# Amazon Algorithms and Why Publishing is Getting Much Tougher



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I'm re-posting a "doomsday" scenario I predicted back in December of 2013. I'm starting to think that day has arrived...

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,171103.msg2442337.html#msg2442337

As a kind of response to Russell Blake's post about how Amazon might cut royalty rates...I've come up with a scenario that I find far more likely.

And that is, what might come to pass if Amazon "churns" the new release lists even more quickly than it already does.

When I first started publishing at the tail end of 2010, the bestseller lists were much stickier. I could publish an ebook and be on a bestseller list for months on end. But as more and more books were published, and as Amazon tweaked their algos, something changed.

Nowadays there is the notorious 30 day cliff. Because of this cliff, after my book is out thirty days, its ranking immediately begins to drop. Before long, its sales will drop until they become almost nonexistent.

What if Amazon decides that they want even faster churn to keep lists fresh and exciting to customers? What if, in the near future, after my book is out a week, its sales begin to taper off the way it currently happens in a month?

Can Amazon do this? Would they?

It seems to me that customers want to keep finding new and exciting things again and again and again. It might behoove Amazon to, in the near future, have bestseller lists that are in flux with even more frequency than they have right now.

For writers, that will mean pressure to churn books out even faster to maintain any kind of virtual shelf space and visibility. As fast as many of us are pushing ourselves already, that could prove difficult.

As it is, I find that ideally I want to release something once or twice a month to maintain my profile and continue to keep my series and books up on the charts. I can't imagine what will happen if they start churning any faster.

And although this scenario might not sound as scary as slashing royalty rates, its much more insidious and also more likely, in my opinion. Right now, the 30 day cliff is one of the biggest things that hurts my sales, and I feel it with every book I put out. I can't imagine what would happen if that time frame gets shortened.
*****
Edited to Add: Although my prediction made at the end of 2013 wasn't completely precise about the nature of the changes, I think with the addition of Kindle Unlimited and the way the Algo's and Also Boughts are currently penalizing any sales slow down, the new normal has made it very difficult for a book to consistently stay high in the rankings and earn income over an extended period of time.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

David S. said:


> Amazon will do whatever is in the best interest of Amazon, whether short-term or long-term. Nothing else matters. Sometimes we benefit, sometimes we are squashed. Amazon doesn't care either way.


Yes, but it's still important to gather data and see if our conclusions are actually correct. There may be ways to strategize based on what we're seeing. For instance, I'm putting more efforts now towards previously neglected platforms, getting books up on Draft2Digital, etc.

I'm putting less effort into trying to fit my books into Kindle Unlimited right now, because my feeling is that the Amazon algo churn makes it more and more difficult to make consistent money on any individual title. So although I want to benefit where possible, I need to adjust strategy based on my findings.

I'm still interested to see what others are noticing, even if we can't change Amazon or what they do.


----------



## MissingAlaska (Apr 28, 2014)

Well, as a writer trying to break into the bestseller list, it is in my interest that Amazon churns the lists faster.  I've read lots of complaints from authors on here that they cannot get visibility and that their works languish with ever being discovered while other works dominate the lists for months.  It seems Amazon is darned if they do and darned if they don't. 

For every loser, there are going to be winners.  In the end, Amazon will still be selling books and someone has to write them.  Who gets to the top of the pile - that's the question. You just have to learn to play the game as they change the rules.

In my mind, as long as it is a level playing field (trade vs indie publishing differences aside), to the victor go the spoils.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

michaelsnuckols said:


> Well, as a writer trying to break into the bestseller list, it is in my interest that Amazon churns the lists faster. I've read lots of complaints from authors on here that they cannot get visibility and that their works languish with ever being discovered while other works dominate the lists for months.
> For every loser, there are going to be winners.
> 
> Who gets to the top of the pile - that's the question. You just have to learn to play the game as they change the rules.


It's a valid point that you make. With stickier lists and rankings, it's tougher for a new book to break into the upper echelon. The more books flood into the market, the more important it will be to provide a pathway into those upper reaches of the lists, so that new books can still get there.

The question is, at what cost to individual writers? You see, getting there is fine and dandy. But from experience, I can tell you that working hard on a book and then publishing, only to see it rise and fall from grace within a matter of days is not so gratifying.

This kind of churn implies that your backlist needs to be gigantic, and your new release schedule will need to be something on the order of a new book (or novella) almost every week.

And it could get even worse, since the trend so far is for the churn to increase over time.

Edited to add: Other than faster releases, there will be a need to know how and when to send fans or promotions at the book to, in a sense, artificially elevate the sales numbers to keep it afloat. This will prove exceedingly difficult for the average writer.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

From a different but related thread, Phoenix Sullivan wrote, in part:

*And I fully agree with gorvnice that there has been an algo change helping to apply downward pressure by favoring longer and higher sales and punishing short-term pulses. I'm thinking the change hit maybe late April or by May 1 at least. There may have been an interim change, but that's when I started seeing a real impact to new release sales. My theory -- well, speculation as I don't have the hard figures -- is that the history weighting has changed. Less history being weighted in means those books that normally could hang at a #100 rank with 20-30% fewer sales after a week can't any longer. It takes more sales to maintain rank. And it "seems" maybe no history is being counted for the first few days after hitting a rank. So new releases or books that are on promo have to hit enough sales every day to maintain rank that they normally would have to make to hit that rank in the first place. *

My Comment on Phoenix's excellent analysis: This isn't just a minor tweak. The implications of the new algo's and weighting make it extremely difficult to maintain visibility and make money on any given title. It goes beyond that, too, but this is the tip of the iceberg, imo.


----------



## MissingAlaska (Apr 28, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> It's a valid point that you make. With stickier lists and rankings, it's tougher for a new book to break into the upper echelon. The more books flood into the market, the more important it will be to provide a pathway into those upper reaches of the lists, so that new books can still get there.
> 
> The question is, at what cost to individual writers? You see, getting there is fine and dandy. But from experience, I can tell you that working hard on a book and then publishing, only to see it rise and fall from grace within a matter of days is not so gratifying.
> 
> ...


Isn't the churn also the result of 2000 books being published a day? Many authors are releasing less-than-stellar material just to beat that 30 day cliff, hoping that at least one of their works remains visible to the public (e.g. weekly releases in erotica). This is a self-defeating positive feedback loop. More authors publishing more works means it is harder for anyone's work to stand out - which forces people to publish more often ad nauseum in even greater numbers until quality is nil. Amazon - and readers - have to sort through this avalanche. At some point, readers are going to say "enough" and go back to trade publishers.

Maybe we all should all collectively cut back on how much we publish - and only release the very best? Relying upon beating the 30-day cliff as your marketing tool rather than building an audience and a brand are the root problem here.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

michaelsnuckols said:


> Isn't the churn also the result of 2000 books being published a day? Amazon - and readers - have to sort through this avalanche. Relying upon beating the 30-day cliff as your marketing tool rather than building an audience and a brand are the root problem here.


Again, you make some valid points. What I would say is that we hopefully want to find a happy middle ground where Amazon is helping readers find books and using recommendations, lists, etc. for that purpose.

My feeling is that their needs do not necessarily line up with ours, because to them books are essentially interchangeable. Amazon doesn't mind if one book goes down and another just pops up immediately to replace it.

The readers don't care either.

But as a working writer, if you publish a book and it only has visibility for a week and then begins an inexorable descent down into the back depths, it forces you to write and publish faster.

Some of my pen name work has gathered a fan base, but you have to be really big to have enough hardcore fans to be above the fray. Being discovered by new and casual readers is really how most of the money is made, imo.

I'm not sure what can be done about it. That's partly why I posted this. I'm sincerely curious what results others are seeing and what are some likely outcomes, how to strategize, etc.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Look some authors have beat the same books to death for years now thanks to promotions. When I'm seeing books from 2011 buy bookbub ads to move up the charts as a reader and ebook deal picker, I'm bored. Everyone already got the book during one of the many free runs and now there's a 99 cent deal? Yawn. 

Other authors kept releasing and those are the authors just chilling with multiple spots on their genre best seller list. I think amazon is starting to reward frequent publishers vs the same title we've seen promoted again and again and again for three years. And that's important because it's how you make readers happy that there's something new to come buy everyday.


----------



## MissingAlaska (Apr 28, 2014)

gorvnice said:


> But as a working writer, if you publish a book and it only has visibility for a week and then begins an inexorable descent down into the back depths, it forces you to write and publish faster.


The questions I ask (and I'm not implying anything about your work as I've never read it) are these: Did the work tumble off the list strictly because of the algorithm? Or, did it drop because a promotion ended and it wasn't good enough to keep people's attention? Really good works _do _manage to stay on these lists (e.g. Hugh Howey). So-so works drop off of them. Works that have also been read by most readers - and therefore have solds lots - also drop off.

I wholly concur with Elizabeth Ann West's comment as well.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Just thinking out loud here.
In the end, the readers decide who sells and who doesn't.
Now I am pretty sure that if "everyone" owned a certain book then it would not still be hitting the best seller lists.

I am no expert on Amazon but I do believe their algos are based on sales.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

michaelsnuckols said:


> The questions I ask (and I'm not implying anything about your work as I've never read it) are these: Did the work tumble off the list strictly because of the algorithm? Or, did it drop because a promotion ended and it wasn't good enough to keep people's attention? Really good works _do _manage to stay on these lists (e.g. Hugh Howey). So-so works drop off of them. Works that have also been read by most readers - and therefore have solds lots - also drop off.


No, work doesn't drop off strictly because of algo's. But I'm the same writer who had books on the lists and hanging high up in rankings for months and months at a time between 2011-2012. In 2013 I saw a change and this has continued to "worsen" from then until now.

Others who know more than me, such as Phoenix Sullivan and Courtney Milan, have alluded to this as well. Even HM Ward mentioned this once on here, can't find the post right now to link to.

You are correct that the very top of the heap writers like Hugh Howey and H.M. Ward and a very select group will continue to thrive, almost no matter what. Most of us are not them.

What I'm talking about isn't something that has to do with quality of work, imo. It's a very massive change in how Amazon weights sales and calculates rankings. It makes it very difficult to hold a very high ranking (say 2,000 and above) for more than a week.

I would be very interested to see how many writers have a book that has maintained a rank consistently above 1,000 for more than three or four weeks since the beginning of 2014. By the way, I'm not saying they don't exist. I just think its much, much more rare now than it was a few months ago.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Totally annecdotal, but I've noticed that beginning in May my Amazon.com sales collapsed to approx. a third of what they used to be. So far it's only Amazon.com - my sales at the other Amazons are unaffected, as are other platforms. I initially put it down to the summer slump and to not having had an English language release since early April. But now I have put out new releases in two different series and a genre that always sells well for me and my Amazon.com sales are still crap.

Something had definitely changed and it started in approx. May.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Here is where H.M. Ward also mentioned this change (before KU even happened). And if she's noticing it, then you know it's HUGE.

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,188585.msg2659793.html#msg2659793
From H.M. Ward:
*There IS a change with Amazon. I see it too, although Id attributed most if what Im feeling due to a slowing of my releases (avg release rate for 2013 was 2.5 per month, this year to date has been 1/ mo). That aside, Im noticing that titles (mine and others) that hit the top 10 aren't sticking as well. They blip and slip. This could be due to BB ads or something else, but even names with staying power aren't hitting as high or holding as long. The result is a decrease in sales. I think the nature of the platform itself has changed. Add in the faker top paid books from Amazons imprints that clog the top 5, & it throws the rest of the list from top to bottom. This doesn't just affect top teners. It also messed with those who had been in the 2Ks and now their rank is 5K and they don't know why.

When all other variables remain the same, the constant change is the flood of new authors. The slush pile is moving and mixing with everything. Amazon/ kdp/ sales is an organic (or part Borg) ecosystem. Meaning, I feel the tremors too. The ground is about to shift.*


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

> Look some authors have beat the same books to death for years now thanks to promotions. When I'm seeing books from 2011 buy bookbub ads to move up the charts as a reader and ebook deal picker, I'm bored. Everyone already got the book during one of the many free runs and now there's a 99 cent deal? Yawn.


Maybe you're bored, but obviously most Bookbub subscribers aren't. Bookbub does a really good job of picking books that their subscribers might want. When several thousands download a book from 2011 that means not everyone has gotten it that wants it. If they had, the promo wouldn't work.

Don't you write romance? Well, it's a whole lot easier to find your audience in romance, let me tell ya. Romance readers have pages and pages of facebook where they sit and discuss romance novels, the male MC, the covers, etc. Goodreads is full of romance readers. There are tons of romance blogs. Those of us that don't write romance or any of the other handful of extremely popular genres don't find our readers that easily. Bookbub helps us do that, and very effectively. For example, they have 910,000 historical fiction readers (separate from historical romance). Those are my potential readers.

There is no way in the world 910,000 people see my bookbub ad. They just don't. If they did, the next ad I did with them wouldn't be successful. No matter what day you run a Bookbub, you are only reaching a percentage, but it's enough people to make it a success. But 6 months down the line, I reach many people who didn't look at the ad before. I myself haven't bought for several months from a Bookbub ad because I have too much to read. So anyone who ran the last six months I haven't seen. I don't just keep dumping more and more on my kindle. I realize some people just keep downloading, but I don't. I doubt I'm that unique of a person that I'm the only one who doesn't look at my Bookbub ad every day.

Trust me, if there was a way to potentially reach those people as effectively without spending money you wouldn't have to be bothered seeing my book anymore. There really isn't right now. And, obviously, it doesn't "irritate" the majority or I wouldn't make my money back and then some every time I run it. 

Instead of denigrating those who run books several times, be glad you enjoy writing in a genre where you can find your readers easier. I'm not complaining that you can find your readers without doing so, why complain that others can't without using the most effective tool out there as much as we can? We aren't so stupid we would be doing so if it didn't work.


----------



## kpaul (Jun 18, 2013)

In the olden days, bookstores would give premium spots on their shelves for a LOT shorter time - like a day or a week? Then cycle the next book in.  (That premium placement was like Zon's Recent and Popular and other lists. So, thirty days is actually a lot longer than books got in the past. 

ETA: Also, I've noticed post-KU that some old classics (1950s) are shooting up in rankings...


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I don't  know that I would consider it a "doomsday" if Amazon started churning the new releases faster -- that would just mean more exposure to more books, and readers who browse new books would find it more rewarding to return and browse more often, because the list changes.

Any business model that depends too heavily on algorithms (specifically those that optimize timing and practices to get an extra bump over what they would otherwise get) is going to run into problems every couple of years.  That's just the nature of the beast.  This isn't just true of books and Amazon -- it's a pattern you see in any activity on the web (and even in the stock market).

Some people do pretty well changing up their strategy every year or so, but only if they are really good at spotting new trends and leaping on them.  But you have to be really good at changing gears.

I prefer the slow and steady method. It has always paid off in the end.

Camille


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

There seems to be two camps, for the most part.  The first camp seems to think that this isn't a big deal.  The first camp's adherents will say that every so often everyone runs around screaming "the sky is falling" and that this is just another change in a long line of changes (usually pointing back to when Select first started up and how everyone freaked out about it).

Then there are those who fall into the second camp, where I would put myself.  We believe what's happening now is a sea change, much bigger and of a total different category than previous changes (for the record, I was never at all concerned about Select when it first started up). 

Unfortunately, in camp #2 you also find conspiracy theorists and fear mongers, speculators of nonsensical misinformation.

Of the two camps, camp #1 seems much more level-headed and logical.  But in this case, I think the camp #2 people are much more on the money.  Something has changed.  It started a long time ago, maybe even a year ago, but was more of a blip on the radar.  Then it shifted again throughout the course of the last 6-8 months, and recently it shifted yet again, with the advent of Kindle Unlimited and even more pressure on the rankings and sales.

At this point, I'd say the Amazon store is almost completely unrecognizable to me from what it was a year or more ago.  Infinitely more competition, infinitely tougher to get visible, infinitely tougher to stay visible, much more difficult to make money off a single title.

People rely on advertising and sales promos to artificially boost books rankings, spending more and more money to get any reasonable result.  At some point, it will cost quite a bit of money to get proper advertising, and this will begin to create barriers to entry for the little guys and those (like me) who don't make use of Bookbub and the like.

Those in camp #1 can try and downplay things, but I'm sufficiently convinced that the sky is not falling--it has already fallen.  If you look hard enough, there's some puffy clouds right there and there and there, right in front of you!!


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

> Also, I've noticed post-KU that some old classics (1950s) are shooting up in rankings...


And again, think about it: How many new cars, new televisions, new washing machines, new computers, etc. are competing directly with the same products manufactured in the 1950s?

More books every day. More supply. Same demand. Something's gotta give.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Where is the "you may be right, but I'm not going to angst over things I can't influence and worry about what I can influence instead" category?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Where is the "you may be right, but I'm not going to angst over things I can't influence and worry about what I can influence instead" category?


That's not as fun--I like keeping it at two categories, like Amazon. So I guess that puts me in good company 

You're right about not getting angsty, but I think that discussing if this is real--and then understanding what might be causing it--can indeed help with strategy. That's for each publisher/author to decide. But pretending it hasn't happened is just as silly as whining incessantly and refusing to do anything about it.


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

> People rely on advertising and sales promos to artificially boost books rankings, spending more and more money to get any reasonable result. At some point, it will cost quite a bit of money to get proper advertising, and this will begin to create barriers to entry for the little guys and those (like me) who don't make use of Bookbub and the like.


I don't know a business or product that doesn't need to have advertising as part of its plan. How else do you think people find books? You can't just count on throwing the book out there and hoping it makes it big. Maybe you could before, but that's pretty hard to do now. Boosting your rank with a ad promo is no more "artificial" than having a bunch of ARC readers leave reviews, etc. You have to promote. If people don't see your book it can't rise in rank.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Caddy said:


> Boosting your rank with a ad promo is no more "artificial" than having a bunch of ARC readers leave reviews, etc. You have to promote. If people don't see your book it can't rise in rank.


I don't really have a problem with ads or promotions. I don't use them and never needed to previously.

My concern is that although my books can get visibility early on (without promotions), I can't sustain anything. And from what I've seen and read of promotions, they are fairly similar in that you get a nice boost for a few days and then a sink back into obscurity.

The good promotional/ad sites are very competitive and expensive.

So when I say artificial, I only mean that you need to continually go outside of Amazon now to get visibility "boosts." There's nothing wrong with it--but it points to the larger issue I'm looking at.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

> People rely on advertising and sales promos to artificially boost books rankings, spending more and more money to get any reasonable result. At some point, it will cost quite a bit of money to get proper advertising, and this will begin to create barriers to entry for the little guys and those (like me) who don't make use of Bookbub and the like.


First of all, I think that effective advertising = lots of money is fundamentally flawed. The problem is that what is effective varies per book/author. If you find it hard to get any traction for any book, it may be that there is something wrong with the product or its presentation.

The thing is that the books that get picked for Bookbub are almost always books that are ALREADY selling reasonably well.

For the absolute beginning prawn, life has always been hard. It was in 2011 and it's no different now.

Also, as usual all the focus in kerfuffles like this is on Amazon. I sell well on Kobo, B&N and Apple. I do not have Mac and I never go to the ibookstore because the iTunes software annoys the crap out of me. I am not in the US and can't shop at B&N. I never go that site either. Yet my books are doing fine there without me hovering about looking at their rankings. I forget Google Play, which doesn't even have rankings, and that's an absolute pain in the ^&$$% to navigate. Still, people find my books there.

Advertising is a custom-made assembly of stuff authors do to draw people to their books. Paid advertising is only a small part of it. All the stores above (or at least a good number of them) also offer alsobots that can work for you. Put yourself in the same categories as books you'd like to see there. Use keywords. Use cover art and blurbs. And buy the occasional ad on sites that people report good results with.

Yet when Amazon changes something, it's suddenly as if the sky is falling.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> First of all, I think that effective advertising = lots of money is fundamentally flawed. All the stores above (or at least a good number of them) also offer alsobots that can work for you. Put yourself in the same categories as books you'd like to see there. Use keywords. Use cover art and blurbs. And buy the occasional ad on sites that people report good results with.
> 
> Yet when Amazon changes something, it's suddenly as if the sky is falling.


Haha, well, I'm not sure what point you're making here. I sell well on the other sites, too, just like you're describing (mainly Kobo and B&N). That's in part why I'm tending not to go exclusive with Amazon.

You made the sky is falling comment, which I discussed earlier--that doesn't change anything about the validity of what I'm pointing out. Yes, I think at Amazon things have drastically changed. My books are in the proper categories and they DO in fact get discovered early on, when first published.

I've basically explained how things have changed (over the last year in particular) and I've backed it up with comments by Phoenix and H.M. Ward, and yet still it seems as though I'm a madman running around shouting naked in the streets.

I think what I'm talking about is a major change that's taken place at Amazon-- and that such a massive shift in how books are found and sold is a worthy topic of discussion. If you can point out where the logic is flawed, please do.


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

Caddy, you kept publishing. Why you think that was directed at you, I don't know... and I don't think ALL bookbub ads are stupid and I never said that. But promoting the same book over and over and over again and seeing dwindling results isn't a problem with the promotion, but just that the book has peaked.

There are very few products that don't have new packaging or new formula or new model as part of their marketing plan. In other words, even Tide, when it markets, is usually touting some brand new formula to make your whites whiter or to fight stains harder.... until they make a laundry detergent that will wash and fold my clothes for me, it's the same darn thing to me. Products that don't change packaging or formulas every few years fall into the "you need us, and there's little competition in our niche." Things like WD-40 or green scrubbies. 

Even super best-selling authors keep publishing. Rowling didn't stop forever after Harry Potter (and I'm sure the woman doesn't need more money at this point), and now she's even returning to the series. Hugh wrote more after Wool. Authors like King, Robb, Patterson etc. keep publishing. Because that's how you keep your fans happy. 

It is my hypothesis, and smarter publishers than me have known this and shared this and I also didn't listen, that if you write to your fan base, your new readers will come. Because fans tell others.

If however, an author feels like he or she just penned something that should just be a blockbuster that makes them tons and tons of money so they don't have to work anymore, realize that most of the literature that just sells and sells and sells is like 1% of the 1% of top authors. And even that number, many of those authors never saw that success in their lifetime.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Seriously, it seems like a sea change... and yeah, it might be, within the small microcosm of KDP.  But it's one that is totally expected.  Inevitable, even.

Those of us who say it's no big deal are going back much further than Select.  It goes back further than KDP even. (KDP being a real "sea change" of a much much greater scale than any changes in algorithms.)  You could even find models much further back than the internet, but most of us who realized that this is just a blip on the continuum are thinking about Google.

Amazon has said in stockholder reports that they consider their major competitor to be Google.  They think of themselves as a search company that uses retail as an income stream rather than as a retailer that uses search algorithms.  And if you look at the history of Google's search algorithms, you'll see it again and again.  People think the algorithm is forever. They optimize for the algorithm.  Google doesn't like how those optimized pages are climbing the search results in a way it considered unnatural... Google makes a huge change in the algorithm that takes away a "tool" people were counting on.

And yes, for those who were counting on that tool, this is a catastrophe.  But it's like building your house on the side of an active volcano that is known to have catastrophic eruptions every year or two.

Google (and Amazon definitely has a similar development cycle to Google -- with some hooks of its own) -- has multiple overhaul cycles.  As far as any individual webpage is concerned, there are adjustments that can have a major effect on your page monthly, quarterly, yearly, and then a big one every two or three years.  People who are not trying to optimize for Google's search algorithm hardly notice it -- because these adjustments are mainly intended to undercut people who are trying to get a leg up on the competition.    I used to notice it because two things would happen whenever Google did this: my income would jump, and all the people into SEO would scream about the end of the world.

And, yeah, it was kind of the end of the world, because everything those people worked so hard to achieve was permanently gone.  They'd built their houses on the side of a volcano.

BUT... two things happened. Some of those people just continued to build on the side of that volcano, but MOST people learned.  Instead of trying to game the algorithms, they started building their business on more solid ground.  Sure, if a technique came a long that boosted income, they might run in and play with it a bit -- but they recognized that it was a temporary thing, and they didn't build their whole business model around it. (Except for those whose business model was to cash in quick and get out quicker.)

So no, there aren't really two camps.  The glass is both half full AND half empty.  It is a sea change... and it's also not a big deal if you realize that the sea constantly changes.

Camille


----------



## Elizabeth Ann West (Jul 11, 2011)

+1 Camille. I think we're talking about the same thing.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> Seriously, it seems like a sea change... and yeah, it might be, within the small microcosm of KDP. But it's one that is totally expected. Inevitable, even.
> 
> Those of us who say it's no big deal are going back much further than Select.
> So no, there aren't really two camps. The glass is both half full AND half empty. It is a sea change... and it's also not a big deal if you realize that the sea constantly changes.
> Camille


Great post. I like what you're saying and pretty much agree with it.

That being said, it still makes sense to discuss events like this when they take place. I think most people are so scared about this stuff that they either try to minimize it (oh no, the sky is falling again with sarcastic eye roll inserted) or they freak out (Amazon wants to kill all indies). Hence, my two camps analogy.

My feeling is that it's a big deal, but manageable by understanding the impact and what strategies make sense given the nature of the change.

Currently, my strategy is to put more effort into non-Amazon outlets, because I think the competition and the "churn" is not as intense elsewhere...yet. As for Amazon, I'm going to keep trying new things, when possible, to see if anything sticks.

But I'll admit, to me the nature of the change appears to be that I'm hoping for Amazon to either go backwards a few steps with their tinkering, or perhaps other platforms to rise and gain more marketshare...I don't like thinking that way, it's just currently how I feel.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

> I've basically explained how things have changed (over the last year in particular) and I've backed it up with comments by Phoenix and H.M. Ward, and yet still it seems as though I'm a madman running around shouting naked in the streets.


Well, maybe you are a madman shouting naked in the streets. I can't check that from here. 

But. The thing is that all those people whose comments you cite may be right, but they're also trying to game Amazon only. And Amazon is only part of the story. And all their comments are analytical, too. Not pro-active. It's about analysing after sales have already happened, and then worrying about that something *may* have changed on Amazon. OMG the sky is falling!

The story is that a well-written book + series + genre-appropriate cover + good blurb + some advertising as suits the author + new releases is how you will climb slowly or less slowly to decent sales. Not stellar, not top-100 overall, but decent. Moderate living wage kind of decent.

That was true in tradepub, and it remains true now.

Write true to your passion and interest, build a readership and Amazon can go dance naked in the streets. Amazon is a vehicle you use, it's not a holy land.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> Well, maybe you are a madman shouting naked in the streets. I can't check that from here.


Nice. Haha. I will say, you're correct about the nature of their comments as well as my discussion here. Your advice is good and rings true to my experience.

Anyway, just because the sky fell doesn't mean we can't shoot for the stars. Maybe it's even easier this way...


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> Great post. I like what you're saying and pretty much agree with it.
> 
> That being said, it still makes sense to discuss events like this when they take place. I think most people are so scared about this stuff that they either try to minimize it (oh no, the sky is falling again with sarcastic eye roll inserted) or they freak out (Amazon wants to kill all indies). Hence, my two camps analogy.


I agree it's good to discuss it, but I take issue with your idea that people who don't think the sky is falling are scared. They aren't scared. They just have more realistic expectations. The only place they are wrong is in dismissing other people's pain. (At the same time, people who are going through difficulties don't always realize that people aren't actually dismissing them but trying to help them put it in perspective.)

The reason to discuss it is to help the people who are freaking out, or maybe to help people in future from getting so invested in algorithm-based techniques that they are devastated when it changes.

Camille


----------



## trublue (Jul 7, 2012)

Patty Jansen said:


> Where is the "you may be right, but I'm not going to angst over things I can't influence and worry about what I can influence instead" category?


Yes!!!!!!

I'm so over this topic


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> The reason to discuss it is to help the people who are freaking out, or maybe to help people in future from getting so invested in algorithm-based techniques that they are devastated when it changes


+1

Wibbow, wibbow, wibbow. Would I be better off writing? When something comes along that you cannot possibly influence or control (i.e., how Amazon or any other retailer sets up or changes their algorithms and terms and conditions and so forth), note it, and adjust your strategies and tactics accordingly, but really think about the time you're spending. Would you be better off writing the next book, or better off worrying about something you can't control?


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I think it goes without saying that 99 percent of the time I'm better off writing.

But since we're all here discussing self-publishing, I don't think it's so bad to discuss a very major change in how books are selling at Amazon.  As to what can be done about it, I don't think that something is silly to discuss simply because "we can't do anything about it."

First of all, I don't know yet what can be done.  Some people may have ideas or perspectives I haven't considered.  Maybe I'll get information, maybe I'll get told that my conclusions are wrong and it will be backed up by data, facts, or at least logic.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> ... and I don't think ALL bookbub ads are stupid and I never said that. But promoting the same book over and over and over again and seeing dwindling results isn't a problem with the promotion, but just that the book has peaked.


SMP is built around backlist. Old backlist. And yet we keep selling. I have a BB ad on Sunday for my 2011 thriller that's seen #84 paid, #1 free and #79 paid via BB. Silly me pimping the old girl out yet again...



Patty Jansen said:


> Also, as usual all the focus in kerfuffles like this is on Amazon. I sell well on Kobo, B&N and Apple. I do not have Mac and I never go to the ibookstore because the iTunes software annoys the crap out of me. I am not in the US and can't shop at B&N. I never go that site either. Yet my books are doing fine there without me hovering about looking at their rankings. I forget Google Play, which doesn't even have rankings, and that's an absolute pain in the ^&$$% to navigate. Still, people find my books there.
> 
> Advertising is a custom-made assembly of stuff authors do to draw people to their books. Paid advertising is only a small part of it. All the stores above (or at least a good number of them) also offer alsobots that can work for you. Put yourself in the same categories as books you'd like to see there. Use keywords. Use cover art and blurbs. And buy the occasional ad on sites that people report good results with.
> 
> Yet when Amazon changes something, it's suddenly as if the sky is falling.


Patty, you're right. Most of us are concentrating on Amazon because 1) it's our biggest market and 2) we pay more attention to its algorithms. Maybe we should start a separate thread about the other stores and the issues we have with them. Like for BN who've in the past set a #125 rank threshold for sexy times books. Who apparently curate their New Releases list so only 300 hand-picked titles appear at a time. Who go through periods of 99 cent price bias that can tank a 99c release simply depending on when it's released. I'm happy enough to gripe about how they also throw obstacles in the path of *our* selling success, whether those same obstacles affect anyone else or not. We've sold over 50,000 units on BN this year; I'm sure there are some on this thread who wouldn't understand there's any issue.

It's not that we can't sell; it's that we can't sell as optimally as we would like.

And that might be the crux of the divide between the two disparate camps. Those selling well are seeing the changes affect them at the better ranks more so than those who aren't selling as much. To be frank, even with the changes, the successful will continue to be more successful than those in the camp who are shrugging their shoulders and saying they'll just continue to navigate the calm waters where they are as they always have.



Jim Johnson said:


> Would you be better off writing the next book, or better off worrying about something you can't control?


Why are those things mutually exclusive? Do you write 24 hours a day? Should writers not have conversations about the weather or politics or the world economy or anything else they can't control and instead just go off and write to the exclusion of, you know, thinking?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Sigh.

I would be better off writing.

But I will make one more attempt:

When people say "there is nothing you can do about it, so you'd be better off writing" they ARE discussing it.  And they are discussing it in the most useful way.  That is, they're saying: okay, what you were doing is not going to be effective any more, so what next?  Write.  That's the one thing you control, and until you know what the next wave will bring, that is the most useful thing you can do.

This is the one thing I learned from all the Google shake outs (and for that matter, all the stock market shake outs): In the end you are always better off going back to the basics, especially in times of uncertainty.  Create (or invest in) value.  Look to do a better job of serving your audience.  Look to making your production more efficient.  And to quote the old Baron de Rothschilde -- when there is blood in the streets, buy.  That is, don't be distracted by panic, instead, find value and invest in it, because the panic will pass.

For us, "buy" means to create property or value.  Build on to your foundation.

Camille


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

I like the way you put things, Camille.  And of course I agree that creating more product and sticking with the basics is the way to go.  Write good stuff, make good covers, blurbs, genre choices, etc.

But the stuff that people like Phoenix  bring to the table (and Courtney Milan and others), people who really study the way these platforms work…they bring knowledge that to me is priceless.  And for me, discussing these patterns and trying to tap into the wealth of others who are keeping track of what's happening, is also priceless.

It's too simplistic to say that all you can do is not panic and just write more.  The truth is, people like Phoenix are doing way more than that, and if I can get a few ideas from them, a few crumbs, then I might learn something that helps my business.

When I make a post like this, I hope that someone who really studies this market and cares about it will perhaps step in and mention some of what they're seeing.  Or maybe someone else like me who's seeing anecdotal evidence will chime in too.  Maybe a picture will emerge.

My mind naturally works that way. If someone else just puts their head down and pushes forward, I don't begrudge them that.  It's simply not how I approach this business.

I like to think about what it all means, where the advantage might be, what people might be missing, what I might be missing.  It's fun for me.  If you're tired of it and want to write, go write.  I'll be here when you come back.


----------



## trublue (Jul 7, 2012)

Jim Johnson said:


> +1
> 
> Wibbow, wibbow, wibbow. Would I be better off writing? When something comes along that you cannot possibly influence or control (i.e., how Amazon or any other retailer sets up or changes their algorithms and terms and conditions and so forth), note it, and adjust your strategies and tactics accordingly, but really think about the time you're spending. Would you be better off writing the next book, or better off worrying about something you can't control?


Yes, this is so true. Guys no matter what industry you are in, there will be changes. Some will work for us and some won't. In the end, the only thing you can do is keep writing.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I'm not going to comment on anyone's specific advice.

I'm just going to point out what I said above about rebuilding your house on the side of the active volcano. Playing the algorithms is always a short term, temporary strategy. The new world order will also be replaced by a newer one. I enjoy studying algorithms as much as anyone (heck, I've been doing it for years and years) -- but the longer you study it, the more firm the lesson is: _stop playing the system_ and start looking at the goals of the system.

The goals of the system here is to serve the readers. Everything about it will change and change again, but that stays constant. When I did article farm writing, people studied the algorithms and would shoot to success, only to be shot down again and again. Those who concentrated on the articles themselves -- on being useful and clear, etc -- always did better and better as the algorithms changed. They did better not because they were following every wrinkle in how the algorithms worked, but because they realized where the algorithms were going.

Create the product the algorithm is looking for, and it will come to you. It may take a while, and you'll have ups and downs, but on the whole, most of the changes will be good for you. IF you keep the goal in mind rather than the temporary current practice.

Camille


----------



## pauldude000 (May 22, 2013)

Elizabeth Ann West said:


> I think amazon is starting to reward frequent publishers vs the same title we've seen promoted again and again and again for three years. And that's important because it's how you make readers happy that there's something new to come buy everyday.


That actually does make sense and it fits perfectly with Amazon's public image.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> I'm just going to point out what I said above about rebuilding your house on the side of the active volcano. Playing the algorithms is always a short term, temporary strategy. The new world order will also be replaced by a newer one. I enjoy studying algorithms as much as anyone (heck, I've been doing it for years and years) -- but the longer you study it, the more firm the lesson is: _stop playing the system_ and start looking at the goals of the system.


Well, first, I'm not playing the system. I'm working with the system. Maybe you don't see the difference, but I do. And the goals of the system, in this case, are changing. Right now, I don't know what Amazon's end game is. Do you? Do they want to play indies as pawns in their negotiations with the Big 5? Do they want to encourage higher-priced books? More churn? Push more customers into KU? Grab more market share? Increase their margins? Sacrifice ebooks as loss leaders for selling everything else in their store?

In the end, it would be great to say the vendor's goal is the same as mine: to sell more high-quality books to an increasingly larger audience.

A lot of the authors I work with, however, are retired and only dabbling in writing. They've sold their millions of copies in print and have paid their writing dues. They aren't producing quickly. So I've got a lot of static inventory to optimize. I've also chosen to capitalize on short-term gains with multi-author box sets. By their nature, that's inventory that churns very quickly and has limited shelf life. There is no long tail.

But even without that, my philosophy on ebook sales is not that it's a marathon, running doggedly and pacing oneself from start to finish. It's a race made up of sprints. There is money to be made now if we're quick enough to act on it. I'd like to make as much as possible while we know there's still gold to be had and not bank on the gold being there in 2 years or 10 down the road.

Not everyone is going to agree with my philosophy. Some will think it crass to say money is my aim. But it sure as heck is Amazon's end game in whatever form that manifests. It's every publisher's end game, though it may not be every author's.

Some of the smart and the lucky will adapt and thrive. Some will be swept away in the lava flow. But just because others choose to avoid the volcano doesn't mean they won't get caught in a tornado or drought or wildfire or be hit by a bus they never saw coming. Everything we do is a risk. Including writing more. Producing more product -- especially if it's not what readers want -- isn't always the right answer.


----------



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

kpaul said:


> In the olden days, bookstores would give premium spots on their shelves for a LOT shorter time - like a day or a week? Then cycle the next book in. (That premium placement was like Zon's Recent and Popular and other lists. So, thirty days is actually a lot longer than books got in the past.
> 
> ETA: Also, I've noticed post-KU that some old classics (1950s) are shooting up in rankings...


I was about to post about the bookshops churning the books. A number of years ago I read that some of the supermarkets etc that sell books turn them over in hours rather than days. I'm fortunate that one of my books has prime book real estate on the counter near the till. When a new minion came along and moved it to the shelves sales dropped to nil  
We are fortunate that we can do something to boost sales by advertising, doing freebies and countdowns etc and interacting with our readers on boards such as this. If you are trad published you just have to watch your book sink and there's not much you can do about it (except by sneakily rearranging the bookshelves in the bookshop to your advantage


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

This is why it is so important to be present on as many platforms as possible. So if there is an issue at one platform, e.g. an Amazon algorithm change cutting sales in half or Kobo pulling all self-published books in a panic attack over erotica or one of the many other things that have happened, there's always another platform to pick up the slack.

Like I said, my Amazon.com sales have dwindled in the past three months. However, at the same time my Amazon DE sales exploded due to a successful new release, Weltbild (Who?) also grew and passed Amazon.com and Scribd is looking good. The more income streams you have, the less the collapse of one retailer can hurt you.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

I'm not sure the goal _is_ churn.

As I was saying on the other thread, and as Phoenix has already pointed out, these changes seem to be reactionary against Bookbub and other promotional sites.

What most of us have observed is that Amazon algorithms are no longer rewarding sales spikes. They still reward incremental growth and they reward slow and steady sales. They've done this for a long time, in fact. I thought it was common knowledge with a new release to try to divide your list up and get a chunk of people buying for four days in a row if you wanted to crack the algos and stay up on the charts. Isn't that in Let's Get Visible? (Not that I would know personally, considering only 20-40 of the 900 people on my mailing list ever buy my new releases. So I ain't got enough to divide.  But from people who have lotses of fans, dividing up the list is apparently the way to go.)

Anyway, I do agree that spikes are rewarded _even less_ than they used to be. But I don't think this is because Amazon wants more churn to the charts, but rather because they are trying to prevent churn. I think they want to keep promoted books from upsetting the apple cart and from displacing other books, which are selling well organically. I think that new releases are getting caught in the crossfire in an attempt to suppress promoted books.


----------



## UltraRob (Dec 5, 2011)

Just wait until Amazon starts deleting books with sufficiently low sales or ratings to clean up their catalogue. There will be a "new release" period and then if you can't find an audience you'll be out the door after a certain amount of time or if your ranking drops below a certain threshhold. It's coming, it's just a matter of when.

Then again, this might be a good thing, after all it will get rid of a lot of the clutter and clean up the searches. Good books will become easier to find, whereas the drek will be removed entirely. 

Rob


----------



## EC (Aug 20, 2013)

Patty Jansen said:


> Where is the "you may be right, but I'm not going to angst over things I can't influence and worry about what I can influence instead" category?


Thank you Patty - I've spent all week polishing up a title that I hope to pub on Sunday.

Then on Monday I'll start on a new title.

All I can control is my output -


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

UltraRob said:


> Just wait until Amazon starts deleting books with sufficiently low sales or ratings to clean up their catalogue. There will be a "new release" period and then if you can't find an audience you'll be out the door after a certain amount of time or if your ranking drops below a certain threshhold. It's coming, it's just a matter of when.


What?!

I can think of zero reason for Amazon to ever do anything like this. They have unlimited digital space. That's the whole selling point of the store in the first place. They have EVERYTHING. (Remember, back in 2003, if you wanted to read a book that was out of print and your library didn't have it and it couldn't be ordered? You found it on Amazon.)


----------



## Bookslinger (Jan 12, 2014)

UltraRob said:


> Just wait until Amazon starts deleting books with sufficiently low sales or ratings to clean up their catalogue. There will be a "new release" period and then if you can't find an audience you'll be out the door after a certain amount of time or if your ranking drops below a certain threshhold. It's coming, it's just a matter of when.


Some of the people here sure do like their speculation presented as fact.

I like this thread. I think the OP has good points, but many of the responses are so true. Camille is probably the most right. People have been trying to game Amazon for years now and they get so panicked when Amazon stops allowing it. You should expect that Amazon is going to change up things. That's what they're all about. It almost certainly is just trying to figure out how to accommodate their many writers who all want attention (and I'm sure Amazon wants them to have that attention so they will stay on the website and maybe some of them will even hit it big). Predicting that every single thing Amazon does is the beginning of their their Dark Plan to screw indies over is not helpful. It's getting a little old reading that on these boards, quite frankly.

I think the OP should also consider that just talking about strategy in these kinds of threads, unfortunately, means you're going to have more competition doing the same strategy you are. (Haven't we seen that with Viola Rivard's awesome posts and the fact that now many writers are attempting to copy her?) I'm all for sharing information, but sometimes it works against your goals. You're putting stuff out there for a ton of writers to see. Most of them will never comment on this website, but they're definitely watching what you're doing because they obviously want the same thing you want.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Bookslinger (Jan 12, 2014)

What?!

I can think of zero reason for Amazon to ever do anything like this. They have unlimited digital space. That's the whole selling point of the store in the first place. They have EVERYTHING. (Remember, back in 2003, if you wanted to read a book that was out of print and your library didn't have it and it couldn't be ordered? You found it on Amazon.)
[/quote]

I think it's more likely that you'll see the writers who can't get traction just give up and pull their stuff from Amazon. I already know of writers who have done this. They didn't like their reviews or they just didn't hit it as big as they wanted to pay certain bills and poof, they were out.

Since Amazon seems to want to be "the everything store," I don't see many of the panicky scenarios that are often presented happening in reality. They want more stock, not less. So it will just be a matter of whether it benefits the people who want to provide that stock to keep it on their website, go somewhere else, or just get out of the game entirely.


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2014)

reading Camille and Phoenix argue their positions on this thread.


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

> Including writing more. Producing more product -- especially if it's not what readers want -- isn't always the right answer.


But what will readers want next year? In three years? That changes, too. A few genres are always solid, but some ebb and flow. There is just as much risk in chasing the popular genre. And you need to enjoy writing the book, too, or it shows. Authors have to also understand there is more money to be made in certain genres, but if you write great books in any genre and keep producing great books, you will eventually make a living. Four thousand dollars a month, for example, is vastly different from ten thousand a month, but it is still a decent living, right? And some may only want a thousand a month because they write for love and hoping to make enough to paid for a cool trip every year, or extra money to afford to go out to dinner and movies, etc.

We aren't all going to "get rich". Authors that expect to get rich in months or even a couple of years are going to be disappointed nine times out of ten. Even those who expect to make a living in a couple of years will be. But making a living can be done in any genre, if you write great books, keep producing, and find your audience.

Take the $4,000 a month. Let's say you sell for $4.99. To make $4,200 a month you need to sell 1,200 books a month. That sounds hard for most of us, but if you have 10 books, that's only 120 books of each. If you have 20, it's only 60 of each. If you have 30, it's only a book a day. Obviously, some will sell more and some less. Also, there are fees taken out of your royalties by Amazon, but you get the picture.

So, maybe the answer is not chasing after the "gold rush" but concentrating on making a normal, decent living. If you strike gold, great, but in the meantime you need to love writing what you write and you need to pay your bills. Make it a goal to make enough to do that and it is not insurmountable.

The key is great books. Not just pushing out "okay" or subpar books to build a backlist as quick as possible. If you can write great books quickly, fine. If not, you can still make a living. The key, once again, is great books. Solid story, great cover, great editing/proofing, wise marketing and planning on buying some advertising. It doesn't have to be expensive (and I would argue Bookbub is NOT expensive as you get your money back and then some if you have a series), but any business needs to plan for advertising.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Great insights, Caddy. Thanks for sharing them.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

gorvnice said:


> Here is where H.M. Ward also mentioned this change (before KU even happened). And if she's noticing it, then you know it's HUGE.
> 
> http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,188585.msg2659793.html#msg2659793
> From H.M. Ward:
> ...


It's worth noting that Holly is riding a 15-volume series with no end in sight. I'm still faithfully buying every installment, but that's likely a problem with new releases in such a long series: your pool of potential buyers narrows with each installment. New releases won't spike as high.

That said, I agree Amazon is trying to suppress bumps due to BB ads and the like. Eventually, things will calm down and level out to a new normal. New strategies will arise.

The level of panic here has been toxic in the last few days.  I'm a member of several closed writers forums with people who are making a living at this - and the attitude there is: watch, wait, learn, adapt. There's little needless speculation or undercurrent of fear, anger, and panic. That's reserved for KB, as usual... It's unfortunate because I like KB, but every day I find I get less and less out of spending time here.

I'm going to stop speculating about this and resume speculating about what really matters: how to write a damn good book that people will want to read.


----------



## ElHawk (Aug 13, 2012)

I find all these speculation threads frankly ridiculous. All sorts of things _could_ happen or _might_ happen or _maybe will_ happen.

Why expend energy and emotion fretting about this stuff? It's probably equally likely that all the popular doomsday scenarios won't happen, and meanwhile you've just tripped yourself out and wasted your writing time by fantasizing about the End of Days.

The only thing that's worth devoting this much thought and angst and discussion to is how you're going to maximize your business with regards to _what's actually happening right now_. What you KNOW about the market, not what you predict MIGHT happen.

I mean, I swear, if I had a nickel for every prophet's prediction that never even came close to coming true, I wouldn't need to write books anymore.


----------



## dianasg (Jan 8, 2010)

ElHawk said:


> I find all these speculation threads frankly ridiculous. All sorts of things _could_ happen or _might_ happen or _maybe will_ happen.
> 
> Why expend energy and emotion fretting about this stuff? It's probably equally likely that all the popular doomsday scenarios won't happen, and meanwhile you've just tripped yourself out and wasted your writing time by fantasizing about the End of Days.
> 
> ...


This! Voices like yours are the reason I stick around!


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

ElHawk said:


> I find all these speculation threads frankly ridiculous. All sorts of things _could_ happen or _might_ happen or _maybe will_ happen.
> 
> Why expend energy and emotion fretting about this stuff? It's probably equally likely that all the popular doomsday scenarios won't happen, and meanwhile you've just tripped yourself out and wasted your writing time by fantasizing about the End of Days.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

ElHawk said:


> I find all these speculation threads frankly ridiculous. All sorts of things _could_ happen or _might_ happen or _maybe will_ happen.
> 
> Why expend energy and emotion fretting about this stuff? It's probably equally likely that all the popular doomsday scenarios won't happen, and meanwhile you've just tripped yourself out and wasted your writing time by fantasizing about the End of Days.
> 
> ...


To keep me entertained while I procrastinate taking out the trash.
I am enjoying the debate between Phoenix and Camille.
Now to the one that said Amazon should pull low selling books. Let's do a bit of math. It costs less than 1 cent for Amazon to store your book. For simple math, I am going to say each low seller costs $2.99. If there are 50,000 that sell one copy a month, Amazon has made roughly $49,000. Would you like $49,000 a month? Note I subtracted roughly $1000 for fees and other little details.
Why would Amazon throw away that kind of money? If you would throw away that kind of money, please contact me immediately I have some nice business investments for you.

Key Points:
Don't panic and remember this is a business.
In business, you always take a chance on not having tomorrow there. (Pick a field please. Stock Market, Oil Field, Retail if the major industry in your area collapses, etc)


----------



## CfaE (Jul 25, 2014)

I think, like someone else said, that it paves the way for more authors to see the bestseller lists, which I like the idea of.

As someone who has been publishing on KDP since 2010, and has never seen the Amazon 'promotion' on any of my books yet, I'm probably a bit biased in wanting to see some visibility land on more books. But then, I don't see the 30 day rule being 100% accurate either. 

A friend of mine published his second book recently, and he got the Amazon algorithm promoting his book for him. He doesn't know how he got it because he didn't do any promotion himself. He was too busy playing a video game. But his book picked up some speed, and it got the kiss of Amazon visibility. It kept a high rank for about two months. He made a nice chunk of cash off it that would pay his wages for the next four months. He plans to put out another book when the money runs out, or when he gets bored of that video game. Whatever happens first. (This is not my method of marketing. I spent four years working my ass off instead, but apparently playing video games works better than all the things I've tried--World of Warcraft here I come! )

I suppose it depends on how much you earn as a bestseller, and how much you want to earn as an author, but the current system seems to give you enough cash to make a living for a few months from one bestseller, so by putting out a new book every few months (four seems reasonable), you should still get an income from it. 

I don't think Ammy would reduce it to a week. But if they did, everyone would get a bestseller week, which at 100 sales a day for seven days based on a price of $2.99 would make them all $1,400, which would pay for a low-end month's wages. That's not counting cross sales on your other books, which could double your income if not more. Basically, whatever Amazon change, there is always a way to make a living off it if Amazon shows your books to the customers.

However, if you're on the invisible shelf (it's on page 354 of every category), you're probably not going to earn very much no matter how hard you work. That's just the luck of the draw, I guess.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I'm not sure that Phoenix and I are really having a debate.  I think it's more ... The two sides of this thing don't match up in focus at all.  I think she'd really like to talk pros and cons of algorithms, maybe debate which strategies are better or worse -- but that isn't relevant to the other side.  And our view isn't relevant to her.

It's like two different discussions going on in the same space.  (And I suspect that's frustrating.  The people who want that debate about algorithm strategies just didn't show up.)

Camille


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

Caddy said:


> But what will readers want next year? In three years? That changes, too. A few genres are always solid, but some ebb and flow. There is just as much risk in chasing the popular genre. And you need to enjoy writing the book, too, or it shows. Authors have to also understand there is more money to be made in certain genres, but if you write great books in any genre and keep producing great books, you will eventually make a living. Four thousand dollars a month, for example, is vastly different from ten thousand a month, but it is still a decent living, right? And some may only want a thousand a month because they write for love and hoping to make enough to paid for a cool trip every year, or extra money to afford to go out to dinner and movies, etc.
> 
> We aren't all going to "get rich". Authors that expect to get rich in months or even a couple of years are going to be disappointed nine times out of ten. Even those who expect to make a living in a couple of years will be. But making a living can be done in any genre, if you write great books, keep producing, and find your audience.
> 
> ...


+1+1+1+1+1

IMHO. You've absolutely nailed it with this post, Caddy.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> It's like two different discussions going on in the same space. (And I suspect that's frustrating. The people who want that debate about algorithm strategies just didn't show up.)


I think you're right. It reminds me of discussions writers have had elsewhere debating rejectomancy on short story (and novel) submissions. There's a camp that tries to pick apart every possible detail and every possible reason why a particular story or submission got rejected and what the best way would be to score an acceptance on a market. And then the other camp is in the 'just write more stories, keep learning craft, and send them out; the sales will come over time if you're persistent and prolific."

I had a pair of good friends, good writers, in my old writer group who both gave up writing because they spent so much time playing the rejectomancy game that they burned themselves out. And I liked their stories. :/


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Jim Johnson said:


> I think you're right. It reminds me of discussions writers have had elsewhere debating rejectomancy on short story (and novel) submissions. There's a camp that tries to pick apart every possible detail and every possible reason why a particular story or submission got rejected and what the best way would be to score an acceptance on a market. And then the other camp is in the 'just write more stories, keep learning craft, and send them out; the sales will come over time if you're persistent and prolific."
> 
> I had a pair of good friends, good writers, in my old writer group who both gave up writing because they spent so much time playing the rejectomancy game that they burned themselves out. And I liked their stories. :/


I think this is why the old saw about how everybody has to receive 100 rejections before they are published was such a useful rule of thumb even though there was no basis in reality behind it: it keeps people from obsessing about what rejections mean. They just concentrate on acquiring them (which you can't do without writing and submitting) and it gets them past the obsessive stage.

Camille


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

ElHawk said:


> I find all these speculation threads frankly ridiculous. All sorts of things _could_ happen or _might_ happen or _maybe will_ happen.
> 
> Why expend energy and emotion fretting about this stuff? It's probably equally likely that all the popular doomsday scenarios won't happen, and meanwhile you've just tripped yourself out and wasted your writing time by fantasizing about the End of Days.
> 
> ...


I'm not into speculating, but something HAS happened that has negatively affected my sales and I want to know what it is. It's no coincidence it's happened at the same time everyone else's did. 
I'm not speculating what may happen in the future, but something is happening right now.


----------



## Wired (Jan 10, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> ...something HAS happened that has negatively affected my sales and I want to know what it is. It's no coincidence it's happened at the same time everyone else's did. I'm not speculating what may happen in the future, but something is happening right now.


This.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Note: I know absolutely nothing about publishing but here are my thoughts on what happened.
1.  It is the Mommy I want season in the Northern Hemisphere.
2.  They are always adding  new books so Amazon had to change the speed of some of their algorithms.
3.  Amazon just released their own subscription program.
4.  They recently added a phone to their hardware.
5. Phone and subscription services mean new customers.
6.  New means slower for a bit.

Put all of these things together and I would bet you 10 authors paychecks that nearly everyone is experiencing a slight sales drop.  This includes the big names.
Other thought: do you really think that Stephen King sells thousands of one or two of his books every day?  I don't doubt that he sells 1000 a day but I bet it is spread out of several books.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

For what it is worth, my sales are doing nicely, thank you very much.

Every time someone posts a "Is KDP stuck?" thread, there are others who agree with it. After having worked in retail, I know that sometimes, yes, there is a problem, but more often, retail is just... lumpy. I'd have three copies of the same book sitting on the shelf for months and months and months, then all of a sudden, eight people come along on the same day wanting a copy. Three are in luck, but for the other five, I'd be banging my head against the wall. Why? Yegads, whyyyyyy? Sometimes I'd ask them: is there a course or something where some lecturer recommended this book. Nope.

Fiction sales are no different, but at least we can no longer run out of stock.

I think the flood of instantaneous data turns some people into obsessive checkers and analysers. As long as you understand that analysis is a tool and a much less important one than a great product.

I'm not of the "check my sales once every week variety". I like to know what is going on. Seeing small numbers of sales coming in during the day keeps me happy. But that's about it. I think back to the query submission days where I'd wait for months to hear back. The frustration drove me batty. They'd consider my book for five minutes, but spend nine months doing it?


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

I don't think my sales dropping from 300+ a day to 170 in the span of four days,  and also vanishing from also - boughts and sub category bestseller lists is due to something "lumpy".


----------



## A past poster (Oct 23, 2013)

J Ryan said:


> I'm not into speculating, but something HAS happened that has negatively affected my sales and I want to know what it is. It's no coincidence it's happened at the same time everyone else's did.


This


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

There appears to be a "nothing has happened at all and everything is a-ok" group and a "the end of the world is nigh!" Crowd. 

Then there's the group like me that sees something has happened and just wants answers.  I don't think it's the apocalypse,  but I just want to know what the heck happened. 
Unfortunately those in my camp seem to rankle the feathers of the other two sides.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

J Ryan said:


> There appears to be a "nothing has happened at all and everything is a-ok" group and a "the end of the world is nigh!" Crowd.
> 
> Then there's the group like me that sees something has happened and just wants answers. I don't think it's the apocalypse, but I just want to know what the heck happened.
> Unfortunately those in my camp seem to rankle the feathers of the other two sides.


I think we have some answers, even if we're not sure why or where it's leading. The algo's have placed added pressure on books. Also Boughts seem to be "crunching" less, and also perhaps dropping off more quickly if sales are not maintained.

There are certainly questions about what it means overall. Perhaps some stability will come back to the platform once things settle down. But even before this KU situation, I've noticed the algo change and how much pressure it put on my books.

I've gotten some insight and developed some possible strategies thanks to what others have posted here and in the other threads around. So thanks to all the folks who've contributed thoughts and theories.

I'm very happy with how this thread turned out, even if I could've spent some of this time writing my new book! 

Best of luck to everyone else, may your sales be plentiful and constant!!!


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> I don't think my sales dropping from 300+ a day to 170 in the span of four days, and also vanishing from also - boughts and sub category bestseller lists is due to something "lumpy".


On a site that sells hundreds of thousands of books every day, with millions more in stock? Sorry to break it to you, but that's not a lump, that's a dimple.

_Edited to comply with Forum Decorum. Civility, please. --Betsy_


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

atmaweapon said:


> On a site that sells hundreds of thousands of books every day, with millions more in stock? Sorry to break it to you, but that's not a lump, that's a dimple.


Actually, I think that snapshot of data is meaningful, and I don't think dismissing it the way you just did is fair or accurate.

That snapshot of data, along with the relevant points made by people in the know like H.M. Ward, Phoenix Sullivan and Courtney Milan say that there is something happening. Despite the fact that its all a drop in the bucket, that drop matters to a lot of us.

_Edited quoted text. --Betsy_


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

atmaweapon said:


> On a site that sells hundreds of thousands of books every day, with millions more in stock? Sorry to break it to you, but that's not a lump, that's a dimple.


Yes it's a very drastic drop that occurred in the span of four days. My sales have been climbing every day since I started publishing. You're telling me they climbed every day and then just completely fell off a cliff like that one day? Meanwhile others on here are reporting the exact same thing? Whatever.

_Edited quoted text and a reference to the quoted text. --Betsy_


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Gosh, we're ALL self-centred, because we're human. Or none of us are. Just quit it with the name-calling. There is no need for it. Nor does a discussion qualify as rankling feathers.

I think there is a very important mantra that self-publishers seem to forget but that applies to everything in life:

_What goes up, must come down_

No author, no book, not even Harry Potter or George RR Martin, will continue to sell better or even at the same level all the time. Those stratospheric books have a much longer tail than ours, but a tail, they have.

You can discuss about why indefinitely, but it's not something you can do anything about. Putting out another great product is.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> Gosh, we're ALL self-centred, because we're human. Or none of us are. Just quit it with the name-calling. There is no need for it. Nor does a discussion qualify as rankling feathers.
> 
> I think there is a very important mantra that self-publishers seem to forget but that applies to everything in life:
> 
> ...


Oh make no mistake. I'm still working on my next serial. I'm just afraid it'll never have a chance to get off the ground with the way things dropped over the last four days, but I'll keep plugging along.

Like I said in another thread: I have 12 novellas and one novel planned before the end of the year. 
Hopefully things turn out well with all of them.

I just find it strange that I dropped like a rock so quickly and others are reporting the same thing.

But I digress. At this point I'm just repeating myself and I have nothing new to add.


----------



## Edward W. Robertson (May 18, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> I think there is a very important mantra that self-publishers seem to forget but that applies to everything in life:
> 
> _What goes up, must come down_
> 
> ...


That is a tremendously important quote to bear in mind. We should all staple it above our desks. Or, for many of us, our beds/couches/that really big dog bed that they never use even though it feels like it's made from a skinned cloud. In my mind, it's publishing's Rule #1.

I don't think it's true that there's never anything you can do, though. What if, for instance, Amazon stopped promoting earlier volumes of a series as heavily as they used to? There would absolutely be things you could do about that. You could try writing shorter series, for one. Just being aware that you'd need to put more focus on promoting the first book could be very helpful. The details behind a change matter.

That said, I'd bet the answer here is that Thunderdome is simply getting more Thunderdome. If true, there isn't much to be done about that. I like hearing about what others are seeing, though. I'm a geek for this stuff. And sometimes, threads like this expose changes that _can_ be acted on.


----------



## Book Master (May 3, 2013)

You know, lately, every-time I visit this site I read the doom and gloom. I'm tired of reading how amazon is against us. H*ll, it is in every thread just about anymore.

Stop with the rehash about the company that supports you.Wake up folks to your number one Company that gives you the chance to make real money out their in the real world.

It is bad for business including yours and it is bad for those that have to work this website to have to monitor everything that is published online here on the site.

You know what, I use to learn a few things from some of the best on this site. I know a little about self publishing but the advice I learn here is helpful. 

When I read many threads condemning the company that you associate with, then it becomes discerning  to me that something is wrong.

The company, Amazon, has your best interest at heart. They are not out there to utilize you as an Author as a tool.

I have read many successful Authors on this site and what they do to succeed. Follow that advice and continue to employ what they teach as that will only help you be a success.

I have nothing to say against the Company I'm associated with. Best advice to others is do what is preached so often here..................Continue to Write & Publish Great Books!


----------



## FictionalWriter (Aug 4, 2010)

Book Master said:


> The company, Amazon, has your best interest at heart. They are not out there to utilize you as an Author as a tool.


Not sure if that was tongue-in-cheek, but it did make me smile. Okay, it made me chuckle a little too.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> Right now, I don't know what Amazon's end game is. Do you? Do they want to play indies as pawns in their negotiations with the Big 5? Do they want to encourage higher-priced books? More churn? Push more customers into KU? Grab more market share? Increase their margins? Sacrifice ebooks as loss leaders for selling everything else in their store?


I don't know either, but I'm going to hazard a guess: customer satisfaction which leads to more sales.

In a sense I think we're a gateway drug. A simple transaction, fully under control of Amazon as long as the customer's kindle goes online regularly, with a generous return policy, will lead to customer satisfaction which can/will be transferred to other items. The end game? Customers who buy most, if not all of their stuff, at easy, cheap, customer friendly Amazon.

As long as we play along, we should be good. As long as our products are good we will be beneficial to customer satisfaction, hence to Amazon's end game. As long as we drive our readers to Amazon, Amazon will help us.



CoraBuhlert said:


> This is why it is so important to be present on as many platforms as possible. So if there is an issue at one platform, e.g. an Amazon algorithm change cutting sales in half or Kobo pulling all self-published books in a panic attack over erotica or one of the many other things that have happened, there's always another platform to pick up the slack.
> 
> Like I said, my Amazon.com sales have dwindled in the past three months. However, at the same time my Amazon DE sales exploded due to a successful new release, Weltbild (Who?) also grew and passed Amazon.com and Scribd is looking good. The more income streams you have, the less the collapse of one retailer can hurt you.


I completely agree with a policy of diversification and trying to get in touch with your reader base (whether through social media, reader lists or other means).
If you're a fan of JK Rowling you're going to buy her latest book, no matter where it is sold.

It could be completely coincidence, but my sales with other vendors have been up as well. Amazon dot com is now at 60% of my sales, down from 78% last year.
Even in the last days I have seen an uptick, which I can't explain.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Andrew,
My amazon account agrees with your drug analogy.


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Patty Jansen said:


> I think there is a very important mantra that self-publishers seem to forget but that applies to everything in life:
> 
> _What goes up, must come down_
> 
> No author, no book, not even Harry Potter or George RR Martin, will continue to sell better or even at the same level all the time. Those stratospheric books have a much longer tail than ours, but a tail, they have.


See, I think a lot of us are very aware of that principle. What we're discussing is a change that has rearranged the very physics of how fast things go up and come down in Amazon world.

Now, again, I'm fine if you don't care about the physics and how it's changed or why. But some of us do care, and we're intrigued by the changes, looking for data snapshots and pictures to help build an analysis of this very dynamic situation.

A lot of where I had success was through just such an analysis, and I feel (as I said earlier) that I've gained some ideas about how to approach the next little while based in part on this discussion. This isn't useless for me, I assure you. People like Phoenix and others who are talking about these changes do it because it helps them in some small way.

Everyone has their process that works. If this sort of discussion didn't help me at some level, I wouldn't bother. A lot of us have been writing for years, some of us have been successful at self-publishing, and we're not losing sight of the very basic methods that work. We're simply trying to fine tune what we're seeing so that we can get better at this business.


----------



## Book Master (May 3, 2013)

You place a post on WC, everyone comes after you. It is the truth, stop condemning the Company that feeds you.

Cinisajoy, I love ya! You are something else. You make this place what it is.

BM


----------



## gorvnice (Dec 29, 2010)

Book Master said:


> You place a post on WC, everyone comes after you. It is the truth, stop condemning the Company that feeds you.
> BM


But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Amazon.


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

I think the bottom line is that Amazon doesn't owe authors anything but delivery of their books when readers pay for them. Everything else you get from them is gravy. 

Another bottom line - just because a company's plans happen to benefit you does not mean the plans were made TO benefit you. Often, our interests will align, but that is gravy, not intentional.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Book Master said:


> You place a post on WC, everyone comes after you. It is the truth, stop condemning the Company that feeds you.
> 
> BM


By the same token, stop it with the Amazon worshipping. It's company. Its first interest group are the shareholders. Its second interest group are (although probably more first-and-a-half) are the customers. Its third interest are the employees. Content providers are a dime a dozen.

Similarly, to me, to all of us, Amazon is a venue to sell our books. There are others. When listing our books on a venue, we consider the pros and cons in a business-like manner. To me, Amazon is not the most important venue. If they do something daft, I'll pick up my books and walk in a second. In fact, I've been on the verge of doing just that a couple of times. If I did that and they fixed whatever annoyed me so much, I'd come back. Easy.

It's a BUSINESS relationship.

Yes, there is limited advantage in knowing how to optimise sales there. That's why we're all at the KB, right?


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

I don't hate Amazon and I don't believe I've bashed them in this thread. 
I don't believe they're out to get us or they're trying to hurt us. 
I'm just someone seeking answers.


----------



## FictionalWriter (Aug 4, 2010)

I love my son. Would give my life for him. Certainly doesn't mean I like everything he does and won't criticize some of the his actions. 

And he's my child. 

Amazon is a company I sell my books through.  I can like some of the things they do as well as NOT like some of the things they do. They are not immune to criticism just like everything and everyone else.


----------



## Book Master (May 3, 2013)

Patty Jansen said:


> By the same token, stop it with the Amazon worshipping. It's company. Its first interest group are the shareholders. Its second interest group are (although probably more first-and-a-half) are the customers. Its third interest are the employees. Content providers are a dime a dozen.
> 
> Similarly, to me, to all of us, Amazon is a venue to sell our books. There are others. When listing our books on a venue, we consider the pros and cons in a business-like manner. To me, Amazon is not the most important venue. If they do something daft, I'll pick up my books and walk in a second. In fact, I've been on the verge of doing just that a couple of times. If I did that and they fixed whatever annoyed me so much, I'd come back. Easy.
> 
> ...





Jana DeLeon said:


> I think the bottom line is that Amazon doesn't owe authors anything but delivery of their books when readers pay for them. Everything else you get from them is gravy.
> 
> Another bottom line - just because a company's plans happen to benefit you does not mean the plans were made TO benefit you. Often, our interests will align, but that is gravy, not intentional.
> 
> Do I worship Amazon as my reliance? I think you have another new ballgame with what you interpret with my post.


Yes, called the payday. nothing like getting paid for passive income. It is too bad that the companies we all work for take the heat on decisions that they make to ensure future profits not only for them but the people that work


Jana DeLeon said:


> I think the bottom line is that Amazon doesn't owe authors anything but delivery of their books when readers pay for them. Everything else you get from them is gravy.
> 
> Another bottom line - just because a company's plans happen to benefit you does not mean the plans were made TO benefit you. Often, our interests will align, but that is gravy, not intentional.


Yeah! We can keep going with this kind of things on Writers Cafe or we can offer others great advice on all things concerning self-publishing and I'm sure that is and always will be the intention of what this site is about.


----------



## Book Master (May 3, 2013)

Can we  go over the same news in many new threads? Otherwise, I'll go make some money getting paid for it.


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

gorvnice said:


> But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Amazon.


I LOLed...


----------



## Guest (Jul 26, 2014)

If you can't handle uncertainty, then you picked the wrong business.

ETA: Which is not to say that there's anything wrong with trying to figure out how the market works, why certain books do well and others don't, and use that to build a better business. But just because something works today doesn't mean that it's going to work forever.

Individually, we're all lumps in this market. Individually, we're all insignificant. I'm a lot more swayed by stuff like the Author Earnings Report and the annual Smashwords surveys than by anecdotes on a message board that tends to be drunk on doomsday speculation half the time.

The sky is not falling, Amazon is neither good nor evil, change is the only constant, free advice is worth what you pay for it, and when a poor man eats a chicken, one of them is sick.


----------



## Wired (Jan 10, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> ... it's a very drastic drop that occurred in the span of four days. My sales have been climbing every day since I started publishing ... then just completely fell off a cliff ...


My situation exactly. All this since KU. As others have said, some (reliable) answers would be nice.


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm not sure why there are accusations of not being able to handle uncertainty in this business. Several authors just want to discuss about what they see as changes in KDP. Several authors think that's a waste of time. 

Nobody is saying Amazon is trying to kill self-publishing. It'd be interesting, however, to talk about individual experiences, so as a business owner, you can perhaps plan how to market your next book, which you're right now writing.

For myself, it's important we share our experiences and observations. Although I might not agree with everything being stated, I find the information valuable. I learned so much from everyone who does. Thank you.

I've found, in every "sky is falling" thread, there is always a nugget of wisdom that hasn't been repeated 1000X . Thank you, OP, for sharing your thoughts gathered from the last 12 months. It was most interesting to reread Russell's, Holly's and Phoenix's old posts and compare it to current KDP events.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Andrew Ashling said:


> I don't know either, but I'm going to hazard a guess: customer satisfaction which leads to more sales.


That's what they are saying to their stock holders. It is their actual plan. Sure the plan can change, but you know, it is something with actual on-the-record information, filed with the SEC, etc. etc. And everything Amazon has ever done has always been in line with that, and with other things they have said.

This is knowable. We don't have to make up things about Amazon's agenda.

At the same time, it may be knowable, but it is not fully predictable (except for the fact that things WILL change regularly, and that changes that affect you may be coming from some completely other quarter than you think).

Amazon is sort of like water: they are interested in two things - customer satisfaction via providing the customer with every product possible. (That's important to remember -- like Google, their interest is not in optimizing sales but rather maximizing them by offering everything and making sure the customers can find what they want, and NOT what the sellers want to sell.) And they are incredibly patient about reaching their goal.

And like water, if you block Amazon's path, Amazon will find other ways to reach its own level. So the specific path is fluid and not always predictable, but the ultimate destination is known. If you want to leverage the power of Amazon, the key is not to look at the current path (which will change) but to look at the destination. Customer satisfaction.

Camille


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

Write great books. Don't rely on any one particular outlet. Everything will change. Diversify. And _most _important of all, avoid short sentences.


----------



## Guest (Jul 26, 2014)

And what if a dragon comes and smashes all the kindles then breathes fire on the Amazon servers... It's such a waste of time worrying about this. But it seems when we're bored and have nothing else to discuss, we become just like the reality TV watching public and bicker about crap that we have no control over. What if this happens and what if that happens? Sounds like a bunch of middle school kids to me. Write your books and stop with the Ancient Aliens, JFK Assasination, We didn't land on the moon, absolutely useless garbage. Or don't... I don't care. It's why a rarely come here anymore. And if you want to write a scathing reply, I won't see it.  I have more important things to do...like take a nap then pick crud out of my toenails.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

Aliens are real! The Illuminati alien overlords don't want us to sell books. It's a serious issue. They've taken their time out from destroying the rain forests and the world economy to change the Amazon algorithms against us. Stickin' it to the little guy since 50,000 BC. Darn aliens.  

I've got to go finish a book about aliens.


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

I read somewhere aliens make you pick crud out of toenails.


----------



## Twizzlers (Feb 6, 2014)

How come a bunch of people saying "well something changed that has negatively affected my sales.  Wonder what it is? Maybe it's the algorithms?" 
Is turned by other people to 
"Aliens! Conspiracy!  The sky is falling!"


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

Aliens are behind almost everything. Including energetic mind control. Their behind this argument, right now... 
Don't let them win.


----------



## Redacted1111 (Oct 26, 2013)

Sorry, no more alien jokes. I'm done.

They're watching...


----------



## daveconifer (Oct 20, 2009)

I feel like I need to say this just in case anybody doesn't know Phoenix.  She is not a system-gamer.  She's not one to learn how to 'trick' the system. She plays fair.  She also knows a lot about how Amazon works, and keeps up with the changes (which all go way over my head).  If Amazon wants hoops jumped through, she's always among the first to know how to get to them.

I was lucky enough to work with her in the past and know firsthand how she operates.

I thought this was a great thread  full of smart posters.  It had everything all the classic ones had, except goofy pictures...


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

daveconifer said:


> I feel like I need to say this just in case anybody doesn't know Phoenix. She is not a system-gamer. She's not one to learn how to 'trick' the system. She plays fair. She also knows a lot about how Amazon works, and keeps up with the changes (which all go way over my head). If Amazon wants hoops jumped through, she's always among the first to know how to get to them.
> 
> I was lucky enough to work with her in the past and know firsthand how she operates.
> 
> I thought this was a great thread full of smart posters. It had everything all the classic ones had, except goofy pictures...


Nobody is saying that anyone here is cheating or trying to trick the system. Nor is this about breaking any rules. There are people who do that, but that's not what anybody seems to be talking about here.

What I'm saying (and I won't speak for others) is that when you depend on the algorithm -- when you optimize for it and your business strategy depends on it -- you may not realize it, but you are on some level gaming the algorithm.

That doesn't mean you're cheating or that you should not do it -- there are a perfectly ethical school of business which depends on figuring out the algorithm and optimizing for it. But when you do that, you're acting in your own best interests (nothing wrong with that) and not that of the algorithm.

It's a form of "Tragedy of the Commons" except that with Amazon and Google, they monitor it and adjust the rules to stop any advantage people find in it. This is not because any individual is creating a problem, but because a whole bunch of individuals acting in harmony starts to have an effect on the results. The whole point of the algorithm is to correct for that. To prevent it from happening.

The ultimate goal of these algorithms, especially Google, but Amazon seems to follow suit (a generation or two behind) is that they want you to not optimize for the search engine, but optimize for the user. That's why Google dumped so much of their keyword rankings. (It's there now just for bidding ads, not for finding pages.) They reward human clarity -- just simple writing of a good clear article -- above things like keywords and all the stuff that two or three years ago was considered good, ethical SEO practice.

So I'm perfectly willing to change the phrasing to "optimizing" rather than "gaming." It's more accurate, but the effect is the same. People tend not to realize this until they have been through enough of these crashes.

It IS an effective short term tactic, but like futures trading, tends to be a ineffective gamble in the long term. (Mainly because you can't repeat your successes. You start over from scratch each time.)

Camille


----------



## Jana DeLeon (Jan 20, 2011)

Per the Oxford dictionary - "game" as a verb - Manipulate (a situation), typically in a way that is unfair or unscrupulous:
it was very easy for a few big companies to game the system politicians blamed electricity generators for gaming the market.

Optimizing is making legal and ethical use of what is available. They are too totally different things as one implies a lack of ethical standard, and I imagine most authors would have a problem with that.

What we know of algos says put your book into as many formats as you can, make good use of categories then use keywords to get your book into additional niche categories, and publish at least every 90 days to keep from falling off the cliff.

Those are the standards for everyone. When Amazon changes the algos to stop favoring sales as long as they used to, it affects everyone. When they release a new program that some are in and some aren't and weigh (for example) borrows more than sales, it affects everyone who is not in the program.

The only thing in an author's control is writing books that resonate with readers and releasing them on a regular basis.


----------



## jcalloway (Jan 10, 2014)

J Ryan said:


> How come a bunch of people saying "well something changed that has negatively affected my sales. Wonder what it is? Maybe it's the algorithms?"
> Is turned by other people to
> "Aliens! Conspiracy! The sky is falling!"


JRyan - I know you write shifter-related PNR. I've noticed your particular subgenre (werewolf/BBW, specifically) is cooling down quite a bit as of late. It definitely had a burst earlier in the year, which I think you know as I've seen you post in Viola's serial thread. This cool down could be something you might want to take into account. If the demand is tapering off as the PNR crowd are looking to diversify their reading material, perhaps now would be a good time for you to consider diversifying your offerings.

Not saying you should abandon your in-progress series, especially as you have a reader base, but maybe you could play around with something in a fresher subgenre while you continue to work on your werewolves.

Dragons, for instance, seem to be gaining momentum, from what I've seen.

I think the algorithms are changing again, but there's nothing we can do about that. What we CAN do is keep writing. If you're doing serials in PNR, particularly, you have the ability to be especially flexible when these changes occur. More flexible than novel writers, at least. Just keep your ear to the ground, your eyes on the best seller lists, and innovate.*

*This is not my standard advice for writing/publishing, but I believe (from previous posts) JRyan is writing to make a living, not writing the books of his heart, so if he's writing to the market, he needs to follow the market. Especially when it twists and turns as it is doing now.

Also, I have to say that this summer has been pretty crazy for me in terms of sales. I had huge spikes at the start of July, now I'm definitely slumping. I'm sure KU has played some part in this. But still, the fact remains that it's summer, and summer has never been a great time for book sales (from my experience). People are outside enjoying the sun, they're on vacation, they have houses full of out-of-school kids. If you've never experienced a summer slump before, it can be terrifying, especially when all those pretty numbers on your royalty reports take a nosedive. But just keep in mind that summer doesn't last forever, and once it's over we'll be nearer to the Christmas season when sales, historically, tend to go through the roof. So, keep writing. And remember this is a long game with plenty of ups and downs along the way.


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> The ultimate goal of these algorithms, especially Google, but Amazon seems to follow suit (a generation or two behind) is that they want you to not optimize for the search engine, but optimize for the user. That's why Google dumped so much of their keyword rankings. (It's there now just for bidding ads, not for finding pages.) They reward human clarity -- just simple writing of a good clear article -- above things like keywords and all the stuff that two or three years ago was considered good, ethical SEO practice.


And sometimes a change is made for no other reason than convenience or lack of computing power. Sometimes there is no goal behind it other than the physical constraints of technology. Sometimes it's just a cigar.



> It IS an effective short term tactic, but like futures trading, tends to be a ineffective gamble in the long term. (Mainly because you can't repeat your successes. You start over from scratch each time.)


And plenty of folk who do dollar-cost averaging wind up making a lot less money than the future traders or the day traders. Earning high short-term profits and then reinvesting those profits into the *same* long-term vehicles conservative investors use means more initial money invested by the short-termers and higher gains overall. *It isn't either/or.* It's optimizing the mix. It's buying Amazon stock on the day it drops for a lower price than another investor bought it the day before. If they both hang onto it for 2 years, the one who optimized and bought at a lower price will make more money over the term. Not by having to work harder or worry about any interim changes, but simply by buying on the right day early on.



kward said:


> A few honest, snark-free questions for you:
> 
> Would it be safe to say you're looking for an answer as to what's caused your sales dip because you want to figure out how to fix the problem?
> 
> ...


Understanding the algorithms is no different than looking for and acting upon business intelligence, whether marketing or financial. Most businesses looking to, say, build a new store don't blindly buy land and hope when they build the structure customers will come. If it's a great store and offers quality merchandise customers can't get anywhere else, yes, a few people will travel out of their way to go to that store specifically. But most companies don't rely on hope. They do very thorough market analysis -- from real estate value to population demographics to ease of access to localization of competitors to traffic patterns to future build in the area. By the same token, understanding why a book sells or doesn't sell on a site provides multiple insights.

One more thought to add to the mix. I actually don't need to understand the endgame to act upon business intelligence, because there are times when something is put into place not because there *is* an endgame but because of simple convenience. I don't need to know every single store USA Today or the New York Times bestseller folk compile data for to figure out strategies for optimizing my chance to hit those lists. I simply need to know which of the stores I publish in report sales to them, when they consider those sales, and about how many sales are needed to make the lists. If, in the future, they exclude KU borrows or 99c box sets or further divide their lists to include/exclude more books, then that info becomes more business intel to add to my launch strategies, giving me a better idea for what day to launch, where to launch, and how best to pace the launch.

In the above, it wouldn't matter WHY the list guys are making those changes, and it wouldn't matter if the reasons are "unknowable" or not. Is it better to know what the underlying disease is to treat it? Of course. But if you never figure out what the disease is, does that stop anyone from at least treating the symptoms and optimizing comfort?

(And *Dave*: thanks for the vote of confidence in my white hat ways!)


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

As a small business owner in a labor-intensive occupation, I work very hard getting the job done. I also work very hard at getting homeowners' attention so they will tell other homeowners about my business.

That is the small picture.

In the big picture category, I need to always pay attention to the economy, what other roofing companies are doing/charging, how the housing business is (focus on older homes or new houses this year?), and other factors NOT WITHIN MY CONTROL. No matter how hard I work, it doesn't help if I keep working (and making less and less money) because I didn't understand the market and why it's going this way or that way.

IOW, what Phoenix said.

Keep writing is good advice. Keep an eye on what's happening and how it affects others (and perhaps, you) is good business sense.


----------



## CfaE (Jul 25, 2014)

People have been manipulating algorithms since the inception of Google. SEO (search engine optimisation) means to optimise a website using various strategies so that it will gain a higher ranking in search engines and therefore manipulate the search engine result pages. There is an entire industry of professionals who do this for a living. There are white hat ones: those who follow the terms and conditions of the search engine to create the better websites that will rank high in their results, and there are black hat ones: those who will manipulate the results by any means necessary, including breaking the rules of the TOC and risking expulsion from the search results in the process.

Both black and white hat marketers exist in the industry. The difference is that the white hat marketers generally don't get slapped with Google penalties every other week, and imo they produce better content on the internet.

There is no 'gaming the system' in an underhanded way when it comes to manipulating ranking results because most algorithms are setup to show the most relevant results, which means that to win you need to provide the best or most relevant content. There are sometimes glitches that can be manipulated for a short time in every algorithm, but often the algorithm is updated in that case, so it's not a sustainable strategy. A classic glitch in Google's algorithm was the blog one, where blogs got extra 'Google Love' for a short time and some cowboy SEMs and authors had some glory days in 2012 because of it. Those SEMs are all out of a job now because their clients were royally ticked off when the glitch got fixed and their rankings dropped like a stone. Usually only black hat SEMs  or cowboys will use a glitch to sell to their clients because they don't care if it's sustainable. Overall, the only way to continually be successful in any kind of ranking system is to not break any of the rules, but it's a lot harder work to rank well using white hat SEO. 

In the early days when Google started noticing that people were manipulating their algorithm, they setup a TOC for those who were doing it and changed the algorithms so that anyone breaking their TOC would suffer a penalty. The TOC demanded that the SEMs provided a website that had relevant and high quality content by using keywords and authority links to determine if a site was 'playing by the rules'. So in terms of manipulating ranking, Google said: 'Okay, you can do this, but if you want to rank high, you better provide our visitors with exactly what they are looking for'. By using Googlebot and the algorithms, Google got the SEOs to label their websites clearly and provide high quality content for all their users. Pages that don't do that, don't appear in people's search results for high volume keywords. 

Amazon use white hat SEO on their website to rank high in Google organic search results. They also use paid advertising with Adwords pay per click campaigns to appear high in Google's paid search results, which means that Amazon has staff or a hires a marketing company that manipulates Google's algorithm for the highest ranking spot in exactly the same way that an author would manipulate Amazon's algorithm to make their book rank first. I doubt Amazon would have a problem with an author following their TOC and using all the tools available to rank high in their results. The difference with Amazon is that, unlike Google, it doesn't use the most relevant or high quality results for its algorithm. It uses the most popular (most sold) results, which means the results are not based on quality, but rather they are based on popularity. But, since literature is art, I suspect popularity is the only gage they can use since art is objective and doesn't follow any rules of quality other than grammar. It is possible that in the future Amazon may include grammar rules in their algorithm though to improve the quality of the products they offer.

Ranking is the key to visibility. Visibility means sales. To compete in any ranking list on the internet, your main marketing strategy will be trying to seduce an algorithm because online marketing has nothing to do with pretty adverts and everything to do with convincing an algorithm to like your page. Online, you are trying to convince an algorithm to love you so that it shows your products first to all the customers. Direct or offline marketing is about making the customer love you with pretty adverts. That's the main difference between the two types of marketing.

On Amazon, some people go dark side (black hat), which can be spamming links, sock puppets and breaking the rules. These people risk being caught and losing everything. In the history of SEO, the losers were all the people who cheated their way to the top. Other people go white hat, which is optimising your product page, using keywords, timing your release well, driving customers to your book, using meta data well etc.) These people usually continue to rank high for the long term because they assist the algorithm by giving it what it wants.

At the end of the day, what a lot of the top authors are doing is professional SEO on their books, but it's more ASRO (Amazon Sales Rank Optimisation). 

But algorithm optimisation isn't a 'hustle'. It's an industry that is mostly known as SEO or SEM, and I should know. I've been a white hat SEM since 2005. I used to be one of the expert UK ones back in the day. I got to see Matt Cutts speak at the SES conference in 2007, and I did the Google dance more times than I'd like to remember. I've made many sites rank high in Google. I never got around to optimising my own website though (what a dumbass). It's on my to-do-list.

I hope this helps clear up any algorithm worries. If you follow the TOC, you really can't go wrong. If you make the algorithm happy, you'll probably be very successful for a long time. On Amazon, that means feeding the algorithm sales/customers.

Studying an algorithm isn't a con of the system. SEMs usually collect data and use statistics from it to work with the system to get the best results. It's predominantly a case of using data to predict certain results, and then finding a way to replicate those results without breaking the TOC, assuming you go white hat. You have to study the algorithm to find out what it wants. Then you feed the algorithm what it wants, and it displays your page high in its results. The problem that a lot of people have is that Amazon's algorithm wants sales, and providing those is a lot harder than selecting the right keywords and getting the right links to your website is.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Jana DeLeon said:


> I think the bottom line is that Amazon doesn't owe authors anything but delivery of their books when readers pay for them. Everything else you get from them is gravy.
> 
> Another bottom line - just because a company's plans happen to benefit you does not mean the plans were made TO benefit you. Often, our interests will align, but that is gravy, not intentional.


+1 Basic corporate business management 101 here.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> And plenty of folk who do dollar-cost averaging wind up making a lot less money than the future traders or the day traders. Earning high short-term profits and then reinvesting those profits into the *same* long-term vehicles conservative investors use means more initial money invested by the short-termers and higher gains overall. *It isn't either/or.* It's optimizing the mix. It's buying Amazon stock on the day it drops for a lower price than another investor bought it the day before. If they both hang onto it for 2 years, the one who optimized and bought at a lower price will make more money over the term. Not by having to work harder or worry about any interim changes, but simply by buying on the right day early on.


I'm not going to bother with the rest -- I think we all are at the point where we take the strategy we take and work out what works best for us.

I will take issue with this, because it's one of those things that really hurt most investors. They don't know it because they do well enough, and don't realize they could do better....

Yes, in theory timing trades and doing all the high flying things like margin trades and dealing in futures should yield more, but in practice it almost universally doesn't. I read a study on this (I don't remember where, although Andrew Tobias has some good explanations of the phenomenon) -- humans, even the smartest, most brilliant math geeks, don't actually do odds very well. We magnify the thing we are paying attention to. (In this case "successes.")

Value investors -- those who pick companies for value, regardless of current price, and otherwise never check the stock prices and never refer to them in their buying and selling decisions -- always beat optimizers in the long term. Automated systems always beat the optimizers too. (This is why the best investment advice you can give the ordinary person is to invest in an index fund, because actively traded funds never do as well, long term. Plus it's too easy to manipulate the results to make it look like it's doing better.)

Value investors are numbers geeks too, don't get me wrong, but they are reading the numbers in a different way. And, yes, they're looking at different numbers. (How much cash the company has on hand, debt ratios, etc.) Both sides look at trends, but value investors are looking for much larger scale trends, and tend to look outside of the stock market numbers. Short term trends can be the noise that obscures the longer term trend. (We see this in the reporting from the publishing industry that touts trends that prove ebooks are stalling out, etc.)

I don't see anything wrong with taking advantage of a buying opportunity. (Hey, AMZN is cheap right now!) That can be "found money." But if it causes you to deviate from your long term value plan, or to waste time looking for such opportunities, it really isn't the big opportunity it sounds like.

Camille


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Adding to daring and Phoenix, now is a pretty good time to buy gold.  In recent history December 22, 2013 would have been best when it dropped to 1187.  Gold is down from it's high.  Now is not the time to sell especially if you bought it when it was over 1325.


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

I bought my gold when it was $300. Hahaha. Too bad, I didn't have $100,000 then to invest in it . I'd be rich, RRRRRRRiiiiiich!

What I've learned from this thread: I so, so miss my old KB friends who love to dish/pontificate/jibber-jabber seriously about AMZ algos, with graphs and numbers and book-watching examples, with some dash of humor. Those were some great threads.

ETA to put in missing word, as pointed out by Betsy! .


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Gennita Low said:


> What I've learned from this thread: I so, so miss my old KB friends who love to seriously about AMZ algos, with graphs and numbers and book-watching examples, with some dash of humor. Those were some great threads.


Gennita--

what word is supposed to be in the space? Dish? Argue? Agree? Pontificate? Inquiring minds want to know!

Betsy


----------



## PhoenixS (Apr 5, 2011)

Gennita Low said:


> What I've learned from this thread: I so, so miss my old KB friends who love to seriously about AMZ algos, with graphs and numbers and book-watching examples, with some dash of humor. Those were some great threads.


*headslap* Humor. THAT's what KB is missing these days!


----------



## Philip Gibson (Nov 18, 2013)

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> *headslap* Humor. THAT's what KB is missing these days!


Okay. What's the difference between a cat and a comma?


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

Phoenix Sullivan said:


> *headslap* Humor. THAT's what KB is missing these days!


For Phoenix!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Gennita Low said:


> I bought my gold when it was $300. Hahaha. Too bad, I didn't have $100,000 then to invest in it . I'd be rich, RRRRRRRiiiiiich!
> 
> What I've learned from this thread: I so, so miss my old KB friends who love to dish/pontificate/jibber-jabber seriously about AMZ algos, with graphs and numbers and book-watching examples, with some dash of humor. Those were some great threads.
> 
> ETA to put in missing word, as pointed out by Betsy! .


I think it was $50 when someone suggested my husband invest in gold back in the 70's. He did not listen. Oh now if your business slows down, bring you and your crew out to see me. All construction industries are hiring/contracting out here right now.
But note husband did not know what he knows now, back in the 70's. We were not married then, nor did we know each other. We got together in late 1990 after he had changed professions.
Now back on topic. Life changes.


----------



## Lucian (Jun 8, 2014)

Philip Gibson said:


> Okay. What's the difference between a cat and a comma?


What?


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

> Okay. What's the difference between a cat and a comma?





Lucian said:


> What?


I'll hazard a guess.

If you leave a comma out, not many people will notice. But if you leave a cat out, it'll wake up the whole street.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

One has claws at the end of its paws, the other has a pause at the end of the clause.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

I prefer not to fly blind so I follow the Phoenix.


----------



## Philip Gibson (Nov 18, 2013)

Cin gets the prize for the correct answer.

Colin gets the prize for a highly original, and acutely observed, answer.


Philip


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

Philip Gibson said:


> Cin gets the prize for the correct answer.
> 
> Colin gets the prize for a highly original, and acutely observed, answer.
> 
> Philip


Thanks Philip. Variety is the splice of life.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Not to be nitpicky and it took me 3 days and 5 pages to realize there is a glaring error in the title.
Has publishing gotten harder or has the actual selling of books gotten harder?
I was under the impression that actually putting your book on Amazon had gotten harder.

Ok, ok I know it is about selling but had to point that out.  
I heard that.  Ok I will go cross stitch.


----------



## Vera Nazarian (Jul 1, 2011)

Gennita Low said:


> What I've learned from this thread: I so, so miss my old KB friends who love to dish/pontificate/jibber-jabber seriously about AMZ algos, with graphs and numbers and book-watching examples, with some dash of humor. Those were some great threads.


Me too.  Loved those practical analysis threads, and this one is a great old-school one! Loving it!

So much excellent analysis here on both sides.

However, I'm definitely on the "I want to know more, and why things are happening, and how to optimize my book placement within the white hat scope of the algos" side.

I am already pretty sure I'm writing good books to the best of my ability, and as fast as possible, and constantly improving -- that's a given.

Now I want to know *what else I can do* to maximize their chances, within the turbulent sea of changes we're in.


----------



## Amyshojai (May 3, 2010)

Interesting thread and LOVE LOVE LOVE the comments about SEO. Having had an intensive 3+ year education in google-ocity while writing for About.com and watching folks penalized by Panda etc during their tenure (and avoiding the same with my site) it's been fun to apply the principles of SEO to my books. 

1. Include appropriate keywords/phrases in your title (or subtitle) if possible
2. Ditto in your book description, especially in the first paragraph
3. Copy those same keyword phrases as your 7 keywords in the dashboard; include category/theme as part of your keyword phrase list
4. Choose appropriate categories and themes--one that best fits and perhaps one that fits but has many fewer books listed=less competition (the goal is to rank on 1st page, even in smaller category helps overall rank and search-ability). An example...my newest nonfiction titles are in both pet care category and relationships/parenting.   The goal is to get the new book in the HNR list for as long as possible and 1st page ranking in the category
5. More reviews boost your ranking (legal ones, of course!). Goal to get on the best reviewed lists, even if it drops off first page.
6. Oh... and make sure it's the best damn book you can write

Adjusting these 1-4 tips moved my nonfiction up the ranking within a 3 week period, and has kept sales steady. Oh, and I also treat the book description as a place to advertise--including links to newsletter subscriptions, for example. Include that in your book's front matter, too, and it'll show in the "preview" with a hot link so even if you don't earn the click/buy, shoppers may take a look at your blog, newsletter, etc. 

I can't control google, or amazon, and guessing makes me crazy. So I do what I can, if it works it works and if it doesn't I try something else. I'm cross-promoting the fiction in the nonfiction...and vice versa.


----------



## CfaE (Jul 25, 2014)

Amyshojai said:


> Interesting thread and LOVE LOVE LOVE the comments about SEO. Having had an intensive 3+ year education in google-ocity while writing for About.com and watching folks penalized by Panda etc during their tenure (and avoiding the same with my site) it's been fun to apply the principles of SEO to my books.
> 
> 1. Include appropriate keywords/phrases in your title (or subtitle) if possible
> 2. Ditto in your book description, especially in the first paragraph
> ...


I found Google a lot easier than Amazon because they tell you what works. You just have to read Matt Cutts blog, and he announces what the algorithm wants. Then it's just a case of trying to give the algorithm what it wants. But yeah, when Panda, Penguin and Hummingbird hit, a lot of sites took a nasty hit from it. First the blog spam sites and all connected to them got a massive penalty across the board (one of my clients hadn't taken my advice, and he got hit by that. Recovery from it was a nightmare). That was the big one because entire sites disappeared into oblivion. Then sites with any kind of paid links got hit next, and that one wiped out a lot of SEOs because it was more than just an algorithm change. It was a change in Google policy. That one hit some sites that weren't black hat because it used to be okay to pay for certain links. Then suddenly it wasn't (I was okay on that one because Google had been warning people off paid links for years, so I never used them on my client sites). Then the final one was a push on authority and community, which is actually why Amazon does so well in Google because of its community. All those reviews and forums are the way that sites rank high in Google these days. Authority comes from having an active community on your site. Social became more important than backlinks.

Amazon is a completely different animal though. Keywords are restricted to seven, but in the same way that links would boost their rank in Google, sales will boost your keyword prominence in Amazon. However, how effective the right keyword is, is questionable in Amazon. I did thousands of hours of keyword research on Amazon, using search engine logs for my data, but none of them yielded a 'golden keyword' that would deliver customers through Amazon. You can use keywords to get more categories though, which will make your book appear on more lists in Amazon and magnify the chances of people seeing it, but I haven't seen any boosts in sales from my work on optimising the product page or the book auxiliary pages. But, I never farmed reviews, and that could be the main thing that I was missing for it to work for me.

In my experience, these are the best options to use:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Select keywords that will land your book in more categories by using things like this: https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A200PDGPEIQX41
[*]Generate social or community activity on the page (reviews or people talking on your page forum or people leaving highlight quotes etc. Any kind of community input will make your product page rank higher in Google, so if you optimised the title and description, this will kick in with some social activity. If your product page ranks high in Google for the right keyword, it will organically gather new visitors every day.
[*]Gather readers on your newsletter or website or blog, and funnel them through to your product page to create sales. <-- This is the winner for high sales ranking in Amazon. Nothing else works as well as generating sales does. Amazon's algorithm wants to be fed sales.
[*]Take advantage of the HNR lists, and get your ranking high on Amazon (get a lot of sales) in the first 30 days. Your book will appear on more lists on Amazon in the first 30 days, therefore being visible to more readers.
[/list]

Those are ones I've seen work, but sustainability is the issue. Ideally you have something in place that continually drives in new visitors to the page, which will generate new sales on the page every day, which will boost your sales rank and get you more visibility on Amazon every day. The reason for this is that sales history comes into play. If your book starts to taper off in sales, it will drop like a stone in rank, which is why sustainable sales are the best option. It's better to have 5 sales a day forever and a 30k rank, than it is to be ranking in the top 5k for a day. I've been in the top 5k for a day. It doesn't do anything very exciting.

As yet, I've not found anything that provides sustainable sales, but I suspect that the answer is to generate visitors to your website using Google and high quality website content that makes readers want to return to your website. Then you can just stick a link to your books on Amazon down the side bar, and let the visitors organically convert to customers.

For years, I tried promoting my Amazon product page when I should have been promoting my own website instead. The best ways to generate new customers is to generate new visitors. You can't do that on your product page. You don't have enough control over it to make it rank high in search engines for hundreds of keywords, but you can do it on your own website.

All my Amazon data is theory though. But in retrospect, I think I should have stuck to what I knew, which was making my site rank high in Google rather than trying to get into the Ammy algorithm, so that's my next plan .


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

Thank you, Claire, for all your information! I didn't understand some of it but I'm bookmarking this thread to reread your posts.  Love these optimization nuggets.


----------



## CfaE (Jul 25, 2014)

Gennita Low said:


> Thank you, Claire, for all your information! I didn't understand some of it but I'm bookmarking this thread to reread your posts.  Love these optimization nuggets.


Thanks. I hope it helps, but just to make sure you don't take bad advice. I have a proven record of good ranking in Google. I've never had any kind of success in Amazon, so make sure you do your own testing rather than blindly taking my advice. That being said. I don't think getting more visitors on your own website can ever be harmful to your sales .


----------



## sportourer1s (Oct 2, 2010)

As someone, like the vast majority of writers selling sod all I could not care less. If you truly are a bestselling author then you should not need search engine optimisation for people to find your work. The huge amounts of cut price eBooks sold and mostly I suspect never read, have made the term bestseller a bit of a misnomer. The sales figures claimed by some people on here rival the big name mainstream authors so they ought ot have legions of fans eagerly awaiting their new works.


----------



## Shelley K (Sep 19, 2011)

michaelsnuckols said:


> Maybe we all should all collectively cut back on how much we publish - and only release the very best? Relying upon beating the 30-day cliff as your marketing tool rather than building an audience and a brand are the root problem here.


Five pages later, and I'm still fairly boggled by this. The number of questions just these sentences prompt in me is amazing. I waver between wanting to shout, "No, no! I'm going to continue to publish my mostly subpar stuff at the highest possible velocity!" and more calmly saying, "I just can't even . . . what?"


----------



## CfaE (Jul 25, 2014)

sportourer1s said:


> As someone, like the vast majority of writers selling sod all I could not care less. If you truly are a bestselling author then you should not need search engine optimisation for people to find your work. The huge amounts of cut price eBooks sold and mostly I suspect never read, have made the term bestseller a bit of a misnomer. The sales figures claimed by some people on here rival the big name mainstream authors so they ought ot have legions of fans eagerly awaiting their new works.


If you're a self-published author, why wouldn't you do your own marketing? You either out-source to a marketing company, or you do it yourself. SEO, or 'online marketing' as it is also known as, is simply marketing online. As I said earlier, Direct marketing (offline marketing) speaks to customers with pretty adverts, and SEO (online marketing) speaks to algorithms, but essentially they are all just marketing.

So what you just said was: "I couldn't care a less about marketing. If you truly are a bestseller, you shouldn't have to do any marketing."

If you didn't market a book, how would people know it existed? It can't be a bestseller if no one ever read it because it was invisible. Readers can't buy invisible books. They can't even see them. Low ranking is like having a store with blacked-out windows and a locked door. It's impossible for people to buy from you.

I understand that authors don't want to do marketing. I don't want to on my books. I'd love to pass all that onto someone else and pay them to get my book ranking high in Amazon for me, so I could just write my next book. But since that service doesn't exist (yet), I guess I'll have to do it myself.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Psst... Keywords are not restricted to seven. Commas are restricted to seven. Make of that what you will.


----------



## Gennita Low (Dec 13, 2012)

sportourer1s said:


> As someone, like the vast majority of writers selling sod all I could not care less. If you truly are a bestselling author then you should not need search engine optimisation for people to find your work. The huge amounts of cut price eBooks sold and mostly I suspect never read, have made the term bestseller a bit of a misnomer. The sales figures claimed by some people on here rival the big name mainstream authors so they ought ot have legions of fans eagerly awaiting their new works.


Good for you and us. Less competition!


----------



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

And then everything is going to change once again when the free trail is over and readers have to pay for KU  

Seeing as the rest of the world doesn't get to be part of the free trial (or KU when it starts) I'll just sit back and watch.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I think this topic would have been the usual jibber-jabber about algorithms (rather than a debate about whether it matters) IF the thread title hadn't involved the phrase "Why Publishing is Getting Much Tougher."  If the premise of this topic were "Changes in the Algorithms" it would have only attracted people who were actually interested in algorithms.  (And it would not have caused people like me to take issue with it at all.)

I'm beginning to think thread titling on KB is an art, at least as tricky as book covers.

Camille


----------



## Colin (Aug 6, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> I think this topic would have been the usual jibber-jabber about algorithms (rather than a debate about whether it matters) IF the thread title hadn't involved the phrase "Why Publishing is Getting Much Tougher." If the premise of this topic were "Changes in the Algorithms" it would have only attracted people who were actually interested in algorithms. (And it would not have caused people like me to take issue with it at all.)
> 
> I'm beginning to think thread titling on KB is an art, at least as tricky as book covers.
> 
> Camille


It's possible, Camille, that discussion board threads are like any form of conversation - they have their own dynamic and will go the way they go.

A bit like algorithms!


----------

