| This 40 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 40 ( 1  ) || |
|26 Year Old Sells 100K eBooks Per Month|
Piracy Schmiracy, She's Making Sales!
| 2:20 pm on Mar 1, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Amanda is selling her books cheap, kind of like the iPhone Apps model, low cost and high volume, so cheap that pirating isn't worthwhile.
|Welcome to disruption. 26-year old Amanda Hocking is the best-selling "indie" writer on the Kindle store, meaning she doesn't have a publishing deal, Novelr says. |
And she shouldn't. She gets to keep 70% of her book sales -- and she sells around 100,000 copies per month. By comparison, it's usually thought that it takes a few tens of thousands of copies sold in the first week to be a New York Times bestselling writer.
This is the future of publishing.
Sells each copy from $0.99 to $3.
Keeps 70% of her profits.
Sells roughly 100K eBooks per month.
Minimum earnings are $70K per month.
Assuming sales hold up, could potentially earn over $1M this year.
[edited by: incrediBILL at 2:49 pm (utc) on Mar 1, 2011]
| 8:51 am on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|You held this up as the future of publishing. It is not. It is the future of dreck |
Dreck as you put it is very much a part of present day publishing and it has been for years. Think "The Sun" and "The Daily Star" here in the UK and the "National Enquirer" or whatever over the pond. This is just its presentation in a different mass media.
| 9:46 am on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|You held this up as the future of publishing. It is not. It is the future of dreck, and as such it is no different from the past of dreck, which includes Barbara Cartland and any of those other drones who have spewed out endless dreck. All that is different is the medium. There is nothing to be learned here about new technology. It is about dreck, pure and simple. |
I now repeat my favorite quote from a long lost post somewhere else here on webmasterworld: WOW. Just WOW.
That is awesomely narrow-minded. My apologies for making anybody else read it again by quoting it. The word "dreck" twelve times in one post? Really? And you somehow expect to be taken seriously? I'll bet that's a record here.
I'm just wondering if many others share that same point of view, or don't you see the big picture of how good of a thing this can be? Should have begun your post by telling us exactly how much Amanda Hocking you have actually in fact read, before you go calling it "dreck". And even if you had read any of her stuff and not liked it, so what. That is the nature of art. One persons trash is another's gold and vice versa.
But to come and say that self-publishing leads to nothing but trash being output is where I believe you are looking at it wrong. Her books are doing well because of not only price but more importantly word-of-mouth. She managed to get some online book bloggers to review her and since then has done very well. People who buy books do so very much on word-of-mouth and that is largely how she has gotten successful.
It is true that a lot of people could put out rubbish through self-publishing. But it will still not do well at all unless it really is good enough to get people talking about it.
The stuff that truly is rubbish? Who cares if it's out there, when you also can have so many other great choices and other voices to be heard (or in this case, read).
My vote for the worst attempt at a parallel ever goes to the spam thing. Nobody goes to Amazon and says "can I buy some spam email please?", but they do say "got any Amanda Hocking?". (my own lame attempt at fixing the parallel, that spam thing's going nowhere) :)
|Following the current trend it's obvious that Amazon the bookseller is positioned itself as Amazon the book publisher as well, pushing Harper Collins, Random House, etc. out the window eventually. Not only is Amazon the publisher, they're selling the digital reader, the Kindle. |
I believe you may have that wrong. To the best of my knowlege (not being an avid book reader myself, don't know how people find the time) they don't actually publish but are a distributor who also provides tools with which you may publish your own works online. Correct me if I'm wrong.
And actually, the big traditional publishing houses are major players in online publishing how I understand it. (my understanding coming from a post in Amanda's blog, see below)
I actually first read this thread a few nights ago, and was intrigued so I followed up by doing a lot of reading on Amanda Hocking's blog [amandahocking.blogspot.com]. (O.k. website critics, the background must go) And there is much more information there which may help enlighten people reading this thread. After all, she is a writer and studies the publishing industry in a way few posters here ever would have. Plus she is entertaining.
I personally have not read any of her books, just a bunch of her blog so far. The "genre" of her books does not seem like it would be my thing. But I say her story is quite interesting and congratulations to her and her success. Her success is also in part due to her usage of social media. Which is a lesson many here are interested in.
| 12:03 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I like her style. :)
| 12:14 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'd like to marry her...
| 2:03 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|they don't actually publish but are a distributor |
Correct, I probably said publisher a couple of times when I should've said distributor, heat of the moment typing :)
| 2:31 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
astupidname, you yourself have not read any Amanda Shlocking's books, so I don't see where you can criticize me for not reading them. You also didn't read my post if you can say, "But to come and say that self-publishing leads to nothing but trash being output is where I believe you are looking at it wrong."
That's precisely what I did not say. I said that dreck--schlock, #*$!, crap, garbage--has always been popular and always will be popular, and that it doesn't matter what the medium is. Dreck sells. Is Amanda Schlocking's stuff selling because of how she sells it or because it is "young adult paranormal schlock"? That is the distinction that is NOT being made here. Don't #*$! a method when it might well not be the method that is selling at all but the garbage itself.
| 2:41 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I have been looking at this for some time now. A person I know has practically abandoned the website he developed over the course of ten years and is selling ebooks.
The argument is he is making way more money for his efforts compared to writing for free and depending on chasing ads or adsense.
In today's trends with the lurching search engines, people scrapping all over the place, and the scraped thrown to the curb by the serps, it behooves us to look at different models to monetise.
If you have quality, original and up to date content and images in a niche where you are the authority - why not dip your toe in this market?
| 2:49 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
If any of you were the least bit informed in the world you would know the author is a vampire and she has special marketing skills thereby she cannot marry. Geez can't I have an intelligent converstion with somebody other than savages.
| 4:43 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|Geez can't I have an intelligent converstion with somebody other than savages |
Well go ahead and try anyway. I'll dance with you baby. I may even kiss you.
| 8:17 pm on Mar 23, 2011 (gmt 0)|
|There are people who approach their work like it is a vehicle to get money with which they will then have a life. And then there are people who actually want to have a life right now, independent of the money they produce, to enjoy what they are doing right now, which includes their work, and to maintain some self-respect while doing it. Big difference. Has nothing to do with sour grapes or any of that. It is a different choice and it allows people to see things from a different perspective than the all-is-dreck perspective. |
Such a tremendously important statement. Now if only I could move myself to later, before I die doing the former.
| This 40 message thread spans 2 pages: < < 40 ( 1  ) |