# Making a Living at Fiction - The Statistics



## Kyle R (Aug 7, 2015)

You'll see people saying it all over the web (if you haven't already)—"Making it as a writer is harder than winning the lottery!"

But is that statement true? Let's check the numbers! :encouragement:


Literary agent Wendy Keller says agencies *typically reject 99.5%* of all submitted manuscripts.

That means submitting writers have a *0.5% chance of catching an agent's interest* (or *1 out of 200*).

Of those who have caught an agent's interest, only 1 to 2 out of 50 (or *1 in 25*) will land representation.

Of those manuscripts that land representation, *3 out of 5 will sell* and be published.

Literary agent Jessica Faust says, of those writers published, *10% will earn enough to make a living* from it (or *1 in 10*).

Therefore:

Odds of a submitting writer getting an agent's expressed interest: *1 in 200* (0.5%)
Odds of a submitting writer, who has interested an agent, having a manuscript ready for representation: *1 in 25*. (4%)
Odds of a submitting writer, who has agent representation, selling their work: *3 in 5*. (60%)
Odds of a published writer earning enough to make a living from their writing: *1 in 10*. (10%)

This means:

If you're a submitting writer entering the slush pile, your chance of making a living from your writing is, at this point: 0.0012% (*1 in 100,000*).

If you can make it past the slush pile, your odds of making a living from your writing leap to 0.24% (*1 out of 500*).

If you can make it past the slush pile and land an agent? Your odds of making a living from your writing increase to 2.4% (*1 out of 50*).

If you've landed an agent and sold a manuscript, your odds of making a living from your writing have risen to 10% (*1 out of 10*).


The odds of winning the lottery, in comparison: 0.000000740741% (*1 in 135,000,000*).

[video=youtube;zMRrNY0pxfM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM[/video]
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM)

_Sources: http://www.fictionfactor.com/guests/advancesroyalties.html, http://www.ritaemmett.com/articles/what-are-the-odds.htm, http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-11/dismal-odds-winning-lottery-infographic_


----------



## Blade (Aug 7, 2015)

Delightful. When I read this:



> Making it as a writer is harder than winning the lottery!



All I have to do is remember this:



> The odds of winning the lottery(*1 in 135,000,000)*



Granted it would depend on the lottery (I believe Lotto 6/49 is 1 in about 34,000,000) and writing a novel is somewhat more involved than buying a lottery ticket but the point is well made. Commentators on the subject should stick with 'a long shot'.

Also 0.1% is 1 out of 1000. 1 in 200 is 0.5% etc.


----------



## Bishop (Aug 7, 2015)

Those odds aren't so bad. Especially if this is just a hobby you'd enjoy going pro at. Personally, I keep telling myself I'll submit a book to some agents, but I always end up shrugging it off. It never bothers me; I really just write for myself more than anything. I get that if I want to get published, I have to at least try, but at the same time I don't really care to pin my hopes on it. The reality is that I'm _okay _at writing. And I'll keep doing it until I can look at a work and truly be proud of it; published or not, whether people read it or not... just want the skill, I suppose.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 7, 2015)

Blade said:
			
		

> Also 0.1% is 1 out of 1000. 1 in 200 is 0.5% etc.



Thanks for the catch! (I was listing the decimals instead of the percentages.)


----------



## Terry D (Aug 7, 2015)

The odds I've seen, and quoted, have been the odds of hitting the writing home-run, like Patterson, King, Meyers, etc. When I did some research I used the figure of earning $5,000,000 per year. I don't recall the exact numbers, but I do remember that the number of writers earning $5M was less than 20, while lotteries create about 160 millionaires each year in the U.S.


----------



## midnightpoet (Aug 7, 2015)

Getting published was a thrill, even getting a rejection letter (at least he/she was interested enough to write back) - but I never thought of making it a career.  I figured extra money would be nice - but my original motivation was, like a lot of others, was simply to write.  If you have a career as a goal, and have the determination and the fire, you won't let statistics intimidate you.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 7, 2015)

Terry D said:


> The odds I've seen, and quoted, have been the odds of hitting the writing home-run, like Patterson, King, Meyers, etc. When I did some research I used the figure of earning $5,000,000 per year. I don't recall the exact numbers, but I do remember that the number of writers earning $5M was less than 20, while lotteries create about 160 millionaires each year in the U.S.



Making millions from fiction is a rarity, for sure! Oh, to live the dream . . .

But there are plenty of writers out there making $30,000 and up, annually—enough to make a living, that is! :encouragement:


----------



## Phil Istine (Aug 7, 2015)

The odds of me existing as me are far bigger than that, but it's happened  .
I do like the idea of being able to make a small, supplemental income one day from writing.  That is unlikely too, but I've made it a target for the future.


----------



## bazz cargo (Aug 7, 2015)

There are a lot of non fiction publications that pay a little, and they are always looking for stuff.


----------



## voltigeur (Aug 7, 2015)

I wonder about the first statistic.  I don’t argue the percentage of rejections but several  sources state that 90 of rejections are for the same 5 to 10 reasons. (Michael Levin, Anne R Allen, and Ellen Brock are three that come to mind.)  
While the verbiage varies somewhat some may quote 11 or 12 reasons but I’ll only list the top 5 here:


Basics – Bad grammar and spelling. Usually trying to force writer's voice.
Too much back story with irrelevant information
POV issues, Head hoping.
Poor dialog. Either rambles (Like normal interactions, or no flow.)
No clear structure. No beginning, middle, and end.
 
So I ask the question, if you avoid these 5 (or 10) mistakes how does that change the top number?


----------



## bazz cargo (Aug 7, 2015)

The big difference is a question, can I sell this book?


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 7, 2015)

It also depends on your definition of making a living. I've never made $30k in a year in 45 years of working; I could live comfortably (not extravagantly) on half that at this point in my life.


----------



## J Anfinson (Aug 7, 2015)

Yeah, but you don't have to put lots of effort into winning the lottery. You buy a ticket and get lucky. If publishing worked that way I'm sure most books would suck.


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 7, 2015)

J Anfinson said:


> Yeah, but you don't have to put lots of effort into winning the lottery. You buy a ticket and get lucky. If publishing worked that way I'm sure most books would suck.



Most books _do_ suck.


----------



## Lewdog (Aug 7, 2015)

Pluralized said:


> Most books _do_ suck.



Nope, just the vampire ones.


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 7, 2015)

Lewdog said:


> Nope, just the vampire ones.




Shiiiit, I ain't about to take that bait, homey.


----------



## popsprocket (Aug 7, 2015)

This doesn't apply to me obviously because I am the best thing since sliced bread.

Does anyone want to read my fantasy book about a farm boy hero who defeats the dark lord? It's super original. No one has ever thought of anything like it before!


----------



## Boofy (Aug 7, 2015)

Is it suited to people who enjoyed Star Wars? Eragon? (Who enjoyed Eragon???) Harry Potter? Lord of the Rings? ;D

I don't really think I want to enter into the publishing rat race at all. I'm still not sure if I even want to bloody drive yet.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 7, 2015)

As both a math geek and someone often compares the likelihood of achieving financial success through writing to the odds of winning the lottery, I do appreciate the numbers. That said, the odds of making even a decent living (by whatever standard you base that on) with writing alone is tiny. Maybe not lottery-odds tiny, but still very small (and with less of a jackpot).

Just like you're a fool to buy lottery tickets expecting to win, you're almost certainly mistaken if you expect to write your first book and quit your day job. 

If you buy lottery tickets because you enjoy having something to root for when they draw the numbers, well, good luck! You MIGHT win. 

Me, I enjoy writing. If I can make money doing it, that would be awesome. I'm not counting on making anything, but I'm trying. Why not? I might win. Even if I don't win the jackpot, I enjoy playing.


----------



## Plasticweld (Aug 7, 2015)

All things are relative 

If you are homeless and write on a piece of cardboard " Will work for food" you are more than likely writing fiction.  You will more than likely have a few people toss you a couple of bucks, which will then mean you are writing for a living.  

No one will mention it if your spelling and grammar are off. 

You don't need an agent or to be represented. 

You don't have to pay taxes on the money and if you have a few bucks left over after getting a sandwich you can always buy that lottery ticket. 


Success depends on your perspective :}  Best of all the slush pile will be what you step in during the winter months.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 8, 2015)

InstituteMan said:


> . . . you're almost certainly mistaken if you expect to write your first book and quit your day job.



You're likely right! From what I've seen many authors say, it seems like the secret (or _a_​ secret) to earning a living from writing isn't to publish just one book (and pray for a mega-success), but to publish often and build yourself a brand. 

Easier said than done, of course! But compounded earnings seems to be the key (rather than praying for a huge single payout). :encouragement:


----------



## popsprocket (Aug 8, 2015)

Kyle R said:


> You're likely right! From what I've seen many authors say, it seems like the secret (or _a_​ secret) to earning a living from writing isn't to publish just one book (and pray for a mega-success), but to publish often and build yourself a brand.
> 
> Easier said than done, of course! But compounded earnings seems to be the key (rather than praying for a huge single payout). :encouragement:



This is a common bit of advice that successful self-publishers throw out there. If you're going to go it alone then don't expect your first book to top Amazon's list and make you a tidy sum. You'll see better success if you publish lots of titles and have that brand going.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 8, 2015)

Just out of curiosity, has anyone actually tested/challenged this theory? I'm not saying it doesn't work, but has anyone looked to see if it really does? Intuitively, it seems like having multiple books would make it easier for one's name to get known - but also intuitively, it seems like it's turning writing into widget production. Is there a tendency for writers to 'churn out' mediocre writing in the quest for name recognition? Are those who write more slowly destined to failure? Obviously, there are prolific writers who are also good/excellent writers - but are they the only SPs who will be successful over the long run?


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 8, 2015)

I don't have experience selling many books, but from my other experience selling things (and with those better at selling things than I am), I am pretty confident that having many good books available will help your sales across all of them all by itself. That applies to both traditionally published authors and self published authors.

By having many books, there's more opportunities for someone to stumble upon one; by having them be good, there's more chance of customers liking the one they find first. Having many also lets you sell a thousand copies in a month by selling a hundred each of ten titles--a more plausible scenario than selling a thousand copies of a single title.

From what I have heard, writing slow doesn't doom your efforts to successfully build a catalog. It just takes longer. Writing crap fast doesn't put you in a better spot than writing slow quality. In fact, slow quality has a better chance of success than fast crap (with the acknowledgment that crap vs. quality is in the eye of the reader).


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 8, 2015)

InstituteMan said:


> I don't have experience selling many books, but from my other experience selling things (and with those better at selling things than I am), I am pretty confident that having many good books available will help your sales across all of them all by itself. That applies to both traditionally published authors and self published authors.



Oh yes, agree. I just wonder sometimes if (particularly for new writers) this advice to get a lot of books out is being taken the wrong way. Given that "good" is subjective, I guess I would instead look at the "production" quality - SPaG, formatting, covers, editing, etc. Just from my own observations, SPs seem to be less patient about things, and perhaps... ? Which is why I was wondering if anyone had done any kind of research to see just how successful this advice actually was overall. Just curiosity, as I said, and not trying to diss the advice.


----------



## Gamer_2k4 (Aug 10, 2015)

voltigeur said:


> So I ask the question, if you avoid these 5 (or 10) mistakes how does that change the top number?



I wonder this too.  If you include ALL submitted works, include the ones that don't have any right to be there, of course the odds are going to be low.  What about works that have had beta readers, extensive copy editing, and so on?

Either way, here's how I look at it.  I'm not interested in making a living from my work (though I wouldn't turn down the opportunity, of course).  From there, we can take out the last percentage of 1/10, and I'm already at a 1 in 10,000 chance of being published.  If we adjust the initial percentage as well (from 1/200 to, say, 1/20), suddenly I'm at a 1 in 1,000 chance of being published.  Low odds? Sure, but they're no longer insurmountable.  That's good enough for me.


----------

