Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
Uh huh. Most big publishers have profit margins ranging from 8-15%, hardly an extortionate rate -- in fact, right around the same range as a typical author's royalty rates. Meanwhile, the public is demanding that publishers both slash their prices by 30% (far more than what they save by going electronic) and increase their costs even further by doubling, or tripling the royalties.
Would you like it, by the way, if your boss decided to slash your salary by 20% because he found out you moved to a cheaper apartment? After all, your costs are now lower, so why do you need the extra money?  |
My employer is off-shoring jobs to places without minimum wage, no retire plans and no health care. You're argument isn't going to garner any sympathy.
My argument was that the author's effort and risk is exactly the same between a physical book and an ebook and their compensation should not change. You've said nothing to refute this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
• Authors don't necessarily get a "raw deal." The publisher invests a lot of time, money and other resources into getting a book published and distinguishing it from the other 250k new books (not including another 250k of short-run and on-demand titles) published every year.
• Authors don't take 50% of the financial responsibility or risks involved in publishing the book. As such, the standard royalty rates -- while perhaps not perfect or ideal -- are far more fair than you assert.
• No one is forced to sign a contract. If an author doesn't like the deal, and they sign anyway, that is their own responsibility.
|
On average I would guess that a typical author spends 6 months to 2 years of effort to write a book. The majority of them do this for no guarantee of income and make nothing. That's the largest financial risk they can make. They are forced into signing bad contracts because they're already risk vested.
I'm tired of hearing about the enormous risks that publishers make. It's their job. The personal risk that an author is taking is huge compared to the risk the publisher is taking to their company.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
What ebook readers will not accept is that it actually costs money to produce an actual professional book, or that prices are based as much on demand as anything else. In a few years, the idea of pegging an ebook's price to a paper copy will be an absurdity, since paper will be largely gone.
|
Again I disagree. Dan Brown sold 100,000 ebooks in a market that everyone keeps saying is insignificant compared to physical books. At $9.99 that's $1 million which is enough for producing a quality product. It's very easy math for publishers to pick authors that they are confident will sell enough copies to recover costs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
Incorrect, especially with an agency model.
$15 cover and list price for an ebook; retailer gets 30%, author gets 10%. Revenues (not profit) are $9. From that $9 you have to repay the investment in the book (advance, editing, proofreading, marketing, special promotions, maybe a book tour), pay taxes, pay your overhead, pay your staff and so forth. And of course, many books just don't sell, and something needs to fill that hole in the ground. The publisher's profits -- what's left over after all that -- is much smaller; as I mentioned, it's around 15%.
|
1) I wasn't talking about the agency model.
2) According to another post in this thread you're saying the same thing. The retailer pays 50%. Are you incorrect?