Some nice evidence that reasonable sales _require_ effective marketing, regardless of the quality of the work: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/17/business/media/rowling-book-skyrockets-to-instant-hit.html?src=un&feedurl=http%3A%2F%2Fjson8.nytimes.com%2Fpages%2Fbusiness%2Fmedia%2Findex.jsonp …
@checker _It's the same book_. If the quality of the book was the only thing that mattered, it would have sold at least decently before.
-
-
@cmuratori@checker Unless quality matters, and it's terrible quality. -
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@cmuratori But if the "quality" is "1k copies" then this article doesn't say much. In other words, adding JKR to garbage would still sell. -
@checker Note I said _evidence_, not proof. There's no way to know the quality for sure. But it got good reviews and was 4 stars on Amazon.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@cmuratori I'm not arguing that marketing isn't important, just that this article doesn't logically prove anything if the book is bad.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori@checker The other thing is that it may only be evidence that a certain very limited kind of marketing (not avail to most) works.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@cmuratori@checker wanna get high man? I got some cheap books man.#towlieThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.