Where your eBook money goes

[mcl]

Originally Posted by raac

>Your argument is only correct if sales of P are additive to the sales of N, if sales of N are
>replaced by P profits would decrease if the costs of production would not be shared by N

Quite.

Except that, right now, sales of P and N are additive, because sales of N are not in any way hindered by sales of P. Publishers just like to claim they are when justifying patently stupid behavior.

At all other times, publishers are happy to admit that sales of P are miniscule and have no real impact.

And since we were talking about /right now/, not some nebulous time in the future, the point stands.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by mcl

Except that, right now, sales of P and N are additive, because sales of N are not in any way hindered by sales of P. Publishers just like to claim they are when justifying patently stupid behavior.

At all other times, publishers are happy to admit that sales of P are miniscule and have no real impact.

And since we were talking about /right now/, not some nebulous time in the future, the point stands.

No, the sales are not entirely additive.

Personal example: There are series where I bought the first few books in paper and later volumes in ebook format. These include Jack Campbell's "Lost Fleet" series, and Mike Shepherd's "Kris Longknife" books. I also switched my buying of Analog Magazine (which I've been reading for about thirty years) from paper to electronic format about five years ago.

These ebook sales are NOT additive. They replaced paper sales, because I would have continued these series regardless. They didn't replace hardcover sales because I would have bought in paperback, but they did replace paper sales.

I can't be the only person who does this.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

No, the sales are not entirely additive.

Personal example: There are series where I bought the first few books in paper and later volumes in ebook format. These include Jack Campbell's "Lost Fleet" series, and Mike Shepherd's "Kris Longknife" books. I also switched my buying of Analog Magazine (which I've been reading for about thirty years) from paper to electronic format about five years ago.

These ebook sales are NOT additive. They replaced paper sales, because I would have continued these series regardless. They didn't replace hardcover sales because I would have bought in paperback, but they did replace paper sales.

I can't be the only person who does this.

They are currently additive for all intents and purposes, because the percentage of sell-through for ebooks is so tiny.

In fact, the sell-through for ebooks is SO small, the profit is really ignorable, as are the costs. They don't make a difference either way since the impact is negligible. So, the publishers have two options:

1) Price ebooks reasonably, and hope to grow the market, or
2) Price ebooks unreasonably and hope to kill the market.

It's quite clear that publishers fear a nontrivial ebook market.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by mcl

fact, the sell-through for ebooks is SO small, the profit is really ignorable, as are the costs.

So you don't believe Jeff Bezos?

"Millions of people now own Kindles," Bezos said. "And Kindle owners read, a lot. When we have both editions, we sell six Kindle books for every 10 physical books.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by kjk

So you don't believe Jeff Bezos?

I don't believe Jeff Bezos is the entire market, no.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by mcl

I don't believe Jeff Bezos is the entire market, no.

I believe Amazon and the Kindle are a major part of the eBook market though-and that Jeff Bezos is in a pretty good position to understand the relative significance of eBook/physical book sales.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by kjk

I believe Amazon and the Kindle are a major part of the eBook market though-and that Jeff Bezos is in a pretty good position to understand the relative significance of eBook/physical book sales.

What we don't have are numbers that would show how many book sales there would have been without the ebook sales.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by mcl

What we don't have are numbers that would show how many book sales there would have been without the ebook sales.

No we don't have those numbers because they cannot exist. However, unless people who buy ebooks never bought books before they had ebook readers, we have to believe that at least some of the money they spend on ebooks now is money they spent on pbooks previously.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

No we don't have those numbers because they cannot exist. However, unless people who buy ebooks never bought books before they had ebook readers, we have to believe that at least some of the money they spend on ebooks now is money they spent on pbooks previously.

I do in fact believe (and have seen others state here and elsewhere) that ebooks and ebook readers have spurred purchases they would not have made otherwise.

Q.E.D.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by mcl

What we don't have are numbers that would show how many book sales there would have been without the ebook sales.

Certainly we do-compare Amazon's pbook sales before they started selling ebooks to their current pbook sales, adjusted for market growth. (Which is a 'bugger' factor that you can assume to be whatever you need it to be to 'prove' your argument, but I tend to accept the experts' opinions on that.)

I think Bezos is an expert-or at least hires experts-although I'm not certain he's telling the truth. I'd prefer to develop the figures myself, but I haven't found any so far. I'm also not quite certain how to define market growth-is it the number of people who buy books or the number of books people buy?

Several studies have shown that people who buy ebooks tend to buy more books, on avarage, than people who buy pbooks. No studies, that I know of, have tested for cross-correlation (i.e. most people who buy ebooks also buy pbooks-so how does that skew the 'market growth' figures?)

So it's my opinion that it would take an expert (probably an economist, although a statistician might be better) to decide how to adjust pbook sales for market growth. Bezos almost certainly has experts who could do this on his payroll, whether or not he's asked them to do this is another question. As is whether or not he's paid any attention to their conclusions.

My own opinion is that pbook sales, per person, are falling as most 'heavy' readers shift to ebooks. I haven't seen evidence of the increased market growth that would make up for this in pbook sales-which means that ebook sales are 'taking away' from potential pbook sales. But as stated, I haven't been able to find figures to prove that so it's only my opinion. FWIW.

[Seli]

Originally Posted by mcl

Except that, right now, sales of P and N are additive, because sales of N are not in any way hindered by sales of P. Publishers just like to claim they are when justifying patently stupid behavior.

At all other times, publishers are happy to admit that sales of P are miniscule and have no real impact.

And since we were talking about /right now/, not some nebulous time in the future, the point stands.

I believe that one of the factors in diminishing music sales is that the market has different things to spend the 'entertainment' part of their disposable income on. Money spent is not spent on music but on mobile phones, ringtones, games, apps, dvd, blu-ray etc.. The spending budget is not infinitely flexible.

If this is the case it is important where the people buying e-books will come from. If it is purely existing readers, it is unlikely that the total amount spent will increase a lot. If non-typical readers end up buying a significant part of ebooks, the market might grow, but in that case it is likely (I can imagine) only in best-seller country. But at the same time this larger market is probably more vulnerable to competition with non-book purchases.

So, if you look at is in this way, again uncertainty about the future of the market means the publishing companies have to be careful if they want to survive in any way.

[mcl]

Originally Posted by Seli

I believe that one of the factors in diminishing music sales is that the market has different things to spend the 'entertainment' part of their disposable income on. Money spent is not spent on music but on mobile phones, ringtones, games, apps, dvd, blu-ray etc.. The spending budget is not infinitely flexible.

If this is the case it is important where the people buying e-books will come from. If it is purely existing readers, it is unlikely that the total amount spent will increase a lot. If non-typical readers end up buying a significant part of ebooks, the market might grow, but in that case it is likely (I can imagine) only in best-seller country. But at the same time this larger market is probably more vulnerable to competition with non-book purchases.

So, if you look at is in this way, again uncertainty about the future of the market means the publishing companies have to be careful if they want to survive in any way.

There's a huge difference between "being careful" and "trying mightily to kill off a new market". Right now, the publishers are doing the latter.

[TallMomof2]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

No we don't have those numbers because they cannot exist. However, unless people who buy ebooks never bought books before they had ebook readers, we have to believe that at least some of the money they spend on ebooks now is money they spent on pbooks previously.

As a purely anecdotal data point, I spend far more on ebooks now than I used to spend on hardbacks and paperbacks. It's so easy to buy ebooks and since they only take up room in memory the additional purchases don't clutter my home.

[fugazied]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

In the current market you need to create at least three different versions (Epub, Kindle, Ereader) and possibly a fourth (PDF), with three different DRM schemes. That adds costs.

But really, we are talking about software which converts file formats in minutes. It can be done on a $500 PC, most of us do it everyday.

There is some cost in having a person quality check the conversions, but that isn't much compared to the overhead in printing, storing and transporting thousands of print books. There are already distribution mechanisms for publishers as well, like Amazon and B&N, and soon iTunes which can handle storage and processing of media.

Also we should take note that with the decline in oil production (we are past peak oil), the price of printing and transporting print media will grow at a fast rate in coming years. It won't be cheap to transport tons of paper from the printer to the warehouse, to the airport, to another warehouse, to the shopfront. Some of these books fly thousands of miles to get to the bookshop. The transport cost of an ebook is about $0.000001

I think many ebook sales ARE additive (imo, no real evidence). Because with the advent of devices like the tablets, iPhones, small notebooks - general use electronic devices which also have the ability to read ebooks. People who would never carry a huge paper in their bag/backpack/pocket due to the weight now have an electronic reader on them at all times.

[GhostHawk]

Personally, perhaps once a year I would get a Gift card to B&N.

Those would normally be the only books I would buy. With the exception of second hand paperbacks from a second hand store.

Since I got my ereader, no one is giving me Gift cards. Perhaps I just need to point out that they could still do so, only from an Ebook store. But I have very few dollars of my own to spend. My wife and I scrape by on 24,000$ gross income. Yes that's before taxes. So every dollar is counted thrice before it is spent. I get 600$ a year rent from some land I own, that is all. My savings put the roof over our heads, thankfully that is paid for. My wife keeps me in essentials from the second hand store. But that 600$ has many places it has to go. I took a gamble last year buying my ebook reader with part of it. Which has in my opinion paid off very nicely. But 15$ ebooks are simply not in my budget.