In light of Nathan Bransford's question of the day (Who Should Have the 'Indie' Label: Self-Publishers or Small Presses?) I thought I'd add my two cents:
Self-pub: you publish the book yourself. Even if you contract someone else to do the editing, line editing, cover, layout, etc., those are one-time fees that you pay, not percentages. You design and execute your own promotional campaign. The majority of the money that comes in on every sale goes to you, with a percentage split going to the distributor such as Amazon, Smashwords, etc.
Independent pub: you publish the book through a small press (e.g. local/ regional distribution, narrow genre range). The publishing house works with you to do the editing, line editing, cover, layout, editing, etc. for a percentage of sales (small or large, depending on your contract). You may or may not get an advance, to be repaid out of sales. You do the promotion, working with the publisher's promotional efforts. The money that comes in on every sale goes to the publisher, with a percentage split going to the distributor (which might be the same as the publisher), your agent (if you used one for the deal) and ultimately to you.
Traditional pub: you publish the book through a big press (e.g. national/international distribution, wide range of authors). The publisher does the editing, line editing, cover, layout, editing, etc. for a large percentage of sales. You may or may not get an advance, to be repaid out of sales. The publisher arranges the promotion, which you carry out in addition to your own efforts. The money that comes in on every sale goes to the publisher, with a percentage split going to the distributor (which might be the same as the publisher), your agent (which you almost certainly used) and ultimately to you.
This is how I see it. I recognize that emotional, economic and/or philosophical positions on these three methods may vary.
I now open the floor for comments.
===== Feel free to comment on this or any other post.
10 comments:
Thank you for leaving a comment. The staff at Landless will treat it with the same care that we would bestow on a newly hatched chick. By the way, no pressure or anything, but have you ever considered subscribing to Landless via RSS?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you covered the three approaches very well!
ReplyDeleteEvery time I ask you anything (door?) I realize you've already answered but I'm willing to risk it yet again (nothing ventured, nothing to turn beet red about). Which of these three roads to you envision yourself taking?
ReplyDelete@ Kittie: Thanks!
ReplyDelete@ Cathy: I was all set to have an anthology of my short fiction published through a small house (indie) but the deal fell through, so I'm back to Plan A (self). I'm working on that now, in fact.
My novel (whenever I get the fershluggener WIP thing done) I'll try to do traditional or indie, but am not opposed to a self-pub route.
Oh crap! Sorry to hear about the deal falling through but you know what? I'm excited to see it go the self route!
ReplyDeleteI think it was Ziggy Kinsella who suggested that indie is the new term for self-publishing. I use the label in that way for myself, but I haven't even self-published anything yet.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, I'm truly independent, as I'm not tied to anything or anyone at the moment. ;-)
I'd probably agree with you. I mean, I did EVERYTHING for the two e-books I did, hence "self publishing". I do think there is some overlap with indie publishing if you set yourself up as your own publishing imprint, but essentially that's just splitting hairs.
ReplyDeleteI'm currently waiting to hear back from an indie press about my novella, but part of me still wants to try the trad route for my YA, but that's mostly because the publishing paradigm hasn't changed quite as much in the UK yet.
In a traditional (print) model, the author wanted to publish a book on his own, sooner or later he had to set up a small publishing house, as there were too many costs associated with print and distribution.
ReplyDeleteGoing digital means you can do it alone, that means "alone".
In a traditional model having a publishing label was important, but not any more.
All self-publishers are indies. Not all indie houses are self-publishers.
I do not see why "self-pub" can't suffice and "indy" can't remain for smaller houses - though some other houses outside the Big Six are hardly independent-anythings these days. Your layout makes sense to me, Tony.
ReplyDeleteI self-published my chapbook, "Dance Groove Funhouse." It left the layout in my hands (in Publisher, which allowed for some iconic graphics). Note to all: Pick common fonts; otherwise, your local Office Depot, etc., might not have them and you have to reformat on the spot.
ReplyDeleteThey stapled by hand, the print was great, I found some nice card stock for the cover (nothing neon), and have sold quite a few copies at my blog.
Thanks, Tony, for this informative, comprehensive breakdown of various methods of publication. Invaluable for us newbies!
(Mine cost about a buck apiece to produce, but there was also the sweat equity of setup, mastering to clip drive, etc.)
Peace, Amy
Your definitions make sense, although I call myself an indie author - which has nothing to do with the way I pub, if that makes sense? I would be an independent author whether I self-pub or go with a small publisher, as opposed to traditional publishing.
ReplyDelete