IngramSpark Code Update

Okay. Got clarification about IngramSpark code usage via the IBPA.

Per IBPA the actual policy is: “no more than five (5) uses p/month, with an annual maximum of 50 uses per IngramSpark account based on the anniversary date. The five uses include a combination of uses for both title set-ups and revisions.”

I interpret that as 50 code uses no matter the source. So not 50 IBPA, 50 ALLi, 50 NiNC, but just 50 total.

I’m SOL for a while because I didn’t have that language before.

I was a member of both IBPA and ALLi to have code access and was using my five codes from each every month and thought that was allowed. This new language makes it clear that IngramSpark had another restriction in the background.

So. If you are going to use IngramSpark for your books plan on only having 50 updates or revisions per year. That means, for example, that you do not want to keep your also by updated for each new release for a long series in multiple formats like I was doing. (30 code uses right there for my latest release.)

I mean, granted, you could still pay $25 to do so, but at that point I think the value of having up-to-date also by content is outweighed by the cost.

Had I known about the full policy I would’ve, for example, only updated the also by section of my first book when I published the last one. And maybe not even that, because that’s still six code uses across formats for each release.

Anyway. Not something that will impact many, but definitely something that impacted me so passing it along.

Author: M.L. Humphrey

M.L. Humphrey is an author who has been published under a variety of pen names and across a variety of subjects and genres. You can contact M.L. at mlhumphreywriter [at]

5 thoughts on “IngramSpark Code Update”

  1. I honestly just don’t understand why they charge. I seriously doubt they have someone sitting there reading through manuscripts to review changes (and if they are, $25 means that person is underpaid…) and so it really costs nothing for Ingram to post the changes to files after their automated system runs its checks. What do they hope to accomplish with this limitation, other than ‘free’ income for them? (I’m guessing that’s probably precisely it, but I’m also cynical, so…)


    1. Honestly, I think there was someone who said, “Look how many codes get used every year, that’s $$$$ we’re leaving on the table.” But what they failed to realize is that something people were getting for free did not have that value of $25 or $50 that they assign it.

      I was willing to pay $250/year for IBPA and ALLi membership to have the ability to update my books when needed, because that was $2 per update. But I’m not going to pay $25 to fix a typo that says “inert” instead of “insert” that was missed during multiple editing passes, has not been mentioned by any readers, and won’t materially impact someone’s ability to learn the material.

      And I do think they manually review covers, due to the fact it takes at least a day to approve any changes there, but not interior updates. They once approved an interior for me that had the wrong book.

      Really what they need is a flat fee per year for their larger users and/or different fees for initial title setup and then updates. I rarely if ever have something kicked back by them for changes anymore, which makes me think it’s the new users who drive their costs for manual review.

      And you’d also think the larger, more established users are actually the ones generating sales for them, too, where they can make more money.

      At the end of the day it’s their business so they can do whatever they want. I just wish they actually clearly communicated so I could run my business without unpleasant surprises from them on a regular basis. Good thing 90% of my print sales aren’t actually through them.


      1. “Good thing 90% of my print sales aren’t actually through them.” Same here, or actually less. In fact so far my only sales through Ingram have been pre-orders (which was the whole point of utilizing them, so yay!)

        Liked by 1 person

  2. I found your post while researching the question of whether the IBPA codes and the ALLI codes could be stacked, resulting in 10 uses per month/100 per year. I’m still wondering, because you say the language you quoted came from IBPA. As far as I can tell from what you wrote, it could apply to the codes IBPA gives its members, and the same policy could apply separately to the codes ALLI gives its members. So knowing that doesn’t tell me whether or not it’s legit to use both. The fact that you were able to implies that IS allows it. Do you have any further clarification since you posted this?


    1. I don’t think you can stack them. You can get 10 uses a month by using both sets of codes, but I believe you will be capped at 50 for the IngramSpark account for the year. At least that’s what looks like happened with me. Hard to tell because I don’t know when they implemented the cap.

      At this point since D2D uses IngramSpark for distribution and doesn’t charge I’d recommend using them instead if you’re dealing with a size they can handle. (I have some shorter titles they can’t handle, but for a normal novel size you’re covered.) They allow one free update per title per quarter as I understand it but I have yet to test that.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: