Quote:
Originally Posted by pilotbob
Yes, I em understand math... but I think this formula:
Total Spent on reader + Total Spent on eBooks / Number of eBooks read
... or cost per book read is a much more correct number than:
Total Spent on reader + Total Spent on eBooks / Number of eBooks in library
... or cost per book in library. Because I could download 10,000 ebooks or get the Pagoda DVD or whatever.... and my cost per book acquisition would be much lower.
So, yes, you have to include all the books you bought in the cost... but only amortize the full cost by books READ not books D/Led for a real cost. You would do the same thing for pbooks... Total Cost of all books / Books Read. To me that is the more interesting number...
Am I babbling?
BOb
|
No, you're not. It's just, how do you amortize an up-front cost. And there's no "right" way to do it. (Ask any accountant.) P-books have no up-front cost, you pay as you go. (or read) It's an apple vs an orange situtation.
As to the cost/read ratio. I view it as one of the costs of affluence. Why do libraries get rid of books? (They do.) There's a check-out count over time. If a book sits in a library for years and nobody checks it out, it get dumped, to be replaced by something new, (and hopefully more popular). (Unless there's archival reference reason for keeping the item. Scientific periodicals are kept for very long periods.) I like to think that I'm "rich" enough to afford unread books, like I can keep hand tools I need once every few years...
I think a better ratio to look at is the p-book to e-book read ratio. In the last 50 books read, how many were p-books vs e-book. And why the ratio? Lack of availability of e-books? Prefer the esthetics of P-books? Already have the sunk expense of one or the other?