If you haven’t commented here before, your first comment will be held for MaryAnn’s approval. This is an anti-spam, anti-troll measure. If you’re not a spammer or a troll, your comment will be approved, and all your future comments will post immediately.
subscribe
notify of
9 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
view all comments
LaSargenta
LaSargenta
Thu, Aug 24, 2017 11:42pm

That is QUITE the tale!

PJK
PJK
Sat, Aug 26, 2017 8:13am

This isn’t a new thing. Scientology did this with L. Ron Hubbard novels years ago. Everytime a new LRH novel would come out it would instruct his followers to buy multiple copies (as many as they could afford, sometimes even more) as soon as possible.

This had two effects: 1) it would push the book onto the NY Times bestseller lists, where Scientology hoped it would both boost sales and/or seduce more people into Scientology, 2) it brought a lot of money into the coffers of Scientology which basically was the whole reason for Scientology to exist in the first place.

In those days (1960-1980’s) you had to buy a lot more books of course, so having the threshold become so low makes it much more easy to achieve the same thing now.

I guess that if an investment of 50000 to 100000 dollars gets you a multi million dollar publishing and/or movie deal, some people will try to game the system.

It would be better for us all if this scheme falls flat on its face, but I’m not expecting this to be last time someone tries this.

Danielm80
Danielm80
reply to  PJK
Sun, Aug 27, 2017 1:18pm

The problem isn’t new, and it isn’t limited to the publishing industry. If you’re in charge of an election, you have to deal with gerrymandering. If you’re in the concert industry, you have to deal with scalpers. If you run a casino, you have to deal with card counting.

The folks at the New York Times Book Review are very aware of the problem, which is why the bestseller list is filled with disclaimers:

https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/methodology/?_r=0

In this case, the Book Review staff caught on to the scheme and corrected the list fairly quickly—though not as quickly as they might have.

This article talks about some of the reasons why the Times doesn’t just ignore bulk sales altogether:

http://observer.com/2016/02/the-truth-about-the-new-york-times-and-wall-street-journal-bestseller-lists/

The article also points out other flaws with the bestseller list. The Book Review staff manipulates the data for its own reasons, to make the list appear influential and respectable, and to generate revenue for the Times. People in other industries do the same kind of thing, for slightly different reasons. That’s why tickets for concerts are so expensive and why gamblers say, “The house always wins.” Election fraud is an even bigger topic.

So it’s kind of up to us. We can push for changes in the system, where change is possible. And when change isn’t possible, we can look at the data with a certain amount of skepticism and make our own, informed decisions about how to spend our money, and cast our votes.

MaryAnn Johanson
reply to  Danielm80
Tue, Aug 29, 2017 3:46pm

caught on to the scheme

I think it’s more fair to say that Pajiba exposed the scam, which forced the Times’ hand. We can’t say whether the Times would have caught on if not for Pajiba’s work.

PJK
PJK
reply to  MaryAnn Johanson
Tue, Sep 12, 2017 10:38am

Strange that the NY Times considers this a sale. If I designed a system like this I would in place a rule that states that only items sold to end customers would be counted. Otherwise the publisher has such a massive loophole for gaming the system that the list would be completely untrustworthy.

MaryAnn Johanson
reply to  PJK
Tue, Sep 12, 2017 1:01pm

And that’s what has been highlighted by this book.

MaryAnn Johanson
reply to  PJK
Tue, Aug 29, 2017 3:45pm

Everytime a new LRH novel would come out it would instruct his followers to buy multiple copies (as many as they could afford, sometimes even more) as soon as possible.

This is true, but they were actually buying actual physical copies of the book. In the case of *Handbook for Mortals,* actual physical copies of the book don’t even seem to exist.

As many others have pointed out, this time, the scam was SO blatant that it was unignorable.

The NYTimes has now removed the book from its bestseller list: http://ew.com/books/2017/08/24/handbook-for-mortals-pulled-new-york-times-bestseller-list/

PJK
PJK
reply to  MaryAnn Johanson
Mon, Sep 04, 2017 3:31pm

I hadn’t caught that part, I thought they had bought copies of the book in bulk from NY Times reporting stores. At least that is how I interpreted the information in the source material.

MaryAnn Johanson
reply to  PJK
Sat, Sep 09, 2017 10:42am

They placed bulk orders for copies of the book that the stores did not have on hand, and that don’t seem to exist.