Falling in Love with E-books -- Harlequin does the full "e"

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

So why should any publisher issue ebook versions given that assumption?

Which is why eBook sales are not taking off.

eBooks have low value in the first place. When you put DRM on them, they lose all value.

It's kinda hard to convince people to pay money for something that has no value.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Doesn't seem like Harlequin "gets" anything.

They gets more money for their wares ('cause nobody can buy them used).

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Which is why eBook sales are not taking off.

eBooks have low value in the first place. When you put DRM on them, they lose all value.

It's kinda hard to convince people to pay money for something that has no value.

Uh huh. So the reason why people buy paper books is so they can resell them when done reading. Right.

Personally, I always found the "value" to be in the reading itself, and bought books I wanted to read. I generally don't resell mine. If I wind up with books I don't want (usually, dupes), I give them away to deserving homes.

You're making a couple of questionable assumptions, one of which appears to be that everyone else shares your motivations and viewpoints. That's almost never true, regardless of what values of "you", "motivations", and "viewpoints" are substituted.
______
Dennis

[jasonkchapman]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Ever been to a used book store? What's one of the largest sections? That's right - Romance Novels.

So today, person reads romance novels. Brings bag of read novels to used bookstore. Gets a couple bucks for them. But here's the important part: picks up another bag of used romance novels for pennies on the dollar. Reads them. Brings them back to the used book store. Repeat as needed.

You state this like it's a fact. It's not. Harlequin and several of its smaller competitors are already involved in e-books. They're already selling them. Readers are already buying them. It's been going on for a while. That's what's really happening today. Like it or not, e-books are working their way into the mainstream on terms set by the market.

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Tomorrow, the proposal is:
Reader spend $300+ to buy an eBook reader.
Reader spends almost full price for the eBook version, then throws them away.
Reader cannot buy the eBooks used. Reader cannot trade them in.

Doesn't seem like Harlequin "gets" anything.

Yes, they do. The fact that you don't agree with the way it's going, doesn't change that. You're probably not one of their customers anyway.

Apparently, they "get" something. Read the announcement again. They're not dipping their toes into the pool. They already have been putting out a percentage of their new releases in e-book form. They're increasing that to 100%. If they weren't selling, they wouldn't do that. If they weren't making money on them, they wouldn't do that.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Tomorrow, the proposal is:
Reader spend $300+ to buy an eBook reader.
Reader spends almost full price for the eBook version, then throws them away.
Reader cannot buy the eBooks used. Reader cannot trade them in.

Doesn't seem like Harlequin "gets" anything.

I almost missed your real point there: Bring the price down so the reader won't feel loss from the inability to trade-in books. From Harlequin's perspective, the proposal above may be better than the present system, since they "get" no return from used book resales, but they can profit off of each e-book sale, no matter the amount. But I agree, e-book costs can be reduced since they will replace resales with new e-sales, and ultimately get more sales from each book.

[rlauzon]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Uh huh. So the reason why people buy paper books is so they can resell them when done reading. Right.

Not necessarily. But part of the value of the book is that when you are done reading it, you can do more with it than just throw it away.

That's especially true when the book is a nice hardcover - which is what eBooks are priced at today.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

You're making a couple of questionable assumptions, one of which appears to be that everyone else shares your motivations and viewpoints. That's almost never true, regardless of what values of "you", "motivations", and "viewpoints" are substituted.

So you would rather pay $15 for a DRMed eBook that can only be read for a short time and cannot be resold/given away, then pay $10 for a paper book that be read for a long time and can be resold/given away?

The only thing that I assume is that intelligent people want to get the best value for their money.

Getting back on the topic:
My point was that there seems to be quite a market in trading used romance novels. Moving to DRMed eBook versions of these seems to be a good idea for the publisher - but a bad idea for the reader.

[Alisa]

I wonder if this is a genre that would lend itself well to the Napster-style subscription model. You can download as many books as you like and read them as much as you want as long as you're a subscriber. If you want to keep them without a subscription, you pay per title. That might be attractive to people who are reading dozens of these books a month, re-readers or not. I'm sure while the used book store might end up being cheaper, the convenience of downloading them on demand is probably worth a little extra. At any rate, I think getting a high-volume publisher like Harlequin into ebooks is a great step towards growing this market and bringing both books and hardware down to a way more attractive price point.

Plus, another bonus to having a reader: You don't have to carry around a book with that lurid cover art. I don't look down on people for reading romances but I could see wanting to keep that private if you're in the break room at work or something.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

The only thing that I assume is that intelligent people want to get the best value for their money.

You also seem to assume that everyone else does or should value things exactly the same way you do.

That's just not so -- we all come to any transaction with our own perspective on what we want out of it, and what it's worth to us. As has been amply demonstrated by a multitude of comments, there are a lot of folks who simply don't give a fillip about being able to sell a book once they're done with it, and care only slightly more about being able to give it away.

This is not a sign of impaired intelligence, this is simply an indication that different factors are valued differently by different people.

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by NatCh

You also seem to assume that everyone else does or should value things exactly the same way you do.

That's just not so -- we all come to any transaction with our own perspective on what we want out of it, and what it's worth to us. As has been amply demonstrated by a multitude of comments, there are a lot of folks who simply don't give a fillip about being able to sell a book once they're done with it, and care only slightly more about being able to give it away.

This is not a sign of impaired intelligence, this is simply an indication that different factors are valued differently by different people.

I very much agree. For instance, my top reasons for wanting ebooks center around the environment (I like trees), my convenience (I want what I want and I want it now), aesthetics (I hate clutter but have tons of old books and a DH who can't bear to part with them), and allergies (said old books make me sneeze my head off). I'd like for them to also be cheaper than pbooks. I believe there's no good reason for them not to be. However I will still choose an ebook over a pbook when I can even if I pay a little more. I don't believe this is a sign of impaired intelligence on my part. I'm willing to pay a bit extra as an early adopter to invest in getting this market off the ground. Same thing when I bought my Prius. People questioned my judgment because it wasn't the best economic decision but economics do not drive all my decisions.

[sianon]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

The only thing that I assume is that intelligent people want to get the best value for their money.

Getting back on the topic:
My point was that there seems to be quite a market in trading used romance novels. Moving to DRMed eBook versions of these seems to be a good idea for the publisher - but a bad idea for the reader.

Again you are putting forward a view that the only factor that counts here is the financial cost. You ignore the other considerations such as convenience. Personally, I like being able to browse an online store for books, rather than driving thirty minutes to a decent bookstore. I have never paid anywhere near the retail price for an e-book. For a new release paper back book here, I would pay on average $30. The most I have paid for an e-book is $17 US (translates to about $21 Australian). Many of the books I pick up cost me a a few dollars, and on Fictionwise, I get rebates on books which builds up nicely to provide me with free books AND I don't have to bother with taking books back to the used book store. The books I buy also aren't dog eared from previous readers.
The other factor is that I can carry many books with me at any given time with minimal weight. Ohhhh and while we are talking of weight issues, I find it much more comfortable to hold the very light Iliad as opposed to a heavier print version of a paper back book, let alone a hardcover book.

Fiction reading is purely about entertainment, the experience of losing yourself in a fantasy world for a few hours. It is not an investment opportunity.

Karen

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by rlauzon

Not necessarily. But part of the value of the book is that when you are done reading it, you can do more with it than just throw it away.

That's especially true when the book is a nice hardcover - which is what eBooks are priced at today.

It's not part of the value for me, in any sense that can get a price tag attached.

I read for pleasure. I appreciate a well crafted book in terms of the production values as well as the content.

But content is key, and production values have a negative effect, not a positive one. If the book isn't something I'm interested in reading in the first place, fine production values won't make it any more attractive to me. If it is a book I want to read, poor production values can make it less attractive.

As mentioned, I buy books to read and keep. If I do dispose of books, I give them away.

Resale value isn't a concern, nor is trading value.

So you would rather pay $15 for a DRMed eBook that can only be read for a short time and cannot be resold/given away, then pay $10 for a paper book that be read for a long time and can be resold/given away?

I don't buy DRMed ebooks, so the question isn't meaningful.

Other than space limitations, I don't have a problem with paper books. For me, ebooks are an additional format, not a replacement. If you could wave a magic wand and give me ebook editions of all of my paper volumes in exchange for my paper books, I'd refuse the deal. I like paper books.

The only thing that I assume is that intelligent people want to get the best value for their money.

As do I, but what constitutes "value" isn't the same for everyone.

I believe your basic point is really "DRM is bad" and "ebooks are over-priced". I agree with both statements, but if that's what you meant, that's what you should have said.

Getting back on the topic:
My point was that there seems to be quite a market in trading used romance novels. Moving to DRMed eBook versions of these seems to be a good idea for the publisher - but a bad idea for the reader.

And the same holds true for any other genre of literature.

But by that logic, publishers shouldn't offer ebooks at all, because what you appear to desire would be good for the reader but bad for them.

With a paper book, there is a single physical copy. If I buy and read a paper book, and choose not to keep it, I can dispose of it. I can resell it, trade it, give it away or simply throw it in the trash. But if I do any of those, I no longer have it. There is only the one copy, and I can't resell it/trade it/give it away and keep it for myself.

With an ebook, that goes out the window, which is why publishers impose DRM in the first place.
______
Dennis

[da_jane]

The issue of author rights has been a big one in the past few years because of the epublished issue. First, my understanding is that most houses were able to make modificiations to many of its contracts without redoing wholesale the entire contract of an author.

Second, yes, there are some authors, like JK Rowling, who are resistant to the ebook (although I've read that there is a big push by the UK publisher to get those in e format now) but for the most part, most books that are on the NYT list are also in ebook format.

Third, S&S made what the Authors' Guild called a "rights grab" this past spring when it attempted to include a No Reversion of rights to the author so long as the ebook was selling. If it is out of print for a period of time, then the rights of distribution (which is what authors are selling to publishers), revert back to the author. Right now, I believe that there is some floor that says that the ebook must be selling in a certain quantity to be considered "in print."

As for romances having no value, I can tell you that at used bookstores, romances have the same amount of value as any other genre fiction book. If anything, they would have more value because they more faster and with greater velocity than any other genre.

Moreover, many romance readers keep their books and like to re-read them. It's true that the ability to resell or trade a book for another is something that voracious readers enjoy but I can tell you from personal experience that reclaiming the space that my 1500 paperbacks once took up is worth the trade off.

As for the value issue - it would be like saying that no intelligent person would go to the movies because once the movie is consumed at the theatre there is no residual value except the memory of the experience.

I applaud Harlequin for providing ebooks as well as print books. If readers desire to engage in the trade of romance books, they are still capable of doing that. If a reader, such as myself, prefers the convenience, immediacy, and portability of an ebook, she can do that as well.

[Jeff Duntemann]

The relationship of ebooks to pbooks is going to be complicated for awhile, and romances are a good example of this. I read somewhere (it was a few years ago) that romance readers read more titles per unit time than any other genre. Most of those titles are read only once, but when an individual reader identifies an author that he/she really likes, the favorite books by favorite authors are read more than once, generally as pbooks. My wife has a "comfort" shelf of pbook romances she reads in stressful times, like the Christmas Angels books by (I think) Debbie McComber. ("Shirley, Goodness, and Mercy will follow me wherever I go...") She's read them more often than I've read Startide Rising. It's a different process and a different psychology; there are times when you want a sort of "comfort read" and as with comfort food there's more on the table than the food itself. Particularly for those who grew up bookish in an era of paper, comfort = pbook. I've seen that effect in myself. There are times when I don't want to be surprised; I want to know precisely how a story unfolds--and I want to read it the same way I did in the bygone, happier times of my life.

This may be true for another 30 years or so, until an entire generation grows up with ubiquitous access to ebooks.

[Xenophon]

Originally Posted by da_jane

Third, S&S made what the Authors' Guild called a "rights grab" this past spring when it attempted to include a No Reversion of rights to the author so long as the ebook was selling. If it is out of print for a period of time, then the rights of distribution (which is what authors are selling to publishers), revert back to the author. Right now, I believe that there is some floor that says that the ebook must be selling in a certain quantity to be considered "in print."

There are other arrangements. As far as I can tell from a variety of postings on Baen's Bar (by both authors and publisher's representatives), Baen buys non-exclusive e-Rights (anywhere in the Universe, until the heat-death of same). Those rights don't revert. Ever.

On the other hand, the reversion clause for paper publication is entirely as usual for the industry. No attempt to hold onto paper rights when they're not selling, even if the e-Book sells like hot-cakes. And, since the e-Rights are non-exclusive, authors are free to sell those rights elsewhere too (starting right away). Essentially, they treat reversion of the e-Rights and the paper rights quite separately.

I haven't heard any complaints about this policy from their authors, either on-line or in person. You may ask, of course, whether a non-insider like me would hear. The only response I have is that those authors who are vocal on the subject have been entirely positive.

Xenophon

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Xenophon

There are other arrangements. As far as I can tell from a variety of postings on Baen's Bar (by both authors and publisher's representatives), Baen buys non-exclusive e-Rights (anywhere in the Universe, until the heat-death of same). Those rights don't revert. Ever.

Baen's rights certainly appear to be non-exclusive, since many books sold by Baen are also available from other eBook retailers in other formats. Eg, David Weber's "Honor Harrington" series, sold by Baen DRM-free, is also sold by Fictionwise at a higher price in secure Mobipocket format. It would be interesting to know how many they sell .