Publishers still missing the point on e-book prices

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

No, I wouldn't suggest that. But just as publishers need to reach out to find a happy medium for both sides, it does no good for consumers to repeatedly slap that hand back. This is an effort that both sides must make, and I'm seeing very little willingness to do that in this thread.

Put it this way: If you were a major publisher, and you read through this thread... would you be willing to take any steps at all to appease this group?

Would or should? Would - probably not. Should? Absolutely. If you don't pay attention to the low end of any market, somebody else will. Ask Procter and Gamble (or Unilever) why they support the informal market in the developing world. Because if they don't somebody else will take it over, build their own brands and become ferocious competitions over time. Capitalism isn't genteel...

But to a culture of being secure behind artificial legal protections for centuries, such a worldview is not assimable...

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Would or should? Would - probably not. Should? Absolutely. If you don't pay attention to the low end of any market, somebody else will. Ask Procter and Gamble (or Unilever) why they support the informal market in the developing world. Because if they don't somebody else will take it over, build their own brands and become ferocious competitions over time. Capitalism isn't genteel...

Yeah, but P&G doesn't offer those prices where they can compete with their First World prices. And publishers may just give up on the $2.99 market because they can't make any money there.

Notwithstanding the various statements in this thread that suggest that publishers are losing money, they seem to be doing quite well despite agency pricing.

But to a culture of being secure behind artificial legal protections for centuries, such a worldview is not assimable...

All legal protections are artificial. The only natural protection is using a weapon.

[Blue Tyson]

Yes, because making the customers that buy the most from you give you the arse and/or hate you = accelerating decline, especially when combined with deliberate (or incompetent) retardation of new formats and sales channels.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I am not willing to troll through the thousands of independent authors books to take a guess and hope that the book is good and that it was proof read. I have a feeling that I am not the only one out there. I might be missing out on some gems but the but the recommended ones I read where not what I want to spend my time reading.

What I find helps is recommendations from MR members on books. Then if the book sounds interesting to me, I can ive it a go if I want.

[EscapeVelocity]

I prefer hard back paper books. Especially well made ones. They are lasting items.

The whole point of going digital was to cut costs and resource use....which should be passed on to the consumer.

What a joke.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by EscapeVelocity

I prefer hard back paper books. Especially well made ones. They are lasting items.

I don't. They're heavy, they take up space in my house, I can't change the font, and I can't carry them with me wherever I go. And it's less convenient to purchase them.

The whole point of going digital was to cut costs and resource use....which should be passed on to the consumer.

Says who?

If there is a "point" in going digital, it was to offer people a better format for reading - for some definitions of "better" anyway. For many people, e-books are better than hardbacks.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Mel

So, when do the publishers get around to providing value for the money? When I'm paying $7.99 for an e-book that is out as an $8 paperback and I don't get the cover art and they've screwed up the formatting so that alternating paragraphs are in different fonts I don't see that the prices should be anywhere near the same. The story was an $8 story but the publisher caused negative value that reduced it to $1.99 territory.

Don't forget the extra added value we get of errors that are not in the pBook editions. Those are a lot of fun and really add a lot of value.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Okay, if we assume a properly-formatted book (a stretch, I know), it should still include the cover art (maybe they could offer hi-res versions in the back of the book). The fact that you can buy, access and read instantly is a plus... portability is a plus... and possibly they could provide additional notes/comments in the ebook that aren't in the printed editions. That's a start.

Indies can provide all that, too.

Speaking of hi-res... I do think we should get hi-res images of things like maps that at the half-asses sizes they give us, they are virtually unreadable. Then we get images of things that can be put in an ePub as text because the publishers are pandering to Amazon where they still use an obsolete format. A lot of the ePub we get are no better then a Mobipocket version because the publishers don't use any of the more advanced formatting where they should. They make the ePub look like the Mobipocket version and that's wrong.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

If I own a piece of farmland, I can offer it for sale for whatever I choose. If you don't like the price, you can buy a different piece of property that is cheaper. But you can't buy my piece of property.

You sell me your farmland for say $100,000. I then turn around and sell it for $50,000. That's might right to do so. But with agency eBooks, you sell me the eBook at whatever the cost and then I (as the store selling eBooks) am unable to sell for any other cost then what you tell me. I cannot lower the price, I cannot raise the price, I cannot have a sale or offer a discount. I'm stuck with what you tell me is the price.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

Companies aren't people though. So realistically no-one in general terms will ever care how they 'feel'.

If a company is good to the customers, customers may very well care about the company.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

If there is a "point" in going digital, it was to offer people a better format for reading - for some definitions of "better" anyway. For many people, e-books are better than hardbacks.

Certainly true for me. The previous poster is evidently fortunate enough to live in a large house, where he can store as many hardbacks as he wishes; I am not. It's the storage savings that are the key benefit of eBooks for me.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Blue Tyson

Le Guin is an octagenarian with an arts degree - the sort of person that is most likely to not be an Internet expert, actually.

That's discrimination to think she doesn't know about the Internet due to her age.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Dead writers don't live in poverty...

"Fact: Copyright is a limited and carefully designed law to protect authors from poverty. It allows authors control over the rights in their books, so that they, like any worker, can make what profit they can from their work."

I can live with that. But Life + 50? Life + 70? Keep stretching it to infinity minus 1? That doesn't benefit "the author", it benefits the middle man. That's where my beef comes from. I have no problem with authors deciding to cut out the middle man. I'm an independent contractor, and I may or may not farm out some of my marketing. I choose, not the middleman. And when I die, I get no more money from my work. Same as a Doctor, Lawyer, or Plumber - even if my work is used for another 100 years. So why are writers special?

One very good reason for this is so the existing works or any forthcoming works can help support the family. If you die and leave behind a wife and kids, your books can help support them.

But I do feel that 50 years is too long. I would go for 25 years and be fine with that.

[spindlegirl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Certainly true for me. The previous poster is evidently fortunate enough to live in a large house, where he can store as many hardbacks as he wishes; I am not. It's the storage savings that are the key benefit of eBooks for me.

Indeed! I can read "War and Peace" and it will put no more strain on my wrist than "Persuasion would.

Even if I did have a large house that could store all kinds of books, I am kinda lazy with regard to housekeeping, and always hated the dusting off of hardback books, etc. It's kind of nice that I can have hundreds of books "shrunk" into something that is no bigger than a paperback.

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You sell me your farmland for say $100,000. I then turn around and sell it for $50,000. That's might right to do so. But with agency eBooks, you sell me the eBook at whatever the cost and then I (as the store selling eBooks) am unable to sell for any other cost then what you tell me. I cannot lower the price, I cannot raise the price, I cannot have a sale or offer a discount. I'm stuck with what you tell me is the price.

Jon, the error in your statement is that the publishers do not sell the ebook to the ebookseller under the agency scheme, which is why you pay sales tax (if your state requires it) where previously you didn't. Under agency, the ebookseller (i.e., Amazon, Sony, etc.) receive a sales fee. They are not the sellers, the publisher is the seller and the Amazons are being paid for the space and advertising.

Your farmland example is the way nonagency book selling works and is why Amazon and Sony, etc., can choose to discount those books. (Technically this isn't correct either as the ebookseller doesn't "buy" the ebook until it sells the ebook, but for our purposes, it is close enough.)