Do some publishers have any idea?

[Timboli]

One of the books I mentioned earlier (The Sorcerer's Daughter by Terry Brooks), that certainly gave me some angst toward the publisher, has just dropped in price for Aussies, by $14.17 USD ... so from $22.29 USD to $8.12 USD, which now makes it around $11.77 AUD.

Too bad I bought the book about 18 months ago, for $9.95 AUD in Trade sized paperback. Guess I am still in front (which is why I decided not to wait any longer), but I would have preferred the ebook.

When I put the book on my automated checking list, it was $13.10 USD on the 28/04/2016. The highest price it got to was $26.76 USD. Early on, it once got as low as $12.21 USD.

I have been checking the price of that ebook daily since it was added to my list, even after buying it as a paperback instead. I wanted to see how long they were going to maintain it at the ridiculous price for Aussies ($30+), that it has been for about 3 years. Not sure what it is now for Americans to buy, but the last few times I bothered to check, it was still around $8 USD ... a huge difference compared with what Aussies were expected to pay.

[darryl]

Amazon Australia has Kindle Version for $A11.99. Amazon US is $US7.99. At current exchange rates this makes the Kindle version $11.78. The Australian price of course includes GST of 10%. The exchange rate now for Australians is quite low at the moment at $US0.68, which doesn't help things. Also not available in any of my libraries. The book was published over 3 years ago.

Personally I am not at all interested at this price.

[pwalker8]

One of the more interesting experiments is to take a look at the list price of books at various times and compare that with the current list price of a similar book. In 1993, a hardback was listed at $22. Based on inflation, that book would cost a bit over $39 now.

The first hard back that I ever bought was a first print/first edition of the Silmarillion from 1977. I still have it, though the price is not listed on the dust cover as later became the custom, but according to google, the original price was $12. That would be a bit over $46 now.

Looking at some of the hard back prices for recent books, I generally see books listed at just under $30 and are sold for under $20.

Sometime people have a tendency to get a price stuck in their head and forget that time and inflation rolls on. My parents use to think that a dollar was a great tip for a waitress, since way back when my mother worked as a waitress in high school, a dime was a great tip. People ask why are books so expensive, but I would flip that and ask, why are books so cheap now?

[Timboli]

@pwalker8 - I'm not exactly sure what you are saying, but I can only look at the price of the other two books in that trilogy and the price of the others in the series, and indeed the price of the ones he has published since the ebook in question ... plus of course, the paperback book prices. None, except perhaps the final ebook in his final chapter of the overall series, has had an expensive price anything like it ... and the latest ebook is still a pre-order. Then there is the huge difference between what Americans paid and what Aussies were expected to pay.

Clearly something is or has been going on. Perhaps an experiment, perhaps making up for losses in the physical book world, or perhaps just waiting until enough physical books have been sold ... maybe the publisher stuffed up and over-ordered.

Who knows really. What I do know, is that the customer is the one being impacted, and most of the customers would be fans, so a pretty poor, dare I say unethical way to treat them, after all the support they have given. I find it quite immoral really, as we all know how weak and desperate many readers can be. Yes, they are pathetic and sad to be that way, but they are still being taken advantage of.

----------------------------------------------------

One also needs to look at the fact, that Terry Brooks ebooks have gone on sale during that 3 year period ... perhaps not in AUS, and certainly not here for the ebook in question.

One of the ironies that abound, and not just in the book world, is the fans usually pay the high prices, and everyone else later gets the product for a steal. In a very real way, the fans are supplementing the purchases made by latecomers. Ethically at least, that is not right, as you are overcharging the ones who support you the most.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Timboli

Then there is the huge difference between what Americans paid and what Aussies were expected to pay.

When it comes to essential American drugs under patent -- true -- the price is much lower in Australia.

When it comes to books written and, I presume, edited in the United States -- like those by Terry Brooks -- I disagree. There is no expectation Australians will pay. There's instead an expectation that a small portion will pay, and most will not.

I just checked the Overdrive collections for Western Australia and South Australia and found many titles by this author, some with immediate availability. Australia is not an impoverished country. Obviously, Australia can, collectively, afford Mr. Brooks's products. True, everyone can't afford to obtain the products immediately. I just don't see how that's a problem.

Originally Posted by Timboli

I find it quite immoral really, as we all know how weak and desperate many readers can be.

If you are going to have an addiction problem in your country, this is the one to have

[darryl]

@Timboli. It is not ethically wrong every time one group of consumers pay a greater price than others. Nor are early purchasers who pay a premium subsidising later purchasers. Where there is healthy competition the laws of supply and demand determine the price, though these forces are of course sometimes manipulated by things like collusion and legislation.

The high prices in Australia are an historical artefact. Australia was given its independence. As a result of this the British were able to retain a lot of the influence and control over their former colony. This left us with some of the highest prices in the world, maintained by mechanisms like parallel import legislation which for books continues to this very day, despite Productivity Commission recommendations. Pricing of various tech products in Australia was the subject of a Parliamentary enquiry. I won't link to the report but to this article which is a little shorter:

Australia Tax

Consumers do have a choice. If the price is too high, don't buy. If you know that the price will drop in the future and be what you term "a steal", but must have and buy it now, you are paying a premium for that early access. This type of windowing works because there is enough demand at the higher price. Of course businesses are going to satisfy this demand before picking up the demand at lower prices if they can. Weak and desperate is no way to describe your fellow readers who choose to buy a book earlier at a higher price.

Ironically enough I agree with you that the pricing of this particular book is too high. Others think it is great value. Both you and I have reacted to this, you by buying a version at a price you found acceptable, me by not buying at all. Give the Big 5 time. They seem to have come to some appreciation of the new reality and are experimenting with their pricing. Unfortunately it makes business sense for them to pick up the demand at the higher prices first, which they have long done with different editions of print books.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Timboli

I find it quite immoral really, as we all know how weak and desperate many readers can be. Yes, they are pathetic and sad to be that way, but they are still being taken advantage of.

You're always good for a laugh.

I especially like how you've eliminated the possibility that those readers have entered the transaction with eyes wide open and are perfectly happy with the price of admission. I mean, that couldn't possibly be the case. Nooooo. they have to be pathetic, and sad, and easily taken advantage of to be willing to pay a price you believe to be too high.

If the rest of the reading world needs to be pathetic and weak, and willing to be taken advantage of in order to fit your narrative, at what point does it make more sense (Occam's Razor being what it is and all) to at least consider the possibility that you're just a bit of a cheapskate?

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

If the rest of the reading world needs to be pathetic and weak, and willing to be taken advantage of in order to fit your narrative, at what point does it make more sense (Occam's Razor being what it is and all) to at least consider the possibility that you're just a bit of a cheapskate?

Of course, there is nothing wrong with being a cheapskate. In order to be one, there has to be enough others willing to pay higher prices. Fortunately there are alternatives you can buy cheaper without depending on sale prices or discounts.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Of course, there is nothing wrong with being a cheapskate. In order to be one, there has to be enough others willing to pay higher prices. Fortunately there are alternatives you can buy cheaper without depending on sale prices or discounts.

Correct. Especially if one acknowledges their own cheapskatedness. I was merely commenting on the humor in the notion that the reading world at large needs to be pathetic, weak half-wits in order to keep the false narrative of people being "taken advantage of" alive.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Timboli

@pwalker8 - I'm not exactly sure what you are saying,
...

I'm saying that compared to inflation, books cost considerably less than they did just 20 years ago. Some prices drop over time because the cost of production goes down, but much of the production cost of books is people cost, not technology cost. The cost of the actual printing has gone down, but that's just a small, small piece of the overall cost.


My point is that simply asserting that books should cost less, and therefore readers are getting ripped off should be seen in that light. Cars cost a lot more than they did 20 years ago, as do houses and food. Why shouldn't books be expected to have the same dynamic?

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I'm saying that compared to inflation, books cost considerably less than they did just 20 years ago. Some prices drop over time because the cost of production goes down, but much of the production cost of books is people cost, not technology cost. The cost of the actual printing has gone down, but that's just a small, small piece of the overall cost.


My point is that simply asserting that books should cost less, and therefore readers are getting ripped off should be seen in that light. Cars cost a lot more than they did 20 years ago, as do houses and food. Why shouldn't books be expected to have the same dynamic?

My first house cost less than typical--not expensive--cars do now. So, sure, books--unlike EVERYTHING ELSE--should plummet in price. Uuhhhhhhh....

Hitch

[darryl]

But of course for books now the market is very very different. Costs are, as we have discussed on Mobileread many times, only one factor in setting price. Often costs are pretty well irrelevant for pricing purposes, except when there is real competition and margins are being squeezed. Traditional publishing is now facing real competition from Indies. They have now, at great cost, seized control of retail pricing and seem to be attempting to come to grips with it. It is taking a while, and there are various signs of experimentation. It seems to me that the fiction market is such that most readers who baulk at the prices of initial releases will happily purchase the books concerned later when they are available at a lower price. Given this it seems to be a very rational business decision to pick up the demand successively at each price point rather than release a book initially at a low price to compete with Indie titles. Of course I'm not thrilled with this because I am rarely prepared to pay more than a certain amount for an e-book, and naturally I prefer instant gratification at my price. I would prefer not to wait, but let's face it, it's not as if there is not plenty of other books to read. With a very few exceptions my favourite authors now are all Indie. However, the strategy of a premium price at release seems to be such an obvious one that I will not be the least bit surprised if some of my favourite Indie authors at least experiment with it. Now there is competition I'm happy to let Supply and Demand work it out.

[leebase]

The fans paying the highest price at release are WHY the exists outside of patronage from the wealthy.

Its also why the vast majority of Indie authors are “authors” the way your waitress is really an “actress”.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I'm saying that compared to inflation, books cost considerably less than they did just 20 years ago. Some prices drop over time because the cost of production goes down, but much of the production cost of books is people cost, not technology cost. The cost of the actual printing has gone down, but that's just a small, small piece of the overall cost.


My point is that simply asserting that books should cost less, and therefore readers are getting ripped off should be seen in that light. Cars cost a lot more than they did 20 years ago, as do houses and food. Why shouldn't books be expected to have the same dynamic?

Have wages risen at the same overall rate as inflation? I would say not. I would say that people in general have less money for non-essentials (like books) than they did twenty years ago. If book prices have not tracked inflation, I would say that was because publishers know that sales would go down far more if the prices got much higher. I really don't see book prices not being higher as a sign that readers are lucky, rather it is a sign that they find it more difficult to pay the prices. If people are grumbling that books cost too much, it is within the context of dropping disposable incomes.

[Deskisamess]

Its also why the vast majority of Indie authors are “authors” the way your waitress is really an “actress”.

I disagree. The main thing, if I understand correctly, that makes an "Indie" an Indie, is that they do not use traditional print publishing by a big publishing house. There are indie authors who are great writers, there are indie authors who are terrible writers, and everything in between. The same can be said for waitstaff.

Not reading any Indie authors because some are bad writers would be like never going to a restaurant again because some waitstaff are bad at their jobs.

The choices we have in this century for accessing and reading books is amazing. It shouldn't be necessary to denigrate various aspects of the reading process in order to advance our particular comfort levels and preferences of who, what, and how we read.