Really?

[Post-Crisis D]

I've suggested that in other threads but people seem to optimistically believe AI will be "happy" to serve our every whim or something.

AI has no emotion. It's like being worried about whether or not a shovel is happy toiling in the dirt.

Thus the quotes around "happy."

[Bill Hiatt]

One of the problems with internet communications is that there's no tone of voice, so it's sometimes hard to tell whether humor or sarcasm is involved. For example,

If we can be commercially creative for the next 30 years, I'll take that as a win.

Gee, if we have that long, I don't need to worry. I'm pretty sure I'll be dead before that.

On the other hand, if I were 17, I'd find that incredibly depressing.

I decided to be done worrying about it. Personally, I will not feed the beast any more than I can help. And I'll be prone, all things being equal, to vote for candidates who are as pro-AI regulation as possible. If AI infringes on me, I'll sue. Beyond that, there isn't much I can do. Others who aren't as worried about the impact of AI may make other choices, and that's fine, too. None of us can be sure what the future will hold, anyway.

What spare time I have I'll spend on honing my craft (and maybe improving my marketing). There's no point expending huge amounts of energy on things I can't control, anyway. So I'll deal with what I can control.

[PJ Post]

One of the problems with internet communications is that there's no tone of voice, so it's sometimes hard to tell whether humor or sarcasm is involved. For example,

If we can be commercially creative for the next 30 years, I'll take that as a win.

Gee, if we have that long, I don't need to worry. I'm pretty sure I'll be dead before that.

That's the spirit!

 

Seriously, no sarcasm: I think we'll have demand for human works for a while. We'll still have to do the marketing and all that, but I think there's going to be a place for us. Look at vinyl records. They keep sticking around, becoming trendy, then fading, then coming around again. Cassettes are even making a comeback. Sheer nostalgia should fuel a few careers between now and then.

See, I'm pretty optimistic after all.

[Bill Hiatt]

But you were just using a thirty-year estimate. I'm inclined to agree we'll still be around, though I draw that conclusion based on somewhat different reasoning.

[PJ Post]

I think the world will be a very different place by 2054, one way or the other. Either way, selling books will be a low priority, at least as we think of it today.

In the here and now, I'm like you in that I'm going to keep doing my thing while I can, learning new stuff and maybe help others along the way.

[Jeff Tanyard]

"Do your own damn homework" would be a common response from it.

I suddenly have an image of a robot wearing an apron and waving a wooden spoon at us and telling us we can't watch television until we eat our vegetables.   

Is her name Rosie?

Is that a Jetsons reference?  Man, it took me several moments to figure out what you were referring to.  I haven't seen that show in ages.

[Post-Crisis D]

"Do your own damn homework" would be a common response from it.

I suddenly have an image of a robot wearing an apron and waving a wooden spoon at us and telling us we can't watch television until we eat our vegetables.   

Is her name Rosie?

Is that a Jetsons reference?  Man, it took me several moments to figure out what you were referring to.  I haven't seen that show in ages.

I thought you were making the Jetsons reference.  I haven't seen it in ages either, but the first thing I thought of when you mentioned a robot in an apron waving a wooden spoon admonishing us to eat our veggies was Rosie the Robot.

[Jeff Tanyard]

I thought you were making the Jetsons reference. 

I wasn't, or at least I wasn't doing it consciously.  Maybe my id did it.

[Post-Crisis D]

I thought you were making the Jetsons reference. 

I wasn't, or at least I wasn't doing it consciously.  Maybe my id did it.

Just take the win. 


A long time ago, I did a parody short story and included a bit that I thought was funny.  Someone came along and congratulated me on my brilliance for parodying an actual thing that happened behind the scenes of the thing I was parodying.  I was like, Thanks!


And then I looked it up. 

[She-la-te-da]

Okay, I wasn't going to say anything, but for the love of God, LEVERAGE AI? Get out in front of it? Are you serious? There's not going to be any leveraging AI by the people like us. We are the ones who are going to be out of work, and hoping that freaking Universal Income is voted in soon enough that we can get in line for it, and like it.

My gods, the things I see people saying who should know better.

[Lorri Moulton]

There are still people buying books!!  Do not give up hope.  I just started a Kickstarter campaign (with a fairly low funding amount) and funded in 13 minutes. 
AI will not win today! 

[alhawke]

Congratulations, Lorri! You got me interested in checking kickstarter out.

Am I missing something? I don't get why people are willing to shell out a lot of money to fund kickstarters, but then buying less books? Is it because few authors are doing funding and there's good visibility there? Or is it that true fans are willing to really go that extra mile?

Whatever the case, your Kickstarter page looks enticing so I can see why it funded. 

[Lorri Moulton]

Thank you, A.L. 

All this AI talk just muddies the waters.  It may not be the "gold rush days" anymore, but there are still people who like and buy books.

ETA: It's easy to blame AI, all the free ebooks, etc. but I think the market is shrinking due to a lot of factors...many economic.  Books may be less of an impulse buy and more of an investment, which might be why Kickstarter is doing well. 

I don't have those $38k campaigns (LOL), but I do sell a few books.

[PJ Post]

Like many social interests that fade over time, while overall demand may decrease, the passion increases for those left in the market, which is why Kickstarters should continue to work. Vinyl records are a good example. Most people don't care, but the ones that do are super excited about them. This is also why I think the 1,000 True Fans approach is the way to go.

[Bill Hiatt]

There are still people buying books!!  Do not give up hope.  I just started a Kickstarter campaign (with a fairly low funding amount) and funded in 13 minutes. 
AI will not win today! 

That's wonderful!

[PJ Post]

Is there anything extra you would do in the "1,000 True Fans" approach that you normally wouldn't do?

It's just a different mindset. It's about the author as a brand as opposed to being a bookseller.

The goal is long term engagement over short-term sales. The biggest driver that might be different or extra is lots of social media, lots and lots and lots, including a specific strategy designed to maximize synergy. It's free (apart from the time) and casts the biggest net in finding potential fans. I'd still do all of the traditional advertising stuff we've always done, KU if it works, AMS if you can make it work and similar. In fact, I'd recommend doing everything that makes sense as long as it doesn't burn you out. But the goal isn't sales, it's visibility, otherwise known as market penetration or awareness.

So, building a brand is the main thing. Making that the priority. Not many self-publishers understand branding or how to leverage it.

[Lorri Moulton]

To me, good branding means we see something which makes us think about something else.

We do this with some of our books. One series revolves around THE Halloween party (LOL) and many of the main characters dress up in 1920s costumes.

On Facebook, we always post 1920s dresses and tea cups when we talk about this series.  Now, when we put up a post like that, many readers think about the book, even if we don't mention it.

What do I base this on? More people grabbing the first free book when I put up those posts. 

Find what works for YOU, your books, your series, etc.  It can be different for everyone.

[Cabbages and kings]

Is there anything extra you would do in the "1,000 True Fans" approach that you normally wouldn't do?

It's just a different mindset. It's about the author as a brand as opposed to being a bookseller.

The goal is long term engagement over short-term sales. The biggest driver that might be different or extra is lots of social media, lots and lots and lots, including a specific strategy designed to maximize synergy. It's free (apart from the time) and casts the biggest net in finding potential fans. I'd still do all of the traditional advertising stuff we've always done, KU if it works, AMS if you can make it work and similar. In fact, I'd recommend doing everything that makes sense as long as it doesn't burn you out. But the goal isn't sales, it's visibility, otherwise known as market penetration or awareness.

So, building a brand is the main thing. Making that the priority. Not many self-publishers understand branding or how to leverage it.

To me, good branding means we see something which makes us think about something else.

We do this with some of our books. One series revolves around THE Halloween party (LOL) and many of the main characters dress up in 1920s costumes.

On Facebook, we always post 1920s dresses and tea cups when we talk about this series.  Now, when we put up a post like that, many readers think about the book, even if we don't mention it.

What do I base this on? More people grabbing the first free book when I put up those posts. 

Find what works for YOU, your books, your series, etc.  It can be different for everyone.

Thanks PJ Post and Lorri Moulton.

[Bill Hiatt]

The biggest driver that might be different or extra is lots of social media, lots and lots and lots, including a specific strategy designed to maximize synergy. It's free (apart from the time) and casts the biggest net in finding potential fans.

Branding is important, but we need to keep in mind that using social media is partly about finding what works. Lorri still gets mileage in places like Facebook, I suspect because she's already found her. Even Facebook's algorithms won't prevent your fans from reaching you if they engage with you a lot. People who visit my page daily still see me in their feed. Much less than that, they see me intermittently, if at all. Most social media doesn't work like it used to.

I suggest that people who like engaging on social media might benefit from Substack. The difference is that Substack doesn't sell ads, so its algorithms aren't built to discourage organic growth in the name of forcing ad buys. Substack makes money only when its authors. As a result, it's kind of like social media was twelve years ago.

[The Bass Bagwhan]

Okay, so in a wild concept of actually returning to the original questions  I'm an editor, so I don't have that cost. However, here's a thought ...

Why do you need editing? How often have you written a book in, say, six months, then pored over it for another six months or more agonising about every detail. Yes, we'll shuffle all the commas around and fix stuff, but we can also help with closure of manuscript and confidence on the writer's part that it's ready for the world. My fee is on average US$100 per 10k words, so your "normal" book of around 50,000 words (to rate as a "book" in some sites) will cost you $500. Will you recoup that? Well, unless you're a strict hobbyist writer who doesn't care for sales, you should at least be hoping to aim for that.

I've designed many of my own covers using stock photos that aren't expensive, but avoiding some kind of pesky subscription to access them can be annoying. The software skills for the design aren't hard — they're the pretty basic elements of the software, so don't be overwhelmed by YouTube videos and what it can do, just worry about what you need. Otherwise,  I've spent $200 on a professional book cover designer who is savvy about what the genre demands. Or you might need specific imagery, such as Tim's books, which will hard to source. But as someone said, spending upwards of this on bespoke images and hand-drawn covers is hard to justify.

How much are you willing to spend on advertising? That's not the question. It's how much you're willing to gamble on experimenting to see if you can make ads work. Starting budgets can be small on FB (I've never made AMS work). You could dedicate $150 a month at $5 per day to see if your ad is working — but really, 10 days is long enough, and remember that if your ad is set up properly but totally fails, it won't cost a thing. It's when authors leave the door open for FB to farm clicks that won't result in sales that you can waste money.
The aim is the achieve a positive ROI no matter how small, and things like book length (in KU) and pricing need to be considered, then you decide how far you want to push that envelope in regards to budget.

I spend about US$300-350 a month and get sales of around US$550-600. BUT I'm Australian and the exchange rate almost doubles that ROI. I started out at five bucks a day.

So advertising costs aren't really a problem as long as you have that positive ROI (and hold your nerve...)

Oh ... formatting. The Styles feature in Word will achieve everything you need for straightforward fiction.

[PJ Post]

Okay, so in a wild concept of actually returning to the original questions 

Yep to all of it.

I've found that a day's work with Grammarly (free version), Word's editor and find and replace are good enough for a reasonably pro publication.

You can buy covers pretty cheap, or make them. The only expensive option is custom illustration - which isn't really necessary.

As for advertising...that's tricky. CPC/AMS is expensive but can work wonders. The email advertising sites are not as effective, but sometimes you get lucky. So, hundreds for basic ads and free KDP promos - to tens of thousands of dollars monthly for effective CPC. But CPC isn't required, certainly not right out of the gate.

The only promotional option with any control is social media, but that takes a long time to get results, as much as a year or more - but it's pretty close to free.

I don't even use styles for formatting. It's just not that complicated. And Word is more than adequate.

The main thing is the time to invest. Squeezing in a writing career after a 40 hour work week, family, other responsibilities, errands, eating, down time to relax...sleep. I think the time is more of a hurdle than the expense, especially given that the financial returns just keep shrinking and shrinking.

[Lorri Moulton]

As P.J. mentioned, it can be a tradeoff between time and money. Money might be faster, but it also can be costly to experiment on what works and what does not.

Time on social media may never pay off, so make sure you're doing something you enjoy.  Find topics you're interested in (that ideally tie in with your stories) and see how it goes.

I've found focusing on one or two places (Facebook in my case) has done better than trying to be everywhere all the time.  Some authors really make that work!  But I would rather slowly build up a following organically. 

People who enjoy what you enjoy are probably more likely to try one of your books. Even if it's not "their thing" they might just see what you're doing.  And if they don't read it...there's a chance a friend or family member might. 

Lots of "mights" but with enough interest, those can work!  And be sure to choose something you want to be identified with since organic can last a long time.

[Hopscotch]

There are still people buying books!!  Do not give up hope.

That's wonderful!

Yes, Lorri, but they're not buying my books, and that's all that counts.  (And, Bill, my voice tone is )

[Hopscotch]

“…If there’s been one dominant message in 21st-century American artistic culture, it’s that you have permission — permission to consume nothing but superhero movies, Barbie, pop music by a recent Disney Channel star; permission to never eat your cultural vegetables; permission to never expand your cultural palate or stretch your attention span.  This permission may seem freeing. But when paired with ruthless, profit-maximizing market forces, it’s contributed to the death of grown-up entertainment.  There are core aspects of the human experience that…can’t be effectively captured in superhero stories….”  Or in copycat trad fiction.  Oh, but I forgot about the coming AIpocalypse.

What Will It Take for Hollywood to Grow Up? – New York Times Aug. 11, 2024

[PJ Post]

“…If there’s been one dominant message in 21st-century American artistic culture...

I think the real problem is one of our own making. The internet and platforms like Spotify and KDP have allowed Creatives to bypass the gatekeepers. And so we did - a lot. As I've noted before, Spotify gets 100,000 uploads every day. KDP has millions of books. And all this is on top of the books and music we already had.

There's a glut of supply. And with the advent of smartphones and streaming and everything else out there screaming for the consumer's attention, demand has understandably plummeted. It's good old supply and demand, which is why we can't even give books away. So, rather than challenge the audience, we go straight for the lowest common denominator - copy and paste.

I watched an essay the other day saying that the music isn't the end product as one might think, it's marketing for the brand's (artist's) merchandise. Musicians have become traveling t-shirt salesmen.

For most of us, we've worked ourselves out of a job.

[TimothyEllis]

I think the real problem is one of our own making. The internet and platforms like Spotify and KDP have allowed Creatives to bypass the gatekeepers. And so we did - a lot. As I've noted before, Spotify gets 100,000 uploads every day. KDP has millions of books. And all this is on top of the books and music we already had.

There's a glut of supply. And with the advent of smartphones and streaming and everything else out there screaming for the consumer's attention, demand has understandably plummeted. It's good old supply and demand, which is why we can't even give books away. So, rather than challenge the audience, we go straight for the lowest common denominator - copy and paste.

I watched an essay the other day saying that the music isn't the end product as one might think, it's marketing for the brand's (artist's) merchandise. Musicians have become traveling t-shirt salesmen.

For most of us, we've worked ourselves out of a job.

I have no idea where you see any of that, but it's not what I see.

Book sales are booming. Just spread across more authors than ever before.

How well you do on any book depends on how well it launches, how well it hits the spot, and how it fits into your catalogue. Also about building a fan base and then keeping them happy. You do that, and how anyone else is doing is largely irrelevant.

[Bill Hiatt]

Personally, I have no interest in being a T-shirt salesman (travelling or otherwise). If it really comes to that, and there's no longer a demand for books, I'll just write for my own enjoyment and forget about trying to sell anything.

That said, I'm not seeing sales fall off the cliff anymore than Timothy is. Mine are smaller than his (and always were), but they do continue to come in, despite the ever-expanding pool of content.

[TimothyEllis]

If it really comes to that, and there's no longer a demand for books, I'll just write for my own enjoyment and forget about trying to sell anything.

That's how I started.

I got the first book out, and kept on writing. Then got the second out, and kept on writing. Book 3 ended up with a cliffhanger, and became it's own trilogy.

I wasn't concerned about selling, just getting the words out of my head. When book 3 took off, it was a surprise to me. No-one saw that coming at all, least of all me.

I had no expectations, and so every sale was a bonus. Still is.

I'm still writing that story. I've had ups and major downs. Currently on the back side of the last swell. All I do is keep on writing.

And as long as the ideas keep coming and the words flow, I'll keep on regardless of if they sell or not.

It was never about selling books. It was about me getting the story out of my head before I went mad, and then continuing on with something I found I was good at, and enjoyed doing. Always will be.

[Lorri Moulton]

I'd have no problem selling T-shirts if it paid enough to keep writing. Stories are the fun part. 

[The Bass Bagwhan]

“…If there’s been one dominant message in 21st-century American artistic culture...

I think the real problem is one of our own making. The internet and platforms like Spotify and KDP have allowed Creatives to bypass the gatekeepers. And so we did - a lot. As I've noted before, Spotify gets 100,000 uploads every day. KDP has millions of books. And all this is on top of the books and music we already had.

There's a glut of supply. And with the advent of smartphones and streaming and everything else out there screaming for the consumer's attention, demand has understandably plummeted. It's good old supply and demand, which is why we can't even give books away. So, rather than challenge the audience, we go straight for the lowest common denominator - copy and paste.

I watched an essay the other day saying that the music isn't the end product as one might think, it's marketing for the brand's (artist's) merchandise. Musicians have become traveling t-shirt salesmen.

For most of us, we've worked ourselves out of a job.

It's kind of true ... musicians have come full circle where live gigs and the merchandise they sell, including physical copies of their music, has for many become a primary target. Then there is selling direct from websites and organisations like Bandcamp.
In the same way that popular authors can sell anything they write, popular musicians can sell anything they create.

[PJ Post]

I have no idea where you see any of that, but it's not what I see.

That said, I'm not seeing sales fall off the cliff anymore than Timothy is.

I was responding to Hopscotch's broader industry commentary, not the sales of individual brands. My understanding is that Taylor Swift is doing quite well for herself, although her music isn't nearly as challenging as Steely Dan, Miles Davis or Joni Mitchell - which was the point of Hopscotch's post:

...permission to never expand your cultural palate or stretch your attention span...

I gave an explanation for this assertion based upon widely available and accepted industry data. I don't see how your personal sales figures in anyway contradict my observations, but I'm always willing to learn.

[PJ Post]

It's kind of true

It's the new paradigm. Branding is the future of creative entrepreneurship. There's just too many of us, and while most of it sucks, that still leaves tons of really really good content - more than any of us can ever get to. That's a marketing problem for Creatives.

It's like going to the grocery store and having 6 million flavors of soda pop or chips. How would they be able to market in that environment or sell enough to stay in business? It's ridiculous, but that's just Tuesday for us. We need a new way - and the broader market is responding whether we choose to participate or not.

[TimothyEllis]

I gave an explanation for this assertion based upon widely available and accepted industry data.

The only industry data available is Trad Publishing's.

And they are seriously going backwards. Have been for years now.

They preach doom and gloom, while the industry as a whole is booming.

Their stats are crap because they do not include anything from Amazon, and Amazon has 80& of the eBook market.

If you're basing anything off Trad stats, then you're going to be making bad decisions, because that data is seriously DEFICIENT.

[Bill Hiatt]

There is undeniably more content than ever. How much of it is actually visible is another question. I certainly wouldn't deny the importance of branding, but I'm not sure we're literally competing against millions. We're competing against whoever might come up in an Amazon search or is readily visible elsewhere. That's not everybody by any means.

It's also true that we don't have any accurate stats in publishing. Any book without an ISBN (which is a lot of indie ebooks) never shows up. And trad publishing does find ways to make Amazon seem less crucial than it is.

[TimothyEllis]

And trad publishing does find ways to make Amazon seem less crucial than it is.

I don't think the Trads know how to use Amazon properly.

I had a look at a few of Mercedes Lackey's books awhile back before the 3rd category came in, and they were only in 2 categories. All of mine are in 8+, and duplicated in books and eBooks.

Add that to their insane pricing, and you have to wonder if they have a clue as how to maximize sales on Amazon.

Maybe they discount Amazon because they're badly using it?

[The Bass Bagwhan]

There is undeniably more content than ever. How much of it is actually visible is another question. I certainly wouldn't deny the importance of branding, but I'm not sure we're literally competing against millions. We're competing against whoever might come up in an Amazon search or is readily visible elsewhere.

That's a good point. If you're in any way visible, then you're competing only with other books that likewise are visible and not the million other titles that never see the light of day for a variety of reasons. As an editor, I've worked on plenty of books that I just know, sadly in some cases, will never be more than the author's dream realised — no one will ever buy it.
Or, as you say, we're competing only against similar search results.
That concept can focus your thinking instead of accepting you're a "drop in the ocean".

[TimothyEllis]

That's a good point. If you're in any way visible, then you're competing only with other books that likewise are visible and not the million other titles that never see the light of day for a variety of reasons. As an editor, I've worked on plenty of books that I just know, sadly in some cases, will never be more than the author's dream realised — no one will ever buy it.
Or, as you say, we're competing only against similar search results.
That concept can focus your thinking instead of accepting you're a "drop in the ocean".

I don't even see it as competition. I share readers with Glynn Stewart and Nathan Lowell. I could call them competitors, but they really aren't.

My readers can read both of them between new books of mine, and they buy all 3 of our new releases in the same month.

That's not competition.

[Bill Hiatt]

Competition only in the sense that there is an upper limit to how much a person can read each month. But I don't really view other authors as competitors. It's hard to build a community on that foundation.

[The Bass Bagwhan]

No, I'm not talking about competing against other authors in any "I'm selling more books than you..." sense, and rusted-on fans who will read anything you produce aren't a factor either. However, books and in particular new releases are certainly competing in the same market space for peoples' attention - otherwise, why bother with professional covers, snappy titles, good blurbs and advertising budgets? We're told that, on average, anyone browsing an internet site for (in this case) something new to read has an attention span of about seven seconds before they'll move on to the next product. Seven seconds.

It's not the writers who are competing - it's the books. For visibility, attention and air-time. Amazon even introduces competition with "Also Boughts" and allowing AMS ads on your product page.

So the point is still the same. At least you're not competing against a gazillion books of new releases every day, just the titles roughly in the wheelhouse of your genre. Which in some categories can still be a significant number.

On a completely different subject, I just checked one of my books on Amazon and I've seen for the first time (I don't look often) that I'm assuming Amazon AI has analysed the written reviews into a short summary that reads like absolute rubbish. I won't bother trying to do anything about it - dealing with Zon from Oz is next to impossible.

[Bill Hiatt]

Absolute rubbish from AI? Who would have guessed?

I'm trying to remember why I like the creative process and let go of the things I can't control. Needless to say, I wouldn't be able to do that if I were reliant on writing income as an important source of money. That's why I'm not particularly interested in selling merch, though I can see how even that might be enjoyable under the right circumstances.

For the Substack book club, I've been reading Elizabeth Gilbert's Big Magic. Some of it I violently disagree with, but her concept that living a creative life is what's important resonates with me. (And yes, I'm aware of the irony of a NYT bestselling author telling other people not be expect to make a living at writing.)

[PJ Post]

There is undeniably more content than ever. How much of it is actually visible is another question.

But I don't really view other authors as competitors.

So...

It's not the writers who are competing - it's the books. For visibility, attention and air-time. Amazon even introduces competition with "Also Boughts" and allowing AMS ads on your product page.

This.

[PJ Post]

I kind of like my AI summary.   

[Bill Hiatt]

So...

Competition in the capitalistic sense all too often seems to promote an atmosphere of semi-hostility and/or a myopic focus on self-interest, often to the detriment of others.

In a technical sense, our books do compete with each other, especially within the same genre. But thinking in strict competitive terms tends to suppress community. (Why give your competitors advice or support?)

I've seen this in education when schools are put in the position of competing for government grants. I can't give more detail without provoking a political discussion. But let's just say that when government funding is handed out based on who "wins," that inevitably creates a group of schools that lose. And it also fosters a reluctance on the part of any school to share promising new techniques or other innovations with others. Thus, it actually slows improvement in general because "winning" schools now have a motivation to keep others from catching up.

Just as schools work better when they share data and insights, self-published authors do as well. Hence, though we do technically compete, we shouldn't think of ourselves as competitors.

We're hunters, but we don't have to be predators.

Scott McCall, character in Teen Wolf. (One can find insight even in YA horror!)

[LilyBLily]

Yes, but no human can write enough books in a month to satisfy a whale reader of genre books. I cannot ever become the exclusive author people read. Were I to write literary fiction, I'd be marketing to an audience that might only read one book a month. Or a year. Genre readers, especially of romance, often read one book a day.

Four books published per year multiplied by how many other writers in exactly my vein? That's the competition. I don't need to beat out everybody, but I do need to be visible and identifiable when a reader has finished all the books by her favorite authors and is searching for something else to read until those authors come out with their next books. Assuming I have zero fans or followers, that gap is my opportunity. They've got to read something while they wait.

So my task is to define my exact vein visibly, market that brand, and also deal with the willful inefficiencies of Amazon algos. Possibly through tweaking keywords and possibly through ads, and so on. The cover sells the book once readers see it, but the keywords, ads, et al. are what energize Amazon to position my book so it is seen. 

[PJ Post]

Competition in the capitalistic sense...

Is typically a zero sum game, but publishing isn't (this is true of art in general). So we agree, but the visibility side of things is zero sum. This is why AMS bids are nuts.

I also agree with you that we should pay it forward, help each other out, share what works and generally not screw each other over - a rising tide and all that. But I'm also pretty sure we're in the minority on that.

So my task is to define my exact vein visibly, market that brand, and also deal with the willful inefficiencies of Amazon algos. Possibly through tweaking keywords and possibly through ads, and so on. The cover sells the book once readers see it, but the keywords, ads, et al. are what energize Amazon to position my book so it is seen.

Exactly. The rub is that everyone else has the same problem.