With all the talk about the price of e-books and what they should be, I thought I'd do a little market research on this issue. In truth, I started doing this research after seeing someone (the name doesn't matter) post on a blog a set of (somewhat loose) criteria for achieving success with fiction published for Kindle.
The blogger's three criteria were as follows (reworded slightly, to fit the format): 1) have a good-looking cover, 2) set the right price (the right price being anyone's guess; however, in this case, $1.99 was deemed acceptable) and 3) have "an established reputation . . . as a writer."
Okay, then. These three things presumably are what will assure you (in the blogger's words) that your "Kindle editions will do real well." (What does "real well" mean? Who knows? Naturally, "real well" could mean different things to different people. But let's table that discussion.)
The blogger (who we'll refer to as Author Y) has Kindle editions of backlisted books that have been selling pretty well. Author Y said that another author (who we'll refer to as Author X) who'd put books up on Kindle would probably do "real well," because Author X and the book met the three criteria.
Let's test these criteria, shall we? And throw in another author for comparison--Author Z.
Now, whereas Author X does indeed have an established reputation (and lots of kudos from folks in the publishing industry) and Author Y has had a long career in the writing business and markets a lot by blogging, Facebook and Twitter, Author Z has no traditional publisher, hardly any reputation to speak of in the business and markets e-books like crazy to readers. Oh, and Author Z's books are priced at $.99 per download (one tiny dollar less than the other two).
Let's compare the numbers (the Kindle Store rankings in weekly averages over the course of a month, for simplicity's sake), between these authors. (And, during the last week, I threw in a bestselling author--Author A (as in A-list? get it?)--whose books sell for the usual $9.99, just for kicks.)
Week 1 Avg. Rank: Author X #14,821 - Author Y #1,334 - Author Z #880
Week 2 Avg. Rank: Author X #20,632 - Author Y #1,294 - Author Z #1,072
Week 3 Avg. Rank: Author X #17,030 - Author Y #1,152 - Author Z #382
Week 4 Avg. Rank: Author X #6,762 - Author Y #1,163 - Author Z #307 - Author A #24,255
Hmm. I think the numbers speak more loudly than words here.
Since Authors X and Y both charge the same price ($1.99 per download), then either Author X has a really lousy cover or that reputation part just doesn't hold water. I would suspect the latter, given that a New York Times bestseller is doing far worse than any of the others.
This all leads me back to the issue of price. Look how well Author Z is doing selling e-books at $.99 per download. Author Z is in fact kicking these other authors' asses in the Kindle Store. This is sans awards, big-time reviews, traditional publisher, etc. So, is the lesson here that it all comes down to price? I don't think so, because Author Y (who markets through blogging and social media) is outselling Author X (who's doing--I don't know, never heard of Author X before this).
Could it be the difference here comes down, not only to price, but to marketing? Because Author Z has marketed relentlessly.
I don't know, but if I were an author putting my backlist on Kindle, I'd set a really low price and not rest on my reputation.
Which reminds me--the New York Times confirms what I've been saying all along about readers' reactions to raising e-book prices so soon. Creating a big, stupid rift between authors and readers in the bargain.
Yeah, thanks MacMillan. I won't say I told you so.
No comments:
Post a Comment