[Rick Gualtieri]

Is $2.99 seen as being a fair price for a 40 page story?

Fair is in the eyes of the beholder. To some yes, to others no. Personally I'm in that latter category, but that's just my opinion. It means about as much as...well, my opinion on anything else.

The market will ultimately decide what is and what isn't fair.

 

[Alan Petersen]

I don't know the books you're referring to, so I have no idea if they "split" a novel, or if they actually wrote it as a serial, which is really not constructed the same as a novel. But there's nothing wrong with serials-- they've been around for ages. Some people happen to like serials. I like writing them, and I like reading them. I object to the notion that they're just a split-up novel, even though some readers will perceive them as such. There are some readers out there that don't like serials and will leave comments along those lines. It doesn't mean they're right, or that everyone hates serials. Sales numbers indicate that some serials are wildly popular.

I also object, very strenuously, to the idea that short works are necessarily drivel. This is insulting to a lot of writers here, frankly. Plenty of readers and writers like shorts. They are particularly popular in certain genres, such as romance and erotica. Novels are not the only quality writing out there. Isaac Asimov wrote wonderful short stories. So did Daphne du Maurier, H.P. Lovecraft, Ray Bradbury... the list goes on and on. "Short" does not equate to "drivel."

I think this is high myself, but for erotic romances, it seems to work for some authors.

Agreed. Does the OP know that the author split a novel in order to cash in or was it written from the start as a serial?

Personally, I don't like serials, especially with cliffhangers. I couldn't even stand watching TV shows like Lost for that reason. So I don't buy short books for that reason. But as a business strategy, I have no problem with it, as long as they're upfront and readers know they're buying chapters as they go along, then everything is clear. I like books so I do pay attention to page count.

 

[CoraBuhlert]

Is $2.99 seen as being a fair price for a 40 page story? (and 40 kindle pages, or Word pages? how long is a page? I used an average 220 word/page count in figuring out how long my story collection was). Because I was told on another forum that $2.99 for 40 pages was outrageous, and it shouldn't cost more than $0.99 - and if Amazon let you charge less than that, it should be less.

Using Amazon's page metric, 40 pages is approx. 13000 to 14000 words, i.e. novelette length. I sell novelettes (i.e. between 7500 and 17500 words) for 2.99 and so do many other authors. And yes, they do sell. In erotica, there even are people charging 2.99 for a 4000 word short story and those sell as well. In my experience, genre is a far better predictor of sales than price.

A lot of people don't like short fiction just as a lot of people don't like serials. However, plenty of people like short stories and plenty like serials and they are willing to pay for it. As long as the author is clear about what the reader is buying (e.g. I always put wordcount and approx. page length in the blurb), there's no problem.

 

[Terrence OBrien]

"Fair is in the eyes of the beholder. To some yes, to others no. Personally I'm in that latter category, but that's just my opinion. It means about as much as...well, my opinion on anything else."

Agree. Not sure what fair means. A seller offers goods at a given price. Consumere who place a value equal to or greater than that price may buy it. Those who don't value it at the price don't buy it. That's how it works with everything.

 

[EC Sheedy]

I'd like to derail this thread for just a second to comment on what was said here.

We complain about the old system of gatekeepers, but those gatekeepers were set up by readers in the first place. They knew that if XXXX publishing house put out a book, that it would be a good book. They knew that if XXXX bookstore carried the book, it would be a good book. They knew that if XXXX reviewer liked the book, that it was a book worth reading.

Authors had to deal with those gatekeepers on a daily basis, but readers started putting them out of their minds. To a reader, it all blurred into "if a book is published, it must be good." Because the gatekeepers kept bad books from getting to readers.

Now, we live in a different world. And while many readers are excited that they can dig through the slush pile and find a gem, the vast majority will stick to their tried and true authors and occasionally pick up a book a friend recommends. Most fear (yes fear!) the idea of reading a "self-published" book UNLESS they can be assured that it is of quality before they pick it up.

Who assures quality? (i.e. acts as a gatekeeper). It looks like Bookbub and the like are being set up by readers as the new gatekeepers. It used to be "if I can get a publishing contract, I have a shot" or "if I can make it to the NYT Best Sellers list, I have a career", but now it is "if I can just get Bookbub to pick up my book..."

What we are doing is seeing the building of new gatekeepers before our eyes. We, as authors, see the tearing down of walls which keep us from connecting directly with readers as a good thing. Many readers, however, see the swarming hordes of barbarian writers coming at them through the crumbled walls and desperately want some gates and protectors to keep them safe.

I think I'm buying into this idea. I don't want to, but I get why it might be the way things go. No one truly likes being overwhelmed by choice. It's wearying ...

 

[Vera Nazarian]

Um... three to SIX months to write a book? Are you writing epic fantasy?

There is no reason why it should take that long. It takes me about 3 hours a day to write enough to fill a 60k word novel in six weeks. The writing would be the same quality regardless if it is six months or six weeks. Trust me on this, I speak from experience.

Thus, you should write every single day, and a lot more than just 200-500 words.

There is plenty of reason. Depends on the subject matter. On complexity. Amount of research involved. Other factors.

Just because some people can write quickly, does not mean that the vast majority of others don't take years.

I take years on some books. Others happen in a month or two.

Time is completely irrelevant, and all is perfectly okay. Some books need to be marinated longer, that's all.

 

[anotherpage]

I'd never read a book that was cut in pieces unless it was clearly stated that it's a serial. Well, and even then I'm not sure I'd be interested. Given the current eBook market $2.99 for 49 pages isn't acceptable.
I would feel cheated if this ended on a cliffhanger, forcing me to keep buying more pieces. To me, it borders on the unethical (again, unless something is marked as a serial)

While there are some writers who can churn out quality in very short time, I'm sure they're in the minority.
I worry that the "write more books!" mantra is leading some to believe they just have to publish something, anything, and the dollars will come.
The mantra should be "write more good books!"
Unfortunately, the slush is piling up and the readers are taking notice. I think this is the reason that some 'gatekeepers' like Bookbub are doing so well. With an overwhelming choice of titles, a lot of readers want someone to vet their material for them.

I couldn't agree more!

 

[anotherpage]

My thoughts are:

- a story should be as long or short as it needs to be.
- too many self-pubbers are concentrating on the short term at the expense of the long term.
- Everyone has their own thoughts on pricing, but personally I feel that there is a certain point where XX pages for $X.XX dollars is just gouging people.

Yes i agree. I think ultimately a long term approach is best suited.

Serials of 150 pages is one thing. ( a lot of kids books are like that )

Serials of 49 pages.. umm no. That to me is flash fiction almost.

 

[anotherpage]

Splitting up a book is not the same as writing a serial. I've written several books and I'm near the end of my first serial, and believe me, they are quite different creatures.

At my price of $0.99 for 40-60 pages per episode, readers seems willing to buy and I don't get complaints about the price.

Some people love serials:--NetGalley review of my Debt Collector serial

But it's still a difficult sell to get people to buy the individual episodes - many people have told me they love the concept, but they'll wait until the serial is done and then buy the collections. *shrugs* I don't care what format they buy it in, as long as they're interested!

Very good point. I do think that people hold off buying until they see all 3 books or 5. However many there are going to be

 

[anotherpage]

I'd like to derail this thread for just a second to comment on what was said here.

We complain about the old system of gatekeepers, but those gatekeepers were set up by readers in the first place. They knew that if XXXX publishing house put out a book, that it would be a good book. They knew that if XXXX bookstore carried the book, it would be a good book. They knew that if XXXX reviewer liked the book, that it was a book worth reading.

Authors had to deal with those gatekeepers on a daily basis, but readers started putting them out of their minds. To a reader, it all blurred into "if a book is published, it must be good." Because the gatekeepers kept bad books from getting to readers.

Now, we live in a different world. And while many readers are excited that they can dig through the slush pile and find a gem, the vast majority will stick to their tried and true authors and occasionally pick up a book a friend recommends. Most fear (yes fear!) the idea of reading a "self-published" book UNLESS they can be assured that it is of quality before they pick it up.

Who assures quality? (i.e. acts as a gatekeeper). It looks like Bookbub and the like are being set up by readers as the new gatekeepers. It used to be "if I can get a publishing contract, I have a shot" or "if I can make it to the NYT Best Sellers list, I have a career", but now it is "if I can just get Bookbub to pick up my book..."

What we are doing is seeing the building of new gatekeepers before our eyes. We, as authors, see the tearing down of walls which keep us from connecting directly with readers as a good thing. Many readers, however, see the swarming hordes of barbarian writers coming at them through the crumbled walls and desperately want some gates and protectors to keep them safe.

Yes excellent points there.

 

[anotherpage]

I hate serials and I'd never buy them because I prefer to have a whole book. I picked up some first parts that were free and none of them felt complete to me. It was just a book butchered into pieces that weren't even interesting. Now I mostly avoid serials. There are thousands of full books out there, so it doesn't matter. Actually, I'd buy one part of the serial if I knew the story was complete somehow and if I didn't have to read the next one just to get the ending for the first. I'm sure some people prefer serials, so I'm glad there's something for them too.

I laugh at the idea of quality, though. Who can define what quality is? Traditional publishers? Maybe, but they accept all sorts of books that they know will sell. Bookbub? Maybe, but they promoted books with homemade covers and without professional editing too. In the end, the only thing that matters is what people want to buy, so if they'll buy each part of a serial for 2.99$, give them serial. Who am I to complain? Can't blame anyone for offering serials. No one is holding a gun to my head and forcing me to purchase them.

I prefer a full novel. Usually anything that is over 200 words to me is full. Anything below, I tend to take a pass on UNLESS it gets massive reviews and is raved about. And trust me, i don't mind smacking down $5 for a book but it had better be a full novel 250 pages and above and have at least 20 good ratings.

 

[Terrence OBrien]

"- too many self-pubbers are concentrating on the short term at the expense of the long term."

Long term success is a chain of short term successes. Long term success is a record of accomplishment.

 

[anotherpage]

Exactly.

I put my word and approximate page count CLEARLY stated on anything that isn't over 50k/full-length novel.

Be less concerned with what other people are doing, and you'll be happier. Unless it looks like an awesome strategy you want to try. I'm doing novels now, but my serials were the first thing I ever put out that actually sold well/i.e. demonstrated that demand for that particular sort of thing exceeded supply.

That's a good thing to do Dayla. Not sure many folks do that.

I guess it really comes down to each person.

 

[anotherpage]

http://www.kboards.com/index.php/topic,150274.0.html

Check out Elle Casey's thread. Then check out her reviews on Amazon...

http://www.amazon.com/Elle-Casey/e/B006SUPLO6/

Writing fast does not necessarily mean the writing or reviews suffer. You can't pretend there's a correlation between the two. There isn't.

I think that's where I might disagree.

There are a lot of fast guitar players in the world. But it took them YEARS to get to that point.

Most who attempt it, churn out sloppy playing.

Writers who can write fast, usually have a strong editor behind them to sort out the crap

There is definitely a connection between speed and quality. At least when it comes to self-published authors who don't have a business behind them to tell them when its crap.

 

[MegHarris]

Writers who can write fast, usually have a strong editor behind them to sort out the crap

There is definitely a connection between speed and quality. At least when it comes to self-published authors who don't have a business behind them to tell them when its crap.

A sweeping generalization for which you have, I suspect, no real proof.

 

[anotherpage]

Also, time ≠ indicative of quality. There was a video on here not long ago covering someone's cover design. If you looked at the time stamp, the artist put that cover together in an amazingly short amount of time, but that's not indicative of the final quality-it's indicative of the artist knowing what they're doing. The same concept applies to writing.

Exactly as I said. There are few that know what they are doing and can go in an take a lump of clay and knock out a masterpiece

And even those who do, generally have a team of editors who will tell them to either rewrite parts or will fix up the sloppy parts.

What I've found is that when people hear about money being made in writing books, their heart beats start pumping fast, their palms start sweating and all they can see is the GREEN. It's Natural, we're only human.

I LOVE THE GREEN, I LOVE SEEING LOTS OF BOOKS IN THE MARKET

But a GOOD story, a well written story TRUMPS both at least in my opinion.

And a good story is a bit like making a cup of tea. You have to let it stew to get out the real flavor

Are self-published authors willing to let it stew?

how long are they willing to work on a book? 3 months, 6 even a year? or do they want to be shoving out a book every month?

Unfortunately I don't think stories are getting enough time to stew and so what gets served up is weak and lacking in flavor which results in bad reviews

But again, thats not everyone. But it's an easy mistake we can all make, right?

 

[anotherpage]

Long term success is a chain of short term successes. Long term success is a record of accomplishment.

Well said. And a record of accomplishments come from delivering the very best each and every time.

 

[NoCat]

I think that's where I might disagree.

There are a lot of fast guitar players in the world. But it took them YEARS to get to that point.

Most who attempt it, churn out sloppy playing.

Writers who can write fast, usually have a strong editor behind them to sort out the crap

There is definitely a connection between speed and quality. At least when it comes to self-published authors who don't have a business behind them to tell them when its crap.

I've been paid 400-500 bucks for a short story that took 3-4 hours to write. Clearly the editors at the magazines and anthologies that have published me don't care how long it took me to write the story. They have no idea. Any more than a reader has any idea how long it takes you to write a book. Ray Bradbury wrote a story a week pretty much his whole life. Didn't stop him from being one of the greatest writers ever. Because speed has nothing to do with quality.

Speed has NOTHING to do with writing quality. Nothing.

Also, the experience of the writer while writing a story has nothing to do with the experience of the reader while reading. My first readers can't tell which chapters sucked to write, which stories I wrote while sick, etc. They just can't tell. Because as long as I'm writing to the best of my abilities every time I sit down (which is what I do), no one will be able to tell later. I've proven this to myself again and again over the last 4 years.

 

[MegHarris]

Everyone is different.

Exactly, and everyone writes differently. Saying everyone must let stories "stew" for long periods of time is like me asserting that everyone must write without an outline. Just because writing by the seat of my pants is my writing method, that doesn't mean it's the only correct method. Some people can't write without outlines, and that's fine too. Writers write all sorts of different ways, and it's easy to think that our way is the best way. But there are as many ways to write as there are writers.

 

[Mip7]

Kindle readers are'nt stupid. They might be when they first get their kindle, but after getting burned once or twice, they wise up.

When considering a new book they look at the cover and title - if it looks interesting, they check the number of reviews and the page count, then the price. If that all seems reasonable, or they are willing to take a chance on it, they read the Look Inside. If it hooks them, they buy.

If it has few reviews and a low page count, it doesn't have a chance at selling, even for 0.99, unless it is in an extremely hot genre or written by a known author.