|
I really don't see what the difference is if it's Amazon or the publishers losing money on the $9.99 books. Is the difference supposed to be that the publishers can take the hit?
The fact of the matter is, if either Amazon or the publisher doesn't make money on e-books, they won't produce e-books.
Now, don't get me wrong: There are a lot of books I have looked at on the Kindle Store that I won't buy because they're > $9.99. (While bestsellers from the NY Times list are generally $9.99, a significant number of the well-reviewed books in the NY Times Book Review are more costly.) But that doesn't mean I resent the higher price. I simply haven't found an ebook yet worth paying that much. But a blanket statement of, "I refuse to pay more than $9.99 for an ebook" means that the number of ebooks produced will be significantly restricted, since publishers know that they can safely ignore the 500,000 Kindle owners out there and still pick up the millions of readers who haven't got ebook readers yet. That sets up a vicious circle, as a shrinking supply of ebooks will mean a shrinking demand for readers.
So I think the idea of buying only what you feel has value to you is a good and obvious idea, but at the same time, a blanket declaration that > $10 is too much to pay for an ebook does more harm than good -- if your goal is for the publishers and Amazon to actually produce ebooks.
|