About the backlist

[crossi]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

The problem is the agency model. The eBook in question is also being put out as a hardcover and thus the agency a$$holes get to charge hardcover pricing.

They might charge that amount but will they sell any of them at that price?

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by elcreative

As a matter of interest relating to selling, do you have any idea how many copies of The Crystal Button have actually been downloaded?

Quite truthfully, I don't care. Project Gutenberg work is strictly Pro Bono Publico (for the good of the public) as far as I am concerned. Same as working in a public rose garden, or cleaning a park.

However since you asked...

Views - Epub 215
Mobi - 161
LRf -145

total - 521

That's here. PG Australia doesn't keep tabs (at least not readily available).

I mention this one, as I did the whole thing from take-off to touchdown. All my PG US went through Distributed Proofreaders.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

The cost of conversion to several formats and uploading to several platforms is not that cheap. I do it myself, but just for one format, an author would be very lucky to find someone to do it for 60 dollars--oh you found an error? Well, to re-upload it is another 30. Yes, these are real prices from real people I know. And 60 dollars is on the low end with the author doing the format approval.

Yes, an author can continue to make some money for years--but again, conversion isn't the only cost. See my post above. Cover art is actually one of the higher costs and IMO it's a necessity in order to make your money back.

Personally I think $2.99 is about right, if you're doing all the work yourself. I merely note what's out there. I note that publisher already have many a cover that the own (work for hire) to be used. You don't. on Amazon at $2.99, I believe you keep $2.00. 500 books for a break even.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Personally I think $2.99 is about right, if you're doing all the work yourself. I merely note what's out there. I note that publisher already have many a cover that the own (work for hire) to be used. You don't. on Amazon at $2.99, I believe you keep $2.00. 500 books for a break even.

Which would be why most of my books cost $2.99. However, it should be noted that when I released "Under Witch Moon" and "Executive Retention," I paid more for the artwork--so again, keep in mind that I'm working a bare-bones operation and my example left some expenses out.

There's also been some snafus for artwork--I don't always get what I *think* I'm paying for. Twice now I've commissioned art that has turned out to be something I cannot use.

I also have to pay for the graphics software--Gimp, Paint.net and Inkscape are fine for small editing projects, but they aren't powerful/efficient enough for the top efforts. Believe me, I tried to make them work, but recently had to get a new package. My old one was too old.

Publishers pay significantly more than I do for covers. Just because they are publishers they are going to have to shell out 500 to 1000 and up for covers. Even using stock art and having someone blend in all the fonts and so on runs 500 from what I'm told. (This is anecdotal evidence/heresy--but it matches what a lot of artists charge for some of the basic work, especially if they have a few trad publisher credits to their name.)

I'm not knocking the argument. I don't think backlist should cost 9.99 or more -- BUT I do think the costs to put backlist out there are higher than most people think, especially when all the various pieces are hired out.

If an author has to get a lawyer involved to get her backlist rights definitively returned to her (there are a lot of cases right now where publishers are making rights grabs) that's going to cost even more upfront.

The time involved is *enormous.*

I'm not knocking that either for the long-term potential benefits, but I *do* understand that by the time it all comes together some authors are going to feel an urgent need to make back some money on their investment!

[Forster]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Actually, it's a matter of value. (As opposed to values.)

I will use Baen books webscriptions. I have bought various Heinleins (the lesser rated books) for 5 bucks a pop in bulk (6 for $30), Fred Pohl's lesser works for 10 for $40, and Poul Anderson's complete Poleostechnic League Future History series, in large omnibuses (19 novels and a boatload of short stories for $42 (7 @ $6 per omnibus).

All backlist, all dead authors. Somehow Baen is still making money. I have difficulty understanding your "gotta make enough money to justify selling the backlist" worldview. As smaller companies like Baen have shown, they can be successfully marketed, but at a modest price.

If the Big 6 publishers don't want to bother, why don't they sell of their backlist rights for money upfront? If they don't see any money out of them?

Or is the real reason reducing competition for the "bestsellers".

^This.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

But you do expect me to do something. You expect me to sit on my hands and not pirate the particluar I.P. I want

What a non-sequitor. Folks that will steal, will steal. I do not worry about it. I'm speaking about folks who wish to see the backlist put out by the publishers for legitimate purchasing. I was hoping to highlight the inconsistency of wishing companies to spend their time and money creating a product for them, while at the same time arguing that such a product has little value and therefore should be priced like a used paper back book.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

The more people you make happy with your product/service, the more customers you will get.

Another non-sequitor. I replied to your naieve assertion that the customer is always right. Well, that's not true. No business believes it is no matter what their marketing might say.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

This is not selling Fords for free. It's making Ford realize that you can buy a Hundai. And if you do, Ford has one less customer. One less opportunity to make a profit.

Great example. Ford has to compete with Hyundai's new cars -- Ford does not try to put out new cars to compete with used Ford's from the 70's.

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

As to the can't get richer comment. Isn't that what Coca-Cola does every day? or Hersheys, Mars, or Frito-Lay? They know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that nobody has to buy their products

They spend hundreds of millions of dollars convincing folks to pay their high prices. Imagine how cheap Coke would be if the company listened to folks on this forum who think that cost has something to do with price. Let's see...coke is water plus sugar and a few other ingredients that add up to a penny or so, throw in another couple pennies for the can and distribution. And what? Coke should sell for 10 cents a can instead of a dollar? (from a soda machine). Even the 25 cents a can you can get on sale is 2 to three times the cost.

Coke doesn't give a flying fig that lots of folks think their prices are shockingly high. Does not care that there are numerous no-name brands that sell for far cheaper. Every person who drinks a cola is not Coke's customer target. Coke would rather spend millions upon millions of dollars building a brand than saving all of us that money and make their product cheap.

Lee

[leebase]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

FWIW. Just a view from the street.

Thanks for sharing that from an author's pov. We can well imagine that the costs a publisher incurs is much higher.

The more folks see the value in back list books, the more they pay for them, the more there will be.

We have to get over the notion that the book is old. I've never been less entertained because a book was written in the 70's than I have by one written last year. If a book is worth paying for, it's worth paying for.

If it's not -- then it won't be produced.

Lee

[leebase]

Originally Posted by Forster

^This.

Sorry, I missed that earlier. Exactly. Publishers putting out a backlist book they make little to no money on are incurring the likelihood that they are taking sales away from current and profitable books.

That's the same reason publishers don't put out the MMPB version at the same time they release the hard back -- and why they didn't like Amazon selling new release ebooks at $9.99.

Who can blame them? Who in their position would do otherwise?

Lee

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Which would be why most of my books cost $2.99. However, it should be noted that when I released "Under Witch Moon" and "Executive Retention," I paid more for the artwork--so again, keep in mind that I'm working a bare-bones operation and my example left some expenses out.

There's also been some snafus for artwork--I don't always get what I *think* I'm paying for. Twice now I've commissioned art that has turned out to be something I cannot use.

I also have to pay for the graphics software--Gimp, Paint.net and Inkscape are fine for small editing projects, but they aren't powerful/efficient enough for the top efforts. Believe me, I tried to make them work, but recently had to get a new package. My old one was too old.

Publishers pay significantly more than I do for covers. Just because they are publishers they are going to have to shell out 500 to 1000 and up for covers. Even using stock art and having someone blend in all the fonts and so on runs 500 from what I'm told. (This is anecdotal evidence/heresy--but it matches what a lot of artists charge for some of the basic work, especially if they have a few trad publisher credits to their name.)

I'm not knocking the argument. I don't think backlist should cost 9.99 or more -- BUT I do think the costs to put backlist out there are higher than most people think, especially when all the various pieces are hired out.

If an author has to get a lawyer involved to get her backlist rights definitively returned to her (there are a lot of cases right now where publishers are making rights grabs) that's going to cost even more upfront.

The time involved is *enormous.*

I'm not knocking that either for the long-term potential benefits, but I *do* understand that by the time it all comes together some authors are going to feel an urgent need to make back some money on their investment!

I agree with all your problems. Really, I do. I'm just trying to point out that all of them are upfront, one-time charges. Whether they make sense depends on the number of sales expected. at 10,000 sales, clearly profitable, 1,000 marginal and 100 clear loser. And which expenses should be counted. You use a computer do build and edit books. If you also use it for person use, how much of the price should be accounted to the books. Same for internet. i'm not trying to denegrate your costs, but it is sometime hard to put a number on them.

That's why I have problems with the high publisher prices for backlist. 1. they have historical sales records, and they also have done some of these before, they have an idea about sales yields for backlist items. 2. It has been done by niche publishers, with low overhead. And they have enough different authors to work with for the law of large numbers to work it's averaging. Not to mention their "big buyer" discount for things like covers.

I think that's the problem, too high of overhead by the big publishers.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by leebase

Sorry, I missed that earlier. Exactly. Publishers putting out a backlist book they make little to no money on are incurring the likelihood that they are taking sales away from current and profitable books.

That's the same reason publishers don't put out the MMPB version at the same time they release the hard back -- and why they didn't like Amazon selling new release ebooks at $9.99.

Who can blame them? Who in their position would do otherwise?

Lee

I blame them because it isn't a "if I buy this I *won't* buy that" proposition. Books are not like cars; I can read more than one. Cars are expensive so I'm not going to buy more than I need. If publishers priced books in the impulse buy range--at least now and then, they might actually make more money.

A few authors have tried this with 99 cent price sales or even lowering from 6 dollars to 2.99. In the short term it *can* double, triple or quad sales--and this is from no-name indies. Publishers need to take advantage of marketing tools and this includes sales, promotions and the like. I think they should especially do this for backlist if they want to "recreate" interest in older series.

When I put out Under Witch Moon, because it was paranormal (a hot genre at the moment) and because my expenses were higher (paid for pro artwork and so on) I charged 4.99 out the gate. It sold decently--about 2 copies per day. But that wasn't my target, nor was it as high as I expected given what my other series sells (which is a cozy mystery series). So I lowered the price. Sure, it will now take more sales to make back my initial investment, but--since sales increased per day it hasn't been a bad strategy. And remember, I need to make enough on this book to pay for artwork for the next book in the series, the editing and so on--that's the way I choose to run my business. Make enough to pay it forward so that I don't end up assuming a book will sell and finding out it doesn't sell so there I am with high costs that will take me a loooong time to earn back.

Publishers aren't able to micro-manage each book like a single author can. However, the ones who are taking advantage of "sales" and pricing the first in a series lower than others and so on--CAN drum up interest. But by and large, they don't want to expend the energy from what I've seen. They believe their product is "worth" at "least" 9.99 (or whatever magic number they decide upon.) The problem is that the market decides what a product is "worth." So my prediction is that they are selling less than they expected of backlist copies. In most cases, stubbornly, they refuse to lower the price--and then don't put out more backlist books because:

1. It's somewhat expensive in hours and initial cost
2. They can say, "See backlist doesn't always sell so it's hard to get back the initial investment.
3. It will compete with their current authors/books/bestsellers and they have a higher initial investment with those authors--so they are anxious to make back their money there.

Bob Mayers just did a post over on another forum talking about how he wanted his backlist rights back so he could self-publish them. He expected a long drawn out argument to prove he had never sold the erights. (Bob is a fairly high midlist seller in a couple of genres.) Basically according to what he wrote, the publisher didn't argue at all. Now, granted, they probably didn't have a leg to stand on, but they could have made an OFFER to try and get some of the "real estate" out of the series he was talking about--it's stil in print. This was a series that sold EXTREMELY well (a million copies comes to mind, but don't quote me on that. I'd have to go verify the number. But even if it were 100,000, you'd think the publisher might want to negotiate for e-rights to get some of that.)


It's just not a market they are going after very hard.

Really, that's okay with me. It probably helps me as an independent. But it doesn't help me at all as a reader...

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by stonetools

I've seen Elfmark complain about backlist titles from the mid 1980s being offered for $10. Then there is Ralph Sir Edwards post than $2 should be the default. So there is resistance to the $6-10 price point.

That would be because readers have got used to sub-$5 prices for old books. Even new ones that would have actual tangible costs to produce rarely cost much more than $10. People aren't stupid, and most here know perfectly well how much work is involved in digitising a paper book. They also know that publishers do not employ proof readers to check ebooks.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by leebase

Who can blame them? Who in their position would do otherwise?

Who in their position would have ignored the rising interest in ebooks (and other digital trends) until it was almost too late and their backs were against the wall?

Who in their position wouldn't have learned from other industries going through similar business paradigm changes and made necessary adjustments in advance?

Who in their position would have been complacent rather than innovative in coming up with ways to embrace and maximize the changes that a two year-old could see coming?

Who in their position would fight tooth and claw to defend a business model that has outlived its own viability and efficiency?

Who?

I don't tend to feel sorry for self-inflicted wounds.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by leebase

Who's attempting to shut down conversation? I love Baen. I'd love for more companies to do the things I like about Baen. But I can't say "Baen does it, so therefore it must be a financially successful model that other companies should emulate.

That's PARTICIPATING in a conversation, not shutting it down.

Lee

+1

In fact, I wish that there were a moratorium on using Baen...or J.A. Konrath, for that matter...as an example of how things could be done in the e-publishing world. Baen seems to be good at what they do but: (1) it seems pretty clear to me that what a niche publisher putting out 70-80 titles per year does may not be expandable to a publisher putting out 80,000 titles per year; and (2) if what Baen did were so easy that everyone should just imitate them, there would be *some* imitators.

So maybe Baen is unique and their business model isn't easily replicated. Or maybe it's not that successful - David Weber did publish his newest book with Macmillan/Tor. (Although, based on the reviews, maybe this was Baen's idea.)

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

That would be because readers have got used to sub-$5 prices for old books. Even new ones that would have actual tangible costs to produce rarely cost much more than $10. People aren't stupid, and most here know perfectly well how much work is involved in digitising a paper book. They also know that publishers do not employ proof readers to check ebooks.

This is a good point. If I actually believed that a $10 backlist book meant that it was properly proofed and edited as opposed to a $6 backlist book, that would make a difference to me.

If I actually thought that a $10 backlist book was what the publisher had calculated they *needed* to charge in order to make backlist publishing pay for itself (and turn a profit), I would happily buy to help them out and encourage them to continue the practice.

As it is, I don't believe a $10 backlist price point represents anything other than the publisher feeling that $10 is some kind of magic ebook price. It doesn't mean I won't buy, but it does mean I might wait, forget, decide it isn't worth it, etc.

I went through the same thing recently with "Brave New World". It was published in 1932, it's a classic imho, and it's been $8 at B&N for forever, so I've just had it sitting in my wishlist for months, hoping it will come down. Now today I've heard it's (a) 99 cents at Amazon (though potentially not from a publisher that actually owns the rights!) and (b) free on thecopia.com (which I'd never heard of before and don't know if it's reputable or not).

I bought the Amazon version before I realized that it might not be a legal copy (hope Amazon refunds me when/if they have to remove it!) BUT I would have bought the B&N version months ago if it'd been $5 instead of $8-10. For that matter, I might have even jumped at the $8 price if I had known for sure it would be a good quality edition and not a crappy scan. But I've been burned on that with a lot of backlist classics.

Maybe it really does have to be $8 to turn a profit, but considered it's REQUIRED READING in quite a few college / high school courses, I don't think the publisher wasn't guaranteed to get back their investment.

(As for the cover they recommissioned, it...is ugly. And generic. If they paid more than $50 for that cover, they were taken, because I could have done better. Original complaint, I know.)

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

So maybe Baen is unique and their business model isn't easily replicated. Or maybe it's not that successful - David Weber did publish his newest book with Macmillan/Tor. (Although, based on the reviews, maybe this was Baen's idea.)

Or maybe it would port over very nicely to other publishers but they won't try because they're too hung up on the wrong things.

Your argument seems to be that since the other publishers don't follow Baen's lead, it MUST not work for them. Assumes facts very much not in evidence.