|
First of all, so the latest greatest novel comes out by X awesome author.
That author is already at the top of the peak, correct? They have already won the lottery, they are recognized, have loyal fans, and they will sell books. They also have very little to gain by putting out an Ebook version in the first place. Lost sales as you pointed out. Or sales at a lower $ amount.
But would the author really suffer? Considering the lower costs to produce an Ebook with the advantage of selling it over years instead of months. Would that author not make just as much? Its the publisher that takes the lions share of a paper book sales because he has lots of expenses. Yes he'll sell an ebook for less dollars than the equivalent paper book, but he doesn't have the same expenses for it either. He may actually come out ahead on the deal.
For any given book publishers can expect a % of all sales to come in Hard Cover, another % in paperback (at a lower price) and a 3rd % in books.
I won't guess at what the average is for each of those percentages.
But I will bet that not even King or Rowling sells more than 40% of the total as Hardcovers.
To say they are losing money because the price is scaled to drop is not the case.
They are only going to sell so many of those expensive hardcover books at the high price. At some point they are simply going to not have enough sales to justify keeping the books on the shelf. The same is true of paperbacks. They promote, release, hit the supermarket, walmart, bookstore shelves, are bought, and after a few months they are cleared off so the next big book can have its moment in the sun.
Where with Ebooks they simply don't have that whole issue. Books can be posted for years without taking shelf space from the other books. They also don't have the same costs involved. So they "should" be passing that savings onto us the consumer.
Why should someone who invests 150 - 350$ into a device to read ebooks be forced to support those lagging sales of paper books???
Using your proposal, publishers would never sell a mass market paperback, because they wouldn't make as much money off it. Yet publishers do so with almost every book that hits the market. Why?
Because they know only so many people can or will spend the $$ for that hard cover.
More will spend the 8 - 10 $ for a paperback.
And even more would spend 2-5$ for an ebook.
That does not necessarily mean that the ebook sales are taken from the hardcover or paperback sales. That is where the model is wrong, and that is why there is so much debate.
Chances are I will never again spend the big bucks to have the latest hardcover.
Its simply not worth the money spent to me. Nor will I spend money for paperbacks.
Those are not lost sales, you can't lose something you didn't have.
We are through the looking glass, things have changed.
The only real question is who is going to accept the change, and adapt.
And who is going to dig their feet in and be plowed under.
Publishers who work "with" the ebook community will be supported by them.
Those who work "against" it will be buried.
|