Kirkusreviewofbooks

TheMagazine:KirkusReviewsFeaturing305industry-firstreviewsoffiction,nonfiction,children’sandYAbooks;alsointhisissue:interviewswithJacquelineWoodson,AyanaMathis,LeslieJones,ElizabethRusch,LawrenceLindell;andmoresubscribePage2TheMagazine:KirkusReviewsFeaturing305industry-firstreviewsoffiction,nonfiction,

children’sandYAbooks;alsointhisissue:interviewswithJacquelineWoodson,AyanaMathis,LeslieJones,ElizabethRusch,LawrenceLindell;andmoresubscribeTheMagazine:KirkusReviewsFeaturing305industry-firstreviewsoffiction,nonfiction,children’sandYAbooks;alsointhisissue:interviewswithJacquelineWoodson,AyanaMathis,

LeslieJones,ElizabethRusch,LawrenceLindell;andmoresubscribeALLiWatchdogGiacomoGiammatteoprovidesabalancedandobjectiveappraisalofKirkus,thepaidreviewserviceusedbysomeindieauthorswhohopeitwilladdcredibilitytotheirself-publishedbooks–butdoesitalsobringsales?Whileresearchingthispost,Ispoketosix

authorsonthephoneandcommunicatedwithmorethanadozenviaemail.Ineverycasebutone,theauthorswerehappywiththereviewtheyreceivedfromKirkus.Oneauthorpaidfortworeviewsandfeltthemoneywaswellspent.ThecommongroundforallauthorswasthateachonefelttheKirkusreviewlentcredibility,andeveryauthorIspoke

tousedtheblurbintheirmarketing.OneauthorevencreditedKirkuswithbeingresponsibleforafilmoptiononhisbook.But—andthisisabigbut—themajorityofauthors(16outof21)feltthatthereviewswere“notworththemoney.”Despitelendingcredibility.Anddespiteusingthemaseditorialreviewsorasblurbsintheirmarketingefforts—

mostauthorsfelttheywastedmoney.AndallbutthreesaidtheywouldnotpayforanotherreviewfromKirkus.Afterhearingthat,Ifeltitwas…TimeToDigDeeperWhenquestionedaboutwhytheyfeltthemoneywaswasted,theanswerswerealmostidentical.(Iparaphrasedtheresponses.)“Thereviewdidn’tproducesales.”Iremindedthemthat

Whatmatteredwasthattheauthorexpectedsales,andanytimethatyouexpectsomethingthatdoesn’tmaterialize,you’regoingtobedisappointed.Thequestiontobeaskedis,ifaKirkusreviewdoesn’tproducesales,whatgoodisit?

Let’sLookatWhatKirkusDoesDoKirkuspromisesyouareviewin7–9weeksfor$425.Youcanpurchaseanexpeditedreviewfor$575,andtheywilldeliveritin4–6weeks.Theytellyouthereviewwillbe250–300words.Theynevertellyouthatareviewwillboostsales.Indefenseoftheauthorswhoexpectedthat,itwouldbeeasytomakesuchan

inferencebasedonsomeofthewell-placedtestimonialsonKirkus’site.BenefitsofaKirkusReviewCredibility—aKirkusreviewisrespectedthroughouttheindustryandbymediaandlibrariesMarketingtool—agoodKirkusreviewisavaluablemarketingtool,greatforablurbonapressrelease,ortobeplacedonyoursite,orasaneditorialreview

onretailersitesPersonalgratification—everyauthorIknowfeelsgreatwhentheirKirkusreviewhasgoodthingstosayWhatKirkusDoesn’tDoWhatKirkusdoesn’ttellyouisthat,quiteoften,200ormoreofthepromised250–300wordsofthereviewwillbespentonrehashingyourplot.Idon’tknowaboutyou,butifI’mreadingareviewIdon’t

needtoknowtheplot.Iwanttoknowhowthisstorymadeyoufeel.Werethecharactersstrong?Wasthedialoguecrisp?Didtheplothavetwistsandturns,andwasitfullofsurprises?

Wastheendingsatisfying?Diditkeepyouupatnightreading?Didyourunandtellafriendaboutit?Thatiswhatexcitesmeaboutareview,andthatiswhatpersuadesmetobuyabook.ManyauthorsIspokewithfelttheirKirkusreviewsweren’tallthatgood.

Whatmatteredwasthattheauthorexpectedsales,andanytimethatyouexpectsomethingthatdoesn’tmaterialize,you’regoingtobedisappointed.Thequestiontobeaskedis,ifaKirkusreviewdoesn’tproducesales,whatgoodisit?

ThecommongroundforallauthorswasthateachonefelttheKirkusreviewlentcredibility,andeveryauthorIspoketousedtheblurbintheirmarketing.OneauthorevencreditedKirkuswithbeingresponsibleforafilmoptiononhisbook.But—andthisisabigbut—themajorityofauthors(16outof21)feltthatthereviewswere“notworththe

money.”Despitelendingcredibility.

Whatmatteredwasthattheauthorexpectedsales,andanytimethatyouexpectsomethingthatdoesn’tmaterialize,you’regoingtobedisappointed.Thequestiontobeaskedis,ifaKirkusreviewdoesn’tproducesales,whatgoodisit?Let’sLookatWhatKirkusDoesDoKirkuspromisesyouareviewin7–9weeksfor$425.Youcanpurchasean

SeeleyJameshadthistosay:“Kirkusisabrandnamethatdeliversmarketingvaluefortheauthor.However,Iratedthevalueagainstothermarketingoptionsandcametotheconclusionitwasoverpriced.”IempathizewithSeeley,andIunderstandhisfrustration.Butthenagain,SeeleyJamesisatremendousreviewer.Ifyouhaven’treadanyofhis

reviews,gotohissiteanddoit.Bewarned,you’llprobablyendupbuyingafewbooks.Heisoneofthefewreviewerswhoalwaysinspiresmetospendmoney.IbecameaSeeleyJamesfanafterreadinghisreviewofmyfirstbook.Pleasegoreadit,becauseI’msureyou’llbuyit.He’sthatgood.Nottomentionhe’sadamngoodauthor,sobesureto

checkouthisbooks.OtherExamplesAnotherreviewstoodoutforitspaucityofwords.Itwasfromawell-knownauthor,andalthoughthewordcountfellintoKirkus’range(itwas281words),thenumberofwordsdedicatedtothereviewwas15!Andoneofthosewastheauthor’sname.

Hereisthemeatofthereview.Coaxingtheinevitableoutoftheimprobable,(authorname)isabetyoujustcan’tlose.15words!Andthatwasastarredreview.Andtherewasanotherreviewthatcaughtmyeye.ItwasabookI’dread,soIwantedtoseewhatKirkushadtosay.ThebookwasTheyDieAlone,byChristopherBartley.Kirkushadpraise

sprinkledthroughoutthereview,butitwasn’tastarredreview,andtheyendeditwiththisless-than-flatteringstatement:“Astrikingstarttoaserieswithsolidactionandarrestingdetailsbutsaddledwithablandhero.”IreadthisbookandIcantellyouRossDuncanisanythingbutablandhero.(Youcanseemyreviewhere.)Infact,afterreading

Kirkus’takeonthebookI’mconvincedwhoeverrevieweditdidnotunderstandwhattheywerereading.Butdon’ttakemywordforit.TheyDieAlonehas53reviewsonAmazon,witha4.9rating.

Forty-nineofthemare5-starreviews.Theotherfourare4-star.Thesearen’tBartley’sfriendswritingreviews.IknowBartley;hedoesn’thavethatmanyfriends.AllofthismademewonderhowoftenKirkusmissedthemark.Afterreadingthroughall99oftheir“BestIndieBooksof2013,”IwasconvincedKirkusmissedquiteoften—bothways.Food

ForThoughtKirkushasarespectednameinthepublishingbusiness,butpleasemakenote—that’sthepublishingbusiness,nottheconsumermarket.WhenIspoketoKirkusrepresentatives,theyclaimedtohaveanemailnewsletterwithmorethan30,000“consumers”onthelist.Iwouldguessthatasizablechunkofthoseareprobablyauthors,but

evenifwegrantthatall30,000arereaders,howdoesthatcompare?Forgrins,takealookatBookbub.Ibelievetheir“consumer”listisnowmorethan2,000,000.IfIspend$600onaBookbubad,Icanpointtonumbers.Icansay,withoutquestion,thatthemoneyIspentsoldanextra4,000booksat99c,andanadditional350booksat$5.99.

IcancalculatetheroyaltiesandtellyoutheROI(ReturnonInvestment).WithaKirkusreviewIcan’tdothat.Infact,nobodyIspoketocouldquantifyresults.Credibilityisnicetohave,butI’lltakesaleseverytime.SoWhatShouldYouDoWithYour$500?Itdependsonwhatyou’relookingfor.Ifyouwantsales—spenditonBookbub,orENT,or