What would it take...?

[Richard]

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?

Maybe an answer to your question here:

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

The Fan

I think the true path will be something of a hybrid, a book is "published", and the eReader crowd can download it, the tree-killers book-in-hand crowd can utilize a print and bind kiosk service, and (brace yourself) once you own that book right, the bookies can download it to an eReader if they choose, and the techies can go print out a copy to hike through the mud with (what have you).

Although, if the financial incentive is one cent cheaper to stay the same than it is to innovate.... hello stone age! <_<

ETA: don't get all pissy, its a joke...

Sure it's a joke. A nasty intentionally viscious joke that's really an attack on people who dislike e-readers that you then attempt to claim isn't really a nasty dig. Way to fail at being passive-aggressive.

[The Fan]

Sure it's a joke. A nasty intentionally viscious joke that's really an attack on people who dislike e-readers that you then attempt to claim isn't really a nasty dig. Way to fail at being passive-aggressive.

Oh goodness, you are far too sensitive... "nasty intentionally viscious[sic]" :blink:

I do prefer eReaders, true, but I still have a ton (perhaps literally) of paper books as well.

If you took specific personal offense, let me offer you an apology, maliciousness has no place in my soul, much less a thread about paper vs. eBooks...

jeez.

ETA: Wait, what are you taking offense to? The tree-killer razz, right? It occurred to me in Lummel's post that stone age might be misconstrued too. Stone age refers to the way that money dictates innovation, and innovation doesn't exist until its profitable over status quo. Hence we are stuck in the stone age until the future is cheaper.

[Lummel]

I can't imagine moving over entirely to e-readers. And if ADWD was only available electronically I would give it a miss for the foreseeable future because buying it would represent a cash investment of an ereader plus the book. On the hand if there was a point of critical mass when lots of books I wanted to read were only available electronically then sure, I'd have to go with the flow.

At present I don't see it as becoming an either/or situation more of a both/and. Just like in the days when authors published books in installments in literary journals and then released the completed book afterwards.

Yeah I'm still in the stone age and loving it, but I can see uses for ereaders - wouldn't be great as a student to download the core texts and reading for your course onto a reader rather than have to fight for your copy in the library (maybe not so great though if you read with a pencil and marker pen...). Yes having a selection of books and maybe a daily newspaper too on one device when commuting might be easier than schlepping books about with me. With the disadvantages as given by Errand Bard and others above, or me in another very similar thread recently and the advantages of a physical book (...my precious) I don't see an exclusively electronic future. But I do see an 'and' future in which I use an ereader as a reading supplement, maybe for commuting or reading pulpy novels that I wouldn't want to keep.

Maybe publishers will dream up some new model that give ereaders some new unique selling point - for example selling 'unique' content on them or providing taster chapters of future releases in return for an annual fee - that will make them a must have product.

[Errant Bard]

I have to say, e-readers for textbooks or magazines sounds awesome. But on the other hand, if done well, those things should not be actual books anymore but more, like, websites. Hyperlinks in history books? Yes, please.

I suppose it would pose a problem for exams where documents are authorized, if it can connect to the web, though.

One thing I have asked around about, and at least on Kindle, the book rights are not just physically stored on the device itself, but through Amazon. If you lost the reader, you still have the books through your account.

But someone else controls your account. You don't own your books. I mentioned earlier the idea that your book dealer could decide to delete a book you bought... It was not at random, as it already happened. It is putting your library at the mercy of political and economical forces (under the current model.) On the other hand, it's a corporate dream: they control what they give you, and if they go under, well, too bad. For you.

the tree-killers book-in-hand crowd

Huhu, in the face of such self-righteousness, I have to point that e-readers and e-publishing, over their lifetime, consume way more energy than equivalent books. You think producing plastic, microchips or electricity is clean, or something? Or that trees are not a good clean renewable abundant resource, compared to, you know, uranium, petrol or coal, which have finite stocks, are hoarded, are to be more and more expensive, and are likely to start wars for the priviledge of their use?

Although, if the financial incentive is one cent cheaper to stay the same than it is to innovate.... hello stone age! <_<

ETA: don't get all pissy, its a joke...

Right, so I will say, as a joke of course, that the idea that new is always better is rather moronic, and that I much prefer today's "stone age" to any random Orwellian/cyberpunk or other dystopian future. Asking ourselves what adopting the innovations entails can sometimes be good, I hear.

Admittedly, I work in the computer business, and I see what "innovation" means, on a day to day basis.

[Gregor Barksdale]

But someone else controls your account. You don't own your books. I mentioned earlier the idea that your book dealer could decide to delete a book you bought... It was not at random, as it already happened. It is putting your library at the mercy of political and economical forces (under the current model.) On the other hand, it's a corporate dream: they control what they give you, and if they go under, well, too bad. For you.

I see this argument all over the place, and that's true enough, but that's only true when you choose this kind of ebook reader, or this consumer behaviour.

I have a reader that allows buying/downloading from some online bookstore (through a PC) because people ask for it, but it's completely unrelated to the company making the reader.

No-one knows what's on my reader except me. No-one can delete anything in it except me (or whoever has physical access to it). All my epub files are either assembled by myself (sets of articles from the web) or public domain of creative commons novels downloaded legally and anonymously from the web. No DRM of course. I've seen a few novels I think I'll buy on Feedbooks, since they contain no DRM. In that case the seller will know that I've bought those books, but that's hardly different than Amazon knowing I've bought some physical books.

Also, no problem with giving or lending books when doing this, if the other person has her own epub-reading device.

An e-reader and e-books are one thing, and the user's behaviour is another. Of course, some readers like the Kindle are made to have all the disadvantages given in this thread, but it's not in the technology per se. It's a choice by the user.

[Gregor Barksdale]

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:

Of course, Abercrombie is wrong.

He's making profit on all second hand copies. The thing is that the price has already been paid by the first buyer, who paid the full price for all the subsequent readers, and only got reimbursment when he sold to the next person.

The price of a book is the price for the actual physical object, the ability to read the book "forever". Abercrombie has not realized that when someone sells a book, they can't read it anymore. Why would all the chain of readers (sellers/buyers) have to pay the full price? If a book is bought by one person, then sold 3 times, we have 4 people owning the book at some time, and each of them only has to pay a part of it, the sum being the full price, and that's exactly what happens.

If you know you won't read a book anymore, there's no reason for it to have cost the price of a book owned forever.

DRMs should not exist, but since they do, one thing they should do is allowing people to sell used ebooks (ie. allowing a copy with removal of the original and its associated fair use copies).

Abercrombie usually makes fun playing the avaricious writer, but it looks like he's been eventually tainted by this character.

[williamjm]

Of course, Abercrombie is wrong.

He's making profit on all second hand copies. The thing is that the price has already been paid by the first buyer, who paid the full price for all the subsequent readers, and only got reimbursment when he sold to the next person.

The price of a book is the price for the actual physical object, the ability to read the book "forever". Abercrombie has not realized that when someone sells a book, they can't read it anymore. Why would all the chain of readers (sellers/buyers) have to pay the full price? If a book is bought by one person, then sold 3 times, we have 4 people owning the book at some time, and each of them only has to pay a part of it, the sum being the full price, and that's exactly what happens.

If you know you won't read a book anymore, there's no reason for it to have cost the price of a book owned forever.

Abercrombie usually makes fun playing the avaricious writer, but it looks like he's been eventually tainted by this character.

I think you might be reading a bit too much into Abercrombie's comment. I've no idea how you got from what he said to thinking that Joe somehow doesn't realise people can't read (physical) books they've sold on.

DRMs should not exist, but since they do, one thing they should do is allowing people to sell used ebooks (ie. allowing a copy with removal of the original and its associated fair use copies).

The inevitable problem with allowing second-hand e-books to be cheaper than new ones is that there's no incentive for people to then buy new books, since unlike physical books there's no disadvantage to a second-hand e-book (other than not being able to get books on the day of release).

[Gregor Barksdale]

The inevitable problem with allowing second-hand e-books to be cheaper than new ones is that there's no incentive for people to then buy new books, since unlike physical books there's no disadvantage to a second-hand e-book (other than not being able to get books on the day of release).

That's not just true the day of release, that's always true.

The disadvantage is always the possible lack of availability.

When there's no problem of second-hand availability, it means the author has earnt enough money anyway.

[peterbound]

I'm about 90% ebook now. The only time i actually buy the hardback is when it's required for a book signing. I travel too much to lug that shit around, and not having to explain the fucking ridiculous SF/F covers to my co workers really helps me out.

I don't get all the eBook blow back. Shit's happening guys.. get on board. You sound like the VHS crowd with DVD's came out.

[Nukelavee]

You make it sound like we are missing out on something, peter... I'm just not certain what it is. I like books as object, not just as data. At this point, eBooks strike me like microwave bacon - I can see why some people like then, personally, the convenience isn't that big a selling point for me.

On the other hand...something odd about a man who cares what his co-workers think of a book cover.

[Joe Abercrombie]

Abercrombie usually makes fun playing the avaricious writer, but it looks like he's been eventually tainted by this character.

It would be nice if you understood what you were talking about before making an accusation like that.

A guy bought a second hand copy of one of my books. Some other people recommended my other books, and mentioned where he might be able to get them second hand. The guy jokingly said they should all get a share of my profits for making such nice recommendations. I jokingly replied that they were welcome to a share of my profits from the second hand sales. Which are, as a point of fact, nothing. Exactly as they should be.

[Athelstane]

Didn't he try something along those lines a while back - one of those schemes where people would pay him for instalments released on the web, and it didn't really work out? I could be wrong. Certainly Tad Williams tried it with Shadowmarch and couldn't really get folks to pay for it, so it went back to traditional publishing. For me, if you have access to traditional publishing, it's hard to see what advantage you really gain by choosing to go it alone.

I would agree, but I don't think I've ever heard any author express that opinion.

Tad Williams is not Stephen King. I'm not even that huge of a King fan, but the guy is pretty much one of the few authors who's name is recognized by nearly everyone. And releasing stuff on the web is hoakey. If King were to team up with Kindle or whoever else as a marketing ploy, him releasing something on e-reader only would probably work.

Better yet, what about releasing stuff a few weeks early on e-readers, then releasing them in physical format. I could definitely see that as a nice marketing ploy.

As for author's expressing "that" opinion, I guess I misread your earlier post. I know for a fact that the recording industry (mainly the big four labels) have tried to get money off of resales before. Regardless, my point still stands.

[aktarian]

As a recent convert to eReader I love it and plan on buying ebooks in future. I think a lot of comments here are based on misconceptions and not really understanding how they work.

Ownership. This was a problem with Kindle. If you buy eReader that is supported by major seller (kindle/Amezon, Nook/B&N) they have some control over it. To avoid it you can get different brand, of which a lot exist. You'll pay more for it though. My eReder is mine alone and nobody can mess with it. It has no wireless connection so noboy can access it remotely. Every ebook I get is backed up on external disk.

Battery. New ones last long. Not sure how much mine lasts but after 10 hours is about half empty so I guess 20 hours.

Eink screen looks like book. It works in bright light, but not in dark.

When it comes to text-only books eReaders are excellent. 6'' screen is slightly smaller than A5 format but still large enough to be read easily. They suck when it comes to non-text elements such as pictures, charts....

When I order a book I get it within minutes. I log to a seller website (e.g. Amazon), order, wait for confirmation and download. I don't have to wait for days for the book to arrive then wait home for delivery or go pick it up at post office.

As for Martin and ebooks. I doubt he'd switch to ebooks only soon. Ereaders are simply not popular enough for established authors like him. People who publish ebooks only are fresh authors who'd otherwise struggle to find a publisher, get a decent deal atc. They can write ebook, make a deal with online publishers or online publishing branch of established publishers and sell through them. These books are cheaper so more people might give them a try.

What Martin could do is establish sell point through his own site. He is established enough for people to come to him, rather than having him advertise books to people, convincing them to buy it.

Martin and other established authors are best served when they publish both versions, serving both markets. Ereader market is big enough so it pays to play on it, yet not big enough to focus on it exclusivly.

[ZombieWife]

LadyN,

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.

Agreed. Furthermore, while the romance e book market is absolutely booming right now, it also takes a lot of work on part of the author to build a platform, to gain readers, etc.

I saw one model where you sold your first books for 99 cents, then once you reached a certain number of readers, you started to raise that price.

I have to wonder how fast you are planning to write books if you want to make a living off 99 cent profit per book (without any PR help, agents, etc). It would have to be a neck-breaking turnaround at least at first.

But, then again, most of the romance stuff that is selling could be penned by junior high school students. So, there is that as well.

I, personally, love my kindle. (And not just for playing Texas Hold'em, I swear!) I'd go Ebook whenever possible, unless it's something special (like Dance with Dragons). I have so many books that I buy and only read once and I have a difficult time tossing them out. So, for me, it saves space and I'll have my copies digitally, as long as I want.

[Spring Bass]

I'm about 90% ebook now. The only time i actually buy the hardback is when it's required for a book signing. I travel too much to lug that shit around, and not having to explain the fucking ridiculous SF/F covers to my co workers really helps me out.

I don't get all the eBook blow back. Shit's happening guys.. get on board. You sound like the VHS crowd with DVD's came out.

I think it's because e-readers are still a bit pricey (although the price is dropping). I suspect that even many of the physical-copy diehards would have an e-reader if a good one was $50 instead of $100-200 or more, if only by getting one as a present. They really are incredibly convenient.

With music, it was different. The jump in convenience was huge: we went from needing to lug around a ton of expensive CDs with a bunch of songs that we don't like, to carrying around a little (if expensive) music player loaded with hundreds or thousands of songs we like.

Didn't he try something along those lines a while back - one of those schemes where people would pay him for instalments released on the web, and it didn't really work out?

It was a book called The Plant, and he offered to release it chapter by chapter if the percentage of people paying the $1 fee was at least 75% of the total downloaders. He actually did get it for two of the three weeks (the second week dropped down to 70%, but then went back up), but then he doubled the price and chapter lengths, and it fell to pieces.

That way of doing it sounds designed for failure, though. There's a huge incentive to free-ride and not pay. It might have worked better if it was a Groupon-style set-up*, where the chapter gets e-mailed to the people who paid the fee if the number of people making an advance $1 payment reaches a certain number. Stephen King is likely popular enough that he could get hundreds of thousands of people willing to do that each week.

* For those who aren't familiar, Groupon gives out deals of the day, but they only work if a certain number of people decide to sign up for them.

[peterbound]

You make it sound like we are missing out on something, peter... I'm just not certain what it is. I like books as object, not just as data. At this point, eBooks strike me like microwave bacon - I can see why some people like then, personally, the convenience isn't that big a selling point for me.

On the other hand...something odd about a man who cares what his co-workers think of a book cover.

Ha, well, funny story that. When I was a probie i made the mistake of bringing Farland's 'Wizardborn' into work one day. Another FF found the fucker in the bathroom where i left it while taking a shit. I got paged out as 'WaWaWaWizardborn' for about 3 months after that. Made a point of taking the covers off after that.

I'm ranking/old enough now not to give a shit as much, but it's better to avoid the conversation. Let's be honest here, some of the covers of our favorite books are fucking horrid. I read Lumley for a while and i had to rip the fucking paperback covers off. Vampire skulls? Really? Come the fuck on. They are getting better lately, but still have a ways to go.

Just me though.

[Grack21]

You rip the covers off? That's book abuse!

[nickg]

Ha, well, funny story that. When I was a probie i made the mistake of bringing Farland's 'Wizardborn' into work one day. Another FF found the fucker in the bathroom where i left it while taking a shit. I got paged out as 'WaWaWaWizardborn' for about 3 months after that. Made a point of taking the covers off after that.

I'm raking/old enough now not to give a shit as much, but it's better to avoid the conversation. Let's be honest here, some of the covers of our favorite books are fucking horrid. I read Lumley for a while and i had to rip the fucking paperback covers off. Vampire skulls? Really? Come the fuck on. They are getting better lately, but still have a ways to go.

Just me though.

I hate hate hate that fucking conversation. And it never fails either. After they smirk and ask what the book is about, I waste the next minute or so talking to a wall because their eyes glaze over and they clearly lose interest about 6 seconds in. That's funny though.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Peterbourn,

Ha, well, funny story that. When I was a probie i made the mistake of bringing Farland's 'Wizardborn' into work one day. Another FF found the fucker in the bathroom where i left it while taking a shit. I got paged out as 'WaWaWaWizardborn' for about 3 months after that. Made a point of taking the covers off after that.

I'm ranking/old enough now not to give a shit as much, but it's better to avoid the conversation. Let's be honest here, some of the covers of our favorite books are fucking horrid. I read Lumley for a while and i had to rip the fucking paperback covers off. Vampire skulls? Really? Come the fuck on. They are getting better lately, but still have a ways to go.

Just me though.

I always bring a book with me to Court. There are several Judges who make a habit of asking me what I'm reading. A couple of them turned out to be SF/F fans. I like talking about what I'm reading. If someone tries to be an ass about it I ignore them.