# N/A



## No One (Aug 4, 2012)

N/A


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Everyone here is brilliant (tis true!), so we don't discuss "schemes" much in WC. Other forums I have seen, yes. But not here.

We try to understand the algorithms, and to work in an efficient manner with advertising and other promotions, but you won't find a lot of schemes happening here.

Except the scheme for us to all spend a lot of time posting on KB and thereby not getting our WIP Nanowrimo done ....


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I mean, I know we all want to rank highly in our respective niches and sites, but gaming the system like this just provides a temporary boost, *and then the algorithms take this into account and you're back to where you started or even worse because the system penalizes you for it.*


Can you provide any evidence that this is happening?


----------



## btsc99 (Oct 12, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> Am I the only one here who thinks this way?


Plus 1 here. Where Facebooking, Twittering, Liking and all the other "ings" are concerned I have to admit that I am a mixture of ignorance, naivety, reluctance and a very large dollop of innate Brit reserve.

Having said all that, I do realise that marketing (God how I loathe that word) is necessary in order to achieve some form of "presence", but it does go against the grain and I really don't like it.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2012)

I'm with the OP 110% on this one.  All of my marketing right now is the passive kind of stuff that I can do once and comfortably forget about (book description, cover art, sample chapters in the back of the book, etc).  I figure when I have at least 10 titles up that are going for more than $2.99, then I'll put more effort into that.  Until then, it's all I can do just to work on my writing.


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Ummm ... do Author Likes actually do anything? I thought all "Likes" did was customize the recommendations Amazon gives your account.

I guess there are schemes on here from time to time, but the % is quite small compared to other places.

Besides, everyone knows there's only one scheme that works. Maybe everyone should paypal me $5 and I'll tell them. (Spoiler alert: it's just more of that writing stuff we're shirking!)


----------



## A.A (Mar 30, 2012)

Were these threads here?
Because I can honestly say I have never seen a review exchange thread here - except for posts from the occasional newbie who stumbled into the boards and thought review exchanges were a good idea and who is swiftly told they are not.

I know what you're saying and I wish it really was a matter of every book on its merits. I don't believe in any artificial schemes or fake reviews.

I have seen people (not necessarily at KB) who publish their first book with an army of friends/followers/family/church/social groups etc leaving a flood of 5-star reviews and the book then shooting up the ranks and staying there.
I've seen 'big 6' publishers lining up a ton of positive reviews before a book is even published and also gaining recommendations from other authors. (Which is fine and just good marketing.)
I have seen good books on Amazon with rankings of 500,000+ and thought it really sad.

I'm not sure on the 'author likes' one. I haven't joined the thread and don't intend to, but as Dalya said, I can't see it doing much.


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

> Because I can honestly say I have never seen a review exchange thread here -


Nor I. Review exchange suggestions are usually shot down very, very quickly here. What I have seen are tagging threads and the recent "liking" of author pages thread. I have no idea if either of those is unethical or not. It does seem that people expect some benefit from participating in them, and like others, I doubt Amazon intended the system to be used that way, so I have abstained. I'm not sure if that makes them unethical or not, but they do seem to be intended as a way (perhaps a very mild way) of gaming the system.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

There really is no way to game the sales rank, because it's based on sales. 

The only thing we can "hope" to do, is make our books more visible. If "likes" affect anything more than what Amazon recommends to the "liker" I'd be highly doubtful. However, an Amazon Exec told Lillian Hart at a conference, it does.

Just in the off chance it "might" influence books showing in keyword searches (which I highly doubt), I participate in the author "like" program, and that's only because I didn't realize there was a "like" on the author page.

Building a fan base is the only way to influence sales. Get some readers who will read everything you write. I have a few thousand now. Then put out a few works every year for them to buy.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

This makes me uneasy, too.

Mostly because it seems a bit like wearing a rabbit's foot, or throwing salt over your shoulder. Somebody could do a very interesting study on human nature here. Amazon is huge. We dont quite know how it works, exactly, or how our actions affect it, but we have a big stake in trying to influence how it works.

Shazam! Superstition is born. Some of it is based on fact - some of it based on observing patterns and making logical deductions, but so much seems to be rumor and guesswork.

Amazon deletes a lot of reviews and here we are, jumping to conclusions as to why, and so many people are so sure they _know_. Or a new button or logo appears, and were all scrambling about figuring out what it signifies.

Makes me too aware of how insignificant I am, and how little influence I really have.


----------



## KVWitten (Apr 11, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> <snip>
> That aside, personally, I'd rather write a brilliant novel and be recognized on my work alone.
> <snip>


I think everyone would agree with that. But how can readers recognize its brilliance if they never find it??

I think that's what most authors are trying to do - just trying to get their book/s in front of people.


----------



## Justawriter (Jul 24, 2012)

swolf said:


> Can you provide any evidence that this is happening?


I'm not sure about specific examples within Amazon, but I'd have to assume if they see obvious manipulation happening, they'll adjust algorithms accordingly. I'm in mid-process of taking classes with Hubspot, learning about all this stuff and it's very interesting and changes often.

As an example to illustrate this, used to be that you'd enter metatags into your website to help the site rank higher....then Google realized that people were packing their site with not necessarily relevant keywords and artificially bumping their rankings, so they adjusted their algorithms accordingly and site metatags no longer have that effect.

I think you have to be aware of how everything works, but gaming the system in the long run isn't going to really help much I don't think. At the end of the day you need a good book and some marketing to make people aware of it.

The big question is how much marketing is necessary? It can be such a huge time suck...maybe time that is better spent working on the next book?


----------



## cekilgore (Oct 31, 2012)

I agree with helping other indi authors getting the word out about their book through Tagging (agreeing with the search/category slugs tied to a book) and Author liking (not book liking unless I've read it), and blog posting

I do not agree with fake reviews, nor would I ever want one on my book. I'm quite happy with the 1 review I do have because I know its from someone who actually sat down and read my book which makes me happier than ever making a dime with it.

That being said... 

Maybe if we lived in an awesome world where if you write a brilliant book it would automatically get noticed by everyone and read.. then tagging and liking and other soft marketing wouldn't be necessary.  The point is, no one will ever read your brilliant manuscript if they can't find it.  And in the gigantor ocean of Lit that is Amazon (or dare I say Jungle...) a little help form fellow authors is not a bad thing.  Think of them as helping you to cut through some of the underbrush.

The effects are minor and wont burn down the whole jungle. If you think the larger publishing houses (and many of the smaller indi houses) aren't doing this... sorry, but they are. They have tagging and liking parties... and I know some even do paid reviews.. 

Sorry if I ruffle some feathers... but that's my two cents worth.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> The only thing we can "hope" to do, is make our books more visible.


THIS
You can have the best story, writing, cover, blurb, reviews in the world but if no one SEES your title to make the decision to buy it, it's all for naught.

We need more categories, at all sellers. I vote for Fiction > Fantasy > Pigs In Space > Vampires > Thanatology in the Holy Roman Empire


----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> The only thing we can "hope" to do, is make our books more visible. If "likes" affect anything more than what Amazon recommends to the "liker" I'd be highly doubtful. However, an Amazon Exec told Lillian Hart at a conference, it does.


Whoa, I did not read that part. 

I have no problem with these things - it's not gaming - it's called support. Eventually you have to break away from just the authors and get to your core readers.

But in the beginning, we all need a little push, that's what these "schemes" do - they give the newbie a push. That's all.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2012)

People confuse activity with accomplishment. 

I use to participate in the "tag exchange" thread because, at the time, it seemed a good way to support indies. If the tags helped increase visibility of a book in searches (for example, tagging a book with "vampire" so that if a customer searched for "vampire" the book would appear). So long as the tagging was fact-based and not value based (i.e. I didn't tag things with words like "great read" or 'bestseller" or anything I did not myself believe to be accurate). 

But then what started to happen is that I would get all of these strange recommendations from Amazon for things I would never read. And I realized that all of that tagging just screwed up MY recommendations and didn't really do anything for improving visibility of books. Because tagging fifty books with "romance" just told Amazon's bots that "She is interested in romances" when in fact I don't read romances at all and was just trying to "support" fellow writers.

I think all of the liking and tagging and gaming just creates this echo chamber of indies talking to each other and doesn't really do anything to reach actual customers. Think about some of the most successful indies here on KB. How many of them spend their time tagging and liking? Or do they spend their time going out and finding readers?


----------



## Jena H (Oct 2, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> There really is no way to game the sales rank, because it's based on sales.
> 
> The only thing we can "hope" to do, is make our books more visible. If "likes" affect anything more than what Amazon recommends to the "liker" I'd be highly doubtful. However, an Amazon Exec told Lillian Hart at a conference, it does.
> 
> ...


^^^ This.

I have no idea how "tags" and "likes" might help make our books more visible, but I'm _all for_ making my books more visible. Tagging and liking don't directly impact sales, just (theoretically) help put our books on the radar for prospective readers.

(For the record, thanks to the tagging thread, my books have accumulated a respectable number of tags. Sadly, the increasing number of those tags have not necessarily translated to a corresponding increase of sales, so... make of that what you will. YMMV.)


----------



## David J Normoyle (Jun 22, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> People confuse activity with accomplishment.
> 
> I use to participate in the "tag exchange" thread because, at the time, it seemed a good way to support indies. If the tags helped increase visibility of a book in searches (for example, tagging a book with "vampire" so that if a customer searched for "vampire" the book would appear). So long as the tagging was fact-based and not value based (i.e. I didn't tag things with words like "great read" or 'bestseller" or anything I did not myself believe to be accurate).
> 
> ...


I don't see anything wrong with liking or tagging other authors but this has been my experience too. Tagging and liking didn't seem to do anything to raise visibility of my book just seemed to be data that Amazon used to make recommendations to me.


----------



## Flopstick (Jul 19, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> Okay, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in particular or anything like that. I just see these threads about "increasing rank", mostly at amazon, with things like review exchanges and such, and I just don't get it.
> 
> I mean, I know we all want to rank highly in our respective niches and sites, but gaming the system like this just provides a temporary boost, and then the algorithms take this into account and you're back to where you started or even worse because the system penalizes you for it.
> 
> ...


Word.


----------



## wolfrom (May 26, 2012)

Correlation does not equal causation (or so my wife always tells me), but I have noticed an upswing whenever I participate in the tag exchange. If I were to make a guess (and I don't know enough to do more than that), I'd say that Amazon may adjust my visibility not as much based on the cumulative tag count, but on the activity surrounding my ebooks. So if "something" is happening, whether reviews, tags, likes, etc., than more people seem to find my stuff.

It could be that I'm so invisible at times that I notice these small upswings more than most.


----------



## Guest (Nov 7, 2012)

wolfrom said:


> Correlation does not equal causation (or so my wife always tells me), but I have noticed an upswing whenever I participate in the tag exchange.


Make sure, however, that you are not only logged out of Amazon before searching, but that you clear all cookies from your computer. Amazon's algorithms are very sophisticated in that they cater to your account specifically. When I am logged in at work on my work account, I get very different search results than when I log in at home on my personal account, because I have very different purchase and activity patterns between those two accounts. The system generally does not recognize you as the author of your own book, so if you are constantly searching for your own title to check it's standings, this will lead to weird results (and getting Amazon emails trying to sell you your own book).


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> People are free to do what you will. I just find the whole system gaming thing a little silly and pointless. If you have a good book, it will sell.
> 
> Am I the only one here who thinks this way?


No, you are not the only one.

I don't even think it's necessarily a matter of ethics: it might just be a matter of using the tools the way they were intended. I've seen authors do many things that abuse the facilities made available to readers in order to get a competitive advantage. Any time you see authors say "let's get together and do X for each other," it is probably something that is gaming the system. The goal is often to create an unearned impression of quality or popularity.

From what I've seen, the benefits to be gained from participating in any kind of system-gaming exchange (reviews, tags, likes, etc) are not worth the negative publicity they can cause or the way they make me feel.

My book has to compete against something like 1,000 new titles per month, just in the fantasy genre. Some of those books are bound to become more popular than mine, and all other things remaining equal, my ranking will inevitably slip. I don't believe I can market my way out of that reality. My best bet for increasing my sales is to write a _new_ book that becomes more popular than those of my competitors.


----------



## thesmallprint (May 25, 2012)

Whatever your moral/ethical opinion on exchanging votes of any type, I think it would pay to be wary of Amazon's increasing vigilance and action on anything that resembles sock-puppetry.

Another thread quotes an article on Amazon's policy of removing reviews written by authors.

The other factor is Amazon's determination not to enter into lengthy correspondence when questioned. They are judge and jury on perceived violations with no right of appeal.

Joe


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

wolfrom said:


> Correlation does not equal causation (or so my wife always tells me)...


Yep. It's a very old logical fallacy: _post hoc, ergo propter hoc_ ("after this, therefore because of this").


----------



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

With regards to the liking thread, I don't know about everyone else, but I "like" things daily on FB with little thought. If I like the poster I hit the like button on anything they post, often without fully examining the update/image. Is that unethical? Is it misusing FB's like feature? Are there certain standards that should be applied to what I like, tag, retweet, etc? Or is it enough simply that I like the poster and want to be friendly toward them while simultaneously increasing my FB visibility by being active?

Obviously, since I'm participating in the liking thread, I believe the latter. But I certainly don't mean to encourage anyone to participate who finds tagging or liking unethical. Personally, I'm satisfied there's no harm in it, although I don't know that there's any advantage either. My reasoning? I genuinely do like the authors whose pages I'm "liking". They're online friends and fellow authors and I enjoy being supportive of them. As for tagging, I've never tagged books (to my knowledge) with false tags, only tags genuinely describing the contents of the books. Anything that helps readers find the books they're looking for on "health, dieting, tomatoes" or whatever seems like a positive. I have no idea whether the tags actually increased visibility for those books. All I have is the possibly unrelated fact that my most heavily tagged book is far and away my bestseller while my least tagged titles are far and away my most sluggish.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I mean, I know we all want to rank highly in our respective niches and sites, but gaming the system like this just provides a temporary boost, and then the algorithms take this into account and you're back to where you started or even worse because the system penalizes you for it.


What evidence do we have that sales ranking considers anything other than sales?

And a temporary boost? It can easily translate into a permanent boost if it pushes the book up to a point where more people see it. For example, that temporary boost may push a book onto the genre best seller list. That can help a lot.

I don't know how the system penalizes a book.


----------



## Ali Cooper (May 1, 2010)

Hi Michelle,

I don't play games. No tag/like/review exchange, no amazon freebies etc. And perhaps that's one of the reasons why these days I only sell half a dozen books a month on dot com (whereas I used to sell several hundred) - because in the short term, the many people who are playing the system are getting ahead. But I'm Brit and I mostly do OK in UK. So quite honestly I'd rather concentrate on writing good books and interacting with some readers. I don't hang out in author-dominated forums much because I find all the game playing distracting. And it's so refreshing to just walk away from it all. Let's not confuse game playing with marketing - every so often I have a push on that. I can see how it's easy for people to get swept up on this wave of hysteria, but when you step back from it, it looks so ridiculous.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> If you have a good book, it will sell.


No. I can really attested to that being completely and utterly false.


----------



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

Krista D. Ball said:


> No. I can really attested to that being completely and utterly false.


At the risk of sounding cynical, I have to agree. I think we could all list authors whose books are equally remarkable for their good quality and their failure to take off. Likewise, we could all list bestsellers infamous for poor quality (I'm reading one now).

Because of this, I don't believe wholly in the idea of the cream rising to the top. It seems an unpleasant fact that whatever is being stirred rises, quality being desirable but far from crucial. So while I don't think any of us is intentionally peddling dreck (would we be publishing work we didn't believe in?) I do see visibility as the key deciding factor in which books are successful.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> At the risk of sounding cynical, I have to agree. I think we could all list authors whose books are equally remarkable for their good quality and their failure to take off.


Agree. The notion that a good book will sell isn't grounded in fact. But it does sound good. There are far too many good books for the market to absorb. It's a classic oversupply situation. The gatekeepers function was to limit the number of books that entered the market.


----------



## Soothesayer (Oct 19, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Agree. The notion that a good book will sell isn't grounded in fact. But it does sound good. There are far too many good books for the market to absorb. It's a classic oversupply situation. The gatekeepers function was to limit the number of books that entered the market.


I think India & internet marketers (spammers) had a lot more to do with the oversupply part of it (and none of them are good).


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Dara England said:


> At the risk of sounding cynical, I have to agree. I think we could all list authors whose books are equally remarkable for their good quality and their failure to take off. Likewise, we could all list bestsellers infamous for poor quality (I'm reading one now).
> 
> Because of this, I don't believe wholly in the idea of the cream rising to the top. It seems an unpleasant fact that whatever is being stirred rises, quality being desirable but far from crucial. So while I don't think any of us is intentionally peddling dreck (would we be publishing work we didn't believe in?) I do see visibility as the key deciding factor in which books are successful.


I write my angel series for twelve to fifteen year-old girls. What they consider "great" is bound to be very different than what a 25 year-old would consider great.

My history-mystery line is a different voice, written for adults.

I'm sure New Jersey Shore fans think Snooki's book is awesome.

The key is building a fan base of your target readers. You can't worry about the books you think are sh*t or great. Reading tastes are very different and you need to work on upping your visibility among your potential market.


----------



## DLMedley (Oct 6, 2012)

My personal feeling is that the effort spent trying to game the system is probably better spent writing; either your next book, or on a blog. 

That's not to say one shouldn't market, but marketing is more than a scheme. I knew a person in the insurance/securities business whose idea of marketing was handing out a business card at every opportunity, even leaving one with every tip at a restaurant or bar. I believe it's utter ridiculousness. 

Back in the early 2000s, I had a blog in which I managed to acquire a decent following--both lovers and haters. In this blog I wrote mostly personal observations regarding politics, pop culture, or just whatever came to mind. Like I said, I had lovers and haters, but at it's peak I could count on tens of thousands of visitors each month. Sometimes there were spikes up to hundreds of thousands. 

After a few years, it became draining for various reasons so I took it down and went into blogger hiding. I just barely started blogging in earnest again from complete scratch. What I wouldn't give for those tens of thousands of monthly visitors now. 

Regards
DLM


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I'm sorry. Did LISA GRACE swear      

Lisa! Stop it right this minute!


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> I'm sorry. Did LISA GRACE swear
> 
> Lisa! Stop it right this minute!


LOL. I used an as*terik.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

LisaGraceBooks said:


> LOL. I used an as*terik.


I can see through the as*terik.  We are clearly a bad influence on you. Shame on us  Then again, perhaps we are corrupting you and you, too, soon will join the evil Kittenh ranks.

Excellent.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> I can see through the as*terik.  We are clearly a bad influence on you. Shame on us  Then again, perhaps we are corrupting you and you, too, soon will join the evil Kittenh ranks.
> 
> Excellent.


I was just curious to see how many people actually read more than the first line of my posts. I'm on my third night with little sleep (DD keeps spiking a 102 - 103 degree fever, so I'm in a mood.) I thought %&^(&%$) marks in place of actual naughty words would get the point across without tarnishing my-ahem...brand.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Nope. You now have taint.  

Sorry about the sickies


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I think India & internet marketers (spammers) had a lot more to do with the oversupply part of it (and none of them are good).


There was an oversupply of good books before the internet. This means at prevailing prices there were more good books than could be sold. That's why gatekeepers were used to limit movement from the slush pile to the bookstore shelves.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Dalya said:


> Everyone here is brilliant (tis true!), so we don't discuss "schemes" much in WC. Other forums I have seen, yes. But not here.
> 
> We try to understand the algorithms, and to work in an efficient manner with advertising and other promotions, but you won't find a lot of schemes happening here.
> 
> Except the scheme for us to all spend a lot of time posting on KB and thereby not getting our WIP Nanowrimo done ....


Thank you for clarifying that this takes place in other forums because I was trying to figure out where these threads were on KB.


----------



## B.A. Spangler (Jan 25, 2012)

Dara England said:


> At the risk of sounding cynical, I have to agree. I think we could all list authors whose books are equally remarkable for their good quality and their failure to take off. Likewise, we could all list bestsellers infamous for poor quality (I'm reading one now).
> 
> Because of this, I don't believe wholly in the idea of the cream rising to the top. It seems an unpleasant fact that whatever is being stirred rises, quality being desirable but far from crucial. So while I don't think any of us is intentionally peddling dreck (would we be publishing work we didn't believe in?) I do see visibility as the key deciding factor in which books are successful.


This this this - visibility is at the front.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

Amazon isn't "gameable". Why? Because the results and recommendations are based on profit, not relevance like Google.

Good books will sell, bad ones won't. Show me a shitty book that is a best-seller? You can't. Show me a shitty website that is #1 on Google, easy. 

Sure, you can work to get reviews and likes and tags, and you can put in keywords in your titles and descriptions. That's not gaming the system. That's called marketing.


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

What constitutes "gaming the system"? Using any ethical tool laying around?

Was playing freebie roulette gaming the system. or just using what was offered? Konrath made $100K in January with one roulette spin. Many others, including a number in this forum, made crazy amounts of cash with a spin or two. Sure, it was artificial, and had absolutely zero to do with literary quality (although a nice cover helped). But standing beside the wheel and being too proud to spin it did not make one a better writer, nor able to meet more readers.

This is a visibility game. Amazon's windows are the most valuable bookstore windows ever built. And they are becoming more valuable by the second (i.e. it is much harder for any of us to get in them for any of a hundred reasons, not the least of which is Amazon's increasing activity as a publisher themselves and their algo shift toward higher-priced books).

Of course, you can do like Lisa and create your own windows--if you already have people inside your store, you don't have to worry about the window shoppers as much. But rule of thumb is is if 10,000 writers are all doing the same thing, none of them are gaining anything. Be the first to do something, and then you're set. For a while.


----------



## DLMedley (Oct 6, 2012)

> Show me a [crappy] book that is a best-seller


I don't know. By the standards of many people, 50 Shades would fit into that category.

But since there's a whole thread dedicated to the merits of 50 Shades, I'll leave it at that.

Regards
DLM


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I don't know. By the standards of many people, 50 Shades would fit into that category.


And by the standards of the millions who bought it and liked it, it doesn't fit.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I want my work to succeed on it's own merits, not the merits of my system gaming *or marketing efforts*.


I understand what you mean, but we must recognize that a book that isn't marketed well won't perform well. And I say that with resentment to the marketing schemes that we've all seen. There are honest and wholesome ways to market, just as there are honest and wholesome ways to write. There are also bad ways of both.

Find a publicity or marketing method that you enjoy and stick to it. You don't have to do everything. It's a marathon, not a sprint.


----------



## DLMedley (Oct 6, 2012)

> And by the standards of the millions who bought it and liked it, it doesn't fit.


Which is my point exactly. It's difficult to correlate "crappy" with sales because tastes are so subjective.

In my opinion.

Regards
DLM


----------



## AnitaDobs (Sep 18, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> What evidence do we have that sales ranking considers anything other than sales?


I think the point is sales ranking at Amazon at least doesn't just consider straight 'which sold more' rankings. From my own titles some are ranked higher than others, even though they didn't sell as many as a lower ranked title. So they do seem to have some kind of algo that takes into account recents/frequency/amounts on a given day... and who knows what else mysterious factors


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Sure. The algorithm operation is consistent with an exponential moving average. The more recent the sale, the greater weight it carries. However, there is no evidence that it takes anything other than sales and sales date/time into consideration. And that applies to all books, regardless of how much gaming the author has done.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

I'm sick of all these people gaming the system by writing great books with compelling characters and novel twists. It's totally unfair the way they use their years of experience and knowledge of the craft to write special stories which transcend the genre and set off a firestorm of word of mouth. The only fair thing would be if we all put our manuscripts into a random word generator and then published the results.

Under pen-names, of course.


----------



## MLKatz (Sep 8, 2012)

Here's the deal. 

I placed a link to my Amazon author page on my real Facebook page (not a fan page). A few readers have "friended" me, but it is mostly the place I am hooked into my circle of real life friends and family. I got dozens of Likes and comments, but all on Facebook! Nobody clicked through to give my Amazon author page, or my book pages a Like. 

I mentioned this frustration to one friend, who had read my book, and she immediately hopped over to Like me an Amazon. 

Sometimes yo have to really explicitly tell folks what you want them to do. Is that gaming or a call to action?


----------



## Ali Cooper (May 1, 2010)

BrianKittrell said:


> I understand what you mean, but we must recognize that a book that isn't marketed well won't perform well. And I say that with resentment to the marketing schemes that we've all seen. There are honest and wholesome ways to market, just as there are honest and wholesome ways to write. There are also bad ways of both.
> 
> Find a publicity or marketing method that you enjoy and stick to it. You don't have to do everything. It's a marathon, not a sprint.


You're absolutely right. Of course, each person's definition of what is honest and wholesome differs.
I would have to say that since I published to kindle 2.5 years ago, this forum and others (and facebook etc) have become more dominated by threads about how to push books to the top of the rankings in various ways other than straightforward consistent marketing. Of course, to some extent mainstream publishers do this too. But it does seem that indie marketing has become increasingly obsessed with playing to whatever amazon is doing at the time.

And much as I might be against it, if I thought it would make the difference between me earning a living from writing or not, I daresay I'd feel obliged to try it.

However, as Brian says, it comes down to what you enjoy. And I'd add that it also comes down to what you feel is ethically right.

As regards 'oversupplying the market', that in itself is a ridiculous phrase. With indie publishing there is more choice. Oversupply is simply referring to big companies wanting all the income for themselves, and finding they get more profit from large sales of a small selection of books rather than lesser sales from a longer list. It isn't relevant to indies unless individuals are greedy.
The biggest problem in the indie market, as far as I can see, is the desire to kick others out of the way at all costs rather than to work with them. If everyone accepted a lesser share, they could get a higher income for that share because they wouldn't be constantly trying to undercut one another. There are plenty of indie authors who, when I first published, were selling a good number of books at $3.99 each, whereas now they've reduced the price to 99c to get the same sales. I know there are exceptions to this, but they used to be the norm. And this is part of the 'gaming' that I'm not prepared to be a part of.


----------



## Amy Corwin (Jan 3, 2011)

Ali Cooper said:


> Hi Michelle,
> 
> I don't play games. No tag/like/review exchange, no amazon freebies etc. And perhaps that's one of the reasons why these days I only sell half a dozen books a month on dot com (whereas I used to sell several hundred) - because in the short term, the many people who are playing the system are getting ahead. But I'm Brit and I mostly do OK in UK. So quite honestly I'd rather concentrate on writing good books and interacting with some readers. I don't hang out in author-dominated forums much because I find all the game playing distracting. And it's so refreshing to just walk away from it all. Let's not confuse game playing with marketing - every so often I have a push on that. I can see how it's easy for people to get swept up on this wave of hysteria, but when you step back from it, it looks so ridiculous.


It sounds like you and I are together in the same boat (rather like Pi) but I'm not sure that it's that we refuse the game the system so much as we stink at marketing. There's a lot of gaming in marketing by the very nature of the beast, but one hopes to err more on the side of honestly trying to reach out to people rather than just ... well, see that's where it's hard to even define gaming. Frankly, the goals are the nearly the same since both hope to build an audience by hook or by crook.
But I think most people do try to be honest about it, it's just that some of the "look at me" tactics are less upfront and honest than others. Like assuming thousands of fake IDs to make it look like you are a bunch of different people writing glowing reviews (or whatever) of your books. Anything dependent upon not being yourself is probably not a good thing. LOL

Anyway, the bottom line is that folks need to come up with their own strategies (or lack thereof in my case) and hope for the best. Then write the next book, because ultimately, who knows what the outcome will be?


----------



## Guest (Nov 8, 2012)

jimkukral said:


> Amazon isn't "gameable". Why? Because the results and recommendations are based on profit, not relevance like Google.
> 
> Good books will sell, bad ones won't. Show me a [crappy] book that is a best-seller?


Jim, you are not that naive. That is a happy, fluffy thought but not based in reality. And you know it. Heck, history is filled with outstanding books that never sold in the author's lifetime, and only decades later were appreciated by the masses. And history is filled with books that became bestsellers (and even got praise in their time) and we look back and say "WTF?" (Chariots of the Gods? Eragon, The Da Vinci Code, etc). Most bestsellers are popcorn books. They aren't really "good" at all but they satisfy a need. Like McDonald's french fries. And there is nothing wrong with consuming a popcorn book once in a while for cheap entertainment value, but too many of them will make your brain flabby and unable to identify actual real literature (like eating too much salt destroys the taste buds and makes one incapable of enjoying food that isn't hyper-processed.)


----------



## gljones (Nov 6, 2012)

I'm in full agreement with you.  Amazon is where I direct people to place orders.  I don't have the inclination, interest or patience to figure out all the silly stuff you can do to promote your book on Amazon.  In my opinion if it's a good book, it should sell itself.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

gljones said:


> In my opinion if it's a good book, it should sell itself.


Several people have said this, and I've said it too. However, I also agree with those who say that a good book can't sell itself if it isn't seen. That's why I believe that no amount of marketing can create a bestseller, but no book can become a bestseller without at least some initial marketing.

The most important marketing you can do for your book is to refine your metadata (cover, title, description, categories, & keywords/tags). Not all buyers bother to read an excerpt, so your metadata is your only chance to show them why they should read your book. Metadata is something that is totally within your control and that can't be considered "gaming the system" unless you do something misleading (which is against Amazon's TOS).


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Ali Cooper said:


> As regards 'oversupplying the market', that in itself is a ridiculous phrase.


Oversupplying means there are too many goods to be sold at a given price. It stems from the downward sloping demand curves almost all goods face. Oversupply is relieved by either curtailing supply or reducing price. The market absorbs different volumes of goods at different prices.

The other way to alleviate oversupply is to move the demand curve to the right. This involves doing things other than adjusting price and production volume. For example, promotion could do it. That's what we are all trying to do with promotion, just expressed in more boring terms.

We see examples of oversupply everyday. Stores have sales to reduce inventory. They couldn't sell all their stock at a given price, so they change the price. There was an oversupply at one price, but the market absorbs that oversupply at a lower price. The remainder table at book stores is a classic example of oversupply. All those John Grisham books wouldn't sell at $15, so they are on the remainder table at $6.

The gatekeepers were maintaining the supply at the point where the supply curve intersected the demand curve. The intersection is a single price at a single production volume. Put out too many books at that price, and there is an oversupply at that price.

I acknowledge that books are all different. However, each book does have a supply and demand curve. Aggregate all them and we get an industry.



> It isn't relevant to indies unless individuals are greedy.


Independent books face the same market pressures and dynamics as any other good. However, any book with no paper edition does have a marginal cost of zero. That is very unusual. It leads to a flat supply curve that intersects a downward sloping demand curve. Flat supply [initially mistakenly said "flat demand curves."] curves with zero marginal cost of production do challenge traditional supply ideas. But the challenge is due to the marginal cost, not the independent status. The same would apply to a Random House eBook with no paper.

It's hard to oversupply in this case since there are no production runs. Hence, the demand curve rules the market, and the supply curve simply takes residence at whatever point the book is priced. However, even with a hinky supply curve, the demand curve still functions like the demand curve for any old widget. Books aren't special.



> There are plenty of indie authors who, when I first published, were selling a good number of books at $3.99 each, whereas now they've reduced the price to 99c to get the same sales.


That's a classic example of oversupply. It was alleviated by reducing prices from $3.99 to 99 cents. Supply drove prices down, just like it did on that remainder table at B&N. In this case, it was the supply of titles, not the size of production runs.



> It sounds like you and I are together in the same boat (rather like Pi) but I'm not sure that it's that we refuse the game the system so much as we stink at marketing.


I've always maintained gaming is anything I suck at.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

I think the age of the title, marketing efforts, and algorithms change book prices more than oversupply. Going from $3.99 to $0.99 is a result of: 1) declining sales to give them a boost, 2) temporary sale to perhaps increase exposure, 3) funsies.

Those ends do not automatically assume causation. The cause proposed by some is oversupply, but I don't agree with that. As titles age, their tendency to decline is greater than new stuff. Couple that with powerful algorithms putting down-pressure on aging books, you get almost guaranteed decline.

To maintain sales of a book that has started its downward trend, you must: market A LOT more than you were or the book must be so absolutely wonderful that people keep spreading the word. The latter depends entirely upon your book finding an audience that will push your book.

The reason so many promote the idea of writing more books is because you can use new titles to use the "new release system" to garner a few more readers who might adopt your backlist as you march along. You want new releases to create a "snowball effect."

To demonstrate:

Books published | New Reader Pickup | Old Reader Base
1 | +20 | 0
2 | +25 | 20
3 | +40 | 45
4 | +60 | 85
5 | +100 | 145
6 | +150 | 245
7 | +200 | 395
8 | +300 | 595
9 | +500 | 895
10 | +700 | 1395 <- At this point, if all of your old base plus your new base buy in the same week of release, this could propel you to NY Times status.

This is just a basic curve chart. The more books you add, the more potential readers you garner. You want two things to happen: 1) "New Pickups" go back and read your backlist and 2) "Old Base" continues to buy your new stuff.

This is why:
1. Series sell well. I have no data, but I would suggest that many authors doing well write in series because they're reliable. They are reliable for the reasons stated above.
2. Maintaining contact with your readers is critical to your future success. I hear, "Oh, I only had five readers buy the book." Well, if they loved your book, they might join your mailing list or FB page and buy your next. And your next. And the next.

#2 can feel dirty to some people, but it's really not. If anything, it's the least dirty kind of marketing. You're advertising your products that the people have liked in the past, only a new version of them. There's no better target market than people who already like your work, and they don't consider welcome updates and information about things they like to be spam.

Well, there you go. Take it and run with it.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Those ends do not automatically assume causation. The cause proposed by some is oversupply, but I don't agree with that. As titles age, their tendency to decline is greater than new stuff. Couple that with powerful algorithms putting down-pressure on aging books, you get almost guaranteed decline.


I wouldn't dispute that age has an effect on the demand curve for a book. That is an example of moving the demand curve left. As mentioned earlier, it can indeed have an effect. Oversupply is then a function of the resulting demand curve and asking price. Algorithms also can move the curve right and left. A simpler way to look at algorithms in this case is to think of them as promotional tools. They are like an ad or a review in the NYT. Visibility can easily shift the curve. That's the purpose of promotion.



> The reason so many promote the idea of writing more books is because you can use new titles to use the "new release system" to garner a few more readers who might adopt your backlist as you march along. You want new releases to create a "snowball effect."


That's an example of moving the demand curve to the right for the backlist.

These examples are fine. I agree. But they don't deal with oversupply. Oversupply deals with moving along the demand curve. These examples deal with moving the whole curve. The notion of oversupply is very comfortable with a demand curve that moves right and left. There is no contradiction.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

I understand how oversupply could be an issue, but it's one that isn't solvable.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I understand how oversupply could be an issue, but it's one that isn't solvable.


Sure it is. The market solves it every day by lowering prices. That's why those prices quoted above moved from $3.99 to 99 cents. I would agree we can't make the market do what we want. That's why price controls are such failures.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Price is _not_ an issue for plenty of people. People are willing to pay for quality. There's a reason people buy BMW's, Mercedes, and Lexus'. And it has nothing to do with being cheap. I've said this before in another thread. I don't go to the cheapest dentist, doctor, or pediatrician. I wouldn't hire the chepaest lawyer. I don't stay in the cheapest hotels. I don't eat in the cheapest restaurants.
I don't wear the cheapest clothes I can find or drink the cheapest coffee. I don't hire the cheapest contractors ro work on my house. You get what you pay for.

If you write quality books, and do something to reach out so they can _discover_ your books, you will find readers willing to pay for your books.

In reading, building a reader base is key. They will _pay_ to read what you write.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Price is not an issue for plenty of people. People are willing to pay for quality.


Correct. And those people represent one set of consumer behaviors among the many sets that make up the aggregate. They are on the upper left side of the demand curve. Many more consumers occupy the segments to their lower right.



> I've said this before in another thread. I don't go to the cheapest dentist, doctor, or pediatrician. I wouldn't hire the chepaest lawyer. I don't stay in the cheapest hotels. I don't eat in the cheapest restaurants. I don't wear the cheapest clothes I can find or drink the cheapest coffee. I don't hire the cheapest contractors ro work on my house. You get what you pay for.


That also represents one set of consumer behaviors. There are many more. You do indeed get what you pay for, but the same thing can sell for a range of prices.



> If you write quality books, and do something to reach out so they can discover your books, you will find readers willing to pay for your books.


I agree. The more interesting question is how many buyers and quality books are there? As the supply of quality books at a given price increases, buyers will gravitate to the same quality books at a lower price. The demand curve for the quality books will shift to the left, and the buyers willing to pay the old price will shrink. Those buyers will still inhabit the upper left of the D-curve, but the number of quality books they buy at any given price decreases. These buyers are price sensitive. They look for the best price for that Mercedes. With paper, there is a constraint due to the positive marginal cost of production. But we are in the odd situation of having a zero MC of production. That production constraint is lifted.

So some people will be able to sell their quality books at high prices. Many more will not be able to sell their quality books at the same price. Note all this deals with aggregate supply and demand. That aggregate includes books at all prices, and buyers willing to pay all prices. It tells us little about the ability of any single author. It simply tells us the environment in which she operates. Her ability to compete in that environment is a function of a bunch of individual and unique variables. The aggregate contains examples of just about everything.


----------



## Shane Murray (Aug 1, 2012)

Dalya said:


> Except the scheme for us to all spend a lot of time posting on KB and thereby not getting our WIP Nanowrimo done ....


Guilty...


----------



## Shane Murray (Aug 1, 2012)

Anya said:


> I've seen 'big 6' publishers lining up a ton of positive reviews before a book is even published and also gaining recommendations from other authors. (Which is fine and just good marketing.)


I think that people have been trying to "game the system" for a very long time, and like Anya said, the big pubs are doing it too.

I am not saying that it is alright to go out and get an army of friends to review your book and rate it when they have not even read it, or have and just lie, though I think getting fellow ours on the KB to review books honestly is no different than what has been going on in the publishing world for a long time.


----------



## Shane Murray (Aug 1, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I think all of the liking and tagging and gaming just creates this echo chamber of indies talking to each other and doesn't really do anything to reach actual customers. Think about some of the most successful indies here on KB. How many of them spend their time tagging and liking? Or do they spend their time going out and finding readers?


I would definitely agree with this, I bought, liked, and downloaded some books of a friend of mine on here, and now Amazon keeps recommending his stuff to me, all the time...


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I agree. The more interesting question is how many buyers and quality books are there? As the supply of quality books at a given price increases, buyers will gravitate to the same quality books at a lower price. The demand curve for the quality books will shift to the left, and the buyers willing to pay the old price will shrink. Those buyers will still inhabit the upper left of the D-curve, but the number of quality books they buy at any given price decreases. These buyers are price sensitive. They look for the best price for that Mercedes. With paper, there is a constraint due to the positive marginal cost of production. But we are in the odd situation of having a zero MC of production. That constraint is lifted.
> 
> So some people will be able to sell their quality books at high prices. Many more will not be able to sell their quality books at the same price. Note all this deals with aggregate supply and demand. That aggregate includes books at all prices, and buyers willing to pay all prices. It tells us little about the ability of any single author. It simply tells us the environment in which she operates.


I disagree. People are not as price conscious at a certain level. Matter of fact-they want something others can not afford. I think books could become a luxury item. 
Most polls on what readers expect to pay come out at around 9.99 to 14.99 for ebooks. Everything under 9.99 is a bargain. Indies have room to push their prices up and still make money. Certain brands will. Others will relegate themselves to the 99 cent bin. Again, as indies, this is the author's personal choice. You do get to pick what price level of reader you want.

There are reader who will not look at the 99 cent books.

As Dalya pointed out - she was drawn in to order the free ebook on marketing because it was $6.99 marked down to free - It was the _perceived value_ she was getting, and she knows better. I sell less, but I make more money having my books at a higher price.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Sure it is. The market solves it every day by lowering prices. That's why those prices quoted above moved from $3.99 to 99 cents. I would agree we can't make the market do what we want. That's why price controls are such failures.


That is not solving the problem of oversupply. That is adapting to an oversupply situation. Lower prices can and does solve oversupply in markets where the product is finite, but ebooks are infinite. The supply doesn't reduce because more books are sold at a lower price. Supply remains the same (infinite).


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> That is not solving the problem of oversupply. That is adapting to an oversupply situation. Lower prices can and does solve oversupply in markets where the product is finite, but ebooks are infinite. The supply doesn't reduce because more books are sold at a lower price. Supply remains the same (infinite).


This. For awhile, and for those who make it on a sub genre best seller list, 99 cent books can become visible faster. However, plenty of cheap books never make it that high up the ranks, and in that case it doesn't matter if your book is 99 cents or 9.99.

The top 100 Kindle books list is filled with those that give the majority of readers of what they want. It's a combination of great cover, blurb, targeted writing for the reader, voice, publicity, visibilty, reach, etc. Price seems to have little bearing.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> That is not solving the problem of oversupply. That is adapting to an oversupply situation.


There is no problem. It's an imbalance. Of course markets adapt to an imbalance. They achieve balance. They do it everyday. That's how they work.



> Lower prices can and does solve oversupply in markets where the product is finite, but ebooks are infinite.


With a flat supply curve and zero marginal cost of production, we can consider the number of available titles to be the supply at any given time. The number of available titles varies and is finite.



> The supply doesn't reduce because more books are sold at a lower price. Supply remains the same (infinite).


I agree lower prices don't reduce short term supply. They absorb the quantities that constituted an oversupply at a higher price. The oversupply condition disappears, but not because supply diminishes.



> The top 100 Kindle books list is filled with those that give the majority of readers of what they want. It's a combination of great cover, blurb, targeted writing for the reader, voice, publicity, visibilty, reach, etc. Price seems to have little bearing.


We can test if price has little bearing by increasing price on any one of that top 100 to see if sales change. We have no reason to think books are not price sensitive. I'd also note the Fallacy of Composition enters the picture here. If a million books have great cover, blurb, targeted writing for the reader, voice, publicity, visibilty, and reach, they can't all fit into the top 100.

Regarding infinite supply... It's important because it means there is no marginal cost of production for units 2...n. However, with an infinite supply of each title, and a finite demand curve, the number of titles can be used as as supply. The marginal cost of unit-1 can be substantial, and can easily be a constraint on supply of titles if prices fall too low.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> We can test if price has little bearing by increasing price on any one of that top 100 to see if sales change. We have no reason to think books are not price sensitive.
> 
> Regarding infinite supply... It's important because it means there is no marginal cost of production for units 2...n. However, with an infinite supply of each title, and a finite demand curve, the number of titles can be used as as supply.


Come on, Terrence!
The "test" has already been done, lol.

The prices on the top 10 Amazon Best Seller list in books range from currently unavailable, 99 cents to $12.99! In other words, every price available at the 70% profit level is an option and can get you there as an ebook.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/digital-text/ref=pd_dp_ts_kstore_1 
Then there is the Amazon best seller book list:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=sv_b_3 : 
$7.75, $16.35, $9.35, $15.95, $10.00, $20.48, $10.98 $16.53, $19.75 and number #10 $27.73

Now, is there a price represented on any of the top ten lists outside of the price range for books? No. So come on Terrence, prices on books are not going in the crapper.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I disagree. People are not as price conscious at a certain level. Matter of fact-they want something others can not afford. I think books could become a luxury item.


That's one consumer behavior. Others are price sensitive at those levels. Hence the total number willing to pay up shrinks. Everyone doesn't have to adopt the same behavior for an economic pressure to emerge.



> Most polls on what readers expect to pay come out at around 9.99 to 14.99 for ebooks. Everything under 9.99 is a bargain. Indies have room to push their prices up and still make money.


They can certainly make money at higher prices. The key is to maximize revenue, not price. Setting a high price is easy. Maximizing revenue is hard.



> Certain brands will. Others will relegate themselves to the 99 cent bin. Again, as indies, this is the author's personal choice. You do get to pick what price level of reader you want.


Of course it's a choice. And I agree one gets to pick the price level of reader. We just don't get to pick the number of buyers at that level.



> There are reader who will not look at the 99 cent books.


Correct. And there are many who do. That simply recognizes different consumer behaviors.



> As Dalya pointed out - she was drawn in to order the free ebook on marketing because it was $6.99 marked down to free - It was the perceived value she was getting, and she knows better. I sell less, but I make more money having my books at a higher price.


Wonderful. I wish you both the best of luck. As I stated earlier, the aggregate is composed of all sorts of individual experiences. I'm describing the market environment, not any individual's experience.



> Come on, Terrence!
> The "test" has already been done, lol.
> The prices on the top 10 Amazon Best Seller list in books range from currently unavailable, 99 cents to $12.99! In other words, every price available at the 70% profit level is an option and can get you there as an ebook.


OK. Just pick any book and keep pushing up the price to see if price has little bearing. What you describe is a variety of prices represented in the top 100, not a steady increase in price of any individual book. Take that 99 cent book and change the price to $12.99. See if the unit sales change.



> Now, is there a price represented on any of the top ten lists outside of the price range for books? No. So come on Terrence, prices on books are not going in the crapper.


Fine with me. But note that's not a position I have taken. But the crapper is probably more welcoming to books' unit sales than prices. Amazon controls minimum price, but it has no control over minimum sales. Neither does the author.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

> Terrence OBrien quote: We have no reason to think books are not price sensitive.


I just showed you two top 100 best seller lists on Amazon to prove books are still selling at the highest of the book spectrum prices to the lowest. Price is not the deciding issue and are not on a downward trend.

Your whole argument was prices will end up low (like 99 cents) because of over supply. You totally ignore the facts Brian mentioned and the fact that books sell because of "perceived value" to the reader and that they will pay more for the books they want.

Authors who build up fan bases have nothing to worry about, as one book does not substitute for the book they want.

If people want _Breaking Dawn_ at $14.99 they don't care that there are a million other vampire books out there at 99 cents. *It doesn't affect the price of Breaking Dawn at all*.

That's the trend and that will continue to be the trend. Write your books, build up your fan base as quick as you can, and don't worry about any of the other books out there.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I just showed you two top 100 best seller lists on Amazon to prove books are still selling at the highest of the book spectrum prices to the lowest. Price is not the deciding issue and are not on a downward trend.


Fine with me. That wasn't my point. I suggested increasing the prices of books to see if price has little bearing. Just take any one of those books and increase the price. Try moving the price from 99 cents to $12 to see if price has little bearing. But I'd also note 100 books selected for high sales demonstrate little about one million books.



> Your whole argument was prices will end up low (like 99 cents) because of over supply. You totally ignore the facts Brian mentioned and the fact that books sell because of "perceived value" to the reader and that they will pay more for the books they want.


No. That's not my argument. Which of Brian's points? I agree with his points about moving the demand curve for backlists to the right by writing new books. And I agree that algorithms can move a demand curve to the left. However, I distinguished those observations from the oversupply phenomenon. I also agree the supply of any book is infinite. But I think the number of titles is the governing supply factor here.



> Authors who build up fan bases have nothing to worry about, as one book does not substitute for the book they want.


Wonderful. I wish them the best of luck.



> If people want Breaking Dawn at $14.99 they don't care that their are a million other vampire books out there at 99 cents. It doesn't affect the price of Breaking Dawn at all.


I agree.



> That's the trend and that will continue to be the trend. Write your books, build up your fan base as quick as you can, and don't worry about any of the other books out there.


What trend? Regarding advice on what authors should do, I don't care what they do. None of my business what they do. I wish them all the best whatever path they take.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

> There is no problem. It's an imbalance. Of course markets adapt to an imbalance. They achieve balance. They do it everyday. That's how they work.


Problem. Imbalance. Issue. Condition. Synonyms for "things you can solve." Whether it's something that is actually damaging anyone remains to be seen. It's not damaging you. It's not damaging me. Others seem to think that it is damaging them. So, I referred to it as a "problem." Imbalance, issue, condition... six one way, half a dozen another.



Terrence OBrien said:


> With a flat supply curve and zero marginal cost of production, we can consider the number of available titles to be the supply at any given time. _The number of available titles varies and is finite_.


You contradicted yourself a bit there. If the number of available titles is finite, they do not or cannot vary. I would agree that they vary. Constantly. New submissions (almost on an hourly basis) create new infinite supply points. At any given second, yes, the count of titles might be finite, but by the time you whisper that number, a new title has been launched.

The only thing that works in our favor in this "situation" is that books are not a zero-sum game. People don't buy one book and keep it until it falls apart in twenty or more years. They consume more as they finish them and as budget allows.

With the flat supply curve, you're representing the condition as producers bringing low supply to the marketplace when the opposite is true. Customers know that the opposite is true. That's why we had the price boycotts and the folks shouting about high-priced eBooks. They know the supply is infinite of any given title. Pricing at certain points above established norms (which vary depending on the group in question, of course) can cause backlash. But, I digress.



Terrence OBrien said:


> I agree lower prices don't reduce short term supply. _They absorb the quantities that constituted an oversupply at a higher price_. *The oversupply condition disappears, but not because supply diminishes*.


To the underlined bit, lower prices or higher prices don't reduce or maintain supply in this market. The supply of each title is infinite, and the number of new books is ever-increasing. The availability of free books proves that the demand will never be too big to use up the whole supply.

To the emphasized (italics) bit, how can you oversupply or undersupply a product that can be replicated infinitely? If they buy 1,000,000 copies at $0.99 or buy 50,000 copies at $4.99, the supply hasn't changed whatsoever. It is still infinite. The model works and is very effective at explaining physical inventory and sales, but it doesn't work quite as well with digital goods that have both an infinite supply and an infinite shelf life.

To the bold bit, the oversupply condition cannot disappear in this market type unless people start taking down titles. The supply remains infinite even with one book available, but the number of supply points/portals/gateways/whatever are fewer. We're seeing the opposite, though.

I am certainly not worried, I must say. Those who produce good stories that they care about and pour effort into will get out of it what they put into it. Those looking for a scheme to get rich fast will soon find that it's a lot of hard work to actually make money in this business. Like any business, you have to keep adapting, keep pushing forward, and keep working hard every day. I'm sure we all can agree on that.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Problem. Imbalance. Issue. Condition. Synonyms for "things you can solve." Whether it's something that is actually damaging anyone remains to be seen. It's not damaging you. It's not damaging me. Others seem to think that it is damaging them. So, I referred to it as a "problem." Imbalance, issue, condition... six one way, half a dozen another.


It's a normal condition of a market. We usually don't look for solutions to normal conditions that happen everyday in all sorts of markets. Some people don't like it? OK. I suspect they don't understand it.



> You contradicted yourself a bit there. If the number of available titles is finite, they do not or cannot vary. I would agree that they vary. Constantly. New submissions (almost on an hourly basis) create new infinite supply points. At any given second, yes, the count of titles might be finite, but by the time you whisper that number, a new title has been launched.


What's the contradiction? I stand by the idea that the number of titles is finite and can vary.



> With the flat supply curve, you're representing the condition as producers bringing low supply to the marketplace when the opposite is true.


No. I'm representing the odd situation where there is zero marginal cost of production for units 2...n. The producer is willing to sell any quantity at his price. With most goods we have a positive marginal cost of production, and that marginal cost eventually rises above the producer's price. So he has a quantity constraint. With no MC of production that constraint does not exist.



> Customers know that the opposite is true. That's why we had the price boycotts and the folks shouting about high-priced eBooks. They know the supply is infinite of any given title. Pricing at certain points above established norms (which vary depending on the group in question, of course) can cause backlash. But, I digress.


OK.



> To the underlined bit, lower prices or higher prices don't reduce or maintain supply in this market. The supply of each title is infinite, and the number of new books is ever-increasing. The availability of free books proves that the demand will never be too big to use up the whole supply.


Sorry. I'm moving between goods with a positive MC of production and the odd situation of the flat supply curve. Didn't make that clear enough. I agree demand can never use up an infinite supply. Demand is finite.



> To the emphasized (italics) bit, how can you oversupply or undersupply a product that can be replicated infinitely? If they buy 1,000,000 copies at $0.99 or buy 50,000 copies at $4.99, the supply hasn't changed whatsoever. It is still infinite. The model works and is very effective at explaining physical inventory and sales, but it doesn't work quite as well with digital goods that have both an infinite supply and an infinite shelf life.


I agree you can't oversupply for a single book. But you can oversupply titles. You are dealing with single book supply. I am dealing with the supply of titles. Two very different things. I think the infinite stuff is important in defining a zero Mc of production, but it loses any real meaning beyond that. When one tool loses meaning, I look for another that does have meaning. That's why I'm using the number of available titles as supply. Have I spoken of both? Yes. But I hope you understand now.



> To the bold bit, the oversupply condition cannot disappear in this market type unless people start taking down titles. The supply remains infinite even with one book available, but the number of supply points/portals/gateways/whatever are fewer. We're seeing the opposite, though.


We should probably note the whole oversupply discussion started with my comment that we had an oversupply prior to the internet era. That was prior to the infinite stuff. In that era it wasn't an oversupply of paper copies the gatekeepers were regulating, it was the supply of titles. But if the oversupply today is due to titles, then it can be alleviated by either shrinking supply or lowering price. Oversupply exists for a specific price. Note the supply of titles is different from the supply of copies.



> I am certainly not worried, I must say. Those who produce good stories that they care about and pour effort into will get out of it what they put into it. Those looking for a scheme to get rich fast will soon find that it's a lot of hard work to actually make money in this business. Like any business, you have to keep adapting, keep pushing forward, and keep working hard every day. I'm sure we all can agree on that.


OK. Good luck. But I never underestimate the talent of folks trying to make a fast buck. Their motivation tells us nothing about their talent and abilities.


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Sure it is. The market solves it every day by lowering prices. That's why those prices quoted above moved from $3.99 to 99 cents. I would agree we can't make the market do what we want. That's why price controls are such failures.


Sorry, I am not fully in this thread, just skimming a couple of pages, but I'm not sure this strategy works for ALL genres and books.

I've tried lowering a couple of books from $3.99 to 0.99 or a bit more for a while, with zero results. Then I move them back to $3.99 or $4.99, and one or two sell soon after that.

In other words, it's conceivable that lowering the prices, for some books, is actually counterproductive: it reduces perceived value of the book in the mind of the customer, for whom the $3.99 presents no problem: if he/she wants the book (usually because someone has told them about it), they will buy it for whatever price it's at, within reason (meaning, not if it's $15.99).


----------



## jri2 (Nov 3, 2012)

Hi.  I agree besides much of the energy put in trying to win the systems game is negative energy that won't help creativity.

John


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

jri2 said:


> Hi. I agree besides much of the energy put in trying to win the systems game is negative energy that won't help creativity.
> 
> John


I haven't gone that far, but this whole Twitter, FB, blogging, sales watching thing is bloodsucking. (sorry, an emotional outburst.) I'll be out of it as soon as I can. I'm surprised that such giants as Salman Rushdie do it too (I mean, the Twitter thing.)


----------



## Guest (Nov 9, 2012)

Richardcrasta said:


> In other words, it's conceivable that lowering the prices, for some books, is actually counterproductive: it reduces perceived value of the book in the mind of the customer, for whom the $3.99 presents no problem: if he/she wants the book (usually because someone has told them about it), they will buy it for whatever price it's at, within reason (meaning, not if it's $15.99).


The problem is that most people don't understand the difference between value and price. Price is merely the actual cost of the item to the customer. Value is the perception that the customer has of the item.

I use to sell $1500 Kirby vacuums. Now who would buy a $1500 Kirby when you can get a $200 Kenmore? Lots of people if you convince them of the value of the machine. I sold on average 15 a month and pulled in $1000 a week in commissions. Now could the Kirby company restructure it's brand and sell the machines at "more competitive" prices in stores? Sure...but they would need to sell more machines and the lower cost to achieve the same goal. And at a certain price point, if the price gets "too low" the percieved value of the unit drops and it becomes just another vacuum. At which case the lowest price vacuum wins. But there is this substantial market of customers who are willing to drop serious money on a unit they perceive to have a high value. If price was the driving motivator, nobody would buy a Kirby. But price isn't the driving motivator. Value is. Build value in a product and, even if you sell fewer units, you can increase your profit.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> Sorry, I am not fully in this thread, just skimming a couple of pages, but I'm not sure this strategy works for ALL genres and books.


It's not a strategy. It's an observation of how markets deal with an oversupply at a given price. We see it everywhere. It's the result of the aggregate of all market pressures, not any individual's actions. It represents the environment in which individuals operate. Individuals then have to select a strategy to work in that environment. It's certainly not presented as a recommendation for anyone to follow.



> The problem is that most people don't understand the difference between value and price. Price is merely the actual cost of the item to the customer. Value is the perception that the customer has of the item.


Price is the value the market places on an item expressed in dollars. It encompasses all the individual perceptions, tastes, and preferences. The consumer's preference is expressed in what he is willing to pay. Put that together with the suppliers' costs of production and the quantity he is willing to supply to consumers, and we get the market price.



> If price was the driving motivator, nobody would buy a Kirby. But price isn't the driving motivator. Value is. Build value in a product and, even if you sell fewer units, you can increase your profit.


Price is the driving motivator for similar goods. What you describe is a situation where the goods are substantially different. The items are on two different demand curves. The Kirby D-curve is to the right of the rest. We se this all the time with products of varying quality designed for the same generic task.

EDIT: The demand curve reflects all the values of consumers measured in dollars. Consumers will fall all along the curve. They may fall above or below the price point. But it's the demand curve that incorporates the aggregate of valuation from consumers. That value is expressed in dollars. Trade then occurs at the point on the demand curve where suppliers will deliver the goods.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> People confuse activity with accomplishment.
> 
> I use to participate in the "tag exchange" thread because, at the time, it seemed a good way to support indies. If the tags helped increase visibility of a book in searches (for example, tagging a book with "vampire" so that if a customer searched for "vampire" the book would appear). So long as the tagging was fact-based and not value based (i.e. I didn't tag things with words like "great read" or 'bestseller" or anything I did not myself believe to be accurate).
> 
> ...


I used to do the 'liking' and tagging thread a few years ago, and then the FB liking of other authors, but at the time, my FB page was a book page. When I switched to an author page a year or so ago, I did not ask for other authors to 'like' it. There are some who are my friends who have, but the majority of my likes are actual readers. I don't have a lot of them, but I love the fact that the ones who are there are real fans and support my books. I had paid for a FB ad for my page in the summer but the likes it generated looked like fake FB accounts (ie, one blurry picture and no other posts/info on the accounts) so I deleted them from my page.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Jim, you are not that naive. That is a happy, fluffy thought but not based in reality. And you know it. Heck, history is filled with outstanding books that never sold in the author's lifetime, and only decades later were appreciated by the masses. And history is filled with books that became bestsellers (and even got praise in their time) and we look back and say "WTF?" (Chariots of the Gods? Eragon, The Da Vinci Code, etc). Most bestsellers are popcorn books. They aren't really "good" at all but they satisfy a need. Like McDonald's french fries. And there is nothing wrong with consuming a popcorn book once in a while for cheap entertainment value, but too many of them will make your brain flabby and unable to identify actual real literature (like eating too much salt destroys the taste buds and makes one incapable of enjoying food that isn't hyper-processed.)


Show me a shitty book on Amazon that is a best-seller. And by "shitty" I mean poorly formatted, typos, bad story, horrible cheap/fast writing and in general sucks. You're defining "good" differently. I'm talking about scam books. Books that were written to make money and fool people. Those are the types of books that are appearing who are trying to make a quick buck and game the system. But it won't happen, because those books will never get far. Amazon will self-police itself with poor reviews and no sales, therefore leaving the book to die on the vine.


----------



## scottnicholson (Jan 31, 2010)

It's getting harder to put forth any argument on price/value when Amazon itself is gaming its own system by favoring higher-priced books on the popularity lists. So you can't really compete just on price alone anymore (although it is a tool in the kit.)


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

jimkukral said:


> Show me a [crappy] book on Amazon that is a best-seller. And by "[crappy]" I mean poorly formatted, typos, bad story, horrible cheap/fast writing and in general sucks.


Oh, Jim, please do not issue me this kind of challenge. It's not fair. Have you looked at some of the more...fetish erotica out there on Amazon? Some of those are rough, and I don't mean the sexual exploits.


----------



## tensen (May 17, 2011)

This talk about gatekeepers and remainder tables reminds me of something that seems to be missing in the discussion.

The price changes to affect the marketplace occur when companies produce too many widgets for a supply. But multiple titles aren't the same as the widget in this case, because we are talking about an oversaturation of too many different widgets.

An ebook being an intangible thing doesn't matter if you sell 1000 copies in 10 years, or 1000 copies in 10 days. It matters in terms of how quickly you make back your expenses. The print book market used to have to make it back in a limited period of time, either to affect their cashflow or because a bookstore used to send back hordes of copies of books.  

The people that are gaming the system are mostly trying to fit into the model of print sales. They want high sales in a short period of time. 

But in this market you can have a book that has sold moderately for a long while and suddenly one of your other titles gains you interest. And suddenly the well written first book could become a best seller. (It might not happen today or tomorrow.)

The general reader may set a price on what they want to spend for an ebook. But they aren't gonna sacrifice the feature of an author they like, or a subject matter they like, just because someone's book is a dollar or 2 or even three or four cheaper than another one. Because price isn't the only thing that matters in selecting a book.

Note, that most of the time in an oversaturated market it is the seller that makes a change. They do that by limiting the number of products available. You don't find every type of TV in an electronics store, nor every type of peanut butter in the grocery store. Yes, that is a combination of space, but it is also due to the fact that most people need to limit their options in some way or else they just get overloaded and giveup.


----------



## Richardcrasta (Jul 29, 2010)

tensen said:


> An ebook being an intangible thing doesn't matter if you sell 1000 copies in 10 years, or 1000 copies in 10 days. It matters in terms of how quickly you make back your expenses. The print book market used to have to make it back in a limited period of time, either to affect their cashflow or because a bookstore used to send back hordes of copies of books.


Well, it does matter if you had planned for the e-book to cover the expenses of writing your next book, of paying for your rent. I know that's considered a quixotic or foolish expectation, but throughout history, there have been authors who risked all, did not allow reality or the advice of pragmatists to interfere with their dreams. "Expenses" in an e-book constitute the investment of time, in writing above all, and to a much smaller degree in book production and marketing.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> With a flat supply curve and zero marginal cost of production, we can consider the number of available titles to be the supply at any given time. The number of available titles varies and is finite.





BrianKittrell said:


> If the number of available titles is finite, they do not or cannot vary. I would agree that they vary. Constantly. New submissions (almost on an hourly basis) create new infinite supply points. At any given second, yes, the count of titles might be finite, but by the time you whisper that number, a new title has been launched.


I have to agree with Terrence on this one, and the number may be more finite than you imagine. Although new titles are constantly being added, shoppers on Amazon.com are exposed to a very small subset of those titles. Only the titles that have traction in the recommendation engine or that have a low sales ranking (not always the same thing) are visible. The many thousands of other titles may as well not exist. Just ask anyone with a ranking above 300K.

From a practical standpoint, we have a finite supply of titles that varies over time as new titles come along and supplant older titles. Amazon only allows so much room at the top. That "discovery zone" defines the finite set of titles that readers can see at any given moment in time. To find a book outside the discovery zone, readers pretty much have to be looking specifically for the title.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> It's getting harder to put forth any argument on price/value when Amazon itself is gaming its own system by favoring higher-priced books on the popularity lists.


Sure. That makes sense for them. Their job is to make money for stockholders, not authors. Authors are just suppliers. One drops out and another takes his place. Why? Because there is such a huge supply of authors. Ain't this a great country?


----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> This thread has grown a bit stale, but I thought it important I reply, since I've been completely inactive in the discussion (meant to be active, but... xD.
> 
> First, let me rephrase my previous statement: A good book will sell with visibility. A truly GREAT book that delivers value to the readers will sell no matter what. If you get it into just a few hands, if it's a truly great book that delivers value, at least a few will tell their friends, and a few more and a few more until you have more sales than you can handle. For this to work, you can't settle for good or even better than most, but one of the best. I have yet to find a single book that wasn't getting the sales it "deserved".


I have to disagree. "Great" is subjective. Maybe the book is on an obscure topic that only a few people are interested in, regardless of how gripping the tale. You're basically saying that every great book will go viral no matter what. And anyone who's ever tried to do a viral campaign will tell you, not so. it's got a lot to do with luck.



> That said, I'm not so sure my novel, World of Flight, will be one of those "best". *shrug* If I don't get sales, oh well. If I _do_ get sales, oh well. Either way, I'm just going to move onto the next novel and create something better than I could imagine. I like this this model of thinking much better than bemoaning my fate that I can't get sales because of visibility and luck and other things that are "out of your hands". If in 5 years, my book isn't selling, my writing isn't good enough, end of story. Time solves all problems of value dissonance.


So your plan is to hope? There's nothing wrong with hope, but action tends to get results faster. And marketing a book has nothing to do with bemoaning a situation. They are not the same thing...so that I don't get at all.



> That said, visibility can't hurt. I love marketing by blogging and creating newsletters and a few other things. But not so much for the marketing aspect, but because I genuinely love these things. They connect me with readers and give me another medium to express myself. I've always found that to be the key to success; to find that overlap between what you love and what works.


I agree with this. Maybe some people like clicking that "Like" button?



> Also, I don't think I have seen any "review exchanges" here, but I've seen other stuff. I just use the review example as an example of the type of stuff I'm talking about.


This is the most interesting thing about this thread...if you exchange likes with another author you're "gaming the system". I'm not following your line of thinking. Especially if this does nothing for the author in the first place. I disagree with that opinion - social proof is subtle but completely relevant.

When you first start a Facebook page or Twitter account you have to get that first like or follow from somewhere. If you enjoy e-mail subscriptions, you have to get that first opt-in e-mail from somewhere. So how do you get e-mail followers? Is that gaming the system?

Most authors figure out after they get a decent amount of social proof to get their social accounts rolling, that only having other authors on their accounts does them very little good when it comes to selling books. They then branch out and get them from somewhere else or start accumulation real fans and forget all about the "Like" thread over at KB.

In other words, they evolve and change their tactics. But still, you have to get that first like or follow from somewhere.

I do giveaways to get social likes and follows - is that gaming the system? If so, then everyone's in on it - that's what KDP Select is. Freebies in exchange for the possibility of a review or a personal recommendation or a visit to your social sites.


----------



## Eric C (Aug 3, 2009)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I have yet to find a single book that wasn't getting the sales it "deserved".


So after Dan Brown hit with The Da Vinci Code and his backlist, which had enjoyed only mediocre sales, also went through the roof, what happened there? Were his earlier books getting the sales they deserved and then got sales undeserved? Or were they in fact books that had not received the sales they deserved until Da Vinci? How do you measure "deserved" anyway?

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, I just think this is an interesting topic.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

nm. I can't argue this stuff with someone who doesn't even have a book out yet...


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

Anyone who thinks Amazon is gameable, show me a horrible book that is a best-seller. It simply isn't possible. Yes, of course, maybe people get fooled by a good cover and good ranking for a bit, but it cannot sustain itself over the long term because it's bad. The reviews and returns will kill it.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

http://www.amazon.com/Dance-Dragons-Song-Fire-Book/dp/0553801473/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1352521553&sr=8-1&keywords=george+rr+martin

3 stars

1.8 stars

http://www.amazon.com/Crossroads-Twilight-Book-Wheel-ebook/dp/B003K15P9M/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1352521590&sr=1-11

These have all been bestsellers (and still are).

~~

Gameable and horrible best-seller are two different concepts.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

So you're basing crappy book off of poor reviews? That's not how I'm judging them. I'm judging them by books that are just bad. Bad quality, poor stories, typos, crappy covers. Just because a book has a 3 star rating doesn't make it crappy. Some people just didn't like it. Other did, a lot. 

And the power of social proof is in effect on this book. It has so many reviews, readers look at it and say, "wow, look how many people bought it, sure, some reviews are bad, but I have to see for myself." Look up Dr. Cialdini.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> A truly GREAT book that delivers value to the readers will sell no matter what.


How do we know there are no truly great books that have not sold? We would have to look at all the books that have not sold, then determine none of them are truly great. It's an interesting speculation, but it remains a speculation.


----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> So what I am saying regarding great books is that things with value spread even without marketing. This is true no matter what the medium. Non-fiction especially. I don't know what it is about novelist that make them think they're so special. We're not. If what we do has value, we will be rewarded. If not, then we won't.


Oh, boy. Well, I sell a heck of a lot of non-fiction and I've got a solid 4.8 rating over 191 products, and I'm telling you that shit DOES NOT sell unless one of those products in in the #1 spot already. Your theory, as it applies to my rather extensive non-fiction business, is just not true. Things happen for a reason. Sometimes that reason is that someone else is marketing your stuff (viral, word-of-mouth) but if you think that "just happens" because something is of high quality, you're very naive.



> Mainly, what I'm saying here is that if people write well and provide value that many people will enjoy, they will get sold. They will get noticed. And they will be successful. So you don't need to learn every marketing strategy out there. You don't need to learn how to manipulate engines to rank yourself up. You just need to provide value. The rest of the internet has already learned this, blogs especially.


Getting noticed and getting sold are not even close to being the same thing. There's this little thing called price. I sell an excellent high-end product, but I absolutely sell more when it's on sale. Did the product get better? No, same stuff. Just got cheaper. Cheaper for a short period of time = good deal. Good deal = sales.

I'd like to see your marketing credentials, what have you built and what techniques did you use to build it? Tell us what worked for you. I've not seen anyone gaming the Amazon search engines, your post was about how clicking book tags was silly and pointless. So before you bemoan about how Krista is elitist, you should take a good look at your own attitude in that OP.

And if I were you, and Liliana Hart said something about selling books or gave out a tip for getting noticed on Amazon because an Amazon executive happened to mention it in her presence, I'd bend my ear in her direction and at the very least swallow down that bad taste in your mouth before making a final decision.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The problem is that most people don't understand the difference between value and price. Price is merely the actual cost of the item to the customer. Value is the perception that the customer has of the item.
> 
> I use to sell $1500 Kirby vacuums. Now who would buy a $1500 Kirby when you can get a $200 Kenmore? Lots of people if you convince them of the value of the machine. I sold on average 15 a month and pulled in $1000 a week in commissions. Now could the Kirby company restructure it's brand and sell the machines at "more competitive" prices in stores? Sure...but they would need to sell more machines and the lower cost to achieve the same goal. And at a certain price point, if the price gets "too low" the percieved value of the unit drops and it becomes just another vacuum. At which case the lowest price vacuum wins. But there is this substantial market of customers who are willing to drop serious money on a unit they perceive to have a high value. If price was the driving motivator, nobody would buy a Kirby. But price isn't the driving motivator. Value is. Build value in a product and, even if you sell fewer units, you can increase your profit.


This is interesting. I wonder though if perceived value works the same for all products? For example it seems a rational assumption that a more expensive vacuum cleaner = better quality. I assume the higher price = more durable doodads and more finely calibrated watchums. Wether or not that actually is the case. But with books? Do people assume a more expensive book is better, and a cheaper one worse, in the same way?

Maybe free or 99 cents have come to mean "probably self published, draw your own conclusions about quality"?


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> We know because that's how it has always worked. I should replace "great" with "provides value". I'm still working on how to best communicate this idea. xD;


We don't know that's how it has always worked. How do we know there were no truly great books that never got out of the slush pile or didn't sell? We would have to look at all the books in the slush pile plus books that didn't sell. Then determine none of them are truly great. It'sstill an interesting speculation, but it still remains a speculation.



> I can't argue this stuff with someone who doesn't even have a book out yet...


I can. I'm not special.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Masha du Toit said:


> This is interesting. I wonder though if perceived value works the same for all products? For example it seems a rational assumption that a more expensive vacuum cleaner = better quality. I assume the higher price = more durable doodads and more finely calibrated watchums. Wether or not that actually is the case. But with books? Do people assume a more expensive book is better, and a cheaper one worse, in the same way?
> 
> Maybe free or 99 cents have come to mean "probably self published, draw your own conclusions about quality"?


I think the subject of perceived value is interesting too, but the concept of "value" in the book industry is so subjective that it's hard to draw consistent conclusions that can be used for marketing or pricing. In the past, book pricing has never really equated to value, at least from the standpoint of content. Trade paperbacks all tended to have the same price, so you spent the same money to get a book you love and one you hate. As for editorial quality, you could count on a certain level of professionalism in those books, but books that were better edited were not more expensive than the others.

Now price is an even worse indicator of quality. Some excellent books are being sold for 99 cents, while some rather poorly edited books sell for more than that. If you look beyond editorial quality, value completely loses its meaning outside the context of an individual buyer. Two people will read the same book, and one will love it while the other hates it. That same book has great value for the first person who might be willing to pay a premium to read more like it, while the second person feels ripped off and will avoid more books by that author in the future at any price.

So I think it all comes down to this: Write the best book you can, publish with a professional level of editorial quality, and experiment with price to maximize your earnings. Do what you can to put your book in front of the readers who will enjoy it most. The rest is up to the aggregate reactions of individual readers (i.e. "the marketplace").


----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I never said things "just happen". I even mentioned that people will tell others (word-of-mouth marketing), but this happens naturally. While you have to put forth a great effort to get the ball rolling, if you have a product that provides people with a great deal of value, it snowballs. If it doesn't, perhaps you should re-examine the value you're providing and find out why people don't find it that valuable.


Maybe your interpretation of "happens naturally" and my interpretation are different. I take it to men - it will JUST HAPPEN.

I'm telling you from personal experience, it does NOT work that way. Let's hear your experience...I'll wait.



> Of course good deals get sales. That's the whole point. I don't even know what you're trying to say here. This is basic common sense.


See, now you're just being ignorant. Not all good deals SELL! That's ludicrous! I can only shake my head at that.



> My attitude had nothing to do with the type of attitude displayed in that post. *shrug* I always found that particular type of viewpoint a bit silly.


Regardless, you insulted people in your OP (and the one where you used the word repugnant), yet you take offense to Krista's perceived insult to you. Funny how that works, eh?



> I never meant to imply this worked at just Amazon. Frankly, the thread is rabit trailing a bit here, but I suppose it's necessary to improve upon the original point. I don't care too much about getting noticed on Amazon. As far as getting noticed is concerned, it's more about just getting noticed at all, Amazon or no. I'm sure marketing in the restrictive area of Amazon appeals to some. I'd rather market myself and my books in a more general sense. What I'm talking about works for everything. Period. You have a thirsty man in a desert, he'll pay a small fortune for a bottle of water because that's how much value it would provide him.


I'd love to hear all about it when you actually do it. Not a jab, that's a serious statement. Until then, seriously, Michelle, you're not doing yourself any favors by sticking your nose in the air. People here have tried a lot of techniques - some work, some don't. Some hardly matter if they work because they are so easy to do - i.e. book tagging. What do you care if they tag books?

Furthermore, you called it "gaming the system".  If liking an author page and tagging a book is gaming the system, then I'd like to know what your professional opinion is on back-linking?



> People like value. YOU like value. If you read something amazing, you share it. Thus how Harry Potter went from a small print-run in a small publisher, to a global phenomenon. That wasn't luck or savvy marketing. That was just people trying to share the value they got from the book.


No, actually. I'm freaking busy, so sharing awesome products is NOT something I normally do. If you remind me, maybe I will. So your premise, again, is wrong.



> Oh, and my credentials? Just keen observation and a few smaller projects to test my theories. Disregard me if you want. I don't mind.


I'm not disregarding you, I'm asking for proof. Difference.



> In the end, my point is that if you're a starving artist, you're doing it wrong. xP I'm not saying that marketing isn't necessary. I AM saying that, in time, even a poor marketing effort on something of great value will snowball. Value is the only key to anything here.


First of all, no - I'm NOT a starving artist. I'm a business owner who happens to write fiction right now. Second, you're still hung up on "it just happens"...there are many failed businesses out there that had good ideas, good products, and high value - yet are long gone. It's painfully obvious you have no marketing or sales background because you're talking about LUCK. Which yes, is important, but good luck with luck. It's pretty discriminatory.



> And, more on topic, that these "marketing" efforts some people take part in are really wasteful. Focus on the value and how to show others the value. That's it.
> 
> Oh! And some of the other marketing strategies may work, really. But if the sales are only a direct result of value-fluff, as I like to call it, then it'll stagnate. True value snowballs. Value-fluff dies as soon as the fluffing does.


Good for you, you hate tagging books or liking author pages. Why start a post insulting those who feel it's worthwhile? Again, I ask - WHY DO YOU CARE what the rest of us do?


----------



## Mike Dennis (Apr 26, 2010)

I for one will not hesitate to ask writer friends to read and review my books. I would do the same for them, and when I get a good review from them, it only helps my book by making their opinion of it visible to other potential readers who might otherwise skip over my books. I have gotten blurbs from famous authors in my genre simply by asking them to read my books and blurb them. There is nothing wrong with any of this.

This is not a "scheme", a word which carries a sinister connotation.

This is not "gaming the system", a phrase which implies a lack of ethics.

This is an honest effort to make my books visible in the ever-widening sea of self-publishing.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

DRMarvello said:


> ...snip
> Do what you can to put your book in front of the readers who will enjoy it most. The rest is up to the aggregate reactions of individual readers (i.e. "the marketplace").


... and there's the rub. Just how exactly to do that!


----------



## WHDean (Nov 2, 2011)

DRMarvello said:


> I think the subject of perceived value is interesting too, but the concept of "value" in the book industry is so subjective that it's hard to draw consistent conclusions that can be used for marketing or pricing. In the past, book pricing has never really equated to value, at least from the standpoint of content. Trade paperbacks all tended to have the same price, so you spent the same money to get a book you love and one you hate. As for editorial quality, you could count on a certain level of professionalism in those books, but books that were better edited were not more expensive than the others.
> 
> Now price is an even worse indicator of quality. Some excellent books are being sold for 99 cents, while some rather poorly edited books sell for more than that. If you look beyond editorial quality, value completely loses its meaning outside the context of an individual buyer. Two people will read the same book, and one will love it while the other hates it. That same book has great value for the first person who might be willing to pay a premium to read more like it, while the second person feels ripped off and will avoid more books by that author in the future at any price.
> 
> So I think it all comes down to this: Write the best book you can, publish with a professional level of editorial quality, and experiment with price to maximize your earnings. Do what you can to put your book in front of the readers who will enjoy it most. The rest is up to the aggregate reactions of individual readers (i.e. "the marketplace").


I suggest that you (and Masha) are confusing literary quality (i.e., an aesthetic judgement) with perceived value (buyer perceptions of quality based on price). You're saying that price and quality don't always match up. No argument here! But this is not an economic analysis; it's an aesthetic one. Price is a _signal _ in the market place. Whether it signals real quality or not is beside the point in an economic analysis. That buyers perceive that it signals quality (i.e., value for them) is what counts. That's why they'll buy $10 books, even though there may be a lot of $3 books that they'd judge just as good or better were they asked to rank the books without knowing anything about the authors or publishers or the price (i.e., if they had nothing but aesthetics to go by). And that's the way you have to look at it if you want to understand the economics of it.

ETA: In case it wasn't obvious, I agree with your observations regarding price and quality: price doesn't perfectly and reliably predict quality. But most consumers believe it does in the main, so that's where you're really at.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Mike Dennis said:


> I for one will not hesitate to ask writer friends to read and review my books.


For my fiction, no, I don't do this. For my non-fiction, yes, I do...because it's written for writers!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I think the subject of perceived value is interesting too, but the concept of "value" in the book industry is so subjective that it's hard to draw consistent conclusions that can be used for marketing or pricing.


I invoke value when my sales suck. Something has to buttress my self esteem.

EDIT: An earlier version of this post did not set off the quote in a box. That made it look like I said it. I didn't. Marvello did. Apologies to all.


----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I'm sorry you're taking my statements so personally, darlin'. Perhaps you feel a bit put out because someone is calling you out on using tactics you, yourself, actually feel are a bit dishonest?  I'm sure you'll deny this fervently. Perhaps it's not true.


Honey, you have no idea what you're talking about and it shows. You're inexperienced and rude to boot. I'm still waiting for your real world experience. When you get some, let me know.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks,

I'm going to read through this thread to see where else there's been rudeness, but I'll say right here, could we knock off the snarky terms of endearment?  I've got the flu and it's a bit much to take.

Thanks.

Betsy


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

No problem, deary.

I KID I KID

OUCH STOP IT


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)




----------



## 56139 (Jan 21, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> Feel free to disagree with me, hun.


LOL....  But you're not making many friends here and when Betsy says knock it off, typically we all knock it off. But feel free to disregard her, if that's the road you want to take.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Masha du Toit said:


> ... and there's the rub. Just how exactly to do that!


Yes. It's a Marketing 101 problem many of us struggle with. Michelle H. touched on it with her question, "What does your ideal reader look like?" With many products, it's possible to paint an accurate picture of that ideal customer. I'm having trouble with that when it comes to marketing fantasy. I'd imagine every fiction genre has the same issue. Our readers seem to come from all walks of life and all ages. We resort to scatter-shot approaches like free days through KDP Select, which are not particularly efficient from a targeted marketing standpoint.

The only thing I can say for sure about fantasy readers is that they like to read fantasy. So I try to find places where fantasy readers go. However, authors are strongly discouraged from doing any kind of marketing in most of those venues. I have to rely on relationship building, which is a worthwhile but very slow process. It seems like we have to try many things (social networking, advertising, etc.) that don't work well on an individual basis (in terms of ROI), but that work together in aggregate to increase our exposure and give our books a chance to find their audience. From there, you are back to the audience being excited enough about your work to take it to the next level.

Marketing a book can be a lot of work, and it rarely yields immediate, lasting results. It's very easy to become discouraged and give up, because you never know how much promotion it will take to tip your book over the attention threshold or if your book will succeed even if you reach that threshold.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> But picturing a single age, a single type of person, perhaps even a single gender, can help focus you beyond anything else I've discovered.


What are you basing this on?


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

...but your current novel isn't for sale yet.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

JanneCO said:


> LOL....  But you're not making many friends here and when Betsy says knock it off, typically we all knock it off. But feel free to disregard her, if that's the road you want to take.


JanneCo, thank you, even with the flu, I can do my own moderating. 

And Michelle, no, you won't be banned for using insincere terms of endearment. But as for it being part of your vernacular, that may very well be; but in your interactions here on KindleBoards, you've used them only three times, all in this thread with people with whom you were having intense discussions. I don't know, maybe that's what brings them out.  But it does make them seem a bit snarky to me. *shrug*

It was meant to be more of a warning shot over everyone's bows, anyway, to turn the rhetorical fire down a bit.

Krista, you've made your point. Anyone who reads the thread can take that into consideration. Or not.

Betsy


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

DRMarvello said:


> Yes. It's a Marketing 101 problem many of us struggle with. Michelle H. touched on it with her question, "What does your ideal reader look like?" With many products, it's possible to paint an accurate picture of that ideal customer. I'm having trouble with that when it comes to marketing fantasy. I'd imagine every fiction genre has the same issue. Our readers seem to come from all walks of life and all ages. We resort to scatter-shot approaches like free days through KDP Select, which are not particularly efficient from a targeted marketing standpoint.
> 
> The only thing I can say for sure about fantasy readers is that they like to read fantasy. So I try to find places where fantasy readers go. However, authors are strongly discouraged from doing any kind of marketing in most of those venues. I have to rely on relationship building, which is a worthwhile but very slow process. It seems like we have to try many things (social networking, advertising, etc.) that don't work well on an individual basis (in terms of ROI), but that work together in aggregate to increase our exposure and give our books a chance to find their audience. From there, you are back to the audience being excited enough about your work to take it to the next level.
> 
> Marketing a book can be a lot of work, and it rarely yields immediate, lasting results. It's very easy to become discouraged and give up, because you never know how much promotion it will take to tip your book over the attention threshold or if your book will succeed even if you reach that threshold.


Wise words. 
I think though, that Michelle's suggestion to picture an possible reader is not a bad idea at all, as long as you remember that it is a "thinking exercise" to help you promote your book, and it does not become limiting.

I've committed to spending more time on this kind of thing once my second book is complete. It seems like a waste of writing time to do it when I've only really got one full length book out there.


----------



## matthewturner (Aug 1, 2012)

I'm still very new here, but my initial findings show very little (if zero) black label marketing going on around here. Sure there's Author Like exchanges and what not, but from my understanding this is more for the newbie who is just trying to get a foundation set (rather than improve the rankings of a particular book)

I'm sure there's the odd post that is aimed at 'you give me a review and I'll give you a review' but I've yet to find them. Compared to some sites out there these boards seem pretty legit.

Anyway, those are the thoughts of a newbie 

Matthew


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2012)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I think the subject of perceived value is interesting too, but the concept of "value" in the book industry is so subjective that it's hard to draw consistent conclusions that can be used for marketing or pricing.


The art of marketing is the art of building real value into a subjective item. Marketing is the reason why some people are willing to spend $5 on a cup of coffee at Starbucks when you can get the same size for less than half the price at Dunkin Donuts. Marketing is why some people will spend $200 on a pair of sneakers, or why people buy the $5 bottle of brand-name mouthwash instead of the $2 store brand (even though in most cases they are in fact the identical products but in different packaging!). Marketing is why you can have an item that sells for $2.99 retail, place it "on sale" at Two for $6, and people think they are getting a bargain.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> The art of marketing is the art of building real value into a subjective item. Marketing is the reason why some people are willing to spend $5 on a cup of coffee at Starbucks when you can get the same size for less than half the price at Dunkin Donuts. Marketing is why some people will spend $200 on a pair of sneakers, or why people buy the $5 bottle of brand-name mouthwash instead of the $2 store brand (even though in most cases they are in fact the identical products but in different packaging!). Marketing is why you can have an item that sells for $2.99 retail, place it "on sale" at Two for $6, and people think they are getting a bargain.


Agreed. Hey, we agree! Here's a fun psych game for everyone. Take two identical boxes. Put dog crap in each one. Same wrapping paper, same labels. Price box A at $.99 and box B at $9.99. Half, or more, of the people will always buy box B. Why? Because despite them knowing it's the same exact thing, if it's priced more, it must be better dog crap.


----------



## btsc99 (Oct 12, 2012)

jimkukral said:


> Because despite them knowing it's the same exact thing, if it's priced more, it must be better dog crap.


* Wonders if the same would hold good for cat crap? *


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> I'd say I'm just not making friends with you.  That said, if I'm banned for using sweetie/hun/etc, then so be it. It's part of my vernacular and would be difficult to stop. I actually looked at the quote and decided to leave it. I wasn't, after all, doing anything Betsy said not to.  My terms of endearment are meant to be placating (in this case, anyway), not snarky. More often than not, though, my terms of endearment are just that, endearing.


You _are_ being rude. Using snarky terms of endearment (as our wonderful mod pointed out) to people you are not close to, who have real ebook selling experience, while you are still "guessing" that you're correct, is not a way to prove you're an expert in that arena. We (Kb'ers) who have been here for any length of time, know who is selling and who isn't. You're not.

Please listen to those who have real world experience; that's how you learn.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2012)

Michelle J Howe said:


> Also, as an aside, I'm not being snarky! xD I just call everyone darlin'/sweetie/honey/etc. xD It's sorta flows naturally whenever I'm talkin' to someone.


I actually know a few people who end every sentence with some term of endearment. These are also the same people whom I personally believe should be Force Choked once per day for being patronizing to everyone else.

Just saying...


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

jimkukral said:


> Agreed. Hey, we agree! Here's a fun psych game for everyone. Take two identical boxes. Put dog crap in each one. Same wrapping paper, same labels. Price box A at $.99 and box B at $9.99. Half, or more, of the people will always buy box B. Why? Because despite them knowing it's the same exact thing, if it's priced more, it must be better dog crap.


The $9.99 box is obviously a nutrient rich blend of fertilzer, made for prize winning roses.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Masha du Toit said:


> I think though, that Michelle's suggestion to picture an possible reader is not a bad idea at all, as long as you remember that it is a "thinking exercise" to help you promote your book, and it does not become limiting.


You are right that picturing the ideal reader is limiting, but that's actually the idea. The technique gives you a focal point that helps you craft a consistent marketing message to a specific audience. Nothing says you have to *stay* with that definition of your reader, however. It's just a starting point, and you can alter it as you learn more about who actually responds to your book. You can use the traction you gain from a focused marketing effort to discover what your "real" market is.



Masha du Toit said:


> I've committed to spending more time on this kind of thing once my second book is complete. It seems like a waste of writing time to do it when I've only really got one full length book out there.


I know it may seem like a waste of time to do it up front, but it's really not. In one of her more recent posts, Michelle mentioned that the technique helps her with her writing. I've found that to be true as well. It helps me be consistent in my tone and it helps me make decisions about what type of content to include. When I have to decide how violent to make a fighting scene, how explicit to make a sex scene, or how much detail to include in the story, my prototypical reader looks over my shoulder and helps me decide. I still write what I want, but my proto-reader helps me figure out *how* to write it.

What I'm describing may sound very calculating and mercenary, but to me it is creatively freeing. It takes a lot of the angst and indecision out of my writing process. It gives me guidelines that help me write more quickly and consistently, and when it comes to speed, I need all the help I can get.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything here. I'm just relating my personal experiences. If you get anything useful out of it, so much the better.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

DRMarvello -
You've made me think  

This sounds a little like the advice Stephen King gives  - to write with a particular person in mind.  In his case I believe it's his wife.  I can see how this can help to simplify the whole painful process of constantly having to make choices about how the story should work, with very little to base your decision on.  

I mean - no matter how nicely I plan, my characters still manage to throw a spanner in the works.  Yesterday, one of them upped and ran away, and I'm thinking...hmmm.  That's actually quite cool.  Now just HOW lost should she be?  How long before she returns again ... so many possibilities.    Something that was not in my outline at all.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

jimkukral said:


> Agreed. Hey, we agree! Here's a fun psych game for everyone. Take two identical boxes. Put dog crap in each one. Same wrapping paper, same labels. Price box A at $.99 and box B at $9.99. Half, or more, of the people will always buy box B. Why? Because despite them knowing it's the same exact thing, if it's priced more, it must be better dog crap.


Do you have proof to back this up? Because it smells like crap to me.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Credentials, experience, and published books are not substitutes for cogent ideas and argument.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Masha du Toit said:


> DRMarvello -
> You've made me think
> 
> This sounds a little like the advice Stephen King gives - to write with a particular person in mind. In his case I believe it's his wife. I can see how this can help to simplify the whole painful process of constantly having to make choices about how the story should work, with very little to base your decision on.
> I mean - no matter how nicely I plan, my characters still manage to throw a spanner in the works. Yesterday, one of them upped and ran away, and I'm thinking...hmmm. That's actually quite cool. Now just HOW lost should she be? How long before she returns again ... so many possibilities.  Something that was not in my outline at all.


I have the same problem with story planning. I've reached the conclusion that I can only outline at a broad level. I know how the story will end and I know the major "beats" along the way, but I don't start planning individual scenes until I reach that segment of the story. Even though I outline each scene before I write it, something unexpected often comes out during the writing--something that affects everything that follows. These "pantsery" experiences can be really disturbing to someone as analytical and structured as I normally am. But I'm learning to enjoy it and take advantage of it.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2012)

Adam Pepper said:


> Do you have proof to back this up? Because it smells like crap to me.


doggie poo aside, we actually see this every day in stores. Most private label (store brand) products are identical to the brand name counterparts. Heck, often they are packaged in the same location with different labels slapped on them. Manufacturers happily do this because it allows them to reach two demographics with the same product. Go to your local WalMart and just hang out on a random aisle like you are looking for something. Note the number of people who buy the brand name version instead of the store brand version.

Voila! Same poop, different price.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> doggie poo aside, we actually see this every day in stores. Most private label (store brand) products are identical to the brand name counterparts. Heck, often they are packaged in the same location with different labels slapped on them. Manufacturers happily do this because it allows them to reach two demographics with the same product. Go to your local WalMart and just hang out on a random aisle like you are looking for something. Note the number of people who buy the brand name version instead of the store brand version.
> 
> Voila! Same poop, different price.


It's true. I'm one of those people who sees the name brand and the private label products side-by-side, compares the list of ingredients to make sure its really the same poop, and then buys the private label. If the name brand goes on sale so it is within a couple percent of the private label price, I'll pick up the name brand. Even with all this analysis, when I walk away with the name brand product, I feel like I got a better deal even though I already _know_ its the same poop.

Price something at $5, and it's worth $5. If you price it at $10 and then "slash the price" to $5, now it's worth $10 and the buyer is getting a killer deal. Same poop, same price, different perceived value.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Voila! Same poop, different price.


I agree that branding works. But branding is more than simply adjusting price. In Jim's example, the content and packaging are the same. Only the price is different. And he's claiming half or more will buy the same item at ten times the price. I call dog poop.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

At the risk of getting off topic and sending Julie into ranting hysteria, whether it's Target Brand Underwear or Stop N Shop green beans, most times, the quality is inferior to the brand name counterpart.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2012)

Adam Pepper said:


> At the risk of getting off topic and sending ***** into ranting hysteria, whether it's Target Brand Underwear or Stop N Shop green beans, most times, the quality is inferior to the brand name counterpart.


lol I work in contract packaging. If it were not for non-disclosure agreements, I could name about a hundred products that are not only identical to the store brand, but packaged in the same facility with different labels put on them.

Not all products, but I think you might be surprised how much of that "superiority" is your own expectation of the product vs the actual ingredients themselves. There is even a brand of perfume that is packaged one way to sell at Macy's for $100 a box, and a different way to sell at Target for $20. SAME PERFUME. Different brand names and stores. I have an aunt who love the "Macy's" version but thinks the Target version stinks. They are the identical fragrance.

I just keep my mouth shut and nod.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> lol I work in contract packaging. If it were not for non-disclosure agreements, I could name about a hundred products that are not only identical to the store brand, but packaged in the same facility with different labels put on them.


100% accurate.


----------



## jimkukral (Oct 31, 2011)

If all this stuff fascinates you, you REALLY must read Dr. Cialdini's book Influence. It's the bible for these types of things. Every marketer, whether they sell books or dog poop, needs to know this stuff.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Adam Pepper said:


> I agree that branding works. But branding is more than simply adjusting price. In Jim's example, the content and packaging are the same. Only the price is different. And he's claiming half or more will buy the same item at ten times the price. I call dog poop.


This is a frequent discussion among art quilters. Many have found that they sold MORE quilts when they raised their prices. Same poop, same packaging. Different prices. It's only art if it's expensive, right?

Although we don't often call our products poop. 

Betsy


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

There is a Veblen good effect where people buy more at a higher price. However, it's usually related to luxury goods. Not sure garden variety books fit the profile. A leather bound set of Harry Potter might.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> lol I work in contract packaging. If it were not for non-disclosure agreements, I could name about a hundred products that are not only identical to the store brand, but packaged in the same facility with different labels put on them.
> 
> Not all products, but I think you might be surprised how much of that "superiority" is your own expectation of the product vs the actual ingredients themselves. There is even a brand of perfume that is packaged one way to sell at Macy's for $100 a box, and a different way to sell at Target for $20. SAME PERFUME. Different brand names and stores. I have an aunt who love the "Macy's" version but thinks the Target version stinks. They are the identical fragrance.
> 
> I just keep my mouth shut and nod.


When I worked at a major cosmetics company, it was well known there are only nine facilities in the US appproved by the FDA for manufacturing skin care products. Labels and bottles are different, but the product itself? Not so much.


----------



## Lisa Grace (Jul 3, 2011)

Michelle J Howe said:


> So, again, not being snarky, darlin'.  I just like hu-mons. xP I know this makes some people uncomfortable, but too bad! Imma love you anyway.


You've been told it's rude by a mod, by Julie, and by me. It's passive aggresive of you to continue. Requesting etiquette on the boards is nothing new, and I can think of one member who was banned for ignoring the mod's requests. (I thought Mike Angel was.)

As far as marketing, you can choose not to listen to those who have been rolling with the changes over the last few years of selling ebooks. You can pretend Writers' Cafe isn't that helpful and keep insulting people who do share their up to the minute marketing, formatting, uploading, and cover experience and pretend your experience is superior to those who have also come from successful marketing backgrounds in other industries.

Please do not refer to me by any of your passive aggressive "endearments" again, as a mod has asked you stop, and now I am, too.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Sigh...

OK, I probably didn't explain myself very well earlier; I had the flu and wasn't up to long explanations.

*As I said earlier, no one is going to be banned for using insincere terms of endearment. *I'm pretty sure that there's nothing in Forum Decorum against it. When I get a chance, I'll re-read it.

When I asked people to stop using them in my initial post in this thread, it was because of the usage back and forth between two or more people that seemed snarky to me; the way the thread was going, I was hoping my comment would cause people to back off the snark a bit. I don't believe I ever said it was actually rude. There are indeed cases where such terms would be appropriate. I can't say that I've seen any in this thread that didn't seem either snarky or, at least, forced.

I do think that, Michelle, as Lisa has asked you not to use those terms with her, it would be appropriate to respect your fellow member in this regard.

I also think that this is a discussion forum. People are allowed to post their opinions regardless of experience level. People are allowed to disregard opinions of others regardless of experience level. Others reading the threads can use the information presented to decide which opinions to hold in high regard and which to disregard. Or, radical thought here, they can ignore the thread completely. KindleBoards, our little corner of the Internet, is a big place all in itself. Lots of threads here.

Discuss the points being made on their merits, or don't. Name calling ("hon" does NOT constitute name calling), belittling people, actual rudeness and using mods as bogeymen will be pruned from future posts.

Seriously, people...don't you have works in progress you could be working on? I do....

Betsy


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Y'all can call me darlin' anytime it strikes your fancy... Ain't this a great country?


----------



## DarkScribe (Aug 30, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> doggie poo aside, we actually see this every day in stores. Most private label (store brand) products are identical to the brand name counterparts. Heck, often they are packaged in the same location with different labels slapped on them. Manufacturers happily do this because it allows them to reach two demographics with the same product. Go to your local WalMart and just hang out on a random aisle like you are looking for something. Note the number of people who buy the brand name version instead of the store brand version.
> 
> Voila! Same poop, different price.


You are pre-supposing that the contents are identical. This is an oft suggested but not oft proved theory. In many cases - if not most - the cheaper house brand is crap by comparison to the higher priced item. I am not a brand snob and over the years have tried several times to test this theory. It only appeared valid once or twice. Even with something as simple as soda water (seltzer in the US) the cheap brand had less "fizz' and went flat sooner. With pet food, my cat and dog would complain or even walk away from house brands. Cheap batteries don't last, cheap cooking oil has a lower smoke point, cheap cheese tastes terrible.

Your theory that people are gullible is not supported by my experience; they are simply more discerning.


----------



## Adam Pepper (May 28, 2011)

DarkScribe said:


> Your theory that people are gullible is not supported by my experience; they are simply more discerning.


I agree. I'd love to see Julie's list, which I'm sure is legit, but what's on it? What types of products? Perfume makes sense because you dress up the packaging and people will pay. But the seltzer example is a perfect one. I used to buy Stop N Shop brand seltzer but once I splurged for Perrier, it ruined me for life. I can assure you it's not in my head. The Perrier has more fizz....by 100 times....


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

MLKatz said:


> Here's the deal.
> 
> I placed a link to my Amazon author page on my real Facebook page (not a fan page). A few readers have "friended" me, but it is mostly the place I am hooked into my circle of real life friends and family. I got dozens of Likes and comments, but all on Facebook! Nobody clicked through to give my Amazon author page, or my book pages a Like.
> 
> ...


I had the exact same problem. I posted on my regular FB page a link to my author page and requested some likes on the author page. I wanted to do some marketing that required a certain number of likes before I could do it. (My request was in a very polite manner). Almost all of the people 'liked' my post, not my page. I think they really thought that was what I was requesting. So, now how do I go back and ask again? I can't really. Not without looking like I'm begging.


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2012)

DarkScribe said:


> You are pre-supposing that the contents are identical.


No "pre-supposing." This is my career. I work in the industry. I KNOW the content is identical. I know this 100% as gospel. And were it not for the fact that I would be FIRED for doing so, I could produce a list of products that are identical to the store brands that would probably make your head explode. It doesn't even just happen between brand names and store brands. It happens between brand names within a larger company. You can have a company that sells a "premium" dish soap and a "discount" dish soap, but if you look at the actual MSDS (Material safety data sheet) you will see they are the exact same product, just with a different dye and label.

Adam--As I said, not all products. And to be clear the big culprits are generally the ones that say "compare to the active ingredients in..." or something along those lines. If you look at the packaging, you will often notice it is almost identical to the brand name packaging.

Here is an example I can give you because it isn't one of our clients. I was buying canned air for use on the computers in the office. OSHA requirements say we have to have an MSDS for every dangerous good in our facility, which includes canned air. We always used Falcon brand because that was what was on our corporate contract with Staples. When the corporate contract ran out and we switched over to OfficeMax, I had to get a new MSDS for the OfficeMax brand canned air, because that is the canned air that was included in the contract pricing. When I contacted OfficeMax for the MSDS, guess what they sent me? An MSDS for Falcon canned air.

I'm not saying every single store brand is the same as a brand name. But I'm just saying it happens an awful lot more often than people realize.


----------



## 60911 (Jun 13, 2012)

Julie is correct. My wife is a Director at a major-name food company (one of the few that doesn't create its own downscale competition). It's true of almost every industry, where the ingredients are exactly the same, they're often produced in the same factory and even on the same line, but one goes into the "brand-name" packaging and one goes into the "house brand" packaging and sells at a tremendous discount. The theory is that the corporation knows someone will make a generic and profit from it, so why not it be them? You see the same thing from pharmaceutical companies after their 7 or 8 year patent runs out, they create their own generic but still sell the name-brand at much higher prices. It's not a closely-guarded secret in the food industry that it happens, but they tend to hush-hush it in their own corporations. Their competitors know, of course, but because most of them are playing by the same rules, it's not widely talked about.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

DarkScribe said:


> You are pre-supposing that the contents are identical. This is an oft suggested but not oft proved theory. In many cases - if not most - the cheaper house brand is crap by comparison to the higher priced item. I am not a brand snob and over the years have tried several times to test this theory. It only appeared valid once or twice. Even with something as simple as soda water (seltzer in the US) the cheap brand had less "fizz' and went flat sooner. With pet food, my cat and dog would complain or even walk away from house brands. Cheap batteries don't last, cheap cooking oil has a lower smoke point, cheap cheese tastes terrible.
> 
> Your theory that people are gullible is not supported by my experience; they are simply more discerning.


I agree. Not all off-brand products are the same as the brand name stuff. Things like sugar, baking soda, etc might be, but plenty of other products are totally different. For instance, ketchup. I prefer Heinz and a store brand isn't going to cut it. I've tried store brand dishsoap that is so watered down, I've had to use three times as much as I would with something like Dawn. That's not a bargain. Their ingredients might be identical but the proportion of them may be different.

Anyway, I'm too far off topic so to get back on, I know that people sometimes use price to screen books. I think some are finding that the $2.99 books are self-published and so won't even glance at them anymore. They are missing out on some great books but maybe they've been burned too many times. One way to counteract that without feeling like you're gouging readers is to offer books bundled together ala Scott Nichelson and Hugh Howey. I tore a page from their book and did that with all four of my books, pricing the bundle at $9.99. Price wise, it looks like a trade published book, but discerning readers will notice that it is three full-length novels, plus a shorter novel/novella length one. At least, I hope they do!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

There are many cases where the same stuff is put in two different packages for two different brands. However, there are also many cases where there is a difference. The fact that something is made at the same plant tells us nothing. Many things are made at that same plant. The cost of producing at the same plant will vary with the materials, specifications, and processes used. These can change for different production runs. House brands can take advantage of that flexibility to reduce their costs.

I realize people have encountered the same stuff in two packages, and I accept they may even have encountered them on the job. OK. But that experience doesn't project to the entire economy and all the various products we see.



> I prefer Heinz and a store brand isn't going to cut it.


Good example. The same plant can make two different runs of ketchup. One run can use ten pounds of tomatoes per gallon, while the other can use five. That's a big cost difference, and it's a big difference in the characteristics of the product. But they both come from the same plant and from the same production line. They might even go in the same kind of packaging.


----------



## Guest (Nov 13, 2012)

MaryMcDonald said:


> I agree. Not all off-brand products are the same as the brand name stuff.


Again, I never said ALL BRANDS. Never. Not once. People are taking my comment and arguing about something that I DID NOT SAY. I said there are more of them that this happens with than most people would care to admit. It happens with ketchup. It happens with toothpaste. It happens with dish soap. It happens with dog food.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Again, I never said ALL BRANDS. Never. Not once. People are taking my comment and arguing about something that I DID NOT SAY. I said there are more of them that this happens with than most people would care to admit. It happens with ketchup. It happens with toothpaste. It happens with dish soap. It happens with dog food.


Wow. Did I say you said all brands? I don't think so. Not to mention the fact that the second part of my post was an attempt to get the subject off brands and back onto books with a suggestion on how to play to the market.


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> Anyway, I'm too far off topic so to get back on, I know that people sometimes use price to screen books. I think some are finding that the $2.99 books are self-published and so won't even glance at them anymore. They are missing out on some great books but maybe they've been burned too many times. One way to counteract that without feeling like you're gouging readers is to offer books bundled together ala Scott Nichelson and Hugh Howey. I tore a page from their book and did that with all four of my books, pricing the bundle at $9.99. Price wise, it looks like a trade published book, but discerning readers will notice that it is three full-length novels, plus a shorter novel/novella length one. At least, I hope they do!


I like this suggestion. All I need now is more than one book! Perhaps I'll give it a try when my trilogy is complete.

At $9.99, the full trilogy "omnibus" would actually be priced higher than the sum of the individual books (at $2.99 each). Once again, same stuff, different price.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

DRMarvello said:


> I like this suggestion. All I need now is more than one book! Perhaps I'll give it a try when my trilogy is complete.
> 
> At $9.99, the full trilogy "omnibus" would actually be priced higher than the sum of the individual books (at $2.99 each). Once again, same stuff, different price.


Yeah, you would have to suit the price to match your books. Mine are priced from $3.29-$4.29, and there are four of them, so $9.99 saves readers about $5.60.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I go away for a day and I come back to you people arguing about brand new goods. Seriously? This is why I can't have nice things


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

MaryMcDonald said:


> Yeah, you would have to suit the price to match your books. Mine are priced from $3.29-$4.29, and there are four of them, so $9.99 saves readers about $5.60.


Gotcha. I was just making a bit of a joke relating to our recent off-topic discussion about different packaging and the price of poop. Sorry it wasn't a very good one. 

Truthfully though, the price of the omnibus does not necessarily have to represent a savings for the reader. For example, with some brands of alcohol, you actually pay more per ounce when you buy the larger bottle. In fact, rather than offer a savings, I would seriously consider keeping the price the same as buying the individual books, and just include some kind of bonus, like a short story prequel or something that might not sell well as a stand-alone product.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> *As I said earlier, no one is going to be banned for using insincere terms of endearment. *


Good to hear, shmoopsie.


----------



## DarkScribe (Aug 30, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> No "pre-supposing." This is my career. I work in the industry. I KNOW the content is identical. I know this 100% as gospel. And were it not for the fact that I would be FIRED for doing so, I could produce a list of products that are identical to the store brands that would probably make your head explode. It doesn't even just happen between brand names and store brands. It happens between brand names within a larger company. You can have a company that sells a "premium" dish soap and a "discount" dish soap, but if you look at the actual MSDS (Material safety data sheet) you will see they are the exact same product, just with a different dye and label.
> 
> Adam--As I said, not all products. And to be clear the big culprits are generally the ones that say "compare to the active ingredients in..." or something along those lines. If you look at the packaging, you will often notice it is almost identical to the brand name packaging.
> 
> ...


Career or not, you cannot speak for all house brands. I have never worked in packaging, but I do work in an industry where this "theory" has been very publicly tested. I did say "with one or two exceptions" and that is pretty much what two current affairs programs found. A small number of exceptions usually in areas where Government legislation strictly controlled contents. Such as medications. One hundred percent Aspirin is the same regardless or brand or packaging. Sugar, salt, etc., won't vary much, but things like foodstuffs can vary enormously. Rumours that the house and premium brands are identical are easy to start, hard to disprove, and will increase sales.

I am not suggesting that you are not right about those items where you have personal knowledge, but that does not set the stage for the entire "house brand" industry. That industry is there to make money for the retailers and according to one recent Government inquiry, they make much more from house brands than premium brands - they control the manufacture and ingredients, and both the wholesale and retail price.

However I do agree that "price perception" is a valid marketing criterion. People tend to distrust things they regard as "cheap". If you can convince someone that what they are buying is worth more than they are paying - you will increase sales. There are lots of ways of doing that.


----------

