Success from talent - 1, Failure from bad luck and poor marketing - 0

An unusual set of circumstances have popped up that permit a crude experiment towards answering a longstanding question - do accomplished writers succeed because of their established name or because they are indeed superior writers? A better formulation might be - To what degree do established writers succeed because of their established brand and to what degree because they are gifted authors?

The circumstances are that J.K. Rowling, author of the phenomenally successful Harry Potter series (450 million copies worldwide), published in the UK in April, a crime mystery under a pseudonym. The details are here.

If the proposition is that established authors succeed not based on the quality of their writing but on their personal brand, then one would expect Rowling to not have been able to find a publisher at all (as there is a nearly infinite number of manuscripts available for review by a definitely limited number of publishers). The corollary is that, even if published, the book ought to have failed. Most debut novels by unknown authors sink without a trace. A successful debut novel is one that sells 5,000 copies in hardback.

The counter-proposition is that, while there is always an element of luck, good writers ultimately win through, with or without a brand name, and with or without a marketing campaign.

So Rowling writes a new book outside of her field of accomplishment (adult mystery genre rather than YA fantasy). Only her agent knew of the deception. The book was well received by a number of publishers but was rejected as not being sufficiently distinctive to breakthrough in the crowded crime market. However, once picked up by mainstream publisher, Little, Brown, it sold about 250-500 copies a month (for the two full months since April) since its publication (depending on whether you go with the higher numbers from the publisher or the lower numbers from Neilsen Bookscan). At that rate, in only its first year, and without any authorial marketing (for obvious reasons), the book was set to sell between 3-6,000 copies, putting it solidly in the range of a successful debut novel. In addition, "It achieved glowing reviews and laudatory quotations for the cover from well-known crime writers."

Natural experiments such as this have the major flaw of being singular in nature and usually there are all sorts of uncontrollable variables that introduce alternate explanations. That said, this particular experiment would seem to support the hypothesis that good writers create their own market regardless of brand name and prior success.

Which is not to say that brand name doesn't matter. While brand name might not explain publication, sales success, and critical reviews, it does clearly explain the new run of 300,000 copies which has been ordered up versus the initial print run of 10,000.