Around the Internet I often see a perception among readers and commenters that the sole reason certain books become wildly popular is because the publisher made them popular. This, presumably, is meant to discredit the success of the book by attributing its popularity not to the book’s merits, but rather to the efforts of a publisher to foist the book onto a gullible public.
Here’s the thing. If it were actually possible for publishers to market the heck out of a book and guarantee that it became as popular as Twilight, well, don’t you think they would? All the time? With every book?
To be sure, marketing helps a book’s popularity, and a publisher can work wonders when they bring all of their resources to bear to give a book a boost. But that just gives a book a shot. What happens from there depends on the book itself and whether it catches fire with its readers.
People who follow the movie industry know that studios are usually pretty good at advertising their way to a certain opening weekend box office draw. In the words of the president of Sony Screen Gems, “Most of a movie’s opening gross is about marketing.” After that, though, what happens is a result of that all important and elusive “word of mouth,” which as this fascinating New Yorker article details, can often be about reaching multiple market segments with the concept of the film itself. Even the very best advertising can only do so much. At some point the movie itself has to sink or swim.
Lots of books get marketing dollars. Not all books become Twilight or The Da Vinci Code or The Help or Harry Potter or insert insanely popular book here. One or more of those books may not be your cup of tea as a reader, but it doesn’t mean that your fellow readers were duped into buying them. Better, I think, to consider what it was about the book that inspired such dedicated readers than to ascribe that special zing to outside forces.
Photo by Zack Sheppard
Francis says
@M Clement Hall: Easy. Brown used the power of myth and religion. He took historical facts and twisted them into fiction to make them work within the mythos he had created.
This amazing book (it's really great) explains it in a lot of details:
https://www.amazon.com/Writers-Journey-Mythic-Structure-3rd/dp/193290736X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1269905654&sr=8-1
Religion has always been a controversial subject, but used for the premise of a mystery/thriller, it was bound to work.
Anonymous says
Nathan needs to read the New York Times article on James Patterson to know that it IS true that marketing can push bad books into the hands of a gullible public.
Patterson doesn't even write his own books any more — he is 100% marketing muscle at this point.
If they put 50% of the marketing behind other good books as they do Patterson's crap (TV commercials anyone?) then they could create the next Twilight.
Ishta Mercurio says
Thank you. I actually said this in the forums, albeit without the flair that you have for diplomacy.
Maybe it's because I'm "new" to this industry, but why does it not seem obvious to people that if they want to write a bestseller, they should look at the current bestsellers and see what it was about those books that helped them make it, instead of slamming the books and the authors for "selling out" and not writing anything with "literary merit"?
There sure are a lot of bitter writers out there these days.
Anonymous says
There sure are a lot of bitter writers out there these days.
What about bitter readers? I'm a reader, not a writer, and I hate all the mass market BS that gets front-of-store placement and little cardboard standees and multi-million dollar contracts for books whose writing is complete crap.
I shouldn't have to dig through a mountain of garbage to find the gems.
There are a lot of industry people who are making bad decisions about which authors and which books to push out toward the public.
Like authors who are 'too close' to their books to see where it needs editing, I think publishers are often too close to certain authors and certain books to make good decisions about how and were to market it.
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
If you don't like mass market books then don't read them! Do you go to the multiplex and just walk into whatever movie has the longest line?
Francis says
@Ishta: It's interesting what you said about reviews. Donald Maass said in his book that for certain genres, most literary agents will expect reviews to shred the novel apart no matter how well written or how good it is. I also distinctly remember a blog entry on Kristin Nelson's blog mentioning this.
Certain publications will rip most books apart and getting a positive review from them (K. Nelson mentioned one magazine in particular, but can't recall its name now) will be considered a miracle. No amount of money will change that.
If you REALLY think about it though, how much power do critics really have? In my opinion: bar to none. A rave review might convince libraries to order bigger stocks, however, those reviews will barely affect the opinion of your average joe (like me and you, who are probably 90%+ of the general readership).
Personally, I feel critics are usually full of it and rely one wine snobbery and 50$ words to look smart. I find it truer for movie reviews, but it applies to books too. I don't really care if Mr. X from the NYT found the book shallow, filled with simplistic metaphors and inappropriate similes… is this book going to entertain me, at least on some level? What are other readers saying about it, those who read in the genre I like?
I remember reading reviews of AVATAR who gave it rotten press because the story was "clichéd" or "simplistic". Are you frickin' kidding me? I'm sitting in a theater with popcorn, a container the size of a lake filled with Diet Coke, and am sporting some ugly and goofy looking glasses. AM I HERE FOR THE LITERARY VALUE OF AVATAR?
Only reviews that count are Amazon reviews, SADLY. Recently an author had its book go from 4.5 stars to 2 stars because angry customers were given it 1 star reviews due to a lack of Kindle version. What a shame.
I really don't think reviews from literary critics have any bearings on the success a book will have with the general public. None at all.
E. F. Collins says
I think this is a wonderful post, sir. I myself have talked badly about Twilight, but not because of the popularity. That isn't a factor. I'm a horror/dark fiction writer and to have those… books… considered horror-ish in any way grates on me. As it does many, many others in my chosen genre.
However, I've come to terms with the fact that because of what I write, I have a million in one chance of hitting the big time. I know this. Stephen King or Dean Koontz, I am not. Bashing of books that have made it big for no other reason than their popularity is like begrudging a super-genius (and I do not mean Wyle E. Coyote here) his/her PHD. There's no point. I think we should aspire to that, as writers we should always strive to make our work the best we can. But as professionals, we should know better than to begrudge popularity. Something in those book(s) strikes a chord with its readers.
I don't have to like a book, or its delivery or characters, to know that *something* made it sell big. I'd have to be an idiot not to respect someone who can touch so many in that way. Doesn't mean it touched me, but hey… I'm twisted and run against the grain.
MJR says
I'd have to disagree with anon above about reviews. I bought THE HELP because of positive reviews. I didn't even know it was a bestseller when I bought it. It just sounded like a book I would love (and I did). I still don't know anyone else who has read it (unlike, say, DA VINCI CODE, which everyone was talking about at the time, and was put directly into my hands by a friend who insisted I read it).
Neil says
I don't particularly care for a lot of what I read these days and find myself saying either "what makes this so popular?" or "I can write that good." But as I read I discover that no, I couldn't write that good (or is it well?) Anyway, popularity these days really is the story these and the turn of phrase and imagination. Need to keep working. Good job, Nathan.
The Red Angel says
I'm glad you posted this. I definitely don't believe that the marketing is the bigger factor in determining a book's success rather than the content. That's a pretty negative perspective to me…
Advertising definitely plays a huge role in familiarizing a certain book to the public, but word of mouth, personal reviews, and the content always prevails. :]
Donna Hole says
I so agree with this sentiment.
I want an agent, and a publishing house, for the effort they put into promoting an author and a work they are enthused about. But, in the end, it is the public that determines if the publishers expense was worth the end product.
I've seen movies that flop at the box office and don't earn out their expenditures or live up to the reviews. Some big name authors fall prey to this problem also. They capitalize on their name, and forget the quality of work needed.
Who can tell what John Q really wants of us.
……….dhole
wendy says
Yes, good point that if it were possible to sway public thinking/buying – big time – with media and publicity everyone would be doing it. Everyone is marketing as much as possible, but the huge successes do seem to tap into something that people want – as you said, Nathan.
I think with Twilight, the younger female market who focus on finding that elusive Prince Charming was tapped into. I've heard that males also read the book, but maybe it's more curiosity with them. With Harry Potter, perhaps it's wish-fulfillment for the younger readers? It's interesting that neither sagas have gratuitous violence or sex,so perhaps this is what the mainstream audience want? If this is true, how ironic would it be when many film producer-types seem to think the opposite. Well, it has become a cliche that sex and violence sells.
worstwriterever says
High concept, did I read about it on this blog?
Sophie Kinsella is really good at it, obviously Stephenie Meyer with Twilight etc.
I think a good high concept is that extra sparkle that combined with a good book and good marketing can start a fire.
https://www.fictionmatters.com/2010/01/06/what-the-heck-is-high-concept/
I don't think that's where I originally read about it though…I think it might have been this blog.
june says
I never heard of Twilight until the movie came out and a woman in the theatre told me about it. I went straight to Barnes & Noble after the movie concluded and bought that book. I loved it and insisted on everyone in the house leaving me alone while I read it.
I was shocked at the negative things people have said about it. It's an insult to the reader; as if you don't have good sense to like this book-a lot!
It's just jealously pure and simple. Stephanie Myers tapped into a fantasy that a lot of women/girls have and it resonated with them. Get over it people. She thought of the idea (or dreamed it). The bottom line is, she got there first and you didn't. You have to live with that.
Ishta Mercurio says
Francis,
I must not have been clear enough in my post. I wasn't referring to reviewers slamming the book, and I understand completely where you are coming from in your post. I think that when we think of a "critic" or a "reviewer", we think of someone who is going to pick something apart a great deal and find a lot wrong with it. Full 5-star reviews are very rarely given out by professional reviewers, because to offer high praise to almost everything devalues the praise. And you are right to say that these reviews might mean a lot to people who share similar tastes with the reviewer, but they won't mean much to anyone else. When I lived in the UK, I became familiar enough with a couple of the newspapers there that I knew which movie reviewers shared my tastes, so I read their opinions but ignored the rest.
In my above post, I was talking about other writers, specifically people who comment in the forums here and on other blogs. There are a number of people, mostly with limited (if any) publishing experience, who comment (a lot) that they hated this book because it didn't meet their standards of "good literature", and thought it was basically unpublishable schlock.
My attitude is: You don't have to like it, but you do have to realize that this is what the market is actually demanding right now. If you don't want to write this type of thing, that's fine, but don't blame anyone for passing your manuscript up in favor of something that you consider to be unfit for publishing. What gets published is all about what publishers think will sell – this is a business. I'm not published yet, but I'd like to be, and I consider reading bestsellers to be an important learning exercise.
And I agree with your first post too, by the way – I enjoyed Twilight, but I wouldn't shelve it with Tolkien. BUT, I did enjoy it, and that says something.
Virginia Woolf has her place. So does Jane Austen. So does Tolkien. So do Dan Brown and Stephenie Meyer. Different people want different things.
Kate Evangelista says
"Word of mouth" can sometimes be a trap too. It's the kind of trust you put into the taste of a friend or a family member that gets you to buy a certain book or watch a certain movie.
I also believe that the bloggers are a powerful force to be reckoned with. Sometimes all it takes is a good review from a popular blog to get the ball rolling.
SAMUEL PARK says
The only thing we can do is write a great book that people love. We're in the business of pleasing people. The more people love our work, the more they'll tell others, and so on. We're in the age of Information; people can smell stinkers from a mile away, but they also find out about a great book pretty fast. And then it becomes a phenomenon.
Anonymous says
@Erica: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wherefore
Ian says
I totally agree with you Samuel.
I know luck plays a part, but the bottom line has to be – if it's a good book then it's more likely to be a hit.
Josin L. McQuein says
june,
That's far too simplistic. People can dislike something – for valid reasons – without it being jealousy.
The simple fact is that when something reaches Twilight/HP/DaVinci levels of popularity, it's going to rack up HUGE numbers of people who hate it just because that many more people have read it and found it not to their taste.
Imagine if a typical "good" seller is something like 5,000 copies – and all 5,000 people who buy it still won't like it. Now, multiply that to "phenomenon" status.
If you look at the percentage of people who dislike it, compared to those who like it, it's not much different than any other book.
Somewhat ironic sounding ver. word considering the context of this post: feforker
Elie says
When the first Harry Potter came out, I was in a bookshop in Islington (London)looking for picture books. Harry Potter had its own cardboard display unit, and without that I wouldn't have noticed it.
I read a child's review of Philip Pulman's The Subtle Knife in the newspaper, and knew I'd love it too.
It's easier to find books now because of the internet. For books to succeed due to word of mouth they have to be visible and around for long enough for word to get around. IMO.
(Apologies if this is here twice – error on page)
Samuel says
Nathan, The Book Thief is not 'literary'. Please, people. Let's not pretend.
Simon says
@Nathan
re: Multiplex analogy.
Sorry, but that's a pretty glib response in my opinion. The natural force of a capitalism will, and has, lead to the homogenisation of popular culture; whereby the lowest denominator dictates the markets for everyone. And yes, there is an inevitability to this, but to deny people who fall outside of the central demographic the right of a protest voice (beyond their dollar value) is to condemn them to only further marginalisation.
People's whose tastes fall within the mainstream vote with their wallets and get what they want/deserve. I think that people who's tastes fall outside that should be applauded and encouraged in demanding 'better'(whatever their own personal definition of 'better' may be.
Anonymous says
I think it would be interesting to discuss just what is the compelling factor on a number of Phenomenon Books.
(We hear sour grape and lofty opinions about why such and such a book should not be a phenomenon. But it is.)
Why not hear more about why a book worked so dynamically.
Scott says
I wasn't a huge fan of The Book Thief either, but it was accessible and sentimental. Are we surprised it hit it big? In fact, similar to all "popular phenomenons", big-selling books scratch those basic itches of so many because they're not literary masterpieces.
I've always found arguing levels of sophistication of popular phenomenon to be an exercise in circuitous frustration. I feel it's all about the reader, viewer, and listener. If you know how to relate to them, you've a better chance of success. Think "campfire", not "lecture".
Anonymous says
One of the things that publishers do that I find hard to take is to follow a phenomenon with a million and one copycats – copycat book covers included.
I went into browse Barnes and Noble Booksellers Sunday only to see almost EVERY YA book had a color theme after Twilight, if not everything else. I mean they even had a copy of Jane Austin's book in Twilight black.
I'm all for Twilight's success. But a hundred Twilights? There can be more than one way to write and sell a great teen vampire romance.
I wanted to buy a new book and couldn't find one that looked like one.
(I had to order the book on my list – apparently, not a black cover and not about supernatural romance = not stocked.)
Nathan Bransford says
simon-
So by not having certain at the front of the store the industry is denying people a protest dollar? What about the books in the back of the store? And millions online?
Sorry, the multiplex analogy stands. There are good outside-the-mainstream movies out there you might just have to drive farther to find them or seek them out. Same goes for books.
others-
And re: THE BOOK THIEF and "literary," it all depends on your definition and threshold. I personally think the voice and prose elevates it to literary, even if it's still accessible. A modern-day ULYSSES probably isn't going to be a mega-bestseller and the biggest sellers will probably have a certain degree of accessibility, but it's not as if very literary books don't make the bestseller list and sell in huge quantities. They do.
Nathan Bransford says
anon-
I'd blame readers not publishers. People who loved TWILIGHT walk straight back to the bookstore and say, "I want something like that."
If it didn't work to have books in the same genre and style waiting for them they wouldn't be there.
Eileen says
There is no doubt in my mind that in the end it comes down to the writing. However, don't underestimate the power of a sizeable print run. If a writer has a smaller print run- word of mouth has to be not only good, but amazing. It has to convince someone to write down the title (not just remember it when they see it in the store) and potentially order it as it won't be in the bookstore.
Anonymous says
No, marketing cannot make a phenomenon. Only word of mouth can do that.
But marketing sure as hell HELPS.
The only reason I'm posting this is not to disagree with you, Nathan, but to keep readers from drawing a false conclusion based on your post, i.e., that publisher/marketing support is ultimately meaningless. It's so, so not. If your books get (a) bright shiny well-designed covers instead of the third retread of some popular stock art, (b) prominent placement in major bookstores throughout the country and (c) some special attention from your publisher's sales team, the chance of your books finding enough of an audience to gain that precious word of mouth is SO much higher.
I think it's important to remember that the story and the audience are the final determinators of any phenomenon. But I think it's important to know what to ask for with your publisher, and to realistically assess/improve your novel's chances.
Simon says
Nathan
sorry if I was unclear. I wasn't suggesting that those of us who look for more sophistication (for want of a better word) than the mainstream model provides, are denied a voter's dollar. On the contrary. I was trying to make the point how that dollar alone will not be enough to slow the capitalist machine's inexorable drive toward low-brow, low-challenge, popular culture.
There's a responsibility upon readers to want 'better', to want originality, to want sophistication, and to be vocal in our demands for it, and militant in encouraging others to do the same.
It's great that people read books, regardless of whether they're books that are entirely to my taste, and I'm not interested in denigrating anybody's work. But I make no apologies in actively encouraging people I know read the books I consider to be great.
My brother used to read and enjoy the likes of Dan Brown; fine – it got him reading, but I saw that as an opportunity to try and get him to read 'better'. Entirely selfishly I weened him onto Murakami, Michael Chabon, Junot Diaz, because these are the writers that deserve to be in the mainstream on merit. My brother would not read Dan Brown now. That makes me pleased.
And that is the crux of my point, and why I took exception to your 'don't like it, turn over' response. Apathy from the reader will only retain the status quo. We can't expect the publishing industry and literary agents to be cultural guardians. Why should they? Their purpose is to make money. The responsibility is with us the readers.
Rant over. Sorry if it sounded heavy. I prepare to have these discussions over a beer and a laugh.
Anonymous says
Nathan said:
I'd blame readers not publishers.
I don't really blame. Marketing what works is a business.
It's more a lament about the loss of individuality when the majority of the books in a section start to resemble each other.
In my perfect bookstore, there would be shiny pink covers and different themes standing out.
I loved the Twilight Saga. I have just had enough of what looks like the same. Viva la difference.
Anonymous says
In the late twentieth century it required a marketing effort — even for a good book — to see the light of day and rack up the big numbers. That required spending money, and the big pockets were the big publishers.
Now, thanks to the internet, it's easier for a good book to achieve success on a small (or zero) marketing budget. An earlier poster mentioned the power of blogs, twitter, etc. Word of mouth is 100 times more powerful than it was 20 years ago. My single-voice post about a book on a reader forum can be read by hundreds — our individual voices can have much greater reach, and it's free.
Yes, you can make something a phenomenon, BUT the writing must be good enough to have an audience (someone will always hate your book).
Today we all have the tools to make it "go viral". You, a few friends, and a hundred blogs and tweets can kick it up a notch. Look at JA Konrath. He's a model for using the internet VERY effectively to make a name and build a readership for his books. He IS making a phenomenon, in my opinion. Before his internet adventures he was a midlist author (I'd never heard of him). Sure, his books are good, but they are what they are — genre fiction. Now he's doing a bang-up job of cover art and blurbs on a low budget, handing out freebies, blogging, glad-handing his way around the net on virtual book tours, etc.
Marketing can't do it all, but it sure as heck gives it a huge kick start.
Nathan Bransford says
simon and anon-
I think I may have initially understood – I've been describing how things are, you're describing how you wish they'd be. I definitely agree that we should strive to support the types of books we want to read with our dollar, and supporting a diversity of choices is a worthy goal.
Simon says
Nathan
to be clear, I wasn't disputing the point of your original post at all. It was pretty much irrefutable.
Broadly speaking I think a lot of the marketing spend comes after the other forces have determined that a project has, or will have, momentum.
I'm aware that Twilight gets huge marketing now (it's impossible not to) but I'm guessing that's on the back of its initial success, rather than the other way round. Am I right? genuine question.
Nathan Bransford says
simon-
TWILIGHT was one of those books where there was quite a bit of attention and marketing even with the first book, though it wasn't until the third or fourth book that it really achieved phenomenon status. They were definitely big books, but the gradually became more and more popular until they were practically inescapable.
Other phenomenon books, like HARRY POTTER, were not overly heralded, and just sort of happened.
I agree with the people who have chimed in to say that marketing and print runs are important – they definitely are. A book has to reach a certain saturation point before it starts taking on a life of its own. And I think that saturation point probably varies from book to book.
Nathan Bransford says
simon-
Oops, in my last post to you I meant "I may have initially MISunderstood" – I see now what you meant with your initial comment and don't think we disagree.
Simon says
Thanks Nathan.
I think it would be daft of any us to think that the industry doesn't throw more weight behind certain projects than others, and when they do it improves that book's chance of success.
But as you say, it can't guarantee it. And at the same time I'm sure the books they choose to get behind aren't picked at random (nor on absolute quality, if there's any way of determining such a thing) but because they have the inherent potential to be big.
SImon says
No problem, Nathan.
I read it as 'misunderstood' anyway.
Arik Durfee says
I think word of mouth is huge. As a teacher, I went out and bought ten copies each of THE ABSOLUTELY TRUE DIARY OF A PART TIME INDIAN, WINTERGIRLS, and THE MAZE RUNNER without having read any of them. But I had heard so many raving good reviews from people that I wanted to have my students read them.
And I think publicity work on the author's part can be just as powerful as anything the publisher can do. I've seen books become word-of-mouth phenomenoms within my school just because the author came and talked to the students. There's something about meeting the author personally that helps transform people into hard-core loyal fans.
Mira says
You know I think people may be under-rating The Da Vinci Code, a book which makes very strong political and sociological arguments and wraps it up so beautifully in a page-turning story that it became a mainstream phenomenon.
Most books that argue so strongly against the use of religion by politicians for social control and the brutal violent oppression of women would not make it to the NY Times Best seller list.
Mira says
Oh, I want to add another comment.
Literary fiction does not appeal to me. It's too much work, brings up sad feelings and it gets under my skin. That's not what I'm looking for in a reading experience.
I look for entertainment. I think those who like literary fiction are looking more for an experience.
So, I think it's not accurate to rate literary fiction as 'better' than commercial. I just think those who read each one are looking for something different from their reading experience.
I also think the market does not cater to the LOWEST common denominator. I think it caters to the COMMON denominator.
Nathan wrote a great post awhile back about archtypes. Phenomenons speak to those archtypes in a powerful way, so much so they touch literally billions of readers. They tend to be on target with whatever archtype is actively present in the culture at the time – which is why some wonderful books that also deal beautifully with archtype may take longer to catch on – even post-humuously – because of where the culture is at in any given moment.
It is very hard to control whether you, as a writer, are personally struggling with archtypes that the entire culture is as well. I don't think this is something anyone can control – it's timing and your own personal path.
So, personally, I plan to just write my books, do the best I can put them out there and let go of the results.
Ha! I could barely write that last paragraphy with a straight face. In actuality I'll freak out at every stage of the process, I'm sure, but that last paragraph sure sounded good.
Anyway, my long post and two cents for what it's worth.
Joanna van der Gracht de Rosado says
There's not much new under the sun.
You've certainly heard the old children's song? DRY BONES…
"With the finger bone connected
to the hand bone,
and the hand bone connected
to the arm bone,
and the arm bone connected
to the shoulder bone,
Oh mercy how they scare!"
***The message is that nothing works alone and of itself… a book phenomenon doesn't either***
A truly great idea springs from the author's brain bone
It moves on down to the finger bones
That tap, tap,tap on the PC bone
For a long, long time…
More ideas, energy and $$$ must come from other bones…
Like Dedicated Agent and Powerful marketing bones…
Cooperative retail bones and those
Affluent consumer bones…
And oh Mercy how they sell!
howdidyougetthere says
Excellent examples. They've all risen to the top for completely different reasons. Considering how many different writers–and writers' voices– there are, this should give hope.
Da Vinci Code: fascinating treasure hunt
Twilight: unwavering fate driven love story, popular since the beginning of time
Harry Potter: take me away fantastical adventure with humour
Book Thief: non-preachy literary poignancy
(The Help haven't read yet.)
Adam Pepper says
It's true that publishing can't manufacture hits like Twilight or Di Vinci (we know they try!) but let's not dismiss the power of advertising and a great big marketing push either.
Anonymous says
I don't think a publisher can *make* something become popular, but they can set a stage so that it *can* become popular.
When my YA got pubbed from a major publisher, in hardcover, my pub didn't even have ARCs of my book available at the Book Expo or ALA. Despite good reviews, B&N declined to stock it, citing "not enough publicity." So, yeah, um, without a publisher's support — something as simple as having ARC's around — led to a snowball effect of no one thinking it was impoortant. Not bloggers, not bookstores. Saddling my book with a hardcover price point rather than a paper back one, sure didn't help, either. Who is going to pay a hardcover price for something they've never heard of?
So a pub can't make something successful, but they can give it a shove in that direction, certainly.
june says
To Anonymous whose YA didn't get publicity: That's terrible. I'm so sorry to hear that happened to you. It took the joy out of what could have been an awesome experience. You did your best, which is write the best story you could. Some things are just beyond your control. I hope you keep writing and get the notice you deserve.
To Josin,
You've made a valid point and sheer numbers probably do impact the responses. That said, I suspect jealously plays a bigger role than people would like to admit 🙂
june says
To Anonymous again:
What you've said is so true. I've been at writer's conferences where the publishers were clearly excited about a YA book and were going all out to promote it. They had me salivating for the ARC and I couldn't rest until I had one in my hot little hands. Then what do I do? Promote it on my blog just the way they hope I will.(If I like it of course)
So, yeah. How strong a publisher gets behind a book, can make a huge difference. I hope you'll be on the recieving end of such a push in the future.
Robert A Meacham says
Thank you for a valuable post on marketing. I can speak to the retail ( real estate piece). As a retailer, we look at the marketing value. Did it create a buzz, timely in what is popular, and that is about it. We look at the exit strategy we have with publications, the how the heck can we move through this product at store level and we have already done this with the contract with our distributor and their contract with Ingrams.
Let's take the Twilight Series. When it came out with book and DVD, we gave it prime location in our stores ( prime real estate) and made a big deal of its release. Other titles may warrant shippers placed in the book section with hope attached.They also get upfront visual with the old #1 best selling author status and so on.
Mayowa says
Well done sir. I've keep seeing these posts on the many issues/failures of the publishing/bookselling industry. Why are writers handing over 90% of profits to them again?
Pens With Cojones