Do some publishers have any idea?

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by leebase

...
So many fans of reading. This whole forum...filled with folks passionate about reading. But MY GOD....so many skin flints who think a book and a cup of coffee should be the same price.
..
.

Starbuck charges a lot more for a cup of coffee than some here are willing to pay for a book.

There is nothing wrong with being cheap or being a skinflint. My father, a child of the depression, was frugal all his life (thought I will say that he had no problem paying for the best when he saw value in it). One of my former co-workers was always looking for the best price on things and regularly described himself as cheap. If getting the lowest price on things floats you boat, more power to you. On the other hand, one should be honest with oneself about it. It doesn't endear you to merchants because you aren't the person who puts a lot of money in their pocket.

I had a co-worker way back when who was well known for being cheap. His idea of a good tip was 10%. There was a waitress at one of the restaurants was a hugger who would hug the regulars when they came in. She rarely hugged my friend. When he remarked on it, one of the other guys said, "well, maybe if you tip her, she would".

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by John F

...
No one seemed to point that leebase's statement was an absolute statement with no qualifiers. It is the internet, it is not some legal statement or mathematical proof: if we had to fully qualify every statement, opinion, post, ... it would be a very tedious forum and participation would quickly decline*.

True it is the internet, but when you make an absolute statement with no qualifiers, you should whine because it's taken as an absolute statement with no qualifiers.

Since leebase's statement is an absolute statement, then if you disagree with it, you should be able to show that it's false with data. You just made an assertion that was easily proven to be incorrect.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

. If getting the lowest price on things floats you boat, more power to you. On the other hand, one should be honest with oneself about it. It doesn't endear you to merchants because you aren't the person who puts a lot of money in their pocket.

Let me get that right. You're saying that if someone is not willing to pay the highest price possible, then they're automatically cheapskates? There's no middle ground? Like, you know, having a limited disposable income (most people do) and choosing on what and how much to spend? Nooo... you must pay the highest price or you're cheap. Wow. Really wow.

[leebase]

It doesn't matter WHAT label one uses. I just don't think books are a commodity like milk. If you like an author and want more of their work to be created....then there is a material difference between how you acquire the book and the benefit the author receives.

Mind you -- I too am a "ride along" in all kinds of ways. I've never paid for Calibre, is just one example. I fast forward through commercials on tv when I can is another.

But I don't care that much for Calibre....nor THAT much for network tv shows that I should feel bad should they go away.

Support the authors you care about....this shouldn't be a radical idea. Buy their book instead of checking it out at the library or borrowing it from a friend. If you CAN'T....then ride along on the support others are giving...and hope it's enough

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by leebase

It doesn't matter WHAT label one uses. I just don't think books are a commodity like milk. If you like an author and want more of their work to be created....then there is a material difference between how you acquire the book and the benefit the author receives.

Mind you -- I too am a "ride along" in all kinds of ways. I've never paid for Calibre, is just one example. I fast forward through commercials on tv when I can is another.

But I don't care that much for Calibre....nor THAT much for network tv shows that I should feel bad should they go away.

Support the authors you care about....this shouldn't be a radical idea. Buy their book instead of checking it out at the library or borrowing it from a friend. If you CAN'T....then ride along on the support others are giving...and hope it's enough

I personally don't care enough about any single author to pay the premium prices for their books. I read many different authors and try new authors all the time. OTOH, I don't necessarily wait for sales or the lowest prices possible, nor do I use libraries. I just pay the amount I consider reasonable for a book, and that price is not in two digits. Plain and simple.

(I do value Calibre very highly and have donated many times to the developer).

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Let me get that right. You're saying that if someone is not willing to pay the highest price possible, then they're automatically cheapskates? There's no middle ground? Like, you know, having a limited disposable income (most people do) and choosing on what and how much to spend? Nooo... you must pay the highest price or you're cheap. Wow. Really wow.

Nope, that's not even remotely close to what I'm saying. Both the co-workers that I mentioned in the post you are quoting made good money so limited income has nothing to do with it, they simply wanted to pay as little as possible for everything.

There is a huge difference between willing to pay the highest price possible and only be willing to pay the cheapest price possible, even if you have plenty of money. That's the difference between being a cheapskate and not. No where in this thread has "limited disposable income" been called cheapskate, indeed, people with limited income have been explicitly excluded a number of times.

I certainly don't always play the highest price possible. But I do frequently buy multiple copies of a book that I like by authors I'm a fan of - Hardback, ebook and audio. I tend to think of that sort of thing as being more of a minor patron than anything else. I certain have no expectation that other people would do the same. It's just one of my little quirks.

The major point that I would make is that if an author can't make a living writing, he or she isn't going to write many books. If I'm a fan of a particular author, I'm going to support that author as much as possible. That doesn't mean that I'm being ripped off. That just means that I want more of their books. The converse of that is that if the only time someone buys an author's books is on the remainder table or from the library, then that author isn't going to write many books. Maybe you care about a specific author, maybe you don't, but that's the what's going to happen.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by leebase

It doesn't matter WHAT label one uses. I just don't think books are a commodity like milk. If you like an author and want more of their work to be created....then there is a material difference between how you acquire the book and the benefit the author receives.

Mind you -- I too am a "ride along" in all kinds of ways. I've never paid for Calibre, is just one example. I fast forward through commercials on tv when I can is another.

But I don't care that much for Calibre....nor THAT much for network tv shows that I should feel bad should they go away.

Support the authors you care about....this shouldn't be a radical idea. Buy their book instead of checking it out at the library or borrowing it from a friend. If you CAN'T....then ride along on the support others are giving...and hope it's enough

The single best thing you can do to bolster the income of most authors is to persuade them to dump their agents, leave traditional publishing and enjoy 70% royalties with KDP. Or, if they really like tradpub type contracts, go with an Amazon imprint.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

If you had limited your assertion to people who have limited discretionary funds, that would have been different.

Don't 97% of the people on this planet have limited discretionary funds? Why would you assume that the conversation is about the very wealthy unless specified otherwise?

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

The major point that I would make is that if an author can't make a living writing, he or she isn't going to write many books. If I'm a fan of a particular author, I'm going to support that author as much as possible. That doesn't mean that I'm being ripped off. That just means that I want more of their books. The converse of that is that if the only time someone buys an author's books is on the remainder table or from the library, then that author isn't going to write many books. Maybe you care about a specific author, maybe you don't, but that's the what's going to happen.

So you are basically saying that those that choose not to support their favourite authors as much as you do are the cause of their demise? Where is the money supposed to come from? Out of discretionary money not already dedicated to books? Unless you are suggesting to change my lifestyle by siphoning money from another luxury category into bigger purchases of books, then I can only conclude that the extra money has to come from savings? Sounds like very good financial advise.

There is a simple reason why most people have a certain upper limit they are willing to spend on books. And that is, because the rest of their discretionary money is allocated elsewhere.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

Don't 97% of the people on this planet have limited discretionary funds? Why would you assume we're talking about the very wealthy?

This is what's known as a false dichotomy. No, the world isn't split between the very wealthy and everyone else who are scrambling to make ends meet, so no I'm not making that assumption. People make choices in how they spend their money.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

This is what's known as a false dichotomy. No, the world isn't split between the very wealthy and everyone else who are scrambling to make ends meet, so no I'm not making that assumption. People make choices in how they spend their money.

Obviously. But I'm pretty sure every person here has limited discretionary income. It's a normal part of life.

I can't imagine paying release hardback price for every book I read. That would come to the price of a decent secondhand car every year, or eating a substantial restaurant dinner out every night. (And I'm not even including the graphic novels.) It's simply not an option. And we are on an above median income.

(Not to mention most hardbacks are inaccessible to me anyhow - too heavy.)

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

So you are basically saying that those that choose not to support their favourite authors as much as you do are the cause of their demise? Where is the money supposed to come from? Out of discretionary money not already dedicated to books? Unless you are suggesting to change my lifestyle by siphoning money from another luxury category into bigger purchases of books, then I can only conclude that the extra money has to come from savings? Sounds like very good financial advise.

There is a simple reason why most people have a certain upper limit they are willing to spend on books. And that is, because the rest of their discretionary money is allocated elsewhere.

Nice strawman you are whacking there. No, I rather explicitly said otherwise. What I said is that if an author can't make a living selling books, then he or she won't write many books, a fairly obvious truth. I'm suggesting that if you like an author and want more of their books, you support them by buying their books.

Yea, I get people like free stuff and don't want to prioritize purchases. There is an old saying, you vote with your dollars. That's what budgeting is all about. If buying books isn't a priority, then that's fine. But don't pretend that publishers should pay attention to what you like or don't like, because you aren't a potential customer to them.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by darryl

The single best thing you can do to bolster the income of most authors is to persuade them to dump their agents, leave traditional publishing and enjoy 70% royalties with KDP. Or, if they really like tradpub type contracts, go with an Amazon imprint.

There is a reason that most name authors don't go that route. It's hard to attract a big enough audience selling just ebooks (paper books for indies tend to cost hardback prices, gee a bit of a double standard there), it's just a much smaller pie than selling to people who buy paper books. Yea, there are indies who make a good living being an indie. Most do not. It's not a coincidence that there are quite a few authors who start as indies and move to traditional publishing.

Successful indie writers are a lot closer to the old pulp writers than anything else, i.e. they churn out a lot of stuff every year. Frankly, I can't think of very many indies who are successful writing one or two books a year. The ones I can think of tend to use smaller publishers rather than go the pure indie route. Not every author is suited to that.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Nice strawman you are whacking there. No, I rather explicitly said otherwise. What I said is that if an author can't make a living selling books, then he or she won't write many books, a fairly obvious truth. I'm suggesting that if you like an author and want more of their books, you support them by buying their books.

Yea, I get people like free stuff and don't want to prioritize purchases. There is an old saying, you vote with your dollars. That's what budgeting is all about. If buying books isn't a priority, then that's fine. But don't pretend that publishers should pay attention to what you like or don't like, because you aren't a potential customer to them.

Who are you to suggest that I don't vote with my wallet? Guess what? I don't support big publishers, because I rather spend it on books I like to read and don't mind paying for.

[crossi]

I support authors by buying a LOT of books not just a few high priced ones. I'm a fast reader. I have frequently bought 10 books in a single week and read them all. One a day is quite common for me. At that rate paying hardback prices is not possible except for the very rare book I have to have Right Now. Anyway what would an author prefer, that I should buy one of their books for $15 or all thirty or forty of their books for $5 each? If they are a one book wonder, yeah maybe they should go for the $15, but if they write a lot go for the maximum number of sales to better spread word about their books and get even more customers.

Also there is the point that back when I was buying paper books, perhaps one in ten of those I bought turned out to be keepers. The rest were just chaff I had to go through to find the books I really liked. Wasted money. No way was I going to waste hardback money on the one in ten odds of getting a keeper. And now I can't even trade in or donate the chaff. I'm just stuck with them.