If you are self publishing fiction, then the only reason to do so would be to keep artistic integrity of the mss and not care if anyone bought it.

I totally disagree with this and I don't think it is a cut and dried as your pronouncements

the only 'right way'

on the matter imply.

Of course it is unlikely that you're going to make much money out of it, if any.

But if it is something you're giving away for free anyway (in the case of my stories, for eg) or something that will be of very low commercial value to a publisher, but of quality and importance to a select group of potential readers (fanzines, family histories, anthologies of creative writing groups...) then those are excellent reasons in themselves.

Doing it as a labour of love, because the writer/publisher wants to do their own cover design, typesetting, promotion - because they enjoy it and want to do it, or see it as valuable promotion for another book, or another activity altogether, is another excellent reason.

As a reader and purchaser of very small print run, often hand made chapbooks and self published books, I can come at it from the other side too, and say that for small collections this intimate, personal, cottage industry way of making work available sometimes suits the person and the work much, much better than a traditional publishing route. Indeed, self publishing is exactly

the right way

Just a couple of things about the actual costs of self-publishing. I use a very good printer in Kent, my average book on a first run (inluding one-time set-up and a proof) can come out between £5 and £6 each for 50 books (inlcuding P+P), about a pound less per book on the reprint; higher quantities will bring it down another pound or so.

Most books of this size (A5, around 300/350 pages) will cost about £6.50 to send to the US (where most of my business is) and about £3.50 each to send to Europe.

Bookshops, and onliine bookstores like Amazon, will want between 60% and 70% discount off retail (and want you to pay P+P to them for orders they take). This means that you really have to have an average retail price of £16 per book, just to break even. The only choice is a higher retail price, or go for larger quantities and greater risks.

At these kinds of profits there's not a lot in wholesaling (they want SOR deals) or trying to get into traditional shops unless it's to up your profile.

The only choice for me was to start up an online sales site and put everything into online promotion, almost exclusively. It's easily promoted through various means, including our own forum, and it's certainly becoming a growing business.

ST

<Added>

The P+P costs to the buyer are a prime consideration in their purchase. It can make my books quite an expensive buy, whcih doesn't help sales.

I also sell PDF versions of my books online at a lower cost. Business for PDF and print versions are currently about 60% PDF and 40% print.

ST, which printers do you use?

Jem in Sittingbourne. Very fast turn around and always excellent work. I've tried others who are cheaper, but the quality (especially the cover repro' and general integrity of the binding) has been lower and disappointing. I don't actually buy at the prices I've quoted above unless as a first test for a title, they're just as guidance for anyone who's considering a short run.

ST

When I self-published, I used Lulu. Which is actually pretty good in the sense that you don't actually have to pay anything to put your book on the site (unless you buy a ISBN or the other offers they have) and you only buy as many as you need. However, if I ever did self publish again, I may not use it (seeing as some retails consider it vanity publishing--though I don't agree with that). If I ever did it again then I might try and do it myself, but wouldn't know the first thing about binding the covers or what have you.

That's IF I ever did it again. Let's just see how I get on subbing to people first.

Lulu are okay, but a) there's the vanity publishing stigma (you MUST have an ISBN BTW) and I've heard that some people have been unhappy with the quality of printing. This was about a year ago, so things might well have changed.

Doing it all yourself - or you and friends - is okay if you have the skills, it can be done and be successful. It's certainly worthwhile if you have the right books and believe that you have an 'in' to the market in some way.

ST

Having used Lulu myself, I have to say it's not the worst quality printing that I've ever seen, but then again, that's kinda like saying Attack of the Clones wasn't as bad as The Phantom Menance. Compare it to traditionally published novels, the print quality and paper used is slightly different, I found.

I think there are better POD things out there, but the thing that attracted me to Lulu was that you didn't have to put any money up front. There was actually a POD company that I found a few years ago that had quite a good reputation (at least within the POD market)--but their prices were a little too high for my tastes. Don't remember what they were called though.

No, you're right, Lulu is a good option for some. It does have disadvantages though, and POD will usually prevent your book from being reviewed and sold through normal channels. As long as you have your own route to market though, it doesn't really matter if it's POD or published, so it's all about how you intend to sell your product.

ST

Just out of curiosity ST, how did you go about self publishing to begin with? Did you use a POD service or was it all done off your own back? Which would you recommend the best way to go?

I hope I'm making it clear that I have experience in self-publishing, not necessarily wisdom

I personally think it's best to avoid POD unless it's to test the market or to provide books for a select established audience. They're still not viewed kindly, obviously because they haven't been through the vetting stage that books usually have to go through, inferring that the book may not be worth publishing through any other means, and that there's a very high chance it could be sub-standard.

Getting coverage for POD is very hard, so it would seem to make sense to set up your own publishig co and go it alone. It's not that hard to set up, but you have to find all the skills you're gonig to need somewhere, and pay for them. Graphic artist for the cover, a website, a forum too preferably, a site that can be linked to other sites via affiliate schemes, all kinds of little expensive things that will eventually come out of your profits. Is any way a 'right way' now? I'm not sure.

ST

Experience is always a good thing in my books.

I only ask because I'm toying with the idea of self-publishing my fiction novel (even despite the cavendant that there is). I recently got myself an artist to do some artwork for it (ie, having some odd artwork in it now and then) and he seems to think that it would go down quite well if we advertised it through manga sites. Of course, I'm talking about this in the near future (when all my agents and publishers list has dried up) but I thought I'd get your opinion of it. Thing is, the only way I know to self-publish is the POD way, but you seem to know the better ways around it so I thought I'd ask.

Ah, now. this is slightly different. An illustrated book that has a strong Manga connection or element and will probably be sold in sci-fi bookshops makes it not just ordinary POD. It's common in the comic world. If it was good quality, nobody would bat an eyelid that it was self-published. I'd set up a publishing company to and sell online and to comic stores. A forum would be very useful too to attract buyers, maybe something that promotes Manga in general. It's not too hard to set up.

ST

Cool. That's actually made me feel a lot better about this idea. To be honest, I never intended it to be a Manga style artwork, it just came out that way--but given how a lot of manga has strong fantasy elements anyway, it might prove a strong sale. But like i said, that won't happen until all the artwork is done, which may take a while so wait and see.

Thanks for the help.

Personally I would dispute all those comments that state self-publishing is a no-no.

Those that take this stance aren’t aware of the entire history of publishing, where initially there were very few publishers and some very famous people, having written texts that are now used in education, self-published their works. (I know of three examples but can’t remember the names at the moment, but I will update this post when I recall who they were)

Even fairly recent successes, such as “Shadowmancer” by GP Taylor (2002) and “A Year in the Merd” by Steven Clarke under the pen name of Paul West have had huge success after producing their works when the belief in them, from the traditional publishing houses, was lacking. They are now extremely successful authors. Steven Clarke got his break in Paris, even though his first novel was written in English.

YES – if you want to make a significant success self-publishing, then you will have to publicise your work and this takes a hell of a lot of work.

There are other things that make self-publishing respected, such as the commitment to your work and the finance you are willing to put behind it – however, concern about a particular author’s viability will kick in if self-publishing only results in a single tome. If you want to be a novelist and you self-publish it is important to demonstrate that you have way more than just one novel in you – this will show your commercial viability and this is something publishing houses want to know.

There are publishers that now understand the merits of self-publishing, such as HarperCollins, who have produced a website where new authors and self-published authors can upload their works for critique and eventually publication, should the community deem it valid. But as self publicity is hard so is managing the escalation up the ladder of acceptability on their web site: www.authonomy.com, is hard and massively time consuming.

When self-publishing started and assigned the derogatory moniker of Vanity Press, so the unknowledgeable perpetuated this name to the benefit of the very few publishing houses that control the entire literary world.

Fortunately the perceived unacceptability of self-publishing is on the wane and thanks needs to be given to publishing houses such as HarperCollins who have had the foresight to see how this, old fashioned way of publishing, can add to the general literary legacy.

Without a doubt there are those that have a surplus of cash and have produced some dire works – vanity press, if you will. But these are comparable to the trash that some traditional publishing houses have produced when they have published autobiographies of “celebrities” that have not even got through their mid-twenties. And this is where the traditional publishing houses that have taken this route, have failed – they have ignored the merits of the English language, they have only considered the cash for their coffers and have set asunder the great literary tradition of the English language to pursue financial gain.

So what I say is – DO IT, produce your self-published works and show these failing publishing houses that there are people who care about our literary traditional and are willing to put hard earned cash behind that belief.

Simon, you are under the mistaken belief that traditional publishing houses are failing, and that self-publishing (SP) is a viable alternative. SP is a different form of publishing entirely. If one goes into SP thinking they are bucking the system, then that is the wrong attitude entirely. Personally I am not against SP - I've done it myself - but it is for hobby fiction writers and niche non-fiction specialists, not for serious authors, and is not a step one should take if one believes it is a backdoor into traditional publishing.
G.P. Taylor is not a good example to hold up as a success story - he was a marketing department's dream and, after being picked up, his novel needed extensive editing before it was suitable for mainstream publication. It is true that many traditional publishing houses are no-longer prepared to invest in a new writer's career and offer such expensive editing services, so, far better than wasting money self-publishing and promoting oneself, one should invest in a damn good editor to convert one's novel into a mainstream commercial proposition.
But that's just my opinion.


- NaomiM

<Added>

I find it extremely worrying that sites like Authonomy and YouWriteOn are touting self-publising as a viable alternative to the traditional route, preying on writers desperate to get their work out to the reading public. Sorry, but the majority of readers simply aren't interested. There is a glut of fiction, and self-published novels will always languish at the bottom of the pile.
We have a number of success stories on WW where members have signed with Agents. Going the slush-pile route ends in success for the writer far more times than going the self-publising route.