Publishers still missing the point on e-book prices

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I don't consider authors who want recognition over income as part of this equation; if they don't care what money they make, they can give their books away, or pay to have them distributed, or just shout to the skies that they've written a book.

The ebook pricing debate has nothing to do with them. It's a debate between those who primarily want a practical income from books in order to sustain a business, and those who primarily must pay for books.

The debate does have bearing on independent authors who want a practical income, and therefore, are on the same side with publishers in trying to maximize their profit for their work.

To be honest, if someone came to me and said, "We want to option your book for a possible movie, Jed Hackerson is set to direct, it will mean taking it out of circulation, but here's a check for $20,000 for the rights"... I'd take the cash. And buy a car. And wouldn't care if no one ever read that book again. That's because I have no pretentions about my work, but I know it's good, and that's good enough for me. (Maybe I'd negotiate a time clause allowing me to re-release the book if the movie deal falls through after some period of time.)

I get what you're saying...but I don't think that it is completely true. Yes, maybe you would take the cash right now but I don't think any writer gets into the business (in the beginning) looking purely to make money. It's really hard to make money in any job, let alone the entertainment industry. It's quicker and easier to make money as someone's employee than to gamble on becoming a well paid author (and by well paid I mean making enough money that writing is the only full time job).

It's what Elfwreck said, most authors are more interested in being read and entering into history than they are interested in just making money.

Note: that is not to say that I think they don't want to make money - just that it is easier to make money doing something else.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

I get what you're saying...but I don't think that it is completely true. Yes, maybe you would take the cash right now but I don't think any writer gets into the business (in the beginning) looking purely to make money...

Sometimes I find it surprising that people have a hard time believing someone would write just because they are good at it... not because they want to become famous. The world is full of people who work at something because they are good at it, it pays the bills, and they have no illusions about becoming famous.

I'm not an artist, but I'm a craftsman. I'm trying to pay a few bills (down the line, like during my retirement, if I can get this stuff to take off). Really. I don't care about fame or history, because fame is fleeting (and usually more of a pain than it is worth), and history erodes everything. And at 51, I don't depend on other people's approval for justification of my efforts. I just do what I like.

And if it turns out that, to be a success, I have to create a pen name and use a model's face on my books... sure, I'll do that in a New York minute. Maybe two, if I need to become a woman. Three or four if it's Snooki.

And if it turns out that this will never pay off... I'll stop. And look for some other way to finance my retirement.

Anyway, that's me. I'm just not like most authors, I guess.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I don't consider authors who want recognition over income as part of this equation; if they don't care what money they make, they can give their books away, or pay to have them distributed, or just shout to the skies that they've written a book.

I wasn't talking about the ones who want recognition more than money, just pointing out that recognition and a readership is part of why most writers write--there are easier ways to make money. There are easier ways to make money writing, doing work-for-hire freelance pieces. (Nonfiction opportunities are everywhere. For fiction writers, there are plenty of game companies looking for people to write story pieces.)

I'm not focusing on the authors who want to be read so much they'll give away their works for free. I mean the ones who consider writing their business, their craft, and want to get paid for it--but also want their work to be enjoyed, and are aware that those are two different forms of support.

For the publisher, every reader who doesn't pay is a lost sale. For ebooks, that includes spouses and children of paying readers. For the writer, the reader who doesn't pay can be an entertaining and supportive fan.

Writers don't want their readers to just buy the books--they want them to read, discuss, share passages from the books. (They'll often settle for "just buy." But if they just wanted to sell their labor for enough to live on, they'd be plumbers instead.) And that means that non-paying readers become part of the support network that increases future sales, because the more people who know the work, the more who can discuss it and get interested in the next book.

They can also encourage other people, who don't have direct contact with someone who's bought it, to buy it, which is the publisher's only reason to tolerate non-paying readers. Authors have always relied on non-paying readers to support their careers in other ways--showing up at book signings, writing fanmail, encouraging other sales, supporting their local library, voting for awards, and so on. (If the Hugo awards voting were limited to people who'd bought the novels or stories, we'd see a *drastically* different set of winners.)

Novelists who want nothing but money for their labor should find another career; writing fiction's a terrible way to make money. There's nothing wrong with wanting money *and* the kind of acclaim that's only available to authors, and that's why many authors write. It's just that that's not why publishers publish--and ebook dynamics and internet commerce are making it easy for authors to find other ways to reach their goals.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

That implies there are only two groups' interests involved: publishers and book-reading customers. There are also authors, whose interest in customers is similar but not identical to publishers' interest; they, too, are looking for ways to connect with customers to make profit.

And I'll add a fourth group. The retailers. They don't earn enough profit then they go out of business.

So far no one (except Apple perhaps) has found a way to make money on digital/streaming services.

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

The debate does have bearing on independent authors who want a practical income, and therefore, are on the same side with publishers in trying to maximize their profit for their work.

How many people are arguing that authors don't deserve a practical income?

You will find that a few people are arguing that reducing the price may increase their profits through increased volume. It doesn't always work that way, but increasing the price doesn't always increase profits either.

You will find that a lot of people are arguing that publishers are saving money through reduced costs while increasing revenues through a one book one reader model. In other words, they see it as a cash grab since they want to read as much as they did before without paying more.

Either way, the publishing industry has PR problems because consumers don't like being ripped off.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by Fbone

And I'll add a fourth group. The retailers. They don't earn enough profit then they go out of business.

So far no one (except Apple perhaps) has found a way to make money on digital/streaming services.

Amazon sure has found a way, my guess is that Kobo is making money, too. And while Apple's digital services are making money, it is a very small amount. They are only interested in these to drive their hardware business.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

You have to appreciate that that goes both ways: Consumers have credibility problems because publishers don't like being ripped off. And both sides deny they are the problem.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Amazon sure has found a way, my guess is that Kobo is making money, too. And while Apple's digital services are making money, it is a very small amount. They are only interested in these to drive their hardware business.

No, neither have. Amazon's streaming and R&D costs hold them back.
Kobo has had to accept further investment money to keep going.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

You have to appreciate that that goes both ways: Consumers have credibility problems because publishers don't like being ripped off. And both sides deny they are the problem.

The publishers aren't being ripped off by their customers. Instead, publishers are punishing their paying customers for what other people do. The constant message of "we can't treat you politely and reasonably* because you might be a thief" is not winning any loyalty, and customers are likely to grab the first alternate that provides them with the kind of entertainment they want.

* We can't authorize an unlimited number of devices.
* We can't let you read your Nook books on a Kindle or vice-versa.
* We can't tell you book size before you buy, or tell you how much of the book is story content vs adverts & excerpts from other books.
* We can't refund your ebook purchase (Amazon does; B&N doesn't; publishers don't)
* We can't authorize your new computer to read your 8-year-old .prc files.
* We can't let you copy-and-paste from the book to your thesis.
* We can't let you print out a few pages to read on the train.
* We can't let you transfer your entire account to your spouse.

... and so on.

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

You have to appreciate that that goes both ways: Consumers have credibility problems because publishers don't like being ripped off. And both sides deny they are the problem.

Companies aren't people though. So realistically no-one in general terms will ever care how they 'feel'.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

Either way, the publishing industry has PR problems because consumers don't like being ripped off.

This is the essential truth. you might want to add credibility issues as well to that.

Unlike an earlier post states, customers are NOT ripping off publishers.

The current mindset of publishers is akin to Neanderthal cave dwellers with their attendant stone implements cowering in the back of the cave, afraid of the rapidly changing outside world. They cower inside because they have no idea about HOW to change or evolve to the new environment.

It is far easier to blame others than solve problems within.

[stonetools]

Heh. Let me throw in a completely different view about publisherrs and pricing, straight from a highly opinionated KIndle blogger:

9.Publishers still don’t get it. However, they are beginning to get it. Can’t really expound much on this without it taking over the post. In Summary: Publishers are now beginning to do what they should have ideally done 10 to 20 years ago to safeguard against what Amazon has done (reduced books to loss leaders). It’s amazing that they did not understand this even after Kindle was released. It’s almost as if they’re in a time-warp and realize things 3 to 5 years too late.
10.Readers now need Publishers. We’ve gone through the Golden Period and now we’re in the muck. Who’s going to pick out the quality books? Not Amazon. It benefits from users coming to Amazon, getting frustrated with the slushpile, and buying something else instead. Think about what Amazon has done – it’s randomized free book offers and turned the Kindle Store into slot machines. You don’t know whether you’ll get rewarded or not. You do know that you’ll go to Amazon.com.
11.Amazon’s 10 year plan might have NOTHING to do with books. All along the belief everyone was laboring under was – What is Amazon going to do with all this power? Is it going to take over Publishing? Perhaps the question should have been – What is Amazon going to do with this gigantic pile of loss leaders? Is it going to reduce books to complimentary glasses of lemonade that get customers in and get them to pay for a 4-course dinner?

LINK

RTWT. Obviously, Mr. Switch11 rejects the idea that publishers are overpricing books. Elsewhere he says:

Books are almost destroyed in terms of value. There are 300+ indie authors each day making their books free. There are hundreds of books on sale for $1 and $2 every month. The price pressure is incredible. Instead of being the preserve of gatekeeper Publishers, books are turning into the preserve of Supermarkets that use books as loss leaders

Clearly he feels that the avalanche of cheap and free books in the Amazon catalogue is not a good thing long term for the book industry. He seems to want the publishers to do more, not less, to defend the value of books. What do you think of THEM apples?

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

You have to appreciate that that goes both ways: Consumers have credibility problems because publishers don't like being ripped off. And both sides deny they are the problem.

Uh, the publishers and retailers are the ones setting the prices. The only way the consumer can rip off the publisher is the literal way: by stealing books. A lot of consumers simply won't do that.

[FizzyWater]

Originally Posted by stonetools

What do you think of THEM apples?

It's frustrating that the argument here always seems to boil down to an all-or-nothing mentality. I don't think a book someone worked on for months, that has had adequate editing, that has a cover that actually hints at what's in it and catches the eye, is only worth $1.

I don't think everyone on this thread, let alone on this forum, thinks all ebooks should be almost free or completely free. There are those who do, but it's not everyone. I really believe that most people in this argument have a moderate view on what a book's value is worth.

My frustration - and I can only speak for mine - is that publishers want me to pay differently for an ebook that the print book. Hell, I was ticked off when publishers started using trade paper books as an intermediary between hardback and MMPB. I don't think ANY fiction book is worth $26 or even $15. My personal "sweet-spot" for the average-length fiction story is $5-$6, but I'm happy to pay less if I can get a nice deal and have been known to pay more if I want it NOW and don't want to wait for it to have a deal or come down to a MMPB price.

If I can walk into Wal-Mart or Target and buy a book at 25% off cover, I want the same for my ebooks. Or at least, I want that opportunity, depending on where I shop for ebooks. There is value added in ebooks, but there is also value taken away IMO, so to me, the difference in format doesn't justify a regular 20-25% increase in real costs to me.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by stonetools

Clearly he feels that the avalanche of cheap and free books in the Amazon catalogue is not a good thing long term for the book industry. He seems to want the publishers to do more, not less, to defend the value of books. What do you think of THEM apples?

It's probably not a good thing for "the book industry," which is several hundred years old, and built in the premise that authors should work at below-minimum-wage for the thin possibility of an award someday maybe, while paper-peddlers get rich off their labor.

The plethora of cheap and free books are great for readers. Great for the authors who are making a living wage off books publishers never would've touched.

Are there *less* mega-star authors now? Is the bestseller pool shrinking? The midlist author possibilities are exploding nicely, and the grade below midlist--what's that called, pulp? Something else? Is becoming financially viable rather than a way to starve slowly unless the author got lucky enough to be discovered by a marketing campaign.

Readers who complain they "can't find the good stuff" are whining about nothing. All the methods they used four years ago--except, perhaps, browsing at Borders--are still available. The NY Times Bestseller list still lists print books that are very popular and many of them are award-winners. A person can limit their reading to Agency publishers and award winners and whatever classics they care for, and have enough to read for the rest of their life.

Readers who are dismayed that the good stuff they recognize is (digitally) shelved right next to $.99 bits of horrific unedited tripe with a pretty cover are... going to have to learn to cope. Complaining that "when I look for books, I now see too many options to remember which are the narrow set I care to consider buying" is just pathetic.

The real complaint is, "I want a bunch of $3 ebooks instead of a $12 ebook but I don't know how to pick four of them that, collectively, I'll enjoy as much or more as I would've enjoyed the $12 ebook." And while I have some sympathy--I've spent time trudging through the digital slushpile--I'm still not seeing how this is "an end to the value of books."

The systems we've accepted as markers of quality and indicators of style-of-content no longer work. We'll have to find new systems, and in the meantime, we'll all be exposed to a variety of literature outside of our preferences, sometimes outside our comfort zones, and possibly outside the confines of grammatical comprehensibility. Oh, woe. We shall be forced to be aware of the *full* range of literary skills of our fellow-man. And aware of how popular some of their ideas are.

This'll be "an end to the book industry" like the mp3 was the end of the music industry. I haven't noticed any shortage of music.