View Single Post
Old 03-12-2010, 06:12 PM   #2
leebase
Karma Kameleon
leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.leebase ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
leebase's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,960
Karma: 26738313
Join Date: Aug 2009
Device: iPad Mini, iPhone X, Kindle Fire Tab HD 8, Walmart Onn
The problem with the article is the author seems to have no idea of what the real costs are of publishing a book. eBooks ARE cheaper than hard backs. The deal McMillan struck with Amazon ensures that the ebooks will always be about 2 to 3 bucks cheaper. $2 to $3 a books is what it costs to make and ship (etc.) the physical book. That's the portion the publishers are all to glad to knock off the price.

What Wal-Mart, Costco do with those cheap hardbacks (a very select few) is use them as loss leaders to get people into the store. Amazon was doing the same thing -- but with EVERY book on the NY Times, all the time. Amazon sold those ebooks at a loss at $9.99.

Sure the consumers loved the $9.99 ebook. They'd like the $9.98 even better and the $.01 best of all except for FREE which they REALLY love.

It's not the publishers that are failing to grasp that ebooks should be cheaper than hard backs. It's folks like this author who have no clue how little the physical cost of the book really is.

Lee
leebase is offline   Reply With Quote