I don’t agree with most (pretty much, any) of what is delivered as fact in this BUT there is one strong truth in the mix. Imparting her advice Brown states why publishing with a big company* is a bad move, and suggests alternatives to make writers some real money:
Here are three big problems the old-timers are facing, and why it’s become more appealing to apply an entrepreneurial spirit to book distribution:
1) Overconfidence, or perhaps plain laziness, has prevented the big guys from mastering SEO, content marketing, and social media. This is unacceptable nowadays, with the position search engines and digital media have acquired. Television and print ads have become antiquated marketing methods in comparison to the supremacy of Twitter.
2) The big guys are slow, and indie publishing is fast. With your book in the proper format and the cover image complete, it takes about half an hour to publish your book online. Amazon will have it live in their store within 12 hours. Voilà-your book is out a year ahead of its prospective release date through a mainstream publisher.
3) The big guys are cutting back advances and still taking a huge chunk of the profit. Where a mainstream author gets a 15% royalty, Amazon gives the indie author a 70% royalty. Smashwords is even higher, with an 85% royalty.
There are countless strong counter arguments, examples and case studies - and there’s no way I can be unbiased in that*. BUT, The Post has it right in the closing line:
On the publishing end, whether the book is released by the big guys or distributed in the fashion of sole proprietorship, marketing will rest principally in the author’s hands.
*I regularly work for one of the those ‘big guys’ alluded to, Penguin Children’s Books.