Sunday, October 12, 2008

Bulletin: correction

Edited to add, this is already old news and the post has been corrected.

For those following Lee Goldberg's blog. One recent entry reads in part

1) Quoting from this site

"Averages are based on at least 5 in print books by at least 3 different authors.
AVERAGE TOTAL SALES FOR BOOK OUT FOR ONE YEAR OR MORE
[updated September 28, 2008]
Ellora's Cave--1206 copies (24 books)
Loose Id--765 copies (49 books)
Amber Quill--832 copies (9 books)


2) Mr Goldberg's interpretation

"If I'm reading these figures correctly (I suck at math), then the average Ellora's Cave author in this sample is selling a mere 50 books a year, an Amber Quill author 92."

3) My correction, pending moderation on Mr. Goldberg's blog:

The figures are, as stated and quoted, averages. Specifically arithmetic means. The average Ellora's Cave author in this sample is selling 796 books in the first year, an Amber Quill author 684. If they have been out for any period of time over one year (all books in the sample out one year or more) the average sales are 1206 and 832 copies per title)

Thanks to those who gave me a heads up. I know these figures are sometimes read incorrectly and would welcome suggestion as to how to make them easier to understand.

See also: Tina Anderson's blog.

17 comments:

Katrina Strauss said...

As I told Mr. Goldberg, pending approval, it's not that he needs to redo his math but rather needs to re-read.

It makes sense to me, but maybe you could restate it as "calculated averages"? I dunno. *shrug*

ggymeta said...

Seriousness aside-- it's a pretty sad day when one of our own Heebie-Honey's admits he sucks at math. :/ He's crushing those hard-built stereotypes the haters have about we Jews our keen number skills.

December/Stacia said...

Yeah, I have no idea how he managed to get 50 copies a year from those bumers; it seems pretty self-explanatory to me. When you say "average first-year sales=1206 copies", I read it as meaning the vaerage book sells 1206 copies in the first year. *shrug* Perhaps I'm too literal? :-)

Angelia Sparrow said...

Stacia, he was dividing the total sales (1204) by total books (24).

Lee Goldberg needs to tend to his own writing. He has a bad habit of pointing and mocking at women's writing, whether professional or fannishly oriented.

kirsten saell said...

OMG, I was wondering how he could come up with 50 books from that! Um, it wouldn't even have occured to me to divide the 1204 by 24.

Maybe I'm just not as smart is he is...?

Or maybe he just doesn't see any relevance in the size of the sample from which the averages are taken? Clearly he's a brilliant, brilliant man. *rolls eyes*

Lee Goldberg said...

I'm an idiot. When I said I suck at math, I forgot to mention I also suck at reading comprehension.

I have corrected my post.

Lee

Lee Goldberg said...

Angela,

I screw up. That said, I have to take exception at your comment:

"Lee Goldberg needs to tend to his own writing. He has a bad habit of pointing and mocking at women's writing, whether professional or fannishly oriented."

I love women writers and I mean that literally. My mother is a writer as are both of my sisters (the bestselling authors of "Visual Chronicles" and "Journal Revolution") and my sister-in-law. I also adore scores of women writers who I am not related to by blood or marriage.

My problem with fanfic isn't that some of it is written by women. My problem with it is that it tramples the creative, intellectual and legal rights of the original authors & rights-holders. But don't get me started on that! :-)

Lee

nbrooks said...

My problem with it is that it tramples the creative, intellectual and legal rights of the original authors & rights-holders.

Oh, please. In my experience fannish writing made no money, wasn't associated with the original rights-holder, and actually drew communities of fans together for far longer than they would have followed a fandom without it. So therefore, the original authors and rights-holders might actually be saying thanks to fandom for caring enough to keep subject matter going through their dedication.

(In my experience it also didn't hurt the rights-holders financially, because a thriving fandom buys -everything- tied-in with the subject - good, bad, or otherwise. )

ggymeta said...

See, it all worked out peacefully-- and no called anyone a female private part. ^_^v

Emily Veinglory said...

The night is still young. Perhaps someone else will decide to act all gynocological.

Or maybe I will have to spend my time actually working on a book. Ebooks still being what could politely be called a 'volume market'.

kirsten saell said...

Work on a book? Don't be such a pussy, Emily.

LOL

Sorry. Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Anonymous said...

My problem with it is that it tramples the creative, intellectual and legal rights of the original authors & rights-holders. But don't get me started on that! :-)


Well, Lee, not all of us can get paid to write Diagnosis Murder tie-in novels. You're living the dream, man!

Anonymous said...

In my fantasy, these comments continue to be interesting and relevant to the original post....not another Goldberg vs. fan fiction slamathon.

(a reader)

M Barnette said...

Actually according to some info I've seen here and there on the net, the 'average' print title sells 99 copies as a new book. I don't have info on remainder sales. Where he got his data on 'average' sales I don't know, but the info on average sell through on books was circulating across most of the publishers.

I think you might have seen it posted on the Phaze author loop when it went around, last year I believe, Em.

Ann Bruce said...

Emily, maybe you should change it to:

Ellora's Cave--1206 copies (sample size: 24 books)

Emily Veinglory said...

That's a good idea; I'll add that on the next update.

Anonymous said...

in case you care, I have sales figures for an in-print book at New Concepts Publishing, run by everybody's favorite person, Madris de Pasture:

Sales of contempory erotic romance book over three quarters (.75 year): 363. This was called "above average" sales for the imprint by the editor herself.

If 363 is "above average", I'd hate to see their average sales.