I find it convenient to have more than one thing I'm passionate about; that way, I can make money at one (or more) of those things while writing as a hobby. Some people make a good living at writing and most people do not. While being an amazing writer helps, it won't determine your fate. Many people don't think Stephenie Meyer is any good, and she's doing pretty well for herself. Edgar Allan Poe lived only on the money he made from his writing and he was poor his entire life.
This topic reminds me of a new book I just bought called "Write Mind: 299 Things Writers Should Never Say To Themselves, and What They Should Say Instead". Here's one of the quotes out of it about this that I love... Wrong Mind: "Since I can't possibly make a living from writing, there is no reason to write." Right Mind: "I write to find out."
oh trust me jesswrite. i'm writing to find out..lolol..but i'm maintenance man at an apartment comples..so i tend to have some real hectic days since we do prettty much do all the work "in house" but i try to fit a good 30 minutes or so after work wether i'm tired or not..but i wouldnt just quit my job to say i am goin to write for a living but it would be nice to say someday though...lolol..but i'm a realistic person so i kno this gon take a while and maybe not ever...glad to see so many peoples opinion on the subject though..
I think you have to write out of passion as even those with successful careers had to fight in the face of discouragement for a long time before generating a steady income. There are also several writers who don't make a living out of their art, but they do it anyway because there are greater rewards in life than money.
Hi, Yes it is possible, it's just not easy. You don't have to become a best seller either. What you need is to develop a name for yourself as a good writer and then write an entire stable of books. Enough so that at any one time at least one of them is selling well. And by well I mean maybe five hundred or a thousand a month. If you have one book doing that, and selling at $2.99 on the seventy percent scheme, and maybe another dozen selling over a hundred a month, you're sitting on two thousand sales a month, that's four thousand in the hand. Fifty grand more or less. But there are provisos - aren't there always. You always have to keep writing since older books drop in sales so new ones have to keep propping them up. I would think a minimum of two books a year, and yes, that is an ask. As well as writing your books you also have to promote them, that means at the least maintaining a blog, twittering and probably a lot more. Looking at it overall, I would say that for most people making a decent wage as an author is damned hard, and steady employment is going to be a lot easier and better paid, except of course for a lucky and talented few. But the real question is, do you want to write even to the point of earning a pittance instead of a salary? Cheers, Greg.
Hi, Sorry to reopen this thread. But on kindleboards they've just started a similar thread based on an article by Dean Wesley Smith about how indie writers can make a living from their writing. It's similar to my post above, but far more detailed. I'll post the link here, though it wasn't working for some reason, but even if it isn't it should give you enough ammo to find the guy's blog. Cheers, Greg. http://www.Deanwesleysmith.com/?p=4019
This also means considerable expenditure on your part, a heavy up-front cost that you will eat if your book doesn't sell. In traditional publishing, the house absorbs these costs, and their willingness to do so is based on their judgment of whether or not you nailed #1 above. You'll also be entirely responsible for advertising, distribution and production costs, sunk costs that are paid before you see any income at all. Again, in traditional publishing, these are borne by the house based on #3 above. Also, if you do have a successful book, you will be responsible for ongoing production and distribtion - the work as well as the expense. In short, if you are to succeed at self-publishing, you must have business skills as well as creative skills.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I'm entirely responsible for the advertisment of the book, the distributation of the book, production and costs of the book, etc? I learn something new every day.
A commercial or independent publishing company, yes. But self-publishing - that's where the "self" comes in.
Although these days traditional publishing houses are doing less and less marketing, as has already been mentioned. More and more of the onus is on the author to promote themselves, especially if they aren't yet an established author. And even established authors sometimes get their marketing budgets pulled if they aren't deemed as commercially lucretive as something that's the latest flash in the pan teen sensation or celebrity cookbook. It's all about the money, honey.
Yes, if you go through a publishing company, they'll do it for you...all the cover design and promoting....to a degree. Chances are you won't have any say in the way your cover looks. And they're not going to pump a lot of money into the advertising bucket for you because you're an unknown. Yes, if you self pub you're going to have to spend some money up front to get the book proofed, formatted (unless you feel comfortable doing it yourself) and a cover designed. That's the price of doing this stuff yourself. Sure, you could design the cover yourself using some graphics program, but unless you're really good...chances are your cover will end up looking like a complete novice did it and to readers who are browsing, say, Amazon, all they're seeing at immediate glance is the cover art. Folks will go for a professional looking cover 9 times out of 10. So if you budget and set money aside to present your book as professionally as possible, then you will get something that can compete with anything put out of a traditional house. Plus, you'll get it to market faster (1 to 2 days once it's ready to go as opposed to 1 to 2 years) and you'll get a larger cut of the profit (70% versus something like 25% - I'll have to check the math on that, but publishing houses give the author the smallest of profit from each sale...it may even be smaller than 25%). The bottom line is, even if you sell through a house - and if that's your dream, then pursue the hell out of it - you're still going to have to do legwork yourself to market and sell the book, same as you will if you self publish. That is, if you want to actually sell copies, build a brand and make money. If you work hard enough, you'll recoup the money you put into the design of the book. Print houses won't give you a penny until after you've earned out your advance, and a lot of books don't ever do that.
And that's a significant difference - commercial publishers will give you an advance. Sometimes not large, but it's money in hand now. And it's based on the publisher's projection of how well your book will sell. That it may not earn out only means you got more money than if you'd gone with a straight royalty package.
Spamalope, my point was that self-publishing requires higher up-front costs, a higher degree of legwork and the ability to manage every business aspect of the process compared to publishing via a house. You work for every extra dollar you get. It comes down to resources, disposition and mix of abilities, as to which road one chooses.
and it's not a given that you'll get an advance from a paying press, either, as many publishers don't shell out an advance to new writers... and most that do won't be going beyond 4 figures unless your book is a potential blockbuster and your agent has drummed up a nice lucrative bidding war for it... but on the up side, it won't cost you a penny out of pocket to get your book in print and out into bookshops... though, as noted by others, you may have to expend some time and energy on promoting it [as in giving radio/tv interviews, doing book-signings, readings, etc.]
