74 replies to this topic

[Darth Vader's Bastard]

This is nothing new. Amazon has been squeezing publishers ever since the introduction of the kindle. People buy a kindle and expect every book they download to be $9 or less, when that simply isn't possible from a publisher's standpoint.

[Seli]

Willie McBride, on 02 March 2012 - 12:26 PM, said:

It's the publishers' fault: they set up a market based on the same contents available in hardcover format at 25$ or in mmpb format at 8$, with all the rest happening behind the scenes. If the average reader has been trained for decades to think that reducing the size of the thing and the quality of the binding and of the paper makes the price change so much, could you seriously blame him if he feels ripped off if an ebook (a file!) costs more than 10$?

The big problem is that publishers have convinced everyone you are paying for physical quality in hardcover or trade, while you are mostly paying for the honour of getting the book first. That does not change with ebooks, if you want the book soon after publication you are probably willing to pay for it. And slowly decreasing the cost of an ebook over time should yield the highest returns. And that is still valid when you don't have cannibalization of hard-cover sales in mind.

felice, on 02 March 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

Printing, shipping, and warehousing of physical books is not an insignificant cost. They aren't the only costs - ebooks shouldn't be free - but the profit margin on an ebook is much bigger than that on a paperback at the same price.

Isn't a lot of the warehousing at the salespoint? I never got a good overview of what part goes where. A big point of the success of Amazon in selling paper books is that they have managed to cut the costs in their half of the chain (which used to be approximately half of the cover prize for traditional retailers) to a minimum. So a fairer comparison of what the publishers have to work with is half of the cover prize against ebook price minus 30% (Apple/Amazon cut). I don't know if the difference is that huge at this point in time, keeping in mind that costs for publishers for setting up a proper IT infrastructure have to be paid from somewhere. But to be honest the few break-downs I have seen don't really make sense.
But still, in the end there is no need for pricepoint to make sense compared to 'cost'.

fionwe1987, on 02 March 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Did you read what I wrote? Ebooks cannot be resold, I cannot lend them out (unless I own a Nook and so does my friend), and I have DRM preventing me from opening it in any software I choose. All of that reduces the value of the ebook for ME, the customer. Did the author and the publisher spend nearly as much to create an ebook as a physical book? Sure. But till they invent a physical book that sticks to you, can only be opened inside the store you bought it from and is illegal to resell or lend out, you can't charge me more for an ebook that does less for me.
...

I don't need to find space to store my ebooks as I do for physical books (I don't ever sell them), I don't have to find dozens of boxes to move them, although I cannot use them as room decoration either. I can search in their contents easily, get them easily to check something (even if I am hours away from my own books). In most stores I can re-download should I ever lose my copy. I can copy bits easily for quotations.
There are things that for me make an ebook more useful and worth more than a paper book. Is that true in all cases: no. Will that be true for all readers: no. So what should be charged for an ebook: tricky. And they are still trying to find a balance in getting the most money out of people that don't mind higher prizes and those that want to pay less.

The same thing is happening now in PC games, trying to see what people are willing to pay for the ease of a digital download vs a cheaper physical copy vs a discounted copy of either. And there is still money to be earned from selling to all three, even if people are complaining all the time.

[Ser Plissken]

Ser Jeedeye, on 02 March 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

This is nothing new. Amazon has been squeezing publishers ever since the introduction of the kindle. People buy a kindle and expect every book they download to be $9 or less, when that simply isn't possible from a publisher's standpoint.

Since I stopped having to worry about where to put them, I've been buying 3 or 4 books every month for the last two years.  Before I got my kindle, that figure was was probably 2 or 3 per year.

I don't expect every e-book I download to be nine bucks or less, but what I don't expect to see are day-of-release e-books costing more than the hardcovers.  That makes no sense whatsoever, unless of course your aim is to confuse and alienate your customers.

e-readers represent a tremendous opportunity for both publishers and booksellers, let's hope they can sort it out...

[Ormond]

unJon, on 02 March 2012 - 08:29 AM, said:

Before the flame war gets this topic closed, I just wanted to point out that it is super hilarious and ironic that stores like B&N are being defended and the demise of Borders is being bemoaned by the same arguments that were used to attack the national bookstores no more than a decade ago. Borders and B&N were evil back then and were going to destroy the publishing industry by squeezing margins and putting authors out of business. Literally the same arguments as are being thrown against Amazon.

As the person who began this thread, I would simply like to state that I never have defended Barnes & Noble and avoid shopping there even more than I avoid shopping on Amazon.

[Darth Vader's Bastard]

Ser Plissken, on 02 March 2012 - 07:29 PM, said:

Since I stopped having to worry about where to put them, I've been buying 3 or 4 books every month for the last two years.  Before I got my kindle, that figure was was probably 2 or 3 per year.

I don't expect every e-book I download to be nine bucks or less, but what I don't expect to see are day-of-release e-books costing more than the hardcovers.  That makes no sense whatsoever, unless of course your aim is to confuse and alienate your customers.

e-readers represent a tremendous opportunity for both publishers and booksellers, let's hope they can sort it out...

Did you buy your e-reader on the condition that books would cost less? Because I've never seen amazon/kindle or any e-reader vendor make such claims.

The fact that a digital book should cost less than a hard copy is the biggest misconception that consumers have, mostly due to Amazon's policies and sneaky/snakey ways. You think publishers are saving thousands of dollars by putting a book out digital as well as print? You'd be wrong.

You're not paying for paper and ink or words on pages. You're paying for content, for a story.

[Ser Plissken]

Jeedeye, did you actually read my post?  Where did I say that e-books should be cheaper than physicals?

Quote: "You're not paying for paper and ink or words on pages. You're paying for content, for a story."

I totally agree.  So can you explain why it is acceptable to charge more for an e-book, a format that costs less to manufacture, warehouse, ship, etc...?

Edited by Ser Plissken, 05 March 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[Ormond]

I don't think that the cost of creating and distributing an ebook vs. a paper book should be the main deciding factor in its price. It should be the value to the consumer. If someone figures out how to manufacture any item for less but the quality remains the same, isn't any increased profit he or she gains earned?

I really do resonate with the argument that ebooks are of less value because they cannot be easily loaned or sold to someone else when the consumer is through with them. That should be a factor that would make ebooks cost less. However, that has to be balanced with the aspects of ebooks that give more value. Even though I do not own an e-reader myself and will probably be among the last in my circle to get one, I realize that they have certain advantages over paper books. The ability to increase font size is a wonderful boon for those with any sort of vision problem. One of my colleagues also says that the ereader is much better for her to hold than a paper book because of the arthritis in her hands. Then there is the main factor why so many prefer ebooks over paper books -- their convenience, both in terms of the ability to immediately download them, and the ability to store hundreds of them on one portable device.

Consumers have certainly shown they are willing to pay more for convenience in many aspects of life. Though I haven't checked the difference myself, I would assume the price for milk and bread at "convenience stores" like 7Eleven is higher than the price at supermarkets. If you take a broken appliance in to be fixed, you expect lower charges than if the repair person comes to your home to fix it.

It certainly seems possible to me that the loss of lending and resale ability on the one hand is balanced by the increased conveniences of size, portability, and format change capability on the other, and so to price an ebook at about the same as a hard copy would be justified.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Ormond, on 05 March 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

I realize that they have certain advantages over paper books. The ability to increase font size is a wonderful boon for those with any sort of vision problem. One of my colleagues also says that the ereader is much better for her to hold than a paper book because of the arthritis in her hands. Then there is the main factor why so many prefer ebooks over paper books -- their convenience, both in terms of the ability to immediately download them, and the ability to store hundreds of them on one portable device.

Honestly, the single biggest thing I love about my Kindle Fire is the ability to hook into my library's collection of ebooks.  I've been reading some stuff that I previously skipped over, and might not have gone to the effort to actually purchase.  My favorite stuff I still get in hardcover, or I may download a few books.  But damn, the ability to have an entire card catalog for instant, free temporary download is pretty sweet.

[felice]

Ser Jeedeye, on 05 March 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

You're not paying for paper and ink or words on pages. You're paying for content, for a story.

Sure, the publishers give away paper and ink for free out of the goodness of their hearts, and the distributors are happy to move them around the world as a public service. The content is (mostly) what we want, but for physical books, the physical costs also have to be covered.

Ormond, on 05 March 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

Consumers have certainly shown they are willing to pay more for convenience in many aspects of life. Though I haven't checked the difference myself, I would assume the price for milk and bread at "convenience stores" like 7Eleven is higher than the price at supermarkets.

Because convenience stores have higher costs; they don't get the volume discounts that supermarket chains do, and they don't have the same turnover either. And on-site repair people have extra travel costs. Price should be and generally is a function of cost.

[Maia]

Ormond, on 05 March 2012 - 11:33 AM, said:

It certainly seems possible to me that the loss of lending and resale ability on the one hand is balanced by the increased conveniences of size, portability, and format change capability on the other, and so to price an ebook at about the same as a hard copy would be justified.

Well, increased convenience is payed-for by the purchase of the e-book reader device, which is the actual source of it . I fail to see why it should be acceptable to be charged for it  twice and by parties that have little/nothing to do with it. Also, I don't see a lot of marketing for e-books. Certainly nothing that would cost nearly as much as physical displays and reservation of space at brick-and-mortar stores.

[Seli]

Maia, on 05 March 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Well, increased convenience is payed-for by the purchase of the e-book reader device, which is the actual source of it . I fail to see why it should be acceptable to be charged for it  twice and by parties that have little/nothing to do with it. Also, I don't see a lot of marketing for e-books. Certainly nothing that would cost nearly as much as physical displays and reservation of space at brick-and-mortar stores.

Perhaps partially true for those dedicated enough to buy a device for e-book reading, but there are many more people out there who buy devices capable of ebook-reading (phones, tablets, etc) who also get the added convenience of the format. And a lot of the marketing is on titles, not on format (writing from a region where penetration of ebooks is a couple of years behind the US).

[Dr. Tachyon]

ebooks Come with one big disadvantage: Their DRM ties them to a specific device or reading software and to the dealer you bought them from and who controls the DRM. This means you may lose them when you move to a different device or the shop goes out of business. Hardcover prices are out of the question under these circumstances.

[Maia]

Seli, on 05 March 2012 - 07:04 PM, said:

Perhaps partially true for those dedicated enough to buy a device for e-book reading, but there are many more people out there who buy devices capable of ebook-reading (phones, tablets, etc) who also get the added convenience of the format.

How is this relevant? Convenience still comes from device/software and is one of the deciding factors for spending money on the device in the first place, whether this device is multi-functional or single-purpose. It has already been bought and payed for - and has zero to do with publishers.

Quote

And a lot of the marketing is on titles, not on format (writing from a region where penetration of ebooks is a couple of years behind the US).

I.e. lion's share of it actually goes towards marketing physical books and does little to nothing for ebooks. Yea, a good argument for making ebooks more expensive... not.

Edited by Maia, 06 March 2012 - 01:11 PM.

[Seli]

Someone, on 06 March 2012 - 04:55 AM, said:

ebooks Come with one big disadvantage: Their DRM ties them to a specific device or reading software and to the dealer you bought them from and who controls the DRM. This means you may lose them when you move to a different device or the shop goes out of business. Hardcover prices are out of the question under these circumstances.

Smaller publishers do sell DRM free ebooks. The big six are not yet doing it, probably on orders of their corporate masters.

Maia, on 06 March 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

How is this relevant? Convenience still comes from device/software and is one of the deciding factors for spending money on the device in the first place, whether this device is multi-functional or single-purpose. It has already been bought and payed for - and has zero to do with publishers.

I.e. lion's share of it actually goes towards marketing physical books and does little to nothing for ebooks. Yea, a good argument for making ebooks more expensive... not.

Basically it is relevant once you claim that just because you buy a device capable of reading ebooks publishers should not be allowed to charge  for the convenience of the file format. That makes as much sense as claiming publishers should make paper books cheaper because you've bought a fancy bookcase, or even a Billy.

As far as I can tell the lion's share of marketing goes to a few books only anyway. But how would you tell the difference for marketing expenses and effort for a title as book, as ebook, or as audiobook? Making sure people are aware of the content works for all of them, especially in case of simultaneous releases. So it only makes sense if the costs are amortized over all available formats.

[Maia]

Seli, on 06 March 2012 - 04:06 PM, said:

Basically it is relevant once you claim that just because you buy a device capable of reading ebooks publishers should not be allowed to charge  for the convenience of the file format.

This is utterly backwards. That's like shops that I live close to charging me extra "for convenience". Convenience comes from the e-reader devices and reading software (not created by publishers), not "the format". And e-books _are_ cheaper to produce and distribute. Maybe not as much cheaper as seems at the first glance, but still.
Charging extra for them is shameless fleecing, that customer acutely feels the unfairness of, and should (and does) deservedly result in problems for publishers. They are sitting in a glasshouse, after all, given the ease of piracy.

Now, textbooks with lots interactive sequences, videos and stuff that are being planned now  - that's a different beast altogether and would be worth a premium. It would feel fair.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Someone,

Someone, on 01 March 2012 - 10:12 AM, said:

Publishers exist because printing and distributing books is expensive and somebody has to pay for all that in advance before there's revenue from the sales. Distribution in digital form removes almost all of that cost. That greatly reduces the role of the publisher and thus the amount of money they can expect to make from a book. Nobody likes it when technology makes their business model obsolete but that's what's happening.

Not entirely.  You still need a staff of editors, copy editors, and layout artists to prepare the book for publication even if the book is only being published as an ebook.  That is hardly inexpensive.  The material and transport costs are not greater than the editing and layout costs.

Or, what Mr. Abercrombie said.

For the record I hate ebooks and will not buy them.  I love my paper books and will keep purchasing them that way for as long as possible.  I sincerely hope for the remainder of my life I can keep experiencing the smell of a new book, paper ink and all.

Edited by Ser Scot A Ellison, 07 March 2012 - 07:36 AM.

[Dr. Tachyon]

Ser Scot A Ellison, on 07 March 2012 - 07:31 AM, said:

Someone,



Not entirely.  You still need a staff of editors, copy editors, and layout artists to prepare the book for publication even if the book is only being published as an ebook.  That is hardly inexpensive.  The material and transport costs are not greater than the editing and layout costs.

You don't need any of that just to get the text out there. Everybody can post a book on the net. Producing quality, finding readers, and getting paid obviously is bit harder but you don't need a publisher or a print just to get a text distributed. That's a big change.

People list all the things publishers have been doing so far and state that it still costs money. Maybe but I'm not convinced that all of that is really needed, much less that people are ready to pay for it. With ebooks the reading experience depends more on the device than some layout work done by the publisher. You want as little as possible of the latter, actually, because it will generally not fit your reading device.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Someone,

I'll tell you what see what non-copy edited work looks like and come back to discuss.

[Lothor Apple Eater]

I don't know if I'm just behind the times, but the mother jones article about being a warehouse slave was eye-opening.  I never guessed at what shit conditions people endured just so I could get 2 free days shipping.

While most of the world (literacy allowing) can read  a book, a fair chunk of people alive today couldn't come up with the 79 dollars for the cheapest kindle, let alone the internet subscription, power bills, etc.  While western people love their gadgets, paper books will have a long life time.  (Or, to paraphrase Stephen Fry, just because they invented escalators doesn't mean that stairs became obsolete.)

[Seli]

Maia, on 07 March 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

This is utterly backwards. That's like shops that I live close to charging me extra "for convenience". Convenience comes from the e-reader devices and reading software (not created by publishers), not "the format". And e-books _are_ cheaper to produce and distribute. Maybe not as much cheaper as seems at the first glance, but still.
Charging extra for them is shameless fleecing, that customer acutely feels the unfairness of, and should (and does) deservedly result in problems for publishers. They are sitting in a glasshouse, after all, given the ease of piracy.

Now, textbooks with lots interactive sequences, videos and stuff that are being planned now  - that's a different beast altogether and would be worth a premium. It would feel fair.

I still disagree. In my eyes the value of the gadgets and software is inherently limited by the available content. No matter how convenient those are, without the content that does not matter. So having the content available in a format that works with the devices is (in my eyes) the bit that should be rewarded.
Aren't all commercial enterprises based on fleecing their customers as much as they can get away with? If you don't like the price asked, you are free not to buy in most cases. And as far as I can tell publishers in general are still behaving within some reason.


The contrast between content provider and content presenter is in a way also a core of  the Amazon vs IPG conflict that started this thread. It is a conflict with one one side an entity that thrives on making things available, on getting things to buyers, on making things convenient. On the other side is a group that represents a system of creating content, and make sure that the content creators get paid. A conflict between a party that needs content, needs some quality, but has no large need for a sustainable supply from any specific source. And a party that wants to sustain its providers.
Both parties are needed for a sustainable future where authors we like can keep publishing quality books. At least in my opinion, partly as a consequence of the way books are produced. But more importantly because I do not trust Amazon not to press its power advantage over individual authors. Publishers do it all the time already, and they rely more on their authors than Amazon ever will.