I'm always
interested in stats relating to independent authors, and I recently
came across a summary of the 2012 Taleist survey of self-published
authors in a blog entitled Publishing a Book Is an Adventure.
Here are some of the stats I found most interesting:
Less than 10% of those
surveyed reported making enough money to live from their earnings.
More than half the respondents earned less than $500, and a quarter
of them did not recoup their initial investment.
Of those who were
able to make a living from their writing, two-thirds are women who
spent 69% more time writing than those outside the top earners'
group.
Thirty-two per cent
of the top earners tried and failed to get a traditional publishing
deal before self-publishing. Those authors who went straight to
self-publication without submitting their work to a traditional
publisher earned 2.5 times more than those who submitted it and were
rejected.
Those who spent the
least time marketing made the most money. (Which makes sense when you
consider that time spent marketing is time spent away from writing.)
Top earners had four
times as many reviews for their most recent book than authors outside
this group. One of the most effective tactics—submitting books to
Amazon top reviewers—resulted in 25% more reviews.
Finally, romance
writers earned more than science fiction, fantasy, and literary
fiction writers.
These statistics
indicate that (if anyone actually thought this) self-publishing is
obviously not the road to riches. However, I found one of the most encouraging statistics to be that 90% of those surveyed said they
would continue to self-publish. This, to me, suggests that the
ability to reach an audience is more important to indie authors than
the money aspect. Of course, in an ideal world, an author could have both...
