# Self publish a book then move to a traditional publisher?



## Daesu (Jan 26, 2012)

I was thinking about self publishing a book, and only printing a certain amount of copies, and attempting to sell them. Could this be a possible transition into getting a book traditionally published? so say if i sell a certain amount and show a publisher that my book has potential would they be more likely to pick it up? i feel like this could be a better idea since i have no previous writing credentials, any thoughts on this?


----------



## Yukinara (Jan 26, 2012)

yes it is a good idea, in fact,many well known authors couldn't get their first book published, they went to self publishing route and later, traditional one


----------



## Rustgold (Jan 26, 2012)

@Yuk : Can you name any?  How long ago did they take that route?  And how well known were they in their local community at the time?  Finally what they needed to do to sell their self published book?


----------



## Yukinara (Jan 26, 2012)

How Darcie Chan become the best selling author, just read and you will understand. Important: READ the comments too.

How Darcie Chan Became a Best-Selling Author - WSJ.com


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 26, 2012)

The book would have to be outstanding for a commercial publisher to pick it up after it's already been published. After all, first rights are gone. Also, from what I've seen/read, they tend to expect the author to continue writing books that will sell at least that well - and through the commercial publisher. So, no, I wouldn't count on that to open any doors.

And no disrespect for Ms Chan, but it's once again a story of the exception, not the rule.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 26, 2012)

It seems to be possible, what percentage it happens for I don't know. Most self published authors sell about 200 copies, then they run out of friends and family  My guess would be if you could demonstrate you could sell substantially more than that a publisher would at least show interest. Shadowmancer was an example.


----------



## Fallen (Jan 26, 2012)

Can I ask, have you tried submitting to the main houses? What's your rejection rate? (Out of the partial (3 chapter, synopsis etc) submissions, how many have asked to see the full manuscript?) 

If it's a good story, presented professionally, they'll review it without you having credentials (so long as they accept unsolicited material).


----------



## Yukinara (Jan 26, 2012)

This is what I think about self publishing: it is a tool for talented writers who can't get accept by any agent to push their works out there. I never think about it as a way to publish a crappy book in hope that someone may buy it. I knew some very crappy self publish books out there. Self publish should be use only when you have talent to write a very very good story and believe in yourself that people will love your work as much as you. 

But I still think, if a book is good, even after piles of rejection letters, someone will finally see your talent and want to represent you.


----------



## Potty (Jan 26, 2012)

J.K Rowling was rejected 7 times before some one showed interest, now look where she is!

Being rejected could just mean the publisher/agent you sent it to wasn't paying attention that day


----------



## shadowwalker (Jan 26, 2012)

There are innumerable reasons why a book isn't picked up right away (if ever). True, some just aren't written well, but the list includes: no open slots at that time (something I just heard about #-o), they've just signed a book that's similar, the ms was sent to an inappropriate agent for genre or subject, the book just doesn't catch their interest (subjective decision), that type of book doesn't have a large enough audience... For just about each of these reasons, there's an alternative solution - try again. Different time of year, different agent, editing, revamping - and of course, always working on the next project which might be timed right, sent to the right agent, and written better. There _are _good reasons for self-publishing - you just have to make sure yours is one of them.

Check out various agent's blogs - many of them have given their reasons for not taking on an author. Also check out some of the less bellicose self-publisher's blogs - I've seen many that tell you when (and when _not_) to go that route.


----------



## dale (Jan 26, 2012)

Potty said:


> J.K Rowling was rejected 7 times before some one showed interest, now look where she is!
> 
> Being rejected could just mean the publisher/agent you sent it to wasn't paying attention that day



lol. bet those agents are kicking theirselves in the ass over that one.


----------



## Daesu (Jan 26, 2012)

Thanks you for all of the info everyone, as far as where i'm at, i am currently in the writing stage. But i'm one of those people who loves to plan things out/know details ahead of time. for example i have mini outlines for every chapter of my book already ^_^. thanks again.


----------



## Potty (Jan 26, 2012)

Daesu said:


> for example i have mini outlines for every chapter of my book already ^_^. thanks again.



Only way to write a book in my opinion. I do the same, without it I would be lost and forget what point I was supposed to be getting to next.

I even have mini outlines for each scene!


----------



## wavegirl36 (Feb 3, 2012)

I'm no expert, but everything I've read tells me that in order to self publish your book successfully (meaning publish it AND sell enough copies to make a profit), you have to be prepared to go crazy with the marketing aspect.  Since your book won't be on the shelves of a bookstore, you have to find creative ways to sell your copies (after every friend and family member has one).  So for me, before I even think of getting a publisher to accept my soon-to-be self published novel, I need to create a marketing plan.  (That's where I'm at right now, I've just finished my book and I'm going through the editing process).  Remember, a publisher won't take a risk on a new author, if there's no reason for them to.  If they could see that there was a huge interest and you were selling books like crazy, then maybe.  So I'd focus on the marketing of your book first.    Good luck!


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 3, 2012)

wavegirl36 said:


> before I even think of getting a publisher to accept my soon-to-be self published novel, I need to create a marketing plan.



Again, why would a publisher want a book that's already been published? And why would you spend all that time and money to self-publish if you really want a commercial publishing contract? If a commercial contract is your ultimate goal, why not spend that time (and no money) actually working that route?

I see too many people thinking that self-publishing is some kind of short-cut to a commercial contract. Too many people looking at the exceptions as if they were the rule. People really need a reality check.


----------



## Rustgold (Feb 3, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> I see too many people thinking that self-publishing is some kind of short-cut to a commercial contract. Too many people looking at the exceptions as if they were the rule. People really need a reality check.



There are how many? 150000? self published books a year on just one self-publishing site.  And what percentage of successful authors used this route to gain a commercial contract?  Surely arithmetic isn't dead.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 3, 2012)

Rustgold said:


> There are how many? 150000? self published books a year on just one self-publishing site.  And what percentage of successful authors used this route to gain a commercial contract?  Surely arithmetic isn't dead.



It would seem to be, if one goes by some self-publishing gurus.


----------



## movieman (Feb 9, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Again, why would a publisher want a book that's already been published?



Because they'll make money.

If your book is successful, they can buy the rights for a known product with a fan-base. If your book isn't successful but does have a good story that they believe they can sell, they're no worse off than if they'd bought it from a normal query.

If you write short stories, magazines usually want to be the first to publish it. But there's no reason why you can't submit a novel you've self-published. For example, there was that fantasy novel a few years ago whose author self-published and was later picked up by a publisher and a Hollywood movie deal; I can't remember the name as I've never read it.

This is particularly true if you only release it as an e-book, since they can still have exclusive print rights.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 9, 2012)

movieman said:


> Because they'll make money.
> 
> If your book is successful, they can buy the rights for a known product with a fan-base. If your book isn't successful but does have a good story that they believe they can sell, they're no worse off than if they'd bought it from a normal query.
> 
> ...



The problem is that the readers already have it. The publisher might make a few additional sales, but enough to even break even on the costs of editing (and yes, they will run it through the ringer just like any book) and printing? Unless the book is a phenomenal success and you clearly have more books of the same quality in you, there's no reason for a publisher to spend money on that book.

Yes, as you noted, it does happen. But again - that's the _exception_, not the rule.


----------



## Sam (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Again, why would a publisher want a book that's already been published? And why would you spend all that time and money to self-publish if you really want a commercial publishing contract? If a commercial contract is your ultimate goal, why not spend that time (and no money) actually working that route?



I self-published the first book in a series and it was picked up for publication when I submitted it to a traditional publishing house a year later.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

Sam W said:


> I self-published the first book in a series and it was picked up for publication when I submitted it to a traditional publishing house a year later.



Which is great - but again, anecdotal. (And it was the first book in a series.) Is that what typically/usually/normally happens? No.

Self-publishing is like the California gold rush - people rushed out there expecting to make a fortune, ignoring the odds or betting on being the exceptions. And it cost most of them dearly for the reality check.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Which is great - but again, anecdotal. (And it was the first book in a series.) Is that what typically/usually/normally happens? No.


Surely you agree that the state of the industry is hardly static, though. That is why big publishing houses are said to be 'traditional' publishing and self-publishing is a newer arena so what is typical/usual/normal is shifting as well. We may not be 100% certain in what direction it is changing yet but there are options now that authors didn't have 'traditionally'. I agree, no one should see self-publishing as a quick and easy route to a fortune but from what I understand publishing through a big house isn't going to automatically take you there, either.

It would seem that staying informed and updated on both options would make more sense than dismissing any publishing possibility out of hand or assuming a certain outcome, good or bad.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

Foxee said:


> Surely you agree that the state of the industry is hardly static, though. That is why big publishing houses are said to be 'traditional' publishing and self-publishing is a newer arena so what is typical/usual/normal is shifting as well. We may not be 100% certain in what direction it is changing yet but there are options now that authors didn't have 'traditionally'. I agree, no one should see self-publishing as a quick and easy route to a fortune but from what I understand publishing through a big house isn't going to automatically take you there, either.
> 
> It would seem that staying informed and updated on both options would make more sense than dismissing any publishing possibility out of hand or assuming a certain outcome, good or bad.



Actually, the big publishing houses are called 'commercial'; the ones calling them 'traditional' tend to be self-publishers who want to make them seem antiquated, or those who are too new to understand publishing terminology. Agreed, however, that epublishing now allows self-publishers options they didn't have before - that doesn't make it a wise decision in every case. And no one that I know of has ever guaranteed success through commercial publishing - in fact, the 'hardships' involved are typically noted. That's being realistic.

I'm not dismissing self-publishing - I'm only dismissing those who try to make it seem like the 'easy' alternative (or worse, the 'smart way to go'). If it sounds too good to be true...


----------



## movieman (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> The problem is that the readers already have it.



The e-book readers already have it. Most people still read print books, and publishers pretty much control that market.

If Stephen King self-published an e-book tomorrow, do you think publishers wouldn't be lining up to buy the print rights?



> Yes, as you noted, it does happen. But again - that's the _exception_, not the rule.



Strawman. No-one has been saying that it was.

99% of self-published novels will never get a trade publishing deal. But 99% of novels have never got a trade-publishing deal and have previously languished in a trunk in the author's attic.

BTW, I was just reading another post on another forum by a Spanish thriller writer who's signed a trade publishing deal for his self-published books with one of the biggest Spanish-language book publishers.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> I'm not dismissing self-publishing - I'm only dismissing those who try to make it seem like the 'easy' alternative (or worse, the 'smart way to go'). If it sounds too good to be true...


Ah, I suppose it's the number of times that you've repeated discouraging remarks about self-publishing in this thread that makes it seem that way.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

Foxee said:


> Ah, I suppose it's the number of times that you've repeated discouraging remarks about self-publishing in this thread that makes it seem that way.



Only as many times as people act like it's a godsend for all writers... It's the other side of the coin. You call it discouraging, I call it realistic.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Only as many times as people act like it's a godsend for all writers... It's the other side of the coin. You call it discouraging, I call it realistic.


I don't think that overall people are treating it in that way. You're always going to have some that think publishing will be easy whether it's self-publishing or 'other people publishing' (how's that for a new designation). Of course, there are plenty of people who think that writing is going to be easy, too.

You can only really smack people with reality so many times before you have to shrug and let them find out for themselves.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

Foxee said:


> You can only really smack people with reality so many times before you have to shrug and let them find out for themselves.



True. I really only try to comment when there is blatant misinformation or truly misleading information. I blame it on the gurus who have spread this stuff, and others then pick it up as if it were gospel. It's a knee-jerk reaction on my part, and happens in a lot of discussions, whether it has to do with self-publishing or anything else. I see something I know is wrong or overstated and I just have to respond.


----------



## KarlR (Feb 10, 2012)

You grow out of that.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

KarlR said:


> You grow out of that.



Haven't in 57 years. Might be too late.


----------



## Foxee (Feb 10, 2012)

shadowwalker said:


> Haven't in 57 years. Might be too late.


Your knee must be tired.


----------



## Yukinara (Feb 10, 2012)

After reading the argument between shadowwalker and Foxee, I did some research and this is the conclusion

It is true that self-publishing is an easy way to get a book out there, but definitely not a shortcut to fame and wealthy. There are plenty of story about author who got rich in 1 year after they first published something. I read a story about Terri Guilliano Long, whose novel hit 80,000 sales via Amazon KPD, an agent told her that the book couldn't sell for more than 500 copies self-published.

But, there is another side of the coin. I have come across some self-published titles which are totally crap. Plain ugly cover design, grammar and spelling errors all over the book and poor marketing strategy. I can list out a few but decided not to

So, why some people are more successful than the others? These are a few common things I leaned from famous self-published authors

-They spent A LOT of time editing the book, both content and copy edit. Amanda Hocking edited her novel based on an editor suggestion, Darcie Chan edited hers with the help of family. They could use weeks or even months to make sure that their works are the best they could make. The same thing applied to cover. Good selling books have nice covers which are professionally edited. On the other hand, the crappy ones have downright ugly cover which no one bother to look at, let alone buying it.
-Effective promotion. All of them know the way to get their works out to reach the readers. Sales don't just pouring in a few days or weeks after launch. They spent time to promote their work and some said that marketing is almost as exhausting as writing. The requirements for a successful ebook are twitter, facebook, and blogs. The readers can easily reach them using those. 

I still remember when I read the online post about Darcie Chan, I scrolled down to read the comment and a guy mentioned that his sale was very poor and he didn't apply any of her techniques to promote his book. I followed the title and looked at his work. They were totally horrible. The cover was made from a simple template with just a title and author's name, and his book only had 3 star rating. A reader commented that there were errors all over the book and the story was boring. I can bet that guy won't get any more sales, who would want to buy a book with a boring story, cover and description? I followed another female author from another blog comment and looked at her book, hers also had 3 stars rating and many readers were angry because the book wasn't finished, the ending was horrible and it was ridden with grammar/spelling mistakes.

Long story short: they may not have a professional publisher/editor  behind, but they work like a professional author and the amount of hard  work really pay back by climbing sales. On the other hand, a bad novel  didn't have all of the above. The author just wrote something and pushed  the book out without much revision. The biggest problems with self-published titles are grammar, spelling, cover design and content. All of them could be fixed by good editors and designers. The thing is that not many people want to spend money and effort. After they finished the book, the first feeling they have is "yahoooo, I just wrote a story, now I have to throw it out there for other people to read". I had that feeling too, but I managed to hold back and sent the manuscript to some editors to critique my work. They REALLY gave me many valuable advices, and now my book is much better than before (it's still not ready to publish, tho). I also hired a good designer to make a cover for me.

I still remember this line from shadowwalker "that's the _exception_, not the rule."

I agreed that the successful authors are exception but they make their own exception by hardworking. Many articles wrote about their success but they failed to mention the hard work behind. That makes other self-published authors think that they can throw any books out there and see a million landed in their bank tomorrow. 

So is it possible to be successful on self-published titles, YES, you can and you definitely will, BUT only with hard work, I mean, tons of work. When I looked back and edited my book, the amount of work is just insane, 50,000 words, errors all over the places, head hopping, giving too much information, etc, but luckily, my editors really helped me improved my book and I can see a near future that I will release a quality novel under my name, something I can proud of.

So shadowwalker's view toward self-publishing is realistic, not everyone can make it that much, but it doesn't mean the gate is closed. There are still plenty of room to be another Amanda Hocking, JA Konrath, Darcie Chan, etc. With hardworking, a lot of patience, and the ability to take criticism, anyone can come close to that level.


----------



## shadowwalker (Feb 10, 2012)

Foxee said:


> Your knee must be tired.



I'm considering replacement surgery. :grin:


----------



## Foxee (Feb 10, 2012)

As far as I can see there is only one surefire shortcut to publishing success, fame, and fortune: *Be a celebrity.*

Not that I'm cynical even a _little bit._


----------



## FrameOfDust (Feb 12, 2012)

I know a author by the name of Brian Reaves who self published his first book, and has since had two or three other published traditionally. I asked him about it a while back and he said that it had worked out pretty well for him.


----------



## Elena Andrews (Feb 14, 2012)

It's what I did. I had some positive meetings and feedback from editors regarding a few projects but (not to sound selfish) I don't always have the time to wait. I write. It's what I like to do. So if Book A is going through the editorial process with someone I focus on Book B, maybe a smaller project that I can put up on my own. No difference in my mind regarding how I write and craft and edit the two. It's just a quicker road for me to self publish. Though as I'm discovering it's also a lot more pressure on the marketing side as there is NO outside help to push the book. I think you just have to go with your gut and do what's best for you


----------

