Old Site


Bookninja 2.0:



.

Hearsay:

June 26, 2008

Onanamazoning

I know a few of you reading this track your stats regularly at Amazon. I know some big-assed famous novelists who watch it hourly like school kids with ears pressed against the proverbial (in a Porky’s sense) wall between the locker rooms, hoping to hear their name mumbled on the other side. But perhaps you shouldn’t. I mean, besides because it wastes your life and makes you look like an idiot when people find out.

It is not uncommon to hear an author talk about Amazon rankings. Amazon is one of the few places to get a sense of how a book is doing in real time — the elaborate, drawn-out process of getting sales numbers from bookstores and back to authors is (to say the least) Byzantine.

Despite its specialization — Amazon counts only its own sales, after all — the immediacy of these rankings can be addictive. I’ve heard authors talk about tracking their status against other books or trying to gauge exactly how many places a single sale might raise their rank. It can get a bit obsessive.

Share the 'Ninja with your 2.0 friends:
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Digg
  • RSS
  • Print
  • email

2 comments on “Onanamazoning”

  1. Mary Novik says:

    Now that we’re out of the closet on this one, can other obsessive authors tell me how these sales rankings actually work? Why do the sales go up and down like a yo-yo? Are they updated every hour or day or what?

  2. Kathryn says:

    I don’t know how often they calculate but I tried a few years ago to gain access to information about how they calculate for an article for this site and they basically told me it was not something they shared. It’s a secret recipe—much like the Colonel Saunders chicken batter—devised to teach writers a lesson for being so self-obsessed. I do know that it has something to do with one’s sales relative to all the other sales in one’s category, so if you buy ten books all at once of your own book, you might briefly have a high score, if, say, no one buys Harry Potter or Dan Brown’s whatever in that same calculation period. In other words, it means almost nothing, except if your agent happens to be trying to sell foreign rights to a publisher who happens to look at your sales ranking in that same period.

    There was some story about an American author who was beseeching friends and family to buy his new book on-line in the first couple of days. Can’t remember who at the moment, and could never really figure out why except it might have been related to the above hypothesis. Sort of sad, if that’s how publishers choose their next emperor.

Discuss

Latest comments:
George on
News catchup
Monica on
News catchup
Andrew S on
News catchup
Shelley on
On the dangers of writing about the past
Steven W. Beattie on
Get out there, nerds!
Sean Dixon on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Sean Dixon on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Franklin Carter on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Steven Jensen on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Rob Payne on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Rob Payne on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Brian Busby on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Blake on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Aaron on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Aaron on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Bart King on
How to be a good loser
A.G. Pasquella on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Fred on
Facebook claims it owns the word "book"
Zachariah Wells on
Under-rated Canadian writers
Steven W. Beattie on
Under-rated Canadian writers


Search blog:
Archives:
Old site archive:

January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003

Feeds: