Publishers Warned On Ebook Prices
An anonymous reader writes "The DoJ says Simon and Schuster, Hachette, Penguin, Macmillan and HarperCollins conspired to raise the prices of ebooks. The report originates from the WSJ, but the BBC adds comments from an analyst bizarrely claiming increased prices are somehow a good thing and thinking otherwise is the result of 'confusion'. I'd like to see an explanation of why the wholesale model, while continuing to work fine (presumably) for physical books, somehow didn't work for ebooks and why the agency model is better despite increasing costs for consumers."
Sounds like these publishers don't know their market. I only buy ebooks because they are inexpensive. At relatively close prices I'd prefer a physical book (where at least I won't be restricted by the publisher's "loan" policy!).
Well he got one thing right: "All the costs are the people in the publisher's HQ..." Exactly. So why don't authors just upload their e-books and cut out publishers all together?
That was even before the so-called "agency" model. There were ebooks available at Fictionwise for $20 years after the paperback had been released at $6.99.
Then they opened up on their feet with a fully automatic weapon, "agency," which attempted to raise eBook prices, banned things like discounts and rebates, and generally attempted to kill eBooks by overpricing them.
They also canceled existing pre-orders at the lower prices. I had a book on order at Fictionwise I had pre-ordered at $8. They forced FW to cancel the deal and refund my money, removed the book and a lot of other ones from fictionwise, and "generously" offered me the book at $12 at either Amazon or Barnes and Noble. My eBook buying, which included buying books at ridiculous prices but getting store credit as a rebate, dropped from over $2000/year to less than $200.
When publishers start acting sane (I'm NOT counting on it) I may go back to them. In the meantime, I've never stopped buying everything Baen brings out, and loving it and them.
Why not paypal the author a few bucks and torrent the ebooks? No trees getting cut nor used books getting shipped around and the author makes money. Keep doing this until publishers realize their short sighted stupidity and change their ways.
This is why at least three quarters of my ebook purchases are from Baen. They price their regular books fairly reasonably, "hardback" books are about $10 than list price, and when they come out in paperback they're about $2-3 off the list price. And for a lot of books if you're willing to pay a small premium they'll let you get the ARC version ("Advance Reader Copy") before the publication date. They also do monthly bundles of books, five or more books packaged together for the price of two or three books, well worth it if you know you really want at least two of the books in the bundle. Plus they have a free library that will let you try out a large number of books for free (in the hopes that you'll buy more books from that author later of course) and their books are DRM free, because they understand that piracy isn't a real problem.
Hopefully if Baen continues to do well eventually the big publishers will learn from their example.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
You can have the best book in existence, but if no one hears about it, no one will ever buy it. It's entirely possible to publish on your own, on a personal website, with a paypal or visa shopping cart or something attached to take orders. What publishers do is get exposure. Even just on amazon.com, maybe they don't directly advertise you, but if someone searches for books, yours will pop up in there somewhere. How do people know to go to your personal website if you are a new unknown author?
It is feasible to do entirely on your own when you are a popular author, but someone starting out new still needs an advertising boost of some sort, or at least listed in a catalog most people know about to make it somewhat easier to discover. However, ebooks should be incredibly cheaper, given that as you pointed out, "publishers" don't really have to publish (or even edit, in some cases) anything. They simply add you to the catalog and handle the sales, and send you royalties. Their cut for something that is essentially automatic (handled by servers) should be much lower than the companies seem to think they deserve.
According to TFA, the publishers went 'agency' in order to try to stop Amazon from 'cornering the market' by selling books cheaply. Now they are under DoJ fire for what was essentially an attempt to set an artificial price floor across the industry.
Squeeze. Crunch.
Y'know what might have been a better plan? Not Insisting on the DRM that makes it possible, and easy, for an incumbent seller to lock in large numbers of buyers and obtain the market power needed to then put the publishers on the rack... It's not as though the story of iTunes went exactly that way with team RIAA or anything...
If DRM actually magically worked, there might be some business case for accepting a smaller slice of an impregnable walled garden; but the present state of it is trivially weak for all the common book formats. Good work on stopping no pirates and giving large retailers the power to cut your throat, guys...
If I'm typical, (and I probaly am not) Amazon, et al, would get more money from me by LOWERING the price.
90% of the ebooks I "buy" are free- either from Amazon, or Gutenberg, or elsewhere. The other 10% I will only buy if they are cheap. If eBooks were in the $2.99/3.99 range (for books I wanted) - I wouldn't hesitate- and the vast majority of books I read would be eBooks.
Instead of making $7 profit on me once or twice a year- they could be getting $1 profit from me 20 or so times a year. Multiply me by a few hundred thousand and that profit margain goes up.
I don't know that I am typical though- in fact I probably am not- because I actually enjoy reading HG Wells, Oscar Wilde, etc- and I don't consider it too much a hassel to not be buying the latest-pop ficiton mega-release.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The author can then negotiate two separate publication deals, one for the ebook version and one for the paper version.
Most likely, a third person will be required, who will be paid to shill the book and get the book tour going.
Ibid.
Try Baen Books or Smashwords. They sell DRM free titles.
Baen has mostly top notch, mainstream authors, albeit only SciFi and Fantasy. Smashwords is a little more of a mixed bag, but some well established authors (like Kristine Kathryn Rusch) are publishing on Smashwords.
The agency model is where publishers set the price of books and retailers get a percentage. This isn't MSRP, the publisher actually gets to set the price the book is sold for.
As opposed to the wholesale model print books use, where publishers sell books to retailers, give them a MSRP, and then the retailers get to set their own prices.
When Amazon started selling ebooks, they used the wholesale model and would frequently set the price to just over whatever the publisher charged them, or even for a loss. As this frequently put the cost of an ebook below the price of a paperback when the book was only available in hardback, publishers got worried that Amazon would get too dominant. When Apple offered to use the agency model, publishers used that to force Amazon to switch.
The thing that really annoys me is that some publishers are lazy about updating their pricelists, so you'll often see the ebook still listed at hardback prices months after the paperback version is available. That sort of crap makes me buy the paperback, use the IRC scanner, and then stuff the book in the attic. The publisher actually makes less money, but at least they kept their precious paper sales.
"Fixes are automatically distributed to people who have the book."
Absolutely NOT! That is a terrible idea. Can you not see how that would be just ripe for abuse and censorship?
Typos and all, when I buy a book, I can read what the author had intended for me to read. Not something which was later changed because someone didnt like the message.
Yes, I know you are only talking about corrections, but my point is, who gets to decide what a "correction" is?