# The Unofficial "Guess the Jan Borrow Payment Rate" Thread



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

So December was $1.70 per borrow on a $500K pool.

January's pool was boosted to $700K, perhaps indicating an adjustment to a larger market due to Christmas sales activity.

Subsequently, February has been adjusted to $600K pool.

What's the consensus estimate for the January actual payment rate per borrow?

I'll start: my guess is *$2.10* based on several factors. First, the belief is that $2 is the target, second, the downgrade for February (while possibly due to the month only having 29 days) means that they may have overestimated the borrowing response rate for January, and third, because the incentive for Amazon to promote KDP Select is greater during the months they're launching the program rather than later.

What do you think?


----------



## David Adams (Jan 2, 2012)

I think they wouldn't adjust it unless they were way out on their estimates... I'm going to be bold and put it at $3.33 a borrow.


----------



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

I believe in the wisdom of the crowds, so I will track whether the collective wisdom wins.  Currently:

Collective wisdom says $2.72.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

I guessed $2.30 the other day in another thread, as I believe $2 is their target too.


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

I think we're looking at a lot more borrows than December so I'm gonna say ninety-five cents.


----------



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

Last month the announcement came on the 12th of the month. I'll try to post crowd average updates periodically until then. Right now we stand at:

Wisdom of Crowds: *$2.17*

I wish we could arrange a prize for best guess...


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

I don't know that they raised it for January because they wanted the amount higher. They could have expected more borrows and they wanted to keep the amount in the same ball park. I believe they are likely to have a good handle on the number of people in Prime and are adjusting as they figure out how many of those borrow.

I'm going to guess it will be close to last month's amount but a little higher: $1.80.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

$1.97


----------



## Alex Owens (Mar 24, 2011)

Giving my pitiful # of borrows my first week weeks in Select, I'm HOPING for somewhere in the ball part of $10 per borrow  but realistically my best guess is going to be $1.77


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

I agree with J.R. - Amazon will not allow it to be less, but won't want it to be too much more.

My guess is $1.85.

Lexi


----------



## Glen Krisch (Dec 21, 2010)

If this was the Price is Right, I would say $1.  Hmm... I'm going to go with $1.94.


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

My January borrows are up about about 30% over December so I'm guessing a 30% increase in total borrows (from 295,000 to 400,000 say). $700,000/400,000 = $1.75 per borrow.


----------



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

After 10 guesses, the crowd consensus is now at $1.976.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2012)




----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

I'm with Jason. I think they're aiming squarely at two dollars per.


----------



## cblewgolf (Jan 3, 2011)

I'm going to say they want it less than a $2.99 sale which is $2.07 but more than paying 35% which would be $1.05. Split the difference and you get *$1.55.*


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I came in way below last time, so not gonna let that happen this time. Going all Blake on this one, saying $4. Oh yeah.

So are we going on a Price is Right system where winner is whoever's closest without going under?


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

$2.17

There is zero chance it's under a dollar fifty, they'd have massive yelling on their hands, which they don't want. Practically speaking, I doubt many of us would pull our books at the end of 90 days if it was $1.50, but really the amounts we're talking here are drops in the bucket for Amazon, and saving a couple hundred thousand dollars is definitely not worth the headache for them.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

I think people will yank their books if it is less than a $2.00 average. that's why I went with $2.30 in my post above (#4).


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

I don't like to stir the pot, and I definitely hope I'm wrong (for all 12 borrows I had in Jan), but I figure *$1.19*.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

Another variable to consider:

KDP Select was only running for maybe 10 days in December (can't remember). It will have been running for 31 days In January. So there are going to be a LOT more borrows (IMO) to be paid out of that pot.

I'm shooting for $1.25


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

I will guess $1.92, Bob.

The really interesting thing is what will the pot be for March? That's when a number of the first adopters expire, and I wonder in Amazon will do all they can to keep the titles exclusive while also attracting even more to the program.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

dgaughran said:


> Another variable to consider:
> 
> KDP Select was only running for maybe 10 days in December (can't remember). It will have been running for 31 days In January. So there are going to be a LOT more borrows (IMO) to be paid out of that pot.
> 
> I'm shooting for $1.25


Are you sure it was only running for 10 days in Dec? I thought i remembered it starting the first week.

If it's only $1.25, authors will scream and some will pull their books. Amazon could prevent that by spending what amounts to petty cash for them, and my bet is they will not allow it to be much lower than December unless they've decided that the program isn't working out, which I don't see much evidence of.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> I think people will yank their books if it is less than a $2.00 average. that's why I went with $2.30 in my post above (#4).


Yup. That's why after revealing the $1.70 or so it was in December, there were tons and tons of people dropping out of the program.

Wait. No, I think most people were quite pleased, especially those getting rentals on 99 cent books.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Select started December 9th or 10th. 
My borrows were down 2/3 in January, but I didn't not  run a free promo either. So you had 26 days of borrowing in a hot buying climate. January tapered off for me, but maybe not for those running free promos.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

David "Half-Orc" Dalglish said:


> Yup. That's why after revealing the $1.70 or so it was in December, there were tons and tons of people dropping out of the program.
> 
> Wait. No, I think most people were quite pleased, especially those getting rentals on 99 cent books.


I was one of those getting borrows on my 99 cent book, and no, I wasn't that happy. To take advantage of the halo effect I raised the price to $2.99 hours before it went free. 
There was a thread around here where lots of people who enrolled books worth 2.99 each or more openly discussed that they have unchecked the box and will be yanking their books after the ninety days are up.


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> There was a thread around here where lots of people who enrolled books worth 2.99 each or more openly discussed that they have unchecked the box and will be yanking their books after the ninety days are up.


Which will eventually result in an increase in value to those who remain in. Less competition.


----------



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

As all my books are 99c I'll be happy with anything that brings in more than my 35% for sales.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> I was one of those getting borrows on my 99 cent book, and no, I wasn't that happy. To take advantage of the halo effect I raised the price to $2.99 hours before it went free.
> There was a thread around here where lots of people who enrolled books worth 2.99 each or more openly discussed that they have unchecked the box and will be yanking their books after the ninety days are up.


There are also numerous threads around here where lot of people who enrolled their books worth $2.99 or more openly discussed that they are quite happy with the results and will not be yanking our books. None of mine are below $2.99 and I'm thrilled with the results. My sales have soared AND so have my total royalties.

Edit: I also see new people enrolling their books all the time. I very much doubt that the number of books will go down. I happen to think if it does, it would encourage Amazon to give us some new goodies such as the ability to have a brief "price cut", so I certainly wouldn't MIND seeing that happen. I just don't expect it.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> I was one of those getting borrows on my 99 cent book, and no, I wasn't that happy. To take advantage of the halo effect I raised the price to $2.99 hours before it went free.
> There was a thread around here where lots of people who enrolled books worth 2.99 each or more openly discussed that they have unchecked the box and will be yanking their books after the ninety days are up.


Is that because they don't want to be limited to only selling on Amazon? That makes sense to me.

If it's because they think someone borrowing their book is a lost sale, I don't agree with that.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

Naturally it would be *limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n*.

B.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

I'm going to say just a modest increase of a dime, to $1.80. In my head though, I'm only counting them all as a dollar so that I can be happily surprised if it's more, or not too depressed if it's less.


----------



## Sandra Edwards (May 10, 2010)

I'm going with $2 a borrow.


----------



## cblewgolf (Jan 3, 2011)

I'm a #'s guy so here's my rationale:

There were 295,000 books borrowed in December over 20 days (guess) = 14750/day

If borrow ratio stays the same...

January - 14750 x 31 days = 457,250 borrows/$700,000 = $1.53 

(darn, I was close with my earlier guess of $1.55)


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2012)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> I was one of those getting borrows on my 99 cent book, and no, I wasn't that happy. To take advantage of the halo effect I raised the price to $2.99 hours before it went free.
> There was a thread around here where lots of people who enrolled books worth 2.99 each or more openly discussed that they have unchecked the box and will be yanking their books after the ninety days are up.


As the one who started the thread when the price was revealed, I recall that the jubilation over getting $1.70 for borrows on 99c or 2.99 books was pretty unanimous, until now.

You weren't happy making 5 times what you would've made on a single sale and almost double the price of the actual book when people didn't even have to pay for it?? Wow. I can just imagine you opening up a present on Christmas morning and looking at your parents and asking, "This is it?"

And I don't think you were being logical when you raised the price to $2.99 either. People with better rankings are getting more sales, and those lower rankings have a tendency to incur more borrows, which lowers the ranking. Lowering the price nets more sales and lower rankings and increases the chances of somebody coming along and deciding to borrow.


----------



## Kay Bratt (Dec 28, 2011)

SAMulraney said:


> I don't like to stir the pot, and I definitely hope I'm wrong (for all 12 borrows I had in Jan), but I figure *$1.19*.


$1.19?! *Someone gag and bind Samulraney*



I am just happy to get anything. My borrows were fantastic for January so even at $1 a borrow I wouldn't be glum. But then I am a half glass full kind of girl.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

foreverjuly said:


> As the one who started the thread when the price was revealed, I recall that the jubilation over getting $1.70 for borrows on 99c or 2.99 books was pretty unanimous, until now.
> 
> You weren't happy making 5 times what you would've made on a single sale and almost double the price of the actual book when people didn't even have to pay for it?? Wow. I can just imagine you opening up a present on Christmas morning and looking at your parents and asking, "This is it?"
> 
> And I don't think you were being logical when you raised the price to $2.99 either. People with better rankings are getting more sales, and those lower rankings have a tendency to incur more borrows, which lowers the ranking. Lowering the price nets more sales and lower rankings and increases the chances of somebody coming along and deciding to borrow.


Your reasoning totally baffles me. Just how do you figure that people with lower rankings have a tendency to incur more borrows? How do you figure that incurring borrows lowers ranking?

I will say this is not my experience.


----------



## Kay Bratt (Dec 28, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Your reasoning totally baffles me. Just how do you figure that people with lower rankings have a tendency to incur more borrows? How do you figure that incurring borrows lowers ranking? I will say this is not my experience.


I second that. My rankings have been fantastic for the last two months and my borrows have, too.


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Your reasoning totally baffles me. Just how do you figure that people with lower rankings have a tendency to incur more borrows? How do you figure that incurring borrows lowers ranking?
> 
> I will say this is not my experience.


A borrow has the same impact on ranking as a sale. Amazon has said this, and it's accurate. So that helps bump you higher on bestseller lists, which makes you more visible, which results in more sales and borrows. It's a great fringe benefit of being in the program, and helps create situations where there are virtuous cycles.



KayBratt said:


> I second that. My rankings have been fantastic for the last two months and my borrows have, too.


So you see how that proves my point? Sales and rankings play off of each other to help support the book. By lower rankings, I mean smaller numbers.


----------



## ToniD (May 3, 2011)

I'm picking $3.00--totally out of my hat.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

foreverjuly said:


> A borrow has the same impact on ranking as a sale. Amazon has said this, and it's accurate. So that helps bump you higher on bestseller lists, which makes you more visible, which results in more sales and borrows. It's a great fringe benefit of being in the program, and helps create situations where there are virtuous cycles.
> 
> So you see how that proves my point? Sales and rankings play off of each other to help support the book. By lower rankings, I mean smaller numbers.


Ah. By "lowering ranking" I thought you mean HIGHER numbers. *eyes spin*


----------



## Guest (Feb 3, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Ah. By "lowering ranking" I thought you mean HIGHER numbers. *eyes spin*


Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Kay Bratt (Dec 28, 2011)

JRTomlin said:


> Ah. By "lowering ranking" I thought you mean HIGHER numbers. *eyes spin*


Oh. Oops.


----------



## MonkeyScribe (Jan 27, 2011)

I'm going to say 1.75.


----------



## D/W (Dec 29, 2010)

dgaughran said:


> Another variable to consider:
> 
> KDP Select was only running for maybe 10 days in December (can't remember). It will have been running for 31 days In January. So there are going to be a LOT more borrows (IMO) to be paid out of that pot.
> 
> I'm shooting for $1.25


KDP Select began on December 8. A tremendous number of people got Kindle Fires for Christmas, which came with a free one-month trial of Amazon Prime, so I'm sure that borrowing increased _tremendously_ after the holiday.

While there were probably a lot more borrows in January, the pot was also sweetened by $200,000 (the money pool went from $500,000 in December to $700,000 in January). There were a total of 295,000 KDP Select borrows in December. My totally random guess is that there will be about 400,000 borrows in January, which would put the per-borrow royalty at *$1.75*. I wouldn't be surprised to see the royalty a bit higher than that, though. I don't think it'll be below $1.70.

February is going to be very interesting. The pot has been lowered to $600,000. A lot of Kindle Fire owners may not have signed up for a year of paid Amazon Prime at the end of January (when their free month trial expired), so I expect there will be less borrows than January. I believe that's why Amazon lowered the pot. They probably want to keep the per-borrow royalty at or above $1.70 in order to keep authors enrolled in KDP Select.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Naturally it would be *limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n*.


This is actually what I expected them to have been shooting for, but it looks like it might actually be twice that in the long run, which makes the program fairly lucrative per borrow.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

David "Half-Orc" Dalglish said:


> This is actually what I expected them to have been shooting for, but it looks like it might actually be twice that in the long run, which makes the program fairly lucrative per borrow.


If the program exceeds *limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n* per borrow, I'd be hard pressed not to sign up. Then again, I don't think I'll have the luxury of a choice for much longer. I fear a drop in the KDP-Standard royalty rate is inevitable.

B.


----------



## Remington Kane (Feb 19, 2011)

$1.70 - Again.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

It'd crack me up hardcore if Amazon announced in their press release (even better if on April 1st for the March numbers) that the borrow amount was $[*limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n*]-1...which is actually really, really close to what it was for December.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Naturally it would be *limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n*.
> 
> B.





David "Half-Orc" Dalglish said:


> It'd crack me up hardcore if Amazon announced in their press release (even better if on April 1st for the March numbers) that the borrow amount was $[*limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n*]-1...which is actually really, really close to what it was for December.


 I hate you both.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

HeatherVivant said:


> I believe in the wisdom of the crowds, so I will track whether the collective wisdom wins. Currently:
> 
> Collective wisdom says $2.72.


In that case, I'll mess with your "collective wisdom" by guessing that lots of folks dropped it after it stopped being free, and January's borrow rate will be... $5.27! Muahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha!


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

JeanneM said:


> I hate you both.


Don't be. I completely goofed the first time I looked at the formula. e =/= 1.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

Actually, I think I have it figured out.  You guys are speaking Lakota Sioux, right?


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> If the program exceeds *limn−>∞ (1+1/n)n* per borrow, I'd be hard pressed not to sign up. Then again, I don't think I'll have the luxury of a choice for much longer. I fear a drop in the KDP-Standard royalty rate is inevitable.
> 
> B.


I think the formula is going to be closer (and similar) to [(1-0) X x]/1 squared . Where x is equal to the amount Amazon decides.

I'm too tired to look up how to print all the little math symbols and the nonsense ones, but trust me, my formula will work.


----------



## ETS PRESS (Nov 4, 2011)

I am going to predict $1.75. 
If $2 is Amazon's goal (which many are assuming), then why not give $2 a borrow and be done with it? 
I noticed a lot of people on other writer's forums planned to pull out of the program.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

JeanneM said:


> I hate you both.


Sorry, let me work that out for you...










...well you get the general idea. (I'm a blast at parties.)

B.


----------



## JeanneM (Mar 21, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Sorry, let me work that out for you...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Thank you! I have been suitably programmed now. Jeanne unit 927 going dark now.


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

Can someone who thinks the amount is going to go up explain the logic to me please?

The way I see it, December was a short month with the program not starting until the 8th and a lot of people not picking up their kindles until the 25th. The January pool of cash went up by 20% which means you'd have to think rentals will go up by less than that, stay the same, or go down.

I just don't see that happening.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, though, just curious.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

My borrows went down in January, but I'm not basing my guesstimate on that. My theory is Amazon wants to stay close to the $2.00 mark per borrow to keep the most amount of indie books available to plump up their library.


----------



## Rachel Schurig (Apr 9, 2011)

My really scientific, well thought out guess is $1.85.

...by scientific and well thought out I mean that I have a random hunch.

In order for my borrows to out perform what I was making on B&N the amount needs to be at least $.02 per borrow. I think I'll stick with Select for now


----------



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

Gregory Lynn said:


> Can someone who thinks the amount is going to go up explain the logic to me please?


My logic is simply that borrows are a function of the number of Prime members who exercise the option, and I don't think that there was a month-over-month 40% increase in Prime members exercising the option. That would be 117,647 new Prime members who have borrowed for a total of 411,764 borrows vs 295,000 or so in December. I think a 20% increase is much more likely, which comes pretty close to $2 (even though I guessed higher).


----------



## HeatherVivant (Dec 30, 2011)

By my count there have been 28 first guesses and the current wisdom of the crowds (including the crazy predictions) is: *$2.08*


----------



## Gregory Lynn (Aug 9, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> My borrows went down in January, but I'm not basing my guesstimate on that. My theory is Amazon wants to stay close to the $2.00 mark per borrow to keep the most amount of indie books available to plump up their library.


I don't mean to be an ass but is there any particular reason why you think that?

Most of the people I have seen say anything about it say they're part of select because they want the additional exposure and not because they're worried so much about the payouts. Granted, that's a pretty small percentage of the titles overall but unless there are a lot of people out there saying they're in it for the payout I don't see how the difference between a one dollar payout and a two dollar payout is going to make much difference.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

JeanneM said:


> Thank you! I have been suitably programmed now. Jeanne unit 927 going dark now.


You are now the intersect.

Too bad CHUCK's cancelled...


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

I have no books in Select right now.

Why? Because both of my books are currently "out there" at BN.com and all the Smashwords affiliates, so I don't want to bother pulling one or both of them back.

BN.com and Smashwords don't make me much money, but that's just because I only have 2 books and I'm apparently PR/promotionally disabled, LOL.

Would I consider it in the future, with one of my forthcoming novels?

Absolutely.

Why?

Umm... you were listening when I said, "BN.com and Smashwords don't make me much money," weren't you?


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

HeatherVivant said:


> By my count there have been 28 first guesses and the current wisdom of the crowds (including the crazy predictions) is: *$2.08*


I'm not crazy. I'm just drawn that way.


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

*SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS PER BORROW*

A boy can dream, can't he?


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

We should be hearing results soon, no?


----------



## RGPorter (Sep 19, 2011)

I just jumped into the select program last month with 1 book and now another. I've had only a couple borrows, but I didn't expect much. I'll be curious to see what they do come back with though.


----------



## Ursula_Bauer (Dec 12, 2010)

I'm going w/ $1.80.

No reason at all, just seems like it will be a little more, but not a ton more.

And last time, for Dec I guessed .08 cents so I have to make up for such a wide margin of error.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Gregory Lynn said:


> Can someone who thinks the amount is going to go up explain the logic to me please?
> 
> The way I see it, December was a short month with the program not starting until the 8th and a lot of people not picking up their kindles until the 25th. The January pool of cash went up by 20% which means you'd have to think rentals will go up by less than that, stay the same, or go down.
> 
> ...


The logic is fairly simple. Amazon wouldn't want the amount paid per borrow going down drastically because that would cause at least some people to leave the program.

Since Amazon increased the pool by 20%, they probably expected borrows to go up by that amount or possibly just slightly less in order to get the payment amount closer to $2 per borrow. Generally, Amazon is very good at predicting these things and I am assuming they are right and that they payment amount will either stay the same or increase only slightly.

You're right that what most people want is increased visibility and access to the "free" thing, but that doesn't mean that the payout isn't a factor in making a decision for quite a few people.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> You're right that what most people want is increased visibility and access to the "free" thing, but that doesn't mean that the payout isn't a factor in making a decision for quite a few people.


Exactly. Plus, now that they've established a baseline, lowering it by more than a little bit would cause grumbling. It almost doesn't matter in some ways how many people would immediately leave the program, they just want to keep the natives happy. Because Amazon Prime is a core part of Amazon's strategy and they will err on the side of caution when a small amount of extra money can keep that running as smoothly as possible. They even just cut off their popular "moms" program because it was eating into Prime, which has resulted in backlash.


----------



## RJ Parker - Author &amp; Amazon Top Reviewer (Nov 10, 2011)

Amazon haven't made an announcement yet and it's only 2 days away from receiving out report for January...I think they are afraid to announce it haha.. I'm thinking it's going to be lower (hope I'm wrong) but I'm going with $1.40. That being said, the lending program represents about 10% of my revenue... do you think it is worth keeping my 7 books in this program for 10% or what? Is it realistic to think that I can make more than that spread around on B&N itunes etc? Thanks...


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

R.J. Parker said:


> Amazon haven't made an announcement yet and it's only 2 days away from receiving out report for January...I think they are afraid to announce it haha.. I'm thinking it's going to be lower (hope I'm wrong) but I'm going with $1.40. That being said, the lending program represents about 10% of my revenue... do you think it is worth keeping my 7 books in this program for 10% or what? Is it realistic to think that I can make more than that spread around on B&N itunes etc? Thanks...


I expect that a delay in reporting may have more to do with the fact that reporting had serious glitches at the end of Jan and first of Feb.

I have no idea whether anyone else can make 10%. My borrows are a little higher than that, possibly because of price, but my B&N et al sales never came even close to 10% of my Amazon sales. Speaking for myself, it wouldn't be realistic to think I can make more that. I never try to speak for anyone else though.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

R.J. Parker said:


> Amazon haven't made an announcement yet and it's only 2 days away from receiving out report for January...I think they are afraid to announce it haha.. I'm thinking it's going to be lower (hope I'm wrong) but I'm going with $1.40. That being said, the lending program represents about 10% of my revenue... do you think it is worth keeping my 7 books in this program for 10% or what? Is it realistic to think that I can make more than that spread around on B&N itunes etc? Thanks...


Everyone's got to make their own decision, but. . .I put one novel in Select that sold very well for quite a bit of 2011 but was tailing off the past three months to 3-4 sales a day. That was still okay, but I wondered if I get get the numbers back to 10-20 sales a day. I went free for two days and was fortunate enough to get picked up by a couple of the major sites and it got pretty high in the free store. On the second day after going paid again, I briefly popped into the top 1000 paid and I had more sales on that one day than it had on all non-Amazon outlets in 2011 combined. And my price was up to $3.99 as opposed to 99 cents for much of 2011. And while my numbers may be above average on that they aren't anywhere near what's possible, as numerous other authors have seen the top 200 or 300 paid when they come off going free.

Or let's take another example - I have a 99 cent short that I published in early January and went free with in mid-January. I had 85 sales in January. This is more than both my collections of shorts in 2011 on Amazon and all other outlets combined.

There are no guarantees, but I share the above to illustrate that direct revenue from borrows are only a small piece of the equation. The impact of going free, the impact on rankings of those borrows, the consideration of what you're giving up on other outlets, those are additional things you have to weigh. One of my novels has been selling double figures a month on Apple, so I have not put it into Select yet. I am about 99% sure that I am losing income in the short term by doing this, but I'm giving it a chance to catch on more. So even though I am completely sold on the value of Select, I'm also trying to leave open the possibility of catching on somewhere else. If those sales start dropping, though. . .


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Gregory Lynn said:


> I don't mean to be an *ss but is there any particular reason why you think that?
> 
> Most of the people I have seen say anything about it say they're part of select because they want the additional exposure and not because they're worried so much about the payouts. Granted, that's a pretty small percentage of the titles overall but unless there are a lot of people out there saying they're in it for the payout I don't see how the difference between a one dollar payout and a two dollar payout is going to make much difference.


Because many authors put many more than one book in. If they put five in and pull four out, Amazon's offering of eBooks to it's prime membership, while slim now, will go down to sad. Since visibilty has not resulted in a huge increase of traffic (for the majority) it may not be worth giving up access through other outlets. They can keep just one book in Prime to get the five free days.

Authors aren't staying in for the money of the select program, but they need to feel they aren't losing anything. If rankings aren't going up and sales stagnate, they are going to feel it's better not to have all those eggs in one basket.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Far more disruptive to the system will be a month with low borrows and a pool fixed at $500,000. Did they announce Feb at $500,000?

Suppose they did, and suppose borrows are way down. Many report sales are down. If borrows follow, we could see a situation where the borrow rate calculated off $500K shoots up. 

Imagine the howls from authors feeling cheated if they reduce the pool to keep the rate in line with Dec and Jan.

Remember, all those 30 day free Prime memberships that came with Xmas Kindles have expired.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

Ben White said:


> *SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS PER BORROW*


This is my guess because, darn it, it just sounds reasonable.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Far more disruptive to the system will be a month with low borrows and a pool fixed at $500,000. Did they announce Feb at $500,000?


They announced it at $600,000 if I recall correctly. And I can't picture them lowering it for a given month once they've announced it. I was a little surprised they announced it as early as they did in January, no real reason to and at least some small level of risk of having a large per borrow amount that they wouldn't match in future months. But I do imagine they don't make decisions like that lightly.


----------



## Lisa_Follett (Oct 22, 2011)

I think we should find out this week.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Far more disruptive to the system will be a month with low borrows and a pool fixed at $500,000. Did they announce Feb at $500,000?
> 
> Suppose they did, and suppose borrows are way down. Many report sales are down. If borrows follow, we could see a situation where the borrow rate calculated off $500K shoots up.
> 
> ...


Amazon can afford to take a few dollars loss on it. No way they reduce the announced amount. They were well aware when the free Prime memberships were expiring when they made the announcement.

Talk about borrowing trouble.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Sure Amazon can take a loss, but I'm not sure this would constitute a loss. They have already allocated $6 million to the program. They might not attract subscribers to Prime, and that would be more of a failure than a loss. A good metric might be the number of 30-day Prime memberships that are converted rather than the number of borrows. (Yes, we then have to look at the profitability of the converted memberships over time.)

However, erratic monthly borrow rates would make the system less stable, increase uncertainly among authors, and possibly lead to mass entries and exits from Select. Think of all the opinions for and against Select we have seen here. Add high rate volatility, and the fun would really kick into gear.

I didn't pay attention to the exact wording Amazon used in describing Select. Do they have room to reduce the monthly dollar pool while still maintaining an average of $500k/month? Reductions in a pool for a given month would be even more fun.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

You have to remember that a borrow is an extra benefit for Prime members, not the main attraction to the program. And WHY would Amazon deliberately do something that would make the program less stable and increase uncertainty such as unnecessarily changing the pool. I never noticed Amazon being stupid.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"And WHY would Amazon deliberately do something that would make the program less stable and increase uncertainty such as unnecessarily changing the pool. I never noticed Amazon being stupid."_

I agree a borrow is an incentive to join Prime. So are videos, free shipping, and the secret Amazon decoder ring.

The rate becomes unstable when Amazon does nothing. The system is inherently unstable. Doing nothing means sticking with a $500K pool when borrows fall. That pushes the rate up, decreases stability, increases volatility, and increases uncertainty.

The rate remains stable when Amazon does something. They reduce the pool to keep the rate in line with previous months. It gets so much more interesting when the Amazon reduces the pool to maintain stability, low volatility, and low uncertainty. Hobson's Choice.


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

> The rate becomes unstable when Amazon does nothing. The system is inherently unstable. Doing nothing means sticking with a $500K pool when borrows fall. That pushes the rate up, decreases stability, increases volatility, and increases uncertainty.


I'm not sure I understand why the rate has to be stable in order for there to be general stability in the system. This suggests that the only reason authors are in Select is for the money they make off of borrows, no? That the majority of Select enrollees will flee if the rate drops below a certain point? To me, anything made off of borrows is a bonus.

I'm also not sure that Amazon cares how many authors are in Select (it doesn't change how much they are giving out), or that the number of indie authors that might leave an "unstable" system would really affect their goals (whatever they may be).

I'd actually rather they didn't mess with the number. Keep it at a minimum of $500k. That, to me, is stability; knowing that the same number is in there from month to month. Sure, bump it up by all means, as a bonus or something, but don't have me guessing each month.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"And WHY would Amazon deliberately do something that would make the program less stable and increase uncertainty such as unnecessarily changing the pool. I never noticed Amazon being stupid."_
> 
> I agree a borrow is an incentive to join Prime. So are videos, free shipping, and the secret Amazon decoder ring.
> 
> ...


Pushing the rate up does not decrease stability or volatility or uncertainty.

Quite the contrary. A higher rate would make Select even more desirable. There is no way on earth it would be to Amazon's benefit to reduce the pool and drive people OUT of Select.

I don't see any logic to your argument that paying poorly would make Select better. There is every indication that they will leave it at a minimum of $500,000.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I'm not sure I understand why the rate has to be stable in order for there to be general stability in the system. This suggests that the only reason authors are in Select is for the money they make off of borrows, no?"_

The only reason? No. It's one factor. Each individual author decides if the factor is a reason for any action.

I also don't know if Amazon cares about the number of authors in Select. They don't call. But that doesn't change the behavior of the system when the dollar pool is held constant and borrows fall.

The stability I refer to is the stability in the rate paid from one month to another. I agree a constant pool of money each month would be stable. So we can have a stability in the pool while having instability in the rate.


----------



## HeidiHall (Sep 5, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I agree a borrow is an incentive to join Prime. So are videos, free shipping, and the secret Amazon decoder ring.


Wait! There's a decoder ring? I was robbed! *wanders off to send Amazon a nasty email*


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Pushing the rate up does not decrease stability or volatility or uncertainty.

Quite the contrary. A higher rate would make Select even more desirable. There is no way on earth it would be to Amazon's benefit to reduce the pool and drive people OUT of Select.

I don't see any logic to your argument that paying poorly would make Select better. There is every indication that they will leave it at a minimum of $500,000."_

Pushing the Feb rate up over Dec and Jan increases volatility by definition. Volatility is a function of the rate of change and magnitude in the rate. Uncertainty increases because we can observe the behavior of the system leads to unpredictable rates. Stability implies rates remaining in a narrow range. Moving out of that range indicates an unstable set of values.

I agree a higher rate may be desirable for authors. There is nothing that says it isn't. If it is more desirable, more people join Select. That's an example of increased entries and exits I mentioned.

Reducing the pool could make the rate constant from one month to the next if borrows fell. This would depend on the number of borrows. I'm not sure how a relatively constant rate drives people out. However, some may feel lowering the pool cheats them, and they might go.

I agree there is no logic to the argument that paying poorly makes Select more desirable. That's why I am not making that argument. I make no argument about the desirability of Select.


----------



## S.A. Mulraney (May 20, 2011)

So, the rate came out lower for January ($1.60). Now what?


----------



## destill (Oct 5, 2010)

HeidiHall said:


> Wait! There's a decoder ring? I was robbed! *wanders off to send Amazon a nasty email*


You beat me to that one!


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

SAMulraney said:


> So, the rate came out lower for January ($1.60). Now what?


::shrugs:: Now what is there will be an exodus, perhaps not mass, but one just the same. I could have made $0.05 cents on those 2 borrows (I was only in Select for two days out of the month), and it wouldn't have bothered me in the least. I gave AWAY 8,000 books. Gave away, as in no money. Why do I care how much a borrow is?

Time to go write. Daughter had me up almost all night last night with this potty training racket. She's 2.5, meaning she an adorable little sociopath. She will pee-pee in th eporry one minute and cheer. The next? She's peeing in a corner in her room, on purpose (like far corner of her room, not an accident, she has to get into the corner to do so). She's like a puppy, who talks and taunts.

But I love her. It's a good thing she an ADORABLE sociopath.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

@AmazonKDP:

*KDP Select January results announced: 
437,000 books borrowed in Jan and authors earned $1.60 per borrow. 
http://bit.ly/t2GcsL*

Darn it. I was off by over a dollar.

B.


----------



## Lexi Revellian (May 31, 2010)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> Daughter had me up almost all night last night with this potty training racket. She's 2.5, meaning she an adorable little sociopath. She will pee-pee in th eporry one minute and cheer. The next? She's peeing in a corner in her room, on purpose (like far corner of her room, not an accident, she has to get into the corner to do so).


Elizabeth, explain carefully to her in simple language that she is providing you with anecdotes with which to entertain her boyfriends when she is a teenager. That ought to do the trick.

Lexi


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

I'll probably keep book 1 of my angel series in the select program, for another ninety days, but maybe not. I have until March 7th to decide and I have 2 more free days I can run in the next three weeks.


----------



## B. Justin Shier (Apr 1, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> I'll probably keep book 1 of my angel series in the select program, for another ninety days, but maybe not. I have until March 7th to decide and I have 2 more free days I can run in the next three weeks.


Lisa, are the borrows holding your interest or are you mostly interested in the free promotions?

B.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

B. Justin Shier said:


> Lisa, are the borrows holding your interest or are you mostly interested in the free promotions?
> 
> B.


I'm in a weird place right now. With the movie deal through Motion Picture Pro Studio, (and it being fast-tracked into preproduction), I'm waiting for them to announce it publicly in a press release along with their major distribution deal for their post-production indie film "Old Fashioned".

I have a publisher that has said (after months of marketing proposals and internal meetings on their end) that they are sending me a contract for the paperbacks for the whole series, but haven't received the contract yet.

The production company of course, likes the idea of me offering Book 1 for free, and I have Book 3 days away from releasing.

So really what has me on the fence is giving book 1 away for free, will help promote the books, and thus the film. But since publishers don't seem to get that eBook giveaways help drive paperback sales rather than cutting into them; I'm not sure which way to go.

The movie deal can be extremely lucrative, so I am leaning at staying in for the 5 free promotional days. But I could go either way.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Be sure to let us know when it will be broadcast.


----------



## CraigInOregon (Aug 6, 2010)

Any word yet?


----------

