Today there is much debate over the value and size of the self-publishing
channel. Yesterday this channel was restricted by the physical supply chain, which
effectively remains owned by the traditional publishing channel. This is no
longer the case with the digital channel and works are only restricted by all
the other works that they compete with on their virtual shelf and the money
spent in promoting and marketing a title.
Self-publishing was once seen by the market as vanity
publishing and being the books that publishers didn’t want and therefore
unworthy of the attention of consumers. The digital market has changed that and
now self-publishing is growing in respectability. There are still poorly
written and edited books, but some would suggest that also applies albeit to a lot
lower extent to the traditional channel. Both now sit side by side on the same
virtual shelf.
Platforms such as Kindle Digital Publishing (KDP) have made
it possible for anyone to publish at relatively little cost and receive a large
proportion of any revenues generated. Some will argue that there still are
costs which are largely forgotten by the author. Others will claim that these tasks
can be outsourced at a very low rate to professionals who don’t carry the corporate
baggage. Some would suggest that publishers have the ability to generate more
sales which even at a lower royalty will generate more money for the author.
Others that self-publishing is more transparent, pays quicker and puts the
author in charge of the price.
The self-publishing channel is now not restricted to new
works, but is increasingly available to those published authors who have been
able to revert their works when the publisher didn’t want them anymore, or
digitally publish works that never had the digital rights licenced in the first
place. The author are now able to republish these themselves digitally via the
likes of KDP and others.
We now have a virtual shelf brimming over with old and new,
self and published works and the challenge for all is now coined as ‘discoverability’.
Marketing spend can still by the bestseller, but those without that backing now
have to increasingly compete head to head with the self-published.
In his Report on self-publishing Hugh Howey draws his conclusion
that the self-publishing channel is far greater than many think and he makes
some claims which others dispute. The reality is that no one really knows the
answer and the data today is incomplete and the analysis often more subjective
than factual. Amazon, do not disclose and make the detail public and as a
result there are many who make assumptions based on their opinion and bad data.
Counting the volume of total works published becomes a
futile exercise as many self-publishing ones don’t have ISBNs, let alone bother
to register them. So how many ‘new’ titles were published last year becomes an guessing
exercise for some and largely irrelevant to many. The slice of market share
achieved by some is as only as good as the data collated and what is often
outside of that is ignored. Even the definition of a work and the number of renditions
starts to be questionable.
Like global warming it would be somewhat naïve to not accept
digital warming is happening and one aspect of this is that self-publishing is
not only growing but that some authors are making a return off this route. Self-publishing
will not cannibalise the traditional channel and as we have said, it can’t
compete with others marketing and promotional spend, but it can be a viable
first step to many, provide a longevity of a work for others and if dismissed
by the traditional players may well come home to haunt some.
