Nook Bestseller List Has Some New Rules
12 June 2011
It looks like Barnes & Noble may be “managing” the Nook bestseller list to make certain worthy (and higher-priced) ebooks do well. Nobody under $3.00 is in the top 125.
From Dan at eBook MarkView:
A few days ago I tweeted that only one book promoted in the Sunshine Deals program on Kindle had cracked the Nook top-100 (Prince of Tides). I found it slightly odd, but nothing more than that. Then ‘My Horizontal Life’ joined it. All well. But then I saw something I don’t usually see.
‘My Horizontal Life’ went from rank 1 to rank 127 in a single day. Possible, but very unusual. And the ‘Prince’ was nowhere to be found either.
Link to the rest at eBook MarketView
Interesting, and not unexpected, really. Why should B&N give Amazon the leg up on *their* site?
I think Amazon is brilliant because they don’t seem to tweak the actual titles they want to rise on the lists, they simply use everything at their disposal to put them there. Price, and placement with HUGE visibility (they are pushing those Sunshine deals pretty hard, and I’m sure putting them all over the “you will like this!” and “customers who bought X also bought…” lists.) The right marketing will do the work for them without needing to selectively ‘prune’ the bestseller lists. Not that I’m saying B&N is doing anything like that. (cough)
B&N was already caught doing it with Erotica titles (most of them self-published). Slapping a 1000 extra ranking on them to get them to fall out of the bestseller lists. It doesn’t surprise me they would be doing more of it.
Now there is a slight indication Kobo might be doing it, as well. Putting all self-published on a different part of their site.
The problem with all this is that they are also including some small publishers in it, too, who find the new avenues opened up to Indies as an easier method of distribution.
And why separate lists? Either the books are good or not. The cream will rise. Give the readers more credit. Readers shouldn’t have to go into two ebook sections of an online store to browse the all ebooks. As a reader I hate the idea.
I agree, J.A. One list that provides information about what’s selling and what’s not without tweaks.
If the bookseller is worried about 99 cent books stealing too much thunder, set up two lists – one that ranks based on the number of books sold and a second that ranks on which books earned the most dollars. Clearly identify the basis for each list and PG is fine.
I don’t have a problem if an online bookseller designs the list so the user can filter by various criteria, but to fudge the list to favor particular titles is something I don’t like.
Many of the Indie Erotica authors lost a lot of money after the Best Sellers list was ‘doctored.’
It would make things easier if B&N would allow readers to filter by genre.
However, B&N’s website doesn’t allow for easy searches. You have to know what you are looking for before you can find it.
K.A. – I agree that Barnes & Noble is terrible for searching and finding genre books.
I have 1 adult novel and 3 YA pieces up. No matter how I tweak the keywords, categories or genre, I basically have to type either my name or the book’s title into the search engine to ever find it.
B&N’s site is a headache. I’m glad they allow me to sell there… but they really need to get a level-head into the game.
YA: Cheat, Liar, Coward
Adult: Shackled
[...] = {"data_track_clickback":true};What are they up to?There’s been a recent little dust-up about the best seller list on B&N, especially their Nook best sellers. The accusation [...]