At CONduit I spoke with an author friend who thought that marketing was indeed a bad thing, especially marketing for YA, because said author felt it didn’t build an audience based on the merits of the book. It built one based on hype and buzz. Instead of buying a book because it delivered a wonderful experience, readers would be buying only because it was what everyone else was doing. Furthermore, publishers only have so much money, and by choosing to put the dollars behind some books, they choose to let other books, which might deliver a better experience, languish.
I understand wanting to build a readership that’s based on love, not hype. But what I think my friend is overlooking is that you can’t love something if you don’t try it. And you won’t try it if you don’t know it’s there. Marketing and PR help make sure people know the book is there.
Yes, some readers might try it the first time because it’s what everyone is doing. But if the book is really that good, i.e. it actually delivers a wonderful experience for the target audience, then those readers will come back for another serving. They might look initially because everyone else is, but they’ll stay for love.
One of my editors just forwarded a link to “Not Quite a PR Campaign” by Sherry Thomas. Lots of interesting details there about what she does for PR, but probably one of the most important ideas she shares is the fact that marketing & PR don’t build an audience. A great story experience does that. However, marketing & PR can get the book in the audience’s hands.
What we all want to happen is word-of-mouth. PR doesn’t really create word-of-mouth, love does. But readers won’t read a book until they know it exists. So then the point of a PR campaign, if a PR campaign has any point at all, is to create awareness and hope that awareness will translate into love, once a critical mass of readers have read and enjoyed your book.
Readers may miss many high quality (i.e. they deliver a great experience to the intended audience) books because the lion’s share of the publisher’s marketing budget is being spent on a small group of books, and the author who gets the leftovers just doesn’t have the cash or know-how to do it themselves. But that doesn’t mean marketing is bad. It means that getting a big marketing push is like any other lucky break or opportunity.
I just started reading Guide to Writing Fiction by Phillys A. Whitney (a huge seller in the 1970’s and 1980’s). It’s a wonderful, slim, down-to-earth volume. She opens the book with a chapter called “Opportunity is Like a Train.” She maintains that her success did not come from starting with loads of talent. In fact, she says her ability was “modest.” She certainly wasn’t as gifted as many other authors she’d worked with in the writing groups of her youth. Nor did it come from immediate initial success. It came from being ready when opportunity knocked.
Of course, I have been lucky. I’ve had extraordinary breaks come my way–along with some pretty bad blows and disappointments. There’s been bad luck too, but that doesn’t always show. Good fortune and unexpected opportunities are always coming along. Perhaps opportunity is like a train on an endless track. Now and then it makes a stop at your station, often without fanfare, and without warning.
…What is important is not the lucky break, the stopping of the train–that’s only part of it. Life is full of trains that stop. What counts is what we are doing with our lives when there is no opportunity and not a train in sight.
James Dashner is someone who is getting a big promo budget from Random House this year for Maze Runner. A very big one. But if you read his story about how he got published (links to all nine parts of the story are in his sidebar) and what got him to this point, you’ll see this promo train was a long time coming.
Meanwhile, if the big promo budget ever stops at my station, I’m going to hop on. Until then, I will keep writing the best stories I can and make my current marketing budget (part publisher, part mine) go as far as possible. I’ll do the one for the love, the other because I can’t share the love if nobody even knows it’s out there.
I’m finally sold on e-publishing. It’s the great equalizer.
There isn’t much that a small publisher can do for you that you can’t do for yourself. If I did get a contract with a traditional publisher, I’d still need the same skills and I’d still have to do the same kind of self-promotion as I do as an independent publisher.
As always, I still need to focus on understanding my audience, and on writing the best stories that I possibly can. A bad first book will kill every other book in a series.
Don’t get me wrong. I’d still take a publishing contract. The one thing they CAN give you is credibility.
TWAbbott.com
forgefire.blogspot.com
That “largest trade category” seems meaningless.
For example, if “adult paper books” were a category, I think (if I understand the categories), it would be $2890.3M (sum of adult hardcover, paperback, and mass market).
Then, if we had “adult e-book” category, I assume it would be somewhat less than $969.9M, since E-Books (excluding religious) probably includes children’s and YA E-books.
So a more meaningful comparison would be “adult paper books” at $2890.3M versus “adult e-books” at somewhat less than $969.9M.
So e-books still have a long way to go for revenue to outstrip paper books.
Not that I don’t want to see it happen, but one must be realistic about these things!
JohnW,
Trade categories are useful to many in the industry. Baen, for example, makes most of its money from mass market paperbacks. Tor, on the other hand, makes most of its money from hardbacks. If you’re with one of those houses, you want to see where your segment is heading.
When your segment is shrinking drastically, it’s helpful to know. If another segment is growing, that’s helpful to know as well. When one format starts to dominate others, it shows where the money in the whole industry is flowing. And where future investment is likely to flow.
The other thing this doesn’t show is net income from the category. Ebooks are much more profitable than paper, which affect how the industry will shift as well. Kris Rusch discusses the recent announcement by those who own Random House about their investment going forward. It’s worth a read: http://kriswrites.com/2012/03/28/the-business-rusch-pay-no-attention-to-that-man-behind-the-curtain/
So when a small category of the trade in just a few years rises to dominate the others, it is indeed useful information. The purpose of the post wasn’t to make a comment about when ebooks would become the lion’s share of all book sales, but to highlight this milestone in the segment’s growth and how the industry is shifting. And this is a huge shift 🙂
Of course, I think comparing ebooks sales to all trade is useful as well. You’re right to point out ebooks haven’t replaced all of paper. It will be interesting to see if ebooks slow their rate of growth this year. If they don’t, this is going to affect a lot of things.
Thanks to your clarification, I can see how those categories may be useful to someone in the publishing industry.
But for most people, I think these kind of headlines are misleading, because it becomes, in the minds of many people, “E-books will outsell paper books in 2012”, which I think is very unlikely, even if I would love to see it happen.
Anything can be misread. But I don’t think it’s misleading for the average person coming to this blog 🙂 Becoming the biggest category is actually a big deal. It’s a huge deal. And the table lays things out in a clear way to understand what that means.
Sounds like you’ve run into some starry-eyed ebookers. What’s your connection to publishing?
I have no connection to publishing, although I am curious what I wrote that made you think otherwise.
I am just a big fan of e-books, but I am tired of them being second class citizens — e-book releases delayed relative to paper and many older SF&F titles still not available as e-books. I guess that will not change until e-books have a much larger share of the market, rather than being outsold by paper books by more than 3 to 1.
I just meant what’s your interest.
As for older titles, many titles have had their rights revert back to the authors. And so it’s up to the various authors to get them back into circulation. But there are titles that the publishers still have licenses to that aren’t up. If you read the Bertlesmann announcement I linked to, it’s clear they see the profits and are working to get them all up. I can’t imagine other publishers wouldn’t do the same. So it’s already changing.