Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
I'm not sure of your logic here. Authors get paid a percentage of the price of the book (either of list or the net depending on the contract). Fairly obviously, they get more for an initial release hard back than they do for a paper back since the hard back cost more. Of course, the exact percentages vary according to the contract.
|
Again... please try to stay on point. My argument with Lee is the notion that customers paying a higher price for books
always equates to giving authors
more support. And it's not true. Not at all. Not even close.
Was I supporting my favorite authors less when new-release best-sellers were selling for $9.99 on Amazon than someone who's now paying the current higher price set by publishers? Or were the authors always getting the same cut (ignoring normal inflationary factors)?
Am I supporting my favorite author less if I buy a new-release ebook for a lesser promotional price than someone who didn't buy the new-release book during that promotion? Or did the author get the same cut?
Am I supporting my favorite author more if I buy their new-release hardcover at list price than someone who buys it at the same time at a discounted price somewhere else? Or did the author get payed the same?
My point has always been that the price payed by the customer is NOT the factor that some were insisting was the most important when determining how much someone might be "supporting the arts" (before they reversed course and tried to make the argument about paying vs borrowing).
The most important factor in determining how much you're supporting your favorite author (if such things concern you at all, quite frankly) is--and always has been--
WHEN you bought their book. Not how much you paid for it.