Last year we conducted an extensive author survey to tease out the strategies and tactics successful authors were using to achieve their success. It was one of our most popular posts in 2016 so this year we did it again! Last year, we focused on emerging authors and financially successful authors, isolating what the financially successful authors do differently than the emerging authors. This year we tweaked the survey to reflect changes in the publishing industry while also revisiting many of the same questions from last year. Thanks to everyone who completed the survey. We (literally) could not have written this post without you 😉
Last year we looked at authors earning over $5,000 per month vs. lower earning authors to tease out the differences. This year, we compared authors making over $100,000 in a single year vs. authors who earn less than $500 / month from book sales. We’ll call these two groups 100Kers and Emerging Authors. The following article will examine the differences between these two groups of authors with an aim towards helping authors get to that $100k goal. Approximately 11% authors surveyed fell into the 100K bucket, so it’s a pretty exclusive club but also one that is within reach.
100kers = Authors who have made $100,000 or more in a single year from book sales
EAs = Emerging Authors who earn less than $500 / year from book sales.
The article below is based on self-reported data from our Authors. Authors are, on the whole, an honest group and we are trusting their input for these results. If you are a market research professional or statistics professional, take a deep breath. We are drawing conclusions based on survey data, not doing heavy statistical analysis. Some of the findings run into the causation vs correlation challenge, and in those cases we do our best to tease out the relevant takeaways.
We wanted to look at the amount of time an author has been writing, but since that’s a tricky question, we focused on the publication date of their first book as a proxy for how long they have been in the publishing game. 88% of 100kers have been writing more than 3 years, compared to only 59% of Emerging Authors. On average, that means 100kers have just been at this longer. Experience counts for a lot and emerging authors shouldn’t get discouraged. It takes time to build an audience for your books.
We wanted to know if there was any correlation between how an author was published and whether or not it got them to the 100k club. The results were pretty surprising to us. Of all 100kers none were purely traditionally published. To be fair, only about 5% of overall respondents were solely traditionally published (James Patterson did not take our survey), so traditionally published authors didn’t make up a big part of the surveyed audience, but none of them were in the 100K club.
Of the 100kers surveyed, 72% were indie and 28% were hybrid. Publishing Independently rewards authors with higher royalty rates which means it is easier to start generating meaningful revenue when you self publish. The Author Earnings reports are showing a trend in which indie authors are taking share from traditional publishing, despite the fact that titles of indie books are priced lower than traditionally published titles. In May 2016 Author Earnings also reported that “the vast majority of traditional publishing’s midlist-or-better earners started their careers more than a decade ago. Their more-recently debuted peers are not doing anywhere near as well. Fewer than 700 Big Five authors authors who debuted in the last 10 years are now earning $25,000 a year or more on Amazon — from all of their hardcover, paperback, audio and ebook editions combined. By contrast, over 1,600 indie authors are currently earning that much or more.” The takeaway here is that publishing as an indie author may be the most viable path to financial success.
Looking at the graph below, you’ll notice that there was a much higher prevalence of Hybrid Authors among 100kers than Emerging Authors (28% vs 17% respectively), which means a lot of the 100kers have signed a publishing contract for at least one of their books. This can mean two things: 1) For some authors, publishing as an indie enables them to then get a contract with a traditional publisher. So indie comes first and traditional publishing comes second. Anecdotally, we’re hearing from publishers that they are looking for authors who already have a track record and a reader following before they extend traditional publishing contracts. So this lines up. It can also mean that 2) some authors who have traditional contracts are then subsequently publishing as an indie due to the higher royalty rates and earning power an author achieves as an indie. This means that publishing independently gives authors a greater opportunity to make more money from their books and achieve monetary success. As we wrote about earlier this year, hybrid publishing gives authors the perks of both paths: access to the support that a publishing house provides while also earning higher royalties per book on the sales of their independent titles. Many very successful authors are taking advantage of this “best of both worlds” scenario to facilitate success and earn more.
The term ‘going wide’ is used to describe authors who have books available on multiple retailers (for example, Amazon, iBooks, Kobo, Nook, etc..). They are available through many stores, so they are casting a ‘wider’ net. Compare this to authors who have books in KDP Select, where those books are required to be exclusive to Amazon (for more on this read our article What is KDP Select). The pros and cons of being Amazon exclusive is a big topic of conversation among the author community. Overall, more people in both groups chose KDP Select over going wide, but the breakdown was the same in both groups. This means 100kers are not doing this differently than EAs. The takeaway here is that the choice to go wide or stay with Amazon doesn’t change your probability of making it to the 100k club. 100kers are doing the same thing emerging authors are doing here, experimenting. Knowing your audience and having a solid marketing plan has a larger impact on success than KDP Select enrollment alone.
Last year we found that 68% of financially successful authors spent over $100 per book cover. This year we found strikingly similar results. 68% of 100kers spent more than $100 on book cover design, whereas only 44% of Emerging Authors spent more than $100 on their cover. Interesting to note, this percentage of Emerging Authors moved up from last year when only 39% of emerging authors dedicated that much money to cover design. This indicates a trend that Emerging Authors are starting to spend more on book cover design. We’re happy to see this, as we know book cover design is a hugely important factor in determining a book’s success. Another interesting note, NONE of the 100k club spent more than $1,000 on a book cover, which means that there is a reasonable cap on what authors should be paying for this service.
The results here were crystal clear. 96% of 100kers choose a professional to edit their books, and most Emerging Authors made the same choice (56%), but that still leaves a big portion of Emerging Authors who weren’t using a professional editor. In fact, almost 20% of Emerging Authors edit their books themselves. It’s been shown time and time again that having a second pair of eyes read your work helps minimize typos and unclear writing.
How much should you pay for editing? While prices certainly vary based on quality, about half of 100kers spend between $250 and $500 on editing, and 20% of 100kers spent between $500-$1000 for editing services. Emerging authors definitely skewed lower, selecting the bargain price of under $50. However, our takeaway is that 100kers consider editing to be very important, and always pay a professional to button up their novels. If you want to ensure good reviews and a good reader experience, then planning to pay $250-500 for an editor should be in every author’s launch budget. That said, we know lots of authors simply don’t have that money to spend. If you don’t have the budget to pay a professional editor, at least have someone else who is not you do the editing. Authors swapping editing services is a decent option: you edit mine and I’ll edit yours.
At Written Word Media, we’re marketers. We love marketing and we love helping authors with marketing – it’s our jam – so this topic was of particular interest to us. When we looked at who handles marketing for authors, the overwhelming answer was that they do it themselves. For both 100kers and Emerging Authors, over 90% of them report doing their marketing themselves. The only difference is that 100kers can hire some help. 45% of 100kers reporting having a ‘helper’ like an intern or assistant who helps with marketing. This makes sense, once you make $100K, you can afford to hire someone. Learning how to market your books yourself is very important part of the process, but once you have figured it out and have some budget to spare, it becomes a prudent business choice to hire help so you can focus on writing. Here at Written Word Media, we work with lots of Author Assistants who book features with us on behalf of their Authors.
To take the Marketing question one step further, we wanted to know which promotional techniques 100kers were using. In the graph below, notice that 100ers use 3 techniques more than EAs: Discount Deal Sites, Facebook Ads, and Amazon Ads. All of these are paid marketing techniques that require a budget. Additionally, notice that there are 3 techniques used more by EAs than 100kers: In-person signings, social media, and Book Giveaways. All of these are mostly free or very low cost but are more difficult to scale and may not be as effective. The pattern is clear, paying for marketing works, and 100kers have figured that out.
Many authors have day jobs to pay the bills. Writing takes time and not everyone can financially afford to take the leap right away. Of Emerging Authors, 66% have a day job (either by themselves or a member of their household) that pays the bills. Additionally, almost 20% of 100kers reported having a day job that supports their writing. Our takeaway is that having a day job or relying on a spouse’s income is pretty typical for writers of all kinds. Work during the day, write during the night, and never, ever quit your night job!
Emerging Authors spent 19.8 hours per week writing, compared to 100Kers who spent 28.6 hours per week writing. That’s a 46% increase! The 100kers write a lot more than the emerging authors. This is pretty consistent with what we found last year. All that extra writing pays off. When we look at the total number of books published we see a huge difference. The 100kers have on average 30.3 books in their catalog! Emerging authors had around 7 on average. Averages don’t tell the whole story when we looked at the 100Kers the maximum number of books was 63 and the minimum was 7. Which means the 100ker with the least amount of books still had 7 books in their backlist! Spending more time writing yields more published books, which appears to be a successful strategy.
These findings are based on the data, and what we see in the marketplace. We work with over 34,000 authors at the time of writing this post, so we have a lot of experience to draw from. That said, there’s nothing like hearing advice from a peer to lend credibility, so we collected advice from our 100Kers and put some of our favorites below. The quotes are pasted verbatim from the survey results.
Don’t expect to get rich. Don’t expect to sell a lot of your first book. This is a journey.
Write and don’t stop. Get the next book ready, but take your time to make it excellent. Try to write and hold a book in a series so you can release the books more closely in time. And marketing is important, so learn how to do it, but don’t spend all your time doing it.
Commit your body and soul to producing the best work you can. Every reader is precious and connecting with them the most important thing you can achieve.
Being an Indie Author is a profession best done independently. Write what you love, write the way you want to, and forget everything. However, market trends should not be ignored in cover design and book title. Learn the market and how to promote within it yourself. Every aspect of your business. Authors are their own best marketing tool. Don’t trust someone else to do for you want you haven’t bothered to learn yourself.
Use a professional cover and hire an editor. If you can’t hire an editor right away, find a teacher or someone with excellent grammar. Also, when starting out, Kindle Unlimited is probably the best route to go unless you can market heavily and pay for advertising.
Write every day. Don’t wait for inspiration. If you were an accountant, you wouldn’t wait until you were inspired to go to work.
Never give up! I was told I could never make it, but I proved everyone wrong. I was rejected by one 300 agents and publishers. And it was a blessing in disguise!!! I now run my own ship and make my own rules. I keep 70% of my earnings! Getting shot down by publishers was the BEST thing to ever happen in my entire life! I wish I could give them a hug! They did me a huge favor and I found indie publishing.
Share your experience as an author in the comments below.
View Comments
Very interesting. I've shared it. I edit and critique more than 200 manuscripts a year, and I'm stunned by the amount writers are saying they spend on editing in this article. In the US, an average-length book costs about $2,500 for a content edit and proofread. Writers should not expect quality editing (certainly not professional or thorough) for only $250. I've never seen it. Nowhere close to that amount. So this stat, while it may be founded in research, isn't the norm and I think doesn't serve authors well (for them to expect to pay so little to have their book edited).
I'm glad you chimed in, I felt I must be a chump for what I've been paying all the while I thought I was getting a deal compared to some big firm's advertised prices! Thank you.
Yeah, I was shocked to see such a low price. $1500 is average for a full court press on my 80-100K words novels.
Agreeing with C.S. Lakin here. Quality editing costs money, so definitely I would urge writers to investigate and ask for personal recommendations from authors who have successful indie books in the market. And remember, as good as some proofreaders may be, this is a different service than editing.
(I'm not an editor for hire, just stating an opinion.)
The responses for the prices on editing were pretty clear from our survey data, but remember, our data is limited to the respondents who filled out our survey so it's great to get an outside opinion. Thanks for sharing!
Then it's kind of a disservice to publish that figure the way you did, and your article should make it clear that the data you put in there may not be entirely accurate for the industry because it just reflects a small sample that filled out your poll. There's no way to verify those authors actually spent that amount, just that they told you they did, and there's nothing in the article that indicates the writer finds this trend odd. Indie authors who are successful need quality editors, not a $50 spell check that's called editing.
Michelle, thanks for your comment. I'm glad that people are speaking out and sharing their data so we can show multiple viewpoints. I certainly understand your perspective - there are lots of professional editors out there that charge a justifiably higher price for their services. It is not our intent to do anyone a disservice.
As you correctly point out, our data is both self-reported and based on a sample of our authors. We cannot verify the actual sales of the authors, nor can we verify what they paid for editing, we're trusting their responses. That's why we add the disclaimer at the beginning of the article, to make sure people see our presentation of the data as both honest and imperfect.
Additionally, take a look at the graph and you'll notice that 32% of 100kers spend $500 or more on their editing, which does support a higher price being paid for editing for a third of the 100kers.
How many "authors" responded? It is extremely rare for an author to pull in $100K from a book.
Hi Michelle,
I can see your point, but I'd like to chime in that I understood from how they presented it at the beginning that this was a sample of volunteer (and mostly self-published) authors. I can see your point, and don't think you are wrong. However, I wouldn't perceive the article was misleading because they did not reiterate that in the paragraph.
Michelle, if you send out a survey, and the surveyees respond, and you publish it — how can that be called irresponsible? It's the results of your survey, for God's sake. Not every opinion that's different from yours is 'irresponsible.' They're just the opinions of a number op people who responded to a survey.
I shouldn't be reading blog responses …
Yep, as a professional editor, I'd be insulted if someone wanted to pay me $250 to do a full-length novel. However, this explains the number of people who say "never mind" when I quote my rates. Depressing.
Ecru, I'm a professional editor, too, and when I went to a per page rate those "never mind" comments diminished. There's something psychologically more palatable about hearing $4.25 per page (or whatever you charge) than hearing $1,275 for your 300 pages. Also far easier to manage on a daily basis. :)
I actually charge by the word! :/ But oh well. I'm not living under a bridge in a box yet, so I guess I'm doing OK!
Isn't the entire point that these people, despite whatever they are paying for editing, are clearly making over 100k? Increasing their margins is just a part of that, and it means that the meticulousness of the work itself isn't necessarily their path to success.
Apart from a very small percentage who seemed to write utter rubbish and get away with it, I would imagine most of those earning good money are paying decent money for a decent editing job. Plus while they might have initial success in a particular marketplace I highly doubt it is a path to long-term success! having read some of the reviews on these authors books it would seem the readers agree.
Why are you assuming that? The data above (and also personal anecdotes in the comments of everybody's high-rolling author friends) is telling you repeatedly that $100k authors for the most part are not spending that much on copyediting. And yet they are doing well and to sustainably make $100k as an indie author in 2017 producing "rubbish" isn't an option. You might have a lucky outlier but this isn't 2009 or even 2011. It's actually competitive out there now, and yet these authors are competing successfully without spending much money on editing services.
It could also be that they have multiple people look at their writing before they send it to a professional editor. I think editing is important and they deserve to be paid well, but I also understand that budgets are very tight, especially for writers who aren't established and lack confidence they can make back what they put in, much less a profit. I had several friends help "edit" my manuscript, so it was fairly polished before I sent it to a professional editor. If you have multiple eyes before catching glaring and obvious problems and are diligent about rewriting anything that trips them up, you could get away with an editor without higher prices or as much experience and still have a decent product. In an ideal world, everyone could spring for $1500 for a highly experienced editor and another $1000 for a great cover, but most people are working with limited resources and doing the best quality that they can at a time. But I can see the point that a writer who is making six-figures could make that jump.
Well said! As a professional editor with over 30 years' experience, I echo your suggestion that it would cost about $2,500 to copy edit a typical book length manuscript . The figures quoted in this article are unrealistic and misleading.
The article is not off. Most indies don't pay more than $500 per book for editing. I'm a member of a number of indie forums and that amount is spot on. For most indies an in-depth edit isn't necessary. They are writing pulp fiction, not literary masterpieces. A check for spelling, grammar, and plot consistency is about all that's needed or wanted.
Please note that a significant number of indies surveyed did pay more than $500 per book. But in general indies are putting out a full book every month. They don't have time for months and months of developmental edits. This isn't a personal insult to you - but a result of what the market is demanding right now for. Again, these books are the equivalent of the old penny dreadfuls. So spending huge amounts on them wouldn't' make sense for the author.
I have never paid more than $300 on an edit and have never received any negative reviews regarding typos, grammar or plot holes. My books sell well because people like the stories. Most indie authors would not be able to afford $2,500 when first starting out. Even now that I can afford it, I would never, ever pay that much.
I found the article to be very useful, thank you!
I publish under a pen name that is suitable for my genre, because my real name is impossible to fins a domain for!
I agree. The only book that I did receive negative reviews was one where I spent over $1,000 for an "assigned professional" editor. Even in my early twenties and not completely competent, I found issues with her editing. It was my first book, so I didn't know how to handle it. But when I released the next two books, I oversaw the publishing process and did pay for editing, as well as studying and cleaning up the manuscript as much as I could on my own. I never got any complaints about those two, even though they aren't perfect. With all that said, now that I know more about the publishing world, I feel the first editor was not truly professional, though she was assigned to the company I published through.
I would agree with that. Many new authors might only make $2,500 in a year on a book - so expecing them to lay out in advance their potential full earnings is unrealistic. It's okay if an editor is freelancing for Random House or Doubleday or editing an already well established author earning $100 K plus - but outside of that I would have thought laying out that sort of money in advance is unrealistic compared to the potential earnings for most indie authors.
Can you give me the name of different indie forums? I am wanting to get familiar with sites as I look for a home of my writing.
C.S. - I think that what you're seeing is a skew based on the SORT of edit being done. For the $100k+ crowd... Most have 30+ books out. The *average* was 33. At that level, most trad pub writers don't get content/developmental editing anymore. They don't NEED it anymore. Ditto in the indie field, where at a certain point your story skills have advanced to the point where you're better at the bits of the work involved in content editing than anyone except the very top dev editors in your genre. Who all charge so much that the value return is usually not worth the expense. (If a dev edit moves a very experienced writer's book up 2% in sales, but costs $5000, it's not a cost-effective business expense.)
What you're seeing for that $250-500 is a copy edit. What you're calling "proofreading". It's just typo correction, for the most part.
A really good comprehensive/content edit is still enormously helpful for "apprentice level" writers - those in their first million or so words of fiction. The main value at that stage of a writer's career is really education - learning what things they are doing wrong in storytelling, so they can do it better the next time. The education value for ALL future books written by that author makes the $2500 price tag you're talking about an often worthwhile investment.
"Typo correction" IS proofreading. Copy editing is far more than that. I'm sure that someone who edits and critiques 200 books a year might know the difference and use the proper terminology.
I disagree that established authors don't have things edited. George R. R. Martin has his work edited and he is edits other people's books. I think it's not so much that it is needed as much as a second set of eyes just helps.
I've see so many books that I assume haven't been professionally edited and the author says it has. Self-published books. I think it's important to get a good editor. I have a BA in journalism, yet I would still have my book edited. But only by someone who I can trust will do a good job. Like George R. R. Martin. As he is clearly out of my reality field, I'll need to chose someone else but I feel people should be very, very careful, in choosing an editor.
Would I pay 2-4k? Of course. It's worth it.
I wrote over the years and just filed things away. I have several things and they are all about 80k words. I would pay according to the length and also for the expertise of the editor.
Anyhow, I just wanted to say, im pretty sure even the pros use a professional editor.
I also enjoyed the article. Thanks to the author.
Many new writers don't understand the differences between editing services. I think the term "copy editing" is loosely thrown around as a catch all for all forms of editing which we know it isn't. A lot of indies only get proof reading and that reflects that lower cost.
Yes, thank you, Ecru! Proofreading and copy editing are not even close to the same thing. Copy editing is not just checking for typos, inconsistency, and grammar mistakes. Professional copy editors (ones who know the Chicago Manual of Style inside and out) make $4.50 a double-spaced typed page -- or more. And they're worth every cent. I think the confusion comes from the large number of people in the indie field who set themselves up as copy editors without really knowing what the profession is about.
My first novel, in 2014, was professionally edited for $1400. It carried around 55k words. That said, I recently reread, and there were many issues with the amount of money I had spent. In my personal experiences, I've learned that once you know how to properly use MS Word, the program does much of it for you. I, like many, can't afford to spend $1000+ for editing all my books. That would be over $30k! And that doesn't include covers.
Every reputable editor needs to be paid for their time at a rate that covers their mortgage and living expenses and more - they don't just want to subsist. It usually takes 4 hours or longer to even critique of a 32 page picture book for 3-6 year olds with editing suggestions, further advice on a couple of re-worked versions and providing written, encouraging and useful feedback at each stage ...and then a final grammar, punctuation and spelling check. (And surely the author expects to pay a trained and experienced editor at the same rate as a garage mechanic or electrician - or at least, the hourly rate they earn themself?) This presumes that the author wants to produce a book that enhances their own reputation among professionals - librarians, magazine reviewers and awards judges, as well as to provide children with the best quality possible ...which they need and deserve. Best-selling traditionally published picture books have often been edited both by the author and an editor to create 50 or more drafts over several years prior to publication.
I think you made a very good distinction when you say best selling traditional published authors have upwards of 50 drafts over several years before publishing.
Best selling Indie books typically take months, not years to produce, and certainly not 50 drafts.
Its a much quicker process, and that may be where part of the price point difference comes in as well
As you'll have noted, I was specifically talking about picture books. I've read that Mem Fox's 'Where is the Green Sheep?' (about 160 words and that's sold millions of copies) took 3 years and at least 50 drafts. It's not exceptional.
I've self-published and had books traditionally published and I'll continue to do both. Those who traditionally publish usually have a number of books in progress and work on some of them for years.
I've recently mentored and edited a picture book for a friend. She had spent months developing it, had it critiqued by beta-reader buddies and really believed it was ready, but it took 4 more drafts before I thought it was anywhere near time to choose to self-publish or approach editors/agents, whatever is her choice.
The other big difference between traditional and indie published picture books is that self-publishers often try to control what the illustrator draws, which is mostly a big mistake if the author wants a truly wonderful and acclaimed book that will sell by recommendation. Trad publishers remove all illustration suggestions that the author inserts and choose the illustrator who is most likely to create what no one else would imagine from the words, and the author and illustrator will have no contact. Hard for the author, but the way the most satisfying books are produced.
In one of my books the words say that Crocodile invites a brolga bird to afternoon tea. I imagined a sly scary crocodile, but the illustrator has shown it in Fred Astaire poses tempting the bird with fancy dance steps. And I and children love it. Giving the illustrator free rein has made it 'our story' rather than purely my story ...and it's a better and more popular book than I would have designed.
In 2012 I had a 176 page non-fiction book traditionally published on calligraphy for greetings cards and scrapbooking. 600 emails were exchanged with suggestions and revisions in the editing process over 18 months. I'm very grateful that the publisher paid a freelance editor for this - her input made the book far far better than I would have created on my own. I wonder what the publisher expected to pay and what the editing actually cost them. If I had chosen to self-publish that one, to be honest, I would have ceased paying for editing much earlier in the process, with consequences to match.
C.S. So glad you made this comment because if you hadn't, I would have. As an editor myself, I'd be hard pressed to earn even minimum wage at those prices.
I totally agree! That's exactly what I thought as well. Editing is crucial. In my mind it is a huge aspect of writing a book.
I think the Authors who spent the lower end of the range would have had smaller books - say between 10,000 to 25,000 words. So it is hard to compare when there are different word counts.
Editing for $250 is not plausible. I believe many people are using the term "editing" to refer to mere proof-reading, with perhaps a few editing comments thrown in.
I agree. I pay a lot more in NZ and don’t regret a cent. I think people are being a bit economical - with the truth!
I paid $6 per double spaced 8.5x11 page with 12pt font. My editor helped launched Steven King and John Grisham.
C. S. Lakin, you spend less than two days per manuscript and make half a million dollars per year? Genuinely curious.
I love getting new info especially when backed up with studis and stats. Good job. I found the info useful. It justifies my spending habits; like paying for a great editor which incidentally is as hard to find as a great doctor or a great car mechanic. I shopped around for nearly 10 years until I found a great editor who came along with a good graphic artist. I've been working with them for nearly 3 years now and have been satisfied.
I also discovered FB ads which I now use for my opinion posts twice a month and my book posts twice a month. I haven't tried Amazon ads bit I'm thinking about it. I do post on their Author Page and in their Amazon Forums. I publish on Kindle, Createspace and Smashwords . I tried NOOK and Kobo for about a year but I never sold any books on either one.
I also advertize on ASK David, Indies Unlimited, Twitter. I post on LinkedIN and Goodreads when I remember but I don't use them on a regular basisi since I stopped doing GR Giveways. I hired a consultant to post on about 150 groups on FB but I stopped recently.
Once again thanks for your article.
BL Wilson
Hello
I wonder if i can use some of your findings and blogs in my marketing magazine. All articles are linked to original and author is named if known.
My magazine is called Indie Publishing News. I have a group on facebook where i help Indie Authors.
Thanks.
To suggest that authors should find $250-500 to be a fair price for editing a BOOK is absurd and shows either a total lack of understanding of the time editing takes and the value editing brings, or an absolute lack of respect for professional editors and the fact that we have to make an actual living.
Absolutely correct. If I charged $250–$500 to copyedit a novel-length manuscript, I'd be making less than minimum wage.
Beta readers are great. Having other writers look over your work is great. Just know that writing and editing are different skills, particularly when it comes to copyediting. A Pulitzer winner might not know that the comma always goes inside the quotes in American English.
For $500, you get 7 hours of my time as a professional, certified editor with 20 years experience. That isn't enough time to *read* a book, let alone edit one. This value is absurd. For a realistic estimate of the time and cost, Google "copyediting instant estimate." For just one round of copyediting on an 80,000 word book, my lowest-paying client would pay over $2000 even to a fairly new editor.
I think you left a zero off the amount a 100ker would pay for editing. Even $2500 would be low. The real charge for a substantive edit would be in the range of $3000 to $5000, and $2500 to $3500 for a copy edit of an average-length book. Editors are professionals and their fees reflect their experience and training. In this field you get what you pay for, and $250 will not get you a professionally edited book.
I edit my books first. Then, my editor does a proofreading in two comprehensive checks. All for the price of £250. The results are excellent and I am blessed I don't have to spend more than that on editing.
This is what I do. My writing group goes over everything in process, which takes the place of a developmental edit, and beta readers catch problems before the MS goes to the copyeditor. I paid $250 for a 52,000 word MS recently - it helps that it was pretty clean to begin with.
I applaud your statement that 100kers consider editing very important, but as a copyeditor I must chime in about the editing costs mentioned in this article. Thank you, Adrienne Montgomerie, C.S. Lakin, Dinah Forbes, and Oona O'Shea. There's no way I could copyedit a typical-length book for $500. It takes much, much longer to copyedit a book than to read the same book. And it takes a professional. Second, I disagree that authors swapping editing services is a decent option. Even the best writer isn't necessarily a skilled editor. Editing is a profession that requires specific training.
why does it matter that you disagree that authors swapping editing services is a decent option? What is it to you if an author decides to do that? If their book sells well and their readers are happy then what business is it of yours? Who cares what you think a decent option is? Just like editors, authors are running a business and have the right to make the decisions that are best for their situation. This goofy snobbery of "you must spend xyz on editing services I just so happen to offer" is just bizarre.
The comments from editors are correct in saying that it's not reasonable to expect to get a full length novel edited for $250-$500.00. What isn't addressed in the research published here is the fact that many of the 100kers write novellas, compendiums of short stories, and contribute to anthologies (shared editing expense among several writers). We don't know (from what's been published here) how many of 100kers crank out six to twelve short books per year, or write formulaic books that require little change from one to the next except location, names, type of threat/protagonist, etc. There is a difference between writers who sweat bullets to bring a story to life, and writers who do it solely as a means to make money. Perhaps some research into these things would add a layer of useful data.
I appreciate your comment, Dan, and the word count of the manuscript is definitely important. But because the article didn't mention the average manuscript length, I think that a lot of indie authors will be misled into thinking that those editing costs are valid for full-length novels. In addition, even in your example of an author who "cranks out six to twelve short books per year" or "writes formulaic books that require little change from one to the next except location, names, type of threat/protagonist," copyediting is necessary and important. And that copyeditor will examine each and every word of the manuscript, which takes time.
Lol at the people that are whining at the article for daring to mention authors are not willing to pay them more than what their book is probably going to make.
Written Word Media didn't magically create those numbers, you can go nuts on them all you want. Indie authors aren't willing to pay your prices. Screaming a lot in comments sections won't change that.
No one is screaming; we're commenting on an "error", in that the article specifies to put aside $250-500 for editing, and that's nowhere near enough. Indie authors can do what they like, but the amount cited low-balls the cost of a real edit to the tune of $2000 or more. If I wanted to publish a good (rdited) book, I'd want to know how much that would actually cost.
I'm not going to pay you to "rdit" my book. I'm just saying.
Indie, I don't consider what I wrote "screaming." Rather, I'm trying to provide information. If an indie author hopes to become a $100k author, he or she needs a high-quality editor. Such an editor won't work for the prices cited in this article—even if the manuscript is a novella rather than a full-length novel. I understand that authors must think about how much profit their books will make, but we editors must think about earning a living wage. Would you really want to hire an editor who's struggling to earn even minimum wage? Just my two cents.
But you're missing the point. You are saying if an author expects to become a $100k author then he/she needs a quality editor (which according to you will be $2,500). But you're glossing RIGHT PAST the fact that the people who were surveyed ARE $100k authors. I personally know several high selling authors who don't pay that much for editing. Who knows, maybe you all are right. Perhaps the books are deeply flawed and poorly edited but if that is true the readers of these books aren't complaining about it, and these authors continue to make bank. So like it or not, yes you CAN be a $100k author without spending what you personally seem to feel is the least that should be spent to accomplish the job of making sure the manuscript is clean and solid.
Lol rather at editors becoming filled with rage at successful authors who minimize their roles. Very interesting to see the conflict of interest here.
I earn over $200k a year and I never use an editor. However, a good proofreader is golden.
How can you not use an editor? Are you a trained CMOS editor? I can't imagine publishing anything without it being professionally edited. I'm a copyeditor so I do my own books, but, as I said, on average it costs a writer about $2,500 US to do basic editing on a full-length manuscript. Often more.
I'd say these numbers are pretty spot on. I paid $455 for my last edit (65k words) and an additional $350 for a final round proof read. And my formatter commented that it was one of the cleanest manuscripts she'd ever seen. Roughly 3 errors she fixed.
I think part of the difference is a lot of indies do several rounds of beta editing with bloggers or even other authors before sending it off to editing. So they skip paying for content editing all together. Not only does it cut that cost out, but it gives a more up-to-date view of what readers are buying. Plus, I can use different people from different walks of life to get my feedback versus one person's eyes. This came in very handy when I wrote a book where one of the characters had childhood cancer. My editor never went through that experience. But one of my beta readers did. Her feedback on the process and emotion it entails was way more accurate than my editor's ever would have been.
I'm also going to agree that these numbers seem spot on.
That some editors charge more than $500 for a copy edit is...well, that's their problem. Plenty of quality editors out there do basic editing for $250-500, and do a fine job.
Frankly I'm stunned the average was SO HIGH. Let's not forget that 8% of those writers making $100k or more pay $100 or less for editing. Which means they're probably counting their subscription to Grammarly or some similar tool as the cost, and they're actually just editing the thing themselves. Which is what I do, on about half my books.
Interestingly enough there is NO pattern of sales or reviews based on which I self-edited and which ones I paid someone to edit.
I think if you weren't a trained editor (and what's that thing about nobody should edit their own books like nobody should be their own attorney?) then you wouldn't be willing to pay this amount for "basic editing". It seems to me that you are doing the same thing that many in the comment thread are freaking out about "editing your own work" or "finding cheaper ways to get the job done". That you think someone has to be "professionally trained" to be able to edit a book to the standards of the average reader shows a lack of awareness of the average reader.
Also, in the long run, for most of us it would be a MUCH better investment to just get "professionally trained" to be editors than it would be to pay someone $2,500 for every book.