Goodreads Giveaways: An Update

Back in August 2014, I blogged about Goodreads giveaways and what I thought was best practice for authors interested in using them as a means of promoting their books [Goodreads Giveaways: Don’t Do What You’re Told]. Since then, Goodreads has made a number of significant changes to their giveaways and so it’s high time for an update…

Goodreads-Logo

WHY BOTHER?

Let’s get one thing out of the way first and fast. Every time I blog or tweet or talk about this – or any other book promotion idea – there is the inevitable, ‘But does it WORK? I haven’t seen any evidence and until I do, I’m not going to bother.’

That’s nice, but repeat after me: with very few exceptions, there are no guarantees when it comes to publicity. There. Are. No. Guarantees. Publicists, self-publishers and the sales and marketing departments of major publishing houses can execute identical PR campaigns for two different books, only for one to become a bestseller and one to disappear instantly without leaving a trace. This is just how it goes – and it’s not confined to the book world. Any time you have a consumer product and a buying public you’re trying to flog it to – movies, new flavors of Coke, apps – you are faced with this conundrum. With the exception of using things that come with a built-in traceable clicks-into-action component, asking ‘But does it work?’ is akin to demanding to know ‘How long is a piece of string?’ We can’t answer it. At best, we can say Books that did well did this, so possibly it works, but we don’t know if it was this specifically that was responsible for the book’s success. 

Where to then for your book promotion plans, if we don’t know for sure what works and there are no guarantees? We must turn to common sense and evaluate if, on balance, it is worth doing a particular thing.

If I were to write three laws of book promotion, the first would be to not annoy anyone with your promotional efforts. The second would be to aim, above all else, to inform people that your book exists who didn’t know it existed before, and do it without breaking the first law. I’m still working on the third one, but it’ll probably involve cupcake-related bribery. I’ll let you know.

In recent years some big players in the publishing industry started to move away from putting ‘spend’ behind things like Tube station ads. The thinking was that although thousands of eyeballs would connect with these ads every day – thus satisfying both the first and second laws – there was no way to know who those eyeballs belonged to. Were the eyeball-owners part of the target demographic for the book? Were they even readers? There was no way to tell. And since Tube ads cost a small fortune, it seemed too big a risk to just throw them up there and hope for the best.

Compare this to running a Goodreads giveaway for your book. Potentially thousands of eyeballs will land on your book’s cover, but you know for a fact that these people are avid readers. Better yet, you know that the majority of them share what they read online – they’re members of a social network built around books, where users track what they read, share their recommendations with other users and leave reviews. How many of them you can reach is not dependent on how many Twitter followers or Facebook fans you have, and you have exactly the same opportunity to reach the site’s users as the major publishing houses who also use the site. The cost of this to you is some time, a few copies of your book and the cost of packaging them and shipping them to the winners’ addresses. What other deal in book promotion land is as good?

So, clearly, I think Goodreads giveaways are great and that you should do them. But I don’t think you should do them the way Goodreads suggest you should and, thanks to a raft of recent changes, you shouldn’t do them the way I said you should back in August 2014 either. Not entirely.

A Quick Recap

Back in 2014 I decided to take a good look at Goodreads giveaways to see if I was making the most of them for myself and for the books whose campaigns I was working on. I did something I’d never done before: I went and read what Goodreads told me I should do to make the most of their giveaway system. They advised that you should run your giveaway for a month and to give away as many copies as you could. But then, in their own slideshow, they included this graph…

Screen Shot 2014-08-18 at 11.15.29

…which clearly showed a significant spike in entries at the beginning and end of the giveaway, and nothing coming even close in between.

Remembering that our aim is to inform new people that our book exists, this graph gives us vital information. Yes, it’s nice that the people who follow us on Twitter, Instagram, etc. enter the giveaways and show interest in reading our book, but they knew about us and it already. What we really want our giveaway to do is to reach people who had never encountered us or the book before. This is why entries that come from the site itself – as opposed to, say, us tweeting a link – are so important.

And they seem to be mostly happening at the start and end of a giveaway, which makes sense when you visit the Giveaways page and see that they’re divided into ‘Just Listed’ and ‘Ending Soon’ charts. So doesn’t it also make sense that you’d want to have as many starts and ends as possible? One month-long giveaway only gives you one of each.

Then there was the idea that you should give away as many books as you could, presumably to (a) make your giveaway as attractive to users as possible – more books mean a greater chance of them winning one and (b) more users receiving a copy of your book meant more reviews of it eventually posted on the site. But here’s the thing: I don’t give a tiny rodent’s arse about the winners posting reviews.

Don’t get me wrong: it’s fantastic if they do. But Goodreads themselves say only 60% of winners – on average – post reviews of the books they receive and in my experience the number can be a lot lower than that. Regardless, it’s not something I can control. Winners are encouraged to review their prizes, but they’re not obligated to. (Totally fair.) What I’m interested in is, above all else, informing new people that my book exists. I’m interested in getting as many entries as I can. And scrolling through the giveaway charts back in August 2014, I saw no evidence that offering fewer prizes led to fewer entries. So why give away more books – read: spend more money – than I absolutely had to?

Ultimately, my takeaway was this: forget your single, month-long giveaway for as many books as you could offer. Instead, give away 1-3 books at a time in a number of shorter giveaways of varying length. That was the best way to maximize entries (eyeballs) I thought – and it was. It worked.

So what’s Changed?

The biggest change is that now you can only list a giveaway that starts 7 days or more in the future and that giveaway has to run for 7 days at least. 

I’m guessing this change was to make things easier for the poor Goodreads team who had to manually approve every giveaway before it went live, and if I recall correctly only had 72 hours or something to do it in. You could also make a giveaway a day long if you liked, increasing their workload even more.

Picture 5

You could never set-up a giveaway when you were already running one for the same book, so in practice this means that now:

  • Your giveaways must run for a week at least
  • Your giveaways must have a week-long break in between.

[UPDATE: Please see the comments below re: setting up more than one giveaway for the same book at a time. Turns out there’s a way around it!]

Neither of these things change my advice. A week is still shorter than a month and I don’t see what difference having to have a week-long break in between them could possibly make. If anything, it improves your chances of reaching the maximum number of eyeballs, as you might have users who only check in once or twice a month.

Goodreads have also let go of the idea that their giveaways are just for books that are new or coming soon. Before, you only had two ‘year’ options under release date: this one or next. Now you can give away a book published twenty years ago, if you like, so long as it’s a brand new copy of it.

Another significant change is that while before you had 6-8 weeks to get your prizes in the post, now you only have 2-3 weeks to do it once you’ve received the winners’ addresses. (Goodreads pick the winners and then tell you where they live.) Plan accordingly.

Once upon a time I’d run a giveaway and then, once it had closed, send messages to the ‘losers’ offering them an e-book edition instead. (You can only give away print books on Goodreads.) This was very time-consuming but it did increase the number of reviews the book would end up with. But now I’m saying don’t even dream of doing this. It’s a big no-no. I’ve heard that sending unsolicited messages to users can get you kicked off the site. One woman apparently got in trouble just for sending messages to the winners to check they got their books. I find this strange considering users can opt out of receiving messages and there’s a limit (10, I think) on how many you can send in one day so it’d difficult to go totally crazy, but hey, them’s the rules.

snowballs of eyeballs (or something)

Let’s talk a little bit more about those eyeballs.

A Goodreads user logs in, navigates to the Giveaways page and is met with the ‘Ending Soon’ chart by default. They spy your book and – there it is! EYEBALL CONTACT ACHIEVED. Mission accomplished. So if 732 people enter your giveaway, that’s 732 new eyeballs in your book promotion bag. 732 people now know your book exists who, potentially, didn’t know it existed before. Right?

Screen Shot 2016-01-15 at 17.40.30

WRONG.

It’s at least 732 people.

Whenever you enter a giveaway on Goodreads, the action gets included in your ‘update feed’ which, depending on when they log in, your Goodreads friends will probably see. (It’s what they see by default when they log in – the ‘Home’ page.) This is a screenshot of mine when I logged in today:

Screen Shot 2016-01-15 at 17.45.16

So C.M. McCoy, author of Eerie, can count both Sherry and me as New Eyeballs reached today. I am a New Eyeball even though I may not have entered this particular giveaway.

(Will I take any action on this? Will I buy the book? Who knows. C.M. McCoy doesn’t know and – here’s the thing – they can’t know. And we’re not wasting our time trying to micro-manage down to the level of things we can’t control and can’t possibly determine, before or after the fact. We can control how far and wide we cast our net, so that’s all we’re focused on right now: MORE EYEBALLS.)

Here’s another thing: whenever you enter a giveaway on Goodreads, there’s an ‘Add to my To-Read shelf’ checkbox that’s checked by default.

entergiveaway

And as soon as a giveaway is listed for a book that you’ve marked as ‘To Read’, you get an email like this:

email

(Yes, I did mark my own book as ‘Want To Read’. For research purposes, naturally! And that Hunger Games thing is totes adorbs, as the kids say that I started mocking them about and now find myself using in everyday speech non-ironically.)

So I log onto Goodreads and browse the giveaway lists to see if there’s anything I might be interested in. I spot Dead Secret by Ava McCarthy and it seems like my kind of thing, so I click ‘Enter Giveaway’ and I leave the ‘Add to my to-read shelf’ box checked, because I do want to read it. Me = an eyeball. But also = eyeballs are the Goodreads friends of mine who see this action pop up on their ‘news feed’ when they log into the site. And if I don’t win and Ava lists another giveaway, I will get an e-mail about it straight to my inbox, prompting me to enter the new one. (Why wouldn’t I? It’s just one click.) In this way, effectively, every giveaway after the first one comes with a mailing list of people who you know want to win a copy of that book. If you only run one giveaway, you fail to capitalize on this.

So What Now?

So while those 2,000 words of blog post were mildly interesting, your coffee’s gone cold now and you just wanna know: what should you actually do?

Well, I think you should:

  • Let go of the idea that this is about getting reviews from the winners – this is about informing people that your book exists (*screams* EYEBALLS!)
  • Definitely run at least 2 giveaways – I like 3-5 over a period of 2-3 months
  • Give away no more than 1-3 books at a time
  • Keep your giveaways short (I like 7-10 days), vary them in length and have them starting and ending on different days of the week (i.e. not always starting on a Monday and ending on a Wednesday. Mix it up.)
  • Don’t bother promoting your giveaway at the beginning and end of it (e.g. on Twitter, Facebook, etc.). This is when Goodreads will do it for you, so why bother? It’s more important for you to do it in between
  • Don’t contact Goodreads users directly for any reason at all

A disclaimer: the first Goodreads giveaway of Distress Signals is live right now and it’s three weeks long. But this is because of the new ‘2-3 weeks to get prizes out’ thing – we won’t have the prizes until February, so I either had to push the end date to the end of the month or not start a giveaway yet. I chose the former. Also it’s only open to the UK and Ireland despite what I said in the August 2014 post about self-publishers restricting the countries their giveaways were open to – they got Angry Dinosaur Face – but Distress Signals isn’t self-published and we have to play by the territory rules. We can only give this edition away in the countries in which it will be published.

But once this first giveaway closes, I’ll be running a few shorter ones with the goal of getting as many entries/eyeballs as possible. I might also try a Goodreads ad campaign because they claim this really amps up the number of entries a giveaway gets. LET’S SEE. I’ll be back once I’m done to let you know the numbers and we’ll see where we are with Goodreads giveaway advice then…

Have you run a Goodreads giveaway? Yay or nay? What would be your advice? 

62 thoughts on “Goodreads Giveaways: An Update

  1. Claire | Art and Soul says:

    This is fantastic information. If I self-publish (or even if a miracle occurs and I get published) I will definitely be running Goodreads giveaways. This article is so helpful for someone who knows next to nothing about it all. Thank you and I look forward to your update! 🙂

  2. Jon Chaisson says:

    Thanks, this is great info to ponder and work with. 🙂

    As an aside, I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a lot more Indiana Jones-ing going in the world (“I dunno, I’m just making this up as I go along.”) than people dare to admit, and I’ve come to use that this kind of outlook w/r/t self-promotion seems to work just fine for me. Go with what works best for me, simple as that. 🙂

  3. alfageeek says:

    Wonderful update! I’m in the middle of a Giveaway (one week, one book, global) designed around the advice of your first post on this. The “run two” advice is brilliant, so thank you so much for updating. I had no idea they went back and harassed the people who have it on their “to read.” I wonder if there’s any other way to encourage Goodreads to ping those people again.

  4. mlbanner says:

    Thanks Catherine! I’ve followed your advice on this and picked up thousands of “want to read” eyeballs from previous giveaways (I’ve done eight now). I’ve recommended this to other authors as well, who have also found this method works well.

    I wish you much success with Distress Signals!

  5. suzannerogersonfantasyauthor says:

    I’m running a giveaway for my first fantasy novel. I set it up to run from 25th Dec to 14th Feb 2016. There was no real reason for those dates, other than the paperback will have been out for two months on 14th. I thought more people would see it if I ran the giveaway for longer – I wished I’d seen your article first!
    It’s going better than I expected though – currently 747 have entered with over 300 marked as to read. And you’ve given me hope that I might get a surge of entrants towards the end. I look forward to seeing your results for the short run giveaways and goodreads ad campaign too.

  6. Theresa Hupp says:

    Great post. This fits with my experience doing a Goodreads giveaway. I gave away five copies of my novel, Lead Me Home, and in retrospect I would only give away two or three. I got several hundred people to sign up for the giveaway, but I can’t say I got any reviews or ratings or anything other than the eyeballs. Still, mailing off a couple of copies is probably a fair exchange for the eyeballs.
    Thanks for the detailed post.
    Theresa Hupp

  7. Kevin Brennan says:

    Now you tell me! I just set one up for a month…

    You’re right, though, about the review aspect of all this. I think I got two reviews out of my last five-book giveaway, and one of them was a phoned-in negative one. The other was bland and not well written. No benefit there.

    But I agree that it’s worth it for the Want to Read lists, which could bear fruit eventually, and for a general increase in interest. Ocular orbs. 😉

    Thanks for sharing your experience!

  8. Roz Morris @Roz_Morris says:

    At last, some good sense about Goodreads! I tried a giveaway for one of my audiobooks on an audiobook group, but it got about three takers and probably no visibility. As we live in giveaway-glut world at the moment, I’m extremely dubious about the wisdom of the goodreads giveaway. But but but your arguments here are sensible. Most of the people I know who’ve done Goodreads promos have given away lots of copies, grumbled about the cost of postage and the fact that nothing seemed to come of it. But your method here looks a lot more doable.
    Thanks for sharing this, Catherine – I’m off to tweet.

    • catherineryanhoward says:

      Thanks Roz! Yes, there is an epidemic of Goodreads Giveaway Grumbles at the moment – but I really think it’s because people are looking at this all wrong. (Or mostly wrong, anyway.) I just think a book centric social network populated by readers who share everything they read online cannot be ignored – and *should* be taken advantage of. We just have to figure out the best way… 🙂

  9. gracebranniganauthor says:

    Thanks for the update. I do giveaways all the time. I have a lot of books. Right now I have about 5 going. I run them for the full 3 months, unless it’s a special occasion book like Christmas coloring books. I generally get 700 to 2500 entries. I also do low-level ads on Goodreads for about 30 books, so I get stats as to who saw what and I definitely see the bump at the beginning and then at the end. I don’t do them short time periods, just don’t have the time! 🙂 Out of all my giveaways I’ve probably gotten 1 out of 6 reviewed. I think it’s good eyeballs on the books doing the giveaways. Since I began combining ads with giveaways, I’ve had some 4,000,000 views. Daily Campaign Total 25188. Campaign Vies To Date 4,021,328. I used to give away all over the world but the shipping is too expensive. Now I only do US and giveaway 2 copies.

      • gracebranniganauthor says:

        Catherine I have the ads run all the time at minimum cost, like $1 a day. I used to do $3 a day and decided to drop it down. Of course they got a lot more hits/views at $3 a day. When you run an ad, and if you have a giveaway, you have the option to click a button in the ad that links to the giveaway and shows that there is a giveaway. So you’re getting double whammy for your ad $. The only time the button is active is when the giveaway is running.

  10. Belinda Pollard (@Belinda_Pollard) says:

    TOTALLY agree.
    eyeballs eyeballs eyeballs

    It’s not about reviews or sales or being able to make a direct causal link as in [Jane had a giveaway. Jane sold 300 extra books. Giveaways are good.]. It’s about lifting the corner of the Invisibility Cloak covering my book as it nestles in amongst the 14,000 billion other books published last year.

    I did my first Goodreads giveaway in December for 1 week with only 1 book, because I was doing a “signed copy” and shipping costs from Australia are horrific. Got about 700 entries, half of those added it to their shelves. I’ve got a BookBub promotion coming up later this month and I’m hoping that some of those 350 will see it and think, “Oh, I’ve seen that book somewhere before. It must be good. Perhaps I’d better buy it while it’s on sale.”

    And if they do, their Goodreads friends will see that they have done so (which is something I hadn’t thought of – thanks for that). And if they don’t, they might see it again somewhere else in a week or a month.

  11. Rebecca Bradley says:

    What an absolutely fantastic and informative post. One I’m totally going to put into practice. Now, for a year old book and shortly for the one coming out in the Spring! Thank you. And all the best with your release! x

  12. Diane Tibert says:

    I’ve run a few Goodreads Giveaways, and after my first one (a few years ago), I saw what you did: don’t giveaway 10 books and run the giveaway for a month or more. I realised (from watching the numbers of entries) that most came when I first posted and when the giveaway was about to end.

    I ran my last giveaway in December, and that’s when I learned about the week notice before the giveaway started, and that it had to be a minimum 7 days.

    My giveaways now run like this: 1 book for seven days. Never end a giveaway on the last day of the month (it seems many do this, and your book gets lost in huge number). I also won’t end a giveaway on a Friday for the same reason.

    I have never given away an ARC copy, but I will in a few months for the fantasy novel “Scattered Stones” that will be released in May.

    Reviews: I’ve had the same experience as you. I’ve given away eight books and received no reviews from Goodreads. However, because a reader saw my book on the Giveaway, he bought the eBook and gave a review.

    I didn’t know about not contacting those who entered the giveaway. I’m glad I didn’t try to do that.

    I wrote about my most recent Goodreads Giveaway here: http://dianetibert.com/2015/12/05/twistmas-goodreads-giveaway/

    Thank you for providing a thorough overview of the Giveaways. The more information we have about them, the better we are able to use them to our advantage.

  13. Joel D Canfield says:

    not annoy anyone with your promotional efforts

    I vehemently disagree. If I’m not annoying anyone with my marketing, I’m not giving my fans something to passionately engage with. I don’t annoy intentionally, but marketing my fans love will almost certainly annoy nonfans, and frankly, my dear . . .

    “Don’t be annoying” is the quickest road to mediocrity.

    But perhaps I’ve misunderstood your application of it in this instance. Since, y’know, you seem to have a clue. Other than this, I mean 🙂

    • catherineryanhoward says:

      I mean don’t piss people off. You have to earn the ‘right’ to try and sell me your book. You have to earn my ‘permission’. I’ve blogged about this before, but in a nutshell: I follow you on Twitter because you tweet interesting links to things. Then you bring out a book and you start incessantly tweeting about how it’s available now, just 99c, has “another” 5-star review, etc. If you were doing this occasionally and still tweeting the interesting links, I wouldn’t mind. But since it’s all you’re doing, I’m annoyed, I’m getting nothing out of it and so I mute or unfollow you. If everyone following you does this, you’ll end up just preaching to the choir and your numbers will stagnate. It’s about balance.

  14. Monica Bruno says:

    This is a great post, Catherine! I had pretty much given up on Goodreads giveaways, but it’s mainly because I was basing the success of running them on the number of reviews I received in return. But what you say is true, it’s more about how many “targeted” eyeballs we can expose our book to. I’m going to try to do another giveaway the way you laid out here and see how it goes. Thanks for sharing, I really appreciate it!

  15. Karen Tomsovic says:

    So much information here. Thanks for doing this so that those of us who are just starting out can get a grip on things. I’m planning a giveaway for my recent debut and this article is pure gold!

  16. guyportman says:

    You might just be the World’s foremost expert on Goodreads giveaways Catherine. I agree with your points. Surely there is no other near free way to get a load of readers to see your book – short of walking around with a sandwich board with your book cover on it. I’ve gone with an 8 days giveaway for my forthcoming psychological thriller, Symbiosis

  17. Ruth2Day says:

    I pretty much agree with you on the giveaways, however I do find it really sad that winners don’t review. While I know it’s not compulsory, the whole idea of Goodreads is to read and review and share. So why not oblige with books that are won? It seems a contradiction not to do so, or implies people enter for the sake of it and don’t take it seriously when they win

  18. Adan Ramie says:

    There’s an amazing amount of useful information here, Catherine. Thanks for a great post — hopefully I can use your advice to get more eyeballs on my first book before my second one comes out!

  19. Dan Perry says:

    Great advice, Catherine. It’s like you’ve started your own (not so little) club. Eyeballs are what matter, I’m definitely going to remember that. And I’m sure you’ll get many more eyeballs on your own books with posts like this. Good luck!

  20. carolynswriting says:

    Hi Catherine, thank you for this, it came at a great time! I did a Giveaway just after my book was released, it got over a 1000 ‘TBR’ but my 5 books that I gave away all went overseas & cost a mint! I got one great review, however, bless the lady’s heart. Now I see it differently, & I’m trying again, with 3 books to go to Aussies only (sorry world!) & will count on ‘eyeballs’ this time, not reviews 🙂

  21. polarbearscience says:

    Very interesting and informative post with essential information for new authors. I have another suggestion to offer – perhaps you’ve covered this before, I don’t know.

    My book came out in November 2015. I later found your 2014 post about Goodreads and was encouraged to give it a try. I took your advice: one signed copy for 10 days, virtually global. It’s run now for 2 days and has good initial hits (it’s called EATEN – a polar bear attack thriller set in Newfoundland).

    Here’s the interesting twist: after I had set up the giveaway (but before it started), I got called by a reporter for a local Newfoundland newspaper, asking if I would be up for an interview? During the interview, I had an opportunity to mention that there would be a giveaway and readers could enter by going to my website.

    Because fortuitously, the weekly paper will come out in the middle of my 10 day giveaway, it means I will have some way to measure how many people who’ve read the interview are interested enough to follow up.

    I also found a privately run local store that agreed to carry 10 copies of the book, primarily because of the upcoming interview in the local paper. However, I can’t get copies to her until after the giveaway is over – which means that disappointed folks who hoped to win a free copy will have an option to buy a copy locally if they don’t want to buy online. More eyes on the book, even those who don’t buy it.

    I’m excited to see how this works out. It might also work for other authors who know that an interview, review, or other media attention is coming up that will allow you to mention a Goodreads giveaway: if you schedule the giveaway so that the media attention comes in the middle of your giveaway, you have the potential to gauge its effectiveness.

    Perhaps this is wishful thinking – we’ll see.

    Susan

    • catherineryanhoward says:

      In my experience online promotion and “real world” stuff don’t mix. One has no effect on the other, two separate worlds, two different audiences (i.e. one global, one local.) It’s good to get some coverage though, wherever it is!

  22. hiro812 says:

    ’ve run a few Goodreads Giveaways, and after my first one (a few years ago), I saw what you did: don’t giveaway 10 books and run the giveaway for a month or more

  23. Sandra Jonas Books (@SJonasBooks) says:

    Great post! For those who would like to run back-to back weeklong giveaways, here’s how:

    Goodreads will allow you to submit a second giveaway provided it’s different from the first and submitted a week in advance. So the day after your first giveaway has started, submit your second giveaway, but make sure the eligible countries are different from those in the first.

    For example, if you selected all the countries for your first giveaway, select just the US in the second.

    Once you submit the giveaway, you can edit it (you don’t have to wait until it’s approved). You can then choose your preferred countries.

    Of course, if you’re running longer giveaways, you don’t have to submit your next giveaway the day after the previous one started. Just remember that you must submit it at least one week before its starting date.

  24. Kenneth Jones says:

    Catherine – You are a star! This was a very helpful article and cleared a lot of my doubts… I wasnt so convinced with Goodreads best practices – the ones that you have shared makes more sense and logical… Thanks a bunch!

    Warm Regards,
    Kenny

  25. Ron says:

    “Definitely run at least 2 giveaways – I like 3-5 over a period of 2-3 months”

    What do you do after 2-3 months? Just wondering how long someone can run a giveaway for before it gets old and the entries drop off significantly (if they do). I have one book so far and I was planning on doing a one week giveaway once a month in perpetuity, but perhaps that’s a bit optimistic. I’m also trying to find out which countries are best to run a giveaway in. I suspect that American style fiction might not appeal to other people in many parts of the world and if we could withhold from them while still distributing as widely as possible, we might save wasted time and expense.
    Also wondering about your experiment with supplementing your giveaway with an ad campaign.

    One other worry is that I read that many of the people who enter giveaways are not serious readers but either want the book to resell (which might not be s bad thing for authors) and are using multiple accounts to game their chances, or, and this is pretty cynical, are other authors who only want the book to lessen the competition removing a book that might be reviewed.

    Anyway, thank you for your valuable advice. For one thing, didn’t know that GR send out notices to prior who previously entered a giveaway but lost.

  26. Robert Clarence Swanson says:

    Great advise. Thanks. One of the authors who commented here mentioned the cost of postage to send his book to winners was so high. FYI, go to a store like Office Max, and have an ink rubber stamp made that says: MEDIA in large print. Put that on the mailer front and back. The cost using USPS is reduced by 2/3rds. Mine went from over $9 to $3.09 per copy of my 336 page novel – anywhere in the USA.

Ah, go on. Tell me what you think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s