Debut author turned down $120,000, 3 books New York deal to self-publish

Most self-published authors don't make that much. Nor do most traditionally-published authors.

 

Hey there, just want to address this really quickly. I'm not sure what indie authors you are hanging with or why they are secretive about their earnings but I've found the indie community to be amazingly open and supportive, which is why I posted my blog in the first place, as a way to "pay it forward."

One place you can check is the Kboards writer's cafe. Amazingly supportive SP community and the earnings/sales are reported from authors regularly.

Here's a link and yes, that first page is overwhelming and not typical of indie earnings, but scroll down a ways and look at what would be the equivalent of the mid-list for trad published authors. By far and wide, indie mid-listers are making far more money than trad mid-listers.

http://www.kboards.com/authors/

 

@peachalulu I imagine most people just don't know the figures - not everyone's going to think to record details like that, especially if they were just doing it to get the book out there rather than as an actual business venture, and even less of those are going to be comfortable sharing them.

 

I tried asking a few Self published authors but I usually got waved off in the - I sold-what-I-wanted-to-sell kind of way. Which I could take as anything under ten as long as it wasn't a family member - lol. I guess that is the trouble everyone has different goals when self publishing.

Good link Brenna! Looks as though a self published author has to keep the books coming same as a traditionally published author if they want to make the bucks.

 

You absolutely hit the nail on the head. The more books you put out, the more successful you are. And as an indie, you can put them out faster than a trad contract would allow. If you read my original blog post, the NC clause was one of my sticking points because it was going to prevent me from putting out my books as fast as I wanted to, and thus build up my back list.

 

I read the link. Interesting. I have to admire your risky move it might not have been my choice but as an author/artist you've got to choose your own path.

I know several artists I wished went the traditional route - but most of them can't stand shmoozing at the art shows and they sell everything they make. If they're happy that's good.

 

I'm going to leave y'all with this. It's a REAL eye opener. I just started reading it and am only half way through but.. wow just wow.

http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/01/questions-from-steve-zacharius-ceo-and.html

Best of luck to you all. Any more questions for me, feel free to contact me off the thread.

Best, Brenna

 

I don't understand why this is so emotional for folks, but I think the hostility is a two way street. Perhaps if everyone took a step back (I know, I'm a fine one to talk) and cleared some chips off a few shoulders...

So what that some people are for it and others not. It's like the italics for thought thread, stick to the points and the evidence and let go of the search for a consensus.

 

I can only speak for myself but this is simply not true in my case. I don't have a issue with self publishing but I do have an issue with claims that have no visible means of support. To dismiss someone as being biased when they aren't biased against self publishing makes little sense.

 

No evidence that you are paying attention to that is.

This is a distortion of what I said.

 

If you have any, then provide it.

 

Nothing odd about DBA, that was never the sole issue.

I simply put the pieces together, some you are ignoring in order to write your own narrative. All we had to go on was this author's own blog, her self published novel, a website where the author can claim any sales history they want, and Kindle sales that say she had a high rate of sales that day which doesn't reflect the claimed 10K book sales since December.

Considering how many good writers send out query letter after letter, and here we have a claim that a publisher was so impressed with an unknown author they wanted a three book contract and were willing to fork over a large advance, which the author chose not to take. If one is independently wealthy, maybe, but the not-common ticks on the list continue to add up.

That's a whole lot more than just the fact she used a DBA instead of just saying self published, (which BTW, I think is a good idea).

I've not said the book wasn't any good. There are some reviews, many of which are positive but it's not like some positive reviews are hard to obtain. There are hundreds of good books out there publishers are not snapping up with big advances.


And, I believe the defensiveness was uncalled for and adds subjective evidence.

 

@GingerCoffee none of that is evidence, which I assume you well know. If you have evidence the author is lying, post it.

As for unknown authors getting huge advances, look at Stephanie Meyer. She got a three-book deal and a $750,000.00 advance as an unknown author, and her writing quality is about average.

 

None of that is evidence, exactly. It's the absence of evidence.

Do you see any significant evidence at all except the author's blog and own claims of sales? I looked at http://www.hughhowey.com/?s=brenna aubrey and I still see nothing except Howey's reporting of Brenna's blog. What did I miss where he was an external source confirming the story.


And I repeat, I'm not saying none of this is true. People need to read more carefully. I'm saying I'm skeptical of the claims. That's quite different from, "I say the claims are false."

And, I also repeat, if this is a marketing gimmick, it's very clever and worth notice.

 

Someone asked in the comments how we knew the story was true, and Howey says the industry isn't that large and Aubrey has a lot of friends in the know who were aware of the deal as it transpired. That indicates to me he has some knowledge of the thing. Plus, Howey is a pretty reliable guy and has been pretty open about the advantage and disadvantages to traditional and self-publishing. It would be odd, in my view, for him to run with something like this based just on a blog post. I suspect if I made up a blog post tomorrow making similar claims, you wouldn't see Howey or anyone like him parroting them. When he answers that question by saying the industry isn't that large and there are plenty of people who were aware of things as they unfolded, he is corroborating the story, and he's in a better position to do that than we are.

In any event, as I said above, so far there is zero evidence whatsoever that the story is fake, so any reasonable weighing of the evidence comes out in favor of Aubrey at this point.

 

You perhaps didn't have a very large number of your posts here deleted by a rogue moderator without any explanation, let alone an apology, ever being offered by anyone, and/or perhaps you haven't repeatedly been given representations (together with requests for promotional assistance) which turned out to be entirely inaccurate, by this forum's staff.

 

No, fortunately I arrived after that episode. I do, however, understand your issues with said past moderator (see the Italics for thoughts sticky thread and you may find I'm more ally than foe in that matter ).

But most of us weren't involved in that and IMO, one or two outliers don't make a forum.

 

Thanks. I hear you. I accept that one or two outliers don't make a forum, but one or two trolls who post negatively in every single thread which mentions anything to do with self-publishing can destroy one, because they inhibit large numbers of former members from returning, and large numbers of potential new members from joining, and when that's allowed to continue indefinitely, unchecked (in spite of repeated assurances that it won't be), it damages the reputation of a forum in exactly the places with which it should be looking to form potential associations and from which it should be looking to draw potential members. It also damages the personal credibility of anyone who's been asked to spread the word that "things are changing" when they're not (or when they're "not adequately"). In the world of web forums, just as in the world of marketing, reputations are built slowly but can be destroyed quickly. It's all pretty saddening and frustrating. And basically just very disappointing.

 

And I still don't get the contentiousness of such a benign issue.

 

The funny thing on the part of the troll contingent is the pretense that you can only educate or enlighten people by being negative or discouraging. It's nonsense, of course. Writers, both new and more experienced, can be told of the pros and cons for either traditional or self-publishing while at the same time being encouraged and supported, whichever path they decide to take.

 

Well, just read through this thread and I can say, with some degree of sincerity, that it had a thicker plot and more thought provoking ideas than some works of fiction I've digested in recent times.

 

LOL ... there are "book ideas" all around us!

 

I agree with this completely, for which reason I found the last few posts from Brenna to be refreshingly reasonable and moderate. That's the voice this conversation needs.

Lex, I am trying to help in this matter, but now you are attacking me directly and that makes it very hard to keep a positive frame of mind in doing so. I know you're not happy in the time it is taking me. That cannot be helped. If I banish these member, delete their questions and scrutiny, how is that any different from when your posts where unjustly deleted? It's the very same thing. I'm not doing that. To expect things to go from black to white in a day is not a reasonable request by anyone's standards. To ask that the topic receive a kind of epistemological shield, that it be disallowed to question or ask for further clarification is not going to ever happen. Every subject in this forum will be treated equally. I don't even allow that kind of exalted status for the one topic that traditionally enjoys that shield, Religion. You know that I side with you on this, but you are asking me to shut people up who are asking fair questions at this point.

 

If I may interject, I too, concur with this assertion. The internet nor indeed, the world in general should in our times, harbour censorship in any of its guises, least of all when in stands in the way of debate and opinion. It is a liberty for which many have fallen.
Was that last part too deep?

 

Excepting the situation where I control 100% of the discourse with an iron fist, and justly reward those reasonable enough to adopt my own views (which doesn't seem feasible at this juncture), I find freedom from censorship to be the most compelling second choice.