Why do many e-books cost more than paperback?

[Xenophon]

Various folks have chimed in with information about numbers shared by Eric Flint, David Drake and other Baen authors. I generally agree with the stuff that they've posted. There are, however, two important things they've glossed over.

First, Jim Baen pointed out (before his untimely death) that eBook sales had increased to a point where they were the second-largest source of income for Baen. That's a (very) distant second to DTF (Dead Tree Format) sales in the U.S., but larger than all foreign sales combined (Canada included). I rather suspect that eBook revenue is still below 10% of the total, though.

Secondly, The eBook sales are profitable. That is, not only do they cover the marginal costs of selling (and marketing, and distribution)... they also cover their pro-rata share of the editorial costs, artwork, development of new authors, and other general overhead. If I correctly understood the explanation (always a big assumption for a tech geek listening to a business discussion ), those pro-rata costs are charged against book sales on a per-sales-dollar basis. This is a big deal! Not just a marginal profit, but a true profit in the full accounting sense of the word.

That profit does NOT include the clear effect of eBooks in boosting sales of paper books -- typically other items in an author's back-list. It also doesn't include the long-tail effect whereby the electronic edition need never go out of print. And, the profit comes in spite of the fact that all Baen's contracts are for non-exclusive eBook rights. That's right -- Baen's authors are perfectly free to sell eBooks through Fictionwise, or Sony Connect, or whereever, in competition with Baen's eSales. And they still make a profit for Baen!

Jim Baen used to say that he dreaded the day when 'the big guys' woke up and smelled the coffee. As things stand now, Baen is the only significant player in Fiction (publishers, that is, not distributors like Fictionwise or Sony Connect) in the US that has sane and profitable eBook sales. We'll see how things go in the future.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by NatCh

One point here, is that the digital storage is totally dependent on electricity. If we were to lose the infrastructure, the paper would still be available, but the e-books would only last as long as our batteries.

Even with e-ink, that's still less than 4 weeks.

Well, it'd last longer, but it wouldn't be accessible.

This is why e-books "is" bad for society and should be discouraged; in the aftermath of armageddon (nuclear war was the first choice there), we will lose all our cultural heritage; this was an argument made seriously not long ago by a respected editor in a widely viewed website.
So now you know why publishers discourage e-books; for the good of humanity!!

[Studio717]

The paper vs. e-format longevity sub-thread is interesting. I'd add that most of us read not original 18th century copies but reprints. One of the most useful aspects of e-books ensuring their survival is the sheer number of copies that are out there. Sure, a paper copy of something from the 17th or 18th century might survive, but where is it? Anything rare ends up in a private collection or in a restricted library. (Anyone tried to borrow anything from UCLA's Clark lately?)

My point is that ebooks offer a chance to not only preserve a single copy of something, but to have nearly universal dissemination. And once machine translations get to the point of being accurate, that knowledge/information/story can be read by anyone who can access it and can read.

The other side is that we've lost so much that was on paper. Most of Western culture's basic texts we know only through Arabic translations, while many many of them are simply gone.

[kovidgoyal]

Regarding the need for decoders to read ebook formats in the future, is that really so different from trying to read the languages of forgotten civilizations today? I'd argue that it's substantially easier since machine formats tend to have very fixed vocabularies. For example, a bunch of us were able to reverse engineer the LRF format in a few months working in our spare time. Contrast that with the years it typically takes dedicated professionals to "decode" a lost language.

[orcinus]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

Data is trapped by hardware.

Data is only as trapped by hardware as the user wants it to be, or is lazy to let it be.

I have files (i wanted to preserve, even some i didn't) on my current desktop computer dating from about a dozen or more previous incarnations, back from DOS times and 40 MB hard drives. I probably would have transfered some from my Amigas before that, but i never felt the need...

So it's not so much about data being trapped as you being too inert or not feeling inclined to move your data. It won't move, copy nor reencode by itself, you know. (just to clarify, not You personally, it's more of an indeterminate "you" )

Neither will the books. If you move from one house (or a flat) to another and leave a book behind, it's entirely your fault, not the book's, ya know
Both require some occasional upkeeping, attention and preserving, and while paper media can last longer inbetween, the digital data requires much less effort.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

I agree here. I have plenty of material, backed-up from 3 PDAs previous, and from my PC pre-2001, that I can still access and use... because I've preserved the software that reads it, or because I've converted it to newer formats. The ease of doing these conversions, compared to "converting" paper books before or after they become decayed/torn/wet/burned/lost, means you generally only have yourself to blame for losing old data.

[JSWolf]

Take Book Designer for example. You have the source file in whatever format it's in. You then have a number of different output formats you can choose from. Want a new format, write a new output converter and done. Same I bet can be done by whatever program the big boys are using to do their conversions. So really, it's not hard to get the ebooks in whatever the format of the day is once the converter is written.

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

'Tain't funny, McGee!

Please accept my apologies Steve. I was caught off guard by the 'newness' of that situation and did not realize that when you said your wife 'hated' you for it you really meant it, I saw it as figurative. This surely is a difficult situation. When a couple faces differences from work it goes deeply to the roots of a relationship. Hope you both go through it intact. Sorry! Steve. If it can help... my wife and I have a political difference. I'm a passionate separatist and she's a passionate federalist. But we love each other and made a pact never to talk politics with anyone present included. It works! But this is trivial compared to what you're going through.

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

If we lose electricity catastrophically, we'll have a lot more to worry about than accessing stored information. Food, for example.

We'll be facing such hardships in no less than twenty years but that's an other subject. Oil is not forever and the planet warming trend will offer us many unforeseen situations.

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

Regarding the need for decoders to read ebook formats in the future, is that really so different from trying to read the languages of forgotten civilizations today? I'd argue that it's substantially easier since machine formats tend to have very fixed vocabularies. For example, a bunch of us were able to reverse engineer the LRF format in a few months working in our spare time. Contrast that with the years it typically takes dedicated professionals to "decode" a lost language.

Agreed. We have had to deal with decoding languages for eons. But do we really have to do it all over again with every digital generation of information ? Every ten years??!??
You are a programmer, you know about manipulating data. I'm just a user, albeit just a bit better tinkerer than normal, but why is it so hard for me to be able to keep my data intact? I can just see the effect the digital nightmare has on the common people who can hardly move a mouse. Or have we forgotten they exist? We are here in a digital ghetto with a bunch of people who understand (most of) what we're talking about. What proportion are we in respect to the rest of the world? Data is erased and forgotten by format obsolescence as soon as it is produced! And we're boasting about its superiority? I want better standards and media support. Period. And what if it's superior, do we really have to kill off the lesser one? Wouldn't you agree that diversity would offer better security? The more different the better I say!

Originally Posted by orcinus

Data is only as trapped by hardware as the user wants it to be, or is lazy to let it be.

I have files (i wanted to preserve, even some i didn't) on my current desktop computer dating from about a dozen or more previous incarnations, back from DOS times and 40 MB hard drives. I probably would have transfered some from my Amigas before that, but i never felt the need...

So it's not so much about data being trapped as you being too inert or not feeling inclined to move your data. It won't move, copy nor reencode by itself, you know. (just to clarify, not You personally, it's more of an indeterminate "you" )

Neither will the books. If you move from one house (or a flat) to another and leave a book behind, it's entirely your fault, not the book's, ya know
Both require some occasional upkeeping, attention and preserving, and while paper media can last longer inbetween, the digital data requires much less effort.

I don't agree about that lazy part. I've sometimes worked harder to retrieve or convert data than it took to produce it the first time. I've got loads of useless software that won't work anymore and that couldn't be updated because the companies writing it don't exist anymore and the computers I used for that software have burned long ago. Forget about what I created with it? I was forced to and it's not out of laziness.
I have some data that was stranded by the fact that the software used to create it was proprietary and that the companies went belly up. Some more data was trapped in a burned hard drive between backups. XP prevents me from reading burned data created with Win 95, why? I'd have to pay someone to retrieve that data, someone who'd know how. I don't have these problems with the notes I took on paper or the drawings I made in my paper sketchbook! Again, I'm not against e-content, I want it to live up to its promises.
In that analogy about stranded books you forgot to add that someone erased part of your books and want money in exchange to print them back. Or they translated them to an other language and then back with significant errors in context. Or burned part of them or locked your library so you can't get them back. And they say it's your fault? And that's every ten years!!?!!

Originally Posted by Studio717

The paper vs. e-format longevity sub-thread is interesting. I'd add that most of us read not original 18th century copies but reprints. One of the most useful aspects of e-books ensuring their survival is the sheer number of copies that are out there. Sure, a paper copy of something from the 17th or 18th century might survive, but where is it? Anything rare ends up in a private collection or in a restricted library. (Anyone tried to borrow anything from UCLA's Clark lately?)

My point is that ebooks offer a chance to not only preserve a single copy of something, but to have nearly universal dissemination. And once machine translations get to the point of being accurate, that knowledge/information/story can be read by anyone who can access it and can read.

The other side is that we've lost so much that was on paper. Most of Western culture's basic texts we know only through Arabic translations, while many many of them are simply gone.

Agreed. With all!
One little thing with the total of this reasoning and most of the arguments in this thread: In defending the way data is used we're only thinking of today. The effects of time other than the ones we've seen since the beginning of PC use have not yet really started. There will be bigger assults on data, some of it not foreseen however intelligent planners are. Hey! just think that in tropical regions CDRWs corrode to garble in 5 to 10 years. Did they know that?

I love the way I can redraw a piece of furniture. I love to come back later and change parts of it and save it as new and print it with no erasure marks. Or just change the display angle in print of a 3D piece. I love that I can add notes to something afterwards. I can bring a drawing to a customer and demonstrate views as if the piece already existed. I would not go back to drawing by hand. No sir!!! I was in the first ones to adopt these digital ways of producing and I'm still excited by them!

Unfortunately some of the drawings I have left are the ones I had printed on perforated edge dot matrix paper, none of their digital counterparts survived. And the ink is fading fast as the ones I drew by hand to bigger formats (I couldn't afford a plotter) are almost pristine in comparison.

When scholars research people for their work they have enough trouble as it is, looking through disseminated documents. The sketches Picasso left are very indicative of the way he thought when he created a major work, they are priceless for that. Rummaging through them was rendered easyer because of the fact he was alive to help in the research through more than 70 years of work. The personal computer is not even that old yet. Some artists, writers included please, were deamed popular well after their deaths. Sorting through their legacy was much much more daunting. Often researchers had to go from country to country gleaning for bits that do not tell anything of the motives pushing the creator towards his muses. But they often manage to find a bit here and there that is indicative enough.
I would not want to be a future dedicated researcher going through today's jumble of burned hard drives, disquettes, tapes or whatever they'll invent next. The people inventing all these things are not thinking of the future they're thinking of their pocket linings.

I want better media support and non evolvable digital standards.

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Take Book Designer for example. You have the source file in whatever format it's in. You then have a number of different output formats you can choose from. Want a new format, write a new output converter and done. Same I bet can be done by whatever program the big boys are using to do their conversions. So really, it's not hard to get the ebooks in whatever the format of the day is once the converter is written.

See! This reasoning is something I look on as a flaw. If it's so easy to change standards and languages, how are we to keep a durable one? That is what we need, something that will stand the test of time like alphabet!

(It's not personnal JS, just an immediate example. Forgive me if it startled you)

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

See! This reasoning is something I look on as a flaw. If it's so easy to change standards and languages, how are we to keep a durable one? That is what we need, something that will stand the test of time like alphabet!

We do have an alphabet that will stand the test of time. It's called Unicode.

Any ebook that is being archived should really be saved as a simple txt file. That's what I do. Well, actually, I archive my stuff in Ascii txt. I really should switch over.

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

We do have an alphabet that will stand the test of time. It's called Unicode.

Any ebook that is being archived should really be saved as a simple txt file. That's what I do. Well, actually, I archive my stuff in Ascii txt. I really should switch over.

You're right.
How old is it? Have there been previous ones? Will they replace it? When, 2 years? Twenty years is too short to talk about longevity!

But it's not only books we're talking about. Look towards the bigger picture.

Hey Guys! I might come out as looking pretentious but I'm not. I'm a father and I'd hate this and further generations to go by as nothingness just like Lemmings.

If this expression could inpire some more durable movement I'd be a happy less worried person.

[athlonkmf]

Originally Posted by Liviu_5

This is why e-books "is" bad for society and should be discouraged; in the aftermath of armageddon (nuclear war was the first choice there), we will lose all our cultural heritage; this was an argument made seriously not long ago by a respected editor in a widely viewed website.
So now you know why publishers discourage e-books; for the good of humanity!!

and paper would survive the armageddon? I don't think the current printing material would survive that long actually.

[athlonkmf]

Originally Posted by orcinus

Data is only as trapped by hardware as the user wants it to be, or is lazy to let it be.

DRM-ed data is trapped by hardware

[da_jane]

<i>I have the feeling that the publishers are seeing the ebooks-format more like a huge dump for non-selling titles.</i>

This is not accurate. Publishers are putting out ebooks for the books that they believe will sell well. It's the reason why bestselling titles are almost always in ebook format but the lesser known ones are not. I would argue that it makes more sense to digitize the poor sellers because of the possibility of making more money back on the advance sooner.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

Please accept my apologies Steve. I was caught off guard by the 'newness' of that situation and did not realize that when you said your wife 'hated' you for it you really meant it, I saw it as figurative. This surely is a difficult situation. When a couple faces differences from work it goes deeply to the roots of a relationship. Hope you both go through it intact. Sorry!

I appreciate your concern... thank you. Fortunately, although my wife and I often discuss the future of the press-printing industry, AND the fact that I am doing some of my best work for the medium that may someday shut it down, the fact is that it is not a sore subject around my house... just ironic as hell!

Anyway, no worries, I am not sensitive about it, and I was making light of the jest at my expense. For the record, "'Taint funny McGee!" is a reference to an old radio sitcom, Fibber McGee and Molly, and I'd hoped that everyone would catch that and realize that I was making fun of myself. Of course, the fact that that radio show probably hasn't been heard by more than 50 people in the past 50 years probably dulled the impact. (Probably should have used a line from M*A*S*H or Desperate Housewives...)

See what happens when you get old? The common sub-references just break down on ya...