July AUTHOR EARNINGS report brings focus on DRM

[Barcey]

I think Felix is correct, it's an indicator of the general philosophy. If you are consumer focused and emphatic with them you are likely to remove DRM. If you are engaged with them and actually listen to them you are likely to remove DRM. If you are internally focused and think about yourself first then you include DRM. Businesses that are consumer focused do better. It is not about just one thing though.

What is just as important is that the data doesn't support the belief that it protects sales. The detractors will claim that it protects sales overall for the industry and not individual titles.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Barcey

The detractors will claim that it protects sales overall for the industry and not individual titles.

Hmm... interesting proposition.
If they actually believe that, it would explain the hissy fit.
And why nobody else has followed the Tor example.

Cartel thinking through and through.

[BillCollins]

But people who buy e-books on Amazon.com have no idea whether the e-book they are purchasing has DRM installed on it or not, right? The sales description does not inform them either way. So they don't base any of their purchasing decisions on whether DRM is present or not.

Just my 3 cents worth.
bill

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by BillCollins

But people who buy e-books on Amazon.com have no idea whether the e-book they are purchasing has DRM installed on it or not, right? The sales description does not inform them either way. So they don't base any of their purchasing decisions on whether DRM is present or not.

Just my 3 cents worth.
bill

As previously mentioned in this thread (post 10), if there is no DRM, the text "Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited" will be included in the product details.

As to how widely known that is, I have no idea.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

To some of us, apparently.

My read is that indie publishers that are effective in driving sales of their titles tend to go DRM-free. And that, like Tor, going DRM-free doesn't seem to be hurting them.

Absent any actual direct pro or con causal data, a rational publisher would take this report as a hint to go DRM-free.

(Bold mine.) That is largely the point that I would like (for obvious reasons) to take away from this. I'm not (yet) convinced that adding DRM actually hurts sales (significantly) of any author that is already selling reasonably well, but even just with the indie data isolated like that, it seems going DRM-free isn't hurting either.

[Barcey]

The other factor that is likely at play here is the benefit of viral (spread the word) versus the ability of DRM to quarantine against it. I believe it is a significant factor in making an author successful.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by gmw

(Bold mine.) That is largely the point that I would like (for obvious reasons) to take away from this. I'm not (yet) convinced that adding DRM actually hurts sales (significantly) of any author that is already selling reasonably well, but even just with the indie data isolated like that, it seems going DRM-free isn't hurting either.

My take on this is that most people don't care that much about DRM. They tend to stay in the basic walled garden of whichever reading device they bought (Amazon - kindle, Apple - iBooks, B&N - nook) and DRM really doesn't cause them a problem. Those who do care, know how to remove DRM from the major book stores.

I suspect that Tor's sales are more a reflection of currently being the number 1 and most active SF&F publisher, as opposed to not using DRM. Also, SF&F readers tend to be a bit more tech savvy as a group than most. I suspect that if you look at the adventure, romance and mystery imprints, then you won't see a big push against DRM.

[BillCollins]

never mind, I now see my post.

[crossi]

Wait until the current crop of ereaders start failing, as all tech does eventually, and all those non-technical people start calling customer service because they can't figure out how to get their old books onto their shiney new devices. They don't complain about or even notice DRM, right up to the point where it becomes a expensive problem for them.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by crossi

Wait until the current crop of ereaders start failing, as all tech does eventually, and all those non-technical people start calling customer service because they can't figure out how to get their old books onto their shiney new devices. They don't complain about or even notice DRM, right up to the point where it becomes a expensive problem for them.

Yes, except that probably most of those people don't care about accessing the books again once they've read them. Probably very few will actually ever care.

[crossi]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Yes, except that probably most of those people don't care about accessing the books again once they've read them. Probably very few will actually ever care.

That seems very strange to me. Up until I got an ereader I'd never lived without multiple overflowing bookcases and boxes of books stacked in corners and under beds. From threads here it seems that that is a common reason why people got ereaders. Unless you reread them there is no point in keeping a read book instead of just tossing it afterwards. If people don't reread what's the point of having your own library as so many here have said they have? I have books I've been rereading since grade school like Burnett's "A Little Princess" and "The Secret Garden". In fact any book that I don't want to reread I consider a wasted purchase. Before my ereader I had 4 bookcases and 29 boxes of "keepers" and I only had that few because I didn't have room for more and had to cull my less favorites.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Yes, except that probably most of those people don't care about accessing the books again once they've read them. Probably very few will actually ever care.

But some people will have a TBR pile of eBooks and want to read those.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by crossi

That seems very strange to me. Up until I got an ereader I'd never lived without multiple overflowing bookcases and boxes of books stacked in corners and under beds.

Me too.
However, I have a cousin who buys books, reads them, and flipps them to the local used book shop and a friend who would buy hardcovers, read them, and donate them to the local library. One reason he loves his kindle is he doesn't have to worry about flipping the books when he's done reading. Both are heavy readers that don't reread.

Takes all kinds.

[speakingtohe]

From two of the charts
Daily $ revenue to authors from bestsellers is 2% to Indies and 37% to Big Five.
Daily Gross Amazon $ Sales of bestsellers is 3% for Indies, and 53% to Big five.
Considering that they say 50% of Indies use DRM that changess the 2% to 1% and the 3% to 1 1/2 % if you are using this data to establish harm caused by DRM.

And by saying

It bears putting a number here and stressing what we are seeing: Self-published authors are now earning nearly 40% of all ebook royalties on the Kindle store. The days of looking at self-publishing as a last option are long gone.

they don't specify whether it is cash $ or number of royalty payments and I suspect it is the latter looking at the other graphs.

Since they say they are using mostly Indie data? I would like to know how many Indie books sold without DRM and the average royalty paid, and the same for Indie DRMed books.

The charts are very pretty but to me they do not seem to add up to what is being stated as fact.

Helen

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Amazon tells you.

"Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited"

Like here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...rd_i=154606011

Originally Posted by avantman42

As previously mentioned in this thread (post 10), if there is no DRM, the text "Simultaneous Device Usage: Unlimited" will be included in the product details.

As to how widely known that is, I have no idea.

It's not consistent. It's possible to have DRM-free books without that simultaneous usage message. For example:

http://www.amazon.com/Halo-First-Str...&keywords=halo