Pricing sucks!

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by dhume01

Given your explanation, I think the point that you're referring to there is that ebooks have more utility than a paperback book.

Yes, in many ways they do. For me overseas shipping costs are a major issue for pbooks, and it takes a long time for them to get to me. Also nobody I know here reads English books, so not being able to hand my books to someone else is not a problem. For me there is no downside to using ebooks, except for large format books with high quality print and pictures.

For those who live in the US things are very different and an ebook can be considered to have less utility than a pbook for many. Still they are so convenient. Anyway, it all depends on your personal situation.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Normally, I'd read through the entire thread to be certain I wasn't posting redundantly, but duty bleats and I soon must go:

HarryT:

This is not meant pejoratively, but you seem to be conflating personal value with what has traditionally determined costs before the shell-game of intellectual property: Production. The reason an eBook should always, always be cheaper is because they cost nothing to produce. Beyond whatever post-production was involved in the scanning/proofing/formatting of older books, each sale of an ebook is pure profit. There's literally an endless supply.

Instead of being able to inflate production costs at customers' expense, publishers must now find ways to make electronic customers pay even more to cover losses. It's a short-sighted solution perhaps championed by people close to retirement who don't have to worry about what happens when their companies lose customers permanently.

And the payoff is that we have a less literate society, in which even fewer people are exposed to important and rewarding books, because, out of the world's collective library, the paltry number of tomes available as carefully done ebooks are also obscenely overpriced.

And in the States, at least, the public library's a bad solution so far because (i) the limited number of eBook copies makes checkout periods impractical for any challenging text and (ii) the eBook selection contains very, very little of value. Visiting the eBook site of the New York Public Library is worse than walking into the commercial bookstore at an airport. Whereas the physical libraries are filled with rare and important books -- all available for several months at a time.

Of course, that's all changing now, and those who need to read Michelet's The Insect in Adams's translation and illustrated by Giacomelli, or find Alfred Jarry's Messalina in the Atlas Press edition, would be forced to buy physical copies new, track them down used for a premium, or sit empty-palmed and wonder what those books are like.

(You can find the extremely flawed public version of the first book here and a sampling of Atlas books here, though Messalina and others have remained OOP for years -- I covet my copy of Max Jacob's The Dice Cup.)

Think of the physical books of the past -- gilded-paged, leather-bound, cover-engraved, filled with drop caps and illustrations so sharp and etched they seem to be line-drawn by a draftsman's pen -- and consider their value as objects against a file on your eReader, a file which can be reproduced endlessly by the publisher and not at all by the owner, even though the very device on which you read your file will stop working years (and perhaps centuries) before the physical book disintegrates.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Because my house became full of books - double-stacked shelves on every available wall. To buy more books I would have had to buy a larger house. For me personally, eBooks are worth FAR more than paper books, because I can store an essentially unlimited number of them on an external drive the size of a pack of playing cards. Naturally I remove the DRM as soon as I buy a book (and I typically buy 4 or 5 books a week).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

This is not meant pejoratively, but you seem to be conflating personal value with what has traditionally determined costs before the shell-game of intellectual property: Production. The reason an eBook should always, always be cheaper is because they cost nothing to produce.

Other than the fact the you appear to believe that server farms cost nothing to run (a false assumption), there are other factors that you are failing to take into account, such as the fact that, within the EU, eBooks have, by law, to be subject to the standard rate of VAT for each country, whereas paper books can be discounted. Thus, in the UK, for example, paper books are zero rated for VAT, whereas eBooks are subject to VAT at 20%. When an eBook is priced the same as a paper book in the UK it is actually only 83% of the price, as far as the underlying cost is concerned.

[DiapDealer]

I don't care about productions costs of books vs ebooks. I didn't care about the production costs of books before ebooks came along. I pay for a collection of words that I want to read. Always have. (I never cared about the envelope that letters sent to me were delivered in either) The words are the only thing that interest (hold any value for) me. I've never resold a book in my life (though I've given away plenty—and lost even more along the way).

So I really don't give two hoots about the production costs that are involved in getting those words in front of my eyes, regardless of the medium. I'm willing to pay AS MUCH for my ebooks as I am for the cheapest in-print (brand-new, not used, not on sale promotionally) physical copy of the same book. Possibly more for the added benefit of not having to drag my ass to the bookstore, or wait 4-5 days for delivery—not to mention the shipping costs saved. The transition from physical to digital hasn't reduced the value of those words I want to read. Not one bit. The paper and the binding meant/mean nothing to me—which should be rather obvious considering I've made a wholesale switch to ebooks.

Even if all ebooks were the EXACT SAME price as their physical counterparts (in this transitional publishing period we appear to be in), I can't see how that would contribute to the end of the world or a reduction in literacy. And in fact, ebooks have proven to be consistently (on average) still cheaper than their physical counterparts.

So it's been a "Very Special Reader Christmas" every day, for the past couple of years for me. I'm saving money on every single book I purchase (by not having to go the dead-tree route). The fact that someone is making a killing off of the bargain I'm getting doesn't interest me in the least.

[HarryT]

Very well said, DD. I agree with every word that you say.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Other than the fact the you appear to believe that server farms cost nothing to run (a false assumption)

Unfortunately for you, the false assumption is yours: That server costs impact primarily on publishers as opposed to sellers. How exactly is the price fixing dealt with by Amazon created by the expense of publishers' servers, and how was having an online bookstore ever an incredible expense for publishers before the advent of eBooks? Most of the publishers I've dealt with talk about how much easier and cheaper online sales are -- it's the unpopularity of physical books that makes them complain.

Things are entirely the opposite of what you're suggesting: Amazon is willing to bring down pricing -- has indeed beseeched publishers to do so -- regardless of their server costs, as is and has Google. It's the publishers who create the artificial hike.

The cost of a server farm for content versus the costs of warehouses, manufacturing, etc.? Not even close in terms of expense. Ask Jude of Head-fi if he'd be willing to take down his servers and start a business dependent on physical manufacturing and warehousing. See what he says about that profit model versus the one he has now.

There are other factors that you are failing to take into account, such as the fact that, within the EU, eBooks have, by law, to be subject to the standard rate of VAT for each country, whereas paper books can be discounted. Thus, in the UK, for example, paper books are zero rated for VAT, whereas eBooks are subject to VAT at 20%. . . .

Even if we were talking about a true 20% price increase, and even if it applied within the States (the locus of the original OP's complaint), he and others are not talking about an increase that small (relatively), nor does it approach the price difference between virtual and physical production and storage.

So far, you have not made a convincing argument for what seems a somewhat solipsistic idea: that, because eBooks books are of greater value to you, personally, publishers should be able to fix and increase eBook prices wherever they like.

I'm an editor who deals with professional writers (and have been one in the past), and I see what has been happening to those who have made a living from their books for years, so I have the modicum of an inkling of a clue where publishers' profits are actually going. Those writers who are not incredibly successful but have followings have done far better dealing with Amazon and other vendors directly than through the boardroom entities that were once their publishers. I'd love to be in the room when someone told [edit: removed names of actual writers in order not to raise issues] about the necessary cost of books from HarperCollins (with whom I've published as well, BTW). Some of the people I knew are still with HC, but I doubt they wish they were.

[Greg_E]

It's only a kick butt bunny story until the end, then it is really sad (based on the animation). Plague Dogs was very similar and you may want to put it on your list too. (again based on the animation)

It's funny, once upon a time the publishers were saying that the reason school text books were so expensive was the cost of the short printing runs... Now that there are some in ebook they are saying the cost of the book (printed or electronic) is because of the cost of the information. Wish they would get their story straight!

[BeccaPrice]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Think of the physical books of the past -- gilded-paged, leather-bound, cover-engraved, filled with drop caps and illustrations so sharp and etched they seem to be line-drawn by a draftsman's pen -- and consider their value as objects against a file on your eReader, a file which can be reproduced endlessly by the publisher and not at all by the owner, even though the very device on which you read your file will stop working years (and perhaps centuries) before the physical book disintegrates.

yes, a beautifully made book is a thing of joy. But my library is filled with cheap paperback SF and mysteries that I can practically hear disintegrating. They're not beautifully made, were never made to last beyond a few readings, but have ripping good stories in them. I have a few beautiful books in my library, but I rarely take them out to cherish them. I have a library filled with books that I can, and do, re-read. And yes, I prefer ereading, because the books will last as long as my computer does, and as long as I continue to back them up as I change computers. Calibre is a thing of joy.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Other than the fact the you appear to believe that server farms cost nothing to run (a false assumption), there are other factors that you are failing to take into account, such as the fact that, within the EU, eBooks have, by law, to be subject to the standard rate of VAT for each country, whereas paper books can be discounted. Thus, in the UK, for example, paper books are zero rated for VAT, whereas eBooks are subject to VAT at 20%. When an eBook is priced the same as a paper book in the UK it is actually only 83% of the price, as far as the underlying cost is concerned.

[nitpick] Because of the interesting way non-EU companies have to register for EU VAT, Amazon only has to charge 15% VAT on the ebooks it sells anywhere inside the EU.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

yes, a beautifully made book is a thing of joy. But my library is filled with cheap paperback SF and mysteries that I can practically hear disintegrating. . . .

But it isn't a question of which format you prefer. It's a question of which is harder and costlier to produce, and why the easier and less expensive format should be priced higher than the other. Whether we prefer a new format or not, that preference (and the law of supply and demand) shouldn't be conflated with the desperate and arbitrary practice of price fixing.

[leebase]

Volume of sales still affect prices. If I were commissioned to write a book....for one copy...I would have to charge all I desired to make for that one copy. Let's say I desired 100,000 dollars. The cost of the ebook or paper printing are immaterial.

If I could find two buyers, I'd halve the price to $50,000 each.

It would never occur to me to price the two copies at the cost it would take to send an email.

I have to feel I have a reasonable chance to make money for me to do work....else I will spend my time on other things that are more likely to make me money. It would help if folks would consider the cost of books as their way of incentivizing production of the books that bring them such joy.

Even ebooks don't just magically appear....even when the paper book already exists. Ere are all manner of rights issues, production, marketing, scheduling. And for what? To sell 500 copies a year for a backlist print? And, meanwhile, competing against sales of new and profitable titles?

If one wants the backlist to come out....then be willing to reward the effort,

Lee

[Prestidigitweeze]

What you seem to be offering is the standard rationale for the high prices in a publisher's back-catalog. That has been been one reason (traditionally) for inflated pricing, but the cost of the book also reflected the superior physical quality of the editions, which were meant to be archival and often bespoke physical rarity due to the passing of time and limited demand. Those who craved Donner's edition of the complete works of Thomas Lovell Beddoes had to be willing to part with serious shekels, but I dispute the reason for that as having been legitimate. I dispute it even more now, when the edition is not to be published physically and no living writer needs to be paid.

You may entertain any desires you like in terms of pricing a single book, but if you're not careful, you're likely to come off as a greedy ebay lunatic. If you want to charge a higher price, then you can again create a limited physical edition with one-time features. I actually have friends who do this. One of them has just gone to Ireland to work on a project that involves their etching the poems into metal, printing them that way on fine paper, and the artist doing the same. They can charge more for those books because they are a form of original artwork. Whereas if they were simply reproduced as an electronic file, the cost to buyers would be ridiculous and no one would pay.

Publishers have a responsibility to consider the market realistically. I would also argue that the excitement of publishing is in making worthwhile books available to as many readers as possible. I'm currently an editor for a magazine which offers a color printed perfect-bound version, a mobi version (though that's about to be discontinued because the format doesn't quite work) and an online version. The online version is free, the printed version is most expensive and the mobi version (soon to be replaced by another format) was about a dollar a copy. Our costs are reflected in the pricing, and that is the fair thing to do.

[DiapDealer]

But what would possess them to drastically lower the price of a product that consumers have clearly shown they're more than willing to buy at the current prices? I still conclude that digitizing the product hasn't changed its overall value to me one bit. I guess it all comes down to what, exactly, you think the product is. And as I mentioned earlier... for me, the product has always been: cleverly arranged words that elicit emotional/intellectual responses.

Sure, I wish ebooks cost less (I wish everything cost less). And there's no question that publishers have buku room to lower the prices—if they were of a mind to throw money away or were just plain brain damaged—but the fact remains that I still read more for less money than I did before ebooks came along. So how can I feel outraged at a system that's consistently saving me money? I feel I've been treated more than fairly (I'm strictly speaking of pricing here... geo-restrictions and drm are another story).

[leebase]

Realistically, it is likely unprofitable to spend time and money publishing back catalogs. We won't have that problem in the future with ebooks that were released when a book first hits the market.

But for now, there are two problems. Either the expectation of low sales or high sales. Low sales is self explanatory....few copies times a small price simply isn't worth it.

Lots of sales at a low price takes money away from higher margin new books.

That's why the used book bin will never be the strike price for an ebook. If you want an ebook, the new paperback price is likely the lowest price we'll ever see. And then only as long as paper back books remain a significant market.

If I spend 15 hours reading a 20 year old novel, I'm just as entertained as reading a new novel for 15 hours. Why should I presume to pay less?

Lee

[DustyDisks]

Originally Posted by leebase

Realistically, it is likely unprofitable to spend time and money publishing back catalogs. We won't have that problem in the future with ebooks that were released when a book first hits the market.

But for now, there are two problems. Either the expectation of low sales or high sales. Low sales is self explanatory....few copies times a small price simply isn't worth it.

Lots of sales at a low price takes money away from higher margin new books.

That's why the used book bin will never be the strike price for an ebook. If you want an ebook, the new paperback price is likely the lowest price we'll ever see. And then only as long as paper back books remain a significant market.

If I spend 15 hours reading a 20 year old novel, I'm just as entertained as reading a new novel for 15 hours. Why should I presume to pay less?

Lee

Understand the points.

It just would be a shame to see the older out of print books not converted, that may still have restrictions on them. Methinks there may be a chance if not converted, they maybe lost in time, in several ways. I have several on my mental list that I would love to get my hands on, the real books or at least in e format.