KEPT is a free paranormal romance ebook (novella): pick it up HERE
A print release featuring KEPT and two other novellas in the series will be released later in the year.
July 10, 2009
There are many sites out there, both regular social networking sites and sites meant for authors to promote themselves and their work. General sites would include Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace. Author Specific sites would include: Author’s Den, Red Room, Nothing Binding, BookBuzzr. There are many more, but I can’t possibly list them all. In addition to that there is the marketing power of Amazon itself. Where you can have an author page and blog as well as participate in many forums on the site itself.
One thing I’ve been personally guilty of is signing up for things like this as if that’s a mark of marketing productivity in and of itself. It isn’t. While it is true that the more places you can be found the better, and it is true that you will always have a trickle of people who stumble upon you and your work (especially if you use really good keywords and lots of description so people who search can find you)… Still… the big power of social networking sites both specifically geared toward authors, and more general sites, is using it.
This is where it gets tricky. You can spend an infinite time using all these various social platforms to socialize with people and get word about your book out there. And if you do spend infinite time doing this, you won’t get anything else done. I have eaten up whole days on Twitter and Facebook and I don’t see a giant surge of book sales as a result of this, mostly wasted effort.
I’m not sure exactly where the purchase point is for people, but the general idea behind social networking for authors isn’t to spam people with your book title. Really all people need to know is that you are a writer, and the genre you write in. Which can be obliquely referred to or spelled out on a profile. If someone likes YOU enough, they will seek out what it is you write. If they don’t like YOU, then it’s pointless to tell them what you wrote, because social networking is all about personal likeability.
That’s why it’s called SOCIAL networking. You hope that you say something funny enough or charming enough or whatever to start a dialogue, and that that dialogue fosters a sort of casual online friendship that may result ultimately in a reader gained. You hope this reader gained, because of the social networking exposure and your availability to them, becomes a TRUE FAN. A true fan will buy everything you write, and not only will they buy everything you write, but they will talk about your work, blog about it, tell their friends about it. They are what makes the word-of-mouth machine run.
There is a common idea of 1,000 true fans, that you need this many fans to be able to make a living as an artist, be it a musician or a writer, or whatever. Keep in mind that 1,000 true fans doesn’t mean only 1,000 people will buy your work. It means you want to cultivate 1,000 rabid screaming tell everybody they know and buy everything you create, fans. If you have 1,000 of THOSE types of fans, I believe you truly are set. Because those types of fans get the word out. Their enthusiasm for your work also is contagious.
While I agree with the math of 1,000 true fans, it’s almost impossible to measure such a thing. 1,000 twitter followers or facebook followers or even newsletter subscribers are not the same. I’m subscribed to some writers’ newsletters where I don’t buy everything they write. I don’t tell everybody and their brother’s cousin about it. I’m not a true fan, but I’m subscribed to their newsletter.
The 1,000 true fans concept may always only be a symbol of a truth, rather than something that can actually be literally measured. Meanwhile we’ll set our twitter follower and facebook follower goals, and newsletter subscriber goals, much higher than that, and hope that somewhere in all of that we connect with enough people to gain that magical number of true fans.
Which brings me back to this whole social networking thing. There are the two extremes: 1. Just signing up for a bunch of stuff but not doing anything with it. 2. Spending every waking second social networking. I don’t believe either is that productive.
So what’s the best way to deal with social networking for the best results? I’ve been throwing this idea around and here is what I have right now as far as a “plan of attack” for more effective social networking toward the end of helping you in your quest for true fans.
1. Sign up for everything. While it’s not enough to just sign up, and you don’t want to spend every waking second on all these different sites, if it’s free to sign up, you may as well. Some people will find you this way, and one thing I’ve learned from releasing KEPT is that you want your book in as many venues as possible, because not everybody goes to the same places. My book does much better at some sites than others, but I don’t really know the quality of those numbers. If I’ve gotten even one true fan from a smaller site, it was worth the effort of listing there.
2. Pick 3 sites that will get your primary focus. I can’t tell you how to pick your three sites (nor will I tell you you can’t just focus on one, or you can’t focus on 5. I’m trying to keep this simple to give people a starting point.) I wish I could analyze and say: “Okay this site is definitely worth your while and will draw to you a strong number of true fans if you work it, and this other site is trash.” But I can’t. Everybody is so different. Each person really has to figure out what works for them. But once you find 3 networking sites that seem promising, you’ll want to focus on consistently interacting in these three places and building relationships, hopefully with people who are likely to read your work.
3. While it’s important to interact regularly, you can’t “only” interact. There is a law of diminishing returns with social networking. You get to a point where it’s too much. Either you get to a point where repeated contact doesn’t help you, or it actually starts to hurt you. i.e. You know you’ve seen this person on the social networking sites, they post so often and usually but not always in the most self-promoting and obnoxious ways. You automatically delete emails from them, and after awhile you just stop following them all together. In the world of social networking, less can be more, as long as it isn’t so “less” that people forget who the hell you are.
It’s important to set a social networking limit. It’s easy to look at it as productive to your writing and use it as an excuse to procrastinate from other more pressing matters like writing and editing. Marketing is important, but you have to have something to market, and building a backlist is as important as building a strong core fan base.
Hopefully reading this has helped you to start to come up with a balanced way of viewing social networking and where it stands in the grand scheme of your marketing plan. I know writing it has helped me.
July 9, 2009
I’ve said for awhile now, that though I appreciate the opportunities Amazon gives to indie authors, that we shouldn’t be “too” grateful because they are ripping us off on Kindle sales. On Kindle we only get 35% cut, that’s less than industry standard for a publisher, and not only that, but it’s an ebook, exactly what is Amazon doing with Kindle books that rates that big of a cut?
With physical books you can understand since they have to ship them out, but when we’re talking about a non-physical product, the most they can say they need is storage space and bandwidth, which in the grand scheme isnt’ THAT expensive.
But as indies we didn’t and don’t have any power to do anything about it. We just had/have to accept our 35% and that’s that. Since it’s “better than royalty rates on e from most mainstream publishers” we’re supposed to be happy about it. But the thing is… when I publish on Kindle, *I* am my publisher, not Amazon, because I prepare the file.
Now, further steps have been taken to screw over indie authors by Amazon. Originally Amazon discounted books put on Kindle by indie authors, but now they don’t. So my $1.00 book used to be discounted to 80 cents. No longer. Now everybody that wants to buy has to pay sticker price. Twenty cents isn’t a lot of money, but psychologically discounts still hold power and sway over consumers, so consumers lose the feeling of “getting a deal.”
And not only that, but more and more mainstream published books are being offered on Amazon Kindle for free, which creates a lack of incentive to actually PAY for anything. When people search by price, the free books glut the results and people who sell their book at the lowest price they can ($1.00) are screwed over once again.
Indies cannot provide their work for free, only larger publishers who are involved with a “different” deal with Amazon Kindle than the little guys. The only thing that prevents people from suing Amazon for breaking fair trade laws, is the fact that because mainstream publishers deal in larger bulk, it can be a different type of deal.
So yes, folks, Amazon is not your friend.
Before the discounts got taken off, and the new flood of free books being released on Amazon Kindle by larger publishers, my Amazon Kindle sales ranking was usually between 1500 and 2000. Right now my sales rank is over 8,500.
So thanks, Amazon, from me to you. Indie authors already had a rough road, and now my exposure is even lower. The percentage of conversion… customers who go to the page and actually buy the book vs. customers who go to the page and exit or buy something else instead, is still the same. The only difference is my exposure, which is less than it was.
I don’t believe it’s a coincidence.
July 7, 2009
I watched the memorial streamed live online today. I didn’t get to see all of it live, had to watch some of it in replay cause my sleep schedule is messed up. I woke up and started watching about the time Brooke Shields spoke about him. I cried during a lot of the service and especially at the end when Paris talked about her dad.
So why was this event so emotionally moving to so many people? There are many who didn’t “get it” who thought somehow this was just about an overblown celebrity death. Or that it was just about the music and the dancing. It wasn’t.
To me what was so tragic about MJ was that he was so hounded and vilified in life by so many. Though he had millions of adoring fans when he was alive, even up til the end, so much of the world seemed to thrill at mocking him… Michael Jackson’s nose, and other various plastic surgeries, Michael Jackson’s skin color, Michael Jackson’s sexual orientation (everybody thought he was gay practically, which I think is retarded. Soft-spoken and shy are not the same as homosexual. Though even if he had been, that’s not a crime), rumors and eyebrow raises about hyperbaric chambers, chimpanzees, Neverland. And then finally the darker allegations of child molestation and the trial where the media crucified him and pleaded the case to the court of public opinion on what an evil and “weird” man MJ was.
Yet, during his lifetime, he never got to do a single normal thing. He was famous practically his whole life, his childhood taken from him by a father so set on fame for his kids. He never got a private life and few private moments. His reclusiveness was considered “weird” and “creepy” but how else was he supposed to be able to have a private moment? He was a musical legend, a fabulous entertainer, and though I was never a “superfan” due to life circumstances in my own life (strict religious upbringing), I thought he was a wonderful singer and dancer. Amazing, in fact.
But to me “that” is not what all of this is about. So many others have said it, but MJ was one of the greater humanitarians of our time. Giving countless millions to 30 charities. Listed in the Guiness Book of World Records as the most charities supported by a pop star. Creating two foundations of his own. Writing music meant to bring people together and get them to look at the larger issues and care for each other and the planet. He wasn’t content to just sit on his ass and write checks. He visited countless children’s hospitals and orphanages on his tours. He personally saved the lives of many sick children by providing medical care to many individual children who were suffering, including a 4 year old boy in Bucharest who needed a liver and would have died without MJ’s tireless effort to find him one.
He made a difference in the world not only musically, but on a broader scale. And what is so SAD about all of this is the life he didn’t get to lead, how the media hounded him and told lies and half truths, using him as a circus freakshow to up their ratings. Make no mistake, the media who now mourns him and has talked almost non-stop about what a great man he was, shares a great deal of the responsibility for his death. Many have said he started dying in 2003 when Martin Bashir’s smear documentary aired.
He gave everything he had and the world only paused to truly care once he’d died and left three small children behind who adored their father. THAT is what is sad to me.
I’m sad that I live in a world still where people talk a good game about not judging people based on superficiality but can’t be bothered to truly live it. Where stories like Edward Scissorhands make us feel all warm and fuzzy, but when confronted with a true Edward Scissorhands, we mock, make rude comments, and assume the worst about them.
The world hasn’t come very far, neither has humanity. I wonder why we’re all here at all if we can’t learn even the most basic concepts of love and understanding. What is the point? Every person who comes here and tries to help heal the world and the people in it is vilified for their efforts.
So that is why I cried through the MJ memorial. Not because he was a pop star, but because he was, IMO a good man, who never had a normal life, who stood up under so much pressure, who was scrutinized and mistreated for being “different” and who ultimately died because no one can live under that strain forever. And the world is still the same messed up place it was before. And though people mourn and cry and are sorry, and miss him now, the next person who comes along whether it is a hundred years from now or a thousand, who does anything on this scale or magnitude again, the world will forget their apologies, and do the same shit all over again.
Because we can’t ever seem to grow past the pettiness or the confines of the darker corners of our humanity.
July 2, 2009
One of the reasons I chose to publish my own work instead of seek a traditional publisher has a lot to do with deadlines and working under them. I don’t usually do my best work under pressure. It makes me feel stressed and rushed. I never really liked the idea of having to work on a set book release schedule, like a book a year (which is about the general schedule you’re expected once you get to the point of a multi-book contract, in order to keep up the momentum.)
You would think with a deadline it would cause me to get more done, but it really doesn’t. I’ve somehow gotten myself hooked into a self-imposed deadline now for the first print release of something like October 31st. This date sounds good to me cause it’s Halloween and I love Halloween. It’s also a really appropriate date to release a paranormal romance on. It also is in time for the holiday shopping season.
It would be “ideal” IMO to release then. And while having that deadline looming “should” make me work more consistently and harder every day to meet it, I find that the opposite happens. I freeze up, it’s too overwhelming, it’s too much to do etc. I feel like I’ll rush to meet the deadline and release a subpar book, which is the last thing I want.
I’ve recently been inspired by people who don’t release things on a deadline. They release them when they are ready to be released. And I think maybe as part of the freedom of publishing my own work I need to get out of my own way and work until something is ready, not work to meet a self-imposed deadline. Because then the date by when things should be done becomes more important than the quality of the work.
I remember when I was working on KEPT and trying to get the layout done. I had wanted to have the final edits and layout done by the end of last October, and instead KEPT ended up being released at the end of November. But it wasn’t until I released the idea of the deadline that I was able to get productive work done and make the forward momentum I needed.
Once I realized I couldn’t make the deadline and my choice was deadline or quality, I chose to let go of the deadline and just focus on the work. It would be done when it was done and then it would be released.
This is what I will have to do again. I have to let go of the notion of a “perfect release date.” There is no such thing. And especially as an indie, there is no pressure to have a certain number of sales or certain number of readers by a certain date. It just happens organically as it happens and that’s fine.
While I would like to release a book a year and think that’s a reasonable goal, I also have to remember that the best way to fail at that is to set that as a deadline/goal. If instead I just work at my own pace and release when things are ready it seems to work out better. One thing that worries me is what if I didn’t release exactly once a year? What if it was once every year and a half or two years? This is a concern because it’s considered unwise in the publishing business to have releases more than a year apart because you don’t want to lose momentum.
But I wonder how true that really is. Is this just a “theory” in the publishing world? So little is actually tested with market research I’m not sure exactly how they would know this as some kind of undisputed fact. So little market research and demographics is compiled in this industry. Even a year is a long time in our fast food world.
The value of fairly frequent releases I would think wouldn’t be so much that I would “keep momentum built” but that I would more quickly build a backlist. Because it’s when you have several books out and people want to check out your other stuff, that I think you’ve got momentum. I’m not really sold on this “one book a year” equals momentum theory.
So as of today I’m discarding this, because it’s not helpful to me. I’ve gotten back into a blank period where I haven’t gotten any work done, even though with a “looming deadline” I should be more disciplined. I just can’t work it up because the self-imposed pressure makes that creative side shut down and causes me to procrastinate further.
I can’t do creative things under stress/pressure. That’s not how creativity works for me.
I’ve got some new inspiration though. I’m going to drop the deadlines so I can just work and release work at my own pace, when that work is ready.
July 1, 2009
Of the top ten words I’d use to describe myself, obstinant ranks right at the very top. I don’t let other people tell me what I can and cannot do. The more someone says I can’t do something or I’m kidding myself, the more intent I am on doing it. Simply because someone said that I couldn’t.
Don’t tell me who I am.
Lately the debate continues to rage over whether or not a self-published author is “real.” This debate doesn’t really happen among readers (who are literally the only people who should ever ultimately matter to a writer.) This debate happens among writers. And mostly between self-published writers and unpublished writers. See, it’s not enough that we call ourselves “self-published authors.” It seems very very important to many people to remind us that we aren’t really published.
Um, alright.
So my book is imaginary? The sales I’ve made were pretend? The fan letters were from fake fans who exist only inside my crazy addled brain? Is that it?
I admit to being very confused by a writer who considers themselves “better” by virtue of the fact that they are “not self-publishing.” I’m not even talking about necessarily a writer with a NY publishing contract who thinks they’re better, I’m talking about an unpublished writer who feels it’s better for their work to languish under their bed where it cannot inform or entertain anybody, rather than to commit the horrible and apparently gullible and naive crime of self-publishing.
Could there be anything more evil? I’m beginning to believe rape and murder are considered equal crimes to self-publishing in the eyes of some. Else why would so much mental real estate be taken up arguing the issue?
My question is… Why the hell are you so concerned with what I’m doing? If it doesn’t affect you, if it doesn’t threaten you, be glad I’m not your competition. Because writing is highly competitive. And as “nice” and giving as we can be on the surface, there is still a lot of ugliness that runs underneath the surface of smiles and congratulations for many.
But it seems to be almost a favorite past time of many unpubbed authors to rag on self-pubbed authors and remind them endlessly that they aren’t really published. What is the point?
I think we have very much lost sight of what matters. The ONLY thing that matters is the readers/fans. That is it. Money is nice, but people have already stated even within the hallowed gates of NY publishing, the money isn’t that great for most writers. You do it for love before you do it for money. And if you do it for money, quit now. If the most important thing to you is the “validation” of an outside publisher publishing you, then by what definition of the word “vanity” are you less vain than I?
The readers are what matter. Entertaining or informing them is what counts at the end of the day. And I’m sorry, but I refuse to wait for “permission” from an industry that rarely produces much work of earth shattering value, to stand between me and my readers. I’m willing to do the work, I’m willing to be patient. I’m willing to let building a fan base take as long as it takes.
There is a very big part of me that would almost like to self publish indefinitely. Even if I succeeded to a point where a trad publisher came calling. There is a big part of me, that wants to just keep doing my own thing forever. Build my reader base, make my money, and let those who don’t like it gnash their teeth in frustration over it.
Because the second I succeeded to the point that I could take a deal, I would never cease hearing about how “Well yeah, but Zoe Winters got a “real” publishing contract in the end, so she still wasn’t legit before then.” My success would be a hammer to beat other self-pubbing authors with. An idea that just pisses me off.
Indie authors all self-publish for their own personal reasons. There is no one borg-like mentality among us. No matter how many strawman arguments or stereotypes you throw out there, it still doesn’t amount to much reality. So if you want to trad pub, fabulous. I’ll never say you’re “lesser” for it, kindly offer me the same respect. What self-publishing authors do is hard and is worthy of respect when done right.
Right now I want no part of the “real published authors club.” Sorry.
June 29, 2009
In PW Daily (Publisher’s Weekly) in my inbox this morning was the following:
Books on Michael Jackson Gain Little Traction
By Rachel Deahl
While Michael Jackson singles shot up to top perches in the iTunes store over the weekend, after celebrations of the King of Pop’s life took hold in the wake of his sudden death late last week, the run on MJ books has been, well, less noticeable. A survey of the major houses by PW found that only one publisher is going back to press with a book about Jackson. Additionally, the most popular titles currently on Amazon about the icon–looming, respectively, at sales ranks of 228 (Michael Jackson Conspiracy by Aphrodite Jones) and 298 (Michael Jackson: For the Record by Chris Cadman)–are self-published.
Well no kidding. Most of the books published by trad publishers regarding Michael Jackson are tabloid talk. A bunch of lies and sensationalism that people, while for some reason could read while he was alive, can no longer stomach now that he’d dead. I think all of this says a lot about us as a culture and has shined a big freaking light on the way our culture enshrines perfection which no one can live up to, and looks for people they can turn into circus sideshows for our further amusement.
So books that lie about MJ aren’t selling? Well, shudder, gasp. It’s about freaking time.
Michael Jackson Conspiracy, btw, the one that is selling so well, is the one that dictates in detail pretty much exactly what happened in the courtroom in 2005. Using court transcripts. It’s written by a woman who originally thought he was guilty just based on judging him from what Tabloids as well as her own corner of “journalism” had said about him over the years. When she looked more deeply into the case she discovered she was wrong.
Journalists at the time, who had pre-judged him as weird and “the kind of person who would do that sort of thing” (Despite a psychiatrist being called in who stated he didn’t fit the pedophile profile but instead MJ had emotionally regressed to a child-like state) were not reporting the news, they weren’t even reporting the case. They were reporting about the “weirdness” that was MJ and reporting about MJ’s friends, and MJ’s family. Isn’t it a little suspicious they didn’t really say much about what was happening in the courtroom? Ever think that might be because what was happening in court was clearly NOT damning evidence against MJ?
Oh wait… they were reporting some things, what the prosecution said, but they skimmed right by everything the defense said. This is why I don’t watch or read the news. They sensationalize and lie about everything, from the economy to swine flu. Clearly there is so little truth in journalism these days we all may as well be reading The National Enquirer.
June 28, 2009
I don’t normally get that upset when a famous person dies. That might sound callous but I don’t “know” the person. When Farrah died, I thought it was sad but I didn’t get weepy about it. Even when Princess Di died (She was an MJ fan btw),though I thought it was sad and researched some into her life and what the hubbub was about because I’d been largely oblivious in many ways, I wasn’t weepy.
But when Michael Jackson died and that sunk it, I was a little weepy. People who aren’t MJ fans might not understand that reaction, not only because they might have the “So? He was just a famous person” reaction but because there was so much “odd” about MJ that he was constant fodder for tabloids and even some sensationalistic mainstream news media. And then there is the child molestation allegations which tarnished his rep almost irreparably for a lot of people.
June 27, 2009
I’ve talked about this before, but I don’t think any writer is really ever truly prepared for it. Not until it happens. And it will happen whether you publish through traditional channels or on your own. And I’m not sure that it’s easier for trad published authors just because they were “vetted” by the mainstream.
We all know that publishing and writing are both highly subjective businesses, what one editor or agent hates, another one loves. And that’s because publishing is filled with human beings with opinions, rather than gods. But IMO, they are not the ones you have to worry about, even if you trad publish. Because at some point those who choose to trad publish, it they find an editor or agent who loves their work then the rejections where it wasn’t to the agent or editor’s taste just fade into the background. Because it becomes irrelevant.
June 26, 2009
Okay for some reason I feel like I’m in a Pull-ups commercial… “I’m a big kid now!” (And that’ll be even funnier with my accent, trust me. In your head, I don’t actually *say* it.)
Anyway so I didn’t *do* my own podcast, but I was *on* a podcast as a guest author. It’s an hour long show with a couple of other guests and we talked about our current work, and our feelings on publishing as independent authors in the current publishing climate.
We talk about platform, publishing on Kindle, what our thoughts are about traditional publishing right now.
And… I have a southern accent. You gotta hear my little twang.
Emma Petersen also called in to say hi to me and gush endlessly about me. 
I didn’t ask her to call and totally blushed when she did, lol.
June 24, 2009
Something I’ve noticed in the Self-publishing world is an extreme cynicism toward any service that is aimed toward self-publishing authors. And I really think it’s gone too far. I understand the outrage over vanity publishers of days past who charged thousands of dollars to print a book (often poorly) that often robbed an author of a lot of money and drove them into debt where they had nothing to show for it and no hope of anything to show for it. I’m fully against crap like that.
But now it’s just gone too far. There is a HUGE difference, IMO in losing $20,000 for crappy books you have to store and can’t sell in bookstores, and paying $120-$149 a year for a service meant to enhance your business (as a self publishing author.) Especially when the former is a misleading scam and the latter is a legitimate opportunity.
In every other business in the world you’re expected to spend money to make money, but you are not required to invest in every service out there to enhance your business. If something isn’t for you, you just don’t do it. That’s fine. But just because it isn’t for you doesn’t make it empirically wrong. Each self-pubbing author needs to decide for themselves what services are right or wrong for them and act accordingly.
I feel like self publishing authors are already at a high enough disadvantage when it comes to ability to produce a quality product, distribution, and sales, why oh why would you not welcome opportunities which may help you?
Two recent examples of shit-storms stirred for no good reason (IMO)
Indiereader.com
and
The Vault (of publetariat.com)
The first, Indiereader, is a site meant to help quality indie authors gain visibility for their work among consumers. It’s an online bookstore especially for indie readers. One of the problems with self-publishing is the stigma. Many people still get up in arms about all the “Crap” out there, and how do they wade through it?
Well Indiereader attempts to address that problem, by “vetting” work and allowing only work that meets a certain quality standard. Meanwhile authors, even self-publishing authors have had a rabid fit over it. (Because it’s like the gatekeeper system, why does it cost money? etc. etc. To be fair, I was one of these rabid authors initially but then stepped back and thought about it a bit.)
I still don’t necessarily agree with every part of Indiereader, i.e. I personally feel it would be more well-received if it was charged month-to-month so people could cancel at any time, instead of an annual fee which requires a larger leap of faith on the part of the author. Not everything about it is perfect, but I’ve spoken with Amy Edelman, the person behind IndieReader, and I think her motivation/heart is in the right place.
If Indiereader.com proves to be successful, then I would think the largest benefit for authors won’t be direct profit from the IR site, but will be the cachet of being able to say they are on IR, and therefore have been “vetted,” and are a proven higher quality indie work and a lower risk for readers. I also think the overall benefit would be the exposure of several GOOD indie-produced books in one place that reach a certain quality standard and therefore help to combat a lot of the stigma of self-publishing.
The Vault is a site meant to help indie authors who are looking to go to the next step (To clarify here, IR and The Vault are in no way affiliated with each other) and acquire a publisher, an outlet to get that exposure in front of publishing pros, by having a site that showcases their self-published work, along with sales stats, author platform pieces, reviews, and etc.
The Vault is being criticized by some because it’s a subscription listing service that charges authors, but not publishing pros. The reason for this is that publishing pros are more likely to use the site if they don’t have to pay, making it more beneficial to the authors listing, and if authors didn’t have to, there would just be another huge slush pile for publishers to go through. (i.e. even authors without enough reviews/sales/platform pieces to interest a publisher would list their books with the ‘just in case’ mentality. If an author is paying a listing fee to be there, they are more likely to only post if they believe their work actually has a chance and meets the standards that publishers will seek.) Nevertheless, as The Vault is new, the first 300 authors to sign up are given a free 90 day trial period (which will start after the first 300 subscribers are reached and it goes live for publishing pros to search. All authors that sign up after that, get the first thirty days free. Then it’s $10/month, with a cancellation option at any time.
Self-pubbing authors have complained about this fee, despite the fact that you can’t even get two triple cheeseburger meals at your local fast food joint for $10. And authors already spend at least this amount per month if they are actively seeking publication through traditional channels. (How many authors buy toner, paper, envelopes, stamps, don’t forget that all important SASE, writing books and magazines, etc. etc.)
I really don’t understand this cynicism and this desire to shoot down anything and everything that may offer self pubbing authors help and exposure they might not otherwise get, for…zomg a fee. Things cost money. Nothing in life is free. And even those who provide services for self-publishing authors, should get paid.
I have spoken extensively with both the creator of IndieReader.com and the creator of The Vault. And while I don’t yet know whether either or both sites will be a success, or the extent of the benefit to indie authors, I don’t feel that either one is a scam, nor worthy of this level of cynicism.
ETA: The original title of this post was: “Tired of the Cynicism, Park it Elsewhere Please.” I thought it was a cute/catchy title that might encourage more people to read, but Mojo’s comment let me know that it could cause people to go into the post thinking that I want to squash all discussion/debate on a topic, which isn’t my point at all. So the title has been changed to something a bit more neutral-sounding for that reason.
