I have literally been having this conversation with so many authors lately (Why is it impossible to find an agent, a publisher? Why am I being ghosted?) Your diagnosis confirms that "It's not me, it's you" (meaning the broad industry trends). Sadly, writers blame themselves, anyway: "I must be a terrible writer." "My book/my query/ must be awful." "I guess I can't write." This is a good reminder that, no, we aren't all failed writers; the business model we're counting on is (somewhat) broken.
It really does feel unfair. As a writer, like you can't even get an answer from agents. The pool is even smaller for BIPOC writers and even smaller for BIPOC agents looking for the smallest pool of BIPOC stories.
I self-published because I like being read. If you're in it for the money your expectations need to be adjusted. I also self-published because I got stupid feedback from editors. Maybe if I followed their advice, I would have a hit but none of their track records showed that. They seemed like real estate agents who list a bunhc of houses knowing some are going to sell not matter how little they work.
So I work my day job and I write and have fun and love to hear from my few regular readers and the occasional new ones. And the $$$s I make take me out to dinner every once in a while and that's nice.
I think we so often want to think that there's this magic answer, and magic industry formula, but it really is as simple as writing what is meaningful to us. Love this!
As someone writing from the querying trenches exactly at this moment, your newsletter resonates so perfectly. It feels like so much else in life: we can do only what we can do, and adjust ourselves accordingly. Some very successful genre writers I know (mostly romantasy) are sure that paranormal is coming back, but maybe not with vampires, so weregophers might be *just* thing, tbh. <runs to google gopher tiktok>
I was gonna say this! It's so refreshing to read an analysis that balances between realistic and non-cynical. It gives me hope without giving me ~false~ hope.
Thanks for this, Kate. I'm in the query trenches now. Rapping my helmet with the manuscript ammo clip. Advancing with eyes and ears open. Making ground wherever the opportunity arises.
Information about what is happening is valuable in and of itself; the reasons why, and advice about next steps is not, necessarily. Your reporting from the "front lines" gives us what we lack -- which is insight. Taking all of our needs, wants, projects, abilities, and tendencies would make an impossible task for you. Formulating a "how to" based on those is even harder. Nonetheless, thank you for your encouragement. It means a lot. And thank you, Kate, for sharing what you know.
The humility of this post is so refreshing. Too many with positions and titles across industries think they know what is happening *now* and what *should happen* in the near future because of what happened in the past.
But most things are so multi-dimensional and multi-causal, so even knowing what happened in the past and why is a conclusion best held loosely. Always good to hear from an insider who acknowledges "nobody knows nothing." 😅
Despite all these externalities affecting the current market, who is out there thinking of the next way to publish and market books? It seems like it is the publishing industry's moment to get disrupted. The existing model of relying on Amazon and the social media platforms while printing at scale in China is failing. Are any publishers trying to figure out new ways to get books into the hands of readers in new ways?
Every 12-18 months or so, someone comes along and tries to "disrupt" publishing and so far nothing much has stuck. (Except ereaders, that was a true disruption that stuck.) Personally, I think the tech bros think it's easy to do, I mean it's just *books* after all, and then they realize it's A: hard and B: there's not a lot of money in it lol. Publishers are doing things in-house, but it's mostly stuff we don't see and that they're not sharing.
Agree about the tech bros disruption, however I was thinking more along the business model. For example, printing in China instead of owning the supply chain of paper, printing and distribution. If it worked for Walmart and Amazon, why have publishers ignored logistics in their business model? Additionally, I'm old enough to remember that books were sold in places other than bookstores back in the day. And that pulp paperbacks, were the ancient disruption to distribution of hardbacks which were more costly to produce. Online retailing destroyed the art of discovery in shopping. I'd love to hear about ideas on how to reach new audiences despite the ease of buying a book anywhere from Kindle.
I know that some publishers do own stakes in the supply chain (paper mills etc) but printing specifically is fraught in the US. There are few actual, physical printers here that can handle this scale, and few publishers are willing/able to just like buy their own. I'm not privy to the higher level discussion of these kinds of things but I figure that if it would save or make them more money than it costs, they'd probably already be doing it.
I do wonder about that, since it seems that most publishers have been content to let Amazon take market share and have not made any plausible method to capture the end customer (reader) and sell direct. This circles back to the infamous author's platform toolbox. While it makes sense in our digital world of everyone needs to be their own brand, it is just another way in which publishers are the last entertainment industry to distance themselves from the customer. The music industry bought venues and licensed music to streaming platforms, the movie and television industries merged with cable and streaming, gaming has created entire of in-game marketplaces, and publishing looks like the sane as it did in the 1990s, except with fewer bookstores and Amazon now accounting for 50% of sales but doesn't share who is buying.
This is great insight, but what I'm dying to know is: When WASN'T it a tough market? I've been writing books since 2005 (3 of the 5 I've written have been published) and it has ALWAYS been "such a tough market right now!" according to my agents and others in the industry. Over the years, I've heard it chalked up to post-9/11 uncertainty, to the financial crisis, to the recession, to the consolidation of the publishing industry, to the rise of social media, to Trump, to the pandemic, to inflation. So, I'm wondering if maybe in the 80s and 90s, editors and agents were just doling out contracts left and right? (Probably while wearing brightly colored blazers with very large shoulder pads, and smoking?)
I have literally been having this conversation with so many authors lately (Why is it impossible to find an agent, a publisher? Why am I being ghosted?) Your diagnosis confirms that "It's not me, it's you" (meaning the broad industry trends). Sadly, writers blame themselves, anyway: "I must be a terrible writer." "My book/my query/ must be awful." "I guess I can't write." This is a good reminder that, no, we aren't all failed writers; the business model we're counting on is (somewhat) broken.
From my head to your comment. #ifeelseen
It really does feel unfair. As a writer, like you can't even get an answer from agents. The pool is even smaller for BIPOC writers and even smaller for BIPOC agents looking for the smallest pool of BIPOC stories.
I self-published because I like being read. If you're in it for the money your expectations need to be adjusted. I also self-published because I got stupid feedback from editors. Maybe if I followed their advice, I would have a hit but none of their track records showed that. They seemed like real estate agents who list a bunhc of houses knowing some are going to sell not matter how little they work.
So I work my day job and I write and have fun and love to hear from my few regular readers and the occasional new ones. And the $$$s I make take me out to dinner every once in a while and that's nice.
I think we so often want to think that there's this magic answer, and magic industry formula, but it really is as simple as writing what is meaningful to us. Love this!
And that Frida Kahlo book looks awesome!!
Thank you, once again for sharing true wisdom and not spinning BS. Reality may bite, but it beats having our heads in the sand.
As someone writing from the querying trenches exactly at this moment, your newsletter resonates so perfectly. It feels like so much else in life: we can do only what we can do, and adjust ourselves accordingly. Some very successful genre writers I know (mostly romantasy) are sure that paranormal is coming back, but maybe not with vampires, so weregophers might be *just* thing, tbh. <runs to google gopher tiktok>
I always appreciate your realistic (and yet not cynical) analysis.
I was gonna say this! It's so refreshing to read an analysis that balances between realistic and non-cynical. It gives me hope without giving me ~false~ hope.
I always remind myself that words have the power to make things happen. No matter which way the market goes, the written word will never die.
Thanks for this, Kate. I'm in the query trenches now. Rapping my helmet with the manuscript ammo clip. Advancing with eyes and ears open. Making ground wherever the opportunity arises.
Good luck! I still clearly remember what that feels like.
Information about what is happening is valuable in and of itself; the reasons why, and advice about next steps is not, necessarily. Your reporting from the "front lines" gives us what we lack -- which is insight. Taking all of our needs, wants, projects, abilities, and tendencies would make an impossible task for you. Formulating a "how to" based on those is even harder. Nonetheless, thank you for your encouragement. It means a lot. And thank you, Kate, for sharing what you know.
The humility of this post is so refreshing. Too many with positions and titles across industries think they know what is happening *now* and what *should happen* in the near future because of what happened in the past.
But most things are so multi-dimensional and multi-causal, so even knowing what happened in the past and why is a conclusion best held loosely. Always good to hear from an insider who acknowledges "nobody knows nothing." 😅
Despite all these externalities affecting the current market, who is out there thinking of the next way to publish and market books? It seems like it is the publishing industry's moment to get disrupted. The existing model of relying on Amazon and the social media platforms while printing at scale in China is failing. Are any publishers trying to figure out new ways to get books into the hands of readers in new ways?
Every 12-18 months or so, someone comes along and tries to "disrupt" publishing and so far nothing much has stuck. (Except ereaders, that was a true disruption that stuck.) Personally, I think the tech bros think it's easy to do, I mean it's just *books* after all, and then they realize it's A: hard and B: there's not a lot of money in it lol. Publishers are doing things in-house, but it's mostly stuff we don't see and that they're not sharing.
Agree about the tech bros disruption, however I was thinking more along the business model. For example, printing in China instead of owning the supply chain of paper, printing and distribution. If it worked for Walmart and Amazon, why have publishers ignored logistics in their business model? Additionally, I'm old enough to remember that books were sold in places other than bookstores back in the day. And that pulp paperbacks, were the ancient disruption to distribution of hardbacks which were more costly to produce. Online retailing destroyed the art of discovery in shopping. I'd love to hear about ideas on how to reach new audiences despite the ease of buying a book anywhere from Kindle.
I know that some publishers do own stakes in the supply chain (paper mills etc) but printing specifically is fraught in the US. There are few actual, physical printers here that can handle this scale, and few publishers are willing/able to just like buy their own. I'm not privy to the higher level discussion of these kinds of things but I figure that if it would save or make them more money than it costs, they'd probably already be doing it.
I do wonder about that, since it seems that most publishers have been content to let Amazon take market share and have not made any plausible method to capture the end customer (reader) and sell direct. This circles back to the infamous author's platform toolbox. While it makes sense in our digital world of everyone needs to be their own brand, it is just another way in which publishers are the last entertainment industry to distance themselves from the customer. The music industry bought venues and licensed music to streaming platforms, the movie and television industries merged with cable and streaming, gaming has created entire of in-game marketplaces, and publishing looks like the sane as it did in the 1990s, except with fewer bookstores and Amazon now accounting for 50% of sales but doesn't share who is buying.
"Except ereaders, that was a true disruption that stuck." Yes. Trim your sails accordingly. And sales : )
Here's an example of sought disruption within the PR/Marketing function, but - as you can see from our exchange - opinions vary on if this will be catalysed internally or externally: https://open.substack.com/pub/kathleenschmidt/p/tiktok-is-having-a-terrible-moment
Thanks for these insights , industry does seem.extra slow
“Weregophers” — I LOVE IT!
Weregophers ... 😆
Love the comment you made-“Write the book you want”.
This is great insight, but what I'm dying to know is: When WASN'T it a tough market? I've been writing books since 2005 (3 of the 5 I've written have been published) and it has ALWAYS been "such a tough market right now!" according to my agents and others in the industry. Over the years, I've heard it chalked up to post-9/11 uncertainty, to the financial crisis, to the recession, to the consolidation of the publishing industry, to the rise of social media, to Trump, to the pandemic, to inflation. So, I'm wondering if maybe in the 80s and 90s, editors and agents were just doling out contracts left and right? (Probably while wearing brightly colored blazers with very large shoulder pads, and smoking?)