After all that, Omid Scobie’s controversial book only sold 9,000 copies in America during its first week
- The new release was easily surpassed by Britney Spears' memoir
- Scobie's book was number 731 on Amazon's bestseller list yesterday
Omid Scobie's controversial book Endgame sold only 8,923 copies in its first week in America.
According to the American ranking system Book Scan, the new edition was easily surpassed by Britney Spears' memoir, which sold 34,438 copies last week.
Scobie's book hit number 731 on Amazon's bestseller list yesterday, which insiders called “disappointing” given the publicity it has received.
Endgame made headlines around the world after it was revealed that the Dutch version of the book 'accidentally' included the names of the two Royals who reportedly wondered what skin color Meghan Markle and Prince Harry's unborn son Archie would have.
A source told the MoS: 'These figures are disappointing when you consider how much promotion Scobie has done for the book and how much publicity has been generated by the Dutch scandal.
Omid Scobie's controversial book Endgame sold only 8,923 copies in its first week in America
According to the American ranking system Book Scan, the new edition was easily surpassed by Britney Spears' memoir, which sold 34,438 copies last week.
Prince Harry's book Spare sold 4,562 copies last week and has been out since January
Only 6,448 copies of Endgame were sold in Britain in its first week. Scobie has repeatedly denied including the names of King Charles and the Princess of Wales in the book, although he has claimed they may have been included in an early version sent to Dutch translators.
'Prince Harry's book Spare sold 4,562 copies last week and has been out since January.'
Only 6,448 copies of Endgame were sold in Britain in its first week. Scobie has repeatedly denied including the names of King Charles and the Princess of Wales in the book, although he has claimed they may have been included in an early version sent to Dutch translators.
Scobie, 42, wrote in a newspaper last week: 'Unbeknownst to me at the time, early and unclear text was provided to the Dutch publisher so that they could begin the translation, on the understanding that their translation would be updated.'
But the publisher called that 'factually incorrect' and added: 'We do not recognize ourselves in his representation of the events.'