Why e-books?

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by HarryT

By the time I drive 15 miles to the nearest large city where there's a decent bookshop, find somewhere to park, pay an extortionate fee for the parking, walk 20 minutes from the carpark to the bookshop, spend a frustrating time trying to find the book I want, walk 20 minutes back to the carpark, and finally drive home again, I really couldn't give a damn if the paperback is £1 cheaper .

But that's *exactly* why paper books have more value according to some people: you have to put some effort into it to get them. Even when ordering online, you will need to research if you *really* want that book, because it is going to take storage space: if you decide you don't want it, or don't want to read it right away, you'll still have to store it. With digital, there is no effort involved. I want... click... I have. Even if I don't read a book for years (there are some I may actually never read...), it only takes the effort of downloading it and putting it into calibre. There, it can basically be forgotten forever without getting in the way; this is almost impossible to do with paper books, except if you throw them into your basement or attic, but at some point, even that will become full. You'll never in your lifetime fill up a 1TB HDD with books. (I hope, or you need some serious help. Look into the "Hoarders" series )

Originally Posted by HarryT

Me too; I've bought every "Webscription" release since they started. Was it 1999? I had a vague feeling it was a little earlier, but you may very well be right - it was a long time ago!

In 1999, I only had internet for about one year. Even if I had been able to buy Baen books (no credit card at that time, Paypal existed for less than a year, etc), I wouldn't have read them as I don't read books from laptop or desktop screens.

I did find all the official free BAEN CD's online, and ripped all series from them, and then completed each of the series by buying the remaining books. There are many doubles on the CD's though, and some series are a mess to sort out.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

. There are many doubles on the CD's though, and some series are a mess to sort out.

Do you still have that issue?

Try this:
http://www.baen.com/catalog/category...s-list/id/2001

Pick a series and sort by publishing date.

Some series (Vorkosigan!) will still be an issue but for most it'll list the proper order.

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

If I stipulate that I'm perfectly-well aware that some ebooks cost more than than their physical counterparts, can we get back to discussing just how prolific the issue really is (or how relevant its occurrence might be)?

I just find it a little puzzling that some people (who indicate that there's reasons--other than price--for why they prefer to buy ebooks) seem downright offended by the fact that a version of a book that they don't value enough to want to buy, might occasionally be a little cheaper than the price of a version they DO value enough to want to buy.

I understand those who place a hard ceiling on what they're willing to pay for any ebook (even though I don't practice it myself). What I don't understand is admitting that buying the ebook would be your preference, and then making it a requirement that your personal preference is not allowed to occasionally cost a little more than something you don't want to buy.

Set a hard price that you think an ebook is worth, and don't worry about what its physical version costs. I mean really: if two different ebooks you want are both available for $6.99, and their physical versions are $7.99 and $5.99 respectively, are you (rhetorical) going to buy the first (in ebook form) and complain that the second (available for the same $6.99 as the first) is priced too high (ignoring, for now, those who wouldn't buy either because $6.99 exceeds the price they're willing to pay for ANY ebook)?

It's the principle of the thing. It's all about precedent, the whole publisher's windowing/pricing strategy, the fact that there's no resale allowed on ebooks, and probably a whole few things that I can't think of at the moment.

In your example, if I knew that the publisher of the $5.99 print book had a policy of pricing the ebook to be at or below the price of the print book, I would whine (at least to myself), and wait a while to see if the publisher drops the price of the ebook. BTW, I did whine about the Patterson Heinlein biography, volume 2, which hadn't dropped its price yet after the TPB was released, and now it's dropped the ebook price to at or below the TPB price. It's still $2 higher than the volume 1 price, so I haven't decided whether to wait to see if a MMPB gets issued, and the ebook price drops further. I probably have a lifetime's worth of TBR pile, and I won't lose any sleep over not reading volume 2. We all have our own reasons to decide why a book is priced too high, and maybe not all of them are rational.

While I find it objectionable that the ebook is priced higher than the cheapest regularly priced (and that may include a standard discount) print book, what really irks me is when a publisher sets the sale price and only puts it on sale at a retailer that for one reason or another I prefer not to buy my ebooks from, especially when the publishers have spent so much time arguing that that particular retailer is EEEEVVVVIIILLL and made them commit crimes in order to counteract the retailer's evilness. If they're so evil, then why do you force people into their walled garden by requiring DRM, and then allow them to sell it for a lower price than everyone else so that people will be rewarded for ditching the retailers you claim to not hate? I am pretty sure it's not just the incompetence of the retailer I normally frequent when I check the 4 major retailers, and it's only on sale at one retailer, and that retailer informs me that the price was set by the publisher.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

It's the principle of the thing. It's all about precedent, the whole publisher's windowing/pricing strategy, the fact that there's no resale allowed on ebooks, and probably a whole few things that I can't think of at the moment.

As far as precedent goes: is it fair that publishers are chided for sticking with an ancient business model, while it's OK for consumers to expect pricing strategies to remain the same forever? The "no resale" thing is certainly one for the debit column when it comes to ebooks (even though I myself have never really availed myself of that particular advantage that physical books have over electronic), but surely it doesn't negate all the other advantages people in this thread have mentioned that electronic has over paper, does it? Don't those advantages add any value?

We all have our own reasons to decide why a book is priced too high, and maybe not all of them are rational.

Maybe?

[darryl]

In most things we buy we pay some regard to the price we are paying and the value we are getting for our money. The usual way to place a monetary value on something is to look at the same thing selling elsewhere or something reasonably close. In this case the product is essentially the written word itself differently packaged. Each package has its own unique characteristics which should be reflected in the price. Of these ebooks are by far the cheapest to produce and distribute. On this basis they should be cheaper than the other formats and significantly so. This does not mean that they will always be the cheapest. Mass Market Paperbacks often end up in remainder bins where they attract a fraction of their retail price. This is a basic operation of supply and demand. Hard Covers too can end up selling at significant discounts for the same reasons. This of course need not happen with ebooks where supply and demand usually coincide, though of course ebooks are, at least currently, often discounted or even given away for marketing reasons. But, these events aside, I expect that an ebook be significantly cheaper than the Mass Market Paperback version. I don't object to a premium for a time on new releases, though once again the ebook should be significantly cheaper in my view. That it often is not is because the Big 5 seem to be pricing by reference to the prices of the other formats, with a view to making the ebook less attractive. This, depite the fact that the profit margin on the ebook is much higher. If the ebook does sell at the inflated price then the Big 5 make a windfall profit.

So, whilst I am not interested in buying print books, mainly because of my eyesight deteriorating with age, I do want what I consider good value for my money. And the best way to determine this is by reference to these formats which, despite my lack of interest in them, are increasing my ebook prices as the Big 5 attempt to steer sales away from Amazon and through the Network they essentially monopolise.

I do not intend to reward the bad behaviour of a cartel of greedy traditional publishers. Fortunately, from the author earnings reports and some posts here, it appears that I am not alone.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

As far as precedent goes: is it fair that publishers are chided for sticking with an ancient business model, while it's OK for consumers to expect pricing strategies to remain the same forever?

Publishers used to make a living selling paper books at prices they set. There was reasonable competition between publishers that I think it's fair to say that the paper book prices were reasonable for both publishers and readers.

With ebooks the publishers should have the same payments to make to authors and editors for producing the text of the book. They save money on physical production and shipping. They benefit from the absence of a second-hand market.

Therefore, if the ebook price is higher than the paper book price, publishers are making 'excess' profit.

Personally, I won't buy a book if the ebook price is higher than the new paper book price.

Well, at the moment it's a very rare ebook that I'll buy unless it's on a special offer making it much cheaper that a new paper copy.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Therefore, if the ebook price is higher than the paper book price, publishers are making 'excess' profit.

Personally, I won't buy a book if the ebook price is higher than the new paper book price.

I see it as a crip tax, and I object to that pretty strenuously. Just as I do to deliberate windowing which makes the accessible format available only months or more after the inaccessible one.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Therefore, if the ebook price is higher than the paper book price, publishers are making 'excess' profit.

Personally, I won't buy a book if the ebook price is higher than the new paper book price.

Often (perhaps even most often), the reason that the paper book is more expensive than the ebook is because the retailer has discounted the paper book.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Therefore, if the ebook price is higher than the paper book price, publishers are making 'excess' profit.

Well sure, I guess. Though I would balk at the term 'excess' profit. But that's probably because I rarely consider the profit a company makes on a product in my determination of said product's value to me.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Often (perhaps even most often), the reason that the paper book is more expensive than the ebook is because the retailer has discounted the paper book.

What a shame that the retailer can't discount the ebook as well.

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by bgalbrecht

While I find it objectionable that the ebook is priced higher than the cheapest regularly priced (and that may include a standard discount) print book, what really irks me is when a publisher sets the sale price and only puts it on sale at a retailer that for one reason or another I prefer not to buy my ebooks from, especially when the publishers have spent so much time arguing that that particular retailer is EEEEVVVVIIILLL and made them commit crimes in order to counteract the retailer's evilness. If they're so evil, then why do you force people into their walled garden by requiring DRM, and then allow them to sell it for a lower price than everyone else so that people will be rewarded for ditching the retailers you claim to not hate? I am pretty sure it's not just the incompetence of the retailer I normally frequent when I check the 4 major retailers, and it's only on sale at one retailer, and that retailer informs me that the price was set by the publisher.

If you're referring to Amazon then AIUI the deal they have with the Big 5 is that the publisher gets to set the price but Amazon can put it on sale, but only for a limited amount of time during a 12month period. I'm pretty sure Amazon set the sale price. It doesn't surprise me that they don't change the "Price set by publisher" caption.

[cfrizz]

I now buy ebooks and ONLY ebooks. Ultimately, it doesn't matter to me any longer what the book costs because if I'm not willing to pay that price, there are millions of other books in my genres that I like to read in the prices that I'm willing to pay to choose from.

By the time if a book I was interested in initially had dropped down, I have since moved on and forgotten about, but have still been happily reading!

[barryem]

I watch the sales for books and buy when they're cheap. That way I have a really nice selection of books to choose from. I'm not in book clubs and for the most part I don't care how long I wait till I read a particular book since I have hundreds waiting to be read.

That said, at times I do find a book I'm eager to read and I'll buy it now and read it, usually regardless of price. When this happens with less expensive books that makes me happy. When it happens with overpriced books it makes me grumble but I'll buy it anyway if I have the money to spare. Reading is important.

Barry

[crossi]

[QUOTE=DiapDealer;3286047]As far as precedent goes: is it fair that publishers are chided for sticking with an ancient business model, while it's OK for consumers to expect pricing strategies to remain the same forever? The "no resale" thing is certainly one for the debit column when it comes to ebooks (even though I myself have never really availed myself of that particular advantage that physical books have over electronic), but surely it doesn't negate all the other advantages people in this thread have mentioned that electronic has over paper, does it? Don't those advantages add any value?

No. The added advantages of reading on an ereader are provided by the maker of the reader itself and paid for when you buy the reader. The publisher only provides a text file which has only minor differences from the same text file he sends to the paper printing device. The minor cost of taking a new book written in word or whatever and converting into two formats one for the printer and one for the reader instead of just one conversion for the printer does not to me justify a higher cost especially when it saves a lot more expences to the publisher as compared to a paper version. Maybe I might buy it if I really, really, REALLY wanted to read it right now (unlikely) but I would still feel ripped of which would leave a sour feeling while reading the book.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by crossi

No. The added advantages of reading on an ereader are provided by the maker of the reader itself and paid for when you buy the reader. The publisher only provides a text file which has only minor differences from the same text file he sends to the paper printing device. The minor cost of taking a new book written in word or whatever and converting into two formats one for the printer and one for the reader instead of just one conversion for the printer does not to me justify a higher cost especially when it saves a lot more expences to the publisher as compared to a paper version. Maybe I might buy it if I really, really, REALLY wanted to read it right now (unlikely) but I would still feel ripped of which would leave a sour feeling while reading the book.

Naturally I disagree with your opinion entirely, but hey .... that's why we have opinions.

Regardless of medium, the stories/message/knowledge books impart hold equal value for me. The media then adds or subtracts from that value (thus why the advantages ebooks provide make me value them higher than other media). The savings publishers may realize because of the nature of epublishing have no bearing on my valuation of their product.

I'm happy that the medium I prefer is quite often cheaper than the others, but I 'm perfectly willing to pay an equal price (or slightly more) for ebooks. *shrug*