Pricing the way it shouldn't be.

[Wetdogeared]

I usually anxiously await new releases from author Peter Robinson and his Inspector Banks series.

At these current prices (available from Canada), I can wait:

Sony's Reader Store. $18.19
Kobobooks. $15.99
Amazon Kindle. $14.29

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by Wetdogeared

I usually anxiously await new releases from author Peter Robinson and his Inspector Banks series.

At these current prices (available from Canada), I can wait:

Sony's Reader Store. $18.19
Kobobooks. $15.99
Amazon Kindle. $14.29

I'd wait too, though in fairness, it is currently in hardcover, so I wouldn't be expecting paperback-level prices yet anyway. I'd think something like $12.99 would be appropriate at the moment - dropping to $6.99 when the paperback is available.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

I'd wait too, though in fairness, it is currently in hardcover, so I wouldn't be expecting paperback-level prices yet anyway. I'd think something like $12.99 would be appropriate at the moment - dropping to $6.99 when the paperback is available.

I also have no particular objection to high pricing when first released, I'm used to ignoring books when only the hardback is released. What I do object to is that all of his backlist books are a fixed $7.99, or about twice what you can get the paperbacks for.

A more egregious example is the pricing of Agatha Christie eBooks.
The Moving Finger was first published 68 years ago. It has, by any conceivable measure, covered its costs. It, along with a bunch of other Christie works, are a fixed $6.99. You could pick it up for a buck or two at any secondhand bookstore.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

A more egregious example is the pricing of Agatha Christie eBooks. The Moving Finger was first published 68 years ago. It has, by any conceivable measure, covered its costs.

That's nice, but prices aren't indexed to costs. They're based on demand and other factors.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

It, along with a bunch of other Christie works, are a fixed $6.99. You could pick it up for a buck or two at any secondhand bookstore.

Used is not a valid price comparison.

Not that price comparisons ought to matter, really. The better question is whether the price matches what customers are willing to pay. If they are, then the price is justified. If they aren't, the publisher will feel market pressures to reduce the price.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

That's nice, but prices aren't indexed to costs. They're based on demand and other factors.

That was added specifically to head off the argument that is usually made when complaining about prices, that eBooks can't be made very cheap because of all the upfront costs that have to be covered.

Used is not a valid price comparison.

Really, why not? Is it where I would be buying the books instead.
None of the factors that would make one prefer a new book (better condition, better resale value) apply to eBooks.
It is perfectly realistic when looking at a ~70 year old, huge volume selling book to say that the competition for this edition is a used book.

Not that price comparisons ought to matter, really. The better question is whether the price matches what customers are willing to pay. If they are, then the price is justified. If they aren't, the publisher will feel market pressures to reduce the price.

With any normal product, it would be retailers (who actually deal with customers, after all) who would react to market needs. Here, they can't.

[jehane]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

A more egregious example is the pricing of Agatha Christie eBooks.
The Moving Finger was first published 68 years ago. It has, by any conceivable measure, covered its costs. It, along with a bunch of other Christie works, are a fixed $6.99. You could pick it up for a buck or two at any secondhand bookstore.

Most of them are available for 5.99USD here. I find it ironic that there are more ebooks available for the US than the UK.

While I can understand your point about used prices, it's not really a fair comparison. How much would you (or the general consumer) be prepared to pay for a new mmpb copy? I would say that 5.99USD is a reasonable price, provided it's a professionally produced work.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

That was added specifically to head off the argument that is usually made when complaining about prices, that eBooks can't be made very cheap because of all the upfront costs that have to be covered.

Just because prices aren't indexed to costs, does not mean that costs don't set a price floor. As a general rule, indexing controls the top end of price ranges, not the bottom.

[J. Strnad]

I think that publishers are missing a bet when they don't price ebooks on out-of-print titles to compete with used paper book prices. They don't have to go down to $1 to compete with the bargain bins, but going to $2.99 or $3.99 would compete very well with musty paperbacks.

The bargain priced ebook may not bring much profit to the publisher, but it's certainly more than a used paper book provides, which is nothing.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by J. Strnad

The bargain priced ebook may not bring much profit to the publisher, but it's certainly more than a used paper book provides, which is nothing.

And certainly more that a lost sale to Darknet provides, which is, again, nothing.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Used is not a valid price comparison.

Actually, it often is, certainly if all I care about is getting (legal) access to the text. It's certainly a price point that ebooks need to compete with for a (not too small) segment of the market.

The better question is whether the price matches what customers are willing to pay. If they are, then the price is justified. If they aren't, the publisher will feel market pressures to reduce the price.

Ah, laissez-faire capitalism. Spoken like a true American.

[luqmaninbmore]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

That's nice, but prices aren't indexed to costs. They're based on demand and other factors.



Used is not a valid price comparison.

Not that price comparisons ought to matter, really. The better question is whether the price matches what customers are willing to pay. If they are, then the price is justified. If they aren't, the publisher will feel market pressures to reduce the price.

Ah, yes, the invisible hand at work. How's that working out for your pension? If people who hold a monopoly are able to use it to successfully extort a higher price, it's justified? How is this anything other than a might-makes-right argument?

[JeremyR]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

Ah, laissez-faire capitalism. Spoken like a true American.

Except it's not.

That means without government meddling, which would include copyright. Without copyright, you'd see copies of books priced only slightly above costs (and free on the internet, though of course people would try to charge money for it if they could).

But with the government basically being the enforcer of the media companies, extending copyright forever (as opposed to the original reasonable length ones), the government has created an artificial monopoly.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

That was added specifically to head off the argument that is usually made when complaining about prices, that eBooks can't be made very cheap because of all the upfront costs that have to be covered.

...and my argument is that prices are based largely on demand, not costs. In fact, the whole idea of "turning a profit" is based on paying off the initial costs, and covering your ongoing costs (royalties, taxes, additional marketing).

Meanwhile, the estate would probably throw a fit if the ebook was priced at $1.99. That not only means less revenue, it also means cheapening the value of one of the most popular authors ever.

I.e. it's largely irrelevant if the book has already earned back all of its costs.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Really, why not? Is it where I would be buying the books instead.

When determining what you are willing to pay, do you compare the cost of a new 2011 BMW 328i to the cost of a 1985 BMW 325i with 75,000 miles on it?

Originally Posted by murraypaul

None of the factors that would make one prefer a new book (better condition, better resale value) apply to eBooks.

Yet another reason why it's not a fair comparison.

You are entitled to say "$7 is more than I'm willing to pay for that ebook," but that still doesn't justify using a 30 year old, yellowed, broken-spined, dog-eared, coffee-stained used mass market paperback as a viable comparison point.

Originally Posted by murraypaul

With any normal product, it would be retailers (who actually deal with customers, after all) who would react to market needs. Here, they can't.

Right, now it's the publishers who set the prices and react to market forces.

Don't forget, with ebooks the publishers should be getting sales data almost as fast as the retailers -- and from a more diverse range of sellers. There is no particular reason why they will have any less incentive to adjust prices than a retailer.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by luqmaninbmore

Ah, yes, the invisible hand at work. How's that working out for your pension?

Not bad, thanks for asking. It's probably doing better than, oh, those Greek state-run pensions. Just a guess.

(I actually don't believe in many of the concepts attributed to the Invisible Hand, by the way, but I do think companies have the right to make profits.)

Originally Posted by luqmainbmore

If people who hold a monopoly are able to use it to successfully extort a higher price, it's justified?

I'd put it more like this:

When dealing physical goods, retailers are essentially buying a huge lot on spec, holding them in inventory, and are responsible for fulfillment. These costs, while not huge and somewhat mitigated by returns, do create risks for the retailer which in turn justify control over pricing.

With digital goods, not so much. No one is complaining about the App Store allowing software publishers to set their own prices, and let's face it, you've got to be pretty extreme to slam Smashwords or Amazon's DTP for giving authors/publishers full control over prices. Publishers also ought to get enough pricing information to indicate "hey, we should try cutting the price a little bit."

Nor are monopolies inherently evil. The problem arises when they engage in anticompetitive behavior. Even then, some people find ways to justify it; for example, many utilities in the US are given local monopolies. Also in the US, Amazon's share of the (paper) book market is extremely high, nearly 70%. One man's monopolist is another man's downtrodden hero, I guess...

[leebase]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Really, why not? Is it where I would be buying the books instead.

Which is exactly why I wrote "you don't matter and never did". If buying used books is your practice, it's fine. But the opinion of a used book buyer doesn't matter a hill of beans to the publishers when it comes to pricing new release books.

Just wait like you always have, someone will buy the book, read it, and then get $.25 selling the book, and then you can buy it.

Lee