Will eBooks create an elite reading class?

[Quexos]

No more of an elite than paper books created, if one considers there is even such an elite.

[DiapDealer]

I hope it creates an elite fighting force of ereading warrior monks.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Quexos

No more of an elite than paper books created, if one considers there is even such an elite.

Actually, books were in fact an upscale product until well into the 20th century.
Most households might own a family bible, handed down through generations in some cases, and a book or two. It wasn't until late nineteenth that widespread literacy started to support a broad publishing industry. And it was a subject of debate among the literary elites whether it was a good thing or not into the 1930's.

[saoir]

On the other hand, here is a device that is so expensive that only a select few can afford it.

Considering the price of hardbacks even most paperbacks, this old quote is just so much garbage isn't it.
Three hardbacks gets you a Kindle.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by saoir

Considering the price of hardbacks even most paperbacks, this old quote is just so much garbage isn't it.
Three hardbacks gets you a Kindle.

True, but consider the thread dates back to early 2010, when ereaders cost ten hardcovers' worth. Smartphones were not yet ubiquitous and iPad was just a rumor.

This is really a perfect example of how fast and thoroughly technology disruptions change things.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Quexos

No more of an elite than paper books created, if one considers there is even such an elite.

I was just thinking that paper backs (which displaced the pulp magazines I understand) did make reading more democratic if that's the word. I remember one book posted here in the Library had a copy of the ad posted for it when the book was new in 1914 and it cost (I think) $1.30 or something like that and that was probably a very expensive purchase for a time when .5 or .10 would buy you a meal in a restaurant. Of course the average wage was probably not very high back then either so that $1.30 was probably a large investment for the average person. Certainly even the hard cover books became cheaper in price after Gutenberg developed his movable type and printing press back in the 1450's. Now we've begun to go beyond that to ebooks. I wonder how low the cost of a book will drop?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by crich70

I wonder how low the cost of a book will drop?

Cheaper than a (large) cuppa joe.

(There is strong evidence from Smashwords and Amazon that, depending on genre, the sweetspot in ebook pricing runs from $2.99-4.99.)

[saoir]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

True, but consider the thread dates back to early 2010, when ereaders cost ten hardcovers' worth. Smartphones were not yet ubiquitous and iPad was just a rumor.

This is really a perfect example of how fast and thoroughly technology disruptions change things.

I take your point but I don't agree. It was wholly predictable that those prices would drop as much or more than they have, and will continue to drop.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by saoir

I take your point but I don't agree. It was wholly predictable that those prices would drop as much or more than they have, and will continue to drop.

Predictable? Maybe.
But not as fast as they did. And not as much as they did.

The only reason the hardware dropped as fast as it did was because Nook in June 2010 chose to price their ereaders at near (below?) cost and Amazon matched them. Until then, ereaders were priced like standalone products with healthy margins baked in. In fact, the recent trends have been for ereader prices to inch slightly higher.

Nook's strategy allowed them to sell $3B in ereaders and ebooks...at a cost of $4B. Hindsight says it was a bad move for them. Too big a drop, too fast.

(Amazon appears to have avoided those problems because their readers are supported by ads, which are bringing them close to $1B a year.)

So no, I don't think prices will continue to drop.
Not with ereader sales volumes declining due to hardware development stagnation and a good portion of ebook sales moving to phones and tablets.

Amazon's cheapest model is currently $10 higher than 2012, Nook $20+, and Kobo $30+. Features are nominally better but the entry level price is higher.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by saoir

Considering the price of hardbacks even most paperbacks, this old quote is just so much garbage isn't it.
Three hardbacks gets you a Kindle.

And most people never buy hardcover books and get there books second hand or from the library or borrow them from friends.

[patrickt]

I went to Google to find out how many people in the U.S. actually read books. There was such a wide range of responses that the answer seems to be that no one knows. The problem is that all the statistics come from self-reporting. Most people are reluctant to say, "I haven't read a book in twenty years."

Just my opinion based on friends, people at work, and my observations is that less than 15% read regularly.

I also had occasion to test the employees where I worked for reading proficiency. All were high school graduates, some had been to college, and a few had college degrees. Twenty-five percent of the employees were functionally illiterate.

The sad thing is that after a series of reading improvement classes, all of the employees who took the classes moved up into functionally literate and even the ones who read well before the class were reading better. That means the students were stupid. Our school system had simply failed to teach them to read with proficiency. Two of the men were identified to have severe dyslexia and both had granduated from high school with no one noticing they couldn't read.

A reporter asked me once what I thought of sex eduction classes in junior high. I said it was a great idea because if the schools taught sex the way the teach reading adolescents wouldn't want to do it.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by patrickt

I went to Google to find out how many people in the U.S. actually read books. There was such a wide range of responses that the answer seems to be that no one knows. The problem is that all the statistics come from self-reporting. Most people are reluctant to say, "I haven't read a book in twenty years."

Just my opinion based on friends, people at work, and my observations is that less than 15% read regularly.

I also had occasion to test the employees where I worked for reading proficiency. All were high school graduates, some had been to college, and a few had college degrees. Twenty-five percent of the employees were functionally illiterate.

The sad thing is that after a series of reading improvement classes, all of the employees who took the classes moved up into functionally literate and even the ones who read well before the class were reading better. That means the students were stupid. Our school system had simply failed to teach them to read with proficiency. Two of the men were identified to have severe dyslexia and both had granduated from high school with no one noticing they couldn't read.

A reporter asked me once what I thought of sex eduction classes in junior high. I said it was a great idea because if the schools taught sex the way the teach reading adolescents wouldn't want to do it.

When I was in college I heard a teacher bemoaning the fact of how bad his students reading comprehension was. I asked him if that wasn't something people were supposed to learn in grade school. He replied that that was his point. Mind I was in college some 20 yrs or so ago. Sad that it doesn't seem to have gotten any better.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by patrickt

I went to Google to find out how many people in the U.S. actually read books. There was such a wide range of responses that the answer seems to be that no one knows. The problem is that all the statistics come from self-reporting. Most people are reluctant to say, "I haven't read a book in twenty years."

Just my opinion based on friends, people at work, and my observations is that less than 15% read regularly.

A number that has surfaced in several of the better polls is 25%, where reading regularly is expressed in books per month. A lot of people read a couple of books a year and to them that is "reading regularly".

The problem is that a lot of reading polls are about preference, not activity or, better yet, purchases. Some polls don't distinguish between reading for work or education and reading for enjoyment. Likewise, a lot of polls ask people whether they prefer print or digital without asking if they actually buy either, or what they read.

It really matters who is promoting the poll and what their agenda is.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Predictable? Maybe.
But not as fast as they did. And not as much as they did.

The only reason the hardware dropped as fast as it did was because Nook in June 2010 chose to price their ereaders at near (below?) cost and Amazon matched them. Until then, ereaders were priced like standalone products with healthy margins baked in. In fact, the recent trends have been for ereader prices to inch slightly higher.

This was a big factor - but the fact that the iPad (announced January 2010) was $400 pretty much meant that the writing was on the wall for $400 e-readers.

[pholy]

The only reason the hardware dropped as fast as it did was because Nook in June 2010 chose to price their ereaders at near (below?) cost and Amazon matched them.

Actually, in March 2010, Kobo announced their first reader at $149.00, for delivery in May. I still have mine, and it still works, if slowly compared to my AuraHD. I think it was Kobo's announcement that started the price cutting.