Author Earnings Romance market analysis

[fjtorres]

AUTHOR EARNING'S Data Guy just gave a presentation at the Romance Writers of America, detailing the state of the Romance book market in 2016:

http://authorearnings.com/2016-rwa-pan-presentation/

The charts are downloadable and mostly self explanatory.
He thoroughly dissects the results of different strategies for title length, pricing, release rates, whether to participate in Kindle Unlimited, whether to set the first volume in a series free...

Interesting reading for anybody curious about how the romance cake is baked.

For everybody else, the juicy stuff lies in the general ebook market overview in the first few slides:

http://authorearnings.com/wp-content...07/Slide08.png

http://authorearnings.com/wp-content...07/Slide10.png

http://authorearnings.com/wp-content...07/Slide12.png

http://authorearnings.com/wp-content...07/Slide14.png

Points that stand out:

- Romance makes up 4.4% of the print book sales captured by Nielsen Bookscan and 45% of paid ebook sales at Amazon. Romance accounts for 235M paid ebook sales a year across Amazon, Apple, Nook, etc. Essentially, two thirds of the romance book market is invisibile to the publishing establishment because 89% of all romance books sold are in digital form.

- More generally: Kindle ebook market share is up to 74%, Apple is running at 11%, Nook 5%, Kobo 3%, Google 2%, and Other 2%. (Back in 2010, when Agency first kicked in, Amazon stood at 54% and Nook at 26%, with Sony around 10%).

Much more at the source, including the usual pretty pictures.

One point to remember: Harlequin policy through the decades was to let most of the titles they published go out of print after a couple of years and, since they considered them "played out", would routinely revert rights upon request. That practice has, of course, ended. But in the years between 2007 and 2012 a whole lot of romance writers rescued a whole lot of titles from out-of-print, typically adding new covers and re-releasing them on KDP. That means they not only brought along the titles but also their "brands" and their readers.

In short: to a very large extent, Indie ebooks becoming a mainstream business is due to romance readers. (With SF&F right behind.)

[crane3]

I have a problem in what is defined as a "romance" novel. I've come across a "romance" tag on books that doesn't look like a "romance" to me like in a SF&F or Mystery. In fact, the last book of the "Lord of the Rings" can be tagged as a "romance" as there is a romantic(?) interest.

So what determines a "romance" novel??

[Blossom]

It's a story where a hero and heroine meet, fall in love and have a happy ever after or happy for now ending.

It focuses solely on the relationship of the h/h and sometimes there might be secondary couples too but there is always a main hero and main heroine. Plots vary which is what makes the genre expansive with subgenres and many tropes.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[fjtorres]

Romance is first and foremost about the relationship between two people. The story can be wrapped in any plot, theme, and environment but if the story falls apart without the relationship it is a ROMANCE. It takes two to tango.

A lot like SF, where if you take out the Scientific (or speculative science) element the story falls apart.

You can have a romance in any genre but the story has to be *about* the romance to fit the genre. Beyond that you'll likely find disagreement over the particulars. Does it need a Happily Ever After or will a Happily for now suffice? Does the relationship have to be consumated or even acknowledged? Does it have to be heterosexual or even among the living?

Very broad field.
In fact, as DG points out in his charts, a good portion of romance gets miscategorized as general fiction or litfic. Just as with SF, there are naysayers who insist that if it's really really good it can't be romance (or SF). Right now, one of the most popular writers of romance (tearjerker specialist Nicholas Sparks) insists he doesn't write romance. Except his stories are all about romantic relationships and nothing but. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck? It's a duck.

[Blossom]

I agree with Sparks. However many of his books are label romances because love stories genre is so small it gets to piggyback off romance but they are not true romances but they are more than likely included in these figures.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[Josieb1]

I read MM Romance, 100% digitally. I occasionally buy a paperback but it's more to stroke than read as I always already have the ebook version. Within MM romance I read every genre except horror, that includes paranormal, shifters, mystery, crime, historical, contemporary and the more erotic genres. But it's all romance, whatever the story the two main characters end up together.

By its very nature this is a genre that owes its life to ereaders, it's easy to hide book covers and titles when no one can see the cover

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Blossom

I agree with Sparks. However many of his books are label romances because love stories genre is so small it gets to piggyback off romance but they are not true romances but they are more than likely included in these figures.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

Why aren't they romances?
The lack of happy ending?

They're 100% about the relationship.

[Cinisajoy]

I like the SEAL Romances.

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Why aren't they romances?
The lack of happy ending?

They're 100% about the relationship.

They are tragic love stories like Romeo and Juliet. You wouldn't call that a romance. Love stories are a very old genre. For Romance think Jane Austen and Georgette Heyer pioneers of romance or a more modern mother of romance Kathleen Woodiwiss. They all have happy endings.

There is also Chicklit which has plenty of romantic elements and are about relationships but not necessarily a happy ending for the couple is required. These are not romances either.



Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

I like the SEAL Romances.

I'm currently reading a romance series about SEALs by Suzanne Brockmann. If done right they can be quite good.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[fjtorres]

I've seen plenty of romance authors who would disagree.

But as I said above, the classification details are debatable but the relationship is indispensable. No relatively nship, no Romance.

Chick lit, though, is easy to pick out: it's all about the "chicks". The guys, if any, don't really matter to the story. Window dressing and plot devices at best. C.F., BRIDGET JONES, PRINCESS DIARIES, STEEL MAGNOLIAS, etc.

The commercial Genres are broad but it's not that hard telling them apart. It's the fine grain sub-genre breakdowns where the debating starts.

[Blossom]

There is a lot mislabeling. The Stephanie Plum series has been put into Romance but they are not romances. I've seen other cozies and mysteries stuck in there as well. Why? They know it will sell better categorized as a romance.

Not all Chicklit is about the chicks as you put it. I've read plenty that were about the lead female and had strong romantic elements but not a happy ending for the couple. They are a lot like cozies in that way. I've seen Urban Fantasy categorized as romance alot when there is hardly any romantic elements at all.

A more modern way to tell is covers like shirtless hairless men, pretty dresses that go on and on, sexy couples and sweet couples in uncomfortable poses. These are almost always romances.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by Blossom

I'm currently reading a romance series about SEALs by Suzanne Brockmann. If done right they can be quite good.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

Have you read any of Gennita Low? She is good.

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

Have you read any of Gennita Low? She is good.

Never heard of her adding her to my romantic suspense list. Thanks.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk

[Blossom]

Here are RWA list of requirements to be eligible for a RITA. (Sorry Mr. Sparks)

Does the entry contain a central love story?

Is the resolution of the romance emotionally satisfying and optimistic?

Does the entry fall within the category description?

I think that shows true romances have a happy ending.


Nicholas Sparks own words.

What is the difference between a love story and a romance novel?

It’s equivalent to the difference between a "legal thriller" and a "techno-thriller." In that instance, both novels include many of the same elements: suspense, good and bad forces pitted against each other, scenes that build to a major plot point, etc. But aside from the obvious, those novels are in different sub-genres and the sub-genres have different requirements. For instance, legal thrillers generally have a court room scene on center stage, techno-thrillers use the world or a city as their setting. Legal thrillers explore the nuances of law, techno-thrillers explore the nuances of scientific or military conflict.

The same situation applies with romance novels and love stories. Though both have romantic elements, the sub-genres have different requirements. Love stories must use universal characters and settings. Romance novels are not bound by this requirement and characters can be rich, famous, or people who lived centuries ago, and the settings can be exotic. Love stories can differ in theme, romance novels have a general theme—"the taming of a man." And finally, romance novels usually have happy endings while love stories are not bound by this requirement. Love stories usually end tragically or, at best, on a bittersweet note.

I agree with almost everything he said except the taming part, although if he is a alpha there will be some taming usually but sometimes it's a women who needs to be convinced about the relationship.

Sent from my XT1528 using Tapatalk