The post I had planned about JK Rowling has already been written and, I have to say, worded much better than what I would have wrote and that.
Conspiracy or just plain fancied seeing what would happen without her history having an effect? Suppose we'll never know. A few have said the sales were terrible, obviously forgetting that for what appeared to be a first time author, she was never going to hit number one. It is, as the Guardian says, down to advertising. Without a big budget, no one knows the book is out there. There was also a limited amount of self promotion she could do, book signings were out for the obvious reason as well as radio and local newspapers. Without them, 1,500 doesn't sound that bad in terms of sales.
The funniest thing of all (I think) is 99% of bookshops and supermarkets haven't got it in stock. It's zoomed up the kindle chart which realistically is the only way of buying it until the distribution chain swings into action. How quickly can they print 50 or 100,000 of the books though? Or are the conspiracy theorists going to claim there are warehouses full of books waiting for this day as it's been planned well in advance.
The false bio is in some ways disturbing though. I wonder whether it was her idea or the result of some market research that says the best chance of being a crime writer is to be male and ex-forces. Anyone who creates a pen name for whatever reason must go through the same choices. Does being ex-forces or ex-police make you a better writer or a better perceived writer though.
To be honest, If she'd have come clean at the start I probably wouldn't have bought it. I guess I will read it at some point, but I won't rush out and buy it when it finally does hit the shops.