What is with these Publishers?

[NightGeometry]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

I'm sure you can come up with other ways of finding new authors-maybe people who are willing to search them out & compile the lists-but the current system, with many authors 'feeding' one publisher and many publishers 'feeding' one distributor works-in the sense of putting the books out in front of people. If we're going to replace that, let's make sure we replace it with something that fixes the shortcomings without creating new problems in areas where the current model works very well.

This would be potentially easy. In that 'easy' way that relies on a large sum of cash, a group of talented people, and gaining momentum. Algorithms for recommendations engines are reasonably well understood, they involve hard maths and a lot of computation, but there are people who write these things (the Netflix competition is an example). If, for example, Shelfari was funded by Amazon to create a good recommendations engine, and was able to import all your book purchases from Amazon, then I suspect it would become a lot easier for me and my friends to find good new authors. I'd love to see this, with options to confine the search space (new authors, books within genres and such).

I would guess the hard part is actually getting enough people to use it, hence the thought that Shelfari / Amazon may be a good place for this to happen. Currently I find Amazon's recommendations a bit hit or miss. I like Sci Fi, they seem to recommend an ungodly amount of Dr Who and Star Trek books which I have no interest in, I need to be able to just filter out sub genres, for example.

If the above partnership did this, and just sent recommended first chapters to a Kindle, then I would probably switch to using a Kindle.

How would a self published author author get noticed in a sea of books. Offer your book to 100 people, free of charge, they read it, rate it, and if it is any good recommendations will start to bleed through the system.

I know I am naive, and I have a maybe unhealthy belief in recommendation engines and 'the wisdom of crowds'.

Anyway, this is going increasingly off topic. Sorry.

[drofgnal]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Other threads have covered this. Until publishers & booksellers open their accounting books we won't have really solid numbers, but most people seem to agree that the cost of paper, printing, etc that's required for pbooks is about equal to the cost of servers & bandwidth that's required for ebooks. Most of the cost is in preparing & advertising the book, not in printing & distributing it-and those costs apply regardless of media.

Again, I can't find solid numbers, but I suspect that the higher price of hardbacks is mostly because, for most books, they're only published in hardback when they're new. So the cost is really for a 'new' book and the fact of it being published in hardback is irrelevant. (And for those that continue to be published in hardback, at the higher hardback prices, after they've also been published in paperback or ebook, at lower prices, I suspect that's 'because they can'. Once people have been conditioned to think that hardbacks cost more the publishers can get away, basically forever, with charging more for them. Whether there's a reason to do so or not.)

I can't buy the fact that it costs the same to bring an e-book and hardback to market. Assume that the cost of editing, marketing and creating the file (either for press or ebook)are identical, that I grant you. But to assume that distribution of the content via electronic means or paper is the same is just wrong. Printing presses, binding equipment, packaging equipment (not to mention material costs) are all complex automated mechanical machines with huge price tags that have to be paid off. Now granted they pay that off over countless books but there is still a huge bill in maintenance and upkeep. One server can store and distribute hundreds of thousands of titles and adequate bandwidth is not that expensive either. An apple pro-x server is a little over 3 grand.

[drofgnal]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Other threads have covered this. Until publishers & booksellers open their accounting books we won't have really solid numbers, but most people seem to agree that the cost of paper, printing, etc that's required for pbooks is about equal to the cost of servers & bandwidth that's required for ebooks. Most of the cost is in preparing & advertising the book, not in printing & distributing it-and those costs apply regardless of media.

Again, I can't find solid numbers, but I suspect that the higher price of hardbacks is mostly because, for most books, they're only published in hardback when they're new. So the cost is really for a 'new' book and the fact of it being published in hardback is irrelevant. (And for those that continue to be published in hardback, at the higher hardback prices, after they've also been published in paperback or ebook, at lower prices, I suspect that's 'because they can'. Once people have been conditioned to think that hardbacks cost more the publishers can get away, basically forever, with charging more for them. Whether there's a reason to do so or not.)

I can't buy the fact that it costs the same to bring an e-book and hardback to market. Assume that the cost of editing, marketing and creating the file (either for press or ebook)are identical, that I grant you. But to assume that distribution of the content via electronic means or paper is the same is just wrong. Printing presses, binding equipment, packaging equipment (not to mention material costs) are all complex automated mechanical machines with huge price tags that have to be paid off. Now granted they pay that off over countless books but there is still a huge bill in maintenance and upkeep. One server can store and distribute hundreds of thousands of titles and adequate bandwidth is not that expensive either, a copy of even war and peace being at best 3 Mb or equivalent in file size to a couple of pictures in a email attachment. An apple pro-x server is a little over 3 grand, and up keep is nothing like complex mechanical machinery.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by drofgnal

I think you've hit the nail on the head. You can forsee a future where major publishing houses are not needed to get a book to market, particularly with ebooks. I was the other day looking for a CJ Cherryh's Downbelow Station. She has some of here lesser known works on Amazon for Kindle, but not her award winner. (Hugo). Lo and behold, she has a web site where she explains she is setting up a system to distribute here ebooks on her own.

Well, that works out just swell... when you're a writer who already has a reputation.

I won't say that working with a publisher is the only way to build a reputation, but so far the biggest successes of Internet-based self-promotion are things like Chocolate Rain and the Tron Guy. I.e. I expect that in the future, building and managing a truly national or international following is still going to require resources (finances, skills, networking, PR, marketing, etc) far beyond the ken of most individual creators.

In addition, some type of filtration is always going to be required. Self-published works are, for better or worse, an undifferentiated seething mass of works that takes tremendous effort to wade through. Again this does not need to exclusively lie in the hands of the publishers, but they do have more experience and fewer conflicts of interest with this task than, say, retailers.

As to the idea that "publishers want control," that's sort of like saying "dogs want food." Everyone in the process wants control over numerous aspects -- publishers, retailers, authors, distributors, critics and readers. That's just a given; i.e. there is nothing wrong with maneuvers to gain control, as long as they are basically done legally and honor the existing rights. E.g. to me, pirating a book because it's out in hardcover but not an ebook isn't a legit protest, because it hurts not only the publishers, but also the retailers and, most importantly, the author. Or a retailer can slash ebook prices to pressure publishers to permanently lower ebook wholesale pricing, but can't legitimately withhold payments in order to force the same change.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Well, that works out just swell... when you're a writer who already has a reputation.

I won't say that working with a publisher is the only way to build a reputation, but so far the biggest successes of Internet-based self-promotion are things like Chocolate Rain and the Tron Guy. I.e. I expect that in the future, building and managing a truly national or international following is still going to require resources (finances, skills, networking, PR, marketing, etc) far beyond the ken of most individual creators.

In addition, some type of filtration is always going to be required. Self-published works are, for better or worse, an undifferentiated seething mass of works that takes tremendous effort to wade through. Again this does not need to exclusively lie in the hands of the publishers, but they do have more experience and fewer conflicts of interest with this task than, say, retailers.

As to the idea that "publishers want control," that's sort of like saying "dogs want food." Everyone in the process wants control over numerous aspects -- publishers, retailers, authors, distributors, critics and readers. That's just a given; i.e. there is nothing wrong with maneuvers to gain control, as long as they are basically done legally and honor the existing rights. E.g. to me, pirating a book because it's out in hardcover but not an ebook isn't a legit protest, because it hurts not only the publishers, but also the retailers and, most importantly, the author. Or a retailer can slash ebook prices to pressure publishers to permanently lower ebook wholesale pricing, but can't legitimately withhold payments in order to force the same change.

I think what you're describing there is the goal of 'what used to be' for many writers. The big marketing campaigns, the sales, the reputation that comes from having sold. Who's to say that those are the goals of the writer going ahead? What if you strip out the idea of sales and marketing altogether? What if the writer, knowing what he knows of the economic situation in publishing, knowing that he can't make nice-nice with an audience and spew a lot of marketing bullshit, no longer has set his course for the land of money, fame and recognition?

I'll be honest right now, as a writer what I wanted two years ago is nowhere near what I want today, or what I know I can achieve. Two years ago my plans were roughly in the ballpark of 'get noticed' 'get published' 'get lots of lolly'. Now I don't want any of those things. Through the process of the first - 'get noticed' - I learned that writing itself is the goal, it is the destination and I've already arrived. I seek no recognition or security from my writing, only adventure and possibly an honest response from time to time. I know that I'd (and by extension any new writer) would need 10,0000 dedicated readers to make a living wage, and I also know that isn't going to happen for me. I'd have to give up everything I've gained over the last two years, a lot of my freedoms to get to the point where I could make a living. And, well, the writing is worth more than that to me. I'd guess a lot of writers are going to have the same experiences over the coming years.

Adjust your sails, the water's getting choppy and there's a storm brewing on the horizon.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

I think what you're describing there is the goal of 'what used to be' for many writers.

Not really. It sounds I'm describing "what used to be" for you. Now to be clear, I view your modified goals as completely legitimate. You write because you want to write, and you're satisfied with your accomplishments.

However, I do not regard those goals as universal. I have no doubt that many authors want their books to be read by as wide an audience as possible, to be compensated for their work, and to otherwise accomplish goals that require more than the solitary act of writing. E.g. C.J. Cherryh isn't giving her work away for free; she fully intends to earn a living as a writer. (Unfortunately, her site also shows how you can benefit from additional resources, like professional web designers...)

Originally Posted by Moejoe

I know that I'd (and by extension any new writer) would need 10,0000 dedicated readers to make a living wage, and I also know that isn't going to happen for me. I'd have to give up everything I've gained over the last two years, a lot of my freedoms to get to the point where I could make a living.

Again, this is your choice. But even people who share this choice do not necessarily share your goals or methods. For example, let's say I'm a doctor and I write a book of advice for sufferers of a specific chronic condition. I earn my living, and will continue to do so, with my practice; I have no real desire to build an ongoing audience for my works or to earn a living exclusively from my writings. However, I may not be the best writer, and can benefit tremendously from excellent editors; I have no idea how to market the book; I want to ensure its integrity; I don't want to spend months or years figuring out all the ins and outs of self-publishing, and so forth.

Also, many writers and artists hold the view that the filtering and editing -- or if you like, losing a portion of control -- is actually beneficial to their work. They regard editors, publishers and other intermediaries more as collaborators than as malevolent, manipulative and exploitative forces. Just as compromise is a part of life, editing is a part of art.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

I'll be honest right now, as a writer what I wanted two years ago is nowhere near what I want today, or what I know I can achieve. Two years ago my plans were roughly in the ballpark of 'get noticed' 'get published' 'get lots of lolly'. Now I don't want any of those things. Through the process of the first - 'get noticed' - I learned that writing itself is the goal, it is the destination and I've already arrived. I seek no recognition or security from my writing, only adventure and possibly an honest response from time to time. I know that I'd (and by extension any new writer) would need 10,0000 dedicated readers to make a living wage, and I also know that isn't going to happen for me. I'd have to give up everything I've gained over the last two years, a lot of my freedoms to get to the point where I could make a living. And, well, the writing is worth more than that to me. I'd guess a lot of writers are going to have the same experiences over the coming years.

Let me see if I understand. You didn't have commercial success and stoically faced economic reality. This lead you to change your goals, so you are no longer looking for fame and fortune. Consequently, you no longer need copyright protection because you have nothing to economically protect. Because you have nothing to protect, copyright is a bad idea and piracy is right and just.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Not really. It sounds I'm describing "what used to be" for you. Now to be clear, I view your modified goals as completely legitimate. You write because you want to write, and you're satisfied with your accomplishments.

However, I do not regard those goals as universal. I have no doubt that many authors want their books to be read by as wide an audience as possible, to be compensated for their work, and to otherwise accomplish goals that require more than the solitary act of writing.



Again, this is your choice. But even people who share this choice do not necessarily share your goals or methods. For example, let's say I'm a doctor and I write a book of advice for sufferers of a specific chronic condition. I earn my living, and will continue to do so, with my practice; I have no real desire to build an ongoing audience for my works or to earn a living exclusively from my writings. However, I may not be the best writer, and can benefit tremendously from excellent editors; I have no idea how to market the book; I want to ensure its integrity; I don't want to spend months or years figuring out all the ins and outs of self-publishing, and so forth.

Also, many writers and artists hold the view that the filtering and editing -- or if you like, losing a portion of control -- is actually beneficial to their work. They regard editors, publishers and other intermediaries more as collaborators than as malevolent, manipulative and exploitative forces. Just as compromise is a part of life, editing is a part of art.

You're right, this is 'my' opinion. I want to produce my fiction unhindered and without interference. I want to control the whole process, from writing to editing, to designing the book cover and anything else that's involved. Plus there's all that horrible, horrible waste of time in the publishing world. I don't have the patience to wait 6 - 18months from completion of the work to publication. I really don't have the time to wait for approval from some third party either. So again, yes, my method doesn't work for all, but in the climate we find ourselves, my method is actually doable now. That kind of freedom you couldn't buy ten years ago, now it's available to all.

[nbvanyoos]

There seems to be a number of members who are pro-publisher on this site, but I suppose that is to be expected. I don't mind publishers making money, but I would mind my publisher delaying my book my readers are clamoring for. It is a safe and comfortable position to say that we have had this model forever and that it need not change. This falls in line with the brilliant person who once said people will never need a computer in their homes (Digital Equipment Corporation is no longer around).

Newspapers are dying, magazines are following close behind, and for anyone to say the dead-tree industry is robust and profitable is like saying the home telephone market is robust and profitable. We didn't create the revolutionary shift, but we are evolving with it. As a business person, I would give my customers what they want, when they want it, if it is physically possible, period. Those who play profit games at the expense of their paying customers will be circumvented (Piracy).

The internet has empowered the consumer, and businesses who have yet to embrace that fact will not be around much longer. Those businesses who have embraced the new technology and exploit it for their gain will flourish in this new electronic economy. As more and more publishers jump on board with the eBook publishing model, those who do not will be left behind. There is a reason B&N is back in eBooks in a big way.

I have read articles from authors who have said they have made more money on eBooks lately than from paperbacks. The reason? Many of their old books are pulled from distribution by the publisher after sales drop. Because of the book return policy with retailers, keeping the old books on shelves makes no sense. But many have since republished those as eBooks and the authors and publishers are making money off something they didn't in the past. EBooks make sense for all parties involved.

The Smartphone avalanche is just getting started, and electronic content will snowball right along with it. Those who believe this site represents the bulk of electronic readers are misguided. Look at the number of internet blogs and tweets to realize that just isn't so. Many of those people have already circumvented publishers and find their content for free on the internet.

To the publishers I say, "Be smart business people and devise a model that will satisfy all your constituents. If not, be prepared for the market to force you, and the market can be a harsh mistress."

[daffy4u]

Maybe someone posted this already in the thread. Please forgive me if I'm repeating.

I've noticed that Amazon is trying to compensate for the delays by deeply discounting the price if you purchase a delayed book as a pre-order. I paid $7.20 for Under the Dome as a pre-order and I see Impact is now $8.87 and will probably drop lower as the King book did. This may work for me as Amazon will automatically drop the price if they go lower.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Let me see if I understand. You didn't have commercial success and stoically faced economic reality. This lead you to change your goals, so you are no longer looking for fame and fortune. Consequently, you no longer need copyright protection because you have nothing to economically protect. Because you have nothing to protect, copyright is a bad idea and piracy is right and just.

Nope. About as badly read as could be.

How can I have commercial success when I don't offer anything commercially and never did? I'm really struggling to understand what you're getting at with this one. And I've never loooked for fame and fortune, doesn't interest me. I did follow the same path of many writers indoctrinated by the publishing system - the get an agent, get edited, get a publisher bullshit. I did once believe that being published was the holy grail of writing and that good things would follow from there. I also once believed in the tooth fairy, Father Christmas and that one day I'd be as tough as Mr T from the A-Team.

Now I believe one hundred percent in writing for the sake of writing, everything else after that is just gravy poured over the meat. I don't give a shit about economic models, I don't care if the publishing industry dies out tomorrow and every last one of the hangers on and middlemen have to find other jobs. I don't care about piracy (which is to say I think it is no more right or wrong than the weather, it just is and you may as well try and stop the rain from pouring or the sun from shining). I don't care about copyright much either; I'll leave the corporations to fight over the rotting carcass of what used to benefit the whole, but now only benefits the few.

I care about writing. I care about story. I care about freedom.

None of these things cost me a cent, and I don't expect to make a cent because of them.

[KindleMan]

Hadn't had a chance to check the board till now and happy to see the response my question generated. It's obvious that this publishing thing is a wee bit complicated. I'm no expert, in fact far from it. I just like to read! But, it seems obvious to me that management types need to do a better job of forecasting the future, of thinking outside the box, looking to others (the music industry for example) AND listening to their customers.

I wouldn't do it very often but I'm an impatient guy and would pay the Hardback price for an ebook copy of certain authors. In fact that's a market I would think that most sellers try to capture, the "impatient or impulse" buyer!

Lots of great info people!

Lobo

(A nook owner, see I told you, I'm Mr "Gotta have it now")

[zacheryjensen]

Originally Posted by daffy4u

Maybe someone posted this already in the thread. Please forgive me if I'm repeating.

I've noticed that Amazon is trying to compensate for the delays by deeply discounting the price if you purchase a delayed book as a pre-order. I paid $7.20 for Under the Dome as a pre-order and I see Impact is now $8.87 and will probably drop lower as the King book did. This may work for me as Amazon will automatically drop the price if they go lower.

Yeah, I'll use this quote to start off a major question to everyone discussing in this thread....

Why are you all ignoring what the publishers, news outlets, big box stores, and just about everyone else on earth already knows about this issue? The eBooks are being delayed because Amazon is selling them for $9.99 and to compete, Wal-mart is marking down the hardcover to the same prices, and Target is doing the same to compete with Wal-mart.

That's the reason, there's nothing more to it. The rest is simple economics and the impact it will eventually have on which books are sold, and how much money retailers will be willing to pay for them over time. Publishers/distributors are slaves to the retailers and have very little actual influence on what they can do other than to delay releases or vary their wholesale prices.

So basically, pubs/distros are afraid the price war will kill their artificially inflated hardcover prices, especially on blockbuster books, and consequently deflate their only effective source for profit generation for most books releases. As has been clearly stated by representatives of publishers, the concern is that over time, this deep discounting process will lead retailers to pressure distributors for lower prices as well, and up the chain it goes, slicing off profit margins for everyone. All it takes is one major publisher to succumb to the pressure and then they all have to just to appease the retailers who now have a rock under their lever.

Of course, Amazon's deeply discounting the pre-order price is clearly an action in response to the publishers. It's a straight up battle for pricing and profits in the publishing business, and frankly I think it's fun to watch.

I hope that clears it up for you. And to all you indignant complainers: the ones who somehow think publishing, writing, retail, authors, and everyone else involve are somehow interested in your personal feelings about what is fair and right are absurd. They only care if they make money. If they make less money by making these changes, they will stop doing it. So quit acting like a bunch of self-righteous babies and simply don't buy from the publishers that do things you don't like. However, since publishers make so much more money off of inflated hardcovers than they do on any other format, I doubt they'll notice your impact for quite a while. And when every publisher makes this practice normal, I'm sure you'll all get over your pride, or maybe stop reading? That is the overarching trend these days anyway...

Afterall, in the end, what difference could it possibly make that you end up waiting for the eBook? Just because someone can do something doesn't make it the best decision. Just because there isn't a technical limitation for releasing eBooks on day one doesn't mean it makes sense to the business. And besides, delays happen often regardless of format simply to better position the sale against competition and retail hot periods (like holidays). Are you going to get your panties in a twist when you learn that the James Patterson novel you've been pining over for 3 whole weeks since you finished the last one won't come out for an extra 2 months, even though it was finished before the last novel was released, just because the latest Dan Brown novel barely came out? I mean, there's no technical reason they couldn't release it in that scenario, right?

Don't forget that at the end of the day, every single publisher, and nearly every popular writer are in it for the payday, and that is what motivates these actions, not some bizarre ethereal unwritten code of consumer-pleasing ethics.

As for me? I've never once in my whole life been remotely interested in buying a hard cover. I've also never cared that I had to wait for the paperback. It's not like the story will get less interesting or I have too little to do, or there aren't enough other books to read in the meantime. Also, I haven't bought a "new" eBook since I began reading electronic texts, and so personally I've got no real concerns here, especially if the results are ultimately that I pay less for eBooks. As it is, all too often eBooks are priced well above paperbacks even for books that have been out for years. Some reality checking is sorely needed in this industry.

But that said, if you really just need a place to point your fingers, then look no further than our dear friend: Amazon.com.

[drofgnal]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Well, that works out just swell... when you're a writer who already has a reputation.

I won't say that working with a publisher is the only way to build a reputation, but so far the biggest successes of Internet-based self-promotion are things like Chocolate Rain and the Tron Guy. I.e. I expect that in the future, building and managing a truly national or international following is still going to require resources (finances, skills, networking, PR, marketing, etc) far beyond the ken of most individual creators.

In addition, some type of filtration is always going to be required. Self-published works are, for better or worse, an undifferentiated seething mass of works that takes tremendous effort to wade through. Again this does not need to exclusively lie in the hands of the publishers, but they do have more experience and fewer conflicts of interest with this task than, say, retailers.

As to the idea that "publishers want control," that's sort of like saying "dogs want food." Everyone in the process wants control over numerous aspects -- publishers, retailers, authors, distributors, critics and readers. That's just a given; i.e. there is nothing wrong with maneuvers to gain control, as long as they are basically done legally and honor the existing rights. E.g. to me, pirating a book because it's out in hardcover but not an ebook isn't a legit protest, because it hurts not only the publishers, but also the retailers and, most importantly, the author. Or a retailer can slash ebook prices to pressure publishers to permanently lower ebook wholesale pricing, but can't legitimately withhold payments in order to force the same change.

I said 'are not needed'. That is different than not desired. If e-books come to dominate then the era of 'there is no other way' because only a publisher can line up printing, distribution, etc will be gone. Do they still have a roll? Of course, their roll will just have to change. You still need editors, people to do electronic formatting, and marketing the authors work. But, their role may change, they may not be so firmly the 'middle man'. This is what I see them fearing, hence the desire to keep hardback front and center and relegate ebook to paperback status.

[DawnFalcon]

zacheryjensen - The mass market won't wait, they'll simply go to the darknets. Same if it's priced identically to the hardback. Again, why does every industry have to learn the music industry's lessons the hard way?

If publishers are dependent on hardback revenue and they're doomed? Well, too bad. Big music is in trouble as well, so they're just...oh...trying to distort the world's legal systems to fight for them, in an effort which is likely to kill off big commercial music entirely for decades.

Post-scarcity economics suck for big companies. This is not news.