Why are some e-books more expensive then their physical version?

[ficbot]

Well, they COULD control it. They are just choosing not to, and by the time they wise up, it may be too late.

[SHARKuk]

Originally Posted by stargazertony

Think the short answer is "greed".

+1 this ..

[Tarana]

<< What I can't handle though is an ebook being $3 more than the paperback. >>

Has it occurred to you that it is the bookseller that is pricing it? Why should they discount an ebook?

[AnemicOak]

[QuantumIguana]

I went though the top 20 Kindle best sellers for 2013. All of them were cheaper than the paper version. There may be some e-books that are more expensive than the paper version, but that looks to be pretty uncommon these days.

[Tarana]

Anemic Oak, That was the funniest post I have seen in ages. Thanks for the reminder.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Tarana

<< What I can't handle though is an ebook being $3 more than the paperback. >>

Has it occurred to you that it is the bookseller that is pricing it? Why should they discount an ebook?

I think there is a difference between discounting and charging the same myself. There are less expenses with an ebook as you don't have to pay for paper and ink, storage, transportation etc. like with a physical book. And some ebooks aren't very well edited to tell the truth. I don't know what amount the bookseller has to pay to the publisher in order to market a given ebook but I bet that factors into what the buyer is charged. At least when it's not a self-published book. I imagine there are other charges that don't apply to paper books, but then shouldn't it balance out? I mean with each medium has its own charges and so they come out even. I mean if I buy a paper book from Amazon I'm charged s/h costs for it, but there is nothing physical to ship with an ebook. With the reader itself sure, but not with the actual text of a book. So that charge doesn't apply.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Tarana

Anemic Oak, That was the funniest post I have seen in ages. Thanks for the reminder.

Agreed. I didn't realize til I started scrolling back just how long it had been since this thread had been resurrected.

[Ntsimp]

Shouldn't it be "thou wast"?

[calvin-c]

Since the terms are from a time before either grammar or spelling was standardized I don't think there's any 'correct' version. If it gets the meaning across then I think they accepted is as good. Today's professors might disagree but I don't think the original writers would.

[DaveinJapan]

Originally Posted by amoroso

As long as publishers and stores have this mindset, ebooks will remain niche products.

Unless others come along and provide a comparable product at a lower price.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Since the terms are from a time before either grammar or spelling was standardized I don't think there's any 'correct' version. If it gets the meaning across then I think they accepted is as good. Today's professors might disagree but I don't think the original writers would.

No...!
All languages have grammar, even if they don't have spelling, and all grammars follow rules. -st is the standard early modern English second person indicative ending: thou liest, thou goest, thou eatest, etc. (There are irregular forms; thou art, thou shalt, but they are limited to the irregular verbs. Thou *shalst is ungrammatical, as is thou *goet.)

However, "thou wert" is not necessarily incorrect; it is just the subjunctive form.

In modern English, we do still sometimes distinguish between indicative and subjunctive: "I was at the store yesterday" is a statement of fact; "was" is the correct standard form for these kind of statements (i.e., indicative statements). "I were at the store yesterday" is ungrammatical in standard english as a statement of fact, but it's proper in contrary-to-fact subjunctive statements ("If I were at the store yesterday, I would have told you." (but I wasn't at the store). It doesn't have to be in the past: "If I were you" is a contrary to fact statement about the present.

Of course a lot of people don't use subjunctive anymore, so you do hear "If I was at the store yesterday" or "If I was you...".

However, earlier forms of the subjunctive were used in far more situations than they are now, including in statements showing hope (i.e., the optative mood) or doubt or even a statement of belief that a person does not know is true, but believes to be true (or sometimes hopes to be true; see optative).

But "wast" is *probably* better, since it doesn't seem like a form of the subjunctive would apply.

Note that "thou wert" is all over the King James bible ("If thou were pure and upright...").

Anyway, the second line doesn't scan well. Maybe "Arise, thread, long since dead/ Fill thy forum with fear and dread!"

[Barty]

Originally Posted by astra

Publishers want to prove that ebooks is a bad thing.
They want customers keep on shedding loads of money for printed books. Also, they know that they will loose the battle, so they try to make as much money as possible while they can to save for a couple of yachts after they are out of business.

I feel your pain, but I am unable to get too worked up about the publishing industry. I need to save my hate for the much eviler cable/telcos.

[piperclassique]

To loose the battle is to release or let go the battle. To fail to win the battle would be to lose it.
Grammar Nazi.........

[candace964]

Price gouging