Would you buy the print or the ebook for the same price?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Fulfilled by Amazon means a third party sale where Amazon stores and delivers stock for an independent seller not a book sold/provided by Amazon.

It also means that the hardcover mentioned could be new/remaindered/secondhand - that's why Amazon have things like "New," "Used - Good" etc listed for books.

As I suspected. So it is not Amazon that is selling it with a cheaper price than the ebook. So comparing a third party seller with Amazon is not valid here I think.

As usual when people find such price differences there is a perfectly reasonable explanation. Other common mistakes people make is to compare the price to an edition that is not released yet.

[Turtle91]

hmmm. A 3rd party selling product that is warehoused and handled by Amazon?? That sounds a little fishy...why would amazon give any profit to a 3rd party if they are the ones doing all the "work"??

It was listed as a "New" hardcover on amazon's website. I thought that Amazon's book pricing was competitive with other retailers? I read a thread on MR that was talking about the benefits of their "free book thing for 3 months" and someone else mentioned that you get the same results from just pricing your book free on a competitor's website...then Amazon figures it out and lowers their price to match.

In any case, I'm not going to pay $11 for an ebook, especially when it is listed for half that in hardcover...on the same web page!

[DiapDealer]

If you don't really want the book in hardcover, then why would the hardcover's price even matter? Just say $11 dollars is more than you're willing to spend on an ebook and be done with it. Forget about the price of the version you've no intention of buying. It's not relevant.

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

If you don't really want the book in hardcover, then why would the hardcover's price even matter? Just say $11 dollars is more than you're willing to spend on an ebook and be done with it. Forget about the price of the version you've no intention of buying. It's not relevant.

In my decision process it IS relevant.

I won't pay more for an ebook than I can get the pbook for. It's a principle thing. Why should the publisher get that much more money for an item that costs them much less to produce?? Now, if the publishers paid the difference directly to the author...I might consider it...but you know what the chances of THAT happening are don't you!

[crossi]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

If you don't really want the book in hardcover, then why would the hardcover's price even matter? Just say $11 dollars is more than you're willing to spend on an ebook and be done with it. Forget about the price of the version you've no intention of buying. It's not relevant.

I take it you don't usually comparison shop while considering buying something? I do a lot of comparing of features and prices of similar items before deciding wether something is a good buy or not.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by crossi

I take it you don't usually comparison shop while considering buying something? I do a lot of comparing of features and prices of similar items before deciding wether something is a good buy or not.

Sure I do. But comparison pricing is only relevant if I might actually buy the other item in question. And even in that case, my comparison has absolutely zilch to do with the costs to produce and/or market said item (or how much profit someone might make on said item). I care very little about anything other than it's value to me. I have no fricking clue what it costs to produce a loaf of bread, but I know it's worth it to me to buy it already sliced--even though they might charge me a lot more to slice it than it actually costs them to do so.

I get having a price-limit you're willing to spend on something. I really do. But what I don't get is an arbitrary, per book, eternally-moving target based on the price of something you'd prefer NOT to buy had they cost the same. I mean; say one of your favorite authors of all time had a book you were dying to read. The print version is on sale for $6 (but you have to order it, pay shipping and handling, and wait for it to be delivered) and the electronic version of the same book was available immediately for $7. You're really gonna buy the print version (or pass on the book altogether) based solely on the "no more than the print version" principle? Really? Seems a little silly. Especially when the same rule, would encourage you to pay $8-10 for the same ebook if the print version went to $15 when the sale was over. It's baffling.

[Tattncat]

A moot point, for me. I only purchase eBooks and if if theynare too expensive, I'll pass and wait until the price goes down to an acceptable level. However, I think the publishers need to take note of the fact that I and (I am relatively sure) others like me are purchasing way more eBooks (bothe in quantity and $ spent)than we did with print books.

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

hmmm. A 3rd party selling product that is warehoused and handled by Amazon?? That sounds a little fishy...why would amazon give any profit to a 3rd party if they are the ones doing all the "work"??

Amazon isn't giving up profits. The sellers own the merchandise. Rather than ship the items directly to buyers they send the item to Amazon. When the item sells it comes from Amazon.

The seller is giving Amazon a share of the profits because they get exposure to Amazon customers. Buyers see that it is fulfilled by Amazon and feel more confidence. Some will be encouraged to purchase in an effort to get free shipping. If sellers get bad feedback due to shipping problems, Amazon will step in to take responsibility for it.

[Turtle91]

I think Diap makes good valid points. But he ignores the fact that many people make buying decisions based on principle.

"Buy American" because it supports your neighbors/country even though better product can be had for cheaper elsewhere.

"Don't buy from xxxx tuna company" because their nets kill dolphins.

"Buy from a local book store" because those big conglomerates are taking over the world and pushing the little guy out of business even though you can get it cheaper and faster from the big guys.

"Buy brand X" because they use recycled materials even though the quality usually sucks.

Those kinds of decision processes happen all the time.

I happen to think it is wrong for publishers to charge the consumer much more for a product that costs much less to produce.

The story is what is being sold. The story has value. I am willing to pay for the story - and I'm willing to pay more for a story that I really like, that i've waited for, or from a favorite author. Likewise, I know that it costs money to produce that story - to pay for the editor, ePub coder, cover artist, advertiser. That makes the story cost a certain amount/worth a certain value - the "ebook value".

If the publisher has to go through added expense to print and ship that story in paperback form, then I would expect to pay a higher price to get that story as a paperback (ebook value + cost of printing/distribution). If I wanted the story in a "collectible" format (hardcover=better materials/quality) then I would expect to pay even more.

But in no wise does it make sense, to me, to pay more for an ebook than a pbook when the publisher does not have any of those additional expenses.

Therefor, I don't buy ebooks if they are priced higher than the pbook...and they should be a bit lower.

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by Fluribus

Amazon isn't giving up profits. The sellers own the merchandise. Rather than ship the items directly to buyers they send the item to Amazon. When the item sells it comes from Amazon.

The seller is giving Amazon a share of the profits because they get exposure to Amazon customers. Buyers see that it is fulfilled by Amazon and feel more confidence. Some will be encouraged to purchase in an effort to get free shipping. If sellers get bad feedback due to shipping problems, Amazon will step in to take responsibility for it.

Ah, looked at from that perspective it makes more sense. There is definitely a reason I got an engineering degree instead of marketing!

[latepaul]

Let me just put out a further few thoughts on costs versus price.

I guess the reason "it should be priced less because it costs less" always strikes me as odd is because it's so often flouted elsewhere. Diap gave the example of a loaf of bread. I'd argue most consumers don't know or care about the costs of making what they buy. They do have an idea of what it's worth. But most people will realise that the price difference between a luxury sports car and an everyday hatchback is more than the costs of manufacture. Many of these would happily buy one if they had the disposable income. My house would cost about 50% more if you picked it up and plonked it down 5 miles down the road - because good schools, better amenities and a perceived 'better' area all have value. I don't know anyone who factors in cost of construction into a house-buying purchase.

Those are fairly specialised examples but that's only to demonstrate the point. I think it's true of everyday items. I don't think we generally judge how much something should be in price by its costs - because we don't know and even for big ticket items don't often try to find out - instead we get our sense of what a "fair" price is based on what similar items go for. And when items are similar but there's an intangible value difference - like with the house or car - then those can sway us to pay more for something that costs the same or even less.

I suspect one of the reasons this comes up for ebooks is that we're in a transition phase. Ebooks are new and so the price question is raised more readily. We don't have the same sense of what the price should be because they haven't been around so long. I think that will settle. People will decide what they're happy to pay and the market will, roughly, come to reflect that. Most people I suspect will get used to paying a certain price for ebooks without mentally comparing it to a paper book.

I understand the principle argument and I'm not trying to convince anyone to change their practices I'm just trying to offer a different perspective. Because whenever this topic comes it there's always an emphasis on a) what it costs to make and b) what you can't do with it, but the fact that there are things you can do with ebooks you can't with paper books and the fact that cost is only vaguely related to buying decisions for most people - never seems to get a mention.

[Turtle91]

Good points latepaul.

I would caution against your housing price example though. I would agree that most people don't take into account the cost of construction of a house when they are purchasing it from someone else - "pre owned" so to speak. They do look at the value (at least the banks do) when they get an appraisal of the house, which is looking to see how much similar houses have sold for in the same area. But people who are having a new house built, or (to a slightly lesser extent) buying a new house from a developer, most certainly DO look at the cost of the construction. It determines what kind of house, with what amenities, on which plot they will build. If Builder A tries to sell me the same style house for 40% more than Builder B, when Builder A's construction costs are drastically lower because I am using lower quality materials/options than Builder B, then I most certainly would not be buying from Builder A. For your example to work you would need to compare purchasing a "pre owned" house with a "used" book.

I also agree that we are somewhat in a transition phase as far as ebooks are concerned, but I think people have a fairly good idea about what they are willing to pay - even if they don't do the mental exercise of realizing that ebooks cost much less to produce, therefore should cost less. People know that a basic (old style) incandescent light bulb is easy to produce...they innately know that it should be cheap, even if they don't know the actual cost of production. They also have a pretty good grasp that LED lights are a bit more complicated to produce and therefore would cost more. I don't think you would ever find anyone who will look at the two bulbs side by side on a store shelf and be willing to pay $50 for a single 60 watt incandescent bulb when the LED is $35.

The more the topic of ebook pricing comes up, the more opportunities there are to educate people. If we all act like penguins and follow the publisher's lead jumping off the iceberg, then we will all think that an ebook should cost $24.95...because that's how much hardbacks cost. Yet if we get people to think through the very basic idea that ebooks should cost less because they are so much easier to produce, then we can have a fairly priced product that makes everyone happy.

Cheers,

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I guess the reason "it should be priced less because it costs less" always strikes me as odd is because it's so often flouted elsewhere.

If eBooks had the same functionality as pBooks, I don't think it would be an argument. The reality is that the eBook cannot be loaned as many times as you wish, resold, or given away after you've read it. Thus, I think people perceive the value as lower for a pBook. "I might really love this and want to share it with others," is a factor that holds me back from buying many eBooks. Oddly, then, the ebooks I'm most likely to buy are the ones I expect to like the least.

In exchange for that lower value, we expect a lower price. And the justification for the expected lower price is the fact that printing and shipping and storing and disposing of unsold copies are all costs that don't exist with eBooks. So we expect that because costs *and* functionality are lower, the price should reflect that reality.

There are people who value an eBook higher than a pBook, for portability and storability reasons. But I think they're the exception, not the rule.

[OddCosine]

Originally Posted by Turtle91

Yet if we get people to think through the very basic idea that ebooks should cost less because they are so much easier to produce, then we can have a fairly priced product that makes everyone happy.

I'd like it to work that way, but don't really think it does. As others have pointed out, the production cost isn't relevant. They should be priced at what the market will bear. If the demand for ebooks becomes greater than for paper books, they should probably cost more.

Back when movies were released on both VHS and DVD, if the DVD was cheaper to produce should it have cost less? Even if most people thought it was a superior product despite being cheaper to produce?

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by latepaul

I don't think we generally judge how much something should be in price by its costs - because we don't know and even for big ticket items don't often try to find out - instead we get our sense of what a "fair" price is based on what similar items go for.

That's probably correct for many, but the points about not being able to sell/lend an ebook, the costs of the ebook compared to a physical book are all just further arguments to back up the belief as to why the ebook should be cheaper. The comparison is there for digital music (even though it's better as it no longer has DRM), and in my experience MP3 albums are generally cheaper than CDs. And that is the bottom line for me, immaterial of cost, usability or anything else, it is still a digital file and not a physical item, so therefore it should be cheaper.