Back list vs. New release

[Kumabjorn]

There is a lot of discussion about e-book pricing. Productions costs being lower should result in a lower consumer price. Unknown indie author should be less than Stephen King.

But what about Stephen King vs. Stephen King? Should an old back list publication, ex. The Shining or It cost less than 11/22/63 or The Wind Through the Keyhole? How much is a fair discrepancy in price? 50%, 40%, 30%? How long time is reasonable for a higher priced new release? Until the next comes out? A year? Two? Six months?

[tecweston]

Well, a lot of backlist books are in paperback, which lowers the price. You also have to remember demand is higher for a brand-new bestseller than it is for a backlist title that's been in paperback for the last couple decades. No one's going to pay $13 for an eBook of The Shining when you can find a used paperback copy for a dollar or two. But lots of people will pay $13 for The Wind Through the Keyhole when the only other option is a hardcover that costs $27.

[Lazybones]

I was reading some Harry Turtledove the other day, and went to see if e-books of his old Videssos cycle novels existed. They were $8 at all the major booksellers, which IMO is ridiculous for books that are more than 20 years old. For $5 I would have considered the purchase, and for $3 I probably would have bought the entire set on impulse.

The publishing industry really needs to jump onto the "long tail" model for older titles.

[RHWright]

I tend to see the production cost argument as marginal.

Ebook pricing is more about demand and perceived value. People (in general) are naturally going to be more willing to pay a premium for new releases from popular authors. And the backlist of popular authors will retain value (and slightly higher pricing) because their will be a heightened demand for it.

Publishers need to look at new paradigms for pricing strategy. And, I think, even more so the bestsellers are going to have to help subsidize the deep backlist. Otherwise we will probably never see ebook editions of more mid-range authors and older titles; they just won't be seen as "profitable" enough on their own.

[Synamon]

I'm a fan of prices for out of print titles that compare to used paperbacks ($2-4) and will buy in bulk at that price point, but up to $7 is reasonable. Maybe there are people who will pay $13 and up for backlist ebooks, I'm not one of them, but I don't buy many $13 new ebooks either.

I think we'll see publishers experiment with prices for these, trying to maximize volume and profits. They will probably be reluctant to go very low for authors still writing, so as not to erode the value of their upcoming books, so there might be different limits for dead versus living authors. I see backlist ebooks as a huge (mostly untapped) market that will explode.


ETA: The Lawrence Block backlist ebooks are a good example, HarperCollins had initially priced them the same as the paperbacks and this week they reduced the prices to about half that ($3.99). Block writes about the pricing strategy in his blog.

[Blossom]

I buy alot of backlist titles that are self published and wont pay over $4. due to formatting problems, OCR errors and lack of knowing how to make a proper ebook like a working TOC...etc

I would say for a professional published backlist title $5 to $6 is acceptable seeing I pay $7 to $8 for a new release.

[carpetmojo]

Back in my heavy physbook days, I loved those "bundles" you could get - I got most of the Harry Bosch series like that, at a fraction of the price for all 3/4.

Also Connolly, and a few others ....

[RainingLemur]

I'd like to see lower prices for some of the older books. I usually keep my eyes open for sales and such. But, sometimes the "sale" price isn't much better than the original price and not worth it. Unless it's a book that is MUST-READ, I'm not going to pay over $8 or $9 for an ebook.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by tecweston

Well, a lot of backlist books are in paperback, which lowers the price. You also have to remember demand is higher for a brand-new bestseller than it is for a backlist title that's been in paperback for the last couple decades. No one's going to pay $13 for an eBook of The Shining when you can find a used paperback copy for a dollar or two. But lots of people will pay $13 for The Wind Through the Keyhole when the only other option is a hardcover that costs $27.

Some people that want the ebook will pay the price. And that together with cheap available paper books to me say that a high ebook price is optimal to get most profit.

[Synamon]

Originally Posted by tompe

Some people that want the ebook will pay the price. And that together with cheap available paper books to me say that a high ebook price is optimal to get most profit.

I disagree. Backlists are volume sales, you want to take advantage of people's willingness to collect an entire series or set of books from an author. To get people to part with the most cash there will be an optimal price point and I don't think it will be high.

[flipreads]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

There is a lot of discussion about e-book pricing. Productions costs being lower should result in a lower consumer price. Unknown indie author should be less than Stephen King.

But what about Stephen King vs. Stephen King? Should an old back list publication, ex. The Shining or It cost less than 11/22/63 or The Wind Through the Keyhole? How much is a fair discrepancy in price? 50%, 40%, 30%? How long time is reasonable for a higher priced new release? Until the next comes out? A year? Two? Six months?

As with everything, it has to do with your marketing plan.

(I even believe that your initial statement, King priced more than the indie author, isn't necessarily true.)

In print, newer titles tend to be more expensive (hence hardcover --> mass market release release), then transition to cheaper (deep discounts, bargain sales, or the mass market release 9 months to 12 months down the line).

That's possible in the eBook market (high now, lower price a month or two down the line, or discount it when the next book gets released).

But another strategy is to price the eBook cheap on initial release, then raise the price later (i.e. 1 month later). And then perhaps discount it again at a later time.

So for me pricing has more to deal with the plan rather than a hard and fast rule. (And both are legitimate, depending on how they are employed.)

[apbschmitz]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

How much is a fair discrepancy in price?

I wonder if the idea of "fair" misses the point. From the producer's end it's more a question of where you can make the most money. Lower prices, more volume, or higher prices, lower volume?

In many ways an eBook is a premium product. Instant delivery, no trek to a book store, no hunting around in a musty used book store, immediate access to an imponderable number of books, convenient storage that doesn't gobble up your living space. You could just as well argue that an eBook ought to cost more.

[VicLavigne]

The producers of ebooks are not looking at volume correctly. Ebooks are potentially unlimited in supply since their is no further production costs.. The publisher could sell billions with no depletion in supply. But to sell huge amounts must make the price attractive to buyers. Really, is one million sales at 9.99 a better deal for the publisher than one billion sales at 1.99? or one billion at 99 cents?

Vic

[J. Strnad]

I think that ebooks should be priced according to sales. They start off at $15. As they sell, the price goes down until, at some point, they become free.

I just can't figure out what those "points" are!

[JSWolf]

To do it right, a backlist book that has no electronic copy would cost more to make then a current book. There's scanning & OCRing to add in that you should not have to do with a new book.