Quote:
Originally Posted by llurgy
The main difference between 1 and 2.
Option 1: You have no choices what-so-ever.
Option 2: You can vote with your wallet to wait until the cost comes down.
With option 1 there is no choice and therefore no feedback to the publisher.
With option 2 there is a choice and therefore feedback to the publisher
|
Except that's not true.
1) There is a choice. Don't buy the ebook, either steal it digitally or check it out from the library. There is always a way to fight back regardless of what they want you to think.
2) That doesn't work since the initial price is so much more.
Example:
Let's say that 100,000 people are going to buy Under The Dome on December 24th.
$9.99 x 100,000 = $999,000 total before Amazon's cut
Now, let's pretend that they released it on the same day as the hardback for $35 and that 10% of his readers bite at that price.
$35 x 10,000 = $350,000
And that they drive away 5% (5,000 people) due to their practices and another 10% (10,000) who opt for the hardback. The other 75% (75,000 people) will purchase Under The Dome on December 24th.
$9.99 x 75,000 = $749,250
$749,250 + $350,000 = $1,099,250 total before Amazon's cut
They would actually make
more money doing it that way regardless of them losing 15% of their initial customers. Now all of those numbers were made up off of the top of my head (I can only guess the numbers of what would happen and how many people would purchase the Kindle edition) but still. Do you understand why I am so against this? What publisher would launch on release date for $9.99 when they can do a limited launch at $25-35 and than raking in the normal sales six weeks later?
It is a standard business strategy. Raise the rates because people will just take it and the small amount of people who do leave will be covered by the the price hike.