Posts Tagged ‘goodreads’

Reviews Slowly Dropping In

January 25, 2010

I’ve started getting some interesting feedback about my book from the giveaways on goodreads and librarything.

I got one quite bitchy 2 * review on goodreads. I won’t post it here, since I am trying to promote my book (I’m not a complete idiot), but the link is above.

Someone else only gave Oom 3 stars, but the review really cheered me up:

Oom, a smart, kind creature from the planet of Llevro has been sent to Earth for a reason unknown to him. As he waits to find out the reason for his adventure, he befriends Joe. Together, they exchange stories of their home planets while awaiting the meeting that will change Oom forever.

When I started reading OOM, it was a little slow, but it quickly picked up and made me want to read all the time. The story was very original and the unforeseeable twists and turns were enjoyable. For me, all of Joe’s questions and Oom’s answers were the best part.

It is a strange feeling to read the reviews. I guess I didn’t realise how naked one can feel by going through the self-publishing game. All in all I am glad I self-published the book, but with hindsight I would not have put in the time to promote it. I think there is more dignity in going through the usual approach of sending manuscripts off to publishers one at a time, privately!

But I can’t go back now so I’ll just have to take the rough with the smooth.


Giveaways Complete

January 3, 2010

My giveaways are complete now. I gave 5 to librarything members and 10 to goodread members.

Hopefully they’ll all read and review it.

Google and Facebook Ad Update

December 3, 2009

Here is a comment I posted on

I found Google AdWords really bad. They have an automated system that checks that the site your ad links to is relevant to the keywords you choose. I linked my ad to my book’s page on Amazon, using keywords that I know very well to be relevant.

After some initial success ( a few clicks, although no sales) Google stopped showing my ad and marked it with a low quality score – its algorithms did not think my keywords relevant because the algorithms are not clever enough to actually read through my book!

I am very suspicious of their cost model. They act like a drug dealer: they get you lots of clicks really cheap at first, then they coerce you into raising your bids to retain the same rate of page impressions.

I found Facebook much fairer. They have a similar cost model and will raise prices if your ads do not generate a good click through rate, but they do not try to be too clever like Google and start spidering the site your ad links to. With Facebook it is also possible to make small tweaks to your ad and then it will give you another chance and give you lots of cheap page impressions before it ascertains the quality score. This actually helped me to improve my ad’s quality, because I was able to experiment with the ad’s target demographic. You can also show your ads to specific groups such as “people who like reading” or even “people who like Australia or aliens”.

However, as I mentioned, the adverts generated clicks but not sales and so it extremely difficult to measure whether they are worth the money.

All in all I thought this was a great experiment and I’ve learned a lot. I am a little embarrassed at my former optimism (see earlier posts!) but it was to be expected. There is definitely no quick and easy way to success.

My focus now is simply to get people to read the book, preferably people who have no connection to me. And I cannot expect people to pay to do me this favour, so I am going to organise a book giveaway through