Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

pajiba.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#71

Post by ada1981 »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #50
scarmig wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get into trouble if you speak ill of the Ch*rch in public. This hinders discoverability.

Trouble with who? The Church? I'm familiar with their weirdo bullying tactics but you can't really take them seriously - they have no power.

They filed enough law suits against people in the IRS to have their millions in back taxes waived and granted non-profit church status.

They bullied the IRS.

It seems that violent aggressive growth tactics are common in start-up religions.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#73

Post by damnfine »

pseingatl wrote: post #61

Because the NYT bestseller list is essentially not an accurate report, but "fake news." In 1983 William Peter Blatty, author of The Exorcist, filed a lawsuit against the NYT for failing to include his book Legion on the list, despite provable sales. The Times won the lawsuit by claiming that their list does not in fact reflect bestsellers, but their own editorial opinion as to what constitutes a bestseller. In other…

Yup. If they want to clean up their public image, this is another place they can start. I have seen a recent shift at NYT, but it is still very lacking in my perception. They seem to be popular, or at least heavily marketed here in HN.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#74

Post by damnfine »

mysterypie wrote: post #63
sireat wrote: post #19

This "buyer" is not going to buy any of the books. The trick only works because the book is considered published yet it is out of stock so has to be back ordered. And these back orders still count for the NYT bestseller list. My guess is they somehow triggered some sort of last second revision for their own book at the publisher thus pausing the printing. So the book is technically published and available in various…

> The trick only works because the book is considered published yet it is out of stock so has to be back ordered. And these back orders still count for the NYT bestseller list. The NYT says that "Sales are defined as completed transactions by individuals"[1]. Either you're mistaken about the trick that was used or the NYT is lying about their methodology. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/methodology/

It would appear they are lying, as they won a court case by arguing they were not. So either way someone is blowing hot air, and either way that someone is the NYT

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#75

Post by ada1981 »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #51
csours wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neil Breen, explained: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KolenE1GCyg (NSFW audio, probably NSFW video)

God bless both of you for introducing me to Neil Breen

Incredible.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#76

Post by zebraflask »

k_sh wrote: post #43
grzm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Likely an attempt to obscure the phrase from search.

Folks here in LA will give you "shut up right now" looks if you speak ill of the CoS in a public place.

Hardly. The CoS is like LA's version of the Amish. There aren't many of them and, much like wild animals, they're more scared of you than you are of them. The most exciting thing they ever do is pay for some floats in a Christmas parade once a year. I think they had a Garfield float last year.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#77

Post by thanatosmin »

pseingatl wrote: post #61

Because the NYT bestseller list is essentially not an accurate report, but "fake news." In 1983 William Peter Blatty, author of The Exorcist, filed a lawsuit against the NYT for failing to include his book Legion on the list, despite provable sales. The Times won the lawsuit by claiming that their list does not in fact reflect bestsellers, but their own editorial opinion as to what constitutes a bestseller. In other…

Please consider reading the article. It was placed on the list as a consequence of a scheme to manipulate the sales data—exactly opposite what you suggest.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#78

Post by mcphage »

protomyth wrote: post #49
rcthompson wrote: post #28

The consensus I've seen from people in the publishing industry is that lots of books buy their way onto the NYT bestseller list, but this one is just being much less subtle about it.

A bit more irritating to fellow publishers (sour grapes) because this publisher didn’t have to fork out actual cash for their own books. Feel sorry for the stores taking the orders with no hope of actual sales.

> Feel sorry for the stores taking the orders with no hope of actual sales.

Since it's not clear if the book has actually even been published, I'm not sure those orders would ever be fulfilled.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#79

Post by mcphage »

briandear wrote: post #16

It Seems like some sort of Neilson Ratings System would be more representative than basing it purely on sales. Or lower the bulk threshold to one. Meaning a single sale of a title “counts” while >1 sales in a transaction counts as 1. Buying 5 copies of one book doesn’t mean it’s being sold (or willingly read by) to 5 distinct people. So it’s popularity is really just “1” because only one person actually bought it. Th…

> Or lower the bulk threshold to one. Meaning a single sale of a title “counts” while >1 sales in a transaction counts as 1.

Not knowing their data, it could be that they settled on 30 because reducing the number below that didn't change the results, and was more effort (ie, expensive) to tabulate.

Re: How did “Handbook for Mortals” get on the NYT bestseller list?

#80

Post by protomyth »

mcphage wrote: post #78
protomyth wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit more irritating to fellow publishers (sour grapes) because this publisher didn’t have to fork out actual cash for their own books. Feel sorry for the stores taking the orders with no hope of actual sales.

> Feel sorry for the stores taking the orders with no hope of actual sales. Since it's not clear if the book has actually even been published, I'm not sure those orders would ever be fulfilled.

Yeah, but some poor sap at the book store has to deal with this crap. Paper cuts add up.
Post reply on HN