Thread: Why aren't e-books included in best seller lists?
View Single Post
Old 07-20-2012, 09:02 AM   #8
avantman42
Wizard
avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.avantman42 ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
avantman42's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,090
Karma: 6058305
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Paperwhite
I think I may not have phrased my original post very well

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lister View Post
So, When Vintage Books (Random House) releases their sales figures for 50 Shades of Grey--which tops every best seller list in the US and UK--they only release what sold in paper? I can't imagine they'd reduce their sales figures by a very likely 20% (probably far more) coming from e-sales. Why would they differentiate?
That is pretty much my point - Amazon apparently won't give out sales figures, but the publishers must know how many they've sold, so I don't understand why, to quote Ms Frostrup, "Sales of digital books ... aren't included with print books on best-seller lists"

So, did Open Book get it wrong? Or did they actually mean that self-published books aren't included on best-seller lists? They never mentioned self-published books, so I'd assumed they were talking about e-books in general.
avantman42 is offline   Reply With Quote