Interesting article on book pricing and why it might rise

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

The difference between then and now probably works out to "very bad" vs "very very bad".

It's not a distinction I'd want to waste a lot of time quantifying.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

It's faster and more convenient now. Do you really think that doesn't make a difference in the volume?

Maybe they could make them take a test before submitting the work.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

I think the point is that to send a manuscript (typewritten or computer) used to cost more time and MONEY. Mailing manuscripts runs about 10 dollars to mail and I'd say another almost 5 to print. So authors *might* have spent a little more time deciding where to send them. Mailing a short story cost under 5 dollars (but considering printing costs and paper was pretty close to 5 dollars total, maybe more depending on the type of printer and so on.)

Indeed. And add to that the fact that editors did not like and would not knowingly read simultaneous submissions (Still true, too.) So you bundled your hardcopy into an envelope or a box, applied (possibly large amounts) of postage, and sent it off ot the highest paying market you knew of that bought that sort of thing. When (not if) it bounced and came back, you repeated the process with the next higher paying market. Lather, rinse, repeat, until you ran out of markets, ran out of postage, ran out of patience and stopped submitting that work, or it sold. The last was the least likely outcome.

With the internet, you sit down and hit send. You can "afford" to be more "careless" with choosing where to send submissions.

And oh, boy, are they...
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I think there was one book where I noticed an editor being acknowledged, but I'm pretty sure that she was mentioned by first name alone. Is there anywhere on the web a way to find out who was the editor of a book (or editors)?

Not convenient, for any book or editor. Authors sometimes mention their editors in acknowledgments.

In recent years, Tor has taken to crediting the editor of a book on the colophon page. Whether this happens is up to the editor. Tor Editor In Chief Beth Meachum resisted for some time, feeling it was the author's book, not hers, but I believe she finally allowed it.
_______
Dennis

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

I'm talking about posts like this and this.


Something like that. I think there was one book where I noticed an editor being acknowledged, but I'm pretty sure that she was mentioned by first name alone. Is there anywhere on the web a way to find out who was the editor of a book (or editors)?

Yes, you can often find out, especially for big-name authors, but it isn't all that easy and sometimes it isn't possible at all. But yes, for privacy reasons, I do not write the full name of my editor(s). For one, they are not looking for more clients--and yes, I've been asked who my editor is or if I have one. I will GLADLY do referrals and mention my artists and editors--but I won't just refer a stranger off the street and I won't refer at all if my editor/agent/artist isn't looking for additional work.

Pro editors do not want their name out there for the most part because enterprising young authors will then say, 'Hey, I loved this book and the editing is top-notch. I'm going to submit to this editor. If editor-so-so liked this book, they'll LOVE mine.' Don't think it doesn't happen. When an editor goes to a writing conference, many of the writers will have fully researched the books she had edited--know them by name, will have read them in some cases and are quite prepared for the pitch. So while an editor probably appreciates the recognition, she also probably doesn't want her name bandied about too freely.

Agents are the same way. They get thanked, but not often as "my agent" full name.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Fair enough.


Maybe they could make them take a test before submitting the work.

In their own way, editors do have tests. They read like this:

Include SASE, the name of the editor for your type of fiction (fantasy versus sci/fi or non-fiction versus fiction, etc).

If you don't follow the instructions, they don't even READ the submission. Don't know what SASE means? Too bad. Haven't got time to educate every newbie on the block. No, I don't care if I just threw away genius. There will be plenty more genius in the next mail bag-- Editors have so much to choose from they are going to turn down some very good stuff with the bad. That's just the way it is. The competition is stiff enough that it *requires* some very good stuff to be discarded.

[EricDP]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Don't know what SASE means? Too bad.

Fortunately, we have the Internet. I would hope anybody with the skill and time to write a novel can do a five second google search to help them with getting it published.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/SASE

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by EricDP

Fortunately, we have the Internet. I would hope anybody with the skill and time to write a novel can do a five second google search to help them with getting it published.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/SASE

They can, but from what I've heard, they often don't. Possibly they forget or figure it isn't important--because few industry require a person to actually stamp their reply envelope. Writers, in particular, think agents and editors WANT their prose--so they don't really envision the world where...they are the least valuable commodity...

[John Carroll]

My opinion on this as a self-publishing author and a long time fantasy genre reader.

I honestly think that ebooks will be the way of the future. 20-50 years from now it may even be illegal to print on paper. That bothers us, but our children and grandchildren won't know any different.

Publishers are going to change. They'll scream throughout the process, but they will change. A likely scenario is that publishers will become half-marketing firms that will find decent writers, edit them, produce their cover art, and promote them on thousands of different sites, handling the distribution and pricing wherever they're sold.

Indie writers (like myself) will flood the market. This is a bad thing in many ways as it will produce a glut of bad works (not mine of course) After awhile, the bad ones will be buried under bad reviews and will no longer be taken seriously. Good writers will struggle to get the first few reviews, but as they do, more people will buy their books.

To be successful will no longer take years of beating down the doors of publishers and agents. Now it will take years of writing and creating works that are actually good (like mine) Writers will succeed by paying attention to the market and writing books.

The reader will change as well. They will learn how to shop differently (as many of you have already) Readers will find groups with like-minded readers and will pay attention to reviews and samples of books.

The record industry and the publishing industry are screaming right now because their universes are drastically changing. The only ones that survive will be the ones that figure out how to embrace the change.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by John Carroll

My opinion on this as a self-publishing author and a long time fantasy genre reader.

Out of curiosity, why self-published? I gather you didn't attempt to go the traditional route?

I honestly think that ebooks will be the way of the future. 20-50 years from now it may even be illegal to print on paper. That bothers us, but our children and grandchildren won't know any different.

Why should it become illegal to print on paper? Paper is made from trees. Trees are a renewable resource. (And paper is hardly the only thing trees are used for. After all, trees produce wood, and wood has myriad uses.)

Publishers are going to change. They'll scream throughout the process, but they will change. A likely scenario is that publishers will become half-marketing firms that will find decent writers, edit them, produce their cover art, and promote them on thousands of different sites, handling the distribution and pricing wherever they're sold.

Publishers are essentially that now. While you can argue that they do it poorly, selling books is what publishers do.

What will differ will be the form in which the content is offered and the manner in which it is distributed.

(My own feeling is that ebooks will cannibalize the mass market paperback.)

Indie writers (like myself) will flood the market. This is a bad thing in many ways as it will produce a glut of bad works (not mine of course) After awhile, the bad ones will be buried under bad reviews and will no longer be taken seriously. Good writers will struggle to get the first few reviews, but as they do, more people will buy their books.

Indie writers are already flooding the market. The Internet is now the world's largest slush pile, and the challenge is to find a worthwhile offering.

But reviews may not be sufficient. Consider the state of Amazon.com, where reviews might be glowing praise posted by the author or the author's sock puppets, and not actual comment by satisfied readers. Personally, I pay attention to reviews by people I know are real reviewers whose taste I understand. (And it doesn't have to be a good review - there are reviewers whose review will make me say "He hated it, so I'll probably love it, because his taste is diametrically opposite mine.")

I take supposed customer reviews with a 5lb sack of salt.

To be successful will no longer take years of beating down the doors of publishers and agents. Now it will take years of writing and creating works that are actually good (like mine) Writers will succeed by paying attention to the market and writing books.

Dream on. I don't care how good your book is. You will not be successful simply because you wrote it and have it available. You will succeed (if you do at all), because you have successfully let the people who might be interested in what you wrote know that your work exists, and gotten them to give you a try. The majority of your time will not be spent writing, it will be spent marketing.

The reader will change as well. They will learn how to shop differently (as many of you have already) Readers will find groups with like-minded readers and will pay attention to reviews and samples of books.

This was happening back before ebooks were even possible.

The record industry and the publishing industry are screaming right now because their universes are drastically changing. The only ones that survive will be the ones that figure out how to embrace the change.

Add the film industry to that list.

But I largely agree. The question is what embracing that change will mean.
______
Dennis

[EricDP]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

But reviews may not be sufficient. Consider the state of Amazon.com, where reviews might be glowing praise posted by the author or the author's sock puppets, and not actual comment by satisfied readers.

Seriously, that is not a problem in real life. Some people post fake good reviews. A bunch of people get the book based on those reviews, feel ripped off, and post scathing bad reviews. There's no way a handful of fakers can keep up with the torrent of bad reviews that will come.

In my experience, the average of online reviews for a given product or store have predicted very accurately how satisfied I am with that product or store. I have learned through direct experience to put a lot of trust in those reviews (except where the number of reviews is very small). The only people who are saying online reviews can't be trusted have an separate agenda. I think in your case it's clear that your agenda is to keep the big publishers in business.

[John Carroll]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Out of curiosity, why self-published? I gather you didn't attempt to go the traditional route?

Excellent question. To go the traditional route, I would have had to find an agent who would have to find a publisher. I figured the time frame on that would be about 4 years realistically and there was about a 10% chance of even succeeding. I decided to invest that effort into self publishing. I think ebooks are the way of the future and decided to take a chance on it after a great deal of debate.

Why should it become illegal to print on paper? Paper is made from trees. Trees are a renewable resource. (And paper is hardly the only thing trees are used for. After all, trees produce wood, and wood has myriad uses.)

It is a fairly slow growing renewable resource and there is not enough of that resource to supply 6 billion people for very long.

Publishers are essentially that now. While you can argue that they do it poorly, selling books is what publishers do.

What will differ will be the form in which the content is offered and the manner in which it is distributed.

(My own feeling is that ebooks will cannibalize the mass market paperback.)

I believe you are right.

Indie writers are already flooding the market. The Internet is now the world's largest slush pile, and the challenge is to find a worthwhile offering.

But reviews may not be sufficient. Consider the state of Amazon.com, where reviews might be glowing praise posted by the author or the author's sock puppets, and not actual comment by satisfied readers. Personally, I pay attention to reviews by people I know are real reviewers whose taste I understand. (And it doesn't have to be a good review - there are reviewers whose review will make me say "He hated it, so I'll probably love it, because his taste is diametrically opposite mine.")

I take supposed customer reviews with a 5lb sack of salt.

Indie writers are new within the last 5 years I believe. New in terms of human history.

Reviews in and of themselves are not sufficient. They are an important aspect of the process though.

Dream on. I don't care how good your book is. You will not be successful simply because you wrote it and have it available. You will succeed (if you do at all), because you have successfully let the people who might be interested in what you wrote know that your work exists, and gotten them to give you a try. The majority of your time will not be spent writing, it will be spent marketing.

This is what I said: "Writers will succeed by paying attention to the market and writing books."
What I meant to say is "Writers will succeed by paying attention to the marketing and writing books. I agree with you about the marketing! Still, it doesn't matter how good the marketing is if the writer doesn't write.

[Lemurion]

I can't speak for others, but I know that I use ebooks as a mass-market paperback replacement. It's why I'm more concerned about price point for ebooks of works that are already in paperback.

Marketing is the big reason I don't see commercial publishing going away - it may change drastically, but I just can't see it vanishing. Having to do your own marketing is probably the biggest drawback of going indie, and I'm not saying that just because I hate doing it.

Running a successful marketing campaign requires a specific skillset, takes time, and often costs money. Not all writers have that skillset, though most could probably acquire it. While money can be an issue, it's not insurmountable, and if something is important enough one can find some money for it. The real killer from a writer's point of view is the time.

Successful marketing takes time, a lot of time, so does writing, and unless you have other means of support, so does making a living. Every hour you spend doing one of those three things is an hour not spent doing one of the others, and the one you're most likely to give up for marketing is an hour that would otherwise be spent writing.

That means we're likely to get fewer and lower quality books produced because the authors spend less time writing - which means less polishing their craft AND less output.

That's why I don't see it as a viable first choice for most writers.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by John Carroll

Excellent question. To go the traditional route, I would have had to find an agent who would have to find a publisher. I figured the time frame on that would be about 4 years realistically and there was about a 10% chance of even succeeding. I decided to invest that effort into self publishing. I think ebooks are the way of the future and decided to take a chance on it after a great deal of debate.

Fair enough. I think you may be on the mark about the time frame and success rate. An enormous amount of luck is required, as well as simple skill.

It is a fairly slow growing renewable resource and there is not enough of that resource to supply 6 billion people for very long.

There has been so far, and I've seen no reason to think it won't continue to be the case. Trees are farmed to insure supply.

And remember, paper is only one end product made from trees. Look around you, and count how many things are made of wood. Tell me what you would use instead? (For that matter, if paper becomes illegal, what will you wipe with? )

I believe you are right.

About ebooks cannibalizing MMPBs? I'm not the only one who thinks so, and I see it as a natural progression.

Indie writers are new within the last 5 years I believe. New in terms of human history.

Indie writers self publishing on the Internet are new. Indie writers as a class are not. Before the Internet and ebooks, we had vanity presses. Want to get published? No problem. Lots of folks willing to publish you for a fee. (Actually selling the books was your problem, but you could get published.)

We still have vanity presses. I've been exchanging messages with a chap elsewhere who published two books through CreateSpace. (It cost him about $1800.) He financed it through gambling winnings in Las Vegas.

Reviews in and of themselves are not sufficient. They are an important aspect of the process though.

Agreed.

This is what I said: "Writers will succeed by paying attention to the market and writing books."
What I meant to say is "Writers will succeed by paying attention to the marketing and writing books. I agree with you about the marketing! Still, it doesn't matter how good the marketing is if the writer doesn't write.

Agreed as well. But expect to spend far more time marketing than writing.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

I can't speak for others, but I know that I use ebooks as a mass-market paperback replacement. It's why I'm more concerned about price point for ebooks of works that are already in paperback.

Me, too. I see ebooks as cannibalizing the market for mass market paperbacks.

Marketing is the big reason I don't see commercial publishing going away - it may change drastically, but I just can't see it vanishing. Having to do your own marketing is probably the biggest drawback of going indie, and I'm not saying that just because I hate doing it.

Agreed. You can argue that they do it poorly (and in many cases it will be true), but selling books is what publishers do.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by EricDP

Seriously, that is not a problem in real life. Some people post fake good reviews. A bunch of people get the book based on those reviews, feel ripped off, and post scathing bad reviews. There's no way a handful of fakers can keep up with the torrent of bad reviews that will come.

If it works for you, splendid. The key is that the reviews average out to matching your expectations, and you are overall satisfied with the books you buy based on those reviews.

In my experience, the average of online reviews for a given product or store have predicted very accurately how satisfied I am with that product or store. I have learned through direct experience to put a lot of trust in those reviews (except where the number of reviews is very small). The only people who are saying online reviews can't be trusted have an separate agenda.

And how does a book get that critical mass of reviews? I prefer reviews by people I already know and trust. I know where they are coming from, and don't have to wonder what their agenda might be, as I already know what it is. A larger quantity of reviews reduces the possibility of rigged results, but you must have that larger quantity.

I think in your case it's clear that your agenda is to keep the big publishers in business.

Because I've had the temerity to suggest it might not be possible for them to produce ebooks at the sort of prices lots of folks would like to see?

Well, sorry about that. But what will you do if I'm right?

Whether the big publishers remain in business is beyond my control. I have no idea whether they will or not, and for the most part, I don't care. I do know an assortment of people trying to make a living, as writers, or as employees of publishers, and I do care about what happens to them.

My agenda, to the extent that I have one, is fairly simple. I know a bit about the process by which books are acquired and published. Based on what I know, I don't think major publishers can make and sell ebooks as cheaply as many people seem to think, and remain in business as going concerns. There's an awful lot of wishful thinking on the part of publishers about how much they can charge, and even more wishful thinking on the part of readers on how little can be charged for them. The truth is somewhere in the middle, and we're all finding out where that middle is.

If the major publishers do go out of business, the dual questions are where you will get books you want to read, and whether the authors can make enough money writing them to make it worth while to continue.

The stuff I like is the end result of a collaborative process. A writer wrote a manuscript. An editor liked it well enough to buy it, and work with the author to improve it. Other people worked on other parts of the process, and the end result was a book I found worth buying, reading, and having on my shelves (or my reading device.) The value for me is an aggregate of all of those parts, and it's value I'm willing to pay for.

Ultimately, you get what you pay for, and if you don't pay, you won't get.

My basic take on "let the big publishers go out of business" is "Be careful what you wish for. You might get it." I strongly suspect you will not be happy if you do.
______
Dennis