[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I was talking about the case where the publisher is making both the pbook and the ebook, if you were wondering.

I assumed so.

And this is like saying that if an ereader manufacturer makes devices with two color options for covers, the device with the most desired color will cannibalize the other.

Nope. The equivalent statement there would be two printed paperback editions with different covers, assuming the more popular cover would cannibalize the sales.

If the price is in the impulse buy range, there would be enough people who would want to buy both, or buy an ebook rather than go to the library. Or get a book in the original language when they already have it translated. Try out a new writer with ebooks, and buy the pbook if they enjoyed the work. It would also be easier to buy books as presents.

And an "impulse buy" range is?

This would be the publishers doing. Obviously the small retailers can't match the prices of the bigger ones. They don't get the same deal on the books. But if the publisher only uses big retailers, then they effectively sell all books half-price. So the "value" that the book has for them is half the "value" that it has for the person who ends up buying it.

No, it's not the publisher's doing.

In any industry that produces goods sold at retail, there will be distributors. The manufacturer simply can't deal with all of the smaller retailers individually. They aren't set up for it, and can't do it profitably. They sell to distributors, who then service the retailers.

Book retailing is like any other form of retail. There will be huge retailers, like Amazon, B&N, Borders, CostCo or Sam's Club who buy in enough volume to deal with the publisher directly. (They will order thousands of copies of popular titles.) Smaller shop order through places like Baker and Taylor or Ingrams. Because the distributor takes a cut, the price they can offer the smaller retailer will not match the one gotten by the big chains, and the smaller retailer will have less margin to offer discounts. They simply won't be able to match the big guy's prices.

The consumer wants the best price, so guess where they shop? Don't blame the publishers for the demise of "Mom and Pop" bookstores: blame consumers buying on price who don't shop there.

This sort of consolidation has been happening across retailing for decades, and is not unique to bookselling.

Won't what? Comment? I just did.

No, that you wouldn't see publishers commenting on it. Like I said, why should they?

And you didn't contradict me on the fact that they make more profit then they do with new authors. Does that mean that you agree?

That they make more profit than they do with new authors? Oh, certainly, they likely do, for any individual title. They don't have acquisition costs or most of the editing costs. At issue is just how big a part of their business selling print editions of PD works is. Offhand, I'd call that a small slice in the overall scheme of things. It's worth doing because there's a market. But if that market disappeared tomorrow, it wouldn't sink the publishers who had been addressing it. It's a sideline for them, not a core business.

But while they may may make more money on them than they do on new authors, they have a strong incentive to continue to publish new authors. Bestsellers have to come from somewhere, and today's international best sellers were new authors, once. The publisher crosses fingers that a new author will find a market, and someday become a bestseller, or at least a consistent mid-list item.

These books will not bring the revenues that the gold mines bring, but they can bring a steady profit.

Which? Reprints of PD stuff, or new authors?

Yes to the first. The publisher hopes so to the second, but that hope is sometimes dashed.

Just so I'm clear about your way of thinking:
1. You read my post that said that HC don't cost that much more to make.
2. You see the fact that I quoted you for that statement.
3. You realize that your initial statement was wrong.
4. You decide to reply with "Who told you hardcovers don't cost all that much more to make?"

My question still stands, and see my revised numbers for why. My error on posting in haste and getting it wrong the first time - I was in a hurry, relied on memory, and didn't unearth the email giving the figures I quoted in my revision. I should know better than to rely on memory.

HCs have higher manufacturing costs than PBs. Those higher costs are why trade paperbacks exist: to provide books in the larger format (which might not be feasible to do as a mass market PB, be cause you just can't make an MMPB that big), but at a lower price than the one required to bind in boards.
______
Dennis