Death of the agency model?

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by sbroome

I think he meant to say "with all due respect" in a Talledega Nights sort of way.

Ahhhh! The whole "No disrespect but..." syndrome. There's a saying around here: "Whenever someone says 'No disrespect but...' you know someone is about to get disrespected."

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by johnnyb

I don't want this to sound rude, but lowering your words-per-day might result in higher income-per-day thus adjusting the ratio in favor of more higher priced books (some of them maybe better quality ones)...
I cannot understand what makes people read 20k words of fiction every day, maybe they should consider reading more complex instead of just more books... I think this is as bad as watching tv and misses the point of reading entirely...

Really? You read any quantum physics texts lately?

Reading is a human skill. Half of people therefore are below average at it, whether in comprehension, or speed, etc. If you can only manage 20K words in a day, that may well include you.

Or, you shouldn't project your own lack of ability onto others - especially at a site for keen readers where there will be a disproportionate percentage of more talented readers compared to the general population.

[Blue Tyson]

Originally Posted by crossi

No one buys something just because it's cheap. But they might refrain from buying something just because they feel its over priced. Sometimes the pleasure of having something is not worth the displeasure of feeling overcharged.

Sure they do.

I bought a low-fat berry yoghurt the other day because it was on sale and cheaper than the other one.

So you are wrong.

Bought two Joan Slonczewski books because they were in a 99c each epub/mobi DRM free double format pack yesterday. Never would buy them at a standard price.

So wrong again.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Ahhhh! The whole "No disrespect but..." syndrome. There's a saying around here: "Whenever someone says 'No disrespect but...' you know someone is about to get disrespected."

Frankly, I just don't know whether I agree with you. And to be truthful . . .

[plib]

Originally Posted by johnnyb

I don't want this to sound rude, but lowering your words-per-day might result in higher income-per-day thus adjusting the ratio in favor of more higher priced books (some of them maybe better quality ones)...
I cannot understand what makes people read 20k words of fiction every day, maybe they should consider reading more complex instead of just more books... I think this is as bad as watching tv and misses the point of reading entirely...

I don't want this to sound rude, but strictly speaking I think it should be "in favor of higher priced books" or "in favor of more high priced books".

[crossi]

Someone who is interested in buying something might be pushed over the buy/not buy divide by a good price but someone who hated yogurt would not likely buy even if they were on sale or even free. Someone without a pet is unlikely to buy a case of dog food no matter how low the price. Price is just the deciding factor not the SOLE factor.

I'm trying to imagine someone who gagged at the thought of eating yogurt filling their shopping cart with it just because it was on sale. Strange picture.

I do admit that people who first get an ereader sometimes do go a bit crazy and start downloading a ton of freebies at first until they realize they are filling their readers with a lot of books they have no intention or interest in ever reading.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by crossi

Someone who is interested in buying something might be pushed over the buy/not buy divide by a good price but someone who hated yogurt would not likely buy even if they were on sale or even free. Someone without a pet is unlikely to buy a case of dog food no matter how low the price. Price is just the deciding factor not the SOLE factor.

I'm trying to imagine someone who gagged at the thought of eating yogurt filling their shopping cart with it just because it was on sale. Strange picture.

I do admit that people who first get an ereader sometimes do go a bit crazy and start downloading a ton of freebies at first until they realize they are filling their readers with a lot of books they have no intention or interest in ever reading.

Many people who've paid for cable TV want to get their money's worth by watching whatever's on TV when they get home, even if they hate the show. People have made Walmart the largest retailer on Earth even though it's a terrible store, because of price. Price moves closer to being a sole deciding factor the less extra money you have.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by sbroome

Many people who've paid for cable TV want to get their money's worth by watching whatever's on TV when they get home, even if they hate the show. People have made Walmart the largest retailer on Earth even though it's a terrible store, because of price. Price moves closer to being a sole deciding factor the less extra money you have.

Actually, I know a people who are extremely well off and will buy almost everything that has been sharply reduced in price. And that really is the only reason they buy that stuff -- not because they wanted it in the first place. One guy buys a ton of useless items and then his head hurts from deciding who he can offload all of these things onto as "gifts".

I could never understand this. If I don't want something I will never buy it, no matter how cheap it is. (it would at least make sense if you think you could easily resell the item for a higher price).

[Kitabi]

IMHO it is really up to the publisher how they want to price their books. The issue is that there is no market for used ebooks due to technical constraints/willingness issues and there is no willingness to try a subscription model to replace it.

Most people unwilling to pay above a particular price point for ebooks are people who get/got books from the used market or the libraries or the hand me down/swap network in the DTB world. By removing and/or restricting these options and not offering an alternative, the publishers have created this growing pool of dissatisfied readers.

Bottomline: A publisher is free to charge whatever it thinks the market would pay for a new book but by removing or restricting secondary means of access they have opened up a hole which is being filled by piracy or complaints depending on the user.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by Kitabi

IMHO it is really up to the publisher how they want to price their books. The issue is that there is no market for used ebooks due to technical constraints/willingness issues and there is no willingness to try a subscription model to replace it.

Most people unwilling to pay above a particular price point for ebooks are people who get/got books from the used market or the libraries or the hand me down/swap network in the DTB world. By removing and/or restricting these options and not offering an alternative, the publishers have created this growing pool of dissatisfied readers.

Bottomline: A publisher is free to charge whatever it thinks the market would pay for a new book but by removing or restricting secondary means of access they have opened up a hole which is being filled by piracy or complaints depending on the user.

Agreed. As I tell my extremely pro-copyright husband all the time: They can charge whatever they want...but that doesn't mean I'm going to buy it. They can keep it and bemoan pirates all they want...when they are destroying their own market.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Actually, I know a people who are extremely well off and will buy almost everything that has been sharply reduced in price. And that really is the only reason they buy that stuff -- not because they wanted it in the first place. One guy buys a ton of useless items and then his head hurts from deciding who he can offload all of these things onto as "gifts".

My sister phones me and tells me how much money she's "saved" in a day out shopping. When she says she's "saved £20", what she actually means is that she's spent £100 (or whatever) .

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by scrapking

Several in this thread have expressed that the resale value of used books factors into their decision to buy paper books over e-books, when the price of each is close.

Where do you guys sell your used books?

When I was still purchasing hardcovers, I would resell them on Amazon. It worked out quite well, with a book costing perhaps $17 new selling for $14 used. Off course this was mainstream best-seller fluff, not esoteric and deep tomes. Most of those I'd hold on to for reference anyway.

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

Wait a minute, publishers make an asinine business decision, and I'm supposed to feel sorry for them? Screw that, they can either figure out a way to deliver a product at a price point that the consumer wants (in sufficient volume to make a profit), or they can go out of business.

Gosh no, you don't have to feel sorry for them, it's just that if they have to keep paying these advances, they will set their prices accordingly. And, unfortunately for folks like you and me, there are ebook shoppers who are willing to pay higher prices, enough to maximize the profit of the supply meets demand curve at a higher price than we'd like to pay.

Two things need to happen to have the pricing fall naturally: advances need to start coming down, and the reading market needs to become more price resistant.

The first may be happening gradually. The big advance is usually a bidding move to attract or keep a best-selling author. But with overall profitability seemingly starting to slide, I think these are going to start falling by necessity. After all, even with a best selling author, if you lose $2 on every book you aren't going to "make it up on volume."

Second, if you as a reader feel that X is too high a price to pay for an ebook, then don't pay it. The only way to bring prices lower is by not buying it when it's higher. Getting rid of the collusionary agency pricing will probably help here.

Just one of two won't solve the problem, in my opinion.

Lower advances + no reader resistance = "charging what the market will bear" = more profit for publishers.

Reader resistance + no lower advances = publisher losses = bankruptcy.

Lower advances + reader resistance = lower prices = new sweet spot = new lower price to complain about ("$7.99!!! What greed! I'll never pay over $4.99 for a book!")

[stonetools]

The latest:

The Justice Department is nearing a settlement with publishers over allegations of ebook pricing, but finalizing the deal is proving problematic as Apple and two publishers are balking at the terms of the deal. Amazon will be permitted to once again discount ebooks to its customers as a result.

Penguin Group and Macmillian have joined Apple in resisting the settlement, the Wall Street Journal reports. The deal voids the contracts Apple signed with publishers in 2010, and permits a return to "wholesale pricing", where the retailer determines the price.

LINK


The article goes on to say that Apple might leave the ebook business altogether if agency pricing goes.The settlement also talks of " a "cooling off" period before the publishers could continue existing deals with retailers."

What does all this mean? Blamed if I know. I guess we have to wait a few more weeks.

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by BuddyBoy

Gosh no, you don't have to feel sorry for them, it's just that if they have to keep paying these advances, they will set their prices accordingly. And, unfortunately for folks like you and me, there are ebook shoppers who are willing to pay higher prices, enough to maximize the profit of the supply meets demand curve at a higher price than we'd like to pay.

Two things need to happen to have the pricing fall naturally: advances need to start coming down, and the reading market needs to become more price resistant.

The first may be happening gradually. The big advance is usually a bidding move to attract or keep a best-selling author. But with overall profitability seemingly starting to slide, I think these are going to start falling by necessity. After all, even with a best selling author, if you lose $2 on every book you aren't going to "make it up on volume."

Second, if you as a reader feel that X is too high a price to pay for an ebook, then don't pay it. The only way to bring prices lower is by not buying it when it's higher. Getting rid of the collusionary agency pricing will probably help here.

Just one of two won't solve the problem, in my opinion.

Lower advances + no reader resistance = "charging what the market will bear" = more profit for publishers.

Reader resistance + no lower advances = publisher losses = bankruptcy.

Lower advances + reader resistance = lower prices = new sweet spot = new lower price to complain about ("$7.99!!! What greed! I'll never pay over $4.99 for a book!")

This is a bit too simple.
Authors and agents get a vote , too. You may not like it that James Patterson gets big advances, but he gets them because lots of people buy his books.
Also, subject matter gets a vote. If you are doing a book on the fishing industry,or warfare in the Congo, the author needs time and resources to investigate that