.self-publishing.or.vanity.publish.

What are everyone's thoughts on Self-Publishing? Do you think it's a respectable way to publish your book, or the lazy way out?

.cutting.corners.or.empowering.yourself.

I myself am Self-Publishing my first book. I even have a Self-Publishing company lined up. I see both sides of this arguement as I can see how a "Vanity Publish" would rub people the wrong way. Other author's work their butts off trying to get themselves published, most likely recieving many rejection letters, where as Self-Publishing author's pay money [alot of money] to cut through all the red tape and step away from all the rejection. It doesn't seem fair, but I would rather do it this way because it would become easier for me to be picked up by another publishing company.

.imagine.your.in.this.position.

What is your opinion about Self-Publishing/Vanity Publishing?

xxFrostyxx

What are everyone's thoughts on Self-Publishing? Do you think it's a respectable way to publish your book, or the lazy way out?

it's ok if all you want is a few copies to give to your friends and family and can afford the cost... but if you want to establish yourself as a writer, it's definitely NOT the way to go...

I would rather do it this way because it would become easier for me to be picked up by another publishing company

sorry, but that's absolutely not true!... paying publishers look on the vanity-published as not worth even looking at, since they clearly couldn't get a publisher to buy their work... and most of the stuff put out that way is hopelessly bad...

the only exceptions are the extremely rare few instances of a book becoming a best-seller and garnering major media attention, no matter how bad it is [i.e., redfield's grade-school-level-awful 'celestine prophecy']...

LadyFrost,

It sounds like you've already made your choice.

In the end, it depends on your goals, I guess. But, as Mammamaia indicated, self-publishing is really not a route to take if it's intended to be used as a stepping stone for the next book written to be picked up by a publisher. I doubt that it will reduce the chance/number of rejections.

Who has read it and provided input? Have you submitted it to agents/publishers yet? What is the plan to sell the books once they're printed? If you intend to get noticed by publishing houses, you'll have to sell well into the thousands, if not more. While you're working on selling the thousands of books in an effort garner attention from publishers, when will you find the time to write?

Just another opinion to add to the mix.

Best of luck with whatever choice you finally settle on.

Terry

Just as a thought LadyFrost, have you ever thought of trying to publish something in a magazine on the net, I mean I know most don't pay, but it does build up a portfolio for you really and may, MAY give you a bit more credit when it comes to trying to get a paid publication.

Just thought I would throw that idea across for you.

~Torana

but it does build up a portfolio for you really and may, MAY give you a bit more credit when it comes to trying to get a paid publication

sorry to say, it won't... traditional [= paying] publishers don't look at having work posted on freebie sites as being 'published'...

and, if you have had any work on them, it's strongly suggested you not mention it in queries to agents or paying venues, if you want to be taken seriously...

mammamaia, its starting to sound like there is absolutely nothing you can do to try and help yourself get successfully published.

I've heard that getting short stories and other articles published in magazines help in getting publishers to notice you, and this I have heard from a well established australian author, who did the same thing. Published work in newspapers, magazines and actually self published his first novel. And now nearly all of his books are on the best sellers list. [By the way he's name is Matthew Reilly and is the author of "Area 7" and "Ice Station"].

Writing is passion for me, something I must do for myself, but if I never get published I wont be disappointed because I know I have talent and so does my family, but if no one else in the entire world get's to see this I wont have regretted anything.

I'm actually leaning more towards getting into the publishing industry myself, I'm aiming towards opening my own Publishing House and I'm currently doing a business course and A Professional Editing and Proofreading course.

Thanks for the help guys.

xxFrostyxx

its starting to sound like there is absolutely nothing you can do to try and help yourself get successfully published.

not nothing... the way to do it is to write great, professional-level stuff and keep sending it out till you find takers...

as for the magazine bit, things may be different in oz... i'm referring to the us publishing industry, only... sorry, should've said so!...

LOL that's alright. I think that I want to keep to australia when I publish my stuff...I may not get as famous as if I would have in US but as I've said publishing is not something I strive to do, just a bonus.

xxFrostyxx

You may visit http://self-publishing-guide.blogspot.com - Your one stop site to Self-Publishing. What, Why and How to self publish your work? How to Self Publish your novels, poetry, etc or maybe finding out Self-Publishing Companies.

What are everyone's thoughts on Self-Publishing? Do you think it's a respectable way to publish your book, or the lazy way out?
I admit, self-publishing may be a bit lazy, but it can save a ton of money and time. Of course, it's usually up to the author to promote their work, but I myself am cool with that. Those are my thoughts.

but it can save a ton of money and time.

how?... compared to what?... sure, it will result in you seeing your work in book form, but you'll be tainted with the vanity-published brush, not be considered really 'published' by anyone but yourself and family, and most likely won't sell enough of the over-priced, poor quality pbs to break even...

Sometimes though if you don't try you will never know. Perhaps if ladyfrost feels this is the right path to walk then she should walk it. Im not sure really what my thoughts on self Publishingf are. But if you want to be able to say hey I have something published then surely the risk is Frostys to take.

But if you want to be able to say hey I have something published

you can say that, but it won't be true!... not in the legitimate publishing world, anyway... and if you want yourself and your work to be taken seriously, that is not the way to do it... once you've been vanity published, agents and paying presses won't be interested in you or your work... sure, there are exceptions, as there are to any rule, but they're extremely rare...

that said, if all you want is a few books to give to family and friends and don't care that you won't be a 'published author' then a decent pod is a good way to go...

Look it works for some OK Just because you like to dampen everything that could be positive doesn't mean it wont work.

Its worked for loads.
Might I say your atitiude is really dampening towards others.

you can say that, but it won't be true!... not in the legitimate publishing world, anyway... and if you want yourself and your work to be taken seriously, that is not the way to do it... once you've been vanity published, agents and paying presses won't be interested in you or your work... sure, there are exceptions, as there are to any rule, but they're extremely rare...

I have my work published at www.lulu.com, even if it is self published. And who knows? You can use self-publishing to show your work to "agents and paying presses", even if the chances of them considering it are slim. It's all in how hard you work for it.

Look it works for some

...i never said it didn't and even mentioned the exceptions...

OK Just because you like to dampen everything that could be positive doesn't mean it wont work.

please don't presume to tell me what i like to do... and what i do is not 'dampen' everything positive, but merely point out the reality and practicality of the business of writing to those who clearly don't know enough about it, or are asking for answers to questions...

i'm not going to sugar-coat the truth, just to make people feel better, when they need to know it, in order to learn what they have to do to succeed at what is a hard-to-impossible business to succeed in... to do anything less, is not being truly helpful...

Its worked for loads.

...if by 'worked' you mean it accomplished what the writers wanted, i haven't said it doesn't... but it hasn't worked for 'loads' of those who hoped it would make them 'published authors'... and the distinction has to be made, or you'll be misleading those who are asking for help in building a writing career...

Might I say your atitiude is really dampening towards others.

you might, but you'd be just being what seems to have become your usual self, where anything i say is concerned... i don't diss your posts or attack you personally, so don't have a clue why you seem to need to do it to me... you're shooting the messenger... i don't make the rules or create the reality, just pass them on honestly, without filtering them through the rose-tinged lenses you seem to prefer...

why can't you just agree to disagree, without being so personally disagreeable?

Above, Lulu.com was mentioned. I think that there is a distinction between them and a vanity press. Lulu is more like a printer for those who want to self-publish, and they don't try to claim to be anything else.

Again, it depends on the goals of the writer, but at most an editor at a major publisher or an agent who sells to them won't be impressed that a writer paid to have someone publish his or her work. A manuscript of the work, unpublished, would do better, especially if the novel was of a quality where it could make it in the market.

In order to impress the agent or the editor, a large number of sales, in the thousands would be needed. How much time would that take to sell such? If you're a naterual salesman and marketeer, maybe it won't be so bad or long...but that is still time you're not writing.

Of the self-published, in general nonfiction, where an individual has an expertise and niche market...be it a motivational speaker for example, or a craftsman of some sort, I believe the odds of success and higher sales are there.

There are always exceptions. One has to decide why they might be the possible exception to the pretty reliable rule.

Just another opinon added to the mix.

Terry

Thank you to all that have replied to this question, it has given me alot of view points to Self-Publishing and has given me ALOT to think about.

I can understand where everyone [including the publishers] are coming from on this subject and I have to admit that I might not be doing the right thing [for my future career] in self-publishing.

But I still might keep it in mind depends on what happens in the future.

Thanks all I'm very greatful.

xxFrostyxx

Above, Lulu.com was mentioned. I think that there is a distinction between them and a vanity press. Lulu is more like a printer for those who want to self-publish, and they don't try to claim to be anything else.

while some who use them may like to think there is, there really is no difference... self-publishing is just one version of 'vanity' publishing...

basically, any publisher/printer that doesn't pay you for your work is commonly considered a 'vanity publisher'...

the reason is that you more or less 'hire' any of those various venues to print your book, so you can sell it, whereas a 'real' publisher 'buys' your book so they can print it and they can sell it...

Actually id have to agree with that Maia. At the end of the day why would you have to pay for your own work if its that good?

The only time I would ever say that self/vanity publishing is okay/good is if you're just using it to see yourself in print or give copies to friends and family. If your intent is to make money or fame, it's the wrong method.

while some who use them may like to think there is, there really is no difference... self-publishing is just one version of 'vanity' publishing...

basically, any publisher/printer that doesn't pay you for your work is commonly considered a 'vanity publisher'...

the reason is that you more or less 'hire' any of those various venues to print your book, so you can sell it, whereas a 'real' publisher 'buys' your book so they can print it and they can sell it...

Mammamia, while that is generally true, in an example I gave above, people who speak on various topics (I've come across a few over the years) often hire a printer to print, usually trade paperback format, books based on their topic or expertise that they sell to those who've attended whatever seminar, workshop, conference, etc.

I would not consier that 'vanity'. It is a business venture. The individual is paying a printer the cost of creating the book, and as the individual does the selling/marketing as part of their regular business activity. They keep a large share (sometimes half or more depending on the pricing) of the revenue from the sales. In general, this is nonfiction material.

So, while I'm 98% in agreement on this, it's a distinction that I think is important.

Terry

you might not, but to the publishing world in general, non-fiction or whatever, it still is an example of 'vanity' publishing, in that the writer paid to have his book printed...

the reason for doing so isn't what determines the 'vanity' label... only that the book wasn't taken on by a paying publisher does...

that said, you've raised a good point, adding another 'good' reason for self-publishing...

I think we could all probably agree that if you're going to self-publish, you should do it with caution.

I self published the Poem Pedlar, Poetry for Children. I did all the work myself including illustrations. I tell a lie, I had a 12 yr old boy do the cover. I only had a small print run and have sold most of the books. Although you will find much advice written about self publishing you will not find much advice about self selling. I trudged round the bookshops to find most of them would order 3 or 4 but it was a wonderful experience to see my book as a centrepiece in Ottokar's window. I live in France so the opportunity to sell the rest is restricted but I can still sell them years later you don't have to do it tomorrow. I have read poems on BBC radio, won prizes and had people throw lunches for the author, (me would you believe). Throw yourself on the unsuspecting public and you will be surprised what you can achieve. Nothing succeeds like success and you have to get your work out there. Several people could split the cost of publishing an anthology of poetry or several short stories. Between you the chances of selling them are much increased. You can get the local newspaper to do an article about you and your book. Do it.

The bottom line is, you can't find anyone to publish the blooming thing. So don't be so blooming snobby. Nobody is going to break the door down and beg you to let them publish your book. In fact there are plenty of people out there anxious to rip you off. I have been offered the chance to have several of my poems published. My recompense is a copy of the paperback. On your bike mate.

Jonathan Livingstone Seagull, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Watership Down are only three titles in a long list of books that were self-published after being rejected by publishing houses. All three of these and many others later became best sellers through orthodox publishers.

If you self publish and can prove good sales to show that there is a demand for your book then this certainly is a way to gain recognition. The internet also provides many avenues for marketing self published works.

Jonathan Livingstone Seagull, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Watership Down are only three titles in a long list of books that were self-published after being rejected by publishing houses. All three of these and many others later became best sellers through orthodox publishers.

If you self publish and can prove good sales to show that there is a demand for your book then this certainly is a way to gain recognition. The internet also provides many avenues for marketing self published works.

It's fairly widely known that Mark Twain self-published. It's not quite so well known that he bankrupted himself doing it.

I've self-published as well, and my advice is, be careful with the marketing budget.

It's fairly widely known that Mark Twain self-published. It's not quite so well known that he bankrupted himself doing it.

I've self-published as well, and my advice is, be careful with the marketing budget.

Mark Twain didn't have the internet.

and can prove good sales

and, as the bard would and did say, 'there's the rub!'

and, as the bard would and did say, 'there's the rub!'

Perhaps, but its how Richard Bach, Richard Adams and others have done it without the benefit of the internet, where books can be promoted with little or no outlay.

Self publishing. Not much mentioned about what is in it for you. It is a wonderful experience, OK it is up to you to make sure you do not bankrupt yourself. Publishing is a closed shop they are doing their best to keep you out. At college we had an editor from one of the top publishers come to give a lecture. Asked how long she had been doing the job, she replied, '7 years.' Asked how many writers from the slush pile had been published in that time? she replied, 'three.' Asked what degrees she had? she replied, 'marketing.' Times change, people find their partners (husbands) on the Internet. I have found no descrimination against self publishing. On the contrary, 'good for you for showing initiative.' People regard me as a writer of some substance not a wanabe. Do it

Hulls Raven Because no other blighter will. You will die clutching a book that has never been published.

I belong to an internet based group of artists, writers and musicians. The group has recently launched its own publishing section, publishing in both hard copy through Lulu and by digital download. I also have my own personal site and a blog. I find it advantageous belonging to the group because the website attracts an average of 30,000 hits a month, largely due to the fact that there is a great deal of variety on the site. I believe that if groups of writers get together in the way that they are beginning to on this particular site then the publishing industry could be effected in the same way that the music industry has been shaken up by the independent record companies. A well produced web site offering interest and variety is an excellent means for promoting your work. Variety attracts and the internet provides a great means for writers to team up to promote their work in this way.

Publishing is a closed shop they are doing their best to keep you out.

not really, though that is what a lot of folks who haven't made it 'in' would like to think... the truth is, that like much else, it just takes time, patience and perseverance, as well as the requisite talent and skills, to get a publisher to accept your work... if it were truly a 'closed shop' no one but the same, already-published writers would have new books on the bookstore shelves... so, how do you explain the slew of brand spanking new writers who get published every year?...

I think my biggest issue with self-publishing is that many writers really want the recognition that comes from being published, and that no matter how nice you present self-publishing; it just cannot give you that.

I can understand that after years of writing and being rejected from publishers, one can get very bitter and think self-publishing is the only way. But is that really what one wants? I have the feeling, deep down many regret self-publishing one day.

I don’t know, maybe I see self-publishing as a resignation. And I am way to proud for that. :cool:

not really, though that is what a lot of folks who haven't made it 'in' would like to think... the truth is, that like much else, it just takes time, patience and perseverance, as well as the requisite talent and skills, to get a publisher to accept your work... if it were truly a 'closed shop' no one but the same, already-published writers would have new books on the bookstore shelves... so, how do you explain the slew of brand spanking new writers who get published every year?...

The reality is that publishers generally will not entertain unsolicited material and to that extent it is a closed shop. The most important thing for a writer who wishes to take the orthodox route it is therefore most necessary to get a reputable agent.

I think my biggest issue with self-publishing is that many writers really want the recognition that comes from being published, and that no matter how nice you present self-publishing; it just cannot give you that.

I can understand that after years of writing and being rejected from publishers, one can get very bitter and think self-publishing is the only way. But is that really what one wants? I have the feeling, deep down many regret self-publishing one day.

I don’t know, maybe I see self-publishing as a resignation. And I am way to proud for that. :cool:


I'd like to repeat a point previously made that writers can group together and self publish and operate to promote their work online in the same was as independent record labels have done. The internet is making many options possible and giving more control and income to the artists.

This is not a vanity thing and when approached in this way can be successful only if it involves writers of a good standard.

The reality is that publishers generally will not entertain unsolicited material and to that extent it is a closed shop. The most important thing for a writer who wishes to take the orthodox route it is therefore most necessary to get a reputable agent.

Nah, publishers want to make money. If you send something they think they can profit off they could not care less who your agent is or even if you have one.

They might reject good stories that even would sell well – in the end they are not perfect. This is part of the challenge I think, if it where easy the recognition wouldn’t be the same.

The reality is that publishers generally will not entertain unsolicited material and to that extent it is a closed shop. The most important thing for a writer who wishes to take the orthodox route it is therefore most necessary to get a reputable agent.

This is true up to a point, and depending on the genre. Many of the large US Publishers don't accept unsolicited manuscripts (except through established agents), but some do. Many midsized and most small houses accept unsolicited manuscripts, but may have reading periods or close on occasion due to the avalanche of submissions they receive and have to contend with/consider.

Whatever the method, each house strives to find and publish the very best works that they can with the limited slots available. Often that pits a slew of new/aspiring authors striving against each other as well as against experienced writers with a reliable sales record and established audience. The competition is very stiff and that makes the odds very high against aspiring authors, but it does not mean it is a "closed shop".

I do not believe publishers are doing their best to keep anyone out. Publishers are doing their best to purchase manuscripts they believe they can best market and sell to entertain readers and, as a result, pay the author, the editors, artists, printing costs and other bills and make a profit so they can expand (or survive) and publish more books to market and sell...

Terry

Nah, publishers want to make money. If you send something they think they can profit off they could not care less who your agent is or even if you have one.

They might reject good stories that even would sell well – in the end they are not perfect. This is part of the challenge I think, if it where easy the recognition wouldn’t be the same.

I would guess that you are not yet published and have little experience of how publishers operate.

You guessed wrong. If you want what I mean said in better words, check outTWErvin2s post.

Nice post btw, TWErvin2. :)

(...) how publishers operate.

Starting a debate about this could prove pointless, since it varies hugely from country to country.

You guessed wrong. If you want what I mean said in better words, check outTWErvin2s post.

Nice post btw, TWErvin2. :)



Starting a debate about this could prove pointless, since it varies hugely from country to country.

I don't see your point. That post effectively confirms what I've said, that the major publishing houses tend not to accept unsolicited work.

Getting back on topic. I repeat that groups of writers self publishing and marketing on the internet is viable but that success will be dependent on quality.

The reality is that publishers generally will not entertain unsolicited material and to that extent it is a closed shop. The most important thing for a writer who wishes to take the orthodox route it is therefore most necessary to get a reputable agent.

Baron: I don't see your point. That post effectively confirms what I've said, that the major publishing houses tend not to accept unsolicited work.

There is a difference between "publishers generally will not entertain" and "major publishers tend not to".

Take Major League Baseball for an analogy. There are only a limited number of slots on the roster for players. They go for the best...most of the players return from year to year on the major league teams (or are traded from one team to another). From the farm teams they often bring up talent that they draft or who walked on and tried out. There is a process and what they deem the best makes it to the top, and on the field for the fans to watch...and hopefully for the team to make money while paying all the expenses, including player salaries. By the defintion given, Major League Baseball would also be considered a closed shop, which I don't believe it is.

Baron: Getting back on topic. I repeat that groups of writers self publishing and marketing on the internet is viable but that success will be dependent on quality.

Writers who have had their work published in anthologies often employ a similar strategy in that each writer with work appearing markets the anthology. Thus, far more exposure through varying efforts focusing on promoting the same piece, making more readers aware than author could individually?

Quality is the key...for if the group of writers accepted writers into their marketing and promotional circle who produced (self-published) substandard/poor quality work, it could damage the "reputation" (I use that for lack of a better word at the moment) of other works being promoted? A reader picks up book A and reads it. If it's a lousy read, they're less likely to take any other advice from any of the authors cross promoting works...and likely to tell their reading friends to do the same?

But, in the end, isn't that what a publishing house (major, medium or small) does (and risk) with each book they select, publish and promote under their name?

Terry

I think the main problem with the publishing industry at the moment is the slush pile. And I speak as someone who's been through it and climbed out of it. :)

Traditional publishers clearly can't recognise work that'll sell well from work that'll languish in mediocrity. Plenty of unreadable crap gets published and flops; work that'll go on to be an international bestseller is often rejected. (J.K.Rowling was rejected by a dozen publishers before Bloomsbury took her on.)

Enid Blyton once had a problem when the editor she knew left her publishing house and the publishers didn't tell her the name of the replacement. So Blyton sent her next manuscript in marked "to the editor" and it ended up in the slush pile.

Sure enough, a few months later she got a rejection slip. The slush pile reader had skimmed the first couple of paragraphs, decided they didn't like it and sent it back. She wrote to the publishers again, they saw what had happened and apologised; they published it and made big money.

In fact, I think the evidence quite clearly is that slush piles don't and can't work. They're an archaic, failed concept and I have no idea why the industry sticks with it.

In critique groups and so on, I read a great deal of unpublished fiction. Most of it is crap. There's some of it that's of a standard with published fiction, and a bit of it that's as good as good published fiction--but many of the better unpublished authors still can't find a publisher, and most of them give up rather than bouncing their heads against the brick wall of slush piles.

Some of the writers who aren't published, write better than me. Why am I published and they not? Because the present apparatus rewards persistence more than it rewards craftsmanship.

I very much understand why writers who've been rejected a few times get the urge to self-publish.

In previous posts I have stated quite clearly how writers may group together to self publish and promote their work and approach publishing in the same way that independent record labels have effected the music industry. The indiependent record labels do not promote rubbish and writers who follow this approach should mirror their method.

Of course publishings houses market works of a certain standard so in that there is no difference. The point is that there is no difference and that writers need no longer be at the mercy of the publishing houses because they have an advantage that previous generations of writers have not had - the internet.

terry just said all my fingers were poised to add here... i thank you and my fingers thank you, pal!

love and hugs, maia

terry just said all my fingers were poised to add here... i thank you and my fingers thank you, pal!

love and hugs, maia

Mammamaia,

We seem to cross paths on the forums regularly enough, and our views often don't mesh/agree--or at least not fully. This time I'm glad to have saved you a few key strokes. :cool:

Terry

As you say, J K Rowling plus other competant writers have been rejected. It would make you weep to think about the amount of talent that is out there that stands no chance of being discovered. As in TV, why are the same old films broadcast again and again? Why are the same old films remade again and again? There is out there a mountain of talent writing plays that are relevant to society today and without dated language and outdated ideas. Surely we don't need to see Pride and Predudice yet again with the latest hot thing playing the leading role.

Take Major League Baseball for an analogy. There are only a limited number of slots on the roster for players. They go for the best...most of the players return from year to year on the major league teams (or are traded from one team to another). From the farm teams they often bring up talent that they draft or who walked on and tried out. There is a process and what they deem the best makes it to the top, and on the field for the fans to watch...and hopefully for the team to make money while paying all the expenses, including player salaries. By the defintion given, Major League Baseball would also be considered a closed shop, which I don't believe it is.


Hmm, where have I seen this analogy before... ;)

I think that self publishing, even though it is a viable means of promoting work, makes the writer of the piece look impatient or amateuristic. I think it has its uses, and i've nothing against it personally, but i don't think that one can ever truly be satisfied with a novel or anthology until it has been published by a company that doesn't do self publishing.

I have been considering the self publishing route as I was a tad offput by some of what I had read about submitting via conventional methods, and the fact that my knowledge of the subject matter (and thus the eventual target market) will exceed that of most publishers.

Perusing this thread as a newb however makes me more inclined to pursue the traditional route, even if a rockier pathway.

It is mentioned above that so called 'vanity published' writers are frowned upon by conventional publishers, why is that please? Are they not inclined to judge the quality of work on its own merit? Is a writer frowned upon because of the perception that he needed to self publish rather than chose to?

Also I am wondering about the marketing aspect of self publishing. One can of course work tirelessly on the net self promoting, especially to a niche market, but one is cut off from the traditional marketing that a traditional publisher can offer surely?

Manny, d'you think you can help me in my thread - "Need Help!" here in publishers section? If you could, then it would be really appreciated.

I should clarify something I wrote above, when I said 'and the fact that my knowledge of the subject matter (and thus the eventual target market) will exceed that of most publishers' , I meant about my topic of choice, not about publishing.

It is mentioned above that so called 'vanity published' writers are frowned upon by conventional publishers, why is that please?

...because 99.9999% of all that's vanity published is so poor in quality that no traditional publisher would touch it...

Are they not inclined to judge the quality of work on its own merit?

...no, because there's simply too much of it... and why should they?... if it's already on the market as a vanity published work, they're not going to be able to make any money on it, unless, as happens only once in a blue moon, the book sold hundreds of thousands of copies, making a reprint a no-brainer... so, the only way such a book will even be noticed by the paying publishers is if it's already a best-seller...

Is a writer frowned upon because of the perception that he needed to self publish rather than chose to?

...absolutely!... and why not?... if the work is good enough, eventually it will find a paying publisher... if it doesn't, it's almost always because the writer gave up before that could happen... even one of america's greatest writers ever [think it was faulkner], had to keep trying after nearly a hundred rejections, before his first book got taken on by a publisher...

Also I am wondering about the marketing aspect of self publishing. One can of course work tirelessly on the net self promoting, especially to a niche market, but one is cut off from the traditional marketing that a traditional publisher can offer surely?

...of course... publishing houses have marketing and distribution venues that self-publishers can't avail themselves of... not to mention the pr cachet of their name alone, and the advertising they can afford to do...

I was tempted by self publishing prior to my arrival here, indeed I had shared some links with an American article writer I know who was considering similar.

My motivation was pure lazyness really and I was labouring under the misguided belief that it would provide a short cut to having a book 'published' and that conventional publishers would look more favourably on me in the future.

Reading this forum and some of the self publishing stories of others linked out from here has convinced me to go the traditional route.

I would have to disagree on some points. It is very possible to make a good living self-publishing and there are numerous reasons why traditional publishers skip over good books. The case is not very cut and dry, especially these days as traditional publishers use the same POD technology that many self-publishers use. In fact, if the self-publisher is good, it is nearly impossible to tell what books have been self-published or traditionally published (unless one knows most of the publishing houses out there).

Now, subsidy or vanity publishing is an entirely different thing. It should not be confused with self-publishing. One can self-publish via a vanity press, but one can also self-publish via their own publishing company and have access to almost all of the same resources traditional publishers have (except for all of the money).

It is really up to the writer. How much control do you want over your work? Do you want 100% royalties or just a small fraction? Either way, you will still have to do most - or a lot - of the marketing. Unless you have a big name already, or a "platform" as publishers are calling things these days, most traditional publishers will do little to no marketing for you. So, you will still have to market and promote your book just as if it was self-published.

I think it comes down to the person. Bookstores do not care whether it was traditionally or self-published (they do care if it was vanity published). As long as they get their discount and can order it through Ingram or Baker & Taylor or some other wholesaler/distributor, they most likely will not even know.

Either way, once the writing is over the journey is not.

Cheers

It is very possible to make a good living self-publishing

with non-fiction, yes, in some cases... but not with fiction, unless you have a built-in market, as with christian-based works that can be sold through christian websites, bookshops and other such 'niche' venues...

and, in the [paying] publishing/literary world, any method by which the writer has to pay to have a book published and/or sold, rather than being paid by the publisher to do so, is considered 'vanity' publishing, whether folks who do/recommend that like it or not...

'self'-publishing by its very name is an exercise in 'vanity' since it's only the writer her/himself who's taking a chance on the work, not anyone else...

I think that self publishing, even though it is a viable means of promoting work, makes the writer of the piece look impatient or amateuristic. I think it has its uses, and i've nothing against it personally, but i don't think that one can ever truly be satisfied with a novel or anthology until it has been published by a company that doesn't do self publishing.
All though that seems like the case as well self-publishing seems like the only idea.
Because it takes forever to get noticed by anyone and by then you're to old to live for a million stories to write.
The only problem with self publishing is that you need money.

All though that seems like the case as well self-publishing seems like the only idea.
Because it takes forever to get noticed by anyone and by then you're to old to live for a million stories to write.
The only problem with self publishing is that you need money.

How long is 'forever'? What constitutes too long to build up writing skills that will not only attract a reputable publisher, but also readers? Is self-publication a shortcut around that?

When does one get too old to write stories?

How long did it take and/or at what age did Rowling, King, Clancy, or Brooks get noticed or published? They've been rather prolific and still have plenty of stories yet to write/tell.

If impatience is the reason to select self-publishing, I'm not sure it's the correct reason. Marketing and building a following, or at least a name/platform where readers will purchase your books (in the vast majority of instances) takes a good bit of time, no matter if you're on your own (self-published) or if a reputable publisher with solid a distribution network accepts your work.

Writing a book and self-publishing, and then setting up a website, visiting a few forums and getting a few local articles in newspapers and book signings...that takes more than a bit of time and patience in itself...how far would that take you as a self-published writer? And the writing/content isn't really that good, how effective will the best marketing and promotion efforts be in the end? In any case, you're still looking at years of work (both writing and marketing) so self-publication isn't necessarily a shortcut, unless the only reason to self-publish is to say you have a book in print, and share it with a few family members and friends. In that case marketing and all the other stuff (except the cost) doesn't matter.

Then there's the expense of self-marketing...

Terry

The case is not very cut and dry, especially these days as traditional publishers use the same POD technology that many self-publishers use. In fact, if the self-publisher is good, it is nearly impossible to tell what books have been self-published or traditionally published (unless one knows most of the publishing houses out there).

That was also my logic.

The marketing aspect must be the single most prohibitive factor if one chooses to self publish.

Setting up a website, marketing it via a few forums and other avenues will still only sell you 50-100 copies or so, that isnt enough to make it worthwhile and further marketing makes it logistically very difficult.

Although the prospect of all returns in my pocket rather than a measly percentage is tempting. :rolleyes:

From a businessman's perspective, if I am not confident enough to risk some of my own cash, how can I expect anyone else to?

I did recently read one self publish site that claimed they did all the boring stuff like ISBN numbers and additionally made it available to bookshops via their purchasing channels, guaranteed a small review in a few bookshop resources (in the hope they will stock it), got it into libraries somewhow, and indeed most of the marketing they claimed a traditional publisher does including making it available on Amazon etc.

I forget who it was as I cant find the link. I recall they offered some kind of silver and gold type deal and the upper one got you X number of copies (quite a lot) but with all the bells and whistles it would be a £10k investment.

You may think I am back sitting on the fence with regard to self publishing, I couldnt possibly comment. :D

Very true Manny, if one goes the self-publishing route there is tons of work to do. However, these days unless you are a big name or already famous or have a "platform", you still have to do all of your own marketing even if printed by a traditional publisher.

One thing is that the publisher you were referring to sounds like a subsidy or vanity publisher. This is very different then true self-publishing. I don't think one should ever pay to have their work published: either get it traditionally published or go the true self-publishing route and set up your own publishing company. Getting your books into Amazon, Barnes & Noble, in the US and UK, in Ingram, etc. is fairly easy for the self-publisher. Getting it reviewed by the big journals that drive much of the market: Kurkus, Library Journal, etc. is hard but not impossible as long as you follow their guidelines and have a long enough lead time (around 4 months) between ARCs and actual publication.

I've done both: I have been with several different traditional publishers and academic presses and have also self-published. I've been happy all around.

What is wrong with sitting on the fence... both sides have green grass ;)

I work with a group of writers and artists who have established our own "publishing company". Effectively this began as publishing our own e-books on the group website but has developed to producing hard copy by using Lulu.com as printers. The group website gets a high percentage of hits which has taken some of the hard work out of promotion. Also, by using Lulu we are able to sell books on Amazon so long as they have ISBN numbers, which the group purchase in batches of 10 at a time. The only cost that has been involved in this is the group membership fee, which just covers the cost of the ISBN number.

I have been published by traditionally publishers and this is my first venture into what may be termed self-publishing and although not as high profile as the marketing strategies of the large publishing houses, it has generated a little success in a very short time. I believe that the big advantage has been working with a group of people, rather than just trying it alone, and having an established website as a base of operations. I have to say that the site, once primarily a visual artists' site, is now being revamped with the publishing side being prominent and the artists' galleries moving into the background but still drawing visitors.

If anyone decides to take this route then I would strongly recommend working in this way, with a group of others. One person on their own, even with a great website, will pull a limited number of visitors whereas a group offers variety that causes people to browse and generates more hits.

I've stated my opinion in this thread before and I still believe that groups of writers working this way can challenge traditional publishing in the same way that independant record labels have shallenged the music industry.

I am a little bit between a rock and a hard place with the decision.

I was mooching on Amazon the other night on a similar subject to my own and found one guys self published (when I checked the publisher) book available at $78 :eek:

His book had reviews on there! Similar is available for 1/5th of that price.

Now it is not rocket science to work out that 10% of a traditional £9-99 book versus 70% of a $78 (£39) book is less than a pound -v- £27-30. One guy has to sell one book to make £27 and one guy has to sell 27. Halve the figures and it is still 13+ to 1 if my %'s are out so much.

One must decide if one wants to make some cash or merely wants to be 'traditional' and do it the hard way I am thinking. Does one write 'for the love of it' only or does one hope for a possibility to earn a sheckle also? I love to write but also like money! :D

If I can combine the two then much better!

I am wondering if most writers are not business people at all. To coin a stereotype; are they sitting by the sea shore, in hopeless debt, penning the great 'never be published' novel or are some actually business people who happen to have enough knowledge on a subject to write about it, and expect payment/profit for the endeavour? (Subject to decent marketing)

I am a Thatcherite - what can I say? :p

I am a little bit between a rock and a hard place with the decision.

I was mooching on Amazon the other night on a similar subject to my own and found one guys self published (when I checked the publisher) book available at $78 :eek:

His book had reviews on there! Similar is available for 1/5th of that price.

Now it is not rocket science to work out that 10% of a traditional £9-99 book versus 70% of a $78 (£39) book is less than a pound -v- £27-30. One guy has to sell one book to make £27 and one guy has to sell 27. Halve the figures and it is still 13+ to 1 if my %'s are out so much.

One must decide if one wants to make some cash or merely wants to be 'traditional' and do it the hard way I am thinking. Does one write 'for the love of it' only or does one hope for a possibility to earn a sheckle also? I love to write but also like money! :D

If I can combine the two then much better!

I am wondering if most writers are not business people at all. To coin a stereotype; are they sitting by the sea shore, in hopeless debt, penning the great 'never be published' novel or are some actually business people who happen to have enough knowledge on a subject to write about it, and expect payment/profit for the endeavour? (Subject to decent marketing)

I am a Thatcherite - what can I say? :p

I don't think that you can pigeonhole writers, they come from all walks of life. As for making money, I think that most of us who take writing seriously want to earn from what we do.

When it comes to pricing, using lulu.com allows pricing to be comparable with normal high street bookshop prices so I don't see the problem there. It comes around to promotion again and this is where I strongly believe that there is great advantage in forming groups and working together for reasons stated in an earlier post.

I found a forum called Absolute Write, there are rooms devoted to self publishing. There is, described in detail over there, a marked difference between self and vanity.

Perusing the threads and reading websites, I seem to leaning toward Diggory Press (http://www.diggorypress.com/#). They are proven to be cheaper than Lulu with much better marketing packages.

Does anyone over here have any experience with them?

Diggory Press: Not recommended. A vanity publisher in the UK.

that's preditors & editors' listing... don't rely on absolute write to be absolutely right... always check out the p&e listing and then google the name to find out for yourself, with a careful perusal of the site and see if there's any negative chatter showing up in the google results...

as for the difference, 'vanity' covers all methods of paying to get your book in print, vs being paid... even the pod venues that don't require an up front fee make you have to buy your own books in order to sell them... and they all require you to do the marketing and pr for your books, which a paying publisher will do for you [yes, you may need to pitch in a bit with book signings, radio/tv interviews, but don't have to do it all on your own, as with the 'vanity' ones]...

btw, the term 'vanity' only refers to the fact that if a writer wants to get his/her work in print and no traditional publisher will pay them for it, then the writers' 'vanity' causes them to do it on their own, one way or another... it's not a term that describes any particular one/s of those methods, which range from paying the entire cost by hiring your own printer, to going with PA or lulu...

I found a forum called Absolute Write, there are rooms devoted to self publishing. There is, described in detail over there, a marked difference between self and vanity.

Perusing the threads and reading websites, I seem to leaning toward Diggory Press (http://www.diggorypress.com/#). They are proven to be cheaper than Lulu with much better marketing packages.

Does anyone over here have any experience with them?

I don't see how they can come a lot cheaper than Lulu when there is no cash outlay except for books ordered. to all intents and purposes, Lulu is just a printer, with the advantage of a proven internet record.

Comparable author copies seem to be cheaper with Diggory. I read a lot tonight to support that.

That said; I also Googled them and found another forum where the Diggory MD particpated with some guy called Manning in some kind of flame war. They claim to be each taking the other to court. :eek:

If Mods allow it*, the link to that is here. (http://booksandtales.com/podforum/viewtopic.php?t=4957)

I was interested in Diggory's platinum option and its alleged distribution etc. Not cheap but effective if it works.

My Google work on Diggory is far from complete however. :(

I would welcome opinions on the Diggory Platinum Deal (http://www.diggorypress.com/diggory-platinum-distribution-p-791.html) if anyone has one.

* I didnt want to be seen as link dropping as a newbie but the links are balanced postives and negatives and pertinent to the conversation. If not allowed Mods please edit links.

Their website is still selling that guy's book, almost a year later. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say "don't use them". ;)

I have since been Googling at length and found much to discredit Diggory by various people across many forums and other media, including that Manning guy's website of complaints and court preparation stuff.

So Diggory is off my list. :p

I don't see how they can come a lot cheaper than Lulu when there is no cash outlay except for books ordered. to all intents and purposes, Lulu is just a printer, with the advantage of a proven internet record.

The only problem with Lulu is that bookstores generally wont carry their titles because of their lack of a return policy and not giving a big enough discount (i.e., 40-50%).

The best way to self-publish and not go the vanity or subsidy press route is to set up your own publishing company and use Lightning Source as your printer. That will get you into Amazon, Ingrams, many other places, and allow you to set your own cover price, discount, and return policy. It is much more work, but if you are leaning towards self-publishing, you might as well go all out.

The only problem with Lulu is that bookstores generally wont carry their titles because of their lack of a return policy and not giving a big enough discount (i.e., 40-50%).

The best way to self-publish and not go the vanity or subsidy press route is to set up your own publishing company and use Lightning Source as your printer. That will get you into Amazon, Ingrams, many other places, and allow you to set your own cover price, discount, and return policy. It is much more work, but if you are leaning towards self-publishing, you might as well go all out.

My own experience so far with Lulu has been good. The group project, nominally our own publishing company, is getting off to a reasonable start and Lulu, in effect, only function as the printer.

I am interested in your input, however, and will look into Lightning Source.

Thanks for posting.

My own experience so far with Lulu has been good.

I too have had a good experience with Lulu, and have self-published several books with their company. I only had one problem, when one of their printers screwed up trying to print my book; when I tried to address the problem (including sending a few photos of the ruined book and complaining various times), they wouldn't give me a straight answer to my question: can I get another copy for free since this wasn't mine or Lulu's fault? They neither said yes or no, so I had to go back, do a little revision, and order another copy. Fortunately, this one turned out right, and ever since then Lulu has done an excellent job printing my manuscripts and what such naught. I quit blaming them for what happened, because they were just about as clueless as I was about the ordeal (about how my book turned out all weird anyways).

I might get a different publishing company someday, but for the time being I'm content and grateful to see my stories in print and available for anyone to buy ^^