Survey Results: The State of Indie Authorship

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

Sorry if someone else has already posted this.

https://www.writtenwordmedia.com/survey-results-the-state-of-indie-authorship

Twenty-five percent of Indies write romance. Click link to see the graph.

Analysis
Romance is big in multiple ways. First, it’s a broad category. There are many romance subgenres that often don’t have much in common. Second, romance is popular among readers and authors. If we asked readers to pick one genre to read for the rest of their lives, it might look a lot like this chart.

Another important data point is that 83% of authors surveyed write in multiple genres. So, while this graph measures what authors view as their “primary” genre, many authors are writing in two or more genres.

It’s common to hear authors discuss which genres do best in KDP Select. So we wanted to look at the genres of authors who had all books in KDP Select vs. Authors who had no books in KDP Select. Largely, there weren’t many differences, but in the chart below we’ve called out the 3 largest differences and highlighted romance.

[PJ Post]

I found the marketing section interesting. Writers are spending a lot of time and money following the same old strategies from 2015.

When everyone is doing the same thing, there's opportunity.

[LilyBLily]

Yeah, I'm not. Once I finish my western series (writing two other books comes first), I might apply to the usual channels to see what happens, but I'm not holding my breath. Can I use the same ads I used in 2016 to sell the same books now? All I know for sure is they will cost more. Also, I fell asleep during the last webinar I attended about how to do Amazon ads, which certainly shows my interest level in them these days. 

[Lorri Moulton]

I'm surprised the separated mystery from cozy mystery, but not very steamy and erotic romance from romance.  Nothing against very steamy/erotic romance, but if they think cozy and other mysteries deserve separate graphs...

[Bill Hiatt]

The emphatic thumbs-down on generative AI for book content is interesting.

An average 15 hours a week spent writing isn't a lot. But that data would be more useful if it was disaggregated based on whether or not people had day jobs or their primary source of income was writing. People whose job is writing obviously spend more time. 15 hours might be all someone with a job could spare.

Up to a point, having more titles helps, which makes sense.

[The Bass Bagwhan]

A problem I have with these kinds of analysis is how while it recognises Romance as a significant market, it doesn't allow for how utterly different that market is compared to others. The  voracious appetite that romance readers have for more and more books, often very similar in every way, just isn't replicated in other genres.

Plus, I didn't see any allowance for book length or size. Yes, some authors have produced 200 books and that's a real achievement. But they can be 30-40k long at best. Again, it's a different workflow and creative process. Don't get me wrong ... good romance writers have to very good at their craft and deserve any success they get. I'm just saying that it's a genre that has many unique factors that skew all-inclusive data like this.

[Hopscotch]

This survey suggests we may be looking at achieving writing success from the wrong end of the telescope.  Romance is the biggest genre by sales.  So big that genre cats should be limited to "Romance" and "All Others."  Women buy 80% of all novels in all cats, except scifi.  We all (not just 25% of indies) should be writing romance from a woman's perspective to make the big bucks. 

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

This survey suggests we may be looking at achieving writing success from the wrong end of the telescope.  Romance is the biggest genre by sales.  So big that genre cats should be limited to "Romance" and "All Others."  Women buy 80% of all novels in all cats, except scifi.  We all (not just 25% of indies) should be writing romance from a woman's perspective to make the big bucks.

I don't usually read romance novels as I find them predictable (you know they are going to end up together, but I suppose that is the point of the story). However, I originally put my Headmaster story in romance as a friend who acted as one of my readers and enjoys romance said it was a romance story. But I ended up with a bad review from a romance reader who claimed it didn't follow the rules of romance novels as there is a twist in the end. I then tried it in contemporary fiction because there didn't seem to be a 'general fiction' category. Another reviewer enjoyed the story but said it was difficult to categorise but thought it probably fitted romance.
It then won a chick-lit award. But that category seems to have disappeared.
I am now trying again and risking putting it in the rom-com category. Going to try a BargainBooksy ad. Will see if I make Big Bucks   

[Bill Hiatt]

This survey suggests we may be looking at achieving writing success from the wrong end of the telescope.  Romance is the biggest genre by sales.  So big that genre cats should be limited to "Romance" and "All Others."  Women buy 80% of all novels in all cats, except scifi.  We all (not just 25% of indies) should be writing romance from a woman's perspective to make the big bucks.

Understanding the market is a good thing. I'm not sure that trying to force oneself to write in a genre one isn't really feeling is a good idea, though. Some people can force themselves that way. Others will produce weaker writing if they try.

Also, a man writing exclusively from a woman's perspective is going to set off alarm bells with some people. Some male writers of romance have used female pen names, but if their real identity comes public, that can be awkward, at best.

[Hopscotch]

Another route into the biggest-money genre?:

What is romantasy? The best-selling book trend, explained.
Washington Post   Feb 11, 2024

“Romantasy is hot, in more ways than one. It’s one of the fastest growing genres, according to market researcher Circana, with sales increasing by 42 percent, from 2022 to 2023. [Sarah J.] Maas alone has sold 40 million copies of her books worldwide….

“These books feature all the fantasy hallmarks, such as magic systems, mythology, high stakes and abundant worldbuilding but the love story is central to the narrative….without the romance, the book falls apart….the #romantasy tag alone has some 800 million views on TikTok…”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2024/02/11/romantasy-explainer-maas-yarro/

[Bill Hiatt]

Sarah J. Maas is outstanding!

I wonder if readers are receptive to male authors of romantasy. That's always been a problem with romance. (Well, a problem for male authors, anyway.)

I just finished the Throne of Glass series. It's interesting to note that Maas does have a HEA structure--but the characters really, really have to work for that happy ending. War, torture, curses, crazed dictators, evil forces from other planes of existence all block the way. And while the main characters get that ending, some of the secondary characters don't. (I recall that from one of her other series, Court of Thorns and Roses, soon to be a TV series.)

Also, at least in TOG, the viewpoint shift and isn't always female. In fact, quite large chunks are done from a male viewpoint.

In other words, it seems a little more like fantasance to me than romantasy--the fantasy elements seem predominate. The love interest is central, but it shares the stage with an enormous number of other threads.

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

The love interest is central, but it shares the stage with an enormous number of other threads.

At a book launch that I attended, John Gordon Davis, author of best selling Hold My Hand I'm Dying, said that every book should have plenty of URST (unresolved sexual tension) 

[Bill Hiatt]

A cross-genre trope? Interesting!

[elleoco]

Also, at least in TOG, the viewpoint shift and isn't always female. In fact, quite large chunks are done from a male viewpoint.

Just for info - it's probably more common these days than not to have dual POV in romances. There are successful male romance authors, some known to be male and at a guess far more that have pen names and aren't known. I admit the one I tried didn't work for me, but then the vast majority of authors of the several genres I read don't work for persnickety me.

[Bill Hiatt]

It's nice to here that male authors can be successful in romance. There was a common belief a while ago that that wouldn't work. I remember conversations I had with a male author using a pen name who was literally afraid to write under his own.

I probably won't end up writing romance, but some of my books come pretty close to romantasy. In fact, the big finish at the end of my longest fantasy is a final HEA for major characters with fraught relationships. In that regard, the structure is similar to Sarah J. Maas's, though I wouldn't put myself in the same class she's in.

[elleoco]

Just to be clear. I don't know of men who write romance under obviously male names or otherwise make it known. Maybe there are some, but my knowledge of the genre is pretty superficial (I don't do things like X and FB, just lurk on a couple of romance forums for readers.) Male romance writers I've heard of either use female pen names, initials, or names that are unisex. It's just that one way or another it gets around in the romance community that so and so is a guy. And after it's known, if those authors have been doing well, they keep right on doing well.

So I'm no expert, just a lucky outlier whose Western historical romances hit with enough readers back in 2010-11 that I have relied on word of mouth for what is for me a decent supplemental retirement income. And reader rumors can't be trusted. Since I haven't published for several years, I saw speculation on one site that I'm dead, which almost made me get in gear again.

[Hopscotch]

Here is what we’re really up against:

How many books did you read in 2023? Are you in the top 1 percent?
Washington Post   Jan 5, 2024

“Of 1,500 Americans surveyed, a less-than-ideal 46 percent finished zero books last year and 5 percent read just one….Reading five books put you in the top 33 percent, while reading 10 books put you in the top 21 percent. Those…who read more than 50 books are the true one-percenters: people who read more books than 99 percent of their fellow Americans….”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/01/05/how-many-books-did-you-read-2023-see-how-you-stack

[TimothyEllis]

“Of 1,500 Americans surveyed,

That's a non-sample.

That's too small to even be credible.

15,000 minimum on that sort of survey to just be credible. 150,000 to be useful.

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

It would be interesting to know how many readers actually read the books they download for free 

[Bill Hiatt]

It would be interesting to know how many readers actually read the books they download for free 

Some do. I've never seen exact statistics, though.

I know some people download random books just for the heck of it, but I'm not sure that's the norm. Most people i know don't want to clutter up their devices with stuff they don't really want.

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

It would be interesting to know how many readers actually read the books they download for free 

Some do. I've never seen exact statistics, though.

I know some people download random books just for the heck of it, but I'm not sure that's the norm. Most people i know don't want to clutter up their devices with stuff they don't really want.

Probably true with a device. I work in our retirement village library sorting the books, hence I have a huge TBR pile next to my bed that I'm hoping to get round to reading 'sometime', but inevitably another more interesting book turns up. 
I sometimes come across a new rating on a book that was a free offer, but that can often be weeks later.

[Lynn]

I have books that I've downloaded for free from authors that I actually read, but because it wasn't a book I sought out it's still sitting at the bottom of the to be read pile. In fact, last night I found a free book and I thought oh maybe I have that already so I went to my library and sure enough back in 2019 I had already downloaded the free book and it's still sitting there unread. I put it at the top of the list but we will see if I ever get to it. I won't name the author because it's quite a popular indie author, but this just goes to show that readers are particular about what they read and it's not a quality issue as much as an interest issue. Readers want to read the books that they're interested in.

To add to that quickly, this is why readers tend to be series loyal more than author loyal, and explains why some authors can really do well with one series but the minute they start branching out they just don't do as well.

[Bill Hiatt]

I must admit that I often take quite a while to get to books I've actually bought. That goes back to the days of brick and mortar, when I was afraid something might go out of print or just not be available in my area. (I had that happen a couple of times.) My tendency was not to buy just what I wanted to read right then, but anything I happened to see that I knew I wanted to read some day. My limit was how much I could carry.

I'm not as hysterical now, and I mostly stick to ebooks anyway, but I'll still snap something up that I may not read for a while. In such a case, I'm not worried about the book going out of print as much as I am about forgetting about it if I don't snap it up. Sometimes (99 cent box sets), it's also because I'm pretty sure it's a sale price and figure I should get it while I can.

[Hopscotch]

Amuses me how young(ish) folks (Bill and Lorri?) can pile up TBR while I'm at the age where I've got to read-it-now in case the universe flips my switch tomorrow.  Don't want to leave anything worth the read unread.  And there are lots of worthies out there.   

[PJ Post]

Side question:

Are self-publishers today (2020's) writing the same kinds of books that were being published in the 1990s and earlier? (I mean in general, obviously, we haven't read every self-published book ever published.) Many of the mainstream books back then dealt with social issues or the frontiers of science or something thinky or evocative - something that resonated with readers long after they finished the book.

I could be completely wrong here, but it seems like a lot of modern books, and media in general, are pretty disposable. Many are copy and paste versions of previously published ideas.

Are self-publishers today more focused on the revenue side of the equation or the literary side? Are they selling books because there is less overhead than selling t-shirts or <insert get-rich-quick internet scheme here>?

I ask because the answer dramatically affects the survey. I know the truth is a mix, but I'm still curious which end of the spectrum is more heavily favored.

If writers are more literary, then they're trying to sell ideas and experiences.

If the writers are more money focused, then the survey has less to do with publishing and more to do with just selling stuff on the internet.

Does genre affect the answer?

Thoughts?

[Bill Hiatt]

Are self-publishers today more focused on the revenue side of the equation or the literary side?

Ah, a great question, but also a tough one to answer.

The indies I've read have produced some great stuff, not at all "minimum viable product," and I see no difference in quality between them and trad authors from the 1990s. But I don't know how much that's worth. Am I unconsciously finding books that are more substantive? There could be a variety of reasons my sample isn't typical.

Most people pay some attention to the revenue side. How much depends on a variety factors. But I'm a firm believer in the notion that creating quality writing is the first step toward lucrative writing--not the only one, of course, but definitely the first. Maybe some writers will cut a few corners in the attempt to produce more, but even that approach doesn't have to lead to the production of mediocre work, particularly for someone who is a fast writer.

[Bill Hiatt]

Amuses me how young(ish) folks (Bill and Lorri?) can pile up TBR while I'm at the age where I've got to read-it-now in case the universe flips my switch tomorrow.  Don't want to leave anything worth the read unread.  And there are lots of worthies out there.   

When I was young, I was told one of the versions of the legend of the Winchester Mystery House in San Jose--that Sarah Winchester was convinced she wouldn't die as long as she kept building. A more common version is that she kept building to confuse the ghosts of all the people killed by Winchester rifles. Likely, both are just legends, but both stories are fed by the combination of odd design features and some unrepaired damage after the 1906 earthquake--stairs that lead nowhere, doors that open on nothing, that kind of thing. But the idea that someone couldn't die until a particular project was finished led me to joke with friends that I couldn't die until I'd read all my books. Since I tend to buy faster than I read, that would effectively make me immortal.

We shall see...

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

I've just been reading the book reviews in the newspaper. Unsurprisingly, all the books are trad published. I don't think I've ever seen a self-published book reviewed in a mainstream newspaper. I know many readers rely on book reviews for their choice of books and the newspapers reach 1000s of readers. Two of my books were originally trad published and I did get some good reviews in the newspapers, but they are reluctant/refuse to review self-published books, which are probably perceived as being inferior.

The local knock and drop free newspapers are happy to do an article on a local writer if you have a newly published book, but they don't do actual book reviews.

Has anyone had any experience getting a self-published book reviewed by a mainstream newspaper? 

[Post-Crisis D]

Over here, newspapers are pretty much dead and, if not dead, largely irrelevant.  In my town, we used to have three newspapers plus the big city paper.  Now there is one local paper which isn't really local but covers a wider region yet has fewer stories than before and then there is the big city paper.

I don't even know if the "local" paper has a print edition anymore.  I think they do but I'm not sure.  They used to distribute it for free but I don't think they do that anymore and I think many people don't think it worth subscribing to.  Not sure how they stay in business unless it is the other areas this "local" paper covers that keeps it afloat.

My mother used to subscribe to the big city paper but dropped that a couple years ago.  I think the rate kept going up while the newspaper kept getting thinner.

So, at least around here, getting your book reviewed in the paper would probably be less worthwhile than someone reviewing it on their blog.

[Jan Hurst-Nicholson]

Not sure where 'over here' is - UK or US? Sad that newspapers seem to have faded.

Here in Durban SA we get two newspapers delivered, both in the morning (one used to be an evening paper). They are delivered to quite a large area throughout the province, although I don't think they go into the rural areas.

We get a Saturday paper, and we also get a Durban and surrounds Sunday Tribune paper. There is also a national newspaper - the Sunday Times, with book reviews.

I also subscribe to the International Express, which is a weekly compilation of the the UK Daily Express, and has book reviews.

And then there are the knock and drop free newspapers, which seem to survive on ads.