Bestseller List Does Not Always Equal Sales
Published August 22, 2004
Making the New York Times bestseller list does not always mean increased sales dollars.
According to Alan Sorensen, an assistant professor of strategic management at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, making the bestseller list had, "no discernible impact on sales," for established authors such as John Grisham. On average, he estimates, appearing on the Times list might increase a book's first-year sales by 13 to 14 percent. The primary benefit goes to first-time authors whose sales increase by an impressive 57%.
Sorensen's findings explode some myths about book retailing. It appears that assessments such as the Times list may be better market-analysis tools than volume-building devices.
Bookstores rely heavily on the Times list in determining book placement and pricing. Make the list and your book is likely to be moved to the front of the store and discounted by as much as 40%. While these merchandising efforts probably yield results for new authors, they may just cut into profit margins for the biggest names.
Sorensen questioned conventional bookselling wisdom and found it wanting. The question for retailers in general is whether other long held assumptions upon which they base their merchandising actually work. If the venerable New York Times bestseller list is a paper tiger, what other bedrock merchandising assumptions need to be reexamined?
Adapted from a post that first appeared on Small Business Trends. Visit and sign up for our free monthly newsletter.
- Bestseller List Does Not Always Equal Sales
- Published: August 22, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Books
- Writer: Anita Campbell
- Anita Campbell's BC Writer page
- Anita Campbell's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Initially I was surprised by the study. But the whole publishing industry has changed so dramatically in the last decade, that I guess I shouldn't be.
The other significant aspect of having a book on the NYT Bestseller List is name recognition. So, even if the List does not mean more bucks for a particular book for the author, it makes her marketable by making her known. There is likely a cumulative effect that is not being factored in. Also, I would like to know more about the broad middle of writers who are neither first timers, nor celebrities of commercial writing. My guess is that being on the list even once has significant impact on name recognition.
I am not aware of any studies, but, based on being a writer and around writers for years, I suspect that being reviewed in the NYT may matter more for the broad middle. That way, one gets the name recognition without having to sell enough books to make the List.
And, the Internet is also having an impact on the List. A large preorder, usually at Amazon, can be created by having someone like Drudge tell his munchkins to buy a book. That will put the book on the List despite a lack of interest by readers in general.
And, the Internet is also having an impact on the List. A large preorder, usually at Amazon, can be created by having someone like Drudge tell his munchkins to buy a book. That will put the book on the List despite a lack of interest by readers in general.
This reminds me of something I read awhile back that I cannot substantiate or come up with exact figures right now, but it was about the time Ann Coulter came out with her first book. Suddenly it was a best seller and heavily promoted by bookstore chains, etc. but almost nobody was buying it. So they looked into why it was considered a best seller when individuals weren't buying it. It was because conservative groups/churches, bought it in mass quantity, by the thousands, to distribute freely among their constituents. Constituents that apparently were walking past it in the bookstores. This is what put it on the best seller list. So now she's suddenly credible and a serious author, when the reality of the situation is that many of her books were stored in warehouses that people were unable to give away.
(This is what I read awhile back, I can't substantiate it with links).
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/18937)
Interesting stuff, thanks Anita. I've always wondered why they make such a big deal on the top of books about it being a "New York Times Besteller"