Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinisajoy
I love this.
Now not at you but one final thought.
Why shouldn't a publisher set a price that most people will pay?
Personally if 9 out of 10 people would willing pay the price I set, then I am not going to worry about lowering my price for the one. $13 times 9 is 117. 10 times 10 is 100. I wouldn't want to lose money.
Just a final thought: if enough people are willing to pay the price, it isn't worth it to lower the price to please the ones that think it should be cheaper.
|
Well, publisher should set the price at something most are willing to pay. This is classic economics theory, you price to maximize your profits. There is particular price point that does it. Below it and you leave a lot of money on the table because a lot of people are willing to pay more. Above it, and you lose a lot of sales. Where that price point is tends to be more of an art than a science, but as long as there is competition, you tend to reach it.
The fly in the ointment is that books aren't a commodity for most people. That is to say, most people don't buy generic books. Some do, but there is a reason that J.K. Rowlings sold many millions of her Harry Potter books and your average indie writer is lucky to sell a thousand (if that). People are willing to pay more for some specific titles than they are for others. Those titles change over time and for each individual consumer. I'm not willing to pay a thin dime for a copy of 50 Shades of Gray. Heck, I wouldn't take it if someone tried to give me a copy. On the other hand, a whole lot of people are willing to pay hardback prices for it.