Simon & Schuster is delaying ebooks by four months

[Sydney's Mom]

"Likewise, a defendant who used the new file-sharing networks in the technological interregnum before digital media could be purchased legally, but who later shifted to paid outlets, might also be able to rely on the defense."

Yup. That is exactly why I am not hiding the fact that I am currently reading the book. All of this talk about higher price for earlier delivery is fine, if they had the ebook available for full price on the release date for the hardcover. I have totally switched to ebooks. I will not be buying another hardcover book, unless I want to look at it sitting on my bookshelf (very few).

I would not have an issue with a rolling price point - full price first month, 20% discount second month, . . .whatever. They just need to realize that a certain portion of their audience has switched to ebooks, and has no desire to accumulate more pbooks. Actually, ebook readers appeal to heavy readers, so they are really shooting themselves in the foot. I was the one who pre-ordered Stephen King, Harry Potter. I didn't wait for the paper back. I actually buy fewer books now, but I am willing to pay more for them. The appeal of the kindle was convenience, not $9.99 books.

I read or heard someone say that musicians don't make money from CDs anymore, just live shows. Well, I have never downloaded an illegal song, and my ipod has just caused me to buy more music. Instead of waiting until I see something, I can download it on a Saturday morning when I hear the song on a TV show. The average age of an ebook reader is older than an ipod user. We probably have more disposable income. I really think the piracy issue is overblown for ebooks. Just like us old foggies have never downloaded illegal songs, but gone like good little girls and boys to itunes and bought them, we would buy our ebooks, and not look on the darknet for them, if only we could find them. It took me awhile to find Under the Dome, because I really wanted to buy the book (and I will pay for it on December 24). I paid more for the ebook than Amazon was charging for the pbook. But I don't want to lug around a pbook. I'm getting older (53), and am looking for the easy way. And ebooks are easy. They don't need to be cheap, just easy.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by dsvick

Like a few others, I dont buy hard cover books, and I rarely get the paperbacks either unless it is something that I know I'll like and will read again. Most (60%) of my books come from the library, so waiting to read a title is not too unreasonable for me - 4 months though is a bit long.

I don't have an eReader yet (soon, very soon) but I can see my purchasing habits changing to doing more purchasing and less borrowing, if for no other reason than the convenience of being able to do it while sitting on my couch.

I think this is bad call on their part it might increase hardcover and paperback sales a small amount. At the same time it will almost certainly decrease the eBook sales.

Just because you have an ereader doesn't mean you have to give up the library. Especially living in Ohio! I use the library pretty much as I always did, checking out books or going on a wait list for them. If i don't want to wait (Southern Vampire Series) I buy the book. And Amazon doesn't always have the lowest price.

[zerospinboson]

Oh look. A graph that shows how ebook sale revenues went from .12% to .25% of the total market. Run!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by wallcraft

The article does not say so explicitly, but these publishers seem to be assuming that they can release 4 months later at the same list price as the hardcover. They are relying on Amazon to continue to take a hit on these titles and offer them at $9.99.

If publishers want to experiment with 4 months later at a lower list price (i.e. less income for them and their authors per sale), this is an approach that has an outside chance of working. I think 4 months later and sky high list prices is very likely to fail.

Either way, the authors of these titles are going to loose money due to the publisher's games. I think this is where the "we need to do this now" comes from, publishers know this is going to loose money for these titles but if only 5-10% of early sales are from ebooks perhaps their authors won't scream too loudly about the money the publishers are taking out of their pockets. Publishers are not in the business of enriching authors, but if I was one of the authors they screwed in this way I would look for another publisher.

I think what the publishers are hoping for is that in 4 months time, the books will no longer be on the NYT best seller list and thus not eligible for the $9.99 price tag. All that will do is cause these books to not be purchased at all.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

Rose Fox has a post on this subject at Publishers Weekly.
http://www.publishersweekly.com/blog...630051163.html

One of the really interesting points is:

It just bugs me all those "stupid" people who think the Kindle is the only reader out there. They think Amazon is going to snatch their content or change it on them. GAH!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by zerospinboson

Oh look. A graph that shows how ebook sale revenues went from .12% to .25% of the total market. Run!

eBook sales is the biggest grown part of the book market at present. So why would the publishers want to stifle that? STUPID!

[Rob G.]

Sorry for repeating myself, but I made this comment in another thread this morning, but it seems maybe more appropriate here:

The book industry is determined to make the same mistakes the music industry did. As eReaders and eReading become more accepted, piracy will also increase. They can either get infront of it and make eBooks cheap enough and convenient enough that a large majority of customers won't bother pirating, or they will try to hang on to a dying business model and allow the pirates to fill the void. The smart publisher would realized the current system's days are numbered and figure something out, but I'd imagine they'll fight tooth and nail to protect something that's already gone, insuring they have to play catchup in the new model (and they probably never will.)

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by catsittingstill

*snip*
If the e-book version is coming out later, though, why not wait? We wait for the paperback version all the time. There's a risk to the publisher there, that by the time the later version comes out you won't want it anymore: they'll be sacrificing the "impulse buy" market. But hey, if that's what they want to do... (shrug)

*snip*

we used to wait for dial-up as well. the times, they are a-changin'. they need to get with the program!

Originally Posted by Amalthia

Are they trying to encourage piracy??? The new generation of internet users aren't exactly used to waiting...and the culture of "sharing" is rather strong. Why give the users an incentive to look elsewhere for an ebook? Really, based on how it went for the music industry they should know in tough economic times people cut discretionary spending first. When it comes to file sharing not everyone is morally strong enough to withstand temptation and wait 4 months.

there are some (many) actions that main stream society does that causes others to become criminals. this is one of them.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

That's a fascinating insight.

Yes, when customers get used to paying lower prices, they'll insist on them. Unfortunately for the publishers, they can't invent market rates; they can only influence them. If *all* publishers agreed to this, they might have a chance to keep their current pricing schedule. However, several other major publishers, and dozens (hundreds?) of small/independent publishers, and lots of individual authors, have decided that ebooks should be cheaper than hardcovers even when released at the same time.

Apparently, these publishers are oblivious to how many people *never* buy hardcovers, and are not switching from hardcover to ebook, but paperback to ebook. Insisting that their ebooks lag behind hardcover sales won't get them back the customers who buy from their competitors during the lag time, because when that 4 months is up, there's a new crop of bestsellers--and their competitors' titles are available as ebooks *now.*

one of the marketing lures of the Kindle at least is/was that the ebook is actually cheaper than the pbook. that can't be ignored

[kjk]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

one of the marketing lures of the Kindle at least is/was that the ebook is actually cheaper than the pbook. that can't be ignored

Hardware manufacturers of eBook readers are all onboard with the marketing message of "digital books are cheaper than physical books"-since it helps sell hardware. The jury is out whether anyone asked the publishers

[wallcraft]

Originally Posted by kjk

Hardware manufacturers of eBook readers are all onboard with the marketing message of "digital books are cheaper than physical books"-since it helps sell hardware. The jury is out whether anyone asked the publishers

Currently the major publishers have not reduced their prices, they are still getting about 50% of the list price back from retailers (including Amazon) and they are typically charging hardback rates for the ebooks. What they are afraid of is that Amazon will stop deeply discounting new and bestseller ebooks and readers will then stop buying from publishers who don't reduce their list price to sane levels. Note that a discount selling price of $9.99 implies that publishers "should" in the long term expect perhaps $8-9 per ebook, i.e. a list price of about $16-18.

[Skydog]

Originally Posted by texasnightowl

Well, if they think by doing this they will "force" me to buy the hardback, they are entirely mistaken. Won't happen. And if the release 4 months later of the ebook is at the hardback price, then I won't be buying that either. I'll wait until the ebook is at the paperback price, no matter how long it takes, or I'll visit my library. It's my money and they better not count on a dime.

Ditto!!

Stupidity on the part of publishers will only increase traffic on the darknet.

[Dulin's Books]

Originally Posted by markbot

If I were advising the publishers I would recommend that they get in front of ebooks before they lose total control...as what happened in music. They should consider backing a single format that has DRM and releasing it at the same time as the hardcover. The reason is that if they allow the device makers to maintain their own formats....

Agree and have been saying this for years. They saw what happened inteh music industry they should have settled this already by getting together and telling the device makers what they want and decide on one DRM/format(for tradional "book material" maga and nespaper etc could/would/should be different) instead of letting the book seller or the reader seller dictate.

[kindlekitten]

yeah, you really think that they would have taken some lessons and learned from the music debacle

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by wallcraft

What they are afraid of is that Amazon will stop deeply discounting new and bestseller ebooks and readers will then stop buying from publishers who don't reduce their list price to sane levels.

I doubt Amazon would "stop buying," because I don't think Amazon buys anything before they sell it, especially not ebooks.

But customers could stop buying over-$10 ebooks if they've gotten used to the lower prices; that's already happening in some cases. And if more publishers go along with that upper limit, the big publishers will lose customers, even for bestselling books. So presumably, they want to convince the customers to not get used to the lower prices... which is pretty much a lost cause. Because some publishers *will* cater to that price point, and Schuster & Hachette are going to find out that they're not part of the literary elite that can demand that kind of prices.

[Barcey]

Luckily MobileRead has lots of quality ebooks available now and for free.

I think I'll send these publishers a Christmas card thanking them for all the money I'm going to keep by not buying their books.