Jump to content

What would it take...?


jdiddyesquire

Recommended Posts

So I'm a big eBook proponent. I read pretty much 95% electronically. In fact, I haven't purchased a hard copy in almost three years.

Over at SFFworld forums Joe Abercrombie poked his head into a thread and made a remark about how he doesn't make anything on second hand copies:

They are very welcome to a percentage of my profits on your second hand purchases...

It reminds me that authors really get so little from each copy of their book sold. Many work on upfront contracts and some get money upfront and then a piece of what sells. It's a pretty inexact science both for publishers (who have to give money upfront for an unwritten manuscript) and authors (who may not be getting anything close to the actual value of their work).

Given the boom in eReaders, what would it take for a big name author to eschew traditional publishing (and possibly hard copies all together) and print solely electronically? How big would the author have to be?

If GRRM said, I'm publishing A Dance with Dragons in eBook format only and to hell with my publisher - how many fewer copies would he sell? How much more money would he make getting almost all the proceeds himself? (I realize GRRM is under contract with Bantam, so this is a hypothetical scenario.)

It's like when a reporter goes solo and transitions from writing for the Washington Post to writing their own site and being a talking head on the news networks. They make a crapload more once they no longer need the exposure that being with a major paper brings. No author has made this transition yet, but it can't be that far away, can it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd refuse to buy if it wasn't a paper book.

You would not finish ASoIF if it wasn't hard copy published?

As a side note: I'm not trying to pass judgement on eReading vs. regular books. I'm merely asking the question of - is it in an authors better interest to publish that way if they're big enough? And how far away are we from someone possibly making that decision?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd refuse to buy if it wasn't a paper book.

I wouldn't read it if it wasn't in paper. But I can't imagine an author like GRRM doing this if there was actually no "print on demand" paper option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't read it if it wasn't in paper. But I can't imagine an author like GRRM doing this if there was actually no "print on demand" paper option.

That's an interesting point. As opposed to doing a run of books with an unknown amount to be sold, people just order a book be printed on demand. Probably would have to accept some kind of reduction in production value to make that work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No author has made this transition yet, but it can't be that far away, can it?
Doesn't Cory Doctorow publish only in electronic form? It would probably be more profitable for author to market their book directly via internet, sure, just as it is theoretically better for music artists (like Radiohead), however some have tried and been disillusioned (like Prince). It's not that simple to make money, but it will develop, though I doubt the paper book will ever be abandoned.

Anyway, I think the day we won't have physical copies of books is actually very far. I really really doubt established authors would gain anything in stopping to publish on paper, that's asking to lose 90% of their readership (stat just made-up on the spot). There are many problems with electronic reading (as I heard about it, maybe it changed):


  • You don't actually own the book, under current laws. Any fucker who sold it to you can decide to erase it from your device, or alter it. "Patches" for books are not so inconceivable.
  • You cannot actually save/backup/retain possession of the book you actually bought. It sucks.
  • You cannot easily lend a book to people you know. It's against copyright laws, and there is still a big push by corporate pencilnecks to harden them.
  • You cannot display the thing as a physical object, bye to people dropping by, looking at your shelves and asking about one book or another. Cover art? Why for?
  • Incidentally, book publishers insist that use of DRM-stuff costs them a lot and thus e-books (at least in my country) are well on their way to be more expensive than printed copies.
  • Which is a shame, because you also must buy an e-reader, which costs you something more, again.
  • Problem with that e-reader is that you cannot decide to take it and one crappy book to your trek in the marshes, thinking that if water gets into it, or sand, or algae, or it's bitten by a croc, or whatever, it's ok to throw it away
  • Also problematic is the fact that paper books don't actually need batteries to run. After the first week of my trek in the mountains, it's cool to still be able to read something. Having to worry about device autonomy may seem a small thing, but it has been for me, one of the biggest annoyances in my e-reading forays (at it was at home, too. When my e-device dies while I'm on the crapper, it's grounds for it to be thrown away. Perhaps less an issue with modern specialised devices, but still a point)
  • Not to forget that e-devices are strictly mono-user. When you have bought one paper comic and one novel, your kid can read the novel while you read the comic. elsewhere. Or inversely. Not so with an e-reader. Unless you buy another reader, and buy ANOTHER copy of the two items mentioned.
  • Reading stuff outside on a sunny day is apparently asking for too much.
  • Not everyone can or does own an e-reader, in the world.
  • Physical books are quasi-impossible to "pirate". E-books, not so much, and unless the model changes (see creative commons) and publishers change with it (not a whelk's chance in a supernova), no way traditional publishers will support anyone to go there, and there is more to publishing books than just writing them, just look at fanfiction.net.

All in all, I might actually buy an e-reader at one point, but that will be when all the aforementioned snags will have disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't Cory Doctorow publish only in electronic form? It would probably be more profitable for author to market their book directly via internet, sure, just as it is theoretically better for music artists (like Radiohead), however some have tried and been disillusioned (like Prince). It's not that simple to make money, but it will develop, though I doubt the paper book will ever be abandoned.

Anyway, I think the day we won't have physical copies of books is actually very far. I really really doubt established authors would gain anything in stopping to publish on paper, that's asking to lose 90% of their readership (stat just made-up on the spot). There are many problems with electronic reading (as I heard about it, maybe it changed):


  • You don't actually own the book, under current laws. Any fucker who sold it to you can decide to erase it from your device, or alter it. "Patches" for books are not so inconceivable.
  • You cannot actually save/backup/retain possession of the book you actually bought. It sucks.
  • You cannot easily lend a book to people you know. It's against copyright laws, and there is still a big push by corporate pencilnecks to harden them.
  • You cannot display the thing as a physical object, bye to people dropping by, looking at your shelves and asking about one book or another. Cover art? Why for?
  • Incidentally, book publishers insist that use of DRM-stuff costs them a lot and thus e-books (at least in my country) are well on their way to be more expensive than printed copies.
  • Which is a shame, because you also must buy an e-reader, which costs you something more, again.
  • Problem with that e-reader is that you cannot decide to take it and one crappy book to your trek in the marshes, thinking that if water gets into it, or sand, or algae, or it's bitten by a croc, or whatever, it's ok to throw it away
  • Also problematic is the fact that paper books don't actually need batteries to run. After the first week of my trek in the mountains, it's cool to still be able to read something. Having to worry about device autonomy may seem a small thing, but it has been for me, one of the biggest annoyances in my e-reading forays (at it was at home, too. When my e-device dies while I'm on the crapper, it's grounds for it to be thrown away. Perhaps less an issue with modern specialised devices, but still a point)
  • Not to forget that e-devices are strictly mono-user. When you have bought one paper comic and one novel, your kid can read the novel while you read the comic. elsewhere. Or inversely. Not so with an e-reader. Unless you buy another reader, and buy ANOTHER copy of the two items mentioned.
  • Reading stuff outside on a sunny day is apparently asking for too much.
  • Not everyone can or does own an e-reader, in the world.
  • Physical books are quasi-impossible to "pirate". E-books, not so much, and unless the model changes (see creative commons) and publishers change with it (not a whelk's chance in a supernova), no way traditional publishers will support anyone to go there, and there is more to publishing books than just writing them, just look at fanfiction.net.

All in all, I might actually buy an e-reader at one point, but that will be when all the aforementioned snags will have disappeared.

Some of that's not true or a little off, some of it is spot on. I don't really want to get into the debate about the goodness of eReading. I was just wondering at what point an author can do better for himself without having to deal with a publisher. Like you say, the answer is probably never. But I find it intriguing that authors are so beholden to publishers and now we have a developing market that could change that paradigm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I find it intriguing that authors are so beholden to publishers and now we have a developing market that could change that paradigm.
It's starting to change. Blogosphere, creative commons, digital publishing and all that stuff weights more and more.

But I think the inconveniences of eReading are an integral part of the problem. Compare it to music: music on portable devices caught fire. Why? In my humble opinion, it's because it became easier to listen to it, and it added something: you had a choice between listening a few tracks on a bulky device at home, and listening an ever changing, hour-long playslist stored on an handheld device. Going digital gave something more, improved ergonomy, pleasure, and availability, and it removed nothing...

Would it be true for books? Nope. They are already portable, they don't have the limitation of music in the first place (needing electricity, among others) and the electronic version would add only the boon of getting to carry your library with you in your bag, in the shape of a single brochure, at the cost of severe added limitations. Not the same beast.

So why would author not jump on ePublishing? Not only because publishers actually do more than print books, but because readership is not ready to follow them, and will not be for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's starting to change. Blogosphere, creative commons, digital publishing and all that stuff weights more and more.

But I think the inconveniences of eReading are an integral part of the problem. Compare it to music: music on portable devices caught fire. Why? In my humble opinion, it's because it became easier to listen to it, and it added something: you had a choice between listening a few tracks on a bulky device at home, and listening an ever changing, hour-long playslist stored on an handheld device. Going digital gave something more, improved ergonomy, pleasure, and availability, and it removed nothing...

Would it be true for books? Nope. They are already portable, they don't have the limitation of music in the first place (needing electricity, among others) and the electronic version would add only the boon of getting to carry your library with you in your bag, in the shape of a single brochure, at the cost of severe added limitations. Not the same beast.

So why would author not jump on ePublishing? Not only because publishers actually do more than print books, but because readership is not ready to follow them, and will not be for a long time.

Maybe I'm just skewed. Every person I know that reads a lot - does so on an eReader. Is that because I hang with a relatively affluent crowd? Maybe. Or is it because I live in a big city where no one has space to keep books? Maybe.

I know that the vast majority of the people of this forum are pretty down on eReading. I dunno. I've broken any emotional attachment to actual books.

(the battery issue is a bit a misnomer... the iPad sucks for reading battery wise, but my Kindle lasts for 10 days of constant reading.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the primary benefits of reading for me is that it's cheap entertainment. A library card is free, and eBooks are (generally, at least for the authors I read) still significantly more expensive than waiting and buying it second hand.

Honestly, the only reason I've ever considered getting an eReader is to access free books from Project Gutenberg. But I can do that on my computer if there's something I really want to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It reminds me that authors really get so little from each copy of their book sold.

Yes, and this is why I try to only buy second hand books if they are not currently being published. I like for authors to get a cut from every book I buy and this doesn't happen when you buy used books. I also like letting publishers know that I like a particular author so I always try to buy new if I can.

Given the boom in eReaders, what would it take for a big name author to eschew traditional publishing (and possibly hard copies all together) and print solely electronically?

Its starting to happen. Not the big huge authors...yet. But a few pretty decently selling authors are experimenting with it to varied degrees.

I can't speak to the Science Fiction and Fantasy genre, but within the Romance genre, a number of long time selling authors have been able to buy back the rights (or had the rights revert back to them) from their publisher for their backlist titles and release them themself as ebooks. A lot of these books weren't currently available from their publisher and their popularity had driven the price for the backlist titles to the roof...and of course the author was getting none of that. So I think its a nice way for these books to be made available once again and for the author to receive compensation for them.

Also, I've noticed a number of authors starting to self publishing short novellas only as ebooks. These are stories that would be too short to be published in print form...and/or would cost more in printed form than most people would be willing to pay for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's at least in part because romance series are more like magazines than books. I do think the E-format lends itself well to newspapers and magazines.

I'm not sure what you are thinking about? Are you thinking about those shorter Harlequin romances? That's not at all what I'm talking about when I mention romance authors releasing their backlist titles in ebook format. I'm talking about single title romance novels. They can run 400 - 600 pages long. So not at all like newspapers and magazines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and this is why I try to only buy second hand books if they are not currently being published. I like for authors to get a cut from every book I buy and this doesn't happen when you buy used books. I also like letting publishers know that I like a particular author so I always try to buy new if I can.

Its starting to happen. Not the big huge authors...yet. But a few pretty decently selling authors are experimenting with it to varied degrees.

I can't speak to the Science Fiction and Fantasy genre, but within the Romance genre, a number of long time selling authors have been able to buy back the rights (or had the rights revert back to them) from their publisher for their backlist titles and release them themself as ebooks. A lot of these books weren't currently available from their publisher and their popularity had driven the price for the backlist titles to the roof...and of course the author was getting none of that. So I think its a nice way for these books to be made available once again and for the author to receive compensation for them.

Also, I've noticed a number of authors starting to self publishing short novellas only as ebooks. These are stories that would be too short to be published in print form...and/or would cost more in printed form than most people would be willing to pay for them.

Ya the novella one is interest. Brent Weeks just released his through Orbit. What was his advantage to doing it through Orbit? Why just release it on his own? With the internet and his already relatively high visibility rating, couldn't he have sold it as well on his own?

Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Self-publishing does not necessarily equal e-publishing. You also have cases where, for example, Tor lets Martha Wells's 1993 debut novel The Element of Fire go out of print, she secures the rights to it, and makes a revised version available print on demand via the Lulu.com service. Given the possibility of POD, there's not really any incentive for an author with full rights to a text to release only an e-book. So while you're framing the question in terms of e-books, it sounds to me like you're really wondering about self-publishing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have an e-reader and I have no plans on getting one.

I have two big issues with e-books. First I hate the DRM software and propriatatry nature of many of the readers (Kindle in particular). I want all ebooks to be the same format and free of DRM.

Also, I'm old school. I love books. I love the joy of holding a book and the intimacy of turning pages. I want at least one part of my life free from technology, batteries and the like. I often am in front of a computer all day, the last thing I want is to be in front of a screen again for my recreation (even with all the advances in e-ink and such).

And another big hurtle for me - I have a library of thousands of books. About half of those I've not read yet and a lot of others are books I'd consider re-reading in the future. I don't have the finances, nor inclination to purchase electronic versions of books I already own. Publishers really need to figure out a way to give out an electronic version with physical books.

So, if GRRM only released DOD in ebook form, I would not read it. The truth is I don't have plans to read it until he finishes the series anyway, but that is another issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have an e-reader and I have no plans on getting one.

I have two big issues with e-books. First I hate the DRM software and propriatatry nature of many of the readers (Kindle in particular). I want all ebooks to be the same format and free of DRM.

Also, I'm old school. I love books. I love the joy of holding a book and the intimacy of turning pages. I want at least one part of my life free from technology, batteries and the like. I often am in front of a computer all day, the last thing I want is to be in front of a screen again for my recreation (even with all the advances in e-ink and such).

And another big hurtle for me - I have a library of thousands of books. About half of those I've not read yet and a lot of others are books I'd consider re-reading in the future. I don't have the finances, nor inclination to purchase electronic versions of books I already own. Publishers really need to figure out a way to give out an electronic version with physical books.

So, if GRRM only released DOD in ebook form, I would not read it. The truth is I don't have plans to read it until he finishes the series anyway, but that is another issue.

DRM issue is annoying. I'm not sure what the final result of that will be. Personally, I'm not a book lender. In fact, I think book lending (and second hand market via the internet) is a bit of problem for giving authors accurate sales numbers. I personally have a desire in making sure the author/publisher gets my dime for a book I want to read.

What I'd like to see is a way to monetize lending the book. So I can buy my eBook for $8, and then lend it to a friend for $1 or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DRM issue is annoying. I'm not sure what the final result of that will be. Personally, I'm not a book lender. In fact, I think book lending (and second hand market via the internet) is a bit of problem for giving authors accurate sales numbers. I personally have a desire in making sure the author/publisher gets my dime for a book I want to read.

What I'd like to see is a way to monetize lending the book. So I can buy my eBook for $8, and then lend it to a friend for $1 or something like that.

I'm not a lender or a sharer. I just want the flexibility to do with my book what I need (after all, I bought it, I should own and control - currently DRM makes it like renting). I want to be able to tranfer the book from one device to another with no hassls - whether it's different brands of e-reader, a phone, my computer, an ipad, etc.

I'm a big believer that in general, second-hand book buying is good for reading and good for authors. The gains out weigh any perceived loss in sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya the novella one is interest. Brent Weeks just released his through Orbit. What was his advantage to doing it through Orbit? Why just release it on his own? With the internet and his already relatively high visibility rating, couldn't he have sold it as well on his own? Who knows?

I'm not familiar with Orbit. But each author when deciding to go the ebook on their own route can hook up with an ebook publisher to do so or self publish. Obviously each author has their reasons going the way they choose. One romance author decided to self publish a novella, instead of through her print publisher or a dedicated ebook publisher, for what seems to be several reasons: (1)money; (2) ability to make publication available to international readers at the same time as US readers; (3) to eliminate distribution/shelving issues (i.e. not being able to get Walmart to carry titles once they aren't brand new; and (4) to eliminate problems with older titles no longer being made available by the publisher. I suppose 2-4 are really just other subsets of 1 as they all seem to come down to being able to sell more copies of her works for longer periods of time...which means more money for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...