writing is fantastic.  Series authors should also do OK if they have a good read through rate to other books in the series - will we see more cliff hangers?

Allie


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## katrina46

J.A. Sutherland said:


> I foresee 600 pages of front matter ...


 I suspect you might be right. You sure won't see anymore back matter.


----------



## 75845

books_mb said:


> I hope that they throw in new stats as well. The number of borrows is not really a good indicator anymore. Number of pages read would be a lot more meaningful.


You need to follow the link in the email:

"After this change, you'll be able to view your Kindle Unlimited (KU) and Kindle Owners' Lending Library (KOLL) Pages Read in your Sales Dashboard report by marketplace and title.

We'll continue to update this Help page with more information on your KDP reports, KU/KOLL royalties, and KDP Select Global Fund payouts as the changes roll out."

https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN


----------



## books_mb

horrordude1973 said:


> I've been writign full time for almost 2 years now..income has been steadily climbing for the past year. I just hate to see it bottom out. if there is a small drop and I can pull it back up again, I'll be ok. I just don't want to sit and watch it all drop then scramble.


Yeah, I know what you mean ... That's why I could never do full time, I'd be worried from morning till morning. You never know what the guys / gals at the ZON come up with next. But my guess is that most authors will be fine with the recent change. It doesn't seem like the kind of change that would break your back if you had steady borrows before.


----------



## Guest

loganbyrne said:


> I think a lot of people here have a sky is falling mentality because of the change. Knowing Amazon, they all ready know that many people were leaving and wanting to leave Select because of the variable borrow rate every month. At least for July, and possibly August, they aren't going to have some massively small payout amount. I don't even think it will be as low as a penny a page at first. I'm not saying it would be some giant number like ten cents a page as per their numbers example they gave out, but I would think at least three cents. They want to draw more people into Select and KU and keep them there. They'd be willing to spend the small chunk of change right now to make sure that happens. Eventually, yes, I believe it will go down to around a penny a page, but they aren't stupid enough to do that right out of the gate.


Select IS and always HAS BEEN an attempt by Amazon to monopolize the marketplace. Otherwise, there'd be no exclusivity aspect to it. This squeezes out short stories and children's books and perhaps a few others. Let Amz know how corrupt they are. As for "fair"? That sounds pretty familiar, but a tired false label thrown about in other areas of human endeavor, some we're not allowed to talk about here.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## books_mb

Mercia McMahon said:


> You need to follow the link in the email:
> 
> "After this change, you'll be able to view your Kindle Unlimited (KU) and Kindle Owners' Lending Library (KOLL) Pages Read in your Sales Dashboard report by marketplace and title.
> 
> We'll continue to update this Help page with more information on your KDP reports, KU/KOLL royalties, and KDP Select Global Fund payouts as the changes roll out."


I didn't even notice that. Fantastic, thank you!


----------



## Melody Simmons

Sorry for posting again but this is becoming quite interesting...For example as a parent I skim through all the books I get for my kids before allowing them to read it.  When I quickly jump through the book and say jump from page 1 to 50 then say jump to the end, it will show the percentage of the book read as 100%  So am I guessing right that Amazon will have a way to record if a reader actually opens each page?  Like each page opened, no matter where in the book, will count?

Also there's still no difference if five 20 page books are read fully and if one 100 page book is read fully, right?


----------



## cinisajoy

Charnell said:


> For such simple math, they made the e-mail explanation very confusing.
> 
> $10,000,000 pot
> 100,000,000 pages read
> Divide the pot from the pages read, you get $.10 per page.
> 100 page book, read 100 times (100x100) is 10,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $1,000 royalty.
> 200 page book, read 100 times (200x100) is 20,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $2,000 royalty.
> 200 page book, read 100 times (200x100) is 20,000 pages read. Oh wait, it was only read halfway (20,000x0.5) which is 10,000 pages read. Multiply that by $.10, you get the $1,000 royalty.


Repluging in those numbers from earlier. 100 pages time 1=100 pages 100 pages times .10 =I am still getting $10.


----------



## 75845

Melody Simmons said:


> So am I guessing right that Amazon will have a way to record if a reader actually opens each page? Like each page opened, no matter where in the book, will count?


Yes all subscription services need this capability because non-fiction books are often read in bits (think student writing an essay using the social media chapters of seven general books about IT).


----------



## Sapphire

Yikes!   I've been off-line all day. I read the email and came to see what KB'ers had to say about it. 13 pages! I better start reading.


----------



## Melody Simmons

katrina46 said:


> I suspect you might be right. You sure won't see anymore back matter.


As long as you number your front matter as page 1 because in the system they describe on the KDP page they will start counting from page 1.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Personally, I think Amazon's marketing department hit a home run. We all know they increase the pool of money as they see fit, so this isn't a redistribution in the sense that there will necessarily be more wealth to spread around, just that the same old wealth that HAS been spread around will continue to be spread in a new way to the same people. We KNOW the pool of money is always going to be right around the amount of millions it takes to pay $1.35 to the number of pages Amazon deems is optimal.

So however much we are paid for the pages we have credited as read (which has many loopholes as all we did was move the 10% line to 100% for ANYONE to get a full borrow rate, think about that for a second), divided by 200 or 300 will show the "borrow" rate for 100% read of a title that size. Aug 15 we will have an idea of what Amazon is looking for in length (I say idea, because based on KDP Select's roll out and KU's roll out, it takes a few months for things to settle out). 

They didn't promise to pay anyone MORE, they only promised not to pay the same. Authors will figure out a way to get readers to go to the end. And I don't think it always be just by virtue of their writing skills.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

dcswain said:


> I'd have to agree with you there on mine too - I wasn't meaning to demean us, it was just a throwaway comment. I've well and truly earned enough from my picture books for this to be a self-sustaining hobby with a few nice dinners out as a bonus.
> 
> It's an interesting time for us all and, as always, we need to keep adapting to whatever the changing landscape throws our way.


"May you live in interesting times" is a curse in some cultures... just sayin'.


----------



## David Berndt

I just wrote a more in depth discussion of this issue if anyone is interested here: 
https://authorfriendly.wordpress.com/2015/06/15/reader-engagement-to-be-the-next-big-thing/


----------



## David Berndt

Atunah said:


> I bet they have an algorithm to figure this out. They can now tell how fast I read already, they tell me how long it will take me to read a book or a chapter and that also works when wifi is off. So if one just slides across the book, they'll know.
> 
> I read pretty fast too, but I don't skip or skim. I read book from 1st page to last and I very rarely DNF a book. I also don't read samples. I can read a book in 3-5 hours, depending on the page count. A 200 pages I can sometimes read in 2. A 350 probably around 4. So I can easily read a book in one sitting. Not sure what 70,000 is in pages. I spend a weekend once reading 5 books in the "Fever" series over a weekend. Late Friday to Sunday. And that was me still doing other stuff. Nothing has made me turn pages before or since quite that obsessively.
> 
> They would not be doing this if they didn't have a way to track the speed of reading, which they already have with chapters left to read and time left in book on kindles. All that can be done with wifi off and as soon as the mothership calls home, that info is send.


I wonder if they will start giving discounts to speed (or speedy) readers, or for that matter a penalty. We are in a new era of words as commodities like pork bellies and oil.


----------



## Atunah

David Berndt said:


> I wonder if they will start giving discounts to speed (or speedy) readers, or for that matter a penalty. We are in a new era of words as commodities like pork bellies and oil.


Why would they penalize readers for reading a bit faster. Doesn't make sense. I don't speed read, that is a very different animal altogether. I just read in my natural speed, which might be faster than some but slower than others. The speed doesn't really matter. Its about reading and enjoying a book.

Books are part of entertainment. They compete with other forms of entertainment. They are also still a product. I pay, I read.


----------



## Charnell

cinisajoy said:


> Repluging in those numbers from earlier. 100 pages time 1=100 pages 100 pages times .10 =I am still getting $10.


That it is, with their horribly outlandish example. There's no way in Wisconsin they're going to be paying out $.10 a page.


----------



## Evenstar

I was going to have a total freak out over this as all my books are short. But after a large glass of wine I suddenly realised that my books aren't in KU!


----------



## R.V. Doon

I think the change is fair for writers of longer fiction. I'm feeling guilty because of the books (some from KB)still sitting on my kindle and waiting for my vacation in 2 weeks.


----------



## Andrew Ashling

Can someone explain how this compares to Scribd?


----------



## cinisajoy

David Berndt said:


> I wonder if they will start giving discounts to speed (or speedy) readers, or for that matter a penalty. We are in a new era of words as commodities like pork bellies and oil.


A penalty for buying/borrowing/visiting their site more often?
That would drive the customer to the competition.
Last time I looked there were 3 subscription programs for books. I can use any or all.
Books are in no way shape form or fashion a commodity. They are a LUXURY. I would be dead without food so that is a commodity. Pretty much everything uses something from the oil industry including food packaging. But as far as books are concerned, they are not needed for survival. (Though there are some people that do need them to maintain mental health.) But as a general rule, books are a LUXURY. 
So why penalize a luxury?


----------



## GeneDoucette

honestly, seeing the numbers-to-pages-to-sales price figures I've seen bouncing around this thread, my first thought is I'm getting away with charging more for my books than most.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

dcswain said:


> I'd have to agree with you there on mine too - I wasn't meaning to demean us, it was just a throwaway comment.


Ah, right, now it makes sense. I saw your comment show up in the thread review after seeing the "while you were typing, (x) new replies were posted" message and I didn't have the context, i.e., that you were commenting as someone with children's books on the market.


----------



## 77071

I doubt they care how fast people read.  People read in many different ways.  They even include many audiobooks and don't charge more for them in the KU subscription model for the reader to experience.

Personally, I've been a member of Scribd for a while now.  They have all the Dreamspinner titles (and several other publishers, and several indie authors) that I want to read.  I read fairly fast, when I'm not busy with other things, often more than ten books a month just thru Scribd.

I've not been penalized, given trouble, or charged more.  They said in an article recently that there's actually a variety of types of readers, including the ones who read a lot.  But they seemed perfectly OK with that, which surprised me.  I kept expecting to have a higher rate charged to me because I read steadily at a fairly medium-high rate.

Apparently this type of service is really supposed to be the Netflix for books.  Right now we have 2-3 competing companies.  What they want, is to get lots of people as members, relying on their service, and happy to stay engaged and subscribed.  

The way they do that is provide content that keeps people interested.  For Netflix, that means acquiring new titles, showing lots of different recommendations, and basically keeping you interested, right?  It's a bit different in KU but I think that's what they're trying to do, just encourage a length their readers want more of.

I will likely subscribe to KU for at least a couple of months with the new system to give it a good try as a reader.  I actually like short pieces, as long as it's not all just short erotica masquerading as romance.


----------



## MJWare

Kidlit gets hosed again!


----------



## Anne Victory

cinisajoy said:


> So now we will get non-fiction filled with fillers. Great. Thanks for nothing..
> Off to send Amazon a letter.


Why do you think this? You get a book of nothing but filler and stop reading, the author only gets paid for what you read before getting fed up. This actually sounds more fair to me regardless of the length of the work.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk


----------



## Melody Simmons

Some more questions...did number of borrows affect sales rank? So will number of pages read in KU affect sales rank?  If so will unscrupulous authors pay people over at Fiverr to borrow books and flip pages?


----------



## Guest

a_g said:


> How is this affecting anyone who is not already in KU? I'm hearing a lot of gloom and doom and for many writers in KU, it's not boding well _at the moment_. I agree we need more information before declaring this a disaster.


The only way it's affected me for sure is that I've decided to go all wide with my short stories, whereas before, I was considering putting at least a few of them in. I've only ever had one story in KU, which performed so horribly that I unpublished it. I write mostly science fiction and fantasy.

As for how else it's going to affect me, only time can tell.


----------



## Rykymus

Wow. Never have I seen so many misinterpretations and so much general panic as today.

CALM DOWN.

The plain fact is that now you will all be compensated in a fashion that better represents the engagement level of the books you write. Is it perfect? No. Nothing ever is. Is it better than what they had before? That depends on your position. 

As SO many have already said (but apparently few are listening to) 10 - 20 page books, or 1 - 200 page book... SAME PAY. How is that not better? If you write good, engaging stories, just keep doing so and you'll get paid.  

I strongly suspect that Amazon has figured out how to deal with all of the questions everyone here has been raising. After all, it took them nearly a year to figure out how to do this. (You really think they thought the current system was a good idea?)

Just wait and see. Meantime, keep writing good stories. All this wild speculation is nothing more than popcorn fodder at this point.

I wish Amazon would have included more information, as all this 'sky is falling' crap could have been avoided.


----------



## 77071

Melody Simmons said:


> Some more questions...did number of borrows affect sales rank? So will number of pages read in KU affect sales rank? If so will unscrupulous authors pay people over at Fiverr to borrow books and flip pages?


I would guess anybody who did the 10% page through (if they're not shut down by now??) will switch to all the book page through. :-/ Hopefully this kind of thing doesn't go on very much, but I really don't know.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Borrows affect sales rank at time of click to borrow. How much was or wasn't read had nothing to do with it. And yes, the scammers who were doing 10% will now just do the whole book. I am really not seeing a guarantee other than that we all just were told now Amazon can pay any of us less (not just shortstory writers) because 100% wasn't read in the name of aligning author and reader interests.


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> so this isn't a redistribution in the sense that there will necessarily be more wealth to spread around


Um, the very definition of "redistribution" is that wealth changes hands without any new wealth being created.



> We KNOW the pool of money is always going to be right around the amount of millions it takes to pay $1.35 to the number of pages Amazon deems is optimal.


Wrong. We "know" nothing.


----------



## cinisajoy

Anne Victory said:


> Why do you think this? You get a book of nothing but filler and stop reading, the author only gets paid for what you read before getting fed up. This actually sounds more fair to me regardless of the length of the work.
> 
> Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk


I just thought of something but I don't want to type it on a public forum. 
Here is the thing and why I called Amazon.


Spoiler



The scammers can always lengthen their books and get their associates to borrow the book and "read" it all the way through.


 That takes money away from the real authors.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I don't really see how this will have much impact on spammers.  They will just make longer books--maybe combine into one volume several books they already have.  And they probably already have associates borrowing their books and paging to 10 percent.  So they'll have to page a little more.

Betsy


----------



## Guest

I vote we retitle this thread to "The KU-pocalypse after-party."


----------



## geronl

Note to self: finish _Star Wanderers_...


----------



## 75814

I foresee some new opportunities for Fiverr gigs. "For $5, I will borrow and 'read' your KU book." 

...I'm off to make a Fiverr page.

Err...I mean...

*runs*


----------



## MJWare

I know of a class that teaches people to pay writers on Odesk to write their books for them, then release them under their own name, like one book a week.One of they things they teach is to make the books 4-6,000 words long and put them in KU.

Do a search for "Minecraft" on your kindle and you'll see what I mean, there's probably a couple thousands of these book, most poorly written.

I'm sure this and some non-fiction authors who abuse the system by publishing junk are the reason for this change--it's just too bad so many authors who spend months writing their books, or pay a lot for quality illustrators are going to get hosed.

Personally, I hope this in the final nail on the KU coffin.


----------



## Guest

geronl said:


> Note to self: finish _Star Wanderers_...


Thanks! Just picked up a copy of your short story collection.


----------



## cinisajoy

Perry Constantine said:


> I foresee some new opportunities for Fiverr gigs. "For $5, I will borrow and 'read' your KU book."
> 
> ...I'm off to make a Fiverr page.
> 
> Err...I mean...
> 
> *runs*


Needs to be $15. Gotta pay for the subscription and all lol.


----------



## 75814

cinisajoy said:


> Needs to be $15. Gotta pay for the subscription and all lol.


Ooooh, good point! Want to be my business manager, Cin?


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> Ooooh, good point! Want to be my business manager, Cin?


Hey, at the numbers Amazon quotes, you could write a 1,000 page "book," buy 100 Fiverr gigs for it, and make $9,500 after expenses!

Where is Vaal? That guy always had interesting things to say about KU and the KU-pocalypse.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

My head hurts. I suck at math. I write short children's book (around 40 pages each). So does this mean I'll get $0.40 if someone finishes my book? I'm so confused, will probably pull everything out and go back to permafree.


----------



## Shelley K

Rykymus said:


> I wish Amazon would have included more information, as all this 'sky is falling' crap could have been avoided.


Facts never get in the way of a good panic.



D. Zollicoffer said:


> My head hurts. I suck at math. I write short children's book (around 40 pages each). So does this mean I'll get $0.40 if someone finishes my book? I'm so confused, will probably pull everything out and go back to permafree.


No, it's doesn't mean that you'll get $.40 if someone finishes your book. It only means you'll get 40 x whatever the price per page ends up being, which is a number that nobody but Amazon can even guess at.

I think we'll be lucky to get a penny per page. Others are more optimistic. None of us knows for sure.


----------



## geronl

Perry Constantine said:


> I foresee some new opportunities for Fiverr gigs. "For $5, I will borrow and 'read' your KU book."
> 
> ...I'm off to make a Fiverr page.
> 
> Err...I mean...
> 
> *runs*


That would need to be multiple books


----------



## geronl

SunnyDay913 said:


> I'm confused...does this eliminate the 10% rule?


I think so


----------



## ruecole

I think us kidlit writers need to form a KU payout support group. :/

Rue


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

Shelley K said:


> Facts never get in the way of a good panic.
> 
> No, it's doesn't mean that you'll get $.40 if someone finishes your book. It only means you'll get 40 x whatever the price per page ends up being, which is a number that nobody but Amazon can even guess at.
> 
> I think we'll be lucky to get a penny per page. Others are more optimistic. None of us knows for sure.


Yeah, I'm pulling out. Wish they'd treat children's books differently since a lot of them are short with illustrations that cost a lot of money.


----------



## ChristinaGarner

MJWare said:


> I know of a class that teaches people to pay writers on Odesk to write their books for them, then release them under their own name, like one book a week.One of they things they teach is to make the books 4-6,000 words long and put them in KU.
> 
> Do a search for "Minecraft" on your kindle and you'll see what I mean, there's probably a couple thousands of these book, most poorly written.


That's despicable.


----------



## DC Swain

ruecole said:


> I think us kidlit writers need to form a KU payout support group. :/
> 
> Rue


It would be great it there was a separate KU for kids books, it could be curated even, but that would probably also be a target for scammers...


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals

There is a FreeTime Unlimited for kids, but it's trad books plus videos and games.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## jackiegp

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


I'd love to know the answer to this, too? Is her math right? Also, what if someone reads half way through, gets distracted, has life issues, but then goes back to the book, finishes it like a month or two later? Will you get paid in full then? Or only half? Or what?


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Monique

Just a minor datapoint. Not sure how helpful it is, but ...

A while back Kobo shared a few statistics with me. One of my books was one of their "most read" for KWL. They mentioned that anything over 50% was considered very good. And that there is overall a very high abandoment rate. Note: these are all paid books, so the figures for borrows would be different.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I don't think anyone is rushing to make decisions. But MOST of us have plans that are 6 months to a year out. This is a major development, even just a big UNKNOWN, so once again, everything planned for summer to the holiday season is a big question mark. I don't think that's wrong to be upset/aggravated/frustrated over. 

And I for one feel after watching what happened with the original KDP Select implementation, I had a pretty good idea of what would happen with Kindle Unlimited . . . great discoverability tool when used, highest payouts would be early months. For many of us, this is like the sixth time at the Amazon changes major things rodeo  sure we're going to all hold on, but we can gripe about it, too!  LOL


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## Monique

lilywhite said:


> That seems like a huge number of people to pay for a book and not even OPEN it. Wow, thanks for sharing that, Monique, it is useful data for sure.


Some just haven't gotten around to it, but yeah, a lot just sit there.


----------



## ruecole

dcswain said:


> It would be great it there was a separate KU for kids books, it could be curated even, but that would probably also be a target for scammers...


I could actually get behind that! 

Rue


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

lilywhite said:


> We don't know that they won't. The announcement is only a few hours old. I don't understand why people are rushing to make huge decisions about the course of their careers based on a single email from Amazon and no hard data or numbers whatsoever.


Better safe than sorry. My books sold before KU came out. With sales we know how much we'll make. But with this -- they could pay us anything. $0.40, $1.00, $0.30. So pulling everything out isn't really that drastic IMHO.


----------



## Guest

cinisajoy said:


> I just thought of something but I don't want to type it on a public forum.
> The scammers can always lengthen their books and get their associates to borrow the book and "read" it all the way through. That takes money away from the real authors.


This guy http://www.amazon.com/Pullman-Brown-German-Dennis-Moore-ebook/dp/B00ZHPV34A/ has 500 books. Stories he found on the internet which he translated with Google Translate and which IMHO are getting borrowed at $1.34 per borrow. All you need is one credit card: free, one KU subscription, $10 a month and you can pay yourself or your sister 500 times 1.34 is about 700 bucks. That's how it works now, because all his books are shorts. He only needs to read 4 pages to get paid. In the new situation he will have to read each and every page. I don't think flipping through a 100 page book in ten minutes is going to get you paid for 100 pages. I think they will also add a time element to it. They said they have a special system to count pages, they didn't say they will just count "page turns." All they have to do to stop all scams is say, the book has to be open for a certain amount of time plus the pages have to be flipped. Minimum wage is what? 7 bucks per hour? Who is going to spend an hour flipping through 100 pages for say 1 buck?


----------



## EC Sheedy

Charnell said:


> That it is, with their horribly outlandish example. There's no way in Wisconsin they're going to be paying out $.10 a page.


Now you just went and spoiled my Christmas.  

_"Worry is a misuse of imagination." Albert Einstein_


----------



## 77071

I drop my head in shame when I think of the books I haven't opened yet (or barely opened), usually bought because they were on sale...


----------



## AllyWho

lilywhite said:


> That seems like a huge number of people to pay for a book and not even OPEN it.


Personally, I have hundreds of books on my kindle and hundreds of them have yet to be opened. I don't find that surprising at all.


----------



## 77071

Wait, what? How has that not been taken down??  



drno said:


> This guy http://www.amazon.com/Pullman-Brown-German-Dennis-Moore-ebook/dp/B00ZHPV34A/ has 500 books. Stories he found on the internet which he translated with Google Translate and which IMHO are getting borrowed at $1.34 per borrow. All you need is one credit card: free, one KU subscription, $10 a month and you can pay yourself or your sister 500 times 1.34 is about 700 bucks. That's how it works now, because all his books are shorts. He only needs to read 4 pages to get paid. In the new situation he will have to read each and every page. I don't think flipping through a 100 page book in ten minutes is going to get you paid for 100 pages. I think they will also add a time element to it. They said they have a special system to count pages, they didn't say they will just count "page turns." All they have to do to stop all scams is say, the book has to be open for a certain amount of time plus the pages have to be flipped. Minimum wage is what? 7 bucks per hour? Who is going to spend an hour flipping through 100 pages for say 1 buck?


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

AliceWE said:


> Personally, I have hundreds of books on my kindle and hundreds of them have yet to be opened. I don't find that surprising at all.


Yeah, I have $60 games from two years ago in shrink wrap. It's not weird at al to have a few unread books.


----------



## PhoenixS

***********


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Andrew Ashling said:


> Can someone explain how this compares to Scribd?


Scribd pay 10% of the cover price for a 'browse', which is where someone reads between 5% and 20% of a book.

I think this change will benefit authors who write well-crafted books that engage a reader and have a high completion rate. No longer will it be enough to have a pretty cover and engaging blurb (even though these will still be important). If a story does not engage the reader's imagination, then that author's earnings will drop, regardless of whether they write novellas or epic sagas.


----------



## aimeeeasterling

I'm intrigued by the repercussions of the change. First of all, I love the idea of having data on where readers give up on my books and on what percentage of readers make it all the way to the end. That could definitely improve my writing over time, which is something I'm always striving for.

But more relevant for the short term --- I wonder if this change will affect ranking on popularity lists? While bestseller list rankings shouldn't change, my understanding is that the popularity lists rank books based on sale price not just on number of sales. If I extrapolate that Amazon will use borrow-income similarly (in other words, ranking a 500 page book fully read after being borrowed much higher than a 5 page book fully read after being borrowed), then longer, more engaging works will rise to the top.

Or perhaps I misunderstand how popularity lists are ranked?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> It can slow down or at least discourage some of the scamleteers. Note I say nothing about stopping them


Yeah, I don't think you can overestimate the willingness of people to work hard to cheat.


----------



## Andrew Ashling

Herc- The Reluctant Geek said:


> Scribd pay 10% of the cover price for a 'browse', which is where someone reads between 5% and 20% of a book.
> 
> I think this change will benefit authors who write well-crafted books that engage a reader and have a high completion rate. No longer will it be enough to have a pretty cover and engaging blurb (even though these will still be important). If a story does not engage the reader's imagination, then that author's earnings will drop, regardless of whether they write novellas or epic tomes.


Thanks.

I just checked my D2D sales records and I get 70% royalty on each book borrowed through Scribd.

I like this a lot more than Amazon's system. You never know how much the fund will be and between how many books/pages it will be divided.


----------



## Marina Finlayson

I hope Amazon works out something so that picture books aren't penalised, but other than that I feel cautiously optimistic about the changes. If reader engagement is being rewarded over length now, I just have to make sure I produce quality writing. And in the end, the writing is the only thing I have complete control over.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I know I'm in the minority but I'm kind of excited. I think this could be really good for me. I could be proven wrong, I know, but I honestly think think this could boost my bottom line. Two months from today the board is going to be in a frenzy.


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## barbie888

I put my 1st in series in KU about a week ago. I'm looking forward to seeing the results after July. I still have the next 2 at other distributors. I'm using KU sort of as a loss leader instead of permafree. This book has been out since 2012 and I've done tons of promoting. Bookbub for 99¢...Bookbub for free, etc...

The book is 464 pages so the data I get after July will be interesting to me. 

I do like having my books everywhere so I doubt I stay in after my 3 months are up. But again, the data! Can't wait


----------



## Monique

barbie888 said:


> I put my 1st in series in KU about a week ago. I'm looking forward to seeing the results after July. I still have the next 2 at other distributors. I'm using KU sort of as a loss leader instead of permafree.


And not having book one in the series hasn't hurt sales of books 2 and 3 at other retailers? Or are they a "series" but can be read as stand alones?


----------



## SB James

I read the first five pages, then read these past two pages after I took a walk and thought about it. I believe this could be a great change for anyone who writes the type of books that readers like to binge read.
I also think this is going to be a boost for boxed sets. Before, if you had shorts in KU that were getting a lot of borrows, this would be discouraging to put those shorts into a boxed set since that would cut the payout. Someone mentioned WAY upthread that putting all those shorts into a boxed set might actually boost read-through, since a reader doesn't have to go back and download the next short once done with the first one.
Also might be a boost to serialized books with major cliffhangers at the end of every episode!  
If the KU payout was going to be anything like the math they were talking about in this email, I might actually ponder putting my books back in book jail KU, but I KNOW that Amazon's not going to pay 10 cents a page.


----------



## KelliWolfe

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> It can slow down or at least discourage some of the scamleteers. Note I say nothing about stopping them
> 
> *OLD MODEL:*
> 1 guy with 10 associates produces 10 scamlets, each 20 pages.
> 10 associates each downloads and "reads" 2 pages of all 10 titles, or 20 pages total per associate, or 200 pages altogether.
> At $1.35 per read, scamleteer earns $135 for 100 reads.
> 
> *NEW MODEL:*
> Scamleteer consolidates 10 scamlets into 1 megascamlet of 200 pages (or 2 demi-megascamlets of 100 pages each - doesn't matter).
> 10 associates each downloads and "reads" all 200 pages, for a total of 2000 pages. With each associate reading 10 times the number of pages than in the Old Model, it's likely going to double their engagement time.
> To earn that same $135 in the Old Model, each page read has to be worth 6.75¢
> 
> Generously, that's 2 to 3 times what the payout is likely to be. So the scamleteer is going to need to work 2-3 times as hard to earn the same amount or employ (and pay) 3-4 times the workforce to complete the reads and cover the increase in employment costs for more time and people.
> 
> If it's a group of warrior folk reading each other's stuff, then the group needs to expand 2-3 times their current size, which means not only doubling the time to read the works the Old Model required, but additionally adding the time to read the works of the expanded group.
> 
> Upshot: Scamleteer must either work 2-3 times as much or make 2-3 times less than with the Old Model. And that's being, I think, quite generous.
> 
> Please don't bring FACTS into this, Monique. Thank you.
> ___________
> 
> Also, for those concerned about how Amazon will be tracking all this, if _Kobo_ has this level of sophistication, then duh. Also, uh, Amazon is _already_ using this technology to track up to 10% reads. How is tracking 30% or 100% any different? And no, encouraging readers to skip to the end isn't going to cheat the system.


How does Amazon know whether you've skimmed/skipped to the end rather than actually reading the book? We already know that they put as little effort as possible into dealing with cheaters/scammers. Does anyone really think they're suddenly going to implement some super-sophisticated algorithm to detect the games this makes possible - when they're going to have even fewer data points to detect fraud than before?

Or will they do the exact same thing they've always done with scammers and plagiarists and ignore it as much as they can no matter how badly it impacts KDP authors?


----------



## The Bass Bagwhan

Well, I slogged through all the pages and hopefully a few folks are still reading the thread to this point...
For many authors like myself the real calculation doesn't change - will KU payments on borrows exceed the potential income from sales going wide? That's all that matters regardless of how AMZ figures that payment.
As for the new system being fair, etc... It's all about AMZ saving money for i_itself_ by eliminating payments to too-short and too-bad books. Amazon asked itself, "How can we stop paying authors $1.35 (ish) for a 5K short story?" And came up with this formula.
It's not about us, it's not about readers. It's about Amazon as a business reducing an overhead it doesn't like, although how it didn't see this problem in the first place is a small mystery.
We must still write well and write a lot. If you prefer doing novellas (like me) it's still more of a marketing problem to get readers to shift to the next title. We're not really disadvantaged at all. You might argue that having (say) three titles and three awesome covers for a total of 100K words is still going to be a better than a single book of the same length, visibility and discoverability-wise.
Hmm... Reading this back, I'll try coffee...


----------



## barbie888

Monique,

I don't know yet if it will hurt sales elsewhere. It sold well when book 2 was released and again when book 3 came out. Although I had better sales before KU. 

I have a BB ad on the 2nd book next month and if they want the 1st, they'll have to go to Amazon. It is a risk I'm willing to take.

They can be read as stand alones as each has their own stories. I bring the characters in from the 1st two books and work in their back story so each book can stand on its own. I've been told readers like this as it's like an visiting an old friend.  

Also, the only way I get really good sales from iTunes, Kobo, B & N etc are when I have a BB ad. Even new releases at the other sites don't generate great sales like Amazon's new releases. My point being that without a good promo, a 3 yr old book languishes. At least that's been my experience.


----------



## Eskimo

KelliWolfe said:


> How does Amazon know whether you've skimmed/skipped to the end rather than actually reading the book? We already know that they put as little effort as possible into dealing with cheaters/scammers. Does anyone really think they're suddenly going to implement some super-sophisticated algorithm to detect the games this makes possible - when they're going to have even fewer data points to detect fraud than before?
> 
> Or will they do the exact same thing they've always done with scammers and plagiarists and ignore it as much as they can no matter how badly it impacts KDP authors?


All online survey software measures how long it takes a respondent to take a survey and how long they stay on each question. So if the average survey takes 15 minutes to complete, the company will know anyone who completes it in less than say 5-7 minutes is being dishonest and they will not count their survey.

Same technology should apply here.


----------



## SB James

Graeme Hague said:


> Well, I slogged through all the pages and hopefully a few folks are still reading the thread to this point...
> For many authors like myself the real calculation doesn't change -- will KU payments on borrows exceed the potential income from sales going wide? That's all that matters regardless of how AMZ figures that payment.
> As for the new system being fair, etc... It's all about AMZ saving money for i_itself_ by eliminating payments to too-short and too-bad books. Amazon asked itself, "How can we stop paying authors $1.35 (ish) for a 5K short story?" And came up with this formula.
> It's not about us, it's not about readers. It's about Amazon as a business reducing an overhead it doesn't like, although how it didn't see this problem in the first place is a small mystery.
> We must still write well and write a lot. If you prefer doing novellas (like me) it's still more of a marketing problem to get readers to shift to the next title. We're not really disadvantaged at all. You might argue that having (say) three titles and three awesome covers for a total of 100K words is still going to be a better than a single book of the same length, visibility and discoverability-wise.
> Hmm... Reading this back, I'll try coffee...


I'd like to think (could be naive of me to think this) that Amazon is also attempting to get some of the authors of longer works back into Select. Making the maximum payout_ any_ book could make a $1.37 is a guaranteed way to spur a mass exodus from Kindle Unlimited and KDP Select in general. The only good thing about that would be stopping the endless flow of junk from getting published, since no one gains anything except a couple of cents, rather than their $1.37. But the incentive for longer works would completely disappear if a longer work can't even get paid a $1.37 if someone made it through 10% of the book.
Am I right or am I wrong? Only time will tell, I suppose.


----------



## Miss Bee

The bottom line is that it doesn't matter how long or short your book is, if it is crap that is badly written, minimally edited (or not at all), with no engaging characters or plot, people will not read it and you won't get paid. In that case, I think the new system is more "fair."

However, the idea that longer works will automatically mean more money and shorter works will stop flooding KU is probably not realistic. A reader is just as likely to ditch a lousy 200K word novel as they would a lousy 20K novella when they are two pages in. Plenty of short story writers can be quite prolific, and some of these writers are very, very good. Readers wait impatiently for their next title and read from cover to cover. The previous payout structure benefitted *poor *short story/erotica/serial writers, but a change in the system doesn't automatically mean sunshine and daisies for novel writers. It just puts everyone on the same page (so to speak).

While it would be nice for Amazon to give writers more information, they have historically refused to do so and I doubt that will change anytime soon. The only way to guarantee a consistent income is to write books people want to read and write a lot of them!


----------



## Charmaine

So I'm only a few pages into this thread, but as someone who writes and likes novellas, I don't see how this could hurt.

To use another person's example whether you have a 1,000 page book or (10) 100 page books or (100) 10 page books, if both are read 100% it really doesn't change much.
The people I see this hurting are scamlet writers and non-engaging writers.

I don't see this as a punishment to short story writers. 
If your short story is good, then you'll do better than someone with a long mediocre novel.


Meh, adjust or be annihilated.
Self-published Writers always have to be on their toes, this is just another example.


----------



## KelliWolfe

SB James said:


> I'd like to think (could be naive of me to think this) that Amazon is also attempting to get some of the authors of longer works back into Select. Making the maximum payout_ any_ book could make a $1.37 is a guaranteed way to spur a mass exodus from Kindle Unlimited and KDP Select in general. The only good thing about that would be stopping the endless flow of junk from getting published, since no one gains anything except a couple of cents, rather than their $1.37. But the incentive for longer works would completely disappear if a longer work can't even get paid a $1.37 if someone made it through 10% of the book.
> Am I right or am I wrong? Only time will tell, I suppose.


At 1 cent per page the borrow for an "average" 200 page book is going to be $2.00 - which is almost exactly what it would be for a buy at $2.99, which is the price point Amazon has been pushing for years.

OTOH, Amazon has watched authors accept borrow payouts of well below $1.50 for those same books for the last year. They might drop down to 0.7 cents per page to make a 200 page book worth something roughly in line with the current payout, while increasing the payout for authors putting out longer works.


----------



## Guest

Perhaps I'm wrong about the details of the history of KU.
If so, someone please straighten me out.

If I'm right, Amazon created it's own problem by going with KU.
Writers of novels found their sales (and income) dropped when borrows were allowed. Instead of 70% of the book price, the books suddenly only brought in $1.50 or so if the KU member read 10%

That is what drove the shift to shorter works. Now a short priced at 99-cents, or $1.99, would pull in money. Just quickly turn out short stuff or divvy up your long work, and you were back in business.

We've made the shift. Now Amazon is trying to fix it's problem, which it created.


----------



## Desert Rose

KelliWolfe said:


> At 1 cent per page the borrow for an "average" 200 page book is going to be $2.00 - which is almost exactly what it would be for a buy at $2.99, which is the price point Amazon has been pushing for years.
> 
> OTOH, Amazon has watched authors accept borrow payouts of well below $1.50 for those same books for the last year. They might drop down to 0.7 cents per page to make a 200 page book worth something roughly in line with the current payout, while increasing the payout for authors putting out longer works.


Except if payouts below $1.50 are the reason for the mass exodus of longer titles from KU, I don't see 1c per page or less bringing those longer works back into the fold, particularly not the ones selling for $3.99 and up.


----------



## Charmaine

Okey Dokey said:


> Perhaps I'm wrong about the details of the history of KU.
> If so, someone please straighten me out.
> 
> If I'm right, Amazon created it's own problem by going with KU.
> Writers of novels found their sales (and income) dropped when borrows were allowed. Instead of 70% of the book price, the books suddenly only brought in $1.50 or so if the KU member read 10%
> 
> That is what drove the shift to shorter works. Now a short priced at 99-cents, or $1.99, would pull in money. Just quickly turn out short stuff or divvy up your long work, and you were back in business.
> 
> We've made the shift. Now Amazon is trying to fix it's problem, which it created.


You're right.
This whole thing has just cemented the practice in my mind of diversify, diversify, diversify.
Have novels, but have novellas or short stories too.
Have a series in KU, but keep one out of it as well.
We need to prepare ourselves for changes before they happen.


----------



## KelliWolfe

Dragovian said:


> Except if payouts below $1.50 are the reason for the mass exodus of longer titles from KU, I don't see 1c per page or less bringing those longer works back into the fold, particularly not the ones selling for $3.99 and up.


Why not? It would make the payout for borrows on longer novels come much closer to what the authors are making on sales.

250 pages = $2.50 (~ a sale at $3.50 cover price)
300 pages = $3.00 (~ a sale at $4.30 cover price)
400 pages = $4.00 (~ a sale at $5.70 cover price)

At those rates rather than the flat $1.35 Amazon is definitely going to be able to start luring authors of longer works into KU. It's vastly more attractive for them.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

KelliWolfe said:


> At 1 cent per page the borrow for an "average" 200 page book is going to be $2.00 - which is almost exactly what it would be for a buy at $2.99, which is the price point Amazon has been pushing for years.
> 
> OTOH, Amazon has watched authors accept borrow payouts of well below $1.50 for those same books for the last year. They might drop down to 0.7 cents per page to make a 200 page book worth something roughly in line with the current payout, while increasing the payout for authors putting out longer works.


Or it might be that some writers get paid way out of proportion, while others take huge loses, so that the same amount of money gets distributed in a much more extreme way. Some people win big, others lose big, with the median staying around 1.35.

They might just create a steeper curve between the haves and havenots, which in the long run will force some writers out of the program and bring others in.



Dragovian said:


> Except if payouts below $1.50 are the reason for the mass exodus of longer titles from KU, I don't see 1c per page or less bringing those longer works back into the fold, particularly not the ones selling for $3.99 and up.


Exactly my thinking. If they are doing this to help make KU more friendly to writers of longer works, they need the payout to be decent for them. If they lower the payment more, KU will just die, and Amazon exclusivity will die with it.

What they're trying to do is make sure short story writers aren't getting a disproportionate piece of the pie, but I don't think they will actually try to shrink the pie. KU couldn't survive if they did.


----------



## cinisajoy

David Chill said:


> All online survey software measures how long it takes a respondent to take a survey and how long they stay on each question. So if the average survey takes 15 minutes to complete, the company will know anyone who completes it in less than say 5-7 minutes is being dishonest and they will not count their survey.
> 
> Same technology should apply here.


That may be fine for surveys but here is the thing and I hope Amazon knows it. There are different reading speeds. 
I dated a guy that read roughly 30 words a minute. I knew someone else that read about 100 words a minute. I read roughly 300 wpm. I have met people that read at least twice that fast. So are you saying Amazon shouldn't count faster reads.
By the way 300 wpm is about 1 paperback page per minute.
That would hurt the romance authors.


----------



## Guest

Scamlet

Scamleteers (sp)

I object to those terms being applied to writers who are trying to adjust to Amazon's ever changing rules.
That's supposed to be a benefit of being indy - being able to ADJUST to changing situations.


----------



## SB James

KelliWolfe said:


> At 1 cent per page the borrow for an "average" 200 page book is going to be $2.00 - which is almost exactly what it would be for a buy at $2.99, which is the price point Amazon has been pushing for years.
> 
> OTOH, Amazon has watched authors accept borrow payouts of well below $1.50 for those same books for the last year. They might drop down to 0.7 cents per page to make a 200 page book worth something roughly in line with the current payout, while increasing the payout for authors putting out longer works.


Yes, this is always possible. 


Dragovian said:


> Except if payouts below $1.50 are the reason for the mass exodus of longer titles from KU, I don't see 1c per page or less bringing those longer works back into the fold, particularly not the ones selling for $3.99 and up.


Oh, for sure! Certainly not enough for me to put these books back into KU. I'd still far rather sell a book than have someone borrow it.


KelliWolfe said:


> Why not? It would make the payout for borrows on longer novels come much closer to what the authors are making on sales.
> 
> 250 pages = $2.50 (~ a sale at $3.50 cover price)
> 300 pages = $3.00 (~ a sale at $4.30 cover price)
> 400 pages = $4.00 (~ a sale at $5.70 cover price)
> 
> At those rates rather than the flat $1.35 Amazon is definitely going to be able to start luring authors of longer works into KU. It's vastly more attractive for them.


Then 1 cent per page would have to be the threshold. Going any lower, (like the .07 cents like you were contemplating) would be a turn off. And, those numbers you have are based on people reading through the entire book. In an ideal world, it would be more attractive, certainly. 
Plans to write a serialized spin-off of this series could still happen, as long as I end each one with a cliffhanger. And maybe do boxed sets after every three 30K word "episode." Too soon to tell what I might do.


----------



## Monique

cinisajoy said:


> That may be fine for surveys but here is the thing and I hope Amazon knows it. There are different reading speeds.
> I dated a guy that read roughly 30 words a minute. I knew someone else that read about 100 words a minute. I read roughly 300 wpm. I have met people that read at least twice that fast. So are you saying Amazon shouldn't count faster reads.
> By the way 300 wpm is about 1 paperback page per minute.
> That would hurt the romance authors.


Amazon isn't stupid, I'm sure they have ways of determining what's a legit read and what isn't. 300 wpm is average. If they do even bother to care about speed, I'd guess they have a threshold beyond which they consider it illegit. It would have to be very, very fast.

As far as data gathered by the Kindle and apps, they probably know what you had for breakfast this morning.


----------



## devalong

KelliWolfe said:


> How does Amazon know whether you've skimmed/skipped to the end rather than actually reading the book?


Phase Two - they give readers a test at the end of your book and you only get paid for the readers who pass .


----------



## SB James

Monique said:


> Amazon isn't stupid, I'm sure they have ways of determining what's a legit read and what isn't. 300 wpm is average. If they do even bother to care about speed, I'd guess they have a threshold beyond which they consider it illegit. It would have to be very, very fast.
> 
> As far as data gathered by the Kindle and apps, they probably know what you had for breakfast this morning.


I have no doubt you are right about this!


----------



## cinisajoy

Monique said:


> Amazon isn't stupid, I'm sure they have ways of determining what's a legit read and what isn't. 300 wpm is average. If they do even bother to care about speed, I'd guess they have a threshold beyond which they consider it illegit. It would have to be very, very fast.
> 
> As far as data gathered by the Kindle and apps, they probably know what you had for breakfast this morning.


Coffee and a couple of books lol.


----------



## Northern pen

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I know I'm in the minority but I'm kind of excited. I think this could be really good for me. I could be proven wrong, I know, but I honestly think think this could boost my bottom line. Two months from today the board is going to be in a frenzy.


Honestly, the way I read it. It is pretty much a certainty that your income will go up. Likely in a very significant way.


----------



## Moist_Tissue

Shelley K said:


> I'd pay to know if there's a spot readers tend to give up on a book. That would be incredibly valuable information to have, actually. We are going to (allegedly) be able to see how many pages have been read throughout the month, so taking the book's rank into consideration and trying to judge borrows based on that, it might become obvious if readers aren't getting all the way through something.
> 
> I'm about to put a long novel into KU. I was going to anyway, but I'm interested to see what happens with it.


If you are serious about learning what readers respond to, you could use MTurk and source out tasks.


----------



## Marina Finlayson

lilywhite said:


> Then you're all sorted because, holy crap, Twiceborn was so good.


Thanks, Tammi!

I think it's likely that Amazon is trying to lure big-name, popular authors back into KU. Like HM Ward, who left because borrows were cannibalising her sales and destroying her income. (I think it was her? There was a long post about it at the time.) And if that's the case, they're going to want the payout to look pretty attractive for novel-length works. As someone was saying upthread, 1 cent per page equates to roughly the same dollar amount as the royalty for a sale.


----------



## PhoenixS

***********


----------



## erikhanberg

Like a few others on here, I'm surprised by the doom and gloom. My hunch is that this is a good thing for quality work.

I *don't* think Amazon tossed out random numbers in that email. We know, for example, that $10 million is a good approximation of the KDP Global fund. I would also imagine that 100,000,000 pages is probably a good approximation of the number of pages read in a month of books in KDP Select. At least, it's in the right order of magnitude.

So is $0.10/page going to be the average they shoot for. I have no idea. Obviously. But as others have said, if KDP Select is going to attract top-tier authors, the chance at a $10 or more payout for someone to finish your book is a HUGE incentive to put your book in the program. 

As with all zero-sum games, for someone to get $10 per borrow instead of $1.34, their profit has to come from somewhere else. And the way it's set up, I suspect it will come from *bad books,* who used to get $1.34 and now get $0.20 or less.

I suspect/hope this is going to drive money to quality.

Scammers certainly exist, but anything they can do is a drop in the bucket against 100,000,000 pages read (assuming that number is even vaguely correct). I don't think they will move the needle substantially on the total payouts.

As for catching any scammers, Amazon's algorithms for sniffing out overly-friendly reviews have gotten pretty sophisticated (if not too much so). It's not at all crazy that they can do the same against bogus page views either. They know what real readers' reading habits look like. They'll be able to correct.

The chance at what I think are going to be larger payouts, plus the chance at the reading statistics, makes me strongly consider adding more books into the program.


----------



## David Wisehart

Amazon's email suggested:

*$.10 per page read*

Instead of crying foul...

Let's assume Amazon knows math.

And they mean what they say.

And let's also borrow Monique's figures from Kobo as further estimates:

*65% open rate

75% completion rate*

So:

*100 page book x $.10 per page read = $10 per full read

$10 per full read x .65 of borrows opened = $6.50 per borrow

$6.50 per borrow x .75 completion rate = $4.88 per borrow*

Now, this may seem high, but if the average borrow rate is 2 new titles per month per subscriber:

*$4.88 x 2 = $9.76 per month*

So Amazon still profits from the subscription, or covers their cost at 2 new borrows per month per subscriber.

However, _no one is gaming Kobo the way they're gaming KU,_ so...

Amazon's open and read-through rates will be much lower.

My guess: _most authors will be shocked and/or depressed to discover how little of their books are being read_.

Historically, most books that are bought are not read.

They sit waiting on shelves, physically or digitally.

Under this new system, popular writers will be incentivized to join, and unpopular writers with be disincentivized to stay.

Either or both of these will improve the reader experience, and give readers more incentive to subscribe.

If popular writers join, and go exclusive, it will increase Amazon's market share and hurt other retailers.

So...

*WHO WINS:*
Writers of page-turners
Scammers (maybe)
Amazon (probably)

*WHO LOSES:*
Writers who can't keep a reader's interest
Scammers (probably)
Other retail stores (probably)

This is the future.

And if Amazon can get this to work, it could be model for all digital book sales.

TLR--_*Write page-turners!*_


----------



## katrina46

Marina Finlayson said:


> Thanks, Tammi!
> 
> I think it's likely that Amazon is trying to lure big-name, popular authors back into KU. Like HM Ward, who left because borrows were cannibalising her sales and destroying her income. (I think it was her? There was a long post about it at the time.) And if that's the case, they're going to want the payout to look pretty attractive for novel-length works. As someone was saying upthread, 1 cent per page equates to roughly the same dollar amount as the royalty for a sale.


I would agree with this except Ward doesn't really write a lot of novel length stories. At least she didn't. Some of it was as short as 90 pages if I remember correctly. She might still do better out of KU, but I admit I haven't checked her Amazon page in a long time. Maybe she writes longer now.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

This will seriously change the balance of payments. In the old model, assume 100 books were borrowed for $1.50 per borrow, for a total payout of $150. Of those 100, 90 were 10 pages each and 10 were 200 pages each.

In the old system, the royalty would have been $135 (90 x 1.50) for the shorter books and $15 (10 x 1.50) for the longer books.

With the new system and assuming 100% reads as well as Amazon paying from the same pot, the $150 would be paid for 2900 pages (900 from shorter books, 2000 for longer books) at a rate of 5.17  cents per page ($150/2900 pages). The 10 longer works would attract 2000 x 0.0517 =  $103.4, or $10.34 each ($103.4/10 books). The shorter books would attract 900 x 0.0517 = $46.60, or a little over $0.51 each ($46.60/90 books).

Even if the longer works aren't fully read, this will still favor longer works. Assume a 100% read for shorter and only 75% for longer books. The $150 royalty (remember its fixed) will now be paid for 900 pages from shorter works and 1500 pages from longer works (0.75 x 2000 pages). This would result in a royalty of  6.25 cents per page ($150/2400 pages). Longer works royalties would be $93.75 ($0.0625 x 1500 pages) or $9.37 per book, while shorter works will get $56.25 ($0.0625 x 900 pages) or 0.63 per book ($56.25/90).  

Apart from visibility in the store, it will no longer matter how many books an author has in KU. Rather, it will be about pages. An author with 100 x 10 page books (1000 pages) will have less skin in the game than an author with 10 x 200 page books (2000 pages).


----------



## erikhanberg

What David Wisehart said.


----------



## katrina46

It's Kmathews I'd like to hear from. She just put over a hundred titles into KU a few months back. I'll be very interested in hearing what she's going to do now. I hope she starts a thread about it.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

David Wisehart said:


> Amazon's email suggested:
> 
> *$.10 per page read*
> 
> Instead of crying foul...
> 
> Let's assume Amazon knows math.
> 
> And they mean what they say.
> 
> And let's also borrow Monique's figures from Kobo as further estimates:
> 
> *65% open rate
> 
> 75% completion rate*
> 
> So:
> 
> *100 page book x $.10 per page read = $10 per full read
> 
> $10 per full read x .65 of borrows opened = $6.50 per borrow
> 
> $6.50 per borrow x .75 completion rate = $4.88 per borrow*
> 
> Now, this may seem high, but if the average borrow rate is 2 new titles per month per subscriber:
> 
> *$4.88 x 2 = $9.76 per month*
> 
> So Amazon still profits from the subscription, or covers their cost at 2 new borrows per month per subscriber.
> 
> However, _no one is gaming Kobo the way they're gaming KU,_ so...
> 
> Amazon's open and read-through rates will be much lower.
> 
> My guess: _most authors will be shocked and/or depressed to discover how little of their books are being read_.
> 
> Historically, most books that are bought are not read.
> 
> They sit waiting on shelves, physically or digitally.
> 
> Under this new system, popular writers will be incentivized to join, and unpopular writers with be disincentivized to stay.
> 
> Either or both of these will improve the reader experience, and give readers more incentive to subscribe.
> 
> If popular writers join, and go exclusive, it will increase Amazon's market share and hurt other retailers.
> 
> So...
> 
> *WHO WINS:*
> Writers of page-turners
> Scammers (maybe)
> Amazon (probably)
> 
> *WHO LOSES:*
> Writers who can't keep a reader's interest
> Scammers (probably)
> Other retail stores (probably)
> 
> This is the future.
> 
> And if Amazon can get this to work, it could be model for all digital book sales.
> 
> TLR--_*Write page-turners!*_


I can't see them doing $0.10. If they did, they would actually be paying short writers more money. Before someone who wrote a 50 page short would've made $1.35, now assuming that someone finishes their short, they'd make $5. Amazon has to always make it difficult. First the silly pot and now this. IMHO, they should just split things into tiers. If your book is under 50 pages you get $0.80 a borrow, etc.

Just seems like they're making it more confusing than it needs to be.


----------



## Eskimo

cinisajoy said:


> That may be fine for surveys but here is the thing and I hope Amazon knows it. There are different reading speeds.
> I dated a guy that read roughly 30 words a minute. I knew someone else that read about 100 words a minute. I read roughly 300 wpm. I have met people that read at least twice that fast. So are you saying Amazon shouldn't count faster reads.
> By the way 300 wpm is about 1 paperback page per minute.
> That would hurt the romance authors.


My point is simply that if someone is flipping through pages quickly rather than reading them, there is a technology that can pick that up.


----------



## 77071

David Wisehart said:


> My guess: _most authors will be shocked and/or depressed to discover how little of their books are being read_.


I wonder. Hm...

I also wonder now if Amazon has been studying my Scribd reading habits. I use the app on my Fire to read.  How much do they know about my hungry, mayfly reading habits?? 

I just checked, and Ms. Ward is doing pretty well, IMO: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ZOFU4JI Good for her! :-D I think authors who are doing great wide may not want to re-join KU for an indiscriminate payout. But time will tell.

I'm very interested in all of this.

*edit* Do I mean indiscriminate? Maybe indeterminate?


----------



## David Wisehart

D. Zollicoffer said:


> I can't see them doing $0.10. If they did, they would actually be paying short writers more money.


Great news for me: I'm short.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

David Wisehart said:


> Great news for me: I'm short.


Lol, short story writers 

I do think it's good that better books will earn more money. But since my stuff is expiring soon -- I'm going to go wide, again.

This just reminded me that it isn't wise to bet everything on one retailer (unless you have tons of books or a large following like Yoda).


----------



## Jill Nojack

David S. said:


> There are hundreds of millions of people who would be very happy to have that job.
> 
> Not that it matters, because a computer will do the job for nearly nothing. Just like a robocaller.


My kindle fire will do it for nothing if I set it to read out loud with the volume off.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

D. Zollicoffer said:


> Just seems like they're making it more confusing than it needs to be.


We don't have access to the numbers so we can only speculate, but there must have been some customer dissatisfaction to prompt Amazon to do this. Maybe customers were citing lack of full length fiction as a reason for dropping out of KU?

The problem may be tied to Amazon trying to control the cost of KU by paying royalties from a fixed pool of money. Each and every book is paid exactly the same, whether it's a 1000 page epic or a 5 page pamphlet, which has led to an exodus of longer fiction from KU and an influx of shorter stuff.

Other lending services, like Scribd, don't have this problem because they base their payments on cover price, so writers of longer fiction get the same money as they would for a sale.


----------



## cinisajoy

HSh said:


> I wonder. Hm...
> 
> I also wonder now if Amazon has been studying my Scribd reading habits. I use the app on my Fire to read.  How much do they know about my hungry, mayfly reading habits??
> 
> I just checked, and Ms. Ward is doing pretty well, IMO: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00ZOFU4JI Good for her! :-D I think authors who are doing great wide may not want to re-join KU for an indiscriminate payout. But time will tell.
> 
> I'm very interested in all of this.
> 
> *edit* Do I mean indiscriminate? Maybe indeterminate?


Ms. Ward didn't have to be exclusive.


----------



## Avis Black

My math also gives me 10 cents a page.  Amazon's likely using a reasonable ballpark figure in their calculations. If they were off by a factor of ten, they'd have to deal with a huge mass of enraged authors.

There's a good chance that Amazon is betting the payments with be covered by the changes in the KOLL part of the program.  It may be that a lot of Prime subscribers would borrow books in a casual way just to get their money's worth from their Prime membership and either never open them, or they would only read a few pages before quitting.  Nonetheless, Amazon was forced to pay authors for those borrows anyway.  Not anymore.  Supposedly there are a heck of a lot more KOLL members than KULL, so KOLL members will end up subsidizing the increases above the average of 1.33 or so a month that authors have been getting.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Avis Black said:


> My math also gives me 10 cents a page. Amazon's likely using a reasonable ballpark figure in their calculations. If they were off by a factor of ten, they'd have to deal with a huge mass of enraged authors.
> 
> There's a good chance that Amazon is betting the payments with be covered by the changes in the KOLL part of the program. It may be that a lot of Prime subscribers would borrow books in a casual way just to get their money's worth from their Prime membership and either never open them, or they would only read a few pages before quitting. Nonetheless, Amazon was forced to pay authors for those borrows anyway. Not anymore. Supposedly there are a heck of a lot more KOLL members than KULL, so KOLL members will end up subsidizing the increases above the average of 1.33 or so a month that authors have been getting.


Amazon are still going to use the same pool of money that they have always used. It's the distribution of money to authors that will change.

That being said, I'd be surprised if they paid more than $0.03 per page.


----------



## Daniel Kenney

Why exactly is paying per word or page fair and paying per book or story is not fair?

I mean, I get it. We don't like people taking a novel, splitting into 10 parts, getting the same borrow for each of the 10 parts that some other person would get for the whole shebang. I really do get it.

But what about people who just write shorter books? (Points self serving finger at self serving self (hint, it's the guy with big ears typing these words)). On the one hand, there is precedent for paying per word (magazine articles for one). So I sort of get that. ON the other hand, there is also precedent for paying for a completed book. It's called the BOOK PUBLISHING INDUSTRY.

Is Charlotte's Web less valuable than (fill in the blank 400 page suspense thriller) ? To a lot of people, no. Charlotte's Web's value has little to do with whether it's 32,000 words or 100,000 words. It's a great book that stays with people. 

Now, let's be clear. In the short term, this change will probably negatively affect my bottom line so that is 100 percent why I'm asking these questions. If on the other hand Amazon announced today that starting July 1 they would be paying authors more who had large heads, were 100% Irish, and got lots of concussions playing football then I'd be jumping up and down because it would benefit me greatly. But, that all being said, is number of words or pages really how we want books to be judged?

Seems sort of fair and sort of weird all at the same time.


----------



## Shelley K

David Wisehart said:


> Amazon's email suggested:
> 
> *$.10 per page read*
> 
> Instead of crying foul...
> 
> Let's assume Amazon knows math.
> 
> And they mean what they say.


I wouldn't assume that. Their example numbers when they announced Kindle Unlimited were nowhere _near_ reality. It's much safer to assume they picked rounded numbers because the math is easier.


----------



## cinisajoy

Avis Black said:


> My math also gives me 10 cents a page. Amazon's likely using a reasonable ballpark figure in their calculations. If they were off by a factor of ten, they'd have to deal with a huge mass of enraged authors.
> 
> There's a good chance that Amazon is betting the payments with be covered by the changes in the KOLL part of the program. It may be that a lot of Prime subscribers would borrow books in a casual way just to get their money's worth from their Prime membership and either never open them, or they would only read a few pages before quitting. Nonetheless, Amazon was forced to pay authors for those borrows anyway. Not anymore. Supposedly there are a heck of a lot more KOLL members than KULL, so KOLL members will end up subsidizing the increases above the average of 1.33 or so a month that authors have been getting.


Prime members get 1 borrow a month.
That email was just an example of what could be paid.


----------



## gorvnice

For those who think 10 cents a page is feasible:

Do you honestly feel that Amazon will pay the author of a 300 page book THIRTY DOLLARS per borrow??


----------



## Eskimo

erikhanberg said:


> So is $0.10/page going to be the average they shoot for. I have no idea. Obviously. But as others have said, if KDP Select is going to attract top-tier authors, the chance at a $10 or more payout for someone to finish your book is a HUGE incentive to put your book in the program.


You could write an encyclopedia, but Amazon is not going to pay any author $10 for a borrow, much less than $30.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

Daniel Kenney said:


> Why exactly is paying per word or page fair and paying per book or story is not fair?
> 
> I mean, I get it. We don't like people taking a novel, splitting into 10 parts, getting the same borrow for each of the 10 parts that some other person would get for the whole shebang. I really do get it.
> 
> But what about people who just write shorter books? (Points self serving finger at self serving self (hint, it's the guy with big ears typing these words)). On the one hand, there is precedent for paying per word (magazine articles for one). So I sort of get that. ON the other hand, there is also precedent for paying for a completed book. It's called the BOOK PUBLISHING INDUSTRY.
> 
> Is Charlotte's Web less valuable than (fill in the blank 400 page suspense thriller) ? To a lot of people, no. Charlotte's Web's value has little to do with whether it's 32,000 words or 100,000 words. It's a great book that stays with people.
> 
> Now, let's be clear. In the short term, this change will probably negatively affect my bottom line so that is 100 percent why I'm asking these questions. If on the other hand Amazon announced today that starting July 1 they would be paying authors more who had large heads, were 100% Irish, and got lots of concussions playing football then I'd be jumping up and down because it would benefit me greatly. But, that all being said, is number of words or pages really how we want books to be judged?
> 
> Seems sort of fair and sort of weird all at the same time.


This. I get what they're doing -- I really do -- but it kinda sends the wrong message.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

gorvnice said:


> For those who think 10 cents a page is feasible:
> 
> Do you honestly feel that Amazon will pay the author of a 300 page book THIRTY DOLLARS per borrow??


Yeah, that number doesn't seem right at all. Even if they're paying less to the scammers. Seems like they'd lose more money under this system. I'm leaning towards no more than $0.03 a page. And even that seems like too much ($9 for a 300 page book if my math is correct).


----------



## Daniel Kenney

As Elizabeth pointed out earlier in the thread, currently Amazon appears to be comfortable paying $1.35 per borrow. If they end up paying shorter works less than that, then it's quite possible they'll end up paying longer works more than that.

Just not that much more that $1.35. At least, I'm not seeing unless A, they think this move will DRAMATICALLY decrease the amount of books and authors in KU while at the same time B committing to paying out the same pot size they currently are. I suppose the real answer to the question is...what is the price a borrow needs to be to get some of these bigger authors back into KU?

The answer is something close to the net profit off a sale. So $2 maybe for a full novel? In the end, I see it shaking out between 0.5 cent per page and a little more than 1 cent per page.

I just can't see it being much more than that. It will sure be interesting to see, though.


----------



## Monique

For the curious, when Amazon announced Select they used this example:



> The monthly royalty payment for each KDP Select book is based on that book's share of the total number of borrows of all participating KDP books in the Kindle Owners' Lending Library. For example, if total borrows of all participating KDP Select books are 100,000 in December and an author's book was borrowed 1,500 times, they will earn $7,500 in additional royalties from KDP Select in December.


We all know that wasn't the way the math worked out in reality. It's just an example, like the one in the OP. I don't see how they could possibly do $0.10.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Daniel Kenney said:


> Why exactly is paying per word or page fair and paying per book or story is not fair?
> 
> I mean, I get it. We don't like people taking a novel, splitting into 10 parts, getting the same borrow for each of the 10 parts that some other person would get for the whole shebang. I really do get it.
> 
> But what about people who just write shorter books? (Points self serving finger at self serving self (hint, it's the guy with big ears typing these words)). On the one hand, there is precedent for paying per word (magazine articles for one). So I sort of get that. ON the other hand, there is also precedent for paying for a completed book. It's called the BOOK PUBLISHING INDUSTRY.
> 
> Is Charlotte's Web less valuable than (fill in the blank 400 page suspense thriller) ? To a lot of people, no. Charlotte's Web's value has little to do with whether it's 32,000 words or 100,000 words. It's a great book that stays with people.
> 
> Now, let's be clear. In the short term, this change will probably negatively affect my bottom line so that is 100 percent why I'm asking these questions. If on the other hand Amazon announced today that starting July 1 they would be paying authors more who had large heads, were 100% Irish, and got lots of concussions playing football then I'd be jumping up and down because it would benefit me greatly. But, that all being said, is number of words or pages really how we want books to be judged?
> 
> Seems sort of fair and sort of weird all at the same time.


Let's be honest, Amazon isn't in this game for quality literature.

What they care about is making sure their customers are happy because happy customers = loyal customers = $$$. If they make a change, you can bet your last dollar that it's to solve a problem that is - or could potentially - impact their bottom line.


----------



## Rykymus

No one is judging the value of a book on the number of words or pages. It's a method of calculating payment for borrows, or in the case of the new KU, pages read. Was it more fair for those writing short work to be paid more? I would bet that on average (and I am not counting childrens' illustrated books here, as they are a different animal) it takes the same amount of time to write, say, 1,000 words of a 5,000 word short as it does to write 1,000 words of a 100,000 novel. Yet, that 5,000 word short generates the same revenue when borrowed and of course read past 10%, even though that novel took 100 times longer to write.

As an author of 100,000 word novels, there was nothing I could do to make up the 50% loss of revenue I was experiencing with each and every borrow. (And 50% of my units moved are through borrows.) The only option I had was to chop up my books, which I wasn't willing to do as they were not written that way. (Yeah, I was surprised at my own integrity as well.) At least those who write shorter works can write MORE short works to make up the difference. Or, you can write longer works. At least you have an option that doesn't require 'gaming' the system.

I wasn't scamming anyone. I was simply writing stories that required more words to tell. Why should each word written by an author who writes shorts be worth more than each word that I write for a full length novel. And neither should each word written by an author of a short be worth less per word than those words that I write for a full length novel.

It is highly doubtful that you can get $2.99 for a 5,000 word short story. (There are exceptions of course.) Most stories of such length sell for 99 cents and pay out 35 cents per borrow. All that is happening here is that Amazon is leveling the playing field as much as is feasible. I'm willing to be that in the end, the majority of us will end up getting paid for borrows at a rate that is quite close to what we would make for a sale. 

If Amazon wants to keep KU successful, and make exclusivity work for them, this is the only way.


----------



## Daniel Kenney

Herc- The Reluctant Geek said:


> Let's be honest, Amazon isn't in this game for quality literature.
> 
> What they care about is making sure their customers are happy because happy customers = loyal customers = $$$. If they make a change, you can bet your last dollar that it's to solve a problem that is - or could potentially - impact their bottom line.


Oh, absolutely. 100% correct. This is the twin strategy of eliminating some drek from the pool along with adding quality authors who hitherto didn't have a high enough incentive to put their books into KU. That is absolutely what this about so that KU is a better program.

But, I hear lots of authors say at least Amazon will finally pay in a more fair way. That's not what this is about. It's about amazon, not authors and fairness. Those people were smart enough to know that some authors would serialize novels in what some consider an unfair way. They are also smart enough to know that children's books are different than adult books. Neither is their concern. Only their concern when it affects their bottom line and their program. Us kids writers don't make much of a dent in their digital environment so it doesn't matter much to them. And I get it. I wish it weren't so but I definitely get it.


----------



## Daniel Kenney

Rykymus said:


> No one is judging the value of a book on the number of words or pages. It's a method of calculating payment for borrows, or in the case of the new KU, pages read. Was it more fair for those writing short work to be paid more? I would bet that on average (and I am not counting childrens' illustrated books here, as they are a different animal) it takes the same amount of time to write, say, 1,000 words of a 5,000 word short as it does to write 1,000 words of a 100,000 novel. Yet, that 5,000 word short generates the same revenue when borrowed and of course read past 10%, even though that novel took 100 times longer to write.
> 
> As an author of 100,000 word novels, there was nothing I could do to make up the 50% loss of revenue I was experiencing with each and every borrow. (And 50% of my units moved are through borrows.) The only option I had was to chop up my books, which I wasn't willing to do as they were not written that way. (Yeah, I was surprised at my own integrity as well.) At least those who write shorter works can write MORE short works to make up the difference. Or, you can write longer works. At least you have an option that doesn't require 'gaming' the system.
> 
> I wasn't scamming anyone. I was simply writing stories that required more words to tell. Why should each word written by an author who writes shorts be worth more than each word that I write for a full length novel. And neither should each word written by an author of a short be worth less per word than those words that I write for a full length novel.
> 
> It is highly doubtful that you can get $2.99 for a 5,000 word short story. (There are exceptions of course.) Most stories of such length sell for 99 cents and pay out 35 cents per borrow. All that is happening here is that Amazon is leveling the playing field as much as is feasible. I'm willing to be that in the end, the majority of us will end up getting paid for borrows at a rate that is quite close to what we would make for a sale.
> 
> If Amazon wants to keep KU successful, and make exclusivity work for them, this is the only way.


Yep, and I'm not addressing the 5,000 word short stories since being the self serving guy I am, I'll just address what I do as a writer...those pesky kids books. And I am arguing that authors of kids books be compensated the same as an author of an adult book. First, its' not all entirely clear that it takes John Grisham or Lee Child longer to write a book than Kate DiCamillo...but even if it did, who cares? One wrote a book for adults within the generally accepted standards of adult books and the other wrote a book for kids within the generally accepted standards of children's books. I don't see why one should get a higher borrow rate than the other?

And yes, this is me with my debate hat on arguing passionately because this will probably cost me quite a bit of money in the short term, I freely admit the bias.


----------



## Mxz

When they say beginning July 1st, they mean they will start counting pages then.  So that payment will come to us at the end of September right?  Or do they mean that the May payment delivered at the end of July will be calculated in this way?


----------



## Kenneth Rosenberg

Monique said:


> For the curious, when Amazon announced Select they used this example:
> 
> We all know that wasn't the way the math worked out in reality. It's just an example, like the one in the OP. I don't see how they could possibly do $0.10.


Seriously, it's probably going to be closer to $0.01 per page. That way, somebody who writes a 100 page book will get a little bit less than before, and somebody who writes a 200 page book will get a little more. They're not suddenly going to switch from paying somebody who wrote a 50 page novella from $1.37 to $5.00. From the same pool of money? When they are theoretically trying to pay people who write shorter fiction less, not more? Really, the bottom line with this KDP example is that whoever came up with it (and the one Monique posted as well) is completely disconnected from the actual numbers. Sure, they're trying to "simplify" things as an example, but they should have been a lot more careful in order to keep from throwing off people's expectations.


----------



## ruecole

Daniel Kenney said:


> Yep, and I'm not addressing the 5,000 word short stories since being the self serving guy I am, I'll just address what I do as a writer...those pesky kids books. And I am arguing that authors of kids books be compensated the same as an author of an adult book. First, its' not all entirely clear that it takes John Grisham or Lee Child longer to write a book than Kate DiCamillo...but even if it did, who cares? One wrote a book for adults within the generally accepted standards of adult books and the other wrote a book for kids within the generally accepted standards of children's books. I don't see why one should get a higher borrow rate than the other?
> 
> And yes, this is me with my debate hat on arguing passionately because this will probably cost me quite a bit of money in the short term, I freely admit the bias.


Dan, you know I'm in agreement with you. 

Length of time to create shouldn't have any bearing on the value of the book. Some writers take 10 years to write a 100K book. Should they be paid more than an author who takes 6 months to write a book of the same length?

Rue


----------



## RubyMadden

Avis Black said:


> My math also gives me 10 cents a page. Amazon's likely using a reasonable ballpark figure in their calculations. If they were off by a factor of ten, they'd have to deal with a huge mass of enraged authors.


Amazon did a huge disservice in using the #'s they did in their announcement today, as that mass of enraged authors is guaranteed to happen in the Fall when everyone gets real data and there is no possible way that a $0.10 per page is sustainable to their business or the KU program. Whatever exec at the top of the Kindle food-chain approved that example will be in the hot-seat in a few months. Stupid, stupid, stupid #'s to use. Embarrassingly bad...


----------



## Daniel Kenney

ruecole said:


> Dan, you know I'm in agreement with you.
> 
> Length of time to create shouldn't have any bearing on the value of the book. Some writers take 10 years to write a 100K book. Should they be paid more than an author who takes 6 months to write a book of the same length?
> 
> Rue


Rue! You may be Canadian and have an unhealthy obsession with rabbits but....you get me


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Kenneth Rosenberg said:


> Seriously, it's probably going to be closer to $0.01 per page. That way, somebody who writes a 100 page book will get a little bit less than before, and somebody who writes a 200 page book will get a little more. They're not suddenly going to switch from paying somebody who wrote a 50 page novella from $1.37 to $5.00. From the same pool of money? When they are theoretically trying to pay people who write shorter fiction less, not more? Really, the bottom line with this KDP example is that whoever came up with it (and the one Monique posted as well) is completely disconnected from the actual numbers. Sure, they're trying to "simplify" things as an example, but they should have been a lot more careful in order to keep from throwing off people's expectations.


We could argue about this for days and days. Or wait until mid August when we'll find out for sure .

I reckon 1 cent per page is way too low and will cause a mass exodus from KU.

Amazon need to keep a good slab of authors while discouraging the 5 page how-to pamphlets. If they drop KU royalties to a point where I am making less than 60 cents per read of my novellas (10,000 - 12,000 words each and they make 60 cents per sale on other channels) then I'll pull them from KU. And because my Novellas aren't exclusive, then my compilations won't be able to stay in either, and they're 50,000 + words each. And I doubt very much that I'll be the only writer doing that sort of math.


----------



## My Dog&#039;s Servant

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> This is why authors drink.


We needed a reason?? 

I'm way behind the curve on this discussion, but as a writer of long novels, I thoroughly approve of this change. I put a few books into Select a couple of months ago, just as an experiment....I'd started wide so had nothing to compare it to. Too soon to tell, so far it's been more of a plus, but not a big one. This new arrangement will make it more positive, I think.

But this announcement reassured me on my judgment....I'd been toying with a serial idea, just for the fun of it, then woke up and reminded myself that I have always been either way ahead of the curve (superheroes? Nobody likes superheroes?) or way, way, way behind, so if I was thinking about playing with something because others were, too, that approach was guaranteed to be on the point of implosion. 

That said, serial writers can still sell and get paid....at the same rate per page as someone writing a 1000 page tome. It won't be at the much higher rate under the old system, but this really does even the playing field, with stories that readers want to read being the winners.


----------



## anniejocoby

ruecole said:


> Dan, you know I'm in agreement with you.
> 
> Length of time to create shouldn't have any bearing on the value of the book. Some writers take 10 years to write a 100K book. Should they be paid more than an author who takes 6 months to write a book of the same length?
> 
> Rue


I'm going to go with Rykmus on this one. It is true that, for a given author, that author will take longer to write a 100,000 word book than a 10,000 word book. So, why on earth should that author expect to be paid the same amount of money for his 100,000 book as his 10,000 word book? One of the books probably took him 10x longer to write. It makes perfect sense to be paid by the page. I mean, I'm not in Select, so I don't really have a dog in this hunt. I will say, though, that I was going to write a serial that would be Select only, but I don't foresee me doing that now. I'm a bit bummed because I really wanted to try out Select for a serial, but them's the breaks. I know why they're doing it, and I agree with the logic 100%.


----------



## Doglover

Mitns said:


> When they say beginning July 1st, they mean they will start counting pages then. So that payment will come to us at the end of September right? Or do they mean that the May payment delivered at the end of July will be calculated in this way?


No. That report is already out - $1.35 per KU borrow, which is about 90 pence in English at the moment. I can see an awful lot more collections being added to Select if they started paying by pages read; I can also see many collections of grotty little self help pamphlets.


----------



## Doglover

gorvnice said:


> For those who think 10 cents a page is feasible:
> 
> Do you honestly feel that Amazon will pay the author of a 300 page book THIRTY DOLLARS per borrow??


Amazon is not going to pay more per borrow than the KU subscription is it? But that is certainly how they made it sound. I am dubious about the page count though; as it is they don't seem able to get it right. I have paperbacks of 280 pages which were showing on the kindle version as 60 pages until I asked them to sort it out. They are saying the page count will have nothing to do with paperback versions, so not sure how they are going to do it.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Daniel Kenney said:


> Yep, and I'm not addressing the 5,000 word short stories since being the self serving guy I am, I'll just address what I do as a writer...those pesky kids books. And I am arguing that authors of kids books be compensated the same as an author of an adult book. First, its' not all entirely clear that it takes John Grisham or Lee Child longer to write a book than Kate DiCamillo...but even if it did, who cares? One wrote a book for adults within the generally accepted standards of adult books and the other wrote a book for kids within the generally accepted standards of children's books. I don't see why one should get a higher borrow rate than the other?
> 
> And yes, this is me with my debate hat on arguing passionately because this will probably cost me quite a bit of money in the short term, I freely admit the bias.


Look at it this way: Last figure I saw, Amazon said around 700,000 books were available in the KU program. How many of those are scam books? 10-pagers filled with Wiki articles or MineCraft stuff that get the 10% ticked when you simply open the book? Literally thousands of them. And Amazon has been shelling out $1.35ish for each of those borrows per month, every month. Now, they'll only be paying those guys a few cents each time. That leaves quite a hefty sum to be spread around to books that people are actually reading when they've already stated that the KU pot is remaining the same or even being increased (I think they said it's up to $11 million for the next month or two).

Readers get annoyed by the scam books. Now, those should be less prevalent and Amazon doesn't have to pay the scammers as much either. Authors writing real stories that get read make more money AND we get some idea as to our own read through. Data which we can use to create better stories in the future. Yes, children's book writers, and some other short fiction writers may see a decline in dollars, and this change will suck if you fall into one of those categories. I get that. But this new system looks to be fairer overall and merit-based, which has to be better for the majority of people involved, authors and readers alike.


----------



## Bbates024

Kenneth Rosenberg said:


> Seriously, it's probably going to be closer to $0.01 per page. That way, somebody who writes a 100 page book will get a little bit less than before, and somebody who writes a 200 page book will get a little more. They're not suddenly going to switch from paying somebody who wrote a 50 page novella from $1.37 to $5.00. From the same pool of money? When they are theoretically trying to pay people who write shorter fiction less, not more? Really, the bottom line with this KDP example is that whoever came up with it (and the one Monique posted as well) is completely disconnected from the actual numbers. Sure, they're trying to "simplify" things as an example, but they should have been a lot more careful in order to keep from throwing off people's expectations.


I agree I doubt they are planing on paying more money out. What might save them money in some places and dish it out more in others is the page count. A reader only has to finish part of your book for you make money so you never know. I could see serials doing just as well as long a someone is reading all 26 pages and you have enough of them out there.

I guess we really wont know how it shakes out until people get paid.


----------



## ruecole

anniejocoby said:


> I'm going to go with Rykmus on this one. It is true that, for a given author, that author will take longer to write a 100,000 word book than a 10,000 word book. So, why on earth should that author expect to be paid the same amount of money for his 100,000 book as his 10,000 word book? One of the books probably took him 10x longer to write. It makes perfect sense to be paid by the page.


Maybe to type, but maybe not. Some authors can take years to write (and rewrite and rewrite) a 10K word book. So why should they be penalized because of a shorter word or page count?

And there are several authors on the boards here who're selling short (as in under 100 page) books for $2.99+ and some are doing quite well. No one is telling them it's not fair they're getting the full 70% royalty and they're earning too much.



Rue


----------



## ruecole

Daniel Kenney said:


> Rue! You may be Canadian and have an unhealthy obsession with rabbits but....you get me


What do you mean "unhealthy obsession?" 

Rue


----------



## erikhanberg

The knowns:

1) The rough amount of July's KDP Select Global Fund (promised to be above $11 million for July and August).

The unknowns:

2) The number of pages of KU books read/month. Maybe 100,000,000 is low. Maybe it's 300,000,000. Who knows. Amazon's not telling (yet). Once the first month is done, we'll know.

3) The number of KU books per month that someone borrows and abandons after 20 pages or less. This one is the real question, but it dramatically affects us all.

Here's some math to think about this last one.

Let's say a KU subscriber reads 2 300-word books through to completion every month. AND that they read the first 20 pages of three other books before abandoning them.

In total, that reader has read 660 pages. Under the current Select rules, they likely generated $6.70 in royalties to KDP authors (5 x $1.34.)

Now, let's say that Amazon doesn't want to pay any more out for that same reader in July.

$6.70 in royalties for 660 pages is just over $0.01/page. That supports the idea that Amazon's per page rate will be low.

But look at the effect on the payments to the authors.

The abandoned books generated $0.20. The two completed books generated $3.04, more than twice what they'd earned before.

This is a crude way of looking at it, but it should frame the benefits of writing good books that people read. Amazon will pay you more for that. It means more ads they can show on the e-ink Kindle, more time using the Kindle fire, more time with the Kindle app open on your iPad. Time spent with their device or apps is good for them. So they'll reward that time. Maybe it will be more than $0.01/page. (If it's $0.03, that 300 word book just generated $9.)

The reason I say the question about abandoned books is important is because if that same reader went through let's say the first 20 pages of 10 books before finding the two she would finish, she generated $16.08 in royalties (12 x $1.34) which means that there is way more money on the table for the two books she finished.

The number of monthly borrows/subscriber and the number of monthly abandoned books/subscriber are the two biggest factors that will determine how this does, and we obviously don't know them.

But even given what I feel like are pretty conservative scenarios, this plan should look good for the authors of the (short or long) books that people finish.


----------



## 75814

If you believe Amazon will pay much more than $0.01 a page or that $0.01 a page will cause a mass exodus from KU, then I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. 

My serial is 15K. According to Amazon, that's about 65 pages (I know this will change, but just for the sake of argument). At $0.01 per page, that's $0.65 per borrow. A sale at $0.99 is $0.35. I'm not making as much of a profit per borrow as I was on the previous model, but it's still almost twice as much as I get for a sale. 

Now yes, it's true that I'll get $0.70 per sale on other platforms like iTunes or Smashwords or D2D. But I don't believe it will cause a mass exodus, for the same reason it didn't cause a mass exodus when KU first began. How many novelists looked at their $3.99+ books and said, "yes, I'll make twice as much per sale on those other channels as per borrow on KU, but I barely sell anything on those other platforms and so I'll stick with KU"? Quite a lot. There were people who left KU and went wide, but there were a lot who stayed or just altered their strategy and started writing shorter material for KU.

It'll be the same thing this time around. Sure, some short writers will go wide or start writing longer. But they might get more novelists coming back. At $0.01 per page, a 300-page book would make $3 per borrow. And Amazon is probably more interested in getting those guys to come back to KU than they are in keeping the short fiction writers happy.


----------



## David VanDyke

ChristinaGarner said:


> Agree. One of my upcoming strategies involved novellas. Sigh...


Not aimed at you directly, but this is an example of why it's unwise to build a strategy around one company's one program that can change at any time.

Go wide, people. Diversify.



carinasanfey said:


> Okay. I'm going for a half-hour nap. When I wake up I'm going to completely redo my launch strategy for the next twenty-four months and start bundling my main name serials in bunches of ten into novels. I don't think I'll be sleeping very much this week. Bring on the caffeine.


See above.

(Again, not aimed at anyone in particular, these ladies just happened to provide good quotable quotes): In fact, I'm going to go so far as to say gaming the KU system is not a strategy. It's not strategic. At most, it's a tactic. The best thing anyone can do is write the best work you can produce, of whatever length you like, and search for what sells the work, rather than trying to write stuff that won't be the best because it doesn't come naturally.


----------



## anniejocoby

ruecole said:


> Maybe to type, but maybe not. Some authors can take years to write (and rewrite and rewrite) a 10K word book. So why should they be penalized because of a shorter word or page count?
> 
> And there are several authors on the boards here who're selling short (as in under 100 page) books for $2.99+ and some are doing quite well. No one is telling them it's not fair they're getting the full 70% royalty and they're earning too much.
> 
> 
> 
> Rue


Apples and oranges. The authors who are charging $2.99 for a short book isn't taking away from authors who write longer works. If they can get people to pay that kind of money for a short book, more power to them. It doesn't affect anyone else. But people who write short works ARE taking away money from those who write longer in the old KU system. They were getting an equal slice of the pie as the longer works, and every slice of the pie diminishes everyone's payout. And I was saying that a given author will take 10x longer to write a 100,000 book than a 10,000 book. I know that it takes some authors a great deal of time to bang out 10,000 words and that other authors can write 100,000 words in that same amount of time. But for a given author, it doesn't seem fair that he would be paid the same amount for a book that took him 10x longer to write than another book that he wrote that was significantly shorter. I totally agree with this new system - it seems significantly more fair to everyone involved.


----------



## kevin armstrong

My understanding is that the writer will only be paid for the first read.


----------



## David VanDyke

kevin armstrong said:


> My understanding is that the writer will only be paid for the first read.


For the first read by any one customer.

I foresee the new scammers farming out 1000 page nonfiction tomes for their 100 scammer buddies to "read."


----------



## nightfire

My author hat:

I create photo books.  They are in Select because the files are too big to "go wide" other than iTunes.  On iTunes I can make enhanced versions of my books that are bigger, different than my Kindle versions.  So I have a bunch of books that will just be in Select.  Guess what, I don't mind less money per borrow.  Why? Because my money comes from my print versions of those books.  People buy/borrow the ebook, love it, and go buy the print version. My longest book is 88 pages, very little text.

I would think other authors that write/illustrate/produce children's books and photo based books are looking at the same thing.  It's a loss leader to get the print book sale.  My ebooks will soon have a CreateSpace coupon in them to encourage them to buy the book directly from CreateSpace at a lower price but still make me the money I would have if they bought it on Amazon. Win-Win.

Putting on my book promotor hat:

I certainly hope this stems the tide of short crap books that come through and take up my time to delete from the site.  For every book we post we delete 30 to 40 garbage PLR/Wikipedia/bad ghostwritten books.

Putting on my reader hat:

Sometimes I buy books that are crap and I don't finish them. I don't bother to return them or it is past the 30 day refund window.  If I subscribed to KU (been considering it but can't read that much yet due to health/eye issues) now I could reward authors that write good books and not reward authors that write crap.

If you don't think Amazon isn't already tracking your reading habits and know how much you have read and when, take a look at the Kindle book you are reading now. Kindle App or Kindle, makes no difference.  At the bottom of the page is the percentage of the book you have read and how long they estimate it will take you to finish the book.

One thing that is up in the air is how they will credit authors when people skip around the book using the slider and not actually reading.  I do skim a lot in nonfiction books and in some fiction if I hit a boring section.  If I do subscribe to KU I was going to use it mostly to research other books in my genre.  10% doesn't matter anymore, but now if I browse a 10 - 20 page book I didn't "reward" an author of a bad book, but if I liked what I saw I can reward that author by buying the book (yes I like to have books I like available to read again) or by borrowing others of their books.

I am all about supporting indie authors, I am also all about crushing the scammers and spammers.  Not all authors that write shorts are spammers.  I have a couple shorts up myself.  But I don't churn shorts to make me rich that are not written by me.  I see the difference every day.


----------



## David Wisehart

gorvnice said:


> For those who think 10 cents a page is feasible:
> 
> Do you honestly feel that Amazon will pay the author of a 300 page book THIRTY DOLLARS per borrow??


They're not paying per borrow, but for pages read.

And in order to calculate that, we need to know the open rate.

Maybe most books borrowed are never opened.

We don't know.

But Amazon does.

And we're about to find out.

Brace yourself-it won't be good news.

What's clear is:

Some writers will be paid much more than they have been.

Most writers will be paid much less.

David


----------



## ruecole

anniejocoby said:


> Apples and oranges. The authors who are charging $2.99 for a short book isn't taking away from authors who write longer works. If they can get people to pay that kind of money for a short book, more power to them. It doesn't affect anyone else. But people who write short works ARE taking away money from those who write longer in the old KU system. They were getting an equal slice of the pie as the longer works, and every slice of the pie diminishes everyone's payout. And I was saying that a given author will take 10x longer to write a 100,000 book than a 10,000 book. I know that it takes some authors a great deal of time to bang out 10,000 words and that other authors can write 100,000 words in that same amount of time. But for a given author, it doesn't seem fair that he would be paid the same amount for a book that took him 10x longer to write than another book that he wrote that was significantly shorter. I totally agree with this new system - it seems significantly more fair to everyone involved.


Taking money away?!?!?!? 

I'm sorry you think my work is not worth the same as yours because it's shorter. 

I'm going to disengage now. This really has me too upset. Seriously. I'm about to watch my royalty income drop at least a third, probably more like a half. That's a big deal to me.

Oh, and I did have my books published wide for two years. Made about $5 a month. KU turned my writing career around. Now it's doing it again. 

Rue


----------



## vlmain

As a lover of short stories, my greatest fear is that people will stop publishing them. I am also a little concerned that many short stories will become full length works of fluff. Time will tell.


----------



## nightfire

David VanDyke said:


> For the first read by any one customer.
> 
> I foresee the new scammers farming out 1000 page nonfiction tomes for their 100 scammer buddies to "read."


It will cost them more for that, the buddies aren't going to spend that much time reading. Plus Amazon can identify groups that are only reading each other's books. I think they will move on to something else, like back to creating PDFs and selling them on their own sites and using the same group of 100 buddies to send them traffic. (We refer to it as the "circle jerk" in affiliate marketing. One guy pimps another guy's book and suddenly you are inundated with offers from 20 other guys for their books.)


----------



## RobertCharles

I'm a huge fan of KU as a reader and I've felt authors have taken advantage of us too long with their ultra short works clogging up the system.

As a writer, this doesn't bother me. I only write novels and will probably make more money.

I'm thinking many of you complaining want to start considering the reader first and your pocket second.


----------



## VEVO

Just a quick survey to see how people are viewing this newest change.


----------



## Avis Black

Although there's a lot of skepticism about potential higher payouts, I do think Amazon can make the math work.  Why?  Because out of the 700,000 or so titles that can be borrowed, I suspect that less than 10,000 of those titles--and maybe a much smaller number than that--are routinely read to completion.  The indie novel that is read and enjoyed from cover to cover is statistically likely to be a rarity, maybe not even 1 percent of all the novels in KULL.  Sturgeon's Law and all that.  Plus, the majority of the titles in KULL are shorter works that will receive smaller payouts.


----------



## geronl

There is a very long thread on that subject already

But I think its too early to know how it all shakes out


----------



## VEVO

geronl said:


> There is a very long thread on that subject already
> 
> But I think its too early to know how it all shakes out


That thread doesn't have a poll.


----------



## geronl

Well, by all means, excuse me.


----------



## geronl

Doglover said:


> Amazon is not going to pay more per borrow than the KU subscription is it? But that is certainly how they made it sound. I am dubious about the page count though; as it is they don't seem able to get it right. I have paperbacks of 280 pages which were showing on the kindle version as 60 pages until I asked them to sort it out. They are saying the page count will have nothing to do with paperback versions, so not sure how they are going to do it.


It would need to fix the page count system before it starts paying per page


----------



## vlmain

anniejocoby said:


> Apples and oranges. The authors who are charging $2.99 for a short book isn't taking away from authors who write longer works. If they can get people to pay that kind of money for a short book, more power to them. It doesn't affect anyone else. But people who write short works ARE taking away money from those who write longer in the old KU system. They were getting an equal slice of the pie as the longer works, and every slice of the pie diminishes everyone's payout.


Doesn't matter whether it's a buy or a borrow. Every new title dilutes the pool, increases competition, and decreases any given title's odds of being seen to a certain degree. Short stories don't take anything away from the writers of full length novels. People will read what they want to read. Period. Those who are inclined to read a 400 page novel will do so, and those who are inclined to read short stories were probably not going to read that 400 page novel, anyway.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Perry Constantine said:


> If you believe Amazon will pay much more than $0.01 a page or that $0.01 a page will cause a mass exodus from KU, then I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.


First, Amazon doesn't set a price per page. They create a pool of money that then gets distributed to authors who participated in the program. The number of pages read will determine how much authors will receive per page.

Second, Amazon wants exclusivity, and exclusivity has its price.

Currently KU is worthwhile because I make twice as much per borrow through KU than I do per sale on other channels on my $1 novellas. If I make $0.30 per borrow from books that make twice as much per sale at other outlets, then I can't see myself staying with KU. And if I'm forced to do that sort of math, then I'm sure others will do it as well.

For all I know, this could very well be Amazon's intention. They want longer works in KU and are willing to reward people who publish that sort of stuff at the expense of those who don't.

Personally, I don't think they want to punish the writers of novellas. They want to get those people who publish 5 or 10 page titles that have very little content. When a customer _buys_ a crappy book, he or she can return it and the scammers get nothing. With KU, that's not an option and the scammer gets full payment. I think Amazon wants to close that loophole. Paying scammers 5 or 10 cents per borrow would make it difficult for them to turn a dollar.


----------



## Doglover

ruecole said:


> Taking money away?!?!?!?
> 
> I'm sorry you think my work is not worth the same as yours because it's shorter.
> 
> I'm going to disengage now. This really has me too upset. Seriously. I'm about to watch my royalty income drop at least a third, probably more like a half. That's a big deal to me.
> 
> Oh, and I did have my books published wide for two years. Made about $5 a month. KU turned my writing career around. Now it's doing it again.
> 
> Rue


Don't be despondent. Put your short stories into an anthology and they will still make a fair few dollars; I know if this works as well as Amazon think and I hope, my omnibus editions are going into select as well. What price 800 pages? At least as much as the royalty on a sale, possibly more. There are always ways around good short stories earning enough but it must be worth it to get rid of these awful self help and how to books.

I have two satire short stories, one only 1600 words, and I get a lot of sales on them but hardly any borrows. All this time I have been hoping they'll get borrowed instead, as they are .99 each. Now it won't matter.

I am watching the kdp forum to see which scammer will be the first to threaten to sue Amazon for changing their terms and conditions. I can't wait!


----------



## Rykymus

Diversity is not for everyone. Espousing that it is the answer for all of us is foolish.

If you want to make money writing stories, they key should be to write good stories.

If you want to make a LOT of money writing stories, the key should be to write a LOT of good stories.

If employee A can make 100 widgets an hour, should he not get paid more than employee B who can only produce 10 widgets per hour? Does anyone here believe that employee A is not deserving of greater compensation for making more widgets?

It takes the same amount of time to cook a large order of french fries as it does to cook a small one. The large one costs more because it is more food. Does anyone here feel they shouldn't have to pay more for a larger portion of food? Does anyone here feel that the restaurateur should not be compensated more for providing you with more food?

It really is as simple as all that.

To Rue: I understand your pain, as I went through the same thing when KU started. I lost a third of my revenue. I went wide and lost even more. I went back to KU. Now, it appears as if I may have weathered the storm, and I will no longer lose so much to each borrow. While I feel your pain, I don't see how it was okay for you to make above average profit while I made less than average profit. At least with the pages read system, everyone will get paid for pages read... Write 10 - 10,000 word shorts, or write 1 - 100,000 word novel. The amount of work you put into the longer work will likely be the same as you did for the shorter ones.

Had Amazon started with the 'pages read' system instead of the flat rate of old, everyone would probably have been fine with it. People are unhappy because they were being paid at a higher rate for less work, and now they have to deal with a level playing field. The change sucks, but at least the change creates equal opportunity for all.

One last thing. I truly hope that Amazon has something up their sleeve for the creators of children's books. Not doing so would be incredibly short sighted, as getting children to read digitally not only creates future readers, but future _digital _readers. However, assume for the moment that they do not. I suspect that the majority of children's book authors will pull their work from Select/KU, perhaps leaving a loss-leader in to entice parents to _buy _their other books. This will result in very few children's books being in Select/KU, in much the same way as fewer full length novels are in Select/KU. End result, people buy children's books instead of getting them through KU. Problem potentially solved.


----------



## ZamajK

Well here's hoping this will get rid of the WarriorForum slime and their "books"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## VEVO

This reply by Phronk basically sum it all up:



Phronk said:


> I'll make less money from this change, but I like it. It's finally fair.
> 
> It never really made sense that short story writers got the same sized slice of the payout as novel writers. Now, for all writers, the payout is more proportional to the amount of work that went into writing. Like many traditionally published stories, we're paid per word (ish).
> 
> The only people who I can see being against the change are short story writers (like me) who were previously getting more than their fair share.
> 
> Most importantly, it's good for readers. This will encourage more variety in length in KU, and books that are exactly as long as they need to be, rather than padded or shortened. We writers should ALWAYS have been writing things that are the proper length, but at least we're more financially incentivized to do it now.


----------



## Elidibus

I'm actually pretty excited about this change, considering only myself here. As I just launched my book at the end of last month, I'm in a pretty unique position where I can easily change my marketing strategy. I write longer books, over 200 pages, usually around 230. And if I understand the math correctly, I'm getting more if a person borrows my book and reads it all the way than I do now, which is awesome. I had planned on staying in KU for a while, until I had a few books out, and now there's really no question about. For my own position, it's a good idea.

However, I hate that others are going to take a hit on this. It's not fair to give us so little warning when making a drastic change like this. I know a lot of people are going to be affected by this adversely, but at the same time, it doesn't seem like this is going away any time soon.

Well, one thing I know for certain. Us indies come to battle loaded. We know how to roll with the punches and adapt to all kinds of things. I'm sure, as a group, we'll still find a way to keep doing what we love and make tons of money while doing it


----------



## The Bass Bagwhan

TuckerAuthor said:


> Look at it this way: Last figure I saw, Amazon said around 700,000 books were available in the KU program. How many of those are scam books? 10-pagers filled with Wiki articles or MineCraft stuff that get the 10% ticked when you simply open the book? Literally thousands of them. And Amazon has been shelling out $1.35ish for each of those borrows per month, every month. Now, they'll only be paying those guys a few cents each time. That leaves quite a hefty sum to be spread around to books that people are actually reading when they've already stated that the KU pot is remaining the same or even being increased (I think they said it's up to $11 million for the next month or two).


Glad you posted this Alan, because the same thought has been ticking over in my head. The new system potentially offers a more fair redistribution of the KULL pie and should marginalise those titles that shouldn't really see any KULL benefit.
Lots of wise heads have contributed to this thread and offered some sage opinions, but I can only believe that the wisest of them all in regard to these changes, Amazon itself, has given it some very careful thought indeed and even the email newsletter would have been thoroughly vetted, before release.
Still, I wouldn't be surprised to see some kind of follow-up, clarification newsletter in the near future. We won't be waiting months for more info.


----------



## Melody Simmons

ruecole said:


> Taking money away?!?!?!?
> 
> I'm sorry you think my work is not worth the same as yours because it's shorter.
> 
> I'm going to disengage now. This really has me too upset. Seriously. I'm about to watch my royalty income drop at least a third, probably more like a half. That's a big deal to me.
> 
> Oh, and I did have my books published wide for two years. Made about $5 a month. KU turned my writing career around. Now it's doing it again.
> 
> Rue


I think hey are rather trying to get rid of scammers who publish those 20-page non-fiction type books with some info copied from the internet. I mean if you read 2 pages from one then it is 10% right? It seems their aim is to encourage proper length books and quality writing. Hopefully the good books will float more to the forefront in search rankings because of this move.


----------



## katrina46

Daniel Kenney said:


> Why exactly is paying per word or page fair and paying per book or story is not fair?
> 
> I mean, I get it. We don't like people taking a novel, splitting into 10 parts, getting the same borrow for each of the 10 parts that some other person would get for the whole shebang. I really do get it.
> 
> But what about people who just write shorter books? (Points self serving finger at self serving self (hint, it's the guy with big ears typing these words)). On the one hand, there is precedent for paying per word (magazine articles for one). So I sort of get that. ON the other hand, there is also precedent for paying for a completed book. It's called the BOOK PUBLISHING INDUSTRY.
> 
> Is Charlotte's Web less valuable than (fill in the blank 400 page suspense thriller) ? To a lot of people, no. Charlotte's Web's value has little to do with whether it's 32,000 words or 100,000 words. It's a great book that stays with people.
> 
> Now, let's be clear. In the short term, this change will probably negatively affect my bottom line so that is 100 percent why I'm asking these questions. If on the other hand Amazon announced today that starting July 1 they would be paying authors more who had large heads, were 100% Irish, and got lots of concussions playing football then I'd be jumping up and down because it would benefit me greatly. But, that all being said, is number of words or pages really how we want books to be judged?
> 
> Seems sort of fair and sort of weird all at the same time.


If it helps at all I really think your head and ears are perfectly proportioned for your frame. And I agree Charlotte's Web is an awesome book. I cried at the end.


----------



## Guest

When all is said and done, it is time to experiment and adapt. After sleeping on it, I`ve come to these conclusions:
1) For a picture book author like myself, with both kindle and print versions, I don`t really see parents wanting to borrow my type of books. They like keep sakes for their little ones.
2) For good quality short stories I think this will happen:
The market will open up again, as people panic and leave in droves, thus opening the door for serious writers to get more visibility on a less saturated market place....this COULD be a good thing IF you are prolific AND good. The alternative? Make your books kdp only and take off select, or, go wide.
I honestly believe cream will rise to the top. It`s just gonna take a little slower, that's all.

I feel that for those who make an honest living already, its scary, for simple old me, its a chance to do my first releases under in new era. Can I ask one thing? Don`t make this a novel vs short debate. Great novels are great. Great shorts are great, and scammers will ALWAYS find a way to claw onto anything. Just be true, enjoy writing and don't be too worried or precious, just keep that backlist building nicely.

Good luck all!  I need a nap!!!!!!!!!


----------



## vlmain

katrina46 said:


> If it helps at all I really think your head and ears are perfectly proportioned for your frame. And I agree Charlotte's Web is an awesome book. I cried at the end.


So did I! That said, it seems a number of people feel writing short stories is easier, and that a short story writer can pump out ten 10k word stories to every 100k novel. It just doesn't work that way. Shorts are not easier to write. I would even argue they are harder because the writer has to create fully fleshed out characters that readers will connect with, and bring a plot to completion in a very short space. That is not easy to do and I don't understand why so many people feel their talent is worth less.

It's kind of like saying a Lamborghini should cost less than an Escalade because they're smaller.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Andrew Murray said:


> 1) For a picture book author like myself, with both kindle and print versions, I don`t really see parents wanting to borrow my type of books. They like keep sakes for their little ones.


I think that's definitely one piece of the picture book puzzle -- but not the whole thing. For that piece, the Kindle version can serve as a preview for a later print purchase, and if that later print purchase happens then it can sort of justify the free or almost-free Kindle copy. I specifically hoped for that in the past when I used the KDP Select free download days.

On the other hand, not every picture book is going to hold that special place. It might just be something a frazzled parent grabs to keep a restless child quiet a little while longer in a waiting room, for example. Or maybe the child has discovered the joy of reading and is racing through book after book (a good thing!), with only a few books making a long-term connection.

Our bookshelves at home have dozens and dozens of children's books, but my kids really only remember a handful. If I mention _Go, Dog, Go!_ they'll immediately remember it, despite all being adults now (or nearly so). If I mention _Home For A Bunny_ they probably wouldn't know what I was talking about even though it's sitting on the same shelf. I can imagine that if they were growing up now, they would be reading like crazy on a Kindle, making full use of a KU subscription. They might enjoy both books, but only want a print copy of one. Is the value of the one-time-read so low that the author should get next to nothing for it, even if the child enjoyed the book?

Other authors aren't being put in a position of virtually giving away their Kindle books with the hope of making a print sale of the same book. "Fair" is a shaky notion, but I think the outcry would be vastly louder if Amazon told _all_ authors, "we'll give you a few cents each time someone borrows your book, but hopefully they'll buy a print copy." There are too many variations to why a parent will get a Kindle book for their child to lump it all into the "print-preview" model.


----------



## jc3000

How does Kindle determine whether a page was read? Do you have to spend a certain amount of time on it before it counts as read? Let's say you write a how-to book and the reader decides to scroll through the book rather than clicking on the chapter links and only spends 2 seconds on each page because they are trying to scroll down to find a certain section, will those page scrolls count as pages read? or do they have to stay on a page for a certain amount of time like 30 seconds in order to have it count as a page read?


----------



## Charmaine

*Putting on my betting hat*

I'd wager that the payment in August is going to be .02-.03 per page, but I think the end game is to steer us to .01 per page. 

I've only slightly altered my plans for the year in that I plan to offer 100 page novellas and 250-350 page novels.
The only thing is that maybe I'd consider putting a 3 novella collection in KU. 
I've always thought it was good practice to keep them out of KU, but now seems like a good time to test the waters.


----------



## Guest

My bet is $.00906.


----------



## jc3000

I've read so many posts in this thread about each page read will be worth 1 cent, does anyone really think this is true? Why would Amazon send out an email to every single author touting 10 cents per page and then in August we're all going to see that Amazon lied through their teeth about 10 cents and we only get 1 cent. I'm going to have to trust Amazon on this because I really have no other choice. I would guess that in May I had about 10,000 pages read of my books, with 10 cents per page I would have made $1,000 but at 1 cent per page I would only of made $100 and that's not even worth getting out of bed for.

I personally can write 2,000 words per hour, so let's say I publish a 60 page book that has 20,000 words and 10,000 pages are read by KU users, that means at 1 cent per page I wrote those 20,000 words for $10 an hour and that doesn't even include the time spent for formatting and editing, but I could get a job for the day at Mcdonald's that would pay more per hour, that is crazy that an author can now make less than a McDonald's worker with the new KU. Thanks Amazon!!!


----------



## 75814

Joe Vasicek said:


> My bet is $.00906.


I'd say that's more likely.


----------



## 75814

jc3000 said:


> I've read so many posts in this thread about each page read will be worth 1 cent, does anyone really think this is true? Why would Amazon send out an email to every single author touting 10 cents per page and then in August we're all going to see that Amazon lied through their teeth about 10 cents and we only get 1 cent. I'm going to have to trust Amazon on this because I really have no other choice. I would guess that in May I had about 10,000 pages read of my books, with 10 cents per page I would have made $1,000 but at 1 cent per page I would only of made $100 and that's not even worth getting out of bed for.


Because Amazon wants to make it look better than it really is. Does anyone remember if they used examples with the initial KU announcement email last year, and if so, what were those numbers?

I mean, do the math. At $0.10 per page, a 100-page book would net $10 per borrow. Basically the cost of one KU subscription. Amazon isn't about to pay that much for a simple borrow.


----------



## Evan of the R.

jc3000 said:


> I've read so many posts in this thread about each page read will be worth 1 cent, does anyone really think this is true? Why would Amazon send out an email to every single author touting 10 cents per page...


They didn't promise - or tout - that it would be 10 cents per page. They were just using an example with easy numbers, because (hopefully) everyone can multiply by 10, while multiplying by $0.00906 is a bit more difficult.

They even noted that they were using this example "for simplicity."

It might be slightly misleading, but they clearly didn't promise 10 cents per page. It's just an example of a possibility for the sake of showing how the math would work.


----------



## L.B

I would imagine that Amazon have pretty good data on how many pages have been read and would have worked this out from that. We don't have that data, so it's pointless speculating, but I'm pretty sure novels are the winners here.


----------



## archaeoroutes

As already mentioned, I liked the old system for my short stories and disliked it for my longer works. No surprises there.

I don't get the bit above about it preventing padding out work. Surely it will encourage it?


----------



## Jacob Stanley

Barnaby Yard said:


> I would imagine that Amazon have pretty good data on how many pages have been read and would have worked this out from that. We don't have that data, so it's pointless speculating, but I'm pretty sure novels are the winners here.


I agree. This has to be aimed at bringing in novels. But 1 cent per page won't be enough to make that happen. Not once you factor in actual completion percentages.

The actual rate has to be high enough to pay a decent amount for a _partial _readthrough of an average length novel, because partial read-throughs are going to be the norm, even for big name writers with great books.

Anything less than 2 or 3 cents will be such a pay cut for everybody, even novelists, that it will result in a mass exodus from KU, and unless they want to destroy the program, I don't see that happening.

I guess I could be massively underestimating the number of people who actually finish the books they download. We'll see.


----------



## L.B

Jacob Stanley said:


> I agree. This has to be aimed at bringing in novels. But 1 cent per page won't be enough to make that happen. Not once you factor in actual completion percentages.
> 
> The actual rate has to be high enough to pay a decent amount for a _partial _readthrough of an average length novel, because partial read-throughs are going to be the norm, even for big name writers with great books.
> 
> Anything less than 2 or 3 cents will be such a pay cut for everybody, even novelists, that it will result in a mass exodus from KU, and unless they want to destroy the program, I don't see that happening.


But why are people saying 1 cent per page? Just blind panic if you ask me.


----------



## Lydniz

archaeoroutes said:


> As already mentioned, I liked the old system for my short stories and disliked it for my longer works. No surprises there.
> 
> I don't get the bit above about it preventing padding out work. Surely it will encourage it?


No, it won't encourage it because you have to get people to keep turning the page, which they won't if a book is shoved full of boring padding.


----------



## Jacob Stanley

Barnaby Yard said:


> But why are people saying 1 cent per page? Just blind panic if you ask me.


Yeah, I agree. 1 cent per page is very pessimistic.

Some people were speculating that 1 cent was reasonable because it would mean a $2.50 payout for a readthrough of a 250 page book, which isn't that far off what Amazon's normal royalty rate.

But that's assuming that the average reader actually finishes the books they start, and that's just not the case. The rates of completion will probably vary wildly from one writer to the next, and I'm guessing an average of 50% completion per reader will actually be a fairly high number.

That means the standard has to be based on partial reads--50 percent 40 percent or whatever the real average is--not full reads, otherwise it screws everybody, and KU is done.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

VEVO said:


> That thread doesn't have a poll.


It does now.  Merged with other thread, to include the poll! Folks, check out the poll at the top of the page.

Betsy


----------



## Roman

I understand the need to change the system, but for us children's book writers this is terrible news. 

The illustration process takes long time and is very expensive. I have two books which are in the production for over 9 months in example. We are already getting the shaft with those exorbitant data transfer fees and now it seems that KU might not be an option any more.

My children's books use the fixed layout so porting them to different platforms would probably be quite difficult. It was hard enough to get them to look right on Amazon.


----------



## GeneDoucette

KelliWolfe said:


> Why not? It would make the payout for borrows on longer novels come much closer to what the authors are making on sales.
> 
> 250 pages = $2.50 (~ a sale at $3.50 cover price)
> 300 pages = $3.00 (~ a sale at $4.30 cover price)
> 400 pages = $4.00 (~ a sale at $5.70 cover price)
> 
> At those rates rather than the flat $1.35 Amazon is definitely going to be able to start luring authors of longer works into KU. It's vastly more attractive for them.


That's assuming your cover prices match the page counts you're displaying. Mine don't. I sell novellas that Amazon lists as 100 pages or less for $2.99. I have a book Amazon says is 120 pages coming out in a month I'm pricing at $3.99. I would need 2 cents per page for it to make sense to use KU.


----------



## Guest

Roman said:


> I understand the need to change the system, but for us children's book writers this is terrible news.
> 
> The illustration process takes long time and is very expensive. I have two books which are in the production for over 9 months in example. We are already getting the shaft with those exorbitant data transfer fees and now it seems that KU might not be an option any more.
> 
> My children's books use the fixed layout so porting them to different platforms would probably be quite difficult. It was hard enough to get them to look right on Amazon.


This is my sentiments exactly for kids books. The only chance we have is to opt out of KU and just put them kdp...so people either BUY or not. I think that people who don't understand our workflow can often take a very snobby attitude, as if a novel is the only thing of value. ( That includes some of the people I`ve seen on these boards btw ) It sucks but we have to adapt, as I said before, or just try something different.


----------



## books_mb

Yes, 10 cents per page is quite unrealistic even if you consider the weighted average instead of assuming every reader goes cover to cover. Say ten people borrow a 300 page book. Of these, 4 read 0 pages, 3 read 100 pages, 2 read 200 pages and 1 reads 300 pages. That's 1000 pages or 100 $ at 10 cents per page, on average 10 $ per borrow. Not gonna happen. Assuming they aim for an average payout of $ 3 per borrow for a 300 page book and assuming the above distribution is somewhat realistic (but who knows) leads to 3 cents per page, which seems much more reasonable.

I'm glad that this change will hurt the scammers big time (at least until they find a new scamming system). Suppose someone had 30 Wiki article books with 50 borrows per day. In the old model and using $ 1.35 per borrow, that translates into a payout of around $ 2000 per month. In the new model, again using the above distribution which means 0.3 pages read per borrowed page and using 3 cents per page, that will reduce to $ 270 per month. So they will make only 1/10 of what they did before the change and the difference can be used to pay legitimate authors.


----------



## jc3000

I have several new books that I am planning on uploading this month, I was going to opt them into KU but because they are short stories at only 20 pages each and if I only get 3 cents per page that would mean 60 cents per borrow down from $1.35, meaning that I lose 75 cents on each book because of this new program. and that doesn't even include partial reads so the average will be more like 40 cents. I agree with many of the posts that say that any pay out over 5 cents per page is a pipe dream because why would Amazon pay 10 cents a page and give the author $10 for a 100 page book, that would bankrupt Amazon and their stock would become worthless, so around 3 cents seems more realistic.

I am trying to keep a roof over my head as kindle is my primary income source, do you think I should opt-in to KU for the new books I am adding in June and July? Or should I take a risk and not opt-in and hope that a customer not being able to read it for free with KU will make them buy it? I really need to make some decisions quickly so when I get the payment for July on Sept. 30th it's not tons less compared to what I usually get.


----------



## ufwriter

Just as a data point: under the current system, with a $1.35 payout per borrow that reaches 10%, a 20-page story gets $0.067 per page, a 100-page story gets $0.0134 per page, a 200-page story gets $0.0067 per page, and a 300-page story gets $0.0045 per page.


----------



## murmcd

The Amazon example is simply that, an example using numbers that are easily understood and will most likely be completely different. When borrows were first offered the example was similar, easy to understand but an amount very different from reality.

One other major consideration before hoisting everything out of KU/select - don't make the assumption the person that borrowed your book would have bought it!!! they may happily buy subsequent books but your first sale may well have been a borrow to take a risk on a new author and you still get paid, maybe not as much but something is better than nothing.


----------



## Hugh Howey

jc3000 said:


> I have several new books that I am planning on uploading this month, I was going to opt them into KU but because they are short stories at only 20 pages each and if I only get 3 cents per page that would mean 60 cents per borrow down from $1.35, meaning that I lose 75 cents on each book because of this new program. and that doesn't even include partial reads so the average will be more like 40 cents. I agree with many of the posts that say that any pay out over 5 cents per page is a pipe dream because why would Amazon pay 10 cents a page and give the author $10 for a 100 page book, that would bankrupt Amazon and their stock would become worthless, so around 3 cents seems more realistic.
> 
> I am trying to keep a roof over my head as kindle is my primary income source, do you think I should opt-in to KU for the new books I am adding in June and July? Or should I take a risk and not opt-in and hope that a customer not being able to read it for free with KU will make them buy it? I really need to make some decisions quickly so when I get the payment for July on Sept. 30th it's not tons less compared to what I usually get.


In what world did it ever make sense to receive $1.35 per reader for a 20-page short story?

Everyone seems to want a get-rich-quick scheme that is unsustainable and/or a poor value for the end-user.

Write TEN 20-page stories, and expect to make in cumulative sales what an author of a 200-page novel receives. Not the same PER item, as if the value to the reader and the level of work from the author is the same.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Fairness of the program change aside, it IS a change in income for short form authors (and children's book authors) and a discussion of change in approach is reasonable here.  JC's post did not question the fairness of the program, only what approach for the future.

Betsy


----------



## NoCat

There is an easy way to get a set amount of money that you know exactly what it will be from a reader buying your book or story, you know. It's called selling it and not being in Select   I have 15k (ie about 40 pages on Amazon) novellas that sell 100+ copies a month at 2.99. I get 2 bucks each time someone buys one, and they don't ever have to read it! It's magical.   Frankly, I do wish that Amazon would stop the whole uneven payments thing and just announce a stable rate per page. That would be more fair for borrows, I think. Then people could immediately do the math for their work and act accordingly.

Anyway, about KU: I think this system is more fair in some ways, but I also think it will punish short story writers more than being a short story writer is already career punishment. Combined with things like demanding exclusivity and the totally arbitrary nature of payments, it's not a program I want to be part of for the moment. I am leaving a single novel in it under a pen name so I can track the monies from that and see what kind of changes happen, and I'll be watching to see what people with high volume sales/borrows are reporting. I would never say never about something like this, it just doesn't work for my business plan right now. I prefer the greater stability of being on multiple platforms and of knowing exactly what I will be paid every time a reader chooses to get a book of mine.

I was listening to a guy talking about business the other day and something he said resonated with me. He said that when things in an industry change, you can either be defensive or offensive. If you play defense, you are digging in, resisting the change, and hoping it won't last. When you play offense, you go after the change, you look for ways it can benefit you, and you adjust accordingly.  He says he always tries to play offense. I'm trying that, too. Change can suck, but not adapting to it can suck worse.


----------



## books_mb

Roman said:


> I understand the need to change the system, but for us children's book writers this is terrible news.
> 
> The illustration process takes long time and is very expensive. I have two books which are in the production for over 9 months in example. We are already getting the shaft with those exorbitant data transfer fees and now it seems that KU might not be an option any more.


Very sorry to hear that. Amazon has to find a way to make illustrations count, otherwise the e-book market for children will go dry. The transfer fees are scandalous and now this ... Maybe an option to apply for an exception and have the applications manually checked? A person could easily see whether something is a plain ol' image or an illustration, a computer probably couldn't.


----------



## 75845

A response to several issues that have been raised in the thread.

Some have answered the "how does Scribd compare" question with technically correct answers about Scribd's payment (except Andrew who said he gets 70% via D2D; he does not as D2D take their cut out of that 70%). However it is the wrong answer to that question. The comparative Scribd response to short works is to ban them unless they are free. I believe that the cut-off is about 10k; below that paid for books can only be sold in the Scribd store. So short story writers are doing better than they might from this change as Amazon could have banned them outright.

Demands for more details from Amazon - they have promised them in the linked article in the email. My guess is you are not getting all information at once because they are first of all gauging the response and then will react to that. So keep complaining about children's picture books so that Amazon devise a way around that issue.

Children's picture books - it is up to Amazon to determine page counts and so they have the ability to adjust for picture books. Keep up the clamour to ensure that they do so.

Why change now? The rumours coming out of Seattle (and reported on this board) was that Amazon insiders were privately admitting that they had got it wrong with KU. They tried a quick adjustment with the bonus payments, but still got burnt with bad publicity in the NYT. They also got criticism from the likes of me for incompetence in not thinking it through properly, probably because they wanted a fast plaster to stick over the Hachette bad publicity in the NYT. So to change the system to what it will be from July too soon would make them look more incompetent. Do not be surprised if down in the Lake Union HQ this change has been sitting on ice for the guts of a year.

Who is the real target? Book-cutters I would guess are the target in terms of what Amazon want to stop. On another kboards thread it was reported that with automatic updates on a complete novel got replaced with a cut-up chapter. This change removes the temptation to cut up books (no advantage and readers hate having to download each chapter). It does not target authors of super short stories. My books have just come out of KU and my 1200 short will leave as planned a few days after this change is implemented, but my 1600 word short will stay in for the 2 further months it is contracted to. I do not feel targeted as I now feel that there is less incentive for others to complain that I am scamming the system when in fact I am a short story writer at heart, who also writes novels.

Ranking - this will probably have to change. I have been wary of downloading and returning unread too many books in case Amazon accuse me of working on a ranking scam, but I feel more confident if I know that those books will earn payments just for the few page reads I need to do to see if I like it. This could lead KU subscribers to download without using the Look Inside which would really screw up the ranking. This might suit Amazon's purposes in terms of favouring Select authors, but eventually the trade publishers (including Amazon) will suffer. I suspect that ranking will switch from downloads to a certain percentage read.


----------



## Guest

As a short story author, I feel a new strategy is now needed.

If the borrow rate is any less than 2 cents per page, it's time for a massive shift in gears.

We need to figure out what the minimum threshold for a bestselling 2.99 story is. 100 pages? 150? 200? Less than 100? It makes a huge difference. Once that is figured out, you set your new books of the new length in KU and you watch how much they're earning vs sales. 

Questions - How much will the books make on amazon if they're not in KU vs if they are in KU? 
- How much will they make going wide?

The reason you need to write to 2.99 profit margin is because of the 70 percent rate. Three 50 page titles at .99 cents earn half a sale than a 150 page story at 2.99 does. The only advantage releasing short works now has is using them promote each other with the first one free (you can do that with longer works though), having more new titles hitting the market and taking up shelf space / best seller slots, and servicing readers who prefer shorter works to longer ones. Also, 99 cent titles will sell more than 2.99 titles which equals less profit but more of a boost in ranking, which could lead to more borrows which may mean more profit long term.

Amazon really have opened a can of worms here. The slipperiness of the borrrow payout that was pushing some folk out of KU just became 10 times worse because they have to read the WHOLE BOOK in order to make a full royalty. Which probably less than a sale of your novel as it is.


----------



## Roberto El Duque

I don't have time to read all 21 pages of this thread; but my two cents:

I think a change in the system was required but not like this. 
Admission: I am am writing across several genres including children's picture books and non-fiction, so may be biased, however...

It is a crazy way to judge a book's value. Reference books are often not read in their entirety but some chapters are read many times by some readers. The new system doesn't seem to account for this and these books will be penalised regardless of length.

Short children's books are often read many times if they are well liked. Some kids want the same bedtime story every night for days! Is this accounted for? On my reading of the email, it seems not.

Amazon need to work out a better way of deciding on a book's value. Perhaps the time spent reading would be better than the number of pages read.


----------



## Guest

I have a 480 page book out there. Real Pages, as in print. The trouble is it's realistically about 320 pages as a kindle read, but this is duly ignored by Amazon. So, there's a potential scam here if you want to play it by using big font, small pages for the print edition which will translate to a higher page count for the kindle version.

This currently means (at 3 cents per page) that I will get $14,40 as opposed to $9.60 for a book that is for sale at $5.99

There appears to be no easy solution to this, except perhaps a sliding scale to the rate, which might also seem unfair to those who write longer works.


----------



## 75814

Rubens4tune said:


> I have a 480 page book out there. Real Pages, as in print. The trouble is it's realistically about 320 pages as a kindle read, but this is duly ignored by Amazon. So, there's a potential scam here if you want to play it by using big font, small pages for the print edition which will translate to a higher page count for the kindle version.
> 
> This currently means (at 3 cents per page) that I will get $14,40 as opposed to $9.60 for a book that is for sale at $5.99
> 
> There appears to be no easy solution to this, except perhaps a sliding scale to the rate, which might also seem unfair to those who write longer works.


Amazon is using a new method for calculating the page length per book. You can make the font big enough to include just one word on a page in the print version and the KENPC will just spit back a number completely different from your print page count. Amazon's not stupid. They're not going to make the system that easy to game.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Mercia McMahon said:


> This could lead KU subscribers to download without using the Look Inside which would really screw up the ranking.


This^ interests me. How does that screw up the rankings? I never very, very, very rarely use the Look Inside feature. Though probably I'm in the vast minority.

Betsy


----------



## 75814

Betsy the Quilter said:


> This^ interests me. How does that screw up the rankings? I never very, very, very rarely use the Look Inside feature. Though probably I'm in the vast minority.


In theory, Mercia has a point. A KU subscriber might just borrow any book, read the first page, then put it back. That still counts as a borrow for the rankings. But in practice, most KU subscribers probably know nothing about the ranking system or borrow rates. I don't see why they'd be more willing to do it now than before. My guess is most of the KU subscribers couldn't care less about rankings or borrow rates.


----------



## Doglover

vlmain said:


> So did I! That said, it seems a number of people feel writing short stories is easier, and that a short story writer can pump out ten 10k word stories to every 100k novel. It just doesn't work that way. Shorts are not easier to write. I would even argue they are harder because the writer has to create fully fleshed out characters that readers will connect with, and bring a plot to completion in a very short space. That is not easy to do and I don't understand why so many people feel their talent is worth less.
> 
> It's kind of like saying a Lamborghini should cost less than an Escalade because they're smaller.


For what it's worth, I think short stories are much harder to write. I have two published, one 1600 words and one 7000 words, both of which I wrote for a competition some thirty years ago, both satire. I won both competition btw, but they weren't easy. I have tried some erotic shorts and thought them a waste of my valuable time; novellas I can do, but not short stories. I admire anyone who can write an engaging short story; I must admit I don't normally read them either, but if I do they are going to be horror. I like Stephen King's shorts as well as Algernon Blackwood's and Dickens, but the women's magazine type don't really do it for me.

Keep up the good work.


----------



## Doglover

Rubens4tune said:


> I have a 480 page book out there. Real Pages, as in print. The trouble is it's realistically about 320 pages as a kindle read, but this is duly ignored by Amazon. So, there's a potential scam here if you want to play it by using big font, small pages for the print edition which will translate to a higher page count for the kindle version.
> 
> This currently means (at 3 cents per page) that I will get $14,40 as opposed to $9.60 for a book that is for sale at $5.99
> 
> There appears to be no easy solution to this, except perhaps a sliding scale to the rate, which might also seem unfair to those who write longer works.


I think I read that the paperback page count won't affect the new way of counting the ebook pages. When did it become 3 cents a page? Did I miss something?


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> Amazon is using a new method for calculating the page length per book. You can make the font big enough to include just one word on a page in the print version and the KENPC will just spit back a number completely different from your print page count. Amazon's not stupid. They're not going to make the system that easy to game.


Well, if they are [using a new method for calculating] then it's not happened yet. AND it was a tongue in cheek comment just in case anyone was thinking I was advocating doing just that.


----------



## Guest

Doglover said:


> When did it become 3 cents a page? Did I miss something?


Yes, a discussion above that implied it might be more like 3cents as opposed to 10cents.


----------



## 75814

Rubens4tune said:


> Well, if they are [using a new method for calculating] then it's not happened yet.


No, it takes effect on July 1st with the new changes to KU. This was spelled out in the link included with the email.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

jc3000 said:


> I have several new books that I am planning on uploading this month, I was going to opt them into KU but because they are short stories at only 20 pages each and if I only get 3 cents per page that would mean 60 cents per borrow down from $1.35, meaning that I lose 75 cents on each book because of this new program. and that doesn't even include partial reads so the average will be more like 40 cents. I agree with many of the posts that say that any pay out over 5 cents per page is a pipe dream because why would Amazon pay 10 cents a page and give the author $10 for a 100 page book, that would bankrupt Amazon and their stock would become worthless, so around 3 cents seems more realistic.


I keep seeing people mention three cents per page. I know it's just speculation, but even as speculation this seems completely unrealistic. Again, do the math - we'd be getting $10 for full (but not epic) novels. I'd love it, but that simply is not going to happen. No matter what other goals Amazon is trying to accomplish, they're not going to give us even half that. Nor should they.



Perry Constantine said:


> In theory, Mercia has a point. A KU subscriber might just borrow any book, read the first page, then put it back. That still counts as a borrow for the rankings. But in practice, most KU subscribers probably know nothing about the ranking system or borrow rates. I don't see why they'd be more willing to do it now than before. My guess is most of the KU subscribers couldn't care less about rankings or borrow rates.


So you have to actually read the first page for it to count for the rankings? I thought all you have to do is actually click Read For Free button on the Amazon book page to borrow it and it impacts the rankings. Those are the phantom borrows we all talk about that impact the rankings but don't show up as paid borrows until the reader at some future point reads 10%.

In either case, I can't see how this impacts rankings at all. It just impacts what we get paid.


----------



## Guest

Perry Constantine said:


> No, it takes effect on July 1st with the new changes to KU. This was spelled out in the link included with the email.


Thanks

I suffer from 'READ APNOEA' small print puts me to sleep.


----------



## 75814

edwardgtalbot said:


> So you have to actually read the first page for it to count for the rankings? I thought all you have to do is actually click Read For Free button on the Amazon book page to borrow it and it impacts the rankings. Those are the phantom borrows we all talk about that impact the rankings but don't show up as paid borrows until the reader at some future point reads 10%.


Sorry, I probably wasn't being clear. The rankings kick in as soon as you borrow the book. What Mercia is saying is that people on KU may not even bother using Look Inside because clicking that Read For Free button doesn't cost them a thing. But they would look at that first page eventually and if they see on page one that it's a bad book (something a buyer would see through Look Inside), they'd return it. But the book would have already gotten the ranking boost.


----------



## 75845

Betsy the Quilter said:


> This^ interests me. How does that screw up the rankings? I never very, very, very rarely use the Look Inside feature. Though probably I'm in the vast minority.
> 
> Betsy


A single borrow can currently lift a book languishing near the bottom 500,000 places in the ranking, once a book is high up Amazon allow it to remain high ranked even if those a little below it are technically selling better. Using KU as a Look Inside replacement could potentially mean that the KU books take over the ranking system. Actually I was wrong to include Amazon Publishing as they are all in KU, but only a select number of non-Amazon trade published books are in it, so the Amazon ranking could become filled with those who are exclusive to Amazon via their imprints or via Select. At one level that is good for Amazon, at another level it could lead customers to distrust the rankings (or Amazon) if their favourite authors seem to struggle to chart on Amazon.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Betsy the Quilter said:


> This^ interests me. How does that screw up the rankings? I never very, very, very rarely use the Look Inside feature. Though probably I'm in the vast minority.
> 
> Betsy


I don't use the Look Inside feature unless I'm really unsure. I'm an impulse buyer. I don't think Amazon is changing anything in the ranking. You will still get the ranking boost the day it is borrowed and money when it's read -- even if it takes weeks.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Mercia McMahon said:


> A single borrow can currently lift a book languishing near the bottom 500,000 places in the ranking, once a book is high up Amazon allow it to remain high ranked even if those a little below it are technically selling better. Using KU as a Look Inside replacement could potentially mean that the KU books take over the ranking system. Actually I was wrong to include Amazon Publishing as they are all in KU, but only a select number of non-Amazon trade published books are in it, so the Amazon ranking could become filled with those who are exclusive to Amazon via their imprints or via Select. At one level that is good for Amazon, at another level it could lead customers to distrust the rankings (or Amazon) if their favourite authors seem to struggle to chart on Amazon.


Ah. I don't really think KU members will change their habits much. They're either using it as a Look Inside replacement already, or they're not.



Amanda M. Lee said:


> I don't use the Look Inside feature unless I'm really unsure. I'm an impulse buyer. I don't think Amazon is changing anything in the ranking. You will still get the ranking boost the day it is borrowed and money when it's read -- even if it takes weeks.


I don't use it much because I'm usually going to Amazon because I'm already interested in the book from a source outside Amazon (usually here on KBoards). If it's a KBoards author, it's because I've become interested in their work through their posts here. Post here serve as my "Look Inside." 

Betsy


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Perry Constantine said:


> Sorry, I probably wasn't being clear. The rankings kick in as soon as you borrow the book. What Mercia is saying is that people on KU may not even bother using Look Inside because clicking that Read For Free button doesn't cost them a thing. But they would look at that first page eventually and if they see on page one that it's a bad book (something a buyer would see through Look Inside), they'd return it. But the book would have already gotten the ranking boost.


Ah, okay. So what we're saying is not that this changes anything with the rankings, just that this is an existing problem which these changes do not address. I agree, it's a bit of a concern. My guess is that Amazon doesn't care that much unless a book gets enough borrows in a day to really have an impact. Where they would draw that line, I'm not sure, but probably at least ten borrows a day for several days in a row.


----------



## Decon

Sara C said:


> So authors could technically make $10-$20 per borrow if their 100-200 page book is read completely each time? Is my math wrong? If that's the case, I'd almost want to go back into Select...almost.


Not read back to see if the math has been done, but I calculate it as follows.

10,000 PAGES READ EARNS $1,000 = 1 cent per page 
$1.00 each 100 page book.

20,000 $2,000 = $0.1 per page
$2 per 200 page book

30,000 $3,000
$3 per 300 page book

Why didn't they just say it's one cent per page

24 page short story approx 5,000 words = 24 cents (less approx $1.20 than was)

48 page novelette approx 10,000 woprds = 48 cents ( less approx $0. 96c than was)

Will this benefit those with create space books where the page count is higher for the eBooks?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Hugh Howey said:


> In what world did it ever make sense to receive $1.35 per reader for a 20-page short story?
> 
> Everyone seems to want a get-rich-quick scheme that is unsustainable and/or a poor value for the end-user.
> 
> Write TEN 20-page stories, and expect to make in cumulative sales what an author of a 200-page novel receives. Not the same PER item, as if the value to the reader and the level of work from the author is the same.


In the same world where my $2.99 30 page short story still sold 101 copies in twelve days in addition to 93 borrows. Readers buy what they want to buy, if you're providing quality content that they want.

Quite frankly, I HATE the precedent being set on Amazon of paid per page (I know other places have done similar programs like Scribd, but Scribd is not as big as Amazon nor are they selling books right along side the subscription). Imagine when this works well for Amazon this becoming a feature of digital over paperback to help get growth going again . . . "Never pay for an unread page in a digital book! Only pay for the pages you READ!"


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

Scribd may have changed policy recently because I have several study guides listed (through Smashwords) that are 2500-3000 words long.


----------



## Guest

Whatever happened to a reader buying a book and the author getting paid whether or not the reader reads it, likes it or hates it? Sounds quite revolutionary these days...

I agree with Elizabeth, Amazon is setting a strange precedent and I can just see this entire scenario benefiting readers and Amazon and biting authors in the tailbone--not the butt--the tailbone.


----------



## 75845

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Quite frankly, I HATE the precedent being set on Amazon of paid per page (I know other places have done similar programs like Scribd, but Scribd is not as big as Amazon nor are they selling books right along side the subscription.


Scribd have always sold books as well, they just don't make it obvious unless the book is not borrowable. Oyster have recently followed suit.

Scribd do not pay by the page. They pay a small amount when a borrower has started reading a book, but fails to hit the 30% mark that triggers a full payment (equivalent to a sale). Those payments are the 10% that was spoken of above. The initial plan was to build up partial reads and once you got ten of them pay you a full sale. The problem was a full sale of what as those ten books may have had ten different prices.


----------



## The Bass Bagwhan

Hugh Howey said:


> In what world did it ever make sense to receive $1.35 per reader for a 20-page short story?
> 
> Everyone seems to want a get-rich-quick scheme that is unsustainable and/or a poor value for the end-user.
> 
> Write TEN 20-page stories, and expect to make in cumulative sales what an author of a 200-page novel receives. Not the same PER item, as if the value to the reader and the level of work from the author is the same.


Hugh, I think it comes from the perception that most books today are all somehow equal, because we're all using the same platform, the same formats and in particular there is a kind of standardisation in pricing - it's all 0.99, 1.99, 2.99 and so on. In the dreaded, traditional publishing past the value of a book, the contract it attracted and the royalties it deserved was very much affected by its genre, style, length and appeal to the market place. We've lost that individual assessment of each manuscript and any subsequent book. 
Right now, lots of people don't want to hear that a 50 page short story isn't equal to a 500 page fantasy behemoth, or that a short, erotic book is an utterly different product to a monster epic, but the reality is that not all books are equal in value in the market place, yet for some reason the KULL system has been doing exactly that. It needed to change.
And we need to remember that we choose to write, we choose to self-publish, and we choose to use Amazon that is a distribution system with its own business model designed to benefit Amazon. Any decision that Amazon makes that we don't like, you have the option to take your books somewhere else. Amazon has no obligation to maintain your existing lifestyle or means of income.
I understand and sympathise that some authors will feel these changes in their wallet - I'm one of them. But if you're only going to write 5000 words and publish them, the KULL payment should reflect that appropriately. If you believe your short story is equal to LOTR, then allow sales to prove that - not borrows.
It's becoming an emotive issue and apologies to anyone feeling the strain, but good discussion needs all sides of the argument.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Decon said:


> Will this benefit those with create space books where the page count is higher for the eBooks?


No, Amazon has said it will be using a formula to calculate pages for all KS books, one different from either the one they use on the book page or the actual createspace count.


----------



## No longer seen

Jacob Stanley said:


> But that's assuming that the average reader actually finishes the books they start, and that's just not the case. The rates of completion will probably vary wildly from one writer to the next, and I'm guessing an average of 50% completion per reader will actually be a fairly high number.
> 
> That means the standard has to be based on partial reads--50 percent 40 percent or whatever the real average is--not full reads, otherwise it screws everybody, and KU is done.


Your average of 40to 50% is probably correct, but doesn't accurately reflect real behavior.

That is, I suspect most readers will either read a few pages, hate the book and therefore put it down -- or finish it.

Yes, some books do start out great, and lose readers in the middle. But who stops reading at 80 or 90%? If I've
gotten that far in the book, I want to know the end.

The principle remains. For other than picture book publishers, writers who keep readers reading to the end will benefit the most from this new system.


----------



## Eskimo

Amazon never said they would pay $.01 per page. The examples they used said they would pay $1 for reading a 100 page book and $2 for reading a $200 page book. And something for a partially read book.

They never said they would pay $3 for a 300 page book or $4 for a 400 page book. Given that they're only paying us $1.37 now, I sincerely doubt that Amazon will go much beyond that. 

Amazon admittedly did not employ a clear explanation but my best guess here is there will be a $2 cap on books that are completely read, so long as they are at least 200 pages long. If they're over 200 pages, don't expect an additional payout.

This is just my two cents here (ha ha), not because I work for Amazon but because I've worked for large companies that operate in the way Amazon operates. Their goal here is to stop paying out $1.37 for short books, not to pay out more money to authors writing long sagas.


----------



## Doglover

Rubens4tune said:


> Thanks
> 
> I suffer from 'READ APNOEA' small print puts me to sleep.


You'd better not sign any legal documents then


----------



## VEVO

David Chill said:


> Amazon never said they would pay $.01 per page. The examples they used said they would pay $1 for reading a 100 page book and $2 for reading a $200 page book. And something for a partially read book.
> 
> They never said they would pay $3 for a 300 page book or $4 for a 400 page book. Given that they're only paying us $1.37 now, I sincerely doubt that Amazon will go much beyond that.
> 
> Amazon admittedly did not employ a clear explanation but my best guess here is there will be a $2 cap on books that are completely read, so long as they are at least 200 pages long. If they're over 200 pages, don't expect an additional payout.
> 
> This is just my two cents here (ha ha), not because I work for Amazon but because I've worked for large companies that operate in the way Amazon operates. Their goal here is to stop paying out $1.37 for short books, not to pay out more money to authors writing long sagas.


Wrong.

Their words:

*Under this new model, the amount an author earns will be determined by their share of total pages read rather than their share of total qualified borrows.*

There is no cap limit.

1000 page book that is read completely by 1 person = 1000 pages read. Amazon is not stupid to change this 1000 page book into a 200 page book. 
200 page book that is read completely by 5 people = 1000 pages read

They both will be paid the same based on their share of total pages read.

From Amazon perspective, why put a cap on 500 pages book to earn equal to a 200 page book?

That is like taking a step backward after moving one step forward.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

OMG! I never thought about the rankings. But since someone mentioned it, I have to. And yes this may drastically affect how books go up and down in the rankings.

Rankings were dependant on price - among other factors. So if you sold a dearer book it jumped more places upwards than cheaper one. And presumably with KU a borrow was always counted as the same, and so it was only the absolute number of borrows that counted. Now with KU assessing how many pages are read and calculating royalties accordingly, presumably one borrow does not equal another borrow in terms of its impact on the sales rank.

The upshot is that if you have a short story out, say ten pages, one borrow may not lift your rankings at all. But a six hundred page monster which someone reads cover to cover, might fly.

Also, haven't read all the posts, but has anyone asked how they'll measure pages read for those who use the kindle for PC download option. I don't have a kindle. I read on a lap top.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## 75845

psychotick said:


> has anyone asked how they'll measure pages read for those who use the kindle for PC download option. I don't have a kindle. I read on a lap top.


It makes no difference how you read the Kindle book because the ability to sync furthest read across devices means that this has been part of the system for years.


----------



## Jill Nojack

psychotick said:


> Hi,
> 
> OMG! I never thought about the rankings. But since someone mentioned it, I have to. And yes this may drastically affect how books go up and down in the rankings.
> 
> Rankings were dependant on price - among other factors. So if you sold a dearer book it jumped more places upwards than cheaper one. And presumably with KU a borrow was always counted as the same, and so it was only the absolute number of borrows that counted. Now with KU assessing how many pages are read and calculating royalties accordingly, presumably one borrow does not equal another borrow in terms of its impact on the sales rank.
> 
> The upshot is that if you have a short story out, say ten pages, one borrow may not lift your rankings at all. But a six hundred page monster which someone reads cover to cover, might fly.
> 
> Also, haven't read all the posts, but has anyone asked how they'll measure pages read for those who use the kindle for PC download option. I don't have a kindle. I read on a lap top.
> 
> Cheers, Greg.


Borrows count in the ranking immediately, whether or not a single page has been read.


----------



## Sapphire

I'm not to the end of reading everything posted yet, but I have two thoughts at the moment:

1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.

2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


----------



## 75814

Graeme Hague said:


> Hugh, I think it comes from the perception that most books today are all somehow equal, because we're all using the same platform, the same formats and in particular there is a kind of standardisation in pricing -- it's all 0.99, 1.99, 2.99 and so on. In the dreaded, traditional publishing past the value of a book, the contract it attracted and the royalties it deserved was very much affected by its genre, style, length and appeal to the market place. We've lost that individual assessment of each manuscript and any subsequent book.
> Right now, lots of people don't want to hear that a 50 page short story isn't equal to a 500 page fantasy behemoth, or that a short, erotic book is an utterly different product to a monster epic, but the reality is that not all books are equal in value in the market place, yet for some reason the KULL system has been doing exactly that. It needed to change.
> And we need to remember that we choose to write, we choose to self-publish, and we choose to use Amazon that is a distribution system with its own business model designed to benefit Amazon. Any decision that Amazon makes that we don't like, you have the option to take your books somewhere else. Amazon has no obligation to maintain your existing lifestyle or means of income.
> I understand and sympathise that some authors will feel these changes in their wallet - I'm one of them. But if you're only going to write 5000 words and publish them, the KULL payment should reflect that appropriately. If you believe your short story is equal to LOTR, then allow sales to prove that - not borrows.
> It's becoming an emotive issue and apologies to anyone feeling the strain, but good discussion needs all sides of the argument.


Except length has never determined quality. If it did, then Atlas Shrugged would be superior to Of Mice and Men.


----------



## Hugh Howey

Sapphire said:


> I'm not to the end of reading everything posted yet, but I have two thoughts at the moment:
> 
> 1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.
> 
> 2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


Best comments yet on this new system.


----------



## RobScottNorton

I'm still fairly new at this, and sorry if this comes across as naive and simplistic, but what I take away from this is that we need to be protective of our businesses. I'm sure I've heard the SPP guys and Joanna Penn talk about the need to protect your business for the future. Relying on a scheme like KU was always a risky thing. Relying on ANY scheme we have no control over is risky.

I've read posts from a few on here about the stress the change is going to cause them in financial terms, and I genuinely feel for them.

I only hope I remember all this when I've more out there, and have more at risk than I do now.


----------



## Fannin Callahan

Sapphire said:


> I'm not to the end of reading everything posted yet, but I have two thoughts at the moment:
> 
> 1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.
> 
> 2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


This will probably sound snide, but I hope not. Some people write to an audience. I think those people do good work, and are often successful. They know what their reader wants, and they deliver it well, and amazingly, somehow, they can often do it quickly. I am in awe of that. Others, such as myself, approach it differently. We write for ourselves, and this process I believe is more difficult, and takes much longer. A full length book, drafting, redrafting, again and again, the process can easily take a year, if you are like me, you are never, ever, pleased. This doesn't necessarily end in a better book, but it takes longer, at least for me, and many other authors that I know who work the same way. My series that I am in the process of self publishing, took a year and a half to write. It was written as a complete novel, then I decided to break it down into four acts and serialize it. Even though the first installment is quite short, just under 20,000 words (the following installments are much longer), it certainly doesn't represent a few weeks of work. But even so, I DO believe that pages read is a perfectly reasonable and fair method of payment. I guess what I'm getting at, you can't measure the amount of work put into a book, or the value of a book by it's length. You can however, measure it's value by whether it has the ability to hold a reader. I imagine as time goes by, there will be some tweaking to Amazon's new approach, but overall, I think we'll see better works thriving, and most of the garbage will begin to fall away. I don't know where I'll end up in the mix. I've no idea at all if my work is any good. I have no objectivity. I am never able to fully like my own work. I wish I could, it would be soooo much easier. But it is true, some of us can spend a week on a single page of writing, hell, sometimes on a paragraph. So, just because a work may be short, it doesn't necessarily mean it was created quickly, or that it is bad. Stephen King's Carrie, for instance, barely a novel, but I think most would agree it is one of the best books of it's kind.


----------



## B.J. Keeton

This is something I may try on my next series, but not my current one. I like the idea of multiple income streams, and since I plan on doing a puply series of fast SFF reads, I may try them in KU. Overall, I think diversity would be better in the long run than being Amazon exclusive, despite having the bonuses for KU.

I don't know, something about how often they change their rules makes me feel pretty ooky about removing my books from BN, Kobo, and iTunes. New books could work as an experiment, and I do see maybe non-fiction and how-tos working well this way. 

I think it will all depend on the real numbers, not the promotional ones Amazon sent out in the email. Until we've had 2-4 months to check out numbers and see how it's going realistically, nothing else can really be known about it.


----------



## ThePete

The thing that floors me about this change isn't Amazon tweaking the KU/KOLL system to entice more reader-favorite authors to join Select, but that _Amazon is giving forward guidance on their payouts for the first time ever!_

*"These trends give us the confidence to look forward and share that the KDP Select global fund will be in excess of $11M for both July and August."*

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 'Zon has NEVER done that before. This alone is a game changer and I'm hoping it continues.


----------



## Eskimo

VEVO said:


> Wrong.
> 
> Their words:
> 
> *Under this new model, the amount an author earns will be determined by their share of total pages read rather than their share of total qualified borrows.*
> 
> There is no cap limit.
> 
> 1000 page book that is read completely by 1 person = 1000 pages read. Amazon is not stupid to change this 1000 page book into a 200 page book.
> 200 page book that is read completely by 5 people = 1000 pages read
> 
> They both will be paid the same based on their share of total pages read.


Sorry. but I don't see where Amazon wrote that there is or is not a cap limit.

And while I'd love to dream that Amazon would pay an author $10 for a borrow on a 1,000 page book read, I don't see how that makes financial sense for them to do so.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

David S. said:


> *Math is hard.*


What David said. My head hurts...


----------



## 77071

Fannin Callahan said:


> This will probably sound snide, but I hope not. Some people write to an audience. I think those people do good work, and are often successful. They know what their reader wants, and they deliver it well, and amazingly, somehow, they can often do it quickly. I am in awe of that. Others, such as myself, approach it differently. We write for ourselves, and this process I believe is more difficult, and takes much longer.


How do you know who writes for what? I mean, how do you know these fast, prolific people with their fingers on the pulse of their audience haven't done exactly the same as you for years and years as they grew and developed their styles.

Seriously, most of us have no idea how much work most full time writers have put in. Exploring their craft, writing thousands (if not millions) of words, not knowing how to find an audience or even if there is one till they learned--and knowing there's always more to learn.

In my opinion, people who write fast have _learned_ to write fast, and even so don't always manage it.

And if I dare bring him up, can I just mention Dean Wesley Smith's sacred cow article about "writing fast?" http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=9789 (Hint: by his estimation 15 minutes a day equals a novel a year. I'm not sure if that would actually work or not. But it's something to think about.)


----------



## Kevin Lee Swaim

I thought about the payout change last night and came to the conclusion that it won't matter to me. I'm pretty dumb when it comes to money and career choices.

I guess I'll keep writing the best I can and hope that someone likes the Elmore Leonard inspired vampire novels and military thrillers.

Hmm, maybe an Elmore Leonard inspired superhero novel should be next?


----------



## Fannin Callahan

HSh said:


> How do you know who writes for what? I mean, how do you know these fast, prolific people with their fingers on the pulse of their audience haven't done exactly the same as you for years and years as they grew and developed their styles.
> 
> Seriously, most of us have no idea how much work most full time writers have put in. Exploring their craft, writing thousands (if not millions) of words, not knowing how to find an audience or even if there is one till they learned--and knowing there's always more to learn.
> 
> In my opinion, people who write fast have _learned_ to write fast, and even so don't always manage it.
> 
> And if I dare bring him up, can I just mention Dean Wesley Smith's sacred cow article about "writing fast?" http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=9789 (Hint: by his estimation 15 minutes a day equals a novel a year. I'm not sure if that would actually work or not. But it's something to think about.)


You are right. You've better illustrated my point. The speed of the writing, the length of the book. None of that will be or is relevant. Only if it is engaging and readable, and the new Amazon payment system will better reflect that I believe.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Sapphire said:


> 1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.
> 
> 2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


Lovely summary. Thank you!


----------



## Drake

It does seem like there had been a lot of complaints on the board about 10 to 15 page stories getting paid the same borrow rate as 300 page novels, and this addresses that issue.  Now we'll just have to see how it plays out in future royalty payments.  I'm cautiously optimistic!


----------



## a_g

A couple of assumptions in the discussion that boggle me.

Since when has Amazon ever been 1) transparent in their dealings, 2) forthcoming with any information?

Since when has Amazon not ever 1) jerked the rug out from under authors with little to no warning, 2) adjusted things to make it more profitable for them, 3) enforced arbitrary rules and conditions while spouting these rules and conditions in the most generic way possible?

An awful lot of authors are counting Amazon for being forthright, transparent and honest _this time_.

An awful lot of authors will be disappointed when they realize their calculations were based on this emails 'example' math, when their previous emails have never born out to be accurate.

An awful lot of authors will be gutted when their calculations based on Transparent Amazon Math fall through because they were banking on being read to 100%.

I can say that we will start to see some serious self-introspection among a few authors when they realize they may be falling short in the craft department. We will most likely see many more will pull their books and take their chances on selling and royalties for their revenue stream. This new change to KU may not serve them any better than the original structure does now.

We need the hard data first.

I have to wonder if in a few months of this being rolled out, we will see more complaints on how this system is more beneficial to short story writers because they stand a chance of getting larger page turns because they're so short and readers aren't willing to give their books a chance?


----------



## L.B

Sapphire said:


> I'm not to the end of reading everything posted yet, but I have two thoughts at the moment:
> 
> 1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.
> 
> 2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


You've nailed it. This pricing rewards reader engagement, it shouldn't matter what length you're writing at as long as you have readers reading your stuff.

It seems people want to earn the same for writing one 10,000 word short as a 50,000 word novel, well sorry, but wow five of those shorts, and if your reader engagement is good, then you'll earn the same.


----------



## crebel

Sapphire said:


> I'm not to the end of reading everything posted yet, but I have two thoughts at the moment:
> 
> 1- Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*. It won't take many months before this becomes an* automatic filter *on poorly written or boring books. This is far better than a gate keeper saying a book isn't good enough for KU. It will be the actual readers making that decision.
> 
> 2- This also *better distinguishes between sales and borrows*. If someone buys a book, they pay for it up front whether they ever open it or finish it. That's much like walking out of a brick and mortar store book in hand. Payment is on the sale and not on the read. Borrowed books will be paid based on pages read. 2 different programs=2 different payment methods for the author. Strategy for a sale is fabulous cover, intriguing blurb, and excellent sample. Strategy for a borrow (in this new system) is to keep the reader turning pages all the way to the end. Of course, the ultimate strategy for both is for the reader to love the book so much they want to read everything the author writes!


As a reader, not an author, these comments make complete sense to me. All of this applies only to one subset of Amazon e-book customers - those who have signed up for Kindle Unlimited.

I keep reading comments about the "unfairness" to children's books and reference materials either because they are read over and over or because only portions of books will be read at a time. This is where I think there is a difference in the actions of a KU participant. How many borrowers are going to keep these books forever as a borrow? Very few, I would think.

I might borrow, say a cookbook or a diet book, to see if I like it or think it would be useful to me. If not, I'll have browsed sections of it and the author will be paid some portion of my "read" - better money than they would have received if I used the "look inside" and decided not to purchase. Or, I decide there are lots of things in the cookbook I want to try. I'm not going to keep a borrowed book on my Kindle for months when there are other things I want to read; now I'll go buy the cookbook to have it in my library. The author gets paid twice, once for my partial read (possibly even full read) through a borrow and again through a sale so I can keep it available for ongoing reference.

Same thing with a book I might borrow for my grandchildren. Yes, a story they love they want to read over and over and over and over. I'm not going to waste another potential borrow by keeping that one book as one of my 10-at-a-time for months. I'm going to now buy the book so I have permanent access to it for my grandchildren.

I also don't think borrowed books languish for months unread on our Kindles like paid books often do. If I'm borrowing, I want to get my monthly subscription's worth. I'm going to read a borrowed book fairly quickly and go on to the next one.

If folks don't think their book can make the money it is worth by being available as a borrow, then don't offer it through KDP Select/Kindle Unlimited. Make it only available for sale, then you can completely control the price and know exactly how much money you will make when/if a sale happens.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot

I think I'm going to sit back and see how this all shakes out. I've got one series in and one series out (under my main name), so we shall see.


----------



## dianapersaud

a_g said:


> A couple of assumptions in the discussion that boggle me.
> 
> Since when has Amazon ever been 1) transparent in their dealings, 2) forthcoming with any information?
> 
> Since when has Amazon not ever 1) jerked the rug out from under authors with little to no warning, 2) adjusted things to make it more profitable for them, 3) enforced arbitrary rules and conditions while spouting these rules and conditions in the most generic way possible?
> 
> An awful lot of authors are counting Amazon for being forthright, transparent and honest _this time_.
> 
> An awful lot of authors will be disappointed when they realize their calculations were based on this emails 'example' math, when their previous emails have never born out to be accurate.
> 
> An awful lot of authors will be gutted when their calculations based on Transparent Amazon Math fall through because they were banking on being read to 100%.
> 
> I can say that we will start to see some serious self-introspection among a few authors when they realize they may be falling short in the craft department. We will most likely see many more will pull their books and take their chances on selling and royalties for their revenue stream. This new change to KU may not serve them any better than the original structure does now.
> 
> We need the hard data first.
> 
> I have to wonder if in a few months of this being rolled out, we will see more complaints on how this system is more beneficial to short story writers because they stand a chance of getting larger page turns because they're so short and readers aren't willing to give their books a chance?





Jim Johnson said:


> Lovely summary. Thank you!


I would like to know how this will affect ranking. Because increased exposure leads to more sales/borrows.

While it would be great for books that are read to 80%-100% completion to rank higher than those read to 20%, not all books will be ranked by Amazon. Or will they?

Most Trad pubbed books are not in KU. I'm sure Amazon has data on the read through rates. Will they/do they apply this to the current ranking algorithm? Will they in the future?


----------



## 75845

dianapersaud said:


> I would like to know how this will affect ranking. Because increased exposure leads to more sales/borrows.
> 
> While it would be great for books that are read to 80%-100% completion to rank higher than those read to 20%, not all books will be ranked by Amazon. Or will they?
> 
> Most Trad pubbed books are not in KU. I'm sure Amazon has data on the read through rates. Will they/do they apply this to the current ranking algorithm? Will they in the future?


Amazon are unlikely to answer your question, you have to wait until the system is up and running and test it. Then test it again after a few months as Amazon will alter the algorithms if there is a problem that is affecting their bottom line or that of their biggest customers (not even Amazon Publishing can outsell the Random Penguin in the Kindle Store).


----------



## Guest

Barnaby Yard said:


> You've nailed it. This pricing rewards reader engagement, it shouldn't matter what length you're writing at as long as you have readers reading your stuff.
> 
> It seems people want to earn the same for writing one 10,000 word short as a 50,000 word novel, well sorry, but wow five of those shorts, and if your reader engagement is good, then you'll earn the same.


The only flaw about this is PICTURE BOOK AUTHORS cannot churn out 5 books and even if we could 32 pages per book, would not amount to much. That`s why I also write in other genres as picture books are my art, my love but I can`t bank on them. Even though I am proud of them.


----------



## Greg Dragon

I commented a million pages ago about KDP disallowing me from opting out due to this announcement, but as someone kindly reminded me to reply to them and quote their wording I did and received this:



> Hello Greg,
> 
> My name is (redacted), I'm a customer Service Supervisor here on Amazon KDP. I am responding regarding the KDP Select cancellation and would like to correct our previous replies.
> 
> Yes, currently as we are introducing Kindle Unlimited Pages Read, we are able to cancel the KDP Select enrollment on request already now.
> 
> Therefore I've cancelled KDP Select enrollment for the following books:
> 
> (book links redacted)
> 
> Please apologize for the confusion by receiving different conflicting replies.
> 
> Thanks for using Amazon KDP.
> 
> Regards,


I know that the outlook on this thread has shifted but I just wanted to let you know that for those who want out, you can leave immediately.


----------



## 75814

Andrew Murray said:


> The only flaw about this is PICTURE BOOK AUTHORS cannot churn out 5 books and even if we could 32 pages per book, would not amount to much. That`s why I also write in other genres as picture books are my art, my love but I can`t bank on them. Even though I am proud of them.


Then stay out of Select.

Yeah, it sucks. But either complain to KDP about it, organize some sort of petition to get them to notice you, or just take your books out of Select and go wide. From what I've heard, iBooks may even be a better platform for picture books anyway.


----------



## Indiecognito

I've been thinking about this development non-stop. 

In May I made $18,000 on Amazon, largely due to KU. I was also one of the few who was happy about KU's start last July, though I've always understood why others were upset---it has been very hard on sales, to be sure.

I'm trying to get to the point of cautious optimism with the latest announcement, though as a writer of shorter instalments, it's difficult for me to be overjoyed. My royalties may just plummet. 

On the other hand this shifts my thinking--I may well simply start to write series rather than serials, which is how I began anyhow. They always sold well, and readers like complete works, so that's a win-win. The only "lose" is that it's hard to get a novel a month out there. 

I appreciate that so many have offered their thoughts, because a lot of you are thinking of this in a much more positive way than my initial cloud-over-my-head crabbiness, and I'm grateful for that.


----------



## John Van Stry

I have a couple of larger books that I don't put on KU because I don't want to get a dollar thirty-five for a book that I normally ask five bucks for.
Now I'll start putting them up. Also, due to reader requests I'm going to up my upcoming book lengths in my series by another 15K to 20K words, so I won't feel bad about putting the larger books on KU.


----------



## Allyson J.

My main name series hasn't been in KU for a while, but I do have a pen name coming out soon and was planning to put those in KU. I probably still will because they are full-length novels in a series. But right now no one knows how this new model will perform. Thank God we can try it out for 90 days, get a feel for it, and--if it bombs--take our work out. I do agree that I'd rather have readers be the gatekeepers than AMZN or agents. After all, their opinions of our work are really the only ones that matter.


----------



## Sam Rivers

> Look at it this way: Last figure I saw, Amazon said around 700,000 books were available in the KU program. How many of those are scam books? 10-pagers filled with Wiki articles or MineCraft stuff that get the 10% ticked when you simply open the book? Literally thousands of them. And Amazon has been shelling out $1.35ish for each of those borrows per month, every month. Now, they'll only be paying those guys a few cents each time. That leaves quite a hefty sum to be spread around to books that people are actually reading when they've already stated that the KU pot is remaining the same or even being increased (I think they said it's up to $11 million for the next month or two).


That sounds encouraging.


----------



## katrina46

HSh said:


> How do you know who writes for what? I mean, how do you know these fast, prolific people with their fingers on the pulse of their audience haven't done exactly the same as you for years and years as they grew and developed their styles.
> 
> Seriously, most of us have no idea how much work most full time writers have put in. Exploring their craft, writing thousands (if not millions) of words, not knowing how to find an audience or even if there is one till they learned--and knowing there's always more to learn.
> 
> In my opinion, people who write fast have _learned_ to write fast, and even so don't always manage it.
> 
> And if I dare bring him up, can I just mention Dean Wesley Smith's sacred cow article about "writing fast?" http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/?p=9789 (Hint: by his estimation 15 minutes a day equals a novel a year. I'm not sure if that would actually work or not. But it's something to think about.)


Sometimes it's not even that writers are so fast. It's that they're treating it like a day job and working overtime. I have certain goals, words per week. When I'm ahead, or when major is going on like this week, I'm on Kboards a lot. Other times I go weeks staying off of Kboards because I'm writing 12 hours a day. I used to work that much on my day job, so why not? That's a real 12 hours minus the same breaks and lunch hour I'd get on any job. No Kboards, no youtube, no netflix. I really don't write fast. I write overtime.


----------



## katrina46

ThePete said:


> The thing that floors me about this change isn't Amazon tweaking the KU/KOLL system to entice more reader-favorite authors to join Select, but that _Amazon is giving forward guidance on their payouts for the first time ever!_
> 
> *"These trends give us the confidence to look forward and share that the KDP Select global fund will be in excess of $11M for both July and August."*
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 'Zon has NEVER done that before. This alone is a game changer and I'm hoping it continues.


It makes sense they would do that when I think about it. It sounds high. It says don't bail, you can still make money. Just like when the first payouts were over 2 dollars. I do not believe the global fund will stay high after this dies down. They just don't want too many jumping ship at once. I imagine those who do might find the algorithms aren't working in their favor right now. I'm going wide one book at a time. I remember all the thread last year about the no ku writers flat lining. I'm sneaking quietly out the back door this time.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

They way I read that $11 million was the way they've said before, it will be split. May was $10.8 million when the announced pool was $3 million. So I'm thinking they are announcing that July and August are $5.5 million each (which is more than $3 million we've seen most of this year as the "announced" amount). But it doesn't matter because like Vaal and others point out, Amazon does whatever they darn well please when it comes time to PAY, adding millions EVERY. SINGLE. MONTH.

We know May was paid out I think ti was $1.35? So 8 million borrows. What would have been the pay out if they hadn't added $7.8 million? $.38 cents a borrow. I'm willing to BET that's going to be pretty darn close to the "minimum" payout for a 100% read of a short.


----------



## John Van Stry

The people who are going to be hurt the most, are the people who write novellas and short stories (and of course the scammers). I write novels, so this won't hurt me at all, it will actually probably help me, as my readers read all of the book, and then move on to the next in the series.

To be honest, I was keeping my books down around 60K to 65K in the series, because of KU. But this does encourage me to actually write longer novels, from this point forward, my goal is going to be to keep each book over 200 pages. Sure, I'll have to put a few more hours in each day, to make sure I can still try and hit my book every 6 week schedule, but hey, if it makes my readers happy, I'm fine with it.


----------



## C. Rysalis

I think this is a great idea - except for authors of illustrated children's books. I hope Amazon comes up with a solution for them.


----------



## Guest

Barnaby Yard said:


> It seems people want to earn the same for writing one 10,000 word short as a 50,000 word novel, well sorry, but wow five of those shorts, and if your reader engagement is good, then you'll earn the same.


I think Hugh Howey is correct. It is about quality. I think more novel writers will have a Come to Jesus wake up call than short story writers. Why? Because (apart from scams) most short stories are a series, so the story has to be good so you entice the reader to read your next story. Short stories have already been optimized for the new KU. On the other hand now let's find out if the 100000 word epics that some spend a year on, will also float. I think a whole bunch of Tolstoi's will end up with a broken heart, when they find out that no one actually wants to read past page 10. In that case I'd rather have 20 short stories instead of 1 novel.


----------



## vlmain

CadyVance said:


> Just as a data point: under the current system, with a $1.35 payout per borrow that reaches 10%, a 20-page story gets $0.067 per page, a 100-page story gets $0.0134 per page, a 200-page story gets $0.0067 per page, and a 300-page story gets $0.0045 per page.


Ah, but that's assuming the reader read all 200-300 pages. I suppose short story writers could argue that the old system wasn't fair because they wrote an amazing stories that people finished and loved, and the person who wrote 300 pages of garbage that people abandoned shortly after hitting 10% got the same pay. It works both ways. The length of a book has nothing to do with its value.

I feel it's too soon for short story writers to jump ship and I sincerely hope they don't. It could very well be that a reader will love their short story enough that they go borrow ten more. They could end up earning as much or more than a writer with one 400 page novel. How this plays out for everyone, only time will tell.


----------



## ilamont

Yesterday I did not see any coverage of the news on Google News, but today _Publishers Weekly_ has an article:

*Amazon Updates Kindle Unlimited and Lending Library Royalty Terms*

No mention of the issues discussed here, i.e., who wins and loses under the new terms.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

vlmain said:


> Ah, but that's assuming the reader read all 200-300 pages. I suppose short story writers could argue that the old system wasn't fair because they wrote an amazing stories that people finished and loved, and the person who wrote 300 pages of garbage that people abandoned shortly after hitting 10% got the same pay. It works both ways. The length of a book has nothing to do with its value.
> 
> I feel it's too soon for short story writers to jump ship and I sincerely hope they don't. It could very well be that a reader will love their short story enough that they go borrow ten more. They could end up earning as much or more than a writer with one 400 page novel. How this plays out for everyone, only time will tell.


 I agree. Politely, I think Amazon did a phenomenal job at obfuscating the real issue which is KU is turning into a pay-per-page-read system. Can you even imagine if the original Select started this way? ? ? People were already up in arms about getting less than a full royalty in the name of increased visibility (potentially) and now, we're all going "Look, it's FAIR" because we're going to be paid based on the pages read? All of this talk about sticking it to the short story writers is not relevant, because otherwise you'd also say that there should be pricing tiers on Amazon based on page count. Under that argument, NO short story should even be allowed to be priced at $2.99 because it's not fair they're making the same earnings as a novel at $2.99! (see, it really sounds ridiculous put like that).

This absolutely opens the door for the question to be since Amazon tracks customer reading on all titles, how long before it's offered to readers if they buy a $4.99 ebook and only read 50%, they only get charged $2.50? Obviously, you cannot do that on a paperback, but on an ebook, they are ONLY purchasing a license, and it's not unreasonable at all in a license situation to pay based on use.

The story became "payments will now be fair!" instead of "OMG, we're going to test a system where content is paid for by the page." I see this system just as easily KILLING long form novels because there won't be enough ROI for authors to write the longer works (time invested) if most readers DNF. Instead, you post a chapter, and if enough get through that, you post the second chapter. Etc. etc. Forget series being abandoned half way through, STORIES will be abandoned half way through.


----------



## Desert Rose

vlmain said:


> I feel it's too soon for short story writers to jump ship and I sincerely hope they don't. It could very well be that a reader will love their short story enough that they go borrow ten more. They could end up earning as much or more than a writer with one 400 page novel. How this plays out for everyone, only time will tell.


But the reader would have loved the story and borrowed ten more on the old system, too. The author is still getting paid less per story, no matter how much the reader loves it.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

This doesn't change my plan one bit. I've always written 95 percent novels and it will stay that way. The shorts for my witch series are strategic. I know it's human nature to freak out about this stuff but nothing is being enhanced here. We're just going over the same stuff over and over again. Half the people are "the sky is falling" and half the people are "quality finally wins." Do you know what I am? Starting another book. The length will not change. My plan will not change. I shall keep on keeping on -- and shut the Internet down for the day. I guarantee when I check back here in eight hours nothing will be different but we will have ten more pages of it. Good luck everyone.


----------



## Mike McIntyre

Pity the poets.


----------



## JalexM

I still think people are gravely over estimating on how much Amazon will pay per page, I'd say 1 cent or less, and only 2 cent optimistically. I also think people are optimistic about their read through, it's not going to look good.


----------



## 77071

Amanda M. Lee said:


> This doesn't change my plan one bit. I've always written 95 percent novels and it will stay that way. The shorts for my witch series are strategic. I know it's human nature to freak out about this stuff but nothing is being enhanced here. We're just going over the same stuff over and over again. Half the people are "the sky is falling" and half the people are "quality finally wins." Do you know what I am? Starting another book. The length will not change. My plan will not change. I shall keep on keeping on -- and shut the Internet down for the day. I guarantee when I check back here in eight hours nothing will be different but we will have ten more pages of it. Good luck everyone.


I really admire your work ethic and self-control!!!


----------



## Silly Writer

If it's a series/serial, they're not being optimistic regarding read-thru... They know their read-thru. It's in black and white on the dashboard.


----------



## S.D

Amanda M. Lee said:


> This doesn't change my plan one bit. I've always written 95 percent novels and it will stay that way. The shorts for my witch series are strategic. I know it's human nature to freak out about this stuff but nothing is being enhanced here. We're just going over the same stuff over and over again. Half the people are "the sky is falling" and half the people are "quality finally wins." Do you know what I am? Starting another book. The length will not change. My plan will not change. I shall keep on keeping on -- and shut the Internet down for the day. I guarantee when I check back here in eight hours nothing will be different but we will have ten more pages of it. Good luck everyone.


1000% Agree. Consistency and execution wins everytime. These changes mean nothing. Keep on moving.


----------



## Monique

S.D said:


> 1000% Agree. Consistency and execution wins everytime. These changes mean nothing. Keep on moving.


Oh, they mean something. We just don't know quite what yet. That doesn't, however, mean you should stop doing what you're doing and freak out.


----------



## Guest

JalexM said:


> I still think people are gravely over estimating on how much Amazon will pay per page, I'd say 1 cent or less, and only 2 cent optimistically.


But don't you think they're doing this to get VM Ward and Rosalind James etc back into KU? If so the pay per page must be somewhat equal to a sale.


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth Ann West wins this thread for me.


----------



## Monique

drno said:


> But don't you think they're doing this to get VM Ward and Rosalind James etc back into KU? If so the pay per page must be somewhat equal to a sale.


They have to balance that against the scamleteers. If they pay too much per page then it will just encourage them. It's a difficult balancing act.


----------



## Caddy

With this program, Amazon is also getting authors to think of their full length novels as worth less, because at a penny a page, you make only $3 for a 60,000 word novel based on page count. That means you have to be thinking your books aren't going to sell at $4.99 yet many indi novels do sell at $4.99 depending on genre.  At $4.99 I make $3.50, which is why I don't put novels in Select. Add that fact that many don't finish books or they sit on kindles for months and you make even less.

As I said earlier, I'm keeping one serialized story in at see what shakes out for page payment, but now it makes even less sense for novels unless you'rr underpricing them anyway, or in a genre where $4.99 doesn't work.


----------



## J.D. Fournier

JalexM said:


> I still think people are gravely over estimating on how much Amazon will pay per page, I'd say 1 cent or less, and only 2 cent optimistically. I also think people are optimistic about their read through, it's not going to look good.


I agree. They at least mentioned for two months the total pot will be $11m. The pages read per book and price per page have an inverse relationship with a fixed pot. I think most people will find much less than 50% per borrow is read. So this actually keeps the page count down and per page price up. You may find for each borrow an average of 25% is read.

Since the books are basically free to the reader, a lot more are abandoned (they are not spending 10 a month to read that book, just 10 dollars to read any available book) . They could better utilize their time reading something a little better. Now if they actually spent 2.99 on the book, they would more likely stick it out to see if it gets better. This means you really have to hook them early, which is the goal anyway but not only that but maintain it. Any slow starting book will not perform in KU, it used to be pretty easy to hit the 10% mark, but now you are trying to get passed the average mark, which is yet to be determined, to get a comparable payout.


----------



## Guest

vrabinec said:


> I dunno. It is a survival of the fittest business this way. The people who aren't getting their complete books read will see smaller and smaller returns on their time and effort. The pool of authors will shrink, but the pool of readers will stay the same. Now, instead of clicking on something that the last ten readers could get through, the reader who might be tempted to click on the same thing because of a shiny cover and decent opening, won't be presented with the option, because that author will have given up. So, instead, he will click on the work of another author who IS making enough to make it worth his while. I just don't see the down side of rewarding people based on their ability to grab and hold a reader. And if an author's works are short, then he should be able to pump more of them out, so it's not like the full-length novel writers have some sort of inherent advantage here.


I think the spirit of your posts agrees with a lot of the stuff I've been reading here and agreeing with. This is nothing for anyone to celebrate. The rug has been pulled underneath everyone reliant on KU for a living and they won't know what shape their business is in until August 15.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I agree. Politely, I think Amazon did a phenomenal job at obfuscating the real issue which is KU is turning into a pay-per-page-read system. Can you even imagine if the original Select started this way? ? ? People were already up in arms about getting less than a full royalty in the name of increased visibility (potentially) and now, we're all going "Look, it's FAIR" because we're going to be paid based on the pages read? All of this talk about sticking it to the short story writers is not relevant, because otherwise you'd also say that there should be pricing tiers on Amazon based on page count. Under that argument, NO short story should even be allowed to be priced at $2.99 because it's not fair they're making the same earnings as a novel at $2.99! (see, it really sounds ridiculous put like that).
> 
> This absolutely opens the door for the question to be since Amazon tracks customer reading on all titles, how long before it's offered to readers if they buy a $4.99 ebook and only read 50%, they only get charged $2.50? Obviously, you cannot do that on a paperback, but on an ebook, they are ONLY purchasing a license, and it's not unreasonable at all in a license situation to pay based on use.
> 
> The story became "payments will now be fair!" instead of "OMG, we're going to test a system where content is paid for by the page." I see this system just as easily KILLING long form novels because there won't be enough ROI for authors to write the longer works (time invested) if most readers DNF. Instead, you post a chapter, and if enough get through that, you post the second chapter. Etc. etc. Forget series being abandoned half way through, STORIES will be abandoned half way through.


I have to agree. Short term, like introducing a new pen name or a new series, Select would probably be okay for the three month period. Going wide, *in my opinion,* is the best idea. Then, your income isn't left only to the whims of Amazon.

And please don't misunderstand me: I respect Amazon, and what it's done for authors. I'm delighted to _sell_ my work at Amazon. But I won't depend on them exclusively for my income. I can't, because the "borrow" amount is never given, and you can't count on it.

What works for me may not work for you, and this may be the best thing to come down the pike...but I think I'll stay wide right now.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Betsy the Quilter]
Posts here serve as my "Look Inside." [/quote]
[quote author=vrabinec said:


> Oh crap.


Indeed.


----------



## Guest

If someone reads 10 percent of your book with the Look Inside widget and then begins your book at the ten percent mark, aren't you missing out on 10 percent of earnings?


----------



## PhoenixS

***********


----------



## Victorine

I think it's a good change. And I think it's better for the readers who want to be able to read novels under the KU program.


----------



## Jim Johnson

drno said:


> If someone reads 10 percent of your book with the Look Inside widget and then begins your book at the ten percent mark, aren't you missing out on 10 percent of earnings?


Does the look inside functionality work that way? I don't think I've ever used Look Inside, then bought the book and was immediately moved to where I stopped reading in the Look Inside. I use the Look Inside function on my PC, not through the Kindle, so that may be a factor?


----------



## NoBlackHats

Amanda M. Lee said:


> This doesn't change my plan one bit. I've always written 95 percent novels and it will stay that way. The shorts for my witch series are strategic. I know it's human nature to freak out about this stuff but nothing is being enhanced here. We're just going over the same stuff over and over again. Half the people are "the sky is falling" and half the people are "quality finally wins." Do you know what I am? Starting another book. The length will not change. My plan will not change. I shall keep on keeping on -- and shut the Internet down for the day. I guarantee when I check back here in eight hours nothing will be different but we will have ten more pages of it. Good luck everyone.


I agree. I may adjust things a bit, but my not-so-super-secret plan is to write lots of good stuff that will sell. I may drop some of my backlist onto other platforms for additional cross-marketing.


----------



## L.B

ShaneJeffery said:


> I think the spirit of your posts agrees with a lot of the stuff I've been reading here and agreeing with. This is nothing for anyone to celebrate. The rug has been pulled underneath everyone reliant on KU for a living and they won't know what shape their business is in until August 15.


I honestly don't understand why you think this.

At 1 cent per word things will be fine in my eyes.

People writing 10,000 word works will need to write six of them to match the money of a 60,000 novel (assuming they both perform as well as each other at reader engagement).

I don't see what the problem in that is?... Other than people want more money for less work.


----------



## Shelley K

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> This absolutely opens the door for the question to be since Amazon tracks customer reading on all titles, how long before it's offered to readers if they buy a $4.99 ebook and only read 50%, they only get charged $2.50? Obviously, you cannot do that on a paperback, but on an ebook, they are ONLY purchasing a license, and it's not unreasonable at all in a license situation to pay based on use.


I don't understand why you're worried about this highly unlikely hypothetical situation, when there are other things to worry about that aren't hypothetical.  Imagine the accounting quagmire such a ridiculous plan would cause both readers, Amazon and authors. Other digital goods are not sold this way (when's the last time you only paid for a half a song or a movie or an app?) and books aren't going to be either.

I think the pages read plan is the best thing Amazon could come up with to try to lure novelists back in and get erotica writers to leave. If they went by length alone, the scammers would all have orgasms at just how much easier it would be too make money and some crap writers would just write longer crap for a higher payout per borrow. To give longer works higher pay, pages read really is the best solution.

Yes, it's going to screw over shorts writers in the context of going from $1.35 when someone borrows a title to however many cents it will end up being now, and it might surprise some writers of slightly longer works when their pay goes down, too. But to take all this an extrapolate to how Amazon is now going to sell _everybody's_ written works by the page is just throwing gas on the brushfire.

As far as KU, I'm not going to do anything differently for the moment. Without actual numbers, there's not much point in worrying too much. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, and write hard in the meantime.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> If I were a betting woman, my money would be on Most Read soon having a prominent list of its own (outside of those books already being bonused) and/or those page reads finding their way into the poplist algos. Maybe 100 pages read will equal the same weight as a freebie, and 1000 pages will weight the same as a sale. That's where I'd start testing the weightings, at least...
> 
> _Note: I haven't done any analysis around the poplists in the past few months. If someone else has done the analysis and has more current, validated info, please amend!_


I pretty much agree for exactly those reasons. I think that Amazon needed the first year of KDP to understand the market, prototype alternatives, then implement a solution that works for their customers. I don't think that we'll see results at first, but as time goes by, the automated systems will kick in, pushing more engaging books upward.


----------



## Gone To Croatan

vlmain said:


> The length of a book has nothing to do with its value.


Yes, that's the problem with this change. I've read shorts that were far more entertaining than some 100k novels.

But it's probably something Amazon had to change, because they can't afford to keep paying out $1.30 per erotica short if the reader pays $10 a month for KU and reads dozens of them. On the other hand, they'll lose income when those erotica writers pull out of KDP Select and go to other stores, too, so maybe it's not so clear cut.

Of course, the fundamental problem is that subscription models just don't work. Someone has to get screwed, it's just a question of who.


----------



## Desert Rose

Shelley K said:


> I think the pages read plan is the best thing Amazon could come up with to try to lure novelists back in and get erotica writers to leave. If they went by length alone, the scammers would all have orgasms at just how much easier it would be too make money and some crap writers would just write longer crap for a higher payout per borrow. To give longer works higher pay, pages read really is the best solution.


I certainly HOPE Amazon isn't trying to force erotica writers to leave, or lumping them in with "scammers" and "crap writers", considering how lucrative erotica is (and no matter what else is going on, people want their porn).


----------



## Cherise

ilamont said:


> Yesterday I did not see any coverage of the news on Google News, but today _Publishers Weekly_ has an article:
> 
> *Amazon Updates Kindle Unlimited and Lending Library Royalty Terms*
> 
> No mention of the issues discussed here, i.e., who wins and loses under the new terms.


  From that article:

"...[T]otal royalties across subscription and a la carte sales earned by KDP Select authors in the U.S. are on track to more than double in the first half of 2015, compared to the same period last year."

/off topic


----------



## pdworkman

I'm happy. I don't think it will actually make a huge difference to my income. When KU came out last year, everyone started recommending writing shorter works. Short stories, novellas, pamphlets. I'm a long-form writer, and really didn't have any desire to write any short fiction to get more KU money, so I have just kept on doing what I do. I have a couple out that are 500 pages, so it's nice that they will get me a few more pennies than those that are only 200-300 pages.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

As an unforeseen bonus, Amazon may begin prorating returns. If you read less than a certain %, then you get your money back. Otherwise you get a percentage.


----------



## azebra

I contacted Amazon for a definition of what they mean by first time read through. I want to know because I write interactive fiction. I have options about how I can structure a book but essentially the first read through. Any read through! Will only ever be around ten percent or less of the book. I got a meaningless reply.


----------



## Cherise

Barnaby Yard said:


> ...
> At 1 cent per word things will be fine in my eyes.
> 
> ...I don't see what the problem in that is?...


We won't know how much we get *per page* read on a borrow until August 15.

It might be as much as 1 cent *per page*, but it will not be anywhere near 1 cent per word.


----------



## books_mb

Sapphire said:


> Everyone is talking about length and trying to encourage longer works in KU. This action may be *more about quality than length*. They aren't paying by page count. They are *paying by pages read*.


I would love to see this as a model for the future, sales and borrows. You only pay for what you read, period. That would really put the focus on quality. If a book is not worth reading, people will simply stop reading after page 10 (no matter how great the cover, blurb, marketing, etc ...) and the author will get next to nothing. If the book is fantastic, people will finish it and the author will be a rich man / woman. But of course, all of this would need to be embedded in a transparent frame, most importantly: a clear (genre-specific) payout per page read, no pot BS, no destructive algo tweaks, no favors for trad publishers. One can dream ...


----------



## L.B

Cherise Kelley said:


> We won't know how much we get *per page* read on a borrow until August 15.
> 
> It might be as much as 1 cent *per page*, but it will not be anywhere near 1 cent per word.


Ha ha! I meant 1 cent per page obviously!


----------



## pdworkman

Strategies for the new paradigm:

1. Write more pages (doesn't matter whether you write short works or long works, they are worth the same per page)
2. Promote to get people to read more pages

Anything else?


----------



## gljones

I'm guessing it will violate the "Spirit" of the new rules if I start releasing works in Times New Roman 75 to increase my page counts.


----------



## John Van Stry

Caddy said:


> With this program, Amazon is also getting authors to think of their full length novels as worth less, because at a penny a page, you make only $3 for a 60,000 word novel based on page count. That means you have to be thinking your books aren't going to sell at $4.99 yet many indi novels do sell at $4.99 depending on genre. At $4.99 I make $3.50, which is why I don't put novels in Select. Add that fact that many don't finish books or they sit on kindles for months and you make even less.
> 
> As I said earlier, I'm keeping one serialized story in at see what shakes out for page payment, but now it makes even less sense for novels unless you'rr underpricing them anyway, or in a genre where $4.99 doesn't work.


Caddy,
This plan applies to KU books only. And for people who write longer works, we'll get more money. Right now, I get $1.35 for each book borrowed. If they go to say one cent per page, I will now get from $1.75 to $4.00 from my books in KU. I have kept my longest works out of KU, because I didn't feel it was worth it, now it will be, and I'll be putting them in at the end of the month.

I can see why they did this too, way too many people were dropping short stories and yes, even scams, into KU and getting over a dollar for a book that they could only have sold for .99 cents and then only received a thirty cent royalty. Those people will suffer, and to be honest, I don't mind at all. Because those of us who write novels will see an increase, and we are now being encouraged to put all of our longer works into KU, and to write more of them. So for me, I see this as a win.

Apologies to those who don't, and for those who have been taking advantage of the system? You KNEW sooner or later Amazon would catch up with you, so quit complaining.


----------



## a_g

gljones said:


> I'm guessing it will violate the "Spirit" of the new rules if I start releasing works in Times New Roman 75 to increase my page counts.


It won't matter. They will have a way to magically standardize page counts so they know.

I have to wonder, will they show these new page counts totals for individual works so that we can have an idea of how far into the book a reader read if they don't make it to 100%?


----------



## Someone

> Has the 'Zon actually done something right? Could it be? I'm thinking, there HAVE to be a lot of scammers, right? If they're not getting a cut now, then there's more money in the pot for the legit authors, and eventually, it'll chase off the scammers and the people who need to work on their writing, because it won't be worth the time to put a book up.


I'm seeing a lot of people say this will stop the scammers and boy do i wish it would; but it's not going to. It's just going to redistribute the location of scamel new releases. ( we'll soon be calling 'em scamels after novels, rather than scamphlets after pamphlets like we do today ) Scammers have the same floor and ceiling prices as everyone else and that is very important to recognize. The scam never was "do what I gotta do for 1.35 a borrow"; it was "do what I gotta do for max amount of money". It never was about the amount of effort extended for $1.35 - what was both the floor and the ceiling price/borrow - so you can't say, "well the 1.35/borrow is different, or even 1.35 will be harder to make, so they'll stop". Because, first of all, it won't be harder to make and, more importantly, they aren't going to stop because of this change.

For scammers it is about making the ceiling and adapting their method to make that. They aren't going to hate this. No,no,no. Just the opposite. This raises the ceiling price, so they are going to love this. All they gotta do is make changes to their B4B methods. Like by say, IDK, using 5 devices with the Kindle App Read Out Loud function set to volume zero and have the devices spend their days and nights _reading_ novel size/sweet-pricing-spot _books_ made up of software-gathered-make-no-sense-pages-of-words. Scammers are gong to say goodbye to $1.35 for a borrow and hello to targeting the borrow ceiling price. Yep, just like authors, they'll adapt.

Anyway, I wonder how much the _author_ of a fully read of a 500 page book of pure nonsense is gonna be paid per borrow. How about you? Too hard to tell with the information out there. However one thing I know for sure is, with this _scammers' fix_, they are going to be paid the same amount the author of 500 pages of carefully put together craft will be.

Think about that
I hate to tell you novelists this. This is going to do the same thing to the novel genres that the across-the-board borrow price did to erotica, non-fiction, and other shorter works genre stores. The scammers will fill them with crap too.

If any of Amazon's intent here was to stop the scammers, they didn't. Instead all they did, _again_, was apply an easy to exploit, even more profitable for the scammers, ineffective treatment to one of the symptoms of the Scamitis disease, instead of placing their efforts into identifying, isolating, and trying to eradicate Scamitis itself. OTOH if Amazon's intent here had nothing to do with the scammers, it was instead all about getting longer works into, which if one notices the name change, the Kindle Unlimted Page Read program. 
Just like the payment structure change, the name change is being done for a reason and it aint got nuthin to do with the scammers.


----------



## Guest

Jim Johnson said:


> Does the look inside functionality work that way? I don't think I've ever used Look Inside, then bought the book and was immediately moved to where I stopped reading in the Look Inside. I use the Look Inside function on my PC, not through the Kindle, so that may be a factor?


No, I mean if someone reads Look Inside, which is 10 percent of the book, decides to borrow your book, he will obviously not begin at page 1. He will start reading where the Look Inside ends.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper

vanstry said:


> Caddy,
> This plan applies to KU books only. And for people who write longer works, we'll get more money. Right now, I get $1.35 for each book borrowed. If they go to say one cent per page, I will now get from $1.75 to $4.00 from my books in KU. I have kept my longest works out of KU, because I didn't feel it was worth it, now it will be, and I'll be putting them in at the end of the month.


This may not be true. It depends on your reader engagement. You could be getting less. The payout isn't based on booklength but on pages read. The book length only provides a payout ceiling, not a guarantee.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

gljones said:


> I'm guessing it will violate the "Spirit" of the new rules if I start releasing works in Times New Roman 75 to increase my page counts.


 

If you hard code in a font and size, you will most likely get one page read and a lot of returns. Kindle owners like to set their own fonts and sizes. Just sayin'.

Betsy


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

I wonder how this will affect reviews. Will readers be able to see how much of the book was read by other readers and base buying decisions on that rather than on reviews?


----------



## John Van Stry

a_g said:


> It won't matter. They will have a way to magically standardize page counts so they know.
> 
> I have to wonder, will they show these new page counts totals for individual works so that we can have an idea of how far into the book a reader read if they don't make it to 100%?


My guess is that they'll use one of the publishing standards, so it's be someplace between 350 and 450 words per page.


----------



## John Van Stry

Saul Tanpepper said:


> This may not be true. It depends on your reader engagement. You could be getting less. The payout isn't based on booklength but on pages read. The book length only provides a payout ceiling, not a guarantee.


I write serials, and series based novels now. So with the exception of the first book in the series, I know everyone else is reading the whole thing. Otherwise they wouldn't keep buying the next one in the series.


----------



## a_g

vanstry said:


> My guess is that they'll use one of the publishing standards, so it's be someplace between 350 and 450 words per page.


It's my hope they will tell us this instead of keeping it as a closely guarded trade secret like apparently everything else in regards to them. It's hard to anticipate what our paychecks will be and how to check to make sure everything's above board if they don't tell us the fee structure. $0.xx per page doesn't help a whole lot if we have no idea how they're defining a page.

*edit:*

I found the answer to my question.



> When we make this change on July 1, 2015, you'll be able to see your book's KENPC listed on the "Promote and Advertise" page in your Bookshelf, and we'll report on total pages read on your Sales Dashboard report. Because it's based on default settings, KENPC may vary from page counts listed on your Amazon detail page, which are derived from other sources.


So we'll know the default settings page count and we'll get a total pages read...but is that overall for all books? Overall for one book? Pages read per book per borrow?


----------



## Caddy

Saul Tanpepper said:


> This may not be true. It depends on your reader engagement. You could be getting less. The payout isn't based on booklength but on pages read. The book length only provides a payout ceiling, not a guarantee.


And, yes, I get it's KU only. You missed my point. Why would I put a 60,000 $4.99 novel in KU? That is about 250 pages. If they pay a penny a page it would be $2.50 for me. I make $3.50 on a $4.99 novel OUT of KU. Why is this better for novels, unless those novels are priced at $2.99 or lower? Many genres support $4.99 novels and then KU simply won't make sense. And, like I said and the poster above said, you would only get the $2.50 IF they read it all or when they did. Out of KU I get the $3.50 when they buy it. They can never read, let it sit for 20 years on a kindle and I'm still paid.

Even for my books well over 100,000 pages, the $4.00 or $4.25 I "might" get if they ever decide to read it out of the many on their kindle instead of the guaranteed $3.50 if they download outside of KU doesn't make up for my lost revenue on B&N, Apple and kobo.

Plus I'd then be totally dependent on Amazon. I don't run a business to be totally dependent on one revenue source. I don't want to be scrambling, trying to build a base from zero on other places if and when Amazon REALLY begins to pay poorly. Doesn't mean I'm right. It does mean I am looking long term.


----------



## Gone To Croatan

vrabinec said:


> But the whole point of this is that, in order for the scammer to get the full payment for 500 pages of nonsense, someone would have to flip to 500 pages of nonsense.


You missed the part about the scammer having multiple Kindles doing text-to-speech through the book as though someone was reading it. You also assume they can't hack Amazon's protocol and send fake page read data back to Amazon automatically. I hadn't thought of those, but now someone's mentioned it, they seem obvious.

Basically, KU seems like a way for scammers to suck money out of Amazon by doing increasingly scammy things, because their payout is completely unrelated to their costs.


----------



## 77071

Caddy said:


> And, yes, I get it's KU only. You missed my point. Why would I put a 60,000 $4.99 novel in KU? That is about 250 pages. If they pay a penny a page it would be $2.50 for me. I make $3.50 on a $4.99 novel OUT of KU. Why is this better for novels, unless those novels are priced at $2.99 or lower? Many genres support $4.99 novels and then KU simply won't make sense. And, like I said and the poster above said, you would only get the $2.50 IF they read it all or when they did. Out of KU I get the $3.50 when they buy it. They can never read, let it sit for 20 years on a kindle and I'm still paid.


But the threshold of being willing to try a book is much lower risk in a subscription plan. That's why some of us like it; it helps us find new readers. If they're avid readers, they go on and read more.

If you're selling well enough already, or at lots of other places, I can well understand not wanting to go into KU. Everybody needs to find what works for them.

I don't know whether this change will be a good thing or a bad thing. Likely that depends on the person.


----------



## a_g

HSh said:


> Everybody needs to find what works for them.
> 
> I don't know whether this change will be a good thing or a bad thing. Likely that depends on the person.


So very very true.


----------



## Someone

Vrabinec
They don't have to waste the time. In fact, this will payment model will make them more efficient. Great job Amazon...
Yeah, this payment structure actually makes scamming both easier and more efficient. Not only that, the barrier to bot automation and/or human readers is even gone now. 

This easy:
Time the time it takes the Kindle App to do the Read Out Loud/page, give it a long book to read, set a timer for when it it time to change books out, let the Kindle App read aloud until the timer goes off ( ding,ding,ding. I'm outta pages to read says the Kindle App Read Aloud to the scammer via the timer ) - and start it on a new book.

Scammers need readers, the Kindle App Read Out Loud function is their new reader. It would have been a complete PIA to use in the old payout structure bc one would always have to be changing the books out after a certain amount of pages. Not anymore. The more pages, the better.
And the Kindle App will read. It likes to read so much, it will read 24/7, never stopping even for the potty. 
It loves to read so much that the only breaks it takes from reading will be when it is loading a new, long book.
Yep, long books. Novels. Because it certainly aint going to be reading shorts and, thus, bugging the guy with the time-to-change-books timer over and over again. 
Say hello to the Scamels


----------



## Douglas Milewski

Edward M. Grant said:


> You missed the part about the scammer having multiple Kindles doing text-to-speech through the book as though someone was reading it. You also assume they can't hack Amazon's protocol and send fake page read data back to Amazon automatically. I hadn't thought of those, but now someone's mentioned it, they seem obvious.
> 
> Basically, KU seems like a way for scammers to suck money out of Amazon by doing increasingly scammy things, because their payout is completely unrelated to their costs.


Those scams are easy to catch. The more successfully you scam, the easier that you are to find. The system scales badly.


----------



## Someone

Douglas
I have been doing this since 2011. If the scammers were easy to catch, the problem would be markedly decreased by now. It also would have been abandoned by many of the scam gurus. But it isn't a smaller problem and they haven't stopped. It is exponentially bigger problem.
Ask anyone who has been doing this for a while.
For every scammer Amazon catches, there at least 100 not caught. It has to be, at least, that or you wouldn't run into their products as often as you do when you browse the store in certain categories.

They are just going to be changing categories...


----------



## Caddy

a_g said:


> So very very true.


100% Agree.


----------



## L.B

Caddy said:


> And, yes, I get it's KU only. You missed my point. Why would I put a 60,000 $4.99 novel in KU?


This assumes that KU subscribers also buy books... Do they? To be honest, I don't know, but I would assume as they are spending £7.99 a month, they would make use of that rather than buy other books on top.

By having your books in there, you are reaching all those not in it who buy books (and benefiting from the boost borrows give algorithms), but also those who only borrow.

Going wide might be better, but only if you can crack those other markets to make up for the borrow money you would be missing.


----------



## John Van Stry

Caddy said:


> And, yes, I get it's KU only. You missed my point. Why would I put a 60,000 $4.99 novel in KU? That is about 250 pages. If they pay a penny a page it would be $2.50 for me. I make $3.50 on a $4.99 novel OUT of KU. Why is this better for novels, unless those novels are priced at $2.99 or lower? Many genres support $4.99 novels and then KU simply won't make sense. And, like I said and the poster above said, you would only get the $2.50 IF they read it all or when they did. Out of KU I get the $3.50 when they buy it. They can never read, let it sit for 20 years on a kindle and I'm still paid.
> 
> Even for my books well over 100,000 pages, the $4.00 or $4.25 I "might" get if they ever decide to read it out of the many on their kindle instead of the guaranteed $3.50 if they download outside of KU doesn't make up for my lost revenue on B&N, Apple and kobo.
> 
> Plus I'd then be totally dependent on Amazon. I don't run a business to be totally dependent on one revenue source. I don't want to be scrambling, trying to build a base from zero on other places if and when Amazon REALLY begins to pay poorly. Doesn't mean I'm right. It does mean I am looking long term.


Well why do you put a book in there now? You're missing the point of KU in the first place. Right now, Amazon pays the exact same amount to all books in KU, regardless of size. 100 words, 100000 words, you still get $1.35. That's it.

With the new plan, you get paid based on pages read, so if the entire book is read, the 100000 word author will get more money. (BTW, 60K words is not 250 pages, even under the current amazon count system, it's under 200.)

Now as to WHY you would put a novel in KU, even though you make LESS money on it? Simple: KU readers don't buy eBooks. They don't have to. There are so many 'free' choices for them, that they only read the free books they get via KU. So if you put your books in KU, yes you will get less money per sale than you do for a regular sale. But you wouldn't have gotten that sale if you weren't in KU anyway. So it comes down to what you are willing to accept for your novel. Me personally, I'll take those 50 to 100 extra sales a day, because it doesn't hurt my other sales.

YMMV


----------



## C. Rysalis

Douglas Milewski said:


> As an unforeseen bonus, Amazon may begin prorating returns. If you read less than a certain %, then you get your money back. Otherwise you get a percentage.


But what if you read 20%, get distracted / forget and read the rest half a year later? That could pose some issues.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

Someone said:


> Douglas
> I have been doing this since 2011. If the scammers were easy6 to catch, the problem would be markedly decreased by now and it would have been abandoned by many of the scam gurus. But it isn't a smaller problem. It is exponentially bigger.
> Ask anyone who has been doing this for a while.
> For every scammer Amazon catches, there at least 100 not caught. It has to be, at least, that or you wouldn't run into so often as you do when you browse the store.


Were you getting paid by the page back then? No. The rules have changed.

Looking at the old system, yes, it's hard to sort out the bad apples. With this system, sorting out the bad apples gets far easier. Maximum payout now means spending maximum time per book, not just 10%. That cuts into profits by 90%. That's a huge reduction in payout right there.

If they are now tracking pages read, they need only look for the outliers. Most humans don't read 24/7. The same code that lets them pay per page is now the same code that spots scammers.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

C. Rysalis said:


> But what if you read 20%, get distracted / forget and read the rest half a year later? That could pose some issues.


No issue. Amazon pays by the page read, not by the book. In a way, this is the ultimate in microtransactions. Each page completed = 1 transaction unit.


----------



## Gone To Croatan

Douglas Milewski said:


> Maximum payout now means spending maximum time per book, not just 10%. That cuts into profits by 90%. That's a huge reduction in payout right there.


As I understand it, there is no maximum payout. The payout goes up for every page 'read'.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals

> Why would I put a 60,000 $4.99 novel in KU? That is about 250 pages. If they pay a penny a page it would be $2.50 for me. I make $3.50 on a $4.99 novel OUT of KU. Why is this better for novels, unless those novels are priced at $2.99 or lower?


The comparison is between the earlier KU program and the new KU program. $2.50 > $1.35 so the new program is better for novels.

Whether it is good or bad for a particular book is far more complicated and always has been. Simply saying you make more from a sale ignores the fact that some borrows would never convert to sales. The actual equation is a little different though. How many of those borrows would ever have been sales? How much higher is your book in the rankings because of those borrows and how many additional sales does that result in?

Example: I can think of one author I discovered in KU. I read everything she wrote. She has since dropped out. I bought her next release so she made $2.09 which is greater than $1.35 so she made out better dropping out, right? No because she's released three books and I have passed on two that I absolutely would have read with KU, so she's actually lost $1.91. She's also not hitting the top 10 in category either which means she's not getting as much exposure. Now, she might still be right. I might give in and buy the books. But it's not as simple as the buy/borrow amounts in straight comparison.

The actual calculation or more accurately guess-timation we need to make is whether borrows + sales due to greater visibility from borrows > Amazon sales converted to borrows + 3rd party sales.


----------



## anniejocoby

Graeme Hague said:


> Hugh, I think it comes from the perception that most books today are all somehow equal, because we're all using the same platform, the same formats and in particular there is a kind of standardisation in pricing -- it's all 0.99, 1.99, 2.99 and so on. In the dreaded, traditional publishing past the value of a book, the contract it attracted and the royalties it deserved was very much affected by its genre, style, length and appeal to the market place. We've lost that individual assessment of each manuscript and any subsequent book.
> Right now, lots of people don't want to hear that a 50 page short story isn't equal to a 500 page fantasy behemoth, or that a short, erotic book is an utterly different product to a monster epic, but the reality is that not all books are equal in value in the market place, yet for some reason the KULL system has been doing exactly that. It needed to change.
> And we need to remember that we choose to write, we choose to self-publish, and we choose to use Amazon that is a distribution system with its own business model designed to benefit Amazon. Any decision that Amazon makes that we don't like, you have the option to take your books somewhere else. Amazon has no obligation to maintain your existing lifestyle or means of income.
> I understand and sympathise that some authors will feel these changes in their wallet - I'm one of them. But if you're only going to write 5000 words and publish them, the KULL payment should reflect that appropriately. If you believe your short story is equal to LOTR, then allow sales to prove that - not borrows.
> It's becoming an emotive issue and apologies to anyone feeling the strain, but good discussion needs all sides of the argument.


Word for word, I agree 100% with this post. It's brilliant. And you're right - this has become an emotional issue, not a logical one. I'm ruled by logic, not emotion. And it's just logical that a 10,000 word short isn't worth as much as a 120,000 word epic. For one, it costs a great deal more to have the 120,000 word book edited and proofed. Two, it takes the author a lot longer to write the longer book. Three, it's a better value to the reader. I understand that short story writers will be losing their income. Hey, a lot of us got hosed when KU even came into being. That's life. You have to roll with the changes and figure out a way around everything that Amazon throws at you. That's still the only way to survive in the indie world. Nobody ever said that this job was easy or fair.


----------



## Caddy

vanstry said:


> Well why do you put a book in there now? You're missing the point of KU in the first place. Right now, Amazon pays the exact same amount to all books in KU, regardless of size. 100 words, 100000 words, you still get $1.35. That's it.
> 
> With the new plan, you get paid based on pages read, so if the entire book is read, the 100000 word author will get more money. (BTW, 60K words is not 250 pages, even under the current amazon count system, it's under 200.)
> 
> Now as to WHY you would put a novel in KU, even though you make LESS money on it? Simple: KU readers don't buy eBooks. They don't have to. There are so many 'free' choices for them, that they only read the free books they get via KU. So if you put your books in KU, yes you will get less money per sale than you do for a regular sale. But you wouldn't have gotten that sale if you weren't in KU anyway. So it comes down to what you are willing to accept for your novel. Me personally, I'll take those 50 to 100 extra sales a day, because it doesn't hurt my other sales.
> 
> YMMV


WHy do I put a book in KU? I don't put novels in there. I do put serials in there. Or did. It was worth the $1.34. I knew it would be worth it until and unless the borrow rate dropped to where I made .50. It just did.  Plus, I was testing KU. I have pulled a serial and will make it into a trilogy of 3 full-length novels. I have the other serial still in, to see what Amazon is going to pay. If they pay enough, it will still be worth it for serials, as I feel people will read a short story or a serial to completion more often than not. It doesn't take long. If it does end up being a penny a page, I will get that one out and go wide.

Some KU readers don't buy ebooks. In fact, probably most. But enough other readers do, and I have enough sales on other sites that I would lose money going exclusive with my novels. If I didn't I might consider it, but again I hate being beholden to one source of income. Andy, yeah, it irks me that traditionally published authors don't hve to be exclusive, and some best-selling 
indies don't have to be exclusive, but the rest of us do. And we're supposed to just be thrilled and jump in. Sorry, but this selective treatment alone tells me Amazon is not a company I want to totally depend on for my income. They've clearly stated they see most of us as unimportant, and they don't really care if we're there or not. I don't want special treatment. I want equal treatment. When it isn't given, I don't feel the urge to come to their party. Then again, I make money on other sites, so that helps make the decision.

I'm not adverse to using KU for a test, but no way am I going to gamble my whole income stream on it. I'm not in this for a hobby, and I also am not trying to find a way to make as much as possible as quickly as possible. I'm in this to build an income over several sources that won't collapse on Amazon's whim. A reasonable, normal income. It can be done without Select or KU. I'm now doing it.


----------



## Cherise

Speaker-To-Animals said:


> The actual ... guess-timation we need to make is whether
> borrows + sales due to greater visibility from borrows >
> Amazon sales + 3rd party sales.


Yep.

And for me so far, it has been greater. Exponentially greater. My books were widely distributed for two years. The other sites made me a grand total of $98 during that time.


----------



## gorvnice

Amazon isn't doing anything but paying by the page.  As far as excitement, it's going to be less about whether your write long or short and more about whether you retain readers.

Writers who aren't holding the attention of their customers are about to be exposed, and for some I suspect the reality will be a very painful wakeup call.  Maybe for myself as well, although I think I have some idea of retention rates.

You think seeing returns or 1 star reviews stings?  Oh my Gosh, I don't think we've even started to feel real pain until we realize that we spent months on a novel and people are abandoning it after reading 5 or 10 percent...


----------



## Douglas Milewski

Edward M. Grant said:


> As I understand it, there is no maximum payout. The payout goes up for every page 'read'.


In the previous system, you had to read a certain percentage of a book to trigger a payout. The minute that a scammer hits that percentage, they switch to another book. That's how you maximize speed, which increases your income. In this system, you must "read" the entire book, which takes longer. So even if the scam is successful, there's no way to accelerate your speed short of hacking the returned data packets. And if you do start hacking, overlapping time signatures will give you away. You'll need to stick inside a human range of pages-per-minute to evade detection, which slows your scam.

Scamming this way can be successful, but making it both lucrative and sustainable? That'll be hard.


----------



## Someone

Douglas Milewski said:


> Were you getting paid by the page back then? No. The rules have changed.
> 
> Looking at the old system, yes, it's hard to sort out the bad apples. With this system, sorting out the bad apples gets far easier. Maximum payout now means spending maximum time per book, not just 10%. That cuts into profits by 90%. That's a huge reduction in payout right there.
> 
> If they are now tracking pages read, they need only look for the outliers. Most humans don't read 24/7. The same code that lets them pay per page is now the same code that spots scammers.


The scammers adapted since KDP started and they will now.
If it was just a matter of Amazon WANTING to look for outliers...
If it was something Amazon actually sought to act against... ( ahem, without them being quite embarrassed all over in the press first, like they were the only time they did do a very, very small amount of housecleaning )
Well, if they were interested in doing that, it isn't like ways to scam this new payment program is the first time Amazon developed something whereas the scams would leave some outlier tracks. Nope, this one is just like all of them - there were tracks left to pick up in all of those too. 
I'd think that after a group of people saw an organization do nothing about an incessant problem, they'd figure out the organization doesn't see the problem as a priority.
Amazon is huge. The scammers in the Kindle and KU program are like ants on a T-Rex. Flicking the ants off isn't a priority for the T-Rex and this problem isn't a priority for Amazon. The only time one of the ants run into an issue is when they do something that just happens to catch the attention of the T-Rex or they are accidentally crushed.

( had to make the sorta Jurassic World reference. That new dinosaur and those Raptors  )


----------



## Gone To Croatan

Douglas Milewski said:


> In this system, you must "read" the entire book, which takes longer.


But "reading" that million word scamepic makes them more money.

Yes, while the Kindle is reading, it's a fraction of what they could get from repeatedly "reading" two pages of a short. But they only have to start and stop the Kindles now and again, rather than switching books every minute, and can sit on the beach the rest of the day. And they don't have to keep uploading new scamlets for their Kindles to read.

So this isn't obviously worse for scammers than the old system, or easier for Amazon to detect. If anything, I'd have thought someone reading 10% of a story every few minutes would be easier. Particularly if no-one ever finished those books.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> And it's just logical that a 10,000 word short isn't worth as much as a 120,000 word epic. For one, it costs a great deal more to have the 120,000 word book edited and proofed. Two, it takes the author a lot longer to write the longer book. Three, it's a better value to the reader.


Associating length with value is opinion, not logic. It's not like eating, to use an example much earlier in this thread -- readers want a good story, not a "more is better" fulfillment. I once bought the _Red Mars_/_Green Mars_/_Blue Mars_ trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. Very long work. Did not finish. I've read short-short stories from indies that I found _vastly_ more enjoyable than trying to push my way through that _Mars_ trilogy.

Yes, it probably costs more to edit a 120K word book than a 10K word short story. The rest of your calculation is arguable at best.

[quote author=vrabinec]I wonder if they'd ever pay a couple cents more for pages with an illustration, just to make it worthwhile for childrens' books authors.[/quote]

If they do, they'll open the gaping hole for scammers that I mentioned much earlier in this mega-thread.

And on another note, it's really sad to see people lumping short story writers, en masse, in with scammers, as if we're "cheating the system." I write short stories for the same reason I write novels: I want to tell an entertaining story. I've _never_ written something to "game" Amazon's system or any other system.

On the other hand, this thread almost tempts me to do just that once the new model is effective. (Not going to, but it's tempting.) I foresee a whole new set of Fiverr gigs, i.e., "I'll read your _whole book_ for just $5..." Automation-ready for the person offering the gig (thus almost pure profit), profitable for authors with long enough works where their 100% read compensation exceeds $5.

And _another_ note: I keep reading "scamepic" as "scame-pic" so I like scamel better.


----------



## EC Sheedy

gorvnice said:


> Amazon isn't doing anything but paying by the page. As far as excitement, it's going to be less about whether your write long or short and more about whether you retain readers.
> 
> Writers who aren't holding the attention of their customers are about to be exposed, and for some I suspect the reality will be a very painful wakeup call. Maybe for myself as well, although I think I have some idea of retention rates.
> 
> You think seeing returns or 1 star reviews stings? Oh my Gosh, I don't think we've even started to feel real pain until we realize that we spent months on a novel and people are abandoning it after reading 5 or 10 percent...


Yes, this new information coming at us does make my knees a bit watery. 

I agree *there will be pain* and it won't all be in the pocketbook. Some writing hearts will be bleeding and some writing egos will be crushed.

Maybe there will be an uptick on craft threads in the WC. And maybe a few writing books like "How to Write Page-turning Prose." Or "Grab your Reader and Don't Let Go." Although I'm guessing those books are already written. (I'll check on Amazon.)

Settling in now to await August 15th, because I can't think of anything else to do. Oh, write. Yes, there is that.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper

The ostensible absence of a royalty cap (other than page count) raises an interesting new situation where a book might now theoretically earn more than the ~$7 earned at the 70% rate and $9.99 ceiling. I'm in a couple large box sets, close to a million words, which are strategically priced at 99 cents. If they were enrolled in Select, borrowed, and read through, that title could earn north of $30 at the $0.01/page rate. As little as 35 cents for a sale, as much as $30 for a borrow. Now I'm really curious how they intend to quantify page reads.

August 15 can't arrive soon enough.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

I had a longer bit about short stories that are near and dear to my heart to help argue against this sentiment that value is a factor of page count, but I have reduced this to the tl;dr version. Here is why I do not think this is going to stem the tide of shorts in any way and instead just ensure there are MORE short stories in KU:

A short story is almost ALWAYS read in one sitting. A novel, not so much.

So if I was strategizing releases to make the best out of the KU program, I would not worry too much. Amazon will change the payout as they see fit, and sure, longer works will have the potential to earn more, but they still have to be read 100%.


----------



## horrordude1973

I see a lot of bashing of the novella and short story authors here and ringing of our death knells how we are about to be "hosed" and we are "done for" 

After my initial freakout yesterday I've had more time to sit and reflect on this. A couple things to keep in mind.

Just because you wrote a 600 page book doesn't mean someone is going to read the whole thing. If they read 50 pages of your epic story and read all 150 page of mine then guess what? I just made more.

I can write a 30-35K novella in 6 weeks, I can do it in 4 if I really push myself. To my knowledge most my readers read my whole books becuse they are short and aren't huge time investments. So I'll be able to put out more of them and put them out more frequently. Not to mention I can start adding them into box sets for KU also.

Lots of cool ways I can go with this to accumulate pages read for KU. Plus this won't affect my actual sales at all the way KU did when it first came out. I've been doing this full time for two years now. I survived KU and I'll survive this if not thrive at it. 

So I know many here hate the short stories and novellas and go on and on about how unfair it is. Well, I'm sure you'll find another reason to hate us soon as I for one am not going anywhere. So no "hosing" for me.


----------



## geronl

Saul Tanpepper said:


> The ostensible absence of a royalty cap (other than page count) raises an interesting new situation where a book might now theoretically earn more than the ~$7 earned at the 70% rate and $9.99 ceiling. I'm in a couple large box sets, close to a million words, which are strategically priced at 99 cents. If they were enrolled in Select, borrowed, and read through, that title could earn north of $30 at the $0.01/page rate. As little as 35 cents for a sale, as much as $30 for a borrow. Now I'm really curious how they intend to quantify page reads.
> 
> August 15 can't arrive soon enough.


You have to tell us how that works out when it happens


----------



## Guest

horrordude1973 said:


> After my initial freakout yesterday I've had more time to sit and reflect on this.


Good.  I've been an ulcer free KOLL/KU fan since I started self-publishing last year. That's not changing. 

I look forward to publishing another series and a new serial. I've got a novel coming out next month, but I don't have plans for more full-length novels. Not my preference.

You do what works for you. Don't worry about what other people do or don't do.

Amazon KOLL/KU panics on author boards follow a formula. Get used to them.


----------



## Secret Pen Pal

cinisajoy said:


> So now we will get non-fiction filled with fillers. Great. Thanks for nothing..
> Off to send Amazon a letter.


Good point. People out to game the system will adapt. I can picture a glut of NF filled with unrelated graphs.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Barnaby Yard said:


> This assumes that KU subscribers also buy books... Do they? To be honest, I don't know, but I would assume as they are spending £7.99 a month, they would make use of that rather than buy other books on top.
> 
> By having your books in there, you are reaching all those not in it who buy books (and benefiting from the boost borrows give algorithms), but also those who only borrow.
> 
> Going wide might be better, but only if you can crack those other markets to make up for the borrow money you would be missing.


I do.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

vanstry said:


> Now as to WHY you would put a novel in KU, even though you make LESS money on it? Simple: KU readers don't buy eBooks. They don't have to.


Do you have a source for that statistic? Because this KU reader buys books. If I like an author, I binge read that author. If all of the author's books aren't in KU, I'll buy ones that aren't. My feeling is that most KU readers are voracious readers. I joined KU because I was spending $10 a month on books that were in the Kindle Daily Deals that were also in KU. So now, I pick up those books in KU and then still spend the rest of my book budget on books NOT in KU.

Betsy


----------



## horrordude1973

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Do you have a source for that statistic? Because this KU reader buys books. If I like an author, I binge read that author. If all of the author's books aren't in KU, I'll buy ones that aren't. My feeling is that most KU readers are voracious readers. I joined KU because I was spending $10 a month on books that were in the Kindle Daily Deals that were also in KU. So now, I pick up those books in KU and then still spend the rest of my book budget on books NOT in KU.
> 
> Betsy


I have KU and I buy books all the time. I know many others who do as well. I use KU to check out new authors I haven't read before and I buy books for authors I know and like. Many of my readers tell me the same. Or since I release so many books they get it on KU first to read it, then buy it later when they have the money. Without some hard data saying KU useers don't buy books is meaningless


----------



## lilywhite

.


----------



## J.T. Williams

I'm _think_ I'm happy about this change. I have plans for the next year laid out that have to be tweaked now, but my primary output is novel length 70k to 100k works. I can understand how many, particularly short story writers, are distressed by this new payout. I had planned to put out multiple shorts for the purpose of KU but now I will bundle into collections. It is too early to see the actual $ per page but I went into Select for exposure. When my novel is priced at 3.99 and my borrow to sale rate is 3-1, I took it as an expected hit for increased exposure. I loved when my 12k short story collection was borrowed... but I figured that wouldn't last. In my case, I think this will work out better.

I was reading an old post by Russell Blake (His "sale loads of books" post). I thought about how now short fiction worked well due to KU and how this was example of how things change... But for the last few days his advice to write novels and just novels, kept bouncing in my head... I feel like this might be why.

This is my first time seeing a sudden change in the landscape... expect the unexpected. Got it.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18

horrordude1973 said:


> I have KU and I buy books all the time. I know many others who do as well.


Me too, and I've discovered new-to-me authors through KU and bought their books. The couple of other KU subscribers I've asked have also reported buying books in addition to borrowing.

As to the whole short vs. long debate. Of course quality matters. Even though I favor longer reads, I'd rather read a good short story than a mediocre novel, although in my case I wouldn't read the mediocre novel. I have no qualms about abandoning anything the minute I'm bored. However, as a big fan of Craig Johnson's Walt Longmire series, I can tell you I'm not paying the same for one of his short stories as for one of his novels. I really don't care if it takes him twice as long to craft the short story. As a reader what I care about is how long the story is going to entertain me, and a novel is going to do that many times longer than a short story.


----------



## Ainsley

horrordude1973 said:


> Just because you wrote a 600 page book doesn't mean someone is going to read the whole thing. If they read 50 pages of your epic story and read all 150 page of mine then guess what? I just made more.


Exactly. I don't see how this is that bad a thing for shorter works.


----------



## MyraScott

horrordude1973 said:


> I see a lot of bashing of the novella and short story authors here and ringing of our death knells how we are about to be "hosed" and we are "done for"


Can you link to the "hosed" and "done for" posts? I couldn't find them.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper

Ainsley said:


> Exactly. I don't see how this is that bad a thing for shorter works.


It's not*. It might be a bad thing if you've shifted your strategy to writing shorter works because you expected to always get the same payout as longer ones. Who this unequivocally hurts is the authors of any length who can't keep readers engaged. And I'm not so sure that's a bad thing.

*picture books, children's books, etc excepted, of course.


----------



## horrordude1973

MyraScott said:


> Can you link to the "hosed" and "done for" posts? I couldn't find them.


I've seen at least 4 or 5, not gonna comb through this entire thread to look for them now


----------



## Secret Pen Pal

Speaker-To-Animals said:


> The comparison is between the earlier KU program and the new KU program. $2.50 > $1.35 so the new program is better for novels.
> 
> Whether it is good or bad for a particular book is far more complicated and always has been. Simply saying you make more from a sale ignores the fact that some borrows would never convert to sales. The actual equation is a little different though. How many of those borrows would ever have been sales? How much higher is your book in the rankings because of those borrows and how many additional sales does that result in?
> 
> Example: I can think of one author I discovered in KU. I read everything she wrote. She has since dropped out. I bought her next release so she made $2.09 which is greater than $1.35 so she made out better dropping out, right? No because she's released three books and I have passed on two that I absolutely would have read with KU, so she's actually lost $1.91. She's also not hitting the top 10 in category either which means she's not getting as much exposure. Now, she might still be right. I might give in and buy the books. But it's not as simple as the buy/borrow amounts in straight comparison.
> 
> The actual calculation or more accurately guess-timation we need to make is whether borrows + sales due to greater visibility from borrows > Amazon sales converted to borrows + 3rd party sales.


Good points. Reaching readers has been a major value of KU for me. Doubt there's any other way I could have moved as many ebooks with so little promo on new pen names. And I doubt most of those readers would be buying most of my books if they weren't in KU; I'm new and don't have the budget for major promo.

I have titles that get 30 to 50 percent sales, at least for some weeks, and others that get more than 90% borrows. I experimented with taking some bundles out of KU to see if there'd be a significant improvement in sales. Sure, I'm making more on each unit, but I'm making less per title on those and I'm losing a lot of exposure for the links in the backmatter because they reach far fewer readers.

I'm not excited about the change, but based on the sell-through on most of my series and serials, readers are going through my books start to finish and picking up the next one.

I'm in agreement with HorrorDude that short lengths won't necessarily be at a disadvantage. Volume may take on greater importance, provided that the work is compelling.


----------



## NoCat

Length has nothing to do with the worth  of a thing. The amount of money and time the author spent has nothing to do with its worth either.

Your book, no matter the length, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it. Readers care that the book is something they want to read and that their time won't be wasted. 

This is a meritocracy in that if you write books people want to read and can't put down, you will likely be rewarded. That was true before KU and will continue to be true after this change. Maybe more so, since now your books will have to be good enough to keep people reading or you won't get paid inside that system.  Which means people writing 50 page stories that get fully read because they are awesome will still earn more than someone writing 500 page novels that lose most readers in the first 20 pages.

Your books are worth what people will pay. Finding that sweet spot of maximizing readership and income is the hard part.

A short story that has demand for it is, technically, worth more than a novel that has no demand, because people will pay for one and not the the other, and therefore the one will out-earn the other. That's reality.

So yeah, I imagine a lot of the serials will make less than before, but probably still more than a lot of people loading in novels that don't get read at all.


----------



## Kenson

Saul Tanpepper said:


> Who this unequivocally hurts is the authors of any length who can't keep readers engaged. And I'm not so sure that's a bad thing


Exactly! I don't write novellas. I'm not sure I know how to and I take the view that a good story takes as long as it takes to be told.
So I'm basically in favour of this change. It doesn't mean that I'm guaranteed to make any more money out of it but the potential is there IF I can keep the reader engaged to the end of the book. If I can't do that then it's a reflection on my storytelling ability rather than any changes that are made to KU.


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

What I want to know is, how will they handle slow readers? What if a person borrows a book, then reads two or three pages a day, over 80 or 100 days? How will Amazon handle the royalty? Will we see the same book come up in our borrowed column over a three month period, and get paid for the pages read during that period? Or will we only get paid for the first month and lose the rest?

What if someone borrows a book, reads half, returns it, then borrows it again 2 months later and reads the second half? Will we get paid for the second borrow? After all, we didn't get paid for the second half of the book the first time around and we are now being paid per page rather than per borrow.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

horrordude1973 said:


> I see a lot of bashing of the novella and short story authors here and ringing of our death knells how we are about to be "hosed" and we are "done for"





MyraScott said:


> Can you link to the "hosed" and "done for" posts? I couldn't find them.





horrordude1973 said:


> I've seen at least 4 or 5, not gonna comb through this entire thread to look for them now


I found several writers of children's books or shorter forms who themselves used those terms, but not other people. I have found a little bit of us vs them in this thread, which I'd prefer not to see. I've also seen references to KU content providers who produce "scraped" content or who have taken longer works and chopped them into smaller pieces just to take advantage of the current pay structure; I didn't read those comments as directed at authors who do write original works in shorter forms.

If I missed something, I apologize. Let's, going forward, respect the hard work of your fellow members.

Thanks,

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## thisisgarrett

David Chill said:


> The principle remains. For other than picture book publishers, writers who keep readers reading to the end will benefit the most from this new system.


I couldn't agree more with this statement. I do believe there are delicate intricacies involved with publishing and promoting that are being discussed here, but once the reader opens your novel and you get them to keep turning pages you should be fine. Keep them turning pages, right?

Now I haven't read through all (as of now) 28 pages of this thread, but this is more of a payout thing rather than exposure thing right?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

My guess is it's just like current borrows. If you pull a book OUT of KDP select and it gets reads the next month, you are paid at the following month's payout, not the payout in which the book was clicked.

So hypothetically, as a reader takes longer to read your book, if it spans over a change in the month, then you will get paid one rate for the pages read in say July and a different rate in say August, because the pool of money and total pages read in any given month change.


----------



## Rykymus

Amazon isn't trying to stop the scammers. If they wanted to, they could. It isn't worth their time...yet.

Will this make it more difficult for scammers? I think possibly. However, the smart ones will adapt, and maybe even make more. The dumb ones will give up and look for some other get-rich-quick scheme.  Frankly, either way, I don't care. It's effect on my business is negligible at best.

I agree that length does not determine value. I also agree that a short story is not of less value than a long one. Value is determined by the reader, not the writer. All I want is to get paid the same 'per word' for my work as everyone else. I get that some people might take a year to write a 10k short, while others might crank out 4 - 100k novels in that same year. However, the fact that it took one person longer to write those 10k words does not make them worth more per word, or per story. I shouldn't be penalized because some people take longer to write, or because some people choose to write short stories instead of novels.

I don't which anyone to lose revenue, but guess what? Those of you who were writing shorts because they paid better in KU were milking a poorly designed system. Good for you, but so sorry, the free-ride is over.

Also, so many people recommending 'go-wide'. I did. I lost $15k a month for months. Even worse, the subscription rate to my mailing list dropped by 50%, and that mailing list is what gets me into the top 10 of all of Amazon every time I release a new novel. I'm back in Select/KU, and I'm not going anywhere for quite a while. So when you blindly shout 'go-wide', I just laugh and shake my head. Fact is, no matter how much you want it to be, it ain't right for everyone.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

Our Amazon sales dropped *90%* because we dropped out of Select and KU last year.

I wrote about Amazon only a couple of months ago. Our last KU author pulled her stuff from Select back in December, I believe. Her formerly steady sales went to zero and have stayed there ever since. Her book pages have been savaged. Categories disappeared. Ranking through the floor. It's almost as if her Amazon book pages were turned off by flipping a switch. She sells practically nothing now. She is our best-selling author.

The reality is this: Amazon is turning into Spotify, and you aren't Taylor Swift.

What Amazon promised was a high royalty (up to 70%) and a big audience. Now they are delivering neither. They are willing to build an infrastructure to count, page by page, how many words into a book our readers travel (while concealing the actual identity of that reader, of course, gotta keep that leash tight), but remain unwilling to tell us how many people actually see our book pages on their site. Now why is that?

Is it because they don't want the average author to know Amazon isn't delivering the audience they promised?

Can we give up a couple of pennies a book and get some visibility? How about growing the pie, Jeff? You've got the audience. Maybe spending a little less time shaving Lincoln's beard and a little more time putting the right books in the hands of the right readers will solve your "how many ants can we fit in this tiny little cage" problem. Why is this a problem for you? Let me break it down for you Jeff:

Amazon has the most refined marketing machine known to man, yet for some reason they can't match readers with books _even if we pay them_. Why?

Proof? Simple. Ask the average middle grade author how their numbers look on Amazon. My guess is (since I work with a room full of them) they'll tell you they would make more money if they loaded their work in a wheelbarrow and rolled it up and down Venice Beach on a Tuesday evening in October.

Those of us willing to look past this "solve a puzzle, win a prize" business model know two things. One, Amazon has utterly abandoned (on your behalf) any pretense of being a book _seller_. *SELLING* books leads to wealth, and we can't have wealthy authors getting all uppity in the bread shop. So instead of selling books and being able to say "I sold a million books" it's borrow-rent-a-grabby books, which can't be quantified any more because nobody sold anything. And Amazon can unilaterally decide on a minute-by-minute basis how much money you actually make. The most mud-soaked sharecroppers in the most miserable medieval hole ever known to man would be appalled.

Amazon is gradually taking control and ownership away from you and keeping it for themselves. The KDP self-publishing deal has been getting steadily worse for years and years.

Meanwhile, Kindle Unlimited is you competing with yourself.

What I know is this: our guild made more money in 19 days out of our own store than we did in four years on Amazon.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Not mid-list, middle grade. As in books targeted to middle schoolers and preteens.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

OK had a little time to think things out. Since I write longer books this seems like a mostly good change for me. But I do have some shorter fiction too.

Based on this change I'm going to adopt the following strategy for some of it. Currently I have to wizard at law books out, and a third underway. They're all about 40 k which is short for me. They were out before KU came in so are also out in other sellers. Because of this my newest plan is to put out the new book, and keep the old books in kindle as well as smashwords etc but not in kindle select or KU. However, I'll compile the books into one 120 k book as well which will go into KU. That way my books go wide and also I get the best royalty from KU.

Reasonable strategy?

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## NoCat

No, Greg/Psychotick, that strat won't work. You cannot have a book wide and also in a bundle exclusive to Amazon. So... ditch that idea before they take your books down.


----------



## Someone

Annie is 100% right Greg. Don't do that.
( Annie - I am just repeating your post bc it is so important for Greg to see it. Considering the size of this thread, I thought there is a better chance of him seeing it if it was posted twice  )


----------



## 75845

Being the smart cookie I am and ever ready to seize the opportunity of the moment I am currently editing my collection of very short poems


----------



## P.T. Phronk

Instead of endlessly confusing myself, I tried out some calculations. And instead of doing it in my head, I used a fancy new technology called a spreadsheet.

I present to you: The New KU Per Page Payout Calculator

You should be able to click on that link to see it and/or make your own copy. Note that only 2 numbers actually matter: the fund and the pages read. Other variables, like the number of words in a page, make absolutely no difference in the end.

I tried out a few scenarios. The first is Amazon's example in the original email, which is simple but not realistic.

I consider Scenario B the most realistic. It keeps Amazon's fund about the same as it's been recently, and estimates 400M total pages read based on 8M borrows (about the same as now, I think?), and an average of 50 pages read per borrow. This results in about 3 cents a page.

The 50 pages read per borrow number is just made up. It might be on the high side, but maybe not, as longer works make their way to KU. If it's actually lower, that's more money per page, so, yay for authors that can keep a reader's attention for more pages than other authors can.

Scenario C is 1 cent per page: the arbitrary number a lot of people have jumped on. All other things being equal, the KU fund would have to drop dramatically, which would look bad for Amazon. My prediction is that it will be more than 1 cent per page, at least for a few months.

With the all-seeing spreadsheet proclaiming that only 2 numbers really matter, one thing should be clear: all that matters for an author is trying to maximize your own contributions to that second number (total pages read). Which means we're paid according to how compelling and numerous our books are. I think that's exactly how it should be.

I probably made mistakes, so correct away.

Unrelated:

Can I point out the worst part of this whole thing?

From Amazon's example:


> •	The author of a 100 page book which was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ...


They should've gotten an editor. "Which" should be "that." It's as if they're trolling authors on purpose.


----------



## Cherise

I don't see them continuing to pay more for a borrow than we would get for a sale. They haven't said this would be the case, but they did say more details would be coming.


----------



## J.T. Williams

Cherise Kelley said:


> I don't see them continuing to pay more for a borrow than we would get for a sale. They haven't said this would be the case, but they did say more details would be coming.


That's what I'm waiting for.


----------



## Ainsley

If the idea is to bring novels back into the fold then the goal for Amazon is to offer less than non-KU royalty but more than the current borrow rate of ~1.3x give or take, right? 

I'd be curious to know just how low a rate novelists would be willing to accept to be part of KU. By the comments posted it seems like a lot of folks are already willing to accept 1c/page...


----------



## Rykymus

Phronk: A solid try, but it's still too much guesswork to offer any sort of accuracy. 

The purpose of Amazon's (remarkably poor) email was to demonstrate X + Y = Z. Unfortunately, they tried using values that were so simple even they couldn't do it correctly. Quite frankly, the only thing that scares me more than the poor quality of the email is the number of people in this thread that actually believe those numbers came from anywhere but thin air.

As for JustPhil's tirade, thanks for adding to the debate. Very useful.


----------



## Harvey Click

Herc- The Reluctant Geek said:


> What I want to know is, how will they handle slow readers? What if a person borrows a book, then reads two or three pages a day, over 80 or 100 days? How will Amazon handle the royalty? Will we see the same book come up in our borrowed column over a three month period, and get paid for the pages read during that period? Or will we only get paid for the first month and lose the rest?


Maybe instead of showing the number of borrows in our monthly report they should show the total number of pages read by all borrowers.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

I've decided that I'm going to give it a shot, and see what happens.

I'm in the process of pulling _one_ book, and only one, from wide release. I won't pull another series story, because I already have on that's Amazon-exclusive in the _Jack Daniels And Associates_ Kindle World. I won't pull any of my current other short stories, because they actually sell on other platforms, and I'd have to take down at least one short story collection from everywhere.

That leaves me with one book to try, until I've finished with at least two pen name novels, or get more short stories written.

Once my book is clear everywhere, I'll put it into Select and KU, and see what happens. And future stories that aren't in any of my current series will begin with a 90-day tour in Select and KU, before going wide.

It may be a mistake for me, but I'm willing to risk it with one book.


----------



## Kathryn Meyer Griffith

All this just makes my head hurt. When I started self-publishing in 2012 after years and years earning pennies on my books from greedy publishers, I thought I'd died and gone to heaven. Only fly in the ointment was I didn't and wouldn't own most of my books (they were still with a publisher) for another 3 years. But I could wait. In three years I'd have all my books back and I'd self-publish each one. Finally I'd make the big bucks at the end of my life.  Anyway, with KDP I was finally making real money. Then KU came in and it all changed. I've been scrambling, juggling like a drunken clown, ever since trying to recapture that old glory of my KDP early days. I think with this last development I can honestly say Amazon isn't doing any of this for us, but for themselves. They should have just left us with the 35%/70% royalties or even lowered them some if they wanted...but these crazy schemes with KU and now this makes no sense. Hey folks, I feel like I'm back with those same old publishers of mine. No accountability and they give us what they want to, not what we're worth. I don't think anything going on now is good for us. Just my two cents.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

The problem is that Amazon is not a publisher. Sure, if you sign with one of their imprints they are, but otherwise they are not your publisher. You are your publisher.  You don't work for them and they don't work for you. You're an independent contractor selling your wares through them.  You set your prices, handle edits, design your own covers, do your marketing and decide if you're in Select or not. Amazon absolutely had to do a subscription service because they're the wave of right now and the immediate future. Amazon can't simply ignore that. Should they have launched KU with more thought and the page reads vs. flat books from the beginning? Probably. A lot of people fashioned their livelihood on pumping shorter works into KU thinking nothing was going to change. Things always change. If we want to play the game we have to roll with the changes.


----------



## 75845

Harvey Click said:


> Maybe instead of showing the number of borrows in our monthly report they should show the total number of pages read by all borrowers.


From the link in the KDP email

"After this change, you'll be able to view your Kindle Unlimited (KU) and Kindle Owners' Lending Library (KOLL) Pages Read in your Sales Dashboard report by marketplace and title.

We'll continue to update this Help page with more information on your KDP reports, KU/KOLL royalties, and KDP Select Global Fund payouts as the changes roll out. "


----------



## 25803

From the link given in the initial email to the Kindle Unlimited Pages Read page:

"This standardized approach allows us to identify pages in a way that works across genres and devices. *Non-text elements within books including images, charts and graphs will count toward a book's KENPC.*" (bolding is mine)

It sounds like picture book authors may not be as penalized as they may have feared.

Regarding the reasoning behind the change, I do think Amazon hopes to entice authors back into Unlimited -- many of them are refusing to participate, even if they don't have to be exclusive. If Amazon were to pay the price per page in their original example, that would do a lot of enticing! I can see successful authors being willing to give up wide distribution if they were paid $.10 per completed page. And those successful authors are the ones whose books are most likely to be completed.

I once read somewhere that most books are not finished by readers... So I do think we will be surprised by how often readers will not complete a book or how quickly they may give up on it. I fear there will be many threads about percentage read once this change gets underway -- with some authors depressed by the read-thru rates and others thrilled.

I don't have any books in Unlimited, but if price per page plays out like their example, it will be a huge lure! I hope non-KU authors will get access to their read-thru percentages too.


----------



## VEVO

http://www.hughhowey.com/new-ku-payout-structure/

Excerpt: (click to read the rest)



> With another June coming and going, we enter KU 2.0. Starting in July, payouts for Kindle Unlimited authors will be based on pages read, not whether or not a reader gets through the first 10% of a work.
> 
> I love this change. It's one many of us have been clamoring for and even expecting. If anything, I'm surprised it took this long.
> 
> What this means for authors is debatable. Those who write shorter works designed for KU may see a drop in income, while those who provide full-length novels may see a rise in income (depending on how many pages readers enjoy). My guess is that the vast majority of authors will earn about the same amount as before. That doesn't mean their income won't fluctuate, only that this change won't be the reason for most fluctuations.
> 
> I'm sure affecting the length of works was central to Amazon's decision. By adjusting the payout knobs, they can influence the page count of works made available to readers. They might even entice some authors who pulled their $2.99-and-up novels and published them elsewhere to consider moving back into Select.
> 
> Should it influence serial fiction authors? Not in my opinion. Serialization worked for me before KU, and with this payout structure, we are getting paid more commensurate with overall length rather than number of titles. If the story calls for episodic releases, then there's no difference in how those pages are rewarded. If you can't hook the reader to continue reading along, you won't get paid either way. And more titles will continue to mean greater visibility on the bestseller lists. So that advantage remains.
> 
> I have a feeling we'll see some knee-jerk reactions from authors without considering these pros and cons. Shorter works still make a lot of sense in KU. It's hard to justify selling short stories for more than a dollar, and you only make 35 cents on that dollar under KDP terms. In KU, a 20 page story might earn just as much as a sale. What we should celebrate is that short stories will no longer earn the same amount as a novel, especially since the 10% threshold was much easier to reach on a short story. That system just wasn't fair. The new system is a vast improvement.
> 
> To those who write works with a mind of maximizing their earnings according to Amazon's algorithms, take note: It's not a good idea. Not in the long term. Write the stories you enjoy and that you think readers' will love. This remains the best way to game the system: Write great works.


_Vevo, I've merged this with the existing thread to avoid splintering the discussion. Thanks. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## David Wisehart

KathyCarmichael said:


> I once read somewhere that most books are not finished by readers... So I do think we will be surprised by how often readers will not complete a book or how quickly they may give up on it. I fear there will be many threads about percentage read once this change gets underway -- with some authors depressed by the read-thru rates and others thrilled.


This is an interesting analysis, if unscientific:

"The Goldfinch" by Donna Tartt: 98.5% read
"Catching Fire" by Suzanne Collins: 43.4%
"The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald: 28.3%
"Fifty Shades of Grey" by E.L. James: 25.9%
"Flash Boys" by Michael Lewis: 21.7%
"Lean In" by Sheryl Sandberg: 12.3%
"Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman: 6.8%
"A Brief History of Time" by Stephen Hawking: 6.6%
"Capital in the Twenty-First Century" by Thomas Piketty: 2.4%

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-summers-most-unread-book-is-1404417569


----------



## cinisajoy

I tried KU for a month,    I found I put off all the paid/free books to make sure the borrows got read.
Now as per bought/downloaded books, do you (generic) as an author really want to know that your book was bought on say Jan 1, 2012 and not even looked at until Dec 31, 2014.  Or worse, your book was picked up and read to 1%, then either forgotten or put on hold.  
Maybe Amazon will eventually tell authors that readers removed from device at 5%.

Now see as a reader,  I don't really see that the author has any business knowing what I did with their book after said author got the money.
I mean if I want to give them away or make trees/angels that is my prerogative as I now own the book.
If your book is big enough I could even make a book safe.  

Now having said that, yes I do tell others if I think an author is good.


----------



## 75814

Amanda M. Lee said:


> The problem is that Amazon is not a publisher. Sure, if you sign with one of their imprints they are, but otherwise they are not your publisher. You are your publisher. You don't work for them and they don't work for you. You're an independent contractor selling your wares through them. You set your prices, handle edits, design your own covers, do your marketing and decide if you're in Select or not. Amazon absolutely had to do a subscription service because they're the wave of right now and the immediate future. Amazon can't simply ignore that. Should they have launched KU with more thought and the page reads vs. flat books from the beginning? Probably. A lot of people fashioned their livelihood on pumping shorter works into KU thinking nothing was going to change. Things always change. If we want to play the game we have to roll with the changes.


Perfectly stated.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> You set your prices, handle edits, design your own covers, do your marketing and decide if you're in Select or not.


We don't set our prices. Thus sayeth Amazon "thy books shall be free" and so it is. Amazon sets the price. The price of your book is zero. Your book has been shoved aside and replaced with little paper boats. Because if your book were actually worth something, you might start getting ideas.

Not only do we have no control over our prices, we have to compete with our own titles in order to be a part of this wacky scheme where we get paid based not on our book's cover price but on how our readers _behave_. We also don't decide if we're in Select or not. Once we sign up we can't leave for three months. Amazon has *total control* over how much you get paid. Forever.

Oh, and if you do decide to leave Select, Amazon punishes you by flipping the switch and making all your book pages go dark. They also yank your book out of all the browse categories for you. I work alongside an author who experienced it first hand only a few months ago. Her entire library was thrown overboard almost to the day when she left Select. A previously steady history of three-figure sales every month went straight through the floor.

This new announcement is nothing more than a smokescreen so they can do another round of pay cuts. Amazon is yanking the leash to remind you who's in charge.

Ask yourself this question: what is Amazon doing to help us *SELL* more books? Hmm? The people with the 70% royalty? What's being done to help them?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> We don't set our prices. Thus sayeth Amazon "thy books shall be free" and so it is. Amazon sets the price. The price of your book is zero. Your book has been shoved aside and replaced with little paper boats. Because if your book were actually worth something, you might start getting ideas.
> 
> Not only do we have no control over our prices, we have to compete with our own titles in order to be a part of this wacky scheme where we get paid based not on our book's cover price but on how our readers _behave_. We also don't decide if we're in Select or not. Once we sign up we can't leave for three months. Amazon has *total control* over how much you get paid. Forever.
> 
> Oh, and if you do decide to leave Select, Amazon punishes you by flipping the switch and making all your book pages go dark. They also yank your book out of all the browse categories for you. I work alongside an author who experienced it first hand only a few months ago. Her entire library was thrown overboard almost to the day when she left Select.
> 
> This new announcement is nothing more than a smokescreen so they can do another round of pay cuts. Amazon is yanking the leash to remind you who's in charge.
> 
> Ask yourself this question: what is Amazon doing to help us *SELL* more books? Hmm? The people with the 70% royalty? What's being done to help them?


It is not Amazon's job to sell your books. It is your job. I am forever thankful Amazon helped me realize a dream.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> We don't set our prices. Thus sayeth Amazon "thy books shall be free" and so it is. Amazon sets the price. The price of your book is zero. Your book has been shoved aside and replaced with little paper boats. Because if your book were actually worth something, you might start getting ideas.
> 
> Not only do we have no control over our prices, we have to compete with our own titles in order to be a part of this wacky scheme where we get paid based not on our book's cover price but on how our readers _behave_. We also don't decide if we're in Select or not. Once we sign up we can't leave for three months. Amazon has *total control* over how much you get paid. Forever.
> 
> Oh, and if you do decide to leave Select, Amazon punishes you by flipping the switch and making all your book pages go dark. They also yank your book out of all the browse categories for you. I work alongside an author who experienced it first hand only a few months ago. Her entire library was thrown overboard almost to the day when she left Select. A previously steady history of three-figure sales every month went straight through the floor.
> 
> This new announcement is nothing more than a smokescreen so they can do another round of pay cuts. Amazon is yanking the leash to remind you who's in charge.
> 
> Ask yourself this question: what is Amazon doing to help us *SELL* more books? Hmm? The people with the 70% royalty? What's being done to help them?


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> We don't set our prices. Thus sayeth Amazon "thy books shall be free" and so it is. Amazon sets the price. The price of your book is zero. Your book has been shoved aside and replaced with little paper boats. Because if your book were actually worth something, you might start getting ideas.
> 
> Not only do we have no control over our prices, we have to compete with our own titles in order to be a part of this wacky scheme where we get paid based not on our book's cover price but on how our readers _behave_. We also don't decide if we're in Select or not. Once we sign up we can't leave for three months. Amazon has *total control* over how much you get paid. Forever.
> 
> Oh, and if you do decide to leave Select, Amazon punishes you by flipping the switch and making all your book pages go dark. They also yank your book out of all the browse categories for you. I work alongside an author who experienced it first hand only a few months ago. Her entire library was thrown overboard almost to the day when she left Select.
> 
> This new announcement is nothing more than a smokescreen so they can do another round of pay cuts. Amazon is yanking the leash to remind you who's in charge.
> 
> Ask yourself this question: what is Amazon doing to help us *SELL* more books? Hmm? The people with the 70% royalty? What's being done to help them?


Every author I know sets their own prices. Yes, they discount some paperbacks. But I am pretty sure that every author I know sets their own prices. Can you show me where Amazon tells Amanda she must charge $3.99, and Joe has to charge $9.99?
Amazon suggests prices but they do not set them.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Can you show me where Amazon tells Amanda she must charge x, and Joe has to charge $9.99?


They have a program called "Select" where you must charge zero. And then Amazon decides how much you get later.

They also have another program called KDP where you are encouraged (I'm being generous) to charge between $2.99 and $9.99 And then you get to compete with the same book priced at zero.

Then Amazon decides how much you get later and blames it on the reader.

Amazon also advertises several dozen other products on your book page, all priced according to Amazon's wishes.

So, maybe you can show me where an author controls their price?

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> They have a program called "Select" where you must charge zero. And then Amazon decides how much you get later.
> 
> They also have another program called KDP where you are encouraged (I'm being generous) to charge between $2.99 and $9.99 And then you get to compete with the same book priced at zero.
> 
> Then Amazon decides how much you get later and blames it on the reader.
> 
> Amazon also advertises several dozen other products on your book page, all priced according to Amazon's wishes.
> 
> So, maybe you can show me where an author controls their price?


Please tell me when KDP Select became mandatory.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> They have a program called "Select" where you must charge zero. And then Amazon decides how much you get later.
> 
> They also have another program called KDP where you are encouraged (I'm being generous) to charge between $2.99 and $9.99 And then you get to compete with the same book priced at zero.
> 
> Then Amazon decides how much you get later and blames it on the reader.
> 
> Amazon also advertises several dozen other products on your book page, all priced according to Amazon's wishes.
> 
> So, maybe you can show me where an author controls their price?


I'm pretty sure it's on the second page of your book upload file. It's near the top and you can even pick your price in other countries. My books still cost money in Select, just FYI. The price is not set at zero.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Please tell me when KDP Select became mandatory.


Please tell me the last time Amazon did something beneficial for authors not in Select.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Monique, sorry, I just couldn't stand to look at the picture of tripe you posted.  :O  Plus it didn't really contribute to the conversation.

Betsy


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> They have a program called "Select" where you must charge zero. And then Amazon decides how much you get later.
> 
> They also have another program called KDP where you are encouraged (I'm being generous) to charge between $2.99 and $9.99 And then you get to compete with the same book priced at zero.
> 
> Then Amazon decides how much you get later and blames it on the reader.
> 
> Amazon also advertises several dozen other products on your book page, all priced according to Amazon's wishes.
> 
> So, maybe you can show me where an author controls their price?


So you are telling me that books in Select are all set at free. Last time I looked and I may be wrong but I know Amanda is in Select and her price is not free. I also know that unless she is running a special, I must pay $3.99 to buy her book. 
So your logic is not working because not every Amazon customer subscribes to KU. 
Oh and to borrow books as a customer I must give Amazon $10 a month. 
Now if you really think $10 = free, please come here cause I have some deals for you.


----------



## Monique

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Monique, sorry, I just couldn't stand to look at the picture you posted.
> 
> Betsy


How about this one? Different, but the same? 

_Um, no. Image removed. Let's keep it civil, OK? --Betsy_


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> Please tell me the last time Amazon did something beneficial for authors not in Select.


Amazon isn't obligated to do anything beneficial for you. They are not your friend. They are not a charity. You have a business relationship with them. You upload your books, they sell your books on their site, and you each get a cut. If you agree to give them exclusivity, then they give you more benefits. How is this shady?


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> So your logic is not working because not every Amazon customer subscribes to KU.


So Amanda's $3.99 book is competing with Amanda's free version in KU. Every potential buyer is put to that choice.

How is that logic working?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Monique said:


> How about this one? Different, but the same?


Um, no...


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I liked the tripe. I was considering ice cream before bed and that killed it. It was a great diet motivator.


----------



## Monique

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Um, no...


But he was smiling.

It's a commentary on the post and not the poster.



Amanda M. Lee said:


> I liked the tripe. I was considering ice cream before bed and that killed it. It was a great diet motivator.


You're welcome!


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> So Amanda's $3.99 book is competing with Amanda's free version in KU. Every potential buyer is put to that choice.
> 
> How is that logic working?


Quite well, thank you. I get solid borrows and sales every day.


----------



## Desert Rose

justphil said:


> So Amanda's $3.99 book is competing with Amanda's free version in KU. Every potential buyer is put to that choice.
> 
> How is that logic working?


I don't know about Amanda, and I am certainly not a big fish, but even with this "competition" about 1/3 of the units I move are sales, not borrows. So I'd say the logic is working pretty well.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I liked the tripe. I was considering ice cream before bed and that killed it. It was a great diet motivator.


Indeed.


----------



## Monique

There are some who are not in Select who still do all right.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> So Amanda's $3.99 book is competing with Amanda's free version in KU. Every potential buyer is put to that choice.
> 
> How is that logic working?


Then how come I consistently sell more units than I lend? How come even my KU titles get more sales than borrows?


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> How is this shady?


Only person using that word is you. Why so defensive? While we're at it, what exactly does Amazon do for their "cut?"



> Then how come I consistently sell more units than I lend? How come even my KU titles get more sales than borrows?


Clearly this is all about you. And before you accuse, no, I have no titles in Select. My self-hosted books outsell my Amazon books 30 to 1 and I get 100% of the royalty.

_Edited to remove reference to edited post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Monique said:


> But he was smiling.
> 
> It's a commentary on the post and not the poster.


Ah, Monique.... Sigh.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> Only person using that word is you. Why so defensive? While we're at it, what exactly does Amazon do for their "cut?"


Amazon sells your books on their site. What more do you expect them to do? That's what they do for their cut. It's the same thing EVERY vendor does for their cut.

And you don't need anyone discrediting your legitimate questions. You're doing that just fine on your own.

_Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> So Amanda's $3.99 book is competing with Amanda's free version in KU. Every potential buyer is put to that choice.
> 
> How is that logic working?


No. Every customer has the choice of whether to join KU and give Amazon $10 or not join KU and just buy books.
Rather like as an author, you have the choice of being exclusive or putting your books everywhere.
So no Amanda is not competing with herself. She is taking advantage of both borrows and sells/sales. 
I think she is doing good too.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> Only person using that word is you. Why so defensive? While we're at it, what exactly does Amazon do for their "cut?"
> 
> Clearly this is all about you. And before you accuse, no, I have no titles in Select. My self-hosted books outsell my Amazon books 30 to 1 and I get 100% of the royalty.


If you think Amazon does nothing for their cut I would suggest yanking your books off and never putting them back. You clearly feel they're ripping you off. Wouldn't that be the best course of action?

_Edited quoted post. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> If you think Amazon does nothing for their cut I would suggest yanking your books off and never putting them back.


You're six months late. After I saw what they did to our romance writer, I wouldn't publish a Chinese soup menu on Amazon.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> You're six months late. After I saw what they did to our romance writer, I wouldn't publish a Chinese soup menu on Amazon.


Then what do you care? You're not in KU, you're not even on Amazon anymore.


----------



## Monique

justphil said:


> You're six months late. After I saw what they did to our romance writer, I wouldn't publish a Chinese soup menu on Amazon.


And no longer selling on Amazon has increased this writer's income?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> You're six months late. After I saw what they did to our romance writer, I wouldn't publish a Chinese soup menu on Amazon.


So why do you care what other authors do on Amazon?


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Justphil -

You are mixing your facts up all over the place. On Amazon.com, books that in Kindle Unlimited are advertised as having a $0.00 cost, but ONLY for readers who are subscribers in the program. Quite frankly, this probably leads to MORE purchases for those books by readers NOT in KU because they click it, read it, and don't bother to return it because it was a title they wanted to read and most books are low enough in price that one accidental purchase of a book enjoyed doesn't break the bank.

KDP Select, an OPTIONAL program for publishers to trade exclusivity with Amazon for a 5 free days, a Kindle Countdown deal (reduce the price over up to 5 days after your price has been stable for at least 30 days) and participation in the Kindle Unlimited subscription program for increased visibility, and access to use Amazon's pay to play advertising program (which mostly does not work based on experiences shared here). In my opinion, Amazon has done MANY things to try to stop authors from just putting all of their books free or 99 cents. They could have allowed permafree set from the dashboard, but instead you HAVE to put the book free on a competitor's site, link to it, tell them, and they have to agree to price match it. They also added a Pricing Suggestion Tool that almost always recommends a $2.99 price point.

KDP is just a publishing platform. It is true that by the Terms and Conditions, Amazon has the right to change your price without your say so, BUT, unless they are price matching a lower price on a competing site, they have to PAY you like the price you set is what sold. So, the only time Amazon lowers the price is when they are price matching elsewhere. You can see this on my By Consequence of Marriage book, the list price is $8.24, but other venues have it at $6.99 and they are price matching. When readers buy it on Amazon, I am NOT getting a royalty based on $8.24, but $6.99. 

I am someone who has made my sales figures and strategies and numbers as public as I can since last summer. When I say that on my main name I have grown from 9% of my earnings coming from non-Amazon platforms to 15% in 3 months, I explain that these numbers represent a delta of a few more hundred dollars a month. When authors talk about "I've seen three times the sales going wide!!!" that doesn't help anyone. "Three times the sales" could be a difference of 1 sale to now seeing 3 sales, or a difference of having 1,000 sales and suddenly seeing 3,000 sales. 

It's just like the Amazon's email to announce this program . . . they've been touting 95% retention rate on KU, but they do so in a vague enough way that I have no idea how they calculate that. If 95% of authors stay in month-to-month, that's great. But what I suspect is MORE likely to be true is if you take the # of books going out and the # of new books coming in, you end up with at least a 95% "retention" of total titles month in and month out. And that's because authors rotate titles, and authors who are successful release even MORE titles into the program while those that are not pull their books one time. With those shorts that many people like to paint with a broad stroke, it's very easy for one author to put in 3 titles in one month to overcompensate for the author who is pulling 1 novel out. Etc. etc.

Anyway, I don't think I'm going to change your mind, and I'm sorry to pull a "OMG, someone is WRONG on the Internet" moment, but threads like this are often read by authors of all experience levels and putting out just factually wrong information won't help others coming months down the line. Anyone with experience in press releases, like Amazon's email, know that the language in those missives are always designed to put a sunny face on the darkest news. Usually, the most telling information is what's NOT in the email or press release rather than what's in it.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Then what do you care? You're not in KU, you're not even on Amazon anymore.


Clearly I should only be concerned for myself. After all, what business do I have being concerned for my fellow authors? How dare I!



> And no longer selling on Amazon has increased this writer's income?


Considering she now earns 18x the royalty, gets a steady stream of measurable traffic to her book pages and can't get shadowbanned by Amazon any more, yeah.



> but threads like this are often read by authors of all experience levels and putting out just factually wrong information won't help others coming months down the line


Relentlessly congratulating Amazon won't help them either. I'm posting my opinion. You're welcome to disagree, but there is nothing factually wrong about my viewpoint. This is a bad deal, it's been getting worse for years now, and there is nobody else even willing to question what they are allowed to keep any more. Don't you find it just a little alarming only one person is speaking up and everyone else in this thread is dogpiling and trying to shut them down?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Monique, Amanda, let's move on...  No more pics.

Thanks,

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## Monique

I haven't seen you this aggressive with squashing a little harmless fun in other threads. 

Sheesh.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> Clearly I should only be concerned for myself. After all, what business do I have being concerned for my fellow authors? How dare I!
> 
> Considering she now earns 18x the royalty, gets a steady stream of measurable traffic to her book pages and can't get shadowbanned by Amazon any more, yeah.


You're not concerned for other authors you're telling them how to think. Shouldn't authors be able to decide what works best for them? It's not your job to tell others what decisions to make. I'm quite happy with my decision.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

Darn. I _liked_ the picture of the haggis...


----------



## 75814

T. M. Bilderback said:


> Darn. I _liked_ the picture of the haggis...


Lies. No one likes the sight of haggis.


----------



## Gentleman Zombie

Wow what a HUGE thread.. I read as much as I could. 

After chatting with a few friends...who all write shorter works, I think we're going to see the following. 

- More Short Story Bundles: If you write in a genre that's friendly towards shorts - it's going to make sense to release those stories in bundles. 

- Serials are going to be just fine. In fact, this might turn out to be very beneficial for those writing popular series. 

- Internet Marketers will be forced to move on. This pretty much puts a nail in the coffin for IM scammers.. especially those who put terribly written shorts up for quick KU borrows. 

In the end - I think it's a "don't panic" situation. Write something and put it in KU to see what happens. You can always take it out if it's not working. 

For me, it's given me the kick in the pants to re-launch my writing efforts. 

Good luck all..


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

T. M. Bilderback said:


> Darn. I _liked_ the picture of the haggis...


I'm definitely not hungry. I am tired, though. I think I shall retire and dream of my $0 books. Night all.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> Oh, and if you do decide to leave Select, Amazon punishes you by flipping the switch and making all your book pages go dark. They also yank your book out of all the browse categories for you. I work alongside an author who experienced it first hand only a few months ago. Her entire library was thrown overboard almost to the day when she left Select. A previously steady history of three-figure sales every month went straight through the floor.


Can someone explain this to a newb? So if I opt into Select and then after 90 days opt out, is the poster saying Amazon will delete my sales history and remove me from all my selected categories? How has that not got more publicity?


----------



## Desert Rose

AliceWE said:


> Can someone explain this to a newb? So if I opt into Select and then after 90 days opt out, is the poster saying Amazon will delete my sales history and remove me from all my selected categories? How has that not got more publicity?


My first book is coming out of select in about 30 hours; I'll let you know if the blacklisting is real. I'm not terribly fussed by the possibility, though.


----------



## Monique

AliceWE said:


> Can someone explain this to a newb? So if I opt into Select and then after 90 days opt out, is the poster saying Amazon will delete my sales history and remove me from all my selected categories? How has that not got more publicity?


It's a very dramatic rendering. Some authors did see a dip in sales when they left the program, but there has been no conclusive evidene of any of his claims. In general, you do receive less exposure when you're not in Select. Added exposure is one of the perks of exclusivity.

But, no, as a rule Amazon does not flip a switch. The books do not go dark. They don't remove categories.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> How has that not got more publicity?


Take a look at this thread!

If you report that a previously very successful author (by her own standards, of course) suddenly found themselves shadowbanned and their sales turned down to zero, you get accused of being a conspiracy theorist or a liar. March, 2014 she sold 36 books and had a fair number of borrows. By July she was up over 100 a month. She left Select in December, just like I did. In March, 2015 she had three sales.

We have a number of theories about what happened, but what we do know is her flagship title was in no fewer than nine browse categories in November. It was in one in March, and she didn't change a thing.

But if you open your mouth, people around here will just dogpile and witch hunt and shout you down, so there you have it. Crabs in a bucket.


----------



## Shelley K

Perry Constantine said:


>


I have made that cat's face since about 11 am yesterday morning.

An awful lot of people don't even seem to understand the rules and policies of the systems they've been publishing within. I find that amazing.

The time to reevaluate, for me, will come mid-August when I have actual facts and figures to work with. Although I suppose when July comes and Amazon rolls out the new dashboard showing pages read (and breaking who knows what in the meantime), it'll be interesting, too.

People will roll with the changes or they won't. I plan to.


----------



## Cherise

justphil said:


> Take a look at this thread!
> 
> If you report that a previously very successful author (by her own standards, of course) suddenly found themselves shadowbanned and their sales turned down to zero, you get accused of being a conspiracy theorist or a liar. March, 2014 she sold 36 books and had a fair number of borrows. By July she was up over 100 a month. She left Select in December, just like I did. In March, 2015 she had three sales.
> 
> We have a number of theories about what happened, but what we do know is her flagship title was in no fewer than nine browse categories in November. It was in one in March, and she didn't change a thing.
> 
> But if you open your mouth, people around here will just dogpile and witch hunt and shout you down, so there you have it. Crabs in a bucket.


Come on. KBoards Writers' Cafe is big, but it does not control the whole Internet.


----------



## 75814

Cherise Kelley said:


> Come on. KBoards Writers' Cafe is big, but it does not control the whole Internet.


Clearly you missed the memo. YouTube's already surrendered and we invaded Reddit last week.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

AliceWE said:


> Can someone explain this to a newb? So if I opt into Select and then after 90 days opt out, is the poster saying Amazon will delete my sales history and remove me from all my selected categories? How has that not got more publicity?


No. That's not what happens. I pulled all of my JAFF out of Select Jan- March of this year, it did just FINE. 

One reason why it might appear that everything goes dark is Amazon has two major milestones in a book release's life. The 30 day Mark and the 90 day mark. Amazon actually uses these for lists, you can see it on the left hand side when you're shopping a keyword phrase or category on Amazon. If I put in "Pride and Prejudice Variation" for example and tell Amazon to search the Kindle Store, on the left hand side about half way down it says Refine By 
Last 30 days (19)
Last 90 Days (41)
Coming Soon (4)

That means a reader can click on the left and see JUST the books out in the last 30 days, just the books out in the last 90 days, or the 4 books with that keyword that are on preorder. These categories also determine if your book is emailed out as a "New from Author So and So" to the existing readers. After 90 days, Amazon NO LONGER considers you a New Release. And since many authors do one run in KDP Select (which is 90 days), they often attribute a loss of momentum to the pull out when it probably would have happened even if they stayed in because the 90 day new release period is over.

Another part of the equation is that there IS increased visibility being IN KDP Select, there are "Exclusive to Amazon" filters at the very bottom left of the Amazon sidebar, there is the fact that "ghost" borrows (where readers have clicked to borrow but not read anything yet) count immediately towards your sales ranking, and your Also Boughts are more than likely OTHER books in the KDP Select program. When you pull out of the program, they readers looking at your book may not be int he program, or they are KU subscribers and they pass you over because you'r enot included anymore. There is an adjustment period where your book needs to build links and Customer who Bought this might like: XYZ connections to books not in KDP Select.

Coincidentally, ANY major change you make to a book that is selling well, whether it's changing KDP Select status or changing the price or changing the keywords or ebook file can halt momentum and make sales suddenly take a nosedive. And that's because the digital bookstore isn't run by people recommending your book, but complex math equations based on all sorts of data unique to your book. You change that data, suddenly the robots have to reassess your book listing.


----------



## Shelley K

justphil said:


> Take a look at this thread!
> 
> If you report that a previously very successful author (by her own standards, of course) suddenly found themselves shadowbanned and their sales turned down to zero, you get accused of being a conspiracy theorist or a liar. March, 2014 she sold 36 books and had a fair number of borrows. By July she was up over 100 a month. She left Select in December, just like I did. In March, 2015 she had three sales.
> 
> We have a number of theories about what happened, but what we do know is her flagship title was in no fewer than nine browse categories in November. It was in one in March, and she didn't change a thing.
> 
> But if you open your mouth, people around here will just dogpile and witch hunt and shout you down, so there you have it. Crabs in a bucket.


All you'd have to do is contact the Author's Guild with some evidence. If it's anti-Amazon, they'll be all over it. Surely you want to get the story out in the media? Plenty of places happily came down against Amazon in their war with Hachette and other companies, and I'm sure they'd froth at the mouth at the idea of proving to the world that Amazon really is a big, bad, unfair marketplace.

If you're that concerned about it, why don't you contact them?


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> No. That's not what happens. I pulled all of my JAFF out of Select Jan- March of this year, it did just FINE.


You followed this sentence with four paragraphs explaining how a book might lose all its sales by leaving Select.

I'm talking about books with a 7-8 month sales history. It's not 30 days or 90 days. Its being dropped from eight browse categories and having perhaps a dozen sales for all of 2015 so far. The books didn't change. The author didn't change. The reviews didn't change. The prices didn't change.

Amazon changed. Amazon shadowbanned her because she took ownership of her book back.

She sold nearly 1000 books last year. Hasn't sold one on Amazon since May 10th.


----------



## Monique

The sad truth is that 100 books a month, while a good accomplishment and something to be proud of, isn't a significant amount of momentum in the sea of books on Amazon. It doesn't take much for that boat to spring a leak.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> It doesn't take much for that boat to spring a leak.


Color me shocked you think she's a loser, and that you're giving Amazon the unqualified benefit of the doubt. She built that sales momentum from a blank sheet of paper in four months.


----------



## NoCat

I agree with Monique. 100 books a month is nice and all, but a drop in the bucket and not enough to achieve significant visibility. That's the level of sales that can and likely will fade out without additional help like advertising and further books in a series.  That's not a conspiracy, that's reality.


----------



## sela

justphil said:


> You're six months late. After I saw what they did to our romance writer, I wouldn't publish a Chinese soup menu on Amazon.


KU did nothing for me and in fact, hurt my income so I was one of those higher selling romance authors who saw my income drop by 40% after KU was introduced and Amazon tweaked their algorithms.

My sales plummeted (from average 5K - 6k books a month to 3.2K) and rank fell in July / Aug when I went from 5 to 4 figures a month ($14K average to $8.5K average). I panicked and put all my books in KU and the loss of income on other channels was made up - barely - by income from borrows -- for a while. However, I stayed at around $8.5 - $9K a month so it did not boost my sales back up to previous levels. My books all sell for $4.99 a copy and I did not have enough borrows to make up for the loss in sales.

Once my books were eligible, I pulled all my titles out of KU and went wide. Best decision I ever made.

I made the first in both my series permafree and that made up for the loss of visibility due to pulling out of KU. And I did lose visibility when I pulled out of KU. Rank plummeted. Sales were lower.

Then, I was lucky to have Apple promote my series and had a bang-up 5-figure month ($22K) and then I started advertising on Facebook and had another bang-up 5-figure month ($24K) and then I had a free Bookbub and had another 5-figure month that was double the month before ($49.5K).

I read that email and was glad I didn't have to worry about it and I feel for everyone who is currently in KU and is worried. You really are at the whim of Amazon. I think they are trying to encourage people to come back in KU and reduce the number of "scam lets" but it will remain to be seen how it all shakes out. I guess I don't think an author should be paid based on how far the reader reads. Nope.

So KU was a wash for me. I'm wide and now my Apple revenue is 60% of Amazon revenue. I think Apple is quickly becoming the new kid on the block. Some people do well in KU under the old system and will do well under the new. It's not for everyone and wasn't for me. I think it is wise to be as nimble as possible and pivot when Amazon - or other retailers - present you with a new reality. For me, I will never go back all in to KDPS. There is no way Amazon alone could make up for the income I make on other retailers.


----------



## Monique

justphil said:


> Color me shocked you think she's a loser, and that you're giving Amazon the unqualified benefit of the doubt. She built that sales momentum from a blank sheet of paper in four months.


I didn't call her a loser. At all. I know how hard it is to build up from nothing and I know how easily it can fade. In the competitive landscape that is Amazon, 3 sales a day is hanging onto visibility with fingernails. It's precarious. It can slip through your fingers pretty quickly if momentum falls.

You're fighting shadows here.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

So why isn't Amazon shadowbanning me? I have PUBLIC threads detailing growth of my titles outside of KU. 

The point is, pulling out of KDP Select by itself is not the reason your sales tanked. Now, when her book came out of the program, some glitch might have happened, but being in EIGHT browsing categories is an awful lot of categories. And if they ALL went away, something happened with her keywords. All she has to do is email them and find out what's going on. Not knowing the genre (you say romance, but if it was erotic romance with any kind of taboo subject matter, then maybe the book has the adult tag?).

Anyway, you don't give any information and since you can't even get the details straight about long established programs on Amazon, please forgive me if I don't just take your word that the facts are just as you lay them out.

It's 1:44 AM where I am, stupid insomnia from stress. The movers come tomorrow to pack us up. I hope everyone has a nice rest of the day/evening, I'm going to try to get some sleep. I'll be careful to put my own tinfoil hat that I wear sometimes safely in the drawer.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> March, 2014 she sold 36 books...In March, 2015 she had three sales.


What I know fits on a postage stamp, so I'm just musing aloud here. But firstly, is selling 36 books/month considered "good"? I've hung out here for a wee while now and I've seen the stats some of the veterans share, I would have thought you would need to be selling over 1,000/month to say you were doing good?

Secondly, I'm not sure if dropping from 36 to 3 sales/month can be categorically pinned as being punished by Amazon? It just sounds like a natural slump?

And anything is just speculation when allegations are made anonymously, I bet I'm not the only one thinking "link to the book concerned please"...


----------



## Rykymus

Sorry, Phil, but what you're posting doesn't support Amazon 'flipped a switch' to punish you or your author. And the fact that you went from describing it as 'going dark' (which most people would interpret as 'the book is no longer available anywhere on Amazon') and then simply described going from 100 to 3 sales per month as the 'punishment' the vendor inflicted upon you (quite a bit different than 'going dark' I'd say) is why nobody believes you.

Perhaps, if you'd simply state your case in clear and concise facts, without the emotion, and allow people to draw their own conclusions instead of shouting that we're all a bunch of dopes that have been hood-winked by Amazon (and yes, I'm paraphrasing) people might actually take you seriously. If indeed, you truly care about other authors (which if true I commend you for) then doing as I described above would be far more helpful to them.

Just for the record, other than a brief, disastrous, stint earlier this year, I have been exclusive with Amazon since I started in December of 2011. If I'm being hoodwinked by Amazon, that's fine, because they've taken me from barely able to pay my rent to earning half a million per year in only 3 years. If that's being a sucker, I'm happy to be one.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> "link to the book concerned please"...


Given the general candor on Writer's Cafe and the many other authors I've been warned by about this place, I'd say that would be the worst advice to follow.



> quite a bit different than 'going dark' I'd say


If you turn a rheostat from 100 to 3, what would you call that? Aggravated dimness?


----------



## vlmain

a_g said:


> I have to wonder, will they show these new page counts totals for individual works so that we can have an idea of how far into the book a reader read if they don't make it to 100%?


I am curious about that, too. That would be an incredibly useful tool for us if they did.


----------



## NoCat

What do books have to do with electric regulators? We're writers, not engineers or electricians or mechanics. Geez.


----------



## Monique

Is this an author you know or one you represented/published?


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> What do books have to do with electric regulators? We're writers


Who apparently can't recognize a metaphor.


----------



## NoCat

Technically, that's an analogy, I think.


----------



## vlmain

drno said:


> No, I mean if someone reads Look Inside, which is 10 percent of the book, decides to borrow your book, he will obviously not begin at page 1. He will start reading where the Look Inside ends.


I wonder how many people read the entire Look Inside section. I use the Look Inside feature a lot, especially if it's an author I am unfamiliar with, but I usually don't read the entire thing. I just want a quick look to make sure they know how to spell and punctuate, and to get a feel for their voice. Typically, I would read only a page or two. I wonder how many others do the same. Also, I don't think I have ever started reading a book from the point where I left off in the Look Inside. It could be because there is often a long period of time between buying the book and sitting down to read it.


----------



## Monique

Annie B said:


> Technically, that's an analogy, I think.


----------



## susan_illene

vlmain said:


> I wonder how many people read the entire Look Inside section. I use the Look Inside feature a lot, especially if it's an author I am unfamiliar with, but I usually don't read the entire thing. I just want a quick look to make sure they know how to spell and punctuate, and to get a feel for their voice. Typically, I would read only a page or two. I wonder how many others do the same. Also, I don't think I have ever started reading a book from the point where I left off in the Look Inside. It could be because there is often a long period of time between buying the book and sitting down to read it.


I'm actually one of those people who will read a whole sample (if the book is good), buy it, and go straight to the spot I left off rather than starting over again. But if they hooked me enough to read the whole sample then I'm too impatient to wait on buying it. I don't use KU, though. If I did I might not bother with samples if I could just borrow it.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Technically, that's an analogy, I think.


All metaphors are analogies.


----------



## NoCat

Phil, Amazon didn't bulldoze you or anyone else. You had a book that sold a tiny amount and after a while it sold even less. That's reality, not Amazon.

Instead of blaming someone else, perhaps examine why that book didn't sell well in the first place? I'm sorry, 36 copies of a book in a month is not success, not if you want long-term visibility and readership.

That's not on Amazon, that's on you as the author or publisher.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Let's  get back on topic, folks...

Betsy


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> If you turn a rheostat from 100 to 3, what would you call that? Aggravated dimness?


Well if you're talking book sales, and given your timeframe is a 12 months, I call that a book dropping into obscurity on its own.

I call it not releasing another book (thanks to the b-boards I'm learning about how you need regular releases to maintain momentum). I also call it a book not being promoted or advertised by the author. I would also look at its cover, blurb and sample and ask "is this book meeting genre expectations?"


----------



## Shelley K

When you pull a book out of Select, you no longer get the benefit of a borrow boosting rank at the time of the borrow. That's independent of being paid for them getting to 10%--when a book is borrowed, it registers similar to a sale in that the rank improves. Doesn't matter if the person never opens it. There are debates about whether it equals a whole sale or a portion of one, but there's a boost. 

So a book that leaves Select no longer gets those borrow boosts in rank, which makes visibility less likely. Which is why so many books not in Select took a hit when KU was rolled out. Books in Select got the borrow rankings boosts that they didn't and zoomed above them. 

It's not a secret, or something insidious, or shadowbanning. It's simply how the algorithms work, for better or worse. It's certainly nothing personal. But if you believe it is and your author's been targeted, take it to the media. As I said upthread, plenty of outlets will pee themselves to show the world how horrible Amazon is. Give them your story. And evidence. 

As far as the coming change, I'm looking forward to July's dashboard, though not the other problems the new dash will undoubtedly cause. I am hoping for a tally of borrows and pages read, because that's great info to have. But I'm not holding my breath for the number of borrows. Pages read will probably have to do.


----------



## vlmain

Crenel said:


> Associating length with value is opinion, not logic. It's not like eating, to use an example much earlier in this thread -- readers want a good story, not a "more is better" fulfillment. I once bought the _Red Mars_/_Green Mars_/_Blue Mars_ trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. Very long work. Did not finish. I've read short-short stories from indies that I found _vastly_ more enjoyable than trying to push my way through that _Mars_ trilogy.
> 
> Yes, it probably costs more to edit a 120K word book than a 10K word short story. The rest of your calculation is arguable at best.


Exactly! X 10



Crenel said:


> And on another note, it's really sad to see people lumping short story writers, en masse, in with scammers, as if we're "cheating the system." I write short stories for the same reason I write novels: I want to tell an entertaining story. I've _never_ written something to "game" Amazon's system or any other system.


I am a huge fan of short stories and really admire short story writers. Although I read a lot of shorts, most of what I write is longer. I have written only enough shorts to know how freaking hard it is. In fact, one of the shorts I wrote several years ago took me much longer to finish than my last book did, so it's really disheartening to see short story writers being treated as though they don't work just as hard or bring as much value to the reader. They do.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Today I realized another negative to this change. I've been developing a tracking system for books that "understands" sales, freebies, and "pseudosales" (KU/KOLL)... but those are all based on books as the unit of measure. Not pages. Even though that system is only for my own use, at least for now, this might affect other tools that take the same structural approach of using the book as the basic unit.

To handle this change, it would have to handle a blend of units. The book-as-unit is still valid in most places, so it can't be discarded, but page-as-unit must be added in some sensible manner. IOW, ideally not just tacked on. My children's book dropped out of KDP Select this week and I've decided not to enroll it, but I still have a couple other titles that will be in the program past the start date of this change. If I get any borrows/reads before they also drop out of Select, then I have a structural puzzle to resolve. Hmm...


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> So a book that leaves Select no longer gets those borrow boosts in rank, which makes visibility less likely.


How encouraging to finally hear a contrary opinion.

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Monique

justphil said:


> How encouraging to finally hear a contrary opinion.


And no one here has denied that books in Select get added exposure. That's one of the perks for giving them exclusivity. It's not hidden or a conspiracy or "shadow". It's an upfront part of the deal. Everyone here, no matter how they feel about Select knows that.

_Edited quoted post and response to removed bit. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> How encouraging to finally hear a contrary opinion.


Also, you might want to try reading Shelley's entire post. Particularly this part:



Shelley K said:


> It's not a secret, or something insidious, or shadowbanning. It's simply how the algorithms work, for better or worse. It's certainly nothing personal.


This is what everyone has been saying. Shadowbanning is not real. I can still locate all my non-KU books through browsing. My non-KU books still sell. Some sell even better than my KU titles.

_Edited quoted post and response to removed bit. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## Douglas E Wright

I doubt you will tell anything about # of pages read with the new system. It will be total number of pages per title per month, not total pages per book per month.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

Why don't you show me where Amazon publicly announces being in Select will get your book more exposure and also admits when your book isn't in Select it gets less?

Because if they don't announce that publicly and leave it up to the author to discover why their book's sales dropped *90%* weeks after leaving Select, I'd call that negligent at best and deceptive at worst. It certainly does nothing to encourage me to trust them, especially when they are now making yet _another_ change to the Select program including yet _another_ change in the royalty structure when KU isn't even a year old yet.

At any rate, the page after page of above replies where you and others accused me of being a liar stands in stark contrast to the now general consensus that Amazon *does* in fact automatically alter your book's visibility after it leaves Select. Doesn't it?


----------



## ufwriter

The reason the book's visibility is altered is because you are no longer getting borrows. Borrows boost rank just like sales do. There is nothing deceptive about this. If you remove those borrows from the equation, of course rank will drop.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> I have a better question. Why don't you show me where Amazon publicly announces being in Select will get your book more exposure and also admits when your book isn't in Select it gets less?
> 
> Because if they don't announce that publicly and leave it up to the author to discover why their book's sales dropped *90%* weeks after leaving Select, I'd call that negligent at best and deceptive at worst. It certainly does nothing to encourage me to trust them, especially when they are now making yet _another_ change to the Select program including yet _another_ change in the royalty structure when KU isn't even a year old yet.
> 
> At any rate, the page after page of above replies where you and others accused me of being a liar stands in stark contrast to the now general consensus that Amazon *does* in fact automatically alter your book's visibility after it leaves Select. Doesn't it?


Being in Select does not guarantee higher rankings. Leaving Select doesn't guarantee a lack of visibility. My KU titles are actually ranked lower than my non-KU ones. If your logic were true, my KU titles would be ranked higher. So why is it the opposite? Why does Sean Platt and Johnny B. Truant's non-KU sci-fi title rank higher than my KU sci-fi title?

No one's calling you a liar, just like no one called your friend a loser (again, provide proof to back up these accusations). We're calling you an exaggerator. Provide some proof to back up your claim. Just because your friend's book went from 36 copies to 0 doesn't prove a conspiracy. I've had drops like that, too. With titles that were still enrolled in KU. So explain that.


----------



## dianasg

justphil said:


> I have a better question. Why don't you show me where Amazon publicly announces being in Select will get your book more exposure and also admits when your book isn't in Select it gets less?


http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,190271.0.html

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,190212.0.html

_Edited. PM me if you have any questions. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## NoCat

My books aren't in Select and have great visibility. So... clearly it isn't either/or. So why would Amazon say it is?

If you have a book that gets borrowed more than it sells, you will be more visible if you have the book in Select. If you take that book out, you will lose the borrows and thereby lose the visibility. Instead of thinking this is some huge conspiracy, perhaps you should figure out how to replace those borrows with sales (running ads usually helps) or decide that hey, for this particular title, Select is the wiser choice. It's called making business decisions, no conspiracy needed.


----------



## VEVO

Annie B said:


> Phil, Amazon didn't bulldoze you or anyone else. You had a book that sold a tiny amount and after a while it sold even less. That's reality, not Amazon.


Spot on.

March 2014: 36 books sold (about 80,000 rank give or take)
July 2014: over 100 books sold (best month) (about 40,000 rank, give or take) 
March 2015: 3 books sold (about 500,000 rank give or take)

It just a progression of a book sales over time.

There are 2 million ebooks that sold less than 3 a month. Amazon has something like 3-4 million ebooks for purchase last time I look. Only a small % of them are selling more than 30 books a month.


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## Kenson

a_g said:


> I have to wonder, will they show these new page counts totals for individual works so that we can have an idea of how far into the book a reader read if they don't make it to 100%?


I don't think the page count totals are going to help in this respect. If you've got a 100 page book and Amazon says your pages read is 100, is that one person who's read the whole book or 5 people who just read the first 20 pages?


----------



## C. Rysalis

I'm now considering KU for the first time ever, I'm just waiting to see what the page payout turns out to be. Hey, that rhymes!


----------



## Anna Drake

Douglas E Wright said:


> I doubt you will tell anything about # of pages read with the new system. It will be total number of pages per title per month, not total pages per book per month.


I will miss knowing how many of my books have been borrowed.


----------



## sd59

what happens if along with this payout change, Amazon changes the KU subscription plan too in a couple of months by removing the borrow limit of 10 books for subscribers and allowing readers to truly borrow unlimited books (or may be increase the limit to 100 or 1000)

This way the reader wins - can borrow a huge number of books without the extra step of bothering to return them to borrow more than 10
Amazon wins - they get away by not having to pay for all those unread borrows but pay only for the pages read 
Authors win - all types of authors win barring those who were till now getting their books to be borrowed but readers were not reading them much
KU wins - the subscription plan gets more popular resulting in more borrows even though book sales might take a hit

Or may be Amazon launches a new subscription plan where the reader pays only by the number of pages read.


----------



## Julia Kavan

Anna Drake said:


> I will miss knowing how many of my books have been borrowed.


We are being paid per page read, not after the book has been read to a certain point, which is when it currently registers on the graph....Maybe - just maybe - borrows will still show up on the graph but as soon as they are borrowed, rather than when the reader reaches 10% as they do now?


----------



## Guest

JUST had a brain wave.
OK, I put my stuff in KU, give it 90 days and see how it does, and then pull out if its bad? Err....NO!  Leave them in, so people who buy books and are not in KU, will SEE your work. And you make a few pence from borrows on the side. The main up-shoot of KU is not a money thing but visibility. Of course I am talking about a NEW author, like me. If you have a mass following then I'm sure you have to re-think your business, but hey, you already make the money I dream about so whatever I will experiment and just start my snowball, then adjust if and when I need to. All this panic is stupid ( my initial reaction included ) We have to see what happens and keep writing. May actually be a blessing for the good writers, including shorts, less dross means less books means higher vis?
BTW, stop picking on each other, its getting too crazy in here. Like an emo forum from 2003 or something. All taking pot-shots. Be nice. Understand that some folk are just frustrated, that's all. It will calm down soon and we will all get used to it. Just keep the art flowing. x
Oh and its my birthday! Any big time authors wanna wire me 10,000 dollars?


----------



## Guest

Anna Drake said:


> I will miss knowing how many of my books have been borrowed.


Nobody in this thread knows for sure. Just wait for the factual information from Amazon.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Andrew Murray said:


> Oh and its my birthday! Any big time authors wanna wire me 10,000 dollars?


I'm not a big time author, sadly I don't have $10,000 to spare, but I can send you 10,000 birthday wishes for an awesome day. .... there, I sent them telepathically, they should arrive . . . up, there they are!

Happy Birthday.


----------



## Guest

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I'm not a big time author, sadly I don't have $10,000 to spare, but I can send you 10,000 birthday wishes for an awesome day. .... there, I sent them telepathically, they should arrive . . . up, there they are!
> 
> Happy Birthday.


ha-ha, that's awesome, thank you!


----------



## Guest

Andrew Murray said:


> BTW, stop picking on each other, its getting too crazy in here. Like an emo forum from 2003 or something. All taking pot-shots. Be nice. Understand that some folk are just frustrated, that's all. It will calm down soon and we will all get used to it. Just keep the art flowing. x
> Oh and its my birthday! Any big time authors wanna wire me 10,000 dollars?


Happy Birthday, Andrew! It's my birthday today, too. Let's enjoy our day!


----------



## sd59

Kenson said:


> I don't think the page count totals are going to help in this respect. If you've got a 100 page book and Amazon says your pages read is 100, is that one person who's read the whole book or 5 people who just read the first 20 pages?


I don't think Amazon is going to provide break up of how many people read how many pages but more likely, it is going to be a daily number of total pages read (similar to the number of borrows currently being shown)


----------



## Guest

Jolie du Pre said:


> Happy Birthday, Andrew! It's my birthday today, too. Let's enjoy our day!


Cheers!!!!!!  happy birthday to you!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Happy birthday, Andrew and Jolie!

Betsy


----------



## GeneDoucette

Annie B said:


> Your book, no matter the length, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it.


^^this


----------



## Sapphire

KU is less than one year old. BEFORE KU, if a writer wrote a short and priced it at 99 cents, they received 35 cent royalty on each sale. This hasn't changed. In KU, they received 1.30-1.35 if a reader exceeded 10%. Now in July 2015 the KU payout changes. Let's assume a one cent per page payout (wild assumption because we have no clue!). The fully-read 40-page short will pay out 40 cents in KU. Yes, it's far less than 1.35. However, the sky didn't fall. The writer is 5 cents better off than a year ago when the only royalty available was .35 for a sale, not even counting the additional readers KU produced. What I'm saying is this past year was a temporary deviation. Instead of bemoaning what Amazon is doing in July 2015, consider saying thanks for the one-year gift that came in July 2014.

The BIG unknown for all writers, shorts - novels - epics, is how much of the books do our readers actually complete. Do they finish them or toss them aside? This is information we've never had. Talk about a dose of reality!


----------



## anniejocoby

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> No. That's not what happens. I pulled all of my JAFF out of Select Jan- March of this year, it did just FINE.
> 
> One reason why it might appear that everything goes dark is Amazon has two major milestones in a book release's life. The 30 day Mark and the 90 day mark. Amazon actually uses these for lists, you can see it on the left hand side when you're shopping a keyword phrase or category on Amazon. If I put in "Pride and Prejudice Variation" for example and tell Amazon to search the Kindle Store, on the left hand side about half way down it says Refine By
> Last 30 days (19)
> Last 90 Days (41)
> Coming Soon (4)
> 
> That means a reader can click on the left and see JUST the books out in the last 30 days, just the books out in the last 90 days, or the 4 books with that keyword that are on preorder. These categories also determine if your book is emailed out as a "New from Author So and So" to the existing readers. After 90 days, Amazon NO LONGER considers you a New Release. And since many authors do one run in KDP Select (which is 90 days), they often attribute a loss of momentum to the pull out when it probably would have happened even if they stayed in because the 90 day new release period is over.
> 
> Another part of the equation is that there IS increased visibility being IN KDP Select, there are "Exclusive to Amazon" filters at the very bottom left of the Amazon sidebar, there is the fact that "ghost" borrows (where readers have clicked to borrow but not read anything yet) count immediately towards your sales ranking, and your Also Boughts are more than likely OTHER books in the KDP Select program. When you pull out of the program, they readers looking at your book may not be int he program, or they are KU subscribers and they pass you over because you'r enot included anymore. There is an adjustment period where your book needs to build links and Customer who Bought this might like: XYZ connections to books not in KDP Select.
> 
> Coincidentally, ANY major change you make to a book that is selling well, whether it's changing KDP Select status or changing the price or changing the keywords or ebook file can halt momentum and make sales suddenly take a nosedive. And that's because the digital bookstore isn't run by people recommending your book, but complex math equations based on all sorts of data unique to your book. You change that data, suddenly the robots have to reassess your book listing.


Dayum, Elizabeth, you're making too much sense as usual.  Thanks for shutting down the conspiracy theories with solid facts and logic. That's much appreciated here, especially in a topic as emotional as this one is.


----------



## Guest

Crenel said:


> My children's book dropped out of KDP Select this week and I've decided not to enroll it, but I still have a couple other titles that will be in the program past the start date of this change.


You're not swayed by this?

This standardized approach allows us to identify pages in a way that works across genres and devices. Non-text elements within books including images, charts and graphs will count toward a book's KENPC.

https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A156OS90J7RDN


----------



## Gone To Croatan

Sapphire said:


> BEFORE KU, if a writer wrote a short and priced it at 99 cents, they received 35 cent royalty on each sale. This hasn't changed. In KU, they received 1.30-1.35 if a reader exceeded 10%. Now in July 2015 the KU payout changes. Let's assume a one cent per page payout (wild assumption because we have no clue!). The fully-read 40-page short will pay out 40 cents in KU. Yes, it's far less than 1.35. However, the sky didn't fall. The writer is 5 cents better off than a year ago when the only royalty available was .35 for a sale, not even counting the additional readers KU produced


Why do people have this idea that everyone prices their shorts at $0.99? Most of my short sales have been at $1.99, and most of the threads I've read here about writing shorts suggested charging $2.99 for some genres, like erotica. Heck, last time I checked the 'what should I charge for my ebook?' tool on KDP, it said I should raise my SF short prices to $2.99, though I can't believe that would really work.

Erotica is probably one of the big markets for KU, and going from $2 for a sale or $1.30 for a borrow to $0.40 for a borrow will be a bit of a hit.


----------



## cinisajoy

Edward M. Grant said:


> Why do people have this idea that everyone prices their shorts at $0.99? Most of my short sales have been at $1.99, and most of the threads I've read here about writing shorts suggested charging $2.99 for some genres, like erotica. Heck, last time I checked the 'what should I charge for my ebook?' tool on KDP, it said I should raise my SF short prices to $2.99, though I can't believe that would really work.
> 
> Erotica is probably one of the big markets for KU, and going from $2 for a sale or $1.30 for a borrow to $0.40 for a borrow will be a bit of a hit.


Hey, hi. How are you? Perhaps you could share some brews in this thread. They seem to be needed.


----------



## Guest

Quote:
*"Your book, no matter the length, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it." *

Not true in the case of a borrow, which is what this discussion is all about.
The reader is paying a subscription and Amazon determines what your book is worth.

And Amazon (not the reader) keeps changing what your book is worth.


----------



## vlmain

justphil said:


> I'm talking about books with a 7-8 month sales history. It's not 30 days or 90 days. Its being dropped from eight browse categories and having perhaps a dozen sales for all of 2015 so far. The books didn't change. The author didn't change. The reviews didn't change. The prices didn't change.
> 
> Amazon changed. Amazon shadowbanned her because she took ownership of her book back.


One of my books has been in Select for over a year. It started with a few sales, then it grew exponentially without any promotion on my part. Then it peaked. Then the sales started to go down a little. Then they went down exponentially despite the promotional efforts on my part.

It happens. It has nothing to do with leaving Select, or being targeted by Amazon. Books have a life cycle, and sales will eventually dwindle unless you continue to add to your catalog of titles. My sales dried up because that book has been the only title under that author name for over a year. That's not Amazon's doing. That's my fault for not continuing to publish under that name. Instead, I started publishing under a couple different pen names, and those titles are doing fine.

The ugly truth that all writers will eventually need to come to terms with is that Amazon isn't responsible for selling your books for you, nor are they a magic bullet. They are a marketplace. They offer a lot of tools for *you* to use to promote your own books. Yes, they often promote titles through their own marketing programs, but you have to understand they are marketing themselves, not you. They are using your titles to draw people to *their* business. They don't market you the way a publisher would market you. They are one gigantic consignment shop and they couldn't care less whether the title a customer buys is yours or mine. They only care that _something_ sells.

So, if you and your friend are depending on Amazon to sell your books, I'm afraid you are in for a serious disappointment.


----------



## Colin

Now your page turner could also be a page earner.


----------



## NoCat

Okey Dokey said:


> Quote:
> *"Your book, no matter the length, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it." *
> 
> Not true in the case of a borrow, which is what this discussion is all about.
> The reader is paying a subscription and Amazon determines what your book is worth.
> 
> And Amazon (not the reader) keeps changing what your book is worth.


Actually it is still true, only money becomes secondary to time. A 50 page book that someone wants to read will make more money than a 500 page book nobody wants. Length isn't a predictor of profit. Reader desire is.


----------



## lamaha

> I'm going to go with Rykmus on this one. It is true that, for a given author, that author will take longer to write a 100,000 word book than a 10,000 word book. So, why on earth should that author expect to be paid the same amount of money for his 100,000 book as his 10,000 word book? One of the books probably took him 10x longer to write. It makes perfect sense to be paid by the page.





ruecole said:


> Maybe to type, but maybe not. Some authors can take years to write (and rewrite and rewrite) a 10K word book. So why should they be penalized because of a shorter word or page count?


In the top quote, the poster was speaking of ONE author's work: a 100,000 word book and a 10,000 word book. So, that single author should very well expect more for the longer work. 
In your example, you are referring to a_ different_ writer -- one who is slower than average. And yes, it's unfortunate to be slow in this business -- but that's the case in every single profession. That's simply modern life; and sometimes the price is quality, sometimes not.

That's unfortunate for slower writers, but the world is not going to adapt to please them. Nobody is deliberately penalising them. They have to either learn to write faster, or accept the consequences of being a slow writer. I have a day job and can only write for 90 minutes a day, before work. That means I can't produce as much as I did when I wrote full time, and thus my publishing rate is slower. I'm not going to accuse anyone of penalising me.

My trade published books definitely took a hit when KU first started a year ago. Now, I have a 300 page Self-published book which I had taken off Select; I put it back on because I think it might do well. The pendulum swings the other way! we have to roll with the punches; Nobody is owed a living as a writer.

What we all should be doing -- whether we write long or short -- is do our best and not depend on Amazon staying the same forever.


----------



## KelliWolfe

Edward M. Grant said:


> Why do people have this idea that everyone prices their shorts at $0.99? Most of my short sales have been at $1.99, and most of the threads I've read here about writing shorts suggested charging $2.99 for some genres, like erotica. Heck, last time I checked the 'what should I charge for my ebook?' tool on KDP, it said I should raise my SF short prices to $2.99, though I can't believe that would really work.
> 
> Erotica is probably one of the big markets for KU, and going from $2 for a sale or $1.30 for a borrow to $0.40 for a borrow will be a bit of a hit.


What you'll see happen in that case is that all of the erotica authors will pull their stories out of KU in very short order - except for the content farmers/scammers/plagiarists, who can churn out enough cheap pages that it's still worthwhile for them. But those of us actually writing aren't going to accept that level of remuneration for the massive amounts of crap we have to deal with from Amazon. At that payout rate it's no longer worth it, and I'm confident enough that Amazon is pulling another KU bait and switch (like they did with the massively inflated estimates of what borrows would be worth when the program started) that I've already removed the auto-renew for Select from all of my stories except the ones that can't be published elsewhere because of content restrictions.


----------



## Rykymus

To expound on OkeyDokey's point. (Which I believe is accurate.)

I dislike the mysterious shifting payout rate model that Amazon uses, and I hope that someday, they fix that as well. However, it is Amazon's business, and they have the right to run how they see fit. As a supplier, I have the right to refuse their terms and go elsewhere. And a mathematical equation can't tell you whether or not you should or should not accept Amazon's terms and enroll in KDP and/or Select/KU. There are variables involved that can't be quantified with equations. Those are the variables that each person has to analyze for themselves.

We are not slaves. We are entrepreneurs. We control our own destinies. We must be wise, and make decisions with our heads, and not our hearts, and we must be ready to shift on a moment's notice. Such is the nature of the digital self-publishing business, and it is definitely not for the weak of heart.


----------



## gorvnice

Rykymus said:


> Such is the nature of the digital self-publishing business, and it is definitely not for the weak of heart.


Amen. And Amen.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

KelliWolfe said:


> What you'll see happen in that case is that all of the erotica authors will pull their stories out of KU in very short order - except for the content farmers/scammers/plagiarists, who can churn out enough cheap pages that it's still worthwhile for them. But those of us actually writing aren't going to accept that level of remuneration for the massive amounts of crap we have to deal with from Amazon. At that payout rate it's no longer worth it, and I'm confident enough that Amazon is pulling another KU bait and switch (like they did with the massively inflated estimates of what borrows would be worth when the program started) that I've already removed the auto-renew for Select from all of my stories except the ones that can't be published elsewhere because of content restrictions.


I think you will be surprised at all the erotica that will remain in KU. I have a really old pen name that's all erotica and I have no intention of taking it out. I will bet others are a lot like me. It's not scraped or plagiarized. I'm leaving it in, though, because it's passive income. I don't make a lot from it but it's not worth moving to me.


----------



## KelliWolfe

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I think you will be surprised at all the erotica that will remain in KU. I have a really old pen name that's all erotica and I have no intention of taking it out. I will bet others are a lot like me. It's not scraped or plagiarized. I'm leaving it in, though, because it's passive income. I don't make a lot from it but it's not worth moving to me.


OK, but you're a very special case. Most people writing erotica are not in your situation. They depend on that income stream, and if Amazon guts it with massively lowered payouts they're not going to continue in KU. They will have to go back to publishing wide in hopes of recouping sales dollar losses through other channels.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

KelliWolfe said:


> OK, but you're a very special case. Most people writing erotica are not in your situation. They depend on that income stream, and if Amazon guts it with massively lowered payouts they're not going to continue in KU. They will have to go back to publishing wide in hopes of recouping sales dollar losses through other channels.


Aren't erotica writers exactly where they were before KU? A lot of erotica was in Select then and writers will still get added money off borrows. I'm not saying a lot won't pull out. I'm just saying a lot will stay in, too.


----------



## Monique

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Aren't erotica writers exactly where they were before KU? A lot of erotica was in Select then and writers will still get added money off borrows. I'm not saying a lot won't pull out. I'm just saying a lot will stay in, too.


I think a lot will stay, at least in the short term. And they do seem to be where they were before KU, but the gravy train of the last yearish will hurt when it stops running so smoothly.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals

Before KU, people were already slowly getting out of short erotica because the market was glutted, bundles were starting to go for 99 cents. 

Edit: added "short" to clarify. Longer form erotica/erotic romance are a different market.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

drno said:


> You're not swayed by this?
> 
> [...]Non-text elements within books including images, charts and graphs will count toward a book's KENPC.


No, not really. I may be wrong in my analysis, but after considering their technical options for making that happen (and of course it's possible I've missed something), I see one of two results. One, books that are primarily illustrations with little text will be calculated to be a small fraction of their actual pages. Alternatively, Amazon will open a huge hole for scammers to abuse the system. The former seems most likely to me, and it will virtually eliminate any revenue for affected books, so I started going wide this week.

Luckily for me, this has little impact on me because I only have one book that fits the pattern (and my sales are generally a joke anyway, across all of my books), but I feel bad for those who have more such books... especially any who aren't connected to an informed community of writers like this one and don't see the trouble brewing for their income.


----------



## Someone

What's lost in the shuffle is that this program, with the exception of how they are going to deal with children's books, only  targets one kind of books. 
It targets unread books - unread books everyone had to split the pot with. 
So I hate to tell ya, but the erotica books villain some of ya want killed aint coming close to dying. The villains are read and read to the end.

Erotica authors
Don't panic. There is no reason to. We, as writers of a genre, are very prolific authors. We also know, by past publishing practices, that a collection of erotica works are read through incredibly fast - the people who will leave reviews on erotica have told us that for years. It is RARE, RARE, RARE that one will read an erotica review that includes DNF. Very rare.

The kind of books that are going to be hit are DNF books. Personally I'd stop jostling windmills and try to get a DNF gauge of myself and authors in my genre. I've done that and as long as I/we can continue to get my/our books in front of eyes, my and my brethren's money will be continued to be made.


EDIT to add
Yoda, you are going to make bank. Like need semi-trucks to haul it kinda bank. I am absolutely thrilled for you. Times a million. You do what needs to be done with a book - you entertain people.


----------



## IreneP

My thought is that Amazon will be paying out around the same money or possibly slightly less for the same overall amount of reader engagement. I think we may see a pretty big shake-up in who is getting the money, though. Obviously authors who write longer and can hold reader attention to the end stand to see a gain. Anyone who has been making bank off getting people to download a short and read a couple of pages to 10% before ditching is in trouble.

We all know there were scammers playing the 10% system. I'm sorry to say, there are some dedicated short story writers who are also probably going to be hit by this, though. If you don't know which category you are in, you might be about to find out.


----------



## KelliWolfe

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Aren't erotica writers exactly where they were before KU? A lot of erotica was in Select then and writers will still get added money off borrows. I'm not saying a lot won't pull out. I'm just saying a lot will stay in, too.


Not hardly.

Before KU there was zero incentive for erotica authors to go into Select. It didn't offer us anything. At the time Kobo and Google were much better markets than they are today, and hardly anyone got KOLL borrows. Free promo days were a joke because you could just get Amazon to price match titles set to free on other channels. All anyone cared about was actual sales - at $2.99.

When KU came out the number of borrows was high enough at the $1.50 price point to make it worthwhile to go into Select for a lot of people. Not all of us, but for a lot of people. Others saw their sales tank and the borrows never remotely made up the difference. But at 1 or 2 cents per page it will no longer worth the effort of dealing with Amazon's BS to write/publish erotica unless you are moving a massive number of copies - or if you don't actually need the income.

I'm personally taking this as the handwriting on the wall that short erotica is done and it's time to jump ship. I am already in the process of deprecating my current catalog and shifting into longer novel and novella length romance anyway, so I don't consider it a disaster. It's just going to make things tight for a while as I carry out the transition.


----------



## 75845

Remember in terms of read-through rates that the figures given out by Kobo and Neilson are ignoring the huge TBR factor for eBooks. My TBR has barely been touched in the last year because I am on three geographic challenges on Goodreads (UK, US, and World) and I've already read the relevant ones from my TBR. Most of my reading is on Scribd and Kindle Unlimited (in the months I have it), despite that I have downloaded 4 books in the past two days so that TBR grows and grows. Invariably I open a book when I first get it, so Kobo would mark that as begun the day it is bought and finished 24 months later. It will not be DNF, it will just be TBR for a long time.

When I was last in Kindle Unlimited I had more than one book that I downloaded the day the account reopened and was removed unread when the account closed 3 months later. All of those books had been opened but never read beyond the Contents. 

Another factor to consider to assure short form writers is that the author of 10 10k books is likely to have a higher average read-through than someone with one 100k, as the latter only gets one chance to impress.

Non-fiction authors benefit in this system because non-fiction books are often read by chapter by someone researching a narrow field. If a chapter is 10% they lose out on vs old deal, but if the chapter is less than 10% they are banking pages rather than giving away free study materials.


----------



## Guest

Monique said:


> I think a lot will stay, at least in the short term. And they do seem to be where they were before KU, but the gravy train of the last yearish will hurt when it stops running so smoothly.


I think erotica writers are now in the same situation as bestselling writers like VM Ward and Rosalind James were when KU was introduced. Borrows eat sales, but the pay per page is so low the borrows do not generate enough revenue to replace lost sales. It would only be smart if they pulled out of KU.


----------



## Ainsley

IreneP said:


> My thought is that Amazon will be paying out around the same money or possibly slightly less for the same overall amount of reader engagement. I think we may see a pretty big shake-up in who is getting the money, though. Obviously authors who write longer and can hold reader attention to the end stand to see a gain. Anyone who has been making bank off getting people to download a short and read a couple of pages to 10% before ditching is in trouble.
> 
> We all know there were scammers playing the 10% system. I'm sorry to say, there are some dedicated short story writers who are also probably going to be hit by this, though. If you don't know which category you are in, you might be about to find out.


But how is 'paying out around the same money' likely to lure back novelists? This isn't about punishing scammers it's about rewarding and enticing full-length authors. I don't see $1.3x being all that enticing.


----------



## cinisajoy

drno said:


> I think erotica writers are now in the same situation as bestselling writers like VM Ward and Rosalind James were when KU was introduced. Borrows eat sales, but the pay per page is so low the borrows do not generate enough revenue to replace lost sales. It would only be smart if they pulled out of KU.


I think you mean HM Ward. She was just way too big to be in Select. Her and Amazon both took a beating that month.


----------



## L.B

Ainsley said:


> But how is 'paying out around the same money' likely to lure back novelists? This isn't about punishing scammers it's about rewarding and enticing full-length authors. I don't see $1.3x being all that enticing.


It will entice back authors who have good reader engagement, I.e. good authors with good books, add they're the ones who will have the most read pages.


----------



## Michael Parnell

Perry Constantine said:


> Amazon isn't obligated to do anything beneficial for you. They are not your friend. They are not a charity. You have a business relationship with them. You upload your books, they sell your books on their site, and you each get a cut. If you agree to give them exclusivity, then they give you more benefits. How is this shady?


I've read this entire thread, and this--so far--is one of the best comments I've seen.

Besides, I think it's good to remember that Amazon has probably given more opportunity to more writers than any publisher, university, newspaper, journal, magazine, government program, writers organization, etc. in the world. They have a track record of years of success in a tough, competitive environment, and much of that is because Amazon is the king of creating symbiotic relationships, where everyone gets a cut that is fair enough--or a market share that is big enough--to keep them happy. I understand people's concerns about income--it's real and relevant--but I suspect Amazon wants to keep all of their marketable writer and will not do anything to turn them away. I hope it works out that way for everyone here.


----------



## IreneP

Ainsley said:


> But how is 'paying out around the same money' likely to lure back novelists? This isn't about punishing scammers it's about rewarding and enticing full-length authors. I don't see $1.3x being all that enticing.


They won't be paying out the same amount of money to the same people.

Under the new system, a good novelist who can hold reader attention through a full-length book will be paid more per borrow than a short-story writer. So, everyone is assuming that the $1.35 figure is what Amazon is aiming at for a borrow of a full-length book. I'm not sure it is. I think Amazon is aiming to SPEND the same amount of money as always but pay authors of longer works more. They will do this by paying less for short stories and less for books that people don't finish.

Between the finish-rate that others have referenced and not paying as much for shorter books, I think Amazon will be able to make really good novelists happy without increasing their own budget drastically.


----------



## IreneP

Oh, and by "really good" I mean novelists who can hold reader attention. I'm not making any other judgement about their skills or worthiness.


----------



## Guest

Ainsley said:


> But how is 'paying out around the same money' likely to lure back novelists? This isn't about punishing scammers it's about rewarding and enticing full-length authors. I don't see $1.3x being all that enticing.


I agree, but I think scammers are also a big target.
Check out this Fiverr link: when you search for "borrow"
http://postimg.org/image/6ye7cve99/


----------



## Guest

cinisajoy said:


> I think you mean HM Ward.


Yes, Holly Ward. Thank you.


----------



## KelliWolfe

As usual, she nailed it.


----------



## Evan of the R.

Boyd said:


> http://selenakitt.com/blog/the-new-kindle-unlimited-what-it-means-for-authors-readers/


Good info. Thanks for posting it here.

The money quote, for me:



> Borrows will be displayed as PAGES now instead of BORROWS. So TOTAL number of PAGES (not broken down by number of borrowers) will appear on the report where the "borrow" appears now. We'll be getting no other information besides this. We won't know the number of people who borrowed each book - will will JUST know the TOTAL number of pages read in each book.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

I have my disagreements with her assessments, but I think that she's right about the winning genres. I would add in Romance as well. And if there's anything that demonstrates that this is a well designed system, it's that conclusion.


Engagement will be the determining factor here, which has always been the metric that authors have needed to meet.


----------



## JessieVerona

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Coincidentally, ANY major change you make to a book that is selling well, whether it's changing KDP Select status or changing the price or changing the keywords or ebook file can halt momentum and make sales suddenly take a nosedive. And that's because the digital bookstore isn't run by people recommending your book, but complex math equations based on all sorts of data unique to your book. You change that data, suddenly the robots have to reassess your book listing.


I had never thought of this. This could explain drops I've seen before when I made changes that I thought shouldn't have affected anything.

What happens when you schedule a freebie promo? I mean when the promo is actually running you obviously lose your ranking, but does the mere act of scheduling the promo cause the equations to be revisited? If so, it would seem to make sense to schedule as closely as possible to the starting date in order to not mess with rankings before absolutely necessary (and when the title is getting ready to lose all ranking anyway).

How long does it generally take for the equation to be reassessed and things to get back to normal? Is there a standard time-frame that you've seen?


----------



## swolf

When KU was first introduced, it incentivized authors to write short, since the same royalty could be made regardless of length. While it was unfair, those were the rules, so we changed to maximize profit within those rules. Some did it legitimately, and some intentionally published crap just hoping to get that 10% read. (And no, I'm not including all erotica as crap. I know a lot of erotica authors dedicated to putting out good work.)

With the new rules, it's tough to guess how it's going to fall out.  But I think it's safe to assume those who are putting out crap are going to be hurt the most.  I believe the biggest shift in revenues will be from those types of authors, to the authors who are creating books that people actually want to read. It will also level out the playing field for those who write longer books. 

But in the long run, 500 pages are 500 pages, whether they're in a single medieval fantasy tome, or spread across twenty 25-page erotica shorts.  The key will be to write stories that keep the readers turning pages. 

I'll be taking a wait-and-see attitude, curious about what the actual numbers will be.  Fortunately, we're self-publishers, and can react quickly as the rules change. So I'll just keep writing, because I'm committed to making a living doing this for as long as possible.

Yeah, I know I'm not adding anything new here. Just wanted to encourage my fellow authors to keep on keeping on.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Hey, SWolf--

it's been very quiet here without you.    Good to see you.

Betsy


----------



## cinisajoy

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Hey, SWolf--
> 
> it's been very quiet here without you.  Good to see you.
> 
> Betsy


Can we throw a welcome back party?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

cinisajoy said:


> Can we throw a welcome back party?


Not here. Maybe in CAPS LOCK WEDNESDAY.


----------



## Heather Hamilton-Senter

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned somewhere deep in the thread I haven't seen yet, but apparently anyone will be allowed to opt out in the first 90 days?

http://selenakitt.com/blog/the-new-kindle-unlimited-what-it-means-for-authors-readers/

I had been considering going wide, so this might be the nudge...


----------



## Sam Rivers

> For the first 90 days, everyone enrolled in KU will be able to opt out AT ANY TIME. You are NOT TIED TO THE 90 DAY PERIOD.


I wonder if that is a direct quote from Amazon.


----------



## Becca Mills

Heather Hamilton-Senter said:


> I'm not sure if this has been mentioned somewhere deep in the thread I haven't seen yet, but apparently anyone will be allowed to opt out in the first 90 days?
> 
> http://selenakitt.com/blog/the-new-kindle-unlimited-what-it-means-for-authors-readers/
> 
> I had been considering going wide, so this might be the nudge...


You can, Heather, but someone upthread reported getting the run-around from KDP support the first time they asked. If you do try to bail out, you might quote the language from the announcement in your message to KDP and say explicitly that you're requesting release because of the changes to KU.


----------



## Heather Hamilton-Senter

Thanks Becca! Maybe it depends on who you end up talking to......


----------



## henderson

Once Crepier is out of the ninety day window for Kindle Select (or Kindle Unlimited), I am planning to publish on other platforms.


----------



## Someone

If Amazon wants to entice longer works, they have to pay higher than they would pay when a reader read more than 10% of a longer work under the old system. Otherwise, what's the point? If a longer work author isn't paid more than $1.35 when a reader reads X amount of pages of their longer work, then the longer work author actually loses money with this new payment plan. Amazon doesn't want that - being paid less isn't enticing.
So the question is, like always, solve for X


----------



## Becca Mills

Heather Hamilton-Senter said:


> Thanks Becca! Maybe it depends on who you end up talking to......


As usual, eh?


----------



## JalexM

Someone said:


> If Amazon wants to entice longer works, they have to pay higher than they would pay when a reader read more than 10% of a longer work under the old system. Otherwise, what's the point? If a longer work author isn't paid more than $1.35 when a reader reads X amount of pages of their longer work, then the longer work author actually loses money with this new payment plan. Amazon doesn't want that - being paid less isn't enticing.
> So the question is, like always, solve for X


Then they should write to entice readers


----------



## PermaStudent

I'm away from Kboards trying to wind down the book I'm writing, I come back, and the entire world has imploded...  

Maybe not that bad.  None of my stuff is currently in KU, but I had planned to write a serial specifically for KU later this year.  And now, with this change...I am proceeding as planned.  A page read is a page read whether it's a serial or a novel.  In fact, I actually feel a little liberated now, because I tend to go long when I write, and I was dreading having to enforce arbitrary breaking points to make a serial the most profitable under the old model.

Whatever your strategy is going forward, I hope the changes bring y'all more profit than expected.


----------



## Ainsley

JalexM said:


> Then they should write to entice readers


This kind of statement has been floating around and it means absolutely nothing. Even worse it assumes that writers have not been trying to entice readers, which makes no sense. There is no way to know what a reader wants so there's no way to know what will 'entice'. This is the equivalent of telling someone to 'write harder'.


----------



## BGArcher

I think this is a classic case of "when life throws you lemons make lemonade" (and if I just throw this post through prowritingaid it would be highlighted green for that line). I have been a short erotica writer for the last nine months because it was a good DAY JOB. It wasn't my passion but readers enjoyed my work and borrows are how I've been paying my rent. The thing is, I am passionate about mystery novels, and have three in various states of finished gathering dust in Scrivener files on my Macbook Pro. While I'm well aware this means I won't be making the kind of $ I have been on my shorts in the next few months... I'm seeing this as an opportunity to re-work those novels and get them out there, and a few months down the line I foresee making even more $ if I work hard and just... Keep... Writing.


----------



## 75814

Someone said:


> If Amazon wants to entice longer works, they have to pay higher than they would pay when a reader read more than 10% of a longer work under the old system. Otherwise, what's the point? If a longer work author isn't paid more than $1.35 when a reader reads X amount of pages of their longer work, then the longer work author actually loses money with this new payment plan. Amazon doesn't want that - being paid less isn't enticing.
> So the question is, like always, solve for X


Except under this new system, authors of longer works have the potential to make more per borrow than they did under the old system. And if you're getting paid per page, then that potential is there. Using the $0.01/page example (yes, I know it's not confirmed, but it's easy to use it as an example), a 150-page book makes $1.50 per complete read, which is more than it made under the old borrow system. And the more pages a book is--provided the reader completes it--the more money the author makes. So the potential for higher earnings for longer works exists in this new system, whereas it didn't exist before.

No one can guarantee how many pages of a book a reader will read. But if you're confident that readers won't read at least 130 pages of your 300-page novel, then you have other problems beyond KU.


----------



## cinisajoy

I think this looks right for how the pay scale will work.

Let's do a penny a page for simple math.  
Author a gets 10 pages read.  That is 10 cents.  Author b has 250 pages read.  That is $2.50.  Now to get the average paid... 
We do Author a's income + author b's income and divide by the number of authors.
So we have .10 +2.50= 2.60 for total income.
Now if we divide total income by number of authors we get 2.60/2 =1.30
So the average payout would be $1.30.
Note on averages there are always high numbers and low numbers.
Average will always be a middle number.    So when you see that word used especially for incomes, remember there are always lower and higher earners.


----------



## Rykymus

Ah, but there is a way to figure out what readers want. They're called "reviews." Read them, and you'll not only see what they like, but what they don't like.


----------



## JalexM

Ainsley said:


> This kind of statement has been floating around and it means absolutely nothing. Even worse it assumes that writers have not been trying to entice readers, which makes no sense. There is no way to know what a reader wants so there's no way to know what will 'entice'. This is the equivalent of telling someone to 'write harder'.


That's what reviews are for, reading mine I found out some people had issues following the ending of my novel, so next time i'll work on it. If readers aren't reading far in your book, you're not going to get paid, simple as that. So you'll have to find out why they're not getting far. I believe most will be surprised with how much a reader actually reads of their books. Even if people only get half way through my book, if we go by the one cent a page deal I'm still getting 2 dollars. Unless the way they figure out length totally screws up my page count. Of course that's not an excuse for mediocrity.


----------



## Someone

> Except under this new system, authors of longer works have the potential to make more per borrow than they did under the old system. And if you're getting paid per page, then that potential is there. Using the $0.01/page example (yes, I know it's not confirmed, but it's easy to use it as an example), a 150-page book makes $1.50 per complete read, which is more than it made under the old borrow system. And the more pages a book is--provided the reader completes it--the more money the author makes. So the potential for higher earnings for longer works exists in this new system, whereas it didn't exist before.


You are missing my point. My point is there is a breakeven point that must be hit for this to make sense - ie fulfill Amazon's stated goals - and,to fulfill the goals, the breakeven point is going to have to take in account that the average read length of books in the genre readers read the longest is 62% and that longer work authors are going to want to be paid more than 1.35.

Perry
On a second read of this, I'm concerned that it might come across as stern and/or cross. I don't mean it that way at all. I'm just trying to succinctly let you know what my point is, ie the amount paid per page needs to line up with Amazon's stated goas when known reader behavior and past payment history is taken into consideration.


----------



## dianapersaud

JalexM said:


> That's what reviews are for, reading mine I found out some people had issues following the ending of my novel, so next time i'll work on it. If readers aren't reading far in your book, you're not going to get paid, simple as that. So you'll have to find out why they're not getting far. *I believe most will be surprised with how much a reader actually reads of their books*. Even if people only get half way through my book, if we go by the one cent a page deal I'm still getting 2 dollars. Unless the way they figure out length totally screws up my page count. Of course that's not an excuse for mediocrity.


Amazon isn't going to tell you how far a reader gets in your book. They will tell you total pages read. That's it.
Without knowing how many people downloaded your book- you have no way of calculating percent read.

Authors who write in series have a general idea of read through rate but it's not perfect.

It will be interesting to see if they leave the blue line (for borrows) or if it goes away. If they leave it, we can calculate the percent ourselves, if pages read is tied to book title on the dashboard. (The email said it wouldn't be tied to book title & Marketplace).


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek

dianapersaud said:


> Amazon isn't going to tell you how far a reader gets in your book. They will tell you total pages read. That's it.
> Without knowing how many people downloaded your book- you have no way of calculating percent read.
> 
> Authors who write in series have a general idea of read through rate but it's not perfect.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if they leave the blue line (for borrows) or if it goes away. If they leave it, we can calculate the percent ourselves, if pages read is tied to book title on the dashboard. (The email said it wouldn't be tied to book title & Marketplace).


If you get a moderate number of borrows a day, then you could probably figure out how many borrows you have through the rankings fluctuations on author central or using 3rd party sites like sales rank express. It gets tougher if you have more than 5 or 6 per hour and an equivalent number of sales.


----------



## Julia Kavan

dianapersaud said:


> It will be interesting to see if they leave the blue line (for borrows) or if it goes away. If they leave it, we can calculate the percent ourselves, if pages read is tied to book title on the dashboard. (The email said it wouldn't be tied to book title & Marketplace).


I emailed KDP yesterday to ask this question. The response is:

"In this case, I'm sorry to let you know that the number of individual borrows for each title will no longer be available either on the sales graph or in the report."

I also said that having the number of borrows available alongside the number of pages read would be useful to us as writers. Their response:

"Please know I've taken your concern as feedback and communicated the same to our business team for consideration as we plan future improvements.
As always, please remember you can count on us at any time.
Thanks for being part of Amazon KDP!"

They also repeated the same examples for payments.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Julia Kavan said:


> I emailed KDP yesterday to ask this question.


Thanks for sharing their responses. This decrease in useful information available to the writer is just another negative facet of this change. It's up to each person to figure out what works best for them, but this just adds to my sense that Select is not going to be of interest to me after this change takes effect.


----------



## KaiW

Julia Kavan said:


> I emailed KDP yesterday to ask this question. The response is:
> 
> "In this case, I'm sorry to let you know that the number of individual borrows for each title will no longer be available either on the sales graph or in the report."


This is nuts, as it's now a case of 'pick a number - any number' for KU earnings in any given month? No way at all for us (or BookReport) to track how borrows are going from month to month. If that's the case, and it truly is a case of blind reporting, then I'm out. Surely such a system is not one that any reasonable business person could take seriously.


----------



## a_g

Herc- The Reluctant Geek said:


> If you get a moderate number of borrows a day, then you could probably figure out how many borrows you have through the rankings fluctuations on author central or using 3rd party sites like sales rank express. It gets tougher if you have more than 5 or 6 per hour and an equivalent number of sales.


Or when Amazon decides to mess with the algorithms. Again.


----------



## Speaker-To-Animals

Anything you hear from your personal kdp concierge, if you're a large enough seller to have one should be taken with a grain of salt. Anything heard from an anonymous kdp csr should be taken with a large Siberian salt mine.


----------



## L.B

KaiW said:


> This is nuts, as it's now a case of 'pick a number - any number' for KU earnings in any given month? No way at all for us (or BookReport) to track how borrows are going from month to month. If that's the case, and it truly is a case of blind reporting, then I'm out. Surely such a system is not one that any reasonable business person could take seriously.


It's not blind reporting, just reporting on 'pages read' instead of 'books borrowed'.

To be honest, I think it will give a much better indicator of how you are doing as a writer, as we'll know if people are actually reading our stuff.


----------



## JumpingShip

If they're going to pay for pages read, they should at least have a graph for that.   Are we just supposed to wait until the 15th of the month every month to see what we earned the prior month? That won't fly. My books are due to come out of Select mid-July, and I'd hoped to have at least some data to help me decide. I'm not against pay per page, but Amazon should give us clear data. They need to share it with us.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West

Even if you had the total borrows you would have a ghastly view of how far readers got in your book. Take 4 readers. If 2 read fully, 1 to 75% and one 5%, you average is 70%... But most of your readers actually read most if not all of your book! See how the average of 70% wouldn't be very helpful ....


----------



## Nic

Boyd said:


> http://selenakitt.com/blog/the-new-kindle-unlimited-what-it-means-for-authors-readers/


Thanks!


----------



## a_g

Barnaby Yard said:


> It's not blind reporting, just reporting on 'pages read' instead of 'books borrowed'.
> 
> To be honest, I think it will give a much better indicator of how you are doing as a writer, as we'll know if people are actually reading our stuff.


So this is a conundrum I'm having a bit of a difficulty getting my head around.

How will you know how well a promotion push for KU did if you don't have download numbers available to you? Jump in rankings? Maybe, but it is still hard to gauge considering the rankings are fluctuating all the time, sometimes lag, and are harder to pin down to a specific promotional offering.

600 pages read on a 200 page book? Is that 3 books downloaded read to 100% Is that 6 books downloaded read to 50%? Is that 1 book read to 100%, 4 books read to 50%, 8 books read to 25%...

The number is still meaningless except in terms of how much we're getting paid.


----------



## Nic

What I don't understand is that Scribd borrows are reported in Smashwords per book and including how far/how much of that book was read. Every time, every borrow. Should be easy for Amazon to emulate.

Obviously it is something which is possible. Also obviously they have more or less decided to change towards the same system as Scribd.


----------



## KaiW

Barnaby Yard said:


> It's not blind reporting, just reporting on 'pages read' instead of 'books borrowed'.


Of course it's blind reporting if we can't track 'pages read' from one day to the next and just get a tally unrelated to who knows what in the middle of Aug. Or more to the point 'blind trust'


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> So this is a conundrum I'm having a bit of a difficulty getting my head around.
> 
> How will you know how well a promotion push for KU did if you don't have download numbers available to you? Jump in rankings? Maybe, but it is still hard to gauge considering the rankings are fluctuating all the time, sometimes lag, and are harder to pin down to a specific promotional offering.
> 
> 600 pages read on a 200 page book? Is that 3 books downloaded read to 100% Is that 6 books downloaded read to 50%? Is that 1 book read to 100%, 4 books read to 50%, 8 books read to 25%...
> 
> The number is still meaningless except in terms of how much we're getting paid.


You'd know how well your promotions dp by now many you sell surely? This is only about borrow information.

You could also tell by looking at the number of pages read... If reader engagement is good.


----------



## L.B

KaiW said:


> Of course it's blind reporting if we can't track 'pages read' from one day to the next and just get a tally unrelated to who knows what in the middle of Aug. Or more to the point 'blind trust'


Why wouldn't you be able to track them from one day to the next?


----------



## KaiW

See the post I just quoted when talking about reporting being blind. KU apparently aren't going to report borrows in the graph or dash.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

It's blind reporting and we have to trust Amazon _*right now*_. The only thing that's changed is the metric. I do agree that it's going to be a little harder to evaluate your results because it's a brand new metric that we don't have as much context for. But I suspect over time, some of us will like it better and others will like it less. Like many things.


----------



## L.B

KaiW said:


> See the post I just quoted when talking about reporting being blind. KU apparently aren't going to report borrows in the graph or dash.


They are not reporting borrows any more full stop. The pages read will replace it, on the graph as well.


----------



## swolf

Having the borrow count would help, but it would still be confusing.  If a book is popular, it's going to get new borrows every day, but those people may not start reading it until a few days, or a few weeks later (if ever). So you're going to get pages read from borrows that happened previously, and some readers may go slow while others go fast, so it's going to be difficult to keep the two in synch.  You're going to be getting pages read this month for books that were borrowed last month. And you're going to be getting borrows this month that won't have any pages read until next month.

The only way it would really help if they broke down each individual borrow, showing the date the borrow happened, and how many pages read so far. But even that would be confusing as far as tracking your monthly earnings, since those stats would necessarily have to be spread over different months.


----------



## Remington Kane

Hi everyone, I've just written a post on my blog about the new payout structure for Kindle Unlimited and given examples of how the new system might compensate different authors.

In short, those of you who write longer books will likely make more than in the old system, although, there are many variables that might influence payment.

One thing that is a fact, is that pages read will be the biggest factor, along with the size of the monthly pot.

http://www.remingtonkane.com/for-authors/ku-payouts-old-vs-new


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Hi, I've merged another thread with the existing thread.  Sorry for any confusion.

Betsy
KB Mod


----------



## a_g

edwardgtalbot said:


> It's blind reporting and we have to trust Amazon _*right now*_.


Yeah, and that's one of my big problems. I have very little trust in them right now. This is not making me trust them _more_.



edwardgtalbot said:


> The only thing that's changed is the metric. I do agree that it's going to be a little harder to evaluate your results because it's a brand new metric that we don't have as much context for. But I suspect over time, some of us will like it better and others will like it less. Like many things.


But change is haaaaaard. 



Barnaby Yard said:


> You could also tell by looking at the number of pages read... If reader engagement is good.


At this time, knowing total number of pages read per book still means nothing if I don't know where they have stopped reading. I still don't know anything more about 'reader engagement'. All I 'know' is how many pages were read in a book for the month. That's it. Nothing else.


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> At this time, knowing total number of pages read per book still means nothing if I don't know where they have stopped reading. I still don't know anything more about 'reader engagement'. All I 'know' is how many pages were read in a book for the month. That's it. Nothing else.


You don't know how many pages have been read of yours AT ALL right now though do you?! That's new information you will be getting. AGain, this is only for the select program, your sales will still continue as normal. So now you'll have data on how many you are selling of a book, alongside data of how many pages are being read of that book.

I really don't see it as a big deal, but I guess if people do, they can just pull out of select.


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Another reason why we still need to see how many borrows we have per day is so that we can gauge things like staying power. Pages read does NOT tell me if my book borrows have begun a decline or climb, only that someone has gotten around to reading it.

If I look at my report and see that 200 pages of my book has been read, I don't know if that's 1 person that read most of my book or 200 people all getting started. That's VERY important information. And no, your book ranking does not tell you that. My rankings don't tell me how many units have been moved and I'm not going to run my business on blind half guesses.

We NEED to know if out book borrows are going mon-25, tues-50, wed-100 OR mon-100, tues-50, wed-75. Who can run a successful business if they don't know this most basic if info!?


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Barnaby Yard said:


> You don't know how many pages have been read of yours AT ALL right now though do you?! That's new information you will be getting. AGain, this is only for the select program, your sales will still continue as normal. So now you'll have data on how many you are selling of a book, alongside data of how many pages are being read of that book.
> 
> I really don't see it as a big deal, but I guess if people do, they can just pull out of select.


Except that sales and borrows are two different things. You cannot assume the number of one based off of the other. That's why BOTH metrics are needed. Just because my sales fluctuate one way it does not mean that my borrows are moving in a similar fashion. Buyers and borrowers tend to be different purchasing demographics. We need to see how BOTH are behaving.


----------



## L.B

Stephanie Marks said:


> Except that sales and borrows are two different things. You cannot assume the number of one based off of the other. That's why BOTH metrics are needed. Just because my sales fluctuate one way it does not mean that my borrows are moving in a similar fashion. Buyers and borrowers tend to be different purchasing demographics. We need to see how BOTH are behaving.


So under the previous system, if your sales stayed the same, but your borrows changed... what would do? Do you take action on that and change things with your book or promotional activities? If not, then I don't see how it's that useful. If you do make changes, you could also end up affecting sales in a negative way.

With the page reads, if you see 200 pages read day one, then 350 for day two, then 1200 for day three, you can probably deduce you are performing better over that period.

At the end of the day, select is whatever Amazon decide it is, get in or get out, it's up to you.


----------



## a_g

Barnaby Yard said:


> You don't know how many pages have been read of yours AT ALL right now though do you?! That's new information you will be getting. AGain, this is only for the select program, your sales will still continue as normal. So now you'll have data on how many you are selling of a book, alongside data of how many pages are being read of that book.
> 
> I really don't see it as a big deal, but I guess if people do, they can just pull out of select.


Because it's being touted as this magical mystical experience that knowing our pages read will tell us reader engagement.

No it doesn't. It's just telling us if our books are being read. Under the old system in KU, if a borrow showed up on our dash we knew they at least read through 10%. Not useful to know deeper reader engagement, true.

But pages per day isn't that much more useful, so it really needs to stop being bandied about that it is.

You're right, people can pull out of select if they don't like it. But since for many of us, this is a business, making business decisions we'd like a little more information than YAY MY BOOK HAS 257 PAGE READS TODAY!

Making business decisions on bad or incomplete information can be costly.

No one will really know how it all shakes out until 8/15 rolls around. I'm not going to sit here and applaud that Tinker Bell is alive until we have more information than the song and tap dance routine Amazon is shoveling at us and expecting us to clap that this is a good thing.

Amazon is notorious for withholding information. This pages read per day is about as useful as the other information they parse out. Pretty much useless.



Stephanie Marks said:


> Another reason why we still need to see how many borrows we have per day is so that we can gauge things like staying power. Pages read does NOT tell me if my book borrows have begun a decline or climb, only that someone has gotten around to reading it.
> 
> If I look at my report and see that 200 pages of my book has been read, I don't know if that's 1 person that read most of my book or 200 people all getting started. That's VERY important information. And no, your book ranking does not tell you that. My rankings don't tell me how many units have been moved and I'm not going to run my business on blind half guesses.
> 
> We NEED to know if out book borrows are going mon-25, tues-50, wed-100 OR mon-100, tues-50, wed-75. Who can run a successful business if they don't know this most basic if info!?


Thank you. Yes.


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> Because it's being touted as this magical mystical experience that knowing our pages read will tell us reader engagement.
> 
> No it doesn't. It's just telling us if our books are being read. Under the old system in KU, if a borrow showed up on our dash we knew they at least read through 10%. Not useful to know deeper reader engagement, true.
> 
> But pages per day isn't that much more useful, so it really needs to stop being bandied about that it is.
> 
> You're right, people can pull out of select if they don't like it. But since for many of us, this is a business, making business decisions we'd like a little more information than YAY MY BOOK HAS 257 PAGE READS TODAY!


If you pull out of select and just go on your sales data, you will have less data on what your readers are doing than if you stayed in.


----------



## KaiW

Stephanie Marks said:


> Except that sales and borrows are two different things. You cannot assume the number of one based off of the other. That's why BOTH metrics are needed. Just because my sales fluctuate one way it does not mean that my borrows are moving in a similar fashion. Buyers and borrowers tend to be different purchasing demographics. We need to see how BOTH are behaving.


EXACTLY THIS. Under the current system we could track these metrics from day to day. If we can't do that with the new system, and the numbers are just willy-nilly, then I'm out.


----------



## a_g

Barnaby Yard said:


> If you pull out of select and just go on your sales data, you will have less data on what your readers are doing than if you stayed in.


I'm still not seeing how I have more data. I'd have more money, sure. Not more data.


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> I'm still not seeing how I have more data. I'd have more money, sure. Not more data.


When you're selling, you can track sales and not a lot else, the pages read would be more data surely?

Anyway, if you would make more money out of it, why are you worried about it anyway?!


----------



## a_g

Barnaby Yard said:


> When you're selling, you can track sales and not a lot else, the pages read would be more data surely?
> 
> Anyway, if you would make more money out of it, why are you worried about it anyway?!


Because I'm not in this to be willy nilly. If it's going to be touted as a good thing to have all this data, then I'm obviously missing how it's useful and so far no explanation has come forth to help me understand it.

If I stay in, I will obviously made do with what's available. Amazon has seen fit to make sure that's with as little information as possible.

I just don't like it when smoke is blown up my @$$ and told it is for my benefit.


----------



## A. N. Other Author

I have nothing in KU, so no skin in the game here, so to speak. But I see good and bad in it.

The good is mainly for readers, as it will encourage writers to really polish their work. At the moment, if a writer puts out a 10,000 "episode" of a series/season, that's approx 33 pages, so a reader only needs to go through 3 pages for the author to get paid. If that novellete (whatever it's called) is marketed well, it could net the reader a good chunk of cash, even it's not that good and the reader puts it down after 5 pages and never picks up the others in the "series". The new system, will, hopefully, discourage authors from simply chopping up their books for the sake of hoping to make a little extra through KU.

Now, I'm not putting down authors who actually plan their season this way; it's a great format when done well - I will be doing something similar myself in 2016 - but just halting the story a few chapters in and calling it an episode? No, that's not what KU is for, and I'm sure it's one of the reasons Amazon is doing this. 

But it will also be good for writers whose work is genuinely GOOD. A 40,000 word novella is, what, 130-140 pages? So 14 pages read on the old system = a paid borrow. In the new system, a poor book put down after 10-15 pages will rightfully earn less than a good book that is read all the way through. 

It might also mean that Amazon's algorythms feature those "good" books more favourably. Might it even affect ranking? Surely, if Amazon are focusing on customers ahead of writers (which they should do, of course), a book that has been borrowed 1000 times and read all the way through 800 times should surely land higher than a book with 10,000 borrows but only 100 read-throughs. 

So overall, it's going to reward quality. Those authors whose 1st books are perma-free now, or just do well in KU, and have high 2nd/3rd/4th-book borrows shouldn't worry IMO. It's going to be good for you.


----------



## A. N. Other Author

Regarding the speculation re "per-page" payments. Is there any notice on what constitutes a "page?" I usually work it out as 300 words per page, but with Kindles it can be anything from 50 words to 500 dependin on the reader's settings. Or is it more likely to be calculated as a % of book read?


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> Because I'm not in this to be willy nilly. If it's going to be touted as a good thing to have all this data, then I'm obviously missing how it's useful and so far no explanation has come forth to help me understand it.
> 
> If I stay in, I will obviously made do with what's available. Amazon has seen fit to make sure that's with as little information as possible.
> 
> I just don't like it when smoke is blown up my @$$ and told it is for my benefit.


Well it's definitely not for your benefit. Amazon, like any business, would only ever do things for their own interests. Without them though, being a full time self pubbed author wouldn't be possible, so I think most of us need to suck it up and get writing!


----------



## a_g

Barnaby Yard, I think I see where we may be crossing wires.

Erotica, up until now, has been a fast moving genre to write in. The old KU payout provided useful data for short story erotica writers to know fairly quickly at a glance what was hitting all the good spots and which were failing. As in, knowing within a week if you have hit a sweet spot or fired off into the woods.

Many erotica writing business models depended on having this information.

Now, that's gone. Sure we have sales and yeah I think we're going to see a shift in profitability in short erotica but since this entire discussion is about the authors and not the readers, I don't see that much of the erotica buying readership out there is going to change.

And if it is, then the information we depended on to be able to shift nimbly to readjust has just been pulled away from us. We have no useful matrix by which to gauge how well our business is doing.

The thing is, this page read business? It's not going to help authors of full length novels either. They'll be getting more money for being in KU, sure, and I'm glad for it. But knowing the number of reads per book isn't telling them anything about read through. (Except in those instances where a novel has been in KU for a month and has a sum total of 50 page reads. I'd think that would be very telling.)

Which is what many of the arguments about how having page reads but not downloads seems to be resting on. Sure, the author can look at page reads and start to guesstimate what their payout will be when the 15th of the next month rolls around, but no one has any good information as to whether they're getting more benefit being in KU as opposed to being wide.



ADDavies said:


> Regarding the speculation re "per-page" payments. Is there any notice on what constitutes a "page?" I usually work it out as 300 words per page, but with Kindles it can be anything from 50 words to 500 dependin on the reader's settings. Or is it more likely to be calculated as a % of book read?


None that I've seen so far. I suspect this is going to be one of Amazon's carefully guarded trade secrets despite what they assure us as the page total will be found somewhere for us to see.


----------



## Evan of the R.

a_g said:


> I suspect this is going to be one of Amazon's carefully guarded trade secrets despite what they assure us as the page total will be found somewhere for us to see.


Selena Kitt said that she was told that the new page counts will replace the old ones:



> The current page estimation system will change to the new (KENPC) one once the new KU rolls out in July.


I'm assuming that means the new page count will be displayed on our books' KDP pages.


----------



## L.B

a_g said:


> Barnaby Yard, I think I see where we may be crossing wires.
> 
> Erotica, up until now, has been a fast moving genre to write in. The old KU payout provided useful data for short story erotica writers to know fairly quickly at a glance what was hitting all the good spots and which were failing. As in, knowing within a week if you have hit a sweet spot or fired off into the woods.
> 
> Many erotica writing business models depended on having this information.
> 
> Now, that's gone. Sure we have sales and yeah I think we're going to see a shift in profitability in short erotica but since this entire discussion is about the authors and not the readers, I don't see that much of the erotica buying readership out there is going to change.
> 
> And if it is, then the information we depended on to be able to shift nimbly to readjust has just been pulled away from us. We have no useful matrix by which to gauge how well our business is doing.
> 
> The thing is, this page read business? It's not going to help authors of full length novels either. They'll be getting more money for being in KU, sure, and I'm glad for it. But knowing the number of reads per book isn't telling them anything about read through. (Except in those instances where a novel has been in KU for a month and has a sum total of 50 page reads. I'd think that would be very telling.)
> 
> Which is what many of the arguments about how having page reads but not downloads seems to be resting on. Sure, the author can look at page reads and start to guesstimate what their payout will be when the 15th of the next month rolls around, but no one has any good information as to whether they're getting more benefit being in KU as opposed to being wide.
> 
> None that I've seen so far. I suspect this is going to be one of Amazon's carefully guarded trade secrets despite what they assure us as the page total will be found somewhere for us to see.


Good point A_G, people writing shorts to trends etc will probably find this new system a lot more difficult. It will be harder to spot things moving that quickly I would imagine. Generally though, for someone not following trends or seeing what sticks, but just churning out books, I don't see much of a big deal.

I do think one of the key elements is how many words per page, as mentioned above.


----------



## a_g

Evan of the R. said:


> Selena Kitt said that she was told that the new page counts will replace the old ones:
> 
> I'm assuming that means the new page count will be displayed on our books' KDP pages.


Yes she did. Did this rep also tell her how many words would be considered a page? I think that has the potential to be a real sticking point for many writers. Only time will tell for that, I guess.


----------



## Andrew Ashling

a_g said:


> Or when Amazon decides to mess with the algorithms. Again.


Which they will do coinciding with the launch of the new system to obfuscate said messing with.


----------



## a_g

Andrew Ashling said:


> Which they will do coinciding with the launch of the new system to obfuscate said messing with.


Absolutes in life: Taxes, death and Amazon screwing with the algos regularly.


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Barnaby Yard said:


> So under the previous system, if your sales stayed the same, but your borrows changed... what would do? Do you take action on that and change things with your book or promotional activities? If not, then I don't see how it's that useful. If you do make changes, you could also end up affecting sales in a negative way.
> 
> With the page reads, if you see 200 pages read day one, then 350 for day two, then 1200 for day three, you can probably deduce you are performing better over that period.
> 
> At the end of the day, select is whatever Amazon decide it is, get in or get out, it's up to you.


Actually yes, I can use that info. Depending on what sales vs borrows are doing I can determine if my pricing is more sales based, borrows based or a good balance. I can see if certain days of the week have recognizable patterns for downloads. That is HUGE for me. I started off with very specific high borrow days and low borrow day. That changed to a very steady upward trend with no low borrow days. Now I have a fairly leveled out weeks. Without seeing exactly how many units are moving I never would have known that.

An increase in pages read from one day to another can simply mean it's Monday vs Saturday. Generally speaking people will have more free time to get further in their books on Saturday than Monday. That's not more books downloaded that's just more people with time on their hands to read that day.

Just because you don't use this info for your business decisions it doesn't mean that other publishers don't factor it in.


----------



## Drake

Remington Kane said:


> Hi everyone, I've just written a post on my blog about the new payout structure for Kindle Unlimited and given examples of how the new system might compensate different authors.
> 
> In short, those of you who write longer books will likely make more than in the old system, although, there are many variables that might influence payment.
> 
> One thing that is a fact, is that pages read will be the biggest factor, along with the size of the monthly pot.
> 
> http://www.remingtonkane.com/for-authors/ku-payouts-old-vs-new


That's a helpful chart, thanks for posting it.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

If you're treating your publishing like a business, you -- like any business, including Amazon -- should be basing decisions on _good_ data. Quality and quantity are not the same thing; more is not necessarily better. Having no data is better than believing bad or misleading data. A murky "pages read" number is hopefully not _bad_ data, but it could certainly be misleading data.


----------



## KelliWolfe

a_g said:


> Yes she did. Did this rep also tell her how many words would be considered a page? I think that has the potential to be a real sticking point for many writers. Only time will tell for that, I guess.


Most likely it will be something very much along the same lines as how they calculate now, but with extra checks thrown in to catch the scammers who are using formatting tricks to make their books look longer. Several of the currently popular "Get Rich Writing Erotica" guides instruct readers to expand margins and use double spacing between lines and even more spacing between paragraphs to bump their page counts, and I have no doubt there are similar things going on with the non-fiction scamlets.


----------



## L.B

Stephanie Marks said:


> Just because you don't use this info for your business decisions it doesn't mean that other publishers don't factor it in.


That's interesting, and I can see how borrows in that instance would be more useful. The thing is, getting data on evrything would useful, every breakdown imaginable, but the only way you can get that is if you sell yourself from your own platform. That's probably not going to produce many sales. Amazon sell a LOT of books. You take their exposure and already engaged reader base, so you have to take their stats as well.


----------



## Anna Drake

With this new system from KU about to descend on our heads, would it make any sense to leave old books in KU but place new books wide?

I know the popularity of books can vary with different vendors. I had a very popular book on B&N that sold almost no copies on Amazon. But at least, with new releases, we'd get some kind of feedback on whether we're hitting or missing the target. I have a third book in a series that I hope, if I QUIT reading this thread, I will finish soon. My series books can be read out of order, so I'm wondering if there's some reason not to try this?


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## lamaha

Crenel said:


> Yes, it probably costs more to edit a 120K word book than a 10K word short story.


Most of all, it takes TIME to TYPE. And of all the tasks involved in writing, typing, for me any many others, is far and away the worst. The most time consuming. Never mind about story or writing quality, which is subjective. Depending on your regular schedule, typing an epic takes not just weeks but months. Some people type faster than others, but still, even for the fastest typists, it takes time. That time alone needs to be paid, just as in any normal job. The argument which should be better recompensed falls quite drastically at the time hurdle-


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Barnaby Yard said:


> That's interesting, and I can see how borrows in that instance would be more useful. The thing is, getting data on evrything would useful, every breakdown imaginable, but the only way you can get that is if you sell yourself from your own platform. That's probably not going to produce many sales. Amazon sell a LOT of books. You take their exposure and already engaged reader base, so you have to take their stats as well.


Yes obviously, we are playin in their sandbox. But I'm not asking for ALL the toys just a bloody shovel. The most basic tool to allow me to get the job done with SOME semblance of accuracy. And it's not just about "accept it or get out". I run my business efficiently by taking the time to weigh the pros and cons of Amazons latest action. It would be more prudent to stick around for three months and analyze the data from after the change and THEN make a choice.

This isn't a hobby for me and I'm not about to make snap decisions just because I don't agree with their actions. I was on my way to what could have been my first 5-figure month in the next couple of months. I intend to move carefully.


----------



## Guest

Stephanie Marks said:


> Another reason why we still need to see how many borrows we have per day is so that we can gauge things like staying power. Pages read does NOT tell me if my book borrows have begun a decline or climb, only that someone has gotten around to reading it.


I agree with you. More reader info is always better. But I'm trying to understand Amazon's reasoning. They are treating us like children by not giving us all information, but maybe we have been behaving like children. Till now we've cared about sales, borrows. Till now we've been mining the endless sea of new readers. Maybe the quality of our books was not very good. Maybe promotional prowess did create winners that did not deserve it. I think BookBuB etc may have unwittingly led to this change. If making our monthly check dependent on sales and borrows led to writers concentrating on sales and promotions, then maybe making us dependent on pages read, will make us concentrate on quality. I think we'll pretty soon find out if we've been throwing promotional money at bottomless pits.


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> I run my business on data, too, Stephanie, so I'm at a loss on how you've been able to know your daily borrows so precisely for the past year.
> 
> In the current system, the only thing the graph shows you is how many folk have hit the 10% read mark. It does NOT tell you how many borrows you've had on any given day. You don't know if a person borrowed the book last Monday and only got around to reading 10% of it on Saturday when it shows up on the graph. Nor does it show you how many borrows you've had that no one's gotten around to reading yet.
> 
> How is the proposed system any different? I'm not saying it will be better, because for the purposes described -- daily tracking of borrows -- it won't be. Nor will it be worse from what I can tell. All-in-all, I really don't see any way to use either of the graphed methods to gauge business decisions. Ranks, OTOH, for all their flaws, are far more transparent.
> 
> It actually seems to me that if you're using the graphed data under the current model to make business decisions, you're operating under erroneous assumptions about that data.


No it wasn't a perfect system but it was enough that I was able to determine the patterns stated above. I was able to figure out which genres I had written had the best initial interest and which had the best read through. 
I've only been publishing since March so this is my 4th month. While NO I don't know EXACT numbers I truly believe that knowing those borrows is what helped me start publishing with a three figure month and jump to a four figure month so quickly.

It's like an incomplete road map. It didn't have all the roads but there were enough to get me where I was going. Now it's like they've erased a few major streets. I'll figure out a new way from point A to point B but for the way my mind lays out the patterns it will be MUCH more difficult.


----------



## dianapersaud

Stephanie Marks said:


> No it wasn't a perfect system but it was enough that I was able to determine the patterns stated above. I was able to figure out which genres I had written had the best initial interest and which had the best read through.
> I've only been publishing since March so this is my 4th month. While NO I don't know EXACT numbers I truly believe that knowing those borrows is what helped me start publishing with a three figure month and jump to a four figure month so quickly.
> 
> It's like an incomplete road map. It didn't have all the roads but there were enough to get me where I was going. Now it's like they've erased a few major streets. I'll figure out a new way from point A to point B but for the way my mind lays out the patterns it will be MUCH more difficult.


Amazon wants us to have less information.

From my understanding, we will have total pages read, updated (daily?) when readers connect their devices and Amazon can capture that info.

So Book 1: 50 pages
Book 2: 25 pages

A week later it might be:
Book 1: 100 pages
Book 2: 50 pages

If that is based on TWO people reading your books, that is a good thing. If it was 10 people, not so good.
(IF your book was 100 pages long, then it might mean that one person completed book 1 or two people got as far as 50%. Or one is 75% complete and the slow reader is only 25% complete. Or it could mean 10 people gave up at 10%. Or they are just getting started and will finish later. All of those scenarios mean different things for the writer. Are you reaching readers? The only way to know is to see if book 2 sells. So Amazon isn't helping us determine anything.

I don't think they are going to tell us HOW MANY people are reading the books, so you can't determine the % read.

Does anyone know if Amazon will leave the blue line- so we have an idea of how many books were borrowed per day/per title? IF that info is provided, we have to manually calculate % read.


----------



## CJAnderson

carinasanfey said:


> I'm taking them out of KU and going wide.


I think we will see a lot of this. The only reason many people stayed in KU was for the borrow payout. Now that's been cut in over half why stay? And how accurate is the tracking of read pages? What if they just flip through the book? How can it be proven someone actually "read" the book?


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Stephanie Marks said:


> No it wasn't a perfect system but it was enough that I was able to determine the patterns stated above. I was able to figure out which genres I had written had the best initial interest and which had the best read through.
> I've only been publishing since March so this is my 4th month. While NO I don't know EXACT numbers I truly believe that knowing those borrows is what helped me start publishing with a three figure month and jump to a four figure month so quickly.


To follow up on what Phoenix was saying, this phrase above I think is the key point: "knowing those borrows." You do not know when people borrowed. What you know is when the fact of someone hitting 10% is communicated to Amazon. They might have downloaded it five minutes earlier or five months earlier. With the old numbers, you knew "number of readers whose milestone of hitting 10% in a book was communicated from their device to Amazon on a given day". With the new numbers, you will know "number of newly read pages in a book communicated from a reader device to Amazon on a given day."

Now, we could make an assumption that a reader hitting 10% is meaningful in terms of concluding that they are committed to the book. But I'm not sure the basis for that assumption would be all that strong. Ultimately we can make pretty similar conclusions about read through with the old an the new, we'll just be using units other than "readers"

Some have said we'll be losing the ability to make conclusions about borrows cannibalizing sales or the pros and cons of going wide, but again I think that assumes things about the current data that aren't good assumptions. It would be very wrong to conclude that every 10% read would have been a sale. So it's really no more apples to apples than it was before.

The one thing we're losing is a handle on the number of readers who have read 10% of our books. A valid concern to be sure, but I just haven't heard any examples of how that could be really critical that don't make assumptions about the meaning of that data which aren't supportable.


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## vlmain

a_g said:


> Because I'm not in this to be willy nilly. If it's going to be touted as a good thing to have all this data, then I'm obviously missing how it's useful and so far no explanation has come forth to help me understand it.


I don't think it ever will. I had hoped we would get some useful data under the new system, but it doesn't look like we will. Total page count is useless as far as metrics we can use to make informed decisions. It is disappointing.

Someone mentioned up thread that at least under the old system, we knew how many times our book had been borrowed. Not really. We only knew how many times it had been read past 10%, although I still feel that was better information than what the new system will give us.

So, now I am back where I started, which is to consider KU to be an added bonus--the icing on the cake. For useful data on how well marketing is working, reader engagement, etc, we're going to have to rely on the data we get from the sales side.


----------



## Stephanie Marks

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> We have some good metrics around how many sales-equivalents (whether a sale or a borrow) it takes to hit each rank. It's pretty simple to look at number of books *sold* in a given day and subtract from the expected number to hit or maintain a rank to get the number of books borrowed. That takes most of the guess-work out of the equation. At least it presents a clearer picture than trying to use the graphs to gauge daily borrow rates.
> 
> It will, of course, take some time to figure out the adjustments. Just as it took time to start getting ideas around what the ratio of sales-to-read-borrows is for our books. It shouldn't take long, though, before we have an idea of the average. Maybe Book 1 in a series gets the equivalent of a 25% read-through rate within 2 weeks based on the number of borrows. Book 2 might get a 50% equivalent, and we might expect 90% on Book 3. We gauge the number of borrows from the ranks and we have our road map. No different from establishing that initial 10% read rate. The roads are the same; the signage will just be different.


Yes except that not everyone's mind works the same way. I have NEVER been able to wrap my mind around those sales to rank metrics though others find them laughably obvious. Just like how ppl here are saying that borrow info doesn't mean much because it was incomplete. For me it was like a bright canvas. There is no point in arguing over it, we just see the patterns in different ways.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I think it would be best for everyone threatening to leave if they go. Save yourselves. I shall sacrifice myself and stay behind and make sure everyone makes it on a life raft.


----------



## Will C. Brown

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I think it would be best for everyone threatening to leave if they go. Save yourselves. I shall sacrifice myself and stay behind and make sure everyone makes it on a life raft.


It that happened Amazon's KU payout would be .25 a page! Hmmm...yeah...do what Amanda says.


----------



## P.T. Phronk

a_g said:


> Yes she did. Did this rep also tell her how many words would be considered a page? I think that has the potential to be a real sticking point for many writers. Only time will tell for that, I guess.


Why would this be a sticking point? It doesn't matter at all, except psychologically.

Let's say 1000 words are read through KU across all authors. 300 words were from Author A's books, and 700 were from Author B's books.

If 10 words are in a page: 100 pages total, Author A gets 30 pages and 30% of the pot, Author B gets 70 pages and 70% of the pot.

If 100 words are in a page: 10 pages total, Author A gets 3 pages and 30% of the pot, Author B gets 7 pages and 70% of the pot.

A few pennies are at stake depending on how they round it, but that's about it. The number of words in a page doesn't matter at all, except to roughly line up with what we think of as a paper "page" after translation to electronic form.

(And a few little issues like how images and white space count toward pages)


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

KaiW said:


> If that's the case, and it truly is a case of blind reporting, then I'm out. Surely such a system is not one that any reasonable business person could take seriously.


Try having to make do with trad publishing sales reports


----------



## lamaha

vrabinec said:


> Not being a smartass, but how do you figure into the equation that a good writer can say more with fewer words than a poor writer? Though, I suppose if a writer is poor, nobody'll get through the book anyway.


Good and bad are subjective. Typing time, as measured by word count, is objective. That's all. It's really irrelevant if you or I consider a writer good or bad; the READER decides that by turning the pages.


----------



## Saul Tanpepper

Will C. Brown said:


> It that happened Amazon's KU payout would be .25 a page! Hmmm...yeah...do what Amanda says.


This essentially gets to the heart of Amazon's obfuscation with their reporting methods and their so-called pot. Half the books could leave the program - no, more accurately, half the pages could be read, ostensibly making the ones that are read worth twice as much. Except Amazon won't pay twice as much. Amazon already knows what it wants to pay/page and they'll stay within a few % points of that number. If there's enough money in the pot, they won't add anything; if it's not enough, they will. Stay in or out, leave or enter, none of it will make any difference to the KU participants. Your page value has already been determined (and, yes, I have a few books in).

It's been said before and bears repeating: If it works for you, for all or some of your books, go with KU. If not, go wide.


----------



## cinisajoy

You know on pages borrowed, I am pretty sure if you write a long book and see 10 pages read after a month, you will know you aren't engaging readers.  Whereas if you see 2,500,000 pages read, you know you are engaging readers.
That is 10,000 borrows at 250 pages.  I am almost positive, I just low balled the big authors in KU.


----------



## shalym

lamaha said:


> Most of all, it takes TIME to TYPE. And of all the tasks involved in writing, typing, for me any many others, is far and away the worst. The most time consuming. Never mind about story or writing quality, which is subjective. Depending on your regular schedule, typing an epic takes not just weeks but months. Some people type faster than others, but still, even for the fastest typists, it takes time. That time alone needs to be paid, just as in any normal job. The argument which should be better recompensed falls quite drastically at the time hurdle-


If your typing is that slow, you may want to look into a speech recognition program that does dictation. Dragon Naturally Speaking costs about $50, and works really well once it's trained.

Shari


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Saul Tanpepper said:


> This essentially gets to the heart of Amazon's obfuscation with their reporting methods and their so-called pot. Half the books could leave the program - no, more accurately, half the pages could be read, ostensibly making the ones that are read worth twice as much. Except Amazon won't pay twice as much. Amazon already knows what it wants to pay/page and they'll stay within a few % points of that number. If there's enough money in the pot, they won't add anything; if it's not enough, they will. Stay in or out, leave or enter, none of it will make any difference to the KU participants. Your page value has already been determined (and, yes, I have a few books in).


Overall true, but Amazon has more variables to consider than just what it wants to pay per page. It also has a target for # of paying KU subscribers, and one piece of that is ensuring that the content options are attractive enough (which is ultimately what I'm sure is driving this change). It is also evaluating the relationship between purchasing behavior and KU membership and borrow behavior. I'm sure it also evaluates how rank changes due to borrowing impact their overall ecosystem. And there are other things.

So while I do think that in the past 6-9 months it's been clear what Amazon wants to pay per "borrow", I also think that possibly this latest move is an attempt by them to move a bit from that kind of author-centric goal. If you think about it, it actually didn't make sense in the past for that to be their only apparent driver.


----------



## Guest

I'm NOT sure that a reader, in the case of borrows, decides what is good and bad.

Gone With the Wind got my attention several years ago.
But I never finished the book. It is a GREAT book, but life intervenes.

Now suppose Margaret Mitchell was paid by the number of pages I read. Does that mean she should have written a better book?

No.

Should she have torn her hair out and tried to figure out where she went wrong at page 109 where I stopped reading?

No.

Life intervenes with readers. Let's not go crazy that a borrowed book was not finished.

But we should go crazy with Amazon constantly messing with our payouts.
Amazon is the biggest retailer with loads of merchandise to sell.
But we are writers. We only make one product. It's not easy for us to try to make vacuum cleaners when our writing income is chopped at Amazon's whim.


----------



## Donna White Glaser

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I think it would be best for everyone threatening to leave if they go. Save yourselves. I shall sacrifice myself and stay behind and make sure everyone makes it on a life raft.


You're so good to us, Yoda! My hero!

MTA: Except I'm staying in KU for a bit while this sorts out. It looks promising to me, at least at first glance. Like all AMZ programs, we'll have to wait 6-9 months to see how it shakes out.


----------



## D. Zollicoffer

Has it been confirmed that you can opt out of this if you still have books in KU? I was going to pull out anyway since my sales have been  cannibalized. I'm basically making the same in or out lol


----------



## a_g

Phronk said:


> Why would this be a sticking point? It doesn't matter at all, except psychologically.


Never underestimate an author's ability to get twitchy when they are told that their 400 page novel only comes to 250 for Amazon's new whirlygig whizbang way of normalizing words/page for payout leveraged across hundreds of page reads a day.


----------



## Douglas Milewski

Amazon always needs the payouts large enough to attract the most successful writers. If anything, they want the unsuccessful authors to drop KDP, leaving them with a higher average quality. They want to pay successful writers. You make them money.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Donna White Glaser said:


> You're so good to us, Yoda! My hero!
> 
> MTA: Except I'm staying in KU for a bit while this sorts out. It looks promising to me, at least at first glance. Like all AMZ programs, we'll have to wait 6-9 months to see how it shakes out.


I've always been exclusive. I'm not changing my game plan until I see actual numbers. I believe I'm poised to do very well. I have always focused on novels and only add shorts to my most popular series for visibility purposes. That will not change. I will still write the shorts despite the change. Now I must go. Another novel awaits.


----------



## Jules90

Having read this thread, I am really surprised that nobody is talking about the huge elephant in the room from Monday's KU email. The email states that each author's total number of pages read will be divided by the TOTAL PAGES READ IN THE ENTIRE KU SYSTEM FOR THAT PARTICULAR MONTH. Let's take a moment to think about what that means. As KU grows in total subscribers, the total number of pages read per month increases. AND as more and more full-length books show up in place of shorts (because the per-page payment system is designed to encourage that), the total number of pages read in the entire KU system WILL KEEP CLIMBING every single month.

So why do we care about this "little" detail? Because it guarantees a race to the bottom for the per-page payment rate. It will all go swimmingly for those all-important early months of this change, but look out below once we get past the first 90 days. Everyone is going on about the per-page rate as if it will be a fairly constant number. I'm sorry folks, but it won't be. The more pages are read each month in the entire system, the smaller each author's piece of the pie gets. It's just math, but oh boy, it's going to be a mess for many authors. Even if your books are hundreds of pages, that won't be very helpful when the total number of pages read in the KU system jumps by 10 or 20 or 30 percent IN A SINGLE MONTH and with zero warning and no ways for authors to anticipate it or prepare for it. The higher the total number of pages read goes each month, the lower that per-page payout drops, even if you have many thousands of pages in the system (such as novelists).

For those novelists who have been singing the praises of this new system, you are in for a rude awakening unless you are one of the very few authors who sells extremely well. But even if you are one of those lucky few, why on earth would you want to be in a system that is completely unpredictable from one month to the next?! Why would any of us want this? The total number of pages read in the KU system will fluctuate every month, which guarantees that each author's percentage of that total will also fluctuate every month, and depending on the growth of the system in total pages and subscribers, the fluctuations could be quite large in a single month-to-month period. For anyone who makes a living from their books, whether they are short or long, this system introduces a level of uncertainty and unpredictability that no sane business person would ever accept (unless they want to lose their shirt).

What terrifies me the most is that this KU per-page payout system may eventually be introduced throughout the entire KDP store. This KU experiment may well turn out to be a test run for using this system KDP-wide. I'm not trying to depress anyone, but I think it's really important that we pay attention to the details here (and we've been given precious few details to be sure). Yes, we can opt out of KU, but what happens if this system takes over all of KDP?


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

lamaha said:


> That time alone needs to be paid, just as in any normal job.


I couldn't agree less. Writing as we are generally discussing it here is not like a "normal job" any more than other creative pursuits (music, film, etc.). If you want to be paid for your time, there are countless jobs out there, from flipping burgers to corporate law. The time it takes a musical artist to record a song or album, the time it takes the crew of people to produce a movie, and the time it takes a writer to type and edit a book, mean _nothing_ in terms of market value and compensation. Nobody deserves more pay just because they spent longer typing their novel.


----------



## Monique

Jules90,

This is exactly how the current system works: there's a pool of money and you get a piece of that pie based on how many borrows you got vs total borrows. It's not anything new. The payments fluctuate now. Amazon adds to the pot to keep the payout where they want it. I don't see why that would change.


----------



## Atunah

And if the pages read per month go up, so does the pool as it means more subscribers. If I read four 350 page booksa month through KU, that would be a payout of $11.2 taking the example of 0.008 cents per page read. So they'd have to fill $1.20 into the pot for a reader like me. But like any subscription program, many don't use it as much as they may start out, some will use more. But didn't they add to that pot each month already?

Really, they just want more subscribers that spend even more time on the site to spend even more money on other stuff they come across while looking at KU books.


----------



## Shelley K

Jules90 said:


> What terrifies me the most is that this KU per-page payout system may eventually be introduced throughout the entire KDP store.


You can take it easy. That would be an accounting nightmare for Amazon, readers and authors. I don't know why anybody is worried about this. First, authors aren't going to stand for it. Second, it would require refund/chargebacks on most purchases OR require Amazon to sell books for nothing and wait until pages were read to collect revenue. That's just . . . no. Third, no other digital good is sold this way.

I think we all have enough to digest without fearing problems that don't yet exist.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Monique said:


> Jules90,
> 
> This is exactly how the current system works: there's a pool of money and you get a piece of that pie based on how many borrows you got vs total borrows. It's not anything new. The payments fluctuate now. Amazon adds to the pot to keep the payout where they want it. I don't see why that would change.


What Monique said. Amazon will adjust the size of the pool to get the result they want, which is a more complex thing than just a target cost per page in all likelihood.


----------



## Ainsley

Jules90 said:


> Having read this thread, I am really surprised that nobody is talking about the huge elephant in the room from Monday's KU email. The email states that each author's total number of pages read will be divided by the TOTAL PAGES READ IN THE ENTIRE KU SYSTEM FOR THAT PARTICULAR MONTH. Let's take a moment to think about what that means. As KU grows in total subscribers, the total number of pages read per month increases. AND as more and more full-length books show up in place of shorts (because the per-page payment system is designed to encourage that), the total number of pages read in the entire KU system WILL KEEP CLIMBING every single month.
> 
> So why do we care about this "little" detail? Because it guarantees a race to the bottom for the per-page payment rate. It will all go swimmingly for those all-important early months of this change, but look out below once we get past the first 90 days. Everyone is going on about the per-page rate as if it will be a fairly constant number. I'm sorry folks, but it won't be. The more pages are read each month in the entire system, the smaller each author's piece of the pie gets. It's just math, but oh boy, it's going to be a mess for many authors. Even if your books are hundreds of pages, that won't be very helpful when the total number of pages read in the KU system jumps by 10 or 20 or 30 percent IN A SINGLE MONTH and with zero warning and no ways for authors to anticipate it or prepare for it. The higher the total number of pages read goes each month, the lower that per-page payout drops, even if you have many thousands of pages in the system (such as novelists).
> 
> For those novelists who have been singing the praises of this new system, you are in for a rude awakening unless you are one of the very few authors who sells extremely well. But even if you are one of those lucky few, why on earth would you want to be in a system that is completely unpredictable from one month to the next?! Why would any of us want this? The total number of pages read in the KU system will fluctuate every month, which guarantees that each author's percentage of that total will also fluctuate every month, and depending on the growth of the system in total pages and subscribers, the fluctuations could be quite large in a single month-to-month period. For anyone who makes a living from their books, whether they are short or long, this system introduces a level of uncertainty and unpredictability that no sane business person would ever accept (unless they want to lose their shirt).
> 
> What terrifies me the most is that this KU per-page payout system may eventually be introduced throughout the entire KDP store. This KU experiment may well turn out to be a test run for using this system KDP-wide. I'm not trying to depress anyone, but I think it's really important that we pay attention to the details here (and we've been given precious few details to be sure). Yes, we can opt out of KU, but what happens if this system takes over all of KDP?


I keep coming back to luring of full-length authors when it comes to the doom and gloom viewpoint. If bringing back the more successful novelists who've bailed or avoided KU is a priority then it profits Amazon nothing to create a race to the bottom. Not while success is still possible outside KU. If they do that the successful authors will simply bail again, and next time a lot more folks who are just plain fed up will leave with them.

If bringing back longer works and the bigger names who write them is in any way a priority Amazon will have to put money on the table. Especially if Amazon wants the subscription service to be the dominant model.

A lot of this discussion is coming from a position of powerlessness. If that were the case Amazon would not be implementing this change.


----------



## Sapphire

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Hey, SWolf--
> 
> it's been very quiet here without you.  Good to see you.
> 
> Betsy


I've missed your posts. I've REALLY missed your bouncing devil avatar!


----------



## David VanDyke

As long the scammers are suppressed and the system works as intended, this especially will reward authors who write content that keeps readers glued to their Kindles, reading, rather than readers who nibble at the work and digest it slowly. In other words, (IMO) it will reward writers of works that voracious genre fiction readers read...which is pretty much where we were before KU. It appear to me this simply re-normalizes the system to resemble the _a la carte_ fiction market more closely.

Genuine non-scam nonfiction is, of course, another story. Nonfiction authors might be better served staying out of KU, as the 50-page "How to Put Up Drywall" or "Civil War Uniforms of the 20th Maine" that legitimately command $9.99 can't earn anywhere near that much in KU.


----------



## Jules90

Monique said:


> Jules90,
> 
> This is exactly how the current system works: there's a pool of money and you get a piece of that pie based on how many borrows you got vs total borrows. It's not anything new. The payments fluctuate now. Amazon adds to the pot to keep the payout where they want it. I don't see why that would change.


Over the past year, the number of borrows has increased and the number of subscribers also increased which means the pot increased. And where did the per-borrow payout go from month to month on average? DOWN. It started out near two dollars and went down as low as $1.33. You are right that fluctuations are part of the system, but the trend was almost a straight line in the downward direction over the first year of KU. If you guys want to believe that won't continue going forward, that's up to you. I see the numbers, and I'm out. We are not powerless, but we also shouldn't be naive. A steady downward trend in per-borrow payouts (on average) in a system that has done nothing but grow bigger and more profitable is some very significant writing on the wall.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Jules90 said:


> Having read this thread, I am really surprised that nobody is talking about the huge elephant in the room from Monday's KU email. The email states that each author's total number of pages read will be divided by the TOTAL PAGES READ IN THE ENTIRE KU SYSTEM FOR THAT PARTICULAR MONTH. Let's take a moment to think about what that means. As KU grows in total subscribers, the total number of pages read per month increases. AND as more and more full-length books show up in place of shorts (because the per-page payment system is designed to encourage that), the total number of pages read in the entire KU system WILL KEEP CLIMBING every single month.
> 
> So why do we care about this "little" detail? Because it guarantees a race to the bottom for the per-page payment rate. It will all go swimmingly for those all-important early months of this change, but look out below once we get past the first 90 days. Everyone is going on about the per-page rate as if it will be a fairly constant number. I'm sorry folks, but it won't be. The more pages are read each month in the entire system, the smaller each author's piece of the pie gets. It's just math, but oh boy, it's going to be a mess for many authors. Even if your books are hundreds of pages, that won't be very helpful when the total number of pages read in the KU system jumps by 10 or 20 or 30 percent IN A SINGLE MONTH and with zero warning and no ways for authors to anticipate it or prepare for it. The higher the total number of pages read goes each month, the lower that per-page payout drops, even if you have many thousands of pages in the system (such as novelists).
> 
> For those novelists who have been singing the praises of this new system, you are in for a rude awakening unless you are one of the very few authors who sells extremely well. But even if you are one of those lucky few, why on earth would you want to be in a system that is completely unpredictable from one month to the next?! Why would any of us want this? The total number of pages read in the KU system will fluctuate every month, which guarantees that each author's percentage of that total will also fluctuate every month, and depending on the growth of the system in total pages and subscribers, the fluctuations could be quite large in a single month-to-month period. For anyone who makes a living from their books, whether they are short or long, this system introduces a level of uncertainty and unpredictability that no sane business person would ever accept (unless they want to lose their shirt).
> 
> What terrifies me the most is that this KU per-page payout system may eventually be introduced throughout the entire KDP store. This KU experiment may well turn out to be a test run for using this system KDP-wide. I'm not trying to depress anyone, but I think it's really important that we pay attention to the details here (and we've been given precious few details to be sure). Yes, we can opt out of KU, but what happens if this system takes over all of KDP?


I knew I shouldn't have come back online. I had to research ghost hunting equipment and popped my head in and saw this and had to respond.
Nothing you point out is any different from how KU works now. The borrows grew exponentially each month since the program's inception. They weren't flat. Amazon fed money into it once they hit the borrow amount they were comfortable with each month to keep levels where they decided they needed to be. This will be no different. Amazon doesn't care if KU is profitable. They care if their whole business model is profitable. KU is merely a way to get people to filter into the store and (hopefully for them) buy other goods.
I'm on Amazon buying stuff every week. I got a box from them today. What was in it? A laminated map of London's streets for a cozy series I plan on writing down the road, eight boxes of Twinings pomegranate and mixed berry K-Cups because I can't find them in stores and I'm addicted to them, a new blu-ray player because I use mine so often it's showing signs of distress and a two-pack of those really big silicone ice cube trays for my iced tea habit. That's on top of the Lego: Jurassic World video game delivered on Friday. Next week I'll get another delivery that's probably equally eclectic. I'm the kind of buyer Amazon wants to keep. KU is merely a filter.
No one is making anyone go into KU. I know a lot of people out of it and a lot of people in it. I happen to love it for myself but understand why others don't love it. No one is making you do anything.


----------



## Ainsley

Jules90 said:


> Over the past year, the number of borrows has increased and the number of subscribers also increased which means the pot increased. And where did the per-borrow payout go from month to month on average? DOWN. It started out near two dollars and went down as low as $1.33. You are right that fluctuations are part of the system, but the trend was almost a straight line in the downward direction over the first year of KU. If you guys want to believe that won't continue going forward, that's up to you. I see the numbers, and I'm out. We are not powerless, but we also shouldn't be naive. A steady downward trend in per-borrow payouts (on average) in a system that has done nothing but grow bigger and more profitable is some very significant writing on the wall.


Then why would they change the model. Why go rework the system again a year later if they got the results they wanted.


----------



## azebra

Reply from Amazon with more details about what constitutes 'read through'. As a writer of interactive fiction which is LONG but people RETURN TO THE BEGINNING I really wanted more info. I still have more questions but I think this answers questions others have asked. Aplogies if someone else already posted (this thread is long):

Hello,

I'm writing to follow up on your feedback comments for your recent contact with KDP Support Team. I'm sorry your concerns weren't properly addressed.

When it comes to Kindle Unlimited / KOLL borrows, the new system that we will start on July 1, will count each time a single page is read for the first time. This means that, if a reader bought your book today and read up until page 10 during this month, we'll pay only those 10 pages read during that month in their respective payment cycle. However, if that person reads from page 10 up to page 50 the next month, we'll then pay for those pages that were read the next month in the next payment cycle as well. If the person goes back through the pages and then re-reads them, we won't be paying that second time the pages are read.

We'll continue to set a KDP Select Global Fund each month. Beginning July 1, 2015, the amount you earn will be determined by your share of total pages read instead of total qualified borrows. We'll count pages of your book read by Kindle Unlimited (KU) or Kindle Owners' Lending Library (KOLL) customers for the first time. Here are some examples of how it would work if the fund was $10M and 100,000,000 total pages were read in the month:

• The author of a 100 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

• The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $2,000 ($10 million multiplied by 20,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

• The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed 100 times but only read half way through on average would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).

The payment schedule will remain the same as your other sales from KDP, and will be one combined payment that includes royalties for sales and the payout from the KDP Select Global Fund. Regardless of your country of residence, we'll continue to pay you via the method you've chosen in your account (Electronic Funds Transfer or paper check, depending on your particular options). To find out how to switch to EFT for faster payment, visit our Help page: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?moduleId=ARND44SEDMKAU

If you have additional questions about KDP Select, be sure to check out our Help page: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A6KILDRNSCOBA

Please let us know if this does address your concerns. We'll be happy to help with more information if needed.


----------



## Monique

Jules90 said:


> Over the past year, the number of borrows has increased and the number of subscribers also increased which means the pot increased. And where did the per-borrow payout go from month to month on average? DOWN. It started out near two dollars and went down as low as $1.33. You are right that fluctuations are part of the system, but the trend was almost a straight line in the downward direction over the first year of KU. If you guys want to believe that won't continue going forward, that's up to you. I see the numbers, and I'm out. We are not powerless, but we also shouldn't be naive. A steady downward trend in per-borrow payouts (on average) in a system that has done nothing but grow bigger and more profitable is some very significant writing on the wall.


No one is being naive. You "discovered" a part of the new system that was troubling for you and we pointed out that it's nothing new. No one here, including you, has any idea what the numbers will be. You are, of course, free to leave before we get a sense of how this new system will work, but just because people are willing to see what happens doesn't mean they have blinders on.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Jules90 said:


> Over the past year, the number of borrows has increased and the number of subscribers also increased which means the pot increased. And where did the per-borrow payout go from month to month on average? DOWN. It started out near two dollars and went down as low as $1.33. You are right that fluctuations are part of the system, but the trend was almost a straight line in the downward direction over the first year of KU. If you guys want to believe that won't continue going forward, that's up to you. I see the numbers, and I'm out. We are not powerless, but we also shouldn't be naive. A steady downward trend in per-borrow payouts (on average) in a system that has done nothing but grow bigger and more profitable is some very significant writing on the wall.


That's not entirely true. The borrows number did go drastically down in the first few months because the volume skyrocketed. For months now the borrows have remained in the same little area. That's not a downward trend. That's a stabilizing number. I see why people want $2 borrows, but that's not feasible when you're dealing with volume of this magnitude. Before KU I was getting between 500-700 borrows a month ($1,000 to $1,400) when people had one borrow for the entire month. That's just for borrows. Since KU my borrows have been growing exponentially. This past month I ended up with more than 33,000 borrows across two names and one very anemic old erotica name that barely exists. What is better? Is 700 borrows at $2 better than 33,000 at $1.35?
No one says you have to stay in. That's your choice to make. Everyone has to make it on their own. They have to plot their own business plan. I don't consider myself naive. While this will be a new experience I think I could profit from it greatly. I also could be wrong. I have no way of knowing until August 15.


----------



## cinisajoy

Now I don't know about everyone else but just doing the quick math on Amanda's post, I would take the 33,000.
I do believe if one is getting those kinds of borrows,  the books are being read completely.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

cinisajoy said:


> Now I don't know about everyone else but just doing the quick math on Amanda's post, I would take the 33,000.
> I do believe if one is getting those kinds of borrows, the books are being read completely.


I would guess not all are being read completely but I still think this system could benefit me. People called me an idiot for keeping my novels in KU but I was happy with my numbers. I'm hoping I will be even happier in two months. I'm certainly not changing my business model right now, though. I'm going to keep on doing what I'm doing and wait to see what happens.


----------



## cinisajoy

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I would guess not all are being read completely but I still think this system could benefit me. People called me an idiot for keeping my novels in KU but I was happy with my numbers. I'm hoping I will be even happier in two months. I'm certainly not changing my business model right now, though. I'm going to keep on doing what I'm doing and wait to see what happens.


If I had to guess I would bet money at least 80% will be read completely.


----------



## Guest

This might turn out to be a very interesting experiment. Some of us may find out that rewriting some of our old stories might make us more money than writing new ones.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

cinisajoy said:


> If I had to guess I would bet money at least 80% will be read completely.


I don't know. I would guess some people borrowed my books and never got to the 10% because they didn't like the snark. I have no ideas what that number is, though. I would say I am cautiously optimistic but still working hard. I'm doing Camp NaNo in July and plan on writing two novels. I have a writing schedule and that's something I have control over so it's not going to change.


----------



## Briteka

After giving it some thought, I've decided I'll remain in KU for the time being. The numbers for me are simple. I will stay in as long as it's $.04 a page or above. I will pull all books if it's below $.04 a page. I really have no idea what the payout is going to come out as. Part of me believes it will be $.01 a page because, well, anything more than that is a huge payout for novels. Another part of me believes that Amazon will massage the numbers to allow short story writers to get the same amount of money they were getting because that's the audience that has formed around KU. If all of those get pulled out, the KU library shrinks dramatically and subscribers will also shrink.

I guess, basically, this is just my way of saying, "I have no idea, but I would be stupid to pull my books based on nothing but assumptions". We'll see.

I still have my audiences intact on other vendors, and I believe that even if I pull all my shorts out, my income won't be hurt. In fact, maybe it'll give me a shot of brilliance and allow me to think of something new to grow my income outside of Amazon.


----------



## EC Sheedy

Will C. Brown said:


> It that happened Amazon's KU payout would be .25 a page! Hmmm...yeah...do what Amanda says.


Funny, I was thinking the same thing. If I'm the last one in and the fund is 10,000,000.00 and one of my books is read through to the stinkin' end, can I retire?


----------



## EC Sheedy

Will C. Brown said:


> It that happened Amazon's KU payout would be .25 a page! Hmmm...yeah...do what Amanda says.


Funny, I was thinking the same thing. If I'm the last one in and the fund is 10,000,000.00 and one of my books is read through to the stinkin' end, can I retire?


Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Try having to make do with trad publishing sales reports


This! I still have some trad publishing statements that I only ever poked at with a big stick from ten feet away. Impenetrable . . .


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

A friend of mine nailed this yesterday.  We're getting paid based on pageviews.

This dovetails perfectly with my assertion that, according to Amazon, we're no longer in the bookselling business.  We're selling some portion of a river of nausea-colored slurry some Amazon executive likely referred to as called "content" in a Powerpoint earlier this year.  "It will be just like web advertising, only better for us and worse for them!"  Why?  Simple.  Web advertisers get credit for the pageview no matter who is viewing it.  Kindle Unlimited pages expire after one use. 

A year from now, when an important conversation involving money gets around to "how many books did you sell" what will be your answer?  Well, if you're in Kindle Unlimited, the answer is "zero."  You're not selling books any more.  You're selling pageviews.  You get paid when a "customer" ladles a teaspoon of slop out of the trough and tastes it.  You'll get paid a little more if they like it.

Amazon gets to decide what a page is.  Amazon gets to decide what "reading a page" is (that should be interesting, trying to use a computer to determine if a page was "read" or not), Amazon gets to decide how much you'll be paid for that "read page" on a continuously variable basis.  And at the end of the month, what do you have?  You won't even know which books are being read!  You'll just have a big "pages read" number which is, for all intents and purposes absolutely useless.

What is the relationship between reader and author now?  The author is a little content factory and the reader is a gullet that eats pageviews and &$#@s cash.  Amazon owns the ATM and takes a thick slice in exchange for printing a receipt.

All the people hereabouts obsessed with blurbs and covers, your worry-free days are about to begin!  Who needs a blurb or cover if the book is one-tap-free and there's no sale taking place?  How invested are readers going to be if they don't own the book?  It's no longer necessary to summarize the work in an exciting way if they can just read it free and decide when to stop reading on their own.  No longer necessary to have book covers.  Just put up an ad:  "you can read this book for free, it's really good."  

And Amazon still keeps the number of people visiting your book page a secret (while they clog it with ads for products sold by everyone-but-you), they keep the people who "bought" your book a secret (they aren't your customers, Amazon is just letting you borrow them) and they charge you up to 65% of your cover price and do absolutely nothing in return for that money other than bill others on your behalf and then charge you an additional fee to deliver your book, because for some reason a Kindlegen .mobi file is ten times the size of the epub version of the identical book. 

Amazon has a near-total lock on the book business right now.  If Amazon were truly interested in books, readers and authors, they would spend their time trying to find ways to sell more stories to middle-grade readers, and trying to find ways to get more products into schools.  They'd have a program for non-fiction writers.  They'd put together a search system that could drill through all of human literary history to find the one book that matches a precise, exacting description of plot, characters, genre, length, type, setting, tone, imagery, language, reading level, etc.  They'd give authors access to e-mail promotions.  They'd match cover artists with authors.  They'd match blurb writers with authors.  

They could build a system that puts exactly the right book into the hands of exactly the right reader at the exact time they want it, and everyone would be willing to pay obscene, shocking amounts of money for that.  

But instead, all they want to do is arbitrage and rent-seek.  Build a machine that shaves Lincoln's beard a little closer and deliver a bag of hair to the shareholders so the suits can congratulate themselves on CNBC.

Amazon had 20 years to get it right.  It's never been about books.  It's about a river of slurry, and making it go faster.  Kindle Unlimited is nothing more than the little dish of candy by the cash register in a store full of not-books.


----------



## Atunah

0.04 a page read seems just way to high for them to pay. That would be for a 350 page book $14. $2 for a 50 page short. 

But hey, if they could get some publishers on board with such payouts, I am all for it as a reader.  

Seems a bit out there though. The example I used earlier, if I read four 350 page books that is 1400 pages. That would cost them $56 to pay out. With a gain from me the reader $10. I am not good in math, but that doesn't really make any sense to me.


----------



## Briteka

Atunah said:


> 0.04 a page read seems just way to high for them to pay. That would be for a 350 page book $14. $2 for a 50 page short.
> 
> But hey, if they could get some publishers on board with such payouts, I am all for it as a reader.
> 
> Seems a bit out there though. The example I used earlier, if I read four 350 page books that is 1400 pages. That would cost them $56 to pay out. With a gain from me the reader $10. I am not good in math, but that doesn't really make any sense to me.


You are absolutely right.

At the same time, Amazon is no longer in a position to dictate such low rates and people just have to accept them. They aren't even the top income generators anymore for some authors. So if it doesn't make sense for us to keep our books in KU, we will simply pull them, and KU will lose millions of books in its library, making it a much less desirable service for readers. $.04 is the price Amazon has to pay me for it to make sense for me to stay in. Anything less than that and I am making less money than I would if I were to pull my books and put them up on other vendors. I'm alright either way, but I'll give Amazon the chance to show that it make sense for me to stay in.


----------



## Shelley K

justphil said:


> You won't even know which books are being read! You'll just have a big "pages read" number which is, for all intents and purposes absolutely useless.


I have no comment on the rest of your post, but this is untrue. You will have a separate "pages read" number for each title. So you will know which books are being read.


----------



## Atunah

Briteka said:


> You are absolutely right.
> 
> At the same time, Amazon is no longer in a position to dictate such low rates and people just have to accept them. They aren't even the top income generators anymore for some authors. So if it doesn't make sense for us to keep our books in KU, we will simply pull them, and KU will lose millions of books in its library, making it a much less desirable service for readers. $.04 is the price Amazon has to pay me for it to make sense for me to stay in. Anything less than that and I am making less money than I would if I were to pull my books and put them up on other vendors. I'm alright either way, but I'll give Amazon the chance to show that it make sense for me to stay in.


Holy cow, you get paid $14 royalty for books on other vendors? . Those are like hardcover prices the publisher can barely charge anymore. Actually I don't see that much at all. $12.99 yes, but then it would be less with the percentage Amazon takes. Well good luck then on those vendors.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Briteka said:


> You are absolutely right.
> 
> At the same time, Amazon is no longer in a position to dictate such low rates and people just have to accept them. They aren't even the top income generators anymore for some authors. So if it doesn't make sense for us to keep our books in KU, we will simply pull them, and KU will lose millions of books in its library, making it a much less desirable service for readers. $.04 is the price Amazon has to pay me for it to make sense for me to stay in. Anything less than that and I am making less money than I would if I were to pull my books and put them up on other vendors. I'm alright either way, but I'll give Amazon the chance to show that it make sense for me to stay in.


While Amazon is not the top income source of all authors it is still the top dog for most authors. There are outliers in everything. I don't think $.04 is even remotely feasible and I'm more than happy with $.01 a page. I don't think Amazon will realistically lose millions of books. I'm absolutely positive there will be a shifting of titles but I would bet the number of titles in Select keeps going up. That is a number we can watch, though. I could be wrong.


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## daffodils321

Ainsley said:


> I keep coming back to luring of full-length authors when it comes to the doom and gloom viewpoint. If bringing back the more successful novelists who've bailed or avoided KU is a priority then it profits Amazon nothing to create a race to the bottom. Not while success is still possible outside KU. If they do that the successful authors will simply bail again, and next time a lot more folks who are just plain fed up will leave with them.
> 
> If bringing back longer works and the bigger names who write them is in any way a priority Amazon will have to put money on the table. Especially if Amazon wants the subscription service to be the dominant model.
> 
> A lot of this discussion is coming from a position of powerlessness. If that were the case Amazon would not be implementing this change.


I agree. My guess would be that the borrow rate will go up for those who write average length novels. It's probably prudent to observe what's happened in other industries (like music) and use that as a warning as to what can happen to ebooks. But books aren't music, movies, tv ect. The industry is different. It may have the same fate (payment wise). But it may not. And if this race to the bottom happens it could be years off. (Or not). TBH, I really don't see this change in payment system being that different than the borrow system.


----------



## Briteka

Atunah said:


> Holy cow, you get paid $14 royalty for books on other vendors? . Those are like hardcover prices the publisher can barely charge anymore. Actually I don't see that much at all. $12.99 yes, but then it would be less with the percentage Amazon takes. Well good luck then on those vendors.


No. That's not the way this works. 

At $.04 a page, I make around $1.00 a book "buy". That's the limit where Amazon exclusivity makes financial sense. Any less than that and I make more by placing my books on other vendors.


----------



## Briteka

Amanda M. Lee said:


> While Amazon is not the top income source of all authors it is still the top dog for most authors. There are outliers in everything. I don't think $.04 is even remotely feasible and I'm more than happy with $.01 a page. I don't think Amazon will realistically lose millions of books. I'm absolutely positive there will be a shifting of titles but I would bet the number of titles in Select keeps going up. That is a number we can watch, though. I could be wrong.


The $2.99 for short erotica and erotic romance method still sells. Very few authors are going to make more money selling their shorts at $.25 through KU than they are selling at $2.99 on other retailers.


----------



## Abalone

This thread is so entertaining. It's like Battle Royale meets the Brady Bunch. No offense, of course. I welcome this news.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Briteka said:


> The $2.99 for short erotica and erotic romance method still sells. Very few authors are going to make more money selling their shorts at $.25 through KU than they are selling at $2.99 on other retailers.


What about volume? Is 20 borrows worth less than one sale? I'm not saying that will be the case but it very well could be.


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> A friend of mine nailed this yesterday. We're getting paid based on pageviews.
> 
> This dovetails perfectly with my assertion that, according to Amazon, we're no longer in the bookselling business. We're selling some portion of a river of nausea-colored slurry some Amazon executive likely referred to as called "content" in a Powerpoint earlier this year. "It will be just like web advertising, only better for us and worse for them!" Why? Simple. Web advertisers get credit for the pageview no matter who is viewing it. Kindle Unlimited pages expire after one use.
> 
> A year from now, when an important conversation involving money gets around to "how many books did you sell" what will be your answer? Well, if you're in Kindle Unlimited, the answer is "zero." You're not selling books any more. You're selling pageviews. You get paid when a "customer" ladles a teaspoon of slop out of the trough and tastes it. You'll get paid a little more if they like it.
> 
> Amazon gets to decide what a page is. Amazon gets to decide what "reading a page" is (that should be interesting, trying to use a computer to determine if a page was "read" or not), Amazon gets to decide how much you'll be paid for that "read page" on a continuously variable basis. And at the end of the month, what do you have? You won't even know which books are being read! You'll just have a big "pages read" number which is, for all intents and purposes absolutely useless.
> 
> What is the relationship between reader and author now? The author is a little content factory and the reader is a gullet that eats pageviews and &$#@s cash. Amazon owns the ATM and takes a thick slice in exchange for printing a receipt.
> 
> All the people hereabouts obsessed with blurbs and covers, your worry-free days are about to begin! Who needs a blurb or cover if the book is one-tap-free and there's no sale taking place? How invested are readers going to be if they don't own the book? It's no longer necessary to summarize the work in an exciting way if they can just read it free and decide when to stop reading on their own. No longer necessary to have book covers. Just put up an ad: "you can read this book for free, it's really good."
> 
> And Amazon still keeps the number of people visiting your book page a secret (while they clog it with ads for products sold by everyone-but-you), they keep the people who "bought" your book a secret (they aren't your customers, Amazon is just letting you borrow them) and they charge you up to 65% of your cover price and do absolutely nothing in return for that money other than bill others on your behalf and then charge you an additional fee to deliver your book, because for some reason a Kindlegen .mobi file is ten times the size of the epub version of the identical book.
> 
> Amazon has a near-total lock on the book business right now. If Amazon were truly interested in books, readers and authors, they would spend their time trying to find ways to sell more stories to middle-grade readers, and trying to find ways to get more products into schools. They'd have a program for non-fiction writers. They'd put together a search system that could drill through all of human literary history to find the one book that matches a precise, exacting description of plot, characters, genre, length, type, setting, tone, imagery, language, reading level, etc. They'd give authors access to e-mail promotions. They'd match cover artists with authors. They'd match blurb writers with authors.
> 
> They could build a system that puts exactly the right book into the hands of exactly the right reader at the exact time they want it, and everyone would be willing to pay obscene, shocking amounts of money for that.
> 
> But instead, all they want to do is arbitrage and rent-seek. Build a machine that shaves Lincoln's beard a little closer and deliver a bag of hair to the shareholders so the suits can congratulate themselves on CNBC.
> 
> Amazon had 20 years to get it right. It's never been about books. It's about a river of slurry, and making it go faster. Kindle Unlimited is nothing more than the little dish of candy by the cash register in a store full of not-books.


Repeating myself: NOT EVERY BOOK READER SUBSCRIBES TO KINDLE UNLIMITED. We do still buy books or book files or whatever you choose to call them. Words on a screen works too. So whichever meaning you choose Amazon still gets my money. And as per Kindle Unlimited if I choose to subscribe, I have to give Amazon $10 a month so in no way is the book number ever going to be zero.

Oh and not to be nitpicky, but if I buy something it is mine to keep, if I borrow something I have to return it. So in no way is a borrow a sale. You cannot buy a borrow.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Briteka said:


> The $2.99 for short erotica and erotic romance method still sells. Very few authors are going to make more money selling their shorts at $.25 through KU than they are selling at $2.99 on other retailers.


Pedantically, I'd argue that no writer makes/is going to make any money _selling_ anything through KU. Because KU is for borrows, not sales. Sales are sales; borrows are borrows. They ain't the same thing. KU is not a sales channel.


----------



## Briteka

Amanda M. Lee said:


> What about volume? Is 20 borrows worth less than one sale? I'm not saying that will be the case but it very well could be.


Volume is the main component I've considered about my own decision. KU basically only doubles sales on other channels.


----------



## Briteka

Jim Johnson said:


> Pedantically, I'd argue that no writer makes/is going to make any money _selling_ anything through KU. Because KU is for borrows, not sales. Sales are sales; borrows are borrows. They ain't the same thing. KU is not a sales channel.


That is quite pedantic. 
KU should be viewed as a sales channel.


----------



## Becca Mills

justphil said:


> Amazon had 20 years to get it right. It's never been about books. It's about a river of slurry, and making it go faster. Kindle Unlimited is nothing more than the little dish of candy by the cash register in a store full of not-books.


So? Do you think Target has a passionate emotional attachment to bed sheets or plastic bins or any other product it sells? Amazon is a store. Stores are here to make money by selling things. Bezos started with books because he thought they provided an easier entry point for online commerce than other products, not because he wanted to sit in a library all day reading. This should shock and appall exactly no one.

I too find Amazon's sales environment imperfect. I wish the company provided a lot more data and that KDP support were more competent. I wish the company didn't make the 70% royalty dependent on Select membership in several foreign stores. I wish there were more subcategories in my genre and that I could set books to $0.00 directly.

Despite these imperfections, the environment works well for me, and I'm making money selling a book I never would've written if Amazon hadn't come along and made self-publishing viable. That's due in part to my having tried to _make_ the Amazon sales environment work for me. You could do that as well. For instance, you react to the presence of also-boughts on your book page with outrage, as though the also-bought books are stealing your readers. But the also-bought system also means that _your_ books are advertised on _other people's_ pages, enabling new readers to discover your work through the pages of the authors they already know. This is a terrific opportunity. Band together with some other authors who are writing quality work in your genre -- folks in your guild, maybe? -- and put out a free boxed set. You'll all end up in one another's also-boughts, hugely expanding your opportunities for reader discovery. In fact, also-boughts seem almost custom-made for the group-based approach you and your guildmates are taking to publishing.

By all means, write politely to KDP and tell them what you'd like to see change. Then go ahead and exploit the sales environment as it currently stands. Make the most of the tools you're offered, imperfect as they may be. If you're unwilling to work with the tools Amazon is offering, then don't sell your books through Amazon. Ranting about it here, in front of audience that is making or is trying to make those tools work for them, accomplishes nothing.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> Do you think Target has a passionate emotional attachment to bed sheets or plastic bins or any other product it sells?


As a matter of fact, they do. Target sells one brand of clothing. Merona. Target owns Merona.



> But the also-bought system also means that your books are advertised on other people's pages


That's what they keep telling me. I have no details, of course, because Amazon keeps all that information to themselves and won't let me know. Because, you know, if I knew where my books were appearing, I might oh, I don't know, *sell more books*.



> as though the also-bought books are stealing your readers


They aren't stealing my readers. They are diluting my marketing efforts. I'm trying to explain to a prospective customer why they should buy my book while there's a loudspeaker overhead shouting *GREETINGS! HOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE OTHER 200 BOOKS INSTEAD? DID WE MENTION YOU CAN GET THIS POOR DUMB BASTARD'S BOOK FREE? WHY BUY WHEN YOU CAN PAY US RENT? WE HAVE UNLIMITED REASONS YOU DON'T NEED THIS BOOK! CLICKHERECLICKHERECLICKHERE*

And what have I accomplished? I just spent money/time/expertise/talent to deliver free traffic to Amazon.com in exchange for nothing.

Meanwhile, I'm being asked to participate in a sales scheme where Amazon can literally decide _day by day_ how much I get paid with three completely independent and arbitrary ways to lower my royalties.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Briteka said:


> That is quite pedantic.
> KU should be viewed as a sales channel.


Do you view libraries as sales channels?


----------



## Briteka

Jim Johnson said:


> Do you view libraries as sales channels?


If they pay me per check out, then yes.


----------



## Atunah

Briteka said:


> No. That's not the way this works.
> 
> At $.04 a page, I make around $1.00 a book "buy". That's the limit where Amazon exclusivity makes financial sense. Any less than that and I make more by placing my books on other vendors.


I guess I am confused then. I thought the new rules are paid by page read. So if you want 4 cents and I read a 350 page book, that would get the author $14. So how is this not how this works. Color me befuddled.

If you'd make $1 for the 4 cents read that would mean a super short short of 25 pages then? Well isn't this the whole issue why they are changing this? The gravy train problem that has been going on with this super short stuff?
Erotica I assume. 
Since I keep reading that readers will pay 2.99 for that short stuff than KU would not have brought as much in as a sale before this change either. So there really isn't much difference for those authors. Sell for 2.99 and make money, right?

Again, not even in Neverland will they pay 4 cents for page read. Just seems like wishful thinking. Especially for the short short writers. Then a 50 page short would make $2, more than under the old plan. That would defeat the purpose of the thing.



Briteka said:


> That is quite pedantic.
> KU should be viewed as a sales channel.


If KU was a sale channel, then I should legally own each book I read through the program. You can't have a sale without a product changing hands. A loan is not a product changing hands. Its a loan. I have to give it back. I didn't buy it, I borrowed it.


----------



## KaiW

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Try having to make do with trad publishing sales reports


Oh I'm very familiar with those. Difference is I get them long after the fact & have already been paid upfront so this info can only minimally inform ongoing marketing/publishing decisions, whereas Zon's KU dashboard does. Or did.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> That would defeat the purpose of the thing.


The purpose being for Amazon to pay less.

Think about the alternative for a moment. When you sell books on Amazon and you are not in Select, your failure is assured. You have no idea:

1. What your conversion rate is, or whether it is going up or down. 
2. Where your customers came from. 
3. How many readers are repeat customers. 
4. Why people did or did not like your book (unless they leave a review, which is rare) 
5. Why people bought your book 
6. Whether or not they bought it based on the sample, cover or blurb (or all three or none) 
7. Who those customers are (age, likes and dislikes, favorite authors, how they find books to read, gender, education, reading level -- we know Amazon frowns on too much communication between authors and readers) 
8. Where or how they read your book 
9. How important price is to them 
10. How fast they read your work

For non-Select authors, Amazon is a gigantic black box that is absolutely impossible to interpret for the purpose of improving your marketing. Authors would literally be better off hawking books out of a cardboard box outside a mall. At least you'd have some contact with your readers.


----------



## Jim Johnson

vrabinec said:


> Is it really the same thing? I thought people had to pay to be a part of KU. To me, that would make it more along the lines of buying a power drill from Home Depot versus borrowing one from Rent-A-Center. The customer pays both ways. If KU is free to all customers, then Amazon's just giving the stuff away, and THEN it's akin to a library.


KU has a monthly subscription fee for readers, yeah. And your example is what I was getting at. You can buy a power drill (book) through any sales channel. Or you can pay to borrow a power drill (book). In the first case, it's a sale since you keep what you bought. In the second case, it's a borrow because you have to give it back. There's no sale happening there. No one at Rent-A-Center is going to say that their monthly total of drills borrowed were # of drills sold.


----------



## Briteka

Atunah said:


> If you'd make $1 for the 4 cents read that would mean a super short short of 25 pages then? Well isn't this the whole issue why they are changing this? The gravy train problem that has been going on with this super short stuff?


Correct.



> Erotica I assume.


Erotic romance serials.



> Since I keep reading that readers will pay 2.99 for that short stuff than KU would not have brought as much in as a sale before this change either. So there really isn't much difference for those authors. Sell for 2.99 and make money, right?
> 
> Again, not even in Neverland will they pay 4 cents for page read. Just seems like wishful thinking. Especially for the short short writers. Then a 50 page short would make $2, more than under the old plan. That would defeat the purpose of the thing.


At around $1.30, the amount of borrows KU pushed made me more income than selling books on other vendors. At around $1.00, the amount of borrows KU pushes makes me more than placing the books on other vendors. Any less than that, and I lose money by being a part of KU.

I don't care about Amazon's position on this. They are not my Fairy Godmother. They will provide me with terms that make financial sense to me, or I will simply not do business with them. I was simply posting my numbers and expectations. I will give them a chance to meet my expectations, and if they don't, I will go elsewhere. I'm well aware that $.04 isn't likely, but I will give them a chance.


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> As a matter of fact, they do. Target sells one brand of clothing. Merona. Target owns Merona.
> 
> That's what they keep telling me. I have no details, of course, because Amazon keeps all that information to themselves and won't let me know. Because, you know, if I knew where my books were appearing, I might oh, I don't know, *sell more books*.
> 
> They aren't stealing my readers. They are diluting my marketing efforts. I'm trying to explain to a prospective customer why they should buy my book while there's a loudspeaker overhead shouting *GREETINGS! HOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE OTHER 200 BOOKS INSTEAD? DID WE MENTION YOU CAN GET THIS POOR DUMB BASTARD'S BOOK FREE? WHY BUY WHEN YOU CAN PAY US RENT? WE HAVE UNLIMITED REASONS YOU DON'T NEED THIS BOOK! CLICKHERECLICKHERECLICKHERE*
> 
> And what have I accomplished? I just spent money/time/expertise/talent to deliver free traffic to Amazon.com in exchange for nothing.
> 
> Meanwhile, I'm being asked to participate in a sales scheme where Amazon can literally decide _day by day_ how much I get paid with three completely independent and arbitrary ways to lower my royalties.


If your cover and blurb are good enough, I won't be scrolling to see what else is there. I will be clicking on the right side of the page that says buy now with one click.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

I understand that for some (many) this is a very emotional issue and that for everyone, it has potential impact for your business. I appreciate that, for the most part, the discussion has stayed civil. I hope that it will stay that way.

Justphil, please stop the shouting (all caps, bolded no less). See Forum Decorum. At some point you will need to agree to disagree--I think you've made your points.

Betsy
KB Moderator


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> For non-Select authors, Amazon is a gigantic black box that is absolutely impossible to interpret for the purpose of improving your marketing. Authors would literally be better off hawking books out of a cardboard box outside a mall. At least you'd have some contact with your readers.


What? Amazon reports *sales numbers*, right? So surely if you market your book, book sells, you know marketing is working? If book doesn't sell, then marketing is not working. Have I over simplified it, or missed something?

From reading your posts, I think your issue is that your book doesn't sell. At all. I don't see that as a retailers problem, after all your book is on the shelf alongside everyone else's product. The issue is that no one is picking it up. You need to look at your cover, blurb, opening pages and what marketing effort you are expending to interest people in looking at your book. None of that is Amazon's fault. Lack of sales is an author issue, surely?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> The purpose being for Amazon to pay less.
> 
> Think about the alternative for a moment. When you sell books on Amazon and you are not in Select, your failure is assured. You have no idea:
> 
> 1. What your conversion rate is, or whether it is going up or down.
> 2. Where your customers came from.
> 3. How many readers are repeat customers.
> 4. Why people did or did not like your book (unless they leave a review, which is rare)
> 5. Why people bought your book
> 6. Whether or not they bought it based on the sample, cover or blurb (or all three or none)
> 7. Who those customers are (age, likes and dislikes, favorite authors, how they find books to read, gender, education, reading level -- we know Amazon frowns on too much communication between authors and readers)
> 8. Where or how they read your book
> 9. How important price is to them
> 10. How fast they read your work
> 
> For non-Select authors, Amazon is a gigantic black box that is absolutely impossible to interpret for the purpose of improving your marketing. Authors would literally be better off hawking books out of a cardboard box outside a mall. At least you'd have some contact with your readers.


I think the thousands of non-Select authors making bank would beg to differ.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

justphil said:


> As a matter of fact, they do. Target sells one brand of clothing. Merona. Target owns Merona.
> 
> That's what they keep telling me. I have no details, of course, because Amazon keeps all that information to themselves and won't let me know. Because, you know, if I knew where my books were appearing, I might oh, I don't know, *sell more books*.
> 
> They aren't stealing my readers. They are diluting my marketing efforts. I'm trying to explain to a prospective customer why they should buy my book while there's a loudspeaker overhead shouting *GREETINGS! HOW ABOUT ONE OF THESE OTHER 200 BOOKS INSTEAD? DID WE MENTION YOU CAN GET THIS POOR DUMB BASTARD'S BOOK FREE? WHY BUY WHEN YOU CAN PAY US RENT? WE HAVE UNLIMITED REASONS YOU DON'T NEED THIS BOOK! CLICKHERECLICKHERECLICKHERE*
> 
> And what have I accomplished? I just spent money/time/expertise/talent to deliver free traffic to Amazon.com in exchange for nothing.
> 
> Meanwhile, I'm being asked to participate in a sales scheme where Amazon can literally decide _day by day_ how much I get paid with three completely independent and arbitrary ways to lower my royalties.


Target sells a lot more than just Merona clothing. I buy other brands there all the time. As for the rest, since you don't sell on Amazon, I'm still confused why you care.


----------



## Rykymus

A lot of talk about per page rates, how pages are calculated, percentage of pages read, etc... Even talk of knowing exactly how many books were sold or borrowed per day.

Seriously? Per day?

Now, I can understand why you would want to know the 'per day' numbers in regards to judging the effectiveness of a promotion. (At least at the most basic level.) And I have expressed my concern for the loss of this metric to my KDP rep. (In a quite lengthy and passionate email.) However, my concerns are not in the minutiae of daily, or even weekly numbers. Mine are in 'monthly revenue.' In the end, that's what matters most to me. That's what pays the bills. That's what keeps me able to continue writing.

Would I like access to all those additional metrics? Sure. (I even said as much in that email.) Am I going to get them? Doubtful. However, I will wait and see how my monthly revenue compares after the change. You see, I don't build my career around marketing. I don't do promotions. I don't even use the tools that Select provides. I just write. That's what Amazon wants you to do.

I will continue to remain exclusive to Amazon for the foreseeable future, as I gain more new readers (and new subscribers to the mailing list) through KU than going wide. Growing that mailing list of loyal readers is the most important thing for me right now, as it is the most effective marketing tool there is, bar none.

That slurry of content that JustPhil refers to is not something evil. It's my ride to a comfortable retirement. You just have to build a boat that won't sink in it.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> So surely if you market your book, book sells, you know marketing is working?


Perhaps. We don't know why it's working, though, and that's kind of important. We also don't know how it changes over time. That's even more important.



> If book doesn't sell, then marketing is not working.


Not necessarily. Marketing might be working fine, but can't compete with louder marketing.



> I think your issue is that your book doesn't sell.


I think it's telling when someone makes a series of cogent points that the audience here immediately turns to ad hominem and tries to take advantage of what they believe are other people's insecurities to score popularity points. For the record, we sell more books every three weeks than in all our time on Amazon combined, including borrows.



> Lack of sales is an author issue, surely?


Lack of sales is a lack of visibility. Full stop. We have irrefutable proof in our most recent sales numbers.



> I'm still confused why you care.


Amazon has a big influence on the book business. I sell books. I realize that's advanced thinking, but there it is.



> At some point you will need to agree to disagree--I think you've made your points.


Feel free to kick me out at your convenience, Betsy. I think that will establish once and for all where Kboards comes down on issues like this and how you feel about outsiders.

Again, for the record, I have plenty of friends. I'm not here to win a popularity contest. This is about the business of selling books, and this also represents only the latest in a non-stop parade of excuses for Amazon to cut royalties while those who are not in Select are flat ignored. I would think that would be of considerable import, but again, it's your site. I probably should be working anyway.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

AliceWE said:


> What? Amazon reports *sales numbers*, right? So surely if you market your book, book sells, you know marketing is working? If book doesn't sell, then marketing is not working. Have I over simplified it, or missed something?


Yes, this is over-simplifying. If you want to maximize your revenue (in any business), you don't measure marketing on a "yes it's working" or "no it's not working" basis. You look at _what pieces_ are working (or not). Do a search for "A/B split testing" to see how detailed this can be. Understanding the performance of the marketing chain is pretty impossible right now with Amazon. And other platforms. I see this as a separate issue from the KU change, one I've written about elsewhere, and I don't think it adds much to this particular discussion.


----------



## Briteka

Rykymus said:


> A lot of talk about per page rates, how pages are calculated, percentage of pages read, etc... Even talk of knowing exactly how many books were sold or borrowed per day.
> 
> Seriously? Per day?
> 
> Now, I can understand why you would want to know the 'per day' numbers in regards to judging the effectiveness of a promotion. (At least at the most basic level.) And I have expressed my concern for the loss of this metric to my KDP rep. (In a quite lengthy and passionate email.) However, my concerns are not in the minutiae of daily, or even weekly numbers. Mine are in 'monthly revenue.' In the end, that's what matters most to me. That's what pays the bills. That's what keeps me able to continue writing.
> 
> Would I like access to all those additional metrics? Sure. (I even said as much in that email.) Am I going to get them? Doubtful. However, I will wait and see how my monthly revenue compares after the change. You see, I don't build my career around marketing. I don't do promotions. I don't even use the tools that Select provides. I just write. That's what Amazon wants you to do.
> 
> I will continue to remain exclusive to Amazon for the foreseeable future, as I gain more new readers (and new subscribers to the mailing list) through KU than going wide. Growing that mailing list of loyal readers is the most important thing for me right now, as it is the most effective marketing tool there is, bar none.
> 
> That slurry of content that JustPhil refers to is not something evil. It's my ride to a comfortable retirement. You just have to build a boat that won't sink in it.


The only problem is that Amazon will continue to shrink while certain other retailers will continue to grow. Going all-in at Amazon is tying yourself to a sinking ship. It takes some time to gain traction on other retailers, but there will come a point where you have to start at those retailers because Amazon will have sunk too far. I just worry that people going all-in from the start of their careers will be at a severe disadvantage later on.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Briteka said:


> The only problem is that Amazon will continue to shrink while certain other retailers will continue to grow. Going all-in at Amazon is tying yourself to a sinking ship. It takes some time to gain traction on other retailers, but there will come a point where you have to start at those retailers because Amazon will have sunk too far. I just worry that people going all-in from the start of their careers will be at a severe disadvantage later on.


How is Amazon shrinking?


----------



## cinisajoy

I have a prediction.    The All stars will continue to be all stars.  The get rich quickers will find themselves working for pennies.  Everyone else will fall somewhere in the middle.


----------



## Andrew Ashling

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I understand that for some (many) this is a very emotional issue and that for everyone, it has potential impact for your business. I appreciate that, for the most part, the discussion has stayed civil. I hope that it will stay that way.
> 
> Justphil, please stop the shouting (all caps, bolded no less). See Forum Decorum. At some point you will need to agree to disagree--I think you've made your points.
> 
> Betsy
> KB Moderator


Actually this was Amazon shouting. Writer. Character. Not the same person/entity.


----------



## Rykymus

Phil, I applaud your passion, and your belief in your position. However, you have yet to make cogent arguments, or offer irrefutable facts, despite the fact that others have asked you politely for them. You only offer points of view... Yours. That's fine, everyone is entitled to them, but if you truly want to make any of us 'see the light', you need to change your tactics.

Of course, you may continue screaming from the rooftops, if that pleases you.

I congratulate you on finding success without Amazon. We should all be so fortunate. However, just because some of us choose to stay where we are, despite your opinions, it does not make us wrong, or stupid. It makes us different.


----------



## Briteka

Amanda M. Lee said:


> How is Amazon shrinking?


Amazon's market share is shrinking to Play and iTunes, and it will only continue. Younger generations of people are used to buying their media from the integrated systems of their devices, which is an Apple device or Android device, and this trend is only going to continue. I don't see Amazon implementing anything to make people use a third-party store any longer. Their prices aren't the best anymore since Google has decided to go all in and price lower than Amazon at all costs. In some ways, Google has a better discovery system. In other ways, Amazon has a better discovery system. They're basically tied in that regard, and I doubt that Amazon is ever going to be able to create a search algorithm that out-searches Google. Amazon has better lists and visibility algos, but I believe Google has a chance to do that better.

In a lot of ways, KU is Amazon's way of giving up on the ebook business.


----------



## cinisajoy

Briteka said:


> Amazon's market share is shrinking to Play and iTunes, and it will only continue. Younger generations of people are used to buying their media from the integrated systems of their devices, which is an Apple device or Android device, and this trend is only going to continue. I don't see Amazon implementing anything to make people use a third-party store any longer. Their prices aren't the best anymore since Google has decided to go all in and price lower than Amazon at all costs. In some ways, Google has a better discovery system. In other ways, Amazon has a better discovery system. They're basically tied in that regard, and I doubt that Amazon is ever going to be able to create a search algorithm that out-searches Google. Amazon has better lists and visibility algos, but I believe Google has a chance to do that better.
> 
> In a lot of ways, KU is Amazon's way of giving up on the ebook business.


How many books does Amazon have? How many books does Google have? How many books does Apple have? Now how many books do Google and Apple have that are not available on Amazon? 
Shrinking does not mean failing.
KU is Amazon responding to customers that wanted a subscription program so they could read on their ereaders. It is an answer to Scribd and Oyster.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> Lack of sales is a lack of visibility. Full stop. We have irrefutable proof in our most recent sales numbers.


Again I'm confused. Isn't that where marketing comes in, to increase your book's visibility?

I'm still not seeing how lack of sales is Amazon's fault? if your marketing effort doesn't work, I can't see how you can automatically equate that with Amazon blacklisting your books and suppressing your titles. Maybe marketing didn't work because people don't find the book appealing for other reasons?

I'm a newbie, I'm reading these threads to learn and I still think putting my debut into KU is a good idea. I'm not seeing any hard data from you to refute that. From my perspective I think someone who sells (or has KU borrows of) 30,000 copies a month has a much better grasp on how Amazon works than someone who only sells 3 copies a month.


----------



## Briteka

cinisajoy said:


> How many books does Amazon have? How many books does Google have? How many books does Apple have? Now how many books do Google and Apple have that are not available on Amazon?
> Shrinking does not mean failing.
> KU is Amazon responding to customers that wanted a subscription program so they could read on their ereaders. It is an answer to Scribd and Oyster.


We'll just agree to disagree. Amazon isn't failing yet as an ebook seller, but I see it as an eventuality. It came to power by offering cheap ebooks. And it stayed in power because of Kindle/store familiarity. Google is now doing the same thing to Amazon that Amazon did to everyone else with pricing, and familiarity will wane because new generations are more familiar with Play and iTunes.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> KU is Amazon's way of giving up on the ebook business.


Sometimes the only reward in a thread like this is when someone writes 11 words that clears the bases with a vapor trail right over the left field fence.



> I'm still not seeing how lack of sales is Amazon's fault?


Amazon has a multi-billion-dollar marketing machine superior to all others ever invented by man. But they leave book marketing exclusively in the hands of a writer somewhere in rural Indiana. Explain that rationally, and I will retract every word.


----------



## Monique

justphil said:


> The purpose being for Amazon to pay less.
> 
> Think about the alternative for a moment. When you sell books on Amazon and you are not in Select, your failure is assured.


These two statements alone show that you have no idea how Amazon works. One is so short-sighted it's blind and the other appears to be simply a fabrication meant to assuage your own failure to sell on Amazon. Thousands of people sell well on Amazon and are not in Select.

I would address your other points, but you don't want to discuss things. You don't want to learn. You just want to have someone to blame. Feel free to keep blaming Amazon and the rest of us will work to understand it and profit.


----------



## JalexM

justphil said:


> Feel free to kick me out at your convenience, Betsy. I think that will establish once and for all where Kboards comes down on issues like this and how you feel about outsiders.


There's discussing issues and then there is overstating your valuable opinions.

You are the master of your writing, not amazon, not smashwords, no one else is. If you're having problems with sales it's not amazon's fault. It's just a platform for the ones who want to succeed have a chance too.
I've sold more out of select then in, and that's my problem and mine alone.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> Amazon has a multi-billion-dollar marketing machine superior to all others ever invented by man. But they leave book marketing exclusively in the hands of a writer somewhere in rural Indiana. Explain that rationally, and I will retract every word.


Are you for real? Is this thread being Punk'd?

Amazon does marketing for books that are selling. See that is the thing I've learned by hanging out on these forums. Authors are responsible for getting the ball rolling and directing readers to a retailer. It's much like advertising that companies do to let you know about a product that you can then buy from Walmart, or Target or PotteryBarn. The retailers don't buy the ad break in the Superbowl the producer of the product does.

Once you interest people enough that they start buying your book, Amazon has these things called algorithms. It has best seller lists, most popular and hot new releases, also bought recommendations and emails out if you follow an author. These are all marketing tools that an author can hook into IF your marketing effort generates sufficient interest in your book to make them kick in. Again this is all stuff I've learned hanging out here. It kind of staggers me that you say you have been publishing books for over a year but haven't figured out the difference between a retailer and a supplier.


----------



## Rykymus

Amazon's weapon against losing the 'younger generation' to the built-in apps on iOS and Android devices is exclusivity. They lost the device war, and they know it. They also know that people are too lazy (or don't know that they can) to download an app to shop for and read kindle books on their iOS and Android devices. The only way they are going to get them to do so is to give them a reason. A subscription service for read-a-holics is a reason. Exclusivity of books is a reason. All Amazon has to do to win the ebook competition is to make exclusivity worth it to enough of us. So far, they're trying to find ways that work for all of us... Amazon, authors, and readers.

Other vendors getting an increase in the market share does not equal Amazon is shrinking, as the size of the pie is also growing. Although I have seen more people stating that Amazon has become a smaller percentage of their overall sales, with some even saying that sales on other venues have been higher than on Amazon, I'm still seeing that most people sell more through Amazon than all other vendors combined.

Just be thankful that Amazon is trying to find ways to make it work for everyone. They could extend the exclusivity requirement to not just Select, but all of KDP, if they wanted to. And if they did, most of us, (myself included) would have little choice but to comply.


----------



## Usedtoposthere

I'm jumping in here for just a sec to say--I think it's really easy to get all-or-nothing about this change. But it doesn't have to be. And, yes, it's another big change that we're having to adapt to, just like when KU came out and started paying the same for erotic romance shorts as for 115K novels (like mine), and Contemporary Romance got flooded with 20K pieces of billionaire stepbrother serials and it was hard to list and...oh, my. My head's sweating!

Anyway. What I did when that happened was, I went wide. And now that THIS has happened, I'm putting my next two (100k) books back into Select, since both happen to be releasing around first week of July. I've been assured that I can pull the books out at any time without penalty, so really, I don't see that I have much to lose. I have two series out wide now, so I can easily compare where I am now with my books on Amazon in, say, the Escape to New Zealand series, to where the new book in that series (the one in Select) will be. 

So that's my answer. Keep the wide stuff wide, and experiment with having some things in Select. Just as others adapted to the previous change by writing short for Select (which I didn't, because I'm not good at writing short and my audience doesn't like it anyway--but hey, that's not Amazon's fault). 

I think the answer to "what to do" varies by author and situation, and of course it's nerve-wracking, but this isn't an easy business! There are lots of things I miss about being in Select, though, so if it works? I'm going to be all about that! Or I'll just cross my fingers that Montlake wants lots more books, because being an indie is TOUGH. It is. No doubt about it. The upside is terrific, but it's hard to know if you've made the right decisions. This year, I've made one big one that didn't work out, one that's working out great, and a couple where the jury's still out. And it's all been Major Heartburn. 

My 2 cents.


----------



## Guest

This topic has been hashed at least 3 ways to Sunday.
And we're hashing something we don't know what we're talking about.
Amazon isn't giving us the info to make an informed discussion.
Let's just kick this can down the road and find a topic we can discuss intelligently.

Without more facts, this has just become tiresome.


----------



## Rykymus

3 people just explain it rationally to you, Phil.  Start retracting.


----------



## Someone

Could we please refrain from basically labeling the works of authors in entire genres as the "gravy train problems"? Neither Erotica nor children's books changed their model because of KU. Works in both genres were short long before the Kindle was even an engineer's thought, let alone KU. Their works just happened to fit KU well. That they were a natural fit doesn't make their works "gravy train problems". However one genre did change their model for KU. Authors in one genre did game the KU system in mass by purposefully changing their model for KU; didn't they? And what do you know? The authors of that genre who did change their model into "gravy train problems" are already saying, _"oh this is no problem. We'll just combine our serial books into one edition."_ So if you must state such line of thought like "gravy train problems" then at least apply it correctly to the beloved romance genre that did change their model, breaking up longer works into serials, and did it to ride the "gravy train" and/or "get rich quick". 
Oh no, that's your beloved ox being gored now. Maybe with it having a gaping hole of truth in it's side, you will see how offensive your incorrect, misplaced and unfair labeling is.

Another factoid
Amazon didn't say, "Authors of longer works complained that they were getting paid as much as short works' authors so, in response, we are going to gut those "gravey train problem" short works' writers" like their statement is being translated into here. They never mentioned anything like, "we are going to target those wicked gravy train, get rich posers". Nope, instead they said they are gong to adjust the payment plan so longer works didn't experience the payment disparity that was the cause of the complaints.


----------



## J.A. Sutherland

justphil said:


> Amazon has a multi-billion-dollar marketing machine superior to all others ever invented by man. But they leave book marketing exclusively in the hands of a writer somewhere in rural Indiana. Explain that rationally, and I will retract every word.


The rational explanation is that they don't market a book by a writer in rural Indiana ... because they market books in general. They don't care which book someone buys, only that they buy a book and whatever else they can buy from toilet paper to magic underwear. The only reason for them to market a particular book is if their algorithms decide the customer would like it. Marketing your book is your responsibility -- no retailer gives a flying attempt to fornicate with a rolling donut if your book sells, only that something does.


----------



## G.L. Snodgrass

I have loved this thread. An intelligent, passionate conversation. Remember people. This is business, nothing personal. My objective is to make enough money so that I don't have to get a real job. The thought of going back to carrying a briefcase to a small cubicle each morning scares the hell out of me.

With *my* objective in mind I analyzed the numbers and determined *my* best chance was to be in KU. I believe my analysis was correct for that model. I didn't have to get a real job.

The business model has changed. This is not a surprise, nothing lasts. Now that there is a new model I will have to conduct a new analysis. If going wide makes me more money, then I will do that. If staying in KU makes me more money then I stay. It is really that simple.

Of course I will have to wait until 15 Aug to get my numbers. I wish I had the numbers now, but again, this is business. I can't blame Amazon for making decisions best for their business when I am doing the same for mine.

Other writers will do things differently, Going with a gut feel, or what they wished for instead of reality. That's fine. To each his/her own.

What ever happens, believe me it beats the alternative. Cubicles are where souls go to die.


----------



## cinisajoy

Rykymus said:


> Amazon's weapon against losing the 'younger generation' to the built-in apps on iOS and Android devices is exclusivity. They lost the device war, and they know it. They also know that people are too lazy (or don't know that they can) to download an app to shop for and read kindle books on their iOS and Android devices. The only way they are going to get them to do so is to give them a reason. A subscription service for read-a-holics is a reason. Exclusivity of books is a reason. All Amazon has to do to win the ebook competition is to make exclusivity worth it to enough of us. So far, they're trying to find ways that work for all of us... Amazon, authors, and readers.
> 
> Other vendors getting an increase in the market share does not equal Amazon is shrinking, as the size of the pie is also growing. Although I have seen more people stating that Amazon has become a smaller percentage of their overall sales, with some even saying that sales on other venues have been higher than on Amazon, I'm still seeing that most people sell more through Amazon than all other vendors combined.
> 
> Just be thankful that Amazon is trying to find ways to make it work for everyone. They could extend the exclusivity requirement to not just Select, but all of KDP, if they wanted to. And if they did, most of us, (myself included) would have little choice but to comply.


One little point. It is easy to get the kindle app on any android. I think they have an apple app too. Matter of fact my first android tablet came with Kindle pre-loaded.


----------



## cinisajoy

Now I may be the village idiot but I am almost certain my ex husband (second one not the unprintable one) is getting a movie for Father's Day because I am a loyal Amazon customer.    I know this because I bought the movie.  My first thought was Amazon when my daughter said she couldn't find the movie anywhere.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

Let me tell you a story. It's what I do. I may start a thread on this and show everyone how easy it is. I was invited to do so.

Last week a guy bought a book collection from our shop. Price was five bucks. Know what my colleague's royalty was on that sale? Five bucks.

Know what else we got? We know his name. He signed up for our newsletter (happened automatically as part of the sale - no muss no fuss) - we have his e-mail address and regular address. Why, we even know what country he's in. We also know how often he visits the shop.

He got a little freebie reward for his purchase. Our shop automatically e-mailed him and told him about it. Our readers accumulate those rewards with every purchase. We can give them away too.

But you know what else we can do? My buddy can e-mail him tomorrow and say "hey, you know what? I really appreciate you buying my book and being my reader. Here's a coupon for a free book of your choice in our shop. Thanks again. Hope to see you back soon." He could say "hey, I notice you like my book. If you buy the next one in the series tomorrow I'll give you the third and fourth for 50% off. Thanks for being our customer."

We can do that stuff _all day long_. In fact, that's where we get almost all our traffic. "Hey, come in to the shop tomorrow I'll give you 50% off the whole store. Thanks for being our customer."

Meanwhile, on Amazon, our books are under a moldy tarp in a dark room. Outside are cricket noises. Occasionally you hear a train in the distance.

Take it for what it's worth. I've said my piece.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

cinisajoy said:


> Now I may be the village idiot but I am almost certain my ex husband (second one not the unprintable one) is getting a movie for Father's Day because I am a loyal Amazon customer. I know this because I bought the movie. My first thought was Amazon when my daughter said she couldn't find the movie anywhere.


I buy everything that I can from Amazon. It's convenient. Movies, TV shows, video games, K-cups, shoes, clothes, vitamins, essential oils, Star Wars everything, etc. The only stuff I don't buy there is because I can't. When I move next year I will have a steady stream of goods being delivered. Now, I won't get everything (Restoration Hardware, Pottery Barn and Crate & Barrel are going to love me), but a lot of stuff is coming from Amazon. I am loyal, too. Their customer service is topnotch. I have all Apple devices and still own a Kindle because I hate reading on my iPad. I'm not worried about Smazon losing the book game in the slightest.


----------



## Someone

I'm like you Yoda and might even be a little worse. It's a rare day there isn't a box on the front porch, LOL.


----------



## Monique

I just got a box of groceries delivered from Amazon today. Yesterday, tennis shoes.


----------



## cinisajoy

justphil said:


> Let me tell you a story. It's what I do. I may start a thread on this and show everyone how easy it is. I was invited to do so.
> 
> Last week a guy bought a book collection from our shop. Price was five bucks. Know what my colleague's royalty was on that sale? Five bucks.
> 
> Know what else we got? We know his name. He signed up for our newsletter (happened automatically as part of the sale - no muss no fuss) - we have his e-mail address and regular address. Why, we even know what country he's in. We also know how often he visits the shop.
> 
> He got a little freebie reward for his purchase. Our shop automatically e-mailed him and told him about it. Our readers accumulate those rewards with every purchase. We can give them away too.
> 
> But you know what else we can do? My buddy can e-mail him tomorrow and say "hey, you know what? I really appreciate you buying my book and being my reader. Here's a coupon for a free book of your choice in our shop. Thanks again. Hope to see you back soon." He could say "hey, I notice you like my book. If you buy the next one in the series tomorrow I'll give you the third and fourth for 50% off. Thanks for being our customer."
> 
> We can do that stuff _all day long_. In fact, that's where we get almost all our traffic. "Hey, come in to the shop tomorrow I'll give you 50% off the whole store. Thanks for being our customer."
> 
> Meanwhile, on Amazon, our books are under a moldy tarp in a dark room. Outside are cricket noises. Occasionally you hear a train in the distance.
> 
> Take it for what it's worth. I've said my piece.


Ok. So I come in your store and buy a book for $5. You give that $5 to the author. You made a net sale of $0. If you do that with every book, how long will you stay in business? 
Last time I went to school, you needed money to pay the bills.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> He got a little freebie reward for his purchase. Our shop automatically e-mailed him and told him about it. Our readers accumulate those rewards with every purchase. We can give them away too.


Isn't that the point of newsletters lists? I thought most authors maintained them without the need for the expensive overhead of keeping a physical store. Or are you trying to say Amazon stops you from keeping an email database of engaged readers?


----------



## YoMama

justphil said:


> Meanwhile, on Amazon, our books are under a moldy tarp in a dark room. Outside are cricket noises. Occasionally you hear a train in the distance.
> 
> Take it for what it's worth. I've said my piece.


That's cool man. I get it. You don't like Amazon.

I am on this board reading because I want to learn how to make money from people who are way way smarter than me. You're just polluting the knowledge right now.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Monique said:


> I just got a box of groceries delivered from Amazon today. Yesterday, tennis shoes.


No one would deliver groceries in my neighborhood, lol. If they did, I would totally do it. I hate the grocery store.


----------



## Desert Rose

Monique said:


> I just got a box of groceries delivered from Amazon today. Yesterday, tennis shoes.


I have a subscription to coffee. Amazon is magic.


----------



## Rykymus

I can do the same thing, Phil. I have a website that is primed and ready to sell direct. I also have 15,000 email addresses of fans that will buy everything I write within days of receiving the announcement. So yes, I could flip the switch tomorrow and start selling direct, and I would make $3.90 per sale instead of $2.70. I wouldn't even have to offer any rewards to entice them to buy. That's called creating a product that people want to buy more of.

But I don't. And there's a good reason I don't.

Word of mouth only goes so far. If I stopped selling on Amazon and sold only direct, the growth rate of my mailing list would fall to a trickle. I move between 20,000 to 40,000 units per month on Amazon. With Select/KU, I move an additional 10,000 units in borrows. No way any of us would move that many units per month through our own websites. No way period. So until my mailing list reaches 100,000 names, or I become a household name, or Hollywood dumps a ton of cash on my front lawn, OR Amazon makes the conditions so untenable that I have no choice but to leave, I'm staying put. And you know what? That's not being stupid, or being a sucker. That's knowing what your goals are and how to best achieve them. That's what I'm doing. That was my goal from day one. It works for me. If it stops working, I'll make the appropriate changes, but not because of prophecies of doom and gloom from others, but because of hard data, collected, witnessed, and analyzed by myself.

Amazon doesn't work for you. That's fine. You do what works for you. But you need to accept that it doesn't work the same for everyone. If you did, more people would listen to you.

Is it fair? Nope. Who ever said life was fair?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Boyd said:


> fresh.amazon.com


Oh, I know about it, lol. My neighborhood is not covered.


----------



## 75814

justphil said:


> Let me tell you a story. It's what I do. I may start a thread on this and show everyone how easy it is. I was invited to do so.
> 
> Last week a guy bought a book collection from our shop. Price was five bucks. Know what my colleague's royalty was on that sale? Five bucks.


And how do you stay in business when you give 100% royalties to the author?



> Know what else we got? We know his name. He signed up for our newsletter (happened automatically as part of the sale - no muss no fuss) - we have his e-mail address and regular address. Why, we even know what country he's in. We also know how often he visits the shop.
> 
> He got a little freebie reward for his purchase. Our shop automatically e-mailed him and told him about it. Our readers accumulate those rewards with every purchase. We can give them away too.
> 
> But you know what else we can do? My buddy can e-mail him tomorrow and say "hey, you know what? I really appreciate you buying my book and being my reader. Here's a coupon for a free book of your choice in our shop. Thanks again. Hope to see you back soon." He could say "hey, I notice you like my book. If you buy the next one in the series tomorrow I'll give you the third and fourth for 50% off. Thanks for being our customer."
> 
> We can do that stuff _all day long_. In fact, that's where we get almost all our traffic. "Hey, come in to the shop tomorrow I'll give you 50% off the whole store. Thanks for being our customer."
> 
> Meanwhile, on Amazon, our books are under a moldy tarp in a dark room. Outside are cricket noises. Occasionally you hear a train in the distance.
> 
> Take it for what it's worth. I've said my piece.


What it's worth is precisely bupkiss. I'm hardly an Amazon lover--there are many people on this board who can tell you about the many, many times I've criticized them. But your criticism here is completely baseless. And do you know why? Because you're throwing it solely at Amazon, but guess what?

iBooks doesn't give you customer contact information.

Kobo doesn't give you customer contact information.

Barnes & Noble doesn't give you customer contact information.

Smashwords doesn't give you customer contact information.

Google Play doesn't give you customer contact information.

And do you know why? Because there are customers who _don't want publishers to have their contact information!_ This isn't some insidious Amazon conspiracy, this is common practice. Just because someone buys your books doesn't mean they want to get your emails. That's why we set-up opt-in email lists, so that customers can sign-up if they choose to.

The only vendor I know of that provides customer contact info to publishers is DriveThru Fiction. And even then, the customer can say, "no, I don't want publishers to be able to contact me."

Do you have any idea how many angry emails Amazon would get swarmed with if Amazon handed out customer emails to publishers?

Try using logic in your thinking process. It might help.


----------



## AllyWho

justphil said:


> Meanwhile, on Amazon, our books are under a moldy tarp in a dark room. Outside are cricket noises. Occasionally you hear a train in the distance.


This is why I place a higher value on the experiences of people who are selling thousands of units a month via Amazon. They, at least, have figured out how to cast aside the tarp and turn on a light.

I also want to add how much I appreciate those who have done well going wide with other *retailers*, and who have taken the time to share their opinions on the changes to KU. Rational discussion (backed up with experience and hard data) is invaluable when trying to figure out a strategy.


----------



## Shane Lochlann Black

> And how do you stay in business when you give 100% royalties to the author?


Because the authors own the store.



> What it's worth is precisely bupkiss.


Your attitude is uncalled for. You don't like me? That's fine.

This isn't show friends. It's show business.


----------



## Rykymus

And that's great, Phil. You didn't find success at Amazon, so you found another path to success. But that 100% royalty share comes at a price, and that price is significantly lower sales volume than what is _possible _on Amazon, should you be willing to offer a product that will sell in their market place, and play the game they designed to your best advantage.

Good luck with your store. I hope you put Amazon out of business someday.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I need to disengage. I'm way behind this week and will have to write all weekend to catch up. I'm going to write a chapter, watch Hannibal, and then write like the wind until at least 3 a.m. Have fun.


----------



## Monique

You might be able to get some non-perishables through Prime Pantry, iffin yer interested. http://www.amazon.com/gp/pantry/info

Selling from your website can be a great supplement to selling on other vendors. A replacement? Only if you're wildly popular. And even then, I'm hard pressed to think of anyone who does only that.

Phil, I fear, your ADS is clouding your judgement on this. But if you're happy selling a small amount and keeping all the revenue, more power to you.


----------



## NoCat

Serials aren't going anywhere. Neither are short erotica pieces. KU Readers don't care what a borrow pays. They have already voted with their borrows and people like serials and erotica.

So... I think serialists and such who get a lot of borrows now will still find themselves getting a lot of borrows (now pages read) and proportionally, which their income per title might go down, they will continue to take a good % of the overall money pie.


----------



## Guest

Phil makes a good point, though, that KU is no longer about selling "books" but about selling "pageviews." And the line between "book" and "content" is going to be blurred as the market continues to trend toward subscription services. I already have a fan on my email list who insists that I don't call ebooks "books," because (according to him) books are supposed to be printed and bound.

Personally, I think it's more about stories than it is about books. But as Amazon changes the game--not just the playing field, but the fundamentals of the game itself--there is a very real chance that author pay will go down. We saw it with the KU-pocalypse, as Jules rightly pointed out. And since we have no solid metrics to compare with pages, the new KU could very easily cut our pay like a bookish version of Spotify.


----------



## cinisajoy

It is not SELLING.  It is still a borrow same as before.    Now either the books will be actually read or the author gets a smaller piece of the pie.
I am assuming if you had good borrows before you will still have good borrows. 
Now on the erotic authors, I would recommend bundling to make it easier on their readers.


----------



## Guest

Erotic shorts aren't going away because the genre is all about sex, and the experience of orgasm is conveyed better in the short form than the long form. In other words, there's an artistic reason for the length independent of marketing gimmicks. But for more immersive stuff like science fiction and fantasy, where a quickie just doesn't really satisfy, we'll probably see fewer shorts.

Also, are you _triple_-spacing after your periods, Cin? BLASPHEMY!!!!


----------



## lamaha

Crenel said:


> I couldn't agree less. Writing as we are generally discussing it here is not like a "normal job" any more than other creative pursuits (music, film, etc.). If you want to be paid for your time, there are countless jobs out there, from flipping burgers to corporate law. The time it takes a musical artist to record a song or album, the time it takes the crew of people to produce a movie, and the time it takes a writer to type and edit a book, mean _nothing_ in terms of market value and compensation. Nobody deserves more pay just because they spent longer typing their novel.


I'd be the first person to agree that writing, or any of the arts, is not like a normal job. But when it comes down to finding a fair means of payment, that's exactly the problem. I don't agree, for instance, that a popular book is necessarily a good book -- but many people do. I'm pretty demanding in my taste. Just look at amazon reviews to see how subjective quality is; we will never, ever agree on quality, and to argue that ""some short stories are better than some long ones", an argument I've seen over and over again here, is futile.

Therefore we HAVE to find an objective means of paying for work, and really, the only truly objective means is typing time. Whether you're a slow or a fast typer, you will ALWAYS take more time to type a 100,000 word epic than a 10,000 word short story. And that's why longer works deserve more payment than shorter ones, regardless of (unmeasurable) writing quality, and why the old system was so unfair.

In the end, though, it's readers who decide, and that's good. It forces us to write well enough to keep them reading. It forces us to improve our own personal quality. Whatever that is.

Traditionally, short stories and non-fiction articles were always paid by the word. AKA known as typing. There's nothing knew in this -- just that short story writers have been spoiled for a year by KU, and now feel a little bit entitled.


----------



## cinisajoy

Joe Vasicek said:


> Erotic shorts aren't going away because the genre is all about sex, and the experience of orgasm is conveyed better in the short form than the long form. In other words, there's an artistic reason for the length independent of marketing gimmicks. But for more immersive stuff like science fiction and fantasy, where a quickie just doesn't really satisfy, we'll probably see fewer shorts.
> 
> Also, are you _triple_-spacing after your periods, Cin? BLASPHEMY!!!!


I know shorts work better in erotica. It is also why I think bundling them would be great since women are the primary readers of erotica.


----------



## Rykymus

It's only about selling page views if you approach it that way. I'm not going to change how I write my stories. I always try to write stories that people will want to read, cover to cover, as I'm quite sure everyone else does as well.

Just as the guy who wanted you not to call them "books" because they weren't printed and bound. It's all about individual perception. 

I also don't think that this is the beginning of the downward spiral to paying authors peanuts. Amazon knows as well as anyone that if they don't keep the terms attractive to enough quality authors, KU will die. 

Amazon knows how to make money. They've proven that time and again. So why do so many of you think that Amazon is planning on making slaves out of us? There's no profit in that.


----------



## Desert Rose

Rykymus said:


> I also don't think that this is the beginning of the downward spiral to paying authors peanuts. Amazon knows as well as anyone that if they don't keep the terms attractive to enough quality authors, KU will die.
> 
> Amazon knows how to make money. They've proven that time and again. So why do so many of you think that Amazon is planning on making slaves out of us? There's no profit in that.


I dunno, it's a system that worked for tradpub for decades. Which is probably why we, as authors, are conditioned to think we're somehow the least valuable part of the publishing machine.


----------



## hopecartercan

Rykymus said:


> I also don't think that this is the beginning of the downward spiral to paying authors peanuts. Amazon knows as well as anyone that if they don't keep the terms attractive to enough quality authors, KU will die.
> 
> Amazon knows how to make money. They've proven that time and again. So why do so many of you think that Amazon is planning on making slaves out of us? There's no profit in that.


Well, if you're familiar with mturk (the crowdhelp service run by Amazon, wherein most people earn $2.00/hour for their work or less), then you will surely understand that Amazon is very familiar at helping people to sell themselves/their talents into voluntary servitude. I think this new KU spin is the equivalent of Mturk for Books. Of course you will have outliers who do well--maybe even very well--but nearly everyone else will suffer.


----------



## a_g

Dragovian said:


> I have a subscription to coffee. Amazon is magic.


Wait, what? We can get those? *goes to look*


----------



## Gator

Monique said:


> I just got a box of groceries delivered from Amazon today. Yesterday, tennis shoes.


I think AmazonFresh only delivers to three major cities in California so far. You're in LA?


----------



## Shelley K

Monique said:


> You might be able to get some non-perishables through Prime Pantry, iffin yer interested. http://www.amazon.com/gp/pantry/info


If you get the coupons they sometimes have for different items, it can end up cheaper or breaking even with what it would cost to buy locally. And it's dropped on the doorstep. It's brilliant. Not the greatest selection in the world, but it'll grow. I also have a local, privately-owned grocery store that delivers for $5. I rarely go grocery shopping.

Phil, your statement that people not in Select are doomed to failure gives away your bias in the matter. An awful lot of people do exceptionally well without it. I know several and know _of_ many more.


----------



## Monique

Gator said:


> I think AmazonFresh only delivers to three major cities in California so far. You're in LA?


Si. Although, I stopped the Fresh deliveries. Difficult to justify the cost when I walk to two grocery stores  I do use Pantry all the time for random stuff though.


----------



## Monique

Yeah, the selection for Pantry stuff is a little limited, and yet, I never have trouble filling the box. It's fun to try to get as close to 100% as possible.


----------



## Jessie Jasen

hopecartercan said:


> Well, if you're familiar with mturk (the crowdhelp service run by Amazon, wherein most people earn $2.00/hour for their work or less), then you will surely understand that Amazon is very familiar at helping people to sell themselves/their talents into voluntary servitude. I think this new KU spin is the equivalent of Mturk for Books. Of course you will have outliers who do well--maybe even very well--but nearly everyone else will suffer.


1. Many of the people who work at mturk live in third world countries where average earning is $3 per day. So, getting $2 per hour is a small fortune.

2. KU has pumped up their global fund and will continue to do so. As long as the fund remains high and continues to grow, there will be more money for all writers.


----------



## Jessie Jasen

Shelley K said:


> If you get the coupons they sometimes have for different items, it can end up cheaper or breaking even with what it would cost to buy locally. And it's dropped on the doorstep. It's brilliant. Not the greatest selection in the world, but it'll grow. I also have a local, privately-owned grocery store that delivers for $5. I rarely go grocery shopping.
> 
> Phil, your statement that people not in Select are doomed to failure gives away your bias in the matter. An awful lot of people do exceptionally well without it. I know several and know _of_ many more.


Is there any way of telling which genres profit most from KU? That's what I'd like to know. My guess is romance and erotica (naturally), but last week I scrolled through the bestseller lists for space opera and found that almost all books on the list were in KU and that other works by same writers were in KU.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Gator

Monique said:


> Si.


I grew up in that area. The Valley, Santa Monica, and eastern Ventura County. Great place with a 10-lane parking lot called "the 405."


----------



## Monique

Gator said:


> I grew up in that area. The Valley, Santa Monica, and eastern Ventura County. Great place with a 10-lane parking lot called "the 405."


Ayup.  It's a crazy town, but I love it.


----------



## Guest

lamaha said:


> Therefore we HAVE to find an objective means of paying for work, and really, the only truly objective means is typing time.


Totally, completely, 110% disagree. When I buy a book, I'm not buying 200 man- (or woman-) hours of typing time, I'm buying a story that I want to read. And if the market can bear more for one story than for another, that is what it should be priced at.

Let the free market sort things out on its own. Not only is it more efficient, it's also much more fair.


----------



## Gator

Joe Vasicek said:


> Let the free market sort things out on its own. Not only is it more efficient, it's also much more fair.


Here's a U.S. history book, Joe. It'll remind you how inefficient and how unfair many of our industries have been in the free market.

ETA: That sounds a lot more snarky than I meant it. Sorry, Joe! The repercussions of the free market have not been kind to many market participants and bystanders.


----------



## Doglover

Dragovian said:


> I dunno, it's a system that worked for tradpub for decades. Which is probably why we, as authors, are conditioned to think we're somehow the least valuable part of the publishing machine.


Speak for yourself. Trad publishers got away with pay a pittance because there was no alternative; now there is.


----------



## Guest

Gator said:


> Here's a U.S. history book, Joe. It'll remind you how inefficient and how unfair many of our industries have been in the free market.


You're speaking to someone who scored a 5 out of 5 on the AP US History test, majored in Political Science, interned in Washington DC at a major K street think tank, and listens to podcasts on economics, history, and political philosophy to relax at the end of the day.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

Monique said:


> Yeah, the selection for Pantry stuff is a little limited, and yet, I never have trouble filling the box. It's fun to try to get as close to 100% as possible.


Do they have haggis, Monique? he asked innocently...


----------



## Monique

T. M. Bilderback said:


> Do they have haggis, Monique? he asked innocently...


Heehee!


----------



## Gator

Joe Vasicek said:


> You're speaking to someone who scored a 5 out of 5 on the AP US History test,


You're speaking to someone who took AP US History, too, and aced every test and quiz. I didn't take the AP exam, because I didn't have the money. (And they were pretty adamant that I pay first, let me tell you.)



> majored in Political Science, interned in Washington DC at a major K street think tank, and listens to podcasts on economics, history, and political philosophy to relax at the end of the day.


You would have had a much more fun time if you'd come with us and *made* history with the 3rd & 4th Marine Aircraft Wings, the 4th Marine Division, the Air Force Flight Test Center, and the space shuttles.


----------



## Becca Mills

You guys need a tape measure?


----------



## Guest

I have nothing but respect for military personnel. They were the only people I met in Washington who were conscious of the fact that their decisions had the power to destroy people's lives and livelihoods, largely because they were the only people who were willing to die for what they believed in.

In my experience, any system that minimizes the role of government is by default more fair and more efficient. That's why I support free market capitalism, which is the polar opposite of crony capitalism in every important respect.


----------



## Doglover

Becca Mills said:


> You guys need a tape measure?


Excellent!


----------



## EC Sheedy

Doglover said:


> Excellent!


Because we have left the universe of KU to discuss even more weighty issues, can I ask you Doglover: if that is your dog in your avatar (and not a black bear) what kind of dog is it? And is he/she really THAT big?  And is her/his name _Awesome_?


----------



## Crystal_

Joe Vasicek said:


> You're speaking to someone who scored a 5 out of 5 on the AP US History test, majored in Political Science, interned in Washington DC at a major K street think tank, and listens to podcasts on economics, history, and political philosophy to relax at the end of the day.


I got a 4 on my AP US History test and I can't remember a single thing I learned that year. I also got 5s on the AP Literature and the AP Language test. And on my AP Chem test (I peaked in high school achievement wise TBH). Are we giving out prizes for this now?

Or can I get a special badge so everyone knows I'm more qualified than they are because I did well on a test in high school?


----------



## Jessie Jasen

Albert Einstein dropped out of high school… (just had to put that one out   )


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I drank and had sex in a field in high school.


----------



## Doglover

EC Sheedy said:


> Because we have left the universe of KU to discuss even more weighty issues, can I ask you Doglover: if that is your dog in your avatar (and not a black bear) what kind of dog is it? And is he/she really THAT big?  And is her/his name _Awesome_?


That is my Ferdinand, yes, aka Ferdie Bear. He weighs 180 lbs, 12 stone, 80 kg, whichever language you are in and his head when standing on all fours comes just above my waist. I have another, a lady bear, called Diva who is only slightly smaller due to the delicacy of her gender. They are Newfoundland dogs, bred originally to drag shipwrecks into shore and to rescue people from drowning by either offering a rear end for the drowning person to grab hold off and be swum back to shore, or by taking a lifeboat by its rope and swimming out to sea with it. They are still used as lifeguards. Mine don't swim, thank goodness, but they do love water, just won't go in far enough to swim. The Good Lord gave them webbed feet but sent no instructions to go with them. This is my website, http://www.gentle-newfoundland-dogs.com which I built to advise people thinking of buying one of these unique breeds. Ferdie and Diva say thank you for the compliments!


----------



## 75814

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I drank and had sex in a field in high school.


Your high school experience was clearly a lot more awesome than mine.


----------



## NoCat

I dropped out of High School also. And failed Honor's English.

I now have two college degrees and quit my MA program with 2 terms left to go or I'd have three. One is in English, haha.


----------



## ufwriter

Annie B said:


> I dropped out of High School also. And failed Honor's English.
> 
> I now have two college degrees and quit my MA program with 2 terms left to go or I'd have three. One is in English, haha.


Totally off topic, but I just love your covers so much. I've got the first couple of books on my Kindle, and I can't wait to read them.


----------



## 75814

CadyVance said:


> Totally off topic, but I just love your covers so much. I've got the first couple of books on my Kindle, and I can't wait to read them.


I was thinking the exact same thing. Just bought the first TSS book.

Those author signatures seriously do work, folks. Not the first time I've picked up someone's book just because of the signature.


----------



## eleanorberesford

Sorry for the weird posts of nothing but quotes. I think my son was trying to close Tapatalk to open Blocky Roads.

Back to lurking on this thread.


----------



## jc3000

I write children's books which are usually around 20-40 pages and 3 days I ago I uploaded a new one but did not enroll it in KU and so far I have 0 sales, usually by this time I have at least 20 sales (both regular and KU sales) I think this is because the KU borrows push my book up the rankings, where as now nobody can find it because it has 0 sales. I panicked and I went ahead and enrolled it in KU which was going against my strategy of un-enrolling all of my books, but now I see that I need it to help me in the rankings. Unless most short story authors pull their books from KU and the subscribers are forced to go back to buying books because there's little content left that is enrolled in KU short story authors are basically screwed.

My KU income is about to go from 1500 to 150, which is based on 1 cent per page and we all know that there is no way in hell it's going to be any higher than that. Before KU started I was making almost as much just from regular sales but then those sales started to dry up when people started signing up to KU and I was forced to enroll and now I am forced to stay enrolled to help me in the rankings. It's a lose-lose situation.

I know many of you will say "write longer, more engaging books" Well, when you have 2 weeks to do that before this new change kicks in that's a bit hard, I can write 5,000 words a day and it will take me longer than that to write a full novel, but am not sure if a ten year old wants to read a novel. I guess what Amazon is saying is that short story authors are no longer welcomed on their site.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

azebra said:


> Reply from Amazon with more details about what constitutes 'read through'. As a writer of interactive fiction which is LONG but people RETURN TO THE BEGINNING I really wanted more info. I still have more questions but I think this answers questions others have asked. Aplogies if someone else already posted (this thread is long):
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm writing to follow up on your feedback comments for your recent contact with KDP Support Team. I'm sorry your concerns weren't properly addressed.
> 
> When it comes to Kindle Unlimited / KOLL borrows, the new system that we will start on July 1, will count each time a single page is read for the first time. This means that, if a reader bought your book today and read up until page 10 during this month, we'll pay only those 10 pages read during that month in their respective payment cycle. However, if that person reads from page 10 up to page 50 the next month, we'll then pay for those pages that were read the next month in the next payment cycle as well. If the person goes back through the pages and then re-reads them, we won't be paying that second time the pages are read.
> 
> We'll continue to set a KDP Select Global Fund each month. Beginning July 1, 2015, the amount you earn will be determined by your share of total pages read instead of total qualified borrows. We'll count pages of your book read by Kindle Unlimited (KU) or Kindle Owners' Lending Library (KOLL) customers for the first time. Here are some examples of how it would work if the fund was $10M and 100,000,000 total pages were read in the month:
> 
> - The author of a 100 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> - The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed and read completely 100 times would earn $2,000 ($10 million multiplied by 20,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> - The author of a 200 page book that was borrowed 100 times but only read half way through on average would earn $1,000 ($10 million multiplied by 10,000 pages for this author divided by 100,000,000 total pages).
> 
> The payment schedule will remain the same as your other sales from KDP, and will be one combined payment that includes royalties for sales and the payout from the KDP Select Global Fund. Regardless of your country of residence, we'll continue to pay you via the method you've chosen in your account (Electronic Funds Transfer or paper check, depending on your particular options). To find out how to switch to EFT for faster payment, visit our Help page: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?moduleId=ARND44SEDMKAU
> 
> If you have additional questions about KDP Select, be sure to check out our Help page: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A6KILDRNSCOBA
> 
> Please let us know if this does address your concerns. We'll be happy to help with more information if needed.


Thanks for posting this.


----------



## Doglover

As things stand, borrows don't appear on the graph until 10% has been read. This being the case, when will they appear on the graph with this new system? When they are downloaded, like KOLL? I don't expect anyone to know, but it is a question I thought worth discussing.


----------



## L.B

Doglover said:


> As things stand, borrows don't appear on the graph until 10% has been read. This being the case, when will they appear on the graph with this new system? When they are downloaded, like KOLL? I don't expect anyone to know, but it is a question I thought worth discussing.


A page will appear once viewed by a reader I would imagine.


----------



## Jessie Jasen

I failed a year in high school and nobody ever asked me to have sex in a field.


----------



## ufwriter

justphil said:


> If you report that a previously very successful author (by her own standards, of course) suddenly found themselves shadowbanned and their sales turned down to zero, you get accused of being a conspiracy theorist or a liar. March, 2014 she sold 36 books and had a fair number of borrows. By July she was up over 100 a month. She left Select in December, just like I did. In March, 2015 she had three sales.


I'm a little curious about these numbers. In another thread, you stated this book sold in the double-digits with around 1 sale per day, not over 100 per month. Does this 100 figure include borrows? If so, this would be a huge indication of why sales faltered when you removed the book from Select. With the 70 borrows gone, the rank would suffer, leading to a decrease in visibility, and therefore, fewer sales. If the book had been selling more than 30 copies in a month, it might have been able to take the hit to the ranking drop.

If you're not included borrows in the numbers stated here, there's some discrepancies in your figures.


----------



## [email protected]

Becca Mills said:


> You guys need a tape measure?


----------



## BEAST

So what about bundles? If a reader readers all the shorts in a short series/serial and then gets the bundle at a later date. Will the author essentially get paid twice for the same story? I've had numerous readers post reviews on the last book in a series saying they were going to reread the series. What's stopping an author from shooting out an email to newsletters subscribers saying, "Hey, so and so book is now bundled. Borrow it on with your KU subscription and relive the fun!"

I'm not saying this will be a big issue but still. Wouldn't this be a way to double dip?


----------



## L.B

Maximillion said:


> So what about bundles? If a reader readers all the shorts in a short series/serial and then gets the bundle at a later date. Will the author essentially get paid twice for the same story? I've had numerous readers post reviews on the last book in a series saying they were going to reread the series. What's stopping an author from shooting out an email to newsletters subscribers saying, "Hey, so and so book is now bundled. Borrow it on with your KU subscription and relive the fun!"
> 
> I'm not saying this will be a big issue but still. Wouldn't this be a way to double dip?


Not just bundles, I'd imagine people could borrow a book again a year or two after they've read it to read it again. You'd get paid again.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Barnaby Yard said:


> Not just bundles, I'd imagine people could borrow a book again a year or two after they've read it to read it again. You'd get paid again.


I am pretty sure you don't get paid again for a second borrow. Also, with the new per page system it definitely said you only get paid the first time a reader reads a given page.


----------



## L.B

edwardgtalbot said:


> I am pretty sure you don't get paid again for a second borrow. Also, with the new per page system it definitely said you only get paid the first time a reader reads a given page.


In one sitting yes, but I've they've returned it then borrowed it again a year later?!


----------



## BEAST

Barnaby Yard said:


> In one sitting yes, but I've they've returned it then borrowed it again a year later?!


Let me be clear. Reader reads a short series as each season/chapter comes out. The series ends. A month later the author bundles the shorts and puts the bundle in KU. Then the author shoots out an email saying its bundled and can be borrowed. Lets just say that only ten readers reread the bundled version. Still, that's like $2.50 the author makes if the bundled version is 250 page at a penny a page. That's in addition to the money made with the initial borrows of the shorts. Previously, I wouldn't put bundles in KU because it might cannibalize KU borrows of the shorts. With the page pay that is no longer the case.

Like I said, it may not be a big issue but I can see authors with massive backlists and many bundles making a nice little penny.


----------



## 75814

Depends on the reader, really. Speaking personally, there are very few books I reread, because my TBR pile is so huge.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Barnaby Yard said:


> In one sitting yes, but I've they've returned it then borrowed it again a year later?!


No, I'm pretty sure Amazon doesn't pay you again if someone returns it and comes back later. And to Maximillion's point, yes it's different with a boxed set that bundles titles - Amazon considers that a different book.


----------



## hopecartercan

jc3000 said:


> I write children's books which are usually around 20-40 pages and 3 days I ago I uploaded a new one but did not enroll it in KU and so far I have 0 sales, usually by this time I have at least 20 sales (both regular and KU sales) I think this is because the KU borrows push my book up the rankings, where as now nobody can find it because it has 0 sales. I panicked and I went ahead and enrolled it in KU which was going against my strategy of un-enrolling all of my books, but now I see that I need it to help me in the rankings. Unless most short story authors pull their books from KU and the subscribers are forced to go back to buying books because there's little content left that is enrolled in KU short story authors are basically screwed.
> 
> My KU income is about to go from 1500 to 150, which is based on 1 cent per page and we all know that there is no way in hell it's going to be any higher than that. Before KU started I was making almost as much just from regular sales but then those sales started to dry up when people started signing up to KU and I was forced to enroll and now I am forced to stay enrolled to help me in the rankings. It's a lose-lose situation.
> 
> I know many of you will say "write longer, more engaging books" Well, when you have 2 weeks to do that before this new change kicks in that's a bit hard, I can write 5,000 words a day and it will take me longer than that to write a full novel, but am not sure if a ten year old wants to read a novel. I guess what Amazon is saying is that short story authors are no longer welcomed on their site.


We are in the same boat. Half of my books are adult (maybe 100-125 pages), the other half are for kids (40-60 pages). I experienced the same thing when I did not add my book to KU last week. Obviously, in terms of rankings, Amazon counts a borrow as a sale. Therefore your book increases in popularity if it is in KU. Also, they promote their KU titles more vigorously. I am staying with KU, but I am expecting my income to drop by at least 50%. Like you, I believe they are only going to shell out $0.01 per borrow. I even considered the fact that after the first few months of the new program, they're going to drop that payment to somewhere between a half-penny and a full-penny.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

oakwood said:


> Ah, a battle of minds


Darn it! And here I am, out of ammunition!


----------



## lamaha

Joe Vasicek said:


> Totally, completely, 110% disagree. When I buy a book, I'm not buying 200 man- (or woman-) hours of typing time, I'm buying a story that I want to read. And if the market can bear more for one story than for another, that is what it should be priced at.
> 
> Let the free market sort things out on its own. Not only is it more efficient, it's also much more fair.


You missed this bit in my post:


> In the end, though, it's readers who decide, and that's good. It forces us to write well enough to keep them reading. It forces us to improve our own personal quality. Whatever that is.


Yes, of course the reader decides in the end. But from the point of view of Amazon treating authors fairly, story length is the only objective means to determine pricing. And all other things being equal (ie: enjoyment of the story) I'll pay more for 8 hours of a delightful reading than for 30 minutes (of equally delightful reading). Just like I'll pay more for a month in the Caribbean, rather than a day. And I love the Caribbean!

So yes, time, ie length, does matter.


----------



## Jessie Jasen

My dear KBoarders…it's so nice to have people to panic with…us, panicin' together… *opens arms and gives everyone a hug* *and then sighs*


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Barnaby Yard said:


> In one sitting yes, but I've they've returned it then borrowed it again a year later?!


It doesn't matter. You only get credit for the borrow once -- even if they borrow it multiple times.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

I haven't decided what I'm going to do with my omnibuses. In general they sell okay. I didn't have them in JU for obvious reasons. I guess now it makes sense to put them in.


----------



## Jessie Jasen

I think people like you who have longer works written are going to profit from the new system. And I don't think it will be as bad as many are portraying. As long as people are subscribing to KU, there will be money. For sure, KU will have many more subscribers by the end of the year.


----------



## Chrisbwritin

FWIW, I think the first few months are going to be a wooing period so if it's EVER going to be profitable to stay in KU or come drink the Kool-Aid, it's now. People who wait it out a few months to see how the chips fall and then sign up are going to miss the honeymoon phase and lose on both ends. Just my .02. At this point, I plan to pull everything I have left in on June 30th. I'm typically a pretty big risk-taker in business, but I'm not willing to play Russian roulette. I'd need SOME sort of assurance that it won't go below x a page or months of data to comb through to at least make it a calculated risk.


----------



## DashaGLogan

How do they determine it?
What about people like my mother who always read the end of a book first? How will they actually determine if a person read the whole book or just browsed through it (likely if you get it for free, especially for non fiction books, where one is perhaps only interested in a certain chapter of the book)?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

DashaGLogan said:


> How do they determine it?
> What about people like my mother who always read the end of a book first? How will they actually determine if a person read the whole book or just browsed through it (likely if you get it for free, especially for non fiction books, where one is perhaps only interested in a certain chapter of the book)?


They already have the technology to know which places you visit and which ones you jump to, just FYI.


----------



## L.B

Amanda M. Lee said:


> It doesn't matter. You only get credit for the borrow once -- even if they borrow it multiple times.


Interesting, thanks Amanda (and others, just catching up!)


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> Why is it that people who are worrying about the technology for determining page reads and reader behavior (skipping around in the book, re-reading pages, etc) have pretty much already stopped questioning how Amazon knows someone read 10% of a book in order to credit borrows for the past year? To those folk, I ask, "What's the difference in measuring?" I think if folk were concerned that Amazon was short-changing them in the 10% read department and crediting them with fewer borrows, we'd have seen at least one thread here in the past year with someone complaining. Did I miss it if it happened?


They are asking now because, under the new system, every page matters. ZOMG! Presumably, if a reader chooses to skip around - or avoid some boring bits - the payout will reflect that. Many also wonder if the scammers will simply have people borrow a book and spam the page forward button until the end to get full payment. I suspect Amazon has thought of things like this already or they wouldn't be changing the system in this manner.

I'd advise everyone at this point to take a deep breath, stop the hand wringing, and wait to see what happens. Yes, people writing shorts or kids' books are likely to see a drop in revenue, but honestly, we don't know that for sure. If this strategy eliminates enough of the "How-to" and Wiki article scammers and the pot is distributed more to those who are honestly trying to provide readers with good stories, we might be surprised come August at the number that pops up. Amazon has already indicated that they will allow people to leave Select before their 90-day period during this transition, so what's the harm in waiting?

If you feel more comfortable running away screaming, however, please be my guest ;-)


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Unless I'm missing something, value that will be lost by anyone who stays in Select after June with actively-read books is a sense of audience size. It's never been perfect, because someone might borrow first and then buy later, or download a free Kindle copy first and then buy the print edition (e.g., of a picture book), but it was possible to make a reasonable approximation. A borrow read to ten percent still represents one person. "Pages read" throws that away entirely, you won't know if that 100 pages (or whatever) represents reaching one person or a dozen or more. For fiction, you might be able to guess at what it might mean, but it will only be a guess. For non-fiction, it won't even be worth guessing. If all you care about is your next payment this may not matter, but if you're trying to build your audience and track your success in doing so, this new reporting model will undermine your ability to do so..


----------



## cinisajoy

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> Happy to move this reply over to a new thread if one is started (although this one has pretty much devolved anyway... )
> 
> I have story too. This is how a typical month would go for us.
> 
> Two of our authors release new books at the beginning of the month.
> 
> We send one of our monthly emails to our subscriber list letting them know that one of the books is in Select and we've immediately put it free and encourage them to grab a copy. While they're snagging the freebie, they buy in aggregate another 40 or 50 books from the author's inventory.
> 
> We let them know the second new release, which is Book 2 in a series (but can be read standalone), is currently at full price but will be on sale for 99¢ at the end of the month, and encourage them to wait for the sale because we value their patronage and like to reward them with advance notice of sales.
> 
> A couple of days later, Amazon sends emails to customers who've shown an interest in the second of the authors and lets them know she has a new release. It's the full-price one and sales spike as customers buy.
> 
> The free release spikes high in the store and non-newsletter subscribers see it in the bestselling lists and snag it plus a couple of hundred copies of the author's other works while they're at it. When it comes off free, the book's visibility ensures sales and the sales ensure visibility as it rises in the paid ranks.
> 
> Meanwhile, a half dozen of our box sets that've been hanging in the Top #3000 get recommendation emails from Amazon, resulting in 800 sales above their normal day's sales.
> 
> Then a book by an author we don't know gets a BookBub ad. One of our authors' books is #2 in that book's alsobots, and customers who go to the page because of the BB ad buy a couple of dozen copies of our author's book too.
> 
> A week later, Amazon sends a general romance email and the new release that was free is face-out in the mail as the representative title for its sub-category. That exposure results in another 100 sales.
> 
> Two weeks after the box sets got their recommendation emails, they get another one, with 600 extra sales for the day.
> 
> We put the second author's new release on sale and advertise it at the end of the month. It sells a few hundred copies and, because we discount Book 1 of the series at the same time, Book 1 sells a hundred copies more than usual.
> 
> At the end of the month, for just these 8 titles in the inventory, we've seen *above the average expected* sales :
> * a few thousand free downloads
> * 600 sales of collateral titles (2000 sales total)
> * 1400 additional sales of the box sets (28,000 total)
> * 2000 sales/borrows of the title that started the month as a freebie (3000 sales/borrows total)
> * 2000 sales of the Book 2 new release title (3000 sales total)
> 
> Of the 36,000 total sales for these 8 titles (and several thousand freeloads), we can directly attribute to Amazon's internal marketing engine:
> * about half of the free downloads
> * 500 sales of collateral titles
> * 1200 sales of the box sets
> * 1000 sales for the previously free new release
> * 1000 sales of the Book 2 new release title
> 
> That's about 3700 sales -- or about 10% of the total sales -- that Amazon drove for us directly. And store visibility during promotions likely account for another 25-30%. Plus we have a happy subscriber base because we ensured they were able to get one of the new releases for free and the other when it went on sale for 99¢ - with minimal compromising to our total revenue for the books.
> 
> Yes, we have a website (well, had; we're starting a planned shutdown) that we could sell from direct, but we opted to send folk to the major retailers instead. Because those retailers can help us drive more sales than we can do on our own. And we don't have to teach thousands of customers how to sideload.
> 
> Selling direct is a fine option. For customers who enjoy the personal experience, it's great! For selling signed copies of print and swag and other specialty items, it can't be beat. But for commercially viable ebooks, it's a muzzle if it isn't combined with other venue options. Personal touchpoints plus impersonal distribution options for the win.


Not to mention the fact that you put good authors together in your box sets.


----------



## Michael Parnell

Okay, who's making notes for their new $2.99 short--one with a big green dollar sign on the cover--about how to "make money fast" under the new KU payout system?


----------



## edwardgtalbot

Michael Parnell said:


> Okay, who's making notes for their new $2.99 short--one with a big green dollar sign on the cover--about how to "make money fast" under the new KU payout system?


I just published it yeterday


----------



## cinisajoy

edwardgtalbot said:


> I just published it yeterday


You should have waited 2 weeks lol.


----------



## Michael Parnell

edwardgtalbot said:


> I just published it yeterday


I knew someone would beat me to it. I'm always a day late and two dollars and ninety-nine cents short.


----------



## Kallie

Amanda M. Lee said:


> I drank and had sex in a field in high school.


As did I, Amanda! In the back of a Ford Pickup. Gotta love a good Friday night field party!


----------



## JeanneM

DashaGLogan said:


> How do they determine it?
> What about people like my mother who always read the end of a book first? How will they actually determine if a person read the whole book or just browsed through it (likely if you get it for free, especially for non fiction books, where one is perhaps only interested in a certain chapter of the book)?


LOL I thought my mom was the only one who did that. Used to drive me crazy, but she would say, "Well, how will I know I'll like it if I don't know how it ends? I don't want to waste my time."


----------



## TromboneAl

I apologize if this has been asked and I missed it:

What happens if someone reads 20% of a book and then puts it on a shelf for two months and then finishes reading the book?


----------



## Will C. Brown

TromboneAl said:


> I apologize if this has been asked and I missed it:
> 
> What happens if someone reads 20% of a book and then puts it on a shelf for two months and then finishes reading the book?


In this scenario you'll get paid for the 20% of pages they read in that first month. You'll get paid for the 80% two months later once they complete the book.


----------



## Guest

Hugh Howey said:


> In what world did it ever make sense to receive $1.35 per reader for a 20-page short story?
> 
> Everyone seems to want a get-rich-quick scheme that is unsustainable and/or a poor value for the end-user.
> 
> Write TEN 20-page stories, and expect to make in cumulative sales what an author of a 200-page novel receives. Not the same PER item, as if the value to the reader and the level of work from the author is the same.


In the world that was July 2014 - July 2015.

Amazon made it that way and everyone adapted (or a lot of people did). The clear message was that units were more valuable than length.

If Amazon had got it right to begin with, then you wouldn't have people tearing their hair out right now. What we really don't need is big time novelists laughing at the little guys trying to survive on the system that Amazon created.


----------



## RaeC

ShaneJeffery said:


> In the world that was July 2014 - July 2015.
> 
> Amazon made it that way and everyone adapted (or a lot of people did). The clear message was that units were more valuable than length.
> 
> If Amazon had got it right to begin with, then you wouldn't have people tearing their hair out right now. What we really don't need is big time novelists laughing at the little guys trying to survive on the system that Amazon created.


This. The system was imperfect before, it's still as imperfect now. The only difference is who's tearing their hair.

And I can't believe there are actual authors who correlate value with page length.


----------



## edwardgtalbot

When it comes to my fellow indie authors, I try to abide by Ben Franklin's quote at the signing of the Declaration of Independence: "We must all hang together or most assuredly we will all hang separately"


----------



## lamaha

AdrianC said:


> This. The system was imperfect before, it's still as imperfect now. The only difference is who's tearing their hair.
> 
> And I can't believe there are actual authors who correlate value with page length.


You mean story length, surely?
Well, it's individual. I don't like short stories. Yes, I've read a few excellent ones but I don't choose to read them. I love long, long engaging novels that I can get lost in. They are of more value to me. I would never pay the same for a short story as for a novel.

That doesn't mean I look down on short stories/novellas or their authors. I wouldn't be able to write one; but then. I don't want to!


----------



## L.B

AdrianC said:


> This. The system was imperfect before, it's still as imperfect now. The only difference is who's tearing their hair.
> 
> And I can't believe there are actual authors who correlate value with page length.


How would you assign value to a work?


----------



## L.B

Boyd said:


> What readers are willing to pay.


How would you implement that on a borrow basis?


----------



## anniejocoby

AdrianC said:


> This. The system was imperfect before, it's still as imperfect now. The only difference is who's tearing their hair.
> 
> And I can't believe there are actual authors who correlate value with page length.


Here's the thing. All the arguments about value seem to come down to "I've read awesome short stories and bad novels, so really the short stories have just as much value as the novels." That, to me, is a logical fallacy. It's comparing GOOD short stories to BAD novels. Compare GOOD novels to GOOD short stories and the argument changes. In that case, the novels have more value, because it takes the reader longer to read, and gives the reader more of a story and more of a world.

Let's put it another way - is a ten minute film the same value as a full-length film? If you say that it is, would you pay $11 to see that 10 minute movie? How about if you had to pay for that 10 minute movie, and then had to pay 6 more times for the sequels, in order for the story to be completed? Assuming that the 10 minute short is just as quality as the full-length movie would be. It's not a perfect analogy, but it does illustrate why, in many people's views, novels should be assigned more value than shorts.

Nobody is saying that they hate short story writers or any of that. But there is an excellent argument that the previous payout scheme was unfair to longer works.

But I don't really have a dog in this hunt, and I never did. I've always been wide. But I did see the previous scheme as being inequitable.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> Compare GOOD novels to GOOD short stories and the argument changes. In that case, the novels have more value, because it takes the reader longer to read, and gives the reader more of a story and more of a world.


Attributing time spent reading to value is an opinion. It's OK to have an opinion, we all do, but don't elevate to a logically-derived fact. I don't value a story because I spent more time reading it, I value a story because it was good, period. Some people do value length in itself, but that's a preference for some people, not a foundation upon which to build a solid answer for what is or is not more valuable.



anniejocoby said:


> Let's put it another way - is a ten minute film the same value as a full-length film? If you say that it is, would you pay $11 to see that 10 minute movie? How about if you had to pay for that 10 minute movie, and then had to pay 6 more times for the sequels, in order for the story to be completed? Assuming that the 10 minute short is just as quality as the full-length movie would be. It's not a perfect analogy, but it does illustrate why, in many people's views, novels should be assigned more value than shorts.


That's not even a valid analogy -- a short story that isn't done at the end isn't a short story. It's an installment in a longer story, not a complete work. If that is the "logic" behind assigning more value to a novel than an actual short story, it is deeply flawed. I would agree that a complete novel would have more value than an installment, but this has nothing to do with short stories.


----------



## Rykymus

Length is a legitimate measure of the 'value' of a story. It is not the only measure. There is also quality, engagement level, entertainment level, time involved, etc... The list is long and varied, and which metric is of most concern changes from reader to reader.

However, length has long been used as a common measure for the 'price' we charge for a story. Granted, using price as the primary measure has more to do with printing costs than the overall value of the story. But it is a fact that the majority of self-publishers charge less for a short story than they do for a much longer novel.

Most of you were not selling your shorts for $3, $4, or $5 each, as you know darned well that few readers would pay that price for a short. (And if they did, they'd likely complain about the length vs price issue.) You were usually selling them for $1-$2. So surely you can understand why it seems a bit hypocritical that you are complaining about your borrows now paying about the same as your sales. After all, I don't remember hearing any of you complaining when those of us who wrote longer stories were getting paid half for a borrow of what we made for a sale.


----------



## Briteka

Rykymus said:


> Length is a legitimate measure of the 'value' of a story. It is not the only measure. There is also quality, engagement level, entertainment level, time involved, etc... The list is long and varied, and which metric is of most concern changes from reader to reader.
> 
> However, length has long been used as a common measure for the 'price' we charge for a story. Granted, using price as the primary measure has more to do with printing costs than the overall value of the story. But it is a fact that the majority of self-publishers charge less for a short story than they do for a much longer novel.
> 
> Most of you were not selling your shorts for $3, $4, or $5 each, as you know darned well that few readers would pay that price for a short. (And if they did, they'd likely complain about the length vs price issue.) You were usually selling them for $1-$2. So surely you can understand why it seems a bit hypocritical that you are complaining about your borrows now paying about the same as your sales. After all, I don't remember hearing any of you complaining when those of us who wrote longer stories were getting paid half for a borrow of what we made for a sale.


$2.99 has been the most common price for erotica/erotic romance shorts for years, and when people discuss KU and shorts, they're usually talking about erotica and erotic romance.


----------



## anniejocoby

[quote author=Crenel lin

That's not even a valid analogy -- a short story that isn't done at the end isn't a short story. It's an installment in a longer story, not a complete work. If that is the "logic" behind assigning more value to a novel than an actual short story, it is deeply flawed. I would agree that a complete novel would have more value than an installment, but this has nothing to do with short stories.
[/quote]
Then you would have no problem paying $11 to see a ten minute film? Assuming this film is a standalone?


----------



## P.T. Phronk

Amazon has a pretty awesome alternate system where people can vote with their wallets to determine value by whatever criteria they choose. Actually, every book published through KDP is opted in by default and can't opt out, unlike KU. 

But for the all-you-can-read model of KU, I can't think of a measure of value more aligned with the average person's intuitions than pages read. It correlates with quality (i.e., the better the book, the more likely it will be fully read), and more importantly, it correlates with the amount of time that it entertains someone. With almost everything we buy, we pay a greater amount for better and/or more.

So I'm cool with the new calculation, even though, as an author of short stuff, my wallet won't be. If it sucks too much I'll just opt out.


----------



## vlmain

Briteka said:


> $2.99 has been the most common price for erotica/erotic romance shorts for years, and when people discuss KU and shorts, they're usually talking about erotica and erotic romance.


And nonfiction. Especially business topics. That is another area where the value is in the information, and its potential returns, as opposed to the length of the work.


----------



## Nope

.


----------



## Doglover

Some of Stephen King's short stories are far better than some of his novels - so what? How else are Amazon supposed to work out what is fair and stop the scamphlets and illiterate porn getting the same share as everyone else? I don't want my fee for a borrow dependant on whether a reader wants to take the trouble to say how good it was; does anybody? They are saying if it is that bad it probably won't get read and we won't get paid no matter the length, which seems fair to me.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> Then you would have no problem paying $11 to see a ten minute film? Assuming this film is a standalone?


That is correct, in general. Likewise, in theory, I would happily pay $100 for a 4-page pamphlet... if I was certain of the value therein.

In reality I'm not OK paying $11 for a feature-length blockbuster (which is why I basically never do), and my pre-purchase analysis of a film is very different from my pre-purchase analysis of a book. I can say with certainty, however, that I have never used the length of a film or book to guide my decision on whether to buy or not.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Phronk said:


> But for the all-you-can-read model of KU, I can't think of a measure of value more aligned with the average person's intuitions than pages read.


How about percent read, not as an all-or-nothing cut-off (very open to gaming the system) as it has been, but a proportional compensation based on, say, five percent increments. This would consistently reward for actual perceived value based on reader behavior without punishing creators of short stand-alone works of any kind.


----------



## anniejocoby

Crenel said:


> That is correct, in general. Likewise, in theory, I would happily pay $100 for a 4-page pamphlet... if I was certain of the value therein.
> 
> In reality I'm not OK paying $11 for a feature-length blockbuster (which is why I basically never do), and my pre-purchase analysis of a film is very different from my pre-purchase analysis of a book. I can say with certainty, however, that I have never used the length of a film or book to guide my decision on whether to buy or not.


Fair enough...but I would have to say that you're in the minority. I would think that most people would not plunk down their hard-earned cash for a 10 minute film, not when they can see a feature-length movie for that same amount of money. Because, if you think about it, if everybody was willing to pay the same amount of money for a cinematic short as they would for a three-hour epic, movie studios would be making some serious bank putting out jillions of short films for the public consumption.

This is not to denigrate the short story - it definitely has its place in literature. In fact, sometimes even I prefer reading short stories over novels, just because my attention span tends to be so short that a novel has to really grab me if I ever hope to finish it. Sometimes a little short story is all I want to read. But there's a reason why short stories tend to be sold in collections, and these collections go for the same price as a full-price book. If you think about it, out in the world, in bookstores where dead tree books are sold, you pretty much can only buy short story collections. I can't remember the last time I've seen a short story all by itself on the shelf.

And I have a book on my shelf by the popular writer Jennifer Weiner. It's a collection of about 15 short stories. I paid $5.99 for it, the same price as one of her novels (I bought it at one of those discount bookstores). Should I have paid $90 for this book ($5.99 X 15 stories)? Would anybody pay $90 for this book? After all, if each of these short stories are worth exactly the same as a full-length novel, and the full-length novel sells for $5.99, then every short story within that collection should be priced at $5.99, no more and no less. That would make that collection so prohibitively high that I doubt anybody would pay it. I have a book that has the complete collection of Edgar Allen Poe shorts (whom I love, btw). That has like 100 stories in it. By all rights, that book should be $500+. A lot of people would pay that for a first edition of that particular collection, but I can't imagine anybody buying it off the shelf for that price if it's just an ordinary edition.

And don't you think that, as profit-hungry traditional publishers are, if they could sell each of Jennifer Weiner's short stories at the same price as one of her novels they would do that? Yet they put them into a collection and sold them all at one low price. Hmmm.....

Another poster, I think it was Shane, said it best - Amazon should have started with this method of paying. If they did, nobody would be upset. It's the sudden change that has upset the apple cart.

And, just so you know, I'm affected by this change, too. I WAS going to write a serial of about 10,000-15,000 words apiece. About six installments. I was going to get started on it next month. I was totally excited about trying out KU that way. Now, that plan is scrapped. But, oh well....time to think of a new plan.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Crenel said:


> How about percent read, not as an all-or-nothing cut-off (very open to gaming the system) as it has been, but a proportional compensation based on, say, five percent increments. This would consistently reward for actual perceived value based on reader behavior without punishing creators of short stand-alone works of any kind.


I've been keeping out of this thread as best I can but - punishing? Really? Is that how you see it?

Because as a writer of long novels, I could say that I've been 'punished' for the past year. I don't see it that way, as it happens; I'm grateful for the income I've had from borrows so far, which has increased month on month. But it's always been a disappointment to me that my books, which keep a reader entertained (I hope) for several hours, were rewarded exactly the same as a few minutes' worth of short story. I have the greatest respect for short story and novella writers (because I've never been able to write short form work, at all), but it has never been equitable to pay the same amount to every book, regardless of length.

You've had a year to enjoy the benefits of writing short. Now it's time for the long-form writers to get their share of the pie.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

You know what? I'm massively excited for this. I BELIEVE I'm going to do well. Could I be disappointed? Yes. We will not know for seven weeks. I got another good piece of news today -- and compounded with the new system -- I believe July is going to be my best month ever. I'm not letting this change my work ethic or plan. I wrote a pen name book last week. I edited it today and sent it off to my first editor. Tomorrow I start another book. Monday and Tuesday I edit my next Avery Shaw book so I can send that off to another editor. I plan on writing two books for Camp NaNo. Nothing is changing for me right now. I've opted to be excited about this and until I have reason not to be I'm not going to change a thing.


----------



## PearlEarringLady

Yoda (sorry, can't think of you as anything else), I love your posts, they're always so upbeat and let's-do-it. But I get exhausted reading them...


----------



## Sonya Bateman

P.J. Post said:


> I don't understand...which song is a better value...
> 
> 53rd and 3rd or Stairway to Heaven?


Stairway! But only because... yanno, it's Zeppelin. 

Conversely, Man in the Box is a better value than...anything by the White Stripes. Because Alice in Chains.

(I'm not making any sense at all. I just wanted to vote for Stairway. )


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

PaulineMRoss said:


> You've had a year to enjoy the benefits of writing short. Now it's time for the long-form writers to get their share of the pie.


I believe inequity is resolved by eliminating it, not by swapping around who suffers and who doesn't.

I removed the rest of my reply due to the apparent futility of it. If you're convinced that length = value and you only care that the tables are turned, there's nothing more for me to say.


----------



## Doglover

Amanda M. Lee said:


> You know what? I'm massively excited for this. I BELIEVE I'm going to do well. Could I be disappointed? Yes. We will not know for seven weeks. I got another good piece of news today -- and compounded with the new system -- I believe July is going to be my best month ever. I'm not letting this change my work ethic or plan. I wrote a pen name book last week. I edited it today and sent it off to my first editor. Tomorrow I start another book. Monday and Tuesday I edit my next Avery Shaw book so I can send that off to another editor. I plan on writing two books for Camp NaNo. Nothing is changing for me right now. I've opted to be excited about this and until I have reason not to be I'm not going to change a thing.


You took the words right out of my keyboard! The people panicking seem to be the people writing very short stories especially to make the most of KU. I have two short stories, satire, which have not done well out of borrows but still do very well out of sales. If people started borrowing them, I would probably be better off.


----------



## L.B

Crenel said:


> How about percent read, not as an all-or-nothing cut-off (very open to gaming the system) as it has been, but a proportional compensation based on, say, five percent increments. This would consistently reward for actual perceived value based on reader behavior without punishing creators of short stand-alone works of any kind.


That would still hear it towards short works. More people would reach 5% of a crap book of the book was really short, than 5% of a crap novel.

I honestly don't understand why you and others think short works are losing out here.

If you want to earn the same as a 60,000 word novel from your 20,000 word shorts... Write three of them.

Expecting to earn three times as much for the same word output seems kind of crazy.

Someone here said that books should be baked at whatever people are willing to pay for them, but how do you apply that to borrows? I don't see how.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

As a reader only, and not even a subscriber to KU, perhaps I have no right to an opinion. But I do have one. 

When the model was 'paid by the borrow', I remember thinking that seemed somewhat unfair for short story writers since the average reader might read 6 of them in the same time they'd, otherwise, read one longer work. At $1 per borrow (I'm using a number that makes the math easy) the short story writer gets $6 when the novel writer gets only $1. I'm assuming here that the stories/books are GOOD, and borrowers read what they borrow.

With the 'per page' model. . . . the remuneration will be more equitable, it seems to me. In this scenario, assuming both books are good and the 6 shorts equal the length of the one longer book, now both the short story writer and the novel writer get paid the same amount. Neither is at a disadvantage if both have written good, readable books. That's, key, I think: the new model will tend to reward writers that can keep a reader's interest -- whether they write short or long.

The folks who WILL be most likely to LOSE, will be the people who write junk. And, remember, these crap books were pulling money from GOOD writers whether they specialize in the short story, serials, or novels. Sure, they'll get borrows, but most readers will realize quickly that it's junk and so rather than getting paid a whole $1 for a borrow, they'll only get a few cents. That also seems fair to me. And if I were a KU subscriber I'd report everyone of those junk books I happened across and request Amazon to remove 'em.

The other consideration is whether the 'per page model' means EVERYONE gets less. It's possible, I suppose. As I understand it, Amazon has, in the past, set a "KU total payout amount' each month and the 'per borrow' method was how they divvied up the money. They've been regularly increasing the pot, but also have had increasing subscribers and borrowers, so the unit payment has fluctuated. Assuming that's the same system, though, the per page figure depends on how big they make that pot. But I still think that people who write good stuff will get a _fair_ share of the pot . . . . and MORE will go to the 'good authors' (whether they write short of long) and less to the junk writers.

I'm dead sure people will be disappointed if their money comes out less the first month -- though I'd argue it's probably due to a whole lot of factors. It won't be possible, of course, to draw any hard conclusions for several months. 

And, remember, the subscribers won't know or care, for the most part. They just want to read a lot and read good stuff. 

eta: this analysis, if that's what it is , assumes we're talking fiction or other books that are 'cover-to-cover' reads. A lot of non fiction and reference could also be borrowed . . . . and NOT read straight through but only dipped in now and then. I have no idea how they'll work out how many 'pages' of something like that gets read. Overall, it might make that sort of book less profitable under this model. Even if it's a good book.


----------



## swolf

As a writer of both long and short, I agree that the KU playing field has been tilted towards shorts for the past year. (Which is why I responded by writing more of them.)

And while I think there should be more value placed on longer works than shorter works, there is also something to be said for short works having the value of a 'story' inherent to them, just like longer works. In other words, I could spend my time writing a single 300-page novel, or spend it writing ten 30-page shorts.  While they both add up to 300 pages, it can be argued there is more inherent value in the shorts because they contain ten different stories.  Sometimes people get more enjoyment out of a short story than a novel, so you have ten times more chances of that happening with the ten shorts. 

In my opinion, a hybrid system would be more fair.  Something where you'd get a small base amount if someone borrows your book and reads it (maybe 50% instead of 10%, to cut out most of the scammers), and then you also get royalties for pages read.  That way, longer writers would be compensated for the extra work they've put into their stories, and the short writers would be compensated for putting out more stories (that people actually read).


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

Maeve Binchy's collection of short stories didn't sell as well as her novels.
Jeffrey Archer's collection of short stories don't sell as well as his novels.

Short stories in general don't sell as well as novels because readers mostly prefer to immerse themselves in a novel, even if the collection of short stories is half the price of the novel. (I worked in a secondhand bookshop and did most of the pricing)

This has been my experience of print books. Erotica and ebooks are probably different.


----------



## swolf

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Maeve Binchy's collection of short stories didn't sell as well as her novels.
> Jeffrey Archer's collection of short stories don't sell as well as his novels.
> 
> Short stories in general don't sell as well as novels because readers mostly prefer to immerse themselves in a novel, even if the collection of short stories is half the price of the novel. (I worked in a secondhand bookshop and did most of the pricing)
> 
> This has been my experience of print books. Erotica and ebooks are probably different.


With ebooks, short story collections are analogous to bundles, and in the printed book world, single short stories are extremely rare. I can say from my own experience that my short stories outsell my longer works (in terms of quantities sold, not royalties.) We're also talking about borrowing, not buying, where a reader paying a flat fee of $10 a month may feel like they're getting more bang for their buck if they read a lot of shorts rather than fewer novels.

If shorts weren't so popular with readers in KU, there would be no reason for Amazon to change the rules.


----------



## Jim Johnson

Ann in Arlington said:


> And, remember, the subscribers won't know or care, for the most part. They just want to read a lot and read good stuff.


Yup. With my reader hat on, the hat with the KU subscriber pin stuck in it, I can say that with the old system, I'd borrow a book I was interested in, and I made sure to read at least 10% of the book, even if it didn't hold my interest to finish it. I figured I'd give the book and the author a fair shake, and even if they couldn't hold me down past 10%, at least they'd get a little ***** in their pocket.

But now...well. I don't 'have' to read 10% any more. I'll continue to borrow books that are in my reading wheelhouse, have enticing blurbs, and/or are recommended. I'll give the writer and the story a fair shake (usually a chapter or two). The books that hold me down and keep me reading are the ones I'll end up finishing. The ones that don't keep me engaged get returned at wherever I was pulled out of the story.

So as a reader, I want more writers to write stories that engage me and hold my interest from beginning to end. As a writer, that's my goal for my readers. If I can't hold a reader's interest through a short story or a novel or whatever, I'm not doing my job and need to work on my craft to get there.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

swolf said:


> With ebooks, short story collections are analogous to bundles, and in the printed book world, single short stories are extremely rare. I can say from my own experience that my short stories outsell my longer works (in terms of quantities sold, not royalties.) We're also talking about borrowing, not buying, where a reader paying a flat fee of $10 a month may feel like they're getting more bang for their buck if they read a lot of shorts rather than fewer novels.
> 
> If shorts weren't so popular with readers in KU, there would be no reason for Amazon to change the rules.


That's why I mentioned that ebooks might differ


----------



## JumpingShip

Amanda M. Lee said:


> You know what? I'm massively excited for this. I BELIEVE I'm going to do well. Could I be disappointed? Yes. We will not know for seven weeks. I got another good piece of news today -- and compounded with the new system -- I believe July is going to be my best month ever. I'm not letting this change my work ethic or plan. I wrote a pen name book last week. I edited it today and sent it off to my first editor. Tomorrow I start another book. Monday and Tuesday I edit my next Avery Shaw book so I can send that off to another editor. I plan on writing two books for Camp NaNo. Nothing is changing for me right now. I've opted to be excited about this and until I have reason not to be I'm not going to change a thing.


I'm cautiously optimistic. Many of the reviews on my books say, 'couldn't put it down', which I know tons of reviewers say about many books, but I'm hoping they really mean it.  Right now, I am a month out from a Bookbub ad in May, and sales are still pretty strong for rest of the series, so I'm taking that as a good sign.

I have a couple of weeks to evaluate it before my books are due to come out of KU in mid-July, so I'm just going to assume a penny/page (what I hope is a low-ball estimate) and do the math from that.

Does anyone think it'll go lower than penny/page? I didn't think it could, but looking at Spotify, which pays less than a penny/play, it's something to think about. If it does, I'm sure most would abandon KU.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

MaryMcDonald said:


> Does anyone think it'll go lower than penny/page? I didn't think it could, but looking at Spotify, which pays less than a penny/play, it's something to think about. If it does, I'm sure most would abandon KU.


My guess is probably not for the first two or three months. Part of their goal with this is to entice some of the bigger names back into the program and less than a penny per page won't be enough to do that I'm pretty sure. But, really it's all speculation until we see that first round of payouts. We know Amazon already knows the number of pages read for previous months and we know they've set the pot at $11 million for the next two months. So, if they don't increase the pot, we should have a reasonable idea of where they think the payout should be.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson

MaryMcDonald said:


> Does anyone think it'll go lower than penny/page? I didn't think it could, but looking at Spotify, which pays less than a penny/play, it's something to think about. If it does, I'm sure most would abandon KU.


What is a US penny? Do you mean one cent?


----------



## Becca Mills

I'm usually not a big rah-rah-free-market sort of person, but this debate is bringing home to me how much I prefer to let customers decide what particular books are "worth," rather than having a centralized authority do it. There are so many different ways to determine "value." Is it the length of time it took to produce the book? The amount of time it takes to read it? The quality of entertainment provided, regardless of length? The amount of money put into its production? The only possible answer is "all of the above" because the answer is different for different people.

When you can just _sell_ books directly to customers, then you know what each one is worth -- either a good number of people buy it at the price you've set, or they don't. So much simpler. And harsher, of course, since the book market seems fond of telling us our books can't be sold at any price.  Nevertheless, in the absence of that real-market test, Amazon is never going to be able to establish a system that strikes everyone as measuring value fairly. Someone is always going to feel their work is being devalued or someone else's is being overvalued.


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What is a US penny? Do you mean one cent?


Yes.


----------



## Becca Mills

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> What is a US penny? Do you mean one cent?


We give our coins cute names, just to be confusing.


----------



## anniejocoby

I hate to say this, but I think that at least part of the problem is that short story writers are looking at this whole change emotionally. They're going to see their earnings drop, and I get that. That sucks. You know, you start writing with a certain assumption, and you see your income rise, and now, well, suddenly the rug is pulled out from under you. 

But here's the thing - the only thing that you can be certain of with Amazon is that it's seemingly capricious and, just when you think you're safe, the rules will change. They'll change the algos, such as when they made it to where free runs were not as weighted as paid sales, which caused a lot of writers angst. I wasn't around back then, but I would imagine that such a change caused the sturm and drang "it's just not fair" reaction that this change caused. They'll cause your permafrees to have considerably less value by introducing the all you can eat KU. In the process, they'll penalize writers who aren't in the KU program by allegedly weighting borrows more than sales. Over at ACX, they'll slash royalty rates out of nowhere. That change really sucked, because people pay a lot of money to get those audio books done. Then, once you're into it for thousands of dollars, assuming that the royalty rates were up to 90% - BOOM - suddenly they're 40%. 

Every time there's is drastic change over at Amazon, people get upset because their livelihood is affected. But if you examine all these changes with a  detached eye that isn't colored by emotion, you can see that there were sound reasons for every change. Of course free runs shouldn't have the same weight as paid books when determining the book's rank. Of course ACX couldn't afford to pay producers 90% royalties. Of course longer works should be paid more per borrow than shorter ones. It's just business, nothing personal. Those of us with permafree suffered when the KU scheme was introduced, but what can you do? 

When you get into this business, you always have to expect the unexpected. If your business model is predicated on Amazon, or anyone else, staying the same for years, then it's time to change your business model. Short stories can still make a decent living - they just have to write more shorts than they were before. 

Be a shark and never, ever stop swimming.


----------



## pwtucker

Congrats on a the good news, Amanda. Any chance you could share what it is?


----------



## xandy3

Well as most of my ebooks are short stories and one novella, this will really stink for me. 
Contemplating a new business plan as we speak....


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

pwtucker said:


> Congrats on a the good news, Amanda. Any chance you could share what it is?


Not until a little later.


----------



## 10105

I wonder how hopping throughout the book with the TOC affects the page count read. Publishers of anthologies might want to put the best story last to encourage readers to jump there. I'd assume that when they finished that story it would appear that they'd read the whole book. Just guessing.


----------



## 75845

Ann in Arlington said:


> A lot of non fiction and reference could also be borrowed . . . . and NOT read straight through but only dipped in now and then. I have no idea how they'll work out how many 'pages' of something like that gets read.


Exactly the same way that they currently work out if 10% has been read. For writers of large non-fiction works this change is likely to see an increase in income, while writers of shorter non-fiction works are more likely to see a drop.

It is not so much about dipping in now and again but KU users borrowing a range of books that each have a small amount about the topic they are researching (e.g., for an essay).


----------



## TuckerAuthor

anniejocoby said:


> I hate to say this, but I think that at least part of the problem is that short story writers are looking at this whole change emotionally. They're going to see their earnings drop, and I get that. That sucks. You know, you start writing with a certain assumption, and you see your income rise, and now, well, suddenly the rug is pulled out from under you.
> 
> But here's the thing - the only thing that you can be certain of with Amazon is that it's seemingly capricious and, just when you think you're safe, the rules will change. They'll change the algos, such as when they made it to where free runs were not as weighted as paid sales, which caused a lot of writers angst. I wasn't around back then, but I would imagine that such a change caused the sturm and drang "it's just not fair" reaction that this change caused. They'll cause your permafrees to have considerably less value by introducing the all you can eat KU. In the process, they'll penalize writers who aren't in the KU program by allegedly weighting borrows more than sales. Over at ACX, they'll slash royalty rates out of nowhere. That change really sucked, because people pay a lot of money to get those audio books done. Then, once you're into it for thousands of dollars, assuming that the royalty rates were up to 90% - BOOM - suddenly they're 40%.
> 
> Every time there's is drastic change over at Amazon, people get upset because their livelihood is affected. But if you examine all these changes with a detached eye that isn't colored by emotion, you can see that there were sound reasons for every change. Of course free runs shouldn't have the same weight as paid books when determining the book's rank. Of course ACX couldn't afford to pay producers 90% royalties. Of course longer works should be paid more per borrow than shorter ones. It's just business, nothing personal. Those of us with permafree suffered when the KU scheme was introduced, but what can you do?
> 
> When you get into this business, you always have to expect the unexpected. If your business model is predicated on Amazon, or anyone else, staying the same for years, then it's time to change your business model. Short stories can still make a decent living - they just have to write more shorts than they were before.
> 
> Be a shark and never, ever stop swimming.


Where is the "love it!" button for this post?

We aren't privy to the thousands of emails and calls that Amazon gets every day from their customers (i.e. readers in our case) in large part complaining about this or that. They are what drives most of what Amazon does. Now, readers in KU weren't complaining that shorts and novels were paid the same per borrow. Most, I'm sure, have no idea, nor do they really care, how the author gets compensated. The readers complained there weren't enough good, longer books in the system. The fact that those complaints coincided with the grumblings from many authors about the original payout structure was just an added bonus. They studied the situation under the premise that they wanted to increase the length and quality of offerings in KU. Thus, they came upon the per page renumeration idea. We, as the suppliers, may or may not like it, but I dare say it should go a long way toward accomplishing what Amazon is after - assuming the compensation is attractive enough, which I'm sure they will monitor closely.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> I hate to say this, but I think that at least part of the problem is that short story writers are looking at this whole change emotionally....
> 
> [...]
> 
> But if you examine all these changes with a detached eye that isn't colored by emotion, you can see....


Good grief. And you're not at all emotionally responding to the prospect of a better payout. Personally I think lack of respect is a part of the problem _of this thread_, including holier-than-though pronouncements about short form writers and pretending that arbitrary feelings are "logical" because they support your position, not because they're actually logical.

Clearly there is a strong sentiment here that, word for word, page for page, length is the only (or only major/relevant) determinant of rewardable value. I think that's nonsense and self-serving on the part of novel writers, but I'm not going to change anyone's mind there, so I won't comment further on that.

There's also apparently a strong us-vs-them sentiment on the part of long-form writers regarding short-form writers, which is an understandable _emotional_ reaction to feeling "disappointed" about the compensation model that ends in a few days. No rational, impartial conversation can be expected in that kind of environment.

Maybe my mix of books makes it easier for me to see this from more than one angle. It's unfortunate that people are so stuck on their own situation that they can't look beyond it. I have two novels on the market -- yes, I'm a long-form writer. I have a stand-alone short and a collection of shorts published so far -- yes, I'm a short-form writer. I have a children's picture book on Amazon (et al) -- yes, I'm affected by how those books are very likely going to be treated very poorly by the secret page calculation algorithm. And I have nonfiction books out there as well. Even though this change _might benefit me significantly_ as I release the novels I have in the queue, I still think it's a poorly crafted idea that substitutes "length" for "real value as perceived by readers."


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

TuckerAuthor said:


> We aren't privy to the thousands of emails and calls that Amazon gets every day from their customers....
> [...]
> The readers complained there weren't enough good, longer books in the system.


Apparently I'm missing something. How do we know the latter if the former is true?


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Crenel said:


> Apparently I'm missing something. How do we know the latter if the former is true?


Anecdotal evidence from KU readers I've talked to and heard about others talking to. Yes, again, it's guesswork, but the line of reasoning makes sense. We'll know more in the next 2-3 months and then we can make more informed decisions.


----------



## azebra

Monique said:


> Just a minor datapoint. Not sure how helpful it is, but ...
> 
> A while back Kobo shared a few statistics with me. One of my books was one of their "most read" for KWL. They mentioned that anything over 50% was considered very good. And that there is overall a very high abandoment rate. Note: these are all paid books, so the figures for borrows would be different.


Thanks for posting this. Coupled with the info that Amazon gave me about continuing to pay out in pages read in subsequent months I find this quite heartening. I have a few books in KU including three bundles. My four book bundle is the best seller and stand out most borrowed. Right now that one title accounts for more than fifty percent of my borrows this month. It's always been a bit of a bug bear that a book I sell for 9.99 only gets $1.35 for a borrow but I took the hit because it all helps the rankings. I woke up this morning thinking about how now I will get more money for that title HOPEFULLY or at the very least I will know if people read it!


----------



## anniejocoby

Crenel said:


> Good grief. And you're not at all emotionally responding to the prospect of a better payout. Personally I think lack of respect is a part of the problem _of this thread_, including holier-than-though pronouncements about short form writers and pretending that arbitrary feelings are "logical" because they support your position, not because they're actually logical.
> 
> Clearly there is a strong sentiment here that, word for word, page for page, length is the only (or only major/relevant) determinant of rewardable value. I think that's nonsense and self-serving on the part of novel writers, but I'm not going to change anyone's mind there, so I won't comment further on that.
> 
> There's also apparently a strong us-vs-them sentiment on the part of long-form writers regarding short-form writers, which is an understandable _emotional_ reaction to feeling "disappointed" about the compensation model that ends in a few days. No rational, impartial conversation can be expected in that kind of environment.
> 
> Maybe my mix of books makes it easier for me to see this from more than one angle. It's unfortunate that people are so stuck on their own situation that they can't look beyond it. I have two novels on the market -- yes, I'm a long-form writer. I have a stand-alone short and a collection of shorts published so far -- yes, I'm a short-form writer. I have a children's picture book on Amazon (et al) -- yes, I'm affected by how those books are very likely going to be treated very poorly by the secret page calculation algorithm. And I have nonfiction books out there as well. Even though this change _might benefit me significantly_ as I release the novels I have in the queue, I still think it's a poorly crafted idea that substitutes "length" for "real value as perceived by readers."


Okay...so, again, why are short stories sold as collections, not as standalones? You didn't even answer that question - should a collection of short stories be priced $100 if there are 10 short stories in there? Novels are $10 in book stores. If there is a collection of 10 short stories and each one is valued the same as a novel, then short story collections should be 100s of dollars. Right

I'm not emotional about this, I just get frustrated with the inability for you to see and understand that length does matter.

I have no books in KU. This whole change affects me not one bit.

I'm just trying to speak up for the novel writers who have been paid the same for their 100,000 word book as those with a 10,000 word book and guess what? The 10,000 word book writer can write four, five, six, ten stories for every one story the 100,000 word writer can write. So, the 100,000 word writer takes three months to write his one book and get $1.37 per borrow. The short writer writes 20 books in that same amount of time and gets $1.37 per borrow twenty times. And that's supposed to be fair.

Sorry you can't see that. There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.

Out.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

azebra said:


> It's always been a bit of a bug bear that a book I sell for 9.99 only gets $1.35 for a borrow but I took the hit because *it all helps the rankings*.


(emphasis added)

Exactly -- and this is why giving away books with _no_ compensation via free-download days is considered a _benefit_ of Select, as is being able to drastically reduce the price via a Countdown. It's why people struggle to get their books into permafree status, for which there is _no_ compensation. Authors benefit from having their works out more, increasing visibility.

KU/KOLL "borrows" give the reader _less_ long-term value than a free-download copy that becomes a permanent part of the customer's digital library, yet writers are complaining that the compensation for this lower value is "not enough" (whether in the past or after the July 1 change), even though the higher long-term value to the reader (free distribution) earns _no compensation at all_.

Any business might be "disappointed" to not make a profit on every single item they stock, but that doesn't stop them from using some products as loss leaders, and I've never seen any complain about how their loss leaders weren't adequately paid for.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> Okay...so, again, why are short stories sold as collections, not as standalones? [...]
> 
> I'm not emotional about this, I just get frustrated with the inability for you to see and understand that length does matter.
> 
> [...]
> So, the 100,000 word writer takes three months to write his one book and get $1.37 per borrow. The short writer writes 20 books in that same amount of time and gets $1.37 per borrow twenty times. And that's supposed to be fair.
> 
> Sorry you can't see that. There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.


"Fisking" is apparently frowned upon here, so I shortened your quote to address your points in order:

1. Short stories are sold in collections _in print_ because it's less feasible to physically distribute stand-alone short stories. Short stories are sold in collections _digitally_ for any number of reasons. One of my short stories is sold stand-alone. Others are bundled into a collection. My reason for the latter, which is _not_ representative of choices made by others, is that I'm an obscure author and thus I need to maximize the value perceived by the potential buyer.

2. I will take at face value that you are not emotional over the impact of this on you, since you've stated that you have no books in Select. However, that still does not elevate opinions to "logic."

3. I didn't say length "doesn't matter," I said it is a poor determinant for rewardable value.

4. Sorry you "can't see" that a) your analysis of the time and effort to write short stories is faulty because there is not a 1:1 relationship between short-form and long-form word counts, b) creative efforts are generally not paid for based on production time, and c) each author _chooses for themselves_ what they want to write based on whatever criteria they choose, and there is nothing unfair about them earning (or failing to earn) rewards based on their choices. As for being "blind" ...well, forum decorum dictates that I end here.


----------



## JumpingShip

Crenel said:


> Good grief. And you're not at all emotionally responding to the prospect of a better payout. Personally I think lack of respect is a part of the problem _of this thread_, including holier-than-though pronouncements about short form writers and pretending that arbitrary feelings are "logical" because they support your position, not because they're actually logical.
> 
> Clearly there is a strong sentiment here that, word for word, page for page, length is the only (or only major/relevant) determinant of rewardable value. I think that's nonsense and self-serving on the part of novel writers, but I'm not going to change anyone's mind there, so I won't comment further on that.
> 
> There's also apparently a strong us-vs-them sentiment on the part of long-form writers regarding short-form writers, which is an understandable _emotional_ reaction to feeling "disappointed" about the compensation model that ends in a few days. No rational, impartial conversation can be expected in that kind of environment.
> 
> Maybe my mix of books makes it easier for me to see this from more than one angle. It's unfortunate that people are so stuck on their own situation that they can't look beyond it. I have two novels on the market -- yes, I'm a long-form writer. I have a stand-alone short and a collection of shorts published so far -- yes, I'm a short-form writer. I have a children's picture book on Amazon (et al) -- yes, I'm affected by how those books are very likely going to be treated very poorly by the secret page calculation algorithm. And I have nonfiction books out there as well. Even though this change _might benefit me significantly_ as I release the novels I have in the queue, I still think it's a poorly crafted idea that substitutes "length" for "real value as perceived by readers."


What I don't understand is why, if readers are willing to pay just as much for a short story as a novel, you don't just pull out of KU? You can sell them for $2.99 or whatever, and keep your earnings up.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

S.W. Vaughn said:


> Stairway! But only because... yanno, it's Zeppelin.
> 
> Conversely, Man in the Box is a better value than...anything by the White Stripes. Because Alice in Chains.
> 
> (I'm not making any sense at all. I just wanted to vote for Stairway. )


Sorry, I have to vote for _Light My Fire_. The Doors over Led Zeppelin for me.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

MaryMcDonald said:


> What I don't understand is why, if readers are willing to pay just as much for a short story as a novel, you don't just pull out of KU? You can sell them for $2.99 or whatever, and keep your earnings up.


Well, this is another aspect of this highly-fractured thread: Some people are only looking at what the change means _for them_ while others are looking at what the change means _for everybody_. I'm in the latter group; if I was in the former group, I would never have commented because my own choices with my books are irrelevant to anyone but me.


----------



## anniejocoby

Crenel said:


> Well, this is another aspect of this highly-fractured thread: Some people are only looking at what the change means _for them_ while others are looking at what the change means _for everybody_. I'm in the latter group; if I was in the former group, I would never have commented because my own choices with my books are irrelevant to anyone but me.


Except the change means NOTHING to me. I'm not in KU and I never have been. In fact, it's detrimental to me, because I was planning to write a six episode serial to put into KU as soon as my new series is done. Each episode around 10,000 words. I was totally excited about it. Now, I'm not going to do it. I'm disappointed by the change, to be honest with you. But that personal disappointment doesn't change my original position.


----------



## anniejocoby

Crenel said:


> "Fisking" is apparently frowned upon here, so I shortened your quote to address your points in order:
> 
> 1. Short stories are sold in collections _in print_ because it's less feasible to physically distribute stand-alone short stories. Short stories are sold in collections _digitally_ for any number of reasons. One of my short stories is sold stand-alone. Others are bundled into a collection. My reason for the latter, which is _not_ representative of choices made by others, is that I'm an obscure author and thus I need to maximize the value perceived by the potential buyer.


Okay, then. Jennifer Weiner's short story collection is on Kindle selling for $13.00. 11 stories. Her novel, "Who Do You Love" is also selling at $13.00. Kindle ebook, not paperback. So, should the short story collection be on Kindle selling for $143? Each short story in the collection should cost as much as her one novel, right? What about all the other short story collections out there on ebook - same thing? Should all the short story collections be priced so that each of the short stories cost the same as a novel? I'm talking about ebooks here.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

anniejocoby said:


> Okay, then. Jennifer Weiner's short story collection is on Kindle selling for $13.00. 11 stories. Her novel, "Who Do You Love" is also selling at $13.00. Kindle ebook, not paperback. So, should the short story collection be on Kindle selling for $143? Each short story in the collection should cost as much as her one novel, right? What about all the other short story collections out there on ebook - same thing? Should all the short story collections be priced so that each of the short stories cost the same as a novel? I'm talking about ebooks here.


First, selling and compensating for borrowing are fundamentally different. The buyer for a "borrow" is Amazon; they're paying for distributing books to readers who do not pay for the books directly. Perhaps Amazon should (and they certainly could) not compensate for borrows at all, just like how they don't compensate for freely-downloaded copies. That would truly be fair to all writers and would definitely eliminate scammers gaming the system to maximize compensation. Second, on the tangent of selling to readers, books should be priced according to market expectations, and while the market may bear a price of $150+ for some books, it's not likely that such books would be collections of short stories. Finally, limiting oneself to 1:1 relationships and all-or-nothing judgments is not a solid foundation for _logical_ analysis.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

I don't consent


----------



## anniejocoby

T. M. Bilderback said:


> And, to anniejocoby: You should still write your shorts for KU. Even if it's a penny per page read, what have you lost? Try each title for three months, then go wide. Short story or long novel, you'll make the same amount, it's only for three months, and you will have money in your pocket for your work that you wouldn't have received without trying.


I know what you're saying, but I'm still disappointed. I was looking forward to writing those shorts and getting full borrow rates for them, and, if that worked out, writing more shorts to keep up my sales when I'm in a slump. Needless to say, this new payout scheme makes my whole plan much less attractive. Right now, there's not necessarily an advantage to me to even use KU, although I'll see how it goes. Thanks for the encouragement!


----------



## cinisajoy

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> Sorry, I have to vote for _Light My Fire_. The Doors over Led Zeppelin for me.


Free Bird or Inna Gadda Da Vida.


----------



## GoneToWriterSanctum

cinisajoy said:


> Free Bird or Inna Gadda Da Vida.


Nah. The Beatles. Together or individually.

And Frank Zappa. Lyrics aside, he was a musical genius!


----------



## Genre Hoarder

First things first, I go away for a month and come back to find that yoda has revealed her real identity (I knew who she was a long time ago, but it wasn't my place to say.) and S. Wolf is back! Yay!

Now, about the questions posed here - I am not all frightened by the new KU payout system. I have fifty titles available now. They are shorts, novellas, and novels. Because I see this as a business and know that Amazon is a business, I don't take it personally if and when they change something. I have to roll with the punches and adjust as I deem necessary. 

I think this change will be interesting at the very least and potentially lucrative at best. Either way, I'm happy!


----------



## 75845

azebra said:


> Thanks for posting this [Kobo read statistics]. Coupled with the info that Amazon gave me about continuing to pay out in pages read in subsequent months I find this quite heartening.


Kobo's statistics are meaningless for anyone who uses their service and has a large TBR or a busy life. Two days ago I downloaded a freebie to my Kobo Mini and the home screen changed immediately to list that newly downloaded book as read at 1%. I still have not opened the book, yet Kobo's statistics are counting me as starting to read it the moment I download it, so with a large TBR I will have a lot of books registering as only 1% read after one year. I suspect that Kobo would change that automatic "opening" (it doesn't actually open it just registers as read 1% on the home page) if they ever started paying by page read.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> Sorry, I have to vote for _Light My Fire_. The Doors over Led Zeppelin for me.


As a vote of...confidence? for The Doors, the instant I read your post, Light My Fire became stuck in my head and will not leave. So they have definite sticking power. 



cinisajoy said:


> Free Bird or Inna Gadda Da Vida.


FREEEEEEE BIIIIIIIIIIRRRRDDD!!! Oh man, we used to yell that at EVERYTHING that might be playing music. 



T. M. Bilderback said:


> Nah. The Beatles. Together or individually.
> 
> And Frank Zappa. Lyrics aside, he was a musical genius!


The Beatles are unarguably quality. But their songs were typically very short and they released so many of them! <--see how I'm totally relevant to the thread


----------



## cinisajoy

Free Bird is 9 minutes and Inna Gadda Da Vida was 18 minutes so also relevant to the thread.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

cinisajoy said:


> Free Bird is 9 minutes and Inna Gadda Da Vida was 18 minutes so also relevant to the thread.


We're so relevant!


----------



## Gertie Kindle

cinisajoy said:


> Free Bird is 9 minutes and Inna Gadda Da Vida was 18 minutes so also relevant to the thread.


So, did they get paid by the note listened? Did The Beatles get paid as much for a two minute song as The Doors did for a seven minute song? And what about youtube?

Now we're really relevant.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> So, did they get paid by the note listened? Did The Beatles get paid as much for a two minute song as The Doors did for a seven minute song? And what about youtube?
> 
> Now we're really relevant.


Awwww yeah. Rockin' the relevance. 

(BTW, still singing Light My Fire over here... )

All I'm going to say on the subject of the KU changes, for serious, is this:

1. I write short and short-ish -- the series in my sig is 35K - 50K per book, and the serial is around 17K - 18K per episode. I'm staying in Select. My only income right now is from my books and I'm scared that I'll see a serious drop, but also hopeful that people will actually read my stuff and want to read more. And I'll probably try to write faster... 

2. I don't think there is any way, at all, for Amazon to judge the quality or the worth of any one story, regardless of length, over another. The closest thing we have to a quality filter is readers, and even that isn't 100% reliable because in order for readers to judge quality, they have to be able to find your stuff so they can read it. If you're not visible... well, you're kind of in a vacuum as far as quality.

I think these changes are the best way Amazon could find to make the KU payout system as fair and equitable as possible, short of hiring thousands of "quality readers" who happen to be perfectly representative of the tastes and filters of millions of readers, and somehow having them read all of everything published through Select and decide, on an individual basis of "quality," how much each story should be paid per borrow.

Which, of course, is ridiculous.

We're also all WILDLY speculating when we know nothing. The only concrete piece of information we have is "you'll be paid something for every page every KU subscriber reads from your book." We don't even know what constitutes a "page" yet... and we know that if we don't like the new Select, we get a free 90-day mulligan.

So, in the immortal words of Douglas Adams: Don't Panic. Not yet, anyway.


----------



## Gertie Kindle

The way I see it, you'll get paid for all those readers who finish as well as those who quit before 10%. This change might tempt me back into Select. Maybe.


----------



## A.A

Am wondering if this change will cause a shift in the type of novels indie authors produce - in terms of those choosing to put their books in Select.

At the moment, indies are pretty free to write what they want and cross genres if they want. But it seems clear that those doing the best stick to definite genres and meet genre expectations. And readers who love certain genres will tend to read those books to the end because those books are meeting their expectations.

Books that are cross-genre might lose some readers along the way. Books that go outside expectations might lose readers along the way. Books that are more literary often lose readers just because they're literary. 
Kobo said:



> The Goldfinch, by the Pulitzer Prize-winning Donna Tartt, was one of 2014's biggest sellers. But data released by Kobo, a rival to the Kindle, claimed that only 44 per cent of readers who downloaded it read to the end.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/amazon/11692026/Amazons-to-pay-Kindle-authors-only-for-pages-read.html

Will indie novels in Select start tending toward becoming very tightly genre-specific. And longer?.

Will this cause a bigger chasm between Big-5 novels and indie novels? Big-5 novels (or Amazon novels/other publishers) with publicity pushes behind them might be freer to explore more literary or cross-genre paths.


----------



## CJAnderson

Very interesting take on all of this....and I tend to agree.

*Amazon Tweaks Its Kindle Unlimited System. It Still Sucks For KDP Select Authors*
"Now that I've returned to the US and have parked myself in front of the computer again, people are asking me what I think of Amazon's plan to tweak the way its Kindle Unlimited system pays KDP Select authors. In the past, Amazon would designate a certain amount of cash ($3 million this June, according to this Verge article) as a payment pot, and all KDP Select authors participating in Kindle Unlimited would get a small bit of the pot if someone who downloaded their book read more than 10% of it. This predictably led to authors making short books in order to get to the 10% mark as quickly as possible, and equally predictably diluted the effectiveness of the tactic. It also made authors of longer works complain quite a lot, as they had to compete with bite-sized books for the same tiny bit of the pot.

As a result, .... _click link below for more._

Source: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2015/06/21/amazon-tweaks-its-kindle-unlimited-system-it-still-sucks-for-kdp-select-authors/

_Click on link to read more. Entire articles should not be posted here, thanks. --Betsy/KB Mod_


----------



## TuckerAuthor

CJAnderson said:


> This June, every KDP Select author participating in Kindle Unlimited can not, among all of them totaled up, make more than $3 million. Why? Because that's the pot. That's how much Amazon wants to splash out this month, and no more.
> Source: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2015/06/21/amazon-tweaks-its-kindle-unlimited-system-it-still-sucks-for-kdp-select-authors/


Scalzi's built a reputation on being inflammatory, but he should check his facts a little better than relying on an article in the Verge. Amazon adjusts the pot each month to bring the payouts to a level they feel is appropriate, so yes, they are still in control of how much we make, but it's not as grim as he paints it out to be.


----------



## Desert Rose

Why let facts get in the way of a good rant?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

CJAnderson said:


> Very interesting take on all of this....and I tend to agree.
> 
> *Amazon Tweaks Its Kindle Unlimited System. It Still Sucks For KDP Select Authors*
> "Now that I've returned to the US and have parked myself in front of the computer again, people are asking me what I think of Amazon's plan to tweak the way its Kindle Unlimited system pays KDP Select authors. In the past, Amazon would designate a certain amount of cash ($3 million this June, according to this Verge article) as a payment pot, and all KDP Select authors participating in Kindle Unlimited would get a small bit of the pot if someone who downloaded their book read more than 10% of it. This predictably led to authors making short books in order to get to the 10% mark as quickly as possible, and equally predictably diluted the effectiveness of the tactic. It also made authors of longer works complain quite a lot, as they had to compete with bite-sized books for the same tiny bit of the pot.
> As a result,
> 
> Source: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2015/06/21/amazon-tweaks-its-kindle-unlimited-system-it-still-sucks-for-kdp-select-authors/
> 
> _Click on link to read more. Entire articles should not be posted here, thanks. --Betsy/KB Mod_


There are a couple small problems with this:
1. Amazon always tops up the fund so it won't be $3 million. It will most likely be closer to $8 million.
2. The so-called cap doesn't exist because that would insinuate no one can buy books in Select. You don't just get borrows when you're in Select. The borrows are great, but my sales are also up because of the rank increases. Did Amazon somehow cap my sales potential when I wasn't looking? They surely are evil wizards.

_Edited quoted post.. --Betsy_


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Amanda M. Lee said:


> 2. The so-called cap doesn't exist because that would insinuate no one can buy books in Select.


The context is specific to borrows, and the phrase "my success as an author comes by disadvantaging other authors" is undoubtedly specific to the KU/KOLL part of Select. Although I'm not him and can't speak authoritatively for him, I'm _pretty sure_ he's not talking about a total earnings cap, just the cap on earnings from borrows, which obviously does exist.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Crenel said:


> The context is specific to borrows, and the phrase "my success as an author comes by disadvantaging other authors" is undoubtedly specific to the KU/KOLL part of Select. Although I'm not him and can't speak authoritatively for him, I'm _pretty sure_ he's not talking about a total earnings cap, just the cap on earnings from borrows, which obviously does exist.


And yet my earning potential is in no way capped.


----------



## kellion

Been following this thread closely -- this move happened right after I published my first short in KDP because another middle-grade writer advised me that KU was good for the audience. So I haven't been counting on the income, but it does change the calculus.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Amanda M. Lee said:


> And yet my earning potential is in no way capped.


Right. But that's not what he's talking about.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Crenel said:


> Right. But that's not what he's talking about.


He said my income potential was capped in KU -- and it's not. By his argument there are only so many books purchased a year so everyone's earning potential is capped.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Amanda M. Lee said:


> He said my income potential was capped in KU -- and it's not. By his argument there are only so many books purchased a year so everyone's earning potential is capped.


Hmm. Is this a joke that I'm somehow missing?

In case you're actually being serious, I'm not sure I can find any other way to say what I've already said. His "argument" has _nothing to do_ with "books purchased a year" or everyone's earning potential _overall_. It's about KU borrows, period. And yes, unless you have a neat trick for exceeding the monthly payment pool, your income potential _from Kindle Unlimited_ is capped by that pool.

It's just basic math: Pool - Other Authors Cut = Your Cut. But if you're willing to argue that 2+2 = 5, I'll at least understand that I'm missing a joke here.


----------



## Doglover

anniejocoby said:


> Except the change means NOTHING to me. I'm not in KU and I never have been. In fact, it's detrimental to me, because I was planning to write a six episode serial to put into KU as soon as my new series is done. Each episode around 10,000 words. I was totally excited about it. Now, I'm not going to do it. I'm disappointed by the change, to be honest with you. But that personal disappointment doesn't change my original position.


It does mean something to you then, doesn't it? You are changing your plan because of it and you are disappointed by the change, so how can you say it means nothing? From my point of view, apart from two short stories which were the very first thing I ever published and a novella, all my books are full length novels. They are all in select except my free ones and while sales and borrows are creeping up I am happy with whatever kdp decide.


----------



## L.B

Crenel said:


> Hmm. Is this a joke that I'm somehow missing?
> 
> In case you're actually being serious, I'm not sure I can find any other way to say what I've already said. His "argument" has _nothing to do_ with "books purchased a year" or everyone's earning potential _overall_. It's about KU borrows, period. And yes, unless you have a neat trick for exceeding the monthly payment pool, your income potential _from Kindle Unlimited_ is capped by that pool.
> 
> It's just basic math: Pool - Other Authors Cut = Your Cut. But if you're willing to argue that 2+2 = 5, I'll at least understand that I'm missing a joke here.


He repeatedly says things in the article like 'a cap on earnings' without being specific to being in select.

He also he enjoys being in 'the open market where earnings aren't capped', well everyone in select is still also in the open market.

It reads like a scaremongering piece to drive clicks/controversy to me.

You haven't answered my previous reply to an earlier post of yours. What would you consider 'fair'? And none of your 5% increments rubbish which would only encourage small spam books again.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Barnaby Yard said:


> He repeatedly says things in the article like 'a cap on earnings' without being specific to being in select.
> 
> [...]
> 
> You haven't answered my previous reply to an earlier post of yours. What would you consider 'fair'? And none of your 5% increments rubbish which would only encourage small spam books again.


The only way to argue that he's talking about overall earnings is to ignore the glaringly-obvious context.

As for the rest... your lack of respect merits no answer.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Crenel said:


> The only way to argue that he's talking about overall earnings is to ignore the glaringly-obvious context.
> 
> As for the rest... your lack of respect merits no answer.


No. The only way to argue that he's talking about overall earnings is to read what he said.


----------



## L.B

Crenel said:


> The only way to argue that he's talking about overall earnings is to ignore the glaringly-obvious context.
> 
> As for the rest... your lack of respect merits no answer.


Hmm.. Apologies if I've shown 'a lack of respect', not quite sure how though...

Anyway, yes the title of the article is select, but he's using language to insinuate earnings are limited by enrolling in it. This is simply not true.

Amanda is a shining example of making it work, in fact, she's probably banking more than Scalzi!


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Amanda M. Lee said:


> No. The only way to argue that he's talking about overall earnings is to read what he said.


"We begin bombing in five minutes."

Saying context doesn't matter is like saying non-verbal communication doesn't matter. Real communication happens when people factor in _what_ is said along with _how_, _where_, _when_, and _why_ it is said. Ignoring context because it suits an argument is... well, to keep things civil, I'll just say it's not something I would do if I wanted to be taken seriously.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Crenel said:


> "We begin bombing in five minutes."
> 
> Saying context doesn't matter is like saying non-verbal communication doesn't matter. Real communication happens when people factor in _what_ is said along with _how_, _where_, _when_, and _why_ it is said. Ignoring context because it suits an argument is... well, to keep things civil, I'll just say it's not something I would do if I wanted to be taken seriously.


I'm going off what he wrote. If you don't want to take me seriously, you don't have to.


----------



## Guest

Almost fifty pages...


----------



## VEVO

Amanda M. Lee said:


> There are a couple small problems with this:
> 1. Amazon always tops up the fund so it won't be $3 million. It will most likely be closer to $8 million.
> 2. The so-called cap doesn't exist because that would insinuate no one can buy books in Select. You don't just get borrows when you're in Select. The borrows are great, but my sales are also up because of the rank increases. Did Amazon somehow cap my sales potential when I wasn't looking? They surely are evil wizards.


Several people already mentioned that $3 million "error" when it will be in excess of $11 million. But I don't think he will fix it in his blog. He doesn't seem to care that he is misleading his readers.

Here's the KU Global Fund by month:

July 2014 was $2.785 million in payout
August was $4.7 million
September was $5 million
October was $5.5 million
November was $6.5 million
December was $7.25 million
January 2015 was $8.50 million
February was $8.00 million
March was $9.30 million
April was $9.80 million
May was $10.8 million


----------



## Nope

.


----------



## DC Swain

Joe Vasicek said:


> Almost fifty pages...


Glad no one took you up on that bet


----------



## Cherise

This is my favorite thread right now. It's so fun to watch the drama.


----------



## ufwriter

Crenel said:


> "We begin bombing in five minutes."
> 
> Saying context doesn't matter is like saying non-verbal communication doesn't matter. Real communication happens when people factor in _what_ is said along with _how_, _where_, _when_, and _why_ it is said. Ignoring context because it suits an argument is... well, to keep things civil, I'll just say it's not something I would do if I wanted to be taken seriously.


I am a huge, huge fan of Scalzi, but _in this context_ he is talking about a cap on earnings.


----------



## 75845

A.A said:


> Am wondering if this change will cause a shift in the type of novels indie authors produce - in terms of those choosing to put their books in Select.
> 
> At the moment, indies are pretty free to write what they want and cross genres if they want. But it seems clear that those doing the best stick to definite genres and meet genre expectations. And readers who love certain genres will tend to read those books to the end because those books are meeting their expectations.
> 
> Books that are cross-genre might lose some readers along the way. Books that go outside expectations might lose readers along the way. Books that are more literary often lose readers just because they're literary.
> Kobo said: [Donna Tartt 44% completion]
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/amazon/11692026/Amazons-to-pay-Kindle-authors-only-for-pages-read.html
> 
> Will indie novels in Select start tending toward becoming very tightly genre-specific. And longer?.


Kobo count a book as being first read from it is first downloaded so most books on most Kobos are according to their statistics started and immediately dropped in favour of something else. So to translate the much quoted Tartt statistic it means that a prize-winning book was offered very quite cheap so lots of people grabbed it in case it was never that cheap again. Kobo began counting all those purchasers as beginning to read The Goldfinch that day. Only 44% managed to finish it within 12 months, as far as most of the remaining 56% were concerned they had not started reading it; it was on their TBR. But Kobo had marked them all as reading 1% even if they never opened the book after downloading it.


----------



## 75845

Barnaby Yard said:


> He repeatedly says things in the article like 'a cap on earnings' without being specific to being in select.
> He also he enjoys being in 'the open market where earnings aren't capped', well everyone in select is still also in the open market.


You means like when he writes

"Why? Because Amazon puts an arbitrary cap on the amount of money it's possible to earn -- and not just a cap on what you, as an author, can earn, but what every author in the KDP Select system participating in Kindle Unlimited can make."

He is quite clear that he is talking about the earnings that all authors in Kindle Unlimited can earn. He may not be singing from your hymn sheet, but he ain't whistling the tune you claim he is. Scalzi is explaining things to those outside the system as he draws fans from the WorldCon crowd that is not known for either its love of or deep knowledge about self-publishing.


----------



## swolf

I've seen some of the numbers self-published authors have made in KU, and if there's a cap, it's a hell of a high one.


----------



## L.B

Mercia McMahon said:


> You means like when he writes
> 
> "Why? Because Amazon puts an arbitrary cap on the amount of money it's possible to earn -- and not just a cap on what you, as an author, can earn, but what every author in the KDP Select system participating in Kindle Unlimited can make."
> 
> He is quite clear that he is talking about the earnings that all authors in Kindle Unlimited can earn. He may not be singing from your hymn sheet, but he ain't whistling the tune you claim he is. Scalzi is explaining things to those outside the system as he draws fans from the WorldCon crowd that is not known for either its love of or deep knowledge about self-publishing.


I think the first half of that sentence makes it deliberately misleading personally.

It's a bit of a nonsense anyway, as has been pointed out, there are almost certainly authors on this site making more than he does by using select.


----------



## sinapse

swolf said:


> In my opinion, a hybrid system would be more fair. Something where you'd get a small base amount if someone borrows your book and reads it (maybe 50% instead of 10%, to cut out most of the scammers), and then you also get royalties for pages read. That way, longer writers would be compensated for the extra work they've put into their stories, and the short writers would be compensated for putting out more stories (that people actually read).


Upvote this! Thanks once again swolf.


----------



## Sapphire

swolf said:


> In my opinion, a hybrid system would be more fair. Something where you'd get a small base amount if someone borrows your book and reads it (maybe 50% instead of 10%, to cut out most of the scammers), and then you also get royalties for pages read. That way, longer writers would be compensated for the extra work they've put into their stories, and the short writers would be compensated for putting out more stories (that people actually read).


Do you know what the problem with this is? It's logical and makes sense.


----------



## lamaha

II was wondering, but I think I know the answer -- if i borrow a book, give it back and borrow it again read it 100% both times, I assume in that case each time counts as a first read?


----------



## cinisajoy

lamaha said:


> II was wondering, but I think I know the answer -- if i borrow a book, give it back and borrow it again read it 100% both times, I assume in that case each time counts as a first read?


Nope, only first time read counts.


----------



## Jim Johnson

lamaha said:


> II was wondering, but I think I know the answer -- if i borrow a book, give it back and borrow it again read it 100% both times, I assume in that case each time counts as a first read?


Unlikely. Amazon knows which books you've borrowed and read.


----------



## lamaha

Jim Johnson said:


> Unlikely. Amazon knows which books you've borrowed and read.


#
hmmm -- that seems a bot unfair, since I am using up my "borrow" quota for a second borrow. Not that I am enrolled in the programme as a reader, but still.
OTOH if I loved a book that much I'd just buy it.


----------



## Doglover

lamaha said:


> #
> hmmm -- that seems a bot unfair, since I am using up my "borrow" quota for a second borrow. Not that I am enrolled in the programme as a reader, but still.
> OTOH if I loved a book that much I'd just buy it.


What quota? It's not called 'kindle unlimited' for nothing.


----------



## Monique

Mercia McMahon said:


> Kobo count a book as being first read from it is first downloaded so most books on most Kobos are according to their statistics started and immediately dropped in favour of something else. So to translate the much quoted Tartt statistic it means that a prize-winning book was offered very quite cheap so lots of people grabbed it in case it was never that cheap again. Kobo began counting all those purchasers as beginning to read The Goldfinch that day. Only 44% managed to finish it within 12 months, as far as most of the remaining 56% were concerned they had not started reading it; it was on their TBR. But Kobo had marked them all as reading 1% even if they never opened the book after downloading it.


Upon what are you basing the idea that Kobo counts a book as first read when it's downloaded? They have a stat for opens and it's not 100%.


----------



## lamaha

Doglover said:


> What quota? It's not called 'kindle unlimited' for nothing.


But you can only have ten at a time. That's what I meant. But -- no big deal.


----------



## Desert Rose

Mercia McMahon said:


> You means like when he writes
> 
> "Why? Because Amazon puts an arbitrary cap on the amount of money it's possible to earn -- and not just a cap on what you, as an author, can earn, but what every author in the KDP Select system participating in Kindle Unlimited can make."
> 
> He is quite clear that he is talking about the earnings that all authors in Kindle Unlimited can earn. He may not be singing from your hymn sheet, but he ain't whistling the tune you claim he is. Scalzi is explaining things to those outside the system as he draws fans from the WorldCon crowd that is not known for either its love of or deep knowledge about self-publishing.


But that is not a cap on what I, and every other author in Select, can earn; it's a cap on what we will receive _from borrows._ Borrows are only a portion of our earnings, so our earnings themselves are not capped in any way.


----------



## cinisajoy

lamaha said:


> But you can only have ten at a time. That's what I meant. But -- no big deal.


Yes but as soon as you return one you can get another. So there is no borrow quota.


----------



## cinisajoy

I just looked and there are 10 books per page on my kindle.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

lamaha said:


> II was wondering, but I think I know the answer -- if i borrow a book, give it back and borrow it again read it 100% both times, I assume in that case each time counts as a first read?


No. It only counts for ranking the first time you borrow it and you only get paid for the pages read once.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

lamaha said:


> II was wondering, but I think I know the answer -- if i borrow a book, give it back and borrow it again read it 100% both times, I assume in that case each time counts as a first read?


Yeah, there's no way they'd ever be able to pay borrows like that. Because if that were the case, you could just keep borrowing your own book and "read" it over and over and over and over, and pile up the money. Get a few friends to do the same, and... well, you see the problem.


----------



## lamaha

Yes, I get it now! Ha. Would never have thought that far.


----------



## Sonya Bateman

lamaha said:


> Yes, I get it now! Ha. Would never have thought that far.


I generally follow things to the most twisted conclusion possible.


----------



## 75845

Monique said:


> Upon what are you basing the idea that Kobo counts a book as first read when it's downloaded? They have a stat for opens and it's not 100%.


As I stated in my previous Kobo comment: if you buy a book that is downloaded to a Kobo reader it appears on the homescreen as 1% read. The unread reads are probably for those without a physical reader. Even if they weren't doing that most people open a newly downloaded book to check that they have been sent the correct one, so any statistic gathering such as Kobo's will run up against the TBR problem. Such statistics provide no basis for judging how a reader reads their current book.


----------



## Brittney

Can we place some ebooks in KDP Select but keep others in regukar KDP?


----------



## Cherise

Dragovian said:


> But that is not a cap on what I, and every other author in Select, can earn; it's a cap on what we will receive _from borrows._


Amazon has always added to the borrow pot so that payouts on borrows will be in the amount Amazon wants them to be. There is no cap. It is imaginary. This means you need not resent other authors for what they make on borrows.

In other news, the thread has reached 50 pages!


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Cherise Kelley said:


> There is no cap. It is imaginary.


You can earn more than the total they make available for the pool for any given month? Please tell me how.

The pool _is_ the cap, and Amazon chooses the pool size every time. Whether they choose to adjust it or not, they're in control, and it is a ceiling on earnings _from borrows_. Saying it doesn't exist makes no sense.



Dragovian said:


> ...it's a cap on what we will receive _from borrows._ Borrows are only a portion of our earnings, so our earnings themselves are not capped in any way.


And he's only talking about the former, not the latter. He states this explicitly, repeatedly, in his blog post. Any extrapolation to total earnings is not supported by his words _or_ the context.

How many times he refers to sales: 0
How many times he refers to earnings without the same sentence making clear reference to KU: 0
How many times he refers specifically to KU: 8

People here are reading things into his words, it's that simple.


----------



## Monique

Mercia McMahon said:


> As I stated in my previous Kobo comment: if you buy a book that is downloaded to a Kobo reader it appears on the homescreen as 1% read. The unread reads are probably for those without a physical reader. Even if they weren't doing that most people open a newly downloaded book to check that they have been sent the correct one, so any statistic gathering such as Kobo's will run up against the TBR problem. Such statistics provide no basis for judging how a reader reads their current book.


The statistics on the reader and those on the backend are not the same. The stats the showed me included completion %, number of session, average length of session, time to read, abandonment, etc. What the actual ereader shows is not what is being tracked on the back end.


----------



## Becca Mills

The Babe said:


> Can we place some ebooks in KDP Select but keep others in regukar KDP?


Yes, you can.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Crenel said:


> You can earn more than the total they make available for the pool for any given month? Please tell me how.
> 
> The pool _is_ the cap, and Amazon chooses the pool size every time. Whether they choose to adjust it or not, they're in control, and it is a ceiling on earnings _from borrows_. Saying it doesn't exist makes no sense.
> 
> And he's only talking about the former, not the latter. He states this explicitly, repeatedly, in his blog post. Any extrapolation to total earnings is not supported by his words _or_ the context.
> 
> How many times he refers to sales: 0
> How many times he refers to earnings without the same sentence making clear reference to KU: 0
> How many times he refers specifically to KU: 8
> 
> People here are reading things into his words, it's that simple.


Except he does not clarify he's talking about a cap on borrows. He says on EARNINGS if you're in KDP Select. You can argue it all you want, but that's the simple truth. You can believe you're intuiting what he's saying, but his actual words say earnings. He was also wrong about the size of the pot, so how do you know what he's saying if he's saying something different? And, again, if you want to argue semantics, everyone's earnings are capped by the potential reader pool.


----------



## Rykymus

OMG! There are only 7.5 million people on Earth that can borrow my book! I have an earnings cap! Darn you fate!

Who cares what Scalzi says?


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Except he does not clarify he's talking about a cap on borrows. He says on EARNINGS if you're in KDP Select. You can argue it all you want, but that's the simple truth. You can believe you're intuiting what he's saying, but his actual words say earnings. He was also wrong about the size of the pot, so how do you know what he's saying if he's saying something different? And, again, if you want to argue semantics, everyone's earnings are capped by the potential reader pool.


There's no "intuiting" or arguing "semantics" -- he never talks about total earnings, never talks about sales, and explicity, repeatedly talks about earnings from Kindle Unlimited. If you choose to read more into it, ignoring the title, context, and written word, that's not his fault. How much more clarity do you need? Just look at the numbers I already posted. Actually read what he wrote, from the title to the last paragraph, it is _all_ about Kindle Unlimited and the payment pool that sets a cap on _Kindle Unlimited_ earnings for everyone in the program.

As for _total earnings_ being capped by the "potential reader pool" that is both obvious and irrelevant. Nobody cares because it's not news to anybody, and it has nothing to do with what he wrote.

(And since "being a fan of Scalzi" seems to be a subtheme here, I'm not a fan of his, at any level.)



Rykymus said:


> OMG! There are only 7.5 million people on Earth that can borrow my book! I have an earnings cap! Darn you fate!
> 
> Who cares what Scalzi says?


That's not what he wrote -- and it doesn't matter that _he_ wrote that post, the situation can be analyzed without taking into account the identity of one commentator. If somebody here would like to explain how any participant in KDP Select can earn more _from borrows_ than Amazon allocates to each month's payment pool, which means that my earnings _from borrows_ have zero impact on earnings _from borrows_ for others, I will gladly acknowledge that there is no cap on _Kindle Unlimited_ earnings. But we all know this is not the case, so why is this even being argued?

_Edited slightly for clarity, replacing "it" with "that post."_


----------



## Cherise

Crenel said:


> You can earn more than the total they make available for the pool for any given month? Please tell me how.


Yes.

Amazon has added to the pool every month that Kindle Unlimited has been available. The pool is just an arbitrary number. Amazon can and does alter it so that the payout is as much as they want it to be. They have done this every single month. By quite a bit.


----------



## Ann in Arlington

I kind of feel like there are two interpretations of the article . . . . I can see both points of view, personally.  

I suggest you all just agree to disagree . . . . .


----------



## DavidLee

Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader. You could write the most amazing book ever but there's no guarantee when (or if) the borrower will read it. But you don't get paid until they do. And even then, you don't know how much you'll be paid. 

As a business owner myself, I would never accept such draconian terms. No sane person would.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

DavidLee said:


> Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader. You could write the most amazing book ever but there's no guarantee when (or if) the borrower will read it. But you don't get paid until they do. And even then, you don't know how much you'll be paid.
> 
> As a business owner myself, I would never accept such draconian terms. No sane person would.


Oh, no. I can't find my straight jacket.


----------



## Brittney

DavidLee said:


> Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader. You could write the most amazing book ever but there's no guarantee when (or if) the borrower will read it. But you don't get paid until they do. And even then, you don't know how much you'll be paid.
> 
> As a business owner myself, I would never accept such draconian terms. No sane person would.


*Exactly!!*


----------



## Monique

Calling a large segment of the board morons isn't the best introduction for a 1 and 2 post newb.


----------



## Atunah

Monique said:


> Calling a large segment of the board morons isn't the best introduction for a 1 and 2 post newb.


But but but, you are missing the big point. I have all the power, I am reader, I am Oz. I am mighty and I am the decider 

Now bow minions.


----------



## Monique




----------



## Betsy the Quilter

David and Brittney,

welcome to KBoards. So as to help you both find your footing here, please be sure to read Forum Decorum. We require civil discourse. Strong opinions are fine (you've got that part down), but name calling is not. As was stated earlier, suggesting that a significant part of the members posting in this thread are morons, world-class or not, is NOT appropriate.

Let's all move on from that unfortunate choice of words.


----------



## T.K.

This is so interesting and I love to see everyone's thoughts. (Mostly...)

(Funny thought: I was just thinking what if McDonalds did the same thing? You could order all the food you want for FREE but McDonalds only gets paid if you eat it.   )


----------



## Desert Rose

DavidLee said:


> Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader. You could write the most amazing book ever but there's no guarantee when (or if) the borrower will read it. But you don't get paid until they do. And even then, you don't know how much you'll be paid.
> 
> As a business owner myself, I would never accept such draconian terms. No sane person would.


Oh dear heavens, next thing you know readers will be allowed to decide what they buy, too! And they might do it based on something other than clever marketing and a pretty cover. Where are my pearls; I need to clutch them.


----------



## cinisajoy

Amanda M. Lee said:


> Oh, no. I can't find my straight jacket.


I will loan you mine.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Anyone needing a straight jacket can get one from the cabana boys.  They keep them in one of the pool lockers.

Betsy


----------



## Rykymus

DavidLee: I understand your reaction, but the payout rate and method are only part of the equation. You have to look at volume of units moved, number of pages read per unit, number of new eyes coming to your work, in the case of a series, the number of new followers that will now go on to either borrow or buy subsequent episodes. Then there is your mailing list. If you are getting 100 new subscribers per month from KU that you were not getting without KU, that has value as well. (Especially if they become hooked on your series, and you eventually stop offering it in KU and they become buyers instead of borrowers.)

A very simple analogy would be that it is better to sell 100,000,000 page reads at half a cent per page than it is to sell 1,000 books at $2 profit per sale.

Amazon does what they do because the have the customer base we want. We put up with what they do because it works in our favor. (Maybe not for all of us, but you get the idea.)


----------



## vlmain

DavidLee said:


> Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader.


But they allowed us to retain the greatest power of all -- the power to opt out of KU.

And since when have writers *not* been at the mercy of readers? Writers have always relied on readers for their income. No readers, no paycheck.


----------



## vlmain

anniejocoby said:


> I'm just trying to speak up for the novel writers who have been paid the same for their 100,000 word book as those with a 10,000 word book and guess what? The 10,000 word book writer can write four, five, six, ten stories for every one story the 100,000 word writer can write. So, the 100,000 word writer takes three months to write his one book and get $1.37 per borrow. The short writer writes 20 books in that same amount of time and gets $1.37 per borrow twenty times. And that's supposed to be fair.


For that to be true, which it isn't, we would have to believe that all writers write at the same pace, which they don't. So, there's that.

My current work in progress has taken me over six months to rough draft a little over fifty pages. It's not because I am unbearably slow. It's because of the amount of research I have had to do, because I, unlike the scamleteers who copy and paste wiki's for profit, believe in doing my research and providing unique, quality information. The topic I am writing on requires an incredible amount of research and statistics.

Then, there are the interviews with the heads of departments of companies that do business in the product sector I am writing about. I have conducted nine interviews, so far. One such department head took months of wooing to get an interview. The information I have gleaned from him is invaluable.

So, with that in mind, how is it that my work, which will probably be around 30,000 words when finished, is worth so much less than a full length novel? And how on earth would I be able to do that ten times to your 100,000 word novel that you say can be done in three months?



anniejocoby said:


> Sorry you can't see that. There are none so blind as those who choose not to see.


My thoughts, exactly.


----------



## anniejocoby

vlmain said:


> For that to be true, which it isn't, we would have to believe that all writers write at the same pace, which they don't. So, there's that.
> 
> My current work in progress has taken me over six months to rough draft a little over fifty pages. It's not because I am unbearably slow. It's because of the amount of research I have had to do, because I, unlike the scamleteers who copy and paste wiki's for profit, believe in doing my research and providing unique, quality information. The topic I am writing on requires an incredible amount of research and statistics.
> 
> Then, there are the interviews with the heads of departments of companies that do business in the product sector I am writing about. I have conducted nine interviews, so far. One such department head took months of wooing to get an interview. The information I have gleaned from him is invaluable.
> 
> So, with that in mind, how is it that my work, which will probably be around 30,000 words when finished, is worth so much less than a full length novel? And how on earth would I be able to do that ten times to your 100,000 word novel that you say can be done in three months?
> 
> My thoughts, exactly.


I have to admit that I feel for the non-fiction writers like yourself, and the children's book authors. Unfortunately, they're the babies that got thrown out with the bathwater. There always has to be somebody who is going to get hurt in any change.

I was referring more to the writers who admit that they write two stories a week. Nothing against them, but they can certainly crank out the stories to where they get a large slice of the pie just because they put out so many stories.

Again, though, with non-fiction writers who have to do a ton of research, this change does suck. It also sucks because readers tend to skip around when reading non-fiction, so the pages read might not be representative of how long the book actually is. If KU could tweak the payout a bit so that the non-fiction and children's writers could get paid a bit more per page read to compensate for the inequalities, that would be good.


----------



## Doglover

DavidLee said:


> Only a world-class moron would think this was a good idea for writers. Good for Amazon? Absolutely. For writers? Amazon has taken away your power and given it to someone you have no control over: the reader. You could write the most amazing book ever but there's no guarantee when (or if) the borrower will read it. But you don't get paid until they do. And even then, you don't know how much you'll be paid.
> 
> As a business owner myself, I would never accept such draconian terms. No sane person would.


Amazon has taken away nothing; we are all free to remove our books from Select and even from Amazon itself if we don't like it. Anyone who 'would never accept such draconian terms' your answer is simple - go elsewhere or sell from your own website. See how much more money you make.

I can't wait to see how this pans out and I am confident that if Amazon get lots of complaints then, they will change things again. If we are not happy, their coffers are not happy.


----------



## Guest

Well, it's page 51 and the thread hasn't been locked yet, but the discussion has degenerated into neverending perennial debate topics (such as writing speed vs. writing quality) and pointless tit-for-tat bickering. All things considered, let's call it a draw.

Side note: if you REALLY want to see some serious perennial debates, check out a Christian apologetics message board. I've seen fights over the oneness of God go from 0 to 100 pages in the course of an afternoon.


----------



## Doglover

Joe Vasicek said:


> Well, it's page 51 and the thread hasn't been locked yet, but the discussion has degenerated into neverending perennial debate topics (such as writing speed vs. writing quality) and pointless tit-for-tat bickering. All things considered, let's call it a draw.
> 
> Side note: if you REALLY want to see some serious perennial debates, check out a Christian apologetics message board. I've seen fights over the oneness of God go from 0 to 100 pages in the course of an afternoon.


Surely, in order to call something a draw, one must have all the facts and nobody does. Even Amazon itself don't have all the facts until they have their new software in place and counting pages. It is a good debate and one which has gone a long way to dispel the scaremongering put about by various anti-select bloggers. People on the kdp forum are panicking because they read some uninformed muppet telling them they will get paid per page read for sales, not just borrows.

No point discussing or debating until the first month's tally is up and running. The program for this must have cost a fortune.


----------



## vlmain

anniejocoby said:


> I have to admit that I feel for the non-fiction writers like yourself, and the children's book authors. Unfortunately, they're the babies that got thrown out with the bathwater. There always has to be somebody who is going to get hurt in any change.


I suspect what will happen is that a lot of nonfiction, especially that which requites a lot of research, will get pulled from K/U. Not that there is a lot of it in there to begin with, because it doesn't appear that there is. At least, not from what I have seen. I could be mistaken, though.

Time will tell, but I am not convinced that the change in how they pay is really going to hurt people like me all that much, anyway. Now that I have had more time to mull this over and go back over my sales sheets, I can see that my business topics are purchased much more than borrowed. I believe people probably buy it rather than borrow so they can refer back to it.

When the announcement was made, I was apprehensive, but the more I have thought about it, I am actually looking forward to the change. I see it as a means of weeding out the poorly written material, both short and long. I am a short story lover, and where we disagree is in the value--I believe a well written, entertaining short is every bit as valuable as a novel. Writing has never been about being compensated on an hourly basis for time spent. It has always been about delivering value to the reader, regardless of how long it took to accomplish that.

That said, I don't think this is necessarily a given win for novel writers, either. I still believe an exceptional short story has the potential to out earn a mediocre novel.


----------



## vlmain

Joe Vasicek said:


> Side note: if you REALLY want to see some serious perennial debates, check out a Christian apologetics message board. I've seen fights over the oneness of God go from 0 to 100 pages in the course of an afternoon.


An entire afternoon? It must have been a slow board!


----------



## Guest

vlmain said:


> An entire afternoon? It must have been a slow board!


Well, it was a Mormon board, not an Evangelical board. 



Doglover said:


> Surely, in order to call something a draw, one must have all the facts and nobody does.


I'm talking about my bet that this thread would be locked before page 50. It wasn't, but not from lack of everyone doing their part.


----------



## RedAlert

I am working on my first novel, and I seriously wonder if it will take the rest of my life to finish it.  It is kicking my butt.  Meantime, I am trying to learn as much as I can about self publishing, and I thank KBoards for the lessons I am learning.  This thread has been a crack up.  I admit, I am now distracted by the Cabana Boys.

I think that the payout will start high and gradually wan.    It will not maintain a high level of riches for anyone.

Lawd, "writing better" for higher page reads may not be an option for someone like me.  I will put forth my best effort, always.  But, if my best effort just gets me cents on the dollar, well, I probably won't be able to fix it.  I have been hoping that I might gain a teensy following in the B market!

The main thing that astounds me is the report(s) that readers mostly do not read through to the end of a book.  I had no idea that the stat was so high.  Oh, I have the same experience as you guys do, with my personal reading, maybe buying a paperback that I actually never read, for one reason or another, but cr*p!  How do you prepare for that?  If it's true that the chances that someone will open the book and read through to the finish are dismal, then I am completely confused as to whether this new pay plan is going to work or not.  I can see my best but lowly efforts earning 30 or 40 cents a book.  Geez.  Well, I guess that would make me a commercial writer, for what it's worth (a lot.)  But, not enough to even pay the light bill.  Maybe buy some midnight oil.  For more writing.

When I don't write, I tend to make lists.  Wonder if I could sell those?


----------



## anniejocoby

vlmain said:


> That said, I don't think this is necessarily a given win for novel writers, either. I still believe an exceptional short story has the potential to out earn a mediocre novel.


Agreed, which is another reason why I don't see this change as being unfair. If a novel is sucky and boring, then that author won't get paid much, because the reader will give up. If the novel is engaging, then the author will get paid more. So, all these arguments about good short stories being worth more than boring novels is really a moot point, because the boring novels won't get read. The good ones will, though, and I would daresay that most readers value them more than the shorties. Again, you have to compare good (engaging) short stories with good (engaging) novels, not compare engaging short stories to boring novels, because it then becomes an apples to orange comparison.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Doglover said:


> People on the kdp forum are panicking because they read some uninformed muppet telling them they will get paid per page read for sales, not just borrows.


Fascinating. I've managed to read almost everything in this mega-thread, some of it more than once, and I have yet to see anyone doing what you describe (i.e., "panicking [about being told they would be] paid per page read for sales"). I also haven't seen anybody, Muppet or otherwise, claiming that being paid per-page applies to _sales_. If that was a Muppet it must have been Animal, he always was pretty crazy. If you have his blog address, please share, I wouldn't want to miss that.


----------



## Doglover

Crenel said:


> Fascinating. I've managed to read almost everything in this mega-thread, some of it more than once, and I have yet to see anyone doing what you describe (i.e., "panicking [about being told they would be] paid per page read for sales"). I also haven't seen anybody, Muppet or otherwise, claiming that being paid per-page applies to _sales_. If that was a Muppet it must have been Animal, he always was pretty crazy. If you have his blog address, please share, I wouldn't want to miss that.


I didn't say this forum, I said the kdp forum. You will have to go there to find addresses as I don't read blogs and even if I should come across one, I would not assume them to be an authority on the subject. I detest the Muppets so wouldn't know who the hell Animal was.


----------



## Northern pen

I keep coming back, waiting for someone to tell us that dataguy or some other smarty pants has calculated a solid approximation of the number of pages read last month so we can have an actually number to work with 


Yet again I leave disappointed...  but hey, at least this time there was muppets.


----------



## TheGapBetweenMerlons

Doglover said:


> I didn't say this forum, I said the kdp forum.


Whoops, I missed that, sorry for the snarky comment.



Doglover said:


> I detest the Muppets so wouldn't know who the hell Animal was.


Ah, too bad, but everyone has their own tastes.


----------



## swolf

DavidLee said:


> world-class moron


My mother always told me that if I'm going to do something, be the best at it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

In your years here, you've been called many things, swolf, but never a moron.

Betsy


----------



## 75845

VEVO said:


> Several people already mentioned that $3 million "error" when it will be in excess of $11 million. But I don't think he will fix it in his blog. He doesn't seem to care that he is misleading his readers.


It's not an error. KDP are currently running a KU banner ad proclaiming the June 2015 payout at $3m.


----------



## BEAST

I'm looking forward to the complaints about the new KU page read reporting system and the thread that will pop up where people will check in with their daily page count. Little writing will be done. Watching that page count tick up with every refresh will be the new time drain. July will be such an awesome month!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Mercia McMahon said:


> It's not an error. KDP are currently running a KU banner ad proclaiming the June 2015 payout at $3m.


Isn't that the base? And they've added to it? See

https://kdp.amazon.com/community/ann.jspa?annID=786



> Today we have a few exciting announcements to share related to the KDP Select global fund. The first is that we're adding a bonus of $7.8 million to the May KDP Select global fund on top of the previously announced $3 million base fund, bringing the total fund to $10.8 million. We are also pleased to report that:


Posted June 15, 2015.

Or is the KDP Select global fund a different thing?

Betsy


----------



## P.T. Phronk

Robyn Wideman said:


> I keep coming back, waiting for someone to tell us that dataguy or some other smarty pants has calculated a solid approximation of the number of pages read last month so we can have an actually number to work with
> 
> Yet again I leave disappointed... but hey, at least this time there was muppets.


I wouldn't call myself a smarty pants (nor a world-class moron), but I've made an attempt with this spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zeo2yx2twKl8QwgDUTKoufuwiHtjQs50y4JzMLCo-g8/edit?usp=sharing

The only number that can't be semi-accurately estimated is the average number of pages read per borrow (i.e. per book that would previously have been read to 10%). I don't think any amount of scraping Amazon data could figure that out right now. I guessed 50 pages per borrow on average, which leads to about 3 cents per page payout.

But the average could really be a lot lower, especially in the early days when there are still a lot of short books, and/or a lot of users tend to skim around within books. (Which means more $ per page).

It could also be higher if a lot of long books start getting read, as the changes encourage. (Which means less $ per page).

Who knows. It's also worth noting: if the average pages read number goes up or down, and you fall within the average, your total payout doesn't really change. What matters is getting above that average. Which makes Scalzi right about one thing: it's still a competition between authors in KU. So is the real world of sales, but at least the math is complicated enough that we can find ways where "coopetition" makes everyone happy and rich (and Kboards is an amazing example of living that dream!). KU's combination of a zero-sum game with an element of randomness (the pool) makes some of the criticism deserved. The literal bottom line for me, though, is that I get more paid eyeballs on my books within KU than outside of it, at least short-term and with some books.


----------



## 10105

During all this I've been thinking about the problems KDP will have maintaining an accurate record of pages read per book per reader. They'd have to be prepared to to take a hit every time anyone turned a page. Potential bandwidth bloat. And they'd have to assume that everyone's Kindle was online when those pages were turned. I don't know the ratio of wi-fi-only to 3G devices, but that is a variable that can muddy the algorithms.

They do something like that when they sync where readers are reading to keep mulitple devices/apps pointing at the same location. That would be a test: page through a book, don't close it, then go see where a different device thinks you are in that book.

If the algorithms take their reader page polls only when an on-line device closes the book, I see potential errors in the stats right off. I also see ways for writers to game the system to lure readers to navigate directly to the last page from the first.


----------



## Rayven T. Hill

Al Stevens said:


> During all this I've been thinking about the problems KDP will have maintaining an accurate record of pages read per book per reader. They'd have to be prepared to to take a hit every time anyone turned a page. Potential bandwidth bloat. And they'd have to assume that everyone's Kindle was online when those pages were turned. I don't know the ratio of wi-fi-only to 3G devices, but that is a variable that can muddy the algorithms.
> 
> They do something like that when they sync where readers are reading to keep mulitple devices/apps pointing at the same location. That would be a test: page through a book, don't close it, then go see where a different device thinks you are in that book.
> 
> If the algorithms take their reader page polls only when an on-line device closes the book, I see potential errors in the stats right off. I also see ways for writers to game the system to lure readers to navigate directly to the last page from the first.


I doubt if the data is going to be recorded that way. More than likely, the Kindle OS will record the information and send it to the Amazon servers on a periodic basis.


----------



## swolf

Phronk said:


> But the average could really be a lot lower, especially in the early days when there are still a lot of short books, and/or a lot of users tend to skim around within books. (Which means less $ per page).
> 
> It could also be higher if a lot of long books start getting read, as the changes encourage. (Which means more $ per page).


It's the opposite. A lower average means more royalties per page.


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## 10105

It isn't a question of sophistication or when they started collecting. It's a question of accuracy, which wasn't an issue until now when author royalties are affected by the precision of their collection algorithms. You know, what all this hollering has been about for the past 50 pages...


----------



## TuckerAuthor

Al Stevens said:


> It isn't a question of sophistication or when they started collecting. It's a question of accuracy, which wasn't an issue until now when author royalties are affected by the precision of their collection algorithms. You know, what all this hollering has been about for the past 50 pages...


I'm reasonably certain they've had this data all along. Way before KU came into being. I suppose it's possible to construct a scenario where someone subscribes to the program, downloads some books, reads a bit, then unsubscribes without ever synching their Kindle again and some page reads might be lost, but I think that's pretty far-fetched.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter

Al Stevens said:


> During all this I've been thinking about the problems KDP will have maintaining an accurate record of pages read per book per reader. They'd have to be prepared to to take a hit every time anyone turned a page. Potential bandwidth bloat. And they'd have to assume that everyone's Kindle was online when those pages were turned. I don't know the ratio of wi-fi-only to 3G devices, but that is a variable that can muddy the algorithms.
> 
> They do something like that when they sync where readers are reading to keep mulitple devices/apps pointing at the same location. That would be a test: page through a book, don't close it, then go see where a different device thinks you are in that book.


They're collecting the information now, as you point out, for synching purposes. However, it isn't done on a page by page basis. Synchs between the device and the mothership tend to happen periodically, if wifi is on all the time (as on my devices), or when a book is closed. Many people don't leave WiFi or 3G on all the time in order to extend battery life; the synching is done when connection is reestablished.

Betsy


----------



## shel

I've read most of this thread, but haven't been able to figure out what will happen with overlap borrows for June/July when the program changes. 

For example: What if a book is borrowed in June and hits the 10% mark on June 30th, then the remainder is read in July. If Amazon pays for both it's a bit of a double dip. If not, page reads in July might actually be lower than subsequent months, which would cause authors to undervalue the program. 

My instinct says the the borrow programs usually look better in early months, so it'll probably be the double dip, but I wondered if anyone had the word on this from Amazon?


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

shel said:


> I've read most of this thread, but haven't been able to figure out what will happen with overlap borrows for June/July when the program changes.
> 
> For example: What if a book is borrowed in June and hits the 10% mark on June 30th, then the remainder is read in July. If Amazon pays for both it's a bit of a double dip. If not, page reads in July might actually be lower than subsequent months, which would cause authors to undervalue the program.
> 
> My instinct says the the borrow programs usually look better in early months, so it'll probably be the double dip, but I wondered if anyone had the word on this from Amazon?


That is a good question. I'm going to guess that you're either paid the 10 percent threshold if you pass it before July 1 or you're paid by the page after July 1. Amazon is not going to pay us twice.


----------



## PhoenixS

**********


----------



## 75845

Betsy the Quilter said:


> Isn't that the base? And they've added to it? See
> 
> https://kdp.amazon.com/community/ann.jspa?annID=786
> 
> Posted June 15, 2015.
> 
> Or is the KDP Select global fund a different thing?
> 
> Betsy


Indeed, but that does not make lifting a figure from KDP and believing them an error. John Scalzi is (presumably) a non-user of KU writing primarily for other non-users of KU. He did his research and stopped at the point at which he got a figure from the horse's mouth. However I would not be surprised if KDP (and Amazon shareholders) would like the pay out to be $3M and they hope that this change will reduce the payouts being made on booklets that currently trigger the full payment as soon as they are opened.


----------



## Atunah

They have been collecting anything they can squeeze out of our kindles. They already do more than just remember the point you left of for sync, they have had the algorithm for time left by chapter and time left by book. It works very well for me and it constantly changes as sometimes I read in a long block, other days I keep having to set it down every 10 minutes. My kindle constantly adjusts based on that and it does that with wifi on or off. So it collects that all the time and once you call home, it sends that data off. There is no point for anyone to have a subscription and not turn on wifi once in a while. You'd just be stuck with the same 10 books. Who would pay for that. 

Just need to turn it on once a day, that would be enough for the info to be send. It sends it along with collection info, reading stop point, notes you take, bookmarks etc. That all gets saved already. They even save notes I make in a library book in the off chance I might buy it in the future. I don't think counting exact read pages will be that difficult for them. They already know how long it takes on average for each reader to read a book so they know what it takes on average to read a page. More like 2 pages on a kindle screen, depending on the font size.


----------



## cinisajoy

Atunah said:


> They have been collecting anything they can squeeze out of our kindles. They already do more than just remember the point you left of for sync, they have had the algorithm for time left by chapter and time left by book. It works very well for me and it constantly changes as sometimes I read in a long block, other days I keep having to set it down every 10 minutes. My kindle constantly adjusts based on that and it does that with wifi on or off. So it collects that all the time and once you call home, it sends that data off. There is no point for anyone to have a subscription and not turn on wifi once in a while. You'd just be stuck with the same 10 books. Who would pay for that.
> 
> Just need to turn it on once a day, that would be enough for the info to be send. It sends it along with collection info, reading stop point, notes you take, bookmarks etc. That all gets saved already. They even save notes I make in a library book in the off chance I might buy it in the future. I don't think counting exact read pages will be that difficult for them. They already know how long it takes on average for each reader to read a book so they know what it takes on average to read a page. More like 2 pages on a kindle screen, depending on the font size.


I think my kindle is set to 3 pages on a kindle is one actual page.


----------



## crebel

Atunah said:


> They have been collecting anything they can squeeze out of our kindles. They already do more than just remember the point you left of for sync, they have had the algorithm for time left by chapter and time left by book. It works very well for me and it constantly changes as sometimes I read in a long block, other days I keep having to set it down every 10 minutes. My kindle constantly adjusts based on that and it does that with wifi on or off. So it collects that all the time and once you call home, it sends that data off. There is no point for anyone to have a subscription and not turn on wifi once in a while. You'd just be stuck with the same 10 books. Who would pay for that.
> 
> Just need to turn it on once a day, that would be enough for the info to be send. It sends it along with collection info, reading stop point, notes you take, bookmarks etc. That all gets saved already. They even save notes I make in a library book in the off chance I might buy it in the future. I don't think counting exact read pages will be that difficult for them. They already know how long it takes on average for each reader to read a book so they know what it takes on average to read a page. More like 2 pages on a kindle screen, depending on the font size.


This. Plus their "collection" of my reading data is pretty darned accurate. When I open a book for the first time on my Kindle, a little screen pops up with general information about the book including the "average" length of time it takes to read. Let's use 6 hours as an example; yet, when I close that screen and start reading, the bottom of my screen where I keep length of time in book visible, will say 3 hours and is accurate, so they have already calculated my reading speed from past books.

Sure, there may be some people who never connect to the mothership and transfer everything by USB to an actual Kindle device, but if they have the Kindle app on their phones or tablets or use Kindle for PC, I would think Amazon will still be able to draw data from those accounts (even archived data) when they are connected by wifi or 3/4G.


----------



## Atunah

cinisajoy said:


> I think my kindle is set to 3 pages on a kindle is one actual page.


I haven't actually checked on mine as I don't pay a lot of attention to that. I use size 3-4 from the left, so not the smallest and not the largest. I read fairly fast so I only see the pages go up once in a while or I see how much time I have left in the book. Depending on what I have set.


----------



## P.T. Phronk

swolf said:


> It's the opposite. A lower average means more royalties per page.


Whoops, that's what I meant. Proof reading is hard. Thanks swolf.


----------



## Guest

Quote:
*"Calling a large segment of the board morons . . ."*

I'm a member of the small segment


----------



## cinisajoy

Atunah said:


> I haven't actually checked on mine as I don't pay a lot of attention to that. I use size 3-4 from the left, so not the smallest and not the largest. I read fairly fast so I only see the pages go up once in a while or I see how much time I have left in the book. Depending on what I have set.


I wouldn't have known if it wasn't for the fact that I was reading a book, I also own in hardback. On the subject of time read is there a way to change to that on the keyboard?

On topic of payouts, depending on the pay for page, I have a friend that may lose his shirt.


----------



## Tricia O&#039;

shel said:


> I've read most of this thread, but haven't been able to figure out what will happen with overlap borrows for June/July when the program changes.
> 
> For example: What if a book is borrowed in June and hits the 10% mark on June 30th, then the remainder is read in July. If Amazon pays for both it's a bit of a double dip. If not, page reads in July might actually be lower than subsequent months, which would cause authors to undervalue the program.
> 
> My instinct says the the borrow programs usually look better in early months, so it'll probably be the double dip, but I wondered if anyone had the word on this from Amazon?


I had the same question. What happens when 30 pages of a book is read in July and 200 pages are read in August?


----------



## L.B

Tricia O' said:


> I had the same question. What happens when 30 pages of a book is read in July and 200 pages are read in August?


You get thirty cents in July, two hundred in august.


----------



## Amanda M. Lee

Tricia O' said:


> I had the same question. What happens when 30 pages of a book is read in July and 200 pages are read in August?


Then you get paid for 30 pages in July (or when you get your July payments) and 200 pages in August.


----------



## meh

TOS.


----------



## Mike McIntyre

The pages read payout model is too complicated. Amazon should instead embed pop quizzes in KU ebooks. If the reader answers 10 of 10 questions correctly, the author gets 100% of that month's payout, 5 of 10 gets 50%, and 0 of 10 gets nothing. Just kidding. (I think  )


----------



## WriterThatWas

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> I'm pretty sure they're collecting this data already and have been collecting it for a while. It's not like they're going to *start* collecting it on July 1.
> 
> And what about 10% reads? Do you believe they've been mis-calculated for the past year? Because that's pretty much the same technology and math being used there.
> 
> 
> 
> Phoenix Sullivan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure they're collecting this data already and have been collecting it for a while. It's not like they're going to *start* collecting it on July 1.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, they've had this since day one. At the beginning of Kindle (not KU), you could have the device or download the kindle app to your pc. If you send a book to both, Amazon would ask "do you want to go the point you stopped reading?" in the other device. Amazon always knows where you are in the book, by account and on whatever multiple devices you own.
> 
> Scrubbing that data for the KU segment should be easy for them.
Click to expand...


----------



## CJAnderson

So June 30 is the last day to get the old KU payout (1.35ish) ?


----------



## Ann in Arlington

crebel said:


> This. Plus their "collection" of my reading data is pretty darned accurate. When I open a book for the first time on my Kindle, a little screen pops up with general information about the book including the "average" length of time it takes to read. Let's use 6 hours as an example; yet, when I close that screen and start reading, the bottom of my screen where I keep length of time in book visible, will say 3 hours and is accurate, so they have already calculated my reading speed from past books.
> 
> Sure, there may be some people who never connect to the mothership and transfer everything by USB to an actual Kindle device, but if they have the Kindle app on their phones or tablets or use Kindle for PC, I would think Amazon will still be able to draw data from those accounts (even archived data) when they are connected by wifi or 3/4G.


I kinda thought for KU you'd have to borrow via wireless . . . but I may be mistaken.


----------



## crebel

Ann in Arlington said:


> I kinda thought for KU you'd have to borrow via wireless . . . but I may be mistaken.


You may be correct, Ann, (I haven't used KU myself). If true, then Amazon will have no trouble calculating pages read given the accuracy of information they already give us across devices. I was just commenting on the accuracy of the information they are already collecting.


----------



## Aero

I see this as a big win for amazon. They can pay what gets borrowed the most (sex) the least with no fear of retribution. I am complelty guessing that those select few that get more will sing and others who are making less will hide. Another amazon win. And they continue to increase their profits at the expense of authors. Did they not do this last year? And is everyone going to be surprised when they do it again next year? This could be a huge opportunity for one of the other players to capitalize on the uncertainty, such a missed opportunity!


----------



## K&#039;Sennia Visitor

Replying mostly so that I get emails when there are new posts. I do love this thread though, it's very exciting!

Okay, so here are my super wise words to add to this wonderful thread. You ready? Are you sure?

*deep breath*

Okay, here goes: 

People who can write fast, write lots, and write good will always do the best no matter what system they are publishing under. 

  See! Told you I was wise. "giggles muchly"

  Carry on my fair thread and bring me much more marvelous entertainment and joy.


----------



## Rykymus

The above was the best post in this entire thread.


----------



## Guest

Rykymus said:


> The above was the best post in this entire thread.


Yeah, I don't think anything else really needs to be said after that.


----------



## Gator

Joe Vasicek said:


> Yeah, I don't think anything else really needs to be said after that.


The important stuff does: stats.

*Global Pool vs. total number of borrows (pages)*

The KDP Select Global Pool in May 2015 ($10.8 million) was 9.8 times as large as it was in January 2013 ($1.1 million).* The number of borrows in May 2015 (8 million) was 16.2 times as large as it was in January 2013 (447,154). The number of borrows has grown 65% more than the size of the Global Pool. This implies that, compared to earlier in the KDP Select Program, the authors supplying eBooks to KU are accommodating a disproportionate number of subscribers for what they're being compensated for (the Global Pool).


MonthGlobal PoolPymt/BorrowNum BorrowsJan. 2013$1,100,000$2.51438,247May 2015$10,800,000$1.358,000,000

Amazon is now changing the measuring stick: total pages read. Come July, Amazon isn't going to tell us what the equivalent number of borrows is. It's an opportunity for Amazon to significantly decrease the growth of the Global Pool amount offered to accommodate the growth of KU subscribers. (Not saying it's guaranteed, but based upon Amazon's history of squeezing suppliers, we shouldn't rule it out.)

We need to watch the growth of total pages read compared to the growth of the Global Pool in the future, too, so we can calculate whether the disproportion is growing or not.

*KU eBook Growth*

The number of eBooks added to the Kindle Store per day since Amazon's announcement has jumped 50%. The number of eBooks added to KU per day since Amazon's announcement has only jumped 19%. I expect a significant portion of those extra pre-orders to enter KDP Select on their publishing dates. So expect some added competition in KU.


Kindle StoreGrowth/DayKU Growth/DayJan. 1 - June 142,8481,093Since announcement:4,2701,301

* = I don't have the sizes of the KDP Select Global Pool for each month before Jan. 2013. If anyone else does, please let me know.

PS: For those keeping score from last week, I'm a college graduate, too.


----------



## swolf

It's misleading to go back to January of 2013 and compare numbers from there, because the situation was so much different. Back then, each subscriber could only borrow one book per month, where now it's unlimited.  Your theories may be correct, but the stats you're using should start in July of 2014, when KU began.


----------



## Gator

swolf said:


> It's misleading to go back to January of 2013 and compare numbers from there, because the situation was so much different. Back then, each subscriber could only borrow one book per month, where now it's unlimited. Your theories may be correct, but the stats you're using should start in July of 2014, when KU began.


I'm comparing compensation per borrow. That compensation has shrunk over time.

P.S. I have to hit the rack, but I'll be back later to discuss this.


----------



## swolf

Gator said:


> I'm comparing compensation per borrow. That compensation has shrunk over time.


I'm not disputing that, but you have to admit a borrow means something completely different if you can only do it once a month instead of unlimited times. The potential upside in earnings offsets the lower amount paid for each borrow.


----------



## Guest

Flights_of_Fantasy said:


> Replying mostly so that I get emails when there are new posts. I do love this thread though, it's very exciting!
> 
> Okay, so here are my super wise words to add to this wonderful thread. You ready? Are you sure?
> 
> *deep breath*
> 
> Okay, here goes:
> 
> People who can write fast, write lots, and write good will always do the best no matter what system they are publishing under.
> 
> See! Told you I was wise. "giggles muchly"
> 
> Carry on my fair thread and bring me much more marvelous entertainment and joy.


You are so incredibly wise. I love you!


----------



## Gator

swolf said:


> but you have to admit a borrow means something completely different if you can only do it once a month instead of unlimited times.


Along those lines, yes. But to be more accurate, I would admit that it's two separate business models with some identical nomenclature (borrows) that, when pooled together with a third business model, produces a purse big enough to compensate KDP authors at a rate of a little more than $2 per borrow, except for two problems. (And I'll get to those later if I can remember before I shut everything down. The temperature just hit 101 and it's still rising.)

The first business model, Amazon Prime, costs the subscriber $99 annually and pays for much of the total costs of Prime benefits (2-day shipping, video streaming, Kindle First, free borrow, etc.) Coupled with the third business model, extra profits made from more purchases from frequent, loyal (Prime) customers, this produces a surplus, even after the Prime benefits are paid for.

The second business model, a paid subscription (Kindle Unlimited), costs the subscriber $119.88 annually. During the introductory period of the subscription model, Amazon loses money, but at some point, it reaches the break-even point and produces a profit thereafter. Coupled with the third business model, extra profits made from more purchases from frequent, loyal (KU) customers, this puts the break-even point much sooner. KU is doing so well that KU customers are purchasing about $50 ($56 IIRC) more than regular customers, in addition to the KU subscription.

The first problem is that, for each borrow, Amazon must pay non-KDP publishers for an eBook purchase, rather than the same payment per borrow every KDP Select author gets. Since their payments are higher than the average, the KDP Select authors get less than average.

The second problem is the group of unethical opportunists getting paid to borrow KU eBooks. They bump the total number of borrows up, and the KDP Select authors who pay them take a chunk of the Global Pool that they don't deserve.

By my (rough) estimates, accounting for these two problems reduces the $2+ average payout by 10% to 20%.



> The potential upside in earnings offsets the lower amount paid for each borrow.


I agree with you there, but I would compare the "lower amount paid for each borrow" to the amount paid for a sale, not KU borrow amount compared to Prime borrow amount.

I hope I made sense. These four brain cells I have left don't operate at optimum at this temperature. Now I'm shutting down to go read a book (thanks, Monique!) -- if my Kindle doesn't melt.


----------



## K&#039;Sennia Visitor

Jolie du Pre said:


> You are so incredibly wise. I love you!


 "giggles muchly" Thanks you. <3

My computer doesn't love me as much as you do and it kept doing everything it could to prevent me from logging back in. Luckily I'm a ninja and I sneaked back in, anyway!


----------

