What is with these Publishers?

[Bremen Cole]

[QUOTE=rhadin;730966 where I proposed a new publishing model: do away with paperbacks and publish only hardcover and ebooks, delaying ebooks for 3 months. With such a change, several constituencies could be appeased, although there will be no appeasement of those who require instant access to everything.[/QUOTE]

Well, I propose a new publishing model. My model is to make a great product, and cater to the needs and wants of the customer. In your model yes, several constituencies are appeased, if fact ALL are appeased except the customer. We already have a system like that now.

[omk3]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Before ebooks your choice was hardcover, paperback, or not at all. I didn't hear a scream by anyone for paperbacks and hardcovers to be released simultaneously. It was expected and accepted that the paperback version would come a year later. And this is still the accepted process.

Actually, I always grumbled that I had to wait so long for the paperback.

In greek publishing, by the way, there are no such distinctions. As far as I know, every book comes out in one format only, which varies in size and is usually better quality paper than even the hardcover here. But that is beside the point.

Some of us for various reasons don't want to buy paper any more. I would maybe compromise with an elevated price in the first few months of publication, but I don't see why I have to wait to be able to read the book at all.

[TallMomof2]

I also did not like having to wait months for the paperback version but since I usually had a big backlog it wasn't that much of a problem. Nowadays, the publishers are hurting themselves by not releasing the ebook with the hardback because they are definitely losing ebook sales. For example, I saw ebook versions of Under The Dome in the usual dark places within days of the hardback being released. It's obvious that not releasing the ebook doesn't affect the availability of it. I'm sure that some who download the darknet version buy the official ebook when it's available but many don't.

It's absurd to equate ebook buyers with former hardback buyers. In the pbook days I bought probably 100 paperbacks for every hardback. Nowadays it's ebooks all the way. Delaying ebook releases will only alienate me. There's too much other stuff to read now so by the time the ebook is released I'll be on to something else.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Before ebooks your choice was hardcover, paperback, or not at all. I didn't hear a scream by anyone for paperbacks and hardcovers to be released simultaneously. It was expected and accepted that the paperback version would come a year later. And this is still the accepted process.

Now, because you want to read an ebook rather than a pbook you demand that they be released simultaneously. What makes for the sudden change? I don't get your intense dislike for publishers. Seems to me that a 3 month delay for a cheaper version is not unreasonable and is better than the 12 month delay that exists for paperbacks and with which you have been content for decades.

Why aren't you demanding that the hardcover, paperback, and ebook versions be released simultaneously? What is so special about ebooks other than you like them?

I'm proposing that ebooks be the paperback substitute and that the delay be reduced. Considering that there are competing interests involved, I think it is a reasonable solution. OTOH, I have no doubt that publishers would be willing to simultaneously release hardcover and ebook versions at the same high price but I don't hear any clamor for that.

At least I offer a proposal that takes into account the varied interests. Where is your suggestion that balances the competing interests?

I think you get me wrong - I AM demanding that they're all released at the same time. I am UNWILLING to wait. I WILL NOT accept artificial delays on digital products. If you have a digital product to sell, then why aren't you (as in the you of the publishers) selling it to me? If Book A comes out tomorrow in Hardback and not digital, Book A will soon be replaced in my want list, and I'll guarantee you that there won't be an impulse purchase of Book A.

You have my suggestion, it's very simple; if you have a product to sell to me, sell it to me, don't pussyfoot around with staggered releases in the hopes that you're going to sell more or sell at a higher price or whatever the hell that strategy is supposed to do.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Bottom line, Daffy, is that if the publishing industry had to meet your demands there would be no publishing industry. That may be acceptable to you and to many others, but I see a role for publishers for quite some time to come.

As with Moejoe, I wonder why you weren't refusing to read Stephen King when your only choice was hardcover or paperback -- when ebooks didn't exist -- and the paperback version was delayed 12 to 18 months. What makes the ebook so special?

I didn't see this earlier, but I bought the hardback of King day of release on offer and an impulse buy, two days after I downloaded the darknet copy. Either which way it is the very LAST money I ever spend on hardback, paperback or King for that matter (godawful book wasn't worth the 900kb download).

The ebook is special because of its nature. It's digital. It can be made available much easier than a physical book. There are zero real-world explanations for why an ebook can't be offered on the same day as a hardback.

[drofgnal]

Originally Posted by omk3

But there are still a lot people who don't want either hardcovers (because of their bulk for example) or ebooks (because they don't have a reader or don't want to give up paper for whatever reason). Paperbacks are just right for them, so why take them away?

If publishers have to keep the current model as it is, why not have ebooks come out at the same time with the hardcovers, and at the same price. I may want to read a specific book the moment it comes out, but no way am I going to add another bulky volume to my already suffering bookshelves. When the paperback comes out, lower the price of the ebook to match that of the paperback.

I know it doesn't really sound right to have two different prices for the same product, but then timing is an important factor, and it's not like the difference in quality between hardcovers and paperbacks is such as to alone adequately explain their price difference.

I don't understand why an ebook should be the same price as a hardcover, and I'd not pay it. There is an awful lot of cost associated with paper, printing, packaging and shipping that is not there with an ebook. I want to see certain titles when the hardcover comes out, but then again, I'm not going to pay what I think is a premium to get them. If an ebook is the same cost as the hardcover, I'd rather wait.

[daffy4u]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Bottom line, Daffy, is that if the publishing industry had to meet your demands there would be no publishing industry. That may be acceptable to you and to many others, but I see a role for publishers for quite some time to come.

As with Moejoe, I wonder why you weren't refusing to read Stephen King when your only choice was hardcover or paperback -- when ebooks didn't exist -- and the paperback version was delayed 12 to 18 months. What makes the ebook so special?

I just wanted to come back and say I'm sorry if it seems I'm being too harsh toward you. I don't mean to be.

It's very important for me (us) to see what publishers are thinking. Just as it's very important for publishers to know what the consumer is thinking.

We may not ever agree on this subject but I do appreciate you taking the time to share the view from the other side.

[drofgnal]

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

@Kindleman

They are fearful of losing control of the product. They are also fearful of independent publishers/writers.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. You can forsee a future where major publishing houses are not needed to get a book to market, particularly with ebooks. I was the other day looking for a CJ Cherryh's Downbelow Station. She has some of here lesser known works on Amazon for Kindle, but not her award winner. (Hugo). Lo and behold, she has a web site where she explains she is setting up a system to distribute here ebooks on her own.

So the publishing houses will still want the hardcover to be first. If ebook comes to dominate as it probably will at somepoint in the future, the need for writers to have publishing houses for publication and distribution of their work may be drastically reduced if not non-existent. This is about them maintaining their status as middle man between the artist and consumer. Hopefully the artists can impress upon the publishers the need to keep the paying consumer happy as they won't listen to the consumer.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

What is with the Publishers? They are living in the past.

Out of curiousity, what professional experience or insider knowledge qualifies you to evaluate the correctness or lack thereof of their business model?

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

They are also fearful of independent publishers/writers.

Not unless they are independent publishers themselves. Really... this is a pretty silly thing to say.

- Ahi

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by drofgnal

I think you've hit the nail on the head. You can forsee a future where major publishing houses are not needed to get a book to market, particularly with ebooks. I was the other day looking for a CJ Cherryh's Downbelow Station. She has some of here lesser known works on Amazon for Kindle, but not her award winner. (Hugo). Lo and behold, she has a web site where she explains she is setting up a system to distribute here ebooks on her own.

An important point is being missed here. CJ Cherryh can do this and make enough sales of her ebook through her website because she built a reputation through the traditional publishing process. Imagine no book publishing companies and all authors selling ebooks from their own websites. How would you know who to look for, who to buy? How many times would you need to be burned by buying poorly written drivel before you would stop buying from unknown authors?

When you (and that's the universal you, not soemone in particular) name a popular print author whose works you like and whose ebooks you'd gladly buy from the author's website, you are implicitly acknowledging the work that some publisher did to get that print book out there for you to find and the author to love. How many thousands of self-published authors remain unknown and sell only 50 copies of their work in their lifetime? How many hours each day will you devote to finding author websites and how much money will you risk on unvetted work? And if you complain now about poor formatting, typos, and poor grammar/syntax, how much more will you be willing to tolerate with unvetted authors?

Originally Posted by drofgnal

So the publishing houses will still want the hardcover to be first. If ebook comes to dominate as it probably will at somepoint in the future, the need for writers to have publishing houses for publication and distribution of their work may be drastically reduced if not non-existent. This is about them maintaining their status as middle man between the artist and consumer. Hopefully the artists can impress upon the publishers the need to keep the paying consumer happy as they won't listen to the consumer.

This is more than about maintaining the publisher as the middleman; this is also about creating a demand for an author's work. Ask some of our more successful author's on MR, such as Steve Jordan, about the difficulties in getting attention in the marketplace. I am not saying that it can't be done; I am saying that few authors are capable of doing it. And the authors you generally look for now, the CJ Cherryhs of this world, had their reputations developed by publishing houses who backed their work and made it possible for them to devote time to their craft and not to the myriad other things that are required for a successful writing career.

[kindlekitten]

Originally Posted by KindleMan

I was Barnes and Noble and saw Douglas Preston's new book "Impact" out on display. I had seen it on B&N's website as an ebook, but not available until May. Now, I know some publishers are starting to delay the release of ebooks until the Hardcover paper version has been out for 3 - 4 months but come on! Why not release the ebook version, but at the current Hardbound price? I can buy the book on B&N's website for $15.20, why not let me download it for the same price? I just don't get the thought process here...

Can someone explain it to me?

Lobo

because they LOVE pirates!!!

Originally Posted by Moejoe

It's like they're wilfully ignorant of the world. Who the hell waits 28 days for anything when you have the internet?

seriously! I can finish and then start two menstrual cycles in 28 days! does anyone SERIOUSLY think that will make me any happier about waiting for a book!?

Originally Posted by rhadin

Well, I'm not so sure that the delay in ebook availability is such a bad idea. (Yes, I'm ready for the shooting to begin.) I just blogged about this today at An American Editor where I proposed a new publishing model: do away with paperbacks and publish only hardcover and ebooks, delaying ebooks for 3 months. With such a change, several constituencies could be appeased, although there will be no appeasement of those who require instant access to everything.

worst idea EVER!!!!

Originally Posted by ahi

Out of curiousity, what professional experience or insider knowledge qualifies you to evaluate the correctness or lack thereof of their business model?


- Ahi

probably as a consumer. the most important experience of all when it comes to business models

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

I didn't see this earlier, but I bought the hardback of King day of release on offer and an impulse buy, two days after I downloaded the darknet copy. Either which way it is the very LAST money I ever spend on hardback, paperback or King for that matter (godawful book wasn't worth the 900kb download).

I hope you didn't think I was suggesting that anyone should buy King or Brown or even read free versions of them.

However, I am surprised that you would download a copy from the darknet. I thought you were an author yourself and one who wants reasonable copyright protection for your own work. Am I wrong?

[JSWolf]

Please see https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64813 for the original thread on the delay.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by drofgnal

I don't understand why an ebook should be the same price as a hardcover, and I'd not pay it. There is an awful lot of cost associated with paper, printing, packaging and shipping that is not there with an ebook. I want to see certain titles when the hardcover comes out, but then again, I'm not going to pay what I think is a premium to get them. If an ebook is the same cost as the hardcover, I'd rather wait.

Other threads have covered this. Until publishers & booksellers open their accounting books we won't have really solid numbers, but most people seem to agree that the cost of paper, printing, etc that's required for pbooks is about equal to the cost of servers & bandwidth that's required for ebooks. Most of the cost is in preparing & advertising the book, not in printing & distributing it-and those costs apply regardless of media.

Again, I can't find solid numbers, but I suspect that the higher price of hardbacks is mostly because, for most books, they're only published in hardback when they're new. So the cost is really for a 'new' book and the fact of it being published in hardback is irrelevant. (And for those that continue to be published in hardback, at the higher hardback prices, after they've also been published in paperback or ebook, at lower prices, I suspect that's 'because they can'. Once people have been conditioned to think that hardbacks cost more the publishers can get away, basically forever, with charging more for them. Whether there's a reason to do so or not.)

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by rhadin

Now, because you want to read an ebook rather than a pbook you demand that they be released simultaneously. What makes for the sudden change? I don't get your intense dislike for publishers. Seems to me that a 3 month delay for a cheaper version is not unreasonable and is better than the 12 month delay that exists for paperbacks and with which you have been content for decades.

Because the ebooks are:
1) Usually priced to match hardcover (although releasing w/paperback might fix that)
2) Often not as well-formatted (lower quality = expectation of more versatility)
3) Sometimes not released at all--and in those cases, there's no incentive not to go to the darknet for them.

If the ebook isn't released with the hardcover, will the publisher list a publication date for the ebook? If not, customers don't know if it'll ever be available.

I'm proposing that ebooks be the paperback substitute and that the delay be reduced.

Ebooks are not a replacement for paperbacks; they reach drastically different markets. PBacks reach low-income markets that don't have computers and dedicated ebook readers. Publishers who swapped their cheap, low-tech, well-established market for a high-tech market fraught with weird legal concerns would be shooting themselves in the foot.

At least I offer a proposal that takes into account the varied interests. Where is your suggestion that balances the competing interests?

Publishers need to stop being terrified of the torrents, and pay attention to their *paying* customers. It doesn't matter how many unauthorized copies are floating around--what matters is how to get paid for as many as possible. And they can do that with low prices & user convenience.

Any big-name publisher could try an experiment: pick three dozen authors of equal rankings (however they rank them internally); offer half of those authors' works under the current glitchy ebook system, and the other half under Baen's system. Wait one year and tabulate the results.