UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion

Following on from her piece last week, Tara Sparling has a blog post on what puts readers off self-pubbed books, and guess what comes out on top?

(hint: buy my book!)

http://tarasparlingwrites.wordpress.c...

I wonder if she'd mind if I stole her graph to use as the group wallpaper.

Good article and some good feedback there for authors like myself.

I do think it's very hard for self-pubbed authors though to know when they have the balance right between publicity and relationship building.

I spend a lot of time on twitter and enjoy the bsnter but often get to the end of the night and think 'should I do another promotional tweet or not?'. It's hard to know the right answer - on the one hand I don't want to piss people off but on the other hand I want to make sure they know I'm a writer and not just someone there to pass time!

My no.1 answer: book cover made with Microsoft Paint.

I am shamelessly re-blogging this because I think it is really useful (with credit to both you and the original poster, David).

Pushy marketing winds me up. Obviously, I like to know that you have written a book, but I don't want to hear about it all the time in random conversations.

I think that lots of people believe that because a book is self-published and so not going through publishing houses, then the bad books aren't being separated from the good books and everything is just being published. Then they start picking out every little thing that they can to support their argument.

'Oh, this is a SELF-PUBLISHED book, so THAT'S why the cover looks like it was made on Paint. Oh, and THAT'S why there's a typo in the product description on Amazon', etc.

Then, because self-published authors are getting this bad reputation, they try really hard to fight against it, with some going as far as 'read my book! please! I promise you'll enjoy it if you read it! Just give it a go!' which then gives them a worse reputation.

(Note - I'm talking in general, not our authors. You're all lovely people)

Katy wrote: "Pushy marketing winds me up. Obviously, I like to know that you have written a book, but I don't want to hear about it all the time in random conversations."

Exactly.

Hopefully blogposts like this will make those authors that keep yelling at readers realise how counter-productive it is and that it is more likely to make people determined not to buy your book.

Although, I do have some sympathy about the covers. It is not easy to justify spending money on a fancy cover when you first start out. They should always try to do better than these http://lousybookcovers.com/ though.

Bad covers will definitely put me off reading a book.

I get that it probably costs a lot to get a cover professionally made, but the cover is going to be the thing that sells your book. With so many people browsing sites like Amazon, where the books come up in grids with title, average rating and price, the cover has to stand out.

Having said that, I think that decent covers can be hand-made too. They don't all have to look like some of those on that site you posted! haha

Katy wrote: "Bad covers will definitely put me off reading a book."

I think that is sensible on the whole - after all if the cover is bad, amateurish or just plain ugly the chances are that the contents are going to be the same.

And there are so many books out there we all need some form of filtering and it looks as though for many people cover quality is one of their major first filters.

David wrote: "if the cover is bad, amateurish or just plain ugly the chances are that the contents are going to be the same ..."

Yes, I tend to assume that if the author spent half an hour messing about in Microsoft Paint, then that's the kind of time, energy, research, and commitment they put into the contents, editing, and proofreading, too.

Great article. Made me want to do an impression of that scene from When Harry met Sally.

Katy wrote: "I think that lots of people believe that because a book is self-published and so not going through publishing houses, then the bad books aren't being separated from the good books and everything is just being published. Then they start picking out every little thing that they can to support their argument."

Sadly, to a large extent they're right. I browse through Amazon most days, and I come across some really terrible books.

Will wrote: "Great article. Made me want to do an impression of that scene from When Harry met Sally."

I'd love to see that.

Although, talking of covers, just come across this on Hugh Howey's blog:

http://www.hughhowey.com/canva-for-co...

Might give it a go, see what it's like. I need a new short story cover.

That's cool but I still recommend our Katie Stewart.

Her covers are magnificent.

Let's not run ourselves down too much here. There are some really cacky trad published covers too. I think we should be encouraging people up, not laughing them down. Some cover art is about taste. I personally don't like some of the cartoony chick-lit ones. Imagine how you'd feel if you found your cover on one of those sites.

Hopefully they'd re-think their cover.

Can't comment, really. I didn't follow that link.

I get all of that, but I see PLENTY of evidence that pushy tactics work for a lot of authors! Will not mention the ones that make me sigh every time...

One thing the article fails to address is price! Make something free or very cheap, add a few quotes from certain sources (love the obscure but great sounding ones), or get loads of people to say its amazing and you'll sell!

I saw a badly edited, crude book selling in the top 100 with terrible reviews & found out it sold because it was featured on the Daily Mail! Sex escapades sell...

So the chart is actually flawed! It's a black & white portrayal of something definitely grey! :)

Covers are so last century.
Are we not talking about ebooks here?
The only time I notice a cover is if it has a cloak on it. (I am doing a survey)

Kath wrote: "I personally don't like some of the cartoony chick-lit ones....."

See, now they are my favourite type of cover. Especially if it is pink :)

Euw! Pukey pink! Nope, a skinny bird teetering about in high heels and swinging a handbag and I want to slap someone!

Hmm... maybe somebody should write a book on how not to self-publish (BUY IT! BUY IT! BUY IT!)

Was that last part meant to be subliminal, Rosen? Because it was actually quite bliminal!

I'm with you, Kath - the pink covers put me off completely :)

Thing is, if we don't yell to the treetops, no one will buy the book, because no one will know it exists.

(No one is a big pal of mine. She buys lots of my stuff...)

If we do yell to the treetops, no one still buys it, because everyone's too busy moaning that someone dared ask them to move their clicky finger and look at something.

Good article. As someone newly embarking on the self publishing minefield, I do intend to avoid such marketing tactics. I know they turn me off. But how do you get the balance right in attracting a potential audience without over saturating them? It's something I will have to learn as I go along, I suppose. Probably the best marketing is word of mouth, and that's the direction I'm (perhaps naively) hoping my book sales will go in. So, a bit of marketing is ok, I reckon. Maybe a tweet once a week will do....

As far as covers go, well I tried to get myself a decent one through a graphic designer since that's the advice I was given. I like it anyway, even if no one else does. I can always change it later.

That's what's good about our author threads.

Your book is visible right in the title whenever it's posted on without having to bang on about it constantly.

Paul, I have three self-declared fans who send me fan mail. That's a modest number to most, I'm sure, but thrilling to me. All three found my books through doing Amazon searches for the kind of books they like.

Never heard of Tara Sparling, so can't comment on her musings, but it is obvious that there is an uncertain quality about self-published authors, and if they don't manage to address this, then books are not easily sold. (And I speak as someone whose novel was reviewed by the Historical Novel Review Society and they said the pages fell out of my book!)
What I have discovered, however, is that if the book is set in a distinctive place, then people from there don't seem to care if it is self-published or not.

Natasha, that's encouraging. Even one would be enough. :) I will approach all this tentatively though, and not simply bombard readers with a sales pitch. After all, I'm a writer not a marketing executive.

There's Jim sorted selling in Tsarina then.

Paul wrote: "Even one would be enough. :)"

Agreed. Two more were gravy. I have a niche audience, though.

Paul wrote: "Good article. As someone newly embarking on the self publishing minefield, I do intend to avoid such marketing tactics. I know they turn me off. But how do you get the balance right in attracting a..."

this is the difficulty - there's definitely a balance needed because really people aren't going to buy my books just cos I'm a nice bloke, they need to know I'm a writer first and foremost!

Yes, finding the very thin line between promotion and being an annoying bstd is hard.

Some of those covers wouldn't make me want to buy those books but I do judge on more than that. I've bought books with great looking covers which weren't very good, and great books with not so great covers. It is true it is a matter of taste.

I think there is an answer, but some people might not like it...

The plain truth is that good books will sell. In the past, the gate keepers were the editors, agents and publishers. They waded through the slush pile and had to endure countless badly written books. And send the equally countless rejection slips.

What happened? The writers who learnt the craft managed to get their books through these gatekeepers. They learned how to avoid the basic errors, how to write an interesting and/or exciting story. Admittedly some traditionally published work was pretty poorly written, but it usually had something going for it - excitement, lurid sexy bits, sexy lurid bits.

It might take a long time for a writer to learn this craft. Almost every successful writer can tell of the hundreds of rejection slips. The successful ones are the ones who stuck at it, took the hard knocks and kept on improving.

The same thing is happening right now - the only difference is that the gatekeepers have changed. Now the gatekeepers are the readers. They are the ones having to wade through the slush pile, looking for the diamonds in a pile of dross.

And, just as before, the successful self-published writers are going to be the ones who learn the craft. Good writing, interesting plots, believable characters. And yes - bits which are alternately lurid and/or sexy.

The good news is that self-published writers don't have to go through the same gatekeepers. The bad news is that you have to sort out your own publicity, editing, blurb and cover.

And, just as with traditional publishing, the successful self-published writers will be those who stick at it and learn the craft.

Over time, I expect traditional publishing and self-publishing to merge. But this will only really happen when self-published authors get more professional about the product they put out there. That's beginning to happen, but we have a long way to go yet.

I'd agree with that. Learning and applying what you learn is important.

I've certainly seen that happening in our authors that have been here a while.

self-publishing literary fiction. Nuff said

On the "pushy marketing" - those authors don't plug brain in. Repeat tweets hit the SAME audience every time. Including the tweeps who have already bought the book. Have unfollowed so many.

Marc wrote: "self-publishing literary fiction. Nuff said"

Nope, you haven't. Elucidate.

the tag litfic when applied to self-published books puts off readers ;-)

Bad spelling.
Bad punctuation.
Inability to put two sentences together.
Gratuitous obscene language.

Marc wrote: "the tag litfic when applied to self-published books puts off readers ;-)"

Does it? I'm not aware of that.

Will wrote: "The plain truth is that good books will sell."

Sorry but this is not true. Many brilliant books do not sell whilst many terrible books fly off the shelf.

Yep, what Rosen said.

Patti (baconater) wrote: "Marc wrote: "the tag litfic when applied to self-published books puts off readers ;-)"

Does it? I'm not aware of that."

I think it's to do with several things. For litfic to have validation seems the last of the remaining gatekeepers are still required. Plus other things about ereaders and convenience when LitFic is not always a convenient read. Sorry, just feeling a bit bleak about it all right now

Rosen - I suppose that depends on your definition of what makes a good book. I would argue that a good book is one that people want to read. Even the trashiest of airport novels must be doing something right, whether we think it is brilliant or not.

Will wrote: "Rosen - I suppose that depends on your definition of what makes a good book. I would argue that a good book is one that people want to read. Even the trashiest of airport novels must be doing somet..."

That's a very idealistic view.

Supposing a shy lady and an extrovert lady write the same book, in parallel universes.

The extrovert lady chats on forums, sends many emails, updates social networks, attends writing conventions, organises book signings and generally gets out and about.

The shy lady stays at home, embarrassed by the very idea of socialising in order to get book sales.

There is no difference in how good the books are, yet one author's work flies of the shelf and the other makes very few sales.

This is not an obscure example. Expose applies to all published books, all of the time.

Patti (baconater) wrote: "There's Jim sorted selling in Tsarina then."

Oh my Tsarina sales are pretty good, but as part of the publishing deal all the money goes to the Governor's Investigation Office :-(
Well they got to fund it somehow I suppose

And which of the two is the most successful self-published author?

A book is not just a collection of words that fill the gap between "once upon a time" and "the end". It is the complete package. The entire experience from the cover and blurb through to the blogs and reviews. When we set out to be self-published we have to take on the responsibility for all of that ourselves. That's the "self" part of self-published.

This thread is about what it takes to be a self-published author. My contention is that it takes more than just writing a brilliant book and expecting people to notice it somehow. The price for bypassing the gatekeepers is that we need to do the jobs that they used to do.

Idealistic? I would prefer to say realistic. For me the idealists are the ones that write a great book but don't market it ... or those who write a poor book and wonder why people don't want to read it.

You just reversed the discussion by framing a point I made as your own.