book publishing profitable in 2014

[pwalker8]

I ran across this interesting article this morning which claims that publishing was profitable in 2014 mostly on the back of the YA/Children's books, which were up 22.4 percent over 2013. It also says that ebooks sales where up 5.6 percent.


http://flavorwire.com/494377/are-you...e079-407405489

I'm not sure about the reliability of this particular website, or the linked stories in this article, but interesting none the less. I find the explanation at least plausible. I know that I still read a fair percentage of books in the YA/Children's category (some of the top sellers in that category are quite good)

[Xanthe]

A lot of the paranormal genre writers have moved down into the YA category to scoop up some of that Twilight, Harry Potter, and Hunger Games money.

[speakingtohe]

I actually thought publishing was profitable for the majority of publishers still in business.

Oh well.

Helen

[crich70]

I imagine profitability in publishing has always been a gamble for publishers. I mean if they pick the next new (author name) who has something unique to say and do it often enough they rake in the $$ but they have to pick what will sell and even publishers make mistakes as to what the public wants I'm sure.

[DuckieTigger]

Sometimes I wonder though how they come up with their conclusions:

Adult Fiction/Non-Fiction is down by 3.3 percent over last year, it becomes obvious that YA/Children’s books are keeping the industry out of the red.

Is publishing so unprofitable that a mere 3.3% down is going to turn black numbers into red ones? Maybe it is obvious for everybody else, but I don't see it.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Sometimes I wonder though how they come up with their conclusions:
Is publishing so unprofitable that a mere 3.3% down is going to turn black numbers into red ones? Maybe it is obvious for everybody else, but I don't see it.

Could be that 3.3% is hardcover sales.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

I actually thought publishing was profitable for the majority of publishers still in business.

Oh well.

Helen

Yes indeed, or we need an explanation from Adam Smith.

[fjtorres]

The big boys are generally profitable, overall.
About 11% margin worth of profits.
(Smaller publishers... it varies. Which is why the big boys keep finding acquisition targets.)

http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014...actually-make/

On the other hand, if you look at their profits, most of it comes from ebooks, which account for 20%-plus of their revenues.

http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014...big-publisher/

Depending on how you interpret the public data you could make a case that pbook publishing is a money loser.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

The big boys are generally profitable, overall.
About 11% margin worth of profits.
(Smaller publishers... it varies. Which is why the big boys keep finding acquisition targets.)

http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014...actually-make/

On the other hand, if you look at their profits, most of it comes from ebooks, which account for 20%-plus of their revenues.

http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014...big-publisher/

Depending on how you interpret the public data you could make a case that pbook publishing is a money loser.

Thank you for those links. These are very interesting for several reasons:

• a big part of good ebook sales is supported by only one to three exceptionally well doing titles per publisher
• including those titles is the Divergent series which might explain the rise of YA mentioned in original article in this thread
• S&S had some good success through subscription services Oyster and Scribd and their backlist - they always had and still consider Kindle Unlimited as a possible candidate in the future (very interesting, IMO)
• strong ebook sales increase the net profit percent overall - this one should not be a surprise, but it is not the "ebooks hurt pbook sales" either

You would think, that publishers looking at these numbers would start pushing ebook sales instead of hinder them. In the case of at least one big publisher (Simon & Schuster) Amazon is not seen as the evil empire out to destroy publishers. The sooner the publishers embrace this new thing called ebooks, the sooner they can make money by adopting.

[murg]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

You would think, that publishers looking at these numbers would start pushing ebook sales instead of hinder them. In the case of at least one big publisher (Simon & Schuster) Amazon is not seen as the evil empire out to destroy publishers. The sooner the publishers embrace this new thing called ebooks, the sooner they can make money by adopting.

You're dreamin'...

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by murg

You're dreamin'...

No I am not dreaming. Won't hurt my feelings any if one or two publishers go belly up and get sold for scraps.

Unless you're trying to tell me that the big publishers will always be here only because it worked for the last 100 years. So it will work for the next 100 without any changes?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Won't hurt my feelings any if one or two publishers go belly up and get sold for scraps.

Those scraps (backlist IP rights) are worth a lot of money and will keep the last vestiges of the big publishers around until they run out. So 100 years is a good estimate of when we'll see the last of the randy Penguin.

(Note that MGM is still alive and twitching on the strength of the Bond flicks. The BPHs can do the same, firing all production staff and living off copyright licenses.)

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I ran across this interesting article this morning which claims that publishing was profitable in 2014 mostly on the back of the YA/Children's books, which were up 22.4 percent over 2013. It also says that ebooks sales where up 5.6 percent.

And without agency pricing? Who would've ever guessed!? It looks like Amazon isn't hurting big publishers that badly then.

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by murg

You're dreamin'...

No he's not. We the consumers will have the final word/choice. There are 77 million baby boomers with our declining eyesight and decreased living spaces that want to simplify our lives but continue to do the things we love to do.

Ereaders, tablets and phones make it possible for us to continue reading comfortably and store tons of books that we love to read without taking up/over what precious little living space we have. they make it possible for us to read where ever we are without being weighed down by the weight of paper books.

They might not like it, but there is no going back...adapt or die. The vast majority of us won't care one way or another if they do, there are too many options out there for us to get what we want, even if the BWM do not want to comply.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Those scraps (backlist IP rights) are worth a lot of money and will keep the last vestiges of the big publishers around until they run out. So 100 years is a good estimate of when we'll see the last of the randy Penguin.

(Note that MGM is still alive and twitching on the strength of the Bond flicks. The BPHs can do the same, firing all production staff and living off copyright licenses.)

Isn't it great the way infinite copyright duration increases the incentive to produce?