Quote:
Originally Posted by rhadin
Maybe the problem is one of numbers (  ): arguing the costs of a single ebook as opposed to a complete product line. For example, Simon & Schuster publishes 2,000 titles each year so although the cost to produce a single ebook might be inexpensive compared to the cost of producing a single pbook, that equation changes when the costs of producing 2,000 books is considered. Something has to subsidize the costs of the book that sells 500 copies and is, economically speaking, a failure/disaster. If every title sold 20,000+ copies the parameters of the argument might change, but few titles of all the titles published reach such a plateau. And most books (if I had to guess, I'd guesstimate at least 75%) do not break even, let alone earn a profit.
The other "fallacy" is the attempt to impose two disparate economic models on a single product. You can't divorce ebooks from pbooks until we reach the day, which is still years away, when there are no pbooks, just ebooks. Until then both ebooks and pbooks need to fit within a single economic model. |
It seems to me that the problem all along has been with this part: "Something has to subsidize the costs of the book that sells 500 copies and is, economically speaking, a failure/disaster... And most books (if I had to guess, I'd guesstimate at least 75%) do not break even, let alone earn a profit. "
Or perhaps a better idea is to change the business model so that there aren't so many failures and no way to recoup the loss. At least with ebooks, once the initial upfront costs are done, that book can "live" forever and attempt to earn out. The whole idea of printing warehouses full of books that everyone knows won't sell...seems like a bad idea. Even before ebooks that model sounds like a bad idea. I'm not saying that it didn't work for a while, but it probably needed some innovation a long time ago.