Wide Reports Of Rankings Tumbling

[Shoe]

I noticed on Author Support Network (FB) then elsewhere many reports of rankings plunging beginning yesterday. The speculation is all over the place, including that borrows are no longer counted (but wide books are tumbling too). It's either a glitch or Zon is rolling out a new algo, ...or something.

[notthatamanda]

By plunging you mean the ranking getting worse?  The number going up?
I noticed my rankings looked better (lower numbers) than I expected.  I am not in KU.

[Shoe]

Ranks getting worse, falling by 50-100k in some instances over the course of an hour. If you don't monitor your ranks closely check your author rank graph in Author Central.

[notthatamanda]

Okay, most of mine are in red, a couple in green.  That means the rank number is going up, aka, getting worse. 

As I said I'm not in KU, been out for over a year, so one tally mark for it having nothing to do with borrows.

I don't know what to make of it.  I got a book that sold 3 copies today and is at 43000 ish.  That seems better than it should be.
It is also top 50 for one subcategory, top 100 for another and knocking at the door of the top 100 for a third.  I've been monitoring these sub categories obsessively for over a month.  I've had days where I sold more books and the ranks weren't as good (lower numbers that is) either in the paid list, or the sub categories.

[JRTomlin]

That is weird. I have one series that is within a normal range of variance having the change down a few thousand. But I have another four novel  series that got absolutely hammered and is down 100K+ on each book. The third has dropped some but less than 15K each which isn't that drastic.

It is odd that four novels plummeted and the others didn't. No clue what could be up with that.

[Maggie Ann]

Had a few green arrows, but a couple of them were obviously because someone else's book did worse than mine.

Actually, overall, I had a decent sales day with paid sales just edging out freebies.

[Shoe]

It is odd that four novels plummeted and the others didn't. No clue what could be up with that.

Three of my twelve took a similar nose dive, but sales/downloads on all books looked normal yesterday and so far today. It'll be interesting to see how widespread it is, though I suspect it's more a glitch or maintenance issue than a sign of the end of times.

[Lynn]

My author rank has improved a bit today. Not sure about the individual books because I don't pay much attention to that. Sales difference from yesterday / today doesn't really seem to warrant the increase (sales today are lower than yesterday) but what do I know about rank? I don't do more than look at the pretty graph every few days. :D

[notthatamanda]

I noticed a lot of trade book preorders hitting the top 100 in my subcategories this week.  It was really surprising how many there were.  Any chance it is a big trade week for 2020 titles to be on preorder?  Could that account for it?

[TimothyEllis]

Things look pretty normal to me, as far as normal ever is.

My 3rd best rank this morning jumped 157,000 overnight. So its not all down in the rank movements.

I've been seeing strange rank movements for months now. Books jump 100k up or down with almost no relevance to sales or reads.

What genres are they mainly reporting on, because Sci-Fi seems normal to me.

[notthatamanda]

My rankings have seemed stuck for extra long periods.  Like 12 hours or more.  Been going on for months.

[Shoe]

What genres are they mainly reporting on, because Sci-Fi seems normal to me.

I think the reports on Author Support Network are from fantasy and romance writers. The two books I have in a romance sub-cat took a hit.

[Tom Wood]

Lindsay Buroker reports seeing the same observation in the FB Groups:

https://twitter.com/GoblinWriter/status/1189637338084888578

[123mlh]

I noticed at one point that books that had launched better had a certain rank threshold they wouldn't go below. So a book that sold well out of the gate would never drop below a rank of a million no matter how bad it did later. I wonder if Amazon finally removed that artificial support and that's what some people are seeing.

[RPatton]

The problem with assuming it's a change to algos is that there's no way to take all the variables into consideration. Amazon has been doing some marketing magic with their imprints (and didn't they launch a new one recently?) and Trads are making some big pushes.

I'm not saying there isn't something happening under the hood, but without access to all the data and digging beyond the "Argh! Ranks are dropping, Amazon must have changed something", all that's available is anecdotal data. Without the transparency of knowing exactly how many borrows a book has, it's impossible to say with any certainty whether Amazon is tweaking something or not and without exhausting all the variables, I'm not sure that these cries of concern have a reason for concern.

[TimothyEllis]

Amazon just made a big change to AMS ads again.

Suddenly my ad is in an ad group, which is new.

One wonders if what's being reported is a side effect of changes to the ad system?

[Simon Haynes]

From https://twitter.com/DavidGaughran/status/1189809919261904897

[notthatamanda]

The problem with assuming it's a change to algos is that there's no way to take all the variables into consideration. Amazon has been doing some marketing magic with their imprints (and didn't they launch a new one recently?) and Trads are making some big pushes.

I'm not saying there isn't something happening under the hood, but without access to all the data and digging beyond the "Argh! Ranks are dropping, Amazon must have changed something", all that's available is anecdotal data. Without the transparency of knowing exactly how many borrows a book has, it's impossible to say with any certainty whether Amazon is tweaking something or not and without exhausting all the variables, I'm not sure that these cries of concern have a reason for concern.

What are "their imprints"?

[notthatamanda]

Amazon just made a big change to AMS ads again.

Suddenly my ad is in an ad group, which is new.

One wonders if what's being reported is a side effect of changes to the ad system?

What do you mean by group?  Are you referring to portfolios or something else?



{Fixed quote. t.}

[TimothyEllis]

Amazon just made a big change to AMS ads again.

Suddenly my ad is in an ad group, which is new.

One wonders if what's being reported is a side effect of changes to the ad system?

What do you mean by group?  Are you referring to portfolios or something else?

That's what it's called now. An Ad Group. Completely renamed my one ad to that and all.

[Simon Haynes]

It might be something like facebooks campaign/sets/ads setup.

Don't forget AMS was primarily designed for companies to sell everyday products via amazon, not indie authors with their ebooks and paperbacks.

So, if you're a company selling hard drives or campervans or whatever, I guess you add all similar products to the same group and market them with one set of keywords.

Not quite as relevant with books, although I might try it as I have two different scifi comedy series.

[ingobernable]

I think my ranking is stuck. I looked at it hours ago and now it seems to be about the same. 

[Maggie Ann]

The problem with assuming it's a change to algos is that there's no way to take all the variables into consideration. Amazon has been doing some marketing magic with their imprints (and didn't they launch a new one recently?) and Trads are making some big pushes.

I'm not saying there isn't something happening under the hood, but without access to all the data and digging beyond the "Argh! Ranks are dropping, Amazon must have changed something", all that's available is anecdotal data. Without the transparency of knowing exactly how many borrows a book has, it's impossible to say with any certainty whether Amazon is tweaking something or not and without exhausting all the variables, I'm not sure that these cries of concern have a reason for concern.

What are "their imprints"?

That's when Amazon acts as a publisher. They publish indies under their own imprints or publisher's name. Mystery is one and romance is another.

[notthatamanda]

So do those say "Published by Amazon digital services" like ours do, or is there another phrase they use?

[123mlh]

Something definitely shifted.

A few days ago I'd looked at the top 100 Cozy titles for Kindle and noted which were KU, which were not and the price points. My analysis a few days ago showed 83/100 titles were in KU and the top slots were dominated by KU titles. I also looked at prices. Today I just did that same check and got 66/99 (I missed one title and am too lazy to go back and recount) are KU titles and the top slots are mostly non-KU titles although there are still some in there. Prices seem to be divided up about the same as before with a little heavier weighting to 99 cent titles this time around (41) versus before (33).

As for what Tim mentioned, yes, AMS now has your targeting keywords hidden under an Ad Group for each ad. It's disconcerting the first time you go in and see it.

And Amazon has its own publishing lines such as 47North. I can't remember the others off of the top of my head.

[BelindaWhite]

They still say "sold by Amazon digital services", but their publishing imprint is listed as Publisher. I know Montlake and 47North are theirs. They have others too. A bunch, actually, I think.

[Bill Hiatt]

Here's a complete list: https://amazonpublishing.amazon.com/our-imprints.html

We know Amazon has been doing what it can to push imprints. Amazon Charts was really about that, at least in part. Imprint books are boycotted by most sales outlets, so no way they can make a traditional bestseller list no matter how much they sell. Charts is a way of rewarding imprint books that do well. We've also heard about changes in the search algorithms intended to boost Amazon product lines. What else may be happening is, as RPatton says, hard to say.

For what it's worth, my prawny numbers are about what I'd expect. They're mostly down, but I haven't had a sale since October 26, and only 12 pages read in that time. With those kinds of figures, I'd expect my numbers to have descended more than they have.

While anything is possible, I have a hard time thinking Amazon is adjusting the ranks of KU books downward. If people get no ranking boost for being in KU, unless they continue to rake in huge amounts of money, why be in KU? It would be a bold move to combat scammers, but there are a lot of honest people in KU who might just bail out, so it would seem contrary to Amazon's interest to make a move like that.

As indies, we have a habit of succumbing to chickenlittleism. There are times when the sky actually isn't falling. As some of you have said, I think technical issues, possible exacerbated by big pushes by Amazon and the trads, are to blame. If the trend persists, then it may be a different story.

Remember when a 50% royalty option showed by briefly on the dashboard, and many, many people were convinced Amazon was getting ready to cut royalties? I thought at the time it was an accidental inclusion of the Amazon imprint ebook royalty rate in the chart. Amazon said it was a mistake. Royalties haven't fallen to 50%. Sometimes a mistake is a mistake.

It would be nice if we had more stable working conditions, particularly for those of you who depend on your writing income. (At that point, it becomes natural to freak out.) However, we've gone through self-proclaimed Armageddons many times and are still here. Take slow, deep breaths and wait until more information is available before worrying too much.

[Simon Haynes]

My sales and page reads are around their 7-day average, but my rankings (book and author) have worsened considerably over the past 48 hours.

If their system is temporarily neglecting to include borrows in rankings, that would explain it.

I always assume these things are stuff-ups rather than deliberate tweaks to the Way Things Work. You can probably count the number of major KDP game-changers on the fingers of one hand, but stuff-ups come around all the time.

[BelindaWhite]

Here's a complete list: https://amazonpublishing.amazon.com/our-imprints.html


As indies, we have a habit of succumbing to chickenlittleism. There are times when the sky actually isn't falling. As some of you have said, I think technical issues, possible exacerbated by big pushes by Amazon and the trads, are to blame. If the trend persists, then it may be a different story.

Remember when a 50% royalty option showed by briefly on the dashboard, and many, many people were convinced Amazon was getting ready to cut royalties? I thought at the time it was an accidental inclusion of the Amazon imprint ebook royalty rate in the chart. Amazon said it was a mistake. Royalties haven't fallen to 50%. Sometimes a mistake is a mistake.

It would be nice if we had more stable working conditions, particularly for those of you who depend on your writing income. (At that point, it becomes natural to freak out.) However, we've gone through self-proclaimed Armageddons many times and are still here. Take slow, deep breaths and wait until more information is available before worrying too much.

While I agree with this sentiment in part, the fact is that as time goes on it will be harder to recognize whether or not the 'trend' is continuing. Right now, it's highly evident because authors (like me) that have had stable rankings for months have now been pushed off a rather large curb. To look at my books' line graphs for rankings, it looks like they took a short walk off a very long pier.

At this point, we can recognize a definite change because my sales (and others) along with page reads and income are still right where they were before the big drop. That will change as our books lose visibility due to the ranking drop. And, at this point, after having lost rank for a few days, I don't think I'll be regaining it anytime soon. I'm not a heavy spender. I was really counting on maintaining the momentum through releases.

I'm really glad that whatever it is they've done, at least they didn't do it last month. (That's me being super selfish.)

[Bill Hiatt]

Here's a complete list: https://amazonpublishing.amazon.com/our-imprints.html


As indies, we have a habit of succumbing to chickenlittleism. There are times when the sky actually isn't falling. As some of you have said, I think technical issues, possible exacerbated by big pushes by Amazon and the trads, are to blame. If the trend persists, then it may be a different story.

Remember when a 50% royalty option showed by briefly on the dashboard, and many, many people were convinced Amazon was getting ready to cut royalties? I thought at the time it was an accidental inclusion of the Amazon imprint ebook royalty rate in the chart. Amazon said it was a mistake. Royalties haven't fallen to 50%. Sometimes a mistake is a mistake.

It would be nice if we had more stable working conditions, particularly for those of you who depend on your writing income. (At that point, it becomes natural to freak out.) However, we've gone through self-proclaimed Armageddons many times and are still here. Take slow, deep breaths and wait until more information is available before worrying too much.

While I agree with this sentiment in part, the fact is that as time goes on it will be harder to recognize whether or not the 'trend' is continuing. Right now, it's highly evident because authors (like me) that have had stable rankings for months have now been pushed off a rather large curb. To look at my books' line graphs for rankings, it looks like they took a short walk off a very long pier.

At this point, we can recognize a definite change because my sales (and others) along with page reads and income are still right where they were before the big drop. That will change as our books lose visibility due to the ranking drop. And, at this point, after having lost rank for a few days, I don't think I'll be regaining it anytime soon. I'm not a heavy spender. I was really counting on maintaining the momentum through releases.

I'm really glad that whatever it is they've done, at least they didn't do it last month. (That's me being super selfish.)

You make good points. Whether or not a trend will still be visible depends on what is causing the rankings drop. Let's say the rankings now exclude KU borrows. Authors making a lot of sales and borrows would see a rank drop, but not a complete collapse. They'd presumably still have enough visibility to keep pulling in some business. If their rankings continued to be lower than anticipated (seemingly reflecting sales but not borrows), that would still be a visible discrepancy.

(Getting less visibility doesn't preclude sales, by the way. I've had titles get very low, then rise again. When a book is far down in the abyss, even one sale can pop it up by 800,000 or 900,000 and make it potentially more likely to get subsequent sales, at least for a short time. So in the scenario you're thinking about, the trend data might be less obvious, but there would still be some indicators.)

On the other hand, if the ranking drop is caused by increased push from imprints and the trads, rankings might go up and down, seemingly without connection to sales and/or borrows--because they're really connection to what's happening to others, not what's happening to the writers making the observation. Sales and pages read are absolute. Rankings are relative, partly dependent on how other people are doing. 

[TimothyEllis]

On the other hand, if the ranking drop is caused by increased push from imprints and the trads, rankings might go up and down, seemingly without connection to sales and/or borrows--because they're really connection to what's happening to others, not what's happening to the writers making the observation. Sales and pages read are absolute. Rankings are relative, partly dependent on how other people are doing.

That has definitely been happening lately, and for a while now.

[BelindaWhite]

I agree that we can still have indications of a trend, just that it will never be more obvious than it is right now. And yes, sales will happen at lesser ranks, but to a much lesser degree, depending on the ranking difference.

I'm still getting good sales (for now), so no, my ranks didn't quite collapse. I'm not rending my clothes or anything like that. But they DID take a significant dive. Right when a lot of other KU authors had ranks dive too.

Still hopeful that it's a glitch, but I'm a little doubtful too. When things start going good for me, the 'Zon has a way of pulling the rug out from under me. I've actually been kind of waiting for it. The fact that this one affects more authors than just me and a few select others, actually makes me feel a little better.

I guess it's true that misery loves company.

[Bill Hiatt]

I know exactly what you're saying about Amazon tending to pull the rug out from under people. Amazon would profit far more from indie sales if it provided a more stable environment. Instead, it keeps building us up, only to knock us down--and probably doesn't even realize it's doing it most of the time. (I think it's usually pursuing other goals, and indies end up as collateral damage.)

Part of what makes me a little optimistic that this isn't one of those rug-pulling times is that the prevailing theory--that the drops have something to do with counting KU borrows differently--is far from what Amazon's business model has been up to now. It wouldn't probably remove one of the only incentives there is to stay in KU unless it had decided to dump KU--or was being incredibly foolish (which, I admit, is possible.) The really big money makers have a built-in incentive to stay in KU, but more middling KU authors might well look more favorably on at least trying wide in the event of such a change. People who feel that KU cannibalizes sales would be especially prone. From a ranking standpoint, it would be better to try to force consumers to actually buy the book, even if only a tenth of them did so.

We all know that Amazon has made part of its pitch for KU the number of books available. A mass exodus is the last thing it should want--unless, as I said, it's prepared to let KU fall by the wayside. I guess we'll see.

[Simon Haynes]

Maybe instead of counting a borrow as a sale, they're now counting a 'sale' when readers hit a certain mark in the book, such as 75%.

That way you can't pay a farm of 5000 people or bots to borrow and immediately return all of your KU books, blasting you up the rankings. (I assume that's happening somewhere out there. Build a rank-based system, and someone will think of a way to game it.)

If so, I'd expect ranks to improve again after a week or so, as readers with the books in their library continue to read them. Or not, in the case of the 5000.



ETA: my rankings on the UK/CA/AU stores are normal. It's only the US that's dropped.

Hey, maybe there's a big run on horror or halloween books, and those have swamped the bestseller charts. No real call for halloween in AU/UK.

[Bill Hiatt]

Maybe instead of counting a borrow as a sale, they're now counting a 'sale' when readers hit a certain mark in the book, such as 75%.

That way you can't pay a farm of 5000 people or bots to borrow and immediately return all of your KU books, blasting you up the rankings. (I assume that's happening somewhere out there. Build a rank-based system, and someone will think of a way to game it.)

If so, I'd expect ranks to improve again after a week or so, as readers with the books in their library continue to read them. Or not, in the case of the 5000.



ETA: my rankings on the UK/CA/AU stores are normal. It's only the US that's dropped.

Hey, maybe there's a big run on horror or halloween books, and those have swamped the bestseller charts. No real call for halloween in AU/UK.

Interesting points. It's true that the nonexistent threshold for counting a borrow as a sale could be easily gamed. And it's certainly true that rankings should stabilize if that's the case. People would lose ghost borrows and anyone who borrows but doesn't get very far. Neither of those losses would be crippling.

As far as only the US dropping is concerned, it's not uncommon for Amazon to roll out changes one store at a time.

[Simon Haynes]

If Amazon did change something like that, you can bet they'd keep it to themselves though. If they broadcast it, the scammers would only sit down to work out how to game the new system again.

I'm guessing that's why we never hear about these changes.

[TimothyEllis]

 

Interesting. Big drops yesterday, same sort of rises today. Although when I say big drops, most of them were about 15k or so, with a few being 100k, but that's actually normal.

Yesterday most of my books had a minus value on the rank change, (in BR), and today they have a positive one.

No idea why, but whatever it was yesterday seems to be correcting already.

[Shoe]

whatever it was yesterday seems to be correcting already.

Same here. Whatever it was, it was fairly widespread, and now seems to have passed.

Hardly worth reporting, but you never know.

[Simon Haynes]

Just to show I haven't been imagining things ...

[BelindaWhite]

Not good at figuring out technology when it comes to posting screenshots, but yup. Simon's graph is pretty much what all of mine look like today! Not totally back where I was, but close enough for me to be super happy with the fix.

[notthatamanda]

All of my overall ranks went way red today (looking at the sales rank page on author central).
But, and this is the weird part, I have two books that I am most concerned with selling and the sub category rankings all look better, noticeably better.
Even though the overall rank is worse, with higher numbers.

I'm not concerned, I just think it's weird.

[Bill Hiatt]

All of my overall ranks went way red today (looking at the sales rank page on author central).
But, and this is the weird part, I have two books that I am most concerned with selling and the sub category rankings all look better, noticeably better.
Even though the overall rank is worse, with higher numbers.

I'm not concerned, I just think it's weird.

I've seen that kind of pattern before. It usually means one part of the reporting is lagging behind another part. That kind of slowdown would be especially likely if Amazon had to make some kind of large-scale correction.