sequel or single...publishing?

Question

I have written a book that by it self can be a single story but I made it to be a sequel. For publishing which is better for my first type of book, a single story or a sequel type of book?

Answer 1

It is fine if you want to write a sequel, but it is better for publishing purposes if it also can stand alone. A publisher doesn't want to get into a two or more book contract with an untested author. That is scary to them because there is always the possibility the first one tanks and they owe you one more book. So it is better to sell it as a single book and then offer them a sequel after the first one is in the works or out. This gives them the option and also frees you up to make a better deal in the event the first one is a runaway hit. Pax- C

Answer 2

It all depends entirely upon how the book sells. This is why it is so important to make sure that if the book sell poorly, that it is a story that doesn't HAVE to have a sequel. Publishers are not going to buy a sequel to a book that did not sell very well. If luck shines your way and it sells alot of copies, then you can write the next book. People say that a sequel will almost always take about half of the time to write as the first one, and a third book takes half the time of the second. P.S.- don't mention it is a series to the publishers; they get nervous about them. Good Luck!

Answer 3

When you say "story," do you mean a short story? And do you mean a story that can stand on its own as opposed to a story that leads into another book?
Getting published is extremely difficult. You need to write this the way that you think is best and worry about sequels later.