Okay, despite the tongue in cheek filk of Hamlet above, I actually believe both are valid paths for authors. My upcoming book How to Publish the Damn Book is also going to be covering this question, but I think this is important enough to write about in multiple places.
While my book is going to cover this in far more detail than this post is, there are a few things I wanted to discuss related to last week’s post about the cost of editing. I also feel like adding my voice to the folks trying to strip away the stigma relating to both methods of publishing since right now there seem to be two warring camps: those who think self-publishers aren’t really publishing and those who think that traditional authors are foolish for bothering with the process.
So, am I trad or self published?
Joke’s on you, I’m both. Sort of. My books have been published under the imprint “Insomnia Publishing” which is the traditional publishing company I used to co-own with my business partner. That company now does other things, but I continue to release under that imprint because it’s mine. I have also worked at two traditional publishers, including my own, and been published by the other multiple times for short story collections. In addition, I have a number of pieces in anthologies all over the place that have been both indie and traditionally published by various people and organizations.
I have gone through the query process and actually do pay royalties to myself based on book sales, though my royalty rate is more generous than it would be under a trad publisher. My expenses, however, come out of my company’s budget, so I ensure I put money back into that budget when I make sales. This method is very common for indie authors who want the protection of an LLC (in the US anyway).
What’s the real difference?
When you get into the meat and potatoes of the difference between self-publishing and traditional publishing, the line is drawn around two things: finances and control.
With traditional publishing, the costs associated with publishing the book (and doing it well is not inexpensive, particularly early on) are absorbed by the publishing company. When I was running one, my company easily put $10,000 of equity into every book we launched. That is not an exaggeration. Most legitimate publishers put a similar volume of equity into the book. In exchange, authors receive a relatively small portion of the profits and, potentially, an advance. In reality, very few authors ever earn out their advance. Also, authors have very little control over the process and don’t get final say in things like cover art.
With traditional publishing, the costs associated with publishing the book (and doing it well is not inexpensive, particularly early on) are absorbed by the publishing company.
Conversely, in self-publishing, the author is responsible for handling the full costs of producing the work for publication which, as I indicated above, is not a particularly cheap process. However, they get complete control over every decision and earn every penny of the profit, assuming there is any. While you can, of course, spend less than $10,000 to publish a book these days, trying to cut all the corners possible (particularly early on) will result in disaster. As you gain experience, some of the expenses will go down, but… you’ll still have to pay for things.
Fine, but which is better?
This is where it gets sticky. The answer is: neither. No method is inherently superior to the other, no matter what people are screaming from the rooftops.
There are a lot of authors who just plain are never going to be successful doing self-publishing because they don’t have the overhead costs to invest and also may find the business end of things incredibly overwhelming. There’s no shame in that, might I add.
There are also a ton of authors who would do better self-publishing because they have the capital to invest and can do everything a traditional publisher would do for them. These people can manage their own publication process and handle things effectively.
Then you have authors who might start traditional, learn the process, gain experience, and then make the jump to indie. That’s also a real thing people do.
Like I said, there’s no one true way to do this thing. There is only right or wrong for you as the author. Determining that is going to be something only you are able to do (or you and a publishing coach, maybe). That said, there are a lot of questions you should ask yourself before you make the decision about which direction you want to go.
There’s no one true way to do this thing. There is only right or wrong for you as the author.
So what are the questions?
The things that will determine which direction you ought to go are…
Can I afford to invest several thousand dollars in something that might not bring me profit in the immediate future? (Or could I afford to if I spent some time saving up?)
Am I able to handle the requirements of finding my own publishing team and identify what editor(s), formatter, cover designer, and so on I want to work with?
Have I studied business enough to be able to handle running a small business of my own? Is this something I think I could learn?
Am I able to manage my own time and be a “self-starter” in regards to managing tasks that need doing on a regular basis, or do I operate better with someone else telling me what needs doing?
Do I have any goals that being a traditionally published author will support? (Like a movie deal, for example.)
These questions can help you identify which route is best for you. If you don’t think you’ll have the equity to invest in a book, then going traditional is a perfectly respectable route to take. Truly. There’s no shame in that, and this isn’t about “gatekeeping.” Business has costs associated with it (the term “cost of doing business” is not exclusive to other arenas), and there is absolutely no avoiding that reality.
Business has costs associated with it, and there is absolutely no avoiding that reality.
Also, you will notice that there’s one thing I don’t mention up there: marketing. Why isn’t marketing on the list of questions? Well…
Marketing is inescapable.
No matter which direction you go, you (as the author) will be responsible for the lion’s share of your marketing (if not all of it in the case of self-publishing). The cold, hard reality is that you will need to sell your book yourself no matter what. You cannot just throw your book at a publisher, wave, and walk away. It doesn’t work that way.
The thought process of “publishers are going to do all the work” is pervasive in writing communities. I don’t know where this myth originated because I’ve spoken to some of the top authors who started back in the 1970s, and it wasn’t true then either. It’s never been true. Raymond E. Feist told me a story about going door to door with a wagon of books trying to sell them to bookstores back when he was first publishing.
Authors have always been responsible for the success of their book because they have to sell it themselves to some extent. Publishers do provide support to authors selling books, but that support is often portioned out to the most successful. Those who are brand new or aren’t selling well? They aren’t going to get a lot of investment. You need to earn your marketing budget with them and display that you’re going to be worth putting money into.
Authors have always been responsible for the success of their book because they have to sell it themselves to some extent
So many people throw up their hands at that and scream about “what are publishers even for, then!” and the reality is that their power is in investing the money to publish your book. They also will often handle advertising for you. They’ll pay for things like Amazon ads, BookBub ads, and other such things. That? That’s a thing a publisher does. However, advertising and marketing are not synonyms. They are deeply related (advertising is part of marketing but not all of marketing), but they aren’t the same. Marketing your book is always going to be your job. Much to everyone’s chagrin and tragedy.
So which direction should I go?
I sadly cannot give you a secret sauce for this. If it’s a question you’re wrestling with, contact me, and we can do some coaching about what you might benefit from, but I can’t answer the question for you, as much as I wish I could. This decision requires a lot of personal consideration and thought about what your goals are and where you’re at in your journey.
The good news is that you can always try both of them with different projects and see what you think. It’s not a zero sum game. That said, be aware that you are unlikely to get the rights to your work back once you sell them to a publisher, so don’t experiment with a work (or universe) you are deeply invested in unless you know for sure that’s what you want to do. If you go in whole hog and discover you hate it, you’ll end up losing something incredibly personal, and that is going to hurt.
QUESTION FOR MY READERS
If you read this far, you’re one of the people who is in my target audience, and I wanted to know what kind of content you are looking for from this publication. Right now I have a complete mish-mash of content of personal essays, my editing content, and things about my books.
I know I should probably focus on either my editorial content or my author content here, and I’m honestly not sure which y’all prefer. Or do you enjoy the chaos of having both of those things all put together because, frankly, I am a whole human being and have feelings about both?
For people who have just subscribed, take a peruse through previous articles to see what I mean about this and please let me know what you’re here to see from me? That’ll help me make sure I deliver what you’re looking for.
To Self-Publish or Trad Publish?