Slog
News & ArtsThursday, February 4, 2010
Books / Money Fighting Amazon
Posted by Paul Constant on Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:54 AM
It looks like the battle between Macmillan and Amazon is really heating up: Macmillan, which refused to sell their ebooks on the Kindle for $9.99, saw their titles pulled from Amazon. Amazon then responded with a very passive-aggressive note accusing Macmillan of having a monopoly on their own titles and then stating that they would carry Macmillan books at Macmillan's prices. But that still hasn't happened.
Here's what has happened, though:
Macmillan has put out an ad in the New York Times reading "Available at booksellers everywhere except Amazon."
Macmillan got a standing ovation from independent booksellers at a conference.
Duane Swierczynski has put up a satirical post on his blog about Amazon taking his books hostage.
And Rupert Murdoch, who owns HarperCollins Books, has said that the $9.99 price point is too low for him, too. Are we about to see publishers revolt against Amazon and the Kindle?
Meanwhile, Steve Jobs just leans back in his throne made of iPhones and laughs like this: Mu-hu-hu-ha-ha-ha.
2
What's Jobs going to sell them for, then? He's a red herring in this fight. The fact that Will immediately jumps on it is enough to tell you that.
What IS a fair price? As a consumer, I know I won't pay more than $9.99, or not often. And publishers need to consider that the cost of printing is nil, the cost of storage is nil, the cost of shipping is nil, the cost of returns is nil, and the cost of keeping, selling, and transmitting the e-book is 100% borne by Amazon. Are publishers really making less profit on $9.99 e-books than they are off of $35 hardcovers?
The real question here is "how much will people actually pay for an e-book?" Because, whatever their other benefits are, e-books are quite simply not as valuable as physical books.
What IS a fair price? As a consumer, I know I won't pay more than $9.99, or not often. And publishers need to consider that the cost of printing is nil, the cost of storage is nil, the cost of shipping is nil, the cost of returns is nil, and the cost of keeping, selling, and transmitting the e-book is 100% borne by Amazon. Are publishers really making less profit on $9.99 e-books than they are off of $35 hardcovers?
The real question here is "how much will people actually pay for an e-book?" Because, whatever their other benefits are, e-books are quite simply not as valuable as physical books.
3
I admire Amazon's intentions and I so loathe its means that I'm half inclined to stop buying Kindle books altogether.
Amazon is behaving like a company that has market power, and it's doing so at the very moment that this power is on the wane. They're going to eat this. Wait and see.
Amazon is behaving like a company that has market power, and it's doing so at the very moment that this power is on the wane. They're going to eat this. Wait and see.
4
If they eat this, e-book sales will collapse, and not just for the Kindle. Amazon is taking the heat for every e-book vendor here.
6
@5, Jesus Fucking Christ, Will, FUCK OFF. You don't know what you're talking about; you're babbling.
Amazon losing this fight does not help Apple.
Amazon losing this fight does not help Apple.
7
I suspect publishers (and authors, of course, who have to earn a living) are terrified of the fact that per copy they won't make as much off of each e-book as they do off of each physical volume.
I don't have a clue what today's authors make per copy. I'll make up example numbers; the specifics don't matter. It's about ratio.
I've published 5 books, all paperback, all retailing $12.99USD. One per year. I average total sales of 200,000 copies of all my books per year. I pocket (after fees, taxes, agents, whatever) $1 per copy. So, I make a nice income of $200,000 a year (YES, I know most authors don't make that much; it's just example numbers).
In the brave new world of Kindle and e-books, I'd be nervous of
1) How much they e-book would cut into physical sales
2) if I had to sell each copy on Amazon for $7.99 instead of $12.99, would I still make $1 per copy?
3) If I'm used to making $200,000 a year, or $70,000 a year, or $30,000 a year as an author, will Kindle prices change my income for the better, worse, or leave it neutral? If there was a chance of my earnings going down from what I need to live and pay for my future retirement, why SHOULD I embrace it? To benefit society and Amazon?
4) Book stores are obviously freaked since the whole thing is an assault on them. An assault on them is possibly an assault on #3 above.
I think that in particular #3 is what has the creative types concerned, and justifiably.
I'm sure someone will flame me now in the name of Cory Doctorow (who I usually agree with, FWIW).
I don't have a clue what today's authors make per copy. I'll make up example numbers; the specifics don't matter. It's about ratio.
I've published 5 books, all paperback, all retailing $12.99USD. One per year. I average total sales of 200,000 copies of all my books per year. I pocket (after fees, taxes, agents, whatever) $1 per copy. So, I make a nice income of $200,000 a year (YES, I know most authors don't make that much; it's just example numbers).
In the brave new world of Kindle and e-books, I'd be nervous of
1) How much they e-book would cut into physical sales
2) if I had to sell each copy on Amazon for $7.99 instead of $12.99, would I still make $1 per copy?
3) If I'm used to making $200,000 a year, or $70,000 a year, or $30,000 a year as an author, will Kindle prices change my income for the better, worse, or leave it neutral? If there was a chance of my earnings going down from what I need to live and pay for my future retirement, why SHOULD I embrace it? To benefit society and Amazon?
4) Book stores are obviously freaked since the whole thing is an assault on them. An assault on them is possibly an assault on #3 above.
I think that in particular #3 is what has the creative types concerned, and justifiably.
I'm sure someone will flame me now in the name of Cory Doctorow (who I usually agree with, FWIW).
8
I suspect publishers (and authors, of course, who have to earn a living) are terrified of the fact that per copy they won't make as much off of each e-book as they do off of each physical volume.
I don't have a clue what today's authors make per copy. I'll make up example numbers; the specifics don't matter. It's about ratio.
I've published 5 books, all paperback, all retailing $12.99USD. One per year. I average total sales of 200,000 copies of all my books per year. I pocket (after fees, taxes, agents, whatever) $1 per copy. So, I make a nice income of $200,000 a year (YES, I know most authors don't make that much; it's just example numbers).
In the brave new world of Kindle and e-books, I'd be nervous of
1) How much they e-book would cut into physical sales
2) if I had to sell each copy on Amazon for $7.99 instead of $12.99, would I still make $1 per copy?
3) If I'm used to making $200,000 a year, or $70,000 a year, or $30,000 a year as an author, will Kindle prices change my income for the better, worse, or leave it neutral? If there was a chance of my earnings going down from what I need to live and pay for my future retirement, why SHOULD I embrace it? To benefit society and Amazon?
4) Book stores are obviously freaked since the whole thing is an assault on them. An assault on them is possibly an assault on #3 above.
I think that in particular #3 is what has the creative types concerned, and justifiably.
I'm sure someone will flame me now in the name of Cory Doctorow (who I usually agree with, FWIW).
I don't have a clue what today's authors make per copy. I'll make up example numbers; the specifics don't matter. It's about ratio.
I've published 5 books, all paperback, all retailing $12.99USD. One per year. I average total sales of 200,000 copies of all my books per year. I pocket (after fees, taxes, agents, whatever) $1 per copy. So, I make a nice income of $200,000 a year (YES, I know most authors don't make that much; it's just example numbers).
In the brave new world of Kindle and e-books, I'd be nervous of
1) How much they e-book would cut into physical sales
2) if I had to sell each copy on Amazon for $7.99 instead of $12.99, would I still make $1 per copy?
3) If I'm used to making $200,000 a year, or $70,000 a year, or $30,000 a year as an author, will Kindle prices change my income for the better, worse, or leave it neutral? If there was a chance of my earnings going down from what I need to live and pay for my future retirement, why SHOULD I embrace it? To benefit society and Amazon?
4) Book stores are obviously freaked since the whole thing is an assault on them. An assault on them is possibly an assault on #3 above.
I think that in particular #3 is what has the creative types concerned, and justifiably.
I'm sure someone will flame me now in the name of Cory Doctorow (who I usually agree with, FWIW).
12
Joe, the thing that makes the difference is the total distribution cost. I'm not sure how much it costs to make a book, and to store it in a warehouse, and to ship it to a distributor, and to ship back any returns, but it's not a trivial number. All of those costs go away with e-books. They're replaced by other costs -- disk storage, transmission bandwidth, lifetime free wireless -- but neither publisher nor author pays for any of that. Amazon does.
So my question is, are publishers really clearing less dough with e-books, after all these savings are accounted for? I don't know. I'm going to guess they probably are. Likewise, I think there's probably just as much money left for the author.
What I think they're worried about is that e-books increasingly make publishers look like unnecessary middlemen. Authors need someone to make physical books for them; but do they really need someone to upload a digital file for them? What happens if Macmillan's top authors all say, "uh, you know, I think I'll just send this to Amazon myself, been nice knowing you"?
So my question is, are publishers really clearing less dough with e-books, after all these savings are accounted for? I don't know. I'm going to guess they probably are. Likewise, I think there's probably just as much money left for the author.
What I think they're worried about is that e-books increasingly make publishers look like unnecessary middlemen. Authors need someone to make physical books for them; but do they really need someone to upload a digital file for them? What happens if Macmillan's top authors all say, "uh, you know, I think I'll just send this to Amazon myself, been nice knowing you"?
13
So, it looks like the Science Fiction & Fantasy writers of America have taken Amazon off their website as a buy option. They've replaced it with Indiebound (an indie bookstore online site). They say that this is in response to Amazon's decision in regards to Macmillan - saying that Amazon has made the work of many of the Associations authors unavailabe to the buying public.
"Our authors depend on people buying their books and since a significant percentage of them publish through Macmillan or its subsidiaries, we would prefer to send traffic to stores where the books can actually be purchased," SFWA said, adding that volunteers are "redirecting book links to Indiebound.org, Powell’s, Barnes & Noble and Borders."
And Fnarf, I think you are off on this one. Amazon will cave because they have to. This is a seismic shift, market driven by competition. and as someone recently slaughtered by market competition I have to say it's satisfying to watch Amazon squirming. More than satrisfying. Delightful, in fact...
"Our authors depend on people buying their books and since a significant percentage of them publish through Macmillan or its subsidiaries, we would prefer to send traffic to stores where the books can actually be purchased," SFWA said, adding that volunteers are "redirecting book links to Indiebound.org, Powell’s, Barnes & Noble and Borders."
And Fnarf, I think you are off on this one. Amazon will cave because they have to. This is a seismic shift, market driven by competition. and as someone recently slaughtered by market competition I have to say it's satisfying to watch Amazon squirming. More than satrisfying. Delightful, in fact...
14
@13, maybe so. I hold no brief for Amazon. But I think Macmillan is shooting themselves in the foot here, because I think if they succeed in driving e-book prices up as high as paper books, they'll kill e-book sales. Which may be their intention. But if they do that, they're going to end up feeding piracy. Much like the record companies, publishers have to realize that they can't stuff that genie back in the bottle; you can't uninvent the atom bomb.
15
You can't. But you can determine how much you can sell the bomb for. I can't speak to the future of e-book pricing, alI I really know is that this is a game changer.
16
The real game breaker will come when and if someone huge--say, a Stephen King, a Dan Brown, or a JK Rowling--pulls a Radiohead "In Rainbows" and bypasses every publisher to go freely electronic.
It could have a horrible effect long term on libraries and independent bookstores. The ramifications of the book industry following in the footsteps of the music industry are significantly different. The record album is a modern invention. Books are ancient.
It could have a horrible effect long term on libraries and independent bookstores. The ramifications of the book industry following in the footsteps of the music industry are significantly different. The record album is a modern invention. Books are ancient.
17
@13, @14 - I am so not surprised.
Look, Fnarf and others, just because you want to believe that the authors are raking in cash cause you're overpaying for an eBook, doesn't make it so.
Even with the shift to iPad, the cold hard reality is that eBooks of any kind are not a good revenue source for authors. Most of that money is being sucked up by people other than the ones who actually wrote - or illustrated - what you're reading. It's not like they were getting rich off of hard cover books either.
Greed will be why the iPad wins the market share among eReaders, that plus the leverage of the iPhone as an eReader. The publishers and distributors are doing this to themselves.
Look, Fnarf and others, just because you want to believe that the authors are raking in cash cause you're overpaying for an eBook, doesn't make it so.
Even with the shift to iPad, the cold hard reality is that eBooks of any kind are not a good revenue source for authors. Most of that money is being sucked up by people other than the ones who actually wrote - or illustrated - what you're reading. It's not like they were getting rich off of hard cover books either.
Greed will be why the iPad wins the market share among eReaders, that plus the leverage of the iPhone as an eReader. The publishers and distributors are doing this to themselves.
18
"Greed will be why the iPad wins the market share among eReaders"
What does this even mean? It looks like English, but it is content-free. Shut up, Will. Shut up.
What does this even mean? It looks like English, but it is content-free. Shut up, Will. Shut up.
20
@ Fnarf, there's one important distinction between what happened with music and mp3's, and what's happening here with books. You said,
Record companies had to jump on board with mp3's because people were already trading them through Napster and then the P2P networks; suing the crap out of traders, along with hopping on board with iTunes, brought them some control over that. But people can still rip their CD's and share them.
What people can't do is rip their books into electronic format and share them. Unless publishers are as riddled with people leaking unpublished material as record companies are with unreleased albums, this genie is still very much in its bottle. I think the vast majority of titles in print still have yet to see release as an eBook.
Now, my statement is based on a couple of things that I admit ignorance of - how many titles have been converted to eBook, how many of those have been released, how tight is the publishers' collective control of leaks, how effective those anti-piracy and anti-sharing doohickeys are (can't even remember what they're called), and whether unauthorized trading of eBooks is taking place at all.
However, I can bet that it's nothing like Napster in 2000. The record industry was in a bind then; the publishers are not, so far as I can tell. That doesn't mean that they won't fuck themselves out of a good thing, but they are in a stronger position than the record companies were.
I think that they want to avoid the "one price fits all" scheme of iTunes, which is fair. Some authors are perennial bestsellers, some books contain a lot more useful information than others, and the publishers are in a position to judge those markets and go for the price people will pay. So the question is, will eBook buyers's expectations be shaped by their mp3 experiences and want everything to be the same price? I'm not so sure.
Sorry for the longwinded comment...
More...
Much like the record companies, publishers have to realize that they can't stuff that genie back in the bottle; you can't uninvent the atom bomb.
Record companies had to jump on board with mp3's because people were already trading them through Napster and then the P2P networks; suing the crap out of traders, along with hopping on board with iTunes, brought them some control over that. But people can still rip their CD's and share them.
What people can't do is rip their books into electronic format and share them. Unless publishers are as riddled with people leaking unpublished material as record companies are with unreleased albums, this genie is still very much in its bottle. I think the vast majority of titles in print still have yet to see release as an eBook.
Now, my statement is based on a couple of things that I admit ignorance of - how many titles have been converted to eBook, how many of those have been released, how tight is the publishers' collective control of leaks, how effective those anti-piracy and anti-sharing doohickeys are (can't even remember what they're called), and whether unauthorized trading of eBooks is taking place at all.
However, I can bet that it's nothing like Napster in 2000. The record industry was in a bind then; the publishers are not, so far as I can tell. That doesn't mean that they won't fuck themselves out of a good thing, but they are in a stronger position than the record companies were.
I think that they want to avoid the "one price fits all" scheme of iTunes, which is fair. Some authors are perennial bestsellers, some books contain a lot more useful information than others, and the publishers are in a position to judge those markets and go for the price people will pay. So the question is, will eBook buyers's expectations be shaped by their mp3 experiences and want everything to be the same price? I'm not so sure.
Sorry for the longwinded comment...
21
On a completely different note, I think it's funny that Amazon, a local company, isn't getting a single defender, when there was no shortage of people coming to Starbucks' aid when they disguised their 15th Ave shop as an independent cafe.
23
@ Fnarf and others who are focusing on distribution costs (or the lack thereof) for e-books:
The cost of physically making and shipping a book is a very small portion of the total cost (as in about 10%).
The majority of it comes from labor that is necessary whether it's an e-book or a physical book-- the editing, copyediting, layout, typesetting, marketing, cover design, and so on. That's the stuff that turns a manuscript, however good, into a readable, professional book.
So when you say you don't want to pay $10 for an e-book, you're not only stiffing the author (who will make nowhere near $1 per book, btw), but also the dozens of people who worked their asses off to refine, publish, and market that book so that you could even hear of it, much less get it.
The cost of physically making and shipping a book is a very small portion of the total cost (as in about 10%).
The majority of it comes from labor that is necessary whether it's an e-book or a physical book-- the editing, copyediting, layout, typesetting, marketing, cover design, and so on. That's the stuff that turns a manuscript, however good, into a readable, professional book.
So when you say you don't want to pay $10 for an e-book, you're not only stiffing the author (who will make nowhere near $1 per book, btw), but also the dozens of people who worked their asses off to refine, publish, and market that book so that you could even hear of it, much less get it.
24
after all, when we create a new format it drops the price of things, right?
anyone remember when records cost $6 or maybe $8?
or when games cost $15?
anyone remember when records cost $6 or maybe $8?
or when games cost $15?
26
@ Fnarf, thought of something else.
Upthread you say that maybe authors can just upload their books without the middleman (the publisher), but besides the things Megan @ 23 points out, there's also the marketing.
Now, there are a lot of unpublished authors out there who are uploading their works in .pdf format (especially genre fiction authors), and I will bet that people who used to self-publish are going that route too, but few of them have any hope of making a living this way; if they do, it will only be because they had some kind of viral hit and got a book deal out of it.
Upthread you say that maybe authors can just upload their books without the middleman (the publisher), but besides the things Megan @ 23 points out, there's also the marketing.
Now, there are a lot of unpublished authors out there who are uploading their works in .pdf format (especially genre fiction authors), and I will bet that people who used to self-publish are going that route too, but few of them have any hope of making a living this way; if they do, it will only be because they had some kind of viral hit and got a book deal out of it.
27
@23, good points all. I'm interested to hear that production is such a small portion of the cost.
But one of the things I hate about e-books -- and a big part of the reason why I won't pay as much for one as I will for a paper book -- is that most of that typesetting, design, and editing get tossed out the window. E-books don't have fonts or any kind of typesetting embedded in them; they display in the device's built-in font. And they are frequently, in my experience, completely unedited, sometimes to the point of unreadability (I have one e-book with several THOUSAND typos in it, all of them introduced in the conversion process).
It's not as if $9.99 is ludicrously below the cost of a paperback, after all. And you are getting a lot less in return. In addition to the lack of typesetting, there's the simple business of being able to resell a paper book used, typically gaining back around a quarter of its cost.
Let me put it this way: if publishers and e-book makers want to put something into their product to make it worth as much as a paper book, I might consider paying as much.
But one of the things I hate about e-books -- and a big part of the reason why I won't pay as much for one as I will for a paper book -- is that most of that typesetting, design, and editing get tossed out the window. E-books don't have fonts or any kind of typesetting embedded in them; they display in the device's built-in font. And they are frequently, in my experience, completely unedited, sometimes to the point of unreadability (I have one e-book with several THOUSAND typos in it, all of them introduced in the conversion process).
It's not as if $9.99 is ludicrously below the cost of a paperback, after all. And you are getting a lot less in return. In addition to the lack of typesetting, there's the simple business of being able to resell a paper book used, typically gaining back around a quarter of its cost.
Let me put it this way: if publishers and e-book makers want to put something into their product to make it worth as much as a paper book, I might consider paying as much.
28
because we all know Amazon is oh-so-evil not wanting to charge more than 10 dollars for Kindle titles, but Apple is sweet as pie even though they too are now in the e-book reader market which does nothing for local bookstores.
Just admit that you are a fanboy, please. This has nothing to do with anything besides fanboydom.
Just admit that you are a fanboy, please. This has nothing to do with anything besides fanboydom.
29
@26, that's true. But I think the reason publishers fear this is not because of unknown new authors, but the big guns. Tom Clancy doesn't need a marketing department; he's going to sell a zillion no matter what. If he bypasses Penguin for e-book sales of his next blockbuster, it probably wouldn't hurt those sales a bit, but it would hurt Penguin.
Of course, the day when even Clancy is going to go "all electronic" is not going to be soon, so he's still going to need a publisher. I wonder if authors are going to start trying to negotiate separate contracts for e-pub?
Of course, the day when even Clancy is going to go "all electronic" is not going to be soon, so he's still going to need a publisher. I wonder if authors are going to start trying to negotiate separate contracts for e-pub?
30
I will never, ever, ever pay $15 for an e-book. I could buy 3 to 5 used books for that much, or two new paperbacks. With physical copies, I actually own them as well - I'm not just licensing them from a company on some proprietary hardware.
32
@ 31, self-published authors have always sold their books on consignment to bookstores. This page is just Amazon's consignment buyer. I see nothing there regarding having your works sold in eBook format for the Kindle.
33
@32. I am just saying that people are already bypassing publishers for tangible copies of books. The Advantage program is a way of selling on Amazon and marketing on Amazon. It is another form of seller profiles specifically for selling your own works.
34
@ 29, good point. I suppose they might try to act in concert to prevent that from becoming an option for their mega-bestsellers, but if they could do that, it's not much different from having them sign with a different publisher when their contract is up.
My guess is that most of them will still need the editors, etc. that Megan mentions. I don't see them paying for that stuff out of their own pocket, no matter how wealthy they are. (And who would do it for them anyway? Those people aren't exactly freelancers.)
My guess is that most of them will still need the editors, etc. that Megan mentions. I don't see them paying for that stuff out of their own pocket, no matter how wealthy they are. (And who would do it for them anyway? Those people aren't exactly freelancers.)
35
I generally loathe Amazon as a company - I bought a Kindle *in spite* of them, not because of them - but I really hope they prevail in this one. I rarely buy ebooks over $10, as I rarely buy paper books over that amount either (textbooks and references are the usual exception, along with my Indiespensable subscription and graphic memoir addiction). I've decided not to give Macmillan any money for a while; my reading list has plenty on it to steer clear of them.
If I were convinced this were causing Macmillan financial harm, I might feel differently. But I was under the impression that the $10 bestsellers are loss leaders for Amazon, not the publisher. Every time they've voiced a concern it has to do with the threat to consumers' expectations - that they won't regard the $30 hardcover as reasonable anymore if there exist $10 ebooks, not bothering to ask themselves whether most people buy a lot of $30 hardcovers as it is. It isn't really clear to me what their cost breakdowns are or why that's the expectation. They need to step up and justify that if they want my money.
Meanwhile, I'm off to pay a trip to this place in town that lets me go home with books for free. There's a book I want to read and it's got a $50 cover price with no electronic edition. I totally would've paid $10 for the Kindle version, though.
If I were convinced this were causing Macmillan financial harm, I might feel differently. But I was under the impression that the $10 bestsellers are loss leaders for Amazon, not the publisher. Every time they've voiced a concern it has to do with the threat to consumers' expectations - that they won't regard the $30 hardcover as reasonable anymore if there exist $10 ebooks, not bothering to ask themselves whether most people buy a lot of $30 hardcovers as it is. It isn't really clear to me what their cost breakdowns are or why that's the expectation. They need to step up and justify that if they want my money.
Meanwhile, I'm off to pay a trip to this place in town that lets me go home with books for free. There's a book I want to read and it's got a $50 cover price with no electronic edition. I totally would've paid $10 for the Kindle version, though.
36
poor, poor giant book publishing industry.
they really are the victims.
even the can-do-no-wrong apple caved to variable pricing.
matt @20 makes some very good points, but i'm still interested to hear more thatn the technical perspective on why:
music industry bad, itunes good
but
publishing industry good, kindle ebooks bad
they really are the victims.
even the can-do-no-wrong apple caved to variable pricing.
matt @20 makes some very good points, but i'm still interested to hear more thatn the technical perspective on why:
music industry bad, itunes good
but
publishing industry good, kindle ebooks bad
37
Clean-up @ 34: First paragraph should read:
@ 29, good point. I suppose they might try to act in concert to prevent that from becoming an option for their mega-bestsellers, but if the authors could do that, it's not much different from having them sign with a different publisher when their contract is up.
@ 29, good point. I suppose they might try to act in concert to prevent that from becoming an option for their mega-bestsellers, but if the authors could do that, it's not much different from having them sign with a different publisher when their contract is up.
38
Fnarf - the e-book copyright question is a good one. At this moment publishers are still claiming that they own the rights to all formats but I think that will have to change. I'm curious to see how this will play out...
We really are at the dawn of a new era here and all this messiness is just an example of how confused the industry is about it. I think the schaunfred (sp?) I'm feeling right now is that Amazon and that horrible Bezoz person have up until now said to authors, publishers and consumers "This is how it's going to be. Our way or the highway." And now someone is standing up to them. And the dynamic will change. Because they don't have the only ball in the game anymore. I'm all for healthy competition. But Amazon was trying to hold on to a monopoly and that seems to be ending - which is good for everybody.
We really are at the dawn of a new era here and all this messiness is just an example of how confused the industry is about it. I think the schaunfred (sp?) I'm feeling right now is that Amazon and that horrible Bezoz person have up until now said to authors, publishers and consumers "This is how it's going to be. Our way or the highway." And now someone is standing up to them. And the dynamic will change. Because they don't have the only ball in the game anymore. I'm all for healthy competition. But Amazon was trying to hold on to a monopoly and that seems to be ending - which is good for everybody.
39
Fnarf, good point about some e-books lacking the necessary layout/typesetting-- I've certainly seen quite a few that clearly didn't think about the transition from paper to screen at all.
In terms of the bigger picture, the other thing to consider is that Macmillan's plan doesn't mean that *all* of their books are suddenly going to be more than $9.99-- they just want to do something akin to the e-book version of hardcover vs. paperback, where brand-new books may be more expensive, but older ones that have been out for ages become much cheaper.
Hell, for everyone in love with Apple, iTunes does the same thing with some of their music-- you can get some older albums for $8 instead of $10 or more.
In terms of the bigger picture, the other thing to consider is that Macmillan's plan doesn't mean that *all* of their books are suddenly going to be more than $9.99-- they just want to do something akin to the e-book version of hardcover vs. paperback, where brand-new books may be more expensive, but older ones that have been out for ages become much cheaper.
Hell, for everyone in love with Apple, iTunes does the same thing with some of their music-- you can get some older albums for $8 instead of $10 or more.
40
Most of the authors have been saying that the eBook version takes them about as long as any other published version - approving proofs, layout, making sure it's readable and doesn't break paras mid-thought - but not fiscally rewarding in time/effort.
Stuff is changing, but it's like back when MP3 and VCR formats were still in flux. The agreements aren't there, the revenue stream has been hijacked by prior bit players, and the winner will probably be what's most popular - NOT what's "best".
Stuff is changing, but it's like back when MP3 and VCR formats were still in flux. The agreements aren't there, the revenue stream has been hijacked by prior bit players, and the winner will probably be what's most popular - NOT what's "best".
41
@38, it is unsettled. Nobody knows the math yet.
It's not as simple as "40% of 9.99 minus editing, etc. and author's payment" vs "40% of 35.00 minus editing, printing, author's payment". It's pretty standard business practice to try to sell something for less but selling a lot more of them. Otherwise cars would cost $250,000, and baseball tickets would cost $1,000 each. You don't try to maximize profit on each item, but overall. It's entirely possible that publishers could earn exactly as much from $9.99 e-books if they sell significantly more of them, even if their profit on each one is just pennies.
It is a fact that fewer e-books will sell if the price is $13.99 than if it is $9.99. What is not known is if Macmillan will make more money at $13.99 or not. That's what everybody wants to know: what does the price point curve look like?
Amazon NEVER had a monopoly, or the only ball in the game, by the way. You can buy e-books in other places, and have been able to do so for longer than the Kindle has been around. Sony is selling Macmillan books (like bestseller "Sarah's Key" by Tatiana de Rosnay) for ... wait for it ... $9.99. Barnes and Noble is selling the e-book of "Sarah's Key" for -- oh no! $9.99!
When the iPad is available, the Apple bookstore will probably be selling it for whatever the other guys are, whether that's $9.99 or something higher. That's why Apple isn't going to "win" if Amazon loses here.
It's not as simple as "40% of 9.99 minus editing, etc. and author's payment" vs "40% of 35.00 minus editing, printing, author's payment". It's pretty standard business practice to try to sell something for less but selling a lot more of them. Otherwise cars would cost $250,000, and baseball tickets would cost $1,000 each. You don't try to maximize profit on each item, but overall. It's entirely possible that publishers could earn exactly as much from $9.99 e-books if they sell significantly more of them, even if their profit on each one is just pennies.
It is a fact that fewer e-books will sell if the price is $13.99 than if it is $9.99. What is not known is if Macmillan will make more money at $13.99 or not. That's what everybody wants to know: what does the price point curve look like?
Amazon NEVER had a monopoly, or the only ball in the game, by the way. You can buy e-books in other places, and have been able to do so for longer than the Kindle has been around. Sony is selling Macmillan books (like bestseller "Sarah's Key" by Tatiana de Rosnay) for ... wait for it ... $9.99. Barnes and Noble is selling the e-book of "Sarah's Key" for -- oh no! $9.99!
When the iPad is available, the Apple bookstore will probably be selling it for whatever the other guys are, whether that's $9.99 or something higher. That's why Apple isn't going to "win" if Amazon loses here.
42
@40, you're STILL full of shit. There ISN'T ANY LAYOUT in e-books. You don't understand how they work. They're marked-up text files; the layout is done by the device. And most of the ones I have have obviously not been checked out by anybody. They just do the conversion, which is similar to converting a Word doc to pdf, only it's probably QuarkXpress (at least once the publisher has it).
There's no such thing as a "proof" of an e-book.
There's no such thing as a "proof" of an e-book.
43
Fnarf - you are obviously more informed than I am about ebook devices on the market. But I do think that the Kindle was the first device to really cross over in the public mindset about ebooks. And it did make Amazon the big bully on the playground.
You know, about 10 years ago I was dating this guy who worked for microsoft on their ebook reader, which never got off the ground (kinda like the guy I was dating). Does anyone know anything about Bill & Co in this equation?
You know, about 10 years ago I was dating this guy who worked for microsoft on their ebook reader, which never got off the ground (kinda like the guy I was dating). Does anyone know anything about Bill & Co in this equation?
44
@43, "Does anyone know anything about Bill & Co in this equation?"
funny you should ask, this guy seems to have some insight into that:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinio…
funny you should ask, this guy seems to have some insight into that:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinio…
45
@43, I don't know how well-informed I am; I just have google like everybody else. Kindle is obviously the big winner in the "mind share" of e-readers, but that doesn't always mean that much -- iPhones are only 16% of smartphones, for instance. I think Kindles do better than that -- maybe half or a little more -- but of course e-readers is (so far) a tiny market compared to smartphones (maybe 1/25th the size?)
I was just reading about Microsoft's abortive efforts in various fields, including e-readers and tablets. Theirs was basically sabotaged internally by other departments that felt threatened, like the Office group. Oh, that was here, on Slog, in the morning news: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinio…
I was just reading about Microsoft's abortive efforts in various fields, including e-readers and tablets. Theirs was basically sabotaged internally by other departments that felt threatened, like the Office group. Oh, that was here, on Slog, in the morning news: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/04/opinio…
46
It'll be hilarious to see the mess they publish without the aid of an editor, especially the Stephen Kings and Dan Browns of the publishing world. I'd pay to see an unedited Dan Brown manuscript. I bet it's jibberish.
How will self-published e-books affect the foreign market? Is Stephen King going to pay to have his books translated in a hundred different languages?
The real game breaker will come when and if someone huge--say, a Stephen King, a Dan Brown, or a JK Rowling--pulls a Radiohead "In Rainbows" and bypasses every publisher to go freely electronic.
It'll be hilarious to see the mess they publish without the aid of an editor, especially the Stephen Kings and Dan Browns of the publishing world. I'd pay to see an unedited Dan Brown manuscript. I bet it's jibberish.
How will self-published e-books affect the foreign market? Is Stephen King going to pay to have his books translated in a hundred different languages?
47
He already has them translated. And even your opinion piece in the NYT, Fnarf, talks about the stylus-bound limitations, which are not what the iPad is limited to.
The cold hard facts are that most people who read eBooks do so on iPhones. And, in a similar manner, most eBooks will get distro using iPad - because it works and everyone is going to use them.
Do you have more cool techy things that do it better? Sure.
But they won't be where the market is.
People are kind of lazy. They don't care if Betamax has a better format than VHS - they just want what they want.
The cold hard facts are that most people who read eBooks do so on iPhones. And, in a similar manner, most eBooks will get distro using iPad - because it works and everyone is going to use them.
Do you have more cool techy things that do it better? Sure.
But they won't be where the market is.
People are kind of lazy. They don't care if Betamax has a better format than VHS - they just want what they want.
50
Will, the device he was talking about was fifteen years ago. Yes, it was inferior to today's touch-screens. That's not the shock. It doesn't even make sense; as usual your argument, whatever it is (no one can tell what point you're trying to make), doesn't have anything to do with the question being addressed or the link; it's just random noise.
The point of the article, which was an aside addressed to someone else, shithead, is that Microsoft's tablet project was sabotaged from within. The "stylus-bound limitation" you refer to was a deliberate fuckup insisted upon by the Office VP. There's no point in telling you to read the article, because YOU CANNOT READ.
As for your assertion that "most people who read e-books do so on an iPhone" is laughable on the face of it. You have no idea if it's true or not; you know nothing about iPhones. You don't even HAVE one. You just think you're going to get in good with the cool kids if you talk up their favorite devices. Sadly for you, even the most devout Apple fanboys think you're a twat.
But yeah, nice job hijacking this thread, which isn't about iPads, for your own bullshit. Why, oh WHY can't you content yourself with shitting all over the Seattle P-I blogs, and leave this one alone?
The point of the article, which was an aside addressed to someone else, shithead, is that Microsoft's tablet project was sabotaged from within. The "stylus-bound limitation" you refer to was a deliberate fuckup insisted upon by the Office VP. There's no point in telling you to read the article, because YOU CANNOT READ.
As for your assertion that "most people who read e-books do so on an iPhone" is laughable on the face of it. You have no idea if it's true or not; you know nothing about iPhones. You don't even HAVE one. You just think you're going to get in good with the cool kids if you talk up their favorite devices. Sadly for you, even the most devout Apple fanboys think you're a twat.
But yeah, nice job hijacking this thread, which isn't about iPads, for your own bullshit. Why, oh WHY can't you content yourself with shitting all over the Seattle P-I blogs, and leave this one alone?
51
The Microsoft article sounds accurate from what I recall hearing from ex-boyfriend. They couldn't seem to support the project... But you think by now they'd have entered the fray. Did the antitrust lawsuit really do that much damage to their competitve edge? I get that they decide to stick to software instead of hardware, I guess...but at the time they seemed pretty cocky that they would lead the charge in this ebook battle.
Ex-boyfriend did say to me at the time (I owned a bookstore)"Don't worry, it won't happen for another ten years." He was right.
Ex-boyfriend did say to me at the time (I owned a bookstore)"Don't worry, it won't happen for another ten years." He was right.
52
@51, oh, you're THAT Michael Wells. I'm sorry, I'm very slow. I bought a lot of books in your store once upon a time, when I lived on the Hill. Now I feel dumb for arguing with someone who's a lot closer to the real world of bookselling than I am -- though I'm a "bookseller" too, if you count the guy carrying the big box into Third Place (and then carrying it right back out again, mostly). Hunh! And I sold my first two books on Amazon's seller program yesterday (they take a HUGE bite out).
I'm interested in this debate from both sides -- I'm a dedicated real-book person, a frequent, nearly constant small bookshop patron, and also a mostly-frustrated Kindle owner. I think it's an interesting discussion. I just wish "it" didn't have to jump in and poo in the water.....
I'm interested in this debate from both sides -- I'm a dedicated real-book person, a frequent, nearly constant small bookshop patron, and also a mostly-frustrated Kindle owner. I think it's an interesting discussion. I just wish "it" didn't have to jump in and poo in the water.....
53
Fnarf - at this moment you're probably a much more active bookseller than I am. The discussion about the future of the book, bookselling, publishing and writing affects every one of us not just those in the biz. in fact, most of the people in the biz are far behind the general reading public on the new world of bookls. Trust me on one...
Also- I do have way too much time on my hands right now which is why I'm slogging through every day...
Also- I do have way too much time on my hands right now which is why I'm slogging through every day...
54
Fnarf @42: I keep seeing this talking point about "the costs of typesetting" popping up when in reality anyone who knows the Kindle or ePub format knows that "approving proofs, layout, making sure it's readable and doesn't break paras mid-thought" isn't a part of the process.
It's a convenient lie that seems logical on first blush and cuts the debate short before people realize that what's being sold is generally a text file with chapter hyperlinks and maybe a nice greyscale (soon to be color) jpeg for a "cover."
This is not a huge design cost, folks. I can't speak to the cost of copy-editing, but the actual design of most eBooks is not that expensive or complicated. And yes, I worked for four years for a major publisher in an eBook/web related position.
It's a convenient lie that seems logical on first blush and cuts the debate short before people realize that what's being sold is generally a text file with chapter hyperlinks and maybe a nice greyscale (soon to be color) jpeg for a "cover."
This is not a huge design cost, folks. I can't speak to the cost of copy-editing, but the actual design of most eBooks is not that expensive or complicated. And yes, I worked for four years for a major publisher in an eBook/web related position.
55
A friend's response to Scalzi's latest: http://doctorideas.blogspot.com/2010/02/…
Scalzi's perspective is very biased, a fact he admits here, but a disturbing amount of people are quoting his word like gospel. His situation is an exception rather than a rule and a lot of his points aren't exactly correct.
Scalzi's perspective is very biased, a fact he admits here, but a disturbing amount of people are quoting his word like gospel. His situation is an exception rather than a rule and a lot of his points aren't exactly correct.
56
Personally, I'm fine with paying $9.99 for eBooks.
What I'm not down with is how every hardback book I pick up at a bookstore is !!$25!! That's always a no-go for me. I like to read books, I like to own them, but I'm tired of storing them--my house has limited space left at this time for more dead-tree media, so for probably 75% of what I read, the Kindle app on the iPhone is just fine. I always have my phone with me, so I find myself reading more than the old days.
What I'm not down with is how every hardback book I pick up at a bookstore is !!$25!! That's always a no-go for me. I like to read books, I like to own them, but I'm tired of storing them--my house has limited space left at this time for more dead-tree media, so for probably 75% of what I read, the Kindle app on the iPhone is just fine. I always have my phone with me, so I find myself reading more than the old days.
57
It's an interesting discussion but until the iPad hits, nothing is going to happen.
But as to Fnarf's remark about "no typesetting." That's not complete. Yes you can use plain text files at Pfroject Gutenberg but publishers are also going to have a lot more fun with ebooks on the iPad. I am porting City Comforts to it and the new ebook format will be very much a different kind of book...it won't be static, for example. Also sorts of embeds and live links and maybe even video. Plus editions can be changed every month or so.
But as to Fnarf's remark about "no typesetting." That's not complete. Yes you can use plain text files at Pfroject Gutenberg but publishers are also going to have a lot more fun with ebooks on the iPad. I am porting City Comforts to it and the new ebook format will be very much a different kind of book...it won't be static, for example. Also sorts of embeds and live links and maybe even video. Plus editions can be changed every month or so.
58
Fnarf doesn't believe anything exists until it's on Google or a wiki.
Don't confuse him with reality.
Don't confuse him with reality.
59
I thought the point of paying double for a hardback copy instead of waiting for paperback was not for the sturdier exterior but so you could read it as soon as it came out. Why can't ebooks be priced based on how recently the book came out? If the hardback is $25, then charge $19.99 for the ebook. Then, a year later, charge $13.99 for the paperback and $9.99 for the ebook.
60
Will in Seattle is scared of facts, documentation and citation.
Will, "the plural of anecdote is not data."
Will, "the plural of anecdote is not data."
61
I'll bet you lunch that, a year from now, the vast majority of eBooks that are being sold FOR MONEY IN THE USA will be on either an iPad or an iPhone.
I made a bet with someone else about the elections after they kept telling me certain things were impossible.
You're welcome to try me.
Just an average lunch, not Flying Fish. OK, Jigae? I've made a lot of cash from IPOs and various stocks on bets like that. It's why I bought Ford in March 09.
I made a bet with someone else about the elections after they kept telling me certain things were impossible.
You're welcome to try me.
Just an average lunch, not Flying Fish. OK, Jigae? I've made a lot of cash from IPOs and various stocks on bets like that. It's why I bought Ford in March 09.
62
I'm not saying you're wrong about the iPad. I'm merely stating you have a huge aversion to backing up your "facts." it's obnoxious, childish, and weird.
63
Check out this link: http://pubrants.blogspot.com/2010/01/gam… It's from the blog Pub Rants, written by a YA literary agent. I find her blog particularly interesting and helpful in that she often details the nitty-gritty financial details of her negotiations on the author's behalf.
At this point in time, everyone has pretty much acknowledged that the publishing industry (along with every other industry) is going through a paradigm shift from physical to digital. It's this phase right now, with one foot in either tub, that's got everyone nervous -- the authors, the publishers and the consumers.
The publishers want to cover the marketing costs and any buy-back returns of the print editions, especially in these pro-digital times. The consumers (understandably) are getting tired of paying upwards of $25 - $40 for a new (print) release, and want reasonable prices -- but the $9.99 locked in price on the digital may be driving up the prices on the print versions. The authors just want to pay the bills and put food on the table.
Also, the iPad? Eh, I'll take a dedicated e-reader with a front-lit screen. These back-lit screens hurt my eyes and give me a headache after a couple hours. Plus, the Nook and the Sony E-readers have that E-ink page display, which is also easier on the eyes when you're actually sitting and reading a book for several hours.
Maybe the people buying the iPad don't read for hours anymore. Or maybe the back-lit screen doesn't bother them. I just turned 30 last week, so I don't think it's my age. I love books -- I was always the kid in the corner, reading, when everyone else was watching tv or playing sports. Whenever the computer or tv hurts my eyes, I put on my reading glasses and curl up with a nice book.
More...
At this point in time, everyone has pretty much acknowledged that the publishing industry (along with every other industry) is going through a paradigm shift from physical to digital. It's this phase right now, with one foot in either tub, that's got everyone nervous -- the authors, the publishers and the consumers.
The publishers want to cover the marketing costs and any buy-back returns of the print editions, especially in these pro-digital times. The consumers (understandably) are getting tired of paying upwards of $25 - $40 for a new (print) release, and want reasonable prices -- but the $9.99 locked in price on the digital may be driving up the prices on the print versions. The authors just want to pay the bills and put food on the table.
Also, the iPad? Eh, I'll take a dedicated e-reader with a front-lit screen. These back-lit screens hurt my eyes and give me a headache after a couple hours. Plus, the Nook and the Sony E-readers have that E-ink page display, which is also easier on the eyes when you're actually sitting and reading a book for several hours.
Maybe the people buying the iPad don't read for hours anymore. Or maybe the back-lit screen doesn't bother them. I just turned 30 last week, so I don't think it's my age. I love books -- I was always the kid in the corner, reading, when everyone else was watching tv or playing sports. Whenever the computer or tv hurts my eyes, I put on my reading glasses and curl up with a nice book.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (63) RSS