Pricing sucks!

[GregoryDahler]

HarryT -

I suppose you are right. I guess I was just naively assuming that they would be much cheaper in their ubiquity. I am probably just being cheap!

Stephen King's new book at ~$15USD is pretty good...

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Harmon

This is the part that puzzles me. . . . I'm willing to agree with the argument that the public is entitled to a better deal than that produced by the normal market, since the book market involves a time-limited monopoly granted by law to the seller. What I don't get is why anyone should believe that the price of a pbook version and that of an ebook version of the same book should bear any particular relationship to each other. Why shouldn't a paperback version be cheaper than an electronic version

It seems we agree in bafflement. Thank you for stating your case calmly and clearly, but I need help in understanding what seem to me to be leaps.

You seem to be disputing the idea that the cost of production should partially determine the price of the object. To do this, you appear to be making two different arguments:

1. That charging too much is for a thing is a traditional and time-honored mode of capitalism and various levels of excess should be tolerated because you don't mind paying more personally and/or the practice is already common.

Counter: But if that were true, then price fixing wouldn't be an issue. Besides which, virtually everything is priced above its value. The question is not whether it is overpriced but how much and in relation to what.

If every winemaker got together and decided to charge $3,000 a bottle for merlot, there's very little we could do about it and some people would pay. But do you really want to live in a world in which only the wealthy and the financially irresponsible have access to merlot (and, no, the trick answer is not I prefer Malbec)? Where is the civilized line between reasonable and infinite increase where demand is infinite?

2. In your view, paperbacks have been perceived traditionally as the cheapest form of a book, especially in relation to hardbacks. Additionally, you not only prefer eBooks to paperbacks but feel they are classier and more convenient. Therefore, even though paperbacks cost substantially more to produce than eBooks and the same argument against convenience applies to hardcovers as paperbacks, you personally wouldn't mind seeing three tiers of pricing with the least expensive and least secure format priced higher than the second-least expensive and second-most secure.

Counter: First, the ubiquitously cheap paperback has been limited to pulp and cutouts since the mid-80s. The dimestore paperback is a fond and distant memory, as any student with a textbook purchasing list will attest.

Second, pricing eBooks higher than paperbacks due to greater convenience has no parallel model. Mp3s are never priced higher than CDs -- they are impermanent and lossy -- and there is an equivalent loss of advanced formatting and image resolution whether an individual book uses either or not. Pictures universally look worse. Complex layouts are impractical for the moment. If the original is in color, then the eBook either is not or cannot be seen that way (at least on a pre-Mirasol eInk screen). Even devices that allow for color layouts do not offer the resolution and clarity of a physical book.

And so on.

It makes no sense to adopt one pricing model for film, music and art and an astronomically inflated one for publishing, which involves the least amount of work of any of the media and preceded them all in terms of basic tech. What you have is the least technically involved kind of media possible distributed by people who are behaving like cell phone providers. News flash, publishers: Your jobs and expenses aren't nearly that demanding or complex.

Higher resolution FLAC files are more expensive than mp3s but not nearly as expensive as CDs nor CDs as expensive as SACDs, HCDs or DVD-A. For reference, see this price list on Boomkat, but there are many other examples.

Typical pricing

In media, thus far, the scheme goes like this:

High-resolution media (Blu-Ray, SACD)
Standard resolution media (DVDs, CDs)
Legacy media (vinyl, etc.)

High-resolution files (24-bit-92k FLAC; few other commercial examples)
Standard resolution files (FLAC, ALAC, DVD-quality files)
Lossy files (mp3s, movie files optimized for iPods, etc.)

Logically speaking, publishing should look like this:

Gorgeous full-color illustrated editions
Standard hardcovers
Standard paperbacks

High-resolution color editions with special features
Standard color editions
Lossy editions (ePub, mobi, etc.)

Also:

What I don't get is why anyone should believe that the price of a pbook version and that of an ebook version of the same book should bear any particular relationship to each other.

With all due respect, what I don't get are arguments that imply aberration on the part of the person with whom one disagrees, as in, in what vicious parallel universe would a human lab rat with forelegs feel compelled to believe that Steamwizard guides to Harry Potter books were worth reading? Answer (and I'm not a Steamwizard guide to Harry Potter fan): In what universe, parallel or otherwise, would someone not?

I can easily imagine a situation where a publisher would price the hardback higher than the ebook (due to the beauty and permanence of the hardback,) the ebook less but still higher than the paperback (due to the portability of the ebook) and the paperback less than either (since it's a one-read throwaway.)

The thing to be clear about is this: unique value to the user versus a potentially useful but common side-effect. Lack of physicality is an aspect, not a feature, of any digitized file. Thus, less clutter is an indirect benefit of all digital files, not a feature built specifically into an ebook file. The potential benefit costs nothing to music and film lovers and should similarly cost nothing here.

We're heading for a world in which physical books are largely gone, but that doesn't mean book publishers can or should charge people for their attendant decluttering. Lack of clutter is an end result and not a feature. Writers are not visiting our houses, cleaning out our closets and donating things to Good Will, nor does Microsoft charge more for applications that take up less space.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

1. That charging too much is for a thing is a traditional and time-honored mode of capitalism and various levels of excess should be tolerated because you don't mind paying more personally and/or the practice is already common.

Charging more than the item costs to produce is called "profit", and is the very basis of capitalism, of course. At what point does "making profit" turn into "charging too much"? Isn't that a purely subjective determination? If a publisher charges £10 for an eBook, and I'm willing to pay £12, then for me, they are not charging too much. If you're only willing to pay £8, though, then for you they are charging too much.

Counter: Pricing eBooks higher than paperbacks due to greater convenience has no parallel model. Mp3s are never priced higher than CDs -- they are impermanent and lossy -- and there is an equivalent loss of advanced formatting and image resolution whether an individual book uses either or not. Pictures universally look worse. Complex layouts are ultimately impractical for the moment. If the original is in color, then the eBook either is not or cannot be seen that way (at least on a pre-Mirasol eInk screen). Even devices that allow for color layouts do not offer the resolution and clarity of a physical book.

But are eBooks priced higher than paperbacks? I've never seen an example of a publisher's recommended retail price for a paperback being lower than that same publisher's retail price for the equivalent eBook. Do you have an example of such a situation? I generally find the opposite - that even though the eBook is subject to VAT and the paper book isn't, the eBook is still somewhat cheaper than the paper book.

What can happen, of course, is that a particular retail may choose to discount a paper book so that it becomes cheaper than the eBook, but it's not the publisher who's doing so.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Harry:

Your first quote is from my interpretation of Harmon's position, which could be in error and which he is certainly free to correct. I needn't offer an example of that sort of peculiar pricing because it isn't my idea and I don't find it desirable or practical (which was my point).

The second quote is from a response to Harmon's specific idea that he wouldn't mind having eBooks priced higher than paperbacks. It doesn't make sense unless you remember that I'm responding to an idea which I find not only unfeasible but unprecedented. Again, I'm not certain whether Harmon meant all or only certain eBooks, whether I understood his point or whether he was entirely serious. Again, he is welcome to correct me if I've failed to grasp his argument.

What can happen, of course, is that a particular retail may choose to discount a paper book so that it becomes cheaper than the eBook, but it's not the publisher who's doing so.

On this, we're in agreement. That's why I chose to talk about new books being directed to the same store by the same publisher, only in different formats. It's the publisher's original pricing disparities that I'm criticizing, not what happens along the way.

[HarryT]

Thanks for the clarification - we are in agreement about this .

[Pinecone]

Originally Posted by carld

And all those unsold books that were paid for upfront have to be returned at the publisher's expense. They actually get less than they would for actual sales. Despite this, publishers still made money. If they need to charge more for ebooks to generate enough revenue to stay afloat then they're a company headed for disaster.

While that may indeed be a reason for high ebook prices, it's a portent of looming failure for that company.

No, the pbooks are so expensive to produce, it they are unsold, the publisher only requires the COVER to be returned, and the rest of the book is trash. That is why so many pbooks have the disclaimer, "If you bought this book without a cover, it is stolen."

[carld]

Originally Posted by Pinecone

No, the pbooks are so expensive to produce, it they are unsold, the publisher only requires the COVER to be returned, and the rest of the book is trash. That is why so many pbooks have the disclaimer, "If you bought this book without a cover, it is stolen."

Yes, that's true. The remainders still have to be paid for, but publisher does save at least some money. Even so, that only underscores the point, paper is a lot more expensive than electrons.

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But are eBooks priced higher than paperbacks? I've never seen an example of a publisher's recommended retail price for a paperback being lower than that same publisher's retail price for the equivalent eBook.

Depending on where one is located, it's far from uncommon. It happens to me routinely. Of course, it might also be because of Amazon's $2 surcharge (+15% VAT), but it's not at all unusual for the books I've looked at that the paperback (already out) is $6.99-$9.99, not discounted but full retail price, and the ebook is $10.49-$13.79.

(I'm saying "might be because of Amazon's surcharge" because that's not applied to every single book as far as I can tell, considering I still get the odd $0.99 or $1.99 book as well.)

Random examples:
Beguilement (The Sharing Knife, Book 1) by Lois McMaster Bujold - Kindle price $10.57, paperback (full retail price) $7.99
The New Policeman by Kate Thompson - Kindle price $12.12, paperback (full retail price) $8.99
The London Eye Mystery by Siobhan Dowd - Kindle price $10.49, paperback (full retail price) $7.50

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

Random examples:
Beguilement (The Sharing Knife, Book 1) by Lois McMaster Bujold - Kindle price $10.57, paperback (full retail price) $7.99
The New Policeman by Kate Thompson - Kindle price $12.12, paperback (full retail price) $8.99
The London Eye Mystery by Siobhan Dowd - Kindle price $10.49, paperback (full retail price) $7.50

Whereas for me in the UK:

Beguilement: Kindle eBook £5.75, paperback £7.99
The New Policeman: Kindle £6.07, paperback £7.99
The London Eye Mystery: Kindle £3.99, paperback £5.99

[gweeks]

Originally Posted by Pinecone

No, the pbooks are so expensive to produce, it they are unsold, the publisher only requires the COVER to be returned, and the rest of the book is trash. That is why so many pbooks have the disclaimer, "If you bought this book without a cover, it is stolen."

That doesn't mean the mass market paperbacks (the only ones that allow stripping for returns) are cheap, just that shipping them back one at a time costs more than the printing costs.

Greg Weeks

I case you are interested in the actual costs of printing, the last time I looked a few years ago a 200-300 page mass market sized paperback cost about $.75 each to print and bind in reasonable quantity of 5000. Shipping them in pallets to the warehouse added pennies each to the cost. Drop the quantity down and the price goes up steeply. Increase the quantity and the price goes down slightly. I don't know what the costs are today, I'm sure they have gone up. The sweet spot for the number of books to print has changed too I'm sure. Hard cover printing and binding has changed so that it's possible to do short runs of 20 or so hard covers for about $20 each for the printing and binding. Not POD, but actual offset printing. The POD printers have made things easier too. A moderately sized trade paperback can be done with POD for about $9 now in quantity 1. The shipping for quantity 1 will set you back almost as much as the printing and binding.

[JSWolf]

Mass market seems to be going away. What is happening is that on new print runs, we are getting trade format so the publisher can charge more. Also, because it's now in trade and that's the cheapest current version, the eBook price goes up. So where we had the $7.99 MMPB, we now have the $9.99-$14.99 trade. Given agency pricing, the eBook price remains high due to the trick of swapping MMPB for trade. This is very sleazy and should not be allowed. But it is and they get away with it. Trade needs to go away except when warranted. In most cases, it's not warranted. It's just there so publishers can charge more for paperback books and eBooks.

When publishers started switching to trade, they said it's what the customer wanted. That's BS. The customer does not want to get ripped off.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Harmon

Helpful hint: the fact that a bankrupt book seller didn't pay its bills doesn't tell us anything about the normal practices of solvent book sellers.

Actually it tells you an awful lot... retailers do NOT pay up front for their stock unless they are unable to establish a credit account... booksellers get their stock long before paying for it (standard T&C usually give from 30 days up to 90 or even more for larger bookseller) so the fact that a bankrupt bookseller didn't pay its bills had a serious effect on publishers... a large chain can be carrying several hundred thousand pounds (dollars, yen euros whatever) of unpaid for stock at any one time with several major publishers... oh yes, I've worked in the retail book trade at various levels from design and publishing to managing outlets so I do know what I'm talking about... and I agree with the person you sniped, if you think someone's wrong then do the damned research yourself, why should someone else do it for you...

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Whereas for me in the UK:

Beguilement: Kindle eBook £5.75, paperback £7.99
The New Policeman: Kindle £6.07, paperback £7.99
The London Eye Mystery: Kindle £3.99, paperback £5.99

*nods*

I just meant to point out that it's not nearly as clear-cut for all of us. In some regions (and without agency pricing being a factor here), the difference can be rather marked - the ebook costing $2.50-3.50 more than the RRP of an already released paperback is a fairly common occurrence.

I haven't yet come across an ebook costing more than the RRP of a hardcover, though, and in plenty of cases, the paper book and ebook prices are comparable or in the ebook's favour.

[gweeks]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Actually it tells you an awful lot... retailers do NOT pay up front for their stock unless they are unable to establish a credit account... booksellers get their stock long before paying for it (standard T&C usually give from 30 days up to 90 or even more for larger bookseller) so the fact that a bankrupt bookseller didn't pay its bills had a serious effect on publishers... a large chain can be carrying several hundred thousand pounds (dollars, yen euros whatever) of unpaid for stock at any one time with several major publishers... oh yes, I've worked in the retail book trade at various levels from design and publishing to managing outlets so I do know what I'm talking about... and I agree with the person you sniped, if you think someone's wrong then do the damned research yourself, why should someone else do it for you...

I have no idea what terms Borders were given before the change to cash. I think most booksellers are on net 90 or longer rather than net 30. Borders had millions owed to the major publishers at the time they were switched to cash terms.

Greg Weeks

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by gweeks

I have no idea what terms Borders were given before the change to cash. I think most booksellers are on net 90 or longer rather than net 30. Borders had millions owed to the major publishers at the time they were switched to cash terms.

Greg Weeks

Chains get more time than indies hence why I said 30 to 90 days or more... being big makes the pub want to sell you more... but then you have a problem when they hit trouble because they owe so much that they then get more time simply for that reason...