Publishing Self vs. Traditional Publishing: Don't Limit Yourself

Discussion in 'Articles' started by losthawken, Dec 13, 2013.

By losthawken on Dec 13, 2013 at 2:57 PM
  1. losthawken

    losthawken Author J. Aurel Guay Role Play Moderator Contributor

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,150
    Likes Received:
    81
    Location:
    Maine

    Publishing Self vs. Traditional Publishing: Don't Limit Yourself

    Discussion in 'Articles' started by losthawken, Dec 13, 2013.

    I posted this in my WF blog yesterday, but I thought it fit well here too.

    An author friend shared a link to this very interesting report on www.digitalbookworld.com by sociologist Dana Beth Weinberg.

    dbweinberg-income.jpg

    Based on a 2013 survey, where authors responded to a variety of questions, Weinburg analyzed some really important and interesting facets related to the self vs traditional publishing debate. Three types of authors were identified, ‘Self Published’, ‘Traditionally Published’, and ‘Hybrid’ (which means a combination of both other types).

    In looking at the graphs, the bottom line to me, is that self publishing is a risky game that, while personally rewarding, won’t bring in any real profit on its own. However, at the same time the most driven and focused authors, as inferred by profit and number of manuscripts produced, do not limit themselves from any outlet, but make up the majority of the ‘Hybrid’ category.

    dbweinberg-productivity.jpg

    Maybe these ‘Hybrid authors’ start out self publishing, and then move up to traditional publishing. Maybe traditionally published authors break away and make a go of it on their own once their name is established. I imagine that it isn’t as simple as that. Only one thing is really clear, the authors who earn more are those who produce more manuscripts, are more focused on their goals, and don’t limit themselves to any one publishing format.

    dbweinberg-priorities.jpg

    So what are you doing reading this? Get writing already!!
     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2013
    hansraj and GingerCoffee like this.

Comments

Discussion in 'Articles' started by losthawken, Dec 13, 2013.

    1. shadowwalker
      shadowwalker
      I would imagine (just from discussions among various published authors and publishing personnel) that most hybrid authors are trade published who have self-published their backlists. As you note, it really is more complicated than these graphs show as far as the hybrid authors. It would be interesting to see a more detailed breakdown of that category itself.
    2. losthawken
      losthawken
      Agreed, I wish we could see a breakdown of income/manuscript independent and traditional. I'd also be interested to know what the graph of # of manuscripts by author income would look like.
    3. Peter Werme
      Peter Werme
      That is a very interesting read, and something that everyone should try to learn from.
      hansraj and losthawken like this.
    4. daemon
      daemon
      The numbers are misleading. Income probably has more to do with book quality than publication method. Traditionally published books represent a certain standard of quality. ("quality" does not necessarily mean "artistic merit", but rather "enjoyable to read".) For every hundred or thousand manuscripts sent to a publisher, they select the few that entice the reader the most. The numbers indicate little more than the obvious fact that a book that entices the reader will sell more copies than a book that does not.
    5. isaac223
      isaac223
      I'm just shocked that aspiring authors only make $0.

      Wait...
    6. Shadowfax
      Shadowfax
      On the contrary, 10% of aspiring authors make up to $5k.

      I'm surprised that they actually make anything. Once they make something, it must, logically, be because they've been published; the only question is whether traditionally or self-pub.
    7. isaac223
      isaac223
      Right, and in which case they are no longer merely aspiring authors.

Share This Page