Blogger: Janet Kobobel Grant
Location: Books & Such Main Office, Santa Rosa, Calif.
Recently I served on the faculty of a writers conference and heard over and over again questions about self-publishing. Actually, I heard not just questions but also statements–statements that suggested conferees and even some faculty members viewed self-publishing as synonymous with a royalty-paying publisher. Misinformation and confusion abounded. Let’s explore what self-publishing is, who could benefit from it, and how it compares to traditional publishing (i.e., publishing with a publisher that pays royalties).
Let’s start our conversation with a comparison of publishing with a traditional publishing house and self-publishing.
Royalty-paying publishing
—Project must make it over the hurdles of a publishing committee that includes sales and marketing staff before a contract is offered.
–An editor works with the author to refine the manuscript and has the power to declare the manuscript “unacceptable,” which means the project isn’t deemed publishable by the editor, and the rights are returned to the writer.
–A marketing team will implement a marketing plan for the author’s title, while editorial, sales, and marketing staff must reach agreement about the cover, working as a team to create what they consider a cover most likely to cause the book to sell. The title (and subtitle for nonfiction) will go through the same process.
–All of the sales staff will be introduced to the project at a sales meeting and will then sell the title to retailers and special markets before the book is released and after its release. Each title will appear in the publisher’s catalog and on the publisher’s website.
–A marketing and publicity budget will be created for each title, with the publisher deciding what level of budget to apply to each book.
–The author will receive an advance (payment to be taken from royalties to provide the author with financial resources to have the time to write the manuscript) and royalties, which are paid from copies sold.
–The publisher may have retained additional rights to the content and can sell the rights to have the book published in other languages, as an e-book, as an audio book, etc.
Self-publishing
—Most companies that offer their services to you to provide a printed book have few hurdles for a book to leap over beyond the author having the funds to pay the publisher to create a book from the manuscript.
–Some self-publishing entities edit manuscripts, but since the writer is paying to have the book published, the manuscript won’t be deemed unacceptable. It will be published.
–Marketing is available through some self-publishers, but the author will pay for the marketing rather than the publisher furnishing the marketing.
–The covers of self-published books seldom meet the level of design of a royalty-paying publisher’s because the budget isn’t large enough for such a cover.
–No sales team exists in self-publishing. No presentations are made to Barnes & Noble, Borders, WalMart, or Costco.
–The author pays for everything: editing, designing of the cover, printing, editing, marketing. It’s the other side of the coin from a traditional publisher in which the author receives payment.
–Other methods of conveying the text–foreign languages, audio, ebooks, etc.–will not be exercised by a self-publisher. Distribution in its many forms falls on the author’s shoulders.
It seems clear to me that traditional publishing and self-publishing are very different animals–rather like comparing a dog to a cat. So which is the better route to pursue? We’ll talk about that tomorrow.
Meanwhile, if you have a different perspective on these two routes, please tell me about it.
Janet,
Probably one of the clearest comparisons I’ve seen of the two avenues to publication. The one thing missing is a timeline, specifically the amount of time from completion of the manuscript to “contract” to book availability. Maybe you can toss this in as part of a later post.
Great post. Very clear. I’d heard different opinions of self publishing versus traditional before, but this is very clear.
Thanks for the post!
I’d like to hear from authors who saw success through self-publishing and others who either found it a waste of time or an actual detriment to their career.
Good point, Richard. In terms of the time-frame, self-publishing wins the race with foot-pounding aplomb. You could have your book in a few months, but traditional publishing usually takes 12 months–sometimes 18 months–from when you hand in your manuscript.
Jennifer, I don’t know if we’ll hear from anyone who saw self-publishing as a detriment because it’s hard to know what might have unfolded if the writer had gone the traditional publishing route, but I’d like to hear from those who did self-publishing about their experiences.
Janet,
I concur with others who commented what a good comparison you wrote about traditional publishing and self-publishing. I have never self-published anything, but I know a woman who wrote a children’s book with good artwork. It was her entry to visit a number of schools where the book was sometimes purchased by students. But she has worked very hard for every sale. Sometimes an author will self-publish a booklet that can be sold on his or her book table to supplement a speaking topic. That could be printed at a local print shop and the cost is not high. One might call that mini-self-publishing. I’m smiling.
Charlotte Adelsperger