I really like Lincoln’s newsletter but this is a view of the worldview never agree with. Publishing, even “publishing well” shouldn’t take two years. The industry tries to cope with low average input quality with more QA in the wrong part of value chain
Conversation
Most books (including all of mine) sell less less than 5000 copies because that’s what they deserve not because they need a 2 year ooga booga. Most books should get low quality, quick production if the material even deserves bookification, and get polished post-publication
2
2
23
The industry is built on unnecessary authorial Stockholm syndrome around a game of gatekeepers generally not worth playing for 90% who try. Self-publish, keep 10x more of the money, ditch quality fetishes unless you like doing it yourself, save trees.
5
2
31
Replying to
FWIW I don't disagree with this at all. I probably should have added something about self-publishing. I wasn't trying to say that there aren't a lot of benefits to it, only that if you are trad publishing most of the timeline is eaten up in things like edits and promotion.
1
1
Replying to
My point is it’s 90% misallocated effort and the industry is kinda a dinosaur
like buggywhip makers miraculously managing to continue selling whips to a market which had moved on from horses to cars. It feels like car owners buying whips as a backup 😂
Replying to
lol. Although has the market moved on ? Ebook growth has stalled and print still somehow dominates book sales. Obviously some people make a lot of money with ebooks, but with the overall market print still is king which means dealing with retail if you go that route
2
1
Replying to
Text on the internet absolutely dwarfs books though
As a blog native I’ve never thought of paper books as anything more than an archival curiosity and something to give my parents as a souvenir. 9 of my 10 volumes are ebook only and do good enough sales for me at 10x margin
1
1
Show replies
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Show

