Charlie Stross: Publishers "Cutting their own throats"

[carld]

Originally Posted by taustin

Speaking of axes to grind, have you ever considered that the publishers just might, possibly, on a bad day, have some incentive to slightly exaggerate their financial woes? I mean, really, what could they possibly gain by convincing both the buying public and the writers they buy from that they need to raise prices (which is what's happening on ebooks, make no mistake) and lower royalties?

Actually, I think they're lying through their teeth. Also, there's not really any need to be sarcastic.

Originally Posted by taustin

You find the publishers' claims more credible.

I never said I find the publisher's claims credible, exactly the opposite in fact.

Originally Posted by taustin

I find Charlie's (and Charlie) more credible. Simple as that.

Err, unless I'm completely misreading it, isn't HE the one who agrees with publishers that ebooks are just as expensive to produce as paperbooks?

To quote Stonetools from upthread:

Originally Posted by stonetools

Well, Charles Stross says that ebooks coist almost as much to produce as pbooks,

Now I'm all confused.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by taustin

According to industry indisders (including the very Charlie Stross in the subject line), the publisher invests about as many man-hours in a book as the author does - hundreds or thousands. And the price of putting ink on paper and getting the finished product to the store shelf is about 10% of the total cover price. Add in a production process that isn't, as you note, optomized for ebook production, and the book version may actually cost more to produce and sell than the paper version (though it shoudn't - it should literally be one or two extra mouse clicks).

How did you arrive at the 10%?
I googled printing costs and found this:

Paperback - up to 7.5x 9.25
$1.28 / unit + $0.02 per page (minimum $3.50 per unit)

Paperback over 7.5x9.25
$1.85 per unit + $0.027 per page (minimum $4.75 per unit)

Hardcover (no dust jacket)
$8.50 per unit + $0.02 per page

Hardcover (jacketed)
$10.75 per unit + $0.02 per page

So a 250 page small paperback would cost $6.28 per book (just for printing). The publisher would get a better price, but if they actually get $1 per book (10% of a $10 book) it means that printers are ripping off indie authors who want to self publish in a big way.

If we assume that all the books are sold, and ignore shipping and storage costs, the only way for the ebook to cost more than the pbook is if the publisher pays someone for the format conversion of one file more than $1 per printed book. And if the printer has a 2000 books minimum like the one I linked to, that means more than $2000 for 1 format shift. While the author earns $5000 (if they receive 25%) for writing it.

Does this sound right to you?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by carld

Err, unless I'm completely misreading it, isn't HE the one who agrees with publishers that ebooks are just as expensive to produce as paperbooks?

To quote Stonetools from upthread:

Now I'm all confused.

Well actually reading the blog and comments, he seems to say exactly the opposite, that there are significant pBook only costs, that amount to about half of the publisher's overall costs for the title.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by teh603

Wait, how are the costs of printing and shipping only 10~20% of the cost of a printed book?

Take the raw document, run it through a data processing engine like Smashwords and Bookie Jar have, and then five or ten minutes later you have ebooks in all major formats and probably the minor ones as well. What you're *not* having to pay for is paper, ink, people to run the printing machines, amortization on those printing machines, glue, the guy who runs the binding machine, amortization on the binding machine, the guy who packs the books into shipping cartons, the shipping cartons themselves, each stage of shipping (and believe me, that can add up), customs fees if you print overseas, and a hella lot of other stuff.

Stuff that adds up quickly. Now, where are your numbers?

My point is that whatever the print costs are, they play a small role in determining the price of a book- and did so long before there even was an Internet. When the book comes out, who the author is, whether its hardcover, trade paperback , or MMPB-all those play a far bigger role.

[stonetools]

Some clarification on charles Stross's views on the costing of printing :

15:
Rick: of the steps I outline in commercial genre fiction publishing, just three (14-16 inclusive) relate to publishing books on paper. The rest are still needed for ebooks.

This is why the folks who think that moving production towards ebooks will drive costs down are so wrong.

A print run of 5000 hardbacks ... each book weighs around 600 grams, but of that, only around 400 grams is paper. So we're talking about 2.5 tons of processed wood pulp. Paper simply isn't that expensive. My understanding is that the physical process of buying the paper and printing those book blocks will cost around $2-3 per unit, or around $10-15,000 ... roughly as much as the other production costs, and the author's advance.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by teh603

Wait, how are the costs of printing and shipping only 10~20% of the cost of a printed book?

Take the raw document, run it through a data processing engine like Smashwords and Bookie Jar have, and then five or ten minutes later you have ebooks in all major formats and probably the minor ones as well.

One of Stross' points is that a manuscript is not a book. The original draft manuscript needs editing, proofreading, and formatting--if the author does these herself, she's absorbing those production costs; a publishing company has to pay out of pocket for them. It needs a bookcover; ditto. It needs an ISBN number. If it's being published by someone other than the author, it has to be worked into their schedule and advertising system; more costs there. It needs a blurb, the bit next to the book in ebook stores, or on the back cover for print books, to give potential buyers a reason to fork over their money. (Many authors are atrocious at writing their own blurbs. They know too much about the book to figure out what's appealing to someone who hasn't already read it.)

Believing that the hour or so it takes to format-for-Smashwords is the complete production time misses a lot of the work that should be going on between "I have a finished story" and "this is ready to sell to strangers."

Editing's top of the list, with bookcover a close second; there's a lot of rough drafts on Smashwords. Because of this, I don't buy anything there without sampling it, unless I know I love everything that author writes. (Which IMHO counts as sampling--I already know they write things I'm happy to read.)

Formatting's also part of that. While an experienced desktop publisher can convert for Smashwords in an hour or two, the first time will probably take quite a bit longer--and any complicated book will also take longer. Converting for sales in other stores takes more time, and not everyone will be happy with Smashwords' feeds to other stores.

Formatting for print, even print-on-demand, is a *lot* more work. For that, you have to start dealing with fonts, line heights, kerning, and problems with orphan words on pages. And high-resolution art for the cover; an 850x550 pixel image won't work.

What you're *not* having to pay for is paper, ink, people to run the printing machines, amortization on those printing machines, glue, the guy who runs the binding machine, amortization on the binding machine, the guy who packs the books into shipping cartons, the shipping cartons themselves, each stage of shipping (and believe me, that can add up), customs fees if you print overseas, and a hella lot of other stuff.

Nor the accounting that keeps track of all those things. I agree that the publishers' blithe statements that the print-and-ship part is 10-20% of book costs are suspect--maybe that's "per full-price hardcover with a print run of over 20,000." (They very carefully don't mention print run sizes when they talk about costs.) They also very carefully never discuss MMPB production costs, where the editing is already done and the marketing is minimal.

But those costs don't mean that the other parts are minor; most of the time (which is paid time for *someone*) involved in mainstream publishing happens spread out over many months before it ever hits paper.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Insalata

You’re probably right, but I’d rather see ebooks replace paperbacks

They'll probably largely replace paperbacks, too. But hard backs are a major part of publishers' profits, so that matters more for this discussion.

Originally Posted by Insalata

, and publishers offering a hardback version printed on decent paper, and properly bound instead of the current hardbacks that are just as cheaply and badly made as most paperbacks. If a hardback was a beautiful thing, lovely to hold and to look at, people might be less unhappy about paying a higher price.

Actually, in the long run, I expect we'll see books stores survive in part on small, relatively inexepnsive print on demand machines. Pick out a book, feed in your credit card, and by the time you're done with your Starbucks latte, your books is ready.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by carld

Actually, I think they're lying through their teeth. Also, there's not really any need to be sarcastic.




I never said I find the publisher's claims credible, exactly the opposite in fact.



Err, unless I'm completely misreading it, isn't HE the one who agrees with publishers that ebooks are just as expensive to produce as paperbooks?

To quote Stonetools from upthread:



Now I'm all confused.

Quoting is messed up, but you're equating "almost as expensive" with "as espensive," and they aren't the same. As for being sarcastic, that's how I get when you get for insulting award winning authors.

At this point, I can't tell what you're actually disagreeing with.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

How did you arrive at the 10%?
I googled printing costs and found this:

Looks like a vanity press to me. While not all vanity presses are outright scams, I am not inclined to take anything from anyone who charges authors to publish instead of paying them at face value.

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

So a 250 page small paperback would cost $6.28 per book (just for printing). The publisher would get a better price, but if they actually get $1 per book (10% of a $10 book) it means that printers are ripping off indie authors who want to self publish in a big way.

That would mean exactly that, yes. That is the most notable characteristic of the vanity press industry, in fact.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by stonetools

My point is that whatever the print costs are, they play a small role in determining the price of a book- and did so long before there even was an Internet. When the book comes out, who the author is, whether its hardcover, trade paperback , or MMPB-all those play a far bigger role.

That, I agree with entirely. The real rule is "what the market will bear."

[carld]

Originally Posted by taustin

Quoting is messed up, but you're equating "almost as expensive" with "as espensive," and they aren't the same. As for being sarcastic, that's how I get when you get for insulting award winning authors.

At this point, I can't tell what you're actually disagreeing with.

I didn't insult anyone except the publishers (and I still believe that the publishers are lying about publishing costs), and if you can't tell what I'm disagreeing with then you aren't reading my posts. Your own post made claims that I said things that I didn't say.

Anyway, this is veering into the personal insult territory, so I'm done with it.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by carld

I didn't insult anyone except the publishers (and I still believe that the publishers are lying about publishing costs), and if you can't tell what I'm disagreeing with then you aren't reading my posts. Your own post made claims that I said things that I didn't say.

Anyway, this is veering into the personal insult territory, so I'm done with it.

My mistake. It was JeremyR who started the insults.

And since it has become quite apparent that nobody - including me - has had anything new to say on this subject since some time yesterday, and nobody - including me - will willing to consider much of anything that disagrees with their preconceived notions, I've been done with this for some time, too.

You seem to be arguing with me, but you keep saying you agree with me. I really can't figure out what your point is. Nor do I much care any more. Hell, I dont' much care what my point is any more.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by taustin

Sounds like you should be in the business of turning existing books in to ebooks. You'll make a fortune. Seriously, dude, you should go in to that business. If you're right, you'll do well.

Dude, take a look at the Patricia Clarke library here. All done for free by MR people. I did the scan/proof for The Crystal Button (Crutledge did the e-book type formatting. I released on PG Australia in HTML.)

I've done others. Like I said, it ain't rocket science. Now show me the publisher willing to cough up $500-800 for a well-proofed novel/short story anthology and I'm in business. Funny, I don't see anybody....

[BillSmithBooks]

The relative cost of physical production, warehousing and distribution depends greatly to whom the publisher is speaking.

When they are speaking to authors, it is a HUGE cost for them.

When they are defending their pricing on ebooks, it is a tiny, insignificant part of the cost.

Publishers (and other big media companies) lie..."exaggerate" if you'd like to be charitable. We know that. Consider the scandal about discrepencies in ebook royalty sales reports that went whirling around writers' blogs a couple of months ago.

There is no debating the point: ebooks do NOT cost as much to produce as ebooks, as evidenced by the original ebooks by established pro authors like Mike Stackpole, Konrath, Dean Wesley Smith and many, many others,

But then again, none of the above authors has office space in the middle of Manhattan and huge teams of high-salaried executives to pay. None of them buy co-op space in stores or have sales reps pounding the pavement, and yes, none of them have to deal with printing, warehousing, distribution and returns...

But I believe Charlie Stross is right -- one way for publishers to retain some control over their destiny is to go DRM free and sell direct to readers.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Dude, take a look at the Patricia Clarke library here. All done for free by MR people. I did the scan/proof for The Crystal Button (Crutledge did the e-book type formatting. I released on PG Australia in HTML.)

I've done others. Like I said, it ain't rocket science. Now show me the publisher willing to cough up $500-800 for a well-proofed novel/short story anthology and I'm in business. Funny, I don't see anybody....

Have you actually offered your services to any publishers??? And by your own numbers (24 hours/book) then an individual could be expected to do around 80 books per year (for 8hr day, 5 day week, 48 week year) so say we just look at a million books needing OCR etc, that needs 12,500 man years of work... and there's a lot more books waiting conversion to e-format than that... may not be rocket science but it does require people capable of reading and proofing to do the work and they aren't available at the moment... it's also a mind-numbingly boring job that tends to ruin any enjoyment in the work being dealt with. It's one thing doing a few to get some PD work out in a different form but quite another if you end up doing it full time...