Self Publishing - Writers Forum

AdrienneW · 12-15-2005, 03:14 PM

Hello. I am new here and I have a question.
Has any one here ever had a book self published. Self publishing, from what I understand, is not the same as print on demand. Rather, you send your manuscript to a publisher for X amount of copies, pay the bill, then distribute the work. (kinda like what a publisher would do)
I could be wrong...but I just wanted to clarify what I had in mind.

Any how. Has any one done this? I have looked at a few print companies and it seems that the prices are pretty reasonable to extremely high, depending on what you want. Personally I am not asking for much.

Has any one ever done this? Was there a particular company that you used? What would you feel to be a fair price per paper back book? Most places seem to want 3.50-4.50 per book with shipping, minimum order of 150-200.

Do you think publishers would look at a "finished" product? quicker then a submitted manuscript?

Thank you for your time.

Nickie · 12-15-2005, 04:00 PM

Hi there Adrienne!

I have self-published my last novel, like I edited the manuscript (I have a Master's in Literature and Linguistics), converted the ms. into PDF file, had a friend design a cover, and then send off the files (by email) to a printer. Later on I promoted the work and saw that it could be bought, both from me as online from Proxis.be and Proxis.nl

I live in Belgium, so I don't suppose that giving you the link to my printer will be very helpful. This guy is not too expensive, he delivers good qualtiy and I pay about 5 euro per book (sell them for 15) The big advantage is, I only order as many (or little) copies as I need. No problem for him. He can print one or thousand, makes no difference.

I must say I was rather - and still am - successful in selling this novel. It's about the best thing I ever did! Most of the libraries in Flanders now have my novel in their racks, and there is never a copy available in my home town library (I check that out, as I get paid too for that).

Nickie

SPNews · 12-15-2005, 04:55 PM

Having a finished product is a good way to capture traditional publishers attention. Many traditional publishers would rather publish an author who already has published works under thier belts. If you submit a self-published book to a traditional publishing house and they reject it...you're still a published author.

Have you already found a self-publishing company? If not, FountainPenn House of Publishing offers affordable publishing services with a minimum order of 50 books. To find out additional information you may contact me at: 1.866.725.0794

Danielle-Kim Davis
VP/Marketing Dir.

mammamaia · 12-16-2005, 11:27 AM

yet another advertising tout from this new 'member'!... and misleading advice to boot... as for your question, adrienne:

Quote:

Do you think publishers would look at a "finished" product? quicker then a submitted manuscript?

...the honest answer is 'probably not'... most [if not all] won't even look at books sent to them without being queried first and requesting it... why would a publisher want to buy a book that is already in print?... the only exception would be a self-published work that has been selling like hotcakes and can still make them a bundle as a reprint...

Quote:

Having a finished product is a good way to capture traditional publishers attention. Many traditional publishers would rather publish an author who already has published works under thier belts. If you submit a self-published book to a traditional publishing house and they reject it...you're still a published author.

...this is mostly nonsense, imo... having a 'finished product' will only capture a paying publisher's attention if it's selling well and has gained the attention of the major book reviewers... otherwise, it's just another self-published piece of work that didn't interest 'real' publishing houses...

...sure, traditional publishers will be more interested in writers who've been 'published'... but they don't consider self or vanity-published works as 'published'...

...and, no matter how many self-/vanity-published books you submit, you're still not considered a 'published author' by those in the traditional paying side of the industry!...

nethawk · 12-17-2005, 12:46 AM

I sent my first book to a print on demand husband and wife team, but it's not something I would ever do again. I wouldn't recommend others do it unless they're content with reaching small audiences with small runs OR they have megabucks anyhow and can afford to spend time and lots of cash to advertise themselves and their books. I don't think my book is "shot" from being able to interest an agent down the road since its premise is exceptionally good, but it's definitely a blot on my career.

Stewart · 12-17-2005, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrienneW

Has any one here ever had a book self published.

No, and unless you just want to distribute a few recipe books among your friends, then I would never recommend it. The general view is that if it is self-published then it was never any good for publishing and, in all likelihood, was rejected by many publishers.

Self-publishing is a stigma that I would never like to be tarred with and, as a writer, you should aim higher. You can see people arguing that people like Virginia Woolf and Edgar Allen Poe were self-published (Lulu make a deal of this) but fail to realise that, in those authors' day, there was no big publishing houses and the availablity of word processors was...nought. Therefore, only the serious writers wrote their novels with pen and paper. Nowadays, word processors and the internet make it possible for any fool to write something and, using crap like Lulu or Publish America, self-publish. The problem is these manuscripts are rarely proofread or edited and the language, in particular, is dire.

Quote:

Do you think publishers would look at a "finished" product? quicker then a submitted manuscript?

No, because it's becoming an ever increasing fact that you will need to find an agent to represent you and hawk your work around publishing houses. This is, of course, a result of every fool churning off crap with their word processors and sending it in to join slush piles. With an agent they would rather see an enquiry letter and, at most, three chapters from your novel. If they like it, they'll ask to read the rest. And, if they like that they'll want to represent you and take your manuscript to publishing houses.

In the meantime: keep writing.

mammamaia · 12-17-2005, 10:44 AM

to answer the original question [sort of], one of my earliest mentees self-published her book of poems and art, after i helped her rewrite the poems, while teaching her the difference between 'real' serious poetry and the not very good stream-of-consciousness 'hobby' sort she'd churned out...

she used a reputable printing firm and ended up with a very nice, full-cover book that she then set about touting at poetry readings, indie book shops, art shows, and everywhere else she could...

it cost her something over $15,000 for the first 750 copies, so she probably still hasn't made back her expenses, 3 years later... but she is proud of her accomplishment, happy to have her work 'out there' and considered it a worthwhile investment...

maggie · 12-17-2005, 09:05 PM

Hey Adrienne,

I self-published four books. Three were cookbooks. One of those sold over 15,000 copies. The second one sold over 10,000 copies and the third one is doing okay. I also self-published a little book of wit and wisdom that sold okay. I had one book published by a regular publisher. It was a bed and breakfast guide. It did okay too.

My two first cookbooks were picked up by a French publisher (I live in Canada where we have two official languages). They distributed the books in Quebec, Canada; France; Belguim; and parts of French Africa. Those books did okay too.

I am just in the process of having a book done by POD (print-on-demand). This will be my first experience with that so I'll be interested to see how that goes compared to the self-publishing.

The thing with self-publishing is that you need to have a really good marketing plan in place because all the marketing and promotion is up to you. However, you need to know this also...if you go through a publisher, unless you're very well known, you still have to do all the marketing and publicity. They won't be sending you on any tours or anything like that, so you still end up doing lots of the work on that end.

Hope this has been helpful. If you have any more questions, I'd be happy to respond.

Stewart · 12-18-2005, 04:20 AM

http://www.hodrw.com/selfpromomistakes.htm

AdrienneW · 12-18-2005, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Connor Wolf

No, and unless you just want to distribute a few recipe books among your friends, then I would never recommend it. The general view is that if it is self-published then it was never any good for publishing and, in all likelihood, was rejected by many publishers.

Self-publishing is a stigma that I would never like to be tarred with and, as a writer, you should aim higher. You can see people arguing that people like Virginia Woolf and Edgar Allen Poe were self-published (Lulu make a deal of this) but fail to realise that, in those authors' day, there was no big publishing houses and the availablity of word processors was...nought. Therefore, only the serious writers wrote their novels with pen and paper. Nowadays, word processors and the internet make it possible for any fool to write something and, using crap like Lulu or Publish America, self-publish. The problem is these manuscripts are rarely proofread or edited and the language, in particular, is dire.

No, because it's becoming an ever increasing fact that you will need to find an agent to represent you and hawk your work around publishing houses. This is, of course, a result of every fool churning off crap with their word processors and sending it in to join slush piles. With an agent they would rather see an enquiry letter and, at most, three chapters from your novel. If they like it, they'll ask to read the rest. And, if they like that they'll want to represent you and take your manuscript to publishing houses.

In the meantime: keep writing.

Okay.

Maybe I am looking at things a bit differently. Why can't a writer just have a story to tell? Why can't a writer be satisfied with putting their imagination into words and selling it? Why does it HAVE to be published, by any one other then the writer? in order for it to be any good.

I do understand where you are comming from. But look at the market today for musicians? Many of them got tired of fighting against the current and started using the media opertunities open to them (namely the net) and got their stuff out there for people to listen and are selling their albums.

Maybe if more writers did self publish, side stepped the publishing companies that the public would get a taste of other types of works. Works that are not the "norm" for many publishing companies.

By only going through these publishing houses it would seem you are actually letting them decide what the public should be exposed too. Publishing houses are going to be influenced by what sells. Not always what is new, different and a breath of fresh air.

I don't know I am just kicking around idea here...but honestly it seems to me that a lot of agents and publishers don't really want "new" people. They simply want what sells.

Stewart · 12-18-2005, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrienneW

Maybe I am looking at things a bit differently. Why can't a writer just have a story to tell? Why can't a writer be satisfied with putting their imagination into words and selling it? Why does it HAVE to be published, by any one other then the writer? in order for it to be any good.

Hey, it's okay to have a story to tell and to distribute it but once you get to the point where the story is appearing in Lulu or Publish America's stores then it opens itself up to scrutiny as it's no longer a story to tell and is actually a story to sell. And, having read plenty of downloadable previews on Lulu, I am thankful that we have publishing houses and agents saving us from stumbling across the drek.

Selorian · 12-18-2005, 08:43 AM

I have hesitated on posting here because I don't know all the answers, one way or another. I've finally decided to offer my opinion. Unlike some of the others, who seem to know all of the answers, I won't try to act like what I think is written in stone fact.

The publishing world is in the process of change right now. Since you use music as an example, I will to. Let's look at publishing digitally by POD like the music industry and MP3. POD is here to stay, the same as MP3 was, and the big publishers will have to eventually embrace it the same as record companies had to embrace the digital MP3 format. It won't be soon, but the wheels of change are turning.

The problems I see that will have to be overcome are hard ones. First, there has been so much trash done by POD that the truly good work is lost in the crowd. This is what gives POD the bad name. Second,there is less time involved in trying out a music download from a indie band than there is in reading the writing of a POD published author. Reading a book is a time consuming activity where you want to be submersed in the story that the writer is telling--you don't spend three minutes reading a book like you do listening to a song.

I believe with the right promotion, a POD author can get there bookout there and read, but it would be a lot of work. The major drawback as of now is the stigma that all the horrible writers have caused--the belief that all POD books are crap. This taints people from giving them a chance and also causes the traditional publishers to believe their isn't any use in looking at POD published books or authors. Over time, I believe this can be changed with the success of more books published in this new way.

I can see the two ways merging somewhere down the road. A blending of the two that will combine the best aspects of each and creating a new way for the publishing industry to evolve. Change is what keeps the world going,and I believe that POD technology will be the change that the world of publishing will have to accept if they want to continue to exist and grow. This is just the beginning.

Just my two cents.

Nickie · 12-18-2005, 10:13 AM

Because I want to start my own publishing business, I have done my research and so I know for sure that (at least in my country and the Netherlands) all major publishing houses use the POD technique to print their books. It's much easier - and cheaper! Printing books the classical way is more time-consuming and a lot more expensive, so less leverage for the publisher.

The quality of the books doesn't have to suffer. You can choose the type of paper and way of binding.

And Selorian, you are right. Many establihsed houses are not very willing to accept the work of new authors. And this is what I like to change. I'll work mainly with new authors, offer them a chance. They only need to write a good story.

Nickie

mammamaia · 12-18-2005, 12:12 PM

Why can't a writer just have a story to tell?

...you can!... no one is saying you can't...

Why can't a writer be satisfied with putting their imagination into words and selling it?

...many are... that's why vanity and pod publishers abound and thrive...

Why does it HAVE to be published, by any one other then the writer? in order for it to be any good.

...it doesn't... but if you DO want to SELL it, and make money with it, self-publishing isn't the way to go... that cookbook success story is the classic exception to the rule... fiction is on a whole 'nother plane, so the exceptions there are even more rare...

maggie · 12-18-2005, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdrienneW

Okay.

Maybe I am looking at things a bit differently. Why can't a writer just have a story to tell? Why can't a writer be satisfied with putting their imagination into words and selling it? Why does it HAVE to be published, by any one other then the writer? in order for it to be any good.

I do understand where you are comming from. But look at the market today for musicians? Many of them got tired of fighting against the current and started using the media opertunities open to them (namely the net) and got their stuff out there for people to listen and are selling their albums.

Maybe if more writers did self publish, side stepped the publishing companies that the public would get a taste of other types of works. Works that are not the "norm" for many publishing companies.

By only going through these publishing houses it would seem you are actually letting them decide what the public should be exposed too. Publishing houses are going to be influenced by what sells. Not always what is new, different and a breath of fresh air.

I don't know I am just kicking around idea here...but honestly it seems to me that a lot of agents and publishers don't really want "new" people. They simply want what sells.

You make some very good and valid points. If you really want to use POD for your books then I would suggest that you not let others discourage you. Do your homework and be sure of what you're getting into. Be prepared to do the work of marketing your book and getting some publicity for it.

I applaud your independent approach and agree with you that more authors need to have that kind of attitude. Just know that if you want your book to sell reasonably well that you will have to do all the marketing and promotion. Educate yourself on how to do those things and you will be okay. You can get a POD publisher now for $99.00 U.S. so that isn't spending a fortune to get your book out there. However, for this amount you have to do all the editing, formatting and cover design yourself. I'll be doing all that work myself.

I'd be glad to chat with you further about POD or traditional self-publishing if you would like.