Quote:
Originally Posted by mcl
Ok, let's take your argument:
title A has cost X associated with it.
In the past, cost X was passed to the consumer as part of the price of item N.
Today, item N costs the same and covers the same cost X that always existed, but now there's a new item -- P -- that you're arguing should bear its own share of cost X.
If you really wanted to be equitable, you'd raise the price of P ***AND*** lower the price of N, since some of the cost X which was buried in the price of N is now not being borne entirely by N, but by both N and P together.
But that's not what's happening.
And since that's not happening, the profit that the publisher always made off N isn't held constant with the introduction of P (due to cost equalization). The profit is increased, because N is still bearing all the cost of X, but that cost is being used as an argument to raise the price of P.
|
Instead it allows the author to earn out their advance faster and publishers recoup their up front costs and give them a greater ability to buy other books from their authors.
Your argument still comes back to saying people who buy ebooks are special and don't need to pay their share of the costs.